2008 NFL Draft: Scout's Inc. take on 49ers selections
I have to be honest. While I've read about both Kentwan Balmer and Chilo Rachal, I have plenty to learn about them before safely being able to see what they bring to the table for the 49ers. Later this week the folks from Conquest Chronicles, our USC blog, will have insight on Chilo Rachal. Additionally, I hope to get some more info on Kentwan Balmer from the folks at Carolina March, our UNC blog. In the meantime, Scout's Inc has been throwing up their thoughts on first and second round choices.
What he brings: There are concerns that Balmer is a one-year wonder, and he's a developmental prospect who needs to learn to play with better leverage. Still, he has good size and the frame to get even bigger. He's also athletic for his size, so if he bulks up and learns to play with better leverage, he should develop into an excellent nose tackle.
How he fits: We think this a great pick based on the 49ers' inability to stop the run. Balmer should strengthen the interior of the defense as a nose tackle and will be an upgrade over Aubrayo Franklin. Balmer has the quickest and most explosive hands in the draft. The key for him will be his ability to learn the proper technique while maintaining his pad level and learning to play in a 3-4 system. He can contribute immediately as a first- and second-down player, but doesn't have the ability to help as a pass-rusher.
What he brings: The biggest knock on Rachal is his lack of athletic ability and has problems redirecting in pass protection. He struggles, at times, to reach blockers in the second level and athletically he has some limitations. However, he's quick off the ball, jars defenders with a strong punch and gets in position quickly. He also does a good job holding his ground against bull-rushers.
How he fits: It's obvious the 49ers feel they need to upgrade at guard with the loss of Larry Allen in the offseason. Rachal is a mauler who needs to be in a confined area due to his athletic limitations. However, he has the size and initial quickness to wall off and position while creating inside lanes. He should be able to come in and compete with David Baas at right guard.
Whether Balmer is lined up at nose tackle or as a defensive end, he seems like a prototypical big-bodied guy who will take up offensive lineman, freeing up space for the linebackers to make plays. If he was drafted to be a pass-rusher we may have some issues early on, but if he's taken because he's just one damn big dude, he could fit in quickly. Of course working alongside a guy like Justin Smith has to be a positive for a young guy like Balmer.
As for Rachal, Conquest Chronicles is high on the guy and doesn't think him leaving early will be the worst thing in the world for him. For you Warriors fans out there, Kelenna Azebuike left Kentucky after his junior year because of family money issues. After most of a season in the NBDL, he latched on with the Warriors and has been a big contributor. It sounds like Rachal is further along than that and can make a contribution immediately. Combined the retirement of Larry Allen with the Dave Baas injury and he'll certainly get a shot right off the bat.
0 recs |
11
comments
| Add your comment
Read Related
Comments
RE: Balmer
I don’t like that they like the pick because it will shore up our run defense. Reason being: our run defense was pretty darn good last year! What we need Balmer to do is help open up the pass rush, dammit! I don’t blame people for looking at cumulative stats and going “oh, they suck!” but our run defense was REALLY not the problem. Balmer is actually a good pick if he picks up at nosetackle and opens things up for Banta-Cain and Lawson to whoop some QB ass. He’s not a good pick if we’re bringing him in to stop the stupid run. That addresses a non-need.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on
Apr 26, 2008 6:50 PM PDT
reply
0 recs
Chilo Rachal
At the risk of pre-empting whatever Paragon SC might be working up, Rachal’s a good kid and certainly seems to have the potential to do well in the pros. He’s one of those guys you don’t hear much about for all the right reasons – stays on the straight and narrow, plays hard, and so on. For all the comments about his ability against the pass rush, there are few to no instances of someone having sacked Booty or Sanchez because they got past Rachal – and he’s a really good run blocker. The main known risk is his knees, frankly. He’s spent some time out for injuries (senior year of high school and first year at SC), though that has dropped off – which makes me wonder if he just needed better care and rehab.
Anyway, I hope for his sake he works out – by all accounts he really wanted to stay for his last year at SC, but his mother is profoundly ill and his father is borderline health-wise for remaining in his construction job , so Rachal came out early basically to make sure they get medical treatment. I’m pretty cynical about the gap between the student athlete rhetoric and reality in college football, but Rachal’s the kind of player I like to see for SC – a good kid who makes the most of his opportunities with hard work. Hopefully next year the folks here who were a little worried about taking him this high in the draft will feel a lot better about him as well.
by DC Trojan on
Apr 26, 2008 7:01 PM PDT
reply
0 recs
howtheyscore
i’m a little suprised. You always seems to know your facts, but you are very wrong here. If you think the niners had a good run defense, look at the players, stats, or games. Other than P-willie, our front seven was young, franklin, douglas, bani-cain, smith, and that rookie(not pwillie, someone else, plays ROLB blanking on name). So its pretty bad. Then factor in 22nd in yards per game. And if you get a chance, look at the st.louis part II, balitmore, pittsburgh, atlanta, new york, and new orleans games. we got killed. And then factor in the fact that seatle, arizona, and cincinatti don’t even throw the ball, it means that we are in trouble. Balmor can fix that at the nose. But a big issue now has occured. The niners need to watch balmor carefully. If, and a big if, we think he could be a dominate defensive player, then we need to either have him pack on 20 punds or so and become a major force, or change to a 4-3, with smith, balmor, franklin/sagatoga, and lawson in the front 4 and thomas, willis, and banti-cain/ that rookie/ someone else. So it is a pretty good pick. As for the second pick, a maor sleeper. He’s got a huge upside. we will just have to see.
by montasmob69 on
Apr 26, 2008 11:08 PM PDT
reply
0 recs
On the contrary
The problems with the “run defense” last season tended to come from different places. The defense being on the field a ridiculous amount of time being probably the most significant. The inability to generate a pass rush forced the team to dedicate more bodies to coverage at the expense of stopping the run. Cumulative yards aren’t very useful because a defense that is on the field longer is going to 1) give up more total yards regardless, and 2) tire, thus giving up more yards late in games. The other thing is that being behind so often, teams had the luxury of just running at us later in games. A lot of yards were given up when the games were already well out of hand.
