Exactly. Tanny came out and said that they probably wouldn't have traded Washington if they hadn't drafted McKnight. Now maybe that was all NFL draft PR bullshit but when you're cutting a veteran after using a second round pick to get a guard, it seems like you expect the guard to play. When you trade up for a third down back/return guy and then immediately trade your third down back/return guy, you expect that guy to play. And when you draft someone in the first round with Coleman and Lowrey as the competition, you expect that guy to play.
I disagree. I think they expected Slaw to be the man and just put the competition thing in there to lite a fire under Slaw's ass. He did, at the very least the same as Faneca and he's almost 10 years younger so I would grade that choice a B+.
We'll never know if they expected Ducasse to be a rookie starter or simply believed that he might be able to start as a rookie and would then blossom in years 2-4 of his rookie contract, but there is zero chance they drafted a second round pick to inspire a sixth round pick with one year of experience (and a consumate grinder) to play harder.
The Jets ran a 2 back system in 2009, and again in 2010. Barring injury to LT or Greene, we weren't going to be seeing much of McKnight. It took Leon snapping his leg in half to get Greene any significant playing time. As far as Ducasse, well, just look at how long it took the Jets' starting O-line in 2008 to jell with Callahan's zone blocking philosophy. Almost half a season before the running game was effective at all. When Faneca was released, he did an interview on NFLN and said the Jets were grooming a guy at his position and they decided to go with him. It wasn't too hard to figure out that he was talking about Slauson, if you stopped taking account Ducasse's draft position. Slauson was the guy before they even pulled the trigger on Ducasse
Based just on their rookie year production, it's an F. I don't see how there can be any grade but F really.. none of them contributed at all. That being said, I believe all 4 of them have a chance to contribute a lot next year, and you can't grade a draft class for at least 3 years.
I understand the point about Slauson, but he didn't show much last year. It was his improvement during camp and pre-season that earned him the start. My recollection was that until then he was in a competition with Ducasse. As others have said you don't use a second round pick to light a fire under a one year vet picked in the sixth round. I know it is the general opinion here that Faneca was declining, and his contract too high. But the FO justified this move by saying they would let Slauson and Ducasse fight it out who would win the starter's job. I feared was going to be a replay of the Bender Clarke competition to replace Kendall, which of course nobody deserved to win - sometimes both suck. And while Slauson was much better than the Bender Clarke fiasco, he was, after all, the weakest starter on teh whole team. Not an A+ move for the FO, imvho. To the contrary, the hope had to be Ducasse might be good enough to start. He wasn't. Wilson also was a first round pick who was intended to be available to play the nickel, even perhaps start if Revis held out. Imagine if Revis had? OMG. As it was, even with Revis, Wilson saw very little time as the nickel back. McKnight's being in poor shape was his fault, but how well was he scouted? Connor will probably be the only FB on the roster next year, and i like his style, but he made almost no contribution this year. He apparently does well in practice, though, and I am mindful of the point that this is after all a team that made it to the Champ Game. Overall, while I am tempted to give them an Incomplete, we are really grading this year, and on that basis, I give these rookies a D.
Ducasse- his athleticism seems average to poor......in the preseason i bet this board lites up when he plays just like he did last prseason
So you are predicting that Callahan will have had a year with a second round pick and he won't have helped the guy improve at all?
If you think about it they released the worst starter on the team and replaced him with the worst starter on the team. The new starter is 10 years younger and carries much less salary. Now that in and of itself isnt an A+ move in this isnatnce, it isnt even close. However Slauson looks like he can be an above average starter when he gets some experience under his belt. We aren't privy to what the staff saw in Slauson towards the end of last year. Maybe they thought he was going to be at worst a wash with Faneca. Faneca couldn't pass block if his life depended on it. Leaving him there might have gotten Sanchez killed anyway.
I am not questioning the decision to let Faneca go. The point for discussion here was really Ducasse. I was merely pointing out that Ducasse's failure to win the starting job or even get more playing time than he did was not because Slauson was a really great player. I hope Slauson improves, and perhaps he will. I also think he was serviceable this past year, but the fact remains he was the weakest starter on the team, and that is a relevant consideration when one looks at Ducasse and wonder why he did not get more playing time.
you cant grade a draft until 3 seasons so we should really grade the 2008 draft gholston - F Keller - B Lowery - C ainge - F garner - F henry - F so we really only got 2 players out of it. Keller has been very good but still hasn't dominated so he gets a B not an A, lowery was a 4th rounder who has been solid and versatile. good job on the 4th rounder. the other players failed so i rate the draft overall as a D
The only fair grade right now is an "Incomplete." None had a major impact this season, but it doesn't meant that they all won't eventually be good players. I think it takes about 3 seasons to truly grade a draft.
Erik Ainge has been very consistent! He's been the IR or Drug Rehab and has not even making a difference on the practice field.
You are the voice of reason. How some of these armchair GMs can grade talent without any real information is amazing! They should demand jobs with the Jets to replace Mr.T. ( NOT)
Slauson must have shown something to REX. He decided to keep Slauson and cut Faneca. Yet you seem to have more info then Rex did. Very interesting. I expect that possibly Callahan knew a bit more about Slauson then our armchair GMs. My point of view is that Slauson graded out well this year. He was NOT the worst Jets starter at all as you suggested. See Killer -Keller; Cro et al. Ther guy was pretty darn good! Yet his problem is that so many of you wanted him to fail and he didn't. McKnight contributed quite a bit to special teams and had a big game against Buffalo. Yet all that is ever mentioned is that he came to camp out of shape. The guy failed his physical test on one day and passed it the very next day. i know that you meant to mention that. McKnight was heavily recruited coming out of HS. he is vastly talented. The GMs who get paid to know talent all feel he has tremendous talent. Its up to Rex and the player to work to develop that talent without the armchair GMs constantly harping on the fact that the player threw up upon reporting. Did REX goof up in keeping McKnight? I will let the armchair GMs answer that question in 2 years. Ducasse is an interesting case. Everyone knew that coming from Univ. of Mass. was a very tough jump to start in the NFL. Yet many anti-Slausonites were giddy feeling that Vlad was the answer! When it didn't happen they became skeptical of Slauson! IMO REX & T know a bit about personnel then armchair GMs.. If they feel that Vlad can play I will not judge the pick until a few years are in. He is vastly inexperienced. Yet he did get into a game and did not embarass himself at all. Conner did Ok until he received a stinger. then he seemed to cool down a bit and went inactive. I agree with you that an INCOMPLETE is the only grade that can be rendered at this time.