More help

by JPBarnett on Mar 25, 2009 1:35 AM PDT Comment 36 comments

The mock draft over at Stampede Blue is under way. Curry and Raji are off the board and the Cheifs are on the clock. I am still doing as much research as I can to do a good job drafting as the Oakland.

Thanks for all the advice I've seen thus far!

I'm also interested in 2nd and 3rd round possibilities. Obviously it can be hard to project, so positional needs might be easier.

Also, I'm not a diehard Raiders fan, so if you want to pepper in some general info on playing style, coaching patterns, etc so I can get a little better feel for this team. I will let you all know what I've done so you can see/let me know how I did.

0 recs | Comment 36 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Read More: stampede blue, 2009 mock draft, 2009 nfl draft, Oakland Raiders, Mock Draft(Silver And Black Pride)

Comments

it's hard to judge what we'll do in the second

We might go center, but Satele is here now and it might not be considered a need by the team. I’d say to draft a run stopper at DT in the second or the best pass rusher at DE. Safety is also a very likely move. I’m thinking Oakland will look at D-Line help in the second. As for the third, either Jaspar Brinkley or Chip Vaughn if the D-Line’s been addressed. If not, then a name like Otis Sidbury will come up at DE or Terrance Taylor at DT.

V- "I'm not questioning your powers of observation. I'm merely remarking on the paradox of asking a masked man who he is."

by KA1Z3R on Mar 25, 2009 4:01 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

D-Line

seems to be the biggest need then. Maybe O-line, but preferably WR, in the first.

by JPBarnett on Mar 25, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

If Raji and Crab-Man

get drafted before our pick, we would probably go

1. Jason Smith
2. Eugene Monroe
3. RAK

and the next one I think deserves some debate

Aaron Maybin or Rey Rey

by DarthDavis on Mar 25, 2009 4:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

But is that go-to reciever going to be there with our 2nd pick

I think not.
less than a week ago I also had J Smith as our first selection, but we need to keep teams honest. last year teams loaded up the box and blitzed often to get to Jamarcus early and disrupt him(for the most part it worked) resulting in a lot of 3 and outs.

My selection now would be (If Raji and Crab-Man are gone) DHB. He possess amazing speed for a big guy, great leaping ability, and has real good upper body strengh.

"May the wind be at our back, here comes the Silver and Black "

by RUKidding on Mar 25, 2009 5:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Thank You RUKidding

Ive been preaching to everyone on these blogs and stuff tht beyond crabtree no one from this draft class would be a step up from Schilens, who is our best pure receiver. If we are to bring in a receiver, it needs to be a no.1 so schilens can be the 2 and higgins can be the slot.

But as for the draft possibilities in the 2nd round, I myself am alone in really liking Patrick Chung. The best open field tackler in this draft besides aaron curry, extremely experienced in guarding tight ends, which is what our ss does frequently in our defense, and can hit like a truck.

Another outside shot it Clay Matthews. if he somehow slip to the raiders in the second, i think they hop all over him. The raiders dont have a big thumper in the middle. Morrison is more smart and quick, and hoard is just pure speed. Matthews can play all the linebacker positions and would be a large step up from ricky brown.

I dont think the raiders are going to do anything about DT in this draft. I think we have experienced big guys in the middle, and i think if they were so bad they would be long gone like gibril wilson and kwame harris.

Center will not be addressed in the 2nd, but maybe later on with a center guard combo like antoine cladwell. He would be a 3rd round choice.

Beyond that if i can lay claim to any player ive introduced to this blog it is lawrence sidbury. I know you guys might have heard his name before, but if i had to stamp my claim on any player ive been preaching non stop its the DE from Richmond. Dwight freeney like spin move and quickness, a steal in the 4th or later.

by posey440 on Mar 25, 2009 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why spend a second round pick when we have Huff

Lets see what we can salvage out of him and his top play against our opponents top receiver targets i.e. TE. Why gamble when we know Huff can cover them (TE’s) better then anyone. Why take the gamble on a SS in the second round? Instead we should look at Chris Clemons who can play both FS and SS in the late 3rd to early 4th.

As far as second round goes, Robiskie is a money pick for a WR, he grew up on the Raider sidelines watching his dad coach. And is as pro ready as they come, he doesn’t have that high of a ceiling but should be the top rookie WR next year if we are looking for production.

Also DEFENSE DEFENSE DEFENSE, and a WR and a TE. Look for Run D front 7 players (and avoid Paul Kruger big time!) But Sean Smith at #40 is the exception to the above!

Go with Rey Rey if RAK, Raji (the best possible choice, and Crab Man are gone, he is a Raider type player!

Did Raji and Crab-Man really go already I find that incredibly hard to believe!

by DarthDavis on Mar 25, 2009 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think we need to stop babying Huff

I loved him coming out of college, but after i saw him struggle to break our lineup and guys like cutler who were picked after him flourish, im just not the type of guy who is gonna sit around and wait for huff to get it. He can cover tight ends well, but so can chung. and chung is much bigger and a better run stopper than huff. I think we need cable to tell huff “Look, you are a Top 10 pick. Youve been in this league for 3 years. We arent going to sit around and wait for you to get it. If you want this job, then take it.”

There is a saying that goes “If you can take a hotter girl to the prom, you do it.” This can be said for alot of the raiders positions, but especially with our safeties, where we have no clear cut starters right now. It could be branch/eugene, or huff/branch or huff/eugene. We dont know. I will say that kevin ellison in the 4th round would be good at ss, but chung does everything ellison does and also is an expert at guarding tight ends.

by posey440 on Mar 25, 2009 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am not babying Huff

but there is a career and something positive he brings to the SS position and its actually really really important given our Pass D. I think people need to stop being so jaded that Huff didn’t turn out like they thought and maybe hurt their street cred with their friends or they feel silly because they bought his jersey. Huff is solid at a crucial part of our Pass D, taking away underneath options away from Nnamdi and Mr. 4.18. And no one know how Chung will perform against Gates, Gonzo, and Scheffler c’mon dude the PAC-10 TE’s vs. the AFC West TE’s are like universes apart.

by DarthDavis on Mar 25, 2009 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He does bring something positive, but he is no starter as of now.

Huff, with the production he has given us, would have been a great 3rd round pick up. But he is not. He is the no. 7 overall player in that draft class, and he is having trouble starting the lineup. And yeah the AFC west tightends are much better than the pac 10s but the same can be said for bj raji and the afc west Guards-brian waters, kris dielman. Any rookie who comes in will play better players than he did in college.

I just have completely jumped ship on huff. he cant get on the field, and when he does he is great at covering tight end, but this means nothing if we continue to have him miss tackles in the 2nd level and allowing 12 yard runs to be 45 yard runs. He is not a 3 down safety, chung has shown the ability to be.

by posey440 on Mar 25, 2009 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Huff

I’ve said this before that I believe that Huff is a t the top of the “Rob Ryan misuse of talent class”. Huff was anything but tentative at Texas and he was a play maker. While not showing as much in his stats, his rookie season in 2006, Huff did display some of that “attack first-react second” ability. I believe that Rob Ryan ruined Huff’s progress to the point that he lost all confidence in his abilities as he was coached out of his natural instincts.

While Chung would be a good get if the Raiders draft plays out in a way that it is a value pick, I bellieve that Huff gets his last shot this season under the new coaching regime.

BTW, we don’t know yet where the Raiders will play Huff. The Raiders official roster on their website first indicated earlier this year that Huff was listed as strong safety. As you know he was at free last season. So I emailed the Raiders seeking clarification on Huff as well as a few other “mislabeled” players and the Raiders corrected their roster a few days later listing Huff just as a safety, neither free or strong. I say this because I believe that this coaching staff is going to give Huff every opportunity to succeed at whichever position suits his talents.

Your team is your child...You love it no matter what.

by TheRaiderWay on Mar 25, 2009 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

As they should

as long as we improve our Run D! BTW San Fran Chronicle is saying the Raiders are offering Bush for Braylon Edwards straight up!

by DarthDavis on Mar 25, 2009 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rumor

David White put it as a rumor as part of his rumor mill piece:

Rumor No. 2: the Raiders have talked with the Browns about trading running back Michael Bush for wide receiver Braylon Edwards in a straight-up deal.

Again, not true, according to several team and league officials. While some teams have called to inquire about Bush’s services, the Raiders are saying he is not on the trading block.

