Solomon Thomas--Stanford

Originally posted by SteveYoung:
Lynch sucks.
Dial is a backup.
Ehere is Brooks?
Who plays SS?

1. SS- Jamal Adams
2. LEO- Charles Harris
3. SAM- Ryan Anderson
4. NT- Dalvin Tomlinson

SAM: Ahmad Brooks / Ryan Anderson
LDE/5T: DeForest Bucker
NT/1T: Dalvin Tomlinson / Quinton Dial
RDT/3T: Earl Mitchell / Arik Armstead
RDE/LEO: Eli Harold / Charles Harris

WILL: Malcolm Smith/Ray-Ray Armstrong
MIKE: Navarro Bowman

SS- Jamal Adams
FS- Jimmy Ward / Eric Reid

My D is 10x better than your D

That made me chuckle!

TBF, mine was just "at a glance today." I hadn't added in any draft picks.

Brooks is not the future but yes, if he's still here, he's got a legit shot at starting at the SAM but he's not ideal anymore at covering TE's and RB's out of the backfield. He can set the edge though and can add some pass rush.

No issues on anyone who's looking at scheme fits. ShanaLynch clearly are too. So whether you're into a FS, SS, ILB, ER, 3T, QB, etc...it's anyone's guess.

But I'm praying for a trade down like most of you.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
Of course he can. Bennett 274 is rotated/arbitrarily placed there often. You can give over or under looks and move guys around between 5T and 3T based on situation, alignment, matchups, and when the offense motions the TE across the formation, this is often arbitrarily done for you.

Thomas would be a really good 3T or 5T. In the scheme we're going to, there literally is a spot for all different kinds of talent in the front seven. Name a front seven guy, he's got a spot in t
But we still need FAT NTs!!!

This is true...Bennett is a natural edge rusher, as effective as their LEO, and b/c of his skill set, used to move inside some too. He's equally good against the run. He's sort of taken that position to the next level. The LDE/5T isn't supposed to get that many sacks!

We badly need 3 or 4 really good pass rushers at those 4 spots and certainly, one immoveable fatty NT.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
Of course he can. Bennett 274 is rotated/arbitrarily placed there often. You can give over or under looks and move guys around between 5T and 3T based on situation, alignment, matchups, and when the offense motions the TE across the formation, this is often arbitrarily done for you.

Thomas would be a really good 3T or 5T. In the scheme we're going to, there literally is a spot for all different kinds of talent in the front seven. Name a front seven guy, he's got a spot in this D.

But we still need FAT NTs!!!

He can play the position but he's going to have to put on weight. Justin Smith, Bryant Young didn't play it at 270. It's not college anymore he'll get engulfed on combo blocks at 270. Bennett plays strongside end as base but Buckner at 3 is iffy. Typically you want the 4-3 tackle at 3, and the 3-4 tackle at 5 in this d.

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
Of course he can. Bennett 274 is rotated/arbitrarily placed there often. You can give over or under looks and move guys around between 5T and 3T based on situation, alignment, matchups, and when the offense motions the TE across the formation, this is often arbitrarily done for you.

Thomas would be a really good 3T or 5T. In the scheme we're going to, there literally is a spot for all different kinds of talent in the front seven. Name a front seven guy, he's got a spot in this D.

But we still need FAT NTs!!!

He can play the position but he's going to have to put on weight. Justin Smith, Bryant Young didn't play it at 270. It's not college anymore he'll get engulfed on combo blocks at 270. Bennett plays strongside end as base but Buckner at 3 is iffy. Typically you want the 4-3 tackle at 3, and the 3-4 tackle at 5 in this d.

That's where I have Buckner (LDE/5T). I just hope fans don't expect him to get double digit sacks like Bennett.

Yeah, Bryant Young played at 305, 290 coming out. So I'd like him to add about 20 pounds over the next couple years. But his skill set there at the 3T is ideal.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Of course he can. Bennett 274 is rotated/arbitrarily placed there often. You can give over or under looks and move guys around between 5T and 3T based on situation, alignment, matchups, and when the offense motions the TE across the formation, this is often arbitrarily done for you.

Thomas would be a really good 3T or 5T. In the scheme we're going to, there literally is a spot for all different kinds of talent in the front seven. Name a front seven guy, he's got a spot in t
But we still need FAT NTs!!!

This is true...Bennett is a natural edge rusher, as effective as their LEO, and b/c of his skill set, used to move inside some too. He's equally good against the run. He's sort of taken that position to the next level. The LDE/5T isn't supposed to get that many sacks!

We badly need 3 or 4 really good pass rushers at those 4 spots and certainly, one immoveable fatty NT.

Agreed. I'd personally roll with AA at 3T, Buck at 5T, get 2 fatties (FA/draft), a Leo, and a Hooker, and call it a day.

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Of course he can. Bennett 274 is rotated/arbitrarily placed there often. You can give over or under looks and move guys around between 5T and 3T based on situation, alignment, matchups, and when the offense motions the TE across the formation, this is often arbitrarily done for you.

Thomas would be a really good 3T or 5T. In the scheme we're going to, there literally is a spot for all different kinds of talent in the front seven. Name a front seven guy, he's got a spot in this D.

But we still need FAT NTs!!!

He can play the position but he's going to have to put on weight. Justin Smith, Bryant Young didn't play it at 270. It's not college anymore he'll get engulfed on combo blocks at 270. Bennett plays strongside end as base but Buckner at 3 is iffy. Typically you want the 4-3 tackle at 3, and the 3-4 tackle at 5 in this d.

Oh, you don't have to sell me on not drafting Thomas . But I disagree that he doesn't have a spot in the scheme.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
Oh, you don't have to sell me on not drafting Thomas . But I disagree that he doesn't have a spot in the scheme.

I know I'm very critical of taking him but I do think he has several spots. He can pick up weight and be a great 3 tech. This scenario won't happen because of Buckner but he could play a Bennett like 5 too.

If he we end up taking him he'll be a great pick I just see it as a luxury pick.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
Agreed. I'd personally roll with AA at 3T, Buck at 5T, get 2 fatties (FA/draft), a Leo, and a Hooker, and call it a day.

That's certainly one way to go. I wouldn't complain about that either...wait, we're talking Hooker as in the S, right? Not Amsterdam?

Originally posted by tjd808185:
He can play the position but he's going to have to put on weight. Justin Smith, Bryant Young didn't play it at 270. It's not college anymore he'll get engulfed on combo blocks at 270. Bennett plays strongside end as base but Buckner at 3 is iffy. Typically you want the 4-3 tackle at 3, and the 3-4 tackle at 5 in this d.

B.Young was 276 when he was drafted and gradually added weight over his career.

If we take Thomas, Armstead becomes only a 1st and 2nd down player. He may not even be on the team when the season begins so who knows but I would rather give him one more year to pan out and I would take one of the Ohio State DB's over Thomas who is not the elite pass rusher we are looking for (though a very good all-around prospect)

Originally posted by StubbyNBY:
If we take Thomas, Armstead becomes only a 1st and 2nd down player. He may not even be on the team when the season begins so who knows but I would rather give him one more year to pan out and I would take one of the Ohio State DB's over Thomas who is not the elite pass rusher we are looking for (though a very good all-around prospect)

Armstead was one of the worst 1nd and 2nd down DLinemen in the league last year. Taking Thomas will probably regulate him to what he does best, pass rush.

Originally posted by jcs:
B.Young was 276 when he was drafted and gradually added weight over his career.

Never said he couldn't. Never said he wouldn't be a beastly 3 either. I'm a hater but that's not my complaint.

Originally posted by SteveYoung:

Originally posted by jonnydel:
He was a DE in name only because he played the 5 tech in a 3-4.....You do realize he made the pro-bowl as both a DT and DE because of that, right?? When we were in "nickel" 70% of the time Cowboy was inside as a DT.

I ask, why can't he be the "LEO"?? That's where Michael Bennett plays, most of the time, and he's nearly the exact same height, weight, arm length and is darn near unblockable, at times, in pass rush. If Bennet hadn't been there in the SB against NE it would've been a blowout. The only problem NE had in that game was Bennett.

Thomas is a guy who has not only shown top tier athleticism, but also a relentless motor.

Michael Bennett is not the LEO. He is the LDE. Cliff Avril is the LEO.

Bennett doesn't stay in one spot, they move him around and he does line up as a LEO at times, 8 of his 11 sacks in 2013 came from the "LEO" spot, the other 2 from when they moved him around inside for different matchups.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1967772-nfl-free-agency-breaking-down-michael-bennetts-production-in-2013

As his production has increased, Bennett has played the LEO more on passing downs. I remember in the SB against NE he was playing the LEO a lot. Then, against the Falcons he was playing LDE more on base downs. He's a player that provides flexibility to gain production out of a number of D-line spots - Thomas would be of that kind of mold. I don't think he'd be strict LDE. You could see him line up at LDE on base downs or at LEO if AA ever starts producing. That'd give a monster D-line if you can have 3 guys that size, that speed able to disrupt and still have the speed to rush the passer.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Agreed. I'd personally roll with AA at 3T, Buck at 5T, get 2 fatties (FA/draft), a Leo, and a Hooker, and call it a day.

That's certainly one way to go. I wouldn't complain about that either...wait, we're talking Hooker as in the S, right? Not Amsterdam?

Both?

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by SteveYoung:
Read this. It sums up everything that I have been saying.

http://ninerswire.usatoday.com/2017/03/22/espns-mel-kiper-taps-hot-name-to-49ers-in-mock-nfl-draft/

Jamal Adams will be the pick. He checks all the boxes and we won't have to fit a square peg in a round hole with him. Book it

Thomas is suited best as a 3-4 defensive tackle. And even then, he needs to gain weight to hold up there in the NFL. He appears to have the frame and skill set to be good in that role. He's great at shooting gaps and gaining leverage against guards and centers.

But he doesn't look like a player that should kick outside, where flexibility, multiple pass-rushing moves and length are needed – particularly when talking about a player getting taken second overall that weighs in the 270s. He's not built to play in space, he's built to occupy blockers. And those kind of players aren't top-five picks.

After going back and watching game film, I am even more against drafting Thomas, he's a very good 3tech, but when he was put on the outside, he wasn't nearly as good. Barnett is a much better choice as a Leo, which is what we need, not another guy on the inside. If we needed another 3tech, I'd be all for grabbing him, but we don't, so I'm not.

This 100%