Athletic podcast, Connor Hughes craps all over media myths Adams & Becton

[Drums]

4 hours ago, hmhertz said:

In his two years as a Jet the beast has proved  he is a sieve as a pass protector.

Hercules Becton barely beat Javelin Guidry in the BP 23- 21

I've seen smallish DBs knock the big dope flat on his big a** while he stood

around not blocking anybody

Please find this footage 

[Anthony Jet]

I have no interest in watching this. What are the myths he crapped on?

 

thanks in advance

[Anthony Jet]

5 hours ago, T0mShane said:

What drives me nuts with these types of podcasts is that these beat guys will hammer players and coaches with inside info that they wouldn’t dare put into their actual columns because they’re afraid the Jets would ban them from the facility.

What’s the difference between a column or a podcast? Still putting it out there no?

 

I mean except the obvious that someone like me will never see/hear it in a podcast 

[varjet]

The Seahawks also gave us a 2nd round pick for Sheldon Richardson, which we squandered to move up for Darnold.    That to me was the tragedy of Darnold.  At 6 he was a better pick.  
 

If I was Ms Allen, I think it’s time for the Seahawks to get a reboot.  
 

Credit John Dorsey for picking Mayfield over Darnold.  He figured out that the physicals did matter if you can’t read a defense.  We should bring him in as a consultant. 

[slimjasi]

6 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

While it's a popular idea, I don't think it's so automatic or obvious that one pick will be a pass rusher.

I do think one will be either a LB or DB. The other could be a WR but it's too early to say (and I know nothing about this draft class, as usual). Opinions aside, the fact is he's guaranteed so much $ in 2022 in two veteran DEs and a veteran WR (like $13-14MM apiece for each of the 3), that it would be unsurprising to see him pass over both positions that early.

[nj meadowlands]

5 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Also keep in mind I do think there's a very strong possibility that Douglas is not going to stay pat at what is currently #4 and #7. The second #1 pick is a tremendous advantage, and with selections that early - and not drafting a QB oneself - there'll be the opportunity to trade down with one of those picks and do it again next year. And unlike 2022, following a sucky Wilson season, for the 2023 draft it's not outside the realm of possibility that they'll look hard at round 1 QBs. 

I love this take. 

[Bungaman]

6 hours ago, Alentador31 said:

I don't disagree but with his skillet you have to try. 

This is so appropriate on a number of levels - I'll bet the skillet in his kitchen is like 18" cast iron, and well worn.

[Be_a_Jet]

I like some of Connors writing but that dude rants like no other - I cannot get through a podcast of his. 
 

He makes the same point 15 different ways before moving on and just circles and circles around his thoughts. 
 

Im grateful Twitter limits his characters 

[hmhertz]

2 hours ago, Drums said:

Please find this footage 

I've seen it multiple times. One I remember specifically, Matt Milano a smallish lb (216lbs)

put the big baby on his keister

[derp]

5 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I didn't say they don't need tackle depth. I'm just saying it's not a 1st round thing - or a 2nd round thing - and it isn't a $6MM+ per year thing. Those are investments you make when you're looking for a starter, not for depth, and anyway not on a team with this many holes & needed upgrades.

This year was also a bit fluky as well. You don't plan on your starting LT missing 2+ months of the season, and there's typically no adequate replacement; that's what makes some guys backups. Best chance of getting a lateral move is a late spring cut like Moses, with little competitive interest from other teams so he's cheap, or a current/recent mid- or late-round pick who is surprisingly good right away (e.g. Fabini, and then a year later, Ryan Young). But a team with this many 1st team spots in need of upgrading has no business first filling in backup spots in round 2. If they take a tackle in round 2 this spring it means they're preparing for life without/after Becton not Fant, and quite possibly starting in 2022 not just for the future/emergency.

I also don't agree that a specific Douglas pattern of letting older guys go is relevant. He let older guys go when they weren't good enough (and/or were actually getting worse); they were acquired by Maccagnan not by himself; may not have been a scheme fit; may have been damaged goods; and the team was just getting started in his teardown. I think he'll make a serious effort to extend Fant if he's still playing at this level through October next year and Becton is still a question mark. This is one of JD's wins; he's not going to be so eager to ditch it.

Also the action he gets, keep in mind the team - unlike the fans - does see him in action in practices. Or at least they did before they went virtual this week. I think that makes it less likely they'll sub Becton in because he won't get enough practice reps before a game. Anyway, just like with Mims, they saw to know they didn't need to see him in games with the way he looked in practice. Fans didn't see that, so it looked like he was just getting benched for no reason. Could be the same thing is going on with Becton. I've no idea one way or the other.

I’d argue that the need for tackle depth is more significant this offseason with Becton potentially missing nearly the entire year this year than it was last offseason when he just was in and out of games the year before. 

I’d add that draft wise, Douglas has drafted one anticipated day one position player starter outside the first round - that was Moore and frankly there was a chance he was behind Cole to start camp too. Mims, Zuniga, Davis - depth pieces year one anticipated to start year two outside the first round. Major expiring starters after this coming season are McGovern and Fant. He’s going to patch other holes in free agency anyway.

You're entitled to think that the prior pattern isn’t relevant - and we haven’t seen it with another guy that he’s signed to a multi year deal. I just can’t exactly see how Douglas always signing guys to deals that will expire before they’re 30 can get tossed out. That’s not just re-signing guys, it’s all the contracts he’s given out in free agency too.

Fant may also very well get better money elsewhere. If they extend him it’s obviously a different story. If not, drafting a day two tackle for the needed depth and a potential starter very much fits Douglas’ patterns. Especially with no real evidence Becton can get through a season healthy. It might not happen but I’d be moderately surprised if it doesn’t. We’ll know if he’s planning to do it based on what he does in FA, where there are roster spots tend to make for pretty obvious draft targets. Was the same thing with the Ashtyn Davis pick, James Morgan. Draft ends up pretty predictable.

As for your last paragraph, I guess there are two implications there. Either he’s looking good in which case they should play him, or he’s not and there should be more urgency around investing in the tackle position.

[Sperm Edwards]

18 hours ago, derp said:

I’d argue that the need for tackle depth is more significant this offseason with Becton potentially missing nearly the entire year this year than it was last offseason when he just was in and out of games the year before. 

I’d add that draft wise, Douglas has drafted one anticipated day one position player starter outside the first round - that was Moore and frankly there was a chance he was behind Cole to start camp too. Mims, Zuniga, Davis - depth pieces year one anticipated to start year two outside the first round. Major expiring starters after this coming season are McGovern and Fant. He’s going to patch other holes in free agency anyway.

You're entitled to think that the prior pattern isn’t relevant - and we haven’t seen it with another guy that he’s signed to a multi year deal. I just can’t exactly see how Douglas always signing guys to deals that will expire before they’re 30 can get tossed out. That’s not just re-signing guys, it’s all the contracts he’s given out in free agency too.

Fant may also very well get better money elsewhere. If they extend him it’s obviously a different story. If not, drafting a day two tackle for the needed depth and a potential starter very much fits Douglas’ patterns. Especially with no real evidence Becton can get through a season healthy. It might not happen but I’d be moderately surprised if it doesn’t. We’ll know if he’s planning to do it based on what he does in FA, where there are roster spots tend to make for pretty obvious draft targets. Was the same thing with the Ashtyn Davis pick, James Morgan. Draft ends up pretty predictable.

As for your last paragraph, I guess there are two implications there. Either he’s looking good in which case they should play him, or he’s not and there should be more urgency around investing in the tackle position.

Agree to disagree & all that, but it's a 2-offseason "pattern" with the team in different building stages at those times, so yes I think it's premature to see a pattern yet.

So far all he'd done is let dead weight go that he didn't want anymore: Beachum, Osemele, Winters, Shell, Harrison, DT (RIP), Bell, H.Anderson, R.Anderson, J.Jenkins, Poole, Trumaine Johnson, Quincy Enunwa, Lac Edwards, McDougald, Perriman -- the only one with even close to the relevance of a starting LT is Robby Anderson.

Trades: Adams was the only one with real trade value, and it was the best transaction he's done. Who else? McLendon was a 30something NT whose contract was coming up and he got a 5th round pick for him. About the same thing for Avery Williamson. 

Aside from Robby Anderson, the rest were guys he was really looking to upgrade independent of their dollars. So I don't think just Robby Anderson is a pattern relevant to Fant, where there's also the significant difference between the two in that he brought in  Fant himself, initially caught some flack for the overpayment, and now gets bragging rights for hitting on him. 

[derp]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Agree to disagree & all that, but it's a 2-offseason "pattern" with the team in different building stages at those times, so yes I think it's premature to see a pattern yet.

So far all he'd done is let dead weight go that he didn't want anymore: Beachum, Osemele, Winters, Shell, Harrison, DT (RIP), Bell, H.Anderson, R.Anderson, J.Jenkins, Poole, Trumaine Johnson, Quincy Enunwa, Lac Edwards, McDougald, Perriman -- the only one with even close to the relevance of a starting LT is Robby Anderson.

Trades: Adams was the only one with real trade value, and it was the best transaction he's done. Who else? McLendon was a 30something NT whose contract was coming up and he got a 5th round pick for him. About the same thing for Avery Williamson. 

Aside from Robby Anderson, the rest were guys he was really looking to upgrade independent of their dollars. So I don't think just Robby Anderson is a pattern relevant to Fant, where there's also the significant difference between the two in that he brought in  Fant himself, initially caught some flack for the overpayment, and now gets bragging rights for hitting on him. 

You're talking about the guys he’s let leave, the roster was horrific. I’m talking about the guys he’s signed. That’s where it’s all three years or less, no future guaranteed money after 30.

He’s gotten out of the cap mess a little and I’d think he’ll have to step out of the three years or less at some point but signing Fant to an annual eight figure deal that’ll get him into his 30’s presumably with hefty guarantees would be a deviation from prior signings and there are a lot of guys he’s passed on who’d make sense on paper but haven’t been able to fit in that little box and get more/longer money elsewhere.

The younger signings just remind me of the Eagles like 15, 20 years ago where they let guys go because they’d rather do it a year early than a year late. It’s signing rather than extending but I think bringing in guys who will hit the market again before 30 gives them another shot at a big deal and keeping it short makes it seem like they’ll actually play out that deal instead of mailing it in like we’ve seen with so many big contracts.

The big thing with Fant would be if he’s more comfortable bringing guys back. Free agency is obviously a mess and that’s why the team’s cap situation has been so bad. But he’s been really really careful to not create serious dead money. Perhaps digging out of the hole, perhaps doesn’t like free agents and extensions are different. The continuity on the OL would certainly be nice.

Probably depends on how Fant’s wired too - does he like being here, value continuity, appreciate the Jets taking a shot on him, appreciate a sure thing contract wise. Does he want to play left tackle and will that be an option here? I’m sure some other team would sign him to do it. Imagine he’d get more money, maybe years too, on the open market.

[Sperm Edwards]

59 minutes ago, derp said:

You're talking about the guys he’s let leave, the roster was horrific. I’m talking about the guys he’s signed. That’s where it’s all three years or less, no future guaranteed money after 30.

He’s gotten out of the cap mess a little and I’d think he’ll have to step out of the three years or less at some point but signing Fant to an annual eight figure deal that’ll get him into his 30’s presumably with hefty guarantees would be a deviation from prior signings and there are a lot of guys he’s passed on who’d make sense on paper but haven’t been able to fit in that little box and get more/longer money elsewhere.

The younger signings just remind me of the Eagles like 15, 20 years ago where they let guys go because they’d rather do it a year early than a year late. It’s signing rather than extending but I think bringing in guys who will hit the market again before 30 gives them another shot at a big deal and keeping it short makes it seem like they’ll actually play out that deal instead of mailing it in like we’ve seen with so many big contracts.

The big thing with Fant would be if he’s more comfortable bringing guys back. Free agency is obviously a mess and that’s why the team’s cap situation has been so bad. But he’s been really really careful to not create serious dead money. Perhaps digging out of the hole, perhaps doesn’t like free agents and extensions are different. The continuity on the OL would certainly be nice.

Probably depends on how Fant’s wired too - does he like being here, value continuity, appreciate the Jets taking a shot on him, appreciate a sure thing contract wise. Does he want to play left tackle and will that be an option here? I’m sure some other team would sign him to do it. Imagine he’d get more money, maybe years too, on the open market.

What's the difference; he let them leave because the roster was bad. It's still bad, though. 

Except it's such a small sample size of worthy starters, this "pattern" can easily be due to which specific players it was and their roles on the team, not some aversion to extending any/all starters past age 30. 

IOW, not statistically significant. If he keeps doing that for another year or two, then you can say this is a clear pattern whereby here in 2021 we can predict what he'll do for 2023. 

30-32 isn't old for an offensive lineman anyway. It's not like he's a WR or DB or RB. Some age before others, and Fant does have a major past knee injury, but my feeling is what he does with Fant will depend on how he plays next year and whether or not Becton retakes the LT position. If Fant is the starting LT I think he gets an extension and will be happy to stay here in that role; if Becton gets moved back to LT and Fant at RT next year, Fant will still probably get an offer from the Jets, but he'll get a better one elsewhere to play LT.

[derp]

49 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What's the difference; he let them leave because the roster was bad. It's still bad, though. 

Except it's such a small sample size of worthy starters, this "pattern" can easily be due to which specific players it was and their roles on the team, not some aversion to extending any/all starters past age 30. 

IOW, not statistically significant. If he keeps doing that for another year or two, then you can say this is a clear pattern whereby here in 2021 we can predict what he'll do for 2023. 

30-32 isn't old for an offensive lineman anyway. It's not like he's a WR or DB or RB. Some age before others, and Fant does have a major past knee injury, but my feeling is what he does with Fant will depend on how he plays next year and whether or not Becton retakes the LT position. If Fant is the starting LT I think he gets an extension and will be happy to stay here in that role; if Becton gets moved back to LT and Fant at RT next year, Fant will still probably get an offer from the Jets, but he'll get a better one elsewhere to play LT.

I mean, I’m also saying the guys he’s let leave shouldnt be factors in this conversation.

If you’re talking about all the contracts he’s signed it’s almost certainly enough to be statistically significant that he hasn’t signed someone who’d fall in that category. Even if you filter some it very likely is. Maybe it’s random, it certainly doesn’t mean it’s set in stone, but as someone with a numbers background I don’t think you can toss out lack of statistical significance here. Granted you could probably test something and find no significance and I could test something else and find significance - which probably gets to the fact that we’re talking across each other a little and this is a mix of semantics and unknowns. 

That said it’s been two offseasons, he’s only signed guys who essentially have no reason to mail it in. Super, super careful cap wise. If he signs Fant I don’t think it’s because he’s comfortable with an offensive lineman aging well or because he’s let other guys go but because after Fant being here multiple years he’s comfortable Fant will keep working and be playing at a high enough level through the contract to be worth another deal. 

[Sperm Edwards]

14 minutes ago, derp said:

I mean, I’m also saying the guys he’s let leave shouldnt be factors in this conversation.

If you’re talking about all the contracts he’s signed it’s almost certainly enough to be statistically significant that he hasn’t signed someone who’d fall in that category. Even if you filter some it very likely is. Maybe it’s random, it certainly doesn’t mean it’s set in stone, but as someone with a numbers background I don’t think you can toss out lack of statistical significance here. Granted you could probably test something and find no significance and I could test something else and find significance - which probably gets to the fact that we’re talking across each other a little and this is a mix of semantics and unknowns. 

That said it’s been two offseasons, he’s only signed guys who essentially have no reason to mail it in. Super, super careful cap wise. If he signs Fant I don’t think it’s because he’s comfortable with an offensive lineman aging well or because he’s let other guys go but because after Fant being here multiple years he’s comfortable Fant will keep working and be playing at a high enough level through the contract to be worth another deal. 

No, I'm just saying the sample size is so small among above-average, still-in-prime starters, that I'm not reading too much into them being part of a pattern regarding what he's likely or unlikely to do re: Fant. 

1-2 preseasons ago he was also about to start his rebuild via the draft, hoarding picks he hadn't yet had a chance to use. So I take for granted a lot of GMs who want to build through the draft will not get deep into bed with veterans in or entering their 30s. 

Too small a sample size, from a vastly different situation, to say "therefore he's not extending Fant." And even if he doesn't, that still depends on his own situation not a pattern. If Becton has retaken the LT position or if Fant has gotten injured, then those are themselves variables that don't speak to what he'd have done if a healthy Fant was still the starting LT.

He's had 2 offseasons during his roster teardown & draft pick hoarding. Just saying 2020 and 2021 offseasons aren't apples to apples comparisons to the 2023 roster situation. 

[derp]

55 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

No, I'm just saying the sample size is so small among above-average, still-in-prime starters, that I'm not reading too much into them being part of a pattern regarding what he's likely or unlikely to do re: Fant. 

1-2 preseasons ago he was also about to start his rebuild via the draft, hoarding picks he hadn't yet had a chance to use. So I take for granted a lot of GMs who want to build through the draft will not get deep into bed with veterans in or entering their 30s. 

Too small a sample size, from a vastly different situation, to say "therefore he's not extending Fant." And even if he doesn't, that still depends on his own situation not a pattern. If Becton has retaken the LT position or if Fant has gotten injured, then those are themselves variables that don't speak to what he'd have done if a healthy Fant was still the starting LT.

He's had 2 offseasons during his roster teardown & draft pick hoarding. Just saying 2020 and 2021 offseasons aren't apples to apples comparisons to the 2023 roster situation. 

You extrapolated me to saying “therefore he’s not extending Fant” and I think I’ve made it pretty clear that’s not my take. You’re saying stop saying he’s not extending Fant and I’m saying stop throwing out the last two offseasons and taking it for granted Fant will be brought back. And regarding sample size it’s small, ergo it’s possibly just randomness, but I stand by what I said in the other post. At this point it’s a lot of quibbling and talking across each other.

You’ve also gotten to kicking Fant out a little further which brings me back to what started this. If Fant isn’t extended this offseason and gets next season you’ve got an expiring player and a guy who’s missed a ton of time at the two tackle spots. So I still think they potentially take a tackle day two to fill Moses’ role. Again, I’m not talking Neal or Ekwonu here. Even if they might re-sign Fant they always like having the option to back fill and Becton misses time. And as I said several posts ago, they rarely draft for season one starters outside the first round - it’s for season two starters. Couple paths that they’ll need a new tackle in 2023 - and depth in 2022. That’s pretty standard to use day two capital on. And the fun part is we’ll see either way.

[CanadaSteve]

On 12/14/2021 at 6:48 AM, Joe Jets fan said:

Beckon is going to end up being the same as Mims, both showed flashes their rookie years.  Then both turn out to be too lazy to put in the work that playing in the nfl demands.  
 

new coaching staff recognizes this and won’t play them just because of draft status.   This is a good thing

And it CAN'T be emphasized enough that the 2020 draft  was a crap-shoot for every team.  Without having the ability to meet the players, talk with them, get a feel for them as people.  I am not saying Becton and Mims should be given up on....far from it.  BUT.....arrows are pointing in a certain direction.  They only get one more year.  Three years is a LONG time to be given to solidify potential.  I doubt they will get a fourth.  In Mims' case, he may not even get the third year.

[Greensleeves]

On 12/14/2021 at 6:01 AM, Alentador31 said:

Becton doesn't get special treatment because of his draft slot. He gets special treatment because when healthy he is a beast.

How soon people forget and use injuries against him. I get that it's frustrating as hell, but that in no way diminishes his talent. After AVT he is our most talented lineman - he just needs to show he can stay on the field.

[varjet]

If you are Joe Douglas and you are GMing for your job this off season, do you roll with Fant and Becton as your tackles.  Unlike some other teams, there are not really credible candidates on the roster-T 4 is Edoga.   I don’t know where Conor McDermott goes.

If JD picked Wirfs like he was supposed to he could be entering this off season only needing a RG (I don’t think he can count on Cam Clark for that either).  Now he basically needs another T to be a backstop for Becton.  The easiest thing to do with Becton in 2022 is assume he can play RT and keep Fant at LT-give him a 1 year extension, or keep the franchise tag.  

I don’t think Moses signs again given he signed as a backup and started all season.  

[Sperm Edwards]

18 hours ago, derp said:

You extrapolated me to saying “therefore he’s not extending Fant” and I think I’ve made it pretty clear that’s not my take. You’re saying stop saying he’s not extending Fant and I’m saying stop throwing out the last two offseasons and taking it for granted Fant will be brought back. And regarding sample size it’s small, ergo it’s possibly just randomness, but I stand by what I said in the other post. At this point it’s a lot of quibbling and talking across each other.

You’ve also gotten to kicking Fant out a little further which brings me back to what started this. If Fant isn’t extended this offseason and gets next season you’ve got an expiring player and a guy who’s missed a ton of time at the two tackle spots. So I still think they potentially take a tackle day two to fill Moses’ role. Again, I’m not talking Neal or Ekwonu here. Even if they might re-sign Fant they always like having the option to back fill and Becton misses time. And as I said several posts ago, they rarely draft for season one starters outside the first round - it’s for season two starters. Couple paths that they’ll need a new tackle in 2023 - and depth in 2022. That’s pretty standard to use day two capital on. And the fun part is we’ll see either way.

I don’t know what he’ll do. All I’m saying is the decision won’t be: he’s dumping Fant because Fant will be >30 and that’s his pattern.

The only way it makes sense to take a day 2 tackle is if he views Fant as an expiring player. If Fant gets extended for 2023+ then he’s not expiring. Certainly not enough to draft a designated backup on day 2 in 2022.

GMs don’t draft planned-backups on day 2. They don’t even typically take on a Moses type veteran as a backup, but he was cheap and they didn’t have anyone else non-disastrous on the roster and didn’t want his rookie QB to have OT excuses. Douglas either had concerns that Becton wasn’t in the best shape after the spring, or that Fant wasn’t a particularly good RT in 2020, or both. Plus Moses was cheap and didn’t prevent the jets from getting any other starters the way it would if he uses a day 2 pick.

Day 2 (especially where the Jets pick) is if you’re looking for a starter within a year because your current one is a stopgap, not to be a planned backup who maybe starts in 2-3 years if others fail or get injured. It’s too early for that for a team with legit bigger holes than a backup OT. That’s what day 3 or FA are for. 

[derp]

47 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don’t know what he’ll do. All I’m saying is the decision won’t be: he’s dumping Fant because Fant will be >30 and that’s his pattern.

The only way it makes sense to take a day 2 tackle is if he views Fant as an expiring player. If Fant gets extended for 2023+ then he’s not expiring. Certainly not enough to draft a designated backup on day 2 in 2022.

GMs don’t draft planned-backups on day 2. They don’t even typically take on a Moses type veteran as a backup, but he was cheap and they didn’t have anyone else non-disastrous on the roster and didn’t want his rookie QB to have OT excuses. Douglas either had concerns that Becton wasn’t in the best shape after the spring, or that Fant wasn’t a particularly good RT in 2020, or both. Plus Moses was cheap and didn’t prevent the jets from getting any other starters the way it would if he uses a day 2 pick.

Day 2 (especially where the Jets pick) is if you’re looking for a starter within a year because your current one is a stopgap, not to be a planned backup who maybe starts in 2-3 years if others fail or get injured. It’s too early for that for a team with legit bigger holes than a backup OT. That’s what day 3 or FA are for. 

I’ve repeatedly said I’m not sure if he’s dumping Fant and explained the thought process isn’t as simple as you’re describing there. 

Obviously they’re not extending Fant and then drafting a tackle. I even said that. And if Fant isn’t extended, he is an expiring player.

Isn’t the tackle situation now worse than when what you described when they signed Moses? Moses was an opportunistic signing but also covered a concern that I’d imagine is greater now. 

[Sperm Edwards]

7 minutes ago, derp said:

I’ve repeatedly said I’m not sure if he’s dumping Fant and explained the thought process isn’t as simple as you’re describing there. 

Obviously they’re not extending Fant and then drafting a tackle. I even said that. And if Fant isn’t extended, he is an expiring player.

Isn’t the tackle situation now worse than when what you described when they signed Moses? Moses was an opportunistic signing but also covered a concern that I’d imagine is greater now. 

No, the tackle situation is not worse. Even still, what he didn't do in April was use a day 2 pick on a RT of the future. He had 2 starting tackles: one he liked a lot and another he was just ok with. He has those same 2 tackles, but their positions (and the confidence in them) has flipped. Either way, drafting a backup doesn't trump drafting a starter.

If they have no desire to extend Fant - which would be curious after this season he's had - then it'd make some sense in round 3. I don't think he's yet at a point where he's decided to take the money & run on Fant after 2022, though he certainly could (and would, if he regresses next year). The team is so young, and about to get younger still, I don't see why they'd be even leaning towards getting rid of him.

Your last sentence is really what it was about: Moses was an opportunistic signing. But the difference between having him as an extra vs. a day 2 pick in his stead is that Moses was ready to start full-time right now. A round 3 rookie T may not ever be starter-worthy, let alone full-time as a rookie beginning weeks 1-2.

If the way things ended up this year ushers in a new philosophy of "we need 3 starting tackles" then he's going to get another ~$2-5MM experienced veteran (Beachum/Moses level; maybe Mitch Schwartz if his back is ok now), where exceeding the typical backup $$ a bit is particularly affordable while the starting tackle tandem has a combined $15MM cap charge. And if the reason is they truly don't like Becton anymore, then they should be trading him while his value is still probably at least a 2nd and take it from there.

Can agree to disagree if you like, but I don't think a 3-4 win team will (or should) draft an intended-backup on day 2, at a position where he's getting either 100% or 0% of the snaps each game for weeks/months at a time.

[derp]

42 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

No, the tackle situation is not worse. Even still, what he didn't do in April was use a day 2 pick on a RT of the future. He had 2 starting tackles: one he liked a lot and another he was just ok with. He has those same 2 tackles, but their positions (and the confidence in them) has flipped. Either way, drafting a backup doesn't trump drafting a starter.

If they have no desire to extend Fant - which would be curious after this season he's had - then it'd make some sense in round 3. I don't think he's yet at a point where he's decided to take the money & run on Fant after 2022, though he certainly could (and would, if he regresses next year). The team is so young, and about to get younger still, I don't see why they'd be even leaning towards getting rid of him.

Your last sentence is really what it was about: Moses was an opportunistic signing. But the difference between having him as an extra vs. a day 2 pick in his stead is that Moses was ready to start full-time right now. A round 3 rookie T may not ever be starter-worthy, let alone full-time as a rookie beginning weeks 1-2.

If the way things ended up this year ushers in a new philosophy of "we need 3 starting tackles" then he's going to get another ~$2-5MM experienced veteran (Beachum/Moses level; maybe Mitch Schwartz if his back is ok now), where exceeding the typical backup $$ a bit is particularly affordable while the starting tackle tandem has a combined $15MM cap charge. And if the reason is they truly don't like Becton anymore, then they should be trading him while his value is still probably at least a 2nd and take it from there.

Can agree to disagree if you like, but I don't think a 3-4 win team will (or should) draft an intended-backup on day 2, at a position where he's getting either 100% or 0% of the snaps each game for weeks/months at a time.

If you don’t think Becton going from out of shape to missing a season is worse we will certainly have to agree to disagree there.

The rest of it I think is less disagreeing than it is talking across each other and one or both of us isn’t/aren’t articulating well. I think there are two paths here - Fant extended and Fant not extended. From my perspective I acknowledge that Fant could be extended am but interested in talking about the scenario he’s not extended - because I think it’s non trivial - and you’re continuing down the Fant is extended path and saying it doesn’t make sense to draft a tackle (“intended backup”) if Fant is extended. I get that. It doesn’t make sense to draft a day two tackle if Fant is extended. They’d have to address that issue differently.

So I think in the same way you’re stuck on my <30 comment I’m stuck on you leaping to the scenario where they extend Fant when all I’m talking about is the scenario where they don’t extend Fant. 

Again, by no means am I saying they’re not going to extend Fant. I do think there’s a mismatch though - the deal that makes sense for the Jets is very different than the deal that makes sense for Fant. He signed here to potentially play left tackle, got kicked to the right side when they drafted Becton, struggled, and has been great on the left side. If I’m Fant I want a big deal to play left tackle, and if I’m the Jets I don’t think I want to give him that kind of deal. Unless I’ve given up on Becton, in which case that’s it’s own issue.

Maybe the Jets move him to the left side and kick Becton to the right. I think that’s far from a guarantee. But his performance this season - with poor QB play as well - warrants LT money on the open market. Guys have gotten paid for less, he got paid for less. And giving him LT money to play RT - especially when he was better at LT - is a tough sell. If they make him a left tackle, they’re probably in for a situation with Becton anyway. Since giving Fant LT money to play RT when he was good at LT and moving Becton to RT both seem unlikely to happen/end well, I think somethings got to give at tackle. And Becton missing time is still a problem.

I realize there are layers - but I don’t see a clean path to an extension and I do see a need for tackle depth. So between those two, letting him get paid in FA and adding tackle depth in the interim lines up for me. Probably the same way extending him and signing a cheap veteran who’s below replacement level lines up for you. And knowing the Jets, they’ll choose door three.

[Chrebetfan80]

On 12/16/2021 at 10:02 AM, derp said:

You're talking about the guys he’s let leave, the roster was horrific. I’m talking about the guys he’s signed. That’s where it’s all three years or less, no future guaranteed money after 30.

He’s gotten out of the cap mess a little and I’d think he’ll have to step out of the three years or less at some point but signing Fant to an annual eight figure deal that’ll get him into his 30’s presumably with hefty guarantees would be a deviation from prior signings and there are a lot of guys he’s passed on who’d make sense on paper but haven’t been able to fit in that little box and get more/longer money elsewhere.

The younger signings just remind me of the Eagles like 15, 20 years ago where they let guys go because they’d rather do it a year early than a year late. It’s signing rather than extending but I think bringing in guys who will hit the market again before 30 gives them another shot at a big deal and keeping it short makes it seem like they’ll actually play out that deal instead of mailing it in like we’ve seen with so many big contracts.

The big thing with Fant would be if he’s more comfortable bringing guys back. Free agency is obviously a mess and that’s why the team’s cap situation has been so bad. But he’s been really really careful to not create serious dead money. Perhaps digging out of the hole, perhaps doesn’t like free agents and extensions are different. The continuity on the OL would certainly be nice.

Probably depends on how Fant’s wired too - does he like being here, value continuity, appreciate the Jets taking a shot on him, appreciate a sure thing contract wise. Does he want to play left tackle and will that be an option here? I’m sure some other team would sign him to do it. Imagine he’d get more money, maybe years too, on the open market.

guys will take short term deals this year as the cap is supposed to raise significantly even next year again and the year after possibly.  Ive heard reports of close to 300M in 2023/24 so I think you can give guys a nice pay day now and still get short years out of it because guys wont mind having another FA in those years.  I could see fant sign a 2 year extension, something that takes him with a team option up until 2024 and pays him at a 14-16 mil range over the next 3 years.  next year he is at 9.25m so if the extension was a 2 year extension and he gets a raise next year something like 2 year extension worth 35 mil where it boosts his 2022 salary 4mil from 9.25 to 13.25 then 15m in 2023 and a team option for 2024 worth 16 m. something like that maybe?  i could see that. And i think thats fair for top 15 LT money. 

[Sperm Edwards]

3 hours ago, derp said:

If you don’t think Becton going from out of shape to missing a season is worse we will certainly have to agree to disagree there.

The rest of it I think is less disagreeing than it is talking across each other and one or both of us isn’t/aren’t articulating well. I think there are two paths here - Fant extended and Fant not extended. From my perspective I acknowledge that Fant could be extended am but interested in talking about the scenario he’s not extended - because I think it’s non trivial - and you’re continuing down the Fant is extended path and saying it doesn’t make sense to draft a tackle (“intended backup”) if Fant is extended. I get that. It doesn’t make sense to draft a day two tackle if Fant is extended. They’d have to address that issue differently.

So I think in the same way you’re stuck on my <30 comment I’m stuck on you leaping to the scenario where they extend Fant when all I’m talking about is the scenario where they don’t extend Fant. 

Again, by no means am I saying they’re not going to extend Fant. I do think there’s a mismatch though - the deal that makes sense for the Jets is very different than the deal that makes sense for Fant. He signed here to potentially play left tackle, got kicked to the right side when they drafted Becton, struggled, and has been great on the left side. If I’m Fant I want a big deal to play left tackle, and if I’m the Jets I don’t think I want to give him that kind of deal. Unless I’ve given up on Becton, in which case that’s it’s own issue.

Maybe the Jets move him to the left side and kick Becton to the right. I think that’s far from a guarantee. But his performance this season - with poor QB play as well - warrants LT money on the open market. Guys have gotten paid for less, he got paid for less. And giving him LT money to play RT - especially when he was better at LT - is a tough sell. If they make him a left tackle, they’re probably in for a situation with Becton anyway. Since giving Fant LT money to play RT when he was good at LT and moving Becton to RT both seem unlikely to happen/end well, I think somethings got to give at tackle. And Becton missing time is still a problem.

I realize there are layers - but I don’t see a clean path to an extension and I do see a need for tackle depth. So between those two, letting him get paid in FA and adding tackle depth in the interim lines up for me. Probably the same way extending him and signing a cheap veteran who’s below replacement level lines up for you. And knowing the Jets, they’ll choose door three.

Fant's past money has evened out. He was badly overpaid as a RT - particularly one who came in after being a backup/swing tackle/6th lineman in Seattle - and underpaid as a LT.

I don't think Fant is going to get anywhere near elite LT money anyway that you're fearing. He may get an earned bump to the $15MM range max if he keeps up his current play level -- he's only got 2 starting seasons under his belt; only one of them wasn't below average; he's still a pure pass protector (this year very good at that, but hardly elite aside from the 1-sack stat that's boosted by others' assignments getting to our QB first); he isn't particularly good in run blocking; and he'll be 31 in year 1 of his next contract. Fant is not going to be a bank breaker. 

Even still, I don't discount the team moving on from him; only that if they're not moving on from him or Becton past 2022, I'm not seeing a mere "depth" pick in round 2 or 3 when the team needs starters elsewhere. I'd sooner take on a veteran contract when you know they can step in right away in case of injury, and it looks like Douglas views the draft that way, too (but again it's too early to claim a predictable pattern after just 2 offseasons). 

And if they're ready to move on from Becton, they should trade him while he still has value and find their next man up, not hold onto him until his value's diminished further and try to get half-pregnant. They either believe in him or they don't, and it's not going to be based only on the same things fans are: they see him up close when he's not in action and we don't.

[derp]

17 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Fant's past money has evened out. He was badly overpaid as a RT - particularly one who came in after being a backup/swing tackle/6th lineman in Seattle - and underpaid as a LT.

I don't think Fant is going to get anywhere near elite LT money anyway that you're fearing. He may get an earned bump to the $15MM range max if he keeps up his current play level -- he's only got 2 starting seasons under his belt; only one of them wasn't below average; he's still a pure pass protector (this year very good at that, but hardly elite aside from the 1-sack stat that's boosted by others' assignments getting to our QB first); he isn't particularly good in run blocking; and he'll be 31 in year 1 of his next contract. Fant is not going to be a bank breaker. 

Even still, I don't discount the team moving on from him; only that if they're not moving on from him or Becton past 2022, I'm not seeing a mere "depth" pick in round 2 or 3 when the team needs starters elsewhere. I'd sooner take on a veteran contract when you know they can step in right away in case of injury, and it looks like Douglas views the draft that way, too (but again it's too early to claim a predictable pattern after just 2 offseasons). 

And if they're ready to move on from Becton, they should trade him while he still has value and find their next man up, not hold onto him until his value's diminished further and try to get half-pregnant. They either believe in him or they don't, and it's not going to be based only on the same things fans are: they see him up close when he's not in action and we don't.

I agree with your $15m figure - but think that’s probably too much to pay a right tackle who has played well at left tackle. He was certainly overpaid for a spot but I imagine he wants to get paid. Agree with your assessment of Fant. I actually think he’s a nice left tackle to have for developing a young QB but this offense is really structured to be run -> play action and make things easy on the quarterback and he’s not a good fit there. Part of why the Wilson pick befuddled me as well but I digress. Also there’s the where do you play Becton situation. Another reason I think Fant and the Jets are mismatched. 

I agree with the bold. My point this entire time was if you change the not to are then the day two pick - for depth and to back fill, is likely. And it’s nice to fill short-term depth needs with long-term starter needs simultaneously. I think you’re arguing with stuff I’m not saying and I’m arguing with stuff you’re not saying. We usually do a better job discussing - respect you a lot as a poster or I would’ve stopped engaging a while ago because we were quite out of sync.

I also agree regarding Becton. He’s a bigger question mark for us than for the team - they see him day to day and we don’t. He’s somewhere in between franchise LT and won’t play for us and I’m sure their take is much closer to one than the other. It would be a bad look to get rid of him but Douglas has done that. I think you responded to me in another thread but I’d think teams would be reluctant about taking on Jets castoffs. But OL is needed across the league so maybe they can get something if they want to move on.

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, derp said:

I agree with your $15m figure - but think that’s probably too much to pay a right tackle who has played well at left tackle. He was certainly overpaid for a spot but I imagine he wants to get paid. Agree with your assessment of Fant. I actually think he’s a nice left tackle to have for developing a young QB but this offense is really structured to be run -> play action and make things easy on the quarterback and he’s not a good fit there. Part of why the Wilson pick befuddled me as well but I digress. Also there’s the where do you play Becton situation. Another reason I think Fant and the Jets are mismatched. 

I agree with the bold. My point this entire time was if you change the not to are then the day two pick - for depth and to back fill, is likely. And it’s nice to fill short-term depth needs with long-term starter needs simultaneously. I think you’re arguing with stuff I’m not saying and I’m arguing with stuff you’re not saying. We usually do a better job discussing - respect you a lot as a poster or I would’ve stopped engaging a while ago because we were quite out of sync.

I also agree regarding Becton. He’s a bigger question mark for us than for the team - they see him day to day and we don’t. He’s somewhere in between franchise LT and won’t play for us and I’m sure their take is much closer to one than the other. It would be a bad look to get rid of him but Douglas has done that. I think you responded to me in another thread but I’d think teams would be reluctant about taking on Jets castoffs. But OL is needed across the league so maybe they can get something if they want to move on.

If they're moving on from Becton and are looking for an immediate plug-in starter then they should be looking at the top of round 2 - or even pooling a 2 and their 3 to get back into round 1, not merely "[some random pick] on day 2" jmo.

The only other way I see a round 3 RT making sense is if they decide to sign a 1-2 yr stopgap for not that much and who's only getting 1 yr guaranteed for skill. In that case, then yes a round 3 pick might be fine: the starter doesn't make so much that he's a must-start player, and the hope is the '22 3rd rounder looks good enough the team thinks it has it's starter for '23 and beyond.

Not with Fant at LT and Becton at RT, though. That combo - at least to me - means you get a meh RT veteran just in case Becton disappoints again, and then revisit in the '23 offseason. 

[varjet]

Look at how bad the offense looked when the RG was not functional.  It will look much worse if the RT is not functional. 

One can argue that every team should have 3 starting tackles.  I think you have to try and keep as much of the OL together this year as possible, and next year they can do a Chiefs and rebuild it.   We need to use our money and draft picks for too many other positions, although 3rd and 4th round should look for OL, like what should have happened in 2020.  

I would bring Becton and Moses back to compete at RT.  Fant will get hurt and he can try LT again.  If they need Fant in 2023 they can franchise him for about how much he would cost multi-year, or at least threaten to.  

I would use the draft picks and FA money this off season on TE, WR (we only have Mims, Moore and Davis returning), RB (Carter and Perine), QB 1b, etc., LB, S and CB.  Yes, we can use EDGE as well, but at least we have those with Lawson and Curry returning. 

[derp]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

If they're moving on from Becton and are looking for an immediate plug-in starter then they should be looking at the top of round 2 - or even pooling a 2 and their 3 to get back into round 1, not merely "[some random pick] on day 2" jmo.

The only other way I see a round 3 RT making sense is if they decide to sign a 1-2 yr stopgap for not that much and who's only getting 1 yr guaranteed for skill. In that case, then yes a round 3 pick might be fine: the starter doesn't make so much that he's a must-start player, and the hope is the '22 3rd rounder looks good enough the team thinks it has it's starter for '23 and beyond.

Not with Fant at LT and Becton at RT, though. That combo - at least to me - means you get a meh RT veteran just in case Becton disappoints again, and then revisit in the '23 offseason. 

Moving on from Becton +/- extending Fant is an entirely different scenario. I’d think continued Becton + not extended Fant is a similar scenario to your second paragraph. Agree with your third - assuming Becton isn’t traded. Then it gets back to your first paragraph.

[varjet]

Fant is under contract next year for about $9mm, and Becton's cap number is $5mm (he has $6mm dead money from his signing bonus).  So to me the options are T (ignoring G and C for now) are:

• Fant at LT, Becton at RT, and find a credible reserve T.  Fant and Becton are $15mm, not bad for 2 Ts.  Moses is $4mm this year.  How much does he want?  With Wilson getting paid what he does, we could afford $20mm in Ts.  I like this option in the short term.
• Draft Evan Neal (and not someone else) and roll with him, Fant and Becton.  Neal will cost $6m-$8mm.  Fant rolls off in 2023.  I think this is the better long-term option but it means that the Neal pick is not being used for another need.  But it also means we don't have to sign Moses or someone else.   If the Jets are picking 4, it is not unlikely that Neal is the BPA there (2 QBs, 2 EDGE).  
• I don't think Fant, Becton and a FA who does not think he starting or prospective lower round draft pick is going to work.  We should use our 2nd and 3rd picks on other positions.

Moses was signed as a backup and played the entire season.  That may have been one of JD's better moves (it did not win many games, but kept Wilson, White and Flacco sort of alive).  I really think they should do that again.