The Master Plan: Get Your Priorities Straight
Yesterday we talked about what positions the Jets would likely target, but here’s how we break down how to prioritize them and what the max we’d be willing to pay for each position. Obviously, the Jets won’t have as much space as we’d like, but here’s what were willing to pay … averaging total dollars to years of the deal … so a 5 year $25 million total contract would equate to $5 million TCV/Year. Are these numbers nothing more than best guesses? You better believe it.
1) Inside Linebacker — $8 million TCV/Year — As a caveat, this is a lot of money for a 3-4 Inside Linebacker, like a lot a lot. If the Jets want to be fearsome in the first year of Ryan’s reign, then there’s one player who’s the sensible key to doing that … Bart Scott. There’s really just that one person that we’d pay this money to, not Ray Lewis. Beyond Scott, the team would be best suited finding a lowpriced veteran for a lot less, promoting from within (a Jason Trusnik, Marques Murrell or Kenwin Cummings type) and/or find someone in the draft to take over Eric Barton’s spot. The problem is finding grinders who can also play well in pass coverage … thus the reason we’re willing to overpay for Bart Scott in the first place.
2) Strong Safety — $2.5 million TCV/Year — Jimmy Leonhard seems the obvious choice here. Ryan loves his fire and believes that he is just the player to complement Rhodes. It seems a foregone conclusion that Leonhard will be a Jet … I like the move, but I don’t like overpaying for someone that the team might not be competitively bidding against other teams.
3) Quarterback — $5 million TCV/Year — The organization can say all they want that they have faith in their young guys … fine. The truth is that all three average well below what other QBs make and the team can afford to spread some money to the Quarterback position. I don’t think that going for a guy like Kurt Warner or Kerry Collins is necessarily the right move, but $5 million would ensure a competent QB who could play if pressed into service.
4) Cornerback — $5 million TCV/Year — Coming in and playing with Revis, the team could use a starter who is ready to get picked on by opposing offenses. The team doesn’t need to pay a lot for someone who can do this, but they’re unlikely to find a corner willing to play for minimums who’s able to play at the level the team needs.
5) Right Guard/Tackle — $2.5 million TCV/Year — The team doesn’t need another former first round draft pick, they need a ham-and-egger. A consistent starter level player who won’t require much compensation and the team can plug in at the appropriate position. Otherwise, take your lumps and go with Hunter or Turner.
6) Tight End — under $1 million TCV/Year — Can you block? OK Good. Are you willing to play for veteran minimums? Even better.
7) Nose Tackle — $3 million TCV/Year — The team has a lot of money tied up with Jenkins. There’s few free young players who would deserve more than minimum deals, so the number above is really representative of a league vet.
8) Wide Reciever — $8 million TCV/Year — Although not getting talked about much, this is a market that might be favorable for the Jets to finding a receiver, espcially if the Bart Scott thing falls apart. There seem to be more than a few above average tall & fast receivers on the market this year. The problem is that most of them are of the ‘decoy’ rather than ‘real primary threat’ variety and be looking for Bernard Berrian money. The question is one of whether the Jets can justify spending a lot of money on a guy who probably won’t make as much of an impact on this team as money spent elsewhere would.
9) Kicker – $1.5 Million TCV/Year — Feely should fit this need, he’s already familiar with the team and kicking in NY.
75 Responses to The Master Plan: Get Your Priorities Straight
-
As a Jets fan who’s lived in Baltimore for almost a decade now, I’d absolutely pay $8M / yr for Bart Scott. The key here is that not only does he fit a need in our scheme, he’s also one of the nastiest, meanest players I’ve ever seen. When Rex talks about “playing through the whistle”, Bart’s the best example of it (often playing “past” the whistle too). I suspect that when Rex looks at our current personnel on D, the biggest gap he sees isn’t talent, it’s mentality. The BAL defense has always intimidated opponents, and Bart would go a long way towards getting that here as well.
Leonhard – not crazy about him for more than $2M / yr or so. He was great this past season, but the scheme made him look good, not the other way around. Let’s not forget he was a Bills castoff 11 months ago. Good player with great intangibles, but let’s not go overboard for him.
If they shore up those two positions in FA, they can go after best player available in the draft, whether it’s a CB, WR, or DL. You can always find RG types in the middle rounds (NE, NYG and IND all got most of their interior lineman from rounds 4-7).
-
JustAGreenGuy says:
Scott, Boden, Campbell and Tank. Those pieces will help finish our 40 year puzzle. If we can’t get Scott we should keep Moore. Boden, Campbell and Tank shouldn’t be too costly or screw em.
-
JDB says:
got a feeling that Tanny is gonna go after Stacy Andrews, he wanted him last year until the Bengals franchised him, they had another bad season, he didn’t have a phenomanal year, and he’ll probably be cheaper than Moore, i can’t see him commanding $7 million
as far as nose tackle, Ron Brace is the guy, probably a 2nd round pick.
-
oh yeah bart scott for this awesome throw at the 40 second mark
-
Davo says:
Wait, so, after the purge at ILB, if Scott re-signs with the Ravens, what’s plan B?
Davo
-
TheLostScientist says:
I agree with pound4pound there is no reason in getting a guard or tackle in free agency. It’s better to build the lines through the draft. The only FA I really want is Scott. Im not sure about Leonhard but I wouldn’t have a problem if he came for a low price. As for a blocking Tight End you can find one in the later rounds of the draft. The draft is the way to build the team. Get the best player available at 17 or trade down and get more picks I think drafting a WR at 17 is a little bit of a reach.
-
He was pissed. I like that clip.
Davo- Plan B? hahhahahaha other than the draft I’m sure we have none.
-
Chris says:
Since the Ravens are close to resigning Scott. I say we go after Maualuga in the first round of the draft. I’d love to see him flying around the field blowing people up.
Next, we find a CB in the second round or go after Bodden, McFadden, or even Jabari Greer.
Now WR is an interesting question, I actually believe that for what Ryan wants to do.,.. our current corp is fine. We need to limit turnovers and be a run first team while breaking in our inexperienced QB (if we sign a vet this is subject to change). But Coles, Cotch, Clowney, and Stuckey are an above average corp. (Not to mention Keller is practically a WR anyway)
-
SackDance99 says:
My only quibble about the priorities is that I’d put CB 9th. Why tie up another $5M in the no. 2 CB position when Lowery and Poteat will be fine in a Ryan blitzing 3-4 defense? If Moore is cut, the Jets will have bona fide (meaning nobody on the current roster with any significant or successful NFL experience) holes at QB, ILB, RG, and blocking TE. I think upgrading SS is critical to what Ryan wants to do with the defensive secondary, so I have no problem with his signing Leonhard, even if it’s a slight overpay. Every new HC needs his “on-field coaches” and if the Jets can’t sign Scott, Leonhard is a good and cheaper alternative.
I’m a broken record here, but if we want to look at why the Jets haven’t won a Super Bowl since Namath it’s probably because Namath is this franchise’s only All-Pro QB and he’s only 1 of 2 Jets QBs that were drafted by the Jets and made the Pro Bowl (Ken O’Brien was the other). There may not be a “franchise” QB in this draft (but that was said last year, too), but the Jets have to find one and, while I like Ratliff’s potential, the Jets’ roster doesn’t have anyone that I would be comfortable starting. So, if I were the Jets, I’d take a hard look at Stafford and Freeman. Also, I have a favorite potential 2nd day dark horse–Painter from Purdue. He looked all-world as a junior with Keller and guys like Brees and Orton have been decent coming out of that program. A guy who has good chemistry with the Jets only playmaking receiver might be worth a 4th-6th rounder. Also, the Jets should evaluate the free agent market or maybe consider a trade.
-
In my world Lowery is moved to safety. I think he can be a good corner, but a pro bowl safety. He is a strong tackler, and forces fumbles. Having a cushion between him and the reciever he covers will compensate for his speed and enable him to jump more routes.
Sack- I kind of like Painter too. He had a down year tho.
-
Igs says:
It’s funny how RG is considered need. Because like we already have one, and a good, young one at that…
-
Ed says:
Damon Huard just got cut. That wouldn’t be a bad back-up plan at QB. And cheap.
-
JAGG, Painter’s down year made him a 2nd day pick. Going into 2008, he was talked about as a Heisman candidate. He’s 6-4, has a strong arm, was fairly accurate in his career, but has major questions about his ability to win against quality competition, which is a knock against Freeman, too. I’m just saying that a 5th rounder might not be too bad and I like the Keller connection. In my world, the more 6-4 (or taller) QBs with strong arms that you bring into camp, the higher likelihood you may find that you have a franchise QB (seems to work for the Pats). Also, this draft has a lot of sub-6-3 QBs, Painter’s one of the few taller guys that also has a strong arm.
-
ridinmywave says:
Lol @ lgs
-
lgs, Moore hasn’t been cut, yet. I wonder if the Ravens sign Scott and Lewis whether the Jets then turn around and re-negotiate with Moore. I like Moore, but $7 million is a lot of love for an average player. Plus, I tend to discount his good year last year because the 4 guys around him were the best that he’s played with (Brick and Mangold keep getting better, Faneca’s the best LG that the Jets have had in a long time and Woody was an upgrade over Clement). So, did he get better or was he just along for the ride. My guess is that the answer is somewhere in the middle and, in that case, $7 million is too much.
-
Ilan says:
If Bart Scott falls through how about the jets look at a South Carolina guy who people were excited about last year. Playing at 275 pounds, Jasper Brinkley had another good year at SC after being injured the previous year and he’s apparently dropped 20-25 pounds and put up good agility numbers at the combine. He seems like the prototypical 3-4 inside backer.
-
So what about the 6-3 230pound athletic (played wr on practice squad) qb we already have with a really strong arm we already have in camp by the name of ratliff?
I’m sorry but I’m on the “no qb’s” bandwagon, we already have a bunch of young guys on the team to compete. No qb in this draft is ready to come in and start this coming season probably exceept for stafford.
So we really wouldn’t be addressing any significant needs here in drafting a qb right now, besides the fact that the the skill sets of the underclassmen qb’s in the draft don’t really set any seperation from that of a ratliff or clemens. And you really can’t refute that.
-
Nick says:
Scott, Andrews, and Canty will be the only ones worth their price tag to us. Even paying Leonhard 2 mil/year is too much, but it’s probably what he’ll command.
And where did Ryan say he thinks Leonhard would be the perfect compliment to Rhodes? Isn’t that tampering?
-
Sack- I’m not against drafting Painter. With our current QB situation and where he will be drafted I have no issue bringing him into camp.
-
Leigh bodden would be nice, I would also look at lito sheppard as well. Some good vets to pair with revis and we can throw lowery beside kerry.
I was really surprised the texans threw the franchise on dunta robinson, he would have been perfect. -
Sack,
Well I know we hatched this argument out quite a bit. But I would say, you signed him for that much. He played above and beyond his level so pay him. His entire contract s not particularly big for a RG, this is just a place where he was promised a lot of $. Now your so called cap genius Tanenbaum signd him to that deal. So either he planned to screw him or he doesn’t know what he’s doing. You decide…
Also, I’m not so sure about this, but lately I’m hearing he is willing to renegotiate…
If we go day 2 with a QB, forget it. That’s a developmental guy, like maybe Stephen McGee who I’ve seen touted as a sleeper because of hi lack of experience and his physical skills.
-
JetOrange says:
I am glad we did the bulk of our free Agent shopping last year, I just don’t see the values. I can’t see Baltimore letting Scott go. I’m not so hot on the vertically challenged Leonard. I’m not sure what plan B is , but I’m considering moving Pace inside and have Gholston and Murrell split OLB position…
-
I don’t remember that pace did so well in pass coverage last season
-
sec108 says:
lgs and Sack, forgive me for jumping in the middle of this but, but lgs, your contract logic is severely flawed. Contracts are often desinged with big roster bonuses that are due around the time of free agency, its used as a decision making tool for the team, and both sides know it full well. If you like him and deem he’s worth it you generally renegotiate it into more years or something (see Pace, Calvin or Rhodes, Kerry), or if you love the player and he truly has overperformed his contract and paying him the bonus makes financial sense for the team (cheaper of equal to what you would pay for a player of equal value) then you simply pay.
As sack pointed out, he has yet to be cut, so it may very well turn out to be one of the other scenarios above, although I doubt it would be the last, becuase anyone who has watched Brandon Moore the last few years know he is a decent player, nothing more, and certainly not worth a $7 million bonus, whether its in his contract or not.
-
Brad says:
Sackdance- Talked about this in the past, And i agree we need to find a Franchise QB, but i was reading, listening to some analysts, and they made an interesting point about flacco and ryan- both finished college- believe they were both there for 5 years with many years at QB in college. All these guys coming out this year are underclassmen. Sanchez- 1 yr., stafford, freeman- all under classmen, not enough experience. The analysts stating this is a major difference between Flacco and Ryan of last year, which helped to make them successful, and to be warry of these guys in the draft this year.
-
Bent says: I also agree that OL should be addressed in the draft. You can get a solid starter in the first three rounds (maybe not even ready to start until next year) and their rookie contract will be so much cheaper than a solid veteran starter. Good cap sense, especially with so much invested in the LG and RT positions.
For kicker, I’d rather not see Feely back. I have no confidence in him. Bring in a few guys on minimum deals and give the job to the most reliable one.
Ilan. I loved Brinkley and saw him as an elite ILB candidate before his injuries and weight gain. Those issues will mean he is great value. He’s not a mike LB though (so not “compatible” with Harris), but I’d take a flyer on him for depth in the late rounds, certainly.
Re: Moore, I agree Sack’s point that Plan B may well be to retain him if they can’t get Bart Scott. They can’t afford to spend that kind of money on both the OL and the LBs so, one or other has to give. That explains why they have yet to release Moore, because with Scott off the market, retaining him (albeit hopefully restructured) will be the best use of their resources, rather than going out and getting another FA.
I seriously can’t see us being able to afford to fill more than 2 or 3 of these needs through free agency.
-
My Pet Goat says:
Iggs,
It’s ‘hashed’, not ‘hatched’ this argument… And since when did NFL contracts become moral obligations. There’s a reason why FA’s and rookies hold out for guaranteed money. Moore knew he had his head in the chopping block this offseason the day he signed his contract. This isn’t about honoring agreements or keeping a man at his word, NFL contracts are so flimsy that I wouldn’t wipe my ass with one.
And SD, do you really want another Rookie in the mix, at least for this season? I know you like ‘em tall, but isn’t Ainge 6’5″?
MPG
-
Pet goat, i don’t need you to correct my grammar on a blog post. Are you kidding me??
Sec,
You’re definately right about contracts. I’m not taking that for granted. But the priority should be renegotiating and not cutting. Cutting shouldn’t even be on the table. I think its in bad taste and bad judgement. And still, I beleive bonuses should be within a reasonable set of guidelines or you end up sleeping in your own mess. Which is what the Jets are doing right now.
Bent,
The Jets could address OL in the draft or they could use the pick on an actual need that actually exists right now and some good young players for the future on day 2. There should be an emphasis on filling needs through the draft and younger, second rate FAs that still have upside. If signing Bart Scott means we lose Moore, i don’t want Bart Scott. I’d raher make sure that I take care of the good players that are here.
-
ramble914 says:
And let’s not forget that Moore got his current contract by exploiting the Kendall situation. Maybe this is payback.
-
Brad, I think the underclassman thing is overrated. it speaks more to the wya you should handle a rookie’s psyche and responsibilities than to their potential. Round 1 grade means they have all the physical tools to start. Underclassman may mean that they don’t have the maturity.
-
brian311 says:
One point on the Moore situation. Everyone keeps fixating on the $7 million number – but this can be prorated to future years by restructuring (similar to what we just did with Rhodes and Pace). So the question is not whether Moore is worth $7 million next year. clearly, he is not. The proper question is it worthwhile to guarantee Moore $7 million in the future, and keep him around? By renegotiating his contract, his 2009 cap number would most likely be in the $3 million range, which seems acceptable based on 1) his play last year, 2) the fact that he has been a jet and nothing else and 3) replacing him could potentially cost the same amount. at least that is my take on it
-
Except for the fact that rarely does an underclass QB ever make it big in the NFL. All the best NFL QB’s were seniors and multiple year starters in college.
-
Basset, i resent you not making WR the #1 priority position.
-
brian311,
I hear ya. My problem is I have never been high in Moore, and IMO, if we can replace him with someone better, I’m all for it.
-
ramble I disagree. I talked about this with someone and there’s an article on the NFL website that goes through the 15 underclassman QBs that have been draft since underclassmen were able to be drafted – I think 1991 – It’s a pretty mixed bag.
-
now restructuring is a much more gentile and respectable way to treat a player like that. He’s a commodity, not a thorn in your side.
-
Goat, I tend to repeat myself too much on the QB issue, but here’s what I would do. I’d sign Leftwich and draft another QB, whether it’s a 1st rounder or 7th rounder is up to the FO and what they think of KC, Ratliff and Ainge. I like Ratliff because he’s the only QB on the roster that fits my personal profile for what I like in terms of physical attributes: 6-4 or over height, a strong arm, accuracy and enough mobility or savvy to elude a pass rush. To me, that gets you in the door to camp (but, it’s a sliding scale, if the height isn’t quite there, but the arm strength is special, like with Stafford, I’d compromise). There are dozens of other attributes that would then make a good starter, like leadership ability, ability to read defenses, pocket presence, etc.
So, because KC isn’t my type of QB and Ainge’s arm and mobility aren’t quite what I like, I’d have no qualms about getting rid of one or both of them (but, I’d like to keep Ainge and if he has some competition for the 3rd QB spot, good…I’d like to see him pushed by a guy like Painter).
Also, I’m a big believer that the loser of a QB battle between younger guys, like KC and Ratliff, has to be cut. So, no matter what, the Jets will need a 3rd QB.
