Solomon Thomas, DT

Originally posted by communist:
like the player, hate the pick.

Love this pick. I cannot people are upset we drafted DL three years in a row. You can never have too many defensive lineman. This is like when the Niners spent a bunch of picks on the offensive line, and we reaped the benefits of it for years (Staley at #27 in 2007, Davis at #11 in 2010, Iupati at #17 in 2010); someone also referenced the Cowboys funneling a bunch of resources into their oline too, and that also has worked out really well.

It might not be a "sexy" pick, but our front 7 is starting to look incredibly formidable. Buckner, Foster, Bowman, Thomas, etc... hard not to get excited. Hard to believe we got Thomas and picked up two thirds and a fourth. We absolutely fleeced the Bears. A couple days ago I wrote out this contrived scenario where the Bears traded up from #3 to #2, but I thought the chances of it actually happening in real life were remote.

Originally posted by valrod33:

Originally posted by communist:

like the player, hate the pick.

huh?

not that difficult to understand.

Originally posted by theduke85:
Love this pick. I cannot people are upset we drafted DL three years in a row. You can never have too many defensive lineman. This is like when the Niners spent a bunch of picks on the offensive line, and we reaped the benefits of it for years (Staley at #27 in 2007, Davis at #11 in 2010, Iupati at #17 in 2010); someone also referenced the Cowboys funneling a bunch of resources into their oline too, and that also has worked out really well.

It might not be a "sexy" pick, but our front 7 is starting to look incredibly formidable. Buckner, Foster, Bowman, Thomas, etc... hard not to get excited. Hard to believe we got Thomas and picked up two thirds and a fourth. We absolutely fleeced the Bears. A couple days ago I wrote out this contrived scenario where the Bears traded up from #3 to #2, but I thought the chances of it actually happening in real life were remote.

I'm with ya this was a great pick/trade for us....getting Foster late was a bonus. We still got 9 picks!

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by communist:

like the player, hate the pick.

I like Fournette as well, great player. yet, would have hated the Niners if picked him. need-based bpa to me is Jamal.

Originally posted by communist:
I like Fournette as well, great player. yet, would have hated the Niners if picked him. need-based bpa to me is Jamal.

A bit of an oxymoron there isn't it?

Originally posted by spraked:

Originally posted by communist:
I like Fournette as well, great player. yet, would have hated the Niners if picked him. need-based bpa to me is Jamal.

A bit of an oxymoron there isn't it?

I saw that too. It doesn't make any sense lol.

Originally posted by spraked:

Originally posted by communist:

I like Fournette as well, great player. yet, would have hated the Niners if picked him. need-based bpa to me is Jamal.

A bit of an oxymoron there isn't it?

no it isn't. a team that picks within top5 a year after it got its franchise qb, won't draft a qb again even if the guy is bpa ovr. either it trades out or picks the 2nd best player (assuming that any other position is a need).

Originally posted by theduke85:

Love this pick. I cannot people are upset we drafted DL three years in a row. You can never have too many defensive lineman. This is like when the Niners spent a bunch of picks on the offensive line, and we reaped the benefits of it for years (Staley at #27 in 2007, Davis at #11 in 2010, Iupati at #17 in 2010); someone also referenced the Cowboys funneling a bunch of resources into their oline too, and that also has worked out really well.

It might not be a "sexy" pick, but our front 7 is starting to look incredibly formidable. Buckner, Foster, Bowman, Thomas, etc... hard not to get excited. Hard to believe we got Thomas and picked up two thirds and a fourth. We absolutely fleeced the Bears. A couple days ago I wrote out this contrived scenario where the Bears traded up from #3 to #2, but I thought the chances of it actually happening in real life were remote.

It would be nice if the team valued QBs and WRs enough to spend early draft picks on them.

The trade was great and I like the player but it seems as if the same positions are being neglected as were neglected under Baalke.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by theduke85:

Love this pick. I cannot people are upset we drafted DL three years in a row. You can never have too many defensive lineman. This is like when the Niners spent a bunch of picks on the offensive line, and we reaped the benefits of it for years (Staley at #27 in 2007, Davis at #11 in 2010, Iupati at #17 in 2010); someone also referenced the Cowboys funneling a bunch of resources into their oline too, and that also has worked out really well.

