McFadden Fans: Worth Trading Up?

Discussion in 'New York Jets' started by Namath2Kolber, Apr 25, 2008.

  1. BlairThomas#1

    BlairThomas#1 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    What the Jets did last year should have no bearing on their strategy this year.

    Trading up all depends on two things: 1) How committed the team is to one particular player and 2) cost.

    I think you could easily make the case that the Jets don't think Chris Long, Sedrick Ellis or Glenn Dorsey are suited to the 3-4, that Gholston is not worth a #6 pick based on the full body of his work, that Ryan is not the right guy and that no DB grades-out in the Top 10. Then, it simply becomes a one person draft for the Jets with McFadden as THE guy. If that is the case, I say go get him.
     
  2. ANJI

    ANJI New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Messages:
    706
    Likes Received:
    0
    ^^ So true.
     
  3. Pilotpf

    Pilotpf Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    0
    The front office did a good job minimizing our needs before this draft tomorrow. We don't have huge holes in our roster. So when we say we need a CB, we need a WR, we need a OLB we're really just saying we want an upgrade over our serviceable starters. Not to mention we already have an improved team from last year, so another impact ILB next to Harris would only elevate the play of our front 7, and I wouldn't be opposed to that.
     
  4. Docny1975

    Docny1975 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,355
    Likes Received:
    0
    I totally agree with this statement. I was saying we shouldnt pick someone just because the patriots want that person as well.
     
  5. LWC611

    LWC611 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    23
    Simply stated, No.....
     
  6. BlairThomas#1

    BlairThomas#1 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, I would say that the Jets least serviceable starters in priority order are:

    1) Clemens
    2) Poteat
    3) Elam
    4) Moore
    5) B.Thomas
    6) Slot WR

    What do you guys think?
     
  7. kennyo07

    kennyo07 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would disagree with Clemens as #1. By your logic we should take Ryan or either Flacco, Brohm or Henne in Rd 2. You cant give the guy 8 games with a bad bad team and make your decision either for him or against him. Plain and simple the jury is still out on Clemens so I would not say he is not serviceable at this point.
     
  8. Docny1975

    Docny1975 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,355
    Likes Received:
    0
    We dont have Poteat. I think need and where we draft isnt nice no one imo worth picking there of what I think we do need which is CB and WR then LB then DE then FS.
     
  9. amuck57

    amuck57 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Messages:
    262
    Likes Received:
    91
    HELL NO.....
    1st DE/DT
    2nd OLB/ILB
    4th WR
    4th CB
    6th DT/LB
    7th OT
     
  10. BlairThomas#1

    BlairThomas#1 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is not that I think Clemens doesn't have a chance, but I would be disappointed if the Jets didn't select a QB during the draft. Based on Clemens performance and the fact that he plays the most important position on the field, he is the shakiest of the Jets 22 starters going into the season.
     
  11. Pilotpf

    Pilotpf Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    0
    and you are right, but if we just so happen to pick the person NE wants it would be a much sweeter pick, no?

    There is no way that Clemens/QB is our least serviceable position.

    CB/OLB both need an upgrade more than QB. . . I won't be mad if we draft ryan, but Clemens has to be given at least full year before we write him off as a bust
     
  12. islesfan

    islesfan New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    No way would I trade up. Right now they're almost assured of getting either Long, Ryan, DMF or Gholston. I'd be happy with any of those guys regardless of whatever blemishes they might have.

    Having said that, I'd definitely trade down into the 8-15 range if the opportunity presented itself. I'd target McKelvin, Stewart, Mayo and Harvey.
     
  13. wildthing202

    wildthing202 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2003
    Messages:
    14,495
    Likes Received:
    4
    DMC's mommy hates NYC....
     
  14. hiker

    hiker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    Messages:
    4,525
    Likes Received:
    84
    I want DMC if he's there, but if not, a trade down wouldn't be a bad thing. And I mean specifically, down to 8 with the Ravens or 13 w/Carolina for Ryan and take McKelvin or Rodgers-Cromartie.

    I guess you can tell I see our #1 need being at CB, but no reason to reach for one at #6. All that said, yeah, I would still rather have DMC. But no trade-up.
     
    #34 hiker, Apr 25, 2008
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2008
  15. KERRYRHODES25

    KERRYRHODES25 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    0
    i hope we get him at 6
     
  16. allan1

    allan1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    8,840
    Likes Received:
    13
    Hopefully by tomorrow, Goodell punishes NE and makes them give up the 7 : )
     
  17. Mehl-56

    Mehl-56 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,471
    Likes Received:
    237
    Won't happen... it's not thier pick... it's San Frans traded to NE
     
  18. Mehl-56

    Mehl-56 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,471
    Likes Received:
    237
    God I hope not
     
  19. Namath2Kolber

    Namath2Kolber New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,970
    Likes Received:
    1
    I guess Tannenbaum agreed . . .
     

Share This Page