for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Fennelly: Draftniks Don't Understand Giants Draft Philosophy

gidiefor : Mod : 2/22/2013 10:39 am
Story Linked Below:
Link - ( New Window )
he's right  
Victor in CT : 2/22/2013 10:43 am : link
.
this is a pretty big draft  
Neverend : 2/22/2013 10:44 am : link
more so than recent years. as much as i love guys like tyler eifert or that ultra quick kid at wr, cordalle patterson, id be hellaciously pissed if they go that direction. this team needs reinforcements on D or the oline
We'd all like to think we know.  
Ten Ton Hammer : 2/22/2013 10:46 am : link
We don't.
OL, DL, LB, CB  
Spark Em Up 22 : 2/22/2013 10:46 am : link
Any other position taken in this draft is a waste
Spark  
Sy'56 : 2/22/2013 10:49 am : link
Thats a silly strategy. Think about it.
Reese has said time and time again it's not strictly BPA..  
GP : 2/22/2013 10:50 am : link
it is a combination of BPA and need.
So there philosophy is BPA  
jeff57 : 2/22/2013 10:50 am : link
What team's isn't?
Obviously....  
rptl530 : 2/22/2013 10:51 am : link
to predetermine which positions you are going to select is silly but let's face this fact.

In premium rounds the pick 9 times out of 10 fills a need area. They can spin it that that player was BPA and we'd never know the difference since we don't have access to their board.

Pretty damn big coincidence that the BPA always matches need though.
Sound and fury, signifying nothing.  
Klaatu : 2/22/2013 10:52 am : link
Ross filled a need. So did KP and Nicks. And rookies may not start, but they often see significant amounts of playing time.
It's not fully BPA  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/22/2013 10:52 am : link
They take a lot of things into account. People who reduce it to bumpersticker type slogans are people to ignore.
The rookies not starting thing is Coughlin's, not Reese's  
jeff57 : 2/22/2013 10:56 am : link
And really has nothing to do with draft philosophy.
I always laugh when I see  
ITaLiRiCaN : 2/22/2013 10:57 am : link
a mock draft having the Giants selecting a tight end with their first round pick. Hasn't happened since 02.
Sounds good but  
TMS : 2/22/2013 10:58 am : link
what about Nicks in 2009, Wilson in 2012. Were they the BPAs or need picks? Paul in 2010 and Prince in 2011 probably were.
This guy doesn't get it either  
BillT : 2/22/2013 10:59 am : link
"...sticking to GM Jerry Reese’s mantra to select the best available player on his board." I call BS.

Starting with EA's first draft and going on through Reese's drafts the Giants have used over 70% of their premium picks (rounds 1-3) on DL, DB and WR. 30 of 42 premium picks in those 3 positions (not counting the 2 #1's for Eli). That's what people don't get about the Giamts' draft strategy. They know where they want their talent and they draft BPA in those positions over 70% of the time.
For the Ross, KP, and Nicks picks  
Ten Ton Hammer : 2/22/2013 11:00 am : link
You can call them 'Need' picks every single bit as much as BPA picks.

They didn't just take Phillips because they needed a safety. He was legitimately the best player on pretty much every draft head's board.

They didn't just need a wide receiver. Nicks was a legitimately really good college prospect.

They didn't just need a CB. Ross was well thought of at his slot.
What Jerry Reese has said is that the Giants  
BigBlueBuff : 2/22/2013 11:01 am : link
take BPA. He has qualified it by saying that if two prospects are relatively equal then need will push them to one over the other. Over the years this has resulted in picks that seem suspiciously like need picks (Phillips, Ross, Nicks, Wilson) and a few that seem like purely BPA picks (JPP and Amukamura).

Personally, I would like purely BPA but I'm not an NFL GM with a full scouting department and a head coach in my ear either.
The Giants hadn't drafted a RB in round one since 2000.  
Klaatu : 2/22/2013 11:02 am : link
Then they drafted Wilson in the first round in 2012. I'll never say never again...about RB, TE, or most other positions.
i dont understand why people just dont understand  
Blue Blood : 2/22/2013 11:06 am : link
its not BPA vs NEED.. its a combination of both unless the player value is so very high you have to go with BPA as was the case with JPP who the Giants had rated as sixth on their board and Prince who most prognosticators had as a top ten pick and no lower than 13 and the #2 CB behind Peterson that year..

In the cases like Nicks.. sure there was a need a WR.. but the value was also there.. can you say that he wasnt a good value @ #29? no you cant.. he was VERY good value @ #29.. so there Value and Need matched well..

When you get into trouble is when you place need far above value... the danger there is drafting a player who might not be very good to plug a hole you have.
Interesting Debate  
Vegas Steve : 2/22/2013 11:20 am : link
Lets just say for point of discussion that Guard C. Womack is available at #19 and his draft grade is 9.2

Now lets say Lane Johnson is also available but his draft grade is 8.6

Will the giants select the guard who many believe is the best player in the draft or will they take the OLT.

While both are positions needs in this case I believe the giants would select the LT because it is a premium postion

They may also feel that they can get a very good guard later in the draft who is closer to starting than the developmental LT prospects they can nap later
I think they'd select Warmack  
jeff57 : 2/22/2013 11:23 am : link
Guard is also a position of need. Warmack has a better chance of being an allpro than Johnson. Could be the best guard to come around in a long time.
Of course Reese looks to strike a balance between need and BPA.  
Klaatu : 2/22/2013 11:30 am : link
I didn't mean to imply that Ross, KP, and Nicks were strictly "need" picks. Sometimes, you just get lucky, and I've used the word "serendipity" many times when commenting on Reese's drafts.

We needed a CB in 2007 and Ross just happened to be there waiting for us. Still, you could make a case that Jon Beason was the BPA.

KP was a no-brainer, and an excellent example of serendipity. Nicks was too, for the most part, but in that 2009 draft the Sintim pick stands out as a huge, need-filling reach.
Agree with  
Mr. Nickels : 2/22/2013 12:42 pm : link
a combo of bpa/need

2012- David Wilson NEED pick
2011 - Prince - pure BPA
2010 - JPP BPA (according to us and we were right)
2009 - Nicks pure NEED pick
2008 - Kenny Phillips perfect combo need/bpa
2007- Aaron Ross pure NEED pick
2006- Kiwanuka not really sure either arguably bpa after a trade down but really was not the bpa, only a need if strahan retired but he didn't and tuck and osi both emerged
Coughlin just touched on it just now  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/22/2013 12:44 pm : link
essentially saying how they strive to match up great athelets at areas of need. There are a lot of considerations that go into this thing, people want simple answers that don't exist.
Does Fennelly get paid  
Blackbeard : 2/22/2013 1:04 pm : link
for spouting all this wisdom?
Talk about Mr. Obvious!
Rookies  
stretch234 : 2/22/2013 1:09 pm : link
Defensive rookies have always seen more playing time than offensive rookies here. Does it have something to do with a very complex Offensive system - probably. That is not going to change anytime soon with the Giants.
Reality  
Rjanyg : 2/22/2013 1:17 pm : link
In this day and age of the salary cap you need to hit on your early picks to hopefully be starters by year 2. With any luck, you get 4 or 5 by year 3. These players need to produce at an affordable salary. Look at the position the Giants are in now. We have uncertainty at several positions and are up against the cap with not enough money to sign our 3 RFA's, our draft picks let alone our Left Tackle, Tight End or MLB.

They should be looking for starters this year. Fluker at Right Tackle or Wormack for Left Guard in the first round.

That is the best way to get the most out of our first rounder this year.
So, if Matt Barkley is there at #19....  
PeterS : 2/22/2013 1:21 pm : link
...?

Now, what about successful rookie starters on other teams like the RB for the Redskins?

I just wish we could draft a defensive coordinator!
Warmack  
stretch234 : 2/22/2013 1:31 pm : link
He seems to be aure thing of being a real good player. Johnson has major questions if he can play LT in the NFL. If that is the case, I am taking Warmack.

I would still prefer to not draft OL at 19 and go DL
Best player available is the first filter  
JoeCabbie : 2/22/2013 1:50 pm : link
several players with very similar grades will form the best player available pool. From this group we will probably chose the player in the position of most need or value. But BPA is the first filter, so we do draft BPA.
It's been said that Wilson last year  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/22/2013 1:55 pm : link
wasn't the highest rated player on their board, so again, simple answers don't exist.
You can tell people don't understand the Jints draft philoshpy,  
jintsfan : 2/22/2013 1:57 pm : link
just look at all of the mock drafts posted here and the trade up, trade down, stay put posts. I guess it's find to do a mock draft but in reality the Jints have a plan and a draft board and that is what they stand by.
Sneakers  
JoeCabbie : 2/22/2013 1:59 pm : link
who in the know said Wilson didn't have top rating at the time?
I won't say  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/22/2013 2:03 pm : link
I'll let the people here choose to speak for themselves. I won't go so far as to say it was true, either.
As in  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/22/2013 2:03 pm : link
I'm not willing to vouch for it,
Garafolo was one of the guys who had it, IIRC.  
Riggies : 2/22/2013 2:04 pm : link
He and another reporter were ripped for saying so too by the people who cling to the incorrect notion that the Giants strictly draft BPA.
Riggies  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/22/2013 2:05 pm : link
I remember posters breaking that, and they knew it before the first round even started. They called the pick.
But even without that example  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/22/2013 2:06 pm : link
the simple outlook answers are nonsense.
I'm not talking about the Wilson pick itself, but the part where  
Riggies : 2/22/2013 2:08 pm : link
there was at least another player left higher on their board, BPA-wise, when they took him.

Garafolo said it, I think on Twitter, and he was hammered here and elsewhere for it, then another guy had the same tip and the same response happened.
Reese has stated numerous  
Brandon Walsh : 2/22/2013 2:08 pm : link
times that the Giants draft board has the players ranked in "Rows" not in a listed numerical order. Players in the same row have the same grade. If our pick comes up and the highest row has multiple players left, we will then address to fill an area of need, draft a premimum position (DE, WR, CB) or look to trade back (Kiwanuka in 2006).

An obvious case of a player being the only one left in his row unexpectley was Prince, he was the only one left in his row, hence the pure BPA pick.

With David Wilson last year, there have been reports there were four players in his row. Cordy Glenn, Reuben Randle were two of the three. Never heard the other. Its obvious the Giants at the time last year viewed running back as a higher need then WR and Oline, coupled with the face they saw an an opportunity to get a dynamic player at running back that they wouldnt have been able to get later in the draft.
Eric  
JoeCabbie : 2/22/2013 2:09 pm : link
called Wilson on here. That doesn't mean he didn't grade out comparable to the others.
The grade story was broken on here too  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/22/2013 2:12 pm : link
Either way, boiler plate "BPA" answers are just as silly as boilerplate "need" answers.

It's far more in depth than that.

And Coughlin talked just today about matching up athletes with positions at need.

The simple answers are just that, simplistic and not based in truth.
this is thread mostly regarding 1st round, IMO  
alligatorpie : 2/22/2013 2:40 pm : link
and maybe second round.

After that, value (vs the other hundreds of players) is much harder to gauge.

Later rounds are still interesting, maybe even more so, than the early rounds, since the equation becomes more complex, do to look for types that fit our team? Do you look for projects? Etc.

And, since BPA is more about first round, one ought to consider how players are slated in college, i.e. certain high quality types of players are typically put in certain positions at the college level, an equation that wont necessarily make for good strategy in the NFL, with the NFL's need to max out each and every position and more to choose from, player wise.

So, for example, you are more likely to find 1st round value at cornerback, than say, safety, since greater athletes are typically (not always) put in the first position rather than the second one, on a given college team.

That equation might be the case with guards, however, on the occasions that great athletes -are- playing at guard or center in college, if value is there, by all means take one.

But that does not mean, in any way shape or form, that the best college safety in the draft is worthy of the first round value, for example. So need rarely trumps BPA totally early.

This year it looks like we will find a great 'both' pick.
gatorpie - this comment makes no sense  
BlueLou : 2/22/2013 3:57 pm : link
Quote:
this is thread mostly regarding 1st round, IMO
alligatorpie : 2:40 pm
and maybe second round.

After that, value (vs the other hundreds of players) is much harder to gauge.


Because as the draft prolongs to later and later slots, there is far more chance that a prospect the Giants ranked on a higher tier falls to a slot where the alternative players available are on much lower tiers. Markus Kuhn was a good example last year: JR reported that the Giants had him valued as roughly a 4th round selection and he was under consideration at the slot where they drafted Mosley. By round 7, he must have been a rather obvious selection for them as the "BPA". And in fact and retrospect, he was a far better pick vis a vis immediate impact than either Mosley or McCants.
gatorpie - this comment makes no sense  
BlueLou : 2/22/2013 3:57 pm : link
Quote:
this is thread mostly regarding 1st round, IMO
alligatorpie : 2:40 pm
and maybe second round.

After that, value (vs the other hundreds of players) is much harder to gauge.


Because as the draft prolongs to later and later slots, there is far more chance that a prospect the Giants ranked on a higher tier falls to a slot where the alternative players available are on much lower tiers. Markus Kuhn was a good example last year: JR reported that the Giants had him valued as roughly a 4th round selection and he was under consideration at the slot where they drafted Mosley. By round 7, he must have been a rather obvious selection for them as the "BPA". And in fact and retrospect, he was a far better pick vis a vis immediate impact than either Mosley or McCants.
rjanyg  
stretch234 : 2/22/2013 4:12 pm : link
It is almost impossible to get 4 or 5 starters in a draft. For the simple reason it is hard to find players from the 3rd round on.

On another post I went through the so called best teams of drafting, in generally similar position to the Giants. From 07-10 GB managed to find 4 starters from those rounds in 4 years and they had the most. Balt had 3, Pitts had 2, NE had 1. About half the players picked in those rounds by the good teams were either on their 3rd or more team or out of the league.

The Giants had more players still on their team than the the others, but GB and Balt had better quality

The 1st 2 rounds are the key, as those are generally the guys receiving the second team contract
bluelou, just got back sorry for the delay  
alligatorpie : 2/22/2013 6:01 pm : link
I do agree that in your particular scenario, DT Kuhn falling very far from where we had him ranked, and still being on the board at our pick, the -decision- was an easy and a good one.

However, I was talking about -process- (what leads into a decision) and, in late rounds the process, also the general scenario, is much more complex because teams would not have been able to vet ALL the many prospects in the same depth that they have vetted the top 35 or so prospects, so the thinking would be more targeted in your scenario, or more ...strategic (who is the best kicker statistically?) or what have you. In other words, we would have less idea about what we are missing and also in a sense more room to think about factors other than pure athletics.
in other words  
alligatorpie : 2/22/2013 6:23 pm : link
Process = all year long,

and each team has a method of thinking and sorting...IMO different methods for late rounds than early ones.

Decision = 5 minutes,

"whoooeee, sheee-uut, lookie who dropped (or not)"
Seems simple to me  
mrvax : 2/22/2013 6:30 pm : link
for the Giants it's BPA AND need unless there's a guy sitting there that you just can't pass up because of how high you rated him.

That seems to cover all the Giants drafts for about the last 7 years.
I would guess that the 'rows'  
alligatorpie : 2/22/2013 7:15 pm : link
are themselves already a blend of value (the B part) and need and team specific style. debate the % mixes.

so that come draft day, its just a relatively clear thing.

work all year to make the 5 minutes go slick-like.

at least in the early rounds.
Stretch! I read that post and it was very enlightening,  
Rjanyg : 2/22/2013 11:23 pm : link
2005, Giants had 4 picks, 3 became starters: C Web, Tuck, Jacobs. 75% since they had 4 picks. Couple that with Burress, Pierce and McKenzie and boy was that an off season. Set us up for not one but 2 championships.

It didn't happen right away but eventually ghe 2005 draft became starters. Some undrafted free agents start eventually as well, Suebert, Ohara, Butler, Hynoski, Cruz.

This year, we are tight against the cap with many needs. The scouts better come through this year.
Some very, very good posts on this thread---great topic and great read  
Optimus-NY : 2/22/2013 11:39 pm : link
These 3 posts stood out to me:

Quote:
It's not fully BPA
Sneakers O'toole : 10:52 am
They take a lot of things into account. People who reduce it to bumpersticker type slogans are people to ignore.


Quote:
Best player available is the first filter
JoeCabbie : 1:50 pm
several players with very similar grades will form the best player available pool. From this group we will probably chose the player in the position of most need or value. But BPA is the first filter, so we do draft BPA.


Quote:
Reese has stated numerous
Brandon Walsh : 2:08 pm
times that the Giants draft board has the players ranked in "Rows" not in a listed numerical order. Players in the same row have the same grade. If our pick comes up and the highest row has multiple players left, we will then address to fill an area of need, draft a premimum position (DE, WR, CB) or look to trade back (Kiwanuka in 2006).

An obvious case of a player being the only one left in his row unexpectley was Prince, he was the only one left in his row, hence the pure BPA pick.

With David Wilson last year, there have been reports there were four players in his row. Cordy Glenn, Reuben Randle were two of the three. Never heard the other. Its obvious the Giants at the time last year viewed running back as a higher need then WR and Oline, coupled with the face they saw an an opportunity to get a dynamic player at running back that they wouldnt have been able to get later in the draft.


I'd describe what I think I understand the Giants' draft philosophy as being filtered primarily as follows:



I. PRIMARY FILTER:
A. BPA
B. Premium Position
C. Grade of athlete (look at the grade of athlete that JPP and Wilson are as evidence)
D. Measurables (Giants love long arms on their Lineman--just ask Tom Brady)


II. SECONDARY FILTER:
A. System Fit
B. Area of Need
C. Positional Strength of Draft
D. Intangibles (toughness, heart, competitiveness, leadership, etc.)




**I'd guess that the Primary Filters are weighted more than the Secondary Filters in the Giants' grading system.
**A Tertiary filter or factor I'd introduce is one that is flexible with the draft itself: when positional runs occur in the draft.
IF a run occurs in the draft, then I'd say that the Giants  
Optimus-NY : 2/22/2013 11:46 pm : link
might push certain players at that particular position towards the higher rank of a "row", as Reese terms the way the Giants have their board set up.
The tertiary filter of  
BlueLou : 2/23/2013 2:14 am : link
"runs at a position" becomes part of the fungible "depth of strength" at a position as the draft evolves. But that's nitpicking: Brand Walsh's post should be incorporated into the website somewhere for permanent reference when this old argument of "BPA vs need" gets its yearly multiple reincarnations around draft time. Great post.
BlueLou - good point. That makes more sense on second though.  
Optimus-NY : 2/23/2013 10:53 am : link
Agreed as well regarding Brandon Walsh's post. Excellent point by you and great, great post by B. Walsh.
bingo  
alligatorpie : 2/23/2013 11:02 am : link
and the past so many years there have been runs on guards, maybe now accounted for in the typical rankings, not just in our rows.

prior to that the DTs.

maybe the corners and wrs are dropping?
Back to the Corner