Fowler: League executives believe DK is available

[Rhg1084]

20 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

I'd rather have lockett.

Metcalfe is a lose cannon, lockett is really good

No way, Lockett is 30 years old. DK is 24 and a much better player 

[Dcat]

45 minutes ago, Joe W. Namath said:

Why did the Jets make Jamal Adams available?  Cause they knew he was a selfish diva and wasnt worth the money.  Red flags were there.

And now Jet fans want to get hosed by the seahawks or titans and fall for the same thing.  Just unreal.

as if you "know" that it's the "same thing".

You don't.

[oatmeal]

24 minutes ago, slats said:

What I see is that Joe Douglas sees WR as a major need and that if he can’t trade for a top vet he will need to draft one high. 

This, kinda common sense tbh

No matter how much you like players in the draft they are still lotto tickets until proven otherwise.
 

That’s why I don’t get the obsession around here with freaking draft picks 

[CanadaSteve]

2 hours ago, Rhg1084 said:

JD can’t miss out on him too. If we could get him trading both our 2nd rounders would be awesome. I’d even give them pick 10. Should be interesting 

NOT A CHANCE for #10.

However....JD could get creative here.  He could move down in the draft now to around 15 or so, regain an asset (such as a 2nd this year or a better pick next year) THEN trade with Seattle.  

[Rhg1084]

17 minutes ago, CanadienJetsFan said:

I’ll believe it, when I see it.

ignore the noise.

Well in fairness every rumor that has popped up this off-season turned out to be true. (Russell Wilson, Cooper, Davante, Tyreek)

[Jet_Engine1]

Send them 10 back for their Elite WR, then if necessary,  use 35 and 39(?) to jump back into 1 if necessary. 

Still 2 1st rounders, an Elite and proven NFL WR, and picks to spare. 

[Rhg1084]

4 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

NOT A CHANCE for #10.

However....JD could get creative here.  He could move down in the draft now to around 15 or so, regain an asset (such as a 2nd this year or a better pick next year) THEN trade with Seattle.  

Listen you’re probably right where 10 could be a bit much or an overpay. But at this point who cares, just bring in a big time WR for Zach. You still have 3 picks in the top 38 even with giving up 10

[DetroitRed]

1 hour ago, FidelioJet said:

I think the Jets and Seattle are in a stalemate.  Seattle doesn't seem to have any interest in paying him $30mm a year and the Jets do...but the Jets probably have an offer on the table that isn't what Seattle wants.  

Total guess, but Jets probably have the Hill offer on the table and Seattle probably wants their 1st rounder back.  

Question is, is there someone else willing to give up more than what the Jets are offering?  If not, JD just sits tight and eventually Seattle will take what's on the table.

 

I respect what you said in the last thread about it being ridiculous for them not to accept the Jet’s offer,  if its the best.  The problem is, there aren’t going to be too many teams bidding.  Its very possible the Jets are the only serious contender. And if they are in no hurry to trade him, they are going to make the Jets overpay.  Like the Adams situation.  They same GM is not going to be had again. I don’t see them doing this without something very close to their 2 ones , back in return 

[GreenFish]

2 hours ago, FidelioJet said:

I think the Jets and Seattle are in a stalemate.  Seattle doesn't seem to have any interest in paying him $30mm a year and the Jets do...but the Jets probably have an offer on the table that isn't what Seattle wants.  

Total guess, but Jets probably have the Hill offer on the table and Seattle probably wants their 1st rounder back.  

Question is, is there someone else willing to give up more than what the Jets are offering?  If not, JD just sits tight and eventually Seattle will take what's on the table.

 

Cant imagine DK gets $30m from anyone. He’s not better or more accomplished than Hill. Adams just got $28 per year and he's also better than DK.

[MBGreen]

4 minutes ago, Rhg1084 said:

Listen you’re probably right where 10 could be a bit much or an overpay. But at this point who cares, just bring in a big time WR for Zach. You still have 3 picks in the top 38 even with giving up 10

I would offer the same deal we offered KC for Tyreek as a starting point.  I'd prefer we get DK or AJ because they're both proven WR1s and they're still only 24.  But the caveat is that it has to be a sign & trade....you don't give up premium picks or the #10 for 1 year of either player.

Seattle/Tennessee may bite for the same pkg offered to KC....if not, then work your way up to 10 in the negotiation.  Just my .02

[CanadienJetsFan]

10 minutes ago, Rhg1084 said:

Well in fairness every rumor that has popped up this off-season turned out to be true. (Russell Wilson, Cooper, Davante, Tyreek)

And We haven’t nailed one yet. Coincidence?

