Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

My attempt at a mock draft.

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
John232


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 13382
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 1:37 am    Post subject: My attempt at a mock draft. Reply with quote

This is my attempt at a mock draft. The goal for this team should be to acquire more picks and to draft guys in the early rounds who can step in and function within our scheme. I am going to attempt to keep ACL projects and hard developmental guys to a minimum in the first couple rounds.

The first thing i'll to get out of the way is the trade back with Carolina. There seems to be a growing sentiment (and for good reason) that because other teams like Chicago, the Jets and the Jags are rumored to be attempting tradebacks, that our value at 2 for a tradeback is somehow diminished. I don't agree with that. The reason being is Thomas, Allen and Lattimore will all be gone by pick 8 and those are all massive positions of need for the Panthers. And Solomon Thomas would be a huge pickup for them.

So the trade would go as such:

SF Receives:
#8
2018 First
#40(2)
#98 (3)
#152(5)

Carolina Receives
#2


this works out to a relatively equal deal that favors Carolina from a draft value chart. Obviously this might not play out that way due to the saturation in talent in the early first but I feel like it's fair and Carolina isn't giving away a kings ransom.

so to begin:

Round 1, pick 8

Corey Davis, WR

This knocks out two birds with one stone in going BPA and need. We have absolutely nothing on offense outside of Garcon and Hyde. Kerley and Vance are average but nothing to write home about. Corey Davis is a complete receiver who already runs an NFL route tree. Physically, he's the total package. He has great size, strength and speed. He can run after the catch, he catches at a high point and although he might not be Boldin, he can also shield off defensive backs with his frame. He also consistently (and prolifically) produced in his college career. When he played against NFL level prospects, he more often than not held up his end of the bargain. Having a guy like him on the outside not only adds a dimension to our offense we haven't had in years, it gives any future QB a receiver to develop with. If there is a fault to his game, I would argue it's his hands. They're very good, but he does have concentration drops, but hands are something that can be coached up and having a guy like Garcon to mentor him, a guy who had unreliable hands early on, could do wonders for him.


Round 2, pick 34.

Evan Engram, TE

Same reasoning as above. We go BPA. Evan Engram is exactly the kind of player Shanny would love. Look at what he did with Jordan Reed and look at how Atlanta loaded up on TE's last year. Giving Engram gives us a match-up nightmare at TE who can work all over the field. Not only that, his size although not outstanding, isn't horrible either. He's a phenomenal gadget player and if it wasn't for OJ Howard and David Njoku, he'd possible be going in the top 20.


Round 2 pick 40. (Carolina)

Tyus Bowser, OLB/DE

I've been low key falling in love with him over the past couple months. He's a jack of all trades Linebacker. He shows tremendous ability in defending the pass, but can also adeptly rush the passer. I do have concerns about his weight and ability against the run, but I think you can plug him in right away as a 3rd down specialist who can probably usurp Ahmad Brooks for the SAM backer position right away. His ability to cover AND rush the passer gives us some much needed athleticism and versatility on defense. With that said, he does need to develop more of a tool kit when it comes to rushing the passer, but his Motor doesn't stop and given that he's only recently dedicated himself to Football, i'd say he's a pretty good guy to take a chance on at 40.
In short, he has a very high ceiling, but I think his floor is above a total flame out bust. At worst, he's probably solid depth but a guy who who might be a bit of a disappointment. I will say that I grappled heavily with picking Ryan Anderson here too, but I just can't bring myself to add a slow Linebacker to a defense that's already lacking speed and quickness.

Round 3, 66.

Derek Rivers, DE

I'm not a huge fan of him, but a lot of other people love him as a prospect. He fits our scheme and is a big position of need. Great athlete who produced a ton in college. I personally see a guy who has a high motor, great traits but needs to develop a lot more to reach his (high) ceiling, but depending on what we do with Lynch, we could see him take over in the next year or two. I would slot him to be someone who rotates in on a regular basis on third down. I'm also aware he might not last until our first pick in the third.



