To QB or not QB

[nicg4360]

In all seriousness I think we should skip any qb at 6. If one of the "big 5" slips to our second consider it but I would prefer a Peterman in the 3rd. He seems like he could be the sleeper this year.

Sent from my Moto Z using JetNation.com mobile app

[32EBoozer]

5 minutes ago, nicg4360 said:

In all seriousness I think we should skip any qb at 6. If one of the "big 5" slips to our second consider it but I would prefer a Peterman in the 3rd. He seems like he could be the sleeper this year.

Sent from my Moto Z using JetNation.com mobile app
 

Fixed!! I think this young man might come to be the best QB out of this draft. Keep those QB's coming until we find the ONE!

[nicg4360]

Fixed!! I think this young man might come to be the best QB out of this draft. Keep those QB's coming until we find the ONE!
[-o

A few opinions whom I have read state that if there was a Dak Prescot in this draft he would be the one to take a chance on. It does not burn a second or 1st round pick and with him coming from a pro style offence he could see the field sooner than later.

Sent from my Moto Z using JetNation.com mobile app

[Lil Woody]

45 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

Historically speaking, I think it's safe to say that at least three and probably four will not "continue their momentum," whatever that means, and that we won't have a shot at the one or two who do.

You miss 100% of the shots you do not take.

We definitely have a shot, if our Owner, GM and HC actually devised a plan to tank, then we have a GREAT shot. If NBA teams can tank, so can NFL teams. Pretending it's about integrity and job security and whatever else is bullsh*t. If an owner and GM agree to a tank, it's absolutely fine by me. It's strategy and since the rest of the NFL doesn't seem to give a sh*t about other teams cheating on the field,, giving away draft picks to let another team absorb a QB salary, or whatever other shenanigans goes on under the guise of gamesmanship and/or strategy.... there is nothing they can say about effectively using the system in place to acquire the best talent. 

[Paradis]

1 hour ago, dbatesman said:

Historically speaking, I think it's safe to say that at least three and probably four will not "continue their momentum," whatever that means, and that we won't have a shot at the one or two who do.

Well you're wrong - or at least not representing the situation accurately. But i wouldn't expect you to backpedal, cause you've done that 0 times.

Yes, it's unlikely that Rosen, Darnold, Jackson, Allen and Falk all uniformly ascend. But only 1? pfff, cmon guy. Not to mention at least 1-2 who currently aren't considered top prospects will come out of the cave. 

Lets start with recognizing next year has better chances. You can work your way back to honesty from there.

[Paradis]

47 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

And if you die of starvation before you get that Ribeye,  then what ?

We've got 2 logs on the roster already. Adding a 3rd isn't going to stave of starvation. Believe me, if there was a prospect with the pick, I'd be all over it. 

[RutgersJetFan]

31 minutes ago, Lil Woody said:

You miss 100% of the shots you do not take.

We definitely have a shot, if our Owner, GM and HC actually devised a plan to tank, then we have a GREAT shot. If NBA teams can tank, so can NFL teams. Pretending it's about integrity and job security and whatever else is bullsh*t. If an owner and GM agree to a tank, it's absolutely fine by me. It's strategy and since the rest of the NFL doesn't seem to give a sh*t about other teams cheating on the field,, giving away draft picks to let another team absorb a QB salary, or whatever other shenanigans goes on under the guise of gamesmanship and/or strategy.... there is nothing they can say about effectively using the system in place to acquire the best talent. 

And if it doesn't work, we'd probably still draft Rosen anyways. Because, well, you know...

[HessStation]

3 hours ago, dbatesman said:

We have no answer at the most important position in sports, but if we get a shot at one this year we should turn it down and wait for Darnold, because that's a workable plan that definitely doesn't depend on a million things breaking exactly right. Also Petty and Hackenberg, come on folks, one of them is bound to work out. A nurse comes to my house and velcros my shoes for me every morning

Somebody wants THREE qbs with slim shots at stardom instead of just two. 

[Lil Woody]

Just now, RutgersJetFan said:

And if it doesn't work, we'd probably still draft Rosen anyways. Because, well, you know...

Awww how cute, my pet snowflake is following me around again.

[Tinstar]

35 minutes ago, Paradis said:

We've got 2 logs on the roster already. Adding a 3rd isn't going to stave of starvation. Believe me, if there was a prospect with the pick, I'd be all over it. 

So I take it that you believe both those logs have more potential that either of the 2 projected 1st round logs from this draft  ? The vast majority of these boards think that Hack was the worst 2nd round pick in the history of the Draft . A large portion like Petty because he's not that QB the giants signed in free agency .  yet 2 kids with at worst, 2nd round talent who will most likely go in the top 20 of the draft are garbage because 4 QBs with greater potential might be available next year .

Make sense to me . 

 

[Paradis]

So I take it that you believe both those logs have more potential that either of the 2 projected 1st round logs from this draft  ? The vast majority of these boards think that Hack was the worst 2nd round pick in the history of the Draft . A large portion like Petty because he's not that QB the giants signed in free agency .  yet 2 kids with at worst, 2nd round talent who will most likely go in the top 20 of the draft are garbage because 4 QBs with greater potential might be available next year .
Make sense to me . 

Coming from someone who saw Jesus in Hack -- I'm not surprised you're struggling with my POV.

Whether or not you agree that next year is worth holding out hope for aside, doesn't change that this year is sh*t. You're trying to sell me on wasting a high pick on EJ and Geno in 2013 and I'm telling you fck no. We've already got people of that calibre on the roster. See it through and re-evaluate next year with better options.

End of story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tinstar]

1 minute ago, Paradis said:

 

 

Coming from someone who saw Jesus in Hack -- I'm not surprised you're struggling with my POV.

Whether or not you agree that next year is worth holding out hope for aside, doesn't change that this year is sh*t. You're trying to sell me on wasting a high pick on EJ and Geno in 2013 and I'm telling you fck no. We've already got people of that calibre on the roster. See it through and re-evaluate next year with better options.

End of story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I see Jesus in you too Paradis, but that's another story .

Other that say Garrett, who I have some questions about, who would you say is the next can't miss prospect in this draft  ?

[Savage69]

3 minutes ago, Paradis said:

 

Coming from someone who saw Jesus in Hack -- I'm not surprised you're struggling with my POV.

Whether or not you agree that next year is worth holding out hope for aside, doesn't change that this year is sh*t. You're trying to sell me on wasting a high pick on EJ and Geno in 2013 and I'm telling you fck no. We've already got people of that calibre on the roster. See it through and re-evaluate next year with better options.

End of story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

So how do you like the TE OJ Howard this year??

[HessStation]

2 hours ago, RutgersJetFan said:

No no, the best safety in college might still be available. That's totally worth passing on a quarterback with a first round grade for. 

This is very short sighted and cynical of you. 

[Paradis]

I see Jesus in you too Paradis, but that's another story .
Other that say Garrett, who I have some questions about, who would you say is the next can't miss prospect in this draft  ?

Love you too!

This year holds very few "cant miss" players IMO. Good for depth and filling out roster needs, horrible for blue chips. No tackles, no complete corners, barely a handful of legit disruptive front 7 ppl. Adams, Williams, Cook and Foster maybe (on field anyway)

Now, SAFEST? There's a few; F Lamp, C Samuel, K Hunt, C Sutton, R Anderson, E Engram and C Davis all have a 0.1% chance of busting IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tinstar]

1 minute ago, Paradis said:

 

 

Love you too!

This year holds very few "cant miss" players IMO. Good for depth and filling out roster needs, horrible for blue chips. No tackles, no complete corners, barely a handful of legit disruptive front 7 ppl. Adams, Williams, Cook and Foster maybe (on field anyway)

Now, SAFEST? There's a few; F Lamp, C Samuel, K Hunt, C Sutton, R Anderson, E Engram and C Davis all have a 0.1% chance of busting IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well you mentioned the guy I was considering, but I bet you wouldn't take that guy at 6 . Not going to tell you who yet, but I think you know .

[Lil Woody]

25 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

who would you say is the next can't miss prospect in this draft  ?

That's a difficult way to attack the question. There are some guys I think are "can't miss" that aren't worth the 6th pick, some might not even go in the 1st round.

Elfien, Lamp, Feeney for example. 

But even at the top of the draft....I'd say Adams is a can't miss guy. But that doesn't mean he's worth the 6th. Howard looks like can't miss, I'd take him at 6.  Solomon Thomas too, he'd be worth taking a 6, but maybe not for our defensive scheme.  I never say can't miss for WRs, but i have a lot of confidence in both Williams and Davis. Ramczyck is a can't miss player. But I'm not sure he can't miss at LT.  But at the worst he's a 12 year starter at RT imo and also not worth the 6th pick..

[Paradis]

Well you mentioned the guy I was considering, but I bet you wouldn't take that guy at 6 . Not going to tell you who yet, but I think you know .

Nope. Foster?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paradis]

So how do you like the TE OJ Howard this year??

Overrated


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SickJetFan]

1st off thesis not a religious post. Looks like it is recent but I cannot tell.  What I find interesting if it is recent he sure is moving that shoulder good don't you think?

 

 

[dbatesman]

2 hours ago, Paradis said:

Well you're wrong - or at least not representing the situation accurately. But i wouldn't expect you to backpedal, cause you've done that 0 times.

Yes, it's unlikely that Rosen, Darnold, Jackson, Allen and Falk all uniformly ascend. But only 1? pfff, cmon guy. Not to mention at least 1-2 who currently aren't considered top prospects will come out of the cave. 

Lets start with recognizing next year has better chances. You can work your way back to honesty from there.

ok

[RutgersJetFan]

56 minutes ago, Lil Woody said:

That's a difficult way to attack the question. There are some guys I think are "can't miss" that aren't worth the 6th pick, some might not even go in the 1st round.

Elfien, Lamp, Feeney for example. 

But even at the top of the draft....I'd say Adams is a can't miss guy. But that doesn't mean he's worth the 6th. Howard looks like can't miss, I'd take him at 6.  Solomon Thomas too, he'd be worth taking a 6, but maybe not for our defensive scheme.  I never say can't miss for WRs, but i have a lot of confidence in both Williams and Davis. Ramczyck is a can't miss player. But I'm not sure he can't miss at LT.  But at the worst he's a 12 year starter at RT imo and also not worth the 6th pick..

yah but which of these are lonsmen 

[Warfish]

2 hours ago, HessStation said:

Somebody wants THREE qbs with slim shots at stardom instead of just two. 

As opposed to what?  Two with slim chances and one with no chance whatsoever who'll take away playing time from the other two?

What is your alternative option here?

[Paradis]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

As opposed to what?  Two with slim chances and one with no chance whatsoever who'll take away playing time from the other two?
What is your alternative option here?

 

You've asked the same stupid question 8 times warfish -- and keep getting the same answer. Some people believe in quality over quantity. There's no empirical data to suggest adding sh*tty QB's to a sh*tty roster eventually translates to finding one. Cleveland's a glaring example why.

Just accept that some people don't think there's a point in adding one of these lesser people to the team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HessStation]

20 minutes ago, Warfish said:

As opposed to what?  Two with slim chances and one with no chance whatsoever who'll take away playing time from the other two?

What is your alternative option here?

Picking a prospect with a better risk reward at a less important position and then seeing what you have in the two slim chances you already have, especially the one you wasted a second round pick on last year....and then if or when you're comfortable with the fact neither slim chance you already have on the roster isn't going to be a star, you pick a QB in 2018 which basically every draft expert is telling you is a much better year to take a QB especially early in the first round. 

[thadude]

Kizer in round 2

[thadude]

5 hours ago, Jetdawgg said:

You picked out the players. I just addressed who you selected. How about reading what you write here?

Smith signed with the Giants for less money than McCown. The Jets got fleeced by a loser again. Good teams don't let this happen. Look at the Steelers. They cut losers and bring in better players. That is clearly the model for sustainability.

I run a company. I get blamed for everything?

Clearly everyone makes mistakes. It is how you fix them that counts.

I agree Geno is better than McCown.  How that piece of crap got a $6 million deal plus incentives from Mac is laughable

[thadude]

30 minutes ago, HessStation said:

Picking a prospect with a better risk reward at a less important position and then seeing what you have in the two slim chances you already have, especially the one you wasted a second round pick on last year....and then if or when you're comfortable with the fact neither slim chance you already have on the roster isn't going to be a star, you pick a QB in 2018 which basically every draft expert is telling you is a much better year to take a QB especially early in the first round. 

I love how people swear next year is the best qb class since 1983.   There is only one "can't miss" guy it's Darnold and he could easily stay for his senior year 

[rangerous]

imo, they should not use a top pick on a qb.  this season kind of parallels the late 90's where they selected todd in 76 with their first pick and then chose robinson in 77 (9th rd)  (no. followed by ryan in 78 (11th rd).  todd was annointed starter just about straight out of the gate and namath was traded.  eventually robinson won the job until micheals soured on him and shipped him to dever.  ryan?  ryan was an effective backup through the obrien years.

[thadude]

3 minutes ago, rangerous said:

imo, they should not use a top pick on a qb.  this season kind of parallels the late 90's where they selected todd in 76 with their first pick and then chose robinson in 77 (9th rd)  (no. followed by ryan in 78 (11th rd).  todd was annointed starter just about straight out of the gate and namath was traded.  eventually robinson won the job until micheals soured on him and shipped him to dever.  ryan?  ryan was an effective backup through the obrien years.

Mac said himself he believes in the Green Bay Packers philosophy of drafting a qb every year which is why they drafted Aaron Rodgers in the first round when they still had Brett Favre

 

Nothing precludes the jets from drafting a qb in 2018 if they take one in 2017.  Nothing.

 

 

[HessStation]

10 minutes ago, thadude said:

I love how people swear next year is the best qb class since 1983.   There is only one "can't miss" guy it's Darnold and he could easily stay for his senior year 

Get a grip. Nobody's swearing by anything. 

[thadude]

Just now, HessStation said:

Get a grip. Nobody's swearing by anything. 

What ru talking about?  People are cheering us fielding a Division III co-Ed roster next year because they think we are guaranteed a franchise qb in the 2018 draft

[HessStation]

7 minutes ago, thadude said:

What ru talking about?  People are cheering us fielding a Division III co-Ed roster next year because they think we are guaranteed a franchise qb in the 2018 draft

And for good reason. That doesn't validate your strongman that everyone thinks next year is '83. 

[rangerous]

3 minutes ago, thadude said:

Mac said himself he believes in the Green Bay Packers philosophy of drafting a qb every year which is why they drafted Aaron Rodgers in the first round when they still had Brett Favre

 

Nothing precludes the jets from drafting a qb in 2018 if they take one in 2017.  Nothing.

 

 

i totally agree with this.  and that mmqb article about hack proves this out.  if a qb is the bpa then mac is going to draft the guy.  i think what people seem to misunderstand is that there is positional bias so the players can be judges on an equalized value basis. 

[Ghost420]

7 hours ago, JetsFanatic said:

I like a third option:

Do not pick QB at #6 this year and hope Hackenberg develops.

Unbelievable how a QB who turns 22 this year and is taken in the 2nd round is already written off as an option.

 

He is so inaccurate idk if you can fix that