There are 47 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Welcome Newest 49er S Eric Reid

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Yes, but I wonder what the future holds as lawsuits pile up from former players. May have some major changes...but I understand that it's a physical game and you can't guess at changes coming. Plus, Reid seems to have the intelligence and ability to morph his game if necessary...very smart and coach-able.

MadDog--I understand your point of view, and for those of you who spend a lot of time evaluating the prospects it may make sense to second guess the front office. But when you think of Harbaugh sitting in Reid's living room years ago trying to recruit him to Stanford, and all the HS film he watched, and then the college film and perhaps personal contacts with his coaches and father...just no way I am going to be as knowledgeable as Harbaugh...whether I spend every weekend watching college football or not. I read a great deal but that's not the same as having interviewed a kid and following him for four to six years. But to each their own!
My argument is that the name of the player does not matter to some select fans who ardently defend management. It could have been Travis Frederick that we drafted; these individuals will defend the pick to the death....simply because our organizational team made the call. These same handful of individuals then slander anyone who challenges the pick.

To me, if a fan has little to no background knowledge of a player, it is better to admit they no nothing on the player, but they hope management got it right, rather than saying management must have got it right because...they are part of our team. Every year and every pick stands on its' own.
[ Edited by MadDog49er on Apr 26, 2013 at 12:20 PM ]
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
My argument is that the name of the player does not matter to some select fans who ardently defend management. It could have been Travis Frederick that we drafted; these individuals will defend the pick to the death....simply because our organizational team made the call. These same handful of individuals then slander anyone who challenges the pick.

To me, if a fan has little to no background knowledge of a player, it is better to admit they no nothing on the player, but they hope management got it right, rather than saying management must have got it right because...they are part of our team. Every year and every pick stands on its' own.

Pretty sure that's what most of us are saying. And that hope is validated by precedent.
[ Edited by LA9erFan on Apr 26, 2013 at 12:20 PM ]
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
I say this in kindness to all who follow the draft: For those who trust the front office, I think you should trust your own evaluation more. Your opinion may, or may not match what the brass think, but it will be yours. Blindly trusting the front office (as some do on this board) gets you an Aldon Smith one year and a Jenkins the next.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that Janoris Jenkins last year, coming into the draft, was superior to AJ Jenkins. Trust what you see. Sure, you won't get every single detail that the team has access to, but if you watch enough games, and you do your research on measurables, and know the history of what usually pans out and what doesn't, you have just a fair shot as guys who do this for a living. Trust what you see, not a person who represents your organization.

I know that one guy on the board got dogpiled a couple of years ago with his BPA board of 1. Christian Ponder and 2. Ricky Stanzi. I think he was brave to put it out there and defend it with decent arguments. He was wrong, but it was his evaluation and he stood by it.

In the end, you are going to get a broad perspective on players. In the case with Reid, some say he was great value as a mid-first rounder, like Charles Davis of NFL Network. Others, like Daniel Jeremiah, also of NFL Network, think he presents mid-late second round value. Who is right? Nobody knows. That is up to each person to determine.

My argument has always been to those who base their opinion solely on the brass, and tend to be the most aggressive in defending the pick: You do not need to depend on the team's scout and coaches and GM to determine your perspective on a player. You can do this on your own. Trust your instincts.

Finally, if you base your opinion of a player solely on the experts, you end up with a set of picks that didn't look like Seattle's last year. Irvin, Wagner and Wilson turned out to be pretty good, even though the Seahawks were panned by many to have had the worst draft. Trust your instincts.

Got us Kaepernick, Anthony Davis, Mike Iupati, and several others as well. Also got us to the Super Bowl two years after that seemed to be an absurd notion. The front office has earned the trust that many of us have in them.

I "trust my instincts" on things that I'm educated on, because there's a foundation and reason for there to be trust. Trusting your instincts over that of people who know considerably more about a subject (and a solid track record) is merely hubris.

Trusting your instincts give you Blaine Gabbert & Adam Carriker over Aldon Smith & Patrick Willis, just as it gives you JJ Watt & Mike Iupati. Goes both ways.

there is one flaw with that logic. A Front Office is only doing great until they are not anymore.

Name me one Front Office that remained intact for 20 years....10years? Go ahead look at the Front Offices of the franchises who have been winning super bowls lately.

Why is there so much turn over in this field? My experience tells me that in this field not even experts are experts. Sure I will take a GM who has good runs in them as opposed to those who seem to NEVER get it right. But I can't think of anyone who can earn my undying respect to the point that many posters just blindly follow.

I guess I did trust Walsh that much, but look at how many whiffs he had.

I don't think it is hubris that gives an armchair GM the confidence to think he can right and the GM is just flat out wrong, I think it is recognition that they are not nearly as smart or informed as too many people give them credit for.

I respect my intelligence and instincts enough to know that if I were a GM I would be a damned good one. I think you would be too LA
Originally posted by olapac:
Wait - Did we trade our second 3rd round pick (#93) to Dallas instead of the first one (#74), or the other way around? I could have sworn it was #74, but ESPN's draft tracker shows us holding that pick and Dallas now owning #93.

It was 74. That was the initial report. If it is diff, then maybe a mistake by ESPN or maybe we adjusted it during the hiatus? Is any of ther other picks changed?
Originally posted by WildBill:
Well if they change the game too much, it is going to called touch fooball.

The thing is also, I doubt, that we are privy to all the film available on him. Not to mention on all the players available. Nor can anyone honestly say that they watched evry game and every player. There is simply not enought time, there is film that colleges make available on the player to teams that include isolated and bad play as well as well as highlights, this I know. These are film not avaiable to the public.

I often wonder if touch football is on its way! LOL! When I think of tackling I think of Willis, who is a classic form guy. He doesn't have to have hit at great velocity to make a punishing tackle, and I doubt guys want to be tackled by Patrick any more than Goldson. Just looks more lethal when a collision is at high speed.

My preference is to go back to leather helmets so players protect their brains. Still won't eliminate concussions but may help. In a couple of centuries folks may look back at the NFL and think...what barbarians those 21st Century humans were!
Originally posted by WildBill:
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
The Reid pick surprised me only because I believe the league is going away from big hits and will pass rules to enforce tackling over collisions. This puts Reid at a disadvantage as the main knock on him is that, like Goldson, he tended to miss some tackles when going for a knockout. But his physical and mental strengths make him a good choice whatever the rules.

Big hits are still allowed, just have to watch how you hit. Reid seems to lean and use his shoulder to do so, which is okay, the key is not leading or lowering your helmet.

Yeah, Seattle can do whatever they want. Why can't we? We play in the NFC West and this isn't the Superbowl at the moment so Reid should be fine. LOL.

Best yet, he has a 41" leap and is already 6'1". This will be KEY to the one big area we got TORCHED in all year...nobody to man-up against tall TE's and WR's esp. on deep bombs and the RZ/EZ plays. If we can get another coverage S, see-ya Whitner and thanks for your salary!

PS: Still think we end up signing Woodson for cheap.
Originally posted by WildBill:
Originally posted by olapac:
Wait - Did we trade our second 3rd round pick (#93) to Dallas instead of the first one (#74), or the other way around? I could have sworn it was #74, but ESPN's draft tracker shows us holding that pick and Dallas now owning #93.

It was 74. That was the initial report. If it is diff, then maybe a mistake by ESPN or maybe we adjusted it during the hiatus? Is any of ther other picks changed?

No, still 11 more total (2 in the 2nd, 1, then 2, 1, 2 and 3). But they definitely have Dallas with #93 and 49ers still holding #74.

Could be a mistake on ESPN's part as SI.com has it reversed to what we originally thought the terms were.
Phoenix and I part on our evaluation of Reid, and I respect his views as much as anyone's on the board.

In the end, I hope some who feel offended by my critique understand that it would give me great pleasure to see Reid be an All-Pro. However, as an honest evaluator, I can't assign a high grade on a player or a top grade for a draft for the team simply based on what our team does in the draft.

Final note, since I'd like to get back to the draft itself...once I return home from work...It would be a fun experiment to someday have a set of fans bypass the draft weekend, then give them a list of the players selected by each team without draft positions or team names, and let them assign a grade. Then, reveal the team name later. To me, that strips out all bias.
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
My argument is that the name of the player does not matter to some select fans who ardently defend management. It could have been Travis Frederick that we drafted; these individuals will defend the pick to the death....simply because our organizational team made the call. These same handful of individuals then slander anyone who challenges the pick.

To me, if a fan has little to no background knowledge of a player, it is better to admit they no nothing on the player, but they hope management got it right, rather than saying management must have got it right because...they are part of our team. Every year and every pick stands on its' own.

lol, I'm pretty sure if we had traded up to pick Frederick at 18, most people would be pretty pissed. You seem to be misrepresenting the board and grouping level-headed people into a blind faith cult. I have and will still admit that I don't follow college football and know very little on these players. But I also don't make definitive statements regarding how great they'll be. I remain optimistic in our picks because I TRUST our FO because they have a GREAT track record. In fact, I would say that what you consider blind support is merely backlash to definitive predictions (grades) of mediocrity from know-it-alls.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 10,989
Originally posted by Bluefalcon61:
You were the only person on the board yesterday (server overload)

Who was the 1% who wasn't angry?

That would be me. I did not anticipate the drafting of Reid.

So, I had to go through my notes, read more about Reid, and think about the trade.

At this point, I am pleased with the pick and the trade. I am looking forward to the rest of the draft.



Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Yes, but I wonder what the future holds as lawsuits pile up from former players. May have some major changes...but I understand that it's a physical game and you can't guess at changes coming. Plus, Reid seems to have the intelligence and ability to morph his game if necessary...very smart and coach-able.

MadDog--I understand your point of view, and for those of you who spend a lot of time evaluating the prospects it may make sense to second guess the front office. But when you think of Harbaugh sitting in Reid's living room years ago trying to recruit him to Stanford, and all the HS film he watched, and then the college film and perhaps personal contacts with his coaches and father...just no way I am going to be as knowledgeable as Harbaugh...whether I spend every weekend watching college football or not. I read a great deal but that's not the same as having interviewed a kid and following him for four to six years. But to each their own!
My argument is that the name of the player does not matter to some select fans who ardently defend management. It could have been Travis Frederick that we drafted; these individuals will defend the pick to the death....simply because our organizational team made the call. These same handful of individuals then slander anyone who challenges the pick.

To me, if a fan has little to no background knowledge of a player, it is better to admit they no nothing on the player, but they hope management got it right, rather than saying management must have got it right because...they are part of our team. Every year and every pick stands on its' own.

Agreed. Do your own research and use your own mind, develop your own opinions. Otherwise you're just the mass media and a puppet to the NFL. And remember, they are more than one right answer here...tons of different scenarios, like the old, "Choose your own Adventure" books.

I'm a classic example of someone that has NO CLUE about college football...but did my own research, trusted other's board, matched my research with our picks with needs, etc. and made the best guess possible. Now if he turns out to be a stud, we can say his VALUE should have been top 5. But nobody talks about this...go back and redraft based on value and match THOSE up with your original thoughts/feelings on the matter.

Yes, if you're lazy, trust the FO but if he doesn't turn up, don't b***h about it. In short, use your own damn brain and develop your own conviction and have the balls to stand by it and justify it. Otherwise, what VALUE is your own opinion?
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
My argument is that the name of the player does not matter to some select fans who ardently defend management. It could have been Travis Frederick that we drafted; these individuals will defend the pick to the death....simply because our organizational team made the call. These same handful of individuals then slander anyone who challenges the pick.

To me, if a fan has little to no background knowledge of a player, it is better to admit they no nothing on the player, but they hope management got it right, rather than saying management must have got it right because...they are part of our team. Every year and every pick stands on its' own.

Pretty sure that's what most of us are saying. And that hope is validated by precedent.


That's an important point. If our FO had been drafting a bunch of bozos over the last few years, they would deserve skepticism. However, when you look at the track record specifically of Baalke (and considering that it takes a few years for most prospects to develop), it becomes clear that this guy knows what he's going. IMO, it's not a stretch to say that the change of fortunes starting in 2011 as well as the foundation for long-term success (and we can include the hiring of Harbaugh) has been built predominantly on his moves:

2010 draft
Impact players - Davis (starting RT), Iupati (starting LG), Bowman (starting ILB)
Contributors - Anthony Dixon, Kyle Williams

2011 draft
Impact players - Aldon Smith (record-setter, starting DE/OLB), Kap (franchise QB)
Key contributors - Chris Culliver (starting CB), Kendall Hunter (#2 RB)
Contributors - Bruce Miller (starting FB)

2012 draft
Minor/limited impact - LaMichael James (potential #1 KR/PR in 2013)
No impact, but remain on the roster: AJ Jenkins, Trenton Robinson, Joe Looney, Darius Fleming, Cam Johnson

That doesn't mean Baalke isn't immune from criticism because he's not. I won't ever be happy with the Jenkins pick until he shows he can play in the NFL, much less be worthy of a 1st round selection. That said, when a guy has a track record of winning more times than he loses, I personally afford him a little more leeway in my assessments, knowing that from a historical perspective, he's been right more times (and in more impactful ways) than he's been wrong.
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
I say this in kindness to all who follow the draft: For those who trust the front office, I think you should trust your own evaluation more. Your opinion may, or may not match what the brass think, but it will be yours. Blindly trusting the front office (as some do on this board) gets you an Aldon Smith one year and a Jenkins the next.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that Janoris Jenkins last year, coming into the draft, was superior to AJ Jenkins. Trust what you see. Sure, you won't get every single detail that the team has access to, but if you watch enough games, and you do your research on measurables, and know the history of what usually pans out and what doesn't, you have just a fair shot as guys who do this for a living. Trust what you see, not a person who represents your organization.

I know that one guy on the board got dogpiled a couple of years ago with his BPA board of 1. Christian Ponder and 2. Ricky Stanzi. I think he was brave to put it out there and defend it with decent arguments. He was wrong, but it was his evaluation and he stood by it.

In the end, you are going to get a broad perspective on players. In the case with Reid, some say he was great value as a mid-first rounder, like Charles Davis of NFL Network. Others, like Daniel Jeremiah, also of NFL Network, think he presents mid-late second round value. Who is right? Nobody knows. That is up to each person to determine.

My argument has always been to those who base their opinion solely on the brass, and tend to be the most aggressive in defending the pick: You do not need to depend on the team's scout and coaches and GM to determine your perspective on a player. You can do this on your own. Trust your instincts.

Finally, if you base your opinion of a player solely on the experts, you end up with a set of picks that didn't look like Seattle's last year. Irvin, Wagner and Wilson turned out to be pretty good, even though the Seahawks were panned by many to have had the worst draft. Trust your instincts.


I like this.

First, the whole point of a message board is to discuss our opinions, not rummage through facts and figures. We can't discuss our opinions if we feel our opinions are invalid due to the fact that we are not professionals.
There are many professional economists, politicians, and they all disagree. They are more well informed simply because they do it for a living, but people certainly have a right to express their opinions without being chastised or made to look foolish because they are not professionals in the subject matter. What kind of Brave New World would we have if everybody blindly followed the experts?

Second, the experts don't agree with each other anyways. So, if you have to follow the experts, there will almost always be an "expert" who has an opinion similar to yours.

It's important to have an opinion and stand by it. You can trust and admire Harbaalke yet still stand by your opinions.
I like Margus Hunt for example. If we don't pick him, or he doesn't get picked until the sixth round, I might think there is something wrong with him that was not reported on, but I will still stand by what I think of him based upon what I saw. If he doesn't pan out, then fine. The experts get it wrong too.

Most importantly, people should feel free to express their opinions, and not worry who's feet they are stepping on. That is the point of a discussion board.
Originally posted by danimal:
there is one flaw with that logic. A Front Office is only doing great until they are not anymore.

Name me one Front Office that remained intact for 20 years....10years? Go ahead look at the Front Offices of the franchises who have been winning super bowls lately.

Why is there so much turn over in this field? My experience tells me that in this field not even experts are experts. Sure I will take a GM who has good runs in them as opposed to those who seem to NEVER get it right. But I can't think of anyone who can earn my undying respect to the point that many posters just blindly follow.

I guess I did trust Walsh that much, but look at how many whiffs he had.

I don't think it is hubris that gives an armchair GM the confidence to think he can right and the GM is just flat out wrong, I think it is recognition that they are not nearly as smart or informed as too many people give them credit for.

I respect my intelligence and instincts enough to know that if I were a GM I would be a damned good one. I think you would be too LA

I think there's actually a remarkable amount of stability in the front offices of the best teams. Ozzie Newsome, Bill Belicheck, Jerry Reese, & Kevin Colbert have all been with their respective franchises for quite some time. Guys underneath them will leave because they get better positions with other teams, but that's a sign of competence rather than incompetence. Those are probably the 4 most consistent teams in football in the last 15 years or so.

It's not a matter of my intelligence or instincts. First and foremost, I simply don't invest the amount of time necessary in it to feel like I have expertise in it. Secondly, I don't have the access to the means of evaluation that professionals do...which is even true of those who DO invest their time in this as a hobby. I have a certain degree of expertise in another sport, which is the foundation of my opinion of the importance of access to information.

Even the best GMs whiff, as you said. Even the worst GMs hit home runs. This is an argument of degree and probability. The Front Office has proven that the odds of them coming up with an excellent player is better than most, which is all you can ask for as a fan. Precedent shows that if they like someone, they're more likely to be right than most people are, including people on this board.
[ Edited by LA9erFan on Apr 26, 2013 at 12:39 PM ]
Originally posted by Rsrkshn:
A bit off topic, but am I the only guy that thinks that Culliver is not for long with the Niners. Quite apart from laking marbles, he seems like a chronic disgruntled type. He took a swipe at the organization about the Niners being disingenuous when they were "negotiating" with Goldson. Niners better start drafting CBs now. They're gonna need several replacement real soon, beginning next year.

I really doubt that Whitner goes this year. It would be too traumatic for the team's backfield. But I do hope that an upgrade is in order for next year.

Still have the nagging sense that someone more impactful could have been had at #18. I have to say, that while I'm still not 100% with where the pick occured (hate giving up the #74), I do feel better about it with hearing what some others, whose opinions I respect, being so high on the guy.

Unless it's a pass rusher, ala Aldon Smith, who puts up 15 sacks while taking 50% of the snaps, I can't envision a more impactful player vs. someone like Reid who will be on the field 100% of the time.

Yeah, Culliver, seems like a great talent who needs to hone his skills a bit more but man, mentally, he needs counseling and an education. His mentality helps him stay angry on the field but clearly, something isn't adding up here.

Whitner? Who knows...we only have 1M to sign rookies right now and he or Goodwin could be one of those picks to go June 1st, sadly. That and b/c his coverage was horrendous last year and ultimately, cost us the Superbowl.