There are 160 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Who would 49ers have picked if they stayed at #34?

Who would 49ers have picked if they stayed at #34?

Originally posted by LieutKaffee:
Originally posted by maxsmart:
Baalke said they had a player targeted at #34, but he didn't know who would be available at #40 and they had a group of acceptable players. Harbaugh said that they had CB targeted during the draft but it didn't work out. "There definitely were times in the draft that we wanted cornerbacks. Had them targeted. But, that's the way it worked out."

We know that CB wasn't targeted with the picks in the 1st Reid, 2nd McDonald and 3rd Lemonier since they traded up for them. Also unlikely that they wanted a CB in the 4th. So I think that they may have picked CB Slay at #34 if they hadn't traded back to #40. Or perhaps Harbaugh wanted Hawthorne or McGee in the 5th?

I'm not sure that Carradine was their first choice, as Fangio said: "Carradine can only hope to be as good as Ray McDonald some day," Fangio said. "He's got a lot of climbing to do before I'm ready to compare him to Ray."
I'm on board with most of your thinking (nice analysis, by the way), except I don't think Fangio's comment is any indication of not liking Carradine as prospect. I think he was simply going out of his way to praise an established pro.

I agree, plus he doesn't want the rookie to get a big head.
Some of the analysis and speculation in this thread confuses me. The question is who would the 49ers have taken if they had stayed at #34. There are only six possible answers: Justin Hunter, Zach Ertz, Darius Slay, Giovani Bernard, Manti Te'o, Geno Smith, Tank Carradine. If Tank was their overnight favorite, their risk paid off and they got their guy. If it was one of the others, that means Tank was the backup plan.

We can cross off Bernard, Te'o, and Smith for pretty obvious reasons. I've long maintained the 49ers had zero-zip-nada interest in Ertz amid all the fanboying on the Zone, but that's only my personal gut feeling. Slay would make the most sense here (so I agree with the OP that it was Slay if it wasn't Carradine), but I think it's far more likely Carradine was in fact the target the whole time. Getting a 3rd in that trade was enormous. I think Baalke was willing to take the risk of losing Tank because (a) he's creaming his pants about all the high picks we have in 2014, and (b) he's smarter and better at mock drafts than we are, and was probably almost positive Tank would not get stolen.

As for when we had CBs targeted based on Harbaugh's comment? I think the possibilities are nearly endless who he may have been referring to. I think the OP is incorrect to rule out the third round simply because we traded up for Lemonier. When the 3rd round began it's entirely possible the 49ers had Mathieu, Wreh-Wilson, McFadden, and/or Logan Ryan ranked ahead of Lemonier on their board. They may have traded up for Lemonier because he was the last player they had left with a 3rd round grade and didn't want to miss out.

BW Webb was the only CB drafted in the 4th round, and a lot of Zoners thought he would be a good fit. It's certainly possible the 49ers' board went 1. Webb, 2. Patton, 3. Lattimore as the round was progressing and they were left with options 2 and 3. Finally, Terry Hawthorne had previously been linked to the 49ers and he went just a few spots before we took Dial. And Dial in the 5th had a bit of a "reach" feel to it. I think it's possible or even likely they preferred Hawthorne in that spot.
Glen Coffee
Originally posted by LieutKaffee:
Some of the analysis and speculation in this thread confuses me. The question is who would the 49ers have taken if they had stayed at #34. There are only six possible answers: Justin Hunter, Zach Ertz, Darius Slay, Giovani Bernard, Manti Te'o, Geno Smith, Tank Carradine. If Tank was their overnight favorite, their risk paid off and they got their guy. If it was one of the others, that means Tank was the backup plan.

We can cross off Bernard, Te'o, and Smith for pretty obvious reasons. I've long maintained the 49ers had zero-zip-nada interest in Ertz amid all the fanboying on the Zone, but that's only my personal gut feeling. Slay would make the most sense here (so I agree with the OP that it was Slay if it wasn't Carradine), but I think it's far more likely Carradine was in fact the target the whole time. Getting a 3rd in that trade was enormous. I think Baalke was willing to take the risk of losing Tank because (a) he's creaming his pants about all the high picks we have in 2014, and (b) he's smarter and better at mock drafts than we are, and was probably almost positive Tank would not get stolen.

