Looking back, 2006 is one of the best recent years to revisit post-Draft analysis. Articles ridiculing the Texans, praising the Cardinals, and believing there must be some genuine divinity behind the Saints that allowed them to grab the consensus best player in the draft.
How many people still want to say they would rather have Reggie Bush over Mario Williams. Williams has 30.5 sacks, seven forced fumbles (plus he returned one for a touchdown) and just started in his first Pro Bowl.
Bush, on the other hand, has been injury plagued. And when he is on the field, he has been far from the "game changer" that the "Consensus Number One Pick" should be. Twenty touchdowns and over 3,000 total yards (not counting returns) over three years is nothing to sneeze at for most players. But it's nothing to be proud of for the "closest thing to a sure thing."
For fun, go read Gene Wojciechowski's post draft analysis of how the Texan's "gagged." Unless you are a Saints fan, you'll laugh.
Sure, sometimes they get it right on (see the freakishly prescient Michael Smith's pre-draft analysis), but more often than not, it's a educated guessing game where experts are paid way too much to offer as much insight as you can find here.
I'm not saying I will not read it, but that's just because it's football, and I'll read and critique anything written about the 49ers.