Tank Carradine Thread

Originally posted by ElephantHaley:

I don't get it. Now a days rokkie contracts are 4 years, lets say this Tank misses and red shirts this year, what happens next year in 2014 if he has just a so so "rookie" year? What i'm saying is I think the 49ers shoulda waited til round 3 for this guy and if he was gone by then then so be it. This guy wont see the field this season. Another draft pick since 12' that wont contribute as a Rookie. Coulda had DE Margus Hunt who is bing called a "Star" so far in Camp.

Lol. Too much hard knocks.

Originally posted by ElephantHaley:
I don't get it. Now a days rokkie contracts are 4 years, lets say this Tank misses and red shirts this year, what happens next year in 2014 if he has just a so so "rookie" year? What i'm saying is I think the 49ers shoulda waited til round 3 for this guy and if he was gone by then then so be it. This guy wont see the field this season. Another draft pick since 12' that wont contribute as a Rookie. Coulda had DE Margus Hunt who is bing called a "Star" so far in Camp.

yeah and hes also like 28 years old or whatever. personallly i'll go with the younger more talented player who might have to be red-shirted

I find it odd to say, "the 49ers can afford to red shirt him". A pass rusher that can contribute is huge for a Super Bowl contending team. If anything, the 49ers, or any SB contender, cannot afford to red shirt rookies. They are in win-now mode and anyone that can contribute their talent to the cause should pitch in. If Dorsey fizzles out for any reason, there isn't much behind him on the depth chart.

I think it's actually the crap teams that can afford to red shirt rookies. Let's take, for example, the team across the bay. Who cares if their rookies can't play this year due to injury? They aren't going anywhere above 4 wins. They are the ones that can afford to draft injured rookies with high potential and just sit them and allow them to heal. The downs they play aren't meaningful.

In the long run, Tank will shine, and I respect the long term move, but the fact that he may not play a down this season hurts the playoff run.

another wasted pick we could have took another WR or CB that could have helped this team right now. Instead Baalke drafted 3 gimpy players who cant even get on the field this year.

Originally posted by thl408:
I find it odd to say, "the 49ers can afford to red shirt him". A pass rusher that can contribute is huge for a Super Bowl contending team. If anything, the 49ers, or any SB contender, cannot afford to red shirt rookies. They are in win-now mode and anyone that can contribute their talent to the cause should pitch in. If Dorsey fizzles out for any reason, there isn't much behind him on the depth chart.

I think it's actually the crap teams that can afford to red shirt rookies. Let's take, for example, the team across the bay. Who cares if their rookies can't play this year due to injury? They aren't going anywhere above 4 wins. They are the ones that can afford to draft injured rookies with high potential and just sit them and allow them to heal. The downs they play aren't meaningful.

In the long run, Tank will shine, and I respect the long term move, but the fact that he may not play a down this season hurts the playoff run.

I think your forgetting about Carradines injury, with all the talent on defense the 9ers can afford to let him sit and heal. And as of right now Ian Williams is the starter at NT, Dorsey is the back up at all three positions on the D-line. Also Corey Lemonier looks to be a promising pass-rusher. Judging from what we've seen lat Thursday he'll bring a lot of pass-rush and quickness to the defense.

And I think you got it backwards, struggling teams need their rookies to start, winning teams can afford to sit their rookies. Struggling teams aren't drafting cause they know they're not going to the playoffs, they're drafting to win....see 2012 Colts.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
I think your forgetting about Carradines injury, with all the talent on defense the 9ers can afford to let him sit and heal. And as of right now Ian Williams is the starter at NT, Dorsey is the back up at all three positions on the D-line. Also Corey Lemonier looks to be a promising pass-rusher. Judging from what we've seen lat Thursday he'll bring a lot of pass-rush and quickness to the defense.

And I think you got it backwards, struggling teams need their rookies to start, winning teams can afford to sit their rookies. Struggling teams aren't drafting cause they know they're not going to the playoffs, they're drafting to win....see 2012 Colts.

Sorry, but I think that logic is reversed for the reasons I stated. I did not forget about Tank's injury. That's the reason I posted what I did in post #261.

Super Bowl contenders need players to play and contribute to the cause. Win-now mode means 'all hands on deck', there is a window to win and every player needs to contribute. Crap teams are going to be crap. What's the difference between a 3 win season and a 5 win season? A worse draft pick in April's draft.

