Jake Moody-K-Michigan 3rd Round 2023 Draft

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Meh, only reason Hoodie traded up was b/c our FO locked in on a freaking PK in the 3rd round. Like with Wishnowsky, had we waited until the 5th, Hoodie would have taken the better player in the 6th like he did with Jake Bailey.

Hoodie had free reign to trade up too for Moody as well. No chance.

This is such a weird reading of the situation. The mental gymnastics you have to pull off to put down our FO while avoiding to put down the Patriots is impressive.

Simply follow the P situation. Mitch Wishnowsky was a "generational special teams weapon." Yet nobody else used a high pick on him. Not even Hoodie. Naturally if 2 or 3 players are coveted, the second one goes, the other must follow. No doubt had we waited until the 5th, Hoodie would have followed. But nobody but us prioritizes a P or PK that high.

That's faulty logic. You're basing this on assumptions that neither you or I know to be true. Correlation isn't causation.

it's just ironic to me that you're literally blaming the Niners FO for forcing one of the best coaches in history to pick kickers and punters rounds early. It's a comically bad take from a guy who seemingly justified any move Baalke made.

You're basing an assumption Hoodie would have traded up for him at 100 like Kyle noted. Nope. He didn't before. Why now? For all we know he has his guy rated higher and had to now trade up for him because he was next off the board after we took Moody at 3 and there was at least one other team who needed a P/K.

Not even Baalke would take a PK in the 3rd and a P in the 4th.

Please point out anywhere I've assumed anything. I'll wait.

You implied it by claiming I'm playing mental gymnastics. It's not that hard of a concept. If there are a consensus 3 quality QB's, the second the first goes, the next two will follow. No different here. Hoodie needed ST the same years we did. He clearly didn't like Wishnowsky and Moody enough to beat SF to the punch and he got just as much production from waiting like most teams.

Wut? Pointing out your illogical assumption does not equal me arguing in favor of the opposite assumption. You're just full of assumptions.

Illogical, even after we've already seen the pattern once before? LOL. K.

Illogical meaning the use of a logical fallacy. Correlation doesn't equal causation. You do understand that, right?

Except they did it again this time too. LOL.

Did what? You're so wrapped up in what you think is going on in brains of HOF coaches. It's really quite funny especially since you have to simultaneously put down our FO while defending BillB (who by the way once picked a long snapper right after Baalke took a punter, lulz (Pinion)).

NC when Pinion was a Baalke 5th rounder:

How many times have we been burned by a short KO or been unable to defend a punt in the playoffs/ Superbowl? If this guy can consistently keep the ball in the air for 5 seconds we have excellent gunners who should have no issues downing the ball or forcing a deep fair catch. He practices Aussie-style kicks as well AND FG's in the 52-62+ yard ranges.

Then if he kicks every ball out if the EZ (like up in Seattle with poor weather late in years/playoffs and for night games in the Santa Clara winds, Chicago, Lambeau, etc) he could be a huge weapon for us and really preserve the 40-year old Dawson as a result to focus on just FG's inside 50 yards. This guy could be a lock for this roster.

Is it OK to cheer for this guy? Too soon? Not PC?

Oh how the turn tables.

Thanks for proving my point on the 3rd example.

Unlike you, I learn. This is a perfect example of how he was hyped up as an offensive special teams weapon and in the end, he can't do kickoffs, we have to use our 50 year old PK to do it, isn't anymore effective in inclemental weather, and is no more productive than a P you'd get as an UDFA. It turns out the FO didn't factor in the elevation he was punting in.

But I'm excited you're so hyped about losing value on P's and PK's. That sounds like a winning stance!

I did/do like both players. Always did. It's just unlikely they'll be any more special than anyone else they could have taken much later in the end.

Pinion wasn't even a top 5 punter coming out. I think there's a difference between a consensus number 1 kicker and a guy that hadn't proven to be very good. The issue isn't taking the punter or kicker, if Pinion turns into Andy Lee the he'd have been more than worth it, the issue is the person selected. You live in this myopic space, probably dig yourself into a hole, I get it, but I'll reserve judgement on the pick once Moody has a chance to prove his worth. He becomes a pro-bowler on a rookie contract, great pick. He becomes a middle of the pack journeyman, then bad pick. I just don't understand the inclination to make such definitive conclusions based on such scant knowledge. Must be Dunning-Krueger at work.

