Andrew Thomas-OT-Georgia

The more I think about it the more I wouldn't mind if they picked an O lineman if he fell to them. They may even be able to get one if they trade back 3 or 4 spots and pick up an extra pick. One of the issues fans were complaining about all year was the lack of pass protection so if they have an opportunity to improve that as well as get an eventual replacement for Staley they may jump on it.

I know receiver is also a need, especially now that Sanders is gone but they can probably get a pretty good receiver later in the draft. Maybe not as good as the top 3 but still an improvement over what we have. Remember, 1st round receivers taken in recent drafts haven't done well. Out of the last 18 receivers taken in round one only Amari Cooper has been good. It might be the high scoring fast paced offenses that are making the receivers harder to evaluate but drafting a guy in the 1st is no guaranty that he will be great. I won't be unhappy if they draft Jeudy or Ruggs but I won't start screaming if they go O line either.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

The more I think about it the more I wouldn't mind if they picked an O lineman if he fell to them. They may even be able to get one if they trade back 3 or 4 spots and pick up an extra pick. One of the issues fans were complaining about all year was the lack of pass protection so if they have an opportunity to improve that as well as get an eventual replacement for Staley they may jump on it.

I know receiver is also a need, especially now that Sanders is gone but they can probably get a pretty good receiver later in the draft. Maybe not as good as the top 3 but still an improvement over what we have. Remember, 1st round receivers taken in recent drafts haven't done well. Out of the last 18 receivers taken in round one only Amari Cooper has been good. It might be the high scoring fast paced offenses that are making the receivers harder to evaluate but drafting a guy in the 1st is no guaranty that he will be great. I won't be unhappy if they draft Jeudy or Ruggs but I won't start screaming if they go O line either.

Especially if Kyle can get a 2nd TE, that too would eliminate the immediate need for a dominant XWR for 1K snaps. Still get one later, of course.

Just a thought...

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by FL9er:

I thought this thread was about Andrew Thomas? A player that may or may not drop to #13.

Daniel Jeremiah's latest top 50 puts Thomas at #17, the fourth highest OT on his list. Jeremiah's main issue with Thomas is that he is not a very agile player. Strong at the point of attack but to move to the second level in Kyle's system does not look like a strength.

I'd love to hear Phoenix's stance on this as well.

Originally posted by NCommand:

I do. Absolutely. Always have and our own history backs that up.

We're talking about a potential top 10 pick falling to 13. And what is the difference between a dominant IDT and ER? Is Aaron Donald (top 10 pick) that much less effective than Nick Bosa? Staley from a top G like Nelson?

We're talking about a top 10 talent.

You can't devalue any of the top T's if you think all 4 will go top 10 JUST because one might play G for us for a year or two in our scheme. Top talent is top talent. Period. He's going to help this line expoentionally no matter where he starts. Any of the four. And you may not realize just by how much as we've had nothing but subpar G's here since Mike Iupati, who was drafted at 17.

I don't see Becton either...scheme.

Why are any of them dropping if they're all top 10 talents and play one of the most important position in football lol? Like I said damn near every team ahead of us (and right after us) could use a OL and plug them in at OG IF you think that so easy to do.

Also how am I devaluing any of the top OTs? If we're talking about playing tackle, then let's talk about playing tackle NOT guard for the next couple yrs. How many convos have we had about this FO drafting guys then NOT playing them at the position that got them drafted as high as they were...now you're talking about doing just that with a top 13 pick

My pt with the edge example, is overall it's a more impactful position than DT. Just is. IF you can get an elite pass rushing DT like Donald then yeah his value sky rockets...facts are those guys don't grow on trees. It's a reason I'm not all about D Brown at 13. End of the day you're not facing elite pass rushers at DT on a weekly basis.

You talk abut Thomas as an elite talent, but have you seen him play guard? I'll answer that he's never played it...At this pt you just hoping he will be.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Why are any of them dropping if they're all top 10 talents and play one of the most important position in football lol? Like I said damn near every team ahead of us (and right after us) could use a OL and plug them in at OG IF you think that so easy to do.

Also how am I devaluing any of the top OTs? If we're talking about playing tackle, then let's talk about playing tackle NOT guard for the next couple yrs. How many convos have we had about this FO drafting guys then NOT playing them at the position that got them drafted as high as they were...now you're talking about doing just that with a top 13 pick

My pt with the edge example, is overall it's a more impactful position than DT. Just is. IF you can get an elite pass rushing DT like Donald then yeah his value sky rockets...facts are those guys don't grow on trees. It's a reason I'm not all about D Brown at 13. End of the day you're not facing elite pass rushers at DT on a weekly basis.

You talk abut Thomas as an elite talent, but have you seen him play guard? I'll answer that he's never played it...At this pt you just hoping he will be.

Why? Because you have 4 projected to go top 10 and all it takes is one move to push a 4th T past 10. When was the last time 4 highly rated T's went in the first 10 picks? It might happen but there's always a chance one falls a tad.

I definitely don't think moving a T to G is easy. In fact, you don't want to be doing that with many schemes like our old power scheme.

I'm just saying in Kyle's scheme with Benton, that's going to work beautifully with high traits. T's do move to G and G's to T all the time based on team needs and scheme. Bottom line, if you have top 10 talent for T, a move to G will be relatively easy IMHO (in this scheme, with Benton).

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

The more I think about it the more I wouldn't mind if they picked an O lineman if he fell to them. They may even be able to get one if they trade back 3 or 4 spots and pick up an extra pick. One of the issues fans were complaining about all year was the lack of pass protection so if they have an opportunity to improve that as well as get an eventual replacement for Staley they may jump on it.

I know receiver is also a need, especially now that Sanders is gone but they can probably get a pretty good receiver later in the draft. Maybe not as good as the top 3 but still an improvement over what we have. Remember, 1st round receivers taken in recent drafts haven't done well. Out of the last 18 receivers taken in round one only Amari Cooper has been good. It might be the high scoring fast paced offenses that are making the receivers harder to evaluate but drafting a guy in the 1st is no guaranty that he will be great. I won't be unhappy if they draft Jeudy or Ruggs but I won't start screaming if they go O line either.

Drafting a OL early is not guarantee that they will be great either. You got your good with Ramczyk taken at 32, McG taken at 9, Q taken at 6 etc and you got your bad with Bolles taken at 20, billy price taken at 21, Tytus Howard taken at 23, Bradbury at 18 (who some in here were screaming for) etc...

I could make a list a mile long of good OGs not taken in the 1st rd that turned into good players.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
The more I think about it the more I wouldn't mind if they picked an O lineman if he fell to them. They may even be able to get one if they trade back 3 or 4 spots and pick up an extra pick. One of the issues fans were complaining about all year was the lack of pass protection so if they have an opportunity to improve that as well as get an eventual replacement for Staley they may jump on it.

I know receiver is also a need, especially now that Sanders is gone but they can probably get a pretty good receiver later in the draft. Maybe not as good as the top 3 but still an improvement over what we have. Remember, 1st round receivers taken in recent drafts haven't done well. Out of the last 18 receivers taken in round one only Amari Cooper has been good. It might be the high scoring fast paced offenses that are making the receivers harder to evaluate but drafting a guy in the 1st is no guaranty that he will be great. I won't be unhappy if they draft Jeudy or Ruggs but I won't start screaming if they go O line either.

We aren't getting one of the top 4 OTs if we trade back 3 or 4 spots. My guess is the Bucs will jump up to pick the 4th OT ahead of us (or swap picks with us ideally) and there will be at least two of the top 3 WRs available when we pick.

If we're sitting at 13 and only one of the top OTs is remaining, the Bucs may call to try to swap picks with us. They'd have to give us their 3rd round pick which would be a horrible deal for them on the trade value chart, but they don't have any options if the top OT is gone. They can't pick one of the top WRs to be their 3rd WR after Evans and Godwin and they don't really need a DT with Suh, Vea, Gholston. Getting an elite tackle like Thomas to protect Tom Brady is way more value than whoever else they would pick at 13 and 76. That 3rd round pick is enough for them to move up in front of us though.

Something to consider...

Originally posted by NCommand:
Why? Because you have 4 projected to go top 10 and all it takes is one move to push a 4th T past 10. When was the last time 4 highly rated T's went in the first 10 picks? It might happen but there's always a chance one falls a tad.

I definitely don't think moving a T to G is easy. In fact, you don't want to be doing that with many schemes like our old power scheme.

I'm just saying in Kyle's scheme with Benton, that's going to work beautifully with high traits. T's do move to G and G's to T all the time based on team needs and scheme. Bottom line, if you have top 10 talent for T, a move to G will be relatively easy IMHO (in this scheme, with Benton).

I don't expect the draft to be static either. There's gonna be trades. I also don't think every OT is a scheme fit for SF. You can probably cross one right off our board.

I understand OTs move inside. BUT let's look at Kyle's OT prototype. McG. How'd he look when pushed inside? He's built to play T. If the end game is making whomever we draft a T then look at McG. That might NOT translate inside. At that point you're just projecting and I'm not projecting a prospect with the 13th overall pick. There's probably no rookie mini camps, not OTAs, no on field programs this off season. You got a rookie trying to learn a whole new offense and a whole new position.

As far as Thomas (which is what this thread is about) I do like him a lot. DJ nailed it, Matt Miller talked about it as well. He's not super agile. He's got big boy strength and length for days. His feet are all over the place in PP and he had a TE lined up beside him a lot in PP.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by FL9er:
I thought this thread was about Andrew Thomas? A player that may or may not drop to #13.

Daniel Jeremiah's latest top 50 puts Thomas at #17, the fourth highest OT on his list. Jeremiah's main issue with Thomas is that he is not a very agile player. Strong at the point of attack but to move to the second level in Kyle's system does not look like a strength.

I'd love to hear Phoenix's stance on this as well.

If he's there at #13, take him. There is so much game film of him and while his strength isn't his agility the way it is for someone like Wirfs, he's so much more coordinated and efficient with his movements that I don't see it being an issue. He's ferocious as a run blocker and is the best overall pass blocker amongst the top tackles, if teams are going to talk themselves out of it because other guys blew up at the Underwear Olympics, I'm all for it.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Something to consider...

An important factor to remember when talking about the Isaiah Simmons vs. taking an OT debate for the #Giants at No. 4 overall.

The highest pick Dave Gettleman has ever spent on an OL is 34th overall (Will Hernandez).

— Jordan Reid (@JReidNFL) April 1, 2020

his LT was Jordan Gross for a couple yrs (multiple pro-bowler) and he tended to pay for OL like Micheal Oher and Solder. I believe when he came into Carolina He also had Jeff Otah who was a top 10 pick from a couple yrs prior. Daryl Williams turned into a good LT for them while he was there as well.

Don't get in twisted he likes his lineman. Traded for Zeitler last yr as well.

Living in NY, trust me the fans want a OT....Solder is poop and is being paid like $20M this yr his gone after this yr and they don't have a starting RT either.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

I don't expect the draft to be static either. There's gonna be trades. I also don't think every OT is a scheme fit for SF. You can probably cross one right off our board.

I understand OTs move inside. BUT let's look at Kyle's OT prototype. McG. How'd he look when pushed inside? He's built to play T. If the end game is making whomever we draft a T then look at McG. That might NOT translate inside. At that point you're just projecting and I'm not projecting a prospect with the 13th overall pick. There's probably no rookie mini camps, not OTAs, no on field programs this off season. You got a rookie trying to learn a whole new offense and a whole new position.

As far as Thomas (which is what this thread is about) I do like him a lot. DJ nailed it, Matt Miller talked about it as well. He's not super agile. He's got big boy strength and length for days. His feet are all over the place in PP and he had a TE lined up beside him a lot in PP.

Totally. It's safe to say we agree on the 4th T who wouldn't be the greatest fit. LOL.

I just can't use a handful of unexpected snaps at RG in game 1 of his NFL career to make a definitive stance on McGlinchey as a G. Same with Brunskill, yet fans have no issues doing that now. Odd.

Unless he's massively oversized or a power T, T's are projected to G all the time at the NFL level because of their physical (size, short arms, lack of athleticism) or specific traits. It's all a projection esp. for OL which is why so many end up moving around before finding their best fit...or they're so talented, they move to help the team/unit.

If pass protection isn't as strong, wouldn't G be a better spot for him pinched in between a C and T? At least until he's more refined?

I am with you on position changes. We've seen that fail too many times as a 9er fan. And if it wasn't this scheme and if we didn't have Benton, I'd certainly be more worried about it, that's for sure.

Anyhow, we're getting close. It certainly looks like we're going WR and OL 13 and 31 or possibly, vice versa. Can't wait.

Watch...they go IDT and CB. Ha.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

his LT was Jordan Gross for a couple yrs (multiple pro-bowler) and he tended to pay for OL like Micheal Oher and Solder. I believe when he came into Carolina He also had Jeff Otah who was a top 10 pick from a couple yrs prior. Daryl Williams turned into a good LT for them while he was there as well.

Don't get in twisted he likes his lineman. Traded for Zeitler last yr as well.

Living in NY, trust me the fans want a OT....Solder is poop and is being paid like $20M this yr his gone after this yr and they don't have a starting RT either.

That's great insight! Tweet seems disingenuous with this info. I always thought he prioritized the OL too.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

If he's there at #13, take him. There is so much game film of him and while his strength isn't his agility the way it is for someone like Wirfs, he's so much more coordinated and efficient with his movements that I don't see it being an issue. He's ferocious as a run blocker and is the best overall pass blocker amongst the top tackles, if teams are going to talk themselves out of it because other guys blew up at the Underwear Olympics, I'm all for it.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Totally. It's safe to say we agree on the 4th T who wouldn't be the greatest fit. LOL.

I just can't use a handful of unexpected snaps at RG in game 1 of his NFL career to make a definitive stance on McGlinchey as a G. Same with Brunskill, yet fans have no issues doing that now. Odd.

Unless he's massively oversized or a power T, T's are projected to G all the time at the NFL level because of their physical (size, short arms, lack of athleticism) or specific traits. It's all a projection esp. for OL which is why so many end up moving around before finding their best fit...or they're so talented, they move to help the team/unit.

If pass protection isn't as strong, wouldn't G be a better spot for him pinched in between a C and T? At least until he's more refined?

I am with you on position changes. We've seen that fail too many times as a 9er fan. And if it wasn't this scheme and if we didn't have Benton, I'd certainly be more worried about it, that's for sure.

Anyhow, we're getting close. It certainly looks like we're going WR and OL 13 and 31 or possibly, vice versa. Can't wait.

Watch...they go IDT and CB. Ha.

you can't objectively think McG would make for a good guard lol. He needs to be out in space. He would get blown apart by Donald in a phone booth. I don't think Brunskill's best position is OG either. I think he has the makings of a starting tackle.

Let's not project top 15 picks to play totally different positions, please

How about we start looking at guards to play....guard If we're really feeling wild look at the second/third tier of OTs that have the skill set to play G/T. I want the IOL fixed, but I'm not willing to bet on "what if we move so and so" to a certain position with a top 13 pick.

FWIW they met with Josh Jones who's just below the top OTs. I think it's safe to say they will be drafting a OL at some pt. I don't see it happening at 13 though. just my two cents.