Let's talk Malik McDowell at #8!

[*FreeFua*]

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?

 

[LinvilleGorge]

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.

[Lemory]

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. 

[juliosantos]

HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL  NAHHHHHH i will blow torch my eyeball if we draft another dt or lb rd 1

[*FreeFua*]

Don't let his stats fool you. 

Watch his games, he'd constantly be getting doubled and was still collapsing pockets.

[*FreeFua*]

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.

[rippadonn]

Love the measurables and all but the difference between an NFL DT and an NFL DE is speed, speed, speed. 

[*FreeFua*]

NFL compares McDowell to Ziggy Ansah as their 'weaknesses' read a lot alike. 

Ziggy: http://www.nfl.com/draft/2013/profiles/ziggy-ansah?id=2539931

 

Malik: http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/profiles/malik-mcdowell?id=2557970

[Soul Rebel]

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. 

[*FreeFua*]

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.

[Pimpdaddy]

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...

[*FreeFua*]

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. 

[LinvilleGorge]

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.

[*FreeFua*]

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