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

TE upgrade
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 13801
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 1:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Geek wrote:
y2lamanaki wrote:
Geek wrote:
Right now it's not nearly our biggest hole or most important position. It's a pretty great TE draft but unless a really good player falls a round or two I don't think it's a very pressing need and could wait till next season or a couple from now.


I agree that there are bigger needs, but as this is a multi-year rebuild and we have needs at every position essentially, grab the best player available regardless of position. If a TE is there and can make a difference, go for it.


That's what I meant by taking one if a player falls a round or two. Like it's not big enough of a need that we should go out of our way to take a TE, but if they're BPA we should go after them. In fact I think BPA is the best way to usually draft. Take few needs but grab the BPA, maybe in a 70/30 BPA/need ratio.


Gotcha - we definitely mostly agree then. I would agree with this model - take the top guy on the board unless you've already addressed it. Our main difference is in if the guy falls a round or two. I don't think that part is as necessary as the talent is, but it could just be semantics for us. As we pick at the top of the round, someone who might have been rated as a late second is definitely a possibility to be there at the top of the 3rd, which is similar to falling a round. If we each say "grab him if he's the top guy" then we're on exactly the same page.
_________________


Future Hall of Famer Frank Gore's Career Rushing List Tracker:

*Currently Ranked 8th All-Time
*Yards needed to pass #7 Eric Dickerson: 194
*Yards needed to pass #6 Jerome Bettis: 597
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 19579
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 2:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

y2lamanaki wrote:
Geek wrote:
y2lamanaki wrote:
Geek wrote:
Right now it's not nearly our biggest hole or most important position. It's a pretty great TE draft but unless a really good player falls a round or two I don't think it's a very pressing need and could wait till next season or a couple from now.


I agree that there are bigger needs, but as this is a multi-year rebuild and we have needs at every position essentially, grab the best player available regardless of position. If a TE is there and can make a difference, go for it.


That's what I meant by taking one if a player falls a round or two. Like it's not big enough of a need that we should go out of our way to take a TE, but if they're BPA we should go after them. In fact I think BPA is the best way to usually draft. Take few needs but grab the BPA, maybe in a 70/30 BPA/need ratio.


Gotcha - we definitely mostly agree then. I would agree with this model - take the top guy on the board unless you've already addressed it. Our main difference is in if the guy falls a round or two. I don't think that part is as necessary as the talent is, but it could just be semantics for us. As we pick at the top of the round, someone who might have been rated as a late second is definitely a possibility to be there at the top of the 3rd, which is similar to falling a round. If we each say "grab him if he's the top guy" then we're on exactly the same page.


Usually I'm more in favor of filling needs and so I usually say Best Player Available At A Position of Need. The problem is that pretty much defines our entire roster. Even in that environment though the new staff will view certain positions as more important than others. Doesn't mean the team should reach to fill that position but should help them decide which positions to go after first and which to shoot for lower in the draft. Same thing with evaluating the talent available at any position. If the team thinks there are a ton of TEs available they might decide to wait on one even if they really want a TE, but if they think there are only a couple of centers with the potential to be really good they might take one earlier.

Still this is the best year in the 21st century for the team to go BPA ... thanks to Trent's utterly destroying the talent level of the team.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 13801
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 4:23 pm    Post subject: Re: TE upgrade Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:
Pandomonium wrote:
big9erfan wrote:
Pandomonium wrote:
Again these are only my opinions I'm posting just like my earlier WR post.

They are intended to spark intellectual discussions/debates on the board
that I feel are lacking:

I don't really care for ANY of our TEs

They show a flash here and there but lack any real consistency for any of them to be quality starters.

Do we address this discrepancy in the draft or in Free Agency?
or do you guys feel we are fine the way things are?

Discuss


McDonald has more potential to be a solid contributor at TE than any of our WRs do ... IMHO of course.


McDonald has been vastly inconsistent for us for the entire time he's been in SF. He has no more potential than what he has shown us. He basically is ....what he is going to be...nothing more.


Yeah. I know. It's just that I like our WRs even less.


I have to agree. McDonald might have the most potential of any of our receivers/tight ends, which just speaks to how awful Baalke was at acquiring talent at the skill positions. All things considered, he was pretty bad at running backs, too. He just lucked into Hyde.
_________________


Future Hall of Famer Frank Gore's Career Rushing List Tracker:

*Currently Ranked 8th All-Time
*Yards needed to pass #7 Eric Dickerson: 194
*Yards needed to pass #6 Jerome Bettis: 597
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 19579
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:52 pm    Post subject: Re: TE upgrade Reply with quote

y2lamanaki wrote:
big9erfan wrote:
Pandomonium wrote:
big9erfan wrote:
Pandomonium wrote:
Again these are only my opinions I'm posting just like my earlier WR post.

They are intended to spark intellectual discussions/debates on the board
that I feel are lacking:

I don't really care for ANY of our TEs

They show a flash here and there but lack any real consistency for any of them to be quality starters.

Do we address this discrepancy in the draft or in Free Agency?
or do you guys feel we are fine the way things are?

Discuss


McDonald has more potential to be a solid contributor at TE than any of our WRs do ... IMHO of course.


McDonald has been vastly inconsistent for us for the entire time he's been in SF. He has no more potential than what he has shown us. He basically is ....what he is going to be...nothing more.


Yeah. I know. It's just that I like our WRs even less.


I have to agree. McDonald might have the most potential of any of our receivers/tight ends, which just speaks to how awful Baalke was at acquiring talent at the skill positions. All things considered, he was pretty bad at running backs, too. He just lucked into Hyde.


... and honestly I'm still not sure about Hyde either. Appears to be good but not great. That would be fine if he could stay healthy and play the majority of each game over the course of a full season. That's something we have yet to see.

While your tallying up Trent's failures at the skill positions let's not forget to consider all the QBs he drafted over his time here.
_________________
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
Page 2 of 2

 
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