Originally posted by swoosh6996:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
35 pages of posts...this kid is catching up to the Jimmy G thread

About 30 of it is whining and b***hing about the pick. He will probably pan out better than any other player we would have drafted instead.

After reading that he's tried for 8 other teams definitely makes me feel better. Dude would've been selected not long after our pick then. So great job by our FO making sure they got their guy.

Let's just hope he's gonna be a stud for us and a 49er for the next 15 years.

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Meh, only reason Hoodie traded up was b/c our FO locked in on a freaking PK in the 3rd round. Like with Wishnowsky, had we waited until the 5th, Hoodie would have taken the better player in the 6th like he did with Jake Bailey.

Hoodie had free reign to trade up too for Moody as well. No chance.

This is such a weird reading of the situation. The mental gymnastics you have to pull off to put down our FO while avoiding to put down the Patriots is impressive.

Simply follow the P situation. Mitch Wishnowsky was a "generational special teams weapon." Yet nobody else used a high pick on him. Not even Hoodie. Naturally if 2 or 3 players are coveted, the second one goes, the other must follow. No doubt had we waited until the 5th, Hoodie would have followed. But nobody but us prioritizes a P or PK that high.

That's faulty logic. You're basing this on assumptions that neither you or I know to be true. Correlation isn't causation.

it's just ironic to me that you're literally blaming the Niners FO for forcing one of the best coaches in history to pick kickers and punters rounds early. It's a comically bad take from a guy who seemingly justified any move Baalke made.

You're basing an assumption Hoodie would have traded up for him at 100 like Kyle noted. Nope. He didn't before. Why now? For all we know he has his guy rated higher and had to now trade up for him because he was next off the board after we took Moody at 3 and there was at least one other team who needed a P/K.

Not even Baalke would take a PK in the 3rd and a P in the 4th.

Please point out anywhere I've assumed anything. I'll wait.

You implied it by claiming I'm playing mental gymnastics. It's not that hard of a concept. If there are a consensus 3 quality QB's, the second the first goes, the next two will follow. No different here. Hoodie needed ST the same years we did. He clearly didn't like Wishnowsky and Moody enough to beat SF to the punch and he got just as much production from waiting like most teams.

Wut? Pointing out your illogical assumption does not equal me arguing in favor of the opposite assumption. You're just full of assumptions.

Illogical, even after we've already seen the pattern once before? LOL. K.

Illogical meaning the use of a logical fallacy. Correlation doesn't equal causation. You do understand that, right?

Except they did it again this time too. LOL.

Did what? You're so wrapped up in what you think is going on in brains of HOF coaches. It's really quite funny especially since you have to simultaneously put down our FO while defending BillB (who by the way once picked a long snapper right after Baalke took a punter, lulz (Pinion)).

NC when Pinion was a Baalke 5th rounder:

How many times have we been burned by a short KO or been unable to defend a punt in the playoffs/ Superbowl? If this guy can consistently keep the ball in the air for 5 seconds we have excellent gunners who should have no issues downing the ball or forcing a deep fair catch. He practices Aussie-style kicks as well AND FG's in the 52-62+ yard ranges.

Then if he kicks every ball out if the EZ (like up in Seattle with poor weather late in years/playoffs and for night games in the Santa Clara winds, Chicago, Lambeau, etc) he could be a huge weapon for us and really preserve the 40-year old Dawson as a result to focus on just FG's inside 50 yards. This guy could be a lock for this roster.

Is it OK to cheer for this guy? Too soon? Not PC?

Oh how the turn tables.

Thanks for proving my point on the 3rd example.

Unlike you, I learn. This is a perfect example of how he was hyped up as an offensive special teams weapon and in the end, he can't do kickoffs, we have to use our 50 year old PK to do it, isn't anymore effective in inclemental weather, and is no more productive than a P you'd get as an UDFA. It turns out the FO didn't factor in the elevation he was punting in.

But I'm excited you're so hyped about losing value on P's and PK's. That sounds like a winning stance!

I did/do like both players. Always did. It's just unlikely they'll be any more special than anyone else they could have taken much later in the end.

Pinion wasn't even a top 5 punter coming out.

You could have ended the discussion right there. That's exactly the point. Like Andy Lee drafted in the 6th round. You got less skills and less production from a 4th rounder.

It's generally not a huge ordeal.

