Jump to content

Raiders hire Mike Mayock as GM


RaidersAreOne

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

6+ years to have a force, and that's assuming we don't need a new QB, RB, TE, WR1, DE on top of still needing longer term answers at CB, LB, DT, and potentially SS depending on Abram's growth? 

We've had the pieces to be a dominant force for the last 3+ years for the most part and just needed some supporting cast. Guys are going to start getting older, paid, banged up, etc. A nifty piece here and there in the 5th round isn't going to put that over the top. 

Carr is going to need a new contract, and even at that, in 2-3 years he'll be hitting a downward slide physically for the position. 

Jacobs already can't stay healthy and Drake is a decent backup at best. 

We have zilch at WR really. Guys like Jones and Edwards are good prospects, but neither profiles as a WR1. Renfrow is a slot guy who is going to get paid. 

Miller is gonna be around as an expensive piece. We still need another OG and a RT. 

On D, we still need better DTs. The guys we have are playing gutsy ball, but it's not exactly pretty nor dominant nor long term. At DE Max and Yannick are going to be exceptionally expensive to keep. Kudos to Perryman as a tackler, and he's a capable starter but replaceable. Littleton is expensive and the rest of our LBs have either age or ridiculous inexperience working against them. At CB, Hayward will likely be retired, Mullen is a CB2, and Facyson will be pushing 30 and is good but not a world beater. Abram is hit or miss (literally) play by play. 

With age and contract status playing a role, this could be a very different looking team in 2-3 years. 2-3 more years like the last 3, we're stuck in middling purgatory. 

 

The Raiders will have a ton of Cap space if Mayock picks up a few more late round players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Bitty 2.0 said:

The Raiders will have a ton of Cap space if Mayock picks up a few more late round players.

Oh the cap space thing again? We're back at that? 

A few more late round players isn't off setting the losses we're going to be taking due to horrid contracts tying up money and unable to use. And even then, cap space doesn't take years off of people's bodies.

All the cap space in the world isn't saving our situation unless every single late round pick of Mayock is literally a star from day one. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ronjon1990 said:

Oh the cap space thing again? We're back at that? 

A few more late round players isn't off setting the losses we're going to be taking due to horrid contracts tying up money and unable to use. And even then, cap space doesn't take years off of people's bodies.

All the cap space in the world isn't saving our situation unless every single late round pick of Mayock is literally a star from day one. 

 

 

Explain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jeremy408 said:

Explain.

Above, I mentioned that "in 2-3 years" we can't expect the same team. Age, injury, retirement, guys just moving on. Every team goes through it. 

We're on the precipice of a really tough pill to swallow in terms of cap space. Our timeline for it sucks. 

Miller, Carr, Waller on offense. I think we can safely say all 3 are squarely looking at top 10 $ for their respective positions. We still need a guard and another tackle. We still need WRs. We still need a healthy and available RB, assuming we don't screw up and pay Jacobs too. 

Just with those 3, that's a lot of money. And right now and for the foreseeable future, they are absolutely essential for our offense. Losing any of them would fundamentally alter our offense for at least a year or more. And at some point, Renfrow won't be especially cheap either. 

On D, Yan and Max at the very least are going to be expensive as both are obviously top 10 as well. We still need a few pieces right now, much less over the next 2-3 years with guys like Hayward unlikely to be around. 

Some time in the next couple of years, we're looking at paying or losing the services of a top 10 LT, top 3 TE, top 10ish QB, top 5 slot WR, an arguably top 10 (when healthy) RB, and 2 top 10 pass rushers. There's 7 guys right there that will command a big chunk of change. That doesn't factor in other guys we will need to resign or sign in the meantime to round out the team. 

We had a lucky window where Carr was locked up, Waller was on a cheap FA deal, and some of our key guys (Miller, Renfrow, Jacobs, Mullen, Crosby in particular) were on rookie deals. Then there's the tier 2 guys like Abram, guys on prove it deals that are stepping up like Facyson and Perryman. 

There's almost no way we keep the bulk of our guys and production when pay day comes. And we have a lot of pay days coming due at once. 

Bitty's argument is that a couple of more drafts turn is into a dominant force, but that ignores that we currently have top 10 quality players at premium positions and still have pretty significant holes to fill at the same time cheap deals expire. 

To offset that, we would need a Hobbs, Crosby, and Renfrow type, ready to play from day 1 at the positions we still need, AND that same type to replace guys we'll inevitably lose. 

Our impending mess is like a cluster chart. All of our true stars that make up our core almost all happen to be at the most expensive positions (QB, Pass rusher, LT) or are so good at a cheaper position they won't necessarily remain "cheap" in the grand scheme (TE, Slot). 

To keep them all would be a huge amount of cap, and almost all at once. Then what's put around them? Or if one or two leaves, we're replacing a huge hole in terms of quality and production. 

If the argument being made is that in 2 or 3 years we'll be a juggernaut, there's no way it accounts for just how pricey our guys are going to get and the impact that will have on their supporting cast, many of whom are arguably outplaying their own short, cheap deals. The only way to offset that is nailing the draft at positions we already need AND positions we don't know we need yet depending on who isn't retained. Cap space only goes so far when you're paying multiple guys at top 10 positional rates, and Mayock's drafting hasn't been that good, at least not enough to fill that many potential holes coming open in quick succession. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

Low key, Josh Jacobs has become a big disappointment. He looked poised to be a great back as a rookie and has not turned the corner.

He's gotten a bit of a pass, but he was another whiff in round 1 when you consider position. 

yea, you dont draft pretty good RBs in round 1

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

Above, I mentioned that "in 2-3 years" we can't expect the same team. Age, injury, retirement, guys just moving on. Every team goes through it. 

We're on the precipice of a really tough pill to swallow in terms of cap space. Our timeline for it sucks. 

Miller, Carr, Waller on offense. I think we can safely say all 3 are squarely looking at top 10 $ for their respective positions. We still need a guard and another tackle. We still need WRs. We still need a healthy and available RB, assuming we don't screw up and pay Jacobs too. 

Just with those 3, that's a lot of money. And right now and for the foreseeable future, they are absolutely essential for our offense. Losing any of them would fundamentally alter our offense for at least a year or more. And at some point, Renfrow won't be especially cheap either. 

On D, Yan and Max at the very least are going to be expensive as both are obviously top 10 as well. We still need a few pieces right now, much less over the next 2-3 years with guys like Hayward unlikely to be around. 

Some time in the next couple of years, we're looking at paying or losing the services of a top 10 LT, top 3 TE, top 10ish QB, top 5 slot WR, an arguably top 10 (when healthy) RB, and 2 top 10 pass rushers. There's 7 guys right there that will command a big chunk of change. That doesn't factor in other guys we will need to resign or sign in the meantime to round out the team. 

We had a lucky window where Carr was locked up, Waller was on a cheap FA deal, and some of our key guys (Miller, Renfrow, Jacobs, Mullen, Crosby in particular) were on rookie deals. Then there's the tier 2 guys like Abram, guys on prove it deals that are stepping up like Facyson and Perryman. 

There's almost no way we keep the bulk of our guys and production when pay day comes. And we have a lot of pay days coming due at once. 

Bitty's argument is that a couple of more drafts turn is into a dominant force, but that ignores that we currently have top 10 quality players at premium positions and still have pretty significant holes to fill at the same time cheap deals expire. 

To offset that, we would need a Hobbs, Crosby, and Renfrow type, ready to play from day 1 at the positions we still need, AND that same type to replace guys we'll inevitably lose. 

Our impending mess is like a cluster chart. All of our true stars that make up our core almost all happen to be at the most expensive positions (QB, Pass rusher, LT) or are so good at a cheaper position they won't necessarily remain "cheap" in the grand scheme (TE, Slot). 

To keep them all would be a huge amount of cap, and almost all at once. Then what's put around them? Or if one or two leaves, we're replacing a huge hole in terms of quality and production. 

If the argument being made is that in 2 or 3 years we'll be a juggernaut, there's no way it accounts for just how pricey our guys are going to get and the impact that will have on their supporting cast, many of whom are arguably outplaying their own short, cheap deals. The only way to offset that is nailing the draft at positions we already need AND positions we don't know we need yet depending on who isn't retained. Cap space only goes so far when you're paying multiple guys at top 10 positional rates, and Mayock's drafting hasn't been that good, at least not enough to fill that many potential holes coming open in quick succession. 

From the offense I personally don't see the problem with paying Carr waller miller and renfrow. after that everyone else is interchangable. You just have to go get role players that do the things that make your offense work. For example I think this off-season would be good to get someone like John Ross for next to nothing. He feels that deep threat that makes the defense have to think role. Heck if desean Jackson does well I have no problem paying him 2 million to come back again. Never really have to pay a running back you can just keep drafting the ones that work(sometimes you can get them undrafted)

I don't see the guard tackle dilemma being that big of a deal considering the fact that Leatherwood gets better at tackle he can play that and if he doesn't he can play guard and we just go get a tackle.

My thing is more defense because there's no way we're going to be able to pay max Crosby and Yannick it's just virtually impossible. Then there's the fact that we're stuck with Littleton and Nassib for the foreseeable future while they get older. i think Kwiat too but cant we get rid of him after this year?

I think a ram in the bush for us is the fact that we may be able to pay Brandon Faychon for a bargain deal at the end of the season. The question is can we get mullen for cheap. Also want to see if Solomon Thomas will come back for a cheap deal. 

Another thing to account for is if the cap goes up every year so there's that

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bitty 2.0 said:

People need to calm down he basically had 3 drafts and has a few real good players out of the late rounds. If he just keeps that up the Raiders will be a dominant force in 2-3 years. Just imagine the team with more players like Maxx, Hobbs, Hunter and hopefully Andre James. Who are just a bunch of good cheap young players

And Ruggs did actually look like a potential star in the making. We could say possibly we should have picked up the now obvious character flaws but that's always really tough to do and no-one here as far as I know posted about him being a risk taking potential danger in advance, I certainly never saw any reports of character red flags.

Abram is looking like a much better pick these days aswell, maybe not a star but pretty good at least, thanks to Gus. If Jacobs can ever stay healthy that'll look like pretty good class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ronjon1990 said:

Above, I mentioned that "in 2-3 years" we can't expect the same team. Age, injury, retirement, guys just moving on. Every team goes through it. 

We're on the precipice of a really tough pill to swallow in terms of cap space. Our timeline for it sucks. 

Miller, Carr, Waller on offense. I think we can safely say all 3 are squarely looking at top 10 $ for their respective positions. We still need a guard and another tackle. We still need WRs. We still need a healthy and available RB, assuming we don't screw up and pay Jacobs too. 

Just with those 3, that's a lot of money. And right now and for the foreseeable future, they are absolutely essential for our offense. Losing any of them would fundamentally alter our offense for at least a year or more. And at some point, Renfrow won't be especially cheap either. 

On D, Yan and Max at the very least are going to be expensive as both are obviously top 10 as well. We still need a few pieces right now, much less over the next 2-3 years with guys like Hayward unlikely to be around. 

Some time in the next couple of years, we're looking at paying or losing the services of a top 10 LT, top 3 TE, top 10ish QB, top 5 slot WR, an arguably top 10 (when healthy) RB, and 2 top 10 pass rushers. There's 7 guys right there that will command a big chunk of change. That doesn't factor in other guys we will need to resign or sign in the meantime to round out the team. 

We had a lucky window where Carr was locked up, Waller was on a cheap FA deal, and some of our key guys (Miller, Renfrow, Jacobs, Mullen, Crosby in particular) were on rookie deals. Then there's the tier 2 guys like Abram, guys on prove it deals that are stepping up like Facyson and Perryman. 

There's almost no way we keep the bulk of our guys and production when pay day comes. And we have a lot of pay days coming due at once. 

Bitty's argument is that a couple of more drafts turn is into a dominant force, but that ignores that we currently have top 10 quality players at premium positions and still have pretty significant holes to fill at the same time cheap deals expire. 

To offset that, we would need a Hobbs, Crosby, and Renfrow type, ready to play from day 1 at the positions we still need, AND that same type to replace guys we'll inevitably lose. 

Our impending mess is like a cluster chart. All of our true stars that make up our core almost all happen to be at the most expensive positions (QB, Pass rusher, LT) or are so good at a cheaper position they won't necessarily remain "cheap" in the grand scheme (TE, Slot). 

To keep them all would be a huge amount of cap, and almost all at once. Then what's put around them? Or if one or two leaves, we're replacing a huge hole in terms of quality and production. 

If the argument being made is that in 2 or 3 years we'll be a juggernaut, there's no way it accounts for just how pricey our guys are going to get and the impact that will have on their supporting cast, many of whom are arguably outplaying their own short, cheap deals. The only way to offset that is nailing the draft at positions we already need AND positions we don't know we need yet depending on who isn't retained. Cap space only goes so far when you're paying multiple guys at top 10 positional rates, and Mayock's drafting hasn't been that good, at least not enough to fill that many potential holes coming open in quick succession. 

You're assuming the Raiders O-line is not going to get any better. If they can keep improving it be a huge savings ( even with Millers big up coming contract) Over the next 2 years alot of the bad contracts will be gone. Next year the Raiders have 51 million and then in 23 they have 160million, that more then enough space to fill all of the Raiders needs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Darbsk said:

And Ruggs did actually look like a potential star in the making. We could say possibly we should have picked up the now obvious character flaws but that's always really tough to do and no-one here as far as I know posted about him being a risk taking potential danger in advance, I certainly never saw any reports of character red flags.

Abram is looking like a much better pick these days aswell, maybe not a star but pretty good at least, thanks to Gus. If Jacobs can ever stay healthy that'll look like pretty good class.

"star in the making" is a little rich. You can't be a star WR averaging 2.5 catches a game. He was a quality deep threat, but he was never going to be a guy who takes games over or a WR you feed the ball to. He was never a Tyreke Hill type. His ceiling was a D Jax type Z WR. 

He was a good role player and the Raiders can fill that role with a guy like Fuller, Ross, Chark, etc. They still lack a #1 WR to be a go to for Carr. He had a little of that with Crabtree. That is guy I thought we'd get with Lamb and hope they find that piece for the offense. 

All it took was losing speed at the Z receiver spot to show how poor the position is on the outside. Replace the Z with and find a true 1 and this offense will be unstoppable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, big_palooka said:

"star in the making" is a little rich. You can't be a star WR averaging 2.5 catches a game. He was a quality deep threat, but he was never going to be a guy who takes games over or a WR you feed the ball to. He was never a Tyreke Hill type. His ceiling was a D Jax type Z WR. 

He was a good role player and the Raiders can fill that role with a guy like Fuller, Ross, Chark, etc. They still lack a #1 WR to be a go to for Carr. He had a little of that with Crabtree. That is guy I thought we'd get with Lamb and hope they find that piece for the offense. 

All it took was losing speed at the Z receiver spot to show how poor the position is on the outside. Replace the Z with and find a true 1 and this offense will be unstoppable. 

No, I think he was a little more than you're giving credit for here. Sure, he had a long way to go but there's no disputing he'd made a big leap from year 1 to year 2 and even Hill didn't really have all that great a rookie year. I think if he'd been able to stay on the straight and narrow he'd have increased his workload gradually and really become a household name as a big play threat. Now, I do agree he was never going to be a 100 catch guy but that's not what we needed and I think he could have been a real star player catching 60 to 70 balls a year at a 15 yard clip with numerous highlight real plays, that is the type of player he could have been I feel, the definition of impact player or playmaker where he does nothing for a half then bang, 70 yard TD to turn the momentum. 

I do agree with your second comment though, imagine if we could have had a guy like Metcalf as a #1 with Ruggs as the big play, blazer that keeps the safeties honest, now that would have been something. If we get a genuine, quality #1 type receiver then we can still be a really, really potent offense totally agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, big_palooka said:

"star in the making" is a little rich. You can't be a star WR averaging 2.5 catches a game. He was a quality deep threat, but he was never going to be a guy who takes games over or a WR you feed the ball to. He was never a Tyreke Hill type. His ceiling was a D Jax type Z WR. 

He was a good role player and the Raiders can fill that role with a guy like Fuller, Ross, Chark, etc. They still lack a #1 WR to be a go to for Carr. He had a little of that with Crabtree. That is guy I thought we'd get with Lamb and hope they find that piece for the offense. 

All it took was losing speed at the Z receiver spot to show how poor the position is on the outside. Replace the Z with and find a true 1 and this offense will be unstoppable. 

He was top 15-20 in yards off those 2 catches a game. He was pretty dynamic and definitely ascending. Hopefully he’s easily replaceable but I don’t know about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, big_palooka said:

Low key, Josh Jacobs has become a big disappointment. He looked poised to be a great back as a rookie and has not turned the corner.

He's gotten a bit of a pass, but he was another whiff in round 1 when you consider position. 

He gets injured literally every game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

He was top 15-20 in yards off those 2 catches a game. He was pretty dynamic and definitely ascending. Hopefully he’s easily replaceable but I don’t know about that.

I think he was a talented WR. He wasn't a one trick pony in terms of his ability on contested catches. He was a straight line sprinter however. His ceiling was D Jax, which would have been great. But he was nowhere near a Tyreke type player in the fact he was not as fluid, sudden and lacked the ability to break tackles and leave defenders grabbing for air. 

Ruggs could take the top off, make contested catches down field and would have been a legit weapon as a deep threat. Still not the dynamic all around WR1 target Lamb, Jefferson, etc will be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...