2014 NFL Draft: Is Aaron Donald a fit for the Rams?

[bluecollarram]

Brian Spurlock-USA TODAY Sports
×
Get the latest St. Louis Rams news with Turf Show Times
Follow Turf Show Times on Twitter
Like Turf Show Times Facebook
The Rams are pretty well stocked along the defensive line, but there are a few players in the draft who could make it even better.
Tweet Share on Twitter (1) Share Share on Facebook  Share Share with Rams friends 73 Comments
The idea of the St. Louis Rams drafting Jadeveon Clowney has been well-covered. He's an option with the second pick, if they don't trade it. But there's another defensive lineman who could also be an even better fit and might just be available at No. 13: Aaron Donald from Pitt.
Donald wowed the world at the Combine. His work there was enough to get him moved up from Mike Mayock's third-best defensive tackle to the top DT on the draft guru's board as of today. But as good as his Combine numbers were, his tape is even better.
Retired NFL defensive end Stephen White put Donald under the microscope today. He walked away very impressed with what Donald can do, playing at any position along the defensive line and possessing the kind of technique many NFL veterans will never have.
... this guy plays at a level, technique-wise, that I haven't seen from a college defensive lineman in the last decade. Yes, I'm including Atkins, Gerald McCoy, Ndamukong Suh, Marcell Dareus, Nick Fairley and anybody else you can name. None of them had what this kid has at that point in their football lives.
The Rams drafted Michael Brockers in the first round in 2012, and signed free agent Kendall Langford that same year. Langford has two more years left on his contract. Donald would essentially be his replacement, working mostly as a three-technique while Brockers handles the power role.
Taking Donald with the 13th pick, if he makes it that far, would allow the Rams to part ways with Langford and his $7 million cap hit next season (or even $6 million cap hit this season). Not to mentioned giving them TWO blue chip interior linemen on an all-blue chip line bookended by Robert Quinn and Chris Long.
It's maybe a stretch for the Rams to draft Donald, but Fisher's draft history is long on defensive linemen taken in the first round.

 

[wrstdude]

Yes please. Best player at his position and makes Langford expendable. I think it would be a huge mistake to pass on him if he's there at 13.

 

[Flipper_336]

Is Donald a fit? Maybe, although we have all remarked that Fisher and Waufle seem to prefer tall defensive linemen.

Is Donald a need? Not when we have far worse players than Langford (the man Donald would replace) starting at guard, safety and outside linebacker.

 

[bluecollarram]

Is Donald a fit? Maybe, although we have all remarked that Fisher and Waufle seem to prefer tall defensive linemen.

Is Donald a need? Not when we have far worse players than Langford (the man Donald would replace) starting at guard, safety and outside linebacker.

IMO, fit is more about scheme. This kid has talent to "fit" any scheme. Shooting through the gap to hit a RB or QB is a benefit on any play. Kid just plays in the backfield so much it's ridiculous.

As far as "need" I just don't see the benefit of passing on a player just to fill a hole on the roster. We have other draft picks for that.

 

[Flipper_336]

I just don't see the benefit of passing on a player just to fill a hole on the roster. We have other draft picks for that.

I know that yours is a viewpoint shared by many in the NFL fanbase, and that's fine. I suppose we'll just have to continue to suck at those positions while they get filled by late-round picks and UDFAs.

 

[RamsJunkie]

Yeah I would take him in a heart beat at 13. Theres not to many DTs out there that can put up 10 plus sacks a year I think this guy could do it. I think he would have more of an impact on this team than clowney would. As much as we rotate guys on the Dline in and out he would get plenty of playing time. I believe this move would put us in contention to break the sack record. How could you stop Quinn Donald Hayes and Long from killing your QB on pass rush downs? That would be so good it should be illegal.

 

[wrstdude]

Is Donald a fit? Maybe, although we have all remarked that Fisher and Waufle seem to prefer tall defensive linemen.

Is Donald a need? Not when we have far worse players than Langford (the man Donald would replace) starting at guard, safety and outside linebacker.

I'm a need guy at heart and one could certainly argue that the Rams need Donald more than any of those positions. Guard would likely be filled pick #2 anyway. Safeties will fall to the 2nd round so we're guaranteed a solid one there. I don't see Dunbar being worse than Langford. We took a top outside LB in Ogletree last year. Pass rushing DT is a huge need on this team-something Langford does only adequately.

 

[Flipper_336]

I don't see Dunbar being worse than Langford.

I can't argue with any of your other points as they're perfectly valid, even though my drafting philosophy would differ. But there's no way that Dunbar is as good as Langford.

 

[rhinobean]

I'm waiting til the free agent stuff is over to see where the Rams needs are before adding to the mock draft fire! Want to know what the real football minds are thinking first!

 

[bluecollarram]

I know that yours is a viewpoint shared by many in the NFL fanbase, and that's fine. I suppose we'll just have to continue to suck at those positions while they get filled by late-round picks and UDFAs.

Suck at what positions? We are talking about a first round pick, second or third round picks are not "late round" picks should be DB's, OG's, and LB's that can start or push for playing time in those spots. Im just not a fan of picking a particular position with a first round pick because we "need" that position filled.

 

[Flipper_336]

Im just not a fan of picking a particular position with a first round pick because we "need" that position filled.

And I'm not a fan of using one of our top two picks on a position where we already have a good starter when there are massive holes elsewhere. Just a difference in philosophy, that's all.

 

[bluecollarram]

And I'm not a fan of using one of our top two picks on a position where we already have a good starter when there are massive holes elsewhere. Just a difference in philosophy, that's all.

I get where you are coming from. The Rams IMO, are in a great place in this draft due to their recent draft strategy. There are many young players on the roster so we aren't sure what we have yet which lends to great flexibility in this draft. The only "massive" holes I see are OL which can be addressed with the second pick or the second or later round picks. FA period may change that as well.

Off topic how do you only quote only part of a post? I've tried it a couple times and didn't succeed

 

[Flipper_336]

Off topic how do you only quote only part of a post? I've tried it a couple times and didn't succeed

You just delete the parts you don't need, once you've clicked "Reply" and the post appears in the reply box.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Donald has made me a believer. I wouldn't mind if the Rams drafted him. They always should be looking to the future.

 

[mr.stlouis]

Sure he's a good fit. I just like other players better.

 

[bluecollarram]

once you've clicked "Reply" and the post appears in the reply box.

Thankx

 

[RamFan503]

Off topic how do you only quote only part of a post? I've tried it a couple times and didn't succeed

Hit reply and then just mark the section(s) you don't want to include and hit either backspace or delete.

 

[wrstdude]

I can't argue with any of your other points as they're perfectly valid, even though my drafting philosophy would differ. But there's no way that Dunbar is as good as Langford.

Dunbar does his job. He's a 2 down, run stopping LBer. Langford had arguably his best year that only resulted in 5 sacks. He's, at 28, likely a downward trending player at that position. He also benefitted from Quinn's monster season. Dunbar was suspended the first 4 games and his role was largely reduced. You could argue he regressed, but he did come off a 115 tackle season the previous year and PFF had him rated very high as I recall. To me they're both adequate. If Dunbar is worse, it's only marginally.

For me, I take the 3 down player over the 2 down player all day long. Need can be equated that way as well. Do you need a guy who's on the field less than the guy who is on the field more? I see Donald capable of getting 10 sacks/year where we probably won't ever see Langford get more than his 5.

 

[bluecollarram]

I see Donald capable of getting 10 sacks/year where we probably won't ever see Langford get more than his 5.

My POV is not even that Donald gets double digit sacks, that kind of penetration disrupts plays period.

 

[RamFan503]

I am a need plus best player available guy. I see a huge need on the O-line in more than one spot. But in the draft, if you see a guy that is a total stud and you are not completely stacked at his position, you should think long and hard about taking him. I'm not sure if Donald is that stud but if the Rams think he is and decide to take him, I won't be upset in the slightest. I keep hearing him being referred to as "disruptive". My ideal D-line is disruptive all game long.

Personally, I think our defensive backfield will play WAY better this season. JJ and True are coming into their third year and I think their game and growth last year was severely hampered by Walton. McDonald has some experience, McLeod has some experience now, we still haven't seen what Matt the Hat has to offer, and I am hopeful on Davis coming on. We may need to pick up another CB and S but I'm not so sure that it is as dire as I was thinking before GW signed to be our DC.

So in the end, you have only a few opportunities to get real studs to put on the field together. If Donald is another one, take him and get after it. A notorious D is something that can get you deep in the playoffs almost by itself.