The topic is value and what you passed on as well as the PK's taken later (4th-UDFA's) and did they do better in the end?

Stay tuned, but I'll stick with history, probability and patterns of this FO and what that's told me.

So far, you're 0-1. Hopefully you'll be right on this one but to question fans questioning the value of this pick is comical.

Take the Tankle approach and say you feel its a great pick without the defamation of others. Take a 'chance.'

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by swoosh6996:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
35 pages of posts...this kid is catching up to the Jimmy G thread

About 30 of it is whining and b***hing about the pick. He will probably pan out better than any other player we would have drafted instead.

After reading that he's tried for 8 other teams definitely makes me feel better. Dude would've been selected not long after our pick then. So great job by our FO making sure they got their guy.

Let's just hope he's gonna be a stud for us and a 49er for the next 15 years.

That's exactly how I feel. If he is a great kicker we have peace of mind for 15 years easy. At pick 99 that's fine by me. Who else would we have taken? He is the only starter from this draft imo. The other picks are all depth and special teams.

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
After reading that he's tried for 8 other teams definitely makes me feel better. Dude would've been selected not long after our pick then. So great job by our FO making sure they got their guy.

Let's just hope he's gonna be a stud for us and a 49er for the next 15 years.

One thing that I really like about him that was a major knock for me on Aguayo is that he has experience kicking in really f**ked up conditions.

Aguayo had zero experience kicking in cold weather, for the most part he was kicking in perfect, sunny conditions. He faced little actual adversity and his coaches protected him from having to take unfavorable kicks. The moment he hit actual adversity in the NFL, he was done.

On the other hand, Harbaugh had Moody out there trying out 60+ yard kicks in the cold.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
After reading that he's tried for 8 other teams definitely makes me feel better. Dude would've been selected not long after our pick then. So great job by our FO making sure they got their guy.

Let's just hope he's gonna be a stud for us and a 49er for the next 15 years.

One thing that I really like about him that was a major knock for me on Aguayo is that he has experience kicking in really f**ked up conditions.

Aguayo had zero experience kicking in cold weather, for the most part he was kicking in perfect, sunny conditions. He faced little actual adversity and his coaches protected him from having to take unfavorable kicks. The moment he hit actual adversity in the NFL, he was done.

On the other hand, Harbaugh had Moody out there trying out 60+ yard kicks in the cold.

Did the kick go through the uprights?

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Meh, only reason Hoodie traded up was b/c our FO locked in on a freaking PK in the 3rd round. Like with Wishnowsky, had we waited until the 5th, Hoodie would have taken the better player in the 6th like he did with Jake Bailey.

Hoodie had free reign to trade up too for Moody as well. No chance.

This is such a weird reading of the situation. The mental gymnastics you have to pull off to put down our FO while avoiding to put down the Patriots is impressive.

Simply follow the P situation. Mitch Wishnowsky was a "generational special teams weapon." Yet nobody else used a high pick on him. Not even Hoodie. Naturally if 2 or 3 players are coveted, the second one goes, the other must follow. No doubt had we waited until the 5th, Hoodie would have followed. But nobody but us prioritizes a P or PK that high.

That's faulty logic. You're basing this on assumptions that neither you or I know to be true. Correlation isn't causation.

it's just ironic to me that you're literally blaming the Niners FO for forcing one of the best coaches in history to pick kickers and punters rounds early. It's a comically bad take from a guy who seemingly justified any move Baalke made.

You're basing an assumption Hoodie would have traded up for him at 100 like Kyle noted. Nope. He didn't before. Why now? For all we know he has his guy rated higher and had to now trade up for him because he was next off the board after we took Moody at 3 and there was at least one other team who needed a P/K.

Not even Baalke would take a PK in the 3rd and a P in the 4th.

Please point out anywhere I've assumed anything. I'll wait.

You implied it by claiming I'm playing mental gymnastics. It's not that hard of a concept. If there are a consensus 3 quality QB's, the second the first goes, the next two will follow. No different here. Hoodie needed ST the same years we did. He clearly didn't like Wishnowsky and Moody enough to beat SF to the punch and he got just as much production from waiting like most teams.

Wut? Pointing out your illogical assumption does not equal me arguing in favor of the opposite assumption. You're just full of assumptions.

Illogical, even after we've already seen the pattern once before? LOL. K.

Illogical meaning the use of a logical fallacy. Correlation doesn't equal causation. You do understand that, right?

Except they did it again this time too. LOL.

Did what? You're so wrapped up in what you think is going on in brains of HOF coaches. It's really quite funny especially since you have to simultaneously put down our FO while defending BillB (who by the way once picked a long snapper right after Baalke took a punter, lulz (Pinion)).

NC when Pinion was a Baalke 5th rounder:

How many times have we been burned by a short KO or been unable to defend a punt in the playoffs/ Superbowl? If this guy can consistently keep the ball in the air for 5 seconds we have excellent gunners who should have no issues downing the ball or forcing a deep fair catch. He practices Aussie-style kicks as well AND FG's in the 52-62+ yard ranges.

Then if he kicks every ball out if the EZ (like up in Seattle with poor weather late in years/playoffs and for night games in the Santa Clara winds, Chicago, Lambeau, etc) he could be a huge weapon for us and really preserve the 40-year old Dawson as a result to focus on just FG's inside 50 yards. This guy could be a lock for this roster.

Is it OK to cheer for this guy? Too soon? Not PC?

Oh how the turn tables.

Originally posted by NCommand:
You could have ended the discussion right there. That's exactly the point. Like Andy Lee drafted in the 6th round. You got less skills and less production from a 4th rounder.

It's generally not a huge ordeal.

The topic is value and what you passed on as well as the PK's taken later (4th-UDFA's) and did they do better in the end?

Stay tuned, but I'll stick with history, probability and patterns of this FO and what that's told me.

So far, you're 0-1. Hopefully you'll be right on this one but to question fans questioning the value of this pick is comical.

Take the Tankle approach and say you feel its a great pick without the defamation of others. Take a 'chance.'

And what exactly did we pass on? This comes up every time a player gets drafted that someone thinks isn't as "good a value" as someone else who might have been available at that spot. It 's true of many players but especially true of the kickers we have selected in the last few years. The problem is that no one is willing to identity who they think that "someone else" might be. it's all just a bunch of vague talk about "better value".

When people were bellyaching and bedwetting about the Wishnowsky pick I said, fine, pick "A PLAYER" who was available at that spot that they thought would have been a better choice and at the end of the season we can see who ended up making more of a contribution to their respective teams. No one took me up on the offer because a lot of fourth round picks end up contributing nothing. And no, you can't go back now and cheery pick some player who ended up outperforming their draft position and saying, see they could have had this guy.

I made the same proposition when they drafted Moody, who was a compensatory third round pick at a number that would have, under normal circumstances, put the selection in the fourth round, but again, no one has taken me up on the offer. They just come in here and complain about how taking a kicker isn't "good value". They needed a kicker, so they got a kicker, I honestly don't see what all of the handwringing is about, especially this year. Without any picks until the end of the third round the chances of the team picking ANYONE in this draft who would turn out to be a day one starter on that roster was pretty small.

Placekickers generally lead their teams in scoring every year. They are in a position to have an impact on whether or not a team wins or loses a game every time they step on the field. How is that less valuable than a fourth round selection who might end up on the practice squad for three years, or is a rotational player who gets 15 snaps a game? Outside of the first two rounds maybe I think the only way to judge a player is do they end up contributing or not. It makes absolutely no difference to me where they were drafted.

In their first year, I think, the FO went after that kid Williams in the third and picked up Breida as a UDFA. Two running backs, one contributed one didn't. Same with Sermon and Mitchell. If the goal was to get a running back out of that draft then they succeeded, just not at the pick they might have envisioned. "But, but, but if they hadn't picked Sermon they could have had unidentified player x who would have ended up being a better "value" and Mitchell as well". Honestly, it's just all grist for the mill for people who are more invested in the "process" of the draft then they are in the outcome for the team.

I can honestly say that, outside of briefly wondering if DK Metcalf might have been a better pick than Samuel the year they came out (he probably wasn't in terms of how those respective teams are built), I have never once thought about how the team "could have had", this guy or that guy. It doesn't bother me one bit that they didn't draft Patrick Mahomes, it's all pointless hindsight. I prefer to root for the team we have rather than some imaginary team we might have had if only things had gone differently.

The 49ers have a long history of recycling other team's kickers and I have always hoped that one day they would select one of their own who would carve out his own niche as "the guy". Maybe Moody will be the one, in which case he will have been well worth the pick. Even if he isn't I suspect he will end up contributing more to the team than a lot of other players they might have selected there would have. In which case he will have still been well worth the pick. Go Niners!

