You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 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

2017 Draft Thread 2 Pro days & rumors!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 58, 59, 60 ... 98, 99, 100  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 19733
Location: El Dorado Hills
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For anyone still not wanting Thomas at 2 ... then who?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
John232


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 13383
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:
For anyone still not wanting Thomas at 2 ... then who?


Assuming we're not trading?

From what little of i've seen of the below discussed players....:



I'd be going Corey Davis or Mike Williams. irony being is that Davis could very well drop to late first. Regardless, both guys are very good receiver prospects, maybe not a CJ or Larry Fitz, but they both come off as very low floor, with a pretty nice ceiling. I think Dez Bryant is appropriate for Mike Williams and Corey Davis being compared to Jordy Nelson, both of whom are huge talents.



But outside of those two? I'm pretty firmly in the Malik Hooker, Foster or Jamal Adams. Out of those three, I'd probably lean Jamal Adams. Hooker seems the rangier deep cover guy, but Adams skill set is realllly nice. And frankly, I don't see Reid transitioning and I'm not holding out hope for Tartt, at least not as a SS. Ward can still fit in at CB, or if really needed, FS. Not only that, Reid is probably still relatively tradeable too. (If we were insistent on moving Ward to FS). But if we did go Hooker, I really wouldn't complain either. Can't go wrong with either.

Foster I like, but his size is a bit worrisome. But moreso the fact that we signed Malcolm Smith, which I presume took Fosters opening (assuming Bowman is back and healthy, which is a big if).


The MOST intriguing person though is OJ Howard. Outside of Garrett, he is probably the guy most likely to be a perennial pro-bowler for his position. He's an absolute freak and having him, Regardless of McBrickles new contract would be a huge addition to the offense.

Fournette just doesn't do it for me, Allen injury scares me and this draft is way too deep at corner for us to be investing the #2 pick into one.
_________________

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


Joined: 06 Sep 2014
Posts: 1618
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 2:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:
For anyone still not wanting Thomas at 2 ... then who?


I want Thomas, but if not him it's got to be Hooker. I just can't get behind taking a WR @2 that isn't Megatron level talent, and no one else really stands out to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fureys49ers


Joined: 31 Mar 2015
Posts: 962
Location: Sacramento, CA
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am a Thomas fan but if not him than I'd have to go with one of the safeties. Both Adams and Hooker in my mind have the skillset to become pro bowlers. Each have their own brand of football and excel in different areas but their effectiveness in what they do can't be argued. I've been placing a lot of emphasis on the DL and getting that aired up, and I still want to more than anything, but when I think about what really drives the Seahawks defense and allows them to be as effective as they are is the play from the safeties. Without Thomas or Chancelllor that defense just isn't the same. May be a little bit too obvious but I have to think Lynch not only knows this but agrees with it whole heartedly being the type of impact he brought to the teams he played on. Another "might be obvious" point I have is Kyle's ego, this dude has had success with various types of talent at almost every position. I really feel like he thinks he can put together an efficient offense with anyone, give him a defense that can keep him in games and I truly feel that he feels he can go win his team that game. Reason I say this is because while taking a WR might be tempting I doubt Shanahan is begging for a reach at #2 and wanting, regardless of what's available, an offensive weapon. He seems the type of guy who would walk into the war room, say "give me picks in the middle rounds to get guys I like and the rest can go to making a defense that will be able to give me a shot to win." May be a stretch, might not be far off, but if I'm putting money on it I know how I'd bet. Not saying he doesn't want top talent on his offense at his command, just saying I'm not sure if he things it's all that necessary for him.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 19733
Location: El Dorado Hills
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fureys49ers wrote:
I am a Thomas fan but if not him than I'd have to go with one of the safeties. Both Adams and Hooker in my mind have the skillset to become pro bowlers. Each have their own brand of football and excel in different areas but their effectiveness in what they do can't be argued. I've been placing a lot of emphasis on the DL and getting that aired up, and I still want to more than anything, but when I think about what really drives the Seahawks defense and allows them to be as effective as they are is the play from the safeties. Without Thomas or Chancelllor that defense just isn't the same. May be a little bit too obvious but I have to think Lynch not only knows this but agrees with it whole heartedly being the type of impact he brought to the teams he played on. Another "might be obvious" point I have is Kyle's ego, this dude has had success with various types of talent at almost every position. I really feel like he thinks he can put together an efficient offense with anyone, give him a defense that can keep him in games and I truly feel that he feels he can go win his team that game. Reason I say this is because while taking a WR might be tempting I doubt Shanahan is begging for a reach at #2 and wanting, regardless of what's available, an offensive weapon. He seems the type of guy who would walk into the war room, say "give me picks in the middle rounds to get guys I like and the rest can go to making a defense that will be able to give me a shot to win." May be a stretch, might not be far off, but if I'm putting money on it I know how I'd bet. Not saying he doesn't want top talent on his offense at his command, just saying I'm not sure if he things it's all that necessary for him.


