No I've never made the case we should keep Sam. Sam has his place in this draft as well. If things stayed as they are then Sam would fit with Pitt along with our 3rd from the hawks. Boom - Sam just turned a low 3rd into a low first. Something like that is how we get value out of Sam. We have to think package trades - not Sam straight up for a pick. With all the additional picks from earlier trading our deal making would thrive. Drafting a FQB is a once in a lifetime opportunity? The Bengals just got one. Its like the 5th one they have had in my lifetime.
Your right this isn't 1990. Parcells would have drooled to draft under these rules. Let me take you back in time. In the 90s first round picks were expensive right out of the gate. Top 10 picks much more so, and the #1 pick cost a fortune. In fact, a lot of teams didn't have the cap space for the top pick. This was what hand cuffed BP in 1997. We had the number of teams that couldn't afford to sign the top pick and our options were limited. With rookie contracts that is no longer as big of a problem. Nearly everyone is in play for a deal and the opportunity to clean up is always a possibility for a team in the right place at the right time.
But the point of the game isn't to "draft a quality QB", it's to win a championship, and no matter how much surrounding talent you have, the odds are longer if you don't also have a great QB. Go back to the last time the Jets were in an AFCCG - they had a lot of high quality talent, but they did not have a very good QB. Or this year, look at the Steelers who are among the best teams in football, why? Because they got Rothlisberger back. Or look at the Browns who had 8 Top 50 picks between 2017 and 2018 (Ok, they had the #52 pick in 2017 which I'm counting here), and probably have had more Top 50 picks over the past 15-20 years than any other team. How many SBs have they won? How many AFC Championships? How many times did they even win the division? None. And how many great - or even very good - QBs have they had over that time? None. That's no coincidence. As to the great OL being THE key ingredient in all great teams, I agree for the most part. That said, it's easier to find great OL talent than great QBs. Of course when you have a GM like Macc who completely ignored the value of the OL you're going to fail. At this point, I trust Douglas to do the right thing. I think he has a really deep background in how to build successful teams for the long haul. That said, I also hope that he understands the necessity of having a great QB and how hard and rare it is to get one. If he goes for "quantity over quality", I won't be shocked, but I will be very disappointed.
I see your point but dont agree with some of it. Put Big Ben on our team and he goes nowhere. We are talking about getting a quantity of quality (multiple top 50 picks). Not quantity over quality.
And four years later, all the good players want to get paid, we can't afford to keep them all, and we're back to square one.
This reminds me of a financial excercise I did with Wal-Mart stock back in 1974 when the price was "pretty high" and the valuation not cheap. As it turned out, you would have been OK paying 50 times the then-current price for Wal-Mart and still done as well with the S&P 500. Back to football....suppose you could go back in time and trade for Patrick Mahomes. But let's assume he was picked at #1 (instead of #10).....how much would you be willing to give up to get him ? If I knew then what I know now....there's NO RISK because I know the future.....you have to say he's worth at least four #1 draft picks, and maybe five. And maybe 1 or 2 second rounders. If you knew the future....and the team holding the #1 pick at that time DID NOT know the future....but they were going to take Mahomes on a gamble or trade the pick to another team for players or multiple picks....how high would YOU go to get the #1 pick to take Mahomes given that you have seen the future ? Quite frankly, I don't know at what point I would say "too much" -- six #1 draft picks ? Seven ?
You have to manage the cap. In the 1990's teams were still learning. The Giants cut Phil Simms and Parcells talked himself out of the #1 overall pick (Orlando Pace) because they didn't understand the cap. NO TEAM has ever had to give up draft picks -- including 1st Round picks and also including Top 5 picks -- because they couldn't afford to sign them under the salary cap, and that includes both before and after the rookie salary cap was put in place.
Signing the picks isn't the problem. It's what happens four years later when they all want to get paid.
Not all of them pan out. I agree, I've always wanted some kind of "Hometown Credit" where if you sign your own players -- esp. those who've been with you 10 or more years -- you don't have to count 100% of their salaries against the cap. The 1990's Cowboys teams were the ones who had their depth killed by the cap. You can sign 1 and 2 and 3 top-stars but after that, it's decision-time. But some decisions -- like Texas trading Hopkins -- border on the idiotic.
True but if they aren't all panning out, then we're better off taking the QB. Of course the QB might not pan out either, but Lawrence is as good as it gets as a prospect, and we could have him for the next 15-20 years.