Originally posted by 49ers81:

Originally posted by NCommand:
You could have ended the discussion right there. That's exactly the point. Like Andy Lee drafted in the 6th round. You got less skills and less production from a 4th rounder.

It's generally not a huge ordeal.

The topic is value and what you passed on as well as the PK's taken later (4th-UDFA's) and did they do better in the end?

Stay tuned, but I'll stick with history, probability and patterns of this FO and what that's told me.

So far, you're 0-1. Hopefully you'll be right on this one but to question fans questioning the value of this pick is comical.

Take the Tankle approach and say you feel its a great pick without the defamation of others. Take a 'chance.'

And what exactly did we pass on? This comes up every time a player gets drafted that someone thinks isn't as "good a value" as someone else who might have been available at that spot. It 's true of many players but especially true of the kickers we have selected in the last few years. The problem is that no one is willing to identity who they think that "someone else" might be. it's all just a bunch of vague talk about "better value".

When people were bellyaching and bedwetting about the Wishnowsky pick I said, fine, pick "A PLAYER" who was available at that spot that they thought would have been a better choice and at the end of the season we can see who ended up making more of a contribution to their respective teams. No one took me up on the offer because a lot of fourth round picks end up contributing nothing. And no, you can't go back now and cheery pick some player who ended up outperforming their draft position and saying, see they could have had this guy.

I made the same proposition when they drafted Moody, who was a compensatory third round pick at a number that would have, under normal circumstances, put the selection in the fourth round, but again, no one has taken me up on the offer. They just come in here and complain about how taking a kicker isn't "good value". They needed a kicker, so they got a kicker, I honestly don't see what all of the handwringing is about, especially this year. Without any picks until the end of the third round the chances of the team picking ANYONE in this draft who would turn out to be a day one starter on that roster was pretty small.

Placekickers generally lead their teams in scoring every year. They are in a position to have an impact on whether or not a team wins or loses a game every time they step on the field. How is that less valuable than a fourth round selection who might end up on the practice squad for three years, or is a rotational player who gets 15 snaps a game? Outside of the first two rounds maybe I think the only way to judge a player is do they end up contributing or not. It makes absolutely no difference to me where they were drafted.

In their first year, I think, the FO went after that kid Williams in the third and picked up Breida as a UDFA. Two running backs, one contributed one didn't. Same with Sermon and Mitchell. If the goal was to get a running back out of that draft then they succeeded, just not at the pick they might have envisioned. "But, but, but if they hadn't picked Sermon they could have had unidentified player x who would have ended up being a better "value" and Mitchell as well". Honestly, it's just all grist for the mill for people who are more invested in the "process" of the draft then they are in the outcome for the team.

I can honestly say that, outside of briefly wondering if DK Metcalf might have been a better pick than Samuel the year they came out (he probably wasn't in terms of how those respective teams are built), I have never once thought about how the team "could have had", this guy or that guy. It doesn't bother me one bit that they didn't draft Patrick Mahomes, it's all pointless hindsight. I prefer to root for the team we have rather than some imaginary team we might have had if only things had gone differently.

The 49ers have a long history of recycling other team's kickers and I have always hoped that one day they would select one of their own who would carve out his own niche as "the guy". Maybe Moody will be the one, in which case he will have been well worth the pick. Even if he isn't I suspect he will end up contributing more to the team than a lot of other players they might have selected there would have. In which case he will have still been well worth the pick. Go Niners!

You tell me? What could this team have needed back in 2019 on a Superbowl run over an below-average punter (at that time) at 110?

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-draft-picks-2019-complete-draft-results-rounds-1-3/1rm4xh2zhcdb11ode47x52k1x2

You can play the exact same exercise this year in 2023 on a similar roster. What did we need more at 99?

All that said, I hope the same as you do. Like Wish, I do like the player and time did and will, tell.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 49ers81:

Originally posted by NCommand:
You could have ended the discussion right there. That's exactly the point. Like Andy Lee drafted in the 6th round. You got less skills and less production from a 4th rounder.

It's generally not a huge ordeal.

The topic is value and what you passed on as well as the PK's taken later (4th-UDFA's) and did they do better in the end?

Stay tuned, but I'll stick with history, probability and patterns of this FO and what that's told me.

So far, you're 0-1. Hopefully you'll be right on this one but to question fans questioning the value of this pick is comical.

Take the Tankle approach and say you feel its a great pick without the defamation of others. Take a 'chance.'

And what exactly did we pass on? This comes up every time a player gets drafted that someone thinks isn't as "good a value" as someone else who might have been available at that spot. It 's true of many players but especially true of the kickers we have selected in the last few years. The problem is that no one is willing to identity who they think that "someone else" might be. it's all just a bunch of vague talk about "better value".

When people were bellyaching and bedwetting about the Wishnowsky pick I said, fine, pick "A PLAYER" who was available at that spot that they thought would have been a better choice and at the end of the season we can see who ended up making more of a contribution to their respective teams. No one took me up on the offer because a lot of fourth round picks end up contributing nothing. And no, you can't go back now and cheery pick some player who ended up outperforming their draft position and saying, see they could have had this guy.

I made the same proposition when they drafted Moody, who was a compensatory third round pick at a number that would have, under normal circumstances, put the selection in the fourth round, but again, no one has taken me up on the offer. They just come in here and complain about how taking a kicker isn't "good value". They needed a kicker, so they got a kicker, I honestly don't see what all of the handwringing is about, especially this year. Without any picks until the end of the third round the chances of the team picking ANYONE in this draft who would turn out to be a day one starter on that roster was pretty small.

Placekickers generally lead their teams in scoring every year. They are in a position to have an impact on whether or not a team wins or loses a game every time they step on the field. How is that less valuable than a fourth round selection who might end up on the practice squad for three years, or is a rotational player who gets 15 snaps a game? Outside of the first two rounds maybe I think the only way to judge a player is do they end up contributing or not. It makes absolutely no difference to me where they were drafted.

In their first year, I think, the FO went after that kid Williams in the third and picked up Breida as a UDFA. Two running backs, one contributed one didn't. Same with Sermon and Mitchell. If the goal was to get a running back out of that draft then they succeeded, just not at the pick they might have envisioned. "But, but, but if they hadn't picked Sermon they could have had unidentified player x who would have ended up being a better "value" and Mitchell as well". Honestly, it's just all grist for the mill for people who are more invested in the "process" of the draft then they are in the outcome for the team.

I can honestly say that, outside of briefly wondering if DK Metcalf might have been a better pick than Samuel the year they came out (he probably wasn't in terms of how those respective teams are built), I have never once thought about how the team "could have had", this guy or that guy. It doesn't bother me one bit that they didn't draft Patrick Mahomes, it's all pointless hindsight. I prefer to root for the team we have rather than some imaginary team we might have had if only things had gone differently.

The 49ers have a long history of recycling other team's kickers and I have always hoped that one day they would select one of their own who would carve out his own niche as "the guy". Maybe Moody will be the one, in which case he will have been well worth the pick. Even if he isn't I suspect he will end up contributing more to the team than a lot of other players they might have selected there would have. In which case he will have still been well worth the pick. Go Niners!

You tell me? What could this team have needed back in 2019 on a Superbowl run over an below-average punter (at that time) at 110?

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-draft-picks-2019-complete-draft-results-rounds-1-3/1rm4xh2zhcdb11ode47x52k1x2

You can play the exact same exercise this year in 2023 on a similar roster. What did we need more at 99?

All that said, I hope the same as you do. Like Wish, I do like the player and time did and will, tell.

Can I play? Personally I'd go Dewand Jones. But Braeden Daniels or Nick Saldiveri woulda been real nice. Or if we are set with McKivitz then we could have gone Clark Phillips or Kelee Ringo at CB either of those woulda made me happy. And if they wanted to try for a Center they could have taken Jon Gaines.

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 49ers81:

Originally posted by NCommand:
You could have ended the discussion right there. That's exactly the point. Like Andy Lee drafted in the 6th round. You got less skills and less production from a 4th rounder.

It's generally not a huge ordeal.

The topic is value and what you passed on as well as the PK's taken later (4th-UDFA's) and did they do better in the end?

Stay tuned, but I'll stick with history, probability and patterns of this FO and what that's told me.

So far, you're 0-1. Hopefully you'll be right on this one but to question fans questioning the value of this pick is comical.

Take the Tankle approach and say you feel its a great pick without the defamation of others. Take a 'chance.'

And what exactly did we pass on? This comes up every time a player gets drafted that someone thinks isn't as "good a value" as someone else who might have been available at that spot. It 's true of many players but especially true of the kickers we have selected in the last few years. The problem is that no one is willing to identity who they think that "someone else" might be. it's all just a bunch of vague talk about "better value".

When people were bellyaching and bedwetting about the Wishnowsky pick I said, fine, pick "A PLAYER" who was available at that spot that they thought would have been a better choice and at the end of the season we can see who ended up making more of a contribution to their respective teams. No one took me up on the offer because a lot of fourth round picks end up contributing nothing. And no, you can't go back now and cheery pick some player who ended up outperforming their draft position and saying, see they could have had this guy.

I made the same proposition when they drafted Moody, who was a compensatory third round pick at a number that would have, under normal circumstances, put the selection in the fourth round, but again, no one has taken me up on the offer. They just come in here and complain about how taking a kicker isn't "good value". They needed a kicker, so they got a kicker, I honestly don't see what all of the handwringing is about, especially this year. Without any picks until the end of the third round the chances of the team picking ANYONE in this draft who would turn out to be a day one starter on that roster was pretty small.

Placekickers generally lead their teams in scoring every year. They are in a position to have an impact on whether or not a team wins or loses a game every time they step on the field. How is that less valuable than a fourth round selection who might end up on the practice squad for three years, or is a rotational player who gets 15 snaps a game? Outside of the first two rounds maybe I think the only way to judge a player is do they end up contributing or not. It makes absolutely no difference to me where they were drafted.

In their first year, I think, the FO went after that kid Williams in the third and picked up Breida as a UDFA. Two running backs, one contributed one didn't. Same with Sermon and Mitchell. If the goal was to get a running back out of that draft then they succeeded, just not at the pick they might have envisioned. "But, but, but if they hadn't picked Sermon they could have had unidentified player x who would have ended up being a better "value" and Mitchell as well". Honestly, it's just all grist for the mill for people who are more invested in the "process" of the draft then they are in the outcome for the team.

I can honestly say that, outside of briefly wondering if DK Metcalf might have been a better pick than Samuel the year they came out (he probably wasn't in terms of how those respective teams are built), I have never once thought about how the team "could have had", this guy or that guy. It doesn't bother me one bit that they didn't draft Patrick Mahomes, it's all pointless hindsight. I prefer to root for the team we have rather than some imaginary team we might have had if only things had gone differently.

The 49ers have a long history of recycling other team's kickers and I have always hoped that one day they would select one of their own who would carve out his own niche as "the guy". Maybe Moody will be the one, in which case he will have been well worth the pick. Even if he isn't I suspect he will end up contributing more to the team than a lot of other players they might have selected there would have. In which case he will have still been well worth the pick. Go Niners!

You tell me? What could this team have needed back in 2019 on a Superbowl run over an below-average punter (at that time) at 110?

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-draft-picks-2019-complete-draft-results-rounds-1-3/1rm4xh2zhcdb11ode47x52k1x2

You can play the exact same exercise this year in 2023 on a similar roster. What did we need more at 99?

All that said, I hope the same as you do. Like Wish, I do like the player and time did and will, tell.

Can I play? Personally I'd go Dewand Jones. But Braeden Daniels or Nick Saldiveri woulda been real nice. Or if we are set with McKivitz then we could have gone Clark Phillips or Kelee Ringo at CB either of those woulda made me happy. And if they wanted to try for a Center they could have taken Jon Gaines.

You're a Jason Poe fan. That gives you a license to do whatever the hell you want!

Originally posted by thl408:
Did the kick go through the uprights?

No

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 49ers81:

Originally posted by NCommand:
You could have ended the discussion right there. That's exactly the point. Like Andy Lee drafted in the 6th round. You got less skills and less production from a 4th rounder.

It's generally not a huge ordeal.

The topic is value and what you passed on as well as the PK's taken later (4th-UDFA's) and did they do better in the end?

Stay tuned, but I'll stick with history, probability and patterns of this FO and what that's told me.

So far, you're 0-1. Hopefully you'll be right on this one but to question fans questioning the value of this pick is comical.

Take the Tankle approach and say you feel its a great pick without the defamation of others. Take a 'chance.'

