Minor Niner News Thread

[TecmoSuperJoe]

32 minutes ago, Forge said:

53. 

Year	Age	Tm	Pos	No.	G	GS	AV
1998	24	SFO	g	74	9	3	2
1999	25	SFO	LT/t	74	16	16	9
2000	26	SFO	RG	74	15	15	9
2001	27	SFO	RG	74	16	16	10
2002	28	SFO	lg	74	3	3	2
2003	29	WAS	lg

Exactly. 53 games in five years with the team. Basically a little over three years. Not enough to even think about your jersey memorized your honor. At least when Wallace and Staley are on the docket with their body of work. Same with Dean as previously pointed out. At least Dean was a Pro Bowl quality player though.

Edited March 21, 2018 by PapaShogun

[big9erfan]

1 hour ago, PapaShogun said:

Exactly. 53 games in five years with the team. Basically a little over three years. Not enough to even think about your jersey memorized your honor. At least when Wallace and Staley are on the docket with their body of work. Same with Dean as previously pointed out. At least Dean was a Pro Bowl quality player though.

I think 53 games over 5 years is pretty average given injuries and whatnot. I just wasn't sure you knew he was here for 5 full seasons.

[N4L]

At my highschool, certain numbers are reserved for really good players. For example the starting tailback will be issued #32, but only if he can live up to the legacy of all of the other great runners that wore the number. They don't just give that number to anyone, and when they give it to you they explain why the number is sacred and why you have a duty to the guys that came before you and also the guys that will come after you. They do the same thing for #52 as the inside LB or #22 for the starting free saftey. Those numbers aren't worn every year and aren't offered to anyone but a select few. It adds to the mystic of the number if it's only worn by other greats. 

So I don't have a problem with #94 being issued to Solomon Thomas, because obviously the FO and coaching staff thinks he can be an all pro type player or they wouldn't have taken him at #3 (he seems like he has a somewhat  similar skillset to the cowboy as well). Not sure I like the idea of a fringe roster player wearing #53, and I certainly don't feel there will ever be anyone worthy of wearing #52 or #21 simply because willis and gore both overcame so much, and had such a deep passion for the game that I don't think will ever be matched. It would almost be like issuing #16 again, you had better he DAMN sure that whoever wears it gets a fist full of rings. 

[49erurtaza]

I thought this article was really good.

Here's a sample 

http://amp.si.com/nfl/2018/03/22/sam-darnold-usc-pro-day-draft-cleveland-browns-mmqb?__twitter_impression=true

1. Explaining McKinnon and Richburg. One thing I love about the way the 49ers are building under GM John Lynch and coach Kyle Shanahan: Every move is made with purpose, because what Shanahan wants is so clear. And the first week of free agency was an incredible example of it. To illustrate that, I’ll take you to a conversation I had with Brian Hoyer a few years back, where he relayed a talk he had with Shanahan, then Cleveland’s offensive coordinator, about what his offense needed from a personnel standpoint.

“You need a big-time, play-making ‘X’,” Hoyer said. “Kyle always wanted who was really, really fast. .. He wants two pass-catching backs. … He wants a move-the-chains possession receiver. … He wants a smart, athletic center, who can take the mental burden off the quarterback.”

 

 

[rudyZ]

8 hours ago, N4L said:

It would almost be like issuing #16 again, you had better he DAMN sure that whoever wears it gets a fist full of rings. 

Then I don't understand why we didn't give it to Beat Hard last year... like, come on... surefire HoFer. The kid deserved to keep his college number, after such a glorious career at Iowa.

[oldman9er]

 

[DirtyJersey9er]

Anyone listen to Lynch on Golic and Wingo from yesterday?

[big9erfan]

10 hours ago, 49erurtaza said:

I thought this article was really good.

Here's a sample 

http://amp.si.com/nfl/2018/03/22/sam-darnold-usc-pro-day-draft-cleveland-browns-mmqb?__twitter_impression=true

1. Explaining McKinnon and Richburg. One thing I love about the way the 49ers are building under GM John Lynch and coach Kyle Shanahan: Every move is made with purpose, because what Shanahan wants is so clear. And the first week of free agency was an incredible example of it. To illustrate that, I’ll take you to a conversation I had with Brian Hoyer a few years back, where he relayed a talk he had with Shanahan, then Cleveland’s offensive coordinator, about what his offense needed from a personnel standpoint.

“You need a big-time, play-making ‘X’,” Hoyer said. “Kyle always wanted who was really, really fast. .. He wants two pass-catching backs. … He wants a move-the-chains possession receiver. … He wants a smart, athletic center, who can take the mental burden off the quarterback.”

 

 

This is pretty much what I meant a couple days ago when I responded in the Cooper thread that I loved what the 49ers FO is doind.  Not that I loved Cooper but that they had a clear vision and plan and were going about executing that plan.  Richburg and KcMinnon are exactly what Hoyer was talking about. But the Attaochu and Cooper signings also fit the plan in that they are attempts to upgrade the o-line and pass rush, even if they are part time players or backups. Baalke let the overall talent level deteriorate almost every year for the last 3 years he was here. This FO seems determine to do the opposite.

[big9erfan]

One of my minor pet peeves is how often I see someone here suggest we don't need a good guy at some position because we have Jimmie.  Or that Jimmie will back our guys better. He will, hopefully, make guys look better, but they won't really be better.  Take our o-line for instance.  Didn't give up many sacks those last few games.  Statistically nice.  But that was Jimmie's quick release not them getting better. And he was being whalloped pretty often right after he let the ball go. Sure he made our o-line look better, but they were still the same guys. Imagine how effective our offense could be if he had time to sit back there and let plays develop and find absolutely the righ guy to go to every play. And wasn't picking himself off the ground every other play and nursing aches and pains all season long.  Same with receivers. I've heard people suggest we're fine because Jimmie will make the guys we've got better.  Nope.  They might catch more balls, but many of them will still be just average talents. So if our offense is OK with those guys in there now imagine what it would be like if had our own Julio Jones or Rob Gronkowski. Sure we can get by with the likes of Beadles or Bourne.  But we'll be a whole lot better with more talented players in there - not guy's whose stats go up because the QB is so good. 

[oldman9er]

I think having these draft picks is just a burden. A costly burden. We should donate the draft picks to Cleveland, and just sign a bunch of UDFAs. WE got Jimmy Montana G, dammit. Give him an extension on top of his extension, so we don't lose him at the age of 31. He will play and win all SBs until he is 49. He can win 16 games per year with a bunch of nice, cheap UDFAs.. so why draft and pay the top draftees? 

 

[rudyZ]

56 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

One of my minor pet peeves is how often I see someone here suggest we don't need a good guy at some position because we have Jimmie.  Or that Jimmie will back our guys better. He will, hopefully, make guys look better, but they won't really be better.  Take our o-line for instance.  Didn't give up many sacks those last few games.  Statistically nice.  But that was Jimmie's quick release not them getting better. And he was being whalloped pretty often right after he let the ball go. Sure he made our o-line look better, but they were still the same guys. Imagine how effective our offense could be if he had time to sit back there and let plays develop and find absolutely the righ guy to go to every play. And wasn't picking himself off the ground every other play and nursing aches and pains all season long.  Same with receivers. I've heard people suggest we're fine because Jimmie will make the guys we've got better.  Nope.  They might catch more balls, but many of them will still be just average talents. So if our offense is OK with those guys in there now imagine what it would be like if had our own Julio Jones or Rob Gronkowski. Sure we can get by with the likes of Beadles or Bourne.  But we'll be a whole lot better with more talented players in there - not guy's whose stats go up because the QB is so good. 

I don't think people don't want to address the offensive talent because we have Jimmy. We just feel Jimmy makes us competitive on offense right now, even without improving his surrounding cast (although, Richburg might be a really huge upgrade that will make everyone better). So, the idea is to now improve the defense so that it can be competitive as well, which it really wasn't last year. It's just that the priority should be on defense, if we want to win more games in the future. We could have gone all offense heavy, and sure, the offense would have been great, but we couldn't have stopped anyone on defense. So defense should be a focus, right now. But honestly, we're in year 2, I don't care if we don't make the playoffs right away, so if we still leave a hole on defense in order to add a great offensive talent, I'd love it. We're building for the future. I don't think we shouldn't give Jimmy shiny new toys. I think we can be competitive with what we currently have on that side. We will certainly upgrade in the future, probably as early as the draft. But if we don't, it wouldn't be the end of the world. If we went all-out on offense in the draft, and neglected the defense, I'd be worried. If we went all-out on defense, and neglected the offense, I feel we'd still be pretty good. But the reality is that we'll probably add talent to both sides, so don't worry, we're not counting on Jimmy to make everyone better. 

