2021 NY JETS/NFL FREE AGENCY DRAFT TRADES RUMORS HAPPENINGS ***

[TampaJet]

18 hours ago, win4ever said:

I forgot the article (or video) that mentioned it, but there was something about how the 49ers found success with unheralded guys that fit the defensive system than their big free agent splashes like Kwon Alexander, or trades like Dee Ford.  Feel like maybe they are targeting more towards guys that might fit the system, rather than the other way around.  I wish I remembered where I saw it so I could reference it.  

Anyway, really wanted Fuller, wish we were in on him.   

I think this is relevant.  I wanted Fuller too, but it sounds like he wanted to  go to Denver no matter what.

[32EBoozer]

26 minutes ago, Jetlife33 said:

 

Prepare to see Leo production drop like Game Stop shares after the Reddit peak! He was discipled by Mo Wilk expect similar play post guaranteed money. 

[Warfish]

2 hours ago, T0mShane said:

Jets fans: Gase is killing this team OMG

Also Jets fans: We need to replace every player/No one can win with these stiffs

Lol at Tom still defending Gase.  

[BornJetsFan1983]

6 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Lol at Tom still defending Gase.  

That was so last season...

[RedBeardedSavage]

1 hour ago, Stark said:

Gase 

Gase - true the team appears extremely devoid of talent. It’s impossible to know if we have anything because the horrible coach and his ineptitude. Our team always looked flat and unprepared. 
 

I think trying to gauge or apply any real value is going to be skewed because of how bad Gase actually was. 
 

we need more talent yes. Would I be surprised if a handful of players shock me just due to the coaching changes/scheme, no. 
 

Barring any shocking QB trade I still say we trade that #2 pick for an RG III size compensation and let JD have a chance to speed up the process. 

Unrelated, love the avatar. Watched that show last Spring early quarantine. It's great. 

[chad2coles]

18 hours ago, clayton163v said:

Shane Lemeiux started the last nine games of the season for the Giants.  He is the future.  Zeitler was cut to make room for him in the starting lineup since the other guard spot is taken up by the 2018 second round pick Will Hernandez.  That the two played together last year is not the point.  The point is the Giants went with Lemieux for this season and the seasons to come. 

Look, I do not deny that Zeitler has some tread left on his tire.  But he is a very NOW player.  The Jets are rebuilding and we need tomorrow's players.  If we were reloading, it would be very different.  We are rebuilding, not reloading.

The other 3 have no business starting. They aren’t now guys. They aren’t future guys. They are never guys. Every free agent signing doesn’t have to be part of the future. If he’s blocking for our qb, that helps the future. 

[derp]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

Sure but who's here to shock you?  lol  Crowder is the only consistent main stay, I guess maybe the OL could improve with new coaching but we also hired rookie HC, who hired a rookie OC and DC.   We really have no clue what we're getting here, albeit, more than likely an upgrade over Gase and company.

I want Fields but I dont see it happening and because of that and my fear of Zach Wilson, I'm starting to lean toward the trade back as well.  I'm almost all in on it but my plan would include bringing back Bridgewater.  This team is sooo bad and I've been messing around with trade back scenarios, they legit could rebuild entire units with proper execution.  

This is where I’ve gotten as well. Part of me thinks that as quiet as the team was pre FA, this Wilson to the Jets buzz is somewhere in between complete speculation and intentional leaks. Bridgewater would make sense in a deal back with Carolina. Throw in a dart throw at a quarterback in round 3 or 4 and work a little on building up the roster.

Jets still don’t have a clear cut primary option in the passing game and didn’t seriously address tight end this offseason despite some young guys being available...

[varjet]

7 minutes ago, chad2coles said:

The other 3 have no business starting. They aren’t now guys. They aren’t future guys. They are never guys. Every free agent signing doesn’t have to be part of the future. If he’s blocking for our qb, that helps the future. 

This is right.  The  Jets need at least 5 good OL.  They have 2.75 right now.  Those are big holes.  

[Adoni Beast]

1 minute ago, derp said:

Throw in a dart throw at a quarterback in round 3 or 4 and work a little on building up the roster.

Signing JAG starters and throwing QB darts in the mid rounds (especially in this draft) will end up with a depth chart of:

Ryan Fitzpatrick

Bryce Petty

Christian Hackenberg

You only do that when you have no other choice.

But to forgo drafting a QB at 2 in the 1st without having to trade up for once is madness.

[derp]

14 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

Signing JAG starters and throwing QB darts in the mid rounds (especially in this draft) will end up with a depth chart of:

Ryan Fitzpatrick

Bryce Petty

Christian Hackenberg

You only do that when you have no other choice.

But to forgo drafting a QB at 2 in the 1st without having to trade up for once is madness.

Who are the best quarterbacks to get drafted in the top 3 lately?

[nycdan]

1 minute ago, derp said:

Who are the best quarterbacks to get drafted in the top 3 lately?

Lots of whiffs recently, but I'd say Luck, then Burrow, then *choke* Mayfield in the last decade.  

