Aaron Donald | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Aaron Donald

jlfin

jlfin

old pro
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
9,602
Reaction score
1,152
Age
63
Location
windermere
The more I read about him, the more he sounds like Warren Sapp. I think if he's there at 19, Hickey may be tempted.
I personally wouldnt have a problem with that.
Hickey was part of the FO staff that built a SB defense. He may be looking for his own Warren Sapp, Derrick Brooks etc.
The way to beat the Pats is to get quick pressure on Brady up the middle without blitzing.
Donald is relentless in that regard and would open things up for Wake, Vernon and Jordan
I know we have good DT's, but we dont have disruptive DT's.
 
jlfin said:
The more I read about him, the more he sounds like Warren Sapp. I think if he's there at 19, Hickey may be tempted.
I personally wouldnt have a problem with that.
Hickey was part of the FO staff that built a SB defense. He may be looking for his own Warren Sapp, Derrick Brooks etc.
The way to beat the Pats is to get quick pressure on Brady up the middle without blitzing.
Donald is relentless in that regard and would open things up for Wake, Vernon and Jordan
I know we have good DT's, but we dont have disruptive DT's.
Click to expand...

I don't think he'll be there at 19, but because he is smaller than ideal, he could be. Of the players who might be there, I only have Shazier rated higher.
 
I don't doubt his talent. But you don't draft a 3 tech when you have 2 very solid 3 techs and Earl Mitchell who would likely fit at 3 tech. We need a big body in there if we do anything, and I wouldn't because I think we have good developmental guys. Drafting him here just doesn't make any sense because we'd have to play guys out of position...we need to draft a guy who is an immediate upgrade and frankly even if he was we'd just be losing value from guys like Starks, Odrick and Mitchell. We should be taking value away from weaknesses, not strengths.
 
FearTheBeard said:
I don't doubt his talent. But you don't draft a 3 tech when you have 2 very solid 3 techs and Earl Mitchell who would likely fit at 3 tech. We need a big body in there if we do anything, and I wouldn't because I think we have good developmental guys. Drafting him here just doesn't make any sense because we'd have to play guys out of position...we need to draft a guy who is an immediate upgrade and frankly even if he was we'd just be losing value from guys like Starks, Odrick and Mitchell. We should be taking value away from weaknesses, not strengths.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The draft isn't about plugging holes. It's about finding the best talents for your system. Starks is on a 2-year deal (and old), Mitchell shouldn't prevent you from drafting anyone, Odrick is on the last year of his contract. Almost every position of every team is in flux like this on a yearly basis, and that's why you don't bypass better players for lesser player that fill immediate needs. If all else is equal, by all means, address the immediate need, but if Shazier is off the board (which he very well could be), and Donald is on the board, there's a very small chance that you're going to get a better player than Donald at 19.
 
You NEVER turn away from drafting elite talent even if you have the position manned for the upcoming season. You have to think four dimensionally when you draft. Like off-her-doll said, you have guys moving on all that time at every position. Though we have 3 DT's set for 2014, we only have two under contract for 2015, and both have contracts where they are candidate to be cut to make cap space if there's a younger cheaper option to replace them. It's HARD to add elite players, and you are far better off drafting them than you are signing them in free agency. And there are fewer options at elite talent with the 19th pick than you'd have higher up in the draft. Donald is one of the few elite looking talents that looks like he might drop. Like others have said, if he's still there, I'd take him.
 
If he's there at 19 it's pretty much a no-brainer. Forget the DT depth; this kid is extremely talented. Dude gets to the QB at an insane rate for an interior player. Heck, he played a lot of DE at Pitt, you could play him there too. We did a decent job of patching holes in FA for the very reason of being able to go bpa. If he's there at 19, I'm pretty sure he'd be bpa.

To me it'd be a different issue: if he's there at 19, you're probably going to be fielding calls for him via a trade up from someone like Seattle, Frisco, Denver, NewO, Philly. I think the question would be whether you'd rather move back and get more players or stay and draft a stud.
 
The sleeper 3 tech dt is carraun Reid of Princeton...I doubt he gets out of the 3rd round...
 
I'd love to draft Aaron Donald. He's explosive. He's someone who can collapse the pocket from the inside on pass plays. I don't remember ever having a disruptive DT like he potentially could be.
 
I haven't seen a mock where Dobson makes it to #19, but if he did Miami would be wise to take him. He gives you a lot of flexibility in that he can play DE and I don't think the Sapp comparison is too far off the mark. Dobson may be the most disruptive defensive player in the entire draft.
 
He's my favorite player in the draft, along with Kyle Van Noy. Favorite in terms of liking the way they play. I'm not claiming they'll be the two best guys out of this crop.

A few months ago when I started following the process more closely, Donald and Van Noy were strangely low in the ratings. Van Noy has remained there, probably because there was no way he could duplicate 2012 in terms of percentage of big plays among his total tackles. It was ridiculous. He naturally returned to a more normal level and somehow that's being held against him. It never ceases to amaze me that guys who have proven they can make a major impact are downgraded if they flatten out late in their career, like Van Noy and Marquise Lee, yet stiffs who are mostly projections are happily adjusted toward the top.

Donald reminds me of Tavon Austin last year in that somehow I was seeing second round projections on him in January. Didn't make a fleck of sense, given the rare talent and playmaking ability. Austin jumped to a more logical level and it looks like Donald will follow the same route. I don't think he'll get within 4-5 picks of our choice.

j-off-her-doll and others described it perfectly earlier in the thread. Earl Mitchell and others on our defensive line roster should mean nothing toward a decision on Aaron Donald, if he's there, just like Tannehill's presence should mean nothing if Bridgewater somehow slipped to us. We don't have strengths. You've got to hammer that into your skull. Nothing on this team is elite. Even the punter hits too many line drives. Last year the opposition allowed him to get away with it via only one deep man allowing the ball to drop and scamper. Since I joined this site in 2005 an ongoing amazement is lists of our players held up as special, and no need to touch that area. Meanwhile, on any other team we wouldn't be scared of that group or even be able to name them. Draft a great player. It won't hurt. If we end up with a right tackle at #19 I'll be ill. What are the odds the best player available happens to be a right tackle? The Hickey era will immediately stamp itself as not appreciably different than Spielman or Ireland.
 
j-off-her-doll said:
I disagree. The draft isn't about plugging holes. It's about finding the best talents for your system. Starks is on a 2-year deal (and old), Mitchell shouldn't prevent you from drafting anyone, Odrick is on the last year of his contract. Almost every position of every team is in flux like this on a yearly basis, and that's why you don't bypass better players for lesser player that fill immediate needs. If all else is equal, by all means, address the immediate need, but if Shazier is off the board (which he very well could be), and Donald is on the board, there's a very small chance that you're going to get a better player than Donald at 19.
Click to expand...

He isn't a can't miss top 5 prospect...he's a damn solid one but you don't draft into your top position of strength in the first round. It doesn't make your team better. Starks has played at a high level, Odrick has as well and they're both 3 techs. Find me a position on this roster that is deeper? You can't blindly go BPA or you end up with what we had with Jordan last year. If you get Donald on the field you're taking off Starks and Odrick. If you draft a LBer or a OL you're trading Wheeler or our not existent RT for an impressive prospect...there is a clear upgrade that makes your team better. I find with BPA within reason....but Donald would be even more of a luxury pick than Dion was last year...it would make zero sense. I'd prefer Shazier too and I'd be shocked if he wasn't there.

Upgrade your best slot (maybe) with a marginally better prospect or upgrade a Wheeler/Clabo with a marginally lesser prospect? What makes the team better? It's not Donald.
 
Awsi Dooger said:
j-off-her-doll and others described it perfectly earlier in the thread. Earl Mitchell and others on our defensive line roster should mean nothing toward a decision on Aaron Donald, if he's there, just like Tannehill's presence should mean nothing if Bridgewater somehow slipped to us. We don't have strengths. You've got to hammer that into your skull. Nothing on this team is elite. Even the punter hits too many line drives. Last year the opposition allowed him to get away with it via only one deep man allowing the ball to drop and scamper. Since I joined this site in 2005 an ongoing amazement is lists of our players held up as special, and no need to touch that area. Meanwhile, on any other team we wouldn't be scared of that group or even be able to name them. Draft a great player. It won't hurt. If we end up with a right tackle at #19 I'll be ill. What are the odds the best player available happens to be a right tackle? The Hickey era will immediately stamp itself as not appreciably different than Spielman or Ireland.
Click to expand...

This is my point...you can't possibly justify drafting Bridgewater just because you want to blindly pick BPA. As I said look what we have in Jordan...a guy who's playing a position that 3 other guys are already holding down. You can look at how much more talented one guy is but then you have to look at the value you're losing by leaving more talented players on the bench. A minor upgrade at one position (Donald over Odrick) is not a better approach than a huge upgrade at another (Shazier over Wheeler, Martin over ?, etc).

Do you like this defense better?
Wake-Donald-Mitchell-Vernon
Wheeler-Ellerbe-Misi

or

Wake-Odrick-Mitchell-Vernon
Shazier-Ellerbe-Misi

It's crazy that after Dion last year people seriously think that drafting players into positions of strength makes any sense. Pick from a pool of positions that can make an immediate impact (RB, TE, OL, LBer, FS, WR) and if the guy's are immediate upgrades take the highest guy on your board. Positional value is important, it can't just be cast aside. If a guy like Louis Nix was a Donald level prospect, then we could talk business because he'd be an immediate upgrade over Mitchell more than likely.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If Dion Jordan played up to his billing as a #3 overall pass rusher, he would have been a great pick.

The problem with Jordan is that he's a better LB than a pass rusher/DE, and he's not a good enough LB to justify his #3 overall selection.
 
j-off-her-doll said:
If Dion Jordan played up to his billing as a #3 overall pass rusher, he would have been a great pick.

The problem with Jordan is that he's a better LB than a pass rusher/DE, and he's not a good enough LB to justify his #3 overall selection.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with the Jordan pick because you know what at the time we took him we didn't really know what we had in Vernon. It'd be like drafting a corner this year if we hadn't drafted Taylor and only had Davis. I would've understood because there wasn't an established guy across from Wake and to me an edge rush is extremely important in the NFL. I just don't see how Donald makes THIS team better. I get liking a prospect, cause I like him as probably a top 12 guy...but I think all good draft philosophies draw from a lot of things, and pure BPA is too simplistic an approach. I don't think there's any guarantee that Donald plays at a higher level than Starks over the final 2 years of his contract. Odrick was fantastic last year. I don't want to leave these guys on the bench because we have him rated slightly higher, we're taking value away from our better players. I make this same argument against guys like Marquise Lee, but even with how deep this draft is at WR I'd understand taking a guy like Evans because it's something different in a position group we're strong at. I really don't think there's a DT in this draft that will definitively give us an upgrade on Odrick/Starks at 3-tech.

Shazier > Wheeler
Evans > Hartline
Ebron > Sims
Martin > Garner?
Su'a-Filo > Brenner
Donald > Starks/Odrick

The only key contributors on our team there are Hartline and the DT's. Even then we'd just push Hartline to the slot. The other guys are clear upgrades and Evans, Shazier, Ebron are all pretty similarly rated guys, I'd even have the OL in the same ballpark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom