Maccnificent

[bostonmajet]

2 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

I didn't see Sperm address this, so I will step up.  You don't have Mo's timeline right.  When Maccagnan took over the Jets had Mo on his 5th year option - $7M.  By that point, they could have easily traded him and knew it was coming to a head. He didn't break his leg until week 17.  They franchised him for 2016 and gave him a big deal anyway.  

I have responded that trading someone on his last year option is highly unlikely; it rarely happens - it wasn't like Mo was lighting it up anyway; once he broke his leg, it became almost impossible (so they never would have been able to trade him).

[Sperm Edwards]

48 minutes ago, rangerous said:

in all fairness, the injuries to smith are on the freakish side and you can almost say the same thing for mauldin. petty may yet turn into a decent back up or even starter and simon is on the practice suqad.  nothing to write home about but clearly better than the previous two idzik drafts. 

Lol okay. They were both doing just great up until then, right? IIRC Mauldin, in particular, was nearly cut. So even though he'd made the team, he got brownie points both for being a recent 3rd round draft pick and the gutted & not-replaced roster having basically nobody. And that's just his on-field performance, not even getting to his other garbage. Smith wasn't looking anything like a success himself. I think it sucks that either of them got injured - Smith in particular - but he looked like a fast meh.

[BROOKLYN JET]

[BROOKLYN JET]

5 hours ago, T0mShane said:

Prom night in the mod room?

[BROOKLYN JET]

4 hours ago, joewilly12 said:

Dont they say.....WINNING CHANGES EVERYTHING 

Alcohol changes everything.

[BROOKLYN JET]

3 hours ago, Pac said:

So who's the GM that hits on every decision?

Teh Falcon

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, bostonmajet said:

I have responded that trading someone on his last year option is highly unlikely; it rarely happens - it wasn't like Mo was lighting it up anyway; once he broke his leg, it became almost impossible (so they never would have been able to trade him).

Where do you get this stuff from, other than simply making it up? Trading someone in his last/option year is hardly rare. Just trades involving the Jets this year alone: Sheldon, McDougle, Davis, Pryor, and Martin. The only player they picked up who wasn't in his final contract year was Kearse, with merely 2 years remaining. You can go back as far as you want with the Jets on both sides of trades with these types of players: Revis, DRob, Santonio, Tebow, and probably dozens of others more than that over that last decade or so.

Mo clearly did have trade value, which is why Maccagnan was still seeking a 1st rounder outright for Mo. You make it sound like we couldn't get so much as a 7th rounder, like with Sanchez. Mo broke his leg; it's not like it snapped in half, nor was this an ACL or Lisfranc injury. His "not lighting it up" came well after he signed his extension; prior to that everyone expected a full recovery in time to be 100% for the season opener (and would have been if he wasn't a slacker). 

If his trade value was nil or negligible because of his future prospects due to a broken leg, then explain the rationale behind both tagging that player at $16m, and then handing him a $17m/yr contract with 2 years guaranteed for skill - plus still more than that guaranteed for injury - starting that very year.

It's one or the other, not both.

And this is just 2016, not even counting 2015 when his trade value was higher on the 5th yr team option at $7m.

[BROOKLYN JET]

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

 

I'll lay 3:1 odds she gives great helmet. I mean she kinda has to, right?

Then again, just thinking about it I'm as flaccid as a newborn.

What, you don't have the one with JIF kissing her?

[bostonmajet]

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Well you brought up the idea of his desire to test FA, not me. My recollection (from 2015) is he wanted to stay with the team that gave him a shot as an UDFA. Not to mention, if he could have been had in that $6-7m range (I think $7m is the highest he could have gotten with a year left on his deal, with a year less salary inflation). And it's not a pure net $6-7m anyway. Next you have to subtract the $3.5m/year paid to McLendon to (inadequately) take his place. So you're talking about a $3m/year savings, which would have been more than offset by his $3m+ better play, and the lack of necessity to retain Mo at that stupid, unwarranted amount. 

I gave you credit for it; so not sure why you care who brought it up - also, we were pretty tight cap wise, so the 3.5 million does matter regardless of better play

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Next, that is not almost always how a new contract goes. The opposite seems more common. The time a final-year contract situation is usually torn up is if it's a franchise tag, and that's because the tag amount, plus the extension's signing bonus, is a stupid amount to start with cap-wise. So typically, you leave the existing (low) final year in place and the extension is tacked onto that starting with the following year(s). Watt's extension is a great example of this. When a SB is given, the amortized amount is added to the cap hit of that current final season, but that's really it.

Disagree

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The grade of "A" should never enter the conversation, even as an "I'm not saying he should get an A" contrast. His ceiling for assessment, at this point, is 2 full letter grades below that.

Your last line is just personally attacking those with whom you disagree instead of arguing on the merits, to paint his advocates as models of sanity and balance, and those critical as being wildly irrational. Truth is, in terms of merit, the "pro-Maccagnan" camp is the far more irrational on balance; tossing around nonsensical "I think he's done a good job so far" without examples as to why, or showing that most - or even half - his moves pan out. Those who think he's in over his head repeatedly point to various examples of individual mishaps rather than personal feelings. So it's uncalled for, if you want to have a rational discussion. You ask why, and I give you examples; I don't just stick my fingers in my ears and baselessly type HE SUCKS HE SUCKS HE SUCKS. Not in the way his supporters seem to reflexively lay all blame on the HC while shielding the GM. 

I guess I will put anything in the conversation I want, but the point is I was explaining that I am NOT giving him an A (or wasn't) - I could have said I am not giving him a B either - doesn't really change my point; I also disagree with your opinion about the ceiling for his assessment/handling of inherited contract issues.

Finally, I am not sure you understand what personally attacking is.... I never called you (or anyone else a name); I have gotten a lot worse by many on this board ... often who don't even read the posts just the title and maybe the first line.

I was, however, suggesting that there are those who hate Mac, and therefore will paint him as evil; just like there are those who love him that seem to feel that he can do no wrong. Many, YES MANY, on this board, love/hate and also only know extremes. I also said you OR someone else... implying that there WILL be someone on this board doing this. Do you want to make a bet on that? Not sure the odds are on your side on that one. Sorry you took offense.

My point, is:

I think some contracts, by nature, are harder to deal with than others - so maybe we should grade on curve;

Also, not sure what the average length of a GM's tenure - but if it is somewhere in the  6 year mark, I would put more emphasis on the tasks he has to do for the last 4 years, than a small number of issues in the first 2 - not excusing nor saying it isn't important (but less important); given those 2 points I would grade a hard issue by a newbie GM less important than what he deals with in his 3 and 4th years.

[BROOKLYN JET]

1 hour ago, Integrity28 said:

Over/under on how many times Pac grinned to himself, in gleeful self-satisfaction over coming up with - what he surely thinks is - a brilliant thread title.

 

16 minutes ago, BROOKLYN JET said:

I love the title.

[bostonmajet]

2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Where do you get this stuff from, other than simply making it up? Trading someone in his last/option year is hardly rare. Just trades involving the Jets this year alone: Sheldon, McDougle, Davis, Pryor, and Martin. The only player they picked up who wasn't in his final contract year was Kearse, with merely 2 years remaining. You can go back as far as you want with the Jets on both sides of trades with these types of players: Revis, DRob, Santonio, Tebow, and probably dozens of others more than that over that last decade or so.

Mo clearly did have trade value, which is why Maccagnan was still seeking a 1st rounder outright for Mo. You make it sound like we couldn't get so much as a 7th rounder, like with Sanchez. Mo broke his leg; it's not like it snapped in half, nor was this an ACL or Lisfranc injury. His "not lighting it up" came well after he signed his extension; prior to that everyone expected a full recovery in time to be 100% for the season opener (and would have been if he wasn't a slacker). 

If his trade value was nil or negligible because of his future prospects due to a broken leg, then explain the rationale behind both tagging that player at $16m, and then handing him a $17m/yr contract with 2 years guaranteed for skill - plus still more than that guaranteed for injury - starting that very year.

It's one or the other, not both.

And this is just 2016, not even counting 2015 when his trade value was higher on the 5th yr team option at $7m.

It is rare that I guy who wants this money is traded on his last year option; even harder after that. Also, MO was already pissed at the Jets before Mac, so yeah, that makes it harder.

Yes, he did have trade value, but not as much as the Jets wanted or felt was valued. Clearly, they wanted to keep him, so the trade value needs to be more than the keep value. Had we given him away for a 4th (let alone a 7th), this board would have erupted.

I like how you 'attacked' me by calling me out for making stuff up while doing the same by using rumors about his trade value ... but if you want i will give you the last word on all of this. I am tired of this debate, but I typed the response, so... feel free to go to town - I am out...

 

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, bostonmajet said:

I gave you credit for it; so not sure why you care who brought it up - also, we were pretty tight cap wise, so the 3.5 million does matter regardless of better play

Disagree

I guess I will put anything in the conversation I want, but the point is I was explaining that I am NOT giving him an A (or wasn't) - I could have said I am not giving him a B either - doesn't really change my point; I also disagree with your opinion about the ceiling for his assessment/handling of inherited contract issues.

Finally, I am not sure you understand what personally attacking is.... I never called you (or anyone else a name); I have gotten a lot worse by many on this board ... often who don't even read the posts just the title and maybe the first line.

I was, however, suggesting that there are those who hate Mac, and therefore will paint him as evil; just like there are those who love him that seem to feel that he can do no wrong. Many, YES MANY, on this board, love/hate and also only know extremes. I also said you OR someone else... implying that there WILL be someone on this board doing this. Do you want to make a bet on that? Not sure the odds are on your side on that one. Sorry you took offense.

My point, is:

I think some contracts, by nature, are harder to deal with than others - so maybe we should grade on curve;

Also, not sure what the average length of a GM's tenure - but if it is somewhere in the  6 year mark, I would put more emphasis on the tasks he has to do for the last 4 years, than a small number of issues in the first 2 - not excusing nor saying it isn't important (but less important); given those 2 points I would grade a hard issue by a newbie GM less important than what he deals with in his 3 and 4th years.

Tight cap-wise? What on earth are you talking about? He had some $60m of cap room to spend. The $3.5m was the net result a year later. And that's still nonsense, because we had enough to ink 2 veteran RB contracts, Fitzpatrick, tag Mo foolishly, and more. 

Nobody "hates Maccagnan" but there are many who think he's done a horrible job as the GM. They hate his job performance; nobody gives a crap about him personally.

You can disagree all you want about what teams do with the cheap final year of a prior contract, but it's like disagreeing about the color of the sky. Few teams are dumb enough to do that, and players' agents accept it in exchange for big money right now. It is the norm. Go look up a bunch of contracts and you'll see the rarity is for a team to tear up a cheap, final year. A 5 year extension is 5 years added onto the current year (for a total of 6 years under contract). That is the norm, unless the player was hit with the franchise tag or was already a FA.

[Gastineau Lives]

2 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

Was making another post, so I figured I'd throw this in too:

We were all hoping for better. The question is, since when is "hoping for better" worth a top 10 RG contract?  I understand the contract isn't crazy out of line, but I don't pay that to a guy "I am still not sold on"

Who is #036 and why is he part a$$hole?  What did Rich Miano ever do to you?

LMAO Rich Miano ran over Phil's cat in the Fall of 1989. He never forgave him.

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, bostonmajet said:

It is rare that I guy who wants this money is traded on his last year option; even harder after that. Also, MO was already pissed at the Jets before Mac, so yeah, that makes it harder.

Yes, he did have trade value, but not as much as the Jets wanted or felt was valued. Clearly, they wanted to keep him, so the trade value needs to be more than the keep value. Had we given him away for a 4th (let alone a 7th), this board would have erupted.

I like how you 'attacked' me by calling me out for making stuff up while doing the same by using rumors about his trade value ... but if you want i will give you the last word on all of this. I am tired of this debate, but I typed the response, so... feel free to go to town - I am out...

 

Who cares if it's not as much as the team wanted? They were better off without him. They knew he had laziness and tardiness issues before the extension. They knew the massive amount he wanted. And they certinaly knew they didn't need him, with Sheldon and Leo still on the team.

Who gives a crap if "the board" erupts over a 4th rounder?  And again, you're just making this up; his value was higher than that. His job is to assemble the best roster he can, not get temporary cheers from several dozen people on the internet. If/when Mo sucks (or doesn't live up to his contract) for his new team, the GM will be vindicated.

