No WR until the 3rd round

We have 3 picks in the first two rounds. I think one of them should be used to get a wide receiver.

We have 4 picks in rounds three to five. I would like to pick up another wide with one of those picks.

CB> WR> CB> DE> QB>WR> C> S

Originally posted by kronik:

Originally posted by Quest4six:

Originally posted by GorefullBore:

Originally posted by kronik:
How did our run first team do against Seattle at Clink? They didn't do so hot against Carolina or Green Bay for that matter. To think we have to rely on Gore again... No more dude. The run first mentality has not worked in 3 years. It's a fallacy.

BTW, I believe we were dead last in 3rd & short runs. That is not too impressive for a run first team.

The run first approach got us to a Super Bowl, and got Seattle a Super Bowl Championship . I would say that approach works just fine.

That stat about us being dead last on 3rd & short runs is BS. I'd like to see proof of that as I am 99% sure that the Raiders, Texans, Browns, and Jaguars own that category. Notice they also happen to be the worst teams in the NFL?

Seattle and Carolina both arguably have the top rushing defenses in the NFL, its obvious we didn't run well against them because they are stacked on the RunD. It was also snowing in GB, if you look up the stats for that game, both offenses struggled to get anything going.
Our run-first approach is the reason we became 13-3 and had an NFC championship game.

Originally posted by 60sFan:

Originally posted by Quest4six:
Donte Moncrief is as talented as any WR we would get in the 1st

That being said, a 2-3rd round CB isn't as talented as one we would get in the 1st

My opinion we go

1. Trade up for Gilbert/Fuller
2. Moncreif
3. Stanley Jean Baptise (if you don't know who this is i suggest you educate yourself.)

I agree with this with this except, I would prefer Keith McGill in that 3rd slot.

McGill is pretty close to the same thing as Baptise, I like McGill as well but you can't ignore the vertical Baptise has.
Because Baptise played in a tougher conference than McGill, and in my opinion had a better season, I went with him.

McGill only had 1int last season despite being the top CB for Utah
Baptise is a converted WR and despite missing three games last season, and not having nearly as much playing time as McGill, had 4 picks

I am not saying our run game is our weakest part of our team but it's over-exaggerated. Regarding those 3 playoff games this year, you got excuses for everything. The run game didn't do much against New Orleans and NY Giants in 2011. Played much better in playoff games in 2012 due to Kaep bursting onto the scene. But then the RB running game was terrible again in 2013 again with 3 games played. All 3 were poor again with Green bay being one of the worst run D in the league. Heck, they were even missing starters like Clay Matthews. Maybe our run game is not as good as everyone thinks?

BTW, here's a link to some stats. Take a look at the stats based on down and distance.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/8479/frank-gore

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1989939-49ers-by-the-numbers-2013-stats-san-francisco-must-improve-in-2014/page/6

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

According to this site, the Niners ranked 29th in overall rushing stats and were stuffed in short yardage situations 25% of the time .

Originally posted by 60sFan:

I agree with this with this except, I would prefer Keith McGill in that 3rd slot.

I hope you like him as a safety.

Originally posted by Quest4six:

Originally posted by kronik:
I am not saying our run game is our weakest part of our team but it's over-exaggerated. Regarding those 3 playoff games this year, you got excuses for everything. The run game didn't do much against New Orleans and NY Giants in 2011. Played much better in playoff games in 2012 due to Kaep bursting onto the scene. But then the RB running game was terrible again in 2013 again with 3 games played. All 3 were poor again with Green bay being one of the worst run D in the league. Heck, they were even missing starters like Clay Matthews. Maybe our run game is not as good as everyone thinks?

BTW, here's a link to some stats. Take a look at the stats based on down and distance.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/8479/frank-gore

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1989939-49ers-by-the-numbers-2013-stats-san-francisco-must-improve-in-2014/page/6

True, you do make a good argument. I agree with you now, one thing I feel that has kept many teams from becoming the bottom on the NFL is their ability to be dynamic and adapt to the change happening in the game. I think our time with the power run scheme is coming to a close. I do still think that alot of our offense is built around it, but I would like to see some changes made. I think we need to start using a 3 WR set more often and open up our offense.

Solid post Kronik

Originally posted by MC9BEAT:
There is no doubt the 49ers will try to extend Crabtree but it is no guarantee that they can. How much will he ask for? $8M? , $10M, $12M a year? What if he wants to go FA and test the waters? I am hopeful but it is not a given. Either way Boldin won't be here more than a couple of years. We need to develop his replacement and also need depth. If we lose 2 WR's to injury again this year like we did the last 2 seasons it would be nice to have some talented depth.

Thats true, and the one thing that worries me is Crabs is the same guy who held out on us over his rookie contract. If you see above I took Landry and Moncrief in the same draft, who I feel would both be solid replacements.
Plus, Kap would be a 10x better QB if we gave him more options that just Crabs, VD, and Boldin.
Like I said to Kronik, I want to see a 3 WR set become common in our offense.

I like Moncrief and Landry as well. If we got lucky we might be able to land Moncrief a 56 and possibly Landry at 77. If they were available I would draft them. We need depth. We need a vertical threat. We need a replacement for Boldin to develop.

Originally posted by Quest4six:

That stat about us being dead last on 3rd & short runs is BS. I'd like to see proof of that as I am 99% sure that the Raiders, Texans, Browns, and Jaguars own that category. Notice they also happen to be the worst teams in the NFL?

Seattle and Carolina both arguably have the top rushing defenses in the NFL, its obvious we didn't run well against them because they are stacked on the RunD. It was also snowing in GB, if you look up the stats for that game, both offenses struggled to get anything going.
Our run-first approach is the reason we became 13-3 and had an NFC championship game.


McGill is pretty close to the same thing as Baptise, I like McGill as well but you can't ignore the vertical Baptise has.
Because Baptise played in a tougher conference than McGill, and in my opinion had a better season, I went with him.

McGill only had 1int last season despite being the top CB for Utah
Baptise is a converted WR and despite missing three games last season, and not having nearly as much playing time as McGill, had 4 picks

What makes you think the B1G is a better conference than the Pac-12? I'm a Purdue/B1G fan and still think the Pac-12 produces better CBs because most Pac12 teams are heavy passing/high tempo offenses which equates to more reps in pass coverage and more plays per game (Pac-12 had 6 teams in the top 27 of plays per game; the B1G had 1 at #26). I'm neither a fan of McGill nor SJB but to say SJB played in a tougher conference is debatable to me.

Originally posted by kronik:
I am not saying our run game is our weakest part of our team but it's over-exaggerated. Regarding those 3 playoff games this year, you got excuses for everything. The run game didn't do much against New Orleans and NY Giants in 2011. Played much better in playoff games in 2012 due to Kaep bursting onto the scene. But then the RB running game was terrible again in 2013 again with 3 games played. All 3 were poor again with Green bay being one of the worst run D in the league. Heck, they were even missing starters like Clay Matthews. Maybe our run game is not as good as everyone thinks?

BTW, here's a link to some stats. Take a look at the stats based on down and distance.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/8479/frank-gore

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1989939-49ers-by-the-numbers-2013-stats-san-francisco-must-improve-in-2014/page/6

IMO it comes down to scheme and predictability. The running game was fine but the offense played into defense's hands far too often. Also teams stayed in a loaded box consistently against the 49ers, they need to better spread defense's out in order to have more success with the running game.

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:

With the first 3 picks, I can see a CB in the 1st rd, a WR w/pick #56 (don't be surprised to see Baalke trade up) to get the guy they like the most. Could be Matthews, Adams, Moncrief, who knows. The last pick in the 2nd I can see another CB or a S.

Unless the really like a DE like Tuitt, then it might be 1.DE 2.CB 2.WR 3.CB 3.WR
1. DE Tuitt (trade back)
2A CB Fuller or Roby or Verrett (trade up)
2B WR Bryant (or Moncreif / Robinson / Matthews)?
3A CB Desir or Baptiste etc ?
3B WR Dri Archer or Seatrunk (trade LMJ), Richardson, etc

Originally posted by Quest4six:

Originally posted by GorefullBore:

Originally posted by kronik:

How did our run first team do against Seattle at Clink? They didn't do so hot against Carolina or Green Bay for that matter. To think we have to rely on Gore again... No more dude. The run first mentality has not worked in 3 years. It's a fallacy.

BTW, I believe we were dead last in 3rd & short runs. That is not too impressive for a run first team.

The run first approach got us to a Super Bowl, and got Seattle a Super Bowl Championship . I would say that approach works just fine.

