Adam Schefter: I expect Sam Darnold to start for the Jets next season

[Charlie Brown]

2 hours ago, Rhg1084 said:

 

[jgb]

10 minutes ago, Charlie Brown said:

No, the Jets don't have enough good players to invest in good players.

[Jetsfan80]

10 hours ago, Irish Jet said:

And stop with the trade down stuff. It's everyone's favoured option every single year. Always more favourable to our fanbase than the other team's coincidentally. 

Douglas did it multiple times in his first draft, and comes from a prior org (Baltimore) who traded down all the time.

It was only difficult for Maccagnan because he was inept and a pu$$y.  Tannenbaum philosophically felt it was best to trade up for a more "sure thing", a strategy that failed him badly when he traded up for the likes of Stephen Hill, Dustin Keller, Joe McKnight, etc.  

If Douglas wants to trade down, he will, and will likely get pretty good value back. 

[BroadwayRay]

On 1/15/2021 at 1:57 PM, Paradis said:

It always amazes me how quickly/frequently fans wind up at “conspiracy” theories, staring every GM ever... especially with regards to “floating false narratives” in order to some tease some team into altering their whole offseason/draft approach. 

It’s insane. 

“Hey, I know. Well tell everyone we love Sam - so they’ll try to trade us for him”

”great idea, Joe”

Yeah, silly me for thinking coaches and GMs would ever dare “float false narratives.” How ignorant of me!

Kliff Kingsbury: "Josh (Rosen) Is Our Guy"

FEBRUARY 12, 2019

 

Photo by Arizona Cardinals Cardinals coach Kliff Kingsbury talks to the media Tuesday while introducing his defensive coaching staff. 

The speculation about the Cardinals and their plans of what they will do with their No. 1 overall draft pick – as noted by team president Michael Bidwill – doesn't figure to slow over the next few months.

But in terms of the team potentially going after Oklahoma quarterback Kyler Murray instead of sticking with 2018 first-round pick Josh Rosen, coach Kliff Kingsbury tried to quash such talk Tuesday.

"Our feelings toward Josh haven't waned or changed," Kingsbury said. "I get that we have the first pick and there are going to be a million scenarios, and over the next three months they are going to come up. But Josh is our guy."

The Murray-Cardinals speculation has been partially fueled by an interview Kingsbury did during the college football season in which – as Texas Tech's head coach – he said if he had the top pick in the NFL draft, he'd take Murray. The comments came in late October, the week leading into Texas Tech's game against Murray and the Oklahoma Sooners.

Coincidentally, Kingsbury not only found himself with an NFL head coaching job a few months later, it happened to be with the Cardinals – who own the No. 1 pick.

"Kyler is a tremendous player, and I said that, being very complimentary before we played an opponent," Kingsbury said. "I understand the sound bite. But like I said there will be a ton of scenarios before we come to the draft."

Murray, who was a first-round pick of baseball's Oakland A's, announced Monday he was turning down a chance to play baseball for now (and eschewing more than $4 million of bonus money) to focus on the NFL and be drafted.

Rosen, the 10th pick overall in 2018, was the centerpiece of the Cardinals' pitch during their coaching search. The team sought out a coach that would transform Rosen to be the team's quarterback of the future.

"I do think that there's a lot of things that we do, that we did at Texas Tech, that can be successful," Kingsbury said at his introductory press conference last month. "Josh Rosen is incredibly talented, one of the most talented throwers you'll see. A young player, obviously, that I'm excited to work with and develop. But as a pure thrower, it's hard to find a guy that throws it better."

[Paradis]

54 minutes ago, BroadwayRay said:

Yeah, silly me for thinking coaches and GMs would ever dare “float false narratives.” How ignorant of me!

True but not a great example. That was to avoid an obvious media bonanza for 2 months after taking Rosen 10 months ago. They had the first pick in the draft. No need to trick anyone. It wasn’t to drum up some backwards trade value scenario either....

If Saleh and JD want to move on from Darnold, that would be fine. No one would question it. They may very well go that direction and continue to say they love Darnold to avoid questions and such but to manipulate other GMs decision making is a stretch to say the least 

[Sperm Edwards]

21 hours ago, Irish Jet said:

A large part of the difference is simply age/contract value. Conklin is a top 10 pick who has hit. You're right that he wouldn't demand that value on the market simply because he's older and needs to get paid. Not because he's not good enough on the field.

And a position is not a player. You cannot get a premium Tackle like Sewell in Free Agency, no more than you can get an elite QB. Literally another position you can get premium talent, if anything this is an argument for Sewell as you can get quality WR's or CB's in Free Agency far sooner than you can get an elite tackle. Conklin is probably the very best you can get, and I wanted him. 

You seem really caught up in the difference between right and left tackle, as if right tackle is significantly less valuable. Yes the best tackles generally play on the left to protects predominantly right handed QB's which makes the difference look a lot more striking on the balance sheet than it actually is on the field. Penei Sewell would be a weapon that George Fant simply is not. You wont have the likes of Bosa moving away from Becton to take over the game, you can run effectively to either side, run play action effectively to either side. It would be a serious asset that would make it very easy to put together a dominant line.

And stop with the trade down stuff. It's everyone's favoured option every single year. Always more favourable to our fanbase than the other team's coincidentally. It's not easy to do. I'd prefer we trade for Deshaun Watson if we do anything, but I think it's pretty unlikely. 

The trade down “stuff” you’re scoffing at is the most likely thing to happen, assuming they don’t take a QB, and with good reason.

Your premise, with which I (and it would seem most GMs) disagree, is that an OL needs individually super-elite players to be of championship caliber. Results show this couldn’t be less valid. The OL needs adequacy individually (and preferably with a top 10-12 LT). The Jets haven’t had such a unit in a decade, and for some it has led to the belief we need to now overcompensate when we do not. The Superman myth that Sewell at LT actually is like adding 2-3 players is unserious: an inadequate LG next to him negates Sewell even if he pans out as dreamed individually.

Right tackle is different for two reasons. One is the more obvious, that it’s not the blindside protector of the offense’s real drink-stirring straw. The other is value because of the first reason, in that the RT position doesn’t and has never required such a high pick to adequately fill (directly or, in this case, indirectly).

What is lost on people pining for Sewell at #2 is you’re lowering the value and impact of the team’s biggest hit from the prior draft class, with the hopes of using him temporarily with Sewell before losing him to FA. Then there’s the idea hat the Jets will easily/automatically recoup this #2 with an Adams trade as he’s about to hit FA despite the team demoting him to RT. Never mind other teams with probowl RTs (even 1st round ones) have been unable to do this. Ever. Guys like Conklin and James and Woody and plenty of others reach FA because no one offers up draft picks non-LTs who also need a big contract to keep, even if they’re 1st round former pro bowlers. GMs will pay a high pick (but not #2 overall high) or a higher FA contract, not both. An all pro RT like Conklin costs zero draft picks as a FA at $14MM while a probowl LT like Tunsil costs a 1st rounder and more plus a market-setting contract extension at $22M.

The only team I can recall succeeding with comparable investment at RT was 2013 Philadelphia and there were circumstances there that just don’t exist here (already having an elite LT into his 30s signed for an under-market deal, whom they envisioned would run out of gas soon - i.e. they were probably losing him in a couple years anyway - with their young RT flipping sides; plus the inability to trade down because that draft class was so uniquely weak the return didn’t justify it). Very, very different scenarios that still ultimately required its QB2 to briefly play like a HOFer on demand. Also the rest of their roster was much better than ours is now, and they were 4-12 level bad at because of injuries. The GM behind that wisdom had also just replaced Andy Reid with Chip Kelly, so take that into account as well.

The overwhelming number of playoff teams assemble a merely solid enough OL, most with 0 or 1 of top 5-10-ish draft picks donated to the cause. With LT Becton already here, with a long future ahead of him, it’s not even remotely required to achieve a Super Bowl team level of OL adequacy by then sinking #2 overall on another tackle. Plus if Sewell, who hasn’t played since 2 seasons ago, is anything but Joe Thomas Part II then it’s a disastrous pick rather than merely myopic since you used at least 2 (higher) first rounders on him, plus probably more.

Maybe if the team didn’t have 10+ other starting positions in need of upgrades it could be justified to use #2 like a FA add at RT. But not when they’d still need at least 2 more OLmen, a RB, at least one WR, a TE, probably a QB, an EDGE (or two), at least 2 LBs, 2 CBs, and at least one S (two if Davis doesn’t take a major step forward). That’s just the starters; plus they need some much improved depth to account for injuries, which are/were in need of upgrades and refills as well.

That ridiculously long list is why you trade down if you’re not taking a QB or an edge or a Julio type WR: positions that you must either draft or fork over 1s to trade to get (and then lock in with a high contract after the trade). 

[Sperm Edwards]

On 1/16/2021 at 11:13 PM, bitonti said:

I'm not going to post my resume but I assure you Sperm I'm aware of statistical significance. There's only been like 75 drafts there's not much enough samples in all of football for 99.5 percent significance, whether it be draft picks or anything else. This isn't baseball. 

I'm acting this way because you're acting this way

Why does it have to be back to back seasons or the same position 

Sewell and Becton is nick and brick. Is that a good comparison? It's not perfect but it's close enough. 

Bottom line is that the best lines in the game have 2 or 3 pro bowl or all pro 

1 dude is not enough and I don't understand why you believe it is. Signing thuney for more than a rookie contract Sewell? Why is that so smart? 

It’s smarter because assets have value and you seem oblivious to your own example of it: Ferguson with the really high pick because he’s a LT and the Jets badly needed one. Then Jets took Mangold with a low 1st rounder not at #6 (let alone need to move up to/around #6 to get him). It’s all the difference. The #2 pick has the value of 3 picks of Mangold draft slot. Even with a hole at center, no GM would draft one at #6.

Take a RT at #23 or #33? I’m totally on board with that, depending who else is there when it’s our pick. 

Signing Thuney as a FA is not only smarter it’s vastly smarter than using/trading #2 overall on Thuney because the cap space to pay him, unlike at #2 pick, is an asset every team good and bad either has or can easily create if/when the former team doesn’t feel they need him anymore (at those dollars). That’s why these guys become available in FA in the first place. That’s why you would never be able to sign Thuney and then ever hope you could ever flip him to get a #2 overall pick in return (and probably not even any slot 1st rounder). Ditto Conklin, had Douglas signed him over Fant as he should have (or Ten would have traded him instead of losing him for nothing). Indy couldn’t even get the #2 pick for Nelson if they were looking to trade him this spring.

I’m shocked you can’t (or are unwilling to) grasp this. 

[Augustiniak]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The trade down “stuff” you’re scoffing at is the most likely thing to happen, assuming they don’t take a QB, and with good reason.

Your premise, with which I (and it would seem most GMs) disagree, is that an OL needs individually super-elite players to be of championship caliber. Results show this couldn’t be less valid. The OL needs adequacy individually (and preferably with a top 10-12 LT). The Jets haven’t had such a unit in a decade, and for some it has led to the belief we need to now overcompensate when we do not. The Superman myth that Sewell at LT actually is like adding 2-3 players is unserious: an inadequate LG next to him negates Sewell even if he pans out as dreamed individually.

Right tackle is different for two reasons. One is the more obvious, that it’s not the blindside protector of the offense’s real drink-stirring straw. The other is value because of the first reason, in that the RT position doesn’t and has never required such a high pick to adequately fill (directly or, in this case, indirectly).

What is lost on people pining for Sewell at #2 is you’re lowering the value and impact of the team’s biggest hit from the prior draft class, with the hopes of using him temporarily with Sewell before losing him to FA. Then there’s the idea hat the Jets will easily/automatically recoup this #2 with an Adams trade as he’s about to hit FA despite the team demoting him to RT. Never mind other teams with probowl RTs (even 1st round ones) have been unable to do this. Ever. Guys like Conklin and James and Woody and plenty of others reach FA because no one offers up draft picks non-LTs who also need a big contract to keep, even if they’re 1st round former pro bowlers. GMs will pay a high pick (but not #2 overall high) or a higher FA contract, not both. An all pro RT like Conklin costs zero draft picks as a FA at $14MM while a probowl LT like Tunsil costs a 1st rounder and more plus a market-setting contract extension at $22M.

The only team I can recall succeeding with comparable investment at RT was 2013 Philadelphia and there were circumstances there that just don’t exist here (already having an elite LT into his 30s signed for an under-market deal, whom they envisioned would run out of gas soon - i.e. they were probably losing him in a couple years anyway - with their young RT flipping sides; plus the inability to trade down because that draft class was so uniquely weak the return didn’t justify it). Very, very different scenarios that still ultimately required its QB2 to briefly play like a HOFer on demand. Also the rest of their roster was much better than ours is now, and they were 4-12 level bad at because of injuries. The GM behind that wisdom had also just replaced Andy Reid with Chip Kelly, so take that into account as well.

The overwhelming number of playoff teams assemble a merely solid enough OL, most with 0 or 1 of top 5-10-ish draft picks donated to the cause. With LT Becton already here, with a long future ahead of him, it’s not even remotely required to achieve a Super Bowl team level of OL adequacy by then sinking #2 overall on another tackle. Plus if Sewell, who hasn’t played since 2 seasons ago, is anything but Joe Thomas Part II then it’s a disastrous pick rather than merely myopic since you used at least 2 (higher) first rounders on him, plus probably more.

Maybe if the team didn’t have 10+ other starting positions in need of upgrades it could be justified to use #2 like a FA add at RT. But not when they’d still need at least 2 more OLmen, a RB, at least one WR, a TE, probably a QB, an EDGE (or two), at least 2 LBs, 2 CBs, and at least one S (two if Davis doesn’t take a major step forward). That’s just the starters; plus they need some much improved depth to account for injuries, which are/were in need of upgrades and refills as well.

That ridiculously long list is why you trade down if you’re not taking a QB or an edge or a Julio type WR: positions that you must either draft or fork over 1s to trade to get (and then lock in with a high contract after the trade). 

In sum, you don’t need 2 absolute tackle studs to have a good or great OL.  You need 5 competent starters who can play well together.  And also, that 2nd pick in the draft is for a qb, whether the jets take one or trade back.  If the jets are so intent on taking a tackle they can trade back and get one. 

I think so many here are so obsessed with building a theoretical brick wall in front of our qbs is because we haven’t had a competent qb in so long who can actually get rid of the ball and not require the OL to stonewall the pass rush for 7 mississippi.  You watch brees and Brady still, they get the ball out quickly.  Get the ball out, don’t take sacks, dump it off if you have to or throw it away and don’t take negative yards.  If you have such a qb, you don’t need bechton AND sewell AND thurney AND....

