Muhammad Wilkerson Windy City Bound?

[SenorGato]

If Mo actually doesn't want to extend here then trade him. So far I don't think that's the case and we're dealing with the usual noise and nonsense of this time of year. Jets still have multiple ways to clear cap space right now. 

I think the situation will end well either way. Mostly jusy annoyed by how people basically want to give him away, seemingly happy with a 2nd/3rd and cap space. 

[Smashmouth]

3 hours ago, SenorGato said:

There's that Jet fannish desperation. 

There is no desperation in this situation . We are stacked on the DL and have much more pressing needs that's why Wilk who is a very good player is expendable and has not been signed long term. He is NOT elite he is not a 15 mil + a year presence . Period.

The Jets biggest needs IMHO are at LB, Im talking real LB's not some bullsh*t hybrid pass rusher that never seem to pan out and when they can't rush the passee they really can't play the position.

[The Engineer]

8 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

There is no desperation in this situation . We are stacked on the DL and have much more pressing needs that's why Wilk who is a very good player is expendable and has not been signed long term. He is NOT elite he is not a 15 mil + a year presence . Period.

The Jets biggest needs IMHO are at LB, Im talking real LB's not some bullsh*t hybrid pass rusher that never seem to pan out and when they can't rush the passee they really can't play the position.

Except that he is Elite. MO is #96 just in case you've been watching a different number, cause if you actually were watching that number you would already know this.

[SenorGato]

8 minutes ago, The Engineer said:

Except that he is Elite. MO is #96 just in case you've been watching a different number, cause if you actually were watching that number you would already know this.

It still blows my mind that a chunk of this fanbase has no idea how good he is relative to his peers.

[Raideraholic]

17 minutes ago, SenorGato said:

If Mo actually doesn't want to extend here then trade him. So far I don't think that's the case and we're dealing with the usual noise and nonsense of this time of year. Jets still have multiple ways to clear cap space right now. 

It isn't  Muhammad Wilkerson that isn't willing to extend ( he has wanted to for the last three years) .   The Jets are the ones who aren't serious about extending him( once they drafted the younger cheaper Leonard Williams - that probably singled the end of Wilkerson career as a Jet.       Now can the Jets find a trading partner, where both parties can get what they want.    

[SenorGato]

Just now, Raideraholic said:

It isn't  Muhammad Wilkerson that isn't willing to extend ( he has wanted to for the last three years) .   The Jets are the ones who aren't serious about extending him( once they drafted the younger cheaper Leonard Williams - that probably singled the end of Wilkerson career as a Jet.       Now can the Jets find a trading partner, where both parties can get what they want

Just got safer to say the Jets will lock up Mo.

[Ghost]

3 hours ago, drdetroit said:

Same people screaming the entire season and offseason to lock up Mo with a $100 million extension now want to trade him for a 5th R's pick just clear cap space for Fitz

 

Mo + Geno >>>> Fitz and a couple mid round picks

 

Come on man. You're constantly defending Geno Smith. 

 

Geno is not the answer. It's that simple. I'd rather go with Petty. 

[Patriot Killa]

26 minutes ago, Raideraholic said:

It isn't  Muhammad Wilkerson that isn't willing to extend ( he has wanted to for the last three years) .   The Jets are the ones who aren't serious about extending him( once they drafted the younger cheaper Leonard Williams - that probably singled the end of Wilkerson career as a Jet.       Now can the Jets find a trading partner, where both parties can get what they want.    

Oh really? How does our GM like his coffee?

[Raideraholic]

1 hour ago, Patriot Killa said:

Oh really? How does our GM like his coffee?

a skim latte with black coffee mixed in.

[drdetroit]

1 hour ago, Ghost said:

Come on man. You're constantly defending Geno Smith. 

 

Geno is not the answer. It's that simple. I'd rather go with Petty. 

Geno is not the answer and neither is trading mo for trash after we lost Snacks

[Sperm Edwards]

22 hours ago, Greenseed4 said:

The Jets are comfortable paying Mo $15.7M this season, hence the tag that was extended.  They would prefer to have him on board for an extended contract but if he's disagreeable they need to find suitable compensation. If they can't, then that's what they get: another season of play from Mo for $15.7M.  And they can tag him again next year if I'm not mistaken.

Either way, we're not the losers some doomsday posters would have you believe we are.  We either pay out the nose for an incredible talent, or get appropriately compensated by another team who's willing to do so. 

Aside from the Cromartie contract (which wasn't even all that bad considering the Bowles-D infusion/lack of proven CBs/his previous year of play),  McCaggs has shown plenty of competence in his negotiations.  

These things require patience and a poker face. 

And coffee, apparently. 

Well it's not all that simple.

First, I don't think they really want him back at that figure for this year. They tagged him and risked eating it because for 1 year it's not like it would be a tragedy we speak of for years to come. It's Mo, not a turd nobody wants or likes.

Second, he has to be the voice of reason when his HC demands they overpay so badly for a player like Cromartie when the team had 3 young CBs on the roster and that HC's first calling was as a DB coach after playing DB himself. If Bowles knew what player salary was appropriate under the cap he'd be the GM. His closeness to players - particularly one(s) he closely coached all year in 2015 - can cause emotion to cloud judgment. Bowles can say he wants a player, but Maccagnan has to be the one to say we will not even pay $5M per on a year-to-year deal, and if someone outbids us they're welcome to sign him. Especially after already signing Revis and Skrine to such large deals. We had enough DB depth and talent without him.

Third, they cannot tag Mo next year. I mean technically they can, but Mo's tag would be a 20% raise over this year ($18.9M?). Year 3 it's the QB tag or a 144% raise over his prior year's amount, whichever is greater. But the other thing is we'd be renting him for 1 more year for whatever pick compensation we turn down, since we wouldn't be able to trade him with a franchise tag number of $19M (let alone $27M).

I think Maccagnan is showing much better patience and restraint so far this offseason, and possibly too much (he should have signed one tackle so we don't head into the draft needing to upgrade two of them). But I'd rather see that than mortgaging the future with restructure deals so he can max out the cap again without the requisite QB.

[pointman]

You guys ever read forum posts from opposing team fans about Mo? Its like we are the only ones who don't think he is amazing.

[Sperm Edwards]

19 minutes ago, pointman said:

You guys ever read forum posts from opposing team fans about Mo? Its like we are the only ones who don't think he is amazing.

Everyone here likes Mo plenty. That's not the issue.

There are very few teams - if any - who would be willing to part with a 1st round pick this year on top of paying the kind of contract Wilkerson is looking for. Hopefully there's 1 willing to fork that price over to us and then to him. Whatever the # is that Mo has in mind, he and the Jets have (reportedly) never been close. Granted, the Jets need him less than most teams because of who else is on the roster, but that should only further illustrate how difficult it is to make this trade because everyone else should (comparatively) need a player like him on their DL more than we do.

I think we'll get a trade done, and hopefully it's for more than expected. But the consensus among those that cover their respective teams is mostly the same: super player, would love to have him, but he's not worth what it would take to acquire him from the Jets and then sign him after that.

[pointman]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Everyone here likes Mo plenty. That's not the issue.

There are very few teams - if any - who would be willing to part with a 1st round pick this year on top of paying the kind of contract Wilkerson is looking for. Hopefully there's 1 willing to fork that price over to us and then to him. Whatever the # is that Mo has in mind, he and the Jets have (reportedly) never been close. Granted, the Jets need him less than most teams because of who else is on the roster, but that should only further illustrate how difficult it is to make this trade because everyone else should (comparatively) need a player like him on their DL more than we do.

I think we'll get a trade done, and hopefully it's for more than expected. But the consensus among those that cover their respective teams is mostly the same: super player, would love to have him, but he's not worth what it would take to acquire him from the Jets and then sign him after that.

Actually, some people here act like they don't like him at all. I am not a fanboy at all. I am in the club that he should be traded, just making an observation at how we seem to dislike our own more than the outside world. 

 

I think you're right, don't really argue any of what you said... buuut I am thinking there is more of a market for him than we think.. at least I hope.

[Smashmouth]

13 hours ago, The Engineer said:

Except that he is Elite. MO is #96 just in case you've been watching a different number, cause if you actually were watching that number you would already know this.

what I know (and I don't need you to point out his number believe me) is he is not an elite player he's a very good player but he's not game changing elite not by a long shot. This is purely a money decision on a part of the team that happens to be stacked with good young players. At some point something has to give and paying Wilkerson 15 + million on a multi year deal would be stupid at this stage. This also comes down to timing IMO If it were switched around and it was Sheldon or even Williams in this situation they would be in the same boat.

[Smashmouth]

6 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Everyone here likes Mo plenty. That's not the issue.

There are very few teams - if any - who would be willing to part with a 1st round pick this year on top of paying the kind of contract Wilkerson is looking for. Hopefully there's 1 willing to fork that price over to us and then to him. Whatever the # is that Mo has in mind, he and the Jets have (reportedly) never been close. Granted, the Jets need him less than most teams because of who else is on the roster, but that should only further illustrate how difficult it is to make this trade because everyone else should (comparatively) need a player like him on their DL more than we do.

I think we'll get a trade done, and hopefully it's for more than expected. But the consensus among those that cover their respective teams is mostly the same: super player, would love to have him, but he's not worth what it would take to acquire him from the Jets and then sign him after that.

100% agree this is not a popularity contest if it were Wilk would have already been signed for too much money on a team that has more pressing needs and in a nut shell that's all this is about. Of course others need to make something out of this that its not. if Idiot Rex and Tanny were here we would continue on with our current weaknesses and Pay a DL millions of dollars to be Held by the Pats for the nest 5 + years.

[Sperm Edwards]

8 hours ago, pointman said:

Actually, some people here act like they don't like him at all. I am not a fanboy at all. I am in the club that he should be traded, just making an observation at how we seem to dislike our own more than the outside world. 

 

I think you're right, don't really argue any of what you said... buuut I am thinking there is more of a market for him than we think.. at least I hope.

I haven't seen any people act like they don't like him at all. That's not to say no one has brought up any imperfect holes in him as a player as a rationale for not paying $16-18M/year (on top of turning down a high draft pick) to keep him.

Put it this way: say we didn't have him on the roster. Our starters are Williams and Richardson and they're signed for relatively cheap for the next 2-4 years. We have our #20 pick as well as the #25 pick. We have just under $20M in cap room. We have no known+good option at QB (short term or long term) and would like to move up in the draft to grab a potential franchise QB if possible.

OK that is the setting. You'd burn one of those 1st rounders, and 80-90% of our available cap space, to add a 3rd 3-4 DE that relegates one of them to the bench or badly miscast as a below-average OLB? Because that's what you're deciding to do by turning down a trade offer and signing him long term instead.

[Sperm Edwards]

4 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

what I know (and I don't need you to point out his number believe me) is he is not an elite player he's a very good player but he's not game changing elite not by a long shot. This is purely a money decision on a part of the team that happens to be stacked with good young players. At some point something has to give and paying Wilkerson 15 + million on a multi year deal would be stupid at this stage. This also comes down to timing IMO If it were switched around and it was Sheldon or even Williams in this situation they would be in the same boat.

+1 the we must keep everyone has led to what exactly? Remember the "core four"? Well we've got them all (Revis had a 2 year hiatus), and I think we'd be lucky to finish above 8-8 with all of them healthy. So the gang's still all here and they add up to a below-average LT with a $14-15M cap charge, a center who (while still excellent) carries nearly another $10M, an ILB who ideally should be off the field on passing downs for another $7.5M, and an excellent (but no longer total shutdown) corner at $17M. It's like $50M for the 4 of them. To add another $16-18M for Wilkerson - when we already have an above average pair of young 3-4 DEs - is poor cap/roster management. Super player that Mo is, we will win nothing with a ridiculously top-heavy roster like that, where none of the top-heavy guys are a QB worth a damn.

As much as I'll miss him (and surely there will be games when I'll curse having let him go, lol), he is a luxury. You want to keep him? Don't spend $7M from last year on Cromartie, and instead save it for Mo later on (which would have effectively cut Mo's cap charge by ~$2M/year over the next 4 if locked up). And with or without a year of Cro, you don't sign Revis for $16-17M/year. One or the other between him & Mo, not both. Enough of the ridiculously top-heavy rosters with 5 mega-rich ones, 5 so-so pay ones (2 of which end up not being worth the $), and 40+ who make sh*t money, who we can't afford them either if/when they become anything (like losing Snacks). 

Get a worthwhile QB and draft well and these FA losses (or a trade-loss in this case) won't be a tragedy. You can't expect to keep drafting the same damn position in round 1 and then expect to keep the earlier one(s) past their rookie deals.

[pointman]

4 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I haven't seen any people act like they don't like him at all. That's not to say no one has brought up any imperfect holes in him as a player as a rationale for not paying $16-18M/year (on top of turning down a high draft pick) to keep him.

Put it this way: say we didn't have him on the roster. Our starters are Williams and Richardson and they're signed for relatively cheap for the next 2-4 years. We have our #20 pick as well as the #25 pick. We have just under $20M in cap room. We have no known+good option at QB (short term or long term) and would like to move up in the draft to grab a potential franchise QB if possible.

OK that is the setting. You'd burn one of those 1st rounders, and 80-90% of our available cap space, to add a 3rd 3-4 DE that relegates one of them to the bench or badly miscast as a below-average OLB? Because that's what you're deciding to do by turning down a trade offer and signing him long term instead.

I'm with you. Don't need to convince me.

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, pointman said:

I'm with you. Don't need to convince me.

Crap. Well then help find someone for me to argue with then.

[pointman]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Crap. Well then help find someone for me to argue with then.

JoeWilly12 or whatever his name is, he's your huckleberry. 

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, pointman said:

JoeWilly12 or whatever his name is, he's your huckleberry. 

You spelled dingleberry wrong.

[cant wait]

4 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I haven't seen any people act like they don't like him at all. That's not to say no one has brought up any imperfect holes in him as a player as a rationale for not paying $16-18M/year (on top of turning down a high draft pick) to keep him.

Put it this way: say we didn't have him on the roster. Our starters are Williams and Richardson and they're signed for relatively cheap for the next 2-4 years. We have our #20 pick as well as the #25 pick. We have just under $20M in cap room. We have no known+good option at QB (short term or long term) and would like to move up in the draft to grab a potential franchise QB if possible.

OK that is the setting. You'd burn one of those 1st rounders, and 80-90% of our available cap space, to add a 3rd 3-4 DE that relegates one of them to the bench or badly miscast as a below-average OLB? Because that's what you're deciding to do by turning down a trade offer and signing him long term instead.

You can always trade mo after he's been signed too, it's not like players under contract don't have trade value. NO was able to get a nice package back for graham when they ran into their cap issues. Mo Wilkerson under contract at age 26-28 is still a very valuable asset. Plus you can never have too many top DL, I don't think the jets are worried about finding enough playing time for mo/Sheldon/Williams 

[whodeawhodat]

15 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Everyone here likes Mo plenty. That's not the issue.

There are very few teams - if any - who would be willing to part with a 1st round pick this year on top of paying the kind of contract Wilkerson is looking for. Hopefully there's 1 willing to fork that price over to us and then to him. Whatever the # is that Mo has in mind, he and the Jets have (reportedly) never been close. Granted, the Jets need him less than most teams because of who else is on the roster, but that should only further illustrate how difficult it is to make this trade because everyone else should (comparatively) need a player like him on their DL more than we do.

I think we'll get a trade done, and hopefully it's for more than expected. But the consensus among those that cover their respective teams is mostly the same: super player, would love to have him, but he's not worth what it would take to acquire him from the Jets and then sign him after that.

saving grace is that Mo is much better than any DL that can be drafted this year and at his age has plenty of good years left(not a 1 year rental).  Hope we get something worthwhile in return.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, cant wait said:

You can always trade mo after he's been signed too, it's not like players under contract don't have trade value. NO was able to get a nice package back for graham when they ran into their cap issues. Mo Wilkerson under contract at age 26-28 is still a very valuable asset. Plus you can never have too many top DL, I don't think the jets are worried about finding enough playing time for mo/Sheldon/Williams 

Nope.

They can't sign and trade him at that kind of money. You want to pay him a $25M+ signing bonus and then trade him? Come on.

Next, they know Sheldon is not only wasted at OLB, but he's not a particularly good fit there and we can do better than him out there. 

Its not a matter of having too many top DL. It's  matter of trading away (by not accepting) a first round pick and >$16M per year on a 3rd DE when we already have 2 starters for the 2 starting positions.

 

[Sperm Edwards]

4 minutes ago, whodeawhodat said:

saving grace is that Mo is much better than any DL that can be drafted this year and at his age has plenty of good years left(not a 1 year rental).  Hope we get something worthwhile in return.

But we're not looking to draft one this year in the first place. We're full. 

[pointman]

27 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

You spelled dingleberry wrong.

[Savage69]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

But we're not looking to draft one this year in the first place. We're full. 

Since the Pats traded Jones they may be looking to replace him in the draft.. Don't have to worry about Mo going to the Pats since Mo wants more then Brady money..

[rex-n-effect]

3 minutes ago, Savage69 said:

Since the Pats traded Jones they may be looking to replace him in the draft.. Don't have to worry about Mo going to the Pats since Mo wants more then Brady money..

The question is whether Mo accepts under the table payments.

[Sperm Edwards]

3 minutes ago, Savage69 said:

Since the Pats traded Jones they may be looking to replace him in the draft.. Don't have to worry about Mo going to the Pats since Mo wants more then Brady money..

On the cap, yes. 

[Savage69]

1 minute ago, rex-n-effect said:

The question is whether Mo accepts under the table payments.

Mo has a foundation also but there is no proof that Brady takes under the table payments he has always been easy to deal with contract wise.. Some players are some are like Mo..

[whodeawhodat]

12 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

But we're not looking to draft one this year in the first place. We're full. 

I was speaking to trade value, not for us replacing mo.

[Sperm Edwards]

7 minutes ago, whodeawhodat said:

I was speaking to trade value, not for us replacing mo.

Oh. I see. 

I think those who want a sure thing could still want a sure thing. Swinging and missing happens to everyone no matter how good the prospect. Question is how much they're willing to pay in picks and $.

[Nostradamus]

On 4/2/2016 at 7:49 PM, SenorGato said:

Right now I would guess Shaq Lawson is the most likely guy to be targeted by the Jets in round one that isn't a QB. Unfortunately this draft sucks balls and I have serious doubts he makes it to 20. 11 is about the point sh*t starts getting real with him it seems (if not before that), so.....maybe?

It'd better take alot more than swapping firsts THO to gift them Wilkerson.

They don't like Wilkersons attitude....a deal wouldn't be surprising

[Raideraholic]

14 hours ago, whodeawhodat said:

saving grace is that Mo is much better than any DL that can be drafted this year and at his age has plenty of good years left(not a 1 year rental).  Hope we get something worthwhile in return.

I don't think you can make that statement.   Someone in this draft could be proven in time to be better than Muhammad Wilkerson .    Just Muhammad Wilkerson is a known commodity right now , and a team has to pick that player that could be that player in time.( Wilkerson was a late first rounder for the Jets - turn out a very good choice the Jets made).

As a Raider fan I would rather draft Robert   NKemdiche or Chis Jones  every time over trading for Muhammad Wilkerson .( great player) .      Both players give my team what they are looking for without having to give up picks, and pay a N Suh type of contract.