Revisiting this convo with @MaximusD163 This looks WAY more like the contract of someone who can be cut at the end of camp than someone who will be taking over a starting job.
I am aware, the question I have is still “what does Williamson bring to the team that other guys can’t do almost as well but cheaper?” I would rather use that money to extend Marcus Maye and/or Jamal Adams. Williamson is not going to be part of the team when they potentially are super bowl competitors, so why spend that money on him now? He upgrades a position we are already good in.
"Almost as well" is where we will always differ. I don't think Hewitt and Burgess were anywhere near the player Williamson is. I think they are serviceable backups that were forced to start and they had a difficult time consistently playing at a starter level.
It’s also not just the other ILB’s that make Williamson superfluous. The Jets’ defensive line group are excellent run stoppers. They have a rotation of at least 6 guys who are making tackles before they get to the second level. You also have Jamal Adams who is making plays as a run stuffer. At this point, Nickel is more of a base defense in practice around the league. I have to think Williamson is a guy that is going to get subbed out on a number of plays. If you’re playing man defense against 11 personnel, you have 2 CB’s on outside WR’s. You have 1 NCB on SWR. 1SS on TE. 1MLB on RB. 1 FS playing center field. 4 Down Linemen. That’s 10 defensive personnel. Leaves you with 1 other player to assign somewhere. How much more effective of a blitzer is Williamson than the other guys really? What if you want to send Mosley or Adams on a blitz instead? How much better is Williamson at covering a TE or RB? Only 1 team ran the ball on at least 50% of offensive snaps: The Ravens. Many of those runs were Jackson... How much better would Williamson fare bringing down Jackson than Hewitt etc? Williamson is just not bringing value compared to his price tag. Williamson just doesn’t contribute as a plus player on passing plays, which is the primary type of offense in the NFL now.
Don't forget the importance of manufacturing a pass rush when you don't have one. Neither Williamson or Mosely are ever going to be man to man cover linebackers. Or deep center field cover 2 inside linebackers like Luke Kuechly. But they are both what I'd call party at the football kind of guys. They are both sure tacklers that will rally to stop YAC plays, screens, flat routes, etc. And they are both very good blitzers. They will always be reinforcements near the ball to prevent any broken tackle against defensive backs turning into big gains. You don't want to drop them into deep zones. If you are, you're using them wrong. Similar to when we tried to line up Hewitt to cover slot receivers. The worst quarterbacks in the league will identify and exploit that matchup. I think that's where the Onwuasor comes into play. Think Bart Scott + David Harris and how they were effectively used to combat the pass. If you try to use them like Kuechly and Thomas Davis you're doing something wrong.
While I get what you are saying, your analogy is a decade old and the league has changed a lot at this point. The Jets were also able to manufacture pressure by leaving Revis on an island, something the Jets most certainly are not able to do right now. Bart Scott would just not be the impact guy he was if he played in the league now, I’m sorry. I know he slowed down some, but do you remember how badly he was exposed in his last few years against the pass game? Whether you’re playing man or zone, Williamson just doesn’t have the cover skills.
I also think you’re kind of agreeing with my point about Williamson’s value, especially with Onwuasor. Do you want to pay $6.5 mm to a guy who might only be on the field on 1st downs? Would Williamson even see significant snaps against the Chiefs? Cardinals? Were the Jets unable to stop the run last year without him? Do you think they will be unable to manufacture pressure specifically because they wouldn’t have Williamson this year?
It's changed but it also hasn't in some respects. The two #1 seeds were the best two rushing teams in the NFL. 6 out of the top 8 teams in team rushing made the playoffs last year. My point was to the effectiveness that Mosely and Williamson can create on passing downs. We know they can stop the run. But they do more for the passing game than given credit, just because they're not deep hook to curl/post route cover players. A lot of the successes of the better offenses come from the principles of the air raid. Throw short to set everything else up. They can both be effective in stopping that short passing game. I would look at four down lineman (including Jenkins even if he stands up), Williamson, Mosely and Onwuasor on the field is a multiple front that isn't a huge negative against the pass. If you need to, you can sub someone on 3rd down to get Poole in. Onwuasor was signed to allow for flexibility of doing so. NOW, I wouldn't be surprised if we cut Williamson now. But I don't think it's an absolute necessary. It's good to have defensive flexibility. Especially when the cap isn't a big issue. And we'll get more for him as a comp pick walking next year than we will do cutting him (net nothing) now.
It would be ideal to trade back in the draft and add a few mid round picks--use those to add outside linebacker depth. Really getting tired of seeing Luvu, Langi and Basham as starters. We can do way better here.
Understood. I just think you'd rather keep a strength as flexible as possible. We were supposed to sign Barr with Williamson, Mosely and Lee on the roster. Trade Lee, Barr changes his mind, Williamson and Mosely are both done for the year by week 2. Suddenly your strength appears to be a major weakness. Even though Burgess and Hewitt really did a good job once they settled in.
Is this a bit of sarcasm? Luvu has only started one game in two seasons and that wasn't even last year. Basham 3 starts, 2 last season. Langi 3 last season And for this, you would have us either not select a top of the range OT or WR but trade down to add some more defence?
I agree with trading down but not for defense. Trade back to acquire another second and 4th-5th. I would still take a wr or ot with the 1st. I just think Justin Jefferson or another wr/or and a few more picks helps more than anyone except maybe the top 2 ots
I do trust Douglas so far, but he would have to produce a real haul of picks that become starters - above average starters - to warrant trading down and leaving a top OT or WR go to someone else.
How far you dropping down in the first? 11 to ? What is the lowest point you would drop down to in a trade and would a lower 1st a 2nd round and a 4th or 5th really be worth it?
Agreed. You have to feel real good about Ruggs (who will rise so a trade down eyeing him might be smart) or Josh Jones (who I haven't really watched but wasn't impressed at the senior bowl. @FJF made a good point. He's loading up on short contracts to play the compensatory pick game. You have to have a lot of confidence in your draft picks to play that game. But it's the right way to build.
I backspaced but I was going to include that if he's 50% better than Idzik or Maccagnan then it's a win.
I think we could have Jefferson, Austin Jackson, josh Jones, and a few other wr around 20-23ish. I wouldn't go much farther. And it also depends on what the scout say about them. I like Jefferson a lot. I think Jackson will be a good starter. And either would slot me to address other needs with the extra 2nd and other pick. I have some faith in Douglas for what I have seen. If he can get more picks and get us 2 we, 2 ol, edge, and a cb in the first 3 rounds it's got a better chance to improve our roster than 1 of each. Then we can fill out depth. I may do another mock soon with a trade back. I think someone will want to jump the Raiders
