There are 190 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Quality more important than Quantity in the draft

Originally posted by Murphys1:
Why move up when the draft flattens out after the first 15 or so...lots of starter material in round 2. As I said in a different thread, I wish we had 7 picks in rounds 2 and 3, and we'd do fine. Unless we can get a guy like Watkins, let's just get 4 or 5 future starters and hope one or two develop into stars.

This. I'm amazed at how many keep insisting on trading up when the depth of this draft is in the middle rounds, if anything it might be better for the 49ers to trade down, acquire some extra picks next year and keep it rolling forward. The difference between a guy like Justin Gilbert and a Kyle Fuller or Jason Verrett isn't big enough to justify trading away multiple picks for him. With as stacked as this draft is, you can find almost equal talent all the way through the end of the 2nd round.
Originally posted by Garlicboy:
There are only so many roster spots. Quantity is finite.

You contradict yourself. You only want trading into the 2nd or 3rd round, but that will not yield Gilbert, Dennard or Pryor.

Who cares? Gilbert is not that much better of a prospect than a guy like Fuller who can be had without trading up. People are going nuts over him because of the Combine which is a huge mistake. Pryor is a decent safety prospect but nothing to write home about and with the 49ers likely re-signing Pryor, they can afford to take a guy to develop over a year or two behind Whitner. Dennard I think is an outstanding prospect, a potential shutdown corner in the NFL but when the strength of the draft is the CB position, I can't justify trading up for him.


You also have to accept that draft picks will be able to replace guys that are currently on the roster, guys like Baldwin and others are not guaranteed to be on the roster, not to mention the 8 or 9 free agents that will be walking from the 49ers. I can see the 49ers adding about 8 or 9 players through the draft.

Last year a whole bunch of people posted on here about how the 49ers weren't going to draft a lot of players and how they were going to trade away a lot of their picks to move up and they would take 5 or 6 players at most and they still ended up drafting 9 or 10 guys. In the NFL, you have to replenish your roster and replace talent on a yearly basis, planning for 2-3 years down the road, not just the following year.
[ Edited by Phoenix49ers on Mar 2, 2014 at 11:48 PM ]
I'll be very surprised if Baalke stays at 30.
Like last year, even though the niners pick late it will be an entertaining draft. Some picks will be used to move up, others will be used to gain extra picks the next year. I also read that many teams may seek to move out of their picks in the top ten and others on the outside of the top ten will look to move up. Not to mention the movement within the top top. Everyone is clamoring it is a talent filled draft, so there maybe some teams that look to get extra picks. Sometimes a team gambles and loses when they move back, then the next thing you know they are pissed and want to deal again.

Hopefully, Baalke can take advantage if he smells blood to move up when others panick and over or under pay.


Originally posted by Garlicboy:
There are only so many roster spots. Quantity is finite.

You contradict yourself. You only want trading into the 2nd or 3rd round, but that will not yield Gilbert, Dennard or Pryor.

Like all drafts, until they suit up and play, they are spashy names, who is to say they succeed? Montana, Sherman, Brady were all late picks, have a whole bunch and you may find a diamond in the rough. Draft is an inexact science. You may not end up with Megatron or Deion, but it is the team that finds gems in the rough more often that are in the playoff hunt consistently. Hell, teams have taken from the niners practice squad and they did well.
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Last year a whole bunch of people posted on here about how the 49ers weren't going to draft a lot of players and how they were going to trade away a lot of their picks to move up and they would take 5 or 6 players at most and they still ended up drafting 9 or 10 guys. In the NFL, you have to replenish your roster and replace talent on a yearly basis, planning for 2-3 years down the road, not just the following year.h
I agree, still they may trade a pick or two for next years, with Baalke it is about opportunity. If he can trade a thrid round for a second round next year he would. It is weighing the pros and cons if a player they like is their or not. Last year Tank and Lattimore was there and they knew they could stash them. If they weren't he might have acted differently.

The only sure things is death and taxes. Baalke keeps everyone guessing, move up, move down, stay pat, trade picks for next year. So any of you clamoring for a player, thats not the pick , remember-if he doesn't have long arms, that pick's odd has decreased
  • xcfan
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,481
the first three rounds are stacked with starters. you'd be a fool not to make a play for a player or two.
I'm with Phoenix. This draft is deep and I can see Baalke taking advantage of some other team homing in on their draft crush to move up in the latter rounds and gain more picks for next year.

