Malik Hooker S Ohio State

I don't want no stink'n safety.

Originally posted by zugschef:

As if Thomas was the most important player on the Seattle defense... he is not. He is not even the most important safety on that team (according to the players on that defense).

Drafting a safety at number 2 as a team with as little talent as the Niners is just insane, especially if you've already got 2 first and one second round safety on the team. Safety is easily one of the two positions where the Niners have the most talent. And that's where you waste your pick?

Santa Clara Brownies!

Single High FS with elite range is one of, if not as important as (Elephant) in this scheme.

Hooker being picked assumes Garrett is off the board.

Kyle and Lynch don't care about previous draft picks and where they were used. By this logic, Adams, Hooker, Thomas, and Fournette would all be off the board.

If the coaching staff deems Ward capable of manning this role, then Hooker's need drops, and his value at two drops.

I haven't seen anything from Ward that leads me to believe he can do this.

Originally posted by mayo49:

I don't want no stink'n safety.

See post above

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by tjd808185:

In regards to Ward the majority of scouting reports seem to prefer his ability to cover out of the slots. He was safety in college but as pointed out he mostly played in the box, slot coverage. I think he's worth a shot at free safety but I wouldn't pass on a great fs prospect because of him. He's a perfectly good slot corner and you play 5 deep on secondary 70% of the time. This isn't sending AA to the bench.

I haven't read scout reports saying he was a better fit for the slot, more that he has the ability to do it. He played SS more than FS in college due to his tackling ability. He lacks the size to do that in the NFL.

This is what mayock said...

"He's a true free safety. The concern is frame (5-foot-11, 193 pounds) and durability is an issue. He can play strong safety, but I worry about his frame over a 16-game season. This is a kid who's a natural center fielder, but he'll move up to make a play (against the run)." -- Mike Mayock

Yeah, I read his scouting report. And was hoping to find evidence for it l, but:

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

I watched some Jimmie Ward from college. First I'll say this, I hope the guy proves he can be a great single high FS. I like him, he's a good player for us. Hopefully the staff can see enough to get an answer to that in the offseason workouts before the draft, because if he can man the single high FS, it opens up even more in the draft. Hooker might still be the pick, but his need would drop, and make his value at 2 drop.

That being said, I simply didn't see enough to make me think he can. First thing that caught my eye was that he was listed as a SS. Wtf? This must be a typo. He's awfully small for a SS. But whatever, not important. So I watched some stuff, and I saw that he played these two spots the vast majority of the time: Slot Corner, Box Safety. He really did play like a SS in what I saw.

He was an animal. Close-ish to the line of scrimmage, and reallly really good as a corner (slot and outside). My hunch is that most of his picks are from his Slot/ Box Safety zone role. He did play off the screen a couple times, where I think it's two deep, or something, hard to tell, but didn't see.

Anyone able to find better stuff?

Here's two examples:

His injury/durability is a legit concern, but his "lack of experience" is so over analyzed and way overblown. It's not like we're the patriots where a bad play from a roookie in a championship game can cost us a super bowl appearance. Lol he's going to be starting on a not so good team. He'll be learning quick.

Oh that and I'm getting my hopes up we have much better coaching now!

Originally posted by NYniner85:

So? Go look at the top S in the league and when they were drafted...a ton of 2nd and 3rd rd picks.

CBS had his as the 45th best prospect...

45. Jimmie Ward, SS, Northern Illinois (5-11, 191, Sr.): The top senior safety on the board, Ward is a versatile defensive back with cornerback movement skills and the physical mentality of a safety. He takes aggressive, confident angles in zone, but also shows the feet and athleticism to play tight in man coverage.

He moved up the boards because of versatility.

What mayock said..."He's a true free safety. The concern is frame (5-foot-11, 193 pounds) and durability is an issue. He can play strong safety, but I worry about his frame over a 16-game season. This is a kid who's a natural center fielder, but he'll move up to make a play (against the run)." -- Mike Mayock

Let him play FS and get pass breakups and INTs, he has the body and athletic ability to do it.

