There are 148 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

MadDog's Niners Draft Grade and Analysis

  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,537
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by buck:
If you refrained from remarks such as those highlighted in bold, this discussion would be more civil.

I find your charge that some fans are not honest and your implied assertion that you are honest to be particularly irksome.

First, the charge borders on the banal as there can always be some fans who are not honest.
Second, instead of painting with a broad brush, challenge those individuals who you feel are not honest.

If you are skeptical, I encourage you to go ahead and post a "Who will be a better NFL guard: DeCastro or Looney"? Pre-draft, this would probably be a 99%-1% vote for DeCastro, and people would be relentlessly slamming the poll as the stupidest thing they have ever seen. Post draft, my guess would be 60%-40% DeCastro, but there would be a lot of anti-DeCastro sentiment. We saw the same results last year with the post-draft, "Who will be the best NFL quarterback from this class?" thread. Want to take a wild guess who won?

If DeCastro was selected by the Niners, this board would be fighting to get in as many DeCastro Pro-Bowl Bound threads as possible, and people would never even think about Looney. I'm not so sure there are more than ten people who knew Looney going into the draft. You could run a similar thread for any pre and post draft WR thread on who will be the best WR in the draft. Run that one for fun as well.

The point being that fans desperately want their players to succeed, and this alters their ability to make a fair judgment on a player. It is not an honest way to evaluate talent and future success. It is not criminal, it is human nature. But, it is not accurate.

I am skeptical. I followed your suggestion and created the poll. "Who will be a better NFL guard: DeCastro or Looney"?

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl-draft/165578-who-better-nfl-guard-decastro-looney/#post1

You are a fan.

I strongly urge you to curb or control that mind altering desperation that limits your ability to make a fair judgement of a player.

I understand that it is difficult for you to do this.

But, if you want members to trust your talent evaluation, you must learn to control this desperation that so limits your integrity and clouds your judgement .
[ Edited by buck on May 4, 2012 at 8:36 AM ]
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by oldninerdude:
Yeah, those 6'2" OLBs are just terrible. Von Miller, Elvis Dumervil, Rodney Harrison, etc. LOL.

Baalke and Harbaugh like to draft a special teams guy once in awhile. Colin Jones last year. Fleming this year, and his ability to play OLB is a plus, added depth at the position.

"Good football player, athletic, quick, productive." YOUR WORDS! That's not value for a 5th rounder???? If you don't see it, maybe you're not looking.

Your argument is that there were better players on the board when they made this pick (at #165, when you had Fleming at #168 on your own board).

So, tell us: what better OLBs were on the board at that point? Give us some names. What OLB did you have listed higher on your board? (Cameron Johnson doesn't count, given the fact that he's a Niner now, after all.) And please don't try to pass off somebody at a different position, since its clear that the Niners were looking for OLB depth at that point.
*Von Miller plays in a 43 defense- 6'2 5/8"
*Rodney Harrison played safety for the Patriots
*Fleming is 6'1 1/4"
*Big Board not the same as a value board
*Tim Fugger better 34 OLB prospect
*No requirement to go OLB in the 5th round; better players at better positions available
Sorry, I meant James Harison--OLB for Pittsburgh--6'0" all pro. Remember him. Or is he just one of the "acceptions" you referred to in your earlier post.

No requirement for any team to pick any position at any time.

But criticizing a team for their selection in a later round, of a player at a position of need, even if its only a need for depth, by claiming that there are "better players at better postiions available" seems unfair, at best, and somewhat hypocritical.

Thank you again for creating this thread. Its been useful, to me, to compare your "grade and analysis" and your "mock" to what the Niners actually did in the draft.

I don't believe that any of my posts have specifically claimed that any of your proposed selections were "F" type grades--just that I could see how the Niners would take the pick they selected instead, given their needs. They certainly don't need me to "defend" them, and I'm not trying to do so. I'm just making the comparisons for purposes of my own edification--and your thread has been the perfect foil.

