Originally posted by susweel:
MD gave us a F for not trading up for DeCastro.
Yes......and as much as I respect MD, I disagree with him on this point. It comes down to this...
MD's thinking is that the Niners have struggled mightily to put a solid player at that RG spot for years, ever since Smiley left. Quite true. The question then becomes... Does adding a great quality RG solve the Niners' offensive problems enough to warrant investing1st and 3rd round picks on said player (which is what it would have taken to trade up for DeCastro)?
The Niner FO clearly didn't think so, even if they felt that DeCastro might someday become a Pro Bowl player. In general, I don't think the team places a high value on the OG position, thinking they can develop a solid OG via good coaching and therefore don't need to invest a high draft pick on one....instead saving those high picks for skill players such as the guys we've seen them draft in the past two years.....pass rusher, QB, CB, WR, and RB....
The Niners' Front Office's thinking obviously was that they already had a good developmental RG in Kilgore and simply needed to add a decent prospect to compete for that position (which could be had later in the draft)....and of course, that is what happened. They felt that the teams' biggest weakness last season was not the OL per se, but playmakers on offense or, more specifically, guys who can stretch the field, get open consistently on pass routes, and actually create concern for opposing defenses.
As we all know, the team was woeful on third down and in the red zone, so they chose to get playmakers with their first two picks. Now....we can all argue about the players themselves and whether they got good value at those slots in the draft but I think no one can argue with their strategy
of adding playmakers and guys with top speed.