Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

I personally think it is completely reasonable to think that when the majority of your best players are in their first few seasons in the league, growing pains are to be expected.

The Jaguars won 15 games combined in the 4 seasons leading into last season.  Does that mean their roster was awful or they just were young?

Last year the playoffs included 7 of the top 10 oldest teams in the NFL.  2 more in the top half.  The Chiefs were 17th, Jags 25th and Rams 31.

So yes, a young roster can definitely contend, but it is far less common.

If people want to say the Jets roster is awful, then that's fine.  I personally think there is more talent present then some.  That should also be fine.  I'm not trying to say that the roster is loaded.  It's not.  I just don't think it's the desolate wasteland some make it out to be.

I think Shane's question is a good one.  How many Jets could you get a 3rd round pick or better for right now?

Also, growing pains we can tolerate, that's actually not what you're seeing though.  You're seeing guys who are playing exactly to what you can expect from them.  Who do you see as falling under "growing pains?"  What player on the team right now is going to be significantly better in a year or two?

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Reluctance to move on from bad choices is how my first wife lasted so long. 

I present this without(much) commentary.  I think the general consensus of Jets fan is that Macc has done a poor job.  On the other hand, I think non Jets fans have a different perception.  McShay app

Jets fans are conditioned to hate the GM, HC, OC and QB  I think the strongest praise I can think of for Maccagnan is that he seems to be learning from his mistakes and will have cap room to sign

Posted Images

43 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Who are the seven good starters he drafted? Just curious.

I'm guessing, Williams, Lee, Jenkins, Shell, Adams, Maye and the 7th is either Robby Anderson, who he didn't draft, or Lachlan Edwards. 

But there are still players that could develop into good starters. Many players take a few years to realize their potential. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

I'm guessing, Williams, Lee, Jenkins, Shell, Adams, Maye and the 7th is either Robby Anderson, who he didn't draft, or Lachlan Edwards. 

But there are still players that could develop into good starters. Many players take a few years to realize their potential. 

Half those guys are simply not "good" starters.  Williams has materially underperformed his draft position.  Lee as well, more than half the fanbase is desperate to have him cut/traded.  Shell?  Average at best.  Adams, one season, too early to judge.  Same for Maye.  Robby wasn't drafted (so not part of the 22 Macc drafted).  And a Punter?  Seriously?

The fact that we cannot easily identify these "seven good starters" is rather telling.  That only you even tried (everyone else ignored the question) is also telling.   

I also don't give much worth to the 21 of 22 stat.  For one, Macc controls the roster so he doesn't get a pat on the back for keeping say, Hack on the roster.  It's also telling how many FA we've signed (in terms of number of players) and how few have lasted more than a season or two.

Macc's era so far is one of disappointment, in record, in talent, and in overall roster improvement.  It's damn hard to say we're materially better today, three years in, than we were the day Macc and Bowles were hired. 21 of 22 and two 5 win seasons, yeah, great.

  • Upvote 1
  • Post of the Week 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, HawkeyeJet said:

I present this without(much) commentary.  I think the general consensus of Jets fan is that Macc has done a poor job.  On the other hand, I think non Jets fans have a different perception.  McShay appears to be one.  I am not advocating for or against, I just find it interesting.  The numbers used here will go down a bit, but I think his overall point would stay the same.

 

21 of 22 still on the roster. I wonder what is considered good. Or, if there is a number that's considered good. Or, if this is just an anecdotal observation with some related speculation, what is the number for all of the other GMs in the league, just for some context.

Of course, intuitively, that sounds good. Always good to have a little context, though. Also, as noted above, picks like Hack seem to make the quoted metric sound good despite all indications suggesting the Hack pick is very likely a major bust.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

There just seems to be this dichotomy that Jets fans think their team is in horrible shape and those outside think it's not as bad.

Very weird. Same thing with Bowles

I think Mac and Bowles are treated well by the league and the press.   People like them.  They are good, honest guys.  It is possible that they also cooperate with the press in providing information, so the press is nice to them.  

But nice does not walk the dog.  I am not convinced that either of them are good at their jobs.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets see he has solidified safety, safety, non impact ILb and punter in three years.

