Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Dedicated to College Football and Draft discussion.
post

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby terrytate » Mon Mar 05, 2018 12:52 pm

Bootz2004 wrote:Wait, don't take him at 7 but trade back to 15? Y'all are trying to be too cute. If that's the case take him at 7 and be done. Those 8 spots won't make a difference.



I don't WANT to draft Davenport at 7. If all the big dogs are gone, it may well be the best option though. The kid is too raw for a top 10 pick bit his measurables and value as an edge rusher might make it necessary. He's over 260, so he has the size you really need in an every down 4-3 DE. Athletically speaking, he is very similar to Jadaveon Clowney, his speed and agility is top shelf. He's clearly the second best pass rusher in this draft after Chubb.

Mata'afa isn't going to be a high pick. He's just not.

Another guy I like and wanted to see at the combine was Duke Ejiofor. I'll admit, I haven't seen THAT much film but what I did see looked real good. If we don't get an edge in the first then he's a guy I'd like to look at in a later round.
User avatar
terrytate
 
Posts: 2314
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 1:49 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 100 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Doctor » Tue Mar 06, 2018 10:53 am

terrytate wrote:
Bootz2004 wrote:Wait, don't take him at 7 but trade back to 15? Y'all are trying to be too cute. If that's the case take him at 7 and be done. Those 8 spots won't make a difference.



I don't WANT to draft Davenport at 7. If all the big dogs are gone, it may well be the best option though. The kid is too raw for a top 10 pick bit his measurables and value as an edge rusher might make it necessary. He's over 260, so he has the size you really need in an every down 4-3 DE. Athletically speaking, he is very similar to Jadaveon Clowney, his speed and agility is top shelf. He's clearly the second best pass rusher in this draft after Chubb.

Mata'afa isn't going to be a high pick. He's just not.

Another guy I like and wanted to see at the combine was Duke Ejiofor. I'll admit, I haven't seen THAT much film but what I did see looked real good. If we don't get an edge in the first then he's a guy I'd like to look at in a later round.

What nightmare scenario is Davenport BPA at #7??
Image
User avatar
Doctor
 
Posts: 5161
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:54 pm
Location: Out of the Office. Will return next Fall.
Has thanked: 222 times
Been thanked: 152 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Air-Buc-Pirate » Tue Mar 06, 2018 2:04 pm

I wouldn't be upset if we get Davenport.
User avatar
Air-Buc-Pirate
 
Posts: 445
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:57 pm
Has thanked: 91 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby I Are Serious Poster » Tue Mar 06, 2018 4:04 pm

We don't have the team culture necessary to support Davenport's development. He may very well go somewhere else and find success, but he would bust here. It's a terrible situation for him.
I Are Serious Poster
 
Posts: 233
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 9:49 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 14 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby beardmcdoug » Tue Mar 06, 2018 4:22 pm

Doctor wrote:
terrytate wrote:

I don't WANT to draft Davenport at 7. If all the big dogs are gone, it may well be the best option though. The kid is too raw for a top 10 pick bit his measurables and value as an edge rusher might make it necessary. He's over 260, so he has the size you really need in an every down 4-3 DE. Athletically speaking, he is very similar to Jadaveon Clowney, his speed and agility is top shelf. He's clearly the second best pass rusher in this draft after Chubb.

Mata'afa isn't going to be a high pick. He's just not.

Another guy I like and wanted to see at the combine was Duke Ejiofor. I'll admit, I haven't seen THAT much film but what I did see looked real good. If we don't get an edge in the first then he's a guy I'd like to look at in a later round.

What nightmare scenario is Davenport BPA at #7??


Jesus, I know right?

Nelson, Chubb, Fitz, Vea, Ward, and James all gone by the time we pick at #7? That would mean only 1 QB drafted between Browns/Giants/Colts/Jets/Broncos

I'd shoot myself in the face if we drafted Davenport at 7
User avatar
beardmcdoug
 
Posts: 3010
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:30 pm
Has thanked: 362 times
Been thanked: 236 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Tue Mar 06, 2018 4:35 pm

beardmcdoug wrote:I'd shoot myself in the face if we drafted Davenport at 7


Image
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13170
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 628 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Mar 06, 2018 4:39 pm

beardmcdoug wrote:
Doctor wrote:What nightmare scenario is Davenport BPA at #7??


Jesus, I know right?

Nelson, Chubb, Fitz, Vea, Ward, and James all gone by the time we pick at #7? That would mean only 1 QB drafted between Browns/Giants/Colts/Jets/Broncos

I'd shoot myself in the face if we drafted Davenport at 7


That would likely mean teams would be trying to trade up if that many QBs are still available since trading up to 7 is less cost prohibitive than say the top 5.

I think this draft is win-win for the Bucs at 7. Either alot of QBs will go early (most likely imo) which will push the top non-QBs down -or- QB's don't go high which would increase the Bucs trade down options at 7.

I think it's unlikely that if a couple of these top 4 QB prospects are still there at 7 that the Bucs wouldn't have some decent offers. Teams are always looking to make sure they give up enough if they're trading up in the draft for a QB. Look at the Chiefs and Texans last year. This years QB class is better that Trubisky-Mahomes-Watson who went 2nd, 10th, and 12th and ALL 3 were traded UP for.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12708
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 526 times
Been thanked: 548 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby beardmcdoug » Tue Mar 06, 2018 4:46 pm

yup, agreed DN

and yup, that'd be me MB
User avatar
beardmcdoug
 
Posts: 3010
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:30 pm
Has thanked: 362 times
Been thanked: 236 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Deja Entendu » Tue Mar 06, 2018 10:25 pm

I haven't seen much talk in here about Landry, but I'd be thrilled with him as a consolation prize. I like him better than Key or Davenport.
Deja Entendu
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:59 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Cheb » Tue Mar 06, 2018 10:47 pm

Deja Entendu wrote:I haven't seen much talk in here about Landry, but I'd be thrilled with him as a consolation prize. I like him better than Key or Davenport.


In the second round, sure.

At seven, he can pound sand.
Image
Cheb
 
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:00 pm
Location: West Coast is best coast
Has thanked: 72 times
Been thanked: 330 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby MJW » Tue Mar 06, 2018 10:50 pm

Deja Entendu wrote:I haven't seen much talk in here about Landry, but I'd be thrilled with him as a consolation prize. I like him better than Key or Davenport.


No thanks to another 250 lbs. rusher. Landry is a 3-4 guy. So is Spence, but that's a topic for another thread.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8656
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Bootz2004 » Wed Mar 07, 2018 12:57 am

MJW wrote:
Deja Entendu wrote:I haven't seen much talk in here about Landry, but I'd be thrilled with him as a consolation prize. I like him better than Key or Davenport.


No thanks to another 250 lbs. rusher. Landry is a 3-4 guy. So is Spence, but that's a topic for another thread.


So you wouldn't want Khalil Mack on this team, huh?
User avatar
Bootz2004
 
Posts: 23275
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 497 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby MJW » Wed Mar 07, 2018 12:59 am

Bootz2004 wrote:
MJW wrote:
No thanks to another 250 lbs. rusher. Landry is a 3-4 guy. So is Spence, but that's a topic for another thread.


So you wouldn't want Khalil Mack on this team, huh?


Try less hard.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8656
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Bootz2004 » Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:04 am

MJW wrote:
Bootz2004 wrote:
So you wouldn't want Khalil Mack on this team, huh?


Try less hard.


Answer the question. He seems to be doing fine as a 4-3 DE and a smaller stature and size than Landry. You're saying you wouldn't want him on this team, right?
User avatar
Bootz2004
 
Posts: 23275
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 497 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby MJW » Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:29 am

Bootz2004 wrote:
MJW wrote:
Try less hard.


Answer the question. He seems to be doing fine as a 4-3 DE and a smaller stature and size than Landry. You're saying you wouldn't want him on this team, right?


Yep, that's what I mean. Just like if I said I didn't want a 203 pound feature back, I would be saying I wouldn't want Barry Sanders. You got me. Well done.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8656
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Bootz2004 » Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:33 am

MJW wrote:
Bootz2004 wrote:
Answer the question. He seems to be doing fine as a 4-3 DE and a smaller stature and size than Landry. You're saying you wouldn't want him on this team, right?


Yep, that's what I mean. Just like if I said I didn't want a 203 pound feature back, I would be saying I wouldn't want Barry Sanders. You got me. Well done.


Typical MJW. You say what you mean except you don't mean what you say.
User avatar
Bootz2004
 
Posts: 23275
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 497 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby MJW » Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:34 am

Bootz2004 wrote:
MJW wrote:
Yep, that's what I mean. Just like if I said I didn't want a 203 pound feature back, I would be saying I wouldn't want Barry Sanders. You got me. Well done.


Typical MJW. You say what you mean except you don't mean what you say.


I expect people not to be actively stupid. If you're saying that's a problem, it's a worse look for you than it is for me.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8656
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Bootz2004 » Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:36 am

MJW wrote:
Bootz2004 wrote:
Typical MJW. You say what you mean except you don't mean what you say.


I expect people not to be actively stupid. If you're saying that's a problem, it's a worse look for you than it is for me.


I expect people can answer simple questions. Shouldn't be difficult if they feel the point they made was valid. You clearly did not, which is why instead of answering and focusing on the topic you chose to deflect and focus on Bootz. That's sad.
User avatar
Bootz2004
 
Posts: 23275
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 497 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby MJW » Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:42 am

Bootz2004 wrote:
MJW wrote:
I expect people not to be actively stupid. If you're saying that's a problem, it's a worse look for you than it is for me.


I expect people can answer simple questions. Shouldn't be difficult if they feel the point they made was valid. You clearly did not, which is why instead of answering and focusing on the topic you chose to deflect and focus on Bootz. That's sad.


I'm not going to filter every point through a, "What if someone intentionally tries to miss my point?" filter. I have too much respect for this community to treat them like idiots. If you choose to act a fool, mazel tov, but I won't be indulging you.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8656
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Bootz2004 » Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:47 am

MJW wrote:
Bootz2004 wrote:
I expect people can answer simple questions. Shouldn't be difficult if they feel the point they made was valid. You clearly did not, which is why instead of answering and focusing on the topic you chose to deflect and focus on Bootz. That's sad.


I'm not going to filter every point through a, "What if someone intentionally tries to miss my point?" filter. I have too much respect for this community to treat them like idiots. If you choose to act a fool, mazel tov, but I won't be indulging you.


Miss your point? Let's see..
MJW wrote:No thanks to another 250 lbs. rusher.


Now what was the REAL point you were making? That you don't want another 250lbs rusher? Or that you don't want some 250lbs rushers?? I asked you a simple question and you chose to deflect to save face per the usual. So instead of making this personal like you always do why not cut the crap and answer the question? Stick to football for once. It's a healthy discussion we could potentially have about what you really meant..
User avatar
Bootz2004
 
Posts: 23275
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 497 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby MJW » Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:50 am

Bootz2004 wrote:
MJW wrote:
I'm not going to filter every point through a, "What if someone intentionally tries to miss my point?" filter. I have too much respect for this community to treat them like idiots. If you choose to act a fool, mazel tov, but I won't be indulging you.


Miss your point? Let's see..
MJW wrote:No thanks to another 250 lbs. rusher.


Now what was the REAL point you were making? That you don't want another 250lbs rusher? Or that you don't want some 250lbs rushers?? I asked you a simple question and you chose to deflect to save face per the usual. So instead of making this personal like you always do why not cut the crap and answer the question? Stick to football for once. It's a healthy discussion we could potentially have about what you really meant..


It's not a healthy discussion because:
1) Khalil Mack isn't available
2) Harold Landry couldn't wash Khalil Mack's jock
3) Khalil Mack is an exception to the rule, which doesn't make the rule non-existent

And here's the thing...I know those things, and YOU know those things, and both of us know each other know these those. Which is what I mean by, "acting a fool." It's not about having a legitimate discussion. It's about playing, "Gotchya" because I didn't write my post in a way that covers for you pretending not to understand it. It's foolishness. I'm not going to run every post through a team of lawyers in case some clown decides to purposefully misunderstand it so he can play gotchya. You want to waste your time, you go ahead and waste it.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8656
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Bootz2004 » Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:58 am

MJW wrote:
Bootz2004 wrote:
Miss your point? Let's see..

Now what was the REAL point you were making? That you don't want another 250lbs rusher? Or that you don't want some 250lbs rushers?? I asked you a simple question and you chose to deflect to save face per the usual. So instead of making this personal like you always do why not cut the crap and answer the question? Stick to football for once. It's a healthy discussion we could potentially have about what you really meant..


It's not a healthy discussion because
1) Khalil Mack isn't available
2) Harold Landry couldn't wash Khalil Mack's jock
3) Khalil Mack is an exception to the rule, which doesn't make the rule non-existent

And here's the thing...I know this things, and YOU know those things, and both of us know each other know these things. Which is what I mean by, "acting a fool." It's not about having a legitimate discussion. It's about playing, "Gotchya" because I didn't write my post in a way that covers for you pretending not to understand it. It's foolishness.


I don't pretend to interpret one's meaning which is why I asked. Your defensiveness on the matter was very telling however. But how is someone supposed to assume you mean Mack was the exception to the rule with this vague statement..
MJW wrote:No thanks to another 250 lbs. rusher.


He's less than 250, smaller than Landry. So I'll give you a few lessons tonight.
1. Be more specific when making a point. Broad statements like that can be interpreted a number of ways.
2. Don't be so arrogant to think everyone knows what you really mean when you yourself don't say what you really mean. People aren't mind readers, no matter what you think.
3. Stop being so damn defensive and ready for a fight. Just answer a question or if you don't want to, just say so. Why you choose to fight with so many is beyond even me. And believe me I've been in a few. But man you can turn the most simple exchanges into unnecessary back and forths.
4. I'll say again, STOP BEING SO ARROGANT TO THINK EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT YOU REALLY MEAN.

I hope for your sake you take my advice and keep posting. We enjoy your content around here even if you have personal vindettas.
User avatar
Bootz2004
 
Posts: 23275
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 497 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby mdb1958 » Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:44 am

LEIGHTON VANDER ESCH - DE ???

LORENZO CARTER - DE ???
mdb1958
 
Posts: 9490
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 155 times
Been thanked: 89 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby mdb1958 » Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:50 am

What do ya'll think about JOHN FRANKLIN-MYERS - DE

He was a late addition.
mdb1958
 
Posts: 9490
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 155 times
Been thanked: 89 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby mdb1958 » Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:56 am

MJW wrote:
Deja Entendu wrote:I haven't seen much talk in here about Landry, but I'd be thrilled with him as a consolation prize. I like him better than Key or Davenport.


No thanks to another 250 lbs. rusher. Landry is a 3-4 guy. So is Spence, but that's a topic for another thread.



DeMarcus Lawrence came in at 251 MJ, they will grow. You got to look at each player individually, some are locked into a box with what they are going to be and some arent.

And the man with the power is the one that will ask "this is what I'd like from you - do you think you can do it".
mdb1958
 
Posts: 9490
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 155 times
Been thanked: 89 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Bucs N Beers » Wed Mar 07, 2018 7:03 am

Man if it comes down to picking at 7 with Chubb, Nelson, Barkley, and Fitz all gone, and no one ants to trade up. Gun to my head I’m picking Vea over Davenport.

IMO there shouldn’t be a scenario where we pick Davenport at 7.
User avatar
Bucs N Beers
 
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:33 am
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Super K » Wed Mar 07, 2018 7:06 am

Bucs N Beers wrote:Man if it comes down to picking at 7 with Chubb, Nelson, Barkley, and Fitz all gone, and no one ants to trade up. Gun to my head I’m picking Vea over Davenport.

IMO there shouldn’t be a scenario where we pick Davenport at 7.


Hell yeah we should pick Vea over Davenport!...that doesn't even require any hesitation....

At 7 we should walk away with 1 of these 3:

Chubb
Nelson
Vea
User avatar
Super K
 
Posts: 7165
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:26 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 209 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Mar 07, 2018 7:50 am

Von Miller came in around 250lbs also.

4-3 or 3-4 is way overblown in 2018. Teams are rarely in 'base defense' and the game has become mostly situational where teams are in sub package and rotating Dlinemen in based on down and distance.

Point is, you need guys that can rush the QB. Idc if they're 250 or 265.

Weight is very overrated for a defensive player imo unless you're a 2 gapping Dlinemen.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12708
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 526 times
Been thanked: 548 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby Super K » Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:03 am

The problem isn't just his weight, it's his production..

Fell off the map after his huge year..that's concerning...
User avatar
Super K
 
Posts: 7165
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:26 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 209 times

Re: Draft Watch: Defensive Ends

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:21 am

Super K wrote:The problem isn't just his weight, it's his production..

Fell off the map after his huge year..that's concerning...


He also got injured (ankle iirc) early in the season.

Landry has decent length and is probably the most fluid EDGE rusher in this class when it comes to the ability bend the corner w/ leverage and flatten to the QB.

Landry and Davenport are clustered pretty close together for me in terms of value as the 2nd/3rd best EDGE defenders.

I really like Dorance Armstrong as well, who should be there at pick 38.

I know some FSU fans don't like Josh Sweat, but if his medical checks out ok some team is going take him day 2. He had the most impressive workout for any EDGE defender imo and has the prototype build and length.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12708
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 526 times
Been thanked: 548 times

PreviousNext

post

Return to College Football/Draft Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests