Jump to content

Braxton Re-signed!


extmenace
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, jetstream23 said:

 

 

 

 

 

This girl's constant tweeting every day since the end of the season made it happen.  Maybe JD just got so annoyed with her that he signed Berrios? lol

But she may be the real MVP here of getting Braxton's deal done.

 

 

 

Boom!

He lit her up and sent her a killer shoutout.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

WR is still a critical need. Draft at least 2 in rounds 1-3.

They're not drafting two of them by round 3.
I'd expect at #10 - or later if they trade down from there, or one of their high round 2 picks at the latest - but there'll probably be another lower-end veteran signing after the dust settles. They didn't sign Berrios at $6MM/year be the WR5/6. If they do take a second one it'll be in/around round 5 (or later, since I'm still expecting him to trade down in at least one spot). 

Also possible the team hasn't 100% given up on Mims yet. 96%, yeah maybe, but not 100% lol. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

They're not drafting two of them by round 3.
I'd expect at #10 - or later if they trade down from there, or one of their high round 2 picks at the latest - but there'll probably be another lower-end veteran signing after the dust settles. They didn't sign Berrios at $6MM/year be the WR5/6. If they do take a second one it'll be in/around round 5 (or later, since I'm still expecting him to trade down in at least one spot). 

Also possible the team hasn't 100% given up on Mims yet. 96%, yeah maybe, but not 100% lol. 

 

I’m all for building depth at positions that are important and where the Jets are typically always hurt at. If two rookie receivers squeeze someone else out of the rotation, that’s a good thing.  Having Berrios as your 1 bc of injuries is bad. Less important position but the same goes for RB. They need to draft these guys every year. Stop worrying about DB’s and rotational DT’s.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

They're not drafting two of them by round 3.
I'd expect at #10 - or later if they trade down from there, or one of their high round 2 picks at the latest - but there'll probably be another lower-end veteran signing after the dust settles. They didn't sign Berrios at $6MM/year be the WR5/6. If they do take a second one it'll be in/around round 5 (or later, since I'm still expecting him to trade down in at least one spot). 

Also possible the team hasn't 100% given up on Mims yet. 96%, yeah maybe, but not 100% lol. 

 

I do expect 2 pass catchers in rounds 2-3.  One of them being a TE.  

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

4 hours ago, Matt39 said:

I’m all for building depth at positions that are important and where the Jets are typically always hurt at. If two rookie receivers squeeze someone else out of the rotation, that’s a good thing.  Having Berrios as your 1 bc of injuries is bad. Less important position but the same goes for RB. They need to draft these guys every year. Stop worrying about DB’s and rotational DT’s.

Worry shmurry. They need another starting LB more than they need a WR5. WR5 isn’t a “critical need” imo, let alone a rookie WR5.

If someone sticks out as a can’t-pass-on prospect, yeah I’ve got no problem with that. But there’s depth and there’s depth. They need starters at other positions more than a 5th/6th wideout who’ll work with the QB almost never, and odds are will be the one who’s squeezed out unless they chose so poorly in round 1 and is better - as a rookie - than the 3 returning WRs. And Mr. Mims lol. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Worry shmurry. They need another starting LB more than they need a WR5. WR5 isn’t a “critical need” imo, let alone a rookie WR5.

If someone sticks out as a can’t-pass-on prospect, yeah I’ve got no problem with that. But there’s depth and there’s depth. They need starters at other positions more than a 5th/6th wideout who’ll work with the QB almost never, and odds are will be the one who’s squeezed out unless they chose so poorly in round 1 and is better - as a rookie - than the 3 returning WRs. And Mr. Mims lol. 

Moore and Davis staying healthy is unlikely. I’m factoring that in too. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Moore and Davis staying healthy is unlikely. I’m factoring that in too. 

Teams don’t draft a WR5 before drafting starters out of fear of two simultaneous WR injuries

If Moore and Davis are both injured at the same time again, then you’re still just talking about a 3rd WR and most likely for 1-3 games at that (if even that many). Also it’s different than last year since they’ll have 2 TEs and last year they had zero, so any WR injury was magnified that much more. 

So I still say the only way they should look to drafting a 2nd rookie WR as early as round 3 is if it’s a pure BAP selection (and I’m 100% behind them if that’s what they do) — but it’d be value-based because they just couldn’t pass up on the guy they took; not a purely position-based pick.

Really, they’ll be fine even if they don’t draft two of them.

  1. R1 rookie WR (or could be top of R2)
  2. Moore
  3. Davis
  4. Berrios
  5. R2 rookie TE
  6. Uzomah
  7. Probably another cheap veteran WR

Really, this is enough that they aren’t painted into a corner to draft another WR in round 3 as though they’d be in “critical need” territory.

  • Upvote 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, doitny said:

they will be back way before then. probably by Wednesday when we dont get a #1 WR

The Jets have 3 WRs who have potential, but all need to take big a step forward in different ways.   That’s far from from a given.    

Dangerous roll of the dice at an important position but everything else looks like there is a good plan, so I’ll wait and see.  Free agent WR or not.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Would have been worth every Penny and that’s a long way away from Christian Kirk money, ya goof.

lol no way that is where we disagree, I'm a Joe Douglas type and you are a Macc type....as time has shown us your approach does not work in the long run. Even if you get a good player giving money for moneys sake is not worth it. CJ mosely is perfect example. Macc just kept piling on the cash until he left Baltimorewell anyway we just disagree. 

You have to be glad we didnt have to overpay him,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BornJetsFan1983 said:

lol no way that is where we disagree, I'm a Joe Douglas type and you are a Macc type....

Oh GTFO with that sir.  I was ripping on Mike Maccagnan years before he finally got fired, and have been known as one of Douglas' biggest supporters.  

Me being willing to spend an extra $1-$2M on a valuable slot receiver/returner does not put me in a pro-Macc / anti-Douglas camp, and you can kindly GFY for suggesting this.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Oh GTFO with that sir.  I was ripping on Mike Maccagnan years before he finally got fired, and have been known as one of Douglas' biggest supporters.  

Me being willing to spend an extra $1-$2M on a valuable slot receiver/returner does not put me in a pro-Macc / anti-Douglas camp, and you can kindly GFY for suggesting this.

yet you want to overspend on guys, One of the biggest thingJoe doesnt do and Macc did.

I think it squarely puts you in the Macc Camp. Over paying guys instead of sticking to yoru guns and paying guys what they are worth.

Im not sure what GFY means but Im sure it is just your mind breaking at the realization you would be Macc in the NFL and not like Joe.

 

  • Thumb Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BornJetsFan1983 said:

yet you want to overspend on guys, One of the biggest thingJoe doesnt do and Macc did.

I think it squarely puts you in the Macc Camp. Over paying guys instead of sticking to yoru guns and paying guys what they are worth.

Im not sure what GFY means but Im sure it is just your mind breaking at the realization you would be Macc in the NFL and not like Joe.

 

 

I was willing to "overspend" on ONE guy, not several. 

You are annoying.  GFY means "Go f**k yourself".  So go do that, please, instead of completely mischaracterizing my opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BornJetsFan1983 said:

yet you want to overspend on guys, One of the biggest thingJoe doesnt do and Macc did.

I think it squarely puts you in the Macc Camp. Over paying guys instead of sticking to yoru guns and paying guys what they are worth.

Im not sure what GFY means but Im sure it is just your mind breaking at the realization you would be Macc in the NFL and not like Joe.

 

It means "Get Flacco, immediatelY"

Used in a sentence:

"Hey JD, GFY!"

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

Just now, Jetsfan80 said:

 

I was willing to "overspend" on ONE guy, not several. 

You are annoying.  GFY means "Go f**k yourself".  So go do that, please, instead of completely mischaracterizing my opinions.

Mischaracterizing you would be like saying you drink coffee coffee all the time and wear dumb glasses while not knowing how to do your job.  

"overpaying just one guy" as you put it, is Macc - esk. and then crying about it is even more Macc - esk somehow

Be better.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...