ozzieny Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 Stacked box, Schotty offense, not suited for pounding it up the middle. They didn't really use him well. He didn't fit what they were trying to do. I see it like this, if we're RBBC then touches should look like this: 15 for Ivory, 15 for CJ and 8 for this guy, and loose change for the rest. All situationally appropriate. That is a 3-headed monster with various skill sets, and all with starting experience. I can't knock it. All 3 of them are better than Powell, who would ideally be packed in a trade for a veteran CB now. Why on earth would anyone want to trade a vet CB for a 4th round RB like Powell that has a limited skill set? You'd have to sweeten the deal and just curios as to who you have in mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LAD_Brooklyn Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 Idzik took a look at mini camp and wasn't liking Pryor with the number 35 . Made sure he got his 1st rounder looking pretty with the 25 so axe Green. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 Why on earth would anyone want to trade a vet CB for a 4th round RB like Powell that has a limited skill set? You'd have to sweeten the deal and just curios as to who you have in mind. To get out from under a bad contract, and add depth to an area of possible need. Sweeten the deal? I didn't say a veteran hall of fame CB, I just said a veteran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 I guess that's one way to free up #25 for Pryor lol Idzik took a look at mini camp and wasn't liking Pryor with the number 35 . Made sure he got his 1st rounder looking pretty with the 25 so axe Green. #25 safety from Louisville? No thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roscoeword Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 I like Powell more than Ivory. There, I said it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LAD_Brooklyn Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 I like Powell more than Ivory. There, I said it. It's nothing wrong with that as Powell is more dependable as a catcher, pass blocker and staying healthy. Ivory is more of a pawn if anything else as it's no secret that his only impact is when he gets the ball. But just going by the eye test is just obvious that Ivory it the better pure runner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgb Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 I like Powell more than Ivory. There, I said it. a healthy ivory > powell but durability definitely counts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Powell is better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 I drafted Richardson way too early in fantasy. He's small and frail and gets tackled easily. Meh. Can't we just keep Goodson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 I think I don't care. I drafted Richardson way too early in fantasy. He's small and frail and gets tackled easily. Meh. Can't we just keep Goodson. They certainly might. They picked up this kid off waivers and he makes peanuts. They can cut him at any time just as if he was an UDFA, no cap hit. Nothing. They didn't have too many backs in. They have some vets, but Fabian Truss is the only guy they had in I really heard of and he was a tryout player that was considered a possible small school (Samford) draftee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 I drafted Richardson way too early in fantasy. He's small and frail and gets tackled easily. Meh. Can't we just keep Goodson. We still might, just need to be set at RB if he's unavailable, and this signing accomplishes that. Plenty of backs on the roster now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 FWIW, looking at the transactions and the try-out roster it looks like they cut CB Nick Taylor (the super fast basketball kid from FIU, who was in Vikings camp previously as a WR/return man) and T Tevon Conrad. They had Taylor back in as a try-out, but I don't see that Conrad was even at the mini-camp. I guess that means that Green is still around, but will be wearing a different number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 They certainly might. They picked up this kid off waivers and he makes peanuts. They can cut him at any time just as if he was an UDFA, no cap hit. Nothing. They didn't have too many backs in. They have some vets, but Fabian Truss is the only guy they had in I really heard of and he was a tryout player that was considered a possible small school (Samford) draftee. I don't know if that's true. He's playing under his rookie contract (entering year 3) and some remaining $ may still be guaranteed. Granted, he was a 7th round pick I think, so it isn't much, but it's possible there may be a hit if he's cut, depending on what's in his rookie contract. Plucking a player off waivers means you take on the deal they had (which is why no one picked up Sanchez off waivers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 I don't know if that's true. He's playing under his rookie contract (entering year 3) and some remaining $ may still be guaranteed. Granted, he was a 7th round pick I think, so it isn't much, but it's possible there may be a hit if he's cut, depending on what's in his rookie contract. Plucking a player off waivers means you take on the deal they had (which is why no one picked up Sanchez off waivers). Maybe. He is getting like $570K. Who cares? FWIW, I do not think it is guaranteed. This is from one of the Reilly articles I read: Last year’s 233rd overall pick was Missouri Western defensive end David Bass. The Raiders picked Bass and gave him a four-year, $2.209 million contract, including a $48,600 signing bonus. The signing bonus was the only guaranteed money in his deal. This is all pretty typical for a seventh-round pick’s contract. Bass’s base salary in 2013 was $405,000. This year, it will be $495,000. Bass was claimed off waivers last Sept. 1 by the Bears, who picked up his contract. http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2014/05/jets_sign_seventh-round_draft_pick_trevor_reilly.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 I suddenly know why the JETS picked Daryl Richardson and i am liking it. "Richardson already has a comfort level in the AFC East; he averaged 5.9 yards per carry against the division in 2012." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Maybe. He is getting like $570K. Who cares? FWIW, I do not think it is guaranteed. This is from one of the Reilly articles I read: http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2014/05/jets_sign_seventh-round_draft_pick_trevor_reilly.html Well then none of it matters. If he sucks then he'll be cut. Good. If they had to absorb 1-2 years I think that's significant. Not screams of horror significant,but absorbing over $500K for a 3rd string RB you picked up after the draft and cut before the season, is idiotic. Especially when the team already has 4 to head into the season with, counting Goodson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 According to Jason's site if Richardson is cut there is a $570,000 cap saving and 0 dead money http://overthecap.com/teamcap.php?Team=Jets&Year=2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetlife33 Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Honestly , Goodson minus the baggage > Richardson. But hey if we replace Green with Richardson I'm all for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzieny Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 To get out from under a bad contract, and add depth to an area of possible need. Sweeten the deal? I didn't say a veteran hall of fame CB, I just said a veteran. ok get rid of Powell's contract - that's smart - but we have enough depth at cb. I would just use Powell as a chip in a trade and get a quality veteran cb to start along side Milliner. Do what you have to make it happen - sweeten the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roscoeword Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 It's nothing wrong with that as Powell is more dependable as a catcher, pass blocker and staying healthy. Ivory is more of a pawn if anything else as it's no secret that his only impact is when he gets the ball. But just going by the eye test is just obvious that Ivory it the better pure runner. But it looks to me that Powell is a purer running back as well. Ivory runs straight ahead looking to hit someone - he's not shifty, has no moves, is basically a wild man. Powell has running instincts with some moves. And he seems to be getting better with each carry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gastineau Lives Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 But it looks to me that Powell is a purer running back as well. Ivory runs straight ahead looking to hit someone - he's not shifty, has no moves, is basically a wild man. Powell has running instincts with some moves. And he seems to be getting better with each carry. No. Your perception is getting away from reality. On the same amount of carries, Ivory had almost three times as many runs of 20+ yards as Powell. You don't do that running headfirst into the first guy you see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 ok get rid of Powell's contract - that's smart - but we have enough depth at cb. I would just use Powell as a chip in a trade and get a quality veteran cb to start along side Milliner. Do what you have to make it happen - sweeten the deal. You asked why teams would want to trade a veteran CB. I responded to unload a bad contract. Meaning the other team would want to trade away the bad contract given to the veteran CB. Not Powell's contract. Nevermind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 No. Your perception is getting away from reality. On the same amount of carries, Ivory had almost three times as many runs of 20+ yards as Powell. You don't do that running headfirst into the first guy you see. Not to mention a higher percentage of Ivory's carries (compared to Powell) were likely short-yardage where his job was to bull forward to get like a yard, not to patiently wait in the backfield for a hole to form. He's a good RB other than the receiver part of the job. Or at least that's what he's demonstrated so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonehands Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 You asked why teams would want to trade a veteran CB. I responded to unload a bad contract. Meaning the other team would want to trade away the bad contract given to the veteran CB. Not Powell's contract. Nevermind. A bad contract is one where the money owed exceeds the value provided by the player in terms of their performance. Why would you want that? The release of Richardson and CJ shows you what the trade value is of an average productive running back. You aren't getting anything of value for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 A bad contract is one where the money owed exceeds the value provided by the player in terms of their performance. Why would you want that? The release of Richardson and CJ shows you what the trade value is of an average productive running back. You aren't getting anything of value for that. I understand that, I wasn't advocating it was a good idea. He asked why, and I provided one scenario. I am not endorsing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonehands Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 I understand that, I wasn't advocating it was a good idea. He asked why, and I provided one scenario. I am not endorsing it. I guess it was someone else that said that Powell would ideally be packed in a deal for a veteran cornerback......which was truly an absurd notion for all the reason discussed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.