Jump to content

Week 5 GDT: Raiders at Chargers


RaidersAreOne

Who takes home the W this weekend?  

26 members have voted

  1. 1. Who takes home the W this weekend?

  2. 2. What will the point difference be?



Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, big_palooka said:

James is going to be an all-pro player. He's a once a generation safety prospect IMO. Said that before the draft, he's delivering on it all ready.

The Raiders could have drafted OT later in the draft and they did with Parker. So they could have still landed Parker and looked at Crosby (Lions drafted in round 5) had a nice preseason. Or a guy I was touting Des Harrison, who is the starting LT for Cleveland and wasn't drafted. Or Orlando Brown, round 4 who will be a stud. 

Point is.... there were other ways to fill the tackle spots. Draft and FA while still taking the BPA in the draft.

I get the logic, I just hated the execution. And thankfully Miller has looked solid, because nobody liked that pick in real time.

Like I said, I really liked James. Genuinely, all pro type guy. But I am sure you can appreciate 1. the low value of the safety position in general 2. the terrible draft management and utter waste of draft capital signalled by taking safeties in rd 1,2,1 in 3 consecutive years. In a year where our misuse of draft capital is already highly questionable and in a bright spotlight 3. The absolute potential disaster going into the season relying on Penn at LT coming off injury at age 35 with only Brandon Parker or a late round or UDFA tackle in that spot behind him. Despite their hindsight successes thus far, relying on a guy like Brown or Harrison for a starring role on the offensive line is a potential implosion for what is essentially an offense based team whose only hope is it's QB. A QB who needs desperately to be well protected. Add in the Mack trade shortly before the season and all that drama, and it's easy to see the whole season swallowed into a dark abyss over it all. James might well be the better player, but if we picked him I could definitely see significantly worse outcomes for the overall team than picking Miller, and Parker for the double dip. 

Double dipping on 2 tall pass protecting type tackles was most definitely prudent. Taking bigger longshot risks at tackle in the draft, maybe that works out in hindsight. But it's not exactly the place to take long odds risks. Not with the state of the tackles on the roster. And how sought after good ones are (meaning how hard the position is to fill with FAs).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, holyghost said:

Like I said, I really liked James. Genuinely, all pro type guy. But I am sure you can appreciate 1. the low value of the safety position in general 2. the terrible draft management and utter waste of draft capital signalled by taking safeties in rd 1,2,1 in 3 consecutive years. In a year where our misuse of draft capital is already highly questionable 3. The absolute potential disaster going into the season relying on Penn at LT coming off injury at age 35 with only Brandon Parker or a late round or UDFA tackle in that spot behind him. Despite their successes thus far, relying on a guy like Brown or Harrison for a starring role on the offensive line is a potential implosion for what is essentially an offense based team whose only hope is it's QB who needs desperately to be well protected. Add in the Mack trade shortly before the season and all that drama, and it's easy to see the whole season swallowed into a dark abyss over it all. James might well be the better player, but if we picked him I could definitely see significantly worse outcomes for the overall team than picking Miller, and Parker for the double dip. 

Double dipping on 2 tall tackles was most definitely prudent. Taking bigger longshot risks at tackle in the draft, maybe that works out in hindsight but it's not exactly the place to take long odds risks. Not with the state of the tackles on the roster. And how sought after good ones are (meaning how hard the position is to fill with FAs).

 

 The tackles aren’t just tall they’re both super athletic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, holyghost said:

Like I said, I really liked James. Genuinely, all pro type guy. But I am sure you can appreciate 1. the low value of the safety position in general 2. the terrible draft management and utter waste of draft capital signalled by taking safeties in rd 1,2,1 in 3 consecutive years.

Most situations, yes I would agree. Not in the case of James. He transcends the norm for me at the position. He not a normal safety. He can affect the game in multiple ways, line up anywhere on the field and always gets to the ball. You draft him. 

