Chatter intensifies of a Myles Jack slide

I just saw this. I don't know what to make of it.

If we somehow come away with Myles Jack in this draft without trading up would be huge.

I wouldn't even mind trading with the Browns at 8.

But, if we come away with Jack, Alonso and Maxwell , well I think you gotta tip your hat to Tannenbaum.

 

I agree it would a steal to get Jack too.

 

He could fall to us. Several mocks have him falling. The injury is what are making teams very cautious and honestly, I'd be as well. He's a great talent, but the injury could be a problem. That sucks.

 

Here's my problem with this scenario, if Jack slid to 13, then that means there IS an injury issue, because all teams have access to injury details.

I'm not gonna lie, his talent makes you want to draft him, but you also have to worry about drafting someone who isn't what he was, especially that high in the 1st.

That is the type of decision I would hate to have in a war room.

 

I don't believe it either. He might drop to eight, Giants might be trying to pull off huge smokescreen.

 

Jack is the type of player, you take however you can get him. Trade up? Do it. He falls to 13, do it.

He's worth the risk.

 

I agree Fin, if he's there at 13, go for it..I won't hold it against them.

 

Boomer said on our show this week that he feels the injury concerns are somewhat overblown and wouldn't be surprised if some teams are hyping the knee issues in an attempt to get Jack to drop.

 

Welp...too big of a gamble for me...we already have a couple of injury prone linebackers in Misi and Kiko, not really trying to pull off the trifecta with Jack and that knee.

 

Until his career ends in 3 years.

 

I actually think we will draft him. I was wondering this morning who the most injured player was cause that is who we would draft. I was actually going to post that we would draft Jack.

 

Yep - I'd hate to have to make the call on this one too if he fell to us at #13.

We need players to come in and compete; not sit on the bench and treatment table. I like the Ozzie Newsome philosophy of not taking risks on your Rd 1 pick.

But then again he is a great prospect.

Tough one.

 

Today's medical capabilities.. I'd take him. We have Jelani Jenkins another year. If getting surgery this year makes the rest of his career a healthier one, just have him do it. Kid is gonna be a monster. We aren't winning the SB this year anyways. If we have to stash him a year the team would be better off.

 

Quick question for everyone. How many linebackers on the planet would you rather have covering Gronk and Charles Clay? If you really think about it, I bet the number is very low.

 

Conversely, how many LBs do you want with degenerative knee issues? If by the time we are ready to compete he is a shell of himself, what good was he?

Jack has now come out and admitted he does have a degenerative knee issue, this should now be a doctors decision, if a Dr says his knee may be shredded in 4 years, then you have to pass.

 

Honestly, the intent from all the interviews ive seen and heard from jack shows me no reason he wants to ball in the nfl for a long time and be great while hes doing it. While his knee may be an issue there is nothing but upside from every other aspect of his game, i might be crazy or brilliant but grabbing jack then using a later round pick on jaylon smith could mean one of the best LB cores every built... and young too.

 

I do agree that you need to trust your doctors. If they say his speed is gone, or they think he will be out of the league in four years passing on him is probably a wise decision.

Just out of curiosity, and I really have no idea what the correct answer is, but do you think that general managers get spooked by what other teams do? For instance, let's just say (purely for argument's sake) that our team doctors give him a clean bill of health and expect a full recovery, but Jack slides all the way to 13. Do you think that GMs will start to question their own doctors and will assume that other teams doctors know something they don't or fear being the GM that took the guy that everyone said stay away from? Or do you guys think that GMs leave the decisions in the hands of the doctors?

 

Let's say this is not smokescreens and teams' doctors are really worried about the knee, would you take Jack in the 30's in the first?

If yes, take him at 13.

 

Do y'all think he would really say his knee was degenerating right before the draft?

So he is going from top-LB in the draft to dropping to the 30s because of a tweet? Has he met with many teams/doctors/scouts before now that thought he was the shiz? Yes.

 

I'm not sure I follow you. Why would you pick him at #13, if you could get him at #35 instead? The price is significantly cheaper.

