There are 88 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Wide Receiver Class of 2014

Originally posted by BigYellowKahuna:
Not sure if this has been posted yet but Matt Barrows on Greg Cosell's thought on some of the big WR's in the 2014 draft :


http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2014/02/think-big-a-ranking-of-wrs-who-fit-49ers-physical-style.html

Sorry, s/h posted here as well:

On the topic of WR's, it's nice to know there is some serious SIZE out there for us:
Kelvin Benjamin Florida State 6-5, 234
Mike Evans Texas A&M 6-5, 225
Donte Moncrief Ole Miss 6-3, 226

(Videos of each inside from Cosell) Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2014/02/think-big-a-ranking-of-wrs-who-fit-49ers-physical-style.html#storylink=cpy

On the flip side, we have Crabtree (healthy), Boldin and VD who receive around 75% of the passes in this offense. As much as I would love to have some youth, speed, size, athleticism, talent with these guys (for a year or two down the road to replace either Crabtree or Boldin) what we need RIGHT NOW is a Manningham-like player. Manningham is a guy who "had" excellent burst and shakeability off the LOS. He was incredibel as creating space and separation in very tight quarters (esp. the RZ) and was an excellent route runner. Like Jerry Rice said, you win or lose within your first one or two steps off the LOS. Period. We have VD, Crabtree and Boldin...none of these guys are electric at the snap and at the LOS but very good once they get going (Crabtree in RAC, VD in seperation speed and Boldin in body control and positioning - all three have excellent hands).

Now, is Patton in this mold? It's hard to say b/c he's had so few AR or primary read targets. So if we're looking to get better down the road, we should go with the players listed above BUT if we want to improve next year, we may need to get a Manningham-like player later in the draft (ideally if he can double as a #3 WR/Returner).

Thought on who would fit as a returner and excellent Manningham-like player and how this could effect the draft?

PS: Also, don't expect a top first round WR draft pick to get many, if any looks next year with Crabtree, Boldin and VD on the field. It was recently shown that we rarely run 3 or 4+ WR sets. So lower your expectations BIG TIME!
I say we draft both Benjamin and Bryant at the receiver position.
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by BigYellowKahuna:
Not sure if this has been posted yet but Matt Barrows on Greg Cosell's thought on some of the big WR's in the 2014 draft :


http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2014/02/think-big-a-ranking-of-wrs-who-fit-49ers-physical-style.html

Sorry, s/h posted here as well:

On the topic of WR's, it's nice to know there is some serious SIZE out there for us:
Kelvin Benjamin Florida State 6-5, 234
Mike Evans Texas A&M 6-5, 225
Donte Moncrief Ole Miss 6-3, 226

(Videos of each inside from Cosell) Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2014/02/think-big-a-ranking-of-wrs-who-fit-49ers-physical-style.html#storylink=cpy

On the flip side, we have Crabtree (healthy), Boldin and VD who receive around 75% of the passes in this offense. As much as I would love to have some youth, speed, size, athleticism, talent with these guys (for a year or two down the road to replace either Crabtree or Boldin) what we need RIGHT NOW is a Manningham-like player. Manningham is a guy who "had" excellent burst and shakeability off the LOS. He was incredibel as creating space and separation in very tight quarters (esp. the RZ) and was an excellent route runner. Like Jerry Rice said, you win or lose within your first one or two steps off the LOS. Period. We have VD, Crabtree and Boldin...none of these guys are electric at the snap and at the LOS but very good once they get going (Crabtree in RAC, VD in seperation speed and Boldin in body control and positioning - all three have excellent hands).

Now, is Patton in this mold? It's hard to say b/c he's had so few AR or primary read targets. So if we're looking to get better down the road, we should go with the players listed above BUT if we want to improve next year, we may need to get a Manningham-like player later in the draft (ideally if he can double as a #3 WR/Returner).

Thought on who would fit as a returner and excellent Manningham-like player and how this could effect the draft?

PS: Also, don't expect a top first round WR draft pick to get many, if any looks next year with Crabtree, Boldin and VD on the field. It was recently shown that we rarely run 3 or 4+ WR sets. So lower your expectations BIG TIME!

Some might argue that our rare use of 3-wide sets is partially due to personnel. You want to utilize playmakers if you have them.
Originally posted by LottOfDefense:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by jimrat:
Originally posted by Murphys1:
OTC--no Cooks? Do you feel he's too small to fit the Niner profile? Sure do love his numbers, though.