[Forge]

1 hour ago, big9erfan said:

One of my minor pet peeves is how often I see someone here suggest we don't need a good guy at some position because we have Jimmie.  Or that Jimmie will back our guys better. He will, hopefully, make guys look better, but they won't really be better.  Take our o-line for instance.  Didn't give up many sacks those last few games.  Statistically nice.  But that was Jimmie's quick release not them getting better. And he was being whalloped pretty often right after he let the ball go. Sure he made our o-line look better, but they were still the same guys. Imagine how effective our offense could be if he had time to sit back there and let plays develop and find absolutely the righ guy to go to every play. And wasn't picking himself off the ground every other play and nursing aches and pains all season long.  Same with receivers. I've heard people suggest we're fine because Jimmie will make the guys we've got better.  Nope.  They might catch more balls, but many of them will still be just average talents. So if our offense is OK with those guys in there now imagine what it would be like if had our own Julio Jones or Rob Gronkowski. Sure we can get by with the likes of Beadles or Bourne.  But we'll be a whole lot better with more talented players in there - not guy's whose stats go up because the QB is so good. 

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I didn't much care about the pass protection with regards to helping the offensive line. Jimmy does help mitigate a lot of that, as does Shanny's scheme, so I think we are okay in that regard depending on how Garnett plays. My biggest concern is the run game. Can the line create holes on run plays  and generate a push on short yardage plays? The biggest knock I see on McKinnon, for example, is that he's just not a great running back. Great athlete, subpar actual running back. Lacks the patience and vision. If that's the case, creating these big holes to run through becomes more important to make up for his short comings. But from a passing perspective, we aren't even close to being one of the worst teams in the league, in my opinion, particularly with Jimmy as the quarterback. 

[rudyZ]

2 minutes ago, Forge said:

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I didn't much care about the pass protection with regards to helping the offensive line. Jimmy does help mitigate a lot of that, as does Shanny's scheme, so I think we are okay in that regard depending on how Garnett plays. My biggest concern is the run game. Can the line create holes on run plays  and generate a push on short yardage plays? The biggest knock I see on McKinnon, for example, is that he's just not a great running back. Great athlete, subpar actual running back. Lacks the patience and vision. If that's the case, creating these big holes to run through becomes more important to make up for his short comings. But from a passing perspective, we aren't even close to being one of the worst teams in the league, in my opinion, particularly with Jimmy as the quarterback. 

Having an actual running game would also make it easier in the passing game. And a bigger focus on the screen game, now that we have The Jet, will also slow down the pass rush, thus helping the OL. 

[big9erfan]

2 hours ago, rudyZ said:

I don't think people don't want to address the offensive talent because we have Jimmy. We just feel Jimmy makes us competitive on offense right now, even without improving his surrounding cast (although, Richburg might be a really huge upgrade that will make everyone better). So, the idea is to now improve the defense so that it can be competitive as well, which it really wasn't last year. It's just that the priority should be on defense, if we want to win more games in the future. We could have gone all offense heavy, and sure, the offense would have been great, but we couldn't have stopped anyone on defense. So defense should be a focus, right now. But honestly, we're in year 2, I don't care if we don't make the playoffs right away, so if we still leave a hole on defense in order to add a great offensive talent, I'd love it. We're building for the future. I don't think we shouldn't give Jimmy shiny new toys. I think we can be competitive with what we currently have on that side. We will certainly upgrade in the future, probably as early as the draft. But if we don't, it wouldn't be the end of the world. If we went all-out on offense in the draft, and neglected the defense, I'd be worried. If we went all-out on defense, and neglected the offense, I feel we'd still be pretty good. But the reality is that we'll probably add talent to both sides, so don't worry, we're not counting on Jimmy to make everyone better. 

I agree with what you're saying. I think our top priority is defense too.  But I've heard suggestions for instance that our receivers are fine and will be better now that we have Jimmy. That's what I don't agree with.  I'm not talking about what spot in the draft we do that. Just the suggestion or implication that guys will suddenly be better with Jimmie throwing to them. They won't! If they are an average talent, or below average talent, that's what they are no matter who is throwing to them.

The one thing I don't agree with, and strongly, is that we are "building for the future".  Screw that. We're building for today. For now. I'm not interested in "being competitive". I WILL be disappointed if we con't make the playoffs. Heck, I want us shooting for, and planning for, winning it all  The Eagles won 7 games in 2015 and 2016.. And of course then jumped up to 13 wins and the SB.They ddin't do that by picking random guys who were talented and thinking they will fit in over time. They did it by identifying specific needs and putting a careful plan together to fill those needs. That's what we appear to be doing. So I'm happy as can be about that, but impatient. But our FO acts as if they as too. So I'm happy about that too. Far, far too many plans "for the future" go down the tubes when the building blocks suddenly disappear. LV odds makers currently have us with 7th highest odds of winning it all. Some will scoff at that, but they are pretty darn good when it comes to odds. So screw "the future". Let's figure out how to improve those odds for the next SB not some distant future SB.

OK and since when I suggested a big back you seemed to think I meant regardless of talent. And when I mentioned wanting to improve our o-line and receivers you seemed to think I meant at the expense of or instead of improving the defense, let me save yuou the time of suggesting I'm talking about totally disregarding the future. I'm not. I'm not suggesting paying an outrageous amount of money to get a single player for a single season or anything like that. Sure - manage the cap. And of course keep an eye of the future. But, damn, do whatever you can within reason to win now.

[rudyZ]

59 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

let me save yuou the time of suggesting I'm talking about totally disregarding the future.

I don't think building for the future automatically means neglecting the present, nor does improving the present means we're neglecting the future. I'm just saying that I won't be too mad if we make moves that take more time to pan out, because we're not building this team just for this year. If we don't win this year, it's not the end of the world. Of course we're trying to win now, I never said otherwise. I've never been more confident in this team. Even more confident than 2012, when we were firing on all cylinders. I'm just saying that if we had only one priority, it would be to improve the defense, because the offense, with Kyle and Jimmy, can hold its own. The defense can't. But realistically, we're not done addressing the offense. I seriously doubt we'll have an all-out defensive draft. If we do have a shot at a RB or WR or TE or OG or OT that may help us right away or in the future, we should do that. But if we don't, we're still capable. Jimmy is not making the players around him better than they can be. He's just better than the Hoyers of this world, the BeatHards, the Kaepernicks, the Blaine Gabberts, at extracting the talent these guys do have. Hoyers probably used 30% of Goodwin, Beathard used 40%, then Jimmy came in and used 85% of his potential. That's how much of a difference maker he is. Before Jimmy, our OL blocked at 50% of their collective capacity, after they blocked at 75%. It's a trickle down effect. Jimmy does one thing well, it helps the OL hold on longer, which gives the WRs more time to get open, which helps moving the chains, which opens up running lane, etc. He's not making anyone better than they can possibly be. He's just extracting more of what they do have. Would I love to have a superb athlete like Barkley, Guice or Penny in the backfield, or a #1 receiver who draws so much attention everybody else is running free? Absolutely. That would be a move for now and the future. But if we don't get that opportunity, because the prospects don't line up, or because a better prospect at another position is within our reach, I won't feel bad about it. We could come out of this draft with zero new offensive player, and I'd still feel good about the offense. But if we come out of this draft without adding a difference maker on the defensive side, I'll be worried. I'll be worried for the present moreso than the future, actually. Because there's still next year's free agency and draft. Because our window is only just opening. If we don't win it this year, there's still next year, and the following five years. So there's plenty of time to improve Jimmy's weapons. If we don't win the superbowl this year, it probably won't be because of the offense (I feel like I've used this argument recently, I think it was about Sherman). It will be because of a lack of pass rush, if anything. But the offense, it's fine. Perhaps not amazing in its current form, but more than adequate. Coming out of the Harbaugh/Smith/Kaepernick/Gabbert/Roman/Geep/Chip era, adequate feels unusual. But I have rewatched Jimmy's highlights recently, and damn, I'm getting used to it very fast. We'll move the ball, I'm sure of it. Score when we can (I think we had the highest scoring percentage in the league after Jimmy took over). I just hope the defense will pitch in.