There are 169 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Who's better? Willis or Aldon

Who's better? Willis or Aldon

My whole point is that its not fair to compare talents, they are two different positions with entirely different expectations. But we can talk about which position is more valuable, especially in todays NFL, and IMO OLB is much more important then ILB, especially when you are talking about two players both in the top three of their respective positions. That is my only point. Like i said, if i was building a team from scratch right now, and i could only take one or the other, i would have to take Aldon, simply because it is a harder position to find talent of his level.
At what?

I hate these "who's better" questions. THEY PLAY DIFFERENT POSITIONS!

It's like saying, "Who's better, Frank Gore or Vernon Davis?"
Originally posted by verb1der:
I'm not sold on Aldon until he can record a sack with out Justin Smith next to him.

I don't know if this quote was addressed or not, but I went back & looked at all of Aldon's sacks from last year & 9 of them came from plays when either Justin Smith wasn't on the field or when they were lined up on opposite sides of the OL (1 came from Aldon chasing down a bootleg, which had nothing to do with any of the DL). So I think it's safe to say that Aldon relying on Justin to get sacks is a myth.

Aldon was playing with a torn labrum from the Pats' game on. It was just a coincidence that Justin Smith got hurt around the same time Aldon was playing hurt. I've had a torn labrum; it's quite painful & you can do major long-term damage if you strain your shoulder too much with that injury.
[ Edited by VPofCarnage on Jun 29, 2013 at 1:27 AM ]
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
BTW that is a ridiculous statement. Does that mean Von Miller is more valuable than willis or bowman? How about wake or Matthews?

THAT is laughable.

That's not laughable. Von Miller is absolutely more valuable than Willis. So is Wake. I don't know about Matthews the 'roid monkey though.
Originally posted by buck:
Your claim that Aldon is "Crap at coverage and stopping the run" is not supported by the numbers.

If we are going to compare players, we should compare Aldon Smith as 49er to Charles Haley as a 49er.

Charles Haley played six years for the 49ers. He played in 106 games and started 63.

In his career with the 49ers, Haley had 326 tackles, 66 sacks, 14 forced fumbles, 1 interception, and 0 passes defended.

Aldon Smith has played for the 49ers for two years. In those two years, he has played in 32 games and started 16.

Aldon Smith has had 102 tackles, 33.5 sacks, 1 interception, 5 passes defended, and 5 forced fumbles.

Smith has averaged 51 tackles, 16.75 sacks, 2.5 forced fumbles, 0.5 interceptions, and 2.5 passes defended year.

Over his career with the 49ers, Haley averaged 54.33 tackles, 11.8 sacks, 2.33 forced fumbles, 0.167 interceptions, and 0 passes defended.

Aldon Smith is a better pass rusher than Haley was.

Aldon Smith is fundamentally as good as Haley was against the run.

Aldon Smith is better against the pass than Haley was.

And if I remember correctly, nobody has ever complained about Haley's run defense or coverage skills.
I could argue with you that Haley in his prime is still better than Aldon is right now. When you think of the 49ers front 7, people can argue that Willis, Justin or Aldon is the key to their dominance. But with Haley, he's hands down the most dominant player you think of when he played in the 3-4 in SF or in the Dallas 4-3. Haley in his prime could string his moves together better and was double teamed more. Watching Haley in his prime, he just jumped off the screen. It shouldn't only be stats when you compare the 2 players. Haley's presence on field had to be accounted for on every down. Haley was the west coast version of LT.

Haley helped his team to 5 SB wins, and was the main factor on D in Dallas first 2 wins.

But Aldon is getting better every year. So in 2 or 3 more years if he keep improving like he is now, he'll be better than Haley in his prime.
Who's better, Justin Smith or Andy Lee????
Originally posted by Axl49:
That list was the worst list of all time and they know nothing. Willis is the most valuable MLB in the game and a key component to building a team and dynasty for years to come. An edge rusher you can almost buy or get in FA now. You dont find many P Willis everyday.

This is silly. Do you find great edge rushers like Aldon pretty easily? There is only 1 P Willis, but there are more good/great ILBs than good great OLBs/4-3 DEs especially when there normally 1.5-2x as many.
Originally posted by VPofCarnage:
Originally posted by verb1der:
I'm not sold on Aldon until he can record a sack with out Justin Smith next to him.

I don't know if this quote was addressed or not, but I went back & looked at all of Aldon's sacks from last year & 9 of them came from plays when either Justin Smith wasn't on the field or when they were lined up on opposite sides of the OL (1 came from Aldon chasing down a bootleg, which had nothing to do with any of the DL). So I think it's safe to say that Aldon relying on Justin to get sacks is a myth.

Aldon was playing with a torn labrum from the Pats' game on. It was just a coincidence that Justin Smith got hurt around the same time Aldon was playing hurt. I've had a torn labrum; it's quite painful & you can do major long-term damage if you strain your shoulder too much with that injury.

I'm a huge J.Smith fan, but someone on NFL Network (Faulk, I think) made the observation that Justin is the one that may be benefiting the most from the relationship. If you think about it, Smith was always very good, but it wasn't until 2011 (When Aldon arrived), that Justin became this dominant force. I never thought about it that way before, but it makes sense. Heresy, I know.
[ Edited by TheGhostofOak on Jun 29, 2013 at 5:25 AM ]
Originally posted by FunkNinerFlex:
I could argue with you that Haley in his prime is still better than Aldon is right now. When you think of the 49ers front 7, people can argue that Willis, Justin or Aldon is the key to their dominance. But with Haley, he's hands down the most dominant player you think of when he played in the 3-4 in SF or in the Dallas 4-3. Haley in his prime could string his moves together better and was double teamed more. Watching Haley in his prime, he just jumped off the screen. It shouldn't only be stats when you compare the 2 players. Haley's presence on field had to be accounted for on every down. Haley was the west coast version of LT.

Haley helped his team to 5 SB wins, and was the main factor on D in Dallas first 2 wins.

But Aldon is getting better every year. So in 2 or 3 more years if he keep improving like he is now, he'll be better than Haley in his prime.
I think there is a little "romaticizing of the past" going on here. While I agree that its not always about the stats, if you dont think Aldon "jumps off the screen," then you may need a new TV. Even when Aldon doesn't get the sack he's still disruptive.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 9,723
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Ok here is the thing buck. No NFL football player is crap at their position or they wouldn't play football. You either excel at certain aspects of the game or you don't. Brooks excels against the run IMO and to you he excels at just about everything. With aldon he excels at getting after the qb and is constantly improving at every aspect of the game. Does the Poster really think aldon is crap at those 2 things? I highly doubt it. I think he is just saying he has more room to improve in that aspect of his game compared to the league average.

Your conjecture about what my intention was flawed.

What you think the original poster was saying or was not saying is just more conjecture.

The poster said what he said. I responded to it.

I do think that Aldon Smith improved all aspects of his game in his second year and I think that he understands that he has to continue improving.

  • mayo49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 20,821
I love them both the same. Why have to pick between the two?
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 9,723
Originally posted by mayo49:
I love them both the same. Why have to pick between the two?


I agree. I did not, and will not, vote for one over the other.

Patrick Willis, Navarro Bowman, Aldon Smith, and Ahmad Brooks are arguably the best line backing unit in the NFL.

They are 49ers and I am estatic that they are on the team.
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Ok here is the thing buck. No NFL football player is crap at their position or they wouldn't play football. You either excel at certain aspects of the game or you don't. Brooks excels against the run IMO and to you he excels at just about everything. With aldon he excels at getting after the qb and is constantly improving at every aspect of the game. Does the Poster really think aldon is crap at those 2 things? I highly doubt it. I think he is just saying he has more room to improve in that aspect of his game compared to the league average.

Your conjecture about what my intention was flawed.

What you think the original poster was saying or was not saying is just more conjecture.

The poster said what he said. I responded to it.

I do think that Aldon Smith improved all aspects of his game in his second year and I think that he understands that he has to continue improving.



Yeah I agree. Aldon is already scary good but if he becomes a dominant force against the run and can utilize his massive wing span to get INTs and bat balls down than watch out opposing offenses. He is pretty stout against the run as it is but needs some work. I would like to see more growth in his coverage skills so we can send more ILB blitzes and keep offensive lines guessing.
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by mayo49:
I love them both the same. Why have to pick between the two?


I agree. I did not, and will not, vote for one over the other.

Patrick Willis, Navarro Bowman, Aldon Smith, and Ahmad Brooks are arguably the best line backing unit in the NFL.

They are 49ers and I am estatic that they are on the team.


I don't think anyone would dispute that. We could very well have the best backup LB's in the league this year too. Lemo, Harlalson and Grant is a pretty impressive back up unit..

Did we resign Grant? I haven't heard anything about him..
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
My whole point is that its not fair to compare talents, they are two different positions with entirely different expectations. But we can talk about which position is more valuable, especially in todays NFL, and IMO OLB is much more important then ILB, especially when you are talking about two players both in the top three of their respective positions. That is my only point. Like i said, if i was building a team from scratch right now, and i could only take one or the other, i would have to take Aldon, simply because it is a harder position to find talent of his level.

If I was building a team from scratch I would also choose Aldon Smith but mostly because he is a couple years younger. Now if pat was the same age then I would take pat because he makes everyone around him better and is a leader. Aldon is not a leader. I am just getting frustrated with the faithful because IMO pat is underappreciated and undervalued. With the emergence of some young stars (Bowman and Aldon in particular), Willis is kind of pushed to the side or at least it seems that way.

I just don't see how a dominant passrusher who has a lot of growing to do is as important as the best ILB in the game who is a lot more polished.

Is your thinking behind the statement based on the league being more quarterback driven? Even though it may seem that way, I think it will eventually balance back out. I think your starting to see it with qb's being able to run the ball and WR's being more versatile and being a factor in the running game. Then you have Runningbacks like AP and CJ2K who can run for 2,000 yards.

I don't think passrushers are as scarce as you think they are. There are plenty in the league at both OLB and DE. I can name at least 20 that have recorded double digit sacks. Are they on aldon's level? no probably not but neither are any of the ILB's.

You point to contracts as evidence to ILB's not being as important as OLB's but if that was the case than why did the 49ers sign Navarro to a long term contract when they already had pat signed? They could've used that money on other more important needs in free agency like corner or olb but they didn't. They could've found a serviceable ILB to go along with the best ILB in the game but they didn't.
[ Edited by JimDrinkAMiller on Jun 29, 2013 at 9:35 AM ]