i'm starting to get a bad feeling about him as well. :(

Good analogy.

I think I'm the type of GM who would always be trading up to get players instead of trading down.

Chiefs defense was tied for 5th in total points, Arizona was 6th.

I'm a big believer in trading down (at least to a certain extent). If you can get value for the pick, you have a better shot at getting lucky with 3 guys than one guy in the first round. No, not all of them will hit...but you only need one out of 3 to hit as opposed to putting all your hopes in a single pick.

A little early to give up dont you think? This is a boom or bust draft class. Hopefully it booms after thid year so the Chiefs will have a nice pick next year and some cap space to sign guys.

The relationship between pick value and player success isn't linear. The further you trade back, the less potential high-end value you're getting. You limiting your chances of ending up with nothing but you're also limiting your chances of getting actual blue-chip talent.

Sure, you can shotgun it, take 3, and hit 1. You're not going home empty-handed.

Or you can use a rifle, hit 1, and ****ing KILL IT.

If you want a couple of pheasants, a shotgun works fine. If you want to bring down a rhino, you better have a rifle.

Yeah....that's great when you have a bunch of holes on your roster. No way the entire 49ers draft class makes that roster.

After years of following this team, it's obvious that every GM we have is an idiot until we actually get to a Super Bowl.

For all the Baalke love, and he has made some good moves, let's not forget his crappy 2012 draft or wasting some high picks on non-difference makers. He hasn't been perfect. Inheriting a strong talent base when he took over and the success Harbaugh has brought has allowed them to trade down and stockpile picks for future drafts. And as we talked about this offseason, the most successful drafts come from having a lot of draft picks, giving you more opportunities to hit and make moves for guys you target.

Next year will be the first year we are in a position to have extra picks in the draft, so let's see where that takes us...

Somewhere in the middle of the season, when the offense hadn't quite gotten it together, I remember Reid said something along the lines of Alex is getting a lot of blame for things that he has no control over and that he was actually minimizing the damage, but that criticism is just part of being the QB.

9ers have one of the best rosters in the NFL, imo. Sometimes it's better to grab a lot of players and throw them against the wall and see what sticks than it is to grab a guy who might be able to beat one other guy.

The only real weaknesses I think on that roster are CB and WR. They addressed one in the draft and the other in a trade.

I'll take those over anything Palmer would have given us.

I disagree

imo when you roster is talented you should trade up and grab the higher players that fit you specific needs.

Quantity over quality is what crappy teams use because they might get lucky and have several guys make their roster

I understand where you're coming from, and I do think it is a balancing act..but give this a read:


http://www.vox.com/2014/5/7/5683448/...s-irrationally


This was particularly interesting: He and Thaler figured this out by calculating the odds that the first player picked at any given position will perform better — in terms of the number of games he starts in his first five seasons — than the second player drafted at that position. This is relevant because a team will often trade up when they identify a player they prefer at a needed position: they need a wide receiver, and a few highly-rated ones are available, but they trade up because they're certain one is much better.

But the data says that teams just aren't very good at figuring out when this is true. On average, the chance that first player will start more games than the second one picked at his position: 52 percent. Compared to the third, it's still only 55 percent, and compared to the fourth, it's merely 56 percent.


Bottom Line: Scouts and GMs just aren't good enough to figure out who should really be in round 1 or round 2 or round 3 and are better off trading down for the most part.

Palmer turned the ball over 15! times more than Alex Smith.

You really don't think 15 more turnovers last year would have cost us 3+ games? Seriously?

And that's how they lost out on Marcus Cooper.