Reading the Tea Leaves on Niners' Activity in Free Agency

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by dj43:
I see this FA actions so far as being appropriate, in that they are all short-term, stop-gap solutions, with the possible exception of David Carr.

What I see are moves to strengthen the second tier/special team strength. Spikes IS a liability in pass coverage but quite good against the run game. His sack numbers were helped by blitz packages in which Willis allowed him to run free. In short, he is past his prime and the team needs better depth.

McKillop is not being seen as more than a SP guy, and that is fine. All good teams need guys like that. He apparently has not shown enough to satisfy the coaches that he is the replacement for Spikes. Wilhelm was a short-term addition to buy time for McKillop to develop. The fact they are looking at Ayodele tells me they see McK as "only" as ST player. As I said, that is good enough, but not enough to solve the need for a better backup/future replacement for Spikes.

The OL moves all indicate something I have been saying for three years - David Baas is not the answer. By bringing in Pitts, IF they sign him, it allows them more flexibility in BPA in the first three picks. The team MUST improve the LG spot if they are to be successful. Signing Pitts would at least buy them another 2-3 years of serviceable play during which time they can find the other pieces to allow the offense to develop the versatility needed to succeed in this league. The tender to Baas buys a year to solve that problem - a shrewd move - it doesn't cost a lot and buys time even if it doesn't solve the long-term need, it frees a spot if a true value pops up at BPA time in the draft.

OT is the big question mark. Sims, though a surprisingly good replacement at LT last season, is NOT the answer. The guy had 3/4 of a season as a decent, not great, play. The rest of his career has been rather gloomy. It would not be wise to stake the future of the offense on his ability to either be the starting RT, OR the main swing OT. I would like to be wrong and he re-signs and plays well, but history tells me otherwise. I am totally convinced they will spend one of the first two picks on OT. The only question is; who will it be? All that has been well-discussed in the Draft Room so I won't repeat it all here. The most intriguing part of the draft will be how OL choices go - so much talent and so many teams with similar needs.

That leaves me with the impression the main focus in FA will continue be to solve backup/ST needs thereby allowing them to go BPA for OT, KR/PR and safety/CB. I think the moves so far, IF Pitts signs, will allow more latitude to select value rather than just need. Pitts is the key, IMO. If he signs, then they can look at either Iupati, or one of the other top tier OTs that will be available at #13/17. If Pitts doesn't sign, then I expect Iupati to get serious consideration - Baas' limitations hurt the offense too much to overlook.

So FA and the draft are inextricably linked and though FA will not overall impact that draft will have, it will have a substantial influence of the choices at #17 and the second and third rounds.

Finally, the Carr signing was very good. He is a good player who will, at the very least, give time for Davis to develop. I would also not be surprised to see him beat out Smith. His college resume is the prototype for what the team seems to want in a QB right now.

So far, so good. Still question marks to be answered in FA.

Very intelligent post. Great job.

I think you're spot on about Sims. Half a season of great effort may not make up for a career of disappointing ("gloomy") production.

I disagree somewhat with your take on Spikes. I recall him covering, in a small space and over a short distance, guys coming out of the backfield and TEs over the middle--so I don't get the "he's a liability in coverage" criticism. I will concede that he's not the guy you want covering Roddy White on the flat (neither is Nate Clements, tho), but I think he's still got lots of ability and maximizes it. Just my take tho.

I fully concur with what you say about Carr. Good short term solution that may turn out to be much more.

Mind if I piggy-back, fellas? Great posts you two!

I agree with most of what you both say esp. how FA is tied to the draft.

The coverage in the middle of the field over the past few years has been horrendous (and yes, that's with Willis, Lawson sliding over, Roman, Goldson, etc.). I think Bly may be the only guy who I've ever seen defend a pass in the middle of the field on a regular basis esp. on third downs. It's a real problem and has contributed to many non-stops on third downs, affected the amount of time the defense is on the field (and affects our offense TOP) AND has contributed to big yards for many QB's including some below-average QB's and WR's who we seem to make look like future HOFers.

I think I disagree with the Baas assessment as well. Did we ever pull the RG (Chilo) once last year? If I remember correctly, almost every one of Gore's long TD's was as a result of a Baas pull block against an 8 to 9-man front. This is saying something given he was playing injured most of the year AND he's still learning to play LG (I thought he was a much stronger RG, personally). Add to the fact that our run-at-will philosophy and actual scheme was downright horrendous and the most predictable in the entire league, NONE of our o-line even had half a chance. When your line is constantly going up against 8-10 man front who are run blitzing up the middle on very predictable calls, your o-line has no shot in hell and will get injured a ton. And that is exactly what happened except Baas played all year hurt. Even our best linemen, Staley, looked like a joke last year and even he got injured too. It ALL starts with a poor offensive philosophy AND scheme. Neither played to our strengths.

So, I give all of our linemen a slight pass for last year as they had to face some harsh circumstances (let's not forget the spread adjustment too). I genuinely think if Baas or any of our starting linemen left and played for a team that had a better philosophy and o-scheme, they'd play well, develop and grow in confidence.

As far as FA goes, to date, the only person we have ACTUALLY signed is Carr. Unfortunately, we need veteran key FA's and UPGRADES as we already have plenty of youth at many key positions and we are ready to make a real run. We need a key starting upgrade veteran on the o-line, FS, OLB and P/KR along with some key depth such as what we seem to be targeting right now. Now, are these "upgrades" available this year? Some were and have come and gone...there may be more so let's hope we can pick up some more Bly's, Harris' and Simms.

Stay tunned...

Originally posted by danimal:
some serious over thinking going on in here.

8-8 team + no significant changes = another 8-8 team.

LMAO! Could be worse with an 8-8 strength of schedule this year too?

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by danimal:
some serious over thinking going on in here.

8-8 team + no significant changes = another 8-8 team.

LMAO! Could be worse with an 8-8 strength of schedule this year too?

Yeah, I usually don't like to identify teams by record. Basically, they are a mediocre team and according to all the tea leaves I have been reading, they seem determined to remain a mediocre team for years to come.

Originally posted by dj43:
I see this FA actions so far as being appropriate, in that they are all short-term, stop-gap solutions, with the possible exception of David Carr.

What I see are moves to strengthen the second tier/special team strength. Spikes IS a liability in pass coverage but quite good against the run game. His sack numbers were helped by blitz packages in which Willis allowed him to run free. In short, he is past his prime and the team needs better depth.

McKillop is not being seen as more than a SP guy, and that is fine. All good teams need guys like that. He apparently has not shown enough to satisfy the coaches that he is the replacement for Spikes. Wilhelm was a short-term addition to buy time for McKillop to develop. The fact they are looking at Ayodele tells me they see McK as "only" as ST player. As I said, that is good enough, but not enough to solve the need for a better backup/future replacement for Spikes.

The OL moves all indicate something I have been saying for three years - David Baas is not the answer. By bringing in Pitts, IF they sign him, it allows them more flexibility in BPA in the first three picks. The team MUST improve the LG spot if they are to be successful. Signing Pitts would at least buy them another 2-3 years of serviceable play during which time they can find the other pieces to allow the offense to develop the versatility needed to succeed in this league. The tender to Baas buys a year to solve that problem - a shrewd move - it doesn't cost a lot and buys time even if it doesn't solve the long-term need, it frees a spot if a true value pops up at BPA time in the draft.

OT is the big question mark. Sims, though a surprisingly good replacement at LT last season, is NOT the answer. The guy had 3/4 of a season as a decent, not great, play. The rest of his career has been rather gloomy. It would not be wise to stake the future of the offense on his ability to either be the starting RT, OR the main swing OT. I would like to be wrong and he re-signs and plays well, but history tells me otherwise. I am totally convinced they will spend one of the first two picks on OT. The only question is; who will it be? All that has been well-discussed in the Draft Room so I won't repeat it all here. The most intriguing part of the draft will be how OL choices go - so much talent and so many teams with similar needs.

That leaves me with the impression the main focus in FA will continue be to solve backup/ST needs thereby allowing them to go BPA for OT, KR/PR and safety/CB. I think the moves so far, IF Pitts signs, will allow more latitude to select value rather than just need. Pitts is the key, IMO. If he signs, then they can look at either Iupati, or one of the other top tier OTs that will be available at #13/17. If Pitts doesn't sign, then I expect Iupati to get serious consideration - Baas' limitations hurt the offense too much to overlook.

So FA and the draft are inextricably linked and though FA will not have the overall impact that the draft will have, it will have a substantial influence of the choices at #17 and the second and third rounds.

Finally, the Carr signing was very good. He is a good player who will, at the very least, give time for Davis to develop. I would also not be surprised to see him beat out Smith. His college resume is the prototype for what the team seems to want in a QB right now.

So far, so good. Still question marks to be answered in FA.

Excellent, well-articulated point-of-view, as always from you, dj.

From your summary, I surmise that you see a short-term need for 3 OL, as follows:

Starting RT - probably via a high draft pick.

Swing OT - probably via FA, unless the club sees Snyder filling this role. Unlikely that the club would want to back-up a rookie with another rookie from the draft. Unlikely that Sims will return, given the club's ambivalence so far. The FA closet looks very bare, in terms of finding such a veteran player. Remember that last year, the "swing" OT actually started 9 games. While much of the talk has been about drafting the starting RT (and appropriately so), the "swing" OT is a key position to fill through FA, unless Snyder is targeted to be that guy.

Starting LG - if not Baas, could this be Snyder, Wragge, or Wallace? Apparently not, given the club's interest in Pitts. Unlikely that that the club would want to start 2 rookies on the OL (RT and LG) at the same time. Seems like there is still some sentiment to let Baas start in a "show-me" contract year, when he is highly motivated for a big payday, from the Niners or another team, unless a "better" FA OG (Pitts?), can be signed. If no better FA OG can be signed, does the club draft an OG to sit for 1 year behind Baas, with the expectation of starting that player in 2011? Can the club admit that Baas was a swing and miss as Pick #33 and that Wallace is a bust?

Am I reading the tea leaves correctly?

Originally posted by danimal:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by danimal:
some serious over thinking going on in here.

8-8 team + no significant changes = another 8-8 team.

LMAO! Could be worse with an 8-8 strength of schedule this year too?

Yeah, I usually don't like to identify teams by record. Basically, they are a mediocre team and according to all the tea leaves I have been reading, they seem determined to remain a mediocre team for years to come.

FA isnt over yet and we still have the draft coming up. Also more veteran cuts will be coming up after the draft. 7 NFL teams have signed just 1 FA. And a handful of others have only signed 2 FA. I think you guys need to take a chill pill and save these statements for opening day.

Also there is a thing called player progressions. The young players get better every year and then so does the team. Plus another year in the same offense with a legit #1 WR finally. We are a 10 win team with no moves. We should have had 10 last year. We are a Vds drop in the endzone vs Seattle and the Favre miracle from being 10-6.

Originally posted by danimal:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by danimal:
some serious over thinking going on in here.

8-8 team + no significant changes = another 8-8 team.

LMAO! Could be worse with an 8-8 strength of schedule this year too?

Yeah, I usually don't like to identify teams by record. Basically, they are a mediocre team and according to all the tea leaves I have been reading, they seem determined to remain a mediocre team for years to come.

Yeah, I'm hearing rumblings that McCloughan will opt out of the draft in an effort to remain mediocre.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by dj43:
I see this FA actions so far as being appropriate, in that they are all short-term, stop-gap solutions, with the possible exception of David Carr.

What I see are moves to strengthen the second tier/special team strength. Spikes IS a liability in pass coverage but quite good against the run game. His sack numbers were helped by blitz packages in which Willis allowed him to run free. In short, he is past his prime and the team needs better depth.

