Albert Breer suggests Jets may bend on the price for a trade down

[Skeptable]

16 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

They better not "bend on the price" to move all the way from 3 to 15.

Why does it matter... Getting #15, #46 and 2020 1st is technically bending below value according to Jimmy Johnson Trade value chart and I would accept that... Because the 2020 #1 could be super valuable.

[SR24]

Just now, jetstream23 said:

I have thought this was a likely scenario for a long time. Nobody really wants to trade up too badly and the Jets may put a discount on the number 3 pick in order to pull someone up the board and get out of that spot.

Wouldn’t be surprised if it was something like the Redskins 15th pick, 46th pick (2nd round) and a 2nd rounder next year. 

Mac should be fired if he jumps all the way down to 15 for that compensation hopefully we're all wrong lol

[RedBeardedSavage]

I’m willing to take veterans (o-lineman or corners) in lieu of some draft selections to move down. 

If we are indeed talking about the Redskins, I’d take scherff or Trent Williams in a package with their 2nd rounder this year to move down. 

For me, the worst case scenario is taking another d-lineman @ 3.  I don’t care about the draft value chart, I don’t care about how good some of these d-line prospects are - I care about bringing  in players that will help Darnold develop.  

[ZachEY]

2 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

I have thought this was a likely scenario for a long time. Nobody really wants to trade up too badly and the Jets may put a discount on the number 3 pick in order to pull someone up the board and get out of that spot.

 Wouldn’t be surprised if it was something like the Redskins 15th pick, 46th pick (2nd round) and a 2nd rounder next year. 

Which would be terrible.

[ZachEY]

2 minutes ago, Skeptable said:

Why does it matter... Getting #15, #46 and 2020 1st is technically bending below value according to Jimmy Johnson Trade value chart and I would accept that... Because the 2020 #1 could be super valuable.

As I said, that's what you're betting on.  The Skins being top 3.

It matters, because, we're a bad football team, and at 3, if we don't do something stupid, we can add a bonafide good football player to our bad football team.  Dropping down to 15 at a discount decreases those changes, obviously.

[Bruce Harper]

4 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

I have thought this was a likely scenario for a long time. Nobody really wants to trade up too badly and the Jets may put a discount on the number 3 pick in order to pull someone up the board and get out of that spot.

Wouldn’t be surprised if it was something like the Redskins 15th pick, 46th pick (2nd round) and a 2nd rounder next year. 

No thank you.

[JoJoTownsell1]

4 minutes ago, Dcat said:

Ive done some mocks on the mock sites with the Jets having Washington's 1 & 2 (plus the 2020 1 & 2) and Washington taking a QB at #3.

So far, I've always been able to come away with Dillard, Taylor or Ford at 15.  And I've been able to get Winovich, J Ferguson and even Polite on occasion with the Redskins 2nd rounder.  Most of the time with that, it's slim pickings for C at 3.04, but occasionally there's a good one there.

I've also tried it drafting the best remaining Edge rusher at 15 and C or OT in the 2nd.  When I go that way, I always get 2 inferior players compared to when I take the tackle at 1.15.  So, if we do trade with Washington, Unless somehow Sweat falls to 15, 15 would be OT and 2.14 would be Edge (or C) with 3.04 being C (or Edge).

I'd love winovich in the second. 

[ZachEY]

4 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Are we really? The Jets do not need another defensive tackle. Being able to draft offense without getting crushed for it while accruing more picks isnt all that bad. If Fant is Travis Kelce/Ertz etc, that's way more valuable to the Jets right now than Q. Will, imo.

I mean, I wouldn't take Q. Will.  But, I get your point.

I take Oliver there.  If he's gone, I try to get back a few slots first, before taking the discount.

I'm sure Fant will be better than Herdon, but are we really in need of replacing Macc's only good draft pick?

[shuler82]

1 minute ago, TeddEY said:

Which would be terrible.

Don’t worry, Big Mac is playing three dimensional chess.  First tactical move was loudly pronouncing how desperate he was to move down and recoup draft picks. What could go wrong? 

[SR24]

Just now, RedBeardedSavage said:

I’m willing to take veterans (o-lineman or corners) in lieu of some draft selections to move down. 

If we are indeed talking about the Redskins, I’d take scherff or Trent Williams in a package with their 2nd rounder this year to move down. 

For me, the worst case scenario is taking another d-lineman @ 3.  I don’t care about the draft value chart, I don’t care about how good some of these d-line prospects are - I care about bringing  in players that will help Darnold develop.  

Yesss we need Scherff coming in any deal for #3

[varjet]

Mac would be lucky to get the value chart here-compare Johnson's and Harvards.

Washington would not overpay like we did for Darnold.  That could be ok in this context though.  

[section314]

What a shocker. Tell the world for months you want out, and then when you get discount bids, you’re confused? Say it again, we canned the wrong guy.

[Klecko73isGod]

10 minutes ago, JiF said:

No doubt and if the Redskins are in love with a QB, they shouldnt have to bend one single bit. 

Exactly, if you think he's the guy, you pay whatever it takes to get him. 

Snyder better be prepared to part with his whole draft and part of next year's. 

[Klecko73isGod]

1 minute ago, varjet said:

Mac would be lucky to get the value chart here-compare Johnson's and Harvards.

Washington would not overpay like we did for Darnold.  That could be ok in this context though.  

You do know who owns that team, right?

[NYs Stepchild]

1 minute ago, shuler82 said:

Don’t worry, Big Mac is playing three dimensional chess.  First tactical move was loudly pronouncing how desperate he was to move down and recoup draft picks. What could go wrong? 

Yes, the smart move would be to not tell anyone we'd be willing to trade out. 

That's why I never tell anyone when I want to sell anything. 

[Greenbloodblitz]

I absolutely expect Carr and Rosen to be traded during the draft. And I think the Redskins and or the Giants will be involved.

[Bruce Harper]

2 minutes ago, section314 said:

What a shocker. Tell the world for months you want out, and then when you get discount bids, you’re confused? Say it again, we canned the wrong guy.

You can beat him up for a lot of things but I don't think it was a problem that he said he would trade down for the right offer.  Of course he would.  I don't think that devalues the pick.

[Greenbloodblitz]

I think Denver will wind up moving up and taking Haskins...

[Greenbloodblitz]

I think the Jets will trade down and we're not getting a first next year. We're getting a first, second and 3rd this year, a second next year. And this is fine by me because we can package two of those thirds and move back up into the second this year. So we'll wind up with a first and 2 seconds this year and next. Sounds great to me

[Skeptable]

13 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

As I said, that's what you're betting on.  The Skins being top 3.

It matters, because, we're a bad football team, and at 3, if we don't do something stupid, we can add a bonafide good football player to our bad football team.  Dropping down to 15 at a discount decreases those changes, obviously.

Not necessarily... because you get more picks which should increase your chance of getting impact players.... I Know... I know... Mac's draft history.... but to be fair... some of that is Mac trying to fit picks into what Bowles wanted... Choir boys... These coaches don't need choir boys... hence why I think this is going to be a very different draft..

[Lupz27]

35 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

They better not "bend on the price" to move all the way from 3 to 15.

3 to 15 needs to fetch the equivalent of 3 1st round picks for me which is basically this and next years 1st, this and next years 2nd, and maybe a throw in player at a position of need like C, CB, or edge.

[Jetsbb]

3 minutes ago, Greenbloodblitz said:

I think the Jets will trade down and we're not getting a first next year. We're getting a first, second and 3rd this year, a second next year. And this is fine by me because we can package two of those thirds and move back up into the second this year. So we'll wind up with a first and 2 seconds this year and next. Sounds great to me

So they get less for going from 3 to 15 than the Colts got for going from 3 to 6. Terrible

[Greenbloodblitz]

Just now, Jetsbb said:

So they get less for going from 3 to 15 than the Colts got for going from 3 to 6. Terrible

The value of quarterbacks this year is not there at the top of the draft.

[NYJetsDaddy]

34 minutes ago, faba said:

This is too far down to go to get a impact player stay at 3

That is so not true.

[nycdan]

19 minutes ago, NYs Stepchild said:

Why does it sound like you think both teams would be getting ripped off on this deal? 

