Skip to main content

Crabtree or Raji?


BJ Raji currently holds a five vote edge over Michael Crabtree in the ongoing poll. Since they are now the clear front-runners I will now compare the two.

Raji seems to be the perfect fit as a Nose in a 3-4. He also could play the nose tackle spot in the 4-3 which is currently occupied by Gerrard Warren and Turd Sands. Kelly plays the 3-technique spot.

Facts:
- The Raiders are paying a load for those three DTs.
- Tom Cable said Warren was one of the leaders of the team.
- Warren was a Top 5 pick.
- The Raiders don't traditionally believe they need  to draft defensive tackles high.
- The Raiders best WR last year was JLH, who had 22 receptions.
- Javon Walker has the rest of his contract guaranteed at a much lower rate.
- The mood of the team still seems to be wanting playmakers and protection for Russell.

BJ Raji, seemingly would address an area of great need, but he also doesn't make a ton of sense monetarily or within the normal Raider draft framework. The question was "Who would you darft..." but I am coming at this from the team perspective. I dislike Raji, and I don't think the team will draft Raji based on these facts.

Crabtree has been labeled a Diva, and from what I have seen, he might be one. It almost goes without saying that great WRs are divas, so this doesn't preclude him from being our draft selection. Also, Davis never cares much about divas. One thing is for sure, Cable wants this team to start playing for each other instead of themselves. Crabtree scores touchdowns and helps his team, that will be all that matters. I personally don't love Crabtree either, although it is hard to argue that we don't need a WR. Still, the Crabtree selection makes much more sense than Raji.

I will now attempt to persuade people to vote like I want you to and therefore taint my poll. Let's be real, we don't like to change our minds, but I ask you to keep an open mind. If not, I guess my poll is safe.

We have been consistently poor at stopping the run. The DTs changed, the DEs changed, the LBs changed and still we do a poor job. The one consistent thing, a poor SAM LB. If Curry is available, it would make sense to grab him.

The interesting thing is how the Mark Sanchez/Matthew Stafford situation is going to pan out. If Stafford doesn't go #1, he could fall. Sanchez if he falls past Seattle, there are plenty of teams wanting to trade up to Jacksonville at #8.

If you are a team wanting a QB and one of them is available and four other teams are trying to trade up to #8 to get such a QB, what would you do? You would see if the #7 team might want to swing a deal to move down as you leapfrog your competitors.

This makes sense. What also makes sense is the fact we would love to move up from the second round or down in the first to select Alex Mack, while acquiring players / more picks.

Maclin/Mack or Heyward-Bey/Mack are possible scenarios if we traded down. The possibility for trading down is opening up. I think Tom Cable is right, normally it isn't something we do, but we have to be open to it this year.

I contradict my thoughts that it wont happen, but if someone is willing to give up a load for the pick, Al Davis isn't stupid.




 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Oakland Raiders Swing for the Fences in 2016 NFL Draft

[embed align="center"]http://gty.im/153039819[/embed] These aren't your daddy's Oakland Raiders or even your younger self's Raiders. If anything, these are your newborn's Raiders or your puppy's Raiders. These are the Raiders we've never seen before. Indicative of the freshness of the franchise was their 2016 NFL Draft. No longer slave to a high draft pick and desperate needs, the theme of the draft for the Raiders was upside. It's as if general manager Reggie McKenzie got so used to hitting his draft picks out of the park that he started swinging for the fences. We'll have to wait a couple of years before we know if he struck out or if he'll continue his Ruthian ways. First, McKenzie boldly went with a safety at No. 14 overall. Kyle Joseph is coming off a torn ACL and fills a major need, but safety isn't a premium position. Only a handful of safeties have been drafted in the first 14 picks in the last 15 years and include names like Ea

The Raiders aren't who we thought they were....they're better

The Oakland Raiders are tired of being the team that will be good in a year or two. The team expects to win now and it is winning now. We thought the Raiders needed more talent. We thought that being in the playoff hunt was a year away for this team, but we were wrong. This isn't the team we thought they were, they're better. On Sunday, they moved to 3-3 on Sunday with a 37-29 win over the San Diego Chargers that wasn't close until the final minute. It was also the Raiders second road win of the season. The last time the Raiders had two road wins by their sixth game was 2011. Before that, a five-year streak from 1998-2002. The Raiders went 8-8 in 1998, 1999 and 2011 and narrowly missed the playoffs each year.  They made the playoffs in 2000, 2001 and 2002. They didn't have a losing record in any of those seasons because teams that can win on the road are usually pretty good. As the season matures, there is more and more evidence that some of the "best-case scenario

2012 NFL Strength of Schedule

  Disclaimer Some strength of schedule models calculate strength of schedule based on the opponents the team has faced to date.  My model calculates strength of schedule based on all the opponents on a team's schedule.  The reason for this is because it reduces weekly fluctuations. For example, when a team plays their Week 17 game, in the traditional model their strength of schedule would change by 31 games...their Week 17 opponent's 16 games plus the additional game played by each of their prior 15 opponents.  In my model, when a team plays their Week 17 game their strength of schedule will only change by 15 games...one additional game for each of the opponents on their schedule.