Zack Martin should be a Jet!

[SenorGato]

Lol @ booing Richardson on draft day.

[dbatesman]

And do they screen the Jet fans and only let in the douche bags?

Yes.

Total number of Jets fans screened out: 0

[RutgersJetFan]

Yes.

Total number of Jets fans screened out: 0

 

[T0mShane]

I just want to hear the sick burn that preceded this gif.

[RutgersJetFan]

I just want to hear the sick burn that preceded this gif.

Favorite edit of this gif:

[slats]

People are ready to lose their minds if the Jets draft another CB in the first round, but want to add a third first rounder to the OL? Championship teams are rarely -if ever- built that way.

Fortunately (for me, at least), I'm pretty sure John Idzik gets that. Last year, he was in a position where he needed, at a minimum, competition for Vlad Ducasse at OG, and he managed to wait until the third round to draft one. This year, he's got his five starters in place, as well as the two developmental guys he took in the fifth and sixth rounds last year. I'd be very surprised if he took an OL in the first three rounds this year, and absolutely shocked if he took one in the first.

On day three, however, I'd be surprised if he used less than two of his nine picks on OL to push the guys he took last year.

[Gastineau Lives]

The two worst units for the Jets were the WR corps and the defensive backfield. Among the worst in football on both counts. I just don't see John Idzik passing up a Cooks, Beckham, Lee or Dennard, Pryor, Gilbert to draft a guy to compete/replace a ten year veteran or the guy he spent his third rounder on last year.

 

The philosophy is that you don't go crazy signing free agents but instead build through the draft, from what I understand. He passed on signing Desean Jackson, he passed on every good cornerback. I doubt he did these things so that he can draft a guard in the first round or that building through the draft means tossing away your third rounder on a guy that was replaced by your first rounder the following year. This approach is not sustainable.

[slats]

The two worst units for the Jets were the WR corps and the defensive backfield. Among the worst in football on both counts. I just don't see John Idzik passing up a Cooks, Beckham, Lee or Dennard, Pryor, Gilbert to draft a guy to compete/replace a ten year veteran or the guy he spent his third rounder on last year.

 

The philosophy is that you don't go crazy signing free agents but instead build through the draft, from what I understand. He passed on signing Desean Jackson, he passed on every good cornerback. I doubt he did these things so that he can draft a guard in the first round or that building through the draft means tossing away your third rounder on a guy that was replaced by your first rounder the following year. This approach is not sustainable.

Yeah, I'm certainly hoping that he passed on those positions by design, as this draft is said to be loaded at those positions. And if it is by design, he'll certainly be looking to draft receivers and defensive backs in the first couple rounds.

[Cyberjet]

Yeah, I'm certainly hoping that he passed on those positions by design, as this draft is said to be loaded at those positions. And if it is by design, he'll certainly be looking to draft receivers and defensive backs in the first couple rounds.

The draft being loaded with WR and DB  might be the reason you don't go first round with WR and DB because you get good comparable quality in later rounds. 1st round is BAP - could be OL. You never know who gets injured or who doesn't develop into a starting OL.

[peebag]

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2014/profiles/zack-martin?id=2543480

[Gastineau Lives]

The draft being loaded with WR and DB  might be the reason you don't go first round with WR and DB because you get good comparable quality in later rounds. 1st round is BAP - could be OL. You never know who gets injured or who doesn't develop into a starting OL.

 

I think if you want to help your running game you should get yourself an NFL calibre passing game. Draft a guy that keeps the safety out of the box.

[#27TheDominator]

BPA - how do you decide BPA between a WR / OL/ ILB/ CB? Theoretically need is not suppose to be an issue. Do you pick a WR as BPA when the draft is deep on WRs? BPA doesn't mean best athlete available. I really feel the Jets go LBer or Martin - Martin would solidify that unit for years.

