Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

2014 Draft Talk Thread #2
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 61, 62, 63 ... 98, 99, 100  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
THE MAD STORK


Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 583
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mr.Bob Dobalina wrote:
I just heard Todd Mcshay say that Robinson is the best offensive tackle he has evaluated in the last 12 years. Shocked


I like Robinson a lot. And this sounds great, I just wish it came from sometimes opinion I took serious. Only person worse than mcshay is kiper.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
101Raider


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 2471
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
Baggabonez wrote:
TiberiusRising wrote:
101Raider wrote:
91jmay wrote:
RaidersAreOne wrote:
Just throwing this out there, what would people think of Hageman at #5? He is going to shoot up draft boards like no other after the combine.

I've been driving his bandwagon for ages but not sure he is worth a top 5 pick. If we can get a trade back, I would take him anywhere after 10# though.

+1, though I'd be okay with him at 8. Happy/ecstatic after 10

Well my thought is if we would take him at 8 I have no issues taking him at 5. I think he is the best DT prospect however I dont like players who seem to take plays off. I wouldnt hate it but I would hope they would have some assurances about his drive/want to.


Hageman isn't a quick twitch athlete. I don't know that he takes plays off as much as he just won't be able to consistently beat people with anything other than a bull rush. He has the whole package except burst, probably best suited as a 43 NT (think Sims) or 34 DE. I wouldn't draft Hageman in the 1st for the Raiders at this time.


Agree 100% Bagga. Hageman doesn't look like a future star at the position. Looks like a sound starter role playing type. I wouldn't draft him in the 1st.


Look, I'm not trying to sell him. But saying that he lacks burst and comparing him to Sims is just wrong. I'm not sure if we're talking about the same player. I mean a guy that's 300+ and has a 36 inch vertical is definitely quick twitch in my book. His 10yard split in the 40 is reportedly a 1.57, I mean that's ridiculous. He might be a work-out warrior yes, but he's definitely not a plodder.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raiiiiidersssss


Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 5218
Location: The Black Hole
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mr.Bob Dobalina wrote:
I just heard Todd Mcshay say that Robinson is the best offensive tackle he has evaluated in the last 12 years. Shocked


Shocked Shocked Shocked
_________________
MACKiavelli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raiiiiidersssss


Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 5218
Location: The Black Hole
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 5:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

THE MAD STORK wrote:
Mr.Bob Dobalina wrote:
I just heard Todd Mcshay say that Robinson is the best offensive tackle he has evaluated in the last 12 years. Shocked


I like Robinson a lot. And this sounds great, I just wish it came from sometimes opinion I took serious. Only person worse than mcshay is kiper.


not even close dude. McShay and Kiper aren't that bad imo

and Robinson at RT? maybe we would finally have our bookend tackles (after resigning Veldheer long term
_________________
MACKiavelli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmac505


Joined: 07 Aug 2008
Posts: 778
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How many people here would trade our first 2nd and 2nd next year to trade with Houston. I dont know if the values add up or anything, just hypothetically if houston phoned us and offered how many would take it?

In a heart beat i would do it for Clowney
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baggabonez


Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 6023
Location: RaiderNation
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmac505 wrote:
How many people here would trade our first 2nd and 2nd next year to trade with Houston. I dont know if the values add up or anything, just hypothetically if houston phoned us and offered how many would take it?

In a heart beat i would do it for Clowney

Under no circumstances would I trade up. It guts the team. Is Clowney going to play every position on the DL at the same time?
_________________
Nodisrespect on building inside out wrote:
teams without highly draft DT's make the playoffs and win the superbowl regularly.

Bonez wrote:
Teams that win Superbowls and make the playoffs aren't picking in the Top 5, clearly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baggabonez


Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 6023
Location: RaiderNation
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

101Raider wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
Baggabonez wrote:
TiberiusRising wrote:
101Raider wrote:
91jmay wrote:
RaidersAreOne wrote:
Just throwing this out there, what would people think of Hageman at #5? He is going to shoot up draft boards like no other after the combine.

I've been driving his bandwagon for ages but not sure he is worth a top 5 pick. If we can get a trade back, I would take him anywhere after 10# though.

