Raiders sign LB Cory Littleton to 3 years, 36M

[Packerraymond]

15 minutes ago, jimkelly02 said:

Oh please you’d be absolutely jumping with joy if your team signed him to this deal.  Sour grapes!

Nope, we were all excited when Hooper got signed and when we paid 2/13 for Kirksey. Paying RB's, ILB, TEs is just not good business unless they are truly HOF special.

[RaidersAreOne]

Just now, Packerraymond said:

Paying RB's, ILB, TEs is just not good business unless they are truly HOF special.

Say what? If you have a good player at these positions, don't re-sign them unless they are HOF worthy? That's a brutal take imo.

[Teen Girl Squad]

40 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

Less than I expected, but more than I'd pay.

My thoughts as well. Basically the standard FA tax. While steals and deals are obviously always preferred, getting good players for fair prices/team friendly shorter deals works as well. Good signing by the Raiders.

[Dr LBC]

5 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

Say what? If you have a good player at these positions, don't re-sign them unless they are HOF worthy? That's a brutal take imo.

That's not what he's saying.  He's saying they're more disposable positions than others and, generally, I agree with him.  I'm a bit more flexible on TE because I feel like there a shade more scarcity at TE than there is at ILB and RB, so there's a place where I'm willing to pay the "consistently very good/great" at TE but less so for the other two positions (wherein we regularly see late round and UDFA guys surface as serviceable starters when playing behind very good lines).  He's making the economical argument.

[El Ramster]

A real one. Wish corey the best he’s earned every penny. A killer on ST for years. Get paid my brother.

[Packerraymond]

11 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

Say what? If you have a good player at these positions, don't re-sign them unless they are HOF worthy? That's a brutal take imo.

You offer them a team friendly deal, if they say no, see ya. Packer fans would've offered Blake 7-8m per. I would've paid the same for Littleton. Look at the SB champs hodgepodge of ILBs, none of them anything special. Chris Jones, Frank Clark and their big space eaters made them good enough. Littleton had the best DT in the NFL and a darn good one in Brockers too. I'll be watching him, but he's a clear regression candidate IMO.

[MrOaktown_56]

 

 

 

 

 

3

1 minute ago, Packerraymond said:

You offer them a team friendly deal, if they say no, see ya. Packer fans would've offered Blake 7-8m per. I would've paid the same for Littleton. Look at the SB champs hodgepodge of ILBs, none of them anything special. Chris Jones, Frank Clark and their big space eaters made them good enough. Littleton had the best DT in the NFL and a darn good one in Brockers too. I'll be watching him, but he's a clear regression candidate IMO.

We're signing him because of his value as a coverage backer though. That has less to do with his front. He can cover tight ends and force turnovers. Both are very valuable in today's NFL.

[SBXISBXVSBXVIII]

50 minutes ago, baconrad11 said:

Honestly, I see Las Vegas being one of the most attractive teams for free agents now, due to it's location, new stadium, history, etc...and the fact that you guys have a competent GM in place with a SB winning HC (regardless of whether Gruden is as good as some people believe, he's still a big name) 

Don't forget no state income tax

[jimkelly02]

Of course, Littleton may not produce 136tkls, 3.5 sacks, 2 ints, 9 pd’s next year and you’ll likely be like I told you so.  Those numbers are insane! 
Obviously the DLine helped keep blockers off him.  
However, your not signing anyone but guy like Kirksey, whose barely played in 2 years, for 7-8M.  It’s easy to sit back and smuggly say “I’d only have paid Littleton 7-8M” but that’s not the real world.  Your going to end up with a talentless roster and tons of cap space with that philosophy.  
at the end of the day, the Raiders had a massive whole at coverage LB.  Massive! And they signed one of the best in the business for a deal that was far below initial estimates.  

4 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

You offer them a team friendly deal, if they say no, see ya. Packer fans would've offered Blake 7-8m per. I would've paid the same for Littleton. Look at the SB champs hodgepodge of ILBs, none of them anything special. Chris Jones, Frank Clark and their big space eaters made them good enough. Littleton had the best DT in the NFL and a darn good one in Brockers too. I'll be watching him, but he's a clear regression candidate IMO.

