Recapping the first Las Vegas Raiders Draft

[drfrey13]

8 hours ago, Geezy said:

it wasn't low-risk if they valued Ruggs that much more than the others. To me, they wanted to add speed to open up the offense and Ruggs has that in spades. Also, the fact that Ruggs is known as a hard worker and is ultra-competitive fits exactly what Gruden and Mayock are looking for. If they were just looking to add one of the top WRs, then yes, trade back, grab an extra pick, but if you wanted Ruggs, you needed to get him at 12, because he was gone at 13, imo. As far as Arnette, Mayock said he felt he was in the 25-40 range. I feel like we valued Arnette significantly more than the rest of the CBs available. At that point, the risk was too high and I believe you go get your guy. Trust me, I love draft picks and would like to hoard as much capital as anyone, but at some point you have to go get your guys. Also, with our roster being a lot deeper than in seasons past, and especially with the restrictions the pandemic has caused, I think the focus was more on quality than quantity, especially in the later rounds. 

I do not disagree that is what they thought but I do disagree with that philosophy.  Sometimes it is the correct way to do things but most of the time it is not.  If Mayock thought he was in the 25-40 range why are you selecting him at 19.  Yes we had a need but by Mayocks own words show we reached.  You overdraft QBs and when you think you are that close to a championship.  Maybe a #1 WR but not a complimentary WR.  If there is any truth that Gruden thought Arnette was a better player than Okudah then he needs to be removed from the draft war room next year.  He is horrible at evaluating talent.  In the end I like both players but for the 5th 1st round pick in a row we have reached.  If you count Kolton Miller then it is 6 in a row but then you get the argument of who is pulling the strings.  We got good players but I think you try to get great players early in the draft and you will get busts more often but when you can hit is win you build contenders.  I do not want to be the team that is happy winning a one playoff game every few years.

[reddevil]

20 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

I do not disagree that is what they thought but I do disagree with that philosophy.  Sometimes it is the correct way to do things but most of the time it is not.  If Mayock thought he was in the 25-40 range why are you selecting him at 19.  Yes we had a need but by Mayocks own words show we reached.  You overdraft QBs and when you think you are that close to a championship.  Maybe a #1 WR but not a complimentary WR.  If there is any truth that Gruden thought Arnette was a better player than Okudah then he needs to be removed from the draft war room next year.  He is horrible at evaluating talent.  In the end I like both players but for the 5th 1st round pick in a row we have reached.  If you count Kolton Miller then it is 6 in a row but then you get the argument of who is pulling the strings.  We got good players but I think you try to get great players early in the draft and you will get busts more often but when you can hit is win you build contenders.  I do not want to be the team that is happy winning a one playoff game every few years.

Are you saying that every 1st round pick since Miller has been a reach? Jacobs? Abram? Ruggs? All certified reaches? I get your point, but I don’t think you can realistically qualify that statement tbh.

Edited May 1, 2020 by reddevil

[drfrey13]

Sorry for the double post.

Edited May 2, 2020 by drfrey13

[drfrey13]

8 hours ago, reddevil said:

Are you saying that every 1st round pick since Miller has been a reach? Jacobs? Abram? Ruggs? All certified reaches? I get your point, but I don’t think you can realistically qualify that statement tbh.

I believe that all five players, 6 if you wanted to include Miller, were selected when they were not BVA (Best Value Available).  Is there a player drafted after Jacobs that ends up having a better career?  Maybe not but I do not think we needed to select him at that position to get him.  Sometimes the BVA might only be a position or 2 but I believe that all of those players could have been selected 5-10 slots lower.  Mayock said it himself that he thought Arnette was in the 25-40 range.  Who were the other 6-21 players he thought better or equal value?  I can not prove my philosophy is better or worse because any given year it can be better or worse.  I just believe in a combination of BPA and value.  I have my favorite players every year I want us to draft and sometimes we do but just because someone is my favorite player does not mean I would select them #1.  The year we selected Cooper Gordon was my favorite player but there is no way I would have selected Gordon over Cooper.  I would only have been happy selecting Gordon after a trade back into the teens.

[reddevil]

1 hour ago, drfrey13 said:

I believe that all five players, 6 if you wanted to include Miller, were selected when they were not BVA (Best Value Available).  Is there a player drafted after Jacobs that ends up having a better career?  Maybe not but I do not think we needed to select him at that position to get him.  Sometimes the BVA might only be a position or 2 but I believe that all of those players could have been selected 5-10 slots lower.  Mayock said it himself that he thought Arnette was in the 25-40 range.  Who were the other 6-21 players he thought better or equal value?  I can not prove my philosophy is better or worse because any given year it can be better or worse.  I just believe in a combination of BPA and value.  I have my favorite players every year I want us to draft and sometimes we do but just because someone is my favorite player does not mean I would select them #1.  The year we selected Cooper Gordon was my favorite player but there is no way I would have selected Gordon over Cooper.  I would only have been happy selecting Gordon after a trade back into the teens.

Not sure I agree that all 5 were picked too far away from their value position. That said, you are absolutely right to point out that Grudock do not follow a model based on value. This draft, if we needed any definitive evidence, clearly shows that our FO draft for need, scheme and fit and they care very little about perceived value.

[RaidersAreOne]

 

[drfrey13]

8 hours ago, reddevil said:

Not sure I agree that all 5 were picked too far away from their value position. That said, you are absolutely right to point out that Grudock do not follow a model based on value. This draft, if we needed any definitive evidence, clearly shows that our FO draft for need, scheme and fit and they care very little about perceived value.

Their way may very well lead to a better team.  Maybe they are attempting to fill the roster with a strong base of players who fit the scheme perfectly and then swing for the fences.  No matter if I agree or not it is my team so when I disagree with what my team does I hope I am the one that is wrong.  Not my team because in the end my teams success is what matters.

[MrOaktown_56]

3 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

Their way may very well lead to a better team.  Maybe they are attempting to fill the roster with a strong base of players who fit the scheme perfectly and then swing for the fences.  No matter if I agree or not it is my team so when I disagree with what my team does I hope I am the one that is wrong.  Not my team because in the end my teams success is what matters.

Agree. Reggie went "BPA" instead of drafting for need and scheme fits and look how it turned out.

[RaidersAreOne]

1 hour ago, goldfishwars said:

13. Las Vegas Raiders

This Class In One Sentence:
A really fun class with excellent value in places, but more than a whiff of boom or bust in others 

Pre-Draft Needs 
CB, CB, WR, WR

Selections
1. 12. Henry Ruggs  | WR | Alabama
1. 19. Damon Arnette  | CB | Ohio State
3. 80. Lynn Bowden  | WR | Kentucky
3. 81. Bryan Edwards  | WR | South Carolina
3. 100. Tanner Muse  | ILB | Clemson
4. 109. John Simpson  | G | Clemson
4. 139. Amik Robertson  | CB | Louisiana Tech

Picks Heading In
1. 12.
1. 19.
3. 80.
3. 81.
3. 91.
4. 121.
5. 159.

Favorite Pick
Bryan Edwards – It’s a toss-up between Edwards and Robertson here, but I like the value of the receiver slightly more. A prototypical X size at 6’3 and 215 pounds he is strong at the catch point and an explosive tackle-breaker as runner. He was used inside and outside at South Carolina and could play either as a big-slot or an outside possession receiver.

Most Questionable Pick
Damon Arnette – I would bet good money that Atlanta picking AJ Terrell took the wind out of their sails at 19. To be honest, I think Terrell would have been a reach at 19 too, but he ticked all of the Mayock go-to boxes. As a compromise, Arnette has good size and plays a really physical brand of football, almost to his detriment at times. He also plays a little faster on tape than he timed at the combine. Still, I look at him here at 19 and then at Jaylon Johnson going at pick 50 and wonder where the disconnect is, not least because some of the off-field stuff that comes along with the selection made here. 

Overview
Were they set-up to achieve more than what they managed to get? Perhaps, but overall I’d be pretty happy if I was a Raiders fan. The team are moving to Las Vegas, they have to be willing to put on a show and they certainly look a ton more exciting on paper after the draft. That starts with the pick for Ruggs at 12, who I had a feeling might be the first receiver off the board. The overall results for burners with his speed aren’t great when you think of similar explosive receivers taken in this range. I had Lamb and Jeudy rated higher, but Ruggs's speed gives them a unique strategic advantage, someone whose speed can tip the coverages. Ruggs isn’t just a burner either, he has soft hands and route quickness and makes contested catches. He has had some issues working through physical defenders and was never the ‘go-to’ receiver at Alabama. But the athletic ceiling is off the charts.

Lynn Bowden in the third gives the offense yet more of an explosive element. He has some immediate low-risk, quick-hit ability and you can run some jet sweeps and use his ability as a devastating open-field runner. At the least, he offers immediate impact as a returner. Tanner Muse at 100 was a weird one, I hadn’t thought about him in that kind of range. Perhaps slightly early for a special teams ace, although he did do that Clemson. Perhaps the Raiders see him as a future weakside linebacker or safety hybrid, he does have the speed for it – but didn’t always play to that speed on tape. 

I really like both of the 4th round picks, in John Simpson and Amik Robertson. Simpson is a bad man to have in the trenches, a huge package with grown man strength. With 11-inch hands and 34-inch arms, he regularly bullies defensive tackles out of their stances and has surprising athleticism when pulling. He does have some balance and conditioning issues to work through. I believe Robertson might have some health concerns which may have been why he was available where he went. He’s a small, power-packed corner with some eye-popping plays on tape. 14 interceptions and 34 pass break-ups in his career and he’s been a consistent threat to take the ball away. Fearless and competitive, will be ideal in the slot given his size limitations.

