2021 Draft Thread - Day 3 Throwdown

[Darbsk]

Little disappointed we didn't at least throw a pick at DT but we do have several options. Solomon Thomas I really, really liked coming out of college at 3T so I do have high hopes for him and Irving has indeed flashed huge potential in the past. I'm going to be honest and say I don't know a whole lot about Philon but have read he's been solid but hasn't played in a long while so who knows. I personally would have gone after at least one DT and especially in the last round maybe Wilson or Tonga would gave been great.

Fascinated now and very impatient to see what we have in Thomas, Jefferson and Irving as that's where we've placed our chips.

[ronjon1990]

35 minutes ago, raiders4life said:

Hey man we’re all entitled to our own opinions and you can be pessimistic all you want.. but it’s mind boggling to me that you just argued that a pick in the 2nd round was bad because they could’ve drafted the same guy in the 1st. That’s just a whole new level of being negative.

 

I mean just for entertainment purposes.. let’s look at the trade value chart. You’re arguing the Raiders should’ve picked Moehrig at 17 (valued at 950) instead of using picks 48 and 121 (valued at 420 and 52 respectively). They got Moehrig for literally half the value/investment than they would’ve if they drafted him at 17. Mind boggling. 

I don't really care what where we got Moehrig. I wanted him anyway. 

But that doesn't dispel my hatred of the Leatherwood pick. That was an objectively dumb pick to make, no matter how you cut it. What was it called, a 60% chance he would have been available with our 2nd? Moehrig was a 1st round talent, and there was quite the run on S's early day 2. Had we not found a trade partner to move up and get him, we would have been caught with our roosters in our hands as Holland and Grant were off the board. Taking Leatherwood at 17 was an unnecessary risk, and one that could have blown up and made us look really bad considering that FS was pretty much our top overall need. 

A 100% chance we get Moehrig at 17 and a ~60% chance we get Leatherwood at 48 without having to give up picks to move up and keep from looking like a hot mess. Criticizing that is mind boggling? If it were so mind boggling, our draft strategies (which haven't yielded much success, btw, so I don't want to hear anything about "their board". Their board sucks then. And it sucks because the players who they have high on their boards routinely suck. The player they think is BPA routinely sucks. So spare me the "you have to have faith" stuff. They haven't earned that.) wouldn't be a freaking meme on sports media.  

[ronjon1990]

56 minutes ago, Jeremy408 said:

well I mean we signed 5 upside guys at defensive tackles lol. I was more concerned about nose tackle going into this draft. That's why if they're able to figure out a way to get one of those two without drafting them that was a smart way to deal with that. 

I also wonder what the plan is at slot corner

My guess is Johnson or Amik? Maybe Hobbs surprises? 

With another DE being taken, maybe we ditch Nassib along with possibly ditching Heath, maybe we sign someone. 

[FloydFan]

I hope we ditch them both and go get Sherman or Heyward. 

[Jeremy408]

2 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

My guess is Johnson or Amik? Maybe Hobbs surprises? 

With another DE being taken, maybe we ditch Nassib along with possibly ditching Heath, maybe we sign someone. 

 thought we would trade NASA during the draft but I think his contract is too sucky for that.

[Dessie]

6 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

I don't really care what where we got Moehrig. I wanted him anyway. 

But that doesn't dispel my hatred of the Leatherwood pick. That was an objectively dumb pick to make, no matter how you cut it. What was it called, a 60% chance he would have been available with our 2nd? Moehrig was a 1st round talent, and there was quite the run on S's early day 2. Had we not found a trade partner to move up and get him, we would have been caught with our roosters in our hands as Holland and Grant were off the board. Taking Leatherwood at 17 was an unnecessary risk, and one that could have blown up and made us look really bad considering that FS was pretty much our top overall need. 

A 100% chance we get Moehrig at 17 and a ~60% chance we get Leatherwood at 48 without having to give up picks to move up and keep from looking like a hot mess. Criticizing that is mind boggling? If it were so mind boggling, our draft strategies (which haven't yielded much success, btw, so I don't want to hear anything about "their board". Their board sucks then. And it sucks because the players who they have high on their boards routinely suck. The player they think is BPA routinely sucks. So spare me the "you have to have faith" stuff. They haven't earned that.) wouldn't be a freaking meme on sports media.  

Who would you have taken at each pick, if you re going to whine surely you are going to say who you thought we should have taken ? 

[ronjon1990]

1 hour ago, Dessie said:

Who did you want at every pick ? 

Before I give an answer, every pick we HAD or every pick we MADE including trade ups? Because those become two very different lists and I don't do the "so and so would've been there at...". 

Edited May 1, 2021 by ronjon1990

[ronjon1990]

4 minutes ago, Dessie said:

Who would you have taken at each pick, if you re going to whine surely you are going to say who you thought we should have taken ? 

