Talk of Bowers at 10 Picking up Steam; Looking at Day 3 QB’s

[Gastineau Lives]

1 minute ago, AFJF said:

Wasn't Tim Tebow a Heisman winner?

Only in certain arguments 

[slats]

16 hours ago, AFJF said:

This is why I'm so adamant about the pick being Bowers.  Taking any player who you're hoping does not see the field isn't the move when your QB is 41 and you're getting fired if you don't win now.  Especially in a deep class in which you may get a player this year who is as as good as the one you might get with your 1 next season.

Using future picks to get more picks this year would also align with that approach.

The argument that an OL or WR would not be expected to see the field holds no water. An OT selected at #10 overall would absolutely be in competition for a starting job and, given the Jets’ team history and the history of their 33 year old penciled in starters, will be likely to be on the field at some point. A WR taken at #10 would be expected to jump ahead of Lazard and Gipson as the third WR in exactly the same way that Brock Bowers would be expected to line up as the “big slot” with two WRs and another TE on the field. At both OT and WR, there are starting openings in 2025. 
 
On the last line, I hate that. Read a good article on the science of drafting and analytical approach is to trade down to acquire more picks, with trading for future picks bringing a 174% increase in value. I would hate to see him trade future picks this year just so the team can be short on picks again next season, looking to overpay again to fill the void. 

[Augustiniak]

Just now, slats said:

The argument that an OL or WR would not be expected to see the field holds no water. An OT selected at #10 overall would absolutely be in competition for a starting job and, given the Jets’ team history and the history of their 33 year old penciled in starters, will be likely to be on the field at some point. A WR taken at #10 would be expected to jump ahead of Lazard and Gipson as the third WR in exactly the same way that Brock Bowers would be expected to line up as the “big slot” with two WRs and another TE on the field. At both OT and WR, there are starting openings in 2025. 
 
On the last line, I hate that. Read a good article on the science of drafting and analytical approach is to trade down to acquire more picks, with trading for future picks bringing a 174% increase in value. I would hate to see him trade future picks this year just so the team can be short on picks again next season, looking to overpay again to fill the void. 

Realistically, i think we’re getting 1 of 3 guys - bowers, fuaga or fautanu.  Obviously just my opinion, based on readings and mocks.  But if we’re probably not getting rome or nabers, probably not taking a qb and probably not going defense, by process of elimination who’s left?  Doubt they take fashanu with those tiny hands and doubt they take Latham.

if they stay at 10 i think it’s bowers, b/c they won’t want to risk losing him if he’s absolutely their guy.  But if they’re intent on going OL, which is the smart thing to do, then trade back and get an extra 3rd rounder.  

I like bowers as a player but i think his rookie impact isn’t going to be monstrous, and jd is toast here if there’s a tackle injury and the OL falters while rodgers is healthy.  

[varjet]

Here is another way to look at Bowers:

• If he is that good and Bowers is sitting there at 10 for the Jets to pick him, JD’s phone should be ringing with teams who want to trade up for him.  I am not seeing that happening. 
• JD’s phone was not ringing last year for teams wanted to trade for WmD4.   The premium players were gone when the Jets picked last here, and they will likely be gone when the Jets pick at 10.

[T0mShane]

1 hour ago, AFJF said:

Wasn't Tim Tebow a Heisman winner?

Do you think Stetson Bennett was a bad QB? 

[T0mShane]

1 hour ago, Gastineau Lives said:

You know who’s not prematurely balding? Me. And I have the testosterone level of a scented candle.

You, an effete man of the theater, would likewise not survive the rigors of an NFL season. 

[T0mShane]

1 hour ago, Guilhermezmc said:

This whole thing is about him being bald, right? 

Bald bro. Hayden Hurst. 

[Maynard13]

On 4/13/2024 at 3:16 PM, jetblue95 said:

 

would think a generational hall of fame talent is not someone you would pass up.  

obviously we don't know who will be on the board.  that goes without saying when discussing who the jets may target at 10.  who are the great players you would advocate taking over bowers?

Take the other potential HOF player in a trade back.

[Maynard13]

2 hours ago, Augustiniak said:

Realistically, i think we’re getting 1 of 3 guys - bowers, fuaga or fautanu.  Obviously just my opinion, based on readings and mocks.  But if we’re probably not getting rome or nabers, probably not taking a qb and probably not going defense, by process of elimination who’s left?  Doubt they take fashanu with those tiny hands and doubt they take Latham.

if they stay at 10 i think it’s bowers, b/c they won’t want to risk losing him if he’s absolutely their guy.  But if they’re intent on going OL, which is the smart thing to do, then trade back and get an extra 3rd rounder.  

I like bowers as a player but i think his rookie impact isn’t going to be monstrous, and jd is toast here if there’s a tackle injury and the OL falters while rodgers is healthy.  

I avoid all three of those guys.  A TE is not necessarry right now. Fugua is a RT, we need a LT and he's not an elite pass protector.  Fanshanau wouldnt be terrible but I love the idea of tradin back and getting an extra 2nd/3rd and take a prospect like Mims who is an absloute beast 6'7 340.  The only reason he isnt listed top 10 is because he hasnt played as much. But during his time, he dominated.  Our OL is still very susceptible and JD HAS to plan for 2025 for a LT prospect to take over and fill in this year if needed, which invariably, he will based on Smith's last few years.     

[Augustiniak]

2 minutes ago, Maynard13 said:

I avoid all three of those guys.  A TE is not necessarry right now. Fugua is a RT, we need a LT and he's not an elite pass protector.  Fanshanau wouldnt be terrible but I love the idea of tradin back and getting an extra 2nd/3rd and take a prospect like Mims who is an absloute beast 6'7 340.  The only reason he isnt listed top 10 is because he hasnt played as much. But during his time, he dominated.  Our OL is still very susceptible and JD HAS to plan for 2025 for a LT prospect to take over and fill in this year if needed, which invariably, he will based on Smith's last few years.     

Drafting purely based on need usually winds up being bad.  That’s how you end up with becton over wirfs.  If the jets want a tackle i would take the best RT and that’s fuaga, and then figure out a plan for LT if they still need one.  

[Maynard13]

4 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

Drafting purely based on need usually winds up being bad.  That’s how you end up with becton over wirfs.  If the jets want a tackle i would take the best RT and that’s fuaga, and then figure out a plan for LT if they still need one.  

Well that was a dumb pick by JD.  Wirfs clearly had a higher upside.  But Fuaga is not in that realm. He is not an elite pass protector.  You trade back and take a guy like Mims who is IMO next up behind Alt.

[Augustiniak]

Just now, Maynard13 said:

Well that was a dumb pick by JD.  Wirfs clearly had a higher upside.  But Fuaga is not in that realm. He is not an elite pass protector.  You trade back and take a guy like Mims who is IMO next up behind Alt.

Fuaga is a good in pass pro, considerably better than Latham.  And there’s just no way jd is going to take a chance on mims after the becton fail.  No way.  And nobody thinks mims is next after alt. 

[Maynard13]

16 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

Fuaga is a good in pass pro, considerably better than Latham.  And there’s just no way jd is going to take a chance on mims after the becton fail.  No way.  And nobody thinks mims is next after alt. 

LOL I do. LOL. And many think he is going to be a steal. He is flying up draft boards

[varjet]

My Jets Draft Board, for practical purposes-the first two picks need to be OL and a WR/weapon:

Picking at 10:

1. Nabers
2. Alt
3. Odunze
4. Bowers
5. Fuaga
6. Latham
7. Fantanu

Trading down from 10:

1. Bowers
2. Fuaga
3. Latham
4. Fantanu
5. Guyton
6. BTJ
7. Barton
8. Leggett

Guys I like in the second/third:

• Leggett
• Morley
• Pearsall
• Zinger
• Rosengarten
• Zinter
• Leggett

My perfect draft would be Guyton and a WR like Leggett/Pearsall/Morley, and then use the other Day 2 pick on best OL.  

