Malik Hooker S Ohio State

Saleh needs both a strong deep S and another stud on the DL...I'm thinking he'd be attracted to someone like Carlos Watkins, who's a good run stuffer but is also very mobile for his size. Think he'd be very good alongside Mitchell. I don't see Lynch taking Allen at #2...his shoulder issue isn't going away and a bigger guy is what's really needed to fill out the front 4 DL. I think Hooker's too good to pass up...so if Lynch doesn't trade down, I'd like to see him take him. With Reid not likely to get extended and Tartt not exactly setting the world on fire, I'd also like Lynch to grab Melifonwu. That'd give Saleh a bigger and faster secondary...something he wants, I believe. I don't buy Ward at the deep FS...just don't believe he's stout enough.

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:
I don't think anyone is necessarily saying FS is a bigger need than DL...

An elite FS will allow us to keep a SS in the box (better run D). A FS prevents us from having a big need at CB so we can use our high draft picks on DL and LB (better run D).

There are many ways to skin a cat, but using the first of 10 picks on a FS is in no way shape or form sacrificing our run defense.

Few other points:

"Why didn't Seattle take Thomas at 6?"
Because they thought Thomas would be there at 14 and Okung wouldn't. You need to consider the entire draft board and other teams probable picks. We don't have 2 picks in the top 15. Do you think hooker is there at 34? If not, and he's you're guy, you take him at 2. If you think he will be there at 34, then you wait and cross your fingers you were correct. That doesn't diminish the desire at all, it just weighs the your desire vs the other teams in the league, who don't run the same defense.

As for why are we talking about Seattle this is the niners blah blah. We get it, you prefer Thomas. But let's not confuse the narrative. Who do we have on this niner roster?

DeForest Buckner (DL). That's it!! Can maybe include Rashard Robinson (CB) who is a 1 year player and Navarro Bowman (MLB) who is coming back from his second major injury. Point is, we don't have a defensive identity. What we do have, is a D coordinator who learned under carrol, hand picked by our head coach, reportedly because he likes how Seattle's defense is run. It's completely nonsensical to not take Pete's defensive philosophy into account when literally building our defense from scratch.

Fine post. Fine post!

And if fans don't want to talk about Seattle, simply refer to our history. The defenses were near identical.

Originally posted by Jasta:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by Jasta:
Just watch this. Gives a great background to the FS position in Seattle's type of 4:3 defense and why it's so important.

https://youtu.be/glWAP7vbeH8

My post was specific to the 49ers so Seattle means little to me.

Our secondary was the strength of our defense last year and we were historically bad at stopping the run...drafting a poor tackling FS at #2 will help that more than a DLman who is able to stop the run and rush the passer?

That doesn't even take into consideration of Jimmie Ward at FS vs Armstead at where we don't even know?

So you didn't even click the link? It's a scouting report of Hooker.

Your second point has some merit... but IMO that's a reason to draft Adams (who I am slightly in favour of over Hooker) than drafting yet another interior defensive lineman.

I just thought I'd point out that in the video you linked to, toward the end the analyst specifically says that in his opinion that the FS position is the most important position in that type of defense AND he emphatically says (I'm not exaggerating) that the 9ers should take Hooker (go to about the 12min 30 second mark).

Was listening to Jim Rome today and this dude was supposed to be on but flaked out on the interview. Red Flag. Character issue.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:

I don't think anyone is necessarily saying FS is a bigger need than DL...

An elite FS will allow us to keep a SS in the box (better run D). A FS prevents us from having a big need at CB so we can use our high draft picks on DL and LB (better run D).

There are many ways to skin a cat, but using the first of 10 picks on a FS is in no way shape or form sacrificing our run defense.

Few other points:

"Why didn't Seattle take Thomas at 6?"
Because they thought Thomas would be there at 14 and Okung wouldn't. You need to consider the entire draft board and other teams probable picks. We don't have 2 picks in the top 15. Do you think hooker is there at 34? If not, and he's you're guy, you take him at 2. If you think he will be there at 34, then you wait and cross your fingers you were correct. That doesn't diminish the desire at all, it just weighs the your desire vs the other teams in the league, who don't run the same defense.

As for why are we talking about Seattle this is the niners blah blah. We get it, you prefer Thomas. But let's not confuse the narrative. Who do we have on this niner roster?

DeForest Buckner (DL). That's it!! Can maybe include Rashard Robinson (CB) who is a 1 year player and Navarro Bowman (MLB) who is coming back from his second major injury. Point is, we don't have a defensive identity. What we do have, is a D coordinator who learned under carrol, hand picked by our head coach, reportedly because he likes how Seattle's defense is run. It's completely nonsensical to not take Pete's defensive philosophy into account when literally building our defense from scratch.

Fine post. Fine post!

And if fans don't want to talk about Seattle, simply refer to our history. The defenses were near identical.

Seattle didn't take Thomas at #6 because he didn't merit the pick as a prospect. And, Thomas was a more complete player than Hooker.

Hooker almost quits football and you're not worried about his passions? Line him up next to Borland.

Tye only safety worth the second pick is Adams if you're looking at game film, but his combine was terrible.

I don't care where they were selected Eric Berry and Earl Thomas are the glue of their secondary. In Earl's case best player on the d, Berry is at least topv3. If you can't see their value and would only take them after "x" pick that's your own stupidity. How many elite D's are you going to see with a safety anchoring them before you wise up on their value? Is Hooker that kind of a player I think that's a different story.

Originally posted by bigwads:

Seattle didn't take Thomas at #6 because he didn't merit the pick as a prospect.

With this level of insider knowledge, you'd be a valuable asset to lynch and the 49ers organization. Please tell me their draft picks this year, maybe we can swipe a few out from under them.


You have no clue how high they valued Thomas other than they took him in the first round as the first piece of a defensive rebuild, and ahead of JPP.

If Myles g was available at 2, id take him over hooker. Doesn't mean I don't find hooker worthy of picking at, just that I prefer Myles even more.

Or let's say in the case of the browns. If they ONLY had one pick in the first, maybe they go QB. But they have 1 and 12 so they go Myles at 1 and QB at 12. Doesn't mean QB wasn't worthy of their number 1, obvi they would have picked him, but in this case they figured hey, our qb still might be there at 12 but no way Myles is. They are just playing the board

Originally posted by 49erphan:

I just thought I'd point out that in the video you linked to, toward the end the analyst specifically says that in his opinion that the FS position is the most important position in that type of defense AND he emphatically says (I'm not exaggerating) that the 9ers should take Hooker (go to about the 12min 30 second mark).

I have no idea who that person is. I can make a video saying something different, it doesn't make me a so called expert. That's why I asked.

Importance of a position vs need are two different things. We can all agree QB is the most important position in the game. Should the Pats draft QB with their first pick?

The basic premise of my original comment was it makes no sense that people say Thomas is a luxury pick because we're ok on DL while saying Hooker is a need pick.

The way I see it our secondary is a lot more proven than our DL. So how the hell can FS be a bigger need?

So let's draft a player with way more question marks at a position that hardly ever goes top 2 because it's really important in Seattle?

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:

With this level of insider knowledge, you'd be a valuable asset to lynch and the 49ers organization. Please tell me they're draft picks this year, maybe we can swipe a few out from under them.


You have no clue how high they valued Thomas other than they took him in the first round as the first piece of a defensive rebuild, and ahead of JPP.

If Myles g was available at 2, id take him over hooker. Doesn't mean I don't find hooker worthy of picking at, just that I prefer Myles even more.

Or let's say in the case of the browns. If they ONLY had one pick in the first, maybe they go QB. But they have 1 and 12 so they go Myles at 1 and QB at 12. Doesn't mean QB wasn't worthy of their number 1, obvi they would have picked him, but in this case they figured hey, our qb still might be there at 12 but no way Myles is. They are just playing the board

JPP was not that highly rated and was a lot more project than sure thing. The point people are trying to make is that FS is so important to Carroll's success. If they felt that strongly about the need and the fit then they would've drafted him first and dealt with whomever was available with their second pick. The fact that they took Okung first means they didn't value Thomas as a top 10 pick. And given how important the position is apparently how is that possible?

Is Ward > Armstead. At this point, absolutely. But that's not where the planning should end.

The run D will be helped by having healthy DLineman, a scheme that doesn't suck (e.g. JoN), and a true 2gapping Fat Nosetackle. It will also be helped tremendously by being able to put 8 in the box.

The single high FS truly is the second most important position (and, yes, it can be argued that it's tied for most important, but I'll concede it's the second) in this scheme. Teams have been trying to chase the magic unicorn that is known as Earl Thomas for years. You don't have to draft 1st round corners. Why? Earl Thomas masks the CBs limitations. You can put 8 in the box. Why? Earl Thomas.

Ward is good. He might be really good at this role. But if you want to see this scheme shine, get an elite talent with elite range at that single high. Carroll's first draft pick to install this scheme? Earl Thomas.

Malik Hooker is the closest thing I've seen to Earl. You watch him, and the comparison is obvious. I've never seen any Ward play and thought " that's Earl Thomas".

As for this draft, the closest thing I've seen to Earl Thomas is going to be there at 2. He won't be at 34. But this draft is ridiculously deep in Elephant, and a damn good one will be there at 34.

If we go with Hooker, then Lawson/Harris/whomever, and then get some damn fat NTs, our defense is getting really good, really fast.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:

With this level of insider knowledge, you'd be a valuable asset to lynch and the 49ers organization. Please tell me they're draft picks this year, maybe we can swipe a few out from under them.


You have no clue how high they valued Thomas other than they took him in the first round as the first piece of a defensive rebuild, and ahead of JPP.

If Myles g was available at 2, id take him over hooker. Doesn't mean I don't find hooker worthy of picking at, just that I prefer Myles even more.

