Originally posted by MadDog49er:
You can simply end this debate by accepting what I stated early in this thread: That Hill is no automatic to make the team, and that Hill is no automatic to be higher than Battle on the depth chart. He may, or may not be. We simply don't know right now, and to put Battle in the same catagory with Zeigler, and elevate Hill to a different plain than these two is not rational, until training camp begins and we see how it all plays out.
My premise, which you continue to distort when you chronically misquote me, is that Battle has proven throughout the years to be a reliable target, which you summarily dismiss.
My premise is that Hill was behind Battle on the depth chart last year (this was a fact), and only received valuable playing time after Battle was injured (this was a fact). I then debunked your erroneous logic that Hill outperformed Battle since he received more catches overall. Battle led the team in receptions the first half of the year (this is a fact), Hill was third in receptions the second half of the year (this is a fact). The players who outperformed Hill in the second half of the season had less receptions than Battle in the first half of the season (this is a fact).
Finally, just so we can set the record straight, is there ANYTHING that Battle has done for our team (leading the team in receptions in the past, being a team leader, a guy who played through injuries, a guy who played in 40+ consecutive games, a guy who went from a 6th round selection to the leading receiver for our team in multiple years, a guy who is known as one of the better blocking WR's in the NFC). I'm just looking for one brief moment where you could possibly be impartial and give Battle some credit for what he's done for this team. If you do, I won't claim that you have "mad love" for Battle. I promise.
Has Battle done anything of merit during his career as a Niner? If so, please list.
P.S. In reference to Post 50, where you attacked me unprovoked, stating:
Let's see your mindless unintelligent response to this one
Uh, you really don't want to to make this a battle of intelligence, because you will only embarrass yourself. Really embarrass yourself, kind of like in the past, in the error-plagued Battle vs. Johnson thread you wrote where I systematically dissected and posted for the entire board to see, your three major statistical errors (The board may for reference sake take a look at this thread, Post 111, where I copied your error-plagued thread from the past that I thrashed. As a bonus, later on in the thread, you added a fourth false statistic that I also debunked). As I remember how that played out before the board, you were wrong, and I was right. And, that was really embarrassing for you.
My advice: You don't want to head down the intelligence track. That would only cause you further embarrassment, since you will never win that one.
My advice once again, is to run away from this thread, or simply agree with my premise that Hill is no lock to beat out Battle for a roster spot, which is a logical statement.
You started all of this with Post 50, so don't attempt to play the martyr as you did in the Battle vs. Johnson thread. You brought this embarrassment upon yourself in that thread and this one as well. At least you are consistent, and I have to give you credit for that.
I love how the "plain" of one's intelligence plays into matters of opinion regarding the #6 WR on the SF 49ers.
None of us know for certain what the will happen when the turk walks the halls. Additionally, none of us know what the game day depth chart will be. Battle's knee could be 100% and Hill could totally flop. McCloughan/Singletary/Raye/Sully may not/no longer be impressed with Hill, for all we know. Heck, Singletary might look deep into Battle's eyes and see "it."
Is it so inconceivable that Hill could be kept above Battle? And spare me the "can't you read English" crap that you're going to spew about you saying as much in your posts because, despite you stating it, your continued responses imply that anyone who entertains this possibility is an idiot.
I has not B smart az U gais—or on the same "plain"—but I will furnish my opinion. While my opinion feels like fact to me, I am willing to acknowledge that it is my opinion and that YMMV. I also acknowledge that none of our opinions matter because we are not making the decision.
If I had to come up with a rank order and cut two WR today it would be:
Bruce, Morgan, Crabtree, Jones, Hill | Battle, Zeigler
The Zeigler decision is a no brainer (IMO). And, like it or not, this is a "what have you done for me lately" league. That is what puts Battle on the outside for me (read: IMO). He's done all the good things that you've mentioned but he also has a bum knee, is getting older, more expensive, and likely hit his ceiling.
The way I see it (read: IMO), there's less risk in expecting Hill to marginally elevate his game to Battle's historical level than expecting Battle's knee to remain viable. It is entirely possible that the Niner's decision makers disagree with me but it is far from inconceivable that they might agree.
You are free to disagree.................................. but really you should just admit I'm right and leave this thread.