2018 Draft Thread I

[JIllg]

11 hours ago, big9erfan said:

It's just such a bad year to be looking for a pass rusher, particular at 9 and then 59.  If your forced me to take a pass rusher at 9 I think I'd take Davenport. His floor might be lower than either Landry or Chubb, but his ceiling might be higher. Of course both guys being so "iffy" is why I'd probably go with Smith or Edmunds.

I really don't buy that Davenport's ceiling is that much higher. They are both really similar in terms of functional strength, 10 yd split, and a number of other measurables. Davenport gives you height and arm length and and has shown occasional use of both to win, but Landry uses his lack of height to make the punch target very small for blockers and had a much better short shuttle and three cone, which confirm what the film shows about his ability to bend the edge and change directions rapidly. Ultimately, I think Landry has a similar ceiling with a much higher floor, because he already bends well and has good hand placement and jerk moves, though he has more injury concern and could definitely stand to add better counters. 

[big9erfan]

11 hours ago, N4L said:

When I started watching more and more of Landry, I thought he reminded me of Aaron Lynch. Good hand fighter, isn't going to wow you with physical abilities but he has a natural feel to rushing the passer. Would you say that was a decent comparison? 

Lynch has talent, but obviously has some off field issues that show up on the field. 

Not sure if Landry is a cornerstone pass rusher. I feel like we could get a decent speed rusher in the third round, anyone that fits the bill I should check out? 

I don't if it's a good comparison or not. But if it is, then he should be a 3rd or 4th rounder not contemplated at the 9 overall pick.

[big9erfan]

6 hours ago, PapaShogun said:

Could just be the offense he played it and how he was utilized. He had 1000 scrimmage yards last season, and over 900 a couple of years before. Just looking at their team stats it doesn't seem like he was ever the feature back as a rusher, but still was their leader in scrimmage yards at that same position.

I know this was a while ago, but Ricky Watters also had smaller yearly numbers during his college days. When he went to the 49ers though he became a monster numbers wise as a rusher and receiver. 

 

I loved Curtis Samuel last year who maybe was a similar kind of player.  But I loved him as a WR who you could occasionally line up in the backfield, or who could run an occasional jet sweep, not as a RB you could occasionally like up outside.

[rudyZ]

20 minutes ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

Edmunds isn"t iffy?! I'd say he's more iffy than Landry, but less so than Davenport. Edmunds is still more physical specimen than football player at this point, and I find that troubling. There is a certain point where you just can't teach instincts, and 3 down LBs in the modern NFL have to process a lot of information from snap-to-snap. I don't have any idea if Edmunds has got what it takes between the ears to reach his potential, but he certainly didn't seem to be all that good at playing his position in college.

With Landry, he seems to know how to play his position quite well. It's more a question of whether or not he can develop the techniques needed to dominate at the next level - inside moves, spin moves, etc. I tend to think that these sorts of techniques are more easily taught at the NFL level than what Edmunds is lacking, namely, any clear idea of where he should be and what routes to the ball he should take on any given play.

Landry's position requires a lot less instinct and diagnostic skills. That's why LBs only rarely manage to become impact players, and pass rushers much more often. Their job is simpler: get past the OL in front of you and chase the ball. So the likelihood of a guy like Landry becoming an impact player in the NFL are higher than Edmunds, in my opinion. But Edmunds is young and supremely athletic. Who knows how he will develop. You're banking on promise, but it's hard to be really confident he'll be great. With Landry, it's easier. He needs better technique, mostly, at a comparatively easier task.

[y2lamanaki]

4 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

I don't if it's a good comparison or not. But if it is, then he should be a 3rd or 4th rounder not contemplated at the 9 overall pick.

Lynch didn't fall so far based on talent. He fell because of off-field concerns. On talent alone, he'd probably have been considered a late first/early second pick. In terms of talent, I actually like that comparison for Landry.

Of course, that's still not a #9 overall-type guy.

[big9erfan]

30 minutes ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

Edmunds isn"t iffy?! I'd say he's more iffy than Landry, but less so than Davenport. Edmunds is still more physical specimen than football player at this point, and I find that troubling. There is a certain point where you just can't teach instincts, and 3 down LBs in the modern NFL have to process a lot of information from snap-to-snap. I don't have any idea if Edmunds has got what it takes between the ears to reach his potential, but he certainly didn't seem to be all that good at playing his position in college.

With Landry, he seems to know how to play his position quite well. It's more a question of whether or not he can develop the techniques needed to dominate at the next level - inside moves, spin moves, etc. I tend to think that these sorts of techniques are more easily taught at the NFL level than what Edmunds is lacking, namely, any clear idea of where he should be and what routes to the ball he should take on any given play.

I started out not being crazy about Edmunds, but I've somehow talked myself into thinking more of him.  I value pass rushing and pass coverage skills in a LB more than run stopping ability. I think that Edmunds is a fantastic coverage LB and can be a really good pass rushing LB whether that's up the middle, or even occasionally off the edge. If all he had to do was tee-off on the QB like Landry does he could potentially be as good of an edge rusher as Landry.  I honestly think that Landry COULD be Eli Harold. Not saying he will be, just that it's possible.  I just don't see Edmunds as anything less than a decent starter, and hopefully a whole lot more.  So, yeah, I consider Edmunds a better propsect and less "iffy".

Probably woth noting that Edmunds is 2 years younger with one less year of college experience.You would expect Landry to look a litle more polished with the extra year of experience and extra couple of year to develop his body.

[J-ALL-DAY]

I guess I'm not getting the Lynch/Landry comparisons. Landry has the type of explosiveness that Lynch simply does not have. Lynch is a very solid all around player and obviously stronger, but I never saw him beating tackles with the type of quickness that we see from Landry. 

[big9erfan]

24 minutes ago, JIllg said:

I really don't buy that Davenport's ceiling is that much higher. They are both really similar in terms of functional strength, 10 yd split, and a number of other measurables. Davenport gives you height and arm length and and has shown occasional use of both to win, but Landry uses his lack of height to make the punch target very small for blockers and had a much better short shuttle and three cone, which confirm what the film shows about his ability to bend the edge and change directions rapidly. Ultimately, I think Landry has a similar ceiling with a much higher floor, because he already bends well and has good hand placement and jerk moves, though he has more injury concern and could definitely stand to add better counters. 

You could well be right. Bottom  line is that I would be happy with either if we traded down, and unhappy with either at 9.

[rudyZ]

8 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

I don't if it's a good comparison or not. But if it is, then he should be a 3rd or 4th rounder not contemplated at the 9 overall pick.

He only compared Landry to Lynch in terms of style, the hand fighting and the feel for pass rushing. Landry is a better athlete, in my opinion. Lynch is a much stiffer guy. Just compare their cone drills. Landry is a sub 7 guy (which is usually a good indicator, for a pass rusher), and Lynch timed at 7.46 at his pro day. We're really not talking about the same type of athletes here. There's a lot more explosion in Landry. That's something we could really use. 

[big9erfan]

7 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said:

Lynch didn't fall so far based on talent. He fell because of off-field concerns. On talent alone, he'd probably have been considered a late first/early second pick. In terms of talent, I actually like that comparison for Landry.

Of course, that's still not a #9 overall-type guy.

Yes, but I'm talking about how he played.  Lynch had two decent years for us and two rather worthless years.  That's the kind of output I'd expect/hope to get out of a third or fourth round pick, not a high first rounder.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

20 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

I loved Curtis Samuel last year who maybe was a similar kind of player.  But I loved him as a WR who you could occasionally line up in the backfield, or who could run an occasional jet sweep, not as a RB you could occasionally like up outside.

Well, Curtis is under 200 pounds. That's bad for a runningback. He probably wouldn't last with a significant amount of carries. Someone in the 225 range might. Obviously someone like Jaylen would have to prove he actually has the vision, burst, and elusiveness at the pro level to even have a chance at succeeding. Wherever he goes I hope he actually gets a decent shot at showing what he could do as a runner. 

[big9erfan]

7 minutes ago, rudyZ said:

He only compared Landry to Lynch in terms of style, the hand fighting and the feel for pass rushing. Landry is a better athlete, in my opinion. Lynch is a much stiffer guy. Just compare their cone drills. Landry is a sub 7 guy (which is usually a good indicator, for a pass rusher), and Lynch timed at 7.46 at his pro day. We're really not talking about the same type of athletes here. There's a lot more explosion in Landry. That's something we could really use. 

I was joking. I don't think Lynch was very good. I would hope anyone we take at 9 is a whole lot better than Lynch. I get the part about the comparison. They really are totally different players. Lynch was about 270 and more of a power rusher.  He actually did manage to bull doze NFL linemen every now and then. Landry is much more of a classic NFL pass rusher. I expect him to be a whole lot better. Just not sure I expect to be good enough to warrant the 9 overall pick. On the other hand taking positional value into accout I'd be oin board if our management thought he was good enough to take that high.

[y2lamanaki]

11 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

I guess I'm not getting the Lynch/Landry comparisons. Landry has the type of explosiveness that Lynch simply does not have. Lynch is a very solid all around player and obviously stronger, but I never saw him beating tackles with the type of quickness that we see from Landry. 

I think this is slightly inaccurate. I think Landry has the type of explosiveness Lynch just doesn't have the drive to display. If you go back and watch his Notre Dame tape, you can see it. He played hungry. Then he lost his drive. I think he had a similar NFL career with us. First year was far and away more of a hungry Lynch then we had the last three years. I think with Lynch it's always about drive. I wouldn't be surprised to see him have a more explosive year in Chicago this year, only to lose that drive in 2019.

[y2lamanaki]

13 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

Yes, but I'm talking about how he played.  Lynch had two decent years for us and two rather worthless years.  That's the kind of output I'd expect/hope to get out of a third or fourth round pick, not a high first rounder.

Totally fair. I was just comparing them as college players, not Lynch in NFL vs. Landry projected NFL. If Landry only gives what Lynch gave, I agree with you - that's a mid-round guy. I would be surprised if Landry doesn't outperform Lynch, though.

[J-ALL-DAY]

Trust me I'm one of the few Aaron Lynch truthers out there. What he did his rookie season was pretty damn impressive. I remember in ND and he looked like the next dominant defensive player in college football. However, Landry has different type of explosiveness. I saw a few cut ups of just how much quicker his get off is compared to the rest of the DL. 

One of the reasons Lynch never up that many sacks even his rookie season despite all the pressures was he wasn't quite explosive enough. Similar to Buckner and why his ratio of pressures/sacks is so low. I expect Thomas to put up more sacks this season than Buckner despite being the inferior player just because he is more explosive.