RB Leonard Fournette

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by GMniner805:
This is the Baalke mindset that got the 49ers in this situation to begin with.

To rebuild a football team you draft the BPA period.

When the 49ers drafted Patrick Willis they had two average starting LBs and just as many holes as they do now. Same with Vernon Davis, EJ was better than average. Drafting strictly on need normally means passing on better players.

So if a guard is BPA at two do you draft him?

Exactly. You can't just say "BPA". It's more like:

BPA at a position of value and need.

Yep. There is no way I would ever take a center or guard with the 2nd pick no matter how great they were. A RB would have to be SO elite for me to go there as well. When you talk BPA you have to consider the value of the position.

all of these people on this board are just crazy I'm sorry but you don't draft for need . you draft the best player on your board and if there is 2 players that are equal on your board then the tie breaker is which player u need more . it aint to complicated if you love leonard fournette then you take him who cares what other people think if he is top 3 on your board like the rumors are saying then u might as well and take him . you wont be good for a couple years you need to build your house take the best player period end of discussion .

Originally posted by Tylerawiseguy:

all of these people on this board are just crazy I'm sorry but you don't draft for need . you draft the best player on your board and if there is 2 players that are equal on your board then the tie breaker is which player u need more .

Originally posted by Tylerawiseguy:

all of these people on this board are just crazy I'm sorry but you don't draft for need . you draft the best player on your board and if there is 2 players that are equal on your board then the tie breaker is which player u need more . it aint to complicated if you love leonard fournette then you take him who cares what other people think if he is top 3 on your board like the rumors are saying then u might as well and take him . you wont be good for a couple years you need to build your house take the best player period end of discussion .

You do realise that most arguing against Fournette don't have him as BPA right? So this BPA argument that keeps popping up really isn't as period end of discussion as you'd like it to be.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Originally posted by Tylerawiseguy:

all of these people on this board are just crazy I'm sorry but you don't draft for need . you draft the best player on your board and if there is 2 players that are equal on your board then the tie breaker is which player u need more .

He's saying if there's a tie on BPA, go with The guy that probably helps you more day one...not necessarily a flat out "need".
But of course as we know there's several factors like how the draft is looking for next year, your upcoming FAs, 2018 FAs etc.

And it's the deepest draft for defense in years. One could make the same argument--that good players can be found in the 3rd round--at every position. Why do you think teams value high first round picks? The odds are better of getting a great player.

Originally posted by Lurker:

And it's the deepest draft for defense in years. One could make the same argument--that good players can be found in the 3rd round--at every position. Why do you think teams value high first round picks? The odds are better of getting a great player.

That's why I wanna hold onto our fourths and our early 5th. You could get possible starters there...Even if you have to coach up for a year(if not two) as they rotate.

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Originally posted by Tylerawiseguy:

all of these people on this board are just crazy I'm sorry but you don't draft for need . you draft the best player on your board and if there is 2 players that are equal on your board then the tie breaker is which player u need more .

He's saying if there's a tie on BPA, go with The guy that probably helps you more day one...not necessarily a flat out "need".
But of course as we know there's several factors like how the draft is looking for next year, your upcoming FAs, 2018 FAs etc.

BPA at a position of need

1a Garrett
1b Trib/Four

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Originally posted by Tylerawiseguy:

all of these people on this board are just crazy I'm sorry but you don't draft for need . you draft the best player on your board and if there is 2 players that are equal on your board then the tie breaker is which player u need more .

He's saying if there's a tie on BPA, go with The guy that probably helps you more day one...not necessarily a flat out "need".
But of course as we know there's several factors like how the draft is looking for next year, your upcoming FAs, 2018 FAs etc.

BPA at a position of need

Combined with position of being able to upgrade at

We don't have any holes right now at any position IMO... Just positions you can upgrade at, also bring players in who can add different elements of certain traits you like at that position for better scheme fit.

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:
Combined with position of being able to upgrade at

We don't have any holes right now at any position IMO... Just positions you can upgrade at, also bring players in who can add different elements of certain traits you like at that position for better scheme fit.

Well said. The holes are filled. It's all just upgrades.

Originally posted by JaggedJ:
You do realise that most arguing against Fournette don't have him as BPA right? So this BPA argument that keeps popping up really isn't as period end of discussion as you'd like it to be.

Well, it is a bit of both. You could argue Fournette is near enough BPA. Daniel Jeremiah has him as the No.5 best player in his Top 50, I mean that's near enough for me if we were to grab him at 2.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
1a Garrett
1b Trib/Four

Yes sir!!

That's exactly where I am at.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by GMniner805:
This is the Baalke mindset that got the 49ers in this situation to begin with.

To rebuild a football team you draft the BPA period.

When the 49ers drafted Patrick Willis they had two average starting LBs and just as many holes as they do now. Same with Vernon Davis, EJ was better than average. Drafting strictly on need normally means passing on better players.

So if a guard is BPA at two do you draft him?

Exactly. You can't just say "BPA". It's more like:

BPA at a position of value and need.

Yep. There is no way I would ever take a center or guard with the 2nd pick no matter how great they were. A RB would have to be SO elite for me to go there as well. When you talk BPA you have to consider the value of the position.

Value and need are subjective. If the guard is a Steve Hutchinson type he easily could be in play at 2, what if the guard can kick out to tackle??

sub·jec·tive
səbˈjektiv/
adjective
1.
based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.
^ thats for you NY

Originally posted by Rascal:
Well, it is a bit of both. You could argue Fournette is near enough BPA. Daniel Jeremiah has him as the No.5 best player in his Top 50, I mean that's near enough for me if we were to grab him at 2.

Yet the post I replied to said we go BPA and that's it, end of discussion, period. Anything else is Baalke thinking.

So are we going BPA or "near enough to BPA" and considering there will 100% be strong defensive players anywhere near our picks to be considered "near enough to BPA" I'm not sure what argument he was trying to make.