Bold Predictions - 1.0

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Then how in the world did Staley ever make it to the probowl? They just don't give those away. How on God's green earth did our 9ers even get to the playoffs with such an O-line?

By playing extremely well on D and ST and very cautiously on O. Throwing the ball away or taking sacks rather than turn the ball over, running into the line rather than risk throwing all the time in 3rd down situtations, and playing field position. Great coaching even though I thought it was too conservative...it worked!

Staley made it to the pro bowl because he is a funny engaging guy who is popular amoung his peers and has some skills that are excellent...blocking down field being his best. I think he is actually better than he played last year and wonder if he will play much better this coming year, but has not been the wall you want on the blind side. If the middle of the line had held up better and Smith could step up into the pocket Staley may have looked better as well.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
By playing extremely well on D and ST and very cautiously on O. Throwing the ball away or taking sacks rather than turn the ball over, running into the line rather than risk throwing all the time in 3rd down situtations, and playing field position. Great coaching even though I thought it was too conservative...it worked!

Staley made it to the pro bowl because he is a funny engaging guy who is popular amoung his peers and has some skills that are excellent...blocking down field being his best. I think he is actually better than he played last year and wonder if he will play much better this coming year, but has not been the wall you want on the blind side. If the middle of the line had held up better and Smith could step up into the pocket Staley may have looked better as well.

Oooohhhhh, for a minute there I was thinking his probowl selection had more to do with his overall skills as a O-lineman and that he had something to do with our playoff appearance.

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Oooohhhhh, for a minute there I was thinking his probowl selection had more to do with his overall skills as a O-lineman and that he had something to do with our playoff appearance.

No, nothing at all! LOL! There is that...but I've been watching pro bowl votes for a very long time and take them for what they are...popularity contests unless there is a huge disparity in talent.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

No, nothing at all! LOL! There is that...but I've been watching pro bowl votes for a very long time and take them for what they are...popularity contests unless there is a huge disparity in talent.

I think hebLso was alternative for Ll pro team as well

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
I think hebLso was alternative for Ll pro team as well

?

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

?

All pro sorry sometimes I can't type on my phone

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
All pro sorry sometimes I can't type on my phone

Ahh! Thanks. I am not really down on the guy but he doesn't seem to be the power type lineman Harbaugh likes to employ. Staley is very quick and mobile, which you would think is perfect for the WCO but everything I have read indicates Harbaugh prefers power linemen. Maybe Harbaugh has just lived with the hand he is dealt and doesn't really have a preference or has a different preference?

This line now has enough young talent drafted by Harbaugh and Baalke that it should become a elite line over the next couple of years...barring injuries. In other words--they have their guys.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
All pro sorry sometimes I can't type on my phone

Ahh! Thanks. I am not really down on the guy but he doesn't seem to be the power type lineman Harbaugh likes to employ. Staley is very quick and mobile, which you would think is perfect for the WCO but everything I have read indicates Harbaugh prefers power linemen. Maybe Harbaugh has just lived with the hand he is dealt and doesn't really have a preference or has a different preference?

This line now has enough young talent drafted by Harbaugh and Baalke that it should become a elite line over the next couple of years...barring injuries. In other words--they have their guys.

Those are very good points. Staley is singed long term, so until JH has a better option Staley will be our ace OT.

I will say this: I get the sneaky feeling that JH & Co. is gonna - or trying - to find a way to get Boone and Kilgore into the starting line-up; JH & Co. really like these two. I know it's early, and Goodwin is excused from these practices, but I wouldn't be surprised to see an open competition at C with Goodwin and Kilgore. I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with that. Personally, I'd like to see Kilgore start at G and have Boone as the ultimate swing man. But I have a strong feeling that JH & Co. is going to find a way to get Kilgore and Boone on the field at the same time. "Best 5".

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
All pro sorry sometimes I can't type on my phone

Ahh! Thanks. I am not really down on the guy but he doesn't seem to be the power type lineman Harbaugh likes to employ. Staley is very quick and mobile, which you would think is perfect for the WCO but everything I have read indicates Harbaugh prefers power linemen. Maybe Harbaugh has just lived with the hand he is dealt and doesn't really have a preference or has a different preference?

This line now has enough young talent drafted by Harbaugh and Baalke that it should become a elite line over the next couple of years...barring injuries. In other words--they have their guys.

Those are very good points. Staley is singed long term, so until JH has a better option Staley will be our ace OT.

