There are 80 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Playing time for draft picks

Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by McLovinAlexSmith:
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by McLovinAlexSmith:
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by McLovinAlexSmith:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Im sorry, but you guys defending ORG on this are just wrong. I love what Baalke has done since he has been here and have defended him many times, but he screwed the pooch on this one.

We are in desperate need of quality depth at DL, OLB, and OL and also most would argue TE. Had we drafted at any of those positions #1 or #2 we would have had a contributer, and also an improved team. It is not ok, in todays NFL, to redshirt your #1 and #2 draft picks, barring key positions like QB. Just cant do it. This is not the old NFL, where vets played their whole careers for one team, and draft picks had to earn their spots over time. In todays NFL your #1 and #2 need to contribute.

Also contracts for 1st round picks are now 4 years, so to waste 25% of his contract to be red shirted is not smart football management.

Jeez...do any of you guys remember what it was like when this team was good? SMDH.

Yes I do Marvin but even then first and second round picks contributed unless they were complete crap.

SOME may have contributed, but not very much. Those were also the days BEFORE Free Agency so the ONLY way to fill a hole was the draft.

here look at the names during the 80s and 90s and most of those dudes played unless they were not good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_San_Francisco_49ers_first-round_draft_picks

How many of them made big contributions AS ROOKIES.

Lol at that argument. 82, 83, 86 & 88 we didn't even have a 1st rounder.

Also you can compare taht 81 draft class to the 2011 draft class IMO. that's when we loaded up on rookies that came out a contributed straight away.
Originally posted by ads_2006:
3/7 are not even on the team (injury/cut)

Slowey was cut, big deal. Cam was a late round guy with a lot of potential. That's why he's on the practice squad.

Fleming is on IR. He's still part of the team also. That's like saying Ray Lewis isn't on the Ravens because he's injured. Nonsense.
Originally posted by strickac:
Originally posted by ads_2006:
3/7 are not even on the team (injury/cut)

Slowey was cut, big deal. Cam was a late round guy with a lot of potential. That's why he's on the practice squad.

Fleming is on IR. He's still part of the team also. That's like saying Ray Lewis isn't on the Ravens because he's injured. Nonsense.
If Cam had great potential we wouldn't sign Haggins. Cam can ride the pine on the 53 just as good as Haggins.
Originally posted by pd24:
Originally posted by GolittaCamper:
Originally posted by pd24:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by pd24:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by pd24:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Im sorry, but weather or not an Inactive RB(Jacobs) or an over the hill WR stick around longer than a single year should not effect how you draft.

I understand your point Marvin i really do. But We had and do continue to have some glaring depth issues. BPA is a good formula, but you cant follow it so strict to where you hurt your football team in the upcoming season. Needs must be filled first, especially when they could contribute instantly. You dont reach, obviously, but you still have to draft based on need, while considering BPA. This year at #1 especially there were alot of players that could have contributed greatly.

Like who?


So you don't really have a player in mind.

Do your own research. Anyone who followed the draft, or followed the draft pics available, and reasonble to target at those pics would know there were playmakers (or at the very least contibuters) to be had at poition of need.
Who would these so called impact players replace?

Me, my draft choices were simple, Fleener, replaces Celek, and when Walker leaves for free agency, replaces Walker. Second round maybe a reach but I wanted Robert Turbin, replaces Dixon, after that best safety available, because Dashon will leave next season. Then best defender available all the way to the last pick.
Fleener would have been good but he isn't doing that great playing with his college QB so i don't know how well he would have did here in a lesser role. Turbin wouldn't have played this year and if we are replacing Dashon, I wouldn't want to do it with a late 3rd rounder. I think if we decide to let him walk, we replace him with a 1st round safety this year and we have alot of ammo to move up and get a real good player.

Sure, Dashon and Walker are goners, so I would be looking to get there replacements this season, before they try and walk, it would create leverage if they knew we did not need them so badly. If they end up walking there back ups are in the system, and if those backups aren't killing it, you have next years draft, now we have no leverage, and have cut the odds of drafting a replacement in half. I think a guy like Turbin or Fleener will be around in next years draft, but I like the idea of seasoning them a bit. Like a said Fleener replaces Celek, who barely plays, and Turbi replaces Dixon on ST and a few mop up snaps. Not a great draft, but compared to this years...

Well hell I'm generally proven wrong about the draft, let's just hope I'm wrong again!
when do we find out if theyre in actives this week or not?
Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
when do we find out if theyre in actives this week or not?

2 minutes prior to kickoff
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
There is just no way to justify the redshirting of a #1 and #2 pick. Especially when you are redshirting both. No excuse.

We are not talking about a couple guys that only get a snap or two a game because we have a deep roster. We are talking about guys BURRIED on the depth chart. We have extreme depth problems at OLB, DL, OL, TE, but we are good enough to ignore that and draft a WR and RB that are not even active on game days? I dont buy that logic.

With you all the way! I also don't but the argument that James and Jenkins were best player available. We had more pressing needs and players available that could have filled them. or at least suited up on game day! I guess everyone is entitled to a mediocre draft, and I'm of the opinion this was it. We needed a big, fast receiver, got a small one. We needed an heir apparent to Gore, with a similar running style, got another version of Hunter, but with less power. Neither of them good enough to even suit up. If they were third or later picks, I could justify it, but not where they were picked. And other areas of need, already addressed above? Nada of worth. Sorry, but the braintrust had a brainfart.
At the end of the day there are a million ways we could have approached this draft, and it seems we went with a BPA approach in regards to what we felt would give us stability down the road. With a defense that was basically returning all it's starters and an offense with four first round picks on the line, a first round pick at te, a first at qb, a first at wr... I can't argue the strat. It's too early to say whats right and wrong, lets just see how it plays out.