49ers Targeting Mike Evans?

Originally posted by hofer36:

Originally posted by GORO:
Last year it was reported the 49ers wanted to move up and take Sheldon Richardson, instead it was Eric Reid they traded up for and not earlier in the round like rumored. Baalke drafts for need in the early rounds so if they do move up it will be for Justin Gilbert or another Corner back they really like.

may be they tried to get richardson but couldn't get up that high

Yep, for all we know they may have had a deal with a team after the Jets pick to trade with if Richardson was still available. When he was gone and Vacarro was picked they probably felt that the safety's would start going and wanted to get their next guy.

Originally posted by Scoots:
The 49ers are not going to be in a win-now mode. They have said many times that they are operating in a win-always mode. Look at what they do in free agency ... does that look like the must win now?

I do agree that the 49ers must pick up a large jump ball red zone threat in this draft be it at WR or TE. I don't understand the people mocking Cooks to the 49ers as he doesn't solve the offenses biggest issue ... red zone scoring.

The 49ers seemed to be obsessed with WRs in free agency this year. Almost every major WR was rumored to be on their radar or actually came in for a visit. The talking point is "win always" the reality is no GM or head coach has the job stability to worry about 3 - 5 years down the road.

Originally posted by Ottawa49er:

If we move up, it had better be for a CB, not a wideout. We NEED a CB much more than we need a receiver!!!!

This is true. I wouldn't mind trading up for Gilbert or Dennard.

Originally posted by NeonNiner:

Originally posted by Ottawa49er:
If we move up, it had better be for a CB, not a wideout. We NEED a CB much more than we need a receiver!!!!

This is true. I wouldn't mind trading up for Gilbert or Dennard.

Not sure I agree. Sure, right now our starting WRs are better than our starting CBs.

But our WRs are not under long contract. And over the last several years the 9ers have shown they have a MUCH easier time finding CBs to fill in than WRs.

It really seems like our success rate with FA CBs is dramatically better than it is with WRs. Same is true with our draft picks...

I don't see much of a gap between the top CB and those that are likely to be available with our second round picks. I think after Evans, Watkins, Cooks, Beckham, and maybe Lee the talent drops a bit to guys like Robinson, Adams, Matthews, Moncrief, Benjamin...

As we all know though, every single pick of the draft is a crap shoot.

Originally posted by TheFunkyChicken:
Not sure I agree. Sure, right now our starting WRs are better than our starting CBs.

But our WRs are not under long contract. And over the last several years the 9ers have shown they have a MUCH easier time finding CBs to fill in than WRs.

It really seems like our success rate with FA CBs is dramatically better than it is with WRs. Same is true with our draft picks...

This!

That said, the players available at WR at the bottom of the first are not that exciting, but there are some really good CB options there and later in the draft there are quite a few really intriguing WR prospects.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by CWin4949:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by SaksV:

Originally posted by CWin4949:
JJ Stokes was similar to Evans IMO. I think Evans has more talent, but the ceiling is about the same.

This

Stokes was running in the 4.7 range. They are not comparable at all......

4.7.... not true.

Stokes was clocked at 4.54 in Santa Clara.

Those are not his combine #'s. Evans is faster. Combine is apples to apples comparison. Btw do you have a link to that claim in Santa Clara?

a link? No, but I think I vaguely remember something about him posting a 4.54 for one of the 49er scouts....

A link?? Really, you want me to actually PROVE it??? Come on man, what happen to the days of just taking a fellow fan at his word???

Like the West Coast Rap All Stars said Bro.....we're all in the same gang homie....

Shhhhh, a link.....You know what the hell website this is???

Lets not get all potato off in this mug....


OF COURSE I got a link...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1006929/2/index.htm


This spring, word got around that Stokes was in the neighborhood of 4.7, though a 49er scout timed him at 4.54—not blazing, but plenty quick for the San Francisco system.

Again....Im not saying Evans is JJ Stokes, I'm saying they're similar in style and Evans ceiling isn't very much more than Stokes was.

Originally posted by natrone06:

Originally posted by CWin4949:
Beating Cyrus Jones and John Fulton is hardly a ringing endorsement, dude won't be playing against street FAs on Sundays, and the OU was a borderline flag.

Not saying he doesn't have talent, just saying he's over hyped a bit and not worth trading way up in the draft to get.

Let me get this straight......you are saying the competition in the nfl will be at a higher level then college?

Well not in Jacksonville and Oakland anyway....

Originally posted by Butter:
The Niners have somewhere in the neighborhood of 45-48 players I think will beat out rookies for roster spots. They have another 10-15 that I think would likely get picked up by other teams if they were cut. Trading down is only an option of the are trading for future picks. But the Niners should be in win now mode at all costs.

Back on topic: If the Niners had a Mike Evans type player against the Ravens in the Super Bowl or the Seahawks last year, would Evans have won a jump ball to score the game winning touchdown? That to me is the real question.

I think the bigger question is do we have a QB that can make the right read and make a good throw with the correct touch on the pass to put it in a place where his WR can go up and get it and not in a spot where the DB can swat it away foe an INT....

We were also going to trade up to pick Jimmy Clausen in 2010...

Originally posted by JD81:
@evansilva ESPN's Chris Mortensen suggested Mike Evans as a trade-up target for #49ers. Mort hearing Niners "could be very aggressive in this draft."

@evansilva On NFL Insiders, Mort again talked about possibility of #49ers trade up for Mike Evans. "Buzz inside league circles that you keep hearing."

@evansilva Chris Mortensen said he's heard "more than twice" #49ers could be "ready to do something big" & #Raiders are "open for business" at No. 5.


Thoughts, Faithful?

If someone is hearing we are trading up, we are likely planning on trading back.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

I would say there is zero chance the Niners would move all the way up to 5. It would cost a fortune and Evans isnt worth that

It's also about what team is willing to trade to begin with. How bad a team wants a certain player also goes into the value of the slot,...NOT just that generic chart we see.

Also,...we could get other players @ #5. It may cost a lot but so does a Lombardi Trophy.

We don't have a bunch of slots for a slew of rookies,..we are limited to 53 with a roster that's full till next year. That means trade to future drafts (why when we're trying to win now?) or draft a bunch of injured players and hide them on IR for a year.

Again...53.

smoke and mirrors

I would be stunned if the 49ers don't trade up ... but I think it more likely they trade up to higher in the 2nd half of the first rather than into the top 5. Frankly I think it's absolutely not going to be into the top 5.

If one of the 15-20 players the 49ers have graded as first round prospects falls to a trading parter where the price is reasonable and possibly where the deal is already in place then the Baalke will go up to get his guy even if there is a possibility he'll be there at 30.

Originally posted by Ottawa49er:

Originally posted by kingkong916:

all this talk about WRs in the first round is to throw off everyone else, they are going CB in the first round.....definitely need a #1 CB

This

The 49ers dont place high value on cbs, we're going wr or another position/trade back