In all fairness it's kind of hard to get it out of my head when we've seen that same pre-draft sell before, being perpetuated by a hype machine that these days essentially doesn't even care anymore if they get it wrong (whatever gets the most clicks > being right), that never actually delivers.
I agree with your desire that Douglas go after the guy who will best help the team right away, be that OT, WR, TE. But for the love of all that's holy, no DT or even any defensive players with the first two picks! As for criticizing him for bad picks, I don't think I've done that. What I have done is criticize him for picking players without regard to how they can best be used, knowing that he has also hired the CS and is well aware of what systems they're comfortable with, and what their strengths and weaknesses as coaches are. Hiring a defensive minded HC, and allowing him to pick an unproven guy as his OC, and then drafting a QB who would need a lot of development was dumb. So IMO, picking Zach at #2 - in a vacuum - wasn't bad - but picking him in light of these other factors was. But with Maccagnan, I did blame him, both at the time of his picks and after. I needed no hindsight to know that passing on Mahomes when we needed a QB was a colossal mistake, exceeded only by taking a SS, and THEN taking another S!
I don't necessarily disagree with most of this, aside the difference being negligible. An ability to separate even a little more, when you couple that with NFL DBs, makes a big difference. Still I would not kill JD for taking him, I do think he is a top 15 prospect. Just that he is no Nabers/Harrison, and there are other prospects at OT that are also top 10/15 like Olu and possibly Latham that I like as well. As far as redraft of AJ Brown, I think AJ mostly beat the odds rather than a prospect with his profile is a high probability to become a top WR receiver. So, yes HE personally would go top 10, but another prospect with similar profile may not. Speed and ability to separate still gives you a better chance. If Nabers is there at 10, I am running to the podium. Rome - there are other OT options to consider as well IMO.
I don't disagree with anything you're saying. My point was that high quality can sink to 10 and we should focus on BPA While I am not advocating to pick a QB i am advocating we go BPA even if it is a QB realistically if ROdgers pans out even a little this would be a good time to select a QB and groom him/sit him while Rodger does his thing. Kind of sick of drafting a QB high and throwing him to the wolves. See Sanchez, Darnold, ZAch -- each of whom might have sucked regardless but we definitely did them no favors
Again, how much are you accounting (not just you but everyone who discusses what to do with draft picks) for the situation the draftee goes into with whether they succeed/fail and by how much? To me this is a WAY bigger impact.
I disagree that you go BPA no matter what. That's what Macc did and it was incompetent. You have to factor in team need unless you're already a SB contender. And if you're a team who needs a QB, that has to be your primary focus. As to drafting a QB now and letting him sit and learn, yes in an ideal world that would make sense...like in an ideal world, the Jets would have a proven record of being able to identify and develop QBs. But in reality the Jets haven't proven they can do this. In fact, they've proven only that they know how to destroy young QBs. Until they prove otherwise it's a waste of a high draft pick for them to take a QB in the 1st round.
we will have to respectfully disagree. In my book, BPA is the smart move. Of course some times teams trade taking a gamble that someone they value very highly is worth movng up for, or may sink, but in general you try to get the most value from each pick Also picking QBs when you need them (as opposed to when they're available) is dumb
Yes, ATD. But just to clarify, making QB your focus isn't the same thing as drafting one even if there isn't a stud available for you to draft. In that case, you live with signing vets and waiting until the opportunity comes.
I understand and respect that. If I'm the GM however, unless I'm blown away with a great trade down offer, I'm staying put and taking the best OT on the board. I wouldn't care if all 4 QBs and all 3 of the top WRs were still on the board. An offense begins and ends, lives or dies with its OL. IMO nothing else matters.
This is a good point too…the team needs to be able to develop the players they draft. Bad teams with bad coaches will have a much worse hit rate on draft picks…is that due to the front office/scouting/GM decisions, or is that due to good prospects coming into poor coaching, poor schemes that don’t maximize their skill sets, etc. Truth is really probably a bit of both. For sure coaching matters. Specifically with the QBs we’ve drafted, though, none have gone on to some crazy success after leaving here, so I have to say they probably weren’t as good as their hype regardless…and yeah I get Geno finally had a good season 10 years later, but for the most part, the QBs we’ve drafted didn’t go on to great success elsewhere. Same goes for our HCs too…none have gone on to great success outside of Pete Carroll decades ago (crazy to type that!)
You're in a minority of one who doesn't think that the Jets have had poor OL play. I don't know what you've been watching, but the OL play has been abysmal for most of the last 5-10 years. It was pretty good during that magic season of 2015 or 2016, but since then it's mostly been crap. Injuries have been a big part of that as the Jets have been down to the #3 or #4 on the depth chart fairly regularly. The QB play hasn't helped, but the QB is more reliant on the OL than the OL is on the QB.
100% No idea what games he was watching to come to a conclusion that our OL play was ok. But that’s the result of a GM in Mac who quite blatantly said he didn’t think it was good to invest significant draft capital into OL…Fucking idiot. He literally drafted like 3 OL in his 5 years, and the highest was what, a third rounder? May have been a 2nd rounder, but can’t recall offhand. JD walked into an OL disaster created by Mac. Though to be honest, JD has had 5 years to fix it and still hasn’t…so he’s not blameless here.
Focusing on the reality over the idealized hypothetical will typical paint the more accurate projection picture. In reality the Jets are a team that currently can't even bring themselves to fire an offensive coordinator with one of the worst 2 year run track records in league history. Being dysfunctional to that extent and a team who can't even get that right is not going to have any noteworthy success trying to develop a young QB. Putting the cart before the horse is never a good bet to work. We have trouble clearing that basic hump lol
The only Jets' coach that I can think of since Parcells who picked or built the scheme around the talents of his players is Ulbrich to some extent, and even there, Saleh is looking for very specific types of players who fit the specific requirements of the defensive scheme he wants to run. So, it still really is forcing players into a scheme. I can't think of a single Jets OC who has done what the best OCs in the NFL do, i.e., pick a scheme or devise/alter a scheme so that it fits the strengths of their QB and offensive players. It's one of the reasons the Jets have continued to struggle and not make the playoffs. They're always trying to force square pegs into round holes, then scratching their ass and are perplexed why things didn't work. I'm beginning think that 90% of the coaching fraternity is brain dead.
I don't agree with this at all. Exhibit A is the Patriots. They had a scheme and QB of quick reads and releases. Among other things, one benefit of that is the OL didn't need to protect as long. Few sacks, hurries etc. A lot of their OL then had great stats, got paid in FA (e.g., Solder) and then sucked elsewhere. it's way too simple to think it's all about the OL. There are synergies that depend on the scheme and QB. Similarly having a balanced running and passing game helps tremendously, as does an offense that is efficient at getting yardage. all of your stats (OL and QB) get affected when the team is frequently in obvious-passing downs
I think about this everytime I see somebody drooling all over the possibility of spending a premium pick at WR based on some isolated out fantasy value that might come out of it. As opposed to what the track record reality *here* is telling us will probably happen. It took Garrett Wilson damn near 170 targets last year just to break 1000 yards in one of the most mediocre 1000 receiving seasons you'll ever see. Anybody who thinks that was all on Zach isn't being honest with themselves. And that isn't even getting into our track record with the 2nd round flyers we've taken in recent years Talk to me again about spending a lottery pick at WR after our turn-things-around version of Mike McDaniel enters the building.
We'll just have to agree to disagree. You actually make my case for me regarding your post on always taking BPA in the draft. Belichick NEVER aspired to that philosophy. He took players that no one else had interest in because he believed they would be great fits in his scheme. He missed a lot, and perhaps even missed on more than he hit, but when he hit they became very good. Also Trent Brown did not suck elsewhere. The coaches under Belichick that got HC jobs sucked, and the Patriots backup QBs (with the exception of Brissett) have mostly sucked, as have players at other positions. The thing they were missing was the coaching they were getting from Belichick and his staff and the scheme. When those players went to other teams, they didn't fit those schemes and that's why they struggled and failed. Not every player in the NFL can play in just any old scheme. In fact, I believe that it is the minority of players who can do that and play at a high level. Most are better fits for a specific scheme. You want to talk about simple? That's blindly following the BPA "rule" in the draft. It requires no thinking, no planning in team building, just have your scouts rank the prospects in the rounds in which they were likely to go, and then take the BPA. And that's exactly how Mac had the scouts evaluating prospects, not for scheme fit, not for leadership, love of football or any of those things, just their rank in each round of the draft, and that's pretty much how Mac took them.That's how we wound up with a sorry OL, no weapons, no QB and 8 years of futility. Mac was the BPA poster boy. I'm sorry, you're a good guy and good poster, but your reasoning on this is totally off imo.
IMO, the most critical time for a young player - of ANY position, but especially QB - is the first 2 years, and of those, the first year. If they aren't developed properly in the those first two years, they're likely ruined as a starter, and maybe even as backup. There are some very rare exceptions, but in those cases the QB almost certainly received great coaching and development before coming to the NFL. IMO, not nearly enough blame is focused on the CS and FO for QB (and other position) failure, when in fact, the MOST blame should be placed there. If this isn't true then simple odds would dictate that every once in a while the Jets would discover a great young QB who went on to lead them for a decade or more. But if you look at the coaches the Jets have had over the years none of them were known as great QB developers, so is really just bad luck or coincidence that the Jets haven't had a great young QB in all that time? More likely, if the Jets hired a great offensive HC they would "suddenly" find a great young QB.
I also had Latham rated lower originally, especially after watching play-offs, but then after looking at all 22, it was actually not a bad game. A concern I had with Latham was that he was too big - 262lbs. However, he actually lost 20 lbs, and weighed in at 242 at combine. This is a 5 star HS recruit, great measurables, 2nd team AP all American. Good in both running game and in Pass Pro. Played a lot of games where he can make a difference early. And he is young too, just turned 21. That matters. Especially when people talk about getting Fautanu, 3 years older, less accomplished, and undersized. As far as Alabama OL being bad, Dickerson who came out recently was good, and more importantly Latham's tape looks decent too. I would not mind the guy even at 10 and would be a slam dunk on a trade down. Still if Olu is there I would take him first, but if JD takes Latham at 10, it would not be the worst thing. I think right now, assuming Alt and Harrison are gone and say trade down is not an option, I would go in this order: 1 Nabers, 2 Olu, 3 Latham, 4 Odunze. Nabers would be a steal, but I would not kill JD for the other 3.
In an earlier post where I mentioned the Alabama OL, I said aside from Dickerson and perhaps 1 or 2 others or something to that extent.
