OTC's Non-Reactionary 2019 49ers Draft Grade/Review

Solid post. I think most of your grades are spot on based on your analysis and justification.

The only disagreement I have is with the Dre Greenlaw grade. When you get into Day 3, there are things the general public isn't exposed to that results in "overdraft" or "underdraft" based on media perception. Cashman is a solid prospect, but Saleh values game tape speed, which I give Greenlaw the edge.

And I think the comparison you want to make is Greenlaw vs. Malcolm Smith, not Lee. Nzeocha got a 3 year deal to basically be our starting SAM, regulating Smith to a backup roll across SAM, MIKE, and his natural position at WILL. Lee performed as well as you can expect for someone forced into that role, and I think he's a lock for the 2019 roster as the backup WILL.

Which means...you'll have Smith and Greenlaw duke it out for one of the backup LB spots. Greenlaw is small to be an every down LBer, but on passing downs and ST, he'll have his chance to shine.

I'd grade it as more of a C/C-, but a D+ is an overreaction IMHO.

Nice work OTC, as usual.

There was way too much emotion in the reaction to this draft. For me, everything after about the 3rd was just icing. Like, there is no point in getting excited or depressed about the UDFA haul or misses, their chances of contributing anything to the team outside of the pre seasons is minimal. Obviously a couple of them will make it in one roster or another but predicting which is nearly impossible.

So (for me) the critical part of the draft is A+, B and B. I will take that, every draft! And behind them Wishnowsky on ST and a couple of depth players, Harris, Smith and maybe, maybe Skule.

But we have either the 2nd or 3rd most important position on the roster - not sure which - edge pass rusher hopefully sorted. Tying one of the two best players in the whole draft with the team's position of maximum need (by far) is massive. I think this draft combined with the earlier FA work will take the team forward by leaps and bounds. Not from day one though. These things take a little time.

Rating the draft in combination with the FA activity comes in around A- in my opinion. For now.

I don't understand giving the Deebo and Hurd picks a B. It still feels like we didn't have any understanding of how other teams valued the WRs in this draft and we reached because we liked those guys and zeroed in on them before the draft.

We picked Deebo at 36. The next WR taken was AJ Brown at 51. Parris Campbell went 59th and Andy Isabella went 62nd. If feels like we took Deebo at least 20 picks too early given most of us felt Brown was a much better receiver. Deebo is a good fit and a good player, but it's a horrible value in a draft this deep at WR.

We picked Hurd at 67 when guys like Terry McLaurin, Miles Boykin, and Hakeem Butler were all available. We should have looked to trade back even if we were targeting Hurd. Picking him 67th when those other receivers were available (especially Butler who wasn't picked until the 4th round) seems like a horrible value. He has RAC ability, but also has a history of concussions and extremely short arms for his height (32") which limits his upside as a red zone threat.

It seems like we're getting a B grade because we lucked into the #2 pick and didn't blow it by passing on Bosa or QW. On a scale of how well we realistically could have done with our picks from A to F, this feels more like a C or D though.

Originally posted by GEEK:

Solid post. I think most of your grades are spot on based on your analysis and justification.

The only disagreement I have is with the Dre Greenlaw grade. When you get into Day 3, there are things the general public isn't exposed to that results in "overdraft" or "underdraft" based on media perception. Cashman is a solid prospect, but Saleh values game tape speed, which I give Greenlaw the edge.

And I think the comparison you want to make is Greenlaw vs. Malcolm Smith, not Lee. Nzeocha got a 3 year deal to basically be our starting SAM, regulating Smith to a backup roll across SAM, MIKE, and his natural position at WILL. Lee performed as well as you can expect for someone forced into that role, and I think he's a lock for the 2019 roster as the backup WILL.

Which means...you'll have Smith and Greenlaw duke it out for one of the backup LB spots. Greenlaw is small to be an every down LBer, but on passing downs and ST, he'll have his chance to shine.

I'd grade it as more of a C/C-, but a D+ is an overreaction IMHO.

Fair post. To explain why I rated it that low, it was because of a few different reasons.

1) I saw players on the board who could challenge for a starting spot, and in review, I wasn't convinced that Greenlaw was any better than our worst linebacker, who one could argue should improve going into next year.

2) While Greenlaw should at least make the PS, I thought we could've at least used a more versatile guy who could also compete at SAM so Malcolm could backup at WILL, his more natural spot.

3) Greenlaw's issues with working off of blocks concerned me that he might not even be good on special teams, further lowering his value to me.


Overall though, I think we did a pretty good job of targeting as many weak areas that we could, in an effort to hopefully prevent the mishaps we faced last year that caused a team that had a chance to win 8-9 games, win only 4.

No edge presence last year. Draft Pass Rusher? Check.
No tall RZ threat, no one but Pettis getting open, passes bouncing off others' hands for INTs. Draft receivers? Check.
No legit TE2. Passes clanging off Celek's hands for INTs. Draft security blanket TE2? Check.
Injuries and poor performance at CB. Add another body at CB? Check.
Mediocre punting and big returns happening on us way too often. Draft big leg punter? Check.
Lack of OT depth. Draft OT? Check.

So we addressed quite a lot. We didn't get a S, OG/C, or SAM. If they had landed one of those in the Greenlaw slot, it would've been just about a perfect draft on paper and gotten an A from me. That was my only major complaint, for the reasons previously mentioned, along with some minor, debatable value discrepancies.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Solid post. I think most of your grades are spot on based on your analysis and justification.

The only disagreement I have is with the Dre Greenlaw grade. When you get into Day 3, there are things the general public isn't exposed to that results in "overdraft" or "underdraft" based on media perception. Cashman is a solid prospect, but Saleh values game tape speed, which I give Greenlaw the edge.

And I think the comparison you want to make is Greenlaw vs. Malcolm Smith, not Lee. Nzeocha got a 3 year deal to basically be our starting SAM, regulating Smith to a backup roll across SAM, MIKE, and his natural position at WILL. Lee performed as well as you can expect for someone forced into that role, and I think he's a lock for the 2019 roster as the backup WILL.

Which means...you'll have Smith and Greenlaw duke it out for one of the backup LB spots. Greenlaw is small to be an every down LBer, but on passing downs and ST, he'll have his chance to shine.

I'd grade it as more of a C/C-, but a D+ is an overreaction IMHO.

Fair post. To explain why I rated it that low, it was because of a few different reasons.

1) I saw players on the board who could challenge for a starting spot, and in review, I wasn't convinced that Greenlaw was any better than our worst linebacker, who one could argue should improve going into next year.

2) While Greenlaw should at least make the PS, I thought we could've at least used a more versatile guy who could also compete at SAM so Malcolm could backup at WILL, his more natural spot.

3) Greenlaw's issues with working off of blocks concerned me that he might not even be good on special teams, further lowering his value to me.


Overall though, I think we did a pretty good job of targeting as many weak areas that we could, in an effort to hopefully prevent the mishaps we faced last year that caused a team that had a chance to win 8-9 games, win only 4.

No edge presence last year. Draft Pass Rusher? Check.
No tall RZ threat, no one but Pettis getting open, passes bouncing off others' hands for INTs. Draft receivers? Check.
No legit TE2. Passes clanging off Celek's hands for INTs. Draft security blanket TE2? Check.
Injuries and poor performance at CB. Add another body at CB? Check.
Mediocre punting and big returns happening on us way too often. Draft big leg punter? Check.
Lack of OT depth. Draft OT? Check.

So we addressed quite a lot. We didn't get a S, OG/C, or SAM. If they had landed one of those in the Greenlaw slot, it would've been just about a perfect draft on paper and gotten an A from me. That was my only major complaint, for the reasons previously mentioned, along with some minor, debatable value discrepancies.

Yep makes sense to justify your grade. We will just have to see what happens in preseason.

And 100% agree with addressing critical needs this off-season. It's extremely difficult to address every single primary and secondary need in one off-season. But we double dipped at pass rush and receiving threats while hoping some low risk high reward type signings materilze.

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Solid post. I think most of your grades are spot on based on your analysis and justification.

The only disagreement I have is with the Dre Greenlaw grade. When you get into Day 3, there are things the general public isn't exposed to that results in "overdraft" or "underdraft" based on media perception. Cashman is a solid prospect, but Saleh values game tape speed, which I give Greenlaw the edge.

And I think the comparison you want to make is Greenlaw vs. Malcolm Smith, not Lee. Nzeocha got a 3 year deal to basically be our starting SAM, regulating Smith to a backup roll across SAM, MIKE, and his natural position at WILL. Lee performed as well as you can expect for someone forced into that role, and I think he's a lock for the 2019 roster as the backup WILL.

Which means...you'll have Smith and Greenlaw duke it out for one of the backup LB spots. Greenlaw is small to be an every down LBer, but on passing downs and ST, he'll have his chance to shine.

I'd grade it as more of a C/C-, but a D+ is an overreaction IMHO.

Fair post. To explain why I rated it that low, it was because of a few different reasons.

1) I saw players on the board who could challenge for a starting spot, and in review, I wasn't convinced that Greenlaw was any better than our worst linebacker, who one could argue should improve going into next year.

2) While Greenlaw should at least make the PS, I thought we could've at least used a more versatile guy who could also compete at SAM so Malcolm could backup at WILL, his more natural spot.

3) Greenlaw's issues with working off of blocks concerned me that he might not even be good on special teams, further lowering his value to me.


Overall though, I think we did a pretty good job of targeting as many weak areas that we could, in an effort to hopefully prevent the mishaps we faced last year that caused a team that had a chance to win 8-9 games, win only 4.

No edge presence last year. Draft Pass Rusher? Check.
No tall RZ threat, no one but Pettis getting open, passes bouncing off others' hands for INTs. Draft receivers? Check.
No legit TE2. Passes clanging off Celek's hands for INTs. Draft security blanket TE2? Check.
Injuries and poor performance at CB. Add another body at CB? Check.
Mediocre punting and big returns happening on us way too often. Draft big leg punter? Check.
Lack of OT depth. Draft OT? Check.

So we addressed quite a lot. We didn't get a S, OG/C, or SAM. If they had landed one of those in the Greenlaw slot, it would've been just about a perfect draft on paper and gotten an A from me. That was my only major complaint, for the reasons previously mentioned, along with some minor, debatable value discrepancies.

Yep makes sense to justify your grade. We will just have to see what happens in preseason.

And 100% agree with addressing critical needs this off-season. It's extremely difficult to address every single primary and secondary need in one off-season. But we double dipped at pass rush and receiving threats while hoping some low risk high reward type signings materilze.

Yeah, things will certainly be interesting. Right now, for our remaining needs, the 49ers essentially did this:

S: Nothing, with the hope players stay healthy and rebound.
SAM: All eggs into the Nzeocha/Malcolm out of position basket (and hoping he is healthy too).
Interior OL: Throwing darts at street players/UDFAs and hoping health returns for Richburg, Tomlinson, Person, and Garnett.

If any of the above three areas continue to fail, the 2020 potential draft targets will start to become pretty obvious.

Originally posted by eastcoast49ersfan:

I don't understand giving the Deebo and Hurd picks a B. It still feels like we didn't have any understanding of how other teams valued the WRs in this draft and we reached because we liked those guys and zeroed in on them before the draft.

We picked Deebo at 36. The next WR taken was AJ Brown at 51. Parris Campbell went 59th and Andy Isabella went 62nd. If feels like we took Deebo at least 20 picks too early given most of us felt Brown was a much better receiver. Deebo is a good fit and a good player, but it's a horrible value in a draft this deep at WR.

We picked Hurd at 67 when guys like Terry McLaurin, Miles Boykin, and Hakeem Butler were all available. We should have looked to trade back even if we were targeting Hurd. Picking him 67th when those other receivers were available (especially Butler who wasn't picked until the 4th round) seems like a horrible value. He has RAC ability, but also has a history of concussions and extremely short arms for his height (32") which limits his upside as a red zone threat.

It seems like we're getting a B grade because we lucked into the #2 pick and didn't blow it by passing on Bosa or QW. On a scale of how well we realistically could have done with our picks from A to F, this feels more like a C or D though.

erm, OTC might well disagree but to me, it isnt axquestion of how other teams value receivers or whatever position. It is how we value them and what use Shanahan can make of them.

