After all the moves, I think the Jets must take a tackle in round 1.

[bitonti]

4 minutes ago, genot said:

I want McConkey to. He won't last past 2nd rd. We need to trade down. At least once, if not twice. Grab a Tackle in the 1st and trade yp in the 2nd to make sure McConkey will be there.

I've seen mocks with ladd going 1.32 to Kcc 

[Sammybighead]

I agree, take the OT. This team cannot survive with Max mitchell playing LT for any extended periods of time

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

15 minutes ago, bitonti said:

I've seen mocks with ladd going 1.32 to Kcc 

Saw a mock the other day of Adonai Mitchell to KC.

I want him or Ladd after a trade-down.

 

[Jetty]

Jets are not spending a top 10 pick on a back up. Trade back collect more assets so you can grab a WR and a OT within the first 100 picks.

[derp]

2 hours ago, bitonti said:

Wouldn't the wr be an insurance policy too? With lazard on the roster would the rookie be wr4? 

No.

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

A team is only as strong as its weakest link.

The Rodgers' offense will predominantly still be an 11-personnel / 3 WR attack. 

Jets still need a full-time slot.  X Gipson was a UDFA who made one big play the entire season which came on ST and not on offense.

Ladd looks like Cooper Kupp out there running around.

On paper, he's a much better athlete.

If he's 75% of the player Kupp is, the Jets are cooking with gas.

Jets should be able to snag him in a tradeback scenario.  I don't think he will go day 1.  They can most likely get him in round 2.

 

[derp]

1 hour ago, Untouchable said:

I don’t think Douglas cares and neither do I

The dude was fully prepared to take a guy like Michael Mayer at #15 last year. And Mayer wasn’t in the same stratosphere as Bowers.

Now they’ve solidified the OL and have one of the better WR duo’s in the league. Sure it’s all dependent on health but you could say that about any team.

Bowers could legitimately be the piece that puts this offense over the top and has the Jets right in the thick of things.

If true should it be a little scary that Douglas almost spent the 15th pick on a guy who had 304 yards for a Raiders team that didn’t have a whole lot of target competition last year?

[Barry McCockinner]

47 minutes ago, HighPitch said:

Pretty sure jd is not this skilled and got lucky that 2 over the hill ol guys and a wr actually agreed

I mean he didn't even expect Tyron Smith to sign the offer he made. He definitely got lucky.

But it seems clear what his intent was with the pre-draft roster moves so far. There are no must-have positions, or at least none obvious to the public. They may feel this way internally about OT or WR or some other position for whatever reason but looking at the current roster other GMs can't pin them down to anything. Looks like they can take the best pass rusher available if they want.

[extmenace]

2 hours ago, Untouchable said:

Why do fans think we need to sink a Top 10 pick into an insurance policy?

If Smith getting hurt and the prospect of Warren starting a few games terrifies you, then go sign someone like Josh Jones or Bakhtiari.

It’s not really an insurance policy, it’s drafting a 2025 starter that will be able to protect the current starters in 2024. How many offensive line configurations did we have last year? If we were to draft a first round offensive lineman, the likelihood of playing significant snaps is high. the key here is for the Jets to draft a guy with some positional flexibility. If we need a guard one game and a tackle in another, he could cover it. This team is going to be very run heavy, this offense needs an offensive line for everything to work. I am open for a tackle or a wide receiver. We need both positions and both positions would certainly fill a need at premium positions both in the short term and long-term plans of this team. You really can’t go wrong going either or.

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, extmenace said:

It’s not really an insurance policy, it’s drafting a 2025 starter that will be able to protect the current starters in 2024. How many offensive line configurations did we have last year? If we were to draft a first round offensive lineman, the likelihood of playing significant snaps is high. the key here is for the Jets to draft a guy with some positional flexibility. If we need a guard one game and a tackle in another, he could cover it. This team is going to be very run heavy, this offense needs an offensive line for everything to work. I am open for a tackle or a wide receiver. We need both positions and both positions would certainly fill a need at premium positions both in the short term and long-term plans of this team. You really can’t go wrong going either or.

i think a more reasonable plan would be to take a guy in the 3rd round and groom him, rather than take a guy at 10 and then sit him initially. if the logic is that you're planning for the future, well you also need a qb so why not draft a qb and sit him?  that's more important.

everything points to a weapon in round 1 and a tackle in round 3.

[genot]

36 minutes ago, bitonti said:

I've seen mocks with ladd going 1.32 to Kcc 

It wouldn't be a shock. Close to a cant miss prospect as a slot receiver.

[Sonny Werblin]

They need to conduct the draft with the idea of moving Moses to a backup role.carter warren and max Mitchell need to #4 and #5. Another G would be nice too.

[THE BARON]

58 minutes ago, NYJCAP2 said:

Bowers tweaked a hammy and couldn’t even perform at the pro day. Douglas is not going to put his name on this player.
 

He’s talented but going to fall like a rock in the draft.

as long as it is the jets he falls to, i am very happy.  a tweaked hammy is nothing to worry about with any position. also... i would not put any emphasis on what a prospect does in pro day or especially not the combine so long as the in-game tape is there.  bowers dropping to 10 would be monumental luck for the jets.  they have not had a such a splendid te since mickey shuler and bowers should produce significantly more than him

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, bitonti said:

Lets take a step back both wr and ot make sense at 10. It becomes a matter of preference 

Morgan Moses only missed 3 games last year but every week he would rotate with mekari 

Tyron Smith hasn't played a full season in a decade 

Both of these dudes are broken down. The rookie OT will start the only question is when and how much. It could be a month it could be all year but that player, whether they take him in Rd 1 or Rd 3 is going to play. Alot 

Meanwhile Rodgers has shown no capacity to target or develop a rookie wr in fact all he does is blast them. Given his preference He's throwing to wilson, Williams lazard and the vets most likely. Cobby! Guys who know what to do with his funny little hand motions and audibles. I don't think Rodgers cares about adding a BTJ and he's the shadow gm 

But your bolded part above is what I was thinking. Whether one likes Rodgers here or not - and many don't - the reality is he is here so if you're going to live by the sword & die by the sword, at least try to do the former. A rookie WR will be a WR4 in 2024 until Wilson, Williams, or Lazard gets injured. Wilson & Williams are the two every-down starters. Lazard couldn't be any worse than he was last year (and will likely be a good amount better with Rodgers, so long as he's kept upright) and will be out there on about half the snaps, and they'll go 12 a good amount of the time, too. Plus yeah there are other FAs still out there capable of filling out WR4/5 duties, aside from maybe drafting a day-2 WR outright. 

I don't know that I'd say Moses & Smith are broken down. But the reality is they have two tackles in their early-mid 30s who each missed significant time last year, and neither one is under contract next year. 

The likelihood is he should see somewhere between 3-5 starts at a combination of LT and RT this year, and then next year he's the starting LT. This also leaves the option open to moving down to recoup a 2nd rounder if the opportunity is there, since a round 1 tackle they draft need not be a week 1 opening drive starter.

Warren, I haven't formed a full opinion of him other than based on his action last year he hasn't earned the team relying upon him at this point. It wasn't tragically bad or anything, but he didn't look like a reliable starter just yet. Likelihood aside, if he could take a giant leap forward - enough to be a mid-level RT starter by next season - then they have killer tackle depth for this year and then have their starting tackles for next year, too. I wouldn't bet on it but yeah I'd like them to not head into the season next year yet again with no one chiseled in stone as a sure thing at either tackle spot. Anyway the thing with mid-round tackles is it's hardly uncommon to take more than just 1 rookie summer to bear fruit, and if the solution is to throw them in the trash unless they're awesome as rookies then we're going to piss away a lot more draft picks. But I'm not ready to have him as both the top tackle depth and the only tackle future (aside from crossing fingers to count on yet another 3rd-4th round pick for the 3rd year in a row).

Douglas may be on the hot seat, but if he loses one of his current starting tackles and that puts Rodgers on IR again he may as well jump out of the frying pan into the fire. 

If it turns out you didn't need it this year, better quality insurance was always a waste of money in hindsight.

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

But your bolded part above is what I was thinking. Whether one likes Rodgers here or not - and many don't - the reality is he is here so if you're going to live by the sword & die by the sword, at least try to do the former. A rookie WR will be a WR4 in 2024 until Wilson, Williams, or Lazard gets injured. Wilson & Williams are the two every-down starters. Lazard couldn't be any worse than he was last year (and will likely be a good amount better with Rodgers, so long as he's kept upright) and will be out there on about half the snaps, and they'll go 12 a good amount of the time, too. Plus yeah there are other FAs still out there capable of filling out WR4/5 duties, aside from maybe drafting a day-2 WR outright. 

I don't know that I'd say Moses & Smith are broken down. But the reality is they have two tackles in their early-mid 30s who each missed significant time last year, and neither one is under contract next year. 

The likelihood is he should see somewhere between 3-5 starts at a combination of LT and RT this year, and then next year he's the starting LT. This also leaves the option open to moving down to recoup a 2nd rounder if the opportunity is there, since a round 1 tackle they draft need not be a week 1 opening drive starter.

Warren, I haven't formed a full opinion of him other than based on his action last year he hasn't earned the team relying upon him at this point. It wasn't tragically bad or anything, but he didn't look like a reliable starter just yet. Likelihood aside, if he could take a giant leap forward - enough to be a mid-level RT starter by next season - then they have killer tackle depth for this year and then have their starting tackles for next year, too. I wouldn't bet on it but yeah I'd like them to not head into the season next year yet again with no one chiseled in stone as a sure thing at either tackle spot. Anyway the thing with mid-round tackles is it's hardly uncommon to take more than just 1 rookie summer to bear fruit, and if the solution is to throw them in the trash unless they're awesome as rookies then we're going to piss away a lot more draft picks. But I'm not ready to have him as both the top tackle depth and the only tackle future (aside from crossing fingers to count on yet another 3rd-4th round pick for the 3rd year in a row).

Douglas may be on the hot seat, but if he loses one of his current starting tackles and that puts Rodgers on IR again he may as well jump out of the frying pan into the fire. 

If it turns out you didn't need it this year, better quality insurance was always a waste of money in hindsight.

if the jets took rome, he starts and is on the field a lot.  

[playtowinthegame]

IF Joe Douglas goes OL in the 1st round it will be his third offensive lineman drafted in the 1st round.

2020: Mekhi "Hamburglar" Becton (Offensive Tackle)
2021: Alijah Vera-Tucker (Offensive Guard/Tackle)
2022: N/A
2023: N/A
2024: Offensive Tackle?

Find a OT in another round, beaches. JD is not that good at picking offensive lineman in the 1st round. Becton is a bust, and AVT is alright, but he's missed 22 games after the Broncos game the past two seasons. I'd rather get a skill position. A big NO to drafting another big ugly with our 10th overall pick. 

[Jdeet]

3 hours ago, DoubleDown said:

"Must" is a strong word, but taking OT is certainly high on the list of priorities.

The Jets need a long term, franchise LT.  They currently have two 33 year old 1 year rentals at both OT spots.  Drafting a tackle is not an insurance policy.  It's what a smart GM who has the ability to look beyond 1 year does when he has a blue chip premium position prospect staring him in the face.

Problem is, JD is not looking beyond year 1. The Jets will take a WR or Bowers. Not an insurance policy. We have backup Tackles. We need a WR more, especially after we trade Allen Lazard. 

[playtowinthegame]

1 minute ago, Jdeet said:

Problem is, JD is not looking beyond year 1. The Jets will take a WR or Bowers. Not an insurance policy. We have backup Tackles. We need a WR more, especially after we trade Allen Lazard. 

You think Joe Douglas can find a buyer for Lazard?

[jetswinbaby!]

If Alt is there, he will take Alt...

If not, he takes Bowers, or any of the top 3 WR's, if there...

[Sperm Edwards]

4 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

if the jets took rome, he starts and is on the field a lot.  

I don't doubt the talent of any of the guys up top who could get taken by the Jets (I'm excluding the QBs).

Rodgers tends to not spread it around to 6 different guys, though. He tends to hyper-focus on two. 

The talent is there, but the value may not be there this year from a rookie WR. Looked at through that longer-term valuation lens, a long term LT (who will see starts at one or both tackle spots this year, plus a crap ton of 1st team practice reps in for Smith) is not much more of a backup than taking a WR.

I'd be happy with either myself. I just think OT is far more likely where they stand today. Plus it being a deeper OT class means he's not desperate to take one at #10 and can be flexible enough to move down if a decent offer comes in. 

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don't doubt the talent of any of the guys up top who could get taken by the Jets (I'm excluding the QBs).

Rodgers tends to not spread it around to 6 different guys, though. He tends to hyper-focus on two. 

The talent is there, but the value may not be there this year from a rookie WR. Looked at through that longer-term valuation lens, a long term LT (who will see starts at one or both tackle spots this year, plus a crap ton of 1st team practice reps in for Smith) is not much more of a backup than taking a WR.

I'd be happy with either myself. I just think OT is far more likely where they stand today. Plus it being a deeper OT class means he's not desperate to take one at #10 and can be flexible enough to move down if a decent offer comes in. 

If they’re still hell bent on going OT in round 1, then yes, trade back and get an extra pick.  There’s enough tackles around. 

The extra problem jd has is that last year his #1 pick barely played.  Not sure if that’s b/c he wasn’t ready, saleh was benching him on purpose or something else, but it was a problem.  Now, if they take a tackle and tell the world he’s starting next season at LT, then it pisses off smith who may think he’s here again if things go well.  And, the tackle they took at 10 doesn’t have a starting spot so he’s on the bench to start the season.  All in all i don’t see a tackle in round 1.  I see a skill position player, wr or bowers.  I’m not a fan of TE in round 1 esp. at 10, but i do think bowers will be good.  If the jets took bowers, for example, they could throw him tons of passes and that will look much better for jd’s resume and that also plays into it.  He can’t have fashanu sit there while smith plays most of the season, not when rodgers has a season or two left. 

[bicketybam]

11 minutes ago, Jdeet said:

Problem is, JD is not looking beyond year 1. The Jets will take a WR or Bowers. Not an insurance policy. We have backup Tackles. We need a WR more, especially after we trade Allen Lazard. 

Trading Lazard is going to be tough.

[Larz]

It’s certainly a possibility but I think the jets like Carter Warrren. 
 

Dallas Turner wont be there but if the jets don’t get clowney they will be looking at Verse.  
 

Bowers is probably the pick 

[UntouchableCrew]

I get the sentiment.

That said, whether OT or WR -- I think a top ten pick should really be used on the highest upside elite player, not to fill a "need." I get being afraid of injury to OL or WR (I am afraid of both) but I think adding capable bodies is what the later rounds and tail end of FA is for. Adding potential superstars is what a top ten pick is for.

That's not necessarily to say "don't draft an OL." Just don't draft him because you're worried about Tyron Smith. Draft him because you have conviction this dude is going to be the next perennial Pro Bowl OT.

[UntouchableCrew]

16 minutes ago, Jdeet said:

Problem is, JD is not looking beyond year 1. 

Honestly, nothing about his FA so far suggests that.

[derp]

10 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don't doubt the talent of any of the guys up top who could get taken by the Jets (I'm excluding the QBs).

Rodgers tends to not spread it around to 6 different guys, though. He tends to hyper-focus on two. 

The talent is there, but the value may not be there this year from a rookie WR. Looked at through that longer-term valuation lens, a long term LT (who will see starts at one or both tackle spots this year, plus a crap ton of 1st team practice reps in for Smith) is not much more of a backup than taking a WR.

I'd be happy with either myself. I just think OT is far more likely where they stand today. Plus it being a deeper OT class means he's not desperate to take one at #10 and can be flexible enough to move down if a decent offer comes in. 

The wide receiver is on the field in three wide sets. If there’s an injury to Williams or (hopefully not) Wilson, he steps into as large a role as the tackle would.

Ultimately this draft has three WR’s who’d likely have been considered the best WR in the draft any of the last ten years with the exception of 2021. That the third of those guys is probably going no higher than 7th presents a really unique opportunity to be in striking distance for an elite player at a premium position who’s usually not going to be available that late.

Similarly, there’s a huge clump of tackle prospects who will likely go in the 10-30 range, and a couple of other good ones who will go after that. Guys will go in the 20’s who’d usually go in the teens.

To me you try to get one of those WR’s for this year and the long term and then start dangling the 2025 first round pick to move back up and get someone in that second tier of tackles. It’s aggressive and I usually don’t like trading future capital but I think given the strength of this class at both position groups it’s actually the most prudent use of available assets.

Hopefully get long term answers at two premium positions, they’re well situated to develop both position groups, and they need high quality depth at both.

[Bobby816]

Absolutely not at all on the train saying don’t take OT. I’d be perfectly happy if we chose Alt, Fuaga or Fashanu.

But the argument to it is that that guy with a healthy OL will next to never play. And we need insurance there as well as future.

Name me any team ok with there starting OT getting injured and are completely prepared of it happens? And are spending top 10 picks as protection to that.

[derp]

7 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Honestly, nothing about his FA so far suggests that.

Nothing like signing two players to two year deals and everyone else to one year deals to say I’m thinking long term.

[UntouchableCrew]

2 minutes ago, derp said:

Nothing like signing two players to two year deals and everyone else to one year deals to say I’m thinking long term.

I'd argue throwing tons of money around and f**king the future cap to sign the top of the FA class is far more of a sign of someone desperate to win immediately. Douglas is doing what he's pretty much always done -- keeping cap flexibility for the future.

[Barton]

Get good oIine depth somewhere else. 

[derp]

5 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

I'd argue throwing tons of money around and f**king the future cap to sign the top of the FA class is far more of a sign of someone desperate to win immediately. Douglas is doing what he's pretty much always done -- keeping cap flexibility for the future.

Simpson, Kinlaw, and Taylor have cap hits going out to 2028. Lazard and Wes Schweitzer have cap hits until 2027. Laken Tomlinson, CJ Uzomah, Carl Lawson, and Duane Brown - four players who did not significantly contribute positively during their time with the Jets - have charges that total over 10% of this year’s salary cap. I think maybe we pump the brakes a little on praising the cap handling.

[Jdeet]

28 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Honestly, nothing about his FA so far suggests that.

What are you talking about ? Nearly every signing is a win now signing. Almost all 1 year deals on established vets. 

JD doesn’t care about the future. He cares about 2024 and keeping his job. It’s “all in for 2024”. 

[UntouchableCrew]

19 minutes ago, derp said:

Simpson, Kinlaw, and Taylor have cap hits going out to 2028. Lazard and Wes Schweitzer have cap hits until 2027.

I mean, they're de minimis to the point of being largely irrelevant. None of those deals will prevent us from doing anything.

19 minutes ago, derp said:

Laken Tomlinson, CJ Uzomah, Carl Lawson, and Duane Brown - four players who did not significantly contribute positively during their time with the Jets - have charges that total over 10% of this year’s salary cap. I think maybe we pump the brakes a little on praising the cap handling.

I'm just talking about what he's doing this offseason. I.e., he's not signing another Laken Tomlinson type contract.

[UntouchableCrew]

16 minutes ago, Jdeet said:

What are you talking about ? Nearly every signing is a win now signing. Almost all 1 year deals on established vets. 

JD doesn’t care about the future. He cares about 2024 and keeping his job. It’s “all in for 2024”. 

I fundamentally disagree with the idea that signing vets to bargain deals signals "you don't care about the future."

[GreenFish]

If the draft is about the future, then tackle is definitely an option. We don't have a starter under contract for 2025. The issue is you want your first round pick to contribute right away unless he is a QB.

My current hope for 10 is

MHJ > Odunze > Nabers > Jayden Daniels > Trade up to 8 for one of those 4 > Trade Down and pick up a 2nd > Alt > Bowers