Jump to content

DESHAUN OFFICIALLY REQUESTS TRADE BABY


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

Your the big stats guy, look at his stats.

He's a good WR..... that's had the fortune of playing with Brees, Brady, Watson and in the Rams pass friendly offense. 

He's fine. Would love to have him on the Jets. But it's also fair to question how good a guy is when teams, especially smart teams, are fine letting him go (even if it's usually for decent comp).

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Just for me personally, I think we should build up the OL and give Sweet Sammy another shot, we can always trade for a 25-year-old top-5 QB a year from now. JMO

Congratulations to the Miami Dolphins. 

Posted Images

15 minutes ago, greenwichjetfan said:

The 2021 Jets are not going to be coached/coordinated by Adam Gase on offense, nor by Gregg Williams on defense - As some might know by now, I had only Adam Gase on my "Do not touch" list in 2019, and have been proven right every minute since the hire. I agree wholeheartedly that this alone will make the team better, but again, this is separate from Deshaun's deal. 

35 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

I’ve heard for two years that Adam Gase was the worst coach in NFL history, but now he’s gone and the team is still going to be terrible because there’s no talent? It feels as though guys like @greenwichjetfan should apologize to Gase for slandering him.

It brings me immense joy to know that I was on the right side of history, and that Shane once again proved how bad he is at evaluating GMs/HCs (see Mangini, Idzik, Gase). 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, greenwichjetfan said:

Thanks. My comments in red above.

Separately, I never said the '21 Jets will be the '20 Jets part 2. I'm saying that most of what you've put above is fair, but it's all separate from the Deshaun deal. The Jets will be better no matter what. It's hard not to go up from 2 wins and the worst HC in Jets history.

I was simply refuting the comments all over the board that Deshaun could come to this team and his mere presence would make the current Jets roster better. It's been stated multiple times, and it's incorrect. 

Lastly, I think I am a little biased because I love Fields. I think he's going to be the real deal - so for me, it's about weighting the difference between Fields on a rookie deal and all of these premium picks that JD has accumulated vs. Watson, a few FAs, and hoping the rest of the team just automatically becomes better.

I'm still struggling to determine what the right price would be for Deshaun. I like the idea of taking on a few bad contracts from the Texans in exchange for lowering the price for Deshaun, but practically I'm not sure the Texans will afford us that luxury. I think at the moment, I'd be ok with giving up this year's 1.02, both of this year's Jamal picks (first and third rounders), and our second rounder next year which could conditionally become a first rounder if Deshaun plays 80%+ snaps and the team makes the playoffs. No players from our end, no other commitments past this year. But that's a moving target. 

I think it's because you're reading into their comments to mean more than it does. Watson coming to this team does make the current roster better. That doesn't therefore equate to the point to which you (and others even more so) have taken it, which is that he's all that's needed and then we're done. 

I have nothing for or against Fields. I've seen one game with him - highlights, actually - and he looked terrific. I do think it's vastly overstated what a rookie QB surrounded by rookies will soon become. 

Bit's comments are understandable from a frustration standpoint, but he makes up so much that is demonstrably and patently untrue that it falls on deaf ears. The truth is bad enough without embellishment that gets people rolling their eyes at the absurdity of the exaggerations.

As far as Mosley and the 2020 rookies, my point was merely that they won't be as bad on the 2021 Jets as they were on the 2020 team, with most of them missing half or the entirety of the season. If they'd all played 16 games after full camps under good coaching, then I'd share your pessimism. I don't think as much as some (or even most) about this first Douglas draft class, but have always allowed that the future is unknown & these aren't all bust careers chiseled in stone already. Just that he isn't the drafting savant some like to believe because he's got a good reputation from before he got here, plus Becton being a hit when his only OT downside was drafting Wirfs instead. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

Who hates Watson? I don’t see anyone, this is some strange hill you are on. I haven’t seen anyone say he isn’t good. Questioning if he is truly great is not saying he’s not good. It’s really strange my friend.

It's simply strange that some Jets fans are finding reasons not to give up 2-3 firsts for a young, very good (at minimum) QB.  This is a slam dunk my man.  QB is the most important position in pro sports.  Don't overthink it. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

It's simply strange that some Jets fans are finding reasons not to give up 2-3 firsts for a young, very good (at minimum) QB.  This is a slam dunk my man.  QB is the most important position in pro sports.  Don't overthink it. 

Yep we saw how important it was during the Super Bowl when Mahomes was running for his life with parts of his O line missing. I rather build the team first instead of giving up assets and listen to Watson fan boys cry he has no weapons..:blink:

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, greenwichjetfan said:

It brings me immense joy to know that I was on the right side of history, and that Shane once again proved how bad he is at evaluating GMs/HCs (see Mangini, Idzik, Gase). 

Drama Popcorn GIF

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

QB A his first three years as a starter: 13,176 yards, 81 tds, 36 ints

QB B his first three years as a starter: 12,840 yards, 85 tds, 28 ints

QB C his first three years as a starter: 14,635 yards, 90 tds, 32 ints

All three QBs' would be worth three first rounders plus, including the 2nd overall pick in a draft as one of the 1st rounders.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Columbia Jet Fan said:

Right?? 

I actually think the Dolphins one is in the ball park and as I imagine if he gets traded it will be likely to NYJ or Miami maybe its a moot point, but if you look at the offers - the Jets are offering: 

Two 1s in two years (including #2 overall) 

Two 2s (including 34 overall this year)

Darnold + QW. 

Lets compare that to Carolina as they seem to be the team mentioned the most outside of Miami/NYJ

Two 1s in two years (including #8 overall) 

Second round this year

2023 Third Round Pick 

Teddy, Robby, and Christian McCaffery

Doing a little algebra here. 

Our #2 overall = 2600 draft points, Carolinas first two picks this year are worth 1910 draft points. If Carolinas 1 next year is worth one round less this year - that puts it at ~500 points - lets give them that value (although one may say its worse than that as Carolina will likely be better - but whatever). They are still short 190 points. Carolinas 3rd rounder THIS YEAR is worth 225 points, so lets say all of Carolinas draft value in PKs trade is worth #2. FWIW Chad Reuter of nfl.com projected a trade up with NYJ for Carolina in his mock and said that Carolina would have to trade 8, first rounder next year, plus 3 & 4 this year, plus a third rounder next year. So we're basically saying Carolinas 3 & 4 = 2nd rounder this year - which it doesn't on the draft value - 2 is worth more - and that Carolinas 2023 3rd rounder =2022 2nd rounder - it doesn't but this way it helps the case. 

The remainder is Jets second rounder this year, second rounder next year, AND FIRST ROUNDER next year, plus Darnold (call him a second this year), plus QW = Teddy Bridgewater, Robby Anderson, and Christian McCafferey. I mean, this isn't even close in my eyes. I personally think if we traded QW we would get two 1sts for him. He is a stud inside pass rusher with 3 years remaining on his rookie deal and was hyped as one of the top prospects in recent years. Darnold and Teddy you can debate about all day who is better now but I think most would agree that Darnold has more value at the moment given his contract. Robby Anderson apparently was worth a 4th in 2019 but for arguments sake: 

Teddy = Darnold - cross them out 

Robby is worth next years Jets second rounder - or the equivalent of a third this year. 

That still leaves Jets #34 overall, Jets 1st next year + Quinnen Williams for Christian McCafferey. I wouldn't trade Quinnen for McCafferey straight up, and I'm pretty sure every NFL analyst would agree with that - so basically the Jets have to overpay by at minimum #34 this year, and next year's first just so Houston would be in a better position to draft their next franchise QB?? Makes zero sense. 

Agree, except Teddy does not = Darnold in terms of trade value. If someone was offering Carolina a 3rd round pick for a $20MM salary dump, imo  he'd have already been dealt.

Also (even worse) it's not just the Jets' natural 1st round pick next year, but it's whichever is higher between the two (a distinction Carolina doesn't have to worry about; it'd not even like King said whichever is the Jets' natural pick, in the event they're without Wilson for most or all of the season, and that pick is top 5-10: if their natural pick is #26 then they only have to fork over #26. The Jets - already giving up more independent of this pick - are being further penalized for having Seattle's pick next year).

I don't know what Anderson's value is. I think you're at least in the ballpark, but no less than that; he was allegedly worth an upcoming 4th rounder when he was on a 1 yr RFA deal with unknown future-contract requirements. 

The rest of it you're spot-on as well. King has always been overrated & anyone with a calculator sees these are dramatically lopsided.

A good way of measuring is what if you remove Houston/Watson from the equation, and presume the two teams made this trade between each other. I'm thinking there's a pretty low chance the Jets would trade with Carolina, down from #2 to #8, for that package in return. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, johnnysd said:

That's certainly true. In the modern day NFL Joe would have had good knees and would dominate this league. Even cripple Namath is way better than Watson.

No.  This is extreme dislike of Watson talking here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I comprehend it just fine. There is no mythical good or great qb that makes a train wreck of a roster like Tampa into a SB winner (let alone with 10 games against playoff teams). In his prime Drew Brees QB'd a losing team 4 out of 5 seasons; one of which was even in a season where no team in the division was even .500. Rodgers recently QB'd a 6-win team despite throwing just 2 picks. Those Saints/Packers teams were were all with noticeably more help than Watson had (one offensive lineman and 14 games surrendering 25+ pts). 

So to conveniently and simplistically put the Texans' 4-win season all on Watson not being a good enough QB - as though anyone else was going to lift them into anything either - I find absurd. Still more absurd while whining about the necessity of every extra draft pick to build this team, as though Fields plus a couple extra later + future 1st round draft picks alone would automatically make the Jets demonstrably better. 

Can the Jets build a winner without such a transaction? Of course, and no one says otherwise. No one denies the team would be better off if they drafted Fields, he became Watson Part II, and they kept all their draft picks in the process.

The problem is that's far from a certainty - he might be Watson II and also might end up being a tougher/more-mobile Josh Rosen Part II or closer to the latter than the former. Until he's given a couple NFL seasons you don't know which you got; you don't get to then trade for a Watson 2-3 years later if it turns out you guessed wrong; and you'll have eaten up 2-3 years of those precious picks' rookie deals (on top of the remainder of the rookie deals from QW, Becton, Mims, etc.).

I’ve never once blamed Watson for the 4-12 season. What I’ve said and continue to say is even with a very good qb you need pieces around him to have a successful team. Trading a huge ransom for a qb and paying him strongly cuts into the ability to put those pieces around him. You get those pieces via draft or FA. No draft pick or Fa signing is 100%. So the more resource management you have to build a strong roster the better.

There is no easy way out of this. This is what happens when you have 10 years of awful coaching and roster management. There are risks with doing it and risks not doing it, meaning getting Watson at all costs. Ideally we can get him without giving up 3 or more firsts.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

It's simply strange that some Jets fans are finding reasons not to give up 2-3 firsts for a young, very good (at minimum) QB.  This is a slam dunk my man.  QB is the most important position in pro sports.  Don't overthink it. 

That’s your opinion, I don’t share your opinion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

It's simply strange that some Jets fans are finding reasons not to give up 2-3 firsts for a young, very good (at minimum) QB.  This is a slam dunk my man.  QB is the most important position in pro sports.  Don't overthink it. 

Because Watson is going to cost more than 2-3 firsts

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Agree, except Teddy does not = Darnold in terms of trade value. If someone was offering Carolina a 3rd round pick for a $20MM salary dump, imo  he'd have already been dealt.

Also (even worse) it's not just the Jets' natural 1st round pick next year, but it's whichever is higher between the two (a distinction Carolina doesn't have to worry about; it'd not even like King said whichever is the Jets' natural pick, in the event they're without Wilson for most or all of the season, and that pick is top 5-10: if their natural pick is #26 then they only have to fork over #26. The Jets - already giving up more independent of this pick - are being further penalized for having Seattle's pick next year).

I don't know what Anderson's value is. I think you're at least in the ballpark, but no less than that; he was allegedly worth an upcoming 4th rounder when he was on a 1 yr RFA deal with unknown future-contract requirements. 

The rest of it you're spot-on as well. King has always been overrated & anyone with a calculator sees these are dramatically lopsided.

