very low standards of what to expect out of tight ends. Other than maybe 2 solid seasons of Jeremy Shockey the Giants haven't had a truly talented tight end in recent memory. Boss and Ballard were not nearly as good as most of us think they were (and in hindsight, perhaps Shockey wasn't either).
I think the Giants are overdue to actually go out on the limb and try to acquire a legitimate TE who can be a consistent difference maker on offense. I think they attempted to do that a couple seasons back with trying to bring in Tony Gonzalez and I think that's what they're attempting to do now with Bennett, who seems to have a lot of potential.
Maybe Tom Coughlin isn't ready to move on from Jake Ballard, but Jerry Reese is (or at least he was willing to risk losing him), and I'll primarily trust Reese over Coughlin when it comes to these kind of personnel decisions. I agree on principal that we have to move forward - I'm exhausted with this team settling for "serviceable" players at the TE position. Let's roll the dice and try to get a real playmaker in here.
Last year at this time, many here laughed at the dirth at TE
I think the "waived injured" gentleman's agreement was "violated" and really pissed off Reese and TC.
That said, we have(at this point) Bennett, Pascoe and Hopkins. Is ANYONE really worried about the TE position, esp. with Pope?
Lets's see who he has coached up: Stephen Alexander, Ben Coates, Shiancoe, Shockey(blocking), Boss, Ballard, etc...Not worried in the least and I'm rather certain neither is Eli
"mistake" may be too strong of a word, it was a "calculated risk" as TC said. I take that to mean, it was worth the risk and potential loss of player to do it rather than eliminate somebody else from the roster.
Now you could argue it may have been a mistake if there were more "worthy" cuts than Ballard, IMO, but perhaps the Giants/Reese/Coughlin did not feel it was worth risking a HEALTHY player that can provide for the team THIS YEAR for a player that there are a lot of what if's around, but knew that he definately would not play this year.
That being said, I feel like we have this discussion about something similar every year, and the same people speak in absolutes every year as if they know exactly what the future holds. And every year, those same people tend to look kind of foolish for doing so. And then they do it again the next time.
look on the Mini-camp updates thread it seems that Coughlin may not have been happy or completely on-board with the risk and is certainly upset at the outcome.
It's absolutely not some lock he can get Bennett straight and there's not much reason to think he's going to make Pascoe and Beckum any better than what they've shown themselves to be (not very good to tolerable quality).
For all we know, Hopkins isn't anything but another Darcy Johnson.
actually, if you look at my posts earlier on this thread, I have no problem with losing Ballard. I appreciate what he did here last season, but it's not like we're losing an All Pro. Our only disagreement is over Sintim. We'll see what does this year, but I'm not very confident in regards to him.
There is solid evidence year in, year out that the system in working.
Shockey goes down, Boss steps in.
Boss leaves, Ballard steps in.
Plaxico gone, Smith breaks Giants records.
Smith hurts himself, Cruz tops Smith.
It happens every year. Now I'm not saying I'm counting on an unknown to come in and do it again, but I trust that the front office does have what they feel to be a solid contingency plan. That's why we're always drafting talent. Additionally, that's why we brought in Bennett, which makes the handwringing a little more perplexing.
But damn, people, we've won two Superbowls while making all of these "mistakes".
Something is working.
Additionally, I think it's important to continue to remember
that Ballard would have actually cleared waivers if he got pass the Pats (if I understand correctly). The plan almost worked. Even if he was healthy the Patriots would have absolutely no place for Ballard on their roster - they picked him up just because they could. It was definitely a dick move by the Pats imo . . . they gain nothing from this.
He may get cut during training camp, I don't know.
But I don't feel like I've personally seen enough of him (partly because he's been injured for two years) to make a decision on him for myself as a fan.
I do know that Reese said he brought him in specifically to be in 3rd down pass rushing situations, and I do remember seeing him come in on 3rd down against Dallas his rookie year in '09 and make a huge sack on Tony Romo. Eric discounted that as an "unblocked" sack, but that lessens the fact that perhaps they had so many passrushers in there that it created a mismatch that Sintim was able to use his speed to get to Romo before he knew what hit him. I saw that play in person, as I was sitting in the endzone that it happened in. Perhaps they like him as a mismatch in those situations.
