Predicting stats is impossible. I'm just saying I have almost no doubt that Bowers would contribute more this season than a backup OT. Making good decisions is about probabilities, not exact numbers. Bowers is more likely to help us this season than a backup OT.
For starters, my take isn't living in any bubble that wants to pretend the Jets are not currently a fairly terrible offensive football team until firmly proven otherwise. With a fairly deep rooted question in play on how much better we can even realistically expect to be over 2023 without any whole sale changes to the coaching staff, and with a declining 41yo QB who's underlying metrics last time he saw any extended playing time in 2022 weren't exactly night and day higher then Zach Wilson's behind a much worse o-line and with infinitely worse OC support. What swan song version of Rodgers we get in NY, which in overwhelming probability will likely fall somewhere between worse then below league average 2022 41 QBR Rodgers but better then 2023 Zach Wilson, actually matters quite a bit in this said equation. I don't expect any incoming OL to be a slam dunk high level performer in year 1 to answer your question. But I would feel a lot better about plugging that hole with them then i would the visible alternatives. Within an offense where any chance of success we do find will undoubtfully revolve around how well the OL is holding up for Breece and with the run game carrying the lion share load. I'll extend the same offer that Revision poster just basically refused on grounds that it might incriminate himself and all the mostly hot air takes he's being posting latter. Or any other poster that keeps citing this GFIN appeal in drafting Brock Bowers. Go on record and give us a ball park estimate on what you think that actually looks like in the 2024 Hackett offense. I mean jesus. If you feel that strongly about something, but are too afraid of actually owning that opinion because it could very well make you look fairly clueless latter, maybe that's a pretty glaring sign you need to both re-think and re-evalalute that said opinion stance btw. Just a thought
Even with probabilities, I think OT easily comes out on top. Brock will PLAY more, yes. But will he HELP more over replacements Conk/Ruckert as a rookie? Even with some slot reps, I don't think so. Our tackles are old and missed 7 games last year. It is fair to say from probability perspective a rookie OT will play these games, and maybe more. Smith averaged actually less than 13 games over las few years. And Moses is coming off surgery with both of them a year older. So, half the snaps is a reasonable estimate, if not conservative one. And these snaps will be a major upgrade over pathetic scrubs we have on the bench, not Conklin. Also you need to factor in the risk of injury for Rodgers. These half the games the risk will be reduced with a good OT. And when Rodgers is hurt, then there will be drastic drop off in the entire offense. Nor just between Rodgers and Tyrod, but also play calling will go from Rodgers to Hack. Finally when Rodgers and Breece will have more time, overall the offensive production with skyrocket. So, yeah, I expect Brock to play more than say Latham, but probability wise the benefit achieved by a good OT over replacement and for offense in general would be higher for Latham.
Here, it really isn't that hard btw. If the jets draft Brock Bowers I feel pretty confident he ends up like most round 1 TEs do when drafted to bad offensive teams and systems. He'll end up a mostly fungible asset type of non factor, and who won't even match Conklin's production from last year. I'd be surprised if he even finds 50 catches or 500 yards if Mike Williams stays healthy and with Garrett being such a force fed target hog. In an offense that looks to have Breece lead the league in carries. Feel free to bump that on me latter. I got no fear in owning anything I say latter.
I don't think anyone completely dismissed the value of Brock because of position. But why do you find it hard to accept that positional value does matter and the value of Brock is likely lower than similarly talented WR for example? I have showed evidence, which included transition tags for positions (top 10 salary average), NFL receiving stats, where the absolute best TE pass catcher bar none is still behind 24 WRs, etc... I think majority of people who do not want Brock at 10 still realize the guy is a top 20 draft pick in general and have seen his snaps. Also help me understand your position on watching tape. Just the other day I mentioned it was the most important and things like 40 time, yards, etc, come after, when we talked about Odunze. You responded saying that tape is not key measure, and referenced things like yards and TDs (where Odunze excelled): https://forums.theganggreen.com/posts/4396099/ . Now when talking about Brock (who didn't have that many yards and TDs last year) you went away from the previous position and are saying it "is all about tape". May I ask why?
