There are 144 users in the forums
Originally posted by NCommand:
Create a custom 49ers jersey ⇨We're taking that Tiger in red on Sunday kind of mentality this year! @ Levi's Stadium https://t.co/zrEzRT3HMC
— Kyle Juszczyk (@JuiceCheck44) April 14, 2019
1. Kyle Juszczyk, FB, San Francisco 49ersThree-year compensation: $15.45 million
Percent above average: 174.3
For the third consecutive year, Juszczyk ranks head and shoulders above the pack. To put his four-year, $21 million deal in context, Donald would need to make about $108 million over three years to be similarly ahead of the defensive tackle market. Russell Wilson's four-year, $140 million extension would need to be a four-year, $202.9 million deal to rank similarly ahead of the quarterback class.
Nobody has joined the 49ers in rewarding the fullback position, either. Juszczyk is one of just four veteran fullbacks in the league signed to a deal of three seasons or more. The former Raven averages $5.3 million across that deal; the other three players average $5.6 million combined. Most of the league's multiyear deals at the position are rookie contracts, including several undrafted free agents. The only other fullback in the league with an average salary over $2 million is Patrick DiMarco, who is at $2.1 million.
You can understand why Kyle Shanahan might want to target a fullback like Juszczyk, who would help mask San Francisco's pre-snap tendencies while potentially creating a mismatch against a linebacker. I advocated for the Patriots to use James Develin in a similar way in advance of the Super Bowl, and their breakthrough came when they were able to use Develin and their tight ends to create mismatches out of a running formation in the passing game. Juszczyk offers similar flexibility.
The issue isn't wanting Juszczyk on the roster. It's paying him more than twice as much as any other fullback in the league. He has offered little as a runner over his first two seasons in San Francisco, carrying the ball 15 times for 61 yards. Those 15 runs include a pair of fourth-and-1 stuffs and a third-and-1 stuff which resulted in a lost fumble. Juszczyk has fumbled four times across 98 touches, which is the seventh-worst rate in the league over the past two seasons among players with 50 touches or more.
It's almost impossible for a back to be valuable with that sort of fumble rate. Niners fans might argue that Juszczyk was signed to serve as a receiver, and indeed, he has been more productive catching passes. Juszczyk has caught 63 passes for 639 yards over the past two seasons, and Shanahan has been able to scheme him open for big plays, most notably this 56-yard catch against the Vikings last September. Of course, Shanahan would also theoretically be able to scheme open another fullback or H-back, too.
Juszczyk's production as a receiver has been similar to players like Antonio Gates, Brandon LaFell and Jaron Brown over the past two seasons, guys who are on the fringes of NFL rosters at this point of their careers. It's hard to make a case that he has been a good enough receiver to overcome the fumble issues.
If the argument is that Juszczyk helps as a blocker, that's also tough to trust, as 36.8 percent of San Francisco's running plays with Juszczyk on the field result in a successful run by expected points added (EPA). Without Juszczyk on the field, though, that figure rises to 42.8 percent.
In the bigger picture, there just isn't much evidence of Juszczyk making a consistent difference. The 49ers are successful on offense by EPA for 41.9 percent of their snaps with Juszczyk on the field. Without him, they've been successful on ... 41.8 percent of their snaps. I don't think those on/off stats are enough to totally discount Juszczyk, but it's also fair to say that there isn't a clear case he's making a difference.
Is spending too much on a fullback going to make or break the 49ers' chances of competing? Of course not. Juszczyk's deal, though, is one of a series of shocking contracts the 49ers have handed out to make sure they get their guy at a given position, even if it means paying something well above market value or expectations.
Those deals have not aged well. Malcolm Smith, who signed a five-year, $26.5 million deal after relatively anonymous play with the Raiders, missed all of his debut season with a torn pectoral and only started five games in his second campaign while dealing with a hamstring injury. The 49ers paid him more than $12 million for two years of injuries and replacement-level play before forcing him to take a pay cut this offseason.
Jerick McKinnon, signed last March to a four-year, $30 million deal after struggling as a runner during his final two season in Minnesota, went down with a torn ACL in training camp. The 49ers couldn't have predicted that McKinnon would get hurt, of course, but there was never much logic in paying nearly $12 million in guarantees to a running back in a Shanahan scheme which has been finding useful backs out of nowhere for two decades. The NFL has been devaluing fullbacks for about as long. Juszczyk has bucked the financial trend, but the 49ers haven't reaped much benefit halfway through the league's largest outlier of a deal.
Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:
Hello darkness, my old friend.
Juice just obliterates this ranking every year, man. And now that more data are in it's even worse than everyone thought.
(note: I don't hate the player, I hate the contract. Or, put more honestly, I like the player and despise the contract)
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/27031059/the-nfl-20-biggest-outlier-contracts-why-fullback-reigns-again
1. Kyle Juszczyk, FB, San Francisco 49ersThree-year compensation: $15.45 million
Percent above average: 174.3
For the third consecutive year, Juszczyk ranks head and shoulders above the pack. To put his four-year, $21 million deal in context, Donald would need to make about $108 million over three years to be similarly ahead of the defensive tackle market. Russell Wilson's four-year, $140 million extension would need to be a four-year, $202.9 million deal to rank similarly ahead of the quarterback class.
Nobody has joined the 49ers in rewarding the fullback position, either. Juszczyk is one of just four veteran fullbacks in the league signed to a deal of three seasons or more. The former Raven averages $5.3 million across that deal; the other three players average $5.6 million combined. Most of the league's multiyear deals at the position are rookie contracts, including several undrafted free agents. The only other fullback in the league with an average salary over $2 million is Patrick DiMarco, who is at $2.1 million.
You can understand why Kyle Shanahan might want to target a fullback like Juszczyk, who would help mask San Francisco's pre-snap tendencies while potentially creating a mismatch against a linebacker. I advocated for the Patriots to use James Develin in a similar way in advance of the Super Bowl, and their breakthrough came when they were able to use Develin and their tight ends to create mismatches out of a running formation in the passing game. Juszczyk offers similar flexibility.
The issue isn't wanting Juszczyk on the roster. It's paying him more than twice as much as any other fullback in the league. He has offered little as a runner over his first two seasons in San Francisco, carrying the ball 15 times for 61 yards. Those 15 runs include a pair of fourth-and-1 stuffs and a third-and-1 stuff which resulted in a lost fumble. Juszczyk has fumbled four times across 98 touches, which is the seventh-worst rate in the league over the past two seasons among players with 50 touches or more.
It's almost impossible for a back to be valuable with that sort of fumble rate. Niners fans might argue that Juszczyk was signed to serve as a receiver, and indeed, he has been more productive catching passes. Juszczyk has caught 63 passes for 639 yards over the past two seasons, and Shanahan has been able to scheme him open for big plays, most notably this 56-yard catch against the Vikings last September. Of course, Shanahan would also theoretically be able to scheme open another fullback or H-back, too.
Juszczyk's production as a receiver has been similar to players like Antonio Gates, Brandon LaFell and Jaron Brown over the past two seasons, guys who are on the fringes of NFL rosters at this point of their careers. It's hard to make a case that he has been a good enough receiver to overcome the fumble issues.
If the argument is that Juszczyk helps as a blocker, that's also tough to trust, as 36.8 percent of San Francisco's running plays with Juszczyk on the field result in a successful run by expected points added (EPA). Without Juszczyk on the field, though, that figure rises to 42.8 percent.
In the bigger picture, there just isn't much evidence of Juszczyk making a consistent difference. The 49ers are successful on offense by EPA for 41.9 percent of their snaps with Juszczyk on the field. Without him, they've been successful on ... 41.8 percent of their snaps. I don't think those on/off stats are enough to totally discount Juszczyk, but it's also fair to say that there isn't a clear case he's making a difference.
Is spending too much on a fullback going to make or break the 49ers' chances of competing? Of course not. Juszczyk's deal, though, is one of a series of shocking contracts the 49ers have handed out to make sure they get their guy at a given position, even if it means paying something well above market value or expectations.
Those deals have not aged well. Malcolm Smith, who signed a five-year, $26.5 million deal after relatively anonymous play with the Raiders, missed all of his debut season with a torn pectoral and only started five games in his second campaign while dealing with a hamstring injury. The 49ers paid him more than $12 million for two years of injuries and replacement-level play before forcing him to take a pay cut this offseason.
Jerick McKinnon, signed last March to a four-year, $30 million deal after struggling as a runner during his final two season in Minnesota, went down with a torn ACL in training camp. The 49ers couldn't have predicted that McKinnon would get hurt, of course, but there was never much logic in paying nearly $12 million in guarantees to a running back in a Shanahan scheme which has been finding useful backs out of nowhere for two decades. The NFL has been devaluing fullbacks for about as long. Juszczyk has bucked the financial trend, but the 49ers haven't reaped much benefit halfway through the league's largest outlier of a deal.
Originally posted by 49ersVic:
The article is missing a crucial component in the analysis, which is at that time of signing Juszyck, how much cap room was available for the 49ers to spend and which free agents were available? There was no player worth re-signing from Baalke's regimen when Shanahaan and Lynch took over and therefore they could afford this size contact + some and still can...
Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:
Originally posted by 49ersVic:
The article is missing a crucial component in the analysis, which is at that time of signing Juszyck, how much cap room was available for the 49ers to spend and which free agents were available? There was no player worth re-signing from Baalke's regimen when Shanahaan and Lynch took over and therefore they could afford this size contact + some and still can...
Nobody has ever debated if the 49ers could afford the contract or not.
By this logic paying Malcolm Smith like he was a top 10 player at his position was a good signing too.
Or to push the argument even farther, given that the 9ers have 30 million in cap room right now, they might as well just give Gould 20 million for the season to get him in camp.
Juice is the first player in NFL history to make more than double the second highest paid player at his position. I'd bet $5,000 dollars that he'll also be the last.
Having enough cap room to do something stupid and insane makes it *slightly* easier to stomach, but it doesn't make it any less stupid or insane.
Originally posted by thl408:
Paying double for a FB is like paying double for a can of apple juice. At least you didn't pay double for a beer. The new front office had to do something to entice free agents to come to that crappy team.
Originally posted by 49ersVic:
Juszyck also had 2 other teams willing to pay close to what the 49ers paid too if you remember. So sometimes its driven by supply / demand dynamics.
Originally posted by thl408:
Paying double for a FB is like paying double for a can of apple juice. At least you didn't pay double for a beer. The new front office had to do something to entice free agents to come to that crappy team.
Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:I didn't say anything about it being special. Just that it was something that had to be done to get free agents to sign on to a bad team/franchise. I still think there's something to my point of how overpaying for a FB is not as bad as overpaying for a premier position such as CB. At least the 49ers use Juice and he's good at what he does even if he is overpaid by a lot. In hindsight, there were other contracts that were worse based off usage and production gained (Garcon/Malcolm).
Originally posted by thl408:
Paying double for a FB is like paying double for a can of apple juice. At least you didn't pay double for a beer. The new front office had to do something to entice free agents to come to that crappy team.
Bad teams have been enticing good players with money since free agency has existed. There's nothing that special about that.
Yet despite that happening year in and year out, nobody has ever gotten *anywhere close* to overpaying like this in the history of the NFL.
These arguments are like trying to fell a tree with a pea shooter, IMO.
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:I didn't say anything about it being special. Just that it was something that had to be done to get free agents to sign on to a bad team/franchise. I still think there's something to my point of how overpaying for a FB is not as bad as overpaying for a premier position such as CB. At least the 49ers use Juice and he's good at what he does even if he is overpaid by a lot. In hindsight, there were other contracts that were worse based off usage and production gained (Garcon/Malcolm).
Originally posted by thl408:
Paying double for a FB is like paying double for a can of apple juice. At least you didn't pay double for a beer. The new front office had to do something to entice free agents to come to that crappy team.
Bad teams have been enticing good players with money since free agency has existed. There's nothing that special about that.
Yet despite that happening year in and year out, nobody has ever gotten *anywhere close* to overpaying like this in the history of the NFL.
These arguments are like trying to fell a tree with a pea shooter, IMO.
Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:Originally posted by 49ersVic:Juszyck also had 2 other teams willing to pay close to what the 49ers paid too if you remember. So sometimes its driven by supply / demand dynamics.
I know the 9ers have claimed this, but people say a lot of things.*
That three NFL teams in one off-season were all competing to do something that no other team in NFL history has ever even gotten *close* to doing just doesn't pass the smell test. That doesn't mean that Juice's agent didn't claim it or that the 9ers didn't justify and explain it to themselves that way, but it just strains credulity way too far, IMO.
*Examples: Every time a player is perceived to be taken early in the draft, for ever team it "leaks" out to the local media that other teams were just about to take him; ever off-season every so-far disappointing player is having "the best off-season of his career", etc.
Originally posted by evil:
Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:
Originally posted by 49ersVic:
Juszyck also had 2 other teams willing to pay close to what the 49ers paid too if you remember. So sometimes its driven by supply / demand dynamics.
I know the 9ers have claimed this, but people say a lot of things.*
That three NFL teams in one off-season were all competing to do something that no other team in NFL history has ever even gotten *close* to doing just doesn't pass the smell test. That doesn't mean that Juice's agent didn't claim it or that the 9ers didn't justify and explain it to themselves that way, but it just strains credulity way too far, IMO.
*Examples: Every time a player is perceived to be taken early in the draft, for ever team it "leaks" out to the local media that other teams were just about to take him; ever off-season every so-far disappointing player is having "the best off-season of his career", etc.
Adam Schefter claimed it not the 9ers, he was being pursued by us and 2 other teams.