I'm not the best person to ask because I don't like trading a lot of picks for one player. I like it the other way around. Mahomes went to a complete team that had already made the payoffs 5 seasons in a row. In his third year they overcame the playoff hump and went to the SB. Mahomes on the Jets would have been a very different story. Yes he is a great passer who can make all the throws and good decisions but without all the talent around him like he had on the Chiefs he wouldn't be that successful or well regarded. He would have still been good but I doubt we would have been a playoff team more then once since 2016. In 2017 (and 18. and 19, and 20) we needed o-linemen. If we would have traded up for Mahomes we would have had nothing left to build around him. Its not so different then the situation we are in now. So to a competitive team IMO he would be worth around four 1s and a maybe a few 2s and 3s. Our harsh reality is that we haven't been ready for a #1 QB since Sanchez. Let me ask you this. If we win a game and switch draft positions with Jacksonville, how much would you be willing to give up to get Lawrence? That would actually be an interesting question for the whole forum except too many peoples heads would blow up at the thought of not getting the #1 pick.
Yes it takes a team...but the QB, and then an elite FQB, is THE hardest piece to find. No guarantees. Not with TL, Fields, or anyone. sure but when you have the first pick, and you have a generational guy like this....put him in the conversation of great prospects alongside the likes of Luck, Manning, Elway....you CAN’T pass on that. sure, he could flop. Many highly rated QBs have flopped before, and many will in the future. That will ALWAYS be true. That’s why someone is is SO highly rated ... you can’t pass on it. a truly elite QB is worth more than any other position. It’s the one reason why teams like GB, Sea, NE, NO, Pitt, have a Super Bowl chance EVERY YEAR. I don’t care how many great OL or WRs or CBs you get....they don’t get you that. Shoot...we HAD that with Rex...a stud D, a great OL...and for what? We got close two years, and lost each time to a FQB. Enough. if you don’t have the QB, you are hoping for a confluence of events that is rare. don’t overthink it. don’t get cute with Fields is almost as good. don’t get cute with Zach is a hidden gem take the guy whose done it from the go on the largest scale....he’s won championship, he beat Alabama, he shines, he’s a great kid this is a fucking no brainer and from a practical matter, like has already been said, a GM can’t pass on him. If he passes and TL does what everyone thinks he’ll do, the GM looks bad. If he takes him and the kid flops, no one is going to say he made the wrong move because pretty much everyone thinks TL is a stud. So just from human nature, it’d be super hard to pass it would be so typically Jets, of course, which is always a concern, but it would be a firable offense in my book
Good analysis. You pretty much addressed all the possible objections to taking Lawrence if they have the #1 pick.
The only team that would not take Lawrence at #1 overall is the Bengals because they have Burrow who looks like the real thing and beat Lawrence last year for the Championship. There is NO WAY that Jacksonville would trade out of the #1 overall slot and I doubt they trade out of #2, either. Cincy never even seriously entertained offers for Joe Burrow, who had 1 spectacular year. Trevor has had 3 spectacular years. Assuming he finishes strong, the Chargers (who won't finish last and draft 1st) might be willing to keep Herbert and pass on Lawrence but I'm not 100% convinced on that. Neither were the experts when they did this excercise a few weeks ago. The Dolphins, even with Tua, would have probably taken Lawrence with the Texans pick had it been #1 overall.
Quite a lot. Having said that, the maximum price I'm willing to pay to trade up is smaller than the minimum package I'd accept to trade down because there are diminishing returns to draft picks.
Glad you brought San Diego in the picture. Justin Herbert is very, very impressive to me and I would be thrilled if on year one, either TL or Fields can match his incredible poise and leadership with the Jets. Our personnel is far more talented than the record reflects, but we are cursed with the worst CS ever.
If Herbert re-creates his Year 1 over the next 25-30 games, he's a franchise QB. Let's see if he's the real deal or if he just struck Lightning In A Bottle in Year 1. We want to annoint QB's as Franchise QB's or Busts in 1 or 2 years. You have to see 3 years before you can really pronounce. And even then, there are late-bloomers (from Phil Simms to Ryan Tannehill) who might not go to All-Pro level but can go to Top 10 level.
I see both sides of the argument.... Lawrence is a great prospect, but the JETS as a whole are a blackhole of talent. Here's a good comparison if the JETS were to somehow get a haul for trading down.... 2000, JETS had FOUR 1st round draft picks..... definitely set up a nice run in the near future (and made Herm look better than he was), and Pennington was a solid QB as part of that draft..... BUT was never able to get to that "next level".
