Who SFshould take — each prospect's model grade, weighted up where the roster is thin, so highly graded players at positions SF needs rise to the top.
| Rank↑ | Player | Fit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Colin Simmonsblend#4$11M EDGEBlue Chip· Texas· model #4· critical need | 0.93 |
| 2 | Trevor Goosbyblend#3$12M OTBlue Chip· Texas· model #3· critical need | 0.89 |
| 3 | Jordan Seatonblend#5$10M OTBlue Chip· LSU· model #5· critical need | 0.88 |
| 4 | William Echolesblend#9$8M DL1st Round· Ole Miss· model #9· critical need | 0.88 |
| 5 | Leonard Mooreblend#2$13M CBBlue Chip· Notre Dame· model #2· critical need | 0.86 |
| 6 | Kyngstonn Viliamu-Asablend#12$7M LB1st Round· Notre Dame· model #12· critical need | 0.85 |
| 7 | KJ Boldenblend#8$8M S1st Round· Georgia· model #8· critical need | 0.83 |
| 8 | Jeremiah Smithblend#1$14M WRBlue Chip· Ohio State· model #1 | 0.80 |
| 9 | DL1st Round· Iowa· model #18· critical need | 0.79 |
| 10 | David Stoneblend#19$5M DL1st Round· Oklahoma· model #19· critical need | 0.79 |
| 11 | Cayden Greenblend#13$7M OT1st Round· Missouri· model #13· critical need | 0.78 |
| 12 | Dylan Stewartblend#24$4M EDGE1st Round· South Carolina· model #24· critical need | 0.78 |
| 13 | Cam Colemanblend#6$9M WRBlue Chip· Texas· model #6 | 0.77 |
| 14 | Dante Mooreblend#7 QB1st Round· Oregon· model #7 | 0.76 |
| 15 | A'Mauri Washingtonblend#27$4M DL1st Round· Oregon· model #27· critical need | 0.76 |
| 16 | OT1st Round· Iowa· model #16· critical need | 0.76 |
| 17 | Adam Trickblend#30$4M LB1st Round· Texas Tech· model #30· critical need | 0.75 |
| 18 | G1st Round· Ohio State· model #20· critical need | 0.75 |
| 19 | Quincy Rhodes Jr.blend#31$4M DL1st Round· Arkansas· model #31· critical need | 0.74 |
| 20 | Ryan Williamsblend#10$8M WR1st Round· Alabama· model #10 | 0.73 |
| 21 | Sammy Brownblend#34$4M LBDay 2· Clemson· model #34· critical need | 0.73 |
| 22 | Arch Manningblend#11 QB1st Round· Texas· model #11 | 0.72 |
| 23 | S1st Round· Oregon· model #22· critical need | 0.71 |
| 24 | Ethan Wesloskiblend#40$3M LBDay 2· Oklahoma State· model #40· critical need | 0.70 |
| 25 | LBDay 2· Penn State· model #42· critical need | 0.69 |
| 26 | CB1st Round· Miami· model #25· critical need | 0.69 |
| 27 | CB1st Round· Illinois· model #26· critical need | 0.69 |
| 28 | LBDay 2· Georgia· model #48· critical need | 0.68 |
| 29 | Boubacar Traoreblend#50$2M DLDay 2· Notre Dame· model #50· critical need | 0.67 |
| 30 | LBDay 2· Ole Miss· model #51· critical need | 0.67 |
| 31 | Damon Wilson IIblend#53$2M EDGEDay 2· Miami· model #53· critical need | 0.67 |
| 32 | Maverick Baranowskiblend#55$2M LBDay 2· Minnesota· model #55· critical need | 0.67 |
| 33 | Julian Sayinblend#14 QB1st Round· Ohio State· model #14 | 0.66 |
| 34 | Will Heldtblend#58$2M EDGEDay 2· Clemson· model #58· critical need | 0.66 |
| 35 | Ellis Robinson IVblend#32$4M CB1st Round· Georgia· model #32· critical need | 0.66 |
| 36 | DLDay 2· Michigan State· model #61· critical need | 0.66 |
| 37 | Kewan Lacyblend#17$5M RB1st Round· Ole Miss· model #17 | 0.65 |
| 38 | Rasheem Bilesblend#15$6M ATH1st Round· Texas· model #15 | 0.65 |
| 39 | Justin Scottblend#63$2M DLDay 2· Miami· model #63· critical need | 0.65 |
| 40 | LBDay 2· San José State· model #65· critical need | 0.64 |
| 41 | EDGEDay 2· Oregon· model #66· critical need | 0.64 |
| 42 | DLDay 2· Oregon· model #71· critical need | 0.64 |
| 43 | LBDay 2· Virginia· model #73· critical need | 0.64 |
| 44 | Devin Smithblend#74$2M LBDay 2· Kentucky· model #74· critical need | 0.64 |
| 45 | Jamari Johnsonblend#21$5M ATH1st Round· Oregon· model #21 | 0.64 |
| 46 | Brandon Smithblend#77$2M DLDay 2· Western Michigan· model #77· critical need | 0.63 |
| 47 | DLDay 2· Arizona State· model #78· critical need | 0.63 |
| 48 | Jadan Baughblend#23$4M ATH1st Round· Florida· model #23 | 0.63 |
| 49 | Jordan Kwiatkowskiblend#84$2M LBDay 2· Central Michigan· model #84· critical need | 0.63 |
| 50 | LBDay 2· Houston· model #86· critical need | 0.63 |
San Francisco lists defensive front, specialists and offensive line as its top needs, yet the house mock has KJ Duff coming off the board at 26 — a tight end. That leaves Austin Siereveld, the model's 20th-ranked player against a room mark of 49, sitting untouched at the position of greatest need. Xavier Scott's gap is even louder: 26th on the model, 150th in the room, a 124-spot split at a position SF didn't rank as a need. Somewhere between the model and the board, San Francisco's actual priorities got lost.
Written by our models from the live board; every name and number checked