24 minutes ago, holyghost said:

3. The absolute potential disaster going into the season relying on Penn at LT coming off injury at age 35 with only Brandon Parker or a late round or UDFA tackle in that spot behind him.

There were options in FA (Solder, Flemming). And trade, like what Cincy did with Cordy Glenn.

I completely understand the glaring need at T and addressing it. But with holes everywhere on the roster and a legit all-pro talent on the board, give me the sure thing. Miller has been solid and if he becomes a true franchise LT, then my opinion may change. IMO, he will develop at best into an average starting LT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Bitty 2.0 said:

 The tackles aren’t just tall they’re both super athletic.

Parker IMO was a reach. Small school guy, got worked at the Senior Bowl. Didn't get that pick at all let alone trading up for him.

Wanted Warner who was my LB2 behind Roquan Smith. And just like safety, the LBs still suck fierce 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

Most situations, yes I would agree. Not in the case of James. He transcends the norm for me at the position. He not a normal safety. He can affect the game in multiple ways, line up anywhere on the field and always gets to the ball. You draft him. 

There were options in FA (Solder, Flemming). And trade, like what Cincy did with Cordy Glenn.

I completely understand the glaring need at T and addressing it. But with holes everywhere on the roster and a legit all-pro talent on the board, give me the sure thing. Miller has been solid and if he becomes a true franchise LT, then my opinion may change. IMO, he will develop at best into an average starting LT. 

I saw the same thing you saw with James. He looked able to play CB in a pinch, and play it well. True defensive leader type personality.

But on defense we're touching on the Mack theory again. If we draft James, we just can't trade Mack. Because James added alone makes the defense marginally better if at all. James paired with this dogpile we have playing now is a wasted talent. You have to keep Mack in the hope you can field a great defense. Not good, great. And then you have to slam the draft next year on defensive players again. If we have 4,5 great defenders and 5 really good ones, that is what you need for a great defense. We're not even close to that, even with Mack. 

Solder you break the bank for or you don't get him. Fleming, don't know about. 2 guys with 32 teams competing is a very thin market. FA is over by the draft. We had to draft LT and T overall. We'll see what Miller becomes. I doubt very highly he'll be as good a LT as James will be a S. But if he is genuinely an 8 year player at left tackle for us then it's well worth it. 8 years for me means he's good enough that noone is itching to replace him in all that time. Rookie contract and 2nd contract. In this league, that's good. And at that position it's great. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, holyghost said:

But on defense we're touching on the Mack theory again. If we draft James, we just can't trade Mack. Because James added alone makes the defense marginally better if at all. James paired with this dogpile we have playing now is a wasted talent. You have to keep Mack in the hope you can field a great defense. Not good, great. And then you have to slam the draft next year on defensive players again. If we have 4,5 great defenders and 5 really good ones, that is what you need for a great defense. We're not even close to that, even with Mack. . 

That's what I envisioned honestly. To me, the offense had the pieces to be successful. It was risky, but they had just drafted Sharpe and Ware, had Penn. You resign Mack. Then draft James and I'd go further and throw Landry at 41 vs. trading out of that spot. Imagine a defense with Mack, James and Landry.... it was a realistic scenario that never happened.

As it stands now, the Raiders don't have a single "dude" on defense. When Frostee Rucker is your leader on defense you've got problems. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, big_palooka said:

James is going to be an all-pro player. He's a once a generation safety prospect IMO. Said that before the draft, he's delivering on it all ready.

The Raiders could have drafted OT later in the draft and they did with Parker. So they could have still landed Parker and looked at Crosby (Lions drafted in round 5) had a nice preseason. Or a guy I was touting Des Harrison, who is the starting LT for Cleveland and wasn't drafted. Or Orlando Brown, round 4 who will be a stud. 

Point is.... there were other ways to fill the tackle spots. Draft and FA while still taking the BPA in the draft.

I get the logic, I just hated the execution. And thankfully Miller has looked solid, because nobody liked that pick in real time.

You do not get to mention Orlando Brown I was killed for saying forget his bad combine dude was going to be a stud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, big_palooka said:

Parker IMO was a reach. Small school guy, got worked at the Senior Bowl. Didn't get that pick at all let alone trading up for him.

Wanted Warner who was my LB2 behind Roquan Smith. And just like safety, the LBs still suck fierce 

This week will  settle this issue if they perform well then Gruden was right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ehhh I can see the comment either way after you guys mentioned your POV. But I'm not gonna give him the benefit of the doubt seeing as its been a pattern for him. He has a worse case of Foot-In-Mouth Disease than Ben McAdoo last year. Seriously what kind of clown wouldn't be able to shut up about pass rushers and Mack week after week in our predicament? And then who talks about a draft class this candidly merely 4 weeks into the season? I bet Miller felt real good hearing that. Yeah, he's a football player but oof. I cringe every time Gruden gets quoted these days. Make it stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, big_palooka said:

James is going to be an all-pro player. He's a once a generation safety prospect IMO. Said that before the draft, he's delivering on it all ready.

The Raiders could have drafted OT later in the draft and they did with Parker. So they could have still landed Parker and looked at Crosby (Lions drafted in round 5) had a nice preseason. Or a guy I was touting Des Harrison, who is the starting LT for Cleveland and wasn't drafted. Or Orlando Brown, round 4 who will be a stud. 

Point is.... there were other ways to fill the tackle spots. Draft and FA while still taking the BPA in the draft.

I get the logic, I just hated the execution. And thankfully Miller has looked solid, because nobody liked that pick in real time.

I don't think they would have gone into the season only with guys drafted in the 4th or 5th as the primary guy at OT. Yes there are guys to be found later in the draft who can start but the chances of late round OTs being cut within a year or 2 is much higher. I mean you can draft Justin Ellis or Maurice Hurst in rnd 4 or 5, but they can just as easily be Max Valles, Shilhique Calhoen, Jack Crawford or Christo Biluki. If they pan out great, but if they are your solution as a starter before their first camp you are doing bad business imo.

We made our bed in FA, when we failed to adress the OT position, and when you want to keep your QB upright this basically forced us to take an OT in rnd 1 or 2. 

I am interested to know if our FO thought about trading for Trent Brown. That could have made room for drafting James.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Bitty 2.0 said:

This week will  settle this issue if they perform well then Gruden was right.

I hardly think 2 rookies starting in the 5th game of the season settles any issue. He was right in the fact the team needed OTs. It will take a couple seasons to settle the issue on if Miller/Parker are good players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just looked up some stats...

 

On the Offensive DVOA list we are at 9, while the Chargers are #4.
Previous opponents: LAR #1, DEN #13, MIA #16, CLE # 29

Points/game we are #14, while the Chargers are #9.
Previous opponents: LAR #2, CLE #11, DEN #25, MIA #26

Yards/game we are #2, while the Chargers are #9.
Previous opponents: LAR #1, DEN #13, CLE #19, MIA #30

Running yards/game: OAK #16., LAC #8
Previous opponents: CLE #2, DEN #3, LAR #7, MIA #26

Passing yards/game: OAK #4, LAC #14
Previous opponents: LAR #2, DEN #20, CLE #24, MIA #28

Overall there will be 2 good offenses in this game. We are better at passing, while they are better at running the ball. The big issue for me is that while we are better in terms of yards/game, they are better in points/game and the W goes to the team with the most points after all. 


On the Defensive DVOA list we are #26, while the Chargers are #21.
Previous opponents: CLE #4, MIA #7, LAR #9, DEN #17

Opponents avg passer rating OKA #16., LAC #25.
Previous opponents: MIA #2, CLE #5, LAR #13, DEN #19

Opponents yards/game OAK #27-ek, LAC #22.
Previous opponents: LAR #9, DEN #17, CLE #25, MIA #26

Opponents rush yards/game OAK #30, LAC #18.
Previous opponents: LAR #5, DEN #8, MIA #20, CLE #24

Opponents passing yards/game OAK #17, LAC #20.
Previous opponents: LAR #14, DEN #19, CLE #23, MIA #26

Allowed points OAK #31, LAC #28.
Previous opponents: LAR #5, MIA #14, DEN #17, CLE #18

There will be 2 weak defenses in this battle alongside those O's, so overall I'm expecting a shootout!


LAC can run really well with their talented RB duo and most probably they will want to have long drives to keep Carr on the bench.

LAC has a positive TO margin, while we are in the negativ side with a INT happy QB at the helm...

The trenches will be where this game is won or lost for us IMO. 

The Hankins-Hurst duo VS. the Feeney-Pouncey-Schofield trio and the Mebane-Philon duo VS. KO-Hudson-Jackson. If KO can't play we will have an even bigger challenge obviously.

Melvin Ingram could cause problems for the rookie Miller-Parker tandem, but Carr will be able to help them out with his quick release. On the other side Okung and Barksdale will try to slow down Irvin and Key...most probably with good success...

The absence of Travis Benjamin is great news, because Rivers would have killed our slow S' with him on board...

The CB duties will be interesting IMO...
Conley had success against M.Williams in college, but I think he has the best chance to run with K.Allen, while Melvin and DRC could have a better shot against the big, tall guy then the shifty Allen.


Overall I think the Chargers have the better chance to win the game on paper, even on that "Raider home field". Their 2-2 record is not a bad one with the KC and LAR defeats and they have the personel on offense to cause problems for us. With that said I think if Carr, Lynch and the others can reuse that feeling from the Browns game late we could get the W.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Miller... right now, he's average. If you notice, Gruden is calling the offense to get the ball out quick. We're not seeing a lot of 5-7 step drops or long developing play action passes. Miller's movement is great, but he's getting pushed back and still taking false steps as was the concern at UCLA. 

Average is ahead of the game for a guy most thought needed a redshirt season. Offseason will be big for his development.

Miller and Parker will limit what this offense can ultimately do this season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

On Miller... right now, he's average. If you notice, Gruden is calling the offense to get the ball out quick. We're not seeing a lot of 5-7 step drops or long developing play action passes. Miller's movement is great, but he's getting pushed back and still taking false steps as was the concern at UCLA. 

Average is ahead of the game for a guy most thought needed a redshirt season. Offseason will be big for his development.

Miller and Parker will limit what this offense can ultimately do this season. 

100% right. Though I would argue in this league average as a rookie LT is more than ahead of the game. It's downright promising, no jinx. This is a league with significant pass blocking problems. And guys do not show up "league ready" for complex offenses, not any more. 

All in all as long as (for now) he's a guy we're not looking at the way the Giants look at Ereck Flowers every week, I'm all set. I'll be convinced he has a solid ceiling and is a good answer at the position if he gets through the full year playing like this. Next offseason, with a year of confidence under his belt from stepping in and performing at the position, he can really work on technique and strength and may have a really good future. There's nothing like the possibility of having a stonewalling left tackle. 

He's also not getting a thick stream of help like we were feeding our tackles in 2016. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, holyghost said:

100% right. Though I would argue in this league average as a rookie LT is more than ahead of the game. It's downright promising, no jinx. This is a league with significant pass blocking problems. And guys do not show up "league ready" for complex offenses, not any more. 

All in all as long as (for now) he's a guy we're not looking at the way the Giants look at Ereck Flowers every week, I'm all set. I'll be convinced he has a solid ceiling and is a good answer at the position if he gets through the full year playing like this. Next offseason, with a year of confidence under his belt from stepping in and performing at the position, he can really work on technique and strength and may have a really good future. There's nothing like the possibility of having a stonewalling left tackle. 

He's also not getting a thick stream of help like we were feeding our tackles in 2016. 

I'm cautiously optimistic. This fan base has a tendency to overrate players when they flash even the slightest ability (see Karl "move him to FS" Joseph). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...