Official NFL Draft Rumors and News Thread

[jetstream23]

Random idea, and I've been a bit out of the loop lately, but is Tee Higgins still angling for a trade?  I'd love to see some sort of creative tradeback with Cincy to #20 for Tee Higgins.  Maybe the Jets trade #10, their 3rd round pick, and a pick next year for Higgins and the Bengals' #20?  No idea if that would work but getting WR Higgins and then being positioned for an OT at #20 in a deep OT class would be a bit of a homerun IMO.

[Adoni Beast]

9 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

And the pats are taking maye.  

Which sucks for us...

[slats]

11 minutes ago, Rolloffjet said:

If chargers go ot i think they go latham or fuaga true Rt. They have slater as there LT. so if they dont trade down which i think They will but if they cant it will be latham or fuaga. 

This would be a dream come true, but I really can’t imagine them taking a RT over the Nabers at #5. 

[T0mShane]

6 hours ago, Augustiniak said:

I think woody has had it with saleh in large part b/c he finally realized he needs offensive minds.  

Arthur Smith, baby. 

[derp]

21 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

If you’re the incoming GM would you rather have the eighth pick next year or the OT7(?) from the draft prior? 

You’re not answering the question. Does that make a meaningful difference in terms of whether or not you want the job given everything else you outlined?

That question asked, I’ll answer yours too. It depends, right? If Guyton looks like he might be a franchise left tackle, I’d take the bird in the hand. We are talking about moving up to secure a top three to four most important position on offense 

The other important context is that is probably one of the worse scenarios. The Jets pick tenth this year coming off a season with four snaps of Aaron Rodgers with Zach Wilson as the backup QB and arguably a worse overall roster.

It’s also possible that the pick is 18 and the job is up for grabs. They would have a tackle need and likely be looking at players worse than Guyton without a year of NFL experience to fill that hole.

Or there’s scenarios that the team makes the playoffs and has an answer at left tackle next year instead of the 24th pick, or when Tyron Smith inevitably misses time the rookie steps in, holds the fort, and has value.

Not that the scenario is necessarily going to be a positive one, but pointing out there’s a wide range of outcomes. And if the answer is it’s a bad job regardless of whether you have pick 8 or year two Tyler Guyton (spoiler alert - that’s the right answer - the eighth pick isn’t magically attracting a high end GM candidate) in my opinion the positive outweighs the negative overall.

[Augustiniak]

8 minutes ago, slats said:

This would be a dream come true, but I really can’t imagine them taking a RT over the Nabers at #5. 

I think all the harbaugh OL talk is a ruse to get someone to trade ahead of him for alt so he can have Harrison. 

[Augustiniak]

9 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Arthur Smith, baby. 

Reading the tea leaves as best as one can, my hunch is that woody believes in douglas more than saleh.  It would also potentially explain why they also appear to be scouting qbs.  Why would they send the qb coach to see nix, with no 2nd rounder?  What scenario unfolds where the jets consider nix?

[SomebodytoAnybody47]

31 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

Apparently Brian Kelly let it slip that Washington is taking Jayden Daniels.

During an interview during quarterback Jayden Daniels' pro day on Wednesday, LSU head coach Brian Kelly hinted where his Heisman Trophy winner will land in this year's draft.

"He's going to be so committed to taking care of himself that you're not going to have to worry about size or he doesn't weigh enough," Kelly said. "Lamar's (Jackson) done a pretty good job with his size. (Patrick) Mahomes, I wouldn't consider him a giant. He's gonna get the ball out to his playmakers and make plays for Washington."

https://x.com/SleeperNFL/status/1773439960227680367?s=20

 

This is good news if true. Then it’s fight for McCarthy at 4 with Arizona trading out. Thus pushing down a playmaker. 

[Jets and Redskins]

I would watch for LAC, Tenn, Chi at nine, and possibly AZ as trade down teams. Team would trade up for QB and Wr?

If jets want Bowers he should be there and maybe one of the OT. The oline is deep so a team my be more likely to trade down then pick one very high.

I think if the Jets want one of the big 3 Wr they probably have to trade up or another team probably will. We may be able to trade down and still get Bowers?

[ChuckkieB]

1 hour ago, slimjasi said:

I’m all about doubling up at OL and WR. I want two of each in this draft. I’d be more open to trading up if we had a 2nd round pick. But, as is, LOT of good players will come off the board between our first and 3rd round picks. If anything, we need morel picks, not fewer picks. 
 

Fair point, and I do agree that no matter what, a WR and OL need to be taken with our first two picks.

[T0mShane]

37 minutes ago, derp said:

You’re not answering the question. Does that make a meaningful difference in terms of whether or not you want the job given everything else you outlined?

That question asked, I’ll answer yours too. It depends, right? If Guyton looks like he might be a franchise left tackle, I’d take the bird in the hand. We are talking about moving up to secure a top three to four most important position on offense 

The other important context is that is probably one of the worse scenarios. The Jets pick tenth this year coming off a season with four snaps of Aaron Rodgers with Zach Wilson as the backup QB and arguably a worse overall roster.

It’s also possible that the pick is 18 and the job is up for grabs. They would have a tackle need and likely be looking at players worse than Guyton without a year of NFL experience to fill that hole.

Or there’s scenarios that the team makes the playoffs and has an answer at left tackle next year instead of the 24th pick, or when Tyron Smith inevitably misses time the rookie steps in, holds the fort, and has value.

Not that the scenario is necessarily going to be a positive one, but pointing out there’s a wide range of outcomes. And if the answer is it’s a bad job regardless of whether you have pick 8 or year two Tyler Guyton (spoiler alert - that’s the right answer - the eighth pick isn’t magically attracting a high end GM candidate) in my opinion the positive outweighs the negative overall.

In the scenario I presented—7 or fewer wins, top ten pick—yes, if I were an aspiring GM coming into a clean house situation, I’d want the top ten pick as opposed to the previous regime’s bottom-of-the-first tackle that just spent a year with Keith Carter. It’s always possible that tackle shows something as a rookie and develops into something great, but we obviously won’t know that on the day of the draft, so using future resources to take that chance probably isn’t ideal for the health of the franchise. Do you trust Douglas and Carter to identify a good tackle, particularly one who’ll need some development? 

[T0mShane]

40 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

Reading the tea leaves as best as one can, my hunch is that woody believes in douglas more than saleh.  It would also potentially explain why they also appear to be scouting qbs.  Why would they send the qb coach to see nix, with no 2nd rounder?  What scenario unfolds where the jets consider nix?

You’d have to think it’s due diligence, right? If they know Rodgers is coming back, they simply can’t burn a first on a QB, especially one as underwhelming as Nix, right? 

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, T0mShane said:

You’d have to think it’s due diligence, right? If they know Rodgers is coming back, they simply can’t burn a first on a QB, especially one as underwhelming as Nix, right? 

At a minimum, yet, they did interview qbs at the combine and the jets qb coach was at nix’s pro day.  They also were present for pratt’s.  Different draft capital required for each.  Seems as if they’re not sniffing the top 3 qbs and likely not the 4th either unless they go rogue and trade up. 

The scenario that is most logical if they’re considering nix or penix, is that they trade back, get a 2nd rounder (even if they flip back 1 of their 2 4ths), and then they’d have a pick in the first 4 rounds.  They would then be in a position to go OL/wr which seems most likely.  But what if a scenario is taking nix, sitting him for a year or until injuries hit, and then go OL in round 2.  

[derp]

9 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

In the scenario I presented—7 or fewer wins, top ten pick—yes, if I were an aspiring GM coming into a clean house situation, I’d want the top ten pick as opposed to the previous regime’s bottom-of-the-first tackle that just spent a year with Keith Carter. It’s always possible that tackle shows something as a rookie and develops into something great, but we obviously won’t know that on the day of the draft, so using future resources to take that chance probably isn’t ideal for the health of the franchise. Do you trust Douglas and Carter to identify a good tackle, particularly one who’ll need some development? 

You still aren’t answering the question. Does that difference make a meaningful difference in terms of how appealing the job is to the extent that you’re looking in different aisles of GM candidates? Even if you’d prefer the eighth pick, which is reasonable, is it not still a bad job?

It's reasonable to argue the job is worse, but I’m asking if it would make any practical difference since it’s a bad job regardless.

If you’re taking the seventh best tackle in a strong tackle class you’re not really identifying a player, right? You’re identifying a strong position group and taking whoever’s left from a tier.

Let’s also acknowledge that the seventh best tackle this year would’ve been a top three tackle last year and gone in the teens. Those kinds of guys aren’t usually available as late as they will be this year which is a big chunk of the appeal.

[T0mShane]

2 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

At a minimum, yet, they did interview qbs at the combine and the jets qb coach was at nix’s pro day.  They also were present for pratt’s.  Different draft capital required for each.  Seems as if they’re not sniffing the top 3 qbs and likely not the 4th either unless they go rogue and trade up. 

The scenario that is most logical if they’re considering nix or penix, is that they trade back, get a 2nd rounder (even if they flip back 1 of their 2 4ths), and then they’d have a pick in the first 4 rounds.  They would then be in a position to go OL/wr which seems most likely.  But what if a scenario is taking nix, sitting him for a year or until injuries hit, and then go OL in round 2.  

It’d be prudent to find a QB in this draft and, in a trade back scenario where they can get Nix in round two or something, it makes sense, but it seems unlikely right now that Nix gets out of R1, and I think any scenario where the Jets use a first on a QB this year is deeeeeply implausible.

[Augustiniak]

Just now, T0mShane said:

It’d be prudent to find a QB in this draft and, in a trade back scenario where they can get Nix in round two or something, it makes sense, but it seems unlikely right now that Nix gets out of R1, and I think any scenario where the Jets use a first on a QB this year is deeeeeply implausible.

I agree nix shouldn’t be there in round 2, yet the jets qb coach was front and center today.  Round 4, definitely.  

[T0mShane]

19 minutes ago, derp said:

You still aren’t answering the question. Does that difference make a meaningful difference in terms of how appealing the job is to the extent that you’re looking in different aisles of GM candidates? Even if you’d prefer the eighth pick, which is reasonable, is it not still a bad job?

It's reasonable to argue the job is worse, but I’m asking if it would make any practical difference since it’s a bad job regardless.

If you’re taking the seventh best tackle in a strong tackle class you’re not really identifying a player, right? You’re identifying a strong position group and taking whoever’s left from a tier.

Let’s also acknowledge that the seventh best tackle this year would’ve been a top three tackle last year and gone in the teens. Those kinds of guys aren’t usually available as late as they will be this year which is a big chunk of the appeal.

We both acknowledge the Jets job is bad, and my point is that whichever skell GM takes this job will want to pick his own players with any and every pick he’s alotted, so depriving him of a top ten pick would make the job significantly less appealing than it’d be with that pick in hand. I also dislike the idea of giving Douglas another bite at the apple to pick a tackle project considering he’s currently batting .0000 in that area over four years. Agreed that Guyton is intriguing and if you can guarantee me the Jets do well enough to bring back the current regime then, sure, do whatever they want to do to get it right ASAP. But no such guarantee exists, same as last season when we could have lost the 10th overall to the Packers if we didn’t have Rodgers playing time qualifier built into the trade. 

[jetstream23]

1 hour ago, slats said:

This would be a dream come true, but I really can’t imagine them taking a RT over the Nabers at #5. 

The Chargers lost Keenan Allen AND Mike Williams.  I'm 99.9% sure they're taking the best available WR at #5.   And, there's even a non-zero % chance that Nabers goes #4 to Arizona and MHJ falls into the Chargers lap.

 

[derp]

6 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

We both acknowledge the Jets job is bad, and my point is that whichever skell GM takes this job will want to pick his own players with any and every pick he’s alotted, so depriving him of a top ten pick would make the job significantly less appealing than it’d be with that pick in hand. I also dislike the idea of giving Douglas another bite at the apple to pick a tackle project considering he’s currently batting .0000 in that area over four years. Agreed that Guyton is intriguing and if you can guarantee me the Jets do well enough to bring back the current regime then, sure, do whatever they want to do to get it right ASAP. But no such guarantee exists, same as last season when we could have lost the 10th overall to the Packers if we didn’t have Rodgers playing time qualifier built into the trade. 

I think the downside scenario matters if it would impact the caliber of candidate that they could hire, but it won’t. So the whole idea that it’s less appealing to a potential GM candidate is kind of a distinction without a difference. And there’s still an upside scenario.

And again, he’s not really picking the guy if he’s picking the last guy left. He’s just saying this is a guy available at pick 27 who usually goes at pick 15 and we have a stopgap starter who misses games and need both a long term answer and depth so this is a unique opportunity and use the pick a year early.

[T0mShane]

14 minutes ago, derp said:

I think the downside scenario matters if it would impact the caliber of candidate that they could hire, but it won’t. So the whole idea that it’s less appealing to a potential GM candidate is kind of a distinction without a difference. And there’s still an upside scenario.

And again, he’s not really picking the guy if he’s picking the last guy left. He’s just saying this is a guy available at pick 27 who usually goes at pick 15 and we have a stopgap starter who misses games and need both a long term answer and depth so this is a unique opportunity and use the pick a year early.

Isn’t this premised on the idea that 1. We’re going to get the bottom of the barrel GM candidate anyway, so it doesn’t matter whether the job is more appealing or not? And 2. The presumptuous idea that Guyton will definitely be better than any tackle that might be picked in the top ten next year? 

[SomebodytoAnybody47]

28 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

We both acknowledge the Jets job is bad, and my point is that whichever skell GM takes this job will want to pick his own players with any and every pick he’s alotted, so depriving him of a top ten pick would make the job significantly less appealing than it’d be with that pick in hand. I also dislike the idea of giving Douglas another bite at the apple to pick a tackle project considering he’s currently batting .0000 in that area over four years. Agreed that Guyton is intriguing and if you can guarantee me the Jets do well enough to bring back the current regime then, sure, do whatever they want to do to get it right ASAP. But no such guarantee exists, same as last season when we could have lost the 10th overall to the Packers if we didn’t have Rodgers playing time qualifier built into the trade. 

I don’t think have that pick will matter much. The roster at its current state would probably matter more than anything. 

Did Rodgers look good? Is he toast and retiring, leaving a gaping hole at QB?

Are there holes once again along the whole OL? 
How did our rookies look? Etc etc. 

Panthers gave away the farm, had a poor roster, with their rookie qb who looked bad and still found a young offensive coach. 

The overall reputation of the Jets and Woody itself is what hinders the search. 

[T0mShane]

7 minutes ago, SomebodytoAnybody47 said:

I don’t think have that pick will matter much. The roster at its current state would probably matter more than anything. 

Did Rodgers look good? Is he toast and retiring, leaving a gaping hole at QB?

Are there holes once again along the whole OL? 
How did our rookies look? Etc etc. 

Panthers gave away the farm, had a poor roster, with their rookie qb who looked bad and still found a young offensive coach. 

The overall reputation of the Jets and Woody itself is what hinders the search. 

Panthers are a perfect example to the contrary, though. If they don’t trade future considerations last year, they’re holding the first overall pick and using that to shop for coaches instead of settling for Dave Canales and Bryce Young. 

[derp]

30 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Isn’t this premised on the idea that 1. We’re going to get the bottom of the barrel GM candidate anyway, so it doesn’t matter whether the job is more appealing or not? And 2. The presumptuous idea that Guyton will definitely be better than any tackle that might be picked in the top ten next year? 

1. I believe you’re making the argument it’s not a good idea to make a value play on a tackle in a very strong tackle class because in a team is bad scenario having the tackle spot filled is less appealing than having the top ten pick to a GM candidate. I’ve asked multiple times if that means the Jets would be able to hire a meaningfully worse GM candidate, since the job will - as we agree - be a bad job anyway, and it really only matters if the job is less appealing if they’re going to be able to hire a significantly worse candidate for that reason. Nobody’s said yes to that one.

That being the case, the GM appeal argument doesn’t really move the needle for me in terms of considering whether to be aggressive this year in adding a tackle in a strong class. I think you can argue against, and I get where you’re coming from with the idea, but again I think it’s a concern that functionally doesn’t really result in any difference for the team so it’s not something I’d weigh heavily.

2. You pulled that one out of thin air. I honestly have no clue how next year’s tackle class looks, but that was never part of the argument. I think the caliber of tackle who’s going to go in the 20’s this year would usually go in the teens, which I believe I said.

[T0mShane]

7 minutes ago, derp said:

1. I believe you’re making the argument it’s not a good idea to make a value play on a tackle in a very strong tackle class because in a team is bad scenario having the tackle spot filled is less appealing than having the top ten pick to a GM candidate. I’ve asked multiple times if that means the Jets would be able to hire a meaningfully worse GM candidate, since the job will - as we agree - be a bad job anyway, and it really only matters if the job is less appealing if they’re going to be able to hire a significantly worse candidate for that reason. Nobody’s said yes to that one.

That being the case, the GM appeal argument doesn’t really move the needle for me in terms of considering whether to be aggressive this year in adding a tackle in a strong class. I think you can argue against, and I get where you’re coming from with the idea, but again I think it’s a concern that functionally doesn’t really result in any difference for the team so it’s not something I’d weigh heavily.

2. You pulled that one out of thin air. I honestly have no clue how next year’s tackle class looks, but that was never part of the argument. I think the caliber of tackle who’s going to go in the 20’s this year would usually go in the teens, which I believe I said.

To answer the question specifically: if you are shopping for a GM candidate, having a top ten pick in your pocket makes the job infinitely more appealing to a set of candidates regardless of our opinion of how good or bad the job is. The only way to make the job less bad is to draft well, and drafting well requires premium draft picks. Even if it’s the most bargain bin GM candidate on the face of the earth, you are going to give the job to someone, and you need to hope that Joe Douglas’ replacement will find a better player in the 2025 top ten than Douglas can find with the 27th pick this year. 

[Jack Straw]

He's a 4.5s guy (from last year's times, anyway), which is fast for a TE and slow for a WR. And yes, big but slow WRs tend to fall.
Anyway, sit and wait for the season. Want to put $50 to a charity of the other guy's choosing that Bowers has a worse season next year than Sam LaPorta did this year?

Sam Laporta had one of the greatest seasons ever for a rookie tight end.

That’s a sucker’s bet and not an indictment of Brock Bowers.

[derp]

37 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

To answer the question specifically: if you are shopping for a GM candidate, having a top ten pick in your pocket makes the job infinitely more appealing to a set of candidates regardless of our opinion of how good or bad the job is. The only way to make the job less bad is to draft well, and drafting well requires premium draft picks. Even if it’s the most bargain bin GM candidate on the face of the earth, you are going to give the job to someone, and you need to hope that Joe Douglas’ replacement will find a better player in the 2025 top ten than Douglas can find with the 27th pick this year. 

I think infinitely is quite hyperbolic, especially if you’re talking about a pick in the back end of the top ten. You’re talking about weighing having pick eight and a hole at left tackle or no pick eight and a left tackle who’s been developing behind Tyron Smith for a year. Yeah, you’d probably rather have eight, but it’s not this absolute chasm where you’re going to hire a quality candidate with eight and a bad candidate with the tackle. Somebody’s going to take the job because there aren’t many and either way it won’t be a top of the market candidate.

And it’s really really diving into the team falls apart scenario - which is possible and within the realm of outcomes, but not the only outcome. You’re weighing one against the other like the team’s definitely going 7-10 and, granted I’m not terribly optimistic when it comes to the Jets, but there are definitely other scenarios.

[Doggin94it]

9 hours ago, Jack Straw said:

 

Sam Laporta had one of the greatest seasons ever for a rookie tight end.

That’s a sucker’s bet and not an indictment of Brock Bowers.

 

Of course it is. But your entire argument is that bowers is the best TE prospect ever, unique, more "great rookie wide receiver" than "great TE". If so, he should easily outstrip LaPorta. That you don't actually believe it'll happen is telling

[JustInFudge]

20 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

Of course it is. But your entire argument is that bowers is the best TE prospect ever, unique, more "great rookie wide receiver" than "great TE". If so, he should easily outstrip LaPorta. That you don't actually believe it'll happen is telling

It's really not telling at all.  It's very plausible Bowers doesnt do what LaPorta did as a rookie, especially depending what team he lands on but what if the following season, he head and shoulders the best TE in the game and then proceeds to break every TE record known to man on a way to a 1st ballot HOF career? lol

[slats]

12 hours ago, T0mShane said:

You’d have to think it’s due diligence, right? If they know Rodgers is coming back, they simply can’t burn a first on a QB, especially one as underwhelming as Nix, right? 

Is Rodgers coming back or are they firing Douglas? Because I really don’t see it being both. 

[Dcat]

14 hours ago, jetstream23 said:

Random idea, and I've been a bit out of the loop lately, but is Tee Higgins still angling for a trade?  I'd love to see some sort of creative tradeback with Cincy to #20 for Tee Higgins.  Maybe the Jets trade #10, their 3rd round pick, and a pick next year for Higgins and the Bengals' #20?  No idea if that would work but getting WR Higgins and then being positioned for an OT at #20 in a deep OT class would be a bit of a homerun IMO.

^ like this

[Dcat]

Bowers at 10 with no pick again until 3rd is like the worst possible scenario of all.   Damn them to hell if they do that.

[TuscanyTile2]

6 minutes ago, Dcat said:

Bowers at 10 with no pick again until 3rd is like the worst possible scenario of all.   Damn them to hell if they do that.

That's the current situation though.  Are you saying they should trade down?  Or maybe that they should trade some of next year's draft capital to get more in this draft? 

When I look at the 1 year deals JD gave, the same holes that we had going into this offseason are going to exist next offseason (though I could see JD "resigning" Morgan Moses to fill an OT spot).  But that would leave LT, OG, WR2 as gaping holes going into next offseason.  I think Tyler Conklin's contract is up after this coming season too, btw.  Plus we're soon going to have to pay the Sauce, GW, Breece, JJ draft class.  And AR8 is on the wrong side of 40. 

In other words, this team is going to need another major rebuild soon enough.  I think JD fully realizes this and is going to try to trade down in this draft as a result.  While I think he wants to "win now", he has to have one eye on the future because there's a very reasonable chance we make the playoffs this year and he's extended.

[Augustiniak]

7 minutes ago, Dcat said:

Bowers at 10 with no pick again until 3rd is like the worst possible scenario of all.   Damn them to hell if they do that.

I agree, and I’d like to believe there are legitimate trade back scenarios.

[Jack Straw]

1 hour ago, Doggin94it said:

Of course it is. But your entire argument is that bowers is the best TE prospect ever, unique, more "great rookie wide receiver" than "great TE". If so, he should easily outstrip LaPorta. That you don't actually believe it'll happen is telling

Or maybe there are variables outside of a players' control that impact their production. Namely, offensive coordinator, run/pass ratio, quarterback, injuries, and much more. The Lions offense was stacked and finished fifth in points (27.1 per game), second in passing yards (258.9 per game), fifth in rushing yards (135.9), and third in total touchdowns (58).

You're asking me to place a wager when I don't even know where Bowers be playing or who will be throwing him the ball. That's dumb, and I'm sure you know it. And most importantly, it is no indication of what I think of the actual player.

[UntouchableCrew]

14 hours ago, Augustiniak said:

Reading the tea leaves as best as one can, my hunch is that woody believes in douglas more than saleh. 

He’s basically said as much. Not sure that means we’re drafting a QB but Saleh feels like he’s on borrowed time here.