Mean Papi Green Posted April 22, 2005 Author Share Posted April 22, 2005 Some of the logic here really is baffling. Lets just arbitrarily decide that a guy who has averaged 29 catches for 281.5 yards and 1.5 TDs over the last two years and doesn't block would be considered the best TE in this draft and worthy of a #1 pick. The reason? Well he's 26, he's more developed than Heath Miller--- nevermind that his state of development at 26 is not all that impressive. and lets just arbitrarily dismiss guys with 1st round talent and decide that there's no way they could possibly contribute 281.5 yards and 1.5 TDs with no blocking... dood get over it noone gives a flying pelvis what you think about teh trade, its done and you'll see in a few months how good it was, move on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jethead Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 smart and safe can be the same route Fair enough. I like this move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Excellent points mean papi but..... the fact that he was traded with their lower 1st rd pick for our 1st rd pick.....WHEN THEY WERE DESPERATE TO GET BACK IN THE 1st RD.......well we got fleeced. ......................gonna go play the trombone now yeah right - in 3 years when we are laughing how the Raiders #26 pick was an absolute bust and the two JETS 2nds are solid starters - then we will see who got fleeced what people are forgetting is that picks are NOT KNOWN QUANTITIES - at this point they are JUST PICKS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardSeymour Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Ah christ, eff up by me. I meant to say that you all have decided Jolley would be worth a #2 pick. Sorry YWM, I spaced, probably a freudian slip. The Jets haven't attached #1 round pick value to Jolley, I agree with that. I MEANT to say people around here have decided Jolley's just as good as a #2 pick, and that's what I question. Sorry it took me so long to notice my own error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YJF Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Ah christ, eff up by me. I meant to say that you all have decided Jolley would be worth a #2 pick. Sorry YWM, I spaced, probably a freudian slip. The Jets haven't attached #1 round pick value to Jolley, I agree with that. I MEANT to say people around here have decided Jolley's just as good as a #2 pick, and that's what I question. Sorry it took me so long to notice my own error. Doug Jolley has 2nd or 3rd round value. He is a player The Jets obtained by trading down. Jets didn't lose any picks. They traded down and by doing so, They got a good young player that fits their system like a glove. Teams are going to trade down to the 2nd round and acquire an extra pick or two. Some will get a 3, some will get a 4, a combination of later picks etc Jets should have held out for more in this situation but they got a good package out of this deal. Now if The Jets front office valued Jolley more than Heath Miller and Alex Smith. Than the move is a no brainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LionelRichie Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Now if The Jets front office valued Jolley more than Heath Miller and Alex Smith. Than the move is a no brainer. that is the point of this trade. TB had a higher grade on jolley than miller. nobody knows how miller will adjust to the nfl but there is tons of game film on jolley - not just stats, game film. assuming the jets have jolley rated equal of higher than miller - look at the options. miller + 57 jolley + 47 + 57 no brainer - plus jolley is 1/3 the cost of miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elotk Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 assuming the jets have jolley rated equal of higher than miller - look at the options. miller + 57 jolley + 47 + 57 no brainer - plus jolley is 1/3 the cost of miller Thats not the point. VALUE is VALUE. It doesnt matter how much he's worth to us when your trading for him. The team who had him didnt need him so that should have given us some sort of leverage, obviously not though. Should have gotten 38 and not 47, thats the only problem. eLOT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yourworstmemory Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Ah christ, eff up by me. I meant to say that you all have decided Jolley would be worth a #2 pick. Sorry YWM, I spaced, probably a freudian slip. The Jets haven't attached #1 round pick value to Jolley, I agree with that. I MEANT to say people around here have decided Jolley's just as good as a #2 pick, and that's what I question. Sorry it took me so long to notice my own error. no problem, the way you posted it i just didn't think it was a fair assessment. how you correct it in this post is a fair assessment. i do however think jolley is worth a late 2nd early 3rd round pick. i for one do not like the tight ends in this draft at all. i think jolley is just as good as any of them and i believe he still has as much upside as any of them while not having as much of a downside as the jets have been able to look over pro film and analyze him at this level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Papi Green Posted April 22, 2005 Author Share Posted April 22, 2005 Ah christ, eff up by me. I meant to say that you all have decided Jolley would be worth a #2 pick. Sorry YWM, I spaced, probably a freudian slip. The Jets haven't attached #1 round pick value to Jolley, I agree with that. I MEANT to say people around here have decided Jolley's just as good as a #2 pick, and that's what I question. Sorry it took me so long to notice my own error. i've never said that isaid Jolley was better than any TE that we could have had in this draft in round 2, period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Papi Green Posted April 22, 2005 Author Share Posted April 22, 2005 Thats not the point. VALUE is VALUE. It doesnt matter how much he's worth to us when your trading for him. The team who had him didnt need him so that should have given us some sort of leverage, obviously not though. Should have gotten 38 and not 47, thats the only problem. eLOT 38 , 47 plus Jolley??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Papi Green Posted April 22, 2005 Author Share Posted April 22, 2005 Thats not the point. VALUE is VALUE. It doesnt matter how much he's worth to us when your trading for him. The team who had him didnt need him so that should have given us some sort of leverage, obviously not though. Should have gotten 38 and not 47, thats the only problem. eLOT 38 , 47 plus Jolley??? that would have been nice but unrealistic, dont forget that Jolley is the guy Oak refused to part with last year when inquiring about Lamont...now you tell me this is a guy that they didnt want??? baloney they didnt want to part with him then or now but did so only because tehy were desperate to get in the first round, not beacuse they were dumping him as many here would have you believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetgreen13 Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 38 , 47 plus Jolley??? that would have been nice but unrealistic, dont forget that Jolley is the guy Oak refused to part with last year when inquiring about Lamont...now you tell me this is a guy that they didnt want??? baloney they didnt want to part with him then or now but did so only because tehy were desperate to get in the first round, not beacuse they were dumping him as many here would have you believe not 38, 47 + jolley. 38, (instead of 47 & 2 6th rounders) + jolley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elotk Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 I said 38 and NOT 47. Meaning 38 instead of 47. eLOT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Papi Green Posted April 22, 2005 Author Share Posted April 22, 2005 now taht i think about it more, what would have been real interesting would be if we had given them our 1 and 2 for their 2 second rounders and Jolley that would have been the perfect trade IMO, but we'll have to live with the 6's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LionelRichie Posted April 25, 2005 Share Posted April 25, 2005 that is the point of this trade. TB had a higher grade on jolley than miller. nobody knows how miller will adjust to the nfl but there is tons of game film on jolley - not just stats, game film. assuming the jets have jolley rated equal of higher than miller - look at the options. miller + 57 jolley + 47 + 57 no brainer - plus jolley is 1/3 the cost of miller i would say this trade worked out just fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.