That's really the only play that stands out in memory of Sintim, to me. It was a pretty good one to have. Perhaps they want him back to create more speed mismatches like that. I guess Eric doesn't like "unblocked sacks" or devalues them for some reason.
You can't admit that Reese could make a mistake? Just because the Giants have won two Super Bowls in the last five years means management never makes mistakes? I suppose the three season in between in which the Giants only made the playoffs once and lost was all part of the plan to win a Super Bowl in 2011, so no mistakes were made then either.
Reese is not infallible. He makes mistakes. Every GM does. You don't judge them on their mistakes, you judge them on their successes, but that doesn't mean they are above criticism for their mistakes.
And, of course, the Giants will replace him. Everyone gets replaced. It doesn't mean they are replaced with someone better.
That is the only play Sintim has made that I have any memory of. I hope he does get better, but I just can't say I see that happening as of right now. This is the last year of his contract, though. So, this is the last chance he has to do i here.
I suspect we miscalculated the probability of Ballard getting picked up.
That sucks - more for emotional reasons than football ones. We were already without him this year, and his knee was severely messed up. There's no guarantee he'll be the Ballard we had earlier in the year. Ballard's attempts to run on the sideline in the Super Bowl will always be remembered, but he's replaceable on the field.
When I was bummed about Smith, just like this year that I'm bummed about Ballard, I'm going to let it play out and trust that this organization is going to be able to adjust and move on.
Even if he was healthy the Patriots would have absolutely no place for Ballard on their roster - they picked him up just because they could. It was definitely a dick move by the Pats imo . . . they gain nothing from this.
You make no sense. None of what you said is true. How is it a dick move according to your logic if they gain nothing from it?
Think! According to you, the Patriots gain nothing, and yet they are willing to pay a guy $540K to sit in a hot tub all year and count against their salary cap. Why? So that in 2013 he can be a free agent and then return to the Giants? How is that dicking the Giants? You just saved them $540K in cap room and they still get the player back they want in 2013.
is not making sure a guy who can't play this year is locked into a spot on the team, I think we'll be alright.
How is that a mistake by any stretch of the imagination? If anything, we didn't remain loyal to a guy who gave his all to perform in the SB, but from a roster makeup standpoint, it is the right thing to do.
The Giants wanted to keep Ballard.
They knew he couldn't play in 2012 and so did every other team so they figured that nobody would have the foresight to claim a guy destined for IR and pay him $540K just so that they would own his rights for 2013.
But Belichick had that kind of foresight. Props to him.
every story about this the Patriots did the exact same thing to Denver in 2010 when Denver waived/injured safety Josh Barrett.
There was no ax to grind really with Denver - even though they had not the greatest history there.
The Pats just thought it was a good move and they did it. The Giants took a risk and lost and when you take a risk and lose then yes it's a mistake.
If Reese had this to do over again, maybe he cuts selvish capers - he's used to it, or one of the other players in the 75 - 90 spots on the roster who don't have NFL game experience and probably never will get it. But that's just my speculation. I'd love to hear Reese's comments on this in a transparent moment
And how is Josh Barrett working out for the Patriots?
wanted to keep Boss, but not at such a high salary. The same with Smith.
Reese has defined his career here by making many decisions not based on loyalty to past accomplishments, but to the current economic situation and roster makeup.
The results have shown him to be correct most of the time.
Those calling this a mistake are probably the same ones who screamed about losing Smith and Boss. We couldn't possibly win without those two key components, right?
was awful and then got hurt, but it's kind of irrelevant to my point.
Like Eric says, if we're to assume, and it is an assumption, the Giants wanted Ballard back in 2013 then this was a mistake. There is no debate really. The Giants cannot get Ballard back in 2013 unless the Pats cut him, which is possible, but probably not likely.
If you hit on 17 when the dealer has a 6 showing, it's a mistake. Just because you draw a 4 and win the hand, doesn't mean it wasn't the wrong play at the time, it just means you got lucky.
Sometimes it's better to be lucky than smart, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't strive to be smart. You can't count on luck.
Like Eric says, if we're to assume, and it is an assumption, the Giants wanted Ballard back in 2013 then this was a mistake. There is no debate really
If the Giants wanted Ballard back and he isn't available, it is a calculated risk, otherwise they wouldn't have made him available to begin with. They would have Cruz'ed him for this year.
Calling it a mistake or calling it a prudent move not knowing what future impact Ballard will have either here or elsewhere is not just a blind guess, it is laughable.
It was a similar situation. Belichick thought he'd show off his remarkable "foresight" (according to Milton) by snatching Barrett from the Broncos, letting him sit on IR for a year, and then having him when he was back and "healthy" the next year.
I'm sure the Bronco's fans were pissed that they took the risk, but now, two years removed, I'm not so sure they are too worried about it, know what I mean?
And that's why I'm saying we have to let all of this play out and we won't know if it was a "mistake" or not until at the very least, 2013.
Like any move, it's a calculation based upon the likelihood of things transpiring.
That's not a mistake. That's randomness.
Mistake calls into question knowing the end result. If Ballard never plays again, it's not a mistake. If Ballard would have been beaten out by Bennet and Robinson, then it's not a mistake.
Mistakes require ex post knowledge.
Just because people wish it didn't happen does not mean it's a mistake.
are different. Reese fully expected other teams to make them offers, he set a value, and wasn't going off that number (and in Smith's case apparently didn't get a chance to).
But in the case of Ballard - and to be clear I was one saying it isn't a huge loss - I believe Reese fully expected he wouldn't get claimed and would be on IR.
It is my opinion Reese was wrong. I was not critical of the Smith or Boss decisions at the time. Those were business decisions.
I don't see why that's a big deal to say someone was wrong or made a mistake - it has nothing to do with forests or trees.
By some of your logic then 2nd round pick Clint Sintim wasn't a mistake - people critical of it just can't see the forest through the trees and don't understand the big picture. Reese is right more than wrong and that contributes to the Giants status, but to not criticize him when he's wrong is too far extreme the other way.
The Giants overcame that mistake and won a Super Bowl, but it was still probably a mistake.
they played the percentages - they had to expose him to do what they wanted - 9 times out of 10 it probably works - Little Bill was watching and waiting though - and he grabbed
Not sure what he grabbed - but his percentages told him to take the risk he took
We have much more information on Sintim to evaluate on whether or not his pick was a "mistake".
We have no idea what's going to happen with Ballard.
His knee was shredded.
Given further information, you can start to claim it was a mistake. At this point, you're claiming it's a mistake based upon one possibility (of many) occurring.
Again, Diehl knows it's a mistake because he sees the end result.
If Ballard never plays again, was it a mistake?
Again, the mistake could happen. It's far too early to determine if it is one. It could end up helping the Giants, allowing them to keep one more player, and not paying his salary.
It may not be, but it's based on info. that we don't have at the moment (i.e., his medical reports).
totally agree gidie, the benfit of hindsight tells me it was a mistake
thing people are ignoring here is that there is no hindsight until Ballard is able to make a meaningful contribution.
It isn't hindsight that he was claimed, it was a calculated risk, both on the part of the Giants for leaving him exposed and by the Pats for claiming him.
The hindsight part won't come into play for at least a year.
Reese did say this was very rare re losing an injured
player like this. It didn't work out, but to me a calculated risk, based on huge sample sizes, well worth taking. I don't call that a mistake when your experience says the odds of losing are overwhelmingly in your favor, imo
I think the Giants are overdue to actually go out on the limb and try to acquire a legitimate TE who can be a consistent difference maker on offense. I think they attempted to do that a couple seasons back with trying to bring in Tony Gonzalez and I think that's what they're attempting to do now with Bennett, who seems to have a lot of potential.
Maybe Tom Coughlin isn't ready to move on from Jake Ballard, but Jerry Reese is (or at least he was willing to risk losing him), and I'll primarily trust Reese over Coughlin when it comes to these kind of personnel decisions. I agree on principal that we have to move forward - I'm exhausted with this team settling for "serviceable" players at the TE position. Let's roll the dice and try to get a real playmaker in here.
I think the "waived injured" gentleman's agreement was "violated" and really pissed off Reese and TC.
That said, we have(at this point) Bennett, Pascoe and Hopkins. Is ANYONE really worried about the TE position, esp. with Pope?
Lets's see who he has coached up: Stephen Alexander, Ben Coates, Shiancoe, Shockey(blocking), Boss, Ballard, etc...Not worried in the least and I'm rather certain neither is Eli
Now you could argue it may have been a mistake if there were more "worthy" cuts than Ballard, IMO, but perhaps the Giants/Reese/Coughlin did not feel it was worth risking a HEALTHY player that can provide for the team THIS YEAR for a player that there are a lot of what if's around, but knew that he definately would not play this year.
That being said, I feel like we have this discussion about something similar every year, and the same people speak in absolutes every year as if they know exactly what the future holds. And every year, those same people tend to look kind of foolish for doing so. And then they do it again the next time.
Mistake is way too strong given that we're discussing a guy who can't even play until NEXT season and we haven't even started the 2012 season yet.
Like, really? Serious?
It's absolutely not some lock he can get Bennett straight and there's not much reason to think he's going to make Pascoe and Beckum any better than what they've shown themselves to be (not very good to tolerable quality).
For all we know, Hopkins isn't anything but another Darcy Johnson.
Might not translate into much this coming year, but beyond who knows.
TC and Reese, by all indications, make all these decisions together.
Shockey goes down, Boss steps in.
Boss leaves, Ballard steps in.
Plaxico gone, Smith breaks Giants records.
Smith hurts himself, Cruz tops Smith.
It happens every year. Now I'm not saying I'm counting on an unknown to come in and do it again, but I trust that the front office does have what they feel to be a solid contingency plan. That's why we're always drafting talent. Additionally, that's why we brought in Bennett, which makes the handwringing a little more perplexing.
But damn, people, we've won two Superbowls while making all of these "mistakes".
Something is working.
But I don't feel like I've personally seen enough of him (partly because he's been injured for two years) to make a decision on him for myself as a fan.
I do know that Reese said he brought him in specifically to be in 3rd down pass rushing situations, and I do remember seeing him come in on 3rd down against Dallas his rookie year in '09 and make a huge sack on Tony Romo. Eric discounted that as an "unblocked" sack, but that lessens the fact that perhaps they had so many passrushers in there that it created a mismatch that Sintim was able to use his speed to get to Romo before he knew what hit him. I saw that play in person, as I was sitting in the endzone that it happened in. Perhaps they like him as a mismatch in those situations.
That's really the only play that stands out in memory of Sintim, to me. It was a pretty good one to have. Perhaps they want him back to create more speed mismatches like that. I guess Eric doesn't like "unblocked sacks" or devalues them for some reason.
Reese is not infallible. He makes mistakes. Every GM does. You don't judge them on their mistakes, you judge them on their successes, but that doesn't mean they are above criticism for their mistakes.
And, of course, the Giants will replace him. Everyone gets replaced. It doesn't mean they are replaced with someone better.
What if Ballard never suits up again, then what?
Was letting Steve Smith and Kevin Boss go a mistake last year? I'm sure you were calling it one. How's that working out, now?
That sucks - more for emotional reasons than football ones. We were already without him this year, and his knee was severely messed up. There's no guarantee he'll be the Ballard we had earlier in the year. Ballard's attempts to run on the sideline in the Super Bowl will always be remembered, but he's replaceable on the field.
Think! According to you, the Patriots gain nothing, and yet they are willing to pay a guy $540K to sit in a hot tub all year and count against their salary cap. Why? So that in 2013 he can be a free agent and then return to the Giants? How is that dicking the Giants? You just saved them $540K in cap room and they still get the player back they want in 2013.
How is that a mistake by any stretch of the imagination? If anything, we didn't remain loyal to a guy who gave his all to perform in the SB, but from a roster makeup standpoint, it is the right thing to do.
They knew he couldn't play in 2012 and so did every other team so they figured that nobody would have the foresight to claim a guy destined for IR and pay him $540K just so that they would own his rights for 2013.
But Belichick had that kind of foresight. Props to him.
There was no ax to grind really with Denver - even though they had not the greatest history there.
The Pats just thought it was a good move and they did it. The Giants took a risk and lost and when you take a risk and lose then yes it's a mistake.
If Reese had this to do over again, maybe he cuts selvish capers - he's used to it, or one of the other players in the 75 - 90 spots on the roster who don't have NFL game experience and probably never will get it. But that's just my speculation. I'd love to hear Reese's comments on this in a transparent moment
Are the Giants bummed? Yes. I have a feeling Ballard was in there long-term plans.
Is this a mistake? Who the hell knows. Saying one way or the other is simply wrong.
Reese has defined his career here by making many decisions not based on loyalty to past accomplishments, but to the current economic situation and roster makeup.
The results have shown him to be correct most of the time.
Those calling this a mistake are probably the same ones who screamed about losing Smith and Boss. We couldn't possibly win without those two key components, right?
Like Eric says, if we're to assume, and it is an assumption, the Giants wanted Ballard back in 2013 then this was a mistake. There is no debate really. The Giants cannot get Ballard back in 2013 unless the Pats cut him, which is possible, but probably not likely.
Some people just can't see the forest for the trees.
Sometimes it's better to be lucky than smart, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't strive to be smart. You can't count on luck.
If the Giants wanted Ballard back and he isn't available, it is a calculated risk, otherwise they wouldn't have made him available to begin with. They would have Cruz'ed him for this year.
Calling it a mistake or calling it a prudent move not knowing what future impact Ballard will have either here or elsewhere is not just a blind guess, it is laughable.
I'm sure the Bronco's fans were pissed that they took the risk, but now, two years removed, I'm not so sure they are too worried about it, know what I mean?
And that's why I'm saying we have to let all of this play out and we won't know if it was a "mistake" or not until at the very least, 2013.
2012 Injured cannot play
2013 will play at a reduced physical capacity
2014 back to 100 % ( again this is if he heals well)
That's not a mistake. That's randomness.
Mistake calls into question knowing the end result. If Ballard never plays again, it's not a mistake. If Ballard would have been beaten out by Bennet and Robinson, then it's not a mistake.
Mistakes require ex post knowledge.
Just because people wish it didn't happen does not mean it's a mistake.
But in the case of Ballard - and to be clear I was one saying it isn't a huge loss - I believe Reese fully expected he wouldn't get claimed and would be on IR.
It is my opinion Reese was wrong. I was not critical of the Smith or Boss decisions at the time. Those were business decisions.
I don't see why that's a big deal to say someone was wrong or made a mistake - it has nothing to do with forests or trees.
By some of your logic then 2nd round pick Clint Sintim wasn't a mistake - people critical of it just can't see the forest through the trees and don't understand the big picture. Reese is right more than wrong and that contributes to the Giants status, but to not criticize him when he's wrong is too far extreme the other way.
The Giants overcame that mistake and won a Super Bowl, but it was still probably a mistake.
And you know what, it was a mistake.
Not sure what he grabbed - but his percentages told him to take the risk he took
We have no idea what's going to happen with Ballard.
His knee was shredded.
Given further information, you can start to claim it was a mistake. At this point, you're claiming it's a mistake based upon one possibility (of many) occurring.
If Ballard never plays again, was it a mistake?
Again, the mistake could happen. It's far too early to determine if it is one. It could end up helping the Giants, allowing them to keep one more player, and not paying his salary.
It may not be, but it's based on info. that we don't have at the moment (i.e., his medical reports).
Hypothetical none of us know the answer to, but:
If Reese knew the Pats were going to claim Ballard would he still waive him? If the answer is no, then waiving him was a mistake.
If he is claimed, but can never play again, is that a mistake?
Again, it may be a mistake. Far too early to tell.
It isn't hindsight that he was claimed, it was a calculated risk, both on the part of the Giants for leaving him exposed and by the Pats for claiming him.
The hindsight part won't come into play for at least a year.
Let's revisit this either later this season or 2013.
right now, based only on the facts of today it was a mistake IMO.
Not a huge one and absolutely the Giants can win the SB this year or next year or the following year - despite this mistake.
"Reese great? You mean like in losing Ballard?" Book it