Trade the #9, please.

[Integrity28]

#9 is worth 1350 on the value chart. (The #13 is worth 1150, I'd be down with trading that one instead.)

 

Minnesota and St. Louis have multiple first rounders. 

 

Minny with #23 (760) and #25 (720).

 

St. Louis with #16 (1000) and #22 (780).

 

 

I'd be happy with any combination of a 1st rounder, and the appropriate 2nd and 3rd round pick compensation from either team to load up on more picks. It's an imperative that we have a big draft, with as meek as our roster looks.

 

----

 

Another scenario would be San Fran, who has the #31 (600), and in the second round #34 (560), #61 (292), and in the third #74 (220).

 

I could see us trading #9 for #31, 34 and 74, a 1st, 2nd and 3rd round pick. 

 

That would make the Revis trade look like this:

 

Tampa gets Revis.

 

Jets move back 4 picks from #9 to #13, and add #31, #34, #74 this year, and the conditional 4th next year. That has some serious Hershel Walker gravitas to it.

 

If we traded SF the #13 instead, as has been talked about in another thread, then we get #31 and #34. We might have to kick them a 7th rounder to make up for the slight difference, but I doubt it.

 

----

 

Use this tool to quickly see which teams have what picks, and their value.

 

http://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp?RequestTeam=min

[bitonti]

more is not necessarily better. if the jets are gonna find good players 9 and 13 are two good places to start looking. trading down for late 1/early 2 is fun on paper but they need top talent. Stick and pick. 

[JustInFudge]

Everything I've been hearing and reading lately is that his is going to be an interesting draft with a lot of movement.  Hand full of teams looking to move up, hand full looking to move down.  Definitely think that Idzik should be looking to acquire more picks.  Hopefully, that's the case and they find a suitor.  

[khesanh]

more is not necessarily better. if the jets are gonna find good players 9 and 13 are two good places to start looking. trading down for late 1/early 2 is fun on paper but they need top talent. Stick and pick. 

Agreed. We need to get better and I would rather get 2 or 3 impact players than a bunch of roster filler. Miami is better, New England is better, and believe it or not, Buffalo will compete.  We have to take the best available players

[slats]

It's a move you make while you're on the clock. I'd imagine they have a couple names they think are well worth the #9, and if they drop, the Jets will pounce. If not, then I expect they'll do everything they can to move down. The Jets have way too many holes to not be looking to acquire more picks. 

 

Have to believe the Jets would like to position themselves to get an extra 1st or 2nd next year, too. Especially if they're eyeing the 2014 QBs. 

[JADEDGREEN]

I agree with the thread starting monkey!

[19andOhWait]

+1 to this! 

 

strength of this draft is rounds 2-3, I really hope we can move down from either 9 or 13 

[Integrity28]

more is not necessarily better. if the jets are gonna find good players 9 and 13 are two good places to start looking. trading down for late 1/early 2 is fun on paper but they need top talent. Stick and pick. 

 

I don't need this pointed out. It's a given.

 

However, because we have exorbitant team needs at positions that don't typically get drafted in the top of the 1st round, I feel that the trade down is relevant for us, and still enables us to accomplish the goal of drafting impact players.

 

We move back and we can essentially draft an OLB at #13, which is where an OLB should be drafted. High. But then we can address OG and TE, or WR with the late 1st rounders.

 

Let's  play it out, assuming we trade the #13 to SF.

 

#9 - Cooper

#31 (from SF) - DJ Hayden or Justin Hunter

#34 (from SF) - Zach Ertz 

#39 - Margus Hunt 

 

I don't have deep knowledge of scouting and what-not, but I'd be happier with a draft sorta like this ^^^ in the first 2 rounds.

 

I think by forfeiting a pick that might be spent on maybe Mingo, we allow gain the picks to take Hayden and Ertz, or other players that have starting potential and should matriculate successfully, and still have the flexibility to take a guy like Hunt.

 

I dunno, I'm just a fan, but it seems logical to me that because we have needs at positions that don't traditionally get drafted early, we can trade a high-pick and still get equal caliber prospects at positions that just get drafted later. My examples above may not be the best at illustrating this, but I'd stand by my logic.