I hadn't considered the impact of Lynch being a former safety. Maybe if it comes down to a tossup between a couple of guys and one is a safety he leans in that direction.

We can't count on getting Cousins next year or any QB that's better than this year's best QBs. I still think they're trying to figure out a way to get one of them. They've clearly put place holder guys in place. So obviously they've got something in mind for the long range answer. Man if only we could trade back.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 17055
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:
Fureys49ers wrote:
I am a Thomas fan but if not him than I'd have to go with one of the safeties. Both Adams and Hooker in my mind have the skillset to become pro bowlers. Each have their own brand of football and excel in different areas but their effectiveness in what they do can't be argued. I've been placing a lot of emphasis on the DL and getting that aired up, and I still want to more than anything, but when I think about what really drives the Seahawks defense and allows them to be as effective as they are is the play from the safeties. Without Thomas or Chancelllor that defense just isn't the same. May be a little bit too obvious but I have to think Lynch not only knows this but agrees with it whole heartedly being the type of impact he brought to the teams he played on. Another "might be obvious" point I have is Kyle's ego, this dude has had success with various types of talent at almost every position. I really feel like he thinks he can put together an efficient offense with anyone, give him a defense that can keep him in games and I truly feel that he feels he can go win his team that game. Reason I say this is because while taking a WR might be tempting I doubt Shanahan is begging for a reach at #2 and wanting, regardless of what's available, an offensive weapon. He seems the type of guy who would walk into the war room, say "give me picks in the middle rounds to get guys I like and the rest can go to making a defense that will be able to give me a shot to win." May be a stretch, might not be far off, but if I'm putting money on it I know how I'd bet. Not saying he doesn't want top talent on his offense at his command, just saying I'm not sure if he things it's all that necessary for him.


I hadn't considered the impact of Lynch being a former safety. Maybe if it comes down to a tossup between a couple of guys and one is a safety he leans in that direction.

We can't count on getting Cousins next year or any QB that's better than this year's best QBs. I still think they're trying to figure out a way to get one of them. They've clearly put place holder guys in place. So obviously they've got something in mind for the long range answer. Man if only we could trade back.



Then again, he himself was a third round safety. Maybe he thinks hall of fame safeties don't have to be drafted early on. Wink
_________________


RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking

1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
oldman9er


Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 43427
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Feels weird to be thinking S st #2. I don't believe that one safety has been selected top 3 for over 30 years (or ever?) in League history... and these options don't seem special enough to do so now.

I hope they :

1. trade back, or combine #2 in some clever trade for a QB... or
2. select Thomas, or
3. select Trubs
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 19733
Location: El Dorado Hills
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rudyZ wrote:
big9erfan wrote:
Fureys49ers wrote:
I am a Thomas fan but if not him than I'd have to go with one of the safeties. Both Adams and Hooker in my mind have the skillset to become pro bowlers. Each have their own brand of football and excel in different areas but their effectiveness in what they do can't be argued. I've been placing a lot of emphasis on the DL and getting that aired up, and I still want to more than anything, but when I think about what really drives the Seahawks defense and allows them to be as effective as they are is the play from the safeties. Without Thomas or Chancelllor that defense just isn't the same. May be a little bit too obvious but I have to think Lynch not only knows this but agrees with it whole heartedly being the type of impact he brought to the teams he played on. Another "might be obvious" point I have is Kyle's ego, this dude has had success with various types of talent at almost every position. I really feel like he thinks he can put together an efficient offense with anyone, give him a defense that can keep him in games and I truly feel that he feels he can go win his team that game. Reason I say this is because while taking a WR might be tempting I doubt Shanahan is begging for a reach at #2 and wanting, regardless of what's available, an offensive weapon. He seems the type of guy who would walk into the war room, say "give me picks in the middle rounds to get guys I like and the rest can go to making a defense that will be able to give me a shot to win." May be a stretch, might not be far off, but if I'm putting money on it I know how I'd bet. Not saying he doesn't want top talent on his offense at his command, just saying I'm not sure if he things it's all that necessary for him.


