Tasker

I'm very happy to see this in the SF boards, and hope it is in their front office notebooks too. I might be happy with Davis if he is the best available at #8, but I would love to see him in the to 7 with SF or Oakland picking him. If he is in the top seven with Bush, three QBs, Hawk, and Brick, it would mean Mario Williams is ours. Mario Williams > Brick > Davis > Ngata, so I'm looking forward to Ngata being available for whoever is picking at #9. I don't know enough about Hawk, but I'm really hoping none of the three QBs falls out of the top 7 messing things up.

The little I've seen of Davis he impresses me, but there really has to be a significant gap in talent between him and other people on the board in our scouts' eyes to pick a TE at #8. I'd much rather have Davis than Ngata, who I've thought was overrated since the first time I saw him play. Can't we send this hype to Al Davis? He loves speed, and picks ahead of us. If he fixates on Davis the way some people are, he could let someone else slide by. Three QBs, Bush, Brick, Vernon Davis, and Hawk are seven picks, and that would force Mario Williams to us. I know Super Mario's stock has risen, but if those seven guys (or Ngata or others) pick before the Bills we could end up with the guy we want. I would even trade up for Mario if the cost isn't too great. I want two things from this draft: 1) Getting the most talented players for the next five years 2) Addressing the lines If we can do both great (Brick, Mario), but I think 1) is just barely more important than 2), especially in the first round, so if Davis is better than other guys there I can live with it.

Or we could play Losman while upgrading the rest of the team as much as possible (especially both lines), and after having given him a 16 game shot (instead of the BS 5-11 nightmare that Mularkey weaved in 2005) we can evaluate next winter if we need to find another option, and our team will be stronger for it. We know our lines suck, we don't have play makers at TE, we have some holes on D. We don't know if our Quarterback will be good or not yet. Play JP, fix the play calling (maybe let Willis play sometimes!), and upgrade the team the best we can, focusing on the lines. Then next winter let's talk about how our QB situation is looking.

I completely agree. I don't want to exaggerate and take the bad throws off of JPL's shoulders, but since the difference between his 49% and a 55% is 12 catches, you figure that between the times he got rid of the ball instead of taking a sack, the balls Reed dropped, and playing hurt in bad weather against New England he might be better than a 49% QB, and holding up that number is silly (whether compared against Elway or Eli Manning). That doesn't forgive him for missing an open Moulds against Carolina , but I think this kid with the right team and coaching, and a fair chance, can be our QB for a long time, and we can focus on building the rest of our team around him and Willis. We should certainly "open it up" in camp, although if he and Holcomb are the two choices, it better come out with JP on top. We should certainly review next winter with a 16 start season under his belt, and go another direction, but this off season we need to forget about QB aquisitions, and build the rest of the team the best we can.

Not addressing the lines would be foolish. Taking Davis over Ngata does not mean not addressing the lines. We aren't drafting for 2006 only. I like the idea of Brick or Super Mario or Ngata, but guys who know more than I do have to evaluate the talents available, and take the player that will be most valuable to this team over the next five years. Position does matter, and addressing the lines is our number 1 off season priority, but if Davis is viewed as a better five year player than Ngata, and we address the lines with the rest of the draft and free agency, I have no problem picking him. What I would really like is if Oakland takes Davis as his stock rises, and we get something like this: 1 HOU - Bush 2 NO - Leinart 3 TEN - Young 4 NYJ - Cutler 5 GB - Brick 6 Oak - Davis 7 SF - Hawk 8 BUFFALO - MARIO WILLIAMS There are other combinations which push Super Mario down, but I think I'm just dreaming. Either way, there is quality at 8, especially if three QBs are already off the board, so evaluate talent and personalities, and get somebody good.

Mario Williams? I'm not saying how much I would give up to go up and pick him, but I would much rather have him than whover is available at 8, and would be exploring all options to trade up and get him, and only decide based on how much it would cost us, not on him not being worth trading up. Also, a quick hit on the Losman stuff. He threw 228 passes and completed 113 of them for 49.6%. If he completed one more that percentage would start with a 5 instead of a 4, and we would probably be a little less worried, strangely. Also, it would have taken 12 more completions to get to 55%. Not making any excuses for the guy, but a few Josh Reed drops, bad protection, playing hurt in the NE game, and terrible play calling by Mularkey factored in too. After coming back from his "month off" he completed 56% against KC, 55% against SD, 55% against Carolina, all three very solid teams. We don't know what we have with him yet, but I am very optimistic. We do not take a QB in the draft this year. We start JPL 16 times in 2006 with the best team and play calling we can have around him, then evaluate more next winter.

You would rather have Bush and Willis than Mario and Willis?

I know I'm feeding the troll, but why does this thread exist? It shows that the lack of moderation of this forum detracts from it significantly. We have way too many threads as it is, we don't need something like this.

Or Washington meaning we don't pick Ngata, and take Davis (I know, lines first) or trade up for Super Mario. Still, 37 is pretty old, and even older when you are carrying around 365lbs. I wonder how much he has left in the tank. I haven't seen him play for a couple years, but my gut likes the idea.

Yeah, my bad. Actually, I meant to have him and not Ngata in that group. I don't see a team picking Ngata when Williams is available, but he could join the list. The three QBs, Bush, Brick, and Hawk could all be chosen while Williams is available. I guess we will have to wait and see. I would just much rather have Super Mario than Ngata, and am trying to play games in my head of how that is possible. I sure hope Vince Young doesn't slip out of the top 7, because that would mess things up further.

Mario Williams is the best hope we have. If three QBs, Bush, Hawk, and Ngata go in the top 7, then we only need one team to stretch for us to get Mario without trading up. I don't see that happening, so I would consider a trade up. I'm excited over the Davis excitement, because as much as I like him, we need a lineman, so getting him into the top 7 would help. Any other ideas on player who could crack the top 7 with rising stock combine performances?

Assuming Bush, Leinart, and Young are top 7, for us not to get one of Ngata, Hawk, Brick, or Super Mario, those four have to be the exact players filling out the top seven and nobody else. If one other player gets into the top seven, we get Ngata, Brick or Super Mario (or Hawk, but I see him higher, and don't really want LB help). So the real question is will anybody else slide into the top 7? Or will we be stuck with those seven gone, and need to get Huff or trade down, or reach for somebody else who isn't a top 8 pick. If Cutler moves into a top 7 (Jets or a trade), we are looking good. Ditto for Huff, White, or anybody else. I still consider trading up for the right deal if it means Brick or Mario. I wouldn't trade up for Ngata, who I don't think will be better right away than Sam Adams, and is worth an 8 pick, but not an 8 pick and extra picks needed to trade up. Edit: I've been watching some combine coverage, and hear more and more that Cutler will be taken before 8 (good news for the Bills), some people saying top 5 or even top 3.

The Young bashing makes me laugh. He has some flaws and quirks, but this guy will be better than Leinart and Cutler. Of course I'm not interested because I think JPL will be better than Leinart and Cutler, and we need help in the trenches.

Couldn't agree more. I'm not that interested in Huff, but if we get forced into him and can't trade down (for a team that wants Cutler, etc), then we might have to take him as the top talent rather than reaching for a lineman. What I'm really hoping is that Cutler, White, or somebody else slides into that top 7, Oak or SF pick Ngata, and we get Super Mario. Seems possible, but not that likely.

I'm sold on JPL being our best option for 2006, and he better get 16 starts as we rebuild. Based on how he does in those 16 starts, next winter we decide if he is the direction we want to go (I think so now), or if we need to do something else. But there are no options we have now to do better than JPL, and we have more important areas to address this off season while giving JPL the chance he deserves after what we have invested/risked on him.

Tough to see Ngata, Ferguson, Mario Williams all gone, with Hawk being a top 7 pick on almost every list I've seen, and especially with Cutler's stock rising and pushing him into the top 7 in a lot of possibilities (from an article today): I'm very happy with Williams, Ferguson, or Ngata (in that order).

Absolutely. The season could have gone different and we could have had a chance at Peppers, but I think you clearly pick Mike Williams with that pick, unless you have picked up something the rest of us haven't (that he is a loser on the inside). I don't blame TD for Mike Williams nearly as much as other picks. I blame Mike Williams for Mike Williams. That much physical talent and no heart lead to one big loser. That much physical talent and an average heart and you have a stud. That much heart and a superstar heart and you have a legend. We got unlucky, but there are many other top four picks just as bad. The hindsight thing is silly. All that said, we need a great draft this year, with a combination of research and scouting, smart decisions, and good luck. That and Mario Williams slipping to 8

Losman should study, but he should also get ready to play. Only Mularky would bench him for Holcomb and a 5-11 season. Maybe he will get it all right away, maybe it will take some time, maybe he won't get it. But he better get 16 starts in 2006. The WR are fine, and will be fine. Not that they can't study and be coached, but they aren't our problem. McGahee will be fine too. Remember he was doing pretty well until Mularky told him to shut up instead of backing him. Willis shouldn't have gone south after that, but with that lack of respect from his coach, no stretching the defense with 2-yard dump holcumb, our crappy o-line, and 3rd and goal Shelton, and not much to play for, it was easy to get off track. I think we play JPL and improve our line, play calling, and coaching motivation skills, and Willis will continue on his path to greatness.

Three years from now the player from this draft people will talk about is Mario Williams (and Reggie Bush, but that's not news). Obviously we take him at 8 if he falls there, and I would consider all options to trade up to 4-7, but I don't think any of those will work out for us. Ngata seems like the best fit. If he is gone, there should be quality available in someone else. I usually like taking the best players over filling needs, but it would be hard to not address the lines with that pick.

If I had the 4th pick I would take Mario Williams over D'Brick as well. I think he will fall lower than 4, but probably not to 8, so I would consider trading up if the cost of doing so is made up for by the difference of player. I'm not sure what it would take to get us to 4, 5, 6, or 7. I'm also not sure yet what a difference 4 to 8 will be. I'm still hoping a few players I don't really want can find their way in there, like the Jets trading down a little but staying ahead of us meaning they take Cutler. There will be quality at 8, and if a few faces like Cutler or White sneak into the top 7 we should do just fine. Four is better than 8, but not a huge cost.

I like the Ngata pick. He seems solid, and addresses a need. I think we need the best lineman available either way. My preference is clearly Mario Williams, who won't go top 4, but I have a tough time seeing him get past 5-6-7. We need an OL in the second or third round. I wouldn't mind seeing a tight end somewhere, but no way we pick one that high. Anybody who watched this season knows that losing in the trenches was our biggest problem. Between the draft and free agency, I think we can fix things pretty well, but we need a really well executed draft to get us quality.

My big question at this point (a little off topic) is who else has a chance to sneak into the top 7 and bump one of those seven down to us? Who on your list of 10 available for us might sneak into the top 7 and push someone better down? (Mario Williams, please please please). I've heard some of the Cutler to the Jets talk, but am doubtful. Of the players you list, Davis, Holmes, White, Huff, and both Williams play positions not in the top 7, so could potentially be a need pick (although I'm not expecting any of this to happen). So if the top 5 go as you picked them, then San Fran going for a defensive back and taking Huff and Oakland sticking with Ngata would push Mario Williams to us. Probably not going to happen, but I'm really hoping somebody's stock rises or someone drafts based on need, leaving us with a better player.

So who are the names that could go in the top 7 ahead of us? Definite: Bush, Lienart, Young Possible: Hawk, D'Brick, Mario Williams, Dmeca Ryans, Ngata, Winston Justice, Lendale White, Kiwanuka, Huff, Hali, Cutler. Can people add anybody else who has a shot of going in the top 7? I'm still looking for ways for Mario Williams to fall to us, so anytime I hear any new name listed as a possible top seven pick, I get excited.

I think we could have gone 5-11 or better with 16 JPL starts, but that is correctly water under the bridge. Rather than compare Carson Palmer or Eli Manning, MM thought he was doing a Philip Rivers / Drew Brees thing, and the results on the field proved him very very wrong. But we also can't be tied to the past. I don't want to start JPL because we spent a high pick on him, or because he deserves the chance. I want to start JPL because I think that is the best option right now for us achieving our main goal: get back to the playoffs and try to win the Super Bowl. If a better QB option falls on our lap (including with the #8 pick or free agency), I am all for it, but I think with limited draft picks and limited cap space, our resources can be better spent to address other needs, and give JPL an honest shot in 2006. KH is a great backup, but is only a backup or stopgap. Which means you play him for one of two reasons: starter injured, or no other option. I think JPL is not to the no other option point, and needs to start. I think that everything is open, and an inferior player should not be given the job based on politics. But I think that JPL is better, and I think any plan to do better than JPL for 2006 will be too costly to be justified. So start JPL, backup KH, and build the best team and gameplan you can around that decision. If after 16 starts JPL clearly isn't the answer, cut bait after next season if a better option can be found.

JPL is better than Holcomb, and gives this team a better chance to win than Holcomb. That was true all year long this year (manipulate the stats to back another point of view if you want, but I think that is silly), and that is going to get truer every game that he plays. His ability to succeed this year and win was hurt by the flip flopping and lack of support from MM, but he still was the guy. Do people out there think that if he played 16 games we would have finished 4-12 or worse? If so I think you guys are crazy. I am very strongly of the opinion that if JPL had started 16 games we would have been as successful if not more successful in 2005, and more importantly more prepared for 2006. If he proves not to be what optimists think he can be, and we can upgrade our more by finding a new quarterback than by fixing other issues, then I am fine with that. But he should have started 16 games this year, and I would rather address the lines and the offensive game plan and let him start 16 times next year than see Kelly Holcomb play or than try to start again in the draft or use cap space for a free agent QB. Beating Cincy didn't make Holcomb a good quarterback, just like his big playoff game against Pittsburgh years ago didn't. Maybe there are people out there who hold out hope Holcomb will become something he is not at the moment (a playoff caliber quarterback), but I think it is a little more realistic to expect JPL to impove than KH, given age and experience. LET JP PLAY!