DESHAUN OFFICIALLY REQUESTS TRADE BABY

[JoJoTownsell1]

7 minutes ago, Wonderboy said:

Eli isn't even considered a HOF QB by many.  Rodgers for all his glory, and Farve, won only 1 SB each.  Add Drew Brees to that list. Yes its great to have a FQB. Not disputing that.  Just not willing to rob Peter to pay Paul. BTW, Dilfer and Johnson both won SB's and were below average QB's their entire career.  Throw in Plunkett, Rypien, Doug Williams, Hostettler while youre at it.

I don't think anyone has said you can't win without a franchise QB. Just the odds dictate that without one you are likely doomed. For proof, see the new York Jets the last 4 decades.

And I never said Eli was a HOF qb. I said he was "pretty good."

[Sperm Edwards]

4 hours ago, Beerfish said:

The #2 overall pick is not what is holding back the naysayers or doubters like me in this deal it is the heap of other resources being bandied about.

If we are going to trade the #2 overall pick (which you can parlay into a number of other picks if you wish) for watson go for it.  Everyone would rather have watson than a rookie.  Once you start adding two other 1sts and the talk about other picks as well., well there is a limit.

I get where you’re coming from. I just see Watson’s career as being plenty long enough to more than overcome a couple extra draft picks. If the Jets had simply let Adams walk in FA because his contract demands were way too high, 2 of those 1st round picks wouldn’t even be here. So it’s not like the Jets will be without 3 or 4 (or whatever) first round picks compared to other teams going forward. Two of them were “extra” picks; three of them if we get a 1st (or just about a 1st) for Darnold. For most teams, losing 4 1st round picks would literally mean they wouldn’t have a 1st round pick until 5 years from now. That’s just not the case here. 

It’s true that the team we were isn’t the team we are. But I’m unconvinced I’d get a lot of fans here to admit they’d:

• turn down a trade of Watson for Darnold + Adams + the team’s 2021 1st round pick
• want the team to seek out trading Watson if he was aleady on the team

The Jets have 4 first rounders this year & next year. They may have a 5th 1st rounder coming for Darnold. Their 2nd round pick this year is an insignificant trade-up to nominally become a 6th one. On top of that the team isn’t nearly up against the cap, and is 3 seasons away from the next major draft pick (QW) to be in the first year of an expensive contract extension.

As has been mentioned, the margin of error in whiffing on picks is narrowed more after such a trade. But it’s also true he’ll provide a bigger margin than sticking with Darnold, and whiffing on a QB at #2 this year isn’t going to put the team in a better position to win in the upcoming 3 seasons either. 

There is no risk-free path forward. Not for the Jets, and not for any other team either.

[Wonderboy]

15 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

I don't think anyone has said you can't win without a franchise QB. Just the odds dictate that without one you are likely doomed. For proof, see the new York Jets the last 4 decades.

And I never said Eli was a HOF qb. I said he was "pretty good."

And I never said I didn't want one.  We have a legit chance to get one at #2 this year and build around the QB we take.  If you look at NFL dynasties, Pats (Brady) , Cowboys (Staubach/Aikman), Steelers (Bradshaw), 49er's (Montana) they all had FQB's BUT they also had incredible all around talent on defense and offense. How many teams had great QB's and did squat or never went to the dance or won once.  

[Sperm Edwards]

8 minutes ago, Wonderboy said:

And I never said I didn't want one.  We have a legit chance to get one at #2 this year and build around the QB we take.  If you look at NFL dynasties, Pats (Brady) , Cowboys (Staubach/Aikman), Steelers (Bradshaw), 49er's (Montana) they all had FQB's BUT they also had incredible all around talent on defense and offense. How many teams had great QB's and did squat or never went to the dance or won once.  

What if it turns out we don’t have a legit chance to get one at #2 this year? I mean, what if - despite all the high hopes and film study and comparisons - from #2 onward the best of the bunch is just ok, and the rest aren’t even that? It would hardly be unprecedented. 

And to put it off for a year later, perhaps there is only 1 or even 2 such QBs; but one of them will go #1 and we’ve got no chance at him, and the other went much later like Prescott/similar, but after holding off on the position in 2021 and in FA in 2022 Douglas isn’t going to wait until rounds 4-6 to finally draft one. 

I’m not saying all that will happen. But this is the Jets so I’m saying that will happen. #getwatson

[Wonderboy]

23 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What if it turns out we don’t have a legit chance to get one at #2 this year? I mean, what if - despite all the high hopes and film study and comparisons - from #2 onward the best of the bunch is just ok, and the rest aren’t even that? It would hardly be unprecedented. 

And to put it off for a year later, perhaps there is only 1 or even 2 such QBs; but one of them will go #1 and we’ve got no chance at him, and the other went much later like Prescott/similar, but after holding off on the position in 2021 and in FA in 2022 Douglas isn’t going to wait until rounds 4-6 to finally draft one. 

I’m not saying all that will happen. But this is the Jets so I’m saying that will happen. #getwatson

If is, in my book, the biggest word in the English language. Mahomes, Rodgers, Farve, Marino etc etc etc were all taken later - even Watson was taken 12th. Not impossible to still get one later in 1st round. #keeppicks

[Wonderboy]

2 minutes ago, Wonderboy said:

Double

 

[Beerfish]

54 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I get where you’re coming from. I just see Watson’s career as being plenty long enough to more than overcome a couple extra draft picks. If the Jets had simply let Adams walk in FA because his contract demands were way too high, 2 of those 1st round picks wouldn’t even be here. So it’s not like the Jets will be without 3 or 4 (or whatever) first round picks compared to other teams going forward. Two of them were “extra” picks; three of them if we get a 1st (or just about a 1st) for Darnold. For most teams, losing 4 1st round picks would literally mean they wouldn’t have a 1st round pick until 5 years from now. That’s just not the case here. 

It’s true that the team we were isn’t the team we are. But I’m unconvinced I’d get a lot of fans here to admit they’d:

• turn down a trade of Watson for Darnold + Adams + the team’s 2021 1st round pick
• want the team to seek out trading Watson if he was aleady on the team

The Jets have 4 first rounders this year & next year. They may have a 5th 1st rounder coming for Darnold. Their 2nd round pick this year is an insignificant trade-up to nominally become a 6th one. On top of that the team isn’t nearly up against the cap, and is 3 seasons away from the next major draft pick (QW) to be in the first year of an expensive contract extension.

As has been mentioned, the margin of error in whiffing on picks is narrowed more after such a trade. But it’s also true he’ll provide a bigger margin than sticking with Darnold, and whiffing on a QB at #2 this year isn’t going to put the team in a better position to win in the upcoming 3 seasons either. 

There is no risk-free path forward. Not for the Jets, and not for any other team either.

But you can modify risk.

The Watson deal is putting all your eggs in one basket.

[JohnnyLV]

49 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

 

• turn down a trade of Watson for Darnold + Adams + the team’s 2021 1st round pick

Well this question exists in 2 realities. If this trade happens before the season we do it.

Imagine a draft pick # is in a box, and the box can't be opened until after this season. Well you might do this because you think the pick in the box is a mid rounder.

But Jamal was traded for 2 firsts, and the one this year is much higher and expected and we have the #2 pick in the draft which is incredibly valuable.

The situation is completely different now you just dont throw away the value of the pick because you would have before you had more info.

It's like say you were playing Let's Make a deal and you are offered $5000 for your door. Well you might get a goat or some lame prize so it might make the deal. But say they opened your door first and it had the car, would you take the $5000 now?

Or you have a family heirloom painting that has been in the family for a really long time. But you sort of hate it. it's just a blurry pics of some flowers floating in a pond, and you cant even see the signature. But some guy at a cocktail party you are hosting says he really loves it and will give you $10,000. You think that sounds like a great deal but a friend says why don't you get it appraised first? Well you get it appraised and it turns our to be a Monet worth like $30 million. You gonna take the 10,000?

What the pic was worth before we know what pic we have is irrelevant. We have found money in the #2 pick you do not ever just toss that away.

 

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, johnnysd said:

Well this question exists in 2 realities. If this trade happens before the season we do it.

Imagine a draft pick # is in a box, and the box can't be opened until after this season. Well you might do this because you think the pick in the box is a mid rounder.

But Jamal was traded for 2 firsts, and the one this year is much higher and expected and we have the #2 pick in the draft which is incredibly valuable.

The situation is completely different now you just dont throw away the value of the pick because you would have before you had more info.

It's like say you were playing Let's Make a deal and you are offered $5000 for your door. Well you might get a goat or some lame prize so it might make the deal. But say they opened your door first and it had the car, would you take the $5000 now?

Or you have a family heirloom painting that has been in the family for a really long time. But you sort of hate it. it's just a blurry pics of some flowers floating in a pond, and you cant even see the signature. But some guy at a cocktail party you are hosting says he really loves it and will give you $10,000. You think that sounds like a great deal but a friend says why don't you get it appraised first? Well you get it appraised and it turns our to be a Monet worth like $30 million. You gonna take the 10,000?

What the pic was worth before we know what pic we have is irrelevant. We have found money in the #2 pick you do not ever just toss that away.

 

I don't consider Watson throwing it away. He'd be the best QB in team history. 

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Beerfish said:

But you can modify risk.

The Watson deal is putting all your eggs in one basket.

It's not much different otherwise, in effect. Draft another who's about as productive as Darnold's been and then 3+ years (in addition to the high pick(s) and those drafted &/or signed to hopefully lessen his suck) are wasted.

In theory we could move on, and we're initially set up better. Problem is first of all he'd have to be even worse than Darnold for the team to cut bait sooner; and second we'd have to be positioned to get someone better when that bait-cutting decision is made.

I just think, if he's gettable, that this is a unique opportunity to make such a trade without removing all opportunities to build around him. Though fewer of course, the team still would have plenty of high picks & spending room in the short term, plus a HOF QB and a usual full arsenal of picks annually in the long-term.

[Maxman]

Just now, Sperm Edwards said:

It's not much different otherwise, in effect. Draft another who's about as productive as Darnold's been and then 3+ years (in addition to the high pick(s) and those drafted &/or signed to hopefully lessen his suck) are wasted.

In theory we could move on, and we're initially set up better. Problem is first of all he'd have to be even worse than Darnold for the team to cut bait sooner; and second we'd have to be positioned to get someone better when that bait-cutting decision is made.

I just think, if he's gettable, that this is a unique opportunity to make such a trade without removing all opportunities to build around him. Though fewer of course, the team still would have plenty of high picks & spending room in the short term, plus a HOF QB and a usual full arsenal of picks annually in the long-term.

HOW CAN YOU EVEN THINK ABOUT THE JETS QB RIGHT NOW?  WE ARE WORKING ON EMOJI ISSUES.

Geez, I don't even know who you are anymore.  ??️??

[Dcat]

1 minute ago, Maxman said:

HOW CAN YOU EVEN THINK ABOUT THE JETS QB RIGHT NOW?  WE ARE WORKING ON EMOJI ISSUES.

Geez, I don't even know who you are anymore.  ??️??

Literally the Post of the Year 2021. And it's only February.

[Dcat]

5 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It's not much different otherwise, in effect. Draft another who's about as productive as Darnold's been and then 3+ years (in addition to the high pick(s) and those drafted &/or signed to hopefully lessen his suck) are wasted.

In theory we could move on, and we're initially set up better. Problem is first of all he'd have to be even worse than Darnold for the team to cut bait sooner; and second we'd have to be positioned to get someone better when that bait-cutting decision is made.

I just think, if he's gettable, that this is a unique opportunity to make such a trade without removing all opportunities to build around him. Though fewer of course, the team still would have plenty of high picks & spending room in the short term, plus a HOF QB and a usual full arsenal of picks annually in the long-term.

Hope is a dangerous thing, Andy.   The Jets with a good QB is but a mere hope. I don't post a lot about trading for Watson because it's going to break me into pieces when he goes to a rival.  It's about time for us to have more than an experiment at the position.  Get it done Douglas, get it f'ing done.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, johnnysd said:

Well this question exists in 2 realities. If this trade happens before the season we do it.

Imagine a draft pick # is in a box, and the box can't be opened until after this season. Well you might do this because you think the pick in the box is a mid rounder.

But Jamal was traded for 2 firsts, and the one this year is much higher and expected and we have the #2 pick in the draft which is incredibly valuable.

The situation is completely different now you just dont throw away the value of the pick because you would have before you had more info.

It's like say you were playing Let's Make a deal and you are offered $5000 for your door. Well you might get a goat or some lame prize so it might make the deal. But say they opened your door first and it had the car, would you take the $5000 now?

Or you have a family heirloom painting that has been in the family for a really long time. But you sort of hate it. it's just a blurry pics of some flowers floating in a pond, and you cant even see the signature. But some guy at a cocktail party you are hosting says he really loves it and will give you $10,000. You think that sounds like a great deal but a friend says why don't you get it appraised first? Well you get it appraised and it turns our to be a Monet worth like $30 million. You gonna take the 10,000?

What the pic was worth before we know what pic we have is irrelevant. We have found money in the #2 pick you do not ever just toss that away.

 

I alluded to that point earlier, though, as Beerfish hit on that days ago. I just don't agree: if the team had a 25 yr old Deshaun Watson and just 2 first round picks in the next 2 seasons instead of 5, after making a straight-up trade involving Adams/Darnold, it's pretty unlikely you'd be calling for the team to trade him. There's at least a 99% chance instead you'd advocate just using the normal stockpile of resources it had available to build around him. 

The only difference is the knowledge of seeing path B to get to that spot instead of path A. The players involved are the same in the end, though. 

Even if a Houston fan came knocking on our door suggesting we move him for a few #1 picks, he'd be rightly laughed off the board. That's why I don't agree on that point, and the extra picks we got for Darnold & Adams make all the difference. Except it's even better knowing the picks came from two players who rightly shouldn't have been in the team's long term plans anyway. You part with Adams for picks when someone comes knocking, not Watson. 

[Sperm Edwards]

20 minutes ago, Maxman said:

HOW CAN YOU EVEN THINK ABOUT THE JETS QB RIGHT NOW?  WE ARE WORKING ON EMOJI ISSUES.

Geez, I don't even know who you are anymore.  ??️??

Spermoji? 

I'm waiting. 

[Sperm Edwards]

14 minutes ago, Dcat said:

Hope is a dangerous thing, Andy.   The Jets with a good QB is but a mere hope. I don't post a lot about trading for Watson because it's going to break me into pieces when he goes to a rival.  It's about time for us to have more than an experiment at the position.  Get it done Douglas, get it f'ing done.

I stopped for a week. Then wanted to see what this thread was, 20-30 pages later, and...

 

[Flea Flicking Frank]

6 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

1. That’s not a lot of writing for me.

2. Right now it’s not looking too surprising that each point you’ve made was just shot down & it didn’t change your stance at all. 

The only under-25 QB to have a completion percentage over 70%. What’s more, he did it while leading the league in yards per completed pass (i.e. he didn’t get that completion percentage by dumping it off, behind a worse line than the Jets fielded). Yet your “stance” is Fields - who’s never taken an NFL snap - already has a more promising future. Lmao.

You either have a bit of a hard time comprehending, or you twist what I write for the sake of arguing. Are you a lawyer by any chance?

let me try to sum this up for you. I think Watson is good. I think paying him and trading 3-4 first round picks, one being 2 overall which is worth a lot of draft capital by itself, is way too much. I think fields has more upside than Watson, by no means does that mean I think he has a more promising future. But I think when I look at all the possible ways this can play out, I think the jets future has a far higher probability of being better by trading back a few slots and grabbing fields than paying am absurd price for a good qb who just proved without a really good roster sound him, isn’t going to win. Twist away.

[Flea Flicking Frank]

7 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Exactly why Watson is so valuable.

Yes, you need a good QB and a strong team.  Acquiring Watson would not be nearly as devastating to our chances of also building a quality roster than you are arguing.  And even if the team suffers some short-term deficiencies on building the rest of the roster, again, he's 25.  The long-term would be bright regardless.  

If Watson was so valuable by himself, the titans wouldn’t have gone 4-12 this year. Sorry. And I strongly disagree with the premise that he doesn’t absolutely debilitate our chances of building a competent roster with what it takes to get him plus his cost. Plus being the operative word there.

[Dunnie]

If Watson was so valuable by himself, the titans wouldn’t have gone 4-12 this year. Sorry. And I strongly disagree with the premise that he doesn’t absolutely debilitate our chances of building a competent roster with what it takes to get him plus his cost. Plus being the operative word there.

Errrr Texans

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using JetNation.com mobile app

[Flea Flicking Frank]

14 minutes ago, Dunnie said:

Errrr Texans

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using JetNation.com mobile app
 

Oops! That’s what happens when I post pre coffee 

[T0mShane]

10 hours ago, derp said:

Oh I don’t think he can f around either but I think it’s very non trivial Caserio shoots himself in the foot and that scenario has to be part of planning.

Gotcha. I’m just projecting that Caserio sees this as unsustainable and will want a resolution sooner than later. 

[derp]

Just now, T0mShane said:

Gotcha. I’m just projecting that Caserio sees this as unsustainable and will want a resolution sooner than later. 

I think that’s a very rational conclusion for Caserio to come to...but the Texans have been irrational this whole time.

[Beaver]

[T0mShane]

10 hours ago, Beerfish said:

But you can modify risk.

The Watson deal is putting all your eggs in one basket.

It’s putting like three eggs in one basket and trading it for an extremely fertile hen

[Jimmy 2 Times]

11 hours ago, Wonderboy said:

My point, if you follow the bouncing ball, is that balance across the board, is more important.  Acquiring a FQB, at the expense of depleting your draft picks and available cash resources is just plain silly.  Marino went to 1 SB and was crushed by the 49er's, who were probably the greatest NFL team ever. Yea they had Montana and Rice (best QR/WR combo ever) but they also had incredible balance throughout that roster.  Just ridiculous.

Rice wasn't on the 84 Niners. 

[32EBoozer]

3 hours ago, T0mShane said:

Gotcha. I’m just projecting that Caserio sees this as unsustainable and will want a resolution sooner than later. 

TS I don’t think I’ve seen you push trading for a player more than Watson. I’ve been on this board (in one incarnation or another) since 2004. I don’t even remember you pushing to draft a player with this much determination. Your viagra must be kicking in

[T0mShane]

16 minutes ago, 32EBoozer said:

TS I don’t think I’ve seen you push trading for a player more than Watson. I’ve been on this board (in one incarnation or another) since 2004. I don’t even remember you pushing to draft a player with this much determination. Your viagra must be kicking in

Man, this is such a rare opportunity. This is like being in Applebee’s in midtown one night and Rihanna—for some weird fucjing reason—is there and she decides she wants to bang you, but you only have that thirty seconds to decide what to do. Sure, your wife will divorce you and, yeah, your kids are outside in the car waiting for you to come back with the to-go order, and you’re parked in a handicap spot with the engine running, but on the other hand it’s Rihanna and you will never, ever, EVER get this kind of opportunity again. There really is no choice to be made when fate calls you home

[32EBoozer]

4 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

This is like being in Applebee’s in midtown one night

 

5 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

your kids are outside in the car waiting for you to come back with the to-go order, and you’re parked in a handicap spot with the engine running,

These two comments  are a juxtaposition. There are no parking spaces in Manhattan pre COVID.

[Wonderboy]

54 minutes ago, Jimmy 2 Times said:

Rice wasn't on the 84 Niners. 

Yea so. He played with Montana and Young. Those teams were just lights out all around. 

[Wonderboy]

16 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Man, this is such a rare opportunity. This is like being in Applebee’s in midtown one night and Rihanna—for some weird fucjing reason—is there and she decides she wants to bang you, but you only have that thirty seconds to decide what to do. Sure, your wife will divorce you and, yeah, your kids are outside in the car waiting for you to come back with the to-go order, and you’re parked in a handicap spot with the engine running, but on the other hand it’s Rihanna and you will never, ever, EVER get this kind of opportunity again. There really is no choice to be made when fate calls you home

30 seconds? Send in @joewilly12

[T0mShane]

Just now, Wonderboy said:

Yea so. He played with Montana and Young. Those teams were just lights out all around. 

Also, they got DeBartolo thrown out of the league for circumventing the cap to build that “all around team.”

[JoJoTownsell1]

5 hours ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

If Watson was so valuable by himself, the titans wouldn’t have gone 4-12 this year. Sorry. And I strongly disagree with the premise that he doesn’t absolutely debilitate our chances of building a competent roster with what it takes to get him plus his cost. Plus being the operative word there.

Just an absolutely horrific argument. Aaron Rodgers went 6-9-1 in 2018.  I assume you were telling your friends that this Rodgers dude is not that good. 

And some of you are acting as if Watson has been a numbers guy his entire career but never took his team to the playoffs. The kid is  25 and has made the playoffs 2 out of 4 years. 

The two times he didn't were his rookie year (where he got hurt) and  this year when the Texans literally gave away their best weapon (Hopkins) and had one of the worst defenses including a comically bad secondary, giving up 30TD passes with just 3 INTs. 

[joewilly12]

4 minutes ago, Wonderboy said:

30 seconds? Send in @joewilly12

You are named @Wonderboy  not me. 

[Wonderboy]

7 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Also, they got DeBartolo thrown out of the league for circumventing the cap to build that “all around team.”

Send PM to Woody

[Flea Flicking Frank]

7 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

Just an absolutely horrific argument. Aaron Rodgers went 6-9-1 in 2018.  I assume you were telling your friends that this Rodgers dude is not that good. 

And some of you are acting as if Watson has been a numbers guy his entire career but never took his team to the playoffs. The kid is  25 and has made the playoffs 2 out of 4 years. 

The two times he didn't were his rookie year (where he got hurt) and  this year when the Texans literally gave away their best weapon (Hopkins) and had one of the worst defenses including a comically bad secondary, giving up 30TD passes with just 3 INTs. 

Damn, everyone gets their panties in such a bunch over Watson. All I’m saying is if you don’t build a team around a QB, they won’t win. Chill, that wasn’t in anyway a knock on Watson. You need to build a team, trading 4 first rounders makes it hard to build a team.