Raiders Defense

[Jeremy408]

4 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

lol.. I just want a LB who can impact the game. Raiders LBs have been garbage for decades now

My take on it is I wouldn't say we exactly need a linebacker. .I think with a simpler defense and an improved pass rush they should be better. 

With that being said, I don't see a universe that you pass on Michael Parsons. Mike Mayock said it best when he said that we didn't have an impact player at any level I think that Micah Parsons would automatically give the Raiders an impact player and alpha male at the second level. 

Edited March 29, 2021 by Jeremy408

[MrOaktown_56]

11 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

I think he proved to be the same average player he was starting in Chicago who had a more talented defense. Sure tackler, knows his assignments, plays hard. Nothing special. Just a guy. 

He's not going to be a sideline to sideline playmaker who makes plays behind the LOS, creates havoc and forces turnovers. I want that Roquan Smith type for my defense. Have literally been on that bandwagon for years now it seems.

I love JOK as well fwiw. 

I agree he is not that guy but how many of those are there in the league, especially since keuchly retired and Thomas Davis got out of his prime?

Roquan, white (though his coverage is suspect), Wagner, Warner, off the top of my head I can’t think of many others. There are maybe 7 or 8 top tier linebackers in the rest of the league, but there are at least 64 starters. I’d definitely put Kwit in the upper half hence above average. 
 

now if you’re saying he’s not an impact player like those guys then sure. But I think he’s pretty good. We do need a rangy playmaker at LB though. That person might already be on the team. I’m willing to take a chance on Littleton rebounding at Will, or morrow taking another step, rather than spending a 1st on JOK when the edge and OT class are very strong. But I won’t complain if we take him.

 

 

[ronjon1990]

32 minutes ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

I agree he is not that guy but how many of those are there in the league, especially since keuchly retired and Thomas Davis got out of his prime?

Roquan, white (though his coverage is suspect), Wagner, Warner, off the top of my head I can’t think of many others. There are maybe 7 or 8 top tier linebackers in the rest of the league, but there are at least 64 starters. I’d definitely put Kwit in the upper half hence above average. 
 

now if you’re saying he’s not an impact player like those guys then sure. But I think he’s pretty good. We do need a rangy playmaker at LB though. That person might already be on the team. I’m willing to take a chance on Littleton rebounding at Will, or morrow taking another step, rather than spending a 1st on JOK when the edge and OT class are very strong. But I won’t complain if we take him.

 

 

I'd put him in the upper 1/3 tbh. 

He's solid and not much of a liability, jack of all trades type. 

I'd take a guy like him at MLB over a boom or bust type who is great at one thing but poor in other areas. Not irreplaceable but the last guy you'll "need" to replace. 

 

[Jeremy408]

29 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

I'd put him in the upper 1/3 tbh. 

He's solid and not much of a liability, jack of all trades type. 

I'd take a guy like him at MLB over a boom or bust type who is great at one thing but poor in other areas. Not irreplaceable but the last guy you'll "need" to replace. 

 

Right. My take is if you're going to get a linebacker he better be head and shoulders better than Kwit talent wise 

[ronjon1990]

27 minutes ago, Jeremy408 said:

Right. My take is if you're going to get a linebacker he better be head and shoulders better than Kwit talent wise 

Not only that, but there better not be anything else needed. 

Uograding on a Kwit type is the definition of luxury. 

I think he's a starting LB on almost any team not sporting a consistent All Pro.

[Humble_Beast]

1 hour ago, ronjon1990 said:

I'd put him in the upper 1/3 tbh. 

He's solid and not much of a liability, jack of all trades type. 

I'd take a guy like him at MLB over a boom or bust type who is great at one thing but poor in other areas. Not irreplaceable but the last guy you'll "need" to replace. 

 

exactly this, not all world but a solid starter. better then our pathetic Lbs of the past. 

[Jeremy408]

3 hours ago, ronjon1990 said:

Not only that, but there better not be anything else needed. 

Uograding on a Kwit type is the definition of luxury. 

I think he's a starting LB on almost any team not sporting a consistent All Pro.