Round 3, 98 (Carolina)

Akhello Withersppon, CB

With Ward still most likely moving to Safety and Brock being release, we sort of end up with a ton of question marks at corner. I think most of us would agree that in limited playing time, Dontae Johnson and Reaser showed some promise and Johnson especially might flourish in our new system, but that shouldn't prevent us from grabbing another corner. Withersppoon appears to have pretty outstanding physical traits and seems to be a forgotten prospect amongst a loaded DB class. We took a huge chance on Robinson last year, but the common denominator between a pick like Robinson and Witherspoon is the athleticism and it's what pushed me towards Witherspoon instead of Rasul Douglas (who I also like). I don't think he's going to start right away but I expect him to see a fair amount of playing time and really push Redmon, Williams, Reaser and Johnson for that third CB 2 position.



Round 4, 109.


Josh Dobbs. QB

We're going QB whether we like it or not. Dobbs improved every year in college, and had a great offseason. Not only that, his game tape isn't bad by any stretch. He just wasn't prolific. This is great value and he's a great option for a project QB who can sit behind Hoyer and Barkley for a year or two. Schematically, he's also a really solid fit for us. Furthermore, we're not pulling a Jets and drafting a guy in the second who clearly has no business starting in the NFL. The problem is, he may not be here. There's already talk of him going at top of the second round. Personally, i think we're going to see a run on QB's in the end of the first and then teams will settle for a bit. We'll see Chad Kelly go around this range too..potentially to us as well.


Round 4, 146.


Jordan Morgan OT/G

Reports seem to state he's a good athlete who will probably move inside to guard. He appears to have the ability to be a swing lineman which is always valuable and could eventually be someone to take over for Beadles.

Round 5, 146

Rayshawn Jenkins, SS

In the box safety with good size. We need to address safety in this draft at some point and Jenkins has a lot of the desired physical traits the scheme calls for. I am assuming Reid will move to SS but should something happen to Ward, we would be moving him back to FS and Tartt would be the SS. Regardless, Jenkins seems like a solid pick for in the box safety depth.

Round 5, 152 (Carolina

Jamal Williams, RB

This is a guy we've been linked too quite a bit. He might not last to this round, but Running backs have a tendency to drop. Addresses an issue of depth. Hightower and Harris are nice, but having Davis as a fourth back is no bueno, and given Hyde's injury history, a 4th RB might see substantial time and Davis doesn't belong anywhere near the field


Round 5, 161,

Josh Malone, WR.

Great physical traits but didn't produce at a real high level. Not a terrible pickup, but might not last until this round. Another pick here would be Jalen Robinette, WR from Air Force.

Round 6, 186

Avery Moss, DE.

Great athlete, lots of development. A small school prospect who is being overshadowed by guys like Bowser and Rivers.


Round 6, 202

Dan Skipper, OT

He's 6'10, that's big. PS candidate and a good option for a late round developmental prospect.

Round 7, 219

Kevin Davis, ILB.

WEW, Really hitting that need. Two year starter who produced but he's rated pretty low on most sites and seems like this would be an accurate range for him..

Depth Chart:


QB: Hoyer, Barkley, Dobbs
RB: Hyde, Hightower, Harris, Williams
FB: Polish Name
TE: McDonald, Engram, Paulsen
WR: Davis, Malone
WR, Garcon, Goodwin
Slot, Kerley, Robinson
OT: Trent Brown. Theus
OG: Garnett
OC: Zuttah, Kilgore
OG: Beadles, Morgan
OT: Staley. Gilliam

DE: Lynch, Rivers
NT: Mitchell, Dial
DT: Buckner, Chris Jones
EDGE: Armstead, Blair

OLB: Malcom Smith,
ILB: Bow: Ray Ray Armstrong
OLB: Ahmad Brooks, Bowser, Harold

CB: Robinson, Witherspoon, Johnson
Nickel: Williams, Redmond, Reaser

DB: ward
S: Reid, Tartt, Jenkins

ST: DiAmancho
LS: Nelson
K: Gould
P: Pinion

Notable cuts:


Carradine (He was the last guy I cut)
Dekota Watson
Garrett Celek
JaCorey Shepard
Bruce Ellington


PS Squad:


Antonio Pipkin (UDFA)
Mike Davis
Avery Moss (Drafted)
Blake Bell
Dan Skipper (Drafted)
DeAndre Smelter
Aaron Burbridge
Prince Charles Iworah
Wynton Mcmanis
Kevin Davis (Drafted)




Anyways, I probably messed this up but I'd like to think these were accurate ranges, I think Jamal Williams, Witherspoon Dobbs, Rivers and Malone are probably going to go before those picks but crazy things happen all the time.
_________________

xsaMainevent on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oldman9er


Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 43420
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank Jeebus I am not a Panthers fan, or I'd shoot myself in the face over that trade.

- Don't love the value of any WR in the top 10
- Would be happy with the Engram pick
- Would be cautiously pleased with the Bowser pick.
( not sold on him as a top 70 prospect )
- I'd swap Rivers and Bowser, as I do have Rivers in the top 50.. great pick.
- Witherspoon is okay, but I'd rather more physicality in the CBs.
- Wouldn't select Dobbs till rd 6, if that.
- The rest looks alright.

- REALLY hope they don't wait till rd 7 to add some MLB/WLB help.
- Confused by your position labeling on the DL. You have it as EDGE for the LDE/5 tech position? and your NT (1 tech) and DT (3 tech) should be swapped over.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John232


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 13382
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

oldman9er wrote:
Thank Jeebus I am not a Panthers fan, or I'd shoot myself in the face over that trade.

- Don't love the value of any WR in the top 10
- Would be happy with the Engram pick
- Would be cautiously pleased with the Bowser pick.
( not sold on him as a top 70 prospect )
- I'd swap Rivers and Bowser, as I do have Rivers in the top 50.. great pick.
- Witherspoon is okay, but I'd rather more physicality in the CBs.
- Wouldn't select Dobbs till rd 6, if that.
- The rest looks alright.

- REALLY hope they don't wait till rd 7 to add some MLB/WLB help.
- Confused by your position labeling on the DL. You have it as EDGE for the LDE/5 tech position? and your NT (1 tech) and DT (3 tech) should be swapped over.



Great points brought up.

To address the trade; I think if there IS a trade, it probably doesn't look like this. I just went off value charts. I think it's more likely we just see their 8th, 40th and a first next year and it ends there.

I disagree on the receiver value but I understand it, I just think Davis is a legit top ten talent in any draft that isn't stupid loaded at receiver.

I think it's conceivable to swap Bowser and Rivers. I have a man crush on Bowser and I think he is less likely to drop to our third rounder than Rivers. But if I swapped them, I don't know if I would flinch at all.

Akhello was a weird pick for me, I think he has great pure cover skills but like you, i'm a bit leery of his physicality. I also considered going Rasul Douglas with that pick or any one of the available inside backers. I just think what we do with Ward and Reid is going to have huge ramifications on our whole draft. Very much a ripple effect if we do move Ward to FS.

Josh Dobbs I have as a 5th round prospect but due to being a QB, and a QB in a weak QB class, I don't see him dropping to the 5th, much less the sixth.

In regards to the line I must admit...I'm a bit confused on how we're going to play Armstead.

Here's how I see it playing out.

5 tech(edge?) Blair and Armstead play the 5 tech, or the Michael Bennett role. I realize that Armstead is playing out of position here, but I think we have to give him a shot in this role. I also happen to think Blair is a perfect fit here Then either one of those guys will kick inside on passing downs. Then this is where you have the SAM, conceivably Brooks/Bowser playing in the 9 gap manning outside contain.

NG/1tech: Earl Mitchell was brought in to play this role. I also think this is a position we could address by round 4 too.

3 Tech: Buckner and Dial: Playing on the weak side of the line, still both playing out of position but I think can function at a high level here.

LEO/Elephant/DE: Lynch, Rivers on the RDE spot that we saw guys like Chris Clemons and Clint Avril play.

Granted, I'm still educating myself on this defense but that's what I sort of envision, but I'm also open to correction or at least speculation as to how our Defensive front will play out.
_________________

xsaMainevent on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 19314
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

John232 wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
Thank Jeebus I am not a Panthers fan, or I'd shoot myself in the face over that trade.

- Don't love the value of any WR in the top 10
- Would be happy with the Engram pick
- Would be cautiously pleased with the Bowser pick.
( not sold on him as a top 70 prospect )
- I'd swap Rivers and Bowser, as I do have Rivers in the top 50.. great pick.
- Witherspoon is okay, but I'd rather more physicality in the CBs.
- Wouldn't select Dobbs till rd 6, if that.
- The rest looks alright.

- REALLY hope they don't wait till rd 7 to add some MLB/WLB help.
- Confused by your position labeling on the DL. You have it as EDGE for the LDE/5 tech position? and your NT (1 tech) and DT (3 tech) should be swapped over.



Great points brought up.

To address the trade; I think if there IS a trade, it probably doesn't look like this. I just went off value charts. I think it's more likely we just see their 8th, 40th and a first next year and it ends there.

I disagree on the receiver value but I understand it, I just think Davis is a legit top ten talent in any draft that isn't stupid loaded at receiver.

I think it's conceivable to swap Bowser and Rivers. I have a man crush on Bowser and I think he is less likely to drop to our third rounder than Rivers. But if I swapped them, I don't know if I would flinch at all.

Akhello was a weird pick for me, I think he has great pure cover skills but like you, i'm a bit leery of his physicality. I also considered going Rasul Douglas with that pick or any one of the available inside backers. I just think what we do with Ward and Reid is going to have huge ramifications on our whole draft. Very much a ripple effect if we do move Ward to FS.

Josh Dobbs I have as a 5th round prospect but due to being a QB, and a QB in a weak QB class, I don't see him dropping to the 5th, much less the sixth.

In regards to the line I must admit...I'm a bit confused on how we're going to play Armstead.

Here's how I see it playing out.

5 tech(edge?) Blair and Armstead play the 5 tech, or the Michael Bennett role. I realize that Armstead is playing out of position here, but I think we have to give him a shot in this role. I also happen to think Blair is a perfect fit here Then either one of those guys will kick inside on passing downs. Then this is where you have the SAM, conceivably Brooks/Bowser playing in the 9 gap manning outside contain.

NG/1tech: Earl Mitchell was brought in to play this role. I also think this is a position we could address by round 4 too.

3 Tech: Buckner and Dial: Playing on the weak side of the line, still both playing out of position but I think can function at a high level here.

LEO/Elephant/DE: Lynch, Rivers on the RDE spot that we saw guys like Chris Clemons and Clint Avril play.

Granted, I'm still educating myself on this defense but that's what I sort of envision, but I'm also open to correction or at least speculation as to how our Defensive front will play out.


I don't think that there's any way that we grab their first next year. I think a trade starts and ends at #8 and #40. Maybe we get a late round pick, or maybe we don't get 40 - we could get their second #2 pick and a mid/late round pick. But there's no way I see us getting a future first from them.

I'd be ecstatic if we did though.
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John232


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 13382
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forge wrote:
John232 wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
Thank Jeebus I am not a Panthers fan, or I'd shoot myself in the face over that trade.

- Don't love the value of any WR in the top 10
- Would be happy with the Engram pick
- Would be cautiously pleased with the Bowser pick.
( not sold on him as a top 70 prospect )
- I'd swap Rivers and Bowser, as I do have Rivers in the top 50.. great pick.
- Witherspoon is okay, but I'd rather more physicality in the CBs.
- Wouldn't select Dobbs till rd 6, if that.
- The rest looks alright.

- REALLY hope they don't wait till rd 7 to add some MLB/WLB help.
- Confused by your position labeling on the DL. You have it as EDGE for the LDE/5 tech position? and your NT (1 tech) and DT (3 tech) should be swapped over.



Great points brought up.

To address the trade; I think if there IS a trade, it probably doesn't look like this. I just went off value charts. I think it's more likely we just see their 8th, 40th and a first next year and it ends there.

I disagree on the receiver value but I understand it, I just think Davis is a legit top ten talent in any draft that isn't stupid loaded at receiver.

I think it's conceivable to swap Bowser and Rivers. I have a man crush on Bowser and I think he is less likely to drop to our third rounder than Rivers. But if I swapped them, I don't know if I would flinch at all.

Akhello was a weird pick for me, I think he has great pure cover skills but like you, i'm a bit leery of his physicality. I also considered going Rasul Douglas with that pick or any one of the available inside backers. I just think what we do with Ward and Reid is going to have huge ramifications on our whole draft. Very much a ripple effect if we do move Ward to FS.

Josh Dobbs I have as a 5th round prospect but due to being a QB, and a QB in a weak QB class, I don't see him dropping to the 5th, much less the sixth.

In regards to the line I must admit...I'm a bit confused on how we're going to play Armstead.

Here's how I see it playing out.

5 tech(edge?) Blair and Armstead play the 5 tech, or the Michael Bennett role. I realize that Armstead is playing out of position here, but I think we have to give him a shot in this role. I also happen to think Blair is a perfect fit here Then either one of those guys will kick inside on passing downs. Then this is where you have the SAM, conceivably Brooks/Bowser playing in the 9 gap manning outside contain.

NG/1tech: Earl Mitchell was brought in to play this role. I also think this is a position we could address by round 4 too.

3 Tech: Buckner and Dial: Playing on the weak side of the line, still both playing out of position but I think can function at a high level here.

LEO/Elephant/DE: Lynch, Rivers on the RDE spot that we saw guys like Chris Clemons and Clint Avril play.

Granted, I'm still educating myself on this defense but that's what I sort of envision, but I'm also open to correction or at least speculation as to how our Defensive front will play out.


I don't think that there's any way that we grab their first next year. I think a trade starts and ends at #8 and #40. Maybe we get a late round pick, or maybe we don't get 40 - we could get their second #2 pick and a mid/late round pick. But there's no way I see us getting a future first from them.

I'd be ecstatic if we did though.



I would be absolutely incensed if all we got out of a trade back to 8 would bea second round pick. I can understand maybe not next years first, but at least their second and another mid round pick. There's a very good chance neither Thomas or Fournette make it to 8, make them pay for it.
_________________

xsaMainevent on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 19314
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

John232 wrote:
Forge wrote:
John232 wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
Thank Jeebus I am not a Panthers fan, or I'd shoot myself in the face over that trade.

- Don't love the value of any WR in the top 10
- Would be happy with the Engram pick
- Would be cautiously pleased with the Bowser pick.
( not sold on him as a top 70 prospect )
- I'd swap Rivers and Bowser, as I do have Rivers in the top 50.. great pick.
- Witherspoon is okay, but I'd rather more physicality in the CBs.
- Wouldn't select Dobbs till rd 6, if that.
- The rest looks alright.

- REALLY hope they don't wait till rd 7 to add some MLB/WLB help.
- Confused by your position labeling on the DL. You have it as EDGE for the LDE/5 tech position? and your NT (1 tech) and DT (3 tech) should be swapped over.



Great points brought up.

To address the trade; I think if there IS a trade, it probably doesn't look like this. I just went off value charts. I think it's more likely we just see their 8th, 40th and a first next year and it ends there.

I disagree on the receiver value but I understand it, I just think Davis is a legit top ten talent in any draft that isn't stupid loaded at receiver.

I think it's conceivable to swap Bowser and Rivers. I have a man crush on Bowser and I think he is less likely to drop to our third rounder than Rivers. But if I swapped them, I don't know if I would flinch at all.

Akhello was a weird pick for me, I think he has great pure cover skills but like you, i'm a bit leery of his physicality. I also considered going Rasul Douglas with that pick or any one of the available inside backers. I just think what we do with Ward and Reid is going to have huge ramifications on our whole draft. Very much a ripple effect if we do move Ward to FS.

Josh Dobbs I have as a 5th round prospect but due to being a QB, and a QB in a weak QB class, I don't see him dropping to the 5th, much less the sixth.

In regards to the line I must admit...I'm a bit confused on how we're going to play Armstead.

Here's how I see it playing out.

5 tech(edge?) Blair and Armstead play the 5 tech, or the Michael Bennett role. I realize that Armstead is playing out of position here, but I think we have to give him a shot in this role. I also happen to think Blair is a perfect fit here Then either one of those guys will kick inside on passing downs. Then this is where you have the SAM, conceivably Brooks/Bowser playing in the 9 gap manning outside contain.

NG/1tech: Earl Mitchell was brought in to play this role. I also think this is a position we could address by round 4 too.

3 Tech: Buckner and Dial: Playing on the weak side of the line, still both playing out of position but I think can function at a high level here.

LEO/Elephant/DE: Lynch, Rivers on the RDE spot that we saw guys like Chris Clemons and Clint Avril play.

