Tiny Linebacker

[Snell41]

I'll do it as I'm much bigger than Little Lee. You need to see some pictures of my neighborhood in Harlem? Tell you exactly what street I grew up on also. Where you repping the suburbs or your parent basement still?

Talk to your doctor, to see if Latuda may be right for you.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jet Nut]

1 hour ago, Beerfish said:

And no where did i say he would bust if he is not on the field all downs.  I said he would not be worthy of that #20 pick in the draft if he was a situational player unless he makes just a ton of huge plays, sacks, ints, forcing turnovers.

Let's change that.  You would take anyone else because he'll only be on the field for two downs.  And that a big safety is better suited for the position over a smaller, fast LB. 

 

[drdetroit]

Wah!!!! We should have drafted poor man's Kaepernick instead wah!!!!

[bealeb319]

I really like the players and attitude our front office has brought in for us. I did NOT like the LEE pick and I still am not sold that he was the best player for us at our pick but I DO trust that our scouts know more than I do the players they have brought in these past two years seem to be doing pretty good. BPA is really only an educated guess, there are always players drafted who project a lower skill set or measurable but have a bigger heart and a chip on their shoulder...just look at how Jalin has been doing for us in training camp so far.

[Ohio State NY Jets fan]

How many dump offs and screen passes have burned the Jets in the last decade? Slow linebackers?

Lee was drafted to change that, a sack, pick 6, and stopping a few 3rd and long conversions will win more games for the Jets than giving up an extra yard or two as a thug run stopper (and I am ok if the 20th pick sits for the rare goal line stand) 

Great fit for Bowles defense

[Harlemnite1]

15 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Lee trying to tackle an NFL RB:

 

LOL

[BurnleyJet]

I like this Draft the later picks and UDFA are looking good. The first two picks i'm not so keen on. Let's see how Lee fits into Bowles D?

I would have gone Offensive Tackle or Q.B in round one personally. 

[Harlemnite1]

17 hours ago, gEYno said:

Ah, yes, as neither street names/numbers or photos of Harlem can be found on Google.

I work for the goverment  you think I would let you track me down?

[NYs Stepchild]

1 hour ago, Harlemnite1 said:

I work for the goverment  you think I would let you track me down?

Maybe you should learn how to spell government before you try impressing people with that tidbit. 

I'm not surprised though. The government is obviously being run by guys like you. 

[slats]

16 hours ago, Beerfish said:

And no where did i say he would bust if he is not on the field all downs.  I said he would not be worthy of that #20 pick in the draft if he was a situational player unless he makes just a ton of huge plays, sacks, ints, forcing turnovers.

I doubt he was drafted to be a situational player forever. For his rookie season, give him a smaller, specific set of duties and hope he flourishes. Next year, give him more of the offense to learn in preparation to move into the starting lineup. And the situations he's supposed to play in are generally when the team is in the nickel - which is roughly 67% of the time in the NFL these days. Hardly part time work. 

Kid's been physical and flying around the field in practice, which is encouraging. He wasn't a great coverage linebacker in college, and that's a big part of what the Jets want him to do as a pro. That's the learning curve to watch. 

[Lizard King]

On August 4, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Beerfish said:

 

How did you make Kyle Wilson that small?

[Lizard King]

One vibe I seem to be getting from the Bowles era, to me at least seems very clear... It doesn't matter who you are, you'll get a chance if you can prove you can perform. It's a very nice change from the "die with my favorite guys" mentality... And truthfully, the sign of a very confident and strong leader.  

[Larz]

The last time the jets took the guy I wanted in the first round it was brick. 

Everybody settled down

[NYs Stepchild]

13 minutes ago, Larz said:

The last time the jets took the guy I wanted in the first round it was brick. 

Everybody settled down

That also means you didn't want Mangold, Revis, Wilkerson, Richardson, Williamson, or Pryor. 

Not something I would be bragging about. 

[Larz]

On draft day nobody wanted any of those players

Lol

[FTL Jet Fan]

4 hours ago, Harlemnite1 said:

I work for the goverment  you think I would let you track me down?

That makes you easier to find. 

[NYs Stepchild]

21 minutes ago, Larz said:

On draft day nobody wanted any of those players

Lol

I guess that proves that we should probably give these guys a game or two before we pass judgment. 

[Larz]

54 minutes ago, NYs Stepchild said:

I guess that proves that we should probably give these guys a game or two before we pass judgment. 

or most fans want a QB, WR, RB or pass rusher on draft day not a CB, DE, safety or center

[drdetroit]

Randy Moss burned Revis in his first game in 2007 he must suck

[drdetroit]

1 hour ago, Larz said:

or most fans want a QB, WR, RB or pass rusher on draft day not a CB, DE, safety or center

So who would you have taken over Lee?

[Sperm Edwards]

On August 5, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Jet Nut said:

Except you completely missed the point.  Beer said he'll be a bust if he isn't on th field every snap.  I say he'll be fine if he does what he's supposed to do, even if he has to sit one down. 

Nowhere did I say we scrap BPA. 

I get the point just fine. I wouldn't base anything on how much he (or anyone) plays as a rookie. But if, career-wise, he's a situational player, then @Beerfish is kind of correct. It's poor allocation of a finite amount of resources, akin to taking a guard with a top 3 pick. FA guards - good ones - don't cost nearly enough to warrant expending such a high draft pick on a prospect at that position. Same with a situational ILB. If we take a situational ILB in round 3, fine. Take one at #20 overall, and it's not fine. Unless it's the GM making a pure PR move, a situational ILB drafted in round 1 shouldn't even have his 5th year option exercised.

There are players who fill this need who one can find in middle rounds or as non-backbreakers in free agency. A first round ILB better be top 3 at his position. Ditto first round safety. Why? Because getting a mere top 10-15 player at that position is too easy to find elsewhere - where one would be signing a known quantity sure thing - to justify burning the 20th pick in the country to get one. It's fine to draft a player in round 1 who is only middle of the pack at his position. But make it a position where even the #15-ish ranked player would still command $10M, $12M, $15M, or more as a free agent.

Lastly, come on, you did say they took him to fill a need/position, and frankly I believe you are correct in this assessment.  

Hey, I never saw him play one game in college and I don't rank college talent, so I leave that to people who really follow this stuff. But as a pure value pick, looking objectively at what it would cost to find a comparable FA to fill that need, it is a poor value selection. Hopefully he isn't just a situational player and therefore becomes well worthy of his draft slot, because what's done is done.

[detectivekimble]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I get the point just fine. I wouldn't base anything on how much he (or anyone) plays as a rookie. But if, career-wise, he's a situational player, then @Beerfish is kind of correct. It's poor allocation of a finite amount of resources, akin to taking a guard with a top 3 pick. FA guards - good ones - don't cost nearly enough to warrant expending such a high draft pick on a prospect at that position. Same with a situational ILB. If we take a situational ILB in round 3, fine. Take one at #20 overall, and it's not fine. Unless it's the GM making a pure PR move, a situational ILB drafted in round 1 shouldn't even have his 5th year option exercised.

There are players who fill this need who one can find in middle rounds or as non-backbreakers in free agency. A first round ILB better be top 3 at his position. Ditto first round safety. Why? Because getting a mere top 10-15 player at that position is too easy to find elsewhere - where one would be signing a known quantity sure thing - to justify burning the 20th pick in the country to get one. It's fine to draft a player in round 1 who is only middle of the pack at his position. But make it a position where even the #15-ish ranked player would still command $10M, $12M, $15M, or more as a free agent.

Lastly, come on, you did say they took him to fill a need/position, and frankly I believe you are correct in this assessment.  

Hey, I never saw him play one game in college and I don't rank college talent, so I leave that to people who really follow this stuff. But as a pure value pick, looking objectively at what it would cost to find a comparable FA to fill that need, it is a poor value selection. Hopefully he isn't just a situational player and therefore becomes well worthy of his draft slot, because what's done is done.

This isn't true.  The Jets thought/think he has impact player written all over him.  They weren't the only ones.  The NFL Draft Advisory Board gave him a top 15 grade, even though he's only played LB for like two years.  Chris Ash also said he has the highest upside of any OSU player taken.

He's freakishly fast, has great instincts, and is smart (30+ wonderlic).  The Jets were also an ideal landing spot for him.  He's surrounded by a bunch of thumpers. 

[jamesr]

18 hours ago, drdetroit said:

So who would you have taken over Lee?

Had we not gone for Lee, I'd have been fine with Treadwell or possibly Doctson. But I'm thrilled with Lee, hope to see him making an early impact.

[slats]

8 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I get the point just fine. I wouldn't base anything on how much he (or anyone) plays as a rookie. But if, career-wise, he's a situational player, then @Beerfish is kind of correct. It's poor allocation of a finite amount of resources, akin to taking a guard with a top 3 pick. FA guards - good ones - don't cost nearly enough to warrant expending such a high draft pick on a prospect at that position. Same with a situational ILB. If we take a situational ILB in round 3, fine. Take one at #20 overall, and it's not fine. Unless it's the GM making a pure PR move, a situational ILB drafted in round 1 shouldn't even have his 5th year option exercised.

There are players who fill this need who one can find in middle rounds or as non-backbreakers in free agency. A first round ILB better be top 3 at his position. Ditto first round safety. Why? Because getting a mere top 10-15 player at that position is too easy to find elsewhere - where one would be signing a known quantity sure thing - to justify burning the 20th pick in the country to get one. It's fine to draft a player in round 1 who is only middle of the pack at his position. But make it a position where even the #15-ish ranked player would still command $10M, $12M, $15M, or more as a free agent.

Lastly, come on, you did say they took him to fill a need/position, and frankly I believe you are correct in this assessment.  

Hey, I never saw him play one game in college and I don't rank college talent, so I leave that to people who really follow this stuff. But as a pure value pick, looking objectively at what it would cost to find a comparable FA to fill that need, it is a poor value selection. Hopefully he isn't just a situational player and therefore becomes well worthy of his draft slot, because what's done is done.

I just don't agree. Defensive positions are so much different than offense when assessing value of the position. It's a poor value to take a safety in the first round until that safety is Ed Reed or Troy Polamalu. Then all of a sudden it was remarkably clever. But yes, drafting guards high is dumb. 

Darron Lee wasn't drafted to cover a gap as an inside LB in the 3-4, he was drafted to be a disruptive playmaker. If he's the guy they think he is - if he's sacking the QB, defending passes, intercepting passes, tackling for a loss, etc.- he'll be well worth the 5th year option, regardless of his positional designation on the official roster. 

[k-met57]

16 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I get the point just fine. I wouldn't base anything on how much he (or anyone) plays as a rookie. But if, career-wise, he's a situational player, then @Beerfish is kind of correct. It's poor allocation of a finite amount of resources, akin to taking a guard with a top 3 pick. FA guards - good ones - don't cost nearly enough to warrant expending such a high draft pick on a prospect at that position. Same with a situational ILB. If we take a situational ILB in round 3, fine. Take one at #20 overall, and it's not fine. Unless it's the GM making a pure PR move, a situational ILB drafted in round 1 shouldn't even have his 5th year option exercised.

There are players who fill this need who one can find in middle rounds or as non-backbreakers in free agency. A first round ILB better be top 3 at his position. Ditto first round safety. Why? Because getting a mere top 10-15 player at that position is too easy to find elsewhere - where one would be signing a known quantity sure thing - to justify burning the 20th pick in the country to get one. It's fine to draft a player in round 1 who is only middle of the pack at his position. But make it a position where even the #15-ish ranked player would still command $10M, $12M, $15M, or more as a free agent.

Lastly, come on, you did say they took him to fill a need/position, and frankly I believe you are correct in this assessment.  

Hey, I never saw him play one game in college and I don't rank college talent, so I leave that to people who really follow this stuff. But as a pure value pick, looking objectively at what it would cost to find a comparable FA to fill that need, it is a poor value selection. Hopefully he isn't just a situational player and therefore becomes well worthy of his draft slot, because what's done is done.

Silly line of thinking. You don't draft any position under assumption that the player better be top 3 at his position. You draft in every round and hope that you get a productive football player that will help you win games. If you hit on a good player in round 1 every year...you will be pretty damn good.

[Sperm Edwards]

15 hours ago, detectivekimble said:

This isn't true.  The Jets thought/think he has impact player written all over him.  They weren't the only ones.  The NFL Draft Advisory Board gave him a top 15 grade, even though he's only played LB for like two years.  Chris Ash also said he has the highest upside of any OSU player taken.

He's freakishly fast, has great instincts, and is smart (30+ wonderlic).  The Jets were also an ideal landing spot for him.  He's surrounded by a bunch of thumpers. 

I'm responding to a post that says quite plainly that he was drafted specifically to fill a position and fill a need. That is not BAP-based drafting; that is need-based drafting.

[Sperm Edwards]

50 minutes ago, k-met57 said:

Silly line of thinking. You don't draft any position under assumption that the player better be top 3 at his position. You draft in every round and hope that you get a productive football player that will help you win games. If you hit on a good player in round 1 every year...you will be pretty damn good.

Actually that is precisely my point. You cannot assume, no matter how wonderful of a prospect someone is, that he will be top 3 at his position. Therefore IMO there are positions that represent poor value for round 1 compared to others.

Look at it this way - and I'm exaggerating an extreme example on purpose - imagine we need a safety. Badly. There's a terrific prospect coming out, and irrespective of position he's seen as one of the top 3 or 4 players in the country (some say he's the best). But our #1 pick is at #2 overall, and you just don't take a safety #2. Ever. Why? Because a safety isn't worth the 2nd pick in the country unless he quickly develops into just about the best safety in the league, as part of a long HOF career after that. The problem is you can't figure that's going to happen no matter how great of a prospect he is. If we instead take the boring left tackle and he is merely very good, it's still a good pick even if he's a relative disappointment for a 2nd overall pick. Why? Because he plays every single down and in order to adequately replace him in free agency with a young, long-term solution will cost upwards of $14M/year. A safety? We can get a more than adequate safety for 1/3 of that, so it's not worth burning what is supposed to be a franchise-changing pick on a cheap position.

Same thing here. If he turns into a part time player, it was a bad pick. It's too cheap and too easy to find a full-time player in mid-rounds or in free agency, and then we can use the mid first round pick on the type of player we can't just find in FA or (without crazy luck) in mid-rounds.

[Sperm Edwards]

8 hours ago, slats said:

I just don't agree. Defensive positions are so much different than offense when assessing value of the position. It's a poor value to take a safety in the first round until that safety is Ed Reed or Troy Polamalu. Then all of a sudden it was remarkably clever. But yes, drafting guards high is dumb. 

Darron Lee wasn't drafted to cover a gap as an inside LB in the 3-4, he was drafted to be a disruptive playmaker. If he's the guy they think he is - if he's sacking the QB, defending passes, intercepting passes, tackling for a loss, etc.- he'll be well worth the 5th year option, regardless of his positional designation on the official roster. 

That is my point. Unless he turns into Reed or Polamalu, or basically a top-3 safety for his time, then safety is poor value in round 1.

My point is if he is merely an ok ILB - never mind if he's not a full time player (which was what was insinuated) - then it is poor value for a #1 pick precisely because he won't even be worth the 5th year option money. 

It goes without saying that if he's a full time stud playmaking terror all over the middle of the field, that it will be a wise pick in hindsight. My point is more that if he is merely ok then he won't be worth that 5th year option money. A QB (or CB or LT or another big money position) then he could still very well be worth a 5th year option, however, even if he was merely ok.

On average, it's a cheap position (like safety and TE). It only becomes good pick value if the prospect becomes a great (or nearly-great) pro. Because if he's merely ok we can find that in FA with ease, and without great expense. First rounders, IMO, are for drafting the types of talent+position combo that are typically unavailable later or in FA, and if they ever were available as a FA it's a bank-breaker even for a mostly unproven one (e.g. Osweiller).

[Jet Nut]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I'm responding to a post that says quite plainly that he was drafted specifically to fill a position and fill a need. That is not BAP-based drafting; that is need-based drafting.

Again, unless I missed where someone else said that, the conversation I was having never said that at all.  

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, Jet Nut said:

Again, unless I missed where someone else said that, the conversation I was having never said that at all.  

"He'll be worth the 20th pick when he fills the need and position they took him to fill."

Unless my eyes deceive me, this clearly suggests you believe they took him to fill a need and position, not necessarily because he was easily the best football player on their board regardless of position or value. 

The truth is, other than the obvious with Williams, all his draft picks have been need-based. That's fine & I have no objection if it works out, but I think it naturally makes it more difficult to draft the best football player he can get his hands on with each of his picks. 

[drdetroit]

This would be something I cared about if we didn't have a top 3 Defensive Line to protect him

[Larz]

22 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

"He'll be worth the 20th pick when he fills the need and position they took him to fill."

Unless my eyes deceive me, this clearly suggests you believe they took him to fill a need and position, not necessarily because he was easily the best football player on their board regardless of position or value. 

The truth is, other than the obvious with Williams, all his draft picks have been need-based. That's fine & I have no objection if it works out, but I think it naturally makes it more difficult to draft the best football player he can get his hands on with each of his picks. 

I think you would debate milk vs cookies, lol

 

[Sperm Edwards]

14 hours ago, Larz said:

I think you would debate milk vs cookies, lol

 

Perhaps. 

All I'm saying is that 20th in the country is pretty high if he only becomes a role player at ILB. It's one of the cheapest FA positions a team can fill even for a full time starter (and such a FA veteran wouldn't need to be eased in due to inexperience). 

All other things being equal, I'd rather use the first round on players who would be cost prohibitive as FAs, or the type who is too much of a team cornerstone to generally reach free agency in the first place. Then you get your role player without busting the cap, and still get to use a 1st rounder on a player that would have busted the cap (or that was unavailable in free agency). 

Obviously if he turns into Luke Keuchly II, or nearly Kuechly II, then it doesn't matter because then he would be such a premium-cost, irreplaceable, elite cornerstone of the team. But that's my point: it's plays against the draft value odds, by effectively betting that the player will only be worth such a high pick if he's top 3 at his position. Otherwise fill the role with cheaper resources and spend the pick on an every down player who'd otherwise be unaffordable/unavailable.

If I had any talent for brevity, I would have just put it this way: draft a $13-20M+/yr position player in round 1, not a $6-8M/yr position player. 

[Larz]

41 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Perhaps

I set you up for 5 paragraphs on cookies. I am disappointed

[Jet Nut]

16 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

"He'll be worth the 20th pick when he fills the need and position they took him to fill."

Unless my eyes deceive me, this clearly suggests you believe they took him to fill a need and position, not necessarily because he was easily the best football player on their board regardless of position or value. 

The truth is, other than the obvious with Williams, all his draft picks have been need-based. That's fine & I have no objection if it works out, but I think it naturally makes it more difficult to draft the best football player he can get his hands on with each of his picks. 

Yeah, what they want in him.  One more time, someone said what he has to do to be successful.  I said he just has to fill what they want him to fill.  Speed and havoc.  Wasn't meant to say they picked a LB after targeting LB. Either way I explain this, clarified that I didn't mean it wasn't a BPA pick. Of you want to believe I not being honest, oh well.

i do think their drafts can be viewed as BPA.  Not seeing to much evidence that Macc has strayed from his philosophy of drafting BPA. I do think that when you get to lower rounds where the separation of talent levels starts to blur you can become more needs oriented