Mike Tannenbaum has made savvy moves...Hutch

[SoFlaJets]

It's still early and the Jets will have to pay the bill down the road, but general manager Mike Tannenbaum is looking pretty savvy these days, especially for someone who was criticized for being just a salary cap guy and not having an eye for talent.

First, Tannenbaum signed LB Bart Scott and S Jim Leonhard in free agency, a pair of home runs.

Secondly, he traded up to get quarterback Mark Sanchez, getting him for a song and dance from his best pal, Browns coach Eric Mangini. Despite his up-and-down start, Sanchez has the look of the franchise quarterback the Jets thought he was.

Thirdly, the Jets traded up to draft running back Shonn Greene in the third round. On Sunday, coach Rex Ryan revealed the Jets had given him a first-round grade. In addition to being the heir apparent to Thomas Jones, Greene has enough bounce to replace Leon Washington.

Next, the general manager traded for Browns wide receiver Braylon Edwards, who looks like the big wide receiver the Jets have needed since the departure of Keyshawn Johnson. His legal troubles aren't expected to cause him to miss any time this season.

Earlier, Tannenbaum traded for CB Lito Sheppard, a starter, though he's had trouble staying on the field. He has missed four of the first seven games with a quad injury.

On the down side, Tannenbaum has traded away valuable draft picks in the Edwards and Sheppard deals, and he must pay Edwards, who is seeking $9 million per season. Edwards, though, will be a restricted free agent minus a new Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Also, Tannenbaum is staring at a $10 million roster bonus due Sheppard in March.

What's more, the GM has yet to pay Washington and has several core players nearing the end of their contracts, including Pro Bowl C Nick Mangold and LB David Harris.

Finally, his decision to keep Kellen Clemens as the backup instead of signing a proven veteran is up for debate.

Contrary to a report, the offer that Washington turned down from the Jets this offseason wasn't exactly for $5 million per season. It depends on your perspective.

If the new money started in 2010, which the Jets wanted, the deal would've been worth $5 million per season with Washington paying for $535,000 this season.

But the Washington camp wanted the new money to start this season, which would've drastically altered the average of the deal.

It's easy to second-guess Washington's decision now that he's injured but this is his big chance, and perhaps only chance, at a blockbuster deal and for him to sign a deal he wasn't happy with -- and had to live with for the next four or five years -- would've been crazy.

* * * *

Sanchez, in the wake of him munching on a hot dog on the sideline during the Jets-Raiders game, has bought 500 hot dogs and hamburgers and rolls and buns through the A&P supermarket and with donate them to the Community soup kitchen of Morristown. ...

Practice notes: WR Jerricho Cotchery looked sharp in the portion of practice opened to the media. ... RB-turned-WR-turned-RB Danny Woodhead is working with the running backs. ... The Jets practiced indoors Wednesday instead of in a steady rain. ... CB Justin Miller is wearing No. 32.

[SoFlaJets]

.

.

.

<------------how do you guys like this new avatar pic I just found from this article? Scott decapitating an Eagle

[bitonti]

It's easy to second-guess Washington's decision now that he's injured but this is his big chance, and perhaps only chance, at a blockbuster deal and for him to sign a deal he wasn't happy with -- and had to live with for the next four or five years -- would've been crazy.

Yeah how could he possibly live with all those millions... crazy.

[SoFlaJets]

Yeah how could he possibly live with all those millions... crazy.

Keels should be fired by Leon...today. Can you guys imagine what Mrs. Leon was thinking, seeing her man on the turf on Sunday?

[ToonTime]

"Tannenbaum signed LB Bart Scott and S Jim Leonhard in free agency, a pair of home runs"

I dont know about these signings being homeruns, I havent seen either of these guys doing mush this year. Im not saying I dont like the signings but I need to see more from both of these guys.

[SoFlaJets]

"Tannenbaum signed LB Bart Scott and S Jim Leonhard in free agency, a pair of home runs"

I dont know about these signings being homeruns, I havent seen either of these guys doing mush this year. Im not saying I dont like the signings but I need to see more from both of these guys.

really? Consider the alternatives that we had last year.

[RSJ]

I think Tannenbaum has done an outstanding job here. He is WAY underrated.

[Greenseed3]

.

.

.

<------------how do you guys like this new avatar pic I just found from this article? Scott decapitating an Eagle

big fan:cheers:

[#27TheDominator]

"Tannenbaum signed LB Bart Scott and S Jim Leonhard in free agency, a pair of home runs"

I dont know about these signings being homeruns, I havent seen either of these guys doing mush this year. Im not saying I dont like the signings but I need to see more from both of these guys.

really? Consider the alternatives that we had last year.

There is a big difference between a good signing and a homerun.

[Ghost]

Anyone think we can keep Mangold, Harris, and Washington?

[bitonti]

Anyone think we can keep Mangold, Harris, and Washington?

I wouldn't worry about keeping washington anymore...

[#27TheDominator]

Anyone think we can keep Mangold, Harris, and Washington?

Depending on the CBA they'd all be restricted when their deals are up, but more importantly Harris and Mangold are signed through the 2010 seasons. No rush. They'll probably be extended next off-season.

[Ghost]

Depending on the CBA they'd all be restricted when their deals are up, but more importantly Harris and Mangold are signed through the 2010 seasons. No rush. They'll probably be extended next off-season.

I honestly don't know anything about the CBA. Would it be a good thing for us?

[Ghost]

I wouldn't worry about keeping washington anymore...

Hopefully we sign him for a cheaper deal.

[#27TheDominator]

I honestly don't know anything about the CBA. Would it be a good thing for us?

No idea. Depends on the terms.

[slats]

I'm still not a huge Tannenbaum fan. I still hate the Favre trade, for example. He makes a lot of high profile moves, but does little for our depth. Injuries at WR and CB have hurt the team this year, and the loss of Jenkins is also going to be a killer.

RB is the rare position that he's solidified, probably only because he has as much faith in TJ as a lot of people who post here do. With Leon's injury, it's fortunate that we have a guy like Greene in place.

Picks traded in the past and in the future would've helped bolster the team in some of these paper thin areas. This is why the Gholston pick hurts so bad. Other GM's who keep or stockpile their picks have a little more wiggle room to miss on a top ten pick, Tannenbaum's style leaves no such room for error.

[Bleedin Green]

I'm still not a huge Tannenbaum fan. I still hate the Favre trade, for example. He makes a lot of high profile moves, but does little for our depth. Injuries at WR and CB have hurt the team this year, and the loss of Jenkins is also going to be a killer.

RB is the rare position that he's solidified, probably only because he has as much faith in TJ as a lot of people who post here do. With Leon's injury, it's fortunate that we have a guy like Greene in place.

Picks traded in the past and in the future would've helped bolster the team in some of these paper thin areas. This is why the Gholston pick hurts so bad. Other GM's who keep or stockpile their picks have a little more wiggle room to miss on a top ten pick, Tannenbaum's style leaves no such room for error.

I agree somewhat on the depth concerns, but I think there are reasons beyond just trades for that. Granted the Favre trade in the end may not have gotten us much value for a 3rd round pick, but a guy like me appreciates it just for the fact that without that trade Pennington is still our starter and there is no Sanchez in NY.

And actually, while there are still areas of concern regarding depth, I think this year has shown it might not be as bad as previously thought. Our WR position was considered a disaster, and while the Edwards acquisition certainly helped that out, we've still been without our #2 and #3 recently and yet Clowney has stepped in big in 2 of the last 3 games. DB was another place of concern, but the Jets brought in two veteran talents who have unfortunately missed time, but outside of the Miami game, these guys have still handled themselves pretty well, despite prior feelings on guys like Lowery and Coleman. The lines more than anything are the places of concern with depth, and I think that is legitimate, but I also think the blame Tannenbaum gets for this might be a little overdone.

Mikey T has made his very first priority for this team to get the starting lineup set as much as possible. Considering the mess he inherited, the only players worth a damn on this team were mostly either getting way up in years (Martin, Mawae) or injury prone (Abraham, Pennington (if you consider him quality )). Others still were not fit for the scheme being run by the new coach (Vilma). This was a pretty poor team to inherit. So getting the starting lineup set has been the priority. And when making those trades that allegedly cost us depth, that was always the goal. Look at the trades that have been made and the results netted:

Thomas Jones - Got a starting player AND didn't lose us a pick, just a trade down as the Jets swapped second rounders with Chicago. Has started every game since and been a solid player.

