Working the Draft: Value Picks vs Over-Drafted Reaches

Baalke selected ~six "reaches" based on consensus opinion of value (per mock drafts), and only one "steal".

I like Baalke, but Baalke feels that he knows who is good and doesn't give a rat's ass what the consensus is. However if you can get a guy in rd 6-7 (eg. Pinion), why draft him in rd 5? Most of these six "reaches" likely would have been available a little later and he could have waited a little to draft them

My Hope = Baalke is so good that he KNOWS who is going to be good and didn't want to risk losing them by trading back.

My Fear = Baalke is arrogant and falls in "love" with his favorite "sons" and blindly "reaches" for them higher than they deserved to go

This draft will be a litmus test. It will be interesting to see how it works out. If Baalke is right and these "reaches" turn out to be really good players, we can rest easy knowing he's a darn good drafter. If they don't turn out great, we know Baalke isn't very good because he is arrogant and drafts players higher than needed and doesn't get good value for his picks.

"Reaches" and round projected to be picked: (per popular mock draft projections)
Rd 1. Armstead: many slotted him to the 49ers, but others (like Bill Polian) thought he was a reach. (so borderline reach)
Rd 2. Tartt: was projected in rd 3-4
Rd 4. Bell: projected in rd 5
Rd 4. Smelter: projected rd 5-7
Rd 5. Pinion: projected UDFA
Rd 6. Silberman: projected UDFA

"Steals": Rd 3. Eli Harold: projected rd 2

This whole draft seemed like a reach, but who knows, we just have to wait and see how they do on the field.

You do understand draft projections and "consensus" are meaningless and not supported by any real evidence. 32 different GMs with 32 different opinions on players in which none of us are privy to.

They're considered reaches based on what?? "draft experts" none of them are GMs for a reason lol...there's a lot more that goes into evaluating a player than what the media says. Maybe just maybe Baalke thought the players he drafted fit the scheme they want in SF, maybe they took certain players off their board or put them lower based on injuries or character concerns? Tons of zoners wanted Strong at 15, he dropped all the way to the 3rd for a reason.


Every single mock had Arik at 15 yet baalke was able to trade down with SD and still get the player they wanted, I could care less if one guy doesn't like him lol...you're really REACHING on that

you're pretty much just going off of CBS sports big board which has zero to do with SF's big board...they get paid a lot of cash to do what they do for a reason. Baalke has had this team stocked with talent since he came here and it was even more obvious when we lost so many starters last year and we were still able to go 8-8 in the toughest division.

Originally posted by natrone06:
You do understand draft projections and "consensus" are meaningless and not supported by any real evidence. 32 different GMs with 32 different opinions on players in which none of us are privy to.

This. All these draft ratings, profiles and projections are entertaining but lol at anyone who takes them to heart. Youre talking about someones subjective opinions of a player without thought to fit on a particular scheme or even full access to all the data that GM's are privy to.

The Cards took a guy in the 4th round that was widely thought to go undrafted, the Patriots took a long smapper right after the 49ers took Pinion, once the draft starts, all the previous prognostications, mock drafts, player profiles, all of that is essentially meaningless.

While it's awesome to see drafts where you trade all over the place and take a nice player everywhere you pick, those are hard to come by because most of the other GMs are trying to do the same thing. I wouldn't put too much stock in whether a player is over-drafted or not. What'll really count is how their NFL career turns out. Then, their original draft position will label them as a disappointment, total failure, or spectacular failure.

I posted this in another thread, but 2 and 3 are interesting points: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82857c66/article/bill-walshs-nfl-draft-philosophies-six-lessons-from-the-master


Objectively, it does look like some picks were reaches. But I think when GMs say "BPA," it's a simple answer to a very thorough draft strategy. It's a nice way to say that they followed their plan, whatever it was. These guys get paid big money to run real-life fantasy drafts, so I'd at least expect them to be armed with overall grades, position rankings, expected value to other teams, and a goal of what to get.

Here's a stab at the plan they used:
In hindsight, it looks like Baalke wanted three good defensive prospects in Day 1 and 2, which is what he got. I have a feeling that Kendricks was definitely on the list for round 2, but with Tartt not far behind.
Round 4 looked solely dedicated to adding three diamonds they liked on offense. Each has the tools of a starter, but has something to work on (Bell - learn TE, Davis - conditioning, Smelter - health).
I'm not sure why Pinion was a 5th round pick, but Baalke had some reason, good or bad. It looks like he already spent the first six on potential starters. Might have been prime time for ST in round 5.
Then, the last two picks were used to beef up the OL.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by natrone06:

You do understand draft projections and "consensus" are meaningless and not supported by any real evidence. 32 different GMs with 32 different opinions on players in which none of us are privy to.

This. All these draft ratings, profiles and projections are entertaining but lol at anyone who takes them to heart. Youre talking about someones subjective opinions of a player without thought to fit on a particular scheme or even full access to all the data that GM's are privy to.

The Cards took a guy in the 4th round that was widely thought to go undrafted, the Patriots took a long smapper right after the 49ers took Pinion, once the draft starts, all the previous prognostications, mock drafts, player profiles, all of that is essentially meaningless.

End thread, really. Drafting is not a science, people. It is nearer an art. Even the best fail and fail again. Look back at Bill Walsh's drafts. Every thread about Baalke always includes posters gloating about Jenkins. So when we discuss Bill Walsh, a master drafter, do they throw in Todd Shell's name triumphantly, before demanding that he should have been sacked?" Or James Owens. Who? Bill Walsh's first pick was not a huge success.

And that is drafting. You will get Willis. You will get Jenkins. But then you pick up Frank Gore in the 3rd or Aaron Lynch in the 5th.

If a player is selected one round before his projected round (projected by media analysts), we have to consider that Baalke is afraid that player won't be there when it comes time for the 49ers' to be on the clock in the following round. So a 'reach' of one round may not really be a reach.

Just an observation here...
2011 DRAFT
Aldon Smith
Colin Kaeperkick
Chris Culliver
Kendall Hunter
Daniel Kilgore
Ronald Johnson
Colin Jones
Bruce Miller
Mike Person
Curtis Holcomb
Mel Kipers grade? C

Originally posted by Vito_Corleone:
"Reaches" and round projected to be picked: (per popular mock draft projections)
Rd 1. Armstead: many slotted him to the 49ers, but others (like Bill Polian) thought he was a reach. (so borderline reach)
Rd 2. Tartt: was projected in rd 3-4
Rd 4. Bell: projected in rd 5
Rd 4. Smelter: projected rd 5-7
Rd 5. Pinion: projected UDFA
Rd 6. Silberman: projected UDFA

"Steals": Rd 3. Eli Harold: projected rd 2

This is a very superficial way of looking it. Teams don't adhere to publicly-available draft boards. It is especially ridiculous when you start breaking it down in the later rounds. I mean, we took Bell in the 4th, and you think it's a reach because he was "supposed" to go in the 5th? He was the 117th pick in the draft. How in blazing hell could draft experts predict that far into the draft with any reliability?

Man... all these projections and analyst draft grades don't mean jack. If these guys making these projos were so great at their jobs they would be working for an NFL team and not some tv network or website. A GM should take a player based on where HE rates them and no one else, because at the end of the day he is the only person who has to answer for a bad draft.

Originally posted by Vito_Corleone:
(like Bill Polian)

Also.....go look at how Bill Polian drafted his last few years with the Colts and tell me he's in any position to criticize anyone else when it comes to drafting. Him bashing the 49ers draft made me feel quite reassured about it.

Usually a reach is a position of need, I don't see how they are reaches when Baalke drafted BPA in his eyes.

Originally posted by Vito_Corleone:
Baalke selected ~six "reaches" based on consensus opinion of value, and only one "steal".

I like Baalke, but Baalke feels that he knows who is good and doesn't give a rat's ass what the consensus is. However if you can get a guy in rd 6-7 (eg. Pinion), why draft him in rd 5? Most of these six "reaches" likely would have been available a little later and he could have waited a little to draft them

My Hope = Baalke is so good that he KNOWS who is going to be good and didn't want to risk losing them by trading back.

My Fear = Baalke is arrogant and falls in "love" with his favorite "sons" and blindly "reaches" for them higher than they deserved to go

This draft will be a litmus test. It will be interesting to see how it works out. If Baalke is right and these "reaches" turn out to be really good players, we can rest easy knowing he's a darn good drafter. If they don't turn out great, we know Baalke isn't very good because he is arrogant and drafts players higher than needed and doesn't get good value for his picks.

"Reaches" and round projected to be picked: (per popular mock draft projections)
Rd 1. Armstead: many slotted him to the 49ers, but others (like Bill Polian) thought he was a reach. (so borderline reach)
Rd 2. Tartt: was projected in rd 3-4
Rd 4. Bell: projected in rd 5
Rd 4. Smelter: projected rd 5-7
Rd 5. Pinion: projected UDFA
Rd 6. Silberman: projected UDFA

"Steals": Rd 3. Eli Harold: projected rd 2

Tartt was a top 3 Safety on most teams boards, some had rated him higher than Collins. New England ended up taking Jordan Richards at end of Rd2 who was rated lower than Tartt. One would think that if Tartt had been still on the board at end of Rd2, Bellichek would have taken him over Richards.

Originally posted by crew:

Tartt was a top 3 Safety on most teams boards, some had rated him higher than Collins. New England ended up taking Jordan Richards at end of Rd2 who was rated lower than Tartt. One would think that if Tartt had been still on the board at end of Rd2, Bellichek would have taken him over Richards.

Word is when the eagles traded up they were targeting Tartt with the pick right after us, but instead they had to go with Rowe