We had a pretty good haul this draft. Not great but good. My grades.

[detectivekimble]

1 hour ago, dbatesman said:

Of course you do. But some guys are likelier than others to be the "wrong one," and a guy who has horrible stats and horrible film is pretty much the archetype. Say this pick was a wideout who dropped half the passes thrown his way, or a safety who ran a 4.9, or a guard who only managed 5 reps on the bench. Still giving it an A?

Bad analogy.  This is more like drafting a WR with great physical tools who had a good freshman year, but then had to play in a triple option offense his sophomore and junior years.

[dbatesman]

Just now, BowlesMovement said:

As hard as it has been to hit on a QB historically, its getting harder and harder every year, and that is going to continue unless the NFL starts embracing the spread offense. The majority of top colleges these days are running a spread, and the reality is that very few spread QB's have ever really hit in the NFL, so if you want a QB, your going to have to buck some trend sooner or later, or just luck your ass off. I don't thinks is about cracking any code, few guys have the physical traits that Hackenberg have, and as much as the haters like yourself want to throw cute little weapinzzzz comments out, external factors can and do impact QB's. And obviously this pick tells you that Mac and his staff buy into those external factors impacting him, and there is a chance he can be good. Time will tell, but I still don't think a late 2nd is that big of a risk to take on a guy with a ton of upside.

I see this as truncated downside risk, with a high ceiling, even if it is a very low probability of a high ceiling. As for a precedent for a guy with Hackenbergs profile succeeding, well, it all depends on if you want to consider all the factors that are involved, Penn State issues, HC left, new offense, horrible O line, bad offensive coaches. How many big time QB prospects have that as a part of their profile?

Wow, when you factor all that in, he probably should have gone first overall.

[JustInFudge]

56 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

This is a message board.  Some people liked the picks and some hated them.  That's what the entire Jets forum looks like right now:  People yelling about whether they liked or hated the picks.  What's wrong with adding a grade to them?  So far this thread has had some pretty productive debates already.  So I did something right. 

I was more so talking in generalities but took advantage of the opportunity to insult you. 

The "grades" are completely subjective based on some douchebags 5 minute youtube analysis and prediction where they will be drafted.  Grades are just talking points, so for that you've achieved your goal and there is nothing wrong with it, I guess.  Still doesnt change the facts its a stupid exercise.  

For example, most people had Lee in the top 15.  On paper, he's by far the best player the Jets drafted and you gave him a B.  Meanwhile some folks had Hackenburg undraftable and you gave him an A.  It makes zero sense, just like you giving a 6th and 7th round picks an "A".  (drafting a punter period should earn you an F, IMO).  You're grading is totally and completely subjective and what you're grading each pick on is inconsistent. 

All that said, this was a weird year.  Very few standout, cant miss prospects.  Very few sexy picks.  Very few with all-pro level type of ceilings.  Very few household names we've been talking about for years (interestingly enough Hack was one of the few).  Personally, I've never been so unsure or less convicted about Jets targets in this draft than I ever have before.  So while I probably found myself scratching my head with each pick, I really didnt have any clue how this thing was going to go, so I'm not actually sure why any of this surprised me, which is why I guess after the initial shock, I'm warming up to each pick.

 

 

[BowlesMovement]

1 hour ago, dbatesman said:

Indirectly he did. He took Geno and then passed on Bridgewater and Carr the next year, even though Geno had shown nothing whatsoever to indicate he was a franchise player. If Hackenberg really is Maccagnan's "guy," like all of you keep saying, it's pretty easy to see history repeating itself, especially considering Hackenberg likely won't get the chance to sh*t his pants this year and force the issue the way Geno did in 2013.

I disagree, I think Idzik got fired for his overall incompetence, and the fact that I think Woody finally came to realize that Rex was an asshat idiot moron jackass clown, and needed to clean house and get rid of Idzik as well, because he did not look good enough to pick a coach of his own. I don't really think it was because of Geno, maybe it factored in, but that alone would not have undone him.

[BowlesMovement]

1 minute ago, dbatesman said:

Wow, when you factor all that in, he probably should have gone first overall.

If you want to have a grown up discussion, we can, you want to act like a clown, go ahead........

[dbatesman]

3 minutes ago, BowlesMovement said:

I disagree, I think Idzik got fired for his overall incompetence, and the fact that I think Woody finally came to realize that Rex was an asshat idiot moron jackass clown, and needed to clean house and get rid of Idzik as well, because he did not look good enough to pick a coach of his own. I don't really think it was because of Geno, maybe it factored in, but that alone would not have undone him.

It's because of Geno insofar as he didn't take another QB. If he'd drafted Bridgewater or Carr in 2014, he'd still be here.

[Patriot Killa]

I can tell just by these two offseasons that Maccagg is the best we have had a GM for many years. Whatever moves he makes we need to trust until proven otherwise.

[ZachEY]

4 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

It's because of Geno insofar as he didn't take another QB. If he'd drafted Bridgewater or Carr in 2014, he'd still be here.

Yup, the hope is we do as Carolina did and draft Clausen followed by Newton a year later as opposed to as the Jets did, drafting Geno and then doing nothing when opportunity arose.

[JetBlue]

21 minutes ago, afosomf said:

watch the bama OSU game I posted in Lee thread,  he was terrible in run defense, If saban would have just pounded Henry Bama wins game easily. this should have been a 2nd rd pick at best

Right because no player ever has a bad or sub par game. I think the scouts watched a hell of a lot more film than you on him so I believe they are in a better position to make the call, no?  Also, when are we going to give this BRAND NEW SCOUTING STAFF the benefit of the doubt?    I know everyone thinks they know more than guys who do this for a living but at least let their picks get on the before you criticize them.   

[Obrien2Toon]

I'd switch Lee to the A and Hack to the B, but otherwise I have almost identical grades.

Good job

[afosomf]

13 minutes ago, JetBlue said:

Right because no player ever has a bad or sub par game. I think the scouts watched a hell of a lot more film than you on him so I believe they are in a better position to make the call, no?  Also, when are we going to give this BRAND NEW SCOUTING STAFF the benefit of the doubt?    I know everyone thinks they know more than guys who do this for a living but at least let their picks get on the before you criticize them.   

time will tell who is right, He is not terrible, I just do not believe he is worth a 1st rd grade

[JetBlue]

1 minute ago, afosomf said:

time will tell who is right, He is not terrible, I just do not believe he is worth a 1st rd grade

And you are certainly entitled to that opinion, although every "expert" I have read, had him going in the top 25.  

[Jet Nut]

2 hours ago, dbatesman said:

The only QB I really liked in this draft was Goff. Barring that, I wouldn't have taken anyone in the first or second. In the third or later, I would have been happy with literally anyone other than Hackenberg or Cook. If you want a specific name, I like Kevin Hogan a lot, especially where the Chiefs got him.

Lol, so not on,y do the Jets not know what they're doing all the other teams that drafted others over Cookmdont know what they're doing either. 

[Jetsfan80]

34 minutes ago, JiF said:

I was more so talking in generalities but took advantage of the opportunity to insult you. 

The "grades" are completely subjective based on some douchebags 5 minute youtube analysis and prediction where they will be drafted.  Grades are just talking points, so for that you've achieved your goal and there is nothing wrong with it, I guess.  Still doesnt change the facts its a stupid exercise.  

For example, most people had Lee in the top 15.  On paper, he's by far the best player the Jets drafted and you gave him a B.  Meanwhile some folks had Hackenburg undraftable and you gave him an A.  It makes zero sense, just like you giving a 6th and 7th round picks an "A".  (drafting a punter period should earn you an F, IMO).  You're grading is totally and completely subjective and what you're grading each pick on is inconsistent. 

