Is this possible

Originally posted by NickSh49:
But then you're asking those players to develop and show their talent in less than four months time this summer!?! We don't have the space to keep all 13!!


So what you're saying is "let's take ALL these dudes, throw them in camp, and figure out who is dope and who is not in a super small window of time." Meanwhile, the guys who get cut in August will go play for other teams.

It's just not realistic with the roster the 49ers have now. The numbers just don't work out. It is dumb to spend 13 picks on new players when you don't have the space on the roster to develop them properly. You're throwing them all into practice and expecting to figure out who is good and who is crap in record time. That's not a good plan.

Yes, I get that but it's a new day in the NFL. The days when an OLman could play back up for four or five years and then come in to start is long gone. Smart coaches can sometimes figure out which ones will become good versus the guys who will flatline on potential...but it's getting harder.

A lot of people complained about letting Cooper get away last year and this year will be worse...but if Morris develops then it wasn't necessarily a mistake. I listed a lot of marginal players a few pages back who could be replaced by a good rookie...no reason to assume a rookie has no shot if you trust your evaluation process. But look back and see the lists of draft picks who did not make it on this team, even though Baalke is considered a very good draft GM.

2013
Daniels
Cooper

2012
Jenkins
Robinson
Slowey
Johnson

2011
Johnson
Jones
Person
Holcomb

Most of these guys were low picks and some will make it on other teams, but others made the team and are making a difference. Here are the guys who were drafted after the first four rounds and have been pretty good:

2013
Dial 5th
Moody 6th
Bykowski 7th

2012
Flemming 5th

2011
Kilgore 5th
Miller 7th

Edit: how many x niners can you list who are starting for other teams and making a major impact? Cooper? Not steller but I like him. Others?

Edit #2: I might agree with you if the team could keep twenty guys on a JV roster but that's not the current system.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by NickSh49:
But then you're asking those players to develop and show their talent in less than four months time this summer!?! We don't have the space to keep all 13!!


So what you're saying is "let's take ALL these dudes, throw them in camp, and figure out who is dope and who is not in a super small window of time." Meanwhile, the guys who get cut in August will go play for other teams.

It's just not realistic with the roster the 49ers have now. The numbers just don't work out. It is dumb to spend 13 picks on new players when you don't have the space on the roster to develop them properly. You're throwing them all into practice and expecting to figure out who is good and who is crap in record time. That's not a good plan.

Yes, I get that but it's a new day in the NFL. The days when an OLman could play back up for four or five years and then come in to start is long gone. Smart coaches can sometimes figure out which ones will become good versus the guys who will flatline on potential...but it's getting harder.

A lot of people complained about letting Cooper get away last year and this year will be worse...but if Morris develops then it wasn't necessarily a mistake. I listed a lot of marginal players a few pages back who could be replaced by a good rookie...no reason to assume a rookie has no shot if you trust your evaluation process. But look back and see the lists of draft picks who did not make it on this team, even though Baalke is considered a very good draft GM.

2013
Daniels
Cooper

2012
Jenkins
Robinson
Slowey
Johnson

2011
Johnson
Jones
Person
Holcomb

Most of these guys were low picks and some will make it on other teams, but others made the team and are making a difference. Here are the guys who were drafted after the first four rounds and have been pretty good:

2013
Dial 5th
Moody 6th
Bykowski 7th

2012
Flemming 5th

2011
Kilgore 5th
Miller 7th

Edit: how many x niners can you list who are starting for other teams and making a major impact? Cooper? Not steller but I like him. Others?

Edit #2: I might agree with you if the team could keep twenty guys on a JV roster but that's not the current system.

Dial? Moody? Flemming? Has Bykowski even seen the field? You're telling me these guys have been "pretty good?" I'm talking about drafting franchise players and you're saying we need the Darius Flemmings of the world?

You're talking about taking 13 guys and figuring out if we should keep them within 3 months. I'm sorry, but that's not a logical strategy.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NickSh49:
But then you're asking those players to develop and show their talent in less than four months time this summer!?! We don't have the space to keep all 13!!


So what you're saying is "let's take ALL these dudes, throw them in camp, and figure out who is dope and who is not in a super small window of time." Meanwhile, the guys who get cut in August will go play for other teams.

It's just not realistic with the roster the 49ers have now. The numbers just don't work out. It is dumb to spend 13 picks on new players when you don't have the space on the roster to develop them properly. You're throwing them all into practice and expecting to figure out who is good and who is crap in record time. That's not a good plan.

First of all, if we draft well, we're going to cut players who can play in the NFL and are pretty much certain to go to another team and do well anyway. Case in point Ed McCaffrey. We cut him after 1994 because we were loaded at WR and he goes on to play for Denver for a very successful career.

Second, the fact that you have multiple drafts in the 2nd and 3rd rounds doesn't mean you didn't do your homework on them and studied them. If you have, say 4 picks in the 2nd round, and no picks in the first - and you pick WR CB WR WR (for example) you aren't picking those WR's out of a hat. You have studied them as you would have studied the first rounders.

Finally, why not overload a historically positional weakness with some draft capital? Walsh did that in 1981 and it worked well. (granted - Walsh was one of a kind)He did the same thing in '83 with the linebacker position.

13 guys is too many. So is 11, especially with this roster. I stand by that.

If you guys want to go back to 2005 and argue this notion, that would make sense. The fact is that we don't need that much help, and we won't be able to figure how who is worth a s**t by August anyway.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NickSh49:
I'm not sure where that came from. How does that relate to the notion that the 49ers want to find a trade partner so they can take the guy they believe in? Again, I think you're coming from this from the standpoint that "the Niners are going to miss on their draft picks, so more guys therefore are better." I think that's a defeatist attitude. And the problem, again, is that NFL front offices don't draft scared. They don't hedge their bets that way. They do research and make informed decisions about the best way to improve their football team.

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl-draft/178030-49ers-draft-prediction-picks-then-updated-espn-reports/page2/

If you go to Post #18 on that page, you'll see where I broke down the difference between first-round WR's and WR's taken in rounds 2-7. The chances of finding a true franchise player at WR beyond Round 1 are slim. Now, your counter to that argument is that first round receivers bust as well, which is valid.

However, again, my argument is that even if you go "more bodies" over "one guy with supposed talent" is that you could easily get a Ryan Broyles and a Brian Quick in the second round instead of simply a Dez Bryant.

I think we'll go around in circles here... you think we should hedge our bets, and I think they should go all-in on one.

But the crux of my argument is that the more talented players are in Round 1, so why not take the more talented player you have the most confidence in instead of compromising in the second round with players who are not as highly graded?

Cause again, if you wait or trade down, that's what you are doing. You are compromising and hoping for the best. You are simply not adding the most talented players to your roster. You're taking players with a lower grade and hoping they play above their supposed potential.

And isn't that what drafting AJ Jenkins was by the way? Taking a player that was supposedly better than advertised? That didn't work out so well, and I think the 49ers would rather move up and take a more touted prospect than spend more picks on lesser players.

I read it. Interesting that they didn't take a WR in the first round last year. Patton was a 4rth round pick.

The counter-argument to this is that first-round guys bust just as often.

That is my point. First round picks don't always make it either. Joe Montana was a 3rd round pick. Charles Haley was a 4rth. So what does all this have to do with Talent Evaluation? Talent evaluation is the heart of a General Managers job. It determines whether or not he'll stay at his pick, trade up or trade down. The best GM's are the best talent evaluators. So any trade up or trade down, to be successful, you have to have great talent evaluation skills.

The strategy of trading down is to assume that you aren't going to be 100% successful at talent evaluation and I think it's more rooted in reality. I think that's a valid strategy. Trading up (or in the case of AJ Jenkins *not* trading down) can be making a big mistake in talent evaluation. It can happen to any GM. I think if you have a positional weakness that has been historically a positional weakness for a long time, I don't see why trading down and putting some numbers at that position, as well as putting more work in to evaluate those draftees isn't a viable strategy.

They didn't take a receiver in the first round last year because they took Jenkins in 2012. That's a simple case of waiting to see if the guy would pan out. He didn't. It is what it is.

The reasoning is not all-encompassing here, not universal. I'm not saying, "Take a first-round receiver or nothing every year regardless of the situation with the team." It's a matter of what your roster requires. For example, I would argue against the Lions drafting a WR in the first round this year. They have bigger needs at other positions and added Golden Tate in free agency.

