Golden Nuggets: Marvelous?

by James Brady on Mar 19, 2009 1:35 AM PDT in 49ers Links

Morning everyone, James here with the Golden Nuggets. I'm getting them up early today, I kind of have somewhere to be, so I apologize in advance if anything is sloppy. I will note that there isn't a whole lot to work with today news-wise, so don't mistake lack of links for lack of effort. At any rate, I only have a couple, but you should definitely read them regardless. As soon as I can I'll get on and post some more, and as always, post some in the comments if you come across any. Big on my mind today is OT Marvel Smith. I don't know how I feel about him, its probably not a good idea when, you know, we wonder if he can produce as much as Jonas Jennings. Either way, here's some links for you.

T Marvel Smith officially visited the Niners yesterday for a meeting and a physical. (SFGate.com)

A look at the hiring and firing of head coaches, where our (previous) own Steve Mariucci is mentioned. (SFGate.com)

According to Marvel Smith's agent, the visit today went very well. (SacBee.com)

Look for new 49ers unis this coming season. I can practically see Mr. Lam foaming at the mouth. (SacBee.com)

How do you feel about Bruuuuuce possibly not returning? (NBCBayArea.com)

The NFL Total Access crew takes a look at the state of the 49ers. (NFL.com)

Not 49ers news, but general NFL rules, the competition committe is tryiing to make sure the Ed Hochuli call doesn't happen again. (NFL.com)

And due to lack of news, a look at Detroit's biggest criteria for being on their team. Haha. (Yahoo.com)

Tweet Comment 8 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I don’t think we need to change the rules because Ed blew a call. If a ref blows a whistle than guys stop playing. For a defense to recover a fumble while the offense is standing around on a dead play is just stupid. I can live with the occasional play is dead by whistle mistake over the alternative.

NFL Network Analysis . . . WE NEED A OT! League leading 110 sacks allowed the last two years. Anyone arguing our top need is a pass rusher is just insane.

by bignerd on Mar 19, 2009 2:12 AM PDT reply actions

That's why

I believe refs should let things play out and not blow a play dead so soon. I know they have this whole “player safety” arguement in recent years, but this is football. Players will get hurt. It’s unfortunate, but a team shouldn’t have their season decided by a premature whistle.

Also, I would say pass rush is our biggest priority. By which I mean a Ron Brace in the 2nd round to shore up the DLine and free up our current LBs to be more productive. As for OT, I think Snyder is servicable. I don’t know if I like the idea of getting one of the top ranked OTs just to drop him at RT. That seems like a waste. And I wouldn’t feel comfortable with one of these guys taking over LT and moving Staley back to the right either.

As far as the draft is concerned, I’m thinking doing everything possible to trade down is the best bet. If we could trade with Philly that would be perfect. The late 1st, early 2nd round would fit us much better, and with 3 picks there, we could grab Brace, one of the RTs expected to go around there, and have a number of options with the other pick like DB, DE/OLB, WR possibly, RB, etc. I guess I just don’t like anybody that is more than likely to still be available at 10 enough to warrant the #10 draft pick.

And on the 110 sacks note. I think our OLine wasn’t helped much by Dilfer/JTO. I did some quick math (I added the pass attempts and sacks, and then divided sacks by that total: sacks/(sacks+atts)) and got the following:
2007 – Dilfer 11%
2008 – JTO 12.7%
2007-2008 – Hill 7.3%

Over a whole season, Hills stats would work out to about 37 sacks. Granted, that’s still not great, but much better than 55. It would put us around 20th in the league. But with a line that is more stabilized recently and a QB that isn’t so sack prone, I don’t see us repeating a 55 sack year next season.

by Sebaz49 on Mar 20, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions

I agree with all the above...

… except the trading down with Philly part. Not that I wouldn’t love to trade down, but I don’t think the Eagles are all that interested in unloading their two first round picks when they have many needs, too.

I agree with the OT thing, and I would hate to replace a player who already showed he can play LT with an unproven player just because the money warrants it. As I’ve also expressed before, I’d be uncomfortable giving Staley a raise just because some top 10 pick forces the 49ers to pay Staley what he’s actually worth as a LT to keep the kid at RT. As you point out, it’s kind of a waste.

I’m starting to really like Brace, but I’m thinking other teams are as well. He’s not a flashy player, but he seems to be a better “anchor” than Raji is. If a team is just looking for a mass in the middle to help shore up their run defense, Brace could probably go late in the first.

I also share your opinion that the sack numbers are a little misleading. Not only did the team have an immobile QB for some of that (Dilfer) and a useless QB that held the ball for too long (O’Sullivan), they also had one of the worst coordinators in the history of the NFL in giving up sacks. Not that it’s entirely his fault, but Martz has never really shown that his offense is good at preventing sacks.

With a more conservative offense (which is what this year’s sounds like), the sack number will go down, regardless of the 49ers improving at RT or not.

by sfgfan on Mar 20, 2009 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions

Yea I know

the trade down with the Eagles is only a dream. I doubt a trade with Philly will happen, but it would be the best case scenario for the Niners, in my opinion.

by Sebaz49 on Mar 23, 2009 7:04 AM PDT up reply actions

Link

Sando’s Mailbag (ESPN.com)

by David Fucillo on Mar 19, 2009 9:13 AM PDT reply actions

For the record

I loved Mooch, and still do. Any coach that can get a team to come back and win 39-38 in the NFC Wild Card round is special. Mooch made T.O. the terror he is on the field, and was a victim of the terror T.O. was off the field (and on the sidelines). Sure Mooch failed miserably in Detroit, but Mooch coulnd`t turn water into whine either.

by Andrew Davidson on Mar 19, 2009 7:29 PM PDT reply actions

Quick FYI

That article was an excellent read by the way.

by Andrew Davidson on Mar 19, 2009 7:35 PM PDT up reply actions

Mooch

I liked Mooch, too, but that article seemed a little misleading as to why Mooch got canned. It seemed to place the blame solely on ownership and that there were “tender” feelings being hurt. I don’t think that was necessarily the case at all. From what I understand, Mooch had his vision of how he wanted the team to continue to run, while the 49ers (somewhat fueled by Walsh, I think) had a semi-different vision. It’s not coincidental that Walsh’s protege took over as GM and Mooch got fired the following year.

Think about it this way: if you were the inexperienced ownership, would you take the advice of a head coach who led his team to the playoffs 4 out of the past 6 years but has some glaring weaknesses? Or would you listen to the person that the HOF head coach that acts as one of your “advisers” 100% wholeheartedly endorses? And who’s to say Walsh didn’t have his opinion thrown into the ring, as well?

I’m not saying the Yorks were right in taking Donahue’s side, but I can definitely see the reasoning behind it.

by sfgfan on Mar 20, 2009 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions