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

Archived Thread

Per Ralph: Giants very high on Evans

Brandon Walsh : 4/24/2014 10:12 pm
Quote:
So who does Cruz think the Giants should select? He tabbed Texas A& M wide receiver Mike Evans as the ideal candidate to fill that outside role. He’s not the only one either. Several sources have told the Daily News recently that Evans, a 6-5, 225-pounder, is up near the top of the Giants’ draft board and a player they very seriously have their eye on at No. 12.


Ralph is normally spot on when it comes to the Giants 1st round draft pick. I still don't think Evans gets past Tampa, Buffalo, and Detroit .

Some actual rumors opposed to speculation two weeks out. Nice to see
Link - ( New Window )
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
He reminds me a lot of Marques Colston  
Curtis in VA : 4/25/2014 9:10 am : link
who also had trouble with separation and long speed.
They absolutely need more skill position players on offense.  
Ten Ton Hammer : 4/25/2014 9:16 am : link
They have no reliable offensive players other than Cruz.

You don't know what to expect from Randle, or any other WR on the roster.
Well, with the Daily News all over this, and  
Jimmy Googs : 4/25/2014 9:16 am : link
Victor Cruz mentioning Evans by name yesterday on the NFLN, it appears everybody associated with the organization is having lunch in the Draft War Room...

RE: I  
Klaatu : 4/25/2014 9:17 am : link
In comment 11637643 AcidTest said:
Quote:
would honestly rather trade down and take Latimer, than trade up to get Evans, or even take Evans at #12. If Latimer's foot has healed, he looks like a bigger, stronger, faster, version of Nicks. What's not to like?


Latimer is holding a private workout today, 1:00 pm. Around 17 teams are expected to send reps, don't know if the Giants are one of them. Latimer has already had visits with a bunch of teams, including the Redskins, Eagles, and Jags.
I think he meant the  
Joe in Knoxville : 4/25/2014 9:19 am : link
Giants are getting high and then taking evans


Only explanation

Giants should draft nothing but offensive lineman and linebackers and hope to hit on 1 on each side of the ball

If Eli gets killed it wont matter who is running around down field catching balls
That's not how the draft is used  
JonC : 4/25/2014 9:26 am : link
that's how free agency is used.
The premium positions, especially  
JonC : 4/25/2014 9:29 am : link
are homegrown talents because you coach them up from scratch, and you get them on their cheap rookie contracts. WR, DE, CB are predictable choices.

Now, if they feel an OT is a suitable value at #12, he could certainly be the pick. Evans figures to be gone, as does Gilbert, and an OT is probably the better pick than Donald or any other DT at #12.
This guy is a horse...  
chrispisano66 : 4/25/2014 9:29 am : link
If he is there at 12 you run to the podium.
If Evans  
NJGiantFan84 : 4/25/2014 9:34 am : link
is there at 12 (which I don't think he will be) and The Giants do not select him, I would be shocked.
The Giants better be really high on  
Randy in CT : 4/25/2014 9:36 am : link
12 players.
The ones who think this is a "smokescreen"  
Brandon Walsh : 4/25/2014 9:43 am : link
really have no idea how Reese and the Giants operate.

First WR is a premium position to the Giants. Look at the drafts since 07 under Reese and how many picks they have used on WR in rounds 1-3.

Second, Reese loves tall, fast, lengthy football players,and this certainly applies at the WR. Him and Coughlin even value WRs more that can stretch the defense and keep the 8th man out of the box for the running game.

If Evans is there at 12, they are sprinting to the podium. Book it.
Evans is the pick I have wanted all along  
GiantJake : 4/25/2014 9:48 am : link
but he will not be available when the Giants pick. The Giants are going to take Zack Martin and take the best available WR in round 2.
RE: Blue blood  
Blue Blood : 4/25/2014 9:48 am : link
In comment 11637574 jc in c-ville said:
Quote:
Those triple threats amounted to what?



