ZachEY Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 9 hours ago, Jetsbb said: http://www.draftinsider.net/blog/?p=11284 Sources close to the situation tell me the New York Jets made a serious offer to the Tennessee Titans for the initial pick of the draft. Those with knowledge of the situation tell me the team was close to getting the deal done. I’m told it is believed veteran defensive lineman Muhammad Wilkerson was part of the deal. And while many in the New York area dismissed my initial report earlier this week over the New York Jets being dark horses for trading to the top of the draft, it was revealed within 24 hours of the report that Jared Goff would be making an official visit to the franchise. Goff won’t be make it past the fourth pick of the draft. Will the Jets continue to attempt to move up into the early reaches of round one? Sources tell me they believe so but much depends on who the Los Angeles Rams ultimately select with the first pick in two weeks time. Pretty hot take right here. The Jets tried to move up to #1, and in doing so, offered the player they're rumored to be trying to trade because they don't want to pay his contract? Is this premium content? I'd pay just about anything for that info... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 3 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: Why is this incumbent upon me to show that? Maybe it hasn't been done. But sometimes it could have been done, if only a team had pulled the trigger on trading up, which was my point. The reality is there haven't been very many of these trade-the-farm deals. It's not like there are 5 of them every year for the past 30 years so it should be simple for me to find one that worked out. Far from it. It could have been done...just wasnt. When it was ever attempted, if failed. You dont have to show anything, I know the history for the most part. Thats the reason why my position on the subject is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Just now, Integrity28 said: I got the sense, reading clipping this morning, that the Rams got themselves a good old fashioned hustling... report I read was the Rams bit the bullet and paid the "iron price" because they feared the Eagles were about to get a deal done. Well, I credit Tennessee for manufacturing that pressure. I think Tenn taking offers and entertaining talks with other teams created a partially false sense of urgency, and the Rams blinked first. Dummies. Sounds like the Jets getting duped into drafting Gholston out of fear the Patriots were going to. A few years earlier we traded up for DSlob (two #1s and a #4, which technically might rival this trade in chart "points" though I haven't added it up), in large part because we were afraid the Patriots were going to move up to grab him as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 1 minute ago, Villain The Foe said: It could have been done...just wasnt. When it was ever attempted, if failed. You dont have to show anything, I know the history for the most part. Thats the reason why my position on the subject is what it is. Teams - generally bad teams - going 0 for 5 is on the players traded-up for, not necessarily the process itself. If teams were 0 for 50, then that would be far more compelling. In the end it depends for whom you're trading up, not the idea of trading up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Just now, Sperm Edwards said: Sounds like the Jets getting duped into drafting Gholston out of fear the Patriots were going to. A few years earlier we traded up for DSlob (two #1s and a #4, which technically might rival this trade in chart "points" though I haven't added it up), in large part because we were afraid the Patriots were going to move up to grab him as well. Yea, Darwin's Law is never more obvious than it is in the context of "NFL braintrusts" preying upon each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 13 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said: Teams - generally bad teams - going 0 for 5 is on the players traded-up for, not necessarily the process itself. If teams were 0 for 50, then that would be far more compelling. In the end it depends for whom you're trading up, not the idea of trading up. Teams- generally good teams- dont trade their future, and yet many of those good teams have franchise QB's as well. Name me a franchise QB in the league today where their team mortgaged their future to get them. Is this the time where I should be simply shut my face and say Josh Gordon is an idiot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Just now, Villain The Foe said: Teams- generally good teams- dont trade their future, and yet many of those good teams have franchise QB's as well. Is this the time where I should be simply shut my face and say Josh Gordon is an idiot? Either that or you could again attempt to shovel the ridiculous idea that he wants out of the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said: Either that or you could again attempt to shovel the ridiculous idea that he wants out of the NFL. Josh Gordon is a ******* Idiot! lmao. You're not bad Sperm! Nice comeback lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augustiniak Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 2 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said: Teams- generally good teams- dont trade their future, and yet many of those good teams have franchise QB's as well. Name me a franchise QB in the league today where their team mortgaged their future to get them. Is this the time where I should be simply shut my face and say Josh Gordon is an idiot? that's why i'm surprised mccags was 'all in', unless he didn't offer any picks next year and hoped wilk was enough of a carrot to override all the picks other teams were offering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 1 minute ago, Augustiniak said: that's why i'm surprised mccags was 'all in', unless he didn't offer any picks next year and hoped wilk was enough of a carrot to override all the picks other teams were offering. When I heard that the Jets were involved the first thing I thought was our 1st, 2nd and Wilk. Macc is no idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southparkcpa Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 12 hours ago, Charlie Brown said: This just shows that our GM, HC and FO are really on point. What I like is that while they obviously interested in the pick they wouldn't overpay for a prospect. There are no Lucks or Peyton Mannings in this draft and IMO we shouldn't act like they are.... agreed..all these arm chair GM's knocking the JETS is off base. A number 1 pick is a crap shoot. Mo is NOT. Mo for a 1 is in fact a fair trade so if we offered Mo, a 3 for the 1 and they decline? Tough. I imagine Mo's salary demand is what is turning off potential suitors. Tanny would have blown the GM of the Titans and given them 3 picks and Mo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southparkcpa Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 15 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said: You're not bad Sperm You realize how disturbing this statement is? No wonder you want Glennon.:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 1 minute ago, southparkcpa said: You realize how disturbing this statement is? No wonder you want Glennon.:) Damn, you must have heard the closet door close behind me! lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangers9 Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 If true I'm glad we didn't do it. It would have included Wilk and picks and I think that Wilk is a lot better than Goff. And as other posters have shown these trades don't often work out. Like Wash trading up for RG3. You'd think after benefiting from that deal the Rams would know better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LockeJET Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 The Jets offer wasn't as strong as the others because they were looking to get to #1 but not to take a QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southparkcpa Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 2 minutes ago, Rangers9 said: If true I'm glad we didn't do it. It would have included Wilk and picks and I think that Wilk is a lot better than Goff. And as other posters have shown these trades don't often work out. Like Wash trading up for RG3. You'd think after benefiting from that deal the Rams would know better. or us trading the farm to get the 5 pick for suckchez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augustiniak Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 18 minutes ago, Villain The Foe said: When I heard that the Jets were involved the first thing I thought was our 1st, 2nd and Wilk. Macc is no idiot. now that it does not appear the jets would have to trade up for a qb, would they still trade up with chicago, for example, if they can get to 11 and deal wilk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 1 minute ago, Augustiniak said: now that it does not appear the jets would have to trade up for a qb, would they still trade up with chicago, for example, if they can get to 11 and deal wilk? Possibly. My thing is Im not really impressed with Lynch and I dont think Goff/Wentz will be there at 11. Who do you think we could get there that would be worth trading up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roscoeword Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Reminds me of the Hershel Walker deal - which didn't work out too well for the team that gave up so much for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 2 hours ago, derp said: They didn't have as far to go, but the Giants gave up a bunch of picks for Eli Manning and that worked out pretty well. You don't often see trades like that for a quarterback because teams in a position to draft one often need the quarterback. So they'll just take the guy. Eli refused to play for the Chargers, the Rams had Bradford, and the Titans have Mariota. This year is kind of unique because we don't even know who the top guy is. Right now people believe the Rams could have traded up for either Goff or Wentz and that probably won't be leaked for a bit to retain the intrigue. There you go. And if you want to look at the value given up there, it was comparable to this trade. The #4 overall that the Giants surrendered was worth a sh*t ton more than the Rams' #15 overall this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augustiniak Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Just now, Villain The Foe said: Possibly. My thing is Im not really impressed with Lynch and I dont think Goff/Wentz will be there at 11. Who do you think we could get there that would be worth trading up? exactly my point. the jets best offer could be multiple picks in rounds 2, 3 and 4. then at 20 they can either draft a qb or just bap. but the issue i think mccags and othe rgms are looking at, is that the value is blurred from the middle of the first to mid 2nd. so i can see why he wouldn't want to stay at 20 if he can fix his cap situation and move up to where he believes the draft value is greater. but then you factor in the qb issue and hey, if they think lynch can be good i'm all on board. half these teams who have decent starters took a risk and it worked. mccags has to know he's got a few swings to get it right, and he really can't do worse at picking qbs than idzik or tanny anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 46 minutes ago, gEYno said: Pretty hot take right here. The Jets tried to move up to #1, and in doing so, offered the player they're rumored to be trying to trade because they don't want to pay his contract? Is this premium content? I'd pay just about anything for that info... I would have figured it would be picks for pick, so we could then try to trade Mo for a pick to someone else later. Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 11 hours ago, ylekram said: ask yourself this. who was the last cant miss prospect? one could probably argue only andrew luck, even tho i know your not a huge fan. now what would it have took to get the colts #1 pick? i dont think they would have took 5 1st rounders. what the skins did with rg3 and what the rams did this year was pay $10 for a $2 lottery ticket. if the jets were sold on a guy, i could see trading 2 1st rounders to get him, but i cant see trading 2 whole drafts for the same chance, especially on a "can miss prospect" and not a "cant miss prospect" I agree. As for Luck, I think he was a "cant miss prospect". I think Luck is good. I just dont like how the media and fans have just handed this guy the reigns though as if he can do no wrong. Thats actually my problem. I think Luck is a top 10 QB, I dont think he's a top 3 QB and I dont think he's better than a guy that the seahawks got in that same draft in the 3rd round. Yet another reason why the Redskins messed up in that draft. Not only could they saved themselve the trouble and just taken Cousins, but they could have also taken Wilson one round earlier. Giving all of those picks away for a rookie is stupid, even for a "cant miss" because the saying is not true. You can certainly miss on a cant miss prospect. Ryan Leaf was a cant miss prospect, so much so that it came down to the wire on whether the Colts should take him or Manning. Sometimes its just best to stay where you are in the draft. If you hit great, if you missed then the only thing you lost was that initial draft pick, not two years worth. Good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangers9 Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 11 minutes ago, southparkcpa said: or us trading the farm to get the 5 pick for suckchez. That trade up for Sanchez with Cleveland wasn't that bad because it included players on the Jets that Mangini liked and not too many draft picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 1 minute ago, Rangers9 said: That trade up for Sanchez with Cleveland wasn't that bad because it included players on the Jets that Mangini liked and not too many draft picks. Agreed. Sanchez wasn't actually the trade that cost the Jets picks to set them back... it was all the other stupid moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 16 minutes ago, Augustiniak said: exactly my point. the jets best offer could be multiple picks in rounds 2, 3 and 4. then at 20 they can either draft a qb or just bap. but the issue i think mccags and othe rgms are looking at, is that the value is blurred from the middle of the first to mid 2nd. so i can see why he wouldn't want to stay at 20 if he can fix his cap situation and move up to where he believes the draft value is greater. but then you factor in the qb issue and hey, if they think lynch can be good i'm all on board. half these teams who have decent starters took a risk and it worked. mccags has to know he's got a few swings to get it right, and he really can't do worse at picking qbs than idzik or tanny anyway. If the Jets are really concerned about this QB situation and they're not interested in bringing in Fitz or Glennon then if I was the GM I would trade Wilkerson to Tenn and see if I could get their two lowest 2nd rounders at best or a mid 2nd rounder and their high 3rd rounder at worst. Then I would trade down in the first, BUT stay in front of Arizona, probably trading with the Packers, Seattle or KC and I would draft Connor Cook while probably picking up another 3rd rounder in that trade down. I think that Connor Cook will not make it to the 2nd round because Arizona knows that Carson Palmer isnt forever and this would be a good opportunity to develop a QB while Carson is still there. That would give us quite a few 2nd rounders and 3rd rounders and I would stack up on Olinemen, OLB's and 1 RB which would be Kenneth Dixon. Maybe trade down again and pick up a 4th rounder or 5th rounder and pick up Kevin Hogan and/or Cody Kessler. I would pick up a couple QB's this draft if I could. No way would I move up though. Connor had to fall to me, if he doesnt...cool. I'd take my 4th and 5th rounders to speculate on Hogan/Kessler and I would try my best to pitch a 3rd rounder to Tampa for Glennon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Just now, Integrity28 said: Agreed. Sanchez wasn't actually the trade that cost the Jets picks to set them back... it was all the other stupid moves. Or anyway, it was the player but not what was given up to get him. Trade-wise, it's hard to find a team that moved up so many slots in exchange for so little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangers9 Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Tannenbaum wasn't a terrible trader esp on draft day. He always got value back on deals in terms of the draft value chart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerfish Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 11 minutes ago, Rangers9 said: Tannenbaum wasn't a terrible trader esp on draft day. He always got value back on deals in terms of the draft value chart. Not really, he treated later round picks as garbage. The Sanchez deal was wonderfully done and he had some others that were fine but he also had idiotic ones. Classic example 2006, he trades down from 71 to 76 in the 3rd round with philly and only gets a 7th rounder out of it when value suggested a 5, 6 if he was giving them a present. (Not to mention the Jets were going to take Chris Gocong, he traded down, philly promptly took gocong and we drafted the boar hunter.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckkieB Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 It looks like the Jets QB hunting and will be active on draft day to trading up for "their guy" if he's still available. I think trading up to #2 is still a possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augustiniak Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 2 minutes ago, ChuckkieB said: It looks like the Jets QB hunting and will be active on draft day to trading up for "their guy" if he's still available. I think trading up to #2 is still a possibility. you have to admire a gm who doesn't want to risk his reputation on fitz, geno and petty. hurray! 2 minutes ago, ChuckkieB said: It looks like the Jets QB hunting and will be active on draft day to trading up for "their guy" if he's still available. I think trading up to #2 is still a possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patriot Killa Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 I rally like the Korrea kid if we don't go OLB round 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangers9 Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 27 minutes ago, Beerfish said: Not really, he treated later round picks as garbage. The Sanchez deal was wonderfully done and he had some others that were fine but he also had idiotic ones. Classic example 2006, he trades down from 71 to 76 in the 3rd round with philly and only gets a 7th rounder out of it when value suggested a 5, 6 if he was giving them a present. (Not to mention the Jets were going to take Chris Gocong, he traded down, philly promptly took gocong and we drafted the boar hunter.) I can't remember his not getting at least value according to the chart on a draft day deal. The problem was he didn't always choose good players. I'm not looking this up but I can remember a deal he made with the Redskins so they could select Rocky McIntosh that on paper for us looked good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerfish Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 10 minutes ago, Rangers9 said: I can't remember his not getting at least value according to the chart on a draft day deal. The problem was he didn't always choose good players. I'm not looking this up but I can remember a deal he made with the Redskins so they could select Rocky McIntosh that on paper for us looked good. He didn't get close to value on the trade i mentioned. He did well in that Rocky McIntosh deal, traded down for more picks then traded back up to get Clemens. He also let Rex get away with making picks, what kind of idiocy is that? lets draft Sanchezs high school buddy, Just wasted late rounders. He was not all bad, he was aggressive when he needed to be but he killed all depth and development of this team by having consistent drafts of 4,5,6 picks and wasting some of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chirorob Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 2 hours ago, Rangers9 said: That trade up for Sanchez with Cleveland wasn't that bad because it included players on the Jets that Mangini liked and not too many draft picks. That was value wise, a good trade for us. A 1 and a 2, and a couple JAGS that Mangini liked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.