Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 141
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    18,366
    Jim Nagy @JimNagy_SB

    Some context on @Raiders decision to take Alex Leatherwood with No. 17 pick. Media crushed them but Leatherwood was going in first round. Spoke to multiple teams picking in 20-32 range that had Leatherwood in Round 1. Most don’t agree with the pick but it wasn’t a reach.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7,458
    Quote Originally Posted by HunterNRoss View Post
    Jim Nagy @JimNagy_SB

    Some context on @Raiders decision to take Alex Leatherwood with No. 17 pick. Media crushed them but Leatherwood was going in first round. Spoke to multiple teams picking in 20-32 range that had Leatherwood in Round 1. Most don’t agree with the pick but it wasn’t a reach.
    Most don’t agree with the pick= they would have drafted someone else= it was a reach. I don’t agree that it was a huge reach. And I don’t think he’d be there at 48. But a closely ranked player might have been. But if we’re set on leatherwood, then that’s ok.

    But... why pass on a trade down. I haven’t read anything that confirms he’d be gone by 23. The reason we didn’t trade down is the compensation wasn’t enough. I think the fact that we keep reaching and not trading down to get these players is the frustrating part. And it’s always an excuse. Couldn’t find a trade partner. Trade isn’t good enough. Blah, blah.

    So the leatherwood frustration is actually a build up of the Ferrell, Arnette, etc reaches. And if those players performed up to their draft slot, leatherwood would be given the benefit of doubt.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7,458
    Anyone know what we were offered to trade down?

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    13,141
    Quote Originally Posted by FarOutIos View Post
    Most don’t agree with the pick= they would have drafted someone else= it was a reach. I don’t agree that it was a huge reach. And I don’t think he’d be there at 48. But a closely ranked player might have been. But if we’re set on leatherwood, then that’s ok.

    But... why pass on a trade down. I haven’t read anything that confirms he’d be gone by 23. The reason we didn’t trade down is the compensation wasn’t enough. I think the fact that we keep reaching and not trading down to get these players is the frustrating part. And it’s always an excuse. Couldn’t find a trade partner. Trade isn’t good enough. Blah, blah.

    So the leatherwood frustration is actually a build up of the Ferrell, Arnette, etc reaches. And if those players performed up to their draft slot, leatherwood would be given the benefit of doubt.
    Usually the internet and tv heads draft boards are often different than NFL draft boards. You're going off of the internet and tv heads group think because we don't have access to the NFL draft boards. I believe Nagy, he is really well connected in the NFL.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    5,982
    Quote Originally Posted by HunterNRoss View Post
    Jim Nagy @JimNagy_SB

    Some context on @Raiders decision to take Alex Leatherwood with No. 17 pick. Media crushed them but Leatherwood was going in first round. Spoke to multiple teams picking in 20-32 range that had Leatherwood in Round 1. Most don’t agree with the pick but it wasn’t a reach.
    It wasn't a reach?

    Report: He uses his height well, lacks upper body strength, does not finish blocks, struggles with athletic DE's and he lacks a nasty attitude.

    They said he gave up 3 sacks ,and 7 hurries last year(not sure if that is true).

    My question to you Hunter, is Can you name a RT drafted in the top 20(over the last 10 years) with that type of history and report? I'm asking , I never heard of that before, maybe I'm wrong, I just have never seen that. Maybe I should ask Megatron.

    We can agree and disagree all day long. If you want to call someone out for a 5-11 prediction, knock yourself out, it's your prerogative. I would urge to read the prediction thread from the beginning(selective memory fogs conversation).OR if you want to tell someone their comments are ASININE for stating the OL did not block for Derek Week 3 in 2017 at Washington, go right ahead, no hard feelings. ( I was right there too)

    Homerism is way different. Homerism IMHO is shameful. The inability to say this looks like another Audacious Arrogant mistake by a guy who thinks he is King of the Raiders. We all knew Cee Dee was better than Ruggs, we all knew Clelin was a reach, and so on right down the line.
    I don't expect you to be critical of the Raiders like I am( my God you have blue ink, that would be inappropriate ), my reference was not aimed at you, but you took it the hardest.

    It was really aimed at a few that are trying to hang their hat on something.(I really don't want to see them disappointed again this year)

    So tell me. what is it that you're reading or hearing that is making you feel better about this draft pick(that's a rhetorical question.)I have had 3 days to listen.

    How come your not as angry as I am? LOL

    AGAIN, I hope I'm wrong, we'll see.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    Posts
    4,074
    The pick is a banger coming off a covid year

    Fills a hole we need

    From a high caliber program

    Optimism is what keeps me coming back for more.

    I hope you get pleasantly surprised like Randy Quaid in Major League.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Raider Nation
    Posts
    16,153
    Quote Originally Posted by rubiconraider View Post
    It wasn't a reach?

    Report: He uses his height well, lacks upper body strength, does not finish blocks, struggles with athletic DE's and he lacks a nasty attitude.

    They said he gave up 3 sacks ,and 7 hurries last year(not sure if that is true).

    My question to you Hunter, is Can you name a RT drafted in the top 20(over the last 10 years) with that type of history and report? I'm asking , I never heard of that before, maybe I'm wrong, I just have never seen that. Maybe I should ask Megatron.

    We can agree and disagree all day long. If you want to call someone out for a 5-11 prediction, knock yourself out, it's your prerogative. I would urge to read the prediction thread from the beginning(selective memory fogs conversation).OR if you want to tell someone their comments are ASININE for stating the OL did not block for Derek Week 3 in 2017 at Washington, go right ahead, no hard feelings. ( I was right there too)

    Homerism is way different. Homerism IMHO is shameful. The inability to say this looks like another Audacious Arrogant mistake by a guy who thinks he is King of the Raiders. We all knew Cee Dee was better than Ruggs, we all knew Clelin was a reach, and so on right down the line.
    I don't expect you to be critical of the Raiders like I am( my God you have blue ink, that would be inappropriate ), my reference was not aimed at you, but you took it the hardest.

    It was really aimed at a few that are trying to hang their hat on something.(I really don't want to see them disappointed again this year)

    So tell me. what is it that you're reading or hearing that is making you feel better about this draft pick(that's a rhetorical question.)I have had 3 days to listen.

    How come your not as angry as I am? LOL

    AGAIN, I hope I'm wrong, we'll see.
    ALL of the clips, film, and games I have seen of this guy show him finishing his blocks big time. I saw him pushing guys 10-15 yards down the field! He needs to work a bit on his footwork and leaning in to defender on passing downs. These are things Cable can fix. Some say he did poorly during the senior bowl, maybe so, but the videos I saw of him at the senior bowl practices show him throwing guys around and hold blocks as well.

    Sure, he wasn't the top guy on the board, but he WILL be a good tackle for us. I believe that whole heartedly.

    "...prone to stoogery.".

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7,458
    Quote Originally Posted by krsonekth View Post
    Usually the internet and tv heads draft boards are often different than NFL draft boards. You're going off of the internet and tv heads group think because we don't have access to the NFL draft boards. I believe Nagy, he is really well connected in the NFL.
    Nagy might not be wrong. But it still doesn’t mean it wasn’t a reach. Just not a big reach. He said teams had leatherwood as a first round talent. But what he didn’t say is what OTs still on the board did they rank higher? Seems like a couple of the second round OTs could have been on some first round boards.

    There are a lot of draft boards. And they’re all different. Bottom line is was there a better value/higher ranked player available. And could you have gotten a similarly ranked player later. I think it’s yes to both of those. And I think leatherwood was going to be there if we traded down. He wouldn’t have been there for us in the second round. But we missed the chance at even a little extra draft capital.

    I think the main reason they liked leatherwood isn’t because he was the best OT available. But because they liked his potential more. So while he might not have been a great pick, he might end up being the best OT. Cable is banking on his ability to develop the player- which is a good thing. We need that on defense too.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Raider Nation
    Posts
    16,153
    Quote Originally Posted by rubiconraider View Post
    It wasn't a reach?

    Report: He uses his height well, lacks upper body strength, does not finish blocks, struggles with athletic DE's and he lacks a nasty attitude.

    They said he gave up 3 sacks ,and 7 hurries last year(not sure if that is true).

    My question to you Hunter, is Can you name a RT drafted in the top 20(over the last 10 years) with that type of history and report? I'm asking , I never heard of that before, maybe I'm wrong, I just have never seen that. Maybe I should ask Megatron.

    We can agree and disagree all day long. If you want to call someone out for a 5-11 prediction, knock yourself out, it's your prerogative. I would urge to read the prediction thread from the beginning(selective memory fogs conversation).OR if you want to tell someone their comments are ASININE for stating the OL did not block for Derek Week 3 in 2017 at Washington, go right ahead, no hard feelings. ( I was right there too)

    Homerism is way different. Homerism IMHO is shameful. The inability to say this looks like another Audacious Arrogant mistake by a guy who thinks he is King of the Raiders. We all knew Cee Dee was better than Ruggs, we all knew Clelin was a reach, and so on right down the line.
    I don't expect you to be critical of the Raiders like I am( my God you have blue ink, that would be inappropriate ), my reference was not aimed at you, but you took it the hardest.

    It was really aimed at a few that are trying to hang their hat on something.(I really don't want to see them disappointed again this year)

    So tell me. what is it that you're reading or hearing that is making you feel better about this draft pick(that's a rhetorical question.)I have had 3 days to listen.