All that said, this was a weird year.  Very few standout, cant miss prospects.  Very few sexy picks.  Very few with all-pro level type of ceilings.  Very few household names we've been talking about for years (interestingly enough Hack was one of the few).  Personally, I've never been so unsure or less convicted about Jets targets in this draft than I ever have before.  So while I probably found myself scratching my head with each pick, I really didnt have any clue how this thing was going to go, so I'm not actually sure why any of this surprised me, which is why I guess after the initial shock, I'm warming up to each pick.

 

 

I guess my Lee grade was based on Treadwell being there.  Treadwell seemed like a slam dunk, can't miss kind of pick, despite all the huffing and puffing about his 40 time.  Lee filled a specific skillset we needed, and will be a very good player.  Solid pick, but not an "A".

The A for Hackenberg was more based on Macc's approach than Hackenberg himself.  He evaluated the guy highly and took him.  If his evaluation is correct, everyone will agree its an A.  If he's wrong, then the pick probably gets somewhere between a B- and a C.  A swing and a miss in the 2nd round on a QB probably can't get lower than a C unless the guy could have been had later.  Even today, 3 years later, I'd give Idzik about a B- for taking Geno. 

Completely subjective analysis for a crapshoot draft.  I agree with you there.

[CTM]

if we're giving Mac an A for Hackenborg simply cause he liked him, why isnt every grade an A? Is the assumption that he didn't really like the other players?

[Jet Nut]

1 hour ago, T0mShane said:

Same logic would apply to giving Jamarcus Russell $10 mil per. Everything but the tools is awful, but hey, there's a chance. 

Or worse, taking Lynch and paying him 1st round money.

[Smashmouth]

2 hours ago, Mainejet said:

Lee is an F pick. This guy is miscast with this defense. He'll never be a big contributor for this defense. Apparently, Mac and Bowles have never read their Jets history books because this team has been down that road in the past.

The Burris is not so much a bad pick because of the player, but because of what position he plays. The Jets NEEDED a TE in this draft. It was an absolute must to get better and beat cover 2 formations. There were a few decent TE's available in this draft that Mac skipped over. That is a huge mistake. I personally love the Hackenberg and the punter pick.

The Jets History Books ? Really ?

[Jet Nut]

1 hour ago, dbatesman said:

Wow, when you factor all that in, he probably should have gone first overall.

Who's ever said that? 

How is it worse than you making it sound like Hackenberg should have gone last.  How does this childish reply help make your case? 

[T0mShane]

12 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Or worse, taking Lynch and paying him 1st round money.

John Elways fleeced himself and traded up to do it!

[Joe Jets fan]

1 hour ago, dbatesman said:

That it happened three years ago.

That's for showing your true feelings.   Will now be taking your opinion on Hack with the knowledge that you are biased and should not be given any thought or time. 

[Jet Nut]

5 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

John Elways fleeced himself and traded up to do it!

And Elways history of drafting QBs out of college?  Anyone could have taken a chance on a first ballot HOF, GOAT QB.  

Elway also blew the Osweiller fiasco any way it's looked at, stuck himself with Sanchez as his starter and tried for a month to trade for Kaep to lead his team.  And now traded up to pick a QB who has more questions than answers.

Why do we always decide that every other teams FO knows more than us.  

[Dcat]

2 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

For the sake of comparison, Mangini got rid of Vilma because he needed a 3-4 ILB to take his place... and never found one, in 3 years. 

the idea that Vilma wouldn't be solid as an ILB in a 3-4 was always just a smoke screen for whatever the real reason was for getting rid of Vilma.  THere was something bad between him and the FO/coaching staff that led to his trade to New Orleans, where he was solid.  

[Irish Jet]

I think the LB's will save this draft from being a disaster regardless - They're pretty safe picks who can contribute from day one and I loved the value of Jenkins in the Third. While I think the Hackenberg pick could set us back it's ultimately a second rounder so we're not obligated to invest too much time in him if he goes the way of Sanchez, Geno, Clemens etc. which I suspect he will. 

 

[Augustiniak]

7 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

And Elways history of drafting QBs out of college?  Anyone could have taken a chance on a first ballot HOF, GOAT QB.  

Elway also blew the Osweiller fiasco any way it's looked at, stuck himself with Sanchez as his starter and tried for a month to trade for Kaep to lead his team.  And now traded up to pick a QB who has more questions than answers.

Why do we always decide that every other teams FO knows more than us.  

because the jets screw up too many picks we assume that other teams don't.

[Jet Nut]

1 hour ago, afosomf said:

watch the bama OSU game I posted in Lee thread,  he was terrible in run defense, If saban would have just pounded Henry Bama wins game easily. this should have been a 2nd rd pick at best

Yes because the number one team in he country, with a history of running the ball down opponents throats does that to a mess of a team and you pin it all on one LB. lol

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, The Crusher said:

I wonder if he was actually damaged (regressed) or simply got no better than he was when he started.  I do think he must sit for awhile before we play him here. 

See, this is the thing I'm not following. If the idea is that throwing him out there right away will ruin him, then how does that reconcile with him possibly not already being ruined by the prior 2 seasons? If he's already damaged from his 2014-2015 seasons what good is sitting him going to do? If 2 years of that didn't ruin him, why would 1 year of good offensive coaching do him such harm?

I'm not saying we have to throw him out there week 1 or anything. But I've read more than enough from some - and I'm not saying you - who believe a QB gets permanently ruined by non-ideal circumstances while he's so young. I just think it's largely a contradictory position to take. 

[Sperm Edwards]

On 5/2/2016 at 2:06 PM, Jet Nut said:

Or worse, taking Lynch and paying him 1st round money.

Late first rounders don't make much. Plus if he works out, then a 1st round pick can get a 5th year team option. Not so with a player taken after that. It's why Denver lost Osweiller to free agency this year and had to make an offer of $14m to keep him for even 1 more year (had to guarantee him 2 more at probably more than he's worth).

Truthfully, if Macc wanted a QB then he should have gone for the gold. Neither of the top 2 QBs drafted were taken by the teams that naturally ended up with the picks, meaning a trade was doable. They're clearly better prospects, and you don't pass up on them because of the possibility of drafting an ILB at 20. Wentz is supposedly the best with the big knock on him being many say he needs to sit for a year. But they say that crap about lots of QBs who start right away and aren't terrible (let alone not "getting ruined" by tossing them out there).

[NYs Stepchild]

35 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

The Jets History Books ? Really ?

Yes can you believe this guy is the Jets GM for over a year and hasn't read the Jets' history books. Obviously he just doesn't care enough to be prepared. 

[NYs Stepchild]

23 minutes ago, Dcat said:

the idea that Vilma wouldn't be solid as an ILB in a 3-4 was always just a smoke screen for whatever the real reason was for getting rid of Vilma.  THere was something bad between him and the FO/coaching staff that led to his trade to New Orleans, where he was solid.  

Mangini ran a straight up read and react 3-4. Vilma did not suit this. You need to take on and shed blocks from lineman for that. You cannot go around blockers in a 2 gap. 

Bowles runs a hybrid 1 gap penetrating 3-4 where the OLBs take on blockers and set the edge. One inside LB stands up any free blocker, and the other cleans up. Lee is going to clean up. Anyone that says he doesn't fit doesn't know anything about our defensive schemes. 

[BowlesMovement]

8 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

See, this is the thing I'm not following. If the idea is that throwing him out there right away will ruin him, then how does that reconcile with him possibly not already being ruined by the prior 2 seasons? If he's already damaged from his 2014-2015 seasons what good is sitting him going to do? If 2 years of that didn't ruin him, why would 1 year of good offensive coaching do him such harm?

I'm not saying we have to throw him out there week 1 or anything. But I've read more than enough from some - and I'm not saying you - who believe a QB gets permanently ruined by non-ideal circumstances while he's so young. I just think it's largely a contradictory position to take. 

I don't think there is a one size fits all for this with QB's. I think some players are ready sooner than others, but I think the important thing is identifying when they are ready. I think most people think with Hackenberg he needs to sit, the assumption is his confidence is shaken from the beatings he took. A rookie QB in the NFL is going to get tested, and tested hard, if his confidence is already shaky, not sure the best thing is to let him go out and take a beating while still learning the system. Then again, the coaches have to make that determination, if they think he is ready, I'd love to see him start sooner rather than later.

[Dcat]

1 minute ago, NYs Stepchild said:

Mangini ran a straight up read and react 3-4. Vilma did not suit this. You need to take on and shed blocks from lineman for that. You cannot go around blockers in a 2 gap. 

Bowles runs a hybrid 1 gap penetrating 3-4 where the OLBs take on blockers and set the edge. One inside LB stands up any free blocker, and the other cleans up. Lee is going to clean up. Anyone that says he doesn't fit doesn't know anything about our defensive schemes. 

there you go. Thank you for an accurate explanation. And I agree.  I have no doubt that the above is an accurate assessment of what happened. Although there was something else about Vilma that I vaguely recall as well which led to the trade..

[The Crusher]

14 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

See, this is the thing I'm not following. If the idea is that throwing him out there right away will ruin him, then how does that reconcile with him possibly not already being ruined by the prior 2 seasons? If he's already damaged from his 2014-2015 seasons what good is sitting him going to do? If 2 years of that didn't ruin him, why would 1 year of good offensive coaching do him such harm?

I'm not saying we have to throw him out there week 1 or anything. But I've read more than enough from some - and I'm not saying you - who believe a QB gets permanently ruined by non-ideal circumstances while he's so young. I just think it's largely a contradictory position to take. 

I guess its the difference of falling off a one story garage or a seven story apartment building.  The first one may hurt and damage you but the second one will kill you.

[Kleckineau]

46 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

And Elways history of drafting QBs out of college?  Anyone could have taken a chance on a first ballot HOF, GOAT QB.  

Elway also blew the Osweiller fiasco any way it's looked at, stuck himself with Sanchez as his starter and tried for a month to trade for Kaep to lead his team.  And now traded up to pick a QB who has more questions than answers.

Why do we always decide that every other teams FO knows more than Jets FO.  

Because if you are older than 10 history tells you so.

[no psls]

4 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

I think people are freaking out about this draft class, one way or the other.  No, this didn't seem to be a pure BPA type of draft.  And that's OK.  It doesn't have to be.  You have to add talent that fits what you're trying to do, and that's what Macc did this year.  But these picks were neither amazing nor terrible, despite how polarizing the thread titles read on JN this morning.   We took a lot of smart, high character, and athletic guys in this draft class.  Nothing wrong with that!

Here are my grades:

 

1.20:  Darron Lee, LB, Ohio St.

Let's face it.  Laquon Treadwell would have been a fun pick.  His value was perfect at that spot (especially considering Minnesota snagged him 3 picks later), and he was a guy we brought in for a private visit.  Had we grabbed him, it would have been a signal that we loved what we saw. 

But Lee makes a ton of sense nonetheless.  The Jets are attempting to ride the wave of seemingly "undersized" LB's who have sideline to sideline speed.  And Lee is an exceptional athlete to boot.  We will never ask him to try to win battles at the point of attack, but we WILL ask him to make plays all over the field, particularly on 3rd down, where we have had so much difficulty, and not just under Todd Bowles.

I also don't agree that comparable players were available later.  Yes, we could have taken Su'a Cravens at 51 (he went 53 to Washington).  But Cravens is already being listed as a safety on the Redskins' depth chart.  He's not the same kind of player as Lee.  Lee is a first round talent and we took him where he was valued.  Thus, while it was hard to get excited about an "unsexy" pick in the first, it's also hard to kill the pick either.

GRADE:  B

 

2.51:  Christian Hackenberg, QB, Penn St.

The evaluation of this pick comes down to one, simple argument that is somewhat circular in nature:  You never know with QB's, and thus you have to trust that the guy making the decision to invest in one made the right call.  Macc evidently had Hackenberg listed as his 2nd favorite QB behind Goff.  So he went and got his guy.  He put his name on this pick, and made a bold decision.  We say we want our GM to take QB's until we find one, then criticize him for taking the "wrong one".  That's the nature of the NFL, guys.  Unless you tank or trade up with a king's ransom worth of picks, you always run a high risk of taking the "wrong one".

So my grade here is a reflection not of what Hackenberg is or is not capable of, though all reports suggest he's a bright kid with a high ceiling (and a low floor), nor even the "value" of the pick (if we could have guaranteed he'd have been available in the 3rd round, for instance, this would be a reach.  But we do not have any way of knowing that).  My grade is a reflection of our front office taking the information at hand and making a call to get a signal caller.  We now have Hackenberg and Petty as the future of this franchise, and the clock is now ticking on Macc and Bowles as a result:  Make it work with these young QB's or their time will be over.

Grade: A

 

3.83:  Jordan Jenkins, OLB, Georgia

More athleticism comes to the Jets at the LB corps with the addition of Jenkins, who will play along the edge.  This was Macc's best pick of the draft when it comes to value, and it also met a huge need for the Jets, much like each of the first 2 picks.  The reason Jenkins was not a pick in the first couple of rounds is that he's more like a Calvin Pace than he'll ever be like a Von Miller.  It's no fun being unable to get a sack machine on the roster, but that cannot be used to knock this pick.  Jenkins was consistent at Georgia, more athletic than many realize, and should be a solid pro.  If you can get a potential solid starter in the 3rd round, you've made a great pick. 

Grade:  A

 

4.118:  Juston Burris, CB, NC State

Burris wasn't an interception machine in school, but what he was actually was more impressive:  He was a guy people avoided.  Burris was only targeted 44 times last year, and his completion % against was a low 34 %.  Granted, this was not against SEC competition, which has to be taken into account.  But finding a guy with ideal size (6', 212 lbs) and a nice body of work in the 4th round is a pretty good get here.  Burris also does not seem to be a reach, as most sources had him valued around this range.  Again, not a guy that blows anyone away, but simply a solid pick.

Grade:  B+

5.158:  Brandon Shell, OT, South Carolina

Finally the Jets were able to add some O-Line help in this draft.  To do so they had to give up future draft capital, which hurts the grade on this pick slightly.  Clearly the Jets love the kid or they would not have made this move, though it also could have been a "need" pick they felt had to happen.  In either instance we'll have to "wait and see" on this one.  If Shell does not end up Breno Giacomini's eventual replacement at RT or at least a solid backup, it will end up being a high risk, low reward pick.

Grade:  C+

 

7.235:  Loc Edwards, P, Sam Houston St.

Ryan Quigley is gone, and with a pair of 7th rounders to play with, the Jets made sure to grab the top candidate to be his replacement before waiting for the UDFA pool to materialize.  Kudos for the pick!

Grade:  A

 

7.241:  Charone Peak, WR, Clemson

A Scotty McKnight, Peak is not.  At 6-2, 209 lbs and with great speed, the Jets are very clear about what they look for out of WR's these days.  And that's good to see.  Peak is well worth the flyer despite his knee injuries, and will add some needed depth to an aging WR corps. 

Grade:  A

 

OVERALL 2016 DRAFT GRADE:  B+

You can't grade a draft for at least three years . Who are you , the Great Karnac ?

[Beerfish]

4 minutes ago, no psls said:

You can't grade a draft for at least three years . Who are you , the Great Karnac ?

What is the point of grading a draft after you KNOW who is good or bad?  You should grade the draft at the same time the Jets graded these players that is the only way your opinion is worth a spit three years down the road.  I give Tom Brady a draft grade of A+++, I give Jamarcus Russell a grade of F-!  Am I right?????