Nevertheless, it appears that you are becoming more and more agitated by this discussion. There is nothing anyone could ever say that might convince you of the merit of any of Baalke's selections. He's Niner's front office/management, so he must be wrong in your eyes. That's fine. Its your opinion and you're welcome to it.

You can storm and rage at Baalke all you want. Ultimately, we get to see how the Niners selections actually perform out on the field--the ultimate test of the quality of their selections.

It's just too bad that you can't appreciate to any degree the thought that Baalke and Harbaugh put into their selections, even those, like Fleming, that appear to coincide with your own evaluation.

So I will leave you where I found you. Posting about "missed golden opportunities" that really didn't exist.

Howling at the moon, so to speak, like a MadDog.

Thanks again, I enjoyed it while it remained civil.
Originally posted by oldninerdude:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
As for my draft board, based on my best player available board, in a straight up, no trade draft, I had:
Round One- Peter Konz, C/G
Round Two- Mohamed Sanu, WR
Round Three- Brandon Thompson, NT
Round Four- Malik Jackson, DE
Round Five- Vick Ballard, RB
Round Six- Antonio Allen, SS
Round Seven- Derrius Brooks, CB
Well just for fun, like we did last year, lets compare your posted "mock" draft to Baalke's actual draft in light of what actually occurred. You and Baalke, "mano a mano". Or "mano a perro" if you prefer.

And since you did not grade Baalke based just on the picks, but threw in trade speculation as well, that's got to apply to your "mock" as well.

Round 1--Peter Konz. C/G Drafted in the first round by you, but all 32 teams passed on him in the first round and he was taken by the Falcons at #55. He's 6'5" and 315 out of Wisconsin, and in previous posts you have expressed that you rated him very highly, espcecially at C. In other posts you have been highly critical of Jonathan Goodwin, the team's center who was a two time pro bowler (with the Saints).

Baalke's Round 1 pick was A.J. Jenkins at #30. A very fast, knowledgeable, productive WR with excellent hands and route running skills. Hard to find fault with taking him at #30, especially when guys like Blackmon and Floyd were already taken. Perhaps this is why you spend so much time with the speculative "they missed on a golden opportunity to move up and take DeCasto" argument. Its impossible to argue that they should have moved back to take Jenkins--since there's evidence that the Rams would have taken him at #33.
So head up, you would have taken a C that was clearly overrated by you, that would have been available in the mid to late second round, and Baalke took an underrated WR just before a rival would have snagged him. Advantage: Baalke

Round 2--Mohamed Sanu. WR drafted in the Second by you, actually taken in the Third round by the Bengals at #83 overall. He's 6'2" and 215 lbs. A possession type WR, who lacks the speed necessary to be a deep threat, but is very capable of catching in traffic and downfield blocking--characteristics that you have previously posted you believe the Niners value (who wouldn't). Trouble with the pick is that he's really just a mirror image, at best, of Crabtree--who's also 6'2" and 215ish, without the elite speed. Sanu, however, also lacks the extra long reach that Crabtree has.
Baalke used the second round pick, #61, to take LMJ, an explosively quick RB who adds a speed dimension out of the backfield that the Niners have been lacking for at least the past 8 years. Combined with the speedy Jenkins, the Niners now have two new playmakers who will increase the team's effectiveness on third down and short yardage situations. This will improve the entire OL play by making it less likely that the 5 OL will have to face 8 an 9 man defensive fronts in those situations.
Head to head: Advantage Baalke again. You did not increase the WR depth at all by adding a new or different dimension, but simply got a clone of Crabs.

