Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Let's talk Malik McDowell at #8!

*FreeFua*

By *FreeFua*,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

*FreeFua* Grand Master

*FreeFua*

Posted
Posted

At 6'6", 276lbs Malik McDowell has that athletic freak look to him. No one really talks about him being an option at 8 because he is LISTED as a defensive tackle. What I want to discuss is - is he better suited to be a 4-3 defensive end? 

I figured I'd include this 'Bottom Line' quote from his NFL Draft Profile so it doesn't look like I'm the only one thinking it. 

• Has similar physical traits and abilities of Arik Armstead and DeForest Buckner, but may not share their football character. McDowell lacked production along the interior and could benefit from a move to a defensive end spot in a 4-3 or 3-4 front. McDowell is raw, but when he flashes, it can be blinding. McDowell is an explosive, ascending prospect with All-Pro potential if he grows into his body and takes the necessary coaching.

Malik has shown the ability to shed blockers and stop the run from his defensive tackle position as well. Occasionally on passing downs MSU would kick McDowell outside and let him rush:

If you go to the 2:37, 3:51 and 4:12 marks you'll see McDowell lined up outside and going up against McGlichey (who would've been the 1st tackle off the board and most likely our pick if he had declared). 

Personally the more I watch Malik, the more I see a player who could be plugged in day 1 and be that three down edge rusher that Rivera was talking about at the Senior Bowl. 

What do you guys think?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted

Sounds like a huge risk at #8. 

Seems like a classic bust prospect to me. Has all the physical tools, flashes tremendous potential, will likely perform well at the underwear Olympics, but simply hasn't produced at a high level on the football field. No thanks. I don't want to spend a top 10 pick on that type of prospect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lemory Community Regular

Lemory

Posted
Posted

He's obviously got all the tools to be DE but at #8 your looking good for a guy that can come in and produce. It might take him a while to get to where we need him to be. If Gman takes him at 8, I won't be mad but, I feel like we could do better at 8. If we traded back he might be a good pick but I doubt we move back from a top 10 pick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
*FreeFua* Grand Master

*FreeFua*

Posted
  • Author
Posted
9 minutes ago, Lemory said:

He's obviously got all the tools to be DE but at #8 your looking good for a guy that can come in and produce. It might take him a while to get to where we need him to be. If Gman takes him at 8, I won't be mad but, I feel like we could do better at 8. If we traded back he might be a good pick but I doubt we move back from a top 10 pick. 

Like I've been saying I think Fournette will be the pick if he's there but I don't see him getting past Jacksonville.

So now that leaves us most likely going defensive end. 

There's Solomon Thomas (who i like), Derek Barnett and then guys like Taco Charlton, Charles Harris who will most likely go end of the 1st, top of 2nd. 

McDowell is definitely a wild card imo. Thomas appears to be the safer pick but isn't as athletic as McDowell. In a league that's get more and more athletic and quicker every year, guys like McDowell are sure tempting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Soul Rebel Experienced

Soul Rebel

Posted
Posted

TBH, I see your point of him getting kicked outside to DE at the NFL. If I told you there's a 6'6", 276 pound DL that is freakishly athletic, long, great at shedding blocks, constantly double-teamed and does a great job of getting after the QB, I would think you're talking about a DE, not a DT.

My biggest question is why did MSU play him at tackle rather than DE?  

I'm not against this at all, but I do however think that there will be more solid, less risk prospects at #8. I like what I see and he is definitely a DG / RR kind of pick. Flexible enough to play along the line and would give them a few guys to rotate around. I do think he could flip to DE in the NFL and his athleticism is tantalizing. He was constantly double-teamed and still got a lot of pressure on the QB. 

Unfortunately at 8, I would prefer Barnett.  If we were picking 12-18 range, I would consider it.... just to much risk at #8 for my blood. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
*FreeFua* Grand Master

*FreeFua*

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 hours ago, Soul Rebel said:

My biggest question is why did MSU play him at tackle rather than DE?  

Yeah there is that.

However I read on Twitter that they did start him at defensive end against Northwestern in hopes of getting more pressure on the QB

Coming out of high school he was labeled as a strong side defensive end. From the snaps I've seen him lined up outside he does a lot better on the strong side as opposed to weak side. 

I think he's definitely worth a workout and visit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pimpdaddy Grand Master

Pimpdaddy

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Sounds like a huge risk at #8. 

Seems like a classic bust prospect to me. Has all the physical tools, flashes tremendous potential, will likely perform well at the underwear Olympics, but simply hasn't produced at a high level on the football field. No thanks. I don't want to spend a top 10 pick on that type of prospect.

...Tha end...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
*FreeFua* Grand Master

*FreeFua*

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Sounds like a huge risk at #8. 

Seems like a classic bust prospect to me. Has all the physical tools, flashes tremendous potential, will likely perform well at the underwear Olympics, but simply hasn't produced at a high level on the football field. No thanks. I don't want to spend a top 10 pick on that type of prospect.

1. There's really no sure thing in the draft. Some called Cam and KB boom or bust type prospects. By your logic I guess you were against drafting both these guys as well? 

2. Hasn't produced? That tells me you're simply just looking at the box scores and haven't gone and watched all his games that are available on draftbreakdown. Here's a guy that was double teamed and even triple teamed at times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, *FreeFua* said:

1. There's really no sure thing in the draft. Some called Cam and KB boom or bust type prospects. By your logic I guess you were against drafting both these guys as well? 

2. Hasn't produced? That tells me you're simply just looking at the box scores and haven't gone and watched all his games that are available on draftbreakdown. Here's a guy that was double teamed and even triple teamed at times. 

1. Cam and KB were boom or bust prospects. I told everyone who would listen that Cam would either be great or a complete bust. I didn't see any other way it could go down. Either his game would translate to the NFL or it wouldn't. Had the rookie wage scale not been implemented and we were going to have to pay him like a future HOFer as a rookie I would've been very hesitant to draft him, but given the financial protection of the rookie wage scale, no way you could pass on his potential.

2. Most really good college DL are getting double teamed by opponents. The great ones figure out how to still produce. If we take a DL for om the state of Michigan with the intent of playing him at DE, I'd rather take Taco Charlton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
*FreeFua* Grand Master

*FreeFua*

Posted
  • Author
Posted
18 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

1. Cam and KB were boom or bust prospects. I told everyone who would listen that Cam would either be great or a complete bust. I didn't see any other way it could go down. Either his game would translate to the NFL or it wouldn't. Had the rookie wage scale not been implemented and we were going to have to pay him like a future HOFer as a rookie I would've been very hesitant to draft him, but given the financial protection of the rookie wage scale, no way you could pass on his potential.

2. Most really good college DL are getting double teamed by opponents. The great ones figure out how to still produce. If we take a DL for om the state of Michigan with the intent of playing him at DE, I'd rather take Taco Charlton.

I can tell by your #2 that you haven't watched any of McDowell's cut ups. 

I do like Charlton too though. 

We're kind of in a tough spot at #8. Guys like McDowell, Thomas and Charlton could all be considered reaches at 8 but if Fournette is gone I'm thinking we go DE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Candler Cat
      This Team...

      By Candler Cat · Posted

      The last child @ home has told me he wants to go to a game, so we're seeing vs Rams on the 30th
    • tukafan21
      Bryce Young Haters..

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      Did we really shut them down though? They had 369 yards of offense.   That is 9 more yards than they average per game and 53 more than we give up per game this year.   If a team gave up 369 yards per game on defense, they'd be the 7th worst defense in the league this year. Yes, I will give our defense credit for having the 4th down stand near our goal line as well as creating the fumble that stopped their first drive, as they did rise to the occasion then, but even the INT was just a ridiculous play/throw and handed it to us and they also missed a FG. We didn't force them into a single punt all game.  We had 1 sack on a QB who had 37 pass attempts. They had drives of 56, 49, 50, 43, 58, and 71 yards (while we only had 2 over 40 yards ourselves). We bent, a lot, but never really broke, partially due to the Packers own mistakes, that's a far cry from "shutting them down" in my opinion.  Again, this is why I'm critical of us after a day like today, I'm able to look beyond a final score and evaluate how we played on the whole, and we keep squeaking out these wins despite not playing well at all.  And yes, that is what great teams do, but they also play well in the majority of their games, where as all we seem to do is squeak out ugly wins without ever playing all that well. I'm not saying I'm unhappy that we won, I've never once said anything like that, but when week after week I see serious concerns with how we played, then I'm going to call out what I see.
    • Butterflyj30
      Other 11/2 NFL games

      By Butterflyj30 · Posted

      Washington is going to have to do better than this
×
×
  • Create New...