GRADING THE DRAFT: A Head Scratcher !!!

I'm fine with the draft now, but it was deflating at the time. Instead of getting upset I'm trying to understand the thought process behind why Lynch selected who he did.

With that, some of the main concerns I've read are (1) no LEO, (2) no #1 or bigger WR, and (3) no defensive leader at LB. Here's an alternate perspective of why we zigged instead of zagged.

1. Pass rush: The team isn't excited about LEO, but they're content. They must've had a mid-round grade on Landry and didn't feel the need to reach for a pass rusher that may not surpass Marsh. Armstead will have the lead and Marsh will rotate in as a speed rusher.

The team waited to see if they could get Chubb or if perhaps other prospects fell down ge board and when it didn't happen, they picked up Armstead's option. Attaochu will be a long shot in the mix and has the abilty to fill in at SAM if Harold comes out. I don't believe for a second that Harold has a chance to play LEO. If anything they'll just blitz him a little more from SAM. He's clearly not the answer.

I don't think the solution is on the roster, but Marsh was effective in his role and we'll be alright until next year. I don't think the team is done adding players though. Dumervil or McCain could still get a call.

2. No #1 WR: The only guys I viewed as potential #1 WRs were DJ Moore and maybe Ridley. Moore has a complete game, while I think Ridley will struggle with contested catches and playing physical. Those weren't option for us, so it's a moot point.

Kyle wanted a guy that fit his scheme and had he ability to add YAC. Pettis' slim frame makes people assume he's a slot WR. That's not his game. I see him as an ideal fit Goodwin's role. He's not that tough, over the middle guy that Garçon is, but he can uncover quickly and fill that role too. With the health of Goodwin and Goodwin being a inconsistent, Pettis should get some snaps early and it keeps Robinson off the field (and probably off the roster).

Richie James can also play all over, but I think he's going to compete immediately with Taylor for the slot role. Here's a quick article that talks about Kyle and his ideal WRs. It was written in January and this guy nailed it:

Kyle's WR preferences, 2018 draft

We don't necessarily need a #1 WR. We need each receiver to play their position exceptionally well. What we added was quality depth at all 3 positions and guys that will compete for starting jobs in the near future. Rookies typically don't start WR unless it's due to injuries or their drafted early in the 1st, so I'm not anticipating a rookie starting at WR for us. That doesn't mean they were bad picks. We'll have to give these guys time to cement their place on the offense. In the mean time, our WR depth and STs notably improved.

3. Leader of the D: While Foster's troubles are a real threat to him not playing for us, the team must have comfort that he'll be back. Is he the guy you want leading the D? Maybe, maybe not, but his play makes guys follow him. The team was a different unit without him. It was obvious how deflated the defense was when he came off the field. He's a leader whether you condone his behavior or not. In short, they haven't given up on him yet.

Fred Warner was also a team captain and could be that guy down that line. Sherman will lead the secondary and Tartt will assist in that role. The D-line is full of younger, high character guys. Earl Mitchell is the veteran presence. Not worried there. I think we're jumping the gun and not letting Foster or Warner show that they can't handle the responsibility.

Good work 9moon

... and almost after 3 weeks, lets be honest.. we still scratching our heads !!

I find Shanahan's logic on not drafting a pass rusher ingenuous.

• Shanahan: "You've got to be pretty good to beat out [DL Cassius] Marsh. You've got to be pretty good to beat out [DL Arik] Armstead. You don't just get guys. If you get them, someone else has got to get cut and we've got a pretty good group.

The comparison to Marsh and AA is misdirected. If a draftee makes the team, even as a starter, you don't replace the top guys, you cut the guys at the bottom of the list. Nobody in the draft could challenge Pita or Harold? By the way, Charles Haley was a fourth rounder.

Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:
I find Shanahan's logic on not drafting a pass rusher ingenuous.

• Shanahan: "You've got to be pretty good to beat out [DL Cassius] Marsh. You've got to be pretty good to beat out [DL Arik] Armstead. You don't just get guys. If you get them, someone else has got to get cut and we've got a pretty good group.

The comparison to Marsh and AA is misdirected. If a draftee makes the team, even as a starter, you don't replace the top guys, you cut the guys at the bottom of the list. Nobody in the draft could challenge Pita or Harold? By the way, Charles Haley was a fourth rounder.

it's not that it's INGENUOUS... but it just makes you scratch your head because of the DL that they drafted... even if these guys (damaged goods or not) becomes a success, these are players who are to play DTs... same position as Solomon and DBuck...

Instead of loading up on DTs, we should have done what the Super Bowl Giants did w/their DL.. .. load up on DE and use them all on passing downs..

" Speed 4" - is how they beat them Patriots !!

Excellent post moon!

Disagree on McGlinchy.

IMO, the Raiders would have taken him w/the next pick.

To me as, a fan, the FO when after and got the players it had targeted, in short they had a plan as to who they wanted and stuck to it. As a semi- draftnik and a person who enjoys following the draft I did not feel they got "value " at many of the selections made at the time in my view......"IF" they did not have the player fall to them at their particular draft slot, ( i.e. A lot of us feel they really wanted R.Smith LB Georgia ) then move the pick, trade down and adjust later. We will never know for certain what they were offered for the # 9 pick overall, but as it most likely would have been for the last of the big 4 QB's it was probably for a lot, maby next years # 1 and depending on the team we traded with a mid first round pick this year.. So...assuming that might have included a very valuable pick in next years draft then to me, we move the pick and go into next year armed for bear. Any how, I'm rambling so we shall see....

I know many of you are really disappointed in the Niners' draft this year but with all due respect, I think you are missing the threads that run through virtually all of the picks, namely versatility and character. Many of the picks were team captains (have leadership qualities), love the game, will work really hard to get better, are team guys, and won't complain about playing time. Both Lynch and Shanahan have been around the game long enough to know that talent isn't enough in the NFL. The players that really contribute to championship teams have the aforementioned intangibles.

Also, many of the guys the Niners drafted this year can play more than one position. If you recall, the Niners were decimated by injuries this past year so to me, this draft addressed depth at key positions (CB, S, WR, ST) that they simply didn't have. Or, have you forgotten that Dante Johnson started many games at CB this past year? CB was a major need in the off-season and the team addressed it. Both Garcon and Taylor were hurt at times this past season so the team addressed WR depth. They had injuries at LB. They addressed that. K Williams is a slight guy so they got a slot CB as depth. They got a starting center, a starting OT, a starting CB, and a potential starter at OG in free agency.

The front office has a long term plan in place and it may not include guys like Armstead and Ward so they drafted guys to fill in if they cut ties to those guys. The team has already cut ties with Trent Brown, Carlos Hyde, Eric Reid, Navarro Bowman, and Elvis Dumervil. See a pattern here? The team wants to get younger, cheaper, healthier, stronger in mind, body, and character, and better in overall talent. It seems to me that most of the picks were insurance policies in case of injuries this year.

Now, one can debate the wisdom of drafting insurance policies but at least on one level, it is understandable. One last point....it is clear that the Niners weren't impressed with the pass rushers (or the OGs) in this draft, either on tape or in the interview room and that is why they didn't draft one.

Grading the draft in a vacuum doesn't make sense. One has to look at all of the other moves the team made (not to mention the Foster situation), and then try to understand what the long term vision of the team is. Given all of that, I would give the draft a solid B...

Cheers!

Originally posted by longterm9erfan:
I know many of you are really disappointed in the Niners' draft this year but with all due respect, I think you are missing the threads that run through virtually all of the picks, namely versatility and character. Many of the picks were team captains (have leadership qualities), love the game, will work really hard to get better, are team guys, and won't complain about playing time. Both Lynch and Shanahan have been around the game long enough to know that talent isn't enough in the NFL. The players that really contribute to championship teams have the aforementioned intangibles.

Also, many of the guys the Niners drafted this year can play more than one position. If you recall, the Niners were decimated by injuries this past year so to me, this draft addressed depth at key positions (CB, S, WR, ST) that they simply didn't have. Or, have you forgotten that Dante Johnson started many games at CB this past year? CB was a major need in the off-season and the team addressed it. Both Garcon and Taylor were hurt at times this past season so the team addressed WR depth. They had injuries at LB. They addressed that. K Williams is a slight guy so they got a slot CB as depth. They got a starting center, a starting OT, a starting CB, and a potential starter at OG in free agency.

The front office has a long term plan in place and it may not include guys like Armstead and Ward so they drafted guys to fill in if they cut ties to those guys. The team has already cut ties with Trent Brown, Carlos Hyde, Eric Reid, Navarro Bowman, and Elvis Dumervil. See a pattern here? The team wants to get younger, cheaper, healthier, stronger in mind, body, and character, and better in overall talent. It seems to me that most of the picks were insurance policies in case of injuries this year.

Now, one can debate the wisdom of drafting insurance policies but at least on one level, it is understandable. One last point....it is clear that the Niners weren't impressed with the pass rushers (or the OGs) in this draft, either on tape or in the interview room and that is why they didn't draft one.

Grading the draft in a vacuum doesn't make sense. One has to look at all of the other moves the team made (not to mention the Foster situation), and then try to understand what the long term vision of the team is. Given all of that, I would give the draft a solid B...

Cheers!

The Carlos Hyde, Reid, Bowman and Elvis' decision was a no brainer.. Carlos may put up better numbers in Cleveland, but that doesn't make him a player we should have kept.. The guy wasn't CARLOS HURTING HYDE for nothing.. Reid was too soft while both Bowman and Elvis are just playing for their retirement funds..

The possible mistake here was the trade of Trent Brown.. the guy was very capable, he's still young and we could have been more patient with him... this could be a mistake because of what we did we the pick we got from the Patriots...

We not only failed to fill in the spots that could get us over the rest of the West, instead, we took players that would only help us ease the pain when the players ahead of them decides to go elswhere..

Originally posted by 9moon:

The Carlos Hyde, Reid, Bowman and Elvis' decision was a no brainer.. Carlos may put up better numbers in Cleveland, but that doesn't make him a player we should have kept.. The guy wasn't CARLOS HURTING HYDE for nothing.. Reid was too soft while both Bowman and Elvis are just playing for their retirement funds..

The possible mistake here was the trade of Trent Brown.. the guy was very capable, he's still young and we could have been more patient with him... this could be a mistake because of what we did we the pick we got from the Patriots...

We not only failed to fill in the spots that could get us over the rest of the West, instead, we took players that would only help us ease the pain when the players ahead of them decides to go elswhere..

Trading Trent made sense. His weight issues, injuries, and lack of ability in the run game were all factors. McGlinchy isn't the pass protector Trent was, but he's significantly better as a zone run blocker. There's no comparison there and the running game is what Kyle bases his offense off of.

This new look Oline should be fun to watch. We have plenty of speed now at RB and with McG, Cooper and Richburg in the mix it should be a nice boost to the offense.

As for not addressing key spots to make us competitive in the West, I disagree. I don't think we're better at Leo, but we are better everywhere else. While Leo may again be a weakness, we have no holes on this team. That's a major accomplishment this offseason.

Originally posted by strickac:

Originally posted by 9moon:
The Carlos Hyde, Reid, Bowman and Elvis' decision was a no brainer.. Carlos may put up better numbers in Cleveland, but that doesn't make him a player we should have kept.. The guy wasn't CARLOS HURTING HYDE for nothing.. Reid was too soft while both Bowman and Elvis are just playing for their retirement funds..

The possible mistake here was the trade of Trent Brown.. the guy was very capable, he's still young and we could have been more patient with him... this could be a mistake because of what we did we the pick we got from the Patriots...

We not only failed to fill in the spots that could get us over the rest of the West, instead, we took players that would only help us ease the pain when the players ahead of them decides to go elswhere..

Trading Trent made sense. His weight issues, injuries, and lack of ability in the run game were all factors. McGlinchy isn't the pass protector Trent was, but he's significantly better as a zone run blocker. There's no comparison there and the running game is what Kyle bases his offense off of.

This new look Oline should be fun to watch. We have plenty of speed now at RB and with McG, Cooper and Richburg in the mix it should be a nice boost to the offense.

As for not addressing key spots to make us competitive in the West, I disagree. I don't think we're better at Leo, but we are better everywhere else. While Leo may again be a weakness, we have no holes on this team. That's a major accomplishment this offseason.

IT DOESN'T make any sense.. we should be looking for OL who can block better to protect The Gift !! Why in the world would you draft a better run blocking OT and trade a better pass blocking OT when we don't even have a legitimate RB???

Heck if you ask me, for being a late pick, Trent has done a great job making the team and it wast just a matter of time before he develops. Don't forget that his first 3 years were supposed to be THE LEARNING SESSION, and now, the Patriots will end up benefiting when the guy blooms.

as for the addressing the key spots, and how u do not agree, do you really see all the rookie WRs being on the field at the same time??

Originally posted by 9moon:

IT DOESN'T make any sense.. we should be looking for OL who can block better to protect The Gift !! Why in the world would you draft a better run blocking OT and trade a better pass blocking OT when we don't even have a legitimate RB???

Heck if you ask me, for being a late pick, Trent has done a great job making the team and it wast just a matter of time before he develops. Don't forget that his first 3 years were supposed to be THE LEARNING SESSION, and now, the Patriots will end up benefiting when the guy blooms.

as for the addressing the key spots, and how u do not agree, do you really see all the rookie WRs being on the field at the same time??

Trent was entering his contract year and they didn't want to pay him because he's unreliable (injuries and weight) and was a weak link in the run game. This is a run-first team.

I've been a huge Trent supporter. I went crazy watching Pears suck at life while everyone knew Trent was an upgrade. He's excellent in the passing game, but since they were afraid to pay him a big contract I can understand the move. It came down to fit and reliability and he just didn't fit the zone scheme to Kyle's liking.

I definitely don't think Pettis and James will open the season getting much action, but that's not the point. Goodwin and Garçon will probably both be banged up at some point and Pettis can step in. Trent is a good player, but he's injured and James can fill in there. Those picks help push down other players. Guys like Robinson and Murphy got plenty of snaps down the stretch and I think that's where the rookies will show their value. They are being groomed for the future, which is a good thing.

As rookies they'll start off on STs and improve the return game. They'll learn behind the starters and wait for their opportunities, not unlike most other rookies.

And I certainly think we have legit RBs. Jet, Brieda, and Joe are excellent fits in this scheme. I expect our rushing attack to take a giant step forward with Hyde gone, the Oline additions, and McKinnon and Joe added to the backfield. We don't need a bell cow. We have a solid committee of backs and Jet is a serious threat in the passing game. I'm very excited about this group. Hyde was a terrible fit IMO.

Originally posted by strickac:
Trent was entering his contract year and they didn't want to pay him because he's unreliable (injuries and weight) and was a weak link in the run game. This is a run-first team.

I've been a huge Trent supporter. I went crazy watching Pears suck at life while everyone knew Trent was an upgrade. He's excellent in the passing game, but since they were afraid to pay him a big contract I can understand the move. It came down to fit and reliability and he just didn't fit the zone scheme to Kyle's liking.

Very good points, Strick... Not only was Trent unreliable (showing up at last team gathering out of shape) but was due a very big payday. I can understand why the Niners made that change. Not only did they get a better run blocker, they got a very durable (never missed a college game), high character leader who they can put at RT for the next decade. Plus, because McGlinchey is a rookie, they won't have to pay him a lot until he has been in the league for a few years so they are going to save some money, which they can use to sign their guys such as Buckner.

I know for many of you that it is tough to give up on a talent like Trent Brown (and he is a talent), but this front office wants guys who are going to work really hard to get better and Trent never showed that he was willing to do that. The last point is that the Niners don't plan on drafting as high as 9 in the near future so getting a very solid starting RT (and perhaps even a future LT) in this draft was probably necessary. The more one looks at why the Niners took McG at 9, the more it is understandable if one looks at the big picture (not just this year but the future).

Ok not to be a complete jerk and dick, but since when has moon been typing/posting sentences I can understand.

I disagree with him though, very happy with the draft.

Originally posted by AB81Rules:
Ok not to be a complete jerk and dick, but since when has moon been typing/posting sentences I can understand.

I disagree with him though, very happy with the draft.

no offense taken, it's not your fault that you need an actual drawing to understand what's in front of you.

.. on the other hand, how can you say your happy with the draft?

did you do any mock at all?? if you did, do you remember us drafting similar players and their positions??