Round 3--Brandon Thompson. NT out of Clemson, he's 6'2" and 314 lbs who was taken at #93 by the Bengals. He is, again, a virtual clone of a guy already on the Niners, Ian Williams, who signed with the Niners last season as an UDFA, and played NT at Notre Dame. So you spend a 3rd rounder on a guy who's gonna be fourth on the depth chart behind Sopoaga, RJF, and Williams. Seems like a wasted pick.
Baalke used the Third Round to pick Joe Looney at #117. He will compete for RG with Kilgore, Person, and Boone, and will, according to Baalke, someday be a starter. Considering the fact that your NT was not even on the board when Baalke selected Looney, the fact that Looney fell a little due to an untimely foot injury (and was actually rated as a second round value), and the fact that this pick addresses a position of actual, present need--
Head to head: Advantage Baalke again.

Round 4--Malik Jackson. DT out of Tennessee, he's 6'4" and 284, drafted by the Broncos, probably as a 3-4 DE, with the #137 pick overall. Again, he appears to be a clone of a guy already on the Niner's roster, Demarcus Dobbs. If the Niners had taken Jackson he'd be behind Justin Smith, Ray MacDonald, Takuafu, RJF, and Dobbs. In other words, a long shot to even make the roster. Again, why would the Niners want to take him in the Fourth to line up behind all those other DL guys? Seems, again, like a wasted pick.
Baalke used the Fourth round to pick Darious Fleming, a 6'2", 245 lb OLB out of Notre Dame, at #165. You described him above as "a good football player, athletic, fast, and productive." He plays ST, and will back up at OLB--where the Niners took a risk last year in carrying only 3 OLB. Fleming fills a need for depth and will contribute on ST. What's not to like.
Advantage: Baalke, again.

Round 5--Vick Ballard. RB out of Miss. St. who is 5'10" and 219 lbs that was drafted by the Colts at #170 overall. Strong and tough, but no elite speed or explosiveness, he would, again, have to compete with Gore, Hunter, Jacobs, Dixon and Cartwright. Adds nothing that Hunter and Dixon don't already provide, Seems like a wasted pick.
Baalke used the 5th round to take Trent Robinson at #180, a safety who's projected to backup Goldson and Whitner. Somewhat undersized, he's tough and has excellent coverage skills, and may find his way onto the field in nickel and dime situations, where coverage skills are more important than playing in the box. You gave him an A grade.
Advantage: Baalke.

Round 6--Antonio Allen. SS taken by the Jets at #242 overall, in the 7th round. He's 6'1", 210 and has the size expected of a SS. He fell, however to the 7th round, and you're taking him in the 6th. Doesn't appear to be a great value.
Baalke used the 6th round, pick #199 overall, to take Slowey, a small school OL with excellent strength, speed, and nastiness, who's probably gonna need a year on the PS to get a little bigger. You give him an A grade.
Advantage: this one might be even, depending on how these two guys develop over the next couple years.

Round 7--Darrious Brooks. CB out of W. Kentucky, he's 5'10" and 192 who went undrafted. All 32 teams passed on him in all 7 rounds.
Baalke used the 7th round to pick Cameron Johnson at #237, who surprisingly fell precipitously in the draft, but who appears to offer great value at OLB. You give him an A grade.
Advantage: Baalke.

Now, if we take the hypothetical "trade up" "golden opportunity" scenario that you use to criticize Baalke, and apply it to your "mock" draft, it just gets worse. You'd have to subtract Konz AND Brandon Thompson, and add DeCastro, leaving you with one guy who might make the team, and start--DeCastro--and five other guys who would struggle to even make the roster.

Your "mock" does nothing to address the now very apparent preexisting problem with the Niner offense--the lack of speed.

Swapping DeCastro in for Snyder is not gonna make the OL better on short yardage downs when faced with 8 and 9 men fronts. The OL last year got swamped and overwhelmed in those situations, frequently. In retrospect, it was the most glaring problem with the team last season. The additions of Jenkins, LMJ, and Looney on the other hand will force defenses to rethink the "stacking the box, run-blitz" attitude after they get burned a few times by Jenkins on a slant, or LMJ out fo the backfield.

Thank goodness we now have a HC who is capable of identifying the problem and a GM capable of addressing it in the draft.

Compare that to Singletary's response to the same problem: "Give me some offensive linemen with bite." Sorta what you're proposing with the "draft Konz" or "draft Decastro" draft strategy. BTW, how'd that turn out for Singletary? Oh, right.

So thanks again for posting this whole "draft grade and analysis" thread. Its been a great way to help think about what Baalke and Harbaugh have done in this year's draft.

Oldninerdude you are becoming my favorite poster because we seem to have similar opinions. Your rebuttal of MadDog is right on.

The main points being MadDog's mock doesn't address the speed issue which Baalke addressed which our team was seriously lacking. A lot of the guys that he picks in his mocks seem too similar to guys the niners have already.

Ian Williams will be good, he obviously had enough talent that the Niners couldn't put him on the practice squad. (It doesn't matter that he wasn't drafted.)

Also Slowey will be in the similar boat, I don't think the niners are going to want to move him to the practice squad because of the same problem and that other teams might snatch him up.

Looks like Looney might be a little more pro ready than we think (see article below).

http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2012/05/newberry-looney-has-a-leg-up-on-most-rookies.html
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Forming an opinion after the NIners draft is not an objective way to grade a player, since you already have a bias to root for the guy, and see the best in a player, because you desperately want them to succeed.

This is a trap that some fall into. Nobody on the board is bemoaning the fact that we didn't select Stephen Hill, Mohamed Sanu, Rueben Randle, Brian Quick. But, we know how the game is played, If one of these guys were selected, and not Jenkins, nobody would be saddened that we didn't take Jenkins. If you are curious how much support there was on the board for Jenkins before the draft, happy hunting. There was more interest in players like Tommy Streeter. In other words, some fans will defend to the death a Niners' selection, regardless of the selection. That is not an honest evaluation. I provide an honest evaluation that does not waver on whether the team selects a player or not.

Doubt my previous statements? Please review the thread last year after the draft on which QB drafted would be most successful. It was CK in a landslide. Fans are fans, I get it. However, to criticize someone's assessment of players in the draft and defend management, hardly knowing anything about a player going into the draft is shoddy.

I have been following Jenkins and watching him for years. That is not the "exact same way" as someone who scrambles for a draft guide after the pick to figure out who we got.

I am DIE HARD niner fan and I love the draft, but I don't have the time to review all players before the actual draft. But now I've watched Jenkins against tape of the other WR (Wright, Hill, Sanu, Streeter, Blackmon, Floyd)......it's surprising that he wasn't rated higher. Jenkins is not just a "speed" guy, he is productive, got the speed, has decent height and didn't have the best Qb's throwing to him.

People talked a lot about Streeter and Hill because they are big and 6 4 and 215 and really fast (4.36), but neither of those guys have hardly any college production compared to Jenkins. Those guys wouldn't be in the conversation at all except for the combine. Even I thought the Niners could have used Streeter in the 5th round, but Jenkins is a much better prospect. If you listen to the draft gurus (mayock and kiper) said Streeter and hill are superraw and only really run the 9 route. so that is MASSIVE gamble you are taking. Jenkins is way more pro ready than those guys.

I agree to some extent that no matter who we pick we are going to be biased. But the true football fans on the board can watch college tape and make their own decisions give us a little credit.
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Forming an opinion after the NIners draft is not an objective way to grade a player, since you already have a bias to root for the guy, and see the best in a player, because you desperately want them to succeed.

This is a trap that some fall into. Nobody on the board is bemoaning the fact that we didn't select Stephen Hill, Mohamed Sanu, Rueben Randle, Brian Quick. But, we know how the game is played, If one of these guys were selected, and not Jenkins, nobody would be saddened that we didn't take Jenkins. If you are curious how much support there was on the board for Jenkins before the draft, happy hunting. There was more interest in players like Tommy Streeter. In other words, some fans will defend to the death a Niners' selection, regardless of the selection. That is not an honest evaluation. I provide an honest evaluation that does not waver on whether the team selects a player or not.

