The Marcus Davenport Hype Train Is Leaving the Station

Originally posted by Giedi:
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.

It's like Danielle Hunter, kid never really put it together at LSU but had the measurables (actually better than Davenport) He was a project but was also an athlete that could be molded into something.

He's avg 8.5 sacks in 3 yrs and this past yr was his first season as a starter. He was a 3rd round pick and rightfully so. Davenport could be Hunter or he could be barkevious mingo, that's why you don't spend a top 10 pick on a player like that.

Originally posted by Giedi:

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.

Your point is spot on but Charles Haley is a tough comparison to Davenport.

Haley was a stud not only for his athletic ability but the dude was a football junkie and was SUPER competitive.

By all accounts Davenport isn't anything like that. That's another reason why I would be nervous taking him so high. It's not to say that Davenport can't be one of those guys who puts in enough work regardless of not being a huge football fan - guys like Curtis Martin have gotten into the HOF essentially treating this like a job.

But that passion that Haley had and his desire to learn the X's and O's helped make him a dominant player.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Giedi:
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.

It's like Danielle Hunter, kid never really put it together at LSU but had the measurables (actually better than Davenport) He was a project but was also an athlete that could be molded into something.

He's avg 8.5 sacks in 3 yrs and this past yr was his first season as a starter. He was a 3rd round pick and rightfully so. Davenport could be Hunter or he could be barkevious mingo, that's why you don't spend a top 10 pick on a player like that.

Wow, D. Hunter 12.5 sacks in his 2nd year. Barkevious 9 sacks in 5 years. And I agree, I don't think we have to reach for an edge rusher (since we have Attouchu, we can go Obo or even Key later in the draft. I can see the benefits of getting Smith - I'm slowly warming up to him. The other benefit is if we get Roquan, Foster's issues won't affect the team.

Have you seen Danielle Hunter's spider chart? It's pretty nuts.

Just for comparison:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by Giedi:

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.

Your point is spot on but Charles Haley is a tough comparison to Davenport.

Haley was a stud not only for his athletic ability but the dude was a football junkie and was SUPER competitive.

By all accounts Davenport isn't anything like that. That's another reason why I would be nervous taking him so high. It's not to say that Davenport can't be one of those guys who puts in enough work regardless of not being a huge football fan - guys like Curtis Martin have gotten into the HOF essentially treating this like a job.

But that passion that Haley had and his desire to learn the X's and O's helped make him a dominant player.

Yeah, I don't get the feeling that Davenport is really passionate about football. I'm wondering if he can take the pain of playing in the NFL. He could dominate his college opponents, but what happens when he's dominated by OT's and Guards in the NFL, does he have the passion to shrug that off and work to get better? I don't know.

Originally posted by FL9er:

I believe UTSA defensive end Marcus Davenport will go somewhere between picks 10 and 16, and has the potential to make that look way too low. One college scouting director who's been studying him for a couple years told me Davenport played at 240 pounds in 2016, and 265 pounds in '17, while adding "he's still coming" weight-wise. Some believe he has a higher ceiling than Bradley Chubb.

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/04/19/jon-gruden-oakland-raiders-minicamp-draft-mmqb

Just adding some stats to what the scout said:

2014: Weight: 190-200
2.5 TFL 2.5 Sacks
2015: Weight: 218-219
7.5 TFL 4 Sacks
2016: Weight: 240
10 TFL 6.5 Sacks
2017: Weight 265
17.5 TFL 8.5 Sacks

Every year Davenport's sacks and tackle for loss improved as his weight increases. Chubb weighs 269 while being 2 inch shorter.

This is the only guy i don't want us to draft in the 1st (then again I said the same thing about armstead )

Originally posted by investasi:

Originally posted by FL9er:

I believe UTSA defensive end Marcus Davenport will go somewhere between picks 10 and 16, and has the potential to make that look way too low. One college scouting director who's been studying him for a couple years told me Davenport played at 240 pounds in 2016, and 265 pounds in '17, while adding "he's still coming" weight-wise. Some believe he has a higher ceiling than Bradley Chubb.

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/04/19/jon-gruden-oakland-raiders-minicamp-draft-mmqb

Just adding some stats to what the scout said:

2014: Weight: 190-200
2.5 TFL 2.5 Sacks
2015: Weight: 218-219
7.5 TFL 4 Sacks
2016: Weight: 240
10 TFL 6.5 Sacks
2017: Weight 265
17.5 TFL 8.5 Sacks

Every year Davenport's sacks and tackle for loss improved as his weight increases. Chubb weighs 269 while being 2 inch shorter.

2018 weight 290
2019 weight 315
2020 weight 350
2021 weight 405

Originally posted by GhostOfBaalke:

Originally posted by investasi:

Originally posted by FL9er:

I believe UTSA defensive end Marcus Davenport will go somewhere between picks 10 and 16, and has the potential to make that look way too low. One college scouting director who's been studying him for a couple years told me Davenport played at 240 pounds in 2016, and 265 pounds in '17, while adding "he's still coming" weight-wise. Some believe he has a higher ceiling than Bradley Chubb.

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/04/19/jon-gruden-oakland-raiders-minicamp-draft-mmqb

Just adding some stats to what the scout said:

2014: Weight: 190-200
2.5 TFL 2.5 Sacks
2015: Weight: 218-219
7.5 TFL 4 Sacks
2016: Weight: 240
10 TFL 6.5 Sacks
2017: Weight 265
17.5 TFL 8.5 Sacks

Every year Davenport's sacks and tackle for loss improved as his weight increases. Chubb weighs 269 while being 2 inch shorter.

2018 weight 290
2019 weight 315
2020 weight 350
2021 weight 405

Originally posted by Heroism:

Just for comparison:

Damn...and he was a 3rd rd pick didn't realize how small his hands are. Even Thomas has bigger hands (which people were b***hing about last yr)

Marcus Davenport

6'5 3/4"
264 Lbs
33 5/8" arms
22 reps bench
4.59-40

Ezekiel Ansah

6'5 1/4"
271 Lbs
35 1/8" arms
21 reps bench
4.63-40

Martin Mayhew drafted Ziggy #5 and he had 62 tackles and 4.5 sacks his senior year at BYU. Then they saw him do stuff at the combine that guys his size shouldn't be able to do and boom, he was the 5th overall pick and just franchised as one of the league's best pass rushers.

The exact same things that were said about Ansah are being said about Davenport and it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Davenport was our guy at 9.

Size, speed, potential. The kid is a beast. I have him rated over Landry.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Aaron Lynch approves.

Originally posted by SteveYoung:
Marcus Davenport

6'5 3/4"
264 Lbs
33 5/8" arms
22 reps bench
4.59-40

Ezekiel Ansah

6'5 1/4"
271 Lbs
35 1/8" arms
21 reps bench
4.63-40

Originally posted by SteveYoung:

Marcus Davenport

6'5 3/4"
264 Lbs
33 5/8" arms
22 reps bench
4.59-40

Ezekiel Ansah

6'5 1/4"
271 Lbs
35 1/8" arms
21 reps bench
4.63-40

Martin Mayhew drafted Ziggy #5 and he had 62 tackles and 4.5 sacks his senior year at BYU. Then they saw him do stuff at the combine that guys his size shouldn't be able to do and boom, he was the 5th overall pick and just franchised as one of the league's best pass rushers.

The exact same things that were said about Ansah are being said about Davenport and it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Davenport was our guy at 9.

Size, speed, potential. The kid is a beast. I have him rated over Landry.

He's like college Ziggy but with poor pad level and less dog in him.

Davenport isn't my pick. But I still think with the right coaching and mindset, he could be a beast.