NFL | Jamal Adams overvalued?

[thadude]

20 minutes ago, PepPep said:

Fair enough. I guess you are right. I was looking at Peppers as strictly a SS to replace Pryor. One that could cover and be used as a returner.  

How lousy is Pryor we are already discussing replacing him after year 3

 

FU Idzik

 

[PepPep]

3 minutes ago, thadude said:

How lousy is Pryor we are already discussing replacing him after year 3

 

FU Idzik

 

I had high hopes for Pryor. He's got the talent. Sometimes the light bulb just never goes on. His major issues are taking bad angles and being a liability in coverage. But those are, essentially, what safeties need to be good at. He's not awful, but has not lived up to expectations. I don't think he will get cut, even if we draft Adams. Frankly, its still fairly early in his career and he can still turn things around. But once his rookie contract is up and he has not shown major improvement, he's a goner, an essentially a wasted 1st round pick.

That's essentially the length of time I give a rookie. Unless the players proves to be hopeless or just not good enough to stay on the roster, OR is constantly injured, I give him 3-4 years to develop and show considerable improvement. That's just me. If he can't prove himself in that time, you let him walk. If he does, you re-sign him, pick up his option, etc,. etc. I know that's probably longer than most fans like to give players to prove themselves.   

So Hack, for example, has 2-3 more seasons to show he can be a legit starting NFL QB (lets say by 2020 when his contract is up). If, in that time, he shows he is the Franchise QB for the Jets, he should get a legit Franchise QB contract. 

[Warfish]

On 4/7/2017 at 10:04 AM, Lil Woody said:

.

(USA Today Fantasy Sports) Louisiana State S Jamal Adams isn't a "game changer" and isn't likely to be selected as early in the 2017 NFL Draft as many expect, according to an NFC executive. "If you are going to be a safety who goes inside the top five, you better make a ton of plays," the executive said. "Look where Landon Collins went. Adams isn't better than Collins."

No Safety is a "game changer".

No Cornerback is a "game changer".

If ever we needed evidence of that, it's D. Revis, supposedly the greatest DB ever to play the game.

Yet despite his skill, what did Revis really accomplish?  Nothing.  He didn't win games, he didn't stop the offenses other 10 guys, he didn't score points.  

DB's are vital, make no mistake, as a unit.  And even then, your DB's < your Offense and ability to score in the modern NFL.

In no way is a Safety worth a top 5 pick, especially if you're a weak team and your offense is not Top-5 in the NFL.    

Know what effect a top 5 safety has on the Jets next year?  We go from 31st in Pass D to 30th in Pass D.

More and more I am convinced these days that only Offensive skill-position players are true game-changers in this league today.   

[varjet]

7 minutes ago, Warfish said:

No Safety is a "game changer".

No Cornerback is a "game changer".

If ever we needed evidence of that, it's D. Revis, supposedly the greatest DB ever to play the game.

Yet despite his skill, what did Revis really accomplish?  Nothing.  He didn't win games, he didn't stop the offenses other 10 guys, he didn't score points.  

DB's are vital, make no mistake, as a unit.  And even then, your DB's < your Offense and ability to score in the modern NFL.

In no way is a Safety worth a top 5 pick, especially if you're a weak team and your offense is not Top-5 in the NFL.    

Know what effect a top 5 safety has on the Jets next year?  We go from 31st in Pass D to 30th in Pass D.

More and more I am convinced these days that only Offensive skill-position players are true game-changers in this league today.   

The more I think about it, I agree with the above more and more.

But that being said, the NFL is a herd mentality, for the Jets at 6 it would not surprise me if, other than the guy who can rush the passer who gets picked first, the next picks after him are offensive side players.

Let's see who of Williams, Howard, Davis, Fournette and Trubisky, in that order, are available.

I do also agree that Adams and Hooker will be great NFL safeties, but I can see safeties picked in this draft after them being fully capable.

[bitonti]

18 hours ago, varjet said:

 

The key to the top 10 is Trubisky, and who breaks down to trade with the Jets for the right to pick him.

Houston and Cleveland are the frontrunners.

 

I'm wondering if a safety, even if he's Eric Friggin Berry, would help this team as much as Trubisky.

