RB Leonard Fournette

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:

Excellent point. When people say imagine how Shanahan would do with an elite running back, as if we are going to like the pro version of the 1990s Nebraska Cornhuskers with Fournette. We had a historically bad defense last year and have a chance to get an elite defensive player.

This. If Hyde got almost a 1,000 behind poor run blocking and predictable run playcalls its not like Fournette would have had 2,000.

Say he got you 5 yards a carry instead of Hyde's 4.6, the difference would have been less than a 100 rushing yards.


What the 49ers need is a high quality #2 back and serious upgrades to a woeful defense.

Don't believe anything you hear this time of year.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:

Excellent point. When people say imagine how Shanahan would do with an elite running back, as if we are going to like the pro version of the 1990s Nebraska Cornhuskers with Fournette. We had a historically bad defense last year and have a chance to get an elite defensive player.

This. If Hyde got almost a 1,000 behind poor run blocking and predictable run playcalls its not like Fournette would have had 2,000.

Say he got you 5 yards a carry instead of Hyde's 4.6, the difference would have been less than a 100 rushing yards.


What the 49ers need is a high quality #2 back and serious upgrades to a woeful defense.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

This. If Hyde got almost a 1,000 behind poor run blocking and predictable run playcalls its not like Fournette would have had 2,000.

Say he got you 5 yards a carry instead of Hyde's 4.6, the difference would have been less than a 100 rushing yards.


What the 49ers need is a high quality #2 back and serious upgrades to a woeful defense.

This

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
This. If Hyde got almost a 1,000 behind poor run blocking and predictable run playcalls its not like Fournette would have had 2,000.

Say he got you 5 yards a carry instead of Hyde's 4.6, the difference would have been less than a 100 rushing yards.

What the 49ers need is a high quality #2 back and serious upgrades to a woeful defense.

If Hyde could stay healthy he'd have more than a 1k yards. His problem isn't play it's staying on the field. From there you're hoping an improved passing game + a top rushing attack could lead to a better team. If we had McD I'd be all for LF but with Shanny's zone read it would shock me if we selected him.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:
Excellent point. When people say imagine how Shanahan would do with an elite running back, as if we are going to like the pro version of the 1990s Nebraska Cornhuskers with Fournette. We had a historically bad defense last year and have a chance to get an elite defensive player.

This. If Hyde got almost a 1,000 behind poor run blocking and predictable run playcalls its not like Fournette would have had 2,000.

Say he got you 5 yards a carry instead of Hyde's 4.6, the difference would have been less than a 100 rushing yards.

What the 49ers need is a high quality #2 back and serious upgrades to a woeful defense.

Your comment ignores two truths about Hyde that have been mentioned repeatedly: 1) he's often not on the field because he's injured and 2) he's in the last year of his contract. I like Hyde but I believe the team also has to see the big picture.

And yards are not the significant metric. Yards just lead to first downs and touchdowns.

I think the idea that Leonard Fournette cannot play in Shanahan's system is false.

Originally posted by Lurker:

Your comment ignores two truths about Hyde that have been mentioned repeatedly: 1) he's often not on the field because he's injured and 2) he's in the last year of his contract. I like Hyde but I believe the team also has to see the big picture.

And yards are not the significant metric. Yards just lead to first downs and touchdowns.

Big picture is RB is the easiest position to find competent starters in.

Big picture is RB is simply not as important as of a position as it used to be with the changes to the passing game.

Drafting a RB who may not even be the best guy on his own college team at #2 when the only decent thing on our terrible roster last year was the rushing offense in one of the best defensive rich drafts in a while is not big picture. It's stupid and I pray we don't do that.

Originally posted by Lurker:

I think the idea that Leonard Fournette cannot play in Shanahan's system is false.

Of course he can play in his system. Is that the ideal fit given his skillsets? No it's not.

So why draft a guy so high to not play him to his strengths? And while we can adjust for him...that's 10 other guys plus backups who have to adjust because of one guy.

Originally posted by Lurker:
I think the idea that Leonard Fournette cannot play in Shanahan's system is false.

I don't think anyone is saying he CAN'T play in Shanahans's offense but that his best talents aren't a good match for Shanahan's offense. Is it a good match? If so, in what ways?

