Deal Done for Ahmad Brooks (6yr @ $44.5 million)

Originally posted by candlestick49er:
1) Brooks being the "6th-7th best player on our D" says more about our defense than it does about his talent. You can't knock him for playing on a defensive unit that has several good players. From 1987-1992, Steve Young was the 2nd best QB on the team...does that have anything to do with his worth as a player?

2) I disagree that Brooks is being paid like a star player. If Mario Williams (a definite star player) signs a contract similar to Brooks, then you'll have a valid point. We'll see if Brooks' deal is anywhere near MW's contract. If not, then its safe to say that Ahmad was signed to a fair deal. I expect MW's deal to be significantly more than what Brooks got.

3) I disagree that there are "tons of guys" that have done more than Brooks. He isn't an elite player, but he is still better than many players at his position.

Originally posted by andes14:
An important point people are glossing over:

I hope people realize that on 1st and 2nd down, Brooks isn't even gonna be rushing the passer all that much. Aldon will be an every down player, and he will be doing most of the early down pass rushing, meaning Brooks will oftentimes be in coverage as Fangio rarely brings 5 or more rushers. If we did let Brooks walk, all we'd really need to go a long ways in replacing him would have been just a good coverage/set the edge LB, a la even our good friend Manny Lawson.

1) Brooks is great against the run, which is valuable on 1st and 2nd down.

2) Brooks is a good pass rusher, which adds unpredictability to our defense. Opposing offenses still have to account for Brooks coming off the edge, unlike Lawson.

3) Brooks is solid in coverage, which means he isn't a liability when dropping back.

If that's your minimum expectation for his role, then he's extremely valuable to our defense. Now add the fact that he's an every down player (and a good 3rd down pass rusher), a hard worker (at least in recent seasons), already knows the system, already developed chemistry with the front seven, is entering his prime (and still has room to get better), AND he wants to be here. Plus, he wasn't grossly overpaid and the team didn't break the bank to keep him. Its not worth letting him go just to save money since he does bring a lot to our team.

You're right that Brooks is a real nice player and I'd love to have him back. I just personally put his worth somewhere around $10M guaranteed and I just think we should have waited because I really don't think any other team would have approached 17, and if they did, THEN give it to him. I really don't think we would have to worry about some team stepping in and offering him like 25-30 mil guaranteed. Now we likely lose Rogers which I think hurts more than if we were to have lost Brooks.

Brooks is quite valuable to our run d. He did great against the rush and he is an improving passrusher. And compared to other olb's contracts he is making not making that much in comparison.

Holy s**t, Brooks cares more about getting ready for next season than spending time with his fam!

Q: Is being in Santa Clara right now, is that a departure from your normal offseason routine? Didn't you usually go back to Virginia in the offseason?
Brooks: Yeah, I usually go home in the offseason to my mother's house. I have a daughter out there. So, that's pretty much my main reason why I go home. But I realized that I'm not 23, 24 years old anymore. I'm 28 and a lot of things change over the years. You grow up and you start seeing things from a different light and my career's here in California. So, I really want to make the best for my career and just capitalize on what I've already gained.

http://sfo.scout.com/2/1162892.html

Originally posted by andes14:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
Not to mention that Juan Gonzalez, Garrett Anderson, Jeff Bagwell, and Carlos Delgado were better baseball players than Derek Jeter. I still laugh at those comments.

You are way too influenced by his playing in a huge market and on a team that has won a lot. If you put Delgado in NY all those years and give him those rings and let Jeter toil away in Toronto all those years, let's see if you have the same opinion. Juan Gon, Bagwell, Delgado all swung the bat way better and put up better #'s. And #'s are 99% of baseball. But stop hijacking threads.

You are getting like JoeCool on the issue. Which is not cool. When your argument goes beyond football players and into baseball, you have over-argued your point of view. I'm pretty sure we all know where you stand in regard to your view of Brooks contract. I think most of us may not agree but we respect your view to some extent. Glad you are a fan of the NIners too

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
I think you are underrating Brooks my man.

We have the best front 7 in the league with Brooks, not despite Brooks.

If we let Brooks walks with no backup plan and we insert an outside variable, that could collapse. 3-4 OLB with his skills sets are not easy to find. Before brooks and Aldon we were struggling big time. And Aldon isn't even a pure 3-4 olb yet, more like a Hybrid DE/OLB for now.

Who would replace Brooks if we let him go?

Our FO didn't let that happen and i'm glad.

So now who are we gonna replace Rogers wtih? The bottom line is that LOLB spot is gonna spend a lot of time in coverage. There are FA's we could have signed (like Lawson) that can do that for a fraction of the cost and also there are LB's in the draft that can cover/set the edge.

Also just FYI, despite rushing on most passing downs (more than he will in 2012), Brooks finished with 1 sack over the last 6 games. Again, he's good, but not $17M guaranteed good.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Dude, why are you arguing this so hard? There is no way you have a more educated opinion about the team than Baalke and Co. I'm not saying that every once in a while we can't be right while the team was wrong, but consider it dumb luck. Every angle you are thinking of has been thought by the front office 10 times over.

Again, I love Baalke, just like I love Harbaugh, doesn't mean I didn't disagree like hell with his decision to keep the FG vs. Dallas over taking the 1st down. But just because I felt that wasn't the smartest move doesn't mean I think I'd be a better coach. I'm not thrilled with paying Brooks like he's a star, esp. when I think if he hit the open market no other team would come close. That's why I think we're holding off on giving Alex Smith the 5 year/$50 or 60M deal his agent's probably asking for right now. Because we know no other team will offer that. If no other team offers him more than $5M per year, we can just offer him 6 and save some serious money.

But just because this move makes me raise an eyebrow (and I obviously hope I'm wrong and Brooks does play like the star he's gonna be paid like), doesn't mean I think I'd be a better GM than Baalke (who deservedly won Exec of the Year) or anything of the sort.

Originally posted by qnnhan7:

Originally posted by andes14:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
Not to mention that Juan Gonzalez, Garrett Anderson, Jeff Bagwell, and Carlos Delgado were better baseball players than Derek Jeter. I still laugh at those comments.

You are way too influenced by his playing in a huge market and on a team that has won a lot. If you put Delgado in NY all those years and give him those rings and let Jeter toil away in Toronto all those years, let's see if you have the same opinion. Juan Gon, Bagwell, Delgado all swung the bat way better and put up better #'s. And #'s are 99% of baseball. But stop hijacking threads.

You are getting like JoeCool on the issue. Which is not cool. When your argument goes beyond football players and into baseball, you have over-argued your point of view. I'm pretty sure we all know where you stand in regard to your view of Brooks contract. I think most of us may not agree but we respect your view to some extent. Glad you are a fan of the NIners too

Hahah, but alas, I'm not the one that changed the subject, that goof troop ninerjohn is.

Originally posted by WRATHman44:

Originally posted by andes14:

Originally posted by Shorteous:
Good, so the opponent will know exactly who is rushing on each down and who they have to worry about being effective. Take away the rushing threat from other OLB and all you have done is created an unbalanced defensive front easy to counter. Ala why Lawson is gone.

It was like this on early downs last year too (Haralson didn't rush much, Brooks did) and our D did OK.

yup, and 3rd down is the same as 1st and 2nd . Even IF you know contracts, you don't know defense if you believe this.

Last year for the most part, teams knew who was rushing on each play. In base it was RayMac, Sope, J. Smith, and Brooks. In nickel it was Brooks, RayMac, J. Smith, and A. Smith. Very predictable, but very effective. Again, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

CC..it's true, we've had some awesome LB's over the years. I give Dave Wilcox a ton of credit...he was really the prototype for the modern LB. He got after the QB pretty good and was one mean SOB on the field. The rest, as they say, is history, and our current group will make their own for years to come. Ain't that cool...