But I do think the 49ers need to draft at the position with the mentality that both Crabs & Boldin are unknown quantities with the team down the road. I think they need to invest in the position with a talent they see starting at the #1 or the #2 for the next 3-5-8 years. And I think this is the year you do it... you don't wait a year or two years from now when Boldin retires and we're stuck with Michael Crabtree and no one else that's really worth a s**t.

You think that player can be found in the second round. You think the chances are better if they take more guys in the second round instead of a higher-graded talent in the first. We disagree on that.

And I think what separates my argument a bit here is that by trading up, you get to choose the player. With your scenario, you don't. You're just hoping the players you like fall to you.

And that's the biggest difference. I'm arguing the 49ers should move up and take the dude they want. You're arguing that they should stay put or trade down and HOPE the talent they like is there when it is their turn to pick.

With my strategy, the Niners will get the guy they want assuming they can execute the trade. A team will be on the clock and they can say, "Mr. Receiver is there, and we are going to commit to the player we want right now."

With your strategy, that guarantee isn't there. You can do all the homework you want, and the players you like may not be there. That's just a fact.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NickSh49:
I'm not sure where that came from. How does that relate to the notion that the 49ers want to find a trade partner so they can take the guy they believe in? Again, I think you're coming from this from the standpoint that "the Niners are going to miss on their draft picks, so more guys therefore are better." I think that's a defeatist attitude. And the problem, again, is that NFL front offices don't draft scared. They don't hedge their bets that way. They do research and make informed decisions about the best way to improve their football team.

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl-draft/178030-49ers-draft-prediction-picks-then-updated-espn-reports/page2/

If you go to Post #18 on that page, you'll see where I broke down the difference between first-round WR's and WR's taken in rounds 2-7. The chances of finding a true franchise player at WR beyond Round 1 are slim. Now, your counter to that argument is that first round receivers bust as well, which is valid.

However, again, my argument is that even if you go "more bodies" over "one guy with supposed talent" is that you could easily get a Ryan Broyles and a Brian Quick in the second round instead of simply a Dez Bryant.

I think we'll go around in circles here... you think we should hedge our bets, and I think they should go all-in on one.

But the crux of my argument is that the more talented players are in Round 1, so why not take the more talented player you have the most confidence in instead of compromising in the second round with players who are not as highly graded?

Cause again, if you wait or trade down, that's what you are doing. You are compromising and hoping for the best. You are simply not adding the most talented players to your roster. You're taking players with a lower grade and hoping they play above their supposed potential.

And isn't that what drafting AJ Jenkins was by the way? Taking a player that was supposedly better than advertised? That didn't work out so well, and I think the 49ers would rather move up and take a more touted prospect than spend more picks on lesser players.

I read it. Interesting that they didn't take a WR in the first round last year. Patton was a 4rth round pick.

The counter-argument to this is that first-round guys bust just as often.

That is my point. First round picks don't always make it either. Joe Montana was a 3rd round pick. Charles Haley was a 4rth. So what does all this have to do with Talent Evaluation? Talent evaluation is the heart of a General Managers job. It determines whether or not he'll stay at his pick, trade up or trade down. The best GM's are the best talent evaluators. So any trade up or trade down, to be successful, you have to have great talent evaluation skills.

The strategy of trading down is to assume that you aren't going to be 100% successful at talent evaluation and I think it's more rooted in reality. I think that's a valid strategy. Trading up (or in the case of AJ Jenkins *not* trading down) can be making a big mistake in talent evaluation. It can happen to any GM. I think if you have a positional weakness that has been historically a positional weakness for a long time, I don't see why trading down and putting some numbers at that position, as well as putting more work in to evaluate those draftees isn't a viable strategy.

They didn't take a receiver in the first round last year because they took Jenkins in 2012. That's a simple case of waiting to see if the guy would pan out. He didn't. It is what it is.

The reasoning is not all-encompassing here, not universal. I'm not saying, "Take a first-round receiver or nothing every year regardless of the situation with the team." It's a matter of what your roster requires. For example, I would argue against the Lions drafting a WR in the first round this year. They have bigger needs at other positions and added Golden Tate in free agency.

But I do think the 49ers need to draft at the position with the mentality that both Crabs & Boldin are unknown quantities with the team down the road. I think they need to invest in the position with a talent they see starting at the #1 or the #2 for the next 3-5-8 years. And I think this is the year you do it... you don't wait a year or two years from now when Boldin retires and we're stuck with Michael Crabtree and no one else that's really worth a s**t.

You think that player can be found in the second round. You think the chances are better if they take more guys in the second round instead of a higher-graded talent in the first. We disagree on that.

And I think what separates my argument a bit here is that by trading up, you get to choose the player. With your scenario, you don't. You're just hoping the players you like fall to you.

And that's the biggest difference. I'm arguing the 49ers should move up and take the dude they want. You're arguing that they should stay put or trade down and HOPE the talent they like is there when it is their turn to pick.

With my strategy, the Niners will get the guy they want assuming they can execute the trade. A team will be on the clock and they can say, "Mr. Receiver is there, and we are going to commit to the player we want right now."

With your strategy, that guarantee isn't there. You can do all the homework you want, and the players you like may not be there. That's just a fact.

Originally posted by NickSh49:
Dial? Moody? Flemming? Has Bykowski even seen the field? You're telling me these guys have been "pretty good?" I'm talking about drafting franchise players and you're saying we need the Darius Flemmings of the world?

You're talking about taking 13 guys and figuring out if we should keep them within 3 months. I'm sorry, but that's not a logical strategy.

So you can admit that they are replaceable? LOL...OK...with the 1st pick of the 49ers, #30 in the first round...they pick a third string MLB! Yeah...

Not sure what your point is. No good players can be drafted after the 2nd? 3rd? 4th? 5th? We should just trade all our picks for the highest three picks we can get and hope they aren't named Jenkins?

I see the point of trading up for qualilty and might do that if I were the GM but this draft is so deep that Baalke may not do that. He may picks five or six guys who will excel...but he won't know which five or six of the ten to thirteen will excel until training camp gets into full bore...if then.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by NickSh49:
Dial? Moody? Flemming? Has Bykowski even seen the field? You're telling me these guys have been "pretty good?" I'm talking about drafting franchise players and you're saying we need the Darius Flemmings of the world?

You're talking about taking 13 guys and figuring out if we should keep them within 3 months. I'm sorry, but that's not a logical strategy.

So you can admit that they are replaceable? LOL...OK...with the 1st pick of the 49ers, #30 in the first round...they pick a third string MLB! Yeah...

Not sure what your point is. No good players can be drafted after the 2nd? 3rd? 4th? 5th? We should just trade all our picks for the highest three picks we can get and hope they aren't named Jenkins?

I see the point of trading up for qualilty and might do that if I were the GM but this draft is so deep that Baalke may not do that. He may picks five or six guys who will excel...but he won't know which five or six of the ten to thirteen will excel until training camp gets into full bore...if then.

Yes, I'm admitting those fringe players are definitely replaceable. You are apparently arguing we should upgrade our 3rd stringers with some of these picks? That makes no sense... I mean I get the idea of improving your depth, but my point is that if you take more players, especially in later rounds, you're going to end up with a lot of bums instead of talent who will actually contribute.

I'm not saying ignore rounds 2-7. I'm saying we don't need 11 new players on this team, and therefore, trading up for a franchise WR in Round 1 makes a ton of sense. And your main argument against this is, "What if we mess up again? We should take more guys and cover our asses cause we could mess up, even though we don't have enough time this summer to evaluate all 11-13 of them to see if we were right in the first place."

And the thing you keep missing is that it's Baalke's job to know... and his scouts and etc. That's why they won't take 11 or 13 dudes. They'll do their homework and take their guys. They won't draft scared, which is what you're arguing. You're saying they should take more dudes cause they're afraid of messing up. You're saying they should hedge their bets. That's not how this works.

You're essentially saying our front office is going to admit they don't know what they're doing and say, "We're not sure who we really like, so we'll just take as many dudes we can and hope for the best." That's not how educated, well-paid people do their jobs. They don't throw darts and hope for the best.

Moving up means you take the guy you like. Trading down or staying put (with 11 picks at least) means you're HOPING the guy you like is there. The smarter thing to do is to be proactive and control your fate, not sit there and draft scared like you don't know what you're doing.

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by HarbaughzDeep:
8 roster spots are not available. That is your answer.

People keep saying things like this. The reality is that 8 roster spots very much could be available. We can stand to upgrade or add at the following positions QB, WR, OL, DL, OLB, ILB, CB, S. That right there is 8 spots in itself. Not to mention that we very well could draft two wide receivers. And we could draft a couple offensive and defensive linemen. Competition is key and what Harbaalke value!

Exactly. In my last draft game mock I drafted 10 players that would make the team for sure barring a total misjudgment of ability.(A Bust)

We could add a top DE, A top C or G, and a pass rusher That's 3 in the trenches.

Add a safety and up to 2 CB's. We have Brock, Cook and Culliver and the rest could be upgraded That's 3 DB's

We could add an ILB while Bowman is out and for a long term back up. That's 1

We could add a #3 QB That's 1

We could go after a 3rd TE or a back up FB That's 2

We could draft 3 WR's. We have Crabtree,Boldin,Patton and Lloyd. Baldwin's a bust and Osgood we can't afford anymore. With Boldin and Lloyd on borrowed time and Crabtree uncertain we need to start developing young receivers now because it takes time. We can't afford a roster spot for a wr who is only a coverage guy on special teams. If we draft 3 WR's and 1 is also a return man we go into camp with 7, our starters , Patton and Lloyd and the 3 rookies. If 1 gets injured before the season starts a roster spot opens and we keep the healthy 6. If they all stay healthy we cut Lloyd loose. We won't need him. We will have both starters, Patton and 3 talented rookies for depth. Lloyd wouldn't be needed. That's 3

Potential 13 roster spots. It all depends on the talent of the players.

If we traded back 5-8 slots twice and got a 3rd rd pick for each move we could end up around #45 with 2 more 2nd rounders and 5 more 3rd rounders giving us 8 total in rounds 2 and 3. If we draft well I could see all 8 making the team plus we would still have our 4th and 5th rd picks. There are Safties, ILB's and QB's that could still be on the board in the 4th and 5th rounds.

Originally posted by NickSh49:
Yes, I'm admitting those fringe players are definitely replaceable. You are apparently arguing we should upgrade our 3rd stringers with some of these picks? That makes no sense... I mean I get the idea of improving your depth, but my point is that if you take more players, especially in later rounds, you're going to end up with a lot of bums instead of talent who will actually contribute.

You replace players with better players, no matter the round. And we didn't think Moody was a first round guy because he wasn't...but he filled in really well when called upon. You say bums, I say potential all pros...tomato, tomauto.

I'm not saying ignore rounds 2-7. I'm saying we don't need 11 new players on this team, and therefore, trading up for a franchise WR in Round 1 makes a ton of sense. And your main argument against this is, "What if we mess up again? We should take more guys and cover our asses cause we could mess up, even though we don't have enough time this summer to evaluate all 11-13 of them to see if we were right in the first place."

The niners will start training camp with approximately 90 players. Some will be hurt, some will give up (not completely...well...Coffee did), some will prove to be not as good as they looked on film or fooled the scouts...just so many variables when judging talent. One kid from Stanford years ago, received his signing bonus, quit, and moved to the South Pacific with a suitcase full of drugs. One can't always count on twenty year olds.

And the thing you keep missing is that it's Baalke's job to know... and his scouts and etc. That's why they won't take 11 or 13 dudes. They'll do their homework and take their guys. They won't draft scared, which is what you're arguing. You're saying they should take more dudes cause they're afraid of messing up. You're saying they should hedge their bets. That's not how this works.

You keep missing that Baalke selected Jenkins with his name in an envelope...special surprise player...super talent...fast...productive...under the radar. How did that work out? I have not used the word scared or even implied scared. Where do you get this? They may or may not draft ten, twelve or fourteen players...I have no idea what Baalke would do. My comments are addressed to those who think we should draft no more than eight players, or five...after all...there aren't openings...no one should come to camp and compete...they have jobs and can take the offseason off. No need to worry...the niners are only going to draft for specific five need spots and every one else is totally safe. Is that really your take? Sounds like a good way to become mediocre.

You're essentially saying our front office is going to admit they don't know what they're doing and say, "We're not sure who we really like, so we'll just take as many dudes we can and hope for the best." That's not how educated, well-paid people do their jobs. They don't throw darts and hope for the best.

