The possibility of keeping Darnold and trading down thread

[JetsandI]

Just now, xrade said:

I only watched a couple of his entire games on YouTube because of all the talk about him.

BYU offense is crazy.   A lot of disguising plays to keep defense off balance.   QB was not the reason for that but he took advantage of it.   If we expected him to carry to play like he was with BYU for Jets then we would be in major disappointment.

He has ability to make all throws but he has yet to be tested by real defense.  That is something he will learn how to handle at next level.   Bills' Josh Allen could  game as a rookie thanking to his frame and running ability.  It took him at least 2 years to make a showcase at qb.   Granted he had mechanic to tweak during that span but he could make pro throws coming out of Wyoming.

I firmly believe that Trevor Lawrence is only qb in the draft class that can start a bunch of games as a rookie.   Fields may be there due to his toughness and arm strength.  Wilson and Jones need some magic juice to play on the field against pro.

[drew39k]

2 hours ago, ekill08x said:

If we trade down to 8...I would take Pitts even though it goes against the grain but he would be the best player. Maybe Slater? I like Slater as much as Sewell. I, like others, also feel both scared and excited about the thought of this. I will say this. If Sam shows little improvement in this system, he’s never making it anywhere else. When is the 5th year option deadline?

To chime in on Pitts, I do think it is important to remember that, historically speaking, TEs are very slow to adjust from college to pro. Even some of the best, high rated guys took a few years to develop. As much as it would seem like he should be an instant impact guy, tight ends rarely are. I dont mind taking him, but it would be with the understanding that it will take a while.

[ekill08x]

2 minutes ago, drew39k said:

To chime in on Pitts, I do think it is important to remember that, historically speaking, TEs are very slow to adjust from college to pro. Even some of the best, high rated guys took a few years to develop. As much as it would seem like he should be an instant impact guy, tight ends rarely are. I dont mind taking him, but it would be with the understanding that it will take a while.

A very solid point. 

[JetsandI]

7 minutes ago, drew39k said:

To chime in on Pitts, I do think it is important to remember that, historically speaking, TEs are very slow to adjust from college to pro. Even some of the best, high rated guys took a few years to develop. As much as it would seem like he should be an instant impact guy, tight ends rarely are. I dont mind taking him, but it would be with the understanding that it will take a while.

Pitts has WR movements.   Clearly generational player.   Scouts love him.     Simply use him at Slot for now and gradually move him into TE role as he bulks up.

Or play WR for good.

[KimuraGod]

 

Trade down to #6 would get us a nice haul and a top prospect  

[drew39k]

9 minutes ago, JetsandI said:

Pitts has WR movements.   Clearly generational player.   Scouts love him.     Simply use him at Slot for now and gradually move him into TE role as he bulks up.

Or play WR for good.

I'm not disagreeing that it would seem like he should be able to seemlesly adjust, I'm just pointing out that even uber althetic receiver types of Tight ends don't transition quickly. 

TJ Hockenson went 8th overall and managed a stat line of 32/367/2 his rookie year. Even year 2, while better, was still just decent te production at 67/723/6

Aarons Hernandez had 45 grabs for 560 as a rookie.

Graham was 31 for 356.

Ertz was 36 for 469

Kelce didn't play his rookie year, but did perform well in year two.

Kittle had 43 grabs for about 500 yards.

It's just not a position that typically translates right away. 

 

[drew39k]

3 minutes ago, xenajets said:

 

Trade down to #6 would get us a nice haul and a top prospect  

At 6 we would miss Sewell but probably still be able to get one of Chase or Devonta Smith, which after signing Davis isn't as big of a need but would still be a great add. Would also give the added bonus of having a guy ready to step into a starter role next year if we decide to move on from Crowder or Mims ends up being a bust

[JetsandI]

1 minute ago, drew39k said:

I'm not disagreeing that it would seem like he should be able to seemlesly adjust, I'm just pointing out that even uber althetic receiver types of Tight ends don't transition quickly. 

 

 

Oh...Sometimes I forget that this is for all of people instead of me. lol.    I can't imagine how Jet community feel about Pitts' "lackluster" rookie season as TE after 4th and 5th rounders didn't see any action on field last year.   Brutal.

[jetsfan4life51]

3 hours ago, Bobby816 said:

I've been pretty vocal that this is my favorite scenario for us, outside of trading for Watson.

 

Why I like it is bc we aren't a team that needs 1 thing. We need talent all over the place. And the more valuable picks we have.... the faster that transition to a good team can happen.

Furthermore... if we can trade back and add another 1st next year. That gives us 3 1st rounders just in that draft. Allowing us to do nearly anything we want. Trade for a proven QB. Trade up in the draft for a guy. Etc.

This also gives us a year to look as Sam more. Under an offense that suits him more. Hopefully with better talent and protection around him.

This can go 3 ways.

1. He plays great which is the best of the options bc we then have possibly a franchise QB AND still 3 1st next year. The hard thing to tell yet on this is if we pick up his 5th year option or not. I think he'd be like 18mill or something next year if we pick that up. For a team like us who has money... that doesn't hurt us much. We don't pick up that option... we can always try and sign him long term. Or even tag him.

2. He plays just OK. This would be the worst situation for us. Bc we still wouldn't have a clear decision on him.

3. He plays awful. If he plays awful at least that clears up if we need a QB or not. We'd also more than likely be drafting high. So it would make a trade up easier for a top QB perhaps. Also if trading for a proven QB that pick is more valuable.