The Jets are truly beggars at the QB position and can't be choosers.

Trading down is the gutless way  out, it's like going up to bat and hoping for a walk. They have to take a swing sooner or later.  

[bitonti]

10 minutes ago, Warfish said:

 

More and more I am convinced these days that only Offensive skill-position players are true game-changers in this league today.   

 

Ill take it one step further, ONLY QBs are true game changers

the Jets could draft Fournette and run him into stacked 8 man boxes for his early career. The Jets could draft OJ Howard (a guy who had like 10 receptions last year at Alabama) and have no QB to get him the ball

without a QB the team stinks, offense and defense and even specials 

if this team holds their nose up at this QB crop and drafts a safety, someone's getting fired. Maybe everyone. 

 

and don't tell me let's see what Hack has to offer. the guy couldn't be the 3rd QB last year he's not going to jump from 4 to 1 in a year. If he can get past Petty that's a start. 

[MDL_JET]

11 minutes ago, bitonti said:

Ill take it one step further, ONLY QBs are true game changers

the Jets could draft Fournette and run him into stacked 8 man boxes for his early career. The Jets could draft OJ Howard (a guy who had like 10 receptions last year at Alabama) and have no QB to get him the ball

without a QB the team stinks, offense and defense and even specials 

if this team holds their nose up at this QB crop and drafts a safety, someone's getting fired. Maybe everyone. 

 

and don't tell me let's see what Hack has to offer. the guy couldn't be the 3rd QB last year he's not going to jump from 4 to 1 in a year. If he can get past Petty that's a start. 

Thank you Captain Obvious. It's okay to build an offense while still in search for said QB. It would be kind of nice to have a dominant WR or TE or RB helping that young QB. You don't need to stock up on crappy QBs just because we're in need of one. 

[bitonti]

10 minutes ago, MDL_JET said:

Thank you Captain Obvious. It's okay to build an offense while still in search for said QB. It would be kind of nice to have a dominant WR or TE or RB helping that young QB. You don't need to stock up on crappy QBs just because we're in need of one. 

 

A 'dominant' RB wouldn't be dominant if Hackenberg can't complete a pass. 

It's not the weaponz that make the QB good it's the QB that makes the weaponz good. 

[MDL_JET]

1 minute ago, bitonti said:

A 'dominant' RB wouldn't be dominant if Hackenberg can't complete a pass. 

It's not the weaponz that make the QB good it's the QB that makes the weaponz good. 

Ah had no idea. Cool, lets draft 2-3 QBs. Start seeing what sticks. 

[varjet]

29 minutes ago, bitonti said:

I'm wondering if a safety, even if he's Eric Friggin Berry, would help this team as much as Trubisky.

The Jets are truly beggars at the QB position and can't be choosers.

Trading down is the gutless way  out, it's like going up to bat and hoping for a walk. They have to take a swing sooner or later.  

There is no question that the Jets should try to draft a QB.

Teams however are very skittish about reaching too deep, because the last 10 years are littered with QBs (e.g. Ponder, Gabbert) that teams reached for in the first round unsuccessfully.  A team like the Broncos built up a team with a good defense and offensive pieces and then added Manning to the mix, but they also drafted Tebow in the late first round as a bridge.

Look at what Rosenman of the Eagles is doing-basically acquiring QBs and then trading them. 

For most teams it would not be worth picking Trubisky at 6.  For the Jets it could, because what they have at QB is so bad.

You could also see them using on 3rd on Peterman.  

If the Jets could draft Trubisky at 6 and he was another Sanchez/Cousins, or even Tannehill, is that bad?

[bitonti]

7 minutes ago, varjet said:

If the Jets could draft Trubisky at 6 and he was another Sanchez/Cousins, or even Tannehill, is that bad?

 

People have sh*t on Mark Sanchez' career left and right but at this point, after watching Fitz/Geno/Petty/Hack, i'd kill for this team to have 2009 Mark Sanchez again. Tons of flaws sure but at least there was hope. 

[bitonti]

16 minutes ago, MDL_JET said:

Ah had no idea. Cool, lets draft 2-3 QBs. Start seeing what sticks. 

Honestly they should be drafting a QB in rd 1 every year until they find one. That's how dire the situation is with the Jets QB and how little the other position matter on this dumpster fire of a team.  

The team fires a coach and a GM every few years cause they can't find a QB. Not because every coach they hire is an imbicile. It's because a team without a QB is like a race car without a steering wheel. It doesn't matter how great the tires are or the engine or the transmission. 

[HessStation]

Just read bitonti logic, need to take a long jog to sweat it back out. 

[Joe Jets fan]

8 minutes ago, bitonti said:

Honestly they should be drafting a QB in rd 1 every year until they find one. That's how dire the situation is with the Jets QB and how little the other position matter on this dumpster fire of a team.  

The team fires a coach and a GM every few years cause they can't find a QB. Not because every coach they hire is an imbicile. It's because a team without a QB is like a race car without a steering wheel. It doesn't matter how great the tires are or the engine or the transmission. 

Sorry, drafting sh*tty QB after shift QB is a stupid idea.  If there is no QB worth drafting at 6 you don't do it. 

Drafting a sh*t QB early will get you fired faster then anything else.  

You need a day one starting player and a damn good one. 

[SickJetFan]

4 minutes ago, HessStation said:

Just read bitonti logic, need to take a long jog to sweat it back out. 

now thats funny....

[UntouchableCrew]

Adams is a stud and will be one of the best safeties in the league for 10+ years. I'm on record, I want him. He's the next Brian Dawkins.

[bitonti]

52 minutes ago, Joe Jets fan said:

Sorry, drafting sh*tty QB after shift QB is a stupid idea.  If there is no QB worth drafting at 6 you don't do it. 

Drafting a sh*t QB early will get you fired faster then anything else.  

You need a day one starting player and a damn good one. 

 

No one knows if a QB is sh*tty before they are drafted. It's the hardest position to scout and even guys like Bill Walsh drafted their Giovanni Carmazi's over the years 

We do know if a QB is sh*tty after the draft, which is where we are with Hackenberg. Anyone who can't climb over Geno Smith on a depth chart is dead to me. 

[Lil Woody]

3 hours ago, bitonti said:

No one knows if a QB is sh*tty before they are drafted. It's the hardest position to scout and even guys like Bill Walsh drafted their Giovanni Carmazi's over the years 

We do know if a QB is sh*tty after the draft, which is where we are with Hackenberg. Anyone who can't climb over Geno Smith on a depth chart is dead to me. 

So Hack didn't climb over anyone in a year where he was essentially an afterthought by our horrible coaches and was pre-determined to have a redshirt year -  a year where he wasn't ever going to be worked with as a prospect because the geniuses at the controls felt it was a smart idea to wait until the offseason to work with him on his mechanics. 

Your problem is with the QB though. Because he didn't climb the depth chart and because he didn't "beat out" Geno? 

[Toua77]

On 4/9/2017 at 11:17 AM, pointman said:

Pryor sucks. We need a safety. Adams doesn't cover though. And his 40 time wasn't so quick until he had a pro day with his own people clocking him.

This is so wrong it's not even funny. If he didn't cover people wouldn't be projecting him as high as #3 to the Bears in the first place.

[Lil Woody]

8 minutes ago, Toua77 said:

This is so wrong it's not even funny. If he didn't cover people wouldn't be projecting him as high as #3 to the Bears in the first place.

Agreed. I don't want a safety at 6 in any way, but Adams can cover. His limitation is his speed. I am not a big believer in pro day 40s, but I also know the Indy track yields slower results than most tracks, but it IS a constant to compare players against. Him not breaking 4.5 at Indy is a red flag on speed that people were already considering questionable before the combine. I'm sure he did improve his time from Indy with more practice time to learn how to be a better track and field style runner. and he may have had some assists in the timers.  The truth is usually somewhere in the middle. Questions about his agility to flip his hips and recover deep on long balls were a concern and concerns on him lacking range while playing deep middle were also raised. But as a man coverage safety vs TEs...nope, no issue there. He's definitely got that skillset.

If we traded down, I'd be fine taking him, but at 6? No thanks.