[Gastineau Lives]

more is not necessarily better. if the jets are gonna find good players 9 and 13 are two good places to start looking. trading down for late 1/early 2 is fun on paper but they need top talent. Stick and pick. 

I absolutely agree. I'd love Jones and Austin. An impact player for each side of the ball.

[Integrity28]

Agreed. We need to get better and I would rather get 2 or 3 impact players than a bunch of roster filler. Miami is better, New England is better, and believe it or not, Buffalo will compete.  We have to take the best available players

 

 

LOL, so moving from the 13th overall pick to the 31st and 34th = forfeiting an impact player for filler? LMFAO

 

Zach Ertz could make an IMMEDIATE impact on this team, but you don't draft him at #13. You do at #34 though. Some positions grade out just as well, if not better, than the top 15 guys, but because of the position they play, or the quality available at that position in this year's draft, they can be drafted later in the draft. 

 

I dunno... I think my logic is on point. Certainly not an advocation of "roster filler". Pfft... 

[Integrity28]

I absolutely agree. I'd love Jones and Austin. An impact player for each side of the ball.

 

 

I'd love Jones, Ertz and Hunter more. We need offensive playmakers, I agree, but we need more than just one.

[Gastineau Lives]

I'd love Jones, Ertz and Hunter more. We need offensive playmakers, I agree, but we need more than just one.

Please don't try to get between me and my man crush on Tavon Austin.

 

Can I interest you in a Jones, Austin, Escobar/Kelce?

 

I think I'm still not over desperately wanting Percy Harvin and not getting him, I hope you understand

[HessStation]

If they are gonna go skilled position, trade down w both please.

[j4jets]

That would make the Revis trade look like this:

 

Tampa gets Revis.

 

Jets move back 4 picks from #9 to #13, and add #31, #34, #74 this year, and the conditional 4th next year. That has some serious Hershel Walker  gravitas to it.

 

Hershel Walker gravitas? Are you serious? Cowboys received THREE 1st rounders, THREE 2nd rounders, a 3rd rounder, and a 6th rounder along with FIVE players. And the 13th pick that is compensation for Revis, is still there in your scenario, so in theory, Jets gave away Revis for a 1st and a 3rd, just like how it actually happened. Hershel Walker trade was the biggest robbery in the history of the NFL and one can contend we (Jets) didn't even get full value for Revis.

 

But I do agree, we need to trade down. a few spots, not 20+ spots. This draft will run out of first round grade players around the 20th pick.

[j4jets]

more is not necessarily better. if the jets are gonna find good players 9 and 13 are two good places to start looking. trading down for late 1/early 2 is fun on paper but they need top talent. Stick and pick. 

 

I agree with your theory there. However, Im ok if Jets trade their 13th pick, move with in 10 spots, and pick an early 2nd day pick. We need talent, thats for sure. But we also need a lot of talent

[flgreen]

I don't need this pointed out. It's a given.

 

However, because we have exorbitant team needs at positions that don't typically get drafted in the top of the 1st round, I feel that the trade down is relevant for us, and still enables us to accomplish the goal of drafting impact players.

 

We move back and we can essentially draft an OLB at #13, which is where an OLB should be drafted. High. But then we can address OG and TE, or WR with the late 1st rounders.

 

Let's  play it out, assuming we trade the #13 to SF.

 

#9 - Cooper

#31 (from SF) - DJ Hayden or Justin Hunter

#34 (from SF) - Zach Ertz 

#39 - Margus Hunt 

 

I don't have deep knowledge of scouting and what-not, but I'd be happier with a draft sorta like this ^^^ in the first 2 rounds.

 

I think by forfeiting a pick that might be spent on maybe Mingo, we allow gain the picks to take Hayden and Ertz, or other players that have starting potential and should matriculate successfully, and still have the flexibility to take a guy like Hunt.

 

I dunno, I'm just a fan, but it seems logical to me that because we have needs at positions that don't traditionally get drafted early, we can trade a high-pick and still get equal caliber prospects at positions that just get drafted later. My examples above may not be the best at illustrating this, but I'd stand by my logic.

Agree with your logic, but then you go guard at 9?

 

9---Trade

 

13---  Jarvis Jones

 

Guard can come late first, early second.

 

Love Hunt but I think his workout puts him late first

[Integrity28]

Please don't try to get between me and my man crush on Tavon Austin.

 

Can I interest you in a Jones, Austin, Escobar/Kelce?

 

I think I'm still not over desperately wanting Percy Harvin and not getting him, I hope you understand

 

 

LOL, I feel your pain.

 

And no, I want the addition early 2nd rounder. 

[Integrity28]

Hershel Walker gravitas? Are you serious? Cowboys received THREE 1st rounders, THREE 2nd rounders, a 3rd rounder, and a 6th rounder along with FIVE players. And the 13th pick that is compensation for Revis, is still there in your scenario, so in theory, Jets gave away Revis for a 1st and a 3rd, just like how it actually happened. Hershel Walker trade was the biggest robbery in the history of the NFL and one can contend we (Jets) didn't even get full value for Revis.

 

But I do agree, we need to trade down. a few spots, not 20+ spots. This draft will run out of first round grade players around the 20th pick.

 

Yeah, I know what the Cowboys received. I didn't say "get exactly what the Cowboys got for Hershel Walker" did I? I said Hershel Walker gravitas, meaning trading away one player to rebuild your team in a single off-season. You are reading WAY too into the "gravitas" line... LOL, nothing like that trade will ever happen again. I mentioned it more in terms of the rebuild by trading away your best player strategy.

[Integrity28]

Agree with your logic, but then you go guard at 9?

 

9---Trade

 

13---  Jarvis Jones

 

Guard can come late first, early second.

 

Love Hunt but I think his workout puts him late first

 

 

Did I not say I don't know what I'm doing with the picks? Who I said we'd take doesn't matter as much as the logic, and the pure truth that we can get top-grade players at low-demand positions later in the first. 

 

[Obrien2Toon]

I don't need this pointed out. It's a given.

 

However, because we have exorbitant team needs at positions that don't typically get drafted in the top of the 1st round, I feel that the trade down is relevant for us, and still enables us to accomplish the goal of drafting impact players.

 

We move back and we can essentially draft an OLB at #13, which is where an OLB should be drafted. High. But then we can address OG and TE, or WR with the late 1st rounders.

 

Let's  play it out, assuming we trade the #13 to SF.

 

#9 - Cooper

#31 (from SF) - DJ Hayden or Justin Hunter

#34 (from SF) - Zach Ertz 

#39 - Margus Hunt 

 

I don't have deep knowledge of scouting and what-not, but I'd be happier with a draft sorta like this ^^^ in the first 2 rounds.

 

I think by forfeiting a pick that might be spent on maybe Mingo, we allow gain the picks to take Hayden and Ertz, or other players that have starting potential and should matriculate successfully, and still have the flexibility to take a guy like Hunt.

 

I dunno, I'm just a fan, but it seems logical to me that because we have needs at positions that don't traditionally get drafted early, we can trade a high-pick and still get equal caliber prospects at positions that just get drafted later. My examples above may not be the best at illustrating this, but I'd stand by my logic.

That would be a hell of a draft. Love it.

[unbanmadmike1]

The problem with this is that everyone wants to trade back and they won't all be able to.

[khesanh]

LOL, so moving from the 13th overall pick to the 31st and 34th = forfeiting an impact player for filler? LMFAO

 

Zach Ertz could make an IMMEDIATE impact on this team, but you don't draft him at #13. You do at #34 though. Some positions grade out just as well, if not better, than the top 15 guys, but because of the position they play, or the quality available at that position in this year's draft, they can be drafted later in the draft. 

 

I dunno... I think my logic is on point. Certainly not an advocation of "roster filler". Pfft... 

Uh....yes that is what I am saying we need IMPACT PLAYERS!!!!!  There is a big difference between those picks and please keep in mind SF has 13 picks 1. They don't have enough roster space for all those rookies so they will have to trade some away 2. They are a team that wants to win NOW and are built to do so they will do anything to trade up for the best available player (Tavon Austin @ #9 or #13 and guess who has that pick at your precious #31....you guessed it SF.  Therefore, let's not trade down for quantity this team is not a one year fix.  Well have many holes yes, but we have to fill them with players that are ball players.  Look at every playoff team this past year they ALL have impact players we don't have that nor speed on our team

[khesanh]

LOL, so moving from the 13th overall pick to the 31st and 34th = forfeiting an impact player for filler? LMFAO

 

Zach Ertz could make an IMMEDIATE impact on this team, but you don't draft him at #13. You do at #34 though. Some positions grade out just as well, if not better, than the top 15 guys, but because of the position they play, or the quality available at that position in this year's draft, they can be drafted later in the draft. 

 

I dunno... I think my logic is on point. Certainly not an advocation of "roster filler". Pfft... 

Also, please keep in mind that 3 teams in this years draft have 2 first round picks Rams, Vikings, and Jets and SF with their 13 picks will bridge an even larger gap in players from the #13 pick to the #31 and #34 the Rams want a WR so bad they would make a deal with the devil and the Vikings just dealt Percy Harvin so they too want to trade up. 

[Integrity28]

Uh....yes that is what I am saying we need IMPACT PLAYERS!!!!!  There is a big difference between those picks and please keep in mind SF has 13 picks 1. They don't have enough roster space for all those rookies so they will have to trade some away 2. They are a team that wants to win NOW and are built to do so they will do anything to trade up for the best available player (Tavon Austin @ #9 or #13 and guess who has that pick at your precious #31....you guessed it SF.  Therefore, let's not trade down for quantity this team is not a one year fix.  Well have many holes yes, but we have to fill them with players that are ball players.  Look at every playoff team this past year they ALL have impact players we don't have that nor speed on our team

 

Ugh.

 

When you are a team with 7-8 positions of immediate need, and the draft is not regarded as front-heavy, it's fine to trade back.

 

We need a TE just as bad as we need an OLB. At #9 we are likely to get our #2 or #3 ranked OLB, on our draft board. At #31 we could conceivably get our #3 CB, our #2 TE, our #2 WR. 

 

I'm not advocating trading back to NOT get impact players. Impact players can be had all over the draft. What I am advocating is that we identify the spots in the draft where we can get highly-ranked players at positions we need to address. The front of the draft is where you want to pick if you need a LT, DE or some blue-chip skill player. There aren't really any of the latter in this draft.

 

We can stay put, and we can get 2 players that address our needs. Austin and Mingo perhaps.

 

Or we can trade one of those picks, get Austin, Ertz and Margus Hunt, or something like that. The dropoff from Mingo to Hunt is minimal, imo, when you consider it nets us Ertz. 

 

The reality is, there are no elite players in this draft. So... being a team that has gross needs, we should be looking to trade one of our selections to a contender that is looking for that "one piece" where it's worth the early pick for them... while we focus on adding starters at positions that are not projected to be drafted early this year.

[Integrity28]

Also, please keep in mind that 3 teams in this years draft have 2 first round picks Rams, Vikings, and Jets and SF with their 13 picks will bridge an even larger gap in players from the #13 pick to the #31 and #34 the Rams want a WR so bad they would make a deal with the devil and the Vikings just dealt Percy Harvin so they too want to trade up. 

 

Now, I have no clue what point you are trying to make - you started out challenging my suggestion, this reads more like you support it. 

 

LOL

[khesanh]

Now, I have no clue what point you are trying to make - you started out challenging my suggestion, this reads more like you support it. 

 

LOL

Actually the point I am making is the landscape of the draft prospect available will change since there are 3 teams with 6 first round picks everyone can't trade down not enough to go around therefore, teams draft boards change to BPA which will move a lot of teams to snatch a value player like a Ertz, or other position players that we need just because of said change.  You are right there aren't any "Elite Players" in this draft NONE, but certain players fit a certain scheme.  We run a WC offense with a QB (for now) that is limited in his ability so to not get the player for our scheme because we trade back too far.  I think we are all clear that our need are many, G, OLB, SS, WR, QB, RB, TE.  I agree we should trade back a FEW slots like 2 to 5 slots for an extra pick but not to the end of the first round #31 or #34. 

[jetsjetsjetss]

meh id rather they keep both and pick 2 safeish players who can immediettly start.

 

If we trade for multiple picks and strike out itll kill us. Up at 9 and 13 I think we can find some safer guys

[Integrity28]

meh id rather they keep both and pick 2 safeish players who can immediettly start.

 

If we trade for multiple picks and strike out itll kill us. Up at 9 and 13 I think we can find some safer guys

 

Oh, safe players. Got it. Because the higher a player is drafted, the more likely they are to not bust? LOL

 

The players in the mid-teens are just as likely to be able to start as the players in the mid-30's. It all comes down to what positions you are targeting, and how well you did your homework.

 

Teams don't draft TE's early, typically, BUT you can bet that there are at least 3 TEs in this draft that are considered "safe" and who will start. We also need a starter at OG, but teams rarely draft that position in the top 10 either. 

 

In fact, OG, TE, S, ILB, RB are all examples of positions where you can get starters outside the top 20 picks in almost every draft year. They are low-demand positions. It's just how it is.

 

Since we need about 8 immediate contributors on this team, my thinking was get 4 of them in the top 40 picks. We can get a starting TE, OG and S out of the top 40, and still use our #9 or 13 (whichever we keep) for an OLB, a high-demand position. 

[Gastineau Lives]

There are five teams that want to trade back. I'd rather not get in a backwards bidding war to trade our 9 or 13.

[jetsjetsjetss]

Oh, safe players. Got it. Because the higher a player is drafted, the more likely they are to not bust? LOL

 

The players in the mid-teens are just as likely to be able to start as the players in the mid-30's. It all comes down to what positions you are targeting, and how well you did your homework.

 

Teams don't draft TE's early, typically, BUT you can bet that there are at least 3 TEs in this draft that are considered "safe" and who will start. We also need a starter at OG, but teams rarely draft that position in the top 10 either. 

 

In fact, OG, TE, S, ILB, RB are all examples of positions where you can get starters outside the top 20 picks in almost every draft year. They are low-demand positions. It's just how it is.

 

Since we need about 8 immediate contributors on this team, my thinking was get 4 of them in the top 40 picks. We can get a starting TE, OG and S out of the top 40, and still use our #9 or 13 (whichever we keep) for an OLB, a high-demand position. 

 

actually yes. Just for the fact you get to pick the safe players beforehand.

 

heres some people i think are safe and can possibly get. Eifert, star, milliner, vaccaro warmack, cooper

 

i actually hate mingo for us and austin. I think those guys got high ceilings but is a boom or bust thing. Which when you have top picks you take the sure thing

[Integrity28]

actually yes. Just for the fact you get to pick the safe players beforehand.

 

heres some people i think are safe and can possibly get. Eifert, star, milliner, vaccaro warmack, cooper

 

i actually hate mingo for us and austin. I think those guys got high ceilings but is a boom or bust thing. Which when you have top picks you take the sure thing

 

All of your "safe" players could very easily be available after the 13th pick, except maybe Milliner.

 

All of your safe players are OG, S and TE, except Milliner.

 

This draft is loaded with depth at OG, S and TE... which is exactly why it makes sense to trade back to address all of those positions in the top 40 picks. If you stay picking inside the top 15, you shouldn't be picking those positions, except maybe CB. 

 

LOL

[jetsjetsjetss]

All of your "safe" players could very easily be available after the 13th pick, except maybe Milliner.

 

All of your safe players are OG, S and TE, except Milliner.

 

This draft is loaded with depth at OG, S and TE... which is exactly why it makes sense to trade back to address all of those positions in the top 40 picks. If you stay picking inside the top 15, you shouldn't be picking those positions, except maybe CB. 

 

LOL

 

what?

 

Thats the problem I want impact players. This isnt as much as a star league as basketball but we cant just have good enough guys. Everyone is good I want dominant.

 

Star is going to be a stud and was an expected top 5 picks before heart nonsense

 

the gaurds are going right after 13

 

i dont think milliner falls to us at 9 but theres a slight chance

 

vacarro will not be there past 15

 

BAP maybe we will actually get some dominant guys in here people are scared of.

[Integrity28]

what?

 

Thats the problem I want impact players. This isnt as much as a star league as basketball but we cant just have good enough guys. Everyone is good I want dominant.

