I guess this needs repeating until it sinks into the heads of those who think the Jets can "get by" with a mediocre (at best) QB: Even if this approach makes some sense, here's the reality: the higher you draft, the better the odds of getting a great player, and the chances of the Jets having the #2 (let alone #1) pick any time soon is very remote. Couple these facts with the other fact that next year's QB class is much weaker than this one. Yes, the draft is a gamble, no matter how high you pick, and it never fails that each year a new QB or two becomes the "next Andrew Luck", but the reality is that second statement usually gets proven false. If they want certainty - over the long haul, not just a 1 or 2 year rental - then they need to trade for Watson (or possibly Wilson, though I don't like that). Otherwise, they need to take advantage of this very rare and unique situation and take the QB they like the best with the #2 pick.
I'm sold on Wilson because to me he is football smart, has a quick read , recognizes the blitz and fires an accurate ball very quickly, even though the game plan for BYU is mostly get a read and fire long. That is what I see and IMO is paramount to be successful at the NFL level. What keeps me up at night about the kid has nothing to do with cockiness, or arm strength, or leadership, and everything to do with durability. Does he have the build to withstand the punishment at that level. Similar concern to Chad who I loved as a Jet, smart as hell, but fragile.
Our #2 overall pick could be worth two or three 1st round picks if we trade back. To even consider giving up the #2 pick overall and two more additional 1st round picks should be insane and should lead to the GM getting fired.
To me it all comes down to how much we believe in JD’s ability to draft talent. The draft isn’t a lottery ticket, it’s a gamble. A lottery ticket implies it’s all based on luck and out of your control. Gambling still has risks but you can mitigate those risks and that’s why some gamblers make more money than others.
If there were no TL, then Jags would be zeroed in on Zack Wilson and TGG would be talking about Justin Fields being better than Zack!
I hear what you're saying, but picks aren't players. IOW, there's no guarantee that a pick becomes a good player, and there's no real correlation between the number of picks and number of good players (that is, starters). Even though I think Douglas has done a good job so far, in his first and only draft, he's only produced 2 definite starters and I'm giving him the BOTD on Mimms. Simply getting two or maybe three more picks, even premium ones, is no guarantee they'll become starters. Moreover, the QB has the most longevity on a team. Getting a FBQ means you don't have to worry about that problem for at least a decade, during which time it's very possible that the one or two "starters" you drafted instead of the QB have either gotten traded or are out of the game. Put it another way, ask yourself: Why is the #2 pick worth so much, and if that's true, why wouldn't it be worth at least that much to the Jets in terms of the best player they can get? You're assuming some team is willing to trade a couple of additional firsts for the chance to draft ONE player they think will be great, so why is that a bad strategy for the Jets? Keep in mind that any team that could offer the Jets the "haul" you're asking for would themselves likely be a poorly performing team with lots of holes, otherwise they wouldn't have the draft picks to give up. I'm not saying it's crazy to consider alternatives as you've suggested, but it makes more sense to take the opportunity presented which doesn't come around very often. Since 1990 the Jets have only drafted as high as #2 twice: 1990 they had the #2 pick; 1996 they had the #1 pick. That's two times in three decades. They seem to have the stars aligned in having a #2 pick and a bumper crop of good FQB candidates, and they need to take advantage of that and not give it up.
the think in bold sounds eminently logical and plausible but i have never seen this verified, especially if you rule out the number 1 pick. It seems like it should be so easy to prove yet is elusive. All that said, if they're convinced they have their guy and he's a QB then sure use the number 2 to get him and don't look back. If they're less than convinced, then they shouldn't talk themselves into using the pick at QB
Ultimately we'll know what the Jets think of them because I think every team follows this line of thinking. I also tend to believe teams don't have backup plans at quarterback in drafts. They isolate a guy they want and there usually aren't 1A/1B options unless someone falls ridiculously low.
Too many people on this board think if we don't get a new QB this season then it will be a disaster. I ask them, "Why?" Do we have playoff hopes this season? This is the beginning of our rebuild. The year to stock our team with young talent. QB is not the priority. Building a team where a QB can come in and have success, or at least survive, is the priority. You don't begin that by drafting a QB at 2. If Wilson checked the all the 'cant pass this guy up up' boxes, then maybe. He doesn't. He is basically a guy that is going to jump from playing against D2 defenses to NFL defenses. Even Fields is the far better pick. I'd say our chances of drafting a QB this year are 1 in 3.
You're right, it should be easy to prove, but then again there are so many variables with draftees that it's hard to pinpoint why some succeed and others fail. Still, I have see stats (and once posted them here maybe about 3 years ago) showing the "success rate by round" and it supports my assertion. If I can find them again, I'll re-post them. I know some - Br4d for one, but also a few others - have posted numbers that show that QBs taken in the lower 1st and early 2nd round are more likely to succeed, but I don't think that's really connected to talent but more so to the quality of the team drafting a QB in that range. One thing that does argue for is waiting until your team is of that quality before trying to draft a QB, and I believe Br4d has argued for this (he can correct me if I'm wrong). But that approach presents a few problems: drafting in that range allows a number of teams (15+) to have a chance to take "your" QB before you can. Yes, this can be mitigated somewhat by a really shrewd GM who manages to trade up and snag his guy sooner, but A) Is JD that shrewd? We sure don't know that yet; and B) It costs draft capital and/or other valuable assets to do it; and C) there's no guarantee that you find a team willing to trade. Bottom line is that this approach requires not only a shrewd GM, but luck which is completely beyond that GM's control. OTOH, drafting at the top - especially in this case where we have the pick of every QB not named Lawrence - is an extremely rare occurrence. All it takes to succeed is a shrewd GM, no luck, it's all in his sphere of control. Therefore, there are only three reasons that I can see that would argue for not taking a QB at #2: 1. Douglas doesn't think any of them are better than Darnold or better than a QB he can obtain via FA/trade. or 2. He's already traded for Watson (or Wilson) or 3. He thinks he can trade back and still get a QB he likes.
It's very easily verified and like you said just makes logical sense. https://football.pitcherlist.com/pessimists-guide-to-the-nfl-draft/ This shows that chances of success for a QB are higher the higher he is chosen in the 1st round. There is another analysis that I can't find at the moment that shows success of guys taken in round 1, 2, 3 etc. I will say it's still very hard to hit on a FQB even in the first round. But it's a hell of a lot harder in later rounds, so what choice do you have?
I agree. If a GM says "Well I'll be happy with A, B, or C" then I don't think he's really looking for a FQB. I think this might be the case when a team already has a QB that they're ok with, but even then, like you said, they might consider taking a QB that falls if it's a guy they really like - like the KC situation with Mahomes.
We have 2 first round picks next season. We also have a ton of picks in this draft after #2. Also add in a pick for Darnold. We will take a QB. Darnold is done in NY, so who is your QB this season?
It's why the Maccagnan trade up for Darnold was so extremely flawed. He made that deal way too early and there was no consensus as to who was going one or two at that point. Baker going to the Browns was an extremely late development especially for a #1 pick that could've even been used on Barkley and it wasn't clear if the Giants were going to take a QB of the future. So Maccagnan figured he'd get one of the top three. What a horrible strategy.
I don't know what the right move is, but I do know this. If the Jets draft a QB at 2, & he flops, we are screwed for years.
I threw up when Cleveland took Mayfield because I knew that the Giants were taking Barkley. They said so. That left the idiot to draft Darnold who was my least favorite of all the QBs in that draft. I had Mayfield #1 & Jackson #2. I was willing to take a chance on Allen without even watching him live before picking Darnold. Hated him in college. Hate hate hate. lol I was sure we were going to take Mayfield at #3 since all the dumb media had Darnold rated so high. Maccagnan was the Rich Kotite of GMs. Clueless. Then he signs Bell without an O-Line. What an idiot.
What does that mean? Draft nobody at #2? Anyone can be a flop even a non-QB. Injuries happen. Somehow great organizations figure it out. We could take a QB at 2 who could become great and flop on all the other picks.