Kris Jenkins - 3rd and 5th round pick - prior to his injury, the teams most dominant defender over the past year and a half. While the Jets could've netted two players instead of one here, its doubtful either would be anywhere close to the talent Jenkins is.

Darelle Revis - Traded up in the first round to get him. One of the best CBs in the entire league. By far outshining all of his peers in what was a heavy 1st round CB class that year.

David Harris - Traded up in the second round to get him. Outside of a tough year last year due to injuries, has been a top notch LB for the Jets.

Mark Sanchez - As far as I'm concerned, a no-brainer. Only cost the Jets a second rounder in terms of picks and when you need one and can get one, you just have to make a move for a franchise QB. All things considered for a rookie QB, hasn't looked too shabby (outside of Buffalo of course).

Shonn Greene - Moved up in the third to get a guy who they gave a first round grade to. Looked beastly last week.

Lito Sheppard - Low risk trade that will likely only end up costing the Jets last years 5th rounder for a starting CB. Despite injuries, is definitely the Jets second best CB when healthy.

Braylon Edwards - Giving up a 3rd and 5th for a young, big, talented WR.

I may have missed some, but bottom line, most of the trades look pretty good to me, and in the instances they gave up multiple picks, its highly likely you would be severely hampering the quality of your starters by keeping some extra late-round picks that you would probably just hope turned out into good depth players. This is a team who's had to continually fill in the holes of a number of questionable starters over the years, which makes addressing depth that much more difficult. From here on out, outside of help at DE, the Jets are going to be able to make a concerted effort and addressing depth as their #1 priority in the future. I think this is an issue we'll see addressed starting with this draft and FA period, because now the team actually has the ability to do so.

[Larz]

I really really really want tanny to change course and start trading down and stockpiling picks

enough with the splashy trades and FA's already

we need to build around sanchez and improve the bottom of the roster

[Larz]

Hopefully we sign him for a cheaper deal.

I dunno man, that was a theismann, tim krumrie type of break

[KINGDIRK]

I really really really want tanny to change course and start trading down and stockpiling picks

enough with the splashy trades and FA's already

we need to build around sanchez and improve the bottom of the roster

Hell yeah. I want to see the Jets the next 2 drafts really start building thru the draft. Obviously we are shorthanded in the next draft, so some trading down would be nice to see.

[GREENBEAN]

I agree somewhat on the depth concerns, but I think there are reasons beyond just trades for that. Granted the Favre trade in the end may not have gotten us much value for a 3rd round pick, but a guy like me appreciates it just for the fact that without that trade Pennington is still our starter and there is no Sanchez in NY.

And actually, while there are still areas of concern regarding depth, I think this year has shown it might not be as bad as previously thought. Our WR position was considered a disaster, and while the Edwards acquisition certainly helped that out, we've still been without our #2 and #3 recently and yet Clowney has stepped in big in 2 of the last 3 games. DB was another place of concern, but the Jets brought in two veteran talents who have unfortunately missed time, but outside of the Miami game, these guys have still handled themselves pretty well, despite prior feelings on guys like Lowery and Coleman. The lines more than anything are the places of concern with depth, and I think that is legitimate, but I also think the blame Tannenbaum gets for this might be a little overdone.

Mikey T has made his very first priority for this team to get the starting lineup set as much as possible. Considering the mess he inherited, the only players worth a damn on this team were mostly either getting way up in years (Martin, Mawae) or injury prone (Abraham, Pennington (if you consider him quality )). Others still were not fit for the scheme being run by the new coach (Vilma). This was a pretty poor team to inherit. So getting the starting lineup set has been the priority. And when making those trades that allegedly cost us depth, that was always the goal. Look at the trades that have been made and the results netted:

Thomas Jones - Got a starting player AND didn't lose us a pick, just a trade down as the Jets swapped second rounders with Chicago. Has started every game since and been a solid player.