    How come your not as angry as I am? LOL

    AGAIN, I hope I'm wrong, we'll see.
    ALL of the clips, film, and games I have seen of this guy show him finishing his blocks big time. I saw him pushing guys 10-15 yards down the field! He needs to work a bit on his footwork and leaning into the defender on passing downs. These are things Cable can fix. Some say he did poorly during the senior bowl, maybe so, but the videos I saw of him at the senior bowl practices show him throwing guys around and holding his blocks well.

    Sure, he wasn't the top guy on the board, but he WILL be a good tackle for us. I believe that whole heartedly, Rubi. He may have been a reach, but three or four teams were interested in him. Raiders probably knew that. As for Mayock saying he was their top rated pick, why not say that, justify the pick! Let the kid know you have faith in him. I think he will kick butt, my brother. Not trading down, simply means the compensation was not worth it and they were worried one of those other teams would leap at him. Big Lincoln Kennedy thinks he is the 2nd best OT in this year's draft, Cable obviously likes him, that is good enough for me alone. He will turn out to be as good as Miller.

    "...prone to stoogery.".

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    5,982
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfe-Raider View Post
    ALL of the clips, film, and games I have seen of this guy show him finishing his blocks big time. I saw him pushing guys 10-15 yards down the field! He needs to work a bit on his footwork and leaning into the defender on passing downs. These are things Cable can fix. Some say he did poorly during the senior bowl, maybe so, but the videos I saw of him at the senior bowl practices show him throwing guys around and holding his blocks well.

    Sure, he wasn't the top guy on the board, but he WILL be a good tackle for us. I believe that whole heartedly, Rubi. He may have been a reach, but three or four teams were interested in him. Raiders probably knew that. As for Mayock saying he was their top rated pick, why not say that, justify the pick! Let the kid know you have faith in him. I think he will kick butt, my brother. Not trading down, simply means the compensation was not worth it and they were worried one of those other teams would leap at him. Big Lincoln Kennedy thinks he is the 2nd best OT in this year's draft, Cable obviously likes him, that is good enough for me alone. He will turn out to be as good as Miller.
    From your mouth to God's ears.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tuscaloosa, Alabama
    Posts
    7,533
    Just a matter of time before Simpson and Leatherwood become our starting guards. He won't last at right tackle. He's a mauler, not a pass blocker.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,479
    It seems our draft strategy, at least in round 1, is to lock in on a guy that is guaranteed to be there, and take him regardless of who might have fallen or any potential trades. Leatherwood seems to be along those same lines.

    At the end of the day all we can do is hope. There is far more evidence leaning towards the notion that these guys always reach and it doesn’t work, than there is to justify some people saying “who cares what the media idiots say, I trust our front office.” The issue I see is that there is no accountability, Gruden will remain in charge until he decides to quit, so if we struggle this season and miss the playoffs again we’ll be doing this same song and dance once more a year from now.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,265
    Chris Tomasson
    @christomasson
    Looks as #Vikings tried to trade up w/Raiders from 23 to 17. "When we got on the clock a team did call us & inquired about moving up but they gave us a very poor trade offer & it was a team that needed a tackle" said Mayock. Spielman said Vikes looked to trade up/didn't name team


    Chris Tomasson
    @christomasson
    With no trade done, Raiders took tackle Alex Leatherwood at No. 17. It's doubtful the #Vikings wanted Leatherwood and they apparently got their man at No. 23 in Christian Darrisaw.

    Chris Tomasson
    @christomasson
    So now we've got the added excited over the next several years of who turns out to be the better tackle between Raiders No. 17 pick Alex Leatherwood and #Vikings No. 23 pick Christian Darrisaw.
    Last edited by GeniusLoci; 05-05-2021 at 12:16 PM.

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,265
    so it seems like the Vikes tried to trade up to 17 to pick a tackle... and we were afraid that they were going to pick Leatherwood over Darrisaw?

    So Mayock mentioned that they had a trade offer that didn't offer enough in compensation. Looking at the trade value chart, the 17th pick is worth 950, and the 23rd pick is worth 760. A fair compensation for the move-up would have been something in the 190 range, which would be a mid-3rd rounder. The Vikes had three 3rd round picks, one valued at 200 and the other two at 160, 140. I wonder if the Vikes offered the lower third round picks and the Raiders didn't take it hoping for the higher valued 3rd rounder. I have a suspicion that's what happened.

    The more pertinent question is... if we had taken the deal for one of the lower 3rd rounders, slid down to 23rd and selected Leatherwood... the whole narrative would have been that we were idiots for sliding down and taking the 'lesser' of the two tackles between Darrisaw and Leatherwood, know that the Vikes needed a tackle as well. No matter how you cut it, this team is condemned by general public opinion.

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Raider Nation
    Posts
    16,153
    Quote Originally Posted by rubiconraider View Post
    From your mouth to God's ears.
    Amen, my brother, Amen.

    "...prone to stoogery.".

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •