To be clear; 0% chance Jets trade OUT of #2 and still take a QB

[Peace Frog]

2 minutes ago, nycdan said:

I was young.  They were both on rookie deals.  Ultimately neither was probably a Franchise GF so maybe the analogy breaks down a bit.

But it was therapeutic to dredge that back up.

You just reminded me of a past love, she was an Amazon of small proportions.

Dang.  

[riggy001]

35 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

Agreed.  Its only the fantasy football people who come up with this stuff.  A real NFL GM doesn’t mess around if he really likes QB.  

 Yep, this is what mccagnan did, when we trading with colts, we knew one of several would be there, they clearly had a few rated closely. Most believe they thought Baker would fall to them, and then Browns threw a curveball, and took him

[JohnnyLV]

43 minutes ago, Paradis said:

I understand this is a pompous position to take but I’m seeing some of you pull the Charlie Day gif here with trades back and taking Lance, or whomever etc. 

that will never happen. If you love a QB you don’t fck around. Joe doesn’t love Lance at 8. He either loves him at #2 or not at all. There is no cake and eat it too scenario. 

Trade back means Darnold and playmakers.  Pick your side of the Fence. 

I agree completely. Even if we only trade down to 4 we could lose the QB we want. And more and more reports are indicating that it is Wilson and he wouldn't even make it to 4 the highest pick we could realistically trade down to.  

[Greensleeves]

48 minutes ago, Paradis said:

I understand this is a pompous position to take but I’m seeing some of you pull the Charlie Day gif here with trades back and taking Lance, or whomever etc. 

that will never happen. If you love a QB you don’t fck around. Joe doesn’t love Lance at 8. He either loves him at #2 or not at all. There is no cake and eat it too scenario. 

Trade back means Darnold and playmakers.  Pick your side of the Fence. 

Chest bump!

[Peace Frog]

5 minutes ago, Paradis said:

It depends right. Sam is Sam but you don’t want to let your frustration with him inflate your assessment of Wilson/Fields or your feelings on what’s best for the rest of the roster. 

I could get behind Fields at #2, but there’s also something mature/hard way but the right way vibe about trading back (when you can while you can) and plugging holes. 

based on the Wilson hype you could be looking at a Ricky Williams haul. Car calls and offers 2022 & 2023 1st round picks on addition to 2nd round this year, 4th rounder and 3rd next year 

Me—

I'm not frustrated by Sam.  I could get 100% on board with trading back, building the line and adding weapons.  I still think he could be a winning QB.

Problem is, I just don't see this FO going in that direction so I'm setting myself up for moving on. And having a second team to root for.

I like Fields but I'm more intrigued by Wilson.  Has nothing to do with frustration with Sam--I'm not overinflating either of Fields or Wilson because of Sam.

If we came out of the draft with Pitts, a rebuilt line, and an explosive WR and RB?

Throw in a fat man and a tree and I've got Christmas.  

[nycdan]

5 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

I agree completely. Even if we only trade down to 4 we could lose the QB we want. And more and more reports are indicating that it is Wilson and he wouldn't even make it to 4 the highest pick we could realistically trade down to.  

But...let's say you would pick Wilson at #2 if you had to choose.  But you believe (based on whatever intel you have) that you could drop to #4 and get Fields while picking up a 2nd rounder this year and another 1st next year. 

You can feel free to reverse the names of Wilson and Fields in that scenario.

The question is, knowing there's a certain amount of crapshoot and they are both really good prospects, would you rather take the leftover with the extra picks.  If you a) believe they are close in value, and b) believe you will get one at #4, then that really is a very rational option to consider.

I'm a Fields guy, but I would be fine with a move to #4 that netted the picks plus Wilson.

[Peace Frog]

4 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

I agree completely. Even if we only trade down to 4 we could lose the QB we want. And more and more reports are indicating that it is Wilson and he wouldn't even make it to 4 the highest pick we could realistically trade down to.  

That's the exact point.  If we absolutely LOVE Wilson, we can't get cute.  Same with Lance or Fields.  2 it is. 

 

[Peace Frog]

1 minute ago, nycdan said:

But...let's say you would pick Wilson at #2 if you had to choose.  But you believe (based on whatever intel you have) that you could drop to #4 and get Fields while picking up a 2nd rounder this year and another 1st next year. 

You can feel free to reverse the names of Wilson and Fields in that scenario.

The question is, knowing there's a certain amount of crapshoot and they are both really good prospects, would you rather take the leftover with the extra picks.  If you a) believe they are close in value, and b) believe you will get one at #4, then that really is a very rational option to consider.

 

Not doing it.  Not taking sloppy seconds.

Look, both players may be exaclty the same talent/prospect wise.

I just don't see it.

It's like your children--everyone say you love them equally--that is total BS.  It's logically impossible.

I actually force rank my children and some move up and down based upon the passage of time and circumstances.  

I can't believe QB 1B plus the extra draft capital equals QB 1A.

And we all recognize, QB 1B could be MUCH better than QB 1A in actuality.  We just don't know. 

[Jets0712]

If I had to guess what Joe Douglas dreams about at night, it’s trading back to 8, drafting Slater, and Darnold magically becoming good behind a good OL

also if Saleh saw the last 3 years of tape from Sam and feels..Damn he is worth keeping and saw the glimpses that we all saw albeit inconsistent and seems as though some added weaponz and a much better line. And better coaching obviously would be the way to go while trading back, accumulating more picks than.....Maybe????


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[The Crusher]

9 minutes ago, Peace Frog said:

I'm not frustrated by Sam.  I could get 100% on board with trading back, building the line and adding weapons.  I still think he could be a winning QB.

Problem is, I just don't see this FO going in that direction so I'm setting myself up for moving on. And having a second team to root for.

I like Fields but I'm more intrigued by Wilson.  Has nothing to do with frustration with Sam--I'm not overinflating either of Fields or Wilson because of Sam.

If we came out of the draft with Pitts, a rebuilt line, and an explosive WR and RB?

Throw in a fat man and a tree and I've got Christmas.  

Wassup?

[FTL Jet Fan]

If the are going QB you have to take him at 2. The Fins sit at 3 and it wouldn’t surprise me if they take Fields/ Wilson or traded out of the pick to another QB hungry team. Then there we are again wondering who we will draft next year.

[T0mShane]

1 minute ago, Jets0712 said:

also if Saleh saw the last 3 years of tape from Sam and feels..Damn he is worth keeping and saw the glimpses that we all saw albeit inconsistent and seems as though some added weaponz and a much better line. And better coaching obviously would be the way to go while trading back, accumulating more picks than.....Maybe????


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

It’s kind of amusing to watch a bunch of dudes who were screaming about Adam Gase being the worst coach ever snap back to saying that Sam Darnold is garbage and the team is too untalented to even dare trading a few picks for Deshaun Watson. If Darnold is irredeemable and the roster is that pathetic, then what was Gase supposed to do?

[Paradis]

9 minutes ago, Peace Frog said:

Not doing it.  Not taking sloppy seconds.

 

anyone who says this clearly hasn't had sloppy seconds. 

[Paradis]

11 minutes ago, Peace Frog said:

I actually force rank my children and some move up and down based upon the passage of time and circumstances.  

haha, the benefits of this are immeasurable if you take a transparent approach to notifying your children

[Beerfish]

I'm sorry son, you have become Sam Darnold.  Why cant you be more like your brother Josh Allen?

[Joe W. Namath]

We are taking Wilson and we are not going to spend big on any free agents outside of maybe Tueney.

[Jdub03]

32 minutes ago, Paradis said:

It depends right. Sam is Sam but you don’t want to let your frustration with him inflate your assessment of Wilson/Fields or your feelings on what’s best for the rest of the roster. 

I could get behind Fields at #2, but there’s also something mature/hard way but the right way vibe about trading back (when you can while you can) and plugging holes. 

based on the Wilson hype you could be looking at a Ricky Williams haul. Car calls and offers 2022 & 2023 1st round picks on addition to 2nd round this year, 4th rounder and 3rd next year 

Me—

So your saying if the above happens and Fields is there at 8 you wouldn't take him?  I get that if he's your guy just take him at 2, but if this were to happen I'd change plans and draft Fields at 8.

[Jdub03]

32 minutes ago, Paradis said:

It depends right. Sam is Sam but you don’t want to let your frustration with him inflate your assessment of Wilson/Fields or your feelings on what’s best for the rest of the roster. 

I could get behind Fields at #2, but there’s also something mature/hard way but the right way vibe about trading back (when you can while you can) and plugging holes. 

based on the Wilson hype you could be looking at a Ricky Williams haul. Car calls and offers 2022 & 2023 1st round picks on addition to 2nd round this year, 4th rounder and 3rd next year 

Me—

So your saying if the above happens and Fields is there at 8 you wouldn't take him?  I get that if he's your guy just take him at 2, but if this were to happen I'd change plans and draft Fields at 8.

[Jdub03]

41 minutes ago, Paradis said:

 

 

[Jdub03]

39 minutes ago, Paradis said:

 

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by Jdub03
Duplicate

[Jdub03]

37 minutes ago, Paradis said:

 

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by Jdub03
Duplicate

[derp]

38 minutes ago, Paradis said:

Stability at the position and roster as I intimated played a role. Far from the norm. 

I am on the same page as you most of the time but I disagree here.

