2009 Roster Projections: Tight End/Special teams wrap up

by Fooch on Jun 22, 2009 8:00 AM PDT in News Comment 23 comments

I realize we've had a lot of discussion about the tight ends lately. We've compared Bear and the Duke. We've discussed the fashion interests of Vernon Davis. Before we get into my first 53-man roster projection, we might as well wrap up the tight end discussion today....or at least enough for our purposes at this point. In case you missed them, we've already addressed linebacker, safeties, wide receivers, cornerbacks, offensive line, running backs, defensive line, and quarterbacks.

Also, as a heads-up, Samuel Lam put together a 49ers positional battle piece on the tight end position if you want to check that out.

Locks
Vernon Davis, Delanie Walker, Bear Pascoe

Slim/No Chance
Joe Jon Finley

I was ready to have a bubble watch between JJ Finley and Bear Pascoe, but let's be honest...how many people actually think someone other than Bear Pascoe gets that third tight end spot? The team won't be keeping 4 tight ends, so there you have it.

A lot of our discussion has centered on Vernon Davis and Bear Pascoe. That would seem to make sense given that Davis is the #1 guy and Pascoe is the new toy. Throughout all this though, Delanie Walker has been ignored for the most part. Walker was a wide receiver converted into a tight end and often times, he reminds me of Thomas Clayton. He's a guy who excels in the preseason but has not been able to do much of anything once the season gets going. Sure, he's a decent kick returner, but it's not much to write home about. He's certainly seen more regular season action than Clayton, but it still has me curious.

I was going back through the 49er's draft history and I noticed something interesting. Just like Bear Pascoe, Delanie Walker was a 6th round draft choice. In my mind, any production from late round picks is a bonus and not expected. So it sort of becomes a comparison between Walker and Pascoe. Pascoe appears to be here to fill the Bajema role, but with some solid hands to boot. Walker on the other hand is supposed to be a great receiving tight end and special teams player, but not much of a blocker.

Given the ability to carry three tight ends, it seems like any shortcomings can be overcome. And yet, I still wonder which one will excel? Or maybe both will? I doubt the latter, but crazier things have happened. There's been a lot of discussion about how Vernon Davis will see more passes his way this season in a tradiitonal tight end role. The question becomes who will step up more behind Davis: Walker or Pascoe?

0 recs | Comment 23 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The difference

between Delanie Walker and Thomas Clayton is HUGE. Delanie has produced when he has a chance to play. He has caught 33 passes for 359 yards since being here and has made his mark on special teams.

Clayton has done NOTHING since high school. He is the ultimate underachiever. Just over 1000 yards in four years of college. Only 330 yards his senior season in which he was Kansas State’s 3rd string RB. If it wasn’t for the fact that the guy looks like Tarzan, nobody would be interested. In fact, none of the other 32 teams have been interested in him the past two years or they could have taken him off the practice squad for a cup of coffee. The guy has no place on this team.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Jun 22, 2009 8:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

comparison

I’m just trying to point out how some folks have high expectations for both of them primarily due to preseason performances. Walker has definitely made contributions, but the expectations for him come from great preseason performances.

by Fooch on Jun 22, 2009 8:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This isn't totally fair.

Walker AND Clayton have both shown good during the preseason. The difference between the two, at least in most eyes, is that Walker was actually rewarded for those performances. Many 49ers fans who are fans of Clayton feel he’s been slighted all these years. Also, college production is pretty irrelevant once you’re a few years into the league, I think.

I’m not saying that I think Clayton should make the roster or anything. I just thought it was a little unfair to say “Delanie has produced when he has a chance to play” as one of the “differences” between Clayton and Walker.

by sfgfan on Jun 22, 2009 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The point is

that Clayton has NEVER produced. Not in four years of college and not in two years in the pros. You have to be kidding by saying that Clayton’s been slighted all these years. The last six years he has sucked. If he was any good at all, one of the 31 other NFL teams could have just taken him off the practice squad. If he was any good at all he would have been used by Singletary. The kid looks good but doesn’t have it. He has mediocre hands, is not a good blocker, and runs a 4.63 40. The only back on the Niners who is slower is Moran Norris. Just what miracle do you expect from him. College production is usually a pretty good indicator and the fact that Clayton gained only 330 yards in his senior season as the 3rd string RB at Kansas State speaks volumes.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Jun 22, 2009 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Again.

I’m not saying Clayton should make the roster or anything. If anything, I’m probably one of the first people around here to believe he wouldn’t make the roster. Heck, I’m probably one of the first people around here to believe that Michael Robinson would make the roster over him.

I’m not going to get into it much more than I’ve already mentioned. You still say he hasn’t produced in each of the last two years. This is somewhat true. The guy lead the team in rushing yards in each of the last two preseasons. I know that exhibition games mean very little, but in a league where players are rewarded for good exhibition seasons, Clayton has failed to receive any such reward.

The Clayton defenders (not me) aren’t necessarily calling him a great running back or anything like that. People just want to see the guy get a chance after he’s kind of earned it in each of the last two preseasons.

If you need me to clarify my stance some (because you don’t remember or just don’t want to look back), I don’t feel like he’s as talented as Gore or Coffee, that’s for sure. I don’t feel like he’s as useful as Robinson as a bottom of the depth chart back up, as I believe a third or fourth string HB should be able to contribute on special teams. And I think Sheets has quite a bit more potential, and is a tad younger. Basically, I just don’t think Clayton fits with the 49ers. That, however, doesn’t preclude me from understanding how other fans feel about him.

by sfgfan on Jun 22, 2009 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Practice Squad..

I checked out Clayton on the 49ers web page and came up with this. Not much to look at in terms of production. So.. Can anybody tell me why this guy has spent virtually his entire pro-career on the PRACTICE SQUAD..?.

2008 Season (updated weekly):
• Originally drafted in the 6th round by the 49ers in 2007. Spent all of 2007 and the first 14 weeks of the 2008 season on the practice squad as a scout-team running back.
• Signed from the practice squad to the 53-man roster (12-14) due to an ankle injury to starting RB Frank Gore. He dressed for the game but did not play.
• Inactive at St. Louis (12-21) and vs. Washington (12-28).

There must be some talent there some where otherwise he would be gone and pumping gas in Lodi. Are they squirling him away on PS just in case “..in case of emergengy brake glass and let the beast lose…” I don’t know but somthing is wrong here..

by WC-Ninerhead on Jun 22, 2009 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Practice squad

The 49ers keep him on the practice squad because (1) he’s shown he MAY be a capable backup running back in the preseason, (2) he already knows the system (which is a requirement in emergency situations).

by sfgfan on Jun 23, 2009 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

(3) The defense has to beat up on somebody in practice

I guess the better the pratice squad players are the more productive pratices can be.

Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.

by methodrampage on Jun 23, 2009 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

good point

I’m sure they’d love to have another Coffee on the team in exchange for Thomas Clayton.

I take full responsibility for my irresponsibility.

by these3words on Jun 22, 2009 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It all depends

on what role the TE plays in Jimmy Raye’s O. If we go Run ‘em up, Bang ’em up— I don’t see much involvement other than blocking and drop offs for the TE. I’m curious to see the Bear in action (that sounds bad), but I sure wish we kept Bajema— A line up of Billy, JoeJon and the Bear sounds like were ready for a Rumble!

by FiveAlarmFreddy on Jun 22, 2009 10:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Who will contribute more? Gotta be the Bear.

Because he appears to be a better blocker than Walker. At the very least he can be an effective replacement in VD’s blocking assignments if Raye should choose to line up VD in the slot or the backfield. And in 2TE sets, he could be used as an outlet or secondary receiver while remaining an effective blocker.

Walker appears to be a good receiver, but the 9ers haven’t been using their TEs for much besides blocking the last several years. I don’t know where he fits in at this point. Kind of like M. Robinson. I hope Raye does a better job of utilizing these guys than the OCs under Nolan did. The real question might be whether Walker steps in for VD if VD fails as a receiver. Isn’t VDs contract up next year?

by MontanaPass on Jun 22, 2009 11:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Singletary tipped his hand with

Michael Robinson by throwing to him often the second half of the season (17 receptions for 201 yards). During OTAs, Robinson had several good receptions including a 50-yarder from Hill. Raye likes Robinson. In fact, Raye said that guys who can play 3 or 4 positions including special teams can expect to be playing on Sunday. Raye and Robinson have a lot in common.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/171207-a-tale-of-two-quarterbacks

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Jun 22, 2009 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Raye said that guys who can play 3 or 4 positions

Well, no [site decorum]. If one of those positions is kick coverage, you’re of course going ot get into the game on Sunday.

by sfgfan on Jun 22, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well....

Yup, I guess you do actually have to kick off at least once in the game.

Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.

by methodrampage on Jun 22, 2009 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Raye was referring

to guys who will make the roster and therefore be able to play on Sunday. Do you think he would keep a one-dimensional guy like Clayton over someone like Robinson who plays several positions including special teams? No chance.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Jun 23, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have...

… little doubt that Robinson will make the roster. I was just pointing out Raye’s comment as pointing out the obvious as if it’s actually saying something.

by sfgfan on Jun 23, 2009 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Can we trade VD?

by FanBelge on Jun 22, 2009 11:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

No.

by Brendan Scolari on Jul 21, 2009 4:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It seems like Bear has an edge on offense

If you line up two TEs (Davis and Pascoe), and both are capable of blocking and receiving, it becomes much less predictable for the defense as to what plays are going to be run.
In all these threads, I never see any mention of Walker’s blocking prowess or lack thereof.
What type of a blocker at the Line of Scrimmage is he?

They're called RUNS for a reason.

by connie mack on Jun 22, 2009 12:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

He's very poor

I don’t think he has the strength to be a good blocker (hence the reason why he used to be a wide receiver).

by Brendan Scolari on Jul 21, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

49ers draft history

In reviewing Scot McCloughan’s draft history and the draft history of the last 25 years, he actually compares evan better than Bill Walsh if you can believe that. There are more of his selection still on the team or still in the NFL. I am very surprised and I have to tip my hat to Scot. I have judged him unfairly perhaps because of the draft of Alex Smith with the first selection of the 2005 draft.
I have been a 49er fan since 1958 so I have seen the good,bad and ugly.
I would like to see what other 49er fans thoughts about this very fact. Any one?

Mike McClaskey (mikemccwolf @hotmail.com)

by mikemccwolf on Jun 22, 2009 8:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

As to quantity . . .

maybe. As to quality . . . no chance.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Jun 22, 2009 8:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

What??

McCloughan has recently been compared to Matt Millen in terms of drafting (somewhere, I’d have to find it again). His first three first round picks are all arguably busts, although Davis and Lawson have at least one more year. Balmer still has a lot to prove as well. And worst of all, his four drafts (not including 2009, obviously) so far have produced ONE starter that was drafted on the second day, that being Parys Haralson! True, Goldson and Morgan both have good shots at starting this year, but that is still a horrific number.

I think it’s a stretch to call McCloughan anything but bad at drafting at this point. To compare him to one of the best drafters ever is ridiculous. Just my opinion.

by Brendan Scolari on Jul 21, 2009 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs