Assuming the top 3 wide receivers are gone by #10, and we haven't signed a wide receiver in free agency.

[Alka]

If all 3 wide receivers are gone, and we haven't signed a significant wide receiver in free agency, would it make sense to trade down to around #20, and pick up a 2nd round pick?  Pretty much all of the mock drafts I have seen has the top 3 wide receivers gone before #10.

Pick one of the next top tier wide receivers around #20, and in the second round, get the top interior lineman or 2nd tier offensive tackle on the offensive side.  I just worry about injuries on the offensive line, and feel we really need another player to plug in if and when we need it.

I don't think this would be a horrible strategy, and would accomplish a couple of goals at the same time.  

What do you think?

 

[slats]

Who are your trading partners in the #20 range, and what are they trading up for? 

[Warfish]

7 minutes ago, Alka said:

If all 3 wide receivers are gone, and we haven't signed a significant wide receiver in free agency, would it make sense to trade down to around #20, and pick up a 2nd round pick?  Pretty much all of the mock drafts I have seen has the top 3 wide receivers gone before #10.

Pick one of the next top tier wide receivers around #20, and in the second round, get the top interior lineman or 2nd tier offensive tackle on the offensive side.  I just worry about injuries on the offensive line, and feel we really need another player to plug in if and when we need it.

I don't think this would be a horrible strategy, and would accomplish a couple of goals at the same time.  

What do you think?

 

If the top 3 WR's are all gone, and a minimum of 3 QB's are gone (a lock), then almost assuredly a top end OT will have fallen to us.

Trade down is fine, almost everyone seems to like that idea (almost every year), I too would like more picks, but taking the elite OT is also fine.  Our current O-line is both fragile in several spots, and old in several spots.  We'll need depth this year, and starters next year and beyond.

[slimjasi]

If we haven't signed at least one WR in FA, we've already f*cked up to some degree, IMO.

Having said that, given your scenario, I would either take my favorite tackle or trade down (if I could) and focus on stocking up on WR and OTs with my first 4 picks. 

[Plen T]

Bower Power

[MR.GANGGREEN28]

10 minutes ago, Alka said:

If all 3 wide receivers are gone, and we haven't signed a significant wide receiver in free agency, would it make sense to trade down to around #20, and pick up a 2nd round pick?  Pretty much all of the mock drafts I have seen has the top 3 wide receivers gone before #10.

Pick one of the next top tier wide receivers around #20, and in the second round, get the top interior lineman or 2nd tier offensive tackle on the offensive side.  I just worry about injuries on the offensive line, and feel we really need another player to plug in if and when we need it.

I don't think this would be a horrible strategy, and would accomplish a couple of goals at the same time.  

What do you think?

 

Lets say MHJ, Nabers, and Odunze are all taken as well as the projected 4 QBs before we pick. I would believe that the other 2 selections before us would be Alt and one of the premiere pass rushers (Turner/Verse). The question now becomes is Brian Thomas Jr, Oshanu, or Fuaga worth the 10th overall pick?

I'm not so sure.

Given that most likely either only 1 or no defensive players will have been taken by the time we pick, picking the 8th or 9th offensive player off the board won't hold as much value. If we can find a trade partner in this scenario then I wouldn't hate it, but if not, I'd still go with Fuaga or BTJ. I think I'm all set with Bowers unless we can trade back and select him between 16-20.

[bonkertons]

You can sign OL depth.  Warren and Mitchell both can still be developed into something beyond 2024.  See where they're at after the season and then go draft a tackle if you want.  

 

As far as the OP's scenario, I'd just take Bowers or BTJ.  Adding a 2nd doesn't interest me enough to pass on either of those guys, and there's a good chance both will be gone if you move down, especially to the 20 range.

 

But yes, if we don't sign a WR it's a lock that we take one in the 1st.  No way would we take a backup tackle when we only have one weapon on the roster.  

[Alka]

9 minutes ago, slats said:

Who are your trading partners in the #20 range, and what are they trading up for? 

