Muhammad Wilkerson ~ ~ ~

[Larz]

22 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The tag amount isn't what a limiting Mo's trade value. It's the pick(s). The money is in line with - probably less than - what he's seeking per year anyway so that's not a problem for another team to get around. 

Franchise tag salary is only a problem if the tag amount is a good amount more than he'd cost annually on a new deal. 

what is hurting his market is the 10 guys you can get in the draft in the first round on the cheap. there are so many, it takes away the risk of "your guy" not being there when you pick

I would be shocked to see him dealt before the draft, or at all really

 

[Rangers9]

Well would the Titans take Wilk for their overall no. 1 and we would take Goff who would be our starting Qb in 2016. We'd also keep the 20th pick a straight swap Wilk for the no. 1? Considering how good he was last year and how there are no pass rushers available in this draft on his level not far fetched? The only drawback would be his injury. I know it's not going to happen.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Larz said:

what is hurting his market is the 10 guys you can get in the draft in the first round on the cheap. there are so many, it takes away the risk of "your guy" not being there when you pick

I would be shocked to see him dealt before the draft, or at all really

 

Yes and no. There are always players to draft and there are always other FAs to sign. There is always another prospect or veteran that a potential trade partner  loves, if not several other players, since teams rarely have a need at just one position. 

That's why it's unusual to get a high - or even a mid - 1st rounder for a player who needs a contract and is looking to cash in for so much. If not retained on a new deal, it's far, far more common for a team to let a player of this caliber simply go to FA because they know it's a long shot to get a pick (never mind a high pick) for a high priced player with no contract. 

That's why we were able to get a Kris Jenkins or Damien Woody for a 3rd+5th, why NE could get Randy Moss for a 4th, why we only got back a low 1st for Abe, etc. These guys will just cost too much cap $ to give up a higher pick. If they could be re-signed under the terms of their original rookie contracted they'd all be worth top 5-10 picks or higher. 

If Mo was under contract already, at a lower rate after the Jets had paid his up front bonus a year or two ago, then his value would be higher. But of course then the Jets wouldn't likely be shopping him. 

It's not just about supply and demand at DE-DT in the upcoming draft. 

 

[Larz]

18 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Yes and no. There are always players to draft and there are always other FAs to sign. There is always another prospect or veteran that a potential trade partner  loves, if not several other players, since teams rarely have a need at just one position. 

That's why it's unusual to get a high - or even a mid - 1st rounder for a player who needs a contract and is looking to cash in for so much. If not retained on a new deal, it's far, far more common for a team to let a player of this caliber simply go to FA because they know it's a long shot to get a pick (never mind a high pick) for a high priced player with no contract. 

That's why we were able to get a Kris Jenkins or Damien Woody for a 3rd+5th, why NE could get Randy Moss for a 4th, why we only got back a low 1st for Abe, etc. These guys will just cost too much cap $ to give up a higher pick. If they could be re-signed under the terms of their original rookie contracted they'd all be worth top 5-10 picks or higher. 

If Mo was under contract already, at a lower rate after the Jets had paid his up front bonus a year or two ago, then his value would be higher. But of course then the Jets wouldn't likely be shopping him. 

It's not just about supply and demand at DE-DT in the upcoming draft. 

 

agreed, the two are related, but all things considered it would help the jets if this draft was considered to be weak in d-line talent

[joewilly12]

Im guessing Mo Wilk gets traded to the Titans on draft day along with our #20 pick and we get the Titans #1 pick the first selection in the 2016 NFL draft!!!!!!!

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, Larz said:

agreed, the two are related, but all things considered it would help the jets if this draft was considered to be weak in d-line talent

I could be wrong but I still don't think they'd get a top 20 pick for a 3-4 DE who is undoubtedly seeking north of $17M/year.

[Savage69]

20 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Yes and no. There are always players to draft and there are always other FAs to sign. There is always another prospect or veteran that a potential trade partner  loves, if not several other players, since teams rarely have a need at just one position. 

That's why it's unusual to get a high - or even a mid - 1st rounder for a player who needs a contract and is looking to cash in for so much. If not retained on a new deal, it's far, far more common for a team to let a player of this caliber simply go to FA because they know it's a long shot to get a pick (never mind a high pick) for a high priced player with no contract. 

That's why we were able to get a Kris Jenkins or Damien Woody for a 3rd+5th, why NE could get Randy Moss for a 4th, why we only got back a low 1st for Abe, etc. These guys will just cost too much cap $ to give up a higher pick. If they could be re-signed under the terms of their original rookie contracted they'd all be worth top 5-10 picks or higher. 

