Why it should be Kaep, Luck or Peyton for 2012

[deep9er]

I love the 'idea' of Peyton - but I agree with this opinion.

me too.

if there was an easy answer at QB, EVERYONE would be on the same page.

 

[MW49ers5]

me too.

if there was an easy answer at QB, EVERYONE would be on the same page.

Exactly. And, for what it is worth, I don't think the reward is worth the risk. If we had gone 8-8 with Smith being the obvious reason for the poor season - then perhaps, otherwise, as I see it, we were/are a 13-3 team that was but a few mistakes away from having a serious shot at winning a SB without Manning.

 

[imac_21]

1. Kap is a 2nd round QB for a reason, in the history of the NFL draft, most 2nd rounders don't become quality starters.....at all.

Doesn't that apply to every round? Presumably, the higher a player is drafted the better chance he has at becoming a quality starter. Do "most" 1st round quarterbacks become "quality starters?"

 

[imac_21]

Exactly. And, for what it is worth, I don't think the reward is worth the risk. If we had gone 8-8 with Smith being the obvious reason for the poor season - then perhaps, otherwise, as I see it, we were/are a 13-3 team that was but a few mistakes away from having a serious shot at winning a SB without Manning.

Doesn't that absolutely make it worth the risk to bring in Manning? If we get him for 15M, and he is 80% of the Peyton Manning we all saw for the last decade, where does this team end up?

 

[bvanthielriceyoung]

I'm saying No to Manning. Why pay that guy 16-20 million per year coming off a neck injury that has taking forever to heal. If we payout that kind of money we will be unable to sign a lot of our free agents as well. I think keeping this team intact out weights getting Manning, and even if we got him who does he throw the ball too? We would still need to upgrade our receivers.

Who would you rather have hypothetically...

Peyton Manning

Or

Alex Smith and Dashon Goldson

Even Alex Smith and A. Brooks will probably be pretty close to the salary maybe have to throw a lower tier guy in there like a Ted Ginn too. Either way seems like a pretty easy decision.

 

[MHSL82]

Who would you rather have hypothetically...

Peyton Manning

Or

Alex Smith and Dashon Goldson

Even Alex Smith and A. Brooks will probably be pretty close to the salary maybe have to throw a lower tier guy in there like a Ted Ginn too. Either way seems like a pretty easy decision.

Actually, it's Peyton Manning (who is coming off neck injury and older) or Alex Smith and Dashon Goldson. If we sign Peyton or Alex, it means that we're best off in the coaches' eyes not going to Kaepernick right away. One regular hit and Kaepernick is in. Now, bigger hits can always sideline any player, but with Manning's neck injury it might be more likely. I'm of the mind that all this worrying about signing Alex for 10 million and losing out is paranoid, but Peyton scale could be a problem because that's another 6-18 more (according to the 28 number).

 

[imac_21]

Actually, it's Peyton Manning (who is coming off neck injury and older) or Alex Smith and Dashon Goldson. If we sign Peyton or Alex, it means that we're best off in the coaches' eyes not going to Kaepernick right away. One regular hit and Kaepernick is in. Now, bigger hits can always sideline any player, but with Manning's neck injury it might be more likely. I'm of the mind that all this worrying about signing Alex for 10 million and losing out is paranoid, but Peyton scale could be a problem because that's another 6-18 more (according to the 28 number).

Everyone keeps acting as if we would be signing Manning without due diligence regarding the injury. Obviously (I hope) if he can't pass a physical he wouldn't be signed.

So, if he passes a physical, would your rather him or Smith and Goldson?

Furthermore, why can't it be Manning and Goldson as well? It isn't as if we can't manipulate contracts to make them fit.

 

[MHSL82]

Everyone keeps acting as if we would be signing Manning without due diligence regarding the injury. Obviously (I hope) if he can't pass a physical he wouldn't be signed.

So, if he passes a physical, would your rather him or Smith and Goldson?

Furthermore, why can't it be Manning and Goldson as well? It isn't as if we can't manipulate contracts to make them fit.

Even passing a physical doesn't change that he's more susceptible to injury. I was just adding to the equation, not saying that Alex > Manning with an injury.

I'm biased in this matter, so my opinion here doesn't count. I'll admit it right off the bat (as many know), so I can't give you an objective answer. I lived in Utah when Alex played there and was ecstatic when my favorite team growing up picked him (my uncle is from SF so I followed them first and always since because of him), with the first overall pick to boot. I want Alex and the Niners to do well and I haven't written him off, so I would choose Alex and Goldson. Once I have reason to (subjective) and have written him off, I of course put the Niners over Alex. Note, that age factors into this reasoning. If I knew Manning was in his prime, I'd choose Manning, bias notwithstanding.

 

[Kinzu]

Who says we would be signing Manning? We would probably have trade for him and live with the contract the Colts just signed him to last year. I think it's wrong to assume they are just going to release him, and even if they do what are the odds he passes through the waiver wire?

Now then you could offer Crabtree and 1st round pick to get Manning. Crabtree's contract off sets some of the money Manning would be due, but then you only have 1 WR on the roster under contract. You still have 2 Pro-Bowl defensive players to re-sign and a few key contributors as well. Then you get down to needing to find people for Manning to throw the ball to.

That's a lot to squeeze into the cap for the next few years and it does not necessarily make the team any better. They have the cap space to easily work in Alex, Goldson, Rogers, a few other re-signs, and still go after a FA WR.

 

[MHSL82]

Who says we would be signing Manning? We would probably have trade for him and live with the contract the Colts just signed him to last year. I think it's wrong to assume they are just going to release him, and even if they do what are the odds he passes through the waiver wire?

Now then you could offer Crabtree and 1st round pick to get Manning. Crabtree's contract off sets some of the money Manning would be due, but then you only have 1 WR on the roster under contract. You still have 2 Pro-Bowl defensive players to re-sign and a few key contributors as well. Then you get down to needing to find people for Manning to throw the ball to.

That's a lot to squeeze into the cap for the next few years and it does not necessarily make the team any better. They have the cap space to easily work in Alex, Goldson, Rogers, a few other re-signs, and still go after a FA WR.

It's 38 million cap hit to trade and 28 million to keep him. 6-10 (forgt the number) to release him. He's either staying or he's released.

 

[clyde_carbon]

again, we're in a tough spot with no one close to being ready.

my guess is......most here don't want to pay Smith $10M per season, but we've got a good thing going with chemistry. we can pay Alex Smith and keep it going (be a play-off team), or go cheap with CK and be 6-10 this year, 8-8 the next?

not only do you risk the winning record and play-offs, but you risk the chemistry which could dissolve in half a season.

btw - after the season Alex just had there isn't much justification for letting him go, hence you're looking bad by reaching. you can only hope Alex wants WAY too much money.

I absolutely hate the assumption that we'd go 6-10 with Kap in the lineup. It's not like this team was reliant on the QB position this year.

How go you gauge chemistry? How much chemistry would we lose? Which of our WRs has Alex clearly established consistent chemistry with?

 

[MHSL82]

I absolutely hate the assumption that we'd go 6-10 with Kap in the lineup. It's not like this team was reliant on the QB position this year.

How go you gauge chemistry? How much chemistry would we lose? Which of our WRs has Alex clearly established consistent chemistry with?

It'll be more QB reliant this next year (2012), but I agree that 6-10 seems low. People need to remember not only Smith improved this year. Most others did too. With our schedule last year (2011) and as a rookie Kaep, 6-10 was a possibility. Next year will be harder, so if Kaep were a rookie, worse than 6-10 would be possible. But next year's harder schedule wouldn't outweigh what Kaep has learned with one year with the clipboard and so therefore I don't see 6-10 as a realistic possibility. (Convuluted enough for you?) I don't see 13-3 as one either, regardless of QB. So strength of schedule is a factor, also with the fact that +28 TO margin teams don't usually repeat that success; both Alex and Kaep would be negatively affected.

 

[imac_21]

Who says we would be signing Manning? We would probably have trade for him and live with the contract the Colts just signed him to last year. I think it's wrong to assume they are just going to release him, and even if they do what are the odds he passes through the waiver wire?

Now then you could offer Crabtree and 1st round pick to get Manning. Crabtree's contract off sets some of the money Manning would be due, but then you only have 1 WR on the roster under contract. You still have 2 Pro-Bowl defensive players to re-sign and a few key contributors as well. Then you get down to needing to find people for Manning to throw the ball to.

That's a lot to squeeze into the cap for the next few years and it does not necessarily make the team any better. They have the cap space to easily work in Alex, Goldson, Rogers, a few other re-signs, and still go after a FA WR.

No one has to trade for him. His 28M bonus is due March 8th. The league year starts March 13. The Colts have to make a decision on spending 28M on him before they can trade him.

Could they push the bonus back? That's a point of contention. The CBA states that contracts cannot be restructured between the last game of the regular season and the beginning of the league year. The PA will argue that changing the date would be restructuring.

But why would Manning agree to move the date so he can be traded? What does he gain from it? From Andrew Brandt (I'll link the article below).

Manning is in limbo right now, both medically and contractually. The medical part may be out of his control and up to Mother Nature. The contract, however, is totally in his control. He will want to know his fate as soon as possible, needing March 8th to get here as quickly as it can. Why would he prolong that?

Even if Manning were allowed and amenable to moving the date, he would not want to move it past the first couple days of the new League Year -- March 13th -- so if the Colts release him he would be on the market when teams make their quarterback decisions. And, of course, his neck condition will not be dramatically different in a week's time.

Parts 1 and 2 of the article.

Andrew Brandt: The Peyton Predicament

Andrew Brandt: The Peyton Predicament: Part 2

 

[clyde_carbon]

It'll be more QB reliant this next year (2012), but I agree that 6-10 seems low. People need to remember not only Smith improved this year. Most others did too. With our schedule last year (2011) and as a rookie Kaep, 6-10 was a possibility. Next year will be harder, so if Kaep were a rookie, worse than 6-10 would be possible. But next year's harder schedule wouldn't outweigh what Kaep has learned with one year with the clipboard and so therefore I don't see 6-10 as a realistic possibility. (Convuluted enough for you?) I don't see 13-3 as one either, regardless of QB. So strength of schedule is a factor, also with the fact that +28 TO margin teams don't usually repeat that success; both Alex and Kaep would be negatively affected.

Why would it be more QB reliant next year? Is our defense gonna get worse? Is our running game gonna get worse? Is Jim Harbaugh gonna decide to throw it more than 28 times per/gm?

Honestly, I don't see 13-3 next year even if Alex is the QB. We'll probably be as good, but as you said with the harder schedule and people taking aim for us earlier we'll probably end up with a 10-6 or 11-5 record. I don't think we'll win 13 games whether we have Alex or Kap in the lineup.

 

[MHSL82]

Why would it be more QB reliant next year? Is our defense gonna get worse? Is our running game gonna get worse? Is Jim Harbaugh gonna decide to throw it more than 28 times per/gm?

Honestly, I don't see 13-3 next year even if Alex is the QB. We'll probably be as good, but as you said with the harder schedule and people taking aim for us earlier we'll probably end up with a 10-6 or 11-5 record. I don't think we'll win 13 games whether we have Alex or Kap in the lineup.

Maybe I mispoke. What I meant was we're going to need better QB play next year because of the schedule. Plus, the plays will be more complex because a deeper playbook will be thrown at them in the offseason. Our defense and running may get worse but the biggest thing is historically our TO margin will get worse, and so what I meant was that we would be relying on the QB play (quality over quantity) more this next year. Who knows, I guess, maybe the balls will bounce our way, the defense and running will get better, and the plays will be simple, but my bet is that it's going to get higher as the schedule gets tougher and expectations grow. So my response to your statement was that this last year is not a strong corelation to what is needed next year. So the fact that we did not rely on the QB this last year does not alter the question of how Kaep would do next year facing different teams, as you say gunning for us. Still, after all that, I said you were right. Kaep would not be 6-10 or worse next year.

And I said neither QB would reach 13 wins this next year, so I think that's a moot point for the time being.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Maybe I mispoke. What I meant was we're going to need better QB play next year because of the schedule. Plus, the plays will be more complex because a deeper playbook will be thrown at them in the offseason. Our defense and running may get worse but the biggest thing is historically our TO margin will get worse, and so what I meant is we would be relying on the QB play (quality over quantity) more this next year. Who knows, I guess, maybe the ball will bounce our way, the defense and running will get better, and the plays will be simple, but my bet is that it's going to get higher as the schedule gets tougher and expectations grow.

And I said neither QB would reach 13 wins this next year, so I think that's a moot point for the time being.

Absolutely. I too think we're gonna need better QB play. We're gonna need better QB play than what both Alex and Kap are gonna offer. We're always gonna need better QB play until we find our franchise QB.

I think either QB will be limited in terms of what Harbaugh/Roman will ask of them to do next year. The focal points for our team will remain defense/running and good special teams. That's why I'm not placing resigning Alex as a priority.

 

[MW49ers5]

Doesn't that absolutely make it worth the risk to bring in Manning? If we get him for 15M, and he is 80% of the Peyton Manning we all saw for the last decade, where does this team end up?

Well, if I understand your argument correctly, then I would still say no based on the following variables. A $10M contract for Smith and Manning's post season performance over the past decade.

As I see it, the only relatively certain difference Manning could have made this year is an improved offensive ranking. Thus instead of being 14-4 with a low ranked passing offense we could have been 14-4 with a higher ranked passing offense.

 

[imac_21]

Well, if I understand your argument correctly, then I would still say no based on the following variables. A $10M contract for Smith and Manning's post season performance over the past decade.

As I see it, the only relatively certain difference Manning could have made this year is an improved offensive ranking. Thus instead of being 14-4 with a low ranked passing offense we could have been 14-4 with a higher ranked passing offense.

I apologize in advance for the randomness of this post. At about the third paragraph it became a bit of a stream of conscience. I got very loosely mathematical in the analysis, so anyone interested in that can give it a look. If you don't care that much, you don't have to read it (obviously).

You don't think Manning could have been the difference last week?

I think it's largely a myth that he performs poorly in the playoffs as well. Here's a link to his postseason stats. Are they on the level of his regular season stats? No, but he's also playing against some of the best defenses in the league for a lot of those games.

I also think when calculating the risk/reward of replacing Smith with Manning is the downside. I think you'd be hard pressed to make a solid argument that the ceiling with Alex Smith is as high as the ceiling with Peyton Manning (16 games, neck fully healed).

But what about the floor? I'm not going to project a floor for Smith, but what is the floor with Peyton? Obviously it's that the neck injury flares up and he can't play. So then the question becomes Kaep vs Smith.

Now, in terms of math we could get quite complex here, but that would involve applying arbitrary numbers to what we get out of each of the QBs. To me, the question is are you willing to settle for the drop-off from Smith's best to Kaepernick by going after the upgrade of Smith's best to Manning's?

The immeasurable variable here for us (accepting that we can apply relative numbers to Manning, Smith and Kaepernick's potential performances) is the odds of Manning's neck flaring up. There would have to be a point where anyone would say "Manning is too great of an injury risk. We're better of with Smith." That point for each of us would change though (is it 50% Manning stays healthy that you risk it? 75%? 25%?)

Frankly, I don't know what the number would be for me. Probably in the 50-65% range.

I feel the risk greatly outweighs the reward if we get to 75%.

We could, in theory, apply numbers to each QB. Let Manning's ceiling (best possible outcome for us) = 10/10. If Manning is a 10, what is Smith's ceiling? 6 or 7? I'll grant benefit of the doubt and say 7. What's his floor? I think Smith is what he is at this point. Let's put his floor at a 5 (again, relative to Peyton's ceiling). Now, the question becomes what do we expect from Kaepernick? I would say his ceiling would be a 6 or 7 as well (but a different 7. More turnovers, but more "big, explosive" plays as well). What's Kaepernick's floor? I would say a 4. Another factor I didn't mention above is Manning's floor without injury. I would say Manning's worst if he plays the whole season is better than Smith's best, so I would put it at an 8.

So, we have the option between hitting between a 5 and a 7 (Smith) or a 4 and a 10 (Kaep to Manning).

So how much of a gambler are you? Again, as I mentioned above, the faith you have in Manning's neck is a key factor for anyone here.

 

[yossarian]

Isn't it true that the deadline to sign Smith before he's out on the open market and the deadline for the Colts to pay Manning's bonus are really close together? If we we were interested in signing Manning wouldn't that entail stringing Smith along and not signing him before he goes out in the open market, increasing the chances that we wind up with neither qb?

 

[deep9er]

I absolutely hate the assumption that we'd go 6-10 with Kap in the lineup. It's not like this team was reliant on the QB position this year.

How go you gauge chemistry? How much chemistry would we lose? Which of our WRs has Alex clearly established consistent chemistry with?

actually, its not about the record we each predict, its the chance your willing to take on CK? the expectations are now sky high for this team, it doesn't take much poor QB play to de-rail it. you'll take the chance because you want Alex gone, not because you really think CK will match.

its team chemistry, not just Alex and WR's.

i'm not defending Alex Smith as our future, but looking at the other options, this is the lesser of the evils.