It might not be a "sexy" pick, but our front 7 is starting to look incredibly formidable. Buckner, Foster, Bowman, Thomas, etc... hard not to get excited. Hard to believe we got Thomas and picked up two thirds and a fourth. We absolutely fleeced the Bears. A couple days ago I wrote out this contrived scenario where the Bears traded up from #3 to #2, but I thought the chances of it actually happening in real life were remote.

It would be nice if the team valued QBs and WRs enough to spend early draft picks on them.

The trade was great and I like the player but it seems as if the same positions are being neglected as were neglected under Baalke.

That's generally not the best way to rebuild. Usually you address that when you have build up the rest of the roster then you add skill positions

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by spraked:

Originally posted by communist:
I like Fournette as well, great player. yet, would have hated the Niners if picked him. need-based bpa to me is Jamal.

A bit of an oxymoron there isn't it?

no it isn't. a team that picks within top5 a year after it got its franchise qb, won't draft a qb again even if the guy is bpa ovr. either it trades out or picks the 2nd best player (assuming that any other position is a need).

2 things, !st just cause you explain your thinking does not change what the words oxymoron, need-based, or BPA mean. It is still an oxymoron.

2nd, I understand your stance and I can see the thinking, however, I disagree. If the colts had taken a QB of the Future the year before they draft luck would they have not still taken luck then traded one away for good capital (See NE).

I could understand that a team might set up their board to have players that are fairly even and rank the need higher, however, if there is a clear Best Player Available you take them.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by theduke85:
Love this pick. I cannot people are upset we drafted DL three years in a row. You can never have too many defensive lineman. This is like when the Niners spent a bunch of picks on the offensive line, and we reaped the benefits of it for years (Staley at #27 in 2007, Davis at #11 in 2010, Iupati at #17 in 2010); someone also referenced the Cowboys funneling a bunch of resources into their oline too, and that also has worked out really well.

It might not be a "sexy" pick, but our front 7 is starting to look incredibly formidable. Buckner, Foster, Bowman, Thomas, etc... hard not to get excited. Hard to believe we got Thomas and picked up two thirds and a fourth. We absolutely fleeced the Bears. A couple days ago I wrote out this contrived scenario where the Bears traded up from #3 to #2, but I thought the chances of it actually happening in real life were remote.

It would be nice if the team valued QBs and WRs enough to spend early draft picks on them.

The trade was great and I like the player but it seems as if the same positions are being neglected as were neglected under Baalke.

it was only round 1, we had a historically bad defense. we were able to get two monster playmakers. be happy

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by theduke85:
Love this pick. I cannot people are upset we drafted DL three years in a row. You can never have too many defensive lineman. This is like when the Niners spent a bunch of picks on the offensive line, and we reaped the benefits of it for years (Staley at #27 in 2007, Davis at #11 in 2010, Iupati at #17 in 2010); someone also referenced the Cowboys funneling a bunch of resources into their oline too, and that also has worked out really well.

It might not be a "sexy" pick, but our front 7 is starting to look incredibly formidable. Buckner, Foster, Bowman, Thomas, etc... hard not to get excited. Hard to believe we got Thomas and picked up two thirds and a fourth. We absolutely fleeced the Bears. A couple days ago I wrote out this contrived scenario where the Bears traded up from #3 to #2, but I thought the chances of it actually happening in real life were remote.

It would be nice if the team valued QBs and WRs enough to spend early draft picks on them.

The trade was great and I like the player but it seems as if the same positions are being neglected as were neglected under Baalke.

it was only round 1, we had a historically bad defense. we were able to get two monster playmakers. be happy

Fixing one thing at a time fellas.

I'm starting to like the pick the more I read. I wanted Foster at this pick before he went full tard. Now we get him and Thomas how can you not be happy.

Matt Barrows‏Verified account @mattbarrows 46s47 seconds agoMore

#49ers' Solomon Thomas says he's currently at 270 pounds and will probably play at 275. Seahawks DE Michael Bennett is listed at 274.