Raiders' pick scenarios - significant movement still possible

[RobertWeathers]

I am not sure but I think this is close to the mark. Can someone doublecheck me please? (note that there is still movement in some of these that I didn't mark)

Pick # 15, 1st Round (OAK – Richard Seymour) [movement from 12-17]
Pick # 32, 1st Round 
Pick # 33, 2nd Round (CAR – 2010 3rd Round)
Pick # 64, 2nd Round
Pick # 78, 3rd Round (MIN – Randy Moss)
Pick # 96, 3rd Round
Pick # 98, 4th Round (DEN – Laurence Maroney)
Pick #160, 5th Round
Pick #187, 6th Round (NO – David Thomas)

Seeing that they will finish the year 13/14 wins and SB favorites, having 6 picks in the first 100 is equvilent to Donald Trump finding $100k on the street.

 

[The Gr8est]

The equivalent ( within a few picks) of three 1sts and three 3rds, thanks to putrid seasons by Denver and Carolina. it just isn't possible to milk that draft board any better.

We are not worthy. :youtheman:

Actually we don't get Denver's #4. Seattle gets it's choice of our #4 picks for Branch. I don't have a link but have read that a few times.

 

[RayClay]

As to the importance of the top pick placement? Very important, this year. Outside of a QB (ha ha we got one with a 6th) there's only one position we value enough to really want a high pick if needed.

That's a massive agile DL that can take on double teams all day and still generate a pass rush. A Seymour, in other words.

For comparison, I believe Suh was the prototype last year, had we only had that need and the pick.

Was McCoy not enough at #3? BB will not invent a player if one isn't there, so I ask draftniks, is there a dominant 3-4 end available? that will likely decide what we do and a trade up could very well be in the offing, if so IMO.

By the way, don't know if Suh would be considered "that guy" or not.

 

[RayClay]

Actually we don't get Denver's #4. Seattle gets it's choice of our #4 picks. I don't have a link but have read that a few times.

Hmmm. Just going off the posters estimate, but i vaguely remember something like that now that you mention it.

Of course we got our top receiver for that 4th, if that's the case. Still not worthy.

 

[Wretch]

All the players in bold aren't exactly lighting up the league. In fact, Hobbs was criticized here and in Philly for not being able to cover very well, Kaczur was and is in jeoppardy of losing his starting job, Dave Thomas has become more of a bit/role player than anything else in N.O. (their rookie TE Graham is out playing Thomas), and Meriweather... well do I really need to get into him?

Sanders isn't anything spectacular but he is solid and does make some nice contributions. However, I don't think that he would be missed all that much if he weren't on the team.

I wouldn't put too much into the "starter" title (e.g. Duane Starks ring a bell?), all it means is that team doesn't have anyone any better at that position currently on their roster for one reason or another.

Not every player drafted can be an all pro. Do I wish they could be? Of course but we need to keep expectations realistic. If a team get 3 starters out of a draft that is an above average draft. Some drafts had been better than others, but all in all the Pats are a superior drafting team when compared to the NFL as a whole. When you look at a larger sample, not just 3 years, BB and staff are one of the best teams at using the draft to fill needs, either through drafting a player or trading for veterans.

Sanders is a solid starter and would start on most teams, as would Meriweather.

Hobbs was a solid nickel corner and good ST player, and outplayed his draft position. He was also a very tough player that played through injuries and had a solid career until the injuries this year.

Thomas is OK, but he is an undersized receiver TE on a team (NO) with 3 good to very good WR's, Reggie Bush and Pierre Thomas. He has had a solid career so far, not bad for a mid round pick not great either just solid. Kevin Faulk is a role player, that doesn't make him a bad football player.

I would agree with your starter comment for a team with a losing or .500 record, but starter on a perennial playoff team and SB contender is something else entirely.

 

[aabtec]

Who cares about this pick, given our history who the hell sees us using it this decade? Call me back when it's moved #1 overall in 2023.

I think this might be the year that we use most of draft choices. We have alot of holes to fill.

