Why 49ers drafted Buckner....

[Popeyejones]

The complete player, blocking catching and being able to spread the field.

Well, if you want to stand alone and argue with a straight face that Graham is a complete player who is as profficient in blocking as he is as a receiver I guess I can't stop you, but it's kind of a strange claim to make.

I think everybody else really recognizes Graham as he is: a fairly one-dimensional player who is the around the best in the biz at the dimension he excels in (as a pass catcher), but really limited as a blocker.

I'm not saying anything new or surprising. Everyone on this board was scratching their heads last off-season when PC they were going to teach Graham how to block, and until he got hurt were also asking what the Hawks were paying for given how little he was incorporated into the passing attack.

Remember though, my post was a specific response to a specific claim.

 

[Popeyejones]

This also applies to Zach Miller as hawk45 brought up. It's not always about the stats. Miller was hugely beneficial for us and impacted our offense significantly. Were his stats the same as in Oakland? No but his overall production was more to influence the rest of the offense and in that sense he was just as good here.

We're talking about the same Zach Miller who in 2014 agreed to cut his salary in half rather than being cut and who the Hawks traded a 1st round pick and their starting center to push down on the depth chart, right?

He's a decent player no doubt, but if you're arguing that Zach Miller lived up to the FA deal he signed with the Hawks, it's a hard point to argue, because both the Hawks and Miller himself seem to disagree with you.

 

[bigtrain21]

This also applies to Zach Miller as hawk45 brought up. It's not always about the stats. Miller was hugely beneficial for us and impacted our offense significantly. Were his stats the same as in Oakland? No but his overall production was more to influence the rest of the offense and in that sense he was just as good here.

We're talking about the same Zach Miller who in 2014 agreed to cut his salary in half rather than being cut and who the Hawks traded a 1st round pick and their starting center to push down on the depth chart, right?

He's a decent player no doubt, but if you're arguing that Zach Miller lived up to the FA deal he signed with the Hawks, it's a hard point to argue, because both the Hawks and Miller himself seem to disagree with you.

I'm not sure why you spend so much time commenting on stuff you really don't know anything about. I think you must really love to argue. Zach Miller was cut prior to acquiring Graham because he was coming off a season in which he only played 3 games and he failed his physical. The trade didn't push him down the depth chart. He was already off the team.

So you think because the Seahawks went to Miller and asked him to take a pay cut so they would have more money to pay some of the guys that were due an extension like Earl Thomas and Richard Sherman, that it means they didn't value him as a player? That's quite a stretch.

 

[RichNhansom]

This also applies to Zach Miller as hawk45 brought up. It's not always about the stats. Miller was hugely beneficial for us and impacted our offense significantly. Were his stats the same as in Oakland? No but his overall production was more to influence the rest of the offense and in that sense he was just as good here.

We're talking about the same Zach Miller who in 2014 agreed to cut his salary in half rather than being cut and who the Hawks traded a 1st round pick and their starting center to push down on the depth chart, right?

He's a decent player no doubt, but if you're arguing that Zach Miller lived up to the FA deal he signed with the Hawks, it's a hard point to argue, because both the Hawks and Miller himself seem to disagree with you.

I'm not sure why you spend so much time commenting on stuff you really don't know anything about. I think you must really love to argue. Zach Miller was cut prior to acquiring Graham because he was coming off a season in which he only played 3 games and he failed his physical. The trade didn't push him down the depth chart. He was already off the team.

So you think because the Seahawks went to Miller and asked him to take a pay cut so they would have more money to pay some of the guys that were due an extension like Earl Thomas and Richard Sherman, that it means they didn't value him as a player? That's quite a stretch.

You would think a Niner fan more than anyone would understand the value of Zach Miller after watching Delainie Walker walk away. There's actually a thread on the webzone about Delainie Walker that started before he hit FA and no surprise most have no clue how much that offense benefited from his presence.

Marvin help me out here. You are on record in that thread telling everyone if you don't want Walker back then you have no idea of how he is used and what he does for the offense and that was before he left.

Bigtrain already explained the reason Miller was asked to renegotiate. I thought it was obvious. Injuries and age caught up to him. We tried one last time to see if he could get back to the old Miller but he was injury riddled and even slower than when he arrived. Sucks, I really liked having him and our offense took a huge hit without his presence.

I'm on record for things I wanted this off season as #1 a dominant blocking TE and or H-back. #2 big upgrades at center and FB.

We were most efficient when we had Bruce Miller, Zach Miller and Max Unger on the field. Even with a very inexperienced QB we were still productive. Our blocking has continued to get worse each year, bottoming out last year while Wilson has actually improved his play to compensate for it. If we can get back to what we had with Miller, Miller and Unger now that Wilson really has become elite, this offense could be insane.

 

[Popeyejones]

This also applies to Zach Miller as hawk45 brought up. It's not always about the stats. Miller was hugely beneficial for us and impacted our offense significantly. Were his stats the same as in Oakland? No but his overall production was more to influence the rest of the offense and in that sense he was just as good here.

We're talking about the same Zach Miller who in 2014 agreed to cut his salary in half rather than being cut and who the Hawks traded a 1st round pick and their starting center to push down on the depth chart, right?

He's a decent player no doubt, but if you're arguing that Zach Miller lived up to the FA deal he signed with the Hawks, it's a hard point to argue, because both the Hawks and Miller himself seem to disagree with you.

I'm not sure why you spend so much time commenting on stuff you really don't know anything about. I think you must really love to argue. Zach Miller was cut prior to acquiring Graham because he was coming off a season in which he only played 3 games and he failed his physical. The trade didn't push him down the depth chart. He was already off the team.

So you think because the Seahawks went to Miller and asked him to take a pay cut so they would have more money to pay some of the guys that were due an extension like Earl Thomas and Richard Sherman, that it means they didn't value him as a player? That's quite a stretch.

If the Seahawks were getting as much out of Miller as they hoped when they signed him away from Oakland they wouldn't have halved his salary and traded for his replacement at TE 1.

That doesn't stem from a love of arguing, it stems from an affinity for the obvious.

 

[rideaducati]

This also applies to Zach Miller as hawk45 brought up. It's not always about the stats. Miller was hugely beneficial for us and impacted our offense significantly. Were his stats the same as in Oakland? No but his overall production was more to influence the rest of the offense and in that sense he was just as good here.

We're talking about the same Zach Miller who in 2014 agreed to cut his salary in half rather than being cut and who the Hawks traded a 1st round pick and their starting center to push down on the depth chart, right?

He's a decent player no doubt, but if you're arguing that Zach Miller lived up to the FA deal he signed with the Hawks, it's a hard point to argue, because both the Hawks and Miller himself seem to disagree with you.

I'm not sure why you spend so much time commenting on stuff you really don't know anything about. I think you must really love to argue. Zach Miller was cut prior to acquiring Graham because he was coming off a season in which he only played 3 games and he failed his physical. The trade didn't push him down the depth chart. He was already off the team.

So you think because the Seahawks went to Miller and asked him to take a pay cut so they would have more money to pay some of the guys that were due an extension like Earl Thomas and Richard Sherman, that it means they didn't value him as a player? That's quite a stretch.

If the Seahawks were getting as much out of Miller as they hoped when they signed him away from Oakland they wouldn't have halved his salary and traded for his replacement at TE 1.

That doesn't stem from a love of arguing, it stems from an affinity for the obvious.

Unlike the niners organization, the Seahawks plan ahead to replace ageing vets. Miller was ageing. He knew it. The Seahawks front office knew it. Miller took the pay cut because he wanted a job. The Seahawks front office is also pretty good at determining which players to pay and when to pay them...something niner fans are also unaccustomed to seeing done correctly.

It must truly suck being a niner can these days. Unable to conjure up any sort of hope for your own team and only trying desperately to knock other teams down. Just sad.

 

[Sterling Archer]

Just to reiterate the Graham statement and what it was in response to:

Archer said Graham was on pace to put up good season numbers before he got hurt. I replied that he was on pace to put up career lows (not counting his rookie year) in catches, yards, ypg, and TDs.

I wasn't engaging in a debate of imagination over things that hypothetically could have happened but didn't happen, nor do I have any interest in debating imaginary events.

TBF, I don't think anybody was expecting Graham to put up the same numbers as he was on the Saints (or at least should have), but that's kinda the problem also. Everything Graham does with proficiency shows up on the stats sheet, so if you're not getting that stat sheet, what are you paying for?

Did you expect Graham to put up the same numbers here as in NO? Because if so, then of course you are going to be disappointed. We do not run the same offense. However, Graham would have had a good year for a hawk if he hadn't been injured.

Graham's career avg:
1099 yds
89 catches
12.4 avg

2015 (extrapolated to 16 games)
880 yds
70 catches
12.6 avg

It's a volume problem. Same as everyone pointed out with Tate. It doesn't mean the player is horrible here, they don't have as many opportunties. In Graham's case, a good 20 catches under his average. Efficiency wise he's on the same pace. The Seahawks have not had a tight end put up those numbers in as long as I can remember. You'll probably point out the touchdowns are well below his average and that is true. We continued to have redzone problems the first part of last year and Graham did not solve that.

However, I'm done arguing with you because I don't actually care what you think and like I said earlier, it's going to remain to be seen as to whether the Graham acquisition will be worth it and a lot of it depends on his recovery. I'm glad that I'm not a niner fan who is so miserable that I'm on another teams board arguing that their coaching staff is bad at development/utilization when they are known for the exact opposite.

 

[RichNhansom]

This also applies to Zach Miller as hawk45 brought up. It's not always about the stats. Miller was hugely beneficial for us and impacted our offense significantly. Were his stats the same as in Oakland? No but his overall production was more to influence the rest of the offense and in that sense he was just as good here.

We're talking about the same Zach Miller who in 2014 agreed to cut his salary in half rather than being cut and who the Hawks traded a 1st round pick and their starting center to push down on the depth chart, right?

He's a decent player no doubt, but if you're arguing that Zach Miller lived up to the FA deal he signed with the Hawks, it's a hard point to argue, because both the Hawks and Miller himself seem to disagree with you.

I'm not sure why you spend so much time commenting on stuff you really don't know anything about. I think you must really love to argue. Zach Miller was cut prior to acquiring Graham because he was coming off a season in which he only played 3 games and he failed his physical. The trade didn't push him down the depth chart. He was already off the team.

So you think because the Seahawks went to Miller and asked him to take a pay cut so they would have more money to pay some of the guys that were due an extension like Earl Thomas and Richard Sherman, that it means they didn't value him as a player? That's quite a stretch.

If the Seahawks were getting as much out of Miller as they hoped when they signed him away from Oakland they wouldn't have halved his salary and traded for his replacement at TE 1.

That doesn't stem from a love of arguing, it stems from an affinity for the obvious.

Your being obtuse. Do you not read what others write or just ignore it for argument sake?

Miller was close to retirement when we restructured him. It had nothing to do with him not being a success in our organization. You seem to completely miss the point or just don't understand that players age. We didn't watch him walk away in FA because we were to cheap like Walker only to find out we screwed up. His NFL lifespan was coming to an end and he wanted to extend it. If he didn't restructure he would have been released (due to age and injury) and likely would have signed a 1 year deal elsewhere for similar money only to deal with injuries and retire after the season anyway. He/we prolonged his career an additional year. Completely the opposite of how you are trying to paint it.

 

[Popeyejones]

Just to reiterate the Graham statement and what it was in response to:

Archer said Graham was on pace to put up good season numbers before he got hurt. I replied that he was on pace to put up career lows (not counting his rookie year) in catches, yards, ypg, and TDs.

I wasn't engaging in a debate of imagination over things that hypothetically could have happened but didn't happen, nor do I have any interest in debating imaginary events.

TBF, I don't think anybody was expecting Graham to put up the same numbers as he was on the Saints (or at least should have), but that's kinda the problem also. Everything Graham does with proficiency shows up on the stats sheet, so if you're not getting that stat sheet, what are you paying for?

Did you expect Graham to put up the same numbers here as in NO? Because if so, then of course you are going to be disappointed. We do not run the same offense. However, Graham would have had a good year for a hawk if he hadn't been injured.

Graham's career avg:
1099 yds
89 catches
12.4 avg

2015 (extrapolated to 16 games)
880 yds
70 catches
12.6 avg

It's a volume problem. Same as everyone pointed out with Tate. It doesn't mean the player is horrible here, they don't have as many opportunties. In Graham's case, a good 20 catches under his average. Efficiency wise he's on the same pace. The Seahawks have not had a tight end put up those numbers in as long as I can remember. You'll probably point out the touchdowns are well below his average and that is true. We continued to have redzone problems the first part of last year and Graham did not solve that.

However, I'm done arguing with you because I don't actually care what you think and like I said earlier, it's going to remain to be seen as to whether the Graham acquisition will be worth it and a lot of it depends on his recovery. I'm glad that I'm not a niner fan who is so miserable that I'm on another teams board arguing that their coaching staff is bad at development/utilization when they are known for the exact opposite.

Why'd you leave off touchdowns? Was it just an "accident"? :lol:

In any case we 100% agree it's an issue of volume. That was the original question though when the Hawks absorbed his 10 mil salary and traded a 1st and Unger for him: he exists almost exclusively as a receiver, and if he's not going to get the targets to be that in the Hawks offense, what are they paying for exactly.

Regarding Tate, love him as a player and always have, but it's the same shoe on the other foot: he's simply worth more to the Lions than he was to the Hawks because the Lions offense uses his abilities more. It's why at the time I said it sucked for the Hawks to have to lose Tate but it made sense he was more valuable to a team like the Lions.

 

[chris98251]

The complete player, blocking catching and being able to spread the field.

Well, if you want to stand alone and argue with a straight face that Graham is a complete player who is as profficient in blocking as he is as a receiver I guess I can't stop you, but it's kind of a strange claim to make.

I think everybody else really recognizes Graham as he is: a fairly one-dimensional player who is the around the best in the biz at the dimension he excels in (as a pass catcher), but really limited as a blocker.

I'm not saying anything new or surprising. Everyone on this board was scratching their heads last off-season when PC they were going to teach Graham how to block, and until he got hurt were also asking what the Hawks were paying for given how little he was incorporated into the passing attack.

Remember though, my post was a specific response to a specific claim.

I did not say he was proficient, I said he was asked to be a complete player, he was learning how to block on a NFL level and asked to. He was asked to be a complete player, Cable has stated he was coming along and working on it, will he ever be as good as Miller at it? Who knows, but it is what he was asked to learn and do and get better at.

 

[RichNhansom]

Just to reiterate the Graham statement and what it was in response to:

Archer said Graham was on pace to put up good season numbers before he got hurt. I replied that he was on pace to put up career lows (not counting his rookie year) in catches, yards, ypg, and TDs.

I wasn't engaging in a debate of imagination over things that hypothetically could have happened but didn't happen, nor do I have any interest in debating imaginary events.

TBF, I don't think anybody was expecting Graham to put up the same numbers as he was on the Saints (or at least should have), but that's kinda the problem also. Everything Graham does with proficiency shows up on the stats sheet, so if you're not getting that stat sheet, what are you paying for?

Did you expect Graham to put up the same numbers here as in NO? Because if so, then of course you are going to be disappointed. We do not run the same offense. However, Graham would have had a good year for a hawk if he hadn't been injured.

Graham's career avg:
1099 yds
89 catches
12.4 avg

2015 (extrapolated to 16 games)
880 yds
70 catches
12.6 avg

It's a volume problem. Same as everyone pointed out with Tate. It doesn't mean the player is horrible here, they don't have as many opportunties. In Graham's case, a good 20 catches under his average. Efficiency wise he's on the same pace. The Seahawks have not had a tight end put up those numbers in as long as I can remember. You'll probably point out the touchdowns are well below his average and that is true. We continued to have redzone problems the first part of last year and Graham did not solve that.

However, I'm done arguing with you because I don't actually care what you think and like I said earlier, it's going to remain to be seen as to whether the Graham acquisition will be worth it and a lot of it depends on his recovery. I'm glad that I'm not a niner fan who is so miserable that I'm on another teams board arguing that their coaching staff is bad at development/utilization when they are known for the exact opposite.

Why'd you leave off touchdowns? Was it just an "accident"? :lol:

In any case we 100% agree it's an issue of volume. That was the original question though when the Hawks absorbed his 10 mil salary and traded a 1st and Unger for him: he exists almost exclusively as a receiver, and if he's not going to get the targets to be that in the Hawks offense, what are they paying for exactly.

Regarding Tate, love him as a player and always have, but it's the same shoe on the other foot: he's simply worth more to the Lions than he was to the Hawks because the Lions offense uses his abilities more. It's why at the time I said it sucked for the Hawks to have to lose Tate but it made sense he was more valuable to a team like the Lions.

Players don't take less money because they are going to get less targets. It doesn't work that way. He's worth what the market will bear and if you want to have the type of threat he creates you have to pay what other teams are willing to pay. Not real complicated.

Based on your logic we should pigeon hole ourselves and never pay a receiver good money because we don't throw it enough and this is after watching what happened the second half of the season last year.

If you want to be a well rounded team you have to have threats everywhere. So in that there is value. Make sense?

 

[Laloosh]

So... Buckner...

 

[RichNhansom]

So... Buckner...

Good point. How did we get so far off topic? Oh yeah, Popeye the thread derailer. Is that all he contributes to threads now? Derailing them?

 

[Laloosh]

So... Buckner...

Good point. How did we get so far off topic? Oh yeah, Popeye the thread derailer. Is that all he contributes to threads now? Derailing them?

You know who else is richnhansom? Buckner...

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

It must truly suck being a niner fan these days. Unable to conjure up any sort of hope for your own team and only trying desperately to knock other teams down. Just sad.

Spot on analysis and yeah, very sad. Attempting to build one's self up through tearing down others is a common approach to low self esteem. In this case, we could call it low fan esteem.

 

[Marvin49]

It must truly suck being a niner fan these days. Unable to conjure up any sort of hope for your own team and only trying desperately to knock other teams down. Just sad.

Spot on analysis and yeah, very sad. Attempting to build one's self up through tearing down others is a common approach to low self esteem. In this case, we could call it low fan esteem.

I can't speak for other posters, but I'm certainly not in the "Unable to conjure up any sort of hope for your own team" stage. I'm really looking forward to the season to see a number of younger players get a shot. I enjoy football win or lose. Of COURSE I'd rather they win, but there is enjoyment in the journey as well. Now if there were no young players on the roster...yeah, that might be tough. 30 plus draftees tho in the last 3 years makes for a large numbe rof players yet to get a chance.

The recent spurt of success was so much sweeter because I got to see all those great players get drafted, go through the hard times, and come out the other side.

We've just reset that process as all teams will eventually.

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

And in San Fran's case, you get to see the young players coached by the GM too.

A brilliant 2-for-1 offer from the ever generous Trent Baalke.

 

[NINEster]

So, they drafted a defensive lineman to get after the QB.

This is the kind of first rate, innovative thinking we've come to expect from the 49ers!

By itself it doesn't make a ton of sense (3-4 DE), but looking back at 2012 draft.....JJ Watt would have been ok over Aldon Smith.

Also, if you improve the pieces on the DL, the existing OLBs will get more pressure.

BTW, as far as "piece of the puzzle" against Wilson.....it's not extreme edge pressure but strong contain and push back of the pocket that gets to #3.

Baalke has a 3 year plan just for Wilson.

Year 1: Armstead
Year 2: Buckner and moving Tank to OLB in pass rushing situations
Year 3: Best OLB edge rusher

The idea is to trap Wilson and use Bowman to make sure he cannot escape through a collapsed pocket up the middle.

Someone please insert gif of Russell making Bowman look silly right here.

Careful what you wish for.....

 

[Largent80]

Right, lets talk about containment.....

[youtube]v4AyYF_7gHQ[/youtube]

 

[NINEster]

Navorro Bowman was nowhere to be found in that video. I'd rather go GIF, but Bowman has gotten to Wilson more times than you'll wish to admit. The videos are out there.

And Wilson making a big play scrambling play once means it happens all the time?

Like Kap's 50 yard run in the 2013 NFCC....big plays are bound to happen if you have the speed.