** The OFFICIAL NFL Mock Draft Thread **

[BGnight]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All,

Al Davis has a long history of refusing to draft QBs and instead trying to find one through free agency. The most recent example was last year when he passed over Matt Leinart and Jay Cutler for Huff. In the free agency era, I don't think he has ever taken a QB early in the draft- EVER.

[/ QUOTE ]

During the Sugar Bowl, Howie Long said that Al Davis believed that Brady Quinn would be the third best QB in football within a few years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. That's very, very, interesting if Al actually said that. (but it sounds like this was Wies who said this?)

[rwperu34]

[ QUOTE ]
Lamont Jordan is a very good, very talented back. He was solid in 2005 and got hurt this year. I don't know why you think otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

He wasn't good in 2005. His 2006 production was easily replaced by the one and only Justin Fargas. He's due $4.75m if he makes the team next year, the Raiders save $1.5m against the cap if he doesn't. He's going to get cut.

[ QUOTE ]
But drafting Thomas will put them in a good position to solve the most important o line position for ten years or so. I don't understand how you don't see the huge value in this. They had the right idea with Gallery, just the wrong guy.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not against drafting Thomas for the Raiders. It's just that I'm not against drafting Quinn, Peterson, or Johnson either. Personally I think Quinn is the "smallest" upgrade out of the bunch, so I'd lean towards Peterson, Johnson, or Thomas. Since that's three players all with equal value to the Raiders, they should move down to three, if not five, because it wouldn't be so terrible if they got "stuck" with Quinn or Russell. Or they could move down to the 8-10 range and look at Jarret or Lynch or another O-lineman.

No matter which way you slice it and dice it, the Raiders need quantity as much as quality. Whatever position they pass on at the top, they will be picking in the middle and late rounds as well as through free agency. The bottom line is, the when the Raiders pick, they need to take who they think is the best offensive player on the board.

[CharlieDontSurf]

OAK should trade #1 to AZ for #5 .
cards draft THOMAS
raiders draft RUSSELL

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've seen worse trades in my day. Vick seems like the kind of guy Al Davis likes; he has a strong arm and can run.

[/ QUOTE ]

When someone asked me that hypothetical "take anyone in the league to add to your team" question, the first name I thought of was Vick. He'd be great for the Raiders, but that's giving up too much IMO, I'd rather take Quinn and trade away Moss for offensive line improvements.

[/ QUOTE ]just keep in mind that Moss' trade value is very very low right now....don't expect much at all, maybe not even a first day pick.

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oakland trading down to #3 makes a ton of sense to me. They don't want a QB, and Johnson and Peterson should be there at #3. BTW, I think Russell goes #1 overall now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oakland has Lamont Jordan,and pays him a lot of money. They're not picking Peterson. RB is the least of their concerns, and they have a ton.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
They need most help at O-Line and QB. Their receivers are actually pretty solid even if you include Moss. Not sure what they'll do with Porter, but Curry isn't bad if he doesn't get hurt.

[/ QUOTE ]

So let me get this straight. You guys think that Lamont Jordan and Justin Fargas are better than Aaron Brooks and Andruw Walter? If anything, the Raiders might have a strength at QB.

The Raiders have holes everywhere on offense. They can take whatever offensive player they want and be correct in doing so.

QB- Brooks and Walter-One guy that's proven he can handle the position and one guy who is young and has a big arm plus a little bit of game experience.

RB- Jordan and Fargas- Two guys that might get cut. One will be gone for sure, neither were ever any good to begin with.

WR- Curry- Moss and Porter are both gone. At the very least they need to compiment Curry, if not add a #1.

OL- This was the most glaring weakness for the Raiders this past season. Unfortunately, they are probably not one player away, and in fact might be five or six players away.

TE- Do they still have Teyo Johnson? Do they wish they did? No taking a TE #1 overall, but perhaps Miller or Olsen will be available at pick #33.

[/ QUOTE ]Yes I think that a healthy Lamont Jordan is a better football player than either of those QBs. I also think that franchise QBs are hard to come by and thats what gets drafted early in the 1st. There are quite a few adequate RB options that will be available through FA/trade. I still think they should trade down because the #1 pick has more value than taking a non-QB with it this year imo.

[brettbrettr]

If the Raiders save money by cutting him, sure, but I was under the impression that they'd take a hit.

Also, regarding his 2005, he played 14 games, and had 100 or so yeards. But he also caught 70 balls for another 600 or so yards, 11 total TDs. Those numbers really aren't that bad. Actually I think they're pretty good.

I hear you regarding upgrades, but, really, the value of a Peterson over a Jordan pales in comparison to that of a Joe Thomas or Calvin Johnson over whoever is there. And seriously, when you're rebuilding a team, and an offense, Aaron Brooks is not the guy to do it around. Like you I think they should try to move the pick and grab some more.

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No reasons behind this other than I love to speculate. Someone mentioned this on FBGs:

Atlanta trades Matt Schaub and the 10th pick to Oakland(or any of the top few teams that could use a QB) to move up and select Calvin Johnson, who went to school at nearby Georgia Tech.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no way Oakland will trade down from 1 to 10 for an unproven Matt Schaub. Atlanta would at best get a 2nd rounder. Now if Atlanta could get rid of Vick this way and move up like that, then they'd be on to something, but the owner is an idiot so don't expect anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

Schaub is much more proven than Quinn or Russell since we've at least seen him in preseason and spot regular season action. Oakland clearly has multiple positions to fill, and this may help them do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL at Shaub over Quinn or Russel.

[/ QUOTE ]You're ridiculously caught up in the hype right now. YOu need to realize that many first round picks bust and many later round picks turn out to be stars. You can't tell which is which until you see them in the NFL, and after teams have seen Matt Schaub in the NFL they are very interested in trading for him. Furthermore, AL DAVIS DOES NOT TAKE QBS IN THE FIRST ROUND. I don't know how else I can say that.

[capone0]

In the long run, really?

I know his line was mediocre but he had 1025 yards and 3.8 ypc (9 tds) last year when healthy. He was pretty solid through the air with 563 yards and 70 catches with 2 TDs. I thin khe's pretty good but he's already 28 (has like 3 or four more good years) while Quinn or Russell has a ton of good years left.

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
Last year he wanted Vince Young.

[/ QUOTE ]care to back this up in any way?

[ QUOTE ]
W/ high draft picks Al goes after impact athletes, not O-linemen.

[/ QUOTE ] this simply isn't true.

[capone0]

We've seen the difference between a good QB and a bad QB in NO. Brooks isn't that good, Brees is. Brooks on paper seems good, his football IQ isn't that great. With the team he's on, he isn't built for it. He has a cannon he has very good quality receivers, they just haven't worked yet. In NO, he had some talent, just never worked out. With Brees at the helm......it's all looked good so far. I wouldn't put my eggs in the 30 year old Aaron Brook's basket. He's had 1 exceptional year in 2003, other than that, he's been a decent QB who has gotten worse the last 3 seasons straight.