For some reason I can’t find that stats that I’m looking for. I thought they were on Football Outsiders, but I don’t see where the “just the stats” section keeps it. I remember that, pretty frequently last season, we referenced some stats that were fairly encouraging about the run defense. One of them specifically was “yards allowed per rushing attempt,” where we were something like in the top ten in the NFL. FO’s team DVOA and DPAR don’t reflect particularly well on the Niners run defense, I’ll say that. If what I’m saying is out of line, I think that’s the first place to start looking, statistically speaking, to demonstrate it. I’ll try doing a more throrough search in the coming days for the specific stats I’m actually looking for, but I don’t have the time right now.
I could be wrong. I remember being impressed watching the run defense, though. There were a few disaster games, yeah. There were also a few remarkable games (Minnesota, anybody?). I’ll look for more later. I just think there was more to our run defense than a lot of the more easily accessible stats showed.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on
Apr 26, 2008 11:59 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Yards per attempt rushing
I think the Niners defense was pretty respectable in that regard.
by methodrampage on
Apr 27, 2008 8:21 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Balmer starts next year
I know this is going to sound crazy, but I was a little shocked when the 9ers took Willis last year. Obviously it was a good move, but I thought there were more pressing needs at other positions. At the time, inside linebacker was a relatively strong position. Derek Smith, Brandon Moore, and Ulbrich were far from a dream team, but they were NFL-caliber players. Other positions had greater need, namely Nose Tackle and Free Safety. The team passed on some highly touted prospects at both of those positions when they took Willis. But it turned out that Willis was the best player on the board and he was the right pick.
The same happened this year. It seemed to me that a guy like Balmer is best fit to play end in the 9ers 3-4 and end is the one position where the 9ers just signed two big contracts – Justin Smith and “Sagatoga” (by the way, montasmob69’s post was hilarious). Maybe Balmer ends up at DT, or maybe Balmer pushes Sopoanga to DT, but whatever happens there’s a reasonably good player getting pushed off the field. This is the same thing that happened last year. In the preseason, Willis pushed Smith out of the lineup, then Smith got back in the lineup but Moore was riding pine. But that was the right thing to do then and I have confidence that this is the right thing to do now.
All this leads me to a conclusion about the McNolan draft strategy. I think most would agree that the biggest hole in the 49ers defense is at ROLB. But they didn’t draft to address that weakness. They drafted the best player available. Hopefully, it works as well this time as it did last time.
by Nineraguan on
Apr 27, 2008 12:36 AM PDT
reply
0 recs
I hope
youre right. I was so set for them to draft an OT, OLB, ILB, or even WR that I didnt watch or read anything about Balmer. All I know is that most mocks had him going much higher. Looks like all the Groves talk was a McNolan smokescreen. With Nix still on the board would the Niners consider another big bodied mauler on the O-Line in round 3? Nix, Bruce Davis, Dennis Dixon, and the safety from Army are the guys I’d like see in rounds 3,4,6 and 7. Any other names jump out at anyone?
by sam23 on
Apr 27, 2008 1:08 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
i guess
dan connor and mario manningham are a couple big name guys still available that can fill holes too.
by sam23 on
Apr 27, 2008 1:26 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
who's scouting report is that?
“(the 49ers) inability to stop the run?” What?
Weren’t we near tops in the league in defensive YPC last year? I thought we were great against the run…it’s just that teams were leading so often that the sheer amount of carries led to deceptive rushing numbers against us.
What we really sucked at, and what we really needed, was pass rush. In games that teams actually stuck with the pass against us, despite the lead, we were blown out. Am I the only one that remembers Drew Brees having ludicrous amounts of time to rip apart our secondary?
by shlecko on
Apr 27, 2008 7:26 AM PDT
reply
0 recs
The niners run defense
it was pretty bad. if it was good than how could warrick dunn run for over 100 yards, as well as 6 other teams. I know it is not our main issue, but it is important none the less. As for the pass rush, he will need to gain 10-20 pounds in order to be consistantly double-teams and free up lawson.
by montasmob69 on
Apr 27, 2008 9:24 AM PDT
reply
0 recs
did you watch the games?
running for 100 yards against a team isn’t always because they have a bad run defense. as has been repeated by 3-4 people in this thread, the niners were pretty good against the run when you consider the yards given up per carry. It was rare for someone to break off a big (20+) yard run against them. like has been said again and again, they gave up a lot of yards because the offense sucked and they were on the field too much. Also, the lack of pass rush meant that they had to drop more guys into coverage so it was easier for teams to get 4-6 yard gains on the ground.
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners classic Unis
by wjackalope on
Apr 27, 2008 9:43 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs











