NO WAY Jets draft O-line at 10 (opinion)

[jamesr]

The starting premise on this thread is that JD will be fired after this season unless [insert random assumption about results here].

This is purely a fan assumption. A popular narrative on a bulletin board. No one knows what Woody is thinking or planning. Probably not even he does.

Let's say we go 11-5 - a four game improvement over last year - but just miss the playoffs on a tie breaker. Or grab a wild card and lose in round one. Does that get him fired? From 4 wins to 11 in three years? Ending the playoff drought?

Then what? We need to rebuild loads of our OL all at once? The draft isn't about winning now, it's about building to win in the future. Draft picks are for 4 - 5 years minimum. Free agents are not. How you approach free agency does not need to match how you approach the draft. A smart GM knows that.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[83Kelly2Allen18]

1 hour ago, jamesr said:

You don't draft based on what other teams in the division, or anywhere else, are doing. That's how you screw up even more than usual.

You build your team your way. Not dictated by who NE pick, or OMG Buffalo traded up for a WR so we'll have to do that too.




Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 

I don't agree with this. If Beane is moving on the chess board further down from 28, and acquires another queen ( Harrison jr) and the jets draft an OT who doesn't start, that's like losing a chess piece. It's not a proper perspective of the talent available, it's value, and it's value in the context of how it matches up with our opponents. 

 

How the heck are we going to justify not getting Nabers or Odunze but Buffalo moves ahead from 28 for Harrison jr. 

 

Absolutely not. 

[Claymation]

7 hours ago, Rhg1084 said:

If we draft Alt and everyone is healthy whats the plan? Alt play RT and Moses is the swing?

That’s a good problem to have.

[jamesr]

29 minutes ago, 83Kelly2Allen18 said:

I don't agree with this. If Beane is moving on the chess board further down from 28, and acquires another queen ( Harrison jr) and the jets draft an OT who doesn't start, that's like losing a chess piece. It's not a proper perspective of the talent available, it's value, and it's value in the context of how it matches up with our opponents. 

 

How the heck are we going to justify not getting Nabers or Odunze but Buffalo moves ahead from 28 for Harrison jr. 

 

Absolutely not. 

What is your objective overall - to "win the draft", or to win games?

What Buffalo, or Miami, or NE do in the draft is irrelevant. We play 17 games - and hopefully more - and they account for 6 of those. You build the best team you can to take on all opponents. What others do should not influence that.

Let's say Buffalo give up this year's 1, next year's 1 and next year's 2 to move up to draft MHJ. Do we have to also give up next year's picks to match / beat what they do? Then Miami move up to grab someone else, do we mortgage more future picks to match / compete? You can't run a draft like that.

Every team starts with a different baseline of talent, and a different stock of draft picks and cap space. They have different holes to fill, and possibly different states of 'urgency' to win now vs. build for the future (e.g. compare NE with NYJ and Buffalo). Assuming NE draft a young QB at #3 - we're not going to trade up and draft one too, so we can come out of the draft with a better player than they got.

[Claymation]

34 minutes ago, 83Kelly2Allen18 said:

I don't agree with this. If Beane is moving on the chess board further down from 28, and acquires another queen ( Harrison jr) and the jets draft an OT who doesn't start, that's like losing a chess piece. It's not a proper perspective of the talent available, it's value, and it's value in the context of how it matches up with our opponents. 

 

How the heck are we going to justify not getting Nabers or Odunze but Buffalo moves ahead from 28 for Harrison jr. 

 

Absolutely not. 

So Buffalo is going to move from 28 to 4? What are they giving up besides the next 3 1st rounders? 
 

This a deep draft for WR, who is to say that an impact player can’t be had later in the draft.

[ScouserJet]

If Alt is there at 10; the Jets take Alt.

Other than that, I think you may well be right OP.

[Bobby816]

The WR situation and OT situation are very similar. Williams and Lazard FAs after this year. One didn’t play good last year and the other has injury concerns. Moses and Smith are FAs after this year. Moses in general is always healthy but Smith isn’t.

 

We really can’t go wrong if we choose any top 3 WR, Top 3 OT or Bowers.

[slats]

9 hours ago, slimjasi said:

The jets need to draft OL and WR/weapon with their first two picks. The order doesn’t necessarily matter (although it’s usually easier to find an immediate starting caliber WR in the 3rd round than it is a tackle).
 

It really depends on who you like. I would take Odunze over every tackle on the board with the possible exception of Alt, but I would take numerous tackles over Bowers. 

