MadDog's 2013 NFL Draft Review

Originally posted by oldninerdude:
Excellent points you make, Lieut.

MD's entitled to his opinion though, and can give out whatever grades he wants.

Fact is that Baalke has access to coaches film, and has had the time to study quite a bit of it, while MD has stated that he is limited to utube and to whatever video clips might be available on the interwebs, plus he has to study them on his free time, as a hobby. So ultimately Baalke's evaluation of the players in the draft is based on much more information, and is likely to be more accurate and more complete.

Two years ago, for example, MD gave the Niners a "C-" for drafting Aldon Smith, Kaepernick, Culliver, Hunter, Kilgore, and Miller. He was highly critical not only of the Aldon Smith selection, but also of the second round selection of some QB named Kaepernick. Baalke should have taken a QB named Jackson much later, in the 6th or 7th round, and would have gotten equal value, according to MD back then.

Based on that history, it seems wiser to trust Baalke's evaluation of talent over MD's.

Kudos to MD, however, for raising the issues he raises and for giving us all an opportunity to better understand what Baalke does in the draft.

MD's "draft review" every year always makes for an interesting read and challenges us all to think critically about the Niner's draft selections.

Nothing wrong with that. IMHO.

A couple notes: If a fan watches a lot of games, and concentrates and isolates a certain player, which I do, it allows for a pretty decent attempt at grading.

As for the 2011 class, I didn't think the Niners selections were going to pan out the way it did. Smith was the highest remaining OLB on my board, but I saw much better value in Watt. I think many would agree with me in a draft re-do that they would select Watt. As stated before, to much applause, I would regrade it differently, as I do for virtually every other draft (ask 99% of the media, and Mel, Mike M, Todd McShay, etc. what they thought about Seattle's draft last year). People look back and think, "I'd screwed this one up". I have no problem looking back and saying that I missed on an analysis.

At the same time, I think I have fared pretty well with my selections over the year (Iupati, Dez Bryant, Morgan Burnett in 2010) Compare my draft with Baalke's last year, and so far, I've got him smoked. Was there anyone the Niners' selected that matched my pick of Vick Ballard in the late rounds? So, you win some, you lose some. In the end, as stated before, it is hitting more often than others that is the goal.

In the end, it is all fun and games. When it is no longer fun, it is time to move on.

Originally posted by TheSixthRing:

Originally posted by Rubberneck36:

Originally posted by BleedRednGold:

Originally posted by Rubberneck36:

Originally posted by BleedRednGold:

Time and time again you waste your time writing nonsense. I'm glad you're not our GM cause you would run us right into the ground straight into hell. Bottom line, you don't know S#%T!

That will cost you. Write something like that again and it will be your last day on the board. PM me if you dont understand.

Is this the Stanford Experiment all over again? Give nobody's some sense of power and they think they can do anything they want. Well if this is the last one ill make it count. I'll tell you as well you don't know s**t either. f**k you and the other jack ass that knows more about jack and s**t MadDog.

lol. How come I didnt see this. Thats awesome. Now he has something to tell mom at the dinner table tonight.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:
I still wonder how folks evaluate the secondary.

this.

great pass rush will make a db look good
no pass rush will make a db look horrible.

Originally posted by fryet:
Thinks MD for your draft analysis. I was waiting for it. Personally, I think it is the best analysis that we can get as a 49er fan (other paid analysts may know about the draft in general, but they don't know the 49ers as well).

I don't see why MD gets such strong opinions on this board. I posted my draft analysis as well,as did many others. I didn't see anyone tell me that I don't know what I am talking about (which would be accurate). MD is just posting his opinion like everyone else.

Thanks for the kind thoughts. Do you think people would be arguing that I don't know what I am talking about if I gave the team an A grade? The backlash is directly related to the grade. I call it like I see it. I can't sugar coat decisions I think are shaky just because I like the team.

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

Originally posted by theduke85:
I understand this logic, and I was thinking the same thing ('if they traded up to get Reid at 18, why not trade up to 14 to get Vaccaro?').

However, Harbaugh was interviewed on day 3 of the draft. In response to the pick with Reid, he said this (paraphrased): "Reid was our target all week. He is the guy we wanted. He was our top-rated player at the position coming into the draft."

Now, here's what I'm getting at with this: if the 49ers really preferred Reid to Vaccaro, why would they trade up even further to get the latter? They wouldn't! And that's why it's hard to fault them for how it played out (i.e. "oh, if only we had traded up 3 more spots!"). That criticism only makes sense if the team had the same Big Board as us and everyone else.

Thank you so much for your analysis though. Every year I read your stuff. Multiple times throughout the draft when someone was picked that I didn't know, I fired up your "top 50" topic to see where a guy ranked on your list. You get WAY too much crap around here for just sharing your views. I know the Webzone can be tough on people are objective (instead of being blind homers), so just letting you know I appreciate your work!

Thanks for your kind thoughts. Obviously, Trent and I part on our evaluation of Vacarro and Reid. To me, the league is about matchups. With the addition of Percy Harvin and Tavon Austin, it is going to take a different type of FS to play ball with these race cars. I prefer the cover skills and ability of Vacarro way beyond Reid, who I think is good , but not great in that area. As stated earlier, to me, Reid projects to SS in about 2-3 years. I want guys on the back end that are great in coverage.

One note about Jonathan Cyprien. The guy was lights out in coverage at the Senior Bowl, which featured some talented WRs. He would have been a great selection for the team at 33, even though he'd be playing the same position as Whitner, who I don't think is long for this team. In other words, this whole secondary is going to be turned over in the next few years.

One final note: In my draft, I have the Niners selecting Phillip Thomas late in the third round. This would have been 75 picks after Reid. To me, I'll take Thomas at that value over Reid.

lol. So you and Baalke are on a first name basis now, MD? That's great.

As NCommand has also been saying, Whitner may not be long for the team, as you point out. It would not be a complete surprise to see his role taken by Reid, and then see Robinson take over at FS. Maybe not this year, but soon. From the off season moves the team made, it seems pretty clear that the coaching staff was not happy with the play of the secondary at the end of last season. Changes have been made, and more changes may be coming.

Reid's intelligence, athletic prowess (40" jump reach is incredible), and versatility make him a terrific value. Vacarro may have been equally good, or even a little better in some areas, but I don't see how you can claim a "huge" drop off from Vacarro to Reid, and at the same time claim that Phillip Thomas would have been a choice of equal, or near equal value if selected in a later round.

Sorry, but I also have to downgrade your post based on a mixed metaphor: how do you "play ball" with "race cars?" (j/k)

Originally posted by SFL49ER:
The red flag was probably immaturity--if I had to guess

Could be a medical that looks worse to a team. Back problems can cause players to fall farther and faster than knees. A couple years ago, Charles Brown, an Ol who plays for the Saints, was considered a late first, early second rounder, but fell to the fourth. Later on, it was discovered he had a bad back, so teams simply removed him from their boards. it happen.

At the same time, any time a person has YOLO tattooed on their neck, it shows a level of immaturity. This may have been one element in the slide.

Originally posted by Amir:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:
I still wonder how folks evaluate the secondary.

this.

great pass rush will make a db look good
no pass rush will make a db look horrible.

Not just that, but most of a DB's job happens off camera. Unless you have the game film I don't know how you'd evaluate it.

Originally posted by kent:

31. Tank Carradine-DE
34. Justin Hunter- WR
61. Jesse Williams-NT/DE
74. BW Webb-CB
93. Phillip Thomas-S

I like some of these guys and I can see this for a team building for the future. I do not think it makes sense for a team knocking on the door, however. SB opportunities do not come along often. When you are on the door step and have one glaring need, you fill that need. You do not throw a fourth round developmental guy from a small conference out there and hope it works out. Nor do you sign a 45 year old guy and hope he can find the fountain of youth. You get the low risk high upside SEC guy and give your team the best opportunity to win now.

To the 49ers credit, they were able to get plenty of value picks after round one including lots of guys with upside. None of these, however, were critical to the success of the team this season. A replacement for Goldston was always going to be the overwhelming priority and addressing this was always going to happen in round one. This is the way it was done and should have been done.

Teams can't always cover all the bases in a draft. The draft helps fill holes, but you want to make sure you get value for the pick. I don't think less of Baalke for not picking up a very needed quick and young CB from this class, even though it is a big priority for the team. Maybe they can plug the gap for a year with the old guys and see how it pans out, or find another player in FA.

Value picks are most important, and then filling in the gaps with FA.

Originally posted by thl408:
I don't think draft grades can be evaluated a couple days after the draft. They can be done 3 years later like the 'Grade the 2010 draft" thread. At this point, I don't think grades from A to F can be given. It's more like draft impressions rated on a scale of 1-10 "How much do you like what the 49ers did".

You are right. Right now, it is all fun and games. Nobody will know for years.

Originally posted by jacklegniner:
MadDog,

On the Reid pick. In 3 years, when they do the re-draft, do you think Reid will be one of the top 18 players from this draft?

No. I think he will not be considered first round value.

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:
Excellent points you make, Lieut.

MD's entitled to his opinion though, and can give out whatever grades he wants.

Fact is that Baalke has access to coaches film, and has had the time to study quite a bit of it, while MD has stated that he is limited to utube and to whatever video clips might be available on the interwebs, plus he has to study them on his free time, as a hobby. So ultimately Baalke's evaluation of the players in the draft is based on much more information, and is likely to be more accurate and more complete.

Two years ago, for example, MD gave the Niners a "C-" for drafting Aldon Smith, Kaepernick, Culliver, Hunter, Kilgore, and Miller. He was highly critical not only of the Aldon Smith selection, but also of the second round selection of some QB named Kaepernick. Baalke should have taken a QB named Jackson much later, in the 6th or 7th round, and would have gotten equal value, according to MD back then.

Based on that history, it seems wiser to trust Baalke's evaluation of talent over MD's.

Kudos to MD, however, for raising the issues he raises and for giving us all an opportunity to better understand what Baalke does in the draft.

MD's "draft review" every year always makes for an interesting read and challenges us all to think critically about the Niner's draft selections.

Nothing wrong with that. IMHO.

A couple notes: If a fan watches a lot of games, and concentrates and isolates a certain player, which I do, it allows for a pretty decent attempt at grading.

As for the 2011 class, I didn't think the Niners selections were going to pan out the way it did. Smith was the highest remaining OLB on my board, but I saw much better value in Watt. I think many would agree with me in a draft re-do that they would select Watt. As stated before, to much applause, I would regrade it differently, as I do for virtually every other draft (ask 99% of the media, and Mel, Mike M, Todd McShay, etc. what they thought about Seattle's draft last year). People look back and think, "I'd screwed this one up". I have no problem looking back and saying that I missed on an analysis.

At the same time, I think I have fared pretty well with my selections over the year (Iupati, Dez Bryant, Morgan Burnett in 2010) Compare my draft with Baalke's last year, and so far, I've got him smoked. Was there anyone the Niners' selected that matched my pick of Vick Ballard in the late rounds? So, you win some, you lose some. In the end, as stated before, it is hitting more often than others that is the goal.

In the end, it is all fun and games. When it is no longer fun, it is time to move on.

I don't care how many games you watch on TV as a fan, or how often you rewatch, TV coverage is far different from a coaches tape--especially in regard to the secondary. Many times TV coverage doesn't even include the secondary, and you have to rely on the color commentator to tell you if its zone or man to man, etc.

A coaches tape can allow you to focus in on a particular player in the secondary play after play, for an entire game. Big, big difference.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
MD.. someone raised a good question earlier. How would your draft grade differ if the Niners had made NO trades and selected Tank with pick 31 and then Reid at 34?

You must have missed the question so will ask again.. How would you rate the draft if the picks went:

31 Tank
34 Reid
61 McDonald
93 Lemonier
128 Patton
131 Lattimore

In this case, would they not have gotten great value at 31, 128, and 131 and gotten fair market value at 34 61 and 93? So, would your grade change without moving up for Reid and taking your guy Carradine?

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

Originally posted by jacklegniner:
MadDog,

On the Reid pick. In 3 years, when they do the re-draft, do you think Reid will be one of the top 18 players from this draft?

No. I think he will not be considered first round value.

YESSSSSSSSSS

That means he's gonna be the best safety of all time. OF ALL TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
MD.. someone raised a good question earlier. How would your draft grade differ if the Niners had made NO trades and selected Tank with pick 31 and then Reid at 34?

You must have missed the question so will ask again.. How would you rate the draft if the picks went:

31 Tank
34 Reid
61 McDonald
93 Lemonier
128 Patton
131 Lattimore

In this case, would they not have gotten great value at 31, 128, and 131 and gotten fair market value at 34 61 and 93? So, would your grade change without moving up for Reid and taking your guy Carradine?

I doubt Reid would have been available.

sorry MadDog but I trust Baalke's judgement alot more than yours bro. Reid will be a stud and Cinn was a strong possibility of them taking him 3 picks later. But i can understand your reasoning.