Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, sagnam said:

Stay away from Crosby. Far far away. That was the dumbest trade. Old, hurt, and expensive. Pass.

28 isn't that old. He'd be 29 entering next year and not over the 30 mark until the following season. Expensive and injured, yes. But it isn't happening in any case.

Posted
2 hours ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Again, they draft for need when it aligns with BPA. They traded up to get Terrion Arnold, so clearly they saw him as both filling a need and getting the BPA on their board. Last year was the closest I think they've come in the first round to leaning more towards the need category. If it were a 1-10 scale, with 1 being closer to drafting for needs and 10 being closer to drafting for BPA, I'd say Brad is typically at a 7 or 8 on that scale.

they dont draft for need except those times that the bpa lined up with needs....how ridiculous does that sound?  it just HAPPENED to line up with need the last two years.  oh ok.  

Posted
5 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

28 isn't that old. He'd be 29 entering next year and not over the 30 mark until the following season. Expensive and injured, yes. But it isn't happening in any case.

I understand what you are saying, but that type of trade needs to be for someone younger.  Parsons was 26 when he was traded for a players less than what the Raiders want. Three years difference is a long time when discussing football careers. Crosby is going to be in decline. You might be able to get a season or two out of him at the plateau, but he’s not going to be getting better. That’s two years of additional roster attrition for a guy who is as good now as he will ever be.

Posted
5 minutes ago, buddha said:

they dont draft for need except those times that the bpa lined up with needs....how ridiculous does that sound?  it just HAPPENED to line up with need the last two years.  oh ok.  

They don't exclusively draft for need. People here are implying that because they need a tackle, Brad will automatically draft a tackle for the sake of taking one. I don't believe he will unless it aligns with his draft board and player valuation. He will take the best player available on his board, that potentially aligns with a need, assuming that player grades out where he wants them too. Again, he'll likely have a board that grades out players with first round valuations and other metrics. only so many players will have a first round grade on his draft board. If we get to #17 and a tackle isn't one of those guys, I don't believe he'll take one for the sake of it, simply out of need. If a tackle is drafted at #17, it likely means Brad has a first round grade on them and they were either his BPA on his board or very high up on it.

Also, as NY Lion said, Brad is also unpredictable, and could draft anyone. Who predicted Holmes taking Jaymo, Gibbs, Campbell where he did in the draft?

Posted
45 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

I'm glad for once the rug pulled out from under a different fan base who thought they were getting a Pro Bowl player. 

The Ravens probably dodged a bullet, nearing 30 and the injuries are piling up, just had surgery. The Raiders are probably pissed that they lost those 1st round picks and now are pretty much forced to trade him for a lesser return because they already went on their FA spending spree and can't keep the contract now.

Posted
13 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

They don't exclusively draft for need. People here are implying that because they need a tackle, Brad will automatically draft a tackle for the sake of taking one. I don't believe he will unless it aligns with his draft board and player valuation. He will take the best player available on his board, that potentially aligns with a need, assuming that player grades out where he wants them too. Again, he'll likely have a board that grades out players with first round valuations and other metrics. only so many players will have a first round grade on his draft board. If we get to #17 and a tackle isn't one of those guys, I don't believe he'll take one for the sake of it, simply out of need. If a tackle is drafted at #17, it likely means Brad has a first round grade on them and they were either his BPA on his board or very high up on it.

Also, as NY Lion said, Brad is also unpredictable, and could draft anyone. Who predicted Holmes taking Jaymo, Gibbs, Campbell where he did in the draft?

nobody said they "exclusively" draft fpr need, but they DO DRAFT FOR NEED.  Cb was their biggest need and they drafted two of them.  dt was a huge need and they reached for one in round one.

jaymo, gibbs, campbell, laporta were drafted when the lions needed EVERYTHING.

  • Like 1
Posted

 

It smells something awful. It's weird. Like I can't imagine the Ravens just knee-jerked into making a trade like that, that's something you discuss for months, even if the details are worked out at the last seconds. (Granted, new coach and all).

But I don't really believe them if they're claiming there was something totally unexpected on the physical of a guy who wanted to play but wasn't allowed to by the tanking Raiders just two months ago.

Posted
Just now, buddha said:

nobody said they "exclusively" draft fpr need, but they DO DRAFT FOR NEED.  Cb was their biggest need and they drafted two of them.  dt was a huge need and they reached for one in round one.

jaymo, gibbs, campbell, laporta were drafted when the lions needed EVERYTHING.

The only teams who never draft for need are the teams who always need everything.

I'm just of the opinion that you can draft for long-term need (e.g., EDGE or OT this year), while also not boxing yourself into a corner. But I've beat the dead horse to the bone I think.

Posted

The Raiders have shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars in the last two days under the belief they didn't have Crosby's salary on the books.

With the knowledge he's got to pass a physical anyway, I don't see why you don't see what the cost would be. Is it that crazy to think you might get him for less than a 1st round pick now? They almost have to get rid of him in the next 20ish hours, and a lot of teams have already gone in a different direction with their money.

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
23 minutes ago, MichiganCardinal said:

The Raiders have shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars in the last two days under the belief they didn't have Crosby's salary on the books.

With the knowledge he's got to pass a physical anyway, I don't see why you don't see what the cost would be. Is it that crazy to think you might get him for less than a 1st round pick now? They almost have to get rid of him in the next 20ish hours, and a lot of teams have already gone in a different direction with their money.

 

 

I'm not sure if it matters but wouldn't teams avoid him because of some kind of liability? Maybe insurance companies are involved on the business side of a sport? Otherwise the Ravens could just still trade for him but for less of a return?

Posted

The irony is that if the Raiders try to complain to the NFL that Crosby isn’t really hurt, the Ravens will point to the fact that the Raiders thought he was hurt enough to shut him down for the rest of the 2025 season (when Crosby wanted to play but the Raiders organization wanted to tank)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...