 

[bucky]

I am not sure but I think this is close to the mark. Can someone doublecheck me please? (note that there is still movement in some of these that I didn't mark)

Pick # 15, 1st Round (OAK – Richard Seymour) [movement from 12-17]
Pick # 32, 1st Round 
Pick # 33, 2nd Round (CAR – 2010 3rd Round)
Pick # 64, 2nd Round
Pick # 78, 3rd Round (MIN – Randy Moss)
Pick # 96, 3rd Round
Pick # 98, 4th Round (DEN – Laurence Maroney)
Pick #160, 5th Round
Pick #187, 6th Round (NO – David Thomas)

I was under the impression that Seattle gets the higher of the Pats' 4th rounders in the Branch deal. So the 98 becomes something like 128. There's also the question of what the Pats gave up for Paige. I'm guessing it was a 5th or 6th rounder.

The Minnesota pick is too hard to figure out and I don't want to spend the time for a 3rd round pick. It'll fall somewhere between 70 and 80.

 

[The Gr8est]

I think this might be the year that we use most of draft choices. We have alot of holes to fill.

I doubt it. This year won't be any different. BB will use his knowledge of value and take that and other team's inability to resist impulse buying and once again get us some players for use now as well as push a couple of picks into next year for higher value.

Pats have a 13-2 record and the top AFC seed and are not looking at any major FA losses. We are getting a couple of gr8 players back from IR next year too.

We have "wants", even significant ones, but no crying "needs" that MUST be filled in the draft. We'll come out of the draft with some useful players and even more picks in future years. These draft day trades are how the Pats have been able to stay on top and STILL have extra high picks every year.

 

[RobertWeathers]

As to the importance of the top pick placement? Very important, this year. Outside of a QB (ha ha we got one with a 6th) there's only one position we value enough to really want a high pick if needed.

That's a massive agile DL that can take on double teams all day and still generate a pass rush. A Seymour, in other words.

For comparison, I believe Suh was the prototype last year, had we only had that need and the pick.

Was McCoy not enough at #3? BB will not invent a player if one isn't there, so I ask draftniks, is there a dominant 3-4 end available? that will likely decide what we do and a trade up could very well be in the offing, if so IMO.

By the way, don't know if Suh would be considered "that guy" or not.

Just from reading a few of the 2011 NFL Draft scouting reports, there seem to be some decent 3/4, 4/3, DE/OLB prospects available in the 1st round.

Seeing that TBC leads the team w/ 22 hurries (17th in the NFL), a consistent pass rush is still a need IMO.

 

[Haley]

I was under the impression that Seattle gets the higher of the Pats' 4th rounders in the Branch deal. So the 98 becomes something like 128. There's also the question of what the Pats gave up for Paige. I'm guessing it was a 5th or 6th rounder.

The Minnesota pick is too hard to figure out and I don't want to spend the time for a 3rd round pick. It'll fall somewhere between 70 and 80.

Thanks. I was going by this list: 2011 Patriots Draft Picks | NE Patriots Draft which must be incorrect. It is so hard to find this information presented clearly.

 

[RayClay]

Just from reading a few of the 2011 NFL Draft scouting reports, there seem to be some decent 3/4, 4/3, DE/OLB prospects available in the 1st round.

Don't see that as a big issue. Cunningham and whoever is the future IMO. If BB didn't gamble on one in the first round before, I doubt he will now.

Big bust potential there, just ask the Jets.

I mean a 3-4 6'4" 300 ++ pound DE.

 

[upstater1]

As to the importance of the top pick placement? Very important, this year. Outside of a QB (ha ha we got one with a 6th) there's only one position we value enough to really want a high pick if needed.

That's a massive agile DL that can take on double teams all day and still generate a pass rush. A Seymour, in other words.

For comparison, I believe Suh was the prototype last year, had we only had that need and the pick.

Was McCoy not enough at #3? BB will not invent a player if one isn't there, so I ask draftniks, is there a dominant 3-4 end available? that will likely decide what we do and a trade up could very well be in the offing, if so IMO.

By the way, don't know if Suh would be considered "that guy" or not.

here are actually several DE/DT types in that 285/290 range that could be huge assets for the Patriots in the first round. But which ones will Belichick favor?

Remember, when Seymour came out, there were a bunch of guys like him that were also almost indistinguishable, and the knock on Richard in college is that his motor was not always running, he wasn't playing very hard all the time.

So it's impossible to know who Belichick might be favoring.

Craig Heyward is a kid who could do what Seymour did, but people knock his motor too. Maybe Belichick likes him and thinks he can light a fire.

 

[satz]

Raiders pick is great position

Elite rush talent , Tackles and 3-4Ends go before the 20s.

so we have a shot at one of the above and as its not top 10 i do care about the money.also if the pick is above 15 i think we can sign them for 6 yrs instead of 5 if i remember.