 

When in doubt, go by how much money a replacement player will cost.  http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000330088/article/nfl-releases-2014-franchise-transition-tag-numbers  You can start there, at the franchise tag figures.  TE and S are pretty low.  OL is up there, but that is certainly inflated by the prime LTs.  

 

Not sure if its possible that a guard could be BPA at 18

 

I think I agree. 

 

In today's game, guard has become a prime position -- not the throwaway it was in the past where you just plugged in a tackle who came up short on NFL metrics.

 

I don't know about prime position, but it starting to change.  Teams are starting to pay for Gs and RTs.  One reason Gs are not drafted highly is because the best OL generally will play LT.  You are right that it is no longer a throwaway, but many of the best Gs to come from this draft will be guys that were kicked inside. 

 

There are flashier names that could be taken but I'll tell you this, I prefer they take Martin than a TE in the 1st rd. 

 

Yeah.  I am not a big fan of taking TEs high.  It also fits in with my money theory.

[Cyberjet]

I think if you want to help your running game you should get yourself an NFL calibre passing game. Draft a guy that keeps the safety out of the box.

Agree - but that doesn't mean you have to draft a WR in the 1st round particularly with the depth at WR

[Gastineau Lives]

Agree - but that doesn't mean you have to draft a WR in the 1st round particularly with the depth at WR

 

I know there's a lot of depth but why not take a guy like Cooks or Beckham instead of the Donte Moncreifs and Paul Richardsons of the world?

[Cyberjet]

I know there's a lot of depth but why not take a guy like Cooks or Beckham instead of the Donte Moncreifs and Paul Richardsons of the world?

Ultimately that is the argument when it come to WRs - I personally could not tell you how much of a difference there exists between them only that according to experts there is crazy depth at WR in this draft - to me that means there isn't a significant drop off from WR#3 and WR#10. Thus you can pick up a very good WR IN RD 2 or 3. That doesn't appear to be the case with OL this draft. Interesting dynamics.

[Gastineau Lives]

Ultimately that is the argument when it come to WRs - I personally could not tell you how much of a difference there exists between them only that according to experts there is crazy depth at WR in this draft - to me that means there isn't a significant drop off from WR#3 and WR#10. Thus you can pick up a very good WR IN RD 2 or 3. That doesn't appear to be the case with OL this draft. Interesting dynamics.

 

Well, if there is very little drop off between Cooks/Beckham, then I'm not sure why you never hear Richardson and Moncrief et. al, being mentioned in the same sentence, ever. I'd rather take the guy that is clear cut at the top of a very deep class, to me that says something about his talent. I'm not ******* around at a position of need, I'm taking the best guy I can.

[Cyberjet]

Well, if there is very little drop off between Cooks/Beckham, then I'm not sure why you never hear Richardson and Moncrief et. al, being mentioned in the same sentence, ever. I'd rather take the guy that is clear cut at the top of a very deep class, to me that says something about his talent. I'm not ******* around at a position of need, I'm taking the best guy I can.

No one is arguing about picking for need because the assumption is the Jets are going BPA though I'm sure there is some inherent bias when deciding BPA. Maybe it should be BPA ....... for this team. We all get the concept / criteria for ranking specific positions, but how do you decide what are the criteria in choosing who is BPA when it's between a WR / OL/ CB etc. ?

[slats]

No one is arguing about picking for need because the assumption is the Jets are going BPA though I'm sure there is some inherent bias when deciding BPA. Maybe it should be BPA ....... for this team. We all get the concept / criteria for ranking specific positions, but how do you decide what are the criteria in choosing who is BPA when it's between a WR / OL/ CB etc. ?

The left tackle position is the only one on the OL that's part of the discussion when deciding between OL and a WR or CB in the first round. Few guards are drafted in the first round every year, while it's not unusual for CBs and WRs to go in the top five. The best WRs and CBs also get paid significantly more than the best guards in free agency. The best roster have the most players outperforming their contracts - you acquire those players in the draft by selecting the most valuable positions high. So guard wouldn't even be a consideration if all three of these prospects had equal grades. From there, the tie-breaker between the WR and CB would probably be team need - and in the Jets' case, I think that would result in a CB.

For the Jets, WR and CB are also both a greater need than guard. They have their starting OL in place, and drafted two developmental players last year. They could be very happy with Campbell and Aboushi, and we wouldn't even know. I expect them to take more OL on the third day of the draft this year. But the secondary was terrible last year, and they've done nothing in free agency to improve it. The WRs were terrible, and Decker is really the only improvement they brought in.

I love a BAP philosophy, but I also feel the Jets need to find potential starters at receiver and in the secondary in this draft.

[Cyberjet]

I'm not sure about the rule that you you don't draft OL at #18 particularly someone who is versatile. My gut tells me the Jets are not going WR in 1st round, however if they do Idzik must think he is a stud.

[slats]

I'm not sure about the rule that you you don't draft OL at #18 particularly someone who is versatile. My gut tells me the Jets are not going WR in 1st round, however if they do Idzik must think he is a stud.

I couldn't put together a mock draft of the first 17 picks that would result in Zack Martin being the Jets pick at #18. A WR, CB, pass rusher, QB... someone would be rated higher, and play a more highly valued position.

Guards go high in weak drafts. This isn't a weak draft.

[Il Mostro]

Everyone talks about how deep this draft is at WR, the OL may be nearly as deep -- just fewer household names.

[Gastineau Lives]

Everyone talks about how deep this draft is at WR, the OL may be nearly as deep -- just fewer household names.

 

Thank you, Cazzone. I'm mailing you a piece of the Pizza Chiena I made on Sunday. What's your address?

[BroadwayJoe12]

I couldn't put together a mock draft of the first 17 picks that would result in Zack Martin being the Jets pick at #18. A WR, CB, pass rusher, QB... someone would be rated higher, and play a more highly valued position.

Guards go high in weak drafts. This isn't a weak draft.

 

And then the best guard gets drafted two rounds later anyway. Unless I knew that I was drafting Larry Allen or Steve Hutchinson, I just don't like the idea of taking a guard in the first, except in a weak draft as you mentioned. 

[Cyberjet]

It should be interesting

[Matt39]

Aboushi is awful just an FYI. And Winters stunk last year. Guards aren't as valued as high as WR's or CB's.,.but it's still a huge need.

[slats]

Aboushi is awful just an FYI. And Winters stunk last year. Guards aren't as valued as high as WR's or CB's.,.but it's still a huge need.

Offensive lines operate as units, not as individuals. The interior line are the ultimate coach 'em up positions. I'm sure that was Idzik's thinking when he selected three OL in his first draft. Get these guys in the system, develop them, and hope they're ready when his vision of the team starts coming together in year three. I haven't done the research (so feel free), but I think you'd be extremely hard pressed to find a Super Bowl team with three first rounders on the OL, but that you will find a lot of Super Bowl starting OL who were either late picks or went undrafted altogether.

[Il Mostro]

Thank you, Cazzone. I'm mailing you a piece of the Pizza Chiena I made on Sunday. What's your address?

 

 

Nice touch for Easter!  I haven't had that in years -- my family used to put everything except the kitchen sink inside.

[Cyberjet]

The perils of drafting WRs early

John McTigue [ARCHIVE]

ESPN Stats & Information | April 26, 2011

No position exemplifies the risk-reward scenario of the NFL draft more than quarterback.

Peyton Manning and Ryan Leaf. Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers. Jake Long instead of Matt Ryan. JaMarcus Russell in 2007, Sam Bradford in 2010. Although the risk is always there when selecting a quarterback in the first round, the high reward of potentially finding a franchise signal-caller seems to be well worth it.

Each position on the field comes with its own risk-reward scenario. Tight ends, for example, have proved to be reliable and durable first-round picks. All 14 selected in the first round since 2001 were still active in 2010. Linebackers have been durable selections also, as have been defensive backs.

Samsung Next Level Draft Series

• Draft is best bet for franchise QBs

• Evolution of the defensive end

• Strategy for running backs is evolving

• The perils of drafting WRs early

• Where are the safe picks?

• Finding that indispensable tight end

• The truth about spread offenses

Other positions, when drafted in the first round, bring greater risk, which can be defined by taking several factors into account.

Picks of positions that consistently underperform, miss time and see shortened careers should then be considered risky. One position in particular has proved to be the riskiest of all first-round choices.

If your team is considering drafting A.J. Green or Julio Jones, you might want to start worrying. And if that's not enough, remember that the Detroit Lions spent four top-10 picks between 2003 and 2007 on wide receivers and only one of those picks is still with the team.

The NFL has become a more pass-happy league. In 2008, 57.2 percent of NFL plays were called passes and 45.7 percent utilized three or more wide receivers. In 2010, 59.0 percent of plays were called passes and 48.2 percent of plays utilized at least three wideouts.

The increase in passing and wide receiver usage has naturally led to an increase in wide receivers selected in the first round. From 2001 to 2010, wide receivers were the second-most drafted players in the first round, trailing only defensive backs (both corners and safeties).

First-Round WRs Since 1971

OVERALL IN TOP 10

2001-2010 40 14

1991-2000 35 14

1981-1990 29 6

1971-1980 24 8

The 40 first-round picks since 2001 have combined to play 199 seasons in the NFL. Only 41 of those 199 seasons (20.6 percent) saw the receiver eclipse 1,000 receiving yards. Only 17 of the 40 receivers have registered a 1,000-yard season and just nine have done it more than once.

Even if you were to ignore their rookie seasons to account for an NFL learning curve, you'd have 159 seasons and 40 1,000-yard seasons (25.2 percent). Michael Clayton was the only receiver of the group with a 1,000-yard season his rookie year and he never had more than 484 in a season after that.

Compiling the stats from the cumulative 199 seasons for all 40 first-round receivers, the average season hasn't been up to the standards of the top receivers in the league.

WR Production

Average season for wide receivers drafted in the first round since 2001 .

OVERALL IN TOP 10

Games 13.6 13.2

Receptions 47.4 48.0

Rec. yards 635.5 666.0

Rec. TDs 4.2 4.3

Last season alone, 47 wideouts had 48 receptions, 45 had 653 receiving yards and 52 caught four or more touchdown passes.

Go back 20 years and first-round receivers have averaged 13.6 games, 47.5 receptions, 665.8 yards and 4.2 touchdowns per season. That list even includes Randy Moss, Marvin Harrison and Torry Holt, three of the top 10 in career receiving yards.

Other pieces of the puzzle when determining risk are durability and longevity.

No other position drafted since 2001 has seen a higher percentage of players inactive in 2010. Eleven of the 40 first-round receivers did not play in a game last season, meaning 72.5 percent of all first-round receivers played. Defensive backs (79.3 percent) were the only other position to dip below 80 percent.

Ron Schwane/US Presswire

Charles Rogers, the Lions' first-round pick in 2003, was out of the NFL by 2006.

Those 11 wide receivers averaged 5.1 seasons in their careers. Five of those receivers played their last games in or prior to 2006. Only two other offensive players drafted in 2001 or later (running back William Green and tackle Kenyatta Walker) were out by 2006.

Calvin Johnson is the only survivor of the Lions' infamous string of first-round receivers. What happened in Detroit may have been comical, but it exemplified the perils of drafting a wideout in the first round.

Before picking Johnson in 2007, the Lions used those top-10 picks on Charles Rogers (2003), Roy Williams (2004) and Mike Williams (2005). Rogers and Johnson represent the extreme: Rogers is one of the 11 wide receivers picked in the first round since 2001 already out of the NFL and Johnson is one of the nine receivers to post multiple 1,000-yard seasons. Johnson is also one of the eight to make an AP All-Pro team and a Pro Bowl.

Since 2001, there has been a one-in-four chance a receiver would be out of the NFL within five years (Rogers). There is also a one-in-four chance to draft an elite talent (Johnson). Both Mike and Roy Williams represent the other guys -- wild cards, if you will.

Mike Williams joined Rogers as a bust before reviving his career and becoming a serviceable receiver with the Seahawks (751 yards in 2010, three 100-yard games). Roy Williams started his career off strong, picking up 1,310 receiving yards in his third season. Since then, he has been traded to the Cowboys and hasn't topped 900 yards in a season.

With teams passing more and using more three-wide receiver sets, the perception has become that drafting a first-round talent at wide receiver is a necessity. However, despite the increase in pass plays and three-wide receiver formations, wide receivers haven't been targeted more.

Percentage of All Targets to WRs

(Last 3 Seasons)

OVERALL IN RED ZONE

2010 59.2 57.7

2009 58.4 56.5

2008 59.1 57.1

Pass-catching tight ends and running backs are still just as important in offenses. As teams use more platoons at running back and as tight ends become more athletic, that is not likely to change.

The sheer volume of wide receivers in the draft gives teams plenty of opportunities to get a high-caliber player. On a per game basis, first-round receivers since 2001 have averaged 3.4 receptions, 48.0 yards and 0.3 touchdowns. Receivers drafted in the second round or later have averaged 2.1 receptions, 27.5 yards and 0.2 touchdowns per game. (Those numbers were compiled from the 235 wide receivers who played at least one game.)

When thinking of the difference between a first-round receiver and a second-round-or-later receiver, one 20-yard catch per game probably isn't what comes to mind, but players like Greg Jennings, Chad Ochocinco, Vincent Jackson, Anquan Boldin, Brandon Marshall and Mike Wallace (among others) have helped close that gap.

A.J. Green and Julio Jones are the only two wide receivers projected to go in the first round this month, according to both Todd McShay's and Mel Kiper's most recent mock drafts. Both could translate to 1,000-yard talents, but statistically speaking, each has only a one-in-four shot to be a real difference maker.

[slats]

A.J. Green and Julio Jones are the only two wide receivers projected to go in the first round this month, according to both Todd McShay's and Mel Kiper's most recent mock drafts. Both could translate to 1,000-yard talents, but statistically speaking, each has only a one-in-four shot to be a real difference maker.

So I guess the point of this article was to lay out the perils of drafting two guys who each gained more than 2100 yards over their first two seasons in the league, adding 18 TDs a piece? The article says it's a 1 in 4 chance that you'll get that kind of production out of a first round WR. What are the odds that you'll get that kind of production out of a guard?

The bust potential of WRs is well documented, but this thread is about drafting a guard in the first round. WR is just one of a number of positions John Idzik and the Jets are very likely to deem more valuable than a guard with the 18th pick of the draft. CB, TE, OLB, S, and QB are a few others.

[Cyberjet]

My point being is that #18 is a bit of no mans land and the chances of getting a good WR at #18 or in the 2nd and 3rd rounds appear similar with a 25% bust rate whereas other positions at # 18 may be a safer bet.

[slats]

My point being is that #18 is a bit of no mans land and the chances of getting a good WR at #18 or in the 2nd and 3rd rounds appear similar with a 25% bust rate whereas other positions at # 18 may be a safer bet.

Hey, if you want safe, take a kicker with your first pick. He'll practically be a lock to start.

You can be too safe, and a guard falls into that category. You want production out of your first rounder. I already listed a number of positions -including WR- that I believe the Jets will be looking at other than guard this year. Looks to me (based on last year's draft) that Idzik understands and believes in the idea of stockpiling late-round OL and developing them, rather than investing high picks in them.