All we’ve heard is “ the Jets are players”. rhetoric. That’s probably coming from agents to run up the price.

Players don’t want to come here yet. We need to begin winning first.

Dont worry, we’ll draft a WR1 in a months time anyway.

[varjet]

• Seattle really does not want to trade with the Jets, and will have a hard time getting less back from DK than they gave for Adams.
• Hill may be a better player, but DK is younger, has a year left on his rookie deal and can be franchised.  So if the Jets extend him, those cheaper years should be taken into account.  But DK does not have a say on where he is traded to (at least contractually).   So the 10 pick for DK is not ridiculous, assuming that DK actually shows up and plays for year 4.  So practically DK may need to agree on an extension before the trade.
• The Seahawks have no business paying DK $25mm+ (its not $30mm, but its $25mm+) without a real QB.  They need to draft another one and work toward their next QB.
• But yes, it does appear that JD does not have any confidence in the WRs he could get at 10.  At first glance that could indicate that he needs to pay more than 10, but DK actually will cost a lot more at 10.  
• I personally would take Drake London at 10 and pay him $8mm.  

[Spoot-Face]

@joewilly12:

[Lupz27]

1 hour ago, T0mShane said:

The bugaboo, as it’s been with all of these receiver trades, is that DK would have to choose to sign an extension with the Jets to make any trade compensation worthwhile.

Him and Moore are BFF’s I’m sure he would love to reunite.

[peekskill68]

46 minutes ago, slats said:

What I see is that Joe Douglas sees WR as a major need and that if he can’t trade for a top vet he will need to draft one high. 

No argument.  My only point is if JD saw the floor/ceiling of a guy like Wilson or London anywhere close to Metcalf why would he pay $25+ million a season and give up draft capital vs. just drafting them at #10 on a cheaper rookie deal?

[Ghost420]

32 minutes ago, Rhg1084 said:

No way, Lockett is 30 years old. DK is 24 and a much better player 

Lockett is a better wr than Metcalf. That being said in trading for Metcalf not lockett. 

[Jimmy 2 Times]

7 minutes ago, Lupz27 said:

Him and Moore are BFF’s I’m sure he would love to reunite.

I think AJ Brown and Moore are BFF's.

Not sure about DK.  

[Lupz27]

3 minutes ago, Jimmy 2 Times said:

I think AJ Brown and Moore are BFF's.

Not sure about DK.  

I could be wrong but I believe the 3 of them are bff’s.  All 3 played together at Ole Miss for a year.

[thebuzzardman]

2 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

LOL, Packer people

More like pecker people 

[freestater]

34 minutes ago, Jet_Engine1 said:

Send them 10 back for their Elite WR, then if necessary,  use 35 and 39(?) to jump back into 1 if necessary. 

Still 2 1st rounders, an Elite and proven NFL WR, and picks to spare. 

[65 Toss Power Trap]

3 hours ago, Rhg1084 said:

JD can’t miss out on him too. If we could get him trading both our 2nd rounders would be awesome. I’d even give them pick 10. Should be interesting 

Do what it takes.

[Beerfish]

48 minutes ago, Rhg1084 said:

No way, Lockett is 30 years old. DK is 24 and a much better player 

And he will cost much more and is showing signs of being ahead case

Locket has 3 1000 plus seasons the last three years and 26 tds in that time, 255 catches

metcalfe 1 1000 plus seasons, 28 tds, 216 catches.

With all that each players brings as in , cost to acquire, attitude risk and cost of next contract, I'd prefer lockett.

 

 

[NIGHT STALKER]

2 hours ago, FidelioJet said:

I hear you, but if it's just #10 and nothing more I pull the trigger.  You're taking a WR there anyway.  

Taking a WR anyway doesn't really mean much.  As I've said in other threads, DK is a proven WR.  Who knows for sure what Wilson, London or any other WR's draft will bring.  Johnny Lam Jones says hello.

[Jet Nut]

1 hour ago, Rhg1084 said:

Well we’d obviously still have pick 4. Then even if we do give up 10 in the DK trade that means we still have our two high 2nd rd picks. Douglas could even package those together to move back into the 1st to grab the guy he wants. Lots of flexibility 

I agree with that.  

[Jimmy 2 Times]

3 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

And he will cost much more and is showing signs of being ahead case

Locket has 3 1000 plus seasons the last three years and 26 tds in that time, 255 catches

metcalfe 1 1000 plus seasons, 28 tds, 216 catches.

With all that each players brings as in , cost to acquire, attitude risk and cost of next contract, I'd prefer lockett.

 

 

Lockett is probably the better fit for the system too.  

I'd take the offer we gave to KC and give it to the Titans for AJ.  It that fails, I'd target Lockett and still draft a receiver high. 

[jetstream23]

I think I’d only give them the # 10 if the Jets can also get back another mid round pick, something like a 3rd or 4th rounder, that would let them add a decent RB or TE prospect. Those are the rounds I’m looking for those positions.

[jetstream23]

6 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

And he will cost much more and is showing signs of being ahead case

Locket has 3 1000 plus seasons the last three years and 26 tds in that time, 255 catches

metcalfe 1 1000 plus seasons, 28 tds, 216 catches.

With all that each players brings as in , cost to acquire, attitude risk and cost of next contract, I'd prefer lockett.

 

 

Doesn’t Lockett have a bad contract?

[Jet Nut]

20 minutes ago, thebuzzardman said:

More like pecker people 

Pecker heads

[ryu79]

35 minutes ago, varjet said:

• Seattle really does not want to trade with the Jets, and will have a hard time getting less back from DK than they gave for Adams.
• Hill may be a better player, but DK is younger, has a year left on his rookie deal and can be franchised.  So if the Jets extend him, those cheaper years should be taken into account.  But DK does not have a say on where he is traded to (at least contractually).   So the 10 pick for DK is not ridiculous, assuming that DK actually shows up and plays for year 4.  So practically DK may need to agree on an extension before the trade.
• The Seahawks have no business paying DK $25mm+ (its not $30mm, but its $25mm+) without a real QB.  They need to draft another one and work toward their next QB.
• But yes, it does appear that JD does not have any confidence in the WRs he could get at 10.  At first glance that could indicate that he needs to pay more than 10, but DK actually will cost a lot more at 10.  
• I personally would take Drake London at 10 and pay him $8mm.  

Agreed. Seattle wants no business with JD unless they can get a public win over him.

I hope London can run this week at his pro day and tests well. His film and stats are crazy and if he emerged as a real alternative for us would alleviate some of the pressure to do something dumb...

[CanadaSteve]

59 minutes ago, Rhg1084 said:

Listen you’re probably right where 10 could be a bit much or an overpay. But at this point who cares, just bring in a big time WR for Zach. You still have 3 picks in the top 38 even with giving up 10

And that's fair.  I am quite sure JD would look at #10 as fine, since he will probably draft a WR there anyway.  The only difference is DK is proven, but will have the instant high price tag rather than a rookie deal.

I am also sure JD would try and move down a few spots early, and say, "Listen, I don't have #10, but I would offer #15.  We shall see if he is really available.

 

[jetstream23]

2 hours ago, Dunnie said:

JD MUST play the long game here. We have ALL the leverage.

This goes back to a point I’ve been making for a little while. We keep hearing about these amazing WR drafts, year after year. 8, 12, 15 new rookies coming into the NFL almost every year. Well, three or four years later those guys start to hit free agency or become available via trade. My personal feeling is that while wide receivers are very important there is also a pretty good supply of them.

Look at how many big-name WRs are on the move this year. Allen Robinson, Davante Adams, Tyreek Hill, Robert woods, Amari Cooper, and others rumored to be available at this moment via trade.

The Jets can’t make a panic move. JD has shown he will be aggressive as evidenced by his pursuit of Tyreek Hill, but he shouldn’t overpay and he doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who will.

Who are we expecting to be free agents next year at wide receiver?

[Bronxville Jets Fan]

3 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

He sure can miss out on Metcalf if the Seahawks ask for the same comp as what they paid for Adams

No deal, DJ isnt Hill, doesnt deserve the same deal the Jets offered for Hill

DK is 4 years younger than Hill.  I think that makes up the difference in talent between the two.

[Barry McCockinner]

It's going to be a draft day trade when the QB the Seahawks want is available at #4.

#4, #38 & #69 for #9 & DK Metcalf

 

[Paradis]

2 hours ago, The Crusher said:

If we do get DK then we can go edge, linebacker, OL and TE first two days. No particular order. Yes, I think we still draft a TE. I do. Least since want to. Should I? I Excise me Mr. @Paradis feel free to comment, yes I’m taking to you. Should I? Still very confusing, but I think they should, 

Why yes! Of course I ought to be here! …CJ and Conk are coming off bubble seasons and will due for now, but we still draft our own Kelce

 

[David Harris]