| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TiberiusRising
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 5633
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:31 am Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Rolni wrote: | | mhuff24 wrote: | | Do you guys think this is why McClain is still on the roster? I've been trying to wrap my head around why he's still around and hasn't been cut yet. Am I missing something or what? Do you guys think he'll be around next season? |
NO.
He is here, because:
1. we still looking for a late trade for him
2. we are under the cap with him right now, so we won't have to hurry
3. why do him any good with an early cut?
4. he could be our other post June1 cut if everything works out well for CP and we won't have to cut him... |
I still maintain there is a possibility that we will keep him. However I agree that your points excluding #3 are the most likely reasons here is still on the roster. I would think we should be able to trade a player or late pick for him given that the FA market is shallow and the top inside LB's in the draft have off field issues. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rolni
Joined: 08 Jun 2008
Posts: 2167
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| TiberiusRising wrote: | | Rolni wrote: | | mhuff24 wrote: | | Do you guys think this is why McClain is still on the roster? I've been trying to wrap my head around why he's still around and hasn't been cut yet. Am I missing something or what? Do you guys think he'll be around next season? |
NO.
He is here, because:
1. we still looking for a late trade for him
2. we are under the cap with him right now, so we won't have to hurry
3. why do him any good with an early cut?
4. he could be our other post June1 cut if everything works out well for CP and we won't have to cut him... |
I still maintain there is a possibility that we will keep him. However I agree that your points excluding #3 are the most likely reasons here is still on the roster. I would think we should be able to trade a player or late pick for him given that the FA market is shallow and the top inside LB's in the draft have off field issues. |
I can't see it...
1. He plays slow, lazy and bad on the field.
2. He had a bad, heated argument with his HC.
3. He wrote, told really bad things about this franchise, organization when it seemed they cut him.
4. Legal troubles
So basically he is not producing on the field and off the field he is the total opposite of what RM and DA looking for in a player.
_________________
WIN LOSE OR TIE...RAIDER FAN 'TIL I DIE!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TiberiusRising
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 5633
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Rolni wrote: | | TiberiusRising wrote: | | Rolni wrote: | | mhuff24 wrote: | | Do you guys think this is why McClain is still on the roster? I've been trying to wrap my head around why he's still around and hasn't been cut yet. Am I missing something or what? Do you guys think he'll be around next season? |
NO.
He is here, because:
1. we still looking for a late trade for him
2. we are under the cap with him right now, so we won't have to hurry
3. why do him any good with an early cut?
4. he could be our other post June1 cut if everything works out well for CP and we won't have to cut him... |
I still maintain there is a possibility that we will keep him. However I agree that your points excluding #3 are the most likely reasons here is still on the roster. I would think we should be able to trade a player or late pick for him given that the FA market is shallow and the top inside LB's in the draft have off field issues. |
I can't see it...
1. He plays slow, lazy and bad on the field.
2. He had a bad, heated argument with his HC.
3. He wrote, told really bad things about this franchise, organization when it seemed they cut him.
4. Legal troubles
So basically he is not producing on the field and off the field he is the total opposite of what RM and DA looking for in a player. |
We only know what we hear. This kid is young and immature no doubt. I hardly think he is lazy. You do realize that he played hurt for us most of the 2011 season. They would pull him out, he would tape back up and keep going out there. This guy needs structure and teaching. Not for a team to just throw him out and start him and expect him to be the leader of the team. Now with that high a draft pick you expect more but sometimes it doesn't work out that way but it doesn't mean you should keep repeating the same things like its going to work all the sudden. Look who he had to follow as leaders on D. Michael Huff who has never been very good and never much of a leader, and Seymour who is content to get a huge paycheck and sit on the sidelines. He has had 2 different LB coaches and 2 different DC's since he has been here. Not to mention never played with any of the same guys next to him in consecutive years. In all honesty, Curry was his best mentor since arriving but we got rid of him too.
At some point teams have to take chances and it makes the most sense to take those chances on players you gave up the most for.
