Baalke could be right | Page 3 | 49ers Webzone Forum

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:22 AM

#31

dmax
Veteran
Posts: 22,778

Originally posted by Ajanke:
f**k we just lost david baas to the giants

OH F THIS...F THIS

I'm sure this is alex smiths fault

[ Edited by dmax on Jul 27, 2011 at 07:24:04 ]

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:23 AM

#32

elguapo
Veteran
Posts: 25,109

Originally posted by 190836:
Originally posted by elguapo:
With our free agent losses, they are thinking very logically and i agree with their moves or lack of moves so far.

Franklin leaves and ICE replaces him so Ray Mac moves to DE= a little worse against the run...a few yards per game but better pass rush for sure

TKO leaves and bowman replaces him= not much of a drop off in run or pass coverage, and bowman has tons of speed (what did he have 17 tackles in the arizona game?)

Lawson leaves and replaced by Aldon Smith/Brooks= a little worse against the run but better against the pass

Goldson...if he leaves Reggie smith takes over and Mays starts opposite him= save a few million on the cap, lose a few tackles and maybe 3 or so int's (but then again Smith might perform well and so may Mays)

These losses total to our team Defense being worse against the run but better against the pass which is more important these days and is where our team has struggled for the past 5 years. This is what we all wanted to become better against the pass and for that to happen, we need 1 more cb for sure but our improved pass rush might help out clements (if he stays) and compamy.

What do you think about this line of reasoning?

I think so far as a unit on D, we lost some run D but gained pass rush.....and of we actually get a cb like cromartie or joseph our pass d will excell.

How could this be a good move, when all the replacement players that you mentioned are second stringers in a bad team? These guys wouldn't even be in the final roster of a serious contender.

How could this not be a good move....2nd stringer or not they are still better at rushing the passer than their first string counterpart....that much is obvious

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:25 AM

#33

canadian49erfan
Veteran
Posts: 2,469

I need a panic room...

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:26 AM

#34

elguapo
Veteran
Posts: 25,109

Originally posted by TexasNiner:
I can't see the value in really any of our moves so far.

1. We draft players with "potential" or "projects", so odds are (especially this year) none of the rookies will make an immediate impact.

2. We say "signing our own players" is a priority, but it looks like we will lose 2-3 at least of our defensive starters, and in a year with a limited offseason will have young guys or new vets trying to learn a new system and roles.

3. We so far have both done and said that we won't be "major players" in FA. So, not only were we average in talent at best last year, but we are losing players and apparently have no plans to upgrades or replace them with the best available talent.

So, in the end, we have rookies unlikely to help anytime soon, we are losing starters, and we aren't bringing in any upgraded talent or even talent equal to what we lost.

I fail to see the logic.

i explained the logic well. we get worse in one area of the D run defense and better in another area of the D pass D.....the more important area of the defense.

we better get a dam cb

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:29 AM

#35

elguapo
Veteran
Posts: 25,109

Originally posted by Frisco69ers:
losing David Baas is not thinking logically

first of all i was talking about the defensive moves or lack thereof only....not letting baas walk.

However baas was a decent center not a good one and who is to say we wont get a better replacement. He was rated pretty poorly last year as a center, so do you think the rookie center from stanford will be a lot worse....after all they both would of had to learn new systems and the center from stanford already knows it well

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:31 AM

#36

190836
Veteran
Posts: 11,930

Originally posted by elguapo:
Originally posted by 190836:
Originally posted by elguapo:
With our free agent losses, they are thinking very logically and i agree with their moves or lack of moves so far.

Franklin leaves and ICE replaces him so Ray Mac moves to DE= a little worse against the run...a few yards per game but better pass rush for sure

TKO leaves and bowman replaces him= not much of a drop off in run or pass coverage, and bowman has tons of speed (what did he have 17 tackles in the arizona game?)

Lawson leaves and replaced by Aldon Smith/Brooks= a little worse against the run but better against the pass

Goldson...if he leaves Reggie smith takes over and Mays starts opposite him= save a few million on the cap, lose a few tackles and maybe 3 or so int's (but then again Smith might perform well and so may Mays)

These losses total to our team Defense being worse against the run but better against the pass which is more important these days and is where our team has struggled for the past 5 years. This is what we all wanted to become better against the pass and for that to happen, we need 1 more cb for sure but our improved pass rush might help out clements (if he stays) and compamy.