 

[Uncle Rico]

The equivalent ( within a few picks) of three 1sts and three 3rds, thanks to putrid seasons by Denver and Carolina. it just isn't possible to milk that draft board any better.

We are not worthy. :youtheman:

Yup. Just went over the 2010 Draft, comparing the value of what they had going in and what they came out with. Hoping my math and everything else is right here (I'm sure someone will tell me if I have anything wrong!) Value, according to the chart found easily via Google, is in braces.

HAD GOING IN
1 -22 [780]
2 -44 [460]
-47 [430]
-53 [370]
4 -119 [56]
6 -190 [15.4]
7 -205 (c) [9.4]
-229 [2.5]
-231 [2.3]
-247 (c) [.85]
-248 (c) [.80]
-250 (c) [.70]
Total value: 2127.9

PICKED
1 -27 (McCourty) [680]
2 -42 (Gronkowski) [480]
-53 (Cunningham) [370]
-62 (Spikes) [284]
3 -90 (Price) [140]
4 -113 (Hernandez) [68]
5 -150 (Mesko) [31.4]
7 -205 (Larsen) [9.4]
-208 (Welch) [8.2]
-247 (Deaderick) [.85]
-248 (Weston) [.80]
-250 (Z Robinson) [.70]
2011: #32 [580]
Total value: 2653.35 (difference of about 535, or equivalent of a #37 pick)

 

[The Gr8est]

Good work figuring that out - thanks! So when* we win the Super Bowl we'll be picking somewhere in the 12-17 range, 32nd and 33rd. Of course, the odds of BB MAKING all those picks is slim!

*Half kidding on this one - I know that there's a lot of work to be done and that nothing is guaranteed but after reading the Steelers and Jets message boards I thought that I should have a little swagger for my own team!

I think the Steelers' and Rats' messageboard swagger is just fear manifesting itself.

Pats do their talking on the field.

 

[BrainTrust66]

Just did some quick math on strength of schedule, which is the first tiebreaker for draft order. The Raiders had a pretty easy schedule, so they "win" the tiebreaker against everyone except the Rams and Jags. Thus, here are the best and worst case scenarios:

Best Case:
Raiders lose to KC
Redskins beat Giants
Vikings beat Lions
Titans beat Colts
Dolphins result irrelevant in this scenario.

Raiders finish 7-9 and pick 12th due to "winning" tiebreaker vs. Redskins, Dolphins, Vikings and Titans.

Worst Case:
Raiders beat KC
Pats beat Dolphins
Texans beat Jags.

Raiders finish 8-8 and pick 17th due to "losing" tiebreaker to Jags.

Good work figuring that out - thanks! So when* we win the Super Bowl we'll be picking somewhere in the 12-17 range, 32nd and 33rd. Of course, the odds of BB MAKING all those picks is slim!

*Half kidding on this one - I know that there's a lot of work to be done and that nothing is guaranteed but after reading the Steelers and Jets message boards I thought that I should have a little swagger for my own team!

 

[RobertWeathers]

Don't see that as a big issue. Cunningham and whoever is the future IMO. If BB didn't gamble on one in the first round before, I doubt he will now.

Big bust potential there, just ask the Jets.

I mean a 3-4 6'4" 300 ++ pound DE.

I don't disagree. I also expect Cunningham to be improved and a little more productive next year. I do think you can upgrade the TBC/Ninkovitch spot though with some serious impact talent.

I agree that the second coming of Seymour would be highly desirable- at the right price. Certainly think Ty & Gerard Warren still have wheels on the tires, but another kid on the line that can rush the passer, take on double teams and do a nice job vs the run would be something BB would be proactive in acquiring.

 

[BrainTrust66]

I think the Steelers' and Rats' messageboard swagger is just fear manifesting itself.

Pats do their talking on the field.

Ha! No, I think that they are actually delusional enough to believe.

 

[SONS_OF_BELICHICK]

I see the patriots trading there 32 or 33rd pick to the following year and possible one of the 3rds. BB seems to love the 2nd rounders ....

:rocker:

 

[upstater1]

I see the patriots trading there 32 or 33rd pick to the following year and possible one of the 3rds. BB seems to love the 2nd rounders ....

:rocker:

Trading for what?

33 is already great value when it comes to money.

I can only see him trading it for a 2nd and a 2nd next year or something like that.