I will say this: I get the sneaky feeling that JH & Co. is gonna - or trying - to find a way to get Boone and Kilgore into the starting line-up; JH & Co. really like these two. I know it's early, and Goodwin is excused from these practices, but I wouldn't be surprised to see an open competition at C with Goodwin and Kilgore. I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with that. Personally, I'd like to see Kilgore start at G and have Boone as the ultimate swing man. But I have a strong feeling that JH & Co. is going to find a way to get Kilgore and Boone on the field at the same time. "Best 5".

This is exactly what I was saying...I agreed that if we are going bold predictions here, it's a possibility. Unlikely, yes, but possible based of the mere fact Boone has been developing for years now and it seems like the coaches really want to give him a shot, even at RG where he is probably less suited for. I also said that we can expect several lineup mixes now that we have an entire offseason to do it...we are already seeing that with Boone being trained for years as a T suddenly tried out at RG. Then we have Kilgore who was expected to be the front runner initially at RG, now trying out at C along with Slowey. Don't forget Looney, another guy HarBaalke drafted - their guys. Staley was signed LT how many years ago? By which regime? Was that under Harbaugh and Baalke? We've seen the old regime quickly dwindle away and talent behind them developed, tried out and even signed LT IN ONE YEAR! We've seen a focus on "their guys" too. My point is that while none of you are willing to put in the time to truly assess the line play, you ARE basing your opinions on a popularity contest b/c to this point, you've added ZERO analysis of your own. My opinions, like MD or OTC (re: draft) and many others who put in the work and time to draw their own opinions, even if contrary to popular belief, should not be discredited b/c you are unwilling to put in the same work, analysis, yourself.

If you know me and my history, in the end, I've been more right than wrong re: player analysis (strengths, weaknesses, intangibles, etc.) and usually a year or two ahead of the trend. To me, this is where Bill Walsh made his mark...player analysis...often times dropping veterans a year before their decline (to many objections) coupled with player development/growth behind them. I see this with HarBaalke already as well. Hence, the BOLD prediction in this BOLD PREDICTION thread. Sure, I get blasted for it along the way but I'm confident in my own assessments, whether I like the guy or not (and I do like Staley a lot) and try to stay as objective as possible.

Its not that you (not referring to you 9ersLiferInChicago but the other refuters) are incapable of writing your own 400 word analysis, it's that you HAVE NO ANALYSIS. So, again, until you do, and I hope you do so we can actually counter here, I rest my case.

And for the 10th time, nobody is saying Boone should start over Staley but he SHOULD be given a genuine chance to challenge him there and at bare minimum, push Staley to be on his toes b/c up to this point, he's never been challenged before or had to look over his shoulder. And Boone has MORE than turned his life around, his game and is just waiting for a real chance to win a spot, grow and develop like we saw with so many other players last year (and who ALL succeeded and have higher ceilings than the previous starters).

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
All pro sorry sometimes I can't type on my phone

Ahh! Thanks. I am not really down on the guy but he doesn't seem to be the power type lineman Harbaugh likes to employ. Staley is very quick and mobile, which you would think is perfect for the WCO but everything I have read indicates Harbaugh prefers power linemen. Maybe Harbaugh has just lived with the hand he is dealt and doesn't really have a preference or has a different preference?

This line now has enough young talent drafted by Harbaugh and Baalke that it should become a elite line over the next couple of years...barring injuries. In other words--they have their guys.

Those are very good points. Staley is singed long term, so until JH has a better option Staley will be our ace OT.

I will say this: I get the sneaky feeling that JH & Co. is gonna - or trying - to find a way to get Boone and Kilgore into the starting line-up; JH & Co. really like these two. I know it's early, and Goodwin is excused from these practices, but I wouldn't be surprised to see an open competition at C with Goodwin and Kilgore. I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with that. Personally, I'd like to see Kilgore start at G and have Boone as the ultimate swing man. But I have a strong feeling that JH & Co. is going to find a way to get Kilgore and Boone on the field at the same time. "Best 5".

This is exactly what I was saying...I agreed that if we are going bold predictions here, it's a possibility. Unlikely, yes, but possible based of the mere fact Boone has been developing for years now and it seems like the coaches really want to give him a shot, even at RG where he is probably less suited for. I also said that we can expect several lineup mixes now that we have an entire offseason to do it...we are already seeing that with Boone being trained for years as a T suddenly tried out at RG. Then we have Kilgore who was expected to be the front runner initially at RG, now trying out at C along with Slowey. Don't forget Looney, another guy HarBaalke drafted - their guys. Staley was signed LT how many years ago? By which regime? Was that under Harbaugh and Baalke? We've seen the old regime quickly dwindle away and talent behind them developed, tried out and even signed LT IN ONE YEAR! We've seen a focus on "their guys" too. My point is that while none of you are willing to put in the time to truly assess the line play, you ARE basing your opinions on a popularity contest b/c to this point, you've added ZERO analysis of your own. My opinions, like MD or OTC (re: draft) and many others who put in the work and time to draw their own opinions, even if contrary to popular belief, should not be discredited b/c you are unwilling to put in the same work, analysis, yourself.

If you know me and my history, in the end, I've been more right than wrong re: player analysis (strengths, weaknesses, intangibles, etc.) and usually a year or two ahead of the trend. To me, this is where Bill Walsh made his mark...player analysis...often times dropping veterans a year before their decline (to many objections) coupled with player development/growth behind them. I see this with HarBaalke already as well. Hence, the BOLD prediction in this BOLD PREDICTION thread. Sure, I get blasted for it along the way but I'm confident in my own assessments, whether I like the guy or not (and I do like Staley a lot) and try to stay as objective as possible.

Its not that you (not referring to you 9ersLiferInChicago but the other refuters) are incapable of writing your own 400 word analysis, it's that you HAVE NO ANALYSIS. So, again, until you do, and I hope you do so we can actually counter here, I rest my case.

And for the 10th time, nobody is saying Boone should start over Staley but he SHOULD be given a genuine chance to challenge him there and at bare minimum, push Staley to be on his toes b/c up to this point, he's never been challenged before or had to look over his shoulder. And Boone has MORE than turned his life around, his game and is just waiting for a real chance to win a spot, grow and develop like we saw with so many other players last year (and who ALL succeeded and have higher ceilings than the previous starters).

You never respond to my posts dude.

dam my prediction doesn't seem to bold but i'll go with 3 guys having double digit sacks

Originally posted by NickSh49:

1. Seriously NC, you are arm-chair GM'ing here and doing a poor job. You lose more by trading Staley than by keeping him.

2. You are basing your Boone-love off of potential and a very small sample size. That's it. And I'm sure if Boone was in the same league as Staley, Harbaugh would consider replacing Staley via an open competition with Boone.

But since the dudes who get paid to make these decisions love Staley, have him signed through 2017, and are content to use Boone as a guard and backup tackle, well then that makes a ton of sense in my opinion.

3. This isn't a popularity contest. It's an opinion based on logic. Hell, you do remember when Boone came in the league he was overweight and completely undisciplined, right? Yeah, he's been developing, but to think he's suddenly ready to replace Joe Staley is kind of a stretch.

4. If you admit it's a stretch, I think DirtyP and I would agree with you on that. But you're trying to convince us that the coaching staff is keeping a better player on the bench, and I do not think that is the case at all.

5. Boone has a low salary and is great depth in case of injury. We should be happy with that.

Here you go bro! But I was speaking to all those who refuted.

I numbered them for you:
1. We lose more by trading Staley this year and starting Boone? This is a big assumption...BIG assumption b/c you don't know what draft pick we'd get (who we would select) next year, you don't know if Boone takes off and plays BETTER than Staley did last year (like so many Niners we couldn't live w/o in Lawson, TKO, Franklin, Spencer, Baas, Clements, etc...guys behind them ALL played better and most are younger and have more upside) and you don't know if Boone's game suits this offense better than Staley. Who's to say we trade Staley for this pick and pick up some quality FA as a backup behind Boone? Again, this was a BOLD prediction in a BOLD PREDICTION thread. It's possible and seriously something to think about if you ARE a GM. I mean, is it on par with pursuing P. Manning? Ooops, I guess as a GM, even an arm chair one, it's best not to close your mind and stop watching film and thinking about what's best for this team in the long run EVEN if it means you take some growing pains today. Our entire 2011 season encompassed this exact theme! Did you miss that?

2. I'm a Boone's lover? That nasty fake wine? Ha. I think the real lovers of Boone are HarBaalke. They are the ones who signed HIM to a LT contract and clearly, even if out of position, trying to get him on the field even as a RG to be even more valuable. They love his growth and development, attitude and work ethic. The kids been busting his butt as a T for a while now. Now, was it HarBaalke who signed Staley to a LT deal? The point again, is that Boone should be given the genuine opportunity to challenge Staley, period. A real challenge and may the best man win...b/c THAT is what's best for this team. And who's to say in one week, Staley isn't competing with Staley or even Davis at T, or that Davis is tried at RG? It's only been a couple weeks and so far a whole slue of guys are being tried out at C & RG already and we have Looney waiting as well.

3. Why is it a stretch? Was it a stretch to let Franklin walk and have Sopoaga fill in for him, let TKO go for Bowman, start a malcontent in Brooks over Lawson, to let Clements walk for Rogers, to draft Aldon Smith? I think you get my point...look deeper and big picture more. "Gotta watch the film" ~ Singletary. He just didn't watch the film. LOL

4. Oh, I already said its unlikely (hence the point of the OP) BUT I'm not closing my mind off to improving the LT position either by objectively reviewing film of Staley b/c THAT is not a small sample size. He's reached his ceiling already and his "pro bowl" year isn't half as good as you think it is. I don't know if Staley has EVER graded out as the top OL on our line. Ever. And we've had some horrendous OL's here. He's from the old regime and HarBaalke, as ruthless as they are, don't hold any allegiance to him...nor should they. If they feel Boone can do a serviceable job this year, fits their scheme more (better in short yardage and sealing off the edges for runs off tackle, is more than adequate in pass protection, is stronger, feistier, etc.) and will be perceived to grow more and more with upside, pull a Bill Walsh!

5. Completely agree! Worst case scenario, we have a potentially really good LT pushing hard to start, hungry, etc. and like last year when Staley went out (very injury prone), we didn't miss a beat, that's a good problem to have as a backup esp. if he can also fill in at RG if needed (see Snyder)!

Now answer my question about providing your own film analysis as well...then we can talk real player analysis objectively!

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NickSh49:

1. Seriously NC, you are arm-chair GM'ing here and doing a poor job. You lose more by trading Staley than by keeping him.

2. You are basing your Boone-love off of potential and a very small sample size. That's it. And I'm sure if Boone was in the same league as Staley, Harbaugh would consider replacing Staley via an open competition with Boone.

But since the dudes who get paid to make these decisions love Staley, have him signed through 2017, and are content to use Boone as a guard and backup tackle, well then that makes a ton of sense in my opinion.

3. This isn't a popularity contest. It's an opinion based on logic. Hell, you do remember when Boone came in the league he was overweight and completely undisciplined, right? Yeah, he's been developing, but to think he's suddenly ready to replace Joe Staley is kind of a stretch.

4. If you admit it's a stretch, I think DirtyP and I would agree with you on that. But you're trying to convince us that the coaching staff is keeping a better player on the bench, and I do not think that is the case at all.

5. Boone has a low salary and is great depth in case of injury. We should be happy with that.

Here you go bro! But I was speaking to all those who refuted.

I numbered them for you:
1. We lose more by trading Staley this year and starting Boone? This is a big assumption...BIG assumption b/c you don't know what draft pick we'd get (who we would select) next year, you don't know if Boone takes off and plays BETTER than Staley did last year (like so many Niners we couldn't live w/o in Lawson, TKO, Franklin, Spencer, Baas, Clements, etc...guys behind them ALL played better and most are younger and have more upside) and you don't know if Boone's game suits this offense better than Staley. Who's to say we trade Staley for this pick and pick up some quality FA as a backup behind Boone? Again, this was a BOLD prediction in a BOLD PREDICTION thread. It's possible and seriously something to think about if you ARE a GM. I mean, is it on par with pursuing P. Manning? Ooops, I guess as a GM, even an arm chair one, it's best not to close your mind and stop watching film and thinking about what's best for this team in the long run EVEN if it means you take some growing pains today. Our entire 2011 season encompassed this exact theme! Did you miss that?

2. I'm a Boone's lover? That nasty fake wine? Ha. I think the real lovers of Boone are HarBaalke. They are the ones who signed HIM to a LT contract and clearly, even if out of position, trying to get him on the field even as a RG to be even more valuable. They love his growth and development, attitude and work ethic. The kids been busting his butt as a T for a while now. Now, was it HarBaalke who signed Staley to a LT deal? The point again, is that Boone should be given the genuine opportunity to challenge Staley, period. A real challenge and may the best man win...b/c THAT is what's best for this team. And who's to say in one week, Staley isn't competing with Staley or even Davis at T, or that Davis is tried at RG? It's only been a couple weeks and so far a whole slue of guys are being tried out at C & RG already and we have Looney waiting as well.

3. Why is it a stretch? Was it a stretch to let Franklin walk and have Sopoaga fill in for him, let TKO go for Bowman, start a malcontent in Brooks over Lawson, to let Clements walk for Rogers, to draft Aldon Smith? I think you get my point...look deeper and big picture more. "Gotta watch the film" ~ Singletary. He just didn't watch the film. LOL

4. Oh, I already said its unlikely (hence the point of the OP) BUT I'm not closing my mind off to improving the LT position either by objectively reviewing film of Staley b/c THAT is not a small sample size. He's reached his ceiling already and his "pro bowl" year isn't half as good as you think it is. I don't know if Staley has EVER graded out as the top OL on our line. Ever. And we've had some horrendous OL's here. He's from the old regime and HarBaalke, as ruthless as they are, don't hold any allegiance to him...nor should they. If they feel Boone can do a serviceable job this year, fits their scheme more (better in short yardage and sealing off the edges for runs off tackle, is more than adequate in pass protection, is stronger, feistier, etc.) and will be perceived to grow more and more with upside, pull a Bill Walsh!

5. Completely agree! Worst case scenario, we have a potentially really good LT pushing hard to start, hungry, etc. and like last year when Staley went out (very injury prone), we didn't miss a beat, that's a good problem to have as a backup esp. if he can also fill in at RG if needed (see Snyder)!

Now answer my question about providing your own film analysis as well...then we can talk real player analysis objectively!

I think you overvalue Boone and undervalue Staley. We can agree to disagree.

And no... I'm not going to go watch "film," which is a fancy way of saying you went back and re-watched the games.

The coaching staff is at ground level with the players during practice and games. I trust their judgement more than I trust yours.

And regarding #3, I answered this for you in a previous post.

Originally posted by NickSh49:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by DirtyP:
Can someone please point me to a scrap of evidence that indicates Boone is good enough to supplant a pro bowl left tackle?

Can someone point to me a scrap of evidence that Brooks is better than Lawson, that Brown is better then Spencer, that Whitner is better than Williams, that Bowman is better than TKO, that Sopoaga is better than Franklin, that Smith is better than Haralson, that McDonald is better than...oh wait, never mind!

Potential sometimes just needs a chance and an opportunity to grow. It's called development. And Boone has been developing for years!

Brooks better than Lawson? Sack numbers.

Brown better then Spencer? Brown stays healthy.

Whitner better than Williams? Madieu? You're kidding right?

Bowman better than TKO? He's not 45 years old, had more tackles than Willis last year.

Sopoaga better than Franklin? Franklin got cut from the Saints.

Aldon Smith better than Harralson? Sack numbers.


There ya go.

Here.

Originally posted by NickSh49:
I think you overvalue Boone and undervalue Staley. We can agree to disagree.

And no... I'm not going to go watch "film," which is a fancy way of saying you went back and re-watched the games.

The coaching staff is at ground level with the players during practice and games. I trust their judgement more than I trust yours.

And regarding #3, I answered this for you in a previous post.

That's cool to agree to disagree. I've been posting about Staley for years now though and esp. through last year in detailed analysis with many others...play-by-play, etc. along with the entire OL. Obviously, the OL was a targeted area for discussion last year. If you don't want to watch the tape (believe me, I watch every game and have for years, and provide analysis of what I see and let you guys draw your own conclusions), at least go back and revisit the discussions. I try to bring something to the table and sometimes a perspective that isn't so popular (at the time) based on my analysis. But I can't chime in on baseless perspectives. If you want to refute me, explain to me WHY you see things the way you do b/c right now, all I have from you guys is pro bowl voting and the fact that the coaches are trying him at RG (today). Thats it...nothing to go on here. "There's nothing to see here...please disperse!"

Again, you lean on nothing more than other's opinions and perspective. This is NT...draw your own conclusions. By merely focusing on "ground level" perspectives, of which you don't have any insight into either, you miss the fact that coaches are wrong...all the time (see Williams, Kyle or the past 10 years of Niner coaches). These expert coaches are also sometimes TOO close to guys and this can cloud their judgments. Money, 1st round draft status, politics, etc. all can play into a "coaches perspective). This is why so many of us watch our own film, do our own research and draw our own conclusions. I ask the same of you and others...to bring something, anything to the table. Together, we will uncover the truth more often that not.

And again, I'm not asking you to trust my judgement but merely provide your own based on a similar effort before you refer to a third party for your opinion.