Johnathan Hankins...

This is a horrible draft if your looking for 1-tech/0-tech NT's

and even if you draft one, those type of players take time to develop if there not "Busts" like so many are

I Love to build the team thru the draft, just not NT types, too hard to tell what your going to get

Hankins or even Dorsey, we do need that NT to share duties with Mitchell

Hope we get this guy. Young enough to stay impactful, even as we begin to become competative. Will really open up the draft for us. Bummer we missed out on Ronald Leary. Makes us have to invest in OL early imo, when is have rather went all in on D or O skill positions in the draft. Don't want to have to pass on a top LB to get a 1T

Is there a single rumour linking him to us?

If not I don't see it happening

Originally posted by JaggedJ:
Is there a single rumour linking him to us?

If not I don't see it happening

There's no news what so ever of us having any interest. Looks like it's going to be him and Zach Brown not even being in our radar. They see the solution being a couple of draft picks as apposed to two high money FA's.

Fair enough.

A lot hinging on how we do in the draft then.

Originally posted by cools:

This is a horrible draft if your looking for 1-tech/0-tech NT's

and even if you draft one, those type of players take time to develop if there not "Busts" like so many are

I Love to build the team thru the draft, just not NT types, too hard to tell what your going to get

Hankins or even Dorsey, we do need that NT to share duties with Mitchell

Yes and no.

Yes to: NTs take time to develop to NFL lines. Also, we should sign a vet NT.

No to: This draft is terrible for NTs. Actually the opposite. The NT is class is pretty deep, if you're looking for a run stuffing Fat 2gapping wall of a NT, which we need.



We need TWO Fat NT 1Tech 2gappers. (We have all seen what happens when you have one, and he gets hurt).

1. Go hard at Hankins. If that doesn't succeed, then find another space-eating NT in FA (Dorsey (meh), or hopefully one becomes available)
2. Then after we've signed a vet, we have to get another in the draft. Take your pick, I like some of these a lot more than others (and there are more in the draft that I haven't listed - list is not intended to be complete), but any one of them would be better than having none (projected rounds are mostly a guess at this point):

• Dalvin Tomlinson, NT, Alabama Height: 6-3. Weight: 312. Arm: 33. Bench: --. Projected Round: 2-3.
• Elijah Qualls, NT, Washington Height: 6-1. Weight: 313. Arm: 30.63. Bench: 33. Projected Round: 3-4.
• Eddie Vanderdoes, NT, UCLA Height: 6-3. Weight: 305. Arm: 31.63. Bench: 28. Projected Round: 4-5.
• Stevie Tu'ikolovatu, NT, USC Height: 6-1. Weight: 331. Arm: 33. Bench: 28. Projected Round: 5-7.
• Jarron Jones, NT, Notre Dame Height: 6-6. Weight: 316. Arm: 35.5. Bench: 22. Projected Round: 5-7.
• Josh Tupou, NT, Colorado Height: 6-3. Weight: 325. Arm: --. Bench: --. Projected Round: 6-7.
• D.J. Jones, NT, Mississippi Height: 6-1. Weight: 319. Arm: 32.5. Bench: 25. Projected Round: 7-FA.

Hankins>poe

If Hankins is willing to take a 1 year prove it deal, then we should go after him. It would give us the vet beefy NT we need, and if we draft a beefy NT, then the kid can back up Hankins, and learn from him. After the season is over, we can evaluate if we want to bring Hankins back, or let him leave in FA, and net us a comp. pick.

Originally posted by Bobdawg78:

If Hankins is willing to take a 1 year prove it deal, then we should go after him. It would give us the vet beefy NT we need, and if we draft a beefy NT, then the kid can back up Hankins, and learn from him. After the season is over, we can evaluate if we want to bring Hankins back, or let him leave in FA, and net us a comp. pick.

Sounds like a lot of lineman.
-DeFo, AA, Jones, Dial, Mitchell, Blair, really only got room for one more guy at the 1 technique. Hankins would be great but I feel like we really need a 2 down run stuffer and not a guy that would be the top paid guy on defense, assuming he gets paid what he's looking for. Wouldnt surprise me at all if they just resign Dorsey to play run downs.

Originally posted by mayo49:
There's no news what so ever of us having any interest. Looks like it's going to be him and Zach Brown not even being in our radar. They see the solution being a couple of draft picks as apposed to two high money FA's.

As far as I can tell there hasn't been any news of anyone being interested so no telling if we're interested or not until his demands drop to a level where teams become willing to talk to him. Until he shaves a few million off that 10 million a year demand we'll start to see who's really in play for him.

Originally posted by FrozeReactionZ:
Hankins>poe

In a 4-3, I have to agree. in a 3-4, not so much.

Originally posted by Bobdawg78:

If Hankins is willing to take a 1 year prove it deal, then we should go after him. It would give us the vet beefy NT we need, and if we draft a beefy NT, then the kid can back up Hankins, and learn from him. After the season is over, we can evaluate if we want to bring Hankins back, or let him leave in FA, and net us a comp. pick.

I don't understand why teams won't sign him to multi year deal

he is a great young talent but i think teams may think that snacks was the cause of his success. A one year prove it deal with have to do for him. I think its crazy of one year prove deals are so popular this year for top shelf players

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Originally posted by dj43:
The biggest problem with signing him for 4 years/$35 million is that is sets the salary structure you have to live with in the future. So let's say Armstead comes back healthy and plays up to his draft status. In another year you are looking to extend him and now the $10 million becomes the base plus the escalation of time and cap. You wind up paying him $14 million/4 years and are facing a similar escalation with Buckner and whoever else is in line for renewal.

Just too big of a hit on the salary structure in the future.

Not sure I follow. The NFL Market sets the value on DTs, not just the 49ers. Suh is averaging almost 20 a year, Wilkerson 17 mil, Cox 17 mil. Signing Hankins to 8 mil a yr isn't stretching the market at all. It doesn't affect AA's signing, nor Buck's signing - the FA market will set their bands over the next couple of years. Hankins' asking price is about what BWill got (~10 mil avg/yr). I'm advocating making an offer of ~8-9 mil avg/yr. Now, is he worth that? He's worth what he gets paid, so we'll see.

He isn't as good as those guys, and those guys are over paid. Suh's contract is killing Miami. Huge mistake to give that guy that much money. Wilkerson was disappointing this year at half the price. Now if you give him $10 and AA comes back with a very good year, he will be looking for the same thing. Buckner then comes looking for that or more. Before long you have three defensive linemen getting 15% of your cap. That won't work.

Unless Hankins lowers his asking price, I would not be surprised if he is not signed until after the draft. With as much front line defensive talent as there is in this year's draft, a lot of teams are going to get very good players for less than half of what Hankins is demanding. That will set the market...if it goes that far.

Originally posted by JustinNiner:

he is a great young talent but i think teams may think that snacks was the cause of his success. A one year prove it deal with have to do for him. I think its crazy of one year prove deals are so popular this year for top shelf players

The thing is he was better before snacks got there. This past year was considered a down year for him.

Our new d-line coach helped coach him last year, so I wonder if he's pushing for him