Grading Mac's performance thus far

[ZachEY]

16 hours ago, UnitedWhofans said:

Just to be clear, I did agree with you and I meant what geyno said

If what I said is dumb, then I guess the team must actually be good?  As opposed to one of the worst in the league...

[Sperm Edwards]

14 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

It's not the sh*tty older vet QB that I have the problem with.  It's the sh*tty older vet QB that isn't a bargain.  The problem is the price.  You win by having value.  Fitzpatrick at $3M is value, at $12M? Not so much. 

I agree completely, but I was referring to the spending on those around the QB, only to hand it off to a veteran of Fitzpatrick's level. Fine to do such spending on offense - including for short-term solutions - if you're trying to give a young QB every advantage; the position hard enough as a pro (even for a veteran). Big spending on dead-end, short-term solutions that won't directly help a young QB - and to your point, yes, for a backup-level QB handed a starting job - is foolishness.

It's one thing to spend heavily, in the absence of a QB solution, if you're spending heavily on long-term players that (one can reasonably believe) will still be playing at a similarly-high level years later.

[ZachEY]

13 hours ago, RutgersJetFan said:

The team is 15-17 under him. They are absurdly thin on young talent and he's drafted one guy that's even above average, and he honestly lucked into that. We are no closer to finding a franchise quarterback and the two that he has drafted with moderately high picks don't look like they are going to pan out. His coach is probably getting fired at the end of the year, we just scapegoated yet another offensive coordinator, and it's hard to find much to like in any of his free agent signings. Barring a miracle in 2017, it's probably also safe to say that the Jets will have missed the playoffs for all 3 years of his tenure.

I don't think there is a single person out there that doesn't want him to succeed, but going on anything empirical it's hard to judge his tenure so far as anything but pretty bad. If he can't find a quarterback within a year or two I don't think there is any doubt that we'll be looking at the gazillionth regime change this century.

Yeah, so every single word of this is 100% accurate.

[ZachEY]

9 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

I did address the first two things.  I said the Fitzpatrick fiasco of the second year, which might very well have been brought about by Bowles declaring Fitz a starter.  I see Woody all over that decision, and even though Mac is the GM, he has a boss.  I also said right off the start once Williams was drafted, Mo or Sheldon should have been moved for assets, and I did not like the move. 

We get it Sperm, you hate the guy.

Facts have an inherent "hater" bias.

[ZachEY]

9 hours ago, jason423 said:

How crazy is it that the Jets best 2nd round draft pick since 2012 is Stephen Hill who was a complete bust, but its been even worse since then.

I just died.

[Sperm Edwards]

11 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

I did address the first two things.  I said the Fitzpatrick fiasco of the second year, which might very well have been brought about by Bowles declaring Fitz a starter.  I see Woody all over that decision, and even though Mac is the GM, he has a boss.  I also said right off the start once Williams was drafted, Mo or Sheldon should have been moved for assets, and I did not like the move. 

We get it Sperm, you hate the guy.

And here we have it.

1. Any move with negative consequences is all on Woody. There is evidence Woody would like to have brought back Revis (just as I'm sure Kraft wanted to bring him back in NE). There is no evidence that he gave an order to outbid for him no matter what, as though he was a young player who'd be his prime for at least 3 more years. Further, there is no evidence that Maccagnan was against it, which you insinuate by passing blame, and Maccagnan's crazy overspending on other similarly past-prime & unworthy players removes this benefit of the doubt.

2. You again prove my earlier point that you reply to rational discourse by painting it as based on the irrational ("hate"). It's a nice escape for you since it removes the need to debate the individual decisions themselves. Just stick fingers in one's ears and yell "La la la la la" and the problem is solved.

I don't "hate" the guy, and if you don't want people to respond negatively to his job performance, don't start a thread asking others to grade his job performance. 

My point was not that you didn't mention those things; rather it was that (consciously or unconsciously) you lumped the incomprehensibly stupid in with something that sought to offset it, so the balance would appear not so bad. Picking up Fitzpatrick for a conditional 7th round pick and a $3M salary is a completely different transaction than re-signing him a year & a half later, as a UFA, for stupid money. 

Re-signing or keeping a player past his usefulness is not part of the original acquisition. Just like an idiotic 4 yr $68M extension for a 34 year old Patrick Ewing was not part of the decision to draft him #1 in the country over a decade earlier.

 

[UnitedWhofans]

1 hour ago, gEYno said:

You giving him a B for drafting is not really a meaningful measure of success.

He, thus far has 1 good pick in his top 4, and that was when the best player in the draft fell to him.  Otherwise, he's drafted a linebacker who is under performing, a QB not good enough to make 3rd string, and a WR who can't get on the field.

He has added some adequate players in later rounds, but that's all they are.  Adequate.  I know we all want to get fired up about Robby Anderson, but the guy's upside appears to be a #3 WR.

And that is where you, Beerfish and I disagree. I think Lee has potential, you grade him a bust.

[ZachEY]

8 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

And that is where you, Beerfish and I disagree. I think Lee has potential, you grade him a bust.

I'd love for you to find me a post where I'd graded Lee a bust.

And, as per you highlighting a selection of my post, I'd love for you to detail how "potential" and "good" are the same thing.

[#27TheDominator]

2 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

And that is where you, Beerfish and I disagree. I think Lee has potential, you grade him a bust.

He didn't say bust.  He said he was "under performing."  Do you disagree?  He can have potential and still be under-performing.  Do you disagree?  I would say when your first round pick doesn't beat out Erin Henderson, he has probably under performed.  No matter what his potential, Lee will always be a safety sized LB, so the heights of his upside are questionable.

[UnitedWhofans]

2 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

He didn't say bust.  He said he was "under performing."  Do you disagree?  He can have potential and still be under-performing.  Do you disagree?  I would say when your first round pick doesn't beat out Erin Henderson, he has probably under performed.  No matter what his potential, Lee will always be a safety sized LB, so the heights of his upside are questionable.

Then why was he mocked in the top 15 by most draftniks? I keep coming back to this. Lee was not a reach like Hackenberg.

When he says that Macc has hit upon 1 of 4 1st and 2nd round picks, he's leaving no room for growth

The Broncos first round pick couldn't beat out Trevor Siemian, so shouldn't we slag on them too?

Hell, the Rams first round pick (#1) couldn't get on the field until late in the year

[UnitedWhofans]

3 minutes ago, gEYno said:

I'd love for you to find me a post where I'd graded Lee a bust.

And, as per you highlighting a selection of my post, I'd love for you to detail how "potential" and "good" are the same thing.

Having and showing potential IN THE FIRST YEAR, is a good thing. Now, if he is at this same level in two year's time, then it's not good

[ZachEY]

Just now, UnitedWhofans said:

Having and showing potential IN THE FIRST YEAR, is a good thing. Now, if he is at this same level in two year's time, then it's not good

Having potential is a "good thing."  That doesn't make a player "good."  How much he actually showed is up for debate, but still doesn't make a player good, making my statement accurate, even if you don't like it.

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, gEYno said:

Having potential is a "good thing."  That doesn't make a player "good."  How much he actually showed is up for debate, but still doesn't make a player good, making my statement accurate, even if you don't like it.

It doesn't make them bad either. 

[#27TheDominator]

Why do we give a **** where he was mocked?  I can read Kiper and Mayock.  I would hope that my GM is better than them. 

[UnitedWhofans]

1 minute ago, #27TheDominator said:

Why do we give a **** where he was mocked?  I can read Kiper and Mayock.  I would hope that my GM is better than them. 

It wasn't just them. Most draftniks had him going in the top 20. 

If this guy is an undersized player at a non premium position, then why are draft people mocking him in the top 20? Are they all smoking crack?

I give a **** because there has to be something to it. 

[ZachEY]

4 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

It doesn't make them bad either. 

True.  Good thing I said that there has been one good pick of 4.  You just don't like the facts.

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, gEYno said:

True.  Good thing I said that there has been one good pick of 4.  You just don't like the facts.

I would say 1 good pick out of 2 with 2 Incompletes.

[ZachEY]

4 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Why do we give a **** where he was mocked?  I can read Kiper and Mayock.  I would hope that my GM is better than them. 

Because that is his entire basis for analysis.  Have you really not seen this pattern yet?

If some fans thought it was a good idea, than Macc gets a pass (Revis/Fitz).  If mock drafts say it was a good idea, the Macc gets a pass (Lee).

The fact that the GM is getting paid to do it, and has years of experience, is actually completely irrelevant.  It doesn't make any sense whatsoever, but it's how he judges the GM and the team.

[UnitedWhofans]

6 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Because that is his entire basis for analysis.  Have you really not seen this pattern yet?

If some fans thought it was a good idea, than Macc gets a pass (Revis/Fitz).  If mock drafts say it was a good idea, the Macc gets a pass (Lee).

The fact that the GM is getting paid to do it, and has years of experience, is actually completely irrelevant.  It doesn't make any sense whatsoever, but it's how he judges the GM and the team.

People in glass houses....

And it is not some fans, it is a majority

[ZachEY]

2 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

I would say 1 good pick out of 2 with 2 Incompletes.

Which, incidentally, is still one good pick out of 4.

[JustInFudge]

8 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

It wasn't just them. Most draftniks had him going in the top 20. 

If this guy is an undersized player at a non premium position, then why are draft people mocking him in the top 20? Are they all smoking crack?

I give a **** because there has to be something to it. 

There is a reason draftniks play a guessing game on the television set and arent doing it for an actual team.

They dont know sh*t. 

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, gEYno said:

Which, incidentally, is still one good pick out of 4.

I think mine is more accurate to the actual situation, but relatively they are the same

[ZachEY]

1 minute ago, UnitedWhofans said:

People in glass houses....

This response also makes no sense whatsoever.

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, JiF said:

There is a reason draftniks play a guessing game on the television set and arent doing it for an actual team.

They dont know sh*t. 

I've had this discussion with you before. So all if them whiffed on this guy?

[#27TheDominator]

4 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Because that is his entire basis for analysis.  Have you really not seen this pattern yet?

If some fans thought it was a good idea, than Macc gets a pass (Revis/Fitz).  If mock drafts say it was a good idea, the Macc gets a pass (Lee).

The fact that the GM is getting paid to do it, and has years of experience, is actually completely irrelevant.  It doesn't make any sense whatsoever, but it's how he judges the GM and the team.

To be fair, I do give the GM a pass on a guy like Lee.  For 2016 at least.  The guy was eh and has to improve, but I want my GM planning a couple of years out.  The problem is that Mauldin looked fairly bad and this is probably his make or break year. The other issue with Lee, is that he appears to have been drafted to fit Bowles "system" such as it is.  I am not sure that Bowles "system" is going to last.  At that point, where does he fit?    

[Beerfish]

3 minutes ago, JiF said:

There is a reason draftniks play a guessing game on the television set and arent doing it for an actual team.

They dont know sh*t. 

GMs including ours do indeed look at all of these know nothing mocks before the draft.  Both Casserly and Mac have said so.

If Idzik had looked at any of the know nothing fool mocks before his legendary draft we would have about 3 more players from that draft on this team.

[UnitedWhofans]

5 minutes ago, gEYno said:

This response also makes no sense whatsoever.

It kind of does because if a majority of people thought it was a good idea, then they have no right to complain, IMO. 

It's loose but it kind of works. I do admit that it is loose.

[ZachEY]

Just now, #27TheDominator said:

To be fair, I do give the GM a pass on a guy like Lee.  For 2016 at least.  The guy was okay and has to improve, but I want my GM planning a couple of years out.  The problem is that Mauldin looked fairly bad and this is probably his make or break year. The other issue with Lee, is that he appears to have been drafted to fit Bowles "system" such as it is.  I am not sure that Bowles "system" is going to last.  At that point, where does he fit?    

I'm not killing Macc for Lee.  But I'm also not giving him a pass.  I think Lee will be an okay player.  However, I think we can both agree that getting an okay ILB at 20 is poor value.  He needs to be very good for it to make sense, considering the ability to find an okay ILB elsewhere.

A good defensive end (who surprisingly fell to you), an okay inside linebacker, a multi-year project overdrafted QB, and a WR who has barely played and really has no place on the team already, is poor drafting.  Couple that with Free Agency and the actual state of the team, Macc has not succeeded.

[ZachEY]

Just now, UnitedWhofans said:

It kind of does because if a majority of people thought it was a good idea, then they have no right to complain, IMO. 

Let's look at this another way... Why does Macc have a job for the Jets?

[JustInFudge]

7 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

I've had this discussion with you before. So all if them whiffed on this guy?

Depends on how you look at it.  They got it right that he was a 1st round pick.  Some team was stupid enough to do it.  Did they get it right he was the best LB'er in the draft? That's yet to be determined but it surely doesnt look it. 

[#27TheDominator]

1 minute ago, gEYno said:

Let's look at this another way... Why does Macc have a job for the Jets?

To tally the opinions of drafniks and fans, consider the input of the media and make a decision that each will be least able to complain about down the road?

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, #27TheDominator said:

To tally the opinions of drafniks and fans, consider the input of the media and make a decision that each will be least able to complain about down the road?

Welcome to Woody Johnson's Jets.

[ZachEY]

9 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

To tally the opinions of drafniks and fans, consider the input of the media and make a decision that each will be least able to complain about down the road?

Yeah, basically, so the guy who complains incessantly that Woody listens to the fans, so the fans need to stop talking, is saying that the GM should listen to the fans or at least, if his thoughts are in line with the fans, he's above reproach... All of this, without a tinge of irony.

[Stark]

20 hours ago, Tinstar said:

Personally, I think the man's doing a fantastic job. When you're a 1st time GM and or HC, you get mostly 2 years before the natives start rumbling . In NY, you don't even get 1 draft , not the season following the draft, but the actual draft .  Imagine  if this regime didn't start off by winning 10 games . 

In 2 seasons, The Jets have all but :

Transform their Line Backing core.

Transform their Receiving core

Began the rebuild of their OL

Kept the Defensive Line a strength

Start the rebuild of the secondary

Yes, we need stars, but you can't always get them picking outside the top 10 .

We got Williams on our 1st try into the top 10 . We have another shot this spring, so lets see what we come up with .  

Missing ;

Starting QB

Starting LT

Edge rusher

 It's a work in common .

The team age average has dropped as well, if the younger players can progress then we are going to be in better shape the next 2-5 seasons

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, gEYno said:

Yeah, basically, so the guy who complains incessantly that Woody listens to the fans, so the fans need to stop talking, is saying that the GM should listen to the fans or at least, if his thoughts are in line with the fans, he's above reproach... All of this, without a tinge of irony.

The reason for that is simple. Woody sets the organizational structure. Macc is playing within the structure. And I kind of want Macc to keep his job because I don't trust Woody to hire another personnel GM given his track record.