Mega-Merge: 2010 Free Agency Rumors and Reports Thread

[johno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Anyone else read this?

i agree with you Matty. With the strategy suggested in the article, we would be better off for 2010 and 2011, but then be right back in the same spot we are today. cheaper stop gap measures, with intentions on finding young talent is the way to go.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by johno

i agree with you Matty. With the strategy suggested in the article, we would be better off for 2010 and 2011, but then be right back in the same spot we are today. cheaper stop gap measures, with intentions on finding young talent is the way to go.

Hard to believe some are upset over losing out on marginal guys like Clifton and Pashos, who in normal years would have barely registered a blip on most teams' free agent radar. I can see people getting upset over losing out on someone like Dansby, but then again if we're turning over a new leaf you have to at least give the new direction a chance. "Winning" the offseason hasn't gotten us anything in the past.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Hard to believe some are upset over losing out on marginal guys like Clifton and Pashos, who in normal years would have barely registered a blip on most teams' free agent radar. I can see people getting upset over losing out on someone like Dansby, but then again if we're turning over a new leaf you have to at least give the new direction a chance. "Winning" the offseason hasn't gotten us anything in the past.

I was a little upset myself just because these would have been nice band-aide fixes while we got younger in the draft. Now if we kept drafting skill position players after this draft THEN I might start questioning the process a little bit, but I don't find a whole lot wrong with signing these guys.

If we end up going QB with our first pick, we're going to get him killed in my opinion.

Maybe I'll be surprised by the end result, but those would have been nice stop-gaps to help with the rebuild for the time being.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Hard to believe some are upset over losing out on marginal guys like Clifton and Pashos, who in normal years would have barely registered a blip on most teams' free agent radar. I can see people getting upset over losing out on someone like Dansby, but then again if we're turning over a new leaf you have to at least give the new direction a chance. "Winning" the offseason hasn't gotten us anything in the past.

Yep; I mean I want to improve this year over last, but if it means we'll be addressing these positions with better guys next year while giving some guy a shot to start this year, that's better. I'd rather have say, another tackle next year than to have some allegiance to some guy that we brought in on a solid contract and didn't plan on keeping anymore than the year. Imagine we got Pashos and he played decently for us, then you have the dilemma of whether to keep him another year or go ahead and get the stud next year. I suppose you could always cut him after the year or force him into a backup role, but then what was the point in signing him in the first place?

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by johno

i agree with you Matty. With the strategy suggested in the article, we would be better off for 2010 and 2011, but then be right back in the same spot we are today. cheaper stop gap measures, with intentions on finding young talent is the way to go.

we'd only be back where we were today in 2012 if we traded 2010 and 2011 draft picks for veterans or the new CBA has a grandfather rule that penalizes teams who spent big in the uncapped year by taking draft picks away from them. bringing in free agent veterans in an uncapped year doesn't hurt the team if the players fit the system.

[johno]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

we'd only be back where we were today in 2012 if we traded 2010 and 2011 draft picks for veterans or the new CBA has a grandfather rule that penalizes teams who spent big in the uncapped year by taking draft picks away from them. bringing in free agent veterans in an uncapped year doesn't hurt the team if the players fit the system.

i was alluding to the fact that all of those free agents were older players that would be expensive.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by johno

i was alluding to the fact that all of those free agents were older players that would be expensive.

who cares if theyre older if we're only relying on them to start for 1-2 years? and who cares about the expense in an uncapped season? I think Campbell or Bradford would have a much better shot at success with Pashos and Clifton protecting him than a 2nd round rookie tackle or any of the scrubs we currently have on the roster. Ideally, we could have signed one or both of them and then drafted a tackle with one of our 1st two picks in the draft. and come on, its not like the contracts either clifton or pashos signed were outrageous. both were 3 year deals without much garaunteed money. both could have been signed and (if necessary) cut next year (even if there is a cap) with minimal negative cap hit.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

who cares if theyre older if we're only relying on them to start for 1-2 years? I think Campbell or Bradford would have a much better shot at success with Pashos and Clifton protecting him than a 2nd round rookie tackle or any of the scrubs we currently have on the roster.

I know. We need to buy some time for some of the gaping holes we have. If we get a guy that only plays for two or three years, hell just one year; that's more than enough time to fill holes with a draft or two. We should be good in the next two years, maybe one?

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

who cares if theyre older if we're only relying on them to start for 1-2 years? I think Campbell or Bradford would have a much better shot at success with Pashos and Clifton protecting him than a 2nd round rookie tackle or any of the scrubs we currently have on the roster.

there is enough tape and clifton has started enough in the NFL for us to get a feel for what clifton would bring . . .

but how would any of us know pashos would be an upgrade? hes just a name im going to assume me and you never heard of until a month ago.

if you knew the 49ers backup o lineman who started what, 4 games last year, then kudos to you. but i doubt that im handing out kudos for a tony pashos.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

there is enough tape and clifton has started enough in the NFL for us to get a feel for what clifton would bring . . .

but how would any of us know pashos would be an upgrade? hes just a name im going to assume me and you never heard of until a month ago.

if you knew the 49ers backup o lineman who started what, 4 games last year, then kudos to you. but i doubt that im handing out kudos for a tony pashos.

I do imagine that our OL coach (who was SF's last year I believe) knows him, so I hope if he had wanted him we would have pushed harder for him.

Still, lots of holes to be filled either from inside or FA/Draft.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I do imagine that our OL coach (who was SF's last year I believe) knows him, so I hope if he had wanted him we would have pushed harder for him.

Still, lots of holes to be filled either from inside or FA/Draft.

from the sounds of it, we did want him - we just didnt want to spend more on him. as someone else mentioned, its a very odd time for this team to suddenly start being frugal. in an capped year, the skins would be doing exactly what the should be. however, with no cap, there's no reason to not get the guy you want because he wants 1-2MM more than you initially wanted to pay.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

there is enough tape and clifton has started enough in the NFL for us to get a feel for what clifton would bring . . .

but how would any of us know pashos would be an upgrade? hes just a name im going to assume me and you never heard of until a month ago.

if you knew the 49ers backup o lineman who started what, 4 games last year, then kudos to you. but i doubt that im handing out kudos for a tony pashos.

Select which statement most closely identifies yourself

A) I am Stephon Heyer
B) I am Stephon Heyer's agent
c) I am a close relative of Stephon Heyer
D) I plan on betting against the Redskins in 2010 and ensuring Stephon Heyer starts at RT is the best way to ensure the Redskins lose as many games as possible

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Select which statement most closely identifies yourself

A) I am Stephon Heyer
B) I am Stephon Heyer's agent
c) I am a close relative of Stephon Heyer
D) I plan on betting against the Redskins in 2010 and ensuring Stephon Heyer starts at RT is the best way to ensure the Redskins lose as many games as possible

youforgot one more option:

E) i dont pretend to know more than I do.

honestly. pashos could very well = a stephen heyer.

holland could very well = a mike williams

dont pick names out of a hat and act like "ohh we should have done this or we should have done that".

im just having trouble understanding fans who are mad we arent signing these no name guys . . . .when we the fans know nothing other than their name and postion.

sandtrapps post highlights that. ohh an o lineman is available? lets sign him and we are 1/5th done with assembling our o line!!!

DOH!!

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Select which statement most closely identifies yourself

A) I am Stephon Heyer
B) I am Stephon Heyer's agent
c) I am a close relative of Stephon Heyer
D) I plan on betting against the Redskins in 2010 and ensuring Stephon Heyer starts at RT is the best way to ensure the Redskins lose as many games as possible