There are 116 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

MadDog's Niners Draft Grade and Analysis

MadDog,

Again, I'm going to say that I like your posts and you do your homework, and Ill give you props because you do some much more than the other guys you even pulled slowey as a potential pick.

I also agree that most fans on the board are going to be a little bit bias towards the Niners picks and overrate them because we all want them to do well.

However, I do feel that there are a number of fans on the board who "know their s**t" about football. I played football, and have watched it since I was a little kid so I feel if I watch the tapes of players that I can make a judgement on a player.

You rated Stephen Hill and Sanu a lot higher than Jenkins.......I'm still unsure why you rated them so high. HIll was a workout warrior at the combine, only runs deep routes, and has a combined 46 catches since his Junior high school team. He has the size and speed and blocking ability that you want, but will he ever be a wide reciever in the NFL, based on your review of him he blows away Jenkins who had more production in his junior year than all through college. So that pick by you is totally by combine size and speed. Sanu had a ton of production in college, but ran and 4.71 at the combine. He may have better size but may never be able to get open in the NFL. Jenkins has the production, the speed, the agility and is average sized........how come you missed him on your board and didn't have him rated higher? Why was he the 52nd rated player? Also Jenkins had 54% of the passing offense at Illinois which was a bad team, the next guy had 26 catches for 260 yards.

So again, since you are the draft guru guy and claim to be an expert how come you missed him? I guess I would love to hear how you compare Hill and Jenkins?

Originally posted by hofer36:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
I wouldn't read too much into completely isolated quotes. You could have one team saying that and thirty others saying the opposite.


on the other hand, the one team saying it could be right, and the other 30 teams wrong

Yeah for sure......I just offer it as different opinions from the board saying that DeCastro was the best prospect in 10 years? And he's a lock for all pro guard for years to come. Also offers insight on jenkins.

The reason I like the quotes is that they support our picks........and it's from an unbiased (or non niners slanted) source that falls in line with some of the niners decisions. It's just more food for thought. Obviously a lot of teams missed on Jenkins or didn't have him rated as highly.
MadDog, thanks for your draft analysis. I happen to find your posts very entertaining because I tend to strongly (but respectfully) disagree with your views. I know my timing in this thread isn't the greatest but I've been meaning to respond to it. I'm not a draft expert by any means. My knowledge of the rookies are based mainly on scouting reports I've come across. Therefore, I'm not here to debate or argue with your player evaluations. I'm more focused on your reasoning behind the grades.

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Round One- AJ Jenkins
Grade: F

The reason for the grade is more than the player (because to me, Jenkins at 30 is a C+ grade).

I think it's unfair to grade Jenkins an F because you believe we "could've/should've" drafted DeCastro. Unless you were in the war room during the draft, you don't know if a trade up was even a possibility. Its unreasonable to give an F grade based on an assumption. If you believe that Jenkins at 30th overall deserves a C+ then it makes sense to just go with that grade since its based on what actually happened.


Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Round 5- Darius Fleming- Good football player that is athletic, quick, and productive. Not sure how he fits on our team. I speculate the team will shift him inside to ILB, and he will compete for the primary backup role under Bowman. He provides some insurance in case Bowman does not re-sign with the team in the future. The team had greater needs, and there were better players on the board, so this is a head scratcher to me. Grade: D

Based on your reasoning, I'm confused why you think this pick deserves a D. I'm not sure what you expect from a 5th round pick but I think selecting a "Good football player that is athletic, quick, and productive" in this round is great. I understand you believe we had greater needs/better players on the board, but why is picking a good football player in the 5th round (or any late round) worthy of a below average grade?


Originally posted by MadDog49er:
So, as you can see, this is a complicated grade, with the variable of additional productive players next year. In most drafts, the greatest focus of the grade is the first two or three picks, and this was the down part of this draft class. Just not enough bang for your buck, and the loss of a potential Pro-Bowl type player in DeCastro because the team did not make the move up. Late rounders and future picks helped the final score below.

Final Draft Grade: C

You chose to put more emphasis on the first few picks and less on the later selections, but don't you think ALL the picks are equally as important when analyzing a draft class? The most successful draft classes include gems that were found in the mid-late rounds. Consider the greatness of Walsh's 1986 draft class (which didn't have a 1st rounder but instead had many mid-late round picks). The point I'm trying to get across is that the draft is about getting good football players throughout the process, not just the first few picks. The mid-late rounds are pretty important too. With that said, lets take a look at your draft analysis (with equal emphasis across the entire class):

1. Jenkins (C+) "good player, solid #2 WR"
2. James (D) "rotational back"
3. Trade (A) "good negotiation"
4. Trade (A) "great value"
4. Trade (A) "great value"
4. Looney (B-) "smart, savvy, technically sound"
5. Fleming (D) "athletic, quick, productive"
6. Robinson (A) "steal, one of the best FS prospects, outstanding pick"
6. Slowey (A) "terrific pick, brilliant play for a 6th rounder"
7. Johnson (A) "2nd-3rd round value, could be starting material"

According to your analysis, the positives include: 4 potential starters (Jenkins, Looney, Robinson, Johnson), 3 great/good trades, and a versatile backup with excellent upside (Slowey). The negatives include: a rotational back who wont be getting significant snaps and a backup LB who's out of place. It appears your pros far outweigh your cons regarding this draft. Take away your disappointment in not "trading up" for DeCastro and it no longer looks like a "C" draft anymore.
[ Edited by candlestick49er on May 20, 2012 at 3:16 AM ]
Originally posted by LieutKaffee:
MadDog, thanks for the analysis. As the first draft was unfolding I was hoping like heck the 49ers were going to make a move for DeCastro. Then, in the second round, I was hoping like heck Konz would fall just a little bit further (after the Bears traded up for Jeffrey instead of Konz, I thought he had a chance).

But don't you think it's obvious in hindsight that (1) the 49ers didn't consider OL a big need, (2) they didn't have DeCastro or Konz graded as highly as most of us (for that matter, none of the NFL teams seemed to)?

Given (1) and (2), don't you think your grades are too low? You're projecting your own draft crush (DeCastro) onto what you think the 49ers should have done, but the 49ers did exactly what they set out to do. It's not like they botched their plan. They just didn't want the guys that we wanted them to want...

This
[ Edited by juycho on May 20, 2012 at 5:58 AM ]
James and Jenkins have a boost of power few players have. They are high impact and like quarterbacks are valued higher for some teams needs.
I say A+ overall for the off season.
[ Edited by juycho on May 20, 2012 at 5:58 AM ]
just saw this now...hopefully this matches last year and all year long we get to hear MD pretend like he's still right while the rookies are major contributors to the team's success.

Granted this year I think it will be a much tougher task cuz these guys were more drafted as change of pace/eventual starters rather than last year when we were thin at positions like CB and OLB so Aldon and Cully played a big part on D while Hunter took over as Frank's main backup.

Personally I think it's crazy to grade picks on what could've been done. They took the guys they did for a reason. I'm sure Harbaugh and the 49ers front office knew about as much as there is to know about DeCastro so if they felt as strongly about him as you or some other draftniks they would've traded up to get him given the starter void at RG.
Originally posted by juycho:
This

MD has been quite clear from the start. He's giving his analysis, not trying to get inside the heads of the 9ers war room.

Points #1 (9ers evaluation of their OLine) and #2 (9ers evaluation of DeCastro) are completely unrelated to what he's trying to do.
Fantastic analysis as always, but don't agree especially the first two.

The POV that Jenkins will ONLY be a #2 is ludicrous and shows a lack of vision, IMO. There's a reason Baalke went after this kid and the Rams wanted him just as much. He excels at route running, he's a natural sure-handed pass catcher, speed like the Crank, and breaks out of routes seamlessly...w/o that much coaching let alone NFL coaching. In our system, he has some serious upside as he can get much stronger with one full year of our offseason workout regime, he a true die-hard work-ethic junkie, and he seems to be destined to fall under Jerry's wing which is outstanding in it's own merit. My point is, that the "scouts" ID'd AJ to be that WR who can line up anywhere and demand attention due to his "explosiveness". He will be used similarily like Aldon and generate just as effective results.

That explosiveness was also found in another skill position, RB. JH had his dose of LMJ and knows him first hand and what that speed and running ability can do to break open a game. Baalke and Harbaugh picked a sure fire playmaker who's success against great Ds has earned him the respect he deserves. Again, he fits the mold of the Niner, a die-hard worker w/love of football and the focus on it. Oh yea, he's very talented, too...bonus. His explosiveness will also help us in ST once he get more acclimated. But it just seems shortsighted when such a horrible grade is placed on this pick especially what he can bring to both offense and STs. I'm not a homer of his nor Oregon ball, but he simply jumps out at you on any highlight film and so many of them. So what if we have a full RB core? We just upgraded ours again.

A "F" and a "D" seem way off base just given the "need" parameter. Offensive explosiveness was #1 in my book over OG #2 (and let me tell you, I was cursing Baalke for not jumping up for DeCastro at the heat of the moment, too). But I'm not a scout. Yet, I know an offensive playmaker's value is much higher over OLs especially OGs even one as gifted as DeCastro. They didn't give up anything, got their boy and met the #1 need. Not only that, they get one of their athletic OLs while stockpiling picks for next year later so they can focus on that #1 need. So what do they do with their next pick? Another "explosive" offensive playmaker and how!

Only time will tell with this group, but IMO and POV, Baalke did very well again and the values will come in extra TDs, possession and field position in just this year alone. I agree with all your other grades except for RD 5 where I believe again Baalke wanted more versatility as well as depth especially since he could play STs. Unfortunately, we will have to wait on him and he's already far behind the curve.

