49ers Weekend Roundup - The Good, The Bad and The Morons
While there were not as many high dollar/high profile signings by the 49ers, the team certainly established itself on the market. I thought I'd throw out NN posts for those who weren't around this weekend, and then throw out what some of the so-called learned media had to say about the 49ers signings. Some of our old favorites (I'm talking to you Don Banks) had less than favorable things to say...some of which were downright wrong in my opinion.

Courtesy, ESPN
Justin Smith - I can certainly understand why some people think he got lucky in terms of when he hit the market and the money he got, but I still think he's a hell of a ball player that will make an immediate impact. The dollar figures for high end players is always going to be insane so you have to take it with a grain of salt. Justin Smith will bring a talented veteran presence to the defensive line and should be a great mentor for Ray McDonald, Joe Cohen and others.

Courtesy ESPN
Isaac Bruce - I haven't put together my thoughts on the Bruce signing yet, but for now I really like this as a short-term move. For those who hadn't noticed, Isaac Bruce is #3 all time in receiving yards, #6 in receptions and #13 for receiving touchdowns. And I don't think we're getting him in the "Jerry Rice as a Seahawk" phase of his career. I believe Isaac Bruce will be a quality receiving threat in 2008 for the 49ers. More importantly, he brings the veteran knowledge that will be important in the development of guys like Jason Hill and Vernon Davis. Consider him a more accomplished, more athletic and more useful Trent Dilfer!

Courtesy ESPN
Dontarrious Thomas - This may seem like an odd analogy, but Thomas seems like a less talented version of Lavar Arrington. The reason I say this is because Arrington had all the talent in the world but he could never completely harness it to become a true linebacking force. Sure he was a beast who could tear a guy's head off on a tackle but he was more like a runaway train that couldn't do the little things that make other players so great. Dontarrious Thomas sounds like a great athlete who can make plays but has to learn the nuances of the game before he can step up to the next level. Of course, this makes me THAT MUCH MORE EXCITED to see him getting coached by Mike Singletary and playing with Patrick Willis. I expect good things from Thomas.

Courtesy ESPN
J.T. O'Sullivan - When I was first writing about O'Sullivan I didn't think much of him considering he's been a career backup. And then, as mentioned in the post, I caught Matt Barrows' thoughts on him in his Sac Bee blog. Needless to say, I'm intrigued about having a third string guy competing with Shaun Hill and Alex Smith after already knowing the Mike Martz offense. I don't expect J.T. O'Sullivan to take over the starting job, but I do think he'll push Smith and Hill and will help them get a better understanding of the offense. It's a subtle signing, but a good one.

Courtesy ESPN
DeShaun Foster - Considering the situation Foster is arriving into, I think this is a fantastic signing. While I'm disappointed Thomas Clayton won't get more of a shot at real playing time (I think), this solidifies the running game for the next couple of seasons. Michael Robinson is the long term answer backing up Frank Gore, but DeShaun Foster will be a nice option when Gore needs a breather. In the past, defenses were probably a little bit happier to see Maurice Hicks or Michael Robinson on the field. Now they'll see a guy with a ton of talent and something to prove.

Courtesy ESPN
Allen Rossum - This falls into the "Whatever" category of signings. Hopefully he can make a nice little impact in the return game. While I understand letting Hicks go, I definitely will miss some of his big special teams plays. He made important stops and could set the 49ers up with solid field position on occasion when returning.
Time for my soap box moment. I know most of us have made our opinion known about Don Banks when he decides to discuss the 49ers. Well, the Don is at it again, targeting the 49ers signing of Justin Smith. There have been plenty of articles already discussing this signing but I thought I'd go with Banks' view.
Banks acknowledges Smith is a good player, but feels he is a right time, right place type of free agent, with which some of you agree. I won't fight that he definitely was in a market where his price tag was probably inflated a little bit. However, I don't think he's done his due diligence in assessing Smith's past with the history and what he brings to the table. Primarily, Banks goes back to the well repeatedly discussing how Smith does not get sacks like some of the sack artists around the league. Unfortunately, he chooses not to look at the little things Smith can do and will do going forward. Maybe he won't collect 14 or 15 sacks, but I think he and Manny Lawson will bring some serious thunder on that right side of the defensive line.
As far as the FanHouse article mentioned in the diaries? Well I find it ridiculous and a waste of time. This whole Lance Briggs tampering thing is ridiculous primarily because it consists of the Bears crying to the league about a nonexistent issue. One reason I'm even further down on the whole issue? Drew Rosenhaus represents Lance Briggs and even though most people have a certain level of disdain for Rosenhaus, the 49ers have not had many problems with him. They worked together to come up with a very nice long term deal for Frank Gore and TO didn't sign with Rosenhaus until after his relationship with the 49ers had gone to hell. So I suppose you can take that for what it's worth.
0 recs |
71 comments
Comments
Bruce
If you consider his age and the fact he's switching teams for the first time after setting all the franchise receiving records for his original team, I think it fits more into the "Jerry Rice as a Raider" phase of his career. I'd take those kind of results in a heartbeat.
by Josh from Hollywood on Mar 3, 2008 12:59 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Good so far
by montasmob69 on Mar 3, 2008 6:21 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Trading
by sfgfan on Mar 3, 2008 10:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Who you trade a 1st and a 3rd
by methodrampage on Mar 3, 2008 10:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Desean?
by Qbgetter13 on Mar 3, 2008 6:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Pace
by mrsuperdude on Mar 3, 2008 10:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
In a few words...
From what I understand, he seems to be commanding quite a bit of money for someone who's had ONE decent year. This is not to mention, all of his sacks last year (except maybe one or two) came against teams who's pass protection isn't really all that great: St. Louis (injuries decimated their OL), Washington (injuries hurt them on the outside), Detriot (2.5 from a Martz offense with a shoddy OL), Seattle, and Atlanta.
by sfgfan on Mar 3, 2008 10:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Pace
by methodrampage on Mar 3, 2008 10:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No chance in hell
by methodrampage on Mar 3, 2008 1:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Breaking news
by jfainsf49 on Mar 3, 2008 11:58 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Dang
by howtheyscored on Mar 3, 2008 12:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Just wait and see...
What if I said to you with our 29th pick, we picked DE Quentin Groves... holy shit... wow... that makes a hell of a difference for our front seven. Now were looking at vaulting past 21st overall in sacks and could be looking in the upwards of the teens or higher.
Quentin Groves is a man who is tailored made to be a 3-4 DE. Read what Scouts Inc. says about him:
-------------------------------------------------
Strengths: Explodes off the ball and can make plays in the backfield. Extends arms once locked on, shows adequate upper body strength and flashes the ability to shed blocks quickly. Shows good awareness and generally locates the ball quickly. Takes sound angles to the ball and closes down cutback lanes. Plays with a good motor, shows above-average range and makes plays in pursuit. Shows good body control in space, wraps up on contact and is a reliable open field tackler that flashes the ability to deliver the big hit. Plays with a lot of emotion and is a relentless pass rusher. Is fast enough to turn the corner and closes well. Drives legs when is able to get offensive linemen on heels and flashes the ability to collapse the pocket. Does an adequate job of getting hands up when isn't going to get to the quarterback and times jumps fairly well. Is expected to play some outside linebacker this year and is versatile.
Weaknesses: Though generally gets under blockers' pads, hasn't shown great lower body strength and can get driven back. Undersized for an NFL defensive end and there is some concern will wear down if asked to play an every-down role. Can be overaggressive and gets caught too far upfield at times. Isn't always balanced in stance and can give away line stunts. Flashes an effective spin move and has the lateral mobility to redirect inside after starting outside but relies on speed too much and hasn't developed a variety of pass rush moves at this point.
Overall: Groves was redshirted in 2003. During his first three seasons (2004-06) he's played in 40 games (15 starts) and finished with 79 total tackles, 29 tackles for loss and 23 sacks. Groves is going to struggle when teams pound the ball at him when he lines up at end. However, he is big enough to hold his own at outside linebacker in a 3-4 scheme, he excels in pursuit and he has the natural ability to develop into a productive pass rusher. A strong senior season could make him one of the top-five defensive ends to come off the board.
--------------------------------------------------
By picking Groves we gain instant depth at the line man position, and combine that with the up and coming players on the D line, like McDonald and Cohen, with Nolan's tendency to switch out most defensive players in a series, we get a very well rounded group of QB bashers.
With Justin Smith at RE, Issac at DT, Groves at LE for our front three, and our LB core from right to left, Lawson, Willis, Thomas, Moore/Banta-Cain/"who the heck ever", this front seven looks supremely fast, strong, and overwhelmingly able to put pressure on the opposing defense.
Most of you are probably thinking that it's absurd that we would pick a DE with the 29th pick in the draft, when we have such glaring needs at WR and at OG and C. But here's the thing, with the depth of WR in the draft class and the signing of Issac Bruce (who is most likely going to fill one of the top three starting roles for that position on our team), the 49ers are looking more and more likely to pick a WR in the second round.