Doubt my previous statements? Please review the thread last year after the draft on which QB drafted would be most successful. It was CK in a landslide. Fans are fans, I get it. However, to criticize someone's assessment of players in the draft and defend management, hardly knowing anything about a player going into the draft is shoddy.

I have been following Jenkins and watching him for years. That is not the "exact same way" as someone who scrambles for a draft guide after the pick to figure out who we got.

The irony of this post just made my brain explode
Originally posted by Oldschool9erfan:
I am DIE HARD niner fan and I love the draft, but I don't have the time to review all players before the actual draft. But now I've watched Jenkins against tape of the other WR (Wright, Hill, Sanu, Streeter, Blackmon, Floyd)......it's surprising that he wasn't rated higher. Jenkins is not just a "speed" guy, he is productive, got the speed, has decent height and didn't have the best Qb's throwing to him.

People talked a lot about Streeter and Hill because they are big and 6 4 and 215 and really fast (4.36), but neither of those guys have hardly any college production compared to Jenkins. Those guys wouldn't be in the conversation at all except for the combine. Even I thought the Niners could have used Streeter in the 5th round, but Jenkins is a much better prospect. If you listen to the draft gurus (mayock and kiper) said Streeter and hill are superraw and only really run the 9 route. so that is MASSIVE gamble you are taking. Jenkins is way more pro ready than those guys.

I agree to some extent that no matter who we pick we are going to be biased. But the true football fans on the board can watch college tape and make their own decisions give us a little credit.

Not trying to insult any Niners fans, and I hope they don't take it the wrong way. This was really directed toward one member who eagerly critiques my draft without really knowing the players. The basis of his argument is that the Niners selected them, so the players must be good. That is not an unbiased, fair, rational way to approach the draft in our grading.

As stated in this thread, I believe, I challenged one poster who did not believe in this bias to post a DeCastro or Looney thread. I said the results wold come out about 60-40 for DeCastro, even though if DeCastro was the Niners selection, the number would be 99-1 percent. I was not far off. Right now the number is 66-34 percent for DeCastro.

I am also somewhat limited in time, but still dedicate an enormous amount of time following the players through their careers, in the postseason, etc. And, when it comes down to it, it is one man's opinion. But to challenge my draft from the standpoint of, I really don't know the players but I know you are wrong because the Niners did ( fill in the blank) is not a strong argument.
[ Edited by MadDog49er on May 4, 2012 at 12:29 PM ]
  • WWFGD
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 834
Anything MadDog49er says I disagree with.

[ Edited by WWFGD on May 4, 2012 at 1:04 PM ]
I voted twice for Looney because I read this thread first. Couldn't help myself
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Forming an opinion after the NIners draft is not an objective way to grade a player, since you already have a bias to root for the guy, and see the best in a player, because you desperately want them to succeed.

This is a trap that some fall into. Nobody on the board is bemoaning the fact that we didn't select Stephen Hill, Mohamed Sanu, Rueben Randle, Brian Quick. But, we know how the game is played, If one of these guys were selected, and not Jenkins, nobody would be saddened that we didn't take Jenkins. If you are curious how much support there was on the board for Jenkins before the draft, happy hunting. There was more interest in players like Tommy Streeter. In other words, some fans will defend to the death a Niners' selection, regardless of the selection. That is not an honest evaluation. I provide an honest evaluation that does not waver on whether the team selects a player or not.

Doubt my previous statements? Please review the thread last year after the draft on which QB drafted would be most successful. It was CK in a landslide. Fans are fans, I get it. However, to criticize someone's assessment of players in the draft and defend management, hardly knowing anything about a player going into the draft is shoddy.

I have been following Jenkins and watching him for years. That is not the "exact same way" as someone who scrambles for a draft guide after the pick to figure out who we got.
So by your reasoning, ANY grade given after the draft must contain some bias. That would obviously include your own.

Please note that I have not given any grades, either to your "mock" selections, to the Niners selections, or to their draft as a whole.

Apparently your grades are based on the "anti-fan" theory that any pick made by the Niners must not be very good, since some fans will favor the pick just because it was a Niner pick. You say, in essence: "All fans must be wrong to support any Niner pick, so no Niner pick is any good."

Your admitted anti-Baalke bias distorts your view of the Niner draft just as surely as any fan's enthusiastic support for the team may color their view of the Niner picks. And that's true irrespective of whether one learns more about players before the draft, or after.

You post that you've been following Jenkins and watching him for years, undoubtedly because he played at Illinois and you live in Ohio--Big Ten territory. I live in California, and frequently watched LeMichael James play throughout his career at Oregon. So I may not have known as much about Jenkins as I did about LMJ, prior to the draft. But that doesn't mean I haven't done any research about them, both.

I also get to see every Niner game, either live or on local TV. How many Niner games have you been to in the past, say three years? Those games are not broadcast locally in Ohio. So you're stuck with highlights on ESPN, local newspaper reports, or watching games once in awhile down at some restaurant or bar. Based on that, one could argue that you're not paying close enough attention to the Niners to really have a full understanding of the changes in the team over the past year or so, and because of that, you really aren't very well prepared to evaluate their draft strategy or their picks. When's the last time you went to a Niner game, or training camp session?

That kind of conjecture cuts both ways.

I don't claim to be an draft expert, nor did I compare your "mock" to the Niner's draft in order to evaluate or defend either of them. I simply wanted to use the comparison as a means to better understand what the Niners were trying to accomplish in this years draft. It was a very helpful exercise, for me, in that regard.

Sorry if you were upset because your selections did not get sufficient praise. Wasn't my intent to offend, just to compare. Your own grades and written evaluations of each of the Niners' selections were a consideration in the comparisons made. It was easy, for example, to show that Trent Robinson was a better pick for the team in the 5th round partially because you gave him high marks. On the other hand, your pick for that round, RB Vick Ballard, would be competing for time behind not just Gore, but behind Hunter, Jacobs, Dixon, and Cartwright. I don't need to know how Ballard scored on the Wonderlic, or what he had for breakfast, or what his major was in college, to see that he'd have his work cut out for him just to make the team.

You state: "I provide an honest evaluation that does not waver [sic] on whether the team selects a player or not." Being honest about the draft does not mean you have to downgrade every single Niner selection, sometimes in spite of your own evaluation. An example: Fleming: "A good football player. Athletic, quick and productive." Your own words, and you make him sound like an above average pick for a fifth rounder. Yet you give his selection a "D" grade. You had to stretch the facts and "speculate" (imagine) that he's only 6'1" and taken as an ILB, in order to argue that he's not a good fit for the team. That doesn't sound like an honest evaluation, based on your own words.

Obviously, honest, fair and impartial draft evaluations are a good thing. Your claim that you are providing those is somewhat belied by your own words, however. Too many criticisms based on speculation, unsupported hypotheticals, meritless claims.

It raises an interesting question: Which is worse, a fan who supports his team and roots for each and every draft selection to be successful, or a draft "expert" who ignores his own stated evaluations in order to criticize a team's draft? The former may be a fanatic; the latter is being unfair.
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by Oldschool9erfan:
I am DIE HARD niner fan and I love the draft, but I don't have the time to review all players before the actual draft. But now I've watched Jenkins against tape of the other WR (Wright, Hill, Sanu, Streeter, Blackmon, Floyd)......it's surprising that he wasn't rated higher. Jenkins is not just a "speed" guy, he is productive, got the speed, has decent height and didn't have the best Qb's throwing to him.

People talked a lot about Streeter and Hill because they are big and 6 4 and 215 and really fast (4.36), but neither of those guys have hardly any college production compared to Jenkins. Those guys wouldn't be in the conversation at all except for the combine. Even I thought the Niners could have used Streeter in the 5th round, but Jenkins is a much better prospect. If you listen to the draft gurus (mayock and kiper) said Streeter and hill are superraw and only really run the 9 route. so that is MASSIVE gamble you are taking. Jenkins is way more pro ready than those guys.

I agree to some extent that no matter who we pick we are going to be biased. But the true football fans on the board can watch college tape and make their own decisions give us a little credit.

Not trying to insult any Niners fans, and I hope they don't take it the wrong way. This was really directed toward one member who eagerly critiques my draft without really knowing the players. The basis of his argument is that the Niners selected them, so the players must be good. That is not an unbiased, fair, rational way to approach the draft in our grading.

As stated in this thread, I believe, I challenged one poster who did not believe in this bias to post a DeCastro or Looney thread. I said the results wold come out about 60-40 for DeCastro, even though if DeCastro was the Niners selection, the number would be 99-1 percent. I was not far off. Right now the number is 66-34 percent for DeCastro.

I am also somewhat limited in time, but still dedicate an enormous amount of time following the players through their careers, in the postseason, etc. And, when it comes down to it, it is one man's opinion. But to challenge my draft from the standpoint of, I really don't know the players but I know you are wrong because the Niners did ( fill in the blank) is not a strong argument.

MadDog, I tend to agree with most everything you say and hate to see people nitpick at your opinions.

Being the most raw, natural pass rusher in the draft I wanted Aldon Smith badly, but didn't see any way that we would draft him (given that he projected in the late teens to early 20's and many felt he was a better fit for a 4-3). I could still see where you were coming from in preferring JJ Watt as a better scheme fit, and safer pick.

Unfortunately, I also don't see the the value or the same elite ability in AJ Jenkins as I saw in Aldon Smith.

I believe that Balke is getting too cute with his selections in trying to look at specific elite traits in a player and projecting them as better players based on these measurable traits (trying the Billy Beane sabermetrics approach). Last year it was Aldon Smith and his unique arm length. This year it is AJ Jenkins and his hand size/arm length/40. Aldon Smith was a great prospect and a great natural pass rusher. His arms may have been an asset for doing this, but it was not his arm length in particular that made him the elite athlete that he is. He has violent hands, a high motor, can rush inside and out, and displayed such a natural ability to rush the passer. We hit a homerun on Aldon, I'm just afraid that we did it for the wrong reasons and that in hitting on Aldon Smith, this faulty approach is vindicated in Baalke's eyes.

If it was really explosion we were targeting we could have gotten this in spades with our later picks. I'm no expert, but am entitled to my opinion (as are all of us here). If I were the GM, my draft would have been as follows:

1) Cordy Glenn
2) Rueben Randle
4) Joe Adams (I would have traded out of the 3rd as well as there were too many good players at non-positions of need, but would have used the 4th round pick)
4) Josh Norman
5) Chris Rainey
6) Markelle Martin
6) David Molk
7) Cam Johnson

Time will tell which draft will be better, but I just don't see any level of ability that the 1st and 2nd day of Baalke's draft brings, that Day 3 of mine doesn't.

As far as 49er fans hyping up our picks. It is UNREAL. Colin Kaepernick being voted the best QB and Joe Looney being neck and neck with David Decastro is absurd.

