Good Teams Don't Allow Stud young Players to Reach FA (Harrison/ Wilkerson)

[EM31]

The ten years is minute relative to the fact that those guys weren't just randomly let go in the middle of their primes like so many of you are suggesting to do to Wilkerson. By "in his 20s" you mean "after his age 29 season."

What I mean by not in his 30s is that he was 29 when he was traded.  At what age do you think someone starts to be "in his 30s" ?

Normally  i would not worry about the difference except that you were so almost pouty in the way you issued the initial pronouncement as if you as proven Fermat's last theorem or something.

 

[EM31]

Seymour turned 30 at the beginning of his first season in Oakland.

Not the best example because the Raiders gave him a crazy contract that no team would match.  Matching a crazy over the top contract is not the same as letting someone go because you dont want to pay him what he should be paid.  And again they paid him twice, he had two contracts with NE

You understand that "what he should be paid" is highly subjective and is very different depending on who is being asked.

I am sure that Seymour felt the Raiders contract was what he was worth.  Just as I am sure that every player negotiating for a new contract feels that what he is asking for is what he is worth.  When there is a large gap then the record shows good teams tend to stick with their own evaluation and let the player walk or look for a trade partner.

Seymour, Milloy, Law and many others fit that pattern regardless of the point in their respective careers that the difference in valuations occurs.

[Beerfish]

There are a couple of issues here, if we are saying let Wilkerson go he wants to much, we have Williams, Richardson, Harrison then in about 2 years we will be trading one or more of them when they seek their pay day.  then the next guy, then the next guy, players just reaching their peak and producing.  We develop the player, we put up with his rookie year and just getting started in the leauge, the guy finally makes the big step to be the player we think he is and then dump him.

 

In the end it is all going to come down to some tough choices for our team, any one of them is going to make us worse not better.  The big decisions are Wilkerson, Harrison and D'Brick.  (We will cut other players but the ones i listed are the big ones.)

 

I'll say again we do not have the data to collectively voice good opinions becasue we have no idea other than shadowy rumors what the two dlineman want money wise.

[Jet Nut]

You understand that "what he should be paid" is highly subjective and is very different depending on who is being asked.

I am sure that Seymour felt the Raiders contract was what he was worth.  Just as I am sure that every player negotiating for a new contract feels that what he is asking for is what he is worth.  When there is a large gap then the record shows good teams tend to stick with their own evaluation and let the player walk or look for a trade partner.

Seymour, Milloy, Law and many others fit that pattern regardless of the point in their respective careers that the difference in valuations occurs.

No, not all that subjective.  Guys below his level are being paid right at that 100 mil range.  Its not all that hard to figure what he would get on the open market.  

No matter how many times its posted, Mo is not a 30+ or 30ish year old.  Hes also not finishing his second contract and on his way down, he's at his peak.  To compare a guy in his peak years to Law is wrong.   

We agree about the need of a team vs the money it takes to sign that player.  But lets not make it into something more.  Lets not say hes not worth the money he'll get etc or compare him to others just because the only similarity is that they were allowed to walk 

[SenorGato]

What I mean by not in his 30s is that he was 29 when he was traded.  At what age do you think someone starts to be "in his 30s" ?

Normally  i would not worry about the difference except that you were so almost pouty in the way you issued the initial pronouncement as if you as proven Fermat's last theorem or something.

 

Soooo....almost exactly 30, like I said in the post you quote before? Jeez Louise....

Here is literally what is in the post you quoted:

In both cases the Pats kept both guys until their 30s - Seymour at almost exactly 30 and Law well into his. Wilkerson is 3 full seasons away from his age 30 season.

Letting Wilkerson go as he enters his age 27 season, is not even kinda sorta the same thing as the Pats letting go of Seymour, Law, or Milloy if you take the time to dig into those situations. They were all older and all had played through two contracts (or, since this is the sh*tdicked NFL - some or most of a second contract). Throw in the Pats having a young QB building a HOF resume and the situations drift even further apart.

[Joe Jets fan]

I have been reading and thinking we all might be on the same page.   Gato, I would love to hear the numbers of a contract that the Jets could give to Mo that you would be ok with.  Meaning, whats the highest per year and total guaranteed before you think its too much.   There must be a top even for you.  So what is it?  maybe most of us would be ok with it.

[JustInFudge]

Good teams let their stud players walk all the time.  It is almost a hallmark of well managed teams like the Steelers and Patriots that they are prepared to let their top players walk and they simply will not overpay for a sentimental favorite at the expense of losing their handle on the overall team cap situation.  Whether it is Ty Law or Richard Seymour or whoever, if that player insists on a payday that is beyond what the team honestly feels is fair market value then the team moves in a different direction.

Period.

I would say it is the mark of a bad team that they over value their home grown talent and overpay to keep them in house.  The Jets have been guilty of that for years.  The Steelers and Patriots are perennially successful and we are not.  The way that a number of our recent GMs have handled the cap is a good part of the reason why.  We have a fanbase who always wants their ice cream now and we have had GMs, Mike Tanenbaum in particular who saw no probelm in giving that to them every year.  Mike Tanenbaum wins the off season yet again.  At least now he seems to be doing it with the Dolphins.

Every one of us would like Mo to stay for his entire career but only some of us are so short sighted that they are willing to offer a blank check to make that happen.  Big Mo needs to let the reality of his current injury sink in and he needs to accept the fact that while a full recovery is in the cards for him this time around,  that every player, no matter how good is one play away from retirement.  That is what a big signing bonus is meant to cover.  What has to happen is that Wilkerson needs to understand the risk that is being taken by the other side (the Jets) and his asking price needs to come down accordingly to reflect the risks being taken on both sides.

Or he can roll the dice like Leon Washington did.

 

Those teams have this thing called a HOF QB.  A little easier to let some of the better players on your roster go when you've got a HOF at the most important position in all of sports.  

Unfortunately the Jets dont have that luxury.  

 

 

[CanadaSteve]

Still? Instead of all this - why not hit me with some Fletcher Cox and Gerald McCoy numbers. Your boy didn't make as good an argument as you hope, so search for new coattails!

Like I said - I get that you have some kind of deep seeded issue with these guys getting paid. That doesn't matter or play into anything.

Also - you were given massive points for winning that big JJ Watt/Mo Wilkerson showdown. I already gave you that you showed those Wilkerson-is-better-than-Watt guys what's what! You can move past that as it never existed outside of your head in the first place.

Actually dude, its you with the issues here.  Nobody gives a rats ass what Fletcher Cox and Gerald McCoy's numbers are.  If you want though, I could put up McCoy's numbers.  They are slightly less than Mo's over his career.  Mo and Gerald are a good comparison stats wise.  What people have been saying here, which you are either ignoring on purpose or just being a dick about it, is the cost.

McCoy makes about $13 million a season, and will do so for the next five years.  His contract gradually DECREASES over the time.  Watt's contract pays him close to $15 million for the next five years, and his contract INCREASES to $17 million. 

Here is the key here, which IS actually what everyone is talking about:

If Mo wants $17 million a season, let him walk.  He is not worth that much.  If he signs in the $13 million a season, HURRAH!  We can all stop bitching and moaning about this. 

[SenorGato]

I have been reading and thinking we all might be on the same page.   Gato, I would love to hear the numbers of a contract that the Jets could give to Mo that you would be ok with.  Meaning, whats the highest per year and total guaranteed before you think its too much.   There must be a top even for you.  So what is it?  maybe most of us would be ok with it.

I don't have a number, don't care to have a number, and don't need a number. Sorry, but this is a mediocre trap. He should get the deal that will keep him. Pretend I said $40 billion for all that matters.

Actually dude, its you with the issues here.  Nobody gives a rats ass what Fletcher Cox and Gerald McCoy's numbers are.  If you want though, I could put up McCoy's numbers.  They are slightly less than Mo's over his career.  Mo and Gerald are a good comparison stats wise.  What people have been saying here, which you are either ignoring on purpose or just being a dick about it, is the cost.

McCoy makes about $13 million a season, and will do so for the next five years.  His contract gradually DECREASES over the time.  Watt's contract pays him close to $15 million for the next five years, and his contract INCREASES to $17 million. 

Here is the key here, which IS actually what everyone is talking about:

If Mo wants $17 million a season, let him walk.  He is not worth that much.  If he signs in the $13 million a season, HURRAH!  We can all stop bitching and moaning about this. 

Coming from the guy who posted JJ Watt's numbers to debunk the big Watt vs. Wilkerson debate....this is mighty convenient to say. I do want, I was actually the guy who requested it - maybe even requested it multiple times.

OH, it's the COST! Here I was arguing that Wilkerson is better than Watt and that clouds are cotton candy...I had a feeling something was up. So now the imaginary number to work with is $17? How many pieces of paper were in the hat? I'd be cool with $17 million, sounds fair on this end and the Jets keep their best player for the rest of his prime.

[EM31]

No, not all that subjective.  Guys below his level are being paid right at that 100 mil range.  Its not all that hard to figure what he would get on the open market.  

No matter how many times its posted, Mo is not a 30+ or 30ish year old.  Hes also not finishing his second contract and on his way down, he's at his peak.  To compare a guy in his peak years to Law is wrong.   

We agree about the need of a team vs the money it takes to sign that player.  But lets not make it into something more.  Lets not say hes not worth the money he'll get etc or compare him to others just because the only similarity is that they were allowed to walk 

You are still missing the point.

2nd contract, 3rd contract, 4th contract, nth contract it does not matter.  If at the time of the negotiation there is a significant distance between where the team values the player and what the player is asking for, as with Seymour for example even before the end of his 2nd deal then that team has to decide if they are willing to stick with their valuation and let the player move elsewhere or, on the other hand if they are going to cave in and give the player what he wants.

The Patriots particularly but also the Steelers are famous for being willing to move in a different direction and it seems to work out for them.

With Mo he may simply be pricing himself above where the Jets rate him and if that gap is too large then he needs to go.  We should probably have done it earlier which would have maximized our chances at decent value in return but now the injury changes much of that.  Mo needs to prove he is all the way back if he wants a crack at ultra-premium money.  Unfortunately in order to prove it he will need to continue to play without benefit and protection of a new deal and a very large signing bonus.  This is a catch-22 which he can break is he is willing to come down in price.  Paying a premium for an insurance policy should be simple enough to understand.

The price should have come down in any event the moment he got injured.  It simply changed the risk reward proposition for the buyer and the seller needs to account for that.

P.S. I thought you made a whole big thing about having me on ignore. What happened with that?

[Joe Jets fan]

You are still missing the point.

2nd contract, 3rd contract, 4th contract, nth contract it does not matter.  If at the time of the negotiation there is a significant distance between where the team values the player and what the player is asking for, as with Seymour for example even before the end of his 2nd deal then that team has to decide if they are willing to stick with their valuation and let the player move elsewhere or, on the other hand if they are going to cave in and give the player what he wants.

The Patriots particularly but also the Steelers are famous for being willing to move in a different direction and it seems to work out for them.

With Mo he may simply be pricing himself above where the Jets rate him and if that gap is too large then he needs to go.  We should probably have done it earlier which would have maximized our chances at decent value in return but now the injury changes much of that.  Mo needs to prove he is all the way back if he wants a crack at ultra-premium money.  Unfortunately in order to prove it he will need to continue to play without benefit and protection of a new deal and a very large signing bonus.  This is a catch-22 which he can break is he is willing to come down in price.  Paying a premium for an insurance policy should be simple enough to understand.

The price should have come down in any event the moment he got injured.  It simply changed the risk reward proposition for the buyer and the seller needs to account for that.

P.S. I thought you made a whole big thing about having me on ignore. What happened with that?

No, we should pay Mo what ever he wants because kepp our players blah, blah, blah.  Duh, this is just like baseball, we can pay what every we like.  If you don't like that then you are a du du head...

[CanadaSteve]

I don't have a number, don't care to have a number, and don't need a number. Sorry, but this is a mediocre trap. He should get the deal that will keep him. Pretend I said $40 billion for all that matters.

Coming from the guy who posted JJ Watt's numbers to debunk the big Watt vs. Wilkerson debate....this is mighty convenient to say. I do want, I was actually the guy who requested it - maybe even requested it multiple times.

OH, it's the COST! Here I was arguing that Wilkerson is better than Watt and that clouds are cotton candy...I had a feeling something was up. So now the imaginary number to work with is $17? How many pieces of paper were in the hat? I'd be cool with $17 million, sounds fair on this end and the Jets keep their best player for the rest of his prime.

I guess you just like being a dick....got it.

[Sperm Edwards]

The thread title is simply a false statement. Good teams do this all the time when they feel their cap room is better spent elsewhere (or on multiple players), particularly if they already have starter-worthy replacements. Sometimes it turns out to be a bad move, but the good teams also know when to not pay top dollar for a player.

How many good, young WRs has Pittsburgh either traded away or allowed to hit FA? From 2010-2014 they let go of Holmes, Wallace, and Sanders. 

Denver lets go of more than one young stud player every year: Elvis Dumervil, Eric Decker, Orlando Franklin, Julius Thomas off the top of my head. Oh yeah, and Tim Tebow. 

KC let go of their center because he commanded a $9M/year salary in FA. Then they won 10 games without Jamaal Charles. Year before that they let go of Branden Albert.

Seattle parted ways with 3 starting offensive linemen from their SB winning team, and is about to lose another. Plus Byron Maxwell, Golden Tate

Washington let go of Orakpo and went to the playoffs.

These are only some of the more recent ones from just a handful of teams and I'm sure I didn't list all their lost FAs either. 

Good teams pick and choose, and if a player is replaceable - particularly if the downgrade isn't like a fall off a cliff downgrade - then you just don't pay him QB money.

I certainly wouldn't cry if they retained him, but he isn't irreplaceable. The downgrade (if there even is one) from him to Richardson is massively outweighed by the $15M worth of upgrades the team could make elsewhere (if they spend smart).

JMO

[SenorGato]

I guess you just like being a dick....got it.

So that McCoy and/or Cox thing is never going to happen, is it? The good thing is that you showed, without a shadow of a doubt, that JJ Watt is better than Wilkerson. When that guy who said Wilkerson is better shows up he is going to be so pissed and mad.

[SenorGato]

No, we should pay Mo what ever he wants because kepp our players blah, blah, blah.  Duh, this is just like baseball, we can pay what every we like.  If you don't like that then you are a du du head...

Wow, glad no one had a break down over this topic.

[JustInFudge]

The thread title is simply a false statement. Good teams do this all the time when they feel their cap room is better spent elsewhere (or on multiple players), particularly if they already have starter-worthy replacements. Sometimes it turns out to be a bad move, but the good teams also know when to not pay top dollar for a player.

How many good, young WRs has Pittsburgh either traded away or allowed to hit FA? From 2010-2014 they let go of Holmes, Wallace, and Sanders. 

Denver lets go of more than one young stud player every year: Elvis Dumervil, Eric Decker, Orlando Franklin, Julius Thomas off the top of my head. Oh yeah, and Tim Tebow. 

KC let go of their center because he commanded a $9M/year salary in FA. Then they won 10 games without Jamaal Charles. Year before that they let go of Branden Albert.

Seattle parted ways with 3 starting offensive linemen from their SB winning team, and is about to lose another. Plus Byron Maxwell, Golden Tate

Washington let go of Orakpo and went to the playoffs.

These are only some of the more recent ones from just a handful of teams and I'm sure I didn't list all their lost FAs either. 

Good teams pick and choose, and if a player is replaceable - particularly if the downgrade isn't like a fall off a cliff downgrade - then you just don't pay him QB money.

I certainly wouldn't cry if they retained him, but he isn't irreplaceable. The downgrade (if there even is one) from him to Richardson is massively outweighed by the $15M worth of upgrades the team could make elsewhere (if they spend smart).

JMO

I dont think you can make a general statement like that and say it always applied.  It's certainly situation based.  Sure, teams let players walk all the time and are fine.  As I said earlier, teams with QB's obviously make it easier to take the blow of letting talent walk.  However, of the examples you've given and others I've read in this thread, I think the point that most people are missing is that Mo is the best player on the team.  

None of the guys you listed (and the other examples) were referencing the best player on the roster.  So the Jets situation is unique.  Not only is he the best player on the team, they dont have a QB either.  And we're talking about a team that is going to more game on D as opposed to O.  So maybe he's not irreplaceable but it's certainly not going to make them better. 

 

[Snell41]

The thread title is simply a false statement. Good teams do this all the time when they feel their cap room is better spent elsewhere (or on multiple players), particularly if they already have starter-worthy replacements. Sometimes it turns out to be a bad move, but the good teams also know when to not pay top dollar for a player.

How many good, young WRs has Pittsburgh either traded away or allowed to hit FA? From 2010-2014 they let go of Holmes, Wallace, and Sanders. 

Denver lets go of more than one young stud player every year: Elvis Dumervil, Eric Decker, Orlando Franklin, Julius Thomas off the top of my head. Oh yeah, and Tim Tebow. 

KC let go of their center because he commanded a $9M/year salary in FA. Then they won 10 games without Jamaal Charles. Year before that they let go of Branden Albert.

Seattle parted ways with 3 starting offensive linemen from their SB winning team, and is about to lose another. Plus Byron Maxwell, Golden Tate

Washington let go of Orakpo and went to the playoffs.

These are only some of the more recent ones from just a handful of teams and I'm sure I didn't list all their lost FAs either. 

Good teams pick and choose, and if a player is replaceable - particularly if the downgrade isn't like a fall off a cliff downgrade - then you just don't pay him QB money.

I certainly wouldn't cry if they retained him, but he isn't irreplaceable. The downgrade (if there even is one) from him to Richardson is massively outweighed by the $15M worth of upgrades the team could make elsewhere (if they spend smart).

JMO

/thread

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Beerfish]

If we can't pay Wilk then say goodbye to Richardson and Williams as soon as they come into their own at age 26 I guess?  Gato has a valid point through all of this as do other people.  We have an aging Revis on the down side we are paying through the face for , we have an aging DBrick on the downside we are paying through the face for.  We have a 26 year old pro bowler just coking into his own we are going to let walk or trade on the cheap.  That is the worry.

 

As I said before all of this will be more clear when we find out just what he wants but it is NOT a good thing that we may be forced to letting a very good player leave just as he is in his prime.

[BroadwayJets]

 

You don't draft a backup at number 6 overall if you plan to keep the guy he's backing up for close to a $100 million dollars. Let's not forget the guy we just drafted 6th overall is looking very promising at run stopping, same strength as Mo. Cost outweighs the benefit of keeping Mo, especially if we can tag and trade him. 

As for Snacks, if I'm Maccagnan, I'm not paying $8 million a year for a 2 down player that can't get to the quarterback. It's a passing league and we still have Sheldon and Leonard Williams.

 

[SenorGato]

 

You don't draft a backup at number 6 overall if you plan to keep the guy he's backing up for close to a $100 million dollars. Let's not forget the guy we just drafted 6th overall is looking very promising at run stopping, same strength as Mo. Cost outweighs the benefit of keeping Mo, especially if we can tag and trade him. 

As for Snacks, if I'm Maccagnan, I'm not paying $8 million a year for a 2 down player that can't get to the quarterback. It's a passing league and we still have Sheldon and Leonard Williams.

 

There were plenty of snaps going around on the DL last year. Dropping Harrison frees the Jets to run a Richardson-Wilkerson-Williams front on passing downs (aka often), which basically would be the most badass thing this franchise has ever done to win games. 

[BroadwayJets]

There were plenty of snaps going around on the DL last year. Dropping Harrison frees the Jets to run a Richardson-Wilkerson-Williams front on passing downs (aka often), which basically would be the most badass thing this franchise has ever done to win games. 

Fair point. I would argue all we need is one stud OLB, not three above average 34 DEs. I think all three are better suited for a 34 anyway IMO, could be wrong though.

[Paradis]

Harrison can go somewhere else. Finding a run stuffing NT isn't like searching for the hope diamond. He's no Kris Jenkins and deserves to get paid by a team with bottom barrel run D.

 

Bye Snacks.

[CanadaSteve]

So that McCoy and/or Cox thing is never going to happen, is it? The good thing is that you showed, without a shadow of a doubt, that JJ Watt is better than Wilkerson. When that guy who said Wilkerson is better shows up he is going to be so pissed and mad.

Thanks for never addressing what I actually said once, and for still proving you are quite the dick. 

Gerald McCoy

Year Team G Solo Ast Total Sack                 Pass D                                                                                               2012 TB 16 23 7 30 5.0                 2           2013 TB 16 35 15 50 9.0                 4           2014 TB 13 28 7 35 8.5                 3           2015 TB 15 26 8 34 8.5                 1

 

[SenorGato]

Thanks for never addressing what I actually said once, and for still proving you are quite the dick. 

Gerald McCoy

Year Team G Solo Ast Total Sack                 Pass D                                                                                               2012 TB 16 23 7 30 5.0                 2           2013 TB 16 35 15 50 9.0                 4           2014 TB 13 28 7 35 8.5                 3           2015 TB 15 26 8 34 8.5                 1

What did I not address? McCoy's missing first two years there, maybe? Not that Wilkerson isn't already clearly better from that, just funny to randomly eliminate two seasons for the hell of it. That didn't happen when you compared Watt to Wilkerson.

 

 

[SenorGato]

Since copying and pasting seems to be taking a while....Wilkerson in 5 years has 36.5 sacks and 21 PDs, just of the stats mentioned for McCoy. McCoy has 14 PDs and 35.5 sacks over 6 seasons. Wilkerson also has an INT and 9 forced fumbles to McCoy's 0 and 4 (again, over more seasons). Wilkerson is also a little younger, a little bigger, has missed less games....I suppose all that explains the hold up to get these numbahs up when Watt's required no prompting, no missing seasons....I know, I know...I'm being a meany poo poo head.

Edit: Wilkerson also destroys him in tackles, solo and otherwise (301/184 to 188/144)....TFL (50+ to 36+)....Its increasingly insane how much a few sell Wilkerson short here, way short.

[Jetsfan80]

I dont think you can make a general statement like that and say it always applied.  It's certainly situation based.  Sure, teams let players walk all the time and are fine.  As I said earlier, teams with QB's obviously make it easier to take the blow of letting talent walk.  However, of the examples you've given and others I've read in this thread, I think the point that most people are missing is that Mo is the best player on the team. 

Then the solution is simple:  Tag and trade him for the compensation needed to get this franchise a QB.  If Wilkerson wants QB money, he's not getting it.  So we might as well trade him for as many picks as possible, and devote those added resources towards drafting our franchise QB in either '16 or '17.  If it has to be a mid-round pick in 2016 and a 2017 first rounder, so be it.

On top of this, we'd be using the cap space saved to extend or sign other important players.

[SenorGato]

Then the solution is simple:  Tag and trade him for the compensation needed to get this franchise a QB. If Wilkerson wants QB money, he's not getting it.  So we might as well trade him for as many picks as possible, and devote those added resources towards drafting our franchise QB in either '16 or '17.  If it has to be a mid-round pick in 2016 and a 2017 first rounder, so be it.

On top of this, we'd be using the cap space saved to extend or sign other important players.

Not how it works at all, and what many here think is QB money is well short of QB money. From there, if the Jets used whatever compensation to land a franchise QB, that QB doesn't require QB money until his rookie contract is up or close to it. We're talking 4-5 years. 

Wilkerson is *the* other important player to extend, and he actually exists - unlike this QB. It's not even a contest who the most valuable player on this roster is right now.

If there's a DLman to trade - it's Richardson. He, like Wilkerson, would fetch a first without much of an issue to give a marginally better chance at landing a QB. There's the added appeal, to a buyer, of getting the end of his rookie deal in exchange for the risk he gets himself in more trouble.

[Jetsfan80]

Wilkerson is *the* other important player to extend, and he actually exists - unlike this QB. It's not even a contest who the most valuable player on this roster is right now.

Naturally, we need to get blown away with an offer and for Wilkerson to fail to come to reasonable terms for my argument to make sense.  Provided both of those things are true, an Imaginary QB is more valuable than the actual DL stud.  Imaginary QB, even an Imaginary QB that turns out to be only an above average QB with the ability to elevate his play at times, is more valuable to an NFL franchise than JJ Watt.  The upside of an Imaginary QB ending up an elite QB makes this even more true. 

I'd love to have Wilkerson come back.  I've supported this numerous times.  But if there's one thing we need more than Wilkerson, its a QB.  All resources have to be devoted towards this end when it makes sense to do so. 

[SenorGato]

Naturally, we need to get blown away with an offer and for Wilkerson to fail to come to reasonable terms for my argument to make sense.  Provided both of those things are true, an Imaginary QB is more valuable than the actual DL stud.  Imaginary QB, even an Imaginary QB that turns out to be only an above average QB with the ability to elevate his play at times, is more valuable to an NFL franchise than JJ Watt.  The upside of an Imaginary QB ending up an elite QB makes this even more true. 

I'd love to have Wilkerson come back.  I've supported this numerous times.  But if there's one thing we need more than Wilkerson, its a QB.  All resources have to be devoted towards this end when it makes sense to do so. 

The fact that your plan requires a ton of lucky circumstance to even have a shot at working is a small hint that the Jets shouldn't be gambling their best player on it 

Richardson and Wilkerson probably get you around the same thing in a trade. Wilkerson is worth more, just to get that out of the way, but his contract situation is less favorable to a team trading for him and hurts his trade value a little. Leverage Richardson's remaining rookie deal into some draft picks, keep Wilkerson, still have two high end DL without any character issues to worry about, and find a long term QB between now and the 2018 draft.

[Joe Jets fan]

Not how it works at all, and what many here think is QB money is well short of QB money. From there, if the Jets used whatever compensation to land a franchise QB, that QB doesn't require QB money until his rookie contract is up or close to it. We're talking 4-5 years. 

Wilkerson is *the* other important player to extend, and he actually exists - unlike this QB. It's not even a contest who the most valuable player on this roster is right now.

If there's a DLman to trade - it's Richardson. He, like Wilkerson, would fetch a first without much of an issue to give a marginally better chance at landing a QB. There's the added appeal, to a buyer, of getting the end of his rookie deal in exchange for the risk he gets himself in more trouble.

Mo is not even close to the most important player on the team.   Shocking anyone thinks that.   

If Mo has a crap game team can easily still win.  

If QB, Lt, C, WR or CB have a crap game then team loses.  That's what most important player on team means. 

[EM31]

Mo is not even close to the most important player on the team.   Shocking anyone thinks that.   

If Mo has a crap game team can easily still win.  

If QB, Lt, C, WR or CB have a crap game then team loses.  That's what most important player on team means. 

I think he is close to being the best player at his position on the team depending on how far you might feel that Darelle Revis has slipped.  Aside from that your points are well made.

[drdetroit]

It makes more sense to let Willerson walk, resign Fitz and Snacks, and upgrade at RT and OLB by signing a combination of Joe Barksdale and Bruce Irvin.

[drdetroit]

Mo is not even close to the most important player on the team.   Shocking anyone thinks that.   

If Mo has a crap game team can easily still win.  

If QB, Lt, C, WR or CB have a crap game then team loses.  That's what most important player on team means. 

We don't have a great cap situation and have needs at QB, RT and OLB.

A defensive line with Snacks, Leonard Williams and Sheldon is pretty damn good.

 

[Shockwave]

There are a couple of issues here, if we are saying let Wilkerson go he wants to much, we have Williams, Richardson, Harrison then in about 2 years we will be trading one or more of them when they seek their pay day.  then the next guy, then the next guy, players just reaching their peak and producing.  We develop the player, we put up with his rookie year and just getting started in the leauge, the guy finally makes the big step to be the player we think he is and then dump him.

 

In the end it is all going to come down to some tough choices for our team, any one of them is going to make us worse not better.  The big decisions are Wilkerson, Harrison and D'Brick.  (We will cut other players but the ones i listed are the big ones.)

 

I'll say again we do not have the data to collectively voice good opinions becasue we have no idea other than shadowy rumors what the two dlineman want money wise.

Def well said. Keep in mind the cap has risen tremendously. Teams have 75m in cap space. No one is in "cap hell" meaning if the Jets had wanted to get something done they can. 

[Shockwave]

How did this turn into Mo Wilkerson is as good as JJ Watt and should be signed for 17m yearly. Looks like it just became a debate class exercise as the discussion has clearly left reality.