Reese / Beason

saying while winning without investing more in the LB position. How can you have a great 4-3 without at the least solid play from the MLBer?
I didn't buy that, just like I didn't but the early 00's when they did the same thing with the Oline. Not properly addressing that has finally caught up to the team, they invested far to many times in a high-mid round WR over an Olineman.
At any rate, I don't believe for one minute that Beason is a one year rental, he will man the middle of this defense for the next 3-5 seasons. I am very happy with the acquisition.

Then the Giants are cutting him.

He has too many injuries to invest more than a vet minimum into after the year.

why trade for a player if you don't want him next year? And, if you do want him, why not make the trade conditioned upon signing him to a longer term contract?

Bottom line - I don't understand the point of the trade.

In comment 11274404 VPD72 said:

Quote:

Then the Giants are cutting him. He has too many injuries to invest more than a vet minimum into after the year.

They're cutting him? He's a FA. And there's no way of knowing right now whether or not they will decide to retain him or be able to.

we should keep him.

We haven't had a NFL quality MLB in YEARS (going back to Antonio Pierce). Sorry Blackburn.

In comment 11274416 baadbill said:

Quote:

why trade for a player if you don't want him next year? And, if you do want him, why not make the trade conditioned upon signing him to a longer term contract? Bottom line - I don't understand the point of the trade.

They don't have the money to sign him to a deal in this league year.

of our DL-driven scheme and then laud him for this trade. For all we know, Beason might start having knee pain next week and never suit up again for the rest of the year. Secondly, it was never a good idea to stock the roster with 10+ DL's when only 6 or so can get significant time while dumpster diving for street agent LB's. Now we've finally seen a capable LB diagnose, shed blocks, and actually quick enough to get to the ball carrier, we're all amazed.

I'm not here to knock Reese, but he must restock the OL and LB positions this off-season.

This is a rough game. Anyone can start having injuries. Look at calvin johnson. Would you trade for him today?

people defend Reese's unwillingness to appropriately address the LB corp. This is how a capable LB can contribute to a defense.

Then what's the point of giving up a pick for him this year? What was the Giants record when the trade was made? They were already done for the year (sadly) ... Getting Beason because Giants can lock him up for a few years - contingent upon his being healthy - would at least make some sense to me (still prefer youth but, hey...) - But who gives a damn if he plays great this year and is gone next year? This year is (and was) already over - giving away draft picks is just stupid.

that Beason has a good shot of being BBI Player of the Year.

Though Prince, Linval, Pugh would have a slight lead.

solely to help in 2013 after 2013 is already over

7th round for beason is way to much a 2nd or a 3rd would have been fair since they seldom make any impact on our team while 7th rounders do

bradshaw, jo williams. cox and scott

7th round pick becoming a reliable starter are very slim. If there is even a 50 percent chance Beason stays healthy and we sign him next year it was worth it. People whine about the linebackers and now when Reese makes a move for a linebacker he is criticized for investing a SEVENTH round pick. I think some people would rather we cut Manning and obtain the best linebackers money can buy. The salary cap is a zero sum game. You have to invest in some positions at the expense of others.

I don't get it. The 7th rounder is for this year - which makes zero sense since the Giants were already out of by the time of the trade.

What evidence is there that signing him for 2013 increases the Giants chances of signing him for 2014 then would have been the case had they simply waited for 2014 free agency?

In comment 11274184 ZGiants98 said:

Quote:

As far as Im concerned, Beason has had one injury that's a concern to the Giants. He already came back 100 % from the achilles and was playing at a high level with the Panthers after the achilles and had zero injury problems before that. He had a major ACL injury. That's about it. Looks like he's rounding back into shape. I love how everyone keeps dismissing the fact that we are getting compensatory picks next year. A 7th rounder is gonna be more like a 10th rounder. No way all our picks make the 2014 roster. Never happen.

The hamstring comment was a joke in reference to our players always getting injured or having a big time decline in performance after signing a contract. Surely, if Beason were to sign somewhere else, he would revert back to Pro Bowl form. Aside from the ACLs, I am most concerned about the microsurgery. But we will let our physicians make that decision.

In comment 11275255 baadbill said:

Quote:

What evidence is there that signing him for 2013 increases the Giants chances of signing him for 2014 then would have been the case had they simply waited for 2014 free agency?

Before the Bears game the front office doesn't believe the season is over. Since we have him we can negotiate with him before other teams. Also, given his injury history wouldn't you rather see him suit up this year and see how he plays for us before offering him a significant contract? Why wouldn't having him play for us this year increase our chances of signing him? Most players enjoy playing for the Giants because it is a first class. It is somewhat of a gamble, but so is every standard 7th round pick. I like the move.

In comment 11274894 baadbill said:

Quote:

Then what's the point of giving up a pick for him this year? What was the Giants record when the trade was made? They were already done for the year (sadly) ... Getting Beason because Giants can lock him up for a few years - contingent upon his being healthy - would at least make some sense to me (still prefer youth but, hey...) - But who gives a damn if he plays great this year and is gone next year? This year is (and was) already over - giving away draft picks is just stupid.

To see if he can play. It's not about just 2013. Regardless of the opinions of the board populace, it's pretty evident the Giants think 6th and 7th rounders are disposable currency. If fans want to think picks that late are critical, there's no telling them otherwise, but the only thing that matters is what the front office thinks. What they told you is they like Beason's chances of being relevant much more than whatever leftovers are in the 7th round of a draft six months from now.

They think Beason can play. They brought him in because they think highly of him. If he can stay healthy, they have the inside track to keep him.

The one thing you say which I have to absolutely disagree with is the statement: "it's pretty evident the Giants think 6th and 7th rounders are disposable currency."

The draft is a complete crap shoot - even 1st rounders - and the one thing that increases your chances overall is quantity of selections - now maybe you're right about the current regime since it appears they can't get very much value out of any of their draft picks these past few years, but with all such sarcasm aside, draft picks are the single most valuable commodity that exists in Jerry Reese's world.

but not getting value out of picks that late in the draft is not something that's only endemic to the Giants. It's true for just about every team.

Picks in that range are like lottery scratch offs. Sometimes you win $20 and get a special teams player. Most times you don't get anything. And sometimes due to special circumstances or just luck, you actually win a prize.

But I'd never rely on production from a 6th or 7th rd pick. That's nothing but hope and prayers.

You get football players in the first four rounds.

You get athletes who you think might be able to be football players one day after that.

You won't get any disagreement from me - except that I think you overvalue the first four rounds. Go back 5 years later and look at the first round selections and you'll be amazed how awful the selections were compared to how the players careers turned out.

The draft - including the first round (including the first 5 picks) - is a crap shoot. The first round is just less of a crap shoot than the 7th round is.

And I agree about the "scratch off lottery tickets" analogy. But that doesn't mean you don't want to collect those tickets - and you sure as heck don't just give them away.

At the end of the day, I was simply questioning whether trading fro Beason when the team was 0-4 already made any sense IF there was no benefit beyond 2013. As was noted, perhaps the Giants get some inside "first refusal" type consideration from Beason, but at the end of the day he's going to go to the highest bidder and I'm not convinced the Giants did anything but throw away a "scratch off ticket" for nothing of value beyond 2013.