Originally posted by andes14:
So now who are we gonna replace Rogers wtih? The bottom line is that LOLB spot is gonna spend a lot of time in coverage. There are FA's we could have signed (like Lawson) that can do that for a fraction of the cost and also there are LB's in the draft that can cover/set the edge.

Also just FYI, despite rushing on most passing downs (more than he will in 2012), Brooks finished with 1 sack over the last 6 games. Again, he's good, but not $17M guaranteed good.

How could you POSSIBLY know that?

Originally posted by WRATHman44:

Originally posted by andes14:
So now who are we gonna replace Rogers wtih? The bottom line is that LOLB spot is gonna spend a lot of time in coverage. There are FA's we could have signed (like Lawson) that can do that for a fraction of the cost and also there are LB's in the draft that can cover/set the edge.

Also just FYI, despite rushing on most passing downs (more than he will in 2012), Brooks finished with 1 sack over the last 6 games. Again, he's good, but not $17M guaranteed good.

How could you POSSIBLY know that?

and when did sacks become the be all end all? the great players get like 1 per game, and when they get 3 in a game, they go the next 2 without one, by avergare of course

Originally posted by WillistheWall:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:

Originally posted by solidg2000:
KamerIon Wimbley
5 year 48 mil 29 guarenteed
Chad Greenway
5 year 41 mil 21 guarenteed
Karlos Dansby (2010)
5 year 43 mil 22 guarenteed

Is Brooks better then these men?

i'd take him over those 3

Same, by quite a bit too.

Wimbley is better by far.

Originally posted by andes14:
You're right that Brooks is a real nice player and I'd love to have him back. I just personally put his worth somewhere around $10M guaranteed and I just think we should have waited because I really don't think any other team would have approached 17, and if they did, THEN give it to him. I really don't think we would have to worry about some team stepping in and offering him like 25-30 mil guaranteed. Now we likely lose Rogers which I think hurts more than if we were to have lost Brooks.

Age plays into this - Brooks is now entering his prime whereas Rogers has already experienced his peak physical years

Originally posted by crabman82:

Originally posted by WRATHman44:

Originally posted by andes14:
So now who are we gonna replace Rogers wtih? The bottom line is that LOLB spot is gonna spend a lot of time in coverage. There are FA's we could have signed (like Lawson) that can do that for a fraction of the cost and also there are LB's in the draft that can cover/set the edge.

Also just FYI, despite rushing on most passing downs (more than he will in 2012), Brooks finished with 1 sack over the last 6 games. Again, he's good, but not $17M guaranteed good.

How could you POSSIBLY know that?

and when did sacks become the be all end all? the great players get like 1 per game, and when they get 3 in a game, they go the next 2 without one, by avergare of course

It's not an end all be all, it's just surprising to see a 3-4 OLB who finished the year with 1 sack in his final 6 games get paid like such a star.

And how do I know he rushed more in 2011 than he will in 2012. Educated guess. VERY educated guess. We rarely rush more than 4 guys and on base downs it'll be the 3 d-lineman and then most of the time Aldon will be the 4th.

Originally posted by WillistheWall:
Holy s**t, Brooks cares more about getting ready for next season than spending time with his fam!

Q: Is being in Santa Clara right now, is that a departure from your normal offseason routine? Didn't you usually go back to Virginia in the offseason?
Brooks: Yeah, I usually go home in the offseason to my mother's house. I have a daughter out there. So, that's pretty much my main reason why I go home. But I realized that I'm not 23, 24 years old anymore. I'm 28 and a lot of things change over the years. You grow up and you start seeing things from a different light and my career's here in California. So, I really want to make the best for my career and just capitalize on what I've already gained.

http://sfo.scout.com/2/1162892.html

Glad he's not my dad.....