Is Chris Simms Right About Watson?

[Bronx]

If youu don't have an elite QB, most likely you won't go to the Super Bowl. How hard is that to understand? When is Sam going to become elite? from all of the sudden? Are we going to build a team through the draft and hope a miracle QB pops in?  Or maybe gamble for another 3 years while making this outstanding coach miserable.

We have capital (never mentioned in this video), the team will be attractive (good vets might take a pay cut) and we will be guaranteed the most important thing, an elite QB

How many of these teams with 2nd tier QBs have made it to the SB? I rest my case.

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, Pac said:

Unfortunately I do..  all of them.

I've seen horrific coaching, injuries galore, and complacent gm'ing give the impression that a promising young QB is broken beyond repair.

If we run it back with Sam next year and surround him with what is possible with our picks and in FA, I believe we will see young Sam rise like a m'fin Phoenix and serve a plate of Crow so bountiful, that his haters will be  choking on beaks and talons for months!

SO IT IS SAID, SO IT SHALL BE.

 

The coaching, injuries and GMing "failed" Mark Sanchez and Geno Smith, too.  Didn't suddenly make them good at their next stops.

But I guess Sammy is different this time!

[GreenFish]

He’s not wrong in his analysis of the Jets. We have a lot of holes. He lost me at the end by calling NE a team that is a QB away though. Maybe they’re a Brady away. But Watson is not Brady.

Look to trade for Watson but the minute it gets to be too expensive, call it a day. More than 3 first is too expensive.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, FidelioJet said:

While you make reasonable points and theoretically they make sense.. 

I will have to continue to disagree with you - as far as text book you're correct, as far as the reality in our current situation, I simply can't agree. 

 If we end up drafting a QB at 2.  You need to do EVERYTHING in your power to turn him into a player.  That means supporting him however you can.  Give him the resources he needs to succeed.  If he becomes the guy you want him to be then you'll have 15 years to build a balanced team around him.  Once you have established then what you've listed above would be the proper approach to take.

Developing a franchise QB needs to be top priority of any organization.

I was originally all for trading for Watson as that would solve that concern...but he's shown if he's not happy he'll become a problem AND the Jets, by giving up most of their premium resources to acquire him, won't be able to put the assets around him in time for him not to sour.  And now you want to split those resources between offense and defense - forget it.  His agent will be calling Woody a racist by Dec.

He's shown he hasn't been able to win with lesser talent, so the best option is to pass on him - unless you can really get him cheap - something like, Sam, #2 and #34 - anything more than that and you're just kicking this problem down the road two to three years when you'll have trade him again as the new GM and HC search begins.

That's ok, there's no rule that says you have to agree with me (until I've completed my takeover as Emperor of Moderators, but that's not for a few more weeks).

Everything in our power doesn't therefore make it a zero-sum game, where every pick or asset given to the defense is an indirect barrier to success for the QB. Such a view presumes that a QB's development is not impacted by a defense that surrenders 30+ ppg, which you know is ridiculous. It affects playcalling, it affects the defense he's facing, and it affects him and other players when they "know" the D is just going to crap the bed as soon as they're on the field.

There's also such a thing as going overboard to make it too cushy. That's obviously not been an issue with the Jets, but if he only performs with a perfect OL and perfect receivers and a 1400-yard workhorse back, then excuse me wtf do we need to also burn a #2 overall pick for on a QB? A lot of what Watson brings is the removal of a need to willfully ignore half the team for a year or two as though anyone's done that en route to a championship. 

[Sperm Edwards]

@FidelioJet

As for the risk of him wanting out here, too? Nah.

Watson isn't going to be able to cry wolf a second time. One time, sure, whether or not everyone agrees there's a wolf down there, but he's never done it before so he gets the benefit of the doubt. The time/environment is right (if "right" is really the correct word) for people coast to coast having sympathy for him as the squeaky-clean good guy with no record of making noise negatively about his team or FO, who was obnoxiously slighted via a broken promise just so ownership can keep everything white as rain. Not a hard narrative to follow as things played out.

The reality is, while I'm certain that's what Watson is seeing, he also sees the crap situation and ownership has foolishly provided him with an easy out. Without a clean slate, Watson's not going to get such an easy out here & anyway it'd comparatively fall on deaf ears railing against ownership that (if you value actions more than words) has done more for hiring minority HCs - plus retaining them past their worth with undeserved extensions - than any other NFL team. This just isn't a concern I have. His agent didn't even say that about McNair (in his deleted post what he railed against was nepotism, not racism), so if he left that easy accusation out with McNair I don't see how/why he'll now start with Johnson, in the face of Jets' ex-players/employees very publicly saying we're an organization with good people up top (the trash results stemming from incompetence, not interference & intolerance).

Tuck the info from this situation away, sure, but if I'm Douglas I'm not bypassing on Watson because of something that has such a puny chance of happening (never mind within the upcoming 5 years). Right now Watson can do this because he's got a clean slate. He does it again with another team - never mind so soon, for a team with a sterling record of promoting minority HCs - and 90% of those taking his side now will scoff at using civil rights issues so frivolously and so transparently for his own benefit. FFS as it is his only direct statements I recall was him telling people don't rally in on his behalf so they don't contribute to spreading covid.  

[Stark]

5 minutes ago, bitonti said:

im team sewell which makes me hugely unpopular with all other fans 

the Jets don't have the infrastructure to protect any QB, even Trevor, (but they'd have to take him anyway)

 this isn't really about what the fans want and it never was

if Coach Saleh can revive Sam's career he will look like a genius, and if he doesn't, well nothing really lost... it's a free year from his perspective 

that's the game theory way through not push all in on Watson or Wilson/Fields in year 1 of Saleh 

 

just for the hell of it, what you do with Becton keep him left or move him right?

The JETS aren't going to be the same dog sh*t coached team more than likely Gase is an all time bad coach. I would think our offensive line is going to be addressed by at least 1 FA and in draft. Overall Line play should be better this year because of those. The Shanahan offense is designed for QB's to not have to be dropping 7 and putting pressure on Oline.

it shouldn't be about what the fans want, I agree. 

If we go the revive Sam's career route and it doesn't nothing really lost... Shouldn't be a free year for anyone, ever. I agree if this system revives Sams career to the 3rd overall pick in the draft that would be great, but... what do you see from Sam that makes you think that's possible?

I wonder. If "hypothetically" someone told you the JETS were going to trade Jamal Adams and a 1st round pick for Watson, where would you stand? I understand the trade compensation is, in no way, set to that number.. 

Could you see a scenario where you are JD and you give up 1st round picks and ensure you have a to 5 QB knowing you still have 

2nd and 2-3rd round picks this year (plus the rest - & whatever you get from Darnold trade) 

all 2nd and 3rd round picks next draft .... 

I mean I get that people see the 4 first round picks and think 4 all pros, but we all know that's not likely. sure we can get starting quality players with those picks but just draft picks plus all the money we have in FA we can address positions of need and be more calculated in our acquisitions.  Im not saying go sign the biggest $$$ guys either.

[extmenace]

5 hours ago, rangerous said:

Seems like people are throwing around draft picks without much consideration for where they are.  Three first round picks may mean two this season and one next. Or they may mean one in each of the next 3 drafts.  If I were the Texans I’d want this to be front loaded so I get the higher picks early rather than spread out.  And if I’m the jets I’d deal this years two plus first rounders in the next two drafts.  We’ll see.  I’d be willing to bet Douglas is looking at these types of scenarios.

Kind of annoying to me that nobody is considering the value of the number 2 pick. Jamal adams, mack and etc did not net a top 2 pick. According to the draft pick point system, the number 2 pick is worth 2600 points. The number 20 pick is worth 850 points. That number 2 pick is worth 3 #20 picks. By no means am I saying that all trades can be based off the point system but it does at least give you an idea of what that pick is worth. If someone hypothetically had 3 picks inside the 20-25 range this year and then traded another pick that landed in the 20-25 range next year, the media would be praising the Texans for getting a kings ransom. Watson is awesome, a true franchise qb but look at the two teams in the super bowl. They are absolutely stacked. You can’t win in the nfl with a Peyton manning and a mediocre colts team anymore. Watson, in my mind is worth the number 2 pick and Seattle’s first this year only. If the Texans want more picks, they can trade that number 2 pick and turn it into however many picks they can get.

[Stark]

1 hour ago, FidelioJet said:

While you make reasonable points and theoretically they make sense.. 

I will have to continue to disagree with you - as far as text book you're correct, as far as the reality in our current situation, I simply can't agree. 

 If we end up drafting a QB at 2.  You need to do EVERYTHING in your power to turn him into a player.  That means supporting him however you can.  Give him the resources he needs to succeed.  If he becomes the guy you want him to be then you'll have 15 years to build a balanced team around him.  Once you have established then what you've listed above would be the proper approach to take.

Developing a franchise QB needs to be top priority of any organization.

I was originally all for trading for Watson as that would solve that concern...but he's shown if he's not happy he'll become a problem AND the Jets, by giving up most of their premium resources to acquire him, won't be able to put the assets around him in time for him not to sour.  And now you want to split those resources between offense and defense - forget it.  His agent will be calling Woody a racist by Dec.

He's shown he hasn't been able to win with lesser talent, so the best option is to pass on him - unless you can really get him cheap - something like, Sam, #2 and #34 - anything more than that and you're just kicking this problem down the road two to three years when you'll have trade him again as the new GM and HC search begins.

His problem is with the owner, and front office. Not his team... Watson is a high character player that is only responding to being treated like sh*t and being lied to. If you are the Texans owner and you tell your QB or anyone you are going to do X,Y,Z and you don't its going to piss them off. factor in other players are in agreement with Watson about the Texans FO being a sh*t show and you can't say Watson is a malcontent. 

 

You say do everything in your power to turn the QB you take at 2 into a player. If he becomes the guy... if he doesn't your only kicking the problem down the road 2 - 3 year. wash, rinse, repeat.

 

Can the JETS build a team without acquiring Watson sure they can, you even allude to that in your last paragraph... and you give the compensation so I ask... how many draft picks do yo need each year to have a successful draft? because you seem to be hung up on the quantity of picks. Jamal Adams and #2 over all and Sam for Watson? Man I make that trade everyday of the week.

[FidelioJet]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

The bold is absolutely not true.  I've said in this thread, at least 5 times, it's not about 2021 or even 2022 for that matter, it's about 15 years of having a top 3 QB in the NFL.   

And yes, he is that type of player.  100%.  

 

 

While I agree that these two years don't necessarily matter - but this is a player that just forced his way out of a situation.  What happens after two years of no talent football?

Do you expect him to sit around - or will he be busy on Twitter?

[FidelioJet]

8 hours ago, Charlie Brown said:

Hey I am confused..... I thought that you wanted Watson!!!

I did

But I'm really starting to get worried about him - he pulling a full-court Adams, he's being more sneaky having his friends and his agent do his dirty work.

At this point, if we don't immediately surround him with talent it'll get ugly fast - and if we have to give up too much we won't be able to surround him with talent and this is just a disaster waiting to happen.

If we can get him for Sam, #2 and #34 then sure.  Anything more than that and I am really worried about him pulling the same sugar two years from now.

[GreenFish]

Hypothetically, if the Jets trade back and do a relatively descent job plugging holes and Darnold bust AGAIN, what is the Jets record? Looking around the league at teams that suck balls at QB but have a good supporting cast. In 2022, We’d at best be picking in the 6-12 range with an additional 1st.

The doomsday scenario if Darnold bombs again is us essentially being the Carolina Panthers of this year but with an additional 1st.

I wouldn’t bring back Darnold, but giving him one last shot is not the end of the world. Joe D better hit on his draft picks. If Detroit is able to get a 1st for Stafford, they’d be a good trade back partner and we can pick up an additional 1st.

 

[Jetsfan80]

4 minutes ago, GreenFish said:

Hypothetically, if the Jets trade back and do a relatively descent job plugging holes and Darnold bust AGAIN, what is the Jets record? Looking around the league at teams that suck balls at QB but have a good supporting cast. We’d at best be picking in the 6-12 range with an additional 1st.

The doomsday scenario if Darnold bombs again is us being the Carolina Panthers of they had an additional 1st.

I wouldn’t bring back Darnold, but giving him one last shot is not the end of the world. Joe D better hit on his draft picks. If Detroit is able to get a 1st for Stafford, they’d be a good trade back partner and we can pick up an additional 1st.

 

Darnold being the undisputed starting QB of the Jets in 2021 is a good way to give me zero interest in this season.  It will also force me to call for the GM's firing.  

Since football is an entertainment industry I'd prefer to have something entertaining versus something I have zero interest watching.  And I certainly hope Joe Douglas is much smarter than this.

Darnold will fail.  Of this there can be no question.  So if the team wants to tank away a season when there's no real reason to do so, they can have fun with that. 

I can't possibly imagine a good reason why we can't have a legitimate QB competition this summer.  Not one.  Sticking with and building around Sam Darnold, who is a proven failure and has just 1 year left on his contract, makes absolutely no sense.

[JustInFudge]

17 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

While I agree that these two years don't necessarily matter - but this is a player that just forced his way out of a situation.  What happens after two years of no talent football?

Do you expect him to sit around - or will he be busy on Twitter?

Look, I'm shocked we're even having this conversation.  This, never ever happens.  So I dont have the answers.  I dont follow Twitter, so I didnt even know that he had a Twitter meltdown or whatever, I thought all he said was "I'm a 2 now I'm 10".  Is that bad?  Idk, social media is the devil.  Either way, I really dont understand why everyone is acting like you cant add additional talent with Watson.  It's very strange.  The Jets have 6 picks in the top 100 this year.  Say you give away both 1st rounders, I dont think you need to but lets just play a game real quick.

Jets trade for Watson leaving roughly 50 mil to work with so they're also able to add Robinson and Thuney.

With their first 4 picks 34, 66, 87, 99 - they land what I believe are immediate starters/contributors in this draft - 34. CB - Tyson Campbell. 66. C - Creed Humphrey 87. WR - Amari Rodgers 99. RB - Javonte Williams.  And that's not even going into the later rounds where I think you can find some sleeper OL, CB's and even more WR's if you wanted to wait on Rodgers since you got Robinson in FA.  

That is 100% a realistic and in one offseason you just built one of the most explosive offensive teams in Football and threw in #1 CB with the first pick just to show off.

 

 

 

[GreenFish]

19 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

Darnold being the undisputed starting QB of the Jets in 2021 is a good way to give me zero interest in this season.  It will also force me to call for the GM's firing.  

Since football is an entertainment industry I'd prefer to have something entertaining versus something I have zero interest watching.  And I certainly hope Joe Douglas is much smarter than this.

Darnold will fail.  Of this there can be no question.  So if the team wants to tank away a season when there's no real reason to do so, they can have fun with that. 

I can't possibly imagine a good reason why we can't have a legitimate QB competition this summer.  Not one.  Sticking with and building around Sam Darnold, who is a proven failure and has just 1 year left on his contract, makes absolutely no sense.

Yea I don’t think it’s ideal. But I’m a Jets fans...the only way to survive and maintain sanity is to look at the cup half full. So I’m out here to trying to convince myself of the Joe D plan. Lol. It’s a tough sell.

[FidelioJet]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

Look, I'm shocked we're even having this conversation.  This, never ever happens.  So I dont have the answers.  I dont follow Twitter, so I didnt even know that he had a Twitter meltdown or whatever, I thought all he said was "I'm a 2 now I'm 10".  Is that bad?  Idk, social media is the devil.  Either way, I really dont understand why everyone is acting like you cant add additional talent with Watson.  It's very strange.  The Jets have 6 picks in the top 100 this year.  Say you give away both 1st rounders, I dont think you need to but lets just play a game real quick.

Jets trade for Watson leaving roughly 50 mil to work with so they're also able to add Robinson and Thuney.

With their first 4 picks 34, 66, 87, 99 - they land what I believe are immediate starters/contributors in this draft - 34. CB - Tyson Campbell. 66. C - Creed Humphrey 87. WR - Amari Rodgers 99. RB - Javonte Williams.  And that's not even going into the later rounds where I think you can find some sleeper OL, CB's and even more WR's if you wanted to wait on Rodgers since you got Robinson in FA.  

That is 100% a realistic and in one offseason you just built one of the most explosive offensive teams in Football and threw in #1 CB with the first pick just to show off.

 

 

 

So, in this scenario we're giving up #2 and #23 and that's it for Watson.  In that case I agree.  Good move.  

