Open Competition between Becton and Fant at LT, per Saleh

[Doggin94it]

11 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I hear you but still think it’s massive overkill, particularly for this team. This team has at least one starting LT already; two if Becton gets his head out of his ass. They don’t need a third just to unnecessarily make one of the other two expendable a year later. 

Anyway I don’t think that change lifts the overall team as much as upgrading from a dire need (edge rusher) to a prospect worthy of pick #4.

Conversely, taking a tackle at #4 is potentially solving a problem they don’t have, instead of a problem they absolutely do have, and using their top draft asset to do it. 

Oh, I absolutely agree that if one of Thibs or Hutchinson are available at 4, they have to be the pick. But if they're both gone (and they probably will be) what are your other options? A CB (Stingley, Gardner) in a D that deprioritizes CBs? A second tier edge like Karlaftis or Ojabo who would be vastly overdrafted at 4? A S? (God no) An off-ball LB? 

To me, a top 5 pick needs to be spent at one of a very short list of positions: OT, Edge, QB, WR, CB. Obviously, a true unicorn player (like Pitts, Quentin Nelson) can change those rules, but nobody in this draft qualifies. We're not taking a QB, and this D means we shouldn't be using a super-premium pick on a CB. That leaves OT, Edge, and WR. If the team thinks one of the WRs is worth the No. 4 pick, great! If one of the two elite Edges falls, great! If they think Karlaftis or Ojabo or another Edge is 4th-overall worthy, great! But if none of those things are true, you don't pass on a guy like Ekwonu at 4 unless you are absolutely certain you have your bookend tackles already in place for the foreseeable future, and this team can't - can't - possibly feel that way. And that's especially true when the "worst case scenario" for taking him is it turned out you already had your bookends in place and he's "just" a top-tier OG.

[Snook]

20 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

He said that?

That's bad.

Could also be a whole lotta nothing. Teams might want to trade up for one of the tackles. (Yes, I know. I’m grasping at straws)

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, Doggin94it said:

Oh, I absolutely agree that if one of Thibs or Hutchinson are available at 4, they have to be the pick. But if they're both gone (and they probably will be) what are your other options? A CB (Stingley, Gardner) in a D that deprioritizes CBs? A second tier edge like Karlaftis or Ojabo who would be vastly overdrafted at 4? A S? (God no) An off-ball LB? 

To me, a top 5 pick needs to be spent at one of a very short list of positions: OT, Edge, QB, WR, CB. Obviously, a true unicorn player (like Pitts, Quentin Nelson) can change those rules, but nobody in this draft qualifies. We're not taking a QB, and this D means we shouldn't be using a super-premium pick on a CB. That leaves OT, Edge, and WR. If the team thinks one of the WRs is worth the No. 4 pick, great! If one of the two elite Edges falls, great! If they think Karlaftis or Ojabo or another Edge is 4th-overall worthy, great! But if none of those things are true, you don't pass on a guy like Ekwonu at 4 unless you are absolutely certain you have your bookend tackles already in place for the foreseeable future, and this team can't - can't - possibly feel that way. And that's especially true when the "worst case scenario" for taking him is it turned out you already had your bookends in place and he's "just" a top-tier OG.

This is the part where I can't really contribute as much as I'd like because I'm not so well versed on which prospect is rated slightly or significantly higher than others (other than looking at someone else's ranking, but I can't get emotional about who's a reach and who's awesome, when I've no firsthand opinions on the prospect). Plus it's too early to say who else is or isn't worthy of a pick at #4, weeks before the combine and with senior bowl not yet in the rearview mirror, plus pro days etc. 

I totally agree with your positional priority, but if the clear value pick at #4 is OT then someone else will pay for it unless we're just special schmucks. Likewise there may yet be a QB who climbs - this time in 2009 I think Sanchez was still expected to go ~16-20, and maybe Gholston a year earlier, too.  Joe Flacco was a 3rd round prospect. Too many other examples to mention. We'd be an easy trade partner for such teams, as we're not QB - and shouldn't be OT - shopping. The Giants may be QB shopping and OT shopping, so if someone else likes either position it'd be in their interest to leapfrog them by trading with the Jets. 

There may also be another edge rusher who's worthwhile, just because he's not one of the top 2 names being thrown around.

I can sympathize with regret over passing on a tackle but the bookend tackles thing doesn't move me as much when it's really not hard to provide adequate protection to the QB without such expenditures. Plus as of today that pick solves a problem we don't necessarily have. I think a lot of the time it's from GMs doing one of two things: trying to be too thrifty, or getting too caught up in a prospect's ceiling hype. Or moreso, not accounting for the idea that one truly tragic lineman - combined with lousy blocking from the TE and backs - erases a lot of the total adequacy from the other 4 starters on the line. I think we saw a lot of that this past year ourselves. 

If they're already thinking about seriously shopping/dumping Becton, that might change things, but even still it's hard for me to wrap my head around drafting an OT at #4 when the need would be at RT. 

[Green Ghost]

22 hours ago, johnnysd said:

Reading this can't help but think that they may entertain trade offers as well for Becton. Straight up for Cinci's pick?

They’re not giving up their 1st rounder (neither is any other team) for our problem child going into his third season.

Would you take their 3rd round pick? I think I might.

[Green Ghost]

22 hours ago, johnnysd said:

First. So 31 or 32. They need OL help and Becton would still be considered a better prospect than any tackle they are likely to pick there, and teams tend to be very open to "fixing" first rounders.

I just saw this, it basically answer the reply I just left you.

I don’t see any team giving up their #1 pick for a 3rd year disappointment who missed last season and is rumored to not give a s**t about getting back anytime soon.

[JohnnyLV]

6 minutes ago, Green Ghost said:

They’re not giving up their 1st rounder (neither is any other team) for our problem child going into his third season.

Would you take their 3rd round pick? I think I might.

Not sure on a 3rd, but if we say get Ekwonu at 4 maybe we do something like a 3rd this year and then a conditional pick next year which can be nothing or as high as a first with us sending them back like a 3rd. Not sure that would be my plan but I can how it would or at least could work well for us long term. My personal conspiracy theory is that Saleh is a "practice" guy and used some tough love on Mims and Becton which did not work out well. A change of scenery might ultimately be best for both, though it does seem like they have not given up on Mims.

[PepPep]

On 2/1/2022 at 1:57 PM, Sperm Edwards said:

I think too many dramatically overvalue the importance of a team's second guard. The #4 pick in the country on a guard is insane imo. There are enough guards & centers in FA, not to mention ones with experience in ozb.

The Jets have 4 starting OLmen: a more than adequate pass-blocking LT who only turns 30 (30, not 50) in June; a #14 pick LG who looks like a keeper; an under-30 B/B+ veteran center; and a #11 pick RT with more talent than any of the rest. They need a guard -- bfd.

You don't draft a second guard with the #4 overall pick when that role is so easily filled with a FA and/or a much lower pick. With some $60-70MM in cap room, sign someone like Tomlinson, Daniels, C.Williams, etc. or any of the FA centers. Too early to know who'll be re-signed before then, but it won't be all of them. I'd also sign a veteran RT on top of that. Then take a C/G prospect in round 3 or 4. That's a solid OL with legit redundancy at all 5 positions, not including any other OL backups they'd roster. 

Then use the #4 pick on the type of FA who'd cost $15-25MM, like an edge rusher; not the type who can be replaced by a $7-12MM FA or a mid-round (or late round) pick, like the team's #2 guard. Cin has I believe one 1st round pick invested in their OL. StL has zero. Both are in the Super Bowl. 

I mean, you draft the guy who is highest on your board or you trade down.

If Neal or Ekwonu or Cross are up there and the Jets absolutely love one of those players and there's no trade down scenario on the table, you take one of them. You do this because things happen. Our 'more than adequate LT' is coming off injury and going into a contract year. So is our 'B/B+' vet Center. And our '#11 pick at RT' is a huge question mark right now, despite the limitless potential. AVT is the only legit long-term piece we have in place right now. 

 So considering all of this, things could very well go south for this O-line in the near future and they might end up regretting passing on a dominant o-lineman for an edge rusher who they reached for and didn't value as high as the O-lineman.  

I think if Thib or Hutch fall to them at 4, its a no-brainer. I also think they will consider Ojabo and Karl if those guys crush the testing leading up to the draft. But I would not be surprised if Ekwonu or Neal ends up being the pick.  

[football guy]

The Jets are going to look to add as much talent as possible and see how things shake out.  

• Ideal scenario: Becton and Fant earn the starting OT jobs, early draft pick starts at RG short-term or long-term 
• Not-ideal scenario: Jets draft an OL early and both he and Fant beat out Becton for the starting OT spots 

Drafting an OL who can play several positions gives them insurance if the not-ideal scenario plays out, but barring injury it would be an upset if the starting line wasn't the following:   Fant - AVT - CMG - [ROOKIE] - Becton 

[Hex]

On 2/1/2022 at 1:50 PM, Warfish said:

JMO, every position should be an "open competition" every year.  

Competition makes players play their best.

I loathe handing players jobs just because.  At any position.

Earn it, or someone else plays.

This is totally true. I've mentioned the differences between Zach at BYU before he had competition and after

There's a reason he had that super year

[Sperm Edwards]

3 hours ago, PepPep said:

I mean, you draft the guy who is highest on your board or you trade down.

If Neal or Ekwonu or Cross are up there and the Jets absolutely love one of those players and there's no trade down scenario on the table, you take one of them. You do this because things happen. Our 'more than adequate LT' is coming off injury and going into a contract year. So is our 'B/B+' vet Center. And our '#11 pick at RT' is a huge question mark right now, despite the limitless potential. AVT is the only legit long-term piece we have in place right now. 

 So considering all of this, things could very well go south for this O-line in the near future and they might end up regretting passing on a dominant o-lineman for an edge rusher who they reached for and didn't value as high as the O-lineman.  

I think if Thib or Hutch fall to them at 4, its a no-brainer. I also think they will consider Ojabo and Karl if those guys crush the testing leading up to the draft. But I would not be surprised if Ekwonu or Neal ends up being the pick.  

Well we can just disagree on that front. That’s how we ended up with a bunch of highly-rated DTs and the rest of the team was crap.

BAP is a great strategy later in the draft when it’s harder to find NFL talent outright, without making the job harder still by eliminating half the positions on the field..

Up top there are enough highly-talented players that a B+ edge at that extreme need position trumps picking up a 3rd tackle when you only start 2 of them.

IMO people obsess too much over theoretical grades of a fraction of a point, leading to taking a player that won’t improve the team much over another player who will.

[PepPep]

21 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Well we can just disagree on that front. That’s how we ended up with a bunch of highly-rated DTs and the rest of the team was crap.

BAP is a great strategy later in the draft when it’s harder to find NFL talent outright, without making the job harder still by eliminating half the positions on the field..

Up top there are enough highly-talented players that a B+ edge at that extreme need position trumps picking up a 3rd tackle when you only start 2 of them.

IMO people obsess too much over theoretical grades of a fraction of a point, leading to taking a player that won’t improve the team much over another player who will.

Well, another way to look at is Neal or Ekwonu could step right in and start as at the very least a quality Guard before you decide on whether to resign Fant and before you figure out if Becton can be relied on. 

I also have no problem with all those high 1st round picks if they put together a truly dominant pass rush. That was the intent but not the result. Wilk, Richardson, Coples (bust)- these guys didn't turn into that. 

[Sperm Edwards]

22 minutes ago, PepPep said:

Well, another way to look at is Neal or Ekwonu could step right in and start as at the very least a quality Guard before you decide on whether to resign Fant and before you figure out if Becton can be relied on. 

I also have no problem with all those high 1st round picks if they put together a truly dominant pass rush. That was the intent but not the result. Wilk, Richardson, Coples (bust)- these guys didn't turn into that. 

What for? You’re solving a problem that isn’t there (or isn’t necessarily there). So after this season, in a best case scenario, you’ve swapped Ekwonu for Fant — how is this measurably improving the team in comparison to adding an edge rusher where one presently doesn’t exist? And that’s if Ekwonu is everything you hope, or even Fant’s equal in protecting the QB’s blind side in the Jets’ blocking scheme.

Here’s the reality: the Jets’ OL is 4/5 fine. The problems they had weren’t their starters - even with one of their actual starters (the most talented one of the lot) out for the season. It was crappy blocking from 1/5 of the line plus the TEs and the RBs often letting a man come through unblocked (or barely touched), combined with a young QB who didn’t pick up on the free rusher about to take his head off.

Swapping Ekwonu for Fant isn’t an upgrade worthy of the #4 pick in the country, if it even proves to be any upgrade at all once he’s on the field.

[PepPep]

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

What for? You’re solving a problem that isn’t there (or isn’t necessarily there). So after this season, in a best case scenario, you’ve swapped Ekwonu for Fant — how is this measurably improving the team in comparison to adding an edge rusher where one presently doesn’t exist? And that’s if Ekwonu is everything you hope, or even Fant’s equal in protecting the QB’s blind side in the Jets’ blocking scheme.

Here’s the reality: the Jets’ OL is 4/5 fine. The problems they had weren’t their starters - even with one of their actual starters (the most talented one of the lot) out for the season. It was crappy blocking from 1/5 of the line plus the TEs and the RBs often letting a man come through unblocked (or barely touched), combined with a young QB who didn’t pick up on the free rusher about to take his head off.

Swapping Ekwonu for Fant isn’t an upgrade worthy of the #4 pick in the country, if it even proves to be any upgrade at all once he’s on the field.

I think best case scenario Ekwonu ends up being one of the best guards in the NFL, the Jets extend Fant and Becton comes back healthy and dominant on the right or left side. Hopefully, this would leave them with one of the best, youngest, most versatile o-line's in the league. At worst Becton ends up being a bust and Fant signs elsewhere after this year, leaving the Jets with zero legit OT starters. At least then Ekwonu can move to RT and the Jets can draft a pure LT and sign a G. Or however you want to shuffle those guys around. I really don't view Ekwonu as an automatic replacement for Fant. I view him as a plug and play starter at Guard and insurance policy at OT. Somewhat similar to AVT. I think he is projected and WILL play Guard in the NFL but his versatility will have him drafted higher than Guards typically get drafted.   

If the Jets really like an Edge and they think he will be gone by 10, I have no issue with them taking that guy at 4. If they take him at 4 just because they feel like they need an edge and there's other guys on the board ahead of him at other positions, that doesn't really make sense to me. And I think JD will do the same thing. 

[Sperm Edwards]

34 minutes ago, PepPep said:

I think best case scenario Ekwonu ends up being one of the best guards in the NFL, the Jets extend Fant and Becton comes back healthy and dominant on the right or left side. Hopefully, this would leave them with one of the best, youngest, most versatile o-line's in the league. At worst Becton ends up being a bust and Fant signs elsewhere after this year, leaving the Jets with zero legit OT starters. At least then Ekwonu can move to RT and the Jets can draft a pure LT and sign a G. Or however you want to shuffle those guys around. I really don't view Ekwonu as an automatic replacement for Fant. I view him as a plug and play starter at Guard and insurance policy at OT. Somewhat similar to AVT. I think he is projected and WILL play Guard in the NFL but his versatility will have him drafted higher than Guards typically get drafted.   

If the Jets really like an Edge and they think he will be gone by 10, I have no issue with them taking that guy at 4. If they take him at 4 just because they feel like they need an edge and there's other guys on the board ahead of him at other positions, that doesn't really make sense to me. And I think JD will do the same thing. 

Here’s the thing, though — the Jets don’t primarily man-block so who cares if he’s one of the best guards in the NFL? It isn’t going to make the team so much better than a veteran who’s experienced in the system.

The #4 pick is to improve the team, not be an insurance plan in case this or that player - particularly one who’s already been successful at the NFL level before - doesn’t pan out. That’s on top of anointing a college prospect as an automatic upgrade in the first place. 

Fant is only signing elsewhere if the Jets don’t make him an extension offer, and it isn’t going to be anything like the $20MM/yr level contracts of the biggest names either. So they have a LT, and no other OL position is worth a top 10 pick anyway. 

I’d have thought seeing all these playmakers on the two super bowl teams - teams who have both decidedly not over-invested in the OL (I think there’s one 1st round pick investment on both SB teams combined) - would have put an end to the notion of the fallacy that everything flows through the OL, and the 5 best OL starters leads to profit. 

They need an adequate OL and for their TE and backs and QB to be better coached up to recognize where free blitzers are coming from. If Douglas takes a ****ing guard at #4 - or a ****ing center at #10 - he’s as bad at this as all his detractors say he is. 

The only possible rationalization is if they’ve already dumped Becton before the draft starts. Even then it’s overkill since no team needs a #4 overall pick RT in the first place. Fill that in FA (or rounds 2-5) and use that top-5 selection on an elite-skills playmaker on either side of the ball.

[CanadaSteve]

Sperm's point about a team willing to move to #4 shouldn't be ignored.  We keep talking about how we will try and move #10.  I think it is more plausible that we move #4. 

At #10, there is quite a realistic chance that we will have a chance to draft one of the following players:

1) George Karlaftis

2) David Ojabo

3) Cameron Thomas

Then, there are others who are going to shoot up the boards in the next few weeks.  Guys like Jermaine Johnson, Travon Walker, Drake Jackson, Logan Hall....

It is quite feasible that trading #4 (OBVIOUSLY if we can) would net us an extra third next year and still get us another first this year.  

[BurntDice]

27 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Here’s the thing, though — the Jets don’t primarily man-block so who cares if he’s one of the best guards in the NFL? It isn’t going to make the team so much better than a veteran who’s experienced in the system.

The #4 pick is to improve the team, not be an insurance plan in case this or that player - particularly one who’s already been successful at the NFL level before - doesn’t pan out. That’s on top of anointing a college prospect as an automatic upgrade in the first place. 

Fant is only signing elsewhere if the Jets don’t make him an extension offer, and it isn’t going to be anything like the $20MM/yr level contracts of the biggest names either. So they have a LT, and no other OL position is worth a top 10 pick anyway. 

I’d have thought seeing all these playmakers on the two super bowl teams - teams who have both decidedly not over-invested in the OL (I think there’s one 1st round pick investment on both SB teams combined) - would have put an end to the notion of the fallacy that everything flows through the OL, and the 5 best OL starters leads to profit. 

They need an adequate OL and for their TE and backs and QB to be better coached up to recognize where free blitzers are coming from. If Douglas takes a ****ing guard at #4 - or a ****ing center at #10 - he’s as bad at this as all his detractors say he is. 

The only possible rationalization is if they’ve already dumped Becton before the draft starts. Even then it’s overkill since no team needs a #4 overall pick RT in the first place. Fill that in FA (or rounds 2-5) and use that top-5 selection on an elite-skills playmaker on either side of the ball.

I 100% agree with you on all the points you made. It’s just silly to draft another ol in the 1st when it’s completely unneeded. Nearly any other position would be a far greater upgrade if selected. Like S, Edge, CB. That’s just at 4. At 10 it opens up more possibilities like lb, wr. The only hole that needs to filled on the line is rg which there are plenty of options available in fa. Draft an ol or even 2 in the mid rounds to develop and eventually become a starter if fant/McGovern/becton leave or don’t work out. That’s what most teams do and it is successful. That’s the thing this team hasn’t had in years which is depth. I think that’s why so many people are clamoring for a 1st round ol because in the past there has been no pipeline for future starters in any position especially ol. 

[Sperm Edwards]

6 minutes ago, BurntDice said:

I 100% agree with you on all the points you made. It’s just silly to draft another ol in the 1st when it’s completely unneeded. Nearly any other position would be a far greater upgrade if selected. Like S, Edge, CB. That’s just at 4. At 10 it opens up more possibilities like lb, wr. The only hole that needs to filled on the line is rg which there are plenty of options available in fa. Draft an ol or even 2 in the mid rounds to develop and eventually become a starter if fant/McGovern/becton leave or don’t work out. That’s what most teams do and it is successful. That’s the thing this team hasn’t had in years which is depth. I think that’s why so many people are clamoring for a 1st round ol because in the past there has been no pipeline for future starters in any position especially ol. 

Yep, all this except they actually had a lot of OL depth and WR depth. The injuries were just insane. 

2021 OL: 3 2020 starting tackles, two 2020 starting centers, a #14 rookie LG, and he tried playing King of the Dipshits with RG. Then one of them has a neck injury and another retires, leaving them with just one G and one G/C (one of them worse than the other) to start, and Becton missing 16.5 games meant the backup RT played every game, starting the rest of the way. A midseason trade for LDT stabilized the line for the most part, even if he was kinda meh himself.

2021 WR: 2020 starter Davis, 2020 starter Mims, 2020 starter Crowder, 2020 semi-starter Cole, drafted Moore, and still had Berrios for WR6. Then they dropped like flies (along with dropping so many passes).

Sucks, and was improbable, but it wasn’t for any extreme lack of depth-planning, other than keeping it a bit too close to the vest in terms of the quality of those new OL faces & re-signings (e.g. better to overpay a bit to outbid the Bolts for Linsley, and shove him or McG over to RG than a trio of $3-6MM bleh iOL veterans in Lewis, GVR, Feeney (whose neck injury was unfortunate, but who was really penciling him in as a starter after never seeing the field as a rookie). 

[BurntDice]

10 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Yep, all this except they actually had a lot of OL depth and WR depth. The injuries were just insane. 

2021 OL: 3 2020 starting tackles, two 2020 starting centers, a #14 rookie LG, and he tried playing King of the Dipsh*ts with RG. Then one of them has a neck injury and another retires, leaving them with just one G and one G/C (one of them worse than the other) to start, and Becton missing 16.5 games meant the backup RT played every game, starting the rest of the way. A midseason trade for LDT stabilized the line for the most part, even if he was kinda meh himself.

2021 WR: 2020 starter Davis, 2020 starter Mims, 2020 starter Crowder, 2020 semi-starter Cole, drafted Moore, and still had Berrios for WR6. Then they dropped like flies (along with dropping so many passes).

Sucks, and was improbable, but it wasn’t for any extreme lack of depth-planning, other than keeping it a bit too close to the vest in terms of the quality of those new OL faces & re-signings (e.g. better to overpay a bit to outbid the Bolts for Linsley, and shove him or McG over to RG than a trio of $3-6MM bleh iOL veterans in Lewis, GVR, Feeney (whose neck injury was unfortunate, but who was really penciling him in as a starter after never seeing the field as a rookie). 

The depth has definitely been much better under JD. I was mostly talking about the lack of depth in general the past 10 years under mac and idzik. There were meh starters and nothing behind them. I’m just guessing that people have that ingrained in their minds. We haven’t seen someone leave and have a viable young guy come in and become the starter to replace him. It was always replace them with a fa or high draft pick. We haven’t seen the value of mid round picks who were developed into future starters over the years is mostly what I was getting at. Things definitely seem to be heading in that direction. 

[Barton]

12 hours ago, football guy said:

The Jets are going to look to add as much talent as possible and see how things shake out.  

• Ideal scenario: Becton and Fant earn the starting OT jobs, early draft pick starts at RG short-term or long-term 
• Not-ideal scenario: Jets draft an OL early and both he and Fant beat out Becton for the starting OT spots 

Drafting an OL who can play several positions gives them insurance if the not-ideal scenario plays out, but barring injury it would be an upset if the starting line wasn't the following:   Fant - AVT - CMG - [ROOKIE] - Becton 

 

Whats the word on the Jets intentions with Moses and LDT? Will they be aggressive in re-signing them?

[rangerous]

the bottom line is they need two tackles and hopefully the positions set before going into next season.  whether it's fant left and becton right or vice versa it shouldn't matter.  if that can't work then they need to draft a left tackle or re-sign moses or someone else.  and how becton/fant plays out should determine if a tackle is drafted in the first or second rounds or later or if they go the free agent route beyond moses.  it's a long season and they really need good depth at the position.