Miami traded the 123rd pick to Oakland for three later…
Miami traded the 123rd pick to Oakland for three later selections: Nos. 157, 166 and 203. The Raiders used No. 123 on Chad Levitt, who played only 10 NFL games. Miami drafted Nicholas Lopez, John Fiala and Hudhaifa Ismaeli; Fiala eventually played 75 NFL games, but none of the three became a meaningful Dolphins contributor. The trade created opportunity without producing much value for either club.
Las Vegas Raiders Received
- pick 1997 4th round pick (123rd overall, Chad Levitt )
Miami Dolphins Received
- pick 1997 5th round pick (157th overall, Nicholas Lopez ), 1997 6th round pick (166th overall, John Fiala ) and 1997 7th round pick (203rd overall, Hudhaifa Ismaeli)
Trade Analysis
Why Miami Traded Down
Miami chose quantity over one fourth-round selection, turning No. 123 into picks 157, 166 and 203. The strategy was reasonable because late-round draft outcomes are uncertain and extra selections create more chances to find role players. The problem was execution rather than concept.
What Oakland Got at No. 123
The Raiders selected Cornell running back Chad Levitt. His NFL career was extremely limited: 10 games, two rushing attempts for three yards and two receptions for 24 yards. Oakland therefore received almost no sustained on-field value from the higher pick it acquired. Trading three selections for that result was a poor outcome.
How Miami's Three Picks Fared
Miami selected Nicholas Lopez, John Fiala and Hudhaifa Ismaeli. Lopez and Ismaeli did not become NFL contributors. Fiala eventually played 75 games and became a special-teams captain in Pittsburgh, but he did not play for the Dolphins. Miami deserves some credit for creating three chances instead of one, yet the franchise did not realize meaningful football production from those chances. The extra selections improved the odds in theory, but none became a durable Dolphins contributor.
Final Verdict
Even Trade. Both teams receive D+ grades. Oakland paid three late picks for a player who barely contributed, while Miami converted one fourth-rounder into three selections without producing a lasting Dolphins piece. The transaction is a draw because neither side transformed its draft capital into meaningful value. Miami had more opportunities to find a contributor, while Oakland consolidated its capital into the higher selection, but neither approach generated lasting team-level production.