Donte Whitner aka Hitner

We have to re-sign the Hitner.

Originally posted by LottOfDefense:
If Whitner and Boldin come back the 9ers have endless possibilities in the draft.

Agree, not needing to take a SS would mean a CB (if brown gone) and a WR early but other than that anything is fair game. It means we could go C, C/G combo, T earlier or we could go DL earlier or we could trade one of our 2nds or 3rds and stock up for next year. Could even take a backup QB in the 2nd or 3rd. We could double up on CB's (or WR's) early. I know Whitner has his downfalls in coverage but he would probably do better than any free agent we could bring in or any player we drafted. Maybe Clinton-Dix or Pryor could come in day 1 but it would require a 3rd to trade up for them and we would be asking to catch lightning in a bottle twice with expecting another S to come in and play as well as Reid did and not be a weak link. To me it comes down to how much he wants and how long. He's going to be 29 so I'm looking at 2-3 years, not 4 and some where around 3 a year, maybe 4. 2 years 6-8 million is ideal, worst case 3 years 9-10 million. I don't think he would be around that 3rd year so if he wants 3 years we should make it so we can get out of it with little hit. By year 3 he will be much slower than he is now and will be an even bigger liability in coverage. I'd be fine with him for another 1-2 years and next draft or the draft after find a replacement. And I know he signed with us prior to 2011 for 3 years 11.75 million so nearly 4 a year but he was also about to be 26 and he's about to be 29 now.

Hitner will want at least 5.5 mil a year. It's his last chance to make some serious money before he gets over the hill. Eagles and Packers would definitely pay that much for him too.

3 years 15 million ?

Originally posted by susweel:
3 years 15 million ?

This would work...right, AB81Rules?

This may come as a very unpopular take but I don't want Whitner back. And not b/c he's not a good player and doesn't bring a ton of intangibles but for a variety of other reasons:

1. He's capped out. He's certainly not going to get any better.
2. He continues to get abused in coverage in big games (esp. playoffs and Superbowls); inexcusable as a veteran in the Superbowl and NFCCG.
3. He's short (no vertical) and is easily boxed out, one-armed by the bigger, slot WR's and TE's. The timing of his jumps are poor often as well and many times he struggles even getting his head turned around. He also continued to blow some coverages (as he admitted) in the regular season and took some poor angles in run support (cost us points).
4. D/t his inability to cover, Fangio has to keep both S's deep...very deep...like 35-40 yards deep to keep everything in front of him/them and they STILL got beat by Baldwin who got behind them for a critical bomb in the NFCCG. Simply, any h/w done on Seattle (a WELL known foe) indicates that when Wilson is scrambling around, that ball always goes for a deep jump ball. Every time. Reid, this may be somewhat understandable as a rookie, but Whitner has zero excuse here.
5. Contract year. Remember when Rogers played lights out in his contract year? He had 6 INT's that year, undercutting routes, etc. He's had 3 total since then. This is Whitner's contract year so most likely, it's only down hill from here (even though he plays harder than the half-assed Rogers).
6. SS-type. Whitner is your old-school prototypical in-the-box (extra LB) SS. In today's passing NFL, you need coverage S's. It's great if they can be big hitters like in Seattle too but what separates them is their quickness, athleticism, play recognition, the ability to line up anywhere, speed, range and abiity to make plays on the ball (and still be sure-tacklers). Reid is becoming this guy for us right now. Back in the day, Walsh brought in the two biggest/tallest CB/S tandem in the draft (Wright/Lott). Seattle has copied this mold thanks to Carroll's experience with us. Just an FYI.
7. Development/Scheme. Is Whitner our 3-year future? And how does his presence on the field affect our scheme? Wouldn't it be better to have another FS-like S with Reid-abilities teamed together? This may dumb-down the coverage scheme on the field a bit to start the year but it will also most likely increase the play of everyone around them. For instance, if you have two rangy S's like Reid who you can line up anywhere (and not keep them camped out 40+ yards deep), it allows your two CB's to play to their strengths; Culliver and Brock, to play tight, physical, man-press on the edges.
8. Effects on the LB's. What's everyone's biggest concern about our ILB's? That they are constantly stuck in underneath and single coverage and not allowed to play down hill or even blitz much. Was it Whitner and Reid covering Seattle's TE in the NFCCG? Nope...it was Bowman. Knee blown. 2-free ranging S's allow the CB's and LB's to play to their strengths and this hold's true in Seattle as well. Not only can their CB's play rape-press coverage (or simple Cover 3 and that's it) on the outside but they can even isolate a S or LB to "spy" on CK at the same time.
9. Cap. I don't know what Whitner is asking for but it's not going to be cheaper than a top-notch rookie. That money could be used to help in CK and Aldon negotiations. We'll also have this rookie for 4-5 years for next to nothing in comparison. If Baalke can hit on Reid so boldly (which means, he knew what he wanted in a S), no doubt he can do it again this draft.

This isn't to dismiss Whitner as a good S for us and a great Niner but thinking more immediate and LT future here. These are just some things a FO has to consider before negotiating a LT contract with one of our own...whether we can afford it now or not, there is much more to consider.

Originally posted by NCommand:
This may come as a very unpopular take but I don't want Whitner back. And not b/c he's not a good player and doesn't bring a ton of intangibles but for a variety of other reasons:

1. He's capped out. He's certainly not going to get any better.
2. He continues to get abused in coverage in big games (esp. playoffs and Superbowls); inexcusable as a veteran in the Superbowl and NFCCG.
3. He's short (no vertical) and is easily boxed out, one-armed by the bigger, slot WR's and TE's. The timing of his jumps are poor often as well and many times he struggles even getting his head turned around. He also continued to blow some coverages (as he admitted) in the regular season and took some poor angles in run support (cost us points).
4. D/t his inability to cover, Fangio has to keep both S's deep...very deep...like 35-40 yards deep to keep everything in front of him/them and they STILL got beat by Baldwin who got behind them for a critical bomb in the NFCCG. Simply, any h/w done on Seattle (a WELL known foe) indicates that when Wilson is scrambling around, that ball always goes for a deep jump ball. Every time. Reid, this may be somewhat understandable as a rookie, but Whitner has zero excuse here.
5. Contract year. Remember when Rogers played lights out in his contract year? He had 6 INT's that year, undercutting routes, etc. He's had 3 total since then. This is Whitner's contract year so most likely, it's only down hill from here (even though he plays harder than the half-assed Rogers).
6. SS-type. Whitner is your old-school prototypical in-the-box (extra LB) SS. In today's passing NFL, you need coverage S's. It's great if they can be big hitters like in Seattle too but what separates them is their quickness, athleticism, play recognition, the ability to line up anywhere, speed, range and abiity to make plays on the ball (and still be sure-tacklers). Reid is becoming this guy for us right now. Back in the day, Walsh brought in the two biggest/tallest CB/S tandem in the draft (Wright/Lott). Seattle has copied this mold thanks to Carroll's experience with us. Just an FYI.
7. Development/Scheme. Is Whitner our 3-year future? And how does his presence on the field affect our scheme? Wouldn't it be better to have another FS-like S with Reid-abilities teamed together? This may dumb-down the coverage scheme on the field a bit to start the year but it will also most likely increase the play of everyone around them. For instance, if you have two rangy S's like Reid who you can line up anywhere (and not keep them camped out 40+ yards deep), it allows your two CB's to play to their strengths; Culliver and Brock, to play tight, physical, man-press on the edges.
8. Effects on the LB's. What's everyone's biggest concern about our ILB's? That they are constantly stuck in underneath and single coverage and not allowed to play down hill or even blitz much. Was it Whitner and Reid covering Seattle's TE in the NFCCG? Nope...it was Bowman. Knee blown. 2-free ranging S's allow the CB's and LB's to play to their strengths and this hold's true in Seattle as well. Not only can their CB's play rape-press coverage (or simple Cover 3 and that's it) on the outside but they can even isolate a S or LB to "spy" on CK at the same time.
9. Cap. I don't know what Whitner is asking for but it's not going to be cheaper than a top-notch rookie. That money could be used to help in CK and Aldon negotiations. We'll also have this rookie for 4-5 years for next to nothing in comparison. If Baalke can hit on Reid so boldly (which means, he knew what he wanted in a S), no doubt he can do it again this draft.

This isn't to dismiss Whitner as a good S for us and a great Niner but thinking more immediate and LT future here. These are just some things a FO has to consider before negotiating a LT contract with one of our own...whether we can afford it now or not, there is much more to consider.

i dont think you're wrong. you have to make calculated gambles when building a team. we took one last year very few thought would pay off and yet it was reid in the pro bowl and not goldson. i like whitner, and have enjoyed what he has brought to the team, but we cant be afraid to get better.

^^^ Whether fans agree or disagree, it's important to factor in everything. These are tough positions to be in and calls to make esp. for a guy like Whitner who bleeds red and gold and is a high character leader (which also greatly factors in as well). It will be very interesting to watch how the FO handles Whitner and all of our FA's. Will they go bold and let walk ala Goldson or go with the safe route?

Tg

Originally posted by NCommand:

This may come as a very unpopular take but I don't want Whitner back. And not b/c he's not a good player and doesn't bring a ton of intangibles but for a variety of other reasons:

1. He's capped out. He's certainly not going to get any better.
2. He continues to get abused in coverage in big games (esp. playoffs and Superbowls); inexcusable as a veteran in the Superbowl and NFCCG.
3. He's short (no vertical) and is easily boxed out, one-armed by the bigger, slot WR's and TE's. The timing of his jumps are poor often as well and many times he struggles even getting his head turned around. He also continued to blow some coverages (as he admitted) in the regular season and took some poor angles in run support (cost us points).
4. D/t his inability to cover, Fangio has to keep both S's deep...very deep...like 35-40 yards deep to keep everything in front of him/them and they STILL got beat by Baldwin who got behind them for a critical bomb in the NFCCG. Simply, any h/w done on Seattle (a WELL known foe) indicates that when Wilson is scrambling around, that ball always goes for a deep jump ball. Every time. Reid, this may be somewhat understandable as a rookie, but Whitner has zero excuse here.
5. Contract year. Remember when Rogers played lights out in his contract year? He had 6 INT's that year, undercutting routes, etc. He's had 3 total since then. This is Whitner's contract year so most likely, it's only down hill from here (even though he plays harder than the half-assed Rogers).
6. SS-type. Whitner is your old-school prototypical in-the-box (extra LB) SS. In today's passing NFL, you need coverage S's. It's great if they can be big hitters like in Seattle too but what separates them is their quickness, athleticism, play recognition, the ability to line up anywhere, speed, range and abiity to make plays on the ball (and still be sure-tacklers). Reid is becoming this guy for us right now. Back in the day, Walsh brought in the two biggest/tallest CB/S tandem in the draft (Wright/Lott). Seattle has copied this mold thanks to Carroll's experience with us. Just an FYI.
7. Development/Scheme. Is Whitner our 3-year future? And how does his presence on the field affect our scheme? Wouldn't it be better to have another FS-like S with Reid-abilities teamed together? This may dumb-down the coverage scheme on the field a bit to start the year but it will also most likely increase the play of everyone around them. For instance, if you have two rangy S's like Reid who you can line up anywhere (and not keep them camped out 40+ yards deep), it allows your two CB's to play to their strengths; Culliver and Brock, to play tight, physical, man-press on the edges.
8. Effects on the LB's. What's everyone's biggest concern about our ILB's? That they are constantly stuck in underneath and single coverage and not allowed to play down hill or even blitz much. Was it Whitner and Reid covering Seattle's TE in the NFCCG? Nope...it was Bowman. Knee blown. 2-free ranging S's allow the CB's and LB's to play to their strengths and this hold's true in Seattle as well. Not only can their CB's play rape-press coverage (or simple Cover 3 and that's it) on the outside but they can even isolate a S or LB to "spy" on CK at the same time.
9. Cap. I don't know what Whitner is asking for but it's not going to be cheaper than a top-notch rookie. That money could be used to help in CK and Aldon negotiations. We'll also have this rookie for 4-5 years for next to nothing in comparison. If Baalke can hit on Reid so boldly (which means, he knew what he wanted in a S), no doubt he can do it again this draft.

This isn't to dismiss Whitner as a good S for us and a great Niner but thinking more immediate and LT future here. These are just some things a FO has to consider before negotiating a LT contract with one of our own...whether we can afford it now or not, there is much more to consider.

thought I was the only one. Dude is poop. Doesn't wrap gets burnt in coverage

The Whitner-Reid tandem was very good last year and with Eric's expected growth, should be even better next season. Not a bad idea to draft a S for depth, as there's really not much behind Dahl for realistic PT. That said, they could still take a S early to be Whitner's replacement if Whitner agrees to a 2-yr contract, which doesn't seem that likely, honestly. That still means you probably acquire a vet FA for depth, too. What I don't see is Baalke drafting a SS to start alongside Reid...there has to be a solid vet in the mix.

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
The Whitner-Reid tandem was very good last year and with Eric's expected growth, should be even better next season. Not a bad idea to draft a S for depth, as there's really not much behind Dahl for realistic PT. That said, they could still take a S early to be Whitner's replacement if Whitner agrees to a 2-yr contract, which doesn't seem that likely, honestly. That still means you probably acquire a vet FA for depth, too. What I don't see is Baalke drafting a SS to start alongside Reid...there has to be a solid vet in the mix.

This is an awesome point b/c in looking at the Baalke-moves in 2013, his M.O. is to bring in a Second Tier veteran FA and having a clear-cut starter doesn't mean we still won't go a top pick in the draft to push/transition. This issue may fall on Whitner's shoulders like you say...he may want 3 or 4 years minimum at a higher cost.

Originally posted by NCommand:
This may come as a very unpopular take but I don't want Whitner back. And not b/c he's not a good player and doesn't bring a ton of intangibles but for a variety of other reasons:

1. He's capped out. He's certainly not going to get any better.
2. He continues to get abused in coverage in big games (esp. playoffs and Superbowls); inexcusable as a veteran in the Superbowl and NFCCG.
3. He's short (no vertical) and is easily boxed out, one-armed by the bigger, slot WR's and TE's. The timing of his jumps are poor often as well and many times he struggles even getting his head turned around. He also continued to blow some coverages (as he admitted) in the regular season and took some poor angles in run support (cost us points).
4. D/t his inability to cover, Fangio has to keep both S's deep...very deep...like 35-40 yards deep to keep everything in front of him/them and they STILL got beat by Baldwin who got behind them for a critical bomb in the NFCCG. Simply, any h/w done on Seattle (a WELL known foe) indicates that when Wilson is scrambling around, that ball always goes for a deep jump ball. Every time. Reid, this may be somewhat understandable as a rookie, but Whitner has zero excuse here.
5. Contract year. Remember when Rogers played lights out in his contract year? He had 6 INT's that year, undercutting routes, etc. He's had 3 total since then. This is Whitner's contract year so most likely, it's only down hill from here (even though he plays harder than the half-assed Rogers).
6. SS-type. Whitner is your old-school prototypical in-the-box (extra LB) SS. In today's passing NFL, you need coverage S's. It's great if they can be big hitters like in Seattle too but what separates them is their quickness, athleticism, play recognition, the ability to line up anywhere, speed, range and abiity to make plays on the ball (and still be sure-tacklers). Reid is becoming this guy for us right now. Back in the day, Walsh brought in the two biggest/tallest CB/S tandem in the draft (Wright/Lott). Seattle has copied this mold thanks to Carroll's experience with us. Just an FYI.
7. Development/Scheme. Is Whitner our 3-year future? And how does his presence on the field affect our scheme? Wouldn't it be better to have another FS-like S with Reid-abilities teamed together? This may dumb-down the coverage scheme on the field a bit to start the year but it will also most likely increase the play of everyone around them. For instance, if you have two rangy S's like Reid who you can line up anywhere (and not keep them camped out 40+ yards deep), it allows your two CB's to play to their strengths; Culliver and Brock, to play tight, physical, man-press on the edges.
8. Effects on the LB's. What's everyone's biggest concern about our ILB's? That they are constantly stuck in underneath and single coverage and not allowed to play down hill or even blitz much. Was it Whitner and Reid covering Seattle's TE in the NFCCG? Nope...it was Bowman. Knee blown. 2-free ranging S's allow the CB's and LB's to play to their strengths and this hold's true in Seattle as well. Not only can their CB's play rape-press coverage (or simple Cover 3 and that's it) on the outside but they can even isolate a S or LB to "spy" on CK at the same time.
9. Cap. I don't know what Whitner is asking for but it's not going to be cheaper than a top-notch rookie. That money could be used to help in CK and Aldon negotiations. We'll also have this rookie for 4-5 years for next to nothing in comparison. If Baalke can hit on Reid so boldly (which means, he knew what he wanted in a S), no doubt he can do it again this draft.

This isn't to dismiss Whitner as a good S for us and a great Niner but thinking more immediate and LT future here. These are just some things a FO has to consider before negotiating a LT contract with one of our own...whether we can afford it now or not, there is much more to consider.

The newbs probably won't agree but I sure agree %1000000. I have no idea what some of the people are watching when they say we "need" Whitner. They might as well say we "need" the other weak link too, Carlos Rogers.

Originally posted by kronik:
The newbs won't like this but I sure agree %1000000

LOL. I hope they don't...and then post the other side of the coin!

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by kronik:
The newbs won't like this but I sure agree %1000000

LOL. I hope they don't...and then post the other side of the coin!

Signing Whitner to a short term deal does not preclude you from drafting the position and grooming someone for the future. Other than TJ Ward, I do not see a definite upgrade out there at the SS position. You sign Whitner to a shorter term deal and look to the draft, if there isn't value or a guy we want there this year, there is always next year. Baalke is always looking to draft young replacements in advance, if a safety is the top guy on our board in the mid rounds I'm sure we won't hesitate.

We stand to lose Brown and Rogers and face a question mark with how Culliver will play coming off that injury (I like his size and athletic ability but he takes a lot of penalties). Now if Culliver was being groomed for a safety spot this might be a different discussion but he isn't. Whitner is only 28, there are not any better realistic options in FA and the draft remains an option. You can't force the team to upgrade a position at which there are no viable upgrades available (Ward and Byrd aren't coming here). Also, when Brock and Reid stand to be your most experienced starters in the secondary, it is not a great sign for a team that is competing for the SB. I would rather keep some consistency in the secondary, a unit which performed fairly well last season. Unless you'd prefer going into the season with Brock (a new starter), Reid (2nd year safety) and Culliver (coming off an injury, has never started at the top 2 CB spots).

As for Seattle, Thomas may be the best FS in the league and Chancellor is a Pro-Bowler with LB size playing at safety...he's like 6'3, these are exceptions to the rule. Now if we think we can find someone who we think can be groomed into that (Bucannon?), or a great FS in the draft, as I noted, I don't think a 3 year deal to Whitner precludes us from pursuing that avenue. This year's class is strong at CB, little bit of a drop off at S after the top guys are gone so it's about timing as well. Whitner isn't some sort of big weak link preventing us from winning, our O needs to be more consistent, our D has been solid for the last 3 season, playoffs included.

Originally posted by GoldenJoe:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by kronik:
The newbs won't like this but I sure agree %1000000

LOL. I hope they don't...and then post the other side of the coin!

Signing Whitner to a short term deal does not preclude you from drafting the position and grooming someone for the future. Other than TJ Ward, I do not see a definite upgrade out there at the SS position. You sign Whitner to a shorter term deal and look to the draft, if there isn't value or a guy we want there this year, there is always next year. Baalke is always looking to draft young replacements in advance, if a safety is the top guy on our board in the mid rounds I'm sure we won't hesitate.

We stand to lose Brown and Rogers and face a question mark with how Culliver will play coming off that injury (I like his size and athletic ability but he takes a lot of penalties). Now if Culliver was being groomed for a safety spot this might be a different discussion but he isn't. Whitner is only 28, there are not any better realistic options in FA and the draft remains an option. You can't force the team to upgrade a position at which there are no viable upgrades available (Ward and Byrd aren't coming here). Also, when Brock and Reid stand to be your most experienced starters in the secondary, it is not a great sign for a team that is competing for the SB. I would rather keep some consistency in the secondary, a unit which performed fairly well last season. Unless you'd prefer going into the season with Brock (a new starter), Reid (2nd year safety) and Culliver (coming off an injury, has never started at the top 2 CB spots).

As for Seattle, Thomas may be the best FS in the league and Chancellor is a Pro-Bowler with LB size playing at safety...he's like 6'3, these are exceptions to the rule. Now if we think we can find someone who we think can be groomed into that (Bucannon?), or a great FS in the draft, as I noted, I don't think a 3 year deal to Whitner precludes us from pursuing that avenue. This year's class is strong at CB, little bit of a drop off at S after the top guys are gone so it's about timing as well. Whitner isn't some sort of big weak link preventing us from winning, our O needs to be more consistent, our D has been solid for the last 3 season, playoffs included.

Awesome awesome post and very much appreciated. And I do agree with this approach as well and it will most likely shape up this way too. That said, almost all of this will hing in Whitner himself and his contract demands. Ideally, it's a 2-year deal with the clear understanding of mentorship of a top FA pick to start as early as next year, possibly. It would be a heavy front-loaded contract. But if we're looking at 3+ years at a high annual salary with much guaranteed money, we could end up like we did with Rogers contract (6M+ for poor play and stuck with it d/t injuries and nobody groomed to fill in immediately; we HAD to pay him this). It delays the growth and development of an upside talent, forces us to pay high in annual salary and the production on the field continues to decline. It's really going to be up to management in the direction they want to go in, like you said, what's available that could be better and Whitner's own contract LT and $ demands. Sadly, what Whitner lacks in skill set can not be overcome (poor coverage ability and athleticism and range). So is the FO willing to roll the dice on another Goldson-for-Reid move? Is there another Reid out there this year?