AND WITH THE NINTH PICK OF THE 2018 NFL DRAFT...

CrimsonCrew · Post #281 » by **CrimsonCrew** » Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:52 pm

Grant Cohn's attempt at a seven-rounder for the niners:

http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/49ers-post-free-agency-7-round-mock-draft/

I don't like Sutton at #9, but I can't see him falling to 59 (or even close). Then there's this: "Sutton meets all the baseline physical requirements of a possession receiver in Kyle Shanahan’s offense." Whaaaaaa??? Baseline physical requirements? Dude had a great SPARQ score, and his quickness is off the charts for a guy that size.

I_am_1z · Post #282 » by **I_am_1z** » Thu Mar 22, 2018 3:17 am

CrimsonCrew wrote:Grant Cohn's attempt at a seven-rounder for the niners:

http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/49ers-post-free-agency-7-round-mock-draft/

I don't like Sutton at #9, but I can't see him falling to 59 (or even close). Then there's this: "Sutton meets all the baseline physical requirements of a possession receiver in Kyle Shanahan’s offense." Whaaaaaa??? Baseline physical requirements? Dude had a great SPARQ score, and his quickness is off the charts for a guy that size.

Sutton isn't open enough for someone who's that physically gifted. Also waits for the ball to come to him. I'm fairly confident he'll be another Josh Doctson/Jordan Matthews

Post #283 » by **Ray_Dogg** » Thu Mar 22, 2018 2:24 pm

I_am_1z wrote:
CrimsonCrew wrote:Grant Cohn's attempt at a seven-rounder for the niners:

http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/49ers-post-free-agency-7-round-mock-draft/

I don't like Sutton at #9, but I can't see him falling to 59 (or even close). Then there's this: "Sutton meets all the baseline physical requirements of a possession receiver in Kyle Shanahan’s offense." Whaaaaaa??? Baseline physical requirements? Dude had a great SPARQ score, and his quickness is off the charts for a guy that size.

Sutton isn't open enough for someone who's that physically gifted. Also waits for the ball to come to him. I'm fairly confident he'll be another Josh Doctson/Jordan Matthews

Josh Doctson is good, finally got healhty and started balling last season. Matthews isn't and never was imo, was not a fan of his coming out. I see Sutton as much better than Matthews and I think he could be a better all around player than Doctson.

Post #284 » by **CalamityX12** » Thu Mar 22, 2018 2:48 pm

Sutton in the 2nd is a great draft pick IMO.

Didn't like Cohen's trade with GB, I wanted at least GB's 2nd back...

I'll buy into G in the first if the value is there but I'm still for a speed pass rusher with our first pick(outside of Barkley & Nelson)

CrimsonCrew · Post #285 » by **CrimsonCrew** » Thu Mar 22, 2018 4:15 pm

I_am_1z wrote:
CrimsonCrew wrote:Grant Cohn's attempt at a seven-rounder for the niners:

http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/49ers-post-free-agency-7-round-mock-draft/

I don't like Sutton at #9, but I can't see him falling to 59 (or even close). Then there's this: "Sutton meets all the baseline physical requirements of a possession receiver in Kyle Shanahan’s offense." Whaaaaaa??? Baseline physical requirements? Dude had a great SPARQ score, and his quickness is off the charts for a guy that size.

Sutton isn't open enough for someone who's that physically gifted. Also waits for the ball to come to him. I'm fairly confident he'll be another Josh Doctson/Jordan Matthews

I'm not saying he plays that way, but I found it odd that Grant used the baseline phrase. Dude ran one of the best three-cones ever at that size. He's physically gifted, even if he is a possession receiver.

CrimsonCrew · Post #286 » by **CrimsonCrew** » Thu Mar 22, 2018 4:18 pm

CalamityX12 wrote:Sutton in the 2nd is a great draft pick IMO.

Didn't like Cohen's trade with GB, I wanted at least GB's 2nd back...

I'll buy into G in the first if the value is there but I'm still for a speed pass rusher with our first pick(outside of Barkley & Nelson)

Sure, if he's there we'd have to consider him. I just can't see him falling that far. There are numerous mocks that have him going to us at #9. That's very high IMO, but late second is very low.

Bingo_AlphaMan · Post #287 » by **Bingo_AlphaMan** » Thu Mar 22, 2018 5:20 pm

CrimsonCrew wrote:
CalamityX12 wrote:Sutton in the 2nd is a great draft pick IMO.

Didn't like Cohen's trade with GB, I wanted at least GB's 2nd back...

I'll buy into G in the first if the value is there but I'm still for a speed pass rusher with our first pick(outside of Barkley & Nelson)

Sure, if he's there we'd have to consider him. I just can't see him falling that far. There are numerous mocks that have him going to us at #9. That's very high IMO, but late second is very low.

If we trade back that far something tells me R. Smith might still be available, if he is that’s a no brainer pick IMO. We could still find a valuable guard with the early second round pick. With the extra pick we have accumulated (from trading back), we can even work out a better deal for us to move back in the late first early second to get our guard (Wynn/Hernandez). In all honesty, i’m even willing to not even draft a guard at all and simply allow Tomlinson, Cooper, and Joshua to duke it out in camp for the starting gig.

If R. Smith is gone (in Cohn’s scenario) then I’d get Goedert at at that spot and Malik Jefferson in the late first / early second. Again, I wouldn’t consider a guard until the 3rd or 4th round.

I_am_1z · Post #288 » by **I_am_1z** » Sat Mar 24, 2018 7:28 pm

If Kolton Miller and SQBK are off the board then it's time to trade back

Bingo_AlphaMan · Post #289 » by **Bingo_AlphaMan** » Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:51 am

This mock is insanely good. I would do backflips if come April something like this comes to reality:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/ninerswire.usatoday.com/2018/03/25/niners-wire-4-round-nfl-mock-draft-6-0-elite-defender-falls-to-49ers-at-no-9/amp/

Instead of Moore I’d rather a receiver like Anthony Miller. Instead of Davis maybe Jaire Alexander? Otherwise, i can’t really complain about this mock draft at all. Jefferson, Chubb, and Penny are all future pro bowlers.

Post #290 » by **CalamityX12** » Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:34 pm

Bingo_AlphaMan wrote:This mock is insanely good. I would do backflips if come April something like this comes to reality:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/ninerswire.usatoday.com/2018/03/25/niners-wire-4-round-nfl-mock-draft-6-0-elite-defender-falls-to-49ers-at-no-9/amp/

Instead of Moore I’d rather a receiver like Anthony Miller. Instead of Davis maybe Jaire Alexander? Otherwise, i can’t really complain about this mock draft at all. Jefferson, Chubb, and Penny are all future pro bowlers.

Chubb
Davis - fits the CB mold we're implementing
Jefferson - amazing steal IMO
Penny - very good
Moore - idc... lol i was sold at the first 4.

If the draft came out like that, then yes, I'd be happy... my concern would be Chubb...

Why?

I have yet to see someone explain to me or show me that Chubb is a threatening pass rusher. Is he a DE/OLB version of Solomon Thomas? I hear good to great things about all around and the bio of what you want in a defender. But the praise of high marks of being a pass rushing animal is not there... but doesn't mean he can't either.

So that would be my concern. I have Landry due to his speed and potential of being a pass rushing threat. Even if it means thats his only specialty... we have a lot of good to great defenders on the DL already(and growing)...but not a sack monster in the making yet. Buckner could be but the double teams won't allow it as often.

Bingo_AlphaMan · Post #291 » by **Bingo_AlphaMan** » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:03 pm

https://www.ninersnation.com/2018/3/26/17162744/nfl-mock-draft-2018-saquon-barkley-49ers-fit-kyle-shanahan-jerick-mckinnon

Bingo_AlphaMan · Post #292 » by **Bingo_AlphaMan** » Sat Mar 31, 2018 4:56 pm

Watch on YouTube

NinerSickness · Post #293 » by **NinerSickness** » Tue Apr 3, 2018 6:48 am

Still think it's going to be Minkah Fitzpatrick.

If not, my next guess would be Tremaine Edmunds.

Really hoping for a trade up or down.

Post #294 » by **CalamityX12** » Tue Apr 3, 2018 1:24 pm

with a lot of attention towards pass rusher by most 49ers sites, fans or official etc... i would not be surprised we didn't go after one lol....

it's one of those, all the eyes and attention are pointing that way where as in reality Lynch n Co. went the other way.

I'm preparing myself for a soon to be curveball.

CrimsonCrew · Post #295 » by **CrimsonCrew** » Tue Apr 3, 2018 6:12 pm

I'll be interested to see what they do. They weren't exactly a vault last year, with lots of folks pegging Thomas and Foster to the team at #2. A lot of people seem to have us going Edmunds or Davenport, which both make me a little sick. Not a big fan of physical phenoms who were only okay in college. Especially at LB, where instincts are so important. Edmunds seems to get bumped up because people think he could rush the passer, but he's never done it. And I'm hard-pressed to think of many guys other than Ahmad Brooks and maybe Hightower who have successfully transitioned to a pass-rush-heavy role after not doing it in college. Davenport just seems like a total project to me. I'd much rather have Landry or Smith over these guys.

wco81 · Post #296 » by **wco81** » Tue Apr 10, 2018 1:42 pm

McShay now has the 49ers taking Ridley.

CrimsonCrew · Post #297 » by **CrimsonCrew** » Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:37 pm

No way Ridley is worth #9. That would be a bad pick IMO.

wco81 · Post #298 » by **wco81** » Tue Apr 10, 2018 4:24 pm

He claims it would be a pick based on team need.

Post #299 » by **CalamityX12** » Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:02 pm

wco81 wrote:McShay now has the 49ers taking Ridley.

terrible.

lol

CrimsonCrew · Post #300 » by **CrimsonCrew** » Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:09 pm

wco81 wrote:He claims it would be a pick based on team need.

Which is silly. We have bigger needs at DE, CB, OG, LB, NT, OT, and arguably TE and RB. WR is probably one of our three or four strongest positions.

That's not to say we're set at the position by any means, and I'd be completely fine with using a second or third-round pick on a WR. Hell, I'd be okay with the 9th for the right WR. But Ridley isn't a game-changer, and there are much more talented players at actual positions of need. If we trade back into the late teens or twenties, Ridley's on the table. No way at 9.