Tom Gamble, former Assistant GM

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by itlynstalyn:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Unfortunately those expectations are unrealistic from my POV. You turn the Seattle Seahawks roster over in one off season to the point where only one veteran is starting on both sides of the line and we'd all be

The ONLY way we could have been competitive last year and not hit rock bottom with that young of a roster/turnover would be if we had a Franchise QB to carry us, and even then, you're talking 8 wins most likely.

Not even remotely true. If Baalke hadn't gambled so much on players he thought would contribute some day down the line, he'd actually might have some starters or players coming into their own with the last three drafts. Him completely screwing the pooch in 2012 and not even getting ONE good player out of that draft set this franchise back years.

I'm tired of the losing and Baalke has a lot to do with it. Expectations are unrealistic? Would you rather not be like teams like the Patriots and Packers who have GM's that can run a franchise that competes year in and year out? s**t, the Patriots almost made the playoffs with Matt Cassel as QB in 2008. I want someone in charge that doesn't feel losing is acceptable and that rebuilding is just a cyclical part of football. Tell that to the better franchises in the NFL.

I appreciate the discussion and certainly respect your take, but it seems you are missing a lot of context here...as to how we really got here. If you could outline how a rebuild could have been avoided, I'd love to read it and discuss. But if you are banking on a poor 2012 draft or even 2013 to pull us out of it, most teams are lucky if you get 3 starters per draft...so are 6 players really going to make a difference unless one of them was a Franchise QB? The natural ebb-flow of the NFL is a natural bell-curve unless you are built young from the bottom up (Seattle). What we went through was no normal and unavoidable IMHO. It you can outline how it could have been avoided, even with 20-20 hindsight, I'd gladly read and consider it.

I think he also means that if we didn't take chances on all those ACL players, we would've had some better depth to compete, even in that 8-8 and 5-11 year. There's no doubt about that.

And before you say that we were so stacked at so many positions with talent that we had to draft ACL guys, since healthy rookies wouldn't have made the roster back then or would've been stuck as 3rd stringers. Then how come other GMs don't draft this way? I would be really curious to see how many injured guys we drafted compared to other teams. I would even bet that we drafted more injured guys than half the teams in the NFL combined.

Originally posted by itlynstalyn:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by itlynstalyn:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Unfortunately those expectations are unrealistic from my POV. You turn the Seattle Seahawks roster over in one off season to the point where only one veteran is starting on both sides of the line and we'd all be

The ONLY way we could have been competitive last year and not hit rock bottom with that young of a roster/turnover would be if we had a Franchise QB to carry us, and even then, you're talking 8 wins most likely.

Not even remotely true. If Baalke hadn't gambled so much on players he thought would contribute some day down the line, he'd actually might have some starters or players coming into their own with the last three drafts. Him completely screwing the pooch in 2012 and not even getting ONE good player out of that draft set us this franchise back years.

I'm tired of the losing and Baalke has a lot to do with it. Expectations are unrealistic? Would you rather not be like teams like the Patriots and Packers who have GM's that can run a franchise that competes year in and year out? s**t, the Patriots almost made the playoffs with Matt Cassel as QB in 2008. I want someone in charge that doesn't feel losing is acceptable and that rebuilding is just a cyclical part of football. Tell that to the better franchises in the NFL.

We can't allow ourselves to become like complacent Browns/Lions fans. We just can't.

But this is what many people on the board have been led to assume is the norm now, it's like all of the sudden past success doesn't matter and we shouldn't have high expectations for the franchise we grew up with. It's almost like they're allergic to winning.

I think certain self proclaimed experts have been proven wrong over and over and over again that this is the last ditch effort to save face.

"Natural ups and downs" if anything means 10+ wins for a bunch of seasons then a couple of 8 or 9 win seasons.

We're at the bottom of the barrel and that is unacceptable.

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
I think certain self proclaimed experts have been proven wrong over and over and over again that this is the last ditch effort to save face.

"Natural ups and downs" if anything means 10+ wins for a bunch of seasons then a couple of 8 or 9 win seasons.

We're at the bottom of the barrel and that is unacceptable.

100% agree, and anyone who thinks losing is okay is being fed a load of b******t by the FO and are slurping it up through a large straw.

Originally posted by itlynstalyn:

Again, look at the marquee franchises right now. They don't seem to be going through the "natural ebb-flow of the NFL" that you're referring to.

The Giants have gone 7-9, 6-10 and 6-10 in consecutive seasons in one of the weakest divisions in football after winning a SB in 2011.


If we are talking teams like Pittsburgh, New England and Green Bay, having marquee, top of the NFL QBs goes a long way towards keeping you in contention, year in and year out.


If the 49ers had a QB like Brady, Rodgers or Big Ben that would go a long way towards improving their "ebb and flow." This team hasnt had consistent high level QB play in well over a decade.


That certainly isnt their only issue but having that top QB makes up for quite a few deficiencies.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by itlynstalyn:


Again, look at the marquee franchises right now. They don't seem to be going through the "natural ebb-flow of the NFL" that you're referring to.

The Giants have gone 7-9, 6-10 and 6-10 in consecutive seasons in one of the weakest divisions in football after winning a SB in 2011.


If we are talking teams like Pittsburgh, New England and Green Bay, having marquee, top of the NFL QBs goes a long way towards keeping you in contention, year in and year out.


If the 49ers had a QB like Brady, Rodgers or Big Ben that would go a long way towards improving their "ebb and flow." This team hasnt had consistent high level QB play in well over a decade.


That certainly isnt their only issue but having that top QB makes up for quite a few deficiencies.

And they probably also don't have a FO that gets involved in coaching and schemes. Kap was doing just fine running that read option and relying more on his legs than his arm. But of course once he got that big contract, the FO wanted to make sure they keep the investment and made sure JH turned him into a pocket passer. Which failed, just like it did when Skins tried that with RG3, however, Panthers have let Cam be Cam, and same with RW.

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by itlynstalyn:

Again, look at the marquee franchises right now. They don't seem to be going through the "natural ebb-flow of the NFL" that you're referring to.

The Giants have gone 7-9, 6-10 and 6-10 in consecutive seasons in one of the weakest divisions in football after winning a SB in 2011.


If we are talking teams like Pittsburgh, New England and Green Bay, having marquee, top of the NFL QBs goes a long way towards keeping you in contention, year in and year out.


If the 49ers had a QB like Brady, Rodgers or Big Ben that would go a long way towards improving their "ebb and flow." This team hasnt had consistent high level QB play in well over a decade.


That certainly isnt their only issue but having that top QB makes up for quite a few deficiencies.

And they probably also don't have a FO that gets involved in coaching and schemes. Kap was doing just fine running that read option and relying more on his legs than his arm. But of course once he got that big contract, the FO wanted to make sure they keep the investment and made sure JH turned him into a pocket passer. Which failed, just like it did when Skins tried that with RG3, however, Panthers have let Cam be Cam, and same with RW.

That id down right laughable. No one forced Harbaugh to do anything. His absolute refusal to listen to anyone about his offense or offensive coordinator was part of the friction. If Harbaugh wanted changes made to how Kap was used, those were his changes.

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

And they probably also don't have a FO that gets involved in coaching and schemes. Kap was doing just fine running that read option and relying more on his legs than his arm.

And then the league adjusted to him and began daring him to throw the football and he showed an inability to respond.


People need to get off this nonsensical claim that it was some conspiracy against Kaepernick that got him off his game and not that NFL defenses rapidly figured him out and keyed in on his weaknesses. The game tape says otherwise. What he did in 2012 wasnt sustainable. He had to eventually take the next step and develop as a pocket passer to keep defenses honest and it just never happened.


In terms of his weaknesses he hasnt improved upon them much since being drafted in 2011. His footwork is still a mess which leads to poor accuracy, he still has a tendency to drop his eyes and blindly take off and run, even when he has a clean pocket, missing out on some huge plays downfield, he still struggles with understanding where the ball should go when a defense is blitzing and as Steve Young said, he loved working on and building his body, the stuff that came easy to him, not so much the finer points of NFL quarterbacking and that has shown.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by itlynstalyn:


Again, look at the marquee franchises right now. They don't seem to be going through the "natural ebb-flow of the NFL" that you're referring to.

The Giants have gone 7-9, 6-10 and 6-10 in consecutive seasons in one of the weakest divisions in football after winning a SB in 2011.


If we are talking teams like Pittsburgh, New England and Green Bay, having marquee, top of the NFL QBs goes a long way towards keeping you in contention, year in and year out.


If the 49ers had a QB like Brady, Rodgers or Big Ben that would go a long way towards improving their "ebb and flow." This team hasnt had consistent high level QB play in well over a decade.


That certainly isnt their only issue but having that top QB makes up for quite a few deficiencies.

Just no real grasp of reality or context. I pulled out the VERY best 6 years of who many consider the best GM's in the game...littered with 6-7-8 win seasons right in the middle of their best runs and that's WITH Franchise QB's. Like I said, had we had a FQB as well, our down year(s) would be hovering around 8 wins WHILE we were rebuilding in the background (instead of the 5 last year). That's the difference...and the fact that none of those teams during those runs completely turned over their roster in one single off season.

Originally posted by itlynstalyn:

Originally posted by NCommand:
I appreciate the discussion and certainly respect your take, but it seems you are missing a lot of context here...as to how we really got here. If you could outline how a rebuild could have been avoided, I'd love to read it and discuss. But if you are banking on a poor 2012 draft or even 2013 to pull us out of it, most teams are lucky if you get 3 starters per draft...so are 6 players really going to make a difference unless one of them was a Franchise QB? The natural ebb-flow of the NFL is a natural bell-curve unless you are built young from the bottom up (Seattle). What we went through was no normal and unavoidable IMHO. It you can outline how it could have been avoided, even with 20-20 hindsight, I'd gladly read and consider it.

I'm not going to go through this all over again with you because quite frankly it's exhausting. There's plenty of picks Baalke could have made in 2012 and 2013 that are now All-Pro's (that I've already shown before mind you) and he could have had the foresight to see what was needed in terms of getting playmakers instead of complimentary role players or raw projects.

Again, look at the marquee franchises right now. They don't seem to be going through the "natural ebb-flow of the NFL" that you're referring to.

this is the worst part about baalke that can not be avoided. in EVERY draft since hes been GM there has been players ALL OVER the place that he passes on, doesnt pick and maybe completely ignores that turn out being huge playmakers. stars. that we could have had. and what makes it even worse? the players baalke passes on them for end up being projects, ACL projects and or f**king idiots who get arrested every few months. he has proven time and time again the ONLY positions he can draft well for is D linemen. THATS IT. maybe a good line backer here or there. but besides that i am completely inconfident in his ability to get us good players. last time i checked you needed more than a D line to win games

Originally posted by mojave45:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by itlynstalyn:
Again, look at the marquee franchises right now. They don't seem to be going through the "natural ebb-flow of the NFL" that you're referring to.

The Giants have gone 7-9, 6-10 and 6-10 in consecutive seasons in one of the weakest divisions in football after winning a SB in 2011.


If we are talking teams like Pittsburgh, New England and Green Bay, having marquee, top of the NFL QBs goes a long way towards keeping you in contention, year in and year out.


If the 49ers had a QB like Brady, Rodgers or Big Ben that would go a long way towards improving their "ebb and flow." This team hasnt had consistent high level QB play in well over a decade.


That certainly isnt their only issue but having that top QB makes up for quite a few deficiencies.

And they probably also don't have a FO that gets involved in coaching and schemes. Kap was doing just fine running that read option and relying more on his legs than his arm. But of course once he got that big contract, the FO wanted to make sure they keep the investment and made sure JH turned him into a pocket passer. Which failed, just like it did when Skins tried that with RG3, however, Panthers have let Cam be Cam, and same with RW.

That id down right laughable. No one forced Harbaugh to do anything. His absolute refusal to listen to anyone about his offense or offensive coordinator was part of the friction. If Harbaugh wanted changes made to how Kap was used, those were his changes.

Nope. That was a big part of JH arguing mainly with JY, that was the biggest friction between them since JY wanted to protect his investment. They wanted to dial up more passing plays and with Kap playing from the pocket, which obviously wasn't Roman's strength as an OC (see Bills offense last year, they did good as a run first team). Ya, Roman should've been fired and replaced with an OC that is capable of running a JY/Baalke offense.

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by mojave45:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by itlynstalyn:

Again, look at the marquee franchises right now. They don't seem to be going through the "natural ebb-flow of the NFL" that you're referring to.

The Giants have gone 7-9, 6-10 and 6-10 in consecutive seasons in one of the weakest divisions in football after winning a SB in 2011.


If we are talking teams like Pittsburgh, New England and Green Bay, having marquee, top of the NFL QBs goes a long way towards keeping you in contention, year in and year out.


If the 49ers had a QB like Brady, Rodgers or Big Ben that would go a long way towards improving their "ebb and flow." This team hasnt had consistent high level QB play in well over a decade.


That certainly isnt their only issue but having that top QB makes up for quite a few deficiencies.

And they probably also don't have a FO that gets involved in coaching and schemes. Kap was doing just fine running that read option and relying more on his legs than his arm. But of course once he got that big contract, the FO wanted to make sure they keep the investment and made sure JH turned him into a pocket passer. Which failed, just like it did when Skins tried that with RG3, however, Panthers have let Cam be Cam, and same with RW.

That id down right laughable. No one forced Harbaugh to do anything. His absolute refusal to listen to anyone about his offense or offensive coordinator was part of the friction. If Harbaugh wanted changes made to how Kap was used, those were his changes.

Nope. That was a big part of JH arguing mainly with JY, that was the biggest friction between them since JY wanted to protect his investment. They wanted to dial up more passing plays and with Kap playing from the pocket, which obviously wasn't Roman's strength as an OC (see Bills offense last year, they did good as a run first team). Ya, Roman should've been fired and replaced with an OC that is capable of running a JY/Baalke offense.

Harbaugh changed his offense based on Jed York and Baalke asking him to? Uh huh. Because he was such an accommodating guy.

Anyone seen the Tom Gamble thread.

IMO, when looking at the 2012 draft, one can't say "If only Baalke had picked the very best players that all 31 other teams hit on" because that's simply unrealistic. Rather, what if he would have picked just the draft average? That seems a more reasonable question, and one that would take more research. Let's ask what the team would potentially be if instead of the 0% after 4 seasons that SF has from the 2012, they hit on the average % of the 2012 draft. Anyone know what that % is? I know it's a historically poor draft, but anyone have the actual # of guys still on rosters in 2016 and guys starting in 2016?

Originally posted by captveg:

IMO, when looking at the 2012 draft, one can't say "If only Baalke had picked the very best players that all 31 other teams hit on" because that's simply unrealistic. Rather, what if he would have picked just the draft average? That seems a more reasonable question, and one that would take more research. Let's ask what the team would potentially be if instead of the 0% after 4 seasons that SF has from the 2012, they hit on the average % of the 2012 draft. Anyone know what that % is? I know it's a historically poor draft, but anyone have the actual # of guys still on rosters in 2016 and guys starting in 2016?

Yeah, it's 3. If you can get three starters from any draft, you're above the NFL average. We got none in 2012 but in 2013 we got Eric Reid, Cornellius Carradine, Vance McDonald, Quinton Patton & Quinton Dial and made up for it.

Those fans thinking 2012 is the reason we're rebuilding today are lost.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by captveg:

IMO, when looking at the 2012 draft, one can't say "If only Baalke had picked the very best players that all 31 other teams hit on" because that's simply unrealistic. Rather, what if he would have picked just the draft average? That seems a more reasonable question, and one that would take more research. Let's ask what the team would potentially be if instead of the 0% after 4 seasons that SF has from the 2012, they hit on the average % of the 2012 draft. Anyone know what that % is? I know it's a historically poor draft, but anyone have the actual # of guys still on rosters in 2016 and guys starting in 2016?

Yeah, it's 3. If you can get three starters from any draft, you're above the NFL average. We got none in 2012 but in 2013 we got Eric Reid, Cornellius Carradine, Vance McDonald, Quinton Patton & Quinton Dial and made up for it.

Those fans thinking 2012 is the reason we're rebuilding today are lost.

Made up for it how? I hope they do but all of those players have a lot to prove.