There are 139 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

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

Originally posted by andes14:
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.

Fair enough. Perhaps Brooks was slightly overpaid, but his $17M guaranteed contract isn't overpaying him to a point that it puts the team in bad cap shape. At the end of the day, he's a good player and our front office/coaching staff believes he is one of our valuable guys. I think its worth it to slightly overpay to keep somebody who's a great asset to this team.

As we all know, free agency can get unpredictable and crazy. Ridiculous contracts get signed left and right. You don't think Brooks was going to get $25-30M guaranteed, but anything is possible in free agency. I guess the front office would rather overpay a bit and guarantee a player's services than to risk losing him to save money. An argument can be made for either approach so I can see where you're coming from. However, I like that the team is more concerned with securing talent instead of saving dollars.

As far as the possibility of losing Rogers now, it definitely sucks. But I believe our defensive system puts more emphasis on the front 7 over the secondary. It would hurt to lose either player but I can see why Brooks was a priority over Rogers.


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.

Since few changes have made been to the front 7, we can assume that we'll maintain a good pass rush. In fact, we could possibly have a better pass rush since we have 2 guys who can bring heat off the edges every down now. With a good pass rush, it'll be easier to transition a different player into Rogers' role. On the other hand if we kept Rogers and lost Brooks, Rogers would have to cover longer and may not look as good as last year. Plus, Culliver might be ready to start.

I remember Baalke saying that the responsibility of his preferred 3-4 OLBs is (#1) pass rushing and (#2) stopping the run. Coverage is the least important task. Brooks is good at the main responsibilities and solid in the least important job. We'll be more dangerous now that we have a pass rushing threat on BOTH sides every down.

Brooks finishing with 1 sack over the last 6 games isn't really a concern because pressure isn't measured by sack totals. Justin Smith had 2 sacks in the last 8 regular season games. Pass rush doesn't always show up on the stat sheet.
Originally posted by andes14:
Originally posted by WRATHman44:
Originally posted by andes14:
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.

Dude, read the underlined in your own post. Passing downs are 3rd and mid-to-long, or 2nd and long, or any 2min situations. Those are Nickel downs, and Aldon and Ahmad will continue to rush on all of those. The only reason Haralson was on the field during the running situations is because the down and distance dictated that a running play was likely (hence:rushing down). AND, if you go back and check those plays, you'll see Haralson rushing and Brooks dropping on many of them (Brooks rushes AND drops better than Haralson).

Ya dude, I'm in agreement that he'll still rush a lot on 3rd downs, what I'm saying is that Aldon will be the 4th rusher on most 1st and 2nd downs, thus relegating Haralson to coverage. And Haralson barely rushed in 2011 - he finished the last 15 games sackless and rarely even was around the QB. I'm telling you, Brooks is gonna be in coverage a LOT on 1st and 2nd down in 2012 and he wasn't in 2011.

You said "passing downs." We are in our Nickel Defense for "passing downs" (its our defense when we expect teams to pass), which is a 4 man front. In the Nickel, both Aldon and Brooks are regular rushers. So, Brooks will rush just as frequently on passing downs. And you are incorrect that Haralson barely rushed on base downs. Watch the games again. He didn't rush quite as often as Brooks, but it was much closer than you think (stating he wasn't around the QB often doesn't mean he wasn't sent; it means he didn't get there). When Aldon was in on base downs (blowout, late season, and Haralson hurt), he still dropped several times a game. The reason why Baalke explicitly stated that the primary requirement for 3-4 OLBs is pass rushing, is that a 3-4 disguises where the 4th rusher comes from, so you must be equally dangerous as a defense sending either OLB. That's why Pittsburg keeps two expensive OLBs and drafts for the next one every year. They do that 3-4 pretty well over there.
Alot more than I thought he was going to get. I'm happy to have him back, but this definetily has me worried that Carlos might not be brought back.
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

lol, not just his fam, his daughter
i'm gonna try to have his baby now.
sounds like way too much for this dude.
[ Edited by unst4bl3 on Feb 28, 2012 at 9:27 PM ]
Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
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.....

I could get over the neglect for a healthy piece of $17.5 million guaranteed.
Originally posted by unst4bl3:
sounds like way too much for this dude.

i think keeping the unit together played a big role in this signing. I agree though. Don't think he's worth it.
Originally posted by niners4lyfe:
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?

this year, he was

Exactly! We got him cheaper then these suckers and lets not all forget
BROOKS PLAYED THE MOST DEFENSIVE SNAPS THIS YEAR!!!
He rarely left the field
i really like the signing! and i like when baalke is surprising me and the zone
Originally posted by WRATHman44:
You said "passing downs." We are in our Nickel Defense for "passing downs" (its our defense when we expect teams to pass), which is a 4 man front. In the Nickel, both Aldon and Brooks are regular rushers. So, Brooks will rush just as frequently on passing downs. And you are incorrect that Haralson barely rushed on base downs. Watch the games again. He didn't rush quite as often as Brooks, but it was much closer than you think (stating he wasn't around the QB often doesn't mean he wasn't sent; it means he didn't get there). When Aldon was in on base downs (blowout, late season, and Haralson hurt), he still dropped several times a game. The reason why Baalke explicitly stated that the primary requirement for 3-4 OLBs is pass rushing, is that a 3-4 disguises where the 4th rusher comes from, so you must be equally dangerous as a defense sending either OLB. That's why Pittsburg keeps two expensive OLBs and drafts for the next one every year. They do that 3-4 pretty well over there.

Oops, ya my bad. Should have said downs or plays in general, not passing downs. Also, Pittsburgh often rushes 5 and 6 guys so having two outside 'backers that can rush well is more important. It's not as important for us because we rarely rush more than 4. And since our d-line is better than Pit's, we can get away with it.
Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
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.....

I could get over the neglect for a healthy piece of $17.5 million guaranteed.

Might as well bring his daughter out here. He's here for life!
Originally posted by andes14:
Originally posted by WRATHman44:
You said "passing downs." We are in our Nickel Defense for "passing downs" (its our defense when we expect teams to pass), which is a 4 man front. In the Nickel, both Aldon and Brooks are regular rushers. So, Brooks will rush just as frequently on passing downs. And you are incorrect that Haralson barely rushed on base downs. Watch the games again. He didn't rush quite as often as Brooks, but it was much closer than you think (stating he wasn't around the QB often doesn't mean he wasn't sent; it means he didn't get there). When Aldon was in on base downs (blowout, late season, and Haralson hurt), he still dropped several times a game. The reason why Baalke explicitly stated that the primary requirement for 3-4 OLBs is pass rushing, is that a 3-4 disguises where the 4th rusher comes from, so you must be equally dangerous as a defense sending either OLB. That's why Pittsburg keeps two expensive OLBs and drafts for the next one every year. They do that 3-4 pretty well over there.

Oops, ya my bad. Should have said downs or plays in general, not passing downs. Also, Pittsburgh often rushes 5 and 6 guys so having two outside 'backers that can rush well is more important. It's not as important for us because we rarely rush more than 4. And since our d-line is better than Pit's, we can get away with it.

Their DLine used to be every bit as good as ours though with Keisel, Hampton, and Smith. They had 3 very good starters. I mean come on man, Fangio used to blitz a lot more, one of the reasons he didn't this year is because of limited offseason time that prevented them from getting into the entire play book.
Originally posted by WillistheWall:
Originally posted by andes14:
Originally posted by WRATHman44:
You said "passing downs." We are in our Nickel Defense for "passing downs" (its our defense when we expect teams to pass), which is a 4 man front. In the Nickel, both Aldon and Brooks are regular rushers. So, Brooks will rush just as frequently on passing downs. And you are incorrect that Haralson barely rushed on base downs. Watch the games again. He didn't rush quite as often as Brooks, but it was much closer than you think (stating he wasn't around the QB often doesn't mean he wasn't sent; it means he didn't get there). When Aldon was in on base downs (blowout, late season, and Haralson hurt), he still dropped several times a game. The reason why Baalke explicitly stated that the primary requirement for 3-4 OLBs is pass rushing, is that a 3-4 disguises where the 4th rusher comes from, so you must be equally dangerous as a defense sending either OLB. That's why Pittsburg keeps two expensive OLBs and drafts for the next one every year. They do that 3-4 pretty well over there.

Oops, ya my bad. Should have said downs or plays in general, not passing downs. Also, Pittsburgh often rushes 5 and 6 guys so having two outside 'backers that can rush well is more important. It's not as important for us because we rarely rush more than 4. And since our d-line is better than Pit's, we can get away with it.

Their DLine used to be every bit as good as ours though with Keisel, Hampton, and Smith. They had 3 very good starters. I mean come on man, Fangio used to blitz a lot more, one of the reasons he didn't this year is because of limited offseason time that prevented them from getting into the entire play book.

I don't care, I hope we don't blitz much next year either. Our defense was LEGENDARY and if mostly what we did was rush 4 and drop 7, then that's what I hope and expect we do in 2012.