Jump to content

Report: GM Mike Tannenbaum FIRED (MERGED)


gangreenman
 Share

Recommended Posts

I can't imagine that being the case and it would be absolutely asinine to do so. In that case you might as well get one more year out of him, let him walk next offseason and gladly take your 3rd round comp pick.

I agree. He's better than Holmes, but still... We got Holmes and Edwards for a pair of 5ths. I think the likely scenario is that we are looking at something similar to what we got for Abraham and to that I say Whoopty Damn Doo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's being mellowdramatic to try to make it seem like he's making a more salient point that me, because I'm advocating we trade a good player for the betterment of the whole team. God forbid.

I'm melodramatic, but you are acting like it's a guarantee that a couple of good draft picks will = Revis. There is no guarantee that we will get fleeced, but IMO the value of a guy who is going to demand a fair market contract is not as high as you think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. He's better than Holmes, but still... We got Holmes and Edwards for a pair of 5ths. I think the likely scenario is that we are looking at something similar to what we got for Abraham and to that I say Whoopty Damn Doo.

Perhaps, but if the new GM looks at Revis' contract demands and comes to the conclusion that he's not willing to make that commitment, I'm not so sure one more year of Revis in a year destined to be a bumpy ride is worth passing on a first rounder if you know he'll be a goner anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm melodramatic, but you are acting like it's a guarantee that a couple of good draft picks will = Revis. There is no guarantee that we will get fleeced, but IMO the value of a guy who is going to demand a fair market contract is not as high as you think.

No I'm not. I'm saying Revis = picks, players, cap space + new GM = more wins. I don't give a sh*t if we replace Revis. I want this team to win. I could give two sh*ts about individual accomplishments, and him being the best Jet ever.

You just aren't following the logic. Our team ****ing sucks. We need ammunition to go along with a new GM. Hiring a good evaluator of talent, and not giving him any chips to play is a lost cause. By the time our team is competitive again (2014?), Revis will be 2 years old, 2 years more expensive and it's more likely 2 years further removed from his best playing days... so trade him now, when his value is at a peak, and rebuild for crying out loud. Revis is hands down our best leverage for gaining back the ammunition Tannenbaum squandered.

I'd be looking to trade other guys too, but there's just nothing on this roster of value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Falcons only gave up a 7th for Assante Samuel and he negotiated his deal down. By the way, the Falcons are the #1 seed in the better conference and they have a sh*tload of money at CB.

And that is because they build the majority of that team out of the draft. Matt Ryan = drafted. Roddy White, Julio Jones, Jaquizz Rodgers, Harry Douglas, all drafted. Most of the Oline = drafted. This goes to my earlier point, when your team is stacked everywhere else... then it makes sense to spend at CB, because drafting a roster full of talent will put you in good cap position.

We are not the Falcons. We need to become the Falcons. When we do, then it'd be great to go out and pay the next Revis to come complete our team. We need to build a legit roster first though... and without ammunition it's going to take a couple years, and Revis will do nothing but get more expensive and less talented over that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To chime in, I'm not sure the Jets are an outright rebuild situation. If the new GM determines they are, then you trade Revis because you don't rebuild around a $15 mil per corner. This is why keeping Rex screws things up--if he's fired, you scrap the 3-4 (which helps Coples and Wilkerson), and then Revis becomes less important. But, keeping Rex and his blitzes absolutely necessitates big-money corners to compensate for the man coverage scheme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. He's better than Holmes, but still... We got Holmes and Edwards for a pair of 5ths. I think the likely scenario is that we are looking at something similar to what we got for Abraham and to that I say Whoopty Damn Doo.

Neither Holmes or Edwards are nearly as good as Revis. Revis might be one of the best 20 players in football. Easily one of the best 10 defenders.

Horrible comparison, and horrible basis for determining Revis trade value. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I'm not. I'm saying Revis = picks, players, cap space + new GM = more wins. I don't give a sh*t if we replace Revis. I want this team to win. I could give two sh*ts about individual accomplishments, and him being the best Jet ever.

You just aren't following the logic. Our team ****ing sucks. We need ammunition to go along with a new GM. Hiring a good evaluator of talent, and not giving him any chips to play is a lost cause. By the time our team is competitive again (2014?), Revis will be 2 years old, 2 years more expensive and it's more likely 2 years further removed from his best playing days... so trade him now, when his value is at a peak, and rebuild for crying out loud. Revis is hands down our best leverage for gaining back the ammunition Tannenbaum squandered.

I'd be looking to trade other guys too, but there's just nothing on this roster of value.

I follow your logic. You either aren't following mine or your just being an ass.

If we can get value for him, I am fine with trading him. You seem to think we are guaranteed to get these great offers for him but won't accept that the fact that he wants a sh*tload of money will lower them. If we are only offered a first - which is a distinct possibility - I'd probably just as soon keep him. If we're offered more then I'd certainly consider it, anything less is a ****ing joke even for the 1 year rental.

We have ammo for 2014, so he'll only be one year older. LOL that his value is at its peak. He is coming off a torn ACL. I dont' think Revis is our best ammunition. He's our best player, but somebody with a lower set contract and playing well may well be worth more - say WIlkerson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neither Holmes or Edwards are nearly as good as Revis. Revis might be one of the best 20 players in football. Easily one of the best 10 defenders.

Horrible comparison, and horrible basis for determining Revis trade value. LOL

LOL. LOL. LOL.

The reason we want to move the guy is because he wants a fair market (or better) contract. Why give a bunch of picks for the right to sign him to one? This is the Mets trading for Santana. There. That is a completely valid comparision. Who is the football equivalent to Phil Humber? Can't wait to have him.

Shane's comment is 100% on. The fact is, the best chance we'd have to move him is Rex going to D coordinate somewhere and wanting him. He suits the Rex D to a tee and is probably less valuable to other teams (including us after they fire Rex).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To chime in, I'm not sure the Jets are an outright rebuild situation. If the new GM determines they are, then you trade Revis because you don't rebuild around a $15 mil per corner. This is why keeping Rex screws things up--if he's fired, you scrap the 3-4 (which helps Coples and Wilkerson), and then Revis becomes less important. But, keeping Rex and his blitzes absolutely necessitates big-money corners to compensate for the man coverage scheme.

I'm not saying it wouldn't happen, but why would we automatically scrap the 34, when the majority of our team is illsuited for the 43 besides Coples and Wilk, who are scheme diverse?? You really think Harris' slow ass could play MLB and we'd roll out Thomas and Pace as our LDE and RDE?? I think a switch to the 43 could happen, but it wouldn't be an automatic scrapping, or guaranteed since a good deal of fired HCs run variations of the 34.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying it wouldn't happen, but why would we automatically scrap the 34, when the majority of our team is illsuited for the 43 besides Coples and Wilk, who are scheme diverse?? You really think Harris' slow ass could play MLB and we'd roll out Thomas and Pace as our LDE and RDE?? I think a switch to the 43 could happen, but it wouldn't be an automatic scrapping, or guaranteed since a good deal of fired HCs run variations of the 34.

I actually prefer WIlkerson at 3-4 DE. I think it would really help Coples, but I don't think Harris would be effective as a 4-3 MLB. The other LBs are basically meaningless because they are on their way out anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually prefer WIlkerson at 3-4 DE. I think it would really help Coples, but I don't think Harris would be effective as a 4-3 MLB. The other LBs are basically meaningless because they are on their way out anyway.

Davis would be an ideal WLB. Harris would be fine at MLB, both Coples and Wilkerson are probably better suited inside, leaving huge holes at DE and SLB, which, if he's worth his salt, Bellore might be capable of playing. Mauga was promising before injury. Really if they wanted to trade one of their high priced CBs for a first rounder to get that 43 DE, this would be a good year to do it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually prefer WIlkerson at 3-4 DE. I think it would really help Coples, but I don't think Harris would be effective as a 4-3 MLB. The other LBs are basically meaningless because they are on their way out anyway.

Well Harris isn't really that effective as a 3-4 ILB anymore either. It's only for 1 year (2013). After that he's cuttable if he's so bad. And it might make him better as it will offer him the opportunity to lose some weight and therefore (hopefully) gain some of his earlier speed back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying it wouldn't happen, but why would we automatically scrap the 34, when the majority of our team is illsuited for the 43 besides Coples and Wilk, who are scheme diverse?? You really think Harris' slow ass could play MLB and we'd roll out Thomas and Pace as our LDE and RDE?? I think a switch to the 43 could happen, but it wouldn't be an automatic scrapping, or guaranteed since a good deal of fired HCs run variations of the 34.

The GMs we're looking at are mostly from 4-3 teams, I believe, and the 3-4 has been on its way out for awhile. I think the defense ends up looking like this: Coples--Pouha--Ellis--Wilkerson, and you let Davis take over at MLB in the event Harris is cut. The other LB comes from the draft, IMO/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But to answer more simply, I think you have to wait until he's passed a physical to do anything. I can't see anyone giving up anything before that.

That is sort of my point. Even if he passes physical I can see teams low balling saying "Passing physical is one thing, showing on field is another"

Edited by SouthernJet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is sort of my point. Even iof [passes physical I can see teams low balling saying "Passing physical is one thing, showing on field is another"

They'd certainly say that as a negotiating tactic. Our GM's response should be, "OK, then go ahead and hold your draft picks and get into a negotiating war with Revis with 10 other teams when he's a FA in 2014. We're already getting a 3rd round compensatory pick for him in '14 plus we get a year of use and exclusive negotiating rights to him for a year. We're not taking a pick for one round better than that to get rid of him a year early. Not a player like Revis. We'll just keep him for another year then." And our GM should not only say it but he should believe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To chime in, I'm not sure the Jets are an outright rebuild situation. If the new GM determines they are, then you trade Revis because you don't rebuild around a $15 mil per corner. This is why keeping Rex screws things up--if he's fired, you scrap the 3-4 (which helps Coples and Wilkerson), and then Revis becomes less important. But, keeping Rex and his blitzes absolutely necessitates big-money corners to compensate for the man coverage scheme.

While I'm glad to see you are on the fence about this being an outright rebuild (it's not), I disagree with the whole rest of this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GMs we're looking at are mostly from 4-3 teams, I believe, and the 3-4 has been on its way out for awhile. I think the defense ends up looking like this: Coples--Pouha--Ellis--Wilkerson, and you let Davis take over at MLB in the event Harris is cut. The other LB comes from the draft, IMO/

I think if we converted to the 43, we'd be better off utilizing Wilkerson as the UT and Coples as the NT, assuming we run the Jim Johnson version, which is basically what's being played by the niners and giants and searching for strong/weak side DEs via the draft. I think both would absolutely excel in that version of the 43, but I personally feel that we are closer to having it together in the 34 than the 43.

However, if we did make a philosophical change to the 43, you are definitely right and revis becomes a major luxury. The CBs in this type of defense are predominantly asked to play zone coverage and make a play on the ball, which Revis can do as well as anyone, but it's stupid to waste 15 mill a season on that. Either way we're searching for players via the draft, I just think we're closer to the 34 than 43.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I follow your logic. You either aren't following mine or your just being an ass.

If we can get value for him, I am fine with trading him. You seem to think we are guaranteed to get these great offers for him but won't accept that the fact that he wants a sh*tload of money will lower them. If we are only offered a first - which is a distinct possibility - I'd probably just as soon keep him. If we're offered more then I'd certainly consider it, anything less is a ****ing joke even for the 1 year rental.

We have ammo for 2014, so he'll only be one year older. LOL that his value is at its peak. He is coming off a torn ACL. I dont' think Revis is our best ammunition. He's our best player, but somebody with a lower set contract and playing well may well be worth more - say WIlkerson.

Good grief.

You have made this an argument, not me. Multiple times now you've made remarks that serve as the unpinning of where you seem to think we differ in opinion. The fact is, you are forming an argument around what I consider the givens. Like, the things so obvious I didn't think they needed to be explained in detail. Like the bold. Obviously, if we don't get maximum value - it is not worth doing. Duh.

I'm not being an ass. I'm discussing a scenario that give the team the best chance to rebuild holistically, and it is an ideal scenario... therefore the givens are things like, "we get maximum value for him via trade".

Also, torn ACL or not Revis is our greatest commodity. We'd be lucky to get back the pick we spent on Wilkerson. Revis would likely get us more than we paid for him in the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL. LOL. LOL.

The reason we want to move the guy is because he wants a fair market (or better) contract. Why give a bunch of picks for the right to sign him to one? This is the Mets trading for Santana. There. That is a completely valid comparision. Who is the football equivalent to Phil Humber? Can't wait to have him.

Shane's comment is 100% on. The fact is, the best chance we'd have to move him is Rex going to D coordinate somewhere and wanting him. He suits the Rex D to a tee and is probably less valuable to other teams (including us after they fire Rex).

LOL yourself. Your trying so hard to win an argument, you've forgotten the premise of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New day, new start. Maximum value via trade is a nice concept. As I said, I don't think maximum value is always something so enticing, no matter how good a player you are dealing with and there are plenty of times (probably the vast majority) when you are better off keeping the guy, letting it play out and if necessary letting him walk in FA. This is a reason you need a strong GM. A guy fearing for his job, forced to listen to the owner(s) will feel that after failing to trade a high level player that they have to sign him and you get these despicable contracts.

Is the debate whether we should we see what we can get? Then I'm all on board. If it is that we are much better off trading him than keeping him, I would tend to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...