How about the Bengals at #18, or Steelers at #20, trading up for Fuaga?  Steelers have their left tackle in Broderick Jones, but putting Fuaga on the right side, might be something that they might trade up for. Or Dolphins at #21 with Brock Bowers?

Would the Jets want Bowers at #10?  Hard to say right now, but if we didn't have a 2nd receiver, would we still take Bowers there?

 

[bonkertons]

Just now, MR.GANGGREEN28 said:

Lets say MHJ, Nabers, and Odunze are all taken as well as the projected 4 QBs before we pick. I would believe that the other 2 selections before us would be Alt and one of the premiere pass rushers (Turner/Verse). The question now becomes is Brian Thomas Jr, Oshanu, or Fuaga worth the 10th overall pick?

I'm not so sure.

Given that most likely either only 1 or no defensive players will have been taken by the time we pick, picking the 8th or 9th offensive player off the board won't hold as much value. If we can find a trade partner in this scenario then I wouldn't hate it, but if not, I'd still go with Fuaga or BTJ. I think I'm all set with Bowers unless we can trade back and select him between 16-20.

Bowers would be my preference, but I'd have no problem taking BTJ at 10.  Ideally you can move down and get him, but if he's the guy you want and you see him as clearly a notch above the rest of the WRs, I'd just take him and be done with it.  Not worth the risk moving down, IMO.

[SomebodytoAnybody47]

IMO - this mock is pretty realistic. 

https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2024-nfl-mock-draft-post-free-agency-minnesota-vikings-trade-up-jj-mccarthy

Between a few of the OL and Bowers. Someone might want to trade up for one of the top corners or one of the OL. 

Although in this situation I'd ask to swap up with Atlanta and take Nabers.

[peekskill68]

9 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

If we haven't signed at least one WR in FA, we've already f*cked up to some degree, IMO.

Having said that, given your scenario, I would either take my favorite tackle or trade down (if I could) and focus on stocking up on WR and OTs with my first 4 picks. 

JD's whole off season so far has been built around not having to force a pick on draft day. I'd be shocked if he doesn't add a FA WR2 here shortly...

[Augustiniak]

Big ? Is how bowers is really perceived.  But in terms of positional value, a guy like BTJ after a slight trade back is probably what they want.  

[slimjasi]

3 minutes ago, peekskill68 said:

JD's whole off season so far has been built around not having to force a pick on draft day. I'd be shocked if he doesn't add a FA WR2 here shortly...

me too

[mphtrilogy]

trade downs are always a wish list, but I doubt we recoup that 2nd, best might be someone moving up to grab that top CB or Edge and get a 3rd or a couple of 4ths to move down a few slots...

[TuscanyTile2]

I get the impression that our best chance to add both a quality OL and WR in this draft is to take the OL in the 1st round (either at 1.10 or with a trade down) and the WR in the 2nd (if we acquire one in a trade) or 3rd round.  I guess it's a "a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush" type thing though.

[Augustiniak]

Just now, TuscanyTile2 said:

I get the impression that our best chance to add both a quality OL and WR in this draft is to take the OL in the 1st round (either at 1.10 or with a trade down) and the WR in the 2nd (if we acquire one in a trade) or 3rd round.  I guess it's a "a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush" type thing though.

I think they want another stud wr and that’s plan A.  Look how difficult it is to get a good wr in FA now.  

[Alka]

1 minute ago, mphtrilogy said:

trade downs are always a wish list, but I doubt we recoup that 2nd, best might be someone moving up to grab that top CB or Edge and get a 3rd or a couple of 4ths to move down a few slots...

The Jets are not trading down close to 10 picks in order to get a 3rd round pick back.  They won't do that.  However, if they dropped down 1 or 2 picks, I think it's a possibility.

[slats]

11 minutes ago, Alka said:

How about the Bengals at #18, or Steelers at #20, trading up for Fuaga?  Steelers have their left tackle in Broderick Jones, but putting Fuaga on the right side, might be something that they might trade up for. Or Dolphins at #21 with Brock Bowers?

Would the Jets want Bowers at #10?  Hard to say right now, but if we didn't have a 2nd receiver, would we still take Bowers there?

 

I think in that scenario, the Jets wind up taking their BAP. If their BAP is an OT, I’d understand that. I also expect a FA WR addition in the next couple of days. If/when that happens, I think they’ll still be thinking BAP at #10 unless someone comes at them with an over market offer they can’t refuse. So… someone wanting to get ahead of Minnesota for a QB? (although I think Minny will be making a move ahead of us for one). That would be the Raiders at #13 or Seattle (without a second rounder) at #16. I just don’t see a lot of realistic trade back options. 

[Augustiniak]

Just now, Alka said:

The Jets are not trading down close to 10 picks in order to get a 3rd round pick back.  They won't do that.  However, if they dropped down 1 or 2 picks, I think it's a possibility.

Also depends on their board.  If they slide back 3 spots and they know they’re getting one of 3 guys that’s what they’d do.  I don’t think they’re trading back even though i want them to. 

[TuscanyTile2]

1 minute ago, Augustiniak said:

I think they want another stud wr and that’s plan A.  Look how difficult it is to get a good wr in FA now.  

I think ultimately you're going to correct.  And I wouldn't argue with that strategy at all.  But next offseason we're probably going to need 2 OTs again - lol.  

[Augustiniak]

Just now, slats said:

I think in that scenario, the Jets wind up taking their BAP. If their BAP is an OT, I’d understand that. I also expect a FA WR addition in the next couple of days. If/when that happens, I think they’ll still be thinking BAP at #10 unless someone comes at them with an over market offer they can’t refuse. So… someone wanting to get ahead of Minnesota for a QB? (although I think Minny will be making a move ahead of us for one). That would be the Raiders at #13 or Seattle (without a second rounder) at #16. I just don’t see a lot of realistic trade back options. 

A team may want to trade up for bowers, or a defender.  Or a tackle they love.  But i don’t see the jets sliding back more than a few spots.  Their biggest need is playmakers, and if you assume they would consider bowers and thomas jr in the 10-13 range they probably won’t venture far from there.  I’m assuming rome does not make it to 10.  

[Augustiniak]

Just now, TuscanyTile2 said:

I think ultimately you're going to correct.  And I wouldn't argue with that strategy at all.  But next offseason we're probably going to need 2 OTs again - lol.  

They can also draft OL in any other round, move avt to tackle or use FA again.  But true playmaking wrs are so hard to get.  

[TuscanyTile2]

Just now, Augustiniak said:

They can also draft OL in any other round, move avt to tackle or use FA again.  But true playmaking wrs are so hard to get.  

It would be nice to finally start to take on the look like a modern NFL team too next year (with 2 legit WRs and an upper echelon QB).

[Barry McCockinner]

Make the big trade to #4 if MHJ falls there. It won't be cheap, but it will be worth it.

Future picks will be involved.

 

[Greensleeves]

18 minutes ago, MR.GANGGREEN28 said:

Lets say MHJ, Nabers, and Odunze are all taken as well as the projected 4 QBs before we pick. I would believe that the other 2 selections before us would be Alt and one of the premiere pass rushers (Turner/Verse). The question now becomes is Brian Thomas Jr, Oshanu, or Fuaga worth the 10th overall pick?

I'm not so sure.

Given that most likely either only 1 or no defensive players will have been taken by the time we pick, picking the 8th or 9th offensive player off the board won't hold as much value. If we can find a trade partner in this scenario then I wouldn't hate it, but if not, I'd still go with Fuaga or BTJ. I think I'm all set with Bowers unless we can trade back and select him between 16-20.

I somewhat agree - although picking an offensive player that isn't slated to start (any OL) doesn't make sense in a win now team. Trade back and pick WR - hopefully grab a 2nd - go QB, 3rd is the sweet spot in a great OL draft to pick a backup guard or tackle. 

