jonathan opelt

@Bcfromjc @DonAtkinsonNFL I believe he will see less 8 man in the box runs this year. 6 or 7 he easily break 4.5. 8 in the box he falls short. My belief is the wr speed gives him more room to run. 8nmen in the box and brock ends up throwing for a lot of yards. I will take either.

@pelters @DonAtkinsonNFL I think it is more likely he is below 4.2 than 4.5 or above. We will see who is right. I am rooting for you.

Most of the attention has been on the 49ers D-line this offseason. Not surprising given the very depleted state they were in throughout 2025. But… Lynch and Shanahan have quietly improved the strength and depth of their O-line this offseason, as well, by adding three solid veterans (Jones, Lowe, and Toth) and two promising rookies (Willis and Cruz), PLUS securing Trent Williams on a new extension. The 49ers have dramatically improved the D-line, and built a much-improved O-line at the same time. That’s not a minor achievement, but gets no play in the Internet or even mainstream media because it doesn’t fit with the “roster mismanagement” narrative that is trending with the uninformed.

@Bcfromjc @DonAtkinsonNFL 50/50

@pelters @DonAtkinsonNFL In your mind, what are the odds that McCaffrey averages over 4.5 yards per carry? Not great but okay.

@DonAtkinsonNFL @Bcfromjc The top 4 receivers are almost .2 seconds faster in the 40 than last year. If the line protects for a fraction of a second longer this offense will be explosive. Shanahan will let the defenses decide how we beat them this year. Lots of zone coming at us this year. Brock eats zone

The solidifying at left guard helps. So does getting Kittle back soon. But the greatest impact of all is going to be the improved WR room. Deep threat and separation ability of receivers is going to keep teams from cheating up and crowding the box, which is the main reason the 49ers couldn’t run well last season. The poor run game wasn’t ever a CMC problem. The soft spot at left guard (which forced Williams to concentrate on two rushers at once) and opposing defenses bringing safeties up because there was no genuine deep threat by SF, were the principal reasons why CMC couldn’t break through. Evans and Stribling taking the top off the defense is what fixes a lot of run game issues.

@MiyagiFang33 @Coach_Yac I think the niners will use him the way the rams use nacua,motion him in close to the tackle and have him block on runs or get up the field quick against a mismatch.Put a lb on him and he's gone,bring up a safety and someone else is running free.We no longer lack separation at wr

@Coach_Yac He Is Gonna Be In That Jauan Jennings Type of Role.

Chris Simms on the 49ers drafting De'Zhaun Stribling: “The NFL really valued this guy way higher than the public. He was going in the next 10 picks. I think in Kyle Shanahan and just talking to him a little over the weekend, I think they wanted to trade down from #33, but I think then they read the board and were like 'uh oh, he might not be here if we trade too far down. We gotta be careful. Let’s just take him now'.”

@LombardiHimself I remember back in the day cnnsi wrote a post draft article and said frank gore was the worst pick in the draft. Need to give these things some time l.

And now you understand why I've repeated for years to not take mock drafts so seriously. They create a ridiculous disconnect from the reality of what's actually going on in the 49ers' building, where they have a track record of building strong rosters

@Coach_Yac You forgot brandon aiyuk

The 49ers current WR room: Mike Evans Ricky Pearsall Christian Kirk Jordan Watkins Demarcus Robinson Jacob Cowing De'Zhaun Stribling

@Kody__Rogers I bought some of those calls for tomorrow when it crashed today

OPTIONS. That's why we're "hard down" today. Working from the April 24 Expiration Open Interest (OI) here's the rough math.. $13 call wall: 8,637 OI Each contract represents 100 shares. Anyone short those calls starts losing above $13. At $13.50: 8,637×100 × $0.50 = $431,850 At $14.00: 8,637×100 × $1.00 = $863,700 At $14.20: 8,637×100 × $1.20 = $1,036,440 Add the $13.50 strike (3,781 OI) and $14 strike (4,049 OI) positions & the pain compounds quickly for anyone short the call side of tomorrow's expiry. Post-market is $13.11 right now. The important caveat: OI represents both sides of the trade. Not all 8,637 contracts are short. The actual loss figure depends on the net short call exposure, which we can't see precisely. But the directional pressure is clear. ..whoever sold those $13 calls into this week's elevated IV is sitting uncomfortably right now watching the post-market tick. ..that's why today's session looked the way it did. They had one job.

@Kody__Rogers It looks like a lot of shares were shorted today. Can't do that for very long. Borrow rate could start creeping up tomorrow

They need your $SMR shares more than you do right now. ..that's the whole trade. Expect irrational price action over the coming days (we might end a day or two negative), but there is NO WAY we're going lower over the short/intermediate term. Trajectory is UP.

@Coach_Yac Yes, but the draft value chart wouldn't be kind trying to move up from #27

If Vega Ioane starts to fall some, should the 49ers move up and get him? 🤔

@Kody__Rogers I ran all of the filings through chatgpt and it says it believes they are concurrent with a maximum of 1 to 3 million shares left with a possibility that it has ended.

I ran a summary of probabilities based off what sell structure was more advantageous for $FLR. It was almost certain that the sell program was setup sequentially, which (in my mind) would have reduced the selling pressure & allowed a better ask-per-share. ..honestly, I thought the investment team representing @FluorCorp would have known how to maximize price-per-share. Instead they offloaded 40M $SMR shares at the BOTTOM.

@Kody__Rogers Where do you see this. The Feb 13 filing doesnt put this restriction on sales only that they must be within 5% cap. It appears to me that they were concurrent.

BofA, A & B weren’t allowed to run at the same time. We’ll still see evidence of “B” in the next few weeks, but you’re right. ..if $SMR volume stays elevated (which I believe it will), BofA, B will offload quickly.

@Kody__Rogers @FluorCorp @Citibank I would think the last tranche has to be done. The number of shares traded the last 2 days was way too high. The rate of sales would have to be really low for any inventory to be left after today.

@FluorCorp Amendment No. 9 just dropped. Filed April 17, 2026. Transaction date: April 15. @Citibank settled. 12,936,472 shares. $11.6293 per share. Done. ..then this line buried in Item 5: “As of April 15, 2026, the Reporting Persons are no longer the beneficial owners of more than five percent of @NuScale_Power securities and are no longer required to report their holdings on Schedule 13D. Consequently, this Amendment represents the final amendment to the Schedule 13D.” ..this is the last 13D/A Fluor will ever file on $SMR. - THE SCOREBOARD - @GoldmanSachs: 71M shrs. Feb 13. $19.05. BofA Tranche A: 13.5M shrs. Apr 9. $12.07. Citibank: 12,936,472 shrs. Apr 15. $11.63. BofA Tranche B: 13.5M shrs. Pending. 112,936,472 shares distributed. 13,500,000 remaining. ..one program left. The borrow pool dropped from 6.3M to 4.3M this morning before the filing hit. The pool told you Citi settled before the paperwork confirmed it. Same pattern as Tranche A. Watch iborrowdesk. When the pool spikes again, Tranche B is done. ~ One filing left. ~ One program left. ~ One price to be set. Then @FluorCorp is gone from $SMR forever. SEC: sec.gov/Archives/edgar…​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ CREDIT: @pelters

@Kody__Rogers @fundmyfund @NuScale_Power @FluorCorp Yep closed out Wednesday

@pelters @fundmyfund @NuScale_Power @FluorCorp Yeah?! Tranche B down?!

ATTENTION: $FLR is still selling $SMR shares. ..no reason to panic. Every day they have less @NuScale_Power to sell. Eventually they'll have ZERO. I'll let you know when @FluorCorp files their next Schedule 13D.

@Kody__Rogers @fundmyfund @NuScale_Power @FluorCorp Just confirmed the 1st half of this

@Kody__Rogers @fundmyfund @NuScale_Power @FluorCorp I think one tranche fell of yesterday and I still the think the other tranche could still be another 2 days. Either way I jumped in big last Thursday and Friday

@Kody__Rogers @NuScale_Power Watch for the 3rd tranche. I think its still selling and if it abruptly stops ....

Knew it was coming. Just chill. Remove emotion. Shakeout then retrace higher. @NuScale_Power, $SMR

..pretty incredible. $SMR premarket pushing as much volume as it did in the middle of the cash session yesterday. Repositioning.

@Kody__Rogers @fundmyfund @NuScale_Power @FluorCorp Also worth noting if this thing goes to $15 around 20 million shorts will be under water maybe more 23 milliin shares were shorted between mar 10 and mar 24 the price 11.50 and 12.50

@Kody__Rogers @fundmyfund @NuScale_Power @FluorCorp I agree but when I looked the original 77 million sold the daily participation rate was 3.9% that would leave 83 million shares still needed to trade. Might not be the same rate just following the numbers. Level 2 looked different for sure last 2 days

@Kody__Rogers @NuScale_Power Thank you for the replay, amazing explanation

Your instinct on concurrent execution is correct & the logic holds. All three letter agreements signed February 17. Same start date. The hedge books opened together. Tranche A settled April 9. That’s 37 valid trading days from initiation. If BofA-B & Citi ran identical windows, they should be settling within days of each other, not weeks. In truth, filings may already be overdue. On the rate of sells slowing.. this is worth examining carefully. The contracted share pace of @NuScale_Power was fixed by the program structure. What changes at lower price levels is the delta hedging dynamic. As price falls, dealers who are already short need to hedge less aggressively on the margin because their existing short position provides more coverage per dollar move. So yes, the mechanical selling pressure from active hedging likely decelerated as $SMR moved from $15 toward $9. The contracted shares still need to clear, but the incremental pressure from dynamic hedging diminishes at lower prices. The “third of the overhang is gone” framing is technically right but may understate the structural shift. Tranche A’s dealer book closing means one active short position is being unwound or neutralized right now. That’s not just fewer shares to sell, it’s an active buyer emerging where there was previously an active seller. If the programs are symmetric in duration, the next two filings are imminent. Days, not weeks. The Q2 deadline exists but the math suggests these programs were designed to run together & finish together. Last thought.. If you are BofA structuring two tranches under the same agreement on the same date against the same underlying equity, you do not build meaningfully different duration windows into Tranche A vs Tranche B. Different sell windows create internal arbitrage & unequal risk exposure across your own books. You build your sell programs symmetrically.

Use my $SMR analysis to come up with your own conclusion.. Dump the following article into ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity.. ..whatever AI you use. Ask it to independently analyze the @NuScale_Power evidence and give you its own investment opinion. All the primary source data is embedded. SEC filings. FINRA government records. Dark pool data. Institutional 13F positions. Options chain. The full picture. The AI will do the work. You make the call. The Invisible Seller: A Documented Case for NuScale Power. open.substack.com/pub/wealthmx/p…