Pick #12 is in: WR Henry Ruggs, Alabama

[roi34]

2 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

Waller is our go-to receiving threat. Always going to be regardless if we went Lamb or Jeudy. Ruggs just adds a completely different dimension no other player in this draft could. 

My only thought is, ruggs is the best at what he does in this draft. 

 

Juedy while most polished can be outdone by others drafted in 2nd and 3rd. 

[oakdb36]

1 minute ago, reddevil said:

Why, if the effect is to increase rushing yards for Jacobs and yards for Walker and Williams? I’m not saying that he will or that Lamb wouldn’t have the same effect - but speaking theoretically - if he got 900 or so yards each year and our offense as a whole improved significantly with an exponential rise in the other players numbers - why wouldn’t that be worth 12?

Because 12 is way too high for a decoy.

[RaidersAreOne]

This was made over a month ago and I post this dudes videos all the time, well worth the watch:

 

[Nightmare]

Slept on it, thought about it, and I’m ok with the Ruggs pick. Still would have preferred Lamb or Jeudy but I don’t think it’s a bad pick by any means. Ruggs will stretch the field and even if Carr doesn’t particularly throw many deep balls, defenses have to account for him and it will free up more room for other players in the shorter yardage situations. Plus screens and end arounds could be fun, and they’re a staple part of the Carr & Gruden-led offense.

There’s something about it being the Raiders who have made this pick, which has led to some (possibly subconscious) criticism in draft grades. If the 49ers or Broncos chose Ruggs with the picks right after ours, which apparently they were strongly considering, nobody would bat an eyelid. Because the Raiders did it there’s the whole “lol typical Raiders picking a track star” narrative which is still prevalent even with Al Davis long gone.

Could have been better, but I’d give this pick at least a C.

[RaidersAreOne]

Also I see people knocking his stats and lack of production. Remember the same issues with Jacobs and how he wasn't the #1 guy? 

[reddevil]

1 minute ago, oakdb36 said:

Because 12 is way too high for a decoy.

But he wouldn't be a decoy if (surely you don’t think that’s what we solely got him for). If, just as the random theoretical example goes - he was close to 1000 yard receiver in his own right. I’m not necessarily disagreeing with your premise. I would’ve preferred Lamb, but I do think it is arbitrary to have a specific yard number in mind for the player to get in isolation, if he does get significant yards and also improves the team due to his individual skill set and fit.

[Frankie2Gunz]

7 minutes ago, Nightmare said:

Slept on it, thought about it, and I’m ok with the Ruggs pick. Still would have preferred Lamb or Jeudy but I don’t think it’s a bad pick by any means. Ruggs will stretch the field and even if Carr doesn’t particularly throw many deep balls, defenses have to account for him and it will free up more room for other players in the shorter yardage situations. Plus screens and end arounds could be fun, and they’re a staple part of the Carr & Gruden-led offense.

There’s something about it being the Raiders who have made this pick, which has led to some (possibly subconscious) criticism in draft grades. If the 49ers or Broncos chose Ruggs with the picks right after ours, which apparently they were strongly considering, nobody would bat an eyelid. Because the Raiders did it there’s the whole “lol typical Raiders picking a track star” narrative which is still prevalent even with Al Davis long gone.

Could have been better, but I’d give this pick at least a C.

I am telling you right now people that say "typical track star or DHB 2.0" have no idea what they are talking about and have not watched Ruggs.  He is not the elite X that I covet (Julio,Tron) but he is a tough gamer who has good hands.  He was a better pick than Jeudy and I feel that he would have went to SF at 13 had we not picked him. 

[oakdb36]

3 minutes ago, reddevil said:

But he wouldn't be a decoy if (surely you don’t think that’s what we solely got him for).

No, i don't. At 12, I just don't think opening things for other is enough value if you don't produce high numbers yourself. I think that's something you should be able to find with a less valuable asset than the 12th pick. I never thought Ruggs was worth his projection and i'm not going to change that opinion because we drafted him. If/when he produces, i'll gladly acknowledge i was wrong.

[reddevil]

4 minutes ago, oakdb36 said:

No, i don't. At 12, I just don't think opening things for other is enough value if you don't produce high numbers yourself. I think that's something you should be able to find with a less valuable asset than the 12th pick. I never thought Ruggs was worth his projection and i'm not going to change that opinion because we drafted him. If/when he produces, i'll gladly acknowledge i was wrong.

One thing is for certain, the comparison will be real. There will be nowhere to hide if Jeudy and Lamb produce and become superstars and Ruggs doesn’t. 

[RaidersAreOne]

6 minutes ago, oakdb36 said:

No, i don't. At 12, I just don't think opening things for other is enough value if you don't produce high numbers yourself. I think that's something you should be able to find with a less valuable asset than the 12th pick. I never thought Ruggs was worth his projection and i'm not going to change that opinion because we drafted him. If/when he produces, i'll gladly acknowledge i was wrong.

I have no issues with him producing. Just because he had to share one football at Alabama with 3 other high rounders doesn't mean he won't excel at the next level. Again it feels like people look at his speed and the fact he isn't 6'2 and think he can't be a legit #1. He runs good routes, great hands, awesome hopes, elite speed, can block, good work ethic, etc. I mentioned earlier but one big knock on Jacobs was his lack of production and that's on Bama sharing the rock more than the player not being able to handle it.

[agarcia34]

26 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

Also I see people knocking his stats and lack of production. Remember the same issues with Jacobs and how he wasn't the #1 guy? 

Bama will have 3 WR go in the top 15. There is only one ball production not a concern. 

[RaidersAreOne]

Ruggs going after people on TW who were trash talking his girl I think haha.

[Scoundrel]

I would think you guys would trust Mayock a bit more after the production you got from your rookie class last year. I know Ferrell was taken very high and wasn’t a ten sack rookie but he has potential there. He had 4.5 sacks it’s like he was terrible. Trust the process. 

[oakdb36]

17 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

I have no issues with him producing. Just because he had to share one football at Alabama with 3 other high rounders doesn't mean he won't excel at the next level. Again it feels like people look at his speed and the fact he isn't 6'2 and think he can't be a legit #1. He runs good routes, great hands, awesome hopes, elite speed, can block, good work ethic, etc. I mentioned earlier but one big knock on Jacobs was his lack of production and that's on Bama sharing the rock more than the player not being able to handle it.

His size is a factor because there isn't a lot of smaller guys producing high numbers in the NFL but it's not the most important. AB or Hilton have produced at around the same size lately so you can hope he's in that group. The production in college is more concerning. I wouldn't say he shared the production at Alabama. He was clearly the 3rd WR and by a significant margin. So the projection is that a 3rd option in college will become a 1 WR in the pros and that's a tough one.

[RaidersAreOne]

2 minutes ago, Counselor said:

I would think you guys would trust Mayock a bit more after the production you got from your rookie class last year. I know Ferrell was taken very high and wasn’t a ten sack rookie but he has potential there. He had 4.5 sacks it’s like he was terrible. Trust the process. 

Our fan base is an absolute mess.