Posted: 11:03 a.m. Friday, March 29, 2013
Our free agency showing at the safety position was lackluster. To be honest, I'm a bit disappointed. Not so disappointed that I'm too freaked out; the Front Office has handily earned our trust, and I don't think the Craig Dahl signing was as atrocious as some people do. But, I'm a bit disappointed. Especially in light of the fact that Michael Huff went to the Ravens for a negligible amount more than we signed Dahl. And Huff, from most reports, is a better player than Dahl. As a consequence, we seem to be obsessed with the notion that we will find the next brilliant safety in the draft. While it's likely that a rookie will receive serious consideration for the starting position, I think we shouldn't reach for a safety for position's sake. We should always be mindful of who is the best player on the board.
Now, a lot of this could change on draft day. Trading, in particular, makes things tough to predict. If the 49ers, for example, really like WR Tavon Austin and want to target him, then they can do just that. They have the capacity to move up. But, they should only move up for a player worth it. If they move up for a safety, wondering whether or not he will be successful, then that would be a huge mistake. This is how teams cripple themselves: teams are built through the draft. Messing up a first round pick, especially at the expense of other picks, can really set a team back. We probably wouldn't be too screwed - our roster is really deep and full of talent. Obviously we were able to cover up A.J. Jenkins lack of production last year (here's for hoping that we don't have to do that again). Ideally, though, any rookie we draft would have a serious chance of playing for this team in the future. If that means drafting the best player available at an already stacked position, then so be it.
We need a safety. I won't contest that fact. Here's to hoping, though, that we can trade into a spot that gets us the best player available for the maximum amount of value with our pick. Reaching would be a mistake.