This is where I’m at, that if Odunze is on the board, I’ll be disappointed if the Jets don’t take him. That said, I could easily see JD targeting an OT, too. 
 
Both positions have been filled in FA with older players recovering from injury. At the skill positions, the Jets starting lineup is pretty set with Wilson, Williams, Lazard/Gipson platooning the slot, and Conklin. To say the WR is a lock to play (or even start) but the OL wouldn’t, imo, is misguided. There’s no reason that an OL taken at #10 overall would not be in competition for a starting job and, as discussed ad infinitum, the Jets tackles are 33 years old and the Jets history at the position has been written on the IR. Tippmann worked his way into the starting lineup last year, I could see a similar thing happen with another rookie OL this year. 
 
Also think OT is just likely to be his BAP at #10 (the three WRs being gone) and that wanting to trade down and finding a trade partner are two different things. So yeah, I want the WR, but understand and kinda expect the OT. 

[jamesr]

28 minutes ago, Bobby816 said:

The WR situation and OT situation are very similar. Williams and Lazard FAs after this year. One didn’t play good last year and the other has injury concerns. Moses and Smith are FAs after this year. Moses in general is always healthy but Smith isn’t.

 

We really can’t go wrong if we choose any top 3 WR, Top 3 OT or Bowers.

It could actually make Bowers the "luxury pick" of all those you listed - but at the same time he should be able to contribute more straight away.

[Augustiniak]

5 minutes ago, slats said:

This is where I’m at, that if Odunze is on the board, I’ll be disappointed if the Jets don’t take him. That said, I could easily see JD targeting an OT, too. 
 
Both positions have been filled in FA with older players recovering from injury. At the skill positions, the Jets starting lineup is pretty set with Wilson, Williams, Lazard/Gipson platooning the slot, and Conklin. To say the WR is a lock to play (or even start) but the OL wouldn’t, imo, is misguided. There’s no reason that an OL taken at #10 overall would not be in competition for a starting job and, as discussed ad infinitum, the Jets tackles are 33 years old and the Jets history at the position has been written on the IR. Tippmann worked his way into the starting lineup last year, I could see a similar thing happen with another rookie OL this year. 
 
Also think OT is just likely to be his BAP at #10 (the three WRs being gone) and that wanting to trade down and finding a trade partner are two different things. So yeah, I want the WR, but understand and kinda expect the OT. 

The underlying issue with the debate is that the jets have no 2nd round pick.  They have 2 glaring needs - LT and wr (or a guy like bowers, I’ll throw him in there) - and by the time they pick in early round 3, you’re looking at decent developmental tackles and what’s leftover from a bumper crop of wrs.  If the jets had a 2nd round pick, great, they would be much more able to tap into the wr pool and could still take that tackle in round 1 and all would be well (until rodgers gets hurt).  This is the debate, which is harder to get - an impact wr or starting tackle in the 3rd?

best scenario is the jets can trade back and flip their 3rd for a 2nd and then they can address both needs without stressing too much about who’s falling to mid round 3

 

[Barton]

They should be adding a legit veteran Offensive tackle as depth. Baktiari would make sense. 

[viffer]

11 hours ago, bitonti said:

...

wake up bro 3 of the 5 starters are hurt RIGHT NOW 

At least we have starters at those positions.

[viffer]

10 hours ago, Augustiniak said:

...  I sound like a broken record but a trade back is best. They can still get a tackle in this deep class

With who? You need a trade partner to trade back. Maybe if one of the quarterbacks falls to 10, then you might find a trade partner. 

[68JET11]

If somehow Joe Alt drops to 10, which I highly doubt, he should be the pick. That's the only OL guy I would take at 10. If he's not there, then take the best WR at 10 or trade down if possible. Can't be more simple than that.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Bobby816 said:

The WR situation and OT situation are very similar. Williams and Lazard FAs after this year. One didn’t play good last year and the other has injury concerns. Moses and Smith are FAs after this year. Moses in general is always healthy but Smith isn’t.

 

We really can’t go wrong if we choose any top 3 WR, Top 3 OT or Bowers.

 

As of today, next year they have no one locked into place at LT, RT, WR2, WR3. For future planning to lock in the most 2025 starters in 2024, an OT is a no-brainer given those needs:

• Taking a WR in round 1 and an OT in round 3 may just cut that to LT, RT, and WR3, since it's harder to rely upon a 2nd year mid-round OT prospect to handle 100% of the snaps the following season.
• Conversely taking an OT in round 1 and a WR in round 3 cuts next year's need to RT and either WR2 or WR3 (depending how good he is, but the WR doesn't need to be relied upon as a 90-100% snaps guy like OT). There's a high percentage chance you need to find 1 less starter after this season.

That's just on paper, though, and as prospects you can't so-accurately use them like chess pieces yet. IOW it'll depend which guy they add and which guy they pass on to make that plan work out. Like, if they pass on the next Garrett Wilson to instead take any of the three bleh or worse OTs that went before him? Ew. 

[viffer]

2 hours ago, Claymation said:

That’s a good problem to have.

No, it isn't. Too many holes to have the #10 pick sit on the bench. 

[NorthCoastJetsFan]

The only person mentioned here that I do not want is Bowers.

He's a YAC guy, and if the Jets draft a playmaker it has to be someone who can stretch the field and stop the defenses from rolling everyone up close. That is not Bowers.

And, please, no more talk about Bakhtiari. The guy is the poster child for the IR.

This is a deep draft for WRs and OTs. If the guy(s) you want aren't there, trade down and try to get an additional 2nd.  

[viffer]

1 hour ago, Augustiniak said:

The underlying issue with the debate is that the jets have no 2nd round pick.  They have 2 glaring needs - LT and wr (or a guy like bowers, I’ll throw him in there) - and by the time they pick in early round 3, you’re looking at decent developmental tackles and what’s leftover from a bumper crop of wrs.  If the jets had a 2nd round pick, great, they would be much more able to tap into the wr pool and could still take that tackle in round 1 and all would be well (until rodgers gets hurt).  This is the debate, which is harder to get - an impact wr or starting tackle in the 3rd?

best scenario is the jets can trade back and flip their 3rd for a 2nd and then they can address both needs without stressing too much about who’s falling to mid round 3

 

Best scenario, yes, if they can find a trade partner. Best case for us would be if one of the desirable quarterbacks falls to 10. Then maybe we could land a 2nd round pick and keep our 3rd.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Barton said:

They should be adding a legit veteran Offensive tackle as depth. Baktiari would make sense. 

Except that plan - while I'd welcome it if he's healthy - makes no sense.

I'll believe Bakhtiari is willing to sign with the Jets to be a cheap backup two established veteran tackles when I see it -- never mind that he'd do so in the spring so the team locks in this need. It'd be a terrible career move for him, let alone for cheap backup dollars, too.

In terms of him being healthy or not, Bakhtiari falls into one of two extremes, despite the desire of some that he's in between:

• if he's healthy he's a must-start player;
• if not then he's unsuitable even in a backup role.

Signing him as a backup is bordering on (or is actually) nonsensical; either to the team (if he's not able to play) or to the player (if he is).

With the clock ticking on his starting years - he turns 33 himself in September - I don't see why people think he's eager to take a back seat to anyone. Let alone to another probowl/all-pro level peer, and all for the privilege of playing for cheap with every home game (on top of road games) on artificial turf which he just publicly stated how much he hates. 

I think adding him - never mind adding him on the Jets' timeline i.e. now or right after the draft - is a delusional fantasy. He's far more likely to stay as a FA until a starting LT job appears, like Duane Brown did when we first signed him, or go to a team with a much shakier talent penciled in at LT (one he feels he can take the job away from with little difficulty).

It'd make less than no sense for him to choose a cheap backup role with the MetLife Field Jets over a starting role with, say, the LT-less Super Bowl champ Chiefs and their natural bluegrass field in Arrowhead. 

[83Kelly2Allen18]

2 hours ago, jamesr said:

What is your objective overall - to "win the draft", or to win games?

What Buffalo, or Miami, or NE do in the draft is irrelevant. We play 17 games - and hopefully more - and they account for 6 of those. You build the best team you can to take on all opponents. What others do should not influence that.

Let's say Buffalo give up this year's 1, next year's 1 and next year's 2 to move up to draft MHJ. Do we have to also give up next year's picks to match / beat what they do? Then Miami move up to grab someone else, do we mortgage more future picks to match / compete? You can't run a draft like that.

Every team starts with a different baseline of talent, and a different stock of draft picks and cap space. They have different holes to fill, and possibly different states of 'urgency' to win now vs. build for the future (e.g. compare NE with NYJ and Buffalo). Assuming NE draft a young QB at #3 - we're not going to trade up and draft one too, so we can come out of the draft with a better player than they got.

We just disagree man. I look at drafting as not a linear concept of just taking a good player.