That stat about us being dead last on 3rd & short runs is BS. I'd like to see proof of that as I am 99% sure that the Raiders, Texans, Browns, and Jaguars own that category. Notice they also happen to be the worst teams in the NFL?

Seattle and Carolina both arguably have the top rushing defenses in the NFL, its obvious we didn't run well against them because they are stacked on the RunD. It was also snowing in GB, if you look up the stats for that game, both offenses struggled to get anything going.
Our run-first approach is the reason we became 13-3 and had an NFC championship game.

Originally posted by 60sFan:

Originally posted by Quest4six:

Donte Moncrief is as talented as any WR we would get in the 1st

That being said, a 2-3rd round CB isn't as talented as one we would get in the 1st

My opinion we go

1. Trade up for Gilbert/Fuller
2. Moncreif
3. Stanley Jean Baptise (if you don't know who this is i suggest you educate yourself.)

I agree with this with this except, I would prefer Keith McGill in that 3rd slot.

McGill is pretty close to the same thing as Baptise, I like McGill as well but you can't ignore the vertical Baptise has.
Because Baptise played in a tougher conference than McGill, and in my opinion had a better season, I went with him.

McGill only had 1int last season despite being the top CB for Utah
Baptise is a converted WR and despite missing three games last season, and not having nearly as much playing time as McGill, had 4 picks

You convinced me on Baptise. Although a bit raw, I do like the fact he was a WR. Should have better ball skills.

Originally posted by VPofCarnage:

Originally posted by 60sFan:

I agree with this with this except, I would prefer Keith McGill in that 3rd slot.

I hope you like him as a safety.

Funny. Touché.

Originally posted by VPofCarnage:

Originally posted by 60sFan:

I agree with this with this except, I would prefer Keith McGill in that 3rd slot.

I hope you like him as a safety.

Ah, don't draft that guy!

Originally posted by maxsmart:
Unless the really like a DE like Tuitt, then it might be 1.DE 2.CB 2.WR 3.CB 3.WR
1. DE Tuitt (trade back)
2A CB Fuller or Roby or Verrett (trade up)
2B WR Bryant (or Moncreif / Robinson / Matthews)?
3A CB Desir or Baptiste etc ?
3B WR Dri Archer or Seatrunk (trade LMJ), Richardson, etc

I've seen a lot of draft boards have Tuitt going second round. If people pass I believe that Baalke will nab him but we won't trade up.
No way we are getting Fuller, Roby, or Verrett in the second, if we want one of those guys we will have to get them with the 1st.

I like the Moncreif and Matthews idea, I don't think Matthews fill fall this far but if he does i hope we get him.

I have been on the moncrief wagon as well because I want it all in a WR size speed and physicality but something tells me that we need so.one to stretch the field to beat SEA but Benjamin seems he can be a devastating redzone threat. We've lost both times because we can't punch it in inside the twenty. We get down there but settle for the FG. I love Moncrief and I love Adams but we need to score redzone TDs as well

We need quality more than quantity.
We have a huge amount of picks. If we can't trade up then i'd want us to trade out of some of our picks (trading for 2015 picks).

I'd like to trade up and get the best corner on our board... or at least ensure we get the corner we like the most. Whether thats Dennard or Gilbert or someone else, i'll leave that to the draft experts. By looking at mock drafts, it'll probably cost us our 2 second rd picks to move up and get Gilbert. To move up and grab Dennard, maybe it will cost the Tenn 3rd rd pick. Dennard seems to be the better value, but i'm no draft guru.

SOMETHING should be left from our 4 day 2 picks after moving up to get our corner. Whatever that is, take a WR and if anything still left, lets move that for a future pick.

We have a future need at WR, but can afford to develop a guy with Patton and don't require breaking the bank to trade up for a top guy. Better to allocate those resources towards CB and/or future picks to make a trade up next year easier when we know if we have Crabtree or not, we know if Patton is going to be a player for us, and we've seen our "developmental guy" for a year.

I'd also like to see us get Easley for a 1-yr draft-n-stash... might take a 3rd to do that, and i'd be ok with that instead of trading it for a 2015 pick.
Other than that, with one of our later picks, if we can't trade for 2015 picks, i'd like to take chance on someone like D'Anthony Thomas or Dre Archer to compete with LMJ for KR, PR, and slot/scat back guy.

I want two DB's and one WR before the end of day two . . . I don't care much about the order.