Kris Jenkins - 3rd and 5th round pick - prior to his injury, the teams most dominant defender over the past year and a half. While the Jets could've netted two players instead of one here, its doubtful either would be anywhere close to the talent Jenkins is.

Darelle Revis - Traded up in the first round to get him. One of the best CBs in the entire league. By far outshining all of his peers in what was a heavy 1st round CB class that year.

David Harris - Traded up in the second round to get him. Outside of a tough year last year due to injuries, has been a top notch LB for the Jets.

Mark Sanchez - As far as I'm concerned, a no-brainer. Only cost the Jets a second rounder in terms of picks and when you need one and can get one, you just have to make a move for a franchise QB. All things considered for a rookie QB, hasn't looked too shabby (outside of Buffalo of course).

Shonn Greene - Moved up in the third to get a guy who they gave a first round grade to. Looked beastly last week.

Lito Sheppard - Low risk trade that will likely only end up costing the Jets last years 5th rounder for a starting CB. Despite injuries, is definitely the Jets second best CB when healthy.

Braylon Edwards - Giving up a 3rd and 5th for a young, big, talented WR.

I may have missed some, but bottom line, most of the trades look pretty good to me, and in the instances they gave up multiple picks, its highly likely you would be severely hampering the quality of your starters by keeping some extra late-round picks that you would probably just hope turned out into good depth players. This is a team who's had to continually fill in the holes of a number of questionable starters over the years, which makes addressing depth that much more difficult. From here on out, outside of help at DE, the Jets are going to be able to make a concerted effort and addressing depth as their #1 priority in the future. I think this is an issue we'll see addressed starting with this draft and FA period, because now the team actually has the ability to do so.

I just want you to know that I read your entire post. I feel that's important.

All in all I agree with you. I don't agree with everything he's done, but I know that tanny is trying to give us the best football team he can. For that I'm thankful.

[will]

I'm still not a huge Tannenbaum fan. I still hate the Favre trade, for example. He makes a lot of high profile moves, but does little for our depth. Injuries at WR and CB have hurt the team this year, and the loss of Jenkins is also going to be a killer.

RB is the rare position that he's solidified, probably only because he has as much faith in TJ as a lot of people who post here do. With Leon's injury, it's fortunate that we have a guy like Greene in place.

Picks traded in the past and in the future would've helped bolster the team in some of these paper thin areas. This is why the Gholston pick hurts so bad. Other GM's who keep or stockpile their picks have a little more wiggle room to miss on a top ten pick, Tannenbaum's style leaves no such room for error.

Dunno. I disagree. It seemed on paper that the Jets were thin throughout the roster but it hasnt worked out that way. I have been pleasantly surprised by the play of Eric Smith, Strickland and Lowery. That's solid depth in the secondary even before considering Ihedigbo and Carroll who are primarily special teamers. I still hate Drew Coleman. Finally, did you notice Cole make some plays last week. Impressive.

Same at WR, though to a far lesser extent. The Jets lost Cotch and Smith but got decent performances from Clowney and Wright.

Finally, the Jets have two UDFAs contributing on defense: Westerman and DeVito. These guys, plus Murrell, Pitoitua and Woodhead, make up for some of the lost draft picks. I still hold high hopes for Cummings, too.

[#27TheDominator]

Dunno. I disagree. It seemed on paper that the Jets were thin throughout the roster but it hasnt worked out that way. I have been pleasantly surprised by the play of Eric Smith, Strickland and Lowery. That's solid depth in the secondary even before considering Ihedigbo and Carroll who are primarily special teamers. I still hate Drew Coleman. Finally, did you notice Cole make some plays last week. Impressive.

Same at WR, though to a far lesser extent. The Jets lost Cotch and Smith but got decent performances from Clowney and Wright.

Finally, the Jets have two UDFAs contributing on defense: Westerman and DeVito. These guys, plus Murrell, Pitoitua and Woodhead, make up for some of the lost draft picks. I still hold high hopes for Cummings, too.

I agree. The obsessive moving up may be a bit much, but I can't argue with the roster overhaul. I think all this chatter about depth is overblown. You get a good starter and keep your crappy starter from last year (like Smith) and you have depth.