 

For me I'm ok with a trade back as long as its not too far back. I think we have to come out of Round 1 with offensive help. So at the top of the draft that's guys like Sewell, Chase and Smith. The defensive side isn't exciting early. We trade back to 8 and the odds of 1 of those 3 guys still there are slim (still could happen with probably 3 QBs going in the top 7). But is obviously a huge risk. This team just in general needs talent. And for a guy like JD that loves to build through the draft... the more great picks you have the better. He knows he doesn't have forever to fix this team.

Agreeing however what if we sign JuJu?  How are we drafting Chase/Smith and running JuJu, Mims, Davis, rookie over the next 3-4 years?  

[jetjuice]

13 minutes ago, jetsfan4life51 said:

Agreeing however what if we sign JuJu?  How are we drafting Chase/Smith and running JuJu, Mims, Davis, rookie over the next 3-4 years?  

You wouldn't be drafting them if we signed JuJu. That would be a luxury for a team like us with a ton of needs still on both sides of the ball. A trade scenario with a specific target in mind really doesn't make much sense because it is rich at the top of the WR class. In fact, it is an insanely deep WR class altogether and that's why teams are hesitant to throw big money deals at these WR's on the market because you can get great value in the draft in the mid rounds. I would target Sewell if we decided to keep Darnold. He needs protection as much as he needs weapons and Sewell is a perfect fit in our zone blocking scheme. We can play him at guard next to Becton, or right tackle if Fant falls off this year. Kyle Pitts would make a lot of sense as well, or maybe even Caleb Farley if we don't do anything more at CB.

[Bobby816]

24 minutes ago, jetsfan4life51 said:

Agreeing however what if we sign JuJu?  How are we drafting Chase/Smith and running JuJu, Mims, Davis, rookie over the next 3-4 years?  

I'd think we'd go in a different direction then. Draft Sewell if still there. If not maybe go Pitts at TE. Maybe go next best OLineman like Slater.

BUT....

What about the idea of trading down again. Let's say there's a team that wants a QB still and wants Lance or something? Then make another trade back.

I also think having 4 highly talented WRs isn't a bad thing. We cant talk about Mims like he's Justin Jefferson last year. Yes we all like him. But he didn't 100% solidify a starting spot for us. If Chase, Smith or even Waddle are there. They should still be options.

[KimuraGod]

12 minutes ago, Bobby816 said:

I'd think we'd go in a different direction then. Draft Sewell if still there. If not maybe go Pitts at TE. Maybe go next best OLineman like Slater.

BUT....

What about the idea of trading down again. Let's say there's a team that wants a QB still and wants Lance or something? Then make another trade back.

I also think having 4 highly talented WRs isn't a bad thing. We cant talk about Mims like he's Justin Jefferson last year. Yes we all like him. But he didn't 100% solidify a starting spot for us. If Chase, Smith or even Waddle are there. They should still be options.

If we do keep Sam then getting his old college receiver and trading down to grab Sewell would be a ‘going all in’. If he didn’t pan out then you take that on the chin. 
 

What is the worst case scenario is if we go half arse building around Sam and are left in limbo like we are now.  

[xrade]

1 hour ago, drew39k said:

To chime in on Pitts, I do think it is important to remember that, historically speaking, TEs are very slow to adjust from college to pro. Even some of the best, high rated guys took a few years to develop. As much as it would seem like he should be an instant impact guy, tight ends rarely are. I dont mind taking him, but it would be with the understanding that it will take a while.

This all very true for a traditional TE. As K and I stated, he is a big WR. Kind of like Waller.  Once Waller left Balt and played a full season in Oak/Vegas, he had a major breakout. Pitts could also be used like Enunwa. The point is not trying to use him as an online TE right away. Make him a weapon and work on his blocking skills as he progresses. 

[jetjuice]

18 minutes ago, Bobby816 said:

I'd think we'd go in a different direction then. Draft Sewell if still there. If not maybe go Pitts at TE. Maybe go next best OLineman like Slater.

BUT....

What about the idea of trading down again. Let's say there's a team that wants a QB still and wants Lance or something? Then make another trade back.

I also think having 4 highly talented WRs isn't a bad thing. We cant talk about Mims like he's Justin Jefferson last year. Yes we all like him. But he didn't 100% solidify a starting spot for us. If Chase, Smith or even Waddle are there. They should still be options.

That's fun to think about, we would control the draft board this year and just cherry pick away at our needs, and probably have three 1sts next year.

[SDotNova]

2 hours ago, drew39k said:

I'm not disagreeing that it would seem like he should be able to seemlesly adjust, I'm just pointing out that even uber althetic receiver types of Tight ends don't transition quickly. 

TJ Hockenson went 8th overall and managed a stat line of 32/367/2 his rookie year. Even year 2, while better, was still just decent te production at 67/723/6

Aarons Hernandez had 45 grabs for 560 as a rookie.

Graham was 31 for 356.

Ertz was 36 for 469

Kelce didn't play his rookie year, but did perform well in year two.

Kittle had 43 grabs for about 500 yards.

It's just not a position that typically translates right away. 

 

I agree. And if we do end up getting Juju, targets to Pitts, considering Herndon is our inline TE and will also get playing time, will be limited.

We are going from rags to riches. Probably better off going OL. Slater would be my pick. He can start off at RG and then kick out to RT after a year or 2.

Edited March 18, 2021 by SDotNova