You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

49ers Select Solomon Thomas, DE, Stanford
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
757-NINER


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 1936
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

J-ALL-DAY wrote:
757-NINER wrote:
First I would like to thank Lynch for not picking a QB...

Now with that out of the way, GREAT trade back, AWESOME pick Applause

Thomas was my guy before Brock was released. Its clear Brock's departure didn't sway their board one bit and they took the guy they would have taken had Brock still been a Niner.

But acquiring extra picks was gold(pun intended) and we now have the ability to really get some gems in the third. I'm loving Lynch right now...


Weren't you one of the people arguing with me about just this? Saying boards should be changed when we lose guys like Brock? I know y2 was one of the people and thought you were one as well.

Anyways, I agree. Lynch played this perfectly to stock pile draft picks while getting the guy he wanted all along.


Yup that was me. And I still say a personnel change does factor into your decision making. I think that's only logical. Just pointing out in the end, they went with the guy they liked all along, which I'm fine with.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J-ALL-DAY


Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 45481
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sure it can, but just didn't think the loss of Brock should have changed their board or plans. Get the best player and go from there. This isn't a team expected to compete in the next few years.
_________________

El ramster on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 19458
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

J-ALL-DAY wrote:
Sure it can, but just didn't think the loss of Brock should have changed their board or plans. Get the best player and go from there. This isn't a team expected to compete in the next few years.


Yep. You and i are simpatico with that thinking
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 19458
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Apparently Thomas won the 2016 pff "award" for best collegiate run defender. Didn't know that. This guy is going to be good. Maybe not right away, but once he fully grows into his body, gets some more coaching...damn, just watch out.
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 19733
Location: El Dorado Hills
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Justvyesterday i decided he wasvthe guy that made the most sense for us. To get him plus a couple ofvextra thirds and a 4th is fantastic in my mind. Better move than any baalke made. Off to good a good start.

I do wonder if thedy evef considered trying to trade back again and pick up more?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Chrissooner49er


Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 5085
Location: Tulsa, OK
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

After this pick, Lynch just needs to retire. He can't do any better than trade down 1 spot, gain 2 3rds and a 4th and still get a guy we really wanted. Just cannot happen again. Too perfect. Just quit will your ahead, John Lynch.
Laughing

Seriously, this absolutely amazed me. What a coup! We fleeced Da Bears and got 'our guy'?! Unbelievable.
And Thomas was the 1st guy I was comfortable--even intrigued--with us drafting. Love the guy's motor and character. What's really exciting is he has so much room to develop/improve at his technique (too bad we don't have Tomsula!) and with his work ethic, you know he will get better.
_________________
fa·nat·ic (f-ntk) A person marked or motivated by an extreme, unreasoning enthusiasm, as for a cause.
Draftday1:Garrett/Thomas/Barnett trade:McCaffrey,Cunningham,Watt,Davis 2-Awuzie,Engram,Kupp,Mixon,Westbrook 3-Switzer,Godwin,Perine,JordanEvans,Anzalone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 13979
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forge wrote:
J-ALL-DAY wrote:
Sure it can, but just didn't think the loss of Brock should have changed their board or plans. Get the best player and go from there. This isn't a team expected to compete in the next few years.


Yep. You and i are simpatico with that thinking


See, for me, because I had Hooker and Adams in the same tier as Thomas, I moved Adams ahead of him (always thought Hooker was ahead, personally). Before Brock's departure, I didn't think there was an explicit need other than the need to upgrade. With Brock gone, I moved Adams up as well, because then he could fill a need (by virtue of moving Ward back to CB). I didn't have Lattimore in that tier, so he didn't jump Thomas. But because I don't expect there to be much of a difference between Adams and Thomas in terms of overall quality, I'd choose the guy who allowed me to get the best eleven players on the field. Adams suddenly did that more (in my view). It's all moot, because before or after I'd still have taken Hooker.

That said, I am not at all disappointed with Thomas. I still don't see him as a traditional LEO, but with Armstead taking snaps there, it's clear to me "traditional" is out the window anyway. And Thomas is a top 5 player in this draft.
_________________


Future Hall of Famer Frank Gore's Career Rushing List Tracker:

*Currently Ranked 8th All-Time
*Yards needed to pass #7 Eric Dickerson: 194
*Yards needed to pass #6 Jerome Bettis: 597
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 19458
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

y2lamanaki wrote:
Forge wrote:
J-ALL-DAY wrote:
Sure it can, but just didn't think the loss of Brock should have changed their board or plans. Get the best player and go from there. This isn't a team expected to compete in the next few years.


Yep. You and i are simpatico with that thinking


See, for me, because I had Hooker and Adams in the same tier as Thomas, I moved Adams ahead of him (always thought Hooker was ahead, personally). Before Brock's departure, I didn't think there was an explicit need other than the need to upgrade. With Brock gone, I moved Adams up as well, because then he could fill a need (by virtue of moving Ward back to CB). I didn't have Lattimore in that tier, so he didn't jump Thomas. But because I don't expect there to be much of a difference between Adams and Thomas in terms of overall quality, I'd choose the guy who allowed me to get the best eleven players on the field. Adams suddenly did that more (in my view). It's all moot, because before or after I'd still have taken Hooker.

That said, I am not at all disappointed with Thomas. I still don't see him as a traditional LEO, but with Armstead taking snaps there, it's clear to me "traditional" is out the window anyway. And Thomas is a top 5 player in this draft.


I had Adams as #2 overall, but similar to you, same "tier" as Thomas, so still acceptable BPA type to me since I get that others may have Thomas higher. I said it before, there weren't really many ways in which the team could screw up that selection to me. The upside with Thomas is huge, and he plays a more valuable position, so I can justify that pretty easily for them to have him higher. Just to be different, when we do "are you smarter than" picks, I'll probably grab Adams with our first pick.
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J-ALL-DAY


Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 45481
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is the thing y2, YOUR thinking isn't terrible since you had a bunch of guys in the same tier. But the team apparently had Thomas/Foster/Garrett in a tier of their own. I didn't want them to change their board or make a panic decision. Stay the course here. If Thomas was the guy, then he should still be the guy regardless of Brock being on the team or not. This team isn't going anywhere next year or probably even the following season so plenty of time to address the CB situation.

And luckily with the way the draft is going, there will be some good ones at our pick in the 3rd.
_________________

El ramster on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 13979
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

J-ALL-DAY wrote:
Here is the thing y2, YOUR thinking isn't terrible since you had a bunch of guys in the same tier. But the team apparently had Thomas/Foster/Garrett in a tier of their own. I didn't want them to change their board or make a panic decision. Stay the course here. If Thomas was the guy, then he should still be the guy regardless of Brock being on the team or not. This team isn't going anywhere next year or probably even the following season so plenty of time to address the CB situation.

And luckily with the way the draft is going, there will be some good ones at our pick in the 3rd.


I agree with this. I wouldn't take a player from a lower tier just because of position unless I had a team with one need (stacked roster, basically) or that player was a QB.
_________________


Future Hall of Famer Frank Gore's Career Rushing List Tracker:

*Currently Ranked 8th All-Time
*Yards needed to pass #7 Eric Dickerson: 194
*Yards needed to pass #6 Jerome Bettis: 597
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
757-NINER


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 1936
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

delete me
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NINERFAN_4_LIFE


Joined: 02 Jan 2007
Posts: 12943
Location: THE GOLD MINE
PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2017 4:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The more I look at this guy, the more I see Justin Smith. They have similar builds. Justin was 6'4 285 and Thomas is 6'3 275. Both are super lean with fire hoses for arms. Both have motors that never stop, both were extremely stout at the point of attack. Natural hand fighters. Ive seen both fight off multiple blockers while still getting push into the backfield. Tough guys to move off of their spot. Hard not to feel really good about this pick.

Interesting to think about how exactly our DL is going to shape out. AA and Buckner are so similar that they dont necessarily compliment eachother very well, but thomas has such a different build that it could enhance everyone's abilities if utilized properly.

Justin played DE in a 4-3 but really good off as a 5tech in a 3 man front with us. Thomas doesnt seem to have an exact fit in the 4-3 Under front. Not quite big enough for NT but not quite an edge player (from what I have seen). Buckner is our UT imo which is traditionally the DT who is supposed to be the slasher by shooting gaps and getting up the field to blow up plays in the backfield (think warren Sapp's roll in TB).

I know people keep putting him in the LEO roll but I would imagine he will be moved around a lot depending on who else is playing on the DL on that particular play and in that particular situation.

because he doesnt necessarily play one particular position, he can play any position theoretically. So hes a great guy to have in your rotations because he can be paired with literally anyone else and do what you require of him.

Thomas and Foster immediately shore up our historically bad run defense. It is so nice to draft two players who are ready to roll from day 1. very excited.
_________________
FOREVER FAITHFUL
----------------------------
FOREVER HATEFUL
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 13979
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2017 9:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NINERFAN_4_LIFE wrote:
The more I look at this guy, the more I see Justin Smith. They have similar builds. Justin was 6'4 285 and Thomas is 6'3 275. Both are super lean with fire hoses for arms. Both have motors that never stop, both were extremely stout at the point of attack. Natural hand fighters. Ive seen both fight off multiple blockers while still getting push into the backfield. Tough guys to move off of their spot. Hard not to feel really good about this pick.

Interesting to think about how exactly our DL is going to shape out. AA and Buckner are so similar that they dont necessarily compliment eachother very well, but thomas has such a different build that it could enhance everyone's abilities if utilized properly.

Justin played DE in a 4-3 but really good off as a 5tech in a 3 man front with us. Thomas doesnt seem to have an exact fit in the 4-3 Under front. Not quite big enough for NT but not quite an edge player (from what I have seen). Buckner is our UT imo which is traditionally the DT who is supposed to be the slasher by shooting gaps and getting up the field to blow up plays in the backfield (think warren Sapp's roll in TB).

I know people keep putting him in the LEO roll but I would imagine he will be moved around a lot depending on who else is playing on the DL on that particular play and in that particular situation.

because he doesnt necessarily play one particular position, he can play any position theoretically. So hes a great guy to have in your rotations because he can be paired with literally anyone else and do what you require of him.

Thomas and Foster immediately shore up our historically bad run defense. It is so nice to draft two players who are ready to roll from day 1. very excited.


Thomas is actually an ideal RDE in the 4-3 Under. However, with Armstead lining up at LEO, and LBs also playing out of position, it seems clear to me we're not going to be running a traditional version of that defense. Which to me is better, because it makes it more difficult to gameplan against. The DL might just be huge in the base (Armstead, Buckner, Mitchell, Thomas), and more "regular" in the nickel (Lynch/Brooks, Buckner, Armstead, Thomas).

It's crazy - I don't know who you double team on our line.
_________________


Future Hall of Famer Frank Gore's Career Rushing List Tracker:

*Currently Ranked 8th All-Time
*Yards needed to pass #7 Eric Dickerson: 194
*Yards needed to pass #6 Jerome Bettis: 597
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 17055
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2017 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

y2lamanaki wrote:
NINERFAN_4_LIFE wrote:
The more I look at this guy, the more I see Justin Smith. They have similar builds. Justin was 6'4 285 and Thomas is 6'3 275. Both are super lean with fire hoses for arms. Both have motors that never stop, both were extremely stout at the point of attack. Natural hand fighters. Ive seen both fight off multiple blockers while still getting push into the backfield. Tough guys to move off of their spot. Hard not to feel really good about this pick.

Interesting to think about how exactly our DL is going to shape out. AA and Buckner are so similar that they dont necessarily compliment eachother very well, but thomas has such a different build that it could enhance everyone's abilities if utilized properly.

Justin played DE in a 4-3 but really good off as a 5tech in a 3 man front with us. Thomas doesnt seem to have an exact fit in the 4-3 Under front. Not quite big enough for NT but not quite an edge player (from what I have seen). Buckner is our UT imo which is traditionally the DT who is supposed to be the slasher by shooting gaps and getting up the field to blow up plays in the backfield (think warren Sapp's roll in TB).

I know people keep putting him in the LEO roll but I would imagine he will be moved around a lot depending on who else is playing on the DL on that particular play and in that particular situation.

because he doesnt necessarily play one particular position, he can play any position theoretically. So hes a great guy to have in your rotations because he can be paired with literally anyone else and do what you require of him.

Thomas and Foster immediately shore up our historically bad run defense. It is so nice to draft two players who are ready to roll from day 1. very excited.


Thomas is actually an ideal RDE in the 4-3 Under. However, with Armstead lining up at LEO, and LBs also playing out of position, it seems clear to me we're not going to be running a traditional version of that defense. Which to me is better, because it makes it more difficult to gameplan against. The DL might just be huge in the base (Armstead, Buckner, Mitchell, Thomas), and more "regular" in the nickel (Lynch/Brooks, Buckner, Armstead, Thomas).

It's crazy - I don't know who you double team on our line.



That's the most reassuring thought. We don't have the ideal personnel, but seriously, our DL can be a match-up nightmare. All three of our first rounders have the potential to require double-teams. It's a number's game. We could even play a three man front with those three guys, and one of them could probably manage to still apply pressure.
_________________


RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking

1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group