I thought the draft went very well. We end up getting potentially two starters on defense and a decent olineman. The good thing is that june 1st I am sure we will see olineman get cut. I rather take a chance on picking up a right guard via the waiver wire than a CB or LB.
The overall talent is weak in this draft. What the FO saw in this draft were two kids who can contribute right away and they cut the fat in terms of drafting depth. They wanted players to play as rookies and saw no help in the offensive game out of this draft. The 1st day picks will make an impact as both are major playmakers coming out of college. Harris you will see on ESPN as well as Revis. These kids can play and they have the discipline that the CS is already looking for. Did they break the draft pick bank to get them? Yes and it is debatable whether or not that was a smart thing to do but honestly the idea was to acquire impact rookies. This is the only other FO i trust since Parcells and I probably trust this one a little more. There may not be alot of rookies this year, but there will be much dicussion about which one to pick as a possible defensive ROY candidate, even though it might go to Landry already because hes that good. Seeing Revis in #24 reminds me of another guy who wore that number, Ty Law, not that I'm comparing the two at all, although they are really good friends. We may not have alot of picks to talk about but it is the quality of the picks that must be dicussed.
Yeah the difference being that Herm and Terry drafted them. After getting like 4 solid picks lastyear, you people still don't trust these guys. Unreal.
C- , we gave up way too damn much. i like the picks, but man, we needed a lot more than we picked up today/yesterday
This is Sporting News grade on our draft: New York Jets. Darrelle Revis immediately becomes the Jets' best cornerback and David Harris gives them the big, physical inside linebacker they need for their 3-4 defense. OT Jacob Bender was a good late pick. A- Funniest thing is to see them giving the Patriots a C grade
I gave them a D and it is probably unfair. The draft itself is probably fine although starting a rookie CB in this league is always an adventure and Harris's past knee injuries are always something to worry about. The reason I gave them a D is because, unfair as it might be, I lumped the FA acquisitions in with the draft picks and graded the combined results. If we had picked up a few good FAs and then picked these three(I'll include Jones here) I would have probably given them a B. I just don't think we did anywhere enough to even come close to the season we had last year because of the schedule.
I went for the D grade because in my opinion we should have improved on what we built last year the OL. We need a solid topnotch OL to compete with the bigboys. I had the needs being G,DT,CB,WR staying put. At #25 to me it was well worth it to get a topnotch G with that pick. With TJ and Washington having a GREAT OL in front of them with big holes to run through. We have 50% of the first two players being all that. If only one pans out we lost 6 players we could have had and increased our odds of maybe 2-3 of them panning out. If one of them is the real deal then this entire 2007 draft we got one player.
Give their first day an A-. They significantly upgraded their secondary and LB with the first 2 picks. Both picks have the potential to start next year. Revis has potential to be big time pro bowl caliber player. The Jets maximized their picks in the draft and made their team much better for the future.
I gave them an "A" maybe I'm getting old - but drafting two guys who are starters - one is the best CB in the draft, the other the #2 ILB in the draft! A
Did you stop to think that maybe the FO didn't give Grubbs or Blalock a first round grade? Folks that wanted Ross at 25 (he wasn't there anyway) wanted Beekman in the 2nd or 3rd. He went in the 4th. Can people please just take the 10,000 foot view and realize this was a crappy draft class once you got past the elite talent? 50% of Revis and Harris "panning out"? That's about the most defeatist comment I've heard from a Jets fan in recent years. You logic beyond that continue to confound... "If only one pans out we lost 6 players we could have had and increased our odds of maybe 2-3 of them panning out." First off, we only lost 4 picks in the 2 trades. 2 of them on the second day. If one pans out we missed out on a late 2nd or 3rd and a late 5th or 6th, both of which would have had much less of a chance of "panning out". "If one of them is the real deal then this entire 2007 draft we got one player." We got Thomas Jones as well as Bender and Stuckey in the deal. And if you blow off the fact we got the last two, you have to stop complaining about the day two picks we gave up in the trades. I just wish people could put things in perspective.
My contradictory opinion on the trades: 1)Our late 1st and 2nd (plus a negligible trade down from Rd. 5 to 6) to move up and get the top rated CB to fill the biggest position of need is a good trade. 2)Had we not traded down to get Jones, we would not have needed to trade up to get Harris. Essentially, these two deals can be looked at as if we gave up a 3rd and 6th rounder for Jones. When looked at that way, it seems like a very good trade.
I think the consensus across the league was spead between this being a weak draft and stockpiling talent. The Pats took everyone and their brother except for that second first rounder they like to kick into the next year of a bad draft class. I've always admired how they efficiently shift a first rounder into the next season when the talent isn't perceived to be there. Our guys seem to have taken a different approach. They had a couple of guys rated high that fell to spots where they could trade up and acquire them rather than hope they keep falling and chance losing them. But to make such a move is a risk maneuver, like what they did with Clemens last year. So now we have 3 players that the FO has fallen in love with enough to trade up for them, and the jury will be out on all three of those moves until at least the end of the 2007 season, and probably further. I can't grade this draft yet, but it'll either be an A or and F.
+1............. that guys math is way bad. And another thing, the reason why "they" say that 50 percent of your draft picks pan out is because most teams are suppose to pick 7 players in 7 rounds. With each pick increasing becoming less likely to be an impact player. We decreased that chance by picking two likely starters.