+1, though I'd be okay with him at 8. Happy/ecstatic after 10

Well my thought is if we would take him at 8 I have no issues taking him at 5. I think he is the best DT prospect however I dont like players who seem to take plays off. I wouldnt hate it but I would hope they would have some assurances about his drive/want to.


Hageman isn't a quick twitch athlete. I don't know that he takes plays off as much as he just won't be able to consistently beat people with anything other than a bull rush. He has the whole package except burst, probably best suited as a 43 NT (think Sims) or 34 DE. I wouldn't draft Hageman in the 1st for the Raiders at this time.


Agree 100% Bagga. Hageman doesn't look like a future star at the position. Looks like a sound starter role playing type. I wouldn't draft him in the 1st.


Look, I'm not trying to sell him. But saying that he lacks burst and comparing him to Sims is just wrong. I'm not sure if we're talking about the same player. I mean a guy that's 300+ and has a 36 inch vertical is definitely quick twitch in my book. His 10yard split in the 40 is reportedly a 1.57, I mean that's ridiculous. He might be a work-out warrior yes, but he's definitely not a plodder.

Slow-twitch does not mean slow. It simply means he's not blowing by people off the snap. Clearly that's not his game
_________________
Nodisrespect on building inside out wrote:
teams without highly draft DT's make the playoffs and win the superbowl regularly.

Bonez wrote:
Teams that win Superbowls and make the playoffs aren't picking in the Top 5, clearly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raidin


Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 5428
Location: Dublin
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmac505 wrote:
How many people here would trade our first 2nd and 2nd next year to trade with Houston. I dont know if the values add up or anything, just hypothetically if houston phoned us and offered how many would take it?

In a heart beat i would do it for Clowney



I would for Bridgewater. It would be crazy to do it for Clowney.
_________________
raidr4life wrote:
Imagine if EricAllen21 posted better. Just imagine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 12196
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

We need as many pics as we can get. No way I'm trading up for anyone in this draft.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmac505


Joined: 07 Aug 2008
Posts: 778
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Baggabonez wrote:
dmac505 wrote:
How many people here would trade our first 2nd and 2nd next year to trade with Houston. I dont know if the values add up or anything, just hypothetically if houston phoned us and offered how many would take it?

In a heart beat i would do it for Clowney

Under no circumstances would I trade up. It guts the team. Is Clowney going to play every position on the DL at the same time?


No, but the way I look at it. We just need impact players right now. I think in FA we can add a few more quality players who fill much needed rolls on this team, similar to what Pat sims did for us last year.

Obviously 95% i think you build a team through the draft, but right now I think the Raiders need to fill wholes through FA, we have the cash to do it, not to go add those 3-4 superstar players, but to add the depth and roll players that you see in championship teams.

So we lose out on a 2nd rd pick this year which hurts, but if we can add Clowney and a solid DT in FA then that would be of the same effect of drafting a DT in the 2nd no?

Secondly, our 2nd next year we could potentially gain back from trading down with our first pick. I am hopeful for a good year, but realistically looking at our schedule id be shocked if we didnt have a top 12 pick.


Look, I understand you build teams through the draft. And Id agree 9 times out of 10. I just think this team right now, is in a very odd spot, and if we can go after the younger, not big names in FA we can start to build the depth and roll players. Then start looking for the serious impact players in years on.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TiberiusRising


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 8953
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Teams like ours should only trade up for a QB in which case we could probably trade with Rams. However I dont think we should. If anything we should trade down. Now if you are a team like SEA, SF, KC ya go ahead and trade up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22680
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Raidin wrote:
dmac505 wrote:
How many people here would trade our first 2nd and 2nd next year to trade with Houston. I dont know if the values add up or anything, just hypothetically if houston phoned us and offered how many would take it?

In a heart beat i would do it for Clowney



I would for Bridgewater. It would be crazy to do it for Clowney.


Yikes. Mortgage the future on Bridgewater?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raidin


Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 5428
Location: Dublin
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
Raidin wrote:
dmac505 wrote:
How many people here would trade our first 2nd and 2nd next year to trade with Houston. I dont know if the values add up or anything, just hypothetically if houston phoned us and offered how many would take it?

In a heart beat i would do it for Clowney



I would for Bridgewater. It would be crazy to do it for Clowney.


Yikes. Mortgage the future on Bridgewater?



Yes. He's the best prospect since Luck an compared to most payers in the years before Luck.
_________________
raidr4life wrote:
Imagine if EricAllen21 posted better. Just imagine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22680
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jimmy Garapollo scares me. I don't think he elevates his stock into round 1, but I'm experiencing deja vu to 2011 and Christian Ponder right now.

He is a similar size and is making his name in the offseason right now. The main thing I remember about Ponder leading up the senior bowl (and hearing it again on JG) was his lack of arm strength and velocity on certain balls.

During Senior Bowl week and later the combine, people started to slowly excuse Ponder's lack of velocity/arm. At the combine some came away saying things like:

Quote:
Arm Strength: Doesn't own a Matthew Stafford-type howitzer, but has plenty of arm strength to make every NFL throw. Good zip on underneath routes; showcasing enough drive to push the ball through tight windows for the quick slant. Good timing and accuracy make up for a lack of a dominant arm for the deep-out. Effective deep-ball thrower; able to launch the ball 50-plus yards with velocity and trajectory.


Seeing a lot of the same with JG. Starting to excuse his lack of velocity/arm strength as his stock rises. You could see signs of it on some passes in the Senior Bowl. It's just interesting when you see other attributes you like, to start believing a deficiency is acceptable. Could spell trouble. In fact, I should probably look at Manziel through the same microscope on a second viewing.

This QB class continues to underwhelm. Brett Smith in the 4th or 5th it is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TiberiusRising


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 8953
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
Jimmy Garapollo scares me. I don't think he elevates his stock into round 1, but I'm experiencing deja vu to 2011 and Christian Ponder right now.

He is a similar size and is making his name in the offseason right now. The main thing I remember about Ponder leading up the senior bowl (and hearing it again on JG) was his lack of arm strength and velocity on certain balls.

During Senior Bowl week and later the combine, people started to slowly excuse Ponder's lack of velocity/arm. At the combine some came away saying things like:

Quote:
Arm Strength: Doesn't own a Matthew Stafford-type howitzer, but has plenty of arm strength to make every NFL throw. Good zip on underneath routes; showcasing enough drive to push the ball through tight windows for the quick slant. Good timing and accuracy make up for a lack of a dominant arm for the deep-out. Effective deep-ball thrower; able to launch the ball 50-plus yards with velocity and trajectory.


Seeing a lot of the same with JG. Starting to excuse his lack of velocity/arm strength as his stock rises. You could see signs of it on some passes in the Senior Bowl. It's just interesting when you see other attributes you like, to start believing a deficiency is acceptable. Could spell trouble. In fact, I should probably look at Manziel through the same microscope on a second viewing.

This QB class continues to underwhelm. Brett Smith in the 4th or 5th it is.

Ponder was considering a borderline 1st rounder already(by "experts") before he got hurt. Then his stock dropped. Then he rose back up the boards after teams realized he was healthy.

And Garrapolo had way more production than Ponder ever did by far. Better feet, quicker release, reads defenses faster. He is better in every way already and that not even close for me. They were maybe close in Garrapolos sophmore season if you compare it to Ponders best season. Heck Garrapolo threw more TD's last season than Ponder did his entire college career.

Now for arm strength. People are confusing arm strength and deep ball accuracy. If you watch him throw his arm is strong, the ball comes out quick, zippy and on a line. Ponder's passes do not come out that way which is why he has a lot of trouble. Now can they improve Garrapolo's deep ball accuracy? I think so but even if not its not really a deal breaker. We are not the Raiders of old that are going to just bomb it out. In fact most teams do not anymore. How many times really does most OL's hold the pass rush for enough time to throw a 40+yard pass. Not a whole lot. Big pass plays these days come from YAC.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 61, 62, 63 ... 98, 99, 100  Next
Page 62 of 100

 
Jump to:  
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