Yep, criticism is whining to those firmly attached to the Maycock. I forget we've been nothing but successful in our drafting in recent years 

[Dessie]

3 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

Before I give an answer, every pick we HAD or every pick we MADE including trade ups? Because those become two very different lists and I don't do the "so and so would've been there at...". 

Every pick we made.

Yeah I don’t like lists when people try and project who would/wouldn’t be there, really really annoying tbh. 

[Dessie]

2 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

Yep, criticism is whining to those firmly attached to the Maycock. I forget we've been nothing but successful in our drafting in recent years 

Sorry it’s not whining cos you have already said that you are better than Gus Bradley... 

[Jeremy408]

25 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

I don't really care what where we got Moehrig. I wanted him anyway. 

But that doesn't dispel my hatred of the Leatherwood pick. That was an objectively dumb pick to make, no matter how you cut it. What was it called, a 60% chance he would have been available with our 2nd? Moehrig was a 1st round talent, and there was quite the run on S's early day 2. Had we not found a trade partner to move up and get him, we would have been caught with our roosters in our hands as Holland and Grant were off the board. Taking Leatherwood at 17 was an unnecessary risk, and one that could have blown up and made us look really bad considering that FS was pretty much our top overall need. 

A 100% chance we get Moehrig at 17 and a ~60% chance we get Leatherwood at 48 without having to give up picks to move up and keep from looking like a hot mess. Criticizing that is mind boggling? If it were so mind boggling, our draft strategies (which haven't yielded much success, btw, so I don't want to hear anything about "their board". Their board sucks then. And it sucks because the players who they have high on their boards routinely suck. The player they think is BPA routinely sucks. So spare me the "you have to have faith" stuff. They haven't earned that.) wouldn't be a freaking meme on sports media.  

To me it's only a bad pick if he doesn't show up week 1 as the starter or if Darrisaw is substantially better. 

[Frankie2Gunz]

I don't know much about the players that we drafted but I like the strategy.  It was pretty clear that our front office and Bradley thought the back end of our D needed help in a bad way. 

I wanted to go D with our first pick but but looking back at what the front office did with the remaining picks I am now ok with taking a RT in the 1st.  Moehrig in the was very good value at an area of need and allows us to move Abram closer to the LOS where he is best suited.  No complaints here. 

A rotational Edge, a versatile hybrid LB, a developmental S and Cb to round in theory is what this team needed to do.  We got younger, added speed and athleticism.  Can they play football at a high level is the big question?

[Jeremy408]

11 minutes ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

I don't know much about the players that we drafted but I like the strategy.  It was pretty clear that our front office and Bradley thought the back end of our D needed help in a bad way. 

I wanted to go D with our first pick but but looking back at what the front office did with the remaining picks I am now ok with taking a RT in the 1st.  Moehrig in the was very good value at an area of need and allows us to move Abram closer to the LOS where he is best suited.  No complaints here. 

A rotational Edge, a versatile hybrid LB, a developmental S and Cb to round in theory is what this team needed to do.  We got younger, added speed and athleticism.  Can they play football at a high level is the big question?

You can clearly see that in Gus Bradley's defense he favors speed and athleticism. The simplified scheme should allow them to play fairly quickly

[Frankie2Gunz]

Just now, Jeremy408 said:

You can clearly see that in Gus Bradley's defense he favors speed and athleticism. The simplified scheme should allow them to play fairly quickly

I am fascinated to see if the more simplified system will improve player productivity, our D overall and if so by how much?  Having Abram closer to the LOS and not have so much responsibility in coverage should help a lot, he was not good.  One of the biggest question marks we have outside of our inability to generate pressure from our interior Dline is Arnette.  He needs to play like a 1st round Cb and if he is getting torched this season like he was last year that will be a major problem.  

[Jeremy408]

3 minutes ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

I am fascinated to see if the more simplified system will improve player productivity, our D overall and if so by how much?  Having Abram closer to the LOS and not have so much responsibility in coverage should help a lot, he was not good.  One of the biggest question marks we have outside of our inability to generate pressure from our interior Dline is Arnette.  He needs to play like a 1st round Cb and if he is getting torched this season like he was last year that will be a major problem.  

I think the pass rush is much better with Ngakoue alone. I'm not simply referring to his consistency with getting eight or more sacks in a season each of his seasons but I even think his presence will make Max Crosby better(who I consider a complimentary pass rusher)

I think the potential from whoever wins from the interior will give the secondary a better chance to be successful. They seem to be very high on Solomon Thomas(which I can see why because once he was signed I did research to find out that he was used wrong his entire time in San Francisco). Plus Eric Harris is gone so now there's actually 11 players playing on the field now lol

I wasn't a big fan of Trevon Moerig during the draft process because one I thought he was going to go in the first round and two he didn't play single high safety so I thought he wouldn't be a good fit. But I actually trust Gus Bradley he has a track record with a good defense of backfield's at every position as long as there's a pass rush. So the interior pass rush is going to be the big question