You're missing the point. I never claimed a safety needs to be taken in the first round to be successful. You made the claim that we shouldn't discount Ward at safety, in part because he was a top safety prospect. You then proceed to post information that would seemingly support your argument, while purposely ignoring information, from the same exact website, that counters your argument. I was merely pointing that out.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Originally posted by zugschef:

As if Thomas was the most important player on the Seattle defense... he is not. He is not even the most important safety on that team (according to the players on that defense).

Drafting a safety at number 2 as a team with as little talent as the Niners is just insane, especially if you've already got 2 first and one second round safety on the team. Safety is easily one of the two positions where the Niners have the most talent. And that's where you waste your pick?

Santa Clara Brownies!

Single High FS with elite range is one of, if not as important as (Elephant) in this scheme.

Hooker being picked assumes Garrett is off the board.

Kyle and Lynch don't care about previous draft picks and where they were used. By this logic, Adams, Hooker, Thomas, and Fournette would all be off the board.

If the coaching staff deems Ward capable of manning this role, then Hooker's need drops, and his value at two drops.

I haven't seen anything from Ward that leads me to believe he can do this.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.uwdawgpound.com/platform/amp/2013/9/13/4727200/the-4-3-under-defining-the-defense

Under Tackle

"This is the defense's namesake. He lines up at the 3-tech on the weak-side. The Under Tackle (UT) is an undersized DT who gets by on speed, quickness and technique. Sheer girth is not very important for this position, atypical for an interior line position. A lot of UTs are former DE's who have shifted inside. Now, not all UT's are the small, quick type. It depends on what the defensive coordinator wants for the situation and position.

If the defense is focused on stopping the run, oftentimes the UT will be a larger defender. He could be similar to a 3-4 DE. There is versatility in how this position could be used. The first star UT was Hall of Famer Warren Sapp. Sapp is an anomaly, a player with great size and strength in addition to quickness.

Typically, a DC wants his best interior pass rusher at the UT. Because he will be in a lot of one-on-one situations against a guard, the UT should be able to knife his way into the backfield and fluster the QB in addition to penetrating on run plays.


One of the main ideas of the 4-3 Under is to get defenders in one-on-one situations. Take a look again at the 4-3 Under on the chalkboard. How does a team (from 21 personnel, or even 12) double team anyone other than the NT? While the defense is predicated on getting one-on-one matchups, it is specifically designed to get the UT and the WDE into one-on-one situations.

When running a 4-3 Under, it is very, very, very important that the 3-tech UT is able to beat solo blocks consistently. More than consistently, frequently. Because the defense is so predicated on getting him those looks, it becomes almost necessary that he is able to dominate single blocks.

In case you haven't noticed: the 3-tech under tackle is one of if not the number one most important player on this entire defense. His ability to rush the passer from the interior in addition to beating his blocker in hopes to stopping runs in the backfield is what the defense if predicated on."

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:

You're missing the point. I never claimed a safety needs to be taken in the first round to be successful. You made the claim that we shouldn't discount Ward at safety, in part because he was a top safety prospect. You then proceed to post information that would seemingly support your argument, while purposely ignoring information, from the same exact website, that counters your argument. I was merely pointing that out.

No he's was one of the top prospects at FS in that draft go look back and you'll see...just because he had a 2nd rd grade doesn't mean he wasn't a top end prospect in that draft at all. Haha Clinton-Dix was the only higher graded FS.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

https://www.google.com/amp/www.uwdawgpound.com/platform/amp/2013/9/13/4727200/the-4-3-under-defining-the-defense

Under Tackle

"This is the defense's namesake. He lines up at the 3-tech on the weak-side. The Under Tackle (UT) is an undersized DT who gets by on speed, quickness and technique. Sheer girth is not very important for this position, atypical for an interior line position. A lot of UTs are former DE's who have shifted inside. Now, not all UT's are the small, quick type. It depends on what the defensive coordinator wants for the situation and position.

If the defense is focused on stopping the run, oftentimes the UT will be a larger defender. He could be similar to a 3-4 DE. There is versatility in how this position could be used. The first star UT was Hall of Famer Warren Sapp. Sapp is an anomaly, a player with great size and strength in addition to quickness.

Typically, a DC wants his best interior pass rusher at the UT. Because he will be in a lot of one-on-one situations against a guard, the UT should be able to knife his way into the backfield and fluster the QB in addition to penetrating on run plays.


One of the main ideas of the 4-3 Under is to get defenders in one-on-one situations. Take a look again at the 4-3 Under on the chalkboard. How does a team (from 21 personnel, or even 12) double team anyone other than the NT? While the defense is predicated on getting one-on-one matchups, it is specifically designed to get the UT and the WDE into one-on-one situations.

When running a 4-3 Under, it is very, very, very important that the 3-tech UT is able to beat solo blocks consistently. More than consistently, frequently. Because the defense is so predicated on getting him those looks, it becomes almost necessary that he is able to dominate single blocks.

In case you haven't noticed: the 3-tech under tackle is one of if not the number one most important player on this entire defense. His ability to rush the passer from the interior in addition to beating his blocker in hopes to stopping runs in the backfield is what the defense if predicated on."

This has nothing to do with what I posted?

Can you name (without looking) who Seattles undertackle is? And his weight?

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:

You're missing the point. I never claimed a safety needs to be taken in the first round to be successful. You made the claim that we shouldn't discount Ward at safety, in part because he was a top safety prospect. You then proceed to post information that would seemingly support your argument, while purposely ignoring information, from the same exact website, that counters your argument. I was merely pointing that out.

No he's was one of the top prospects at FS in that draft go look back and you'll see...just because he had a 2nd rd grade doesn't mean he wasn't a top end prospect in that draft at all. Haha Clinton-Dix was the only higher graded FS.

And yet, I can find no evidence of him actually playing FS all that often, nor that he'd excel at Single High.

Iirc, Calvin Pryor and HaHa were the only two highly touted safeties coming out that year.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

This has nothing to do with what I posted?

Can you name (without looking) who Seattles undertackle is? And his weight?

It kinda does when your talking about importance of positions in this scheme

Oh and guess what I don't care what Seattle does or has on their team. Last I saw we aren't them and Carroll isn't our DC, but how about you go look at when Carroll was our DC we drafted stubby and young. Why can't Thomas be out Bryant young? He was 275 coming out of college.

FYI Bennett plays all over that line including 3-tech

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

And yet, I can find no evidence of him actually playing FS all that often, nor that he'd excel at Single High.

He played both safety spots...here's what mayock said about him

He's a true free safety. The concern is frame (5-foot-11, 193 pounds) and durability is an issue. He can play strong safety, but I worry about his frame over a 16-game season. This is a kid who's a natural center fielder, but he'll move up to make a play (against the run)." -- Mike Mayock

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:

Iirc, Calvin Pryor and HaHa were the only two highly touted safeties coming out that year.

What do you mean highly touted? So a 2nd rd prospect doesn't mean they were highly touted...when I look at drafts I look at top 5 at each position as far as them being top end prospects at their position. Also Pryor was a SS

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
And yet, I can find no evidence of him actually playing FS all that often, nor that he'd excel at Single High.

He played both safety spots...here's what mayock said about him

He's a true free safety. The concern is frame (5-foot-11, 193 pounds) and durability is an issue. He can play strong safety, but I worry about his frame over a 16-game season. This is a kid who's a natural center fielder, but he'll move up to make a play (against the run)." -- Mike Mayock

Yeah, Lobo's second highlight video shows him making play after play as a FS and he's certainly not afraid to crush a WR/TE or support in the running game or even blitz. He looks pretty natural there. If we go Hooker, you can keep Ward at RCB with Robinson and Tartt at SS in the box blasting fools. That said, Lynch already SAID they view Ward as a FS and I do as well. So Hooker may not be the pick unless they feel he'd be a monster upgrade over Ward. Either way, a first rounder is going to the bench in rotation (nickle/dime) in either Armstead or Ward.

The 3T should be the second most premier pass rushing position in this defense. It can go way down the line in terms of impact players (see Seattle) only IF you have 3 or 4 dynamic pass rushers at LDE, E and SAM. We don't have one edge rusher so Thomas' role would be just as important as Hooker. It's a coin flip here for me.