Jaxon Smith-Njigba Should be Jets top Target in Round 1

[32EBoozer]

1 hour ago, Larz said:

Ok captain Smith, since you can’t even name the players you bailed out of an impact player for, I’m going to assume that you are just obsessed with the idea of accumulating picks and not going to expect a rational explanation for the strategery.  
 

This fantasy among jets fans that the draft is a deadline and JD has mjolnir is mind boggling.  I’m looking to get an impact player to help Rodgers beat the chiefs.  
 

I take the best oline at 13, then oline again at 43. Keeping Rodgers upright is the only thing that matters now. 
 

 

The position the Jets have utilized most of their visits for? That would be offensive tackle.

The Jets have used 3-of-10 top 30 visits on the offensive tackle position, bringing in Broderick Jones of Georgia, Anton Harrison of Oklahoma, and Tyler Steen of Alabama.

https://jetsxfactor.com/2023/04/17/ny-jets-top-30-visits-nfl-draft-2023/

You’re so focused on OT you can’t see the forest for the trees.

I named some players at positions of need, but I will expand upon my line of thought. With the likelihood of a 2nd going to GB & no 3rd, other than OT we have need of Center, DT, LB, Slot WR and Safety. Our 5th & 6th picks (#112 & #207) will need a LOT of development. That leaves essentially 3 picks to get quality ‘24 future starting level talent. An extra pick in rd. 2 can get you Mazi Smith & (you pick) Edge Ojulari, LB Henley, LB Jack Campbell, Center JMS or Tippmann, WR Downs etc….

All for moving down and selecting the Harrison, D. Jones, Mauch, Steen type tackle. Remember we also have Max Mitchell in the fold from last year.

You’re locked in on your #13 OT at all cost selection…I’m not.

[derp]

10 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

won't hurt my feelings if you put Tomlinson on the bench.

Restructuring Tomlinson to make him impossible to cut this year and cost a ton of dead money next year, only to draft a guard in the top 15 to put him on the bench, would be one of the more irresponsible sequences of events we’re seen. Doesn’t make sense given the sequence of events.

[bonkertons]

Unless the big OTs are gone I still think you gotta go that direction.  Not to say I wouldn't be excited about JSN and there for sure is upside in the 2nd round with guys like Mauch, Steen, Bergeron, etc.  However I think you have a better chance of finding an impact WR later on than you do of finding a starting OL.  Plus if you're investing heavy into your OL this draft(OT in the 1st, C in the 2nd, and assume the other 2nd is dealt for Rodgers), you're not just insulating AR, but you are building the foundation for his replacement.  Whether that's Zach or another kid 2 years from now.  Stepping into the starting job behind a line that features AVT, Broderick Jones, John Michael Schmitz, and potentially Becton(depending on how things go this year).  That's not a bad deal.  

 

IMO there will always be "sexier" options, but I really think this is the year we need to bite the bullet, have a "boring" draft, and solidify the OL for the present and future.  Who knows, maybe you can keep both 2nds and take a kid like Rashee Rice later on, or Josh Downs, or any number of solid prospects expected to be around in the 2nd.  That's not a bad WR group by any means.  Even if Davis goes in the AR trade.  

[Barry McCockinner]

9 minutes ago, derp said:

Restructuring Tomlinson to make him impossible to cut this year and cost a ton of dead money next year, only to draft a guard in the top 15 to put him on the bench, would be one of the more irresponsible sequences of events we’re seen. Doesn’t make sense given the sequence of events.

I think my preference is just that we take the most immediately impactful player in 2023 that is available at 13. We're shooting for a very short 1 (maaaaybe 2) year window here and should add as many difference makers to that window as we can. If we do take Skoronski, him making Tomlinson a backup isn't a terrible result. I do get what you're saying though.

I don't know that he would start over Becton or Brown though - I think that's doubtful.

[Augustiniak]

7 minutes ago, 32EBoozer said:

The position the Jets have utilized most of their visits for? That would be offensive tackle.

The Jets have used 3-of-10 top 30 visits on the offensive tackle position, bringing in Broderick Jones of Georgia, Anton Harrison of Oklahoma, and Tyler Steen of Alabama.

https://jetsxfactor.com/2023/04/17/ny-jets-top-30-visits-nfl-draft-2023/

You’re so focused on OT you can’t see the forest for the trees.

I named some players at positions of need, but I will expand upon my line of thought. With the likelihood of a 2nd going to GB & no 3rd, other than OT we have need of Center, DT, LB, Slot WR and Safety. Our 5th & 6th picks (#112 & #207) will need a LOT of development. That leaves essentially 3 picks to get quality ‘24 future starting level talent. An extra pick in rd. 2 can get you Mazi Smith & (you pick) Edge Ojulari, LB Henley, LB Jack Campbell, Center JMS or Tippmann, WR Downs etc….

All for moving down and selecting the Harrison, D. Jones, Mauch, Steen type tackle. Remember we also have Max Mitchell in the fold from last year.

You’re locked in on your #13 OT at all cost selection…I’m not.

Agreed in theory but the other thing is that word has it there’s maybe 15-17 players with 1st round grades.  So trading back and getting a guy at, say, 18, that you could also get at 30, isn’t great unless you really get enough draft capital in the trade.  

The worst thing the jets could do is trade for rodgers and not draft an OT for him for the 2 yrs he’d be here.  I do expect a trade back in round 2 and maybe even 3.  Maybe round 1, but that really depends on if the jets see much of a difference in the OTs and how many are on the board when they pick. NE could well take a tackle at 14.

[Warfish]

10 minutes ago, derp said:

Skoronski projects as a high end guard or an average tackle. Last prospect to project as a high end guard or average tackle was AVT. Jets took him to play at his better position - guard - and use as an emergency tackle. Maybe there’s a reason Skoronski is different and will be a better tackle, but I don’t think it’s something you want to 100% bank on. You want the iOL spot as a backup.

And if drafting a guard to start was on the table, they should’ve cut Tomlinson instead of restructuring him to make him impossible to cut. If they’d cut Tomlinson, Skoronski would’ve been an awesome pick to take a shot on because he’s easily the most technically sound guy in this class. Add a swing iOL prospect and see where everyone falls. But they didn’t do that.

Skoronski also came out of high school as a center, but didn’t play the position in college and would be the highest drafted center in a long, long time. Over 20 years, maybe more.

Douglas’ mistakes on the offensive line stem from forcing veteran depth, not leaving room for developmental prospects drafted in the mid rounds, and then leaving big holes he needs to spend serious capital on to fill instead of back filling with young talent on the roster. Feeling like they need to spend premium capital on a tackle this year is just a continuation of that process.

Skoronski is my guy because of his positional flexability.  I believe he would be a good player at any of the three positions, C, G or T.  A "Joe Klecko" of the O-line, if you will.

On a team with as flimsy an O-line as we have had in recent years, that kind of flexability, like AVT pre-injury, is worth it's weight in gold.

I think I said it elsewhere, yes, I think it's quite possible there are better pure OT options also available at #13, and I won't cry if that's who we choose.  But I really like Skor and I think he's gonna be a very solid, long-term Pro player.  

And while I'm not personally advocating for JSN at WR at #13, it would still be better than Defense at that spot.  With Rodgers, we need to provide two things, safety via O-line play, and weapons.  I prefer to protect early and weapons late this draft class, but we'll see.

My REAL unpopular opinion is that we might be best served with another RB in the 2nd, a HR hitter type, because with Hall mending, and Carter/Knight not good enough (IMO) that too would serve Rodgers well.  

But in reality, I got Skor int he firt, Center and DT or LB in the 2nd, WR or LB or DT in the fourth, and I try and snag the one FB available this draft with our late pick or in UDFA if we're lucky.

 

[jetfan40yrs]

12 hours ago, Paradis said:

jesus christ... JSN at #13, for the JETS???!!?! 

What are we doing.

Please don't write the name of the Lord Jesus Christ in vain.

[32EBoozer]

9 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

The worst thing the jets could do is trade for rodgers and not draft an OT for him for the 2 yrs he’d be here.  I do expect a trade back in round 2 and maybe even 3.  Maybe round 1, but that really depends on if the jets see much of a difference in the OTs and how many are on the board when they pick. NE could well take a tackle at 14.

Respectfully, I don’t know where, you’re getting your information. If a round one grade consists of starting immediately, then I agree. There may be only one or two offensive tackle that fit that mold. If that’s the case and they’re off the board, then let’s move down and get multiple players that have a good chance to start next year at linebacker, defensive tackle, Center, wide receiver, and Safety.

[32EBoozer]

9 minutes ago, jetfan40yrs said:

Please don't write the name of the Lord Jesus Christ in vain.

Agree wholeheartedly. 

[derp]

20 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Skoronski is my guy because of his positional flexability.  I believe he would be a good player at any of the three positions, C, G or T.  A "Joe Klecko" of the O-line, if you will.

On a team with as flimsy an O-line as we have had in recent years, that kind of flexability, like AVT pre-injury, is worth it's weight in gold.

I think I said it elsewhere, yes, I think it's quite possible there are better pure OT options also available at #13, and I won't cry if that's who we choose.  But I really like Skor and I think he's gonna be a very solid, long-term Pro player.  

And while I'm not personally advocating for JSN at WR at #13, it would still be better than Defense at that spot.  With Rodgers, we need to provide two things, safety via O-line play, and weapons.  I prefer to protect early and weapons late this draft class, but we'll see.

My REAL unpopular opinion is that we might be best served with another RB in the 2nd, a HR hitter type, because with Hall mending, and Carter/Knight not good enough (IMO) that too would serve Rodgers well.  

But in reality, I got Skor int he firt, Center and DT or LB in the 2nd, WR or LB or DT in the fourth, and I try and snag the one FB available this draft with our late pick or in UDFA if we're lucky.

 

The lack of a guard spot is something you're not addressing and very important. Skoronski's value is probably being a very high end guard, and the Jets can't play him there. That AVT can also kick out to tackle in a pinch and be capable reduces the value of another guard who can kick out to tackle in a pinch.

Let's say he's roughly the level of AVT to the point that there's not a meaningful difference between the two, and they don't want to take a position change to center with the 13th pick - which I don't think is an unreasonable expectation for him as a player. Probably the most likely scenario. That means he's worse than Brown and Becton at tackle by default. They're stuck with AVT and Tomlinson at guard. So he's your third/fourth tackle, third guard, and backup center.

That's valuable, but not something you take in the first round. If the goal is to have a super sub, take Cody Mauch in the second round - another short armed tackle who's got experience snapping at center.

I get that the offensive line was rough last year, but you're taking a guy in the first round because he projects as a high end guard (can't play him right away there) or a good to very good tackle. Using a pick to avoid catastrophe on the offensive line after last year strikes me as reactive, not proactive. And if the line needed that much help, they should've addressed it in free agency.

Also, the offensive line would almost certainly look better with Rodgers than Zach Wilson and two statues. 

[derp]

35 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

I think my preference is just that we take the most immediately impactful player in 2023 that is available at 13. We're shooting for a very short 1 (maaaaybe 2) year window here and should add as many difference makers to that window as we can. If we do take Skoronski, him making Tomlinson a backup isn't a terrible result. I do get what you're saying though.

I don't know that he would start over Becton or Brown though - I think that's doubtful.

I understand from a fan standpoint that an upgrade is an upgrade.

From a general manager standpoint, they knew Skoronski was in this draft class and likely projected to guard when they restructured Tomlinson in March. If you were the general manager and thought there was even the slightest chance you took Skoronski to replace Tomlinson, would you ever restructure Tomlinson - an expensive player - to lock yourself in to him for the year and make him expensive to cut next year? Or would you just let things roll with him and cut him to save money if you took Skoronski? They basically committed to Tomlinson at guard when they restructured him.

[RedBeardedSavage]

2 hours ago, derp said:

Those are all true statements but the end kind of gets to the point that a tackle at 13 is potentially a depth piece who’d be looked at to start next year. Absolutely important, not what we usually see with first round tackles.

And I don’t think it’s outside the realm of possibility that a first round pick would be fourth or fifth up at tackle. Jets needed that last year, but honestly if it’s that likely they’ll need it this year then they should’ve done something else in the veteran market.

It's a good point that we could take a mid-round developmental tackle that's depth this year with an eye towards starting next year.

It depends on the players available -

I don't see a good reason to pass on Paris Johnson or Broderick Jones, but I'd understand passing on Skoronski (because he's more a guard/swing tackle) and Darnell Wright (if the effort concerns are true).

I think it should be difficult for any of us to rely on Mekhi to play. Any game snaps he sees at this point is "above expected" considering his history. Then we're counting on Duane Brown and Max Mitchell? 

Sure, the tackle @ 13 might be a depth piece. But I have a sneaking suspicion that this dude will see significant playing time this year and be the starter after Mekhi + Brown are gone this offseason. 

It feels like many in this thread are almost ruling out tackle @ 13. I think it remains the most likely position to be drafted @ 13, but not guaranteed. 

[JiFtheOracle]

Dont love it, dont hate it, wouldnt do it, dont think it's the value, quite scary considering you're going off of 1 season 2 years ago and all his gaudy production came from the slot w/ two 1st round WR's on the outside getting juicy match ups in man or wide open in zone.  Just feels like a reach, he doesnt really do what WR's that get selected that high do, so you're kind of drafting him for a niche role in an offense.  idk.  Doesnt seem like the most sensible pick for the Jets.

 

 

[derp]

2 minutes ago, RedBeardedSavage said:

It's a good point that we could take a mid-round developmental tackle that's depth this year with an eye towards starting next year.

It depends on the players available -

I don't see a good reason to pass on Paris Johnson or Broderick Jones, but I'd understand passing on Skoronski (because he's more a guard/swing tackle) and Darnell Wright (if the effort concerns are true).

I think it should be difficult for any of us to rely on Mekhi to play. Any game snaps he sees at this point is "above expected" considering his history. Then we're counting on Duane Brown and Max Mitchell? 

Sure, the tackle @ 13 might be a depth piece. But I have a sneaking suspicion that this dude will see significant playing time this year and be the starter after Mekhi + Brown are gone this offseason. 

It feels like many in this thread are almost ruling out tackle @ 13. I think it remains the most likely position to be drafted @ 13, but not guaranteed. 

I think there's pushback on tackle - from me specifically - because so many seem to have it locked in. And because everyone seems to think a tackle automatically helps this year. Which, they might. But this is a raw tackle class and they already have two guys who have played well at the professional level, a guard who's been adequate when kicked out to tackle, and a second year player who they presumably like.

I get it. Depth is a question because the starters are injury prone, it's absolutely something that they need long-term, and I'd love it if the 2024 starting LT was already on the roster. But I don't think it's reasonable to assume that a tackle drafted at 13 helps the team this year at all this year and certainly not reasonable to assume that he's starting.

I also think if depth was that big of a problem - which I agree it's a big question - then maybe they should've addressed that in free agency. The idea of boxing yourself into a tackle who may or may not help this year at 13 because you're terrified of the guys you have penciled in at starters is silly to me. 

Johnson, I get. Jones has huge upside but needs a lot of technique work. So that one depends to me on what they think of him as a person, which I can't answer. Offensive line is hard - need to be mentally tough and put in a lot of time to get technique down. If they think Johnson or Jones will respond well to soaking up stuff from Duane Brown for a year and grind really hard - sweet. If there's any question, that's an awfully big swing to take with the 13th pick.

[derp]

2 minutes ago, JiF said:

Dont love it, dont hate it, wouldnt do it, dont think it's the value, quite scary considering you're going off of 1 season 2 years ago and all his gaudy production came from the slot w/ two 1st round WR's on the outside getting juicy match ups in man or wide open in zone.  Just feels like a reach, he doesnt really do what WR's that get selected that high do, so you're kind of drafting him for a niche role in an offense.  idk.  Doesnt seem like the most sensible pick for the Jets.

 

 

Biggest game by far came with those two sitting out. I get the concern, but he showed out in his opportunity to play without those guys.

[nycdan]

3 minutes ago, derp said:

I think there's pushback on tackle - from me specifically - because so many seem to have it locked in. And because everyone seems to think a tackle automatically helps this year. Which, they might. But this is a raw tackle class and they already have two guys who have played well at the professional level, a guard who's been adequate when kicked out to tackle, and a second year player who they presumably like.

I get it. Depth is a question because the starters are injury prone, it's absolutely something that they need long-term, and I'd love it if the 2024 starting LT was already on the roster. But I don't think it's reasonable to assume that a tackle drafted at 13 helps the team this year at all this year and certainly not reasonable to assume that he's starting.

I also think if depth was that big of a problem - which I agree it's a big question - then maybe they should've addressed that in free agency. The idea of boxing yourself into a tackle who may or may not help this year at 13 because you're terrified of the guys you have penciled in at starters is silly to me. 

Johnson, I get. Jones has huge upside but needs a lot of technique work. So that one depends to me on what they think of him as a person, which I can't answer. Offensive line is hard - need to be mentally tough and put in a lot of time to get technique down. If they think Johnson or Jones will respond well to soaking up stuff from Duane Brown for a year and grind really hard - sweet. If there's any question, that's an awfully big swing to take with the 13th pick.

My sense is that this is a two-year all-in push with Rodgers.  It's a lot to ask to win the SB in 2023 as opposed to one of the next two years.  Given that Duane Brown is likely not here in 2024, securing the Tackle spots for the next two years now feels like a solid option.  Easy to talk about picking up a FA, but good FA Tackles don't come along that often.  I'd say good WRs are easier to find than Tackles.

If we hit on an OT/C combination this draft like we did back in the Brick/Mangold days, then imagine that line next year with a fully healthy Breece Hall.  It would be a return to the 2010/2011 team only with (hopefully) a much better QB.

 

[Beerfish]

2 hours ago, Barton said:

I still can’t get over how JD needs to take another Olineman with a top 20 pick. It will be 3 in 4 years. Does he not have the ability to find capable plus starters in the 2nd or 3rd round? Free agency? Trade market? It shows his incompetence, IMO. 

The problem is when the previous gm drafted a net total of 3 olinman in 5 years we had nothing at all in the position.

The Becton and Cameron Clark flop picks really hurt.

 

 

 

 

[RedBeardedSavage]

1 minute ago, derp said:

I think there's pushback on tackle - from me specifically - because so many seem to have it locked in. And because everyone seems to think a tackle automatically helps this year. Which, they might. But this is a raw tackle class and they already have two guys who have played well at the professional level, a guard who's been adequate when kicked out to tackle, and a second year player who they presumably like.

I get it. Depth is a question because the starters are injury prone, it's absolutely something that they need long-term, and I'd love it if the 2024 starting LT was already on the roster. But I don't think it's reasonable to assume that a tackle drafted at 13 helps the team this year at all this year and certainly not reasonable to assume that he's starting.

I also think if depth was that big of a problem - which I agree it's a big question - then maybe they should've addressed that in free agency. The idea of boxing yourself into a tackle who may or may not help this year at 13 because you're terrified of the guys you have penciled in at starters is silly to me. 

Johnson, I get. Jones has huge upside but needs a lot of technique work. So that one depends to me on what they think of him as a person, which I can't answer. Offensive line is hard - need to be mentally tough and put in a lot of time to get technique down. If they think Johnson or Jones will respond well to soaking up stuff from Duane Brown for a year and grind really hard - sweet. If there's any question, that's an awfully big swing to take with the 13th pick.

I don't think we're far apart - essentially, if I understand correctly, you don't believe we're "locked-in" @ tackle and I don't believe we're "good at tackle, anyone @ 13 will only be a depth piece".

We agree if Paris Johnson is there, it's a no-brainer. If it's Broderick, we like the talent but he's raw and we don't know about the character (will he put in the work to develop or will always just rely on physical ability?)

I would've loved to add a tackle in FA, but that didn't happen and we're here now. 

But I mean, I look at the board and I don't see many other positions worth taking here? It's like JSN, if Jalen Carter drops, perhaps a DE (although, also a depth piece at this point) - and what else?

Granted, you know more about these things than I do - outside of tackle and JSN, who else is realistic at this spot?

[JiFtheOracle]

2 minutes ago, derp said:

Biggest game by far came with those two sitting out.

Yeah, totally ridiculous game, he still only had 1 reception not lined up in the slot.  And I think that game highlights more than any the wide open, wtf was the D doing, that I'm referring too, so that 1 game, doesnt really change my concerns.  He may be a fantastic player, I dont doubt it or wouldnt be surprised.  It just risky, IMO and I wouldnt do it because I think there will be better value than a slot WR.

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

My only question about him is contested catch ability at the next level.

Dude knows how to get open, find the spaces before and after the catch.

But the Jets also desperately need a long-term answer at OT.

I doubt JD even considers anything other than OT at #13…

[derp]

Just now, RedBeardedSavage said:

I don't think we're far apart - essentially, if I understand correctly, you don't believe we're "locked-in" @ tackle and I don't believe we're "good at tackle, anyone @ 13 will only be a depth piece".

We agree if Paris Johnson is there, it's a no-brainer. If it's Broderick, we like the talent but he's raw and we don't know about the character (will he put in the work to develop or will always just rely on physical ability?)

I would've loved to add a tackle in FA, but that didn't happen and we're here now. 

But I mean, I look at the board and I don't see many other positions worth taking here? It's like JSN, if Jalen Carter drops, perhaps a DE (although, also a depth piece at this point) - and what else?

Granted, you know more about these things than I do - outside of tackle and JSN, who else is realistic at this spot?

I don't think we're far apart either. I don't know if they're locked in at tackle, but I don't think they should be. And I think there's a wider range of outcomes for a tackle at 13 this year than the majority of board members seem to believe. Guy could absolutely make an impact, but he might not.

And if they take a tackle at 13, he doesn't start, and the majority of the board is killing him and Douglas, I'll be here reminding everyone that the tackle not making an impact this year was a reasonable outcome when they drafted him.

Agree on the prospects. I'm leaning encouraged on Jones - but I just genuinely don't know. And honestly it kind of depends what they thought when they brought him in. I think for a raw player at a position like offensive line - you really can't make mistakes and need to work hard - character is a huge part of the evaluation. Like I said if they brought him in, they think he'd click with Brown, he's locked in on getting better - awesome. I just can't see that so it's hard for me to say they should definitely go Jones. I do love the upside if they liked him.

I think an edge would make an impact - Van Ness, Murphy, obviously Wilson if he falls. That guy at least gets rotational snaps. I'd rather see JFM inside more, that's a better way to fill the DT need than drafting a DT. And next offseason it's likely that Lawson and Huff are gone, so what looks like a really full room will be Johnson, Clemons, and JFM (who I'd like to see at DT) pretty quickly. I don't know if it's necessarily better than tackle, but I think it's close enough that I'd rather they take the guy they think is a better prospect and more likely to have long-term success - and I don't think we should take for granted that the answer there is a tackle. If I felt better about an edge than a tackle, I'd rather take the edge than the tackle.

Also think you can look at the class not having many first round grades two ways. One is, if you love a prospect with one of those first round grades and you can get him, that's huge. The other is if you're looking at depth pieces anyway and have guys with first round grades on the board, your pick should be pretty valuable to a team that's not in range to get a guy with a first round grade. And you're giving up capital to get Rodgers anyway. So I think it's prudent to keep an ear open for calls from a team that wants to move up and see if you can get a pretty hefty offer.

