|
|
Post by Lithfan on May 1, 2016 10:04:22 GMT -5
Now that we have had some time to consider what Macc and the Jets did over the course of the last 3 days, and the initial emotional responses have passed, what do you think. I will start with my thoughts.
Seems to me that the coaching staff is really betting on themselves in this draft. The first pick, Darron Lee, is a guy with the speed that Coach Bowles seems to covet in his defense -- this appears to be a Bowles pick. The kid has only played two years at LB, having been a QB & CB in high school. He is raw and he is still learning his postition. I think this is why when we watch tape, many of us see a guy with poor instincts who appears at times to be hesitant. He has great straight line speed, but will that translate into cover ability. Bowles even mentioned that he needs to learn/improve his technique in coverage. Whether he develops into the impact player that we are hoping for is on the coaching staff, as well as the kid's ability to learn.
I feel pretty much the same way with the Hackenberg pick. The guy's tape is dreadful, bad, and horrible all wrapped up in one. There are reasons for that and those reasons have been discussed ad nauseum. Once again, the GM and CS are taking a guy with great measureables, a guy who has run a pro style offense in the past, but a guy who is horribly broken. Give the kid some credit for sticking it out at Penn State and dealing with situations that no 18-21 year old should have to deal with. And he seems like a good smart kid from the interviews and TV segments about him. The only thing that matters now is can he be fixed. After the beating that he took behind that porous Penn State OL, can he be taught to trust his protections, and stand tall in the pocket. Can the CS fix his mechanics which are so badly broken, improve the footwork so that his accuracy will improve. Once again, the CS is betting on themselves. If Hack can be fixed, we could have the big armed QB who forces teams to defend the entire field. Or if he can't, we are going to be right back here looking for our franchise QB again, and again, and again...
Jenkins is a guy who is coming in with a much higher floor and lower ceiling than the first two. Much closer to a finished product than Lee or Hack. I don't know much about Burris, but I would put Brandon Shell into the same category as the first two picks. Another guy who has the physical gifts to be successful, size, strength, arm length that you look for in a starting tackle, but a lot to learn to be successful.
Macc may be betting his career as Jet GM on Hackenburg, but I see this as a draft that is likely to define this coaching staff as well. If they can shape these raw, but talented kids into players, we may look back at this as a great draft some day. Or this could go down in Jet history as the draft we passed on Paxton Lynch, Jaylon Smith and Myles Jack.
Agree? Disagree? Other thoughts on the draft class?
|
|
cmart
Full Member
Posts: 146
|
Post by cmart on May 1, 2016 10:21:28 GMT -5
Now that we have had some time to consider what Macc and the Jets did over the course of the last 3 days, and the initial emotional responses have passed, what do you think. I will start with my thoughts. Seems to me that the coaching staff is really betting on themselves in this draft. The first pick, Darron Lee, is a guy with the speed that Coach Bowles seems to covet in his defense -- this appears to be a Bowles pick. The kid has only played two years at LB, having been a QB & CB in high school. He is raw and he is still learning his postition. I think this is why when we watch tape, many of us see a guy with poor instincts who appears at times to be hesitant. He has great straight line speed, but will that translate into cover ability. Bowles even mentioned that he needs to learn/improve his technique in coverage. Whether he develops into the impact player that we are hoping for is on the coaching staff, as well as the kid's ability to learn. I feel pretty much the same way with the Hackenberg pick. The guy's tape is dreadful, bad, and horrible all wrapped up in one. There are reasons for that and those reasons have been discussed ad nauseum. Once again, the GM and CS are taking a guy with great measureables, a guy who has run a pro style offense in the past, but a guy who is horribly broken. Give the kid some credit for sticking it out at Penn State and dealing with situations that no 18-21 year old should have to deal with. And he seems like a good smart kid from the interviews and TV segments about him. The only thing that matters now is can he be fixed. After the beating that he took behind that porous Penn State OL, can he be taught to trust his protections, and stand tall in the pocket. Can the CS fix his mechanics which are so badly broken, improve the footwork so that his accuracy will improve. Once again, the CS is betting on themselves. If Hack can be fixed, we could have the big armed QB who forces teams to defend the entire field. Or if he can't, we are going to be right back here looking for our franchise QB again, and again, and again... Jenkins is a guy who is coming in with a much higher floor and lower ceiling than the first two. Much closer to a finished product than Lee or Hack. I don't know much about Burris, but I would put Brandon Shell into the same category as the first two picks. Another guy who has the physical gifts to be successful, size, strength, arm length that you look for in a starting tackle, but a lot to learn to be successful. Macc may be betting his career as Jet GM on Hackenburg, but I see this as a draft that is likely to define this coaching staff as well. If they can shape these raw, but talented kids into players, we may look back at this as a great draft some day. Or this could go down in Jet history as the draft we passed on Paxton Lynch, Jaylon Smith and Myles Jack. Agree? Disagree? Other thoughts on the draft class? good summary... just a few points I'll add By all accounts Hackenberg has already started the "fix process" by working w/Jordan Palmer. So that's a plus. So the Jets CS per se don't really have to start from the beginning to build CH back up..Palmer already started that. Of course they can tweak some of those things if they want.. Regarding Shell..This could be a good case of the pundits putting most of their "scouting" emphasis on just the players final season (Hack too)..Shell was moved to LT this past season and was also coming off shoulder surgery in the spring, which no doubt slowed his ability to workout spring 2015, and by accounts "struggled" at LT..He was more comfortable and played better his previous seasons at RT, which Mcc has already stated is where they plan to play him. |
|
|
|
Post by RobR on May 1, 2016 12:56:51 GMT -5
No comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by crossfire on May 1, 2016 13:16:01 GMT -5
Two excellent posts. I agree that the coaching staff definitely bet on itself. Could they fail? Of course. But I sure like the idea of a front office, scouting department and coaching staff that believes In itself.
I have to admit, I wasn't initially in on the Hack pick. But I also wasn't totally on board for the Lynch pick either. I thought both had potential but neither was a sure thing. Unlike some, I did not want to move way up to get Lynch. Too much risk. But like I have always said, I'm no draft genius and if Mac and the scouting department felt it was the right thing to do, I would have hoped for the best.
We all heard that the coaching staff liked Hackenberg so I tried to read as much and watch as much as I could regarding him. And there is a lot out there regarding him. Bad and good. Both well deserved.
But I came away feeling pretty good about him. I like the fact that he took responsibility for everything, including things that were out of his control. He didn't bitch, moan and complain. And in the shitty situation he was in at Penn State, that would have been very easy. Personally I think he made the right and wrong decision by going to Penn State. He got to play under O'Brien and thrived in a pro system.
But then the shit hit the fan. The sanctions and the new coaching staff. The team went to shit. The coaching staff even messed with Hackenberg's footwork. Being the good soldier, he did what he was told. His footwork went from very good to awful. He got flat-footed and even the easiest throws looked terrible. Again, he never pointed the finger at anyone. He took full responsibility.
When he decided to enter the draft, he started working with Palmer. He even went so far as to rent a house down the road from him. And as cmart said, he began the process of correcting all of the bad habits he got into. He difference in his combine and pro day we're night and day.
Is he "fixed"? I think it's a process. But to me, the good news is that he had good habits and was asked to change. He didn't handle those changes well but it's not like he slipped into them, he was asked to change those changes made him look uncomfortable. Add to that an offensive line that was more porous than the Titanic and it was a recipe for disaster.
But this kid has a damn good head on his shoulders. Well, at least in my opinion. Do I think he can fail? Of course. I think anyone can fail and he has shown people why he can fail. But he has also shown why he can succeed.
I have been a Jets fan since the Joe Willie days and there hasn't' been a lot of good QB play on the Jets. We've had some good QB play but there certainly hasn't been a franchise QB since Joe.
I love the makeup of this kid and really think he can fix the problems. And if he does, he checks all the other boxes needed to be very good.
Am I looking at this with the rose colored glasses of a fan? Yes, to a degree, I am. But that's not really like me. I'm not a pessimist by nature but this team has taught me to expect the worst and hope for better. So for me to have a good feeling about a Jets QB is rare.
Let's all hope Mac looks like a genius for this pick. If he does, the fortunes of this franchise could be on the rise.
|
|
|
|
Post by beerfish on May 2, 2016 12:15:13 GMT -5
Seemed like a the quiet mans version of a Rex/Tanny draft to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by crossfire on May 3, 2016 15:39:58 GMT -5
There was one particular comment from Mac that I found interesting. He said that they had a 4th round grade on Shell. Because of that and that they expected a compensatory 4th in next years draft, he was willing to trade a 2017 4th for a 2016 5th.
But I think sometimes we look at the mocks and read the reports and we place a guy in a certain round of the draft based on that. Then we deem picks good or bad because they were picked before or after where the consensus of mocks places them.