And what exactly did we pass on? This comes up every time a player gets drafted that someone thinks isn't as "good a value" as someone else who might have been available at that spot. It 's true of many players but especially true of the kickers we have selected in the last few years. The problem is that no one is willing to identity who they think that "someone else" might be. it's all just a bunch of vague talk about "better value".

When people were bellyaching and bedwetting about the Wishnowsky pick I said, fine, pick "A PLAYER" who was available at that spot that they thought would have been a better choice and at the end of the season we can see who ended up making more of a contribution to their respective teams. No one took me up on the offer because a lot of fourth round picks end up contributing nothing. And no, you can't go back now and cheery pick some player who ended up outperforming their draft position and saying, see they could have had this guy.

I made the same proposition when they drafted Moody, who was a compensatory third round pick at a number that would have, under normal circumstances, put the selection in the fourth round, but again, no one has taken me up on the offer. They just come in here and complain about how taking a kicker isn't "good value". They needed a kicker, so they got a kicker, I honestly don't see what all of the handwringing is about, especially this year. Without any picks until the end of the third round the chances of the team picking ANYONE in this draft who would turn out to be a day one starter on that roster was pretty small.

Placekickers generally lead their teams in scoring every year. They are in a position to have an impact on whether or not a team wins or loses a game every time they step on the field. How is that less valuable than a fourth round selection who might end up on the practice squad for three years, or is a rotational player who gets 15 snaps a game? Outside of the first two rounds maybe I think the only way to judge a player is do they end up contributing or not. It makes absolutely no difference to me where they were drafted.

In their first year, I think, the FO went after that kid Williams in the third and picked up Breida as a UDFA. Two running backs, one contributed one didn't. Same with Sermon and Mitchell. If the goal was to get a running back out of that draft then they succeeded, just not at the pick they might have envisioned. "But, but, but if they hadn't picked Sermon they could have had unidentified player x who would have ended up being a better "value" and Mitchell as well". Honestly, it's just all grist for the mill for people who are more invested in the "process" of the draft then they are in the outcome for the team.

I can honestly say that, outside of briefly wondering if DK Metcalf might have been a better pick than Samuel the year they came out (he probably wasn't in terms of how those respective teams are built), I have never once thought about how the team "could have had", this guy or that guy. It doesn't bother me one bit that they didn't draft Patrick Mahomes, it's all pointless hindsight. I prefer to root for the team we have rather than some imaginary team we might have had if only things had gone differently.

The 49ers have a long history of recycling other team's kickers and I have always hoped that one day they would select one of their own who would carve out his own niche as "the guy". Maybe Moody will be the one, in which case he will have been well worth the pick. Even if he isn't I suspect he will end up contributing more to the team than a lot of other players they might have selected there would have. In which case he will have still been well worth the pick. Go Niners!

You tell me? What could this team have needed back in 2019 on a Superbowl run over an below-average punter (at that time) at 110?

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-draft-picks-2019-complete-draft-results-rounds-1-3/1rm4xh2zhcdb11ode47x52k1x2

You can play the exact same exercise this year in 2023 on a similar roster. What did we need more at 99?

All that said, I hope the same as you do. Like Wish, I do like the player and time did and will, tell.

Well, that's the point right? Who did we need more that was available at that spot? I don't follow college football AT ALL so I really have no idea who any of these guys are outside of the handful that get talked up a lot in the run up to the draft. Given that I have to assume that the guys on the team who are tasked with doing that type of analysis are better qualified to make the call than I am.

Lynch has already said that they were interested in tackles but all of the ones they considered worthwhile were gone by the time they selected at which point, it can be assumed, that they believed Moody represented greater potential value to the team than anyone else they could have drafted at that spot. There was also the legitimate concern that he wouldn't be available by the time they picked in the 5th round. If you want a player and think he'll help your team than why wait. Take him while you can rather than wait for someone who might have been your 3rd, 4th or 5th choice at the position? That's what UDFA's are for.

I'm not the one who is complaining about the pick, I'm not well versed in who else might have been available at that spot to offer up an alternative so I am asking, legitimately, for someone to say here is a guy that would have been better and fills a need and will end up making more of an immediate contribution than a player at a position that has the opportunity to impact the outcome of a game every time he walks onto the field. It's a pretty straight forward proposition.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by thl408:
Did the kick go through the uprights?

No

cut him

Whats wrong with picking up an instant starting player on this stacked team ?