Jump to content

MacCagnan's valuation history of the QB position


Integrity28
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Jetscreen said:

And I don't recall a single person calling Lee a fidget or whatever it is you're calling him? I wasn't a poster back then but I was looking at the board? What I saw was unanimous praise for selecting Lee. I recall Beerfish and one other poster (his name escapes me) criticizing the pick but that's it. Everyone said Darron Lee was Ryan Shazier. It was a great pick all the way. How wrong could they be?

This is....not accurate 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, nycdan said:

An open invitation to practice the art of Necromancy (or is it Necrophilia?).

Yup.  I always get curious as to original reactions, not revisionist history two years later.  There were plenty of people who did not like the pick, including me (I was on another site back then).  The Lee pick is made on page 25 of the thread.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

I liked the fact that we picked somebody that did well athletically, but didn't know much about him. Thing is, Lee is not a pick people are crucifying him for - it is the total lack of any success outside of round 1.  He has Jenkins, Shell and ... crickets.

2015: is not so good unless Mauldin is a miracle but yeah. 

2016: Jenkins and Shell, Burris is depth and Edwards is still our starting punter! 

2017: Maye we know, the rest is TBD.

Not sure what people expect?  Studs throughout each draft? Getting 4-5 starters each one? That's not realistic, let alone over such a short period of time. And so far hasn't had a huge bust in the first round, even if you don't like the pick. Hate to break it to ya but building a team takes time, not just a couple of drafts. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MDL_JET said:

2015: is not so good unless Mauldin is a miracle but yeah. 

2016: Jenkins and Shell, Burris is depth and Edwards is still our starting punter! 

2017: Maye we know, the rest is TBD.

Not sure what people expect?  Studs throughout each draft? Getting 4-5 starters each one? That's not realistic, let alone over such a short period of time. And so far hasn't had a huge bust in the first round, even if you don't like the pick. Hate to break it to ya but building a team takes time, not just a couple of drafts. 

Not starters.  Rotational players.  He has had 19 picks outside the 1st round and you were able to name 5 with a straight face.  One was a punter - and I think if he weren't drafted the other Aussie might have beaten him out. 

He picked like a Puss in the first round.  Not busting on safe picks is not a big deal.  Lee remains to be seen, but returns have not been great.  OTOH, at least he took a shot.  It doesn't take so long to build a team as you think.  Certainly not 4 years.  He has actually been worse at free agency than the draft. 

I don't expect 4-5 starters a year, but how many true starters has he given us?  Williams, Jenkins, Adams, Lee.  That is four in three drafts.  On a barren, clean sheet team.  Shell and Lee are potential legit starters, but not yet IMO.  Count the punter if you'd like, I wouldn't.  Ryan Quigley was punting in the NFC championship.  Free agency has netted us Carpenter and a bunch of flotsam. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mauldin is a prime example.  He was eh as a rookie, then sucked, then got hurt.  Some people want to act like he has to be "developed."  Why?  It is his walk year.  What he does after 2018 is meaningless to me as far as draft position. If he turns out good/great it doesn't help the Jets much.  Like Farrior, some of that is luck, some scheme, but what Farrior did in Pittsburgh or what Mangold did on his subsequent contracts didn't help the team anymore than just signing Mawae or Pace.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

Never I want the D :P

Yeah I agree the Offense really needs to be addressed especially the OL QB is a given. The longer the offense has the ball the better the chance our defense does not get worn down consistently in the 4th quarter where games are won and lost. This team really needs LB's which are always the heart and soul of a 3-4 defense. Do we have 1 LB you can truly say is even in the conversation of top 10 in the league ? I would think any good defense should have at least one or 2 we have 0

More because the QB will be here for longer than any other player if we get him straightened out early, and will go a lot longer towards a ring than specifically worrying about the 2018 defense when we’re not going to a SB this year anyway.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, #27TheDominator said:

Not starters.  Rotational players.  He has had 19 picks outside the 1st round and you were able to name 5 with a straight face.  One was a punter - and I think if he weren't drafted the other Aussie might have beaten him out. 

He picked like a Puss in the first round.  Not busting on safe picks is not a big deal.  Lee remains to be seen, but returns have not been great.  OTOH, at least he took a shot.  It doesn't take so long to build a team as you think.  Certainly not 4 years.  He has actually been worse at free agency than the draft. 

I don't expect 4-5 starters a year, but how many true starters has he given us?  Williams, Jenkins, Adams, Lee.  That is four in three drafts.  On a barren, clean sheet team.  Shell and Lee are potential legit starters, but not yet IMO.  Count the punter if you'd like, I wouldn't.  Ryan Quigley was punting in the NFC championship.  Free agency has netted us Carpenter and a bunch of flotsam. 

People were generally ok with the Lee pick based on the reviews of the various draftniks.  On one hand I give Mac a pass on the Lee pick because he was picked inconsistent with projections, and it is hard to find players picked after Lee that actually were better (other than Artie Burns, see below).  

But Mac's picks generally cause me to wonder just how much he actually scouts vs. reading McShay's and Kipers reviews.   Lee was projected to the Falcons, who took Keanu Neal, a better player than Lee, and the Falcons then took Deion Jones in the second round.  Myles Jack and Hunter Henry, among others, went after Lee and into the second round.  Quite frankly, when you look at the 2016 draft, the first and second rounds were interchangeable, but the players projected to go in the first round tended to go there.   Some teams had it figured out, most did not.  The Steelers took Artie Burns several picks after them-they know how to draft, year after year-that is why they are competitive, year after year.  I am just not buying that Mac is a good scout, because he has yet to show any value added from the scouting side, other than Marcus Maye.    Not only was Mac playing the political game with his first round picks, but the Jets would be better off if they just drafted BPA based on Kipers/McShay's grades rather than the players that they picked.  That is sad.

1 hour ago, #27TheDominator said:

Mauldin is a prime example.  He was eh as a rookie, then sucked, then got hurt.  Some people want to act like he has to be "developed."  Why?  It is his walk year.  What he does after 2018 is meaningless to me as far as draft position. If he turns out good/great it doesn't help the Jets much.  Like Farrior, some of that is luck, some scheme, but what Farrior did in Pittsburgh or what Mangold did on his subsequent contracts didn't help the team anymore than just signing Mawae or Pace.

At this point Mauldin could hopefully make the team better, could be extended mid-season if he has his act together, or allowed to leave and provide the Jets with a comp pick.   If he is cut this year with nothing to show for it that is another sign of a bad draft pick.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

More because the QB will be here for longer than any other player if we get him straightened out early, and will go a lot longer towards a ring than specifically worrying about the 2018 defense when we’re not going to a SB this year anyway.

if you look at teams with sustained success they found a good qb, and had a flow of weapons around him.  it's amazing how you can have many years of being in contention this way.  of course you need to find a good qb, but for those teams, the draft and FA becomes SO much easier.  make sure you have wrs and rbs, have a reliable TE, does not need to be gronk.  have a decent offensive line.  you don't need to burn premium picks on lbs who don't rush the passer, safeties who can't cover or defensive linemen who are better vs the run than the pass.  this is why it's worth trading multiple premium picks for a qb.  it allows you to more than compensate for this loss in the draft and FA.  if the jets drafted a qb, rb and strengthened the OL this year you could turn the team around years faster than the time it takes to keep adding pieces to a defense that hopefully becomes very good.  

the giants understood how to build a defense, but they've deviated from this philosophy.  they draft pass rushing DL, not coples, not gholston, not sheldon, not williams.

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Augustiniak said:

if you look at teams with sustained success they found a good qb, and had a flow of weapons around him.  it's amazing how you can have many years of being in contention this way.  of course you need to find a good qb, but for those teams, the draft and FA becomes SO much easier.  make sure you have wrs and rbs, have a reliable TE, does not need to be gronk.  have a decent offensive line.  you don't need to burn premium picks on lbs who don't rush the passer, safeties who can't cover or defensive linemen who are better vs the run than the pass.  this is why it's worth trading multiple premium picks for a qb.  it allows you to more than compensate for this loss in the draft and FA.  if the jets drafted a qb, rb and strengthened the OL this year you could turn the team around years faster than the time it takes to keep adding pieces to a defense that hopefully becomes very good.  

the giants understood how to build a defense, but they've deviated from this philosophy.  they draft pass rushing DL, not coples, not gholston, not sheldon, not williams.

Agree on all, but in fairness to the DL list at the end of your post, the idea was fine but they just chose poorly. Coples and Gholston were both pass rushing prospects who were busts, and Sheldon was an inside gap shooter (though we then so often used him as a space occupying end, to free up Calvin Pace and a blitzing Harris/safeties). Plus go look at the top half of round one in that 2013 draft. Sheldon was just about the best pick they could have made there (other than hindsight saying they should have drafted a guy at #13 that was expected to go in the mid-20s or later).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/9/2018 at 12:43 PM, Lith said:

 

Yup.  I always get curious as to original reactions, not revisionist history two years later.  There were plenty of people who did not like the pick, including me (I was on another site back then).  The Lee pick is made on page 25 of the thread.

 

Sorry, my bad. I just remember how anyone that didn't like the pick at the time, was inexplicably attacked. As though Mac could do no wrong? Really, how posters could equate not liking what the front office does as a federal crime just escapes me? It's fans opinion, nothing more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2018 at 6:34 AM, Sperm Edwards said:

Agree on all, but in fairness to the DL list at the end of your post, the idea was fine but they just chose poorly. Coples and Gholston were both pass rushing prospects who were busts, and Sheldon was an inside gap shooter (though we then so often used him as a space occupying end, to free up Calvin Pace and a blitzing Harris/safeties). Plus go look at the top half of round one in that 2013 draft. Sheldon was just about the best pick they could have made there (other than hindsight saying they should have drafted a guy at #13 that was expected to go in the mid-20s or later).

Think about that for a second lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2018 at 6:34 AM, Sperm Edwards said:

Agree on all, but in fairness to the DL list at the end of your post, the idea was fine but they just chose poorly. Coples and Gholston were both pass rushing prospects who were busts, and Sheldon was an inside gap shooter (though we then so often used him as a space occupying end, to free up Calvin Pace and a blitzing Harris/safeties). Plus go look at the top half of round one in that 2013 draft. Sheldon was just about the best pick they could have made there (other than hindsight saying they should have drafted a guy at #13 that was expected to go in the mid-20s or later).

The Waldo numbers would have seen to Gholston and Coples, just like the Lewin stats for Sanchez. Basically all of the draft ****ery is the direct result of ignoring positional value and very basic analytics.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

The Waldo numbers would have seen to Gholston and Coples, just like the Lewin stats for Sanchez. Basically all of the draft ****ery is the direct result of ignoring positional value and very basic analytics.

Silly you. We need to keep taking BAP regardless of position, waiting for the magical day when this strict, theoretical BAP and positional importance magically align. Then it'll happen for the other few must-have positions just when we need it also. Then watch the **** out, NFL -- the Jets are a-comin' for ya! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

The Waldo numbers would have seen to Gholston and Coples, just like the Lewin stats for Sanchez. Basically all of the draft ****ery is the direct result of ignoring positional value and very basic analytics.

I really wish I was more aware at the time so I could have been properly pissed. I know for a fact that I defended these three picks, though Sanchez was mostly "they paid nothing to trade up and he looks interesting."

Big difference? No one pays me to even be aware of that stuff. An NFL front office OTOH...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That Lee spot in the draft was a dead zone.  Will Fuller and then a parade of scrubs.

Someone mentioned Artie Burns,  he's horrible according to my Steeler fan friends.  Plays like old man Revis, big cushion and then makes the tackle 8 yards downfield.  We would have hated him as much as Lee.

Sometimes your draft spot gets you burned -  like the Golston year.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, dcJet said:

That Lee spot in the draft was a dead zone.  Will Fuller and then a parade of scrubs.

Someone mentioned Artie Burns,  he's horrible according to my Steeler fan friends.  Plays like old man Revis, big cushion and then makes the tackle 8 yards downfield.  We would have hated him as much as Lee.

Sometimes your draft spot gets you burned -  like the Golston year.   

That was me on Artie Burns.  I agree he is not great.  

According to PFF:

  • Darron Lee had a 34.9 overall rating in 2017 and was 86th best LB.
  • Artie Burns had a 80.8 overall rating in 2017 and was 43rd best CB.
  • Will Fuller had a 73 overall rating in 2017 and was 55th best WR.

The Jets were, and are still, in need of a CB or WR (or 20), so we can't say Lee was a need pick.  

This was a bad draft, and the draftniks basically completely misestimated the 1st round.  I am going to spare us the trauma of looking up Myles Jack's or Deion Jones rating.  Yes, PFF is not necessarily gospel, but I think the disparity here says something. 

Mac is adding ZERO value to this team from his scouting.  Yes, you had to be a very good scout to outperform in 2016, but some scouts did.  The Steelers did.  Mac's former colleagues in Houston did.  Lee was a decent 2nd round pick, not the 20th pick, in retrospect.

Did anyone redo the 2016 draft?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, varjet said:

That was me on Artie Burns.  I agree he is not great.  

According to PFF:

  • Darron Lee had a 34.9 overall rating in 2017 and was 86th best LB.
  • Artie Burns had a 80.8 overall rating in 2017 and was 43rd best CB.
  • Will Fuller had a 73 overall rating in 2017 and was 55th best WR.

The Jets were, and are still, in need of a CB or WR (or 20), so we can't say Lee was a need pick.  

This was a bad draft, and the draftniks basically completely misestimated the 1st round.  I am going to spare us the trauma of looking up Myles Jack's or Deion Jones rating.  Yes, PFF is not necessarily gospel, but I think the disparity here says something. 

Mac is adding ZERO value to this team from his scouting.  Yes, you had to be a very good scout to outperform in 2016, but some scouts did.  The Steelers did.  Mac's former colleagues in Houston did.  Lee was a decent 2nd round pick, not the 20th pick, in retrospect.

Did anyone redo the 2016 draft?

Actually, I believe Mac knew the value was in OL. That's what I thought he'd take. I hoped Jack Conklin would have been available for us when we picked.

But just as soon as the draft commenced, you saw GM's, knowing how little talent was in the draft, trading up to get the best OL. Mac could have done the same. He had a deal ready to trade up to #10 and take Laremy Tunsil. Ultimately, he decided not to? I think Bowles persuaded him to stay at 20 and take Lee. I think Mac went with Bowles suggestion because could keep his 2nd round pick and take Hackenberg. 

So although I believe the scouting dept. did their jobs leading up to the draft, I don't think Mac and Blowes listened to their staff.

Regardless of all of that, I think it's clear Darron Lee was not Mac's 1st or 2nd choice? All of the really good OL that Mac wanted were gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jetscreen said:

Actually, I believe Mac knew the value was in OL. That's what I thought he'd take. I hoped Jack Conklin would have been available for us when we picked.

But just as soon as the draft commenced, you saw GM's, knowing how little talent was in the draft, trading up to get the best OL. Mac could have done the same. He had a deal ready to trade up to #10 and take Laremy Tunsil. Ultimately, he decided not to? I think Bowles persuaded him to stay at 20 and take Lee. I think Mac went with Bowles suggestion because could keep his 2nd round pick and take Hackenberg. 

So although I believe the scouting dept. did their jobs leading up to the draft, I don't think Mac and Blowes listened to their staff.

Regardless of all of that, I think it's clear Darron Lee was not Mac's 1st or 2nd choice? All of the really good OL that Mac wanted were gone.

When mccagnan tells the media that he inquires or inquired about trading up, i get the feeling that this is increasingly a ploy to get the media and fans off his back.  The reality is that it is highly unlikely that he trades up in the first round to get a qb.  He's going to stay at 6 and if that means Chubb we get Chubb.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/6/2018 at 4:54 PM, T0mShane said:

What’s odd is that even shortly after drafting Petty, Macc pinned his value as a “number two quarterback in this league,” as if he was someone that got drafted against Macc’s will. And both McCown and Fitzpatrick reek of Bowles’ wishes considering his history with veteran washouts. Hackenberg is the anomaly because neither of them—Bowles or Macc—seemed particularly enthused about drafting him. Could have been a quid pro quo deal with an agent or something like that. Either way, being in Year Four of a regime and having no QB of merit on the roster should get everyone fired. 

MacCagnan had a hard on for Hackenberg months before the draft. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I was always curious about Maccagnans connections to football as a youngster

Turns out he played DIII ball as a DT and LB and a defenseman in lacrosse at trinity College. 

Maybe that explains some things or maybe I'm just bored 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Larz said:

I don't have time to read 16 pages, catch me up, I'm guessing we are supportive of the team? 

Same old, same old? Most posters are ever increasingly critical of Mac because of the job he's done here. You also have these kool-aid drinking posters that think Mac and Bowles are wonderful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...