Even with our stacked roster, I can see open spots in our secondary, at receiver and the OL.
Originally posted by ninergold:
I'm with Phoenix. This draft is deep and I can see Baalke taking advantage of some other team homing in on their draft crush to move up in the latter rounds and gain more picks for next year.

Even with our stacked roster, I can see open spots in our secondary, at receiver and the OL.

And it's not even so much to stack picks in this draft, but to continue stacking picks in future drafts. If Baalke can trade out of the 1st, pick up an extra 2nd or 3rd rounder next year as a result, go for it.
We are in a great position , the draft is a lot deeper than some think , we could stand pat and still get some solid players , but it will be tempting for our front office to package some picks and move up and grab a couple impact players that will contribute immediately , either way our squad is going to have a field day with the wealth of picks at our disposal
Don't know that they need to trade up...Cooks or Beckham should be there at #30. Let's say they want Cooks...if Baalke feels somebody else might pick him, he won't hesistate to trade up (likely NTE 5 spots up). I like Cooks over Beckham primarily because of his tremendous production. He also looks more stout, which helps. I see Beckham more like Manningham and we know how banged up he's been. I agree with your overall draft assessment...given Lattimore, Carradine, Marquardt, Ian Williams, Dial should be on the active roster. I'd much rather have 6-7 blue-chippers than 11-12 guys, at least half of whom won't sniff the roster. PS could change a bit, but it's pretty strong already.
with the amount of picks we have and a deep roster already, we should be using a mid round pick on a specialist such as a kick returner. I would gladly have a guy on the roster who ONLY returns punts/kick offs like a Hester (when Chi didnt use him as a wr). Of course i can already see us instead, using these picks on injured players that play O or D line, CB, WR etc.
The counterpoint to this concept is to draft more players than we have spots for, and have them compete for roster survival. This would increase pressure on rookies, as well as many vets. I think either method has merit, and the deciding factor between the two should be the confidence the FO has in the options that are available when we pick.
The problem is that acquiring depth is not the Niners' issue. Their main issue is to find starters in two prime areas, cornerback and wide receiver. Considering the talent already in these positions, trading up will likely be necessary to find someone ready to start with more talent than those in place. Standing pat with the starters that got the Niners to the championship game is safe, but not to take the chance at finding more productive players handicaps chances for admission into the Super Bowl. Another reason to trade up for a wide receiver is that Baalke has not been good at selecting receivers; trading up will lessen his subjectivity and rely more on consensus value.

Also, teams can't stockpile players for two or three years down the road (except for injured players). Players have to be able to play now, at least on special teams, which will take considerable talent to replace those already there, or they get cut. Lastly, acquiring a quantity of picks that will force talented players off the roster will help only other teams, particularly those with fewer selections in the draft.
[ Edited by Paul_Hofer on Mar 3, 2014 at 11:53 AM ]
Imagine if Baalke:

1.) Didn't trade up to draft Eric Reid because he thought he'd be there.

2.) Didn't trade up because he didn't want to use a 3rd to move up.

3.) Didn't move up because he viewed Jonathon Cyprien, Matt Elam and Eric Reid as Equals.


4.) Waited until the 2nd/3rd round and drafted Beccaria Rambo, Earl Wolf or TJ McDonald.
As he thought they were just a tad below Eric Reid.
[ Edited by Garlicboy on Mar 3, 2014 at 12:19 PM ]
Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:
The problem is that acquiring depth is not the Niners' issue. Their main issue is to find starters in two prime areas, cornerback and wide receiver. Considering the talent already in these positions, trading up will likely be necessary to find someone ready to start with more talent than those in place. Standing pat with the starters that got the Niners to the championship game is safe, but not to take the chance at finding more productive players handicaps chances for admission into the Super Bowl. Another reason to trade up for a wide receiver is that Baalke has not been good at selecting receivers; trading up will lessen his subjectivity and rely more on consensus value.

Also, teams can't stockpile players for two or three years down the road (except for injured players). Players have to be able to play now, at least on special teams, which will take considerable talent to replace those already there, or they get cut. Lastly, acquiring a quantity of picks that will force talented players off the roster will help only other teams, particularly those with fewer selections in the draft.

well said Paul Hofer!