Here's a writeup in NFL Gen by @goldfishwars for those interested.

[drfrey13]

On 5/4/2020 at 10:59 AM, RaidersAreOne said:

Here's a writeup in NFL Gen by @goldfishwars for those interested.

Pretty close to my exact feelings just a more concise and well written post than I could put together.

Edited May 8, 2020 by drfrey13

[Humble_Beast]

Even if Arnette has a lower ceiling, if he can be a solid starter for 6-8 years it would be a win. We legit have guys who 

might a star ⭐️ : Ruggs 

might be starters: Arnette, Simpson, Amik, Edwards 

maybe a starter: Muse like likely but he does has a ceiling to be a starter 

wild card: Lynn Bowden 

if it pans out to be a foundation piece in Ruggs, plus 4 starters it would be a hell of a draft. 

[Bitty 2.0]

On 5/2/2020 at 4:00 AM, drfrey13 said:

I believe that all five players, 6 if you wanted to include Miller, were selected when they were not BVA (Best Value Available).  Is there a player drafted after Jacobs that ends up having a better career?  Maybe not but I do not think we needed to select him at that position to get him.  Sometimes the BVA might only be a position or 2 but I believe that all of those players could have been selected 5-10 slots lower.  Mayock said it himself that he thought Arnette was in the 25-40 range.  Who were the other 6-21 players he thought better or equal value?  I can not prove my philosophy is better or worse because any given year it can be better or worse.  I just believe in a combination of BPA and value.  I have my favorite players every year I want us to draft and sometimes we do but just because someone is my favorite player does not mean I would select them #1.  The year we selected Cooper Gordon was my favorite player but there is no way I would have selected Gordon over Cooper.  I would only have been happy selecting Gordon after a trade back into the teens.

So it doesn't matter that Gruden was right and Miller is the best LT in that draft class?

[drfrey13]

2 hours ago, Bitty 2.0 said:

So it doesn't matter that Gruden was right and Miller is the best LT in that draft class?

If Miller turns out to be the best and he was close to his BVA then it is a good selection.  If the difference is huge and we could have obtained more draft capital then no.  No matter how well a player does relative to the rest of the draft class does not play into value.  It is perceived value at the time of the draft.  The most extreme case of this would be Tom Brady.  If NE traded up to #1 to draft Brady in 2000 they still win but his value at the time would have been one of the worst, if not the worst of all time.  Think of it like stocks.  If I knew Amazon would be worth over $2400 a share today would I have received a good deal if I had paid $10 in 1997?  No.  It was trading at under $2.  I am still rich right now but I could have over 5 times as much right now.  Miller is not an extreme case but if we could have traded back and received an extra 2nd in 2019 to draft AJ Brown, just a long shot example, how much greater is the value of the draft selection?  That is the point.  Not to say whether you are right or wrong years after the draft.

[Bitty 2.0]

35 minutes ago, drfrey13 said:

If Miller turns out to be the best and he was close to his BVA then it is a good selection.  If the difference is huge and we could have obtained more draft capital then no.  No matter how well a player does relative to the rest of the draft class does not play into value.  It is perceived value at the time of the draft.  The most extreme case of this would be Tom Brady.  If NE traded up to #1 to draft Brady in 2000 they still win but his value at the time would have been one of the worst, if not the worst of all time.  Think of it like stocks.  If I knew Amazon would be worth over $2400 a share today would I have received a good deal if I had paid $10 in 1997?  No.  It was trading at under $2.  I am still rich right now but I could have over 5 times as much right now.  Miller is not an extreme case but if we could have traded back and received an extra 2nd in 2019 to draft AJ Brown, just a long shot example, how much greater is the value of the draft selection?  That is the point.  Not to say whether you are right or wrong years after the draft.

It’s more like if you’re picking between yahoo and Amazon.

One would have made you rich and the other would’ve made you broke.

[drfrey13]

2 hours ago, Bitty 2.0 said:

It’s more like if you’re picking between yahoo and Amazon.

One would have made you rich and the other would’ve made you broke.

That is the other aspect of being right or wrong.  I have to apologize because I think you are misunderstanding me and I am throwing around terms but not using them correctly.  What I should have clarified in the beginning is that when I say value I mean expected value.  After the games are played then you can decide on actual value.  During the draft expected value is what counts.  You can win the draft but have everybody's career end from injury in the first couple years.  How good is your front office?  They are as good as the opportunities they give your coaches to succeed.  If you could go back to the 2000 draft and know everything that you know now when would you take Brady?  You could take him in the first and still look like a genius but I would say that is stupid.  Why not select the best player that falls between every pick you have.  That is how you would maximize the talent level on your team.  GMs do not know how things are going to turn out but they do have an expected value.  They are not perfect but it is not often a team pulls a Jihad Ward and drafts a player 3 rounds to early.  We have reached a lot since RM got here and although he is not as bad Mayock has done the same in the 1st round.