[PepPep]

Maybe I am wrong but I firmly believe the Jets only need a quick, speedy, shifty slot receiver to complete this unit. He doesn't have to be a premier top tier talent. He can be a role player. They really have no reason to go after JSN at 13. Especially if one of the top 3 OTs is on the board.

Drafting a top tier O-lineman to compete for a starting spot and to take over at LT (or RT) next year is WAY more important. Protecting Rodgers is WAY more important. Having a good o-line with good depth for both the run game and pass game is WAY more important. Having insurance in case our OTs (all 3 of whom have history of missing time due to injury/medicals) is WAY more important. Its a boring pick, but I'm taking the O-OT any day of the week in this scenario.   

Listen, Blake Freeman or Matthew Bergeron are fine in Rd. 2. But I would much rather take a WR in Rd. 2- Josh Downs, Tyler Scott, 'Tank' Dell would all be great fits. 

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

Olave and Wilson on the field together with him, and JSN was the alpha target hog

[SomebodytoAnybody47]

24 minutes ago, derp said:

I think there's pushback on tackle - from me specifically - because so many seem to have it locked in. And because everyone seems to think a tackle automatically helps this year. Which, they might. But this is a raw tackle class and they already have two guys who have played well at the professional level, a guard who's been adequate when kicked out to tackle, and a second year player who they presumably like.

I get it. Depth is a question because the starters are injury prone, it's absolutely something that they need long-term, and I'd love it if the 2024 starting LT was already on the roster. But I don't think it's reasonable to assume that a tackle drafted at 13 helps the team this year at all this year and certainly not reasonable to assume that he's starting.

I also think if depth was that big of a problem - which I agree it's a big question - then maybe they should've addressed that in free agency. The idea of boxing yourself into a tackle who may or may not help this year at 13 because you're terrified of the guys you have penciled in at starters is silly to me. 

Johnson, I get. Jones has huge upside but needs a lot of technique work. So that one depends to me on what they think of him as a person, which I can't answer. Offensive line is hard - need to be mentally tough and put in a lot of time to get technique down. If they think Johnson or Jones will respond well to soaking up stuff from Duane Brown for a year and grind really hard - sweet. If there's any question, that's an awfully big swing to take with the 13th pick.

Taking an OT at 13 is buying insurance. Brown is practically retired. Becton, who the hell knows. Plus it's rare an OL plays an entire season together, injuries are bound to happen. You're buying insurance for your new QB. Otherwise it's back to musical chairs. And looking for another one next year anyway. 

 

[derp]

13 minutes ago, JiF said:

Yeah, totally ridiculous game, he still only had 1 reception not lined up in the slot.  And I think that game highlights more than any the wide open, wtf was the D doing, that I'm referring too, so that 1 game, doesnt really change my concerns.  He may be a fantastic player, I dont doubt it or wouldnt be surprised.  It just risky, IMO and I wouldnt do it because I think there will be better value than a slot WR.

Totally fair, was just pointing out that versus the benefitting from Wilson/Olave. I think at the end of the day the things that translate most at WR in the NFL right now are quickness, route running, hands, and toughness - and he checks those boxes enough to feel like a pretty safe prospect. I do understand not wanting him at 13 though.

[RedBeardedSavage]

4 minutes ago, derp said:

I don't think we're far apart either. I don't know if they're locked in at tackle, but I don't think they should be. And I think there's a wider range of outcomes for a tackle at 13 this year than the majority of board members seem to believe. Guy could absolutely make an impact, but he might not.

And if they take a tackle at 13, he doesn't start, and the majority of the board is killing him and Douglas, I'll be here reminding everyone that the tackle not making an impact this year was a reasonable outcome when they drafted him.

Agree on the prospects. I'm leaning encouraged on Jones - but I just genuinely don't know. And honestly it kind of depends what they thought when they brought him in. I think for a raw player at a position like offensive line - you really can't make mistakes and need to work hard - character is a huge part of the evaluation. Like I said if they brought him in, they think he'd click with Brown, he's locked in on getting better - awesome. I just can't see that so it's hard for me to say they should definitely go Jones. I do love the upside if they liked him.

I think an edge would make an impact - Van Ness, Murphy, obviously Wilson if he falls. That guy at least gets rotational snaps. I'd rather see JFM inside more, that's a better way to fill the DT need than drafting a DT. And next offseason it's likely that Lawson and Huff are gone, so what looks like a really full room will be Johnson, Clemons, and JFM (who I'd like to see at DT) pretty quickly. I don't know if it's necessarily better than tackle, but I think it's close enough that I'd rather they take the guy they think is a better prospect and more likely to have long-term success - and I don't think we should take for granted that the answer there is a tackle. If I felt better about an edge than a tackle, I'd rather take the edge than the tackle.

Also think you can look at the class not having many first round grades two ways. One is, if you love a prospect with one of those first round grades and you can get him, that's huge. The other is if you're looking at depth pieces anyway and have guys with first round grades on the board, your pick should be pretty valuable to a team that's not in range to get a guy with a first round grade. And you're giving up capital to get Rodgers anyway. So I think it's prudent to keep an ear open for calls from a team that wants to move up and see if you can get a pretty hefty offer.

Good stuff, informative as always. 

Should be interesting to see. I'd feel most relieved at Paris or Broderick @ 13, but by no means does it have to be either of those two guys. 

Interested to see how it plays out.

[derp]

2 minutes ago, Zachtomims47 said:

Taking an OT at 13 is buying insurance. Brown is practically retired. Becton, who the hell knows. Plus it's rare an OL plays an entire season together, injuries are bound to happen. You're buying insurance for your new QB. Otherwise it's back to musical chairs. And looking for another one next year anyway. 

 

It is a raise the floor play for a team that should have Super Bowl aspirations and has no better than the fourth best roster in their conference.

[derp]

36 minutes ago, nycdan said:

My sense is that this is a two-year all-in push with Rodgers.  It's a lot to ask to win the SB in 2023 as opposed to one of the next two years.  Given that Duane Brown is likely not here in 2024, securing the Tackle spots for the next two years now feels like a solid option.  Easy to talk about picking up a FA, but good FA Tackles don't come along that often.  I'd say good WRs are easier to find than Tackles.

If we hit on an OT/C combination this draft like we did back in the Brick/Mangold days, then imagine that line next year with a fully healthy Breece Hall.  It would be a return to the 2010/2011 team only with (hopefully) a much better QB.

 

Orlando Brown went for $16M a year when he was projected a good bit higher than that. And the Jets were supposedly in on him. Could also bring back George Fant if depth is a concern. And I do understand the two year thing, posted about it somewhere.

I also think the 2024 argument is the best one - most just argue for tackle to help this year and I don’t think that’s a prudent expectation. And if 2024 is in play then character, which is always important, is huge - and we only know so much about that.

I posted this in response to someone else and reorganized it - but I think it sums up my thoughts reasonably well. I'm not locked in on no tackle, I just disagree with the those who are locked in on a tackle. Should be the premium position player they are most confident will be a good player, in my opinion.

I think there's a wider range of outcomes for a tackle at 13 this year than the majority of board members seem to believe. Guy could absolutely make an impact, but he might not.

And if they take a tackle at 13, he doesn't start, and the majority of the board is killing him and Douglas, I'll be here reminding everyone that the tackle not making an impact this year was a reasonable outcome when they drafted him.

For example, if I felt better about an edge than a tackle, I'd rather take the edge than the tackle for the sake of taking a tackle. I think it's close enough that I'd rather they take the guy they think is a better prospect and more likely to have long-term success - and I don't think we should take for granted that the answer there is a tackle.

[jetfan40yrs]

10 hours ago, Barry McCockinner said:

So in a year where we're going for it you're OK with using #13 overall on a backup T?

I don't think it's a crazy idea, T is a really important position, just not sure it's a great one. Not sold on it.

Possibly, but OT is a precarious position for the Jets because of injuries. Not easy decision. (And it's quite plausible that the rookie will outplay Brown.)

[32EBoozer]

1 hour ago, RedBeardedSavage said:

It feels like many in this thread are almost ruling out tackle @ 13. I think it remains the most likely position to be drafted @ 13, but not guaranteed. 

I think people, like myself, project the top two offensive tackles being gone by 13. There are other tackles available later, in round one, and into the second round. My argument, is that with so many other holes on the roster let’s pick up a second and/or third round pick to fill those holes while still addressing offensive tackle later in the first or second round.

[Warfish]

Jaxon Smith-Njigba
WR 

PFF BIG BOARD RANK
12
HEIGHT
6' 0"
WEIGHT
196
CLASS
Jr.
AGE
21.1

Smith-Njigba missed almost the entire fall with hamstring issues but was Ohio State’s leading receiver in 2021 as a sophomore. That year, he caught 95 passes for 1,595 yards and nine scores. He provides the uncoachable route-running ability and ball skills that will always have a role in the NFL.

Where he wins: Technically Savvy

JSN processes the game like it’s in slow motion. His ability to break off routes without warning and catch the ball as he’s changing directions is unmatched in the class.

What’s his role: Slot

He ran 83.0% of his routes from the slot in his career, where he proved to be a sure-handed receiver who possessed the short-area speed to separate from defenders and consistently move the chains.

What can he Improve: Very little

It’s not to say there’s nowhere JSN can improve, but rather that the most deficient areas of his skill set all revolve around purely physical tools.

 

------------------------------------

 

JAXON SMITH-NJIGBA WR OHIO STATE | NFL DRAFT PROFILE & SCOUTING REPORT

SCOUTING REPORT: STRENGTHS

• Super productive slot receiver who Led Ohio state in receptions and yardage in 2021 despite playing officially as the third receiver behind Olave and Garret Wilson
• Smooth hips with outstanding agility who is equally adept at moving laterally as vertically
• Has outstanding soft hands demonstrated by his impressive 141.8 QB rating when targetted in 2021
• Often used on deep routes, getting separation down the sideline or over the middle on crossing routes by extending his arms rather than pure speed.
• Does a nice job locating and tracking deep passes and is a legitimate vertical threat. Willing to go up and attack the ball.
• Has the strong hands any NFL wide receiver coach and quarterback would covet. Tracks the deep ball over either shoulder and brings in passes fluidly without breaking stride downfield.
• Has a knack for getting open and is a quarterback's best friend - passers just need to toss the ball in his area and he'll come down with it.
• Has enough straight-line speed and takes advantage of open seams when his quarterback is on target.
• Good effort and technique as a blocker for his size. Can beat the press with elusiveness or physical contact. Runs elite crisp routes with sharp cuts.
• Has good body strength to squirm out of tackles with the coordination to maneuver his frame between defenders.

SCOUTING REPORT: WEAKNESSES

• Has dominated at the college level but doesn't have any elite traits that translate to the pro game - athletically he's good not great
• Doesn't have any serious explosion to his game and may find it difficult to separate at the NFL level
• Has missed a major chunk of his junior year with a hamstring injury - will have to demonstrate this is the exception rather than the rule for him
• Has had a few more drops than you would hope for in a top wideout - mostly due to occasional lapses of concentration rather than anything more intrinsic
• Spent most of his college career playing in the slot - so it remains to be seen how he will stand up as an outside threat

SCOUTING REPORT: SUMMARY

Smith-Njigba began the 2022 campaign as one of the top receivers in college football – if not the top receiver – and a candidate for national honors After an outstanding season when he led Ohio State with school-record totals of 95 receptions and 1,606 receiving yards on a team that also featured first-round NFL Draft picks Garrett Wilson and Chris Olave.

However, his stock suffered a big fall in 2022 after he was sidelined with an injury. Despite this Smith-Njigba has some of the best natural playing skills of any receiver in this year's draft class, he runs great routes, is explosive enough, and has nice hands along with the ability to fight for the ball with a natural affinity to find gaps in the coverage.

A year on the sidelines has also led scouts to question his athletic talents, where his lack of explosiveness and only average speed may put a limit on his pro upside. In addition, he risks being viewed as a slot-only player further reducing his draft demand.

Smith-Njigba is a very solid NFL prospect who assuming can stay healthy can carve out a quality NFL career. Expect him to be selected late on day one in the 2023 NFL Draft.

[MichaelScott]

Because there is nothing AR loves more than rookie WRs.

[Barry McCockinner]

3 minutes ago, MichaelScott said:

Because there is nothing AR loves more than rookie WRs.

Below is a full list of 1st round WR's the Packers drafted while Aaron Rodgers was on the team:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[RedBeardedSavage]

12 minutes ago, 32EBoozer said:

I think people, like myself, project the top two offensive tackles being gone by 13. There are other tackles available later, in round one, and into the second round. My argument, is that with so many other holes on the roster let’s pick up a second and/or third round pick to fill those holes while still addressing offensive tackle later in the first or second round.

Fair, but if one of those top two tackles is available at 13, we should pounce, no?

[PepPep]

42 minutes ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

My only question about him is contested catch ability at the next level.

Dude knows how to get open, find the spaces before and after the catch.

But the Jets also desperately need a long-term answer at OT.

I doubt JD even considers anything other than OT at #13…

100% how I feel. 

I get it. The Jets are going after Rodgers and making a push for a run. Circumstances have, in part, dictated their fate. Zach flopped, their 2022 rookies excelled. Rodgers became available for a low price tag considering his resume. The Jets do seem like a team 'a QB away' from competing. 

However, I am amazed at how many fans are so shortsighted when looking at the draft. As you said, the Jets have absolutely no long-term answer at either OT position. Even if they draft a guy who doesn't start this year, he is almost guaranteed to be a critical depth piece this year and a critical starter next year. Brown has one foot in retirement and neither Becton nor Mitchell have proven they can be relied upon. Best case scenario Becton steps up and stays healthy and Mitchell continue to improve. Still, Brown will be approaching 40 and you want young, quality depth on rookie deals.