Jump to content

Mel Kiper ..... first mock has us taking....


Stark

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 183
  • Created
  • Last Reply
46 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

Draft to the strength of the draft class, not to outrun the history of how the franchise has drafted in the past few years.

Top of this draft is strong on defense. Tim Williams, Reuben Foster, among several others just present the best value... I'm okay with them drafting D, as long as they aren't doing the same bullsh*t where they keep pouring resources into the D, and it keeps being a monumental letdown. 

The top of the draft certainly favors D.  I mean, the QB's are always going to get looked at there but that's more out of a demand than it is talent, sometimes.  The thing I worry about is, are any of these guys on D's outside of Miles Garrett cant miss prospects?  

Foster is probably safe but that's not a good use of the #6 overall picks.  Positional value and what not.  Which is why I'm good with someone who can cover if we're really going to ignore offense in the 1st round again.

I'm firmly planted in the take Watson and dont think twice if he's available camp...but if that's not available, someone who can cover isnt a bad idea.  And that's mainly because I dont think after Garrett there is a cant miss OLB prospect worthy of 6th overall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My rules on drafting is:

1) You take the best available player, BPA defined as the player who will make the biggest difference on your team, per dollar spent.  For example, you can have a guard and CB rated highly, but CBs are worth more money/

2) If two players are basically the same, take the one that fills the greatest need.

3) If you are already deep at the position of the BPA, either trade down, skip to the next player, or perhaps move an existing player.

4) None of this applies if you need a QB.  In that case, be reasonably aggressive in reaching for a QB until you find one.  The Packers, for example, are not in this boat-they can pick a QB purely based on value, because they have a QB.  The Jets need to reach.  The jury is still out whether passing on Lynch or picking Hack last year were the right moves.

But fundamentally most great teams follow BPA in the first round for the most part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JiF said:

The top of the draft certainly favors D.  I mean, the QB's are always going to get looked at there but that's more out of a demand than it is talent, sometimes.  The thing I worry about is, are any of these guys on D's outside of Miles Garrett cant miss prospects?  

Foster is probably safe but that's not a good use of the #6 overall picks.  Positional value and what not.  Which is why I'm good with someone who can cover if we're really going to ignore offense in the 1st round again.

I'm firmly planted in the take Watson and dont think twice if he's available camp...but if that's not available, someone who can cover isnt a bad idea.  And that's mainly because I dont think after Garrett there is a cant miss OLB prospect worthy of 6th overall. 

Malik Hooker is the second coming of Ed Reed.  That'll help the coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JiF said:

The top of the draft certainly favors D.  I mean, the QB's are always going to get looked at there but that's more out of a demand than it is talent, sometimes.  The thing I worry about is, are any of these guys on D's outside of Miles Garrett cant miss prospects?  

Foster is probably safe but that's not a good use of the #6 overall picks.  Positional value and what not.  Which is why I'm good with someone who can cover if we're really going to ignore offense in the 1st round again.

I'm firmly planted in the take Watson and dont think twice if he's available camp...but if that's not available, someone who can cover isnt a bad idea.  And that's mainly because I dont think after Garrett there is a cant miss OLB prospect worthy of 6th overall. 

Foster is a safe pick, imo. I don't see how drafting a guy that can easily become a 10-year starter is a bad use of any pick, regardless of position. 

I can appreciate the POV on Watson too. It really comes down to how risk averse the GM is being, and from a fans standpoint, how quickly they expect impact. I read dumb posts here daily about Mac not being a good GM because his drafts "haven't produced much". 1st and 2nd year players taken after the 3rd round don't contribute immediately... so, whatever, fans are clowns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, detectivekimble said:

Malik Hooker is the second coming of Ed Reed.  That'll help the coverage.

Hooker make some incredible plays.  The one he made vs. Clemson in the playoffs was ridiculous.  To cover that much field in that short of time to beat the WR to a well placed ball was just straight nutty.

I keep hearing him being compared to Ed Reed.  And honestly, it's not fair.  Ed is top 3 all time IMO.  That's a big comparison to live up to.

FWIW - Ed Reed would have been a Jet if it were up to me.  I remember almost peeing my pants that were going to select him and then Brian Thomas happened. Kind of similar to Brady > Sapp. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, detectivekimble said:

Malik Hooker is the second coming of Ed Reed.  That'll help the coverage.

And also, Reed was a 3 year starter who produced every year while his INT's #'s increased every year.  

Hooker is a 1 year wonder.  That scares me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

Foster is a safe pick, imo. I don't see how drafting a guy that can easily become a 10-year starter is a bad use of any pick, regardless of position. 

I can appreciate the POV on Watson too. It really comes down to how risk averse the GM is being, and from a fans standpoint, how quickly they expect impact. I read dumb posts here daily about Mac not being a good GM because his drafts "haven't produced much". 1st and 2nd year players taken after the 3rd round don't contribute immediately... so, whatever, fans are clowns.

Yeah, disagree.  Positional value still applies.  He's not worth it there IMO.  He makes tackles.  We already have a fast undersized MLB who makes tackles and nothing else (cant cover, cant pass rush), so it's redundant IMO.  And the difference between the 32nd ranked MLB and the 1st MLB is minimal.  It's a poor use of a high pick, just like last year.  It's just not impact position, even if he's in the league for 10 years. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Deciding what position to draft, rather than what player is a sure way to make a sh*t pick.  

To an extent. I think it's ok to narrow it down to some positions that high in the draft (or put another way, which positions to steer clear of).

Not naming actual prospect names here, but a theoretical QB prospect who's valued more as the #20ish overall prospect, is still more worthwhile a "value" pick of a safety or ILB that early. The QB just needs to be pretty good to be a really successful pick. At #6, a S or ILB (or RB, TE, RT, OG, and for us WR) needs to be a great pro to outweigh the value of a just pretty-good QB. It's bad enough when those types are just meh and we take them in the bottom half of rd 1.

Fully reaching for a QB who isn't even round 1 talent, though, yeah that's how you draft a bust (or worse, a marginal bust in whom the team still misplaces false hope on a contract extension).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JiF said:

Yeah, disagree.  Positional value still applies.  He's not worth it there IMO.  He makes tackles.  We already have a fast undersized MLB who makes tackles and nothing else (cant cover, cant pass rush), so it's redundant IMO.  And the difference between the 32nd ranked MLB and the 1st MLB is minimal.  It's a poor use of a high pick, just like last year.  It's just not impact position, even if he's in the league for 10 years. 

 

Normally, this is my stance. I'm just presenting the argument for safe picking. 

Personally, I look QB, LT, DE, OLB, CB or WR - because those are the guys that get paid the most. I talk about positional economics all the time, so I'm with you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Lray said:

Probably because it's such early days. The senior bowl and combine will shake things out and make more sense out of the current situation.

This, 100%.

We just have to sit tight so the next Vernon Gholston can shoot up peoples' draft lists, so we can take a demon OPR #6 overall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Since 2007, the Jets have had 12 first rounders, 9 have been DL and DBs. And we're talkin about drafting some more. 

The problem isn't taking a corner in this draft.  The problem is that taking a corner is a good pick for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Integrity28 said:

Normally, this is my stance. I'm just presenting the argument for safe picking. 

Personally, I look QB, LT, DE, OLB, CB or WR - because those are the guys that get paid the most. I talk about positional economics all the time, so I'm with you. 

I'm a full believer myself.

I expect a safety. If they are unsuccessful in renegotiating with Revis, then safety becomes a lock. That's my guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JiF said:

Yeah, disagree.  Positional value still applies.  He's not worth it there IMO.  He makes tackles.  We already have a fast undersized MLB who makes tackles and nothing else (cant cover, cant pass rush), so it's redundant IMO.  And the difference between the 32nd ranked MLB and the 1st MLB is minimal.  It's a poor use of a high pick, just like last year.  It's just not impact position, even if he's in the league for 10 years. 

 

there is validity to impact position very high in a draft.  i've come around to even value a rb at #6.  regardless of how many defensive players they draft, they will never contend for the division until they start getting playmakers on offense.  if they drafted cook i'd be thrilled.  let's get a guy who can take the holes that powell gets and go 70 yards instead of 20.  while i see the need to improve the secondary, it's more painful to watch this offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, gEYno said:

So, DL then!

That is 100% happening, followed by the resident blog reading experts fellating the pick through new threads, lecturing us on the genius of BAP strategy. If we're lucky, maybe they'll even cite some draft prospect metrics for us along with whatever pros and cons they've paraphrased from Walterfootball.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Say the jets take a safety given the importance of the position in today's NFL and the fact that there are 2 really good prospects projected to go top 10.    Who do you go for and why?

Malik Hooker - S, Ohio State

Hooker is a tall, rangy safety prospect with incredible instincts. He usually lines up as the high safety and he has an uncanny ability to anticipate throws, drive on the ball, and finish. He is ultra-fluid in his change of direction and has the ability to match up with tight ends in man coverage. He has the best ball skills of any safety I've ever evaluated in college. He is also a threat to score every time he touches the ball. Against the run, he is quick to key, read and fill the alley. He does have some fly-by missed tackles, but overall he's reliable in this area. Hooker has the potential to be one of the league's best safeties very early in his NFL career.

Jamal Adams - S, LSU

Adams has ideal size, versatility, and explosiveness for the position. He lines up as both the high safety and in the box. Against the pass, he is at his best roaming underneath or matching up in the slot. He can range and make plays from the deep middle, but he's more valuable closer to the line of scrimmage. He doesn't have a lot of ball production but he provides a physical presence and delivers huge hits on opposing pass-catchers. He is at his best in run support. He is quick to key and explode to the alley. With outstanding range against the run, he makes a lot of plays from the opposite hash. He is a dynamic athlete, and I've been told his intangibles are off the charts. He will be a tone-setter for an NFL defense, and he's ready to play right away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I'm a full believer myself.

I expect a safety. If they are unsuccessful in renegotiating with Revis, then safety becomes a lock. That's my guess.

Moving Revis to safety would be the nail in the coffin on the HC/GM being able to evaluate talent. He's been playing 10-15 yards off the line of scrimmage since week 17 of 2015, and he's terrible in space like that. He's not good at communicating with other secondary members in coverage, and cannot pick up on the routes and tight coverage the way he used to when he played man, on the line, when he basically ran routes for the WRs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...