Obviously, the Giants have more needs on offense than defense this year. I think we all can agree on that. Now you have to make pick #12.
I'm not asking to name a player. I want to know your drafting philosophy for our first round pick #12.
Are you in the "pure BPA" camp
or
are you in the "offense comes first" and the #12 guy must be on offense?
------------------------------------------------
IMO, I believe that with the 1st pick, I go BPA regardless of whether or not the player is offense or defense.
but how do you know he has a chance to start in his first year before he's even been in camp?
So I definitely wouldn't target one particular position or even side of the field out of some assumption that we'd rise above a .500 team if we merely get the one player who fills that one weakness. I wouldn't think I'd have earned that assumption.
Quote:
there is no doubt you go with the best player available as long as he has a chance to start in his first year. Right now I do not feel that an OT will be a starter at OT for the Giants in 2014 and that pick seems to be the consensus on here.
but how do you know he has a chance to start in his first year before he's even been in camp?
Doesnt seem that for $5.5 million Beatty will be sitting and you have Pugh on the other end, so not saying it is an impossibility but it is unlikely
In the second however, Hankins was too good to pass up. He was only 5 spots behind Trufant and 13 ahead of Pugh on my board. I think he'll be a real good player for us and I'm real glad that we picked a player I liked in the same spot. Still working on this year's personal board but I'm really looking forward to next month.
the biggest need on this team is pass catchers. we lost our #1 WR and we saw how the team played last year when he wasn't trying hard. we also don't have a tight end. our offensive line needs to be rebuilt too, but that's more of a long-term project to me. the most glaring need in the immediate future is pass catchers.
some other factors i consider:
it just so happens that there are quite a few very talented pass catchers in the upper echelon of this draft. so that influences my decision even more.
a top-flight pass catcher in this league makes a ton of money in free agency. that makes it that much more important to draft well when it comes to skill position players like WRs or TEs. another factor.
our QB in the twilight of his career. we know he can't win games by himself. he's not Tom Brady. he needs a good supporting cast in order to be successful in this league. sure, he also needs a good OL (who doesn't), but the OL is closer to good right now than the WRs and TEs are. another factor.
put all of that together and i'm almost certainly taking a WR or a TE with my first pick this year.
1) Group draft prospects into tiers based on comparable grades (physical, mental, health, positional impact)
2) Evaluate team needs (roster, strategy, contracts)
3) Once on the clock, review the players in the highest remaining tier and select one based on -
a) Prefer the equivalent player at the position of higher need
b) All else being equal, choose the player at the position of need less likely to be available in quality at a later round
c) A player in the highest remaining tier is to be preferred over a lower tier player at a position of greater need. Trust your grades!
else
Consider Ebron or Donald if either are there.
For this year for instance, we can STILL get some very good offensive players round 2-4 if we go BPA round 1 at a non OL or non offensive position.
In my guesstimate if Donald is still there at 12 he wont be slight BPA Donald will be glaring BPA by a considerable margin. If the Giants board matches my value on him then you can't ignore that kind of grade to go for strict need especially since the likelihood of a strong OL still being available at 43 is very high.
Other years the 'need differential' is higher than the 'value differential' and you need to go for the near BPA pick at the higher need position vs strict BPA at a lesser need position.
I am not a believer that it's a MUST to burn the first rounder on a lineman.
We saw in 2012 and 2013 that Eli needs more than Victor Cruz. The offense doesn't work without a #1 receiver. All they have is Cruz.
Also obviously if you think a player will be among the elites at his position - safety, DT, LB, TE, etc.
With all that said my top targets for the #12 pick in no specific order would be Donald (pass rusher), Barr (pass rusher), Lewan (LT), Ebron (potential to be a top receiving TE).
So, for example, both DT and LB are somewhat thin. DT is more important in our defense, so even though but DT has more depth than LB, DTs would rank higher.
Similarly on offense, both WR and OG are pretty thin, but WR is more important PLUS a WR like Evans is a better player than any guard we could get at 12.
Not really a hard and fast formula, more like a guideline. Based on this reasoning last year I wanted Xavier Rhodes instead of Pugh because I felt CB was a need and Rhodes was a better player Pugh. So what the hell do I know.
1. we already have a starting LT in Beatty. true, Beatty played like shit last year, but also true, he has shown he can play well in the past and our entire OL broke down last year. he was a problem, but he wasn't THE problem. i expect him to improve substantially and his contract is fairly team-friendly for a good LT. so if he returns to form, we're in great shape cap-wise.
2. we already have a starting RT in Pugh who, oh by the way, was pretty much the best rookie OL in the league last year, despite being the fifth OL drafted. i don't see us messing with that. i think Pugh stays right where he is.
3. we already shored up the OL with Schwartz, we're getting Snee back, and we also got Walton. that's a pretty big FA investment in one area of the team. that, to me, makes it less likely that we use our premium pick on the same area of the team.
4. the so-called blue chip OTs from last year's draft (Eric Fisher, Luke Joeckel, Lane Johnson and DJ Fluker) all had their struggles last year. none of them were as good as Pugh. it's a very hard position to nail in the draft.
My dilemma is it's a LT I prefer, and its Lewan,but Beatty is an X factor within himself. He likely comes back ok as a player but that might be all. He complicates my plan more because several, more technique knowledgeable BBIers ,say he can't slide to a OG.
As a result, if all that be true, then a versatile guy mentioned most on the blog, Zack Martin, who could play OG and cover for Snee if he faulters, for WB if he faulters, or stay at LG if no one faulters.I know they have GS penciled in for LG, but I feel Snee just will not be able to handle the grind, possibly even of camp. Whatever the scenario, a versatile OL like ZM, along with one in both GS, and JP if need be, would provide for a lot of combinations, especially since the team is a little injury prone in recent history.
That all is why I go OL at 12; young legs, versatility, best 5 to protect Eli.
Camp will be so brutal for starting OL competition that the regular season will be a relief for the starters.
An aside: Jags and Browns still have $$$; think one might take WB and his contract off our hands for a 3rd?
If more than 1 player was in my highest tier, I'd factor in need.
It seems like the Giants do it this way also. If you look at Ross/Pugh, you might think the Giants picked from need. Then you see Kiwi/JPP and you think BPA.
Ideally I'd be able to move back a few spots, pick up someone in a position of need, and get an extra pick. I'd really like that.
If moving isn't really an option then it is definitely the player that stands out the most (either the highest graded player in their tier or the position with the highest drop off in talent likely to be available in the next round), as long as they play a position that can get them snaps/play time soon.
trading back is something that i would consider in the moment, if the right deal comes to me when i'm on the clock. but i'm not planning on trading back because that would take my eye off the ball for pick #12.
Lewan/Martin-Schwarz-Walton-Snee-Pugh or,
Pugh-Schwartz-Walton-Snee-Lewan/Martin
They had a pretty solid group of linebackers when they drafted LT.
But if the pick were absolutely left up to me I'd pick who I had on the board as the Best OL guy available. Jerry will get hung if he doesn't fix the OL this draft.
I preface this with the statement "I am not suggesting cut bait on Beatty"...
But what if the scenario when our pick is up that the BPA and/or top guy on the Reese draft board is a LT. Why by-pass this player who could either replace a struggling or potentially not-ready Beatty in 2014? Its not like you don't give Beatty a chance to make it, but then you hedge that bet. And if Beatty does make it, then you hopefully find a place for this quality player on the line or worst case (which hurts) is a deeper bench.
1. we already have a starting LT in Beatty. true, Beatty played like shit last year, but also true, he has shown he can play well in the past and our entire OL broke down last year. he was a problem, but he wasn't THE problem. i expect him to improve substantially and his contract is fairly team-friendly for a good LT. so if he returns to form, we're in great shape cap-wise.
2. we already have a starting RT in Pugh who, oh by the way, was pretty much the best rookie OL in the league last year, despite being the fifth OL drafted. i don't see us messing with that. i think Pugh stays right where he is.
3. we already shored up the OL with Schwartz, we're getting Snee back, and we also got Walton. that's a pretty big FA investment in one area of the team. that, to me, makes it less likely that we use our premium pick on the same area of the team.
4. the so-called blue chip OTs from last year's draft (Eric Fisher, Luke Joeckel, Lane Johnson and DJ Fluker) all had their struggles last year. none of them were as good as Pugh. it's a very hard position to nail in the draft.
Because Pugh can play anywhere and if they get another like that, it could be one hell of a solid Oline, with/without Beatty at max potential.
Majority of the major holes have been addressed through free agency. The OL looks to be improved, our secondary looks to be one of the top 10 in the league, and the linebacking corps looks to be much better than it has been in the past. The biggest, most glaring holes are a #1 receiver that can take attention away from Cruz, and a tight end. Being that we spent money the way we did in free agency and plugged most of the holes the roster had at the end of the season, I think we can take a quality over quantity approach to the draft.
Now, if you're after a particular player (e.g., Donald) and you get information that another team is seeking to trade up to take him before your pick I'd carefully consider whether I'd prefer to trade up myself, or alternately stay where we are because we knoww that one of the other guys we are high on will have to fall to us in those circumstances.
We just don't know though
1. we already have a starting LT in Beatty. true, Beatty played like shit last year, but also true, he has shown he can play well in the past and our entire OL broke down last year. he was a problem, but he wasn't THE problem. i expect him to improve substantially and his contract is fairly team-friendly for a good LT. so if he returns to form, we're in great shape cap-wise.
2. we already have a starting RT in Pugh who, oh by the way, was pretty much the best rookie OL in the league last year, despite being the fifth OL drafted. i don't see us messing with that. i think Pugh stays right where he is.
3. we already shored up the OL with Schwartz, we're getting Snee back, and we also got Walton. that's a pretty big FA investment in one area of the team. that, to me, makes it less likely that we use our premium pick on the same area of the team.
4. the so-called blue chip OTs from last year's draft (Eric Fisher, Luke Joeckel, Lane Johnson and DJ Fluker) all had their struggles last year. none of them were as good as Pugh. it's a very hard position to nail in the draft.
The Giants don't give up on players quickly. Beatty had a bad year but practically the whole offense did in our old system. If Beatty returns to form this OL is pretty set save for Snee's spot (who is still a shaky proposition at best). We can get that OG or versatile OL to fill that spot at 43.
With that said, you almost always go for a guy if he is glaring BPA over everyone else (unless you are absolutely stocked at that position like CB). Donald , if the draft falls like many are predicting will be glaring BPA over everyone else IMO. Take him and have a dominant pass rushing DT for the next decade to play along side a totally young and talented line of JPP,DaMonster and Hankins.
Then go fishing in the later rounds.
that will give you an OL that will allow your qb to function like he used to.
The Giants presently, are NOT one player away from approaching their former glory - they have several but not an overwhelming number holes. They still have some very good players at key positions.
In my view, this is not a very rich at top type draft (as are most drafts), but rather a very deep draft (as most aren't).
I think that the team, given it's advantageous drafting positions across the board, can pick up some very solid players by first trading down then parlaying several of the remaining lower picks to move up to come way from this draft with as many as three #2s and maybe a couple of #3s.
Except maybe consult Zoltan's crystal ball about future injuries.
Ebron - 77
Gilbert - 76
Barr - 77
Donald - 75
it's easy.