Who's more valuable, Patrick Willis or Frank Gore?
by Fooch on Dec 2, 2008 9:00 AM PST
in News
30 comments
I started thinking about this issue during the Bills game and a little more when someone suggested in a FanPost packaging Gore in a deal to get Tom Brady. The 49ers have a young, major impact player on offense in Frank Gore and on defense in Patrick Willis. The question is who is more valuable to the team. When a team is 4-8 it's probably a little difficult to assess "most valuable," but I think it's still worth doing.
One other reason for doing this is to get an idea of fan attitude towards the two of them. Frank Gore has struggled at times this season and some people have been quick to jump on him and suggest changes. People here recognize his abilities, but sometimes people can forget about the good thing, particularly when the shiny new toy, Patrick Willis, comes along. So, I thought I'd look at the arguments for and against each guy being more valuable.
Frank Gore
I start with Gore because he is the longer tenured 49er. Gore has certainly struggled at times this year, but he's still managed to put up some rather impressive numbers. Considering how poorly the offense has been at times over the past couple of years and his numbers are all the more remarkable. This season he's sitting at 926 yards and 1,280 total yards. If Gore puts together a decent performance this Sunday, he'll become the first 49ers running back to rush for 1,000+ yards in three straight seasons (not even the great Roger Craig did that).
So, why is he more valuable to the 49ers than Patrick Willis? Well, when he's on his game, he is an unstoppable force of nature. He's not the biggest guy on the field but he's got the ability to run guys over like nobody's business. He has shown a combination of shifty moves and an ability to break arm tackles with the best of them. Just as impressive is the fact that he's led the team in receptions the last two years and is tied for the lead this year with Isaac Bruce. FInally, when he's dominant, Gore can seemingly single-handedly win games on his own with his running and receiving performance.
Why is he not as valuable? Often times if the offensive line is struggling, Gore can really struggle to get going. His numbers are solid but his yards per carry has been down a bit this year and last. Physically, he lacks the breakaway speed that the great running backs seem to have. He doesn't need to have Devin Hester speed, but when he gets into the secondary he sometimes lacks that next gear necessary to break the 50+ yard touchdown runs. He can make solid plays, but not always the big, huge plays that can completely change the momentum of the game.
Patrick Willis
Bamm Bamm has been in the NFL for less than two full seasons and already predictions of the Hall of Fame abound. He led the NFL in tackles as a rookie, set a single season record for tackles with that number, was defensive rookie of the year and made the Pro Bowl. In his second season, Willis is #2 in total tackles and leads all linebackers in pass deflections. Last season saw the highlight of him running down Sean Morey to save a touchdown and this year saw an amazing interception return for a touchdown. Needless to say there has been NO sophomore slump for Bamm Bamm.
Why is Patrick Willis more valuable than Frank Gore? He brings a dominant athleticism that allows to make huge plays no matter how poorly the rest of the defense is performing. As bad as the defense has been at times, it seems like he makes a huge play every game, more often than not seeing him streak across the field to make a tackle in the back field. When he's not getting large tackle totals, it's often because teams are scheming away from him. And even then he still makes an impact. In week 1 he only had 5 total tackles, but he also had two pass deflections. This past week saw him garner 14 tackles, one forced fumble and a pass deflection.
Why is he not as valuable? One could argue his high tackle totals are simply due to a poor defensive line that allows ball carriers through for easy tackles. Of course, tackling a running back is no easy task, so that might not be saying much. Also, it's debateable whether a single defensive player can impact the entire defensive game on his own. Of course, tell that to Lawrence Taylor, Champ Bailey or Deion Sanders.
Going into this post I was thinking I could find sufficient reasons to vote for either Frank Gore or Patrick Willis. After posting the reasons and trying to think of additional reasons, I don't know how I could argue anybody other than Patrick Willis. He is approaching that level of being a guy who can single-handedly impact a game on defense like some of the all-time greats. Given that he's only a second year player, the sky really is the limit for him.
Now this definitely not a knock on Frank Gore. Gore brings so much to the table and I would obviously not be looking for a new running back. Rather, it's more a matter of Gore's dependence on the offensive line and the rest of the offense in his performance. He's put up great numbers for some bad teams, but I'm not sure he's at the level of impact that Patrick Willis has so quickly reached.
So am I off-base with my assessment? Two years ago Frank Gore was far and away the MVP of this team. However, times can change and I think Patrick Willis has grabbed that title from Gore.
0 recs |
30 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
the bottom line is positions
patrick willis is better at his position than frank gore
, I also happen to believe that it is much harder to find a good middle linebacker than a good running back
If I gotta play, I'm gonna play 'till I win,
Since I gotta be here, I can´t wait to begin
by albertoleecho on Dec 2, 2008 9:53 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
good point
Look at what Denver has done with running backs. The RB by committee has never been a problem for them.
Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!
by Fooch on Dec 2, 2008 9:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What's harder to find?
As draft after draft has shown find quality running backs are probably the easiest position to fill. I mean this year alone you have J. Stewart, M. Forte, T. Hightower, C. Johnson, S. Slaton, P. Hillis, F. Jones and D. Mcfadden (to some extent). And I’m sure i’m forgetting some. But to find that pro-bowl quality Linebacker and the physical beast the P-Willi is, I can’t think of any Linebackers who has had as big of an impact he had his rookie year. Especially this year’s draft.
Also lastly, you have to look at career “life” expectancy. Most quality RB’s have 4-5 healthy/productive years, the rest of their years are either plagued with injuries or are less productive. While their are a few exceptions to this rule, F. Gore has already had some big surgeries and i personally can’t seem him having more than 2 more years of continuous productive play. Linebackers on the other hand, while may have some off seasons, can play to their young 30s to their mid 30s and still be productive. I mean you have T. Spikes, J. Porter, R. Lewis just to name a few.
I mean if a trade came along for a WR like A. Johnson, A. Boldin, L. Evans, S. Moss, G. Jennings or even Chad Johnson/B. Edwards and a third round draft pick (or somewhere around there) for F. Gore, I think it would be a pretty fair trade. But for P. Willi… I’m sorry but he is worth way more than that.
Next year will be our year! (copyright 2003*, been used each of last five years)
by StrictlyFootball on Dec 2, 2008 10:31 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
What cost a 3rd rounder and what cost a 1st rounder?
by methodrampage on Dec 2, 2008 10:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
By that rationale...
Tom Brady is less valuable than Giovanni Carmazzi.
Check out The Examined Life. Or don't. Whatever.
"I been waitin' a long time for this! I been waitin' since the f**kin' amateurs!" --WILL "THE THRILL" CLARK
by Josh from Hollywood on Dec 2, 2008 11:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe by your backwards logic it would seem that way.
But it would make Brady that much more valuable than Carmazzi. It’s not that hard to find a stud LB in the 1/3 of the first round. It is a little more difficult to find a Pro Bowl RB in the 3rd. If everything else is equal between a 1st and a 3rd round pick the 3rd rounder is more valuable to a team because his cost of acquisition was much less.
by methodrampage on Dec 3, 2008 7:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, now I understand your point...
I thought you were saying it the other way around. I still disagree with your original point though — comparing players by what pick they were originally taken with is an oversimplification, in my opinion — but now that you’ve put it in context by adding the bit about “If everything else is equal”, I agree.
Check out The Examined Life. Or don't. Whatever.
"I been waitin' a long time for this! I been waitin' since the f**kin' amateurs!" --WILL "THE THRILL" CLARK
by Josh from Hollywood on Dec 3, 2008 11:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I voted for Gore
but I could really go either way. I guess I just feel that Gore is really the only thing we have going on offense, and without him we might not score, ever. Willis is a great player, probably a better player that Gore, but right now on this team, I think Gore is more valuable.
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
by wjackalope on Dec 2, 2008 10:47 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Another way to think of it
Who would be a more likely Hall of Famer, Gore or Willis?
No question, if you ask me. Frank Gore is real good, but not Hall of Fame quality. Willis, if he keeps up this play for 6 more years, will be a lock for the Hall.
by spenczar on Dec 2, 2008 2:15 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I voted for Gore too
The question is who is more valuable to the 49ers, Patrick Willis or Frank Gore.
While Patrick Willis (in my opinion) is, and will be, a better player than Frank Gore, Frank Gore is more valuable to this 9ers team.
First, if Frank Gore were to leave the offense, we would be forced to start either DeShaun Foster or Michael Robinson. I think everyone would agree that this would be an enormous setback to the team (Foster is averaging 2 years per carry and Robinson only has 10 carries on the season). Meanwhile, if Willis got hurt, we still have Spikes and Ulbrich to play in the middle. And, if necessary, we could switch to a 4-3 defense. Although, our defense would definitely suffer, I am much more comfortable with the later scenario.
