PDA

View Full Version : Oakland:Maclin or Crabtree


Rjspartan
03-15-2009, 11:18 AM
if Raji and Orakpo are gone and both receivers are available who do they take?

Iamcanadian
03-15-2009, 11:24 AM
I don't think you can count out Andre Smith in that equation. If Smith gets a workout by them closer to the draft and has improved his conditioning, he could easily be a top 10 pick. As for the WR's, Crabtree doesn't look like an Al Davis type to me. Davis looks for WR's who call be effective in a vertical system and won't be too enamoured by Crabtree.

jnew76
03-15-2009, 11:29 AM
I don't think you can count out Andre Smith in that equation. If Smith gets a workout by them closer to the draft and has improved his conditioning, he could easily be a top 10 pick. As for the WR's, Crabtree doesn't look like an Al Davis type to me. Davis looks for WR's who call be effective in a vertical system and won't be too enamoured by Crabtree.


Completely agree... I think it is more of which lineman is available. Either A. Smith, Monroe, Raji, and I would not count out Oher. I do not think they go receiver at 7... I think they address WR in the next couple of selections.

619
03-15-2009, 11:37 AM
I don't think you can count out Andre Smith in that equation. If Smith gets a workout by them closer to the draft and has improved his conditioning, he could easily be a top 10 pick. As for the WR's, Crabtree doesn't look like an Al Davis type to me. Davis looks for WR's who call be effective in a vertical system and won't be too enamoured by Crabtree.

Crabtree may not have the straight line vertical speed Al usually looks for, but I don't think that necessarily discredits him from becoming a useful threat in both the short and vertical passing game. It's certainly very difficult evaluating a player coming from that TT system, however, Crabtree possesses great ball skills/body positioning as well as a high football IQ to overcome this lack of speed and succeed in most passing situations, imo.

Falcon_from_E_Oakland
03-15-2009, 11:43 AM
Crabtree. I think the whole "Al Davis only wants the biggest and strongest" is way overblown.

ThePudge
03-15-2009, 11:44 AM
Though the Khalif Barnes deal is not long-term you have to think it, if you are to narrow it down to the top likelihoods, it comes down to WR vs. B.J. Raji.

Maclin and the fast-rising Darrius Heyward-Bey seem to fit best not only with Al Davis' tendencies on draft day, but also JaMarcus Russell's arm. Each could be potentially lethal in that scheme. That's not to say that Michael Crabtree is not a fit exactly, but he doesn't offer the speed or vertical ability of the two above. It's just natural to pair up Russell's arm with guys that can really get separation deep. Even though I do think Maclin and DHB are the superior fits, I would expect Crabtree to either be taken before the 7th pick or directly after at 8th Overall to Jacksonville.

Babylon
03-15-2009, 12:18 PM
Al Davis has always been a big vertical passing game believer and at his age he isnt going to change his stripes now. Maclin.

no love
03-15-2009, 12:59 PM
My question would be... is Maclin really more intriguing to Al Davis than say Darrius Heyward-Bey. As far as measurables go, there is no one in this draft that even comes close to Heyward-Bey's freakishness.

Most guys his size don't come close to that sort of elite speed and athleticism. When is the last time a guy who was 6'2" and 212 lbs ran a 4.3 forty?

He basically has Darren McFadden size/speed combo.

Sveen
03-15-2009, 01:39 PM
I'd say Andre Smith, if I have to choose one of the receivers I'd say Maclin because of his speed (which we all know Al Davis loves).

CC.SD
03-15-2009, 01:50 PM
Crabtree didn't even run a 40; If Al passed on Calvin Johnson and brought back Javon Walker for another season, I don't think anyone can predict his movements when it comes to WRs.

Flyboy
03-15-2009, 01:51 PM
Crabtree didn't even run a 40; If Al passed on Calvin Johnson and brought back Javon Walker for another season, I don't think anyone can predict his movements when it comes to WRs.

Lawlz, touche.

Young Legend
03-15-2009, 01:56 PM
I'd say Andre Smith, if I have to choose one of the receivers I'd say Maclin because of his speed (which we all know Al Davis loves).

Where position is A.Smith playing Cause ether Henderson or Barnes will be playing LT and the loser will play RT.

The Raiders signed Barnes so they wouldn't have to draft a LT early on in the draft.

but to the question ill go with Crabtree al davis loves big name players.Raiders have enough Speed at WR with Higgins 4.42,Chaz 4.38,Arman Shields 4.44 they need a good possession WR they will make the difficult catches.who will go over the middle.

RaiderNation
03-15-2009, 01:59 PM
OT in the 1st isnt going to happen after we signed Barnes.

I would prefer Crabtree since he is a natural WR. Maclin seems like Reggie Bush to me. He doesnt run good routes but is great on screen passes and deep passes.

Right now give me Crabtree and our offence could be good this year. If we go Maclin it will take a year or 2 before he becomes a good WR

Paranoidmoonduck
03-15-2009, 02:07 PM
Has no one noticed that a few reports said that, as part of the Barnes deal, they promised not to draft an offensive tackle in April?

Even if that report is bunk, offensive tackle is certainly off the table for the first round. So that leaves a wideout or a defensive lineman or maybe Malcolm Jenkins as a safety (unlikely, but I thought I throw it out there).

If it's between Maclin and Crabtree, the truth is that we won't know who has the upper hand until Oakland picks. You can point to all sort of drafts trends from Oakland as a indicator for one or the other and in my own tally, they are about even in which of those trends they would fulfill.

My gut, however, says Maclin.

brat316
03-15-2009, 02:24 PM
Has no one noticed that a few reports said that, as part of the Barnes deal, they promised not to draft an offensive tackle in April?

Even if that report is bunk, offensive tackle is certainly off the table for the first round. So that leaves a wideout or a defensive lineman or maybe Malcolm Jenkins as a safety (unlikely, but I thought I throw it out there).

If it's between Maclin and Crabtree, the truth is that we won't know who has the upper hand until Oakland picks. You can point to all sort of drafts trends from Oakland as a indicator for one or the other and in my own tally, they are about even in which of those trends they would fulfill.

My gut, however, says Maclin.


What? that means oakland can't even think OT in any round. DHB is the pick

Paranoidmoonduck
03-15-2009, 02:49 PM
What? that means oakland can't even think OT in any round.

They're just reports, but that's what they said.

StorminNorman
03-15-2009, 03:48 PM
Darrius Heyward-Bey

Shere Khan
03-15-2009, 04:56 PM
I wouldn't be suprised if the Bengals grab Maclin.....

gpngc
03-15-2009, 05:02 PM
Grabbing DHB over Maclin because of a faster 40-time (4.43 isn't fast or anything) is a move only the dumbest of men could possibly make...

wait.

OzTitan
03-15-2009, 05:10 PM
FWIW, some top LT prospects in the past have started inside before moving to LT. Didn't Ogden do that?

WMD
03-15-2009, 05:14 PM
Most guys his size don't come close to that sort of elite speed and athleticism. When is the last time a guy who was 6'2" and 212 lbs ran a 4.3 forty?

http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/1442/calvinjohnson.jpg

add 3 inches and about 30 pounds :) and yes, I created this picture.

Paranoidmoonduck
03-15-2009, 05:14 PM
FWIW, some top LT prospects in the past have started inside before moving to LT. Didn't Ogden do that?

So did Robert Gallery. I'm sure that will help Oakland make that decision.

Really, while Oakland needs a RG, the interior line would be best helped by drafting a center with the #40 selection than taking an offensive tackle early in this draft. The team spent two 3rd round selections on Mario Henderson, so he's going to get a full shot at becoming the starter and LT and now they have a potentially decent RT in Barnes.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 05:18 PM
Crabtree should be the pick. There is much more to being a vertical threat than speed. Look at a guy like Larry Fitzgerald. He's not a burner but his ability to compete for the ball makes him one of the most dangerous deep receivers in the league.

Paranoidmoonduck
03-15-2009, 05:20 PM
Crabtree should be the pick. There is much more to being a vertical threat than speed. Look at a guy like Larry Fitzgerald. He's not a burner but his ability to compete for the ball makes him one of the most dangerous deep receivers in the league.

Except that in college Larry Fitzgerald was already a fantastic deep receiver. Crabtree wasn't at Texas Tech.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 05:26 PM
Except that in college Larry Fitzgerald was already a fantastic deep receiver. Crabtree wasn't at Texas Tech.

True, but Crabtree hasn't really been given that opportunitity due to Texas Tech's offense. He has the same type of body control and hands as a Larry Fitzgerland-type.

NIN1984
03-15-2009, 07:01 PM
Everyone has Maclin going to Oakland for his speed and his play making ability but does Al Davis think he can be a true #1 WR in the NFL? because that's what the Raiders need.

Maclin is fast but the Raiders already have a lot fast WRs on the team who can get down the field. I'm not saying they are great wide receivers but Al Davis has said it more than once that he is really high on Higgns and Schilens.

Maclin is a great KR/PR but the Raiders had 5 total TDs last season in that department from Higgins and Miller so Raiders don't need Maclin for one his greatest attributes.

in my opinion it comes down to if Al think Maclin can be a true #1 WR someday. Its not just about speed this time.

thenewfeature06
03-15-2009, 07:06 PM
Everyone has Maclin going to Oakland for his speed and his play making ability but does Al Davis think he can be a true #1 WR in the NFL? because that's what the Raiders need.

Maclin is fast but the Raiders already have a lot fast WRs on the team who can get down the field. I'm not saying they are great wide receivers but Al Davis has said it more than once that he is really high on Higgns and Schilens.

Maclin is a great KR/PR but the Raiders had 5 total TDs last season in that department from Higgins and Miller so Raiders don't need Maclin for one his greatest attributes.

in my opinion it comes down to if Al think Maclin can be a true #1 WR someday. Its not just about speed this time.


i competely agree with you but what happens if Crab isn't there do we reach on DHB or go with Raji, Orako,etc.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 07:11 PM
i competely agree with you but what happens if Crab isn't there do we reach on DHB or go with Raji, Orako,etc.

If Crabtree isn't there I think the pick is Maclin. I think he's a #1 but he's simply not the prospect that Crabtree is. He's still a solid value in the top 10 in my opinion but not an elite prospect.

Orakpo or Raji would definitely help the team but I think WR is a far greater need so unless the Raiders don't think Maclin is worth that high of a pick, I think they go with him.

Paranoidmoonduck
03-15-2009, 08:15 PM
True, but Crabtree hasn't really been given that opportunitity due to Texas Tech's offense. He has the same type of body control and hands as a Larry Fitzgerland-type.

But he doesn't have the same ball awareness (something Fitzgerald probably has over every other receiver in football) or leaping ability. Crabtree is much more of an Anquan Boldin or Dwayne Bowe style receiver. He's not like Fitzgerald at all in terms of playing style.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 08:19 PM
But he doesn't have the same ball awareness (something Fitzgerald probably has over every other receiver in football) or leaping ability. Crabtree is much more of an Anquan Boldin or Dwayne Bowe style receiver. He's not like Fitzgerald at all in terms of playing style.

Crabtree and Fitzgerald are both similar leapers and they both are among the best at competing for the football.

Crabtree also has those hands that just snap the ball out of the air and don't let go even if the DB is ripping the ball or delivering a hard shot. Again, this is something that Fitzgerald is known for.

I'm not saying that Crabtree is as good as Fitzgerald, just that Crabtree will likely excel in the deep passing game for the same reasons Fitzgerald excels at it: great body control, hands, leaping ability, and the desire and talent to compete for the ball.

Paranoidmoonduck
03-15-2009, 08:28 PM
You really have to look at more than "can he jump?" or "can he catch". A guy I compared Crabtree to, Dwayne Bowe, has both those abilities in spades. In fact, I think he's a better leaper than Crabtree (plus has longer arms) and while he had some concentration problems with catching the ball at LSU, he's gotten over that nicely in the NFL. But Bowe has never been and will never been the force Fitzgerald has been deep.

It takes a really unique skill set to be a great deep ball receiver if you can't consistently get behind your man. Crabtree has skill, but his ability to go deep just simply isn't anywhere near as developed or nuanced as Fitzgerald's was coming out of college. Not to say he couldn't work on it, but the odds that he could even get close to Fitzgerald in the regard are pretty slim. And that's not Crabtree's value. His value is the quick-twitch separation he gets off the line and the smoothness with which he runs with the ball in his hands.

He's best as a short to intermediate range wide receiver.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 08:53 PM
You really have to look at more than "can he jump?" or "can he catch". A guy I compared Crabtree to, Dwayne Bowe, has both those abilities in spades. In fact, I think he's a better leaper than Crabtree (plus has longer arms) and while he had some concentration problems with catching the ball at LSU, he's gotten over that nicely in the NFL. But Bowe has never been and will never been the force Fitzgerald has been deep.

It takes a really unique skill set to be a great deep ball receiver if you can't consistently get behind your man. Crabtree has skill, but his ability to go deep just simply isn't anywhere near as developed or nuanced as Fitzgerald's was coming out of college. Not to say he couldn't work on it, but the odds that he could even get close to Fitzgerald in the regard are pretty slim. And that's not Crabtree's value. His value is the quick-twitch separation he gets off the line and the smoothness with which he runs with the ball in his hands.

He's best as a short to intermediate range wide receiver.

I disagree with that assessment, but to each his own.

I don't think Crabtree will ever be as good as Fitzgerald, I mean that's comparing a rookie to a guy who has a chance at the HOF if he continues on his current pace. Still, Crabtree does have the assets to be one of those Fitzgerald-types who is difficult to stop deep because of their ball skills and athletic ability.

Plus, the only way you're ever going to be "elite" as a true #1 receiver is if you are a deep threat. If you don't think Crabtree is going to be a good deep threat, you definitely would not consider him an elite prospect or the #1 receiver in this draft.

Paranoidmoonduck
03-15-2009, 08:54 PM
I consider Anquan Boldin to be a #1 caliber wideout and he's not a much of a deep threat either.

ElectricEye
03-15-2009, 09:11 PM
Plus, the only way you're ever going to be "elite" as a true #1 receiver is if you are a deep threat. If you don't think Crabtree is going to be a good deep threat, you definitely would not consider him an elite prospect or the #1 receiver in this draft.

That's not true. Boldin is a #1 receiver and Bowe is well on his way if he isn't already there and neither are conventional deep threats. Crabtree is no Fitzgerald. Doesn't take much more than watching them to realize that. Doesn't mean he isn't a damn good prospect though.

thetedginnshow
03-15-2009, 09:12 PM
I don't think Crabtree is anything like Fitz.

But someone said Bowe had concentration troubles at LSU... Actually, he had something wrong with his eyes. He got lasik eye surgery and became amazing.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 09:17 PM
That's not true. Boldin is a #1 receiver and Bowe is well on his way if he isn't already there and neither are conventional deep threats. Crabtree is no Fitzgerald. Doesn't take much more than watching them to realize that. Doesn't mean he isn't a damn good prospect though.

When has Boldin ever been featured as a #1 receiver, other than his rookie season when he didn't face as many doubles because he was relatively unknown? Maybe he is a #1, but Boldin hasn't had to face the same type of defensive attention as a true #1 so far in his career. I can't really think of any true #1s who weren't legitimate deep threats.

I never said Crabtree was Fitzgerald. I said he has similar hands, leaping ability, and the desire and talent to compete for the football. I am PROJECTING that those assets will lead to Crabtree being a quality deep threat in the NFL by approaching the deep passing game in a similar fashion as Fitzgerald (not relying on speed but rather superior athleticism and ball skills). It's hard to know for sure what Crabtree will be like in the deep game because he was rarely used in that capacity at Texas Tech.

ElectricEye
03-15-2009, 09:25 PM
When has Boldin ever been featured as a #1 receiver, other than his rookie season when he didn't face as many doubles because he was relatively unknown? Maybe he is a #1, but Boldin hasn't had to face the same type of defensive attention as a true #1 so far in his career. I can't really think of any true #1s who weren't legitimate deep threats.

I never said Crabtree was Fitzgerald. I said he has similar hands, leaping ability, and the desire and talent to compete for the football. I am PROJECTING that those assets will lead to Crabtree being a quality deep threat in the NFL by approaching the deep passing game in a similar fashion as Fitzgerald (not relying on speed but rather superior athleticism and ball skills). It's hard to know for sure what Crabtree will be like in the deep game because he was rarely used in that capacity at Texas Tech.

First off, anyone who thinks Boldin isn't a number one receiver because he hasn't been asked to be...well, I don't agree with them at ALL. You'll find yourself with very little company standing out on that limb.

PROJECTING a guy adding something to his game that he hasn't shown tends not to work out too well. Nobody is used in Fitzgerald's "capacity". They don't design those plays. With Fitz there, you know you can throw into coverage a little bit but you don't run those plays to work it out that way. That's play style. Crabtree could run the same forty, measure in at the same weight, and jump the same vertical as Fitzgerald but he'll never make the same types of plays when he's covered. He's had chances. Doesn't need to be a deep ball for that to happen. Fitz just goes up and gets it like nobody's business. There's very few people in the NFL who can do that, let alone on as consistent a basis as Fitz does. Crabtree won't ever make those types of plays. It's not a knock against him, but he's just not Larry Fitzgerald.

So basically, there's a million guys with similar physical skillsets. You can't project them to incorporate an entirely new element to their game though.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 09:33 PM
First off, anyone who thinks Boldin isn't a number one receiver because he hasn't been asked to be...well, I don't agree with them at ALL. You'll find yourself with very little company standing out on that limb.

PROJECTING a guy adding something to his game that he hasn't shown tends not to work out too well. Nobody is used in Fitzgerald's "capacity". They don't design those plays. With Fitz there, you know you can throw into coverage a little bit but you don't run those plays to work it out that way. That's play style. Crabtree could run the same forty, measure in at the same weight, and jump the same vertical as Fitzgerald but he'll never make the same types of plays when he's covered. He's had chances. Doesn't need to be a deep ball for that to happen. Fitz just goes up and gets it like nobody's business. There's very few people in the NFL who can do that, let alone on as consistent a basis as Fitz does. Crabtree won't ever make those types of plays. It's not a knock against him, but he's just not Larry Fitzgerald.

So basically, there's a million guys with similar physical skillsets. You can't project them to incorporate an entirely new element to their game though.

See I don't think Crabtree is equal to Fitzgerald in terms of making plays on the deep ball but I think he has the skillset to be up there with the elite guys in the NFL at that. I absolutely think Crabtree has made some great plays on the ball during his Texas Tech career as well.

Look at a guy like Adrian Peterson. He never really caught the football in college but he clearly had the skills to be very effective in that facet of the game due to his ability to make plays in space. I didn't think it was overly optimistic to think Peterson would be a threat in the flats and on screens when he got to the NFL and using the same logic I think Crabtree can be a dangerous deep threat even though he hasn't showcased that part of his game in college.

Also, if Boldin hasn't been a #1 in his career yet, how can you project him to be one but then go on and say how you can't project players to do things they haven't done in the past?

Paranoidmoonduck
03-15-2009, 09:41 PM
By that logic, how can you call Larry Fitzgerald a #1 when Boldin has always been there to take the pressure off him? I mean, really, Boldin has as much claim to being of #1 caliber as any other wide receiver who has had a talented guy play opposite him.

And your Adrian Peterson comparison makes no sense. We saw Adrian Peterson be awesome in space in college. Simply projecting that any way you could get him into space would be a positive is completely different from projecting a completely different facet to his game.

Keep in mind that Larry Fitzgerald is probably the only recently memorable deep threat in the NFL who didn't have the speed to consistently get behind their man. It isn't like any guy who has a similar physical skill set has been nearly as awesome as him. He's one of the most unique receiver prospects to enter the NFL in the last decade. Every single other notably great deep threat in the NFL does it with top notch speed.

ElectricEye
03-15-2009, 09:50 PM
See I don't think Crabtree is equal to Fitzgerald in terms of making plays on the deep ball but I think he has the skillset to be up there with the elite guys in the NFL at that. I absolutely think Crabtree has made some great plays on the ball during his Texas Tech career as well.
He doesn't do it though. Can he do it? Maybe. But until he does it's all projection. Football isn't like baseball either. You don't buy into projection. You hope a guy gets better and works on his game but it's not too often that something like that is added to an arsenal. Crabtree did make some good plays on balls at Texas Tech, but not in elite category. No real reason to compare him to Fitzgerald, especially to the extent you did. No real reason to say he'll be an elite player on the deep ball.

Look at a guy like Adrian Peterson. He never really caught the football in college but he clearly had the skills to be very effective in that facet of the game due to his ability to make plays in space. I didn't think it was overly optimistic to think Peterson would be a threat in the flats and on screens when he got to the NFL and using the same logic I think Crabtree can be a dangerous deep threat even though he hasn't showcased that part of his game in college.
Problem is that logic doesn't work. Peterson wasn't asked to be a receiver in college. When he was, he didn't look bad. He's not the only runningback who has had that problem. The best example is LaDainian Tomlinson. He had that question on his shoulders. LT went on to catch a hundred balls in a season. That happens quite a bit with runningbacks. However, possession receivers in college don't usually change into deep threats magically against better competition because they profile similarly to a guy who's been doing that his entire career. Doesn't usually work like that.

Also, if Boldin hasn't been a #1 in his career yet, how can you project him to be one but then go on and say how you can't project players to do things they haven't done in the past?
Boldin is a number one receiver and has been. I could go into how those are completely different situations and using that as leverage is extremely weak, but I think that's the strongest statement.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 09:52 PM
By that logic, how can you call Larry Fitzgerald a #1 when Boldin has always been there to take the pressure off him? I mean, really, Boldin has as much claim to being of #1 caliber as any other wide receiver who has had a talented guy play opposite him.

And your Adrian Peterson comparison makes no sense. We saw Adrian Peterson be awesome in space in college. Simply projecting that any way you could get him into space would be a positive is completely different from projecting a completely different facet to his game.

Keep in mind that Larry Fitzgerald is probably the only recently memorable deep threat in the NFL who didn't have the speed to consistently get behind their man. It isn't like any guy who has a similar physical skill set has been nearly as awesome as him. He's one of the most unique receiver prospects to enter the NFL in the last decade. Every single other notably great deep threat in the NFL does it with top notch speed.

Boldin has never been the focal point of opposing defenses. Fitzgerald is who you gameplan for first against Arizona. Boldin is a great receiver but the reality is that he's never been the best receiver on his team who drew the majority of defensive attention. That's what being a #1 is about. Maybe Boldin is that guy, but he hasn't had the opportunity to show it yet (like Crabtree and his ability to be a deep threat).

Terrell Owens is a very dangerous deep threat (particularly earlier in his career) and he doesn't consistently get behind defenders. Even guys like Brandon Marshall and Calvin Johnson (despite having excellent speed) rely more on their size and athletic ability to make plays down the field. Braylon Edwards is another guy that doesn't rely on speed to make plays down the field.

We saw Crabtree be great at competing for the ball in the college. So wouldn't it make sense that he could compete for the ball down the field as well? It's not like Crabtree has shown he CAN'T be a deep threat, he just never had the opportunity like Boldin hasn't had the opportunity to be a #1.

ElectricEye
03-15-2009, 09:56 PM
Boldin has never been the focal point of opposing defenses. Fitzgerald is who you gameplan for first against Arizona. Boldin is a great receiver but the reality is that he's never been the best receiver on his team who drew the majority of defensive attention. That's what being a #1 is about. Maybe Boldin is that guy, but he hasn't had the opportunity to show it yet (like Crabtree and his ability to be a deep threat).
Ridiculousness. Don't know anyone who's actually watched Boldin play say he wasn't a number one receiver. He's not a deep threat either. You're throwing that label around way too much.

Terrell Owens is a very dangerous deep threat (particularly earlier in his career) and he doesn't consistently get behind defenders. Even guys like Brandon Marshall and Calvin Johnson (despite having excellent speed) rely more on their size and athletic ability to make plays down the field. Braylon Edwards is another guy that doesn't rely on speed to make plays down the field.
All those guys utilize superior speed to Crabtree to get by people with the exception of Marshall who doesn't do much as a deep threat in the first place. Braylon Edwards is one of the more athletically gifted and speedy receivers in the game right now so saying he doesn't use speed to get by people is just ignorant of who he is as a player.

We saw Crabtree be great at competing for the ball in the college. So wouldn't it make sense that he could compete for the ball down the field as well? It's not like Crabtree has shown he CAN'T be a deep threat, he just never had the opportunity like Boldin hasn't had the opportunity to be a #1.No it wouldn't. How many guys outside Fitz with similar speed do you see doing that? Crabtree will be alright deep and probably make a play or two here and there and certainly won't hurt you in that category, but he's not ever going to be a deep threat just because he competes for the ball and has similar times speed to Fitzgerald.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 10:04 PM
How exactly is Boldin a #1 when he's been on the same team as Fitzgerald (clearly the #1 on that team)? You can't have two #1s receivers on the same team. By definition, you have a #1 and a #2. Boldin has always been a secondary thought for opposing defenses as opposed to Fitzgerald who has been the primary focus.

Owens is slower than Crabtree I would guess. Same with Marshall. I think Edwards and Crabtree are similar in terms of speed and athleticism. Edwards certainly is not a burner. I think he ran about a 4.5 coming out and that's a pretty good representation of his game speed.

I already listed many players with similar speed to Crabtree who have had success deep. Owens, Marshall, Edwards, etc.

ElectricEye
03-15-2009, 10:11 PM
How exactly is Boldin a #1 when he's been on the same team as Fitzgerald (clearly the #1 on that team)? You can't have two #1s receivers on the same team. By definition, you have a #1 and a #2. Boldin has always been a secondary thought for opposing defenses as opposed to Fitzgerald who has been the primary focus.
Not always. Boldin gets the double coverage Fitzgerald commands sometimes as well. Hell, Boldin got that treatment much before Fitz did. Fitzgerald only really separated himself this year. You can too have more than one number one receiver on your team as well. That defintion is just making it a status symbol.

Owens is slower than Crabtree I would guess. Same with Marshall. I think Edwards and Crabtree are similar in terms of speed and athleticism. Edwards certainly is not a burner. I think he ran about a 4.5 coming out and that's a pretty good representation of his game speed.
Owens is faster than Crabtree and always has been. Marshall is in the same category speed wise and might even be a shade faster. Edwards ran a 4.42 on his pro day, so that pretty much kills that one as well. Plays up to that speed as well.

I already listed many players with similar speed to Crabtree who have had success deep. etc.Haven't seen ect play yet.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 10:18 PM
You don't know Crabtree's 40 time, so I don't even know why you're trying to make that comparison.

Edwards ran a 4.48 at the combine. Would it have surprised you if Crabtree ran that? It wouldn't have surprised me at all. It's pretty pointless to continue this debate because neither of us is going to be able to prove Owens/Edwards/Marshall/Whoever is faster/slower than Crabtree. You have your opinion, I have mine.

It really comes down to the fact that there are a handful of NFL receivers who are legitimate deep threats despite not consistently getting behind the secondary. I think Crabtree can be one of those receivers. You don't. We're both making a projection and there's no real way to know how it's going to play out until he hits the field. That's the beauty of the NFL Draft.

ElectricEye
03-15-2009, 10:25 PM
You don't know Crabtree's 40 time, so I don't even know why you're trying to make that comparison.
Don't know it, don't need to know it. It's about game speed. Doubt he would have ran that fast.

Edwards ran a 4.48 at the combine. Would it have surprised you if Crabtree ran that? It wouldn't have surprised me at all. It's pretty pointless to continue this debate because neither of us is going to be able to prove Owens/Edwards/Marshall/Whoever is faster/slower than Crabtree. You have your opinion, I have mine.
I would be surprised and I'm far from the only one. Crabtree is pretty much universally agreed upon to be more of a 4.5+ guy. Anything below that would be absolutely shocking considering Maclin(clearly faster, no debate) ran that at the combine. Speed isn't particularly subjective. Not really a matter of opinion. You could break it down to that and the varying degrees of it, but ultimately if there's a unified standard there's right and wrong. If the standard is that Crabtree is fast, there's a lot of fast deep threats in the NFL and they aren't particularly rare.

It really comes down to the fact that there are a handful of NFL receivers who are legitimate deep threats despite not consistently getting behind the secondary. I think Crabtree can be one of those receivers. You don't. We're both making a projection and there's no real way to know how it's going to play out until he hits the field. That's the beauty of the NFL Draft.There aren't many of those guys. There's a Larry Fitzgerald and and the rest of the league. There really isn't much room in that category either.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 10:35 PM
I never said Crabtree was fast. I said he had speed similar to guys like Owens, Marshall, and Edwards. Doesn't even matter about speed though, because those guys aren't beating guys deep anyway. They rely on ball skills to make plays deep, the same as Fitzgerald.

Again, I never said that Crabtree will be Fitzgerald. I just said that I think he'll be a legitimate deep threat for the same reasons that Fitzgerald is.

ElectricEye
03-15-2009, 10:38 PM
I never said Crabtree was fast. I said he had speed similar to guys like Owens, Marshall, and Edwards. Doesn't even matter about speed though, because those guys aren't beating guys deep anyway. They rely on ball skills to make plays deep, the same as Fitzgerald.

Again, I never said that Crabtree will be Fitzgerald. I just said that I think he'll be a legitimate deep threat for the same reasons that Fitzgerald is.

Edwards is one of the best deep threats in the league and it has absolutely nothing to do with his hands or balls skills. That's just flatout wrong. Marshall isn't a deep threat and Owens isn't much of one anymore. Kinda making my point for me here.


The problem with saying Crabtree will succeed deep for the same reasons Fitzgerald does is that no one else besides him does.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 10:42 PM
Edwards is one of the best deep threats in the league and it has absolutely nothing to do with his hands or balls skills. That's just flatout wrong. Marshall isn't a deep threat and Owens isn't much of one anymore. Kinda making my point for me here.


The problem with saying Crabtree will succeed deep for the same reasons Fitzgerald does is that no one else besides him does.

Again, I'm disagreeing with your assessment that Fitzgerald is the only player in the NFL who is a legitimate deep threat who doesn't get behind secondaries consistently. I think there a handful of players who do that and I have already mentioned who. We're just going in circles here so I don't think there's a point to us continually restating points that have already been made.

Kurve
03-15-2009, 10:46 PM
you know if i had to choose a former nfl player or even former HOF that reminds me of Crabree ..for some reason when i look at crabtree i see Michael Irvin but thats just me.

ElectricEye
03-15-2009, 11:00 PM
Again, I'm disagreeing with your assessment that Fitzgerald is the only player in the NFL who is a legitimate deep threat who doesn't get behind secondaries consistently. I think there a handful of players who do that and I have already mentioned who. We're just going in circles here so I don't think there's a point to us continually restating points that have already been made.

Fitz isn't the only guy(very few though), but saying Crabtree will succeed for the same reasons is simply under appreciating what Larry Fitz actually does. Probably won't see another guy like that for a long while. Crabtree might catch a couple over twenty yards every now and again, but he won't be doing much work beyond that.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 11:02 PM
Fitz isn't the only guy(very few though), but saying Crabtree will succeed for the same reasons is simply under appreciating what Larry Fitz actually does. Probably won't see another guy like that for a long while.

I agree. I don't think Crabtree will be Fitzgerald. I do, however, think he will be a legitimate deep threat in the NFL.

ElectricEye
03-15-2009, 11:08 PM
I agree. I don't think Crabtree will be Fitzgerald. I do, however, think he will be a legitimate deep threat in the NFL.

Depends on what you call a deep threat. Based on what we actually know about him, there's a lot of guys like Crabtree who could be considered deep threats. Not a very hard category to put yourself in.

Guys that are good deep aren't always good receivers. They're typically terribly inconsistent and when they are actually open they're usually not the option quarterbacks go to. Devery Henderson types will ALWAYS be valuable, but I'll take a guy like Crabtree who can work consistently every time. I'll take Randy Moss over both of them if I could, but you don't find guys like that very often.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 11:12 PM
Depends on what you call a deep threat. Based on what we actually know about him, there's a lot of guys like Crabtree who could be considered deep threats. Not a very hard category to put yourself in.

Guys that are good deep aren't always good receivers. They're typically terribly inconsistent and when they are actually open they're usually not the option quarterbacks go to. Devery Henderson types will ALWAYS be valuable, but I'll take a guy like Crabtree who can work consistently every time. I'll take Randy Moss over both of them if I could, but you don't find guys like that very often.

I don't think Crabtree's game will revolve around being a deep threat. I just think that threat needs to exist in order for him to be a successful #1. It's much easier to take a player out of the game when you only have to worry about short and intermediate routes. Plus, the jam becomes a lot more effective because you can do it without much risk of being burned deep or the absolute requirement to have help over the top. I think Crabtree is the type of player who will really punish teams if they decide to jam him and not give help over the top consistently.

ElectricEye
03-15-2009, 11:13 PM
I think Crabtree is the type of player who will really punish teams if they decide to jam him and not give help over the top consistently.

Eh. Hasn't shown that ability, doesn't have the physical skillset. Not a good combination. Capitalize, maybe. Lot's of guys can do that. Punish is going far.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-15-2009, 11:15 PM
Eh. Hasn't shown that ability, doesn't have the physical skillset. Not a good combination. Capitalize, maybe. Lot's of guys can do that. Punish is going far.

He was never asked to show it at Texas Tech and he does the physical skillset like I have already explained. Again, going in circles.

Why not just end it here? You have the opinion his skillset doesn't translate well to being a deep threat. I have the opposite opinion. They are both opinion and based on projections. We're not going to change each other's opinion and there's no way we'll see who's right until Crabtree suits up on Sunday's.

NotoRussell
03-16-2009, 09:41 AM
you know if i had to choose a former nfl player or even former HOF that reminds me of Crabree ..for some reason when i look at crabtree i see Michael Irvin but thats just me.

i thought the same thing too as i saw him play, so you arent alone there;)

Oaktown1981
03-16-2009, 10:27 AM
If Crabtree is there at 7 he will be a Raider.

Black Bolt
03-16-2009, 02:24 PM
I consider Anquan Boldin to be a #1 caliber wideout and he's not a much of a deep threat either.

This deep threat thing has gone too far. Chris Carter and Jerry Rice were not true deep threats, but they were unstoppable throughout the course of a game. I don't know what's wrong with that. Crab IS elite.

keylime_5
03-16-2009, 02:26 PM
If Crabtree is there at 7 he will be a Raider.

I agree. I don't think people see that just b/c a guy doesn't have super speed that doesn't mean he's not high on Oakland's draft board. The distance between Crab and Maclin as prospects is greater than some make it sound.

Black Bolt
03-16-2009, 02:28 PM
Larry has gotten better in this aread, but he's not the best YAC WR on this team much less the NFL. Crabtree excels in this area.

Furthermore, I remember Fitzgerald catching his fair share of criticism coming out. Everyone's a critic coming out. His critics seem to have vanished somehow.

First off, anyone who thinks Boldin isn't a number one receiver because he hasn't been asked to be...well, I don't agree with them at ALL. You'll find yourself with very little company standing out on that limb.

PROJECTING a guy adding something to his game that he hasn't shown tends not to work out too well. Nobody is used in Fitzgerald's "capacity". They don't design those plays. With Fitz there, you know you can throw into coverage a little bit but you don't run those plays to work it out that way. That's play style. Crabtree could run the same forty, measure in at the same weight, and jump the same vertical as Fitzgerald but he'll never make the same types of plays when he's covered. He's had chances. Doesn't need to be a deep ball for that to happen. Fitz just goes up and gets it like nobody's business. There's very few people in the NFL who can do that, let alone on as consistent a basis as Fitz does. Crabtree won't ever make those types of plays. It's not a knock against him, but he's just not Larry Fitzgerald.

So basically, there's a million guys with similar physical skillsets. You can't project them to incorporate an entirely new element to their game though.

Black Bolt
03-16-2009, 02:32 PM
The only knock, albeit a big one, is injuries. You probably need to take a closer look at his production. He set rookie records for receiving, so don't tell me that Fitzgerald was the focus of opposing defenses his first year. Boldin, DESPITE MISSING FOUR GAMES, was in the top 4 in 4 categories, including #1 in receptions per game.

Boldin has never been the focal point of opposing defenses. Fitzgerald is who you gameplan for first against Arizona. Boldin is a great receiver but the reality is that he's never been the best receiver on his team who drew the majority of defensive attention. That's what being a #1 is about. Maybe Boldin is that guy, but he hasn't had the opportunity to show it yet (like Crabtree and his ability to be a deep threat).

Terrell Owens is a very dangerous deep threat (particularly earlier in his career) and he doesn't consistently get behind defenders. Even guys like Brandon Marshall and Calvin Johnson (despite having excellent speed) rely more on their size and athletic ability to make plays down the field. Braylon Edwards is another guy that doesn't rely on speed to make plays down the field.

We saw Crabtree be great at competing for the ball in the college. So wouldn't it make sense that he could compete for the ball down the field as well? It's not like Crabtree has shown he CAN'T be a deep threat, he just never had the opportunity like Boldin hasn't had the opportunity to be a #1.

Black Bolt
03-16-2009, 03:01 PM
Eh. Hasn't shown that ability, doesn't have the physical skillset. Not a good combination. Capitalize, maybe. Lot's of guys can do that. Punish is going far.


Are we talking about the same Crabtree?? The one I am talking about is as physical as they come. He is a FOOTBALL PLAYER. He would probably make a great SS if he played that position. Hell, he was a QB coming out of high school. Crab is that kid you played with as a youngster that was just better than all the other kids. I don't doubt him for a second.

gpngc
03-16-2009, 04:08 PM
Are we talking about the same Crabtree?? The one I am talking about is as physical as they come. He is a FOOTBALL PLAYER. He would probably make a great SS if he played that position. Hell, he was a QB coming out of high school. Crab is that kid you played with as a youngster that was just better than all the other kids. I don't doubt him for a second.

Agreed.

I had the same reaction.

And I think people are simply thinking "no 4.3 40? He's not a deep threat." The fact is he went deep as much as any WR prospect. Huge bombs? Maybe not. But that's more Graham Harrell. There is no doubt in my mind that Crabtree can run deep posts and 9s at the next level. Is he going to burn past the DB? Probably not. But as someone once said, the best WRs are the guys you can throw to while their covered. If you missed TTU the past two years, this is a rare case where the youtube videos somewhat do the prospect justice (for the simple fact that there's so much footage of him dominating).

Boldin arguably a better pure WR than Fitzgerald = Eli arguably a better pure QB than Peyton.

Boldin drops passes, Fitz doesn't and has incredible hands. Boldin is best with the ball in his hands, Fitz is best as a surgical route runner. Boldin is just a world-class football player, Fitz on the other hand is the quintessential wide receiver. If he stays healthy and has a long career, he could eclipse Rice as the GOAT.

ElectricEye
03-16-2009, 04:20 PM
Are we talking about the same Crabtree?? The one I am talking about is as physical as they come. He is a FOOTBALL PLAYER. He would probably make a great SS if he played that position. Hell, he was a QB coming out of high school. Crab is that kid you played with as a youngster that was just better than all the other kids. I don't doubt him for a second.

Didn't say he wasn't physical. Read the post and the context.

Black Bolt
03-16-2009, 04:23 PM
Didn't say he wasn't physical. Read the post and the context.

and that's how I took what you said.

Black Bolt
03-16-2009, 04:27 PM
about halfway through this year! For the years prior, Boldin was the better all around WR. Boldin's problem is injuries, period. He averaged MORE catches per game. He had as many TDs and ranked in the top 4 in this category- EVEN THOUGH HE MISSED FOUR GAMES. I don't know where you get off comparing Boldin/Fitz to Peyton/Eil. No matter where you come down, it's a bad comparison.


Agreed.

I had the same reaction.

And I think people are simply thinking "no 4.3 40? He's not a deep threat." The fact is he went deep as much as any WR prospect. Huge bombs? Maybe not. But that's more Graham Harrell. There is no doubt in my mind that Crabtree can run deep posts and 9s at the next level. Is he going to burn past the DB? Probably not. But as someone once said, the best WRs are the guys you can throw to while their covered. If you missed TTU the past two years, this is a rare case where the youtube videos somewhat do the prospect justice (for the simple fact that there's so much footage of him dominating).

Boldin arguably a better pure WR than Fitzgerald = Eli arguably a better pure QB than Peyton.

Boldin drops passes, Fitz doesn't and has incredible hands. Boldin is best with the ball in his hands, Fitz is best as a surgical route runner. Boldin is just a world-class football player, Fitz on the other hand is the quintessential wide receiver. If he stays healthy and has a long career, he could eclipse Rice as the GOAT.

gpngc
03-16-2009, 04:35 PM
about halfway through this year! For the years prior, Boldin was the better all around WR. Boldin's problem is injuries, period. He averaged MORE catches per game. He had as many TDs and ranked in the top 4 in this category- EVEN THOUGH HE MISSED FOUR GAMES. I don't know where you get off comparing Boldin/Fitz to Peyton/Eil. No matter where you come down, it's a bad comparison.

It's not a comparison. Just showing how "arguably" can be used (because face it- everything can be argued), when in my opinion there is no argument.

More catches doesn't mean a better pure WR. Fitz is a pure WR in every sense. A lot of Boldin's catches come on shallow crosses or quick stand-up passes- basically running plays. And I'm not taking anything away from him as a great overall player, but those aren't pure WR routes IMO.

I mean you're going with stats, and that's fine. But it doesn't take away how each of them amass their statistics (BOTH players are impressive statistically). Fitz does it in the pure WR way (hands-catches, surgical routes, catches while he's covered), whereas Boldin does it in the football-player way (breaks tackles, YAC).

Fitzgerald was born a WR, Boldin was a born a football player (a QB-RB-WR hybrid). The only reason I'm getting into this might be because the pure WRs sometimes get trumped for the athletes and it's frustrating because it happened to me at times.

Again, Boldin's a great player, but even he'll say it (there was a whole article in SI about it), he's not a pure WR.

Fitz is.

Black Bolt
03-16-2009, 04:54 PM
Look, my point is that they are BOTH great WRs and they are BOTH #1 WRs. You can say that Boldin is a football players all you want, but the bottom line is that he outperforms most WRs in the NFL. So was that comment about merely being a football player supposed to detract from his production as a WR?

I'll say it again: Until this year, Boldin was the slightly more impactful WR. Fitzgerald got into a zone this year and Boldin got hurt. And don't forget, he took it to another level in the post season. But prior to that, it was Boldin that was the redzone threat, Boldin that would take the end around and Boldin that would break tackles downfield. Let me show you some things.

Boldin played in 80 career games, only 4 more than Fitz due to injury. In that time:

Boldin has 40 TDs, Fitz has 46. Keep in mind that at the end of the regular season, Boldin had 11 and Fitz had 12 but Boldin missed 4 games. Of course Fitz had 7 in the post season.

Boldin has 502 catches for 6496 yards. Fitz has 426 catches for 5975. So Boldin plays only 4 more games than Fitz but has 76 more catches. Fitz has a better career average at 14 per, but Boldin is no slouch at 13. And being that Fitz catches so many jump balls, it goes to show you that Boldin gets it done with YAC. Why is one method better than the other?

My point is that BOTH of these guys are great, and because of the monster year Fitz had, Boldin seems to be getting the shaft. He shouldn't. He is a bonofide #1 and one of the very best in the NFL. The Cards just happen to have two #1s...for now.


It's not a comparison. Just showing how "arguably" can be used (because face it- everything can be argued), when in my opinion there is no argument.

More catches doesn't mean a better pure WR. Fitz is a pure WR in every sense. A lot of Boldin's catches come on shallow crosses or quick stand-up passes- basically running plays. And I'm not taking anything away from him as a great overall player, but those aren't pure WR routes IMO.

I mean you're going with stats, and that's fine. But it doesn't take away how each of them amass their statistics (BOTH players are impressive statistically). Fitz does it in the pure WR way (hands-catches, surgical routes, catches while he's covered), whereas Boldin does it in the football-player way (breaks tackles, YAC).

Fitzgerald was born a WR, Boldin was a born a football player (a QB-RB-WR hybrid). The only reason I'm getting into this might be because the pure WRs sometimes get trumped for the athletes and it's frustrating because it happened to me at times.

Again, Boldin's a great player, but even he'll say it (there was a whole article in SI about it), he's not a pure WR.

Fitz is.

ElectricEye
03-16-2009, 04:56 PM
And I think people are simply thinking "no 4.3 40? He's not a deep threat." The fact is he went deep as much as any WR prospect. Huge bombs? Maybe not. But that's more Graham Harrell. There is no doubt in my mind that Crabtree can run deep posts and 9s at the next level. Is he going to burn past the DB? Probably not. But as someone once said, the best WRs are the guys you can throw to while their covered. If you missed TTU the past two years, this is a rare case where the youtube videos somewhat do the prospect justice (for the simple fact that there's so much footage of him dominating).

You don't have to run a 4.3 to be a deep threat but it certainly helps if you're able to generate separation. I don't know where you're seeing the deep plays from Crabtree, but I mostly saw him working in the 15 yards past the line of scrimmage area and excelling there. He'll be able to catch the ball when he's open wherever in the NFL, but he'll have a hard time generating separation past that fifteen yard range. To me, that means he isn't a deep threat. It's unreasonable to expect anyone, let alone Crabtree, to make Larry Fitzgerald type plays when he's covered as well. Not many people can do that.

gpngc
03-16-2009, 05:01 PM
You don't have to run a 4.3 to be a deep threat but it certainly helps if you're able to generate separation. I don't know where you're seeing the deep plays from Crabtree, but I mostly saw him working in the 15 yards past the line of scrimmage area and excelling there. He'll be able to catch the ball when he's open wherever in the NFL, but he'll have a hard time generating separation past that fifteen yard range. To me, that means he isn't a deep threat. It's unreasonable to expect anyone, let alone Crabtree, to make Larry Fitzgerald type plays when he's covered as well. Not many people can do that.

Um. Texas game?

ElectricEye
03-16-2009, 05:05 PM
Um. Texas game?

How would that throw work further away without totally incompetent coverage? It was a great play and Crabtree competes for the ball better than anyone, but I just don't buy him as a vertical threat.

BigTron
03-16-2009, 07:48 PM
Everyone says the same old Al Davis only drafts speed stuff. Its not 100% true. The Raiders love drafting speedy players but that not always the case.
Z.Miller is not a fastest TE, Kirk Morrison isnt the fastest MLB, Nnamdi Asomugha doesnt have elite speed... im just pointing out that some our best players on the roster who have panned out were not the fastest at their position at that time in the draft. Yes there are hundreds of examples of AL drafting speed, but its not going to be as big of a deal as people make it out to be.

What Al Davis loves more than speed is big name players. And Michael Crabtree is a big name. He loves decorated players who come in with big stats outta college too. So dont be so fast to act like you know what AL Davis is thinking when you do not. As a lifetime Raider fan ill tell you nobody does, trust me. He spent a ton last offseason, this offseason has been super responsible. Its like when people say AL Davis will take any crappy FA like Pac-MAn/T.O/Tank, when actually its the media darling Cowboys who do that. And the Bengals are the team with the long list of offenders who dont get mentioned while the Raiders get trashed. Dont believe the hype.

He is more likely to gamble on size/speed players later in the draft which he is known to do. The first day is different. And dont point to McFadden b/c he was arguable the best in the draft other than off the field stuff. Calvin Johnson blazed a hot 40 time also and was passed for a guy who ran a 4.9(JR)

If Al Davis takes Maclin its because he is an outstanding football player who has elite speed. If not he would take Heyward Bey. SO when he passes Heyward Bey and his elite speed for a football player like Crabtree or Maclin than you can stop with the AL Davis loves speed draft crap. If he does take him ill come back and eat crow.

brat316
03-16-2009, 07:51 PM
what about Fabin Washington, Huff?

RaiderNation
03-16-2009, 11:44 PM
Well Oakland resigned CB/KR Justin Miller today.... this means a returner is not needed any more. JLH and Miller are both pro bowl caliber returners

This could have a big impact on if we get Crabtree or Maclin if there on the board

yourfavestoner
03-16-2009, 11:48 PM
you know if i had to choose a former nfl player or even former HOF that reminds me of Crabree ..for some reason when i look at crabtree i see Michael Irvin but thats just me.

Actually, that's the best comparison I've heard for Crabtree so far.

Black Bolt
03-17-2009, 08:00 AM
what about Fabin Washington, Huff?

of Al giving into his speed fetish high in the draft (to think we traded up for him when we had Charles and Nnamdi!!!), however, he hasn't done that much at all in recent years. Huff was taken where projected and thought by viturally everyone to be worthy of that spot at the time.

BigTron
03-17-2009, 10:53 AM
Im not saying AL Davis does not love draft speed. Im saying its not like he is blinded by speed. Huff was a good pick b/c we had a major need at S. We had some terrible guys like D.Gibson,A.Dorsett etc. We needed a safety. So it wasnt based purely on speed. Also Huff was very productive at Texas was he not?

Fabian Washington and Stanford Routt, OK ill give you that. But neither were high picks. We also took Thomas Howard who is lightning, but look how that worked out.

Anyway. ALL teams covet speed. Al Davis more than others, but dont take it too far or your mock draft will be terrible. I mean how many teams dont pay attention to the 40 and other speed drills?

If they didnt DHB would be a 3rd rounder.

Black Bolt
03-17-2009, 12:14 PM
Crab in the first, one of the top three C in the second, and defense the rest of the way. We will come away with the top player and WR in the draft as well as the top C, both positions of need. How can one argue with that???

Im not saying AL Davis does not love draft speed. Im saying its not like he is blinded by speed. Huff was a good pick b/c we had a major need at S. We had some terrible guys like D.Gibson,A.Dorsett etc. We needed a safety. So it wasnt based purely on speed. Also Huff was very productive at Texas was he not?

Fabian Washington and Stanford Routt, OK ill give you that. But neither were high picks. We also took Thomas Howard who is lightning, but look how that worked out.

Anyway. ALL teams covet speed. Al Davis more than others, but dont take it too far or your mock draft will be terrible. I mean how many teams dont pay attention to the 40 and other speed drills?

If they didnt DHB would be a 3rd rounder.

Mr.Regular
03-17-2009, 12:28 PM
Im not saying AL Davis does not love draft speed. Im saying its not like he is blinded by speed. Huff was a good pick b/c we had a major need at S. We had some terrible guys like D.Gibson,A.Dorsett etc. We needed a safety. So it wasnt based purely on speed. Also Huff was very productive at Texas was he not?

Fabian Washington and Stanford Routt, OK ill give you that. But neither were high picks. We also took Thomas Howard who is lightning, but look how that worked out.

Anyway. ALL teams covet speed. Al Davis more than others, but dont take it too far or your mock draft will be terrible. I mean how many teams dont pay attention to the 40 and other speed drills?

If they didnt DHB would be a 3rd rounder.
Another point to add about Al Davis not being as obsessed with speed as reported is that he drafted Zach Miller high in the second a couple years back after a brutal 40 yard time, and that worked out very well.

RaiderNation
03-17-2009, 04:33 PM
Another point to add about Al Davis not being as obsessed with speed as reported is that he drafted Zach Miller high in the second a couple years back after a brutal 40 yard time, and that worked out very well.

Id say some of that was decided on Kiffin also since he coached in the Pac 10

Black Bolt
03-17-2009, 04:38 PM
Id say some of that was decided on Kiffin also since he coached in the Pac 10

but the point is that Al signed off on it.

619
03-17-2009, 04:39 PM
you know if i had to choose a former nfl player or even former HOF that reminds me of Crabree ..for some reason when i look at crabtree i see Michael Irvin but thats just me.

I absolutely love this comparison.

Dark Knight01
03-18-2009, 03:02 PM
If the Raiders have a choice between the two the pick better be Crabtree!

They already have a WR with the same skill set as Maclin in Johnnie Lee Higgins.

Crabtree is more physical, stronger, catches better with his hands, has better body control, longer arms, and is a better route runner. Wait until Crabtrees body matures more and he becomes even stronger and develops even better body control.

All Maclin has is a better 40 time and that is splittin hairs of course because straight line 40 times are VERY OVER RATED IMO.

You figure Maclin runs a 4.40 and Crabtree would run a 4.50? No big deal....

Crabtree is the better overall WR period.

katnip
03-18-2009, 05:49 PM
Def. Maclin

kiranadwaney
03-18-2009, 06:26 PM
crabtree, all day every day.