I'm just hoping that Macc prioritizes the OL next offseason now that he got a FQB. It will show that he's willing to learn and not stuck in his belief that a good OL can be built with mid round picks. It would be great if one or more of his recent rounds 2-4 picks panned out.
I'd argue the 2 best players on offense are darnold and anderson. both were obtained by mac. darnold as a 3rd overall pick which he traded up to get and had he not traded up we would have gotten allen or rosen most likely. and anderson he signed as an UDFA which is a steal. everyone forgets to give mac credit on robbie for some reason but he found him and signed him as an UDFA
Gotta remember that Mac tried to trade up in 1st rd for Tunsil, ultimately he decided the price was too costly, which in hindsight was probably the wrong decision but he was going after an OLineman in the 1st rd. In the 1st rd at least I think it’s been more value not being there for OL than his philosophy of not selecting OL in the early rounds.
There's a lot of truth to this, but it also shows Macc's blind spot with his BPA-Only approach. If he truly did have a plan for drafting a FQB, then why didn't he put more of an emphasis on getting OL help, even if he had to "overpay"? When you're trying to construct a team from the ground up you can't just take the BPAs no matter what positions they play.
I think the biggest mistake he made in regards to the OL was not over paying in FA, especially this past offseason with a ton of available cap room and quality interior lineman available. Of course we don’t know if he tried and was just rebuffed. I can say with 100% certainty though that there wasn’t a OL that I would’ve taken over any of his 1st rd picks.
to be fair the draft is a guessing game an 15 mins on the clock isn't much time. the jets loved adams but if trubisky had fallen to 6 maybe we take him instead? i wanted trubisky and mocked him to the jets personally and he's looking pretty dam good right now. maybe he just felt watson and mahomes wasn't worth it? i mean hindsight is always 20/20 but adams is a difference maker on our defense and was a great pick. there really wasn't an o-lineman worth taking there either. probably the only complaint would be taking back to back WRs (although it was deemed as a need at the time) in the 3rd and 4th rounds and neither of them panning out when he could have tried to get a lineman in one of those rounds.
That depends on what you're basing your value on. If you're desperate for OL or pass rushing then the VALUE of those positions is - or should be - higher to you. Of course this goes against BPA no matter what, but BPA makes you take players that you might not need as badly on the assumption that you can afford to have gaping holes in one or more spots while you spend the draft capital on areas you don't have as great a need. This is fine if you already have a team that's more or less constructed, but when you're trying to get to basic relevancy it impedes that progress. And while it might be hindsight to many, it should've been obvious to Macc that Mahomes or Watson fit a HUMONGOUS NEED for him, and both have proved that. Had he taken Mahomes he wouldn't have had to used draft capital this year and might well have been able to upgrade the OL and/or pass rushing. Sure, Adams is good, and may become great even, but even if he becomes the greatest Safety in NFL history, he won't make a bigger impact than a FQB. Moreover, it's quite possible that Maye is a better Safety than Adams and he could've had Mahomes and Maye and the aforementioned O/pass rusher. I think Macc's philosophy is flawed.