I didn't intend to come across that way.  I (subjective opinion) don't see Haskins as the  same type of prospect as Goff/Wentz were that you trade gobs of picks to move up for.  Particularly because I think he is more likely to drop past 5 than those two were.  So I think that the price we would want to move down is more than the Redskins could rationally justify.  So either we will take too little or they will pay more than they should.  I do think there is a price in the middle that leaves both teams subject to criticism but not 'ripped off'.  Say they give us 15, their 2nd rounder and 2020 2nd rounder.  Not enough for the Jets in my opinion and more than I think they need to pay to get Haskins.

But as I said, with Snyder, all bets for rational thinking are off.  We could land a bonanza that makes moving down much easier to like.  

[Skeptable]

10 minutes ago, Greenbloodblitz said:

I absolutely expect Carr and Rosen to be traded during the draft. And I think the Redskins and or the Giants will be involved.

Redskins are out on Rosen...  and I believe it... There wouldn't be talk of moving up to 3 if he was... Giants should trade their 2nd rounder for Rosen... Nobody is trading for Carr during the draft... I think the Raiders will have to wait until injuries happen.

[jetspenguin]

it's hilarious to read people say the jets should keep secret they are open to a trade...they haven't been shouting from the rooftop, they let the media do that for them. There is nothing wrong with saying "hey, I'm listening to offers so come correct with your best and final or someone else might get it"

I have ZERO problem with mac saying he is open to trade offers, I only have a problem with him if he takes a STEEP discount. He wont get what we traded because last year a premium was paid to keep the deal quiet and make the deal early. Neither of which apply here apparently so no-one should be expecting that kind of overpayment. 

That being said 3 to 15 is worth a ride on Snyders daughter for a few weeks, 

[Jetsbb]

I don't think Jets trade with Redskins without next years 1 included in the trade.

[jetspenguin]

7 minutes ago, Greenbloodblitz said:

I think the Jets will trade down and we're not getting a first next year. We're getting a first, second and 3rd this year, a second next year. And this is fine by me because we can package two of those thirds and move back up into the second this year. So we'll wind up with a first and 2 seconds this year and next. Sounds great to me

i like this

[carlito1171]

This would actually piss me off more then taking Quinnen or Josh Allen 

[Skeptable]

17 minutes ago, NYs Stepchild said:

Yes, the smart move would be to not tell anyone we'd be willing to trade out. 

That's why I never tell anyone when I want to sell anything. 

Not necessarily... if nobody knows you want to trade out then you won't get any offers... Everyone knows you want to trade out... multiple offers and if they want it bad enough there will be bid war... works both ways.

[New York Mick]

Even with bending going from 3 to 15 is going to include next year’s first. 

[carlito1171]

36 minutes ago, Stonehands said:

My amateur guess is the we receive 2 2nd's, a 3rd and a 5th for moving down from 3 to 15 with one of the 2nd's being next year and maybe the 3rd being next year.  That would restore our presence in rounds 2 and 5 this year.  On the draft value chart it is pretty close to a wash which in the case of a big QB move like that, would be viewed as taking less.

Mac should get thrown out of Florham Park if he takes a deal like that. 

[Lith]

All depends on how far we have to bend.  I would rather bend a little than come away with QW at 3.  But we better not bend all the way over and take it up the...

Looking back at the Eagles trade up from 13 to 2 for Wentz, they gave up #13 a 3rd and a 4th in 2016 draft.  Plus 2017 1st and 2nd.  Plus Kiko Alonzo and Byron Maxwell.  Gave up 5 picks and two players.  If bending a little means 4 picks and no players, I am okay with that.  #15, 46, 76 and next year's 1 is considered bending, sign me up.  But these stories that we are willing to accept less than full value in a tradeup make me a bit queasy.  All depends on what we mean by "bending."

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

Trading down always seems great in theory because you just fast forward through the rube goldberg of sh*t that needs to go right for it to work out like you had planned. In this case it's having at least a couple quarterbacks, a tight end, a linebacker, and another reach come off the board in the top half of the first round so you can pick between an edge guy with no athletic numbers and a receiver who turns corners like an ocean liner. Taylor and JWilliams are gone and I'm sure as sh*t not taking Dillard for the Bills to line Oliver up against.