The saints in one year:

One of the best CBs in the league

A starting RT being groomed for LT

A massive weapon at RB

A starting safety

A starting ILB (who got hurt)

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jetstream23 said:

I agree to a point.  I don't think McShay is saying all are good picks.  But, there will be high turnover of that number going into this season.  Lots of guys are hanging on by a thread.  Hack, Petty and Devin Smith just to name a few. This time next year I'd like to see the number in X of 22.

it will be x of 28, since the further you go out you expect dropoffs

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Half those guys are simply not "good" starters.  Williams has materially underperformed his draft position.  Lee as well, more than half the fanbase is desperate to have him cut/traded.  Shell?  Average at best.  Adams, one season, too early to judge.  Same for Maye.  Robby wasn't drafted (so not part of the 22 Macc drafted).  And a Punter?  Seriously?

The fact that we cannot easily identify these "seven good starters" is rather telling.  That only you even tried (everyone else ignored the question) is also telling.   

I also don't give much worth to the 21 of 22 stat.  For one, Macc controls the roster so he doesn't get a pat on the back for keeping say, Hack on the roster.  It's also telling how many FA we've signed (in terms of number of players) and how few have lasted more than a season or two.

Macc's era so far is one of disappointment, in record, in talent, and in overall roster improvement.  It's damn hard to say we're materially better today, three years in, than we were the day Macc and Bowles were hired. 21 of 22 and two 5 win seasons, yeah, great.

I'm not ready to anoint Macc, but he hasn't been nearly as bad as some of you make it seem. His FA pick ups and trades this past  year were great. He did something no other Jet GM has done in a decade and that's hit on a 2nd round pick. And he has us in position to draft a franchise QB. 

Macc is at a cross-roads of his Jets tenure. If he hits on a QB and a few of his draft picks continue to emerge he will be here for a long time. If not, then guys like you can prepare to build your case for getting the next GM fired...

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, JETSfan4life_1 said:

The everyday JETS fan, give them a GM they don't want him, give them a QB they don't want him, give them a coach they don't want him..

at that point what the phuck do you want ...GEEZ... little ones

Maybe ones that don't suck, a la Macc, Bowles, and Fitz, er, Hack, er, McCown, er, Petty, er, Teddy now?

Maybe ones that can win more than 5 games in their third year together?

I know, it's asking alot to be competitive.  Some folks standards just aren't that high I guess.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

I'm not ready to anoint Macc, but he hasn't been nearly as bad as some of you make it seem. His FA pick ups and trades this past  year were great. He did something no other Jet GM has done in a decade and that's hit on a 2nd round pick. And he has us in position to draft a franchise QB. 

Macc is at a cross-roads of his Jets tenure. If he hits on a QB and a few of his draft picks continue to emerge he will be here for a long time. If not, then guys like you can prepare to build your case for getting the next GM fired...

His FA pickups were "great"?  Guess we define term that differently.

Optimism is fine.  Wake me when we win games to back that optimism up.

Or have we already given up on that for 2018 now too?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SouthernJet said:

it will be x of 28, since the further you go out you expect dropoffs

Right, but I'm saying that if right now it's 21 of 22, then I want to see next year what X of 22 is from those 3 drafts in 2015, 2016, and 2017.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

Lets see he has solidified safety, safety, non impact ILb and punter in three years.

The saints in one year:

One of the best CBs in the league

A starting RT being groomed for LT

A massive weapon at RB

A starting safety

A starting ILB (who got hurt)

The Saints 2017 draft was one of the best drafts any team has had over the last 10 years. but it does point out what a smart FO can do with smart drafting.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, I think he meant the 6-7 solid starters in 3 drafts is good hit rate.  Not the 22/23 note, but who knows

53 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Half those guys are simply not "good" starters.  Williams has materially underperformed his draft position.  Lee as well, more than half the fanbase is desperate to have him cut/traded.  Shell?  Average at best.  Adams, one season, too early to judge.  Same for Maye.  Robby wasn't drafted (so not part of the 22 Macc drafted).  And a Punter?  Seriously?

The fact that we cannot easily identify these "seven good starters" is rather telling.  That only you even tried (everyone else ignored the question) is also telling.   

I also don't give much worth to the 21 of 22 stat.  For one, Macc controls the roster so he doesn't get a pat on the back for keeping say, Hack on the roster.  It's also telling how many FA we've signed (in terms of number of players) and how few have lasted more than a season or two.

Macc's era so far is one of disappointment, in record, in talent, and in overall roster improvement.  It's damn hard to say we're materially better today, three years in, than we were the day Macc and Bowles were hired. 21 of 22 and two 5 win seasons, yeah, great.

