Page 51 of 56 FirstFirst ... 414950515253 ... LastLast
Results 751 to 765 of 834
  1. #751
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,270
    Quote Originally Posted by 9ERS4EVA View Post

    Bottom line is I like the 9ers options at backup TE and backup DL a HELL of a lot more then the options at RG at this juncture. Doesn't mean that Kilgore sucks or we'd be screwed starting him (Don't need to bash a 9er player to enhance my argument) but i'm not comfortable with that kind of risk. CB, WR, FS all make some semblance of sense as well depending on who and where.
    You make it sound like if we DON'T spend our top pick on a guard we are screwed. Why can't we take Fleener or Reyes at 30 AND a guard at 61? Or even better yet, trade up to the 1st half of round 2 and grab our guard.

    Simply put, the value at 30 wont be there for RG like it will be if Fleener is there or a top DE falls. There are half a dozen guards that can be had at 61.

    What is wrong with Fleener/Reyes/Randle/Wright at 30 and a 2nd round RG? Why do we need to spend 30 on a guard? Are we supposed to reach and take an OG or trade back passing an impact player yet again just to get a guard in the 2nd?

    How many times this decade have we passed on impact players to select a guard? Too damn many. Guards are a dime a dozen and for the majority, can be found later. #1 receivers, impact DE's or matchup nightmare TE's aren't.
    Last edited by Sakic19; 04-13-2012 at 07:13 PM.
    --Colorado Avalanche
    --San Francisco 49ers
    --Washington Nationals
    --San Antonio Spurs

    "If a person has an imaginary friend they call him crazy but if a bunch of people have the same imaginary friend they call it religion"

    -My two favourite teams are the SF 49ers and whoever is playing the Seahawks.

    "I'm still waiting for the greatest of all the young QB's to do his thing, but if he doesn't we've been told it wont be his fault"

  2. #752
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    37,587
    I don't see Culliver moving from CB anytime soon either.
    "There were many ways of not burdening one's conscience, of shunning responsibility, looking away, keeping mum. When the unspeakable truth of the holocaust then became known at the end of the war, all too many of us claimed that they had not known anything about it or even suspected anything."

    - Richard Von Weizsaecker

  3. #753
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    20,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Sakic19 View Post
    You make it sound like if we DON'T spend our top pick on a guard we are screwed. Why can't we take Fleener or Reyes at 30 AND a guard at 61? Or even better yet, trade up to the 1st half of round 2 and grab our guard.

    Simply put, the value at 30 wont be there for RG like it will be if Fleener is there or a top DE falls. There are half a dozen guards that can be had at 61.

    What is wrong with Fleener/Reyes/Randle/Wright at 30 and a 2nd round RG? Why do we need to spend 30 on a guard? Are we supposed to reach and take an OG or trade back passing an impact player yet again just to get a guard in the 2nd?

    How many times this decade have we passed on impact players to select a guard? Too damn many. Guards are a dime a dozen and for the majority, can be found later. #1 receivers, impact DE's or matchup nightmare TE's aren't.
    Seriously, if you aren't going to bother and read posts about the same thing throughout this thread then i'm not gonna bother to have the same argument.

    Only thing i'll say is Dwayne Allen is going to be a matchup nightmare too. In the right situation he's a budding Antonio Gates.
    The stand your ground law is like bleach. It works miracles for whites but it'll ruin your colors.

  4. #754
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,270
    Quote Originally Posted by 9ERS4EVA View Post
    Seriously, if you aren't going to bother and read posts about the same thing throughout this thread then i'm not gonna bother to have the same argument.

    Only thing i'll say is Dwayne Allen is going to be a matchup nightmare too. In the right situation he's a budding Antonio Gates.
    Allen would be a nice pick and you are bang on with the comparison. Allen does have great hands and that would be something nice considering Vernon, Crabtree and Ginn all do not.

    He would work the underneath routes while Vernon attacks the seams. I would like Allen.

    The only knock on Allen is that he does not have great speed but his hands and route running make up for it. He is not an especially strong blocker either but neither is Fleener.
    --Colorado Avalanche
    --San Francisco 49ers
    --Washington Nationals
    --San Antonio Spurs

    "If a person has an imaginary friend they call him crazy but if a bunch of people have the same imaginary friend they call it religion"

    -My two favourite teams are the SF 49ers and whoever is playing the Seahawks.

    "I'm still waiting for the greatest of all the young QB's to do his thing, but if he doesn't we've been told it wont be his fault"

  5. #755
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,131
    For the 100th time because you keep repeating it, I DONT WANT TO TAKE A LESSER PLAYER BECAUSE OF NEED. Again with the arguing strawmen. However if there is a player like Fleener there at 30 or anyone else that might be highly sought at a spot that the 9ers are set at they should leverage the pick to trade down to a spot where the value matches the needed player. That's how you play the draft. That's how Walsh did it. It's how Bellicheck does it (tho he keeps blowing the picks he does use). Hell the Rams just did it a month ago.
    I'm reading these two bolded points and they are contradictory. It's not how you play the draft and you are arguing for taking a lesser player. You are advocating passing on a superior player to trade down and take a lesser one. That is exactly what you are saying here.

    Walsh didn't have a set way of playing the draft. Some years he traded down and amassed picks, other times he traded up to secure a top player. The reason you trade down is if you have a number of players with similar grades at that spot and feel you can get one of them later on. That could wind up being the case but we are focusing on the scenario of Fleener being on the board at #30 and whether it would be a good idea to take him. I would take him. You would trade down to the point the player you wanted fit the value. I think your way of doing it is flawed because you are passing up a more talented player for a lesser one. You are also ranking the level of need which I don't agree with. Just because we need a RG doesn't mean we trade down so we can get one in the second round. The 9ers have 7 picks and I'm sure they could find a Guard later. This team needs more impact players and our depth at TE isn't nearly as good as you seem to think it is.

    The Rams didn't need the player at that spot and more importantly, received a gift of epic proportions from a team that was desperate for a QB. The value they got in return far exceeds the pick they gave up when looking at it right now. Ultimately it will be judged by the players acquired, but the Rams got a ridiculous amount of compensation from a team that just doesn't seem to know which direction it wants to go most of the time.
    Last edited by LASam; 04-13-2012 at 10:31 PM.

  6. #756
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,101

    CB KYLE FULLER, VA TECH; CB Pierre Desir, L'wood; CB Stanley Jean-Pierre, NE; CB Keith McGill, UT; SS DEONE BUCANNON, WA ST; SS Ahmad Dixon, Baylor; DE Stephon Tuitt, N.D.; DE Taylor Hart, OR; DE Brent Urban, VA; C Marcus Martin, USC; C TYLER LARSEN, UT ST.; C Weston Richburg, CO St.; OG/OC Anthony Steen, AL; *WR Odell Beckham, LSU; WR Brandin Cooks, OR St; WR Allen Robinson, PA St; WR Jordan Matthews, Vand; *WR PAUL RICHARDSON, CO; WR Mike Davis, TX; *QB Brett Smith, WY

  7. #757
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob View Post

    So we aren't supposed to debate on a message board now? What's the point of being on here if we cant express our views? I wish you would stop with that stuff man.
    --Colorado Avalanche
    --San Francisco 49ers
    --Washington Nationals
    --San Antonio Spurs

    "If a person has an imaginary friend they call him crazy but if a bunch of people have the same imaginary friend they call it religion"

    -My two favourite teams are the SF 49ers and whoever is playing the Seahawks.

    "I'm still waiting for the greatest of all the young QB's to do his thing, but if he doesn't we've been told it wont be his fault"

  8. #758
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,131
    Quote Originally Posted by Sakic19 View Post
    So we aren't supposed to debate on a message board now? What's the point of being on here if we cant express our views? I wish you would stop with that stuff man.
    I have to agree with this. What's the point of this without having discussion? I understand people getting tired of insults and demeaning accusations being thrown around, but that isn't the case here. It's two differing points of view being argued which is what I thought a message board was for among other things.

  9. #759
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,101
    Quote Originally Posted by LASam View Post
    I have to agree with this. What's the point of this without having discussion? I understand people getting tired of insults and demeaning accusations being thrown around, but that isn't the case here. It's two differing points of view being argued which is what I thought a message board was for among other things.
    I'm sorry that my post followed your post but it really has nothing to do with you.
    CB KYLE FULLER, VA TECH; CB Pierre Desir, L'wood; CB Stanley Jean-Pierre, NE; CB Keith McGill, UT; SS DEONE BUCANNON, WA ST; SS Ahmad Dixon, Baylor; DE Stephon Tuitt, N.D.; DE Taylor Hart, OR; DE Brent Urban, VA; C Marcus Martin, USC; C TYLER LARSEN, UT ST.; C Weston Richburg, CO St.; OG/OC Anthony Steen, AL; *WR Odell Beckham, LSU; WR Brandin Cooks, OR St; WR Allen Robinson, PA St; WR Jordan Matthews, Vand; *WR PAUL RICHARDSON, CO; WR Mike Davis, TX; *QB Brett Smith, WY

  10. #760
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob View Post
    I'm sorry that my post followed your post but it really has nothing to do with you.
    So who does it involve then?

    I find it funny how you are annoyed at people for arguing on a message board.
    --Colorado Avalanche
    --San Francisco 49ers
    --Washington Nationals
    --San Antonio Spurs

    "If a person has an imaginary friend they call him crazy but if a bunch of people have the same imaginary friend they call it religion"

    -My two favourite teams are the SF 49ers and whoever is playing the Seahawks.

    "I'm still waiting for the greatest of all the young QB's to do his thing, but if he doesn't we've been told it wont be his fault"

  11. #761
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    20,877
    Quote Originally Posted by LASam View Post
    I'm reading these two bolded points and they are contradictory. It's not how you play the draft and you are arguing for taking a lesser player. You are advocating passing on a superior player to trade down and take a lesser one. That is exactly what you are saying here.

    Walsh didn't have a set way of playing the draft. Some years he traded down and amassed picks, other times he traded up to secure a top player. The reason you trade down is if you have a number of players with similar grades at that spot and feel you can get one of them later on. That could wind up being the case but we are focusing on the scenario of Fleener being on the board at #30 and whether it would be a good idea to take him. I would take him. You would trade down to the point the player you wanted fit the value. I think your way of doing it is flawed because you are passing up a more talented player for a lesser one. You are also ranking the level of need which I don't agree with. Just because we need a RG doesn't mean we trade down so we can get one in the second round. The 9ers have 7 picks and I'm sure they could find a Guard later. This team needs more impact players and our depth at TE isn't nearly as good as you seem to think it is.

    The Rams didn't need the player at that spot and more importantly, received a gift of epic proportions from a team that was desperate for a QB. The value they got in return far exceeds the pick they gave up when looking at it right now. Ultimately it will be judged by the players acquired, but the Rams got a ridiculous amount of compensation from a team that just doesn't seem to know which direction it wants to go most of the time.
    The 9ers don't need the player at 30 either if they can move down and get a better fit just like the Rams did. Obviously the 9ers won't get that gift but the Rams were moving down irregardless of the huge haul. If it wasn't with Washington it would've been with Cleveland.

    If you trade down to a spot where the need matches the value you aren't taking a LESSER player because you are getting 2 PLAYERS for the price of one. Obviously 9er fan thinking is Cody Fleener is better than every propsect in this draft put together but i'd take the potential of Kelechi Osemele and Mike Brewster over Fleener every damn day.

    What hitman fails to keep reading is I don't think the team HAS to take a guard at 30 or even trade down. They can take a WR. They can take a DL if they plan on letting Smith Walk. They can take a CB if they plan on letting Brown walk or aren't sold on Culliver. They can even take a S if they think the value matches. All those positions could have future starting position needs.

    Our depth on the O line is nowhere as good as you seem to think it is. If they think TE depth is an issue, get someone later. TE's are just as easy as guard to find outside the first round.
    Last edited by 9ERS4EVA; 04-14-2012 at 07:03 PM.
    The stand your ground law is like bleach. It works miracles for whites but it'll ruin your colors.

  12. #762
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,131
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob View Post
    I'm sorry that my post followed your post but it really has nothing to do with you.
    No problem. I just couldn't figure out what I had said in that post to bring that reaction. My misunderstanding.

  13. #763
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,131
    The 9ers don't need the player at 30 either if they can move down and get a better fit just like the Rams did. Obviously the 9ers won't get that gift but the Rams were moving down irregardless of the huge haul. If it wasn't with Washington it would've been with Cleveland.
    I think a big part of where we differ is the "better fit" part of the equation. I think Fleener would be a great fit; you don't. I'm not against a trade down, but I don't want to leave a really good player on the board while doing it.

    If you trade down to a spot where the need matches the value you aren't taking a LESSER player because you are getting 2 PLAYERS for the price of one. Obviously 9er fan thinking is Cody Fleener is better than every propsect in this draft put together but i'd take the potential of Kelechi Osemele and Mike Brewster over Fleener every damn day.
    I don't feel that way about Fleener. I like the kid, but there are other players I'm interested in, and I am happy with any of them. My favorite for the pick a few weeks ago was Gilmore, but it appears that is now not going to happen as he has killed it in his workouts and is being forcast to go about 10-12 picks ahead of us. I'd be fine with: Jenkins, Randle, Hill, Branch, Reyes, Upshaw, Worthy, Martin etc. Fleener is being mentioned so much because he's got a history with Harbaugh and there is a good chance he will be there at 30. I'm not going to be upset if they don't pick him. I just want the best talent to be the pick, not a trade down to fill needs with a lesser player. 1 player or 2 players doesn't matter. You left a better talent on the board to move down. This team doesn't have to do that with the roster they have now. They are in prime position to take the best talent and add to this team in numerous places. If they feel that there are a number of players with a similar grade they can get with a trade down, then great, I hope they do it.

    What hitman fails to keep reading is I don't think the team HAS to take a guard at 30 or even trade down. They can take a WR. They can take a DL if they plan on letting Smith Walk. They can take a CB if they plan on letting Brown walk or aren't sold on Culliver. They can even take a S if they think the value matches. All those positions could have future starting position needs. Our depth on the O line is nowhere as good as you seem to think it is. If they think TE depth is an issue, get someone later. TE's are just as easy as guard to find outside the first round.
    I'm saying other than ILB, LS and Punter, this team can draft anybody and have them contribute quite a bit. If Andre Branch is still on the board at 30 and he's the best player on the board, you take him and put him in a rotation with Brooks and Smith to give you a great athletic trio at a very important spot. If Fleener is the best player on your board, you can take him and improve your passing game immediately, and have your starter ready to step in right away or in a year when Walkers contract is up. If Doug Martin is the BPA, you can take him and have your successor to Gore on the team before Gore hits the wall. You can also draft any of the positions you listed and feel good about it. That is where this team is right now and it's a great position to be in. They finally can draft based on talent and not reach for need.

  14. #764
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Bahwston-Title Town
    Posts
    20,158
    Quote Originally Posted by Sakic19 View Post
    So who does it involve then?

    I find it funny how you are annoyed at people for arguing on a message board.
    Just keep the personal insults out and any discussion is fine but I'm sure rob was looking for some new discussion. The back and forth on Fleener has been going strong for several pages now.
    Draft well and then coach em up!

    Find the next Ronnie Lott & Justin Smith

  15. #765
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,101
    LaSam, I agree. Good post.

    Regardless on how each of us phrases our thoughts, I think we all want the same thing. Good players. We all just value them all differently.

    As far as our "discussions" or "arguments".... and this is just me typing and NOT directed any one person. We all seem to get caught up in semantics and the adjectives we choose to describe how much we like or dislike each prospect. Someone says "Joe is a good fit" and someone else counters with "he's not the best fit and that there are other who are better fits". That could be true, but even if it is, that doesn't mean that Joe is not a good fit. I sometimes don't see the point in some posts. They come across as being there for no other reason than to argue. That may not be their intention... but it does feel that way at times.

    Someone thinks a guy has good speed and is elusive and someone else wants to counter by saying he's not elusive but more "shifty". And away we go again.

    I doubt any of the 32 NFL teams have a draft board that separates each individual player from the rest. I'd be willing to bet that most (probably all)... have the prospects grouped and there can be a handful of guys with very similar grades. I know that is true on my board. There will be 32 different opinions on who is the BPA at any point in the Draft.

    Moving down does not mean that a team is "looking to draft" an inferior player. It may work out that way but I doubt the GM making that decision thinks he's getting a lesser player. No GM in his right mind would do that. He will however move down to get someone he likes.... but who he also feels will still be available later (due to intel, the other team's needs, scheme fits, etc...). If our guys saw no "real" difference... in say... Glenn, Konz, Zeitler, Silatolu and Osemele and viewed all as potential and very solid NFL starters... it's conceiveable that we would move down a little to take one. I'm not saying we should... but it is possible. The selection of Rashad Woods tells us that. Not that that particular trade is good example of a successful move down. Sometimes getting an extra pick is a good thing and works out and sometimes taking a prospect at your original spot in the Draft is the way to go. No one really knows.

    If this post has offended anyone... If my using "smilie faces" to show that I think we argue a lot... bothers you hitman...
    CB KYLE FULLER, VA TECH; CB Pierre Desir, L'wood; CB Stanley Jean-Pierre, NE; CB Keith McGill, UT; SS DEONE BUCANNON, WA ST; SS Ahmad Dixon, Baylor; DE Stephon Tuitt, N.D.; DE Taylor Hart, OR; DE Brent Urban, VA; C Marcus Martin, USC; C TYLER LARSEN, UT ST.; C Weston Richburg, CO St.; OG/OC Anthony Steen, AL; *WR Odell Beckham, LSU; WR Brandin Cooks, OR St; WR Allen Robinson, PA St; WR Jordan Matthews, Vand; *WR PAUL RICHARDSON, CO; WR Mike Davis, TX; *QB Brett Smith, WY

Page 51 of 56 FirstFirst ... 414950515253 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  






Fantasy Football Rankings


Part of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.