I’m also not a fan of trading for Watson, i hate giving up all those picks and fortunately i think douglas is a draft pick collector and not a burner like tanny.  I think the qb decision is pretty simple here, either they believe in Zach wilson and think he’d be a great fit in the new offense and take him at 2, thus trading darnold in April, OR they auction the pick off to the highest and/or most desperate bidder (likely atlanta or Carolina) and then draft a wr to help darnold out right away.  They’d probably wind up with chase or smith and even more extra picks and could still draft a qb if they wanted.  But after taking bechton and with FA looming, they’re not going OL at 2 or 5 as this would be inefficient use of resources.

[bitonti]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It’s smarter because assets have value and you seem oblivious to your own example of it: Ferguson with the really high pick because he’s a LT and the Jets badly needed one. Then Jets took Mangold with a low 1st rounder not at #6 (let alone need to move up to/around #6 to get him). It’s all the difference. The #2 pick has the value of 3 picks of Mangold draft slot. Even with a hole at center, no GM would draft one at #6.

Take a RT at #23 or #33? I’m totally on board with that, depending who else is there when it’s our pick. 

Signing Thuney as a FA is not only smarter it’s vastly smarter than using/trading #2 overall on Thuney because the cap space to pay him, unlike at #2 pick, is an asset every team good and bad either has or can easily create if/when the former team doesn’t feel they need him anymore (at those dollars). That’s why these guys become available in FA in the first place. That’s why you would never be able to sign Thuney and then ever hope you could ever flip him to get a #2 overall pick in return (and probably not even any slot 1st rounder). Ditto Conklin, had Douglas signed him over Fant as he should have (or Ten would have traded him instead of losing him for nothing). Indy couldn’t even get the #2 pick for Nelson if they were looking to trade him this spring.

I’m shocked you can’t (or are unwilling to) grasp this. 

This posts neglects 1 there's no qb worth the 2 pick 2 if you they draft Sewell they can play anyone at guard 3 thuney is not signing here 4 trading down from 2 happens about 2x a decade. Who is the target? If it's an offensive player they should stick and pick 5 the Jets have so much cap room and so few assets they can build this team however they want, including 2 stud tackles 

I'm not shocked you are unwilling to grasp this. You have always treated Woody's money as your own and have never endorsed this team spending all the way to the cap 

[Scott Dierking]

2 minutes ago, bitonti said:

This posts neglects 1 there's no qb worth the 2 pick and 2 if you they draft Sewell they can play anyone at guard 3 thuney is not signing here 

@Maxman

I would pay money to witness a podcast of Sperm Edwards and Bitonti going at their draft strategy. Engaging, guys.

[Sperm Edwards]

9 minutes ago, bitonti said:

This posts neglects 1 there's no qb worth the 2 pick 2 if you they draft Sewell they can play anyone at guard 3 thuney is not signing here 4 trading down from 2 happens about 2x a decade. Who is the target? If it's an offensive player they should stick and pick 5 the Jets have so much cap room and so few assets they can build this team however they want, including 2 stud tackles 

I'm not shocked you are unwilling to grasp this. You have always treated Woody's money as your own and have never endorsed this team spending all the way to the cap 

What neglect? There was no QB worth the #1 pick in 2016 either. Goff was going to get drafted at #7 or something.

You not liking either QB at 2 doesn't mean no GM likes either QB at 2. 

I could outline again for you what we could do, but you'll selectively respond to an innocuous sentence and chop off the rest as though it didn't happen anyway, and say your tired one-liner about caring about Woody Johnson's bank account.

The "use your high 1st round pick in back to back seasons on 2 stud tackles" blueprint has worked for how many franchises? The closest I could come to any team even attempting anything close was Tennessee >5 years ago. What do they have to show for it, other than losing one of those tackles to FA after one trip to the playoffs (which itself required a sudden career turnaround from Ryan Tannehill)?

[Augustiniak]

16 minutes ago, bitonti said:

This posts neglects 1 there's no qb worth the 2 pick 2 if you they draft Sewell they can play anyone at guard 3 thuney is not signing here 4 trading down from 2 happens about 2x a decade. Who is the target? If it's an offensive player they should stick and pick 5 the Jets have so much cap room and so few assets they can build this team however they want, including 2 stud tackles 

I'm not shocked you are unwilling to grasp this. You have always treated Woody's money as your own and have never endorsed this team spending all the way to the cap 

i disagree, i think wilson is going to be a good to very good qb.  Of course we can agree to disagree.  I know you’re going to bring up his injury history which is a concern, but strictly from a talent/style perspective, wilson is what you want in a qb, strong arm, quick decision maker, naturally accurate.  But, if the jets agree with you, they’ll probably keep darnold and trade out of 2 b/c pt barnum’s principle says they’ll find a trading partner.  I disagree with drafting sewell, the best teams in the nfl have elite weapons and if the jets trade back a few spots they should target one.

[Augustiniak]

10 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What neglect? There was no QB worth the #1 pick in 2016 either. Goff was going to get drafted at #7 or something.

You not liking either QB at 2 doesn't mean no GM likes either QB at 2. 

I could outline again for you what we could do, but you'll selectively respond to an innocuous sentence and chop off the rest as though it didn't happen anyway, and say your tired one-liner about caring about Woody Johnson's bank account.

The "use your high 1st round pick in back to back seasons on 2 stud tackles" blueprint has worked for how many franchises? The closest I could come to any team even attempting anything close was Tennessee >5 years ago. What do they have to show for it, other than losing one of those tackles to FA after one trip to the playoffs (which itself required a sudden career turnaround from Ryan Tannehill)?

Mccagnan was brainwashed by bowles into believing that that the one ingredient the defense lacked that would make them elite was safeties.  We all know how that worked out.  Overloading on any one position is not how you build long term success.

[Waka Flocka Flacco]

21 minutes ago, bitonti said:

This posts neglects 1 there's no qb worth the 2 pick 2 if you they draft Sewell they can play anyone at guard 3 thuney is not signing here 4 trading down from 2 happens about 2x a decade. Who is the target? If it's an offensive player they should stick and pick 5 the Jets have so much cap room and so few assets they can build this team however they want, including 2 stud tackles 

I'm not shocked you are unwilling to grasp this. You have always treated Woody's money as your own and have never endorsed this team spending all the way to the cap 

bitonti: Woody is cheap

also bitonti: STOP ACTING LIKE ITS YOUR MONEY

[Bugg]

15 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What neglect? There was no QB worth the #1 pick in 2016 either. Goff was going to get drafted at #7 or something.

You not liking either QB at 2 doesn't mean no GM likes either QB at 2. 

I could outline again for you what we could do, but you'll selectively respond to an innocuous sentence and chop off the rest as though it didn't happen anyway, and say your tired one-liner about caring about Woody Johnson's bank account.

The "use your high 1st round pick in back to back seasons on 2 stud tackles" blueprint has worked for how many franchises? The closest I could come to any team even attempting anything close was Tennessee >5 years ago. What do they have to show for it, other than losing one of those tackles to FA after one trip to the playoffs (which itself required a sudden career turnaround from Ryan Tannehill)?

Douglas is either going to pick a QB early in the draft to compete with Darnold, or blow things up for Watson. There's simply no way the Jets go into summer with Darnold as their only and top QB. If he's here at all. The empty talk about Lafleur liking what he sees is either a prelude to working with him in a competition with a shiny new drafted QB, or an attempt not to devalue trade bait. Let's work from the assumption Douglas has a handle either on Watson's value, or those QBs in the draft. 

On record that I've always like Watson; wanted him bad over Adams. The guy has been a winner and good teammate from Clemson until now. But the Texans want a lot for him. Question for Douglas is are the Jets better off staying with the picks they have, with Wilson or Fields early, or say Mac Jones later in the draft? 

Problem With taking Sewell is like taking safeties so early(i.e., how we got here, instead of taking Watson back in 2017!), it's inevitably going to end up with a misallocation of cap resources. Your cap gets disfigured paying 2 tackles LT money, and more likely either Becton or Sewell leaves via free agency. Simply not plausible you could give both the kind of $ they will be looking for once their ELC runs out, unless you want to franchise one for a bunch of years while paying the other top dollar. And that would really piss off the franchised player. 

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, Augustiniak said:

Mccagnan was brainwashed by bowles into believing that that the one ingredient the defense lacked that would make them elite was safeties.  We all know how that worked out.  Overloading on any one position is not how you build long term success.

The only one I believe Bowles had influence on was the Maye pick, so soon after taking Adams, but there's no evidence or a single leak that any pick was really a Bowles pick (Maye included). Maccagnan ran the draft. 

That said, yes it's similar to Maccagnan going overboard on safeties, Maccagnan going overboard on DT-DE hybrids, etc. 

There's this myth that saying "Bookend Tackles" makes it the title of a draft recipe for superbowls. Put aside that no SB winner has ever invested such draft capital in a pair of tackles; they believe it like it's a proven recipe anyway. 

[bitonti]

21 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

 

You not liking either QB at 2 doesn't mean no GM likes

The "use your high 1st round pick in back to back seasons on 2 stud tackles" blueprint has worked for how many franchises? 

It's not just me. It's every source worth a damn. No one except internet fans has given a top 3 grade to these qbs. 

You keep talking about the past 

How there's never been this situation before 

First off who cares. Have you ever heard of past performance not guarantee future results? Just because something did or did not happen in the past it has no relevance to the future 

You know what else has never happened before? A true sophomore winning the Outland. A tackle scoring 95 on pff or whatever it was. Sewell has never happened before. He's a similar prospect to Munoz or Walter Jones or other greats but he's unique 

I'm pretty sure Sperm you have done zero research on Sewell you just don't like him because of position 

News flash the Jets have 1 good lineman and 1 decent one in McGovern. A team starts 5.There's room for 2 great lineman on the roster 

[bitonti]

6 minutes ago, Waka Flocka Flacco said:

bitonti: Woody is cheap

also bitonti: STOP ACTING LIKE ITS YOUR MONEY

Woody: never spend to the cap, move out of the country, put a noob in charge etc 

[Augustiniak]

4 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The only one I believe Bowles had influence on was the Maye pick, so soon after taking Adams, but there's no evidence or a single leak that any pick was really a Bowles pick (Maye included). Maccagnan ran the draft. 

That said, yes it's similar to Maccagnan going overboard on safeties, Maccagnan going overboard on DT-DE hybrids, etc. 

There's this myth that saying "Bookend Tackles" makes it the title of a draft recipe for superbowls. Put aside that no SB winner has ever invested such draft capital in a pair of tackles; they believe it like it's a proven recipe anyway. 

If the jets had a competent qb we wouldn’t all be so paranoid into thinking the best way, or the only way, to build an offense is to overload on OL and then stick the qb in there.  Good qbs make OLs look better, they get rid of the ball quicker and complete a higher % of throws.  I believe Zach wilson would make the offense hum, he seems to have most of the innate desirable traits for the shanahan system.  While we’ll hear how great darnold is for the next few months i think ultimately there will come a consensus that wilson is the guy and darnold will be shipped to Indy or Pittsburgh in April.  That said i do believe douglas would love to trade back from 2 and get even more picks b/c he has confidence in his drafting ability and wants to build the team back quickly with as many high picks as possible.

[bitonti]

8 minutes ago, Bugg said:

 

Problem With taking Sewell is like taking safeties so early(i.e., how we got here, instead of taking Watson back in 2017!), it's inevitably going to end up with a misallocation of cap resources. Your cap gets disfigured paying 2 tackles LT money, and more likely either Becton or Sewell leaves via free agency. Simply not plausible you could give both the kind of $ they will be looking for once their ELC runs out, unless you want to franchise one for a bunch of years while paying the other top dollar. And that would really piss off the franchised player. 

Contra case 

The Jets have no players under contract and over 100 million in cap space. They can pay 2 linemen in 2025. Or they can trade 1 for picks. 

It's inconvenient but not as bad as drafting another bust qb 

Bird in the hand, Sewell is a star, fields/Wilson at 2 are scratcher tickets 

[Augustiniak]

Just now, bitonti said:

Contra case 

The Jets have no players under contract and over 100 million in cap space. They can pay 2 linemen in 2025. Or they can trade 1 for picks. 

It's inconvenient but not as bad as drafting another bust qb 

Bird in the hand, Sewell is a star, fields/Wilson at 2 are scratcher tickets 

Or, sewell becomes just a pretty good tackle and the jets still lack playmakers and qb and you have brick/mangold protecting Sanchez for their salad days.

[Scott Dierking]

1 minute ago, bitonti said:

Contra case 

The Jets have no players under contract and over 100 million in cap space. They can pay 2 linemen in 2025. Or they can trade 1 for picks. 

It's inconvenient but not as bad as drafting another bust qb 

Bird in the hand, Sewell is a star, fields/Wilson at 2 are scratcher tickets 

Who is Sewell's agent, and how much do you owe him?

[bitonti]

1 minute ago, Augustiniak said:

  I believe Zach wilson would make the offense hum, he seems to have most of the innate desirable traits for the shanahan system.  

Zach wilson has had 2 shoulder reconstructions already. His linemen at byu are 25 years old. He has never played elite power 5 competition. His most impressive film is against Utah and San Diego state. Read any scouting report his biggest weakness is durability/ taking a hit. He's like a slightly better already injured Chad Pennington. And the Jets by the way have 1 lineman worth a damn to protect this injury prone skinny player 

How is that supposed to work? At 2 overall? Cmon 

[bitonti]

1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said:

Who is Sewell's agent, and how much do you owe him?

Players like Sewell don't need their agents to pay for pub

That's more of a Zach wilson thing 

[Augustiniak]

Just now, bitonti said:

Zach wilson has had 2 shoulder reconstructions already. His linemen at byu are 25 years old. He has never played elite power 5 competition. His most impressive film is against Utah and San Diego state. Read any scouting report his biggest weakness is durability/ taking a hit. He's like a slightly better already injured Chad Pennington. And the Jets by the way have 1 lineman worth a damn to protect this injury prone skinny player 

How is that supposed to work? At 2 overall? Cmon 

His left arm is stronger than chad’s right arm pre shoulder surgeries.  Again, his injury history is a concern and they need to research this.  But his skill set is great, you can see that by watching him play.  I think with wilson the ONLY concern is durability, not the playmaking ability or mental.

[Philc1]

4 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Who is Sewell's agent, and how much do you owe him?

[bitonti]

4 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

Or, sewell becomes just a pretty good tackle and the jets still lack playmakers and qb and you have brick/mangold protecting Sanchez for their salad days.

Wanting fields or wilson to be franchise is not the same as them being franchise

there are 2 blue chips in this draft maybe 3. Trevor, Sewell and maybe davonta 

Fields and Wilson are red chips and taking them at 2 is a casual 10 slot reach maybe more. 

[Philc1]

1 minute ago, Augustiniak said:

His left arm is stronger than chad’s right arm pre shoulder surgeries.  Again, his injury history is a concern and they need to research this.  But his skill set is great, you can see that by watching him play.  I think with wilson the ONLY concern is durability, not the playmaking ability or mental.

Haven’t we learned for Dee Milliner?

[Bugg]

3 minutes ago, bitonti said:

Contra case 

The Jets have no players under contract and over 100 million in cap space. They can pay 2 linemen in 2025. Or they can trade 1 for picks. 

It's inconvenient but not as bad as drafting another bust qb 

Bird in the hand, Sewell is a star, fields/Wilson at 2 are scratcher tickets 

Still think is a misallocation, but I could understand it, but only if it's coupled with picking a QB later to compete with the beach bum QB. Say, Mac Jones or somebody like that. 

The Jets cannot go into 2021 with Darnold as their QB with no plausible real competition. Seen NOTHING during his tenure here that should allow for that. He's earned nothing. You can point fingers at Gase and before, but Darnold has been terrible. 

[Charlie Brown]

31 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What neglect? There was no QB worth the #1 pick in 2016 either. Goff was going to get drafted at #7 or something.

You not liking either QB at 2 doesn't mean no GM likes either QB at 2. 

 

This is the key point the Jets might not think that they need a QB but plenty of other GM/Teams might feel otherwise....

Nice discussion!!!

All I can say is for once the Jets are in a relatively good place in the draft and appear to have a SANE GM!!!!!  

[Bugg]

4 minutes ago, bitonti said:

Zach wilson has had 2 shoulder reconstructions already. His linemen at byu are 25 years old. He has never played elite power 5 competition. His most impressive film is against Utah and San Diego state. Read any scouting report his biggest weakness is durability/ taking a hit. He's like a slightly better already injured Chad Pennington. And the Jets by the way have 1 lineman worth a damn to protect this injury prone skinny player 

How is that supposed to work? At 2 overall? Cmon 

Would think anyone who saw Pennington's last few post surgery seasons would have to be nuts to take Wilson with the 2nd pick.

[bitonti]

1 minute ago, Augustiniak said:

His left arm is stronger than chad’s right arm pre shoulder surgeries.  Again, his injury history is a concern and they need to research this.  But his skill set is great, you can see that by watching him play.  I think with wilson the ONLY concern is durability, not the playmaking ability or mental.

Not only his durability but also his running style he takes huge hits. He's not cam Newton at 6'6" 260. He's slight in frame and low on upper body muscles because he's been rehabbing his terrible shoulders for an entire off-season. Nfl edge rushers will break Zach wilson in 2. 

[bitonti]

2 minutes ago, Bugg said:

Still think is a misallocation, but I could understand it, but only if it's coupled with picking a QB later to compete with the beach bum QB. Say, Mac Jones or somebody like that. 

The Jets cannot go into 2021 with Darnold as their QB with no plausible real competition. Seen NOTHING during his tenure here that should allow for that. He's earned nothing. You can point fingers at Gase and before, but Darnold has been terrible. 

These are 2 different discussions 

Who is worth 2 and how do they replace Sam these are different questions

there's no easy venn in this draft other than Trevor. 

[bitonti]

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The trade down “stuff” you’re scoffing at is the most likely thing to happen, assuming they don’t take a QB, and with good reason.

Your premise, with which I (and it would seem most GMs) disagree, is that an OL needs individually super-elite players to be of championship caliber. Results show this couldn’t be less valid. The OL needs adequacy individually (and preferably with a top 10-12 LT). The Jets haven’t had such a unit in a decade, and for some it has led to the belief we need to now overcompensate when we do not. The Superman myth that Sewell at LT actually is like adding 2-3 players is unserious: an inadequate LG next to him negates Sewell even if he pans out as dreamed individually.

Right tackle is different for two reasons. One is the more obvious, that it’s not the blindside protector of the offense’s real drink-stirring straw. The other is value because of the first reason, in that the RT position doesn’t and has never required such a high pick to adequately fill (directly or, in this case, indirectly).

What is lost on people pining for Sewell at #2 is you’re lowering the value and impact of the team’s biggest hit from the prior draft class, with the hopes of using him temporarily with Sewell before losing him to FA. Then there’s the idea hat the Jets will easily/automatically recoup this #2 with an Adams trade as he’s about to hit FA despite the team demoting him to RT. Never mind other teams with probowl RTs (even 1st round ones) have been unable to do this. Ever. Guys like Conklin and James and Woody and plenty of others reach FA because no one offers up draft picks non-LTs who also need a big contract to keep, even if they’re 1st round former pro bowlers. GMs will pay a high pick (but not #2 overall high) or a higher FA contract, not both. An all pro RT like Conklin costs zero draft picks as a FA at $14MM while a probowl LT like Tunsil costs a 1st rounder and more plus a market-setting contract extension at $22M.

The only team I can recall succeeding with comparable investment at RT was 2013 Philadelphia and there were circumstances there that just don’t exist here (already having an elite LT into his 30s signed for an under-market deal, whom they envisioned would run out of gas soon - i.e. they were probably losing him in a couple years anyway - with their young RT flipping sides; plus the inability to trade down because that draft class was so uniquely weak the return didn’t justify it). Very, very different scenarios that still ultimately required its QB2 to briefly play like a HOFer on demand. Also the rest of their roster was much better than ours is now, and they were 4-12 level bad at because of injuries. The GM behind that wisdom had also just replaced Andy Reid with Chip Kelly, so take that into account as well.

The overwhelming number of playoff teams assemble a merely solid enough OL, most with 0 or 1 of top 5-10-ish draft picks donated to the cause. With LT Becton already here, with a long future ahead of him, it’s not even remotely required to achieve a Super Bowl team level of OL adequacy by then sinking #2 overall on another tackle. Plus if Sewell, who hasn’t played since 2 seasons ago, is anything but Joe Thomas Part II then it’s a disastrous pick rather than merely myopic since you used at least 2 (higher) first rounders on him, plus probably more.

Maybe if the team didn’t have 10+ other starting positions in need of upgrades it could be justified to use #2 like a FA add at RT. But not when they’d still need at least 2 more OLmen, a RB, at least one WR, a TE, probably a QB, an EDGE (or two), at least 2 LBs, 2 CBs, and at least one S (two if Davis doesn’t take a major step forward). That’s just the starters; plus they need some much improved depth to account for injuries, which are/were in need of upgrades and refills as well.

That ridiculously long list is why you trade down if you’re not taking a QB or an edge or a Julio type WR: positions that you must either draft or fork over 1s to trade to get (and then lock in with a high contract after the trade). 

The essential flaw in this logic is that you value a bust qb at 2 over an all pro tackle because the quarterback plays qb 

Bird in the hand. 

The draft offers an all pro you take the all pro 

These qb are the next trubisky or rg3 or Ryan leaf 

That's what happens when a team takes a qb at 2 overall 

[Sperm Edwards]

3 minutes ago, Bugg said:

Douglas is either going to pick a QB early in the draft to compete with Darnold, or blow things up for Watson. There's simply no way the Jets go into summer with Darnold as their only and top QB. If he's here at all. The empty talk about Lafleur liking what he sees is either a prelude to working with him in a competition with a shiny new drafted QB, or an attempt not to devalue trade bait. Let's work from the assumption Douglas has a handle either on Watson's value, or those QBs in the draft. 

On record that I've always like Watson; wanted him bad over Adams. The guy has been a winner and good teammate from Clemson until now. But the Texans want a lot for him. Question for Douglas is are the Jets better off staying with the picks they have, with Wilson or Fields early, or say Mac Jones later in the draft? 

Problem With taking Sewell is like taking safeties so early(i.e., how we got here, instead of taking Watson back in 2017!), it's inevitably going to end up with a misallocation of cap resources. Your cap gets disfigured paying 2 tackles LT money, and more likely either Becton or Sewell leaves via free agency. Simply not plausible you could give both the kind of $ they will be looking for once their ELC runs out, unless you want to franchise one for a bunch of years while paying the other top dollar. And that would really piss off the franchised player. 

This is the other half of the equation that "OMG WATSON WOUDL BE 40 MILL" screamers neglect. 

Even if Douglas brings back Darnold, he's not bringing back Darnold and pairing him with another Flacco, and then telling his new HC and OC they have to eat s*** for their first season here. He's going to sign a serious FA (or trade for a veteran) to compete.

The cap hit difference would be negligible once you look to see what'd actually happen: $5MM remaining new money owed to Darnold + $12-16MM for a veteran like Brissett. He may put you to sleep when he's on the field, but he’s at least a legit game manager who belongs in the NFL. Total = $17-20MM/year. 

Let's say the supremely unexpected occurs, and Darnold miraculously has a turnaround like Tannehill 2019:

1. 2021 = $17-21MM for the QB1a/1b pair ($5MM Darnold, $12-16MM Brissett/etc)
2. 2022 = $25MM (5th year option)
3. 2023 = $30MM (y1 of a $35-40MM Darnold extension, moderately backloaded)
4. 2024 = $32MM (y2 of the extension)
5. 2025 = $35MM (y3 of the extension)

5 yr total = $139-143MM = ~$28MM/year. Taking over Watson's contract would be ~$29MM/year.  The cap hit for picking up Watson vs. keeping Darnold, assuming Darnold becomes a star QB, is negligible from a cap standpoint.