Rank your receiver prospects for this draft

[clyde_carbon]

What about Watkins? I thought you were a Watkins guy.

The thread specifically mentioned to leave Watkins/Evans out.

Watkins is my #1 WR prospect. Followed by Matthews and Beckham.

 

[TobyTyler]

The thread specifically mentioned to leave Watkins/Evans out.

Watkins is my #1 WR prospect. Followed by Matthews and Beckham.

Yes. Bryant already schooled me up on that. My bad.

 

[purguy12]

I don't trust USC WRs and QBs. Most are all hype.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Nice, thanks for putting those numbers together.

I think the combine performance was huge for cook and a lot of people are buying into the numbers. I'm not saying that as a bad thing because I'm pretty high on him as well.

Overall, the combined rankings of where everyone has them I think is really solid and I'm surprised a little by it. There are a few players I thought would be a little more under the radar and many others appear to be high on them.

I think it's more Cooks affirming that his production wasn't a fluke. Obviously the guy got it done on the field. The questions were his size, and to a lesser extent just how fast he really is. He turned out to be taller than many believed he would be at 5'10", and pretty solidly built at just about 190. And his speed was sensational: best 40, best shuttle, and 10th-best three-cone.

 

[purguy12]

If we stay at our pick I want Cook unless Gilbert, Dennard or a stud DT drops to us. And if that happen I would trade back in the 1st with Denver and then grab Cooks. Imagine landing Either CB and Cooks. Damn that would be a great draft.

 

[deep9er]

If we stay at our pick I want Cook unless Gilbert, Dennard or a stud DT drops to us. And if that happen I would trade back in the 1st with Denver and then grab Cooks. Imagine landing Either CB and Cooks. Damn that would be a great draft.

can't say which players cause just don't know, but would think that is ideal IF trade partners cooperate? we'd keep the 30th but also trade up to late 1st or early 2nd? we'd have to use our two 2nd's at minimum, plus more? but I'm ok with pursuing quality.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

can't say which players cause just don't know, but would think that is ideal IF trade partners cooperate? we'd keep the 30th but also trade up to late 1st or early 2nd? we'd have to use our two 2nd's at minimum, plus more? but I'm ok with pursuing quality.

According to the trade chart, both our second round picks would be worth the 30th or 31st pick. But I don't like that trade. This is a very deep draft. Those two seconds are a big commodity this year.

 

[deep9er]

According to the trade chart, both our second round picks would be worth the 30th or 31st pick. But I don't like that trade. This is a very deep draft. Those two seconds are a big commodity this year.

yes, that is what I'm reading, so not saying those aren't valuable. but if you want to keep one of the 2nd's, then nobody will trade with you?

anyway, similar to last year on Reid, if you really want a certain player, go get him. else, you settle for somebody who doesn't fit as well. last year was a strong Safety class, but we wanted Reid specifically, not whomever else fell.

 

[Clayton]

As a Rams fan, the 3 I don't want to see on the Niners in order are: Odel Beckham Jr, Jordan Matthews and Brandin Cooks. Moncrief 4th because he didnt have a QB in college and is physical. Lee 5th if only because there is a small chance that he lives up to his hype

 

[Crimsoncrew]

yes, that is what I'm reading, so not saying those aren't valuable. but if you want to keep one of the 2nd's, then nobody will trade with you?

anyway, similar to last year on Reid, if you really want a certain player, go get him. else, you settle for somebody who doesn't fit as well. last year was a strong Safety class, but we wanted Reid specifically, not whomever else fell.

I'm not opposed to trading up in general. I'm opposed to trading both second rounders to get up around 30. I would be open to a trade up in the first, but would hope that we use our first and one of the thirds like last year. I'm also open to moving up in the second. I just don't want to move up almost an entire round.

 

[deep9er]

I'm not opposed to trading up in general. I'm opposed to trading both second rounders to get up around 30. I would be open to a trade up in the first, but would hope that we use our first and one of the thirds like last year. I'm also open to moving up in the second. I just don't want to move up almost an entire round.

ok good, we both agree on trading up.....somehow. lets say we do execute a trade up to 18th or so, afterward, I'm not getting the part in bold?

if you don't want to use the two 2nd to move up to 29th or 31st, what are you proposing? how do we move up in the second round?

 

[Crimsoncrew]

ok good, we both agree on trading up.....somehow. lets say we do execute a trade up to 18th or so, afterward, I'm not getting the part in bold?

if you don't want to use the two 2nd to move up to 29th or 31st, what are you proposing? how do we move up in the second round?

A scenario I could see is trading our first and one of the thirds to get into the late-teens or early 20s, then use one of the seconds and either the other third or fourth to move up into the top half of the second.

I'm not saying I want to do that, particularly in a deep draft where picks in the second through fourth rounds are very valuable. I'm just saying I wouldn't necessarily hate that. Baalke seems to do better when he targets his guys and goes and gets them.

 

[NinerSickness]

Ok I guess I'll have to do it without Matthews' 10 time.

1. Cooks (who's the best receiver in the entire draft IMO)
2. Matthews
3. Moncrief
3a. ODB Jr.
5. Kelvin Benjamin

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Double post. Ignore.

 

[NinerSickness]

Ok I guess I'll have to do it without Matthews' 10 time.

1. Cooks (who's the best receiver in the entire draft IMO)
2. Matthews
3. Moncrief
3a. ODB Jr.
5. Kelvin Benjamin

Whoops! I completely forgot about Marqise Lee.

1. Cooks (#1 WR in the draft IMO)
2. Matthews (#2 WR in the draft IMO)
3. Moncrief
4. ODB
5. Lee
6. Benjamin
7. Robinson

 

[purguy12]

I rather have 2 1st then 2 ends. Plus we would land on of the Top Wrs plus a top CB. It would be perfect for the 49ers.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

I rather have 2 1st then 2 ends. Plus we would land on of the Top Wrs plus a top CB. It would be perfect for the 49ers.

I'm assuming you're saying you'd rather have two firsts than two seconds. But that's not the scenario. The scenario is two firsts or a first and two seconds. In this draft, I'm leaning toward the latter.

 

[purguy12]

I'm assuming you're saying you'd rather have two firsts than two seconds. But that's not the scenario. The scenario is two firsts or a first and two seconds. In this draft, I'm leaning toward the latter.

yes and I would rather have 1st then a 1st and 2 nds. I rather grab 2 guys we really need then grab a guy a tier under. This team doesn't need all these rookies they need 1-2 maybe 3 players.

Now I want to say Im ok if they stay the path and do nothing in the 1st 2 rds. U are right its a deep class and we should still get a good player.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

yes and I would rather have 1st then a 1st and 2 nds. I rather grab 2 guys we really need then grab a guy a tier under. This team doesn't need all these rookies they need 1-2 maybe 3 players.

Now I want to say Im ok if they stay the path and do nothing in the 1st 2 rds. U are right its a deep class and we should still get a good player.

I'm just not sure there's a big difference between the player we could get at 31 and the player we could get at 58. I'm not opposed to moving up, but that's a heck of a jump. We have a chance to restock our roster in this draft, and I don't want to trade away picks frivolously just because we have them.

 

[deep9er]

A scenario I could see is trading our first and one of the thirds to get into the late-teens or early 20s, then use one of the seconds and either the other third or fourth to move up into the top half of the second.

I'm not saying I want to do that, particularly in a deep draft where picks in the second through fourth rounds are very valuable. I'm just saying I wouldn't necessarily hate that. Baalke seems to do better when he targets his guys and goes and gets them.

the mid point of the 2nd round is 32 + 16 = 48, so our #56 is definitely on the lower half. it is at the 3/4 mark of round 2. if we use one of the 3rd's to move up, guessing that barely pushes #56 into 'the top half' of the 2nd? if we're ok with #47 or #48, that's fine.

earlier we were looking to move up EARLY 2nd, almost 1st. in this scenario .......not mid 2nd? what you'd end up with is about 12 spots later.

we're on the same page in general (trading up), so main thing is they TRY.