Jump to content

The Athletic reports the obvious


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The contrast between what JD has done when drafting a QB in the top 3 and what Maccagnan did is night and day.   I’m not sure a GM in this league had a worse 5 year run than Maccagnan did, it truly wa

It pisses me off every day. I also feel like a complete moron for posting my feelings about the Mac criticism being a little overboard. Feel like pouring a cup of hot coffee over his head.

It was the approach of a scout.  He knew how to scout players and it seemed as if he evaluated them as individuals without regard for how to build a team.  H never learned that there is a difference b

5 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

The contrast between what JD has done when drafting a QB in the top 3 and what Maccagnan did is night and day.   I’m not sure a GM in this league had a worse 5 year run than Maccagnan did, it truly was an embarrassment.  

Darnold and Macc were similar in that no one could perform worse for longer. 1% worse and they'd never make it in their relative positions as long as they did on any NFL team.

  • Upvote 1
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait to see Darnold with improved weppinz.....such as.....Robby Anderson....

 

Darnold’s support on the outside wasn’t much better, with Robby Anderson (94) and Jermaine Kearse (76) leading the Jets in targets during the quarterback’s rookie season in 2018. 

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's crazy for this piece to suggest that Crowder being on the roster would make the Moore pick "seem superfluous" when Crowder is in the last year of his deal

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sec101row23 said:

Agreed.  Maccagnan never had a plan as to how to build a roster and where to allocate his resources.   It was such a scattered approach that made little sense.  

This is where BAP leads you. No strategy, no plan. Set the player rankings and go take a nap.

  • Upvote 5
  • Thumb Down 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, genot said:

It pisses me off every day. I also feel like a complete moron for posting my feelings about the Mac criticism being a little overboard. Feel like pouring a cup of hot coffee over his head.

Don’t be so hard on yourself.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, genot said:

It pisses me off every day. I also feel like a complete moron for posting my feelings about the Mac criticism being a little overboard. Feel like pouring a cup of hot coffee over his head.

@Pac

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

BAP:  Fine strategy.

BAP without taking into account premium positions / positional importance:  Terrible strategy.

What other strategies are there beyond:

1. take the best player considering need; or 

2. take the best player without considering need.

Is there some third-way I'm not aware of? Taking the worst player at a position of not-need? If we agree these two categories capture the entire universe of draft strategies, then only one can be "BAP" -- #2. Everything else is... everything else. Once you start considering factors other than relative player grade, you're outside of BAP.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

I think it's crazy for this piece to suggest that Crowder being on the roster would make the Moore pick "seem superfluous" when Crowder is in the last year of his deal

Crowder is 27 and could easily be signed to a longer contract if JD wanted it.  It was "superfluous" in the literal sense in that we had more dire needs than an inside-WR.  At first the failure to trade down in rd 2 drove me crazy.  Took 24-48 hrs to see that Moore can be a very special pick and was worth it despite bigger needs elsewhere.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lith said:

It was the approach of a scout.  He knew how to scout players and it seemed as if he evaluated them as individuals without regard for how to build a team.  H never learned that there is a difference between scouting players & building a team.

True.  Each evaluation was in a vacuum.  He also used so many resources on interior players (S, ILB, RB, DT)  and never really invested or addressed the higher priority positions.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jgb said:

What other strategies are there beyond:

1. take the best player considering need; or 

2. take the best player without considering need.

Is there some third-way I'm not aware of? Taking the worst player at a position of not-need? If we agree these two categories capture the entire universe of draft strategies, then only one can be "BAP" -- #2. Everything else is... everything else. Once you start considering factors another than relative player grade, you're outside of BAP.

 

You're right.  BAP with positional importance considered is the only correct approach.  I'm not sure what these other numbskulls have been doing but its not proper drafting. Preaching to the choir here.

You must have noticed by now that no self-respecting, decent GM has ever uttered the words "best available player" when justifying a pick.  There's a good reason for that.  Because no other approach to drafting makes sense.  You always take the BAP, preferably at a premium position, and go from there.

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

 

You're right.  BAP with positional importance considered is the only correct approach.  I'm not sure what these other numbskulls have been doing but its not proper drafting. Preaching to the choir here.

You must have noticed by now that no self-respecting, decent GM has ever uttered the words "best available player" when justifying a pick.  There's a good reason for that.  Because no other approach to drafting makes sense.

You just wanted to prove me wrong about changing minds on the internet. You sly devil.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

The contrast between what JD has done when drafting a QB in the top 3 and what Maccagnan did is night and day.   I’m not sure a GM in this league had a worse 5 year run than Maccagnan did, it truly was an embarrassment.  

Mccagnan is just another failed gm who couldn’t understand that when he became a gm he was no longer a true scout, that he had to make decisions that would help the entire team.  Mccagnan’s mindset appears to have been to draft players in round 1 who had a low bust potential and sign expensive FAs to appease the media and fan base.  He had no concept of how to assemble talent to improve chances of winning.  

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Lith said:

It was the approach of a scout.  He knew how to scout players and it seemed as if he evaluated them as individuals without regard for how to build a team.  H never learned that there is a difference between scouting players & building a team.

How can you draft a QB with the expectation he'll be the face of the franchise for 10+ yrs and not have a plan to build around him. The one thing i'll say is that in some of the drafts Mac was involved in, the o-line talent wasn't as rich as it has been the last two years. Irregardless, he needed to find a way to get some real talent in front of his newly drafted QB.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jgb said:

This is where BAP leads you. No strategy, no plan. Set the player rankings and go take a nap.

BAP works when your team is already set like KC... their GM did just that this year... but a team on a rebuild it just spells disaster. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

I think it's crazy for this piece to suggest that Crowder being on the roster would make the Moore pick "seem superfluous" when Crowder is in the last year of his deal

Also in terms of the offensive scheme there was a big hole with a lack of a big YAC guy which is key to our offense, will open up the outside and the more skilled players and outlets for Wilson will speed his development.

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

BAP:  Fine strategy.

BAP without taking into account premium positions / positional importance:  Terrible strategy.

 

28 minutes ago, jgb said:

What other strategies are there beyond:

1. take the best player considering need; or 

2. take the best player without considering need.

Is there some third-way I'm not aware of? Taking the worst player at a position of not-need? If we agree these two categories capture the entire universe of draft strategies, then only one can be "BAP" -- #2. Everything else is... everything else. Once you start considering factors other than relative player grade, you're outside of BAP.

Yes. Take the best player without considering need when the talent gap is huge or the player plays a premium position (for example, if Lawrence Taylor is on the board, you take him even if your current edge rushers are pro-bowlers and you badly need a safety; you take Peyton Manning even if you already have a competent starter at QB).  For anything else (moderate talent gap or non-premium position), you factor in need

27 minutes ago, Dcat said:

Crowder is 27 and could easily be signed to a longer contract if JD wanted it.  It was "superfluous" in the literal sense in that we had more dire needs than an inside-WR.  At first the failure to trade down in rd 2 drove me crazy.  Took 24-48 hrs to see that Moore can be a very special pick and was worth it despite bigger needs elsewhere.

Yes, for this season, Moore won't add much over and above what Crowder would have. But Moore on a rookie contract (2.2M per or so, at his slot) vs. a re-signed Crowder at 10M per is a huge difference moving forward, and that's without even considering that Moore's floor is probably Crowder and his ceiling is way higher. Yes, need is important. But if you're building a team, and not a SB contender right now, "need" means more than "for this season"; these picks get 4-year contracts, that's the window of "need" to evaluate.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jetsons said:

BAP works when your team is already set like KC... their GM did just that this year... but a team on a rebuild it just spells disaster. 

I will grant that if your team has no holes going BAP won't destroy it.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

 

Yes. Take the best player without considering need when the talent gap is huge or the player plays a premium position (for example, if Lawrence Taylor is on the board, you take him even if your current edge rushers are pro-bowlers and you badly need a safety; you take Peyton Manning even if you already have a competent starter at QB).  For anything else (moderate talent gap or non-premium position), you factor in need

 

Is this situation you are still considering need. You're just assessing that the talent gap tilts the balance so much that you go for the more talented player despite it not being a need position.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, jgb said:

What other strategies are there beyond:

1. take the best player considering need; or 

2. take the best player without considering need.

Is there some third-way I'm not aware of? Taking the worst player at a position of not-need? If we agree these two categories capture the entire universe of draft strategies, then only one can be "BAP" -- #2. Everything else is... everything else. Once you start considering factors other than relative player grade, you're outside of BAP.

Well, there's a difference between a generic BAP in Kiper world and BAP that fits a particular system. So as long as by "need" you are nuancing that wrinkle you are correct. Also, because of system differences, your allocation of draft resources changes (i.e., zone CB vs. man CB). The puzzle is a lot more complicated than just picking the best overall rated player for a position. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

 

Yes, for this season, Moore won't add much over and above what Crowder would have. But Moore on a rookie contract (2.2M per or so, at his slot) vs. a re-signed Crowder at 10M per is a huge difference moving forward, and that's without even considering that Moore's floor is probably Crowder and his ceiling is way higher. Yes, need is important. But if you're building a team, and not a SB contender right now, "need" means more than "for this season"; these picks get 4-year contracts, that's the window of "need" to evaluate.

Agree with this.  Moore's ceiling is way higher than Jamison Crowder's.  But Crowder, nevertheless, is a fine NFL inside WR with a year left on the contract.  Re-upping him with all the cash and cap space the jets have and will have for the next few years would have been easy.  It was NOT a position of need. But it was BPA at a premium position with the potential to replace a good player with a stud.  My initial reaction (that lingered for a couple of days at least) was that unless it was a dire need, JD should have traded down in round 2 hopefully recouping a mid-late 3rd rounder. Not sure why, but it took me too long to acknowledge that he was in JDs top 25 and at that point no one else came close at 34.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sec101row23 said:

Agreed.  Maccagnan never had a plan as to how to build a roster and where to allocate his resources.   It was such a scattered approach that made little sense.  

IIRC after he was fired it was reported Mcc wouldn’t let the position coaches give their input to scouts which makes no sense. 

Correction: Mccagnan didn’t want the HC input. Makes no sense. 
 

From that former DN reporter may 2019:
 

The dynamic between Maccagnan and Gase during the team’s pre-draft meetings was odd. Gase badly wanted to share his opinions on what types of players he was looking for in his system during these organizational discussions, but remained quiet, according to sources. Maccagnan didn’t ask the coach to share his evaluations during those sessions.

The reason? The general manager didn’t want Gase to adversely influence his scouts’ evaluations, according to sources.

It was a curious approach that understandably angered Gase, who simply wanted to provide more information and depth on player prototypes that made sense for his schemes so that he would be on the same page with the guys who had spent the past year or so studying college players.

“It pissed Adam off,” a team source said. “Mike didn’t want him to speak up too much. It’s a weird philosophy.”

Gase shared his thoughts on players to Maccagnan in smaller meetings, but the notion that scouts, by and large, were kept in the dark about how the head coach felt about draft prospects should have ticked him off.

Maccagnan, who had the same philosophy with Todd Bowles, was bent on not having the scouts swayed by the head coach. It was a counterproductive approach that only served to alienate Gase, who expressed his frustrations in myriad ways to many people in league circles.

  • Upvote 2
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...