-
GlockNSoul says:
While some may feel that RG is easy to fill and shouldn’t be considered a priority, I think the true priority stems from the fact that we have no depth on the OL – ABSOLUTELY NONE ! Let’s spend some lesser FA $ to beef up the OL. We can’t expect to skate by every year with no injuries there. If we do get hit with one, we will be totally screwed, as presently constituted.
-
Well Painter definitely could be a revelation, a lot of upside though I don’t like the idea of taking a guy that low.
-
good point on the depth issue.
i posted on another thread that whatever they decide with Moore (keep him or relplace him) they should also add another quality OL through the draft. i would love to know the stats on maintaining a healthy OL for the entire season. we were able to do it last year, but i would bet it is extremely rare
its not like i am Moore’s #1 fan by any stretch, but i do feel a sense of loyalty for born and bred players. the faneca and pace signings last year were great, but to me it means something to develop and keep your players. to throw in a mets analogy, no matter how great santana is, i will always root for/appreciate players like wright and reyes more. Moore might not be a superstar, but he is certainly an above average RG who is entering his prime physically. add that to the fact that another year will only make the OL better from a continuity standpoint, my vote would be to keep him
-
I agree with lgs (wow, there’s a first for everything) on the underclassmen issue. I think a lot of underclassmen stay in for the express purpose of improving draft position and make the wrong decision. Would Peyton been any less of a QB if he came out 1 year earlier and went to the Parcells Jets as opposed to the Colts? Leinart should’ve come out a year earlier, all his senior year did was create doubts about his ability. Cutler spent another year in a terrible program…how did that improve his ability? Curtis Painter might’ve been a first day pick last year, now he’ll be lucky to go mid-way through the second day. Brohm probably had a chance to be the no. 1 pick over JaMarcus Russell. Stafford and Freeman both had (I believe) over 30 NCAA starts…that’s enough experience. One more year with a struggling K-State program could’ve put Freeman into the second day. I guess the wild card is Sanchez, who was beset with injuries. But, I just don’t know what another year at USC would’ve done for him…would he have been like Palmer or Leinart? If I were the Lions GM, with a dome and Megatron, I’d draft Sanchez because I’d want accuracy over arm strength…no need for that extra zip when, at least, 9 games a year you play in perfect weather conditions.
-
Brian, great post – loyalty to certain players speaks a lot to building singular identity in teams. So we can’t cry about the athlete’s me first identity if when it’s time for him to get his bonus, and he’s been working his butt off, we go and cut him.
Sack, that’s a good point about underclassmen, it’s circumstantial and the control group is actually quite small, I think like 15 guys.
Now what do you guys think about cutting Bryan Thomas? Anybody know his numbers?
-
lgs, another of my draft strategy points about QB is either a team drafts a top prospect that is a first-rounder or waits until the second day to draft a QB, who you don’t know is your “franchise” QB, but is a good developmental prospect. I looked at this before, but a team is just as likely to draft a “franchise” QB in the 4th through 7th rounds as it is in the 2nd or 3rd. So, why draft a QB, unless the team has an early 2nd round pick to snatch a guy that unfairly fell out of the 1st round (like Brees, Cunningham or Boomer)? QBs that are late second rounders routinely fail, as do third-rounders. Those picks should be used for any other position, especially an undervalued position like RT, OG, C, TE, RB, ILB, or Safety.
-
Right, Sack, I kinda agree. I would say that the wildcard for me is Freeman, and whether he’s a legitimate 1st rounder or really a pure 2nd rounder. And if it’s a second day guy it has to be a guy like Painter or Stephen McGee where you can say this guy may have fallen more because of circumstances than because of potential or physical attributes.
I don’t agree that there are as many franchise QBs – again pointing to the Scott Wright article on draft countdown that breaks down the numbers pointing to most frnachise QBs coming from round 1 – but that’s debatable – but I agree that generally you go round 1 and forget the 2nd and 3rd round.
-
Darrius Heyward-Bay!!!
-
lgs, if Freeman is mid-second round talent (he has a first-round grade from Scouts Inc and others), I wouldn’t advocate taking him. To me, he’s a late first-rounder that wouldn’t be a reach at 17 because of position scarcity. I just do see him as any worse of a prospect than Cutler or Flacco.
-
Well, I’m just working from hearsay, because I haven’t seen the guy play, but the major diff would be accuracy. And it showed at the combine. And if it’s gonna turn out that this kid is another Vinny Testeverde, than I’d take my chances with mcGee or Painter. Footwork is the other knock and I think that can always be fixed. That being, I wouldn’t cut my heart out if they took him at 17.
Now as an aside, I think no matter who our Qb next season is, they fail if we don’t keep the oline intact and, especially, take care of the WR situation. Agreed?
-
CA Jets Fan says:
Sack dance I agree on Freeman, but I think he may be another Jason Campbell.
He is big, somewhat versatile. Campbell was drafted from LSU at 32 that year by Wash. Why not trade up in the Second round and get him at late 1st round? This way we can get a LB if we do not get Scott at 17 and Freeman at 30-32?
-
John says:
Igs you are on the money. Moore could become a Pete Kendell situation… Here is what Cimini says http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/jets/ Scroll down to the Moore paragraph. Moore is going to be the best of two right guards in free agency. The free agent market for guards is thin. He will make more than $7 million on the open market. He will be scooped up. Favre called Moore the best run blocker on the o-line. The Jets have an in-house guy that actually works out and they want to cut him? I don’t understand. They will either draft someone early, wasting a pick on the same position or pay someone too much money that is kind of over the hill like Faneca to replace Kendall, when they could have gotten Kendall for like $6 million cheaper…
-
Igs, I think they need to go with Sanchez first round and a wr/cb second and third round. If they can’t get Sanchez, get the best available wr/cb/lb available at 17. The Jets have the Saints 3rd round pick and the Redskins 4th round pick from the Kendall trade. They will have to give their 4th round pick to the Saints because of the 4th round pick they got from the Saints last year….
-
Not sure what his price tag is, and he’s had some trouble staying healthy, but Cleveland’s Sean Jones is a free agent and has shown that he could be a special player. If he comes cheap, he could be paired with Rhodes.
-
Andrew Weiss says:
The QB situation is confounded by the logistics of training camp and the number of roster slots in the regular season. There just isn’t time or room for four quarterbacks to be evaluated in camp so I think they’ve got to either pick up a seasoned vet or go with the three guys they have. By taking a drafted quarterback in any round, they put the new guy in Ainge’s spot, especially if he’s a project. Ainge got very little work last year in camp and they carried him on the roster all season.
If Moore is, indeed, willing to renegotiate, I’m missing their reasoning in not re-signing him. I had read that he scoffed at the Jets’ offer. Still, he may cost seven million this year but he’s less than six on the cap and his roster bonus would be only two million next year. I think they want to keep him but are waiting to see if his position becomes pliable enough to renegotiate. If he ultimately refuses, I think they’ll pay him the seven and have him relatively cheaply for the next two years.
As for needs, I vote ILB, safety and corner.
-
John
Great point. And that’s yet anther angle on why even thinking about this is so crazy. All this time you’re trying to make moves and spending money on FAs, trying to put a team together and this guys is right here in your lap so you want to cut him?
If they went that way in the draft I would be very cool with that. I like Sanchez more than Freeman, but he may not be able to start right away. They could take Robiskie, Murphy, or Britt in round 2 if they cant get Heyward-bay. Robiskie aint much of a downfeild guy. Though he has the speed and size you like, he doesn’t seem to get a lot of seperation despite running great routes. What I really want is for that position to one of the priorities.
-
Great article John, I talked with Bent about this. If the problem is that there’s too much money tied up in guard position, well, that’s your GMs fault. It’s the GM that gave kendall the boot because he wanted to make descent (not big) money and then overpaid Faneca, a guy that the steelers were no longer interested in.
And I have to ask, do the Jets only want to spend big money when it’s someone elses refuse. When a guy step up from the inside do they not want to keep that guy? Just restructure. If not, suck it up, you gave him the contract!!!
-
Yes, I would not take Freeman where the Jets are drafting. Ainge has no arm strength. He should be cut anyway. Playing in the new Meadowlands you are going to need arm stregth. Sanchez does not have the strongest arm, but his arm is strong enough.
Ratliff has showed the same thing that Clemens showed in previous years in preseason. That he can play well against the 3rd stringers. Don’t you guys remember Clemens coming in and doing the same thing. I am not saying that Ratliff will not be good because who knows?? I say get some more talent at the QB position and have them compete. Competition only makes players better.
Hopefully, they don’t get rid of Moore, which would allow them to focus on the positions that they need like lb/wr/cb and possibly QB.
They should release Bryan Thomas if they can? He was terrible!
-
IIan,
I echo that, getting a qb in the draft this year addresses nothing and none can make an immediate impact seeing that none are able to come in and immediately start….just another project.
No need for anymore projects, address the ILB, WR, S, G, and DT depth.
-
Ohhhh, please get rid of bryan Thomas. Atleast talk about cutting him before you talk about cutting Moore. It wouldn’t be ideal, but i wouldn’t be heartbroken if the Jets really beleived Freeman was their guy at took him at 17.
