ESPN NFL

Posted by ESPN.com's Mike Sando

Robb from Marin County, Calif., writes: Mike, question regarding Michael Crabtree and the Niners (based on your 7/28 note). What impact might this have on the front office? It's always hypothesized what the impact could be on the team and players' ability to perform over the season. But could a front office miss out on other acquisitions by focusing on signing their first-round pick? Any other negatives for management that could be caused by a prolonged negotiation with a first rounder?

Mike Sando: The 49ers would not be looking hard for players at this stage unless injuries forced them to consider other options. From that standpoint, there's no effect. Crabtree's absence actually leaves open a roster spot until he signs.

A front office in this situation tends to get a little frustrated. Teams generally feel as though they've made legitimate offers, and in a lot of cases they probably have. The 49ers have a good record signing players in time for camp, but it takes two sides to get a deal done and this one with Crabtree had the potential to be problematic.

Crabtree went into this draft as the apparent consensus top-rated prospect at receiver. The 49ers wound up getting a bargain, by most accounts, when Crabtree fell to them at No. 10, three spots after Oakland made Darrius Heyward-Bey the first receiver taken.

If Crabtree expects to be paid more than the typical No. 10 pick based on pre-draft expectations, does that mean players drafted earlier than expected should earn less?

Case in point: Crabtree's agent also represents Chiefs first-round draft choice Tyson Jackson. Jackson went earlier than expected when Kansas City made him the third overall choice. Is Jackson's agent asking the Chiefs for less money than the third overall choice typically would command, based on predraft expectations? No way.

Draft position defines a player's value unless that player is a quarterback. Precedent says so.

The 49ers hold the upper hand right now. They never expected to draft Crabtree. They were never counting on him. They signed Brandon Jones in free agency, kept Isaac Bruce and felt strongly that Josh Morgan would develop into a very good receiver. Jason Hill and Arnaz Battle have also demonstrated ability. The 49ers also installed an offense less receiver-reliant than the one Mike Martz ran last season.

If Crabtree were a quarterback, I think the 49ers would have more to worry about, given that they have not named a starter. Right now, from their perspective, they just need to stay disciplined and hope their other receivers impress during training camp.

Joe from New York writes: Hey Mike, I know nobody in the world is giving the Rams a chance at all and I know their roster is not the greatest right now, but with a much-improved offensive line and if -- and the key word is if -- Steven Jackson can play a full year, can you see the Rams making a playoff run just like the Miami Dolphins or Atlanta Falcons?

I looked at the Dolphins' roster from last year and the Rams' roster for this year and I believe the Rams' roster is better than last years Dolphins' was. Can you please tell me what you think?

Mike Sando: The Dolphins underachieved horrifically in going 1-15. The Rams underachieved horrifically in going 2-14. The Dolphins played a favorable schedule. The Rams play three of their first four on the road. They could quite easily lose potentially tough non-divisional home games against the Colts, Vikings and Saints.

The Rams should improve quite a bit in the standings. I just am not sure they patched enough holes this offseason to reach the playoffs right away. I think the rest of the division, though hardly a juggernaut, would have to be weaker than expected.

---

Windknot from Scottsdale writes: Mike, after reading about Larry Fitzgerald's thumb injury, Kurt Warner's hip and Sendlein's shoulder -- all injuries that they could have justifiably missed games with -- I have a hypothesis that I want your point of view on: Injuries in the NFL can lead to a poor record, but a poor record can also lead to more reported injuries.

Specifically, I submit that a player on a team heading for the postseason is more likely to play through injuries. In addition, a player with a similiar injury on a non-playoff track team is more likely to shut it down and not play. The rationale being, why risk further damage if there is nothing at stake. Thoughts?

Mike Sando: You are right. Coaches sometimes half-joke about the training room being more crowded when a team is struggling. I believe it. It's human nature.

The injuries you cited for the Cardinals don't really stand out as those types of injuries. Sendlein's injury was probably the worst of the three. Offensive linemen tend to honor their own code with less regard for circumstances. Sendlein is a tough guy. He wasn't handed anything. Last season was his chance to prove himself as a starter. He held up is end and scored points in the organization for toughing it out. He enhanced his career.

Teams sometimes do shut down players when there's less at stake. I think it makes sense if the player is risking further injury.

---

Robert from Long Beach, Calif., writes: Just joined Twitter. Really appreciate your tweets and in particular, the radio coverage and audio links you provide. I am a 49er fan and it is great to get the KNBR stuff through your tweets as well as your blogs. Thanks and best wishes.

Mike Sando: Thanks, and you're welcome. We're approaching 5,000 followers on Twitter and I'm glad more people are finding it useful. I've set up a few of the Twitter accounts I follow to forward as text messages to my phone. I also subscribe to several via RSS feeds.

When I post an item to the blog, the headline and link forward automatically to my Twitter account. From there, the information forwards to my Facebook page for discussion.

---

Vinny from Houston writes: In regards to your preseason NFL rankings, the Saints are one of the NFL's "oldest" franchises? The Saints were an expansion team founded in 1967. You guys should be leaders and knowledgeable about the NFL, but you put this kind of drivel out there and later you probably have lots of marketing meetings about how you can't figure out why you aren't doing so well.

Mike Sando:
The "oldest" reference applied to the average age of the Saints' players. By that standard, the Saints have one of the oldest teams in the league. Sorry for any confusion.

---

Jason from Greeley, Colo., writes: Mike, there has been a lot of talk about teams traveling long distances and changing time zones and how that affects their play. This got me thinking about the divisional alignment prior to the 2002 season.

For a long time, teams had to travel far just to play division rivals. The Cardinals had never been to a Super Bowl until this year. Prior to the 2002 season, they had to travel to the Giants, Eagles and Redskins evey year. The Bucs had to leave Florida to go and play in the cold in Chicago and Green Bay.

The Saints, another team that was historically bad, traveled to the West coast to play the 49ers and also had to go play in Atlanta. Since 2002, the Cards and Bucs have been to Super Bowls and the Saints reached the NFC championship game.

I see a pattern here about how travel affects a team's performance. Why can't the NFL see this too and not have West Coast teams playing 10 a.m. games on the East Coast? Travel does affect performance and the league is not just in its treatment of West Coast teams.

Mike Sando: Good thinking. I'm not sure if there's anything to it, or if it's just randomness at work, but I like the thought process. You might also note that the Seahawks went to a Super Bowl for the first time after realignment.

The 49ers didn't have any trouble winning in Atlanta or New Orleans, however, and the 2005 Seattle team was clearly the best in franchise history.

We could calculate miles traveled before and after realignment, factoring for kickoff times, to see how teams fared.

---

Ocho from Seattle writes: Love the blog. I was wondering what your thoughts are on Seattle's seventh-round pick, tight end Cameron Morrah. He seems to have good hands, good speed and at least decent blocking skills. Too optimistic?

Mike Sando: Thanks, Ocho. You might be a little optimistic on the blocking part. That was the knock on him coming out of Cal, in addition to the fact that he was only a one-year starter.

This is a case of the Seahawks taking a flier on a talented but flawed prospect. Unless he's a good blocker, it's difficult to envision him getting on the field much given what John Carlson offers the offense. While Carlson is working on his blocking, he is most gifted as a receiver, so the other tight end, in theory, should be able to block well.

---

Craig from Tennessee writes: Hey, Mike, great job. You make it required reading every day on your posts on the West. Anyway, my question is, do you think the Cardinals will try at least three jump balls a game to Fitz? I mean, he proved that even double-covered, he can out-leap most and still catch the ball.

If they tried this three times a game. I think they get one touchdown and one interference call and that is maybe a bad day. I think the Cards could win 12 games if they did that. Look what Tom Brady and Randy Moss did two years ago ... and you can argue Fitz is better.

Mike Sando: The Cardinals do throw up the ball for grabs sometimes. They did it against the Cowboys in Week 6, though it was hardly designed that way. I don't think throwing up jump balls -- even to Fitzgerald -- is as low-risk as you make it out to be. But there's no question Fitzgerald has made quite a few plays that way, including in the playoffs.