But as I have said before I no the chances are very high he will not be around this year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Oaktown
Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Posts: 3125
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Base d doesn't even matter 70% of the time teams play nickel.
My question is who will be the RE. Team needs a stud pass rusher |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baggabonez
Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 3860
Location: RaiderNation
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| mhuff24 wrote: | | Do you guys think this is why McClain is still on the roster? I've been trying to wrap my head around why he's still around and hasn't been cut yet. Am I missing something or what? Do you guys think he'll be around next season? |
McClain will be traded after the draft to a team that was unable to address MLB in the draft for a 2014 conditional. (cue Giants)
_________________
2013 Mancrush: DT Richardson, OT Joeckel, FS Vaccaro, FS Rambo, WR Dobson, RB Michael, TE McDonald, OT Foketi, WR Swope |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DarthDavis
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 5211
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:42 pm Post subject: Re: 43 vs 34 defense (pre draft) |
|
|
|
| unko_B wrote: | It's amazing how so many people seem to fabricate so much ish in their head that they miss the facts in front of them. the raiders have signed the no. 4 & 7 (Burnett & Maiava) rated 43 OLBs from 2012 along with an undersized LB who played almost exclusively in a tampa 2 (43) defense and you people still think the raiders are switching to a 34 defense? More so, the signing of Hunter, who finally excelled by moving to DE under DA in Denver is coming in to play DE, although his versatility is an added plus. But come on now, give me a break the writing is all over the wall. So far, by these signings & even last years draft picks RM (IMO) is choosing guys who are versatile; bergstrum = T/G, Burris DE (@ SDSU)/OLB, Bililkudi DE (@ GS)/DT.
|
How does an ILB in a 3-4 (Miami/Burnett) get rated as a 4-3 OLB.
Maiava didn't start more then 10 games this last season and is rated the #7 OLB. This is the problem with PFT, it + and - ratings don't count the opportunities missed to generate a + or -, therefore to not play at all is better then to have played moderately poor against a really good team. Thus Desmond Bryant being rated a top 10 DT while not starting and coming in more later in the game during passing situations. Context is every thing and Maiava is clearly not as great as his PFT rating would indicate. If anything I see Maiava as our SP team stud.
Further on Hunter, he is at 275-280lbs. His sack numbers are nothing to write home about. Most of his work has been done at managinge the line of scrimmage, which is what the 3-4 DE's do best. I don't see how the Hunter signing leans to a 3-4 or 4-3. But I can definitely see how the Burnett signing leans to a 3-4.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TiberiusRising
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 5633
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:50 pm Post subject: Re: 43 vs 34 defense (pre draft) |
|
|
|
| DarthDavis wrote: | | unko_B wrote: | It's amazing how so many people seem to fabricate so much ish in their head that they miss the facts in front of them. the raiders have signed the no. 4 & 7 (Burnett & Maiava) rated 43 OLBs from 2012 along with an undersized LB who played almost exclusively in a tampa 2 (43) defense and you people still think the raiders are switching to a 34 defense? More so, the signing of Hunter, who finally excelled by moving to DE under DA in Denver is coming in to play DE, although his versatility is an added plus. But come on now, give me a break the writing is all over the wall. So far, by these signings & even last years draft picks RM (IMO) is choosing guys who are versatile; bergstrum = T/G, Burris DE (@ SDSU)/OLB, Bililkudi DE (@ GS)/DT.
|
How does an ILB in a 3-4 (Miami/Burnett) get rated as a 4-3 OLB.
Maiava didn't start more then 10 games this last season and is rated the #7 OLB. This is the problem with PFT, it + and - ratings don't count the opportunities missed to generate a + or -, therefore to not play at all is better then to have played moderately poor against a really good team. Thus Desmond Bryant being rated a top 10 DT while not starting and coming in more later in the game during passing situations. Context is every thing and Maiava is clearly not as great as his PFT rating would indicate. If anything I see Maiava as our SP team stud.
Further on Hunter, he is at 275-280lbs. His sack numbers are nothing to write home about. Most of his work has been done at managinge the line of scrimmage, which is what the 3-4 DE's do best. I don't see how the Hunter signing leans to a 3-4 or 4-3. But I can definitely see how the Burnett signing leans to a 3-4. |
Dolphins ran a 4-3 last season. They were 3-4 only in his first year there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
unko_B
Joined: 21 Feb 2013
Posts: 30
Location: A Concrete Jungle
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:34 pm Post subject: Re: 43 vs 34 defense (pre draft) |
|
|
|
| DarthDavis wrote: | | unko_B wrote: | It's amazing how so many people seem to fabricate so much ish in their head that they miss the facts in front of them. the raiders have signed the no. 4 & 7 (Burnett & Maiava) rated 43 OLBs from 2012 along with an undersized LB who played almost exclusively in a tampa 2 (43) defense and you people still think the raiders are switching to a 34 defense? More so, the signing of Hunter, who finally excelled by moving to DE under DA in Denver is coming in to play DE, although his versatility is an added plus. But come on now, give me a break the writing is all over the wall. So far, by these signings & even last years draft picks RM (IMO) is choosing guys who are versatile; bergstrum = T/G, Burris DE (@ SDSU)/OLB, Bililkudi DE (@ GS)/DT.
|
How does an ILB in a 3-4 (Miami/Burnett) get rated as a 4-3 OLB.
Maiava didn't start more then 10 games this last season and is rated the #7 OLB. This is the problem with PFT, it + and - ratings don't count the opportunities missed to generate a + or -, therefore to not play at all is better then to have played moderately poor against a really good team. Thus Desmond Bryant being rated a top 10 DT while not starting and coming in more later in the game during passing situations. Context is every thing and Maiava is clearly not as great as his PFT rating would indicate. If anything I see Maiava as our SP team stud.
Further on Hunter, he is at 275-280lbs. His sack numbers are nothing to write home about. Most of his work has been done at managinge the line of scrimmage, which is what the 3-4 DE's do best. I don't see how the Hunter signing leans to a 3-4 or 4-3. But I can definitely see how the Burnett signing leans to a 3-4. |
Miami definitely ran a 43 last year. & to go back to Hunter, his most productive year was when he played outside linebacker under DA in denver, not at defensive end. So making the point that he's 34 DE just doesnt work for me. I agree Maiava will be a ST stud & I hope he's able to contribute on defense as well.
I did like that you pointed out the wholes in the rankings by PFT, i was unaware of that. I used as a reference to show that they graded out positively, not that I think they're the 4th & 7th best linebacker. By no stretch would I believe that enough if they said it.
Like most have said previously, I truly believe there will be multiple fronts & in a conference where we will face Peyton, Phillip & Alex (essentially Andy Reid's offense) twice a year, the raiders will be in more nickel and dime packages more than anything (as i stated in my original post)
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DarthDavis
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 5211
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
http://www.baltimorebeatdown.com/2010/4/9/1412079/football-101-the-ravens-hybrid
4-3 or 3-4 the question might be missing the truth which is the hybrid. Houston and Walker definitely fit the end's of a "Hybrid"
I think Jarvis Jones would grade out lesser in a "hybrid" defense and Dion Jordan and Ziggy Ansah would grade out higher. Jordan maybe less so as teams could run right at him on the weak side and have a huge hole. If the staff liked Ansah his size and strength could be better suited for a more well rounded defender best suited for the "hybrid" blitzer role.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raidin
Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 4316
Location: Dublin
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Baggabonez wrote: | | mhuff24 wrote: | | Do you guys think this is why McClain is still on the roster? I've been trying to wrap my head around why he's still around and hasn't been cut yet. Am I missing something or what? Do you guys think he'll be around next season? |
McClain will be traded after the draft to a team that was unable to address MLB in the draft for a 2014 conditional. (cue Giants) |
It's unlikely any team will trade for him, let alone a 4-3 team.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raiders006
Joined: 09 Jan 2008
Posts: 2394
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
right now we look like the 4-3.
3-4 you need pass rushers, which we have none.
either way our defense will again be hot garbage next year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
