There are 105 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Receivers

  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 22,911
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
I don't understand the perception that Baldwin doesn't have any speed. He's a 4.4 guy like Patton. At 6-4 230, he ran a 4.49. Patton ran 4.48 at 6-0 205.

Baldwin may not be as quick, but he has very good speed, especially for his size and his leaping ability and long arms increase his catch radius greater than perhaps any other active receiver we have right now.

the bottom line,,, what do we have to lose by playing him? no one else is stepping up. i just do not understand this at all. you stand still , you lose ground and thats how you can lose a job,, coach
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 8,471
Gordon is a good receiver.

But, he is one substance abuse violation away from a one year suspension. That concerns me.

I would not give more than a late round pick for him.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 8,471
Originally posted by cciowa:
the bottom line,,, what do we have to lose by playing him? no one else is stepping up. i just do not understand this at all. you stand still , you lose ground and thats how you can lose a job,, coach

Baldwin came to the team with a history of having head problems.

Baldwin clearly has had more success than AJ Jenkins in the league, and yet Andy Reid was willing to make a straight up trade at a drop of the hat.

If we stop and think for a minute we have to wonder why Reid was willing to dump Baldwin so quickly.

In my estimation, Reid was willing to get rid of him, because Baldwin was not dealing with his off the field issues, his head issues, all that well.

One methodological approach to dealing with people with head problems is make them demonstrate that they are taking the required steps--make them earn what they get.

I feel this is a reasonable approach, but it takes time. The problem is that we need a wide receiver to step up right now.

Putting Baldwin on the field too soon could constitute an enabling act--an act that enables him to continue thinking the problems lies elsewhere.

Not putting Baldwin on the field soon could hurt the team's chances of winning.

I think the team has a dilemma. I am no Solomon. I do not what the correct thing to do is.
  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 22,911
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by cciowa:
the bottom line,,, what do we have to lose by playing him? no one else is stepping up. i just do not understand this at all. you stand still , you lose ground and thats how you can lose a job,, coach

Baldwin came to the team with a history of having head problems.

Baldwin clearly has had more success than AJ Jenkins in the league, and yet Andy Reid was willing to make a straight up trade at a drop of the hat.

If we stop and think for a minute we have to wonder why Reid was willing to dump Baldwin so quickly.

In my estimation, Reid was willing to get rid of him, because Baldwin was not dealing with his off the field issues, his head issues, all that well.

One methodological approach to dealing with people with head problems is make them demonstrate that they are taking the required steps--make them earn what they get.

I feel this is a reasonable approach, but it takes time. The problem is that we need a wide receiver to step up right now.

Putting Baldwin on the field too soon could constitute an enabling act--an act that enables him to continue thinking the problems lies elsewhere.

Not putting Baldwin on the field soon could hurt the team's chances of winning.

I think the team has a dilemma. I am no Solomon. I do not what the correct thing to do is.
good thoughts as always buck. i am just thinking when our combined catches for wideouts in three games , excluding boldin and vernon, amounts to something like 10 or so,, we would have nothing to lose by putting jon in. as you said, maybe he is dogging it and has not deserved the chance to start. jenkins sucks to and what is frightening, if your theory is true,, the chiefs could have gotten the best part of that deal
  • mayo49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 20,040
Originally posted by buck:
Gordon is a good receiver.

But, he is one substance abuse violation away from a one year suspension. That concerns me.

I would not give more than a late round pick for him.


Nothing better than a 5th round pick.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 8,471
Originally posted by cciowa:
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by cciowa:
the bottom line,,, what do we have to lose by playing him? no one else is stepping up. i just do not understand this at all. you stand still , you lose ground and thats how you can lose a job,, coach

Baldwin came to the team with a history of having head problems.

Baldwin clearly has had more success than AJ Jenkins in the league, and yet Andy Reid was willing to make a straight up trade at a drop of the hat.

If we stop and think for a minute we have to wonder why Reid was willing to dump Baldwin so quickly.

In my estimation, Reid was willing to get rid of him, because Baldwin was not dealing with his off the field issues, his head issues, all that well.

One methodological approach to dealing with people with head problems is make them demonstrate that they are taking the required steps--make them earn what they get.

I feel this is a reasonable approach, but it takes time. The problem is that we need a wide receiver to step up right now.

Putting Baldwin on the field too soon could constitute an enabling act--an act that enables him to continue thinking the problems lies elsewhere.

Not putting Baldwin on the field soon could hurt the team's chances of winning.

I think the team has a dilemma. I am no Solomon. I do not what the correct thing to do is.
good thoughts as always buck. i am just thinking when our combined catches for wideouts in three games , excluding boldin and vernon, amounts to something like 10 or so,, we would have nothing to lose by putting jon in. as you said, maybe he is dogging it and has not deserved the chance to start. jenkins sucks to and what is frightening, if your theory is true,, the chiefs could have gotten the best part of that deal

I really do not know what we should do with Baldwin.

Even if I had all the information required to make a good decision, I do nog know if I am capable of making the correct decision.

But, I do have experience working with and trying to influence the actions of workers with problems.
I was a shop steward for a little more than four years. I had to, by law, defend the inexcusable and I did so quite well. p
What I do know, what I learned from my experience as the front line defender of the muck up is these problems are not simple.

When I felt one of my co-workers was not being defended correctly, I defied the world and did my job as I saw fit.

I did this in a world that was starkly real. If I did my job poorly, a co-worker could lose his job.

I defended a man that ran a string of whores, that dealt coke, weed, and meth, and I won the damn case.

I did my job well, he was not fired. But, make no mistake he was a problem, and I do mean a serious problem.

The real world just is not the same as the internet world.
[ Edited by buck on Sep 26, 2013 at 3:44 AM ]
john clayton on espn tonite was answering mailbag questions, one of which was what the 49ers are doing to address the wr position

fwiw he said he did not see them trading for a wr, that they are looking at street f/as and that there isnt much there
Originally posted by buck:
I really do not know what we should do with Baldwin.

Even if I had all the information required to make a good decision, I do nog know if I am capable of making the correct decision.

But, I do have experience working with and trying to influence the actions of workers with problems.
I was a shop steward for a little more than four years. I had to, by law, defend the inexcusable and I did so quite well. p
What I do know, what I learned from my experience as the front line defender of the muck up is these problems are not simple.

When I felt one of my co-workers was not being defended correctly, I defied the world and did my job as I saw fit.

I did this in a world that was starkly real. If I did my job poorly, a co-worker could lose his job.

I defended a man that ran a string of whores, that dealt coke, weed, and meth, and I won the damn case.

I did my job well, he was not fired. But, make no mistake he was a problem, and I do mean a serious problem.

If II had had a conflict with him, I would have killed this dude without batting an eye.

The real world just is not the same as the internet world.

All things considered. Why trade for him then?

I highly doubt that the FO was oblivious to the "head problems" you're referring to. Reid didn't pull one over on Baalke so why trade for a headcase?

At least people would've known what to expect if Jenkins was still on the roster but they traded for a guy that can perform, and did perform in PS.

The FO forced their hand on this one. We have a giant hole at WR. We have a capable WR on the roster. A capable WR that made the final cut over other capable WRs.

If Baldwin is such a lost cause that he can't be activated when needed the most then they need to cut him and sign a cap friendly FA right now. Admit you made a mistake and move on.

This is a business. Not acting is the only wrong answer here which is exactly what they're doing.
So why have they not brought back Collie and Hawkins?
Oh ya. So on the subject of receivers... Anybody miss Crabtree yet?

Or was the super fast Ricardo Lockette not an adequate replacement? I mean, you have to admit, Ricardo Lockette is FAST.
Oh ya, AJ Jenkins. He's another one. SUPER FAST. Wow can he just fly.
Originally posted by Young2Rice4TD:
So why have they not brought back Collie and Hawkins?


Because they are not super amazing fantastic blazing ZZZOOOOMMM fast. Everybody knows it's all about speed.
Originally posted by Young2Rice4TD:
So why have they not brought back Collie and Hawkins?

The same reasons nobody has signed them yet?
http://thesidelineview.com/columns/caplans-nfl-corner/best-available-nfl-free-agents-offense
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 8,471
Originally posted by eonblue:
All things considered. Why trade for him then?

I highly doubt that the FO was oblivious to the "head problems" you're referring to. Reid didn't pull one over on Baalke so why trade for a headcase?

At least people would've known what to expect if Jenkins was still on the roster but they traded for a guy that can perform, and did perform in PS.

The FO forced their hand on this one. We have a giant hole at WR. We have a capable WR on the roster. A capable WR that made the final cut over other capable WRs.

If Baldwin is such a lost cause that he can't be activated when needed the most then they need to cut him and sign a cap friendly FA right now. Admit you made a mistake and move on.

This is a business. Not acting is the only wrong answer here which is exactly what they're doing.

It is pretty clear that the FO knew Baldwin has issues. I never said that KC pulled one over on Baalke.

Baldwin has played better than AJ Jenkins in the regular season. Baldwin does have some talent.

If Baldwin straightens up his act, the trade could prove to be a good deal. But, it might take a little longer than five weeks for him to get his act together.

This is the real world. There are seldom any easy answers and there are no panaceas or magic bullets. Sometimes, not acting is the right thing to do.
Originally posted by buck:
It is pretty clear that the FO knew Baldwin has issues. I never said that KC pulled one over on Baalke.

Baldwin has played better than AJ Jenkins in the regular season. Baldwin does have some talent.

If Baldwin straightens up his act, the trade could prove to be a good deal. But, it might take a little longer than five weeks for him to get his act together.

This is the real world. There are seldom any easy answers and there are no panaceas or magic bullets. Sometimes, not acting is the right thing to do.

I never claimed that you said KC pulled one over on Baalke. It was hyperbole.

If sometimes not acting is the right thing to do then we should've never picked this guy up in the first place. The FO should've exercised a little inaction, and avoided this trade entirely. They wouldn't have a dead spot on the roster.

If his problems are so bad he can't step foot out on a field then they should've placed him on NFI and told him to he has 6 weeks to get his head right.
Search Podcast Draft Forum Commentary News Shop Home