OL Study: FA Vs The Draft

I can't agree more. I have been saying this for years. Even though Revis and Harris have turned out well so far we could have gotten so much more if we traded down. We could have still gotten Harris if and we would not have had to give picks to get him and we could have gotten Eric Wright in the 2nd rd who has had a very good rookie campaign for the browns. Plus we would have been able to take OL in top 100 and secured our line for years. Sure revis is better (so far), but would you rather have Revis or Wright and 4-5 picks in the top 100? I like Revis, but I'll take Wright and the picks every time.

 

Low first rounders / high second rounders present an amazing value against the salary cap. Most players taken in these slots compete for starting jobs in their rookie year and some break out to become star players. Despite the impact these players can have the contracts they receive as rookies pay far lower than comparable players could get in free agency. Some draft picks don't work but the same can be said for "proven" free agents.

With the quality and depth at OT and CB (two of the most expensive starting positions to fill in free agency) I hope we take one of each in the first two rounds whether we trade down or not.

 

Got to love that you know just who to pick...Wright and more picks everytime...sounds so enticing AND convincing.

 

If we stayed put we would have had to take Harris with our first round pick, and our 2nd round pick, if a CB, wouldn't even be in the same league as Revis. 3rd round picks are hit or miss, and as shitty as the 2007 draft class was, who knows if they even make the team. Example? The 2007 draft class of the Patriots.

OK, you can have a corner as good as Aaron Glenn, but you'll have to throw in a 3rd round pick. You say no, I say really?

OK, you can have a linebacker as good as Mo Lewis, but you'll have to throw in a 4th round pick. You say no, I say really?

 

Actually, I think he will be better than Mo and Revis is very good too. But as we witnessed this year, good teams win in the trenches and we suck in the trenches, and we sucked this year. So you say start with 7 picks and take 4 players. I say start with 7 picks trade down, get a couple more and pick guys like Blalock, Grubbs, Sears, Staley, etc and build the kind of line that TJ can run behind and CP can pass behind and we can win behind. You know kinda like the one Curtis won the title behind and we went deep into the playoffs with. Not such a bad thing, right?

 

I agree that games are won and loss in the trenches..but we werent exactly solid at MLB and CB either. Those, too were major needs. Frankly, at that point as well as currently..we were in no position to not take a BPA approach. The fact that we filled 2 major needs furthers the point.

Now if you wanna makr an arguement against trading up, rather than trading down and stockpiling picks..I'm w/ ya. I believe we needed depth above all else. But last year's Lineman class, aside from Brown, Grubbs and Thomas, was subpar at best. We were in no position to reach for the sole purpose of taking a linemen.

 

That's the Terry Bradway theory of life. He first enunciated it in the winter of 2003 as he was letting Randy Thomas walk because the price was "too high". The Jets are 34-46 in the intervening years.

 

..And Thomas has gone on to be an average injury prone right guard who was VASTLY overpaid the first 3 years of his contract w. the Skins.

The arguements for McKenzie I'll listen to...but at the time, the contract Thomas was looking for was ridiculous, and he hasnt exactly lived up to that contract.

 

Of course it's not a bad thing. It's just not how you should draft.

Whats the point of taking more O-line high and building a "super unit" if you're ignoring the rest of the team (and better players)?

 

Thomas got hurt this year. That'll happen to anybody randomly.

Giving up on your offensive line is a recipe for failure. Bradway consistently gave up on the solid young players on the the Jet's line and now we're dealing with rejects, misfits and people not good enough to play elsewhere in the NFL occupying two or three slots on the line every year.

The sad thing is the Jets drafted a solid RT in 2001. He wanted to get paid and the Jets said Adrian Jones and Anthony Clement were good enough to get by with. We're 18-30 since they made that decision.

 

I think it is safe to say that the Jets FO is better at drafting than they are at sighing free agents

One year we will sign a free agent stud, instead of a bunch of duds

 

But the reason we got Kendall was that he was a troublemaker and a clubhouse lawyer in Arizona. Was anyone really surprised when he became one here? He just wasn't that good. He is only considered a significant loss because the Jets overestimated Clarke. I have no problem with them getting pissed at Kendall. You don't want bitching in the clubhouse. But it concerns me greatly that they could not see what the Eagles saw with Clarke. There had to be better, affordable options. But they stubbornly stuck with Clarke even when he sucked in TC.

 

Actually the problem with Clarke is that he showed alot of potential in TC IIRC. He came into camp in great shape and all that good stuff you want.

I can't really remember what he looked like in last preseason.

 

At the end of 2006 the LB position was a strong point, the OL was a weak point. We could not run on 06 and we did nothing to improve it except get a better running back who was not going to have success behind the OL. Add the Kendall situation (which they were aware of before the draft) and you have plenty reason to get OL.

 

This is all true...but it's still not a reason to go OL with our first two picks.

Do me a favor...look around the league and show me an OL with all first and second rounders drafted by the same team. It doesn't exist.

 

I agree that it's important to retain young Linemen. But to a certain point. Again, the Mckenzie situation, hell even the Matt O'dwyer situation...I feel was handled awfully. But the contract Thomas was looking for was absolutely ridiculous at the time.

You def. want to retain young players in the trenches..but you cant just hand them a blank check. Especially for a non impact line position like Guard.

 

We did not have to take anyone in the first round. Actually I am not in favor of taking OL in round 1. But I think 2-5 offers real value and we gave this all away. In the past we did very will with Thomas 2nd, Fabini 4th, and McKenzie 3rd.

 

Guard has become a very high impact position over the last half decade. That's why the price of guards has shot through the roof.

Why?

Because there's nothing better than being strong up the middle, particularly in the trenches. DT's, C's and G's have become the key to strong teams and it's hard to find a strong team that does not have solid to excellent players at all 4 or 5 positions in that heirarchy.

The Dallas Cowboys believed this so strongly that they paid a premium to sign a free agent tackle last year and then moved him inside to guard. Not surprisingly they dramatically improved their record after doing so, and managed to do so even after having an upside season in 2006.

Right now in the NFL guards, particularly left guards, are worth as much as any position on the field other than QB.