Jump to content

5 Reasons why I love Jamal Adams thread


Alka

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Alka said:

I will go in reverse order to add to the suspense:

5. He took away from the positive culture of the clubhouse.  By him leaving, the bashing of JD stopped, which would have put a bad spin on other free agents wanting to come to the Jets.

4. If he stayed, then the Jets might have gotten an additional 2 wins, thus preventing the Jets from getting Wilson at #2, and Elijah Moore at #34.

3. If he stayed, then JD probably would have paid him around $15M per year for 4 years, thus preventing the Jets from acquiring all the free agents we got.

2. Having the 1st round pick of this year from Seattle, plus the 3rd round pick from them allowed the Jets to get Vera Tucker, whom we desperately need to vastly improve the offensive line.

1. The Jets still have the 1st round pick from Seattle next year, which will allow the Jets to continue to build the offensive line, and still acquire a top flight linebacker or cornerback for next year in the draft.

Getting Jamal Adams was the best move Mac made, since it allowed the Jets to dump him for future draft capital.   Thank you Jamal Adams!!!

My only issue is you think that he could’ve been the different between 2-14 and 4-12.. everything else is spot on.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, genot said:

The implication was that JD made a decision to trade those players when he became GM based on cost and how they benefited the team. If I'm looking at it that way' the Giants got the best of that deal. Leo was always a good player. He was dominant last year.

Leo was an underachiever until last year. He showed up for a contract year just like so many players. If he puts couple more good year together then maybe it was an ok trade for the Giants. Jets  are building this thing from the ground up and our d-line will be fine without Leo. We still get a couple cheap years out of Q. Moving Leo was 100% the correct move. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/22/2021 at 9:10 PM, genot said:

He was a good player here. Played 80 percent of snaps in every game. It's laughable to call him lazy. At 300lbs playing that much,he probably did play half speed a few plays in a game Doesn't mean he's lazy I thought he needed to be traded. We just drafted QW. Leo was a free agent. The trade made sense. That's why he was traded. Not because JD thought he was lazy or a jag. Like some people here we're calling him

He was an OK player who at the time hadn't shown enough to get the contract that he was going to demand.  Thats why he was traded, not because we had Q, because he wasnt thought to be worth what the position pays.  

When you have the talent to post 11.5 sacks in your contract year and all you push out of yourself in 4 plus seasons is 17 total sacks, youre lazy whether you want to call him that or not.  

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

He was an OK player who at the time hadn't shown enough to get the contract that he was going to demand.  Thats why he was traded, not because we had Q, because he wasnt thought to be worth what the position pays.  

When you have the talent to provide 11.5 sacks and all you push out of yourself is 17 in 4 plus seasons, youre lazy whether you want to call him that or not.  

Exactly. Took him 5 seasons and a looming contract to get there. We’ve seen this story, doesn’t end well for the team/sucker that pays for them. Maybe it’s different this time, rather not roll that dice as we try to build a long term contender. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, genot said:

Sacks. Sacks. Sacks Sacks Sacks Sacks. Didn't have sacks. Looking beyond that stat. He was a good player here 

No one thought it was a bad trade, in fact it was the opposite, Leo for a 3rd was a steal.  No one thought he was worth more looking beyond one stat.

Then roll to his contract year and "Sacks. Sacks. Sacks Sacks Sacks Sacks."   Once he got the stat in the category you thought was worthless when he didnt get sacks, now is the only reason why we're hearing about "dominant", your words, LW.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

He was an OK player who at the time hadn't shown enough to get the contract that he was going to demand.  Thats why he was traded, not because we had Q, because he wasnt thought to be worth what the position pays.  

When you have the talent to provide 11.5 sacks and all you push out of yourself is 17 in 4 plus seasons, youre lazy whether you want to call him that or not.  

Leo was one of three things:

1. Lazy

2. Not good enough

3. Suffered due to the poor culture of the team.

Playing as well as he did last year for the Giants proved to me that he was lazy here with the Jets.

