There are 104 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Is It Time To Identify A Franchise WR ?

Originally posted by Rascal:
I don't think this thread is talking about the intricacies and details of how the 2014 Draft should be approached, but rather the general concept of trading up to secure a top WR talent in future drafts.

It goes hand in hand with your philosophy of the draft. If there is a Jerry Rice within reach, obviously you go for the guy. But other teams may see the same thing, making it impossible to make a trade. My point is that you can't count on a guy like Rice coming along in any given year, so you should change your philosophy to a more realistic one.

As the year progresses we will see how the young guys develop and may be pleasantly surprised by this group of receivers. Then Manningham and Crabtree will come back and create an embarrassment of riches. You can't tell from this vantage point.

The luckiest team I have ever seen in the draft was San Antonio--drafting Tim Duncan when they already had David Robinson...two elite centers, who were/are also great human beings and team mates. There is nothing to say the 9ers won't draft another Rice, but planning to do so is foolhardy. Need to be realistic and plan to develop good talent into a credible WR corps...then let the coaches do their jobs.
[ Edited by dtg_9er on May 28, 2013 at 10:23 AM ]
Sometimes the draft situations is so enticing that it almost forces a GM to go with that best player available --in some cases it may be that #1 receiver 3 years in a row -- like Matt Milen.

Same with Crabtree. He pretty much fell to us after the Raiders went with DHB. It's not totally Millen's fault that 2 of those 3 receivers were busts. There's always that chance that the dude just doesn't have the work ethic and the love of the game to put forth the work once he gets into the NFL, no matter how talented he seems to be.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,510
Originally posted by Rascal:
I don't think this thread is talking about the intricacies and details of how the 2014 Draft should be approached, but rather the general concept of trading up to secure a top WR talent in future drafts.

I thought that you were saying that we need a top WR talent now, not in some undefined future.

Less than 10 posts ago, you stated.


Originally posted by Rascal:

In the 2012 regular season, the 9ers were ranked 23rd in Passing Offense with 3,298 yards. Out of that 3,298 yards, 1,105 yards was contributed by Crab which represented 33.5 % of the total production. The next highest contributor was Vernon with 548 yards which was only 49.6% of Crab's production. That remaining 2,193 yards were contributed by a total of no less than 11 other targets including Mario, Kyle, Randy, Vernon, Delanie, Frank, Kendall, LaMike, Bruce, Garrek and Ted.

What does that tell you ? I think is more than apparent we do need that No. 1 WR without a question.

If we without question need that number 1 WR now, it makes sense to talk about the intricacies and details of the 2014 draft. Wouldn't you agree?
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,510
Here is an interesting tidbit from Pro Football Focus.

This is a list their top 20 wide receivers in 2012.

1. Andre Johnson
2. Demaryius Thomas
3. Reggie Wayne
4. Calvin Johnson
5. Vincent Jackson
6. Roddy White
7. Michael Crabtree
8. A.J. Green
9. Brandon Marshall
10. Percy Harvin
11. Randall Cobb
12. Wes Welker
13. Sidney Rice
14. Danny Amendola
15. Lance Moore
15. Julio Jones
15. Brandon Lloyd
18. Mike A. Williams
18. Steve L. Smith
20. Jason Avant
20. Hakeem Nicks

https://www.profootballfocus.com/data/by_position.php?tab=by_position&season=2012&pos=WR&stype=r&runpass=&teamid=-1&numsnaps=25&numgames=1

I take Pro Football Focus's ranking system with a grain of salt, but there is no denying that they are consistent and professional in their work.

I was very surprised that Crabtree was rated so high.

As I said, it is interesting, and given the discussion, pertinent.
[ Edited by buck on May 28, 2013 at 9:46 AM ]
Maiocco has some very relevant points here in his latest article linked on the Webzone home page:

"Just think about Tom Brady. Until Wes Welker and Randy Moss came to the New England Patriots, Brady never had a true No. 1 receiver. He won his three Super Bowls with a different No. 1 receiver each time: Troy Brown, Deion Branch and David Givens."

"Evidence seems to suggest that No. 1 receiver has very little impact on the bottom line. Crabtree was one of 20 players in the NFL to amass 1,000 yards or more receiving last season. Eleven of those players were on teams that did not even advance to the playoffs."


"There were years in which the Indianapolis Colts' corps of wide receivers was decimated by injuries, and the offense just kept putting up big numbers with Peyton Manning."

He starts his article by talking about '97, which we've talked about here, when the Niners lost the best receiver in football in their first game of the season. TO was in his second season and ended up with 7 or 8 hundred yards and JJ Stokes contributed. His point is that the key was Steve Young, just as the key to the Colts was Manning and Brady for the Patriots.

So, the key here is Kaepernick - if he can perform at a high level this season, the Niners will be fine.
If we without question need that number 1 WR now, it makes sense to talk about the intricacies and details of the 2014 draft. Wouldn't you agree?


Not when you want to talk about our draft position and trading up partner. Those are pure rhetorical questions. It cannot be done.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,510
Originally posted by Rascal:
If we without question need that number 1 WR now, it makes sense to talk about the intricacies and details of the 2014 draft. Wouldn't you agree?


Not when you want to talk about our draft position and trading up partner. Those are pure rhetorical questions. It cannot be done.

True, we do not know our draft position now, but we will know our draft position about five months before the draft. It will be extremely relevant before the draft. This is one of the reasons that I feel the discussion is a premature at this point.

There has been much discussion of positives and negatives trading up in the thread. To trade up we will need a trading partner, and I agree that at this point at this point, we do not have a clue as to who our possible trading partners might be.

Before the draft, we will be able to look at teams ahead of us, evaluate their team needs, and have at least a chance of identifying potential trading partners. Since we do not have a clue about our possible trading partners, the discussions of trades does seem to be both premature and purely theoretical at this time.

At this point, any discussion of trading up seems theoretical or hypothetical,and perhaps even rhetorical.
[ Edited by buck on May 28, 2013 at 1:01 PM ]
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,510
ThOriginally posted by GNielsen:
Maiocco has some very relevant points here in his latest article linked on the Webzone home page:

"Just think about Tom Brady. Until Wes Welker and Randy Moss came to the New England Patriots, Brady never had a true No. 1 receiver. He won his three Super Bowls with a different No. 1 receiver each time: Troy Brown, Deion Branch and David Givens."

"Evidence seems to suggest that No. 1 receiver has very little impact on the bottom line. Crabtree was one of 20 players in the NFL to amass 1,000 yards or more receiving last season. Eleven of those players were on teams that did not even advance to the playoffs."


"There were years in which the Indianapolis Colts' corps of wide receivers was decimated by injuries, and the offense just kept putting up big numbers with Peyton Manning."

He starts his article by talking about '97, which we've talked about here, when the Niners lost the best receiver in football in their first game of the season. TO was in his second season and ended up with 7 or 8 hundred yards and JJ Stokes contributed. His point is that the key was Steve Young, just as the key to the Colts was Manning and Brady for the Patriots.

So, the key here is Kaepernick - if he can perform at a high level this season, the Niners will be fine.

The more that I hear, the more that it becomes clear the many knowledgeable people feel that having a "franchise wide receiver" is at least somewhat overrated, and perhaps even greatly overrated.

While getting a franchise wide receive can not really be bad, I tend to think that making the getting of a franchise wide receiver a critical foundational element in your draft stratergy would be a major mistake.

Limiting your search for a franchise wide receiver to only those receivers who are at least 6 feet 3 inches or taller would be a folly.
Originally posted by buck:
ThOriginally posted by GNielsen:
Maiocco has some very relevant points here in his latest article linked on the Webzone home page:

"Just think about Tom Brady. Until Wes Welker and Randy Moss came to the New England Patriots, Brady never had a true No. 1 receiver. He won his three Super Bowls with a different No. 1 receiver each time: Troy Brown, Deion Branch and David Givens."

"Evidence seems to suggest that No. 1 receiver has very little impact on the bottom line. Crabtree was one of 20 players in the NFL to amass 1,000 yards or more receiving last season. Eleven of those players were on teams that did not even advance to the playoffs."


"There were years in which the Indianapolis Colts' corps of wide receivers was decimated by injuries, and the offense just kept putting up big numbers with Peyton Manning."

He starts his article by talking about '97, which we've talked about here, when the Niners lost the best receiver in football in their first game of the season. TO was in his second season and ended up with 7 or 8 hundred yards and JJ Stokes contributed. His point is that the key was Steve Young, just as the key to the Colts was Manning and Brady for the Patriots.

So, the key here is Kaepernick - if he can perform at a high level this season, the Niners will be fine.

The more that I hear, the more that it becomes clear the many knowledgeable people feel that having a "franchise wide receiver" is at least somewhat overrated, and perhaps even greatly overrated.

While getting a franchise wide receive can not really be bad, I tend to think that making the getting of a franchise wide receiver a critical foundational element in your draft stratergy would be a major mistake.

Limiting your search for a franchise wide receiver to only those receivers who are at least 6 feet 3 inches or taller would be a folly.

Last time I checked, Harbaugh's 49ers were a run-first team anyway.

It ain't sexy, but you put $$$ into the offensive line for a reason.
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by Rascal:
If we without question need that number 1 WR now, it makes sense to talk about the intricacies and details of the 2014 draft. Wouldn't you agree?


Not when you want to talk about our draft position and trading up partner. Those are pure rhetorical questions. It cannot be done.

True, we do not know our draft position now, but we will know our draft position about five months before the draft. It will be extremely relevant before the draft. This is one of the reasons that I feel the discussion is a premature at this point.

There has been much discussion of positives and negatives trading up in the thread. To trade up we will need a trading partner, and I agree that at this point at this point, we do not have a clue as to who our possible trading partners might be.

Before the draft, we will be able to look at teams ahead of us, evaluate their team needs, and have at least a chance of identifying potential trading partners. Since we do not have a clue about our possible trading partners, the discussions of trades does seem to be both premature and purely theoretical at this time.

At this point, any discussion of trading up seems theoretical or hypothetical,and perhaps even rhetorical.


Of course the discussion is theoretical because you have to agree on the principle first before you put it into action. So, there is no point to bring up points about draft position nor trading up partner cos you simply can't.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,510
Originally posted by Rascal:
Of course the discussion is theoretical because you have to agree on the principle first before you put it into action. So, there is no point to bring up points about draft position nor trading up partner cos you simply can't.

The principle that you want us to adopt is that we need a Wide Receiver that has top notch measurables.

You prefer a wide receiver that is at least 6'3" and ideally weigh more than 220 lbs and fast enough to burn and take the top off double teams.

I think it will be difficult to reach a consenus that your preferences are the proper standards that we should use to pick a franchise wide receiver.

Any standards for a wide receiver that automatically exclude a Jerry Rice do not seems like reasonable standards, wouldn't you agree?
Wide receivers are good for making a QB's regular season stats look better, but I think they get a little too much credit for actually helping a team win. It's a glamor position, so it gets a lot of attention. But some of the best teams the last few years didn't have great WRs. Blatimore & New Englad don't have that one amazing guy. I don''t even think the Niners do either; Crabtree's good, but I wouldn't put him in that elite category. I don't buy that the Giants have had any amazing WRs either; look at what Steve Smith did when he left that offense. Eli has good WRs, but I don't think any of them are anywhere near as good as the AJ Greens of the world.

Marqise Lee and Sammy Watkins look like the hottest commodities in next year's draft. I would be more than happy with either one despite the fact that neither one have that ideal size or toughness (at least not yet). I don't think Crabtree will be on the team after 2014, so WR could be a big need unless AJ Jenkins & Patton prove to be amazing.
[ Edited by VPofCarnage on May 31, 2013 at 1:44 PM ]
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by Rascal:
Of course the discussion is theoretical because you have to agree on the principle first before you put it into action. So, there is no point to bring up points about draft position nor trading up partner cos you simply can't.

The principle that you want us to adopt is that we need a Wide Receiver that has top notch measurables.

You prefer a wide receiver that is at least 6'3" and ideally weigh more than 220 lbs and fast enough to burn and take the top off double teams.

I think it will be difficult to reach a consenus that your preferences are the proper standards that we should use to pick a franchise wide receiver.

Any standards for a wide receiver that automatically exclude a Jerry Rice do not seems like reasonable standards, wouldn't you agree?

Just for fun I decided to see how last years leading receivers measured up. It surprised me how big the average top 15 receivers are. Also wanted to compare my two favorites from the bay area.

Legends:
Jerry Rice 6'2" 200 lbs Faster football speed than 40 time
Fred Biletnikoff 6'1" 190 lbs Not a speedy guy by any standard

Current leaders: Only six of fifteen under 6'2"
Calvin Johnson 6'5" 236 lbs
Andre Johnson 6'3" 230 lbs
Brandon Marshal 6'4" 230 lbs
Demaryius Thomas 6'3" 229 lbs
Vincent Jackson 6'5" 230 lbs
Dez Bryant 6'2" 220 lbs
Reggie Wayne 6'0" 198 lbs
Wes Welker 5'9" 185 lbs
Roddy White 6'0" 211 lbs
AJ Green 6'4" 207 lbs
Julio Jones 6'3" 220lbs
Steve Smith 5'9" 185 lbs
Marques Colston 6'4" 225 lbs
Michael Crabtree 6'1" 214 lbs
Victor Cruz 6'0" 204 lbs
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,510
From 2007, the year Calvin Johnson was drafted, to the present 318 wide receivers have attended the combine. (limited to those whose heights were listed)

Of those, 57 were 6 feet 3inchers or taller (17.92 %).

The other 261 were less than 6 feet 3 inches (82.08%).
[ Edited by buck on May 31, 2013 at 7:29 PM ]
Originally posted by buck:
From 2007, the year Calvin Johnson was drafted, to the present 318 wide receivers have attended the combine. (limited to those whose heights were listed)

Of those, 57 were 6 feet 3inchers or taller (17.92 %).

The other 261 were less than 6 feet 3 inches (82.08%).

Yeah, I agree it doesn't matter if the guy is 5'10 or 6'4" but it does matter if he can get open and catch passes. Just was surprised by the top fifteen guys in yards last year...most over 6'2". Would I not want Steve Smith at 5'9"? I'd take (a young) someone like him in a heartbeat!