Tackle or Receiver in round 1?

[JetsMetsRangers]

Whatever player can come in and contribute from day 1........To me that is an offensive weapon not a tackle who might not play a major portion of the season.....With Rogers at QB do not need another Will McDonald pick nor do i want a rookie LT protecting Rogers blind side in case of an injury.......Pick up a seasoned back up tackle and give Rogers another weapon........The window is short and the time is now in my view to go all in.......

[Sperm Edwards]

13 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

I think it’s going to be fuaga or fautanu, assuming alt doesn’t make it to 10.  Besides the whole rodgers thing, if you assume Douglass is here next season, and believes he’s going to get another shot at drafting a qb, then he’s going to want the tackle spots in place.  Fautanu is perfect besides his age b/c he can play rt or g this year and lt for the rest of his career.  

Agree on OT being the most likely (I've said multiple times I'm in no position to guess which one), especially if the top 3 WRs are off the board already, and presuming they won't get great trade down offers.

[TuscanyTile2]

It's pretty much a desperate need that we add both an OL and a WR this year.  

[Rolloffjet]

No tackle rd 1 please!!  wr or bowers need weapons. Ol just sign bak. Or trade up into 2nd for ol. Jd spent too much capital on 1st rd ol. 

[Greenseed4]

2 hours ago, nyjets1969 said:

Unless they get Alt you go Bowers, Odunza or Nabers. Or you trade back none of OTs after Alt are franchise LT pretty much wasting a top 10 pick on a RT you want a franchise player with elite talent none of the Tackles after Alt are really elite talent. But guy like Bowers Odunza or Nabers are elite talent.

Latham is elite.  He can play left or right tackle. 

[Augustiniak]

26 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Agree on OT being the most likely (I've said multiple times I'm in no position to guess which one), especially if the top 3 WRs are off the board already, and presuming they won't get great trade down offers.

I think they’re going to get some offers to slide back but it could depend more on who’s left.  I’ve recently seen mocks where the chargers take alt and tenn takes fuaga, and if the jets are hell bent on OT then i would be surprised if they move out of 10.  On the other hand if fuaga, bowers and fautanu are all there, and they slide back to 12 or 13 that’s a safer play. 

[Integrity28]

1 hour ago, Maynard13 said:

So what exactly is YOUR plan other than blasting Rodgers for being 40? And Taylor was a fine pick up.  Hopefully he doesnt have to play much and stays healthy.  Hey injuries happen. Look at Stafford ,Brady. Both older vets and both missed time later in their careers and BOTH won Super Bowls later in their career.  Trading for Rodgers was a rol of the dice. We all get that but it was and still is the best viable option we have to get to the promised land.   The top 4 qb's are off the board: Daniels, Caleb, Maye (I want no part of McCarthy even if he's there at 10). So what QB are you taking? Nix? Penix? Or are you taking a QB or a tackle or a WR or what are you doing?  

I don’t need a plan.

I’m a middle-aged dude in a message board. Like I said, a few times now, I’m good with a tackle - I’m just smacking around the lemmings who have created an absurd double standard.

I can agree with your premise without agreeing with your debate rationale. Ya dig?

[Integrity28]

1 hour ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

Very good post.  The other argument for taking OL is that, best case scenario, they do get the year to learn.  And in today's NFL that's not a bad thing at all.  Andrew Thomas of the Giants apparently stunk his first year but now is a star.  

This proves my point.

[Integrity28]

1 hour ago, Maynard13 said:

I knew your ego couldnt resist flipping this. 

Yeah, you really got me.

[Integrity28]

Why can’t we have both?

[Integrity28]

53 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I think it's that a tackle should see more than just a lot of time this year, and then all of (one of the) tackle snaps next year. He could even find himself starting as a rookie at RT, and then Moses becomes the backup RT. Or maybe he's too good to bench behind Simpson (who then becomes a ~$6MM backup guard for the year, which would sound crazier if AVT hadn't missed most of the season for both of these past two years).

Super-optimistic or not, the team still sees Rodgers as starting for them for two more seasons, so you could be talking about a pure bench player for two more years. Plus this year a rookie would be QB3 so he wouldn't get any snaps (hopefully, lol). I could see it if this was such a can't-miss group - or if the 4th QB who slips to #10 is such a can't-miss prospect - OR if the one who's going to coach him up is a coach like Reid or Harbaugh. I don't think those reasons qualify here, and there's another draft next year where they won't have to reach for a pure need at OT, presumably later than pick #10 (and/or hope to find another pair of stopgaps in March good enough to be the starter all year).

