The pick at 6 has to be..

[RutgersJetFan]

13 minutes ago, Lil Woody said:

 You just do NOT take safeties at the top of the 1st round unless they have elite speed, range, ball skills and isn't afraid to hit. 

Yah but what if they're....well, you know...

[Lil Woody]

You opening your mouth again @RutgersJetFan? I thought I smelled queef in here.

[Mogglez]

1 hour ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Yah but what if they're....well, you know...

Scrappy? 

Hard working?

Lunch pail guys?

[Mogglez]

1 hour ago, Lil Woody said:

You opening your mouth again @RutgersJetFan? I thought I smelled queef in here.

Lmfaoooooo.

I'm sorry, but this is a hysterical chirp.

[King P]

I like OJ Howard, but I don't think he'll be an elite TE. I think he'll be a Greg Olsen type TE.

I still believe when it's all said and done, David Njoku will be the best TE out of this draft

[Larz]

I cant shake the feeling that peppers will be the best player in this draft.

[Sperm Edwards]

4 hours ago, Paradis said:

The key is not to be overly rigid, or dogmatic. 

Most of what you said there is fairly strong material. You're assessing the situation with management spectacles and making a good argument about not everyone has to be amazing all the time. Nor do we have to be shackled by sunken cost fallacies and things of that nature... I'm with you. Just be careful not to get cement headed about is all i'm saying--

Our situation is a function of our roster and its decision makers. There's more than just "the present" happening. There's self-serving agendas (within reason) that play at least some kind of role in the way things play out as well.

QB, OT, CB, DE/Pass Rushers are vital and can have a significant impact on a team's fortunes. But if the hand you've been dealt says you've got a flush, don't go chasing a full house. Eg -- questionable QBs, no tackles, corners with busted bodies... don't be ruling out running-backs and tight ends when that's your hand. Especially with our roster. That's as bad as Al Davis filling out his draft cards based on 40 times. 

I already addressed that as well: in that case you trade down. Or, to continue with your metaphor, you don't go all in on a TE. 

Players fall. You may get that TE at ~12 overall or later, with something more - and not insignificant - to show for it. 

The choice isn't necessarily between a bust of a CB and a decent TE -- unless one forces that choice upon himself. 

[cant wait]

36 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I already addressed that as well: in that case you trade down. Or, to continue with your metaphor, you don't go all in on a TE. 

Players fall. You may get that TE at ~12 overall or later, with something more - and not insignificant - to show for it. 

The choice isn't necessarily between a bust of a CB and a decent TE -- unless one forces that choice upon himself. 

Agree on the general principle of positional value in draft position, but at the end of the day the best talent usually ends up being the safest/best pick i.e. zeke to dallas at 4. btw sperm I think it's time you got on the hooker train 

 

 

[Paradis]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I already addressed that as well: in that case you trade down. Or, to continue with your metaphor, you don't go all in on a TE. 

Players fall. You may get that TE at ~12 overall or later, with something more - and not insignificant - to show for it. 

The choice isn't necessarily between a bust of a CB and a decent TE -- unless one forces that choice upon himself. 

"trade out" isn't always/often an option. If no one's biting - then what? Apprently you've simply crossed off entire positions as possibilities? That's not prudent. 

[Sperm Edwards]

8 hours ago, Paradis said:

"trade out" isn't always/often an option. If no one's biting - then what? Apprently you've simply crossed off entire positions as possibilities? That's not prudent. 

Unless you're truly stuck, like SF with the #1 pick when Alex Smith came out (with the #1 pick getting a guaranteed $25m+ on half of today's salary cap ceiling), someone's always looking to move up. Even in drafts with a far weaker top 5-10, like 2013, there's always a team who sees a future HOFer in a Dion Jordan and is willing to trade up. One may need to accept slightly less than chart value, if the general desire to trade up is tepid, but there's always going to be a team that gets wet over a prospect they fear won't last to their pick. There's a pair of QBs who may both go in the top 5-10; if both are gone by #6, that leaves the #4 overall non-QB still on the board.

The rigidity is in a GM drawing such a hard line in the sand, on his perceived trade value received for moving up/down, that nothing gets done until much later in the draft when the movement is more inconsequential. Much like moving any veterans - incoming or outgoing - for any pick in the first 4 rounds, our GM has balked at every trade involving a current 4th rounder or higher. No matter how much he's liked a player ahead of his pick, or how much he was looking to move down, or how badly he wanted to move a veteran, he's gotten cold feet. Hopefully he wants to trade down enough - as he's already hinted he wants to - that he doesn't balk over. 

As far as a "gun to my head" decision, I'd probably take Watson, but admittedly I've only seen him play 1 game. I'm also not an NFL GM on thin ice, so I would have no issues grabbing a QB in round 1 again next year if he gives reason to be a disbeliever over the course of a rookie season. When teams are forking over $12m for Fitzpatrick (granted, just the Jets would do this), $18m for Bradford, $16m for Osweiller or Glennon... it speaks to the singular importance of the position. Since their careers are generally longer at a high level (those that pan out at all), I'm not as worried about a win-now situation around them like taking a RB. If I take another next year and then Watson turns a corner, it's easy to move a young, top-10 pick QB - still on his rookie contract for 2-3 yrs - to get a 1st rounder or more in return.

[Sperm Edwards]

7 hours ago, cant wait said:

Agree on the general principle of positional value in draft position, but at the end of the day the best talent usually ends up being the safest/best pick i.e. zeke to dallas at 4. btw sperm I think it's time you got on the hooker train 

 

 

Know what? I let other people and highlight videos tell me that Calvin Pryor was a solid pick because we'd finally have a safety who could cover -- again, because I didn't watch him play in college, I had no choice but to rely upon others grading him against other college talent. Seeing him up close for myself? At least so far, not so much. He's not as bad as he gets credit for being, but for the 18th pick in the draft he's sucky. 

It's not that I don't think he'll be all that. He very well may. Plus I'll say that safety - if he is not just a sure tackler and actually has near corner-like coverage skills - since the top ones are now getting top dollar. Thing is, so far, when teams fork over that kind of coin for a safety it hasn't worked out so great value-wise. That may be due to overpaying for the position in general, and it could also just be due to a couple of individuals not living up to their contracts, which I'll grant is the statistical equivalent to anecdotal evidence.

The problem, again, is if the player - like most of these "best [position] since [5x first team all-pro]" prospects, a so-so NFL safety at #6 is a disaster value-wise. You get a middle-tier left tackle or QB? Still at least saves the team an extra ~$10m per for the next 4 seasons, to use on sure things at safety, ILB, etc. as well as the inside-track on extending him early, for another 5 yrs past the team-option season.

[munchmemory]

14 hours ago, Ex-Rex said:

Different guy different era, different everything. You can't say because one guy failed that the other will because they share the same position.

Sure I can.

[Sperm Edwards]

56 minutes ago, munchmemory said:

Sure I can.

Lol

[GKnight83]

I do not believe the Jets take a TE at 6.  First, I do not believe they have anyone to throw to him.  Second, I think most Alabama players are over-hyped.  Third, I would rather see on OL taken than a TE.  Finally, if the Jets use the 6th pick instead of trading - it will be a QB, S or CB.  Take that to the bank.

[UntouchableCrew]

A freakishly athletic tight end that didn't produce in college at 6 overall? Kill me now. I know people want to go offense but the talent isn't there this draft. It's defense top heavy. If we don't take a QB we need to hope Jamal Adams is there. Dude is the next Dawkins.

[cant wait]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Know what? I let other people and highlight videos tell me that Calvin Pryor was a solid pick because we'd finally have a safety who could cover -- again, because I didn't watch him play in college, I had no choice but to rely upon others grading him against other college talent. Seeing him up close for myself? At least so far, not so much. He's not as bad as he gets credit for being, but for the 18th pick in the draft he's sucky. 

It's not that I don't think he'll be all that. He very well may. Plus I'll say that safety - if he is not just a sure tackler and actually has near corner-like coverage skills - since the top ones are now getting top dollar. Thing is, so far, when teams fork over that kind of coin for a safety it hasn't worked out so great value-wise. That may be due to overpaying for the position in general, and it could also just be due to a couple of individuals not living up to their contracts, which I'll grant is the statistical equivalent to anecdotal evidence.

The problem, again, is if the player - like most of these "best [position] since [5x first team all-pro]" prospects, a so-so NFL safety at #6 is a disaster value-wise. You get a middle-tier left tackle or QB? Still at least saves the team an extra ~$10m per for the next 4 seasons, to use on sure things at safety, ILB, etc. as well as the inside-track on extending him early, for another 5 yrs past the team-option season.

I agree that if all things are equal I'm not taking a safety in the top 10, but man this kid looks like a real special talent. I was hoping for an OT since I think it needs to be priority-- but unless the team trades back to acquire more picks there's not really a true blue-chip talent worth taking top 6 IMO

[jeremy2020]

It will be a defensive lineman...or it's mac/bowles..don't rule out a punter because with the vaunted defense...field position is important

[cant wait]

32 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

It will be a defensive lineman...or it's mac/bowles..don't rule out a punter because with the vaunted defense...field position is important

I'm dreading the idea of allen sitting there at 6

[varjet]

1 hour ago, cant wait said:

I'm dreading the idea of allen sitting there at 6

Do they think Allen can play a 3-4 well?

If for some reason he was the clean BPA, and Macc wanted to take him, it would fine by me if he moved basically 2 DEs-we already have 1 too many.  That would give us a good, cheap DE for another 5 years.

But I can't imagine that Howard, Adams, Hooker and Trubisky would be gone then,

[cant wait]

36 minutes ago, varjet said:

Do they think Allen can play a 3-4 well?

If for some reason he was the clean BPA, and Macc wanted to take him, it would fine by me if he moved basically 2 DEs-we already have 1 too many.  That would give us a good, cheap DE for another 5 years.

But I can't imagine that Howard, Adams, Hooker and Trubisky would be gone then,

I think he's a 5 tech DE or a 3 tech DT, so yeah basically the one position the jets are loaded at. ideally they would trade back in that situation but it's definitely possible he's BPA at 6

[Paradis]

1 hour ago, varjet said:

If for some reason he was the clean BPA, and Macc wanted to take him, it would fine by me if he moved basically 2 DEs-we already have 1 too many.  That would give us a good, cheap DE for another 5 years.

you sound like a victim.

Are you insane? Is DAL going to consider Fournette?? Enoughs enough. 4/5 drafts we've taken a DE and we've achieved NOTHING... no. we will not be fcking taking Allen. Get rid of that thought right now. I'll personally kill everyone on this planet (including myself) if that happens.  

[varjet]

50 minutes ago, Paradis said:

you sound like a victim.

Are you insane? Is DAL going to consider Fournette?? Enoughs enough. 4/5 drafts we've taken a DE and we've achieved NOTHING... no. we will not be fcking taking Allen. Get rid of that thought right now. I'll personally kill everyone on this planet (including myself) if that happens.  

I don't disagree with you.  The point I was trying to make ineffectively that Leo never should have been picked if they were not going to move Mo or SR.

[jetfuel]

On 4/2/2017 at 10:33 AM, JetFanatic said:

O.J Howard.  Okay so I've been thinking about this draft probably a little too much.  It's such a vital draft for this franchise it's not even funny.  As far as order of importance for this draft for me it's this:

1.  An offensive identity. - (O.J Howard)

-I think O.J Howard puts a lot of check-marks in a lot of boxes for the Jets.  Not only does he give them a position of need, but he gives this team some type of weapon and some type of identity on offense.  He will hopefully turn into a player that teams need to gameplan against for us.  He makes all surrounding offensive players much better by making the defense have to account for him all over the field which will open things up and leave one on one coverage for our young speedy receivers to hopefully take advantage of.  At the very least it'll make their job that much easier only going up against single coverage now.  He makes the offensive line a little better as he is a good willing blocker who will only get better.  Most importantly for me, he's going to be a security blanket for one of our young guys in Hackenberg/Petty and most likely their best friend on the field.  I love the potential of having either Petty or Hackenberg winning it out and blossoming and growing with potential playmakers like Howard/Anderson/Enunwa/D. Smith 

2.  Safety - (Budda Baker)

-I think a ball-hawking safety is vital in today's league and on this defense.  I personally think that it was an off year for Wilkerson coming off of that injury and to be honest it was an easy year to check it in and take off lets face it.  It's a trigger effect on defense and it starts with the defensive line.  I think this year we get our old Wilkerson back and I really feel like this defensive line is going to do damage starting up front.  That's going to essential lead to the jobs of our secondary players being that much easier.  Still going to present a great challenge though.  In the last mock I did I have the Jets grabbing Budda Baker.  If you haven't seen this guy play I highly recommend watching his film.  Tyrann Mathieu sticks out at me when I watch this kid in that he's smaller but man is this kid feisty and has tons of heart.  Would love him back there roaming around the secondary.

3a.  Cornerback - (Jalen 'Teez' Tabor)

-Cornerbacks are always a high priority for me.  You can never have enough.  Our current corners are young and have potential.  Claiborne has tons of potential but he's an injury away from leaving us in really bad shape cornerback wise if he goes down.  Getting some insurance in a deep deep deep CB class is ideal and we can land a stud with our top 3rd pick here which is awesome.  I personally have Tabor here because with his underwhelming 40 time I do feel he's going to drop but this kid can play.  If Claiborne can stay healthy and guys like Burris and Williams take the next step and continue to improve this unit can be huge for us.  If the defensive line plays up to their All Star potential there are going to be a lot of rushed inaccurate throws that these CBs can hopefully take advantage of.  

3b.  Wide Receiver - (???)

-Here I would go with the best WR available.  I'm basing this on the fact that I think Decker is gone.  That leaves us with Enunwa/R. Anderson/D. Smith/J. Marshall/C. Peake.  While full of potential I think we still need one.  This receiver class is tricky this year.  I really feel there are guys that are going to be had in the 3rd round who can be legit #1 receivers.  I think we still need one more guy here who we feel can be that guy.  In my mock I have Curtis Samuel from Ohio State going here.  The kid is a WR/RB hybrid and complete stud I think.  

Well that's my nonsense guys thanks for reading I know it was long.  If we can land something like that with our first 4 picks I think it's a great great start to what'll be an exciting season with our young team.

I like your picks but just want to point out that I would be concerned if Jets cut Decker. I think it would be a huge mistake. Enunwa would be their only proven veteran receiver and he has bounced around from position to position and does not have an extensive resume. I love the guy and think he can be great, but at this point in time he is not enough as far as vets go in the group. Especially with the prospect of a young QB stepping in, I think it is important that Decker stays for his abilities as well as his knowledge and leadership at least for 2017. Adding a rookie to the mix does not fix that problem, although I am not against them drafting one.

[Sperm Edwards]

On 4/4/2017 at 11:29 AM, cant wait said:

I agree that if all things are equal I'm not taking a safety in the top 10, but man this kid looks like a real special talent. I was hoping for an OT since I think it needs to be priority-- but unless the team trades back to acquire more picks there's not really a true blue-chip talent worth taking top 6 IMO

Understood, and you may very well be correct. From my standpoint - having never watched these guys other than a few highlight clips - all I can think of is this is nearly word for word what was said about a pair of OGs in 2013. Yeah, you typically don't touch a guard in the top 10 but these guys were different. One of them was going to be a sure HOFer and the other was even better. 

You take a safety at #6 overall, instead of another legitimate 1st round talent plus the 2nd rounder (or more) that you can pick up, and the team still needs: QB, LT, OPR, and CB (among other positions). IMO those 4 are the positions you take at #6, and if the value isn't there then trade down and let someone else draft a TE, S, RB, G, RT, ILB, etc. It's easier to find a damn good safety or TE well after #6 overall than it is to find really good starters at those other positions. It's no accident those positions are routinely taken in the top 5-ish (if not the top 2-3), while no one's touched a safety in the top 3 since free agency began in the NFL. With such needs (or anyway, likely needs, if one wants to be diplomatic) I'm not thrilled taking a safety anywhere in round 1. That's a pick that a team can make if they've already shored up 3 of those 4 positions for the next few years or more.

It's basically a bad pick unless he becomes Eric Berry. If he becomes Eric Berry, then you're talking about a player the team would have to fork over $13m/yr to find in FA (if such a player even reaches FA, and then you still have to worry about him being Jarius Byrd once he gets paid). 

[Tinstar]

11 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Understood, and you may very well be correct. From my standpoint - having never watched these guys other than a few highlight clips - all I can think of is this is nearly word for word what was said about a pair of OGs in 2013. Yeah, you typically don't touch a guard in the top 10 but these guys were different. One of them was going to be a sure HOFer and the other was even better. 

You take a safety at #6 overall, instead of another legitimate 1st round talent plus the 2nd rounder (or more) that you can pick up, and the team still needs: QB, LT, OPR, and CB (among other positions). IMO those 4 are the positions you take at #6, and if the value isn't there then trade down and let someone else draft a TE, S, RB, G, RT, ILB, etc. It's easier to find a damn good safety or TE well after #6 overall than it is to find really good starters at those other positions. It's no accident those positions are routinely taken in the top 5-ish (if not the top 2-3), while no one's touched a safety in the top 3 since free agency began in the NFL. With such needs (or anyway, likely needs, if one wants to be diplomatic) I'm not thrilled taking a safety anywhere in round 1. That's a pick that a team can make if they've already shored up 3 of those 4 positions for the next few years or more.

It's basically a bad pick unless he becomes Eric Berry. If he becomes Eric Berry, then you're talking about a player the team would have to fork over $13m/yr to find in FA (if such a player even reaches FA, and then you still have to worry about him being Jarius Byrd once he gets paid). 

That  there is why I would never draft a non premium position player with a high 1st round pick . If this player turns into a star, now you're looking at paying a safety like he was a leading character in stead of a supporting cast member that he should be .

[Sperm Edwards]

5 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

That  there is why I would never draft a non premium position player with a high 1st round pick . If this player turns into a star, now you're looking at paying a safety like he was a leading character in stead of a supporting cast member that he should be .

Totally agree with you here. The only caveat is that Eric Berry II would theoretically be worth that money, in the form of a lower-cost safety next to him (cost in both dollars and draft picks) plus the team could do with a bit less at CB. In the end that might even-out, and is the type of "bonus" the team's supposed to get back when paying someone so much.

A huge problem with a safety, even if he's kinda ok, is he won't even be worth the 5th year team option for a top 10 pick safety (I don't have the exact figure in front of me, but it'd likely be about $9m in today's cap dollars).

The premium positions would still be areas of need. I don't follow the rationale that says use 1st round picks on safeties (twice), an ILB, and - good as he is - a DE we already had covered by two (actually 3), on rookie contracts/option years/tags, at the time he was drafted. How does a team do that and then act surprised at still having holes and shots in the dark at the highest-priced, hardest to fill, positions in football?

[UntouchableCrew]

I can understand the reservations about taking a safety at #6 but I personally think Jamal Adams is the next Brian Dawkins. Guy is a stud and a leader of men. I am confident if we draft him we won't regret it. He'll be the All-Pro leader of our defense for a decade.

[Tinstar]

Just now, Sperm Edwards said:

Totally agree with you here. The only caveat is that Eric Berry II would theoretically be worth that money, in the form of a lower-cost safety next to him (cost in both dollars and draft picks) plus the team could do with a bit less at CB. In the end that might even-out, and is the type of "bonus" the team's supposed to get back when paying someone so much.

A huge problem with a safety, even if he's kinda ok, is he won't even be worth the 5th year team option for a top 10 pick safety (I don't have the exact figure in front of me, but it'd likely be about $9m in today's cap dollars).

The premium positions would still be areas of need. I don't follow the rationale that says use 1st round picks on safeties (twice), an ILB, and - good as he is - a DE we already had covered by two (actually 3), on rookie contracts/option years/tags, at the time he was drafted. How does a team do that and then act surprised at still having holes and shots in the dark at the highest-priced, hardest to fill, positions in football?

IMO, no safety is worth the type of money that I would pay for a second starter at the edge rusher position . Let's take the Broncos for instance as an example . Am I going to loose either Ware or Miller because I signed a safety to a 13 mil per contract .

[cant wait]

6 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

I can understand the reservations about taking a safety at #6 but I personally think Jamal Adams is the next Brian Dawkins. Guy is a stud and a leader of men. I am confident if we draft him we won't regret it. He'll be the All-Pro leader of our defense for a decade.

Exactly, take the stud. you don't take a lesser player because you're worried you need a more valuable position

[thadude]

On April 4, 2017 at 3:21 PM, jetfuel said:

I like your picks but just want to point out that I would be concerned if Jets cut Decker. I think it would be a huge mistake. Enunwa would be their only proven veteran receiver and he has bounced around from position to position and does not have an extensive resume. I love the guy and think he can be great, but at this point in time he is not enough as far as vets go in the group. Especially with the prospect of a young QB stepping in, I think it is important that Decker stays for his abilities as well as his knowledge and leadership at least for 2017. Adding a rookie to the mix does not fix that problem, although I am not against them drafting one.

Cutting Marshall was a stupid mistake.  Cutting Decker would be doubling down on the stupidity

[thadude]

14 minutes ago, Tinstar said:

IMO, no safety is worth the type of money that I would pay for a second starter at the edge rusher position . Let's take the Broncos for instance as an example . Am I going to loose either Ware or Miller because I signed a safety to a 13 mil per contract .

Watch us draft a friggin safety over an edge rusher like Taco

[thadude]

All these people so obsessed with drafting a safety at 6 -- we can draft a better player at edge rusher or on offense and still get Obi Melifonwu in round 2

[cant wait]

 

Just now, thadude said:

Watch us draft a friggin safety over an edge rusher like Taco

yeah take a slow pass rusher instead of a future all pro safety. genius

[thadude]

30 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Totally agree with you here. The only caveat is that Eric Berry II would theoretically be worth that money, in the form of a lower-cost safety next to him (cost in both dollars and draft picks) plus the team could do with a bit less at CB. In the end that might even-out, and is the type of "bonus" the team's supposed to get back when paying someone so much.

A huge problem with a safety, even if he's kinda ok, is he won't even be worth the 5th year team option for a top 10 pick safety (I don't have the exact figure in front of me, but it'd likely be about $9m in today's cap dollars).

The premium positions would still be areas of need. I don't follow the rationale that says use 1st round picks on safeties (twice), an ILB, and - good as he is - a DE we already had covered by two (actually 3), on rookie contracts/option years/tags, at the time he was drafted. How does a team do that and then act surprised at still having holes and shots in the dark at the highest-priced, hardest to fill, positions in football?

So unless the safety we draft at 6 is the next Ed Reed its a wasted pick?

 

I agree

 

[thadude]

1 minute ago, cant wait said:

 

yeah take a slow pass rusher instead of a future all pro safety. genius

Didn't look slow in actual games skippy.  And your boy is succeptible to post double fakes and isn't that fast himself for his own position