The big decisions he's made have almost all turned out. I don't/didn't like the Favre deal, but I can certainly understand taking the chance. Gholston obviously was not a good pick, but there weren't any good options there. All of his trade ups look like very good deals, unless the jury is still out like Sanchez.

[Sperm Edwards]

I agree. The obsessive moving up may be a bit much, but I can't argue with the roster overhaul. I think all this chatter about depth is overblown. You get a good starter and keep your crappy starter from last year (like Smith) and you have depth.

The big decisions he's made have almost all turned out. I don't/didn't like the Favre deal, but I can certainly understand taking the chance. Gholston obviously was not a good pick, but there weren't any good options there. All of his trade ups look like very good deals, unless the jury is still out like Sanchez.

Even though he traded down first, he then traded up for Clemens. Just sayin'.

Two trade-down's that stick out in my mind were both from the 2006 draft. We ended up with Clemens and Schlegel in back-to-back picks. So much for the notion that draft picks = solid depth. Backup QB's are hardly "depth" in the same way that other positions are; when you need one to fill in for your current and long-term hand-picked starter, the team is usually screwed.

I just think people have this pie-in-the-sky view almost romanticizes unused draft picks. In the past, it used to be just the higher ones. Now it's the mid- and lower-round ones being romanticized, when the reality is that in those positions usually you end up with a player who's a backup for about 2 seasons and then gets cut.

2007 Trade-up's:

GOT: #14 Darrelle Revis, #191

CAR GOT: #25, #59, #164

Revis is infinitely more valuable to the Jets (both then and now) than anyone taken after him in the whole draft. The big pick we gave up here to get him was #59. Other than two centers we weren't drafting, take a good look at the 10-15 players drafted from #59+. Brutal. And the talent-level in that draft was so lousy there materially wasn't much difference between pick #164 and pick #191.

GOT: #47 David Harris, #235 Chansi Stuckey

GB GOT: #63 #89 #191

The big pick we gave up was #89, as we surely would have taken Harris at #63 if he was still there (which he wouldn't have been). The best picks over the next 40 taken were punters. The dropoff from #191 to #235 is only significant on paper. In actuality the talent level in that draft made the two picks almost identical, and the reality is there's every likelihood we probably would have drafted Stuckey at #191 anyway.

The net losses in terms of quantity of picks were:

#59

#89

And if we ended up with two "solid" depth backups better than we have now (which is a guess in and of itself), the dropoff from Revis and Harris to the players we likely would have drafted in our original slots is so great that it doesn't even warrant speculating. I mean, is someone like Paul Soliai (available at #89) truly that much of an upgrade over Sione Pouha? Would he even be an upgrade at all?

What all this means is many throw around the words "draft picks," and the better "depth" we allegedly would now have. This is written as though the picks are just as valuable with the benefit of hindsight as they were when they were traded away.

Sure, we've traded away some higher picks, but you really have to look at those actual drafts and our team's roster at the time. Then think who we would have likely taken in those slots (a guess anyway). THEN you can look at what we allegedly lost. Because a draft pick is not a player. A draft pick is a prospect. And a late 3rd round draft pick in the 2007 draft is not the same as "a 3rd rounder" in another draft in reality. It was what it was at the time: a late 3rd rounder on paper, in a draft that would have had only what is traditionally 5th round and worse talent available.

[RSJ]

Even though he traded down first, he then traded up for Clemens. Just sayin'.

Two trade-down's that stick out in my mind were both from the 2006 draft. We ended up with Clemens and Schlegel in back-to-back picks. So much for the notion that draft picks = solid depth. Backup QB's are hardly "depth" in the same way that other positions are; when you need one to fill in for your current and long-term hand-picked starter, the team is usually screwed.

I just think people have this pie-in-the-sky view almost romanticizes unused draft picks. In the past, it used to be just the higher ones. Now it's the mid- and lower-round ones being romanticized, when the reality is that in those positions usually you end up with a player who's a backup for about 2 seasons and then gets cut.

