So far, I love this draft

[drdetroit]

22 hours ago, prime21 said:

Garbage??? You must be on whatever is worse than crack.

Dude, this guy Mainejet is off his frickin rocker.

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, neckdemon said:

looking to move him for the right deal is probably more like it. at least he's not an idiot and just moving him for a 3rd round pick

Unless he locks him up long term he's going to get less than that later. After keeping him for one more non-SB year and using up another $16M to do so.

That's why teams let franchise-type players go to FA if they're not going to re-sign them. It is hard to trade them unless they're truly unique players, not merely excellent players that a team could do without.

[drdetroit]

1 hour ago, LunAticcalm said:

I'll join the love fest after we win the Super Bowl, for now both the head coach and gm have something to prove to me.

All they did so far was improve the team by 6 wins, upgrade talent on both sides of the ball, and took a pass on a poor man's Colin Kaepernick to draft a Linebacker who is very good in coverage.  But I guess you have to win the Super Bowl in year 1.

[drdetroit]

1 hour ago, bostonmajet said:

The advantage to a team with a lot of holes (the only one really) is that you can draft BPA and still likely fill a need; last year, DL was def not need but def BPA and he pulled the trigger; just my opinion that the Lee pick was likely BPA on their board. First they tried to move all the way up to get a QB and then apparently up to get OT - yes areas of need, but also BPA at those spots

Lee was a need. We had the slowest LB's in the entire NFL last season.  Guys like Pace and Harris couldn't cover me.

 

These idiots hating on the Lee pick just don't understand how the position has changed recently.  Mark Barron, a bust Safety who is smaller than Lee, got a $40 million extension because he played lights out when he switched to Linebacker.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, bostonmajet said:

The advantage to a team with a lot of holes (the only one really) is that you can draft BPA and still likely fill a need; last year, DL was def not need but def BPA and he pulled the trigger; just my opinion that the Lee pick was likely BPA on their board. First they tried to move all the way up to get a QB and then apparently up to get OT - yes areas of need, but also BPA at those spots

What total holes did we have other than QB? The one thing I'd say IS his philosophy is he tries really hard to make sure he's got a warm body he can go into the season with as starter so he doesn't reach too badly in the draft. Oddly enough, the one position he didn't close a deal to do that with this year is QB, and it's the one pick he's getting ripped for reaching. We'll see how it turns out. He's obviously got an arm, can run, and isn't at all stupid. Theoretically, with those raw skills to work with they should be able to work with him and turn him into something. The x-factor is that, unlike most QBs who get drafted in the first few rounds, he didn't have a stellar college career.

[bostonmajet]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What total holes did we have other than QB? The one thing I'd say IS his philosophy is he tries really hard to make sure he's got a warm body he can go into the season with as starter so he doesn't reach too badly in the draft. Oddly enough, the one position he didn't close a deal to do that with this year is QB, and it's the one pick he's getting ripped for reaching. We'll see how it turns out. He's obviously got an arm, can run, and isn't at all stupid. Theoretically, with those raw skills to work with they should be able to work with him and turn him into something. The x-factor is that, unlike most QBs who get drafted in the first few rounds, he didn't have a stellar college career.

I would say other areas of need would be OL, TE, RB just to list the obvious needs for new starters (like RT), important backups (LT and Center), and youth for the future (RB); missing pieces like TE; other areas for depth would be LB, and CB (if mc doogie doesn't stick and milliner can't stay healthy). We are one of the oldest teams out there; guys are going to start dropping sooner or later.

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, bostonmajet said:

I would say other areas of need would be OL, TE, RB just to list the obvious needs for new starters (like RT), important backups (LT and Center), and youth for the future (RB); missing pieces like TE; other areas for depth would be LB, and CB (if mc doogie doesn't stick and milliner can't stay healthy). We are one of the oldest teams out there; guys are going to start dropping sooner or later.

We didn't have a hole on the OL after he swapped left tackles. He'd like an upgrade to RT (as would we all) I'd imagine, but it's not like he wasn't starting for a SB winner. Jokes aside, we actually could do worse. There weren't a lot who were worse, but if he's the weakest link on the team we really don't have big problems. Also I don't see taking a backup LT or C as a "need"-based pick that anyone would deem worthy of the first 3 rounds. That said, when they'd gone through the first 4 rounds without taking a RT prospect, they burned a mid-round pick in next year's draft to take one now, lest they leave the draft without this "need" being addressed.

Youth for the future at RB is not important or urgent right now (i.e. not a "need" in this draft). If it was then they wouldn't have re-signed 2 veterans less than 2 months ago. RB is not the position that typically requires 2 years of grooming so he can finally spread his wings in year 3. So even if it's a desire (for some fans), it's not a "need" pick either.

TE isn't very utilized by Gailey, and the only real effort they made in FA was for one who wasn't terribly expensive. They didn't pull all the stops to get him, even if they did outbid Arizona. After that one whiff they really made no serious effort to bring in a TE, which leads me to believe at least part of the attraction was that Bowles knew & liked him. What they really need is a TEs blocking, and nobody deems blocking TE to be a need worthy of the first few rounds of the draft. The type of TE they'd be looking for in the draft, were they to target the position earlier on, may likely be in Amaro's mold anyway. 

They drafted 2 LBers in the first 3 rounds, and a (non-nickel) CB the pick after that. So I'm not following the point. 

I'm not disagreeing with the importance of the positions you outlined, and I don't have a problem with addressing areas of need. My point was only that I don't see this religious BAP that has been touted here in the past months. 

[Matt39]

One of these centuries we'll pick a skill player on offense with upside. Can't wait.

[Larz]

5 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

One of these centuries we'll pick a skill player on offense with upside. Can't wait.

like devin smith ?

[dbatesman]

With the exception of Hackenberg, all the players seem fine in and of themselves (amid all the consternation about the QB/OL/WR situations, Maccagnan deserves credit for rebuilding the entire linebacking corps in two offseasons, which is something we've been putting off for half a decade or so). But there always has to be a couple of turds in the punchbowl with this team. Hackenberg in the second is inexcusable, especially with a plug-and-play guard staring us in the face. Ditto trading a future 4th to grab a 6th-round player in the 5th. Ditto drafting a punter at all, let alone when guys like Lasco and Allen were on the board, and especially considering one of our first UDFA signings was a better punter. Considering how frequently we cycle through front offices, it's amazing that all of them--all of them!--seem to lack a basic understanding of value and end up outsmarting themselves at least twice every draft.

[BowlesMovement]

3 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

With the exception of Hackenberg and the punter, all the players seem fine (amid all the consternation about the QB/OL/WR situations, Maccagnan deserves credit for rebuilding the entire linebacking corps in two offseasons, which is something we've been putting off for half a decade or so). But there always has to be a couple of turds in the punchbowl with this team. Hackenberg in the second is inexcusable, especially with a plug-and-play guard staring us in the face. Ditto trading a future 4th to grab a 6th-round player in the 5th. Ditto drafting a punter at all, let alone when guys like Lasco and Allen were on the board. Considering how frequently we cycle through front offices, it's amazing that all of them--all of them!--seem to lack a basic understanding of value and end up outsmarting themselves at least twice every draft.

Its kind of amazing that you, and several others on this board, have not been hired by NFL front offices to date. Do they know about you, don't hold back on them, you need to show them what you got.

[bostonmajet]

26 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

We didn't have a hole on the OL after he swapped left tackles. He'd like an upgrade to RT (as would we all) I'd imagine, but it's not like he wasn't starting for a SB winner. Jokes aside, we actually could do worse. There weren't a lot who were worse, but if he's the weakest link on the team we really don't have big problems. Also I don't see taking a backup LT or C as a "need"-based pick that anyone would deem worthy of the first 3 rounds. That said, when they'd gone through the first 4 rounds without taking a RT prospect, they burned a mid-round pick in next year's draft to take one now, lest they leave the draft without this "need" being addressed.

Youth for the future at RB is not important or urgent right now (i.e. not a "need" in this draft). If it was then they wouldn't have re-signed 2 veterans less than 2 months ago. RB is not the position that typically requires 2 years of grooming so he can finally spread his wings in year 3. So even if it's a desire (for some fans), it's not a "need" pick either.

TE isn't very utilized by Gailey, and the only real effort they made in FA was for one who wasn't terribly expensive. They didn't pull all the stops to get him, even if they did outbid Arizona. After that one whiff they really made no serious effort to bring in a TE, which leads me to believe at least part of the attraction was that Bowles knew & liked him. What they really need is a TEs blocking, and nobody deems blocking TE to be a need worthy of the first few rounds of the draft. The type of TE they'd be looking for in the draft, were they to target the position earlier on, may likely be in Amaro's mold anyway. 

They drafted 2 LBers in the first 3 rounds, and a (non-nickel) CB the pick after that. So I'm not following the point. 

I'm not disagreeing with the importance of the positions you outlined, and I don't have a problem with addressing areas of need. My point was only that I don't see this religious BAP that has been touted here in the past months. 

LT is a big question mark for me as he has had injury problems. Even if healthy (or brick was still there) we don't have any backups and we have some old (for football) men out there.

As far as LBs, yes we drafted 2, have harris and (sorry blanking on his name from last year 3rd round); but assuming the 2 new guys work out great; still no depth.

I would have been happier if some of the OL had fallen to us, but I think they think Lee was BPA. I guess we will never know for sure (other than he picked DL last year). The draft is a crap shoot; if 50% work out you are doing well, so the way I see it, even with 75% rate, we still have a way to go.

[Sperm Edwards]

4 hours ago, bostonmajet said:

LT is a big question mark for me as he has had injury problems. Even if healthy (or brick was still there) we don't have any backups and we have some old (for football) men out there.

As far as LBs, yes we drafted 2, have harris and (sorry blanking on his name from last year 3rd round); but assuming the 2 new guys work out great; still no depth.

I would have been happier if some of the OL had fallen to us, but I think they think Lee was BPA. I guess we will never know for sure (other than he picked DL last year). The draft is a crap shoot; if 50% work out you are doing well, so the way I see it, even with 75% rate, we still have a way to go.

It's not true, though. There's a difference between no depth and depth the fans are unaware of because they don't value those depth players themselves. Whether it's Henderson, Qvale, or others, there is depth on the team. Qvale simply hasn't seen the field because our OTs haven't missed a snap. That doesn't spell certain doom if one did. Also I take for granted the team isn't going to draft 2 new starting LBers and their backups in the same draft.

[Cyberjet]

Spot on.

[Matt39]

5 hours ago, BowlesMovement said:

Its kind of amazing that you, and several others on this board, have not been hired by NFL front offices to date. Do they know about you, don't hold back on them, you need to show them what you got.

Nothing the Jets do should be given the benefit of the doubt.

[Cyberjet]

Why? New regime new intelligence.  Love these guys.

[Matt39]

As far as the draft goes, look at the guys who are in the league and are successful. Look how they performed at the combine/college production and then go out and pick guys that are similar assuming they're not boobs. We've seen the data for the edge players...people on the internet crunch the numbers for free. Maybe I'm wrong, but this isnt curing cancer.

[BowlesMovement]

4 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Nothing the Jets do should be given the benefit of the doubt.

Thats fine, your entitled. BUT, Mac has zero to do with the Jets history, and has not shown me he does not know what he is doing. If anything, I lean more towards he knows what he is doing than the other way around. At least he seems to get the need for a QB, unlike past GM's of ours. 

What I do have a problem with is people being drama queens over late second round picks, and acting like Mac has just risked 2 drafts for a horrible player. 

When you question Mac, you are questioning his scouting ability based on your own scouting ability at this point. Saying Hackenberg is a horrible pick, means you think you know more than the scouts. Hey, maybe some do, maybe those should be getting jobs on NFL teams, I don't know..... But I don't think any one of us has a clue of how to scout, nor do we have access to what it takes to scout. Most Jets fans are intellectually lazy asses, who think their passion translates into knowledge, and it doesn't. 

Now, 2 years from now, we are sitting with a 90% bust rate in the draft, it will be pretty clear Mac has no f'ng clue, but to assume that now is agenda driven, nothing more.

Context is important, and ignoring context is idiotic, but honestly, there are a lot of idiotic Jet fans out there. 

This is not directed at you, just the legion of self anointed expert scouts on this board.

[dbatesman]

2 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

As far as the draft goes, look at the guys who are in the league and are successful. Look how they performed at the combine/college production and then go out and pick guys that are similar assuming they're not boobs. Maybe I'm wrong, but this isnt curing cancer.

In fairness to Maccagnan, I feel like we're doing that in the front seven--Lee is a SPARQ darling and Jenkins's 10-yard split is freakish (plus Mauldin looks like a player, and his workouts were awful, so I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on a 3rd-round pass rusher). Everywhere else, on the other hand...

[Matt39]

Just now, BowlesMovement said:

Thats fine, your entitled. BUT, Mac has zero to do with the Jets history, and has not shown me he does not know what he is doing. If anything, I lean more towards he knows what he is doing than the other way around. At least he seems to get the need for a QB, unlike past GM's of ours. 

What I do have a problem with is people being drama queens over late second round picks, and acting like Mac has just risked 2 drafts for a horrible player. 

When you question Mac, you are questioning his scouting ability based on your own scouting ability at this point. Saying Hackenberg is a horrible pick, means you think you know more than the scouts. Hey, maybe some do, maybe those should be getting jobs on NFL teams, I don't know..... But I don't think any one of us has a clue of how to scout, nor do we have access to what it takes to scout. Most Jets fans are intellectually lazy asses, who think their passion translates into knowledge, and it doesn't. 

Now, 2 years from now, we are sitting with a 90% bust rate in the draft, it will be pretty clear Mac has no f'ng clue, but to assume that now is agenda driven, nothing more.

Context is important, and ignoring context is idiotic, but honestly, there are a lot of idiotic Jet fans out there. 

This is not directed at you, just the legion of self anointed expert scouts on this board.

Im just using history and making an educated guess. Hackenberg's college production indicates he's going to have a hard time adjusting. You cant start anymore if you're not completing over 60%...he couldnt even do it in the Big 10. Who's the last QB to start in the league who's completion percentage improved that drastically from college?

[Matt39]

2 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

In fairness to Maccagnan, I feel like we're doing that in the front seven--Lee is a SPARQ darling and Jenkins's 10-yard split is freakish (plus Mauldin looks like a player, and his workouts were awful, so I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on a 3rd-round pass rusher). Everywhere else, on the other hand...

Good to know on Jenkins. Kind of bizarre his 3 cone was that poor, maybe he was hurt?

[Cyberjet]

You can't evaluate in isolation. Strong front 4 followed by above average LBs makes the CBs/safeties better and vice versa.  Love what they are doing.

[BowlesMovement]

Just now, Matt39 said:

Im just using history and making an educated guess. Hackenberg's college production indicates he's going to have a hard time adjusting. You cant start anymore if you're not completing over 60%...he couldnt even do it in the Big 10. Who's the last QB to start in the league who's completion percentage improved that drastically from college?

Most QB's fail, thats the reality. All of it is a projection, not many spread QB's can ever adjust to an NFL offense, yet everyone wanted Lynch, because they know better. Drafting is not an exact science, and football stats are not an exact science.

There is context around his completion % that if you want to ignore, your entitled. Hell, you will probably be right to say he will suck, most do, but we took a small gamble on a late 2nd round draft pick on a kid who had he come out after his freshman year might have been the overall 1 pick, AND, had Obrien stayed, likely would have been a 1 overall pick.

If he was a sure thing, he would have gone over Goff. Goff is no sure thing, nor is Wentz, and Lynch certainly isnt.

Mac made a call based on he and his scouts, he knows more than we do, regardless of how much any of us think we know.

[Cyberjet]

7 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Im just using history and making an educated guess. Hackenberg's college production indicates he's going to have a hard time adjusting. You cant start anymore if you're not completing over 60%...he couldnt even do it in the Big 10. Who's the last QB to start in the league who's completion percentage improved that drastically from college?

Tom Brady

[bostonmajet]

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It's not true, though. There's a difference between no depth and depth the fans are unaware of because they don't value those depth players themselves. Whether it's Henderson, Qvale, or others, there is depth on the team. Qvale simply hasn't seen the field because our OTs haven't missed a snap. That doesn't spell certain doom if one did. Also I take for granted the team isn't going to draft 2 new starting LBers and their backups in the same draft.

Say what you want about what I know or don't know, but most fans and pretty much every analyst agrees with me that the Jets OL has some problems and one of them is age, and another is depth. Qvale FAILED to unseat our RT last year, can he improve sure, but which T spot is he going to take, because if our new LT gets hurt we are in deep ...; Winters was mediocre at best, and our depth is so good they couldn't take the job from him. Please; look at any analysis and most everyone list OL as a need as well as LB and QB. You want to split hairs and argue just to prove your point about BPA; well two can play at that game, noboday including yourself knows what the Jets BPA board looked like, so I say they picked BPA and not need. Of course, I guess if they were picking for need, they why would they try and trade up for OT? Clearly if Macc is drafting based on need and tried to trade up for OT - he feels that is a need, so by your own argument that Macc drafts based on need OT is a need; so, I guess I am right on both counts, OT is a need and Macc drafts BPA.

[Matt39]

3 minutes ago, BowlesMovement said:

Most QB's fail, thats the reality. All of it is a projection, not many spread QB's can ever adjust to an NFL offense, yet everyone wanted Lynch, because they know better. Drafting is not an exact science, and football stats are not an exact science.

There is context around his completion % that if you want to ignore, your entitled. Hell, you will probably be right to say he will suck, most do, but we took a small gamble on a late 2nd round draft pick on a kid who had he come out after his freshman year might have been the overall 1 pick, AND, had Obrien stayed, likely would have been a 1 overall pick.

If he was a sure thing, he would have gone over Goff. Goff is no sure thing, nor is Wentz, and Lynch certainly isnt.

Mac made a call based on he and his scouts, he knows more than we do, regardless of how much any of us think we know.

Take Sudfeld from Indiana. Played with crap, same conference. Completed 60% with a higher YPA. Both "look the part" and everything. I think the Jets reached here, but I dont know anything I guess. 

[Cyberjet]

Tom Brady was an afterthought. Didn't have the support of a great team and coaching staff but had the IT factor. LYNCH does not have it  Hackenberg may have it.

[Warfish]

I like the draft haul, generally.

My only quibble is the QB we picked.

I agreed with passing on Lynch, I don't agree with Hack over Cook, and I don't agree with Hack in the 2nd (I believe he'd have still been available in the 3rd).

Other than that one pick, it's a solid, clearly needs-based, draft with some good prospects.

[dbatesman]

3 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Good to know on Jenkins. Kind of bizarre his 3 cone was that poor, maybe he was hurt?

Not sure about an injury. His jumps were pretty good, so he may just be a power guy rather than a twitch guy, which would make sense because I think he's meant to replace Pace rather than be a full-time pass rusher.

[Sperm Edwards]

25 minutes ago, bostonmajet said:

Say what you want about what I know or don't know, but most fans and pretty much every analyst agrees with me that the Jets OL has some problems and one of them is age, and another is depth. Qvale FAILED to unseat our RT last year, can he improve sure, but which T spot is he going to take, because if our new LT gets hurt we are in deep ...; Winters was mediocre at best, and our depth is so good they couldn't take the job from him. Please; look at any analysis and most everyone list OL as a need as well as LB and QB. You want to split hairs and argue just to prove your point about BPA; well two can play at that game, noboday including yourself knows what the Jets BPA board looked like, so I say they picked BPA and not need. Of course, I guess if they were picking for need, they why would they try and trade up for OT? Clearly if Macc is drafting based on need and tried to trade up for OT - he feels that is a need, so by your own argument that Macc drafts based on need OT is a need; so, I guess I am right on both counts, OT is a need and Macc drafts BPA.

A lot of that doubt is from Bowles, who doesn't bench his known veterans. Last year Mauldin "couldn't unseat" Davis. This year he's starting. Did something magically happen between week 17 and May 1? Likewise, if Qvale (for example) may be adequate depth it doesn't therefore mean he has talent nearly on par with a Laremy Tunsil. That is a silly idea. What Maccagnan does is attempt to put at least a temporary solution in place with older players so he can draft their replacements. It's a repeated plan and not necessarily a bad one in and of itself. But if you want to pull an "any analysis" as rationale of what he does, for OL, then that would stnad to reason he wouldn't be touching Hackenberg in round 2 after passing up on Lynch in round 1. That's kind of trying to play both sides of the coin.

I'm not ripping on him for passing on Lynch nor for drafting Hackenberg. I think ILB is generally too low value for a 1st round pick unless a team is just a couple of players away and he's one of them. That isn't to say Lee won't be a good player (it sounds like he will be). I think it's weak value is all, because it's far easier and cheaper to fill that position in free agency without burning such an asset as a mid-1st round pick. It's an opinion. You don't have to agree.

I can like some things he does and some players he's picked up without believing his sh*t doesn't smell, or everything he does is wise, because of his job title.

[dbatesman]

28 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

A lot of that doubt is from Bowles, who doesn't bench his known veterans. Last year Mauldin "couldn't unseat" Davis. This year he's starting. Did something magically happen between week 17 and May 1?

Yes, Davis signed with the Browns. And anyway they play completely different positions and Mauldin played a higher percentage of snaps than any OLB other than Pace. The example you're looking for here is Cromartie.

[no psls]

Hey Mainejet 

[Sperm Edwards]

8 hours ago, dbatesman said:

Yes, Davis signed with the Browns. And anyway they play completely different positions and Mauldin played a higher percentage of snaps than any OLB other than Pace. The example you're looking for here is Cromartie.

Davis signed with the Browns because we didn't make him an offer to return, not because we tried to and failed. Still, they lined up with Davis far more than Mauldin when only using 2-3 LBers regardless of their nominal position titles (since Bowles moves guys around a lot).

Maudlin was used situationally, not regularly, and I know you know it. His higher snap count among others with an "OLB" position title is related to ther factors having nothing to do with being the regular or starter: Richardson's suspension (and then his hammy injury), then splitting time upon his return as Sheldon certainly wasn't used strictly at OLB (far from it). The only other OLB was Coples who started and then became expendable after Richardson's return, since he was then a backup who provided neither veteran savvy nor valuable special teams play. Oh yeah, and Trevor Reilly. 

Mauldin only saw >half the snaps in 2 games the opponents basically abandoned the run. By year's end he still had barely more than Coples who mercifully only saw 20 snaps the rest of the way after the Oakland game. Lorenzo just didn't see a lot of snaps last year for a guy penciled in to start. When concerned about the run, or short game in general, Bowles still had him off the field, right down to the last game of the season where he was on the sideline for 80% of the snaps. 

So that "more than any OLB except Pace" is an outlier stat because, by official position title, there were only 4 OLBers on the team all year: Pace, Mauldin, Coples (for half a season), and Reilly (whose official position title should be special teams not OLB anyway). Basically he was 2nd - a distant 2nd - out of 2.