The Baalke Meter

Originally posted by davide49:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
I would tend to agree with Mister Moderator here. The thing I remember most about Baalke picks is that he always seemed to waste one on a player with a wrecked knee. The thinking was, at the time, that this player was "a steal" at this draft position and was "going to be great" after surgery and rehab.

Except, that never happened. I don't recall even one of Baalke's gambles on injured players ever panning out. Am I missing someone? Anyone?

Will Redmond? Lol? Kinda but not really?

How do you take players in the 3rd round who will miss their rookie season?!

Consider: From 2013-14, Baalke used five of his 23 picks on players coming off significant knee injuries, spending second-, third-, fourth-, fifth- and seventh-round selections on those rehabbing prospects. Last year, two of those players (RB Marcus Lattimore and FB Trey Millard) weren't in the NFL and the remaining three (DL Tank Carradine, G Brandon Thomas and CB Keith Reaser) played an average of 103 snaps for the 49ers.

In 2015, wide receiver DeAndre Smelter (Round 4) was Baalke's injury pick. This year, cornerback Will Redmond (Round 3) ended up being that guy.

The Rationale and Why It Didn't Work

Baalke's reasoning for drafting injured players and stashing them for a year made sense at the time.

Keep in mind the 49ers were a dominant franchise in 2013 and entering 2014. Few roster spots were up for grabs, and the Niners could afford keeping guys on injury lists with the hope each would impact the team a year or two later.

Branch wrote:

This dilemma gave rise to Baalke's draft-and-stash strategy in which he selected players rehabbing from serious knee injuries. Those players would spend a "redshirt" rookie season on injury lists, where they didn't count against the 53-man roster, and would be fully recovered and ready to contribute a year later.

It was a strategy few teams could afford to adopt because they needed their draft picks to contribute immediately. The 49ers, however, could grab injured prospects at least a round later than they would have been selected if healthy and start reaping the rewards a year later.

It made sense.

And it hasn't worked.

His name is hereby:

Baclke

Jesus, Marcus Lattimore, the guy who knew he'd never play and still we drafted him...in the 4th f'ing round. Good luck Jacksonville...and FU Paraag!

Originally posted by wysiwyg:

Consider: From 2013-14, Baalke used five of his 23 picks on players coming off significant knee injuries, spending second-, third-, fourth-, fifth- and seventh-round selections on those rehabbing prospects. Last year, two of those players (RB Marcus Lattimore and FB Trey Millard) weren't in the NFL and the remaining three (DL Tank Carradine, G Brandon Thomas and CB Keith Reaser) played an average of 103 snaps for the 49ers.

In 2015, wide receiver DeAndre Smelter (Round 4) was Baalke's injury pick. This year, cornerback Will Redmond (Round 3) ended up being that guy.

The Rationale and Why It Didn't Work

Baalke's reasoning for drafting injured players and stashing them for a year made sense at the time.

Keep in mind the 49ers were a dominant franchise in 2013 and entering 2014. Few roster spots were up for grabs, and the Niners could afford keeping guys on injury lists with the hope each would impact the team a year or two later.

Branch wrote:

This dilemma gave rise to Baalke's draft-and-stash strategy in which he selected players rehabbing from serious knee injuries. Those players would spend a "redshirt" rookie season on injury lists, where they didn't count against the 53-man roster, and would be fully recovered and ready to contribute a year later.

It was a strategy few teams could afford to adopt because they needed their draft picks to contribute immediately. The 49ers, however, could grab injured prospects at least a round later than they would have been selected if healthy and start reaping the rewards a year later.

It made sense.

And it hasn't worked.

Great post. It did make sense. It didn't work. And he just kept doing it.

Originally posted by English:
Borlaand

Originally posted by TheXFactor:
He made some nice FA moves. Carlos Rogers was awesome here. Whitner and Bethea were solid as well. Boldin too. Jon Goodwin was a hell of a pickup.
Boreland was a great pick too.

Borland? Third round draft pick who played for one year and retired, keeping three quarters of his signing bonus. This is not my definition of a great pick.

he played stellar in his rookie campaign in case you have a short memory. No one knew in the draft he would get head injuries then retire lol.

Originally posted by TheXFactor:

Originally posted by English:

Borlaand

Originally posted by TheXFactor:

He made some nice FA moves. Carlos Rogers was awesome here. Whitner and Bethea were solid as well. Boldin too. Jon Goodwin was a hell of a pickup.
Boreland was a great pick too.

Borland? Third round draft pick who played for one year and retired, keeping three quarters of his signing bonus. This is not my definition of a great pick.

he played stellar in his rookie campaign.

STELLAR? Not a word I would use. He did have one or two impact plays that I can recall. Perhaps my definition of stellar is different from yours. Ten QB sacks in a season, for example, fits my definition of stellar.

Borland didn't come near to approaching that number. I would rate his one season as promising, but adequate.

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by 9moon:
LET SEE IF HOW MUCH HE'LL OFFER AWEAK ARMHURTS..

After this year's play if you were watching, that probably is an unjustified nickname.

... AND what do you think about his play this year ?? is it now ok to call him AWEAK ARMHURTS??

Originally posted by billbird2111:
STELLAR? Not a word I would use. He did have one or two impact plays that I can recall. Perhaps my definition of stellar is different from yours. Ten QB sacks in a season, for example, fits my definition of stellar.

Borland didn't come near to approaching that number. I would rate his one season as promising, but adequate.

He had 108 tackles (84 unassisted) and 12 tackles for loss. That was more TFL than Bowman or Willis had in their rookie seasons. He could have had a nice career if it wasn't for the concussion concerns.

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by TheXFactor:

Originally posted by English:
Borlaand

Originally posted by TheXFactor:
He made some nice FA moves. Carlos Rogers was awesome here. Whitner and Bethea were solid as well. Boldin too. Jon Goodwin was a hell of a pickup.
Boreland was a great pick too.

Borland? Third round draft pick who played for one year and retired, keeping three quarters of his signing bonus. This is not my definition of a great pick.

he played stellar in his rookie campaign.

STELLAR? Not a word I would use. He did have one or two impact plays that I can recall. Perhaps my definition of stellar is different from yours. Ten QB sacks in a season, for example, fits my definition of stellar.

Borland didn't come near to approaching that number. I would rate his one season as promising, but adequate.

Don't use sacks as a barometer for how well an inside linebacker plays.

Originally posted by 9moon:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by 9moon:

LET SEE IF HOW MUCH HE'LL OFFER AWEAK ARMHURTS..

After this year's play if you were watching, that probably is an unjustified nickname.

... AND what do you think about his play this year ?? is it now ok to call him AWEAK ARMHURTS??

English is right. AA was healthy.

His name should be awful armstead

Originally posted by 9moon:
... AND what do you think about his play this year ?? is it now ok to call him AWEAK ARMHURTS??

Lmao. Do you realize that Armstead had more pressures in 2020 than Buckner in 2019?

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
STELLAR? Not a word I would use. He did have one or two impact plays that I can recall. Perhaps my definition of stellar is different from yours. Ten QB sacks in a season, for example, fits my definition of stellar.

Borland didn't come near to approaching that number. I would rate his one season as promising, but adequate.

He had 108 tackles (84 unassisted) and 12 tackles for loss. That was more TFL than Bowman or Willis had in their rookie seasons. He could have had a nice career if it wasn't for the concussion concerns.

LMAO Borland was a legit contender for defensive rookie of the year.

Is Jacksonville ready for Cassie Baalke? That's the real question

Originally posted by davide49:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
STELLAR? Not a word I would use. He did have one or two impact plays that I can recall. Perhaps my definition of stellar is different from yours. Ten QB sacks in a season, for example, fits my definition of stellar.

Borland didn't come near to approaching that number. I would rate his one season as promising, but adequate.

He had 108 tackles (84 unassisted) and 12 tackles for loss. That was more TFL than Bowman or Willis had in their rookie seasons. He could have had a nice career if it wasn't for the concussion concerns.

LMAO Borland was a legit contender for defensive rookie of the year.

that's what I'm saying.