Ginn and the return game

[imac_21]

I do not understand at all why some want to get rid of Ted Ginn 'in hopes' of trying to find a cheaper version of, well, Ted Ginn. Seems like a senseless risk to me.

If you want a 'Ted Ginn' that produces more in the WR role, then simply target more the Ted Ginn we have. I'm pretty sure he has no contractual limitations on how many passes he can catch.

It isn't that I want a cheaper version of Ted Ginn. I want a cheaper version of a better WR.

I don't know why you suggest that we simply need to target him more. He's been in the league for 6 years and never shown any big play potential as a WR. He's never had more than 2 receiving TDs in a season, he only averages 12.9 ypc (and is supposed to be a deep threat). His career long catch is only 64 yards.

It isn't that I don't see him as a good WR. I see him as a bad WR. I'd much rather sign Mike Wallace and draft a RS.

 

[EKmane]

You said that an experienced return man holds onto the ball. Kyle Williams is an experienced return man.

How much does Adams cost to sign?

Joe Adams is practicing at the Senior Bowl right now, very well too. He shouldbe available in the 3rd round for us.

Joe Adams named 2011 SEC Special Teams Player of the Year - YouTube

Joe Adams, Arkansan by birth...Razorback by grace of God.wmv - YouTube

I would love him in the 3rd to replace Ginn. Way more elusive, way better hands at wr. What a ballplayer!

 

[imac_21]

You said that an experienced return man holds onto the ball. Kyle Williams is an experienced return man.

How much does Adams cost to sign?

Not really he isn't. Less than 2 per game in college, 5 in two years in the NFL.

And did I say an experienced return man holds onto the ball? If so, I take it back. An experienced return man doesn't get hit in the knee and then not go after the ball, but fumbles happen.

As forhow much Adams costs to sign, that would depend on where he's drafted.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

I'm intrigued by Rainey, he does have a little experience as a punt returner. His god damn field speed is amazing. I got so sick of him burning my team in college. For once I'd like to have that kind of weapon on my team.

 

[EaseUrStorm]

Kyle Williams was inactive week 1. Crabtree played in week 1, he missed week 2. Our active WRs in week 1 were Edwards, Crabtree, Morgan and Ginn.

I think cutting Edwards said a lot about our approach to WR. We really could have used him the last two games. There were no reports about him being a problem in the locker room, we didn't need the cap room. . . why cut him? it left us with essentially 3 WRs even with everyone healthy (Crabtree, Williams and Ginn).

Clearly we didn't value the WR position in our offense this year. Now, it may have related to the level of talent at the position and it could change next year if we add a few WRs with talent.

But if we take the same approach next year and only activate 4 WRs, who stays inactive next year so Ginn can play? We already have Morgan and Crabtree above him (as well as Williams, but he would be an inactive).

If we add two WRs that can play (a FA and a high draft pick) then who doesn't dress for games so we can play Ginn?

I agree it was a mistake to cut Braylon, and I thought it would come back to bite them in the playoffs where he could have been a difference maker. But there's more to that decision than how this team values WR's. Possibilities include sending a message to the team when Braylon popped off about not getting as much playing time than the others, his overall attitude, running out of patients with his injuries, or that he may have lost a step. Something big likely happened to move Braylon below Swain.

If we sign Ginn, we will most likely activate 5 WR's. The question doesn't have to be which WR sits. The extra WR who can actually contribute something to our offense naturally becomes activated over the last minimum wage special teamers like Gooden. Ginn provides more special teams value than Gooden so he's in. We already have a lot of resources tied up in special teams with guys like Colin Jones, Spillman, and Castanzo and we can get by without a player like Gooden.

 

[MW49ers5]

Kyle Williams was inactive week 1. Crabtree played in week 1, he missed week 2. Our active WRs in week 1 were Edwards, Crabtree, Morgan and Ginn.

I think cutting Edwards said a lot about our approach to WR. We really could have used him the last two games. There were no reports about him being a problem in the locker room, we didn't need the cap room. . . why cut him? it left us with essentially 3 WRs even with everyone healthy (Crabtree, Williams and Ginn).

Clearly we didn't value the WR position in our offense this year. Now, it may have related to the level of talent at the position and it could change next year if we add a few WRs with talent.

But if we take the same approach next year and only activate 4 WRs, who stays inactive next year so Ginn can play? We already have Morgan and Crabtree above him (as well as Williams, but he would be an inactive).

If we add two WRs that can play (a FA and a high draft pick) then who doesn't dress for games so we can play Ginn?

This is an argument better suited for getting rid of Crabtree not Ginn. Think about it.

If we are going to become a more serious passing offense then we need a #1 WR to replace Crabtree as our current #1, thus pushing Crabtree, Morgan, Williams & Ginn down the depth chart.

Then if we are to also get another WR to replace Ginn our new depth chart would look like:

1) Our new #1,
2) Crabtree,
3) Morgan,
4) Our new RS/WR
5) Williams

In order to pass for >4000 yards next season based on current rates we would have to complete just 5 more passes per game (8 targets).

With Morgan back in the lineup and a new #1 as well as Crabtree, Ginn & Williams I don't think we need another receiver to accomplish this. Thus if we are to get rid of a WR it should be Crabtree not Ginn. If we keep Crabtree how would we justify getting rid of Ginn just to slot a riskier option in the same slot?

 

[MW49ers5]

It isn't that I want a cheaper version of Ted Ginn. I want a cheaper version of a better WR.

I don't know why you suggest that we simply need to target him more. He's been in the league for 6 years and never shown any big play potential as a WR. He's never had more than 2 receiving TDs in a season, he only averages 12.9 ypc (and is supposed to be a deep threat). His career long catch is only 64 yards.

It isn't that I don't see him as a good WR. I see him as a bad WR. I'd much rather sign Mike Wallace and draft a RS.

If we look at this pragmatically within the structure of our type of offense (2TE/3WR) I don't see how it makes sense to expect so much more production from our #4 WR/RS that we would need to replace Ginn in order to achieve that level of increased production.

As for signing Wallace and drafting a RS, well, that would just be senseless.

 

[imac_21]

This is an argument better suited for getting rid of Crabtree not Ginn. Think about it.

If we are going to become a more serious passing offense then we need a #1 WR to replace Crabtree as our current #1, thus pushing Crabtree, Morgan, Williams & Ginn down the depth chart.

Then if we are to also get another WR to replace Ginn our new depth chart would look like:

1) Our new #1,
2) Crabtree,
3) Morgan,
4) Our new RS/WR
5) Williams

In order to pass for >4000 yards next season based on current rates we would have to complete just 5 more passes per game (8 targets).

With Morgan back in the lineup and a new #1 as well as Crabtree, Ginn & Williams I don't think we need another receiver to accomplish this. Thus if we are to get rid of a WR it should be Crabtree not Ginn. If we keep Crabtree how would we justify getting rid of Ginn just to slot a riskier option in the same slot?

If we get rid of Crabtree we're putting a riskier option in that slot, but that slot spends a lot more time on the field. Ginn just doesn't bring anything to the offense.

I truly believe that the drop-off on ST would be minimal if we brought in an experienced RS who could simply protect the ball.

I think we would have a more difficult time replacing Crabtree with someone already on the roster.

When Crabtree's a FA, if we don't bring him back, that's fine. I just don't think we gain anything from cutting him.

On the flip side, I don't see us gaining enough by bringing back Ginn at the contract he's likely to get.

 

[imac_21]

If we look at this pragmatically within the structure of our type of offense (2TE/3WR) I don't see how it makes sense to expect so much more production from our #4 WR/RS that we would need to replace Ginn in order to achieve that level of increased production.

As for signing Wallace and drafting a RS, well, that would just be senseless.

I wonder if the structure of our offense is a result of our personnel, or if our personnel is a result of the structure of the offense.

I'm unsure about the last sentence. Is it sarcasm? We would be adding what might be the best deep threat in the league. He'd also possibly come in a tad bit cheaper than a Colston/Bowe/V Jackson.

 

[clyde_carbon]

I want nothing to do with Ginn or Crabtree.

 

[imac_21]

I mentioned this in the offseason thread, but I think we need to add 2 WRs this year that by kickoff 2013 are our starting WRs. Whether that's FA and the draft, just FA, or just the draft I don't care. But we need to have two new starting WRs soon (if they can start this year, all the better).

I think Crabtree can be effective in the slot, I think Williams can be effective in the slot. I don't think we need both of them. If we add 2 WRs, one of those two can go.

 

[MW49ers5]

If we get rid of Crabtree we're putting a riskier option in that slot, but that slot spends a lot more time on the field. Ginn just doesn't bring anything to the offense.

I truly believe that the drop-off on ST would be minimal if we brought in an experienced RS who could simply protect the ball.

I think we would have a more difficult time replacing Crabtree with someone already on the roster.

When Crabtree's a FA, if we don't bring him back, that's fine. I just don't think we gain anything from cutting him.

On the flip side, I don't see us gaining enough by bringing back Ginn at the contract he's likely to get.

I hear ya...

I suppose I would go with something like:

1) New #1
2) Morgan
3) Williams
4) Ginn
5) Bogan or?

Here is an example of how pass production might be distributed based on ~550 targets:

New #1 WR...1000-1200Yds/8-9TD's
V.Davis..........900-1000Yds/6-7TD's
Morgan...........600 -800Yds/4-5TD's
Walker............300 -400Yds/3-4TD's
Williams...........300 -400Yds/2-3TD's
Ginn................200 -300Yds/1-2TD's
WR5, Gore, Hunter etc or?.........200 -300Yds/1-2TD

This is obviously raw, but I think it demonstrates my point that while asking for more production from our RS is a realistic expectation, I just don't think it requires us to dump Ginn to achieve it.

 

[imac_21]

I hear ya...

I suppose I would go with something like:

1) New #1
2) Morgan
3) Williams
4) Ginn
5) Bogan or?

Here is an example of how pass production might be distributed based on ~550 targets:

New #1 WR...1000-1200Yds/8-9TD's
V.Davis..........900-1000Yds/6-7TD's
Morgan...........600 -800Yds/4-5TD's
Walker............300 -400Yds/3-4TD's
Williams...........300 -400Yds/2-3TD's
Ginn................200 -300Yds/1-2TD's
WR5, Gore, Hunter etc or?.........200 -300Yds/1-2TD

This is obviously raw, but I think it demonstrates my point that while asking for more production from our RS is a realistic expectation, I just don't think it requires us to dump Ginn to achieve it.

I would be adding 2 WRs, but sticking with the hypothetical of adding just a number 1 and replacing Ginn as the KR but keeping Crabtree (I'll leave out TDs because they're tough to project).

WR1 - 1000-1200
Davis - 700-900
Morgan - 600-800
Crabtree - 600-800
Walker - 300-400
Williams - 200-300
KR/PR - 150-200
RBs - 300

Total - 3850 (based on everyone achieving the minimum)

The total in yours is 3500 (based on minimum projection) so it's not that much of a difference. Do any of my projections seem completely off base?

I'd like to involve the RBs in the passing game more. I don't see Davis getting more than he has the last few years if we add a legitimate #1 because that's going to suck a lot of targets away from him.

The reason I'm so willing to let Ginn go is because I don't see him bringing enough to the offense for the contract he will get and I don't think he's a special RS. I honestly believe his production in the return game can be nearly replicated fairly easily (not identically right away, but with not much of a drop). I don't like the idea of committing so much money to him. I feel like he will be overpaid (I wouldn't give him 7 figures per year).

 

[MW49ers5]

I wonder if the structure of our offense is a result of our personnel, or if our personnel is a result of the structure of the offense.

I'm unsure about the last sentence. Is it sarcasm? We would be adding what might be the best deep threat in the league. He'd also possibly come in a tad bit cheaper than a Colston/Bowe/V Jackson.

"I wonder if the structure of our offense is a result of our personnel, or if our personnel is a result of the structure of the offense."

Fair question...I think Harbaugh does want a strong running game and there is no question he likes/loves the versatility of using 2 TE's for both the running game, in protection and in the passing game. I can't recall when, if ever, I have seen H-Backs used as much as we used them this year.


"We would be adding what might be the best deep threat in the league. He'd also possibly come in a tad bit cheaper than a Colston/Bowe/V Jackson."

As for Wallace, I would love to have Wallace, the question there is, do we have the offensive scheme and/or the QB to support a WR like Wallace? I would think that ideally you would like to have Antonio Brown above almost anyone - yes?

 

[imac_21]

Just to build off my last post, ideally I would have

WR1 (new guy)
Morgan
WR3 (also new guy)
Crabtree (would be competing with Morgan for WR2)
KR/PR
Williams

for the WR depth chart. I feel our WR corps badly needs to be rebuilt. I'm sure it's going to start to sound like a broken record, but I feel like we need to add two WRs that can be starting for us week 1 2013.

If Crabtree isn't brought back when his contract is up, that's fine with me. I just wouldn't cut him.

 

[imac_21]

"I wonder if the structure of our offense is a result of our personnel, or if our personnel is a result of the structure of the offense."

Fair question...I think Harbaugh does want a strong running game and there is no question he likes/loves the versatility of using 2 TE's for both the running game, in protection and in the passing game. I can't recall when, if ever, I have seen H-Backs used as much as we used them this year.


"We would be adding what might be the best deep threat in the league. He'd also possibly come in a tad bit cheaper than a Colston/Bowe/V Jackson."

As for Wallace, I would love to have Wallace, the question there is, do we have the offensive scheme and/or the QB to support a WR like Wallace? I would think that ideally you would like to have Antonio Brown above almost anyone - yes?

I just get stuck wondering how much our offense was limited by Harbaugh's lack of trust in Smith early in the season (not distrust, but just a lack of developed trust. An unknown). I think our reliance on our TEs and our lack of ability to make plays at WR really held back the offense. The $64,000 question however, is how much of that was because that's the offense the staff wants to run and how much of it was the offense they were comfortable running with our personnel.

Brown would fill the Ginn role quite nicely (quality, dependable return specialist that can stretch the field). He's a better WR than Ginn.

I just think Wallace is a much better WR than Brown, and my priority is to find a game changing WR. I think Wallace fits that role much more than Brown does.

The issue with adding a WR with Wallace's skill set is whether Smith can take advantage of it. I believe Kaep could, I believe most QBs in the NFL could. Wallace gets behind the defense so quickly and all QBs have the arm strength to get the ball down the field. I'd be more concerned with Smith's ability to get the ball to guys like Colston and Bowe because then it has to be on time to tighter windows.

 

[MW49ers5]

I would be adding 2 WRs, but sticking with the hypothetical of adding just a number 1 and replacing Ginn as the KR but keeping Crabtree (I'll leave out TDs because they're tough to project).

WR1 - 1000-1200
Davis - 700-900
Morgan - 600-800
Crabtree - 600-800
Walker - 300-400
Williams - 200-300
KR/PR - 150-200
RBs - 300

Total - 3850 (based on everyone achieving the minimum)

The total in yours is 3500 (based on minimum projection) so it's not that much of a difference. Do any of my projections seem completely off base?

I'd like to involve the RBs in the passing game more. I don't see Davis getting more than he has the last few years if we add a legitimate #1 because that's going to suck a lot of targets away from him.

The reason I'm so willing to let Ginn go is because I don't see him bringing enough to the offense for the contract he will get and I don't think he's a special RS. I honestly believe his production in the return game can be nearly replicated fairly easily (not identically right away, but with not much of a drop). I don't like the idea of committing so much money to him. I feel like he will be overpaid (I wouldn't give him 7 figures per year).

Everything you projected is perfectly reasonable...I think the bolded is the essential difference in our positions. While I do agree there is a price point where Ginn becomes more expensive than his production would warrant, what that point is I don't know.

 

[MW49ers5]

I just get stuck wondering how much our offense was limited by Harbaugh's lack of trust in Smith early in the season (not distrust, but just a lack of developed trust. An unknown). I think our reliance on our TEs and our lack of ability to make plays at WR really held back the offense. The $64,000 question however, is how much of that was because that's the offense the staff wants to run and how much of it was the offense they were comfortable running with our personnel.

Brown would fill the Ginn role quite nicely (quality, dependable return specialist that can stretch the field). He's a better WR than Ginn.

I just think Wallace is a much better WR than Brown, and my priority is to find a game changing WR. I think Wallace fits that role much more than Brown does.

The issue with adding a WR with Wallace's skill set is whether Smith can take advantage of it. I believe Kaep could, I believe most QBs in the NFL could. Wallace gets behind the defense so quickly and all QBs have the arm strength to get the ball down the field. I'd be more concerned with Smith's ability to get the ball to guys like Colston and Bowe because then it has to be on time to tighter windows.

Interestingly, I go in the other direction. I think Harbaugh knows precisely what he has in Smith as a QB. Thus, not an unknown, but rather an intimate knowledge. I say this based on the offense he & Roman devised for Smith and how well Smith operated within those parameters.

Regarding the $64,000 question I think about this all the time. I mean, Harbaugh is a former QB and yet he and Roman have created an offense more akin to that of a DC not an OC. That said, I believe Harbaugh does want to open up our offense - a lot more!

If I'm right, the new $64,000 question is does Smith have this 'upside' in him. I honestly believe finding the answer to this question will serve as the filter that may eventually lead to replacing Smith. Or, Smith will continue to surprise all of us and show that he can throw for 4000+ yards and 30+ TD's - We'll see that story unfold beginning next season - hell, beginning next training camp.

Smith has shown the ability to hit timing patterns in tiny windows - but not consistently. Thus the question is, what causes this inconsistency? Is it a lack of trust in the receiver, himself, something else entirely?

 

[CalamityX11]

I want someone back there that can hold the fucking ball(yes i'm still livid)....

Ginn works for me as a KR/4th WR.....

 

[Ray_Dogg]

I want nothing to do with Ginn or Crabtree.

+1