I'll expand on my example to illustrate my point. Suppose the Raiders (or Jets, Jags) took three or four injured players that would have gone much higher in the draft if it weren't for their injury. They all get redshirted. Raiders suck again and again they draft high in 2014. Besides not being able to develop and gain playing experience, who cares if those rookies didn't get to play. The team would have sucked with or without them. Crap teams with a plan to rebuild are the ones that should think long term. Contenders need to have a bit more short term thinking.

I'll admit that Baalke has a nice mix of long term, short term vision. He spent some draft picks to acquire a couple vets (McCoy, Boldin). But to spend 2 picks in the first four rounds on injured players that may not play till 2014, you can't tell me that 2 healthy and able players wouldn't help more to this year's cause.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
I think your forgetting about Carradines injury, with all the talent on defense the 9ers can afford to let him sit and heal. And as of right now Ian Williams is the starter at NT, Dorsey is the back up at all three positions on the D-line. Also Corey Lemonier looks to be a promising pass-rusher. Judging from what we've seen lat Thursday he'll bring a lot of pass-rush and quickness to the defense.

And I think you got it backwards, struggling teams need their rookies to start, winning teams can afford to sit their rookies. Struggling teams aren't drafting cause they know they're not going to the playoffs, they're drafting to win....see 2012 Colts.

Sorry, but I think that logic is reversed for the reasons I stated. I did not forget about Tank's injury. That's the reason I posted what I did in post #261.

Super Bowl contenders need players to play and contribute to the cause. Win-now mode means 'all hands on deck', there is a window to win and every player needs to contribute. Crap teams are going to be crap. What's the difference between a 3 win season and a 5 win season? A worse draft pick in April's draft.

I'll expand on my example to illustrate my point. Suppose the Raiders (or Jets, Jags) took three or four injured players that would have gone much higher in the draft if it weren't for their injury. They all get redshirted. Raiders suck again and again they draft high in 2014. Besides not being able to develop and gain playing experience, who cares if those rookies didn't get to play. The team would have sucked with or without them. Crap teams with a plan to rebuild are the ones that should think long term. Contenders need to have a bit more short term thinking.

I'll admit that Baalke has a nice mix of long term, short term vision. He spent some draft picks to acquire a couple vets (McCoy, Boldin). But to spend 2 picks in the first four rounds on injured players that may not play till 2014, you can't tell me that 2 healthy and able players wouldn't help more to this year's cause.

Your still not getting it, its like you don't know our team or my team, not sure if your a 9ers fan yet. But with all the talent the 9ers have on defense THEY can afford to sit players. Tell me why isn't it a problem that Lattimore sits?? AJ Jenkins didn't contribute last year and I could've sworn our 9ers went to the Super Bowl. Again, not seeing your logic.

And your assuming the Raiders draft that way cause they know they're gonna suck the next year.....dude, coaches jobs are on the line they don't call this league Not For Long for nothing. Win now or its your ass, they're not gonna draft 4 Marcus Lattimores cause they know they're gonna suck anyway that just doesn't happen. I've been a die hard fan of the NFL Draft and have never seen a team draft like that.

Totally agree Kolohe!

They just can't seem to get it!

We can afford to let people sit and let them really get healthy.

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Totally agree Kolohe!

They just can't seem to get it!

We can afford to let people sit and let them really get healthy.

Thanks Wally.

And even if Carradine was healthy, how much could he contribute right now, and how many snaps do you think he'd get in a regular game?? Not even enough to make a difference, unless he can beat out Ian Williams for the NT job lol. If anything Lemonier would see more snaps than Carradine IMO.

Originally posted by ElephantHaley:

I don't get it. Now a days rokkie contracts are 4 years, lets say this Tank misses and red shirts this year, what happens next year in 2014 if he has just a so so "rookie" year? What i'm saying is I think the 49ers shoulda waited til round 3 for this guy and if he was gone by then then so be it. This guy wont see the field this season. Another draft pick since 12' that wont contribute as a Rookie. Coulda had DE Margus Hunt who is bing called a "Star" so far in Camp.

Not even week one and you're calling him a bust.

Calm your boner for Hunt.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Your still not getting it, its like you don't know our team or my team, not sure if your a 9ers fan yet. But with all the talent the 9ers have on defense THEY can afford to sit players. Tell me why isn't it a problem that Lattimore sits?? AJ Jenkins didn't contribute last year and I could've sworn our 9ers went to the Super Bowl. Again, not seeing your logic.

