Hypothetical: Who Would You Trade?

[Jetsfan80]

46 minutes ago, bonkertons said:

Lol people saying Sauce because we’d get the most for him is kinda funny. “Let’s trade Sauce because he’s the best one and the hardest to replace”.

 

If the choice was between Sauce and Tyrod Taylor, should we trade Sauce?  Jets fans are so not used to having good things. Crazy. 

This franchise has prioritized defense over offense for decades.  It’s high time to go offense-heavy.  So of the 4, I’d prefer to trade the guy who hasn’t to this point even traveled with WR1s in this scheme. 

JJ would be my 2nd choice given the low snap count of individual EDGE guys in this system.  

[Jetsfan80]

6 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

But Just to reiterate - the goal is to keep all 4. 

[slimjasi]

9 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Probably also not realistic, sadly 

[Barry McCockinner]

13 minutes ago, Jack Straw said:

Jermaine Johnson might be the most overrated Jet on the roster. He's a nice player, but people talk about him like he's a 15 sack guy.

I'd trade Sauce. Zone corner who doesn't cause turnovers and doesn't tackle well. Again, he's a great player but due to the scheme fit + what he'd yield in a return, he makes the most sense.

show me the people talking about him like he's a 15 sack guy. why do people do this?

[PFSIKH]

3 hours ago, Barry McCockinner said:

This is a hypothetical and you must trade one.

We drafted Sauce, G. Wilson, J Johnson and Breece Hall in 2022. Assume they've all remained healthy and continue to ascend as players. Joe Douglas is in the difficult situation of having to trade one of them in order to save that sweet, sweet cap space. 

Who would you trade and why?

I wouldn't trade Sauce.  The others?  Not so much.

Very nicer players, but on the level of a shutdown corner?  No.

[Jack Straw]

46 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

show me the people talking about him like he's a 15 sack guy. why do people do this?

You are easily triggered.

[Barry McCockinner]

Just now, Jack Straw said:

You are easily triggered.

lol wut?

so you admit there aren't actually people talking about him the way you claimed, right? why did you say that bro?

[JiFtheOracle]

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

4 picks, yes, but only one 2.  The rest were 3-5s, with the 5 being a year later than the other picks (2024).  Not exactly an enormous haul for the best RB in the league.  All that barely adds up to one mid-late 1st rounder on the value chart.  If that's about what we could expect for Breece, I'd rather keep him and let Rodgers pepper him with targets the next 1-2 years.

What, meanwhile, would we get for Sauce?

Well, the thread is about who would you trade to keep the others, right?  Not about who gets the highest return, which would obviously be Sauce.  So I started w/, I'd trade the RB first and just pointed out how many picks they got for McCarthy.  That said, there is no way in hell I'd trade Sauce unless the Jets were trading w/ a team that has the potential of picking in the top 3 so they can target a QB.  Otherwise, I wouldnt trade him, he'd be the one I would prioritize to keep while I worked deals for anyone else. 

[Jack Straw]

6 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

lol wut?

so you admit there aren't actually people talking about him the way you claimed, right? why did you say that bro?

To trigger people like you. And I have the neither the time or the inclination to go digging up the posts/articles referring to the future start that is JJ. 

And I should have corrected myself -- people talk about JJ like he will be a 15 sack guy.**

[Barry McCockinner]

4 minutes ago, Jack Straw said:

To trigger people like you. And I have the neither the time or the inclination to go digging up the posts/articles referring to the future start that is JJ. 

And I should have corrected myself -- people talk about JJ like he will be a 15 sack guy.**

I'm not triggered I just think your post is stupid. Thanks for confirming you make things up.

[batman10023]

3 hours ago, Alka said:

First, this is a awful decision to make.  My vote would be to trade Johnson, since the other 3 could end up being All Pro candidates for the majority of their careers, and Johnson is not in that category in my opinion.

same thinking on my part.   plus we seem to be able to get good production out of folks on the DL.

[Jet_Engine1]

As of today, June 5 2024;

Absolutely try to keep: Sauce and Wilson

 

Would be nice to keep but could replace: Hall. 

 

Would like to keep, but if needed to lose one of them: JJ.

 

But this could change with a couple, tbh. If Allen comes in and can be in the ballpark as effective as Hall or JJ goes out and gets 16 sacks this year, it would definitely change.

[Warfish]

1 hour ago, Barry McCockinner said:

show me the people talking about him like he's a 15 sack guy. why do people do this?

There is a great new feature on the forum you might be interested in.  It's called "Search", it lets you do you own research on what people say, so the rest of the forum doesn't have to do it for you.  It's located in the top right of each page, and has some really great filter features.

While you are OP, I didn't see you telling us who YOU would trade, and why. 

Care to let us know?  

[Warfish]

28 minutes ago, JustInFudge said:

Well, the thread is about who would you trade to keep the others, right?  Not about who gets the highest return

How do you separate who to trade from what each would likely get in return?  Aren't the two concepts pretty much tied together at the hip?

Same as "what do we likely have to pay them" would be a part of "who would you trade" thinking, surely?

[Barry McCockinner]

6 minutes ago, Warfish said:

There is a great new feature on the forum you might be interested in.  It's called "Search", it lets you do you own research on what people say, so the rest of the forum doesn't have to do it for you.  It's located in the top right of each page, and has some really great filter features.

While you are OP, I didn't see you telling us who YOU would trade, and why. 

Care to let us know?  

Nah I'm not going to go research some BS claim someone made. I'm on this site all the time and don't see people talking like that. He can feel free to backup the claim if he wants.

I don't know who I would trade but would probably start w/Breece simply because he's a RB and they have a short shelf life. Don't know what kind of value we'd be able to get in return though.

I do think the argument for it being Sauce is a good one. He fetches the most value and we run a zone scheme.

[Warfish]

Just now, Barry McCockinner said:

Nah I'm not going to go research some BS claim someone made.

We absolutely have some folks who have overhyped both J.J. and McDonald in my experience on the forum. 

No, I didn't bookmark those posts just in case I needed to link them to you later, lol.  Your failure to have seen it or notice it, or search for it, does not make it not exist, nor does our unwillingness to do your research for you.

Just now, Barry McCockinner said:

I'm on this site all the time and don't see people talking like that.

You've never seen anyone on JN hype up J.J. eh? 

People see (and believe) what they want to see I guess.

Just now, Barry McCockinner said:

I don't know who I would trade but would probably start w/Breece simply because he's a RB and they have a short shelf life. Don't know what kind of value we'd be able to get in return though.

If he has a 17 game played breakout season, maybe something decent.  But RB is indeed a devalued position overall in the NFL, and hence comp. would be low because most teams would think they could find equivalent talents in the mid-rounds of almost every draft class.  So he conversely may be the easiest to let go, but the least coveted on the open market.

Just now, Barry McCockinner said:

I do think the argument for it being Sauce is a good one. He fetches the most value and we run a zone scheme.

He and QW are clearly the most tradable assets on the defensive side, in terms of being players other teams would covet at positions teams often want any way they can get them.  None of the others come close (yet).  Hall is (as you note) a RB, so cheap, Wilson is a mid-tier NFL WR as of now, not in the elite class yet.  And J.J. is just a serviceable edge so far, nothing more.

You could likely pay all three for what Sauce will demand as a FA, lol.  And Sauce gets back by the most of the three on the market. 

As of now, of course.

[JiFtheOracle]

16 minutes ago, Warfish said:

How do you separate who to trade from what each would likely get in return?  Aren't the two concepts pretty much tied together at the hip?

Same as "what do we likely have to pay them" would be a part of "who would you trade" thinking, surely?

It's simple.  You just do!!!  lol

As mentioned, the thread was about clearing cap space to save the other players.  So, that's how I am separating it.  Who would I trade to make space to keep the others.  The return value doesnt factor into that hypothetical scenario.   

[Warfish]

5 minutes ago, JustInFudge said:

It's simple.  You just do!!!  lol

As mentioned, the thread was about clearing cap space to save the other players.  So, that's how I am separating it.  Who would I trade to make space to keep the others.  The return value doesnt factor into that hypothetical scenario.   

Not gonna go back and forth, but the only way "it doesn't factor" is if you were cutting one to make room. 

Trading inherently includes return value by it's very definition.  The thread is literally titled "who do you trade".

But agree to disagree at this point, lol. SMH.

[Barry McCockinner]

4 minutes ago, Warfish said:

We absolutely have some folks who have overhyped both J.J. and McDonald in my experience on the forum. 

No, I didn't bookmark those posts just in case I needed to link them to you later, lol.  Your failure to have seen it or notice it, or search for it, does not make it not exist, nor does our unwillingness to do your research for you.

You've never seen anyone on JN hype up J.J. eh? 

People see (and believe) what they want to see I guess.

If he has a 17 game played breakout season, maybe something decent.  But RB is indeed a devalued position overall in the NFL, and hence comp. would be low because most teams would think they could find equivalent talents in the mid-rounds of almost every draft class.  So he conversely may be the easiest to let go, but the least coveted on the open market.

He and QW are clearly the most tradable assets on the defensive side, in terms of being players other teams would covet at positions teams often want any way they can get them.  None of the others come close (yet).  Hall is (as you note) a RB, so cheap, Wilson is a mid-tier NFL WR as of now, not in the elite class yet.  And J.J. is just a serviceable edge so far, nothing more.

You could likely pay all three for what Sauce will demand as a FA, lol.  And Sauce gets back by the most of the three on the market. 

As of now, of course.

You cannot prove something doesn't exist. You can only prove it does. So the burden of proof is on the person who claims it exists. 

Show me all the people talking about JJ like he's a 15 sack per year guy or just let it go. jfc

 

 

[Warfish]

5 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

You cannot prove something doesn't exist. You can only prove it does. So the burden of proof is on the person who claims it exists. 

Show me all the people talking about JJ like he's a 15 sack per year guy or just let it go. jfc

Your pedanticism might make more sense if this wasn't about opinion comments made over several years in the tens of thousands of posts on this site tangentially related to this hypothetical thread about hypothetical trades for hypothetical reasons at some hypothetical future.   

If you think anyone is spending their time finding that just to placate your denialism, you're dreaming.  If you think it's a B.S. claim, and that no one here has ever over-rated J.J., great.    

[bicketybam]

1 minute ago, Warfish said:

Your pedanticism might make more sense if this wasn't about opinion comments made over several years in the tens of thousands of posts on this site tangentially related to this hypothetical thread about hypothetical trades for hypothetical reasons at some hypothetical future.   

If you think anyone is spending their time finding that just to placate your denialism, you're dreaming.  If you think it's a B.S. claim, and that no one here has ever over-rated J.J., great.    

People were saying he was a bust 2 years ago, but ok.

[Jack Straw]

14 minutes ago, Warfish said:

We absolutely have some folks who have overhyped both J.J. and McDonald in my experience on the forum. 

No, I didn't bookmark those posts just in case I needed to link them to you later, lol.  Your failure to have seen it or notice it, or search for it, does not make it not exist, nor does our unwillingness to do your research for you.

You've never seen anyone on JN hype up J.J. eh? 

People see (and believe) what they want to see I guess.

If he has a 17 game played breakout season, maybe something decent.  But RB is indeed a devalued position overall in the NFL, and hence comp. would be low because most teams would think they could find equivalent talents in the mid-rounds of almost every draft class.  So he conversely may be the easiest to let go, but the least coveted on the open market.

He and QW are clearly the most tradable assets on the defensive side, in terms of being players other teams would covet at positions teams often want any way they can get them.  None of the others come close (yet).  Hall is (as you note) a RB, so cheap, Wilson is a mid-tier NFL WR as of now, not in the elite class yet.  And J.J. is just a serviceable edge so far, nothing more.

You could likely pay all three for what Sauce will demand as a FA, lol.  And Sauce gets back by the most of the three on the market. 

As of now, of course.

You're doing god's work and have far more patience than I do. 

[Warfish]

1 minute ago, bicketybam said:

People were saying he was a bust 2 years ago, but ok.

Some were in my experience, absolutely.

Notice I'm not demanding you show posts to prove your claim about what "people said" over the past two years.  

[Barry McCockinner]

3 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Your pedanticism might make more sense if this wasn't about opinion comments made over several years in the tens of thousands of posts on this site tangentially related to this hypothetical thread about hypothetical trades for hypothetical reasons at some hypothetical future.   

If you think anyone is spending their time finding that just to placate your denialism, you're dreaming.  If you think it's a B.S. claim, and that no one here has ever over-rated J.J., great.    

still waiting for you to show me all the people talking about him like he's a 15 sack guy. should be pretty easy to pull up if you're so confident it exists. instead you just want to argue that it exists when you could just show me.

cool

[bicketybam]

1 minute ago, Warfish said:

Some were in my experience, absolutely.

Notice I'm not demanding you show posts to prove your claim about what "people said" over the past two years.  

Anyone without Alzheimer's knows people were calling Johnson a bust.

[Jack Straw]

10 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

You cannot prove something doesn't exist. You can only prove it does. So the burden of proof is on the person who claims it exists. 

Show me all the people talking about JJ like he's a 15 sack per year guy or just let it go. jfc

 

 

Yes, I also took intro to philosophy and understand that the burden of proof falls on the person making the claim.

My refusal to dig up the evidence to support my claim doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist. It just means that I don't answer to every bumbling moron who wants to argue over a comment made in passing.

The sky is blue. Water is wet. You're a clown. If you want the evidence, go outside and jump into a lake while looking in the mirror.

[Warfish]

6 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

still waiting for you to show me all the people talking about him like he's a 15 sack guy. should be pretty easy to pull up if you're so confident it exists. instead you just want to argue that it exists when you could just show me.

cool

Yes, pretty easy.  With a unique name like Johnson, and out of several tens of thousands of posts.

And if I spend an hour finding one, let me guess "That's just one, doesn't mean anything".

Get out of here, lol.  Way to derail your own (pretty good topic) thread, lol.

[Barry McCockinner]

2 minutes ago, Jack Straw said:

Yes, I also took intro to philosophy and understand that the burden of proof falls on the person making the claim.

My refusal to dig up the evidence to support my claim doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist. It just means that I don't answer to every bumbling moron who wants to argue over a comment made in passing.

The sky is blue. Water is wet. You're a clown. If you want the evidence, go outside and jump into a lake while looking in the mirror.

Why don't we start with one. Show me one person and then we'll get into "people talk about him like he's a 15 sack per year guy".

Or you can just keep hurling the personal insults, which is always a convincing argument.

[Jack Straw]

5 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

Why don't we start with one. Show me one person and then we'll get into "people talk about him like he's a 15 sack per year guy".

Or you can just keep hurling the personal insults, which is always a convincing argument.

 

"Freak"

"Poor Man's JJ Watt"

"JJ Is ready for a beast of a season"

"Poised for a huge year"

 

[batman10023]

56 minutes ago, Warfish said:

There is a great new feature on the forum you might be interested in.  It's called "Search", it lets you do you own research on what people say, so the rest of the forum doesn't have to do it for you.  It's located in the top right of each page, and has some really great filter features.

While you are OP, I didn't see you telling us who YOU would trade, and why. 

Care to let us know?  

so what would you search to come up with a reasonable number of items to review.

the term "15"?   that's gonna be a ton.  "JJ" maybe a little less.    maybe "JJ 15" gets us the answer.

[Barry McCockinner]

8 minutes ago, Jack Straw said:

 

"Freak"

"Poor Man's JJ Watt"

"JJ Is ready for a beast of a season"

"Poised for a huge year"

 

poor mans TJ watt is pretty strong - nice job. i was wrong.

 

[Claymation]

3 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Exactly.  Those voting Breece think we'd get a haul for him.  We wouldn't, so its not really worth trading him - he'd more valuable to us and Rodgers for the immediate future than he'd be to the rest of the league.  The same principles on not paying for RBs apply to the rest of the league.

Sauce, meanwhile, would give us the best "bang for your buck".  

Who is voting for Breece thinking you are getting a haul. Just say no to Breece Haul.

Wilson, Sauce and JJII all play premium positions. And it looks like the Jets have cornerstones in all three players

[Bronx]

5 hours ago, Joe W. Namath said:

Sauce.  Hed get the most in return.  And we could then resign reed and we have stiggy.

Elite CB > Elite RB 

Besides the fact that DBs have longer careers than RBs.

Stiggy, Sperm Edwards is the greatest!!! (T-IPPY) OMG I love-love-love him!!!, etc. Why?

[peebag]

4 hours ago, Claymation said:

I would trade All Ball Hall

he is neither Tall nor small

you can find another RB at the mall

or against the wall

If you hold on to him we will see his talent fall

Its time for JD to make that call

 

 

I do not like green eggs and ham.

[Jetsfan80]

2 hours ago, JustInFudge said:

Well, the thread is about who would you trade to keep the others, right?  Not about who gets the highest return, which would obviously be Sauce.  So I started w/, I'd trade the RB first and just pointed out how many picks they got for McCarthy.  That said, there is no way in hell I'd trade Sauce unless the Jets were trading w/ a team that has the potential of picking in the top 3 so they can target a QB.  Otherwise, I wouldnt trade him, he'd be the one I would prioritize to keep while I worked deals for anyone else. 

 

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

How do you separate who to trade from what each would likely get in return?  Aren't the two concepts pretty much tied together at the hip?

Same as "what do we likely have to pay them" would be a part of "who would you trade" thinking, surely?

 

1 hour ago, Claymation said:

Who is voting for Breece thinking you are getting a haul. Just say no to Breece Haul.

Wilson, Sauce and JJII all play premium positions. And it looks like the Jets have cornerstones in all three players

If projected return is not a factor, I agree that the easy answer is Breece, and anyone who voted someone else should be mocked.

But since a poll with only one right answer is boring, to Warfish’s point, return was absolutely a factor in my mind, and I didn’t think this discussion would make much sense if you don’t factor it in.