Post-Draft Talk

[Dessie]

5 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

In isolation, the pick is fine. Similar to the O'Connell pick in that regard. 

On draft day, TE and QB2 were both relative needs. Obviously QB2 gonna be a day 3 more than likely. Maybe moving up a few spots for each was necessary, maybe it wasn't. 

Again, in isolation, not a lot of gripe. Had we hired these guys to come in and conduct just the one draft, I'd only knock a bit for Young and say WTF to Tucker. 

But as a whole picture, I have a few gripes. 

O'Connell is justifiable enough, even with the little trade up. Not many QBs left I thought were fits or had any real upside as a backup. We couldn't keep Stidham around, which raises some eyebrows given the connection and he's just changing locale as a backup. But it was a FA thing and came down to money more likely than not. That, I call a cost of doing business. 

Mayer (TE early at all) is a whole different story for me. I'm a bit torn on the Waller situation. I'd called for him to be traded based on age and production. 100% willing to cop to saying he needed to go. But he wasn't shipped off until he and McDaniels got into a tiff. I can give some leeway and say it may have been inevitable, but McDaniels simply hasn't earned that benefit of the doubt from me based on his past up to that very point. I cannot, in good faith, say that I believe they intended to trade Waller and prioritize TE until that spat happened. To me, and I think others like @Jeremy408, it's a bit too much of a stretch to say how great and savvy the move was because of the continually questionable optics behind all things that seem to be McDaniels. Feels like his ego created a need that wasn't intended to be there, and why give a ton of credit for that? Where is the logic? How does it represent a positive step forward when we're spending high picks on cleaning up a mess likely caused internally by a HC few are particularly fond of or confident in? 

Now, let me caveat a bit in a way @Jeremy408 may disagree since things aren't entirely lockstep:

If we still had Waller and we made the exact same move for Mayer under the understanding and recognition that Waller wasn't long for the Raiders, and we approached it as finding Waller's successor because of age and productivity decline, I would be 100% on board with the move in its entirety. That  would show that there was a true plan in place to move the team forward. Heck, trade Waller after landing the target player for all I care and apply the same reasoning. Like I said, I figured he'd be gone sooner rather than later and, again, I too called for it. 

But there's no way on God's green earth that we went into the draft knowing Mayer would be there after we'd already traded Waller. We didn’t ditch Waller anticipating it. We didn't ditch him because of the pick. We didn't ditch him to make the pick. We made the pick because we fairly unceremoniously ditched Waller under less than noble circumstances a good way into the offseason. No logical succession plan was in place. That doesn't just make me skeptical of the pick itself, it makes me skeptical of the regime's ability to function without needing to get lucky to fix their self induced mistakes. 

Mayer, Musgrave, Kincaid (already gone though), LaPorta....had we taken them at 38, then moved Waller or whatever, totally would have been cool with it. To be clear, a TE at 38 would not have bugged me at all- in isolation. But the way it became a bigger need than it was and the trade up to get the TE locked up just reeks of underlying dysfunction and deep rooted issues manifesting as needing make a seemingly desperate move to secure a fix for a problem they themselves created. 

With Waller still on the roster on Friday, a TE at 38, or even a trade up to secure a TE sooner, I approve of the move. 

With Waller already gone, a TE at 38 and subsequently the trade up to secure one just carries a different taste for me. 

Mayer is my new favorite TE and none of this has anything to do with him. It's all about the way everything overall has been handled. 

You don’t think the depth of the draft at TE and that we saved $11m played a part in the trade? If we had left trading Waller that late would that have affected the cap savings? We likely wouldn’t have got a 3rd round either. 

[Jeremy408]

20 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

In isolation, the pick is fine. Similar to the O'Connell pick in that regard. 

On draft day, TE and QB2 were both relative needs. Obviously QB2 gonna be a day 3 more than likely. Maybe moving up a few spots for each was necessary, maybe it wasn't. 

Again, in isolation, not a lot of gripe. Had we hired these guys to come in and conduct just the one draft, I'd only knock a bit for Young and say WTF to Tucker. 

But as a whole picture, I have a few gripes. 

O'Connell is justifiable enough, even with the little trade up. Not many QBs left I thought were fits or had any real upside as a backup. We couldn't keep Stidham around, which raises some eyebrows given the connection and he's just changing locale as a backup. But it was a FA thing and came down to money more likely than not. That, I call a cost of doing business. 

Mayer (TE early at all) is a whole different story for me. I'm a bit torn on the Waller situation. I'd called for him to be traded based on age and production. 100% willing to cop to saying he needed to go. But he wasn't shipped off until he and McDaniels got into a tiff. I can give some leeway and say it may have been inevitable, but McDaniels simply hasn't earned that benefit of the doubt from me based on his past up to that very point. I cannot, in good faith, say that I believe they intended to trade Waller and prioritize TE until that spat happened. To me, and I think others like @Jeremy408, it's a bit too much of a stretch to say how great and savvy the move was because of the continually questionable optics behind all things that seem to be McDaniels. Feels like his ego created a need that wasn't intended to be there, and why give a ton of credit for that? Where is the logic? How does it represent a positive step forward when we're spending high picks on cleaning up a mess likely caused internally by a HC few are particularly fond of or confident in? 

Now, let me caveat a bit in a way @Jeremy408 may disagree since things aren't entirely lockstep:

If we still had Waller and we made the exact same move for Mayer under the understanding and recognition that Waller wasn't long for the Raiders, and we approached it as finding Waller's successor because of age and productivity decline, I would be 100% on board with the move in its entirety. That  would show that there was a true plan in place to move the team forward. Heck, trade Waller after landing the target player for all I care and apply the same reasoning. Like I said, I figured he'd be gone sooner rather than later and, again, I too called for it. 

But there's no way on God's green earth that we went into the draft knowing Mayer would be there after we'd already traded Waller. We didn’t ditch Waller anticipating it. We didn't ditch him because of the pick. We didn't ditch him to make the pick. We made the pick because we fairly unceremoniously ditched Waller under less than noble circumstances a good way into the offseason. No logical succession plan was in place. That doesn't just make me skeptical of the pick itself, it makes me skeptical of the regime's ability to function without needing to get lucky to fix their self induced mistakes. 

Mayer, Musgrave, Kincaid (already gone though), LaPorta....had we taken them at 38, then moved Waller or whatever, totally would have been cool with it. To be clear, a TE at 38 would not have bugged me at all- in isolation. But the way it became a bigger need than it was and the trade up to get the TE locked up just reeks of underlying dysfunction and deep rooted issues manifesting as needing make a seemingly desperate move to secure a fix for a problem they themselves created. 

With Waller still on the roster on Friday, a TE at 38, or even a trade up to secure a TE sooner, I approve of the move. 

With Waller already gone, a TE at 38 and subsequently the trade up to secure one just carries a different taste for me. 

Mayer is my new favorite TE and none of this has anything to do with him. It's all about the way everything overall has been handled. 

Where I agree is the fact that in a lot of ways, the pic is the proverbial "it's OK I fixed it" or potentially, even the "we don't need you" pick. But it doesn't necessarily further the teams progress it just fix is a problem.

where I disagree as I don't think TE should've been a second round pick bottom line we had to third round picks. Tbh I would've been fine with the Georgia pick in the 3rd if it meant getting cam Smith, even if that meant, we ended up getting the same guy in the fourth round. I thought we needed to double down at corner see what is a bigger problem and particularly the passing game in a division where we play two teams that would rather pass than run. And this is all if we let Waller go via trade.
 

if we didn't let Waller go, it would definitely need to be in the third round as a value pic, and while I wouldn't have been as upset as as say the stupid wr vanity pick in the 3rd round, it would still be a problem because if you see the reoccurring theme, it's we pay guys and then we draft guys at high draft picks at the same position as the guys we paid. Which means it was poor evaluation to pay the guys we paid. It creates a scenario where all the resources are being used a few positions. While other positions are being neglected.
 

Like who here would be mad if we didn't get Mike Meyer but we got Trenton Simpson instead. We would all go "Yeah that's a great pick" that actually move the needle and makes the team better by adding actual plus talent to a position, long bereft of it and not just recoups what the team lost.
 

For me, it's centered around the simple fact that offense isn't the problem and particularly TE wasn't a problem until a month ago over something that had nothing to do with football. 

[raidr4life]

1 hour ago, ronjon1990 said:

In isolation, the pick is fine. Similar to the O'Connell pick in that regard. 

On draft day, TE and QB2 were both relative needs. Obviously QB2 gonna be a day 3 more than likely. Maybe moving up a few spots for each was necessary, maybe it wasn't. 

Again, in isolation, not a lot of gripe. Had we hired these guys to come in and conduct just the one draft, I'd only knock a bit for Young and say WTF to Tucker. 

But as a whole picture, I have a few gripes. 

O'Connell is justifiable enough, even with the little trade up. Not many QBs left I thought were fits or had any real upside as a backup. We couldn't keep Stidham around, which raises some eyebrows given the connection and he's just changing locale as a backup. But it was a FA thing and came down to money more likely than not. That, I call a cost of doing business. 

Mayer (TE early at all) is a whole different story for me. I'm a bit torn on the Waller situation. I'd called for him to be traded based on age and production. 100% willing to cop to saying he needed to go. But he wasn't shipped off until he and McDaniels got into a tiff. I can give some leeway and say it may have been inevitable, but McDaniels simply hasn't earned that benefit of the doubt from me based on his past up to that very point. I cannot, in good faith, say that I believe they intended to trade Waller and prioritize TE until that spat happened. To me, and I think others like @Jeremy408, it's a bit too much of a stretch to say how great and savvy the move was because of the continually questionable optics behind all things that seem to be McDaniels. Feels like his ego created a need that wasn't intended to be there, and why give a ton of credit for that? Where is the logic? How does it represent a positive step forward when we're spending high picks on cleaning up a mess likely caused internally by a HC few are particularly fond of or confident in? 

Now, let me caveat a bit in a way @Jeremy408 may disagree since things aren't entirely lockstep:

If we still had Waller and we made the exact same move for Mayer under the understanding and recognition that Waller wasn't long for the Raiders, and we approached it as finding Waller's successor because of age and productivity decline, I would be 100% on board with the move in its entirety. That  would show that there was a true plan in place to move the team forward. Heck, trade Waller after landing the target player for all I care and apply the same reasoning. Like I said, I figured he'd be gone sooner rather than later and, again, I too called for it. 

But there's no way on God's green earth that we went into the draft knowing Mayer would be there after we'd already traded Waller. We didn’t ditch Waller anticipating it. We didn't ditch him because of the pick. We didn't ditch him to make the pick. We made the pick because we fairly unceremoniously ditched Waller under less than noble circumstances a good way into the offseason. No logical succession plan was in place. That doesn't just make me skeptical of the pick itself, it makes me skeptical of the regime's ability to function without needing to get lucky to fix their self induced mistakes. 

Mayer, Musgrave, Kincaid (already gone though), LaPorta....had we taken them at 38, then moved Waller or whatever, totally would have been cool with it. To be clear, a TE at 38 would not have bugged me at all- in isolation. But the way it became a bigger need than it was and the trade up to get the TE locked up just reeks of underlying dysfunction and deep rooted issues manifesting as needing make a seemingly desperate move to secure a fix for a problem they themselves created. 

With Waller still on the roster on Friday, a TE at 38, or even a trade up to secure a TE sooner, I approve of the move. 

With Waller already gone, a TE at 38 and subsequently the trade up to secure one just carries a different taste for me. 

Mayer is my new favorite TE and none of this has anything to do with him. It's all about the way everything overall has been handled. 

You blowing the TE thing out of proportion a guy who was top 15 on their board fell, they couldn't pass up the value. I'm sure they were fine with Hooper like most of us, but they were going TE at some point, if not for Mayer falling they would I'm sure they have went defense and TE later, plans change. Hell all my mocks changed with Ocyrus being there at 38 when the bullets start flying things change you adjust.

[RaidersAreOne]

 

[raidr4life]

5 hours ago, Darbsk said:

Overall grade I'd give would be a C. No real star picks but no real desperate mistakes like with Leatherwood, Arnette, Abram. Hopefully it's one of those that grows with time.

• R1 (7): DE Tyree Wilson (B) - Don't dislike the player but his first step and lack of bend/explosion worry me when it comes to pass rush. I don't think he'll be a bust but he may never be what some think he'll become.
• R2 (35): TE Michael Mayer (B) - Just too good a value to miss, best TE in the draft by a margin. I really, really wanted a defensive player here but totally understand the rational and he'll help the Oline too.
• R3 (70): DT Byron Young (C) - I quite like the player but maybe a bit overdrafted and Adebawore is the hill I'm choosing to die on at DT!
• R3 (100): WR Tre Tucker (F) - The only really bad pick for me, poor value and we already have a very crowded receiver room so I'm not sure he can even stand out there. Far too early if he's just a ST guy.
• R4 (104): CB Jakorian Bennett (B) - Sneaky good pick I feel, I can't say honestly I know that much about him but he did pop when I was watching his teammate on the other corner, decent value too.
• R4 (135): QB Aidan O’Connell (E) - I just don't like him as a player but can understand that he fits with McDaniels. Hate the fact we traded up too. Stetson bennett was the QB I would have gone after as a backup. 
• R5 (170): S Christopher Smith II (B) - Good pick, good value, and similar I feel to a guy I liked, Brandon Joseph. No issues with this pick at all.
• R6 (203): LB Amari Burney - I have no idea about this kid so I can't really grade this pick at all if I'm being honest.......... 
• R7 (231): DT Nesta Jade Silvera (C) - We needed a NT after foolishly letting a good, cheap and young one walk. In the 7th you're not expecting anything so if he makes the PS that would be a win.

