Jump to content

Patriots and Thuney nowhere near a deal


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 155
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Tom Brady says hello.

If they keep Darnold he could join Becton and Sewell but not at # 2. In that scenario the Jets are trading down. Sewell isn't going at 2, so it depends on how far down the Jets trade.  That would be a

Posted Images

45 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Perhaps, but if Seattle wasn't so over-the-top stupid he'd have been left holding the hot potato. 

It's about time we had a GM who wasn't easily the dumbest in the league.  Relying on another team's stupidity is exactly what other front offices have been counting on with the Jets for decades.  For once, a Jets GM took advantage of another team's stupidity.  

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, chad2coles said:

OK, but if Douglas signed Conklin to a big guaranteed deal and he played like garbage because he was on an o-line with really bad guard play and 5 guys that just met eachother he'd get trashed for that too.  No reason not to give him credit where credit is due.

Except he didn't play like garbage. He had his second 1st team AP nod. That holds no more sway than saying "What if ____ was signed and then got injured?" Likelihood has to prevail in making such an argument.

He does get credit for the Adams trade, but I don't know what he turned down before that or how many teams were interested since it was much more behind the scenes than the last similar trade (Revis, while injured). I also give him credit for not caving to Adams and extending him instead of trading him. He did good there. The rest? I'm struggling to find a lot of moves only a top-notch GM would've made, counterbalanced by a 5-10:1 ratio of bad moves. 

List all his moves and non-moves. It's not a pretty picture on balance so far. 

I'm willing to write it off as a first-time GM trying to show how he knows more than everyone else, only to end up with pie on his face while more conventional moves proved smarter.

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

That makes sense. 

Really it probably comes down to whoever is the best pass blocker to plays LT but you would think using a 2nd pick on a lt would give them the upper hand 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Ghost420 said:

Really it probably comes down to whoever is the best pass blocker to plays LT but you would think using a 2nd pick on a lt would give them the upper hand 

I get that. It definitely makes sense.

Personally I don't know how much the LT/RT distinction truly matters anymore from a tactical/schematic standpoint, but obviously it still does when we talk about $/market value - i.e. Orlando Brown Jr wanting to be paid like a "Left".

There are a lot of moving parts right now. But one of the scenarios I'm most comfortable with is aggressively pursuing interior offensive lineman in free agency, and draft a tackle at some point in the top 34. The 'build a super-unit' offensive line strategy seems straight forward and, more importantly, genuinely achievable this offseason. 

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

Except he didn't play like garbage. He had his second 1st team AP nod. That holds no more sway than saying "What if ____ was signed and then got injured?" Likelihood has to prevail in making such an argument.

He does get credit for the Adams trade, but I don't know what he turned down before that or how many teams were interested since it was much more behind the scenes than the last similar trade (Revis, while injured). I also give him credit for not caving to Adams and extending him instead of trading him. He did good there. The rest? I'm struggling to find a lot of moves only a top-notch GM would've made, counterbalanced by a 5-10:1 ratio of bad moves. 

List all his moves and non-moves. It's not a pretty picture on balance so far. 

I'm willing to write it off as a first-time GM trying to show how he knows more than everyone else, only to end up with pie on his face while more conventional moves proved smarter.

You can't say that Conklin would have played as well on the Jets o-line.  In fact, it's almost certain he wouldn't have.  He had a career year, in part, because he was part of the best o-line in football, with the highest graded guard in football playing next to him and Bill Callahan coaching him.

I wanted the Jets to sign Conklin, but I don't think he would have played this well if he was on the Jets o-line, which Douglas, admittedly put together.  I think Douglas prioritized flexibility last offseason while he saw a roster filled with problems - Adams, Bell, Mosely, etc.  If he thought that Fant was a better tackle than Conklin, that would be a bad sign.  I don't think that was the judgement he made.

There's no way you can fairly access his draft at this point.  This offseason will be how he's measured as a GM.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, chad2coles said:

You can't say that Conklin would have played as well on the Jets o-line.  In fact, it's almost certain he wouldn't have.  He had a career year, in part, because he was part of the best o-line in football, with the highest graded guard in football playing next to him and Bill Callahan coaching him.

I wanted the Jets to sign Conklin, but I don't think he would have played this well if he was on the Jets o-line, which Douglas, admittedly put together.  I think Douglas prioritized flexibility last offseason while he saw a roster filled with problems - Adams, Bell, Mosely, etc.  If he thought that Fant was a better tackle than Conklin, that would be a bad sign.  I don't think that was the judgement he made.

