Jump to content

If Brock Bowers falls, do we take him?


Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

Yep, absolutely.  Bill O’Brien did this a lot at Penn State too.

gosh, what I give to see the Jets go that way--

And it's not just the scheme versatility, it's the added nuances of how you can shape your blocking in both run and pass game. With 3 TEs, you can set up so many downfield blocks in the run game as well as short area passing game. those 3 yard digs now turn into 10-12 yards before anyone can even get a hat on the player

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jdeet said:

I mean, it’s not even a remotely comparable player. Kyle Brady was good in college,  Bowers was ridiculous. 

Brady 

4 seasons 76 receptions, 940 yards, 9 TDs
 

Bowers 

3 seasons 175 receptions, 2,500 yds,  31 TDs and 2 National Championships 

Totally Different Offenses from then & now, not to mention All the don’t sneeze on any QB’s & WR’s rule changes, both in the college game as in the nfl … #’s alone can NEVER be used to compare players from then to now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bowers is a pretty sure-thing prospect. He catches the football, scores TDs, and blocks. He is one of the premier players in all of college football and was a focal point for Georgia in their run of dominance. This is a no-joke prospect.

I feel the Jets will go OL, but you can't even be remotely upset if Bowers is the pick. Rodgers loves tight ends and will get him the football consistently - it would take 2 games before the Brock chants are a staple at MetLife.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, extmenace said:

It really depends on how free agency goes. I’d say OL and WR are much more pressing needs. Bowers should be a stud but Conklin is a pro and ruckert has some potential. It’s not really a pressing need.

I'd tend to agree with this. 

Also there's a third option. Say the best OL prospect at #10 is better - but not omg heads & tails better - than an OL prospect we could get 20-30 picks later, if we had a 2nd rounder.

There is a successful precedent with SF trading their following-year's 1st (expected to be in the top 10-15 picks minimum) to grab Joe Staley at #28. Now, easy to say in hindsight since Staley worked so well for them. The following year's 1st rounder ended up as pick #7 overall, but 7 of those top 10 were letdowns, none had 12-year OL careers - half of them as a probowler - and all would've gotten started a year later (and with a much higher contract as a side effect).

Is there a Joe Staley II somewhere between picks 25-45? Maybe, maybe not; allegedly this OL class is more deep than top-heavy so who knows.

IF there's a serious OT starter to be had in that range without a gigantic dropoff, and IF Bowers or a WR at #10 ends up being all he's built up to be, would they not be better off trading next year's #1 for an OL pick this year in the ~#30 range (give or take) plus a supposed game-changer at TE or WR?

I tend to think they won't be heading into the draft with Lazard as the WR2 - not after last season - so it'd be Bowers or an OL pick, though that also (as you say) depends how FA goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jdeet said:

Obviously we have it set in stone that we are picking an OT at 10. Nearly every mock draft seemed to be leading us in that direction. But, I am seeing Brock Bowers fall to us lately, including Mel Kiper’s latest mock.

i personally feel like we can get enough offensive line help in free agency and later in the draft, to allow us to get a unique playmaker like Bowers. He compares to George Kittle with a championship college career and is a superb talent. It would obviously make Aaron Rodgers happy and give a dynamic to our offense that we have really never had. (And to follow that up, wouldn’t be shocked to see us draft WR Ladd McConkey from Georgia, as well, later on day 2)

Is Brock Bowers an acceptable pick, Jets fans, or will this cause a revolt? This might have been brought up previously, but I haven’t been around much. 

Is it acceptable IMO. Yes. Depends on what we do in FA, but yes. I believe we will do just enough in FA to address our biggest needs at QB2, WR and O-line for this to be an 'acceptable' pick. Especially considering the high level of talent we are talking about. 

However- Is it the right pick? Is it a smart pick? Is it the responsible pick? IMO- Probably not. We have a quality pass catching TE in Conk. We have a quality balanced developmental TE in Ruckert who we need to give more snaps to. And we have a raw, uber talented pass catching young TE in Kuntz who we should start developing as well. And this is assuming we cut CJ. Bowers is great, I know he is not just a TE, I know he is a playmaker on offense. But from a practical standpoint, he makes absolutely no sense for the Jets at 10.