My reservations were I think we missed a few chances to snag guys that dropped, maybe that's my name recognition only but feels like a missed opportunity a bit. Strange draft for me really, it wasn't bad or outrageous like a few of the past have been where you're throwing the controls at the TV like with the Leatherwood or Arnette picks but I don't know, it just didn't really generate any excitement either for me................. Maybe it was because of all the guys I really looked into and wanted just kind of passed us by or whether it was just a 'solid' draft without the hype that others like the Eagles got it was just very...........underwhelming. 

I wouldn't call it a bad draft more like boring sans the Tucker pick. I'm fine with the Aidan pick I knew QB's were going to start going it was just a matter of which one you like, they liked Aidan I was pulling for Tune myself. Sometimes boring is good. I see 4 possible impact guys and maybe two contributors but we will see.

[jpaulthe1st]

14 minutes ago, raidr4life said:

You blowing the TE thing out of proportion a guy who was top 15 on their board fell, they couldn't pass up the value. I'm sure they were fine with Hooper like most of us, but they were going TE at some point, if not for Mayer falling they would I'm sure they have went defense and TE later, plans change. Hell all my mocks changed with Ocyrus being there at 38 when the bullets start flying things change you adjust.

This. It’s like a Fantasy Football draft. When value falls to you then you take it and adapt on the fly. Fluidity is king in any sort of draft. 

[RaidersAreOne]

 

[BobbyPhil1781]

I meant to hit B but guess I selected A. 

Pretty happy with this class. Sure, would've liked a couple things done differently but whatever. Still solid

[NCOUGHMAN]

I give the draft a “c”

lot to be desired things got kinda weird after 2nd round

i don’t think they managed the board well but the jako being available was a life saver

tyree has to be a baller for this draft to be successful imo

[massraider]

1 hour ago, RaidersAreOne said:

 

3rd most draft capital on defense in the league. 

Finished 12th in NFL vs consensus board:

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/2023-nfl-draft-consensus-big-board-scores-winners-and-losers/

 

20 teams had more or worse reaches vs consensus board.

 

Adults running the team. Thank god

[MrOaktown_56]

B. Some very good players down the line for me. Really liked Bennett and smith. Young went a tad early but can become a valuable IDL. The qb was eh in terms of value. Same with tucker who was too early. Nesta jade was a decent LB prospect. And Wilson and Mayer were good value where they went. I have some optimism with this class.

[ronjon1990]

4 hours ago, raidr4life said:

You blowing the TE thing out of proportion a guy who was top 15 on their board fell, they couldn't pass up the value. I'm sure they were fine with Hooper like most of us, but they were going TE at some point, if not for Mayer falling they would I'm sure they have went defense and TE later, plans change. Hell all my mocks changed with Ocyrus being there at 38 when the bullets start flying things change you adjust.

And that's all well a good. 

End of story for me, regardless. Is they've shown themselves to prioritize offensive weapons, and I believe it's shortsighted on their part given the overall moves they have made. 

If they ultimately prove me wrong about their ability to build a full team, great. That'd be a good thing. Overall, taking all decisions into account, they've yet to impress me. If someone is impressed by them, I certainly don't get it, but more power to them. 

[ronjon1990]

2 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

B. Some very good players down the line for me. Really liked Bennett and smith. Young went a tad early but can become a valuable IDL. The qb was eh in terms of value. Same with tucker who was too early. Nesta jade was a decent LB prospect. And Wilson and Mayer were good value where they went. I have some optimism with this class.

Anything in particular? 

O'Connell intrigues me as QB2. Folks seem a bit divided on him, but to me for QB2, he seemed like the most likely to actually pan out. 

[Dessie]

3 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

B. Some very good players down the line for me. Really liked Bennett and smith. Young went a tad early but can become a valuable IDL. The qb was eh in terms of value. Same with tucker who was too early. Nesta jade was a decent LB prospect. And Wilson and Mayer were good value where they went. I have some optimism with this class.

Nesta Jade is a DT ? There was a run on QBs so why is it you feel O’Connell was ‘eh ‘ in terms of value ? 

Edited April 30, 2023 by Dessie

[MrOaktown_56]

49 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

Anything in particular? 

O'Connell intrigues me as QB2. Folks seem a bit divided on him, but to me for QB2, he seemed like the most likely to actually pan out. 

Trading up to the 4th round for a backup QB just seems iffy to me. I actually think he's a fine prospect but definitely a cut below guys who are future starters.