Once again, you are misinterpreting my message...Baalke will never say that and he will not admit Jenkins was a mistake. JH will likely not admit keeping Cooper may have been a good idea. These guys are really good at their jobs and their egos show it...which is all to the good! You seem to think making mistakes in the draft is an odd notlion...I believe it is wonderful if you hit on half your picks...no matter how much work you put into it.

Moving up means you take the guy you like. Trading down or staying put (with 11 picks at least) means you're HOPING the guy you like is there. The smarter thing to do is to be proactive and control your fate, not sit there and draft scared like you don't know what you're doing.

Baalke traded up when he had a chance to get Reid, Kaepernick, and other really good players. He has traded down when he had a guy targeted who might fall much later on other boards. That's how it works...not trade up because it's a good idea no matter the context. Last year the team had few weaknesses...they drafted eleven players. Three of them were released to the practice squad or outright, two went on the injured list...that was half their draft and yet folks think it was one of the best drafts last year. In 2011 they drafted ten players, six are still on the team and doing well. They are receiving an A or A+ from most people even though four of the ten picks amounted to nada. In 2010 they drafted Taylor Mays in the second round as a can't miss S...that did not work out well...they missed...it happens.

Once again, I will be hoping they can trade up and/or forward for better picks with some of their lower picks but I will never say they don't need to draft for competition. The great Joe Montana feared being cut every training camp...Walsh let every player know that there was someone out there better than they were and might replace them...that may have been unrealistic but Walsh drafted four QBs and traded for others during Montana's career...so it wasn't a totally empty threat. Young finally eased ( ) him out. It's a violent, competitive game and you need new bodies each and every year in hopes of finding better, faster, stronger, smarter replacements for every and any spot on the roster--starters to backups. Who knows...they may even draft a punter!

Originally posted by NickSh49:

They didn't take a receiver in the first round last year because they took Jenkins in 2012. That's a simple case of waiting to see if the guy would pan out. He didn't. It is what it is.

The reasoning is not all-encompassing here, not universal. I'm not saying, "Take a first-round receiver or nothing every year regardless of the situation with the team." It's a matter of what your roster requires. For example, I would argue against the Lions drafting a WR in the first round this year. They have bigger needs at other positions and added Golden Tate in free agency.

But I do think the 49ers need to draft at the position with the mentality that both Crabs & Boldin are unknown quantities with the team down the road. I think they need to invest in the position with a talent they see starting at the #1 or the #2 for the next 3-5-8 years. And I think this is the year you do it... you don't wait a year or two years from now when Boldin retires and we're stuck with Michael Crabtree and no one else that's really worth a s**t.

You think that player can be found in the second round. You think the chances are better if they take more guys in the second round instead of a higher-graded talent in the first. We disagree on that.

And I think what separates my argument a bit here is that by trading up, you get to choose the player. With your scenario, you don't. You're just hoping the players you like fall to you.

And that's the biggest difference. I'm arguing the 49ers should move up and take the dude they want. You're arguing that they should stay put or trade down and HOPE the talent they like is there when it is their turn to pick.

With my strategy, the Niners will get the guy they want assuming they can execute the trade. A team will be on the clock and they can say, "Mr. Receiver is there, and we are going to commit to the player we want right now."

With your strategy, that guarantee isn't there. You can do all the homework you want, and the players you like may not be there. That's just a fact.

First of all, anybody outside of the first round, first pick, is going to have to wait and see who will fall to them. That first round first pick is the only team that has *total control* of who they get and who they pick. Nobody else does.

Every football team is run just a tad differently from another. One guy's WCO system isn't exactly another guy's WCO system, so getting their *guy* that is unique to their team is a sound strategy. But again, it assumes that you will be 100% correct in your talent evaluations. I get that Harbaugh and Baalke are at or near the top regarding evaluation of talent, but as dtg_49er posted, if you get 2/3rds right, that *is* an excellent draft. No GM gets everything 100% correct.

I think at least several players a year make the 49er team as undrafteds, which means the rest of the NFL including Baalke screwed that up by not drafting an undrafted who makes the team. We're not talking about drafting eleven 7th rounders here, we're talking about maybe drafting possibly 4 *2nd rounders.* I think any athlete that is judged as going in 1st through 4rth round has the talent to make the team and be a starter.