What do you think about this line of reasoning?

I think so far as a unit on D, we lost some run D but gained pass rush.....and of we actually get a cb like cromartie or joseph our pass d will excell.

How could this be a good move, when all the replacement players that you mentioned are second stringers in a bad team? These guys wouldn't even be in the final roster of a serious contender.

How could this not be a good move....2nd stringer or not they are still better at rushing the passer than their first string counterpart....that much is obvious

Now Bass is gone, how do you justify that? That makes it, Bass, Spikes, Franklin,Lawson and probably more to come. This your building through the draft. Welcome to the world of Yorks as the owners.

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:33 AM

#37

kray28
Veteran
Posts: 12,345

When your team has been this terrible for this long....players leaving is not necessarily a bad thing.

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:33 AM

#38

canadian49erfan
Veteran
Posts: 2,469

Originally posted by 190836:
Originally posted by elguapo:
Originally posted by 190836:
Originally posted by elguapo:
With our free agent losses, they are thinking very logically and i agree with their moves or lack of moves so far.

Franklin leaves and ICE replaces him so Ray Mac moves to DE= a little worse against the run...a few yards per game but better pass rush for sure

TKO leaves and bowman replaces him= not much of a drop off in run or pass coverage, and bowman has tons of speed (what did he have 17 tackles in the arizona game?)

Lawson leaves and replaced by Aldon Smith/Brooks= a little worse against the run but better against the pass

Goldson...if he leaves Reggie smith takes over and Mays starts opposite him= save a few million on the cap, lose a few tackles and maybe 3 or so int's (but then again Smith might perform well and so may Mays)

These losses total to our team Defense being worse against the run but better against the pass which is more important these days and is where our team has struggled for the past 5 years. This is what we all wanted to become better against the pass and for that to happen, we need 1 more cb for sure but our improved pass rush might help out clements (if he stays) and compamy.

What do you think about this line of reasoning?

I think so far as a unit on D, we lost some run D but gained pass rush.....and of we actually get a cb like cromartie or joseph our pass d will excell.

How could this be a good move, when all the replacement players that you mentioned are second stringers in a bad team? These guys wouldn't even be in the final roster of a serious contender.

How could this not be a good move....2nd stringer or not they are still better at rushing the passer than their first string counterpart....that much is obvious

Now Bass is gone, how do you justify that? That makes it, Bass, Spikes, Franklin,Lawson and probably more to come. This your building through the draft. Welcome to the world of Yorks as the owners.

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:33 AM

#39

brooklyn49er
Veteran
Posts: 47

We have no depth at the position. Heitmann is out this year too. We need a veteran center.

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:36 AM

#40

kray28
Veteran
Posts: 12,345

I'd trade some of our "effectiveness" against the run for a decent pass rush anyday though.

How long has it been since the 49ers have had a decent pass rush? I'd say we'd have to go back to 2001 when Walsh drafted us a young D in two drafts.

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:39 AM

#41

canadian49erfan
Veteran
Posts: 2,469

Can Kevin Mawae still play? I know he didnt last year, but at this time, we need some patch-work done on this O-Line

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:39 AM

#42

Dajanksta
CrankyJanke
Posts: 67,774

I bet a thousand bucks we don't sign a CB that's not and UDFA

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:44 AM

#43

Aussie49er
Veteran
Posts: 1,028

I think the logic fell of during draft day. They should have trade this years picks away for next years, this year is a wasted year, plain and simple. It will be known as that lockout year, even though no games were lost it will still be regarded as a lesser year.

Maybe their plan is to tank the season and get Luck.

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:44 AM

#44

BodhiPaddlesOut
Veteran
Posts: 9,850

Originally posted by Ajanke:
I bet a thousand bucks we don't sign a CB that's not and UDFA

Done.

Lets swap routing numbers and account numbers.

Jul 27, 2011 at 7:45 AM

#45

Otter
Veteran
Posts: 22,936

Originally posted by elguapo:

Lawson leaves and replaced by Aldon Smith/Brooks= a little worse against the run but better against the pass

I have no idea how you came to this conclusion. Lawson has been better in pass D, than rushing the passer. How does a rookie, who played DE in college upgrade the pass D? He's never really had to drop back in to coverage, he's a project with no experience. If anything, he'd be better against the run.