In all, I dig your analysis, but disagree with some. But your MadDog, and props go to you for all you do for this site.
[ Edited by ninertico on May 20, 2012 at 4:31 PM ]
Mad Dog;
Reeapectfully disagree with you analysis! The Grade is an A!
Baalke is running the draft so it's no wonder MadDog gave it a bad grade.
Originally posted by smithgdwg:
Baalke is running the draft so it's no wonder MadDog gave it a bad grade.

A "C' is not a bad grade. It is an average/mediocre grade. A bad grade is a D or F.
Originally posted by ninertico:
Fantastic analysis as always, but don't agree especially the first two.

The POV that Jenkins will ONLY be a #2 is ludicrous and shows a lack of vision, IMO. There's a reason Baalke went after this kid and the Rams wanted him just as much. He excels at route running, he's a natural sure-handed pass catcher, speed like the Crank, and breaks out of routes seamlessly...w/o that much coaching let alone NFL coaching. In our system, he has some serious upside as he can get much stronger with one full year of our offseason workout regime, he a true die-hard work-ethic junkie, and he seems to be destined to fall under Jerry's wing which is outstanding in it's own merit. My point is, that the "scouts" ID'd AJ to be that WR who can line up anywhere and demand attention due to his "explosiveness". He will be used similarily like Aldon and generate just as effective results.

That explosiveness was also found in another skill position, RB. JH had his dose of LMJ and knows him first hand and what that speed and running ability can do to break open a game. Baalke and Harbaugh picked a sure fire playmaker who's success against great Ds has earned him the respect he deserves. Again, he fits the mold of the Niner, a die-hard worker w/love of football and the focus on it. Oh yea, he's very talented, too...bonus. His explosiveness will also help us in ST once he get more acclimated. But it just seems shortsighted when such a horrible grade is placed on this pick especially what he can bring to both offense and STs. I'm not a homer of his nor Oregon ball, but he simply jumps out at you on any highlight film and so many of them. So what if we have a full RB core? We just upgraded ours again.

A "F" and a "D" seem way off base just given the "need" parameter. Offensive explosiveness was #1 in my book over OG #2 (and let me tell you, I was cursing Baalke for not jumping up for DeCastro at the heat of the moment, too). But I'm not a scout. Yet, I know an offensive playmaker's value is much higher over OLs especially OGs even one as gifted as DeCastro. They didn't give up anything, got their boy and met the #1 need. Not only that, they get one of their athletic OLs while stockpiling picks for next year later so they can focus on that #1 need. So what do they do with their next pick? Another "explosive" offensive playmaker and how!

Only time will tell with this group, but IMO and POV, Baalke did very well again and the values will come in extra TDs, possession and field position in just this year alone. I agree with all your other grades except for RD 5 where I believe again Baalke wanted more versatility as well as depth especially since he could play STs. Unfortunately, we will have to wait on him and he's already far behind the curve.

In all, I dig your analysis, but disagree with some. But your MadDog, and props go to you for all you do for this site.

Thanks for your thoughts. If the Niners wanted to go WR, then I had other guys higher on the board, with Hill, Quick, Sanu all better options. I graded Jenkins the 7th best WR in the draft, below these players.

Hill was the top WR on my board at the time, and according to reports at the rookie camp for the Jets (got to take it with a grain of salt), he looked really, really good.

With those first rounders, a team really needs to maximize its value, and I just don't see Jenkins playing to the level of these other players.
Originally posted by genus49:
just saw this now...hopefully this matches last year and all year long we get to hear MD pretend like he's still right while the rookies are major contributors to the team's success.

Granted this year I think it will be a much tougher task cuz these guys were more drafted as change of pace/eventual starters rather than last year when we were thin at positions like CB and OLB so Aldon and Cully played a big part on D while Hunter took over as Frank's main backup.

Personally I think it's crazy to grade picks on what could've been done. They took the guys they did for a reason. I'm sure Harbaugh and the 49ers front office knew about as much as there is to know about DeCastro so if they felt as strongly about him as you or some other draftniks they would've traded up to get him given the starter void at RG.

Just an honest evaluation. However, for you, I take it all back and give all the picks an A+. Because, as we know, Baalke never misses. Hopes that makes you happy.
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Just an honest evaluation. However, for you, I take it all back and give all the picks an A+. Because, as we know, Baalke never misses. Hopes that makes you happy.

OK, all done here. Time to close the thread down. Nothing more to say.
I would like to give myself a A+

Seriously though it would be much worse if MD gave homer opinions and just labeled every pick a winner. these grades are based on his opinions and how he felt guys should have been drafted. We all know he can be wrong just like he can be right. I don't get why isn't so hard to just say we have different opinions. We should argue those points and keep it civil.
[ Edited by lamontb on May 21, 2012 at 10:03 AM ]