Further, in an offense run by Shaun Hill, and with WRs of Bruce, Morgan, and Johnson, I think a solid running back is necessary for offensive production. Once the Bills contained Frank Gore (after the first drive), the rest of our offense couldn’t do anything. I think that the defense would have a much easier time in the absence of Patrick Willis.
If the 49ers had a good QB and better WRs, then a good running back is not as important, but given this team, a good running back is crucial.
Thus, while Willis may be the better player, Frank Gore is more valuable to THIS 9ers team.
by rdub49erfn on Dec 2, 2008 3:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
as stated above
I agree
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
by wjackalope on Dec 2, 2008 3:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Depends
I guess what it’s all boiling down to is how you define “valuable.” You can look at it whose absence would affect the team the most, or you can look at it who is worth more (talent, etc). The two don’t always go in hand, and the 49ers are a perfect example of that.
If by “valuable,” you are referring to a player’s overall value (talent, how much would he be worth in the open market, how much would he bring back in a trade), then Patrick Willis is the winner, hands down. However, if you are referring to “value” in terms of how much his performance (or lack thereof) will affect a team, then I think Gore may take it pretty handily.
I don’t really know which definition I line up with. I’m just glad they’re both here and are both effective (for, hopefully, at least the next couple of years).
by sfgfan on Dec 2, 2008 4:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
There should be a option
for both because, if we didnt have gore our offense is terrible, even when he’s not making plays, he is a distraction during passing plays, and without willis we would have no defense, no doubt both these guys deserve to be in the Pro Bowl, playoffs 2009
by Dub4lif3 on Dec 2, 2008 4:34 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
It was my post that suggested that.
I voted for Bambam. I rally think that this next couple of years, we ar going to see a lot of quality RB’s coming out. Bambam is one of a kind. I mean, if he went down, the defense suffers a lot. Sure, Spikes is good and Ulbrich, well, let’s just say that he is equivalent to DeShaun Foster in terms of depth in his position. Besides, Foster has shown in the past that he could handle being the featured back. Trade Gore now while he still has some value. He will never become as good as he was two years ago. The fire is gone because he got his big payday.
Second to None!
by Jeff_Fuller_49 on Dec 2, 2008 8:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Fire's gone because he got his big pay day?
That’s a rather large presumption to make. He’s had some bad games but he’s still a top 10 running back in terms of yards per touch and total rushing yards. Considering how awful the offense was last year, wouldn’t you think it’s rather impressive he surpassed 1,000 yards? Defenses could stack 8 men in the box against the likes of Trent Dilfer and Chris Weinke and yet he still had a very solid year.
Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!
by Fooch on Dec 2, 2008 8:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Had a very solid year?
By whose standards? If he is truly the stud RB that some people think he is, he should be getting 2,000 yards. That was his expectation for 2007, right? He is a good RB, no doubt about it. But, RB’s have less life than my Nokia cell phone battery. Case in point: LT of the Chargers. If we could get a high draft pick for Gore or even a very good player, would you? Especially if it will help the 49ers cap, yes I would. And the team should. Should the team wait for Gore to wear down, his production will hurt the team and hurt the team’s chances of getting a good return. Regarding the “big payday” issue, it is quite a “large presumption” but most media people have used that term. You hear and read about the motivation after getting your “big payday.”
Second to None!
by Jeff_Fuller_49 on Dec 3, 2008 7:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Solid and stud
Gore, by any measure, has had a VERY good year. He accounts for almost two-thirds of the 49ers offensive production, what more do you want?
What, does every “stud” back has to get 2,000 yards rushing? Please. It’s a total that is hardly EVER accomplished, let alone expecting it from a player on the WORST offense in the NFL. If that is truly a measure of how good a back is, tell me how many running backs have accomplished that feat in the history of the NFL?
When the 49ers were remotely successful two years ago, he had over 2,000 TOTAL yards from scrimmage. Last year, with the NFL’s worst offense, he still had 1,500+. This year, if he continues at his current pace, he will have almost 1,800 yards. That is solid production from one player on the offense, no matter how you slice it.
by sfgfan on Dec 3, 2008 11:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Gore said it, not me.
Gore predicted he would gain 2,000 yards rushing for the 2007 season.
Second to None!
by Jeff_Fuller_49 on Dec 4, 2008 8:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Players will always say things.
