I liked the draft overall. People need to calm down and realize that we got some great talent this year... Brick and Mangold shouldn't be questioned our o-line was swiss cheese! I think Clemens gives us great QB depth, we have 3 guys who will compete now. The two third rounders were the only questionable choices. I really like RB Washington, and DT Adams. Also, acquiring a 2nd rounder next year will be huge for us. That move proved to me we are going for the playmakers in next year's draft. If none of our QB's work out this year we will have an extra 2nd rounder to use for trading up....
Great post Buttle, I am not going to repost all of my thoughts. I have been doing that for the past 30+ hours. I agree with pretty much everything you said. I wouldn't fire anyone yet. Let the season play out. Give these guys the chance to show whether their plan was a good one or not. Besides, after a firing like that, Woody would be the most hated owner in sports by players/coaches. It would kill his respectability. He already lost his coach, then was forced to fire his GM to promote Tanny. We have to give them the opportunity to fail. It sucks, but that's the way it is.
D'Brick and Mangold were great picks. As Tennenbaum said, its great when the board and your needs match up like that. I would argue that we got insane value for Kellen Clemons. It was obvious the Jets really wanted this player. I wouldnt have been surprised if they had taken him at 35 given the fact that most projected him as a mid first rounder before he got hurt. Instead, they traded down, traded back up, and stole him from the Vikings who apparently were going to draft him. So were talking about a player who is drafted lower than his ability because of an injury, and we got him at the absolute latest point we could have gotten him. I like the Shlegel pick. The fact that internet draftniks thought he would go lower doesnt bother me. This is a player who by all accounts blew our LBs coach away at the combine, was a very productive college player, and filled a need for us I think, we needed some more size at ILB. I know nothing about Eric Smith. As such, I think itd be presumptuous for me to have an opinion on drafting him. As for value, Id trust the professional scouts to peg his value before Id trust amateur scouts on the internet. I know nothing about him, so Ill have no opinion until I do. In fact, the only other player of these guys I know anything about is Leon Washington, and I think he was a solid addition to the backfield. Not a full time guy, never really blew me away at florida state, but a workable back, and you cant have too many of those.
Gabe Watson was "valued" as a low-first, high-second rounder. So if the Jets take him at 35, every "expert" says he is good value at #35. The fact is, 32 teams didn't value him nearly that high and he went in the 4th. The experts might have valued him higher, but not the teams. So if the Jets take him where he was "supposed" to go, they end up with horrible value. But no one knows that. I think the opposite applies here. Ok so the guys they got were "supposed" to go lower. No one knows how low they end up because the Jets picked them. Perhaps they go the very next pick. There is no way to know. Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with or disagree with any of the picks. The fact of the matter is that it is very difficult to determine a player's value. We have to wait until we see them play to determine their "value".
www.nfldraftcountdown.com www.ourlads.com www.thesportingnews.com And voila, everybody's a scout on draft weekend.
Everyone wants to get good value for their picks. They wanted that QB, but they still traded down to get him. I'm sure for these players that you think would be there in the 6th/7th round, clearly the Jets didn't think so. Their value chart wasn't the same as the charts posted on the internet, which is no surprise, *no* team's value chart matches exactly the public perception. The real question is - were they right? You can argue that even if they pan out, they were still "reaches" - but do you really know how all the other teams valued a pick? It's only a reach if you could have gotten the same player later - and no one will ever know that about any pick.
Brad Smith will be anything BUT a possession receiver...he is explosive, fast and elusive. Watch...he runs a sub-4.5 40
The biggest problem I saw is that they overdid it with the character thing. I think they eliminated a lot of good players because they were not team captains or academic all-americans. I would like them to bring in someone to help run the draft. I think Tanny is doing a good job at GM so far but he needs help, just like he was a sidekick for so many years he needs a football guy. Overall it wasnt bad. After drafting McGraw and Pagel, I really dont care that we reached for Smith in round 3. We needed another safety and he sounds like he is a lot smarter than what we have now.
Well thought out, however you are putting too much emphasis on value. Mangini and company came over to the Jets and revised the draft evaluation. He didn't come over here copying the Patriots way of analysing talent. He CHANGED it. What does this say? He feels he can do a better job in finding players who will succeed with the Jets than the Patriots did. That is the litmus test - will they succeed in the NFL as a Jet? Nothing else matters - value has no meaning if they cannot play in the NFL. Despite your accolades for the Pats being the top 3 teams in drafting - I disagree. If you truly look at their drafts they had years where their depth in the draft has not been very good. The year they drafted Brady every other draft pick is out of the NFL. You can argue that the Brady pick alone gives them an A, but the point being that they missed badly across the board. That's not to say they haven't had good drafts, but they have not been aces. Their success has been helped greatly by free agency and great coaching. Mangini has revolutionized the process - I think. I don't know what the process of analyzing talent is like for an NFL team. How do they determine who is 1st or 7th round talent or do they do it that way? All I know is that value relative to the Kipers of the world has no role in the way the Jets picked their talent. For example, Schlegel from the Jets perspective was listed on their board of talent around the end of the 3rd round. That's where they had him. But they also had other players there, thus they trade down 5 spots because they had at least six players they would have been happy to pick at #76 so why not get an extra pick out of it. Good move. Clemens move is just the opposite - they had him higher on their board than any other player and they ensured they got him. Good move. Value is a relative term. It depends on who's evaluation you use as a reference. The draft experts use value as a way to judge a draft, but it's silly because it's basing it on their own mock listings (god knows how they determine it) which has absolutely no relavence to the Jets draft board. Getting back to the Patriots - they tend to do well in value because they may have similar boards to the draft experts. The Pats draft tend to get high grades initially which includes 'value', but they tend not to hold up across the board. Mangini is trying to increase the % of draft picks who will succeed in the NFL for the Jets. If the Pats had it right he wouldn't be trying to revolutionize the methodolgy, he would copy it. The only value that matters is how many of those draft picks will contribute in significant ways for the Jets.
Just as an addenedum: I believe the Jets came into the draft with 9 picks and came out with 10 picks plus a 2nd rounder for 2007. That's pretty good maneuvering and value.
I agree with a lot of what you say Warrior, however, value being relative is a statement of actuality only when that entity which purports to represent given value manifests itself physically and concretely. The reason why there exists the argument of inefficacy with certain picks is because value, as an gauge of quality, as a tool, and a measure is consolidated into an "objective" standard. This standard becomes the norm for qualitative judgement of draft efficacy. The bottom line here is that a team chooses a player based on a norm of value { and even within norms there are deviations - but massive departures from a norm vexes analysts because it doesn't jibe with a constructed constellation of expected value } or on a "boutique" view of value - what you are calling "relative". The "boutique" versions of expected value will always get furrowed brows and spawn questions of efficacy by media buffs and fans, because of the perception of inefficacy. This perception of an objective standard is the judge that makes aspects of the Jets draft appear dubious. If those players that are deemed dubious fare well, then they reprove their value as being greater than the standard norm of expectation. This actually happens more often with players of expected value "busting". Thus just because a player is drafted because of a "relativity" between the standard and the team's boutique or unique board, doesn't justify his actual value. Actual value is only manifested on the field, whether he is drafted by a norm or by a boutique expected value system.
I'm sorry, I'm sure what you say is very good, but I'm too freaking dumb to understand it. These large words are making me sick. I'm going to need another beer now.