And Davante Adams

Not sure they'd like Cooks that much, for whatever reason. Also think they may see Cooks as a player we wouldn't utilize enough to warrant a high selection. Beckham barely makes the cut because of our love for SEC talent and his return ability. Davante Adams is a talented player, but if they're looking for a major deep threat, he's not it. He can make tough catches, no doubt, but he's not a burner. The 49ers don't seem intent on straying from their strategy unless they're shocked a player is still available (like Patton was last year). My guess is if they're looking for a stretch the field element, they will pass on players they have not locked in on as "round targets". This has consistently been their strategy for the past few years.

In 2011, we added several "developmental projects", from early picks (Kaepernick - adjust to pro offense, Culliver - transition from safety to corner), to late ones (Kilgore - transition from T to C/G, Mike Person - transition from T to G, Bruce Miller - transition from DE to FB)

In 2012, it was "add speed" at positions of need (Jenkins, LMJ, Trenton Robinson)

In 2013, we added more developmental prospects that we knew would not play much right away (Carradine, Lattimore, Dial, Moody, Daniels)

This year? I think we go back to trying to add speed again, but we do it with the intention of maintaining team speed on defense, and for offense the idea is to give Kaepernick someone who he's comfortable with and can actually use that strong arm to throw to.

I look at 2012 as an aberration from the norm, and not a repeating trend. I think Baalke tried to get too cute with the 2012 draft having had a success hangover from how well the team played that year and how well the 2011 rookie class performed. He adjusted back to the original philosophy in 2013 and we should see more this year.

My favorites in your list our Landry and Moncrief. Would love to see them get drafted, and then draft this years Patton, the guy that falls later.

I agree with this. I guess my point was that while I DO believe they are going to go after speed, they are going to approach it differently, and do so within the confines or their typical strategy that was the most successful. In keeping this in mind, I am having to remind myself that this may require some patience on draft day. We're going to get a receiver -- it'd be ludicrous and absolutely unconscionable for us not to -- but it may not be extremely early as some of us hope. We needed a receiver and waited until round 4 last year. Now, I disagreed with that approach and personally feel it'd be a mistake to wait that long this year especially with this WR crop so incredibly top-heavy, but I would not be completely shocked if they waited. I seriously hope they don't... but won't be blindsided if they do.
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by BigYellowKahuna:
Not sure if this has been posted yet but Matt Barrows on Greg Cosell's thought on some of the big WR's in the 2014 draft :


http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2014/02/think-big-a-ranking-of-wrs-who-fit-49ers-physical-style.html

Sorry, s/h posted here as well:

On the topic of WR's, it's nice to know there is some serious SIZE out there for us:
Kelvin Benjamin Florida State 6-5, 234
Mike Evans Texas A&M 6-5, 225
Donte Moncrief Ole Miss 6-3, 226

(Videos of each inside from Cosell) Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2014/02/think-big-a-ranking-of-wrs-who-fit-49ers-physical-style.html#storylink=cpy

On the flip side, we have Crabtree (healthy), Boldin and VD who receive around 75% of the passes in this offense. As much as I would love to have some youth, speed, size, athleticism, talent with these guys (for a year or two down the road to replace either Crabtree or Boldin) what we need RIGHT NOW is a Manningham-like player. Manningham is a guy who "had" excellent burst and shakeability off the LOS. He was incredibel as creating space and separation in very tight quarters (esp. the RZ) and was an excellent route runner. Like Jerry Rice said, you win or lose within your first one or two steps off the LOS. Period. We have VD, Crabtree and Boldin...none of these guys are electric at the snap and at the LOS but very good once they get going (Crabtree in RAC, VD in seperation speed and Boldin in body control and positioning - all three have excellent hands).

Now, is Patton in this mold? It's hard to say b/c he's had so few AR or primary read targets. So if we're looking to get better down the road, we should go with the players listed above BUT if we want to improve next year, we may need to get a Manningham-like player later in the draft (ideally if he can double as a #3 WR/Returner).

Thought on who would fit as a returner and excellent Manningham-like player and how this could effect the draft?

PS: Also, don't expect a top first round WR draft pick to get many, if any looks next year with Crabtree, Boldin and VD on the field. It was recently shown that we rarely run 3 or 4+ WR sets. So lower your expectations BIG TIME!

Some might argue that our rare use of 3-wide sets is partially due to personnel. You want to utilize playmakers if you have them.

Possibly but I doubt it...we've had burners (Ginn/Moore) or deep threats (Moss) in the past and never used them. There is a reason we drafted McDonald in the 2nd and why we upped FB Miller's $. We're a power running team that utilizes an intermediate passing game to compliment. Unless we bring in a "burner" to take the top off the defense once or twice a game, I doubt this will happen. Besides, it'd tip the defense off like our jumbo packages. And really, we'd probably use this burner more for decoy routes rather than true weapons IMHO.
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by LottOfDefense:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by jimrat:
Originally posted by Murphys1:
OTC--no Cooks? Do you feel he's too small to fit the Niner profile? Sure do love his numbers, though.

And Davante Adams

Not sure they'd like Cooks that much, for whatever reason. Also think they may see Cooks as a player we wouldn't utilize enough to warrant a high selection. Beckham barely makes the cut because of our love for SEC talent and his return ability. Davante Adams is a talented player, but if they're looking for a major deep threat, he's not it. He can make tough catches, no doubt, but he's not a burner. The 49ers don't seem intent on straying from their strategy unless they're shocked a player is still available (like Patton was last year). My guess is if they're looking for a stretch the field element, they will pass on players they have not locked in on as "round targets". This has consistently been their strategy for the past few years.

In 2011, we added several "developmental projects", from early picks (Kaepernick - adjust to pro offense, Culliver - transition from safety to corner), to late ones (Kilgore - transition from T to C/G, Mike Person - transition from T to G, Bruce Miller - transition from DE to FB)

In 2012, it was "add speed" at positions of need (Jenkins, LMJ, Trenton Robinson)

In 2013, we added more developmental prospects that we knew would not play much right away (Carradine, Lattimore, Dial, Moody, Daniels)

This year? I think we go back to trying to add speed again, but we do it with the intention of maintaining team speed on defense, and for offense the idea is to give Kaepernick someone who he's comfortable with and can actually use that strong arm to throw to.

I look at 2012 as an aberration from the norm, and not a repeating trend. I think Baalke tried to get too cute with the 2012 draft having had a success hangover from how well the team played that year and how well the 2011 rookie class performed. He adjusted back to the original philosophy in 2013 and we should see more this year.

My favorites in your list our Landry and Moncrief. Would love to see them get drafted, and then draft this years Patton, the guy that falls later.

I agree with this. I guess my point was that while I DO believe they are going to go after speed, they are going to approach it differently, and do so within the confines or their typical strategy that was the most successful. In keeping this in mind, I am having to remind myself that this may require some patience on draft day. We're going to get a receiver -- it'd be ludicrous and absolutely unconscionable for us not to -- but it may not be extremely early as some of us hope. We needed a receiver and waited until round 4 last year. Now, I disagreed with that approach and personally feel it'd be a mistake to wait that long this year especially with this WR crop so incredibly top-heavy, but I would not be completely shocked if they waited. I seriously hope they don't... but won't be blindsided if they do.

I agree that Baalke won't be drafting a WR early, too many potential holes in the secondary to warrant it. Baalke's strategy is to go after a player of need and will move up to get them. There will probably be 2 or 3 positions in greater need if Boldin is re-signed. This puts them in a great position to draft Landry/Moncrief and than a slot receiver later in the draft. Because of their "offensive" philosophy, I can't see them think they have a huge need at the slot WR with Patton on the roster.
I look at Mike Evans, I keep thinking he would make one helluva TE than at WR.

Are they sure he's not a TE ....
[ Edited by qnnhan7 on Feb 18, 2014 at 2:36 PM ]
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 9,814
Originally posted by LottOfDefense:
I agree that Baalke won't be drafting a WR early, too many potential holes in the secondary to warrant it. Baalke's strategy is to go after a player of need and will move up to get them. There will probably be 2 or 3 positions in greater need if Boldin is re-signed. This puts them in a great position to draft Landry/Moncrief and than a slot receiver later in the draft. Because of their "offensive" philosophy, I can't see them think they have a huge need at the slot WR with Patton on the roster.

Depends on how you define early. We have at least five picks in the first three rounds.

If we do not extend Whitner, we will need a strong safety. We should take another cornerback.

That still leaves three picks in the first three rounds.

I think we will draft at least one wide receiver in the first three rounds and two in this draft.
[ Edited by buck on Feb 18, 2014 at 12:09 PM ]
Originally posted by NCommand:
Sorry, s/h posted here as well:

On the topic of WR's, it's nice to know there is some serious SIZE out there for us:
Kelvin Benjamin Florida State 6-5, 234
Mike Evans Texas A&M 6-5, 225
Donte Moncrief Ole Miss 6-3, 226



I like Moncrief the most out of these 3. Quick feet for his size. Looks more like a receiver than the other 2.
Originally posted by buck:
Depends on how you define early. We have at least five picks in the first three rounds.

If we do not extend Whitner, we will need a strong safety. We should take another cornerback.

That still leaves three picks in the first three rounds.

I think we will draft at least one wide receiver in the first three rounds and two in this draft.

The 9ers should have 6 picks with in the first 3 rounds, I would be shocked if they waited until the end of the 3rd to draft. I expect them to draft one in the 2nd or at #77 and then one later. Ideally the first to compete with Patton and the 2nd WR would have some speed and some special teams ability.
  • sfout
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 6,255
A bit of info regarding everyones' obsession with the first round WRs. The Steelers beat writers have all but said the Steelers are taking Evans or Benjamin with 15. The writer for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazzette went so far as to say that they've had discussions with Roethlisberger about taking a big bodied WR early. An obvious effort to finally fulfill his request of bringing in someone big.

Matthews and Robinson could be possibilities as well as they are 6'3 220 but it is safe to say that the Steelers will be taking one of those 4 to replace Sanders.
Originally posted by qnnhan7:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Sorry, s/h posted here as well:

On the topic of WR's, it's nice to know there is some serious SIZE out there for us:
Kelvin Benjamin Florida State 6-5, 234
Mike Evans Texas A&M 6-5, 225
Donte Moncrief Ole Miss 6-3, 226



I like Moncrief the most out of these 3. Quick feet for his size. Looks more like a receiver than the other 2.

That's the one who stood out to me as well.

MD had him @ 66 Donte Moncrief Arkansas WR.

So that is one of our second round picks. We go FS/SS or CB @ #1 then? How about the 3rd-6th pick. We may not even have to move this draft.
Originally posted by NCommand:
That's the one who stood out to me as well.

MD had him @ 66 Donte Moncrief Arkansas WR.

So that is one of our second round picks. We go FS/SS or CB @ #1 then? How about the 3rd-6th pick. We may not even have to move this draft.

I've been a big fan of Moncrief for awhile, he's shown the ability to consistently get separation and while he's a bigger receiver, he does have some good quickness and very reliable hands. I would be happy to see him added, very talented and experienced guy who played well against some of the better defenses in college football.




"Cosell also likes Moncrief more than other observers. He cautioned that the following comparisons were meant to give people a frame of reference, but he said Moncrief reminded him a bit of NFL players Demaryius Thomas and Josh Gordon. "Some teams will see him as a better fit than others," Cosell said. "He's a big, physical athlete who definitely has first-step explosion."Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2014/02/think-big-a-ranking-of-wrs-who-fit-49ers-physical-style.html#storylink=cpy"



I definitely see the Josh Gordon comparison. Moncrief plays faster than he'll likely run at the Combine but he can beat a defensive back right off the line and get open downfield in a hurry, combine that with great leaping ability and he's a very intriguing prospect.
[ Edited by Phoenix49ers on Feb 18, 2014 at 1:41 PM ]
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Originally posted by NCommand:
That's the one who stood out to me as well.

MD had him @ 66 Donte Moncrief Arkansas WR.

So that is one of our second round picks. We go FS/SS or CB @ #1 then? How about the 3rd-6th pick. We may not even have to move this draft.

I've been a big fan of Moncrief for awhile, he's shown the ability to consistently get separation and while he's a bigger receiver, he does have some good quickness and very reliable hands. I would be happy to see him added, very talented and experienced guy who played well against some of the better defenses in college football.




"Cosell also likes Moncrief more than other observers. He cautioned that the following comparisons were meant to give people a frame of reference, but he said Moncrief reminded him a bit of NFL players Demaryius Thomas and Josh Gordon. "Some teams will see him as a better fit than others," Cosell said. "He's a big, physical athlete who definitely has first-step explosion."Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2014/02/think-big-a-ranking-of-wrs-who-fit-49ers-physical-style.html#storylink=cpy"



I definitely see the Josh Gordon comparison. Moncrief plays faster than he'll likely run at the Combine but he can beat a defensive back right off the line and get open downfield in a hurry, combine that with great leaping ability and he's a very intriguing prospect.

Thanks for the expert insight guys!
I feel we need a playmaker,
I don't want some big slob WR who can't turn a catch and burn people up field.

Which is why i want this guy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrV19HYDCnk