Michael Crabtree

[MW49ers5]

I found this on another board and thought is was funny and perhaps a little profound based on his post game comments:

Okay....Crabtree wants the ball, lets put him where he might get his hands on it 5-10 times a game....KR/PR.

I think the position would be perfect for him for the following reasons:

1. He'll be the featured player any time the ball is kicked.

2. He won't have to get separation....in fact the other team's players must give him a chance to catch the ball.

3. If he thinks he might get hurt, he can call for a 'fair catch'.

4. He won't have to practice with Alex.

I only see one problem....He's got to learn to catch the fucking ball!

 

[deep9er]

Deep, it seems as if you are invoking the reverse argument - suggesting we should keep him just for the sake of keeping him. I would MUCH rather give Michael Crabtree's targets next season to Joshua Morgan.

If that were to happen, we would then be positioning Crabtree at the same level as Williams & Ginn. I suppose if Crabtree wanted to renegotiate for that level of production then that could be an option as well.

Conversely, if we continue to keep Morgan on the sideline while Crabtree sucks up contract snaps I think we are hurting the team - thus the reason for my addition by subtraction comment.

no, want to keep him cause i think he can contribute a lot going forward. no longer claiming he'll be a "solid starter", but don't see why he can't contribute?

can't deny his production isn't there, so "let him compete" for a job is fair. if Crabtree is so bad, why should you worry? he'll be gone as we bring in other WRs. if Morgan is so good why should you worry, he'll get his snaps Crabtree or no Crabtree.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

A few thoughts on this topic.

I realize people are angry in the wake of an ugly loss, but dropping or trading Crabtree for a relatively low pick is not a solution. First and foremost, we have two WRs under contract through next year: Michael Crabtree and Kyle Williams. So do we get rid of them both and go clean slate at the position? Of course not. We need to keep them both and hope that, as young players, they have learned from their struggles in their first postseason.

Beyond that, I don't think we had another WR who proved to have more worth than Crabtree, at least this season. Morgan was hurt after showing some promise, and I'm eager to see if he can pick up where he left off. But it's not like we've got loads of talent at the position and Crabtree is keeping them on the bench. Brett Swain was our #3 for God's sake. Williams and Ginn were both inconsistent. Edwards was a disaster. Crabtree, inconsistent as he was at times, was easily our most consistent guy.

Beyond the simple reality that we need wide receivers on the roster, Crabtree is a decent receiver. He is what he is: a possession-type player who will likely never make huge, game-changing plays (at least not on a regular basis). But he's pretty good in the role he played this year. If we can look past where he was drafted, he is still a starting caliber WR IMO, though it is looking like he is better-suited in a complementary role rather than a leading role.

Crabtree has progressed a lot this season. I'm as irritated as anyone that he completely disappeared in the playoffs, but that doesn't change the fact that he really came on pretty well at the end of the season. He also made tremendous strides as a blocker and team player. I'll have to review the film, but I thought that he made a couple very good blocks on Sunday. That's not enough in and of itself, but it shows a willingness to do the dirty work that he resisted earlier in his career, and makes me hope that he is finally committing to the team concept.

Finally, as far as yesterday, I'll have to look at my recording and even then won't have a great sense, but I wonder the extent to which Crabtree wasn't getting open, and the extent to which he wasn't getting opportunities. I recall three balls that were batted at the line. One was to Gore, but it seems likely at least one of the others was to Crabtree. The Giants seemed to be on to the slants, and were getting their hands up to bat them down. Smith missed Crabtree high on the sideline on one throw, and threw at his feet once or twice as well (once on a second and ten that would have picked up five or so, as memory serves). The quick slant wasn't working, and Smith generally wasn't getting past one read. He fled the pocket a lot, and threw very poorly while moving to his right. According to Cosell (again, I'd have to take a look at the film), Crabtree was wide open on the first third down, but Smith missed him. So maybe there is some truth to his theory that he was getting open. At least enough to merit more than the five throws he received.

Other than the two TD passes, Smith didn't even hit the easy throws on Sunday. How much of that was his receivers not getting open vs. the weather vs. nerves facing the pass rush, etc.? I'm not at all ready to lay it all on Crabtree given that our passing offense effectively consisted of two passes to Davis and dumpoffs to Gore. Though again, I'll take a look at the tape. Should have paid more attention to Crabtree at the game - my father even called to ask what was going on with Crabtree - but I was too busy focusing on the lines.

It's clear we need to address WR this year, but getting rid of Crabtree will only make the problem worse.

 

[MW49ers5]

no, want to keep him cause i think he can contribute a lot going forward. no longer claiming he'll be a "solid starter", but don't see why he can't contribute?

can't deny his production isn't there, so "let him compete" for a job is fair. if Crabtree is so bad, why should you worry? he'll be gone as we bring in other WRs. if Morgan is so good why should you worry, he'll get his snaps Crabtree or no Crabtree.

If you know he'll likely never be a solid starter why would you worry if we cut him? If you know his production doesn't justify his price why would you even want to keep him?

Do you think he can contribute more than Williams, Ginn or Morgan enough to justify his salary? I don't. So, either reduce his salary (as I said earlier) or cut him and lets move on. To broaden your point, there is nothing to worry about.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

If you know he'll likely never be a solid starter why would you worry if we cut him? If you know his production doesn't justify his price why would you even want to keep him?

Do you think he can contribute more than Williams, Ginn or Morgan enough to justify his salary? I don't. So, either reduce his salary (as I said earlier) or cut him and lets move on. To broaden your point, there is nothing to worry about.

That depends largely on what Morgan and Ginn are making.

 

[MW49ers5]

That depends largely on what Morgan and Ginn are making.

You know, I keep forgetting that Morgan is a FA this year - for some reason I can't seem to lock that in memory...

 

[Crimsoncrew]

You know, I keep forgetting that Morgan is a FA this year - for some reason I can't seem to lock that in memory...

I doubt he'll command a lot of money, but we absolutely cannot consider moving Crabtree until or unless we have re-signed Morgan. That would give Morgan a tremendous amount of leverage in negotiations.

 

[MW49ers5]

I doubt he'll command a lot of money, but we absolutely cannot consider moving Crabtree until or unless we have re-signed Morgan. That would give Morgan a tremendous amount of leverage in negotiations.

1000% agree...and even Ginn depending on the 'plan' there. But, Morgan, yeah absolutely...moving Crabtree prior to signing him would increase his demand.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Where we stand right now cap wise we are forced to use Morgan's money on a better WR if we can. If we are turned down by the free agent WR then we can sign Morgan. Also, unless we replace Ginn with a draft pick we could be forced to choose Ginn over Morgan.

 

[deep9er]

If you know he'll likely never be a solid starter why would you worry if we cut him? If you know his production doesn't justify his price why would you even want to keep him?

Do you think he can contribute more than Williams, Ginn or Morgan enough to justify his salary? I don't. So, either reduce his salary (as I said earlier) or cut him and lets move on. To broaden your point, there is nothing to worry about.

my opinion on Crabtree is more positive than yours, we can still use his play. his production wasn't good but do we automatically cut every player fitting this criteria? think he can hang on to starter role, just not a solid starter.

yes, do think he can contribute more than Williams, Ginn, or Morgan, neither of whom are lighting it up themselves. do we know Morgan will be the same? but as i said earlier, think its fair they throw the balls out and let them compete. we don't have to argue who's better now, they play it out themselves.

what do we gain by cutting Crabtree today? is his contract really that big? if we go out and sign a FA to take his place, is this other guy better AND cheaper?

i'm not worrying about it, you're the one pushing to cut him tomorrow.

 

[MW49ers5]

"My opinion on Crabtree is more positive than yours, we can still use his play."

I understand about your opinion and I'm making respectful concessions just as I would hope you would for my personal opinion. As for his play, I agree we can use it but at what cost is the question.


"His production wasn't good but do we automatically cut every player fitting this criteria?"

Actually, the answer to your question is 75-100% of the time, yes! Players who are low producers either renegotiate their contracts or they are simply cut.


Yes, I do think he can contribute more than Williams, Ginn, or Morgan, neither of whom are lighting it up themselves.

And yet comparatively speaking they are 'lighting it up' as much as Crabtree is. What I mean here is simply this, if we were to give either Williams or Ginn the same number of targets we give Crabtree, could we reasonably assume a relative level of production - I say yes; with Morgan, I think we would get more production.


Do we know Morgan will be the same?

No, he could be even better. Do we know Crabtree won’t be worse.


But as i said earlier, think its fair they throw the balls out and let them compete. we don't have to argue who's better now, they play it out themselves.

Agreed, but the problem with that strategy is that Crabtree still has contractual leverage and I think that begins to hurt our team next year if it hasn't already.


What do we gain by cutting Crabtree today?

Well, as Crimson's comments reminded me - nothing, in fact it would be a detriment.


Is his contract really that big? if we go out and sign a FA to take his place, is this other guy better AND cheaper?

I think his base for 2012 is $3.5m with a $500,000 workout bonus. I don't know what his 'dead' would be, but I know he has received most of his guaranteed so I am guessing it would be nominal.

As to your FA comment, that comment alone should give you reason to pause and wonder why we are keeping him, or at least keeping him at his salary.


I'm not worrying about it, you're the one pushing to cut him tomorrow

I'm not worried either, I just thought you were - As for cutting him tomorrow that is not true at all, until Crimson chimed in I wanted to cut him yesterday.

 

[MW49ers5]

Some of you may be familiar with this writer (The Bay Area Sports Guy - BASG), anyway, I thought this was a decently written piece about Crabtree. As with all articles you will either agree, disagree or both.

What To Do About Michael Crabtree

 

[AU_Fever]

Some of you may be familiar with this writer (The Bay Area Sports Guy - BASG), anyway, I thought this was a decently written piece about Crabtree. As with all articles you will either agree, disagree or both.

What To Do About Michael Crabtree

Good artcile MW. With Williams and Crabtree the only receivers signed for 2012, it is imperative that the Niners sign a receiver thru FA and also draft one within the first two rounds of the upcoming draft. Niners need a true #1 WR to complement Crabtree, who is no more that a #2 receiver. I am just frustrated with his "me first" attitude.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Good artcile MW. With Williams and Crabtree the only receivers signed for 2012, it is imperative that the Niners sign a receiver thru FA and also draft one within the first two rounds of the upcoming draft. Niners need a true #1 WR to complement Crabtree, who is no more that a #2 receiver. I am just frustrated with his "me first" attitude.

I'm not sure this perception is accurate. Crabtree's comments in the past have shown a touch of delusion (I've never had a problem dropping the ball, I'm getting open just not seeing the ball, etc.), but on the field he has generally demonstrated a team first attitude. He has been a willing blocker this season. Until the aftermath of this game, he hasn't made any disparaging remarks about his teammates. In the recent case, he was getting grilled about disappearing in the playoffs, following a devastating loss, and he got defensive. He's a socially awkward guy, but I really don't believe he's the diva he's been portrayed as. I think he's just a loner who is uncomfortable being in the public eye.

As for the article, I thought it was a fair consideration of the dilemma. I think we keep Crabtree. His contract isn't exorbitant, and he's signed for three more seasons barring a pro bowl year next year. Given Fitz, Megatron, Jennings, White, and Steve Smith, not to mention Nicks and Cruz, that's unlikely. I believe a decent chunk of his contract is tied up in workout bonuses.

I know some disagree, but I think Crabtree is a pretty solid second receiver. People are letting his disappearance in the playoffs overshadow what really was a pretty good second half of the season. And we are so thin at WR right now that we'd have to make multiple moves at the position to even consider parting with Crabtree. So he gets at least another year to step up and make some more plays. Hopefully he gets in for the offseason workouts, improves his rapport with Smith, and stops with the easy drops.

 

[deep9er]

"My opinion on Crabtree is more positive than yours, we can still use his play."

I understand about your opinion and I'm making respectful concessions just as I would hope you would for my personal opinion. As for his play, I agree we can use it but at what cost is the question.


"His production wasn't good but do we automatically cut every player fitting this criteria?"

Actually, the answer to your question is 75-100% of the time, yes! Players who are low producers either renegotiate their contracts or they are simply cut.


Yes, I do think he can contribute more than Williams, Ginn, or Morgan, neither of whom are lighting it up themselves.

And yet comparatively speaking they are 'lighting it up' as much as Crabtree is. What I mean here is simply this, if we were to give either Williams or Ginn the same number of targets we give Crabtree, could we reasonably assume a relative level of production - I say yes; with Morgan, I think we would get more production.


Do we know Morgan will be the same?

No, he could be even better. Do we know Crabtree won’t be worse.


But as i said earlier, think its fair they throw the balls out and let them compete. we don't have to argue who's better now, they play it out themselves.

Agreed, but the problem with that strategy is that Crabtree still has contractual leverage and I think that begins to hurt our team next year if it hasn't already.


What do we gain by cutting Crabtree today?

Well, as Crimson's comments reminded me - nothing, in fact it would be a detriment.


Is his contract really that big? if we go out and sign a FA to take his place, is this other guy better AND cheaper?

I think his base for 2012 is $3.5m with a $500,000 workout bonus. I don't know what his 'dead' would be, but I know he has received most of his guaranteed so I am guessing it would be nominal.

As to your FA comment, that comment alone should give you reason to pause and wonder why we are keeping him, or at least keeping him at his salary.


I'm not worrying about it, you're the one pushing to cut him tomorrow

I'm not worried either, I just thought you were - As for cutting him tomorrow that is not true at all, until Crimson chimed in I wanted to cut him yesterday.

so after all this 'shooting the breeze', we're back to square 1......i have a higher opinion of him than you? no problem.

Agreed, but the problem with that strategy is that Crabtree still has contractual leverage and I think that begins to hurt our team next year if it hasn't already.

so you agree we should keep Crabtree at least thru the off-season. glad to see you changed your mind and sorry i don't write like Crimson.

don't understand the part where Crabtree has contractual leverage? if we keep him for the off-season and let him compete, why is that?

 

[h0ckeysk83r]

I'm not sure this perception is accurate. Crabtree's comments in the past have shown a touch of delusion (I've never had a problem dropping the ball, I'm getting open just not seeing the ball, etc.), but on the field he has generally demonstrated a team first attitude. He has been a willing blocker this season. Until the aftermath of this game, he hasn't made any disparaging remarks about his teammates. In the recent case, he was getting grilled about disappearing in the playoffs, following a devastating loss, and he got defensive. He's a socially awkward guy, but I really don't believe he's the diva he's been portrayed as. I think he's just a loner who is uncomfortable being in the public eye.

As for the article, I thought it was a fair consideration of the dilemma. I think we keep Crabtree. His contract isn't exorbitant, and he's signed for three more seasons barring a pro bowl year next year. Given Fitz, Megatron, Jennings, White, and Steve Smith, not to mention Nicks and Cruz, that's unlikely. I believe a decent chunk of his contract is tied up in workout bonuses.

I know some disagree, but I think Crabtree is a pretty solid second receiver. People are letting his disappearance in the playoffs overshadow what really was a pretty good second half of the season. And we are so thin at WR right now that we'd have to make multiple moves at the position to even consider parting with Crabtree. So he gets at least another year to step up and make some more plays. Hopefully he gets in for the offseason workouts, improves his rapport with Smith, and stops with the easy drops.

Well said! I agree.

 

[MW49ers5]

so after all this 'shooting the breeze', we're back to square 1......i have a higher opinion of him than you? no problem.

Agreed, but the problem with that strategy is that Crabtree still has contractual leverage and I think that begins to hurt our team next year if it hasn't already.

so you agree we should keep Crabtree at least thru the off-season. glad to see you changed your mind and sorry i don't write like Crimson.

don't understand the part where Crabtree has contractual leverage? if we keep him for the off-season and let him compete, why is that?

Contractual leverage refers to the business side of football. This condition occurs when a player has been given 'starter money' whether from an extension, free agency or perhaps a '1st round' contract.

Players to us, the fans, are athletes or even icons, however to the owners of a team they are just investments and the only way an owner can realize a return on those investments is if they are playing.

Coaching staffs are under a lot of pressure to make sure the 'money' is on the field, thus creating contractual leverage over the other players at that position.

Most of the time the money is right and should be on the field, but sometimes it isn't and that is when players with equal talent (but a smaller contract) or those with a higher ceiling get lost in the shuffle.

IMO, Crabtree was and remains a bad investment that continues to see more playing time than his ability and/or production warrants. This is partially because of his contract. Thus when the balls are 'rolled out', to use your phrase, the playing field isn't necessarily level.

Edit: My Crimson comments were referring to him reminding me that Morgan is a FA this year and thus we would need to sign Morgan prior to releasing Crabtree if that is our intention. You write just fine as far as I'm concerned...

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Contractual leverage refers to the business side of football. This condition occurs when a player has been given 'starter money' whether from an extension, free agency or perhaps a '1st round' contract.

Players to us, the fans, are athletes or even icons, however to the owners of a team they are just investments and the only way an owner can realize a return on those investments is if they are playing.

Coaching staffs are under a lot of pressure to make sure the 'money' is on the field, thus creating contractual leverage over the other players at that position.

Most of the time the money is right and should be on the field, but sometimes it isn't and that is when players with equal talent (but a smaller contract) or those with a higher ceiling get lost in the shuffle.

IMO, Crabtree was and remains a bad investment that continues to see more playing time than his ability and/or production warrants. This is partially because of his contract. Thus when the balls are 'rolled out', to use your phrase, the playing field isn't necessarily level.

Edit: My Crimson comments were referring to him reminding me that Morgan is a FA this year and thus we would need to sign Morgan prior to releasing Crabtree if that is our intention. You write just fine as far as I'm concerned...

I think the leverage argument is generally valid, but I don't think it bears much here. Neither Baalke nor Harbaugh has any particular loyalty to Crabtree. He wasn't their pick. This season, they were perfectly willing to let Spencer sit on the bench under similar circumstances.

Other than perhaps Morgan pre-injury, no one was a legitimate threat to Crabtree as our #1 receiver, much less as a starter. From game four on, he was clearly our go-to guy, with no one else consistently getting involved. I have trouble believing that only happened due to his contract. Ginn and Williams both had ample opportunity to step up and neither really did it. I'm not saying they can't, especially in Williams' case. But they didn't this year.

 

[Kinzu]

I think Ginn is gone. The team will go harder after re-signing Morgan and let Ginn test the market. Ginn only returns to us if a.) he wants to, b.) no one else makes him an offer. (sorta like what happened with Goldson last year)

Our return man for next year will be Kyle Williams or a player from the draft. You may even see Hunter back there.

I'm just guessing of course, but I think our plan at WR will be to re-sign Morgan, go after a FA, and then draft one in the first 3 rounds.

I don't see the team doing anything with Crabtree. They will look at film see he was picking it up late in the season and give him a chance to build off of that, but I don't see him being the #1 receiver next year and he may not even be #2. If Crabtree wants to be a star WR in this league he will have to work hard to prove himself next year.

He needs to be a more reliable target for the QB and show that he will fight for the ball in the air. He started doing it late in the year, but then disappeared in the playoffs. He and Alex really need an offseason together to work on routes so here is hoping he stays injury free.

 

[Flyingiguana]

if kyle williams comes back as the punt returner someone or multiple ppl need to be fired.