Brandon Fusco Thread

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by jcs:
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/sports/Fusco-Proved-Worth-and-Could-Re-Sign-With-49ers-475414403.html

I wonder if we do for how much?

Among recent RG contracts, Larry Warford of New Orleans is ranked #18 to Fusco's #21. Warford is getting $8M/yr. Laurent Duvernay-Tardiff of KC is #15 and gets $8.250M/yr.

I would guess Fusco, not having quite the same history with the same club, to get around $6.7-7M/yr.

At that price is he expected to start?

Compete but he'd have a big inside track given that's a pretty solid season in year 1 of a complicated system. A guy like Garnett would really have to prove he's a clear cut better option.

100% agree.

However, let's be clear here - they need more talent inside that OL. We can't just replug those guys in there again and expect a quantum leap with improved play.

$7m a year isn't backup money though....

Absolutely right and for me if we're considering Fusco at the number, hell we should consider all available OGs too. I can see $7m with incentives....

I agree. The problem is that outside of Sitton and Norwell, neither of which are realistic opportunities, the only other options that are even in the same range as Fusco are:

Zach Fulton - slightly better pass pro but much less effective run blocker

Joe Berger - not quite as good as Fusco in either pass or run

Josh Kline - better pass pro but WAY less effective run blocker - market value per Sportrac - $10.4M/yr

Justin Pugh - weak pass pro about the same as Fusco in run - market value - $6.4M/yr

There are about two dozen other FA guards but these four are the best of those.

So, if you can re-sign Fusco for $7-8M, why would you go after any of these other guys?

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by dj43:
I agree. The problem is that outside of Sitton and Norwell, neither of which are realistic opportunities, the only other options that are even in the same range as Fusco are:

Zach Fulton - slightly better pass pro but much less effective run blocker

Joe Berger - not quite as good as Fusco in either pass or run

Josh Kline - better pass pro but WAY less effective run blocker - market value per Sportrac - $10.4M/yr

Justin Pugh - weak pass pro about the same as Fusco in run - market value - $6.4M/yr

There are about two dozen other FA guards but these four are the best of those.

So, if you can re-sign Fusco for $7-8M, why would you go after any of these other guys?

+1

Why is Sitton an unrealistic opportunity? We are near the top of the league in $$ and he fits our system.

Originally posted by jcs:

Why is Sitton an unrealistic opportunity? We are near the top of the league in $$ and he fits our system.

Yeah, really don't see what makes any FA that fits scheme unrealistic this year. It only gets unrealistic when people project three or four top FAs at once, which was never gonna happen, and which today Lynch basically said isn't gonna happen.

Originally posted by jcs:
Why is Sitton an unrealistic opportunity? We are near the top of the league in $$ and he fits our system.

Because Lynch is ok re-signing bad players, like Hyde and Fusco, and doesn't like to sign players that can actually help this team. Both Levitre and Sitton should be on top of their list and there is NO EXCUSE for them to sign both of them, if they're available. (unless they flat out refuse to sign here) Lynch needs to approach this free agency tactfully, which I'm afraid he won't.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by jcs:
Why is Sitton an unrealistic opportunity? We are near the top of the league in $$ and he fits our system.

Because Lynch is ok re-signing bad players, like Hyde and Fusco, and doesn't like to sign players that can actually help this team. Both Levitre and Sitton should be on top of their list and there is NO EXCUSE for them to sign both of them, if they're available. (unless they flat out refuse to sign here) Lynch needs to approach this free agency tactfully, which I'm afraid he won't.

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by jcs:

Why is Sitton an unrealistic opportunity? We are near the top of the league in $$ and he fits our system.

Because Lynch is ok re-signing bad players, like Hyde and Fusco, and doesn't like to sign players that can actually help this team. Both Levitre and Sitton should be on top of their list and there is NO EXCUSE for them to sign both of them, if they're available. (unless they flat out refuse to sign here) Lynch needs to approach this free agency tactfully, which I'm afraid he won't.

Yep, he hates to get guys who help the team. I think there's a conspiracy where he is purposefully trying to ruin us. I'm with you 100% pdizo

Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Yep, he hates to get guys who help the team. I think there's a conspiracy where he is purposefully trying to ruin us. I'm with you 100% pdizo

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by dj43:
I agree. The problem is that outside of Sitton and Norwell, neither of which are realistic opportunities, the only other options that are even in the same range as Fusco are:

Zach Fulton - slightly better pass pro but much less effective run blocker

Joe Berger - not quite as good as Fusco in either pass or run

Josh Kline - better pass pro but WAY less effective run blocker - market value per Sportrac - $10.4M/yr

Justin Pugh - weak pass pro about the same as Fusco in run - market value - $6.4M/yr

There are about two dozen other FA guards but these four are the best of those.

So, if you can re-sign Fusco for $7-8M, why would you go after any of these other guys?

+1

Why is Sitton an unrealistic opportunity? We are near the top of the league in $$ and he fits our system.

Because I don't see Chicago, with $63M in cap room, letting him walk.

Originally posted by dj43:

Because I don't see Chicago, with $63M in cap room, letting him walk.

Didn't they already?

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by dj43:
I agree. The problem is that outside of Sitton and Norwell, neither of which are realistic opportunities, the only other options that are even in the same range as Fusco are:

Zach Fulton - slightly better pass pro but much less effective run blocker

Joe Berger - not quite as good as Fusco in either pass or run

Josh Kline - better pass pro but WAY less effective run blocker - market value per Sportrac - $10.4M/yr

Justin Pugh - weak pass pro about the same as Fusco in run - market value - $6.4M/yr

There are about two dozen other FA guards but these four are the best of those.

So, if you can re-sign Fusco for $7-8M, why would you go after any of these other guys?

+1

Why is Sitton an unrealistic opportunity? We are near the top of the league in $$ and he fits our system.

Because I don't see Chicago, with $63M in cap room, letting him walk.

That'll be crazy because they refused to pick up his option at $8 million for the 2018 season, the reason why he'll be a F/A....

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000916834/article/bears-declining-to-pick-up-josh-sittons-contract-option

I can see them targeting Nelson for their 1st rounder to replace him.

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by dj43:
I agree. The problem is that outside of Sitton and Norwell, neither of which are realistic opportunities, the only other options that are even in the same range as Fusco are:

Zach Fulton - slightly better pass pro but much less effective run blocker

Joe Berger - not quite as good as Fusco in either pass or run

Josh Kline - better pass pro but WAY less effective run blocker - market value per Sportrac - $10.4M/yr

Justin Pugh - weak pass pro about the same as Fusco in run - market value - $6.4M/yr

There are about two dozen other FA guards but these four are the best of those.

So, if you can re-sign Fusco for $7-8M, why would you go after any of these other guys?

+1

Why is Sitton an unrealistic opportunity? We are near the top of the league in $$ and he fits our system.

Because I don't see Chicago, with $63M in cap room, letting him walk.

That'll be crazy because they refused to pick up his option at $8 million for the 2018 season, the reason why he'll be a F/A....

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000916834/article/bears-declining-to-pick-up-josh-sittons-contract-option

I can see them targeting Nelson for their 1st rounder to replace him.

I'm aware of that but I believe they will come back with an offer to keep him. When healthy, he is too good to let go.

Of course, that is the issue: health.

Originally posted by dj43:
Because I don't see Chicago, with $63M in cap room, letting him walk.

This is the same team who gave up a mini fortune to move up ONE SPOT to draft Trubisky. The Bears and intelligence are an oxymoron.

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by dj43:
Because I don't see Chicago, with $63M in cap room, letting him walk.

This is the same team who gave up a mini fortune to move up ONE SPOT to draft Trubisky. The Bears and intelligence are an oxymoron.

And paid MIKE GLENNON 15 mill a year lol

Originally posted by TheXFactor:

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by dj43:

Because I don't see Chicago, with $63M in cap room, letting him walk.

This is the same team who gave up a mini fortune to move up ONE SPOT to draft Trubisky. The Bears and intelligence are an oxymoron.

And paid MIKE GLENNON 15 mill a year lol

That's the real issue. I don't see anything wrong with them making a move for a qb they believe is there future.

Originally posted by lamontb:

Originally posted by TheXFactor:

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by dj43:
Because I don't see Chicago, with $63M in cap room, letting him walk.

This is the same team who gave up a mini fortune to move up ONE SPOT to draft Trubisky. The Bears and intelligence are an oxymoron.

And paid MIKE GLENNON 15 mill a year lol

That's the real issue. I don't see anything wrong with them making a move for a qb they believe is there future.

Right, and 1 year later he's gone lol