Post your BIG BOARD for round 1!

[derp]

I'm skipping over, in no particular order even though I'm numbering it, these guys as I don't expect them to be on the board. Any would warrant BPA consideration all the way down at 20.

1. Wentz

2. Goff

3. Ramsey

4. Tunsil

5. Stanley

6. Elliot

7. Bosa (though I don't see the scheme fit)

8. Buckner (though another DL would pain me)

9. Jack (I'm not a doctor so this is kind of a cop out)

So I guess, 9 guys I'm skipping over there. I'm also going to skip over another guy I expect to be gone but he gets a bit of a different description - as I don't think he's a great fit for the Jets. A 24 year old skinny athletic linebacker who's labeled as a pass rusher but really more of a chess piece. Don't think he's a good edge fit for the Jets as I don't see him as a pass rusher - let a 4-3 team take him.

10. Leonard Floyd

Which leads me to my theoretical Jets' big board. Turns out there are not a lot of guys I like for the Jets this year. At least now I expect to be disappointed like I am every year.

11. Shaq Lawson - Fills biggest need on team - OLB to start across from Mauldin. Great athletic testing, apparently very high character, productive, good against pass and run, size to effectively set edge. Decent ceiling and floor. Shoulder injury concerns. Leonard Williams had those too and Jets pulled the trigger.

12. Laquon Treadwell - Love the idea of drafting a receiver. Basically a starter functionally given how much the Jets run 3 wide. Makes a team that basically is built around 2 receivers offensively in Marshall and Decker much harder to defend - plus I believe all 3 could move around the formation. Improves that area of the depth chart so the Jets can withstand an injury as well, losing Marshall or Decker would be crippling. Marshall is getting up there this years - gives a potential long-term replacement/offensive centerpiece. And you've got a talented young player coming into a situation where a. he's not expected to produce right away and b. he has an opportunity to learn from two really technically sound veterans - think there's a better chance of having successfully developing someone that way. I'd be concerned about the lack of speed but Treadwell trumps the others because analytics have shown speed isn't that relevant. Stuff like production, age of production, and weight are actually key for receivers. Treadwell checks a lot of those boxes. And I'm a nerd, so I'll stick with the analytics. Plus he's got awesome hands.

13. Corey Coleman - Everything I said about drafting a receiver for Treadwell. Coleman has a couple of concerns - drops, Baylor offense translation, and he doesn't check off the weight box. But he did produce at a young age and is a great athlete. Think he like Treadwell could play inside or out. Adds a speed element the team doesn't have in their WR group. Team should be able to get some inside info on him from Petty as well.

14. Josh Doctson - Ditto with everything I said about a receiver. Doctson in theory is an awesome WR prospect in terms of hands, polish, etc. Tested out the best athletically as well. Analytics were the tiebreaker as I said with Treadwell, Doctson was a little older when he produced and isn't that bulky. But the athleticism and polish are really appealing. Another guy who could play inside or out with Marshall or Decker. Would be happy with any of the three.

15. Vernon Hargreaves - I don't love the fit because he's a smallish corner and the Jets already have that in Skrine. Plus he fell off a bit this season. But an absolutely outstanding athlete with man cover skills who shouldn't be on the board at 20 and would fill a need so I couldn't get too mad about it.

16. Jack Conklin - I'm completely fine with drafting an offensive lineman. I also have a bit of a bias - it seems to me that historically the B10 offensive tackles who go mid-late R1 who are viewed as solid prospects but a lot of people think may project best to the right side just don't pan out in the NFL. But I am in favor of the idea of drafting a tackle, cutting Breno, and eventually having him flip to the right side. So those kind of offset and Conklin lands a little lower than I think some might have him.

17. Taylor Decker - Ditto the Conklin blurb but I think Conklin is a slightly better athlete who might project better to the left side eventually which nudges him just over Decker.

18. Eli Apple - I don't love the idea of drafting a corner, but Apple is a really good height-speed guy and it would certainly fit a need in the short and long term. One thing about this position is the depth chart is way better for the Jets right now than at receiver. 

19. William Jackson - Ditto Apple except I think Apple is a little more physical and a little less linear and corners who don't tackle or change direction well concern me. Jackson does have great ball skills.

20. Darron Lee - A freakshow of an athlete at linebacker a young guy, and productive. Ran better than two of the three receivers I have above. I am convinced the Jets want to pick and develop a coverage linebacker this year. I just don't think ILB is that much of a premium position to go after in the first round and would rather they do this later. But he could theoretically push for a starting job as a rookie and immediately upgrade in coverage for an absurdly slow linebacker group.

Missing from the 11-20 group I think would be possible - all defensive linemen as I would rather not see one and don't think the value is that absurd for any that they'd need to consider it (aside from Buckner). Noah Spence I'm not touching in the first round with athleticism issues and character questions. Paxton Lynch I think slides out of the first round - totally on board with Schefter. If that Wonderlic of 18 is true combined with him just seeming like a goofball, I don't love it for a guy who needs a lot of developing. Maybe roll the dice day 2.

[afosomf]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

You do sometimes not-draft for not-need. You don't blindly draft BAP. Or anyway, the team's board would already take extreme need and extreme not-need into consideration. Not rigidly drafting the highest rated prospect doesn't necessarily mean a team is reaching due to need. Neither is a smart practice: the highest player of need may be a 20-slot reach, and the BAP may not be that much higher than the next-best BAP. 

It's one thing to take Williams at #6 last year. It's mindlessness to do it again a year later, just because a DT is a little better prospect than another prospect at a position of far greater need, that will be far harder to find later far more costly to fill in FA. The next-best prospect on his board would have to be at least half a round lower on his board to justify such a pick, and that's not likely to be the case. If it is, then he should trade back (or it means he should have traded up).

Maccagnan would deserve to be fired if he drafts a DL who doesn't translate to OLB. I like (or want) to believe he isn't that rigid of a thinker. It would be like the Colts drafting Paxton Lynch if he fell to them at #18 if he's technically the highest-rated prospect on their board. 

QB always trump BAP, i just dont think Lynch is anything special, the jets do have a need at DL if they trade Mo,  Snacks is gone. and I would want to draft the best player available and if I have rankins reed robinson or billings way higher on the board than a spence, i would hope Mac would take the DT.  

[Gas2No99]

I don't have a big board, but I know that I would like these players drafted by the Jets in rounds 3-7:

Kevin Hogan - QB Standford

Tyler Ervin - RB - SanJose St.

De'Runnya Wilson - WR Mississippi St.

Joe Schobert - OLB Wisconsin

Tyler Matakevich - ILB Temple 

1st 2 rounds should yield us 2 starters.

[Sperm Edwards]

5 minutes ago, afosomf said:

QB always trump BAP, i just dont think Lynch is anything special, the jets do have a need at DL if they trade Mo,  Snacks is gone. and I would want to draft the best player available and if I have rankins reed robinson or billings way higher on the board than a spence, i would hope Mac would take the DT.  

I'm not referring to QB specifically. BAP is smart as a general rule. But I take for granted that there are tiers/batches of players that we rank approximately evenly. Within that tier or batch, you take the one that is the combination of biggest need plus the hardest (or most expensive) to find.

For example, I like having a young+beastly OL, but some positions just cost more and are harder to fill in free agency. So if it's down to a G, WR, or CB with roughly even draft grades, then G is the last I'm taking because we can get a really good one for $7M/year and a pro bowl one still for under $10M. But again, that's a generality, and individual players and situations can trump that. If we just took a promising CB in the top 5 last year and have another pro bowler in years 1-2 of a 5 year deal, I'm probably not taking the CB.

Likewise, if we have just taken Williams #6 in the country and he looks like the real deal, and already have Richardson locked up for the next 2 years (not counting possibly extending him as it is), then even without Mo I'm not touching a 3-4 DE (or even bigger DT) in round 1. The HC will try to put all his best players on the field and that means it either interrupts the scheme he wants to run or he'll be playing someone out of position. It makes the out-of-position player less valuable and also keeps a better fit for the position on the bench. So there can be such a thing as too much (too many) of a good thing.

[afosomf]

19 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I'm not referring to QB specifically. BAP is smart as a general rule. But I take for granted that there are tiers/batches of players that we rank approximately evenly. Within that tier or batch, you take the one that is the combination of biggest need plus the hardest (or most expensive) to find.

For example, I like having a young+beastly OL, but some positions just cost more and are harder to fill in free agency. So if it's down to a G, WR, or CB with roughly even draft grades, then G is the last I'm taking because we can get a really good one for $7M/year and a pro bowl one still for under $10M. But again, that's a generality, and individual players and situations can trump that. If we just took a promising CB in the top 5 last year and have another pro bowler in years 1-2 of a 5 year deal, I'm probably not taking the CB.

Likewise, if we have just taken Williams #6 in the country and he looks like the real deal, and already have Richardson locked up for the next 2 years (not counting possibly extending him as it is), then even without Mo I'm not touching a 3-4 DE (or even bigger DT) in round 1. The HC will try to put all his best players on the field and that means it either interrupts the scheme he wants to run or he'll be playing someone out of position. It makes the out-of-position player less valuable and also keeps a better fit for the position on the bench. So there can be such a thing as too much (too many) of a good thing.

Yes if their is just decimal point differences and you need an OLB or guard and DT is not a need, i can agree with taking need.  If Mo does go to bears and jets have DT considerably rated higher than other position of needs, i would bet  Mac takes DT. If Mo stays, I could see Mac trading down or take the player that is close enough rated such as a WR like treadwell or a center like Kelly.

[Sperm Edwards]

14 minutes ago, afosomf said:

Yes if their is just decimal point differences and you need an OLB or guard and DT is not a need, i can agree with taking need.  If Mo does go to bears and jets have DT considerably rated higher than other position of needs, i would bet  Mac takes DT. If Mo stays, I could see Mac trading down or take the player that is close enough rated such as a WR like treadwell or a center like Kelly.

I don't watch college games like you & many others, but at our pick I don't think there is any fall-off-a-cliff dropoff after the highest-rated DT.

And we're not getting the Bears' pick for Mo unless we throw our own #1 pick into the mix. If we could have gotten a pick at least half a round later than Chicago's it would already be a done deal. 

There's always trade chatter around this time, and the only trade chatter surrounding Mo is that the Jets are shopping him while claiming they're not actively shopping him. No rumors of teams calling up the Jets showing interest in him to gauge how their fans would feel about the move. The only leak seems likely to have come from the Jets, which was about a month ago when it was leaked that "a few" teams have called us about Mo (presumably to help stir up interest). I'm still holding onto hope that it wasn't just bullsh*t, but the only people who'd have any motivation to leak that are from the Jets FO or maybe Mo's agent (and the latter is a stretch). 

If we get the Bears' pick even-up for Mo, I'll be rightly impressed with Maccagnan.

[SR24]

1-Jack- Would be a steal even if hes only around for a few years (never know with that knee)

2-Spence- Apart from QB this team needs an Edge rusher and with us getting 1 more year from Mo, Adding an edge rusher could set this Defense up for a great year

3-Treadwell- Put this man on the opposite side of Marshall, with Decker playing full time in the slot, and adding Forte out of the backfield. Whether Fitz,Geno,Hoyer are playing qb, they will have arguably the best receiving core in the NFL to throw to.