[Dunnie]

His father played for the Giants.  He doesn’t want the Jets to own NY. He’s a hater

I completely agree with Simms… bringing Watson here now will handcuff this team and prevent us from building talent throughout the roster. The fact that people can't see this is amazing to me. So sure if you like to go 4 and 12... 5 and 11 for the next 5 to 6 years... By all means bring Watson in ....

Why should we change our way of thinking now after 42 years of losing.

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

[Dcat]

9 hours ago, FidelioJet said:

His argument is sound.

1. Watson is a good QB, entering his prime
2. As good as he is, Watson without talent doesn't win
3. Jets have no talent
4. Therefor, Watson won't win with the Jets
5. Finally, Jets should use their resources to build an NFL roster

It's pretty sound thinking and accurate to the situation.

Once again, as has been shown by many in this thread over-and-over again, the view above is overly simplistic and incorrect.  Not going to repeat all the reasons why because you simply ignore them.  

[Jet_Engine1]

8 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

The coaching, injuries and GMing "failed" Mark Sanchez and Geno Smith, too.  Didn't suddenly make them good at their next stops.

But I guess Sammy is different this time!

[Dcat]

Darnold revival is nothing more than a fairy tale. Wilson vs Watson? Give me Watson.  

[Philc1]

21 hours ago, johnnyjet said:

His father played for the Giants.  He doesn’t want the Jets to own NY. He’s a hater

Or he’s actually right 

 

and his brother played for the jets

[Philc1]

14 hours ago, GreenFish said:

He’s not wrong in his analysis of the Jets. We have a lot of holes. He lost me at the end by calling NE a team that is a QB away though. Maybe they’re a Brady away. But Watson is not Brady.

Look to trade for Watson but the minute it gets to be too expensive, call it a day. More than 3 first is too expensive.

Agree.  The pats with that current roster with Watson misses the playoffs 

[Philc1]

15 hours ago, JiF said:

The bold is absolutely not true.  I've said in this thread, at least 5 times, it's not about 2021 or even 2022 for that matter, it's about 15 years of having a top 3 QB in the NFL.   

And yes, he is that type of player.  100%.  

 

 

Top 3?  Since when is Watson top 3?

[Philc1]

19 hours ago, Pac said:

He just went 4-12 on a more talented team.

[Bowles Movement]

21 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

More than several?