 

I look at like im playing chess vs my division and other top teams on a number of issues

 

My overarching drafting philosophy

When and where I could trade up/ trade down

Which positions are strengths in a draft and how does that relate to my roster construction 

What are my pillars of positional value and how do my opponents compare to my pillars

***Can said singular player create an exponential advantage over my team or vice versa***

I don't think all drafts are the same and I believe each draft is like a new strategy similar to chess

 

But I respect you opinion 

[Claymation]

10 minutes ago, viffer said:

No, it isn't. Too many holes to have the #10 pick sit on the bench. 

Last year, the Jets had 1 OL play over 95%  of the offensive snaps. Let me ask you this, how likely will this entire OL play over 95% of the snaps. Now if the Jets pick an OT at 10, and then pick Wilson or Worthy in the 3rd, I would take that over Odunze and Paul.

What holes do the Jets have?

[83Kelly2Allen18]

2 hours ago, Claymation said:

So Buffalo is going to move from 28 to 4? What are they giving up besides the next 3 1st rounders? 
 

This a deep draft for WR, who is to say that an impact player can’t be had later in the draft.

From what I'm reading I think Buffalo is targeting 4 or 6 or 9. If that's true and the jets take a lineman at ten that doesn't start, that seems like a bad strategy and the jets missing out on the biggest possibility of impact at ten. But you're making it worse because now Buffalo added a perimeter blue chip talent and we didn't. I don't agree with that approach

 

If Buffalo trades up for Harrison jr, I want the jets to have Nabers 

[83Kelly2Allen18]

7 minutes ago, Claymation said:

Last year, the Jets had 1 OL play over 95%  of the offensive snaps. Let me ask you this, how likely will this entire OL play over 95% of the snaps. Now if the Jets pick an OT at 10, and then pick Wilson or Worthy in the 3rd, I would take that over Odunze and Paul.

What holes do the Jets have?

Outside Wilson we don't have another blue chip perimeter wr. Mike Williams is coming off an ACL and is someone I think will help but not till mid season where he'll be 100%

[83Kelly2Allen18]

2 hours ago, Bobby816 said:

The WR situation and OT situation are very similar. Williams and Lazard FAs after this year. One didn’t play good last year and the other has injury concerns. Moses and Smith are FAs after this year. Moses in general is always healthy but Smith isn’t.

 

We really can’t go wrong if we choose any top 3 WR, Top 3 OT or Bowers.

The question is can you find an elite perimeter talent later in the draft. Probably not. You absolutely can draft a good ot later on. It's about impact and how that impact matches up vs other teams. 

 

The Notre Dame tackle doesn't move the needle like Nabers or Odunze 

[Augustiniak]

37 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

 

As of today, next year they have no one locked into place at LT, RT, WR2, WR3. For future planning to lock in the most 2025 starters in 2024, an OT is a no-brainer given those needs:

• Taking a WR in round 1 and an OT in round 3 may just cut that to LT, RT, and WR3, since it's harder to rely upon a 2nd year mid-round OT prospect to handle 100% of the snaps the following season.
• Conversely taking an OT in round 1 and a WR in round 3 cuts next year's need to RT and either WR2 or WR3 (depending how good he is, but the WR doesn't need to be relied upon as a 90-100% snaps guy like OT). There's a high percentage chance you need to find 1 less starter after this season.

That's just on paper, though, and as prospects you can't so-accurately use them like chess pieces yet. IOW it'll depend which guy they add and which guy they pass on to make that plan work out. Like, if they pass on the next Garrett Wilson to instead take any of the three bleh or worse OTs that went before him? Ew. 

If jd had job security, and he was looking beyond 2024, yes, i completely agree, taking the tackle now and having that position fixed going forward is absolutely the correct move.  You have all your picks next year and can address wr easily i would think.

the problems now are 1) no 2nd rounder, 2) rodgers’ health, 3) major needs at LT and wr and 4) a gm who may draft based on saving his a**.  So what does jd do?  If he takes a tackle like fashanu and he sits initially he will get creamed by us fans when our #10 pick is on the bench and rodgers is going to start mouthing off about how he expected more help now.  If they took a guy like fautanu, they could at least throw him at guard immediately and he’s a legit starting guard and can slide to tackle as needed.

if they wait to round 3 to address tackle and take a wr like rome, at least they maxed out on the draft slot.  But taking bowers and then having the OL break down again is the end for douglas. 

Does douglas draft for his a**, or for the future?

[Claymation]

9 minutes ago, 83Kelly2Allen18 said:

Outside Wilson we don't have another blue chip perimeter wr. Mike Williams is coming off an ACL and is someone I think will help but not till mid season where he'll be 100%

And Smith and Moses are a picture of Health?

