Scott Van Pelt Just Asked

[RutgersJetFan]

9 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

I think the compounding mistakes over time can easily cloud our view of a current pick.  Just because we've failed miserably in the past to build the roster doesn't make THIS pick a bad one, necessarily.  The Leonard Williams pick was a good one too.  I noticed you didn't list him amongst the failures, even though you disliked the pick at the time. 

Now, I DO buy the idea that we should have tried like hell to move down, and can't understand the logic that says there were no trade partners available.  But Adams is going to be an excellent player, and we need as many of those as we can get.  Sadly, it's been impossible for this regime, and previous ones, to get excellent players without using premium picks on them.  And even then we still end up with Gholston's and Dee Milliner's. 

It's a frustrating history for sure.  But I'm not pissed at this pick. 

Viewing things in the aggregate is most certainly not clouding. 

[Dcat]

Just now, Jetsfan80 said:

Do you really discount the possibility we can't be the worst team in the NFL next year?  No trade ups needed if you're # 1. 

Bowles will win one or two games too many.  Watch the Patriots fold in week 17 (after having locked up playoffs home-field advantage 2 -3 weeks earlier), giving the Jets a win that removes them from last place.  The ultimate slap in the face by Belichick.

[Jetsfan80]

3 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Viewing things in the aggregate is most certainly not clouding. 

"Clouding" was the wrong word.  This regime sucks, no doubt about it.  But they've made 2 solid picks.  Leonard Williams and now Jamal Adams.  Probably blind squirrel moments but they're still solid choices. 

The trade down argument in reaction to the Adams pick, however, is absolutely legitimate.  If a solid trade down was available to us (which there most likely was), that absolutely should have been "Choice A" with Adams being "Choice B". 

But there's no doubt in my mind that if we were going to pick anyone at 6, Adams was the right guy. 

[The Crusher]

40 minutes ago, Klecko73isGod said:

 

If Jamal Adams makes it to the Hall of Fame, Tom Shane will be calling him a bust on JN on the day of his induction. 

If we haven't won a Lombardi yet so will I. 

[Jetsfan80]

3 minutes ago, Dcat said:

Bowles will win one or two games too many.  Watch the Patriots fold in week 17 (after having locked up playoffs home-field advantage 2 -3 weeks earlier), giving the Jets a win that removes them from last place.  The ultimate slap in the face by Belichick.

Jimmy Garoppolo can beat us throwing to Danny Amendola and Dwayne Allen.  Have no fear. 

[RutgersJetFan]

1 minute ago, Jetsfan80 said:

"Clouding" was the wrong word.  This regime sucks, no doubt about it.  But they've made 2 solid picks.  Leonard Williams and now Jamal Adams.  Probably blind squirrel moments but they're still solid choices. 

The trade down argument in reaction to the Adams pick, however, is absolutely legitimate.  If a solid trade down was available to us (which there most likely was), that absolutely should have been "Choice A" with Adams being "Choice B". 

But there's no doubt in my mind that if we were going to pick anyone at 6, Adams was the right guy. 

Sounds great. Unfortunately the roster still looks as devoid of talent at all the positions that matter the day after we just selected sixth overall. We can try to rationalize that with an infinite amount of narratives, but it doesn't change that reality. That's bad. 

[Jetsfan80]

2 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Sounds great. Unfortunately the roster still looks as devoid of talent at all the positions that matter the day after we just selected sixth overall. We can try to rationalize that with an infinite amount of narratives, but it doesn't change that reality. That's bad. 

The roster sucks.  The pick was good.  The former was going to be the case regardless of who we picked.  We have every right to b*tch, I just don't find much of a reason to hate this one particular pick. 

[The Crusher]

11 minutes ago, Dcat said:

Meanwhile, Buffalo and Cleveland, by trading back, each have TWO 2018 1st round picks. Unless the Jets wind up with the worst record in the NFL, either of those teams will be able to move in front of the Jets to get the unicorn.  Those two teams getting a pair of extra 1st rounders puts a real dent in the "Fold for Darnold" theory.

Yeah but we got the safety in the draft. So their eventual blue chip franchise QBs will be pretty be much neutralized when they play us.  

[roscoeword]

I don't know anything about college football, so somebody please explain why this pick is different than the Calvin Pryor pick, another "hard hitting" safety, a poor selection especially since we need cover guys. 

[RutgersJetFan]

26 minutes ago, HessStation said:

If you consider them sucking next year anyway (which...thumbs up btw) and that they didn't waste it on a QB, I'm not really in a position to bitch about it too much. 

"At least we didn't draft X" seems to be a running theme for this board every April. Can't say that's a good place to be in on a consistent basis.

[CTM]

4 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

The roster sucks.  The pick was good.  The former was going to be the case regardless of who we picked.  We have every right to b*tch, I just don't find much of a reason to hate this one particular pick. 

How have you already lumped this pick in with Williams as a good pick? 

 

[Beerfish]

The fact is that teams that have to draft a play making safety in 2017 when the play making 1st round safety they drafted in 2014 is a big bag of fail you kind of end up spinning your wheels.

The play making olb pick we pick early next year to replace the bag of fail non play making LB we drafted last year could be inconvenient as well.

The play making QB we draft this year or next to replace the bag of fail 2nd round play making Qb we drafted last year may hurt as well.

And we will still be with out a play making TE, LT, CB, WR, RB

[T0mShane]

49 minutes ago, Klecko73isGod said:

 

If Jamal Adams makes it to the Hall of Fame, Tom Shane will be calling him a bust on JN on the day of his induction. 

Oh looky there it only took Klecko 9 hours to put Adams in the Hall of Fame.

[RutgersJetFan]

5 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

The roster sucks.  The pick was good.  The former was going to be the case regardless of who we picked.  We have every right to b*tch, I just don't find much of a reason to hate this one particular pick. 

Any objective observation of the position we selected shouldn't be considered hate or bitching. Adams sounds like a great player and I'm happy he's a leader of men. 

[Klecko73isGod]

Just now, T0mShane said:

Oh looky there it only took Klecko 9 hours to put Adams in the Hall of Fame.

What part of the word "if" do you not understand? 

 

This, after I defended you? You ungrateful SOB. 

[Jetsfan80]

2 minutes ago, CTM said:

How have you already lumped this pick in with Williams as a good pick? 

 

The Williams' pick was viewed as a consensus solid pick at the time, where the guy fell to us in somewhat surprising fashion, and turned out to be a solid player.  Adams is going the same route in my mind.  It's possible for a pick to be a good one before he's played a single down.

[Jolot]

46 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

It's nice and all that Gruden likes the pick and all the blog experts like Adams. Great. But, there is a context here; the Jets have used two of their last four first rounders on safeties. A talentless team with no prospects at the most important positions in football has used two of four first rounders on safeties. And one of those picks was the sixth overall. 

This is just stuff that consistently competitive franchises don't do. You have to fill positions that matter first, and it doesn't seem like the Jets ever have any interest in doing that no matter who is in charge. Three of their last four first rounders have been two safeties and an ILB. I mean come on, are we really praising this crap? 

Agreed 100% , great points ...I feel the same way , while Adams looks like a solid pick, it's hard to call out fans as complainers who watch us draft Defense every single year for almost a decade with not a lot of results . 

[RedBeardedSavage]

56 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

It's nice and all that Gruden likes the pick and all the blog experts like Adams. Great. But, there is a context here; the Jets have used two of their last four first rounders on safeties. A talentless team with no prospects at the most important positions in football has used two of four first rounders on safeties. And one of those picks was the sixth overall. 

This is just stuff that consistently competitive franchises don't do. You have to fill positions that matter first, and it doesn't seem like the Jets ever have any interest in doing that no matter who is in charge. Three of their last four first rounders have been two safeties and an ILB. I mean come on, are we really praising this crap? 

I'd rather hit than bust.  Adams is safe.  For a roster this bad, I'm happy with that today.  

[drsamuel84]

I know a lot of fans are mad that we took yet another defensive player with the first pick but I don't think it's fair to grade this pick based on that history.  If we just look at Macc's tenure, two of the three first rd. picks (Leo and now Adams) were basically seen as can't miss best players in the draft who happened to fall to us.  So in my opinion, not taking those players would've been the bigger mistake.  You could argue the Darron Lee pick but even so, if you look at some of the players drafted after Lee you had:

-Will Fuller: Flamed out after a good start, jury is still out

-Josh Doctson: Barely saw the field and has major injury concerns going forward

-Laquon Treadwell: Didn't do much either as a rookie

-William Jackson III:   Didn't see the field

-Artie Burns: Solid CB at a position of need, could def. argue this one but it's very debatable

 

I think you get the point we didn't miss out on any players significantly better that who we took and can we give Mac credit for resisting that temptation to draft for need in rd. 1?   With the Jets roster, in rd. 1 we needed to go BPA and I think in Macc's tenure so far we've done that in the first rd. which is all you can really ask for.  We're building a solid young foundation.  Also, arguing about trading down is such a moot point cause you have no idea what Macc was really offered, I think once the Bears moved up for Trubisky we lost a lot of the leverage we may have had in trading that pick.

 

[RutgersJetFan]

6 minutes ago, RedBeardedSavage said:

I'd rather hit than bust.  Adams is safe.  For a roster this bad, I'm happy with that today.  

Well not all of us have that type of freedom, Tormund. 

[RedBeardedSavage]

3 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Well not all of us have that type of freedom, Tormund. 

I find your lack of faith disturbing.  

[RutgersJetFan]

3 minutes ago, RedBeardedSavage said:

I find your lack of faith disturbing.  

[RedBeardedSavage]

[CTM]

36 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

The Williams' pick was viewed as a consensus solid pick at the time, where the guy fell to us in somewhat surprising fashion, and turned out to be a solid player.  Adams is going the same route in my mind.  It's possible for a pick to be a good one before he's played a single down.

Is the pick still good if Mahomes is legit? Not that I'm arguing for that scenario, but it seems you are basing your judgement on the more often than not incorrect media and fanboy draft guru industry having him slotted a couple of spots higher. Given lower positional value of S, I'd think he needs to be an all pro level player to warrant his draft slot, no? So it may be a safe pick in terms of a higher floor, but coming away with an average player in low positional value spot at 6 is a waste, so not so safe ?

Further his combine drills were underwhelming which could indicate a lack of necessary athleticism to be truly special. Ya ya, I know,  "intangibles", Crusher has off the charts intangibles but it doesn't mean I'd want the fat bastard patrolling center field for my team.

I don't have an alternate suggestion really (other than obligatory trade down), I don't hate the pick, seems like a good kid at a position of need but I'm not sure how you've already labeled it as "good"

[Jetsfan80]

5 minutes ago, CTM said:

Is the pick still good if Mahomes is legit? Not that I'm arguing for that scenario, but it seems you are basing your judgement on the more often than not incorrect media and fanboy draft guru industry having him slotted a couple of spots higher. Given lower positional value of S, I'd think he needs to be an all pro level player to warrant his draft slot, no? So it may be a safe pick in terms of a higher floor, but coming away with an average player in low positional value spot at 6 is a waste, so not so safe ?

Further his combine drills were underwhelming which could indicate a lack of necessary athleticism to be truly special. Ya ya, I know,  "intangibles", Crusher has off the charts intangibles but it doesn't mean I'd want the fat bastard patrolling center field for my team.

I don't have an alternate suggestion really, I don't hate the pick, seems like a good kid at a position of need but I'm not sure how you've already labeled it as "good"

He just strikes me as a solid football player, and he certainly comes from an LSU program that has developed solid NFL players, particularly in the secondary.  If he ends up one of the top safeties in the NFL as he appears to be very capable of becoming, as well as being the QB of our defense, it would be hard to argue with the pick.  I can understand balking at the idea of taking him in the Top 10, but safeties HAVE increased in value over time.  Even Sean Taylor was viewed as a successful pick before his untimely death, no?

One of the QB's would certainly have been interesting, but they're highly risky too.  I would have certainly liked trading down a few spots and grabbing one much better than, say, the Hackenberg pick.  But those aren't anything close to polished prospects. 

Trading down was "Option A" in my mind, and we SHOULD have been able to make a move.  But if Adams is to be considered our consolation prize, he's a very good one. 

[CTM]

1 minute ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

Trading down was "Option A" in my mind, and we SHOULD have been able to make a move.  But if Adams is to be considered our consolation prize, he's a very good one. 

all i'm saying is that the jury is out on that ..

[HessStation]

59 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

"At least we didn't draft X" seems to be a running theme for this board every April. Can't say that's a good place to be in on a consistent basis.

Actually no, they drafted the BPA dude. There's a million unknown scenarios but they could take Rosen 4th overall next year he could end up better than Mahomes or Watson and Adams could be a perennial pro bowler. There was no clear cut offensive player there. They also had to play w the cards dealt. 