[OtherwiseHappyinLife]

3 hours ago, slats said:

The argument that an OL or WR would not be expected to see the field holds no water. An OT selected at #10 overall would absolutely be in competition for a starting job and, given the Jets’ team history and the history of their 33 year old penciled in starters, will be likely to be on the field at some point. A WR taken at #10 would be expected to jump ahead of Lazard and Gipson as the third WR in exactly the same way that Brock Bowers would be expected to line up as the “big slot” with two WRs and another TE on the field. At both OT and WR, there are starting openings in 2025. 
 
On the last line, I hate that. Read a good article on the science of drafting and analytical approach is to trade down to acquire more picks, with trading for future picks bringing a 174% increase in value. I would hate to see him trade future picks this year just so the team can be short on picks again next season, looking to overpay again to fill the void. 

To add to this a little, seeing the field is one thing and hitting the ground running is another.

First round, first year WRs have had a ton of success in the past 7 to 8 years.  OL and traditional TEs have tended to need more development time.

Since the Jets are in win now mode, Id love to see one of the top 3 WRs drop.  

[SomebodytoAnybody47]

All aboard the Bowers Express!!

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, SomebodytoAnybody47 said:

All aboard the Bowers Express!!

Yes, so basically my 3 choices of bowers, fautanu and fuaga.  We’re getting one of them.  And if someone actually takes bowers ahead of us it’s OT all the way, probably.

[Adoni Beast]

1 minute ago, SomebodytoAnybody47 said:

All aboard the Bowers Express!!

Shrug....here's hoping for the best or DJ is throwing up some serious smokescreens for his boy.

[dbatesman]

16 hours ago, T0mShane said:

Checks a bunch of boxes. Calls Woody “sir.” Name brand guy. Won’t outright bust unless he breaks down. 

Douglas has obviously been a disaster overall, but one thing he's done is draft athletes. Bowers feels like a Maccagnan pick, which would be kind of a bummer.

[SomebodytoAnybody47]

 

Chooo choooo

[jetblue95]

4 minutes ago, SomebodytoAnybody47 said:

 

Chooo choooo

 

smokescreen to get the colts to jump us and take bowers, allowing one of the WRs or alt to fall to 10

[Adoni Beast]

4 minutes ago, jetblue95 said:

 

smokescreen to get the colts to jump us and take bowers, allowing one of the WRs or alt to fall to 10

Or just smokescreen to make it look like we aren't desperate to trade down...who knows. We'll see soon enough.

[slats]

21 hours ago, Jetkwondo said:

Unexpected like maybe Odunze getting picked before Nabers by the Cardinals in Peter Schragers Mock and we go get Nabers at 8, as Nania speculated today... Or....  has Pete guessed right on our pick once again

 

This is the mock that seems to be getting the most attention. In this scenario, I’d suspect that Joe Douglas wouldn’t have to be making calls; he’d be answering when Denver and Oakland call looking to get ahead of Minnesota for QB #5. And if he didn’t get those calls, I’d call Minny and kinda infer that I did. Ideally, instead of the Colts, one of those QB hungry teams will make the trade with Chicago. 

[Smashmouth]

So Conklin averages 60 catches a year the past 3 years and will only get better with Rodgers throwing him the ball . 

How much more Will Bowers offer this team ? Does anyone here think he's going to be a Kelce or a Kittle or a Gronk ?

Also are we just giving up on Ruckert and the Kuntz ?

Does anyone think it would be better to have Bowers Williams and Wilson over Conklin Williams Odunze and Wilson ?

[Rich Thornburgh]

1 minute ago, Smashmouth said:

So Conklin averages 60 catches a year the past 3 years and will only get better with Rodgers throwing him the ball . 

