Solomon Thomas--Stanford

Originally posted by Heroism:

Ronald Blair is the epitome of a high-character guy. At App st, he was hurt during a game and sent to the locker room. He came back out in street clothes. However, guys started dropping like flies and App st. was quickly running out of players mid-way through the game. Ronald Blair, despite being hurt, went back into the locker room, put his pads back on and went out onto the field to help his team finish the game.

Not only is he a high-character guy, but he's an excellent fit in this defense and quite frankly, one of the better young players on this team.

100% agree. He's going to thrive in this defense. Dude just flashes.

Originally posted by English:

Walk? We don't need second stringers any more?

I doubt they'd sign for backup money when they'd probably start for a 3-4 team somewhere, but who knows, depends if they progress properly

Not a good fit. Great player. But he'd essentially be replacing AA at the RDT/3T. He has the skill set to play LDE/5T (Buckner) too. But he's no true LEO edge rusher which is our biggest need by far.

Lynch, Harold, Tank nor Blair are true edge rushers either. Lynch doesn't really have a home....tweener in this 4-3 under. Brooks is not ideal at SAM either.

Like John said, you'd like to go just BPA, which is Thomas here, but you can't always do that based on your needs and scheme fit.

With Ward finally moving to FS (Thomas), Tartt to SS (Chancellor), Robinson at LCB (Sherman), I can see why many are projecting Lattimore to RCB (Shead) IF we can't get Garrett and can't get a trade back.

I just don't see Thomas as a great fit for this scheme right now.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Not a good fit. Great player. But he'd essentially be replacing AA at the RDT/3T. He has the skill set to play LDE/5T (Buckner) too. But he's no true LEO edge rusher which is our biggest need by far.

Lynch, Harold, Tank nor Blair are true edge rushers either. Lynch doesn't really have a home....tweener in this 4-3 under. Brooks is not ideal at SAM either.

Like John said, you'd like to go just BPA, which is Thomas here, but you can't always do that based on your needs and scheme fit.

With Ward finally moving to FS (Thomas), Tartt to SS (Chancellor), Robinson at LCB (Sherman), I can see why many are projecting Lattimore to RCB (Shead) IF we can't get Garrett and can't get a trade back.

I just don't see Thomas as a great fit for this scheme right now.

I don't disagree with you if we expect the #2 pick to slot right in and produce from Day 1. Considering however that this is at least a 2-3 year rebuild before we can seriously think about contending, it might make sense to take BPA here (if we think that BPA is indeed Thomas with Garrett off the board - which he sadly will be) and have him platoon AA at 3-technique where he appears he's the most natural fit. It's not as if we have confidence in AA anyway. In an ideal world, either of the two might develop the ability to play LEO. I also think Thomas might platoon at LEO as well - perhaps he's not ideal for the role right now, but will a lower rounder be that immediately, or indeed ever?

As for trade back, I think I have mentioned in a previous post that I just can't see how we can get value for trading back. #2 is a great pick to trade back from if there are QBs that teams fall in love with, like last year. I simply can't see any of the three top QBs eliciting the same lust from QB-needy teams like Wentz and (stupidly) Goff did last year.

My point basically is: we're a mess right now, and have no confidence in Baalke's prior draft picks. So,we might as well draft absolute BPA and see where the chips fall. If that means platooning a position with high draft picks, so be it: we kind of expect to do this at safety where we have three of those, if we indeed move Ward to FS, as everyone thinks we should (me included). Best case scenario we get a trade piece if we have supernumerary strength in a position. Most people expect AA and/or Reid to be such surplus if we draft someone like Allen or Thomas. As I said, so be it. Let them provide depth right now, or even start when the inevitable injuries mount, and perhaps move them next year.

Originally posted by paulk205:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Not a good fit. Great player. But he'd essentially be replacing AA at the RDT/3T. He has the skill set to play LDE/5T (Buckner) too. But he's no true LEO edge rusher which is our biggest need by far.

Lynch, Harold, Tank nor Blair are true edge rushers either. Lynch doesn't really have a home....tweener in this 4-3 under. Brooks is not ideal at SAM either.

Like John said, you'd like to go just BPA, which is Thomas here, but you can't always do that based on your needs and scheme fit.

With Ward finally moving to FS (Thomas), Tartt to SS (Chancellor), Robinson at LCB (Sherman), I can see why many are projecting Lattimore to RCB (Shead) IF we can't get Garrett and can't get a trade back.

I just don't see Thomas as a great fit for this scheme right now.

I don't disagree with you if we expect the #2 pick to slot right in and produce from Day 1. Considering however that this is at least a 2-3 year rebuild before we can seriously think about contending, it might make sense to take BPA here (if we think that BPA is indeed Thomas with Garrett off the board - which he sadly will be) and have him platoon AA at 3-technique where he appears he's the most natural fit. It's not as if we have confidence in AA anyway. In an ideal world, either of the two might develop the ability to play LEO. I also think Thomas might platoon at LEO as well - perhaps he's not ideal for the role right now, but will a lower rounder be that immediately, or indeed ever?

As for trade back, I think I have mentioned in a previous post that I just can't see how we can get value for trading back. #2 is a great pick to trade back from if there are QBs that teams fall in love with, like last year. I simply can't see any of the three top QBs eliciting the same lust from QB-needy teams like Wentz and (stupidly) Goff did last year.

My point basically is: we're a mess right now, and have no confidence in Baalke's prior draft picks. So,we might as well draft absolute BPA and see where the chips fall. If that means platooning a position with high draft picks, so be it: we kind of expect to do this at safety where we have three of those, if we indeed move Ward to FS, as everyone thinks we should (me included). Best case scenario we get a trade piece if we have supernumerary strength in a position. Most people expect AA and/or Reid to be such surplus if we draft someone like Allen or Thomas. As I said, so be it. Let them provide depth right now, or even start when the inevitable injuries mount, and perhaps move them next year.

In terms of the trade back, if Thomas is the best player available but we're going to pick someone else instead because he's not at all a need, getting anything back for trading back to 5-7 is worthwhile even if we get killed in the trade value chart. I'd happily settle for trading back to #7 and picking up a 2nd round pick in the process. We'd still end up with a player who is about as talented as Solomon Thomas but is also a better fit given the players on our roster (Hooker at FS, Lattimore at CB, Adams at FS/SS, Trubisky/Watson at QB). Fournette isn't a need but he or Thomas could end up at 7 and I'd much rather pick one of them there and get a 2nd round pick to go along with them than take anyone at 2.

The only question is whether any of those guys are worth giving up a 2nd round pick to the Titans, Jets, or Rams (probably not).

Originally posted by paulk205:

I don't disagree with you if we expect the #2 pick to slot right in and produce from Day 1. Considering however that this is at least a 2-3 year rebuild before we can seriously think about contending, it might make sense to take BPA here (if we think that BPA is indeed Thomas with Garrett off the board - which he sadly will be) and have him platoon AA at 3-technique where he appears he's the most natural fit. It's not as if we have confidence in AA anyway. In an ideal world, either of the two might develop the ability to play LEO. I also think Thomas might platoon at LEO as well - perhaps he's not ideal for the role right now, but will a lower rounder be that immediately, or indeed ever?

As for trade back, I think I have mentioned in a previous post that I just can't see how we can get value for trading back. #2 is a great pick to trade back from if there are QBs that teams fall in love with, like last year. I simply can't see any of the three top QBs eliciting the same lust from QB-needy teams like Wentz and (stupidly) Goff did last year.

My point basically is: we're a mess right now, and have no confidence in Baalke's prior draft picks. So,we might as well draft absolute BPA and see where the chips fall. If that means platooning a position with high draft picks, so be it: we kind of expect to do this at safety where we have three of those, if we indeed move Ward to FS, as everyone thinks we should (me included). Best case scenario we get a trade piece if we have supernumerary strength in a position. Most people expect AA and/or Reid to be such surplus if we draft someone like Allen or Thomas. As I said, so be it. Let them provide depth right now, or even start when the inevitable injuries mount, and perhaps move them next year.

Really nice post and I like your point about building for the future. That said, I think we may be trying too hard to make a player fit.

When you are drafting at #2 (assuming we can't trade back), if you don't go QB, you better get a perfect-fit impact player. Period.

With that mindset, one could make an argument better for a player like Marshon Lattimore, Mike Williams or Corey Davis.

PS: I wouldn't be upset if we took him

I'm still not seeing why Thomas can't play Leo until we figure out best fit for everyone. We're not talking about Buckner or Armstead here. This dude isn't small but he moves fast. I see nothing wrong with taking a guy like that and putting him out there vs the smaller rushers who are weaker vs the run.

For instance would we be worried about Aldon Smith playing there? Thomas put up better numbers than Aldon did.

He may not be Vic Beasley but if we're comparing him to Cliff Avril then their numbers are not really that far apart and that's crazy considering Thomas has like 20+ lbs on him.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Really nice post and I like your point about building for the future. That said, I think we may be trying too hard to make a player fit.

When you are drafting at #2 (assuming we can't trade back), if you don't go QB, you better get a perfect-fit impact player. Period.

With that mindset, one could make an argument better for a player like Marshon Lattimore, Mike Williams or Corey Davis.

Lattimore has injury issues and Williams and Davis would be a reach at #2.


To me this team lacks dominant, game-changing players. Thomas is exactly that kind of prospect. The stuff people knock him for is largely nit-picking. You draft the guy, plug him in wherever and let him make plays.


Its not like this team has an established DL. Most of these guys are role-players and rotational players. Thomas along with Buckner give you legitimate foundational pieces that you can build around.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Lattimore has injury issues and Williams and Davis would be a reach at #2.


To me this team lacks dominant, game-changing players. Thomas is exactly that kind of prospect. The stuff people knock him for is largely nit-picking. You draft the guy, plug him in wherever and let him make plays.


Its not like this team has an established DL. Most of these guys are role-players and rotational players. Thomas along with Buckner give you legitimate foundational pieces that you can build around.

Exactly. I feel like people are looking at his weight or the fact that he played mostly inside and just throw their hands up and say bad fit. Yet just in another thread people are saying how Charles Harris is a perfect fit at Leo and yet Thomas tested better across the board, 40, jumps, shuttle, 3 cone, bench...you name it and he did so weighing more.

Kid is a special athlete and still a bit raw and can be easily coached up. He plays mean, he plays tough and he doesn't take plays off and has no off the field concerns. You take that and you worry about fit later. He will make plays in any scheme and we can use all the pass rushers we can get. Especially as has been mentioned there is no allegiance to the Baalke players.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Lattimore has injury issues and Williams and Davis would be a reach at #2.


To me this team lacks dominant, game-changing players. Thomas is exactly that kind of prospect. The stuff people knock him for is largely nit-picking. You draft the guy, plug him in wherever and let him make plays.


Its not like this team has an established DL. Most of these guys are role-players and rotational players. Thomas along with Buckner give you legitimate foundational pieces that you can build around.

I agree on Lattimore, Williams and Davis. I would not be thrilled with then at #2 but would understand...same for Thomas. I'd like to see what we have with Buckner and Armstead first in this defense before this route. If he's that dominant of an impact player over AA, versatile, go for it!

Originally posted by genus49:

Exactly. I feel like people are looking at his weight or the fact that he played mostly inside and just throw their hands up and say bad fit. Yet just in another thread people are saying how Charles Harris is a perfect fit at Leo and yet Thomas tested better across the board, 40, jumps, shuttle, 3 cone, bench...you name it and he did so weighing more.

Kid is a special athlete and still a bit raw and can be easily coached up. He plays mean, he plays tough and he doesn't take plays off and has no off the field concerns. You take that and you worry about fit later. He will make plays in any scheme and we can use all the pass rushers we can get. Especially as has been mentioned there is no allegiance to the Baalke players.

LDE- Michael Bennett 6'3, 273
40 YARD DASH: 5.13 SEC
BENCH PRESS: 24 REPS
VERTICAL JUMP: 31.0 INCH
BROAD JUMP: 110.0 INCH
*slides inside to DT on passing downs

Soloman Thomas 6'3, 273
40 YARD DASH: 4.69 SEC
BENCH PRESS: 30 REPS
VERTICAL JUMP: 35.0 INCH
BROAD JUMP: 126.0 INCH
3 CONE DRILL: 6.95 SEC
20 YARD SHUTTLE: 4.28 SEC

Thomas pretty much blows Bennett away at everything. Bennett is good enough to be a force for Seattle yet Thomas isn't a fit here??

To me the pick will be Thomas or Lattimore and considering we have quite a few young corners with potential and no pass rush taking Thomas is the way to go.

Originally posted by SteveYoung:

LDE- Michael Bennett 6'3, 273
40 YARD DASH: 5.13 SEC
BENCH PRESS: 24 REPS
VERTICAL JUMP: 31.0 INCH
BROAD JUMP: 110.0 INCH
*slides inside to DT on passing downs

Soloman Thomas 6'3, 273
40 YARD DASH: 4.69 SEC
BENCH PRESS: 30 REPS
VERTICAL JUMP: 35.0 INCH
BROAD JUMP: 126.0 INCH
3 CONE DRILL: 6.95 SEC
20 YARD SHUTTLE: 4.28 SEC

Thomas pretty much blows Bennett away at everything. Bennett is good enough to be a force for Seattle yet Thomas isn't a fit here??

To me the pick will be Thomas or Lattimore and considering we have quite a few young corners with potential and no pass rush taking Thomas is the way to go.

People want a dedicated LEO. Bennett slides inside on passing downs, that's literally what many of us have said Thomas will do. And the argument keeps turning into, "well he can play LEO for sure because he's versatile."

If you put Thomas at LDE (strong side) that's fine, that's where his best fit would be, I get it, makes sense, no arguments, were cool. But toying with his position to try and force him into the LEO because "he's fast" is taking him away from his strength.

Why would anybody want to take a player that high and move them away from the reason they are draftable that high?

If the point of taking him is to replace AA, ok I get it. I think giving up on AA after 2 years is a little extreme but I can understand. But taking Thomas with the idea that his combine numbers somehow prove he's a LEO without ever really playing the position...I'm not buying it.

Re-building seems smarter to take the CB last (as in year 2-3) after the QB and front 7 is set.

Did we draft Deion and then go find Steve?

Originally posted by jreff22:

People want a dedicated LEO. Bennett slides inside on passing downs, that's literally what many of us have said Thomas will do. And the argument keeps turning into, "well he can play LEO for sure because he's versatile."

If you put Thomas at LDE (strong side) that's fine, that's where his best fit would be, I get it, makes sense, no arguments, were cool. But toying with his position to try and force him into the LEO because "he's fast" is taking him away from his strength.

Why would anybody want to take a player that high and move them away from the reason they are draftable that high?

If the point of taking him is to replace AA, ok I get it. I think giving up on AA after 2 years is a little extreme but I can understand. But taking Thomas with the idea that his combine numbers somehow prove he's a LEO without ever really playing the position...I'm not buying it.

I don't think Thomas is a fit at LEO. Never did. But I think he is an excellent fit at LDE though and will be better than Bennett IMO.

I think we also need a LEO and there are plenty available in the draft.

Draft Thomas at 2 to play LDE and a guy like Jordan Willis in round 2 to be our LEO.

Originally posted by SteveYoung:

I don't think Thomas is a fit at LEO. Never did. But I think he is an excellent fit at LDE though and will be better than Bennett IMO.

I think we also need a LEO and there are plenty available in the draft.

Draft Thomas at 2 to play LDE and a guy like Jordan Willis in round 2 to be our LEO.

That argumemt I can understand. It's the people saying his fast 40 and 3 cone prove he's a LEO, that I'm having issues with.