Mailbag: Has the ship sailed on Zamir White?

Returning Raider Nation’s questions for the week

There’s a light at the end of the tunnel as the Las Vegas Raiders only have five games left before we can put a bow on the disappointing 2024 season, including this Sunday’s matchup with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. In other words, the next month or so is just a formality as we’re onto the offseason with the mailbag column.

Q: With the O-line seemingly settled and using a bit more power, will this give Zeus a chance to play or has that ship sailed?

A: I think Zamir White will probably be brought back next season since he has one more year left on his contract, but I also think he’s proven that he can’t be a feature back. The emergence of Sincere McCormick will put White in a battle for his roster spot, especially since I would be surprised if the Raiders don’t add another running back in the NFL Draft or free agency.

While the shift to more gap runs under Scott Turner does fit Zeus’ running style more, we don’t know if Turner and the coaching staff will be back next fall. So Las Vegas’ scheme next year will depend on who the offensive coordinator is.

Either way, White’s status with the team is in jeopardy and the ship has sailed on him being the Raiders’ top running back.

Q: Do you think Tre’von Moehrig might be better playing a more ‘SS’ role full-time? It seems like his best plays this year have all been either him playing close to the line or blitzing.

A: Moehrig has definitely played well in the box this season, but part of the reason why he’s showing up more as a strong safety is because he’s been asked to play there at a higher rate after Marcus Epps’ injury.

For example, Pro Football Focus has Moehrig lining up in the box or on the line of scrimmage on 45.9 percent of his snaps in 2024 compared to 31.0 percent when Epps was healthy in 2023.

I’ve always felt that Moehrig is best when playing a versatile role as that’s how he was used at TCU. So, while it’s been good to see him play well as a strong safety, I don’t think his talent would be fully maximized by taking on that role full-time.

Q: How much do you think hiring Luke Getsy and having all these assistant coaches with decades of experience yet still making end-of-game and time management mistakes will hurt Antonio Pierce’s chances of keeping his job?

Photo by Chris Unger/Getty Images

A: What you’ve listed are the primary reasons Pierce is on the hot seat, so all of that will significantly hurt his chances. I still don’t know if AP will end up getting axed at the end of the season or not, but he hasn’t helped himself since there were more end-of-game blunders last week.

Looking at the situation from Mark Davis’ perspective, the team has regressed and the Raiders have been awful in 2024, and Pierce has already admitted he made poor hires last year by firing Getsy, Rich Scangarello and James Cregg. So, how confident can Davis be that Pierce will be able to hire a better staff this time around?

The best way for Pierce to answer that question is if the offense and offensive line continue to improve over these last five weeks so that he can point to Turner and Joe Philbin as being good choices for the interim jobs.

A: Probably the best change under Turner is the use of play-action on early downs. That’s a big reason why Aidan O’Connell had success last week as he’s a good play-action quarterback and the run fakes work better in typical run situations.

Also, Turner has done a good job using motion to create favorable matchups, especially for Brock Bowers, and to take shots down the field. The 58-yard touchdown to Tre Tucker last week is a good example.

Marcus touched on this in a little more detail via the video below if you’d like to take a look.

Q: Outside of the seemingly obvious drafting of Shedeur Sanders or Cam Ward, who could you see the Raiders targeting in the first round and addressing a quarterback later?

A: Especially if they’re picking within the top three, I have a hard time seeing the Raiders passing on a quarterback. But if they didn’t hypothetically, I think Travis Hunter, Tetairoa McMillan, Will Johnson or Mason Graham would all be options.

The first three would all fill needs while Graham would be more of a luxury/best player available pick. Maxx Crosby, Christian Wilkins, Malcolm Koonce (if re-signed) and Graham would be a nasty defensive line. They’d just need to run a ton of odd fronts and find a quality nose tackle to replace John Jenkins.

At quarterback, I’m intrigued by Drew Allar in the second round or later. I think Allar has talent and Penn State’s wide receiving corps is holding him back. I also wouldn’t mind Jalen Milroe on Day 2, but Milroe would have to be paired with a creative offensive coordinator/play-caller like Todd Monken to maximize his skill set.

A: Some fans might not like this, but I think winning does more harm than losing for the Raiders over this last stretch of the season.

This year’s quarterback class isn’t deep like last year’s, so falling to even the fifth pick could take them out of the sweepstakes. Sure, the front office could trade up, but I’d rather be in a spot where the Raiders don’t have to give up assets to get their guy.

In other words, #TeamTank!

A: Right now, I think the Raiders have to get a quarterback and Ward would be my pick. A lot can change between now and April, though.

A: Thank you for the congrats!

The box score targets are any pass where the player/receiver is the closest one to the ball as it’s assumed that is the receiver who the quarterback was trying to throw to. So, the notion that targets that don’t result in catches are negative for the receiver is missing a lot of context.

For, example a drop would go down a target but not a catch and be a negative play for the pass-catcher, but a quarterback throwing an inaccurate pass looks the same in the box score and that’s not the pass-catcher’s fault. You could apply similar logic with a defensive back batting a pass and that could just be the defender making a great play, meaning neither the receiver nor quarterback are at fault.

Also, if the ball is thrown away, that will go down as a target in the box score for the closest receiver but he isn’t at fault for not catching a pass that isn’t thrown to be caught. That’s part of the reason why I like using PFF for targets because they factor out throwaways whereas the box score doesn’t.

Specifically in the Miami game, PFF had Brock Bowers with 16 targets and 13 catches where one of the incompletions was a PBU and another was a drop. I can’t say I remember what happened on the third one, but of the two incompletions we know, PFF is putting the blame on Bowers for one and giving the defender credit for the other, essentially.

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 [email protected] or look for our weekly call for questions on the site. The latter will continue to publish on Thursdays.