I guess I'm just saying the stance on new contracts that Balke takes may not work here.
[ Edited by Baldie on Aug 11, 2014 at 2:25 PM ]
There are 228 users in the forums
Originally posted by Pillbusta:We got Boone for three seasons if we so please. 2014 2015 and we can franchise him ....... At G pay for 2016 if we choose. Boone has NO leverage hereOriginally posted by crake49:At this point, my prediction is that they won't be able to retain Boone this year and they'll be out-bid for Iupati next year. I know that's not what most fans want, but that's my prediction. With Marcus Martin and Brandon Thomas coming on, it looks like Baalke has been trying to prepare for that anyway.
Originally posted by AmpLee:
I think he's a pro-bowl talent, just gets kind of overshadowed on our line and doesn't play his strongest position which is tackle.
To me, 2 years with a top 15 G (or better) that can back-up tackle better than anyone in the league, at about 2 mil/year (during a Superbowl run no less), plus a 3rd or 4th round compensatory selection for when he leaves and signs a big contract elsewhere, is far more valuable than a day two pick in next year's draft. Teams need to start with a first rounder before I even listen, if I'm Baalke. And even then, it's got to be even higher than that to break precedent and give in to the demands of a player holding out. In short, nothing short of a king's ransom would pry us away from Boone. He's just too valuable, with too much at stake, and a decision that will likely impact the way potential hold-outs operate with this FO.
The media is crazy if they think trading him away for a third rounder is a win-win. That would be a massive loss for us.
Originally posted by crake49:At this point, my prediction is that they won't be able to retain Boone this year and they'll be out-bid for Iupati next year. I know that's not what most fans want, but that's my prediction. With Marcus Martin and Brandon Thomas coming on, it looks like Baalke has been trying to prepare for that anyway.
Originally posted by LifelongNiner:Originally posted by AmpLee:Originally posted by LifelongNiner:Originally posted by AmpLee:Originally posted by Wisconsin49erfan:Iupati is better than Boone anyway. If it was a choice between Iupati and Boone, I would much prefer Iupati. If Boone is demanding similar money to Iupati....
I'm not so sure. The ability to play the tackle position at a very high level elevates Boone's value. I understand why he wants to get paid more, he's just going about it in a really bad way.
His ability to start at both positions is exactly why a 2nd or 3rd round pick is not enough. He's not a Pro-Bowler at either, but still a top player. That provides a team A LOT of flexibility. If I'm Baalke, a team would have to overpay (a 1st or a 2nd AND 3rd). I doubt any team bites and if they do, great for us and Alex Boone.
I think he's a pro-bowl talent, just gets kind of overshadowed on our line and doesn't play his strongest position which is tackle.
To me, 2 years with a top 15 G (or better) that can back-up tackle better than anyone in the league, at about 2 mil/year (during a Superbowl run no less), plus a 3rd or 4th round compensatory selection for when he leaves and signs a big contract elsewhere, is far more valuable than a day two pick in next year's draft. Teams need to start with a first rounder before I even listen, if I'm Baalke. And even then, it's got to be even higher than that to break precedent and give in to the demands of a player holding out. In short, nothing short of a king's ransom would pry us away from Boone. He's just too valuable, with too much at stake, and a decision that will likely impact the way potential hold-outs operate with this FO.
The media is crazy if they think trading him away for a third rounder is a win-win. That would be a massive loss for us.
All of this. Except the part about him being a Pro-Bowler. You can be a very good player without being a Pro-Bowler. Ray McDonald is an example.
Another thing to consider is this, people need to stop looking at Alex Boone as an UDFA so any compensation is a plus. It's not a plus. The guy had top tier talent coming into the league and messed it up for himself. Doug Baldwin went undrafted. Does anyone think Seattle could give him up for a 6th at this point?
The idea of a 2nd and 3rd or a first a minimum seems fair because frankly, you aren't finding that many starting quality tackles in the draft. Add in the fact that the guy can start at guard and yes, that king's ransom sounds very reasonable.
Originally posted by Giedi:
I think you *have* to take his UDFA in consideration, because that means the scouting and O-Line coaches are doing something right. Also, because he was UDFA, we used a draft pick for possibly another position. Finally, the practice of trading depth for draft picks is an old one and he's just the most recent iteration of that age old practice. He just might be this years Alex Smith, but on the position of O-Line. I don't want him to leave the team, I'm agreeing with all the folks who say pay the man, but at the same time - you can't force him to play here if he just doesn't want to play here. 49ers have reached out and still there is not movement on the negotiation side, so the option of punishing him and letting him rot via the CBA, I don't think is a good one. His value will drop over time as he continues to languish at home with his beer and wine and not practicing with the team. The rule that you don't negotiate with a player until he shows up at TC is a good one if that player genuinely wants to play for the 49ers, if he hates the 49ers - that rule isn't going to change his mind.
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by Giedi:
I think you *have* to take his UDFA in consideration, because that means the scouting and O-Line coaches are doing something right. Also, because he was UDFA, we used a draft pick for possibly another position. Finally, the practice of trading depth for draft picks is an old one and he's just the most recent iteration of that age old practice. He just might be this years Alex Smith, but on the position of O-Line. I don't want him to leave the team, I'm agreeing with all the folks who say pay the man, but at the same time - you can't force him to play here if he just doesn't want to play here. 49ers have reached out and still there is not movement on the negotiation side, so the option of punishing him and letting him rot via the CBA, I don't think is a good one. His value will drop over time as he continues to languish at home with his beer and wine and not practicing with the team. The rule that you don't negotiate with a player until he shows up at TC is a good one if that player genuinely wants to play for the 49ers, if he hates the 49ers - that rule isn't going to change his mind.
49ers saved his butt. Why should he hate them?
Originally posted by English:Originally posted by Giedi:I think you *have* to take his UDFA in consideration, because that means the scouting and O-Line coaches are doing something right. Also, because he was UDFA, we used a draft pick for possibly another position. Finally, the practice of trading depth for draft picks is an old one and he's just the most recent iteration of that age old practice. He just might be this years Alex Smith, but on the position of O-Line. I don't want him to leave the team, I'm agreeing with all the folks who say pay the man, but at the same time - you can't force him to play here if he just doesn't want to play here. 49ers have reached out and still there is not movement on the negotiation side, so the option of punishing him and letting him rot via the CBA, I don't think is a good one. His value will drop over time as he continues to languish at home with his beer and wine and not practicing with the team. The rule that you don't negotiate with a player until he shows up at TC is a good one if that player genuinely wants to play for the 49ers, if he hates the 49ers - that rule isn't going to change his mind.
49ers saved his butt. Why should he hate them?
Originally posted by Giedi:
If he likes it here, why isn't he at camp? Him being here or not being here doesn't really affect the fact that he has no leverage in negotiations at all.
Originally posted by doc_brown_:
After releasing Carl Nicks, The Bucs are thiner than Snoop Lion at Guard, so trade Boone to Tampa Bay for a 3rd rounder in 2015. Slide Martin/Looney/Snyder/Netter in at RG.
In 2015, our starting Guards will be Brandon Thomas and a rookie, or Martin/Looney/Snyder/Netter.
Originally posted by Giedi:
If he likes it here, why isn't he at camp? Him being here or not being here doesn't really affect the fact that he has no leverage in negotiations at all.
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by Giedi:
I think you *have* to take his UDFA in consideration, because that means the scouting and O-Line coaches are doing something right. Also, because he was UDFA, we used a draft pick for possibly another position. Finally, the practice of trading depth for draft picks is an old one and he's just the most recent iteration of that age old practice. He just might be this years Alex Smith, but on the position of O-Line. I don't want him to leave the team, I'm agreeing with all the folks who say pay the man, but at the same time - you can't force him to play here if he just doesn't want to play here. 49ers have reached out and still there is not movement on the negotiation side, so the option of punishing him and letting him rot via the CBA, I don't think is a good one. His value will drop over time as he continues to languish at home with his beer and wine and not practicing with the team. The rule that you don't negotiate with a player until he shows up at TC is a good one if that player genuinely wants to play for the 49ers, if he hates the 49ers - that rule isn't going to change his mind.
49ers saved his butt. Why should he hate them?