[joewilly12]

Select the #4 ranked WR 

[bicketybam]

1 minute ago, Barry McCockinner said:

Make the big trade to #4 if MHJ falls there. It won't be cheap, but it will be worth it.

Future picks will be involved.

 

How many do you think? Next year's 1 for sure.

[slats]

3 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

A team may want to trade up for bowers, or a defender.  Or a tackle they love.  But i don’t see the jets sliding back more than a few spots.  Their biggest need is playmakers, and if you assume they would consider bowers and thomas jr in the 10-13 range they probably won’t venture far from there.  I’m assuming rome does not make it to 10.  

I expect them to stick and pick. They may use the entire clock trying to find a decent deal but, at the end of the day, I don’t expect JD to get too cute with this draft. I agree that an offensive plamaker (WR, preferably) should be the priority but, with their OL generally spending more time in the mobile tent than on the field, I could easily understand an OT pick as well. I’d be surprised if someone was willing to give up an extra pick to draft a TE at #10. That would be a ballsy move. 

[Untouchable]

The answer is right in front of you but some of you guys are so wrapped up in “positional value” that you refuse to see it.

[peebag]

35 minutes ago, slats said:

Who are your trading partners in the #20 range, and what are they trading up for? 

For the life of me, I can't figure out why people assume trading down is a certainty.

[Larz]

Take the best OT or Bowers. 

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, slats said:

I expect them to stick and pick. They may use the entire clock trying to find a decent deal but, at the end of the day, I don’t expect JD to get too cute with this draft. I agree that an offensive plamaker (WR, preferably) should be the priority but, with their OL generally spending more time in the mobile tent than on the field, I could easily understand an OT pick as well. I’d be surprised if someone was willing to give up an extra pick to draft a TE at #10. That would be a ballsy move. 

At some point, investing in OL becomes too much.  If they used the 10 pick on fatanu, that wouldn’t be a bad pick in terms of the player, b/c he’s eventually going to LT, maybe even this season.  But if all teams are ranked by offensive weapons, the jets are again bottom 10 right now.  1 wr and 1 rb.  Maybe a decent TE, maybe.  But it’s bad.  If this team wants to content for the division they’re going to need 2 more playmakers, not just 1.  Getting Boyd doesn’t move the needle either, he’s slightly above a jag.  They need their own guy.  If it’s thomas jr, ok, i get it, the guy’s big, fast, can catch and is a home run threat.  If it’s rome, all the better.  Bowers, not sure.  Seems more like a chain mover but hey, we need that too.  He could be targeted 10x/game.  

I’d love a trade back, but unless something wild happens i don’t see it happening.  Douglas also needs a big hit with this pick.  

[MR.GANGGREEN28]

2 minutes ago, Greensleeves said:

I somewhat agree - although picking an offensive player that isn't slated to start (any OL) doesn't make sense in a win now team. Trade back and pick WR - hopefully grab a 2nd - go QB, 3rd is the sweet spot in a great OL draft to pick a backup guard or tackle. 

There’s probably a 90% chance if we draft a T with the 10th overall pick, they’d see extensive playing time and it would be very essential depth for us. 4 out of 5 projected starters on the OL have recent injury history.
 

I still do agree with going WR at 10, but not if we’re able to bring in 2 more solid guys via FA or trade. If Odunze is available however, grab him no matter what.

[Untouchable]

Just now, peebag said:

For the life of me, I can't figure out why people assume trading down is a certainty.

People do this sh*t every year

When was the last time the Jets actually traded down in the 1st round?

Off the top of my head the most recent example was almost 20 years ago when Bradway pulled that silly ass trade for Doug Jolley, moved out of the 1st completely and took a mediocre kicker in the 2nd round.

[SomebodytoAnybody47]

9 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

Make the big trade to #4 if MHJ falls there. It won't be cheap, but it will be worth it.

Future picks will be involved.