We’re less than one week away from the biggest event of the offseason: the 2026 NFL draft. There shouldn’t be any drama with the No. 1 overall pick (you never know with this team), as Fernando Mendoza is widely expected to be the next player added to the Las Vegas Raiders’ roster. So, the draft really gets interesting for the Raiders in the second round with pick 36, the primary focus of this week’s mailbag.
Q: Suddenly, I am seeing much press about the Raiders taking Kayden McDonald at #36. While
I am excited about the prospect of that, do you think that is realistic? I mean that in two ways: that he falls that far and that the Raiders would select him there over other needs.
A: I think I’m going to disappoint some people because I kind of have a cop-out answer: I think it’s unlikely, but it is realistic that McDonald is available at No. 36.
It’s unlikely because this year’s defensive tackle class as a whole leaves something to be desired, unless you’re looking for a nose tackle, and McDonald has enough versatility to fit into multiple schemes and lineup at several alignments. Also, I think he’s just as good, if not better, a prospect than his former teammate, Tyleik Williams, who went 28th overall to the Lions last year. Also, there are a handful of teams that are picking at the end of round one who could use a run-stuffing defensive tackle—the Bears, Bills, Texans and Patriots.
However, it is realistic because the Ohio State product doesn’t offer much as a pass-rusher right now. Being a two-down player at a non-premium position clouds his draft projection. Teams might be looking for someone who never has to leave the field with their first-round pick. I think he can develop as a pass-rusher down the line, but that doesn’t matter; it’s about what the clubs in the mid- to late-20s and early-30s think.
As far as whether Las Vegas will select McDonald if he’s available, I imagine he’s one of their top choices heading into Friday. Personally, there are very few other prospects I’d take over him at 36 if I’m John Spytek, and it would likely be someone who was expected to come off the board on Thursday but slid.
I could see Spytek going with a wide receiver or cornerback over McDonald/the more immediate need, since the Raiders have met with so many wideouts and defensive backs throughout the pre-draft process. But I do think there can be a perfect situation where the former Buckeye is the best player available and fills a need in Las Vegas at the top of round two.
Q: What position of need are you planning for the second and third rounds of the draft?
A: If we’re looking just at needs, I think it makes the most sense to target a nose tackle in the second and free safety in the third with how the draft board currently looks. If one of the top three safeties—Caleb Downs, Dillon Thieneman or Emmanuel McNeil-Warren—slides out of the first round, then I’d flip the priority list. But I get the feeling those three are going to be top 20 picks.
Meanwhile, I think McDonald (if he falls), Lee Hunter or Christen Miller are good value at 36. If Miller is the target, I’d like to see the Raiders trade back and get him, but that seems to be wishful thinking because he’s been trending up recently.
At safety, there’s a weird gap between the three prospects mentioned above and AJ Haulcy, the consensus fourth safety in the class. Haulcy’s value is in the 50s, and it wouldn’t be surprising to see him available at the top of the third round. Even if he isn’t, if you’ve been following me over the past several weeks, you know how much I love Bud Clark and would be more than happy taking him at 67.
I know a lot of people are probably thinking wide receiver at either of these two spots. I get that and wouldn’t be surprised if Las Vegas targets the position at 36, especially if KC Concepcion, Omar Cooper Jr. or Denzel Boston fall. But I’m in the camp that wants to see what the Raiders have in the current position group and then target a wideout next offseason. I still have my eye on getting Jeremiah Smith in next year’s draft.
A: This has been a popular question recently, as I think I’ve gotten it every week for at least a month! My stance remains the same: Dillon Thieneman is the only guy I feel strongly about trading up for. I know I mentioned Jermod McCoy in the past, but I get the feeling he’s going top 20 after running a sub-4.4 at Tennessee’s pro day. And I like McDonald, but I’m not trading up for a nose tackle in a deep draft class at the position.
I don’t think I’ve dove into how much it would cost to trade back into the mid- to late-20s, though. The Giants gave up their second-rounder (No. 34 overall) and two third-rounders, No. 99 last year and the other is in this year’s draft, to the Texans to move up to 25 and take Jaxson Dart. That’s a net loss of two third-round picks to jump 10 spots up on the draft order. Granted, New York was likely paying the quarterback premium, which Las Vegas won’t have to do next weekend.
If we’re looking at a draft pick value chart (h/t DraftTek), pick 25 is worth 720 points while pick 36 is worth 540 points. So, Las Vegas would have to make up 180 points. That can be done by giving up all three fourths (No. 102, 117 and 134 combine for 191 points) or sending 67 (255 points) and getting something back in return, like a fourth-rounder.
A: On that note, I’d rather see the Raiders stand pat than trade up, assuming Thieneman doesn’t slide. I’d like them to add as many young players to the roster as possible in a draft class that has a lot of good, not great prospects in it. I think trading back to get more picks is the better and more likely scenario than getting back into the first.
A: Miller is trending toward being a first-round pick, and the Raiders seem comfortable letting DJ Glaze and Charles Grant battle it out at right tackle. So I don’t get the feeling the Clemson product will be on the table at 36.
As far as trading back goes, I definitely wouldn’t mind seeing the Raiders get more picks. A scenario where they can move back, collect assets and still land Hunter or Miller would be a perfect world, in my opinion.
A: Kolton Miller started all 17 games in 2024, so I’m definitely not as concerned about Miller’s health as you are. That being said, I can agree that finding a contingency plan for the 30-year-old (turns 31 in October) should be on Spytek’s radar. But that’s lower on the priority list for this offseason and more of a next year problem, in my opinion.
As previously mentioned, I don’t think the Raiders feel that pressed to draft a tackle this year. Based on their comments this offseason, the new regime seems to be chalking up a lot of last year’s struggles to the old coaching staff, i.e., Brennan Carroll.
But if Las Vegas does target a developmental tackle in the fourth round, the guy I have my eye on is Texas A&M’s Dametrious Crownoever. He has good size to work with and was one of the few offensive tackles who really stood out at the Senior Bowl. Crownover was primarily a right tackle in college, while Grant was on the blind side at William & Mary. So, in theory, that would give Las Vegas a couple of bookends on the offensive line for years to come.
A: My bias says defense since I primarily focus on that side of the ball with my “Tape Don’t Lie” breakdowns and scouting reports at Bleacher Report. Also, I think there are a lot of good defensive prospects in this year’s class, at least more so than offensive.
From a team-building perspective, I’ve always felt like having an elite defense and a really good quarterback while sacrificing some talent at the other offensive positions is the way to go about creating a Super Bowl contender. The offense controls where the ball goes, and a good quarterback can make up for some talent deficiencies by attacking a defense’s weakness, so the latter is more of a team game.
For example, if a defense has 10 good players but one bad corner, guess where the ball is going. The offense can pick on that corner, whereas the offense can limit how many touches a subpar skill player gets or choose not to run behind a bad run-blocking offensive linemen, etc. Also, a quarterback who makes quick decisions and gets the ball out can hide or mask the offensive line’s pass-blocking deficiencies.
Q: Any rumors of the Raiders trading Michael Mayer (contract year) or Jackson Powers-Johnson or anyone else for draft choices?
A: I get questions like these a lot and completely understand where they’re coming from. But I want to make sure I’m transparent with y’all; I don’t have any sources, inside information or anything like that with the Raiders or any team for that matter. I get a few tidbits here and there, but never report them because I’m not that interested in being an insider. I like doing the analysis stuff much more than the breaking news game.
So, I’ll slightly tweak your question and share a few thoughts on who I can see being on the trade block during the draft.
Mayer is an interesting one because, as you said, he is entering a contract year. But Klint Kubiak likes to use a lot of 12 personnel, and I don’t think Mayer has much trade value right now. I’d imagine Kubiak has the former Notre Dame tight end in his plans for next season, and if the Raiders do want to move on from him, it’d be better to wait until the season and hope that he starts hot to be dealt at the trade deadline.
I have a hard time seeing another team giving up anything more than a seventh-round pick for a guy who has had 788 receiving yards in three seasons and will be a free agent in the offseason. But that could change if Mayer comes firing out of the gates in September and October, and a contender has an injury or just needs a tight end.
I’d be pretty surprised if Powers-Johnson gets traded. Spytek seems to like him a lot at guard, and I’d be willing to bet that the coaching staff thinks JPJ will reach his potential now that he only has to worry about playing one position with Tyler Linderbaum coming into town.
A few players who I could see being on the trade block during the draft: Jack Bech, Dont’e Thornton Jr., Tre Tucker, Tyree Wilson and Adam Butler.
I’d like to keep Bech, but with how many wide receivers Las Vegas met with during the pre-draft process, it certainly feels like Kubiak isn’t thrilled with what he has in that position group. Plus, Thornton isn’t a good scheme fit, while Tucker is entering a contract year and is a very similar player to free-agent signing Jalen Nailor.
Wilson is also on an expiring contract and likely won’t have his fifth-year option picked up next month. So, his days in Vegas could be numbered anyway; it’s just a matter of how big or small that number is. Meanwhile, Butler is on the wrong side of 30, and his contract has an out in it next offseason. Especially for a rebuilding team, that’s a tough combination to justify keeping him around if a trade offer is on the table.
Q: What team areas do the Raiders need to get younger and cheaper through the draft?
A: To be honest, I think they’ve done a pretty good job at getting younger this offseason, where the majority of the starters and key contributors are going to be in their 20s next season.
Granted, the edge group is older with Maxx Crosby (28, turns 29 in August), Kwity Paye (27, turns 28 in November) and Koonce (27, turns 28 in June). So, there is some room for youth in that position group. Nose tackle, too, since Butler is currently listed as the starter. But that’s more of a hole on the roster/depth chart than an age issue.
The defensive backs are getting up there as well. Taron Johnson will be 30 in July, Jeremy Chinn just turned 28, Isaiah Pola-Mao turns 27 in June and Eric Stokes’ 27th birthday was last month. Even Darien Porter is older for a second-year pro, turning 25 in January. So, that’s another spot where some youth could be added.
But overall, this is already a pretty young roster with only a few dinosaurs. Well, Kirk Cousins is on it, but I don’t think you need me to tell you that a younger quarterback will be in town soon…
That’ll do it for this week’s mailbag. Thank you all for submitting questions and, as your weekly reminder, if you’d like to have your questions answered in a future column, tweet them at me, @MHolder95, email them to SBPQuestions1@gmail.com or look for our weekly call for questions on the site. The latter will continue to publish on Thursdays.
