49ers expected to receive 3 compensatory picks

[EKmane]

It's still 2 guys with no experience at safety in our defense playing there, with a rookie CB as well.

Overrated! Culliver played very well as a 3rd round, questionable, with only one season as a college cb, pick. He's playing very well here in his 2nd season.

On top of that, he's not even a starter, won't be a lot of pressure on a new 3rd cb.

 

[imac_21]

[/B]
Overrated! Culliver played very well as a 3rd round, questionable, with only one season as a college cb, pick. He's playing very well here in his 2nd season.

On top of that, he's not even a starter, won't be a lot of pressure on a new 3rd cb.

Oh yeah, because you cited one case of a guy playing well as a rookie at CB, so they all do. Good call.

The 3rd CB practically is a starter in the NFL now. A quick search reveals that at the half-way point of the season Cully had played over 300 snaps (can't be bothered to up the exact numbers right now).

And Cully played well as a rookie with two veteran safeties playing behind him. You want to play a rookie at CB with first year safety and a rookie safety playing behind him.

But maybe you're right. Maybe we'll get lucky and Culliver will become a pro bowl FS (Goldson is, so his replacement better be). Maybe we'll get lucky and we'll get a rookie CB that can play as well as Culliver.

Hey, it's a gamble worth taking to bring in new starters at 25% of the spots on a great defense (3rd CB is essentially a starter at this point), all in the secondary.

I'm just curious, what do you see us doing at NT next year, and do you see us making any changes on the offense?

 

[Arete Tzu]

[/B]
Overrated! Culliver played very well as a 3rd round, questionable, with only one season as a college cb, pick. He's playing very well here in his 2nd season.

On top of that, he's not even a starter, won't be a lot of pressure on a new 3rd cb.

you act as if finding a good CB is as easy as finding a good RB. Not to long ago we where shuffling through CBs like Monty Montgomery, and Mark McMillian. For a good part of the last decade our DBs where a major weakness.

 

[EKmane]

Oh yeah, because you cited one case of a guy playing well as a rookie at CB, so they all do. Good call.

The 3rd CB practically is a starter in the NFL now. A quick search reveals that at the half-way point of the season Cully had played over 300 snaps (can't be bothered to up the exact numbers right now).

And Cully played well as a rookie with two veteran safeties playing behind him. You want to play a rookie at CB with first year safety and a rookie safety playing behind him.

But maybe you're right. Maybe we'll get lucky and Culliver will become a pro bowl FS (Goldson is, so his replacement better be). Maybe we'll get lucky and we'll get a rookie CB that can play as well as Culliver.

Hey, it's a gamble worth taking to bring in new starters at 25% of the spots on a great defense (3rd CB is essentially a starter at this point), all in the secondary.

I'm just curious, what do you see us doing at NT next year, and do you see us making any changes on the offense?

at nt I see us only bringing back either Sop or RJF, not both. I think the other will come from the draft or a cheap fa.

I also see us addressing c through the draft, a player to compete with Kilgore.

I also think we look for wr/return depth mid-late.

 

[EKmane]

you act as if finding a good CB is as easy as finding a good RB. Not to long ago we where shuffling through CBs like Monty Montgomery, and Mark McMillian. For a good part of the last decade our DBs where a major weakness.

It's not easy. I just think there are some good ones entering the draft. At the same time, if we couldn't find one in the draft then I know we could find a good coverage fs. Either way I don't look forward to Goldson coming back, even though he's played well.

 

[EKmane]

you act as if finding a good CB is as easy as finding a good RB. Not to long ago we where shuffling through CBs like Monty Montgomery, and Mark McMillian. For a good part of the last decade our DBs where a major weakness.

It seemed that it wasn't a major focus in a lot of prior drafts.

 

[imac_21]

at nt I see us only bringing back either Sop or RJF, not both. I think the other will come from the draft or a cheap fa.

I also see us addressing c through the draft, a player to compete with Kilgore.

I also think we look for wr/return depth mid-late.

So you want to take a strong secondary and shuffle it around and throw shit at the wall to see what sticks at weak areas like NT, C and WR (Ginn and Moss are on one year deals, KW is an unknown).

It feels like you want to shuffle the secondary just for the sake of change.

Our pass defense right now is second in yards allowed, second in yards per attempt allowed, 2nd in yards per game, 12th in attempts allowed, 12in comp %, 3rd in TDs allowed, 7th in QB rating, 9th in sacks and 7th in sack yards.

And you want to shuffle 3 of the 5 main spots? The kicker for me is that despite relatively high rankings in comp% and attempts, they are second in all yards allowed categories. Our secondary this year has been very good. I don't understand looking for 60% turnover.

 

[imac_21]

It seemed that it wasn't a major focus in a lot prior drafts.

Really?

1998 - RW McQuarters in the first round
1999 - Pierson Prioleau and Anthony Parker in the 4th
2000 - Ahmad Plummer in the first, Jason Webster in the 2nd (both in the top 50)
2002 - Mike Rumph in the first
2004 - Shawnte Spencer in the second


I would say it was a pretty decent focus throughout that time period. That's a period of 7 drafts where we drafted 5 CBs in the top 60 picks, and 7 in the first 4 rounds.

It's been the last 5 years that we have been not paying much attention to CB in the draft.

 

[EKmane]

Really?

1998 - RW McQuarters in the first round
1999 - Pierson Prioleau and Anthony Parker in the 4th
2000 - Ahmad Plummer in the first, Jason Webster in the 2nd (both in the top 50)
2002 - Mike Rumph in the first
2004 - Shawnte Spencer in the second


I would say it was a pretty decent focus throughout that time period. That's a period of 7 drafts where we drafted 5 CBs in the top 60 picks, and 7 in the first 4 rounds.

It's been the last 5 years that we have been not paying much attention to CB in the draft.

McQuarters wasn't that bad, Plummer was pretty good for a few seasons and Spencer was good for a few seasons.

Rumph was such a let down

I'm not sure why you went back that far though? He said over the past decade, which is from 02.

You seem to be getting a little excited and trying to poke through everything I post, you should relax a bit, fellow 49er fan.

 

[EKmane]

So you want to take a strong secondary and shuffle it around and throw shit at the wall to see what sticks at weak areas like NT, C and WR (Ginn and Moss are on one year deals, KW is an unknown).

It feels like you want to shuffle the secondary just for the sake of change.

Our pass defense right now is second in yards allowed, second in yards per attempt allowed, 2nd in yards per game, 12th in attempts allowed, 12in comp %, 3rd in TDs allowed, 7th in QB rating, 9th in sacks and 7th in sack yards.

And you want to shuffle 3 of the 5 main spots? The kicker for me is that despite relatively high rankings in comp% and attempts, they are second in all yards allowed categories. Our secondary this year has been very good. I don't understand looking for 60% turnover.

Throw shit at other positions? Where did I come off like that? Kilgore looks strong when he's played, I'm not sure how good of astarting c he'll be, but neither do you. What's wrong with him competing with a rookie?

What's wrong with bringing back ither nt (who seems to be even talent) and letting him compete with a rookie?

I don't see the point of going wr high unless it's one of the guys I mentioned, include Tavon Austin.

 

[EKmane]

So you want to take a strong secondary and shuffle it around and throw shit at the wall to see what sticks at weak areas like NT, C and WR (Ginn and Moss are on one year deals, KW is an unknown).

It feels like you want to shuffle the secondary just for the sake of change.

Our pass defense right now is second in yards allowed, second in yards per attempt allowed, 2nd in yards per game, 12th in attempts allowed, 12in comp %, 3rd in TDs allowed, 7th in QB rating, 9th in sacks and 7th in sack yards.

And you want to shuffle 3 of the 5 main spots? The kicker for me is that despite relatively high rankings in comp% and attempts, they are second in all yards allowed categories. Our secondary this year has been very good. I don't understand looking for 60% turnover.

I'm also in favor of bringing Moss back.

 

[Arete Tzu]

It's been the last 5 years that we have been not paying much attention to CB in the draft.

and in those 5 years we spent big money on free agents like nate clements

 

[EKmane]

and in those 5 years we spent big money on free agents like nate clements

and Walt Harris

 

[imac_21]

McQuarters wasn't that bad, Plummer was pretty good for a few seasons and Spencer was good for a few seasons.

Rumph was such a let down

I'm not sure why you went back that far though? He said over the past decade, which is from 02.

You seem to be getting a little excited and trying to poke through everything I post, you should relax a bit, fellow 49er fan.

He also mentioned Mark McMillian and Monty Mongomery who played in 1999 (McMillian) 1999/2000 (Montgomery). That's why I went back to drafting McQuarters.

Of course CB wasn't a popular draft target in the middle of the decade. We had just spent 3 top 50 picks on CB in 3 years (2000-2002).

We also signed Nate Clements rather than draft a CB in 2006. We weren't exactly ignoring the position. In the time period X mentioned with the names (turn of the century) we were carpet bombing FA for CBs, then turned to the draft in the early part of the century.

 

[imac_21]

I'm also in favor of bringing Moss back.

That doesn't mean he comes back. He's also not the difference maker he's been in the past. He's averaging less than 2 catches per game. Bringing back Moss does not alleviate the need at the position.

 

[EKmane]

He also mentioned Mark McMillian and Monty Mongomery who played in 1999 (McMillian) 1999/2000 (Montgomery). That's why I went back to drafting McQuarters.

Of course CB wasn't a popular draft target in the middle of the decade. We had just spent 3 top 50 picks on CB in 3 years (2000-2002).

We also signed Nate Clements rather than draft a CB in 2006. We weren't exactly ignoring the position. In the time period X mentioned with the names (turn of the century) we were carpet bombing FA for CBs, then turned to the draft in the early part of the century.

It doesn't matter, we already got off of the original point.

The original point was that using our picks (of course not all 14) for depth is not a mistake.

My vision of "shuffling" in the secondary is my opinion, regardless whatever you keep talking about. It may not be right to you or whoever else, it makes sense to me though, as long as the circumstances are right.

 

[imac_21]

Throw shit at other positions? Where did I come off like that? Kilgore looks strong when he's played, I'm not sure how good of astarting c he'll be, but neither do you. What's wrong with him competing with a rookie?

What's wrong with bringing back ither nt (who seems to be even talent) and letting him compete with a rookie?

I don't see the point of going wr high unless it's one of the guys I mentioned, include Tavon Austin.

Where are you drafting these rookies? You have already used our first two picks on a safety and a CB. You're left with throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. There's nothing wrong with Kilgore competing with a rookie, or Sop/RJF competing with a rookie, but those rookies are mid to late round picks that they're competing with, and they play fairly integral positions.

Kilgore has looked good at C on the second and third team in preseason. How many snaps has he taken in the regular season? What NT are you going to draft in the 4th or 5th round to come in and compete for starter snaps as a rookie?

And we can't go for a WR high since you've already created a need at S and filled it (with TJ MacDonald) and CB (with a high pick).

Sure we have 14 picks this year, but our first round pick this year can't get on the field, so what's the point in having a handful of 6th and 7th round picks in camp that we're going to cut?

 

[EKmane]

That doesn't mean he comes back. He's also not the difference maker he's been in the past. He's averaging less than 2 catches per game. Bringing back Moss does not alleviate the need at the position.

Neither does drafting a "ROOKIE". You already said how you feel about rookies being unable to produce, except for the ONE CASE that I cited.

Maybe you can go on to site some more cases where a rookie produces?

 

[imac_21]

It doesn't matter, we already got off of the original point.

The original point was that using our picks (of course not all 14) for depth is not a mistake.

My vision of "shuffling" in the secondary is my opinion, regardless whatever you keep talking about. It may not be right to you or whoever else, it makes sense to me though, as long as the circumstances are right.

Using our picks for depth is a mistake when there isn't room on the roster for them. This is a year to be incredibly aggressive in the draft and get difference makers who can contribute as rookies. We have the ammo to move up and get guys we want. We need to do it. We do not need to sit around in the 4th round and see who's available that might be able to compete for some snaps at NT if he can make the active roster.

 

[imac_21]

Neither does drafting a "ROOKIE". You already said how you feel about rookies being unable to produce, except for the ONE CASE that I cited.

Maybe you can go on to site some more cases where a rookie produces?

Can you vague this question up a bit more? Do you want me to cite some cases of rookie WRs producing? Seriously?