Granted, I'm still educating myself on this defense but that's what I sort of envision, but I'm also open to correction or at least speculation as to how our Defensive front will play out.


I don't think that there's any way that we grab their first next year. I think a trade starts and ends at #8 and #40. Maybe we get a late round pick, or maybe we don't get 40 - we could get their second #2 pick and a mid/late round pick. But there's no way I see us getting a future first from them.

I'd be ecstatic if we did though.



I would be absolutely incensed if all we got out of a trade back to 8 would bea second round pick. I can understand maybe not next years first, but at least their second and another mid round pick. There's a very good chance neither Thomas or Fournette make it to 8, make them pay for it.


Why? This perceived notion of the value of number #2 that some people have baffles me. If they offer me 40 and 8 for 2, I'm jumping all over it (if I don't have much else in the way of trades, of course...I'm still gunning for the best deal possible). Sure, I'm trying to get more, but if that's all I get, I'm perfectly happy.

There's no real value at #2 because there's no surefire #2 prospect in this draft and there's no quarterback. Plus, Chicago and New York are both actively trying to trade out of 3 and 6 if you believe Peter King. Why trade with us when you can make that deal? There are more people looking to move down than up in this trade because this isn't a top heavy draft. You want more picks in the middle.

Even if Thomas or Founette doesn't make it there, Christian would be. OJ Howard makes sense for Carolina. If Fournette and Thomas go in the top 7, it's possible that Lattimore, or Hooker or Adams falls to 8, and they fill needs for Carolina just as well. Possible that Jonathan Allen does.

I'd be very happy if we moved down from 2 and got 40.
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oldman9er


Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 43420
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good feedback returned, John.

You have the DL personnel fine. It was your labeling of the position, and flip-flop spots of the 3 and 1 tech that confounded me a bit.

Quote:
I realize that Armstead is playing out of position here, but


I think the 5 tech in this scheme is about the only natural/feasible fit for Armstead... whereas Blair could have some usefulness at both the 5 and 3. I think Buckner can be an ideal 3 tech.

I'd even be curious, if making the decisions, to take a look at Rivers as the SAM.. while letting Brooks and Lynch mix it up as LEO.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John232


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 13382
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Correct me if I'm wrong, Forge. But I'm assuming your basing the perceived value from 2-8 as the grade you would give all the projected prospects in that range? Because I feel the gap in talent between 2-8 is small. But that's irrelevant to Carolina. They will not be picking this High next year and thus they get a real opportunity add another elite player on defense. But In order for them to do that, they have to trade up to 2.

I'm assuming that after MG, Thomas would be their #2 rated prospect and fills a huge position of need. Thomas will not drop to them at 8, I don't think he drops past us or Chicago, not to mention the Jags and Titans could also take him.

Well, maybe they don't like Thomas, then the next guy would lattimore. Well again, assuming we don't trade, I don't see lattimore dropping them either.

In fact, the only guys with top ten talent that I see dropping to them would be fournette(bad value) Davis (not a position of need) and Foster (no way they take him.) this leaves them with Conley, a reach, Cam Robinson anther reach and possibly Jonathan Allen. I'd say there options become skimp just based on a position of need. Which again, there biggest need gets filled by an elite prospect at 2 with Thomas. So again, getting that elite prospect at 2 is worth more than a second.
_________________

xsaMainevent on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 19314
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

John232 wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, Forge. But I'm assuming your basing the perceived value from 2-8 as the grade you would give all the projected prospects in that range? Because I feel the gap in talent between 2-8 is small. But that's irrelevant to Carolina. They will not be picking this High next year and thus they get a real opportunity add another elite player on defense. But In order for them to do that, they have to trade up to 2.

I'm assuming that after MG, Thomas would be their #2 rated prospect and fills a huge position of need. Thomas will not drop to them at 8, I don't think he drops past us or Chicago, not to mention the Jags and Titans could also take him.

Well, maybe they don't like Thomas, then the next guy would lattimore. Well again, assuming we don't trade, I don't see lattimore dropping them either.