Your team is your child...You love it no matter what.

by TheRaiderWay on Mar 25, 2009 4:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i would do that

in a heartbeat.

Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up!!

by naq92 on Mar 25, 2009 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

If im a raider coach, i say either shit or get off the pot mike huff

Look we have seen more promise out of jamarcus and his rookie season was a waste. I think coming out of college huff was more of a workout warrior. He was like roy williams back in the day for the cowboys. Williams was basically told “ok just roam free and kill people” and he did. But teams started to expose his weaknesses and started going deep on him. I think offenses see huff and say" look he is pretty good in coverage but if out tight end lays a finger on him he will be pancaked." I think huff should follow nnamdi and leave safety for corner and lets bring in a young guy who has some upside and doesnt only have a 4.35 on his resume.

by posey440 on Mar 26, 2009 12:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Raji's gone

and so is Curry. Everyone else is still on the board so far…

by JPBarnett on Mar 25, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just tell us who is available when the raiders pick. But if crabtree is still available, you know what to do.

by posey440 on Mar 25, 2009 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Brian Orakpo or Michael Crabtree in the 1st..

Either one would be good, but what the Raiders are most likely going to do with the 7th pick is get a WR.
In the 2nd round it would depend on what we pick in the 1st. If we pick a WR in the 1st then we will go LB or DT in the 2nd. But if we go DE or LB in the 1st then we go WR in the 2nd.
Right now the Raiders need an OLB, WR, (maybe a S for depth), DT (a good one), and a DE to help Burgess.

by L.A. Raiders on Mar 25, 2009 9:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

In his talk yesterday

Cable made an interesting comment that no one picked up on. He mentioned that he is pleased with the “plan” the Raiders have for draft day. I took that to mean that the Raiders have a potential deal in place to drop out of the #7 spot. It could mean nothing of course, but I was intrigued by his use of “plan”. How can you have a plan if you have no idea of what players will be left when you draft? It just seemed to me that the Raiders are planning on getting out of #7 and getting more picks. In any event this is Cable’s first draft and I am positive that he and Al are on the same page as to what to do in the draft, either move out, or trade a player or two for more picks.

by Laoren on Mar 25, 2009 3:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

A trade down if Raji isn't there

Would be GENIUS!

by DarthDavis on Mar 25, 2009 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not Necessarily

I’ll accept that trading down is a component of the draft “plan”, but I’m sure the Raiders’ plan includes a discussion of needs that should be addressed through the draft, players that Cable and Davis like and dislike, and different scenarios based on who’s available at #7 and so on. I don’t think the “plan” necessarily means trading down. Wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world though, that’s for sure.

Spreading Brinkleyanity to the Raider Nation

by LiveAdam on Mar 25, 2009 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

but trading down is in interesting proposal that we’ve all talked about on here before. I’m thinking that if Crabtree and Raji are gone, that will be their move. In which case I think we might see Heyward-Bey and either Larry English or Brian Cushing be future Raiders. This would be a fantastic thing in my mind and I’d like to see that. We have some many uncertainties on who to draft at 7 based on our needs. More picks equals more talent at more needs. We could potentially have our three main issues of WR, S, LB, and DT fixed up with quality players.

V- "I'm not questioning your powers of observation. I'm merely remarking on the paradox of asking a masked man who he is."

by KA1Z3R on Mar 25, 2009 5:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think they will both be gone.

"We want to Win. The Raider fans deserve it. The Raider players deserve it,even my organization deserves it. You have to Win and Win with a vision of the Super Bowl. That's our passion here"- Mr. Davis

by nishal26 on Mar 25, 2009 5:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

could happen

almost every team before us could use another great WR and they all have bad defenses.

V- "I'm not questioning your powers of observation. I'm merely remarking on the paradox of asking a masked man who he is."

by KA1Z3R on Mar 25, 2009 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That would really really suck

I would hate whoever took Raji and crabtree

by nishal26 on Mar 25, 2009 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Todd McShay's

latest mock, out today, has Detroit passing on Stafford, Cincinnati taking Raji, The Raiders Andre Smith and JAx taking Crabtree at #8.

Your team is your child...You love it no matter what.

by TheRaiderWay on Mar 26, 2009 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

that's retarded

even after signing Khalif Barnes, thus giving us four quality OT’s. Now our biggest needs our biggest needs are WR, S, DE, DT, and LB in that order.

