Jump to content
Want to remove all ads? ×

Muhammad Wilkerson Windy City Bound?

JetNation

By JetNation
in NY Jets Forum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 301
  • Created
  • Last Reply
jett

jett

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, Patriot Killa said:

I honestly don't even want to give them our first. Their first should compensate for Mo. I want #11 overall and a 4th just like we got for Revis.

That's just not going to happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cant wait

cant wait

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Patriot Killa said:

If that is the price then so be it. We need to get that 16mill back and some more picks aren't a bad thing. Talent is in the later rounds this year any way...it's not a top heavy draft.

What are you planning to spend that $16M on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
T0mShane

T0mShane

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

This dude thinks we could trade Mo for #11 straightup, and maybe Jets even get more... I think he's over-stressing the point here, but could you imagine having the #11 and #20?

I read earlier that a lot of evaluators only believe there are 15-18 true first round talents in this draft.

More...

 

Greg Gabriel is a full-on tool, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Integrity28

Integrity28

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, T0mShane said:

An old GM who still thinks it's 1986. 

Either way, I agree with him here. Mo is better than any DE in this draft class, and he's worth the value of a first - even, as I said somewhere else, if it's the last pick of the round.... 600 pts or so on the chart.

I don't care if we get an actual 1st, as long as we get the value of a first. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Il Mostro

Il Mostro

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

Either way, I agree with him here. Mo is better than any DE in this draft class, and he's worth the value of a first - even, as I said somewhere else, if it's the last pick of the round.... 600 pts or so on the chart.

I don't care if we get an actual 1st, as long as we get the value of a first. 

I agree with this, providing he comes back 100% from his injury.  Not only is he better than any of the projected top DE's in the draft but, unlike a rookie, he is a proven talent.  The only dings are the injury status (probably not going to be an issue) and the differential between his salary and a rookie contract.  You've got to knock something off his net value due to the salary, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sperm Edwards

Sperm Edwards

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, ylekram said:

back in the day, my wife told me to stop living in the dark ages and she went out and bought me a laptop. man, it was the greatest thing and i started to finally understand. until all this great sh*t needed user id's and passwords. if figured to myself, "im a cool guy. i am gonna have the coolest handles and passwords". i think i was trying to sign up for ebay. had all these cool id's lined up. one after the other,after the other, they all were taken by someone else.. i spent about an hour trying to find an id that would work. finally,frustated, i said "ill bet nobody has this one". and it worked. so i just stuck with it

I wanted to make a post over at JI (before there was a JN). But of course that meant I had to make up a screen name and register. I gave it almost 6 seconds of thought. Figured I'd come up with a different one later but just never got around to it lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
32EBoozer

32EBoozer

Posted
Posted

If we were to trade Mo, Chicago would appear to be our best bet.

We've worked with them before with Marshall, they're at a good draft position, but not too far above(like Dallas)

which might give them cold feet, and they most certainly run a defensive scheme that Mo could thrive in. 

That also puts us in a position to trade up above SF to grab Goff(if they love him) or Stanley (if he makes it there).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mainejet

Mainejet

Posted
Posted

Trading firsts may actually work to get Mo. I'm not sure about the difference in the point value chart between 11 and 20, but any transaction to acquire Mo may actually only involve trading 1st round draft choices. It's kind of touchy, feely how people compare known commodities to the point value chart, but it does happen quite often.

For me though, I hope Mac can get an extra pick for Mo. In the current deal of merely swapping 1st's, we LOSE a player on our roster. Mac should have a pick in hand to use on another player he can add to the roster. I'm thinking a 3rd, maybe even a 2nd? It really depends on how people compare Mo to the value chart. Because that's really what this transaction is about....

A known commodity being traded for draft choices. I don't believe the Bears have anything that the Jets need from their roster? Like has been said, Martellus Bennett is gone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sperm Edwards

Sperm Edwards

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, 32EBoozer said:

If we were to trade Mo, Chicago would appear to be our best bet.

We've worked with them before with Marshall, they're at a good draft position, but not too far above(like Dallas)

which might give them cold feet, and they most certainly run a defensive scheme that Mo could thrive in. 

That also puts us in a position to trade up above SF to grab Goff(if they love him) or Stanley (if he makes it there).

Only thing is, if we don't make someone at 4-7 a more attractive offer than SF, who is a lower drop at #8, then we're moving up to #11 for Paxton Lynch? 

Seems like there are 2 who are clear-cut "above the rest" prospects, and the rest of them have enough serious question marks that there are is no consensus of who will end up the best of the rest.

Wasn't that long ago, but remember how huge of a surprise it was when Bortles was not only the first QB chosen, but that he was the 3rd pick in the whole draft. My recollection is he was expected to be like the 3rd QB taken, not the 3rd player taken, with the other 2 as mortal locks for the top 9 overall (since 7 of the top 9 could/should have been interested in drafting a QB it seemed impossible for both Bridgewater and Manziel to fall beyond that). It's so easily forgotten because of the quick + colorful implosion of Manziel, combined with Bortles putting up what feels like double Bridgewater's passing #s in 2015 (despite nearly identical Y/A, and maybe a 10% discrepancy in Y/C). If Bortles ended up being the worst pro of the 3 then the howling joke of Jacksonville reaching for him way up there would be the most lasting memory of the 2014 draft.

Just saying that impressions today will be long forgotten if/when the "winner" of the non top-2 QB prospects emerges over the next 1-3 seasons. So a trade up (for Lynch) may be totally warranted, and it may be so foolish that such a trade-up & pick ends up being Maccagnan's downfall.

Taking whoever's there at #20 - which may very include everyone who isn't Wentz or Goff - may end up being the smart move. If we trade up for one, of course, we'll never truly know who would have been there and who wouldn't. Just like if Bortles wasn't taken #3, perhaps he would have dropped 20 slots like the other two (or like Rodgers). Not like there was any consensus view of Bortles as a sure thing, day one starter himself back then. Far from it. Indeed, Chad Henne started the first 3 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
32EBoozer

32EBoozer

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, Mainejet said:

Trading firsts may actually work to get Mo. I'm not sure about the difference in the point value chart between 11 and 20, but any transaction to acquire Mo may actually only involve trading 1st round draft choices. It's kind of touchy, feely how people compare known commodities to the point value chart, but it does happen quite often.

For me though, I hope Mac can get an extra pick for Mo. In the current deal of merely swapping 1st's, we LOSE a player on our roster. Mac should have a pick in hand to use on another player he can add to the roster. I'm thinking a 3rd, maybe even a 2nd? It really depends on how people compare Mo to the value chart. Because that's really what this transaction is about....

A known commodity being traded for draft choices. I don't believe the Bears have anything that the Jets need from their roster? Like has been said, Martellus Bennett is gone. 

The value differential between #11 & #20 is a mid 2nd rd. pick.

I agree, we'd need to get  3rd or 4th thrown in to make it worth our while.

However, our nuts are in a $15m Franchise vice.

Just hope that come draft day some teams like the Bears, SD or Raiders mis out on the Defensive stud they wanted and get desperate 

Maybe the new GM in Chicago goes ALL in. Maybe Oakland or SD (looking for a new stadium) & who have Denver & KC in their division pull the trigger?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost

Ghost

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Thai Jet said:

Why would you even care?  Worry about your Patsies

50 year old jobless man still living in Mom's basement. I'd probably care about stuff that wasn't important to me either. lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
32EBoozer

32EBoozer

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Only thing is, if we don't make someone at 4-7 a more attractive offer than SF, who is a lower drop at #8, then we're moving up to #11 for Paxton Lynch? 

Seems like there are 2 who are clear-cut "above the rest" prospects, and the rest of them have enough serious question marks that there are is no consensus of who will end up the best of the rest.

Wasn't that long ago, but remember how huge of a surprise it was when Bortles was not only the first QB chosen, but that he was the 3rd pick in the whole draft. My recollection is he was expected to be like the 3rd QB taken, not the 3rd player taken, with the other 2 as mortal locks for the top 9 overall (since 7 of the top 9 could/should have been interested in drafting a QB it seemed impossible for both Bridgewater and Manziel to fall beyond that). It's so easily forgotten because of the quick + colorful implosion of Manziel, combined with Bortles putting up what feels like double Bridgewater's passing #s in 2015 (despite nearly identical Y/A, and maybe a 10% discrepancy in Y/C). If Bortles ended up being the worst pro of the 3 then the howling joke of Jacksonville reaching for him way up there would be the most lasting memory of the 2014 draft.

Just saying that impressions today will be long forgotten if/when the "winner" of the non top-2 QB prospects emerges over the next 1-3 seasons. So a trade up (for Lynch) may be totally warranted, and it may be so foolish that such a trade-up & pick ends up being Maccagnan's downfall.

Taking whoever's there at #20 - which may very include everyone who isn't Wentz or Goff - may end up being the smart move. If we trade up for one, of course, we'll never truly know who would have been there and who wouldn't. Just like if Bortles wasn't taken #3, perhaps he would have dropped 20 slots like the other two (or like Rodgers). Not like there was any consensus view of Bortles as a sure thing, day one starter himself back then. Far from it. Indeed, Chad Henne started the first 3 games.

At 20.... you're probably looking at a Defensive player again.

Will the Rams take Lynch? If tha's the guy you want, do you risk losing him?

Are they OK maybe getting Cook or Prescott later? 

I don't know...... but I can't wait for the Draft to get here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
drdetroit

drdetroit

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, FTL Jet Fan said:

I think MO is worth a first round no doubt, I am just to the point of I will believe it when I see it.

Unfortunately the market just isn't there.  The Bears think they can get him for a 2nd

 

the market isn't valuing our players even the good ones

Link to comment
Share on other sites
drdetroit

drdetroit

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, Patriot Killa said:

If that is the price then so be it. We need to get that 16mill back and some more picks aren't a bad thing. Talent is in the later rounds this year any way...it's not a top heavy draft.

I'd rather just keep mo another year and start Geno or trade for Glennon. 

 

Fitz's leverage is disappearing and will be gone if Kaep to Denver happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sperm Edwards

Sperm Edwards

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, 32EBoozer said:

At 20.... you're probably looking at a Defensive player again.

Will the Rams take Lynch? If tha's the guy you want, do you risk losing him?

Are they OK maybe getting Cook or Prescott later? 

I don't know...... but I can't wait for the Draft to get here.

I am not saying we should lose a QB we like over a trade up that has a reasonable price. Rather, just saying it is far from certain that: he would have been the 3rd one off the board, that he wouldn't have been there anyway, nor that he'll even be the best of the rest after Wentz/Goff. 

Understand a lot of the reason I say his is because I haven't seen any of them play, and my eyes were not exactly glued to the combine. But this exact type of decision is supposed to be what makes it valuable having a former head scout as GM in the first place. Because any fool of a GM can just be the highest bidder for any FA.

Agree that the events so far plus the draft anticipation this year has made all of this is really interesting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
drdetroit

drdetroit

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Ghost said:

If we cannot trade him this year, can't we tag him next season and attempt to trade him again? Sucks his salary will increase but so will our cap space next season 

Yes, what I don't understand is the panic to trade Mo for a 4th round pick now.  Fitz is not that much better than Geno.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sperm Edwards

Sperm Edwards

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Mainejet said:

Trading firsts may actually work to get Mo. I'm not sure about the difference in the point value chart between 11 and 20, but any transaction to acquire Mo may actually only involve trading 1st round draft choices. It's kind of touchy, feely how people compare known commodities to the point value chart, but it does happen quite often.

For me though, I hope Mac can get an extra pick for Mo. In the current deal of merely swapping 1st's, we LOSE a player on our roster. Mac should have a pick in hand to use on another player he can add to the roster. I'm thinking a 3rd, maybe even a 2nd? It really depends on how people compare Mo to the value chart. Because that's really what this transaction is about....

A known commodity being traded for draft choices. I don't believe the Bears have anything that the Jets need from their roster? Like has been said, Martellus Bennett is gone. 

We lose a player yes, and a damn good one at that, but it doesn't create a hole at his starting position.

Also the reality of team management for Maccagnan is he knows that keeping him isn't a zero-sum decision for just the draft pick (even though the media always writes about it that way). Mo needs a new contract that will average >10% of the team's entire salary cap limit. In other words, keeping Mo also means giving up another high-priced player (likely at least 2 of them).

The choice isn't Mo or a draft pick. It's Mo or a draft pick plus the cap room to spend another $16M/year on other veteran players. It's the reason it's been so difficult to move Mo for a 1st rounder outright this whole time (going back to last year as well). It's the reason high priced FAs are available every season in the first place, otherwise no one would let anyone good go.

So net result we do not simply lose a player. There is a net gain of 2-3 players, and one of them may end up being a franchise QB we'd otherwise miss out on. That's the idea, anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company

Site Sponsor

MetLife Stadium Tailgate

NY Jets Podcast

NY Jets Podcast

DMCA Page

  • -- DMCA Page
    • ×
    ×
    • Create New...