Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Simple: Because it's MY thread, so I can name it whatever I like. And I'd like to know just how you got that impression from my thread that "my opinion is more valid on the future roster than everyone else's". I don't think I've said anything here that would give that impression. If so please show me.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Tell me about. I mean, the nerve of fans making predictions. Hell, just what the hell are fans for anyway?
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:The ONLY way I see Skov making it is if he clearly beats out Wheeler (doubtful), we keep only 5 CB's (more doubtful), or we keep only 3 TE's (least likely). All other scenarios are unthinkable.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Fixed a few things. I was reminded about Bellore yesterday so I fixed that. But it really don't change my opinion about our ILB situation. And how do we make Skov fit on the 53, or even 46? You think we go with 5 CB's? 3 ILB? 7 OL? Doubtful! And conceded the Celek vs. Carrier. However, as I stated in my fix neither has wowed me. And apparently they haven't really impressed the coaching staff or FO. We just drafted two at that position, and I refuse to think that was just "BPA". Somebody somewhere wasn't thrilled at the what we have.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:We tend to have about 2-3 Special teams picks on the roster so....
Originally posted by AB81Rules:Money being the only reason Dahl might occupy a roster spot for yet another season? (But then, this is a strong roster overall.) I mean, if they see more in Carrier over Celek I can't where, the money be damned. But like I said, neither has really wowed me. I'd look to replace both. But from my eye Celek is better than Carrier.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by AB81Rules:Yeah, I know. But looking at the roster we have now that would mean we go with only 8 OL (I CANNOT see us only carrying 8 OL), cut people like Reaser and go with maybe 5 CB's. I admit I forgot about Bellore. And that would mean that Moody, and perhaps Skov, have slim chances of making it. I disagree about Celek for Carrier, but they both haven't really wowed me though. I see you about Dahl. But with Tartt, a much better talent, I just cannot see how he stays.
A couple issues, they just gave Carrier a 2yr extension, and a $400K bonus.
I doubt Bush, who got a 1yr $2.5M deal, is inactive over Hunter or even Davis.
Bellore, who was signed for ST purposes, makes this team, as he has $305K in LTBE incentives, which is always an indication that that player makes the roster.
Dahl I think, and fear makes the roster, as he has a high guarantee in his base salary, had they intended to let him go, theyb would have been better off cutting him before they redid his deal, and saved $1.7M, now it;s only $650K saved.
I would personally drop Celek for Carrier, drop a OL for Bellore, I think Wheeler has a better shot at making the roster at ILB due to a $1M cap hit.
Well we've gone with 8 healthy OL before, and 8 Total, we went 9 last year only due to Marcus Martin's injury, as he was the 9th OL on the roster. So it's possible.
When I compare Carrier vs Celek, Carrie has $400K gtd, where Celek has $25K gtd, so it shows that they see more in Carrier than Celek.
I can see Dahl cut, but he has gtd money so it may make it more difficult.
Dahl will probably stay at the expense of McCray because of money and special teams, I see Bellore over Moody and I think Skov might bring more special teams value as well.
Beyond that..definitely Carrier over Celek and not just because of money...I really don't know what anyone sees in Celek...they certainly were not seeing it on the field though.
Skov is my bubble guy/ dark horse...if we do go thin somewhere I could see him sneaking onto the roster. For example we could surprise and keep only 3 TE's...then I could see Skov making it for the special teams value and backup ILB utility.
I love it when people make threads about way to early to predict and then defend their predictions until their burger....lol
Then why not simply name it the my opinion is more valid on the future roster than everyone else's thread?
There are 321 users in the forums
Way Too Early 53-man Roster
May 14, 2015 at 8:51 AM
- 9ersLiferInChicago
- Veteran
- Posts: 10,067
May 14, 2015 at 9:00 AM
- NYniner85
- Veteran
- Posts: 107,326
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Simple: Because it's MY thread, so I can name it whatever I like. And I'd like to know just how you got that impression from my thread that "my opinion is more valid on the future roster than everyone else's". I don't think I've said anything here that would give that impression. If so please show me.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Tell me about. I mean, the nerve of fans making predictions. Hell, just what the hell are fans for anyway?
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:The ONLY way I see Skov making it is if he clearly beats out Wheeler (doubtful), we keep only 5 CB's (more doubtful), or we keep only 3 TE's (least likely). All other scenarios are unthinkable.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Fixed a few things. I was reminded about Bellore yesterday so I fixed that. But it really don't change my opinion about our ILB situation. And how do we make Skov fit on the 53, or even 46? You think we go with 5 CB's? 3 ILB? 7 OL? Doubtful! And conceded the Celek vs. Carrier. However, as I stated in my fix neither has wowed me. And apparently they haven't really impressed the coaching staff or FO. We just drafted two at that position, and I refuse to think that was just "BPA". Somebody somewhere wasn't thrilled at the what we have.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:We tend to have about 2-3 Special teams picks on the roster so....
Originally posted by AB81Rules:Money being the only reason Dahl might occupy a roster spot for yet another season? (But then, this is a strong roster overall.) I mean, if they see more in Carrier over Celek I can't where, the money be damned. But like I said, neither has really wowed me. I'd look to replace both. But from my eye Celek is better than Carrier.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by AB81Rules:Yeah, I know. But looking at the roster we have now that would mean we go with only 8 OL (I CANNOT see us only carrying 8 OL), cut people like Reaser and go with maybe 5 CB's. I admit I forgot about Bellore. And that would mean that Moody, and perhaps Skov, have slim chances of making it. I disagree about Celek for Carrier, but they both haven't really wowed me though. I see you about Dahl. But with Tartt, a much better talent, I just cannot see how he stays.
A couple issues, they just gave Carrier a 2yr extension, and a $400K bonus.
I doubt Bush, who got a 1yr $2.5M deal, is inactive over Hunter or even Davis.
