There are 146 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Cam Johnson being traded to Colts???

  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 25,210
Originally posted by Rascal:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by m_brockalexander:
Another interesting tidbit about this trade pointed out by Matt Barrows. This trade means that only two members of our 2012 draft class remain in LMJ and Looney. Guess the front office is trying to take a mulligan on that draft class and still get something out of it long term.

Im just gonna try to forget that draft ever happened at this point and move on. It just ruins my day when i think about it.

But in HarBaalke we trust, right guys? Again, even our FO makes mistakes...therefore it's OK to not only question a move but disagree with it.


Thank you, well said.
of course it is ok to question and disagree with it. it is also not right when those who do that get slapped with a sticker that says they are a fake fan or they would rather have former coaches and gms back
Lemonier. That's all we need to know to understand getting rid of Haralson and Cam Johnson.

I've actually forgotten all about Cam until the last preseason game.

Lemonier made them not worth having.
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by m_brockalexander:
Another interesting tidbit about this trade pointed out by Matt Barrows. This trade means that only two members of our 2012 draft class remain in LMJ and Looney. Guess the front office is trying to take a mulligan on that draft class and still get something out of it long term.

Im just gonna try to forget that draft ever happened at this point and move on. It just ruins my day when i think about it.

But in HarBaalke we trust, right guys? Again, even our FO makes mistakes...therefore it's OK to not only question a move but disagree with it.

NCommand, i agree with you on that point. I actually dont agree with you on Cam, and when you set a standard by trading away haralson for a 7th, you cant really expect to get much more for Cam. But thats besides the current point being discussed i guess.

I was very critical of some of the moves early last offseason, and was trashed a bit for it, BUT, the majority of those criticisms, especially about the draft class and ST were indeed true. Here is the thing, there are always going to be homers to the extreme, that will allow no criticism to go unchallenged, then there are people who are the opposite of that who must bash everything and be critical of everything. Then you have the normal people, that get grouped with the two extremes any time they stray a bit from the current popular opinion of the board. Just the nature of the beast.

I happen to love our FO and coaching staff for the most part, but no they are not perfect, and last offseason was about as bad as it gets in some areas.
Originally posted by NCommand:
LOL @ all the fans saying Cam only had 1 good game. Anyhow if you spend a year developing a 7th rounder who then finally performs you should then expect more than next years 7th rounder. Period.

Name another game where he was any good? Did nothing in the games he was active last year. 0 tackles.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15064/cam-johnson

This preseason?
Denver? Doesn't even show up in defensive stats:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/denver-broncos-san-francisco-49ers-20130808025/

KC? 2 tackles
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/san-francisco-49ers-kansas-city-chiefs-20130816012/

Minnesota? Doesn't show up in defensive stats:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/minnesota-vikings-san-francisco-49ers-20130825025/

Chargers game was the only time he's done anything in a game. The Chargers line is horrible. And that was against a tackle that's not even on a team right now (Max Starks) and Michael Harris (an undrafted FA last year that had the worst tackle grade ever given by profootballfocus).
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/02/07/2013-team-needs-san-diego-chargers/
Originally posted by sweetDwilly:
Do you guys think it's possible, if not likely that Baalke and co are just trying to establish some good will with potential trading partners down the line? I'm not saying they are willing to give away the farm, but maybe they don't have to dominate or squeeze every piece of value out of trade so the other side feels bitter. Just a thought.

Actually, I think this is exactly what makes Baalke so successful as a trading partner. If you're going to cut someone anyway and you can get something, squeezing your trading partner is just going to make you appear greedy, and when you go to that trading partner down the line when you're the one who needs something, they'll almost for sure squeeze back. But if you made them feel good about their first deal, they'll usually be more likely to make the next deal work.

It almost always seems to me like the Niners are getting too little, and then by draft day they have more ammo than anyone despite the fact that they're already better on the field!
Originally posted by spizzy:
There is absolutely no good explanation for this. He is a young promising player where depth was needed. You guys need to get off Baalke's nuts. There are 2, i repeat 2 draft picks left (james and looney) on the roster from a YEAR AGO.
Yet still we have the best roster in pro football 2 years running with the draft ammunition dreams are made of two years running. This is why he was executive of the year 2011
I love the outrage over a seventh round pick that had one good showing in the fourth game of the preseason.

Listen closely: You're not a General Manager. You're a fan with limited knowledge of the inner workings of the team.
  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 25,210
Originally posted by spizzy:
There is absolutely no good explanation for this. He is a young promising player where depth was needed. You guys need to get off Baalke's nuts. There are 2, i repeat 2 draft picks left (james and looney) on the roster from a YEAR AGO.

i hated the draft like the next person but nothing you can do about it, james is good, maybe looney will develop,, i think jon b will be a good wide out for us which washes out a little of the bad taste of jenkins away and maybe we can use this draft pick for cam to move up and get a good player next year. i know it does not make you feel better but i guess that is how you got to look at it. yes, they deserve to get roasted for jenkins but they saw the mistake and traded the mistake for a better player, in my opinion. the first year we had a great draft, last year not so much,, but you gotta be excited about this years rookie class. two out of three ain't bad and i think we know we got lucky and one bad draft did not set back this team two years, which sometimes happens.. now when i calm people down, they ought to KNOW they are over reacting
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
NCommand, i agree with you on that point. I actually dont agree with you on Cam, and when you set a standard by trading away haralson for a 7th, you cant really expect to get much more for Cam. But thats besides the current point being discussed i guess.

I was very critical of some of the moves early last offseason, and was trashed a bit for it, BUT, the majority of those criticisms, especially about the draft class and ST were indeed true. Here is the thing, there are always going to be homers to the extreme, that will allow no criticism to go unchallenged, then there are people who are the opposite of that who must bash everything and be critical of everything. Then you have the normal people, that get grouped with the two extremes any time they stray a bit from the current popular opinion of the board. Just the nature of the beast.

I happen to love our FO and coaching staff for the most part, but no they are not perfect, and last offseason was about as bad as it gets in some areas.

Totally. I'm a big Baalke fan and it took balls to get rid of Jenkins! It's cool if we don't agree on the Cam trade. I understand "why" it was done but I don't think we will get anything close to the value of Cam even if we do develop that guy for a full year. Finding any real production from a late 7th even after a full year of developing him is highly unlikely. And now we establish a 7th round precedence for the future. It's even more unlikely he adds value to our stacked roster with 15 picks next year. Packing late round draft picks is highly unlikely as well as we tried to do that last year to no avail and therefore we had to keep almost all of our picks. So in the end, we gave him away. At least it wasnt an NFC contender!
Originally posted by qnnhan7:
Lemonier. That's all we need to know to understand getting rid of Haralson and Cam Johnson.

I've actually forgotten all about Cam until the last preseason game.

Lemonier made them not worth having.

You said it: his talent leapt off the screen!
Originally posted by redrathman:
I love the outrage over a seventh round pick that had one good showing in the fourth game of the preseason.

Listen closely: You're not a General Manager. You're a fan with limited knowledge of the inner workings of the team.

Well, time to shut down the WZ mods!
what did we get?
Originally posted by redrathman:
I love the outrage over a seventh round pick that had one good showing in the fourth game of the preseason.

Listen closely: You're not a General Manager. You're a fan with limited knowledge of the inner workings of the team.

This right here is a prime example of why you wish you could absolutely love the s**t out of a post.
[ Edited by mryan1004 on Sep 2, 2013 at 11:13 AM ]
Originally posted by jreff22:
what did we get?

Year supply of toilet paper and a copier to be named later.
  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 25,210
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by redrathman:
I love the outrage over a seventh round pick that had one good showing in the fourth game of the preseason.

Listen closely: You're not a General Manager. You're a fan with limited knowledge of the inner workings of the team.

Well, time to shut down the WZ mods!
yes we are not gms but that does not stop us from having an opinion or disagreeing with the front office about something