Login

TheO-LineMatters · 02-02-2021, 02:20 PM

(02-02-2021, 12:17 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote:
(02-02-2021, 11:50 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: If we are switching to a 3-4 defense, I already have Hamilton penciled in as our starting NT. We started the season out pretty poorly in run defense, but once Abry Jones got hurt and Hamilton got more playing time as the starter, our run defense improved quite a bit and even looked competent. He even graded out among the best DT's in the league during that time. It was only after Hamilton got hurt, that the run defense fell to pieces. In my mind, I saw enough to make him the 2021 starting NT no matter what scheme we run. I don't see an immediate need for a DT, unless we are sticking with a 4-3 scheme. In that case, I'd probably address the position with the #33 pick, as I would definitely take a LT at #25. We simply cannot risk losing out on the best OT's, when we're bringing in a rookie QB who is the #1 pick and we have a massive hole at both OT spots.

Personally, I think it's a long shot that we sign Trent Williams in free agency. I truly believe the Niners will do whatever they have to do to get him re-signed before free agency. This is an unusual year for me as I like multiple OT's in this class. Normally, I get fixated on one, maybe two, but this year there are several really good players who imo, would be significant upgrades over Cam Robinson. The problem is that there has been such a scarcity of talent at LT in the last few drafts and teams are gonna select these players rather quickly. With that said, I still believe one or more of the LT's I talked about will be on the board at #25, so I have no desire to trade up. I think we are in a very good position. As for RT, no matter how poorly Jawaan Taylor played last season, I don't think the team is gonna part with him just yet. I believe the best we can do is bring in some good competition for the starting RT spot. Luckily, Taylor set the bar so low, it should be fairly easy to find a better RT in the 3rd to 4th round area of the draft.

As for TE, I'm in the minority. I just don't consider it a need that is big enough to spend a high round pick on. Plenty of good NFL teams can survive without outstanding play from the TE position. Buffalo is a good example. They have competent TE's, but they are nothing that stands out. Kansas City and Travis Kelce is more of an anomaly than what we normally see. Gronk is another example. I believe a good QB, like we're getting in Lawrence, can make decent TE's look much better than they would otherwise be. He didn't even utilize the TE that much at Clemson and he was outstanding. I know we haven't had great play for the TE spot for many years, but we've never really had consistently good QB play since Mark Brunell was here. I believe those two are directly related. As I also said, rookie TE's usually take a long while to develop. Would we really wanna spend that #33 pick on a TE that might take 2-3 years to come into his own or wouldn't we be better off spending that pick that on a defensive player that might make an impact in the first season or two? I'll take the defensive player every time. That doesn't mean I ignore the position. I make TE a priority in free agency.

I'm not really a fan of waiting until #45 to take a CB, but if we stick with a 4-3 scheme, that is most likely going to be the scenario, since getting a 3 technique would be a must. This is a down year for the CB position and to be honest, the real impact guys are gonna either be gone or very thinned out by #45. I consider it a much bigger need than TE and I'd have to see who is left on the board at #33 to decide between CB and 3 technique (if we stuck to a 4-3 base.) I specifically would prefer a CB with size, as Caldwell brought in a bunch of smaller, mid to late round corners last season, which infuriated me. NFL WR's are getting bigger and faster and we need bigger, physical corners to match up with them.

What I would do in round 2 on, is based solely what we intend to use as our base defense and who we sign in free agency, but no matter what, I wanna keep all or as many picks as we have now. We have a ton of needs. I specifically am against trading any first or second day picks. That is gonna be where we should find most of our starters.

Where would you play Parsons? We are stuck with Schobert, at least through next season and Jack is definitely penciled in as either the WLB or the other ILB, depending on whether we switch to a 3-4 scheme. You'd basically be trading up to provide depth at LB. We need immediate starters.
I'd play him in the middle and move Schobert to Sam in 4-3 packages. I'm not gonna let a Schoberts contract affect me from getting a elite LB. I'm not drafting position lm, I'm drafting the best players.

I don't really consider what I'm doing drafting for position, since we have so many positions that we need. I'm just anticipating which guys will be left by the time we pick how they would line up on my value board. As for Parson's, apparently you see way more value in him then I do. I just think this is a pretty weak linebacker class. I have Zaven Collins on top with a big dropoff to the next guy. I'm not saying Parson's is a bad player by any means. I just don't think he's gonna be impactful enough to give him a first round grade. I know someone will draft him in the first round, maybe even top 10, but I don't value him that high.

(02-02-2021, 12:23 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote: Passing on a great player because you fill the need to fill in a position is one of the reasons we are in a position we are in now

Agreed. I just don't see Parson's as a "great" player. I don't even think he's the best Linebacker in this class.

(02-02-2021, 12:41 PM)The Eleventh Doctor Wrote: Put the team in the best position to win.

If the value of Player A is greater than the Value of Players B + C (+ So on) then you make the trade. If not, then you don't. The question becomes is it better to have Player A than having both Player B and Player C (and so forth).

Agreed.