[RutgersJetFan]

3 minutes ago, HessStation said:

Actually no, they drafted the BPA dude. There's a million unknown scenarios but they could take Rosen 4th overall next year he could end up better than Mahomes or Watson and Adams could be a perennial pro bowler. There was no clear cut offensive player there. They also had to play w the cards dealt. 

Eh, we're always playing the cards that we are dealt, and every year I am told why that was the right way to go by the brilliance of blog addicted internet people. And yet, we have quite possibly the worst roster in the league. Might be time for the Jets to try something else.

[HessStation]

7 minutes ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Eh, we're always playing the cards that we are dealt, and every year I am told why that was the right way to go by the brilliance of blog addicted internet people. And yet, we have quite possibly the worst roster in the league. Might be time for the Jets to try something else.

They've also done the QB reach thing 1, 4 and 8 years ago.

[phill1c]

11 hours ago, The Crusher said:

OMG I wish. But it's not simple. It's really hard. I live outside DC and try to root for the Wizards and Capitals. Decent enough franchises. But I really don't care. My fanship lives and dies with this godawful cursed inguinal hernia of a franchise. So no, it's not simple. 

Clearly, you're addicted.

Seek help...Root for the Patriots. Oh wait, you couldn't rationally bitch and whine at every opportunity about them.

[JetFanatic]

1 hour ago, drsamuel84 said:

I know a lot of fans are mad that we took yet another defensive player with the first pick but I don't think it's fair to grade this pick based on that history.  If we just look at Macc's tenure, two of the three first rd. picks (Leo and now Adams) were basically seen as can't miss best players in the draft who happened to fall to us.  So in my opinion, not taking those players would've been the bigger mistake.  You could argue the Darron Lee pick but even so, if you look at some of the players drafted after Lee you had:

-Will Fuller: Flamed out after a good start, jury is still out

-Josh Doctson: Barely saw the field and has major injury concerns going forward

-Laquon Treadwell: Didn't do much either as a rookie

-William Jackson III:   Didn't see the field

-Artie Burns: Solid CB at a position of need, could def. argue this one but it's very debatable

 

I think you get the point we didn't miss out on any players significantly better that who we took and can we give Mac credit for resisting that temptation to draft for need in rd. 1?   With the Jets roster, in rd. 1 we needed to go BPA and I think in Macc's tenure so far we've done that in the first rd. which is all you can really ask for.  We're building a solid young foundation.  Also, arguing about trading down is such a moot point cause you have no idea what Macc was really offered, I think once the Bears moved up for Trubisky we lost a lot of the leverage we may have had in trading that pick.

 

I absolutely agree with this.  If you look at that draft after the Lee pick I still think he was probably the best pick at that spot.  Next year will be very telling, but I think he takes a major step forward with a revamped Wilkerson and a Leo with another year under his belt to help make his job easier.  Scary.  

[Jet Life]

Gruden stinks, but hes right here. Adams is the best pick of the draft.

[RutgersJetFan]

46 minutes ago, HessStation said:

They've also done the QB reach thing 1, 4 and 8 years ago.

I mean granted NFL GM'ing is only a hobby of mine so I may be out of my element here, but I don't think the only alternative to drafting bad quarterbacks is to just draft DL and DBs.

[SMC]

3 hours ago, RutgersJetFan said:

It's nice and all that Gruden likes the pick and all the blog experts like Adams. Great. But, there is a context here; the Jets have used two of their last four first rounders on safeties. A talentless team with no prospects at the most important positions in football has used two of four first rounders on safeties. And one of those picks was the sixth overall. 

This is just stuff that consistently competitive franchises don't do. You have to fill positions that matter first, and it doesn't seem like the Jets ever have any interest in doing that no matter who is in charge. Three of their last four first rounders have been two safeties and an ILB. I mean come on, are we really praising this crap? 

While other teams draft QBs in the first round, the Jets draft safeties.  Yes, Adams is a good prospect, but he doesn't move the needle.  As we all know, QBs are so overvalued because of their disproportionate impact on wins and losses.

BTW, the last offensive player drafting by the Jets in the 1st round was Mark Sanchez 8 years ago.  The Jets have drafted defense 8 straight years and have made the playoffs only twice in that span.  At least they had a top 10 defense 5 times in that span.

[phill1c]

1 minute ago, SMC said:

While other teams draft QBs in the first round, the Jets draft safeties.

The fact that these teams are in a position to draft a QB in the first round kinda says that they aren't really all that worthy of praise.

And, my god, the massive REACH for Trubisky?! We've been there and done that already [Sanchez].