Jump to content

The Mystery of Laken Tomlinson's Sudden Decline


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, rangerous said:

Maybe Tomlinson is the oline equivalent of wilky? He got what should be his final big contract and just didn’t play as hard as he should have. It didn’t help that the jets didn’t have anyone to replace him. And it could also be he didn’t have really good players next to him.  Remember fant looked great when was next to avt. So the jets will have to eat his contract for next season. He’ll be an overpriced back up.

They are likely going to cut him post June 1 and eat $4.3M in dead cap space in 2023 and 2024.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Tank properly in 2020.  It was sitting right there for us.

Barring that, I'd have traded down AND still traded Darnold.  Grab Minshew as a bridge QB.  Or stayed put and taken Fields at 2. 

These were all things I and others wanted to see happen at the time so this isn't just hindsight talking, either.

 

@jgb

It's really an interesting psychological and organizational question why so many franchises fail to appropriately back up highly-drafted young QBs, especially after 1-2 seasons of bad tape. Consider there is no evidence that sitting or playing right away, or facing a camp competition or not, alters a QB's likelihood of success or failure. So what is the reason?

I have some theories, maybe it's a combination of some, all, or none of these:

  • The team honestly believes in good faith that they nailed the pick and therefore resources spent on backups are unnecessary and poor team management. Even if you believe this, players do get hurt and QBs are supremely important.
  • The GM does not want to send any signal that he is not fully confident that he nailed the pick. Perhaps he worries about the owner's reaction, media, or fans. Probably the most valid reason. Everyone has bosses/stakeholders. Yet, this reason is still not credible -- all GM has to do is say "I'm fully confident in QB's ability but I can't guarantee his health. I brought in Backup QB in case there is an injury so we can still win games."
  • The team believes that the rookie will suffer in some way due to the presence of a quality QB on the roster. The "confidence" angle. If a QB can't share the QB room with a competent player or even tangle in a camp battle without suffering a crisis of confidence, that's not a guy who can lead a team to a road victory in Buffalo in January.
  • The team does not see itself as a contender and has committed to making the season all about the young QB's development. Ok... I buy this argument somewhat but it comes with the risk that the QB gets hurt, royally stinks, or the team is better than anticipated and you need another option to turn to. This strategy is basically a big middle finger to the other 53 guys on the roster -- "You and your development do not matter this year. If QB goes down, the season becomes meaningless. Thanks for risking your health and future career, though."
  • The GM loves the other untested options in the QB room and wants to carry them all. Bad team management not to have someone on the roster with experience. These guys are known-quantities and have an effect on the QB room beyond their play. But show me a GM who nails 3 QB pickups at the same time and give him a lifetime contract immediately.
  • GM knows he's getting fired anyway if his highly-drafted QB busts so might as well invest every penny on putting him in the best position to exceed. The self-preservation angleThis one resonates and probably does explain some GM choices. Nevertheless... there's a big difference between backing up your QB with a say -- Trevor Siemen -- and Luke Falk. It's also short-sighted. Bill Polian got the boot after 13 years at the helm and drafting Peyton Manning because Curtis Painter was so, so, so bad. 
  • GM are slaves to custom and teams just don't traditionally invest in the backup position. Maybe, probably. Also a really bad idea for lots of reasons, one of which being that at any moment your ironman starter could lose two games to a concussion in this day and age.
  • GMs are dumb and doing it wrong. Too simple and I don't buy it. These guys have achieved the top of their profession. Absent a few outliers that are utterly incompetent (Macc), I must assume they are rational and knowledgeable.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OtherwiseHappyinLife said:

But remember that the next QB class was not great and the cost of acquiring an elite franchise QB via the trade market is extremely high = 3 first round picks plus an annual contract north of $35M per year.  

Key question for you:  Do you believe the Jets need an elite franchise QB?  If not, then the trade down at the very least allows you to acquire premium talent at other premium positions.  

Regarding these 2 points:

1) You don't reach for a QB prospect in one class just because the next year's class doesn't look promising to you at the time.  That's how you end up with Christian Hackenberg when you could have gotten Pat Mahomes.  Take each QB class one at a time.  If you have to wait 3 years to draft a QB you like, then wait 3 years.  Don't reach.  Ever.

2) No, I don't think the Jets need an ELITE franchise QB to make a deep playoff run, but they do need someone they can count on for at least a few years in a row.  Short of that, they at least need a solid veteran bridge QB in the QB room regardless of who else is in there.  Zigging while others are zagging (I.E. saving money at the QB position without a ton of dropoff and spending elsewhere) isn't a terrible route to take if you can't find the next Mahomes, Burrow or Allen.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jgb said:
  • The team does not see itself as a contender and has committed to making the season all about the young QB's development. Ok... I buy this argument somewhat but it comes with the risk that the QB gets hurt, royally stinks, or the team is better than anticipated and you need another option to turn to. This strategy is basically a big middle finger to the other 53 guys on the roster -- "You and your development do not matter this year. If QB goes down, the season becomes meaningless. Thanks for risking your health and future career, though."

Obviously we got hit by this one.  I used to think there was no point in investing heavily in a QB2 because of the Parcells ideology:  "If you have 2 QBs, you have NO QBs" and if the QB1 went down your season was sunk regardless, so what's the point?

History has proven that to not always be correct.  Some teams have a Nick Foles type QB sitting on their bench and go on a deep run or win a title that way.  Douglas was in Philly when that very thing happened, so its even more perplexing why he, specifically, didn't invest more in the QB2 spot. 

Minshew could easily have been that guy for us.  Why not?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Laken is a major problem.  There were no signs this season that he can function as an average guard in the league which makes it even worse. 

He is top 5 paid player on the team deliver below the levels of Brian Winters, Alex Lewis, Greg Van Roten.

Despite conflicting reports, its clear that it would be difficult to cut him in 2023. 

Joe Douglas usually sets things up to have a solution to player not working out.  An aggressive off-season in 2022 has left us with a sub-par guard being paid like top 5 at the position (and a sub par safety that will be at ~10m/ year.)  I like Douglas, and like his process.  The outcome on Laken really sucks...

I do wonder if the Laken signing (and to some extent Zach) impacts how much weight Douglas puts in the input of the coaching staff going forward.  Put simply, I think Joe D will take the opinions of the coaching staff less seriously going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Irish Jet said:

Playing next to Trent Williams and having great coaching helps.

I really wished the Jets had traded for him when the Redskins made him available. He's arguably been the best OL in the league over the last 3 years. 

If you look at what the 49ers gave up, the Jets realistically could have had Trent Williams at LT and Tristan Wirfs at RT, but thank god our OL savant Joe Douglas helped the Jets avoid that. 

https://www.nfl.com/news/niners-acquire-redskins-tackle-trent-williams-in-trade-0ap3000001111403

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Irish Jet said:

Playing next to Trent Williams and having great coaching helps.

Conversely, playing next to a rotating group of LTs and a very mediocre C can make any LG look bad. You take away your best runner, and have predictable play calling, and you doom the OL to looking bad. JD def. overpaid for him, but what was he going to do? The OL was not great before the injuries. He threw money at the problem until he could fix it with the draft and everyone was trying to sign OL - seller's market.

If he is still on the team next year and we get some upgrades (C IMO), he might be serviceable next year. Hell, if we get back AVT and Brown can get healthy and we get better play calling, the whole OL will be much improved. There were OL playing the last 2 weeks who I had not heard up. I think I heard that the last game made the 10th combination on OL.

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

×
×
  • Create New...