Lazy people need a reason not to be lazy, and I believe that Leo needed to solidify his big contract.  Now that he got his big contract, my guess is he will continue to be lazy.

If he gets 10 sacks or better next year, then I will admit I was wrong.

  • Upvote 3
  • Post of the Week 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alka said:

Leo was one of three things:

1. Lazy

2. Not good enough

3. Suffered due to the poor culture of the team.

Playing as well as he did last year for the Giants proved to me that he was lazy here with the Jets.

Lazy people need a reason not to be lazy, and I believe that Leo needed to solidify his big contract.  Now that he got his big contract, my guess is he will continue to be lazy.

If he gets 10 sacks or better next year, then I will admit I was wrong.

Agreed. Me too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NYJ1 said:

I work with a guy that's a huge Seahawks fan. He thinks the Jamal Adams trade was an excellent trade where the Jets got fleeced. He also claims Jamal wanted out because the Jets suck. Might be true? But the amount we got for him I'm perfectly find with.

Obviously true, but have they considered the part where, you know, Seattle sucked last season WITH Jamal Adams, especially in pass defense?  It would kinda be like Darnold putting up QB33 numbers with Carolina this year and then Panthers fans saying in 2022, "Yeah, well the Jets sucked so I still think we won the trade."

 

4 hours ago, addage said:

I live in Seattle and watch the Hawks games with family. 
That’s the prevailing opinion out here. But they’re nuts. Drank the koolaid. 
They have a QB screaming about a poor OL and they give up 3 hi value picks. They’re in cap hell. They have to pay him or look like idiots. Their best players are all older. 
They’re screwed.  Conceivably they can pull it off but I doubt it 

 

I recall the message board types for Seattle largely bemoaning the trade a year later, but who knows.  Either way, yes, they're f**ked, whether they know it or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, undertow said:

This is such revisionist history...Douglas would have paid Adams eventually if he wasn't such a mental patient and if we won one more game Darnold would be the QB of the team right now.

Meh.  He might be playing revisionist history, but you're offering up altered universe "history".  We really don't know what Douglas was planning to do with Adams and Darnold had circumstances been different. 

But I know for sure I rarely believe Douglas at his word, because that's what good GM's do:  Lie. 

I certainly wouldn't be surprised to learn later on that Douglas never had any intention of paying a Box Safety $17M+ per season.  I also wouldn't be surprised to learn later on that Douglas was lying when he said the Jets wouldn't have traded Darnold had they been picking later than 2.  Maybe they would have pivoted to one of the other QB prospects.  Maybe they would have gone with a vet option while still trading Darnold.  We just don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, genot said:

He traded Leo for Ashlyn Davis. I'm sure in your mind that was a great move by JD. How could it not be. He's JD.

He traded Leonard Williams for a 3 and a 5.  Who the picks ended up being are a separate part of the analysis. 

He also saved money by not having to pay Williams big money (Williams was given franchise tag money by the Giants last season, and then signed a 3-year, $63M extension this offseason).  Big money like that would have been a horrific allocation of resources with Quinnen Williams already on the roster, and would have cost the Jets the ability to sign 1-2 other key players they got this offseason.  Perhaps, say, they would have had to downgrade from signing Corey Davis, while obviously passing on a much cheaper DT option in Sheldon Rankins.  Something like that.

And if you're going to reduce matters to saying the trade was Leonard Williams for Davis, at least get the details right.  They also got a 2021 5th round pick, which I believe was the one they used on S Michael Carter.  

So really, if you're going to do the full analysis with the drafted players included, it was Leonard Williams vs. Ashtyn Davis, Michael Carter, plus 1-2 key free agents.  Which side of the equation are you taking now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, genot said:

Sacks. Sacks. Sacks Sacks Sacks Sacks. Didn't have sacks. Looking beyond that stat. He was a good player here 

Yeah, a "good player" at a non-premium position, who was a former top 10 pick.  Certainly the kind of guy worth paying $75M+ over 4 years (I.E. what he's getting from the Giants in the 2020-2023 span) while we already have Quinnen Williams on the roster, eh?

A 3 and a 5 was the most he could have gotten at the time.  Largely because the draft capital surrendered wasn't the full story at the time.  The Giants gave up the draft capital they did while also knowing they'd have to decide what to pay him in the long run.  That, more than anything, drove his value down.  Sucks.  Oh well.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Meh.  He might be playing revisionist history, but you're offering up altered universe "history".  We really don't know what Douglas was planning to do with Adams and Darnold had circumstances been different. 

But I know for sure I rarely believe Douglas at his word, because that's what good GM's do:  Lie. 

I certainly wouldn't be surprised to learn later on that Douglas never had any intention of paying a Box Safety $17M+ per season.  I also wouldn't be surprised to learn later on that Douglas was lying when he said the Jets wouldn't have traded Darnold had they been picking later than 2.  Maybe they would have pivoted to one of the other QB prospects.  Maybe they would have gone with a vet option while still trading Darnold.  We just don't know.

I'm pretty confident in saying Day 1 Douglas took over the job his plan wasn't trading his best player who was still under control for 5 more years and a QB the team just trade up to take 3rd a year before.....his plan wasn't even getting rid of Gase at that point.  Everything worked out perfect imo but thinking all of this was his master plan from day 1 is fantasy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, undertow said:

I'm pretty confident in saying Day 1 Douglas took over the job his plan wasn't trading his best player who was still on his rookie contract and a QB the team just drafted 3rd a year before.....his plan wasn't even getting rid of Gase at that point.  Everything worked out perfect imo but thinking all of this was his master plan is fantasy. 

Adams' rookie contract was coming to an end.  And Douglas didn't draft the Safety OR the QB in question.  Those are enormous factors in the equation. 

Considering he actually DID trade Jamal Adams, Sam Darnold and also Leonard Williams in the end, it's safe to assume he had plans to re-shape the team according to his vision rather than Mike Maccagnan's.  Ever since he's arrived he's been working to rid the team of the old regime's failures.  Why were Darnold and Adams supposedly exempt from this?  Did circumstances really force Douglas' hand?  Are you actually convinced he was at one time confidently planning to build around the worst QB in the league and a Box Safety?

Adams didn't necessarily need to shoot his way out of town to make a trade happen, though perhaps he made it happen sooner than initially planned.  And as has been true for a long time, new regimes almost always mean new QB's, especially when the old QB has been highly unsuccessful.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Adams' rookie contract was coming to an end.  And Douglas didn't draft the Safety OR the QB in question.  Those are enormous factors in the equation. 

Considering he actually DID trade Jamal Adams, Sam Darnold and also Leonard Williams in the end, it's safe to assume he had plans to re-shape the team according to his vision rather than Mike Maccagnan's.  Adams didn't necessarily need to shoot his way out of town to make a trade happen, though perhaps he made it happen sooner than initially planned.

Adams had 2 years on his rookie deal plus 2 years of the franchise tag....all of these decisions were made over time thinking they were gone from day 1 is goofy....plus like someone else already mentioned holding onto Darnold so long would have made no sense his value plummeted.  Leo was the only guy at the point who was a goner the other two were considered the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Alka said:

I will go in reverse order to add to the suspense:

5. He took away from the positive culture of the clubhouse.  By him leaving, the bashing of JD stopped, which would have put a bad spin on other free agents wanting to come to the Jets.

4. If he stayed, then the Jets might have gotten an additional 2 wins, thus preventing the Jets from getting Wilson at #2, and Elijah Moore at #34.

3. If he stayed, then JD probably would have paid him around $15M per year for 4 years, thus preventing the Jets from acquiring all the free agents we got.

2. Having the 1st round pick of this year from Seattle, plus the 3rd round pick from them allowed the Jets to get Vera Tucker, whom we desperately need to vastly improve the offensive line.

1. The Jets still have the 1st round pick from Seattle next year, which will allow the Jets to continue to build the offensive line, and still acquire a top flight linebacker or cornerback for next year in the draft.

Getting Jamal Adams was the best move Mac made, since it allowed the Jets to dump him for future draft capital.   Thank you Jamal Adams!!!

Probably would have left no matter what but him trashing the GM with the whole I cant believe they took calls about me crying...glad to seem him go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, undertow said:

Adams had 2 years on his rookie deal plus 2 years of the franchise tag....all of these decisions were made over time thinking they were gone from day 1 is goofy....plus like someone else already mentioned holding onto Darnold so long would have made no sense his value plummeted.  Leo was the only guy at the point who was a goner the other two were considered the future.

The point is, at some point contracts end.  So decisions had to be made eventually.  I’m not taking Douglas at his word that he decidedly wanted Adams or Darnold here beyond their rookie deals.  

Building a team devoid in talent at premium positions around a Box Safety is not something a wise GM would do.  Douglas seems a bit too smart to have ever wanted to devote $17M+ to Adams.  That’s not something his old boss, Ozzie Newsome, would have ever advised.  

My guess is he was going to hope to apply the franchise tag at least once to buy time. Adams then proceeded to shoot his way out of town. Luckily Seattle made his decision easy by then.  But at no point do I imagine JD wanted to hand Adams near QB money. 

As for Darnold, again, Douglas didn’t draft him.  Most GMs come in to a new spot looking to build around a QB of his own choosing, eventually, unless the incumbent is successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, peebag said:

One day, this forum will be Jamal thread free.

This is not that day.

Will never happen. The Adams trade will turn into one of the most one sided in the history of the NFL. And it will mark the rejuvenation of a franchise marked by inept failure for decades.  One day a statue honoring Jamal will stand at MetLife with Adams holding two #1  pick cards. One in each hand ?? ?? 

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, genot said:

He was a good player here. Played 80 percent of snaps in every game. It's laughable to call him lazy. At 300lbs playing that much,he probably did play half speed a few plays in a game Doesn't mean he's lazy I thought he needed to be traded. We just drafted QW. Leo was a free agent. The trade made sense. That's why he was traded. Not because JD thought he was lazy or a jag. Like some people here we're calling him

My problem with the Leo situation is that we have in the past basically drafted the same guy over and over again with top ten picks while whiffing/passing on QBs all while being massively under the cap. I prefer to pay a guy like Leo and use those premium picks to address something other than DL. JD seems to understand this, thankfully.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Maynard13 said:

Will never happen. The Adams trade will turn into one of the most one sided in the history of the NFL. And it will mark the rejuvenation of a franchise marked by inept failure for decades.  One day a statue honoring Jamal will stand at MetLife with Adams holding two #1  pick cards. One in each hand ?? ?? 

Hopefully true but unfortunately lost in this however is that the Seattle package of picks is unlikely to be worth the 6th overall used in the first place to draft him ahead of Mahomes or Watson. JD got much more for him than I thought but it isn’t much of a win to sell for less than you paid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, The Crusher said:

Leo was an underachiever until last year. He showed up for a contract year just like so many players. If he puts couple more good year together then maybe it was an ok trade for the Giants. Jets  are building this thing from the ground up and our d-line will be fine without Leo. We still get a couple cheap years out of Q. Moving Leo was 100% the correct move. 

I agree it was the right move. Never said it wasn't Crusher.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

He traded Leonard Williams for a 3 and a 5.  Who the picks ended up being are a separate part of the analysis. 

He also saved money by not having to pay Williams big money (Williams was given franchise tag money by the Giants last season, and then signed a 3-year, $63M extension this offseason).  Big money like that would have been a horrific allocation of resources with Quinnen Williams already on the roster, and would have cost the Jets the ability to sign 1-2 other key players they got this offseason.  Perhaps, say, they would have had to downgrade from signing Corey Davis, while obviously passing on a much cheaper DT option in Sheldon Rankins.  Something like that.

And if you're going to reduce matters to saying the trade was Leonard Williams for Davis, at least get the details right.  They also got a 2021 5th round pick, which I believe was the one they used on S Michael Carter.  

So really, if you're going to do the full analysis with the drafted players included, it was Leonard Williams vs. Ashtyn Davis, Michael Carter, plus 1-2 key free agents.  Which side of the equation are you taking now?

I thought the trade needed to be made. Reading Joe W Namath posts for a long stretch I got the feeling that the players eyeballed by JD to be traded was because of performance. With Darnold, maybe. Leo and Adams. No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, NYJ1 said:

I work with a guy that's a huge Seahawks fan. He thinks the Jamal Adams trade was an excellent trade where the Jets got fleeced. He also claims Jamal wanted out because the Jets suck. Might be true? But the amount we got for him I'm perfectly find with.

I think my brother got this right. The Jets made a great trade but the D got worse without him. I agree with this. Adams was actually better on the Jets than the Seahawks

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jgb said:

Hopefully true but unfortunately lost in this however is that the Seattle package of picks is unlikely to be worth the 6th overall used in the first place to draft him ahead of Mahomes or Watson. JD got much more for him than I thought but it isn’t much of a win to sell for less than you paid.

Debbie Downer

FDFB9577-6512-4F4B-BA74-6DAA6849E5A3.gif

Draft picks is are like chocolates. You never know what you’re gonna get. In this case, we all saw that Adams was a one trick hyped up pony. It was an absolute steal by JD to get 2 #1’s for a player, that in hindsight, could easily be replaced by a 3rd rounder. AVT has already been lauded as ‘the best’ OL on the team. Projection? yes but there’s a lot to like there and JD is on a mission to improve the OL. And we STILL have another #1 on deck to invest on a position that is more vital to a team’s success than safety. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, The Crusher said:

He was serviceable. You don’t give serviceable D lineman big contracts. Well, not if you have a clue. 

Well,we agree to disagree on this Crusher. I think expectations play a big part in our evaluation of him. We thought we we're drafting the next Reggie White. Don't discount who was around him with the Giants. That could have played a part in his elevated play. I remember the Brown game on Monday night. Leo was constantly forcing. May field to leave the pocket. Maybe if we had a Lawson then, Mayfield would have been on his ass.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Maynard13 said:

Debbie Downer

FDFB9577-6512-4F4B-BA74-6DAA6849E5A3.gif

Draft picks is are like chocolates. You never know what you’re gonna get. In this case, we all saw that Adams was a one trick hyped up pony. It was an absolute steal by JD to get 2 #1’s for a player, that in hindsight, could easily be replaced by a 3rd rounder. AVT has already been lauded as ‘the best’ OL on the team. Projection? yes but there’s a lot to like there and JD is on a mission to improve the OL. And we STILL have another #1 on deck to invest on a position that is more vital to a team’s success than safety. 

Ok. Just want to point out the inherent contradiction for saying getting back less value in picks than Mal cost us is no big deal because the draft is a crapshoot but then basing the entire case for optimism on our future draft picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, The Crusher said:

He was serviceable. You don’t give serviceable D lineman big contracts. Well, not if you have a clue. 

Not just about the money, though. When you use a premium first round pick to replace a serviceable guy you trade/let walk, there is also opportunity cost and bust risk to consider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jgb said:

Ok. Just want to point out the inherent contradiction for saying getting back less value in picks than Mal cost us is no big deal because the draft is a crapshoot but then basing the entire case for optimism on our future draft picks.

I would’ve taken two 7th’s to get rid of this toxic azzhole. 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
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...