The most effective way, as has been proven by successful teams, is with mid to late round draft picks. Also proven by overrated GMs like Tannenbaum that trade mid to late round draft picks away like they are two dollar bills, and their team's depth suffers mightily for it. If the Jets had a scouting department that did their jobs well, this thread wouldn't even exist, or at least it would be laughed off the first page. And they have proven that they don't know most of these 'millions of ways' that you so vaguely advise us about.
This is true... but sadly our scouting department has sucked in uncovering “gems” at the RB position so this thread does exist and this question is extremely legitimate. If nothing in our scouting department has changed at evaluating RBs in the mid round range then I dont see our problem changing unless we strike gold and get extremely lucky.
You think if Richardson falls to us the option of trading down becomes the best bet ? I mean with Cinci picking immediately after us this is the latest any HB desperate team could jump up and get the grand prize. A late 1st + 2nd AND a 4th would definitely entice me
I'm not a proponent of trading up, but if you are going to make a move for Richardson, why wouldn't you package Greene (who is at least young and holds some value)? So, something like 1st+Greene+4th. I don't see us moving up though. I'd say just wait to see who is available at 16.
lol I was kidding Nobody would EVER in a million years take Pace/Scott from us. Those two both have bloated contracts that exceeds their performance by far. To put it differently if we had the 10th pick I would actually consider trading DOWN to the 16th pick if the team was willing to take those two off our hands. They both cripple us in FA. Not to mention if we traded Greene and got Richardson we still would need more reliable depth @ hb so that trade wouldnt do us any favors
No. They're in the mess they're in now with little depth and holes because of all the trading up. You cannot build a team that way. If Tanny trades up, he should be fired.
No you shouldn't. That is not the way to build a team. The Jets have drafted fewer players over the last 5 years than any team in the NFL. That's stupid!!! They have holes and no depth because of all the trading up.
We have holes and no depth because of busts. If Ducassehole panned out the OL would look pretty nice. If any of our 8 million hbs panned out wed have a good backfield. Hell we had a pretty good safety that WE drafted and traded him for like a 4th or 5th rounder. If Gholston panned out wed have our elite pass rusher. Sure the fact that we traded alot hurts, but our lack of depth has a lot to do with prime picks getting wasted. However our track record definitely looks better than the rest of our division imo
While trading up was a part of it, many of those picks were traded for Vets to fill holes. So of them panned out, some did not. The Jets have drafted the fewest players, but of those they have among the highest number of problow players drafted over that same span. They have gone quality over quanity to try and build this team. It helped with the turnaround, but they have stopped over the last couple years and look to be continuing with holding on to thier picks this coming draft. With all the non tradeable comp pick we should be getting I would not be shocked to see us move some of our own later round picks to jump up to get a guy we love. We do need depth over all, but are not about to keep 11 rookies on the 53 man roster.
Well tell me how the zillion draft picks the Pats have acquired over the last five years have worked out? I just cannot get over the idea that having good depth is more important than having an elite starter. I'm not advocating no depth, I'm just saying that drafting a likely pro bowler is difficult to pass up. The last Tannenbaum draft I can recall where the Jets kept most of their picks was 2006. It was a great draft, but lets be honest if either Brick or Mangold had busted our perception of that draft class would have been a lot different. As much as people talk about stocking up on picks, a lot of how drafts turn out is based on those early round picks, not the late ones. I dont know how many people hold the 2008 draft in high regard
How has drafting Adrian Peterson, WITHOUT trading up, worked out for the Vikings? Having a surefire Pro Bowl runningback in the NFL guarantees you nothing. Instead of using the example of a team that trades down for salary cap purposes every season that helps your argument one dimensionally. Why not compare the Jets drafts to teams that draft for BPA and hit on them without giving up picks frivolously? The Steelers and Giants come to mind. I can't remember anyone calling those rosters thin. Continuously giving up draft picks in high risk high reward scenarios will only compound the problem.
Yeah...I knew you were kidding. No one is taking Pace or Scott off our hands. My point is, I just don't see Greene coexisting with Richardson. Greene has been a feature back who has been tolerant of LT, but I don't see him being a happy camper with another young guy coming in. I would think we could get by with Richardson, Powell and McKnight.
we have bodies we need players.there is not one explosive player on this roster.if t-rich can be a game changer we should get him.
Has anyone considered that we are going to be getting COMPENSATORY picks? Obviously we cannot use those as trade bait, but those picks WILL give us extra depth so I wouldn't have a problem with entertaining a potential trade.
To be fair all of our compensatory picks dont start coming in until the END of the 5th/6th possibly 7th. So effectively were talking at best maybe having 2 extra early 6th rounders
Alright, bad example on my part and your right, Steelers and Giants are two of the best at waiting for BPA to fall to them. I'm not saying that Richardson is the end all solution to our problems. The OP was about moving up to get Richardson. Simply put acquiring Richardson would be a big upgrade for our offense, I'm well aware it doesnt solve one of our major issues, but Richardson would make the Jets a better team, and thats the goal of the draft to get players to make your team better.
Its not impossible that it could happen. Last years #1 RB lasted until after the #16 pick. If we moved up one or two spots and it cost us a 4th or something I wouldnt mind it, but to move up any sort of distance for something that is not a major need when there will be excellent players that fill a need at #16 would seem crazy. edit: I have no issue with giving up late round draft picks - most of those guys never contribute anything and you get much better production out of UDFAs than you seem to get out of guys taken late in the draft (on average), I just dont want to give up anything in rounds 1 - 3.
Agreed with your first couple sentences. In the top 15 picks, who realistically needs a RB? Colts obviously won't Minny/STL have franchise RB I doubt Cleveland takes him with RGIII prob still on the board TB has the best shot IMO at 5 if they are not sold on Blount WSH? No way, not with the success Shanny has putting in scrub RB and producing top results Jax/Car/Mia/Buf/KC have solid RB situations Seattle is an outside shot if they lose Lynch Ari/Dal/Philly also have very solid RB situations I think it's a lot more feasible than people are making it out to be. There is a realistic chance he starts to slide in the draft.
The old saying in football is that running and defense wins championships, and while this trend is slowly coming to an end, it’s hard to discredit the value of a good ground game. But what is the value of an elite running back? The answer may surprise you. Looking at the upcoming Super Bowl, the New England Patriots come in sporting a running attack consisting of Ben Jarvis Green-Ellis and Danny Woodhead while the Giants have their usual duo of Brandon Jacobs and Ahmad Bradshaw. Not that these players are bad, but do any of them strike fear into your heart? I didn’t think so. Noticeably absent from the big dance are the likes of Adrian Peterson, Ray Rice, Arian Foster, Frank Gore, Maurice Jones-Drew, and Chris Johnson — the "elite" backs with big contracts. In fact, look back over the past ten seasons and you’re hard pressed to find any elite backs that have been in the Super Bowl, and even less that actually won one. Year Super Bowl Champion Leading Rusher Feature Back’s Rushing Yards 2010 Green Bay Packers Brandon Jackson 703 2009 New Orleans Saints Pierre Thomas 793 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers Willie Parker 791 2007 New York Giants Brandon Jacobs 1009 2006 Indianapolis Colts Joseph Addai 1202 2005 Pittsburgh Steelers Willie Parker 1081 2004 New England Patriots Corey Dillon 1635 2003 New England Patriots Antowain Smith 642 2002 Tampa Bay Buccaneers Michael Pittman 718 2001 New England Patriots Antowain Smith 1157 2000 Baltimore Ravens Jamal Lewis 1364 The obvious exception to this trend is Corey Dillon in 2004, who rushed for over 1600 yards, but even in that case Dillon had a resurgence in his career that many did not expect, as well as one of the best offensive lines in football. Jamal Lewis of Baltimore could also be considered an outlier, but that Ravens team defied a lot of trends thanks to the best defense in NFL history. Everybody else on this list is nothing more than a serviceable back that was either part of a pass-first team or a two-headed running game. For five of the past ten years the Champion’s leading rusher was under 1,000 yards. They only broke 1,200 yards three times, and there was only a single player that was over 1,500 yards. Those are some mind-blowing statistics to consider. Evidently having an elite running back is not even in the equation of what adds up to a Super Bowl champion. That’s not to say having a steady running game isn’t important, but clearly having two or three rotational running backs is far more effective than having a single work-horse stud being handed the football. LaDainian Tomlinson and Barry Sanders are two of the greatest running backs in NFL history, and neither won a Super Bowl. Antowain Smith and Willie Parker both have two, and Brandon Jacobs might get his second as well. The difference between these players on the all-time scale is like night and day, but the average backs have multiple rings. Why is this? Part of the reason is, of course, the quarterback. Smith and Parker both had elite quarterbacks leading their teams, thus they got the rings. Passing the ball is much more important than running the ball in the grand scheme of things in today’s NFL, a fact never more prevalent than this season. The Patriots were second in the league in net yards per pass with 7.9, while the league average was 6.3 NY/A, a 1.6-yard difference. Meanwhile, the league leader in yards per carry was the Panthers at 5.4 yards, but that figure is slightly misleading because of Cam Newton. The Vikings and Adrian Peterson were second with 5.2 ypc, while the league average was 4.3 ypc. That’s less than a yard difference between the team with the future Hall of Fame running back and everybody else. Everybody in that graph had a quarterback that could be considered elite, except the Ravens and the Bucs, who had very tough defenses. It turns out that when a GM is building a championship quality team, it is far more worthwhile to invest in the money everywhere else but the running game. The formula is to have a few workable running backs in a sort of committee so you can invest money elsewhere. Adrian Peterson was given a seven-year, $100m contract, which means this season he made more than both Super Bowl teams’ running backs combined ($14m vs. ~$11m). The Giants and the Patriots each had an extra $6 million to play with, which obviously went towards their quarterbacks. By these numbers one could argue that the NFL did not turn into a passing league in the past three years, it has been one for over a decade. Teams still put together elite running games, but the more successful teams share the load. http://thefanhub.com/posts/detail/291094/How-Important-are-Elite-Running-Backs
