Arm and a leg for Gholston?

[stoicsentry]

Just reading NewYorkJets.com and there's an article by "Real Football" about pick-swapping here.

"Our guess is the Jets will have to give up their first and second, as well as a fourth or a fifth, to get to that spot [Raiders #4 pick] and assure themselves of securing Gholston. In 2004, Cleveland moved one spot from seven to six overall, giving up its second-round pick, to select Kellen Winslow."

Is it just me or does that sound like one of the dumbest moves we could make? If we give up our 1, 2 and 4 then we will have no picks between Gholston and the fifth round. Maybe that works for the Giants or Pats, teams that don't need too much and want to grab one difference maker.. but to some degree or another we NEED to fill spots at CB, LB, WR, DE and depth on the OL. Sorry Vernon, I like you, but I'd rather take a reach (McKelvin, for example) than give up our entire draft for you..

[GangGreen1212]

Just reading NewYorkJets.com and there's an article by "Real Football" about pick-swapping here.

"Our guess is the Jets will have to give up their first and second, as well as a fourth or a fifth, to get to that spot [Raiders #4 pick] and assure themselves of securing Gholston. In 2004, Cleveland moved one spot from seven to six overall, giving up its second-round pick, to select Kellen Winslow."

Is it just me or does that sound like one of the dumbest moves we could make? If we give up our 1, 2 and 4 then we will have no picks between Gholston and the fifth round. Maybe that works for the Giants or Pats, teams that don't need too much and want to grab one difference maker.. but to some degree or another we NEED to fill spots at CB, LB, WR, DE and depth on the OL. Sorry Vernon, I like you, but I'd rather take a reach (McKelvin, for example) than give up our entire draft for you..

I could not agree more...we need to be stock piling picks, not giving them away!

[Thai Jet]

Just reading NewYorkJets.com and there's an article by "Real Football" about pick-swapping here.

"Our guess is the Jets will have to give up their first and second, as well as a fourth or a fifth, to get to that spot [Raiders #4 pick] and assure themselves of securing Gholston. In 2004, Cleveland moved one spot from seven to six overall, giving up its second-round pick, to select Kellen Winslow."

Is it just me or does that sound like one of the dumbest moves we could make? If we give up our 1, 2 and 4 then we will have no picks between Gholston and the fifth round. Maybe that works for the Giants or Pats, teams that don't need too much and want to grab one difference maker.. but to some degree or another we NEED to fill spots at CB, LB, WR, DE and depth on the OL. Sorry Vernon, I like you, but I'd rather take a reach (McKelvin, for example) than give up our entire draft for you..

Christ this is D'Rob part II ! I totally agree that this would be one of the stupidest moves we could possibly make. The friggin Cheaters are probably faking an interest in Gholsten just so we'd move up. I say F' it. Stay put and let the chips fall where they may. Or move DOWN !!

[shawn306]

If you can't get Gholston at 6 then trade down and pick up the extra player.

[CoachTsurfing]

I hope and pray we don't do this. It would be horrible. Just pick the best out of Long, gholston, or dmc. If none are available trade down. Even if you don't get fair value, trading down and still getting the next player on your board and paying him less is smart.

[124]

If the Jets moved up for Vernon Gholston I would be VERY pissed. The only player that might be worth trading up for is Matt Ryan. If Atlanta passes on him, the Jets could make a move to move up to 4 to make sure Herm doesn't screw them at 5.

[DMaynard]

I want Gholston. But this would be very dumb. I hate to be superstitious, but if the Jets did this, you just know the football GODS would bend the Jets over and give them a DRob II.

[Sperm Edwards]

Gholston is enough of a risk, shifting to a new position, at #6 as it is. Compounding that risk by also moving our top-5 pick in round 2, AND one of our 4th rounders, is pretty stupid.

Oh - and the contract for this prospect will cost at least another $1M/yr as a final reward. When you make a deal to move up like this, you lose all negotiating leverage. Happened with Eli (who was able to opt-out & secure a new deal after only 4 years) and DRob (who got an ungodly-sized contract for the 4th pick in the draft).

One would think the memory of that situation with DRob has not left Tannenbaum's head. Bradway really tied his hands by trading two firsts & a fourth to move up for Robertson & you end up with a guy still in his rookie contract from way back in 2003 mind you (when the cap limit was $40M lower than now) with scheduled cap hits of $21M ($11M and $10M) over the next 2 years.

I'd do that if it was for the actual Shawn Merriman (not that SD's offering, lol), with the stipulation that it's contingent upon agreeing on a long-term deal. Not for a guy we hope will maybe be almost as good as Merriman someday, who we're not permitted to talk contract with yet, and whose agent will walk all over us after a move-up like that.

[flgreen]

There is no player in this draft worth moving up for. This is a good, and deep draft. On paper Gholston appears to be the best pass rusher in the draft. He has some flaws. If the Jets decide they must have a pass rusher, there is another player who will be there at 6, Derrick Harvey, who is arguably, just as good as Gholston.

If they decide they must have a RB, there is another player, Jon Stewart, who appears to be more NFL worthy then Mc Fadden

Just say no to trade ups

[shawn306]

There is no player in this draft worth moving up for. This is a good, and deep draft. On paper Gholston appears to be the best pass rusher in the draft. He has some flaws. If the Jets decide they must have a pass rusher, there is another player who will be there at 6, Derrick Harvey, who is arguably, just as good as Gholston.

If they decide they must have a RB, there is another player, Jon Stewart, who appears to be more NFL worthy then Mc Fadden

Just say no to trade ups

Agree 100%

[JayKwaz]

Agree 100%

Trade down and get Stewart.

[flgreen]

Trade down and get Stewart.

That would be the optimum scenario.

Two problems, I have seen several mock drafts that have NE taking either Stewart or Harvey. These are probably just people guessing, like myself, but it still worries me.

Plus the fact that because of the depth in this draft, it may be very difficult to trade down. Nobody wants to give up picks. There is going to a lot of talent in the 2nd and 3rd rounds

[Sperm Edwards]

There is no player in this draft worth moving up for. This is a good, and deep draft. On paper Gholston appears to be the best pass rusher in the draft. He has some flaws. If the Jets decide they must have a pass rusher, there is another player who will be there at 6, Derrick Harvey, who is arguably, just as good as Gholston.

If they decide they must have a RB, there is another player, Jon Stewart, who appears to be more NFL worthy then Mc Fadden

Just say no to trade ups

I don't mind trade-up's. Just not trade-up's in the top 10 (let alone top 5). Unless you're seeking an available marquis QB prospect. All other positions a team can make do just as well without a top 5 pick and keeping its other ones.

The one thing "weak" in this draft is the very top. Not that the players projected to go that high aren't outstanding talents or that they won't turn into outstanding players. But more that the talent pool doesn't drop off a cliff after that first handful.

Even when we traded up for DRob, the logic (assuming any logic was used) was that there were thought to be only four blue-chip prospects in an otherwise generally weak draft, and we were trading into the top 4. That move - which turned out to be an awful one - was actually more justifiable than this one would be. It should be noted that 2 of those "absolute sure thing"/"blue chip" prospects were Charles Rogers and Dewayne Robertson.

[Favorite_Toon]

That trade would be ridiculous... Now we would want to trade before the raiders pick? why because they wil ltake him for sure...

I wil say it and say it again.. I dont see the raiders going with a RB..not after I seen the article with Al being very happy about Bush and what he is excpecting from him this year aftyer taking a chance..and also with fargus already working out and looking great.. let alone they still have two other rbs on the team Jordan and Rhodes..

[flgreen]

I don't mind trade-up's. Just not trade-up's in the top 10 (let alone top 5). Unless you're seeking an available marquis QB prospect. All other positions a team can make do just as well without a top 5 pick and keeping its other ones.

The one thing "weak" in this draft is the very top. Not that the players projected to go that high aren't outstanding talents or that they won't turn into outstanding players. But more that the talent pool doesn't drop off a cliff after that first handful.

Even when we traded up for DRob, the logic (assuming any logic was used) was that there were thought to be only four blue-chip prospects in an otherwise generally weak draft, and we were trading into the top 4. That move - which turned out to be an awful one - was actually more justifiable than this one would be. It should be noted that 2 of those "absolute sure thing"/"blue chip" prospects were Charles Rogers and Dewayne Robertson.

I agree with Sperm. Each draft has it's own life. That's why the draft value chart is total BS.

last year was a weak draft depth wise. The Jets made two trade ups, for Revis, and Harris. They gave up nearly their entire draft to get these two players. They were good trades, and produced excellent players. IMO the picks they surrendered wouldn't have produced any where as near as impactful players as the guys they got.

That is not the case this year.

[Sperm Edwards]

I agree with Sperm. Each draft has it's own life. That's why the draft value chart is total BS.

last year was a weak draft depth wise. The Jets made two trade ups, for Revis, and Harris. They gave up nearly their entire draft to get these two players. They were good trades, and produced excellent players. IMO the picks they surrendered wouldn't have produced any where as near as impactful players as the guys they got.

That is not the case this year.

It's the reason we weren't able to trade down in 2006 when we had a dozen holes on the team. No one wanted to give up a first & a second (or more) in a draft where you could get a high-upside/low-bust-potential prospect with even a low first round pick. First round prospects like Winston, Pope, & Watson were going in round 3 & 4.

While this draft may not be quite that stacked, it just isn't so top-heavy that we more or less willingly forgo our draft for Jenkins and one prospect.

[PeterNorth09]

Just reading NewYorkJets.com and there's an article by "Real Football" about pick-swapping here.

"Our guess is the Jets will have to give up their first and second, as well as a fourth or a fifth, to get to that spot [Raiders #4 pick] and assure themselves of securing Gholston. In 2004, Cleveland moved one spot from seven to six overall, giving up its second-round pick, to select Kellen Winslow."

Is it just me or does that sound like one of the dumbest moves we could make? If we give up our 1, 2 and 4 then we will have no picks between Gholston and the fifth round. Maybe that works for the Giants or Pats, teams that don't need too much and want to grab one difference maker.. but to some degree or another we NEED to fill spots at CB, LB, WR, DE and depth on the OL. Sorry Vernon, I like you, but I'd rather take a reach (McKelvin, for example) than give up our entire draft for you..

Unless Gholston turns out to be the next Demarcus Ware he is not worth that trade up.

[Sperm Edwards]

Unless Gholston turns out to be the next Demarcus Ware he is not worth that trade up.

I would only do that for the ACTUAL Demarcus Ware or the ACTUAL Shawn Merriman. Not someone who we hope will measure up to them with a lot of luck.

[madmike1]

Gholston is FAR from a sure thing.

[PeterNorth09]

I would only do that for the ACTUAL Demarcus Ware or the ACTUAL Shawn Merriman. Not someone who we hope will measure up to them with a lot of luck.

or the Actual Jared Allen.

[Sperm Edwards]

or the Actual Jared Allen.

Meh. I don't agree. Ware and Merriman are already stud 3-4 OLB'ers. Allen has always been a 4-3 DE (though he's been damn good at it). No matter how many times you click your heels () we're not switching back to a 4-3 base.

[SUorangefootball]

If the Jets moved up for Vernon Gholston I would be VERY pissed. The only player that might be worth trading up for is Matt Ryan. If Atlanta passes on him, the Jets could make a move to move up to 4 to make sure Herm doesn't screw them at 5.

No offense, but this would be equally stupid. Moving up for ANYONE i repeat ANYONE in this draft is a mistake. I love how people think moving up for Gholston is a mistake but not Ryan, are you kidding me? This team needs help all over the place and you don't waste extra picks to move up and spend more money!

[stoicsentry]

That trade would be ridiculous... Now we would want to trade before the raiders pick? why because they wil ltake him for sure...

I wil say it and say it again.. I dont see the raiders going with a RB..not after I seen the article with Al being very happy about Bush and what he is excpecting from him this year aftyer taking a chance..and also with fargus already working out and looking great.. let alone they still have two other rbs on the team Jordan and Rhodes..

Yeah I don't see the problem with the Raiders. Even if they took Gholston, that would probably leave DMC to us. If they took DMC, it might leave Gholston to us.. either way it works as long as some other team hasn't screwed us by drafting Gholston before the Raiders pick.