Or let's say in the case of the browns. If they ONLY had one pick in the first, maybe they go QB. But they have 1 and 12 so they go Myles at 1 and QB at 12. Doesn't mean QB wasn't worthy of their number 1, obvi they would have picked him, but in this case they figured hey, our qb still might be there at 12 but no way Myles is. They are just playing the board

JPP was not that highly rated and was a lot more project than sure thing. The point people are trying to make is that FS is so important to Carroll's success. If they felt that strongly about the need and the fit then they would've drafted him first and dealt with whomever was available with their second pick. The fact that they took Okung first means they didn't value Thomas as a top 10 pick. And given how important the position is apparently how is that possible?

No, it means he thinks LT is more important than most anything else. U see a tackle you like at 2? If so I'm on board.

Originally posted by genus49:
JPP was not that highly rated and was a lot more project than sure thing. The point people are trying to make is that FS is so important to Carroll's success. If they felt that strongly about the need and the fit then they would've drafted him first and dealt with whomever was available with their second pick. The fact that they took Okung first means they didn't value Thomas as a top 10 pick. And given how important the position is apparently how is that possible?

Or it just says they valued left tackle more and thought Eugene Monroe was a better pick at 6. Are you advocating we pick Cam Robinson? Do we have 2 1st rounders to take that approach? The fact is Carroll started his d off with Earl and he still is the D's most important player. Carroll's 3 techs though are probably the weakest links on his d so you may want to rethink belittling his approach on safety.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Is Ward > Armstead. At this point, absolutely. But that's not where the planning should end.

The run D will be helped by having healthy DLineman, a scheme that doesn't suck (e.g. JoN), and a true 2gapping Fat Nosetackle. It will also be helped tremendously by being able to put 8 in the box.

The single high FS truly is the second most important position (and, yes, it can be argued that it's tied for most important, but I'll concede it's the second) in this scheme. Teams have been trying to chase the magic unicorn that is known as Earl Thomas for years. You don't have to draft 1st round corners. Why? Earl Thomas masks the CBs limitations. You can put 8 in the box. Why? Earl Thomas.

Ward is good. He might be really good at this role. But if you want to see this scheme shine, get an elite talent with elite range at that single high. Carroll's first draft pick to install this scheme? Earl Thomas.

Malik Hooker is the closest thing I've seen to Earl. You watch him, and the comparison is obvious. I've never seen any Ward play and thought " that's Earl Thomas".

As for this draft, the closest thing I've seen to Earl Thomas is going to be there at 2. He won't be at 34. But this draft is ridiculously deep in Elephant, and a damn good one will be there at 34.

If we go with Hooker, then Lawson/Harris/whomever, and then get some damn fat NTs, our defense is getting really good, really fast.

Hooker is close to Thomas in his ability to make plays on the ball when the other team is passing but he's doesn't tackle nearly as well as Thomas, not as proven or experienced as Thomas and not as fast as Thomas and is coming in off injuries which could potential make him even more hesitant to tackle the way he should be.

There's no questioning his ability to make plays back there in college but are his instincts good enough for the pro game and the top QBs who don't make a habit of staring down their receivers like most college QBs?

Originally posted by genus49:

Hooker is close to Thomas in his ability to make plays on the ball when the other team is passing but he's doesn't tackle nearly as well as Thomas, not as proven or experienced as Thomas and not as fast as Thomas and is coming in off injuries which could potential make him even more hesitant to tackle the way he should be.

There's no questioning his ability to make plays back there in college but are his instincts good enough for the pro game and the top QBs who don't make a habit of staring down their receivers like most college QBs?

You have no idea who's faster.

Are his intstincs good enough? Are you grasping for straws here? Lol.

Don't take my word for it.

NFL scout sees Ed Reed as good comp for Ohio State safety

Link

Daniel Jeremiah:
"He has the best combination of range and ball skills that I've ever seen in a college safety. His anticipation and awareness is off the charts. I wasn't in Baltimore when Ed Reed was drafted, but I arrived the following year to scout for the Ravens and spent four years around the future Hall of Famer. Hooker is the closest thing I've seen to Reed seen since I've been scouting. He is also very effective in the run game. He takes proper angles and he's a reliable tackler.

I'm not alone in my opinion. Evaluators around the league rave about him and can't believe he's only been a one-year starter. He's just scratching the surface of what he will eventually become. -- Daniel Jeremiah

Link

"He's on a level with Earl Thomas, and I don't expect any other player to match that this year. Hooker combines awareness, instincts, and excellent burst to cover the field from sideline to sideline like the NFL's greatest. Still young and developing, but his potential is sky-high."


"The first name that comes to mind when watching Hooker is Seattle star safety Earl Thomas. Some have brought up Ed Reed, but Hooker's body type and game are more reminiscent of Thomas than anyone else. "

Link

Mike Mayock on Malik Hooker: He's comparable to Ed Reed and Earl Thomas

Link

Originally posted by genus49:

JPP was not that highly rated and was a lot more project than sure thing. The point people are trying to make is that FS is so important to Carroll's success. If they felt that strongly about the need and the fit then they would've drafted him first and dealt with whomever was available with their second pick. The fact that they took Okung first means they didn't value Thomas as a top 10 pick. And given how important the position is apparently how is that possible?

Absolutely conjecture.