If you could show me one "Joe Looney Bandwagon" thread or even mention leading up to the draft then I will rest my case. Looney, while a solid run blocker throughout college, looked terrible in one practice at the Senior Bowl and hurt his foot in the process. Decastro on the other hand has done nothing but dominate both in college, combine, and pro day. While Looney may very well end up a solid player and pick, what has changed between now and two weeks ago other than the fact that Looney was drafted by the 49ers? Any player can sound good in theory when you look at the height/weight/highlights, these are NFL players, and now that they are 49ers these 49er fans are trying so hard to make them into something that they're not.
[ Edited by 49oz2superbowl on May 4, 2012 at 6:02 PM ]
i like how people are ignoring the only valid criticism. i really do. lulz.
One thing I have been seeing a lot with Jenkins and James as far as grades go is: Jenkins and James are good players but they reached for Jenkins and didn't need James because of the crowded backfield so you get a D or F. Not only on here but a lot of expert grades. We aren't just drafting for now we are drafting for the future and to hopefully build a dynasty. That takes more than one good year and we have to keep replenishing the talent pool for that to happen. So even if Jenkins doesn't contribute much this year Williams, Ginn and Moss are all FA's after this year. All 3 could be gone leaving Crabtree, Manningham and Jenkins. Hard to believe we don't need him. Same with James... personally I wait a year to replace Gore but let's face it even though he did well last year he isn't his old self. He might have a year or two left. Dixon is probably gone, Cartwright is a ST player... Jacobs is on a 1 year deal. Leaves possibly Gore, James and Hunter for next year. Doesn't look like overkill to me. We needed playmakers... guys who can take it to the house... explosion... really lacked that last year (vd might be our only game changer on O). So even if they can't contribute right away they will eventually... we needed playmakers on O and we got them. Just have to look at the bigger picture.
Originally posted by nw9erfan:
Awesome!!

there is no fighting in the draft war room
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,537
Originally posted by zugschef:
i like how people are ignoring the only valid criticism. i really do. lulz.

Enlighten me. What is the only valid criticism that is being ignored?
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,537
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by buck:
If you refrained from remarks such as those highlighted in bold, this discussion would be more civil.

I find your charge that some fans are not honest and your implied assertion that you are honest to be particularly irksome.

First, the charge borders on the banal as there can always be some fans who are not honest.
Second, instead of painting with a broad brush, challenge those individuals who you feel are not honest.

If you are skeptical, I encourage you to go ahead and post a "Who will be a better NFL guard: DeCastro or Looney"? Pre-draft, this would probably be a 99%-1% vote for DeCastro, and people would be relentlessly slamming the poll as the stupidest thing they have ever seen. Post draft, my guess would be 60%-40% DeCastro, but there would be a lot of anti-DeCastro sentiment. We saw the same results last year with the post-draft, "Who will be the best NFL quarterback from this class?" thread. Want to take a wild guess who won?

If DeCastro was selected by the Niners, this board would be fighting to get in as many DeCastro Pro-Bowl Bound threads as possible, and people would never even think about Looney. I'm not so sure there are more than ten people who knew Looney going into the draft. You could run a similar thread for any pre and post draft WR thread on who will be the best WR in the draft. Run that one for fun as well.

The point being that fans desperately want their players to succeed, and this alters their ability to make a fair judgment on a player. It is not an honest way to evaluate talent and future success. It is not criminal, it is human nature. But, it is not accurate.

I am skeptical. I followed your suggestion and created the poll. "Who will be a better NFL guard: DeCastro or Looney"?

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl-draft/165578-who-better-nfl-guard-decastro-looney/#post1

You are a fan.

I strongly urge you to curb or control that mind altering desperation that limits your ability to make a fair judgement of a player.

I understand that it is difficult for you to do this.

But, if you want members to trust your talent evaluation, you must learn to control this desperation that so limits your integrity and clouds your judgement .

I wrote the below in the poll thread, but it also fits in this thread.

There have been 1,899 Views on this thread. edit: Now. there have 3,696 Views

There have been only 99 votes. The vote stands at 72% to 28% edit: There have been 209 votes. The vote now stands at 75% to 25%.

I just do not think your prediction can be accurately be classified as dead on.

I do not deny the existence of a bias in favor of 49er players.

In fact, given that this is forum dedicated to 49ers, it does seem logical to expect such a bias to exist.

Again, I urge you stop painting with a broad brush and challenge those individuals that you feel are not honest.

Cheers.
[ Edited by buck on May 8, 2012 at 7:03 PM ]