2007 Trade-up's:

GOT: #14 Darrelle Revis, #191

CAR GOT: #25, #59, #164

Revis is infinitely more valuable to the Jets (both then and now) than anyone taken after him in the whole draft. The big pick we gave up here to get him was #59. Other than two centers we weren't drafting, take a good look at the 10-15 players drafted from #59+. Brutal. And the talent-level in that draft was so lousy there materially wasn't much difference between pick #164 and pick #191.

GOT: #47 David Harris, #235 Chansi Stuckey

GB GOT: #63 #89 #191

The big pick we gave up was #89, as we surely would have taken Harris at #63 if he was still there (which he wouldn't have been). The best picks over the next 40 taken were punters. The dropoff from #191 to #235 is only significant on paper. In actuality the talent level in that draft made the two picks almost identical, and the reality is there's every likelihood we probably would have drafted Stuckey at #191 anyway.

The net losses in terms of quantity of picks were:

#59

#89

And if we ended up with two "solid" depth backups better than we have now (which is a guess in and of itself), the dropoff from Revis and Harris to the players we likely would have drafted in our original slots is so great that it doesn't even warrant speculating. I mean, is someone like Paul Soliai truly that much of an upgrade over Sione Pouha? Would he even be an upgrade at all?

What all this means is many throw around the words "draft picks," and the better "depth" we allegedly would now have. This is written as though the picks are just as valuable with the benefit of hindsight as they were when they were traded away.

Sure, we've traded away some higher picks, but you really have to look at those actual drafts and our team's roster at the time. Then think who we would have likely taken in those slots (which is a guess anyway). THEN you can look at what we allegedly lost. Because a draft pick is not a player. A draft pick is a prospect. And a late 3rd round draft pick in the 2007 draft is not the same as "a 3rd rounder" in another draft in reality. It was what it was at the time: a late 3rd rounder on paper, in a draft that would have had only what is traditionally 5th round and worse talent available.

Great post. I agree 100%. Also this isn't the days of the 49ers or Steelers where you can develop players for 4 or 5 years. They leave by then. Which is why with the advent of free agency you are better off signing your depth as UDFA's or vets that can fill those roles. The only time trading down really makes sense is if there is no difference in talent and you net another first rund pick in the deal. I think Tannenbaum is ahead of the curve in his approach to building a team.

[sirlancemehlot]

Even though he traded down first, he then traded up for Clemens. Just sayin'.

Two trade-down's that stick out in my mind were both from the 2006 draft. We ended up with Clemens and Schlegel in back-to-back picks. So much for the notion that draft picks = solid depth. Backup QB's are hardly "depth" in the same way that other positions are; when you need one to fill in for your current and long-term hand-picked starter, the team is usually screwed.

I just think people have this pie-in-the-sky view almost romanticizes unused draft picks. In the past, it used to be just the higher ones. Now it's the mid- and lower-round ones being romanticized, when the reality is that in those positions usually you end up with a player who's a backup for about 2 seasons and then gets cut.

2007 Trade-up's:

GOT: #14 Darrelle Revis, #191

CAR GOT: #25, #59, #164

Revis is infinitely more valuable to the Jets (both then and now) than anyone taken after him in the whole draft. The big pick we gave up here to get him was #59. Other than two centers we weren't drafting, take a good look at the 10-15 players drafted from #59+. Brutal. And the talent-level in that draft was so lousy there materially wasn't much difference between pick #164 and pick #191.

GOT: #47 David Harris, #235 Chansi Stuckey

GB GOT: #63 #89 #191

The big pick we gave up was #89, as we surely would have taken Harris at #63 if he was still there (which he wouldn't have been). The best picks over the next 40 taken were punters. The dropoff from #191 to #235 is only significant on paper. In actuality the talent level in that draft made the two picks almost identical, and the reality is there's every likelihood we probably would have drafted Stuckey at #191 anyway.

The net losses in terms of quantity of picks were:

#59

#89

And if we ended up with two "solid" depth backups better than we have now (which is a guess in and of itself), the dropoff from Revis and Harris to the players we likely would have drafted in our original slots is so great that it doesn't even warrant speculating. I mean, is someone like Paul Soliai truly that much of an upgrade over Sione Pouha? Would he even be an upgrade at all?

What all this means is many throw around the words "draft picks," and the better "depth" we allegedly would now have. This is written as though the picks are just as valuable with the benefit of hindsight as they were when they were traded away.

Sure, we've traded away some higher picks, but you really have to look at those actual drafts and our team's roster at the time. Then think who we would have likely taken in those slots (which is a guess anyway). THEN you can look at what we allegedly lost. Because a draft pick is not a player. A draft pick is a prospect. And a late 3rd round draft pick in the 2007 draft is not the same as "a 3rd rounder" in another draft in reality. It was what it was at the time: a late 3rd rounder on paper, in a draft that would have had only what is traditionally 5th round and worse talent available.

There is no denying that it's safer to pick guys on the first day of the draft rather than the last. Likewise, it's safer to sign FA's as they are a known quantity for the most part. However--these players are far more expensive than mid-round draftees and therefore the payroll gets polarized. Leon, a mid-draft guy, has cost us little considering his production. Rhodes, too, has been reasonable over the length of his career. These types of players allow more money to be spent on the roster's back half. Ideally, this gives the team the freedom to develop players and upgrade talent levels from the bottom up. Truth is, there is no perfect formula for team-building. There can be too much reliance on high picks anf FA's over the long haul, just as there could be a ton of misses in the draft. Balance is key here for long term success, and IMO we've overpaid far too often in salary, and given up far too many draft picks in trade to achieve such a balance. As our team ages, we'll be less capable of putting together competitive rosters without drafting replacements.

[JustInFudge]

I'm still not a huge Tannenbaum fan. I still hate the Favre trade, for example. He makes a lot of high profile moves, but does little for our depth. Injuries at WR and CB have hurt the team this year, and the loss of Jenkins is also going to be a killer.

RB is the rare position that he's solidified, probably only because he has as much faith in TJ as a lot of people who post here do. With Leon's injury, it's fortunate that we have a guy like Greene in place.

Picks traded in the past and in the future would've helped bolster the team in some of these paper thin areas. This is why the Gholston pick hurts so bad. Other GM's who keep or stockpile their picks have a little more wiggle room to miss on a top ten pick, Tannenbaum's style leaves no such room for error.

He blew 08 badly. Not a single move that he made last year was a good. His draft was terrible and the Favre move was just moronic.

Gholston and Keller both int the first round :puke2:We couldnt have ****ed that draft up worse. Lowery is going to end up being the best pick, like I predicted at the time.

[LionelRichie]

the jets need to win something for tanny's moves to be considered shrewd otherwise it will just be different GM, same old jets.

since tanny took over as gm the jets record is 27-28. if this was a steeler's or patriots board we would be talking about firing tanny rather than praising him. it's time for all of these moves to pay off with wins not talk.

[#27TheDominator]

I just think people have this pie-in-the-sky view almost romanticizes unused draft picks. In the past, it used to be just the higher ones. Now it's the mid- and lower-round ones being romanticized, when the reality is that in those positions usually you end up with a player who's a backup for about 2 seasons and then gets cut.

Great late round draft pick: Drew Coleman. The entire game thread goes into convulsions as soon as he enters the game. We need more of that!

[Sperm Edwards]

There is no denying that it's safer to pick guys on the first day of the draft rather than the last. Likewise, it's safer to sign FA's as they are a known quantity for the most part. However--these players are far more expensive than mid-round draftees and therefore the payroll gets polarized. Leon, a mid-draft guy, has cost us little considering his production. Rhodes, too, has been reasonable over the length of his career. These types of players allow more money to be spent on the roster's back half. Ideally, this gives the team the freedom to develop players and upgrade talent levels from the bottom up. Truth is, there is no perfect formula for team-building. There can be too much reliance on high picks anf FA's over the long haul, just as there could be a ton of misses in the draft. Balance is key here for long term success, and IMO we've overpaid far too often in salary, and given up far too many draft picks in trade to achieve such a balance. As our team ages, we'll be less capable of putting together competitive rosters without drafting replacements.

I never said there was a secret formula to team-building. Rather I was showing that all is not as it seems, with simple answers and assumptions of non-busts, to those who see everything we do as violating some secret formula.

New England had 8 mid- and late- round draft picks in 2007. How many are helping them with their depth now? How many were helping them even during the 2007 season?

The point is that it is assumed by the team's critics that a lousy roster in need of overhaul can just draft everyone they need - starters and depth alike - in just a few seasons. That is a ridiculous assessment. The depth we have added is mostly cheaper. I would rather cheap-out on the backups than on the starters.

The reality is those same critics would be killing the Jets had they not made half the moves they did. And again the chants would begin about how cheap Woody Johnson is and how he won't spend money to get the best players here.

The reality is this: there is no pleasing a fanbase using ANY method, until that method shows it gets you to the big dance. Most teams that try the "Steelers method" fall flat on their faces and end up with high draft picks year after year.

It's not the method itself; it's how good you work within the method you use.

[sirlancemehlot]

The reality is this: there is no pleasing a fanbase using ANY method, until that method shows it gets you to the big dance.

It's not the method itself; it's how good you work within the method you use.

well, yeah. Isn't that what i said? "No secret formula" = no right or wrong way. A team needs to draft well and pay moderately for drafted contributors. A team needs to sign FA's to fill voids at key positions while trying to cultivate its own talent. Relying too heavily on any single aspect of aquiring players is selling the team short. Trading away tons of picks has a downside no matter how you look at it. At some point, we are going to miss the mid-level guys like Leon and Rhodes etc. that we might have had if we were a bit more frugal with our picks.

[slats]

I want to see more of a balance from Tannenbaum. It's great that he's getting some quality out of his RFA's, but that means that maybe he'd be able to hit on his seventh rounders which he seems to have no trouble just throwing away. Chansi Stuckey was an excellent find. Wouldn't mind more of him.

The constant trade-ups and trading for picks also eliminates any Jets middle-class. There's the guys who get traded for, or brought in as free agents, and then there's the bottom of the roster.

I definitely see depth as a problem on this team. I think Cotchery's injury is directly related to the Jets' three game skid this year. If we had a viable third WR, things might've been different in both division losses. Clowney's maybe coming along, which is a good thing, but when Brad Smith being out of the offensive line-up could be the difference between a win and a loss, you know you have issues with depth at the position. We also have nothing at TE behind our sophomore slumping starter.

It's hard to go over every pick traded away because I do agree that he's generally done very well with the players he's targeted. The Jets have a solid starting 22. But lose any one of them, and the team is hurting. Moreso than other teams in this league. The DL already had a weak link in Marques Douglas, and now they've lost easily their best player. All of a sudden, Rex is in for a major coaching challenge. They've been lucky with the health of the OL, because behind it it there's really nothing there. If we lose our rookie QB, we have three unknown quantities behind him - and why are we carrying four QB's, anyway?

Thankfully RB is one position that the Jets are stocked at, but I hope they revisit the Woodhead to the slot experiment over the offseason.

[lamont_jordan_rules]

I think Tannenbaum has done an outstanding job here. He is WAY underrated.

... + 99999999999999999999999999 ...

... we are very lucky to have mikey t atop our football pyramid ...

l_j_r

[Kleckineau]

Mike T. seems to be a pretty good GM.

His career is still in the early stages.

I like that he is very pro-active in trying to improve theteam.

However.........NFL and all pro sports are bottom line enterprises.

WIN, and win alot more than losing on an annual basis.

Has he done this?

Until he consistently puts a winning product on the field year in and year out, he has really accomplished nothing.

Jury is still out but I am optimistic.

[Sperm Edwards]

well, yeah. Isn't that what i said? "No secret formula" = no right or wrong way. A team needs to draft well and pay moderately for drafted contributors. A team needs to sign FA's to fill voids at key positions while trying to cultivate its own talent. Relying too heavily on any single aspect of aquiring players is selling the team short. Trading away tons of picks has a downside no matter how you look at it. At some point, we are going to miss the mid-level guys like Leon and Rhodes etc. that we might have had if we were a bit more frugal with our picks.

We're not saying the same thing.

I'm saying there is no formula. You're saying there is a formula (draft well and pay moderately for drafted contributors...).

That "formula" - like ANY formula - only works well if you don't screw up doing it.