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by eastcoast49ersfan:

I don't understand giving the Deebo and Hurd picks a B. It still feels like we didn't have any understanding of how other teams valued the WRs in this draft and we reached because we liked those guys and zeroed in on them before the draft.

We picked Deebo at 36. The next WR taken was AJ Brown at 51. Parris Campbell went 59th and Andy Isabella went 62nd. If feels like we took Deebo at least 20 picks too early given most of us felt Brown was a much better receiver. Deebo is a good fit and a good player, but it's a horrible value in a draft this deep at WR.

We picked Hurd at 67 when guys like Terry McLaurin, Miles Boykin, and Hakeem Butler were all available. We should have looked to trade back even if we were targeting Hurd. Picking him 67th when those other receivers were available (especially Butler who wasn't picked until the 4th round) seems like a horrible value. He has RAC ability, but also has a history of concussions and extremely short arms for his height (32") which limits his upside as a red zone threat.

It seems like we're getting a B grade because we lucked into the #2 pick and didn't blow it by passing on Bosa or QW. On a scale of how well we realistically could have done with our picks from A to F, this feels more like a C or D though.

erm, OTC might well disagree but to me, it isnt axquestion of how other teams value receivers or whatever position. It is how we value them and what use Shanahan can make of them.

Exactly. Also, not overly concerned with arm length for bigger receivers. 32" is not considered small for a receiver, even a tall one. Anquan Boldin only had 30" arms, FYI.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by eastcoast49ersfan:

I don't understand giving the Deebo and Hurd picks a B. It still feels like we didn't have any understanding of how other teams valued the WRs in this draft and we reached because we liked those guys and zeroed in on them before the draft.

We picked Deebo at 36. The next WR taken was AJ Brown at 51. Parris Campbell went 59th and Andy Isabella went 62nd. If feels like we took Deebo at least 20 picks too early given most of us felt Brown was a much better receiver. Deebo is a good fit and a good player, but it's a horrible value in a draft this deep at WR.

We picked Hurd at 67 when guys like Terry McLaurin, Miles Boykin, and Hakeem Butler were all available. We should have looked to trade back even if we were targeting Hurd. Picking him 67th when those other receivers were available (especially Butler who wasn't picked until the 4th round) seems like a horrible value. He has RAC ability, but also has a history of concussions and extremely short arms for his height (32") which limits his upside as a red zone threat.

It seems like we're getting a B grade because we lucked into the #2 pick and didn't blow it by passing on Bosa or QW. On a scale of how well we realistically could have done with our picks from A to F, this feels more like a C or D though.

erm, OTC might well disagree but to me, it isnt axquestion of how other teams value receivers or whatever position. It is how we value them and what use Shanahan can make of them.

Exactly. Also, not overly concerned with arm length for bigger receivers. 32" is not considered small for a receiver, even a tall one. Anquan Boldin only had 30" arms, FYI.

I'm just questioning how big of a red zone/jump ball threat he'll be. 32" isn't small for a receiver, but it's pretty damn small for a 6'5 one. Vincent Jackson is the only 6'5 receiver I could find with 32" arms. The majority are 33-35". Hurd is 6'5 but has the catch radius of a 6'3 receiver to go along with a history of concussions and an inability to get open. Butler's arms are more than 3" longer at 35 1/4" and is seemingly a better prospect even if he's not as good of a fit for the 49ers because he isn't as versatile and may not be as good after the catch.

You have to factor in how other teams value players as a GM. It's your job to get the most out of your draft capital that you can. From the outside looking in, it seems like Lynch and Shanahan fell in love with these guys and picked them earlier than they had to. Hopefully it pans out and Shanahan can scheme them open.

Originally posted by eastcoast49ersfan:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by eastcoast49ersfan:

I don't understand giving the Deebo and Hurd picks a B. It still feels like we didn't have any understanding of how other teams valued the WRs in this draft and we reached because we liked those guys and zeroed in on them before the draft.

We picked Deebo at 36. The next WR taken was AJ Brown at 51. Parris Campbell went 59th and Andy Isabella went 62nd. If feels like we took Deebo at least 20 picks too early given most of us felt Brown was a much better receiver. Deebo is a good fit and a good player, but it's a horrible value in a draft this deep at WR.

We picked Hurd at 67 when guys like Terry McLaurin, Miles Boykin, and Hakeem Butler were all available. We should have looked to trade back even if we were targeting Hurd. Picking him 67th when those other receivers were available (especially Butler who wasn't picked until the 4th round) seems like a horrible value. He has RAC ability, but also has a history of concussions and extremely short arms for his height (32") which limits his upside as a red zone threat.

It seems like we're getting a B grade because we lucked into the #2 pick and didn't blow it by passing on Bosa or QW. On a scale of how well we realistically could have done with our picks from A to F, this feels more like a C or D though.

erm, OTC might well disagree but to me, it isnt axquestion of how other teams value receivers or whatever position. It is how we value them and what use Shanahan can make of them.

Exactly. Also, not overly concerned with arm length for bigger receivers. 32" is not considered small for a receiver, even a tall one. Anquan Boldin only had 30" arms, FYI.

I'm just questioning how big of a red zone/jump ball threat he'll be. 32" isn't small for a receiver, but it's pretty damn small for a 6'5 one. Vincent Jackson is the only 6'5 receiver I could find with 32" arms. The majority are 33-35". Hurd is 6'5 but has the catch radius of a 6'3 receiver to go along with a history of concussions and an inability to get open. Butler's arms are more than 3" longer at 35 1/4" and is seemingly a better prospect even if he's not as good of a fit for the 49ers because he isn't as versatile and may not be as good after the catch.

You have to factor in how other teams value players as a GM. It's your job to get the most out of your draft capital that you can. From the outside looking in, it seems like Lynch and Shanahan fell in love with these guys and picked them earlier than they had to. Hopefully it pans out and Shanahan can scheme them open.

I get where you're coming from. While Butler may have great dimensions -- his are abnormally freakish and Calvin Johnson-like -- his value is not tied to that alone. Shanahan seaks multi-faceted weapons for his scheme because he covets players who can create mismatches in more than one way. Butler was not a perfect prospect due to the drops he had in college and still had some rawness coming out early. Hurd has rawness as well.

I don't know who will become the better NFL pro, but I can understand why we could put a higher grade on Hurd. The draft is not easy and you can't know everything about everyone else involved. There's a common theme among almost all our receivers: They're built for RAC or potentially run threats on certain plays. Goodwin, Samuel, Hurd, Pettis, James -- all of these guys can be used that way and it gives defenses another thing to think about.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
I get where you're coming from. While Butler may have great dimensions -- his are abnormally freakish and Calvin Johnson-like -- his value is not tied to that alone. Shanahan seaks multi-faceted weapons for his scheme because he covets players who can create mismatches in more than one way. Butler was not a perfect prospect due to the drops he had in college and still had some rawness coming out early. Hurd has rawness as well.

I don't know who will become the better NFL pro, but I can understand why we could put a higher grade on Hurd. The draft is not easy and you can't know everything about everyone else involved. There's a common theme among almost all our receivers: They're built for RAC or potentially run threats on certain plays. Goodwin, Samuel, Hurd, Pettis, James -- all of these guys can be used that way and it gives defenses another thing to think about.

RAC em. Slap em.

I think of Samuel as an Anquan Boldin type. If his career emulates that, it ends up a sensational pick to me. I admit, I thought that if AJ Brown was there, he would be the pick ahead of Deebo. However, the writing was on the wall, Kyle and company saw so much of Deebo, from the senior bowl personally coaching him, to the pro day, to the official visit. Much has been made about Samuel playing from the slot, but he has played outside and think he can play outside. Although he is only 5'11" and his arm length is only 31 3/8", he has a 39" vertical. Besides what does jump ball matter if you can get open which require quick change of direction which he has I realize that it adds to an element, but with 39" vertical, I think he will be well served.

The Hurd pick was a surprise in that it was back to back (Damn sneaky niners, always making people go what the hell?). Not mad about the pick and like it. Better than the Hakeem pick. Hurd was injured at the combine thus a lack luster 4.66 40, but according to Baylor's testing of its players, he had the following according to Chase Goodbread a college football writer who had an article published on NFL.com, he posted 3 cone 6.6, 20 yard shuttle 3.87 (another article said at his pro day it was 4.18), has run a 4.47- 40, vertical-40" (35.5" at pro day), has a wingspan of 78.5" - pro day, bench press 23 reps, 10 1/4" hands, 32 1/4 length. All this while playing at 224 lbs, His RB days at UT , I understood he play at 240 plus change.

Hakeem is a one trick pony, and while Hurd is not polished, he knows more routes than Hakeem. Another thing, if Hakeem is considered a deep threat with a 4.48 40, what does that make Samuel who also posted a 4.48 or Hurd if his Baylor numbers are accurate. Even at his pro day Hurd has not 100 %. Plus Hakeem dropped more balls than Hurd and definitely Deebo. Plus Hurd has more versatility because of his RB experience. All this and Hurd only had one season.

For Hurd, his biggest problem according to his coaches is that he needs to learn to vary his speed, especially at the top of his route, so that he can come out of his breaks under control and sharper not end up rounding it off or drifting, the other is needing to add to his route tree. However, I think he will be used more than people think. Hurd will be heard in 2019

The thing about Hurd is he will be used more than people think even if he has supposed limitations. Although he needs more experience they say at learning to track balls better on the long ball.

All in all, who the opposing defense will use to guard Pettis, Samuel, and Hurd is critical, cause these three players can be used to move from the slot to the outside and vice versa, thus as we all have heard great mismatches.

As for the rest of the draft. Wishnowsky, did you see him punt the ball using the rugby method and still maintain good control. the ball had a wicked backspin, in the air, if he can use that effectively in game situations, there might some fumbles in game situation, the bad of course is that it could more often bounce back instead of forward if the returner lets it go. Greenlaw, don't know much about him, but he has a good shot as we are not loaded at the position, comes down as always to ST. I do like the Kaden pick. with Hurd, might only have 2 TE's on the roster. Skule, will have to see how he does in OTA and pre, Harris chances is dependent injuries to both others and him. Ends up on either IR or roster.

Baylor's testing pretty regularly inflates measurables (as do most schools). Having run a 4.47 one time would suggest Hurd should run in the 4.6-4.7 range at the combine which is slow for a receiver, but a lot better than the 4.66 he ran at his Pro Day.

35.5" vertical and 10'4 broad are pretty good numbers from his pro day and he's reasonably agile for a bigger WR (as is Butler). We picked him because he's hard to bring down and has pretty good hands, so if we get him the ball, he could be a playmaker like Samuel. His upside isn't that incredible given his lack of top-end speed and length, but hopefully he'll contribute. His RAC ability allegedly makes him a fit in our offense, but I don't think it was a good value when Butler went a round later.

Originally posted by eastcoast49ersfan:
I'm just questioning how big of a red zone/jump ball threat he'll be. 32" isn't small for a receiver, but it's pretty damn small for a 6'5 one. Vincent Jackson is the only 6'5 receiver I could find with 32" arms. The majority are 33-35". Hurd is 6'5 but has the catch radius of a 6'3 receiver to go along with a history of concussions and an inability to get open. Butler's arms are more than 3" longer at 35 1/4" and is seemingly a better prospect even if he's not as good of a fit for the 49ers because he isn't as versatile and may not be as good after the catch.

I preferred Butler and both guys are on the raw side, but one thing to consider is that Hurd may have better tools to separate in the NFL. He's pretty fluid for a big guy and maybe that RB stiff arm mentality helps keep DBs off his chest. Comparatively, Butler is a bit stiff and maybe more vulnerable to press coverage. That said, his advantage is his length and athleticism. Once he's in moving in space, he's a threat to jump and snatch (or drop) balls even with a DB draped on him.

You have to factor in how other teams value players as a GM. It's your job to get the most out of your draft capital that you can. From the outside looking in, it seems like Lynch and Shanahan fell in love with these guys and picked them earlier than they had to. Hopefully it pans out and Shanahan can scheme them open.

That's my concern with their drafting strategy these past few years. I'm fine with coaches falling in love with players. But IMO the GM needs to be more critical. There should be a short list of players that fit the bill. And if it's a one man list, there should be a reason why he's more important than potentially adding competition to multiple positions. I'm sure they do this. But, it seems like they've been picking their favorites while leaving holes on the roster. Hopefully, those guys in the hole can step it up.