In fact, the only guys with top ten talent that I see dropping to them would be fournette(bad value) Davis (not a position of need) and Foster (no way they take him.) this leaves them with Conley, a reach, Cam Robinson anther reach and possibly Jonathan Allen. I'd say there options become skimp just based on a position of need. Which again, there biggest need gets filled by an elite prospect at 2 with Thomas. So again, getting that elite prospect at 2 is worth more than a second.


It's not if teams aren't willing to give up more than that. Basic supply and demand. The market will dictate the value. There's a reason that there are articles out there talking about how the 49ers are going to have difficulty trading that pick.

And here's the thing...why do you think it's unlikely the Panthers pick this high again? I think it's more likely that they pick in the top 8 next year than it is them making the playoffs. It's not like this team has one hole to fill.

They have bad tackles. Their running back is a 30 year old, injury prone vet. Their receivers are not great - Benjamin had a nice rookie season, regressed last year. Funchess is a bust so far. The pass rush is overly reliant on ends who are in their mid 30's. They have a very bad secondary. This isn't a great team - and they play in a division with the reigning NFC champs, a rapidly improving Tampa team, and a team with Drew Brees and Sean Peyton.

Also, the top 8 is extremely fluid. There's no way to say "so and so won't be here", including Fournette and Thomas. In the updated mock at Walter, Thomas lasts until #9. A lot of mocks have Fournette going to the Panthers at 8 right now as it is, and I just landed him there in a mock I'm doing in the GM forum. McShay's had Lattimore at #10 in his 2 round mock with Kiper. There is a fine chance that the Panthers get one of their main guys just by sticking at 8, particularly once you start accounting for possible quarterback picks
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John232


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 13382
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forge wrote:
John232 wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, Forge. But I'm assuming your basing the perceived value from 2-8 as the grade you would give all the projected prospects in that range? Because I feel the gap in talent between 2-8 is small. But that's irrelevant to Carolina. They will not be picking this High next year and thus they get a real opportunity add another elite player on defense. But In order for them to do that, they have to trade up to 2.

I'm assuming that after MG, Thomas would be their #2 rated prospect and fills a huge position of need. Thomas will not drop to them at 8, I don't think he drops past us or Chicago, not to mention the Jags and Titans could also take him.

Well, maybe they don't like Thomas, then the next guy would lattimore. Well again, assuming we don't trade, I don't see lattimore dropping them either.

In fact, the only guys with top ten talent that I see dropping to them would be fournette(bad value) Davis (not a position of need) and Foster (no way they take him.) this leaves them with Conley, a reach, Cam Robinson anther reach and possibly Jonathan Allen. I'd say there options become skimp just based on a position of need. Which again, there biggest need gets filled by an elite prospect at 2 with Thomas. So again, getting that elite prospect at 2 is worth more than a second.


It's not if teams aren't willing to give up more than that. Basic supply and demand. The market will dictate the value. There's a reason that there are articles out there talking about how the 49ers are going to have difficulty trading that pick.

And here's the thing...why do you think it's unlikely the Panthers pick this high again? I think it's more likely that they pick in the top 8 next year than it is them making the playoffs. It's not like this team has one hole to fill.

They have bad tackles. Their running back is a 30 year old, injury prone vet. Their receivers are not great - Benjamin had a nice rookie season, regressed last year. Funchess is a bust so far. The pass rush is overly reliant on ends who are in their mid 30's. They have a very bad secondary. This isn't a great team - and they play in a division with the reigning NFC champs, a rapidly improving Tampa team, and a team with Drew Brees and Sean Peyton.

Also, the top 8 is extremely fluid. There's no way to say "so and so won't be here", including Fournette and Thomas. In the updated mock at Walter, Thomas lasts until #9. A lot of mocks have Fournette going to the Panthers at 8 right now as it is, and I just landed him there in a mock I'm doing in the GM forum. McShay's had Lattimore at #10 in his 2 round mock with Kiper. There is a fine chance that the Panthers get one of their main guys just by sticking at 8, particularly once you start accounting for possible quarterback picks


Fair points. I would still be disappointed with just receiving a second round pick. I think our difference in opinion lies within the motivations and projections of Carolina going forward. I don't see them picking in the top ten again unless they get decimated by injuries. They have a talented team, maybe not contending but I expect them to be in the conversation for the playoffs. Regardless, the this draft is going to be extremely entertaining.
_________________

xsaMainevent on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 19314
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 2:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

John232 wrote:


Fair points. I would still be disappointed with just receiving a second round pick. I think our difference in opinion lies within the motivations and projections of Carolina going forward. I don't see them picking in the top ten again unless they get decimated by injuries. They have a talented team, maybe not contending but I expect them to be in the conversation for the playoffs. Regardless, the this draft is going to be extremely entertaining.