McKillop is not being seen as more than a SP guy, and that is fine. All good teams need guys like that. He apparently has not shown enough to satisfy the coaches that he is the replacement for Spikes. Wilhelm was a short-term addition to buy time for McKillop to develop. The fact they are looking at Ayodele tells me they see McK as "only" as ST player. As I said, that is good enough, but not enough to solve the need for a better backup/future replacement for Spikes.

The OL moves all indicate something I have been saying for three years - David Baas is not the answer. By bringing in Pitts, IF they sign him, it allows them more flexibility in BPA in the first three picks. The team MUST improve the LG spot if they are to be successful. Signing Pitts would at least buy them another 2-3 years of serviceable play during which time they can find the other pieces to allow the offense to develop the versatility needed to succeed in this league. The tender to Baas buys a year to solve that problem - a shrewd move - it doesn't cost a lot and buys time even if it doesn't solve the long-term need, it frees a spot if a true value pops up at BPA time in the draft.

OT is the big question mark. Sims, though a surprisingly good replacement at LT last season, is NOT the answer. The guy had 3/4 of a season as a decent, not great, play. The rest of his career has been rather gloomy. It would not be wise to stake the future of the offense on his ability to either be the starting RT, OR the main swing OT. I would like to be wrong and he re-signs and plays well, but history tells me otherwise. I am totally convinced they will spend one of the first two picks on OT. The only question is; who will it be? All that has been well-discussed in the Draft Room so I won't repeat it all here. The most intriguing part of the draft will be how OL choices go - so much talent and so many teams with similar needs.

That leaves me with the impression the main focus in FA will continue be to solve backup/ST needs thereby allowing them to go BPA for OT, KR/PR and safety/CB. I think the moves so far, IF Pitts signs, will allow more latitude to select value rather than just need. Pitts is the key, IMO. If he signs, then they can look at either Iupati, or one of the other top tier OTs that will be available at #13/17. If Pitts doesn't sign, then I expect Iupati to get serious consideration - Baas' limitations hurt the offense too much to overlook.

So FA and the draft are inextricably linked and though FA will not overall impact that draft will have, it will have a substantial influence of the choices at #17 and the second and third rounds.

Finally, the Carr signing was very good. He is a good player who will, at the very least, give time for Davis to develop. I would also not be surprised to see him beat out Smith. His college resume is the prototype for what the team seems to want in a QB right now.

So far, so good. Still question marks to be answered in FA.

Very intelligent post. Great job.

I think you're spot on about Sims. Half a season of great effort may not make up for a career of disappointing ("gloomy") production.

I disagree somewhat with your take on Spikes. I recall him covering, in a small space and over a short distance, guys coming out of the backfield and TEs over the middle--so I don't get the "he's a liability in coverage" criticism. I will concede that he's not the guy you want covering Roddy White on the flat (neither is Nate Clements, tho), but I think he's still got lots of ability and maximizes it. Just my take tho.

I fully concur with what you say about Carr. Good short term solution that may turn out to be much more.

Mind if I piggy-back, fellas? Great posts you two!

I agree with most of what you both say esp. how FA is tied to the draft.

The coverage in the middle of the field over the past few years has been horrendous (and yes, that's with Willis, Lawson sliding over, Roman, Goldson, etc.). I think Bly may be the only guy who I've ever seen defend a pass in the middle of the field on a regular basis esp. on third downs. It's a real problem and has contributed to many non-stops on third downs, affected the amount of time the defense is on the field (and affects our offense TOP) AND has contributed to big yards for many QB's including some below-average QB's and WR's who we seem to make look like future HOFers.

I think I disagree with the Baas assessment as well. Did we ever pull the RG (Chilo) once last year? If I remember correctly, almost every one of Gore's long TD's was as a result of a Baas pull block against an 8 to 9-man front. This is saying something given he was playing injured most of the year AND he's still learning to play LG (I thought he was a much stronger RG, personally). Add to the fact that our run-at-will philosophy and actual scheme was downright horrendous and the most predictable in the entire league, NONE of our o-line even had half a chance. When your line is constantly going up against 8-10 man front who are run blitzing up the middle on very predictable calls, your o-line has no shot in hell and will get injured a ton. And that is exactly what happened except Baas played all year hurt. Even our best linemen, Staley, looked like a joke last year and even he got injured too. It ALL starts with a poor offensive philosophy AND scheme. Neither played to our strengths.

So, I give all of our linemen a slight pass for last year as they had to face some harsh circumstances (let's not forget the spread adjustment too). I genuinely think if Baas or any of our starting linemen left and played for a team that had a better philosophy and o-scheme, they'd play well, develop and grow in confidence.

As far as FA goes, to date, the only person we have ACTUALLY signed is Carr. Unfortunately, we need veteran key FA's and UPGRADES as we already have plenty of youth at many key positions and we are ready to make a real run. We need a key starting upgrade veteran on the o-line, FS, OLB and P/KR along with some key depth such as what we seem to be targeting right now. Now, are these "upgrades" available this year? Some were and have come and gone...there may be more so let's hope we can pick up some more Bly's, Harris' and Simms.

Stay tunned...

Really excellent analysis. As usual.

I, like you, cannot recall a single play in which Rachal pulled. It was always Baas pulling and leading Gore through the right side.

Your point about offensive scheme being part of the problem with the OL is well taken, as is what you say about some of these guys maybe doing better elsewhere, with a different offensive scheme. Justin Smiley springs to mind.

I expect significant improvements in the scheme next year--Raye is not coming in late and having to learn about the talent on the team as he prepares for the season. And he will have not one but two strong armed QBs to run his offense, one of whom has had significant time playing for him already. No more excuses for any of them, QBs or OC.

I also expect significant improvement in the OL play next year as well. Everything I've read says Solari is a better OL coach than Foerester. Ray Brown brings instant credibility with his knowledge and experience.

And I expect an upgrade in the OL talent, through the draft. If not in the first (assuming the really top tier guys are gone by #13), then in the second, someone to play RT. And another OG as well. Goodby Wallace. Maybe goodbye Wragge.

Add some help to the secondary (Haden at #13), a pass rusher (Graham at #17), a return guy, and a backup NT and let's see what happens.

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:

Originally posted by danimal:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by danimal:
some serious over thinking going on in here.

8-8 team + no significant changes = another 8-8 team.

LMAO! Could be worse with an 8-8 strength of schedule this year too?

Yeah, I usually don't like to identify teams by record. Basically, they are a mediocre team and according to all the tea leaves I have been reading, they seem determined to remain a mediocre team for years to come.

Yeah, I'm hearing rumblings that McCloughan will opt out of the draft in an effort to remain mediocre.

No need for that. He will just draft projects who have no impact for years to come if ever

Originally posted by jimbagg:

Originally posted by dj43:
I see this FA actions so far as being appropriate, in that they are all short-term, stop-gap solutions, with the possible exception of David Carr.

What I see are moves to strengthen the second tier/special team strength. Spikes IS a liability in pass coverage but quite good against the run game. His sack numbers were helped by blitz packages in which Willis allowed him to run free. In short, he is past his prime and the team needs better depth.

McKillop is not being seen as more than a SP guy, and that is fine. All good teams need guys like that. He apparently has not shown enough to satisfy the coaches that he is the replacement for Spikes. Wilhelm was a short-term addition to buy time for McKillop to develop. The fact they are looking at Ayodele tells me they see McK as "only" as ST player. As I said, that is good enough, but not enough to solve the need for a better backup/future replacement for Spikes.

The OL moves all indicate something I have been saying for three years - David Baas is not the answer. By bringing in Pitts, IF they sign him, it allows them more flexibility in BPA in the first three picks. The team MUST improve the LG spot if they are to be successful. Signing Pitts would at least buy them another 2-3 years of serviceable play during which time they can find the other pieces to allow the offense to develop the versatility needed to succeed in this league. The tender to Baas buys a year to solve that problem - a shrewd move - it doesn't cost a lot and buys time even if it doesn't solve the long-term need, it frees a spot if a true value pops up at BPA time in the draft.

OT is the big question mark. Sims, though a surprisingly good replacement at LT last season, is NOT the answer. The guy had 3/4 of a season as a decent, not great, play. The rest of his career has been rather gloomy. It would not be wise to stake the future of the offense on his ability to either be the starting RT, OR the main swing OT. I would like to be wrong and he re-signs and plays well, but history tells me otherwise. I am totally convinced they will spend one of the first two picks on OT. The only question is; who will it be? All that has been well-discussed in the Draft Room so I won't repeat it all here. The most intriguing part of the draft will be how OL choices go - so much talent and so many teams with similar needs.

That leaves me with the impression the main focus in FA will continue be to solve backup/ST needs thereby allowing them to go BPA for OT, KR/PR and safety/CB. I think the moves so far, IF Pitts signs, will allow more latitude to select value rather than just need. Pitts is the key, IMO. If he signs, then they can look at either Iupati, or one of the other top tier OTs that will be available at #13/17. If Pitts doesn't sign, then I expect Iupati to get serious consideration - Baas' limitations hurt the offense too much to overlook.

So FA and the draft are inextricably linked and though FA will not have the overall impact that the draft will have, it will have a substantial influence of the choices at #17 and the second and third rounds.

Finally, the Carr signing was very good. He is a good player who will, at the very least, give time for Davis to develop. I would also not be surprised to see him beat out Smith. His college resume is the prototype for what the team seems to want in a QB right now.

So far, so good. Still question marks to be answered in FA.

Excellent, well-articulated point-of-view, as always from you, dj.

From your summary, I surmise that you see a short-term need for 3 OL, as follows:

Starting RT - probably via a high draft pick.

Swing OT - probably via FA, unless the club sees Snyder filling this role. Unlikely that the club would want to back-up a rookie with another rookie from the draft. Unlikely that Sims will return, given the club's ambivalence so far. The FA closet looks very bare, in terms of finding such a veteran player. Remember that last year, the "swing" OT actually started 9 games. While much of the talk has been about drafting the starting RT (and appropriately so), the "swing" OT is a key position to fill through FA, unless Snyder is targeted to be that guy.

Starting LG - if not Baas, could this be Snyder, Wragge, or Wallace? Apparently not, given the club's interest in Pitts. Unlikely that that the club would want to start 2 rookies on the OL (RT and LG) at the same time. Seems like there is still some sentiment to let Baas start in a "show-me" contract year, when he is highly motivated for a big payday, from the Niners or another team, unless a "better" FA OG (Pitts?), can be signed. If no better FA OG can be signed, does the club draft an OG to sit for 1 year behind Baas, with the expectation of starting that player in 2011? Can the club admit that Baas was a swing and miss as Pick #33 and that Wallace is a bust?

Am I reading the tea leaves correctly?

Thank you.

I think we see it pretty much the same.

As to your last question, "yes" I think the club is admitting those two picks are not the long-term solution. However, the decision they made with Baas is a sound one - give him clear notice he needs to prove himself next season or look for a home in some other city. I hope he does well but his lack of agility is not something that a healthy training camp will cure. Even before his torn plantar fascia, he did not have good footwork. If the 49ers are going to have a run game that can go outside as well as up-the-gut, they will need more agile guards than Baas to do it. Now if he gets into the gym and loses 15 pounds or so, he might be more agile but I doubt it.

As to Wallace, I don't think the club would be entertaining Pitts if they thought Wallace the answer.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by jimbagg:

Originally posted by dj43:
I see this FA actions so far as being appropriate, in that they are all short-term, stop-gap solutions, with the possible exception of David Carr.

