Raiderstation

Raiders Baby wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 8:24 am A lot of “quit your bitching” replies to those of us who called yesterday a head scratcher, so let me stand on it real quick:

Go look at the Round 2 and Round 3 betting threads. How many people had Stukes or Keyron? Boy, Attyla is a rich man today, at least in fake dollars.

Don’t get me wrong, I actually liked Stukes during the predraft process, but with both Boston & Kayden on the board when we originally picked, I don’t think many would’ve guessed we would choose Stukes.

Doesn’t mean it’s the wrong choice, and on Spy’s board we may have gotten great value. And it was nice to convert a 4th into a 3rd.

But let’s not act like it’s unreasonable to call the picks unconventional, and the fact that you cannot find one person who chose Stukes as their Day 2 prediction gives at least anecdotal support to that idea

Dr Death wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 5:17 am I was a bit confused by the Stukes pick. I'm not/wasn't mad about it... just confused because there were others still on the board that were general consensus picks of need that were probably day 1 starters.

Having thought about it for a while, I actually think it was a pretty good pick. This team has struggled with the secondary for so long. It will be good to see a guy that could possibly be an all-pro/star playing for us in the secondary. With QB's like Mahomes, Herbert and Nix to face twice a year, this guy could be a game changer for us.

I'm going to trust this management/coaching staff in so far as they are a damn sight smarter/knowledgable than me... and most of us on this "fan" forum.

Attyla wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 8:20 am He did a few reps at RT last year, not much. Hard to say if he can play the right side. But they have intentions of moving him inside was what I gathered. Hell, when they announced him, they called him a guard.

mstrbass2000 wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 8:33 am most of his reps were at tackle, left tackle and he handled stiff competition in the sec including vs bain...maybe they try to fill a hole at guard but he eventually shines at rt ...love how versatile he is already

Opoponax50 wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 8:29 am Safety is one of the least glamorous picks a team can make. I'm no different than anyone else with respect to wanting a splash pick, but our secondary is flat out terrible and has no depth. People are talking about "Day 1 Starters" when it's most likely that the safety we drafted is going to be on the field Day 1.

I wanted a different position like DT or OT but rationally we need D-backfield in the worst way.

Rabidraider wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 8:34 am People like to piss on Kiper, but he helped make the draft what it is today.

Raiders Baby wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 8:24 am A lot of “quit your bitching” replies to those of us who called yesterday a head scratcher, so let me stand on it real quick:

Go look at the Round 2 and Round 3 betting threads. How many people had Stukes or Keyron? Boy, Attyla is a rich man today, at least in fake dollars.

Don’t get me wrong, I actually liked Stukes during the predraft process, but with both Boston & Kayden on the board when we originally picked, I don’t think many would’ve guessed we would choose Stukes.

Doesn’t mean it’s the wrong choice, and on Spy’s board we may have gotten great value. And it was nice to convert a 4th into a 3rd.

But let’s not act like it’s unreasonable to call the picks unconventional, and the fact that you cannot find one person who chose Stukes as their Day 2 prediction gives at least anecdotal support to that idea

Attyla wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 8:35 am My bet is they move him inside to start, and spot him at other positions as needed.

mstrbass2000 wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 8:33 am most of his reps were at tackle, left tackle and he handled stiff competition in the sec including vs bain...maybe they try to fill a hole at guard but he eventually shines at rt ...love how versatile he is already

Opoponax50 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2026 5:50 pm I wouldn't have taken him solely for that reason. His age is a legit concern too. I sincerely hope he pans out and becomes a HOF'er for us, and we do need S badly, so I don't hate the pick, but this one feels like a reach we didn't need to make. Was he really BPA or was he just BPA at that position?

In this case, BPA should've been the way to go.

Attyla wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 8:26 am In real life, I am not doing too shabby LOL. Well, when it comes to the retirement set up.

vtraider wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2026 6:57 pm Stukes was a good pick. Maybe a little early but not by much and a position of dire need. Crawford definitely wouldn't have been my first choice. I understand the thought. But wouldn't have went for that position myself. But he was picked right around where he should have been