There are no guarantees with any draft pick. There are always surprises both ways, some positive, and some negative. The only thing one can do is base one's decision upon the knowledge we have of the team at present - the age and injury history of players at key positions; the history of the HC, OC and DC in the use of their schemes and handling of players, ability to adjust/adapt, etc.; the pedigree of the player; his work ethic; his experience (if any) in the scheme the Jets will run; the odds/history of how prospects at various positions fare in the 1st round; consider positional value; and the value of the pick itself; and then make the best decision we can. In doing the foregoing, we know the following. This is what we know: That the team at present needs young starting caliber talent for the future at OT That we need depth at OT due to Smith's age and injury history and possibly need depth for Moses That Rodgers will be 42 soon and he isn't as mobile as he used to be, especially coming off of an achilles tendon tear That this is a very strong-deep draft at OT That one should draft to the strength of a draft - when one has a position of need one should draft a player or players at that position in that draft, not wait until another draft that may not have the quality of players at that position, draft one early That AVT is coming off of a season-ending injury and we don't know when he will be ready to play That M. Williams is coming off of an ACL injury and we don't know when he will be ready to play That after G. Wilson and M. Williams, we have two unknowns in Gipson and Brownlee, a meh veteran in Malik Taylor and a ST gunner in Irving Charles at WR That we need additional playmakers at WR, RB and maybe TE That this is a very strong and very deep WR class, perhaps one of the best ever, and according to some, the best in 20 years, and again that we should draft a WR early That the defense is elite and has had a lot of 1st round picks and FA $s invested in it, and the offense needs love to bring it up to the level of the D That Saleh is a former DC, knows little about offense and is more conservative That Hackett is incompetent - he had the worst offense in the NFL two years in a row with two different teams - he pays little attention to detail or discipline - took him half a season to realize that Breece is a good receiver - that he isn't very creative, doesn't scheme players open, can't adjust his scheme to fit the abilities of the players in his scheme (square pegs into round holes) - his play calling is predictable and often bad That Bowers is a great prospect with a top pedigree, perhaps a generational talent, he is a hard worker, not a traditional in-line TE, and can be used in many ways That the Jets haven't traditionally made the TE a focal point in their offense and neither has Hackett That the Jets OL will use both zone and man blocking schemes so that any OT/OL we draft should fit That QBs, WRs, and TEs taken in the 1st round bust at significantly higher rates than OTs do That the Jets have a bad 5 year history of poor OL play and lots of injuries That without a competent backup when Smith or Moses go down with injury that Rodgers will be in peril, and if he goes down for a significant length of time, the season is over That starting a rookie OT isn't optimal, but they do it every year and some, perhaps most, play at a fairly high level That it can take a TE a year or two to develop, just as it can a WR, although some play at a high level as rookies That OTs are the 2nd or 3d most important position on a football team after QB and maybe Edge That CB and WR are in the 2nd tier after QB, OT and Edge as far as positional value That TE is probably down the list below C, OG, RB, DT and LB as far as positional value That the 10th pick has high value and should only be used on an elite player and 99% of the time should be used on QB, OT, Edge, WR, & CB or maybe a stud RB, DT or LB Considering all of that, imo sound logic indicates that the choice in the 1st round should be an OT, or if not a WR
And if our Brady is hurt because he wasn't protected by his LT, then what? I mean, isn't it exactly what happened last year, and Smith will not play full season. The first thing TB did when they got Brady is build a wall around him. I like Rodgers, but this is just putting too many eggs in one basket. You do need to hedge your bets at some point.
Bowers is ready to contribute Day 1 *IF* drafted to the right team/situation. Again though, and BUBBLE EXIT WARNING INCOMING: This discussion isn't taking place on a Dolphins, Lions, or maybe even Chargers at #5 fan board. Your statement there actually has to apply well while Brock Bowers is being drafted into *HERE* and *THIS* offense. A jets offense/system that has been and until proven otherwise will probably remain among the the worst and least creative offenses in the NFL. One that outside the bubble hype probably amounts to one that is ultimately going to fall back into just trying to successfully be a less bad version of the previous 2 year sample we have of Hackett offense without ML. Which will also still be handicapped with said historically bad OC for the foreseeable future, and that will still in all probability include a start from scratch QB change once he finally gets booted out of building. That could be 2 years down the road for all we know, and essentially turn a Bowers pick into a potential "drafting for a hopeful emergence 3 years down the road" scenario. "Rodgers is this offense" isn't a real answer that is actually trying to address or much less solve that logic problem here either.
Technically, I think that was the second thing. They signed Gronk almost immediately after Brady. Minor point, because I don’t think the timing matters when it was all part the broader offseason strategery. You’re right about that part.
Well, my post was in response to someone that expected predicted performance stats to justify some other position which is ridiculous in and of itself, no more than expecting projected stats for an OL or any other position. I do not disagree with the importance of the position and relevant positional value in the assessment. But not LT candidates are equal and not all are meritorious of the top picks, so no, don’t agree come hell and high water an OT should be taken. if the top three tackles are gone for example and a guy like Nabers is there you don’t just reach out for another OL that might be best suited to G in the long run because of position if the value is not there. Either trade down or pick arguably a top tier WR that can be an immediate contributor.
I used the term tape as watching film of actual games and performance against top competition, with metrics like contested catches, separation, shiftiness versus straight speed, catchable ball rate, yac, running all routes etc etc. The 40 yard dash is a speed metric used in the combine and a factor which I responded to on another thread. As for the positional value, I do not disagree with the importance of OT if the right guys are there, as I responded to NC on another thread. I feel after the top three, is far from clear that the rest are at a level to demand a high first round pick, in which case you either trade down or take a stud WR if there. Otherwise, if you just want to go by positional value, then take a QB that has more positional value than anything else. That would really go over well.
Honest question. How did they build that wall, thru the draft or by bringing in some vets. I didn’t follow Tampa much.
I don't believe in "reaching" for a player who is of a much lower talent level. Thankfully, I doubt that all 3 of the top 3 OTs will be gone by # 10, and we don't know who the Jets see as the top 3. Is it Alt, Fashanu and Fuaga, or is it Alt, Fuaga, and Latham, or is Alt, Fautanu and one of Latham and Fashanu? We also don't know how much of a difference the Jets see between those 5 OTs and Nabers or Bowers, the difference could be as little as a hundredth of a point and as much perhaps as several tenths of a point, or maybe even a whole point. There could also be a 2nd tier OT that the Jets think with some work and time could perhaps be as good or maybe even better than those 5, and that they could get following a trade down. The thing is with the blocking scheme supposedly changing and with supposed evaluation after last season, we don't know what else might be changing or where there priorities lie. Their priorities could be just getting playmakers, or it could be on fixing the OL at all costs, or somewhere in the middle. I surely hope that the focus is on the offense in one way or the other, and not the D. The thing is, we really don't know who could be an immediate contributor. Some rookies can start day one and play at a high level, whereas others may take half their rookie season to work on their flaws, learn the offense, and acclimate to the NFL, where others may take a year or two to develop. Past success at the collegiate level is no guarantor of future success in the NFL. Some people here who want Bowers think he would start day one. Others, some of whom want Bowers, and some of whom don't, say that TEs can take a year or two to develop. While if Bowers gets drafted by the right team with a creative and flexible OC, I think it likely he will start day one and probably play at a high level, and even would have a shot at rookie of the year, but if he's drafted by the Jets or another team where the OC is rigid and tries to make players fit his scheme, and wouldn't change his scheme to focus on Bowers, he will be much less successful. Similarly, WRs can sometimes take half a season or a whole year to develop as can OTs. Alot depends upon the quality of the coaching, and how complex/easy the system they will be playing in, how different/similar it is to their collegiate scheme, and if it fits what they do well.
It comes to mind that if the rankings are close and bunched up in the mid ranges for OL and WRs, with remaining QBs out, we might be lucky enough to trade down to the mid range, capture a mid second rounder and still get a solid OL. With the second the options expand offensively as with the third to fill key positions of need. You could end up with an OL, WR and QB moving forward.
Yeah, I don’t have the stamina to mine the archives, and didn’t follow TB much either. My point was mostly how Gronk came out of retirement and joined the Bucs almost immediately after they signed Brady. That all happened pretty early in the NFL year. Brady wasn’t a free agent for very long.
When it comes to Bowers, here’s what we know, and why I think the leap that some take when they try to project his NFL game is a whole lot of ass gas by people who never really watched him play. Brock Bowers, as a TE, sits on the all-time SEC receiving and touchdown list among some really notable company. It isn’t just that he did that playing in the most competitive conference. He also practiced four times a week against an NFL defense. That’s not hyperbole. Run down the 2021 and 2022 UGA defensive depth charts and almost every player was either drafted already or will be. A healthy crop of them first and second day picks. How many other players can we say that about, much less tight ends or receivers. High draft picks fail every year, and there’s no surefire acid test for success. Except, with Bowers, predicting failure is tantamount to saying - we don’t think you can do what you’ve done over the last three years. As if his game will stand still while everyone else progresses.
I've said that Bowers could do very well in the right situation, with an OC that is creative, knows how to use him, and puts him in a position to succeed. Hackett couldn't do that if his life depended upon it. Bowers would still probably be good with the Jets, but not as good as he could and should be with a team that will design their offense around what he can do.
A agreed…but that also goes for Bowers. You’d think he’ll be an instant all pro from all the hype but plenty of TEs don’t pan out either
Agree….or Odunze for that matter. But they both have done plenty against some damned tough competition. Georgia D BTW is top of the line and pro ready, I’m curios to see how many seniors get drafted high out of that bunch. There is a lot to be said about draft choices that got their stripes by playing against or training against superior talent.
Jets twitter is divided into 3. Some want Bowers, some want WR and some want OL. The 3 names that seem likely to be there at 10 are these guys. I know most likely at least 2 of these won't be there. But for sake of argument let's say all 3 are available who do you pick? For OL I put Fashanu or highest ranked OL since opinions are split on best OT at 10.
