Jump to content

Any potential Jets trades on the horizon?


wediditjoe
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Savage69 said:

+1 A Montana/Young QB situation can't exist in the salary cap era.. 

Ya so many fans have all/nothing mentality — minshews not a FQB, he sucks!!! Uh a 6th rounder for a damn good QB2? Yes please!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, jgb said:

So… then why draft Morgan for a 4th? Excellent backup QBs are worth a lot more than a 6th.

1. I also don’t think it will happen 

2. Been taking the high road with you for awhile now but you just always try to get those personal digs in. Not going to work. PS: if I was Jets GM we’d have Ryan Tannehill  with Trubisky backing him up so… yeah going with my QB eval on this one. If you were, we’d still be trying to get Geno weaponz so we can “fairly evaluate him.”

Not sure what you mean about personal digs… ? You mean not getting that trading for Minshew isn’t a good idea? Because unless they believe in house that Morgan or White can’t handle the backup job, it’s just not a good idea. So far, they haven’t shown any urgency. 
 
Lol, that last bit was an attempted personal dig, I guess, that’s far more representative of your straw man version of me than anything I’ve ever posted here. So I appreciate you trying to take the high road away from that stuff up until now. :) 

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

1 minute ago, slats said:

Not sure what you mean about personal digs… ? You mean not getting that trading for Minshew isn’t a good idea? Because unless they believe in house that Morgan or White can’t handle the backup job, it’s just not a good idea. So far, they haven’t shown any urgency. 
 
Lol, that last bit was an attempted personal dig, I guess, that’s far more representative of your straw man version of me than anything I’ve ever posted here. So I appreciate you trying to take the high road away from that stuff up until now. :) 

Apparently it is something “which you just don’t seem to get.” Have a good one, pal.

  • Thumb Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jgb said:

PS: if I was Jets GM we’d have Ryan Tannehill  with Trubisky backing him up so… yeah going with my QB eval on this one.

We know what Tanehill and especially Trubisky are and I'd rather have the upside of Wilson and Morgan than those two.  Especially a Tanehill on a roster that isnt a SB contending roster, we've seen how little difference he makes under those conditions.

Added into this mix is his $100+ million dollar contract 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

We know what Tanehill and especially Trubisky are and I'd rather have the upside of Wilson and Morgan than those two.  Especially a Tanehill on a roster that isnt a SB contending roster, we've seen how little difference he makes under those conditions.

Added into this mix is his $100+ million dollar contract 

I'm gonna have to disagree with you. The net present value Morgan and White combined is less valuable by many orders of magnitude than a FQB like Tannehill. If Wilson puts up Tannehill numbers he'll be getting paid double that by year 4/5 and we'll be ecstatic. Every GM dreams to have a QB worthy of a massive contract. Finding that guy is their raison d'etre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jgb said:

I'm gonna have to disagree with you. The net present value Morgan and White combined is less valuable by many orders of magnitude than a FQB like Tannehill. If Wilson puts up Tannehill numbers he'll be getting paid double that by year 4/5 and we'll be ecstatic. Every GM dreams to have a QB worthy of a massive contract. Finding that guy is their raison d'etre.

Thats fine but Tannehill in playoff games, well his best games are when he throws for well under 100 yards.  

Morgan isnt a failure yet, Trubisky is 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Thats fine but Tannehill in playoff games, well his best games are when he throws for well under 100 yards.  

Morgan isnt a failure yet, Trubisky is 

All good to disagree, man. Trubisky may be a failure as a #2 overall pick. But there is almost no chance that Morgan can hold his jock. Trubisky is better than at least half of the first-round QBs taken in the last ten years. If Morgan becomes Mitch Trubisky, he instantly becomes the best Jets draft pick in years considering the round he was taken in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jgb said:

Ya so many fans have all/nothing mentality — minshews not a FQB, he sucks!!! Uh a 6th rounder for a damn good QB2? Yes please!

Giving up any draft pick for a back up would be a poor job by Douglas considering he showed no urgency in free agency signing a back up with a similar talent level and he just drafted one last year with a 4th.  It really makes very little sense which is probably why people are against it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, undertow said:

Giving up any draft pick for a back up would be a poor job by Douglas considering he showed no urgency in free agency signing a back up with a similar talent level and he just drafted one last year with a 4th.  It really makes very little sense which is probably why people are against it.

I get it. Everyone's entitled to their view. But I just can't get behind Morgan when the guy wasn't even fit to dress last year even when Darnold was hurt. Yes, Gase is an idiot, blah blah blah. But it just seems a terrible bet that Morgan > Minshew. Hell, if JAX has just tired of Minshew (hiding the injury, worried he's got too high a profile and my 'damage the psyche' of Trevor Lawrence), then swap them the great James Morgan in trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, jgb said:

All good to disagree, man. Trubisky may be a failure as a #2 overall pick. But there is almost no chance that Morgan can hold his jock. Trubisky is better than at least half of the first-round QBs taken in the last ten years. If Morgan becomes Mitch Trubisky, he instantly becomes the best Jets draft pick in years considering the round he was taken in.

There is almost no way anyone can say for a fact if Morgan can hold Trubiskis jock or visa versa.  Trubiski is a failure, Morgan isn’t.  I don’t know what the big deal is in saying as Jet GM you would have signed Trubiski to be the QB that no one wants to see on a Jets uniform.  I get you think he can make a comeback, I have no faith.  And don’t buy into him being better than half of half of the top NFL or Jets QBs taken over the last 10+ years.  A failed QB isn’t better than Sanchez or Chad.  He’s actually no better than Geno, both had a decent season and were dumped soon after.  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

There is almost no way anyone can say for a fact if Morgan can hold Trubiskis jock or visa versa.  Trubiski is a failure, Morgan isn’t.  I don’t know what the big deal is in saying as Jet GM you would have signed Trubiski to be the QB that no one wants to see on a Jets uniform.  I get you think he can make a comeback, I have no faith.  And don’t buy into him being better than half of half of the top NFL or Jets QBs taken over the last 10+ years.  A failed QB isn’t better than Sanchez or Chad.  He’s actually no better than Geno, both had a decent season and were dumped soon after.  
 

I didn't say it was a fact. I said almost no chance. This opinion has nothing to do with Morgan himself -- we know nothing about him as a pro -- but is based on the % of drafted QBs who end up being Trubisky-level or better. That % for 4th round and later? Extremely low. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jgb said:

I didn't say it was a fact. I said almost no chance. This opinion has nothing to do with Morgan himself -- we know nothing about him as a pro -- but is based on the % of drafted QBs who end up being Trubisky-level or better. That % for 4th round and later? Extremely low. 

But not knowing about Morgan is one thing, saying he can be better than the failed Trubisky is another.  
But you do realize that you keep saying Minshew sucks then talk about Trubisky’s good year in Chicago.  Minshew had a good season out of two with the Jags and it was as good or better than Trubiskys one year in 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jet Nut said:

But not knowing about Morgan is one thing, saying he can be better than the failed Trubisky is another.  
But you do realize that you keep saying Minshew sucks then talk about Trubisky’s good year in Chicago.  Minshew had a good season out of two with the Jags and it was as good or better than Trubiskys one year in 5

You take that back right now. I have been the most vocal Minshew advocate on this board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nycdan said:

Funny thing about the whole 'Trubisky is a failure' narrative.  The stats do not support it. 

64% Completion %.  64 TDs vs. 37 INTs.  87.2 career rating.

Let's look at just a few comps for context.

Start with Andy Dalton, who CHI brought in to replace Trubisky.  62.2% Comp%.  218 TD / 126 INT (identical ratio).  87.5 career rating.

Fitz is going to start in Washington.  His career numbers are far worse although to be fair, his last few years are comparable.

Daniel Jones is a bit worse.  Darnold is obviously quite a bit worse.

Jameis Winston is starting in NO.  Higher career rating but much lower Comp % and TD:INT ratio.

Cam Newton.  60.1% Comp %.  190 TD vs 118 INTs (lower ratio).  85.8 career rating.

Then there's Lock and Hurts, both of whom I would barely think of as a competent backup.

So just thinking out loud, I would choose Trubisky to start over Dalton, Fitz, Jones, Winston, Darnold, Newton, Lock and Hurts.  You could debate over 2-3 of those guys, but my point is, Trubisky by the numbers, might be better than he was able to show in CHI, which is not exactly a hotbed of star QBs.  He may actually turn out to have a good second career if he can land somewhere with a chance to start.  And believe me, I'm not a fan of his.  

He will forever be known as the Sam Bowie of the 2017 draft.  But he might turn out to be a reasonably capable starting QB.

There is no rational universe where Sam Darnold is handed a starting role (and $20M guaranteed for 2022, oof) while Tannehill, Trubisky and Minshew had to chill on the bench before getting another chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, nycdan said:

Funny thing about the whole 'Trubisky is a failure' narrative.  The stats do not support it. 

64% Completion %.  64 TDs vs. 37 INTs.  87.2 career rating.

Let's look at just a few comps for context.

Start with Andy Dalton, who CHI brought in to replace Trubisky.  62.2% Comp%.  218 TD / 126 INT (identical ratio).  87.5 career rating.

Fitz is going to start in Washington.  His career numbers are far worse although to be fair, his last few years are comparable.

Daniel Jones is a bit worse.  Darnold is obviously quite a bit worse.

Jameis Winston is starting in NO.  Higher career rating but much lower Comp % and TD:INT ratio.

Cam Newton.  60.1% Comp %.  190 TD vs 118 INTs (lower ratio).  85.8 career rating.

Then there's Lock and Hurts, both of whom I would barely think of as a competent backup.

So just thinking out loud, I would choose Trubisky to start over Dalton, Fitz, Jones, Winston, Darnold, Newton, Lock and Hurts.  You could debate over 2-3 of those guys, but my point is, Trubisky by the numbers, might be better than he was able to show in CHI, which is not exactly a hotbed of star QBs.  He may actually turn out to have a good second career if he can land somewhere with a chance to start.  And believe me, I'm not a fan of his.  

He will forever be known as the Sam Bowie of the 2017 draft.  But he might turn out to be a reasonably capable starting QB.

But while comps. Are nice, his yardage numbers, moving the team are bad save for a 3200 yard season, which is Sanchez like

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jgb said:

I'm gonna have to disagree with you. The net present value Morgan and White combined is less valuable by many orders of magnitude than a FQB like Tannehill. If Wilson puts up Tannehill numbers he'll be getting paid double that by year 4/5 and we'll be ecstatic. Every GM dreams to have a QB worthy of a massive contract. Finding that guy is their raison d'etre.

Best line of any post this year. That is it in a nutshell. I'd get greedy and want to do it twice for the same guy.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jet Nut said:

But while comps. Are nice, his yardage numbers, moving the team are bad save for a 3200 yard season, which is Sanchez like

Fair point although you'd have to look at the system CHI ran during those years to see if that was a factor.  I can't comment on that, but just comparing him to Daniel Jones as an example, his Y/A, NY/A and Y/C are all a bit better.  Believe me I do not want to find myself in the position of defending Trubisky as a QB.  But here's a fair question.

As a backup for us right now, would you prefer any of the eight QBs I mentioned over him?  Dalton, Fitz, Jones, Winston, Darnold, Newton, Lock and Hurts.  I think I could see a case for Winston and maybe Dalton but that might be about it.  And yes, I could see preferring a guy like Minshew as well.  Morgan might even turn out to be better than we expect, but the one thing I think we all agree on is the hope that we never find out anything about how our backup QB performs in live games.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jgb said:

There is no rational universe where Sam Darnold is handed a starting role (and $20M guaranteed for 2022, oof) while Tannehill, Trubisky and Minshew had to chill on the bench before getting another chance.

Sams 23.  Has the whole Gase and lack of talent thing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Sams 23.  Has the whole Gase and lack of talent thing.  

Riddle me this how can you tell a secret good QB in hiding who sucked in a bad situation and a QB who just sucks? Not sure you can. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jgb said:

Riddle me this how can you tell a secret good QB in hiding who sucked in a bad situation and a QB who just sucks? Not sure you can. 

The best way to get your answer is to send that QB to a team with CMC, DJ Moore, Robby Anderson, Terrace Marshall and a Joe Brady.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jgb said:

Riddle me this how can you tell a secret good QB in hiding who sucked in a bad situation and a QB who just sucks? Not sure you can. 

And yet this is what people say.  That those around the league still believe in Sam for the reasons given.  The picks use Carolina spend on him backs that idea.  Not saying I agree but…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

The best way to get your answer is to send that QB to a team with CMC, DJ Moore, Robby Anderson, Terrace Marshall and a Joe Brady.  

There are only two outcomes. Darnold is incredible next year and the argument is put to rest. Darnold is not and it continues. Darnold defenders will never admit defeat. Hence why none of them -- and lord knows I have tried -- can state what a successful turnaround by Darnold this season even looks like. They want to keep the escape hatch clear for more excuses.

13 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

And yet this is what people say.  That those around the league still believe in Sam for the reasons given.  The picks use Carolina spend on him backs that idea.  Not saying I agree but…

I'm suggesting Carolina made a terrible decision. Teams are run by humans that are prone to error. And for the record, the trade is forgivable. The triggering of the 5th year is a reckless bet that can't really be justified.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jgb said:

There are only two outcomes. Darnold is incredible next year and the argument is put to rest. Darnold is not and it continues. Darnold defenders will never admit defeat. Hence why none of them -- and lord knows I have tried -- can state what a successful turnaround by Darnold this season even looks like. They want to keep the escape hatch clear for more excuses.

I'm suggesting Carolina made a terrible decision. Teams are run by humans that are prone to error. And for the record, the trade is forgivable. The triggering of the 5th year is a reckless bet that can't really be justified.

I think a 4k yard season with 26/13 type TD ratio, a couple of nice comeback wins and an 8ish win season would be proof that Darnold isn't toast as an NFL player.  Granted, that still may only make him a glorified Bridgewater/Goff/Fitzpatrick type, but not a total zero. 

If he posts a 3500 yard 16/16 TD/int ratio and the Panthers go 6-10, then it's safe to say he is done. The Panthers will keep him around, say  he needs another year but then draft a QB in the top 10 of the draft to replace him. 

  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, jgb said:

I'm suggesting Carolina made a terrible decision. Teams are run by humans that are prone to error. And for the record, the trade is forgivable. The triggering of the 5th year is a reckless bet that can't really be justified.

Absolutely.  It's almost like they were preemptively honoring a sunken cost.  They gave up a 2 and a 4 for him so might as well hand him $25M as well!  No competition at the QB spot, no plan B.  Just Darnold for the next 2 years. 

And even if (when) Darnold fails next season and they elect to draft a new QB (but are still on the hook to pay Darnold, meaning he'll likely be the 2022 Week 1 starter regardless), the current regime may be gone already.  

Great plan, Carolina.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Absolutely.  It's almost like they were preemptively honoring a sunken cost.  They gave up a 2 and a 4 for him so might as well hand him $25M as well!  No competition at the QB spot, no plan B.  Just Darnold for the next 2 years. 

And even if (when) Darnold fails next season and they elect to draft a new QB (but are still on the hook to pay Darnold, meaning he'll likely be the 2022 Week 1 starter regardless), the current regime may be gone already.  

Great plan, Carolina.  

Really strange because they only way he plays under that option is if he doesn't earn it. If he totally redeems himself and goes all Mahomes, they'll extend him after the season anyway. If he's medicore or worse, they could've extended him for less average annual cost. If he sucks, they could've let him walk. Consider CAR also would've held the franchise tag in their back pocket if Darnold does well and plays hardball on extension negotiations, makes no sense to trigger that option at all. Some have suggested they did it to "show Darnold the love" to rehabilitate his broken confidence. Lol, really? Like trading for him and gifting him a starting role with the best supporting cast he ever had wasn't enough? If it takes more than that he ain't the guy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

I think a 4k yard season with 26/13 type TD ratio, a couple of nice comeback wins and an 8ish win season would be proof that Darnold isn't toast as an NFL player.  Granted, that still may only make him a glorified Bridgewater/Goff/Fitzpatrick type, but not a total zero. 

If he posts a 3500 yard 16/16 TD/int ratio and the Panthers go 6-10, then it's safe to say he is done. The Panthers will keep him around, say  he needs another year but then draft a QB in the top 10 of the draft to replace him. 

Thank you for finally giving us some yardstick. Hat tip to you, sir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Absolutely.  It's almost like they were preemptively honoring a sunken cost.  They gave up a 2 and a 4 for him so might as well hand him $25M as well!  No competition at the QB spot, no plan B.  Just Darnold for the next 2 years. 

And even if (when) Darnold fails next season and they elect to draft a new QB (but are still on the hook to pay Darnold, meaning he'll likely be the 2022 Week 1 starter regardless), the current regime may be gone already.  

Great plan, Carolina.  

Lol, they apparently have a slightly higher opinion of him than you and @jgb . It’s a risky move but, if they’re right about him, it will look pretty smart. The fifth year option he’s getting is about $10M less than the projected franchise tag for a QB next year. If he manages even a middle of the pack type season, that number won’t look too terrible. If he’s terrible, though, it won’t look good. I don’t think the contract determines whether or not they bring in another QB next year, though. Darnold’s performance does. 
 
Don’t take that as me thinking it’s a good idea. I was glad JD got what he did for him, and would not be happy if we were on the other side of that trade. But they gave it up because they obviously believe, so in their eyes they’re potentially saving money by picking up that option. If they decide to extend him this offseason, much better to work from $18.8M than $28.9M. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, slats said:

Lol, they apparently have a slightly higher opinion of him than you and @jgb . It’s a risky move but, if they’re right about him, it will look pretty smart.  The fifth year option he’s getting is about $10M less than the projected franchise tag for a QB next year. If he manages even a middle of the pack type season, that number won’t look too terrible.

That's the point.  Putting all of your chips on a QB who was ranked # 35 in his 3rd season in the league last year really makes no sense.  You're supposed to look to mitigate risk at the QB position.  Even when teams take "risky" QB prospects high in the draft, they do so knowing they're handing that player a cheap 4-5 year rookie deal, and can always draft another one. 

Handing a QB with 3 awful years under his belt a guaranteed $25M in 2022 was unnecessary and stupid.  The potential upside, saving $10M like you say, is overwhelmingly negated by the risk...that such a move will get people fired when it fails.  If you truly believe Darnold can be a franchise QB, then let him prove it first.  At that point, you gladly hand him a new contract paying him like one of the game's top QB's anyways.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jetsfan80 said:

At that point, you gladly hand him a new contract paying him like one of the game's top QB's anyways.

Or franchise him if he suddenly wants to play hardball and dare him to do it again.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

That's the point.  Putting all of your chips on a QB who was ranked # 35 in his 3rd season in the league last year really makes no sense.  You're supposed to look to mitigate risk at the QB position.  Even when teams take "risky" QB prospects high in the draft, they do so knowing they're handing that player a cheap 4-5 year rookie deal, and can always draft another one. 

Handing a QB with 3 awful years under his belt a guaranteed $25M in 2022 was unnecessary and stupid.  The potential upside, saving $10M like you say, is overwhelmingly negated by the risk...that such a move will get people fired when it fails.  If you truly believe Darnold can be a franchise QB, then let him prove it first.  At that point, you gladly hand him a new contract paying him like one of the game's top QB's anyways.

It’s hardly “all their chips,” and his guarantee next year is $18.8M, not $25M. Again, I’m not saying I’d do it but, if they believe in the player, they’ve set themselves up to control his rights and can negotiate a deal based on that lower salary rather than the franchise tag. It’s a good place for them to be if Darnold has a top 20 type season. That’s not something you wanna slap the franchise tag on or commit to long term, but one year at $18.8M isn’t going to break them. 
 
Again, not what I’m advocating, but I’ve been blessed/cursed with the ability to see more than one side of most discussions. It’s not completely without logic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, nycdan said:

Fair point although you'd have to look at the system CHI ran during those years to see if that was a factor.  I can't comment on that, but just comparing him to Daniel Jones as an example, his Y/A, NY/A and Y/C are all a bit better.  Believe me I do not want to find myself in the position of defending Trubisky as a QB.  But here's a fair question.

As a backup for us right now, would you prefer any of the eight QBs I mentioned over him?  Dalton, Fitz, Jones, Winston, Darnold, Newton, Lock and Hurts.  I think I could see a case for Winston and maybe Dalton but that might be about it.  And yes, I could see preferring a guy like Minshew as well.  Morgan might even turn out to be better than we expect, but the one thing I think we all agree on is the hope that we never find out anything about how our backup QB performs in live games.

 

Wanted Tannehill. Wanted Trubisky. The smartest team in the AFC-E snatched him up. Minshew is the next best option and who I want. I know it's a pipe dream and JD is unlikely to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jgb said:

I'm suggesting Carolina made a terrible decision. Teams are run by humans that are prone to error. And for the record, the trade is forgivable. The triggering of the 5th year is a reckless bet that can't really be justified.

Unless they're right along with most of the so called experts who believe the same

Actually if they're right they pulled off a major win.  I dont see the reckless bet, theyre on the hook for a year and then who cares

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...