you guys have hijacked the thread (again). this is NOT a 'can we get cutler with our 17th pick'. this is 'is it better to trade an unproven draft pick for a proven starter'. i say 'yes'. why? i'd have traded our #4 'bowling ball with knives' fiasco for a proven d-lineman with two good knees. i'd have traded our #6 'VG' fiasco for a proven OLB that can run faster than jay fricken cutler. all 30 'proven OLB' would kill to come to the jets for VG's money. only time to consider taking the draft pick is if the only 'proven vet' has hit a ceiling and the unproven draft pic shows significantly higher potential. any draft pic in the top 10 will get paid WAY more than any proven vet, so the money thing is in our favor as well. round 2-7? ok, have at it and get younger and deeper. round 1? trade for a proven starter, get better NOW, and save tons of cash.
If I were in charge of Jets... I kind of like this scenario, but I'd alter it a bit: 1. Trade this year's 1st Rounder for next year's 1st Rounder + a player who fills a need right now for us (O-line depth, NT depth, CB depth, etc?). If they won't give us a player with their 1st Round, accept their 1st and a 5th or something along those lines. That gives us two 1st Rounders next year and a very good shot at a true "franchise QB." But should Clemens or Ratty come into their own and far exceed our expectations this year, so be it, play them and we're still in good shape with 2 picks to spend in the 1st Round next year. 2. We need a very good, talented WR right now. If we can pick up a Harrison or Holt REASONABLY right now, then do it, otherwise pull the trigger in Round 2 for the BA Wideout. The draft is deep with them and this would be our chance to acquire an excellent (possibly considered 1st Round candidate in other years) WR in this year's draft. 3. Use the rest of the Day One picks for depth or any other BPA, with concentration on the offense. Our defense is looking pretty good at present. 4. Trade Brad Smith for whatever you can get for him. The Izzo signing makes room for a "special teams only" guy and that's basically what Smith has become. He's good at STs, but he'll never be a good WR IMO or any of the other Mangini multiple crossover positions Mangini tried to experiment with. 5. Day Two: Continue with BPA with emphasis still on offense (possibly another later round WR or O-line depth). Look for a larger, Brandon Jacobs-like, diamond-in-the rough RB as both TJ and Tony Richardson only have a year or two left. Draft a replacement for Nugent, Feely is going to get older and his accuracy will undoubtedly decline.
Is it better to trade picks for a proven starter? Depends on the package. Up to some point it might make sense to get Cutler, but I doubt that the Broncos give him up for a package the Jets should be willing to part with. Whoever gets him probably will both have a greater need and a greater willingness to overpay.
If it were Flacco we were talking about, I'd be on the deal like a dog on a bone. But I have a few reservations with Cutler, so yeah, I think whatever the Broncos are going to want for him is going to be way too high a price for us to be paying right now. The gamble is Clemens and Ratty. What do we have? The Favre Fiasco set us back at least that much. I'm still willing to give both of these guys a shot now, especially since they'll be behind a MUCH better O-line than they'd been behind at any showing in the past. This will be Clemens' year to get it done... I think it's his to lose. With all the other weapons we have (and especially if we can land a Harrison or Holt) or a really top-rated WR in the draft, I think he'll have a decent-to-fairly good season.
From all that seems to be coming out of Jetland, it certainly sounds like they intend to give Clemens his shot behind that improved OL. You have to assume at this point that Schott has told Ryan that Clemens is a good prospect to be the starter on Opening Day. Otherwise what they are doing and not doing makes no sense.
We should trade our 1st, 2nd & 3rd for Cutler if we could. You are getting a proven QB who is 25 with a rocket arm & has a cheap contract. People put so much stock in draft picks when half of them are busts go with the proven. Look at our 1st round picks over the years I could make a list and name it who is the biggest bust.
I was on my blackberry. Seems like you still understood what I ment ALONG WITH SEVERAL OTHERS. . BTW IM TIRED OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU. GO EDIT FOR A NEWSPAPER INSTEAD OF CORRECTING EVERY LITTLE MISTAKE ON A SPORTS FORUM. NO ONE IS HERE TO BE JUDGED ON THEIR GRAMMER. LOOKS LIKE YOU WASTED YOUR TIME TRYING TO BE AN ASSHOLE. MR. PERFECT DIED. I RATHER TALK BACK TO MY ASSHOLE WHEN I FART THAN A CANADIAN.. IT WAS A SIMPLE MISTAKE. IM SURE YOU GET YOUR ASS KICKED A LOT TO.
There are alot of variables here to answer the question. Year to year, it depends on your need, depth in the draft at that position or positions of need, how you feel about the potential picks, and so on. One year, you may trade a pick if needed, the next year you may use it. I would play it year to year with an open mind to trading picks to fill a void if needed.
i would have kept coles ---or deal for holt and would have traded my number 1 this year and next for cutler
Im not a fan of cutler so thats out of the equation. This year if there is no one at 17 worth getting. Id either trade down into the mid to late 20s and get another 2nd and possibly 4th. Or trade down into upper 2nd and get a teams 2010 1st round pick.
I'd trade the 1st Rounder for a Franchise player. I'm not high on Cutler but if, let's say, Big Ben or Phillip Rivers were available for our 1st, I'd take it. As far as Cutler goes, it depends on how confident you are in the draft talent. I'd rather have Cutler then another D-Rob....but, I guess it just depends on how you look at it.
It's called sports ecomonics. In a league with 10 owners, if every owner has 100 dollars to spend - and one does well with his 100 dollars, getting players worth 100 dollars, how do you think his team will fare? Common sense says that, barring a cosmic anomaly in the head of the owners, the aforementioned team will be at flat 50% winning percentage. My point? It is advantageous to uncover that gem of a player with your draft, than pony up the cash and get him. The thing is, you have to get "more" value from the players than what you are paying, to have a winning franchise. if you are getting same value as the money says, then you are eternally locked in that 8-8 mark. If you overpay, then you are destined to failure. That was a crude model, but I think you get the message. Trading the proven player by itself is never bad. You are getting a proven commodity. What's bad is on the other side - salary cap. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- With that regard, either Gholston has to have a lights-out performance for the next decade, or will be a stamp of how dumb Mangini can possibly be for ages.
Be careful, man. Be very careful. Some of them will try to convince you that the Jets trading the 17th overall selection for Ricky Williams would be a solid move for the Jets.
I like the idea of trading 17 for a young, proven player. We're a team built to win now and the two positions we should look to upgrade is a WR and QB, both of which take time to develop. This is magnified by the fact that our position of need don't really correspond to our spot in the draft and this year's particular draft class. If for 17 we could get a Jay Cutler/Braylon Edwards type player I would prefer that.
