Stephen White reviews Marcus Davenport

hebs

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jan 1, 2013
Posts:
5,057
Liked Posts:
4,064
He's my #2 behind Chubb if we go OLB at 8.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Gustavus Adolphus

?‍♂️?
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
Posts:
44,297
Liked Posts:
38,765
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Nebraska Cornhuskers
  2. Villanova Wildcats
Not that I think it's a knock on Davenport, as he's clearly first round talent, but is there a reason why he went to UTSA instead of a bigger school?
 

Luke

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 25, 2016
Posts:
2,149
Liked Posts:
1,514
My opinion of Davenport versus Edmunds is that Davenport has basically the same speed as Edmunds while playing the DE/OLB position whereas Edmunds plays inside linebacker and people want him to play OLB. DE/OLB are much more important positions than inside linebackers which is proved by top salaries (top DE is 17 million, top OLB is 19 million, top inside linebacker is 12 million).

Since Davenport has the potential of eventually being as good or better than the Chubby one, it is well worth the risk of taking him at 8. He has already shown some pass rush moves, he has shown that he takes well to coaching and he is an athletic freak.

If I wanted an inside linebacker with the versatility of Edmunds, I would trade down a bit in the 2nd to get a third (perhaps moving up with a 4th round pick) to pickup Shaquem Griffen. He would be like a Ryan Shazier type but with more speed yet only 10 less pounds. He would be an ultra-versatile defensive player.

This touches on a couple of points which seem pertinent to the Bears #8 selection.

Firstly, how does Pace view Davenport and Edmunds. Edmunds has the higher draft grade (top 5) as an inside LB with the athleticism to add to the pass rush. Davenport is graded lower (top 15) as the ’raw’ prototypical freakish OLB who has double digit sack potential. How does Pace grade these two?

Secondly, as the draft is shaping up, I believe there is a strong possibility that Nelson is available at #8. This brings into question the concept of BPA and positional value. You can buy the best All Pro guard in FA but you can’t even buy a good edge rusher in FA.

Next to QB, an edge rusher is the most important and difficult position to find so I wonder how much a team would move the edge rusher up on their board. Ie. would Pace pass on the #2 prospect who plays guard vs. a #10 - #15 ranked edge rusher who they think could get them double digit sacks?
 

bearmick

Captain Objectivity
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
37,895
Liked Posts:
43,086
I think people are underestimating the importance of a dominant ILB who can do absolutely everything because they have the athletic superiority to cover, tackle, get sideline to sideline fast, blitz, everything. Bears fans should be the last people to undervalue such a player unless they have extremely short memories or are under 15 years old. Edmunds is a standout prospect and will arguably give a greater impact than a solid but not elite pass rusher. And unlike #54, we don't know that Edmunds adds little to the pass rush. He might be outstanding at it.

I still have Edmunds as my #1 choice but would be cool if they do go with a DE/OLB like Landry or Davenport.
 

Mdbearz

Well-known member
Joined:
Jan 9, 2014
Posts:
4,513
Liked Posts:
3,219
Location:
Harford County, MD
I think we are in a good spot, because OLB, ILB or guard would help the team tremendously when the talent is posssibly better than anyone currently on the team.

Edmunds has the potential to be better than Trevathan, Nelson could be the best lineman on the team, and Davenport has the potential to be better than Floyd.

I would take any of those and feel like we improved the team.
 

Adipost

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 28, 2014
Posts:
8,616
Liked Posts:
10,212
Location:
Chicago, IL
I think people are underestimating the importance of a dominant ILB who can do absolutely everything because they have the athletic superiority to cover, tackle, get sideline to sideline fast, blitz, everything. Bears fans should be the last people to undervalue such a player unless they have extremely short memories or are under 15 years old. Edmunds is a standout prospect and will arguably give a greater impact than a solid but not elite pass rusher. And unlike #54, we don't know that Edmunds adds little to the pass rush. He might be outstanding at it.

I still have Edmunds as my #1 choice but would be cool if they do go with a DE/OLB like Landry or Davenport.

Not sure why you categorize Edmunds ceiling as being a top ILB but dismiss Davenport as only capable of becoming a solid OLB.
 

Mdbearz

Well-known member
Joined:
Jan 9, 2014
Posts:
4,513
Liked Posts:
3,219
Location:
Harford County, MD
While I think that Edmunds would be a very good player, we are not playing a 4-3 defense where the 3 technique and Middle linebacker are the most important positions on the field.

The ILBs do have an impact, but just not as much as an OLB in the 3-4 base and even in a nickle package.

I would lean more towards Davenport if it was a choice between the two, because of two reasons, 1. It is a more impactful position. 2. It happens to be a bigger need on our team. And if you think that both players are top ten talent, then it really does make sense to go OLB.
 

bearmick

Captain Objectivity
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
37,895
Liked Posts:
43,086
Not sure why you categorize Edmunds ceiling as being a top ILB but dismiss Davenport as only capable of becoming a solid OLB.

I didn't say Davenport is only capable of being solid.

Edmunds has a much higher grade and looks to be a more standout prospect. There are Davenports every year. Guys like Edmunds are more rare. Both might be elite, neither might. But I think Edmunds is more likely to be.
 

baredown

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 20, 2013
Posts:
691
Liked Posts:
605
Not that I think it's a knock on Davenport, as he's clearly first round talent, but is there a reason why he went to UTSA instead of a bigger school?

He was a late bloomer physically. When he graduated from high school, his weight was in the 190lb range, and he'd been a conversion from WR to DE. The D1 majors simply didn't come calling. Also, he elected to stay home. He's from San Antonio. It's a little doubtful that he was thinking NFL career at the time...

I'm in the 'either Edmunds or Davenport' camp. Edmunds seems like he's athletically a little more "freakish", but Davenport carries a little higher positional value. And it's pretty amazing how closely Davenport's combine numbers align with Clowney's...
 

Treehorn

Well-known member
Joined:
Sep 14, 2012
Posts:
1,770
Liked Posts:
1,110
Location:
California
Great read. He may take longer to develop because of the huge gap in competition he will face.
 

Visionman

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 28, 2017
Posts:
7,995
Liked Posts:
4,451
With the way he learned and took to coaching and the better competition at the senior bowl, I think he's shown he can make that jump.
 

Aesopian

Hooters Waitress
Joined:
Jan 6, 2015
Posts:
16,261
Liked Posts:
9,203
Location:
Jupiter
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bears
[video=youtube_share;xrhx7YSmQ3w]https://youtu.be/xrhx7YSmQ3w[/video]
 

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
41,086
Liked Posts:
23,414
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Hey Dez. 13 mentions on the front page between thread starts and replies.:beer:
 

Luke

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 25, 2016
Posts:
2,149
Liked Posts:
1,514
With the way he learned and took to coaching and the better competition at the senior bowl, I think he's shown he can make that jump.

Jeremiah said that in all the years he has scouted the combine, he has never seen a player improve as much from the first day of practice up through the actual game. Imagine all spring and summer working with Vic, Davenport could be a stud right off the bat.
 

JoJoBoxer

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2010
Posts:
11,577
Liked Posts:
8,008
Look at it this way: Davenport is raw (but no so raw as people want to make him out to be) as an edge rusher while Edmunds is much more raw as an edge rusher since he player ILB.

Add to the fact that Edmunds makes mental mistakes, I would rather work on Davenport's raw skills than the missteps and bad reads of Edmunds.
 

Enasic

Who are the brain police?
Joined:
Mar 17, 2014
Posts:
13,294
Liked Posts:
9,715
Look at it this way: Davenport is raw (but no so raw as people want to make him out to be) as an edge rusher while Edmunds is much more raw as an edge rusher since he player ILB.

Add to the fact that Edmunds makes mental mistakes, I would rather work on Davenport's raw skills than the missteps and bad reads of Edmunds.

I'd be happy with either. But man, this article is convincing. Might sway me into the Davenport camp. But I'd be thrilled with Davenport/Edmunds/Fitzpatrick/Ward/James.

Bears just need play makers. They have a lot of very good or above average players, but they don't really have a game changing play maker. They have a couple of guys right on the edge, but I think because this should be the last time they pick this high, they need to take a swing and try to add a stud play maker. Even if they take a year or two to fully develop. No reason to play it safe in the top 8 on an OG.
 

Top