[Dcat]

43 minutes ago, 68JET11 said:

If somehow Joe Alt drops to 10, which I highly doubt, he should be the pick. That's the only OL guy I would take at 10. If he's not there, then take the best WR at 10 or trade down if possible. Can't be more simple than that.

IMO, the drop from the top 3 WRs to the next set is huge with Brian Thomas being the transition point from 5 star to next level below.  So if top 3 are WR gone lean to one of the top 2 OTs there. With a trade back yielding a 2nd rounder would be very helpful

[Augustiniak]

3 minutes ago, Dcat said:

IMO, the drop from the top 3 WRs to the next set is huge with Brian Thomas being the transition point from 5 star to next level below.  So if top 3 are WR gone lean to one of the top 2 OTs there. With a trade back yielding a 2nd rounder would be very helpful

They don’t need a stud wr, they just need competent wrs.  Would rather have a very good tackle than btj, esp. in round 1.  

[slats]

3 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

So what does jd do?  If he takes a tackle like fashanu and he sits initially he will get creamed by us fans when our #10 pick is on the bench and rodgers is going to start mouthing off about how he expected more help now.  If they took a guy like fautanu, they could at least throw him at guard immediately and he’s a legit starting guard and can slide to tackle as needed.

JD can’t allow himself to be persuaded by fan perception, and certainly not like this. If he’s taking an OL, he needs to take the top one on his board - which is what I think he will do. A guard who can slide out to tackle is probably going to be rated lower on his board than a solid, pure OT. 

[Augustiniak]

Just now, slats said:

JD can’t allow himself to be persuaded by fan perception, and certainly not like this. If he’s taking an OL, he needs to take the top one on his board - which is what I think he will do. A guard who can slide out to tackle is probably going to be rated lower on his board than a solid, pure OT. 

I agree in theory, but the problem is the whole ‘win now’ thing.  Jd may be drafting for his job.  That’s why i said if he had job security, just take the best tackle and that helps the team the most in the long run.  But if his mandate is playoffs or unemployment, what player  addresses that concern the most?  Is it bowers, is it btj, is it the best guard?  Does he take bowers and say he was the best guy on his board?  Not sure how he reconciles winning in 2024 with taking a LT and sitting him. 

[83Kelly2Allen18]

12 minutes ago, Claymation said:

And Smith and Moses are a picture of Health?

It's not mutually exclusive. You can easily find a quality offensive tackle later in the draft. You won't find a Nabers or Odunze later on

[Gastineau Lives]

53 minutes ago, NorthCoastJetsFan said:

The only person mentioned here that I do not want is Bowers.

He's a YAC guy, and if the Jets draft a playmaker it has to be someone who can stretch the field and stop the defenses from rolling everyone up close. That is not Bowers.

And, please, no more talk about Bakhtiari. The guy is the poster child for the IR.

This is a deep draft for WRs and OTs. If the guy(s) you want aren't there, trade down and try to get an additional 2nd.  

Mike Williams Non Field Stretcher 

Garrett Wilson One Trick Pony

YAC MAN Badddd 

My book report by Angelo Berkowitz 

Alternate title: Tyreek Hill 14.1 Career Yards Per Reception Mike Williams 15.6. 
 

Kinda long but catchy

 

[83Kelly2Allen18]

You can draft rosengarten or gonclaves later on. Heck you could probably get coker from tcu in rd 6 and hed be a decent ot prospect to get ready for 2025. 

[83Kelly2Allen18]

15 minutes ago, Dcat said:

IMO, the drop from the top 3 WRs to the next set is huge with Brian Thomas being the transition point from 5 star to next level below.  So if top 3 are WR gone lean to one of the top 2 OTs there. With a trade back yielding a 2nd rounder would be very helpful

Passing on Thomas jr if the top 3 wrs are gone is a mistake. That dude has transcendent traits. No way am I passing up on him for a tackle. 

[Sperm Edwards]

6 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

I agree in theory, but the problem is the whole ‘win now’ thing.  Jd may be drafting for his job.  That’s why i said if he had job security, just take the best tackle and that helps the team the most in the long run.  But if his mandate is playoffs or unemployment, what player  addresses that concern the most?  Is it bowers, is it btj, is it the best guard?  Does he take bowers and say he was the best guy on his board?  Not sure how he reconciles winning in 2024 with taking a LT and sitting him. 

Meh, then sign a bit pricer backup to fill that hole; you don't burn the 10th pick in the draft because of a perceived temporarily more diverse hole (let alone hole in depth) that passes on to a secondary position like guard.

If he drafts a guard at #10 he needs to not only start every game right away but needs to be an all-pro at that position.