The fact that in you call Shell average at best, and then seem to imply that makes him a bad pick is kind of the main part of any argument over the Macc.

You are right, he is average at best.  If you rank the RTs in the league he's in the bottom half, but he is at minimum serviceable as a Starter.  He was a 5th Rd pick.  That is a good return on a 5th RD pick.  A lot of people talk about Jenkins like that too.  Is he a superstar?  No.  But he's a solid player.  A solid starter.  That's perfectly fine for a 3rd round pick.

Macc has done a good job on those type of players.  To date, his main issue is he hasn't crushed the 1st 2 rounds, and hasn't drafted any superstars, so to speak.  No denying that.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

For the record, I think he meant the 6-7 solid starters in 3 drafts is good hit rate.  Not the 22/23 note, but who knows

The fact that in you call Shell average at best, and then seem to imply that makes him a bad pick is kind of the main part of any argument over the Macc.

You are right, he is average at best.  If you rank the RTs in the league he's in the bottom half, but he is at minimum serviceable as a Starter.  He was a 5th Rd pick.  That is a good return on a 5th RD pick.  A lot of people talk about Jenkins like that too.  Is he a superstar?  No.  But he's a solid player.  A solid starter.  That's perfectly fine for a 3rd round pick.

Macc has done a good job on those type of players.  To date, his main issue is he hasn't crushed the 1st 2 rounds, and hasn't drafted any superstars, so to speak.  No denying that.  

I actually think Mac has done a great job with UDFAs too.

Whiffing on 2nd rounders year after year has been his biggest weakness.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TeddEY said:

I think Shane's question is a good one.  How many Jets could you get a 3rd round pick or better for right now?

Also, growing pains we can tolerate, that's actually not what you're seeing though.  You're seeing guys who are playing exactly to what you can expect from them.  Who do you see as falling under "growing pains?"  What player on the team right now is going to be significantly better in a year or two?

I was talking about growing pains as a team, not as individual players.  I don't have the answer to your question.  I still think Williams, both safeties, Jenkins and Lee have lots of growth potential.  That doesn't mean they will, but I think they can. 

As far as Shane's statement, that is valid.  I will not argue anyone who says that the roster is devoid of elite, high end talent.  Hopefully that changes soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

I actually think Mac has done a great job with UDFAs too.

Whiffing on 2nd rounders year after year has been his biggest weakness.

Too bad he’s been whiffing on 1st rounders and 3rd-7th rounders too

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

For the record, I think he meant the 6-7 solid starters in 3 drafts is good hit rate.  Not the 22/23 note, but who knows

I would argue that Macc has not, in fact, had a successful "hit rate".  His high draft picks have been either average or under-performing (including Williams and Lee) and his lower round picks generally poor, regardless of their lingering population on our overall low-talent roster.

19 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

The fact that in you call Shell average at best, and then seem to imply that makes him a bad pick is kind of the main part of any argument over the Macc.  You are right, he is average at best.  If you rank the RTs in the league he's in the bottom half, but he is at minimum serviceable as a Starter.  He was a 5th Rd pick.  That is a good return on a 5th RD pick.  

I didn't say he was a bad pick.  I said he was an average Olineman.  And he is.  Jets Fans attempting to make him into some great player are deluding themselves, thus far he has been average.  As you yourself admit, bottom half of the league.  

19 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

A lot of people talk about Jenkins like that too.  Is he a superstar?  No.  But he's a solid player.  A solid starter.  That's perfectly fine for a 3rd round pick.

No, it's really not.  

19 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

Macc has done a good job on those type of players.  To date, his main issue is he hasn't crushed the 1st 2 rounds, and hasn't drafted any superstars, so to speak.  No denying that.  

Is overall team talent better today than the day Macc arrived?  I can't say that it is.  Maybe you think you can, but it would take a roster spot by roster spot to make such a case, and frankly, I don't think the results would be kind to Macc.  

If you're happy with macc, great, be happy.  I find him to-date decidedly underwhelimg as a GM and this team, after two strati 5 win seasons, once again looking at what will almost assuredly be another losing season ahead in their fourth year in power.  

If a new GM has one winning year on the back of the former regimes players, then has three losing years with his own players, is that GM considered good at his job?  You tell me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, varjet said:

I think Mac and Bowles are treated well by the league and the press.   People like them.  They are good, honest guys.  It is possible that they also cooperate with the press in providing information, so the press is nice to them.  

But nice does not walk the dog.  I am not convinced that either of them are good at their jobs.  

I don't know if that really flies in New York.

They really don't get grilled by the local press either. 

It's just very strange. It can't just be "they don't watch the Jets play"

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Warfish said:

I would argue that Macc has not, in fact, had a successful "hit rate".  His high draft picks have been either average or under-performing (including Williams and Lee) and his lower round picks generally poor, regardless of their lingering population on our overall low-talent roster.

I didn't say he was a bad pick.  I said he was an average Olineman.  And he is.  Jets Fans attempting to make him into some great player are deluding themselves, thus far he has been average.  As you yourself admit, bottom half of the league.  

No, it's really not.  

Is overall team talent better today than the day Macc arrived?  I can't say that it is.  Maybe you think you can, but it would take a roster spot by roster spot to make such a case, and frankly, I don't think the results would be kind to Macc.  

If you're happy with macc, great, be happy.  I find him to-date decidedly underwhelimg as a GM and this team, after two strati 5 win seasons, once again looking at what will almost assuredly be another losing season ahead in their fourth year in power.  

If a new GM has one winning year on the back of the former regimes players, then has three losing years with his own players, is that GM considered good at his job?  You tell me.

What do you expect out of a 3rd Rd pick if a solid/capable starter isn't acceptable?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HawkeyeJet said:

What do you expect out of a 3rd Rd pick if a solid/capable starter isn't acceptable?

They want HOFs at every pick. That doesn't happen. 

And I would argue that their roster is more talented than what it was. People forget the Chansi Stuckey era

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

For the record, I think he meant the 6-7 solid starters in 3 drafts is good hit rate.  Not the 22/23 note, but who knows

The fact that in you call Shell average at best, and then seem to imply that makes him a bad pick is kind of the main part of any argument over the Macc.

You are right, he is average at best.  If you rank the RTs in the league he's in the bottom half, but he is at minimum serviceable as a Starter.  He was a 5th Rd pick.  That is a good return on a 5th RD pick.  A lot of people talk about Jenkins like that too.  Is he a superstar?  No.  But he's a solid player.  A solid starter.  That's perfectly fine for a 3rd round pick.

Macc has done a good job on those type of players.  To date, his main issue is he hasn't crushed the 1st 2 rounds, and hasn't drafted any superstars, so to speak.  No denying that.  

I would dispute whether Shell is a mid-pack RT. Still, I don't think anybody has a problem with that pick.  The issue is that Shell is one of his only good picks - he was a 5th, but they felt strongly enough that they traded a 2017 4th (they gave up their 4th for Clady).  The Redskins took Perrine with that pick and plenty of players were on the board at that point including Julie'n Davenport who may be the Texans LT.

The other quality picks include 3 high floor prospects (2 taken #6 overall) that were considered day 1 starters.  These are not guys we were to expect a big learning curve with and not athletic guys that were expected to burst out later in their careers.  What I am saying is that Adams is not Byron Jones.  That leaves the punter, Maye, and Lee, who has been somewhat disappointing, but not an outright bust. 

The rest of these guys may be on the roster, but none have looked good.  Burris, Peake, Mauldin, Stewart - they have not looked like much.  A case can be made for most, but if you add it up it has not been promising.  It is much easier to forgive athletic guys that need to learn, like Clark and Jones than slugs that are supposed to be ready like Burris.  It is also easier to see how they will improve over time.  Counting Hackenberg being on the roster is disingenuous - the guy was 4th QB (not a thing) half of his time here and they are deathly afraid of him taking a snap.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

Macc has done a good job on those type of players.  To date, his main issue is he hasn't crushed the 1st 2 rounds, and hasn't drafted any superstars, so to speak.  No denying that.  

This is pretty much the biggest knock on Macc. Of the rookie players he has brought in that actually belong on an NFL roster, he has drafted/UDFA 5 solid starters (Leo, Adams, Maye, Jenkins, Anderson) and two player we think will be average starter/roll players (Shell, McGuire). It's a bit early for the 2017 draft class. The 2017 class is TBD. So, player like Leggett and Hansen can make something of themselves as well. Also, Adams and Leo still have the chance of becoming impact players.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GreenFish said:

This is pretty much the biggest knock on Macc. Of the rookie players that actually belong on an NFL roster, he has drafted/UDFA 5 solid starters (Leo, Adams, Maye, Jenkins, Anderson) and two player we think we be average starter (Shell, McGuire). It's a bit early for the 2017 draft class. The 2017 class is TBD. So, player like Leggett and Hansen can make something of themselves as well. Also, Adams and Leo still have the chance of becoming impact players.  

 

That seems like what McShay said.

My bad on Cook. I thought he got hurt preseason. My bad

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, UnitedWhofans said:

They want HOFs at every pick. That doesn't happen. 

And I would argue that their roster is more talented than what it was. People forget the Chansi Stuckey era

I think you forgot the "Chansi Stuckey era."  Chansi Stuckey was on the Jets for 2008 and the first quarter of 2009.  Every week that Stuckey was on the Jets they were better than they have been at any point in the Bowles/Maccagnan era.  As a Jet, he has about 300 more receiving yards than anybody that Maccagnan has drafted and as many receiving TDs as Smith, Peake, McGuire, Stewart, Hansen and Leggett combined.  He has more career receiving yards and TDs than all those players combined by a considerable margin.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, GreenFish said:

This is pretty much the biggest knock on Macc. Of the rookie players he has brought in that actually belong on an NFL roster, he has drafted/UDFA 5 solid starters (Leo, Adams, Maye, Jenkins, Anderson) and two player we think will be average starter/roll players (Shell, McGuire). It's a bit early for the 2017 draft class. The 2017 class is TBD. So, player like Leggett and Hansen can make something of themselves as well. Also, Adams and Leo still have the chance of becoming impact players.  

 

Eliajah McGuire had 2 starts, but only had one game with more than 34 yards rushing.  He averaged three and a half yards per carry.  He finished out the season with games of -3, 24, 0 and -6 yards rushing.  He is young and I am not writing him off, but in what world is that an "average starter?"

  • Post of the Week 1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

I think you forgot the "Chansi Stuckey era."  Chansi Stuckey was on the Jets for 2008 and the first quarter of 2009.  Every week that Stuckey was on the Jets they were better than they have been at any point in the Bowles/Maccagnan era.  As a Jet, he has about 300 more receiving yards than anybody that Maccagnan has drafted and as many receiving TDs as Smith, Peake, McGuire, Stewart, Hansen and Leggett combined.  He has more career receiving yards and TDs than all those players combined by a considerable margin.

Of course he does because the Jets were so thin at WR that they were forced to play him. Now they have depth. 

Remember in 2009 they had to trade for Braylon Edwards

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, HawkeyeJet said:

I present this without(much) commentary.  I think the general consensus of Jets fan is that Macc has done a poor job.  On the other hand, I think non Jets fans have a different perception.  McShay appears to be one.  I am not advocating for or against, I just find it interesting.  The numbers used here will go down a bit, but I think his overall point would stay the same.

 

The problem with this assessment however -- is production. It's great that Macc picked these low-risk or ST jobbers who stick on the roster -- but where's the production? 

His picks haven't moved the needle. We've gotten progressively worse on offense, barring some inflated numbers via an UDFA he had nothing to do with.

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

Of course he does because the Jets were so thin at WR that they were forced to play him. Now they have depth

You are a funny dude.  The 2008 Jets had Coles and Cotchery, either of whom would be the #1 WR on the 2017-2018 Jets.  If the 2008-2009 Jets played the 2017 Jets every week they would be 16-0.

You honestly think the current team is more talented than 2009?  If so, you are too far out there to reason with. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Paradis said:

The problem with this assessment however -- is production. It's great that Macc picked these low-risk or ST jobbers who stick on the roster -- but where's the production? 

His picks haven't moved the needle. We've gotten progressively worse on offense, barring some inflated numbers via an UDFA he had nothing to do with.

Your general point is okay but your reasoning is garbage. Considering that the Jets have gotten solid statistical QB play for 2 of the 3 years he’s been here

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, #27TheDominator said:

You are a funny dude.  The 2008 Jets had Coles and Cotchery, either of whom would be the #1 WR on the 2017-2018 Jets.  If the 2008-2009 Jets played the 2017 Jets every week they would be 16-0.

No they wouldn’t. A younger Coles would be

Link to post
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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.




×
×
  • Create New...