Prior decade you had Ryan, Stafford, Eli, and Cam.

Overall though, top-3 drafted QBs are probably hitting at just below 50% rate.

[Tranquilo]

Just now, nycdan said:

Lots of whiffs recently, but I'd say Luck, then Burrow, then *choke* Mayfield in the last decade.  

Prior decade you had Ryan, Stafford, Eli, and Cam.

Overall though, top-3 drafted QBs are probably hitting at just below 50% rate.

Which is still much higher than anywhere else in the draft 

[JustInFudge]

1 hour ago, Jetlife33 said:

 

2018 list has 2 WR's who have eclipsed 1,000 yards and the other list has none!

[derp]

6 minutes ago, nycdan said:

Lots of whiffs recently, but I'd say Luck, then Burrow, then *choke* Mayfield in the last decade.  

Prior decade you had Ryan, Stafford, Eli, and Cam.

Overall though, top-3 drafted QBs are probably hitting at just below 50% rate.

Yeah, it’s super, super gross. I think even just below a 50% hit rate is monumentally generous.

Cam is technically within the decade of drafts and is now pretty toast. Stafford never won anything and has been up and down. Luck never quite got to the elite level or win anything significant and retired. Burrow is a big unknown. Murray is promising but unknown too.

Eli the only one to win a Super Bowl. Ryan, Cam, and Goff only ones to play in it?

Folks tend to be like “Just take the quarterback at two!” But it’s anything but a sure thing.

Carolina making an offer for the value of the pick is a big offer. Is it crazy to think that they might go over the value of the pick and want to a draft a quarterback who isn’t Douglas’ top guy?

[nycdan]

1 minute ago, Tranquilo said:

Which is still much higher than anywhere else in the draft 

Not so sure really.

If you look at the top 16 but outside the top-3, here is your list of names recently.

Tua, Herbert

Jones, Haskins

Allen, Rosen

Mahomes, Watson

Manuel, Tannehill

I see 4 solid hits (Herbert, Allen, Mahomes, Watson) and one decent one (Tannehill) out of that list of 10.

it's a small sample size but it doesn't conclusively support the top-3 or bust argument.  It does support the argument that it's not completely predictable who is going to thrive in the NFL.

[derp]

6 minutes ago, Tranquilo said:

Which is still much higher than anywhere else in the draft 

Except it’s not even close to that high and all of the best quarterbacks in the league were drafted outside that range.

[nycdan]

3 minutes ago, derp said:

Yeah, it’s super, super gross. I think even just below a 50% hit rate is monumentally generous.

Cam is technically within the decade of drafts and is now pretty toast. Stafford never won anything and has been up and down. Luck never quite got to the elite level or win anything significant and retired. Burrow is a big unknown. Murray is promising but unknown too.

Eli the only one to win a Super Bowl. Ryan, Cam, and Goff only ones to play in it?

Folks tend to be like “Just take the quarterback at two!” But it’s anything but a sure thing.

Carolina making an offer for the value of the pick is a big offer. Is it crazy to think that they might go over the value of the pick and want to a draft a quarterback who isn’t Douglas’ top guy?

I think you have to separate the player from the situation.

Stafford never won anything but he was a very, very good QB in a horrible situation.  He would have probably been at least Matt Ryan on even an average team.  Luck was elite but again, had no protection and generally not much talent around him most of his time there.

However, I think we agree that the QBs picked in the top-3 are far from a sure thing and may be no more likely to succeed than QBs picked later.  We have to keep in mind, though, that QBs picked later in the round are likely going to stronger teams than QBs picked early.  

[section314]

8 minutes ago, nycdan said:

I think you have to separate the player from the situation.

Stafford never won anything but he was a very, very good QB in a horrible situation.  He would have probably been at least Matt Ryan on even an average team.  Luck was elite but again, had no protection and generally not much talent around him most of his time there.

However, I think we agree that the QBs picked in the top-3 are far from a sure thing and may be no more likely to succeed than QBs picked later.  We have to keep in mind, though, that QBs picked later in the round are likely going to stronger teams than QBs picked early.  

That may be about to change very quickly.

[derp]

12 minutes ago, nycdan said:

I think you have to separate the player from the situation.

Stafford never won anything but he was a very, very good QB in a horrible situation.  He would have probably been at least Matt Ryan on even an average team.  Luck was elite but again, had no protection and generally not much talent around him most of his time there.

However, I think we agree that the QBs picked in the top-3 are far from a sure thing and may be no more likely to succeed than QBs picked later.  We have to keep in mind, though, that QBs picked later in the round are likely going to stronger teams than QBs picked early.  

I actually think Luck was shy of elite but it's at least close. Stafford was certainly very good and didn't make the Lions any worse. I do agree that we agree in general.

Isn't the bold something that supports trading down and building the team while taking shots at quarterback and potentially drafting that guy later?

[Savage69]

5 minutes ago, nycdan said:

I think you have to separate the player from the situation.

Stafford never won anything but he was a very, very good QB in a horrible situation.  He would have probably been at least Matt Ryan on even an average team.  Luck was elite but again, had no protection and generally not much talent around him most of his time there.

However, I think we agree that the QBs picked in the top-3 are far from a sure thing and may be no more likely to succeed than QBs picked later.  We have to keep in mind, though, that QBs picked later in the round are likely going to stronger teams than QBs picked early.  

When Montana was drafted in 1979 the 49'ers were a 2-14 team. Brady drafted in 2000 was on a 5-11 team.. If they talent is there it usually shows up sooner or later..

[BroadwayRay]

25 minutes ago, nycdan said:

Not so sure really.

If you look at the top 16 but outside the top-3, here is your list of names recently.

Tua, Herbert

Jones, Haskins

Allen, Rosen

Mahomes, Watson

Manuel, Tannehill

I see 4 solid hits (Herbert, Allen, Mahomes, Watson) and one decent one (Tannehill) out of that list of 10.

it's a small sample size but it doesn't conclusively support the top-3 or bust argument.  It does support the argument that it's not completely predictable who is going to thrive in the NFL.

It coincides with research that has shown about a 50% chance of success with first-round picks in general.

[Tranquilo]

26 minutes ago, nycdan said:

Not so sure really.

If you look at the top 16 but outside the top-3, here is your list of names recently.

Tua, Herbert

Jones, Haskins

Allen, Rosen

Mahomes, Watson

Manuel, Tannehill

I see 4 solid hits (Herbert, Allen, Mahomes, Watson) and one decent one (Tannehill) out of that list of 10.

it's a small sample size but it doesn't conclusively support the top-3 or bust argument.  It does support the argument that it's not completely predictable who is going to thrive in the NFL.

You’re comparing 3 picks (top 3) to 29 picks. So if you take any sample size of 3 throughout the draft, you’re more likely to find starting QBs in the top 3. Im also not making a top 3 or bust argument. 

[nycdan]

1 minute ago, Tranquilo said:

You’re comparing 3 picks (top 3) to 29 picks. So if you take any sample size of 3 throughout the draft, you’re more likely to find starting QBs in the top 3. Im also not making a top 3 or bust argument. 

I was comparing 1-3 against 4-16.  Arbitrary but in response to something posted.

I think there are actually a fairly similar number of QBs drafted in both of those ranges, despite the higher number of overall picks in the latter range.  

The success rates are similar though too.

[Ben Had]

29 minutes ago, nycdan said:

Not so sure really.

If you look at the top 16 but outside the top-3, here is your list of names recently.

Tua, Herbert

Jones, Haskins

Allen, Rosen

Mahomes, Watson

Manuel, Tannehill

I see 4 solid hits (Herbert, Allen, Mahomes, Watson) and one decent one (Tannehill) out of that list of 10.

it's a small sample size but it doesn't conclusively support the top-3 or bust argument.  It does support the argument that it's not completely predictable who is going to thrive in the NFL.

And don't forget...everyone on here was calling Tannehill a bust when he was with the fins.

[Lith]

Curious to see the terms of the deal (guarantees, incentives, etc) because that seems kind of rich for Rankins.

[prime21]

[/url]  

Two year shocker. Talk to me scouting department.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Scoop24]

3 minutes ago, Lith said:

 

Not bad player but not really need . To give out 17 mill.  The Dline is definitely gonna strength of this defense.

[JetsFanNick12]

Jets signing Sheldon Rankins 

[Lith]

2 minutes ago, Scoop24 said:

Not bad player but not really need . To give out 17 mill.  The Dline is definitely gonna strength of this defense.

Hopefully it is low guaranteed and heaviliy incentive laden contract for a guy who has struggled with injuries last two seasons.

[RogerVick1980]

Can’t say I’m watching Rankins a lot 

I guess he’s Injury prone but whenever he was out they would say how he’s important to their defense so I guess when he’s healthy he’s a good player.

[Morrissey]

He’s been hurt for like two seasons, Good deal if he manages to stay healthy. 

[Tranquilo]

13 minutes ago, nycdan said:

I was comparing 1-3 against 4-16.  Arbitrary but in response to something posted.

I think there are actually a fairly similar number of QBs drafted in both of those ranges, despite the higher number of overall picks in the latter range.  

The success rates are similar though too.

Yeah true.

[HawkeyeJet]

Rankins was very good the last full season he played, but that was 2 full seasons ago now. If he's fully healthy, he's still only 26.

This move makes me think the Jets 100% think Franklin-Meyers can be a starting edge in this scheme (which would be great) or he doesn't fit at all(which would be bad).

[Irish Jet]

What happened to the “Douglas doesn’t leak it’s all smokescreen” derpers?

[Tranquilo]

If he's healthy it's a great signing, but seems kind of risky because his last 2 years haven't been great. I think we have more pressing needs, but Saleh has a plan for the defense. They need to hit the offense hard in the draft.