Oakland moved down five spots in the 2007 second round,…
Oakland moved down five spots in the 2007 second round, sending No. 33 to Arizona and receiving Nos. 38 and 105. The Raiders used No. 38 on tight end Zach Miller, who became a productive four-year starter and a Pro Bowler in Oakland. Arizona selected defensive tackle Alan Branch at No. 33, but his Cardinals tenure lasted only three seasons, giving Oakland the better long-term return.
Arizona Cardinals Received
- pick 2007 2nd round pick (33rd overall, Alan Branch)
Las Vegas Raiders Received
- pick 2007 2nd round pick (38th overall, Zach Miller)
- pick 2007 4th round pick (105th overall subsequently traded, A.J. Davis )
Trade Analysis
Arizona targeted Alan Branch, a massive Michigan defensive tackle once discussed as a possible top-10 talent, and paid Oakland a fourth-round selection to climb five spots in the second round. The Cardinals were betting that Branch's size and upside would translate into an interior anchor. Instead, he struggled to establish a major role in Arizona. He appeared in 47 games over three Cardinals seasons but started only three, and his most productive NFL stretch came later with Seattle rather than with the team that traded up for him.
Oakland's side worked considerably better. The Raiders moved only from No. 33 to No. 38 and selected Zach Miller, who quickly became one of the steadier pieces on an unstable offense. Miller caught 226 passes for 2,712 yards and 12 touchdowns in four Oakland seasons, led the team in receiving twice, and earned a Pro Bowl selection after the 2010 season. For a franchise cycling through quarterbacks and offensive systems, his consistency mattered. The fourth-rounder Oakland collected, No. 105, was later moved in another draft-day transaction, adding further flexibility even though Miller alone supplied enough value to justify the move down.
The contrast is especially clear because Arizona paid a premium to secure its preferred player. Trading up can be worthwhile when the target becomes a difference-maker, but Branch never gave the Cardinals that payoff. Oakland accepted the uncertainty of moving down, still landed a player with a sustained starting role, and gained an additional selection.
Arizona did not give away a franchise-altering haul, so a failing grade would be too harsh. Branch contributed rotational snaps and later proved he belonged in the league. Still, the Cardinals spent extra capital for a player whose best years came elsewhere. Oakland's A reflects Miller's productive tenure and the added draft value; Arizona's C reflects a defensible gamble that produced only modest results.