Grant Cohn on Smith's Strengths and Weaknesses

[Flyingiguana]

it's still too early to tell if he can become a franchise qb or not. the jury is out on that. look at guys like rich gannon or kurt warner. took them years to put it together. smith compares much more to gannon, warner just had an excellent arm with that quick release, but warner was basically flipping burgers before he finally made it in the nfl.

 

[mufasa76]

it's still too early to tell if he can become a franchise qb or not. the jury is out on that. look at guys like rich gannon or kurt warner. took them years to put it together. smith compares much more to gannon, warner just had an excellent arm with that quick release, but warner was basically flipping burgers before he finally made it in the nfl.

true-but consider how long it too Kurt once he had the chance to play to get them to the sb..That is why deep's "intangible" argument is spot on...You can only teach that much as a coach the-rest has to come naturally from the PLAYER!!!
We all know that keeping Alex is the safe bet cos we know what we have...I hope he fixes the check down behind the line passes though.....ohhboy!

 

[MHSL82]

true-but consider how long it too Kurt once he had the chance to play to get them to the sb..That is why deep's "intangible" argument is spot on...You can only teach that much as a coach the-rest has to come naturally from the PLAYER!!!
We all know that keeping Alex is the safe bet cos we know what we have...I hope he fixes the check down behind the line passes though.....ohhboy!

I know I am alone in this, but I don't believe intangibles are set. I think that's just a tool to make some fans seem like armchair GMs or scouts. I do, however, think most fail at improving those intangibles and that is why people keep citing this "it" factor thing. I believe that his intangibles will improve, and not just because of familiarity, but also with coaching, confidence, and time to work on them. Obviously he, as the player, is the only one who can makes some of these qualities work. He needs to put the work in, let go of his hesitancies, and understand the offense so much that he can improvise. It's a steep hill so I won't bet on it.

Before he had so much to work on that he couldn't try to learn how to run when he couldn't crawl. A crawler won't be a sprinter without learning how to stand. And metaphorically some QBs never learn how to stand, but I don't think it's merely because they were set on not being able to stand. The ceiling of potential is Joe Montana. I don't think Alex will ever get there, but that's where the ceiling is. Nothing but himself stops him (notice that I didn't include receivers as a reason).

I think it's simple to check the box and say we have figured out this person's potential, ceiling, etc. I admit that I do this all the time. If pressed, I always will back down on any limitation I present on a player unless I see reason to think they won't give it their all. Troy Smith did not have to come back during the bye, as many didn't, and he did have two good games following the bye, but the fact that he thought faxing him plays when he hadn't started a game for us yet (or just one game) was good enough shows me that he limits his potential.

 

[MHSL82]

Perhaps it's more accurate to say that intangibles are set (as in how much money we make in a lifetime is set) but none of us know where that level is (as we don't know how much we will make). There are things to improve the intangibles (as we could get a better paying job) but that's up to the player (us). Some of us are hesitant to apply for the better paying job, it takes a lot of work to get a certain degree, and there are factors, like tuition, that may prevent us from being all we could be.

The thing with Alex is that our situation now seems so rosy/positive, that I don't see the reasons that should hold him back. I know he's hesitant, but there's no reason why he should be hesitant forever. This doesn't mean he will overcome them, just that he can with maturation - we've seen him make he throws. There are offensive philosophies, like Harbaugh being conservative, but there's potential for that to change. He may always be this way, but as the team grows, he may call it differently with more confidence. I just think it's quick to see where the end of the opportunity is. We've seen enough over the last seven years to know where he is today and has been, but he and the rest of the team, like Crabtree, are still writing their history. I don't mean to be too sappy, as I know that this how it comes out, but that's how I feel. I don't think everything will go perfectly as planned, so I do think that it's unlikely Smith will be elite.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

it's still too early to tell if he can become a franchise qb or not. the jury is out on that. look at guys like rich gannon or kurt warner. took them years to put it together. smith compares much more to gannon, warner just had an excellent arm with that quick release, but warner was basically flipping burgers before he finally made it in the nfl.

Other than Gannon, how many elite QBs played extensively for seven years without reaching the very-good-to-great level? That sort of thing is pretty rare. It could happen. Smith still has some upside. But he's also got a ways to go IMO.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

I know I am alone in this, but I don't believe intangibles are set. I think that's just a tool to make some fans seem like armchair GMs or scouts. I do, however, think most fail at improving those intangibles and that is why people keep citing this "it" factor thing. I believe that his intangibles will improve, and not just because of familiarity, but also with coaching, confidence, and time to work on them. Obviously he, as the player, is the only one who can makes some of these qualities work. He needs to put the work in, let go of his hesitancies, and understand the offense so much that he can improvise. It's a steep hill so I won't bet on it.

Before he had so much to work on that he couldn't try to learn how to run when he couldn't crawl. A crawler won't be a sprinter without learning how to stand. And metaphorically some QBs never learn how to stand, but I don't think it's merely because they were set on not being able to stand. The ceiling of potential is Joe Montana. I don't think Alex will ever get there, but that's where the ceiling is. Nothing but himself stops him (notice that I didn't include receivers as a reason).

I think it's simple to check the box and say we have figured out this person's potential, ceiling, etc. I admit that I do this all the time. If pressed, I always will back down on any limitation I present on a player unless I see reason to think they won't give it their all. Troy Smith did not have to come back during the bye, as many didn't, and he did have two good games following the bye, but the fact that he thought faxing him plays when he hadn't started a game for us yet (or just one game) was good enough shows me that he limits his potential.

I don't disagree with this. I think Smith can "improve" his intangibles. I'd be shocked if he ever became the type of player who flourishes amidst the chaos when a play breaks down, but even this year we saw a tremendous improvement in his ability to improvise. His leadership style is one that requires success on the field (most styles require this, ultimately, but Smith's quiet demeanor really needs it), so we may see returns in that area. And as Smith becomes more comfortable in the system, he may do a better job of making more reads, making plays outside the pocket, etc. I just don't know how much room there is for growth. Odds are we'll find out.

 

[deep9er]

I know I am alone in this, but I don't believe intangibles are set. I think that's just a tool to make some fans seem like armchair GMs or scouts. I do, however, think most fail at improving those intangibles and that is why people keep citing this "it" factor thing. I believe that his intangibles will improve, and not just because of familiarity, but also with coaching, confidence, and time to work on them. Obviously he, as the player, is the only one who can makes some of these qualities work. He needs to put the work in, let go of his hesitancies, and understand the offense so much that he can improvise. It's a steep hill so I won't bet on it.

Before he had so much to work on that he couldn't try to learn how to run when he couldn't crawl. A crawler won't be a sprinter without learning how to stand. And metaphorically some QBs never learn how to stand, but I don't think it's merely because they were set on not being able to stand. The ceiling of potential is Joe Montana. I don't think Alex will ever get there, but that's where the ceiling is. Nothing but himself stops him (notice that I didn't include receivers as a reason).

I think it's simple to check the box and say we have figured out this person's potential, ceiling, etc. I admit that I do this all the time. If pressed, I always will back down on any limitation I present on a player unless I see reason to think they won't give it their all. Troy Smith did not have to come back during the bye, as many didn't, and he did have two good games following the bye, but the fact that he thought faxing him plays when he hadn't started a game for us yet (or just one game) was good enough shows me that he limits his potential.

seems to me you're saying the same thing? so don't quite get the "I know I am alone in this"?

 

[clyde_carbon]

Alex Smith? Weaknesses?

 

[MHSL82]

seems to me you're saying the same thing? so don't quite get the "I know I am alone in this"?

I guess it's the certainty some people have about where his ceiling is that differs. I agree more or less in my guess with yours, but I'm less certain (and I'm sure we all have slightly different values assigned to that guess). I'm leaving it open (yes, I know my opinion has no effect on him). I guess my response is more of a ticked off one for some people's certainty. People said they knew Harbaugh was picking Smith because of the lockout and this was said in the "poor Harbaugh must sit this one out" manner. People said they knew Alex couldn't duel it out with Brees. There, of course, are things that Alex will never do, I just don't like the certainty people have in those statements when coupled with specifics. For example, Alex will never be the reason we win a SB. Sure, it's unlikely, but I wouldn't state that as a fact. Alex in the Saints game may have been the reason we weren't blowing them out after five TOs, but he was also the reason we won in the end (VD was a co-reason and Staley's block was great but as far as reasons go, no game is solely won by one player, but one can make the difference).

I'd say arrogance, except that I think that's too strong of a word; unfair to call someone arrogant who is just answering a question or giving an opinion. (I guess I don't have a valid complaint, just voicing my opinion.)

 

[BallsOfFury]

I agree its more or less a fair assessment of Smith's abilities....but Cohn's remarks are a bit confusing. How can Smith become an elite QB if he lacks field vision and improvisation...two of the key abilities of any QB? Its kind of silly that everyone gets stuck on "elite" or not in the first place, but obviously anyone lacking some of the fundamental abilities will not reach that top level, no matter how many 4th quarter comebacks they engineer.

Erm...does it MATTER, if the qb is successful in engineering those comebacks? :ss:

 

[deep9er]

I guess it's the certainty some people have about where his ceiling is that differs. I agree more or less in my guess with yours, but I'm less certain (and I'm sure we all have slightly different values assigned to that guess). I'm leaving it open (yes, I know my opinion has no effect on him). I guess my response is more of a ticked off one for some people's certainty. People said they knew Harbaugh was picking Smith because of the lockout and this was said in the "poor Harbaugh must sit this one out" manner. People said they knew Alex couldn't duel it out with Brees. There, of course, are things that Alex will never do, I just don't like the certainty people have in those statements when coupled with specifics. For example, Alex will never be the reason we win a SB. Sure, it's unlikely, but I wouldn't state that as a fact. Alex in the Saints game may have been the reason we weren't blowing them out after five TOs, but he was also the reason we won in the end (VD was a co-reason and Staley's block was great but as far as reasons go, no game is solely won by one player, but one can make the difference).

I'd say arrogance, except that I think that's too strong of a word; unfair to call someone arrogant who is just answering a question or giving an opinion. (I guess I don't have a valid complaint, just voicing my opinion.)

ok, gotcha.

its the certainty of him hitting his ceiling, i might be 99% certain he's close, and you're 90% (or whatever your number is). not a problem at all.

 

[Flyingiguana]

Other than Gannon, how many elite QBs played extensively for seven years without reaching the very-good-to-great level? That sort of thing is pretty rare. It could happen. Smith still has some upside. But he's also got a ways to go IMO.

rich gannon was a good comparison on draft day and right now that seems to be the path smith is taking. it doesn't happen very often, i would assume you could count on one hand using all of nfl history. point is, we're gonna find out if smith can take those next steps over the next couple seasons.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

rich gannon was a good comparison on draft day and right now that seems to be the path smith is taking. it doesn't happen very often, i would assume you could count on one hand using all of nfl history. point is, we're gonna find out if smith can take those next steps over the next couple seasons.

I can't agree with very much of what you say here. How was Gannon a good comparison on draft day? He was picked in the middle of the 4th round by New England to play DB. Then he went to Minnesota and sat on the bench for three years. It basically took him until his 12th season to become the guy we think of when we hear his name mentioned. Now, I wasn't following the draft avidly in 1987, and maybe Gannon just needed time to develop, as Smith did. But I can't think that these two guys were in nearly the same ballpark as prospects at that time.

As I see it, Smith has one or two years tops. If he doesn't elevate his game, we've got to take a look at Kaepernick before his contract is up. Or take a look elsewhere.

 

[clyde_carbon]

rich gannon was a good comparison on draft day and right now that seems to be the path smith is taking. it doesn't happen very often, i would assume you could count on one hand using all of nfl history. point is, we're gonna find out if smith can take those next steps over the next couple seasons.

How many seasons are we talking, here? If he doesn't improve next year after a full offseason in the offense, why should he come back for another year? This is part of the reason why I only wanna give Smith a 1 year contract.

 

[MHSL82]

How many seasons are we talking, here? If he doesn't improve next year after a full offseason in the offense, why should he come back for another year? This is part of the reason why I only wanna give Smith a 1 year contract.

Wow, I actually agree with Clyde, here. Imagine that (though I haven't ever really gotten in an argument with him before).

I think he should and will sign for more than one year, but I'd need to see the big jump that we're looking for in order to feel confident in him. Right now, I'm obviously more confident in Smith than Clyde, but it doesn't change that Smith has to do what I'm confident he'll do (and this year) for me to remain hopeful.

What I consider a "big jump" is likely a little smaller (but it is relatively big) than Clyde's (but likely bigger than Flyinginguana) and it's not just in stats for me (though that is required overall).

 

[Flyingiguana]

I can't agree with very much of what you say here. How was Gannon a good comparison on draft day? He was picked in the middle of the 4th round by New England to play DB. Then he went to Minnesota and sat on the bench for three years. It basically took him until his 12th season to become the guy we think of when we hear his name mentioned. Now, I wasn't following the draft avidly in 1987, and maybe Gannon just needed time to develop, as Smith did. But I can't think that these two guys were in nearly the same ballpark as prospects at that time.

As I see it, Smith has one or two years tops. If he doesn't elevate his game, we've got to take a look at Kaepernick before his contract is up. Or take a look elsewhere.

where gannon got drafted didn't matter. it was a comparison that was made by a few ppl when smith got drafted. there was the possibility that it would take smith years and most likely playing for another team before he reached his potential. the only comparison would be gannon who was a late bloomer.

 

[Flyingiguana]

How many seasons are we talking, here? If he doesn't improve next year after a full offseason in the offense, why should he come back for another year? This is part of the reason why I only wanna give Smith a 1 year contract.

well i said couple, not a gangbang or an orgy

so 1-2

 

[Crimsoncrew]

where gannon got drafted didn't matter. it was a comparison that was made by a few ppl when smith got drafted. there was the possibility that it would take smith years and most likely playing for another team before he reached his potential. the only comparison would be gannon who was a late bloomer.

Gannon was an ancient bloomer. The only other guy I can think of who comes close to Gannon is Vinny Testaverde, who was a very high pick, did nothing for years, and then put together several pretty good years really late. Though even with Vinny, he was never more than a mediocre QB.

As said, if Smith needs another five years, we've got to move on. I've supported Smith all along, though I would have been more aggressive about trying to find a replacement over the past three years. But as many have said, I think he's really only got this year to move into the top-10. He'll probably get a 2-3 year deal, but I still think he's on the hot seat.

 

[clyde_carbon]

well i said couple, not a gangbang or an orgy

so 1-2

Couple =/= 1 year.

 

[deep9er]

Wow, I actually agree with Clyde, here. Imagine that (though I haven't ever really gotten in an argument with him before).

I think he should and will sign for more than one year, but I'd need to see the big jump that we're looking for in order to feel confident in him. Right now, I'm obviously more confident in Smith than Clyde, but it doesn't change that Smith has to do what I'm confident he'll do (and this year) for me to remain hopeful.

What I consider a "big jump" is likely a little smaller (but it is relatively big) than Clyde's (but likely bigger than Flyinginguana) and it's not just in stats for me (though that is required overall).

my guess is 90% of fans want a 1 year contract, but the question is......will he sign it?

if i was Alex and offered a 1 year deal, i'd sign elsewhere no matter the circumstances, just wouldn't stay in SF.

regarding 'big jump', say he did make a big jump in 2012...........then we wouldn't be able to sign him so easily. he'll have much more leverage on the 49ers, will command much more money.