2 bottles of Cab later...
Your question; "is everyone here who disagrees with the move doing so because of the trade, and not because of Watkins in particular?" is THE issue. I'm OK with Watkins as a top 4 pick. Here are my negatives, and I still think this is a 6-8 win team:
1. The rule of thumb is you only trade next year's number 1 if you are only missing a piece or two, or for a QB.
2. Follows above; you're trading next years number one because it will not be a top 20 pick.
3. Bill Walsh's philosophy was you only took a WR early if he was the last missing piece.
4. Loss of future flexibility for the future if the most important position is disabled/sucks (Manuel).
5. Drafting #1 at your potentially deepest position is disregarding need. I'd say the same if they drafted Donald first and Nix in the second.
6. Management who put's the organization secondary to their job security and gambles the future (naïve on my part, but a factor).
7. Constantly changing schemes/philosophies leads to drafting 4 WR highly not to mention giving up draft choices for Watkins/Graham/Williams. Pass on AJ Green to draft a 3-4 DE etc.
8. Contrarian theory; approval of 76% and koolaide syndrome might scare me more than all the above.
PROVISO: My needle would move towards neutral if there's a complementary move TBA. They spent a lot of time on this trade, but what, if any TBA's are in the works. For example if they have a deal such as Stevie and Goodwin for this year's 3rd and next year's 2nd to N.C. or some variation. If no plan other than to have Goodwin as their 5th WR then I can't get behind this. AGAIN; I hope I'm WRONG.
btw; You did a great job of evaluating 1st round picks way ahead of almost all the internet pundits. I've followed the draft for over 40 years and I'm impressed!