You mean like when we had a triple threat in 2007 and won with Burress Toomer and Smith...

or do you mean when we had a triple threat in Cruz. Nicks and Manningham and won...

oh and by the way.. Green bay did win a Superbowl with a triple threat package at WR Driver, Jennings. Jones and Jordy Nelson..

and and Denver did GO to a Superbowl... and had one of the better offense all year..

so yeah other than having winning seasons and a few of them ending in Superbowl victories because of triple threats at WR on offense..

little was accomplished..
This could all be smoke too......  
Simms11 : 4/25/2014 9:52 am : link
teams go out of there way now to put out misinformation so that they can maneuver to get the players they want in the draft. It's all part of the game. There's also no doubt there is some interest, but how much is questionable.
I would be shocked  
HomerJones45 : 4/25/2014 9:58 am : link
if we didn't trade up to take one of the receivers.
RE: The ones who think this is a  
HomerJones45 : 4/25/2014 10:00 am : link
In comment 11637765 Brandon Walsh said:
Quote:
really have no idea how Reese and the Giants operate.

First WR is a premium position to the Giants. Look at the drafts since 07 under Reese and how many picks they have used on WR in rounds 1-3.

Second, Reese loves tall, fast, lengthy football players,and this certainly applies at the WR. Him and Coughlin even value WRs more that can stretch the defense and keep the 8th man out of the box for the running game.

If Evans is there at 12, they are sprinting to the podium. Book it.
Exactly
RE: I would be shocked  
Brandon Walsh : 4/25/2014 10:06 am : link
In comment 11637817 HomerJones45 said:
Quote:
if we didn't trade up to take one of the receivers.


I also think this is a very good possibility. I think if one of the WR's are in striking range, I think that range is pick 8 (Minnesota), the Giants will make a move. This will get them ahead of Buffalo and Detroit. I figure they would part with a 4th rounder max since they received an extra 5th and were "surprised" they received such a high pick. No chance they part with their 2nd rounder, and highly doubtful their third rounder. Minnesota might be willing to deal at a discount if Bridgewater, Carr, or a CB is their man since they can get them at 12.
At the end of the draft  
ghost718 : 4/25/2014 10:31 am : link
Jerry's gonna be floating in the ice tub

This guy could easily be a bust.95% of the corners he will be matched up against in the NFL are better athletes.
We have Cruz and a bunch of question marks...  
SB : 4/25/2014 11:00 am : link
...the idea that WR is not a need is simply false. Realistically though, we have lots of needs, so if he's there and we take best OT, DT, DE or S, then that would be great.

The only positions that I don't want the Giants to pick at 12 is TE and LB, because the value is just not there.
Wonder if the Giants would trade a future pick  
81_Great_Dane : 4/25/2014 11:03 am : link
to move up in this year's draft. They need an immediate influx of young, inexpensive talent, so trading a pick this year would sting. But if they trade a future pick, they get the benefit of their picks this year.

If they trade up the guy they get better be a stud. Trades for Barden and others really hurt when they didn't pan out.
I have no doubt the Giants are very high on Evans at #12.  
BlueLou : 4/25/2014 11:27 am : link
And they hope someone else takes him before then so they can get one of the guys they have ranked 1-11.
If  
bc4life : 4/25/2014 12:24 pm : link
Matthews, Robinson, Lewan, and Martin are gone - maybe. But, most likely Martin will still be there.

Besides, seems like this draft is fairly deep re: wrs.
Trading up  
Eric from BBI : Admin : 4/25/2014 12:27 pm : link
is foolish.

The team is in the middle of a pretty major rebuild. We're not one player away.

Most of the FAs signed were 1-year rentals.
and  
Eric from BBI : Admin : 4/25/2014 12:28 pm : link
the extra 5th rounder we have is basically a 6th rounder.
Trading up  
bc4life : 4/25/2014 12:40 pm : link
won't happen.
Randy nails it  
TommytheElephant : 4/25/2014 12:58 pm : link
.
RE: RE: The ones who think this is a  
Reb8thVA : 4/25/2014 2:17 pm : link
In comment 11637821 HomerJones45 said:
Quote:
In comment 11637765 Brandon Walsh said:


Quote:


really have no idea how Reese and the Giants operate.