As for when we had CBs targeted based on Harbaugh's comment? I think the possibilities are nearly endless who he may have been referring to. I think the OP is incorrect to rule out the third round simply because we traded up for Lemonier. When the 3rd round began it's entirely possible the 49ers had Mathieu, Wreh-Wilson, McFadden, and/or Logan Ryan ranked ahead of Lemonier on their board. They may have traded up for Lemonier because he was the last player they had left with a 3rd round grade and didn't want to miss out.

BW Webb was the only CB drafted in the 4th round, and a lot of Zoners thought he would be a good fit. It's certainly possible the 49ers' board went 1. Webb, 2. Patton, 3. Lattimore as the round was progressing and they were left with options 2 and 3. Finally, Terry Hawthorne had previously been linked to the 49ers and he went just a few spots before we took Dial. And Dial in the 5th had a bit of a "reach" feel to it. I think it's possible or even likely they preferred Hawthorne in that spot.


If Tank was the target all along, then he certainly wasn't a "must get" target. That is evident in what they did in order to get Reid. While 18th was probably too high, they just weren't willing to take a chance, if they were they would have waited till 31st. In all likehood, Hunter, Ertz and Slay just weren't on 49ers' board although their value were definitely there as proven by being picked at 34th, 35th and 36th respectively. But, like you said they were willing to take a chnace.

But, more likely it was probably a combination of both including losing a target from 19th to 33rd when they expected the guy to be available at 34th.That could have been absolutely anyone on that list. If it was a CB it could have been Trufant or Rhodes. There were 3 DL there too, but I guess we will never know. Is just hard to imagine the 9ers didn't want anyone all the way from 19th until Tank at 40th.
Originally posted by Rascal:
Originally posted by LieutKaffee:
Some of the analysis and speculation in this thread confuses me. The question is who would the 49ers have taken if they had stayed at #34. There are only six possible answers: Justin Hunter, Zach Ertz, Darius Slay, Giovani Bernard, Manti Te'o, Geno Smith, Tank Carradine. If Tank was their overnight favorite, their risk paid off and they got their guy. If it was one of the others, that means Tank was the backup plan.

We can cross off Bernard, Te'o, and Smith for pretty obvious reasons. I've long maintained the 49ers had zero-zip-nada interest in Ertz amid all the fanboying on the Zone, but that's only my personal gut feeling. Slay would make the most sense here (so I agree with the OP that it was Slay if it wasn't Carradine), but I think it's far more likely Carradine was in fact the target the whole time. Getting a 3rd in that trade was enormous. I think Baalke was willing to take the risk of losing Tank because (a) he's creaming his pants about all the high picks we have in 2014, and (b) he's smarter and better at mock drafts than we are, and was probably almost positive Tank would not get stolen.

As for when we had CBs targeted based on Harbaugh's comment? I think the possibilities are nearly endless who he may have been referring to. I think the OP is incorrect to rule out the third round simply because we traded up for Lemonier. When the 3rd round began it's entirely possible the 49ers had Mathieu, Wreh-Wilson, McFadden, and/or Logan Ryan ranked ahead of Lemonier on their board. They may have traded up for Lemonier because he was the last player they had left with a 3rd round grade and didn't want to miss out.

BW Webb was the only CB drafted in the 4th round, and a lot of Zoners thought he would be a good fit. It's certainly possible the 49ers' board went 1. Webb, 2. Patton, 3. Lattimore as the round was progressing and they were left with options 2 and 3. Finally, Terry Hawthorne had previously been linked to the 49ers and he went just a few spots before we took Dial. And Dial in the 5th had a bit of a "reach" feel to it. I think it's possible or even likely they preferred Hawthorne in that spot.


If Tank was the target all along, then he certainly wasn't a "must get" target. That is evident in what they did in order to get Reid. While 18th was probably too high, they just weren't willing to take a chance, if they were they would have waited till 31st. In all likehood, Hunter, Ertz and Slay just weren't on 49ers' board although their value were definitely there as proven by being picked at 34th, 35th and 36th respectively. But, like you said they were willing to take a chnace.

But, more likely it was probably a combination of both including losing a target from 19th to 33rd when they expected the guy to be available at 34th.That could have been absolutely anyone on that list. If it was a CB it could have been Trufant or Rhodes. There were 3 DL there too, but I guess we will never know. Is just hard to imagine the 9ers didn't want anyone all the way from 19th until Tank at 40th.

I think we're talking about two different things. I just realized some in this thread are using the word "target" in direct reference to Baalke's "absolutely we know" comment (which was made after the 1st round concluded), and some are using it in a broader sense of what player the 49ers went into the draft hoping to take at #34 (or something slightly less broad, such as what player the 49ers were hoping would make it to #34 as the draft was progressing into the 20s, etc.).

Of course Tank wasn't the "target all along." It's not like Reid and Tank were the literal #1 and #2 on their internal draft board.

When I made my post about Tank being the target, I meant in reference to Baalke's comment. Tank was the "target" on day 2 in that he was the player they were prepared to draft at #34, and the player they were most hoping to draft at #40. And if it wasn't Tank, then by definition it was one of those other five names. The OP offered interesting speculation that may have been Slay because of Harbaugh's comment about missing out on CBs they had targeted.

But given Tank's superior overall talent and the given the 49ers' demonstrated willingness to take injury risks in this draft, and given that DL was a more immediate need, all signs point to Tank being higher on the 49ers' board than Slay. Which would mean the CB comment refers to someone other than Slay.
[ Edited by LieutKaffee on May 5, 2013 at 2:00 AM ]
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 9,724
Originally posted by Rascal:
If Tank was the target all along, then he certainly wasn't a "must get" target. That is evident in what they did in order to get Reid. While 18th was probably too high, they just weren't willing to take a chance, if they were they would have waited till 31st.

In all likehood, Hunter, Ertz and Slay just weren't on 49ers' board although their value were definitely there as proven by being picked at 34th, 35th and 36th respectively. But, like you said they were willing to take a chance.

But, more likely it was probably a combination of both including losing a target from 19th to 33rd when they expected the guy to be available at 34th.That could have been absolutely anyone on that list. If it was a CB it could have been Trufant or Rhodes. There were 3 DL there too, but I guess we will never know. Is just hard to imagine the 9ers didn't want anyone all the way from 19th until Tank at 40th.

Being picked at a spot, does not prove value. A draftee's value will be proven on the field.

The drafting of Hunter, Ertz, Slay at 34, 35, and 36, or for that matter of Reid at 18, does not prove their value.

If it proves anything, it proves a team thought they had value at those spots.

My sense is that you feel pick 18 was too high for the Reid pick.

Since the 49ers traded up to get up him at 18, I do not see any reason to feel that they felt 18 was too high.
[ Edited by buck on May 5, 2013 at 7:14 AM ]
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 9,724
Originally posted by LieutKaffee:

We can cross off Bernard, Te'o, and Smith for pretty obvious reasons. I've long maintained the 49ers had zero-zip-nada interest in Ertz amid all the fanboying on the Zone.

I had Zack Errtz in my final mock.

I had never seen the word fanboying before, but I had a suspicion that it was not a compliment.

So I looked it up. Here is what I found.
v. To stand, drool, or worship the object of their obsession.

That is pretty demeaning. I just do understand the need that some people have to insult those with whom they disagree.

Thanks a lot.
Originally posted by buck:
I had Zack Errtz in my final mock.

I had never seen the word fanboying before, but I had a suspicion that it was not a compliment.

So I looked it up. Here is what I found.
v. To stand, drool, or worship the object of their obsession.

That is pretty demeaning. I just do understand the need that some people have to insult those with whom they disagree.

Thanks a lot.

Yeah, but that's basically a perfect description of a draft crush.
I feel the 49ers were looking for a CB in the 4th or 5th round but there was a mini run of CBs at that time
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Hunter-I never thought the 49ers were interested in him whatsoever, going back to the end of the regular season. Still to this day I can't think why so many here thought he was a viable option for the 49ers. A guy who is anything but physical, who isn't a good nor willing run-blocker on a physical running team? Yeah...not so much.

Not a big deal here, but I suspect that you are projecting your dislike of Hunter over these months on this particular comment. I mean, you just described Randy Moss here.. who had a role on our team (with those aforementioned characteristics). So it would make sense for SF to have had interest in Hunter to replace that role. Anyway, guess it matters not, at this point.
Originally posted by LieutKaffee:
Between days 1 and 2 Baalke said they absolutely knew who they were going to pick if they kept #34.

Yeah, but as fans, as this point we can basically parse through when Baalke is BSing. (e.g. the story about AJ's name being in the envelope since the night before, which nobody has ever believed for a second).

If Baalke was telling the truth in that moment, the only way to explain it is that they wanted to take Cyprien and were expecting the Jags to take a QB, and when that didn't happen, they traded back.
Very good question, OP. I think he would had selected the tank regardless of draft position.
Originally posted by LieutKaffee:
Between days 1 and 2 Baalke said they absolutely knew who they were going to pick if they kept #34.

This. LieutKaffe already broke it down nicely here:
Originally posted by LieutKaffee:
Some of the analysis and speculation in this thread confuses me. The question is who would the 49ers have taken if they had stayed at #34. There are only six possible answers: Justin Hunter, Zach Ertz, Darius Slay, Giovani Bernard, Manti Te'o, Geno Smith, Tank Carradine. If Tank was their overnight favorite, their risk paid off and they got their guy. If it was one of the others, that means Tank was the backup plan.

We can cross off Bernard, Te'o, and Smith for pretty obvious reasons. I've long maintained the 49ers had zero-zip-nada interest in Ertz amid all the fanboying on the Zone, but that's only my personal gut feeling. Slay would make the most sense here (so I agree with the OP that it was Slay if it wasn't Carradine), but I think it's far more likely Carradine was in fact the target the whole time. Getting a 3rd in that trade was enormous. I think Baalke was willing to take the risk of losing Tank because (a) he's creaming his pants about all the high picks we have in 2014, and (b) he's smarter and better at mock drafts than we are, and was probably almost positive Tank would not get stolen.

The key point here is that Baalke said AFTER round 1 had ended that he "absolutely" knew who they would be picking at 34. So Xavier Rhodes is not a possibility as Baalke already knew he was off the board. It's possible Cyprien was the target, but in all likelihood he wasn't, so Baalke was most likely referring to Hunter, Ertz, Slay or Tank. My guess, like most else, is Slay or Tank or complete BS smokescreen.

LINK: http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2013/04/baalke-expected-more-trading-in-the-first-round.html

"Here's the post-Round 1 press conference with Trent Baalke, who talks about Eric Reid and about how the trade with the Cowboys came about...

If there's no movement, do you know who you want tomorrow, right now? TB: 'Absolutely we know. But that doesn't mean that something can't happen over the night and you wake up tomorrow and the phone rings and somebody has a deal that you can't refuse and you trade back. Otherwise, we are prepared to make the pick.'"
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Originally posted by m_brockalexander:
Who cares? It's over.

It is such a long time till camp...can't we linger for a while? LOL!

Why? The Niners made a great pick and got two additional picks in return. If they f**ked it up, then we should debate what could have been.
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by Rascal:
If Tank was the target all along, then he certainly wasn't a "must get" target. That is evident in what they did in order to get Reid. While 18th was probably too high, they just weren't willing to take a chance, if they were they would have waited till 31st.

In all likehood, Hunter, Ertz and Slay just weren't on 49ers' board although their value were definitely there as proven by being picked at 34th, 35th and 36th respectively. But, like you said they were willing to take a chance.

But, more likely it was probably a combination of both including losing a target from 19th to 33rd when they expected the guy to be available at 34th.That could have been absolutely anyone on that list. If it was a CB it could have been Trufant or Rhodes. There were 3 DL there too, but I guess we will never know. Is just hard to imagine the 9ers didn't want anyone all the way from 19th until Tank at 40th.

Being picked at a spot, does not prove value. A draftee's value will be proven on the field.

The drafting of Hunter, Ertz, Slay at 34, 35, and 36, or for that matter of Reid at 18, does not prove their value.

If it proves anything, it proves a team thought they had value at those spots.

My sense is that you feel pick 18 was too high for the Reid pick.

Since the 49ers traded up to get up him at 18, I do not see any reason to feel that they felt 18 was too high.


I don't know what "value" you are talking about, of course we are referring to value in the context of the draft. If Hunter, Ertz and Slay didn't have value they wouldn't have been picked at those spots in line with what most experts had projected.

Whether Reid was too high at 18th was a point I was trying to make that Tank wasn't a "must get" target. You need to read the thread to know what we have been discussing here.