Wave, that’s debatable. Because i think Sanchez and freeman have more potential than anyone on the roster right now.
-
I don’t know if Sanchez and Freeman have more talent than Clemens or Ratliff. QB is a hard position to evaluate. But I would not be completely upset if they drafted Freeman where they are, but it doesn’t sound like he did that well at the combine and it sounds like he is a little bit of a project.
Yes, Sanchez is also some what of a project too, but the Jets do not have a proven starter on their roster. Sanchez is rated higher as a prospect then Clemens or Ratliff so he is rated higher. I would like to see the Jets take a chance on him if he is there? If not, I do not have a problem going another way. Look at the NFL, almost all of the playoff teams this year had a QB that was drafted in the first round. The team that won the superbowl had a first round QB. The only QBs that was not a first round pick that I can think of is Warner. Yes, I know that you can find a Tom Brady, but he is one of a million chance. Matt Hasselbeck is not “that great”. He can bring a team to the playoffs, but he has not won a superbowl. We want superbowls….
-
Agreed, but I wouldn’t say that Sanchez is project so much as he may need a bit of time before he’s ready to start. Freeman’s a project. He needs a lot of help with his accuracy and his placement downfield.
-
John,
Its not so much who’s picked in the first round or not but their experience at the position. Draft position can be affected by team needs, combine performance, and roster changes etc. Outside of rothlisberger, there were no qb’s whom were underclassmen in the playoffs, in which both sanchez and freeman are. And sanchez is a bigger questionmark because he only has 16 collegiate starts under his belt.
No teams, other than the raiders and steelers, have an underclassman qb starting and since undeclassmen have been allowed to enter the draft, they have not panned out too well. The only decent one considering mechanics and stats was drew bledsoe….
Fact of the matter, neither freeman or snachez can come in and lead a team at this point, so we might as well go with the gentlemen whom are familiar with the system and have showed good potential.
As far as I’m concerned the jury is still out on sanchez as far as starts and oppourtunities. We wanna question ratliff against 2nd and 3rd stringers but praise sanchez in 16 collegiate starts?..
And freeman, although having more experience than sanchez has a BIG question mark about his accuracy, desicion making, and pocket presence!..all there is to be excited about his size and intangibles….sounds familiar..jamarcus russel anyone?(a poor man’s own that is)…
I don’t think were missing out on anything this draft, rather address immediate issues while trying to build for the future….such as future at WR(coles is gone after this year)…..thomas jones(might be gone soon as well)
-
You got 15 underclassman. some have rings. Some bombed. Some are doing average work. Some are starting and some are out of the league. Seems like that reflects the general gruop of 1st round QBs anyway. i wouldn’t put that much stock in it.
-
By the way, the site is reporting that Coles is gone….
-
jim says:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3934737
coles is going, going gone? can someone please explain to me why coles wouldn’t be traded for a pick? what’s the logic behind this, i mean i know they want his salary of their chest, but cutting versus getting a pick to draft a kenny britt, maclin, nicks….????????
-
Harvlis says:
I don’t want to get into a bidding war for Scott. His numbers, over the last three years, are no better than Bartons. I would rather get a good inside backer in the draft.
I don’t want to draft, trade, or pay for a QB, this year. We have three capable guys. If they prove otherwise, next year is the year to draft a QB.
I would love to get Marvin Harrison for a few years. I generally look to get younger but, if we could steal him, I’m all for it.
Everything will depend on our O-Line. We should re-negotiate with Moore and add some serious back-ups to our line-up. We got lucky, healthwise, last season. That might not happen, this year. If we have to put in a back-up, the drop-off is huge. We need to have these guys competing for a position, like with the QB’s.
I would use some of our money to lock up Oakland Punter, Shane Lechler. I believe he is a free agent. Field Position is everything. This guy is a weapon and I believe he wants out of Oakland.
Things are getting interesting.
-
Bent says:
Harvlis – Scott is not all about numbers – he takes on blockers AND can cover. He is a PERFECT fit alongside Harris. I cannot stress that strongly enough. Sure, if the prices get out of hand spend the money more wisely and take your chances with a youngster, but although Scott’s numbers may not make him any more attractive than Barton, he will be a huge upgrade to the team.
And that’s why he’ll command probably double what Barton does in the FA market (although if I was a 4-3 team, I’d take a look at Barton for OLB).
-
Freeman’s numbers at K-State do not indicate that he has problems with accuracy, decisionmaking or pocket presence, but I have heard scouts say that he sometimes struggles with accuracy. I don’t think I’ve read that he has decisionmaking or pocket presence issues. I’ve actually read the opposite, how his INT numbers improved each year and basically took the team on his back. I do agree that he’s not “NFL-ready” but with 6-6 size, mobility and a rocket arm (Russell is nowhere near as mobile and isn’t close to Freeman in his ability to throw on the run, which he did well at the Combine), Freeman has late-first round talent.
-
Bent, You are wrong. Scott has had 100 tackles one time in his career. That is his job, to tackle. Barton has exceeded that five or six times. He is three years older than Scott but, his production is better, all the time, including assists. As far as taking on blockers, a backers job is to shred blockers and make the tackle. The D-linemen have to take on the blockers and let the backers do their thing. We would not be stepping up. That is my point. Why get into a bidding war for a guy that is no better, and in my opinion not as good, as what we have. We should get an inside backer in the draft or find someone else.
-
Bent says:
Again, I disagree. Lewis would be the more productive tackler because Scott takes on blockers, enabling Lewis to play in space and get to the ball carrier. Just like how Jenkins draws double teams enabling others to make the tackle. Is Jenkins a worse player than Robertson because he had fewer tackles in Mangini’s defense? Scott just had a different role in the 3-4 defense to Barton. In any case, the biggest weakness that needs upgrading is coverage and if you don’t see Scott as an upgrade over Barton there, I don’t know what to tell you.
I don’t know if they will get Scott, but I personally hope they can.
-
Moyvore says:
Umm….given the past season, I don’t know why punter doesn’t make the wish list. Unless you like cringing when the 50 or 60 yard booming punt you need to get out of bad field position only goes 35.
The Raiders paid Shane Lechler amazing money to keep him from becoming a free agent. I didn’t watch the pro bowl, but I read that Lechler punted 70 yards from his end zone.
Anyone with that potential in the draft?
-
Bent, So in the Jets 3-4 defense, Barton and Harris don’t have to take on blockers but, in the Baltimore defense Scott’s job was to take on blockers for Lewis. And when Scott comes here, he should be dynamic because he won’t have to take on any blockers. Where did you read this? They are the same size and Barton has consistently been more active. That is what I have seen, watching games, and that is what it says in the stats (your favorite thing). As for comparing Jenkins and Robertson, that is very different. Robertson cannot move the interior like Jenkins. If you play the 3-4 a monster like Jenkins is prefered. Robertons is more fluid. As a result, he makes more tackles but, he is not the consumate NT. There are inside backers that might be better at stuffing the run near the goal line. They may be bigger, stronger, or have a better nose for sniffing out the play. That would lead to more tackles or assists.
-
Bent says:
Harvlis – no that’s not what I’m saying. In a 3-4 defense, one of the inside linebackers always has to take on lead blockers to make up for the fact that there’s one less guy on the line. Often, a team will have one guy that does this most of the time, enabling the other to play in space and be the more productive tackler, but in an ideal world, you need both to be capable of this.
Any difference between the dynamic play of Barton and Scott can be explained by the fact that in the Ravens defense, Scott was the guy taking on blocks most of the time, whereas in the Jets defense Harris was (while healthy) that guy and Barton was the guy that roamed about dynamically.
So, if Scott was a Jet, I’m not saying he won’t have to take on blockers any more so his numbers will rise, I’m saying the fact that he can take on blockers better than Barton and still be a productive tackler will reduce the burden on Harris to do the same and help his productivity. Harris will probably still be the main guy to take on blockers, which could help Scott’s productivity or free him up more in coverage situations, but the exciting thing for the defense is that they are both capable of playing that specific role.
Jenkins isn’t the exact same situation, no, but it provides an example of where good play in the 3-4 doesn’t show up on the stat sheet and in that respect I think the LB’s role can be similar.
And I still say Barton is a liability in coverage, which is one of Scott’s best areas and again an area that doesn’t necessarily show up in the stats (although passes defensed is 19-8 in favor of Scott over the last 3 years).
Finally, where did you get the idea stats are “my favorite thing”. I nearly always formulate my views based on what I see. I do have respect for the likes of football outsiders, because I tend to find that they usually back up my views.
Here’s my wish list for FA’s:
ILB – 1. Bart Scott, 2. Channing Crowder
SS – 1. Jim Leonhard, if at all.
QB – 1. Byron Leftwich or no one.
CB – 1. Leigh Boden, 2. Bryant McFadden
RT – 1. Stacy Andrews, 2. John Stinchcomb
TE – 1. Dan Campbell
DT – Tank Johnson
WR – No one.
DE 1. Chris Canty, 2. Igor Olshansky
I know we can’t sign them all, but I’d be happy if we walked away with Scott, Boden, Campbell, Andrews, and Johnson