Malik Hooker S Ohio State

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Uh Richard Smith was the DC for the Texans when he was there and they ran a 4-3 under...

Cyprien was a SS and a 2nd rd pick not two overall...Ramsey is a good player, but that was what 3 yrs into Bradley's tenure? I never said secondary didn't matter but that's one position where there's a TON of talent at in this draft would you not agree?

I think you're mixing me up with others because I'm not saying you can't play cover 3 without Earl. I don'teven want Hooker. It sure makes it alot easier though but it's important to note that Earl is a rare prospect. Just the secondary is equally important for Seattle. Jax has also heavily invested there. So I don't think it's wise to spend so much on the d line and still not even being close to finished there. Looking later into the draft is a good way to get stuck with Rashaun Woods over Fitzgerald. Not that we made that mistake. Just because analysists are raving how deep of a class it is doesn't mean those players pan out.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
You bring up Seattle as not the model, and then use them to try and prove your point, but you left out some key points.

After drafting Earl, They continued their rebuild and installation of the defense by following these rules:

Corners in later rounds - Sherman 5th round. Browner UDFA. Maxwell 6th round.

Box Safety in late rounds - none drafted higher than 5th round.

Front 7 - use high rounds and FA to get the best damn athletic talent you can in your front 7.

The only high draft pick used in the entire secondary, year after year after year was one guy: Earl Thomas. They did it once. And then never went back to drafting high in the secondary.

Why were they able to build the Legion of Boom with late round athletic talent? 4/5 of their secondary is a 5th round or lower guy. (See: value of a single High Free Safety with elite range, who they drafted year 1, in the first round).

Why not follow this model?

I feel you're either my spirit animal or arch nemesis lol. The ying(Hooker) to my yang(Thomas)...or should Hooker be the yang?

I used the Seattle model to point out that what worked for them isn't going to work for everyone. What worked for Seattle isn't a blueprint for everyone. I think soemone else brought up the whole Tom Brady being a 6th round pick.

If teams want to follow the Pats formula by your logic of like for like teams shouldn't touch QB til the 6th round

They in essence lucked into Earl Thomas still being there after they admitted they figured he'd be gone by their next pick being on the clock. They then hit it out of the park with Chancellor and Sherman and the other corners. Should teams not draft corners til the 5th round?

If it was that simple everyone would be doing it. Drafting isn't easy and we can't all assume that even if Hooker ends up being another Earl Thomas or even better that the rest of the guys we put around him end up being the caliber that Seattle got.

Originally posted by tjd808185:
I think you're mixing me up with others because I'm not saying you can't play cover 3 without Earl. I don'teven want Hooker. It sure makes it alot easier though but it's important to note that Earl is a rare prospect. Just the secondary is equally important for Seattle. Jax has also heavily invested there. So I don't think it's wise to spend so much on the d line and still not even being close to finished there. Looking later into the draft is a good way to get stuck with Rashaun Woods over Fitzgerald. Not that we made that mistake. Just because analysists are raving how deep of a class it is doesn't mean those players pan out.

We were never in position to draft Fitzgerald so not sure why you'd bring that up?

This draft is very deep at DBs. I agree you can't always know who you will get later in the draft but when a position is so rich, you'll get someone good. Plus you see more later corners and safeties perform at a high level vs pass rushers who all tend to go fairly early.

I think this draft is a perfect one to help our defense while Kyle works on coaching up the offense. Thomas at #2 would give us a very solid and versatile player that can play all over the line. We can address the secondary on day 2 and if the board lines up grab either the best WR or edge rusher to play LEO or SAM available.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

I think the Sherman is good, and made better by scheme and having a single high FS with elite range over the top who also guards the seam/post.

I think Kam is good, and made better by scheme and having a single high FS with elite range over the top who also guards the seam/post.

Expert after expert (and me ) disagree with your opinion on who Hooker compares to.

NFL.com compares him to Reggie Nelson (lance Zierlein) so does Bucky brooks.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/profiles/malik-hooker?id=2558060

Fox sports and fanside compare him to Jarius Byrd

https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/2017-nfl-draft-scouting-report-malik-hooker-010817%3Famp%3Dtrue

Pff focus compared him to Reggie Nelson as well

https://www.profootballfocus.com/draft-pff-scouting-report-malik-hooker-s-ohio-state/

I mean sure I've heard Reed and Thomas but don't act like some smart draft analysts haven't compared him to other guys

Originally posted by tjd808185:

I think you're mixing me up with others because I'm not saying you can't play cover 3 without Earl. I don'teven want Hooker. It sure makes it alot easier though but it's important to note that Earl is a rare prospect. Just the secondary is equally important for Seattle. Jax has also heavily invested there. So I don't think it's wise to spend so much on the d line and still not even being close to finished there. Looking later into the draft is a good way to get stuck with Rashaun Woods over Fitzgerald. Not that we made that mistake. Just because analysists are raving how deep of a class it is doesn't mean those players pan out.

