Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

If Sewell is drafted before #8...


MHS831
 Share

Recommended Posts

There are going to be temptations laid before our team. Best Player Available is almost always the right direction to go... except for right now. We have to avoid the temptations of Pitt and Parsons and go for a LT right away at #8. No effin' around and trading down, no trading up, no toying with the idea of a CB.

Pick the danged LT and give the new QB a chance to compete in the system. If we don't take one of the three stud OTs in the draft (and my pick is Slater, then Sewell, then Darrisaw) then we're going to put  the young Darnold out there in another situation like he faced with the Jets. He simply won't stand a chance and the gamble on him will never have even a shot at paying out.

If we grab a great LT and that guy  performs at the expected level, then we can truly evaluate the Darnold move under the best of conditions. We will know if there's hope there or if we swing for QB next time around.

If we do anything else, there's too much wiggle room in the results. Too much of a chance that a poor performance by Darnold will be because of bad line play. It seems stupidly simple, but it really is that straightforward.

  • Pie 5
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darrisaw may be the 2nd best LT in the class but that doesn't mean anything. He's a power man blocker. He doesn't fit the scheme man. Folks have to learn it isn't always about who's the best it's about who can do what we want them to do. If the 49ers draft Mac it isn't necessarily because they think he's the 3rd best QB but it's because they think he can do what they want him to do. This is why when owners draft for their team the results never work out. Good teams draft the right players for their scheme and everything else be damned. 

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article.  I know Slater did a great job with ROY Chase Young, and that means a lot.

I don't want to miss on a starting LT this year.  I don't want to trade back and miss all 3.  If 2 of the 3 are available when we pick, I wouldn't trade back more than to 10 and only if we know one will be there.

Pitts is the player that will make things interesting...Falcons love him, Cowboys love him, and Verge suggested today we like him so much we could trade up to get him.

I don't think Pitts will get close enough to our pick to make a trade, and knowing he'll be one of the non-QBs taken brings us closer to Slater and possibly even Sewell.  

A late 3rd is the value to move back from 8 to 10, and for that, the risk is not worth it to me.  I'm staying put and taking the LT that falls to us.

If 4 QBs and Pitts go in the first 5 picks, all we need is for one of the two remaining teams ahead of us to take a CB, trade to a team that wants the fifth QB, and we get one of Sewell or Slater.  If we feel Darrisaw is better than Slater....take him there.

Fix LT and fixing the rest of the line is easy.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Pitts, Sewell, and Chase are just on a level of their own.  I would throw Trevor on that pile--4 players who are the best of the best. 

If one is there, you have to have a plan to take him.

Thats me after the Darnold trade. Each still have some level of hope they reach the Panthers. 

Pitts- its ultra rare for TE to be draft in the top 7. Especially with stud WRs and QB on the same level

Chase- 4 or 5 QB land in the top seven. miami listens to their Bama QB and takes Waddle. Chase falls to panthers

Sewell- QBs, WRs......O MY!!! Sewell acts his age and needs coaching....shocking huh? Penalize him for convid-out, fine by me if hes there for panthers.

 

Simple math only 7 players can be drafted before pick 8. If 49ers take Jones that greatly helps one of the non-QBs to fall to the Panthers. All they have to do is wait and not take the cheese like 49ers did. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Captain Morgan said:

Interesting article.  I know Slater did a great job with ROY Chase Young, and that means a lot.

I don't want to miss on a starting LT this year.  I don't want to trade back and miss all 3.  If 2 of the 3 are available when we pick, I wouldn't trade back more than to 10 and only if we know one will be there.

Pitts is the player that will make things interesting...Falcons love him, Cowboys love him, and Verge suggested today we like him so much we could trade up to get him.

I don't think Pitts will get close enough to our pick to make a trade, and knowing he'll be one of the non-QBs taken brings us closer to Slater and possibly even Sewell.  

A late 3rd is the value to move back from 8 to 10, and for that, the risk is not worth it to me.  I'm staying put and taking the LT that falls to us.

If 4 QBs and Pitts go in the first 5 picks, all we need is for one of the two remaining teams ahead of us to take a CB, trade to a team that wants the fifth QB, and we get one of Sewell or Slater.  If we feel Darrisaw is better than Slater....take him there.

Fix LT and fixing the rest of the line is easy.

If you are picking Slater as your LT you may ending wanting more.  Steady guy but I am not sold he is a franchise LT.  I think he has pretty decent bust factor.  I doubt he busts completely but rather ends up at G.

Edited by Shocker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve always been a fan of trading back but when I do the mocks, if you wait past the teens, you can get a good OT prospect or an RT, but not someone guaranteed to start at LT. I also like Darrisaw as LT2. So Sewell or Darrisaw at 8. Still good CB available at 39, then OL at 73.

I’m also warming to the idea of trading back at 39 if an offer is available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...