There's no way you can fairly access his draft at this point.  This offseason will be how he's measured as a GM.

Well by that measure, there's no such thing as a bad nor a better move Douglas could have made ;) 

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

Well by that measure, there's no such thing as a bad nor a better move Douglas could have made ;) 

Also fair.  I guess I'll allow myself to be optimistic on Douglas until Watson gets traded to a different team for less than #2, #23, and '22 and '23 1st round picks.  Then he'll be a bum.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RedBeardedSavage said:

I get that. It definitely makes sense.

Personally I don't know how much the LT/RT distinction truly matters anymore from a tactical/schematic standpoint, but obviously it still does when we talk about $/market value - i.e. Orlando Brown Jr wanting to be paid like a "Left".

There are a lot of moving parts right now. But one of the scenarios I'm most comfortable with is aggressively pursuing interior offensive lineman in free agency, and draft a tackle at some point in the top 34. The 'build a super-unit' offensive line strategy seems straight forward and, more importantly, genuinely achievable this offseason. 

I'm 100% on board with that. I just think #2 is too high when the team already has a young LT they love (and are right to love). If we didn't have Becton, there's a good chance I might feel differently. 

I think there's every opportunity to build a rock-solid OL with Becton + FA iOL + McGovern + 2021 rookie (#23 to #34) + another 2021-2022FA or rookie in 2022. It doesn't all have to be settled with long-term 

In the meantime, use that #2 overall pick on a position that's harder to fill dozens of picks later than #2 (or trade down). Particularly when there are QBs in play - one of which we may very well draft - and thoughts that the team might be able to recover as much as a latter-half 1st rounder for Darnold.

Fant doesn't make my heart go pitter-patter either, but he wasn't an omg wtf turnstile all year long. If they can't convince a second iOL FA to sign here in this same offseason (and drop Fant to pay for most of it), then for one more year we've had far worse stopgaps than Fant on the line. Plus that also gives another shot at filling a starting spot with Clark or a later 2022 rookie instead of jumping balls-deep on another 8-figure/year veteran. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, chad2coles said:

Also fair.  I guess I'll allow myself to be optimistic on Douglas until Watson gets traded to a different team for less than #2, #23, and '22 and '23 1st round picks.  Then he'll be a bum.

I think it's ok to be optimistic and also critical of Douglas. Pretty much where I'm at. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I'm 100% on board with that. I just think #2 is too high when the team already has a young LT they love (and are right to love). If we didn't have Becton, there's a good chance I might feel differently. 

I think there's every opportunity to build a rock-solid OL with Becton + FA iOL + McGovern + 2021 rookie (#23 to #34) + another 2021-2022FA or rookie in 2022. It doesn't all have to be settled with long-term 

In the meantime, use that #2 overall pick on a position that's harder to fill dozens of picks later than #2 (or trade down). Particularly when there are QBs in play - one of which we may very well draft - and thoughts that the team might be able to recover as much as a latter-half 1st rounder for Darnold.

Fant doesn't make my heart go pitter-patter either, but he wasn't an omg wtf turnstile all year long. If they can't convince a second iOL FA to sign here in this same offseason (and drop Fant to pay for most of it), then for one more year we've had far worse stopgaps than Fant on the line. Plus that also gives another shot at filling a starting spot with Clark or a later 2022 rookie instead of jumping balls-deep on another 8-figure/year veteran. 

I agree that Fant isn't a deal-breaker, we could keep him. But it does seem like this year's tackle class is quite good, especially in the top 40 or so projected picks. We could do both, honestly - keep Fant for another year and draft his replacement fairly high. 

If current rumors are to be believed, which is always a dicey proposition this time o' year, it does seem like we're QB @ pick 2 and moving on from Darnold.

That being the case, we're hoping Cosmi, Slater or Darrisaw slide to 23, or looking at maybe Radunz or Mayfield at 34 - I'm an amateur at this draft analysis sh*t, but from my understanding, guys like Leatherwood/Eichenberg don't move well enough for this scheme. But I could be wrong.

Another thing is resetting the rookie contract clock. It's spoken about plenty for Quarterback, but I believe Fant has one more year on his deal, and if he plays even halfway decent in the new scheme, he's about to get paid next offseason.

From a positional value standpoint and a maximizing of rookie contract value standpoint, we should probably take a quarterback at 2, and one of each of the top offensive tackle and edge player at 23 and 34. Maybe that's Ossai @ 23 and Radunz at 34 or Cosmi at 23 and Perkins at 34.

We'll see how it plays out, but I think that's a wise way to build a roster. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, RedBeardedSavage said:

I agree that Fant isn't a deal-breaker, we could keep him. But it does seem like this year's tackle class is quite good, especially in the top 40 or so projected picks. We could do both, honestly - keep Fant for another year and draft his replacement fairly high. 

If current rumors are to be believed, which is always a dicey proposition this time o' year, it does seem like we're QB @ pick 2 and moving on from Darnold.

That being the case, we're hoping Cosmi, Slater or Darrisaw slide to 23, or looking at maybe Radunz or Mayfield at 34 - I'm an amateur at this draft analysis sh*t, but from my understanding, guys like Leatherwood/Eichenberg don't move well enough for this scheme. But I could be wrong.

Another thing is resetting the rookie contract clock. It's spoken about plenty for Quarterback, but I believe Fant has one more year on his deal, and if he plays even halfway decent in the new scheme, he's about to get paid next offseason.

From a positional value standpoint and a maximizing of rookie contract value standpoint, we should probably take a quarterback at 2, and one of each of the top offensive tackle and edge player at 23 and 34. Maybe that's Ossai @ 23 and Radunz at 34 or Cosmi at 23 and Perkins at 34.

We'll see how it plays out, but I think that's a wise way to build a roster. 

Fant's got 2 more years left, both at similar money. The only major difference is this year most of his salary gets guaranteed if he's still on the team in the last 1/3 of March. If done early, he's cuttable either year. His salary is $1.2MM higher next year than this year; a difference that's more than offset by what'll likely be a mammoth increase in the cap ceiling (on top of more Maccagnan blunders coming off the cap for good after 2021, though Mosley's number jumps back up, too). 

Whether you're an amateur or not at grading these guys you're ahead of where I am. Good to hear there are a number of tackles this year (not to beat a dead horse, but all the more reason to not sink our top resource in the position). One of those guys plus one of the better iOL FAs is already 4/5 of a line. The other 1/5 can be Fant, it can be a second rookie, it can be Clark, etc. I suppose Edoga's a possibility, too, but that seems like a real long shot plus he's a UFA a year later to boot. Best of that bunch shouldn't be the end of the world for 1 season in which (desire aside) we don't figure to be SB contenders anyway. 

The other thing with Fant is, if a rookie looks great this summer, and Douglas is willing to eat some salary (which he's shown a willingness to do) he can be traded to a contender that just lost its starting LT in Aug/Sept, especially if that team's backup looks pretty bad in early action. Don't know what we'd get, but it beats paying the full amount for a backup or eating most of it and then cutting him. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, chad2coles said:

You can't say that Conklin would have played as well on the Jets o-line.  In fact, it's almost certain he wouldn't have.  He had a career year, in part, because he was part of the best o-line in football, with the highest graded guard in football playing next to him and Bill Callahan coaching him.

I wanted the Jets to sign Conklin, but I don't think he would have played this well if he was on the Jets o-line, which Douglas, admittedly put together.  I think Douglas prioritized flexibility last offseason while he saw a roster filled with problems - Adams, Bell, Mosely, etc.  If he thought that Fant was a better tackle than Conklin, that would be a bad sign.  I don't think that was the judgement he made.

There's no way you can fairly access his draft at this point.  This offseason will be how he's measured as a GM.

Not sure about this take - OT is a lot more of an individual position then IOL and Conklin is a real solid veteran who would have played well with another veteran like GVR next to him.  Would elite RG play have helped him, sure, but hes a good enough player to have been better then Fant (who I routinely defend here), thats just a fact.

I think JD puts a number on guys and doesnt budge, but it seems odd to me that Conklin signed for such a small amount more then George Fant.   So I understand the debate here on JD's thought processs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, chad2coles said:

OK, but if Douglas signed Conklin to a big guaranteed deal and he played like garbage because he was on an o-line with really bad guard play and 5 guys that just met eachother he'd get trashed for that too.  No reason not to give him credit where credit is due.

Baker was awful one year ago with a bad OL.  So the browns drafted Wills and signed Conklin and upgraded the OL.  Suddenly Baker decent this year and they made the playoffs with a top 3 Oline

 

It should seem fairly obvious what the Jets need to do is draft Sewell and sign Thuney 

 

3D9A777E-D91D-4C34-B20F-E66B0B658C90.jpeg.c8a6c432d3a59895859256d221a9022e.jpeg

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...