How much more Will Bowers offer this team ? Does anyone here think he's going to be a Kelce or a Kittle or a Gronk ?

Also are we just giving up on Ruckert and the Kuntz ?

Does anyone think it would be better to have Bowers Williams and Wilson over Conklin Williams Odunze and Wilson ?

If you read this board he’s already better than Kelce

[Smashmouth]

3 minutes ago, Rich Thornburgh said:

If you read this board he’s already better than Kelce

I've heard this 100 times about how this first round TE is generational and all that bullsh*t they almost never are.

[slats]

12 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

So Conklin averages 60 catches a year the past 3 years and will only get better with Rodgers throwing him the ball . 

How much more Will Bowers offer this team ? Does anyone here think he's going to be a Kelce or a Kittle or a Gronk ?

Also are we just giving up on Ruckert and the Kuntz ?

Does anyone think it would be better to have Bowers Williams and Wilson over Conklin Williams Odunze and Wilson ?

It’s not even Conklin he’d be replacing because he’s not a TE, he’s a big slot/H-back, although some folks think we should trade Conklin if Bowers is drafted which doesn’t really feel like moving forward, either. The guy he’d be replacing most would presumably be Lazard. So then the question is whether or not Bowers would be more successful out of the slot than the 6’5”, 227lb Lazard who already has about 2200 yards and 20 TDs of production working with Rodgers. I know he sucked last year, but so did the Jets QBs. 

[Augustiniak]

Just now, slats said:

It’s not even Conklin he’d be replacing because he’s not a TE, he’s a big slot/H-back, although some folks think we should trade Conklin if Bowers is drafted which doesn’t really feel like moving forward, either. The guy he’d be replacing most would presumably be Lazard. So then the question is whether or not Bowers would be more successful out of the slot than the 6’5”, 227lb Lazard who already has about 2200 yards and 20 TDs of production working with Rodgers. I know he sucked last year, but so did the Jets QBs. 

Yes, bowers negates the need for a slot wr.  He still makes the offense better, but the jets need a good tackle more.  

[DoubleDown]

The Jets drafting a tweener TE at #10 to use as a slot WR would be very Jetsy.

[Sperm Edwards]

On 4/15/2024 at 8:51 AM, Claymation said:

Drafting a first-round WR is hard, and the hit rate here is historically lower than other positions. There's a 63 percent chance of drafting a bust or a reach.

So one out 3 WRs taken in the 1st round will come up snake eyes. 

 

You also have to factor the sheer numbers are also at play here. Without that it's not an honest take just looking at straight percentages.

• For low-dollar positions like TEs, they have to really be outstanding prospects to get drafted in round 1, and typically do something at the combine to raise eyebrows on top of that. 
• For high-dollar positions like QB, WR, OT, and DL? They can come off a just-ok or pretty good college season (or career), even from a two-bit school, and skyrocket into the 1st round just from the combine/measurables alone, further boosted by positional value. FFS Stephen Hill was nearly a 1st rounder and he never caught 30 passes or more than 5 TDs in a season before getting drafted 10 slots after round 1.

Then for the bottom 3 probowl rates (WR, OL, DL) the sheer number of starting players vying for a limited number of probowl slots is a big factor in probowl rates. There 2-3x as many starting WRs as there are starting QBs. Factoring in PB alternates, last year there were 11 pro bowl QBs on paper and an equal number of WRs. Pushing aside any player's own performance, just by the numbers it's 2-3x easier to make the probowl as a QB than as a WR. For OL, last year there were 22 players given such honors (twice as many), but consider there are also twice as many starters (5 per team vs 2.5 starting WRs per team):

• 11 probowl QBs out of probably 28 season-long starters = a 40% chance (jfc the Jets suck at this)
• 11 probowl WRs out of some 75 season-long starters = a 15% chance
• 22 probowl OL out of some 150 starters = also a 15% chance

The one that's the big outlier is safety, as there are some 60 starting safeties vying for just 6 probowl slots, and they still have the highest comparative probowl rate for 1st round picks.