[Toua77]

On 4/7/2017 at 4:59 PM, bitonti said:

i agree with the original opinion. He's fast but not all that physically impressive. And his game of tackling and hard hits that's not the league anymore really. Hooker is taller and more relevant to the modern game. Jamal Adams top 10-15 but not top 5 wouldn't be all that shocking 

How?

Adams lines up everywhere on the field. Can play in the box and not get washed out, step up in run support, can handle TE's and WR's passed off to him, can play single high, can man up on TE's and WR's in the slot. He was the #3 rated slot corner in college football last year. I give Hooker an advantage as a center fielder, but its by far not some ridiculous gap in talent.

I'd argue he's more fit for the 'modern game' more than Hooker. The NFL is more of an underneath passing game. Somebody that can handle all of that without a hitch is extremely valuable with guys like Collins, Chancellor, Berry playing similar roles around the league. If anything Hooker is that 'classic' deep safety, because he's not playing in the box with his thin build, and there could be issues if teams gameplan for him to step up and play run support. I haven't seen evidence that Hooker can take on all of these responsibilities yet either (though he looks athletic enough to do it). I feel that teams will be able to easiser remove Hooker's presence from the game if they can bait his aggressiveness and use his weakness in run support to their advantage more than mitigating Adams from doing all of what he does.

[thadude]

Adams isn't as bad as Pryor is at covering people.  Pryor couldn't cover me.  He just isn't great at coverage.  Adams' main issue is covering on deep routes and NFL offensive coordinators will know how to exploit this

 

Troy Polumalu wasn't even taken as a top 6 pick he was 16th overall

 

[bitonti]

13 hours ago, Toua77 said:

How?

Adams lines up everywhere on the field. Can play in the box and not get washed out, step up in run support, can handle TE's and WR's passed off to him, can play single high, can man up on TE's and WR's in the slot. He was the #3 rated slot corner in college football last year. I give Hooker an advantage as a center fielder, but its by far not some ridiculous gap in talent.

I'd argue he's more fit for the 'modern game' more than Hooker. The NFL is more of an underneath passing game. Somebody that can handle all of that without a hitch is extremely valuable with guys like Collins, Chancellor, Berry playing similar roles around the league. If anything Hooker is that 'classic' deep safety, because he's not playing in the box with his thin build, and there could be issues if teams gameplan for him to step up and play run support. I haven't seen evidence that Hooker can take on all of these responsibilities yet either (though he looks athletic enough to do it). I feel that teams will be able to easiser remove Hooker's presence from the game if they can bait his aggressiveness and use his weakness in run support to their advantage more than mitigating Adams from doing all of what he does.

 

no coach is telling the front office they need a top 10 pick to stop the underneath bullsh*t 

but I could see a coach asking for someone to keep the top on the defense 

especially when a guy like John Ross breaks the combine record and probably goes top 10. 

Hooker is the antidote to guys like Ross

No disrespect to Adams but it's the 80 yard bombs teams would use a high pick to stop not the 3 yard TE screens. 

[Komba]

1 minute ago, bitonti said:

no coach is telling the front office they need a top 10 pick to stop the underneath bullsh*t 

but I could see a coach asking for someone to keep the top on the defense 

especially when a guy like John Ross breaks the combine record and probably goes top 10. 

Hooker is the antidote to guys like Ross

No disrespect to Adams but it's the 80 yard bombs teams would use a high pick to stop not the 3 yard TE screens. 

Hooker is so flawed... He doesn't love to tackle people (which I can't think of any great safety having that trait) he's had two significant surgeries despite not having a ton of wear and tear.  He takes awful angles at times although he has great linear speed.

Adams is twitchy as hell (just more athletic than Pryor was/is) so I really don't get that comparison.  

[thadude]

2 hours ago, bitonti said:

no coach is telling the front office they need a top 10 pick to stop the underneath bullsh*t 

but I could see a coach asking for someone to keep the top on the defense 

especially when a guy like John Ross breaks the combine record and probably goes top 10. 

Hooker is the antidote to guys like Ross

No disrespect to Adams but it's the 80 yard bombs teams would use a high pick to stop not the 3 yard TE screens. 

Didn't we already blow a first round pick on Kyle Wilson because he was so great at covering underneath routes?