I have a feeling Baalke wants Austin

[Dodub]

I honestly don't think there is any chance Austin is thete when we pick. If by sone crazy miricle he was, I'd be super happy. If Patterson was there I'd do a backflip. But I think they have about the same chance. Hunter is more realistic.

 

[deep9er]

We're taking the best available giving our draft position, but you have to figure they will be looking at the best D-line, Safety, or Corner on the draft board over a WR. I'd rather address WR through free agency than draft one early. If we draft a WR I'd like to get Da'rick Rogers out of Tennessee with a 3rd or even 4th round pick. Character concerns will cause him to probably go in one of those rounds at the earliest. You also have to factor in he missed an entire year of football, but I think he is worth a gamble with a mid-round pick for a team with 15 draft picks. He has the talent of a 1st round WR if he has his act together.

agree, draft the best available, but i'd do it whether drafting high or low. if your team is good, then you don't have to do it every round, so in our case i'd say first three picks. if your team is bad, i'd go BPA every round.

talent last a career, whereas Need last one or two years. things change fast year to year, and an example is our defense. in 2011 it was considered elite, but two years later who knows?

not advocating BPA 100% without regard, there IS an eye on need factored in when stacking your board.

 

[BINGO]

I have a feeling Baalke will not touch a receiver in the first round. They are becoming somewhat predicatable - somewhat impulsive when it comes to losing a big game.

Last year, we had a chance to get an elite corner in Janoris Jenkins. However, we passed up on him for AJ Jenkins. Jenkins was the pick ONLY BECAUSE fans/media alike were extremely critical of Crabtree and the rest of our WRs for their performance in the NFC Championship Game (their one catch performance). Thus they needed an upgrade and went after Manningham, Moss, and Jenkins.

Now in 2013, the group who is taking most of the blame is the defensive back group. In particular, our corners. So again, those guys are so predictable, rather than get someone like Hankins, Austin, Patterson, etc. they are being who we thought they were by being impulsive again and force a pick by drafting a corner.

 

[mem49er]

Now in 2013, the group who is taking most of the blame is the defensive back group. In particular, our corners. So again, those guys are so predictable, rather than get someone like Hankins, Austin, Patterson, etc. they are being who we thought they were by being impulsive again and force a pick by drafting a corner.

I think unless Dee is there this would be a surprise. Be interesting to see if your theory plays out...

 

[deep9er]

I have a feeling Baalke will not touch a receiver in the first round. They are becoming somewhat predicatable - somewhat impulsive when it comes to losing a big game.

Last year, we had a chance to get an elite corner in Janoris Jenkins. However, we passed up on him for AJ Jenkins. Jenkins was the pick ONLY BECAUSE fans/media alike were extremely critical of Crabtree and the rest of our WRs for their performance in the NFC Championship Game (their one catch performance). Thus they needed an upgrade and went after Manningham, Moss, and Jenkins.

Now in 2013, the group who is taking most of the blame is the defensive back group. In particular, our corners. So again, those guys are so predictable, rather than get someone like Hankins, Austin, Patterson, etc. they are being who we thought they were by being impulsive again and force a pick by drafting a corner.

will have to disagree Baalke is influenced by fan opinion. apparently, the Janoris thing is STILL up your crawl?

if we do draft a CB first, then it is because he's the best player.

 

[Bemular]

will have to disagree Baalke is influenced by fan opinion. apparently, the Janoris thing is STILL up your crawl?

if we do draft a CB first, then it is because he's the best player.

BPA might not be the reason for drafting a CB. The degree to which our secondary failed in the playoffs may have pushed CB into the need category.

 

[deep9er]

BPA might not be the reason for drafting a CB. The degree to which our secondary failed in the playoffs may have pushed CB into the need category.

no argument CB is a need, but there will always be needs somewhere? is CB our biggest need?

anyway, don't see Baalke drafting by the Need extreme. ie Need is factored in somewhere, but don't see him using it as a large factor.

for EXAMPLE......if solid value is a WR, whereas CB is so-so value, he'll take WR.

 

[Bemular]

no argument CB is a need, but there will always be needs somewhere? is CB our biggest need?

anyway, don't see Baalke drafting by the Need extreme. ie Need is factored in somewhere, but don't see him using it as a large factor.

for EXAMPLE......if solid value is a WR, whereas CB is so-so value, he'll take WR.

There are three values you are mentioning only two - In the situation you have outlined above he could also trade the pick.

 

[BINGO]

will have to disagree Baalke is influenced by fan opinion. apparently, the Janoris thing is STILL up your crawl?
if we do draft a CB first, then it is because he's the best player.

It certaintly does! It phucked us over from winning a super bowl.

 

[Jikkle]

You tend to mix need with BPA especially when you have a team built like ours whose on the younger side.

When your a terrible team it's much easier because you have so many holes you can pretty much look at your draft board and whoever is at the top and still available you pick.

My gut feeling is we sell our 1st pick for a 2014 1st rounder since there always seems to be a team that wants to hop back into the end of the 1st round and we pick again after the Ravens and Jags anyways so the odds are high that we'll still get the player we wanted.

Which on a side note is why I hate the new draft format because there is nothing like sitting through the draft for 3 hours waiting for your team to make a move only to find they just traded away the pick.

 

[deep9er]

You tend to mix need with BPA especially when you have a team built like ours whose on the younger side.

When your a terrible team it's much easier because you have so many holes you can pretty much look at your draft board and whoever is at the top and still available you pick.

My gut feeling is we sell our 1st pick for a 2014 1st rounder since there always seems to be a team that wants to hop back into the end of the 1st round and we pick again after the Ravens and Jags anyways so the odds are high that we'll still get the player we wanted.

Which on a side note is why I hate the new draft format because there is nothing like sitting through the draft for 3 hours waiting for your team to make a move only to find they just traded away the pick.

yes, it is never 100% BPA, but for the 1st and 2nd picks (3rd is gray now), it should be much closer to the BPA side.

do want us to trade some into 2014, but hoping it is for 4th, 5th, or 6th's? but ok, hate it to be our 31st but its possible.

 

[Bemular]

yes, it is never 100% BPA, but for the 1st and 2nd picks (3rd is gray now), it should be much closer to the BPA side.

do want us to trade some into 2014, but hoping it is for 4th, 5th, or 6th's? but ok, hate it to be our 31st but its possible.

...I mis-read your post - nevermind

 

[deep9er]

Sorry Deep but that is 100% false. If the BPA is at a position you do not need then you do not take the player. Doing so is just wasting a pick and widening the improvement curve.

if you're opinion is different, no problem. cause you're looking at this season which is human nature. again, it isn't 100% BPA, just far over to that side.

needs change quickly in the NFL, two years ago QB was a huge need, last year RG was a huge need, this year it is D-line, or CB, or WR, or....

so if you keep taking lesser value to fill your immediate needs, that reduced value catches up to you. do you take the #5 rated WR because WR is an immediate need? or do you take the #2 DE?

if you keep taking the most value every year, that value builds up.

 

[Bemular]

if you're opinion is different, no problem. cause you're looking at this season which is human nature. again, it isn't 100% BPA, just far over to that side.

needs change quickly in the NFL, two years ago QB was a huge need, last year RG was a huge need, this year it is D-line, or CB, or WR, or....

so if you keep taking lesser value to fill your immediate needs, that reduced value catches up to you. do you take the #5 rated WR because WR is an immediate need? or do you take the #2 DE?

if you keep taking the most value every year, that value builds up.

I change my response

 

[Bemular]

if you're opinion is different, no problem. cause you're looking at this season which is human nature. again, it isn't 100% BPA, just far over to that side.

needs change quickly in the NFL, two years ago QB was a huge need, last year RG was a huge need, this year it is D-line, or CB, or WR, or....

so if you keep taking lesser value to fill your immediate needs, that reduced value catches up to you. do you take the #5 rated WR because WR is an immediate need? or do you take the #2 DE?

if you keep taking the most value every year, that value builds up.

I changed my response above - But to elaborate on this post, if you are picking early then BPA will probably work - picking late, however, not so much. Need, as a component of value cannot be ignored.

If I don't need the #2 DE but I do need a WR, the #5 WR may suddenly have as much value as the #2 DE. Or, if another GM values either position more than I value both players, then I trade the pick.

You can't keep picking the same position every year just because the BPA is at that position. That, as well, will catch up to a team and put them way behind the improvement curve as I mentioned earlier.

 

[deep9er]

I changed my response above - But to elaborate on this post, if you are picking early then BPA will probably work - picking late, however, not so much. Need, as a component of value cannot be ignored.

If I don't need the #2 DE but I do need a WR, the #5 WR may suddenly have as much value as the #2 DE. Or, if another GM values either position more than I value both players, then I trade the pick.

You can't keep picking the same position every year just because the BPA is at that position. That, as well, will catch up to a team and put them way behind the improvement curve as I mentioned earlier.

picking late meaning slotted late? or picking late as in your later rounds?

 

[Bemular]

picking late meaning slotted late? or picking late as in your later rounds?

Slotted

 

[Jikkle]

yes, it is never 100% BPA, but for the 1st and 2nd picks (3rd is gray now), it should be much closer to the BPA side.

do want us to trade some into 2014, but hoping it is for 4th, 5th, or 6th's? but ok, hate it to be our 31st but its possible.

If we do trade our 31st pick for a 2014 1st round pick than odds are it's going to be higher than 31 and with KC's second rounder we aren't likely lose out on the player we would be targeting at 31. Also having what should be 15 picks for this draft is just way too many so you might as try to spread that number out by getting more picks in 2014.

So it's completely worth the roll of the dice getting a 2014 1st rounder especially with guys like Clowney coming out and Johnny Manziel. Not that we would take Manziel but if we somehow wound up with the number 2 pick in the draft that all but assures us getting Clowney or ransoming off the pick to someone who wants Manziel.

Of course that mostly wishful thinking but at least you have a chance of that pick getting you an impact player or being able to trade up to get one.

 

[NinerSickness]

If we do trade our 31st pick for a 2014 1st round pick

Then I would be happy as a little girl
[YOUTUBE]aiUVQ-pla24[/YOUTUBE]

There are some serious ballers in next year's draft.

 

[deep9er]

If we do trade our 31st pick for a 2014 1st round pick than odds are it's going to be higher than 31 and with KC's second rounder we aren't likely lose out on the player we would be targeting at 31. Also having what should be 15 picks for this draft is just way too many so you might as try to spread that number out by getting more picks in 2014.

So it's completely worth the roll of the dice getting a 2014 1st rounder especially with guys like Clowney coming out and Johnny Manziel. Not that we would take Manziel but if we somehow wound up with the number 2 pick in the draft that all but assures us getting Clowney or ransoming off the pick to someone who wants Manziel.

Of course that mostly wishful thinking but at least you have a chance of that pick getting you an impact player or being able to trade up to get one.

no doubt 15 picks is too many, we can only hope Baalke has trading partners, or the right trading partners?

yeah, rather trade our mid and late picks into 2014, but these are harder to execute trades? who'd want our 5th for their 2014 4th?