Lastly, it's not a personal insult to say you are making stuff up when you actually are stating made-up things and wild guesses as though they are known, proven facts. Whether that's saying GMs usually tear up a cheap final year of a prior contracgt, or suggsting fans personally hate the Jets' GM and paint him as evil (which is a new one I haven't heard before, so bravo).

[Ohio State NY Jets fan]

How many players on this team were on the team last year? 35-40?

[sciond]

so now we have McCown

Mac signs him for 2 yrs at 24 mil

He drafts a CB in round 1

He trades Petty for Vlade Ducasse

Hack is the back up

we are so blessed....

[bealeb319]

Well my question is despite having a plan do these guys actually have a plan?
The kearse, kerley safety whose name i can't recall were all last minute things that do not smack of having a plan.  They will make the team better short term but the concern is still taking reps from younger players.  Nest year at camp we'll be saying, hmmm i wonder if Adarious Stewart and Hansen can play or not?

Guys like Brooks and Kerley a kearse are young enough that they can contribute in early stages of our rebuild and provide needed experience and leadership. They are old enough that they will be looking at or close to retirement when it is time to give your franchise qb his first big check...assuming of course you find that guy.

Sent from my LGUS991 using JetNation.com mobile app

[Pac]

53 minutes ago, sciond said:

so now we have McCown

Mac signs him for 2 yrs at 24 mil

He drafts a CB in round 1

He trades Petty for Vlade Ducasse

Hack is the back up

we are so blessed....

This is where your side loses credibility.  You make up silly hypotheticals and treat them as if they've already happened.

Maccs worst decision was re-signing Fitz and he did everything he could to rid himself of that virus.  You don't leave a QB that you believe in dangling in the wind until the 1st day of training camp.

The lunatic fringe and uninformed media brow beat him for months before he finally had to relent.  The mutiny on the horizon by the likes of Marshall, Decker, and Mangold didn't help either.  In the end they got what they deserved by hitching their wagon to a putrid QB. 

[dbatesman]

Guys it was me. I did it. I held the gun to Maccagnans head and made him resign Fitz. I see now that it was a mistake. Im so sorry

[Spoot-Face]

23 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

Guys it was me. I did it. I held the gun to Maccagnans head and made him resign Fitz. I see now that it was a mistake. Im so sorry

The ILK strikes again.

[Dcat]

9 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Now that we're in the supposedly-requisite 3rd season to tell anything, grade the 2015 draft. Nobody expects your strawman nonsense of going 7 for 7 (and ironically, you're the one making the "extreme" argument in doing so).

Fans do rightly expect a GM, whose only prior qualification was being an NFL scout, to be better than 1 for 6. In particular, where the only one he hit was the easiest no-brainer to not bust in the whole draft (it's not like he went against conventional wisdom and it paid off; it was the safe, pussy pick given he was handed a team already being set for years on its DL). Question is, if Williams is off the board, does he even hit that unacceptable 1 out of 6? 

He is not average. He's demonstrably below average. 

Whatever 'average' is, I'm sure Maccagnan is well below it.

[AFJF]

Bring back Jeremiah George!!!

[BigO]

15 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Well my question is despite having a plan do these guys actually have a plan?

The kearse, kerley safety whose name i can't recall were all last minute things that do not smack of having a plan.  They will make the team better short term but the concern is still taking reps from younger players.  Nest year at camp we'll be saying, hmmm i wonder if Adarious Stewart and Hansen can play or not?

Of course there's a plan. How can you not see the blueprint of the plan  Mac will draft and trade for more safeties and wr's early in next years draft.  Safeties and wr's are like pitchers in baseball ⚾️, you can never have enough of them.  

[Dunnie]

Well my question is despite having a plan do these guys actually have a plan?

The kearse, kerley safety whose name i can't recall were all last minute things that do not smack of having a plan.  They will make the team better short term but the concern is still taking reps from younger players.  Nest year at camp we'll be saying, hmmm i wonder if Adarious Stewart and Hansen can play or not?

 

******* THIS .... Howard Johnson Approves this post !!!!!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app