Davante Adams traded to the Jets (Conditional 3rd)

[#1RAIDER FAN]

8 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

This is sorta the issue, though. 

How many of the wins have come against/as a result of opposing coaches finding ways to lose? 

KC last year and Baltimore this year come to mind as real, quality wins. Of the other 6, one of them is Stefanski mismanaging the heck out of last week, one was against Head Corpse Brandon Staley, 1 was a beating of Tommy DeVito and the Giants, 1 was a close game against a Jets squad that had all but given up. Then Denver, which I'll always appreciate. 

Where we lack evidence is beating a team that genuinely can't afford to lose, isn't garbage, and isn't suffering from a horribly off coaching day. Baltimore isn't sweating an early loss and KC wasn't sweating last Christmas. 

And, heck, I'm not even demanding wins. Our next 4 games come against Sean Payton, Mike Tomlin, Sean McVay, and Amdy Reid. I wouldn't even be mad if we lost all 4, so long as AP isn't getting circles coached around him. We have a skeleton crew and no QB, losses are expected. Just show me something that says "With a better group of players, this guy can turns these losses into wins". 

I think Payton has something to coach for, McVay seems checked out due to injuries but is still a damn good HC, Tomlin is probably coaching for his job this season, and the Chiefs look mortal enough for that game to absolutely matter. 

It'll be the first stretch we've played where stakes truly exist for our opponents. Lose all 4, but play a well coached game, I'm happy. Win all 4 because of some screwball uncharacteristic decisions/key injury/etc....man ot would just feel like HC stat padding. 

I don't disagree, but the bar for AP has been so low that if he just does the obvious things, I'll be satisfied for now. Last year, benching Jimmy and starting Koonce was a positive sign—though an obvious move. If AP can prove he's not stubborn or stuck in outdated ways, he'll already be better than most head coaches we've had.

If we win games because opposing coaches make mistakes while AP avoids them, I'll give him credit. This includes the discipline improvements. Have to be thrilled with how penalties have been reduced—especially given that we were the most penalized team for a decade. He deserves recognition for that.

I want to see his strategy align with in-game decisions. For example, if you're aggressive, don't punt when you're down two scores in the 4th quarter. Stick to being a run-heavy team and bench Zamir or adjust the scheme accordingly. I also want to see the team not have performances like against the Panthers, where they clearly came out unprepared and unenthused. That's AP's calling card, and it was severely lacking week 3. 

All of that is the expectation to me. Forget that I have no faith he and Getsy can handle a young QB. The upside on the offense is going to be limited as long as we have no innovative mind in the building on the offensive side of the ball. 

 

[NYRaider]

5 hours ago, big_palooka said:

Y'all forget Adams wanted to be the highest paid WR in football

Y'all forget Adams said a potato could be QB he'd still put up numbers

Y'all forget Adams vouched for AP as coach

Y'all forget Adams signed off on Getsy as the OC

You're not wrong, but Adams wanted to be a Raider. It's on him wanting to team up with Carr and getting into this fray. 

He was going to be the highest paid WR in football regardless of if it was here or somewhere else. 

Adams has still put up great numbers in each of the last two seasons here. 

Michael Lombardi said the team promised him they were going to get a QB and then failed.

The only gripe I have in this whole situation is that he waited until week 4 to request a trade. He should've done it in the off-season. 

[Darbsk]

1 hour ago, ronjon1990 said:

This is sorta the issue, though. 

How many of the wins have come against/as a result of opposing coaches finding ways to lose? 

KC last year and Baltimore this year come to mind as real, quality wins. Of the other 6, one of them is Stefanski mismanaging the heck out of last week, one was against Head Corpse Brandon Staley, 1 was a beating of Tommy DeVito and the Giants, 1 was a close game against a Jets squad that had all but given up. Then Denver, which I'll always appreciate. 

Where we lack evidence is beating a team that genuinely can't afford to lose, isn't garbage, and isn't suffering from a horribly off coaching day. Baltimore isn't sweating an early loss and KC wasn't sweating last Christmas. 

And, heck, I'm not even demanding wins. Our next 4 games come against Sean Payton, Mike Tomlin, Sean McVay, and Amdy Reid. I wouldn't even be mad if we lost all 4, so long as AP isn't getting circles coached around him. We have a skeleton crew and no QB, losses are expected. Just show me something that says "With a better group of players, this guy can turns these losses into wins". 

I think Payton has something to coach for, McVay seems checked out due to injuries but is still a damn good HC, Tomlin is probably coaching for his job this season, and the Chiefs look mortal enough for that game to absolutely matter. 

It'll be the first stretch we've played where stakes truly exist for our opponents. Lose all 4, but play a well coached game, I'm happy. Win all 4 because of some screwball uncharacteristic decisions/key injury/etc....man ot would just feel like HC stat padding. 

I agree with the last couple paragraphs, let’s see us go against top HCs and see how AP does, I agree with you that if we do well and there’s no egregious coaching errors even if we lose he’ll come out with credit.

I think you’re nit picking a little over the first few paragraphs. It’s not good enough to beat the Super Bowl champs or the top contenders, now we have to do it in specific circumstances? Maybe our play caused the pressure that resulted in poor coaching decisions? It seems like generally we’re taking every opportunity to discredit Antonio Pierce but also trying to deminish any accomplishments too. Smacks of double standards a little to me.

To be clear, I was a Jim Harbaugh advocate but I also want to give AP a fair shake now that he has been chosen.

Edited October 3 by Darbsk

[NYRaider]

Every time we hire a new head coach their first order of business is to get rid of our best players.

Gruden got rid of Amari Cooper / Khalil Mack

JMD got rid of Derek Carr /  Hunter Renfrow / Darren Waller

AP got rid of Davante Adams / Josh Jacobs

[NYRaider]

7 hours ago, RaidersAreOne said:

I mean duh but I am happy to hear someone reinstate it. I like Adams but if he think he is going to hand pick where he gets traded to, F that. I get teams will want to talk to him about his contract and he will have to sign off on agreeing to extend/restructure, but at the end of the day I would happily send him to Cleveland for all I care if it's the best return for a rental.

Adams can basically nuke any trade by saying he won't restructure though.

[RaidersAreOne]

2 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Adams can basically nuke any trade by saying he won't restructure though.

Someone will trade for him as a pure rental then.

[Justwinning]

7 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Every time we hire a new head coach their first order of business is to get rid of our best players.

Gruden got rid of Amari Cooper / Khalil Mack

JMD got rid of Derek Carr /  Hunter Renfrow / Darren Waller

AP got rid of Davante Adams / Josh Jacobs

Jacobs had a similar offer but chose to leave. Adams was in the plans until he wanted out. Different scenarios from Gruden and JMD IMO.

[RaidersAreOne]

Include Mayer in the trade package to the Jets as well (If he's disgruntled being #2). He's be an upgrade over Conklin I'm sure.

[NYRaider]

7 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

Someone will trade for him as a pure rental then.

The issue is that a bad team isn't going to trade for him as a rental. And a good team isn't going to give us what we want unless he's willing to restructure. 

[NYRaider]

6 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

Include Mayer in the trade package to the Jets as well (If he's disgruntled being #2). He's be an upgrade over Conklin I'm sure.

It's already complicated enough trying to make the money work with just Adams involved, don't see any more players being moved.

[NYRaider]

7 minutes ago, Justwinning said:

Jacobs had a similar offer but chose to leave. Adams was in the plans until he wanted out. Different scenarios from Gruden and JMD IMO.

So it's probably even worse for AP. All of those other guys got traded away because that's what the team wanted to do. Jacobs and Adams didn't want to be here anymore.

[Chali21]

1 hour ago, NickButera said:

I have to admit I really don't think he's doing that great of a job. 

But I also have to admit that if he wins this weekend, and he's 8-6 during his time here.....that is crazy impressive considering how atrocious we were in the 9 games prior to him taking over AND how bad our QB situation is.  

I'd have to take a step back and admit, I have no idea how he is finding ways to win games. 

This is the Jerry Smith meme of “I just kept crawling and it kept working.”  He’s very fortunate to be 2-2 this season because if the browns had gotten the extra point I’m not sure the Raiders win the game in overtime. The offense did nothing in the 4th quarter, I can’t see them doing something in overtime. As for this weekend, both teams have garbage offenses and decent defenses. It’s going to be a snooze fest and probably look a lot like their game with the Jets. Fortunately for the Raiders BP’s boy is pretty bad at the QB spot. 

[NickButera]

50 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

This is sorta the issue, though. 

How many of the wins have come against/as a result of opposing coaches finding ways to lose? 