A good way of measuring is what if you remove Houston/Watson from the equation, and presume the two teams made this trade between each other. I'm thinking there's a pretty low chance the Jets would trade with Carolina, down from #2 to #8, for that package in return. 

I think King is pretty transparently throwing in name players with a wide range of potential trade values because it makes the package sound like it’s a lot to an average fan and he knows it’s hard to predict what Houston would get.

Whatever he predicts will almost assuredly be wrong and it’s harder to say *how* wrong when there are players involved versus just picks that it’s easy to break out a chart and calculate.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

He's a good WR..... that's had the fortune of playing with Brees, Brady, Watson and in the Rams pass friendly offense. 

He's fine. Would love to have him on the Jets. But it's also fair to question how good a guy is when teams, especially smart teams, are fine letting him go (even if it's usually for decent comp).

I see how this works, Cooks is only good because of Brees, Brady and Watson, but Watson isnt good because of Hopkins and Cooks?

Has every good receiver with NO, NE and Houston put up Cooks numbers or even close?

Its OK to have great receivers like Watson has had and still be a good QB. You don't need to start criticizing other players to somehow make Watson even better. Watson is a good QB. I haven't seen one poster on this board say otherwise, not one. I would love to have him, I just don't think giving up 3+ 1st including 2 overall is good resource management. If you do, fine, neither of us have say in this anyway.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

what?

No one who is being objective in their discussion of Deshaun Watson would suggest that a crippled Joe Namath would be "way better".  The only explanation for this opinion would be a strong dislike of Watson for some strange reason.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

No one who is being objective in their discussion of Deshaun Watson would suggest that a crippled Joe Namath would be "way better".  The only explanation for this opinion would be a stronslike of Watson for some strange reason.  

You do realize that Joe Namath played his entire Jets career crippled, the way the original poster was defining him? He had a terrible knee injury at Alabama and played in the NFL without the ability to get it fixed back then. And the NFL was not nice to QB's back then.

Namath is in the conversation for the greatest QB to ever play, so your sensitivity over Watson, which is beyond strange, is saying one of the greatest QB to ever play the game is way better than Watson means someone hates Watson? Your strange dude.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

I’ve never once blamed Watson for the 4-12 season. What I’ve said and continue to say is even with a very good qb you need pieces around him to have a successful team. Trading a huge ransom for a qb and paying him strongly cuts into the ability to put those pieces around him. You get those pieces via draft or FA. No draft pick or Fa signing is 100%. So the more resource management you have to build a strong roster the better.

There is no easy way out of this. This is what happens when you have 10 years of awful coaching and roster management. There are risks with doing it and risks not doing it, meaning getting Watson at all costs. Ideally we can get him without giving up 3 or more firsts.

There's no one that doesn't understand that more draft picks > fewer draft picks. 

I'm just not as confident in the QBs coming out this year, let alone the best one the Jets are able to attain next year if they start out with a pick in the 12-22 range.

I also am not as optimistic that all these draft picks are going to not just pan out, but pan out early where the team puts all of them on the field together, as rookies & 1st year players, to decrease that time-to-"profit" (your word). 

I don't think they'll get a 1st rounder for Darnold this year, but probably a 2nd this year or even call that a 1st rounder next year. Now you're looking at 5 round-1 picks, a 6th pick that's only nominally outside round 1 (and their 4th or the extra late 3rd gets that pick back in if so desired). Then the team has its natural picks in round 2 next year, round 3 in both this year and next year, plus their 6 round 4-6 picks as well. Except before you make even one of these selections, the team is going to spend on at least a handful of FAs in March '21, plus whomever they add in March '22.

The idea that the 2022 Jets starters will be

  • 2-4 from the 2020 draft class (Becton, Mims, Davis, Hall), if Douglas is such a good drafter
  • plus these 7 round 1&2 players from 2021-22 (even more if the team trades down from #2)
  • plus 1-2 of the 3 3rd-rounders
  • plus a league-average hit on 1-2 out of 6 from rounds 4-6 over those 2 drafts

That's somewhere between 11-16 starters total. The idea that the team is going to field 50-75% of its starters, all with 0-2 years of NFL experience, is wishful.

What'll more likely happen is multiple picks - and likely multiple high picks - will get wasted anyway because these rookies couldn't beat out veterans (or they're beating out each other), or won't get made because Douglas is going to eventually trade up or trade away for vets a couple times as it is. Because there is such a thing as selecting too many high picks in too short of a span. Part of what helps development is playing alongside good players, not other similarly clueless/learning ones.

I'm even in favor of trading down (if we're not drafting a QB up high), but with that I know the team's not fielding upwards of 15 starters from such a short window of draft classes.

  • Upvote 3
  • Post of the Week 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I’m ready to give up Q and the second. That’s it. To me they are worth four first rounders and one is a sure thing in QW. If we keep all our other picks we should be able to bolster our line and improve the offense. We can work on the defense next year and hope that coaching will improve it more. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

Funny, I say I disagree with your opinion, you say my opinion is wrong..... Carry on, you clearly know more than anyone else. How is Josh Allen working out these days?

Me admitting I was wrong about Josh Allen has, what, exactly, to do with this conversation?  Darnold was my # 1 QB in that draft class.  Meanwhile, Allen had 6 years of inaccuracy and turnover prone play in college/the pros that suggested he might just be bad.  It took a historically unprecedented turnaround, paired with Allen's athleticism and apparently insane work ethic.  What lesson was to be learned there, exactly?

If anything, to me it says that no one has a clue when it comes to QB's, so you might as well go after a sure thing when one comes to your doorstep, even if the cost is steep.  Because you can't win a Super Bowl without a high end QB.  It just doesn't happen in this league any more.  Fields could be elite but he could also have an extremely low floor.  No one really knows how these rookies will do until they arrive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, T0mShane said:

Go to one of those mock draft websites, make those picks for the Jets, then explain why you would turn down Deshaun Watson for, say, Zack Wilson, Alex Leatherwood, and the fifth-ranked CB on the board. Picks are cool and all, but those picks become players, and you have to determine that those three players are worth more than Deshaun Watson.

No you’re 100% right.  But at some point they need to rebuild with draft picks to help the QB.  3 picks in the top 5 is a ton!

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

No you’re 100% right.  But at some point they need to rebuild with draft picks to help the QB.  3 picks in the top 5 is a ton!

Which is why its really too bad the Jets would have zero draft picks left over after trading for Watson.

Wait....

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Which is why its really too bad the Jets would have zero draft picks left over after trading for Watson.

Wait....

I never said they wouldn’t have any picks left over - I’d rather take my chances on a guy picked in the first then the bundle of 5th rounders owned.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Me admitting I was wrong about Josh Allen has, what, exactly, to do with this conversation?  Darnold was my # 1 QB in that draft class.  Meanwhile, Allen had 6 years of inaccuracy and turnover prone play in college/the pros that suggested he might just be bad.  It took a historically unprecedented turnaround, paired with Allen's athleticism and apparently insane work ethic.  What lesson was to be learned there, exactly?

If anything, to me it says that no one has a clue when it comes to QB's, so you might as well go after a sure thing when one comes to your doorstep, even if the cost is steep.  Because you can't win a Super Bowl without a high end QB.  It just doesn't happen in this league any more.  Fields could be elite but he could also have an extremely low floor.  No one really knows how these rookies will do until they arrive.

What it says to me is you could learn a little humility. Declaring your opinions, which is what they are, are right, shows zero humility. In life, humility can be a god thing. I have respected your opinion despite disagreeing with it. You on the other hand have not respected mine. Enjoy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

There's no one that doesn't understand that more draft picks > fewer draft picks. 

I'm just not as confident in the QBs coming out this year, let alone the best one the Jets are able to attain next year if they start out with a pick in the 12-22 range.

I also am not as optimistic that all these draft picks are going to not just pan out, but pan out early where the team puts all of them on the field together, as rookies & 1st year players, to decrease that time-to-"profit" (your word). 

I don't think they'll get a 1st rounder for Darnold this year, but probably a 2nd this year or even call that a 1st rounder next year. Now you're looking at 5 round-1 picks, a 6th pick that's only nominally outside round 1 (and their 4th or the extra late 3rd gets that pick back in if so desired). Then the team has its natural picks in round 2 next year, round 3 in both this year and next year, plus their 6 round 4-6 picks as well. Except before you make even one of these selections, the team is going to spend on at least a handful of FAs in March '21, plus whomever they add in March '22.

The idea that the 2022 Jets starters will be

  • 2-4 from the 2020 draft class (Becton, Mims, Davis, Hall), if Douglas is such a good drafter
  • plus these 7 round 1&2 players from 2021-22 (even more if the team trades down from #2)
  • plus 1-2 of the 3 3rd-rounders
  • plus a league-average hit on 1-2 out of 6 from rounds 4-6 over those 2 drafts

That's somewhere between 11-16 starters total. The idea that the team is going to field 50-75% of its starters, all with 0-2 years of NFL experience, is wishful.

What'll more likely happen is multiple picks - and likely multiple high picks - will get wasted anyway because these rookies couldn't beat out veterans (or they're beating out each other), or won't get made because Douglas is going to eventually trade up or trade away for vets a couple times as it is. Because there is such a thing as selecting too many high picks in too short of a span. Part of what helps development is playing alongside good players, not other similarly clueless/learning ones.

I'm even in favor of trading down (if we're not drafting a QB up high), but with that I know the team's not fielding upwards of 15 starters from such a short window of draft classes.

I understand both sides of this argument, and I understand why some would say trade everything it takes to get him. It would not be my preference at all. If they do it, I will root hard for him and for it to work, but I'd prefer not to go this route and prefer to try to build a good young core and have cheap pieces and a lot of draft picks and cap space to fill in gaps with.  IMO, neither is a sure thing and their are pros and cons to both approaches.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

I understand both sides of this argument, and I understand why some would say trade everything it takes to get him. It would not be my preference at all. If they do it, I will root hard for him and for it to work, but I'd prefer not to go this route and prefer to try to build a good young core and have cheap pieces and a lot of draft picks and cap space to fill in gaps with.  IMO, neither is a sure thing and their are pros and cons to both approaches.

What if you traded for Deshaun Watson and still built a good young core around Deshaun Watson.

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

I understand both sides of this argument, and I understand why some would say trade everything it takes to get him. It would not be my preference at all. If they do it, I will root hard for him and for it to work, but I'd prefer not to go this route and prefer to try to build a good young core and have cheap pieces and a lot of draft picks and cap space to fill in gaps with.  IMO, neither is a sure thing and their are pros and cons to both approaches.

I don’t think trade everything it takes, like the exaggerations of 6-10 first round picks. 

EVERYONE would prefer the Jets drafted a stud QB and keep extra 1st rounders to build around him.

I just don’t have as much confidence as you do that this preference will come to fruition. FFS they’re supposedly still deciding whether or not Darnold might be worth another 1st rounder (by turning down such picks, you’re re-investing that pick) to then hopefully award him a contract that’d be more expensive than Watson’s would be ($29MM/yr x 5 years) via a trade.

I don’t think anyone believes the only pathway to building a champion is trading for Watson. Just that they (we) view that as one good way by eliminating the biggest puzzle piece, at a time when we can better afford such a trade than any other time. Plus the knowledge that it’s a one-time offer; we don’t get to change our minds 2-4 years from now if the decision we made instead hasn’t panned out.

The only move that would make me cringe is if we used #2 overall to upgrade a single non-premiere position like RT.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

What if you traded for Deshaun Watson and still built a good young core around Deshaun Watson.

Humbug! That couldn’t happen. He’s much worse than a crippled Joe Namath throwing laserbeam passes against so many of the AFL’s NFL-reject players.

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Two first round picks including #2
Two second round picks
One third round pick
Q Williams (#3 overall pick from two years ago, rising star in the NFL)
Sam Darnold

Please just make the insanity stop.

Seth Meyers Lol GIF by Late Night with Seth Meyers

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Flea Flicking Frank said:

Id be happy with any outcome that led to the Jets being really good

Yet you, and quite a few others, are against this trade that would make the Jets really good really quickly.

Odd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...