While the Las Vegas Raiders own the No. 1 overall pick, the 2026 NFL draft really starts for the Raiders in the second round with the 36th selection, since former Indiana quarterback Fernando Mendoza is already penciled in for the top spot. That could mean the Silver and Black use their first Day 2 pick to trade back into round one, but regardless, the first major decision that Johy Spytek will have to make is centered around No. 36.
Nose tackle is expected to be one of Spytek’s primary focuses during
the draft, and this year’s class is headlined by Ohio State’s Kayden McDonald, Texas Tech’s Lee Hunter and Georgia’s Christen Miller. So, between those three, who is the Raiders’ best option to fill the need in the middle of the defensive line?
Run Defense
All three of these guys can defend the run; there’s no doubt about that. In fact, Pro Football Focus graded McDonald (91.2) and Miller (90.2) as the two best run defenders among FBS defensive tackles last season, and Hunter (84.5) wasn’t too far behind at No. 12. So, it’s a matter of who is the best of the best and fits what the Raiders are looking for at the position.
Part of what makes McDonald intriguing is that he was so productive last season without having great technique. His combination of strength and athleticism helped him overcome that and get out of bad positions. While the former Buckeye needs to clean that up in the NFL, it kind of helps boost his draft stock. The thought being that if he can be coached up, McDonald could become an even better run defender than he showed this past season.
Meanwhile, the argument could be made that Hunter is the most “pro-ready” nose tackle in the class, especially in a 3-4 base defense. He played in a similar system at Texas Tech, is effective when two-gapping, can eat double teams/combo blocks and destroy centers when left one-on-one. But the other end of that argument is that the former Red Raider doesn’t have as much room for growth against the run.
Again, there’s no doubt about Miller’s effectiveness as a run defender. However, his fit as a true 0-technique is murkier. The Georgia product was used as more of a shade nose tackle and is better at penetrating than holding point against double teams and combo blocks.
Ranking:
- McDonald
- Hunter
- Miller
It’s a close race between McDonald and Hunter; the former just has more potential and was more productive in 2025.
Pass Rush
On the opposite end of the spectrum, neither of these prospects was a very productive pass-rusher last fall. Granted, that’s not what most defenses are concerned about when it comes to nose tackles, but it is a bonus if a gap-filler can also contribute on third downs by getting pressure on their own or setting up teammates via line games and stunts.
McDonald isn’t going to provide pressure up the middle immediately in the NFL. But he does have the athleticism and power to grow in this area down the line. It’s just a matter of him keeping his pads down more consistently and being more effective with his hands.
As for Hunter, his 26 pressures last season, per PFF, aren’t a bad number for a nose tackle by any means. He has some ability to push the pocket occassionally. However, that production came on 328 pass-rush snaps, and the NFL Combine highlighted the Texas Tech product’s lack of athleticism with a 4.12 RAS. The latter limits his ceiling as a third-down contributor.
Miller is a good candidate to do the dirty work as a pass-rusher. He may never come close to putting up double-digit sacks, but he can be effective in line games to help open up pass-rush lanes for other defensive linemen. Also, the former Bulldog’s tape shows some quickness and athleticism to work with.
Ranking:
- Miller
- McDonald
- Hunter
Again, this shouldn’t be the primary concern when it comes to nose tackles, and don’t expect either of these three to contribute much on third downs. But Miller is the best bet if the Raiders are hoping to get some pass-rush production from the nose tackle spot.
Ceiling
Two big factors when considering a prospect’s ceiling are athleticism and age. That’s going to push Hunter to the bottom of the list, since he’s the oldest (turns 24 in July) and least athletic. To be fair, he’s also the only one of these three to complete any athletic testing. However, Hunter’s numbers were well below average, while McDonald and Miller showed some athletic ability on tape, or at least more than the Texas Tech product did.
Athletically, it’s a close call between the other two, and it’s hard to definitively say who the better athlete is without some numbers to go off of. So, the difference comes down to age, where McDonald has a slight advantage, turning 21 in March, while Miller will be 22 in August.
Ranking:
- McDonald
- Miller
- Hunter
Floor
On the opposite end of the spectrum, this is where Hunter’s age and experience help. Plus, he’s proven that he can be a very effective nose tackle in a 3-4 defense. Teams know what they’re getting in the former Red Raider, and that’s a starting-caliber gap filler in the middle of the defensive line.
McDonald has a decent track record to two-gap and be a space-eating 0-technique, too. But the questions about his technique lower the former Buckeye’s floor. Meanwhile, as mentioned above, Miller wasn’t used in the same role that the Raiders will likely have him in if they draft him. So, for Las Vegas specifically, the former Bulldog is a bit more of a gamble.
Ranking:
- Hunter
- McDonald
- Miller
Overall
Ranking:
- McDonald
- Hunter
- Miller
McDonald ranked first or second in all five categories above, which is why I ranked him as the Raiders’ top option at nose tackle. He can contribute right away as a run defender, is a scheme fit and has the most potential to develop into the best overall player of the bunch.
It’s really a close call for the second spot, to me. I can see the argument that Miller would be the better pick since he has more potential, but Hunter is such a natural fit in a 3-4 scheme and can at least give the Raiders a good run-stuffer for the next four years.
To be honest, though, the Silver and Black can’t go wrong with any of these three.