i get that for sure but from all accounts i read the jets fell in love with adams and knew if he fell they would take him. using a high pick like that you really want a player you are in love with. you don't want to settle for a player out of need. we don't know what the backup plan was if adams wasn't there or maybe trubisky was the 1st choice but he went 2nd overall. maybe if adams didn't fall we trade back and get a lineman? nobody really knows. the one thing i can say though that has been proven time and time again throughout NFL history is BPA works better then drafting a need. i read an article on it last year as well but BPA is always the way to go unless you have no other choice. we got lucky this year that BPA was a QB which was what we needed and were going to draft anyway. plus many of the top tackled taken the past few years ain't looking so good. tunsil is doing just ok and bolles has been bad for denver and even the raiders rookie LT they took isn't looking too hot either. if the options weren't good it doens't make sense to reach and take a player you don't like. Gms have more then just the draft to fill holes. Mac also went out and got the top center this year in FA after johnson was the worst. long has been a huge improvement and it shows he isn't ignoring the o-line. we got money to spend, we have 6 draft picks in 2019 mac can improve the o-line and pass rusher which is really all we NEED and any other upgrades or just wants. and to be fair watson doens't look very good. he did last year but this year he's been iffy at best. mahomes yeah that was a great pick. he's tearing it up but as you said hindsight and all. mahomes could slump later this year or next year or could turn out to be a choke artist in playoffs. we don't know. i'm happy with sam though and feel it all worked out for the best. mac has built a really good team in only 2 short years pretty much, he landed out potential FQB who IMO was the best prospect since luck and many shared that sentiment, hasn't missed on a high pick either which is the killer of drafts and we are a young team on the upswing. of course he isn't perfect. no GM is but he's aggressive and smart and has drafted well enough. You should read the article about how the colts pissed away lucks career to see how bad a GM can really be or go look at izdik and the shit team he left mac with and his missing 11 out of 12 picks in 1 draft. You can look at any teams draft and say what they should have done years later
It just depends on which teams Mac spoke with and what their asking price was to move up from the #20 spot in the draft to somewhere between #9 and #12. That price would depend upon how much those teams coveted the players they took. If they would have been happy with a one of the players 10 spots lower in the draft, then their asking price may not have been that high, but if they really liked the player they took and didn't like the players that would have probably been available 10 spots lower, they may have really jacked up their asking price to the realm of highway robbery. I think it would have cost probably at least a 3rd round pick, and more likely a 2nd round pick to move up that many spots, and maybe even a 4th round pick in addition. If that (a 2nd and 4th) was the price, then yes, it was the wrong decision, but if those teams asked for the Jets 2017 1st round pick, or multiple high picks then it was the right decision.
I totally disagree. NFL history has proven no such thing. Taking BPA is better than reaching for a player out of need, but not necessarily better than trading down and getting 2-3 players that can help your team. Similarly, Long was NOT the best C in FA this year, not even close. In fact that's just laughable. Weston Richburg and Ryan Jensen were the top centers in FA. Long was a distant 3rd. NFL.com had Richburg rated the 33rd best FA and Jensen the 50th best FA in 2018. Long? He wasn't even among the top 101 FAs. BusinessInsider had Ryan Jensen listed as one of the top 25 FAs. Neither Richburg nor Long made that list. Richburg signed a 5-year $47.5 million contract. Jensen signed a 4-year $42 million deal. Long signed a 4-year $27.4 million contract. Walter Football had Richburg and Swanson listed as 2 1/2 stars, Jensen as 2 stars and Long as 1 1/2 stars (the same as Johnson). SI had Richburg listed as a difference maker and as the top FA C, then Long, Swanson, Sullivan, Jensen and Bodine lumped together. Sporting News had Jensen listed as the 22nd best player available in FA, Richburg was the 2nd best C, and Long the 4th best C. Every single article I read on FA had Long a distant 3rd (or worse) to Richburg and Jensen.
it's not really up for debate. i wish i could find the article again but it broke down the whole history of it and how it proves over time that BPA is always the way to go. over time it builds a better team then patching holes and passing on better players to do that. teams also have trades and free agency to patch holes but rarely does an amazing player hit FA and when they do it's a massive bidding war. I do agree that trading down can sometimes be the best option but that really depends on too many factors to generalize it. depends on the draft, the talent pool, what you need, who's picking behind you, what your going to get in return, what you can turn that into etc etc. each trade is it's own little bubble. as far as top centers go your just looking at the numbers. richburg is an average at best center that got paid a kings ransom. the giants o-line is terrible and they let him walk to pay solder and it's still terrible. the last thing the giants would do is let a good lineman walk when their line is so bad. they knew letting him go was fine and they lost nothing at the center position and now have a much better LT. giants fans weren't happy with richburg either. SF is the same team that paid mckinon a backup RB like he was a top RB and let hyde walk. i don't think their crazy contracts are a good indicator of anything. and lets not forget the 100 mil they gave kapernick to suck balls. Jenson, again overhyped on lists and not as good as advertised. plus long costs half of what jenson and richburg do. long was a good signing. I'd take him and the extra cap room over jenson or richburg. it's not a huge step down. I also don't care about an NFL article. those are notoriously bad. i mean they have dez bryant at 19th best and no NFL team will touch him and jerry jones just shit talked him too lol. sheldon richardson was ranked 6th best on their list. it's a joke. I know lineman are hard to judge even for your team let alone other teams especially interior lineman but lists from websites are just there for entertainment value at best. PFF which is really the only decent source for this stuff, has richburg ranked 22nd best in the NFL this year. long is 27th , and jenson is ranked 31st (2nd worst center in the NFL) all 3 grade as "average" long was the best value by far and performing just as good as both of them at half the cost and we have an out and aren't committed to paying big money long term to him.
And also keep in mind Long is a natural guard not a center. Don't be surprised if the Jets move him back to guard at some point during the upcoming OL overhaul...
I’m going off what has been widely reported of the Jets discussing moving up with the Giants to select Tunsil. It’s been reported that the Giants wanted a 2 & 4 which turned out to be Hack and I believe Burris. Obviously it’s easy to look back 3 years later and say it was a mistake but at the time it’s a lot to give up for a guy that’s had his picture plastered all over social media wearing a gas mask bong on his damn head. Anyway the point I was making is that Macs supposed philosophy of only drafting OL in the later rounds is overstated and I think the fact that he hasn’t has had more to do with value of the OL in the first round when he was on the clock did not match.
Good points. I agree. When you factor in that the Jets had a lot of holes/needs, there hasn't been a lot of OL talent in recent drafts, at least some of that talent didn't fit the Jets' blocking scheme at the time, and then player rankings/evaluation, it's not all that surprising. I don't think the fact that Bowles was a former DC and that Mac and he were peers should be forgotten either. In a situation like that, you want to be on the same page, have a good collegial partnership, and give your HC what he wants/needs to make his D work. I think it's easy for us to say that we'd have told Bowles to go scratch and then taken who we thought was best for the team, but then that could create a serious problem in their working relationship, and Woody/Chris may have told them to work together, to compromise when necessary. We don't know how much, if any, that may have affected Mac's decisions. With all that said, I still think that it (the OL) should have been a higher priority for Mac and there are OL players that I would have taken that are doing well in the NFL. The LT position is just too important. After failing to trade up for Tunsil, I would have done pretty much whatever it took to have drafted one of Spriggs or Ramczyk.
I would also take that approach, but obviously Macc is a BPA guy, and that's what I take issue with. If I were building a team I would look at my biggest holes and try to fix them first. The only exception - if it is an exception - would be if I had a chance to take a FQB or a true stud at a position that I considered "stable". That said - and again, with the exception of a FQB - if taking that stud prevented me from really upgrading at a position of need, I would pass on the stud, or if possible, I would look to trade down with another team who coveted him, and go after my guy. Trying to rebuild a team relying on the vagaries of who is in each draft, betting that I can substantially build a complete roster using BPA isn't reliable IMO. Then again, I'm not a GM nor am I paid to do this for a living, so I could certainly be wrong. I just find it hard to believe that Macc hasn't been able to upgrade the OL or find a pass rusher after 3+ years.
By doing that you are cheating yourself of the top talent available every year. Gms fail when they look to the draft to patch holes. The draft is for adding talent, free agency is for filling holes. You build the baseline roster by signing pros for the positions you are weak in and then attempt to upgrade the overall talent in the draft. Doing it any other way leaves you less of a chance of getting high end talent on the roster. Cheating towards need in the later 5th,6th,7th rounds is forgivable, drafting for need in the first 4 is how you end up with Stephen hill,Kyle Brady over sapp, Bryan Thomas over ed reed.
I hear you, and I agree that I didn't address FA as part of rebuilding, but while I agree that you need to use FA to flesh out your roster, you're usually not going to find any studs unless you really overpay for them, so I agree that the best way to upgrade your talent is via the draft. But I disagree that the reason you end up with the Hills, Kyle Bradys. and Thomases is because of drafting for need - it's due to poor scouting and assessment. That said, yes, focusing on your need may push you take someone with some questions so that has to be accounted for.
this guy gets it ^ you don't draft a decent player of need over a star player of no need. you draft the star player then fill the hole with a decent player in free agency. only exception is QB and mac pulled off a great move to get us our QB. I do want to draft o-line this year but if the cards fall and say a stud CB is there and no o-line really we should take the CB. it proves to work better over time every time
Make sure the stud CB is also good at sending flowers. Darnold will need them when he's in the hospital.
Yes, if the only player of need available to you in the 1st or 2nd round is only, "decent", then I agree, but if you're talking about the 1st round, or maybe 2nd, there should be players way better than "decent" available at your position of need. Sure, sometimes there isn't, but that's when you consider trading up, even at a premium if you think the player is worth it.