KC last year and Baltimore this year come to mind as real, quality wins. Of the other 6, one of them is Stefanski mismanaging the heck out of last week, one was against Head Corpse Brandon Staley, 1 was a beating of Tommy DeVito and the Giants, 1 was a close game against a Jets squad that had all but given up. Then Denver, which I'll always appreciate. 

Where we lack evidence is beating a team that genuinely can't afford to lose, isn't garbage, and isn't suffering from a horribly off coaching day. Baltimore isn't sweating an early loss and KC wasn't sweating last Christmas. 

And, heck, I'm not even demanding wins. Our next 4 games come against Sean Payton, Mike Tomlin, Sean McVay, and Amdy Reid. I wouldn't even be mad if we lost all 4, so long as AP isn't getting circles coached around him. We have a skeleton crew and no QB, losses are expected. Just show me something that says "With a better group of players, this guy can turns these losses into wins". 

I think Payton has something to coach for, McVay seems checked out due to injuries but is still a damn good HC, Tomlin is probably coaching for his job this season, and the Chiefs look mortal enough for that game to absolutely matter. 

It'll be the first stretch we've played where stakes truly exist for our opponents. Lose all 4, but play a well coached game, I'm happy. Win all 4 because of some screwball uncharacteristic decisions/key injury/etc....man ot would just feel like HC stat padding. 

I agree with most of what you said, it's how I feel too.  How we play is more indicative to me of where we're going. Which is why I see 2-2, or 7-6 and say "meh. need to see more"

But that argument, "Oh we're only winning because we've played bad teams mostly" ..... that's nitpicky and disingenuous if you ask me. This is the NFL, it's a cold hard fact that bad teams lose against most teams and good teams find ways to win against most. And all games are going to be challenging in some phases. Say what you want, but he may be 8-6 in this league on Sunday and that's something that not a lot of HC's have done.  It's a fact that you (and me too) have to reconcile and just tip your hat too. 

[NYRaider]

I will be monitoring the Jets, Saints, and Bills games this weekend. 

The Jets are currently 2-2 coming off of a dismal offensive performance. The Vikings in London is a super tough matchup and if they lose they might feel the need to push a deal through. They play the Bills on MNF in week 6, heading into that game potentially 2-3 isn't a great place to be in and another loss could really hurt their season.

The Saints are also currently 2-2 and coming off of back to back meh offensive performances after looking like world beaters in the first two weeks. They have a tough matchup at Kansas City this week and then play the Bucs the following week. If they're 2-3 going into the Bucs game they could also feel the need to make a big move.

The Bills are 3-1 and looked absolutely dominant during the first 3 weeks before getting absolutely smashed on by the Ravens last week. Their offense looked really good against bad competition but they couldn't get anything going against the Ravens. They have a tough matchup against Houston this week and if they lose / their offense struggles to get going again they may be more inclined to trade for Adams. Their WR's are questionable at best and another mediocre performance could be enough to show them they don't currently have enough fire power to make a deep playoff push.

[ronjon1990]

49 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

I agree with the last couple paragraphs, let’s see us go against top HCs and see how AP does, I agree with you that if we do well and there’s no egregious coaching errors even if we lose he’ll come out with credit.

I think you’re nit picking a little over the first few paragraphs. It’s not good enough to beat the Super Bowl champs or the top contenders, now we have to do it in specific circumstances? Maybe our play caused the pressure that resulted in poor coaching decisions? It seems like generally we’re taking every opportunity to discredit Antonio Pierce but also trying to demonise any accomplishments too. Snacks of double standards a little to me.

To be clear, I was a Jim Harbaugh advocate but I also want to give AP a fair shake now that he has been chosen.

No, not necessarily. 

However, how many times have we seen a coach capitalize against a sleepwalking opponent late in the season who was already set for the playoffs and just trying to avoid an untimely injury? 

Hence me specifying now I wanna see AP do it when the stakes are high and he's not an unknown. Was it a 1-off or can he go toe to toe with an Andy Reid? 

I think when you're evaluating HCs, it's totally fair to ask "Does this guy represent 'Any given Sunday, we might win' or 'Any given Sunday, we might lose'?" Like I said, I wanna see him against good coaches, even in losses, making good coaching decisions. Then, a better roster should bring more wins. But a 1-off win here and there and otherwise feasting on bad teams (Giants last year) or being less of a doofus than the guy across from him (Staley) isn't enough to give me that vibe. Mediocre coaches can win a random game here and there. Hell, Josh McDaniels is undefeated as a HC Bill Belichick but got routinely outcoached bynother good or even mediocre ones.