There are 243 users in the forums
Originally posted by NinerG94:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Anyone worries both Whitner and Brown think they are top tier players and will command top dollars?
They're both better players than they get credit for on this message board too. Especially T-Brown. Most wanted Whitner off the team following the 2011 season. Liability in coverage and all. LOL
Originally posted by Allx9er:Really on the fence about this one. On one hand, a safety with some more coverage ability is definitely a need/upgrade. On the other, this years D will be more vulnerable imho, especially up the middle while bow is recovering. let whitner go and roll with a full blown youth movement and all that comes with it or see if there's a way to carve out a deal and keep a veteran presence around for a year or 2 more.
Originally posted by KID9R:
Originally posted by Allx9er:
Really on the fence about this one. On one hand, a safety with some more coverage ability is definitely a need/upgrade. On the other, this years D will be more vulnerable imho, especially up the middle while bow is recovering. let whitner go and roll with a full blown youth movement and all that comes with it or see if there's a way to carve out a deal and keep a veteran presence around for a year or 2 more.
Whitner was the 5th best safety in coverage last year per Pro Football Focus.
Originally posted by kronik:
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.
The newbs probably won't agree but I sure agree %1000000. I have no idea what some of the people are watching when they say we "need" Whitner. They might as well say we "need" the other weak link too, Carlos Rogers.
Originally posted by InglewoodCA9ers:
Originally posted by kronik:
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.
The newbs probably won't agree but I sure agree %1000000. I have no idea what some of the people are watching when they say we "need" Whitner. They might as well say we "need" the other weak link too, Carlos Rogers.
Maybe u should try watching and studying more film, instead of counting message board posts as leverage to validate your expertise or lack their of regarding matters of assessing football. Thanks, but ill take what the film shows me, coaching evaluations, STATS/FACTS, and how the team measures DW impact/importance over your conjectured 5 star "veteran" WBZ- "expertise"..... lol no hard feelings tho bro....much respect
Originally posted by InglewoodCA9ers:Originally posted by KID9R:Originally posted by Allx9er:Really on the fence about this one. On one hand, a safety with some more coverage ability is definitely a need/upgrade. On the other, this years D will be more vulnerable imho, especially up the middle while bow is recovering. let whitner go and roll with a full blown youth movement and all that comes with it or see if there's a way to carve out a deal and keep a veteran presence around for a year or 2 more.
Whitner was the 5th best safety in coverage last year per Pro Football Focus.
WHAT R U TALKING ABOUT!!?!! SHAME ON U LETTING FACTS GET IN THE WAY of this BS blind HATE for WHITNER this yr by WBZ revisionists!
Maybe I don't know what the fucc I'm watching when I'm studying film b/c I'm a WBZ "Newbie" and b/c posting 1000's of times a day on a message board somehow elevates my "opinions" over others and validates my football acumen. So I guess since I'm a new poster IDK what the fukc im talking about??!!! lol hahaha
Man bruh stop with the BS "facts"....FACT is Whitner was one of the BEST SAFETIES in the game last yr (backed by his stats), a LEADER and GENERAL of a VERY SOPHISTICATED AND NUANCED PASSING DEFENSE THAT ranked 7th in NFL, starting a rookie S (whom Hitner GROOMED), past his prime CB-Rogers, New starter in Brock, injured but efficient T-brown, rotating list of CBs (Cox, Wright, Nmandi), but still MADE intelligent plays, underrated coverage skills, solid ball skills, and was the on-field PLAY-CALLER coupled with PUNISHING and INTIMIDATING hits in a PHYSICAL NFC WEST where your S need to be BIG HITTERS and WRAP ARTISTS!
Don't kid urself Whitner is one of the games best (def TOP 10 S) and his numbers prove that. But I agree with NCommand-of course at the RIGHT PRICE. We're trying to win a SB with a tight window, we don't need too many rookie projects in our 2ndary trying to "figure it out" just bc we got lucky with Reid!! ---SIGN HITNER!!
NCOMMAND- I like ur posts, a lot of it I agree with but I TOTALLY DISAGREE with ur assessment about Whitner and his coverage/skill/ability, YES in 2012, but def WRONG about 2013 Whitner playing alongside less of a gambler in Reid versus DASHON last yr. The unresearched and blind HATE for Whitner on WBZ is often times stupid and annoyingly clouded with conjecture and ignorance. The man was the #7 overall rated Safety b4 he even got to SF.... And many think we will strike lightning in a bottle twice by pairing REID with another rookie S (who wont have the benefit of receiving mentorship or being groomed like Hitner did REID) even though our PASSING D is known as one of the most complicated and nuanced in the entire NFL,...and SUCCESSFUL!!! SMH
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by InglewoodCA9ers:
Originally posted by kronik:
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.
The newbs probably won't agree but I sure agree %1000000. I have no idea what some of the people are watching when they say we "need" Whitner. They might as well say we "need" the other weak link too, Carlos Rogers.
Maybe u should try watching and studying more film, instead of counting message board posts as leverage to validate your expertise or lack their of regarding matters of assessing football. Thanks, but ill take what the film shows me, coaching evaluations, STATS/FACTS, and how the team measures DW impact/importance over your conjectured 5 star "veteran" WBZ- "expertise"..... lol no hard feelings tho bro....much respect
TBH, you come off as a "newb." No need to get overly passionate about the other side of the coin about one of our players. Just present your case. Nobody in here is "hating" on Whitner...at all. But every player has strengths and weaknesses and upon signing big $ to a LT FA deal, all aspects need to be considered. And if you know Baalke's M.O., he is very calculated and analytical; no doubt he is considering ALL of these points...including your PFF stats/facts.
As to his ranking, and I love PFF, one thing they don't consider is the type of defense a S plays in and his role. And they don't consider the differences between a FS's role and a strong S's role. Now, if you were to assign grades to blown coverages, passes he didn't defend, did, blanket coverage (where a QB looks to him and then reverts somewhere else), etc. then you can start to get an accurate account of his rankings. How about missed tackles, poor angles, etc. One thing Fangio does is play both S's, or at least Reid, 35-40 yards deep. That allows for few PD's and INT's but lots of tackles (keeping everything in front of him).
But re: the "eye ball" test, no doubt Reid's abiity in coverage has been HUGE for Whitner on the field. And there is no denying coverage and range is a weakness of Whitner's esp. in big games and in the RZ.
Now if you want to provide details on his game, his strengths and why we SHOULD retain him for the LT, carry on...I'll be happy to contribute to that post as well. This way we cover all bases and we can reasses this FO move next year at this time and assign a grade.
Originally posted by susweel:
.
Originally posted by InglewoodCA9ers:
You're right about my hyper-exuberance and perhaps over-the-top passion for a player. I will say that. But it certainly has NOTHING to do with me being a newbie and its offensive IMO, as you just typed almost half a page + regarding the "other side of the coin" by stating some of the negatives in Hitner's game. So does that make u a "newbie"? FURTHERMORE, the reference to me being a newbie had NOTHING to do with my previous post, but rather me simply saying "YESSSS" to Hitner perhaps coming back, not some long passionate post!!. FACT!! My passion is for the 49ers and facts, not necessarily Hitner and MORE SO b/c of the foolish inference that somehow wanting Hitner back, or disagreeing with u makes me some type of "Newbie"....
Lastly your previous assessments are well taken and respected. I agree with a lot of what you said, but even if all was taken into account the reality is Hitner would still easily be a TOP 10 Safety. But again much respect... you always have very insightful and researched posts and I enjoy reading your opinions..
Thanks bro.
