Curious as to why some think Kaepernick isn't doing well

[Bemular]

LOL, well like I said it takes someone really stubborn to claim victory despite offering no real insight.

This coming from someone who says insight is a weak-ass argument - My God you are dumb!! LOL!!!

Run along retard maybe you and SpacePiss can lick each other’s wounds.

 

[TobyTyler]

That is a concern. We're currently missing our #2 and #4 receivers. Moss is really just a role player at this point. We'll see what happens. Delanie has come on lately, as has Miller as an outlet. We have enough weapons even with the injuries.

Whatever happened to the seam routes and crossing routes to Vernon Davis?

 

[MHSL82]

Smith was huge at the end of those games. He really showed something about his character and his will, as well as his ability to make plays on the football field. But this game is CONSTANTLY cited by people who think he should be the starter, and IMO that game doesn't bear all that much more than the many games in which he has struggled. Alex is a hard worker, he's become pretty darn clutch, and I really like a lot about him. But without better pocket presence, decisiveness, and downfield/edge accuracy, he's never going to do much more than he has to date.

I think all of this is true and could be said without referring to that stretch. I was ok with it to put it into perspective and to use it like you did in this thread, but I understand how that is kind of unfair when other QBs big stretches are not taken out. I've always thought - you add up all the good (not discredited) and all the bad (not excused) and then compare that to everyone else evaluated the same. I think if you did that, you'd get the same result as you did when taking out the good parts of the game. Honestly, and I say this knowing you are a fair poster, I would have felt better about your analysis if you didn't take out the beginning of the game. I'm better settled on a "if the game ended at the 24-23 Saints point of the game" then I am with taking out the good from both ends.

But I know you are a fair poster and have qualified the extent of which you hang on this stretch.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

You're right, those two drives do conceal the rest of the game, but to be fair, taking out the last two drives wouldn't have lead to 10/26. CC is taking out the beginning of the game, too - which had two TDs in it. Outside of that 10/26 stretch that Crimsoncrew took out, he was 14/16 for 241 yards, 3 passing TDs, 1 rushing TD, and 0 INTs. The two incompletes were a spike and the Hastings throw. How much of that was prior to the last two drives + the 10-26 part, is where we'd be. This would likely be a 18/34 for 160 yards. Bad, but better than the 10/26 he cited. If we had the KW fumbles then, Smith would likely have been gone to Miami (his FA trip would have been earlier, he would have also gone to Seattle, probably empty handed, maybe Arizona after Manning - the Niners might have shown even more inclination to go to Kaep or pursued Manning more publicly?).

But, I think those two drives contributed to what Smith is capable of, just as the NFCC limited it. So, I won't spend too much time removing it, just seeing that he had a great stretch of four minutes and will look at everything, good and bad, outside of that stretch.

Sorry, just noticed, but wasn't it a throw to Swain? I remember because I totally called that and the naked boot just before they happened.

 

[MHSL82]

Sorry, just noticed, but wasn't it a throw to Swain? I remember because I totally called that and the naked boot just before they happened.

Yeah, it was. I got the two #4 receivers confused. (Or #5, I don't know how good those two are). (Yes, I know people only discuss receivers as 1s, 2s, and 3s.)

 

[Crimsoncrew]

This is just an awfully strange way of looking at it. He was 24 - 42 for 299 and 3/0. Some parts of the game were better than others, but as a whole it was good. You seem intent to carve out the bad part of the game and act like it was his fault they were behind. Leave out three scoring drives and yeah, he had a bad game. That is also a non-point and an incredibly obtuse argument.

I am not trying to say this was a great game or anything, but comparing it to Cutler's debacle or Kapernick's rough game in STL is again, ridiculous....I can't describe it any better than that.

Obviously reducing his performance to a particular span of time is not a fair comparison when looking at games as a whole. I'm simply pointing out that he was really, really bad for nearly 3/4 of the game during which the offense couldn't get anything going. If we had lost that game, I think Smith would have been more to blame than the D.

In sum, was it a great game? Absolutely. But people who are supporting Smith now hold it up as if it's the greatest game that has ever been played, and that's simply not accurate. It was one of the greatest ends to a game ever. Much of the game was poor, and Smith left the door wide open for the comeback.

Incidentally, nothing to say about the NO offense and the no problems they had?

 

[spacedoodoopistol]

In sum, was it a great game? Absolutely. But people who are supporting Smith now hold it up as if it's the greatest game that has ever been played, and that's simply not accurate. It was one of the greatest ends to a game ever. Much of the game was poor, and Smith left the door wide open for the comeback.

That's fine, I do think its silly when people continually refer to that game or pass to VD. They were good plays that a good QB should make. Like I said, I wouldn't describe his game that day as "great" myself.

 

[spacedoodoopistol]

Incidentally, nothing to say about the NO offense and the no problems they had?

Not sure what you meant by this.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

I think all of this is true and could be said without referring to that stretch. I was ok with it to put it into perspective and to use it like you did in this thread, but I understand how that is kind of unfair when other QBs big stretches are not taken out. I've always thought - you add up all the good (not discredited) and all the bad (not excused) and then compare that to everyone else evaluated the same. I think if you did that, you'd get the same result as you did when taking out the good parts of the game. Honestly, and I say this knowing you are a fair poster, I would have felt better about your analysis if you didn't take out the beginning of the game. I'm better settled on a "if the game ended at the 24-23 Saints point of the game" then I am with taking out the good from both ends.

But I know you are a fair poster and have qualified the extent of which you hang on this stretch.

As memory serves, in the thread I linked to I initially looked at the game minus only the final two drives. But as I revisited it, I realized that we really fell flat in the middle of the game - even the TD to Crabtree came when Goldson returned an INT to the NO four. As said, these discussions tend to push people to the edges, and I get caught up in that to an extent. Smith on the whole played a very good game against NO. As said above, I just think that game is overblown given how much he struggled for the better part of three quarters while our D was putting on a fairly dominating performance.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Not sure what you meant by this.

You implied that NO marched up and down the field in that game. That's far from accurate.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Anyway, I haven't gotten any work done this morning. Getting out of here. I'll try to see where this thread went later tonight.

 

[threelittleturds]

How is it that no one is capable of accurately remembering this game? NO had no trouble scoring? Funny, out of 15 NO drives in the game (not counting the two fumbled punts which deprived them of drives), they scored on only five of them. They scored 14 points in the first three quarters of play, and 17 in the first 55 minutes of play. For a historically good offense, I'd say that's actually quite *a lot* of problems scoring. Meanwhile, in that same span, they turned the ball over five times. Miraculously, despite the constant turnovers, the Saints won the TOP battle by three minutes. The D was incredible for most of the game, and only buckled on two big plays - with big-time YAC - at the very end.

The only reason that game came down to the wire was because, after taking a 17-0 lead, the Niners had nine straight drives none of which netted more than 31 yards, and which combined for 89 yards - only five more yards than we managed on the final drive. For those keeping score at home, we averaged a whopping 2.97 yards per play on those drives. That's despite throwing about twice as often as we ran. I went into GREAT detail on this a couple weeks ago. Can't take the time to do it again now (tracked it down though: http://www.sportshoopla.com/forums/...rted-kaep-beginning-season-4.html#post2568183). Suffice it to say that Smith was given a chance to put the game away, and instead our offense defined incompetence for approximately 40 minutes. That would have been the story of the game without the last four minutes.

Finally, I said Smith's performance "etween the Crabtree TD and the final two drives" was awful, not his performance for the game. In that span, he went 10 of 26 for 58 yards and a lost fumble. He didn't turn the ball over a ton, but the five drives in which we gained fewer than 20 yards before punting aren't much better than INTs.

WTF are you talking about man? The game came down to the wire because at the end of the game the Saints had two big TD passes to Graham and Sproles... they flashed that historically great offense by picking on our safeties who are known for big hits, not great coverage.

What NOBODY expected, not even the biggest Smith supporter (except maybe his mom and wife) was that he answered both of those TDs with 49er TDs.

Everything before that is gravy...

It'd be like arguing that the 1988 Super Bowl wasn't special because Joe Montana should have played better in the 3rd quarter and put the Bengals away. I mean, calm down and stop worrying about being right on the fucking internet... you're seriously arguing that what made Joe Montana special is what makes Alex Smith a piece of shit...

This Alex Smith shit is ridiculous. The paradigm shift is just unreal.

 

[MHSL82]

WTF are you talking about man? The game came down to the wire because at the end of the game the Saints had two big TD passes to Graham and Sproles... they flashed that historically great offense by picking on our safeties who are known for big hits, not great coverage.

What NOBODY expected, not even the biggest Smith supporter (except maybe his mom and wife) was that he answered both of those TDs with 49er TDs.

Everything before that is gravy...

It'd be like arguing that the 1988 Super Bowl wasn't special because Joe Montana should have played better in the 3rd quarter and put the Bengals away. I mean, calm down and stop worrying about being right on the fucking internet... you're seriously arguing that what made Joe Montana special is what makes Alex Smith a piece of shit...

This Alex Smith shit is ridiculous. The paradigm shift is just unreal.

If people didn't exaggerate how good Alex is, how bad Alex is, how good Kaep is now, how bad Kaep is now, etc., we wouldn't have gotten Crimsoncrew's post, I think. Before people get upset, if you don't exaggerate, then I'm not talking about you.

(As for exaggeration on Kaep, I'm not talking about this board; I'm talking about articles and their comments and 49ers.com that go both ways, good and bad.)

 

[threelittleturds]

If people didn't exaggerate how good Alex is, how bad Alex is, how good Kaep is now, how bad Kaep is now, etc., we wouldn't have gotten Crimsoncrew's post, I think. Before people get upset, if you don't exaggerate, then I'm not talking about you.

(As for exaggeration on Kaep, I'm not talking about this board; I'm talking about articles and their comments and 49ers.com that go both ways, good and bad.)

You're wrong, the only issue is perceived exaggeration. Nothing more, nothing less.

Its all so stupid.

 

[MHSL82]

You're wrong, the only issue is perceived exaggeration. Nothing more, nothing less.

Its all so stupid.

Fair enough. I'll buy that. What is a fair assessment of a player often is in the eye of the beholder (good or bad) and how people read what others say is greatly influenced by the reader's perspective.

The way I see it is that Kaep being better than Smith and Smith being a decent to slightly above average QB is not mutually exclusive (and us winning with either is not out of the question). I can see anywhere from mediocre to slightly above average for Smith. I think he fit with this team more than some QBs (even those who may appear better) and definitely more than he would with other teams (even if they had a great defense and running team).

I try to add up all the positives (no discrediting) and all the negatives (no excuses) and compare that to other QBs held to the same standard. It'll still be subjective, but that's my philosophy. I'm sure that's not the best way to do it, but it all relatively evens out, as all QBs have some things they have to overcome (some prohibitive) and some things that work out (that may prop them up).

 

[SY8goat]

You're wrong, the only issue is perceived exaggeration. Nothing more, nothing less.

Its all so stupid.

Arguing on the internet in general, is stupid. Though, it does provide good entertainment to read while taking a dump. Sometimes the comments section of an article is more interesting than the article itself.

 

[MHSL82]

Moss impressed with Kaepernick's fastball, leadership | CSN Bay Area

Moss's explanation on the popped finger pass was that Kaep threw it too late, but his velocity ability got the ball there. If Smith threw the ball late, it'd be an INT more likely, so I can see why there are some opportunities that Kaep gives us that Smith doesn't - nothing to do with hesitancy or too much hesitancy. (There are plenty of other times where it is hesitancy or vision, but I'm not talking about that.) Not just physical, if Smith rightfully knows he can't get it there, he shouldn't throw it. If Kaep trusts that he can, he should. So some missed opportunities with Smith might have actually been the right thing to do, he just doesn't have Kaep's strength. This is all a "no duh" - I'm just linking it to something Moss said about Kaep.

Watch the video - I love having Moss on this team.

 

[Bemular]

Moss impressed with Kaepernick's fastball, leadership | CSN Bay Area

Moss's explanation on the popped finger pass was that Kaep threw it too late, but his velocity ability got the ball there. If Smith threw the ball late, it'd be an INT more likely, so I can see why there are some opportunities that Kaep gives us that Smith doesn't - nothing to do with hesitancy or too much hesitancy. (There are plenty of other times where it is hesitancy or vision, but I'm not talking about that.) Not just physical, if Smith rightfully knows he can't get it there, he shouldn't throw it. If Kaep trusts that he can, he should. So some missed opportunities with Smith might have actually been the right thing to do, he just doesn't have Kaep's strength. This is all a "no duh" - I'm just linking it to something Moss said about Kaep.

Watch the video - I love having Moss on this team.

Yes! Great interview - very classy - I'd like to keep him if we can.

 

[threelittleturds]

Moss impressed with Kaepernick's fastball, leadership | CSN Bay Area

Moss's explanation on the popped finger pass was that Kaep threw it too late, but his velocity ability got the ball there. If Smith threw the ball late, it'd be an INT more likely, so I can see why there are some opportunities that Kaep gives us that Smith doesn't - nothing to do with hesitancy or too much hesitancy. (There are plenty of other times where it is hesitancy or vision, but I'm not talking about that.) Not just physical, if Smith rightfully knows he can't get it there, he shouldn't throw it. If Kaep trusts that he can, he should. So some missed opportunities with Smith might have actually been the right thing to do, he just doesn't have Kaep's strength. This is all a "no duh" - I'm just linking it to something Moss said about Kaep.

Watch the video - I love having Moss on this team.

Anyone who has followed my stupid coaches film threads has probably noticed how I always point out that Moss could have done more, and I'll admit I'm biased because I'm a fan of his... I have flat out loved the guy since he cleared out Lambeau field on MNF in 1998. ... anyway, if he wants to play next year I hope he wants to play for the 49ers, I love what he brings to the offense even though what he is doing doesn't show up on the statsheet.

Anyway, that interview shows how much Moss has matured. He is all about the team, not about himself anymore. Even at 38 and at the outside looking in, I believe T.O. would be causing drama if he were in Randy's shoes.

 

[NinerSickness]

anyway, if he wants to play next year I hope he wants to play for the 49ers, I love what he brings to the offense even though what he is doing doesn't show up on the statsheet.

Seriously? Moss is a washed-up suck-bag and only has a job because the Niners have a weak WR corps with other suck-bags like Kyle Williams and Tedd Ginn (as a WR).

And before Clyde comes along to say Ginn sucks as a return man too, I'll just preemptively say: no he doesn't.