If Mo was under contract already, at a lower rate after the Jets had paid his up front bonus a year or two ago, then his value would be higher. But of course then the Jets wouldn't likely be shopping him. 

It's not just about supply and demand at DE-DT in the upcoming draft. 

 

The Pats got Moss for a 4th because they were the only team he would redo his big contract for.. The Jets should have done what the Pats did with Jones last year when they knew they couldn't sign him without breaking the bank.. If they can't sign him now it's a waste of 15.7 that could have been used to help the team in other area's..

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, Savage69 said:

The Pats got Moss for a 4th because they were the only team he would redo his big contract for.. The Jets should have done what the Pats did with Jones last year when they knew they couldn't sign him without breaking the bank.. If they can't sign him now it's a waste of 15.7 that could have been used to help the team in other area's..

Yes..The point being if money wasn't a factor Oakland could have gotten much more than a 4th round pick for him. 

Big contracts mean you're not going to get back the same draft pick that fans think he's worth. 

Agree with you 100%. If it turns out we can get back only a mid 2nd rounder then take it. The 2016 Jets are not SB or bust when we don't even have a freaking QB. Again. Even if all the FAs are gone by then we're better off saving that space for 2017 and beyond for someone who will be here when we do make our next realistic run. 

There's an in between scenario that is neither maxing everything out every year and outright tanking. 

[Savage69]

4 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Yes..The point being if money wasn't a factor Oakland could have gotten much more than a 4th round pick for him. 

Big contracts mean you're not going to get back the same draft pick that fans think he's worth. 

Agree with you 100%. If it turns out we can get back only a mid 2nd rounder then take it. The 2016 Jets are not SB or bust when we don't even have a freaking QB. Again. Even if all the FAs are gone by then we're better off saving that space for 2017 and beyond for someone who will be here when we do make our next realistic run. 

There's an in between scenario that is neither maxing everything out every year and outright tanking. 

Truer words have never been posted..  

[kelly]

When I put the word 'Really' in the headline, it should actually be in all caps. La Canfora went long form today to express just how passionately his opinion is about how interested Raiders should be in signing Jets franchise defensive endMuhammad Wilkerson.Most of La Canfora's piece is about the stuff we already know -- who the Raiders signed and the fact that they're knocking on the door to being a contender -- so I'll get the meat of it.

Aside from the Raiders being 'this close' to making real noise in the league, La Canfora points to their possible move to Los Angeles, saying "If you are going to L.A., you'd better be ready to win and win people over and have ample star power." and called the addition of Wilkerson a "game changer."

"Wilkerson wouldn't need any provocation to join Oakland. He sees what they are building there and would leap at the opportunity to come on board. If Jets owner Woody Johnson ever had any real interest in keeping the versatile player, well, he's never displayed it, failing to budget for a fair-market deal for him under two different regimes and dating back several years. He could've had Wilkerson at $13 million a year a year ago and balked.Now, with Marcel Dareus getting $60 million guaranteed and guys like Vernon making $18 million a year, the market has moved massively and Johnson continues to lag far behind. So why not get together with Davis down there in Boca Raton next week and work something out? Maybe a couple of second-rounders?

Because I can promise you this much -- Oakland's football people have been infatuated with Wilkerson going back to last spring, when trade rumors percolated after the Jets drafted defensive lineman Leonard Williams in the first round. Oakland had interest then and still would now. With Wilkerson on board they'd have a lynchpin who could help them toggle even more seamlessly between a 4-3 (Wilkerson could play three or five technique) and a 3-4, where Wilkerson already moves between tackle and end."

"Adding Wilkerson, still just 26 years old, would bring stability and bite to that defense, a piece they could count on for years to come. It would be the most impactful move of any this offseason, I believe."

Making such a trade is out of character for Reggie McKenzie who places high value on his draft picks. The most McKenzie has ever done is trade down, as he did in the 2013 draft, moving from number 3 overall to number 12 to pick up a second rounder. Trading down to add more picks is essentially the opposite of trading picks away for players.While La Canfora is looking at McKenzie to keep adding pieces as he has already this offseason, he is asking Mark 'What would Al do?' and to implement it at the owners meetings this weekend.

"They may be able to bend the Jets' ear without having to part with their first-round pick and now Mark Davis would do well to channel his father's aggressive tendencies and explore a move that might result in the Raiders' final game at the decrepit O.co Coliseum coming in mid-January, in the playoffs, celebrating a division title."

The whole idea seems a bit far fetched, honestly. Wilkerson and the Jets haven't been able to come close to a deal which is why he was slapped with the franchise tag. It's one thing to pay top dollar for a free agent, it's another to pay top dollar and give up high draft picks on top of that.

Then again, going after a proven commodity in exchange for unproven draft picks can be tempting.

>     http://www.silverandblackpride.com/2016/3/18/11265046/jason-la-canfora-really-thinks-raiders-should-go-after-mo-wilkerson?_ga=1.161465085.1786668866.1458577725

[Beerfish]

"If Jets owner Woody Johnson ever had any real interest in keeping the versatile player, well, he's never displayed it, failing to budget for a fair-market deal for him under two different regimes and dating back several years. He could've had Wilkerson at $13 million a year a year ago and balked"

I still take some issue with this line of thinking and in most cases it is hindsight, not all but in many.  Mo Wilkerson in years previous to last year simply had not put a full year together for most of his career.  Often being great in the 1st half and then leveling off in the 2nd half.  If he was a 12 sack guy with pretty even production the year previous to last then the 'they should have signed him to an early extension' comments would be more justified.

[BroadwayJets]

On 3/20/2016 at 11:28 AM, Sperm Edwards said:

I could be wrong but I still don't think they'd get a top 20 pick for a 3-4 DE who is undoubtedly seeking north of $17M/year.

I think we'd be lucky to receive an offer for a top 50 pick.

[Bugg]

Simply if the Jets offered Wilkerson to who ever has a shot at Bosa, that team would not make that trade. Because Bosa on Day 1 is almost certain to be a more impactful pass rusher and otherwise close to Wilkerson in everything else, to say nothing about salary. Wilkerson is a very good player, but he is not dominant.Teams'  OLs keep on eye on him, but it's not like Watt who you have to account for every play. He's a very good productive DL guy.On a team with Williams and Richardson(turd he may be off the field) it's too much cap space to 1 unit.  And his contract/tag price is way above his actual value. Not sure who will ever pay him those kind of numbers. But certainly his agent feels otherwise. 

[kelly]

-- Muhammad Wilkerson and the New York Jets have been talking about a new contract since 2014. Surprised it's taking so long? Join the club. Woody Johnson is, too."It's amazing, since we've been negotiating with him for a few years now," the Jets' owner told a handful of reporters Monday at the NFL owners meetings at the Boca Raton Resort and Club.

Wilkerson's camp might take issue with the word "negotiating," considering there haven't been serious talks in quite some time. The Jets used the franchise tag on their Pro Bowl defensive end, meaning they have until July 15 to hammer out a long-term deal. If not, he'll play for his franchise tender in 2016 -- $15.7 million.There's always a chance, albeit remote, of a trade. Johnson sounded like he's in favor of a long-term commitment, but he stopped short of spelling out the team's strategy.

"He's been franchised, so as far as I'm concerned, he's on the team right now," Johnson said. "He's on it. He's a great player. Love to have him. He had a great year last year -- 12 sacks. That little break he's recovering from, from what I've been told, he's recovering well from (his broken leg). So, yeah, if he's in, I'm not going to be disappointed at all."With any player, there has to be a moment where their side and our side are happy, and we feel like we're getting what we want in terms that are acceptable or semi-acceptable to us -- and the same for him. We just haven't been able to do that."

Asked if they've made Wilkerson a fair offer, Johnson said: "I'm not going to characterize the offer. If we made him a fair offer, he didn't accept it. 'Fair' is a subjective thing. It's got to be acceptable to him and us. When we work that out, it'll all be good."

>    http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york-jets/post/_/id/59170/jets-owner-amazed-by-length-of-muhammad-wilkerson-talks

[kelly]

@Connor_J_Hughes What is the most likely deal for Mo, Trade for picks ?, Trade up in draft or swapping pick in same round ? Stays a Jet ?

2:47 PM - 19 Mar 2016 

 

~ ~   HUGHES : I’ve been very vocal about what I feel the Jets should do with Wilkerson. A 3-4 defense does not need three stud 3-4 defensive ends, especially when they have holes elsewhere.The Jets need an inside linebacker with Erin Henderson‘s contract talks at a standstill. They need a pass rusher. You could make the argument they need a nose tackle, too.

Wilkerson on the roster is preventing them from getting any of that.It’s highly unlikely Wilkerson signs a multi-year extension with the Jets, and the team won’t be able to afford to franchise-tag him again. What that means is that the Jets should explore trading him, getting something back, and freeing $15.7 million in cap space.

The trade likely out there ?

Maybe someone parts with one first-round pick, or a second and a fourth. A better option? Maybe the Jets package Wilkerson and their first-round pick, as you said, to move up in the first round and gain back a second or third rounder.One thing is for certain though– The Jets are a better team moving on from Wilkerson and getting something back, than keeping him for sentimental reasons.

Think about this for a second– With Wilkerson on the field, what exactly have the Jets accomplished ? Have they made the playoffs ? Won anything ?

No. So why not use that asset in an attempt to get better ?

>    http://jetswire.usatoday.com/2016/03/20/jets-trading-muhammad-wilkerson-dee-milliner-getting-cut/

[kelly]

Yes, of course, Jets head coach Todd Bowles wants star defensive end Muhammad Wilkerson to remain with the organization long-term. But Bowles has been around the NFL long enough to realize that things don't always work out in an ideal way — and that there are other personnel/salary cap concerns to consider, beyond just giving one player a boatload of money. 

In short, it's all a balancing act, even though Wilkerson is a big part of the Jets' success. Those are the points Bowles raised Tuesday while speaking with reporters at theNFL Annual Meeting in Boca Raton, Fla. 

"You let the business side take care of itself, and you go from there," Bowles said. 

The Jets have applied a $15.701 million franchise tag to Wilkerson for 2016, but they could still trade him. Despite protracted negotiations, the Jets and Wilkerson's camp have yet to agree on a long-term contract. If the Jets don't get a contract done with Wilkerson by July 15, he would play 2016 on a one-year contract for the franchise tag figure. That's presuming the Jets don't trade Wilkerson before then. 

The Jets are pinched for salary cap space, so trading Wilkerson would be a quick way to free up a huge chunk of it. Wilkerson has the Jets' second-highest cap number for 2016, behind cornerback Darrelle Revis ($17 million). "I want all my guys long-term," Bowles said, when asked about Wilkerson. "But unfortunately, that's not the case. It's a business and it doesn't work out that way, wanting a guy long-term and then jeopardizing the team.

"Not saying that this guy is, because he isn't jeopardizing the team. It's a business, and sometimes it works out, and sometimes it doesn't." 

>    http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2016/03/how_jets_todd_bowles_balances_wanting_mo_wilkerson.html#incart_river_index

[Jet Life]

Tony Pauline reporting the word at Florida pro-day is the Jets are shopping Wilk , per his twitter account

[nyjunc]

Quote

I'm also told the New York Jets like Bullard, whom they would consider if they trade Muhammad Wilkerson. And the word coming from Florida pro day is the Jets are shopping Wilkerson. Whether the team can get a deal done anytime soon is another thing altogether. 

http://walterfootball.com/proday.php

 

[jett]

5 minutes ago, Jet Life said:

Tony Pauline reporting the word at Florida pro-day is the Jets are shopping Wilk , per his twitter account

It's the right move I hope we can get it done. 

I'm praying for a 2nd and a 4th but who knows at this point. Might be a 5th at this point. 

 

[kelly]

With Muhammad Wilkerson locked up on the franchise tag, and a contract extension looking unlikely, trade speculation surrounding the New York Jets' top defender has ramped up.Tony Pauline of DraftInsider.net reported Tuesday that "word from the Florida pro day is the Jets are shopping Wilkerson," adding, "whether the team can get a deal done anytime soon is another thing altogether." While it sounds like talks aren't going well, this is the first we've heard that the Jets are actively trying to trade the Pro Bowler.

As ESPN's Rich Cimini wrote last week, a deal with significant compensation might be tough to find after the Arizona Cardinals acquiredChandler Jones for a second-round pick and a 2013 draft bust, Jonathan Cooper. The matter of Wilkerson's contract situation only further complicates matters, as no suitor would be willing to part with a premium pick unless a long-term agreement with the defensive end could be reached. With the size of a few deals handed out in recent years, any extension for Wilkerson would be a huge investment to make.Further complicating matters is the wealth of defensive linemen that will be available in the draft, perhaps the best crop in decades. Any team considering trading its first-rounder for Wilkerson might rather use that pick on a promising prospect who is five years younger and will cost significantly less for the next 4-5 years.

Despite all of the potential roadblocks, a trade appears to be the Jets' plan at the moment. That suggests a long-term deal between the two sides is a pipe dream, with the team looking to get more in return than a 2018 compensatory pick if Wilkerson were to leave in free agency next offseason.There's still plenty to play out here, but Wilkerson's future doesn't appear to be with the Jets at the moment. If he is traded, one name to keep an eye on as a potential replacement in the draft, per Pauline, is Florida'sJonathan Bullard.

 

>      http://espn.go.com/blog/nfl/rumors/post/_/id/29940/nfl-rumor-central-jets-shopping-muhammad-wilkerson

[kelly]

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers want to trade Mike Glennon, and the New York Jets need a quarterback. The Jets also have a top-notch player on a one-year contract in Muhammad Wilkerson. Both teams and players have been mentioned in various trade scenarios, so it was only a matter of time before someone would speculate that the Bucs and Jets would swap Wilkerson and Glennon. And so Manish Mehta did, in the New York Daily News -- as speculation, mind you.

The Jets still want to retain Ryan Fitzpatrick, but they're considering alternate options if the veteran doesn't return. The team has done their due diligence on available signal callers, including the Bucs' backup. Tampa Bay head coach Dirk Koetter all but admitted that Glennon, who won't see the light of day for the Bucs unless Jameis Winston gets injured, can be had in a trade.

The feeling around the league is that the Bucs don't have to get a first-round pick in return for Glennon, who is entering the final year of his rookie contract. Would the Jets be willing to dole out a second-rounder for Glennon? A third-rounder is a no-brainer for a player, who can start right away and have a chance to be your long-term answer at quarterback.

Why this makes sense

The Buccaneers need a defensive end, the Jets need a quarterback, and both Wilkerson and Glennon have only one year left on their contracts. The Bucs have publicly acknowledged that they've been talking to teams about Glennon, and they need to find a trade partner -- or let Glennon walk away next year, with the only compensation a potential compensatory pick in 2018.Meanwhile, the Jets don't have a starting quarterback. They need to find one. And they'd prefer not to be pigeonholed into taking one in the draft -- with the risk of missing out on a signal caller if they are. Mike Glennon is probably the best quarterback available in trade. Someone with starting experience who has the potential to turn into a reliable game manager, given the opportunity.

Why this doesn't make sense

The Jets really want Ryan Fitzpatrick back, and there's no reason for them to give up assets for Glennon when they can simply pay Fitzpatrick what he wants. For the Jets to actually pull the trigger on a Glennon trade, they'd have to give up on the prospect of re-signing Fitzpatrick. That's not going to happen -- at least not for a while yet.

In addition, Wilkerson doesn't quite fit what the Bucs need. They need an edge rusher, someone who can line up outside of an offensive tackle and beat him around the corner with consistency. Wilkerson's a very good player, but he's a 3-4 defensive end who can play defensive tackle on passing downs. That's a valuable skillset, but the Bucs just signed someone who fits that in Robert Ayers, and have William Gholston on the roster. In addition to that, they still have Akeem Spence and Clinton McDonald at defensive tackle as well.And then there's the matter of financial compensation. The Bucs would have to pay Wilkerson close to what they're paying Gerald McCoy to get him to sign a long-term contract. That's an absurd financial commitment at defensive tackle -- and it still doesn't bring them any closer to having an explosive edge rusher in the fold.

 

Odds of this happening: 5%

>     http://www.bucsnation.com/2016/3/25/11304598/nfl-draft-rumors-mike-glennon-for-muhammad-wilkerson-speculation

[Dcat]

the above was posted already in another thread.

Why don't you check before making redundant posts? 

[Savage69]

49 minutes ago, Dcat said:

the above was posted already in another thread.

Why don't you check before making redundant posts? 

If you look up redundant transvestites in the dictionary you will see a picture of Kelly..

[munchmemory]

56 minutes ago, Dcat said:

the above was posted already in another thread.

Why don't you check before making redundant posts? 

Relax.  The girl has a lot on her plate.  With Easter table preparations, egg hunt responsibilities, etc.

[Savage69]

8 minutes ago, munchmemory said:

Relax.  The girl has a lot on her plate.  With Easter table preparations, egg hunt responsibilities, etc.

Prostate exam..

[Irish Jet]

If we traded for Wilkerson for Glennon I would never watch this sport again.

[Savage69]

Just now, Irish Jet said:

If we traded for Wilkerson for Glennon I would never watch this sport again.

Not to worry the Buc's learned their lesson spending large and giving up picks for KJ and Revis.. 

[Sperm Edwards]

3 hours ago, Savage69 said:

Prostate exam..

Hahahahaha

[kelly]

A look at what's happening around the New York Jets :

~ ~  2. No go for Mo : I spoke to officials from four different teams at the owners meetings, and they all said they'd be surprised if the Jets execute a tag-and-trade with Muhammad Wilkerson. "Next to impossible" was how one official described the chances of a deal happening. It's not because teams doubt Wilkerson's ability; it's the price.Any team that trades for the Pro Bowl defensive end would have to pay the player (figure at least $50 million in guarantees) and compensate the Jets. The consensus is that anything less than a first-round pick would be highway robbery.So, basically, the Jets have a three-carat diamond ring and they're trying to sell it to K-Mart customers. It's not happening.

3. Did someone say 'holdout' ?  The Jets have until July 15 to negotiate a long-term contract with Wilkerson, per the franchise-tag rule. If there's no deal and he's really ticked off, would he stage a training-camp holdout? I spoke to one official at the meetings who went so far as to say he wouldn't be shocked if Wilkerson sits out a game or two in the regular season. That would take some onions because Wilkerson would be giving up $924,000 per game, based on his $15.7 million tag. Wilkerson is known for being stubbornly principled, but that's a lot of principle.

rest of above article : 

> http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york-jets/post/_/id/59304/rex-ryans-hope-qb-ryan-fitzpatrick-leaves-jets-for-another-team

[kelly]

Rich Cimini's Sunday morning report discusses the difficulty of pulling off a trade for Muhammad Wilkerson.

I spoke to officials from four different teams at the owners meetings, and they all said they'd be surprised if the Jets execute a tag-and-trade with Muhammad Wilkerson. "Next to impossible" was how one official described the chances of a deal happening. It's not because teams doubt Wilkerson's ability; it's the price.

Any team that trades for the Pro Bowl defensive end would have to pay the player (figure at least $50 million in guarantees) and compensate the Jets. The consensus is that anything less than a first-round pick would be highwayrobbery.

 

This is the situation in a nutshell. A team might be willing to pay a Draft bounty to land Wilkerson. A team might be willing to give Wilkerson a huge contract. It is a lot to ask for a team to do both.If I had to guess, I would say it is much more likely than not Wilkerson plays for the Jets in 2016 for this reason. The biggest short-term argument for trading Wilkerson was opening over $15 million in salary cap space, but the usefulness of that is gone. There aren't many free agents left to spend that excess cap space on. The Jets can make smaller scale moves to maneuver their way around any modest signings they need to make.

Of course the possibility of a trade remains on the table for a long-term reason. The Jets have been unable to lock up Wilkerson long-term. They might end up faced with the possibility of losing their best asset for nickels and dimes on the dollar or lose him for nothing next year. The Jets are going to have much more flexibility to spend a year from now so they could not even count on a compensatory pick.I used to think a second franchise tag in a year was a remote possibility for Wilkerson, but that might become a viable solution. In the best case scenario, a second franchise tag would cost the Jets just short of $19 million. If there isn't a good enough deal on the table right now, the Jets could wait and let the year play out. They'd get another season out of Wilkerson and then they could take a similar trade to the one they could get now with a team that wanted to work out a long-term extension. The $19 million would be gone once he signed the extension.

Anything can happen. Few options look appealing at this point.

>   http://www.ganggreennation.com/2016/3/27/11312756/muhammad-wilkerson-trade-rumors-chances-of-deal-next-to-impossible

[kelly]

Brian Costello is out with a new story with information on the MuhammadWilkerson situation. Costello says the Jets are actively exploring options for a trade despite Mike Maccagnan's declarations to the contrary.

Despite general manager Mike Maccagnan saying they are not "actively pursuing" a trade for Wilkerson, a source said Wednesday that the Jets are indeed shopping him around.

 

Perhaps the best indication the Jets are looking to deal Wilkerson is in how little effort was made pursuing an extension.

Jets owner Woody Johnson said it was "amazing" that the two sides have not been able to make a deal, but the Jets never have shown a true desire to get anything done. Publicly, the Jets have said since Maccagnan arrived last year that they wanted to sign Wilkerson to a long-term deal. Privately, they have offered below-market deals and barely spoken to Wilkerson’s representatives.

Costello also indicates there is belief in league circles that the Jets could hold Wilkerson and franchise him again if they do not get what they seek in a trade.

In any event, I feel like the Jets are taking Wilkerson for granted if this story is accurate. It is difficult to understand why more effort has not been made to get an extension does. Yes, the Jets have more young talent along the defensive line in players like Sheldon Richardson and Leonard Williams. Wilkerson was still the most valuable piece the Jets had on defense in 2015, and his ability to win matchups lined up anywhere makes him a matchup problem.

>      http://www.ganggreennation.com/2016/3/30/11334974/report-jets-actively-shopping-muhammad-wilkerson

[Jet Nut]

On March 22, 2016 at 7:45 AM, Bugg said:

Simply if the Jets offered Wilkerson to who ever has a shot at Bosa, that team would not make that trade. Because Bosa on Day 1 is almost certain to be a more impactful pass rusher and otherwise close to Wilkerson in everything else, to say nothing about salary. Wilkerson is a very good player, but he is not dominant.Teams'  OLs keep on eye on him, but it's not like Watt who you have to account for every play. He's a very good productive DL guy.On a team with Williams and Richardson(turd he may be off the field) it's too much cap space to 1 unit.  And his contract/tag price is way above his actual value. Not sure who will ever pay him those kind of numbers. But certainly his agent feels otherwise. 

Ok, lol.  Love when people believe that Pro Bowl players grow on trees and are so easy to find.  

Argue that the line is a strength that can be downgraded and still be good, not that Mo isn't dominant enough.

[The Green Dude]

Maybe sign Wilk to a 5 yr contract that has a low year 1 base salary with a high signing bonus to give us some cap flexibility. I can't see losing Wilk being a positive whatsoever, regardless of compensation. Lock him up.

[kelly]

The Mo-ment of truth is fast approaching for the Jets.

If the team is going to trade star defensive end Muhammad Wilkerson, it will happen in the next four weeks. The NFL draft begins on April 28, four weeks from Thursday. Wilkerson could be traded during the draft, but it is more likely that if something were to happen, it would occur in the days leading up to the draft.Despite general manager Mike Maccagnan saying they are not “actively pursuing” a trade for Wilkerson, a source said Wednesday that the Jets are indeed shopping him around.There is skepticism around the league as to whether the Jets can find a trade partner who will be willing to surrender the draft picks the Jets are looking for (the starting price surely includes a first-round pick in this year’s draft) and agree to the contract Wilkerson is looking for (more than $50 million guaranteed).

There is a possibility the Jets could try to acquire a player to lessen the draft-pick compensation. With Ryan Fitzpatrick still a free agent, it could make sense for them to target Buccaneers quarterback Mike Glennon in a deal involving Wilkerson.It is astonishing that it has gotten to this point where the Jets again are trying to trade one of their best players. Three years after shipping Darrelle Revis to the Buccaneers, here we go again.

Jets owner Woody Johnson said it was “amazing” that the two sides have not been able to make a deal, but the Jets never have shown a true desire to get anything done. Publicly, the Jets have said since Maccagnan arrived last year that they wanted to sign Wilkerson to a long-term deal. Privately, they have offered below-market deals and barely spoken to Wilkerson’s representatives.Wilkerson, who is recovering from a broken leg, has not said anything publicly about his contract situation this offseason, but he surely is annoyed. Wilkerson has been hoping for a new deal for two years now, but has been turned away by the Jets. They placed the franchise tag on him this year at the price of $15.7 million, so he will be well-compensated in 2016, but the organization has not given him any long-term security.

There are some around the league who believe if the Jets can’t trade Wilkerson, they will use the franchise tag on him again in 2017 for $18.8 million.

The Jets should have gotten something done with Wilkerson last offseason. Many defensive ends from the same 2011 draft class as Wilkerson received new contracts last year and the numbers now look more than reasonable after what happened this March in free agency. Last year, a comfortable landing spot for the Jets and Wilkerson would have been somewhere between what Cam Jordan got from the Saints ($11 million per year, $33 million guaranteed) and what J.J. Watt received from the Texans ($16.6 million per year, $51 million guaranteed).

The Jets had a lot of salary cap space to play with in 2015, too. They could have worked out a five-year, $70 million deal with $42 million guaranteed with Wilkerson that would have been fair for both sides.For whatever reason, though, the Jets do not seem to want to sign Wilkerson long-term. He has been a productive player, anchoring the defensive line. He has been one of the best defensive linemen against the run and has seasons with 12 sacks (2015) and 10½ (2013). He never has gotten into legal trouble. His only off-field hiccup came last season when he was late for a meeting and was benched against the Giants.

If the Jets were not interested in signing Wilkerson last year, it is hard to imagine them being eager to get a deal done this year after the market has exploded. Watt’s contract is no longer the standard at the position, so people can put to bed the “he’s not J.J. Watt” argument. The Giants gave Olivier Vernon $17 million per year and $52 million guaranteed. Since Vernon entered the league in 2012, he has 29 sacks as compared to Wilkerson’s 33½ over that time.All of this trade talk must have Wilkerson disenchanted with the Jets. The team’s decision-makers have given only lukewarm endorsements of Wilkerson to reporters, which could be taken as disrespect.

In four weeks, we may know whether Wilkerson is staying or going in 2016.

>   http://nypost.com/2016/03/30/jets-have-month-to-fix-mo-wilkerson-dilemma-they-created/

[kelly]

One of the big storylines leading into the April 28 draft will be the future ofMuhammad Wilkerson. The New York Jets are open to trading the Pro Bowl defensive end, but it's not easy to execute a tag-and-trade.Any interested team would have to satisfy Wilkerson's contract demands (figure at least $50 million guaranteed) and compensate the Jets, who probably are seeking at least a first-round pick. Wilkerson has a franchise tag and will count $15.7 million against the cap.

Any takers ?

We surveyed ESPN's NFL Nation and found that four of 31 reporters believe the team they cover might have some degree of interest in Wilkerson. Translation: It's not a robust market. Here's a closer look :

THE TOP POSSIBILITIES

Philadelphia Eagles: The Eagles could have some interest for three reasons. Wilkerson went to Temple, so he's a local kid. Admittedly not the main reason, but it could make Philadelphia more attractive to Wilkerson. Second, the Eagles have said that extending Fletcher Cox's contract is a priority. It still isn't done though, which could mean that there is a snag in the talks. If so, the Eagles could move money budgeted for Cox over to Wilkerson. Finally, new defensive coordinator Jim Schwartz loves pressuring quarterbacks without blitzing. The Eagles aren't exactly overstocked with defensive ends at the moment. I don't think Wilkerson to the Eagles is likely, but it's possible. -- Phil Sheridan

Chicago Bears: Wilkerson would be a huge addition for the Bears. Chicago has plenty of salary cap space to sign Wilkerson to a long-term deal, but compensation might be an issue. Would the Jets take the 11th overall pick? Now that Martellus Bennett is gone, the Bears don't have much in terms of attractive veteran players to include in a potential deal. But the interest in Wilkerson has to be there. -- Jeff Dickerson

Tampa Bay Buccaneers: One of the Bucs' biggest weaknesses on defense was the play at defensive end. They addressed it partially by signing Robert Ayers, but he's certainly not the kind of player that Wilkinson is. The Bucs have the No. 9 pick, which would be a good starting point for negotiations, but they have only $19.5 million in cap space. -- Michael DiRocco

A MAYBE

Detroit Lions: It's tough to say there is a ton of interest there because of the potential price tag, but Wilkerson would fit what the Lions are trying to do. He'd probably be a defensive tackle in a 4-3, and the Lions need to find a long-term solution there. They have some cap space to work with, along with 10 picks in this year's draft, so it would be a matter of whether they feel the investment is worth it from a financial and draft pick standpoint. But he would be a fit and Lions general manager Bob Quinn should know his skill set well from his time in New England. -- Michael Rothstein

WISHFUL THINKING

Buffalo Bills fans "drooled over the possibility of Wilkerson reuniting with Rex Ryan in Buffalo," according to team reporter Mike Rodak -- but that was before the Jets slapped him with the franchise tag. Others expressed a similar sentiment: Terrific player but too costly.

The "Titans would love to have him. But can't see them paying the price," reporter Paul Kuharsky said.

Houston Texans reporter Tania Ganguli said the Texans "have a need at defensive end, but haven't been too interested in spending too much on one. Wilkerson would be a great addition here, but I don't see them parting with the assets it would take to add him."

The Green Bay Packers "would love to find someone to replace BJ Raji, but would never go for those terms. Too rich for them," according to Rob Demovsky.

Mike Triplett called the New Orleans Saints a "long shot outside possibility, only because they so desperately need help on defense and the D-line in particular. But they have virtually zero cap space, have started to value their draft picks more in a mini-rebuild and just signed Nick Fairley as a three-technique tackle. So they don't seem like a good fit."

And so it goes.

>    http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york-jets/post/_/id/59399/examining-possible-landing-spots-for-jets-de-mo-wilkerson-if-hes-traded