OT to replace Harris? LBs?

by Qbgetter13 on Apr 3, 2007 12:34 PM PDT

Many would agree that Kwame's time is about up (if not already up) and offensive tackle is a position we might want to take in the draft. Some want to see Snyder step in and play but even if that happens we need to add depth. How soon would you take an offensive tackle and who would it be? Also, Tully Banta-Cain was brought on but if we take Willis, how much playing time will Banta-Cain get. I Think Brandon Moore is our best LB after last year's performance and can play inside or out. Lawson is making too much money to not play. Who would our 4 starting LBs be?

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.

Tweet Comment 31 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Linebackers

I don't think Derek Smith is going to be a 49er for a whole longer, which opens up a spot in the middle down the road and creates a potential platoon in 2007.

If we drafted Willis, I'd assume Banta-Cain and Lawson would be your OLBs and Smith and Moore would be your ILBs initially. However, Moore can play both outside and inside, while Banta-Cain also has versatility. We could keep our linebackers fresh that first with Willis rotating around and then moving into a starting spot in 2008 and Smith (assuming he isn't cut after 2007) becomes the versatile backup.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by David Fucillo on Apr 3, 2007 12:41 PM PDT reply actions

Basically.

What Fooch says is basically the situation. Smith probably won't be around much longer, and even if he is, Nolan will start the best player on the roster. If the team drafts Willis, I'm pretty certain that Smith will begin the season on the bench, or platooning/rotating with Moore and Willis. Depth-wise, inside linebacker is packed, with Ulbrich and Navies also capable of rotating in and out to keep starters fresh.

While Moore can play both inside and outside, it seems that his ability is best utilized inside. That is where he played the majority of the second half of last season, if I'm not mistaken.

Banta-Cain and Lawson will probably start outside, at least at the beginning of the season. With Haralson and Green being the only two backup OLBs, one more player could really help this bunch. Ulbrich, Smith, or Navies could conceivably step in for a few plays at OLB, just to give Lawson or Banta-Cain a breather.

In all, if the 49ers take Willis, their LB group is solid, starters and depth. Taking an additional LB later in the draft (:cough:Quincy Black:cough:) could also be beneficial, but not extremely necessary.

The nice thing about their LB group is that Lawson, Banta-Cain, Green, Haralson, and Moore can all play DE when they go into a nickel and have the potential to provide a pass rush. So pass rushers will always be fresh with this team.

by sfgfan on Apr 3, 2007 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions

I've been an advocate...

... of this all along (in regards to Harris's replacement). As Qbgetter pointed out, many people (including myself) want Snyder to take the starting job away from Kwame. As nice as that would be, this past season should be an indicator that we cannot necessarily trust that it'll play out that way.

Snyder, in his time platooning with (and even starting in place of) players hasn't done much to prove he is better than Kwame. Nolan has given him opportunities to TAKE the starting job, but he hasn't stepped it up and done so.

With that in mind, I've seen some people suggest Aaron Sears in the second round. He's another solid, but underrated, type of player. He's probably the most polished tackle after Joe Thomas, in that he can do both run and pass block. He's got a solid base of "tools" or technique that he can surely build off of. Another bonus is, like Snyder, he can play OG or OT. If the wideouts mentioned in the main thread are gone in the second, I wouldn't mind taking Sears at all.

by sfgfan on Apr 3, 2007 2:19 PM PDT reply actions

OT and LB

Obviously, Willis is the guy I would target for a starting linebacker job. Willis, Moore, and Smith would make a great crew this year, with Smith gone after this season likely. As for LB depth, I think it's possible that Haralson could be a solid pass rush threat in time at the OLB spot. I'd love to grab a versatile LB like Zak DeOssie in the 4th round, a guy who could back up both the inside and outside positions.

Aaron Sears is likely the best choice for an offensive lineman, if he's available at pick #42 he's the guy to grab. If Sears is off the board as DraftTek suggets, I'd likely wait until the third round to pickup a lineman. With some luck Ryan Harris could be available at pick number #97, or maybe James Marten at #76.

by gatling on Apr 3, 2007 6:16 PM PDT reply actions

I agree

On DeOssie and Harris, both were in my mock. I can't see how the #42 pick will not be traded or used to get a WR. Our WR crew might be the worst in the league.

by enut21 on Apr 3, 2007 6:54 PM PDT up reply actions

WR

There are plenty of WR's available in the 3rd and 4th rounds that would be worthwhile if there isn't a suitable one available in the 2nd round.

by gatling on Apr 3, 2007 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions

hmmm

Whats the dropoff between the 1st tier WR's(Jarrett,Rice,Meachem,Bowe, etc.) and the 2nd tier guys in the 3rd and 4th rounds. Do we really want another Brandon Williams in this draft who had zero impact as a Receiver last season.

by enut21 on Apr 3, 2007 7:20 PM PDT up reply actions

WR's

Aundrae Allison, Courtney Taylor, David Clowney, Paul Williams, and Jacoby Jones are all solid options int eh 3rd and 5th rounds. Vernon Davis is going to be the #1 option in this offense, so finding a solid receiver to go with Lelie and Battle is really all we need to do right now. I certainly wouldn't give away a bunch of picks to grab a guy who will be taking a back seat to Davis in the offense over the next few years.

by gatling on Apr 3, 2007 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions

WR picks

I'll post a bigger story about this, but it's conceivable we could trade some picks but not a ton to move up in the 2nd round if a WR falls into the top of the round.

Just using the value chart for now, hypothetically we could move up to the first pick of the 2nd round for our current 2nd rounder combined with our highest 4th rounder and our 6th rounder. If one of the name receivers is there, are we really giving up all that much in that kind of deal considering the assortment of picks we have?

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by David Fucillo on Apr 3, 2007 7:51 PM PDT up reply actions

WR picks

I don't think that would be giving up much at all to move up to the start of the 2nd round, I think the need for a WR is much greater then gatling would suggest. I Don't trust any of ouur Receivers ouutside of Davis to be very productive. are you talking about #124? Because our comp. pick #135 can't be traded.

by enut21 on Apr 3, 2007 7:56 PM PDT up reply actions

Also

It's hard to see the raiders trading pick #33, ecspecially if one of the name WR is there. Drafttek has them taking Jarrett with that pick, I can definitly see that happeneing.

by enut21 on Apr 3, 2007 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions

pick

I mentioned our highest 4th rounder which can't be the comp pick since the comp picks are at the end of the round I believe.

I'm gonna wait and see how the first round plays out since that would determine what receivers might or might no be available early in the 2nd round. It's still way too early to tell who may or may not fall.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by David Fucillo on Apr 3, 2007 8:03 PM PDT up reply actions

Mock

My concern in the mock is that teams won't want to trade for picks outside of the first 3 rounds, since we're going no farther than that. It's possible we could trade up to maybe New England's second 1st rounder or maybe Baltimore's pick, but we'd be giving up our 2nd and 3rd rounders. If you can get a trade with someone who will take our 4th and 6th round picks, then by all means do it. I'm just not sure if it will happen in this mock.

by gatling on Apr 3, 2007 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions

good point

Hadn't totally thought of that one...We'll see what people say. The worst they can do is say no.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by David Fucillo on Apr 3, 2007 8:03 PM PDT up reply actions

I agree

Since the mock is 3 rounds, i don't see a lot of teams moving down without getting 2 picks in the first 3 rounds.

by enut21 on Apr 3, 2007 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions

Trade

What about trading down in the second to grab Craig Davis or Jason Hill? Houston has shown the desire to trade, and our #42 is worth 480 points. Their #56(from Denver) and #92(from Buffalo) total 472 points. Of course it depends on who is available, but adding Davis/Hill at #56, possibly James Marten at #76, Bush at #92, and Soliai at #97. We would have added a starting DE, our 3rd WR, a replacement for Harris, a backup to Gore, and a NT to put in the rotation.

by gatling on Apr 3, 2007 8:45 PM PDT up reply actions

2 WRS

Out of all those guys you named in that second teir, one might make it. I think we need a guy in the 2nd round and a guy in the 5th or 6th round. I like Laurent Robinson from Ill St. I think we need to get to the point where Jacobs cant make our roster and maybe gilmore as well.

I dont know of too many offenses where the TE is the number one option. Chargers and Chiefs are the only two and they both have sorry receivers. As gifted as Davis is, I'm not ready to put him in a class with Gates and Gonzalez. We need receivers that can do the damn job, not ones that just make a DB chase them down the field while alex smith gets sacked or harris is forced to hold.

by Qbgetter13 on Apr 3, 2007 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions

Battle

I really think Arnaz Battle is rounding into form as a very solid receiving option. Since we don't have the true #1 yet (like a Harrison, Boldin/Fitzgerald, Holt, etc...) we need a larger number of solid options.

