Schrager 1.0/ Jets taking Rondale Moore at 23

[JetBlue]

8 minutes ago, football guy said:

This is why I traditionally write more nuanced posts lol... 

The internal debate is not Moore vs. Toney. It's fundamental talent evaluation. 

Joe Douglas starts from the ground up. Foot-speed is one of his one of the most important factors in the evaluation. From there a bunch of other things are considered, but it's not to say that he won't "like" a player whose on the smaller side, rather, he'll shy away from players perceived to be risks. Unlike Macc, he's not a "BPA" type. He's going to draft players at positions of need, but he'll prioritize premium positions first (OT/DE).

For WRs, he's not big on drafting them early unless they're a HWS guy with the ability to develop into a complete, explosive WR. He has a "type", and that type is 6'2"-6'3", 215. That doesn't mean he has threshold cutoffs like some other teams do, but he's less likely to invest a higher draft pick in some of the players that are less traditionally sized. For example, RB Donnell Pumphrey was a Joe Douglas pick. He wanted the player. Pumphrey was a 5'7", 170 lb. RB. But he played tough and had the baseline qualities Douglas looks for (fast feet, play strength, competitiveness, and speed). That said, Joe wasn't taking Pumphrey in round 1 or 2 regardless if he was touted as the next great RB... it's just not how he does business. Lack of size, warranted or not, is a risk, and he will try to mitigate as many risks as possible when selecting someone early. The coaching staff sees things differently. 

Enter Jaylen Waddle, Kadarius Toney, and Ronalde Moore. Mike LaFleur and Miles Austin have privately gushed over these guys. There are plenty of personnel people who think highly of them as well. Some in the organization want the team to trade up for Waddle, others want Toney as a fallback, and then there's a group who are extremely pro-Moore (Joe included). However, just because you like a player does not mean you're prepared to invest premier assets in said player. Joe being Joe, I don't think he'll even consider drafting Moore anytime before the 3rd round because of his size limitations. If he did, that would mean he's throwing a massive bone to the coaching staff, who don't care about how tall he is. 

Great post, all I will say regarding Joes preference for size in WR, is he already has 3-4 receivers that meet those requirements.  What we DON'T have is a weapon like Moore.  I know he is shorter than Tyreek Hill and Hill was not a first rounder, but when you look at the impact he has on the KC offense, that is the reason you consider taking a guy like him in the first round.   

[Beerfish]

21 minutes ago, Paradis said:

I'm just saying, there's a cacophony of good prospects who can play guard and center and you'll find them throughout day 2... If we draft an OG at #23, you're not getting your money's worth. 

Agreed, i could see a tackle there if they were rated high enough. Also, no one's getting tempted by Toney at #23

I don't know who FG talks to, but it's not from JD's lips to his ears. I'm sure there's a variety of scenarios being explored; eg trade threshold for Waddle (if falls to spot X - we make a move)... same with AVT etc Personally i don't think we should be trading up for anyone, and I don't think Joe will.... 3 of positions we're short on (IOL, DBs, DE) will be in heavy supply on day 2... i'd rather trade back then up. 

The two WRs we were least linked to, were Davis and Cole.... the two WRs we signed, were Davis and Cole. Safe to say JD has his own agenda he doesn't share. I would assume the same for draft rumors. 

See bolded part, moneys worth vs what?

Hey if someone totally unexpected drops to 23 fine, take that player.

Heck if someone starts to fall and you want to trade up to get a pitts or smith or waddle or chase, go for it.

But if we are deciding between the best C/G and Rashod bateman or kadarius toney, forgive me if I say get the best olineman.  G/C or tackle.

 

[ryu79]

1 hour ago, Beerfish said:

I don;t like this strategy at all.

A position is deep in a position group we desperately need to upgrade so lets not take the best players in that position.

It begs for double dipping  (like we should have done last year at WR)

Lets pick Chad Jackson instead of Nick Mangold because oline is deep. <--- Dickhead exaggerated comment but still.......

Agreed. That's how we ended up with Shaq Evans and Jalen Saunders in a deep wr draft a few years back by waiting too late... (Well that and just awful scouting and coaching)

[football guy]

13 minutes ago, football guy said:

This is why I traditionally write more nuanced posts lol... 

To add to this, I think the guys to focus on if the Jets are to draft a WR early: 

• Jaylen Waddle, Alabama (need to get into the top 17) 
• Kadarius Toney, Florida (18-45 range) 
• Terrace Marshall, LSU (18-45 range) 

Other guys linked: Rashod Bateman (an Alexander guy who prob ends up with the Ravens), Amon-Ra St. Brown, Tylan Wallace, Simi Fehoko, Anthony Schwartz... the list goes on. 

I think it's Rd. 1-2 or they wait until the 4th, personally. 

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, football guy said:

To add to this, I think the guys to focus on if the Jets are to draft a WR early: 

• Jaylen Waddle, Alabama (need to get into the top 17) 
• Kadarius Toney, Florida (18-45 range) 
• Terrace Marshall, LSU (18-45 range) 

Other guys linked: Rashod Bateman (an Alexander guy who prob ends up with the Ravens), Amon-Ra St. Brown, Tylan Wallace, Simi Fehoko, Anthony Schwartz... the list goes on. 

I think it's Rd. 1-2 or they wait until the 4th, personally. 

Given all the draft picks they have next year I hope they beef up the OL early this year and focus on a wr stud early on next draft.

[Paradis]

41 minutes ago, football guy said:

This is why I traditionally write more nuanced posts lol... 

The internal debate is not Moore vs. Toney. It's fundamental talent evaluation. 

Joe Douglas starts from the ground up. Foot-speed is one of his one of the most important factors in the evaluation. From there a bunch of other things are considered, but it's not to say that he won't "like" a player whose on the smaller side, rather, he'll shy away from players perceived to be risks. Unlike Macc, he's not a "BPA" type. He's going to draft players at positions of need, but he'll prioritize premium positions first (OT/DE).

For WRs, he's not big on drafting them early unless they're a HWS guy with the ability to develop into a complete, explosive WR. He has a "type", and that type is 6'2"-6'3", 215. That doesn't mean he has threshold cutoffs like some other teams do, but he's less likely to invest a higher draft pick in some of the players that are less traditionally sized. For example, RB Donnell Pumphrey was a Joe Douglas pick. He wanted the player. Pumphrey was a 5'7", 170 lb. RB. But he played tough and had the baseline qualities Douglas looks for (fast feet, play strength, competitiveness, and speed). That said, Joe wasn't taking Pumphrey in round 1 or 2 regardless if he was touted as the next great RB... it's just not how he does business. Lack of size, warranted or not, is a risk, and he will try to mitigate as many risks as possible when selecting someone early. The coaching staff sees things differently. 

Enter Jaylen Waddle, Kadarius Toney, and Ronalde Moore. Mike LaFleur and Miles Austin have privately gushed over these guys. There are plenty of personnel people who think highly of them as well. Some in the organization want the team to trade up for Waddle, others want Toney as a fallback, and then there's a group who are extremely pro-Moore (Joe included). However, just because you like a player does not mean you're prepared to invest premier assets in said player. Joe being Joe, I don't think he'll even consider drafting Moore anytime before the 3rd round because of his size limitations. If he did, that would mean he's throwing a massive bone to the coaching staff, who don't care about how tall he is. 

Not that I don’t partially agree and welcome the conversation - but you’re taking some liberties with your “insight” into Joe’s world. Some of this is not accurate. 

[football guy]

22 minutes ago, JetBlue said:

Great post, all I will say regarding Joes preference for size in WR, is he already has 3-4 receivers that meet those requirements.  What we DON'T have is a weapon like Moore.  I know he is shorter than Tyreek Hill and Hill was not a first rounder, but when you look at the impact he has on the KC offense, that is the reason you consider taking a guy like him in the first round.   

Agreed, and I think Joe would agree with you too. Where he'd disagree is the price you pay for a fantastically undersized WR who lacks a clear projection in the NFL. 

He'd love Rondale Moore on the team, but not for a top 34 pick. And I get it, the tape prevails and you compare to guys in the league right now who are successful, but for every Tyreek Hill there's a Tavon Austin, Dexter McCluster, Andy Isabella, and Sinorce Moss. Where you consider taking these guys is critical. Taylor Gabriel/Andrew Hawkins in UDFA, Trindon Holliday round 6, Tyreek Hill round 5, Jamison Crowder/De'Anthony Thomas round 4, Dri Archer late round 3... these are what I think Douglas would call good, appropriate risks. 

If you take in round 1 and they succeed you're a genius, if they fail you're an idiot. Ultimately, Douglas is more of a "I'm going to draft safe, projectable players at the most important positions first, then worry about taking risks later." Maccagnan was different, and it yielded some really good first-round success, but was trash thereafter. 

[football guy]

4 minutes ago, Paradis said:

Not that I don’t partially agree and welcome the conversation - but you’re taking some liberties with your “insight” into Joe’s world. Some of this is not accurate. 

I mean just listen to him talk about how he evaluates wide receivers over the course of his entire career. No inside info there (with exception to starting from the ground up... both he and Gase are big on that)

[Beerfish]

I'll go with my weekly blast douglas for not going Wr last year.

We wouldn't be talking about WR early at all if we drafted one of the many promising guys round 3 onward last year.

We love toys and weaponzzz, the Jets have much  bigger needs than WR unless we are getting an absolute prime player.

[Paradis]

14 minutes ago, football guy said:

I mean just listen to him talk about how he evaluates wide receivers over the course of his entire career. No inside info there (with exception to starting from the ground up... both he and Gase are big on that)

I feel you... and trust me, given the sheer density of low brow discourse happening on the forum lately - I welcome your level headed posts and willingness to get myopic on some of these topics... but i think you might want to pump the brakes on things like "Joe thinks..." and "Joe wants..." type stuff.... because you're writing cheques with those statements and they're bouncing. 

17 minutes ago, football guy said:

 

He'd love Rondale Moore on the team, but not for a top 34 pick. And I get it, the tape prevails and you compare to guys in the league right now who are successful, but for every Tyreek Hill there's a Tavon Austin, Dexter McCluster, Andy Isabella, and Sinorce Moss. Where you consider taking these guys is critical. Taylor Gabriel/Andrew Hawkins in UDFA, Trindon Holliday round 6, Tyreek Hill round 5, Jamison Crowder/De'Anthony Thomas round 4, Dri Archer late round 3... these are what I think Douglas would call good, appropriate risks. 

Stuff like this. You don't know that. 

I know this, because I checked. I have ppl too, but i don't flaunt it and I don't pester them often. I flipped some of this their way this morning and it didn't check out. "Several inaccuracies" was the feedback. 

I think we can all agree the fact that Joe and the Jets will not get lulled into tunnel vision... Very interested to compare last year's to this year's approach. 

[Augustiniak]

4 minutes ago, Paradis said:

I feel you... and trust me, given the sheer density of low brow discourse happening on the forum lately - I welcome your level headed posts and willingness to get myopic on some of these topics... but i think you might want to pump the brakes on things like "Joe thinks..." and "Joe wants..." type stuff.... because you're writing cheques with those statements and they're bouncing. 

Stuff like this. You don't know that. 

I know this, because I checked. I have ppl too, but i don't flaunt it and I don't pester them often. I flipped some of this their way this morning and it didn't check out. "Several inaccuracies" was the feedback. 

I think we can all agree the fact that Joe and the Jets will not get lulled into tunnel vision... Very interested to compare last year's to this year's approach. 

Any idea if they would consider going offense with their first 3 picks?

[k-met57]

23 minutes ago, football guy said:

Agreed, and I think Joe would agree with you too. Where he'd disagree is the price you pay for a fantastically undersized WR who lacks a clear projection in the NFL. 

He'd love Rondale Moore on the team, but not for a top 34 pick. And I get it, the tape prevails and you compare to guys in the league right now who are successful, but for every Tyreek Hill there's a Tavon Austin, Dexter McCluster, Andy Isabella, and Sinorce Moss. Where you consider taking these guys is critical. Taylor Gabriel/Andrew Hawkins in UDFA, Trindon Holliday round 6, Tyreek Hill round 5, Jamison Crowder/De'Anthony Thomas round 4, Dri Archer late round 3... these are what I think Douglas would call good, appropriate risks. 

If you take in round 1 and they succeed you're a genius, if they fail you're an idiot. Ultimately, Douglas is more of a "I'm going to draft safe, projectable players at the most important positions first, then worry about taking risks later." Maccagnan was different, and it yielded some really good first-round success, but was trash thereafter. 

1. size

2. lack of college production (injuries or not)

3. injuries (couple that with size and small players dont usually get healthier in the NFL)

 

what people seem to be missing is that we are not in position to take early round risks with the current roster (imagine passing on CB, or OL for an injury prone 5'7 receiver?). we need all the reliable help we can get....and then if u come across a risk you just cant pass up in the later rounds...you do it.

[slimjasi]

1 hour ago, JetBlue said:

Great post, all I will say regarding Joes preference for size in WR, is he already has 3-4 receivers that meet those requirements.  What we DON'T have is a weapon like Moore.  I know he is shorter than Tyreek Hill and Hill was not a first rounder, but when you look at the impact he has on the KC offense, that is the reason you consider taking a guy like him in the first round.   

Right, but Hill is a truly special/unique player. 

For every Hill, there are 8 million little guys who never got off the practice squad. That's why it's hard to take those guys in the 1st round. 

Also, I'm not crazy about drafting anyone that could help convince the Jets to move on from Crowder - because I really like Crowder. 

[Paradis]

15 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

Any idea if they would consider going offense with their first 3 picks?

No idea - but pretty sure the first pick is gonna be offense at #2

Honestly I don't impost with asks for tips and info. I occasionally reach out to vet something - "Hey this is floating around, true?..." and I get the answer i'm looking for... sometimes more. Which is all you can really hope for/expect at this time of year. 

 

[FidelioJet]

1 hour ago, JetBlue said:

Great post, all I will say regarding Joes preference for size in WR, is he already has 3-4 receivers that meet those requirements.  What we DON'T have is a weapon like Moore.  I know he is shorter than Tyreek Hill and Hill was not a first rounder, but when you look at the impact he has on the KC offense, that is the reason you consider taking a guy like him in the first round.   

We need a home run hitter.

Moore can be that.  I would have no problem with him at #23 at all...

[JetBlue]

51 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

Right, but Hill is a truly special/unique player. 

For every Hill, there are 8 million little guys who never got off the practice squad. That's why it's hard to take those guys in the 1st round. 

Also, I'm not crazy about drafting anyone that could help convince the Jets to move on from Crowder - because I really like Crowder. 

Wait... what? So if you could seriously upgrade the position you wouldn't do it because you "like" the player?   I agree about Hill.  I do believe there are couple of players who could be around in the 3rd that could that all purpose kind of role as well so if they pass on Moore and get one of those guys later I would be okay with it.  I understand that players with that kind of speed and quickness and hands, always causes problems for defense.  The key is just getting the ball in their hands.  Right now we don't have anyone on the team like that, Crowder included. 

[JetBlue]

1 hour ago, football guy said:

Agreed, and I think Joe would agree with you too. Where he'd disagree is the price you pay for a fantastically undersized WR who lacks a clear projection in the NFL. 

He'd love Rondale Moore on the team, but not for a top 34 pick. And I get it, the tape prevails and you compare to guys in the league right now who are successful, but for every Tyreek Hill there's a Tavon Austin, Dexter McCluster, Andy Isabella, and Sinorce Moss. Where you consider taking these guys is critical. Taylor Gabriel/Andrew Hawkins in UDFA, Trindon Holliday round 6, Tyreek Hill round 5, Jamison Crowder/De'Anthony Thomas round 4, Dri Archer late round 3... these are what I think Douglas would call good, appropriate risks. 

If you take in round 1 and they succeed you're a genius, if they fail you're an idiot. Ultimately, Douglas is more of a "I'm going to draft safe, projectable players at the most important positions first, then worry about taking risks later." Maccagnan was different, and it yielded some really good first-round success, but was trash thereafter. 

Again, you make some very good points here.  I have no problem taking a player like this in the later rounds in terms of value.  I just hope we do take one at some point in this draft because they will make Wilson/Fields life a whole lot easier right out of the gate.   I would have loved to taken Antonio Gibson last year in the 3rd round but I think he went right before our pick if I recall correctly.   Even a Joe Reed type in the later rounds would be worth taking a flyer on. 

[slimjasi]

9 minutes ago, JetBlue said:

Wait... what? So if you could seriously upgrade the position you wouldn't do it because you "like" the player?   I agree about Hill.  I do believe there are couple of players who could be around in the 3rd that could that all purpose kind of role as well so if they pass on Moore and get one of those guys later I would be okay with it.  I understand that players with that kind of speed and quickness and hands, always causes problems for defense.  The key is just getting the ball in their hands.  Right now we don't have anyone on the team like that, Crowder included. 

Crowder is a really good player and we have a million holes. I think upgrading Crowder is a luxury - not a priority. 

Now, if you told me this guy was going to be Tyreek Hill, of course I'd want him. But Hill was drafted in the 5th round. It's hard to take a player like that in round 1 (but not impossible). 

[Sperm Edwards]

5 hours ago, Paradis said:

For what it’s worth, IOL is one of the deepest positions in this class and #23 would be a poor use of draft capital at OG/C... 

Yeah my thoughts exactly.

I don't know these guys like you do, but the idea in general is if a draft is deep at a position you don't rush to take one early. Kinda defeats the whole point of taking advantage of a deep class.

#34? Fine, don't get too cute at such a need area. But it's not like this team has merely one need, and the dropoff is far steeper at other ones. 

People already sound like they'd go into a homicidal rage if they see any non-OL pick at #23 (assuming there's no trade up/down) but in playing the odds & this draft class's numbers it'd be smarter. 

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, football guy said:

Agreed, and I think Joe would agree with you too. Where he'd disagree is the price you pay for a fantastically undersized WR who lacks a clear projection in the NFL. 

He'd love Rondale Moore on the team, but not for a top 34 pick. And I get it, the tape prevails and you compare to guys in the league right now who are successful, but for every Tyreek Hill there's a Tavon Austin, Dexter McCluster, Andy Isabella, and Sinorce Moss. Where you consider taking these guys is critical. Taylor Gabriel/Andrew Hawkins in UDFA, Trindon Holliday round 6, Tyreek Hill round 5, Jamison Crowder/De'Anthony Thomas round 4, Dri Archer late round 3... these are what I think Douglas would call good, appropriate risks. 

If you take in round 1 and they succeed you're a genius, if they fail you're an idiot. Ultimately, Douglas is more of a "I'm going to draft safe, projectable players at the most important positions first, then worry about taking risks later." Maccagnan was different, and it yielded some really good first-round success, but was trash thereafter. 

You had me with all of this except for the very end. If anything, Maccagnan was the epitome of drafting the lowest-risk, lowest second-guess prospect rather than the highest-ceiling prospect in round 1. He was trash thereafter regardless of any floor vs. ceiling philosophy.

[Irish Jet]

3 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Yeah my thoughts exactly.

I don't know these guys like you do, but the idea in general is if a draft is deep at a position you don't rush to take one early. Kinda defeats the whole point of taking advantage of a deep class.

#34? Fine, don't get too cute at such a need area. But it's not like this team has merely one need, and the dropoff is far steeper at other ones. 

People already sound like they'd go into a homicidal rage if they see any non-OL pick at #23 (assuming there's no trade up/down) but in playing the odds & this draft class's numbers it'd be smarter. 

I would take putting Wilson in a better situation next year even if it meant we had a worse overall team.

We do have other needs but the I think the biggest need is putting the QB in as good a situation as possible to develop and succeed. 

[Sperm Edwards]

6 minutes ago, Irish Jet said:

I would take putting Wilson in a better situation next year even if it meant we had a worse overall team.

We do have other needs but the I think the biggest need is putting the QB in as good a situation as possible to develop and succeed. 

I don't know that it necessarily - let alone automatically - puts Wilson in a better situation to have 2 rookies blocking for him up the gut. 

To start the season last year, these guys played worse than they ever did before in their careers because of too much turnover all at once in zone, not because they're the least-talented linemen in the history of earth.

If they were each purely manning up on someone it'd be a stronger argument. 

[BornJetsFan1983]

6 hours ago, kevinc855 said:

I kinda love this take. He’s only 5’7, ridiculously fast. Coming from Purdue.

Wayne Chrebet but faster 2.0? 
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nfl.com/_amp/peter-schrager-2021-nfl-mock-draft-1-0-pats-trade-up-for-justin-fields-cardinals

great waste out picks good idea?!

[Bruce Harper]

6 hours ago, football guy said:

There’s going to be some hot debates inside One Florham Park these next 2 weeks. People on the coaching staff loves the Kadarius Toney and Rondale Moore. Moore would shock in round 1. I think he’d potentially be an option late Rd. 2-3, but even then I’m not so sure. 

I like the guy but Rd 1 is too high (for us anyway).

[QB1]

“Starts with foot speed” and proceeds to draft Perrine?

[Bruce Harper]

I'd like to see OL at 23 and 34.

[Skeptable]

7 hours ago, kevinc855 said:

I kinda love this take. He’s only 5’7, ridiculously fast. Coming from Purdue.

Wayne Chrebet but faster 2.0? 
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nfl.com/_amp/peter-schrager-2021-nfl-mock-draft-1-0-pats-trade-up-for-justin-fields-cardinals

At 23... Hahaha you can get him in the 3rd

[JetBlue]

1 hour ago, slimjasi said:

Crowder is a really good player and we have a million holes. I think upgrading Crowder is a luxury - not a priority. 

Now, if you told me this guy was going to be Tyreek Hill, of course I'd want him. But Hill was drafted in the 5th round. It's hard to take a player like that in round 1 (but not impossible). 

So I just said take one in the middle rounds or whatever.  The bottom line is to GET ONE.  See we differ because a player like that is NOT a luxury. First of all they would cost a fraction of what we are paying Crowder and if they truly are the kind of all purpose playmaker we are talking about, they are worth two Crowders.   The idea is to surround your new quarterback with PLAYMAKERS.  How anyone considers that a "luxury" is beyond me.... 

[Irish Jet]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don't know that it necessarily - let alone automatically - puts Wilson in a better situation to have 2 rookies blocking for him up the gut. 

To start the season last year, these guys played worse than they ever did before in their careers because of too much turnover all at once in zone, not because they're the least-talented linemen in the history of earth.

If they were each purely manning up on someone it'd be a stronger argument. 

I don’t know that it will either but I think there’s more chance of stronger competition making it better than worse. They don’t have to start. Make them earn it. And if it’s that bad across the board then sit Wilson until they figure it out. 

I do know what you’re saying though and it will eventually come down to how much they like the prospects. If they think Teven Jenkins is ready to play at a high level right away, that he can play at Tackle long term then I wouldn’t want us to hesitate. 

I’m definitely hyper vigilant on this to the point of it being irrational but I’m still scarred from Mac doing exactly the opposite when I was suggesting the same three years ago.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Irish Jet said:

I don’t know that it will either but I think there’s more chance of stronger competition making it better than worse. They don’t have to start. Make them earn it. And if it’s that bad across the board then sit Wilson until they figure it out. 

I do know what you’re saying though and it will eventually come down to how much they like the prospects. If they think Teven Jenkins is ready to play at a high level right away, that he can play at Tackle long term then I wouldn’t want us to hesitate. 

I’m definitely hyper vigilant on this to the point of it being irrational but I’m still scarred from Mac doing exactly the opposite when I was suggesting the same three years ago.

The odds of 2 rookies being better than 1 on the same line, blocking for a rookie QB

vs.

The odds of 1 rookie on the line plus one elite CB prospect who fell to #23, whereas he might've been gone by 12-15 in another year, because so many others were scurrying around to draft 5 QBs, the top 2-3 WRs, the top 2-3 tackles, an elite TE prospect, a RB, a handful of EDGE & DT prospects, a couple ILBs, and even 1-2 other CBs (among any other positions that ). 

The odds of 2 of 2 drafted rookies beating out every one of the veterans on the line as rookies, plus that improving things right away as the line again goes through 2 more newcomers to each other and to the league, isn't great.

I get the romance of OL OL OL OL but that isn't necessarily going to yield a superior OL this year. The nice thing about the OL as a position group is first of all that star talent is commonly found after round 1, and that it's a position group that can be filled every offseason, whether via FA or via the draft, to build an adequate-enough group to compete for a title. 

[Philc1]

22 hours ago, section314 said:

If this happens, Crowder is gone, right?

Not necessarily.  JD seems to want a roster made up of Zach Wilson and 52 slot receivers

[football guy]

19 hours ago, Paradis said:

I feel you... and trust me, given the sheer density of low brow discourse happening on the forum lately - I welcome your level headed posts and willingness to get myopic on some of these topics... but i think you might want to pump the brakes on things like "Joe thinks..." and "Joe wants..." type stuff.... because you're writing cheques with those statements and they're bouncing. 

Stuff like this. You don't know that. 

I know this, because I checked. I have ppl too, but i don't flaunt it and I don't pester them often. I flipped some of this their way this morning and it didn't check out. "Several inaccuracies" was the feedback. 

I think we can all agree the fact that Joe and the Jets will not get lulled into tunnel vision... Very interested to compare last year's to this year's approach. 

How is he going in the top 34 if their initial grade on him wasn't even top 50? I mean sure, I guess I should replace "Joe" with "the Jets" because I don't know how involved he is in figuring out what every person in the organization is prepping from behind the scenes, but at the end of the day he holds all the strings. If the scouts and front office personnel are saying he's not a top 50 player in their eyes, I would think that's what Joe believes as well. 

[mrcoops]

20 hours ago, football guy said:

To add to this, I think the guys to focus on if the Jets are to draft a WR early: 

• Jaylen Waddle, Alabama (need to get into the top 17) 
• Kadarius Toney, Florida (18-45 range) 
• Terrace Marshall, LSU (18-45 range) 

Other guys linked: Rashod Bateman (an Alexander guy who prob ends up with the Ravens), Amon-Ra St. Brown, Tylan Wallace, Simi Fehoko, Anthony Schwartz... the list goes on. 

I think it's Rd. 1-2 or they wait until the 4th, personally. 

Very interesting, thanks. Lots of guys I like in there - I have a particular obsession with Fehoko and have been picking him in round 5 or 6 in just about every mock I have done. Any idea how high he's likely to go in the real thing?

[football guy]

2 hours ago, football guy said:

How is he going in the top 34 if their initial grade on him wasn't even top 50? I mean sure, I guess I should replace "Joe" with "the Jets" because I don't know how involved he is in figuring out what every person in the organization is prepping from behind the scenes, but at the end of the day he holds all the strings. If the scouts and front office personnel are saying he's not a top 50 player in their eyes, I would think that's what Joe believes as well. 

So apparently he's been elevated as the process has unfolded. There is more internal support not just from the coaches, but from scouts and front office personnel as well. I still don't think the Jets would consider him at No. 23 or No. 34, but I may have been off to say that they would rule him out due to size @Paradis

[Guilhermezmc]

On 4/8/2021 at 1:01 PM, Paradis said:

I'm just saying, there's a cacophony of good prospects who can play guard and center and you'll find them throughout day 2... If we draft an OG at #23, you're not getting your money's worth. 

Agreed, i could see a tackle there if they were rated high enough. Also, no one's getting tempted by Toney at #23

I don't know who FG talks to, but it's not from JD's lips to his ears. I'm sure there's a variety of scenarios being explored; eg trade threshold for Waddle (if falls to spot X - we make a move)... same with AVT etc Personally i don't think we should be trading up for anyone, and I don't think Joe will.... 3 of positions we're short on (IOL, DBs, DE) will be in heavy supply on day 2... i'd rather trade back then up. 

The two WRs we were least linked to, were Davis and Cole.... the two WRs we signed, were Davis and Cole. Safe to say JD has his own agenda he doesn't share. I would assume the same for draft rumors. 

I know you do your work, what's your opinion o AVT, personally I just don't see it what others are seeing, to me he's going to be a below to average guard in the league and nothing more.

I think EDGE would be the pick where you got the most value at 23, but who knows that late in the first is kinda of no mans land, would like to see a trade down.