Even taking one of the top WRs like Odunze or Nabers or Thomas makes a lot more sense than Bowers. Unlike the TE position, the Jets have absolutely nothing at the WR position other than GW. Even if they sign a WR in FA, drafting a WR this year at some point is a must.   

But as you say, the Jets are expected to draft an OT. And for good reason! That is the position they should target 100%. While I agree that they can get 'enough' o-line help to patch together 5 starters, there are NOT very many good options in FA. Especially at OT. And I disagree about  the Jets being able to get OT help 'later in the draft'. When? They have two draft picks in the first three rounds. Even in this deep OT draft, I don't believe the Jets can get a T in Rd. 3 or 4 (or later) who will make much of a significant impact in year one. They are in a position where it would behoove them to draft a plug and play T at 10. And at 10, they should have some nice options - Latham, Fuaga, Mims, maybe even Fashanu or Alt slip, although highly unlikely.  

Bottom line, Brock Bowers is a luxury pick and the Jets don't have that luxury. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a 17 game season last year, there was only one TE with over 1000 yards receiving, and that was Kittle with 1020. His 15.7 ypc also blew away all other top TEs. Of numbers #2-10, not a single one averaged over 10.9 ypc, with a few of them under 10. LaPorta had 10 TDs, no other top TE had more than 6. 
 
The argument for Bowers is generally that he’ll be amongst the best of the best, which is itself probably wishful thinking for a rookie under the Jets offensive tutelage. Even if he were top 3, that would translate to something like 85 catches, 950 yards, and 6 TDs. You’d be paying him close to $5M/year when the franchise number for TEs is $14.1M. Compare that to an OL which is $25.6M, or WR at $25.5. We know the value of OL, and a top ten WR will have production at the 1250 yard, 8 TD level. Top 20, and you’re still over 1000 yards with 7 TDs. 
 
So even if Bowers is great right out of the box, it’s hard to justify a top 10 pick. If he’s a top 15 type player -a respectable pick!- you’re looking at 580 yards and maybe 3 TDs. All of a sudden it doesn’t look very good at all, while a top 20 OL or WR would still be a fantastic pick. That’s why I believe you should stick to premium positions with premium picks, where even an “average starter” is still valuable. 

  • Upvote 5
  • Thumb Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

People do realize FA comes first and if the OL is addressed in FA the need to pass on Bowers and go OL changes a bit.

A lot actually.

yes they know. but there are no great OL free agnets

plus, they want big $$$$

plus they dont want to play for us

 

 

sooooooooooooooo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, slats said:

In a 17 game season last year, there was only one TE with over 1000 yards receiving, and that was Kittle with 1020. His 15.7 ypc also blew away all other top TEs. Of numbers #2-10, not a single one averaged over 10.9 ypc, with a few of them under 10. LaPorta had 10 TDs, no other top TE had more than 6. 
 
The argument for Bowers is generally that he’ll be amongst the best of the best, which is itself probably wishful thinking for a rookie under the Jets offensive tutelage. Even if he were top 3, that would translate to something like 85 catches, 950 yards, and 6 TDs. You’d be paying him close to $5M/year when the franchise number for TEs is $14.1M. Compare that to an OL which is $25.6M, or WR at $25.5. We know the value of OL, and a top ten WR will have production at the 1250 yard, 8 TD level. Top 20, and you’re still over 1000 yards with 7 TDs. 
 
So even if Bowers is great right out of the box, it’s hard to justify a top 10 pick. If he’s a top 15 type player -a respectable pick!- you’re looking at 580 yards and maybe 3 TDs. All of a sudden it doesn’t look very good at all, while a top 20 OL or WR would still be a fantastic pick. That’s why I believe you should stick to premium positions with premium picks, where even an “average starter” is still valuable. 

i like the logic

 

another reason i would go qb, but whatevs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, slats said:

In a 17 game season last year, there was only one TE with over 1000 yards receiving, and that was Kittle with 1020. His 15.7 ypc also blew away all other top TEs. Of numbers #2-10, not a single one averaged over 10.9 ypc, with a few of them under 10. LaPorta had 10 TDs, no other top TE had more than 6. 
 
The argument for Bowers is generally that he’ll be amongst the best of the best, which is itself probably wishful thinking for a rookie under the Jets offensive tutelage. Even if he were top 3, that would translate to something like 85 catches, 950 yards, and 6 TDs. You’d be paying him close to $5M/year when the franchise number for TEs is $14.1M. Compare that to an OL which is $25.6M, or WR at $25.5. We know the value of OL, and a top ten WR will have production at the 1250 yard, 8 TD level. Top 20, and you’re still over 1000 yards with 7 TDs. 
 
So even if Bowers is great right out of the box, it’s hard to justify a top 10 pick. If he’s a top 15 type player -a respectable pick!- you’re looking at 580 yards and maybe 3 TDs. All of a sudden it doesn’t look very good at all, while a top 20 OL or WR would still be a fantastic pick. That’s why I believe you should stick to premium positions with premium picks, where even an “average starter” is still valuable. 

It's hard for me to get past the rookie contract discount, which withers away by taking low-paying positions like RB and TE up top.

The only way it evens out is if they land an above-average starter, at a high dollar position, after round 1. Particularly if that later pick is above average as a rookie. OL is supposedly deep enough to find one 20-40 picks after the Jets' top pick, but as more guys come off the board, the trick is they're left with the guys who are left, not the pick of the litter among all the next-tier guys in a deeper OL draft. Especially if they stay pat with their round 3 pick and don't trade up. In that instance I don't see how they can take a TE as their only pick until slot 72, but it does depend who they sign for the OL in March.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, slats said:

In a 17 game season last year, there was only one TE with over 1000 yards receiving, and that was Kittle with 1020. His 15.7 ypc also blew away all other top TEs. Of numbers #2-10, not a single one averaged over 10.9 ypc, with a few of them under 10. LaPorta had 10 TDs, no other top TE had more than 6. 

If this is how you're measuring the value/impact at TE, then you're doing it wrong. You're also not illustrating the rarefied air that is a consistent presence at TE... 80% of the league has to survive on rotational talent, and it shows when looking at the disparity in play.

All that said, OT is priority #1. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, HighPitch said:

yes they know. but there are no great OL free agnets

plus, they want big $$$$

plus they dont want to play for us

 

 

sooooooooooooooo

There’s also plenty of time for someone to become available.  There’s also the possibility through the trade route It’s early yet.

But as I said, FA starts early March.  They’ll know if the OL has been addressed before the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Arsis said:

Anthony Becth

Yikes.  I sure hope not.  Bowers looks to be an elite TE.  Well above that of AB.  But, you never know.  Remember Johnny Mitchell ??? Eye popping skills on his college film... And, then... UGH !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, HighPitch said:

idk bout you guys but every time i read "it depends on free agency" i wanna barf my mac n cheese from last night out my nose

I mean, it does.

That’s why I don’t see why everyone is just assuming it’s going to be an OT at #10.

Sh*ts going to change rather drastically over the next 3 weeks.

If the Jets sign two mid-level starters on the OL in FA and grab someone like Evans or Ridley to play across from Wilson, I don’t see why people would flip out over adding a potential game breaker like Bowers. The pick could very well still be an OT, but I’m not going to complain about adding playmakers in the passing game when this team has largely been devoid of those kinds of guys throughout our history.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The key with Bowers for me is how he will help the passing game compared to whatever WR is on the board at 10.  The comparison for me is more will he be a bigger upgrade over Conklin than let's say Odunze is over Lazard.  I don't know if I like Odunze that much, but I don't see this group as being the types to scheme for the mismatch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, bonkertons said:

Surprising how many clowns list Becht and Brady as reasons why we shouldn't take Bowers.  Guys who were drafted before a decent chunk of this fanbase were even born.  Keller is the most recent at SIXTEEN years ago, and to act like he was any way comparable to Bowers as a prospect is just comical.  Honestly, to act like any TE prospect ever is comparable to Bowers is comical.  But yeah it's the same stupid argument that some make when saying we should never draft a QB again because Zach, Darnold, and Sanchez sucked.  It's just dumb, and obviously not realistic.  

 

Yes, IF we solve the tackle spots in free agency, Bowers should absolutely be on the table.  If we don't, we're kind of stuck having to use our pick on an OT at 10.  Curious to see what JD does once free agency starts.

Seriously. “We drafted Kyle Brady 30 years ago and it didn’t work out so don’t draft Bowers!” might be the dumbest take I’ve seen lol

  • Upvote 3
  • Post of the Week 1
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...