We aren't gauranteed a top 5 phukin defense just because we take long or gholston... I want the best player available...end of story.
I also agree that I want the Jets' to build there defense up. Gholston & Pat Sims will make a nice impact at #1 & 2. I really want to see Ahtyba Rubin of Iowa St. on the Jets team. He could be there NT of the future would jump at him in round 3 or 4.
I would have given all my draft picks for Revis and Harris. If you can find two future all pro players in a draft, and manage to keep them for atleast 10 years, then after 10 years, you have 20 all pro players on the side. Whereas this is pretty impossible to happen with all the salary cap in place, I would want to try and achieve it. Be it a first rounder or seventh rounder, I would take even one potential all pro player with a solid player for depth. The only problem is, you dont know who, when and where to pick that pro bowler.... Any comments???
I totally agree, especially after what we did in FA this year. I would give our whole draft for Chris Long and some 2nd round stud although it might not be enough. I would much rather have that one can't miss player than 4 or 5 second day picks who may not even make the team or be gone in 2-3 years after sitting on the bench. We have finally shown we are willing to spend money in the off season so now the draft should be used to get that 1 or 2 impact players we can identify. We are not currently in a crisis mode like Miami or Oaklans is where they need multiple positions filled as fast as possible. For them having lots of picks make sense. Hopefully you don't have a high first round pick very often but when you do you have to make the most of it and not waste it on something you really don't need. If you have the chance to get maybe one of the best players at their position in years then you do what you must to make sure you land them.
To be honest...as much as I love Harris and Revis, I wouldve much rather either stayed we were at or traded down. This team is still sorely in need of overall depth..and the only way to build that is to keep all your draft pcisk and draft BPA.
How much do you think a player's performance in the NFL is a result of (1) what his resume is when he shows up in the draft, (2) what team selects him and their specific situation [personnel / schemes], (3) how he is coached / gets along with his coaches, and (4) how he reacts to the plays in a game...? I get the impression from a lot of people's postings here at TGG that they are 'resume' people, first and foremost. Now, me, for one, I tend to rate them (1) - 2 out of 10; (2) 3 out of 10; (3) 3 out of 10; (4) 2 out of 10. The issue is somewhat like the argument about heredity versus environment in terms of how you turn out. Football is a lot more interesting when the player has a lot to do with it in the here and now, rather than what he did last year or the year before, or in college. If you listen to NFL players, the good ones are always working to get better. They focus on it year-round, and they focus pretty hard. This fact gets short shrift too often on the TGG. Everyone of these FA acquisitions by the NYJ is directly in the service of this NFL player approach to the game. All that money is being invested in these FAs focusing hard on getting better than they were with these coaches in these schemes here next year. It is something to take into account, after you read their resumes.
Great post... Too many people go solely based on resume and what the media says. But drafting a player is a process based on... 1. Resume 2. Film Evaluation 3. Triangle/combine numbers 4. Character 5. Fitting into the team's scheme From those factors you put an overall score...consider the big board...and build your team board. It's not Rocket science..but it's more in depth than "Screw Dmac we need Gholston"
No we aren't garunteed a top 5 defense if we draft Gholston. But we also aren't garunteed the best player in the draft if we draft Mcfadden either... I agree that we should be looking at any of the top 5 guys, but I want anybody other than Mcfadden... I don't think he is going to be the superstar you all expect. I still am hoping for a trade down but really any of the other 4 guys have a chance to give us an immediate impact.
You might be right but it isn't "us all" that have him rated that way. Every pro scout board out there has him rated as the number 1 athlete in this year's draft. So blame them for being wrong if he doesn't pan out.
No we arent guaranteed the best player...we're guaranteed the best player AVAILABLE at our spot based on all the evaluating sources available. That's about all you can go on.
My draft board for the first round looks like this right now. 1-Chris Long 2-Jake Long 3-Gholston 4-McFadden 5-Trade the pick if you can 6-Ryan 7-Punt
From this post you seem to think that every player, given the same coaching and situation, will be able to do the same thing. You watch a player play to see how good he is, but statistics can give you a good idea at many positions and statistics is what draws you to look at the players in the first place, just as good looks gets you first dates but nothing else. To you, does is his resume just his statistics or his actual playing? Because if you consider film part of his resume and you're ignoring that, then I'll tell you right now that you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You can't just plug any athlete into a good system with good coaching and a good supporting cast and expect a good player. That is NOT how it works. Just to clarify, statistics are what makes a player stand out from others on paper, so they will get the most looks. Statistics, however, do not equal skill.
Quote: "...From this post you seem to think that every player, given the same coaching and situation, will be able to do the same thing. You watch a player play to see how good he is, but statistics can give you a good idea at many positions and statistics is what draws you to look at the players in the first place, just as good looks gets you first dates but nothing else. To you, does is his resume just his statistics or his actual playing? Because if you consider film part of his resume and you're ignoring that, then I'll tell you right now that you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You can't just plug any athlete into a good system with good coaching and a good supporting cast and expect a good player. That is NOT how it works. Just to clarify, statistics are what makes a player stand out from others on paper, so they will get the most looks. Statistics, however, do not equal skill...." Quack, Resumes are made up of statistics first and often they can lie. 1. For example, say you're a RB that's pretty fast and you happen to be blessed with an overwhelming OL that overpowers everybody. Your yards and touchdowns are more likely to be largely a product of their dominance rather than your running ingenuity. 2. If you're Tom Brady, even you can be drafted by a team whose CS are interested in down the field passing and WRs (Mike Martz) but not so much in developing the OL or the running game. So does that make you a bad QB because the pass rush gives you about 1.8 seconds to catch the ball and look around for an outlet, any outlet before it mashes you. Well, it certainly will play havoc with your accuracy, and your stats. 3. If you are a big 4-3 DE and you suddenly get changed into an OLB in a 3-4 and you discover something terrific about yourself. Another team who's seen the same thing in that last season signs you as a FA and puts you in a position to flourish with that something terrif about yourself and be creative as well. 4. And as a WR, even if you've have dropped most of the balls thrown to you in practice all week, if you get into the SB and catch every thing that's thrown to you, even if it takes using your helmet of all things, then you have come to play for sure. Each of these things have a lot to do with the player, and not a lot to do with resumes, statistics, and everything to do with how lucky the player is with his situation and his coaches, and well he takes advantage of it when he gets the chance. I do think that NFL players can be a lot more than the resumes with which they come into the league with. For sure.
can't disagree with you, but imo after getting jones last season, and signing chatman i can't see us taking a rb.i'd love rodgers- cromartie, if gholston and long are'nt available. i know most will say he is'nt worth the #6, but i really think this guy's gonna set the league on fire!!
I have been on the fence bout the draft for quite some time...First and foremost we cant go with Dorsey even if he is there..It will just be another D-Rob situation, like NJJETS and DON have already stated..You can teach BIG either you are or arent..Yes he can put on weight but that is not his game, he is not a 3-4 NT, he is like a W.Sapp, speed and agility with some size.. I liked the McFadden pick for awhile but I think with what we did on the OL we should give TJ a chance to become a thoroughbred and I think he can do it....I'm not sold on Howies kid at all, just doesnt do it for me, played great and against some weak ass teams and was average in big games..IMO...GHOLSTON, I have really started to come around with him and have started to lean his way but the "Workout Warrior" tag scares me and "Columbine Captain" reminds of so many other busts Mamula etc... I have decided that trading down and accumalating need is our best bet...
Yes, coaching and surrounding talent is a major factor, but you both cannot ignore statistics and you cannot draft a player based on them. I was trying to clarify in my last post, but at this point I'm pretty sure that we're on the same page.
YEa Raiders are in a crisis mode. They Have less needs than the Jets do. Unlike the Jets, the Raiders filled their needs with young players. You really need to get a depth chart for both teams. Bcause your talking out of you arse again.
I looked at your depth chart... How many of those players made it to the playoffs in the last 5 years?