And your assuming the Raiders draft that way cause they know they're gonna suck the next year.....dude, coaches jobs are on the line they don't call this league Not For Long for nothing. Win now or its your ass, they're not gonna draft 4 Marcus Lattimores cause they know they're gonna suck anyway that just doesn't happen. I've been a die hard fan of the NFL Draft and have never seen a team draft like that.

Trust me, I am a 49er fan and I do know the team. Nice try questioning my fanhood as a way to boost your argument, though. My original point is that I think teams that are planning for long term goals (rebuilding teams) are the ones that can afford to sit rookies more so than teams that have a present window for winning it all. I don't want to keep repeating the same thing. I am sure you know my view.

I agree with your point that head coach's jobs are on the line, but a realistic GM, of a rebuilding team, has to look at the makeup of the roster and grade a coach's job on the trend of the team's play, not the overall results (wins/losses). A logical fan of a rebuilding team and a logical GM of a rebuilding team has to understand this. Can the GM of the Raiders expect to contend for a playoff spot? Only if he's on drugs. More important than wins and losses is the way the team responds to the coach, effort level, and an upward trend in performance as the season progresses. The casual fan will not understand this and will just look at wins and losses. I get that.

The 49ers are in a position to mortgage some of their future for immediate help. Baalke did the opposite in drafting for the future rather than the present with the Tank pick. It doesn't help the team in 2013. I don't think that is debatable (assuming Tank doesn't suit up at all this season).

And to answer your question about why it isn't a problem that Lattimore sits, the 49ers are stacked at tailback. They are not at DE. Do they have adequate DE depth? I can go with 'adequate', but it is not stacked. The true DEs are RayMac, Cowboy, Dorsey.

Also, about the 'draft 4 Lattimores' thought. A GM with proper long term vision for a rebuilding team should draft 4 Lattimores (injured player with 1st round pedigree) if the value presented itself. Imagine getting four 1st round talents (in the 4th round) the year after to significantly boost the rebuild process. Unless you stumble upon a franchise QB with the #1 overall pick (Luck), it's going to take a couple years to rebuild a team from crap to something relevant. I understand it's not a popular thing to do for the rabid fanbase, but if you have a 2-3 year plan to rebuild, you stay the course. We've never seen a team draft like this because it wasn't until recently that catastrophic injuries could realistically be rehabilitated to full health.

Originally posted by thl408:
Trust me, I am a 49er fan and I do know the team. Nice try questioning my fanhood as a way to boost your argument, though. My original point is that I think teams that are planning for long term goals (rebuilding teams) are the ones that can afford to sit rookies more so than teams that have a present window for winning it all. I don't want to keep repeating the same thing. I am sure you know my view.

I agree with your point that head coach's jobs are on the line, but a realistic GM, of a rebuilding team, has to look at the makeup of the roster and grade a coach's job on the trend of the team's play, not the overall results (wins/losses). A logical fan of a rebuilding team and a logical GM of a rebuilding team has to understand this. Can the GM of the Raiders expect to contend for a playoff spot? Only if he's on drugs. More important than wins and losses is the way the team responds to the coach, effort level, and an upward trend in performance as the season progresses. The casual fan will not understand this and will just look at wins and losses. I get that.

Except this is the opposite of reality. Teams in rebuilding mode are flipping players and pushing rookies into starting roles significantly more than more established teams like the 49ers. They can't afford for their rookies to not have an impact because they need immediate results. Our team is being built for long term, sustained success, and mortgaging a lot of picks on a single player who may not pan out isn't a very sound strategy. Bad teams don't have the luxury of planning for the long term. They need improvement immediately or they'll be replaced in 2 seasons.

Look at our coaching history over the past decade:
Erickson: 2 seasons, no results, fired
Nolan: 3 seasons, no results, fired
Singletary: 2 seasons, no results, fired

Coaches of rebuilding teams don't have the luxury of drafting project players. The current 49ers do.

Originally posted by redrathman:

Originally posted by ElephantHaley:
I don't get it. Now a days rokkie contracts are 4 years, lets say this Tank misses and red shirts this year, what happens next year in 2014 if he has just a so so "rookie" year? What i'm saying is I think the 49ers shoulda waited til round 3 for this guy and if he was gone by then then so be it. This guy wont see the field this season. Another draft pick since 12' that wont contribute as a Rookie. Coulda had DE Margus Hunt who is bing called a "Star" so far in Camp.

Not even week one and you're calling him a bust.

Calm your boner for Hunt.

I'm not calling Tank a bust. Don't twist my words. In my mock drafts I had us taking Hunt with our #61 2nd rounder. I like Hunt, I personally feel is is and will be the better player but my opinion don't count. Tank may very well be a force but as far as the 1st 2 years of their careers I'd almost bet that Hunt will outshine an injured DE drafted 40th overall? I didn't like the move then and I really don't like the move now? What happens if cowboy or Aldon go down now? We'll be back in the same boat as last December because we have to wait for a Red Shirt hurt DE who may or maynot pan out in year 2 or 3 of his 4 year deal.

Originally posted by ElephantHaley:

Originally posted by redrathman:

Originally posted by ElephantHaley:
I don't get it. Now a days rokkie contracts are 4 years, lets say this Tank misses and red shirts this year, what happens next year in 2014 if he has just a so so "rookie" year? What i'm saying is I think the 49ers shoulda waited til round 3 for this guy and if he was gone by then then so be it. This guy wont see the field this season. Another draft pick since 12' that wont contribute as a Rookie. Coulda had DE Margus Hunt who is bing called a "Star" so far in Camp.

Not even week one and you're calling him a bust.

Calm your boner for Hunt.

I'm not calling Tank a bust. Don't twist my words. In my mock drafts I had us taking Hunt with our #61 2nd rounder. I like Hunt, I personally feel is is and will be the better player but my opinion don't count. Tank may very well be a force but as far as the 1st 2 years of their careers I'd almost bet that Hunt will outshine an injured DE drafted 40th overall? I didn't like the move then and I really don't like the move now? What happens if cowboy or Aldon go down now? We'll be back in the same boat as last December because we have to wait for a Red Shirt hurt DE who may or maynot pan out in year 2 or 3 of his 4 year deal.

I agree. He may turn out great, but he may not. And he may tear that ACL again. The point is why take a player so high who won't even contribute to this super bowl caliber team? Of course we have to build for the future, but not at the expense of today.

Originally posted by Disp:
Except this is the opposite of reality. Teams in rebuilding mode are flipping players and pushing rookies into starting roles significantly more than more established teams like the 49ers. They can't afford for their rookies to not have an impact because they need immediate results. Our team is being built for long term, sustained success, and mortgaging a lot of picks on a single player who may not pan out isn't a very sound strategy. Bad teams don't have the luxury of planning for the long term. They need improvement immediately or they'll be replaced in 2 seasons.

Look at our coaching history over the past decade:
Erickson: 2 seasons, no results, fired
Nolan: 3 seasons, no results, fired
Singletary: 2 seasons, no results, fired

Coaches of rebuilding teams don't have the luxury of drafting project players. The current 49ers do.

Thanks for the reply Disp. I may be talking more about what should happen while you and Kolohe are talking about what does happen. I think GMs of rebuilding teams should stay with a 2-3 year plan to rebuild and that these are the teams that can be more patient with the rookies. Bring them along at their individual pace that is comfortable for that individual. SB contenders are more aided by immediate help from the rookies. There's a window to win and it may close. But hey, it's a bottom line kind of business so rebuilding teams aren't allowed the time they need until the fanbase wants heads to roll. In the case of the three coaching tenures you listed, there just wasn't that upward trend in team development that a rebuilding team should see. I can understand why those coaches were let go.

I think I get your's and Kolohe's point. That that's just not the way it works in the NFL. To that point, I agree that the 49ers could afford to sit rookies. They will still be a winning team regardless of whether Tank, Dial, Lattimore play a productive down or not this season. But had the 49ers drafted rookies that can help now, it no doubt aids in their quest for a SB win - this season.

Case in point is Vance. He will help the team this year. Imagine if the 49ers had drafted another impact rookie that can help this season instead of Tank. It would no doubt give them another DE/WR/CB to use this season. Instead, Tank will need to wait till 13-14 to help. Nothing wrong with that, just won't help this season. Now imagine if they selected another Tank-like player (injured 1st round talent) with the Vance pick. Great value, sure, but doesn't help this season and they'd still be looking for a TE #2.

Kolohe - You mentioned that the Raiders would never draft 4 Lattimore-like players because they know they will suck anyways. I'd like to flip the question back to you and ask what if the 49ers had drafted 4 injured rookies with a window to win being open? Would you have been happy with the good value of the picks even though they won't help in 13-14 when the 49ers have a legitimate shot at the SB and could use some help?