Draft reaction - what's eating Nancy Gay?

Just when John and I had agreed that the Raiders had a productive draft, along came Nancy Gay's SF Chronicle reaction to The Day We Moved On. I had come to enjoy Nancy's point of view - for example, there was no knee-jerk reaction to Kiffin's age, calling him "a winner" at the owners' meetings.

But in today's article Gay all but called Kiffin a loser, criticizing McCown to Miller, Williams to...Gabriel? Worse yet, she suggested the Raiders had a lot to learn from the 49ers. Hmm, John and I said.

One must only compare the two articles linked above to see that Gay's reaction is all about misplaced faith in Randy Moss. Ironic, isn't it?

Nancy has been swearing all along that the Raiders aren't seriously trying to move Moss. So she must be upset with her source given that they parted with Moss for a mere 4th rounder. You can see late in the article that she accuses the Packers of floating "bogus Moss rumors" for a month. The fact seems to be that the Packers couldn't trade for him b/c Moss refused to restructure his contract for anyone but the Pats. How can it be a "bogus rumor" if there are quotes from Bob Harlan himself saying they held a number of meetings on the subject?

She's the first person I've heard criticize the TE pick. Mayock was saying he can do it all - much better blocker than the first TE that was picked, albeit better in space than in-line. And the info she quotes on McCown is a year old and inconsistent with what I've heard elsewhere. Other outlets say McCown asked for a trade to the Raiders b/c he wants a chance to start before becoming a free agent. What he said in 2006 shouldn't be relevant - I can understand wanting to be a backup playing for Martz instead of a backup playing for Tom Walsh! Plus, this trade has been rumored for weeks, with the Lions unwilling to part with him before they secured something in the draft. Now all of a sudden they are going to cut him? Even if they did, why get into a situation where you might have to sign him to a longer deal when you have the chance to get him as a fill-in with one year left on his contract?

The real question is who does Nancy think they should have picked at #33? They traded that pick and got Zach Miller, McCown, and Mike Williams. Not bad at all, if you ask me.

I'm optimistic, although with my most critical eye I'm not thrilled about drafting a track star and a "project" OT. Despite Gay's comments the WR makes sense b/c he is apparently a good kick returner, and while Carr is quite skilled with punt returns, our kick returns have been pretty weak.

Overall grade for the Gay article: D. She essentially told us she didn't have what it took, be it patience, skills or the stomach, to take the article to the next level of analysis and avoid venting her frustration that she was proven wrong on the Moss situation.