Those two scenarios are literally all Baltimore’s done when drafting quarterbacks,  that’s where Douglas learned how you build a team, that team won two Super Bowls with okay quarterback play, they were pretty unstable at the position both times (Flacco started as a rookie from the jump, Flacco had then faded and Jackson started games as a rookie), and part of the roster stability is not overdrafting quarterbacks.

What you outlined in the OP is how most franchises seem to view it for sure. Most franchises have whiffed on QB’s at the very top of the draft, repeatedly and almost exclusively, for the last decade. Teams split hairs at the top, decide they love a certain guy, and get it wrong over and over. We don’t have any evidence Baltimore would have viewed it that way under different circumstances or Douglas does view it that way. I hope he doesn’t.

I also think from stuff like the Mims trade and how he’s reportedly deciding between Darnold and drafting a QB that he’s pretty calculating about this stuff and not just going to fall in love with a guy. Going to do what in aggregate best allows him to build the team.

Given a choice between taking a quarterback at two overall or moving down and taking the fourth (or fifth if Jones goes in the top four) quarterback in this draft I think the team that adds capital and takes the fourth guy has a better outcome most of the time. When you think about the range of outcomes for all the guys in this draft, the difference in odds the second guy is successful and the fourth guy is successful are pretty slim IMO. Seems like several on this site prefer the guy who’s likely to go fourth anyway. Added capital softens the blow of the decent chance he busts and even maybe improves the odds he works out by giving him a decent supporting cast.

Now thats my personal take based on how I have the tiers set up. If Douglas thinks there are two in the second tier instead of three I think it’s very different but I really struggle to believe that someone who’s grading all these guys is going to view them dramatically differently.

I’m sure you’ll disagree with that but had to add my $.02 here.

[rayzor]

If for some crazy reason Douglas sees Lance as the best QB, i still don't see how he should be taken with the 2nd overall when he should be able to be had at a lower pick.

[DoubleDown]

Disagree.  The Jets can certainly trade down, stay within the top half of round 1, and target Wilson, Fields, Lance, or Jones.  Does it involve some risk?  Of course, but what trade down doesn't have some risk associated with it?

You are suggesting that if the Jets take a quarterback anywhere in the first round other than #2, then Darnold's days are not numbered.  That's silly.

[DoubleDown]

EDIT: The new location of the Edit button sucks.

[joewilly12]

In JD we trust. 

What other choice do we have. 

If he wants a QB at #2 so be it whoever it is. 

Hope for the best. 

[PS17]

I keep seeing the “trade down to 8” scenario. That is way too risky if you like the quarterbacks equally. Picks one and two are guaranteed to be quarterbacks. And I would say there is a greater than 50% chance that two of Miami, Atlanta, Philly, and Detroit will be eying the other two QBs on the board. And of course other QB needy teams will be looking to trade up. 

[Peace Frog]

59 minutes ago, Paradis said:

haha, the benefits of this are immeasurable if you take a transparent approach to notifying your children

We sit down quarterly and I force rank them.  Typically Easter, 4th of July, Thanksgiving etc.

They all know the order.  I actually used the force ranking during my Dad's speech at three of my 4 kids weddings.

At one point, they all knew that my younger daughter was ranked 5th below our dog for a few months.  Maybe a year. 

True story.  

 

[RutgersJetFan]

Def wasn’t clear about that 0% calculation until you stated it as to be clear. 

[Peace Frog]

1 hour ago, Paradis said:

anyone who says this clearly hasn't had sloppy seconds. 

Oh no no no no you misundertand.

I've had sloppy seconds.

But not for my bride.  

[Peace Frog]

1 hour ago, Jdub03 said:

So your saying if the above happens and Fields is there at 8 you wouldn't take him?  I get that if he's your guy just take him at 2, but if this were to happen I'd change plans and draft Fields at 8.

If you didn't like him at 2, whey would you like him at 8?

He's either the franchise QB or he's not.

I don't want my GM sitting there dumbfounded at 8 saying "holy crap, never saw this happening!!"

[Nixhead]

Wilson is too good to pass up at #2 unless you just don't like or trust the kid. The kid has a phenomenal arm, a lightning quick release and is very accurate and he put the proper touch on his passes - they are very catchable. In past years guys like him slip in the draft because of the small school lesser competition syndrome but I think the scouts are starting to realize that god given talent is god given talent and for a player to be top 10 in the world he's gonna need some special talents.  Darnold simply doesn't have that kind of talent - sure he has way more than the average college QB and he has other great qualities but what is he really really special at? JD will do his homework and consult with the new staff and if they like and believe in the person behind those talents then the pick is Wilson.

[Dunnie]

1 hour ago, Peace Frog said:

That is certainly a strategy we should follow ?

and Washington before them

 

[Paradis]

28 minutes ago, Peace Frog said:

Oh no no no no you misundertand.

I've had sloppy seconds.

But not for my bride.  

[Larz]

Why do we need these threads? If you disagree with a poster reply to the post or don’t