And when it comes to the O line, well take in to account Staley's slightly disappointing performance for a first round pick last year, McCloughan's unwillingness to pay "skill positions", and the lack of good o-line depth in this year's draft, I find it hard to believe we would pick a first round o line man in this years. I wouldn't be surprised if we traded away one of our WRs and possibly a LB/CB sometime between now and the draft for a higher draft pick and/or an O-lineman. Perhaps from teams like the Raiders, Bears, Miami, Broncos, or possibly the Jets.
All I'm trying to say is that our defense might not look stellar now, but just wait and see what happens in the draft, before you start passing judgments about our 2008 season.
by StrictlyFootball on Mar 3, 2008 6:37 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Quick corrections
Tenth Paragraph, line three, end of sentence: this year's draft, I find it hard to believe we would pick a first round o line man.
Tenth Paragraph, last sentence: Perhaps from a team like the Raiders, Bears, Miami, Jets, or possibly even the Broncos.
by StrictlyFootball on Mar 3, 2008 6:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
...conflicts with this:
by marcello on Mar 3, 2008 7:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'll concede to that...
The longevity factor is hard to determine just because of so many outside variables. Illness, drugs, injury, illegal activities, and sometimes even death. But when it comes to in game play Nolan rarely keeps a defensive lineman on 4 plays in a row (speaking from a man who would sit behind this group of lineman every home game and saw how frequently Nolan interchanges them) and he has not had any big issues with injury. But back on the strength and weight aspect, strength and weight is a heck of a lot easier to increase than both technique and speed.
by StrictlyFootball on Mar 3, 2008 8:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree... but some caveats
First and foremost, Groves' body-type is REALLY not geared to being a 3-4 DE. In theory, your 3-4 DEs should weigh in a lot closer to 300 pounds than 250. His strength and quickness is extremely valuable in the pass rush, but you don't generate pass-rush at 3-4 DE.
With that said, I think Groves would be better suited at 3-4 OLB (preferably on the weak-side, where Tully Banta-Cain and Haralson are currently slated to be playing). That is where the pass rush in a 3-4 should primarily be from. This poses an serious issue, however, and that is how well (or soon) will he adjust?
It is completely possible that he'd come in and learn how to play OLB pretty well. It's also possible that he'll follow more along the lines of Manny Lawson's career path, which is fine by all means, but Lawson was/is far from an immediate pass-rush impact.
I guess all I'm basically saying is that it wouldn't be a bad pick. He could help out, and he may not. But he is most definitely not a 3-4 DE.
by sfgfan on Mar 4, 2008 9:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice article
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/04/SP9KVCRFH.DTL
by nINER REd08 on Mar 4, 2008 2:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Seriously Dude
by methodrampage on Mar 4, 2008 7:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I could be wrong...
by wader251 on Mar 4, 2008 7:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Johnson
What ever happened to Charles Rodgers and Mike Williams, I mean those were some pretty solid early 1st round WR selections.
by methodrampage on Mar 4, 2008 1:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Number Two WR
by wader251 on Mar 4, 2008 5:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm pretty sure
by methodrampage on Mar 5, 2008 8:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Johnson
by nINER REd08 on Mar 4, 2008 11:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh come on
But the way you say it, it sounds like you're excusing Johnson for having a so-so season, effectively giving yourself a point for "Good first round receivers" and then dismissing two completely legitimate first round busts for, and let me get this straight, the reasons they busted - effectively stripping two points from your opponents view.
Which is completely backward. Rogers and Williams were first round busts. They were highly scouted and highly drafted and they sucked it. You can't excuse them retroactively because of why they sucked it. They fit the bill, plain and simple, and they are very strong counter points to what you're trying to say.
Now, Johnson's injury is a good point in your favor that you bring up. Where it gets dicey is the idea that he would have had a particularly good season otherwise. He might have. He probably could have. We'll try to ignore that your best example is a once in a generation freak who came into the league miles ahead of anybody else in this or the last 10 drafts (1998, Randy Moss being the last one by my count), and we'll try to ignore the fact that even then he struggled to make a real impact on that team. We'll give him and your case the complete benefit of the doubt.
It's still 2-1 in favor of your opponents.
I mean, this isn't some weird foreign concept. First round WRs are notorious, more than any single other position in the game, completely notorious for 1) being mostly ineffective the first 1-2 years, and 2) busting at a high percentage.
by howtheyscored on Mar 4, 2008 11:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
dude
by nINER REd08 on Mar 6, 2008 1:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Uh...
No one is shooting down the 49ers' need for a WR. Value-wise, however, it'd be smarter to go with an offensive tackle in the first round at #29.
Besides, you say Joey Harrington was the reason Rogers busted, and I don't think that's completely accurate. Harrington wasn't helped either, throughout his development process. He was on his back more times than not, and that couldn't have really been conducive to his learning curve. Rogers also had injury issues and work ethic problems (things Harrington probably had no hand in). So yeah, Rogers busting probably had more to do with him and the system than it did with Harrington.
by sfgfan on Mar 6, 2008 9:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
uh-huh
"Opponents": Also applicable to "debate," which is what I assumed you were having.
We have different definitions of bust, I think. I'd say the potential for not producting goes way up with a crap QB, but good WRs will still be good WRs so I don't think the potential to bust goes anywhere. Rogers didn't produce well in part because of Harrington, but he busted on his own. As for Mike Williams, you're doing the same thing you did before, excusing him based on the reason that he was a first round bust. Yes, he'd been out of football. Yes, he was out of shape. No, neither of these things stopped him from being drafted in the first round. Scouts still saw first round talent in the guy and he sucked it when given the benefit of that doubt. He was scouted as a first round talent, he was drafted as a first round talent, and like any rookie he had warning signs for why he might not pan out. The fact that in his case those warning signs were valid does not excuse him from being counted as a proper first round bust.
As for why I might sound a little testy, it's phrases like "If you knew anything about the top wrs in this draft..." that get me that way. What need is there to say that I don't know something when I haven't demonstrated any lack of knowledge. It's insulting and it's inflammatory, so if course I'm going to be insulted and inflamed.
I do know something about the WRs in this draft, and we can get good value on the second day, especially since we have more pressing issues to account for on the first day.
by howtheyscored on Mar 6, 2008 12:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
so....
49ers on the clock video:
http://www.nfl.com/teams/sanfrancisco49ers/profile?team=SF
Draft analyst Vic Carucci:
29. San Francisco 49ers (From Indianapolis)
Devin Thomas, WR, Michigan State Thomas, who excels in run-after-catch ability, is the sort of playmaker new offensive coordinator Mike Martz needs in his mission to get the most out of his pass-happy scheme.
Wide Receiver -- The 49ers are about as devoid of talent at the wide receiver position as any team in the league. Quarterback Alex Smith, assuming he is still the starter, won't have a chance to realize his potential until the 49ers draft a franchise wide receiver. In fact, they need upgrades at both the No. 1 and No. 2 spots.
Offensive Tackle With Jonas Jennings being so injury prone, the 49ers need to add another offensive tackle to pair opposite Joe Staley.
Defensive End -- The 49ers need a young powerful defensive end who fits into a 3-4 defensive scheme to rotate with Marques Douglass and Bryant Young, assuming Young returns for another season. If he doesn't, this becomes a higher priority. Adding another guy in the middle to later rounds wouldn't be a bad idea either.
The headline on the espn 49er discussion board:
The 29th pick this year belongs to the 49ers. Look for this 5-11 team to nab a wide receiver. We want to know what you think about the 49ers' draft.
Im just sayin man, they way you talk about it, its like its a crazy idea. you also focus too much on what history says. its all about scouting the individuals in this draft and thats what our staff will be doing instead of worrying about drafting another Rashawn woods. we will get good value in the second day taking our second wr in this draft. Like Andre Caldwell or dexter Jackson.
by nINER REd08 on Mar 7, 2008 2:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This has been discussed to nauseum
by methodrampage on Mar 7, 2008 7:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's simple really.
Well, the NFL doesn't work that way. You haven't even brought up any kind of counter-argument to the primary argument we are making: the WRs this year JUST DON'T SEPARATE THEMSELVES FROM EACH OTHER. If you read scouting reports, it seems like almost every receiver slated to go between the bottom of the first through the third round are all very similar or have similar likelihoods of failing.
Why bother risking a high pick for a late first round receiver when you can probably get a third rounder that'll be pretty much JUST AS GOOD? This is especially true when there's likely to be a decent pass rusher that can play 3-4 OLB or 4-3 DE that the team could also use (remember, a pass rushing 3-4 OLB probably has a better chance of contributing immediately when compared to a WR in ANY system).
