Comparing 49ers draft classes to other NFL draft classes 2005-2008

Originally posted by scopur49er:
You can stare at a list of names on paper forever and convince yourself it looks good but at the end of the day, how much did the players we draft contribute to us winning games compared to the players Baltimore and Philly drafted since 2005?

I don't care if we have a Patrick Willis caliber player at every position, if we can't win games and get to the playoffs it's all meaningless.

Think about it... You can't switch offensive coordinators every year and expect much difference than what has happened.If instant gratification is the goal, it ain't happening. Sometimes hard work and perseverance to succeed takes time and patience, not calling for heads to roll, quite so often.

Originally posted by miked1978:
Nobody knows the draft better than all of us armchair GMs. I mean only an idiot would pass on DeSean Jackson, even though Philly passed on him twice I believe. Only a complete nimrod would pass on Brandon Marshall 4 times. Every armchair GM knew Brandon Marshall was going to be a stud.

Every team has bad drafts. 2008 doesn't look good but its still early too. Plus we picked towards the end of round one too.

I won't claim to be as smart as any of the 32 GMs, but Marshal and Jackson just happen to be two players that I did, in fact, know would be studs in the NFL. Jackson was easy, cuz I watch Cal games. And Marshal I'd never heard of until I watched the East/West Shrine game, and he looked like a varsity player playing with a bunch of freshmen. I couldn't figure what other people were seeing when they said he was a late round pick. Cuz I saw a guy that was big, strong, fast, and caught the ball really naturally.

Sometimes I think GMs out think themselves a little. Dropping players down the board because they're 190 lbs instead of 200, or 6'1" instead of 6'3".

There was an article about this a few months ago. It was something about comparing the Packers drafts after they said they'd hold up their record against anyone, and a writer went though it (and it was the same years you're looking at).

It ended up showing that the Niners have drafted the most current starters and are one of only 7 teams to draft multiple pro-bowlers.

I'll see if I can find the article and post it here.

edit*-

Found it. It was about the Seahawks and mostly looks at the NFC west, but also has some league-wide info and comparisons.


Link

Great post.

I have not given McCloughan a hard time since he's been the GM. I think he's been doing a decent job.

However, the time has come to give the O-line problem its due attention. So far this offseason he's done less than nothing about it. The manner in which he addresses this problem in the coming months will tell a whole lot as far as I'm concerned.

Originally posted by mug0mug:
There was an article about this a few months ago. It was something about comparing the Packers drafts after they said they'd hold up their record against anyone, and a writer went though it (and it was the same years you're looking at).

It ended up showing that the Niners have drafted the most current starters and are one of only 7 teams to draft multiple pro-bowlers.

I'll see if I can find the article and post it here.

edit*-

Found it. It was about the Seahawks and mostly looks at the NFC west, but also has some league-wide info and comparisons.


Link

Ah yeah, I remember this article.

People came out said "Well the talent was so bad, of course he's going to improve it".

I wonder where is susweel?

-9fA

Originally posted by cupcheck:

Originally posted by scopur49er:
You can stare at a list of names on paper forever and convince yourself it looks good but at the end of the day, how much did the players we draft contribute to us winning games compared to the players Baltimore and Philly drafted since 2005?

I don't care if we have a Patrick Willis caliber player at every position, if we can't win games and get to the playoffs it's all meaningless.

Think about it... You can't switch offensive coordinators every year and expect much difference than what has happened.If instant gratification is the goal, it ain't happening. Sometimes hard work and perseverance to succeed takes time and patience, not calling for heads to roll, quite so often.

Instant gratification is certainly not the goal but neither should be the 6-7 year plan.
In this day and age, a good organization that knows what it's doing can turn a team around in 3-4 years. Granted our coaching staff has been in flux but equally important is the right combination of free agent signings to fill personnel gaps and the drafting of core players to build your foundation.
That's where the GM plays a key role.
I'm not necessarily questioning the quality of players we draft - many of them are quite good - but rather the position of the players we drafted. Come draft day, the teams priorities don't always seem to allign with what appears to be their weaknesses.
Last year is a great example of this. Oline and Dline were obvious deficiencies and yet we didn't select a single one until round 7 (Ricky Jean Francois).

Again this year, Oline is a huge deficiency but it wouldn't surprise me if they go a totally different direction.
Bottom line is that we're past due to see a winning product on the field and everyone around the league seems to notice this except for the hardcore fan audience.

Good work KRS-1. Is it possible to post all the other transactions(trades, FA, etc..) that were made by those team during that period?

2007 was a great draft for most teams it seems like. lots of good players. 05 was a bad year. i think 2009 will be considered a good year.

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by cupcheck:

Originally posted by scopur49er:
You can stare at a list of names on paper forever and convince yourself it looks good but at the end of the day, how much did the players we draft contribute to us winning games compared to the players Baltimore and Philly drafted since 2005?

I don't care if we have a Patrick Willis caliber player at every position, if we can't win games and get to the playoffs it's all meaningless.

Think about it... You can't switch offensive coordinators every year and expect much difference than what has happened.If instant gratification is the goal, it ain't happening. Sometimes hard work and perseverance to succeed takes time and patience, not calling for heads to roll, quite so often.

Instant gratification is certainly not the goal but neither should be the 6-7 year plan.
In this day and age, a good organization that knows what it's doing can turn a team around in 3-4 years. Granted our coaching staff has been in flux but equally important is the right combination of free agent signings to fill personnel gaps and the drafting of core players to build your foundation.
That's where the GM plays a key role.
I'm not necessarily questioning the quality of players we draft - many of them are quite good - but rather the position of the players we drafted. Come draft day, the teams priorities don't always seem to allign with what appears to be their weaknesses.
Last year is a great example of this. Oline and Dline were obvious deficiencies and yet we didn't select a single one until round 7 (Ricky Jean Francois).

Again this year, Oline is a huge deficiency but it wouldn't surprise me if they go a totally different direction.
Bottom line is that we're past due to see a winning product on the field and everyone around the league seems to notice this except for the hardcore fan audience.

Totally agree,OL was a disapointment. what would the line have been capable of if injuries, QB.change, run to spread offense, #1 draft choice would have signed?How much was lack of talent, andhow much was playres out of position, QB out of sink with WR, and everyone learning a new offense at mid-season?

This and the ESPN article link posted does show our GM has done a good job, not great but good. Could he have done better in drafts and picked Marshall and Jackson, yes, but so could've the other GM's who passed on these players multiple times. There isn't a GM who will be right on every pick, not even our beloved Bill Walsh. The point is our GM is in the top 5-10 GM's and that is good. Look at what some other teams have for a GM before saying such harsh things about Scot.

Originally posted by steiber:
This and the ESPN article link posted does show our GM has done a good job, not great but good. Could he have done better in drafts and picked Marshall and Jackson, yes, but so could've the other GM's who passed on these players multiple times. There isn't a GM who will be right on every pick, not even our beloved Bill Walsh. The point is our GM is in the top 5-10 GM's and that is good. Look at what some other teams have for a GM before saying such harsh things about Scot.

and to the OP, as well...

IMO, fans are impatient and expect results now. To long have we been a “could be” team and fans expect the team to succeed right here, and right now.

It’s easy to point fingers but this is not one of those times. If and ever, the combination of coaching, system, continuity and esp. players contribute to the success of the team. This is “technically” just the second year under the same offensive system and we’ll progress (hopefully) this year and beyond…

As far as I see it, we have a good squad, at this point, and we can only get better. The continuity will be a welcome sight and as far as track record wise, it show’s McC has picked good players that are able to contribute and are getting better. Not all have panned out, but we are better roster wise from a few years ago…

- 98

I think it is so awesome that we are building through the draft instead of spending big money on old players

What really bugs me about many, not all Zoners is the assertion that Scott is doing a lousy job and has no clue.

Some Zoners imply through their ignorant comments that picking the right college player in the draft is as easy as going to the butcher shop and picking the porterhouse steak instead of the ground chuck.

The truth is that it's not easy at all, if it were, anyone could be an NFL GM.

Scott learned his job at the feet of Ron Wolf, one of the most respected GMs of the past 40 years.

Scott knows what he is doing and most Zoner armhchair GMs are the ones without a clue.

Good post.

I have no problem with any of those drafts; it was the 2002-2004 drafts that set us back nearly a decade.

I did this a year ago looking at McC vs. Parcells vs. Piolli but not this many various teams. Well done.