Also I disagree with the premise that a player taken anywhere in round 1 is a bust if he isn't a probowler. I'd say that holds true if you're talking about a position like TE, but not for WR. DJ Moore is a 1st rounder who's never made a probowl. He's averaged >1000 yards/season despite all those lousy passers throwing to him. He certainly isn't a bust, yet your rationale rates him as such. Ditto Brandin Cooks, and others at "low probowl percentage" positions where there's 2-3x the number of players competing for probowl slots.

Then there are the relative busts. Ted Ginn didn't pan out as an elite WR, but the guy who was expected to be drafted in that slot was Brady Quinn. Ginn was never a probowl WR (and often wasn't even a nominal starter) but he was a better pick than Brady Quinn who was projected as high as #3 and was even worse than Zach Wilson (though admittedly, being a less smelly turd isn't the stuff of bragging rights). 

Also the other difference between TE and WR prospects is a top TE prospect, in a normal draft class, still caps out around somewhere between picks 16-24. If the first WR taken is down in the teens it's more likely isn't nearly as good of a prospect (compared to a teens-20s pick TE) and there's more finger-crossing at play, because if he was all that as a WR prospect then he'd be locked inside the top 10 if not the top 5. TEs usually have to rely upon a weak draft class to get considered inside the top 10.

Anyway I think the numbers you posted are interesting to look at, because I like to geek out with the best of them, but don't agree they automatically mean the things inferred.

[AFJF]

5 hours ago, slats said:

The argument that an OL or WR would not be expected to see the field holds no water. An OT selected at #10 overall would absolutely be in competition for a starting job and, given the Jets’ team history and the history of their 33 year old penciled in starters, will be likely to be on the field at some point. A WR taken at #10 would be expected to jump ahead of Lazard and Gipson as the third WR in exactly the same way that Brock Bowers would be expected to line up as the “big slot” with two WRs and another TE on the field. At both OT and WR, there are starting openings in 2025. 
 
On the last line, I hate that. Read a good article on the science of drafting and analytical approach is to trade down to acquire more picks, with trading for future picks bringing a 174% increase in value. I would hate to see him trade future picks this year just so the team can be short on picks again next season, looking to overpay again to fill the void. 

I said that the hope is that they won't see the field which is 100% true.  You added two of the top tackles in the NFL at their respective positions and you hope they're healthy and playing every week.

Now, is that going to realistically happen?  Not a chance.

But is there a chance they combine to miss six or seven games?  Certainly.  Does that make pick 10 on an OT to play just a few games worth it?  I would say no.  I'm using pick 10 on a day 1 contributor who I expect to play every single week.

Every draft is and should be treated based on the depth of that year's class.  There is a very good chance you'll find a starting caliber tackle late in the first round or early second round this year.  You can't refuse to make a deal today because one you made a few years ago didn't work out.

They went out and gave up multpple premium picks and tens of millions of dollars to add a QB who can win a Super Bowl.  But he's 41 and coming off of an injury.  Every year Rodgers is expected to play should be treated as his last.  Get every single ounce of talent around him this season that you can and hope he gets you a ring.

Otherwise it's another case of the Jets hafl-assing it.  "We want to win now.  But only kind of, because we're also going to proceed as if we have a real shot to win in 3 or 4 years so we'll get Aaron some help this year but not too much".

I think Spielman nailed it.  They've taken a lot of risks to get to this point and should be adding players who will help them win not only in 2026, 2027, 2028 but this year.  

[Augustiniak]

5 minutes ago, AFJF said:

I said that the hope is that they won't see the field which is 100% true.  You added two of the top tackles in the NFL at their respective positions and you hope they're healthy and playing every week.

Now, is that going to realistically happen?  Not a chance.

But is there a chance they combine to miss six or seven games?  Certainly.  Does that make pick 10 on an OT to play just a few games worth it?  I would say no.  I'm using pick 10 on a day 1 contributor who I expect to play every single week.

Every draft is and should be treated based on the depth of that year's class.  There is a very good chance you'll find a starting caliber tackle late in the first round or early second round this year.  You can't refuse to make a deal today because one you made a few years ago didn't work out.

They went out and gave up multpple premium picks and tens of millions of dollars to add a QB who can win a Super Bowl.  But he's 41 and coming off of an injury.  Every year Rodgers is expected to play should be treated as his last.  Get every single ounce of talent around him this season that you can and hope he gets you a ring.

Otherwise it's another case of the Jets hafl-assing it.  "We want to win now.  But only kind of, because we're also going to proceed as if we have a real shot to win in 3 or 4 years so we'll get Aaron some help this year but not too much".

I think Spielman nailed it.  They've taken a lot of risks to get to this point and should be adding players who will help them win not only in 2026, 2027, 2028 but this year.  

But when you really look at the risks taken to max out this year, they’re mostly at tackle.  The defense is mostly set.  You’re obviously hoping rodgers doesn’t tear something the first series.  But are the jets more at risk of not making the playoffs b/c they don’t have a good TE or b/c they have the oldest tackles in the nfl protecting the oldest qb in the nfl?

[extmenace]

On 4/11/2024 at 10:37 AM, CTJetsFan said:

Agree with the "TE" designation being a major issue. If he was designated a "WR", people might view him differently.

Not the issue for me, the issue for me is that our qb has one of the lowest over the middle throw percentages in the league. Rodgers try’s to avoid throwing into congested areas and thats generally where you see your slot options and TE’s do most of their work. I just have concerns that we’ll draft a player that doesn’t fit into the offense.  
 

You’d just think with all the seasons under rodgers belt, he’d have been paired with a talented TE at some point that could be more than a red zone threat. It’s never really happened before…so not sure at his age he’ll change the way he plays to utilize a rookie TE. This isn’t a knock on the prospect, it’s a question of if he can be utilized properly in this offense.

[Claymation]

57 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

So Conklin averages 60 catches a year the past 3 years and will only get better with Rodgers throwing him the ball . 

How much more Will Bowers offer this team ? Does anyone here think he's going to be a Kelce or a Kittle or a Gronk ?

Also are we just giving up on Ruckert and the Kuntz ?

Does anyone think it would be better to have Bowers Williams and Wilson over Conklin Williams Odunze and Wilson ?

By that rationale, the Jets shouldn't have drafted Breece Hall because they had Michael Carter?

[AFJF]

9 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

But when you really look at the risks taken to max out this year, they’re mostly at tackle.  The defense is mostly set.  You’re obviously hoping rodgers doesn’t tear something the first series.  But are the jets more at risk of not making the playoffs b/c they don’t have a good TE or b/c they have the oldest tackles in the nfl protecting the oldest qb in the nfl?

Plenty of risk at WR too with only one proven/reliable option on the roster in Wilson.

Behind him you have an injury prone Mike Williams and a couple of guys with potential who haven't proven anything.  They need another pass catcher.

They're reportedly high on Carter Warren and there are several veteran tackles you can look at after the draft.

IMO, best way forward is:

Trade down from 10 to add picks and take best pass catcher on the board when you're on the clock.  Hopefully you get Bowers later in the round.  If you stay put at 10, take him there.

Get a 2nd round pick by using picks from either this or next year.  Use that pick on an OT who can also play G.

Sign a vet FA OT as your backup with Warren behind that guy.

That gives you:

Smith
Moses
Vet FA
Warren
Rookie T/G

And depending on how many OL they're willing to carry, I'd grab another OL on day 3.

Can't ignore backup tackle situation, but also wouldn't use pick 10 when WR2 is a huge injury risk.