The only guy I would take at linebacker this year in the first two days is Parsons

[lester]

5 hours ago, Jeremy408 said:

My take on it is I wouldn't say we exactly need a linebacker. .I think with a simpler defense and an improved pass rush they should be better. 

With that being said, I don't see a universe that you pass on Michael Parsons. Mike Mayock said it best when he said that we didn't have an impact player at any level I think that Micah Parsons would automatically give the Raiders an impact player and alpha male at the second level. 

That's true you don't pass on a talent like Parsons...but we are talking about two guys Mayock and Gruden who think they are smarter then everybody else...how many times have watched them pass on better talent to reach..bet a dollar it happens again  April 29th...and 30th

 

[drfrey13]

I could be wrong but I see Parsons as a SLB his first year or two and should be able to rush from that position Bradley's system since he does have some DE experience.  He would be a little light but very similar in size to KJ Wright.  Year 3 you move Parsons to the Mike depending on how he develops.  Could also use him as an ILB in 3-4 looks or as a spy on QBs like Mahomes.  The kid has so athletics ability he is a true chess piece.  Might not be our best defensive player year one but would be our most talented.  

[Darbsk]

3 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

I could be wrong but I see Parsons as a SLB his first year or two and should be able to rush from that position Bradley's system since he does have some DE experience.  He would be a little light but very similar in size to KJ Wright.  Year 3 you move Parsons to the Mike depending on how he develops.  Could also use him as an ILB in 3-4 looks or as a spy on QBs like Mahomes.  The kid has so athletics ability he is a true chess piece.  Might not be our best defensive player year one but would be our most talented.  

This is what I was thinking reading through the last few posts. If you really, really like Parsons then he does seem to have a skill set that in our system lends itself to SLB, and as Kwiatkoski and Littleton would seem to be MLB and WILL it would make sense that he fits there with his blitzing ability, range and physicality. Now, if a SLB in today's NFL is worth a 1st round pick is a whole other can of worms.........😁

Edited March 30, 2021 by Darbsk

[ronjon1990]

4 hours ago, lester said:

That's true you don't pass on a talent like Parsons...but we are talking about two guys Mayock and Gruden who think they are smarter then everybody else...how many times have watched them pass on better talent to reach..bet a dollar it happens again  April 29th...and 30th

 

Yup they'll just take a guy like Monty Rice in the 1st and call him a "can't miss" talent when JOK, Bolton, and Collins are still on the board. 

[drfrey13]

5 hours ago, Darbsk said:

This is what I was thinking reading through the last few posts. If you really, really like Parsons then he does seem to have a skill set that in our system lends itself to SLB, and as Kwiatkoski and Littleton would seem to be MLB and WILL it would make sense that he fits there with his blitzing ability, range and physicality. Now, if a SLB in today's NFL is worth a 1st round pick is a whole other can of worms.........😁

One that does not come off the field, plays a similar role to a 3-4 OLB, has college production, and runs a 4.39 at 240+ does.

[Darbsk]

1 hour ago, drfrey13 said:

One that does not come off the field, plays a similar role to a 3-4 OLB, has college production, and runs a 4.39 at 240+ does.

I guess that comes down to coverage skills if he comes off the field much. Personally, I think Morrow is a good coverage guy and Littleton ought to be plus Kwiatkoski was decent in coverage last year. Not really seen that with Parsons but if he can do it, then that would make him much more palatable in the first round for me.

[OnlyGlove]

Was M Collins the worse starter we're had in a long time?

 

I think we look better just not having him on the field.

[MrOaktown_56]

On 3/30/2021 at 9:07 AM, Darbsk said:

I guess that comes down to coverage skills if he comes off the field much. Personally, I think Morrow is a good coverage guy and Littleton ought to be plus Kwiatkoski was decent in coverage last year. Not really seen that with Parsons but if he can do it, then that would make him much more palatable in the first round for me.

Parsons is a freak, but I'm taking back my earlier take. In a defense where LB are primarily asked to cover, I don't see him as a good fit. Especially because there will be really good players who do other things we need on the board. Whether protecting DC (RT), rushing the passer, or playing centerfield.