Bellore, who was signed for ST purposes, makes this team, as he has $305K in LTBE incentives, which is always an indication that that player makes the roster.
Dahl I think, and fear makes the roster, as he has a high guarantee in his base salary, had they intended to let him go, theyb would have been better off cutting him before they redid his deal, and saved $1.7M, now it;s only $650K saved.
I would personally drop Celek for Carrier, drop a OL for Bellore, I think Wheeler has a better shot at making the roster at ILB due to a $1M cap hit.
Well we've gone with 8 healthy OL before, and 8 Total, we went 9 last year only due to Marcus Martin's injury, as he was the 9th OL on the roster. So it's possible.
When I compare Carrier vs Celek, Carrie has $400K gtd, where Celek has $25K gtd, so it shows that they see more in Carrier than Celek.
I can see Dahl cut, but he has gtd money so it may make it more difficult.
Dahl will probably stay at the expense of McCray because of money and special teams, I see Bellore over Moody and I think Skov might bring more special teams value as well.
Beyond that..definitely Carrier over Celek and not just because of money...I really don't know what anyone sees in Celek...they certainly were not seeing it on the field though.
Skov is my bubble guy/ dark horse...if we do go thin somewhere I could see him sneaking onto the roster. For example we could surprise and keep only 3 TE's...then I could see Skov making it for the special teams value and backup ILB utility.
I love it when people make threads about way to early to predict and then defend their predictions until their burger....lol
Then why not simply name it the my opinion is more valid on the future roster than everyone else's thread?
I agree I don't see the big deal in throwing out your ideas on who makes up the final roster people are gonna agree/disagree and state why...I think that's the whole point lol
May 14, 2015 at 9:07 AM
- English
- Moderator
- Posts: 40,210
Is there anything people can talk about here and NOT get into an argument.
Anyone who doesn't like the thread has the option to exit and try other threads instead. This is offseason.
Anyone who doesn't like the thread has the option to exit and try other threads instead. This is offseason.
May 14, 2015 at 9:41 AM
- NeeJ49er
- Veteran
- Posts: 9,580
Originally posted by rapid4:
Gabbert is one of those QBs with skills who got drafted by a crappy team and got killed. Once he gets over it and if properly coached (big ????), he could be a perfectly fine #2.
he could be the next Matt Cavanaugh
May 14, 2015 at 9:48 AM
- tsty
- Veteran
- Posts: 121
Excellent post:
Gabbert is garbage so an expected underwhelming season gets worse if Kapy gets hurt.I would've given even Terrell Pryor at #2 a look and killed off defenses with an occasional Blake Bell (rookie) goal line snap than go into another season with Gabbert.Hunter and Bush are the same type of swing pass receiver out of the backfield but Bush gets the nod here, imagine Bush lining up wide, safeties would respect that more than Hunter. I like Millard over Miller for a true fullback that can bang but unless he can catch which is what Miller does well, the incumbent gets the nod. Cut Vance McDonald, we've seen the best of this kid, I'm excited by the redzone possibilities of two 6'5+ tight ends in the redzone (Bell, Carrier). Every team needs a slot man and the team wants Ellington to be that man so the desire to keep Patton befuddles me cause we've seen the best of him too. The corners in Seattle can only be beat by running past them or catching over them and Patton can do neither. Issac Blakeney is going to be another Balke mistake at receiver because what else do I need to say about a 6'6 kid that was the Carolina state champion in the long jump and triple jump in the redzone (remember the Superbowl).Lemonier is toast and regardless of the weight, the kid from Virginia should be unleashed on opposing qb's, the OLB's again will be feared in this division. Don't sleep on Phillip Wheeler who I expect to beat out Wilhoite to play next to Bowman, trust me its a potent combination (Minnesota got to Kendricks before we could draft him).I expect Dahl and McCray to be cut but expect Tariit to play some this season cause Reid is brittle and Ward isn't very good yet. Pinion beats Andy Lee because of the money issue and the fact that Dawson's kickoffs are always short,it also doesn't hurt the kid can kick 60 yard field goals. Lastly I hope that Aecker is healthy and Dontae Johnson learned a lot because this combination works with Brock and Reiser switching off in the middle, Wright shouldn't make it out of camp (led the league in PI's).
Justin Smith and Mike Davis are huge X factors because Smith makes the whole D-Line better and the combination of Hyde/Davis is power running heaven.
Gabbert is garbage so an expected underwhelming season gets worse if Kapy gets hurt.I would've given even Terrell Pryor at #2 a look and killed off defenses with an occasional Blake Bell (rookie) goal line snap than go into another season with Gabbert.Hunter and Bush are the same type of swing pass receiver out of the backfield but Bush gets the nod here, imagine Bush lining up wide, safeties would respect that more than Hunter. I like Millard over Miller for a true fullback that can bang but unless he can catch which is what Miller does well, the incumbent gets the nod. Cut Vance McDonald, we've seen the best of this kid, I'm excited by the redzone possibilities of two 6'5+ tight ends in the redzone (Bell, Carrier). Every team needs a slot man and the team wants Ellington to be that man so the desire to keep Patton befuddles me cause we've seen the best of him too. The corners in Seattle can only be beat by running past them or catching over them and Patton can do neither. Issac Blakeney is going to be another Balke mistake at receiver because what else do I need to say about a 6'6 kid that was the Carolina state champion in the long jump and triple jump in the redzone (remember the Superbowl).Lemonier is toast and regardless of the weight, the kid from Virginia should be unleashed on opposing qb's, the OLB's again will be feared in this division. Don't sleep on Phillip Wheeler who I expect to beat out Wilhoite to play next to Bowman, trust me its a potent combination (Minnesota got to Kendricks before we could draft him).I expect Dahl and McCray to be cut but expect Tariit to play some this season cause Reid is brittle and Ward isn't very good yet. Pinion beats Andy Lee because of the money issue and the fact that Dawson's kickoffs are always short,it also doesn't hurt the kid can kick 60 yard field goals. Lastly I hope that Aecker is healthy and Dontae Johnson learned a lot because this combination works with Brock and Reiser switching off in the middle, Wright shouldn't make it out of camp (led the league in PI's).
Justin Smith and Mike Davis are huge X factors because Smith makes the whole D-Line better and the combination of Hyde/Davis is power running heaven.
May 14, 2015 at 9:49 AM
- natrone06
- Veteran
- Posts: 3,143
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Simple: Because it's MY thread, so I can name it whatever I like. And I'd like to know just how you got that impression from my thread that "my opinion is more valid on the future roster than everyone else's". I don't think I've said anything here that would give that impression. If so please show me.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Tell me about. I mean, the nerve of fans making predictions. Hell, just what the hell are fans for anyway?
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:The ONLY way I see Skov making it is if he clearly beats out Wheeler (doubtful), we keep only 5 CB's (more doubtful), or we keep only 3 TE's (least likely). All other scenarios are unthinkable.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Fixed a few things. I was reminded about Bellore yesterday so I fixed that. But it really don't change my opinion about our ILB situation. And how do we make Skov fit on the 53, or even 46? You think we go with 5 CB's? 3 ILB? 7 OL? Doubtful! And conceded the Celek vs. Carrier. However, as I stated in my fix neither has wowed me. And apparently they haven't really impressed the coaching staff or FO. We just drafted two at that position, and I refuse to think that was just "BPA". Somebody somewhere wasn't thrilled at the what we have.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:We tend to have about 2-3 Special teams picks on the roster so....
Originally posted by AB81Rules:Money being the only reason Dahl might occupy a roster spot for yet another season? (But then, this is a strong roster overall.) I mean, if they see more in Carrier over Celek I can't where, the money be damned. But like I said, neither has really wowed me. I'd look to replace both. But from my eye Celek is better than Carrier.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by AB81Rules:Yeah, I know. But looking at the roster we have now that would mean we go with only 8 OL (I CANNOT see us only carrying 8 OL), cut people like Reaser and go with maybe 5 CB's. I admit I forgot about Bellore. And that would mean that Moody, and perhaps Skov, have slim chances of making it. I disagree about Celek for Carrier, but they both haven't really wowed me though. I see you about Dahl. But with Tartt, a much better talent, I just cannot see how he stays.
A couple issues, they just gave Carrier a 2yr extension, and a $400K bonus.
I doubt Bush, who got a 1yr $2.5M deal, is inactive over Hunter or even Davis.
Bellore, who was signed for ST purposes, makes this team, as he has $305K in LTBE incentives, which is always an indication that that player makes the roster.
Dahl I think, and fear makes the roster, as he has a high guarantee in his base salary, had they intended to let him go, theyb would have been better off cutting him before they redid his deal, and saved $1.7M, now it;s only $650K saved.
I would personally drop Celek for Carrier, drop a OL for Bellore, I think Wheeler has a better shot at making the roster at ILB due to a $1M cap hit.
Well we've gone with 8 healthy OL before, and 8 Total, we went 9 last year only due to Marcus Martin's injury, as he was the 9th OL on the roster. So it's possible.
When I compare Carrier vs Celek, Carrie has $400K gtd, where Celek has $25K gtd, so it shows that they see more in Carrier than Celek.
I can see Dahl cut, but he has gtd money so it may make it more difficult.
Dahl will probably stay at the expense of McCray because of money and special teams, I see Bellore over Moody and I think Skov might bring more special teams value as well.
Beyond that..definitely Carrier over Celek and not just because of money...I really don't know what anyone sees in Celek...they certainly were not seeing it on the field though.
Skov is my bubble guy/ dark horse...if we do go thin somewhere I could see him sneaking onto the roster. For example we could surprise and keep only 3 TE's...then I could see Skov making it for the special teams value and backup ILB utility.
I love it when people make threads about way to early to predict and then defend their predictions until their burger....lol
Then why not simply name it the my opinion is more valid on the future roster than everyone else's thread?
I agree I don't see the big deal in throwing out your ideas on who makes up the final roster people are gonna agree/disagree and state why...I think that's the whole point lol
By calling the thread "way too early" he is essentially saying the projections are based on not a ton of evidence. To then staunchly argue who will make the roster and use fairly definitive language in doing so seems counter intuitive to the thread title. A lot can play out between now and september and although the title suggest op understands this the way he discusses it does not.
[ Edited by natrone06 on May 14, 2015 at 9:51 AM ]
May 14, 2015 at 9:58 AM
- 9ersLiferInChicago
- Veteran
- Posts: 10,067
Originally posted by NYniner85:I have nothing to debate about your take on Baalke and how he's handled the WR position. For me it's a matter of my opinion. Your right, a valid view is that if he really viewed the WR position as a need position, or wasn't confident in the top 4 spots, he would have drafted much higher for it. That point isn't totally lost upon me. But it could equally viewed with validity that, given the lack of success of drafted WRs under Baalke, there might be a little trepidation on his part in drafting a WR high in the draft, so throwing numbers at the position with rookie FA's could be viewed as a cheap alternative. GMs get nervous about certain positions they've missed on before all the time. Also, it could further be viewed that, given how these WR's are used in colleges evaluating these guys for him may be kind of a weak spot for him. That's not to criticize him; it's just a different - valid - angle of seeing it. After all, isn't he still human, subject to the same frailties as us all? I was told as a kid that nobody can have all their bases covered all the time. We all have focused weaknesses in general areas we excel at. Anyway, that's this A+ 49ers fan vantage point from his couch, or in my case at the moment, my view point while stealing a little time from the office
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by NYniner85:I think Martin will win the job if both are healthy.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by NYniner85:1. I cannot disagree with that.
couple things which probably have already been talked about.
1: Bush is making more money than Hunter who's coming off two serious injuries...I think with the drafting Davis the writing is on the wall for Hunter.
2: Carrier just got a extension, I don't see Bell contributing much (maybe in the red-zone) this year...don't think he will be active game days though.
3. To think that Patton will get cut in favor of a UDFA is kinda silly...Patton is cheap, young, and has experience on the team..I think they have 5-6 WRs active and the UDFA better love ST if they want to be on the team.
4. I think you need to move Pears up the list, he is has over a million in salary this year, he will be active on game days.
5. Agreed Harold needs to pack on some LBs, but Skuta was rolling around at 250 last year
6.Wilhoite is our starting strong-side LBer..period. Hicks was a reach in the 3rd IMO,Kendricks went before us in the 2nd and is pretty small to be a 3-down LB. Tartt is almost the same size as him.
7. Ward is our nickle CB, DJ IMO should be a starting outside CB, wright was down right awful but Baalke has been able to take lemons and turn them into lemonade ...also don't count out Reaser kid has some ability when healthy.
training camp should be crazy...a lot of new faces and young players trying to finally get some snaps
2. Fair enough.
3. I have no problem with keeping Patton. But you do know that we brought in 5 rookie FA, and drafted at that position too, right? Call me silly but somebody is looking for an upgrade. At the very least Patton is on serious notice. And I'd love to keep 6 WR's, but how do we make that number fit?
4. So put Pears over Kilgore and Thomas?
5. Good point. But guy in from of him too.
6. Wilhoite is a backup who started by default. And with Borland off the field there was a clear difference in how teams attacked our defense with Wilhoite on the field. Granted on Kendricks, but we could have had Perryman in the 2nd.
7. Totally agree. But Baalke turns no lemons into anything. The coaching staff does. In any event, I'm pulling for D. Johnson. I hope the coaching staff don't feel pressured to start him simply because he's a Baalke FA pick-up.
Thomas,Pears,Martin will be fighting for LG duties...and if Kilgore is 100% he will remain center, if not Martin will take over( Martin looks like he's in great shape judging from videos over the off-season).
Yes I know how many UDFA were brought in...there's reason they weren't drafted and Patton was though (Baalke said Patton had a great off-season) and there's also a reason Baalke didn't draft a WR (that will actually play this year). Smelter will red shirt and that pick had more to do with the future of Boldin than anything else. Like I said 5 or 6 WRs should be on the squad, I think Patton has played ST not sure Simpson does....also those UDFA need to learn ST to make the team regardless...I like Anderson to make the team out of all the other UDFAs.
Wilhoite started 16 games and played well. He will be the JACK LB I believe (Bo will be the MIKE)...he's job is to keep Bowman clean and take on guards, it's a underrated job but doesn't really require a top 5 LB IMO. Here's a good article on what he had to do last year...
http://alendumonjic.com/2015/03/20/the-friday-profile-49ers-lb-michael-wilhoite/
Baalke finds those "lemons" based on the scheme that the DC (mangini) wants to run... pretty sure that's how it works (group effort) I'm rooting for DJ to get the start as well!
Your right, there's a reason those guys weren't drafted. And Smelter will be yet another redshirt But I seriously doubt Ballke would bring that many guys in from one position just to play ST. He's definiately trying to upgrade 3rd - 5th on the depth chart. I think Baalke has resorted to throwing numbers at the long-standing WR problem, because he's clearly had troubles drafting guys that fit and stick at that position. (Maybe it's his philosophy of a prototypical WR that's failing him)
Wilhoite will play the TED in a 3-4, and indeed with the same responsibilities. But we are relying on Bowman to return to form after a serious knee injury and surgery. Not every is Adrian Peterson. Most players don't come back exactly the same after those kind of injuries and surgery. And for Baalke to rely on that, and a backup (albeit a solid backup, but a backup nonetheless) is a terrible gamble! And for me that's the bigger issue than Wilhoite. Now, we cannot relive the draft. But that don't mean imma ignore the fact that behind Bowman we are thin and vulnerable, and that assuming Bowman returns to form. Behind Bowman all we have are bodies.
Now, I hope Wilhoite proves me a total fool on this and I'll be chief among them to admit that if he do.
I think Thomas will win that roll if healthy...he was a stud at Clemson and I think he could be a more balanced LG than Iupati was. I think you missed my point on UDFAs being just ST players....Smith/Boldin/Ellington/Patton are our 4 top WRs unless someone get's hurt or blows up training camp. The remaining WRs will HAVE to have some sort of ST ability if they want to be on the team and active for game days. We've lost some good ST players this off-season.
If he wasn't confident in the top 4 spots at WR you'd think he would have spent one of those 10 picks on a WR that can play this year? UDFA are just that, they aren't expected to take a spot on the active roster...and if they do it tells you how bad the position really is. (FYI I wanted to move up for Cooper lol)
I wouldn't say he has a problem with drafting WRs because he hasn't really put a priority on it (drafted ONE WR in the 1st 3 rounds since being the GM). He has taking the route of FA the past couple seasons (which worked with Boldin). I think WR will be something to focus on in the 2016 draft.
Yeah we don't know how Bo will come back, but I'm guessing Trent and the medical staff have a better idea than us ...I've seen plenty of videos and read articles that show he doing all sorts of weight related stuff on his knee, it's also reported that he will be a full go at training camp. Bo isn't a everyday player, you know this man!
I didn't see much of anything for ILB in this draft, I trust Baalke at LB and CB over any other position as far as evaluation goes, has he steered us wrong at those spots yet? He brought in vets like Bishop and Wheeler both who have had seasons with over 100 tackles.
Keep your eye on Shayne Skov too...if he's healthy he could be a solid player.... He Was a Butkus Award finalist and the Cardinal's leading tackler for 3 years..
when he started all 14 games he registered 109-13-5.5 with four pass breakups and three forced fumbles
Wilhoite plays the TED LB fine and did a good job with Bo in the past...we will see how it plays out this season.
About the ILB position: this is my opinion, and I'll be the first to tell you that. And I'll be the first to admit that I'm no doctor, and that Baalke, Jimmy T & Co. have a way better vantage point - on Bowman and our ILB situation - than I, or any of us. But we're fans. As fans all we can do is opine. And we can only opine based on what we know about the game and what we see watching the 49ers. When I opine about my beloved 49ers I'm not doing so as a 49ers official with insider knowledge that trumps that of, in this case, Trent Baalke. I'm doing so from the perspective of a life-long A+ 49er fan, and that of someone who's been around the game of football since I was 5 years old (not that that qualifies my opinion as being better than any other fan's because it don't).
I agree with you about Skov. My issue here is the 53 man roster restriction, given who's in front of him. Do we cut Reaser before the guy has had a real chance to prove himself? Do we cut McCray/Dahl? Do we go with 7 on OL, or 5 on the DL, or 3 TE's? I like the gut too. But I just don't see where the room on the roster comes from unless he totally outplays Wheeler, both in the preseason games and in camp, or an injury hits.
May 14, 2015 at 10:37 AM
- 9ersLiferInChicago
- Veteran
- Posts: 10,067
Originally posted by natrone06:SO WHAT I put "Why Too Early" in the title If you disagree with the substance of my 53 predictions then be my guess at telling me where you think I'm wrong, and if you got me on a point I'll be the first to concede, and even make changes if need be. (I think I've proven that in this thread already.) But to grip about, and focus on, what I choose to put in the title of the thread, IMHO, seems a bit touchy and, frankly, petty. I think we all know a whole lot is gonna go into the final 53 between now and final cut-downs, and I' know I stated as much in the first paragraph of my predictions.
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Simple: Because it's MY thread, so I can name it whatever I like. And I'd like to know just how you got that impression from my thread that "my opinion is more valid on the future roster than everyone else's". I don't think I've said anything here that would give that impression. If so please show me.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Tell me about. I mean, the nerve of fans making predictions. Hell, just what the hell are fans for anyway?
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:The ONLY way I see Skov making it is if he clearly beats out Wheeler (doubtful), we keep only 5 CB's (more doubtful), or we keep only 3 TE's (least likely). All other scenarios are unthinkable.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by PhillyNiner:Fixed a few things. I was reminded about Bellore yesterday so I fixed that. But it really don't change my opinion about our ILB situation. And how do we make Skov fit on the 53, or even 46? You think we go with 5 CB's? 3 ILB? 7 OL? Doubtful! And conceded the Celek vs. Carrier. However, as I stated in my fix neither has wowed me. And apparently they haven't really impressed the coaching staff or FO. We just drafted two at that position, and I refuse to think that was just "BPA". Somebody somewhere wasn't thrilled at the what we have.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:We tend to have about 2-3 Special teams picks on the roster so....
Originally posted by AB81Rules:Money being the only reason Dahl might occupy a roster spot for yet another season? (But then, this is a strong roster overall.) I mean, if they see more in Carrier over Celek I can't where, the money be damned. But like I said, neither has really wowed me. I'd look to replace both. But from my eye Celek is better than Carrier.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by AB81Rules:Yeah, I know. But looking at the roster we have now that would mean we go with only 8 OL (I CANNOT see us only carrying 8 OL), cut people like Reaser and go with maybe 5 CB's. I admit I forgot about Bellore. And that would mean that Moody, and perhaps Skov, have slim chances of making it. I disagree about Celek for Carrier, but they both haven't really wowed me though. I see you about Dahl. But with Tartt, a much better talent, I just cannot see how he stays.
A couple issues, they just gave Carrier a 2yr extension, and a $400K bonus.
I doubt Bush, who got a 1yr $2.5M deal, is inactive over Hunter or even Davis.
Bellore, who was signed for ST purposes, makes this team, as he has $305K in LTBE incentives, which is always an indication that that player makes the roster.
Dahl I think, and fear makes the roster, as he has a high guarantee in his base salary, had they intended to let him go, theyb would have been better off cutting him before they redid his deal, and saved $1.7M, now it;s only $650K saved.
I would personally drop Celek for Carrier, drop a OL for Bellore, I think Wheeler has a better shot at making the roster at ILB due to a $1M cap hit.
Well we've gone with 8 healthy OL before, and 8 Total, we went 9 last year only due to Marcus Martin's injury, as he was the 9th OL on the roster. So it's possible.
When I compare Carrier vs Celek, Carrie has $400K gtd, where Celek has $25K gtd, so it shows that they see more in Carrier than Celek.
I can see Dahl cut, but he has gtd money so it may make it more difficult.
Dahl will probably stay at the expense of McCray because of money and special teams, I see Bellore over Moody and I think Skov might bring more special teams value as well.
Beyond that..definitely Carrier over Celek and not just because of money...I really don't know what anyone sees in Celek...they certainly were not seeing it on the field though.
Skov is my bubble guy/ dark horse...if we do go thin somewhere I could see him sneaking onto the roster. For example we could surprise and keep only 3 TE's...then I could see Skov making it for the special teams value and backup ILB utility.
I love it when people make threads about way to early to predict and then defend their predictions until their burger....lol
Then why not simply name it the my opinion is more valid on the future roster than everyone else's thread?
I agree I don't see the big deal in throwing out your ideas on who makes up the final roster people are gonna agree/disagree and state why...I think that's the whole point lol
By calling the thread "way too early" he is essentially saying the projections are based on not a ton of evidence. To then staunchly argue who will make the roster and use fairly definitive language in doing so seems counter intuitive to the thread title. A lot can play out between now and september and although the title suggest op understands this the way he discusses it does not.
Now, is it a little early to make final 53 predictions? Yup! Is it fun for A+ 49ers fans like myself to still contemplate and discus it anyway? You damn right it is
Why can't some here just let fans be fans
May 14, 2015 at 11:24 AM
- NYniner85
- Veteran
- Posts: 107,326
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
I have nothing to debate about your take on Baalke and how he's handled the WR position. For me it's a matter of my opinion. Your right, a valid view is that if he really viewed the WR position as a need position, or wasn't confident in the top 4 spots, he would have drafted much higher for it. That point isn't totally lost upon me. But it could equally viewed with validity that, given the lack of success of drafted WRs under Baalke, there might be a little trepidation on his part in drafting a WR high in the draft, so throwing numbers at the position with rookie FA's could be viewed as a cheap alternative. GMs get nervous about certain positions they've missed on before all the time. Also, it could further be viewed that, given how these WR's are used in colleges evaluating these guys for him may be kind of a weak spot for him. That's not to criticize him; it's just a different - valid - angle of seeing it. After all, isn't he still human, subject to the same frailties as us all? I was told as a kid that nobody can have all their bases covered all the time. We all have focused weaknesses in general areas we excel at. Anyway, that's this A+ 49ers fan vantage point from his couch, or in my case at the moment, my view point while stealing a little time from the office
About the ILB position: this is my opinion, and I'll be the first to tell you that. And I'll be the first to admit that I'm no doctor, and that Baalke, Jimmy T & Co. have a way better vantage point - on Bowman and our ILB situation - than I, or any of us. But we're fans. As fans all we can do is opine. And we can only opine based on what we know about the game and what we see watching the 49ers. When I opine about my beloved 49ers I'm not doing so as a 49ers official with insider knowledge that trumps that of, in this case, Trent Baalke. I'm doing so from the perspective of a life-long A+ 49er fan, and that of someone who's been around the game of football since I was 5 years old (not that that qualifies my opinion as being better than any other fan's because it don't).
I agree with you about Skov. My issue here is the 53 man roster restriction, given who's in front of him. Do we cut Reaser before the guy has had a real chance to prove himself? Do we cut McCray/Dahl? Do we go with 7 on OL, or 5 on the DL, or 3 TE's? I like the gut too. But I just don't see where the room on the roster comes from unless he totally outplays Wheeler, both in the preseason games and in camp, or an injury hits.
You're totally entitled to your opinion regarding how Baalke can or does evaluate the WR position, but I just don't agree with the idea that he isn't "confident" in drafting the position high (wanted to move up for OBJ). I really don't agree that GMs get nervous about drafting any position, unless they give up a bunch of capital to get that person.
I can't get behind the idea that because AJ was a bust means he won't draft one high ever again lol, every other WR taking by Baalke was at the earliest a 4th round pick and we have had vets constantly ahead of them, plus SF has been a run first team. Baalke even stated before the draft this year that there are only so many snaps/targets to be had at the WR spot...you can't honestly think that Kyle Williams (6th rd) and Ronald Johnson (6th rd) where gonna be studs?? Patton and Ellington BOTH had very good vet WRs in front of them and Patton dealt with an injury his 1st season...both have shown some sort of flash when given a chance on the field...Baalke doesn't pick and chose who's getting snaps that's the coaching staff
You sure like the word opine (lol jk), so you're basically saying you think Bowman won't be a good LB anymore because of your gut feeling? Okay fair enough like I said you're entitled to your opinion . I'm just going off of what the coaching staff has said, videos of Bo looking good, the fact that he will be in training camp, He's had a year and a half to rehab, they didn't restructure his deal (which would indicate he isn't healthy if they did), and the fact that they didn't draft anyone at the ILB position....we will find out soon enough.
Not sure who they drop for Skov, just like the name of this thread it's wayyyyy to early to talk about that
May 14, 2015 at 12:16 PM
- KyleShanahan
- Veteran
- Posts: 3,779
IF Pinion could be a great punter and kicker that would be pretty awesome actually. Thats too hard to master tho.
May 14, 2015 at 1:18 PM
- 9ersLiferInChicago
- Veteran
- Posts: 10,067
Originally posted by NYniner85:I see what you are saying about the WR. But I guess for me the measuring stick is this: being able to push a starter for playing time. And from what I can tell under Baalke we haven't a WR that put any starting WR in danger of, at least, losing playing time. Patton hasn't done that, though he's "flashed". And the jury is still out on Ellington if he can, though he's "flashed". At some point somebody has to PUSH for time! BTW, in all fairness he didn't move up to get OBJ, though he "wanted" to. Baalke isn't a big spender. And while that may be good at times, there are times when he should spend big (not saying mortgage the future, but spend). I'm not just talking about 1st round WR drafted, I'm talking about ALL WR drafted under Baalke. None have really panned out - yet. Am I right?
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
I have nothing to debate about your take on Baalke and how he's handled the WR position. For me it's a matter of my opinion. Your right, a valid view is that if he really viewed the WR position as a need position, or wasn't confident in the top 4 spots, he would have drafted much higher for it. That point isn't totally lost upon me. But it could equally viewed with validity that, given the lack of success of drafted WRs under Baalke, there might be a little trepidation on his part in drafting a WR high in the draft, so throwing numbers at the position with rookie FA's could be viewed as a cheap alternative. GMs get nervous about certain positions they've missed on before all the time. Also, it could further be viewed that, given how these WR's are used in colleges evaluating these guys for him may be kind of a weak spot for him. That's not to criticize him; it's just a different - valid - angle of seeing it. After all, isn't he still human, subject to the same frailties as us all? I was told as a kid that nobody can have all their bases covered all the time. We all have focused weaknesses in general areas we excel at. Anyway, that's this A+ 49ers fan vantage point from his couch, or in my case at the moment, my view point while stealing a little time from the office
About the ILB position: this is my opinion, and I'll be the first to tell you that. And I'll be the first to admit that I'm no doctor, and that Baalke, Jimmy T & Co. have a way better vantage point - on Bowman and our ILB situation - than I, or any of us. But we're fans. As fans all we can do is opine. And we can only opine based on what we know about the game and what we see watching the 49ers. When I opine about my beloved 49ers I'm not doing so as a 49ers official with insider knowledge that trumps that of, in this case, Trent Baalke. I'm doing so from the perspective of a life-long A+ 49er fan, and that of someone who's been around the game of football since I was 5 years old (not that that qualifies my opinion as being better than any other fan's because it don't).
I agree with you about Skov. My issue here is the 53 man roster restriction, given who's in front of him. Do we cut Reaser before the guy has had a real chance to prove himself? Do we cut McCray/Dahl? Do we go with 7 on OL, or 5 on the DL, or 3 TE's? I like the gut too. But I just don't see where the room on the roster comes from unless he totally outplays Wheeler, both in the preseason games and in camp, or an injury hits.
You're totally entitled to your opinion regarding how Baalke can or does evaluate the WR position, but I just don't agree with the idea that he isn't "confident" in drafting the position high (wanted to move up for OBJ). I really don't agree that GMs get nervous about drafting any position, unless they give up a bunch of capital to get that person.
I can't get behind the idea that because AJ was a bust means he won't draft one high ever again lol, every other WR taking by Baalke was at the earliest a 4th round pick and we have had vets constantly ahead of them, plus SF has been a run first team. Baalke even stated before the draft this year that there are only so many snaps/targets to be had at the WR spot...you can't honestly think that Kyle Williams (6th rd) and Ronald Johnson (6th rd) where gonna be studs?? Patton and Ellington BOTH had very good vet WRs in front of them and Patton dealt with an injury his 1st season...both have shown some sort of flash when given a chance on the field...Baalke doesn't pick and chose who's getting snaps that's the coaching staff
You sure like the word opine (lol jk), so you're basically saying you think Bowman won't be a good LB anymore because of your gut feeling? Okay fair enough like I said you're entitled to your opinion . I'm just going off of what the coaching staff has said, videos of Bo looking good, the fact that he will be in training camp, He's had a year and a half to rehab, they didn't restructure his deal (which would indicate he isn't healthy if they did), and the fact that they didn't draft anyone at the ILB position....we will find out soon enough.
Not sure who they drop for Skov, just like the name of this thread it's wayyyyy to early to talk about that
Now, I do believe that Baalke really don't put as high a value the WR position as other positions. If so it certainly explains a lot to me. Maybe your right; maybe the run-first thing is playing more into this than what I'm comfortable with. But the problem with that is that you have to be balanced. And in a passing league shamefully stuffed with rules that favor the passing game even run-first teams have to be able to have the ability to make teams pay for putting 8 in the box consistently against them with WR who can beat jams, get separation, and be more than a possession WR.
Look, I'm not calling for us to change into a pass-heavy team. We saw how that worked for us last season. Just that at some point we're gonna have to invest in a young WR who can push for playing time to give this team another weapon to keep the defense honest. T. Smith is that. But behind him who fits that?
I'm not saying that Bowman WON"T be good anymore!! I'll say this again: I'm saying that I don't think it's a good idea to count on him being able to returning to form given the seriousness of the injury and surgery. That is, being as dominant, fast, and the force he was before the injury. Follow me here: With no Cowboy, we are gonna be centering our defense around a guy who's coming off serious injury that MOST don't return the same from. I know he's looking good on video, but the bullets aren't flying. He's not pushing those knees in game form. There's no way for anyone to know if he'll return to pre-injury status, not even Baalke or the coaching staff. If he's not where we hope offenses WILL target him and our defense is gonna be seriously be exposed, especially given we didn't address the position in the draft.
I'm definitely on the side of Bo returning to form. Then all me b***hing would be for nothing, witch I hope will be the case.
May 14, 2015 at 1:35 PM
- NYniner85
- Veteran
- Posts: 107,326
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by NYniner85:I see what you are saying about the WR. But I guess for me the measuring stick is this: being able to push a starter for playing time. And from what I can tell under Baalke we haven't a WR that put any starting WR in danger of, at least, losing playing time. Patton hasn't done that, though he's "flashed". And the jury is still out on Ellington if he can, though he's "flashed". At some point somebody has to PUSH for time! BTW, in all fairness he didn't move up to get OBJ, though he "wanted" to. Baalke isn't a big spender. And while that may be good at times, there are times when he should spend big (not saying mortgage the future, but spend). I'm not just talking about 1st round WR drafted, I'm talking about ALL WR drafted under Baalke. None have really panned out - yet. Am I right?
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
I have nothing to debate about your take on Baalke and how he's handled the WR position. For me it's a matter of my opinion. Your right, a valid view is that if he really viewed the WR position as a need position, or wasn't confident in the top 4 spots, he would have drafted much higher for it. That point isn't totally lost upon me. But it could equally viewed with validity that, given the lack of success of drafted WRs under Baalke, there might be a little trepidation on his part in drafting a WR high in the draft, so throwing numbers at the position with rookie FA's could be viewed as a cheap alternative. GMs get nervous about certain positions they've missed on before all the time. Also, it could further be viewed that, given how these WR's are used in colleges evaluating these guys for him may be kind of a weak spot for him. That's not to criticize him; it's just a different - valid - angle of seeing it. After all, isn't he still human, subject to the same frailties as us all? I was told as a kid that nobody can have all their bases covered all the time. We all have focused weaknesses in general areas we excel at. Anyway, that's this A+ 49ers fan vantage point from his couch, or in my case at the moment, my view point while stealing a little time from the office
About the ILB position: this is my opinion, and I'll be the first to tell you that. And I'll be the first to admit that I'm no doctor, and that Baalke, Jimmy T & Co. have a way better vantage point - on Bowman and our ILB situation - than I, or any of us. But we're fans. As fans all we can do is opine. And we can only opine based on what we know about the game and what we see watching the 49ers. When I opine about my beloved 49ers I'm not doing so as a 49ers official with insider knowledge that trumps that of, in this case, Trent Baalke. I'm doing so from the perspective of a life-long A+ 49er fan, and that of someone who's been around the game of football since I was 5 years old (not that that qualifies my opinion as being better than any other fan's because it don't).
I agree with you about Skov. My issue here is the 53 man roster restriction, given who's in front of him. Do we cut Reaser before the guy has had a real chance to prove himself? Do we cut McCray/Dahl? Do we go with 7 on OL, or 5 on the DL, or 3 TE's? I like the gut too. But I just don't see where the room on the roster comes from unless he totally outplays Wheeler, both in the preseason games and in camp, or an injury hits.
You're totally entitled to your opinion regarding how Baalke can or does evaluate the WR position, but I just don't agree with the idea that he isn't "confident" in drafting the position high (wanted to move up for OBJ). I really don't agree that GMs get nervous about drafting any position, unless they give up a bunch of capital to get that person.
I can't get behind the idea that because AJ was a bust means he won't draft one high ever again lol, every other WR taking by Baalke was at the earliest a 4th round pick and we have had vets constantly ahead of them, plus SF has been a run first team. Baalke even stated before the draft this year that there are only so many snaps/targets to be had at the WR spot...you can't honestly think that Kyle Williams (6th rd) and Ronald Johnson (6th rd) where gonna be studs?? Patton and Ellington BOTH had very good vet WRs in front of them and Patton dealt with an injury his 1st season...both have shown some sort of flash when given a chance on the field...Baalke doesn't pick and chose who's getting snaps that's the coaching staff
You sure like the word opine (lol jk), so you're basically saying you think Bowman won't be a good LB anymore because of your gut feeling? Okay fair enough like I said you're entitled to your opinion . I'm just going off of what the coaching staff has said, videos of Bo looking good, the fact that he will be in training camp, He's had a year and a half to rehab, they didn't restructure his deal (which would indicate he isn't healthy if they did), and the fact that they didn't draft anyone at the ILB position....we will find out soon enough.
Not sure who they drop for Skov, just like the name of this thread it's wayyyyy to early to talk about that
Now, I do believe that Baalke really don't put as high a value the WR position as other positions. If so it certainly explains a lot to me. Maybe your right; maybe the run-first thing is playing more into this than what I'm comfortable with. But the problem with that is that you have to be balanced. And in a passing league shamefully stuffed with rules that favor the passing game even run-first teams have to be able to have the ability to make teams pay for putting 8 in the box consistently against them with WR who can beat jams, get separation, and be more than a possession WR.
Look, I'm not calling for us to change into a pass-heavy team. We saw how that worked for us last season. Just that at some point we're gonna have to invest in a young WR who can push for playing time to give this team another weapon to keep the defense honest. T. Smith is that. But behind him who fits that?
I'm not saying that Bowman WON"T be good anymore!! I'll say this again: I'm saying that I don't think it's a good idea to count on him being able to returning to form given the seriousness of the injury and surgery. That is, being as dominant, fast, and the force he was before the injury. Follow me here: With no Cowboy, we are gonna be centering our defense around a guy who's coming off serious injury that MOST don't return the same from. I know he's looking good on video, but the bullets aren't flying. He's not pushing those knees in game form. There's no way for anyone to know if he'll return to pre-injury status, not even Baalke or the coaching staff. If he's not where we hope offenses WILL target him and our defense is gonna be seriously be exposed, especially given we didn't address the position in the draft.
I'm definitely on the side of Bo returning to form. Then all me b***hing would be for nothing, witch I hope will be the case.
You don't have sell me about being balanced, I preached plenty before the draft lol. I wanted Cooper and thought a trade made sense because minus about 15 players in this draft, I didn't see many day one starters...There are some good prospects in the 2016 draft and Baalke has what looks to be about 12 picks. I wouldn't be surprised at all if we finally get a early pick for one (depending on Smelter of course).
Sure 4th round prospects can make some kind of push on the starters, but when they are both making around $6 million a year (Crabs/Boldin) it financially doesn't make sense to throw them on the bench in favor of a rookie....Ellington/Patton will finally get some playing time, what's the point in drafting them if you're not gonna play them at some point...I think that was a big issue with Baalke and Harbs (just guessing).
Defenses will have to be honest with Smith, Davis, and Bush out there...and I think Davis will benefit most from Smith being here. Also I do remember when a Ravens team won a SB with Boldin and Smith ... That team isn't much different then SF player-wise.
DL has always been the backbone of the defense not our ILBs IMO. They just clean up the mess....we don't even know if Smith will be gone and I think as a whole the LB position looks beastly (Smith,Bo,MW,Brooks,Harold,Lynch). Sure we were lucky to have two pro-bowlers at ILB, but most teams don't even have one lol....having over $10 million a year thrown into our ILB was a big load for them and not necessary.
We can only wait and see what kind of team Baalke has assembled, I am pumped to finally get to see some younger players get to play
May 14, 2015 at 3:07 PM
- NCommand
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 123,305
Originally posted by NYniner85:
...Baalke doesn't pick and chose who's getting snaps that's the coaching staff
This is where the argument ends with me. After 3-4 years, as a GM, would YOU draft a WR with your first pick knowing full well the current coaches preferences (turning a huge slot WR/TE into a blocker, still using a FB in the offense on the regular, power running team, big OL, etc.). Obviously Baalke did try hard to still seriously consider it (ODB, Benjamin, perhaps DGB this year plus others, etc.) but at the end of the day, we are who we are. This off season, Baalke finally got the TYPES of WR's he's been trying to get for the type of offense he'd like us to be...balanced...with TS, Boldin and Ellington, coupled with VD, Bell, McDonald, Bush, Hunter, Hyde/Davis out of the backfield. Perhaps more Patton, Millard, CK on the run, etc. Shorter, intermediate AND deep passes...vertical as much as horizontal.
I actually thought for a while now, NEXT year is a year we may consider a premier WR to challenge opposite TS...to compete with Smelter, etc. There's just different ways to go about finding your parts.