QB or WR-which is a bigger priority for the 49ers?

Finding an elite qb at this level is pure luck. Teams that invest heavily in finding one are clueless and they lose a lot.

Wr is irrelevant, teams that invest picks and $$ on wr are just horrible. An advantage in the trenches and coaching wins football games in the NFL, luck out with a qb and now you get rings.

QB

Duh

/thread

Originally posted by Memphis9er:
Our starter is a developmental project, isn't that obvious?

5 year players aren't developmental project they are vets lol

QB we can't compete with the QB play we have now. Gabbert is just meh.

I think it has to be qb. A great receiver is nothing if the qb can't get him the ball. Randy Moss Oakland version then New England version comes immediately to mind. People thought he was done after 2006.

I agree with Philly and Willis....QB. But one could also look at this as chicken and the egg...who came first. You can argue it, but QB wins out.

I'm gonna go with QB. A top QB (which is neither Gabbert or Kaepernick) is gonna elevate the play of the WR more lilely than the other way around. This has been shown on multiple teams over the last 30-40 years in the NFL.

Next year I suspect it'll be rookie #1 pick starting and Ponder as the #2.

Both. Some say QB makes the receivers or receivers turn QB into franchise QB. Truth is talented playmakers are required from both not only to win games but also make history.

Tom Brady could have achieved the perfect season if they had someone like Gronk with him. IMO, Niners were doomed when they keep Baalke as GM also not addressing QB position with guys like Bradford or Prescott available on the offseason.

Niners could have a 8-8 record but not surprised if they end with same record or worse then Baalke should be gone and then go aggressively st FA to find playmakers

Originally posted by NIMV4683:

Niners could have a 8-8 record

So basically become the Rams? I'll take another losing season if it means higher picks and a shot at a top franchise QB prospect.

Tom Brady could have achieved the perfect season if they had someone like Gronk with him

Because a prime Randy Moss and Wes Welker weren't enough? That Patriots team was absolutely loaded on offense. Years later they go on to win the SB with a bunch of generic players at WR.

QB1

Originally posted by SofaKing:
QB easily.

This.
At least, we got Torrey. With Ellington and Patton, you got two guys who should certainly be good #2-#3 WRs. A good qb can perform well with this material, imho.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by 49er-from-Yavin-IV:
QB.

Yes, it may take a minute to find out if a guy we pick can be or is that FQB, but we don't need another "average" QB there are enough of those guys on our roster.

17 years later we need an actual replacement for Steve Young. Once we know we have that then we concentrate on anything else.

We're counting on Chip Kelly to know one when he sees one. He hasn't had that guy during his time in the NFL yet, so the jury is still out on if he can identify one.

I'm assuming as an "offensive genius" that Kelly will be given the benefit of the doubt to advise Baalke to take one when he sees one available.

I do think he did a good job in trading for Bradford, given the way he looked last night, a 2nd round pick and the rotting corpse of Nick Foles, which the Eagles then turned into a 1st round pick was well worth it.

Understood, and I don't disagree with that. I am not an expert, but I think Bradford has gotten some bad breaks in his career. Assuming Bradford stays healthy we'll see what Norv Turner can do with him in Minnesota. I will be pleasantly surprised if things work out for them in 2016.

Aside from Matt Barkley (with the Eagles in 2013) and Jeff Driskell (this year), I don't know of any QB drafted while Chip Kelly was the HC of that organization. So I don't think there is enough evidence yet to say CK cannot identify a good QB when sees one or to develop that QB when he gets him. Kelly just hasn't had the opportunity in the NFL to do so. I think it's safe to say he can identify a bad (or mediocre at best) QB when he sees one.

Unless the Bengals cut Driskell and we subsequently pick him up again we'll never know how that would have turned out.

No choice but to be patient as we have to wait until the draft to find out if we are in the position (or have the wisdom) to pick the guy who may be our future at the QB position.

QB by a mile!

WR should be #2

Pass Rushing OLB should be in the mix [I know it's early and I'm hoping Tank emerges]

RB may be a possibility too, Hyde's longevity is a concern to me.

I voted wr but it's a chicken or egg conversation for me. Theyou are both important but you need a better offense and foundation for the qb to be successful and not so much for a wr. Look at Alex Smith early years here. It wasn't until the team around him and coaching improved that people started to think he was good. If you feel the team is solid than a qb could be successful here but at the end of they day they are both very important for us. Kind of like a 1a and 1b. Hopefully we find them next year or kaep or Gabbert develops

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by susweel:
The fact that baalke did not address the QB position in the first 3 rounds just speaks to his level of consistent incompetency.

Wasn't a particularly strong QB class. Dak has been a little bit of a surprise other than that what QB should he have taken in the first 3 rounds.

Still doesn't have a TD pass in two games, not really impressed with him.

But definitely QB. Our WRs are "okay", nothing special, but getting a good QB will help make them better.

It's easier to address the WR position though (unless you're Baalke) than the QB position.