But in reality, certain teams may have player ranked much higher or lower than we think.
|
|
|
|
Post by RobR on May 3, 2016 18:00:41 GMT -5
There was one particular comment from Mac that I found interesting. He said that they had a 4th round grade on Shell. Because of that and that they expected a compensatory 4th in next years draft, he was willing to trade a 2017 4th for a 2016 5th. But I think sometimes we look at the mocks and read the reports and we place a guy in a certain round of the draft based on that. Then we deem picks good or bad because they were picked before or after where the consensus of mocks places them. But in reality, certain teams may have player ranked much higher or lower than we think. He obviously had a 4th round or maybe even higher grade on the player, that goes without saying. I'm not sure why counting on a comp pick next year makes any difference. I'd rather have two fourth rounders instead of a fourth and a fifth. Hopefully Shell turns into player but trading higher picks for lower picks is never a good idea for asset management. Who's to say when next years fourth round pick comes on the clock they wouldn't have had someone with a second or third round grade. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2016 8:28:05 GMT -5
There was one particular comment from Mac that I found interesting. He said that they had a 4th round grade on Shell. Because of that and that they expected a compensatory 4th in next years draft, he was willing to trade a 2017 4th for a 2016 5th. But I think sometimes we look at the mocks and read the reports and we place a guy in a certain round of the draft based on that. Then we deem picks good or bad because they were picked before or after where the consensus of mocks places them. But in reality, certain teams may have player ranked much higher or lower than we think. He obviously had a 4th round or maybe even higher grade on the player, that goes without saying. I'm not sure why counting on a comp pick next year makes any difference. I'd rather have two fourth rounders instead of a fourth and a fifth. Hopefully Shell turns into player but trading higher picks for lower picks is never a good idea for asset management. Who's to say when next years fourth round pick comes on the clock they wouldn't have had someone with a second or third round grade. You also have to consider the basic concept of negotiating, the Skins were in a position of power b/c by all accounts the Jets were the one who wanted to make the trade. So making the move was going to cost the Jets a little bit more. |
|
|
|
Post by Peebag on May 4, 2016 15:02:34 GMT -5
This draft will always be judged by the Hackenberg pick - if he's a quality starter, it's a good draft.
|
|
|
|
Post by rangerous on May 5, 2016 5:32:17 GMT -5
of course the success of this year's and last year's drafts will be decided by the coaching staff's ability to get these guys ready to play. imo it just seems that maccagnan is looking for solid players and doesn't have any throwaway picks. i also think that bowles seems to be more of a teacher coach than rex ever could be. he's more like mangini in that department. it also seems like the jets staff is more professional in their whole demeanor, attitude, motivation, etc. bowles sent the team a couple of serious messages last season first by not using genot after he was ready to play and then cutting couples. obviously we'll see over the course of this season and the next if the bowles way. this team can win now with good qb play and barring injury. finally one way to judge how a team is playing is be looking at the injuries. teams that have low injury rates are typically those that are not only well trained in technique but also those whose players are motivated and want to play.
|
|
|
|
Post by beerfish on May 5, 2016 10:47:25 GMT -5
This draft will always be judged by the Hackenberg pick - if he's a quality starter, it's a good draft. Dude....hey where is your boy Cook? Oh....he's wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy down there!  |
|
|
|
Post by Paradis on May 5, 2016 11:05:24 GMT -5
Amidst a half dozen uninspiring picks - is the one polirizing selection of Hackenberg. Which of course this regime is married to now moving forward...
All I care about at this point, is at least handling his development properly. That starts with a redshirt year and keeping Geno on board.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peebag on May 5, 2016 13:16:44 GMT -5
This draft will always be judged by the Hackenberg pick - if he's a quality starter, it's a good draft. Dude....hey where is your boy Cook? Oh....he's wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy down there! Wouldn't you feel better had they gotten a starter with the 2nd round pick and put 4th round pick on Cook?
I know I would.... 
|
|
|
|
Post by jetstream23 on May 5, 2016 16:00:33 GMT -5
I like Hack in Rd 2 more than taking Lynch in Rd 1.
I'm also happy that we've completely rebooted the LB position over the past two drafts. Maudlin, Lee and Jenkins could be fixtures for 10 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by maury77 on May 8, 2016 14:00:17 GMT -5
Even if Hackenberg stinks, if the team can eventually call Lee, Jenkins, Burris and Shell decent to good starters, it is a successful draft.
|
|
