Could Drafting WR at BOTH #4 and #10 be Justified?

[doitny]

27 minutes ago, Claymation said:

You are right you shouldn't, but this isn't the year to start that, would you rather have Hamilton or Neal/Cross/Ikem? After listening to DJ's assessment on Thibs, I wouldn't want him at 10. I still want London at 10. 

ok and what about next year? and the year after that? 

what if were picking at 15 and the BAP is another OL at a spot we could use one. 

at least at 4 we have the whole draft in front of us. i find it hard to believe we couldnt get a good player thats not an OL.

JD backed himself in a corner by drafting 2 OL two years in a row. if he goes for a 3rd then i dont care if Anthony Munoz or Nick Mangold clones are there when we pick we cant do it for a 4th year. 

we might have to get Wilson. i just seen a mock from CBS that has the Giants taking him at 7. depends on how we feel about him but if you dont want to lose him then take him at 4.

and i would take Hamilton before those guys you mentioned. we are paper thin at safety and the OL was a strength last year. and if we have to trade one cause were not going to pay him i think we get more for a safety then an OL.

[More Cowbell]

3 hours ago, Joe Willie White Shoes said:

There was no need, in the middle of a discussion about the relative merits of MVS and Davis, to resort to personal attacks.  If you want to argue with me over whether MVS or Davis is the better receiver, fine. I presented facts and opinion on the players and you, well - you can see your analysis above.  And I'm not thin skinned. But your comments were over the top and  unnecessary.  I'm not going to hijack a thread any more than this post and exchange personal attacks with you.   The back and forth already went too far and I wish I didn't take the bait.  But you have no idea how much football I watch so please, give it a rest next time.  You, me and the board will be better off for it if you stick to defending why you think MVS is the next Jerry Rice and Corey Davis is a Stephen Hill clone than to resort to personal attacks.  We can debate or agree to disagree on how good or mediocre MVS is, but if you don't want to go down that road, just ignore my posts or put me on ignore and spare the "you're stupid" posts.  Thanks.   

That isn't  a personal attack, it's an observation. Mixon ran for over 1100 twice and 1200 this season. His rookie season he played behind incumbent  starter Hill. He wasn't the primary back as a rookie as you seem to think. Last year he was injured and missed a bunch of games yet you are taking those two seasons into account to skew his average down.

Just as you haven't watched Mixon, you haven't watched MVS yet you make the same hot take that both have nothing to offer. If I want to have these kind of assessments on NFL talent, I'll talk to my parrot. He doesn't know a lot of words but he makes a lot more sense than you do.

[JetBlue]

9 hours ago, slats said:

 

The media will continue to mock OL to the Jets because it’s easy to do based on their remarks and JD’s first two drafts, but it’s not the smart move for the Jets. The best move would probably be to trade down in a draft like this, but I don’t think there will be a ton of opportunities. Definitely hoping one of the QBs starts rising to the top, and that at least one team ahead of them takes an OL. The unit should be off the Jets board in the first round, especially if they’re projecting the player to play guard. 
 
Resign or upgrade LTD, resign Moses or sign a reasonable swing/right tackle in free agency, and your starting OL is not only set but really pretty good. It sucked early in the year because it takes time to learn this zone blocking scheme, and to learn to do it as a unit. Once they did that and replaced GVR, they were good. 
 
The pass rush was terrible. These guys are married to their scheme (they will never be blitz happy), and need to be able to rush the passer with their front four consistently. If no trade down is available, taking the best Edge on their board is the move at #4. Then at #10, the top WR on their board will be more than welcome. 

Fair enough, but if they can't trade back, do you take George K.  at 4 instead of Neal or Ekonu?   I understand the salary considerations of having 3 number 1 picks on the OLine but if they rate those guys that high, it will be hard to pass on one of them.   I guess we will have to wait and see.  I am praying they don't take a safety or cornerback at 4.   

[adb280z]

11 hours ago, More Cowbell said:

He is on a team that focuses on one WR which is Adams. Most of the passes to WR go to him. After that, Rogers spreads the ball around to everyone pretty equally but MVS makes big plays when his number is called. Rogers even said after one game GB lost that he felt somewhat responsible for not getting the ball to MVS. I have not seen MVS make the number of drops I saw from Davis last season. MVS would be an upgrade. 

 

MVS catches 49.8% of balls thrown to him over his career, Davis 60.7%

MVS is a nice niche deep threat guy but he's not close to a 1 he's barely the 2nd guy on his team.  Lazard passed him up this year.

[More Cowbell]

37 minutes ago, adb280z said:

MVS catches 49.8% of balls thrown to him over his career, Davis 60.7%

MVS is a nice niche deep threat guy but he's not close to a 1 he's barely the 2nd guy on his team.  Lazard passed him up this year.

Actually I wouldn't  mind Lazard either but he is like a 3 really. He does the dirty work on that team. Also catch % is probably the most unreliable stat you can go by. Some of the passes that Wilson dirted this season were recorded as drops because they were near the recievers feet. That said, Davis dropped a bunch of passes that hit him in his hands.

Also want to add, MVS is the guy that is going out for the home run balls. Deep passes don't  connect a lot of times. 

[adb280z]

24 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

Actually I wouldn't  mind Lazard either but he is like a 3 really. He does the dirty work on that team. Also catch % is probably the most unreliable stat you can go by. Some of the passes that Wilson dirted this season were recorded as drops because they were near the recievers feet. That said, Davis dropped a bunch of passes that hit him in his hands.

Also want to add, MVS is the guy that is going out for the home run balls. Deep passes don't  connect a lot of times. 

Like I said he's fine, but he's not a better player than Davis.  I wouldn't spend on guys like him, draft WRs or sign higher level FAs.

[Smashmouth]

On 2/8/2022 at 8:51 AM, Warfish said:

In discussing WR quite a bit of late, specifically the Berrios issue, it's pretty clear......our WR room sucks today.  Davis (meh) and Moore (mostly hope).

Mims, bust.  Cole, gone.  Crowder, likely gone.  Berrios, maybe gone too.  The rest on our roster, unworthy of discussion.

We have a rookie, who had a piss poor year, in Wilson, and we're looking today at having very little to help him at the skill positions.

We're not signing one of the elite WR's, for many reasons stated elsewhere, but be assured, we are not signing Adams or Robinson or those kind of guys.  

So......how do we do the most we can to support Wilson, the KEY to this franchises immediate future?

I would offer up that drafting WR at BOTH #4 and #10 might be one way to really kick this Offense, and Wilson, into gear.

Ignoring trade downs (just for now), we could likely get the top 2 rated WR's in this draft class, and (I'd hope) cement WR as a strength for years to come.

Lets consider, and for giggles say we draft Garrett Wilson (an amazing route runner comps. to DC's McLaurin) and Drake London (a big, powerful WR, the best contested ball/possession guy in this class).

That would give us Davis/Moore/Wilson/London as our 4 WR set.  There is no universe wher ethat group should be a weakness, or that Wilson should not be 100% supported at WR with that group.

Yes, this would come at a cost, no edge at #4.  We'd have to go edge (perhaps) at the top of the 2nd, and maybe TE with the other 2nd.  D would suffer, and maybe have to be filled in via cheaper FA's.

Is there any argument that this is the way to go for this franchise, to take a huge step towards making the Jets (and Wilson) an Offensive team with real skill players around Wilson?

Thoughts.

With the FA that are available i would have to say no we need to target one in the draft and one in FA with both being capable number 1 wr

[Claymation]

ok and what about next year? and the year after that? 
what if were picking at 15 and the BAP is another OL at a spot we could use one. 
at least at 4 we have the whole draft in front of us. i find it hard to believe we couldnt get a good player thats not an OL.
JD backed himself in a corner by drafting 2 OL two years in a row. if he goes for a 3rd then i dont care if Anthony Munoz or Nick Mangold clones are there when we pick we cant do it for a 4th year. 
we might have to get Wilson. i just seen a mock from CBS that has the Giants taking him at 7. depends on how we feel about him but if you dont want to lose him then take him at 4.
and i would take Hamilton before those guys you mentioned. we are paper thin at safety and the OL was a strength last year. and if we have to trade one cause were not going to pay him i think we get more for a safety then an OL.

Just Drafting BAP is the Macagnan way of doing things. Drafting BAP at a position of need is what good teams do. In your scenario at 15, which would be a good sign for this organization, they would look at prospects with 1st round grades at positional value. So a center wouldn’t have the same value as an edge or CB. Also, this draft hasn’t even happened yet, why are you worried about next year’s draft.

And one last thing, a good OL keeps your QB upright and they are responsible for the running game therefore keeping the other’s team offense off the field.

This franchise has been directionless for over 10 years, they finally have a solid GM and Coach that have an idea on how to move this franchise forward. Daniel Jeremiah on the PFF podcast with Ari Mervov just said the Jets and the Vikings are teams that will see significant amount of improvements this upcoming season.

[doitny]

5 hours ago, Claymation said:

Just Drafting BAP is the Macagnan way of doing things. Drafting BAP at a position of need is what good teams do. In your scenario at 15, which would be a good sign for this organization, they would look at prospects with 1st round grades at positional value. So a center wouldn’t have the same value as an edge or CB. Also, this draft hasn’t even happened yet, why are you worried about next year’s draft.

And one last thing, a good OL keeps your QB upright and they are responsible for the running game therefore keeping the other’s team offense off the field.

This franchise has been directionless for over 10 years, they finally have a solid GM and Coach that have an idea on how to move this franchise forward. Daniel Jeremiah on the PFF podcast with Ari Mervov just said the Jets and the Vikings are teams that will see significant amount of improvements this upcoming season.

but your doing exactly what Mac did. your using BAP . your looking at it as 22 positions instead of position groups. thats how you get Adams and Maye back to back.

what your doing is the same as when we picked 4 DL in 5 years. 

2011 : Mo : ok we picked 30th and needed one

2012: Coples. we need and Edge

2013: Richarson. well the other DT is a position of need....... sound familiar? 

2015: Leo. well the other Edge is a position of need...... again with that line...

and a good GM always worries about the future. you have to think your 1st rd picks will be good. so your looking at 18-20 mil each for 3 guys. thats almost 60 mil for 3 spots. were not paying that. and since were not then why draft a 4 year rental. 

Cincy paying their entire OL 12 players at 29.4 mil. the Rams with 7 players are paying 26 mil for 12. mil. 

yes the OL is important. you just dont have to invest 1st rd picks into it. or in this case overload on it.

so who are you replacing, the RG? LDT played well last year. your not moving the needle that much that you couldnt do with a FA or late round pick. 

we put no pressure on the QB. our safeties were horrible. Zach needs another WR. we have no TE. those positions are more in dire need that OL. 

[Maxman]

On 2/8/2022 at 10:00 AM, AFJF said:

Nope.  Wouldn't even take one at 10.  

Moore is a stud.  Davis will be fine.  Add a TE and a slot early with another WR in the middle rounds and you're good to go.

Pick 4 should be OL and 10 used on edge or to trade down.

 

Yeah I am leaning towards something similar myself, not that I get a vote haha.  I want them to bring Berrios back not that it changes the front end of the depth chart by doing that.

I am in the minority in that I am hoping they can trade back at 4.  Trade down a bit and get another first rounder next year.

Edge - WR - TE - OL ---- first two rounds.

CB is round three but sign a veteran that can start in free agency.

 

[Augustiniak]

3 minutes ago, Maxman said:

Yeah I am leaning towards something similar myself, not that I get a vote haha.  I want them to bring Berrios back not that it changes the front end of the depth chart by doing that.

I am in the minority in that I am hoping they can trade back at 4.  Trade down a bit and get another first rounder next year.

Edge - WR - TE - OL ---- first two rounds.

CB is round three but sign a veteran that can start in free agency.

 

I can also see them targeting Lloyd at 10, as someone to anchor the D when Mosley leaves. Although many here are against it i think there is a realistic chance they go D 2x in round 1, even if they trade back.  I think this scenario would be more realistic if they’re able to land a wr or OL in FA.

[section314]

4 minutes ago, Maxman said:

Yeah I am leaning towards something similar myself, not that I get a vote haha.  I want them to bring Berrios back not that it changes the front end of the depth chart by doing that.

I am in the minority in that I am hoping they can trade back at 4.  Trade down a bit and get another first rounder next year.

Edge - WR - TE - OL ---- first two rounds.

CB is round three but sign a veteran that can start in free agency.

 

Max...today it seems like that would be for Thibs, Ekwono or Hamilton, and we have no idea if any of those would be our guy if there. I'm guessing at least one of them would be. No rocket science here, but really need a QB or two to start lighting it up. 

[Warfish]

12 minutes ago, Maxman said:

• I want them to bring Berrios back
• I am hoping they can trade back at 4, get another first rounder next year.
• Edge - WR - TE - OL ---- first two rounds.
• CB is round three but sign a veteran that can start in free agency.

Gonna be honest Max, I don't think you're "in the minority" on any of these positions.

[slimjasi]

I agree with the general sentiment. 

I don't think there is a WR we would realistically take at #4, but if we don't trade for or sign a significant WR before the draft, I would have no issues with this, myself. 

However, my prediction is that we trade for an established vet WR and then pick another WR at 10. 

[Claymation]

1 hour ago, doitny said:

but your doing exactly what Mac did. your using BAP . your looking at it as 22 positions instead of position groups. thats how you get Adams and Maye back to back.

what your doing is the same as when we picked 4 DL in 5 years. 

2011 : Mo : ok we picked 30th and needed one

2012: Coples. we need and Edge

2013: Richarson. well the other DT is a position of need....... sound familiar? 

2015: Leo. well the other Edge is a position of need...... again with that line...

and a good GM always worries about the future. you have to think your 1st rd picks will be good. so your looking at 18-20 mil each for 3 guys. thats almost 60 mil for 3 spots. were not paying that. and since were not then why draft a 4 year rental. 

Cincy paying their entire OL 12 players at 29.4 mil. the Rams with 7 players are paying 26 mil for 12. mil. 

yes the OL is important. you just dont have to invest 1st rd picks into it. or in this case overload on it.

so who are you replacing, the RG? LDT played well last year. your not moving the needle that much that you couldnt do with a FA or late round pick. 

we put no pressure on the QB. our safeties were horrible. Zach needs another WR. we have no TE. those positions are more in dire need that OL. 

No I'm not, Ikem and Neal are Tackles and its still a position of need. Now Ikem and Neal can play RG this year and be pushed to the outside next year. Hutch is definitely worth the pick. Thib isn't even worth a 10th. I don't want a safety at 4, I don't think there is a CB worth taking in the 1st. 

Now as you know, the Jets just don't have one pick in the top 38, they have 4.  They can address Edge, TE, WR and LB with the other 3 picks. 

Cincy's OL sucks balls, Rams have a cap number of 27 million for next year for just Havenstein and Whitworth. They have 9 players under contract next for their OL.

[AFJF]

9 hours ago, Maxman said:

Yeah I am leaning towards something similar myself, not that I get a vote haha.  I want them to bring Berrios back not that it changes the front end of the depth chart by doing that.

I am in the minority in that I am hoping they can trade back at 4.  Trade down a bit and get another first rounder next year.

Edge - WR - TE - OL ---- first two rounds.

CB is round three but sign a veteran that can start in free agency.

 

Hated the idea of moving down from 4 untill recently.  Deep class at some key spots.  Multiple picks on edge, TE and/or CB would be would be ideal.  

[Peace Frog]

 

Yes. 

[doitny]

9 hours ago, Claymation said:

No I'm not, Ikem and Neal are Tackles and its still a position of need. Now Ikem and Neal can play RG this year and be pushed to the outside next year. Hutch is definitely worth the pick. Thib isn't even worth a 10th. I don't want a safety at 4, I don't think there is a CB worth taking in the 1st. 

Now as you know, the Jets just don't have one pick in the top 38, they have 4.  They can address Edge, TE, WR and LB with the other 3 picks. 

Cincy's OL sucks balls, Rams have a cap number of 27 million for next year for just Havenstein and Whitworth. They have 9 players under contract next for their OL.

you must think Fant wont get extended. cause if he does there is no way we draft a Tackle. not at 4. and we dont have the luxury to do that in case Becton fails. our roster is too crappy for that. or the Luxury to play him out of position for a few years until Fants extension is up.

and i disagree that Tackle is a need. we have 2 right now. and RG can be gotten in the later rds or FA. we dont need to use that high of a pick on it.

they mock 7-8 Edges and WRs to go in rd 1. if you take a WR at 10 we probably get the #1 guy. you wait till rd 2 for Edge we get the 8th or 9th best guy.

i dont care how deep this draft is on Edge, the 9th guy is no where near the 2nd or 3rd best Edge in skill. and we act like Lawson is LT. the guy had 5.5 sacks last year. we really need a 2nd Edge. a really good one. 

your right Cincys OL sucks, and yet there in the SB. i know its the QB. thats the point. i dont remember Mahomes, Herbert, Watson, Allen, etc. load up the Line with 1st rd picks to protect their rookie QBs. 

people make the Josh Allen comparisons. they say Zach can turn it around like he did. there right.

they say we need to get a WR like Diggs for Zach.... there right.

Buffalo has not used not one 1st rd pick on the Line. instead, they used it to build a kick ass defense. and that served Allen better than drafting OL. 

White , Johnson and Flacco threw for 400 and 300 yds each. the OL was good enough for them its good enough for Zach. and we did that all with only one 1st rd pick (AVT) . if anyone needs to be replaced it dont need to be drafted in rd 1.

 

[Origen]

IF the players were there that were worth it.

[Maxman]

3 hours ago, AFJF said:

Hated the idea of moving down from 4 untill recently.  Deep class at some key spots.  Multiple picks on edge, TE and/or CB would be would be ideal.  

With the top 5 being so uncertain right now I am okay trading that. After the combine it gets harder. 

I am hoping the QBs climb like they always do. Someone wants Pickett at # 4, make it happen. Trade down in the first, get a 2nd as well this year and a first next year.    Nice to dream.

[BurnleyJet]

You didn’t get the memo, Green bean said where going Safety at 4..

[AFJF]

9 hours ago, BurnleyJet said:

You didn’t get the memo, Green bean said where going Safety at 4..

After watching more of Hamilton I'd be more comfortable with that than I was before, but still think it's Edge or OT at 4.

[BurnleyJet]

6 hours ago, AFJF said:

After watching more of Hamilton I'd be more comfortable with that than I was before, but still think it's Edge or OT at 4.

I think Jermaine Johnson could be the pick.

[AFJF]

3 hours ago, BurnleyJet said:

I think Jermaine Johnson could be the pick.

At 4?  Interesting.  Don't think he'll there at 10.

[BurnleyJet]

18 hours ago, AFJF said:

At 4?  Interesting.  Don't think he'll there at 10.

He was unblockable during the senior bowl practice. He’s going to blow the combine up.