That's true. How the team is viewed from within would have a lot to say about this. If they feel they are a great player away from being a true contender, they could easily make that move and pay for it. Obviously, I want to gouge the hell out of anyone who comes calling for that number 2 pick Laughing
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John232


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 13382
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oldman9er wrote:
Good feedback returned, John.

You have the DL personnel fine. It was your labeling of the position, and flip-flop spots of the 3 and 1 tech that confounded me a bit.

Quote:
I realize that Armstead is playing out of position here, but


I think the 5 tech in this scheme is about the only natural/feasible fit for Armstead... whereas Blair could have some usefulness at both the 5 and 3. I think Buckner can be an ideal 3 tech.

I'd even be curious, if making the decisions, to take a look at Rivers as the SAM.. while letting Brooks and Lynch mix it up as LEO.


Yeah, I think we're going to see movement t all over the slime from dial, Blair jones.

And I think moving Rivers around along with brooks would be a interesting. I'm sort of banking on Smith being able to be that third MLB too so I could see Bowser getting reps at the weak side backer spot as well.
_________________

xsaMainevent on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oldman9er


Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 43420
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

John232 wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
Good feedback returned, John.

You have the DL personnel fine. It was your labeling of the position, and flip-flop spots of the 3 and 1 tech that confounded me a bit.

Quote:
I realize that Armstead is playing out of position here, but


I think the 5 tech in this scheme is about the only natural/feasible fit for Armstead... whereas Blair could have some usefulness at both the 5 and 3. I think Buckner can be an ideal 3 tech.

I'd even be curious, if making the decisions, to take a look at Rivers as the SAM.. while letting Brooks and Lynch mix it up as LEO.


Yeah, I think we're going to see movement t all over the slime from dial, Blair jones.

And I think moving Rivers around along with brooks would be a interesting. I'm sort of banking on Smith being able to be that third MLB too so I could see Bowser getting reps at the weak side backer spot as well.


I take great offense at you calling these players SLIME. They are human beings! People just like you and I.. trying to make something of themselves, and provide for their loved ones.

Shame on you, sir... SHAME.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John232


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 13382
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oldman9er wrote:
John232 wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
Good feedback returned, John.

You have the DL personnel fine. It was your labeling of the position, and flip-flop spots of the 3 and 1 tech that confounded me a bit.

Quote:
I realize that Armstead is playing out of position here, but


I think the 5 tech in this scheme is about the only natural/feasible fit for Armstead... whereas Blair could have some usefulness at both the 5 and 3. I think Buckner can be an ideal 3 tech.

I'd even be curious, if making the decisions, to take a look at Rivers as the SAM.. while letting Brooks and Lynch mix it up as LEO.


Yeah, I think we're going to see movement t all over the slime from dial, Blair jones.

And I think moving Rivers around along with brooks would be a interesting. I'm sort of banking on Smith being able to be that third MLB too so I could see Bowser getting reps at the weak side backer spot as well.


I take great offense at you calling these players SLIME. They are human beings! People just like you and I.. trying to make something of themselves, and provide for their loved ones.

Shame on you, sir... SHAME.


This is what happens when I type on my phone while sitting on the toilet. The Shame is real.
_________________

xsaMainevent on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
49ers Finest


Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 9927
Location: San Jose
PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

im with forge on this one, i knew the raiders had a similar trade recently and i was like why would they do that, but it happens.

i found it. 2013 draft
No. 3: Oakland → Miami (D). Oakland traded this selection to Miami in exchange for Miami's 2013 first-round selection (12th) and second-round selection (42nd).

oakland went from 3 to 12 and only gained 42

with every team knowing we want to trade, unless somebody really wants fournette or a qb, this is probably what we're getting
_________________
***WE RUN THE WEST!***
SB AT HOME!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

new sig... sorry alex
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group