If we can roll out Davis, Lelie and Battle and one other guy I really like our chances. No true stud yet (hopefully Davis becomes that guy) but in the meantime we're rolling out a solid corp of receivers.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by David Fucillo on Apr 3, 2007 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions

Davis

I wouldn't put him in the Gates-Gonzalez class yet either, but you don't draft a TE at #6 with the idea of him not being the centerpiece of your offense. Might be this year, might be next year or the year after that before Davis reaches that level, but that's what the goal is.

I like Laurent Robinson also, and I'd be ok with him as a second receiver selected in this year's draft. I think Paul Williams is a good risk to take in the 4th round, if he gets it together he could be special. I'm all for a wideout in Round 2 if Sears is gone and/or we don't want to go with Tyler in the second round. Craig Davis and Jason Hill are both WR's I'd be ok with, and it's possible we could drop down in the 2nd and land one of them and maybe add a 3rd round pick also.

by gatling on Apr 3, 2007 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions

Dropoff

From what I've read, many scouts and team people believe that wide receiver this year is a relatively deep group. The only problem is, it is deep in the #2/#3 type of wideouts. Outside of Calvin Johnson, the reports I read seem to find it difficult to say that any of the other wideouts will make a definate contribution (as a #1 wideout).

I know, Jarrett, Rice, Meachem, Bowe, and Hill are kind of at the top of the pot, at least from what we see in mocks and rankings. However, taking in the entire picture, I don't think they have that much more potential than any of the wideouts to be drafted later. Basically, the dropoff between those particular guys, won't be far off from guys in the 3rd/4th like Steve Smith and Paul Williams.

by sfgfan on Apr 4, 2007 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions

RE

i believe there is a bigger dropoff than you think

by Qbgetter13 on Apr 4, 2007 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions

WR analysis

This article sort of reflects what I'm saying. It was produced by the publisher of NFLDraftScout.com, and posted on USAToday.com.

Article

The scouting reports of most of the wideouts after Johnson sound pretty similar in flavor. They're a very talented bunch, differing in types of talent. Some are fast and deep threats. Some are bigger and run routes really well. They all have their strengths and weaknesses that balance out with one another. That is what makes this class of receivers interesting, as a lot of the wideouts don't seem to be screaming "pick me" over the others.

As I've previously said, there are a few players where the combinations of talents make them better choices in the first or second round. It's just that they don't sound THAT much better than the other options.

Giving up a late fourth rounder, in my opinion, would be giving up quality depth at one of the other positions. That, to me, is quite a bit to give up for someone who isn't much better than the player you have available 10 or so picks later.

With recent "whispers" on ESPN that the 49ers are shopping Smiley again (the 49ers were offered a day one pick for Smiley last season and turned it down), the team may benefit from drafting a solid backup behind Wragge and Baas. Last I heard, Smiley was asking for 5-years, $25M+, and the 49ers were looking more into the neighborhood of 5-years, $12M+. Thats a huge difference, so it's been rumored Smiley has priced himself out of the 49ers future plans, making him expendable now.

by sfgfan on Apr 4, 2007 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions

WR crew

Last time I check the SD Chargers had/have a pretty bad WR crew, Eric Parker a #1 WR? And they seem to have had a pretty good offense last year. Oh yeah, they've got that TE that catches a tons of passes. It's too bad we don't have a TE that should be catching a ton of passes, oh wait we do (Vernon Davis). My point is Davis/Battle/Lelie isn't going to be all that bad. I wouldn't mind moving up to grab someone like Rice but at our current draft positions there should be guys who should prove to be more valuable in the long run than reaching for a WR.

by methodrampage on Apr 4, 2007 7:46 AM PDT up reply actions

Atlanta

is another team that comes to mind that has had recently success with a TE as the primary receiver. Of course, they are also an example of why this kind of roster construction is difficult to have continued success with.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down... over and over...

by howtheyscored on Apr 4, 2007 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions

Atlanta

They've had success with Crumpler but they're clearly a receiver short of taking that next step. Or maybe it's a quarterback short!

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by David Fucillo on Apr 4, 2007 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions

QB SHORT

Michael Vick is horrible....the worst thing they ever did was trade schaub...they obviously want to sell jerseys more than they want to win games......all vick does is run around and hit the TE bc he cant hit a real wr route like a post or a streak.... he can throw a ball a mile but cant complete the streak....i would have quit watching football 4yrs ago if i was a falcons fan.

by Qbgetter13 on Apr 4, 2007 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions

Vick

While I like Michael Vick as a playmaker and the face of their organization, its hard for me to say that he is a good QB. I think part of the reason the Falcons are so erratic is because Vick (the leader himself) is erratic. Some games, he's spot on. Other games, not so much.

I know some Falcons fans that say the exact same thing. His wideouts get plenty open, he just has trouble hitting them in the hands/numbers.

The Falcons have picked up some decent wideouts via free agency/draft/trade in recent years (Peerless Price and Michael Jenkins, not to mention one of the better "possession" WRs in Brian Finneran). While Price wasn't/isn't one of the elite wideouts, coupled with the Falcons (usually) top 10 rushing attack, he should have been pretty productive there. Jenkins was a pretty highly regarded (6'4", 200+ lbs, with good speed and physical ability) player coming out of his draft, taken late in the first round.

Basically all I'm saying is that Vick hasn't been able to utilize his wideouts. I think Alex Smith is already a better QB (in the sense a QB makes decisions and makes smart+accurate throws) than Vick, and shouldn't have that problem. I'm not saying the 49ers, Smith, and their wideouts will surely be productive this year, but it's hard for me to believe they won't be.

The wideout corps isn't as bad as it seems. I think Lelie and Battle could be great #2's in any offense, but not quite #1's. Couple them with a unique TE that has WR speed, thats three solid receivers for Smith. Add in someone like Rice or Hill (or even Williams later in the draft) and he can have the potential of four solid wideouts. Not to mention Delanie Walker, like Vernon Davis, will cause matchup problems when he lines up on the end (as a TE) and Vernon splits wide or goes in the slot.

by sfgfan on Apr 4, 2007 8:56 AM PDT up reply actions

Chargers vs 49ers

no way do the chargers have a good WR core....i wouldnt trade them straight up: no way, no how......parker is avg......mccardell is aging but gates is a stud.....i wouldnt put davis in gate's class....davis has a lot to prove (A. can he stay healthy). Theyre also very different from eachother. Gates is a leaper. Throw the ball up and hes coming down with it. Davis is someone where you want to utilize his speed. The 49ers are hoping a LB cant keep up with him but youve rarely seen him go up and take a ball away from a defender. Not to mention that the chargers have a RB that comes to the stadium wearing a cape. Hopefully we are well on our way of have that too. Quote me on this WR draft "Sidney Rice is the second best WR in the class"

by Qbgetter13 on Apr 4, 2007 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions

Rice

He may very well be. But at the same time, someone could make that same prediction with Meachem, Smith or Hill and be completely confident in their choice as well.

I really like Rice, and I hope he falls to #42 (in order, I like Johnson, Meachem, and Rice). But if he doesn't slip that far, then there are still other options, and I wouldn't worry about "missing out" on him.

by sfgfan on Apr 4, 2007 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions

Sears vs. Rice

If both Sears and Rice are available at #42, which way do you go? I'd take Sears, since there isn't a lot of difference in the WR's in the 2nd round and the 3rd or 4th rounds.

by gatling on Apr 4, 2007 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions

Sears vs. Rice

In my mock, I had the team taking Sears. I really like his current set of abilities, as I've written on a couple of occassions. He's pretty good all-around, as he can run and pass block. He's got good size and strength as well.

I think I've previously heard from Nolan and Co. that they think some of better offensive linemen tend to be available in the middle rounds, so its really hard to say where they would go. They've also hinted at similar feelings about WR as well.

So really, I think it's really close. I wouldn't be disappointed either way, as both should pan out to be great picks. I think I may still lean toward Sears, primarily because the right side of the 49ers offensive line may go through a few changes in the coming months (Harris and Smiley may be dealt). Sears can play both OG and OT, so depending on where the 49ers need him, they can begin molding him into a starter there.

But to counter my own choice, it could be argued that the 49ers have Baas and Wragge, who have filled in nicely when they were called upon (Baas during his rookie year, and Wragge last season). Assuming the worst-case scenario (Smiley and Harris are gone), Snyder may take over at tackle and Baas/Wragge will move into the guard. The team really only needs some solid backups, which there are plenty of in the 3rd and 4th rounds (where they have a lot of picks).

Again, it's really a toss-up, but to me, I think I'm leaning toward Sears.

by sfgfan on Apr 4, 2007 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions