Oakland Raiders Draft: Sizing Up Rounds One and Two

J TCorrespondent IFebruary 27, 2008

Someone recently posted an article here about who the Raiders should pick with their first pick.  He has made many laugh at his pick also. 

He says he's telling Al Davis how to do his job, but what he's doing is the same mistakes that Davis already has made for many years that has set the organization back for many years.  What is that might you ask? TERRIBLE drafting.

Let's look at recent first rounders that are no longer w/ the team or are completely ineffective:

Philip Buchanan (2002, 17th overall now w/ the Bucs), Charles Woodson (1998, 4th overall who has now came back and performed great for the Packers and good for him), Tyler Brayton (2003, 32nd overall still w/ the team... unfortunately), Sebastian Janikowski (2000, 17th overall and extremely inconsistent and might be let go this off-season), Michael Huff (2006, 7th overall and he is now on the trading block).. yeah, Davis doesn't know how to draft and it's apparent. If he took DeSean Jackson (WR, CAL) in the first round (4th overall), he'd be following the trend of being a complete idiot. This is the guy the aforementioned person thinks the Raiders should draft.

The Raiders have some bright spots.  The pass D is great, but the lack of pass rush this past season set them back although Nnamdi Asomugha had one of the best seasons of recent NFL CBs. And for another year, the Raiders were crap against the run. 

So why draft a WR when you obviously need to stop the run better, shore up the offensive and defensive line, and find a Sam LB?? Yeah, it doesn't make sense to me either. It also doesn't make sense to draft a guy 4th overall who is expected to be there late in the first round and maybe even fall into the second.

He's 5'9" 169 LBs. I, personally, was bigger than that as a sophomore in HS and I didn't have the character issures he has. Forget about him.

Now for the Raiders first round pick, well it's a combination of three people and should be a rather easy decision.  Pending the Rams, Falcons and Dolphins picks, the Raiders should snag DT Glenn Dorsey (LSU), DT Sedrick Ellis (USC), or DE Chris Long (UVA).

It's not that common to have two phenomenal DTs available that are almost guaranteed top 8 picks.  2003 was the last time. 

"What if those are the first three picks taken?" One might ask. Well, then you got the other Long. The guy who outplayed Joe Thomas (Browns 3rd pick last season) as a Junior and Thomas had one fantastic rookie season. 

If the Raiders feel they should take another risk at a lineman high, it'd be a good bet, and Long would be a good fit plus it would give the Raiders the franchise LT they oh so desperately need.

As for the second round, the Raiders still need to stack the trenches. They're just not good in there, and anyone who knows football knows that's where the games are won and lost. 

I think they should go DT again or DE.  The current DTs on the team aren't good. An underperforming Gerrard Warren, a "play when I want to" Terdell Sands, as well as a couple other guys who aren't even worth mentioning.

The Raiders D is very young, if not the youngest, in the NFL. Why not get some more DTs to grow w/ these other young guys? It makes sense.

I would love it if Quentin Groves DE from (Auburn) was still around or if Kentwan Balmer DT (UNC) stock drops a little bit and he falls out of the first round. He'd be a killer pick up. If those two are gone, Frank Okam DT (Texas) and Lawrence Jackson DE (USC) would be fine by me.. this is assuming Pat Sims DT (Auburn) is gone, which I'm sure he will be.

What about WRs? I could see that being asked.  Late round picks can turn out to be great players. Many WRs that are great in the league were drafted late. TO, Chad Johnson, Marques Colston among many, many others. 

Those guys "might" be found later, and might not.  The team ran the ball great last season anyway, so if they can keep that up and only have Russell throw 20-25 times a game, why waste a 1st rounder on a WR?

It just doesn't make sense.