Convinced the Jets will try to move Up

Discussion in 'Draft' started by Don, Mar 16, 2008.

  1. Don

    Don 2008 TGG Rich Kotite "Least Knowledgeable" Award W

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    23,098
    Likes Received:
    1,588
    I started this off by saying I knew a lot of people would not be happy..I still think that is what they will do. We can only fit 53 players on the team. We have now signed 7 and probably one more to go..just in FA. How ever many people we draft will also have to fit or be considered draft busts. That means 25% of the team or more has to turn over in a single year. It's almost unheard of.
     
  2. asscue35

    asscue35 New Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2003
    Messages:
    557
    Likes Received:
    1
    Don, you are missing the point.Who in the top 5 is worth trading up for? As of now most people believe that the top 5 will be the following in no particular order.C Long, J Long, G Dorsey,DMC, Gholston.M Ryan could also be there.Ask yourself which player among this lot could the Jets be so interested that they may want to move up for? To me the answer is none.Not even C Long.Do we need DMC enough to trade up to get him?NO, same goes for J long ,Dorsey,Gholston or Ryan.
    Its not about trading down.If the Jets feel happy with a particular player at 6 they will not trade down, no matter what is being offered.I say we stay put and draft a good player, Its not worth up trading up 5 spots or whatever it is.See the trouble we are going through trying to get rid of D-Rob.You think this CS is ina hurry to move up 5 or so spots to deal with that again?
     
  3. JetsLookingforDWare

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Messages:
    5,545
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yea but at 6 we're pretty much a lock to:

    1. Not pay as much as anyone ahead of us.

    and

    2. Get a damn good player.

    Ryan, Dorsey, Ellis, McFadden, Mendenhall, Gholston, Long, Long, McKlevin, Cromartie, Harvey...we should get someone...and this isn't even taking into account interesting risers that could shoot up...

    3. We keep our very good position in the second round too.
     
  4. jilozzo

    jilozzo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Messages:
    8,264
    Likes Received:
    2,668
    c. long is the only one i would entertain a trade up for.......

    we all know that parcells is calling everyone in the top ten and spinning it every which way......

    i do think he takes the QB but some team like the jets may be so enamored with chris long they bite.

    jil
     
  5. Don

    Don 2008 TGG Rich Kotite "Least Knowledgeable" Award W

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    23,098
    Likes Received:
    1,588
    We don't want or need Dorsey, Ellis or Jake Long. Neither Dorsey or Ellis is big enough to play the nose or fast enough to play DE in a 3-4. They are prototypical 4-3 DTs. Jake Long will probably be a great player but we just paid a fortune to fix the OL. I don't consider Mendenhall a top 6 pick. He is good but no McFadden.

    That leaves only McFadden, Chris Long, Golston and Ryan as anybody in that top group who can help us and make sense to draft. My thoughts still haven't changed on what we will do if we think none of them will be there when we pick at #6. I'm not sure I even add Ryan into that group. I think it's really Long, Golston and McFadden.
     
  6. Don

    Don 2008 TGG Rich Kotite "Least Knowledgeable" Award W

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    23,098
    Likes Received:
    1,588
    Haha...ok, I got beat up for my previous prediction so you can beat me up for this one too.

    I predict Oakland will trade down from #4.

    After the Hall trade they will have 1 (one) pick in the first 3 rounds...#4.

    I say they trade down and I also think the Jets may try to buy it (depending on what happens with #1 and #2).
     
  7. icetime32

    icetime32 Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    1
    best available

    I believe in taking the best available. If no one in jets opinion avail then trade down
     
  8. JetsLookingforDWare

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Messages:
    5,545
    Likes Received:
    0
    Really?

    I mean I agree that I don't *like* Dorsey or Ellis for our picks, but you nor I cannot give such a definitive statement about what this FO wants or doesn't want.

    Another thing, you don't need speed to play 3-4 DE. What both those guys lack is height and length.

    I personally love Mendenhall as a pro. I actually like him and a healthy Stewart better than McFadden for our offense.

    I have no idea why you've shut down so many options before the draft...for all we know Harvey and Groves have wowed teams...or the CBs...or non-McFadden RBs...
     
  9. Jetfanmack

    Jetfanmack haz chilens?

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    21,496
    Likes Received:
    314
    I'd be extremely surprised if we took Mendenhall in the first round. The only way we take him is if McFadden, Long, Long, and Gholston are all gone, and they really fall in love with Mendenhall. Chances are, that won't happen.

    And there's no way in hell we move UP for Mendenhall. I would lose all faith in the Jets FO.
     
  10. JetsLookingforDWare

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Messages:
    5,545
    Likes Received:
    0
    The opinion of Mendenhall on this board doesn't strike me as high.

    That sucks. He's definitely arguable as the #1 back in this draft, and personally I like him better than McFadden.

    I'd say that about anyone in this draft class. I like our pick right where it is.
     
  11. Harpua

    Harpua Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    8,791
    Likes Received:
    2,311

    From the very little I've seen of Mendenhall, I like him. A strong runner, runs well through contact, has a good burst of speed. Not the elite pure athlete that DMC is, but perhaps a better running back. That said I would not take one of them at #6 unless both Long's and Gholston is not available. That is very possible though at this point.
     

Share This Page