Jump to content

Wilkerson will report to mandatory minicamp next week


JETSfaninNE
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Brian Costello
‏@BrianCoz
Muhammad Wilkerson will be at Jets minicamp: source #nyj: http://nyp.st/1FUZh7Y  via @nypost
 
 
I figured he wouldn't but wasn't sure how far he was going to take it.
 
This could be good news as well, maybe macc daddy a man of his word is finalizing a deal with Wilkerson.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 
This could be good news as well, maybe macc daddy a man of his word is finalizing a deal with Wilkerson.

 

 

What word, and why would this be good?

 

We have 2 ends without him. One is better than Wilkerson and the other is expected to be. One is under contract for the upcoming 2 seasons and can be tagged (like Wilkerson is this year) for another. The other is locked up for the next 5 seasons. That doesn't even count Coples, who's locked up for the next 2 seasons himself, and who stepped in just fine for Wilkerson at the end of 2014 and whose versatility (and lower pricetag) makes only further makes him valuable.

 

Given all that, why on earth would we extend Wilkerson at $10M+/year with $30M+ or whatever in guarantees? Just to do it?

 

Sucks to say it, because I like him very much, but Mo's not a necessary piece of the puzzle anymore. Drafting Williams saw to that. Long-term, we're better off trading him; we can't start 3+ DEs, unless 1 is to be forced inside to nose, which would also negate what made that player special in the first place. Or just as likely, they'll keep him for a run this year, and then next year - or at some point over the course of this year - play it by ear and see what happens. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What word, and why would this be good?

 

We have 2 ends without him. One is better than Wilkerson and the other is expected to be. One is under contract for the upcoming 2 seasons and can be tagged (like Wilkerson is this year) for another. The other is locked up for the next 5 seasons. That doesn't even count Coples, who's locked up for the next 2 seasons himself, and who stepped in just fine for Wilkerson at the end of 2014 and whose versatility (and lower pricetag) makes only further makes him valuable.

 

Given all that, why on earth would we extend Wilkerson at $10M+/year with $30M+ or whatever in guarantees? Just to do it?

 

Sucks to say it, because I like him very much, but Mo's not a necessary piece of the puzzle anymore. Drafting Williams saw to that. Long-term, we're better off trading him; we can't start 3+ DEs, unless 1 is to be forced inside to nose, which would also negate what made that player special in the first place. Or just as likely, they'll keep him for a run this year, and then next year - or at some point over the course of this year - play it by ear and see what happens. 

 

Looking at the type of defense Bowles seems to execute, its better to have as many versatile players on the def line as you can have.   I feel Harrison would likely be a goner after this year as a traditional NT doesn't really fit the scheme Bowles seems to like to use previously.

 

I'm not emotionally tied to keeping him but if the higher ups can work out a deal that works for both Wilkerson and the jets, why wouldn't you do it?  I do believe you can sign him to a contract as long as its a team friendly contract it still wouldn't be hard to move Wilkerson if you really wanted to, say 2 years down the road.

 

Just because we actually drafted well at a single position shouldn't mean we should forcefully weaken that position, especially when your last several drafts have not produced any value players outside of that position.  Of course if a once in a lifetime offer comes around for Wilk, i.e. multiple firsts or a star QB then you def do it.  But I wouldn't be looking to get rid of him just b/c we can...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the type of defense Bowles seems to execute, its better to have as many versatile players on the def line as you can have.   I feel Harrison would likely be a goner after this year as a traditional NT doesn't really fit the scheme Bowles seems to like to use previously.

 

I'm not emotionally tied to keeping him but if the higher ups can work out a deal that works for both Wilkerson and the jets, why wouldn't you do it?  I do believe you can sign him to a contract as long as its a team friendly contract it still wouldn't be hard to move Wilkerson if you really wanted to, say 2 years down the road.

 

Just because we actually drafted well at a single position shouldn't mean we should forcefully weaken that position, especially when your last several drafts have not produced any value players outside of that position.  Of course if a once in a lifetime offer comes around for Wilk, i.e. multiple firsts or a star QB then you def do it.  But I wouldn't be looking to get rid of him just b/c we can...

 

I think it is unrealistic to think Mo will sign a team-friendly deal. It makes no sense for him. He's already getting $7M for this season, and a much larger deal next season either as a FA or as a franchise-tagged player for 1 more season. A team-friendly deal would be like $9M per. Even if the usual 2.5 years of it was guaranteed, that would be moronic for him to accept after waiting all this time to fully cash in. He'd be better off sitting out the first half of the season, reduce his long-term injury risk in the process, and clean up far more.

 

Losing Mo doesn't noticeably weaken the position. Not anymore. That is the point. If they wanted to re-sign Mo to $11M per (give or take) then they shouldn't have drafted Williams at #6. It is a waste of finite resources, whether those resources are cap space or draft picks (high draft picks at that). You can't double up drafting players #13 and then #6 and then pay a player $11M per to play the same position.

 

One of them becomes a backup on any given play. That is a waste. We're better off with another full-time starter or two. A seriously high-end tackle on either side, a demon outside pass rusher; either of these will elevate the team more than a 3rd DE that forces 1 of the 3 to be on the sideline on most plays.

 

Bowles has stated he wants to use a 3-man line. That means having a fat keg in the middle in the mold of Harrison, to take on no less than 2 OLmen on any play he's in there. And if he didn't want a player like that, then they wouldn't have drafted Harrison's hopeful replacement with our final draft pick.

 

It's not that they literally can't fit under the cap. Of course they can. It's that doing so means forgoing the filling of a hole in favor of depth at an already-strong position (which it will still be without Mo). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if the Jets were forced to franchise tag Mo they would gag on the thought.  He just is not worth that and they have no need to pay that.  If he does not come in at a reasonable number he is definitely gone before they would have to franchise him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, I would have to imagine that the Jets and Wilkerson are too far apart.  Either the Jets won't pay the 11 million a year considering they have 2 players locked up for the next few years on rookie contracts, or Wilkerson is really expecting the 14 million a year contract.  Either way, I would expect that a deal isn't getting done.  I also expect that if the Jets won't pay 11 million to 14 million, they likely aren't likely going to pay the franchise tag and risk not being able to trade him.

 

I would therefore expect the Jets to trade him either before the start of the season or wait in hopes a team has an injury or realizes they are in desperate need for him and trade him then.  I think that once the season is over, and people know their draft order, he might be more difficult to move for a good pick.  Clearly it would be nice to get a high 1st and some other conditional pick, but if you trade him to the right team (like Oakland) you may still get a high pick.  Such a team may feel that they are going to do better, but if they show up in the top 5 may not want to trade that for Wilkerson.  There is more risk for the Jets to trade him now, but that will likely have a greater reward.

 

Consider a lucky break and get a top 10 pick for him and still have our pick (probably 12 - 20); we could bundle together to move up (with other stuff) to get our QB, or take BPA again.  Also consider what an extra 6.7 million this year and 11-14 million next year would do for our ability to sign an important player.  It is a big risk, but if you aren't likely to sign him, you might as well make the most of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Darryl Slater ✔@DarrylSlater
Mo Wilkerson's agent, Chad Wiestling, on minicamp: "We have yet to decide whether to attend or not." http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2015/06/mo_wilkerson_hasnt_decided_if_he_will_attend_jets.html
11:58 AM - 4 Jun 2015

 

 

Agent's are funny, "We have yet to decide whether to attend or not.".  Is the agent going

to pay the fine if Wilkerson doesn't show???  Doubt it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darryl Slater ✔@DarrylSlater

Mo Wilkerson's agent, Chad Wiestling, on minicamp: "We have yet to decide whether to attend or not." http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2015/06/mo_wilkerson_hasnt_decided_if_he_will_attend_jets.html

11:58 AM - 4 Jun 2015

Ha ha, "WE", this agent is way over his head. His client will probably get Wally Pipped if he doesn't show, I'm gonna tell you that if Mo doesn't show for mandatory camp Bowles will not be happy!

Bowles brushed all this sh*t off during involuntary OTAs. Mac & Bowles don't seem the types to be intimidated.

This gets ugly if he doesn't show next week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is unrealistic to think Mo will sign a team-friendly deal. It makes no sense for him. He's already getting $7M for this season, and a much larger deal next season either as a FA or as a franchise-tagged player for 1 more season. A team-friendly deal would be like $9M per. Even if the usual 2.5 years of it was guaranteed, that would be moronic for him to accept after waiting all this time to fully cash in. He'd be better off sitting out the first half of the season, reduce his long-term injury risk in the process, and clean up far more.

 

Losing Mo doesn't noticeably weaken the position. Not anymore. That is the point. If they wanted to re-sign Mo to $11M per (give or take) then they shouldn't have drafted Williams at #6. It is a waste of finite resources, whether those resources are cap space or draft picks (high draft picks at that). You can't double up drafting players #13 and then #6 and then pay a player $11M per to play the same position.

 

One of them becomes a backup on any given play. That is a waste. We're better off with another full-time starter or two. A seriously high-end tackle on either side, a demon outside pass rusher; either of these will elevate the team more than a 3rd DE that forces 1 of the 3 to be on the sideline on most plays.

 

Bowles has stated he wants to use a 3-man line. That means having a fat keg in the middle in the mold of Harrison, to take on no less than 2 OLmen on any play he's in there. And if he didn't want a player like that, then they wouldn't have drafted Harrison's hopeful replacement with our final draft pick.

 

It's not that they literally can't fit under the cap. Of course they can. It's that doing so means forgoing the filling of a hole in favor of depth at an already-strong position (which it will still be without Mo). 

 

Not sure if its just your writing style or if you really are angry, but you come off... angry... lol

 

Bowles doesn't use nose tackles to clog up 2 bodies, he didn't in Arizona either and just b/c what he says doesn't mean what he will do on the field.  You seem to want to speak in a finite way like there is no other possibility but yours and if its not yours its stupid.  I just don't see things as vanilla as that.  

 

Its not useless, sure he seems like a waste right now but at the same time we have an "unproven" at the NFL level rookie at the position and a better player in Richardson at the position.  What happens if Richardson gets hurt? Its crazy to say having 3 dominant def lineman is too much before you have even seen how they are played on the field. 

 

I guess we'll just agree to disagree here on signing Wilkerson.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if the Jets were forced to franchise tag Mo they would gag on the thought.  He just is not worth that and they have no need to pay that.  If he does not come in at a reasonable number he is definitely gone before they would have to franchise him.

 

And that's fine.  I'm still of the thought you do what you can to get him here on a team friendly contract that works for both sides.  If you can't then yeah you start testing the waters next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if its just your writing style or if you really are angry, but you come off... angry... lol

 

Bowles doesn't use nose tackles to clog up 2 bodies, he didn't in Arizona either and just b/c what he says doesn't mean what he will do on the field.  You seem to want to speak in a finite way like there is no other possibility but yours and if its not yours its stupid.  I just don't see things as vanilla as that.  

 

Its not useless, sure he seems like a waste right now but at the same time we have an "unproven" at the NFL level rookie at the position and a better player in Richardson at the position.  What happens if Richardson gets hurt? Its crazy to say having 3 dominant def lineman is too much before you have even seen how they are played on the field. 

 

I guess we'll just agree to disagree here on signing Wilkerson.  

 

Wasn't that exactly what Dan WIlliams was doing?  He certainly wasn't one gapping his 330 pound self to two career sacks.  He actually paired Williams with Tommy Kelly at times.  Wilkerson-Snacks-Richardson seems closest to his 2013 starting line of Campbell-Williams-Dockett.  While Bowles was there they put a waiver claim in for 350 lb Alameda Ta'amu (Steelers drunk driver),  They did draft Ed Stinson who is a smaller guy and gave some run to the Englishman, Josh Mauro,  Those guys are a bit smaller, but more space-eaters than penetrators.  That's in addition to Frostee Rucker.  Hell, listening to Pepper that is what they are going to want - no swim moves!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Brian Costello
‏@BrianCoz
Muhammad Wilkerson will be at Jets minicamp: source #nyj: http://nyp.st/1FUZh7Y  via @nypost
 
 
I figured he wouldn't but wasn't sure how far he was going to take it.
 
This could be good news as well, maybe macc daddy a man of his word is finalizing a deal with Wilkerson.

 

Of course he will. Wasnt even a question. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The man isn't worth JJ Watt money (sorry) and so as long as he is asking for that kind of dough, he can sit out as long as he wishes, but he will incur the requisite fines that go with that action. 

 

Bowles was crystal clear the OTA were voluntary, the up coming minicamp is not!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course he will. Wasnt even a question. 

 

Well...

 

 

Darryl Slater ✔@DarrylSlater
Mo Wilkerson's agent, Chad Wiestling, on minicamp: "We have yet to decide whether to attend or not." http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2015/06/mo_wilkerson_hasnt_decided_if_he_will_attend_jets.html
11:58 AM - 4 Jun 2015

 

 

Maybe it's a little bit of a question!

 

The man isn't worth JJ Watt money (sorry) and so as long as he is asking for that kind of dough, he can sit out as long as he wishes, but he will incur the requisite fines that go with that action. 

 

Bowles was crystal clear the OTA were voluntary, the up coming minicamp is not!!

 

Bowles has not a ******* thing to do with it.  It is part of the CBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we need to wait and see on Williams before any meaningful decisions get made. Jets hold the cards right now, but Williams has yet to play a down. Anything could happen.

And if Mo starts kicking off / skipping camp, it'll just feed Williams more reps, making Mo's position worse rather than better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said this for months, Mo is getting traded, we are putting ourself in position to trade up for a Q.B next year if Geno plays like Geno.

I agree; I don't think we are paying Mo what he wants (or even what he is worth now that we added Williams); worst case scenario we don't need a new QB and have 2 picks next year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What word, and why would this be good?

 

We have 2 ends without him. One is better than Wilkerson and the other is expected to be. One is under contract for the upcoming 2 seasons and can be tagged (like Wilkerson is this year) for another. The other is locked up for the next 5 seasons. That doesn't even count Coples, who's locked up for the next 2 seasons himself, and who stepped in just fine for Wilkerson at the end of 2014 and whose versatility (and lower pricetag) makes only further makes him valuable.

 

Given all that, why on earth would we extend Wilkerson at $10M+/year with $30M+ or whatever in guarantees? Just to do it?

 

Sucks to say it, because I like him very much, but Mo's not a necessary piece of the puzzle anymore. Drafting Williams saw to that. Long-term, we're better off trading him; we can't start 3+ DEs, unless 1 is to be forced inside to nose, which would also negate what made that player special in the first place. Or just as likely, they'll keep him for a run this year, and then next year - or at some point over the course of this year - play it by ear and see what happens. 

 

I love Mo and really don't want to see him get traded however; if we were going to trade the guy it would be much easier to do and we would likely get more in return if he is locked into a long term deal instead of the team trading for him needing him to renegotiate, also I think it would make sense to sit back and see what Williams can do on the field before we even consider a trade. Just my opinion.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well...

 

 

Maybe it's a little bit of a question!

 

 

Bowles has not a ******* thing to do with it.  It is part of the CBA.

It wasnt a question from my perspective. Maybe I should have said it that way. I let the insiders kneejerk to every piece of alleged info they write on for the sake of "reads". Wilk wasnt missing mandatory training. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, I would have to imagine that the Jets and Wilkerson are too far apart.  Either the Jets won't pay the 11 million a year considering they have 2 players locked up for the next few years on rookie contracts, or Wilkerson is really expecting the 14 million a year contract.  Either way, I would expect that a deal isn't getting done.  I also expect that if the Jets won't pay 11 million to 14 million, they likely aren't likely going to pay the franchise tag and risk not being able to trade him.

 

I would therefore expect the Jets to trade him either before the start of the season or wait in hopes a team has an injury or realizes they are in desperate need for him and trade him then.  I think that once the season is over, and people know their draft order, he might be more difficult to move for a good pick.  Clearly it would be nice to get a high 1st and some other conditional pick, but if you trade him to the right team (like Oakland) you may still get a high pick.  Such a team may feel that they are going to do better, but if they show up in the top 5 may not want to trade that for Wilkerson.  There is more risk for the Jets to trade him now, but that will likely have a greater reward.

 

Consider a lucky break and get a top 10 pick for him and still have our pick (probably 12 - 20); we could bundle together to move up (with other stuff) to get our QB, or take BPA again.  Also consider what an extra 6.7 million this year and 11-14 million next year would do for our ability to sign an important player.  It is a big risk, but if you aren't likely to sign him, you might as well make the most of it.

 

Unless they consider themselves contenders this year (given how much as been spent on it). In that case, making the most out of him to be keeping him for this one last season at $7M then letting him hit FA. Which I think is further unwinding as the most likely scenario.

 

They could really use him this year, with Williams being a rookie (even if he's a good one).

 

They don't need him long-term. Not unless Williams is a bust or unless they don't think they can lock up Richardson when the time comes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless they consider themselves contenders this year (given how much as been spent on it). In that case, making the most out of him to be keeping him for this one last season at $7M then letting him hit FA. Which I think is further unwinding as the most likely scenario.

 

They could really use him this year, with Williams being a rookie (even if he's a good one).

 

They don't need him long-term. Not unless Williams is a bust or unless they don't think they can lock up Richardson when the time comes.

 

IMO you have to balance the risk that Geno is the real thing and that Williams on a line with Sheldon and with that secondary is going to struggle too much against the risk that Geno is not their guy and they will need to upgrade QB next season.

 

Me: I think if Geno is going to be good enough than so will Williams.  I cannot see Wilkderson being our missing piece; not sure loosing him at this point will hurt the D too much while an extra 1st next year could make all of the difference.

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...