What The Niners did with the Picks from the AS trade

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by OldSchool

The Niners would have been better off using those early picks on their perceived "weaknesses". CB and WR, taking other positions only if the player available is clearly better than anything else on the board. However, I guess that they kind of had little choice after the top 7 DBs already went well before their pick. Idiots should have used some to move up and grab Roby or something.

Yeah....it kind of surprised me that they just kept trading down.

[Jakemall]

Originally Posted by Pestilence

Yeah....it kind of surprised me that they just kept trading down.

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.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Jakemall

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.

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.

[Jakemall]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

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.

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.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by Jakemall

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.

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

[Jakemall]

Originally Posted by Pestilence

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

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.

[ct]

Originally Posted by OldSchool

The Niners would have been better off using those early picks on their perceived "weaknesses". CB and WR, taking other positions only if the player available is clearly better than anything else on the board. However, I guess that they kind of had little choice after the top 7 DBs already went well before their pick. Idiots should have used some to move up and grab Roby or something.

they can always trade for flowers, 2nd round pick should do it

ok i'll stop

[Mr. Laz]

that as much about the 49ers trading around in the draft and the Chiefs just sitting there than it is the Smith trade


apparently we have another ultra conservative GM who either doesn't know how or doesn't believe in maneuvering around. Frustrating

That said, imo the 49ers would have been better moving up and grabbing 4 studs than a bunch of guys who probably won't be able to make their talented roster.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

that as much about the 49ers trading around in the draft and the Chiefs just sitting there than it is the Smith trade


apparently we have another ultra conservative GM who either doesn't know how or doesn't believe in maneuvering around. Frustrating

That said, imo the 49ers would have been better moving up and grabbing 4 studs than a bunch of guys who probably won't be able to make their talented roster.

This.

[ct]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

that as much about the 49ers trading around in the draft and the Chiefs just sitting there than it is the Smith trade


apparently we have another ultra conservative GM who either doesn't know how or doesn't believe in maneuvering around. Frustrating

That said, imo the 49ers would have been better moving up and grabbing 4 studs than a bunch of guys who probably won't be able to make their talented roster.

Cleveland moved around and seemed to get some quality players, SF moved around and ended up with a bunch of ?s imo. Though the Stevie Johnson acquisition was nicely done. also the Brandon Thomas pick pissed me off. If we're gonna draft for the future anyway, he's the ultimate futures investment on the line.

have to say I still think Johnny busts out big time, as in another Cleveland qb fail

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

apparently we have another ultra conservative GM who either doesn't know how or doesn't believe in maneuvering around. Frustrating

I mentioned this earlier, but I'm not sure we can actually determine that yet. Because he traded for Smith, he had no 2nd in either draft, and he had a limited number of picks in both (8 last year, 6 now). That's not a lot of ammo for movement. Next year may give us a more clear window into what he wants to do, assuming we don't trade any more picks away for anyone. They should have double-digit picks, and (non comp) picks in every round.

Also the active teams tend to be the ones that have had multiple tradeable picks in the first three rounds (particularly 1st and 2nd). We just haven't been in that position (and probably won't be next year).

We've also been on the clock until the very last second with every pick. That indicates to me that they're talking, but maybe haven't gotten an offer they like. A lack of movement doesn't necessarily mean there's a lack of interest in movement, if that makes sense.

Guess we'll see next year. Maybe.

[-King-]

People seem more impressed at the quantity of the picks than the quality of them. Guess I don't get it
Posted via Mobile Device

[Deberg_1990]

Originally Posted by -King-

People seem more impressed at the quantity of the picks than the quality of them. Guess I don't get it
Posted via Mobile Device

What I've learned over time is that fans are always more critical of their own team than they are of others and always think the grass is greener.

For instance I work with fans of the Packers and Patriots. They always think their drafts suck. They are alot more critical of Rodgers and Brady than we are.

Human nature.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Kaepernick]

Originally Posted by -King-

People seem more impressed at the quantity of the picks than the quality of them. Guess I don't get it
Posted via Mobile Device

10 years ago, Hyde is a top 5 pick, but RBs are undervalued today. They still have real field value on power running offenses, as you will see from Hyde.

Tank Carradine projected to a top 10 pick before his injury.

The 49ers got 2 top 10 talents deep in the 2nd rounds. You do the math.

Throw in Stevie Johnson who has 3 consecutive 1000 yard seasons receiving basically from Matt Cassel.

Add Lemonier and Borland for kickers.

You will see the quality over time. You will be hearing these names called in the playoffs. Well actually, you will be seeing these guys week 5.

[Rausch]

After two off-seasons and two drafts I'm pretty much done.

Other than the Cooper find he's been piss poor at drafting.

He's been piss poor at the whole draft process (trading up/down and finding value.)

He's done a piss poor job of retaining talent and a piss poor job of replacing talent through free agency.

I'm throwing in my pink "Pioli" flag right now.

He doesn't trade, draft, or sign well.

Reid will likely buy him two more years because Reid makes poop smell like perfume...