T-Sizzle wrote:It just doesn't mesh with PC's philosophy. He wants big outside WRs and it seems we have Baldwin & probably Tate who would be better suited for the slot. Austin seems like a better version of both Tate & Baldwin... but
Q: is that really a need?
Big WR isn't really a need either, so long as we have Rice/Edwards. Either way, I think a WR selection would be a bit of a luxury pick. Nothing wrong with looking at big WRs, but if JS really wanted that, then why did he poo-poo last year's WR class- one that was LOADED with giant WRs?
To be fair, the last draft didn't have a single WR that screamed surefire NFL superstar (Fitz, Megatron, etc), and this draft doesn't either. Most drafts don't. And unless you are getting a megastar WR, it's probably a good idea to not rely on that pick too much. Imagine how much trouble we'd be in if we had drafted Tate in the 1st round (he had a fringe 1st round grade before the draft) and then banked on him to be a #1? Imagine how much trouble Chicago might be in on offense if they had assumed Alshon Jeffery would singlehandedly turn their offense around? Or Arizona with Floyd or even Jacksonville with Blackmon?
I don't think Shark sees Austin as a surefire #1 or a guy that will make this offense elite- but he is a nifty player that fits an existing role in our offense and could provide solid, safe value.
So in that sense, drafting Austin seems completely sensible to me. Yeah, we don't exactly have a burning need for another short WR, but he would bring tremendous value to special teams and he'd likely be better than Doug Baldwin within a year or two as a #3 WR. I see Rice (if healthy) and Tate as long term fixtures, but Baldwin seems pretty shaky with so-so production and a body that is ridiculously injury prone (including college). So to me, Austin makes sense. I just think he's going to be a round two guy- though probably before our 2nd round pick.