Weak 3-4 DE class?

Originally posted by Mr.Mcgibblets:
Another concept I love that is.. thinking outside of the box.

When you have time (or maybe you already know it well enough)... read this link and ask yourself, " who from our current personnel would be exceptional in this scheme?" Of course, it will be helpful to get one of our NTs back.. but yes, this IS a test, and I want your answers!!!!!

http://www.battleredblog.com/2009/7/23/958892/a-very-brief-introduction-the-4-3


(only a temporary derailment of thread topic.. )

Nice read. The best 4-3 under D I can remember was MInnesota with Doleman at RDE and Millard at RDT. They were free to rush the passer every down.

I can see our team running this once in awhile to confuse an offense. NE was great in the early 2000's with their D going from 3-4 to 4-3 in the blink of an eye. (not including spygagte)

Originally posted by Ninefan56:
Apparently in many people eyes Gholston is a good player to develop into a 3/4 end. When I saw his highlights I did not see a player with any skills other than he was tall. Now he might be a potential talent but it would take someone like Tomsula or Harbaugh to see it. If I had to pick between Gholston and Hunt I would take hunt because he at least has combine measurables. So for me if possible I would like Short or Richardson, J. Williams or Jones as DE and B. Williams as NT. B. Williams because it appeared that he and Hunt were the strongest players in the draft.

I agree with you completely that Gholston is nowhere near the top of my list in terms of a 3-4 end. Everyone you named I would take before Gholston. I just prefer him much more than other mid-round guys. I see him rated as anywhere from a third round prospect by some to a fifth rounder by others. I'm putting him towards the higher end of that scale and saying I would love to see him come off the board with a late 3rd should we still have one after trades. By no means am I comparing Gholston to Datone Jones or even Jesse Williams who I am not particularly high on. I do actually rate Hunt above him simply because of his measurables and enormous potential. I just like Gholston because generally you hear about guys with "upside" as being completely raw. I haven't gotten my hands on his tape, nor will I, but from everything I have been able to see and have read he is a solid run defender without any major flaws anchoring or getting cut (unlike Hunt at this point). Developing Gholston would require adding some weight to his frame and teaching him better pass rushing skills and leverage techniques (always a must for a guy his size). Those things I feel fairly certain that Tomsula can teach. And if he doesn't ever become a pass rushing menace, I still see him as being a fairly good rotational player who can take snaps on running downs and play special teams. At the end of the third round I'd be willing to take that, considering he has a fairly high ceiling.

For reference I'd list the best 3-4 DE prospects (starting after Richardson, Floyd, and Star) as: Datone Jones, Sylvester Williams, Jesse Williams, Kawann Short, Margus Hunt, William Gholston, and then Kruger and Devin Taylor. I'm sure guys like Bennie Logan and Akiem Spence could play the 5-tech much in the way Short could, but they are far down the board enough I'd rather go with someone more suited for the position. Hankins I see as more of a NT, but I'd take him after Datone and before Sylvester. In fact, I think both Jesse and Sylvester would be as well suited to NT as to DE, but both can play the 5-tech, just maybe not rush the passer as much as I like from that spot. Brandon Williams I'd also rate above Gholston, clearly.

Questions.

1). How much better would Richardson be than Datone?


2). Would it be worth it to move up to get him?


3). Would the price we'd pay be worth the difference in performance?

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Questions.

1). How much better would Richardson be than Datone?


2). Would it be worth it to move up to get him?


3). Would the price we'd pay be worth the difference in performance?

1. IMO, Sheldon Richardson is A LOT better than Datone

2. He's the only player I'd move up for, but I see mocks saying that he might be a top-10 prospect now, which may be too expensive for us.

3. I'm always weary about trading that much for a prospect, especially since this draft doesn't seem to have any sure-fire prospects.

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Questions.

1). How much better would Richardson be than Datone?


2). Would it be worth it to move up to get him?


3). Would the price we'd pay be worth the difference in performance?

I have Richardson and Datone J. neck and neck on value... so I would consider it worth it to trade into the early 20's to select either. Seems like Richardson will be gone a little earlier though... a bit more hype surrounding him.

Outdated trade charts, be damned... I don't think it would take more than our # 31 and late 3rd to move up to get either, if available.

As the 49ers seem to prefer smaller DEs the way they run the 3-4, wonder if Tank Carradine would be a candidate. About the same size as Jones (6'4" 276 at combine). More exciting player than Jones before his injury. Great motor as well. Seen differing scouting reports indicating he could play 4-3 DE, 3-4 DE or 3-4 LB. Versatility would be great.

On Hunt, he has unique measurables but I have not seen any film where he was able to hold his ground when run at. Probably just technique but could also be that his lower body strength does not match his great upper body strength.

- post #1 :)

Originally posted by kent:
As the 49ers seem to prefer smaller DEs the way they run the 3-4, wonder if Tank Carradine would be a candidate. About the same size as Jones (6'4" 276 at combine). More exciting player than Jones before his injury. Great motor as well. Seen differing scouting reports indicating he could play 4-3 DE, 3-4 DE or 3-4 LB. Versatility would be great.

On Hunt, he has unique measurables but I have not seen any film where he was able to hold his ground when run at. Probably just technique but could also be that his lower body strength does not match his great upper body strength.

- post #1 :)

How interesting. I started wondering this exact same thing yesterday. Watched a bit more of him, and am still unsure. I guess we could mold him into a DE. He has to build up strength in his lower half. Guess it's not a ridiculous experiment... though I don't know if I'd take that on with a top 40 pick.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
I second this. 49ers have been getting by with poverty NT's for far too long. They need a physically dominant guy that can repeatedly demand multiple blockers. Doesn't need to be a strong pass rusher necessarily, just someone who can anchor the line, hold their own and stuff the run up the middle. Soap struggled mightily at times last year and I think that someone like Jesse Williams would be a nice addition as primarily an NT, but also someone who can slide over to DE. Brandon Williams would also be a great choice in the 2nd round.

Just a quick thought on our 3-4 scheme. We play nickel defense so much that a pure space eating, double-tem absorbing NT is only on the field about 1/3 of the time. I don't think a fatty anchor is what we need. Now, I like your idea of Jesse Williams. He's versitile enough to play NT or DE in our base 3-4 while also staying on the field in our nickel D. I like him, and I also like Datone Jones as a pure 3-4 end. If we can get one of those two at 31 or 34, I'll be very happy.

Love to read that a guy has a non-stop motor! Whoever they chose can't be just a place holder, that is a waste in a DL heavy draft.

Phoenix is correct n the bargain NT's. If we get a guy like BrandonWilliams and a FA like Sammy Lee Hill we'd have the start of monster rotation.

we can still look at tweener defensive tackles, they can be groomed to play DE in the 3-4 , as long as they have big motors and bring aggressive play

I'm confident Baalke will find us a solid DE to plug into the rotation

any other fans of Chris Jones from Bowling Green? I think he is being under-appreciated...

Originally posted by Mr.Mcgibblets:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Good morning Mac! Thought this for a long time, but have been won over by the forces of 3/4! With our MLBs it makes sense. But I still love it when they put four down for pass rush downs. Justin is so much harder to deal with in the 3/4.

... and to you, sir.

What does the underlined sentence mean? Whether Justin plays at the 5 tech or 3 tech, I think he kicks arse.

other benefits:

- Aldon becomes more of a straight rusher.
- Brooks rushes better in a 3/4 point stance.
- no need to worry about a true NT.
- can give our stud ILBs more freedom to roam.


Okay! okay! conversion's not happening. I iz done with it.

What about approaching the draft with a view towards the defensive package that teams are increasingly finding themselves in for the majority of the game - the nickel? 4-2-5, with the "5" actually comprised of 2 corners, 2 free safeties, and strong safety?

Do we absolutely have to get the 3-4 DE of the future this year in this draft? The only real options seem to be Datone Jones and Kawan Short and there is no guarantee that Jones will even be available. We may end up having to go NT and getting a DE in the later rounds to develop. They could then sign a FA to back up Justin Smith and Ray McDonald.