I hadn't considered the impact of Lynch being a former safety. Maybe if it comes down to a tossup between a couple of guys and one is a safety he leans in that direction.

We can't count on getting Cousins next year or any QB that's better than this year's best QBs. I still think they're trying to figure out a way to get one of them. They've clearly put place holder guys in place. So obviously they've got something in mind for the long range answer. Man if only we could trade back.



Then again, he himself was a third round safety. Maybe he thinks hall of fame safeties don't have to be drafted early on. Wink


I guess that's the other side of the coin
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 19733
Location: El Dorado Hills
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oldman9er wrote:
Feels weird to be thinking S st #2. I don't believe that one safety has been selected top 3 for over 30 years (or ever?) in League history... and these options don't seem special enough to do so now.

I hope they :

1. trade back, or combine #2 in some clever trade for a QB... or
2. select Thomas, or
3. select Trubs


Interesting as I think these are probably my three preference. I know Trubs isn't as near as high a prospect as we've seen in other years, but I'd rather take a shot at him than use the number 2 pick on a safety or ILB or TE. QBs are just that important! As long as we don't have one we'll struggle every year. There's no time like the present to begin to start our search for one. I think Thomas can be a defensive difference maker so I'm good with him at two. My preference, by a long shot, has always been to trade down.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 17055
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
Feels weird to be thinking S st #2. I don't believe that one safety has been selected top 3 for over 30 years (or ever?) in League history... and these options don't seem special enough to do so now.

I hope they :

1. trade back, or combine #2 in some clever trade for a QB... or
2. select Thomas, or
3. select Trubs


Interesting as I think these are probably my three preference. I know Trubs isn't as near as high a prospect as we've seen in other years, but I'd rather take a shot at him than use the number 2 pick on a safety or ILB or TE. QBs are just that important! As long as we don't have one we'll struggle every year. There's no time like the present to begin to start our search for one. I think Thomas can be a defensive difference maker so I'm good with him at two. My preference, by a long shot, has always been to trade down.



From a talent evaluation perspective, it would be underwhelming to pick a QB at #2, but it would come with Kylo signing off on him, so I'd get on board. I could see it happening, because this draft is Myles Garrett, and then everyone else. #2 could literally be anybody.

Personally, it's trade down. Lots of people look at trade value charts and try to get fair value. I throw the chart out the window. I'm okay with getting less than what the chart says, because let's be honest, #2 this year is worth just about as much as #8. We'll get pretty much the same level of talent at either spot. What if we get only a third rounder to drop down 6 spots? Personally, I don't care. I'd take it. Because I'll probably end up taking the same guy, or one of a bunch of guys I would have taken at #2, and I'd get a third rounder on top of it. Obviously, I wouldn't take the first offer. I would take the best offer I get once we're on the clock. People are so stuck up on the idea of getting the exact value that they should in trades. The truth is, trades probably don't happen if both teams think they get equal value. Trades usually happen when one or both teams think they're getting the better of the deal. A team giving us just a third rounder to move up would say "Suckers! I moved up to #2 with only a third rounder!?", while we'd say "Ha! Sucker! I would have taken the same guy at #2 anyway, and I get your third!"

But, this is John Lynch's first offseason... who knows how he'll do..
_________________


RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking

1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Knowledge


Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 1323
PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You guys already know im on the Fournette wagon. Best player in the draft besides Garrett. Once every decade type talent. Adrian Peterson type talent. You just dont find players at his size with the speed he has. Someone that impacts the team right away. Obviously I'd rather trade back and snag him but im fine at #2. I know RB isnt a huge need and the draft is deep but I'm just not in love with any of these other prospects slated to go #2. I'd probably rather take a chance on one of the QBs at #2 if its not Fournette
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 13979
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Knowledge wrote:
You guys already know im on the Fournette wagon. Best player in the draft besides Garrett. Once every decade type talent. Adrian Peterson type talent. You just dont find players at his size with the speed he has. Someone that impacts the team right away. Obviously I'd rather trade back and snag him but im fine at #2. I know RB isnt a huge need and the draft is deep but I'm just not in love with any of these other prospects slated to go #2. I'd probably rather take a chance on one of the QBs at #2 if its not Fournette


There is a lot in this post I agree with. I think Fournette is the best RB prospect since Peterson and do think he is that literal once in a decade type talent (Peterson drafted 10 years ago). I also have him as the 3rd best prospect in this draft (behind Allen, who I expect to have a Warren Sapp-like career). I wouldn't hate the pick of Fournette at #2 either.

However, I personally would never want to draft a RB at #2 due to their short shelf life, lack of positional importance, and the ability at just about every turn to find a slightly lesser, but still great player anywhere in the draft. Last year is the perfect example. Cowboys felt the need to select Ezekiel Elliot #4 overall over Jalen Ramsey, but now they need DBs in a bad way and if you put Jordan Howard on that team (whom they could have picked up 3 full rounds later), there'd be virtually no difference in the performance between the two players.

Couple that with the fact that Carlos Hyde, even with my doubts about him, is currently our best offensive skill position player, and a top 10 player on the roster, and that means there are a number of other ways I'd rather go. If we were in the Dallas situation of last year where we needed a HB and we were top 4 based on flukes rather than talent-level, than I'd give Fournette a lot more consideration.
_________________


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
oldman9er


Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 43427
PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, I can be an LSU homer at times... and I do like Fournette as first rd talent. I would not hate the pick either, but I would rather not go to him for #2. I actually like Derrius Guice a bit more. Hyde is a good back in his own right.

Guess the bottom line for me is.. there will be a QB or EDGE guy available that will offer more positional value.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 13979
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:
For anyone still not wanting Thomas at 2 ... then who?


I don't know if you included me in this group or not (I don't know who else would be), but just to clarify - I'm not against drafting Thomas at #2. I was against QBs both last year and this year, but Thomas isn't in that category of players I don't want, just one that's not my preference. My draft preferences:

1) Trade #2 as part of a deal to get our QB (likely Cousins). I'd prefer the swap of firsts rather than the outright trade.

2) Trade back in the draft to pick up a slightly lesser player, but also extra draft capital needed in a complete rebuild. Plus get a player at a position that's far more needed.

3) Draft Jonathan Allen, Malik Hooker, or Solomon Thomas at #2. These guys are #2, #3, and #4 on my Big Board respectively, but all come with the caveat that I see them playing at positions with talented starters already in place, sort of curbing that impact somewhat.


So, staying at #2 - I'm only happy with one of those 3 guys (or Garrett if the unthinkable happens), and I don't see a large difference between them. This is like last year where Buckner was my #3 guy, but at our slot the #1 and #2 guys were both available. Was still absolutely thrilled with the pick.

Alternatively, picking up Jonathan Allen or Solomon Thomas and then trading Armstead for extra picks could accomplish the same thing as the trade back scenario if someone wanted to make that trade for Armstead. But I see no way to get Allen/Thomas, Buckner, and Armstead on the field at the same time regularly, and that really limits the effect of our 1st round pick.
_________________


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
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 19458
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We know my take on our draft position - I'm not touching a quarterback in in this draft at #2.

Other than that...I'm pretty open to whoever they choose. I mean, I'm not huge on Fournette at #2, but I would get it . Same for Hooker, Adams, Allen, etc. So long as we don't touch a quarterback.

Often, I do care about positional value, but given that we have needs just about everywhere, there is absolutely no need not to take the best player available rather than reaching for the quarterback, especially one I view as a third round prospect. I'll take a potential all pro at safety in Adams and Hooker over throwing a dart at a dartboard with the quarterback, particularly since there is no reason that we need to draft one this high at the current point in time.

Preference would certainly be to trade back, and like Rudy, I'm perfectly happy with not getting the "value" back for this pick. Move down, take a Foster / Barnett / Davis / Williams / etc, etc.
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 58, 59, 60 ... 98, 99, 100  Next
Page 59 of 100

 
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