"Mike Maccagnan reports the phone is ringing off the hook for the #6 pick"

[Sperm Edwards]

On 4/28/2017 at 11:16 AM, Vader said:

After reading through the thread the big mistake you are making is assuming that "at least the same offer" that was offered the Bills, was offered to the Jets. 

There is no evidence that happened.

Moreover, it's an unlikely scenario because of + cost to move up the additional 4 spots, likely for a target that the trading team assessed could be acquired for less.

Additionally the countervailing pressure: Adams is a consensus elite prospect that fell into our laps, qualifying as bona fide steal territory, and ONLY BECAUSE of a kink in the machinery of draft determinism at picks 2-3. Adams didn't tumble because of character concerns or injury or lack of productivity, or a bad combine. 

Sometimes the optimal move is not to get cute and do too much. In this case Mac did the optimal thing.

Again, there is zero evidence that the Jets were offered the same trade down scenario as the bills. Just because we drafted higher, doesn't mean we would have received "at least" the same offer (which implies the bounty might have been even richer).

In fact, the contrary is true. The additional cost to move up higher would have been a mitigating factor to a deal offer, with the plus countervailing pressure of an elite prospect as the BATNA.

there is no question from negotiating theory the jets and bills scenarios are different and it's important to note that it is impossible to bake the conditions of the bills scenario into the jets scenario.

Hope this makes sense.

The mistake all his advocates are making is that they presume only other teams get called with these trade-down offers, except the Jets. It's always the Jets that are boxed into a corner and have to make a pick.

And your scenario is nonsense. If another team can move up to #6, while only giving up the compensation requisite for a move up to #10, they come out smelling like roses for getting extra value for free. It is not believable that only Maccagnan repeatedly gets no good trade offers. And if that nonsense is to be believed, then it's an even further negative reflection upon him.

[derp]

6 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It could also be a CYA excuse after the fact so he wouldn't get blamed for (yet again) failing to complete a trade.

On the possibility that it is true, then a good argument could be made that teams just don't call the Jets with offers due to Maccagnan's past history of outrageous/ludicrous demands and unwaivering lines in the sand that clearly no one would offer. They'd rather deal with other teams' GMs than try to get a square deal out of our GM.

One cannot deal with such an individual. Best to stay away from him and deal with someone else. I believe that is a good amount of what's been going on.

I unfortunately think this is on the money, and it's a shame if true because I think the Jets really could've done well if they moved down this year.

Also wonder if some of the desire to trade down and accumulate picks is lip service. If you want to move down you're going to have to drop and likely give up a desirable player, otherwise why would teams move up? Unless it's a DL the Jets have needs for good players all over the field.

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, j4jets said:

I bet if we were picking 2nd and were offered what Chicago offered 49ers, we'd pass on it and still select Jamal Adams. Thats Mac. Has no idea how to rebuild a team if he doesn't have $60 mil in cap space available. He does, however, know how hand out multi year significant deals to players and then cut them after a year or two while receiving no comp picks. We lucked into the Snacks comp pick. Maybe Mac can use his brain next time and pick up 2-3 comp picks? Or trade down 2-3 spots in the first and pick up even better draft picks? 

Absolutely.

The story is: Adams is a great, great pick and arguably the best value of player to slot-taken in the whole draft. Of course no one else would want this great player that badly, or recognize this great value, which is why no one else made any offer to get him. Even though he was the only defensive player taken until pick #11. So the next-best defensive player on the board was a good amount lower-ranked than Adams, yet we're to believe nobody wanted him badly enough to trade up.

It's a great story, if you like stories.

[Sperm Edwards]

24 minutes ago, derp said:

I unfortunately think this is on the money, and it's a shame if true because I think the Jets really could've done well if they moved down this year.

Also wonder if some of the desire to trade down and accumulate picks is lip service. If you want to move down you're going to have to drop and likely give up a desirable player, otherwise why would teams move up? Unless it's a DL the Jets have needs for good players all over the field.

I'd said before the draft, if they weren't going to grab a QB then it's indicative they're waiting on the position until next year (and will be giving Petty/Hackenberg their shot in '17). In that case, you want as much ammunition as possible for '18, and fill as many key positions as you could around the QB. I wouldn't have even cared if he got a bit less than chart value, and said that much as well before the draft.

This is ridiculous, that (yet again) because he didn't trade down it means there were positively no offers, yet there were good offers for those other teams that did desire to do so.

 

[SickJetFan]

2 hours ago, j4jets said:

I bet if we were picking 2nd and were offered what Chicago offered 49ers, we'd pass on it and still select Jamal Adams. Thats Mac. Has no idea how to rebuild a team if he doesn't have $60 mil in cap space available. He does, however, know how hand out multi year significant deals to players and then cut them after a year or two while receiving no comp picks. We lucked into the Snacks comp pick. Maybe Mac can use his brain next time and pick up 2-3 comp picks? Or trade down 2-3 spots in the first and pick up even better draft picks? 

I bet you have not showered in a month, have green sh*t oozing from unmentionable places, and have furry teddy bears growing out of your ears.

[Pointdexter]

4 minutes ago, derp said:

I unfortunately think this is on the money, and it's a shame if true because I think the Jets really could've done well if they moved down this year.

Also wonder if some of the desire to trade down and accumulate picks is lip service. If you want to move down you're going to have to drop and likely give up a desirable player, otherwise why would teams move up? Unless it's a DL the Jets have needs for good players all over the field.

This.

I'm sure I'm not the only person who heard Sal Pal report Live on ESPN that "macc's phone was ringing off the hook" for teams wanting the #6 pick.

Secondly,  the idea that SP just made this up as a fake report, in real time, is just asinine.  The moment was exciting enough, no need for made up reports.

No doubt in my mind SP was reporting the truth.

[nj meadowlands]

On 4/28/2017 at 3:02 PM, Sperm Edwards said:

The mistake all his advocates are making is that they presume only other teams get called with these trade-down offers, except the Jets. It's always the Jets that are boxed into a corner and have to make a pick.

And your scenario is nonsense. If another team can move up to #6, while only giving up the compensation requisite for a move up to #10, they come out smelling like roses for getting extra value for free. It is not believable that only Maccagnan repeatedly gets no good trade offers. And if that nonsense is to be believed, then it's an even further negative reflection upon him.

Is it possible to be disappointed that the Jets did not trade down for a king's ransom, and also be content with the pick / convinced they get the best available guy at the 6 spot? I think so.

[Matt39]

2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I'd said before the draft, if they weren't going to grab a QB then it's indicative they're waiting on the position until next year (and will be giving Petty/Hackenberg their shot in '17). In that case, you want as much ammunition as possible for '18, and fill as many positions as you could around the QB. I wouldn't have even cared if he got a bit less than chart value, and said that much as well before the draft.

This is ridiculous, that (yet again) because he didn't trade down it means there were positively no offers, yet there were good offers for those other teams that did desire to do so.

 

This is more a reflection of the regime, including Bowles. If I were to guess- Maccagnan's easily influenced by him and building "his" defense. If they werent going to pick a QB they had no choice but to trade down and gain another pick. But Deon Buchanon or whatever.

[Maxman]

7 hours ago, UntouchableCrew said:

 

Well, if Mac said "the phones ringing off the hook" when they were on the clock and then said "actually the phone wasn't really ringing" during the presser maybe, just MAYBE it was smokescreen to get one of the QB needy teams to call him.

I don't understand people making assumptions about things we'll never truly have the details on.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

 

This.

[derp]

6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I'd said before the draft, if they weren't going to grab a QB then it's indicative they're waiting on the position until next year (and will be giving Petty/Hackenberg their shot in '17). In that case, you want as much ammunition as possible for '18, and fill as many positions as you could around the QB. I wouldn't have even cared if he got a bit less than chart value, and said that much as well before the draft.

This is ridiculous, that (yet again) because he didn't trade down it means there were positively no offers, yet there were good offers for those other teams that did desire to do so.

 

What bothers me is that this is actually a perfect class to address some significant needs for the Jets and they're just not going to have enough picks to do it. Great depth at corner and safety for a secondary in shambles. Around 10 TE's who could probably start for a team with the worst TE situation in the league. They could've drafted six guys at those three positions alone in the first two days and been able to use all of them.

Plus this edge class isn't unreal at the top but is extraordinarily deep - maybe you're not getting an elite guy but it's an opportunity to find an OLB who can get after the QB instead of edge setters.

And still talent to be found at other positions - WR, ILB, RB, even a few OL. This was an opportunity to get a big infusion of talent. And it would've been nice if they had the flexibility to fill some big needs that fall right into the strength of the class but get multiple guys at those positions or grab someone you really like at another slot if he slips because you have a butt load of picks.

Even little things - I know the safeties are "interchangeable" but there's consistently been a more of a SS and more of a FS back there for years. Hopefully Adams is a stud at SS. This was a unique draft in that there are a number of quality FS prospects. Dudes with that skill set have historically been really hard to find. So are they going to miss out on that or are they going to draft two safeties in their first four picks? I don't love it either way. Much more palatable to get one of those guys if there are more picks. 

And maybe it's hard to get picks this year - but teams are clearly willing to give up future ones as well and if you need ammo to go get your QB next year.

At this point honestly I want projects. Get me corners who are going to struggle as rookies or the monster TE Shaheen from Ashland or Hodges who is basically a jumbo WR. Maybe a freaky edge athlete like Bowser. Even injured guys like Moreau, Jones, Butt. If this isn't going to be a draft where we get a big jumpstart on the rebuild let's draft guys who won't be ready and let the worst roster in the NFL work it's magic.

Can't wait to win a meaningless game week 17 and draft a corner no one thought was going to be on the board at #5 next year.

[Sperm Edwards]

18 minutes ago, nj meadowlands said:

Is it possible to be disappointed that the Jets did not trade down for a king's ransom, and also be content with the pick / convinced they get the best available guy at the 6 spot? I think so.

From everything I've read & heard, he's supposed to be a top-notch talent. But in the end, he's still just a safety. Agree to disagree if you like, which is fine, but I think safety is way down on the list of things this team needs, and is far easier to fill later in the draft (or in FA outright) than those other positions. 

[NoBowles]

21 minutes ago, nj meadowlands said:

Is it possible to be disappointed that the Jets did not trade down for a king's ransom, and also be content with the pick / convinced they get the best available guy at the 6 spot? I think so.

This is pretty much spot on with how I feel.

[nj meadowlands]

2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

From everything I've read & heard, he's supposed to be a top-notch talent. But in the end, he's still just a safety. Agree to disagree if you like, which is fine, but I think safety is way down on the list of things this team needs, and is far easier to fill later in the draft (or in FA outright) than those other positions. 

I don't think safety, or any position for that matter, is particularly "easy" to fill with a player of the caliber that Adams is projected as being.

I get your argument (and generally agree with it) regarding using the draft to take premium positions (QB, OT, CB, pass rusher), but there's not a single player any any of those positions that would have been nearly as impactful for the Jets, either in the short or long term, as Jamal Adams.  The fact that some of the major detractors of the pick here were stanning for Solomon Thomas, especially given our roster and what they say we "need", makes me wonder if ANYTHING would have satisfied them.

[Sperm Edwards]

4 minutes ago, derp said:

What bothers me is that this is actually a perfect class to address some significant needs for the Jets and they're just not going to have enough picks to do it. Great depth at corner and safety for a secondary in shambles. Around 10 TE's who could probably start for a team with the worst TE situation in the league. They could've drafted six guys at those three positions alone in the first two days and been able to use all of them.

Plus this edge class isn't unreal at the top but is extraordinarily deep - maybe you're not getting an elite guy but it's an opportunity to find an OLB who can get after the QB instead of edge setters.

And still talent to be found at other positions - WR, ILB, RB, even a few OL. This was an opportunity to get a big infusion of talent. And it would've been nice if they had the flexibility to fill some big needs that fall right into the strength of the class but get multiple guys at those positions or grab someone you really like at another slot if he slips because you have a butt load of picks.

Even little things - I know the safeties are "interchangeable" but there's consistently been a more of a SS and more of a FS back there for years. Hopefully Adams is a stud at SS. This was a unique draft in that there are a number of quality FS prospects. Dudes with that skill set have historically been really hard to find. So are they going to miss out on that or are they going to draft two safeties in their first four picks? I don't love it either way. Much more palatable to get one of those guys if there are more picks. 

And maybe it's hard to get picks this year - but teams are clearly willing to give up future ones as well and if you need ammo to go get your QB next year.

At this point honestly I want projects. Get me corners who are going to struggle as rookies or the monster TE Shaheen from Ashland or Hodges who is basically a jumbo WR. Maybe a freaky edge athlete like Bowser. Even injured guys like Moreau, Jones, Butt. If this isn't going to be a draft where we get a big jumpstart on the rebuild let's draft guys who won't be ready and let the worst roster in the NFL work it's magic.

Can't wait to win a meaningless game week 17 and draft a corner no one thought was going to be on the board at #5 next year.

They said last year that they only want 1st round picks who can contribute right away (as rookies). Seems more protective of their own jobs than being truly important, as they're going nowhere this year.

[Sperm Edwards]

 

10 minutes ago, nj meadowlands said:

I don't think safety, or any position for that matter, is particularly "easy" to fill with a player of the caliber that Adams is projected as being.

I get your argument (and generally agree with it) regarding using the draft to take premium positions (QB, OT, CB, pass rusher), but there's not a single player any any of those positions that would have been nearly as impactful for the Jets, either in the short or long term, as Jamal Adams.  The fact that some of the major detractors of the pick here were stanning for Solomon Thomas, especially given our roster and what they say we "need", makes me wonder if ANYTHING would have satisfied them.

I understand. I just feel that - particularly at a position like safety - the incremental between Adams and another good safety isn't worth nearly the windfall of compensation they bypassed by making the pick. He may be the right pick for a team with fewer holes at so many key positions, a solid starting QB, a solid offense in general, etc. The needs on this team suggest this is a luxury pick and/or one that favors the GM since his bust potential is lower.

To me, that defeats the point of having a career talent evaluator as the GM: that pooling of multiple high resources into one even-higher pick wouldn't be necessary to land good players.

[NJ]

Just now, Sperm Edwards said:

 

The incremental between Adams and another good safety isn't worth nearly the windfall of compensation they bypassed by making the pick.

Ta Da  ... meanwhile .. Adams will be playing an incredible Safety role as all teams we play pick apart our abysmal CB's.   

[Vader]

On 4/28/2017 at 3:02 PM, Sperm Edwards said:

The mistake all his advocates are making is that they presume only other teams get called with these trade-down offers, except the Jets. It's always the Jets that are boxed into a corner and have to make a pick.

And your scenario is nonsense. If another team can move up to #6, while only giving up the compensation requisite for a move up to #10, they come out smelling like roses for getting extra value for free. It is not believable that only Maccagnan repeatedly gets no good trade offers. And if that nonsense is to be believed, then it's an even further negative reflection upon him.

It's all about BATNA, Edwards. Bottom line.

It's THE question for any negotiator, regarding any possible deal.

but even more: There is no evidence that any such compelling alternative existed. None.

 

 

[derp]

18 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

They said last year that they only want 1st round picks who can contribute right away (as rookies). Seems more protective of their own jobs than being truly important, as they're going nowhere this year.

Oh yeah I was talking about forward in this draft. Obviously it's not always a day 2 priority (Hackenberg).

Best thing for their jobs is players developing and picks panning out. Late year progress from positions that develop slower might not be enough though.

The most immediate impact they'll get is probably from a RB, possibly an edge rusher. Curious if they do either. Also TE basically has to happen and would play immediately, wonder if they prioritize polish or upside. I'd prefer upside but they may want a plug and play guy which would be less preferable.

A Michael Roberts or Jeremy Sprinkle would be akin to Jenkins in the third LY, just not as good value I guess. Kittle would be a nice compromise of plug and play but freak athlete. None a great value today though.

[Sperm Edwards]

8 minutes ago, Vader said:

It's all about BATNA, Edwards. Bottom line.

It's THE question for any negotiator, regarding any possible deal.

but even more: There is no evidence that any such compelling alternative existed. None.

 

 

OK so we'll just go on believing that trade offers are only made to other teams that pick after us. There's never a trade to be had while this man is our GM. Go on believing that.

You don't find it a bit coincidental that, despite the team engaging in its 2nd rebuild in his 3rd year, the team has never made a trade involving any more than a 5th round pick?

Nobody wants the 6th pick, with the #2-rated prospect in the draft still available. They want the 10th pick instead, even if they could give up the same compensation to move up to #6.

[Sperm Edwards]

4 minutes ago, derp said:

Oh yeah I was talking about forward in this draft. Obviously it's not always a day 2 priority (Hackenberg).

Best thing for their jobs is players developing and picks panning out. Late year progress from positions that develop slower might not be enough though.

The most immediate impact they'll get is probably from a RB, possibly an edge rusher. Curious if they do either. Also TE basically has to happen and would play immediately, wonder if they prioritize polish or upside. I'd prefer upside but they may want a plug and play guy which would be less preferable.

A Michael Roberts or Jeremy Sprinkle would be akin to Jenkins in the third LY, just not as good value I guess. Kittle would be a nice compromise of plug and play but freak athlete. None a great value today though.

Ah, but the problem with a RB is they already have a crowded backfield (and don't exactly have a dominant OL). The problem with a TE is they have obvious issues in the player(s) delivering the ball to the TE. So he'd run the risk of drafting a solid player at either of those positions, but it would look like they were just meh. 

[j4jets]

2 hours ago, the Claw said:

But they weren't at 2, they were at 6. By pick two the board was already what no one was expecting and it easily may have effected the offers that teams were willing to present. There was a blue chip prospect at a position of need sitting right there.

We (read: you) have no idea what calls or offers came in, so your words, logic, and opinion on this matter are baseless. You may think or bet you know something, but when you don't have any info to base that on, you just end up sounding silly. You will likely lose your bet because there's a lot more scenarios where you're wrong than right.

Adams is going to be a solid player. Just be happy we got a great player.

When you get a lot of phone calls for a pick, chances are low ballers won't be on the line. This team did not need a safety at #6. It needed more ammunition. Mac has run this team to the ground. 

Speaking of scenarios, about the only scenario where you'll be right is if Jamal can be as good as advertised and lift the locker room morale. That's not an easy task. And many teams dropped down yesterday and picked plenty in exchange. There is always trade talk. Always. 

[derp]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Ah, but the problem with a RB is they already have a crowded backfield (and don't exactly have a dominant OL). The problem with a TE is they have obvious issues in the player(s) delivering the ball to the TE. So he'd run the risk of drafting a solid player at either of those positions, but it would look like they were just meh. 

To an extent most guys at this point are likely meh - but the only way you'll stumble into someone who makes an impact is if they have an opportunity. Those are two places I think there should be one and 

I actually agree RB would be a disappointment due to situation (OL and lack of passing game leading to stacked boxes) but I do think there's opportunity especially if it's someone who can play in the passing game. Not something I'd advocate but there opportunity to make a decent impact. A crowded spot but no clear cut lead talent and they could theoretically eat Forte's contract (I think).

The right TE won't make the Pro Bowl obviously but the opportunity is definitely there to waltz into a starting role (a-la Jenkins LY) and without Marshall there will be targets for the taking. Plus regardless of crappy QB you've either got a young one who could use a security blanket or McCown who loves the TE.

[Rangers9]

It's the player not the position. I'm all for trading down but this guy was too good to pass up. 

[j4jets]

1 hour ago, SickJetFan said:

I bet you have not showered in a month, have green sh*t oozing from unmentionable places, and have furry teddy bears growing out of your ears.

I bet your m*m told you that. 

[SickJetFan]

1 minute ago, j4jets said:

I bet your m*m told you that. 

your mom goes to college

[dcJet]

5 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don't have an answer as to individuals because I don't know these players. I don't claim such either, and all I'd be doing (like most do) is regurgitating others' opinions of the players.

I'm sure Adams will be a good player. That is beside the point. The point is the position itself is simply not as valuable as others.

Sure, a stud safety trumps a bust at another position (duh). But the strategy seems to be the team is gearing up for a major push for a QB next year. Fine by me. So since QB - unlike safety - is such a disproportionately important position, if you can pick up an extra 1st rounder next year you do it. Even more so since we'd still get to make a 1st round selection this year to boot. 

Ah, so you're a bean counter like Tanny.  That explains a lot of your posts today.

 

[Vader]

19 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

OK so we'll just go on believing that trade offers are only made to other teams that pick after us. There's never a trade to be had while this man is our GM. Go on believing that.

You don't find it a bit coincidental that, despite the team engaging in its 2nd rebuild in his 3rd year, the team has never made a trade involving any more than a 5th round pick?

Nobody wants the 6th pick, with the #2-rated prospect in the draft still available. They want the 10th pick instead, even if they could give up the same compensation to move up to #6.

this is all speculation on your part, i'm sure you know that. BTW -- existence of conversation/negotiation doesn't necessarily indicate a compelling alternative. Phones ringing off the hook is SOP. Everyone is sniffing everyone else's butt for mutuality and leverage.

To answer your speculative questions tho -- 

• No, no one is trading up for a safety in the top ten. extremely unlikely. The trades had been for QBs. More likely.
• I do find it coincidental re: rebuilds and resource accumulation, that the GM is opting to draft blue chip talent.  We don't know that there have been compelling offers. But what we are learning about is this GM's style of team building, and perhaps how he views singular more valuable blue chip talent (a blue chip prospect that has fallen to us (Williams / Adams)) vis a vis a more diluted array (trading down and accumulating picks). That idea of how to build deserves scrutiny. The decision to NOT DRAFT Adams there would have raised eyebrows among his peers in management, scouting, and the media.  

[j4jets]

27 minutes ago, SickJetFan said:

your mom goes to college

[Sperm Edwards]

On 4/28/2017 at 4:37 PM, Vader said:

this is all speculation on your part, i'm sure you know that. BTW -- existence of conversation/negotiation doesn't necessarily indicate a compelling alternative. Phones ringing off the hook is SOP. Everyone is sniffing everyone else's butt for mutuality and leverage.

To answer your speculative questions tho -- 

• No, no one is trading up for a safety in the top ten. extremely unlikely. The trades had been for QBs. More likely.
• I do find it coincidental re: rebuilds and resource accumulation, that the GM is opting to draft blue chip talent.  We don't know that there have been compelling offers. But what we are learning about is this GM's style of team building, and perhaps how he views singular more valuable blue chip talent (a blue chip prospect that has fallen to us (Williams / Adams)) vis a vis a more diluted array (trading down and accumulating picks). That idea of how to build deserves scrutiny. The decision to NOT DRAFT Adams there would have raised eyebrows among his peers in management, scouting, and the media.  

He has no "style" of team-building that's worth a damn.

He acquires a bunch of players he thinks are good prospects, whether they represent significant incremental improvements or not, and whether or not they match the other personnel.

He drafts players at positions we've already filled with young + proven talent, and at low-level positions more easily filled in later rounds and relatively cheaply in FA.

He reserves acquiring the highest-paid positions (the hardest ones to fill) with low-percentage picks and with has-been FAs.

He likes to bring in new players who are past their prime and who'll only be useful for 1 year +/- 1 year. 

The rest of his "style" of team building is to let players reach the end of their contracts, to the point where he's lost all negotiating leverage, at which point he loses the player or caves. So we pay $17m for Mo, $8m for Williams, and lose Snacks for the equivalent of a 5th round pick, and will lose Sheldon for around the same. Other teams extend their young players before they're painted into such a corner.

I can already see this pattern repeating itself with Enunwa, who should have been extended before the draft, when leverage was highest. Our upper hand will be lowered further in 2018. We'll lock him up between January-March of 2019, for 50-100% higher than it'd have been in March of 2017. 

[Vader]

On 4/28/2017 at 5:00 PM, Sperm Edwards said:

He has no "style" of team-building that's worth a damn.

He acquires a bunch of players he thinks are good prospects, whether they represent significant incremental improvements or not, and whether or not they match the other personnel.

He drafts players at positions we've already filled with young + proven talent, and at low-level positions more easily filled in later rounds and relatively cheaply in FA.

He reserves acquiring the highest-paid positions (the hardest ones to fill) with low-percentage picks and with has-been FAs.

He likes to bring in new players who are past their prime and who'll only be useful for 1 year +/- 1 year. 

The rest of his "style" of team building is to let players reach the end of their contracts, to the point where he's lost all negotiating leverage, at which point he loses the player or caves. So we pay $17m for Mo, $8m for Williams, and lose Snacks for the equivalent of a 5th round pick, and will lose Sheldon for around the same. Other teams extend their young players before they're painted into such a corner.

I can already see this pattern repeating itself with Enunwa, who should have been extended before the draft, when leverage was highest. Our upper hand will be lowered further in 2018. We'll lock him up between January-March of 2019, for 50-100% higher than it'd have been in March of 2017. 

fair points for sure. time will tell how it all shakes out.

[Larz]

So we are believing things gms say on draft day now?

Lol

[Sperm Edwards]

4 minutes ago, Vader said:

fair points for sure. time will tell how it all shakes out.

I think I know, but I would be thrilled to eat my words. Watching failure allows me the immense pleasure of complaining online (), but in all seriousness it'd be a far greater pleasure for me to see the team become a powerhouse and win a SB.

[NoBowles]

8 hours ago, SickJetFan said:

so now your putting words into Gruden mouth too

give me a break

I am not hero worship anyone - i think what is happening here is just the opposite from you...you have probably done this with every GM and head coach since beginning of time "sperm Edwards" tells it all

 

Actually, quite the contrary. Sperm was a HUGE Idzik fan and supporter. He raved about his moves and his plan and credited his drafts and moves. 

[SickJetFan]

6 minutes ago, NoBowles said:

Actually, quite the contrary. Sperm was a HUGE Idzik fan and supporter. He raved about his moves and his plan and credited his drafts and moves. 

Wow really.........now that actually makes some sense

[Vader]

36 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I think I know, but I would be thrilled to eat my words. Watching failure allows me the immense pleasure of complaining online (), but in all seriousness it'd be a far greater pleasure for me to see the team become a powerhouse and win a SB.

There're no words to eat. You speculate and theres hyperbole but ultimately it's largely unprovable.

You basically contend that the GM is malfeasant. 

While he seems to understand tactically how to optimize decision making for minimizing risk - esp top draft choices - I also think strategically - which is ur big beef here - the regime warrants a lot scrutiny.