V- "I'm not questioning your powers of observation. I'm merely remarking on the paradox of asking a masked man who he is."

by KA1Z3R on Mar 26, 2009 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would put DT

ahead of everyone else.

by Raider76 on Mar 26, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Have to say WR and safety ahead of them

actually safety should be #1 as all we have are Huff, Branch, and Eugene. All of which either unproven or not up to par with the starting safety expectation level. WR because Schilens and higgins are young and unproven. We don’t know if they can continue their amazing play next year.

V- "I'm not questioning your powers of observation. I'm merely remarking on the paradox of asking a masked man who he is."

by KA1Z3R on Mar 26, 2009 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You said Huff, Branch and Eugene

are unproven. Then why does it make sense to draft another unproven Safety. All these players are unproven because they haven’t played in an NFL game. Our pass defense was not a problem last year. It was our run D. We need to address that before we pick up a safety or WR. Our recievers need a good year in this system so we can see what we have. You saw towards the end of the season how well they played. Give them time and let them develop. If we draft more recievers than it slows their development down.

by Raider76 on Mar 27, 2009 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

Branch looks like he has potential, huff cant get on the field enough, and eugene is just a smart football player and not a good athlete. But none of these guys have any bulk. We are looking to bring in a ss, not a fs. We need a ss that can cover and help stop the run. Gibril was a good tackler, but he was marginal in the passing game. Our run D isnt so much the DT or Nose but it is the offense that needs to improve on the 27th ranking in time of possession and the second and third level filling the running gaps. I like patrick chung because he looks like huff and gibril wilson combined. Excellent at covering tight ends and an excellent open field tackler and has enough bulk to go toe to toe with tight ends and fullbacks in the run game. And any rookie is uproven like you said, but those rookies look like instant upgrades from what we have at SS and WR.

by posey440 on Mar 27, 2009 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Can't blame everything on WR's.

Part of the problems with our time of possesion was not just the WR’s. We had o-line issues. You also have to look at the QB. You have to look at JaMarcus’ development during the year. This was really his rookie year. You could definately seee the strides he made with the offense towards the end of the season.
I agree we do need a SS but not before a DT. A solid DT takes up linemen. If the o-linemen reaches that second level to our LB’s you are looking at a 4 yard gain at least. Our LB’s are not built for taking on linemen. We need to free them up and let them be playmakers.

by Raider76 on Mar 27, 2009 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That is correct

We need to get our D line to stop the run better, but its not like they were horrible all the time. Our defense has shown the ability to shut down the opponents running games and even passing games in short spurts, usually early in games. But what happened alot is that later in games when teams usually had the lead on us and the offense’s early 3 and outs started to catch up to our defense then we started to let RBs tear us up. I think the lack of second and 3rd level tackling and the offensive woes played a much bigger part in the run defense than our DTs. Every game i saw i never once saw terdell sands get pushed backward 1 yard, so i feel he does a good job holding his gap, but i also saw in those same plays that the rest of our Lbs and safetys miss tackles alot or get driven backward. And if we can improve on our leading the league in offensive 3 and outs we can help the defense exponentially rather than passing on a player like crabtree for a player we dont necessarily need like raji.

by posey440 on Mar 27, 2009 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would put alot of those

problems on the o-line. How many false starts and penalties put us in third and longs. We had the 10th ranked rushing offense but we had problems in pass protection. Why do you think we had to roll the QB on playactions?
I never said Sands would get pushed backward but he wasn’t a space eater who commanded 2 people to block him. Gerard Warren takes up space at times but in a 4-3 you need both DT’s to do that.
I would have to say we agree to disagree on this one.

by Raider76 on Mar 27, 2009 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good call

The fact that Tom says there’s a plan in place says volumes. 1. We do have our eye on certian players and have a strategy to get them. We obviously don’t want to tip our hand, but rest assured this is Tom’s call. Just like the trade that brought us Satele to lock up the center position, we are PLANNING AHEAD. You couldn’t write a better blueprint for rebuilding a team and bring back confidence.“Man i’m Stoked!” Can you see how this positive direction is going to rub off on the players and the rest of the organization!
Nice job, Laoren

"May the wind be at our back, here comes the Silver and Black "

by RUKidding on Mar 26, 2009 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs