bold prediction for the upcoming season

Originally posted by GNielsen:
I don't see them cutting Brooks. He's much more valuable to the defense than some believe. And he doesn't even cost the team that much money. He was actually subject to de-escalator options in his contract because the team didn't win 12 games and his playing percentage was about 1% short of a marker, so his 2013 salary will be something like $2.7 mil instead of the original $4.3 mil. At that cost, he's a tremendous asset to the team. He's under contract through 2017, so the FO obviously believes he's someone they would like to have the option to keep around.

Brooks is soo underrated to the function of the defense around here its not even funny.

Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:

Originally posted by GNielsen:

Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
I provided plenty of facts just as they did. You don't accept mine. I don't accept yours. case closed.

Again, these days there seems to be the tendency with many people to confuse facts and opinions. Your argument rests on your OPINION that the comparative statistics on drops between Walker and Gore favor Gore because the throws to Walker are tougher passes to catch than those to Gore. I hate to break it to you, but that falls into the realm of subjective opinion, not facts. Buck presented the numbers. The numbers are objective facts. You don't accept their value because of a subjective opinion about the relative difficulty of the throws being compared. So, your position rests primarily on subjective opinion and his on objective facts. I'm not sure why that is so hard for some people to grasp.

Some of my argument was opinion no doubt. But I also threw in facts, just like Idaho. My main argument was with Idaho and not buck. Buck just recently jumped in which is good because I enjoy debating with the 2 of you more than others. I don't think it's subjective opinion that it is easier for gore to catch his passes than it is for walker. Walker is typically a lot further down field than gore is. Balls are typically coming in at a lot faster of a rate to walker as opposed to gore. Gore catches and drops a lot of easy dinks and dunks. Walker catches and drops a lot of bullets and some lob passes. Kaep doesn't lob the ball very often though. I don't see how you couldn't come up with the conclusion that on average gore's passes are easier to bring in than walker's. It's like saying what is harder catching a pass at 40 mph with a higher trajectory or a pass at 25 mph with a lower trajectory. Pretty simple if you ask me, but apparently that's my subjective opinion.

But also if we are talking about just facts, than gore recently (the year before last) had a drop % that was almost the same as walker's this year. Last year gore was at 11 % which was BELOW avg. not on par with the rest of the backs.

A couple of things.

First, the drop rate per catchable pass is just what it says.
Last year, Gore dropped 4 catchable passes and Walker dropped 9 catchable passes.
In 2012, Gore's drop rate on catchable passes was 12.5% and Walker's was 30%.

You specifically stated that Gore's hands were just as bad as Delanie's last season. The numbers do not support that claim.

Last year, Walker dropped more than double the number of catchable passes.
The difference between the drop rates is substantial--17.5%.

Second, the argument that you are making about the passes throw to Walker being harder passes to catch are based upon your assumptions of what is typically true of passes thrown by Kaepernick. This is not a very solid argument.

1. Kaepernick was not the only quarterback throwing to Walker and Gore last year.
2. You do not know the speed of any pass thrown to Walker or the speed of any pass thrown to Gore last year.

Your claim that Gore is slowing down in the passing game also is not supported by the numbers.

Gore had a dismal year in 2011. In 2012, he improved his passing game and his 2012 numbers were close to or better than his averages over the past five years.

The new coaching staff installed a new offensive scheme in 2011. We know that Gore has various learning disabilities; he larns a bit slower than most people.

I argued in another post, that difficultly learning the new offense is most likely the reason for his abnormally high number of drops and high drop rate in 2012.

That argument is as logical as anything that you have argued, and supported by improvement in 2012.

Originally posted by IdahoNiner:

Originally posted by GNielsen:
I don't see them cutting Brooks. He's much more valuable to the defense than some believe. And he doesn't even cost the team that much money. He was actually subject to de-escalator options in his contract because the team didn't win 12 games and his playing percentage was about 1% short of a marker, so his 2013 salary will be something like $2.7 mil instead of the original $4.3 mil. At that cost, he's a tremendous asset to the team. He's under contract through 2017, so the FO obviously believes he's someone they would like to have the option to keep around.

Brooks is soo underrated to the function of the defense around here its not even funny.

Not by me. I think Brooks is a solid asset for the team, and I have argued this in other threads.

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by IdahoNiner:

Originally posted by GNielsen:
I don't see them cutting Brooks. He's much more valuable to the defense than some believe. And he doesn't even cost the team that much money. He was actually subject to de-escalator options in his contract because the team didn't win 12 games and his playing percentage was about 1% short of a marker, so his 2013 salary will be something like $2.7 mil instead of the original $4.3 mil. At that cost, he's a tremendous asset to the team. He's under contract through 2017, so the FO obviously believes he's someone they would like to have the option to keep around.

Brooks is soo underrated to the function of the defense around here its not even funny.

Not by me. I think Brooks is a solid asset for the team, and I have argued this in other threads.

Wasnt pointing fingers at anyone buck. Anyone that has been following the defense thoroughly understands his value. Just comenting on the overall trend. People seem to think every OLB should be breaking 15 sacks every season and that is all they are there for.

Originally posted by IdahoNiner:

Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Brooks will eventually be phased out if lemonier proves his worth. Maybe late this year at the earliest. I think eventually brooks will either get cut (not this year) in a year or 2 or take a substantial pay cut. He is less important to this team than a couple of people we have to resign. Kaep, aldon, crabs, iupati.. Not to mention gore or j smith if we want them to stick around. Never said anything about kaep or collapsing w/o crabtree so that doesn't apply to me. Father time is catching up to gore but I did not say he was slowing down or that he was in danger of losing his job to anyone. I did say hunter and james will be more productive as pass catchers in our offense. That is all.

LOL At Lemonier phasing out Brooks late this season. The hits just keep coming.

i did not think he could top himself with the gore thing but now this. brooks is the most valuable player on our defense that no one talks about.

Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
I don't think a new offense is a reason for gore's production to drop off that badly. He's catching swing passes and things of that nature. He's been in the nfl for long enough to be able to execute a simple swing pass ect.. He also had a total of 45 receptions in 2 years not 55 but no biggie. So he's averaging 22.5 not 27.5.

Hope you had a great father's day with your dad and/or son.

You are right about the number of receptions. It should be 45 and not 55. But, what about the decrease in number of passes thrown to him?

Anyway, I am done with this discussion. We have hijacked the thread. Not good.

Eric Reid DROY

Aldon Smith breaks the single season sack record by 2 sacks.

Originally posted by Dr_Bill_Walsh:
Eric Reid DROY

That would be nice.

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:

Originally posted by GNielsen:

Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
I provided plenty of facts just as they did. You don't accept mine. I don't accept yours. case closed.

Again, these days there seems to be the tendency with many people to confuse facts and opinions. Your argument rests on your OPINION that the comparative statistics on drops between Walker and Gore favor Gore because the throws to Walker are tougher passes to catch than those to Gore. I hate to break it to you, but that falls into the realm of subjective opinion, not facts. Buck presented the numbers. The numbers are objective facts. You don't accept their value because of a subjective opinion about the relative difficulty of the throws being compared. So, your position rests primarily on subjective opinion and his on objective facts. I'm not sure why that is so hard for some people to grasp.

Some of my argument was opinion no doubt. But I also threw in facts, just like Idaho. My main argument was with Idaho and not buck. Buck just recently jumped in which is good because I enjoy debating with the 2 of you more than others. I don't think it's subjective opinion that it is easier for gore to catch his passes than it is for walker. Walker is typically a lot further down field than gore is. Balls are typically coming in at a lot faster of a rate to walker as opposed to gore. Gore catches and drops a lot of easy dinks and dunks. Walker catches and drops a lot of bullets and some lob passes. Kaep doesn't lob the ball very often though. I don't see how you couldn't come up with the conclusion that on average gore's passes are easier to bring in than walker's. It's like saying what is harder catching a pass at 40 mph with a higher trajectory or a pass at 25 mph with a lower trajectory. Pretty simple if you ask me, but apparently that's my subjective opinion.

But also if we are talking about just facts, than gore recently (the year before last) had a drop % that was almost the same as walker's this year. Last year gore was at 11 % which was BELOW avg. not on par with the rest of the backs.

A couple of things.

First, the drop rate per catchable pass is just what it says.
Last year, Gore dropped 4 catchable passes and Walker dropped 9 catchable passes.
In 2012, Gore's drop rate on catchable passes was 12.5% and Walker's was 30%.

You specifically stated that Gore's hands were just as bad as Delanie's last season. The numbers do not support that claim.

Last year, Walker dropped more than double the number of catchable passes.
The difference between the drop rates is substantial--17.5%.

Second, the argument that you are making about the passes throw to Walker being harder passes to catch are based upon your assumptions of what is typically true of passes thrown by Kaepernick. This is not a very solid argument.

1. Kaepernick was not the only quarterback throwing to Walker and Gore last year.
2. You do not know the speed of any pass thrown to Walker or the speed of any pass thrown to Gore last year.

Your claim that Gore is slowing down in the passing game also is not supported by the numbers.

Gore had a dismal year in 2011. In 2012, he improved his passing game and his 2012 numbers were close to or better than his averages over the past five years.

The new coaching staff installed a new offensive scheme in 2011. We know that Gore has various learning disabilities; he larns a bit slower than most people.

I argued in another post, that difficultly learning the new offense is most likely the reason for his abnormally high number of drops and high drop rate in 2012.

That argument is as logical as anything that you have argued, and supported by improvement in 2012.

Let's look at walker's and gore's numbers over the past 2 seasons. This is according to the first source.

40 receptions for walker. 10 drops. 8 last season 2 the previous

45 receptions for gore. 10 drops. 4 last season 6 the previous.

Yeah according to the numbers delanie's hands are a bit worse, but they are def comparable.

The fact that the numbers you gave me and the numbers the first source gave me are different tells me neither is reliable.

I do know that the passes thrown to delanie had a faster velocity than the ones thrown to frank. It's common sense more than it is a fact. You throw a ball down field with a faster velocity than those at the LOS. Kind of hard to gauge when you sit behind a computer all day..

Also a new scheme change has nothing to do with a runningback catching the ball. Are any of the routes more difficult than the ones he was running when he averaging around 50 receptions a game? no they aren't. Did he have to learn how to catch a football differently in the new scheme? no he didn't. He's been doing it for years and has no excuse not to be able to catch the ball.

Originally posted by IdahoNiner:

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by IdahoNiner:

Originally posted by GNielsen:
I don't see them cutting Brooks. He's much more valuable to the defense than some believe. And he doesn't even cost the team that much money. He was actually subject to de-escalator options in his contract because the team didn't win 12 games and his playing percentage was about 1% short of a marker, so his 2013 salary will be something like $2.7 mil instead of the original $4.3 mil. At that cost, he's a tremendous asset to the team. He's under contract through 2017, so the FO obviously believes he's someone they would like to have the option to keep around.

Brooks is soo underrated to the function of the defense around here its not even funny.

Not by me. I think Brooks is a solid asset for the team, and I have argued this in other threads.

Wasnt pointing fingers at anyone buck. Anyone that has been following the defense thoroughly understands his value. Just comenting on the overall trend. People seem to think every OLB should be breaking 15 sacks every season and that is all they are there for.

Wasn't just talking about brooks' sacks. His overall production is pretty poor. Doesn't get a substantial amount of turnovers or tackles either. He is stout against the run, I'll give you that. But according to all of you goofballs he comes up with money plays . Notice how our defensive production tanked after the smiths went down, so apparently these money plays weren't as good as you make them out to be. We gave up way more points and yards than we had and had a total of 4 sacks in the entire playoffs. You can point the finger to the smiths being injured all you want, but at the end of the day they still played, and we lost the superbowl.

Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Let's look at walker's and gore's numbers over the past 2 seasons. This is according to the first source.

40 receptions for walker. 10 drops. 8 last season 2 the previous

45 receptions for gore. 10 drops. 4 last season 6 the previous.

Yeah according to the numbers delanie's hands are a bit worse, but they are def comparable.

The fact that the numbers you gave me and the numbers the first source gave me are different tells me neither is reliable.

I do know that the passes thrown to delanie had a faster velocity than the ones thrown to frank. It's common sense more than it is a fact. You throw a ball down field with a faster velocity than those at the LOS. Kind of hard to gauge when you sit behind a computer all day..

Also a new scheme change has nothing to do with a runningback catching the ball. Are any of the routes more difficult than the ones he was running when he averaging around 50 receptions a game? no they aren't. Did he have to learn how to catch a football differently in the new scheme? no he didn't. He's been doing it for years and has no excuse not to be able to catch the ball.

Lol, sitting behind the computer comment. classic. You have obviously never caught a full range of passes before while wearing full pads. You keep bringing up velocity as if thats the only factor to difficulty of catching a pass.

Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Wasn't just talking about brooks' sacks. His overall production is pretty poor. Doesn't get a substantial amount of turnovers or tackles either. He is stout against the run, I'll give you that. But according to all of you goofballs he comes up with money plays . Notice how our defensive production tanked after the smiths went down, so apparently these money plays weren't as good as you make them out to be. We gave up way more points and yards than we had and had a total of 4 sacks in the entire playoffs. You can point the finger to the smiths being injured all you want, but at the end of the day they still played, and we lost the superbowl.

This is really begining to look like trolling lol.

Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:

Originally posted by IdahoNiner:

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by IdahoNiner:

Originally posted by GNielsen:
I don't see them cutting Brooks. He's much more valuable to the defense than some believe. And he doesn't even cost the team that much money. He was actually subject to de-escalator options in his contract because the team didn't win 12 games and his playing percentage was about 1% short of a marker, so his 2013 salary will be something like $2.7 mil instead of the original $4.3 mil. At that cost, he's a tremendous asset to the team. He's under contract through 2017, so the FO obviously believes he's someone they would like to have the option to keep around.

Brooks is soo underrated to the function of the defense around here its not even funny.

Not by me. I think Brooks is a solid asset for the team, and I have argued this in other threads.

Wasnt pointing fingers at anyone buck. Anyone that has been following the defense thoroughly understands his value. Just comenting on the overall trend. People seem to think every OLB should be breaking 15 sacks every season and that is all they are there for.

Wasn't just talking about brooks' sacks. His overall production is pretty poor. Doesn't get a substantial amount of turnovers or tackles either. He is stout against the run, I'll give you that. But according to all of you goofballs he comes up with money plays . Notice how our defensive production tanked after the smiths went down, so apparently these money plays weren't as good as you make them out to be. We gave up way more points and yards than we had and had a total of 4 sacks in the entire playoffs. You can point the finger to the smiths being injured all you want, but at the end of the day they still played, and we lost the superbowl.

Those "money plays" they are referring to are the kind that secured wins for us like in the NFCCG last year. When the falcons are in our RZ driving on us for the go ahead score in the 4th qtr, on back to back snaps Brooks make huge plays. The first one, on 2nd down, he pressures Ryan forcing a short throw and gets a big hit on him that noticeably hurts his shoulder. Then on 3rd down Ryan rolls right, brooks shadows him and jumps up and bats the ball down, setting up Bowman's big 4th down pass breakup. That game could have turned out very different if brooks doesn't make those plays.

To see the plays i'm talking about go to the 8:40 mark in the video.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000128766/49ers-vs-Falcons-highlights

Originally posted by jimmythegreekjr:
My bold prediction is that we will run out of Wide Receivers because they all seem to get injured.

My bold predictions are: A better WR will emerge than Michael Crabtree, leaving the team flexibility to sign him for less money or find a more dynamic wide out. Kaep will have a better chemistry with VD, which is their prime downfield threat, a 250 pounder with 4.38 40 speed who runs a faster 40 than crabtree and does not have durability issues and is a pro-bowler, in my opinion how can he not be considered the man of the receiving corp? I predict Gore won't be used as much in the regular season, but slightly less at that with 750 to 850 yards, which will setup a facade that he is not going to be the main weapon, but come playoff time is when they are going to reintroduce him as a big part of the 49ers machine and he will set a couple of playoff records. I predict Kaep will only have like 400 yards rushing for the entire reg. season because these defenses will be coming after him, but they will severely underestimate his throwing capability and I predict he will have 35 to 40 touchdown passes. I believe Reid will be a better coverage safety than Goldston was, forcing offenses to try to run more, which would be snuffed out by our LBs. I predict Asamgha (please forgive spelling) will regain his probowl form and the 9ers D will make offenses more one dimensional. I predict the 9ers to be 13-3 with their sixth superbowl at the end of it in 2013.

Wow this thread is really starting to go