He was aiming for the record that year. Players will always aim high.
Does that mean that you’re only a “stud” if you break records? That’s what your comment above implies.
by sfgfan on Dec 4, 2008 9:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bottom line...
Bottom line is, I do not think Gore will be as productive as he was in 2006. Call him a stud, the man, the dude or whatever you like, he will continue to gain his yards, 1,000 or 2,000 or whatever. But, he is definitely not going to be the RB that will take the 49ers to another level. Shaun Hill is another good player who will never be the QB to take the 49ers to the playoffs. Sometimes, a good defense is a good offense or vice-versa. Willis will be a mainstay in the LB position for many years to come and he will be able to anchor the defense that will compete with many teams.
Second to None!
by Jeff_Fuller_49 on Dec 4, 2008 11:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Mainstays...
… still don’t correlate to value, that’s all I’m trying to say.
To some, value is based on the effect the player has on the team. Gore, until the day he drops off the face of the Earth in terms of production, will have a greater effect on the 49ers offense than Willis will have on the 49ers defense.
by sfgfan on Dec 4, 2008 11:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Okay...
How many LB’s are there that could be like Bambam? How many RB’s are there that are similar to Gore’s play or even better? I mean, Michael Turner was a mid round pick. So was Steve Slaton, Marion Barber, Terrel Davis (of the Broncos), and even Gore was a 3rd round pick. Look at AJ Hawk. A lot of people thought the Niners were going after him. But, in the 3 years he has been in the league, has his name been mentioned in the same breath as Willis? Name a MLB/ILB that has been better than Willis in the last 2 or even 3 years.
Second to None!
by Jeff_Fuller_49 on Dec 3, 2008 8:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Don't get me wrong Willis is awesome but his awesome might be a little inflated.
He’s been the best player on a not-so-great defense so his numbers are possibly better than what they would be on a better defense.
They’re aren’t a lot of LB’s taken in the top 11 and when one is taken they’re usually pretty good. Jerod Mayo was taken 10th overall last year (plays basically the same position as Willis) and is on pace for 128 tackles (103 solo).
by methodrampage on Dec 3, 2008 11:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's not just being "better"...
… that makes one valuable. As I point out above, there are different perspectives on “value.” One could argue that if the 49ers had ended up with someone like Jon Beason, who was also a rookie last year, the 49ers defense wouldn’t really be that different at all. As method points out, a guy like Mayo would probably allow the 49ers defense to produce at about the same rate.
It is very possible for someone less talented to help the 49ers defense as much as a Willis has. So it’s not just a matter of overall talent that makes someone valuable, unless that’s all that is important to you. But in the grand scheme of things, and in terms of helping your team, the effect Gore has on the 49ers defense FAR exceeds the effect Willis has on the defense.
I’m not discounting Willis’s talents at all. He’s actually (probably) my favorite 49er (primarily because the position he plays is one of my favorites). But if you take Willis away, the 49ers defense will find a way. If you take Gore away, I don’t think the 49ers offense could do the same.
by sfgfan on Dec 3, 2008 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Over the past 3 years I’d almost put Fletcher, Beanson and Ryans in the same class as Willis.
by methodrampage on Dec 3, 2008 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So...
If you were running the 49ers, would you trade Willis for those 3 players you mentioned, methodrampage?
Second to None!
by Jeff_Fuller_49 on Dec 4, 2008 8:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Neither are that valuable
u guys are the most retarded people in the world
alex smith makes the biggest impact on the team, definitly going HoF, probly pro bowl,, even though he hasnt played, hes just that good, if we put him on trading block, we cud either get one of the mannings, brady, or maybe even garcia back, who knows, brees. But he is the greatest QB to ever grace the game of football, haha jk
its a tough decision because without willis our D is terrible and without gore our O is turrible, i mean if i had to choose id take em both, willis is better, better in the locker room, better leader, i mean the kids got a C-Patch. but gore can change the momentum of a game much, much easier than willis just cuz hes offensive player, if your building a defensive team u want willis as a top 3 pick, if ur building an offensive team u want gore in the top 10, thats saying a lot in itself right there. ive thought this question as well, think we played well without gore against the jets in the second half, but if he wasnt there it wud hav been a different game by far. If the niners had to choose either or, it wud be willis, if i ahd to choose, sorry frank(ur my favorite player in the world) but im gonna go with patrick willis
by AViciousHamster on Dec 10, 2008 10:43 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
