There are 90 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Jacobs Tweet

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
IdahoNiner--for clarification the "strawman argument" is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of someone's statement. So when people say you can't judge a draft the first year it is not such an argument. Nor is saying the team's strength is such that draft picks can't get on the field. You might think it wrong but it is not a fallacy.

The only time you should judge a draft early is if a team makes a knot-head move, like trading a bunch of picks for a player who is nearly washed up...but George Allen put together some pretty good teams using this method so even that criticism has to be tempered--did they reach the playoffs with that trade? Last years draft was tailored for depth and many picks were made in case vets were either injured or not up to par.

For instance, Boone at RG is a risk, leaving backup OT empty so they took some guys to cover an emergency. The same is true of Jenkins. They believe he will be a good receiver in a year or two but it takes vets like VD half a year to begin to understand the offense, so what is the likelihood of Jenkins catching on right away. James is lightening in a bottle but there is no way he replaces or takes reps away from Gore or Hunter...they are just too good.

So again i ask, Why draft for those positions #1 and #2 overall, if you know there are other depth issues, and you know these guys wont sniff the field for atleast a season?

And please save the definition of a strawman. I know what it is, thats why i stated it. People are useing a strawman argument against my points. They are misrepresenting my statments. Like i said i know why these guys are riding the pine. My arguement is not that they shouldnt be riding the pine based on depth, but that we highly overdrafted at those positions.

You bring up George Allen? guy hasnt been been around since 1990, and please show me one draft where his entire draft class made no contributions year 1.
[ Edited by IdahoNiner on Nov 16, 2012 at 9:12 AM ]
Originally posted by cmix23:
I guess the packers failed in 05 when the selected Aaron Rodgers with their first pick n sat him on the bench for 3 or 4 years. Who could we have taken this year to have an immediate impact? All 11 starters returned on D our online is one of the best in football we have a top 3 duo at RB and our WR core is the best we had since TO bailed in us. Alex n Kaepernick weren't gonna be replaced so where do u see immediate impact?

Please stop comparing the sitting of a QB, to the sitting of a #1 WR and a #2 RB, as well as the entire rest of the draft class.

We are sitting and developing Kaep as well. QB is the only position in this league that gets a pass.

The immediate Impact should have come with more depth to need positions, (ie backups that get playing time to spell starters) and in special teams.
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
So again i ask, Why draft for those positions #1 and #2 overall, if you know there are other depth issues, and you know these guys wont sniff the field for atleast a season?

So our team is good for years to come. When Moss/Gore other players etc retire we can insert our 1st and 2nd round picks that are now vets.
Originally posted by SFrush:
So using your logic if you don't have an immediate impact as a rookie your career is over. That's what you're saying when you basically have given up on a draft after only one season.

BTW We do have quality depth at WR and RB. So it's not like these rookies are behind bad players at their positions.

Where anywhere did i say anyones career as over? I said the draft was a Failure. It as. simple as that. Not one of these guys have even made an impact on special teams. Nowhere have i said i expect superstars right away from the draft, but i do expect contributions from a draft class in the first year.

People want to keep saying its Ok to sit your entire draft class, with the excuse that good deep teams are allowed to do it, but have provided no evidence of any team that has successfully done it. Not only that but the greatly over estimate the depth on this team. Again the deepest sposts on the roster are RB/WR and thats where we spend our pics? If thats the case atleast draft Martin in the first, who would NOT be sitting on the bench right now, And draft a Randle or a Jeffery in the second if they are gonna redshirt for a season anyways

Some of you spinsters are incredible. This draft as mismanaged. simple as that. I happen to really like Harbaalkie, but they screwed the pooch on this one.
Originally posted by Muggins:
So our team is good for years to come. When Moss/Gore other players etc retire we can insert our 1st and 2nd round picks that are now vets.

Why is the development of a #6 WR and a scat back more important then developing quality depth at other positions, while still possibly having those positions contribute in the first year? whether it be on special teams or as a backup that gets playing time?
So when Jenkins is lighting it up next year alongside Crabs and Davis, and LMJ is doing his Devin Hester impersonation you'll still be saying we screwed the pooch right?
It's too early to tell dude.
Originally posted by Muggins:
So when Jenkins is lighting it up next year alongside Crabs and Davis, and LMJ is doing his Devin Hester impersonation you'll still be saying we screwed the pooch right?

Devin Hester...Really? LMJ offers nothing on Special teams man. If he did he would be active over dixon. Hester has 5 TD's in the return game, and 2 receiving his rookie year.

Again, i hope they work out in the long run, and i do actually like Jenkins. But it is still a failed draft when you get 0 contributions from your draft class year one, and in order for it to be a successful draft, you have to hope and pray that your #1 and #2 draft picks, MIGHT be able to contribute in year two.

This is the only draft where i have critisized Harbaalkie, and i will continue to call it like i see it.
Originally posted by Muggins:
So when Jenkins is lighting it up next year alongside Crabs and Davis, and LMJ is doing his Devin Hester impersonation you'll still be saying we screwed the pooch right?

Exactly. It's easy to criticize the draft now. But if Jenkins and James are valuable contributors next season I think Idahoniner's and his draft failure takes will be nowhere to be found.
  • fip24
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 743
It is too early to make any final judgements on this or last years rookies. With that said, the inability of Jenkins/James to get on the field is not very encouraging. Everybody wants to point to who is ahead of them on the depth chart as some justification but we aren't being very honest. Let's take Jenkins...There is no embarassment with a late 1st rd pick being behind Crabs,Manningham and Moss on our depth chart, especially when you consider this team wants to challenge for the Super Bowl, Randy and Mario have experience and know how that should break a tie or keep them ahead of a rookie. My concern comes with AJ not being able to pass Kyle Williams. You'd expect that a 1st rd pick should be so far (just from a talent perspective) ahead of Kyle that the coaches would have to place him ahead of Kyle.
Please don't say Kyle is a bkup return man and Dixon (in the case of James) is a valuable special teams guy. This team already dresses 4 or 5 special teams only player, can't afford to bench talent just to backup Ginn, etc.
Idaho, Maiocco had a blog a few weeks back talking about LMJ and Jenkins. Ginn, Moss and Jacobs will be FAs next year and probably arent gonna be brought back.


The Niners are grooming LMJ to take over KR duties for next year and Kyle Williams will handle PR duties. Jenkins will only have Crabtree and Manningham ahead of him on the depth chart next year.
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
So again i ask, Why draft for those positions #1 and #2 overall, if you know there are other depth issues, and you know these guys wont sniff the field for atleast a season?

You draft a player for the expected contribution he will make over his entire career.

NFL players dont hit their plateaus until their third or fourth season.

Needs change on nearly a yearly basis and you cant predict which positions will be needs more than 1-2 years out.

If it wasnt for their pedigree, most rookies (first round or otherwise) wouldnt be starting if they were being judged solely on their current level of skill (Anthony Davis is a perfect example of this)


These are arguments about why you take BPA over need, but they also work against what you are saying. Its also why you constantly hear: 'you cant properly grade a draft until three years have passed!'

So lets wait three years to b***h and moan about Jenkins and LMJ shall we?
Doug Martin would certainly be sitting behind Gore and Hunter like it or not. We're a lot more talented than Tampa Bay at Runningback where Doug Martin only had to beat out Legarrette Blount. Jeffery or Randle were not a good fit for us at all. There possession Wr's we already have with Crabtree and Manningham. Baalke clearly wanted a quicker Wr that could complement those guys with more separation down the field.
Originally posted by SFrush:
Doug Martin would certainly be sitting behind Gore and Hunter like it or not. We're a lot more talented than Tampa Bay at Runningback where Doug Martin only had to beat out Legarrette Blount. Jeffery or Randle were not a good fit for us at all. There possession Wr's we already have with Crabtree and Manningham. Baalke clearly wanted a quicker Wr that could complement those guys with more separation down the field.

All of this
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
IdahoNiner--for clarification the "strawman argument" is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of someone's statement. So when people say you can't judge a draft the first year it is not such an argument. Nor is saying the team's strength is such that draft picks can't get on the field. You might think it wrong but it is not a fallacy.

The only time you should judge a draft early is if a team makes a knot-head move, like trading a bunch of picks for a player who is nearly washed up...but George Allen put together some pretty good teams using this method so even that criticism has to be tempered--did they reach the playoffs with that trade? Last years draft was tailored for depth and many picks were made in case vets were either injured or not up to par.

For instance, Boone at RG is a risk, leaving backup OT empty so they took some guys to cover an emergency. The same is true of Jenkins. They believe he will be a good receiver in a year or two but it takes vets like VD half a year to begin to understand the offense, so what is the likelihood of Jenkins catching on right away. James is lightening in a bottle but there is no way he replaces or takes reps away from Gore or Hunter...they are just too good.

So again i ask, Why draft for those positions #1 and #2 overall, if you know there are other depth issues, and you know these guys wont sniff the field for atleast a season?

And please save the definition of a strawman. I know what it is, thats why i stated it. People are useing a strawman argument against my points. They are misrepresenting my statments. Like i said i know why these guys are riding the pine. My arguement is not that they shouldnt be riding the pine based on depth, but that we highly overdrafted at those positions.

You bring up George Allen? guy hasnt been been around since 1990, and please show me one draft where his entire draft class made no contributions year 1.

I'll give you LMJ on that point, but WR was our biggest weakness coming out of last season, that's why Jenkins was drafted. Every WR was being questioned, including crabtree. Jenkins specifically maybe was a reach, but his position was 100% a need for this team on draft day.
Search Podcast Draft Forum Commentary News Shop Home