Oakland Raiders: MMQB offseason grade missing some key components

OAKLAND, CA - DECEMBER 17: Derek Carr #4 of the Oakland Raiders signals to his team during their NFL game against the Dallas Cowboys at Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum on December 17, 2017 in Oakland, California. (Photo by Lachlan Cunningham/Getty Images)
OAKLAND, CA - DECEMBER 17: Derek Carr #4 of the Oakland Raiders signals to his team during their NFL game against the Dallas Cowboys at Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum on December 17, 2017 in Oakland, California. (Photo by Lachlan Cunningham/Getty Images) /
facebooktwitterreddit

The Oakland Raiders offseason of change has resulted in a low grade from Sports Illustrated — a grade that fails to take some key factors into account.

Oakland Raiders head coach Jon Gruden has made quite the splash upon his return to an NFL sideline. He’s made a flurry of moves in reshaping this roster. Some of them have been solid adds, while some of them have been – questionable.

Gruden’s maneuvering through the offseason has been analyzed and criticized – and occasionally praised – by TV talking head, sports radio show hosts, as well as anybody and everybody with a keyboard and a Twitter account.

Gruden’s latest performance review comes from the MMQB’s Robert Klemko, who gave Oakland less than stellar marks for their efforts, grading them the worst in the AFC West. By far.

Harsh. Way harsh, man.

To be fair though, Oakland’s season is hinging on a lot of “ifs,” “maybes,” and guys needing to play to their true potential.

So, it’s not completely outrageous or unreasonable for Klemko to remain a bit skeptical of the Raiders this season.

However, that’s not to say that Klemko’s “report card” for the Raiders is entirely accurate, or even fair. In fact, there are some very key factors that he’s overlooking – factors you’d think are kind of important when making an overall evaluation.

First, let’s take a look at his list of “crucial veteran losses.”

"Crucial veteran losses: CB David Amerson, DE Denico Autry, CB T.J. Carrie, WR Michael Crabtree, K Sebastian Janikowski, P Marquette King"

It’s hard to say that any of these losses were all that crucial, to be honest. Not to mention the fact that Klemko left Sean Smith off the list, but that’s okay.

In the case of Smith, Amerson, and Marquette King, it’s actually addition by subtraction – Smith and Amerson especially. Oakland’s secondary will be far better off without the pair of them, whose far less than stellar performances the last couple of seasons, really helped cripple this defense.

The loss of Autry, Carrie, and Crabtree, weren’t exactly popular at the time. But, you would have to be a fool to not think each of those position groups aren’t better off today than they were last year.

More from Las Vegas Raiders News

Sliding Bruce Irvin to primarily be an edge rusher who can complement Khalil Mack was an excellent move. The additions of Arden Key, Maurice Hurst and P.J. Hall will loom large, and will more than make up for Autry’s absence.

Adding Jordy Nelson, a very precise route who doesn’t drop passes, will give quarterback Derek Carr a target he can depend on. Which should make for a nice change of pace for him.

Crabtree made some clutch catches for this squad, but he also left a lot of balls on the turf. Ditto that for Seth Roberts, and even Amari Cooper.

The addition of Martavis Bryant gives the Raiders a legitimate home run threat and a presence that will take some of the heat and pressure off of Cooper and Nelson. Yes, there is still the specter of a suspension hanging over his head, but until (and if) that’s actually handed down, he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Though he poses it as a question, the underlying subtext of Klemko’s statement is clear. He doesn’t seem to believe that quarterback Derek Carr will be able to utilize Bryant’s talents to their full extent.

"“There’s no telling what kind of player Martavis Bryant will be without the benefit of a two-time Super Bowl-winning quarterback Ben Roethlisberger throwing to him and perhaps the best receiver on earth, Antonio Brown, taking heat off him.”"

While it’s true that having Brown running routes certainly took some of the heat and pressure off Bryant, to basically dismiss the effect Cooper will have on Oakland’s passing game – as well as on opposing defenses and Bryant’s opportunities because of it – is not just blind, it’s ignorant.

As for not knowing what to expect from Nelson, that’s not entirely untrue. But, let’s ask a 39-year old Jerry Rice how he fared in Gruden’s offensive system – and although Rich Gannon is a Raiders legend, Carr is a far better quarterback than him in most every way possible.

The loss of Carrie isn’t the earth shattering deal some seem to make it out to be. There has been so much gnashing of teeth and rending of garments about Carrie walking this offseason, with most people upset that Gruden allowed “Oakland’s best cornerback” to leave.

Okay, let’s all just take a breath. It’s true that Carrie was Oakland’s best cornerback last season. Sure. But, when your only other options are Sean Smith and David Amerson, what is that really saying? It was a profoundly low bar to clear and it wasn’t like Carrie was Deion Sanders in his prime back there.

Carrie was – decent. Serviceable. He seems like a genuinely good guy. But the Raiders will absolutely recover from his loss. Let’s just leave it at that.

Here’s where Klemko’s arguments seem to lose steam as well as credibility in equal proportions.

"“Newcomer Leon Hall could start opposite Gareon Conley, who missed most of his rookie season with a shin injury. Given all the uncertainty in the defensive backfield, Jon Gruden has to hope for a big jump from safety Karl Joseph.”"

If only Gruden had signed somebody other than a 34-year old Leon Hall to start across from Conley. If only.

Oh wait, he did!

More from Golden Gate Sports

Klemko seems to have forgotten entirely about Rashaan Melvin, who isn’t mentioned once anywhere in his rambling screed. Nor is Daryl Worley or Shareece Wright. Sure, they’re not headliner, A-List talent, but they at least deserved a mention.

It’s actually Melvin, not Hall, who will likely be starting opposite Conley. If Conley plays like he has throughout the early portion of the offseason work, and Melvin shows his pretty stellar year with the Colts last season wasn’t a fluke, the Raiders will be fielding two very, very solid corners.

There is some question at the safety spot, sure. But between Marcus Gilchrist, Karl Joseph, Obi Melifonwu, Reggie Nelson, and Shalom Luani – along with defensive coordinator Paul Guenther’s rough explanation of how they’ll be deployed – the uncertainty Klemko speaks of may be a little bit overstated.

Likewise, Klemko’s concern about Oakland’s offensive line is a bit overstated as well. Gabe Jackson and Kelechi Osemele both dealt with nagging injuries that hampered them for much of last season. Add to that, the incompetence of Todd Downing’s, ill-thought out scheme and his taking Oakland’s line away from what they do well, and it’s no surprise that the unit struggled.

Related Story: Move On Marquette, Raiders Just Aren't That Into You

But, with Gruden and line coach Tom Cable getting the line back to doing what they do best – which is blowing people off the ball – don’t be surprised to see Oakland’s offensive line back among the best in the league.

Klemko goes on to express his concern about the team picking up Kansas City castoff inside linebacker Derrick Johnson.

"“If the Raiders are expecting much from 35-year-old linebacker Derrick Johnson, they may be disappointed in his twin surgically-repaired achilles tendons.”"

Let’s ignore the fact that an older NaVorro Bowman, who had a significant injury history of his own, still starred for this Raiders defense last season. Let’s instead, focus on the fact that Johnson has missed just four games over the last three seasons.

Let’s also focus on the fact that over that span, he’s been a consistent force in the middle of the Kansas City defense, averaging 92 tackles a season, and has been as solid against the pass as against the run. Sure, he’s in the twilight of his career, but he’s proven to still have some gas left in the tank.

And lastly, Klemko highlights his concern about the development of Carr – or more precisely, the regression in 2017.

"“Who is Derek Carr? Is he the budding star who had a 60-19 TD/INT ratio in his second and third seasons, or is he the game manager whose statline more closely resembled Blake Bortles than Drew Brees in 2017.”"

First of all – ouch. Second of all – it sucks that Klemko isn’t wrong about the statistical comparison between Bortles and Carr last season.

However – what Klemko fails to note is how much damage post-turtle Todd Downing did to Carr and the offense. Downing’s offense lacked any sort of consistency or identity. It seemed clear that he wanted to be the anti-Bill Musgrave. And he was – in the worst way possible.

Musgrave may have been vanilla and unexciting at times, but his offensive philosophies and schemes were very clear. And he made sure his offensive units ran those schemes very well.

Unlike Downing, whose offensive game planning and play calling was, to put it very kindly and very generously, mediocre. At best. But, it fell on former HC Jack Del Rio for not recognizing and correcting the problem, and he paid the price for it.

Now, with an actual innovative offensive mind in Gruden calling the shots, and some actual competence in the coaching staff, there is every reason to believe that Carr will return to the form that led him to be an MVP candidate in 2016.

It’s all of these insights and little nuggets of thought though, that led Klemko to give Gruden and the Raiders a D-plus for their offseason work, as well as pencil them in for a second consecutive 6-10 campaign.

While there certainly are plenty of question marks and some things absolutely need to break right, Klemko’s problem is that he overvalues some things, undervalues others, and completely ignores still others – see Rashaan Melvin.

Next: 5 FA Running Backs Who Could Help

Gruden’s maneuvering this offseason has definitely raised some eyebrows, but Klemko’s grade seems pretty far off the mark. 6-10 for a second consecutive year? Doesn’t seem likely.

But it’s easy to see why somebody might think so, when leaving some very key components out of one’s argument.