Originally posted by Lurker:

Your comment ignores two truths about Hyde that have been mentioned repeatedly:


1) he's often not on the field because he's injured

I think part of that is a byproduct of his running style, which isnt all too dissimilar from Fournette and simply taking too many hits behind the line of scrimmage due to poor run blocking.

The best way to help him stay healthy is to get him a quality back to split carries with.

and 2) he's in the last year of his contract.

So what? This is ignoring that with the #2 pick, Fournette would be earning an average salary of around $6 or $7 million a year. From Day 1 he would be the most expensive RB on the roster.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Who do you think he'll choose?

I have no idea who the 49ers will choose all I know is it wont be a qb . I think the 2nd pick will be one of 4 players if the browns select myles garrett it will be leonard fournette or malik hooker or Rueben foster or marshon Lattimore . I just get a little irritated when people say it would be a horrible pick to choose fournette and that he wont be a great player and that we don't need him because we have carlos hyde and its like who in the hell is carlos hyde he hasn't proved jack s**t to me . he cant stay healthy !

If the 49ers truly think leonard fournette will be a great player with a chance to be in the hall of fame some day then you take him with the 2nd pick . who gives a s**t what other people think . a few months ago Ronnie lott was on knbr radio and he said the 49ers need to draft a great player with the chance to wear that gold jacket in the hall of fame some day so u have to hit a home run not a single or a double !

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:

Originally posted by GhostOfBaalke:

Originally posted by IdahoNiner:

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:
I think he's simply nitpicking, rightfully so cause that's a MASSIVE decision to take Fournette at #2 when Kyle got a former 6th round pick in Alfred Morris to hit 1600 effing yards. The highest back taken when a Shanahan was on the team has to be Tatum Bell/Clinton Portis right? both second rounders.

The thought of Fournette does sound bad ass and we could make it work IMO easily.

And my response to people always saying that the Shannahans make something of nothing with RB's....Yes they do. But what could they do with an actual top flight talent at RB?

What could they have done with Adrian Peterson in his prime? I would imagine Adrian Petersons numbers would have been inflated with Shanny as his coach.

Yes system is a thing, but as shanny said himself, outside of QB's and OL, it not as important. Definitely not as important as talent.

If he had Fournette he'd get like 1800 yards out of him over 1600 from Morris. Not worth it when you consider all the high level prospects our defense needs so damn bad.

Excellent point. When people say imagine how Shanahan would do with an elite running back, as if we are going to like the pro version of the 1990s Nebraska Cornhuskers with Fournette. We had a historically bad defense last year and have a chance to get an elite defensive player.

That's the biggest crock of sh*t I have ever heard "historically bad defense"!! Fxxking cracks me up. That comment is so ridiculously biased is not even funny.

As if the 9ers didn't have a "historically bad offense".

I am sick and tired of all this BS.

Look, you all listen up, get this once and for all. The 9ers have gone defense in not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4 fxxking years in a row with their 1st round picks alright!!!!!! Eric Reid, Jimmie Ward, Arik Armstead and DeForest Buckner. You remember that right unless you have amnesia?!

And what have the 9ers drafted on offense in recent yeas that is any good?! Sweet FA that's what!! A 2nd rounder in Carlos Hyde who had only played 12 games out of 32 in the past 2 seasons and you want to call that a franchise back??!!

The ONLY 1st rounder on offense we have taken is Joshua Garnett and he hasn't exactly shown much.

As for the rest of the offensive drafts in the past 4 years have been total crap. And on top of that even before the last 4 years we had drafted total busts. Does the name AJ Jenkins ring a bell anyone?! Does the name LaMichael James ring a bell anyone?! Does the name Colin Kaepernick ring a bell anyone?!

So, don't give me this "historically bad defense" BS because that is 100% false. In fact, historically in recent years we have had better defense than offense. Even when we went to the Super Bowl in the 2012 season, as decent as that offense was, it was no comparison to the defense, Justin Smith, Patrick Willis, Aldon Smith just to name a few and we were the 3rd best defense that year!

Furthermore, not only Carlos Hyde is on contract year plus he is still recovering from MCL. And outside of Myles Garrett, Leonard Fournette is the only player who can give you that instantaneous impact and game-changing performance on the football field. Not to mention, even in a rebuild you still need to win a few games and without a half decent offense you can't even put points on the board.

So we actually didn't have a historically bad defense??