 

[RaidersAreOne]

 

[FrantikRam]

21 minutes ago, The LBC said:

That's not what he's saying.  He's saying they're more disposable positions than others and, generally, I agree with him.  I'm a bit more flexible on TE because I feel like there a shade more scarcity at TE than there is at ILB and RB, so there's a place where I'm willing to pay the "consistently very good/great" at TE but less so for the other two positions (wherein we regularly see late round and UDFA guys surface as serviceable starters when playing behind very good lines).  He's making the economical argument.

 

I do not see how a Rams fan can agree that ILB is a "replaceable" position. Littleton was the first above average one that we had since London Fletcher.

[Dr LBC]

2 minutes ago, FrantikRam said:

 

I do not see how a Rams fan can agree that ILB is a "replaceable" position. Littleton was the first above average one that we had since London Fletcher.

Yeah, cuz Laurinaitis was a JAG... *eyeroll*

More to my point, ILB's are a lot like safeties... which are a lot like OC's (if you go by how most fans feel about their OC's); there's an upper tier and then there's a lot, and I mean A LOT, or largely interchangeable average-to-slightly-above-average players (relative to one another in terms of ability) and fans fall major victims to "grass is always greener" syndrome.  They're also a position whose impact is very heavily influenced by the surrounding cast (line in front of them).

I realize this is the internet and it goes against peoples' natural inclinations on the internet, but this is one of those situations (like so many others) that isn't just black and white, no matter how much you want it to be.

[FrantikRam]

27 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

You offer them a team friendly deal, if they say no, see ya. Packer fans would've offered Blake 7-8m per. I would've paid the same for Littleton. Look at the SB champs hodgepodge of ILBs, none of them anything special. Chris Jones, Frank Clark and their big space eaters made them good enough. Littleton had the best DT in the NFL and a darn good one in Brockers too. I'll be watching him, but he's a clear regression candidate IMO.

 

The 49ers were up 10 with 8 minutes to go with the ball in the Super Bowl and massively overpaid for a LB that is about the same caliber as Littleton, but with far more injury issues (even at the time of the signing).

This is an antiquated take.

You do whatever you need to do to upgrade your team, especially while you have stars (Raiders draft class last year) for cheap. By the time they need to re-sign/extend this draft class, that Littleton contract will be done with.

[Packerraymond]

Just now, FrantikRam said:

 

The 49ers were up 10 with 8 minutes to go with the ball in the Super Bowl and massively overpaid for a LB that is about the same caliber as Littleton, but with far more injury issues (even at the time of the signing).

This is an antiquated take.

You do whatever you need to do to upgrade your team, especially while you have stars (Raiders draft class last year) for cheap. By the time they need to re-sign/extend this draft class, that Littleton contract will be done with.

Agree to disagree, I think paying out for all positions as if they're of equal importance is antiquated.

Pay your QB, OL, DL, pass rushers and DBs. Find value everywhere else. Don't think Littleton at 12m is value.

[FrantikRam]

1 minute ago, The LBC said:

Yeah, cuz Laurinaitis was a JAG... *eyeroll*

More to my point, ILB's are a lot like safeties... which are a lot like OC's (if you go by how most fans feel about their OC's); there's an upper tier and then there's a lot, and I mean A LOT, or largely interchangeable average-to-slightly-above-average players (relative to one another in terms of ability) and fans fall major victims to "grass is always greener" syndrome.  They're also a position whose impact is very heavily influenced by the surrounding cast (line in front of them).

I realize this is the internet and it goes against peoples' natural inclinations on the internet, but this is one of those situations (like so many others) that isn't just black and white, no matter how much you want it to be.

 

JL was kind of a JAG - certainly worse than Littleton and was overrated by Rams fans for years. And I say that as an Ohio State fan who screamed for the Rams to draft him.

I agree that it's not black and white - black and white is saying "you don't pay these positions unless they're elite" - what is NOT black and white is applauding the Raiders for this signing while they have some great players on rookie deals.

"They're in a position whose impact is very heavily influenced by the surround cast (line in front of them)" - Seriously? You know what other position is heavily influenced by a line in front of them? QB.

I don't even really disagree with you - I think Littleton is a slightly above average ILB - but I don't think there's a guy on the market right now that's better than him, especially when you factor in his age and durability. Teams should use all their cap space to upgrade their team - sometimes that means overpaying for FAs.