Delete

Originally Posted by LazyJ10

Originally Posted by westcoastsfinest

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by milkandcookies

does no one realize mcnabb migh be going to STL ?!
I also heard that Oakland is in the mix as well.  Either way teams around us are making moves on securing a solid QB in McNabb while we aren't, which means bad news for us during the season.  
seriously...mcnabb still has it in him and if we dont jump on him it means were really satisfied with staying conservative and play it safe...what some of us dont understand if you wanna win you gotta take some risks and yes mcnabb is a risk but its a risk that can STILL produce...hes a veteran he knows what hes doing out there...good teams take that risk ask arizona with warner and most recently ask the vikes they took on the risk on old man favre look how that turned out...you could even add drew brees to that list enough said

  
The basis of your argument calls for risk.....isn't it pretty risky to give the keys to Smith in full.....?

youre joking right?

going with smith is playing it safe and hes our default qb...nothing out of the ordinary

a risk is trading a 1st round pick for a 33 year old qb
  
 
For what it's worth, Steve Spagnuolo squashed any rumors of the Rams offering their second pick for McNabb.
 
Originally Posted by westcoastsfinest

Originally Posted by LazyJ10

Originally Posted by westcoastsfinest

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by milkandcookies

does no one realize mcnabb migh be going to STL ?!
I also heard that Oakland is in the mix as well.  Either way teams around us are making moves on securing a solid QB in McNabb while we aren't, which means bad news for us during the season.  
seriously...mcnabb still has it in him and if we dont jump on him it means were really satisfied with staying conservative and play it safe...what some of us dont understand if you wanna win you gotta take some risks and yes mcnabb is a risk but its a risk that can STILL produce...hes a veteran he knows what hes doing out there...good teams take that risk ask arizona with warner and most recently ask the vikes they took on the risk on old man favre look how that turned out...you could even add drew brees to that list enough said

  
The basis of your argument calls for risk.....isn't it pretty risky to give the keys to Smith in full.....?
youre joking right?

going with smith is playing it safe and hes our default qb...nothing out of the ordinary

a risk is trading a 1st round pick for a 33 year old qb
  
Going with an unproven quarterback is playing it "safe"? I guess?

Go for it, trade on of your 1st rounders for McNabb.  I'm willing to wager you won't win the super bowl. So in return you may win the division and have a early playoff exit...all of which is possible under the plethora of QBs the 9ers have, regardless of how good/bad they are.

For the record, I don't think McNabb is washed up and I'm sure playing in Philly isn't exactly an easy market.  I just don't think the cost is worth the upside in comparison to the upside you'd have going into camp without the trade.

The 9ers need more help than just a QB, that's the point.  If you, or the rest of you, think McNabb is the one piece you need to hoist the Lombardi trophy than there's some denial going on.
 
Originally Posted by LazyJ10

Going with an unproven quarterback is playing it "safe"? I guess?

Go for it, trade on of your 1st rounders for McNabb.  I'm willing to wager you won't win the super bowl. So in return you may win the division and have a early playoff exit...all of which is possible under the plethora of QBs the 9ers have, regardless of how good/bad they are.

For the record, I don't think McNabb is washed up and I'm sure playing in Philly isn't exactly an easy market.  I just don't think the cost is worth the upside in comparison to the upside you'd have going into camp without the trade.

The 9ers need more help than just a QB, that's the point.  If you, or the rest of you, think McNabb is the one piece you need to hoist the Lombardi trophy than there's some denial going on.
yeah im willing to wager alex smith will not win us the superbowl
laugh.gif
...did i say mcnabb is the final piece? nope. did i say mcnabb is gonna take us to promise land? nope...do i think he can get us closer than alex smith can? yes

going with a guy already starting for us is playing it safe...thats alex i mean really what other choice do we have currently since we got rid of hill?

starting nate davis now i'll consider that a risk...other than meaningless preseason games we have seen nothing from him yet

all in all im saying that in order to win we need to take some of that risk...we havent done that in a while

  
 
Originally Posted by westcoastsfinest

Originally Posted by LazyJ10

Going with an unproven quarterback is playing it "safe"? I guess?

Go for it, trade on of your 1st rounders for McNabb.  I'm willing to wager you won't win the super bowl. So in return you may win the division and have a early playoff exit...all of which is possible under the plethora of QBs the 9ers have, regardless of how good/bad they are.

For the record, I don't think McNabb is washed up and I'm sure playing in Philly isn't exactly an easy market.  I just don't think the cost is worth the upside in comparison to the upside you'd have going into camp without the trade.

The 9ers need more help than just a QB, that's the point.  If you, or the rest of you, think McNabb is the one piece you need to hoist the Lombardi trophy than there's some denial going on.
yeah im willing to wager alex smith will not win us the superbowl
laugh.gif
...did i say mcnabb is the final piece? nope. did i say mcnabb is gonna take us to promise land? nope...do i think he can get us closer than alex smith can? yes

going with a guy already starting for us is playing it safe...thats alex i mean really what other choice do we have currently since we got rid of hill?

starting nate davis now i'll consider that a risk...other than meaningless preseason games we have seen nothing from him yet

all in all im saying that in order to win we need to take some of that risk...we havent done that in a while
 
Believe it or not, I get what you're saying.  I'm not huge on Alex Smith, but I am happy (if he remains starter and no McNabb deal happens) to see the guy attempt to operate with some continuity for once.  I hear you on taking a risk (much like AZ did) but I just don't think the cost/benefit is there to warrant the risk.

If it happens, it happens...
 
Originally Posted by LazyJ10

Believe it or not, I get what you're saying.  I'm not huge on Alex Smith, but I am happy (if he remains starter and no McNabb deal happens) to see the guy attempt to operate with some continuity for once.  I hear you on taking a risk (much like AZ did) but I just don't think the cost/benefit is there to warrant the risk.

If it happens, it happens...
i know where youre coming from what you mean by alex being our starter as some type of risk...the risk that we gave him an extension


i dont wanna sound like im venting over here but we just need something to spark this organization...this current 16 year drought is killing me



  
 
Originally Posted by westcoastsfinest

Originally Posted by LazyJ10

Believe it or not, I get what you're saying.  I'm not huge on Alex Smith, but I am happy (if he remains starter and no McNabb deal happens) to see the guy attempt to operate with some continuity for once.  I hear you on taking a risk (much like AZ did) but I just don't think the cost/benefit is there to warrant the risk.

If it happens, it happens...
i know where youre coming from what you mean by alex being our starter as some type of risk...the risk that we gave him an extension

i dont wanna sound like im venting over here but we just need something to spark this organization...this current 16 year drought is killing me
 
laugh.gif
Imagine being a Warrior fan during that, too then.

The extension very friendly to the 9ers though, wasn't it?
 
Originally Posted by LazyJ10

laugh.gif
Imagine being a Warrior fan during that, too then.

The extension very friendly to the 9ers though, wasn't it?
well smith was lucky we even gave an extension
laugh.gif


yehh but seeing joe, steve and jerry the glory years to this? is very frustrating...one day youre walking on water then next thing you know youre sinking on water...i guess we were spoiled from eddie d.

as for the warriors you guys never really had glory years...so you should be used to losing by now
wink.gif



laugh.gif
 no hard feelings
tongue.gif






  
 
Rumors are Oakland would trade Nnamdi for McNabb, since the Eagles already have a pretty strong CB corp, would you do a three team trade giving the 17th to philly, with McNabb to the Raiders and Nhamdi coming here? I know it'll never happen, but just a thought.
 
Originally Posted by kwh3

Rumors are Oakland would trade Nhamdi for McNabb, since the Eagles already have a pretty strong CB corp, would you do a three team trade giving the 17th to philly, with McNabb to the Raiders and Nhamdi coming here? I know it'll never happen, but just a thought.

We can only dream
laugh.gif
 
Originally Posted by NikeTalker23

Eddie D was the one who put us in cap hell it took years to recover from..

well sometimes winning has its consequences

the raiders are always in rumors so no surprise their name is tied with mcnabb
 
From TK:

[h2][/h2]
[h2]Why aren’t the 49ers actively chasing McNabb? They’re not as hungry as Al Davis[/h2]
Posted by Tim Kawakami on March 26th, 2010 at 9:08 am | Categorized as 49ers, Columns, NFL, Raiders

* Straight from this morning’s paper, plus a few toppers

-First, I apologize for some of the duplication from the last blogitem–I didn’t know I was going to write a column on the same issue andeven if I did, the McNabb storyline is good enough that repeating a fewideas doesn’t seem like a terrible offense. 

Everything is in play with McNabb: The rumor obviously touches on AlDavis’ go-for-it mentality, stirs thoughts about JaMarcus Russell’snon-development, affects Tom Cable, evokes Jed York’s ownershipdecisions, Alex Smith’s hold on his job, Mike Singletary’s thoughts…

Even if McNabb never arrives in the Bay Area or comes close, it’s a Raiders/49ers chatter bonanza.

-There are two recent reports on the McNabb front:

1) If they’re going to trade him, the Eagles apparently want a top-42 pick in this year’s draft.

Sounds like what Andy Reid really wants is a pick at the top of the2nd round because the 2nd round now will take place a day after Round1, so the teams sitting at the top of 2 can bargain and dealovernight–gives those high 2 picks some added value.

The Raiders have the 39th pick. Perfect.

The 49ers don’t have a pick that falls into the sweet spot–they’veof course got 13 and 17 in the 1st round, but then don’t pick againuntil 49.

That doesn’t mean they can’t find a way to acquire a pick in thehigh 30s or low 40s, or can’t package 49 plus something else forMcNabb… but it is interesting.

2) McNabb reportedly would prefer to go to the Minnesota Vikings.But they’ve got Brett Favre and it’s incredibly unlikely that Favrewill make a decision on his retirement/non-retirement in time for aMcNabb play.

The larger point of this report is that McNabb clearly doesn’t wantto go to a lousy team (like the Rams). I’d think the Raiders would fallinto this category, but Al D. did this last year with Richard Seymour.

And Al’s the one guy who would trade for a potential Hall of Famerwho can become a free agent next year… and NOT feel he’d have to lockthe guy up long-term or care if the guy wants to stay or not.

That’s what AD did with Seymour last year. Seymour wants to go?Can’t–Al just franchise-tags him. If he potentially needs the franchisetag next year, Al can use it on McNabb and trade Seymour or let Seymourgo or spend crazy money on either guy, since they’re getting to thepoint where either might just take it.

—-the column/

Donovan McNabb is out there, in trade limbo, and for the moment, it looks as if the 49ers are idling on the sideline.

He’s there to be grabbed. The Eagles are listening to offers. McNabb’s right there.

“I understand the situation well,
 
[h1]

Baalke sees draft much like McCloughan[/h1]


Handout

Trent Baalke is running the draft after Scot McCloughan's departure.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2010/03/27/SPO61CM24C.DTL&o=0 



[h2]
[/h2]

Everyone, meet Trent Baalke, the man now in charge of the 49ers' draft. He likes mountain climbing, freshwater fishing and finding the next NFL Idol.

How Baalke goes about the latter will play out during the April 22-24 draft, when he calls the final shots in the team's war room.

Baalke has been friends with ousted general manager Scot McCloughan for 15 years, but by no means is he a McClone. Baalke is willing to make exceptions to size-speed rules if the player is exceptional enough - a break from McCloughan's five-year tenure.

"There are exceptions in this business," Baalke said. "There are guys that don't meet the height-weight-speed standards that can be pretty good football players."

Here's some highlights of Baalke's 35-minute sit-down with reporters Friday:

Q: Will you make changes to the McCloughan-set draft board?

A: A lot of the work we did on this board, we did together. Where the board is at this stage - 85 to 90 percent set - a lot of that is not going to change. Now, are there going to be subtle changes? Yes, there will be. There would be the same changes that would happen whether he was here or not. And there will be some changes that maybe Scot wouldn't have made, but it's going to be minimal.

Q: If you have final say on the draft, who has final say on nondraft football matters?

A: I don't think that's any different than the draft. I think the final say will be me. But at the same time, this isn't a one-man band. It's going to be a collaborative effort. As the decisions get closer to being made, obviously somebody has to make that decision but ... it isn't one guy who just sits there and cracks a whip and makes the decision. There's a lot of consultation.

Q: Do you draft for need or value/best player available?

A: Obviously we look at needs, but the board is going to reflect their value as a player. Then we'll address the needs. You obviously want to take the best available player so if there's a clear difference between two players, we're going to take the best available player. It's not always necessarily going to be at the need position. When two players are very similar in ability and they're at two different positions, that's when you ... address the need.

Q: Would you want a second Frank Gore-type running back, or someone who is different?

A: If you look at the league right now, it's certainly gone to a two-pronged attack, guys that complement each other, different styles that bring a little different element of preparation to the defense's standpoint. ... I think the more you have complementary styles, the harder it is to prepare for.

Q: Any interest in trading for Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb?

A: You have to respect the league policy, which obviously he's under contract with another team, so it's a discussion that we can't have. ... I think we're very comfortable with where we're at this point. I think Coach Singletary has made that clear.

Q: Is Pacman Jones an option?

A: At this point there is absolutely no interest in Pacman. And I don't see that changing.

Briefly: When the 49ers have their first two voluntary organized team activities on Monday and Tuesday, Singletary will be traveling with Baalke to visit draft prospects. ... The 49ers' annual draft party will be April 22 at the Santa Clara Convention Center. A limited number of free tickets are available at 49ers.com.

Read the entire interview online on the Niners Insider blog at sfgate.com/sports.

E-mail David White at [email protected].


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/03/26/SPO61CM24C.DTL#ixzz0jUcNPkhP
 
http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/49ers/archives/2010/03/baalke-gives-bo.html
Baalke gives boost to Spiller bandwagon


Sports journalism rule No. 1: If an NFL personnel guy tells you something within a month of the draft, take it with a smidgen of salt. This is the silly season in the NFL. Up is down. Left is right. Teams schedule visits with players they have no intention of drafting. They ignore the players that make their hearts leap. Which is why you have to look at everything acting GM Trent Baalke said yesterday with a skeptical eye. And yet ...

His answer to a question about running backs was very interesting. When Scot McCloughan was asked in February whether the 49ers could select a running back who complements Frank Gore, he said the following:

We could. Yeah, we could. Again, I think it comes down to what will be his role with us. Is there any special teams value involved in it? Again, where he's taken in the draft is going to say what the role is going to be and how soon we think he can help us. Frank Gore is a really good football player for us and we expect him to be a good football player for us for the next couple of years. But we also understand that we can't count on him forever. And if you start limiting his carries now somewhat - he doesn't like it - but if we protect him. What our vision is is to play 16 (games) and get to the playoffs. We need him to be healthy for him to that.
Asked a similar question Friday, Baalke went a little further, saying this:
... If you look at the backfields that are really starting to have a lot of success, it's not only the two (-pronged approach), it's the three-back system that's becoming even a little bit more ... you look at Dallas' situation with a bell-cow back and another guy that can come in and still have some bell-cow ability in Tashard Choice, a little bit different style than Marion Barber, and then you throw Felix Jones in the mix, of course completely different. They all have different sets of skills but they're all high level guys and it's very difficult to defense. I think the more you have complementary styles, the harder it is to prepare for.
The 49ers are two-thirds of the way to having a near-duplicate setup. Gore is the "bell cow" while Glen Coffee is a guy with "bell-cow ability." What they're missing is a speedster like Jones. Now where on earth could they find someone with similar abilities? Think, Barrows, think!

Cowboys runners
Marion Barber, 4th round, 2005
Tashard Choice, 4th round, 2008
Felix Jones, 1st round (22nd overall), 2008

49ers runners
Frank Gore, 3rd round, 2005
Glen Coffee, 3rd round, 2009
?????

-- Matt Barrows


You know what to do Baalke.
 
indifferent.gif

^ that is some bull %%@*.

how can he honestly compare our rb situation to dallas' ?
Dallas has 3 rb's who run well behind their offensive line.
SF has 2 rb's, of which only 1 can gain significant ydrge behind our *$$$$# offensive line.

Even if we do draft a speedy RB, Gore will still be the only one who can produce.

It starts with the offensive line, we can't have a running game like dallas if we lack the big, strong offensive lineman that the cowboys have.
 
He must be in the wrong thread again, last time I checked the 9ers had 2 1st rounders in a draft that goes 7 rounds which gives them flexibility to build the line throughout the draft.

*shrugs*

Raider fan x 9er fan confused yet again.
 
i think we should draft a big running back like steven jackson to complement gore....and add one more impact wide receiver either through trade or draft.. 
 
Originally Posted by bright nikes

He must be in the wrong thread again, last time I checked the 9ers had 2 1st rounders in a draft that goes 7 rounds which gives them flexibility to build the line throughout the draft.

*shrugs*

Raider fan x 9er fan confused yet again.
laugh.gif

beatingdeadhorse.gif
 
Originally Posted by milkandcookies

indifferent.gif

^ that is some bull %%@*.

how can he honestly compare our rb situation to dallas' ?
Dallas has 3 rb's who run well behind their offensive line.
SF has 2 rb's, of which only 1 can gain significant ydrge behind our *$$$$# offensive line.

Even if we do draft a speedy RB, Gore will still be the only one who can produce.

It starts with the offensive line, we can't have a running game like dallas if we lack the big, strong offensive lineman that the cowboys have.

our?

we?
 
Originally Posted by milkandcookies

Originally Posted by bright nikes

He must be in the wrong thread again, last time I checked the 9ers had 2 1st rounders in a draft that goes 7 rounds which gives them flexibility to build the line throughout the draft.

*shrugs*

Raider fan x 9er fan confused yet again.
laugh.gif

http://www.sternplanet.co...ifs/beatingdeadhorse.gif src="http://www.sternplanet.com/boards/images/gifs/beatingdeadhorse.gif">


roll.gif


 Nothing ANYONE says is going to stop him from posting. Is the stupid that he's a fan of both teams YES but what can't do anything about it.
  
 
Back
Top Bottom