TE is an F for me. Conk is really good, and Ruckert was a 3d round pick two years ago, who is a solid #2 with the upside. It's basically the same as getting a defender: we would be stacking at the position of strength. In the meantime we have older injured and injury prone OTs and open starter spot at WR.
I looked at the player too, and still would not pick him at top 10 given the alternatives. But I was responding to the point about the positions. There may be a good defender too - are you saying we should pick him? Someone like Newton perhaps if Saleh really likes him?
If Bowers and Conklin each added 750 yards between them, is that a bad thing? Whats it matter what position is gaining yards and scoring?
An excellent distinction to make though. I'd have to agree with what @Borat said above if they pick a TE not named Bowers in the 1st round.
I understand your thought process here but I genuinely think Bowers is a Day 1 starter at TE if he's our pick. Maybe he just supplants Ruckert as TE2 to start the year but I think he'd be our TE1 before the end of the season. He would be such a sizeable step up in terms of playmaking and route running on both Conklin and Ruckert, that it wouldn't take him long to get the field. I like both guys we have at TE but neither of them have the upside Bowers does so I wouldn't let either of them preclude me from drafting him. Now, would Hackett and Co. utilize him correctly?? That's the million dollar question but I wouldn't but upset at all if they picked Bowers.
I will say, if we get to 10, or wherever we end up picking in the 1st, and there's a comparable prospect at OT or WR on their board, I would also prefer them to Bowers for the reasons you've mentioned. I'm definitely not of the mindset that we HAVE to draft Bowers, just that if they do, I would totally understand why he was the pick.
Are we playing 12 personnel now almost exclusively to make that happen for two TEs to do that? I don't think so. More likely than not one of them will be underutilized, all while wasting promising 3d round pick Ruckert, who can finally get his opposrtunity. If we get a WR, there is a much bigger upside there. And OT will likely be a necessity as well. And there are good WRs and OTs available. TE is far down the priority list.
Hmm., well, it doesn't make too much sense for it to be conjunctive IMO. It makes more sense to be one or the other-- either case its a successful season. Edit--ok--now I am seeing it on CBS as an "and" statement--thx!
This is some real whataboutism. You're saying we need someone at WR but won't add a weapon that can provide the same production because of the position he's listed at.
I think you are just trying to pick a fight, because there appears to be a struggle in grasping a very basic concept. We already have someone really good at a certain position (Conk) with young back-up with upside (Ruckert). That is why when you add someone else at that position, even if the person is good, there is less to gain as a replacement value. Adding at the position where you have Lazard (ie an open starting spot) you can make a huge replacement value upgrade. Again, if you want to exchange insults or it is not clear why replacing a very good player carries less value than replacing a terrible one, there is no point to continue.
I’d love to play 12 personnel and beat teams to shit on the ground. The Patriots went to a SB playing 12 personnel almost exclusively in 2011. It’s not like we have a big stable of receivers.
Its unrealistic to think we will resign all of our expired contracts, or that we'd even want to. Moreless, do it for the same price they cost now. Its true we never know whose contract will qualify for a comp pick until the dust settles because only the top 32 contracts are awarded. Maybe Kinlaw and Oliver could get a deal that qualifies in a slow FA year, or in the event they beast out, but its idealistic to think it will happen. We will need more FA next year because we have more contracts expiring than this year. On top of that, which signed players will get injured, or start to decline, or be released due to contracts (JFM and Lazard almost certainly will be). This means they aren't eligible for comp picks for the teams that released them.
I didn't say that we'd re-sign them all or that the contracts would be the same. I just said that we could probably re-sign those I mentioned and at a cheaper contract. That didn't mean cheaper than what they're making now or at the same price, but still relatively cheap, since many were bottom of the roster players, STs players, and backups, and would have no real leverage to ask for a big increase. Of course the Jets probably wouldn't want to re-sign all of them and all of them probably wouldn't want to re-sign with the Jets. You took my post way too literally. If I wasn't clear and led you to take my post so literally, my apologies. It's only natural that the Jets would want to upgrade some positions, and that some might want to seek a starting opportunity elsewhere. I just meant that since the culture is supposedly so good, that many, if not most would want to stay, and for those who didn't, it probably wouldn't be that difficult to replace them for around the same price as the Jets would have had to pay to re-sign them. I didn't realize that comp picks were only rewarded for the top 32 contracts. Based on that, then no the Jets won't get a comp pick of Oliver, and probably not for Kinlaw unless he beasts out this season. Unless JD (if he's still here) pushes a lot of money into the future, I don't think the Jets will have the cap space to sign more FAs than they did this year or they will pretty much all have to be low, bottom-of-the-barrel FAs. If he's not here next season, the team will be screwed for the forseeable future, because I can't imagine that Woody would be able to hire or actually hire any quality GM who would take over such a roster/cap mess, and that's even more certain if JD doesn't add a starting caliber OT in this year's draft and if several of the draft class of 2022 want to leave.
I would be happy with that production but I think that’s why Joe Douglas is going to pass on Bowers. He is in ‘win now’ mode and TEs usually take a year or two to develop. He’s not going to want to see his replacement benefit from Bowers.
But the players you mentioned DID sign contracts with the Jets, and their contracts will expire. That means that SD won't get comp pick for Williams, and it means that Dallas won't get a comp pick for Smith, NOT that the Jets won't get a comp pick if they leave in FA next season.
Any GM with a brain looks at the position. It doesn't make any sense to upgrade a position of strength by a relative little amount, when there are HUGE needs at other positions. I know that you think adding Bowers would be a huge upgrade over Conklin, but it wouldn't be as big an upgrade as say Fashanu over Carter Warren or Nabers/Odunze or even Brian Thomas over Lazard, and both positions are more important positions than TE.
