Oh, I'm sold on Hill. We could've taken him at 16 and I would've been one of the few who was very happy.
It would certainly be helpful to get three guys tonight. But not sure how you do that without trading down drastically or giving away a high pick next year.
All this talk about getting great players is way too premature. There are 15 more picks in front of the Jets and to just assume that they will be able to move up is ridiculous.
They should not move up. Keep the picks, keep #77 and keep all of next years picks. @47 plenty of good players will be available. I can't imagine any player that is worth giving up @77 plus other picks. Keep the picks, take bpa at position of need.
Moving up is a lot less expensive in this draft than it has been in years past -- as long as we don't sacrifice any picks from next year's draft, I'd be perfectly happy moving up to get 2-3 picks from round 2.
I said I'd be beside myself if we traded up for Upshaw. 1) We didn't. 2) I never said we wouldn't trade up. 3) I got vrobbed.
The one true fact in life is that if you gamble long enough you will ultimately lose everything. They don't build those multi-billion dollar palaces in Vegas on peoples winnings.
Death is still on the list but taxes no longer are. Anyway, that's a different list..you can avoid gambling.
You also said we should be patient and see who falls to us. Then you asked me if I was joking when I asked you if you would trade up after making the 47th pick. Hiding behind Upshaw is a bit of a cop-out. I wanted Upshaw a ton. I wanted Hill almost as much if we didn't get him. That we couldn't get him doesn't exactly void the whole exchange. Upshaw cost a lot more. You can pretend that Tanny wasn't on the phones with his finger on the trigger for Upshaw if you want, but I think we both know how true that sounds. When you got vRobbed, did the vRobber take your vCash despite your similar protests in this most recent vBet freeroll? There's only one sure thing in life. If you can't spot the sucker in the first 30 minutes at the table; you're it.
Because that's what I wanted us to do. I'm pretty sure we still could have had a lanky quick receiver if we stayed put - and probably a more polished one at that. The Hill pick is exciting though. I asked if that was your strange humor because I honestly didn't understand the post. Whatever you say buddy. I didn't want Upshaw and I sure as hell didn't want to trade up for him. That's why I responded the way I did. I didn't want to trade up at all, but we did. That doesn't mean I like it. Stop trying to rub something in my face that doesn't even belong to me. Once again, I never said we weren't going to do anything.
Seems like the Jets organization doesn't agree with you either. I think you're going to miss the 5th and 7th a little less when you start seeing him get an inch of daylight turned into 6 points every few weeks. It was a question of maximizing opportunity and stealing one of several available premier players. Most people don't look at things like that, but probably should. I have a feeling it's coming again today.
Obviously they disagreed, there's no debating that. That also doesn't mean it was the right approach. If Hill becomes a star then no one is ever going to miss those late picks. I hope he becomes the next Randy Moss minus the attitude. The Jets have depth problems and holes in starting spots because they trade up and trade away multiple picks for one guy all the time. I disagree with that approach and would rather see them make 7+ BPA picks each year. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing with what the FO does. If everyone just agreed with how they do things this would be a very boring site. You can't really say the Jets approach has been overly successful over the years either - unless you're happy with that one ring from 1969.
Guess you also disagree with the rest of the world that is calling Hill an amazing talent and great coup for the Jets. How do you think we could have done better so far?
It seems like you're trying to argue with me for the sake of arguing. I think Hill has a very high ceiling and I'm excited about the pick. I also think he's very raw - which means higher bust potential. If we stayed put at 47 we may have been able to take him right there. If not we could have got a similar type receiver who is more polished. I think he will help us immediately simply forcing safety help. I don't disagree with the pick at all. I simply don't like trading away picks when we have a number of holes as a team, and lack depth. It's not a good formula IMO.
Anybody who has a problem with picking Hill at 43 is nuts. He will have an immediate instant offensive threat and a matchup nightmare. He is going to be awesome on the Tebow packages as well since he's a very good blocking WR w/tons of experience in option sets. BTW Coples, Hill and Davis all seem like Rex Picks. Seems to me that Rex (as opposed to tannny) is definitely buying the groceries.
I just thought there was amazing value to be had by moving up. Enough to make up for any loss of depth concerns and more. They ended up going and getting one of my top 2 guys and I believe it was the best move we could have made. That's all. Not trying to say you think Tebow is better than Rodgers. I felt like Tanny proved my position out pretty convincingly, and I thought I'd have a little fun having a go at you. It's certainly your right to disagree, and to some extent I think it certainly comes down to some amount of personal preference. However, the point of the draft is to get as much value as you possibly can for your picks, and I think the trade up for Hill is a prime example of doing precisely that. We're getting 8 players this draft despite trading for a backup QB/situational role player. Late round picks seem to be more valuable commodities this year. It all made for a good trade up atmosphere. My main point is that the atmosphere is going to be just as good starting in a few minutes, so get ready to likely be mildly disappointed again.
