Lions fan where glad to see him gone. I was not so much, but hey we got to pound the rock with T.J. Duckett more (yes a lot of Lions fans think that Duckett is going to be the answer at RB....the question being why are we picking in the top 10 again.)

Much more likely Martz is going to push for Alex Smith to be dumped. Smith isn't suited for a downfield passing attack in the slightest.

Shaun Hill, you need to call this man right now and express your enthusiasm for working with him. Shine his shoes. Wash his car. Weed his garden. This is your shot at becoming a multi-millionaire, kid.

For all Martz's faults, he does turn the offense around. Whether he can peacefully coexist with a head coach is another manner. Good luck, Mike Nolan.

They don't need to run the ball more. They need to block better. Running the ball behind crappy run blocking just gives you 2nd-and-9, 3rd-and-11, that kind of thing.

I had no problems with Martz emphasizing the passing game. I think he just relied too much on 4-WR sets when the line clearly needed help that TEs and FBs could provide.

I think the question for the 49ers is if they will be the team that sees Martz direct an offense like the Warner-era Rams had, or if this is yet another poor fit for him.

When I first heard this I was shocked and a little annoyed but now I've had a think about it and this doesn't seem like the worst hire ever anymore.

Pros:

-the niners were 32 in the leagure offensively this year, the only way is up and Martz has a long pedigree as a top notch coordinator.

-I reckon he'll probably run a hybrid of his St Louis system and the Kansas system that Vermeil and Saunders set up. I like the idea of getting Davis downfield.

-Staley will move to left tackle, and either Jennings or Snyder will play RT, eith the other guy at left guard. Baas looked pretty decent at RG down the stretch and Heitman is a reasonable center. So I'm not that worried about the offensive line.

-Martz has a superb record with quarterbacks, he might get something useful out of Smith and his three receiver system is similar to the attack Smith ran in college.

Cons:

-Martz's system requires a qb with a quick release, that's the worst part of Smith's game

-He might ignore Gore

-He might ignore Vernon Davis

-He might get Smith killed

-No more Cinncinati offense in SF (sniff sniff)

-He might be insane

-His system uses a lot of three receiver packages, so San Francisco needs to acquire three receivers

re #6 -

He might be insane?

Absolutely brilliant!

Re 2: Smith has a strong arm, he just doesn't have a quick release and his accuracy is debatable (I would contend that it's hard to tell how accurate he could be as he'll be on his 4th offensive coordinator in four years and his receivers are sh*t). He's moore suited to a downfield attack than a short passing game.

For all Martz's success, he's a clear and present danger for any QB playing for him.

The Rams were fine for a while, but even with a HoF LT, and a pretty good O-line in general, he ruined Kurt Warner, and Marc Bulger missed significant time with injury. By the end of time in St Louis, you wanted to send Bulger out in combat fatigues.

Similarly in Detroit, John Kitna's faith in god has been tested heavily, as Martz runs an offense in which pass protection seems to be an optional extra.

If I'm Alex Smith the first thing I do is make sure my health insurance is adequate. Then my real estate agent.

Yeah, this will do wonders for Alex Smith's health. I wonder what the concussion rate is for qbs in Mike Martz offenses.

Yeah, but if I were a 49ers fan, I would be much more inclined to list "he might get Alex Smith killed" among the pros. Good God, Alex Smith sucks, people.

...and Denver fires Jim Bates as DC after only one year--I'm really not sure what to think about that.

Sure, the Broncos regressed, but Bates had such a good track record...

12: I like Bates too but his scheme needs some specific personnel on the defensive line and the Broncos never really found it. Quite gutless of Shanahan to let Bates be the scapegoat.

I am a 49ers fans and am not excited about Martz. I want the team to go back to the days of winning playoff games. With Martz, they should get better, but they won't be going to the Super Bowl. The first thing they will probably do is sign the WR equivalent of Nate Clements. Gore isn't that big of a concern, with his injury history, he probably only has three more years max of being the feature back anyway.

#11

Good God, Alex Smith sucks, people.

Any further insight there? Any thoughts considering that he has played for two of his seasons with some of the weakest casts of offensive players in recent history? Maybe musing about how last season he played hurt whilst being coached by a terribe offensive coordinator. Maybe you could even think about how his premier weapon in the passing game (Davis) has developed slowly or how their best offensive player played through injury all year. You could even have mentioned that he is still one of the youngest starting QBs in the league.

Given all those options you had a difficlut decision to make, and you went for the facile crap you wrote. Well done.

The point is that Martz gets a lot of qurterbacks hurt, especially when his o-line isn't stellar, because Martz just can't stand to limit his receiver options by using more than the bare minimum for protection. Presumably, the 49ers will use a quarterback to run their offense, and presumably, they'll use significant cap space to pay him, because that's what qbs get. Martz exposes valuable assets to undue wear and tear.

Will, agreed. Martz never saw an eligible receiver he didn't like. I don't necessarily think Martz is a bad hire, because, for all his faults, his offense scores points, and he clearly gets the best out of his QBs. He also evaluates QB talent well. He just goes through it at a rate of knots.

Alex Smith (or whoever starts), is likely to have a short and exciting life.

regarding #15

In hindsight that might have been a little strong.

I dunno, James, it just seems to me that building for success, at least for more than a short period of time, is at odds with wearing out guys who always consume a lot of cap space, and just as importantly, who take years to fully train.

I always thought it interesting that Joe Gibbs is also part of the Gillman/Coryell tree, albeit an earlier branch, and that Gibbs had such a completely different approach to protecting the qb.

Kitna was the first ever Martz QB to play in 16 games for consecutive seasons (though he did not take up a lot of cap space, neither did McCown or J.T. O'Sullivan). Kitna did have one concussion (or concussion like symptoms), and had some wear and tear, but he is also 35 years old and made it through a whole season.

Will, I take your point in building for success, and looking back, in those terms Martz has been fortunate that he's been able to mould low-rent QBs. Warner was undrafted, and Bulger was a 6th rounder, so there was no real cap implication in throwing them to the wolves. Significantly, once both had had some success, and got contracts commensurate with that success, both got hurt, and roster-building became an issue. I'm uncertain about Kitna, but I can't imagine he's got a "franchise" contract, so the same applies in Detroit.

Now Martz is working with a #1 draft pick, so the salary cap implications are present from Day 1. The quote from PFP 2005 was;

"Welcome to the NFL Alex Smith. Please, please, please don't torpedo our franchise".

If Martz gets him hurt, then he'll have done it just as effectively. Of course if Smith does turn out to be a 'bust' then injury won't make the 49ers worse off.

Beyond that, Martz is noted for politicking. A charitable individual would say he took the 49ers job because a defensive HC and a young QB is an ideal spot for an innovative offensive mind. Someone more cynical, like for example, me, might say that working for HC on a short lead, who in turn is working for a GM who didn't hire him, has the potential for early promotion. Just a thought.

It's unfortunate to see Conventional Wisdom dominate this thread, from readers who are supposed to be able to see outside the box...

Apart from the fact that Martz would have the 3rd highest win % of a head coach (if he was head coach), here are the ACTUAL sack#'s for his quarterbacks.

1999: 28 sacks 14th in NFL
2000: 20 sacks, 26th in NFL
2001: 38 sacks, 9th in NFL
2003: 37 sacks, T-7th
2004: 41 sacks, T-5th
2006: 49 sacks, 2nd in NFL. (martz no longer HC)
2007: 48 sacks, 2nd in NFL.

Here is the adjusted sack rate Ranking by FO:
2000: 1
2001: 1
2002: 23
2003: 20
2004: 25
2005: 21
(Martz Leaves)
2006: 21
2007: 27

After Martz leaves, Bulgers Sacks don't decrease (if anything they increase) and the adjusted sack rate is no better either.

Btw, Kitna was sacked more than 25 times every year he started, with half the dropbacks, he's slow moving and slow thinking.

Trust me, SF got the best buy of the offseason. Conventional wisdom is lacking most of the Wisdom, as it has most of Martz's career. Just like it was after 5 seasons and a .700 record, yet STL still called for his head while he was in the hospital... STL couldn't have made a worse mistake.

22: Well said, you've just cheered me up. Though I would point out that in 2000 and 2001 the Rams had an amazing offensive line and as much as I think the niners' line was made to look worse than the talent on it, they're nowhere near that good.

#22

It's nearly 1:00am in the UK and I'm working tomorrow so I'll keep this brief.

Sacks are only half the story. If a QB stands in against the rush, gets the ball off and is flattened, his chances of getting hurt are just as high as if he gets sacked. In terms of physical danger, it's the hit that counts, not the sack.

Think back to the Rams glory days. How many times did Warner (and later Bulger), stay in the pocket, get the pass off and then get creamed by the D? Far too often. Martz runs a system that moves the ball and puts points up. That's good. The downside, is that his system doesn't put a premium on pass protection, and QB's who play for him take a lot of punishment, which, eventually, results in injury.

OK, Jimmy, well, to start off, in Alex Smith's rookie year, he gave us, by any statistical measure, the very worst season any post-merger quarterback ever had, ever, even worse than anything Ryan Leaf ever did. As for the "supporting cast" argument:

1. Ryan Leaf's supporting cast wasn't any better, nor were the supporting casts of 30 other horrible QBs over the years, none of whom were as bad as Alex Smith, and

2. The QB is always, no matter what you hear, the most important player on the offense. Alex Smith was making everybody else look worse, just as much, or more so, than the other way around.

Then he mildly improved in 2006, from "worst QB in NFL history" to merely "sucks." Then he returned to historically bad in 2007, and has become fragile along the way, too.

Smith's been in the league three years, and that coincides with the 49ers being, over the same three-year period, the worst offense anyone has ever seen. He's gotten hurt, and he's shown no particular sign of improvement; virtually all QBs are what they are by the time they've played three years in the league. The list of quarterbacks that were god-awful their first three years and then turned into good, or even average, is, well, very short. Probably nonexistent.

It's hard to let go of something you invested $30 million in, I'm sure. But Alex Smith was a horrible mistake, and it's time to acknowledge that and move on. For heaven's sake, the 49ers offense finally woke up when Smith and Dilfer were both injured and they got an undrafted free agent in there.

25: OR the niners' offense finally woke up when Ted Tollner came in to help Jim Hostler who was woefully out of his depth, they even manged to get a decent game out of Dilfer.

Smith is also one of the youngest quarterbacks in history to have played three seasons. He was showing signs of improvement under Norv Turner, when the players around him were still pretty bad. The offensive coaching this year was very poor.

You are right that Smith hasn't ever proven he can be a good player but given the situations he's been in it isn't really possible to say he won't become good either. Terry Bradshaw, John Elway and Troy Aikman were awful when they started in the NFL and they turned out OK. They might have struggled quite a bit if their offensive coaching staff had changed every year. (Personally I can't be bothered spending another offseason arguing about this, what will be will be)

Using sacks, or adjusted sack rate, as a proxy for the physical abuse a coordinator subjects his qb to, while decrying others' indulgence in conventional wisdom, is a nice example of irony.

In Terry Bradshaw's third season in the league, he had a 47.7% comp%, 6.1 YPA, and a 64.1 rating. Those were pretty bad numbers, even for the era. You have a valid case for hope there, even if you have to reach back 35 years to find it. The Steelers, being the Steelers, went 11-3 anyway, but it certainly wasn't because of Bradshaw's brilliant play.

In John Elway's third season, he had a 54.0% comp%, 6.4 YPA, and a 70.2 rating (while leading the league with 605 attempts). Those were, again, pretty poor numbers, though his rushing helped a little. He WAS 2nd in the league in passing yards, despite his per-pass lack of effectiveness.

Troy Aikman? His third year in the league, he had a 65.3% comp%, 7.6 YPA, an 86.7 rating and went to the Pro Bowl. Not a valid comparison.

Now hide the children, because we're about to look at Alex Smith's third season.

48.7% comp%. 4.7 YPA. 57.2 rating. These would have been hideous numbers in Terry Bradshaw's era. Yes, the talent around him is bad, but Ryan Leaf's numbers in his third season (though he didn't play in his second) were notably better across the board than Smith's -- and he got released.

The comparisons just don't work. Elway's numbers, and his talent, gave plenty of reason for hope. Alex Smith has never flashed anything like John Elway's talent, and his numbers are worse than Bradshaw's were 35 years ago, when passing statistics leaguewide were exponentially lower.

He's young? So what? Is a 23 -year-old that far behind a 25-year-old mentally, that it's just that hard for him to figure out how to play in the NFL? Because physically there's very little difference between the two, especially when dealing with a quarterback's skill set.

His coaches have been changing and ineffective? So were Rick Mirer's--Dennis Erickson was even involved!--and Mirer was way better than Smith. He lost his job anyway after three years, because he sucked. Smith is worse.

Sorry, fellas. I'm not sure why some are so invested in defending Alex Smith, but it's a hopeless case. He can't play QB at a reasonable level in the NFL. Drafting him was a mistake, and pretending he's a talented young guy that's still going to develop into a starter is compounding the mistake.

Well, at least they have the #7 draft choice to work with this year. Oh, wait.... BB has that one. Mmmmm....

Re: Smith
If everything broke right for Alex Smith, he'd be an intelligent, mobile quarterback with a good-not-great arm and good accuracy. His upside is a Rich Gannon/Jeff Garcia type (bigger Flutie, too) QB. I just find it interesting/notable that those guys took many years to become established, successful as starters in the NFL. I wonder if Smith may have to take a similar path.

#25

Supporting casts include things like playing on a team with a defense that keeps a team in a game, enabling the offense to stay balanced. The Chargers defense when Leaf played was amazing (even more so when considering who was the QB) the Niners defense was abysmal. On offense Smith had Battle and Lloyd at WR, Barlow at RB and the line stank. It isn't too far fetched so suggest that they might have been one of the least talented teams ever to take an NFL field.

Smith did improve in his next season, he might not have set the league on fire, but the Niners schemed to make their running game work, not to help their young QB. It didn't help that Vernon Davis turned out to be very slow at picking up the system and adapting to the NFL. Further troubel was added by having to play the whole year behind Kwame (run for your life) Harris.

As for this season, the Niners offensive production had bugger all to do with who was playing QB and everything to do with who was coaching the team. I don't know if you watched much 49ers ball this year, but I watched quite a bit and the offensive schemes were just appalling. The games after Tollner took over weren't exactly the rebirth of the Greatest Show on Turf but it was a sea change over Hostler's mess. People who attribute the improvement to Hill are wide of the mark, the change happened in the previous game under Dilfer. If enough people have bought the ruse that it was all due to Hill then good luck to him, at some point he is going to get a contract on the back of it that he doesn't deserve. If Smith had been inserted into the lineup at that point he would have played better than Hill did.

#28

Using statistical analysis of the last season of Smith isn't particularly relevant to anything other than a study of what happens when a poor college or high school standard coach gets put in charge if an NFL offense and then plays NFL teams. Seriously I have never seen such appaling game planning, or such stupid play calls play after play, game after game. The reason the stats showed that it was going to be the worst offense if the DVOA era are because Hostler was far and away the worst coordinator of the DVOA era. In terms of evaluating any player involved in the Niners offense last season should be considered a mulligan.

I personally have no vested interest in defending Smith other than I hate to see a young player universally rubbished when he has hardly been given a chance. I have no idea how much 49ers ball you have watched (how could I) but their failings are not due to Smith.

Rich Gannon stayed on the bench for quite some time, but he was always competent when he did play. Jeff Garcia? Yeah, he spent time in the CFL, but he never put up stats in the NFL nearly as bad as Alex Smith's.

Jimmy, I don't watch the 49ers any more or less than any of 20 other teams, but I have been paying special attention to Alex Smith whenever I get the chance, specifically because his stats have been so awful that it piqued my curiosity as to what's up.

And I happen to agree with your points: Their offense is heinously untalented and horribly coached. But you know what? Good quarterbacks at least put up competent-looking numbers even in terrible situations. Kyle Boller's been surrounded by terrible talent and bad coaching, and Kyle Boller is a bad QB himself, but he's never been nearly as bad as Smith. For the love of all things holy, the 2006 Raiders -- Andrew Walter wasn't as bad as Smith. You know how bad that offense was? Gus Frerotte in 2007 was surrounded by horrible players; he wasn't as bad as Smith. Do the 2007 Dolphins strike you as a competent offensive team? Cleo Lemon was better than Smith. Looked better, played better, stats are better. Remember Kyle Orton in 2005? He was at about the same level as Smith's been.

Please note that I've been careful to avoid comparing Alex Smith to the Ben Roethlisbergers and Carson Palmers of the league. I'm comparing him to Kyle Boller and Andrew Walter and Cleo Lemon and Gus Frerotte and Kyle Orton. Yes, Smith's been saddled with sad teammates and sad coaches; but the 49ers offense and 49ers coaches of the last three years have been saddled with Alex Smith, too. The blame goes all around, and Alex Smith is never going to take the 49ers anywhere. Now is the time to cut bait.

OK, Doug Flutie, since someone brought him up. Doug Flutie washed out of the NFL and went to Canada after being nowhere near as bad as Alex Smith. Smith's ceiling isn't Flutie or Gannon. It's more like Trent Dilfer, if everything breaks perfectly for him.

Boller at least had a defense and a running game as well as top TE and Ogden protecting his blind side.

Even Walter in Tom Walsh's 80's scheme revival still had Randy Moss on the field, and the defense was reasonably good.

Even when people try to come up with a situation as bad as the one Smith was drafted into they struggle.

I am not sure how good Smith is going to get, I just don't think he has had a chance to get there yet.

Kyle Boller had that guy playing left tackle, what is his name. . . .I'm sure he's quite good. Nope, never mind, I can't remember.

Andrew Walter, played with errr, that Moss fellow, quite good if I remember correctly, scored a couple of times this year.

The thing is It's pretty clear that you are totally convinced that Smith will never ever make it. Good for you, I'm sure that there's nothing I can say that could convince you at this stage but personally, I don't think that he's had a chance and that most nfl standard qbs would have been just as bad in the mess that has been the San Francisco offense.

I've just realised that I've been arguing with somone who calls himself Baron von Awesome.

That's ten minutes of my life I won't get back.

The Mike Nolan era in SF will not be ending quietly. This move will either work surprisingly well, utilizing some of the 49ers' latent offensive talent, or it will blow up completely. Exciting gamble for a guy entering 2008 on the hot seat.

Alex Smith may or may not suck. Problem is we can't know because the best receiver he ever played with was BRANDON LLOYD. The common threads this year for 49er QBs were 1) Receivers/TEs couldn't catch, 2) OL sucked so bad that 3 of them got knocked out for the season, and 3) OC sucked so bad that hiring an assistant OC instantly almost doubled offensive production. Maybe Alex Smith sucks, but even Tom Brady would suck with the 'weapons', o-line, and offensive coordinator that the 49ers had this year.

How many seasons will it take to acquire the personnel to run his offense? Is Mike Furrey a FA this year?

Great pickup by the Niners!

Echoing #22, I can't believe the lack of respect Martz's track record gets here. You're writing him off b/c of the Lions? People, THE LIONS??

My biggest question: Why can't you make Vernon Davis a WR? Why couldn't he end up as effective as TO? He's a terrible and unmotivated blocker, but he's a shockingly big and fast man to have running loose in the secondary.

"He might ignore Gore"

Does that mean he won't care about global warming?

Nobody has mentioned that Martz may be the solution to the Alex Smith situation. The man knows QBs. He may be the only one that can either get rid of him if that needs to be done, or make him into a serviceable player.

The Mike Martz offense works very well with Orlando Pace, but not so much with Jeff Backus or Joe Staley. I do think he's an above-average, if eccentric, offensive coordinator.

I spent some time looking up dozens of QBs, and the best-case scenarios for Alex Smith that I can come up with are Vinny Testaverde and Jeff George. Both of those guys were #1 overall picks, and both of them were dropped into absolutely terrible situations. Both of them sucked for three years. Testaverde's second year in the league, the 35 interception year, ranks among the worst seasons any QB has ever had, and lines up well with Alex Smith's performance so far. That was 19 years ago, and Testaverde is still playing. As for George, his numbers were never as bad as Smith's (or Testaverde's), and he had a good career.

Yeah, I know it's a terrible team. But the 1980s Buccaneers weren't any better, I assure you. What about the 1992 New England Patriots, that 2-14 wonder? Their quarterbacks where somebody called Hugh Millen, who played much better than Alex Smith, and Scott Zolak, who played at about Smith's level, actually a little above.

It's an extreme uphill fight. He's a #1 pick and all, but he has nowhere near the talent of Vinny Testaverde or Jeff George. And statistically, he's the worst quarterback ever to play more than a handful of games in the NFL. There's more to that than just his bad o-line and bad receivers and bad coaches. He's not the first QB in history that's had to deal with that.

What are you guys hoping he turns into? I'm asking, because if you want to win the Super Bowl, unless you're planning on building the 2000 Ravens defense, Elvis Grbac or Jim Everett or Jeff George or Jake Plummer isn't going to get it done. You need Troy Aikman or Brett Favre or John Elway or Tom Brady or Peyton Manning. We should be able to agree that Alex Smith is never, ever going to be that. That makes right now as good a time as any to let him loose and look for a real QB; there might not be a real QB out there so you might decide to keep the guy, but at the very least now is the time to cut your mental/emotional ties to him and be ready to replace him at the first good opportunity.

Mike Martz couldn't coach a turd to stink.

And that's all I have to say on that subject..........

I take issue with anyone saying Kyle Orton is comparable to Alex Smith. In 2005 Orton was 27.6 DPAR better than Smith, in 2007 he was 28.7 DPAR better than Smith. I'd point out that Orton also took all of his college snaps from the shotgun, the Bears did not use the shotgun in 2005 when Orton as a rookie out of the 4th round was handed the starting job due to the complete incompetence of the front office. He never had a chance that year and in no way should have been thrown to the wolves. In short Orton is substantially better than Alex Smith and he isn't good enough to start either.

The thing that surprised me about Martz when I looked at the FO stats was that the Lions offense really didn't improve under his leadership. Their offensive DVOA rankings in the past two years were 20th and 25th. The two years prior to that (part of the golden Joey Harrington era) they were 24th and 19th.

Having watched them a fair amount over this entire period, I would have guessed they really had improved considerably. The lack of improvement may be due to the large number of negative plays mentioned in #44

#46 made me spit coffee.

M Martz is bad coach. Good 49ers. Thank you. Move helps Raiders be best team in Bay area. next stop California and that coming soon. Raiders to b better than Chragers in 2008 when Russell start whole season and Charges get worse.
Maybe 49ers can get some other crappy coach to coch defense

Stuart, even journeymen qbs consume significant cap space, and having to go with, say, Ryan Fitzpatrick, in crucial week 14 and week 15 games, because your original journeyman (I would take issue, btw, with the notion that the skills Green, Warner, or Bulger displayed at their peak are commonly found with journeyman qbs) can't tell you what his name is, that's a problem.

If joruneyman qbs were like journeyman running backs, I'd agree with you. They ain't.

"He might be insane." As noted earlier, brilliant. However in this league I would move that from the "cons" category to the "pros".

Alex Smith = Joey Harrington?

He might get Smith killed

How is that a Con?

Still the best take on Alex Smith all year, from Audibles at the Line for Week 3:

Mike Tanier: Alex Smith is an athlete, not a quarterback. He can’t hit receivers in tight spots. He throws behind guys and to the wrong shoulder. Unless he makes some sudden improvement over the next few weeks, I see a guy who is always going to frustrate you because he’s always missing receivers by two yards on deep passes and throwing behind them on short passes.

50: Raiders, We're not the worst team in the Bay Area! Now that's a strong selling point.

Re 27:
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. I mean honestly, what the hell are you using to find out the physical toll? Adj. sack rate doesn't seem like CW to me. If there was a site that had hits things might be more accurate, but by all accounts Smith doesn't have a fast release so his sack rate should line up well with his hits.

It's funny that the arguments I'm seeing here are the same ones I see for Rex Grossman, except they're missing the "He took us to the Super Bowl" part.

Gosh, mactbone, now you are being ironic, by demonstrating your lack of familiarity with the concept, while saying that someone else doesn't understand the term! It's an epidemic!

No, sacks, nor adjusted sack rate, do not always give us a good idea of the toll a qb takes, which is why I thought it ironic that someone would complain about other people's indulgence in conventional wisdom, while engaging in the conventional wisdom that if an offense didn't have it's sacks change, or it's adjusted sack rate change, after a coordinator left, that coordinator does not expose his qbs to greater physical contact than the typical coordinator. That is the conventionally poor way to draw logical conclusions from a data set.

58,

I don't remember saying Conventional Wisdom = Conventional Stats.

Conventional Wisdom says Michael Vick was a SuperStar, Conventional Stats say he was below average.

Try not to confuse Wisdom with Statistics.

The arguments for/against Smith are another symptom of the peril of drafting/paying a QB at the top of round #1. His salary typically gives you the incentive to dump him if you're convinced he's not of 'NFL starting' ability. But your investment (draft status and guaranteed $$) lead you to demand more data before you're convinced. So you hang onto them a year or two longer than you should (Carr, Harrington).

Hey, Blair? Try to avoid drawing conclusions which the statistics you employ do not logically support, while pompously ridiculing others for allegedly engaging in conventional wisdom, and then recommending that others not confuse wisdom with statistics, or Wisdom with Statistics, if you prefer.

Gosh, you're just an irony factory, aren't you!?

When the niners drafted Smith I killed them for it, wrong player at the wrong time.

At this point now I think they should hang on to him for atleast this year.

Consider: He is a Stanford guy and correct me if I am wrong but he had one of the highest Wonderlic Scores ever. So I think its fair to say he is a fairly intelligent guy.

He is playing for a team that decided it was a good idea to bring in ASHLEY LELIE! Personel wise this team has been awful, but it is getting better on defense. This kid has literally not had a chance to succeed.

Smith is still is a very young guy, and maybe just maybe a stern voice like Martz will provide him some stability. Anyone remember Ryan Fitzpatrick? He was a 7th round QB out of Harvard (I think, Ivy league for sure)that Martz loved because of his intelligence. RF also started a game or two for the Rams and played great.

Keep in mind if Smith sucks during the offseason, there is a very real chance that Martz lets it be known.

So what should the niners do in the offseason?

- Trade a late pick for Furrey. He got a new contract prior to last year but basically was the 4th reciever this year, he could even be cut. He knows the system, let Furrey be Welker-esque for Smith.

Get a deep threat or a great route runner, two come to mind that could be available.

Bernard Berrian is set to be a FA, and Mushin Mohammed could be a casualty.

Smith definitely was in a garbage situation, I think this move should help him as a QB.

Importing the Bears receivers counts as giving your QB more talent to work with now? I assure you if your receivers can't get open Muhammed isn't going to help.

62: Ryan, Smith went to Utah, but is a bright guy. He completed his economics degree in three years and I think he scored 47 or 48 on the wonderlic. I agree he never stood a chance with the receivers around him but I am a niners fan and so I'm likely to be biased.

This offseason unrestricted free agent WRs:

Bryant Johnson, Bernard Berrian, Randy Moss, DJ Hackett.

Some other guys that look like they could be available:

Chad Johnson, Javon walker, Donte Stallworth, Isaac Bruce

Not all of the free agents will leave and some of the other guys will not be dealt.

I'm just thrilled that Nolan has gotten himself a coordinator who won't let himself be pushed around. I like Nolan as a coach--his teams always win more games that DVOA would think--but he's a nightmare meddling in the offense. All Martz has to do is be an average coordinator, and we move way up.

re: 27

What's your beef, Will? #22 is using an advanced stat--adjusted sack rate--to debunk a Martz myth. All anyone else is doing is shooting their mouths off about Martz's reputation.

I guess Martz does that to people. BadgerT1000 usually sounds more intelligent than an angry fourth grader, but not in this thread.

Re 64:

Oops, thanks for atleast making my point valid about Smith being a really bright guy.

Re 63: I would love to have Mohammed on my team. Even as 3 or 4 he is a true pro that can still make plays as well as tutoring the other guys.

Berrian has some serious skill and I think if he was on a team that would utilize him properly he could do some damage. I referenced him because I dont think he would demand a ridiculous contract.

Re: 64

From that list, Johnson, Stallworth (assuming he gets released) and Berrian would seem like reasonably targets for the 49ers. If any of them could be had for typical #2 receiver $$, the 49ers should be interested. Walker would likely want more than he's worth and I don't think any of the others will be leaving their current teams.

The earlier idea about Furrey also makes a lot of sense. He's making too much to be playing such a small role in Detroit.

bravehoptoad, I merely observe that it is erroneous to suppose that adjusted sack rate can be used to determine whether a an offensive coordinator, relative to other offensive coordinators, exposes his qbs to more hits. Just because it is an advanced metric does not mean it can used in a logically sound fashion any way one wishes. If you think something is a myth, and wish to debunk it, fine, do so. This use of adjusted sack rate doesn't do so. Why do you consider this observation a "beef"?

As an aside, I've seen adjusted sack rate used in logically unsound fashion with some frequency, usually as a method for detrmining how well an offensive line is pass blocking. I first noted it when one of the Outsiders claimed that the 2004 Vikings were a poor pass blocking team, and used adjusted sack rate to support this theory. Now, anybody who actually watched the 2004 Vikings knew that they were superb pass blockers, and the sacks were overwhelmingly due to a qb who held the ball FOREVER.

Similarly, anybody who watches a Martz offense knows that he employs max protect schemes less than just about anybody, and sends more receivers out than just about anybody; it is the core of his offensive philosophy, just as Joe Gibbs' was always to protect the qb at all costs. Reasonable people can differ as to which approach is more sound, but don't try to say that Martz doesn't expose qbs to more contact. He does. I happen to think this is a short-sighted approach to managing a roster, but some people disagree, and that's fine. Just don't try to use adjusted sack rate to say that the Martz offense doesn't entail those sorts of trade-offs.

68,

The argument could be made, with only 1 or 2 eligible recievers a QB is much more likely to NOT have an open reciever, also leading to sacks (or just picks...).

Joe Gibbs team this year was 14th in sacks/dropback. Not exactly stellar protection.

I'm not positive that Max Protect really offers that much more protection in the long run...

Blair, I wasn't making the argument that the 2007 Washington Redskins were the finest pass protection unit in the NFL.

Will,

Here are the Top Sacks/Dropback in the NFL this year:

New Orleans
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Green Bay
New England
Arizona
Houston
Indianapolis
Dallas

I think it's safe to say, that Spread offenses, or Pass-First offenses actually seem to protect the quarterback more (per dropback) than Run first I-Formation offenses. This assumes that Sacks is correlated with Hits, but I think that is a safe assumption.

As I stated, I don't think Max Protect really offers that much more protection, and I think this small sample of DATA, while not conclusive, supports that theory.

Hits on a quarterback seem much more strongly related to the Offensive line, than the Style of the offense.

And since San Fran finished WORST in Sacks/Dropback with their offense, I won't be surprised to see that happen again in 2008.

San Fran ranked 32nd in Sacks per Dropback.

It can only go uphill. Having a scheme with a reciever to throw to can only help.

Blair, your assumption is unsafe, which has been one of my contentions with your use of adjusted sack rate all along.

If you watched the 49ers games this year, you'd notice that any run over 2 yards was because Gore broke tackles behind the line or dragged people forward, and any time a QB dropped back to pass for more than 3 seconds he was hit. 4 QBs started for the 49ers this year and every single QB switch was due to injury. The sheer number of times that people were going through the line untouched is mindboggling. Hell, the play that killed Smith's arm occured when a Seattle rusher whent straight up the middle of the line unblocked.

The receivers were terrible (Arnaz Battle was the best receiver this year... and he was lowest DVOA receiver every other weak). The offense was terrible top to bottom, but it all starts with the crappy line. Whoever is GM at the 49ers needs to stop throwing money away (ASHLIE LELIE???) and start rebuilding that O-Line. Going after a new QB at this point is just going to be a waste of money - no one is going to be able to stay upright for very long behind that O-line regardless of who they are.

Will,

These recent stats are not Adj. Sack Rate, just purely sacks/dropback.

Are you saying that you do not believe in a positive correlation between sacks and hits?

I am saying that it is not proven that there is a strong enough correlation for a person to say conclusively that the qb who has a low sack per dropback rate has also received a similarly low rate of violent hits.

After observing Mike Martz from afar with the Rams and up close as an ardent fan of the NFC Morth I have determined that Mike Martz is more interested in proving some whacked out ideas he has about passing the football then actually helping teams win games.

He is all but useless to a professional football team unless the goal is to stand back and let Martz experiment in the hope that the results are both entertaining and rewarding.

Martz is a selfish person who is also something of a loon. In essence, a high-maintenance individual. With no payoff who needs the aggravation?

As a Packer fan I will miss seeing the Packer defense stymie Martz so-called "gameplans".

As a fan of football, the sooner the NFL figures out this guy is a crackpot and unworthy of employment the better.

Mike Martz is highly misunderstood by the average fan. Judging from thee comments I'd say he is misunderstood here too.

Blair,

I agree with Will. In fact, sacks might be negatively correlated with hits because any play in which a hit occurs is by definition not a sack, or it would be classified as a sack and not a hit. Even if you want to count sacks as hits (and they are), few sacks does not necessarily mean few hits.

Think of it this way: Lots of hits might equal few sacks if the QB is chucking the ball away at the last second on every play. I'm not saying that it definitely works that way, but Will is right that you can't assume a positive correlation exists.

I have determined that Mike Martz is more interested in proving some whacked out ideas he has about passing the football then actually helping teams win games.

Mike Martz:

19th all time W% for all NFL coaches > 50 games, out of 143 qualifying coaches.

In six full seasons his team ranked 1, 1, 2, 1, 2 in their division.

Sorry, who is it who has whacked out ideas again?

I know I'm coming in late on this, but the worse thing about this is there was a perfect 49er OC candidate available, Cam Cameron. Frank Gore being the #1 and Vernon Davis being the #2 option like LT2 and Gates. I guess it's true, those type of perfect situations never happen.

bravehoptoad, I merely observe that it is erroneous to suppose that adjusted sack rate can be used to determine whether a an offensive coordinator, relative to other offensive coordinators, exposes his qbs to more hits.

Will, at the very least I'll take it that there's a greater correlation between adjusted sack rate and the hits a quarterback takes than between your bombast and the hits a quarterback takes. We can argue about how much meaning sacks have, but at least that's an intelligent argument, as opposed to you simply stating that Martz quarterbacks take more hits, and offering zero evidence for that. Do you have any reason to think that max protect schemes actually protect a quarterback better than spread formations? If yes, then you've got an interesting post on your hands, and please contribute.

Nice move for the 49ers. For all the Lions fans who are happy to see the man go that was largely responsible for a few bright spots after a decade of darkness, well I say enjoy next season. You deserve everything you get.