What I see are moves to strengthen the second tier/special team strength. Spikes IS a liability in pass coverage but quite good against the run game. His sack numbers were helped by blitz packages in which Willis allowed him to run free. In short, he is past his prime and the team needs better depth.

McKillop is not being seen as more than a SP guy, and that is fine. All good teams need guys like that. He apparently has not shown enough to satisfy the coaches that he is the replacement for Spikes. Wilhelm was a short-term addition to buy time for McKillop to develop. The fact they are looking at Ayodele tells me they see McK as "only" as ST player. As I said, that is good enough, but not enough to solve the need for a better backup/future replacement for Spikes.

The OL moves all indicate something I have been saying for three years - David Baas is not the answer. By bringing in Pitts, IF they sign him, it allows them more flexibility in BPA in the first three picks. The team MUST improve the LG spot if they are to be successful. Signing Pitts would at least buy them another 2-3 years of serviceable play during which time they can find the other pieces to allow the offense to develop the versatility needed to succeed in this league. The tender to Baas buys a year to solve that problem - a shrewd move - it doesn't cost a lot and buys time even if it doesn't solve the long-term need, it frees a spot if a true value pops up at BPA time in the draft.

OT is the big question mark. Sims, though a surprisingly good replacement at LT last season, is NOT the answer. The guy had 3/4 of a season as a decent, not great, play. The rest of his career has been rather gloomy. It would not be wise to stake the future of the offense on his ability to either be the starting RT, OR the main swing OT. I would like to be wrong and he re-signs and plays well, but history tells me otherwise. I am totally convinced they will spend one of the first two picks on OT. The only question is; who will it be? All that has been well-discussed in the Draft Room so I won't repeat it all here. The most intriguing part of the draft will be how OL choices go - so much talent and so many teams with similar needs.

That leaves me with the impression the main focus in FA will continue be to solve backup/ST needs thereby allowing them to go BPA for OT, KR/PR and safety/CB. I think the moves so far, IF Pitts signs, will allow more latitude to select value rather than just need. Pitts is the key, IMO. If he signs, then they can look at either Iupati, or one of the other top tier OTs that will be available at #13/17. If Pitts doesn't sign, then I expect Iupati to get serious consideration - Baas' limitations hurt the offense too much to overlook.

So FA and the draft are inextricably linked and though FA will not have the overall impact that the draft will have, it will have a substantial influence of the choices at #17 and the second and third rounds.

Finally, the Carr signing was very good. He is a good player who will, at the very least, give time for Davis to develop. I would also not be surprised to see him beat out Smith. His college resume is the prototype for what the team seems to want in a QB right now.

So far, so good. Still question marks to be answered in FA.

Excellent, well-articulated point-of-view, as always from you, dj.

From your summary, I surmise that you see a short-term need for 3 OL, as follows:

Starting RT - probably via a high draft pick.

Swing OT - probably via FA, unless the club sees Snyder filling this role. Unlikely that the club would want to back-up a rookie with another rookie from the draft. Unlikely that Sims will return, given the club's ambivalence so far. The FA closet looks very bare, in terms of finding such a veteran player. Remember that last year, the "swing" OT actually started 9 games. While much of the talk has been about drafting the starting RT (and appropriately so), the "swing" OT is a key position to fill through FA, unless Snyder is targeted to be that guy.

Starting LG - if not Baas, could this be Snyder, Wragge, or Wallace? Apparently not, given the club's interest in Pitts. Unlikely that that the club would want to start 2 rookies on the OL (RT and LG) at the same time. Seems like there is still some sentiment to let Baas start in a "show-me" contract year, when he is highly motivated for a big payday, from the Niners or another team, unless a "better" FA OG (Pitts?), can be signed. If no better FA OG can be signed, does the club draft an OG to sit for 1 year behind Baas, with the expectation of starting that player in 2011? Can the club admit that Baas was a swing and miss as Pick #33 and that Wallace is a bust?

Am I reading the tea leaves correctly?

Thank you.

I think we see it pretty much the same.

As to your last question, "yes" I think the club is admitting those two picks are not the long-term solution. However, the decision they made with Baas is a sound one - give him clear notice he needs to prove himself next season or look for a home in some other city. I hope he does well but his lack of agility is not something that a healthy training camp will cure. Even before his torn plantar fascia, he did not have good footwork. If the 49ers are going to have a run game that can go outside as well as up-the-gut, they will need more agile guards than Baas to do it. Now if he gets into the gym and loses 15 pounds or so, he might be more agile but I doubt it.

As to Wallace, I don't think the club would be entertaining Pitts if they thought Wallace the answer.

I stongly disagree about Baas. Most of Gores big runs came behind a pulling David Baas. One run against AZ he road a pulling Baas`s back into the endzone which was impressive being down on the goaline.

Watch the tape #64 coming at you and pulling like a mad man. Just in this small sample Baas is directly responsible for 4 tds at least.

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/thread.php?num=139117

Originally posted by jimbagg:

Originally posted by dj43:
I see this FA actions so far as being appropriate, in that they are all short-term, stop-gap solutions, with the possible exception of David Carr.

What I see are moves to strengthen the second tier/special team strength. Spikes IS a liability in pass coverage but quite good against the run game. His sack numbers were helped by blitz packages in which Willis allowed him to run free. In short, he is past his prime and the team needs better depth.

McKillop is not being seen as more than a SP guy, and that is fine. All good teams need guys like that. He apparently has not shown enough to satisfy the coaches that he is the replacement for Spikes. Wilhelm was a short-term addition to buy time for McKillop to develop. The fact they are looking at Ayodele tells me they see McK as "only" as ST player. As I said, that is good enough, but not enough to solve the need for a better backup/future replacement for Spikes.

The OL moves all indicate something I have been saying for three years - David Baas is not the answer. By bringing in Pitts, IF they sign him, it allows them more flexibility in BPA in the first three picks. The team MUST improve the LG spot if they are to be successful. Signing Pitts would at least buy them another 2-3 years of serviceable play during which time they can find the other pieces to allow the offense to develop the versatility needed to succeed in this league. The tender to Baas buys a year to solve that problem - a shrewd move - it doesn't cost a lot and buys time even if it doesn't solve the long-term need, it frees a spot if a true value pops up at BPA time in the draft.

OT is the big question mark. Sims, though a surprisingly good replacement at LT last season, is NOT the answer. The guy had 3/4 of a season as a decent, not great, play. The rest of his career has been rather gloomy. It would not be wise to stake the future of the offense on his ability to either be the starting RT, OR the main swing OT. I would like to be wrong and he re-signs and plays well, but history tells me otherwise. I am totally convinced they will spend one of the first two picks on OT. The only question is; who will it be? All that has been well-discussed in the Draft Room so I won't repeat it all here. The most intriguing part of the draft will be how OL choices go - so much talent and so many teams with similar needs.

That leaves me with the impression the main focus in FA will continue be to solve backup/ST needs thereby allowing them to go BPA for OT, KR/PR and safety/CB. I think the moves so far, IF Pitts signs, will allow more latitude to select value rather than just need. Pitts is the key, IMO. If he signs, then they can look at either Iupati, or one of the other top tier OTs that will be available at #13/17. If Pitts doesn't sign, then I expect Iupati to get serious consideration - Baas' limitations hurt the offense too much to overlook.

So FA and the draft are inextricably linked and though FA will not have the overall impact that the draft will have, it will have a substantial influence of the choices at #17 and the second and third rounds.

Finally, the Carr signing was very good. He is a good player who will, at the very least, give time for Davis to develop. I would also not be surprised to see him beat out Smith. His college resume is the prototype for what the team seems to want in a QB right now.

So far, so good. Still question marks to be answered in FA.

Excellent, well-articulated point-of-view, as always from you, dj.

From your summary, I surmise that you see a short-term need for 3 OL, as follows:

Starting RT - probably via a high draft pick.

Swing OT - probably via FA, unless the club sees Snyder filling this role. Unlikely that the club would want to back-up a rookie with another rookie from the draft. Unlikely that Sims will return, given the club's ambivalence so far. The FA closet looks very bare, in terms of finding such a veteran player. Remember that last year, the "swing" OT actually started 9 games. While much of the talk has been about drafting the starting RT (and appropriately so), the "swing" OT is a key position to fill through FA, unless Snyder is targeted to be that guy.

Starting LG - if not Baas, could this be Snyder, Wragge, or Wallace? Apparently not, given the club's interest in Pitts. Unlikely that that the club would want to start 2 rookies on the OL (RT and LG) at the same time. Seems like there is still some sentiment to let Baas start in a "show-me" contract year, when he is highly motivated for a big payday, from the Niners or another team, unless a "better" FA OG (Pitts?), can be signed. If no better FA OG can be signed, does the club draft an OG to sit for 1 year behind Baas, with the expectation of starting that player in 2011? Can the club admit that Baas was a swing and miss as Pick #33 and that Wallace is a bust?

Am I reading the tea leaves correctly?

Seems like you are.

Primary need is the OL. Need to fill three OL needs: RT, swing OT, and LG.

Here's how I see it, at present:

High pick RT (probably at #49, or trade down to the late first to grab one of the second tier guys, assuming the top guys are gone by #13). Has to be a good football player, and good athlete. May start the season playing behind the swing OT, but may earn a starter's job from the start. A. Boone is the question mark at this position. Maybe bring him up off the PS to backup?

Swing OT--Snyder. His real value is as a versatile backup for every OL position except center. Patrick may also be able to fill this role.

LG--Baas will be back for another year. Pitts may be signed to compete, or maybe just to take the job, although if his knees aren't healthy, I wouldn't bother with him.

Either Wallace is gone or Wragge is, or both.

Time to reshape the OL into a toughminded, competitive bunch with a nasty streak, and give them an offensive scheme that isn't so easy to predict and overwhelm. And I'd take a long look at Rachal at RG as well.

Whew. Lots to be done.

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by jimbagg:

Originally posted by dj43:
I see this FA actions so far as being appropriate, in that they are all short-term, stop-gap solutions, with the possible exception of David Carr.

What I see are moves to strengthen the second tier/special team strength. Spikes IS a liability in pass coverage but quite good against the run game. His sack numbers were helped by blitz packages in which Willis allowed him to run free. In short, he is past his prime and the team needs better depth.

McKillop is not being seen as more than a SP guy, and that is fine. All good teams need guys like that. He apparently has not shown enough to satisfy the coaches that he is the replacement for Spikes. Wilhelm was a short-term addition to buy time for McKillop to develop. The fact they are looking at Ayodele tells me they see McK as "only" as ST player. As I said, that is good enough, but not enough to solve the need for a better backup/future replacement for Spikes.

The OL moves all indicate something I have been saying for three years - David Baas is not the answer. By bringing in Pitts, IF they sign him, it allows them more flexibility in BPA in the first three picks. The team MUST improve the LG spot if they are to be successful. Signing Pitts would at least buy them another 2-3 years of serviceable play during which time they can find the other pieces to allow the offense to develop the versatility needed to succeed in this league. The tender to Baas buys a year to solve that problem - a shrewd move - it doesn't cost a lot and buys time even if it doesn't solve the long-term need, it frees a spot if a true value pops up at BPA time in the draft.

OT is the big question mark. Sims, though a surprisingly good replacement at LT last season, is NOT the answer. The guy had 3/4 of a season as a decent, not great, play. The rest of his career has been rather gloomy. It would not be wise to stake the future of the offense on his ability to either be the starting RT, OR the main swing OT. I would like to be wrong and he re-signs and plays well, but history tells me otherwise. I am totally convinced they will spend one of the first two picks on OT. The only question is; who will it be? All that has been well-discussed in the Draft Room so I won't repeat it all here. The most intriguing part of the draft will be how OL choices go - so much talent and so many teams with similar needs.

That leaves me with the impression the main focus in FA will continue be to solve backup/ST needs thereby allowing them to go BPA for OT, KR/PR and safety/CB. I think the moves so far, IF Pitts signs, will allow more latitude to select value rather than just need. Pitts is the key, IMO. If he signs, then they can look at either Iupati, or one of the other top tier OTs that will be available at #13/17. If Pitts doesn't sign, then I expect Iupati to get serious consideration - Baas' limitations hurt the offense too much to overlook.

So FA and the draft are inextricably linked and though FA will not have the overall impact that the draft will have, it will have a substantial influence of the choices at #17 and the second and third rounds.

Finally, the Carr signing was very good. He is a good player who will, at the very least, give time for Davis to develop. I would also not be surprised to see him beat out Smith. His college resume is the prototype for what the team seems to want in a QB right now.

So far, so good. Still question marks to be answered in FA.

Excellent, well-articulated point-of-view, as always from you, dj.

From your summary, I surmise that you see a short-term need for 3 OL, as follows:

Starting RT - probably via a high draft pick.

Swing OT - probably via FA, unless the club sees Snyder filling this role. Unlikely that the club would want to back-up a rookie with another rookie from the draft. Unlikely that Sims will return, given the club's ambivalence so far. The FA closet looks very bare, in terms of finding such a veteran player. Remember that last year, the "swing" OT actually started 9 games. While much of the talk has been about drafting the starting RT (and appropriately so), the "swing" OT is a key position to fill through FA, unless Snyder is targeted to be that guy.

Starting LG - if not Baas, could this be Snyder, Wragge, or Wallace? Apparently not, given the club's interest in Pitts. Unlikely that that the club would want to start 2 rookies on the OL (RT and LG) at the same time. Seems like there is still some sentiment to let Baas start in a "show-me" contract year, when he is highly motivated for a big payday, from the Niners or another team, unless a "better" FA OG (Pitts?), can be signed. If no better FA OG can be signed, does the club draft an OG to sit for 1 year behind Baas, with the expectation of starting that player in 2011? Can the club admit that Baas was a swing and miss as Pick #33 and that Wallace is a bust?

Am I reading the tea leaves correctly?

Thank you.

I think we see it pretty much the same.

As to your last question, "yes" I think the club is admitting those two picks are not the long-term solution. However, the decision they made with Baas is a sound one - give him clear notice he needs to prove himself next season or look for a home in some other city. I hope he does well but his lack of agility is not something that a healthy training camp will cure. Even before his torn plantar fascia, he did not have good footwork. If the 49ers are going to have a run game that can go outside as well as up-the-gut, they will need more agile guards than Baas to do it. Now if he gets into the gym and loses 15 pounds or so, he might be more agile but I doubt it.

As to Wallace, I don't think the club would be entertaining Pitts if they thought Wallace the answer.

I stongly disagree about Baas. Most of Gores big runs came behind a pulling David Baas. One run against AZ he road a pulling Baas`s back into the endzone which was impressive being down on the goaline.

Watch the tape #64 coming at you and pulling like a mad man. Just in this small sample Baas is directly responsible for 4 tds at least.

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/thread.php?num=139117

There is a big difference between the agility and footwork needed to execute a simple pull-and-lead versus what is required if the DL gets some penetration, or the agility demanded to deal with trap blocking and middle blitz packages.

I too have seen Baas work effectively on pulls where no one obstructs his path to get to the opposite tackle. However, I have also seen him on similar runs where he would trip or run into a teammate because lacked the agility to alter his path enough to avoid the teammate and stay in front of Gore.

It is Baas' work in tight quarters that exposes his lack of agility more than on pulls. When he is asked to make a quick trap, he simply does not have the ability to do it. Similarly, on center blitzes, opponent frequently take advantage of him by delaying a blitzer slightly until Baas commits to help the center or LT, and then blow through where he should have been. Often he will see the blitzer but his reaction is too slow to control it. THAT is where I see Baas' greatest failing.

Overall, IMO, Baas is a "somewhat below average" to "average guard" in this league. He isn't the level of player that will allow for a varied and effective offense.

NOTE: Sorry for turning this into a Baas discussion. We don't need another one of those. The fact the 49ers are even entertaining Chester Pitts, LG, is ample indication to most observers that the team is not satisfied with Baas' play. Well, that, along with the fact they gave him a low tender instead of seeking to sign him long term. To me, all of that validates my opinion of him.

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by jimbagg:

Originally posted by dj43:
I see this FA actions so far as being appropriate, in that they are all short-term, stop-gap solutions, with the possible exception of David Carr.

What I see are moves to strengthen the second tier/special team strength. Spikes IS a liability in pass coverage but quite good against the run game. His sack numbers were helped by blitz packages in which Willis allowed him to run free. In short, he is past his prime and the team needs better depth.

McKillop is not being seen as more than a SP guy, and that is fine. All good teams need guys like that. He apparently has not shown enough to satisfy the coaches that he is the replacement for Spikes. Wilhelm was a short-term addition to buy time for McKillop to develop. The fact they are looking at Ayodele tells me they see McK as "only" as ST player. As I said, that is good enough, but not enough to solve the need for a better backup/future replacement for Spikes.

The OL moves all indicate something I have been saying for three years - David Baas is not the answer. By bringing in Pitts, IF they sign him, it allows them more flexibility in BPA in the first three picks. The team MUST improve the LG spot if they are to be successful. Signing Pitts would at least buy them another 2-3 years of serviceable play during which time they can find the other pieces to allow the offense to develop the versatility needed to succeed in this league. The tender to Baas buys a year to solve that problem - a shrewd move - it doesn't cost a lot and buys time even if it doesn't solve the long-term need, it frees a spot if a true value pops up at BPA time in the draft.

OT is the big question mark. Sims, though a surprisingly good replacement at LT last season, is NOT the answer. The guy had 3/4 of a season as a decent, not great, play. The rest of his career has been rather gloomy. It would not be wise to stake the future of the offense on his ability to either be the starting RT, OR the main swing OT. I would like to be wrong and he re-signs and plays well, but history tells me otherwise. I am totally convinced they will spend one of the first two picks on OT. The only question is; who will it be? All that has been well-discussed in the Draft Room so I won't repeat it all here. The most intriguing part of the draft will be how OL choices go - so much talent and so many teams with similar needs.

That leaves me with the impression the main focus in FA will continue be to solve backup/ST needs thereby allowing them to go BPA for OT, KR/PR and safety/CB. I think the moves so far, IF Pitts signs, will allow more latitude to select value rather than just need. Pitts is the key, IMO. If he signs, then they can look at either Iupati, or one of the other top tier OTs that will be available at #13/17. If Pitts doesn't sign, then I expect Iupati to get serious consideration - Baas' limitations hurt the offense too much to overlook.

So FA and the draft are inextricably linked and though FA will not have the overall impact that the draft will have, it will have a substantial influence of the choices at #17 and the second and third rounds.

Finally, the Carr signing was very good. He is a good player who will, at the very least, give time for Davis to develop. I would also not be surprised to see him beat out Smith. His college resume is the prototype for what the team seems to want in a QB right now.

So far, so good. Still question marks to be answered in FA.

Excellent, well-articulated point-of-view, as always from you, dj.

From your summary, I surmise that you see a short-term need for 3 OL, as follows:

Starting RT - probably via a high draft pick.

Swing OT - probably via FA, unless the club sees Snyder filling this role. Unlikely that the club would want to back-up a rookie with another rookie from the draft. Unlikely that Sims will return, given the club's ambivalence so far. The FA closet looks very bare, in terms of finding such a veteran player. Remember that last year, the "swing" OT actually started 9 games. While much of the talk has been about drafting the starting RT (and appropriately so), the "swing" OT is a key position to fill through FA, unless Snyder is targeted to be that guy.

Starting LG - if not Baas, could this be Snyder, Wragge, or Wallace? Apparently not, given the club's interest in Pitts. Unlikely that that the club would want to start 2 rookies on the OL (RT and LG) at the same time. Seems like there is still some sentiment to let Baas start in a "show-me" contract year, when he is highly motivated for a big payday, from the Niners or another team, unless a "better" FA OG (Pitts?), can be signed. If no better FA OG can be signed, does the club draft an OG to sit for 1 year behind Baas, with the expectation of starting that player in 2011? Can the club admit that Baas was a swing and miss as Pick #33 and that Wallace is a bust?

Am I reading the tea leaves correctly?

Seems like you are.

Primary need is the OL. Need to fill three OL needs: RT, swing OT, and LG.

Here's how I see it, at present:

High pick RT (probably at #49, or trade down to the late first to grab one of the second tier guys, assuming the top guys are gone by #13). Has to be a good football player, and good athlete. May start the season playing behind the swing OT, but may earn a starter's job from the start. A. Boone is the question mark at this position. Maybe bring him up off the PS to backup?
Whew. Lots to be done.

Reports I have read on Boone indicate he has major footwork problems that did not get better with a season on the Practice Squad. He also has trouble getting his butt low enough to maintain leverage. It sounds like he was a big strong project that isn't turning out the way they had hoped.

Originally posted by Dominate:
IF we were to sign Pitts it would be for depth and a chance to compete at LG. I think they are commited to Baas. My 2 cents. They did give him a pretty hign tender, indicating he does hold some value to the team.

he recieved an original round tender

Originally posted by dj43:
There is a big difference between the agility and footwork needed to execute a simple pull-and-lead versus what is required if the DL gets some penetration, or the agility demanded to deal with trap blocking and middle blitz packages.

I too have seen Baas work effectively on pulls where no one obstructs his path to get to the opposite tackle. However, I have also seen him on similar runs where he would trip or run into a teammate because lacked the agility to alter his path enough to avoid the teammate and stay in front of Gore.

It is Baas' work in tight quarters that exposes his lack of agility more than on pulls. When he is asked to make a quick trap, he simply does not have the ability to do it. Similarly, on center blitzes, opponent frequently take advantage of him by delaying a blitzer slightly until Baas commits to help the center or LT, and then blow through where he should have been. Often he will see the blitzer but his reaction is too slow to control it. THAT is where I see Baas' greatest failing.

Overall, IMO, Baas is a "somewhat below average" to "average guard" in this league. He isn't the level of player that will allow for a varied and effective offense.

NOTE: Sorry for turning this into a Baas discussion. We don't need another one of those. The fact the 49ers are even entertaining Chester Pitts, LG, is ample indication to most observers that the team is not satisfied with Baas' play. Well, that, along with the fact they gave him a low tender instead of seeking to sign him long term. To me, all of that validates my opinion of him.

I think this is a fair assessment. And what we may find are major issues with ALL of our o-linemen when breaking down film with the hopes of Brown and a new o-line coach can either help correct or magnify as weaknesses that can not be over come to which we should immediately look to upgrade (which we should be doing anyhow).

But I digress b/c I feel when 8-10 guys are crashing into the o-line, it doesn't matter how much agility you have, you're going to be tripping over your center and RG's who are falling back (as usual) at the POA...couple that with him still learning to play LG as opposed to the right side where I felt he was much stronger and that is why I hold judgement on Baas and all of the o-line from last year.

I don't think until we change our philosophy and scheme, we can really evaluate these players' strengths and weaknesses (just yet). Let's hope everything changes this year from the philosophy to the scheme to the coaches (already made) to growth, contract years factors, FA veterans and draftees, etc...that we see a BIG difference this year.