There are 136 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Donte Whitner aka Hitner

Originally posted by ace49ers:
Lets hope so.

I really havent looked at who could replace Hitner at the back there from either FA or draft. But I feel hes the best there is available at this time.

And Reid could go to a whole other level knowing Hitner is with him again.

YESSSSIIIRRRRRRRRRRR!!
Originally posted by LottOfDefense:
If Whitner and Boldin come back the 9ers have endless possibilities in the draft.

This
Originally posted by InglewoodCA9ers:
HELLLLLLLL fukkin YEAHHH!!! HITNER COMING BACK!!!!! 49ers 2014 !! BACK FOR REVENGE!! donkey187 seahawk187 NINER NATION!!!

And FUKKKIINN that!!! CHEEE HOOOOO!!!
Originally posted by InglewoodCA9ers:
HELLLLLLLL fukkin YEAHHH!!! HITNER COMING BACK!!!!! 49ers 2014 !! BACK FOR REVENGE!! donkey187 seahawk187 NINER NATION!!!

And FUKKKIINN that!!! CHEEE HOOOOO!!!
  • mayo49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 21,304
We have to re-sign the Hitner.
Originally posted by LottOfDefense:
If Whitner and Boldin come back the 9ers have endless possibilities in the draft.

Agree, not needing to take a SS would mean a CB (if brown gone) and a WR early but other than that anything is fair game. It means we could go C, C/G combo, T earlier or we could go DL earlier or we could trade one of our 2nds or 3rds and stock up for next year. Could even take a backup QB in the 2nd or 3rd. We could double up on CB's (or WR's) early. I know Whitner has his downfalls in coverage but he would probably do better than any free agent we could bring in or any player we drafted. Maybe Clinton-Dix or Pryor could come in day 1 but it would require a 3rd to trade up for them and we would be asking to catch lightning in a bottle twice with expecting another S to come in and play as well as Reid did and not be a weak link. To me it comes down to how much he wants and how long. He's going to be 29 so I'm looking at 2-3 years, not 4 and some where around 3 a year, maybe 4. 2 years 6-8 million is ideal, worst case 3 years 9-10 million. I don't think he would be around that 3rd year so if he wants 3 years we should make it so we can get out of it with little hit. By year 3 he will be much slower than he is now and will be an even bigger liability in coverage. I'd be fine with him for another 1-2 years and next draft or the draft after find a replacement. And I know he signed with us prior to 2011 for 3 years 11.75 million so nearly 4 a year but he was also about to be 26 and he's about to be 29 now.
Hitner will want at least 5.5 mil a year. It's his last chance to make some serious money before he gets over the hill. Eagles and Packers would definitely pay that much for him too.
3 years 15 million ?
Originally posted by susweel:
3 years 15 million ?

This would work...right, AB81Rules?
This may come as a very unpopular take but I don't want Whitner back. And not b/c he's not a good player and doesn't bring a ton of intangibles but for a variety of other reasons:

1. He's capped out. He's certainly not going to get any better.
2. He continues to get abused in coverage in big games (esp. playoffs and Superbowls); inexcusable as a veteran in the Superbowl and NFCCG.
3. He's short (no vertical) and is easily boxed out, one-armed by the bigger, slot WR's and TE's. The timing of his jumps are poor often as well and many times he struggles even getting his head turned around. He also continued to blow some coverages (as he admitted) in the regular season and took some poor angles in run support (cost us points).
4. D/t his inability to cover, Fangio has to keep both S's deep...very deep...like 35-40 yards deep to keep everything in front of him/them and they STILL got beat by Baldwin who got behind them for a critical bomb in the NFCCG. Simply, any h/w done on Seattle (a WELL known foe) indicates that when Wilson is scrambling around, that ball always goes for a deep jump ball. Every time. Reid, this may be somewhat understandable as a rookie, but Whitner has zero excuse here.
5. Contract year. Remember when Rogers played lights out in his contract year? He had 6 INT's that year, undercutting routes, etc. He's had 3 total since then. This is Whitner's contract year so most likely, it's only down hill from here (even though he plays harder than the half-assed Rogers).
6. SS-type. Whitner is your old-school prototypical in-the-box (extra LB) SS. In today's passing NFL, you need coverage S's. It's great if they can be big hitters like in Seattle too but what separates them is their quickness, athleticism, play recognition, the ability to line up anywhere, speed, range and abiity to make plays on the ball (and still be sure-tacklers). Reid is becoming this guy for us right now. Back in the day, Walsh brought in the two biggest/tallest CB/S tandem in the draft (Wright/Lott). Seattle has copied this mold thanks to Carroll's experience with us. Just an FYI.
7. Development/Scheme. Is Whitner our 3-year future? And how does his presence on the field affect our scheme? Wouldn't it be better to have another FS-like S with Reid-abilities teamed together? This may dumb-down the coverage scheme on the field a bit to start the year but it will also most likely increase the play of everyone around them. For instance, if you have two rangy S's like Reid who you can line up anywhere (and not keep them camped out 40+ yards deep), it allows your two CB's to play to their strengths; Culliver and Brock, to play tight, physical, man-press on the edges.
8. Effects on the LB's. What's everyone's biggest concern about our ILB's? That they are constantly stuck in underneath and single coverage and not allowed to play down hill or even blitz much. Was it Whitner and Reid covering Seattle's TE in the NFCCG? Nope...it was Bowman. Knee blown. 2-free ranging S's allow the CB's and LB's to play to their strengths and this hold's true in Seattle as well. Not only can their CB's play rape-press coverage (or simple Cover 3 and that's it) on the outside but they can even isolate a S or LB to "spy" on CK at the same time.
9. Cap. I don't know what Whitner is asking for but it's not going to be cheaper than a top-notch rookie. That money could be used to help in CK and Aldon negotiations. We'll also have this rookie for 4-5 years for next to nothing in comparison. If Baalke can hit on Reid so boldly (which means, he knew what he wanted in a S), no doubt he can do it again this draft.

This isn't to dismiss Whitner as a good S for us and a great Niner but thinking more immediate and LT future here. These are just some things a FO has to consider before negotiating a LT contract with one of our own...whether we can afford it now or not, there is much more to consider.
[ Edited by NCommand on Feb 27, 2014 at 10:53 AM ]
Originally posted by NCommand:
This may come as a very unpopular take but I don't want Whitner back. And not b/c he's not a good player and doesn't bring a ton of intangibles but for a variety of other reasons:

1. He's capped out. He's certainly not going to get any better.
2. He continues to get abused in coverage in big games (esp. playoffs and Superbowls); inexcusable as a veteran in the Superbowl and NFCCG.
3. He's short (no vertical) and is easily boxed out, one-armed by the bigger, slot WR's and TE's. The timing of his jumps are poor often as well and many times he struggles even getting his head turned around. He also continued to blow some coverages (as he admitted) in the regular season and took some poor angles in run support (cost us points).
4. D/t his inability to cover, Fangio has to keep both S's deep...very deep...like 35-40 yards deep to keep everything in front of him/them and they STILL got beat by Baldwin who got behind them for a critical bomb in the NFCCG. Simply, any h/w done on Seattle (a WELL known foe) indicates that when Wilson is scrambling around, that ball always goes for a deep jump ball. Every time. Reid, this may be somewhat understandable as a rookie, but Whitner has zero excuse here.
5. Contract year. Remember when Rogers played lights out in his contract year? He had 6 INT's that year, undercutting routes, etc. He's had 3 total since then. This is Whitner's contract year so most likely, it's only down hill from here (even though he plays harder than the half-assed Rogers).
6. SS-type. Whitner is your old-school prototypical in-the-box (extra LB) SS. In today's passing NFL, you need coverage S's. It's great if they can be big hitters like in Seattle too but what separates them is their quickness, athleticism, play recognition, the ability to line up anywhere, speed, range and abiity to make plays on the ball (and still be sure-tacklers). Reid is becoming this guy for us right now. Back in the day, Walsh brought in the two biggest/tallest CB/S tandem in the draft (Wright/Lott). Seattle has copied this mold thanks to Carroll's experience with us. Just an FYI.
7. Development/Scheme. Is Whitner our 3-year future? And how does his presence on the field affect our scheme? Wouldn't it be better to have another FS-like S with Reid-abilities teamed together? This may dumb-down the coverage scheme on the field a bit to start the year but it will also most likely increase the play of everyone around them. For instance, if you have two rangy S's like Reid who you can line up anywhere (and not keep them camped out 40+ yards deep), it allows your two CB's to play to their strengths; Culliver and Brock, to play tight, physical, man-press on the edges.
8. Effects on the LB's. What's everyone's biggest concern about our ILB's? That they are constantly stuck in underneath and single coverage and not allowed to play down hill or even blitz much. Was it Whitner and Reid covering Seattle's TE in the NFCCG? Nope...it was Bowman. Knee blown. 2-free ranging S's allow the CB's and LB's to play to their strengths and this hold's true in Seattle as well. Not only can their CB's play rape-press coverage (or simple Cover 3 and that's it) on the outside but they can even isolate a S or LB to "spy" on CK at the same time.
9. Cap. I don't know what Whitner is asking for but it's not going to be cheaper than a top-notch rookie. That money could be used to help in CK and Aldon negotiations. We'll also have this rookie for 4-5 years for next to nothing in comparison. If Baalke can hit on Reid so boldly (which means, he knew what he wanted in a S), no doubt he can do it again this draft.

This isn't to dismiss Whitner as a good S for us and a great Niner but thinking more immediate and LT future here. These are just some things a FO has to consider before negotiating a LT contract with one of our own...whether we can afford it now or not, there is much more to consider.

I agree with you. I mean are we going to give the guy a significant portion of our cap and have him turn out to be 2012 Whitner. I really like Whitner as a leader and a professional, and he's no doubt and above average safety, but we have some huge contracts to give out to guys that have more important roles on our team. I think we are in a great position with Eric Reid turning out to be a stud and a veteran in a young man's body, to be able to replace Whitner without losing that presence at the S position.
Originally posted by NCommand:
This may come as a very unpopular take but I don't want Whitner back. And not b/c he's not a good player and doesn't bring a ton of intangibles but for a variety of other reasons:

1. He's capped out. He's certainly not going to get any better.
2. He continues to get abused in coverage in big games (esp. playoffs and Superbowls); inexcusable as a veteran in the Superbowl and NFCCG.
3. He's short (no vertical) and is easily boxed out, one-armed by the bigger, slot WR's and TE's. The timing of his jumps are poor often as well and many times he struggles even getting his head turned around. He also continued to blow some coverages (as he admitted) in the regular season and took some poor angles in run support (cost us points).
4. D/t his inability to cover, Fangio has to keep both S's deep...very deep...like 35-40 yards deep to keep everything in front of him/them and they STILL got beat by Baldwin who got behind them for a critical bomb in the NFCCG. Simply, any h/w done on Seattle (a WELL known foe) indicates that when Wilson is scrambling around, that ball always goes for a deep jump ball. Every time. Reid, this may be somewhat understandable as a rookie, but Whitner has zero excuse here.
5. Contract year. Remember when Rogers played lights out in his contract year? He had 6 INT's that year, undercutting routes, etc. He's had 3 total since then. This is Whitner's contract year so most likely, it's only down hill from here (even though he plays harder than the half-assed Rogers).
6. SS-type. Whitner is your old-school prototypical in-the-box (extra LB) SS. In today's passing NFL, you need coverage S's. It's great if they can be big hitters like in Seattle too but what separates them is their quickness, athleticism, play recognition, the ability to line up anywhere, speed, range and abiity to make plays on the ball (and still be sure-tacklers). Reid is becoming this guy for us right now. Back in the day, Walsh brought in the two biggest/tallest CB/S tandem in the draft (Wright/Lott). Seattle has copied this mold thanks to Carroll's experience with us. Just an FYI.
7. Development/Scheme. Is Whitner our 3-year future? And how does his presence on the field affect our scheme? Wouldn't it be better to have another FS-like S with Reid-abilities teamed together? This may dumb-down the coverage scheme on the field a bit to start the year but it will also most likely increase the play of everyone around them. For instance, if you have two rangy S's like Reid who you can line up anywhere (and not keep them camped out 40+ yards deep), it allows your two CB's to play to their strengths; Culliver and Brock, to play tight, physical, man-press on the edges.
8. Effects on the LB's. What's everyone's biggest concern about our ILB's? That they are constantly stuck in underneath and single coverage and not allowed to play down hill or even blitz much. Was it Whitner and Reid covering Seattle's TE in the NFCCG? Nope...it was Bowman. Knee blown. 2-free ranging S's allow the CB's and LB's to play to their strengths and this hold's true in Seattle as well. Not only can their CB's play rape-press coverage (or simple Cover 3 and that's it) on the outside but they can even isolate a S or LB to "spy" on CK at the same time.
9. Cap. I don't know what Whitner is asking for but it's not going to be cheaper than a top-notch rookie. That money could be used to help in CK and Aldon negotiations. We'll also have this rookie for 4-5 years for next to nothing in comparison. If Baalke can hit on Reid so boldly (which means, he knew what he wanted in a S), no doubt he can do it again this draft.

This isn't to dismiss Whitner as a good S for us and a great Niner but thinking more immediate and LT future here. These are just some things a FO has to consider before negotiating a LT contract with one of our own...whether we can afford it now or not, there is much more to consider.

i dont think you're wrong. you have to make calculated gambles when building a team. we took one last year very few thought would pay off and yet it was reid in the pro bowl and not goldson. i like whitner, and have enjoyed what he has brought to the team, but we cant be afraid to get better.
^^^ Whether fans agree or disagree, it's important to factor in everything. These are tough positions to be in and calls to make esp. for a guy like Whitner who bleeds red and gold and is a high character leader (which also greatly factors in as well). It will be very interesting to watch how the FO handles Whitner and all of our FA's. Will they go bold and let walk ala Goldson or go with the safe route?
Tg
Originally posted by NCommand:
This may come as a very unpopular take but I don't want Whitner back. And not b/c he's not a good player and doesn't bring a ton of intangibles but for a variety of other reasons:

1. He's capped out. He's certainly not going to get any better.
2. He continues to get abused in coverage in big games (esp. playoffs and Superbowls); inexcusable as a veteran in the Superbowl and NFCCG.
3. He's short (no vertical) and is easily boxed out, one-armed by the bigger, slot WR's and TE's. The timing of his jumps are poor often as well and many times he struggles even getting his head turned around. He also continued to blow some coverages (as he admitted) in the regular season and took some poor angles in run support (cost us points).
4. D/t his inability to cover, Fangio has to keep both S's deep...very deep...like 35-40 yards deep to keep everything in front of him/them and they STILL got beat by Baldwin who got behind them for a critical bomb in the NFCCG. Simply, any h/w done on Seattle (a WELL known foe) indicates that when Wilson is scrambling around, that ball always goes for a deep jump ball. Every time. Reid, this may be somewhat understandable as a rookie, but Whitner has zero excuse here.
5. Contract year. Remember when Rogers played lights out in his contract year? He had 6 INT's that year, undercutting routes, etc. He's had 3 total since then. This is Whitner's contract year so most likely, it's only down hill from here (even though he plays harder than the half-assed Rogers).
6. SS-type. Whitner is your old-school prototypical in-the-box (extra LB) SS. In today's passing NFL, you need coverage S's. It's great if they can be big hitters like in Seattle too but what separates them is their quickness, athleticism, play recognition, the ability to line up anywhere, speed, range and abiity to make plays on the ball (and still be sure-tacklers). Reid is becoming this guy for us right now. Back in the day, Walsh brought in the two biggest/tallest CB/S tandem in the draft (Wright/Lott). Seattle has copied this mold thanks to Carroll's experience with us. Just an FYI.
7. Development/Scheme. Is Whitner our 3-year future? And how does his presence on the field affect our scheme? Wouldn't it be better to have another FS-like S with Reid-abilities teamed together? This may dumb-down the coverage scheme on the field a bit to start the year but it will also most likely increase the play of everyone around them. For instance, if you have two rangy S's like Reid who you can line up anywhere (and not keep them camped out 40+ yards deep), it allows your two CB's to play to their strengths; Culliver and Brock, to play tight, physical, man-press on the edges.
8. Effects on the LB's. What's everyone's biggest concern about our ILB's? That they are constantly stuck in underneath and single coverage and not allowed to play down hill or even blitz much. Was it Whitner and Reid covering Seattle's TE in the NFCCG? Nope...it was Bowman. Knee blown. 2-free ranging S's allow the CB's and LB's to play to their strengths and this hold's true in Seattle as well. Not only can their CB's play rape-press coverage (or simple Cover 3 and that's it) on the outside but they can even isolate a S or LB to "spy" on CK at the same time.
9. Cap. I don't know what Whitner is asking for but it's not going to be cheaper than a top-notch rookie. That money could be used to help in CK and Aldon negotiations. We'll also have this rookie for 4-5 years for next to nothing in comparison. If Baalke can hit on Reid so boldly (which means, he knew what he wanted in a S), no doubt he can do it again this draft.

This isn't to dismiss Whitner as a good S for us and a great Niner but thinking more immediate and LT future here. These are just some things a FO has to consider before negotiating a LT contract with one of our own...whether we can afford it now or not, there is much more to consider.
thought I was the only one. Dude is poop. Doesn't wrap gets burnt in coverage
The Whitner-Reid tandem was very good last year and with Eric's expected growth, should be even better next season. Not a bad idea to draft a S for depth, as there's really not much behind Dahl for realistic PT. That said, they could still take a S early to be Whitner's replacement if Whitner agrees to a 2-yr contract, which doesn't seem that likely, honestly. That still means you probably acquire a vet FA for depth, too. What I don't see is Baalke drafting a SS to start alongside Reid...there has to be a solid vet in the mix.