Instead of beating your point into pulp and ignoring our counter statements, why don't you look into it and think a little more? What other pressing needs are there for this team? It's been repeated over and over again here for the past few weeks: OL, OL, and pass rush.
by sfgfan on Mar 7, 2008 8:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This pretty much would have been my response.
by howtheyscored on Mar 7, 2008 10:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i LIKEd mINE MORe bETTER
by methodrampage on Mar 7, 2008 1:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yours came in a very close second.
by howtheyscored on Mar 7, 2008 2:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
lol
"If Royal were snagged in the third or fourth round as the scouts are projecting, I'd certainly have no problem with that. Of course does that mean you skip out on the higher tier of receivers in the first two rounds and roll the dice that a guy like Eddie Royal is there later in the draft? Of course a speedy guy without good route-running abilities sounds an awful lot like Ashley Lelie. Maybe Mike Martz can work with him. Personally, I'd rather grab a receiver with one of the first two picks and stock up on depth elsewhere later in the draft."
"What other pressing needs are there for this team? It's been repeated over and over again here for the past few weeks: OL, OL, and pass rush"
That is simply incorrect. We have a group of young talented O-lineman, we could use a little more depth,yes but no its not urgent enough for a must take in the first round. We went that direction last year, giving away our first rounder this year for him. As far as pass rush? Like I said before, we've made moves already to improve the pass rush in free agency, plus come on man, have a little confidence in our young guys. There's definitely a lot of talent there.
by nINER REd08 on Mar 8, 2008 5:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
welll
The pass rush is still a very big hole in the defense. You're telling me that you have that much faith in Banta-Cain, Haralson, and Green to produce sacks? That's very good for you, but I don't feel the same comfort.
The offensive line may be young, but there is one player on the line that can definitely be replaced (with a first rounder). Jennings, while he isn't THAT old, is made of glass and may not play in all the games again this season. Drafting a tackle in the first round that could instantly take his spot in the starting lineup could work wonders for this year and beyond (having Staley and whomever manning the tackles for the next decade).
Another slight correction: people misconstrue the Staley trade from last year by saying the team gave up a first rounder from this year for it. If you look at the trade directly, that's what it is, but you can't do that. The 49ers TRADED DOWN this year to get him last year (because they still have a first rounder).
by sfgfan on Mar 11, 2008 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Johnson
The fact of the matter is there are MORE busts at WR than any other position. The Niners also have a horrible track record drafting WRs less TO is '96(?). With where the team is at right now I'd rather take an OT, like Sam Baker, rather than gamble on a WR in the first round.
by methodrampage on Mar 5, 2008 8:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
WR is a concern,,,
by StrictlyFootball on Mar 4, 2008 1:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Concern? Yes
by sfgfan on Mar 4, 2008 2:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously?
I don't know if you read the comment that I replied to or not or if you can follow comprehend the flow of a conversation or not but let me reiterate what was being discussed (emphasis mine).
Odds are a rookie WR isn't going to be a #1 WR in his rookie year. Don't believe me look up some stats.
For first rounders how'd Ginn Jr., Meachem, or Davis do last year? So you've got 4 of 7 first rounders that played at least decent (I'm going to consider 500+ yards recieving as an arbitrary measure of decency) and 3 that were pretty crappy. That's 1 player above .500.
How about second rounders? Jarret, Rice, and Smith were all below 500 yards.
Third rounders? Jones, Figurs, Robinson, Hill, Walker (I know he was hurt), Williams, and Higgins all fell below the decency threshold only James Jones rose above it.
Typically it takes a WR 3 years to "mature", develop, whatever you want to call it. Don't believe look up some stats. Start with Braylon Edwards; [32 rec. 512 yds. 3 TD] followed by [61 rec. 884 yds. 6 TD] followed by [80 rec. 1289 yds. 16 TD]. Edwards is you're best case scenario.
As for Niners and their ball control offense I'd rather seem them shore up the OL, which is an ifinately safer pick, than gamble on a WR. But that's just me.
by methodrampage on Mar 4, 2008 4:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
On a WR...
I think if we get "another" third round WR, he'll languish in obscurity till he becomes like Brandon Williams. That's why I believe a second or first round WR would force Nolan to give whoever we draft some playing time.
by StrictlyFootball on Mar 4, 2008 7:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Totally agree
by nINER REd08 on Mar 4, 2008 11:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Basically...
Basides, isn't that what Mike Martz is good at? Finding obscure/unconventional guys and turning them into decent NFL receivers (production-wise)?
by sfgfan on Mar 5, 2008 9:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
On the other hand
by howtheyscored on Mar 4, 2008 11:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is very true.
by sfgfan on Mar 5, 2008 9:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nolan
Nolan is a defensive head coach, so of course he's going to differ offensive decisions to the guys who probably understand it better than him. This is (even more) completely understandable if the guy he is differing judgment to is a guy who is well-respected and well-regarded by a lot of people in the league.
Would I like to see the younger guys get a chance? Sure I would, but I wouldn't play a guy who has trouble getting his head in the game (Lelie) over a guy who isn't really much of a slouch and actually works hard (Battle).
by sfgfan on Mar 5, 2008 9:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I do this in the friendliest way possible
by howtheyscored on Mar 5, 2008 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Please be right...
God it would be nice to wear a 49ers WR jersey to a game again, I don't think my Rice one will hold out much longer.
by StrictlyFootball on Mar 5, 2008 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
re
I'm pretty neutral between drafting OL and WR in the first round, but I think this is an argument FOR drafting a WR. You can't always be drafting for the short term and giving up upside -- you have to draft upside sometimes.
I think the Niners should just keep an open mind about it and trust their draft board. Both are significant needs and both are worthy of spending our first round pick on (ie. premium positions: WR and OT).
by sardonic on Mar 11, 2008 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good point.
While they are of equal need, where is the talent pool in this particular draft at? There really aren't any (obvious) #1 WRs in this draft, as a lot of blurbs and/or reports I've seen say that most of the receivers will develop into solid #2's if all goes well. The 49ers have plenty of #2's. Tackles, on the other hand, are fairly deep in potential starters, and the 49ers could sure use a starter at RT this year (or next).
by sfgfan on Mar 11, 2008 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Crap shoot.
With that said, what WRs are worth taking in the late first round this year anyway? It seems to me that after the first couple of guys (which are iffy in themselves), you could take a WR anywhere between the middle of the first and the top of the 4th and likely end up with the same "quality" WR. Does anyone else share this opinion?
by sfgfan on Mar 4, 2008 9:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
J.J Stokes/ Rashaun woods
by bayboy on Mar 4, 2008 2:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I had such high hopes for Rashaun Woods, too.
by howtheyscored on Mar 4, 2008 2:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No
If you want Bruce to be our second WR, we'll just have to deal with Jackson as our #1 again. if you want to hope a young guy will take the job, the chances are MUCH MUCH better that young guy will be Jason Hill than anybody we draft no matter who it is.
by howtheyscored on Mar 4, 2008 10:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ann Killion and Gwen Knapp are...
by sfgfan on Mar 4, 2008 10:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, as SF Chron female sportswriters go
by howtheyscored on Mar 4, 2008 11:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oops
by howtheyscored on Mar 4, 2008 11:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well
by nINER REd08 on Mar 4, 2008 10:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Language
Jason Hill is a very well built receiver for his height. A WR that is 200+ lbs with a 6 foot frame is built really well, and he has speed to boot! There are plenty of 6'2" or taller WRs that get drafted and suck because most of them are clunky and slow and can't create separation if their life dependent on it (see: Williams, Mike or Jarrett, Dwayne).
Suppose Torry Holt and Charles Rogers came out int he same year. I suppose you would have just taken Rogers over Holt because of the size, and then reaped the "benefits" of his size.
Six foot tall is a very respectable size for a WR. As long as he knows how to separate and work hard.
by sfgfan on Mar 5, 2008 9:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If going by measurables...
by StrictlyFootball on Mar 5, 2008 1:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Case in point - Jacksonville WR
by methodrampage on Mar 5, 2008 2:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Like how Dwayne Jarrett dominated last year?
by methodrampage on Mar 5, 2008 9:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or how about Chad Jackson or Travis Wilson
by methodrampage on Mar 5, 2008 10:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Add Derek Hagan & Maurice Stovall to that list
by methodrampage on Mar 5, 2008 10:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I could keep going...
by methodrampage on Mar 5, 2008 2:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It takes one...
by StrictlyFootball on Mar 5, 2008 2:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously
"It just takes one player in a position like WR to take a team to new levels."
Ahh, no. It takes a hell of a lot more than one WR to take a team to the next level.
by methodrampage on Mar 6, 2008 7:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A closer look at Smith's contract...
That's always a good sign, as the 49ers can cut bait with minimal impact if Smith starts to age at the end of his deal.
by sfgfan on Mar 4, 2008 1:42 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 





















