Jump to content

Jets Shopping Sheldon...Again


southtown24th

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, HessStation said:

There's been no on field issues with Richardson since he's been here other than being taken out of position. On the field he's played harder than Wilkerson. He's had one off field issue separate from Mo. Besides that all other Off field issues have been in inclusion WITH Mo, unless you want to be one of those fans overreacting to his media driven spout with Marshall or where all the bitches at tweet....which is much to do about nothing.  

And my original point is clear, that all on field issues started when they resigned Mo instead of SNacKs pushing the better athlete and player, Richardson to the outside so Mo could half ass it all year. I have yet to see Richardson dog it on the field.

Also, Richardson at his best is on a different level than Wilkerson at his best. 

No way. Mo is 300lbs and can rush the passer from the outside. He's rare. There are athletic interior guys like Sheldon that come out every year now. Mo just happens to be a dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply
31 minutes ago, HessStation said:

Player comparison via stats (Although a decent benchmark, obv only one piece of a serious evaluation) 

 

First 2 years (roughly same amount of playing time at same position)

Wilkerson: 8 sacks, 71 Tackles, 47 asst

Richardson: 11 1/2 sacks, 84 tackles, 59 asst

2015: 

Wilkerson: 12 sacks in 16 games

Richardson: 5 sacks in 10 games playing most out of position and off suspension

2016:

Both were horrible one coming off injury and one playing OLB full time

 

...so the closest comparison you can make is in their first two years prior to other variables at play, Richardson was the better player on paper. Mo has two more seasons on Sheldon, but really, the biggest issue is evaluation of Sheldon after 2014 when he was taken out of his natural position, when usually a players 3rd year will be their break out. 

 

To note, you can make an argument for either, I can see that, however you can't make one for Mo in terms of age and questionable motor at times. Something I'd give both the advantage to Sheldon.

 

But if you want to look at 13' and 15' and say that's something Richardson hasn't done, touche. I'll argue he's never had the chance after his first two seasons per scheme. Some of it self inflicted too with suspension but that's maturity and not like Mo has been a staple of security and leadership. 

What about 2014 when Wilk had 10 sacks?

And look, I agree its not like Wilkerson is better in a landslide, but in my opinion when everything is laid out, hes a more valuable, and less risky player then richardson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

No way. Mo is 300lbs and can rush the passer from the outside. He's rare. There are athletic interior guys like Sheldon that come out every year now. Mo just happens to be a dog.

I think that's a good point. 

But I just feel like Richardson, if played at the right position, would be the more disruptive force on the field. 

On paper, Mo is the more unique skill set. 

To others, the stats argument is convoluted for reasons stated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Bleedin Green said:

You making excuses for Sheldon is not a strawman simply because I refuse to accept them.

And no, that would have changed absolutely nothing.  They would still be stupid to trust that dumbass with a big contract, even if they hadn't done so with Mo.  You're the one blinded by making this entire argument about Mo and nothing else, but the connection you're making there is pointless.

So moving a player who played at an All Pro level in just his second year, to a completely new position in years 3 and 4 isn't a good excuse? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fantasy Island said:

Richardson has to much baggage.  Mo has too little desire to play now that he is paid. (see: Revis)

Jerry will give us a 3rd for Potsy.  Let's make the deal and try to draft offense in the next draft.

Just want to say this is probably best case scenario but still pisses me off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, HessStation said:

So moving a player who played at an All Pro level in just his second year, to a completely new position in years 3 and 4 isn't a good excuse? 

 

 

It was a fair argument for 2015, but simply wasn't true for 2016.  It's also a bit Chad-esque to start assigning achievements that were never actually received (i.e., All Pro).  Keep in mind, I've never said he's a bad player, or anything close to that, but he's simply not worth all of the risk that comes along with him.

More importantly than anything though, why do we have to fight like this?  It cuts so deep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BCJet said:

Not to allow facts to get in the way, and yes I agree sheldon has occasionally played out of position, but Wilkerson has 40 career sacks, and 2 double-digit sack seasons (10 and 12.5).  Richardson has 18 careers sacks, with a high of 8.  How exactly is he a better player then Mo?

Secondly, there have been a lot of lockerroom issues with Sheldon.  Yes Mo missed a meeting, and has apparently not been ideal behind the scenes, but why would we not say sheldon has been equally disruptive off the field with his brandon marshall feud, etc?  Neither of them are choir boys, but I just dont see how we would take the risk of sheldon with the league suspensions over keeping Mo.

"Occasionally played out of position" - 2 years at LB is a long occasion. 

Also, I agree with your sentiment on keeping Mo. He had a down year after a bad injury, let him bounce back this year. Unfortunately the decision to deal Sheldon isn't based on talent, if it was we'd have Williams & Sheldon, it's based on his behavior.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Bleedin Green said:

It was a fair argument for 2015, but simply wasn't true for 2016.  It's also a bit Chad-esque to start assigning achievements that were never actually received (i.e., All Pro).  Keep in mind, I've never said he's a bad player, or anything close to that, but he's simply not worth all of the risk that comes along with him.

More importantly than anything though, why do we have to fight like this?  It cuts so deep.

Basically I'm right and you're wrong and I'm just trying to do this as gently as possible. Bc ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, HessStation said:

Plus... by the time they might have a good qb who's ready Mo will be 330 lbs and retiring 

While I appreciate the optimism, it seems more likely that by that time, none of us will any longer exist to watch the real-life Cyberball that led to the Jets next good QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bgivs21 said:

"Occasionally played out of position" - 2 years at LB is a long occasion. 

Also, I agree with your sentiment on keeping Mo. He had a down year after a bad injury, let him bounce back this year. Unfortunately the decision to deal Sheldon isn't based on talent, if it was we'd have Williams & Sheldon, it's based on his behavior.  

I don't think he played as much LB as people say:

Tracking Sheldon

A look at Sheldon Richardson's snap counts by position during his past three seasons with the New York Jets.

POSITION 2014 2015 2016
Right/left end 317 235 387
Right/left tackle 390 180 231
Outside linebacker 43 158 76
Inside linebacker 18 24 11
Nose tackle 9 6 27

I do think he played less 3-tech which is the actual issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, #27TheDominator said:

I don't think he played as much LB as people say:

Tracking Sheldon

A look at Sheldon Richardson's snap counts by position during his past three seasons with the New York Jets.

POSITION 2014 2015 2016
Right/left end 317 235 387
Right/left tackle 390 180 231
Outside linebacker 43 158 76
Inside linebacker 18 24 11
Nose tackle 9 6 27

I do think he played less 3-tech which is the actual issue.

Good point on 3tech and from what I can remember even in Rex's 3-4 scheme, Richardson was still able to play mostly as a 3 not 5, contrary to popular belief.

Per data, I'd keep in mind how they're denfining where he's lining up. Right/left end I presume is he's still an outside 7 but w his hand in the dirt vs OLB where he's probably standing up. Bottom line he's playing C gap vs a B, where he should be. Trying to think back I also presume NT was on 3rd and longs Nickle and dimes. Similar what they tried doing w Coples in Rex years. That right/left tackle is probably the only time he was playing as a 3 or 5 or the inside B gap.

plus theres alignment vs gap responsibilities which Bowles is "suppose to be" known for. Even aligned on inside he'd kick out once the ball was snapped, via fuzzy memory though.

to put a guy that size, even with his skill set, outside the OT's shoulder, even on stunts was hard to freaking watch.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...