Boldin traded to 49ers for 6th rounder - Page 2

49ersfan_87 · 03-11-2013, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperPacker

A 6th for a 32 year old in the last year of his contract getting $6M. I wouldn't say it's rape by the 49ers. To the 49ers it's nothing, but to other teams that don't have 4124 picks it would be quite a lot. And he was going to be cut anyway and the Ravens had made that clear...Exactly how much wouldn't be rape?

https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/...15455731847170

Quote:

Vikings had offered a seventh-round pick for Anquan Boldin, per source with knowledge of the discussions.

Ravens1991 · 03-11-2013, 03:50 PM

We could have just cut Leach and saved 3 million. Yeah Boldjn may technically be overpaid but he had 1 season left. As long as we don't lose anyone who gives a **** If we overpaid for a guy for a season.

49ersfan_87 · 03-11-2013, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpngc

That's true. The picks scare me way more than this acquisition.

SF and SEA making these kind of moves seem a little out of character. And then both trade for WR's on the same day.

SF and SEA game next year is definitely going to be a SNF or MNF game.

SuperPacker · 03-11-2013, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49ersfan_87

https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/...15455731847170

What exactly is this meant to mean? A team that is absolutely desperate for any kind of receiver and just traded a 1st/7th and future mid round pick for their best receiver, only offered a 7th. What is your point?

49ersfan_87 · 03-11-2013, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperPacker

What exactly is this meant to mean? A team that is absolutely desperate for any kind of receiver and just traded a 1st/7th and future mid round pick for their best receiver, only offered a 7th. What is your point?

You said he was going to be cut, the report said another team offered a 7th, so the 49ers had to offer a 6 to up the compensation in a bidding war.

I wasn't trying to start an tired argument or anything, i mean i thought it was pretty ******* clear what i was saying, but everything has to be spelled out nowadays...

BmoreBlackByrdz · 03-11-2013, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravens1991

We could have just cut Leach and saved 3 million. Yeah Boldjn may technically be overpaid but he had 1 season left. As long as we don't lose anyone who gives a **** If we overpaid for a guy for a season.

If we had kept Boldin, we would have likely had no chance at trying to retain Ellerbe.

At least now we have a shot.

I'd rather have Ellerbe >> Boldin, given the retirement of Ray and the uncertainty with Jameel McClain we can't afford to lose him. Couple that with the emergence of Torrey Smith and Dennis Pitta in the passing game and we should survive.

Ravens1991 · 03-11-2013, 04:02 PM

We could have cut leach and had the space we wanted to save with Boldjn. If we cut leach we would be at roughly 15 million. That should be enough for Ellerbe the draft picks and Rfa. And maybe offer reed a competitive offer.

tjsunstein · 03-11-2013, 04:03 PM

Had to see him leaving regardless. His cap number was too high in an offseason where retaining Flacco and Ellerbe were priorities. It's a something or nothing deal for the Ravens and a solid, but not phenomenal, deal for SF. His game is very physical for his age, and his cap number is too high for that risk.

gpngc · 03-11-2013, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49ersfan_87

SF and SEA making these kind of moves seem a little out of character. And then both trade for WR's on the same day.

SF and SEA game next year is definitely going to be a SNF or MNF game.

I'm hearing a lot of this.

These moves are not comparable.

Anquan Boldin is a potentially nice addition. But he doesn't improve the team NEARLY as much as Percy Harvin does for Seattle. Harvin adds a whole new dimension to the offense. Boldin does not.

And Harvin is going to be with Wilson for years. Boldin's a one-year rental.

Seattle is the winner today. They got MUCH better. San Fran added a very similar player to Crabtree that a young QB is going to have one year to learn and use.

Just read a stat. Boldin has 7 TDs in his last 33 reg. season games.

SuperPacker · 03-11-2013, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49ersfan_87

You said he was going to be cut, the report said another team offered a 7th, so the 49ers had to offer a 6 to up the compensation in a bidding war.

I wasn't trying to start an tired argument or anything, i mean i thought it was pretty ******* clear what i was saying, but everything has to be spelled out nowadays...

I'm not saying it was a bad trade by the 49ers and that they shouldn't have traded for him because he was going to be cut. Upping the offer to a 6th was fine, but I just don't agree that it was trade rape. Far from it. Faaaaaaar from it.

Raiderz4Life · 03-11-2013, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49ersfan_87

You said he was going to be cut, the report said another team offered a 7th, so the 49ers had to offer a 6 to up the compensation in a bidding war.

I wasn't trying to start an tired argument or anything, i mean i thought it was pretty ******* clear what i was saying, but everything has to be spelled out nowadays...

I wouldn't call that a bidding war. More like a bidding titty-slap contest.

gpngc · 03-11-2013, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BmoreBlackByrdz

If we had kept Boldin, we would have likely had no chance at trying to retain Ellerbe.

At least now we have a shot.

I'd rather have Ellerbe >> Boldin, given the retirement of Ray and the uncertainty with Jameel McClain we can't afford to lose him. Couple that with the emergence of Torrey Smith and Dennis Pitta in the passing game and we should survive.

Welp. There you go. Ellerbe for the next 3-4 years or Boldin for one? Easy to me.

Plus, keeping Boldin for one year takes away a year of syncing a future WR with his QB. You can shower Smith with targets and give a youngster a full extra season of development.

49ersfan_87 · 03-11-2013, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpngc

I'm hearing a lot of this.

These moves are not comparable.

Anquan Boldin is a potentially nice addition. But he doesn't improve the team NEARLY as much as Percy Harvin does for Seattle. Harvin adds a whole new dimension to the offense. Boldin does not.

And Harvin is going to be with Wilson for years. Boldin's a one-year rental.

Seattle is the winner today. They got MUCH better. San Fran added a very similar player to Crabtree that a young QB is going to have one year to learn and use.

Just read a stat. Boldin has 7 TDs in his last 33 reg. season games.

My point was more about an aggressive mentality than how good/bad either trade was.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperPacker

I'm not saying it was a bad trade by the 49ers and that they shouldn't have traded for him because he was going to be cut. Upping the offer to a 6th was fine, but I just don't agree that it was trade rape. Far from it. Faaaaaaar from it.

Its a fine trade, is it "rape" no. For SF its a move with potentially good upside and little downside. If it works out he's the missing piece, if its not we barely gave up anything. For BAL they get a higher pick of about 20-30 slots than the one the Vikings were offering.

phlysac · 03-11-2013, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpngc

I'm hearing a lot of this.

These moves are not comparable.

Especially if the Harvin deal handcuffs the Hawks from being able to extend any of their young studs on defense.

SickwithIt1010 · 03-11-2013, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phlysac

Especially if the Harvin deal handcuffs the Hawks from being able to extend any of their young studs on defense.

They should be alright, they will have Flynn and guys like Clemons and Miller coming off the books soon opening up so money. Sherman and Thomas are likely to command some big money, but its way too early to know what type of situation they will be in cap wise.

Easy for Percy to say he was megatron money when playing for someone who is on a borderline playoff team compared to what he'd ask for on a contender.

gpngc · 03-11-2013, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phlysac

Especially if the Harvin deal handcuffs the Hawks from being able to extend any of their young studs on defense.

Everybody's on board for 2013. And most are on board for 2014.

Chancellor is FA in 2014.
Sherman is FA in 2015.
Browner RFA in 2014.
Thomas is FA in 2015.
K.J. in 2015.
Wagner/Irvin in 2016.

Next year they'll have to pay Chancellor/Browner but they get Flynn off the books. Harvin might cost them one of those guys.

They have to spend money on offense though.

The thing with Seattle for the next few years is that they are paying their franchise QB NOTHING. He's not a FA until 2016 and I don't think he's allowed to be extended until next year. He also doesn't strike me as the hold-out type but if he keeps winning they might give him the huge deal in two years...

EDIT: HERE - As we’ve mentioned plenty of times (and specifically in relation to Wilson), the new CBA prevents rookie contracts from being renegotiated until three of the mandatory four years have been completed.
That means we'll be paying Russell freaking Wilson 2 million in 2013 and 2014. We'll give him that huge deal in 2015.

Hmmm. So thinking out loud. We should extend Thomas next year. But then there's also the tag game. He's easily worth the top-5 salary of safeties for the franchise tag. Same with Okung. These are good problems to have... now that I think about it - tagging Chancellor might be what we do next year.

I forgot Okung.

So yes, Harvin's deal might cost them Browner or Chancellor, or maybe Sherman in 3 years. But they aren't losing Earl Thomas.

And for the next two years they are locked and loaded...

Jughead10 · 03-11-2013, 04:19 PM

Browner will also be 30 when he is a free agent. He might be looking for a pay day because of his time floating around teams and the CFL in his "prime", but I'm not sure he'll get it.

gpngc · 03-11-2013, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10

Browner will also be 30 when he is a free agent. He might be looking for a pay day because of his time floating around teams and the CFL in his "prime", but I'm not sure he'll get it.

The Seahawks CBs are really good.

But part of the reason they are really good is because they can play in your face and not worry about getting beat because Thomas is so absolutely filthy in center field.

The only time they get beat deep (or even tested really) is when Chancellor is playing deep middle and Thomas is underneath playing man or blitzing.

Jughead10 · 03-11-2013, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpngc

The Seahawks CBs are really good.

But part of the reason they are really good is because they can play in your face and not worry about getting beat because Thomas is so absolutely filthy in center field.

The only time they get beat deep (or even tested really) is when Chancellor is playing deep middle and Thomas is underneath playing man or blitzing.

I understand how good they've been. But is giving a 30 year old CB a big contract smart? Lock up Sherman long term and find another CB elsewhere when the time comes.

SickwithIt1010 · 03-11-2013, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10

I understand how good they've been. But is giving a 30 year old CB a big contract smart?

Not when you can find yourself another big physical corner to molest WR's that is much younger and cheaper.

MetSox17 · 03-11-2013, 04:26 PM

Browner is definitely gonna be the odd man out. Sherman is young and Earl Thomas is the best FS in football. You can start adding mid-late round guys to your secondary to develop for when you're forced to choose between keeping Browner and/or Chancellor.

gpngc · 03-11-2013, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10

I understand how good they've been. But is giving a 30 year old CB a big contract smart? Lock up Sherman long term and find another CB elsewhere when the time comes.

That's pretty much what I just implied.

Jeremy Lane started the 49er game and they didn't do anything against us.

marshallb · 03-11-2013, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49ersfan_87

Its a fine trade, is it "rape" no. For SF its a move with potentially good upside and little downside. If it works out he's the missing piece, if its not we barely gave up anything. For BAL they get a higher pick of about 20-30 slots than the one the Vikings were offering.

I doubt it was that much higher considering that Minnesota has Arizona's 7th rounder, so it was more than likely 8 picks plus compensatory picks, not that big of a difference. I'd have liked to see Minnesota add him cheaply, but for one year at $6 million, a 6th rounder is about as high as I'd have gone if I was running Minnesota. For a team like the 49ers who are serious Super Bowl contenders, then it's a damn good deal, but no where near a rape, no.

zachsaints52 · 03-11-2013, 04:41 PM

49ers just got a little better.

Norcal3518 · 03-11-2013, 04:42 PM

Like this trade for the Niners. giving up a 6th rounder is nothing. Bolding has some good hands to catch Kaeps heaters that he throws. And he is one of the best run blocking Wrs in the league something that cant be over looked when it comes to the read option.