Quote: @FSUVike said:
@ StickyBun said:
@ FSUVike said:
@ StickyBun said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
@ StickyBun said:
Fans sure do love draft picks, lol. Let's see if any of those high picks turn into players. The question I have is: will Derek Carr be a Raider much longer? Read a story where they think its possible that he might end up with the Giants at some point.
Is there a better way to replenish the roster?
Not trading Khalil Mack is a good start, not sure how you're going to replace that guy as he's a generational talent. The Cooper trade I get for sure, nice get on the compensation. I think Draftniks always feel that picks are the way to go regardless. Drafting WELL seems to be the best option, easier said than done however. Jon Gruden does not draft well, its proven. Giving him more picks will lead to just more bad picks more than likely. The team when they get to Vegas will look differently than now and it will be all Gruden's doing, not Reggie McKenzie.
As always, only time will tell with the Raiders. Unique situation with them moving to Vegas.
Who cares how good Mack is if the Owners have neutered Defenses as you've been saying for weeks now?
Like I said, he's a generational talent. They can transcend the new rules. Idiotic trade.
At what cost? He's looking to become the highest paid non-QB in the League. Could Oakland afford to pay him like that and still field a good enough Offense in this new Era you are predicting is a permanent thing?
Oakland didn't want to pay him. Not sure why they ever bothered drafting Mack. You still need defense in the NFL, its just continuing to be mitigated. Again, its Khalil Mack. He's special. Not hard to understand I don't think? We've heard Gruden complain about the lack of a pass rush, which is hilarious because they traded one of the best away.
Guys than can rush the passer are at a premium and always will be. Its the only way to even think about stopping a QB in today's NFL. Kansas City is shining supernova hot right now, but their defense is pathetic. Its going to come back and bite them at some point, most likely the playoffs where they haven't won a game in how many years?
Quote: @StickyBun said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
@ StickyBun said:
Fans sure do love draft picks, lol. Let's see if any of those high picks turn into players. The question I have is: will Derek Carr be a Raider much longer? Read a story where they think its possible that he might end up with the Giants at some point.
Is there a better way to replenish the roster?
Not trading Khalil Mack is a good start, not sure how you're going to replace that guy as he's a generational talent. The Cooper trade I get for sure, nice get on the compensation. I think Draftniks always feel that picks are the way to go regardless. Drafting WELL seems to be the best option, easier said than done however. Jon Gruden does not draft well, its proven. Giving him more picks will lead to just more bad picks more than likely. The team when they get to Vegas will look differently than now and it will be all Gruden's doing, not Reggie McKenzie.
As always, only time will tell with the Raiders. Unique situation with them moving to Vegas.
Oh, no doubts there...trading Mack was beyond stupid...stupid at an epic level...compounding his sheer stupidity is his weekly lamenting about not having a pass rush...his entire handling of Mack was a huge fuck up...
I'm certainly not one to take picks over a generational talent just for the sake of having picks...I think I might have misunderstood your comment.
I'm saying if Defense is being legislated out of the game and your whole roster stinks why commit such a large contract to that side of the ball?
You could only get away with doing so in Oakland if Carr was still on a Rookie deal. He's not. And they need O-Linemen, a RB, WRs and a Move TE to field an Offense capable of keeping up in shootouts.
And there's also the Vegas factor. Think their new fans want to see a nasty Defense anchored by Mack and an Offense that looks like it does now when the Raiders get to town? Or a team that can trade scores with the Chiefs?
Quote: @SFVikeFan said:
Bad deal for both teams. Cooper not worth a 1st, Oakland sending a bad message to the team they've thrown in the towel already.
They are 1-5. The season is over. IMO this is a huge win for the Raiders. That 3rd 1st round pick gives them so much flexibility in the upcoming draft. They are almost assured a top 5 pick so they can package that pick with one of the others and probobly get the #1. Or stand pat and maybe get Macks replacement in Bosa or Oliver. They still have the other 1st round pick they could do alot with. Pick a player they want, package it with other picks and move up, trade it for additional picks outside the first round. All that being said we are talking about the disfunctional Raiders, so they will probobly screw it up and end up with a few busts.
Quote: @SFVikeFan said:
@ FSUVike said:
@ StickyBun said:
@ FSUVike said:
@ StickyBun said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
@ StickyBun said:
Fans sure do love draft picks, lol. Let's see if any of those high picks turn into players. The question I have is: will Derek Carr be a Raider much longer? Read a story where they think its possible that he might end up with the Giants at some point.
Is there a better way to replenish the roster?
Not trading Khalil Mack is a good start, not sure how you're going to replace that guy as he's a generational talent. The Cooper trade I get for sure, nice get on the compensation. I think Draftniks always feel that picks are the way to go regardless. Drafting WELL seems to be the best option, easier said than done however. Jon Gruden does not draft well, its proven. Giving him more picks will lead to just more bad picks more than likely. The team when they get to Vegas will look differently than now and it will be all Gruden's doing, not Reggie McKenzie.
As always, only time will tell with the Raiders. Unique situation with them moving to Vegas.
Who cares how good Mack is if the Owners have neutered Defenses as you've been saying for weeks now?
Like I said, he's a generational talent. They can transcend the new rules. Idiotic trade.
At what cost? He's looking to become the highest paid non-QB in the League. Could Oakland afford to pay him like that and still field a good enough Offense in this new Era you are predicting is a permanent thing?
Yes, but I suspect the Raiders have cashflow issues.
Danielle Hunter - is he not worth a big contract because rules favor the offense? Hunter in his entire career: 0 roughing the passer penalties
I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a cash flow issue, that they
have too much money tied up into the move to be able to set aside all the
guaranteed money into escrow or the trust or whatever they have for a giant FA
deal.
I don’t think that Oakland was really bumping into the cap
very hard in any way that they couldn’t just build around either or both of
these guys. If you get a bunch of draft
picks, I think the odds are that the 3 players they get are going to be worse
than Mack and Cooper.
|
