Why not draft Aaron Donald as a DE ?

.

Agree lots of talk on Donald. However, it is a valid question. I would think he would be well suited to a 3-4 DE. I would question height and arm length, but motor, speed, strength, agility seem to be there.

in the Giants scheme they use players all along the DL.. Tuck played DT and DE.. JPP has played both./. Kiwi plays mostly DE.. Jenkins has played DT and DE...

so if he was drafted they would find a way to use him to take advantage over the defense...

Donald has played every position on the DL.. but he is best used as a 3 tech DT.. which the Giants have a need of..

Start here.


Further reading - ( New Window )

question! WHY NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They have 2 gap responsibility. They are not meant to penetrate. He's the ideal 3 technique DT. And the top rated one at that. He's a penetrator. Why draft him to change positions where he's not really suited for?

he would be good against the run, setting the edge, and shedding blocks to make tackles. Though I don't think he will be an consistently effective pass rusher from that position. He has the versatility to mix it up if you want to play him at DE a few snaps, but honestly his pass rushing skills are best suited to play inside and asking him to rush from the outside is limiting his effectiveness. I don't think he possesses the flexibility to dip and beat NFL tackles consistently as a 43 DE.

Donald had been a B-52?

In comment 11626933 Beer Man said:

Quote:

Donald had been a B-52?

He would had bombed the shit out of Ebron. Unfortunately for Eric, he wouldn't be able catch all of them.

In comment 11626933 Beer Man said:

Quote:

Donald had been a B-52?

Which one would he have been?

That neither Donald nor Ebron will be the pick. Start thinking Evans/Martin

Can he play on the Offensive Line? If so, sure!

asks a valid question.

I'm warming up to being very happy with Donald if he's the pick at #12, provided none of the "sure fire non QB top 10 picks" (e.g. Clowney, Watkins, Mack, Robinson, Matthews) are still available.

and being explosive for a DT doesn't equate to having the speed and explosion to come off the edge at DE. He doesn't fit the 4-3 DE paradigm in any way.

when he was drafted. He was considered to be drafted too high but he was a playmaker who justified the pick. He broke the mold of the prototype DE and I feel that Donald will have a similar impact at DT.

as well as the next John Randle, depending on whom you ask.

....

Dwight Freeney as a DE. Over rated player, who was more of a pass rushing specialist than a 2 way DE, who can rush the passer AND play the run.

Any tackle with long arms would be able to zone him out. I think he'd have to be a DT.

In comment 11627201 JonC said:

Quote:

as well as the next John Randle, depending on whom you ask.

I believe Lawrence Taylor comparisons were mentioned as well.

So Donald falls somewhere between Freeney...Randle...and LT. He was visiting the Cowboys this week and was planning on stopping in Canton to get fitted for his HOF bust and then home to Pittsburgh.

As well as in their 3-4 (very effective against Ole Miss), he's much better suited to stick to the 3-tech in a 4-3 in the pros. He's the squarest of square pegs. No need to look for a round hole to plug him into.

The freaks come out at night.

DONALD!!!!!

Quote:

He certainly lacks the range/length/height of a DE JonC : 2:36 pm : link : reply and being explosive for a DT doesn't equate to having the speed and explosion to come off the edge at DE. He doesn't fit the 4-3 DE paradigm in any way.

Elvis Dumervil is the exception that proves the rule.

5'11", 260#, 4.75 40 yd dash, 73 sacks in 7 seasons.

Not every DE needs to be tall and long. But like Klaatu said, square peg, and the Giants could surely use a square peg behind Jenkins.

can run.

position. That's how I view him. He's not like other DTs who are space eaters and stout, this guy has his own brand of ball and will be a disruptive player in the backfield. Paid him with JPP and the Giants will have quite a pass rushing combo for olines to deal with.

Freeny and Randle all rolled up into one. What a player.

You're being a bit obtuse. I've been clearly I'm speaking of the NYG DE paradigm, and they look for 6'4+ condors who play 2-way well.

Dumervil is a major exception.

and while I think he could occasionally find success at DE, I mostly think the top OT's would eat him up. The combination of their length, size and strength would pretty much cancel out what Donald brings to the table. He's fast, but not faster than the top outside pash rushers.

His advantage imo is that he's too fast for interior defenders, and strong enough to win a lot of battles. Furthermore he has a lot of great football instincts and has already developed a strong arsenal of rush moves.

But the top OT's in the league can handle all of that, while interior linemen can not. Why intentionally line him up against the NFL's best?

and Donald doesn't fit it. Dumervil is indeed the exception to the case.

I wonder we have one for DT in terms of physical size. How big were these guys?

LinJO
Barry C
Hand
Robbins
Canty
Kuhn
Patterson
Jenkins
Hankins
Austin
Alford

Any others am I missing?

or wouldn't be a good selection for the Giants because he didn't "fit" as a 3 tech or 1 tech. As well as Watt has performed in general, as much of a beast as he is and a rare specimen in every which way, would you still say that he's a "poor fit" as a 4-3 DT? Or even maybe as a DE in a 4-3? I think Watt could play ANY DL position well, even a 1 tech; although 1 would be a waste of his talent to some extent.

and typically they have different archetypes for each. But some guys are kinda tweeners, like Kuhn. Of course they drafted him pretty late...

Alford was a typical 3 tech for us, Linval clearly a 1, as was Cofield.

I think they look for 3s who are super quick of the ball, and size isn't as relevant there because Robbins was huge, and Austin and Alford a good bit smaller, no?

His pure athleticism demonstrated in the NFL is a significant leap up from what he showed in college, now it's pretty clear he could play 4-3 DE.

and it's over, no rush.

conversely, >late rounder< brent urban, consensus as a 3-4 type player...but:

who gets push on the inside that the don does not,

albeit does not have that 'step' but-

as a 6'7" 295er, could develop any number of moves, with that push or good leverage that he already uses, could develop moves that could become very useful even as a 4-3 DE.

for example, 'could we use a Watt as a DE in our system? ' damn right we could.

you say urban is 'too slow' at 295?

well, demotre moore is too slow at 250. which is more useful?

was very sophisticated moves for a big man. Pretty refined hand techniques and moves IIRC. The athleticism became rather more clear at the combine.

about Watt.

"slow." Not in a 10 yard box, which is what counts. Forget his 40 YD time, it's pretty meaningless.

agreed, though he's stepped it up another couple notches in the NFL to full beast mode.

is the odd plays, a fumble recovery here, a getting hands high prevent a pass there...plus he uses great leverage for a guy who is 'only' 295.

if the draft falls without us getting a classic DE...my opinion is that a player like urban at DE might help free up our DTs and linebackers to attack inside gaps...and he could take reps on the inside as well if you trust the leverage shown on college tape.

all taking into consideration a relatively much lower round selection and as part of an O focussed draft

may have given coach an incentive to keep our roster DTs locked up each covering multiple inside gaps..thus no interior pass rush.

(which became Marvin A) and our 1st (Prince) enough to move up to 10 and land Watt?

Woulda, coulda, shoulda.

The one time Jon in NYC and I agreed on a Badger!

at times and very varied.

it is a different game than what we have been playing.

remember the banger LBs the aagles used to have, to smash into gaps left open by such an attack?

or our own dynamic DL, able to create O chaos and win even while taking such risks?

what we cannot continue to do is just have both DTs covering 2 gaps, still get no rush from the DEs, and ask the LBs to...whatever they are supposed to and aren't or cannot.

he will primarily play DT. Remember, as a DT, even full time, his sack totals won't be that high. Neither was Sapp's.

What he brings is a disruptive force where he will force double coverage and still manage to get into the backfield. The other guys on the Dline, especially the LDE and RDE will actually get credit for the sacks.

Who cares? As long as he screws up the QB, Oline and RB on most plays it doesn't really matter who gets home.

not his size. By putting him at DT he is up close to the C and/or G, and can utilize these advantages to get the edge. At DE there is more space,and he would be farther away from the OT, so his quickness would be minimized (don't get me wrong he is still quick). This would then mean one of his main advantages would be reduced, and the size issue would come from and center as a problem. DE's need to be bigger. The interview with C Weston Richburg on a different thread pretty much validated this. He said he had a real problem with Donald at the Senior Bowl because of Donald's quickness. Because Donald lined up so close to him, Richburg had a hard time keeping him out of the gap.

In comment 11628169 BlueLou said:

Quote:

and typically they have different archetypes for each. But some guys are kinda tweeners, like Kuhn. Of course they drafted him pretty late... Alford was a typical 3 tech for us, Linval clearly a 1, as was Cofield. I think they look for 3s who are super quick of the ball, and size isn't as relevant there because Robbins was huge, and Austin and Alford a good bit smaller, no?

Yeah I listed everyone. I am curious to see if there is a model in terms of size we are sticking to for our DTs in general at 3T and 1T.

And I'm not sure he's got bend.