I'm gonna disagree with you that there isn't top tier CBs within the first 3 rds. People complain about taking another DL but go look at how many picks we've spent on secondary the past 5 yrs.

and sometimes you end up with AJ Jenkins instead of ty Hilton or Tavon Austin instead of Keenan Allen...see I can do that too

Originally posted by genus49:
I feel you're either my spirit animal or arch nemesis lol. The ying(Hooker) to my yang(Thomas)...or should Hooker be the yang?

I used the Seattle model to point out that what worked for them isn't going to work for everyone. What worked for Seattle isn't a blueprint for everyone. I think soemone else brought up the whole Tom Brady being a 6th round pick.

If teams want to follow the Pats formula by your logic of like for like teams shouldn't touch QB til the 6th round

They in essence lucked into Earl Thomas still being there after they admitted they figured he'd be gone by their next pick being on the clock. They then hit it out of the park with Chancellor and Sherman and the other corners. Should teams not draft corners til the 5th round?

If it was that simple everyone would be doing it. Drafting isn't easy and we can't all assume that even if Hooker ends up being another Earl Thomas or even better that the rest of the guys we put around him end up being the caliber that Seattle got.

lol!

1. Not sure what Tom Brady has to do with this.

2. I was demonstrating the value that Earl brings to that team. He's so good that they can build a Legion of Boom with lower prospects. That's insane, and accurate. If you don't have an Earl, you're going to have to draft higher in the rest of the secondary. If you don't have an elite ranged FS, you might not be able to put 8 in the box.

3. I was demonstrating a viable, proven model that Carroll used to build this thing that we want. Do we have to follow it? Nope. Why wouldn't we?

More and more teams are chasing the magic unicorn that is Earl Thomas.

When talking about Earl Thomas, Mayock: "Because we've become a pass-first league, teams are looking more and more for that free safety that can cover, that has more range, that can possibly drop down and cover a slot without having to go to a nickel (back),"

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

(Oh, and ignore Mayock's most recent rankings - I'm telling you he's on something, and also, Wu will come in here with his Peppers Postings)

Originally posted by NYniner85:
NFL.com compares him to Reggie Nelson (lance Zierlein) so does Bucky brooks.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/profiles/malik-hooker?id=2558060

Fox sports and fanside compare him to Jarius Byrd

https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/2017-nfl-draft-scouting-report-malik-hooker-010817%3Famp%3Dtrue

Pff focus compared him to Reggie Nelson as well

https://www.profootballfocus.com/draft-pff-scouting-report-malik-hooker-s-ohio-state/

I mean sure I've heard Reed and Thomas but don't act like some smart draft analysts haven't compared him to other guys

Google: Malik Hooker Earl Thomas. The screen will go blank at first. Don't worry. That's just the Google servers slowing down as they try to catch their breath to list all the results.



but seriously, I've linked it before, there are a ton of experts out there comparing him to Reed/EarlThomas. You choose to not think he's that level. that's fine. I'm not here to convince you that he is.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Google: Malik Hooker Earl Thomas. The screen will go blank at first. Don't worry. That's just the Google servers slowing down as they try to catch their breath to list all the results.



but seriously, I've linked it before, there are a ton of experts out there comparing him to Reed/EarlThomas. You choose to not think he's that level. that's fine. I'm not here to convince you that he is.

Hey I'm just showing you that it's not all gum drops and unicorns some respected people don't say he's the best safety to come out in 25+ yrs

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Hey I'm just showing you that it's not all gum drops and unicorns some respected people don't say he's the best safety to come out in 25+ yrs

No, of course not. There's experts that are respected and down on any given prospect.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
lol!

1. Not sure what Tom Brady has to do with this.

2. I was demonstrating the value that Earl brings to that team. He's so good that they can build a Legion of Boom with lower prospects. That's insane, and accurate. If you don't have an Earl, you're going to have to draft higher in the rest of the secondary. If you don't have an elite ranged FS, you might not be able to put 8 in the box.

3. I was demonstrating a viable, proven model that Carroll used to build this thing that we want. Do we have to follow it? Nope. Why wouldn't we?

More and more teams are chasing the magic unicorn that is Earl Thomas.

When talking about Earl Thomas, Mayock: "Because we've become a pass-first league, teams are looking more and more for that free safety that can cover, that has more range, that can possibly drop down and cover a slot without having to go to a nickel (back),"

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

(Oh, and ignore Mayock's most recent rankings - I'm telling you he's on something, and also, Wu will come in here with his Peppers Postings)

lol so pay attention to Mayock when he agrees with you but ignore him when he doesn't ?

And Brady was purely an analogy that just because another team is able to get a star player later in the draft doesn't mean that should be the blueprint for everyone else.

You're making a point in saying that Thomas allowed the Seahawks to build with lower round prospects but I'm throwing Brady out there to remind all of us that draft round has nothing to do with how good a player is but more so how they were evaluated or coached up. You're acting like the other guys were made by Thomas, that's not the case. If that was the case why were the guys on the 2010 team not instantly made better by Thomas? Hell the defense actually got worse after Thomas was drafted from the year prior.

Tom Brady is a stud, him being drafted in the 6th round doesn't change that.
Richard Sherman, Kam Chancellor are studs. Them being drafted so low doesn't change that.
Seattle got partially lucky but also their front office did a great job evaluating talent and identifying the traits that they want to see out of their players.

And of course more teams are looking for a guy like Earl Thomas...he's the best safety in the game. That's like saying more teams are looking for a guy like Tom Brady, JJ Watt, Joe Thomas, Von Miller...etc. You can go across the board and it would ring true.

And once again man, I have nothing against Hooker outside of the fact that to me he's a riskier pick at #2 and I trust Ward more to help us at FS than I do Armstead or the other guys outside of Buckner on the DL.

I guess where we also differ is that you value FS more than DL, cover 3 or not I still think DL is more value than any other position on D. If we draft Hooker that's cool, I'd hope he stays healthy and develops into a stud while fixing his issues with run D. But I'd hate to see Thomas go to another team and dominate on the DL if Hooker didn't turn into a well rounded stud.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:

Originally posted by genus49:

There is a difference in pointing out concerns about a prospect and trashing him. If we're picking a guy at #2 his resume better be damn spotless.

Myles Garrett doesn't have a spotless resume, lack of production against better teams, perceived lack of motor. So should you not draft him?

The bottom line is that you draft based on projected output in the NFL and who you think fits your team and can help you the most.

Pass rusher >>>>>> safety...there's a reason there's been two safeties drafted top 5 in 25 yrs. he'd better flawless at FS and while a great prospect he's got issues.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:

Myles Garrett doesn't have a spotless resume, lack of production against better teams, perceived lack of motor. So should you not draft him?

The bottom line is that you draft based on projected output in the NFL and who you think fits your team and can help you the most.

There was obviously hyperbole in what I said but if you can't figure out what I meant then I don't know what to tell you.

When picking so high you need guys who have as many positives as possible at positions impact the game the most while having the least serious red flags or negatives to them.

Garrett has a much larger track record than Hooker or Thomas for that matter so the comparison doesn't fly. And while Garrett's strength is clearly pass rush he's not a major liability vs the run like Hooker is sometimes.

I get it but I was pointing out that Garrett will be drafted #1 and has flaws. Yes Hooker can be a liability in the run game, but if you think you can fix it his traits are draftable, even at the heady heights of #2.

NY, Pass rusher is more valuable than FS but not as much as you think with our new system taken into account. If you think you're getting Ed Reed 2.0 you draft him, I agree there are flaws and I think in Year 1 and maybe 2 there will be struggles. I genuinely think by Year 3 he'll be the best safety in the league.

Now if Thomas can come in and blow up gaps, dominating on run and passing downs from Day 1, that would be the way to go.

Originally posted by genus49:

I think we all agree that if he's the guy we hope he'll be the best ever.

Obviously with any guy we draft at #2 the front office/coaches think the good outweighs the bad and I'll be confident that we did our due diligence in checking on him.

Personal preferences aside I just want this team to be better and have long term success due to the guys we bring in. If that's Hooker, great. If that's Thomas, even better

Nice, agreed

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:

Originally posted by genus49:

I think we all agree that if he's the guy we hope he'll be the best ever.

Obviously with any guy we draft at #2 the front office/coaches think the good outweighs the bad and I'll be confident that we did our due diligence in checking on him.

Personal preferences aside I just want this team to be better and have long term success due to the guys we bring in. If that's Hooker, great. If that's Thomas, even better

Nice, agreed

Which would allow Jimmie to stay at CB so we don't gotta draft there or take one in the fourth/fifth+. Get your pass rusher with your next pick.

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:
Which would allow Jimmie to stay at CB so we don't gotta draft there or take one in the fourth/fifth+. Get your pass rusher with your next pick.

I think Ward is much better at FS. He does way better facing the play than with his back to the QB.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Which would allow Jimmie to stay at CB so we don't gotta draft there or take one in the fourth/fifth+. Get your pass rusher with your next pick.

I think Ward is much better at FS. He does way better facing the play than with his back to the QB.

I was just making the point of Hooker helps us more day one possibly. Cause then the secondary is all set with the pick ya know. But I understand where you're coming from which would then make Hooker irrelevant lol.