 

Star is going to be a stud and was an expected top 5 picks before heart nonsense

 

the gaurds are going right after 13

 

i dont think milliner falls to us at 9 but theres a slight chance

 

vacarro will not be there past 15

 

BAP maybe we will actually get some dominant guys in here people are scared of.

 

Eddie Lacy looks like he might be a dominant RB. We should take him at #9.

 

Your logic is flawed. To imply that no dominant player can be had past pick #13 is stupid.

 

The draft has an element of supply and demand to it. Dominant players at low-demand positions (that we have glaring needs at) can be had later in R1. You listed OG, S and TE, all of which are perfect examples of that type of position that a very good, or dominant, player can be had later in R1 and early R2. We see it every year. 

 

If you are going to use the #9 and #13, you are probably best served using it on QB, OLB, DE, LT, CB, WR in an order sort of like that. Those are the low-supply positions, and the positions that often create the most impact on a team. 

 

My suggest is to use the #13 for one of those positions, in this case OLB, and then trade the #9 to target late R1, early R2 TE, OG, and S. Why? Because I'd rather have any combination of the OG, TE, S in this draft in the 30's than the QB, WR or CB options available at #9 (we don't need DE or LT). The front end of this draft is weak on value. So use one of the picks, then take the other and turn it into two players - a safety and a tight end for instance, and then use our other 2nd rounder for a guard.

 

4 picks. 4 starters. If we get some of the guys I'm liking, they will absolutely be difference makers. 

[jetsjetsjetss]

Eddie Lacy looks like he might be a dominant RB. We should take him at #9.

 

Your logic is flawed. To imply that no dominant player can be had past pick #13 is stupid.

 

The draft has an element of supply and demand to it. Dominant players at low-demand positions (that we have glaring needs at) can be had later in R1. You listed OG, S and TE, all of which are perfect examples of that type of position that a very good, or dominant, player can be had later in R1 and early R2. We see it every year. 

 

If you are going to use the #9 and #13, you are probably best served using it on QB, OLB, DE, LT, CB, WR in an order sort of like that. Those are the low-supply positions, and the positions that often create the most impact on a team. 

 

My suggest is to use the #13 for one of those positions, in this case OLB, and then trade the #9 to target late R1, early R2 TE, OG, and S. Why? Because I'd rather have any combination of the OG, TE, S in this draft in the 30's than the QB, WR or CB options available at #9 (we don't need DE or LT). The front end of this draft is weak on value. So use one of the picks, then take the other and turn it into two players - a safety and a tight end for instance, and then use our other 2nd rounder for a guard.

 

4 picks. 4 starters. If we get some of the guys I'm liking, they will absolutely be difference makers. 

 

impact is different then safe and impactful no one is rating lacy as one of the best players in the draft. the guys im listing have been

 

I want for once some of the best players in the draft. The best saftey or tight end not the second best.

 

say we get like the 31st pick and keep 13 or whatever pick you want. What are some players you would draft?

[slats]

impact is different then safe no one is rating lacy as one of the best players in the draft. the guys im listing have been

 

I want for once some of the best players in the draft. The best saftey or tight end not the second best.

 

say we get like the 31st pick and keep 13 or whatever pick you want. What are some players you would draft?

 

The Jets are in serious need of quantity as well as quality in this draft. Their starters suck, and the team lacks depth. They need bodies at virtually every position. In a draft that has a lot of meat to it in the 20-45 range, trading down and getting multiple picks there is optimal. 

 

Now, they shouldn't make any move until they're on the clock. A guy like Dion Jordan slips to #9, you want to be there to take him. But on the other hand, if you don't see a huge difference between Tavon Austin and the third "best" WR in the draft, believe you can get a starting guard in the 3rd or later, would be just as happy to draft Ertz as Eifert, etc., then you make that move down and get a couple guys (or more) instead of just one. That's just good business. 

 

A move like getting the 49ers' #31 & #34 could put them in a position to take a QB, too, which is pretty intriguing. Don't expect them to reach for one at #9 or #13, and by the time their second rounder comes along, the a few QBs could be off the board. 

 

I like the idea of them trading back multiple times in this draft, and maybe trying to trade a second this year for a first next year - especially if they don't get a QB in this draft.