The Marcus Davenport Hype Train Is Leaving the Station

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

AA was drafted for a 34.

The end.

That's not even close to what I'm talking about...AA was draft as high as he was because of his upside. He was overdrafted based on what he did in college and his film.

I'm not comparing AA to Davenport based on positIon I'm saying they were/will be drafted higher than they should be because of the term that is thrown out entirely too much "upside"

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:
AA was drafted for a 34.

The end.

That's not even close to what I'm talking about...AA was draft as high as he was because of his upside. He was overdrafted based on what he did in college and his film.

I'm not comparing AA to Davenport based on positIon I'm saying they were/will be drafted higher than they should be because of the term that is thrown out entirely too much "upside"

From NFL prospect report

BOTTOM LINE Projection-based prospect with elite size and the traits to become a dominant run-stuffing defensive end in an odd front. Armstead has the explosiveness off the snap and in his jarring punch to gain early advantages and control offensive linemen. Armstead is a fast riser but is still very raw. He will need patience and coaching and must become a more effective pass rusher at some point.

Obviously the one thing that sticks out is Armstead had a lot to prove and grow as a pass rusher and his sack numbers screamed that but that wasn't what he was going to be drafted for however the bold are very similar to the things you hear with Davenport for his position.

He's super intriguing, I may be in the minority but I wouldn't be angry about him at #9.

Originally posted by genus49:

From NFL prospect report

BOTTOM LINE Projection-based prospect with elite size and the traits to become a dominant run-stuffing defensive end in an odd front. Armstead has the explosiveness off the snap and in his jarring punch to gain early advantages and control offensive linemen. Armstead is a fast riser but is still very raw. He will need patience and coaching and must become a more effective pass rusher at some point.

Obviously the one thing that sticks out is Armstead had a lot to prove and grow as a pass rusher and his sack numbers screamed that but that wasn't what he was going to be drafted for however the bold are very similar to the things you hear with Davenport for his position.

Yup this is what I'm talking about...not saying Davenport won't be good or have the same issues as AA just similar prospects

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Yup this is what I'm talking about...not saying Davenport won't be good or have the same issues as AA just similar prospects

Isn't that exactly what you are trying to say? If not i don't see the point of posting it.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Yup this is what I'm talking about...not saying Davenport won't be good or have the same issues as AA just similar prospects

Isn't that exactly what you are trying to say? If not i don't see the point of posting it.

He's trying to say Davenport at 9 is a risky pick for us and he, myself and others would rather take a more proven player to help us win game games now and also someone who can grow as a player.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Yup this is what I'm talking about...not saying Davenport won't be good or have the same issues as AA just similar prospects

Isn't that exactly what you are trying to say? If not i don't see the point of posting it.

He's trying to say Davenport at 9 is a risky pick for us and he, myself and others would rather take a more proven player to help us win game games now and also someone who can grow as a player.

in Davenport's case you potentially have both. No question he has lots of room to grow and he should help whichever team drafts him win games. The learning curve for pass rushers isn't as steep as other positions, which is why Aldon dominated as a rookie. Who ever gets him will throw him in there on passing downs, and he could easily wind up with 5-10 sacks as a rook. Unlike your boy Solomon Thomas this guy is a natural pass rusher

All that said I'm not advocating for drafting Davenport, I do prefer Nelson, Fitzpatrick, Smith and Landry.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Yup this is what I'm talking about...not saying Davenport won't be good or have the same issues as AA just similar prospects

Isn't that exactly what you are trying to say? If not i don't see the point of posting it.

He's trying to say Davenport at 9 is a risky pick for us and he, myself and others would rather take a more proven player to help us win game games now and also someone who can grow as a player.

Every player available at 9 has risk (unless Nelson or Chubb drops). Davenport actually put up sacks and tackles for loss. Something Armstead did not in college.

Originally posted by GMniner805:

in Davenport's case you potentially have both. No question he has lots of room to grow and he should help whichever team drafts him win games. The learning curve for pass rushers isn't as steep as other positions, which is why Aldon dominated as a rookie. Who ever gets him will throw him in there on passing downs, and he could easily wind up with 5-10 sacks as a rook. Unlike your boy Solomon Thomas this guy is a natural pass rusher

All that said I'm not advocating for drafting Davenport, I do prefer Nelson, Fitzpatrick, Smith and Landry.

Thomas is a 49er...is he not your boy now too?

And what makes Davenport a natural pass rusher unlike Thomas? Outside of experience there isn't a ton there in terms of natural pass rush which you can claim Thomas doesn't have. Now Harold Landry has the elite bend around the edge Sully doesn't have but speed to power Thomas can do he just didn't have the same edge rush experience but that's not natural pass rush ability.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Every player available at 9 has risk (unless Nelson or Chubb drops). Davenport actually put up sacks and tackles for loss. Something Armstead did not in college.

Every player in the draft has risk period but not all come with equal levels of risk. Davenport put up stats, albeit against a lower level of competition. He's got a lot of upside but I don't think it is at all farfetched to argue that he comes with substantially more risk than guys like Fitzpatrick, Roquan and Landry.


He's more of a projection/potential pick than a lot of the others likely to be available at #9. Can he perform against elite competition game in and game our? Can he develop a wider array of pass rush moves and play with a more consistent pad level? Can he learn to not overrun plays which from what I've seen is a repeat issue for him?



Lots of talent, lots of potential, lots of questions.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Yup this is what I'm talking about...not saying Davenport won't be good or have the same issues as AA just similar prospects

Isn't that exactly what you are trying to say? If not i don't see the point of posting it.

He's trying to say Davenport at 9 is a risky pick for us and he, myself and others would rather take a more proven player to help us win game games now and also someone who can grow as a player.

Every player available at 9 has risk (unless Nelson or Chubb drops). Davenport actually put up sacks and tackles for loss. Something Armstead did not in college.

Armstead played in a 34 in college. Different responsibilities/techniques.

It's interesting that there has been no team visit report of Davenport. In his pro day interview he mentioned that he is scheduled to visit several teams but was told not to mention the names. If I'm a betting man, I bet 49ers is one of them.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by Jcool:
Every player available at 9 has risk (unless Nelson or Chubb drops). Davenport actually put up sacks and tackles for loss. Something Armstead did not in college.

Every player in the draft has risk period but not all come with equal levels of risk. Davenport put up stats, albeit against a lower level of competition. He's got a lot of upside but I don't think it is at all farfetched to argue that he comes with substantially more risk than guys like Fitzpatrick, Roquan and Landry.

He's more of a projection/potential pick than a lot of the others likely to be available at #9. Can he perform against elite competition game in and game our? Can he develop a wider array of pass rush moves and play with a more consistent pad level? Can he learn to not overrun plays which from what I've seen is a repeat issue for him?

Lots of talent, lots of potential, lots of questions.

I agree. I remember Walsh drafting Larry Roberts - a DE from Alabama in the 2nd round, and then getting Charles Haley from little known James Madioson at the 4th round. Charles dropped to the 4rth round in a big part because it was a little school, there was hardly any film on him, and he was a projection. Larry was a more proven product from a football factory vs a project like Haley. That's the difference to me between a Landry vs Davenport. Landry is proven and Davenport is a project. Davenpport shoudl be taken later because of all the unknows that you mentioned. But if he does develop like Charles did, the team that drafted him will be very happy.

Originally posted by Jcool:
Every player available at 9 has risk (unless Nelson or Chubb drops). Davenport actually put up sacks and tackles for loss. Something Armstead did not in college.

again they play different positions (in college and pros) AA's job was to plug gaps and stuff the run. I'd bet money AA would have more sacks and TFL (then he had at Oregon) if he played in conference USA lol

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Yup this is what I'm talking about...not saying Davenport won't be good or have the same issues as AA just similar prospects

Isn't that exactly what you are trying to say? If not i don't see the point of posting it.

then you're missing the whole point and I see no reason to have to explain it to you ....again.