Offseason thread, WR hunt, Cap Space now $4.768M not counting JJ and Jacobs

[Crimsoncrew]

we don't need superior talent we need actual talent.

goodwin/snyder is not very good and definately could use an upgrade at least at guard. it would help the run game and the pass equally

our wr's are horrible, losing edwards and morgan was a major blow. i don't think i have seen one person that claims qb is a bigger issue on the offense.

WR is a huge need because right now we only have one WR who is even tolerable on the roster, and every offense in the league starts at least two of them. Many start three. So we literally have a hole at a starting position. If we had two guys of Crabtree's ability, I'd wager that significantly more focus would be on Smith.

 

[Bemular]

Earlier you wrote:

"All of the excuses you make for Smith also apply to Crabtree."

So are you now saying that rule applies only to the Crabtree/Smith relationship and only applies to the negative and thus any positives that our other receivers have experienced with Smith as our QB are due mostly if not entirely to their own talents and Smith has nothing to do with those positives?

Now we're discussing two different things. On the one hand, we're evaluating Smith as an NFL quarterback. On that scale, he has been disappointing throughout his career and is presently an average or very slightly above average starting QB. On the other hand, we're evaluating what his receivers have done. Of course Smith plays a role in Davis' success. He throws the ball to Davis. But Davis gets open constantly, making Smith's job much easier. He is also nearly unstoppable running the deep seam. That happens to be one of the balls that Smith throws very well.

Crabtree is not a great receiver. He does not have the physical tools to get open the way Davis does, and he has not yet developed enough of a manufactured skill set (routes, reliable hands, rapport with his QB) to get very open on a regular basis. I think he has been disappointing. But he has not been nearly as bad as Iguana would make him out to be (for instance, by comparing him to a QB who has a career rating of 55.2 and a 2-11 record). And because Smith is not very good at throwing to the sidelines (long, short, or just plain off) or throwing the slant (regularly thrown high), Crabtree is hurt by Smith's weaknesses just as Davis is helped by Smith's strengths. If Crabtree were a great receiver, I'm sure he could put up pretty good numbers with Smith at QB. That doesn't and wouldn't make Smith a better QB or a good QB.

If that is what you are claiming I would have to vehemently disagree. If that is not what you are saying then you will have to concede that Smith is equally as responsible (in a relative manner of speaking) for the success of our other receivers as he is for the failure of Crabtree.

What other receivers? What receiver, other than Vernon Davis, have succeeded with Smith at QB? The next guy on that list is Michael Crabtree. His last two seasons have been the most successful any WR has had playing with Smith.

And when compared on that level it would seem that the only receiver thus far not able to improve with Smith as our QB is Crabtree. Meaning that Crabtree is more likely to be Smith's problem than the other way around.

Who has improved? I'm not even sure Walker has really improved, at least statistically. His improvement effectively consists of moving into the starting lineup in his second season and thus getting more opportunities. His improvement between his second and third year was fairly modest and frankly comparable to Crabtree's improvement this year. This year isn't much of a sample size for Morgan, but it extrapolates out to an improvement of six more yards and one more TD.

Who else has improved? Where are all these WRs that are apparently lighting it up? Did Ted Ginn improve? Did Jason Hill improve? Did Arnaz Battle improve? Did Antonio Bryant improve? How can you possibly argue that Crabtree is the only receiver not to improve with Smith at QB?

Again, I have no skin in this argument but it does seem as if you are moving the goal posts a little. I'm not trying to change your mind but perhaps just give you a different point of view to consider.

Again, I'm not saying Smith is so terrible that no one could have success with him at QB. I'm saying he's not currently good enough to be successful with average NFL talent supporting him. Those are different arguments, and if anyone is moving the goal posts, it's you.

I don't move goal posts and you are losing your mind - Your argument is not even rational anymore. You are now throwing our WR's whom were not even on the team in 2009. Like I said, I am not that interested in this debate - but good luck with it.

 

[Flyingiguana]

there is no double standard. i just don't think crabtree is a good wr and at best i think he should be a #3. the dorsey comparison was about lacking the physical abilities to be an effective starter.

i've stated this before i think smith's upside is rich gannon. there really isnt a wr that compares.

 

[Flyingiguana]

WR is a huge need because right now we only have one WR who is even tolerable on the roster, and every offense in the league starts at least two of them. Many start three. So we literally have a hole at a starting position. If we had two guys of Crabtree's ability, I'd wager that significantly more focus would be on Smith.

well one crabtree was bad enough for everyone and their dog to say we need an upgrade. so...

 

[Crimsoncrew]

I don't move goal posts and you are losing your mind - Your argument is not even rational anymore. You are now throwing our WR's whom were not even on the team in 2009. Like I said, I am not that interested in this debate - but good luck with it.

What about that post lacked reason? You said Crabtree is the only guy not to improve with Smith. So who has improved? That, at least, should be a simple question.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

well one crabtree was bad enough for everyone and their dog to say we need an upgrade. so...

No, having only one WR was enough for everyone and their dog say we need another one.

Yet again, if Crabtree is so bad, why haven't any of our other WRs outperformed him in the last seven years? If Crabtree is comparable to one of the most physically limited QBs to every play in the NFL, why has he been more effective than Morgan, Williams, Bryant, Hill, etc? Why can't you or Bem answer that?

 

[Flyingiguana]

you're seriously gonna say crabtree was a better wr than bryant? i'd put bryant a notch below lloyd who is much better than crabtree

 

[Flyingiguana]

No, having only one WR was enough for everyone and their dog say we need another one.

Yet again, if Crabtree is so bad, why haven't any of our other WRs outperformed him in the last seven years? If Crabtree is comparable to one of the most physically limited QBs to every play in the NFL, why has he been more effective than Morgan, Williams, Bryant, Hill, etc? Why can't you or Bem answer that?

you need to use this thing called the internet and read. ratto summed it up nicely, and he would call you nuts for saying it was smith and not the wr's. crabtree was the #1 guy, he didn't even play like a #4

 

[Bemular]

No, having only one WR was enough for everyone and their dog say we need another one.

Yet again, if Crabtree is so bad, why haven't any of our other WRs outperformed him in the last seven years? If Crabtree is comparable to one of the most physically limited QBs to every play in the NFL, why has he been more effective than Morgan, Williams, Bryant, Hill, etc? Why can't you or Bem answer that?

Speaking only for myself, what you have offered here are merely opinions disguised as a question or questions. And, as I have stated previously, I don't have enough interest in the debate to participate beyond what I already have. But, again, good luck

 

[Crimsoncrew]

you're seriously gonna say crabtree was a better wr than bryant? i'd put bryant a notch below lloyd who is much better than crabtree

No. But he has been more effective on the 49ers.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

you need to use this thing called the internet and read. ratto summed it up nicely, and he would call you nuts for saying it was smith and not the wr's. crabtree was the #1 guy, he didn't even play like a #4

I'm reading this as, "I don't have an answer, so I'm trying to avoid the question." If you mean something else, feel free to, you know, address the points.

 

[Flyingiguana]

No. But he has been more effective on the 49ers.

i would disagree. bryant gave us some big play ability to punish teams when they loaded up against gore. vernon gives us even more big play ability, yet crabtree just like arnaz battle in that promising 2006 season under norv couldn't take advantage.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Speaking only for myself, what you have offered here are merely opinions disguised as a question or questions. And, as I have stated previously, I don't have enough interest in the debate to participate beyond what I already have. But, again, good luck

My questions are just that, questions. You made some statements and I asked you to support them. You have said everyone except Crabtree has improved. Back that up with evidence. You love to talk stats, shouldn't be too hard to support such apparently obvious claims. Who has improved and by how much relative to Crabtree? Who has had success and how much relative to Crabtree? You stated your opinion, I'm asking you to support it.

Now, I did state a few opinions in there. Since you're a bit shaky on identifying opinions, I'll help you out:

Davis gets open often because he is a physical mismatch. Davis is nearly unstoppable down the seam, and Smith throws that pass well.

Crabtree is not a great receiver. He does not have great physical tools. He had not developed tools that can be developed. He has been better, comparatively, than one of the weakest-armed QBs to ever start an NFL game.

Smith is not very good throwing to the sidelines. Smith is not very good at throwing the slant. Crabtree is hurt to some extent because Smith struggles throwing these balls.

Then we have some questions (see above).

Morgan's statistical performance has not improved very much, and certainly not much given the context (first three and a half years in the league, moving from backup to starter).

If you disagree with any of those, feel free to point it out and explain why you disagree. If you don't want to, don't. But don't accuse people of moving the goal posts and then weasel your way out of answering direct questions. That's pretty chickenshit.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

i would disagree. bryant gave us some big play ability to punish teams when they loaded up against gore. vernon gives us even more big play ability, yet crabtree just like arnaz battle in that promising 2006 season under norv couldn't take advantage.

That's a good point. Bryant's ability stretching the field is certainly something Crabtree lacks, and in our offense, especially in 2006, that was probably more valuable than what Crabtree brings to the table. So Bryant I'll concede Bryant was more effective with Smith. He still fell off dramatically in production that year compared to his years before and after.

So that's one receiver that's arguably been better than Crabtree. But Crabtree has virtually no physical talent. So what about the rest?

 

[Flyingiguana]

what about the rest? we've had nothing but crap wr's. that's why we went after edwards since we needed a #1.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

what about the rest? we've had nothing but crap wr's. that's why we went after edwards since we needed a #1.

I'll just take that as you conceding the obvious: that your Dorsey comment was hyperbolic BS.

 

[Flyingiguana]

dorsey was able to get yards and even put in a 3 td game. crabtree was able to get yards, but that doesn't mean he's worthy of being a starter.

crabtree is damaged goods and he has been before we drafted him. he has physical limitations just like dorsey has which affects how good they can be.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

dorsey was able to get yards and even put in a 3 td game. crabtree was able to get yards, but that doesn't mean he's worthy of being a starter.

crabtree is damaged goods and he has been before we drafted him. he has physical limitations just like dorsey has which affects how good they can be.

Good counter. That's the sort of argument Cazic would use to criticize Alex Smith. Congrats, you are OFFICIALLY on his level.

 

[Flyingiguana]

i'm just showing you the facts. put a guy in a position to be the #1 guy and they can put up numbers. all you've given are numbers but yet when the chips were down in the playoffs and late in games it was other players and not crabtree stepping up. u can bash smith all u want, but at least he turned it on when it counted.

look at the damn list of wr's we've had here. the bar isnt exactly being set very high for crabtree.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

i'm just showing you the facts. put a guy in a position to be the #1 guy and they can put up numbers. all you've given are numbers but yet when the chips were down in the playoffs and late in games it was other players and not crabtree stepping up. u can bash smith all u want, but at least he turned it on when it counted.

look at the damn list of wr's we've had here. the bar isnt exactly being set very high for crabtree.

Except, you know, when it REALLY counted. Smith had a decent season. He is still limited. Crabtree is in the same boat. I think they're comparable players in terms of where they stand in relation to others at their positions. You clearly think Smith is far better, and Crabtree far worse, than I do. I'm find with that. I tend to think I'm quite a bit more objective than you on this subject.