RD1		RD2		RD3		RD4		RD5		RD6		RD7
PK/TM		PK/TM		PK/TM		PK/TM		PK/TM		PK/TM		PK/TM
1  JAX	3000	33  JAX	580	65  JAX	265	96  JAX	116	128  JAX	44	160  TEN	26.2	191  JAX	13.8
2  NYJ	2600	34  NYJ	560	66  NYJ	260	97  NYJ	112	129  NYJ	43	161  NYJ	25.8	192  SF	13.4
3  MIA	2200	35  ATL	550	67  HOU	255	98  ATL	108	130  HOU	42	162  ATL	25.4	193  HOU	13
4  ATL	1800	36  MIA	540	68  ATL	250	99  HOU	104	131  ATL	41	163  HOU	25	194  MIA	12.6
5  CIN	1700	37  PHI	530	69  PHI	245	100  CLE	100	132  CIN	40	164  PHI	24.6	195  CIN	12.2
6  PHI	1600	38  CIN	520	70  CIN	240	101  CIN	96	133  PHI	39.5	165  CIN	24.2	196  PHI	11.8
7  DET	1500	39  CAR	510	71  DEN	235	102  DET	92	134  CAR	39	166  DEN	23.8	197  SEA	11.4
8  CAR	1400	40  DEN	500	72  DET	230	103  CAR	88	135  DEN	38.5	167  DAL	23.4	198  BUF	11
9  DEN	1350	41  DET	490	73  CAR	225	104  DEN	86	136  DET	38	168  CAR	23	199  DEN	10.6
10  DAL	1300	42  NYG	480	74  WAS	220	105  DAL	84	137  NYJ	37.5	169  SF	22.6	200  DAL	10.2
11  NYG	1250	43  SF	470	75  DAL	215	106  NYG	82	138  SF	37	170  NE	22.2	201  DEN	9.8
12  SF	1200	44  DAL	460	76  NYG	210	107  SF	80	139  PHI	36.5	171  NYG	21.8	202  SF	9.4
13  LAC	1150	45  JAX	450	77  LAC	205	108  LAC	78	140  MIN	36	172  NE	21.4	203  LAC	9
14  MIN	1100	46  NE	440	78  MIN	200	109  ATL	76	141  NE	35.5	173  LAC	21	204  MIN	8.6
15  NE	1050	47  LAC	430	79  ARI	195	110  NE	74	142  LAC	35	174  MIN	20.6	205  NE	8.2
16  ARI	1000	48  LV	420	80  LV	190	111  LV	72	143  ARI	34.5	175  NYG	20.2	206  ARI	7.8
17  LV	950	49  ARI	410	81  MIA	185	112  HOU	70	144  BUF	34	176  HOU	19.8	207  LV	7.4
18  MIA	900	50  MIA	400	82  WAS	180	113  MIA	68	145  LV	33.5	177  LV	19.4	208  PIT	7
19  WAS	875	51  WAS	390	83  CHI	175	114  WAS	66	146  WAS	33	178  CHI	19	209  WAS	6.6
20  CHI	850	52  CHI	380	84  IND	170	115  MIN	64	147  CHI	31.4	179  LAC	18.6	210  LV	6.2
21  IND	800	53  TEN	370	85  TEN	165	116  TEN	62	148  IND	31	180  IND	18.2	211  IND	5.8
22  TEN	780	54  IND	360	86  NYJ	160	117  IND	60	149  TEN	30.6	181  MIA	17.8	212  JAX	5.4
23  NYJ	760	55  PIT	350	87  PIT	155	118  PIT	58	150  SEA	30.2	182  KC	17.4	213  SEA	5
24  PIT	740	56  SEA	340	88  LAR	150	119  SEA	56	151  PIT	29.8	183  LAR	17	214  TB	4.6
25  JAX	720	57  LAR	330	89  CLE	145	120  JAX	54	152  CLE	29.4	184  BAL	16.6	215  LAR	4.2
26  CLE	700	58  BAL	320	90  MIN	140	121  BAL	52	153  JAX	29	185  CLE	16.2	216  DEN	3.8
27  BAL	680	59  CLE	310	91  CLE	136	122  CLE	50	154  MIN	28.6	186  HOU	15.8	217  PIT	3.4
28  NO	660	60  NO	300	92  GB	132	123  NO	49	155  SF	28.2	187  BUF	15.4	218  GB	3
29  GB	640	61  BUF	292	93  BUF	128	124  MIN	48	156  GB	27.8	188  GB	15	219  CLE	2.3
30  BUF	620	62  GB	284	94  TB	124	125  GB	47	157  BUF	27.4	189  PIT	14.6	220  TB	2
31  TB	600	63  TB	276	95  KC	120	126  TB	46	158  TB	27	190  TEN	14.2	221  MIA	1.7
32  KC	590	64  KC	270			127  KC	45	159  KC	26.6

According to this chart which typically understates the value of draft picks when it comes to moving up for QBs a pick in the 20s averages 700 pts in value whereas the number 2 pick is worth 2600 pts.  So the number 2 pick is probably worth 4 number 1 s in the mid 20s easily. Comparing this trade to Adam’s trade needs to take that into consideration.

 

[bitonti]

17 hours ago, Stark said:

just for the hell of it, what you do with Becton keep him left or move him right?

The JETS aren't going to be the same dog sh*t coached team more than likely Gase is an all time bad coach. I would think our offensive line is going to be addressed by at least 1 FA and in draft. Overall Line play should be better this year because of those. The Shanahan offense is designed for QB's to not have to be dropping 7 and putting pressure on Oline.

it shouldn't be about what the fans want, I agree. 

If we go the revive Sam's career route and it doesn't nothing really lost... Shouldn't be a free year for anyone, ever. I agree if this system revives Sams career to the 3rd overall pick in the draft that would be great, but... what do you see from Sam that makes you think that's possible?

I wonder. If "hypothetically" someone told you the JETS were going to trade Jamal Adams and a 1st round pick for Watson, where would you stand? I understand the trade compensation is, in no way, set to that number.. 

If the Jets draft Sewell he plays left tackle and Becton mauls on the right. 

As for the hypothetical trade, I'd wonder what's in it for Watson 

[tfine]

Chris Simms is 100 percent right


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[FidelioJet]

14 minutes ago, bitonti said:

If the Jets draft Sewell he plays left tackle and Becton mauls on the right. 

As for the hypothetical trade, I'd wonder what's in it for Watson 

I agree, Becton is a RT and would almost immediately be the best RT in the league. Sewell could be a dominant LT.

But what do you want to do at QB? Seriously, I get it,  having two bookends for the next decade would be great

But why not take a QB at 2 and then the top Tackle at 23.  They'll still be a lot of good ones on the board.

Kicking the QB can down the road isn't helping this team.

[bitonti]

18 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

I agree, Becton is a RT and would almost immediately be the best RT in the league. Sewell could be a dominant LT.

But what do you want to do at QB? Seriously, I get it,  having two bookends for the next decade would be great

But why not take a QB at 2 and then the top Tackle at 23.  They'll still be a lot of good ones on the board.

Kicking the QB can down the road isn't helping this team.

Honest answer I want to see darnold / Mullins and Morgan compete. The jets qb room is very young already it does not need to get younger.

There will be other opportunities for drafting the qb 

[tfine]

We tend to get a little starstruck every time a big name is available. Especially a QB. It’s not just us fans but the media as well. The truth is we are not QB away from a championship. If you look at the Super Bowl teams not only are the QBs great but both teams are LOADED with talent. The QB is only one piece of the puzzle it’s a big piece but a piece nonetheless. Look at the GB packers Rodgers has been the best QB in the NFL for almost 17 years. Yet he only has 1 SuperBowl during that time. Why? because his defense hasn’t been up to par and among other things.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Sperm Edwards]

@Bowles Movement I’m not quoting all that because of the poor formatting, but a pick in the mid-20s is not a mid-1st round pick. Even using that over-quoted chart you posted as though it was gospel, a pick in the mid-20s is like 700. A 4:1 ratio to pick #2 would be about 650, or roughly 4 picks in the 28-29 range. That’s a stretch to call #28-29 “mid-20s” as it is, let alone presume #28-29 value as equivalent to a pick in the middle of round 1.

Several is a vague term — technically it means more than two, but textbook definitions aside no one actually uses it for as little as 3 in practice (when a few is more apt). If I tell you to drive several miles down the road, or something happens several months from now, it’s unlikely anyone is thinking I mean just 3. Not only is 4 probably the barest minimum common usage of several (people usually say the number when they mean 4, and I think I’m like most in figuring at least 5 to upwards of 7 or even 8 when I hear/use it myself). 

He further went overboard to not say merely several but rather more than several which is comically ridiculous.

Several is a range, not a specific number that stops at 4 or even 5 to most anyone; it would at least cover a range up to 6 (though I’d use it to mean 7 more than I’d use it for 4). It would suggest greater than 6 to qualify for a typical person to say more than several of anything. “More than several” is not 1 more than the minimum to be possibly used as “several” anyway; since it’s not a specific, single number, it means more than the range encompassed by “several” i.e. at least 7, if not at least 8. 

3-4 picks in the late 20s is not “more than several [i.e. ≥7] mid-first round picks” as he put it. And come on, you know that.

If you or I say “mid-1st round picks” then most people are probably thinking of of draft slots in the 12-20 range, with 16 being the median (not in the mid-20s and definitely not into the late 20s). Pick #2 overall is about 2.5x pick #16, by using chart math. Any more than that, and you’re talking about not only a must-draft prospect at #2 but to further have him followed by an enormous perceived drop-off, where any of the next several (i.e. 4-7) prospects could go #3, like in 2019. That situation doesn’t exist this year. Maybe it would have if Fields had Trask’s game against Alabama, but he didn’t.

So, no way is the #2 pick worth “more than several first round picks,” and if it could even in theory, it’d be limited a very unique, perfect-storm scenario that doesn’t exist this year. 

The prosecution rests.

 

(OK I never rest; please respond/continue so I can babble on for another several paragraphs about these semantics.)

[JustInFudge]

4 hours ago, Philc1 said:

Top 3?  Since when is Watson top 3?

Since I said so

[Philc1]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

Since I said so

[Dunnie]

Since I said so

Hey . What's that on the ground over there ??? Oh .. it's my ASS ... I laughed it off.

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

[Bowles Movement]

On 1/30/2021 at 10:09 AM, Sperm Edwards said:

@Bowles Movement I’m not quoting all that because of the poor formatting, but a pick in the mid-20s is not a mid-1st round pick. Even using that over-quoted chart you posted as though it was gospel, a pick in the mid-20s is like 700. A 4:1 ratio to pick #2 would be about 650, or roughly 4 picks in the 28-29 range. That’s a stretch to call #28-29 “mid-20s” as it is, let alone presume #28-29 value as equivalent to a pick in the middle of round 1.

Several is a vague term — technically it means more than two, but textbook definitions aside no one actually uses it for as little as 3 in practice (when a few is more apt). If I tell you to drive several miles down the road, or something happens several months from now, it’s unlikely anyone is thinking I mean just 3. Not only is 4 probably the barest minimum common usage of several (people usually say the number when they mean 4, and I think I’m like most in figuring at least 5 to upwards of 7 or even 8 when I hear/use it myself). 

He further went overboard to not say merely several but rather more than several which is comically ridiculous.

Several is a range, not a specific number that stops at 4 or even 5 to most anyone; it would at least cover a range up to 6 (though I’d use it to mean 7 more than I’d use it for 4). It would suggest greater than 6 to qualify for a typical person to say more than several of anything. “More than several” is not 1 more than the minimum to be possibly used as “several” anyway; since it’s not a specific, single number, it means more than the range encompassed by “several” i.e. at least 7, if not at least 8. 

3-4 picks in the late 20s is not “more than several [i.e. ≥7] mid-first round picks” as he put it. And come on, you know that.

If you or I say “mid-1st round picks” then most people are probably thinking of of draft slots in the 12-20 range, with 16 being the median (not in the mid-20s and definitely not into the late 20s). Pick #2 overall is about 2.5x pick #16, by using chart math. Any more than that, and you’re talking about not only a must-draft prospect at #2 but to further have him followed by an enormous perceived drop-off, where any of the next several (i.e. 4-7) prospects could go #3, like in 2019. That situation doesn’t exist this year. Maybe it would have if Fields had Trask’s game against Alabama, but he didn’t.

So, no way is the #2 pick worth “more than several first round picks,” and if it could even in theory, it’d be limited a very unique, perfect-storm scenario that doesn’t exist this year. 

The prosecution rests.

 

(OK I never rest; please respond/continue so I can babble on for another several paragraphs about these semantics.)

We gave up 3 second rd picks to move from 6 to 3

and that was a year with 4 qbs that everyone ranked differently.

plug that into your calculator and tell me how that fits with your “defense”

 

[Sperm Edwards]

6 hours ago, Bowles Movement said:

We gave up 3 second rd picks to move from 6 to 3

and that was a year with 4 qbs that everyone ranked differently.

plug that into your calculator and tell me how that fits with your “defense”

 

I’m the prosecution, not the defense  

You are the one who posted a chart to use for calculation, so imo either use it or don’t use it. Either is fine, and of course individuals rank prospects differently, but if you’re going to use the chart as you posted, then #2 is not worth “more than several mid-1st round picks” and frankly It isn’t even in the ballpark.

• A mid-1st round pick is pick 16 give or take 3-4 slots. Some might be as high as 12, some as low as 20, but if you’re going to cumulatively refer to all of them as mid 1st round picks they won’t all be at (let alone worse than) pick 20.
• Even if they were all as low as #28 it still wouldn’t sniff at requiring “more than several” (i.e. some 7-10 of them) to trade up to #2, let alone in this draft with no consensus #2 prospect.
• FFS plenty still believe Sewell should be or will go at #2, and no one is trading in excess of 5-6 1st rounders to get to #2 in a draft where an offensive lineman is even a possible #2 overall pick.

The 2018 draft was unique. I can explain if needed, but I think you know that other than Lawrence - and Lawrence alone - this class isn’t universally viewed the same way as 2018, where any of 4 different players had the potential to be the #1 overall pick.

Plus while it exceeded chart value, the Jets’ trade-up was in the ballpark. 6+37+49+75ish = ~2750, or overpayment by a single high 2nd round pick (about 550). High, but not laughable-WTF.

Several mid 1st rounders - excuse me, more than several mid 1st rounders - would be well outside that overpayment, and comfortably in the laughable-WTF range.