Seattle had traded for Flynn *and* drafted a 3rd round QB. I'm pretty sure they pegged Flynn as a starter before seeing what that 3rd round QB could do. I'm pretty sure they are glad they drafted another QB that year in the 3rd round despite having Flynn and a former 2nd round QB pick on the team already. Also, trading up from round 4 and 5 to round 3 or round 2 is still considered a *trade up* too. Just not at the level of a first round pick trade up. Again, it's a very deep draft, and getting four second round picks this year is probably equivalent to getting 4 first round picks in other years.

Finally, while it makes spectacular television drama for Baalke to trade up and get a Mike Evans (and I'm all for a move like that) it doesn't mean they will do that. I think it's equally likely that that trade out of the first round and concentrate on depth because as you said, Crabs, Anquan, Baldwin, Osgood need to have good understudies behind them due to contract expiration or replaced by better talent.

Originally posted by MC9BEAT:

Exactly. In my last draft game mock I drafted 10 players that would make the team for sure barring a total misjudgment of ability.(A Bust)

We could add a top DE, A top C or G, and a pass rusher That's 3 in the trenches.

Add a safety and up to 2 CB's. We have Brock, Cook and Culliver and the rest could be upgraded That's 3 DB's

We could add an ILB while Bowman is out and for a long term back up. That's 1

We could add a #3 QB That's 1

We could go after a 3rd TE or a back up FB That's 2

We could draft 3 WR's. We have Crabtree,Boldin,Patton and Lloyd. Baldwin's a bust and Osgood we can't afford anymore. With Boldin and Lloyd on borrowed time and Crabtree uncertain we need to start developing young receivers now because it takes time. We can't afford a roster spot for a wr who is only a coverage guy on special teams. If we draft 3 WR's and 1 is also a return man we go into camp with 7, our starters , Patton and Lloyd and the 3 rookies. If 1 gets injured before the season starts a roster spot opens and we keep the healthy 6. If they all stay healthy we cut Lloyd loose. We won't need him. We will have both starters, Patton and 3 talented rookies for depth. Lloyd wouldn't be needed. That's 3

Potential 13 roster spots. It all depends on the talent of the players.

If we traded back 5-8 slots twice and got a 3rd rd pick for each move we could end up around #45 with 2 more 2nd rounders and 5 more 3rd rounders giving us 8 total in rounds 2 and 3. If we draft well I could see all 8 making the team plus we would still have our 4th and 5th rd picks. There are Safties, ILB's and QB's that could still be on the board in the 4th and 5th rounds.

I like this strategy as much as I like a trade up strategy. Excellent work.

James might fetch us a seventh rounder. Teams are simply waiting for us to release him. All leverage lost this offseason. Everyone knows the divorce is coming soon.

I don't see OL or DL being addressed in this draft, I think it is skill position all the way.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by NickSh49:
Yes, I'm admitting those fringe players are definitely replaceable. You are apparently arguing we should upgrade our 3rd stringers with some of these picks? That makes no sense... I mean I get the idea of improving your depth, but my point is that if you take more players, especially in later rounds, you're going to end up with a lot of bums instead of talent who will actually contribute.

You replace players with better players, no matter the round. And we didn't think Moody was a first round guy because he wasn't...but he filled in really well when called upon. You say bums, I say potential all pros...tomato, tomauto.

I'm not saying ignore rounds 2-7. I'm saying we don't need 11 new players on this team, and therefore, trading up for a franchise WR in Round 1 makes a ton of sense. And your main argument against this is, "What if we mess up again? We should take more guys and cover our asses cause we could mess up, even though we don't have enough time this summer to evaluate all 11-13 of them to see if we were right in the first place."

The niners will start training camp with approximately 90 players. Some will be hurt, some will give up (not completely...well...Coffee did), some will prove to be not as good as they looked on film or fooled the scouts...just so many variables when judging talent. One kid from Stanford years ago, received his signing bonus, quit, and moved to the South Pacific with a suitcase full of drugs. One can't always count on twenty year olds.

They still have to get down to 53. I still win the talent-eval arguement. There's simply not enough time to figure out who is any good between 13 players. You end up guessing and potentially letting good players go. That's just not smart, even with your "s**t happens" argument.

And the thing you keep missing is that it's Baalke's job to know... and his scouts and etc. That's why they won't take 11 or 13 dudes. They'll do their homework and take their guys. They won't draft scared, which is what you're arguing. You're saying they should take more dudes cause they're afraid of messing up. You're saying they should hedge their bets. That's not how this works.

You keep missing that Baalke selected Jenkins with his name in an envelope...special surprise player...super talent...fast...productive...under the radar. How did that work out? I have not used the word scared or even implied scared. Where do you get this? They may or may not draft ten, twelve or fourteen players...I have no idea what Baalke would do. My comments are addressed to those who think we should draft no more than eight players, or five...after all...there aren't openings...no one should come to camp and compete...they have jobs and can take the offseason off. No need to worry...the niners are only going to draft for specific five need spots and every one else is totally safe. Is that really your take? Sounds like a good way to become mediocre. Your take is that Baalke's past mistakes are going to affect the way he approaches this draft. That's not how it works. He's not going to take a boatload of players because he might miss. That's the crux of your arguement. Furthermore, I'm not against competition, but we have guys like Moody and Dial already on the roster who are already competing. Some positions don't need 8 guys to compete for 3 spots. I do think they should draft more than one WR, so it's not like I don't understand your logic.

You're essentially saying our front office is going to admit they don't know what they're doing and say, "We're not sure who we really like, so we'll just take as many dudes we can and hope for the best." That's not how educated, well-paid people do their jobs. They don't throw darts and hope for the best.

Once again, you are misinterpreting my message...Baalke will never say that and he will not admit Jenkins was a mistake. JH will likely not admit keeping Cooper may have been a good idea. These guys are really good at their jobs and their egos show it...which is all to the good! You seem to think making mistakes in the draft is an odd notlion...I believe it is wonderful if you hit on half your picks...no matter how much work you put into it. No, but your 50/50-thing is what is driving your argument to take 10 players or more, when again, the Niners don't have enough space for that many new players. Your argument is that some of these rookies should go up against the Moody and Dial's of the world, but again, 3 months is not enough time to figure out who is better. That's why you DEVELOP lower picks over time. An undrafted guy like Victor Cruz didn't get through the numbers game and injuries until his second year in the league. Infact, the Giants were going to put him on the PS until Rex Ryan said he was essentially in love with the guy. This stuff takes time, but let's bring in 13 guys and figure it out in 3 months? Dumb.

Moving up means you take the guy you like. Trading down or staying put (with 11 picks at least) means you're HOPING the guy you like is there. The smarter thing to do is to be proactive and control your fate, not sit there and draft scared like you don't know what you're doing.

Baalke traded up when he had a chance to get Reid, Kaepernick, and other really good players. He has traded down when he had a guy targeted who might fall much later on other boards. That's how it works...not trade up because it's a good idea no matter the context. Last year the team had few weaknesses...they drafted eleven players. Three of them were released to the practice squad or outright, two went on the injured list...that was half their draft and yet folks think it was one of the best drafts last year. In 2011 they drafted ten players, six are still on the team and doing well. They are receiving an A or A+ from most people even though four of the ten picks amounted to nada. In 2010 they drafted Taylor Mays in the second round as a can't miss S...that did not work out well...they missed...it happens. Mays was definitely not seen as a can't-miss-talent. Heavy hitter who can't cover. Singletary pushed for him after the Eagles took Nate Allen.

Once again, I will be hoping they can trade up and/or forward for better picks with some of their lower picks but I will never say they don't need to draft for competition. The great Joe Montana feared being cut every training camp...Walsh let every player know that there was someone out there better than they were and might replace them...that may have been unrealistic but Walsh drafted four QBs and traded for others during Montana's career...so it wasn't a totally empty threat. Young finally eased ( ) him out. It's a violent, competitive game and you need new bodies each and every year in hopes of finding better, faster, stronger, smarter replacements for every and any spot on the roster--starters to backups. Who knows...they may even draft a punter!

Again, I just don't think they need that many players. Draft at the positions you want competition at. I'd like to see them take 2 WR's and 2 CB's for sure, but I'd also like them to move up for a WR they are confident in and take a solid CB in the second round.

There just aren't that many positions where the 49ers can improve at in the all-22 scheme of things. WR & CB, yes. Safety to compete with Bethea, yes. OL & DL depth, yes. TE to compete with Vance? Yes.

I'd say that's about 8 players max. I don't need ILB's to compete with Bowman, Willis, & Wilhoite. Extend that thinking to the rest of the team where we have good starters and decent depth.