58-60% Comp 2900 yards 14 TD 12 Int

[sourceworx]

7 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Those are similar or outright worse QB stats (either individual or team cumulative #s) than:

• Jacksonville in 2016 (3-13)
• 49ers in 2016 (2-14)
• Cleveland in 2015 (3-13)
• Tennessee in 2015 (3-13)
• Chargers in 2015 (4-12) and 2016 (5-11)
• Tennessee in 2014 (2-14)
• Oakland in 2014 (3-13)
• Jets cumulative QBs' #s in 2014 (4-12)
• Tampa in 2013 (4-12)
• Atlanta in 2013 (4-12)
• Washington in 2013 (3-13)

I stopped after the 4 most recent years, but you get the idea. So I'd say we could easily finish with 2-4 wins even if Hackenberg puts up those rookie Flacco numbers.

By the numbers...

Flacco's '08 TD and yardage numbers, and likely the INTs as well, would have been higher if their defense (<15ppg) and ground game (20 TDs) didn't afford Harbaugh (Cameron) the luxury of running the ball 35-40x per game that year. When the D let up 20+ points, he obviously threw a lot more than when they held opponents to ≤13 pts. The latter occurred in 11 games (plus 2x more in the playoffs), so he didn't pass much on balance.

Also his rookie season wasn't 1 TD, 1 INT every week. His first 5 career games his ratio was 1:7 (team was 2-3). The final 11 he was 13:5, throwing 0 picks in 8 of those final 11 (helping the team improve to 9-2 the rest of the way).

Don't expect the 2017 Jets' defense to surrender <15ppg like that '08 Ravens D - comparable to our '09 defense by the numbers - so those meh passing #s could easily result in <5 wins.

No the defense won't be the '08 Ravens defense. But I actually think they may turn out to be solid. So a solid defense, a solid yet unspectacular running game, and rookie Flacco-type numbers out of Hack, and we could pull off 5-6 wins. Maybe even 1 or 2 more if things bounce our way. That puts us out of range for one of the top QBs. 

[varjet]

10 hours ago, long suffering jets fan said:

Didn't Flacco make it into the playoffs his first year?  If Hackenberg looks as good as Flacco did in his first year and miraculously gets us into the playoffs, we don't draft a QB.  Aside from that miracle, we're drafting one.

I think the common prediction is that the Jets are a sub-playoff team that does not pick top 3.  That being said, looking at the schedule it is hard to find 4+ games they win.  People think they beat Jax-I am not so sure. 

1 hour ago, sourceworx said:

No the defense won't be the '08 Ravens defense. But I actually think they may turn out to be solid. So a solid defense, a solid yet unspectacular running game, and rookie Flacco-type numbers out of Hack, and we could pull off 5-6 wins. Maybe even 1 or 2 more if things bounce our way. That puts us out of range for one of the top QBs. 

I think at this point picking sub top 5 Mac would take a Watson or Mahomes.  If they turn out to be good QBs, that pretty much debunks the you have to take a QB top 3-5 hypothesis.  

[Jet Blast]

Regardless of how good Hack looks in 2017, we MUST come out of the 2018 draft with a franchise QB.

The Jets have set  themselves up to be positioned in the top of the draft, essentially making a huge investment in the future. If, against all odds, the we have a good season and are not high enough in the draft to land that long sought after franchise QB, then we MUST trade up... whatever the cost (see Eagles and Carson Wentz). If this means we wind up with 2 franchise QB's, isn't that a shame? What a great problem to have! We could trade one of them and recoup some or all of the capital it cost us to move up in the draft.

Losing season or trade up... there are no other acceptable outcomes.

[BCJet]

7 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

If we're in position to take one of the draft's top 2-3 QBs (presumably with a top 3-ish pick to be in that position), and they're as good as people say they are, there are only 2 options:

1. Draft the QB

2. Trade down, because someone will be willing surrender another 1st rounder and more - if not 2 first rounders and more - to trade up

Under no circumstances could/should/would the Jets draft a non-QB there at any position. It would be impossibly stupid, no matter how stubbornly rigid any GM's philosophy might be. I never say never, but it's hard to believe even Maccagnan would be that much of an imbecile.

What if there is an elite edge rusher available?  Hubbard and Harold Landry can easily both be top 10 edge guys.

[joewilly12]

7 hours ago, stoicsentry said:

Keep in mind that we have many fans that are upset that Geno Smith wasn't given more of a chance. I mean, wow, that's actually something people say. Geno's best season? 59.7% completion, 13 TD/13 INT, 2525 yards (6.9 avg), 5 fumbles. THAT is acceptable QB play in Jetland. You basically just need a pulse.

Just having a pulse hasn't gotten us anywhere..Management and coaches seem to never learn here. Rinse wash repeat..

[Warfish]

20 hours ago, BCJet said:

The question is do those numbers, regardless of the teams W-L total, preclude us from drafting a QB in the first round of the 2018 draft?

No.

[August]

If he puts up those numbers while playing decent/solid football I see no reason to draft another quarterback. I'd think Hackenberg can build on that season and improve going forward. 

[rangerous]

21 hours ago, Mike135 said:

I think it boils down to where we finish the season.  If Hack or Petty do well enough with a crap set of weapons around them to avoid a top draft pick, they have the job moving forward.  Otherwise use a top pick on a QB.

What can really mess this up is if McCown gets any wins at QB.

i just don't see where hack or petty or mccown have the crap weapons everyone seems to talk about.  enunwa is becoming a very good players and both peake and anderson showed good flashes.  powell is more than just a decent back and even forte can make some good contributions.  not to mention jenkins and how stewart and hansen will fit in.  this team doesn't have a raft of superstars but all it takes is for these guys to perform at a high level for the whole season.  some of them will become superstars.

as for the draft pick, as you say it depends on how they finish.  hack/petty do well then maybe they don't use a first rounder on a qb.  on the other hand you look at teams like the niners with montana and young or how the chargers dumped brees for rivers and if the guy is there you almost have to grab him.  

[Sperm Edwards]

4 hours ago, sourceworx said:

No the defense won't be the '08 Ravens defense. But I actually think they may turn out to be solid. So a solid defense, a solid yet unspectacular running game, and rookie Flacco-type numbers out of Hack, and we could pull off 5-6 wins. Maybe even 1 or 2 more if things bounce our way. That puts us out of range for one of the top QBs. 

Obviously they could win even more. Look at Geno's numbers, also in the absence of an '08 Ravens/'09 Jets level defense, and we won 8 games. 

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, BCJet said:

What if there is an elite edge rusher available?  Hubbard and Harold Landry can easily both be top 10 edge guys.

No.

Consider the scenario where we end up with the #2 overall pick. The compensation due for trading down, either in 1 bigger trade-down or 2 smaller ones, could easily be 3 1st rounders (or 2 first rounders plus a 2nd) depending on the prospect available. 

I'd forgo that compensation for a QB prospect, but not for an edge rusher prospect. Nobody tosses away upwards of three 1st round picks for a non-QB prospect. 

[#27TheDominator]

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

 

I'd forgo that compensation for a QB prospect, but not for an edge rusher prospect. Nobody tosses away upwards of three 1st round picks for a non-QB prospect. 

?

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

?

Well played, even if NO's picks in rounds 2-7 were worth two additional 1st round picks.

[PepPep]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and predict that even if Hack does well, very well. I mean, I'm not talking SB or epic Pro Bowl numbers, I'm just talking much better than expected and we STILL have a shot at drafting one of the top QBs, we will still go ahead and draft that QB (if Macc and the scouting department like him). It's just one of those things where you can never have enough QB talent on your team, especially young talent. Most of the time when teams overload at QB it tends to work out. I think this notion of a young talented QB 'rotting' as a backup is overblown. Pats did it with Garroppolo (sp?) while Brady was ini his prime, Washington did it with RG3/Cousins, and teams in general have started drafting QBs in back to back years without bailing on the previously picked QB. 

[MDL_JET]

11 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

If we're in position to take one of the draft's top 2-3 QBs (presumably with a top 3-ish pick to be in that position), and they're as good as people say they are, there are only 2 options:

1. Draft the QB

2. Trade down, because someone will be willing surrender another 1st rounder and more - if not 2 first rounders and more - to trade up

Under no circumstances could/should/would the Jets draft a non-QB there at any position. It would be impossibly stupid, no matter how stubbornly rigid any GM's philosophy might be. I never say never, but it's hard to believe even Maccagnan would be that much of an imbecile.

If Hack is the answer, you trade down two spots and gather the picks and then draft Barkley and finally enjoy a nice offense for many years.

[#27TheDominator]

25 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Well played, even if NO's picks in rounds 2-7 were worth two additional 1st round picks.

I was wondering what "trading the whole draft" amounts to in draft chart "points."  They did give up their 1st (LaVar Arrington) and 3rd the following year. 

That example is more of a deterrent to other front offices than something they would emulate.

[Smashmouth]

On 7/24/2017 at 11:59 AM, BCJet said:

In his rookie year Joe Flacco put up the following numbers - 60%  2917 yards  14/12 TD to Int ratio - he is a similar comp to Hackenberg as he is not a rhythm type passer, who hits on a high % of short passes, he is more of a chunk yards type QB.

The question is do those numbers, regardless of the teams W-L total, preclude us from drafting a QB in the first round of the 2018 draft?

I think it would take a pretty damn good year from Hack if we were to pass on a QB in the next draft.

It would take 63%, 3500 Yards and 20+ TD's and around 10 Ints. He would also have to show the ability to move in the pocket and not look like a statue. Yes those numbers are a bit over the top but you asked the question and that's what they need to be IMHO. Also keep in mind if we are top five in the draft its going to be very difficult to pass on a QB since we have nothing but questions with both Hack and Petty so even if one emerges and the other sh*ts the bed you still don't have a viable back up

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

I was wondering what "trading the whole draft" amounts to in draft chart "points."  They did give up their 1st (LaVar Arrington) and 3rd the following year. 

That example is more of a deterrent to other front offices than something they would emulate.

My memory was bad. I thought they just traded that year's picks in every round to move up for Ricky. Turns out they also traded the 2 picks you outlined. I didn't even remember that part of it. What a friggin' maroon.

OK fine then. It's Exhibit A on why you don't do that no matter how talented the prospect. 

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, MDL_JET said:

If Hack is the answer, you trade down two spots and gather the picks and then draft Barkley and finally enjoy a nice offense for many years.

However much you trade down, you certainly don't stay pat and take a non-QB. Not if there's a QB in your slot that teams will pay through the nose to get.

This is all beside the point. Hackenberg would have to be bordering on great, not merely showing some promise and a slightly better than 1:1 TD:INT ratio, to pass up on a QB there.

We should be so lucky to have a Brees + Rivers problem with Hackenberg (or Petty) + _______.

[#27TheDominator]

24 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

My memory was bad. I thought they just traded that year's picks in every round to move up for Ricky. Turns out they also traded the 2 picks you outlined. I didn't even remember that part of it. What a friggin' maroon.

OK fine then. It's Exhibit A on why you don't do that no matter how talented the prospect. 

It was kind of a weird time.  Teams weren't all dead set on this plug and play a stiff back philosophy.  RBs were still staples of team's offense.  In 1999 it had only been 4 drafts since Ki-Jana Carter went #1 overall.  It had been 9 years before that when Bo was picked #1 overall, but from '77-';81, 4 out of 5 times #1 overall was an RB.  Ditka was an anachronism, surely trying to recreate his glory years with Payton, but he wasn't as crazy far behind the times as picking a back would be now.  

[BCJet]

20 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

No.

Consider the scenario where we end up with the #2 overall pick. The compensation due for trading down, either in 1 bigger trade-down or 2 smaller ones, could easily be 3 1st rounders (or 2 first rounders plus a 2nd) depending on the prospect available. 

I'd forgo that compensation for a QB prospect, but not for an edge rusher prospect. Nobody tosses away upwards of three 1st round picks for a non-QB prospect. 

I didnt think about trading down - was saying more if we are at 6-7 and its Rosen (the "3rd QB") or an edge rusher, but yes, if we can get a good haul to move down 3-5 spots and get a player or even take a QB then, Im fine with it.  

[BCJet]

18 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

I think it would take a pretty damn good year from Hack if we were to pass on a QB in the next draft.

It would take 63%, 3500 Yards and 20+ TD's and around 10 Ints. He would also have to show the ability to move in the pocket and not look like a statue. Yes those numbers are a bit over the top but you asked the question and that's what they need to be IMHO. Also keep in mind if we are top five in the draft its going to be very difficult to pass on a QB since we have nothing but questions with both Hack and Petty so even if one emerges and the other sh*ts the bed you still don't have a viable back up

I know you prefaced it by saying the numbers are a bit over the top, but 63% 3500 and 20-10 as a second year player in his first year playing vs NFL regulars would be incredible stats and we would not be picking in the top 10.  Would be great to get that out of Hack and possibly have our franchise guy here already and be able to take an OT or pass rusher with our first round pick.