Best draft strategy

Originally posted by RishikeshA:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Anyone who is suggesting drafting a DT at 13 is overthinking it.

We have specific needs on this team. DT is not at the top.

Let's see how this defense plays without Buck.

The defensive line is currently a strength of the team.....true or false?

Originally posted by Niner4ever:
Glad they're thinking of trading down and trading guys.

I have asked this a few times in various threads, but can anyone explain the need for both? I cant for the life of me understand it.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by Niner4ever:

Glad they're thinking of trading down and trading guys.

I have asked this a few times in various threads, but can anyone explain the need for both? I cant for the life of me understand it.

Situation: we don't have any picks in rounds 2, 3, 4
solution: we could trade back off both first round picks (would give us plenty of ammo in 2, 3, 4 IMO) however, say we pick at 13, and trade back off 31. Maybe we only get a 2 and a 3 for that. Maybe we can turn a player (perhaps packaged with a 6th) into a 4th round pick.
We're not gonna just be giving players away or just mindlessly trading back, it's just about having options to get midround selections: IE, if we don't trade back we can move a player, if we trade back maybe we don't need to move a player.
Just my opinion but I don't think we're desperate to trade back, or move any of the players mentioned. It shouldn't be too difficult to move back off either pick if we want to. Long story short we're just keeping our options open and letting teams know we're open for business. IMO if we trade back more than once or twice or move more than one player I'll be slightly surprised

also, I think among fans there's an underlying fear of picking a bust with a high pick, so people would (in the hypothetical) rather move down for more chances, than be "married" to a high pick in case it doesn't work out. It's actually sort of a logical fallacy IMO (that more, lower picks is always preferable) but that's arguable, I guess

Originally posted by 91til:

also, I think among fans there's an underlying fear of picking a bust with a high pick, so people would (in the hypothetical) rather move down for more chances, than be "married" to a high pick in case it doesn't work out. It's actually sort of a logical fallacy IMO (that more, lower picks is always preferable) but that's arguable, I guess

If we can hit on those picks at key spots, we are back in business. Later picks are cool but legends generally are first rounders.

Originally posted by 91til:
also, I think among fans there's an underlying fear of picking a bust with a high pick, so people would (in the hypothetical) rather move down for more chances, than be "married" to a high pick in case it doesn't work out. It's actually sort of a logical fallacy IMO (that more, lower picks is always preferable) but that's arguable, I guess

Yeah I wonder if that is what it is!! That or people have some crazy recency bias where we hit on a few mid to late round guys like Warner, Kittle, etc so people think if we trade 2 1st round picks and get 4-5 mid round picks that we will end up with 3-4 studs! Trading away the 31st pick is fine cause the difference in quality of player there and in the 2nd is non-existent, so yeah I'm cool with that; but trading away the 13th pick just doesn't make sense.

We really need a difference maker at receiver, we can't rely on Kyle to scheme open everybody on every damn play. We need the talent. We also need line help to protect Jimmy better however due to his quick release it's not as much of a pressing need as a play maker outside that's fast. Look at what Tyreek Hill did to us? Even if he was not catching balls our defense was double covering him and that cause other people to get open. This is a desperate need in my opinion and we might never be drafting this high in the next couple years.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by Niner4ever:
Glad they're thinking of trading down and trading guys.

I have asked this a few times in various threads, but can anyone explain the need for both? I cant for the life of me understand it.

I think it comes down to the fact that the Niners dont want to pass on a multitude of players in rounds 2,3,and 4 in a draft that is very deep especially at WR and OT. I firmly believe that moving down is the right thing to do unless someone like Okudah falls to us (which he wont). There will be some great players still around a few picks later. Jefferson would be pretty sweet several picks later if we could get a 2nd

Originally posted by elguapo:

We really need a difference maker at receiver, we can't rely on Kyle to scheme open everybody on every damn play. We need the talent. We also need line help to protect Jimmy better however due to his quick release it's not as much of a pressing need as a play maker outside that's fast. Look at what Tyreek Hill did to us? Even if he was not catching balls our defense was double covering him and that cause other people to get open. This is a desperate need in my opinion and we might never be drafting this high in the next couple years.

Disagree, Shanahan doesn't scheme open Kittle, Samuel, Juszczyk, Bourne on every single play they get open on their own an awful lot. Yes some is by design but a lot is on their own. Agree that it would be useful to get a wide out that can stretch the defense. The problem is that Garropolo can't get them the ball if he's on his back. I saw too much pressure and too many hits last season which was especially evident in the Super Bowl.

Ruggs

nah

Originally posted by lamontb:
Ruggs

Hello all,

I've been away for several months (just couldn't bring myself to come on here, then with the shutdown, I'm a full-time worker/homeschool teacher/babysitter and have literally 0 free time). But I thought I'd come in here today and see what you all are thinking. I haven't been this undereducated about the draft since my freshman year in college (2004) so I'm way behind the eight-ball.

Please correct my ignorance if you think I'm off, but here's my take:

1. If Lamb is there, take him as he has outside/inside capability and fits best with Kittle and Samuel
2. Jeudy/Ruggs, either of them bring definite improvement, either in supreme route running or speed, respectively
3. Replace Buckner with a DT or find future LT
4. Trade down to mid 1st and net a 2nd or 3rd, and take someone like Jefferson
5. And if somehow Tua is there, then take a long hard look at taking him

Is that about right? And also, hope everyone is safe during these crazy times...

No to Tua. Position of least need.

Originally posted by English:

No to Tua. Position of least need.

A QB on a rookie deal?

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by RishikeshA:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Anyone who is suggesting drafting a DT at 13 is overthinking it.

We have specific needs on this team. DT is not at the top.

Let's see how this defense plays without Buck.

The defensive line is currently a strength of the team.....true or false?

Falsh.. Bosa and Armstead are the only quality starters.Thomas will not draw double teams. The rest of the dline are quality backups. Ford is a yr older. Gotta get Bosa and Fred Warner some help with a monster in the middle.