 

Yeah, you're not following, but that's probably my fault.

People are worried about Jack's knee. So, hypothetically, lets say you were one of the teams picking in the 30's IN THE FIRST ROUND.....and he's there....would you take him?

If you say yes to that, then you should be ok taking him at 13.

Basically, if you're willing to spend a first round pick on him (even in the 30's) then you should be willing to spend a 13 as the chance of success for a player in between the Pick 11 of Round 1 and the Top 10 Spots of Round 2, aren't all that dramatically different.

 

Curious what supports this?

 

Observation.

 

I'm sorry but I am tired of Miami drafting talent that can't step on the field year 1 because of an injury. I want an instant starter with that pick

 

I think a wild card at 13 for us could be Ryan Kelly. We have got to have O line help but I couldn't pass on Elliott if he is available at 13. I would also be happy if we could pull off Jack/Heargraves at 13 and pick up Derrick Henry in the 2nd.

 

Here's some data using all draft picks from 1996-2008:
http://archive.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2009/04/career-success-by-draft-order.html

There's a meaningful difference, especially in terms of the average time the player starts in the NFL (~4 vs. ~3 years), though less so in terms of probability of becoming a Pro Bowler (once you're outside top 15 first round), but whether you call it "dramatically" different or not is up to the observer.

 

The main issue I have with that data is that there's no accounting for the difference between pre and post rookie caps.

 

Not sure there's been enough time (since 2011) to really evaluate that.

 

Why would that affect the distribution of talent?

 

There are plenty of good picks we could make at #13, to add to Maxwell & Alonso.. Jack may need microfracture surgery... Any scenario where we net 3 above average starters from one pick is worthy of hat tipping.

 

My favorite player in jack.Please happen.

 

I think it all depends on the GM, how much he trusts his Drs, and if he feels like he has the room to gamble, or just going on a gut feeling, but I think a little human nature crawls in there if other teams are passing you might wonder if your own Dr missed something, that's when it's good to have real solid relationships with other teams, like the Steelers and the Giants have, so you can call up those guys and get a real answer.

Edit; to clarify, when I say get a real answer, I mean a non BS answer, I wasn't implying you get THE answer, just a real opinion, or even access to their Drs notes, etc.

Shula had that type of relationship with a few people around the league, it's an edge, you get real info from different orgs, it just increases the depth and therefor quality, of the team knowledge, every little edge counts.

 

Good question.. didn't think of it when I posted. But if you think about it, there actually should be an effect on draft position because the salaries for rookies are now so low.

If the salary of a player is extremely high (as before the rookie wage cap) then you'd expect a different type of player to be drafted high than if the salary is low because the cost of failure is much higher. So I'd hypothesize (that's all this is right now) when enough time has passed we'll see: 1) more high risk/high reward players being taken higher in the draft, and 2) players at less "influential" positions being taken higher in the draft (i.e. teams should be more willing to take a great player at a lesser position high vs. a lesser talent at a more important position).

Is that what the data will eventually show? Not sure, but there should be an effect of the now lower potential cost of failure on who gets picked where.

 

I think its pretty crazy that you of all people, who has been on a tireless quest to get people to understand cost and return on players, is now acting liken the difference between $68 million rookie deals and a rookie cap doesn't change drafting strategy.

 

Less gambles were taken on non-QBs then because of the deals that would need to be signed. Teams often went safe, like olineman or RBs. Changing the rookie salary changed the game.

 

Alright boys...lets throw some **** at this....

Do you take Jack if hes there at 42?

Do you trade up in the 2nd to take Jack? If a trade up - who's the competition we have to beat for him?

 

Wouldn't trade, but if he makes it to us I would go for it at this point. The risk/reward for me would catch up at this point. Still, there are some really concerning things said about how his knee is just a time bomb.

Otherwise, gotta think CB though a bit of a run on them makes the position thin. Alexander hanging around however. DT with the Bama pair, or sticking with Bama, Derek Henry (though not personally a fan for our team). Kevin Dodd or Emanuel Ogbah for pass rush are possibles. I would say stack that DL, tackle or end.