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

49ers Select TE Vance McDonald at #55
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 7187
PostPosted: Sat May 04, 2013 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

elvischannel wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
Everybody had their favorites, but I'm okay with McD being the choice. I didn't really think much of Walker, so I am not worried about McD filling in well for him. Will he be special? or able to be a #1 dangerous TE if Davis is injured? eh... that, not at all sure of. (which is why I wanted Kelce there) .. but hey, I'm fine with giving him every chance to win me over as being that good.

It might be that Kelce's one year suspension for a drug offense kept him off the gold helment list. I don't believe there were any similar character issues with McDonald. Regardless, McDonald's measurables surpass Kelce's and give him a higher ceiling.


I don't know if the suspension had anything to do with it or not, or if they felt after interviewing him that maybe he hadn't grown up enough to their liking. Or maybe we were interested in MacDonald all along and the Kelce thing was a smokescreen; we seemed to do that a lot this year (Duke williams met with us several times too). Kelce is a more refined product for sure, and I had him higher on my list, but you may be correct that MacDonald has a higher ceiling. I didn't have him too far behind so to me it was all kind of the same. If MacDonald can improve his hands though, I'll be ecstatic.
_________________


Two in harmony surpasses one in perfection - P3
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SoCalNiner


Moderator
Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 23105
PostPosted: Sun May 05, 2013 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forge wrote:
elvischannel wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
Everybody had their favorites, but I'm okay with McD being the choice. I didn't really think much of Walker, so I am not worried about McD filling in well for him. Will he be special? or able to be a #1 dangerous TE if Davis is injured? eh... that, not at all sure of. (which is why I wanted Kelce there) .. but hey, I'm fine with giving him every chance to win me over as being that good.

It might be that Kelce's one year suspension for a drug offense kept him off the gold helment list. I don't believe there were any similar character issues with McDonald. Regardless, McDonald's measurables surpass Kelce's and give him a higher ceiling.


I don't know if the suspension had anything to do with it or not, or if they felt after interviewing him that maybe he hadn't grown up enough to their liking. Or maybe we were interested in MacDonald all along and the Kelce thing was a smokescreen; we seemed to do that a lot this year (Duke williams met with us several times too). Kelce is a more refined product for sure, and I had him higher on my list, but you may be correct that MacDonald has a higher ceiling. I didn't have him too far behind so to me it was all kind of the same. If MacDonald can improve his hands though, I'll be ecstatic.


I'm positive the suspension had some say in us not drafting him. It doesn't seem like Baalke likes to go with guys that have off-field issues.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
EverythingSF


Joined: 15 Jun 2010
Posts: 3035
Location: Merced, CA
PostPosted: Sun May 05, 2013 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SoCalNiner wrote:
Forge wrote:
elvischannel wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
Everybody had their favorites, but I'm okay with McD being the choice. I didn't really think much of Walker, so I am not worried about McD filling in well for him. Will he be special? or able to be a #1 dangerous TE if Davis is injured? eh... that, not at all sure of. (which is why I wanted Kelce there) .. but hey, I'm fine with giving him every chance to win me over as being that good.

It might be that Kelce's one year suspension for a drug offense kept him off the gold helment list. I don't believe there were any similar character issues with McDonald. Regardless, McDonald's measurables surpass Kelce's and give him a higher ceiling.


I don't know if the suspension had anything to do with it or not, or if they felt after interviewing him that maybe he hadn't grown up enough to their liking. Or maybe we were interested in MacDonald all along and the Kelce thing was a smokescreen; we seemed to do that a lot this year (Duke williams met with us several times too). Kelce is a more refined product for sure, and I had him higher on my list, but you may be correct that MacDonald has a higher ceiling. I didn't have him too far behind so to me it was all kind of the same. If MacDonald can improve his hands though, I'll be ecstatic.


I'm positive the suspension had some say in us not drafting him. It doesn't seem like Baalke likes to go with guys that have off-field issues.


So if he wasn't suspended you think we would have taken him over Vance? I don't really see that being plausible. I think we see our guy and we go out and get him. I think they liked Vance a lot better for reasons more than Kelce receiving a suspension and that is why they traded up to get him
_________________

^Thanks to NS922

EverythingSF wrote:
Boltstrikes wrote:

Alex's Mom?

Alex's High School Backup? Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SoCalNiner


Moderator
Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 23105
PostPosted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

EverythingSF wrote:
SoCalNiner wrote:
Forge wrote:
elvischannel wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
Everybody had their favorites, but I'm okay with McD being the choice. I didn't really think much of Walker, so I am not worried about McD filling in well for him. Will he be special? or able to be a #1 dangerous TE if Davis is injured? eh... that, not at all sure of. (which is why I wanted Kelce there) .. but hey, I'm fine with giving him every chance to win me over as being that good.

It might be that Kelce's one year suspension for a drug offense kept him off the gold helment list. I don't believe there were any similar character issues with McDonald. Regardless, McDonald's measurables surpass Kelce's and give him a higher ceiling.


I don't know if the suspension had anything to do with it or not, or if they felt after interviewing him that maybe he hadn't grown up enough to their liking. Or maybe we were interested in MacDonald all along and the Kelce thing was a smokescreen; we seemed to do that a lot this year (Duke williams met with us several times too). Kelce is a more refined product for sure, and I had him higher on my list, but you may be correct that MacDonald has a higher ceiling. I didn't have him too far behind so to me it was all kind of the same. If MacDonald can improve his hands though, I'll be ecstatic.


I'm positive the suspension had some say in us not drafting him. It doesn't seem like Baalke likes to go with guys that have off-field issues.


So if he wasn't suspended you think we would have taken him over Vance? I don't really see that being plausible. I think we see our guy and we go out and get him. I think they liked Vance a lot better for reasons more than Kelce receiving a suspension and that is why they traded up to get him


Well we can't say whether or not we would have taken him had the suspension not happened, because it did. I'm just stating that the suspension could have taken him off our board, and in my opinion, could have had a play in why we chose Vance over him. History shows that Jim/Trent tend to stray away from drafting guys with off field issues, and gravitate towards high character guys. They even have that gold helmet system they brought up when they took over.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chrissooner49er


Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 4062
Location: Tulsa, OK
PostPosted: Mon May 06, 2013 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think some of his measurables certainly got their attention:
31 reps with 34 1/2 inch arms?! Shocked That got MY attention!
He only ran a 4.69 40 at the combine, but he is rumored to have run 4.55 at Rice.
But the thing that really stood out to me is how well he runs routes. He is basically a big WR who is rather tenacious and effective at blocking.
If he can just catch that ball regularly...I think he could be something special.
_________________
fa·nat·ic (f-ntk)
A person marked or motivated by an extreme, unreasoning enthusiasm, as for a cause.
Draft wishes:1st-Beckham/Cooks,Fuller/Verrett;2nd-T. Murphy,Moncrief,Su'a-Filo,M. Smith;3rd-Abbrederis,Ben Gardner,J.Watkins,T. Reilly...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SoCalNiner


Moderator
Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 23105
PostPosted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chrissooner49er wrote:
I think some of his measurables certainly got their attention:
31 reps with 34 1/2 inch arms?! Shocked That got MY attention!
He only ran a 4.69 40 at the combine, but he is rumored to have run 4.55 at Rice.
But the thing that really stood out to me is how well he runs routes. He is basically a big WR who is rather tenacious and effective at blocking.
If he can just catch that ball regularly...I think he could be something special.


That's the key, he needs to develop good hands. If he does, he could be a monster for us.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 14426
PostPosted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fact is most sites, at least that I've looked at had Kelce higher, and a couple had Escobar third. But I also found a couple that had Mconald third. I'm guessing the average across all raters had these three pretty close. We picked one of them, and went out of our way to do it. So we surely felt he was better than the other two Now we'll have to wait 2 or 3 year to see if we were right. One thing we almost surely liked was his size and his strength. He blows away many of the other guys in the weight room, whicch isn't critical, but we all know how much we like our recievers to block and he sure has potential to do that.

Same with Reid I think I saw more sites that had Cyprien rated second and some that had Elam. But also some that had Reid. So again we felt stongly enough to give up something to get the guy we wanted. I sure hope we turn out to be right about both of them.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
48 1/2ers


Joined: 01 Aug 2011
Posts: 2418
Location: UCI
PostPosted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:
Fact is most sites, at least that I've looked at had Kelce higher, and a couple had Escobar third. But I also found a couple that had Mconald third. I'm guessing the average across all raters had these three pretty close. We picked one of them, and went out of our way to do it. So we surely felt he was better than the other two Now we'll have to wait 2 or 3 year to see if we were right. One thing we almost surely liked was his size and his strength. He blows away many of the other guys in the weight room, whicch isn't critical, but we all know how much we like our recievers to block and he sure has potential to do that.

Same with Reid I think I saw more sites that had Cyprien rated second and some that had Elam. But also some that had Reid. So again we felt stongly enough to give up something to get the guy we wanted. I sure hope we turn out to be right about both of them.

good post I havent looked at it that way
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LANiner


Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 554
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Tue May 07, 2013 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

also I haven't read every page on this thread but the guy is a long snapper this might just put Jennings on notice sorry rudyz. harbaugh loves versatility and it would free up a roster spot for some one else to make the team like Jewell Hampton or ot marquadt
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
AMG1713


Joined: 05 Mar 2013
Posts: 689
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LANiner wrote:
also I haven't read every page on this thread but the guy is a long snapper this might just put Jennings on notice sorry rudyz. harbaugh loves versatility and it would free up a roster spot for some one else to make the team like Jewell Hampton or ot marquadt


I doubt we'd use a guy who is expected to take a good amount offensive snaps as our long snapper. Too much risk of him getting hurt and the team being SOL during a game without him or, even worse, bringing in a Tray Junkin-esque replacement.
_________________
BoosterRooster22 wrote:
I'd bet my house that JaMarcus Russell has a successful career
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 14426
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AMG1713 wrote:
LANiner wrote:
also I haven't read every page on this thread but the guy is a long snapper this might just put Jennings on notice sorry rudyz. harbaugh loves versatility and it would free up a roster spot for some one else to make the team like Jewell Hampton or ot marquadt


I doubt we'd use a guy who is expected to take a good amount offensive snaps as our long snapper. Too much risk of him getting hurt and the team being SOL during a game without him or, even worse, bringing in a Tray Junkin-esque replacement.


Rudy made the same point. But since the NFL does not list LS as a position I really don't know. Does every team carry a dedicated LS these days?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NINERFAN_4_LIFE


Joined: 02 Jan 2007
Posts: 12535
Location: Buring the eternal flame Candlestick Park, wondering if I should throw my levis into the fire
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 4:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AMG1713 wrote:
LANiner wrote:
also I haven't read every page on this thread but the guy is a long snapper this might just put Jennings on notice sorry rudyz. harbaugh loves versatility and it would free up a roster spot for some one else to make the team like Jewell Hampton or ot marquadt


I doubt we'd use a guy who is expected to take a good amount offensive snaps as our long snapper. Too much risk of him getting hurt and the team being SOL during a game without him or, even worse, bringing in a Tray Junkin-esque replacement.


Then we can just sign Jennings back! he's not going to sign anywhere else

I suggested this same thing years ago with David baas (who was a c in college). I think it would be a good move. I also like the idea of a kicker who also punts, only if he does both well. Not saying get rid of andy, just that whenever he retires or falls off we should find someone who does both

I'm actually hoping that Bruce miller adsorbs a lot of walkers touches. It would be a nice wrinkle in the offense to get him involved and would just add another dimension
_________________
FOREVER FAITHFUL
----------------------------
FOREVER HATEFUL
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LANiner


Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 554
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

we are all about versatility y handicap the roster with along snapper if we can add a extra player that can help us during the season
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
AMG1713


Joined: 05 Mar 2013
Posts: 689
PostPosted: Thu May 09, 2013 1:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LANiner wrote:
we are all about versatility y handicap the roster with along snapper if we can add a extra player that can help us during the season


Because eventually you have to look beyond versatility and just worry about protecting yourself from disastrous situations. It's why teams keep a back up QB, even though there is a 90% chance they'll never take a meaningful snap on offense, defense, or special teams during a season. It's just better not to try your luck.
_________________
BoosterRooster22 wrote:
I'd bet my house that JaMarcus Russell has a successful career
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 14426
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 3:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anyone have any thoughts on Grey as a TE or HB. Don't know that there are any successful conversions of QB to TE. On the other hand he wasn't a pure QB. He ran for close to 2000 yards and played a lot at WR. I think he caught something like 60 passes. And playing QB, RB and WR shows his general athletecism. What are his chances of making that conversion successfully? Maybe not this year, but by the season afterwards?

By the way look at this quote of his below. When putting together mock drafts in the future we should all remember that the 49ers don't just shy away from guys with character issues, they go strongly in the other direction. I think they add some bonus points for guys with good character and high work ethic. Read something aout Patton too that impressed me evven that I can't quite remember what it was - and of course buying his own ticket so he could get started practicing right away?

If only we knew more about guys' character and work ethic I think we would all do better mocks.
"That's fine with me," Gray told CSNBayArea.com on Wednesday. "I believe in myself. Anything that I can do to make sure I stay a 49er, I'm willing to do. I'm pretty sure the coaches know that, too. I'm excited to see where things go once I get to minicamp."
_________________
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
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
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