San Francisco 49ers Discussion - Page 55

Fogcity_faithful · 02-13-2009, 01:01 PM

J.M. Pressley makes a great point in the article. Qb is a need, but not as pressing as many make it out to be. We draft sanchez he sits and learns, we draft some guy later and he sits, what is the difference? Sanchez is part of the media hype, Garcia played CFL ball before he became an NFL player. He is the best QB since Steve retired for us. I feel like we can hmm-and-haw about this all we want. The combine free agency and pro days will change the landscape drastically before the draft occurs

FrankGore · 02-13-2009, 01:36 PM

I have no problem with the idea of taking a QB later to try to develop...the problem is this is one of the worst crops of quarterbacks in a long time. There's literally two quality prospects (Stafford/Sanchez), Josh Freeman who's talented but EXCEPTIONALLY raw, and then a bunch of mid-later round guys who are all shaky at BEST. It's an awful year to find a guy who we think we could develop into a starter. You could talk about Bomar or Davis but neither one is all that impressive...I might take Hunter Cantwell or Mike Teel in a LATE round, but we can't pin our hopes on that.

Basically what I'm saying is, I'm fine with not taking Sanchez, but we're not going to find another "QB of the future" in this draft unless we get stupid lucky. Can't have it both ways this year.

king2am · 02-13-2009, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fogcity_faithful

... The combine free agency and pro days will change the landscape drastically before the draft occurs

This is true.

dan77733 · 02-13-2009, 02:07 PM

QB wise, Hill should be the starter in 2009 and should have been the starter in 2008 from day one but Nolan bringing in Martz and Sullivan ended that.

Hill should be the starter with Smith as the backup. Third stringer should be a late round draft pick (round 6 or 7) or a cheap veteran. I would like to see Garcia come back as the veteran but I dont see that happening.

If I had to pick between a veteran and a late round draft pick, I would much rather have the veteran backing up Hill (and Smith).

One this is for sure - NO WAY IN HELL SHOULD WE DRAFT SANCHEZ OR ANY QB AT 10. I dont give a damn who it is. Hill can hold the fort for a few years until Smith becomes good or we draft a REAL franchise QB. Hill is only 29 and im more concerned about giving him a good running game and dominant OL to protect him even though I do have confidence in him having to win us a game. The Rams game proved it.

We still have to see what happens at the Combine next week and free agency. Six more days left to tag franchise players. I'm hoping Suggs doesnt get tagged. *prays*

GMoney · 02-13-2009, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrankGore

I have no problem with the idea of taking a QB later to try to develop...the problem is this is one of the worst crops of quarterbacks in a long time. There's literally two quality prospects (Stafford/Sanchez), Josh Freeman who's talented but EXCEPTIONALLY raw, and then a bunch of mid-later round guys who are all shaky at BEST. It's an awful year to find a guy who we think we could develop into a starter. You could talk about Bomar or Davis but neither one is all that impressive...I might take Hunter Cantwell or Mike Teel in a LATE round, but we can't pin our hopes on that.

Basically what I'm saying is, I'm fine with not taking Sanchez, but we're not going to find another "QB of the future" in this draft unless we get stupid lucky. Can't have it both ways this year.

This is my point exactly. If we aren't taking Sanchez - don't bother taking a QB at all.

And if we aren't taking a QB at all - where does that leave us? With Hill and Smith.

There is a 90% chance that Smith is NOT the long term answer.

While Hill deserves to start for a year or 2 if his production warrants it, there is also a 90% chance that Hill will not start for the 49ers is 2011 as we will likely be needing an upgrade at that position.

So, why delay the inevitable if we can get a guy who can solve the problem in this years draft?

If we wait another year or 2 to draft a QB - because almost everyone seems to conceed that it will be necessary down the track. Gore will virtually be past it by the time the QB is finally ready. Clements and Harris will be done. Michael Lewis will be past it and J Smith wont be far behind.... Basically we will be at square 1. Id rather solve this MASSIVE problem now.

However, I won't cry or punch walls or disown the niners if they go NT, OT, OLB or FS in round 1.

I just think if a QB is there worthy of the pick. Take him.

Madirishman · 02-13-2009, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GMoney

There is a 90% chance that Smith is NOT the long term answer.

While Hill deserves to start for a year or 2 if his production warrants it, there is also a 90% chance that Hill will not start for the 49ers is 2011 as we will likely be needing an upgrade at that position.

So, you're sayin there's a chance?!?! :)

BandwagonPunditry · 02-13-2009, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madirishman

So, you're sayin there's a chance?!?! :)

In fact, according to him there's a 1% chance that both Hill and Smith are the answer... Aren't stats fun?

chapo123 · 02-13-2009, 08:59 PM

let hill play!
smith, jto and j.martin let those guys go.
sign a vet to backup hill like c.batch or j.garcia and get ot over with.
there is no ab past j.freeman worth taking before the 4th anyway. wait until next season, crop of qb's are way better there should be no rush for one this upcoming year.

thediggler3030 · 02-13-2009, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GMoney

There is a 90% chance that Smith is NOT the long term answer.

While Hill deserves to start for a year or 2 if his production warrants it, there is also a 90% chance that Hill will not start for the 49ers is 2011 as we will likely be needing an upgrade at that position.

Lol, what formula are you using bro?

goonie61 · 02-13-2009, 10:48 PM

There is a 90% chance that the formula is BS

chapo123 · 02-13-2009, 10:58 PM

f*ck formulas

farfromforgotten · 02-13-2009, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan77733

One this is for sure - NO WAY IN HELL SHOULD WE DRAFT SANCHEZ OR ANY QB AT 10. I dont give a damn who it is. Hill can hold the fort for a few years until Smith becomes good or we draft a REAL franchise QB.

until Smith becomes good? LOL.

Lets say that Hill "holds the fort for a few years". What exactly does that mean? We make it to the playoffs? We win a Super Bowl? We hover around .500?

Who will be left of our core talent that we have right now? What will they all be like in a few years? Then lets add that if we do land a "REAL" franchise QB in a few years. That could add possibly another year if he has to sit a year.

How often would you all say a "REAL" franchise QB comes along? Maybe 1 a year? or 2 at the most? We have a lot of good pieces in place for this franchise. And given the division we play in, we more than likely should finish out of the top 10 picks every year. What are the chances of us being able to draft one of those "REAL" franchise QBs then during those years? Probably not very good. It is usually the cellar-dwellar teams that are able to draft the franchise QBs.

I think Shaun Hill could be good enough to keep us around .500 or sneak into the playoffs, but thats it. That keeps us from the ultimate prize of winning a Super Bowl, and would enough to keep us from being able to draft a "REAL" franchise QB.

I dont know if Sanchez will be the answer or not. I'd be more comfortable with Stafford, but I see no way of him making it to 10.

dan77733 · 02-14-2009, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by farfromforgotten

until Smith becomes good? LOL.

Lets say that Hill "holds the fort for a few years". What exactly does that mean? We make it to the playoffs? We win a Super Bowl? We hover around .500?

Who will be left of our core talent that we have right now? What will they all be like in a few years? Then lets add that if we do land a "REAL" franchise QB in a few years. That could add possibly another year if he has to sit a year.

How often would you all say a "REAL" franchise QB comes along? Maybe 1 a year? or 2 at the most? We have a lot of good pieces in place for this franchise. And given the division we play in, we more than likely should finish out of the top 10 picks every year. What are the chances of us being able to draft one of those "REAL" franchise QBs then during those years? Probably not very good. It is usually the cellar-dwellar teams that are able to draft the franchise QBs.

I think Shaun Hill could be good enough to keep us around .500 or sneak into the playoffs, but thats it. That keeps us from the ultimate prize of winning a Super Bowl, and would enough to keep us from being able to draft a "REAL" franchise QB.

I dont know if Sanchez will be the answer or not. I'd be more comfortable with Stafford, but I see no way of him making it to 10.

I'm not a fan of Smith but at the same time, im not stupid either. A lot of time, effort and money was put into Smith and at only 25 years old (in May), he has a huge upside and is just too soon to give up on him. First, he proved that he can play well like he did in 2006. The reason why he sucked in 2007 was because he was injured and he had to learn a new offense. 2008 was Nolan's fault plain and simple, not Smith's. He should be 100% healthy and ready to go come July for training camp if not during OTA's and/or mini-camp. Unless you can already get an established QB who's the same age to be the franchise QB, you hold on to Smith.

As for Hill, I believe that he can be a playoff QB and who knows what could happen in the playoffs. We were 7-9 and would have been a playoff contender if Hill would have started the season like he should have. The starting QB job BELONGS to HILL because he's earned it. His comeback win against the Rams proved it.

You talk about the core talent being older or gone or whatever but if we draft Sanchez, the same thing could happen because he's a rookie and its unlikely he's going to be Ryan or Flacco. Unlike them, he only had 16 starts and im sorry, no way in ******* hell am I going to draft a QB at #10 and pay him top money after just 16 starts especially when you considering the fact that USC is one of the best teams overall and has a damn good if not great coaching staff. All Snachez will do is sit on the bench for two years if not longer trying to figure out what he's supposed to be learning and by the time he knows what he should know and plays good, the core that you're talking about will be old or gone anyway so instead of wasting a draft pick on a QB who wouldnt be doing anything but keeping his ass warm by sitting on the bench, I start HILL who's only 29, improve the OL and get a ******* pass rushing OLB and see what happens.

Either way, there's no guarantee regardless but im a LOT more comfortable and confident with Hill as the starting QB than I would be with Smith or some ******* rookie who'll be nothing more than a waste of a draft pick.

edgrenade · 02-14-2009, 04:34 AM

i say wait to draft Tebow next year.....

chapo123 · 02-14-2009, 10:31 AM

sam bradford, jevean snead, colt mccoy, tim heller, zac robinson, and juice williams will be there next season...how many teams are going to be looking next season?..i mean really

abaddon41_80 · 02-14-2009, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chapo123

sam bradford, jevean snead, colt mccoy, tim heller, zac robinson, and juice williams will be there next season...how many teams are going to be looking next season?..i mean really

I hope the last two are a joke

Brent · 02-14-2009, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edgrenade

i say wait to draft Tebow next year.....

If I didnt know you were joking, I'd wish harm upon you haha.

Quote:

Originally Posted by abaddon41_80

I hope the last two are a joke

Zac hasn't been that bad, he's played well the past couple years and who knows, he might end up being a wanted commodity after the '09 season. You can't assume anything with the draft any more.

chapo123 · 02-14-2009, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abaddon41_80

I hope the last two are a joke

what? any guy named juice has to be a badass

chapo123 · 02-14-2009, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brent

If I didnt know you were joking, I'd wish harm upon you haha.

Zac hasn't been that bad, he's played well the past couple years and who knows, he might end up being a wanted commodity after the '09 season. You can't assume anything with the draft any more.

zac is a lil skinny but he has good pocket pressense and moves around. he's got a good arm as well.

farfromforgotten · 02-15-2009, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan77733

You talk about the core talent being older or gone or whatever but if we draft Sanchez, the same thing could happen because he's a rookie and its unlikely he's going to be Ryan or Flacco. Unlike them, he only had 16 starts and im sorry, no way in ******* hell am I going to draft a QB at #10 and pay him top money after just 16 starts especially when you considering the fact that USC is one of the best teams overall and has a damn good if not great coaching staff. All Snachez will do is sit on the bench for two years if not longer trying to figure out what he's supposed to be learning and by the time he knows what he should know and plays good, the core that you're talking about will be old or gone anyway so instead of wasting a draft pick on a QB who wouldnt be doing anything but keeping his ass warm by sitting on the bench, I start HILL who's only 29, improve the OL and get a ******* pass rushing OLB and see what happens.

I talk about our core of players being 1 or 2 years older by the time Sanchez (possibly Stafford) could be ready to go. You state that you would want Hill to hold the fort or wait to see if Alex gets better in the next few years and if not then draft a REAL franchise QB. Well, that would make our core of players 4 or 5 years older, if you take into account that that QB would probably have to sit a year or 2.

dan77733 · 02-15-2009, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by farfromforgotten

I talk about our core of players being 1 or 2 years older by the time Sanchez (possibly Stafford) could be ready to go. You state that you would want Hill to hold the fort or wait to see if Alex gets better in the next few years and if not then draft a REAL franchise QB. Well, that would make our core of players 4 or 5 years older, if you take into account that that QB would probably have to sit a year or 2.

Hill is only 29 and QB's can play well into their late 30's as long as their arm holds up. Unlike the majority of positions, a QB's legs and knees arent as important especially if he's a pocket passing QB like Hill is. Hill has already played good when given the chance to and in my opinion, should have been the starter in 2008 but Nolan and Martz conspired against him in favor of Sullivan. But thankfully, Nolan and Martz are gone with Sullivan and Martin to follow.

At the end of the 2007 season, I said that HILL was our best QB and over a year later, that STILL remains a fact. Hill as already showed that he can win games and be a very good QB where as a rookie like Sanchez is 50/50 at best and what happens if he FAILS??? What happens if he becomes Smith number 2??? No one is mentioning that at all. The risk and gamble is too high as is the amount of money that would be required to pay him at the number 10 spot. Considering the fact that we already have the number one overall drafted player from 2005 on the roster who plays QB, it makes no sense whatsoever to draft another QB four years later at the number 10 spot especially considering the fact that we would have had a better record and possibly be a playoff team if Hill started from week one as opposed to Sullivan.

Sanchez could turn out to be like Young or Leinart or Smith and im sorry, but its not worth it when you have a QB who's already won you games and can play good enough to continue helping you win games. Depending on what happens in FA, the number 10 spot should be a RT, pass rushing OLB or if he's still available, CB Malcolm Jenkins. And quite honestly, if Jenkins is gone by 10 which he most likely will be, we should trade down a few spots, still get the player at a position we need while paying him less money and gaining an extra draft pick.

Drafting Sanchez isnt going to help us and if anything, is only going to delay solving the problems we have. While QB may or may not be a problem, other positions like RT, FS and a pass rushing OLB are BIGGER problems than what our current problem is at QB which if Hill was younger we wouldnt be having this conversation.

I just hope Singletary doesnt make the same mistake in regards to Hill that Nolan and Martz made a year ago.

farfromforgotten · 02-15-2009, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan77733

Sanchez is 50/50 at best and what happens if he FAILS??? What happens if he becomes Smith number 2??? No one is mentioning that at all. The risk and gamble is too high as is the amount of money that would be required to pay him at the number 10 spot. Considering the fact that we already have the number one overall drafted player from 2005 on the roster who plays QB, it makes no sense whatsoever to draft another QB four years later at the number 10 spot

What happens if he succeeds? You could say that about ANY player coming out of the draft. A lot of people thought Matt Ryan would fail last year and he was a started for several years at BC.

Lets say that Mr. Alex Smith takes a pay cut to stay with the 49ers. Lets say that he still fails. When will it be ok for you if the 49ers take another chance at a QB in round 1? Maybe 5 years later? Maybe 10 years later? Maybe you'll just want to be bitter about it the rest of your life and hope we never select a QB in round 1 again?

I dont know. I'm already tired of it. It's been 4 years. Thats long enough for me. Alex Smith is broken. Its not all his fault. Its just the way it is.

I'm not 100% confident in Mark Sanchez at 10. It's just that I'm 0% confident in Alex Smith and 50% confident in Shaun Hill I guess you could say. I like that he played at USC. Sure he had a lot of talent around him, but he didnt play in one of those gimmick college offenses. I understand that people would like him to have more experience, but what would that exactly change in his situation? Do you all honestly believe that his numbers would change that much? He would still get the "well he played at USC, they have a lot of talent".

Lets say we have an early pick again next year. Lets say that Smith sucks and Hill is so-so. Will there be a QB in that class that you all will be 100% confident in? I mean, what does it take? A Peyton Manning type prospect only comes along every so often, and a lot people liked Ryan Leaf just as much (or more) that year.

Bradford? McCoy? Snead? They all will have just as many question marks.

phlysac · 02-15-2009, 07:01 PM

You don't always have to assume the negative of your options.

What if the 49ers draft Sanchez and then Hill and Smith both play lights-out when they have the opportunity?

farfromforgotten · 02-15-2009, 07:12 PM

We can do the "what ifs" thing up until the draft starts. Alright.

We'll see what happens if Hill gets to start for a full year. You guys want to hold on to hope that Alex will turn his career around? I'm not gonna try and change your minds.

phlysac · 02-15-2009, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by farfromforgotten

We can do the "what ifs" thing up until the draft starts. Alright.

We'll see what happens if Hill gets to start for a full year. You guys want to hold on to hope that Alex will turn his career around? I'm not gonna try and change your minds.

The point I was trying to make is that you are holding onto disbelief in Alex Smith just as vehemently as anyone is supporting him.

Both are possible. So to make a draft decision assuming one will happen isn't the most effective.