The Achilles was more of a fluke thing, not an injury that was clearly due to his being 39 (at the time). The same injury was sustained by AVT (24), Dobbins (24), Tre'davious White (28), and Cam Akers (24, after also tearing an Achilles at 22). Smith misses games every year, and most of the season every other year, of late. Quite a difference. Also behind Rodgers they already have another borderline-starter at QB2 (injury-prone as he is himself). 

Whatever, I'll be happy with a healthy, non-bust for starters. Preference is either one of the top 3 WRs or top 2 OTs, and no matter how high his draft grade I can only get behind a TE with the benefit of hindsight, knowing he's a 1000-yard/year TE. If they drafted a QB and he ended up being all that, I'm in favor of that, too. I just think they're more likely to get the next Trubisky, Bortles, Darnold, Rosen, Mac Jones, Zach, Haskins, Mariota, Winston, Locker, Ponder, Gabbert, etc. because Jets. 

Listen, I’m not arguing for or against anything. I just think the argument being made is ironic, but typical, and creates a double-standard.

I mean, you literally take the wording swap OT for QB, but JN is like nahhhhhh no QB. It’s bias at best. Foolishness at worst.

[Paradis]

14 hours ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

What does JD do if the dominoes fall like this… seems like a worst-case scenario:

1 Caleb

2 Jayden

3 Drake

4 MHJ

5 Nabers

6 Bowers

7 Alt

8 Odunze

9 Fashanu

10 ?? 

I wouldn't lock Alt in to TEN, but regardless, not worst case scenario -- probably the best case scenario for trading back to get ahead of MIN if you love JJ and your name is LV/DEN etc

if that happens and no trade out, i would wager T. Fautanu

[Sperm Edwards]

37 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

Listen, I’m not arguing for or against anything. I just think the argument being made is ironic, but typical, and creates a double-standard.

I mean, you literally take the wording swap OT for QB, but JN is like nahhhhhh no QB. It’s bias at best. Foolishness at worst.

nahhhhh no QB!!!!

 

[Claymation]

16 hours ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

What does JD do if the dominoes fall like this… seems like a worst-case scenario:

1 Caleb

2 Jayden

3 Drake

4 MHJ

5 Nabers

6 Bowers

7 Alt

8 Odunze

9 Fashanu

10 ?? 

Fataunu, he can play inside and move outside next year. I do like Fauga, and believe he would be an excellent guard.

[TuscanyTile2]

Load up on defense so Saleh can embarrass QBs then build the wall at pick 256 and add some flash at WR with Mr Irrelevant.

[Maynard13]

2 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

Listen, I’m not arguing for or against anything. I just think the argument being made is ironic, but typical, and creates a double-standard.

I mean, you literally take the wording swap OT for QB, but JN is like nahhhhhh no QB. It’s bias at best. Foolishness at worst.

HUH? A QB throws throws the ball. A tackle blocks for the QB who throws the ball.  Get it? Got it? Good.

[Maynard13]

2 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

Yeah, you really got me.

 

I think its a striking image.

[Smashmouth]

8 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

40-years olds are injury prone, as evidenced by him popping his Achilles with minutes of starting the season… and regardless of whether they’ve been hurt before.

You guys are either missing or choosing to ignore my point. We need insurance against injuries to the OT and QB, full stop. So, picking a QB is just as viable as OT from a pragmatism standpoint, hence why I’m ridiculing the debate angle. 

Tyrod is getting us nowhere. He was an awful signing.

First things first going down awkwardly and tearing your achillies does not make you injury prone that can happen to a 20 year old and does. Injury prone and major Injury are 2 very different things. Rodgers is always in great shape and it would not be going out on a limb to say he works harder and is in better shape then a good percentage of players much younger than him. Picking a QB at 10 with what's left over makes zero sense and even if we had the number 1 pick there would be the very strong chance the Jets would have traded that pick and compiled a stock pile of picks unless they felt Williams was the heir apparent to Rodgers and a no brainer 

This team is built to win now and 100% will not even think of looking at a QB with the 10th pick and they would be correct in doing that . They will however look at OT or WR and those IMO are the only options with the outside chance they look at a TE or even trade back Pick up a second and grab a guy like Bryan Thomas Jr later in the first and a OL with that 2nd they acquire. 

In the case of Tyrod I agree he's not a good choice I was looking for Wentz and based on the game he played in LA last year with all the starters sitting he made it clear he's a damn good QB. He would have even made a good bridge QB after Rodgers retires in 2 , 3 or 4 years at 32 to 35 years old if he stayed here.

I'm not saying the Jets will do any of this I'm just putting out scenarios ...If it were me I would trade UP and get the OT that I want or the WR that I want if the price was not too steep. Adding a stud WR to our offense of Hall Wilson Williams and Conklin with Rodgers at QB will be very hard to deal with. Thinking of  a WR room of Wilson Williams Odunze/Harrison or Nabers would be insane. That will only happen if the Jets are Okay with Warren as the back up LT

[BornJetsFan1983]

On 4/14/2024 at 4:42 AM, Jetfuel66 said:

• I think seven offensive tackles go in the first round. Maybe more. And it’s because of the scarcity of the position. If you, say, have a tackle need and a receiver need this year—or really any year in this era—it’s fair to say it’ll be a lot easier to address receiver later in the draft than it will be tackle. Which, I think, will have these guys flying off the board.

 

This quote was taken from Albert Breer's article in SI.

Although I would love another weapon or two I agree that receivers are easier to find in the later rounds than tackles. I can see JD locking down one of the top 3 tackles in round 1 and then addressing receiver in round 3. It is definitely harder to find quality OL talent, especially tackles in the later rounds than it is to find receivers. The most recent drafts prove this to be true.

Look I love to have a first round wr but look at last year's...it's not a lock. We have to tackle is one is there. We just will its smart roster construction.

We need it. Hopefully trad back and take a wr in the second.

I'd like to take a tippman type in the third too 

[jamesr]

Both OT and WR will be a "need" position looking at how the roster will look after this year. JD has shown that his drafting strategy is to look beyond immediate need - "win now" may be how we see it but I'd wager it is not the foremost thought in JD's mind.

We have three older (to varying degrees) one-year stop gaps, all with injury concerns, at LT, RT and WR. Exactly which will be more of a need is anyone's guess, and will likely be dictated by how the top 9 picks fall.

[LIJetsFan]

18 hours ago, nyjets1969 said:

Unless they get Alt you go Bowers, Odunza or Nabers. Or you trade back none of OTs after Alt are franchise LT pretty much wasting a top 10 pick on a RT you want a franchise player with elite talent none of the Tackles after Alt are really elite talent. But guy like Bowers Odunza or Nabers are elite talent.

If I knew I was getting a 10 year RT at 10 I'd take him.  At this point it's 50/50 WR vs OT.  If good ones fall then take the guy with the highest floor.  We have to be chosing from the bust free zone this time around.  

[OilfieldJet]

3 minutes ago, LIJetsFan said:

If I knew I was getting a 10 year RT at 10 I'd take him.  At this point it's 50/50 WR vs OT.  If good ones fall then take the guy with the highest floor.  We have to be chosing from the bust free zone this time around.  

Fuaga.

[LIJetsFan]

Just now, OilfieldJet said:

Fuaga.

He's the small hands guy right?  Probably not all that important for an OL guy.  I suppose if the 3rd best WR is there we're taking him regardless.  Then we look at round 3 for some sort of backup OT dude.  It's funny that for an OL guy JD suks at drafting OL.   

[OilfieldJet]

13 minutes ago, LIJetsFan said:

He's the small hands guy right?  Probably not all that important for an OL guy.  I suppose if the 3rd best WR is there we're taking him regardless.  Then we look at round 3 for some sort of backup OT dude.  It's funny that for an OL guy JD suks at drafting OL.   

No, small hands is Fashanu, Fuaga was penalties. 

[Integrity28]

17 hours ago, Maynard13 said:

HUH? A QB throws throws the ball. A tackle blocks for the QB who throws the ball.  Get it? Got it? Good.

Don't be this way.

”Draft OT to be backup insurance because old injury prone farts, then start in the future.”

Swap OT with QB.

I mean, I know you know. You’re spraying dookie At this point because it’s def more fun that acknowledgement. I should know.

[Integrity28]

17 hours ago, Maynard13 said:

 

I think its a striking image.

I’m a knuckle-dragging Adonis.

[Integrity28]

13 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

First things first going down awkwardly and tearing your achillies does not make you injury prone that can happen to a 20 year old and does. Injury prone and major Injury are 2 very different things. Rodgers is always in great shape and it would not be going out on a limb to say he works harder and is in better shape then a good percentage of players much younger than him. Picking a QB at 10 with what's left over makes zero sense and even if we had the number 1 pick there would be the very strong chance the Jets would have traded that pick and compiled a stock pile of picks unless they felt Williams was the heir apparent to Rodgers and a no brainer 

This team is built to win now and 100% will not even think of looking at a QB with the 10th pick and they would be correct in doing that . They will however look at OT or WR and those IMO are the only options with the outside chance they look at a TE or even trade back Pick up a second and grab a guy like Bryan Thomas Jr later in the first and a OL with that 2nd they acquire. 

In the case of Tyrod I agree he's not a good choice I was looking for Wentz and based on the game he played in LA last year with all the starters sitting he made it clear he's a damn good QB. He would have even made a good bridge QB after Rodgers retires in 2 , 3 or 4 years at 32 to 35 years old if he stayed here.

I'm not saying the Jets will do any of this I'm just putting out scenarios ...If it were me I would trade UP and get the OT that I want or the WR that I want if the price was not too steep. Adding a stud WR to our offense of Hall Wilson Williams and Conklin with Rodgers at QB will be very hard to deal with. Thinking of  a WR room of Wilson Williams Odunze/Harrison or Nabers would be insane. That will only happen if the Jets are Okay with Warren as the back up LT

Being 40 in a collision sport makes you injury prone. Period. You cannot rationalize away age.

[bicketybam]

8 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

Being 40 in a collision sport makes you injury prone. Period. You cannot rationalize away age.

[Rich Thornburgh]

21 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

Why can’t we have both?

I dont think Penix gets past seattle

[Rich Thornburgh]

1 hour ago, Integrity28 said:

Being 40 in a collision sport makes you injury prone. Period. You cannot rationalize away age.

Amazing how jets fans want to ignore this franchise’s horrific history of quarterbacks getting injured

[Integrity28]

10 minutes ago, Rich Thornburgh said:

I dont think Penix gets past seattle

Agree. I think JJ McCarthy is the guy being incorporated into all the pre-draft rumors and wouldn't be shocked if he got picked after Penix.

9 minutes ago, Rich Thornburgh said:

Amazing how jets fans want to ignore this franchise’s horrific history of quarterbacks getting injured

Exactly my point in all of this. I've never said "no OT", I'm simply saying if you cannot admit that the argument some are using to rationalize an OT with pick 10 isn't identical to the argument for a QB, then it's steeped in bias and not logic.

[Augustiniak]

Just now, Integrity28 said:

Agree. I think JJ McCarthy is the guy being incorporated into all the pre-draft rumors and wouldn't be shocked if he got picked after Penix.

Exactly my point in all of this. I've never said "no OT", I'm simply saying if you cannot admit that the argument some are using to rationalize an OT with pick 10 isn't identical to the argument for a QB, then it's steeped in bias and not logic.

I wouldn’t be surprised if mccarthy makes it to 10 and the Vikings haven’t traded up.  

[Integrity28]

Just now, Augustiniak said:

I wouldn’t be surprised if mccarthy makes it to 10 and the Vikings haven’t traded up.  

Yep. I've got him pegged as the guy who slides. Not because I think one way or another about him as a prospect, but because his name seems to be attached to the most rumors. Typically, we see this happen when multiple franchises use 1 poor kid as the centerpiece of all of their pre-draft jockeying. I just think he's being used for gamesmanship right now.

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, Integrity28 said:

Yep. I've got him pegged as the guy who slides. Not because I think one way or another about him as a prospect, but because his name seems to be attached to the most rumors. Typically, we see this happen when multiple franchises use 1 poor kid as the centerpiece of all of their pre-draft jockeying. I just think he's being used for gamesmanship right now.

The wild scenario is if the jets consider a qb in that scenario but I’m just a fool holding out hope.  I still want fuaga, he’s perfect for this team

[Integrity28]

12 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

The wild scenario is if the jets consider a qb in that scenario but I’m just a fool holding out hope.  I still want fuaga, he’s perfect for this team

I believe there are a few OL that would be great for us, but I don't think any of them necessitate #10 overall. I think there are 7-8 OL in round 1 worth taking at various points. I am hoping we can see this and recoup a 2nd rounder.