I'll tell you what I saw. The Jets picked the highest rated player at #4 instead of taking Leinart and than the snapped up the highest rated player at 29 and than they took the franchise QB they wanted in the second round. Now you can make any argument you want but if you get the Franchise QB you want and the best rated player at 4 and 29 what the hell are you crying about. They targeted guys in later rounds that are all project, speculation picks that may or may not turn out after doing thousands of hours of research. My only grip with this draft is I saw 4 incredible talents and when Houston decided to take Mario 1 I knew 3 of them were going to be off the board when we picked and we would have to make a decision whether to take D'Brick or Leinart because even though Davis is the best talent left, he plays a position that makes D'Brick or Leinart the pick over him at 4. The Jets don't believe in Leinart and neither do I. They apparently believe in Clemens so they took D'Brick. That was an outstanding evaluation by the Jets. I fully understand why they did it and what the thinking was. I didn't want D'Brick but Houston forced our hand and we could have panicked but we didn't we made the value pick, the need pick and the best player pick all at the same time. After what the Jets did with the first 3 picks which I think was brilliant, I?m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that perhaps they did an incredible job at evaluating this draft and they guys they took down the line while looking like a reach wasn?t a reach. And if you don?t like it they happened to pick up another first day pick next year. I rated the draft a C but in reality it can't be rated until we see what these guys do. What I did see was an organized practical approach. It wasn't a typical Jet fire drill where in the first 2 rounds you?re thinking WTF. I can get as dark as any one on this board because I have gone through this shit with the Jets for 40 years. This was anything but a typical Jet fire drill draft. This is the first time I have felt a glimmer of hope since Parcells quit.
I agree with this completely. Character is nice and all, but it seems to me they sacrificed too much talent for it. I think the original poster brings up some good points, but you really can't judge a draft until after a few years, and to suggest firing Tannenbaum now is pretty ridiculous. Oh, and props to Winston for his awesome post above mine. Very well said.
Well forget the mocks then.... I still say Watson is the better pick He is perfect for our new 3-4. Everyone was talking about how well he did at the Senior Week-- apparently they had to take him out of the drills at times because he was destroying the offense. He was a great player at a great program, and would have been perfect for us.
When a guy could be grabbed a round or 2 later it does not mean he is going to be there. Players are projected at spots. That doesn't mean that players are always going when your pick comes up later. Therefore, its your pick you want that play and you pick him. You don't hope he is going to be there in the next round.
Buttle your not making sense. If Mangini and Tanenbaum like Shlegel (whatever you spell it) and Smith and have them rated higher than other players then they should just take other guys because those guys would be there later? Thats not wasted value to them because they are getting what they believe is the better player. Basically these guys know more than we do so lets give them the benefit of the doubt before we call it the worst draft since Hickey. We knew going in we were going to hear some names we would be suprised with because Mangini like his protege's will evaluate players differently than other teams. Now we have to sit back and wait to see if their evaluation methods work as well as their mentors Bill and Bill. I was so sick of guys crying how we didn't get Gabe fat lazy Watson who couldn't even hold his own on the college level. Why because Mel Kiper and NFL draftcountdown had him going in the second round back in February and he would be a steal for the Jets to get him that late. Just because you saw a few names out there in mock drafts that went lower then predicted doesn't mean they are steals in later rounds. The guys who make these mock drafts sometimes know less than we do. Now if Bradway was making these picks I would say fine rip him because he has bungled up a bunch of picks in the past but to get on the new staff with no history of draft success or failure is just silly.
I really have a hard time following that... you seemed to think we drafted the best player at 4, the best at 29, and seem to think that Clemons is better for us than leinart- yet you give the draft a C for the grade? Just because we passed on Leinart doesn't mean we had Clemons rated higher than him. When did Leinart become such a bad pick? I really don't understand. There really are two kinds of posters on here-- ones who think the lineman was the best pick-- and ones who would have liked to see us bring in bush, or Leinart, who are being treated like they are ignorant fans for thinking that way. I am sorry, but if Leinart plays like Carson Palmer in a 3 years, I really don't want to hear any complaints. I don;t have any probs with the first 3 picks, but I really think that there are people who will go with the FO decisions 100%, and any other move would have been absurd.