First WR is a premium position to the Giants. Look at the drafts since 07 under Reese and how many picks they have used on WR in rounds 1-3.

Second, Reese loves tall, fast, lengthy football players,and this certainly applies at the WR. Him and Coughlin even value WRs more that can stretch the defense and keep the 8th man out of the box for the running game.

If Evans is there at 12, they are sprinting to the podium. Book it.

Exactly


Agreed. If Evans is there he is the pick
RE: Trading up  
HomerJones45 : 4/25/2014 2:54 pm : link
In comment 11638244 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
is foolish.

The team is in the middle of a pretty major rebuild. We're not one player away.

Most of the FAs signed were 1-year rentals.
Here is what NFL.com says about Evans

"He's a big, physical, strong-handed, West Coast possession receiver with playmaking ability who projects as a No. 2 in the pros, where he will make his money as a chain mover and red-zone target."

Gee, sound like anyone we could use?
There are a lot of players in this draft that you could post scouting  
Riggies : 4/25/2014 3:00 pm : link
reports for that the Giants could use.

... which is the problem. They still need major help at a lot of positions and they have limited resources to infuse with talent. Trading up for a non-QB in draft this talent heavy just doesn't make any sense for a team in the Giants' shoes; one player isn't going to cure what ails them.
the only part of that quote  
dorgan : 4/25/2014 3:01 pm : link
I don't agree with is, with playmaking ability who projects as a No. 2 in the pros

If he projected to a 2 we don't really need him. We need an X.
If he was a Z only, I wouldn't want him.

However, I think he'll be find at the X spot and I do want him.
Then here is the other candidate  
HomerJones45 : 4/25/2014 3:07 pm : link
and a big receiver is a real need. We aren't going into the season with Manning throwing to a gimp, two te's with 3 catches in their combined careers, two dwarfs and a space shot.

Worry about one year contracts next year when they run out. You may not want those guys back anyway and if you do, you can re-sign them. Besides, another season like he had last year, and we may have $20 million to go shopping with next year. He needs a big target.
You don't want to trade up for an Evans, then here - ( New Window )
RE: NOOOOOOOOOOOOO  
Mark from Jersey : 4/25/2014 3:09 pm : link
In comment 11637652 Victor in CT said:
Quote:
He doesn't get separation. His big plays come from broken plays. He will need to run precise routes in this offense. Give me some beef up front please.


THIS!!!
I like Evans...  
Dan in the Springs : 4/25/2014 3:10 pm : link
and will be happy with him if we draft him. But I'm against trading up for him specifically because I don't see the gap between him and whoever else might be available at 12 to be large enough to be worth it.

I only like trading up in scenarios where the player acquired is significantly higher than the next desired player.
RE: He reminds me a lot of Marques Colston  
Mark from Jersey : 4/25/2014 3:10 pm : link
In comment 11637696 Curtis in VA said:
Quote:
who also had trouble with separation and long speed.


Colston was also a 7th rounder IIRC
Is Cruz the gimp or a dwarf?  
Riggies : 4/25/2014 3:18 pm : link
I'd have no problem with Benjamin (or Evans or Ebron or whoever) being taken by the Giants at some point. They absolutely do need pass catchers and to improve the offensive skill talent.

They just aren't close or good enough to justify giving up multiple picks for one player right now, not in a draft this seemingly stacked.
The focus on "premium positions" for the Giants has led  
Shockeyisthebest80 : 4/25/2014 3:23 pm : link
to a complete lack of talent in other areas. The Giants always assumed they could coach up players at the OL and TE spots and now those are the weakest links of the entire team. It turns out Pope and Flaherty couldn't turn dogshit into NFL caliber players. Some of us have been begging the Giants to draft an o-lineman early for 4-5 years. They finally did and 12 months later he's their best o-lineman by a mile.

Look at what they did to the CB position in FA. I just don't know if we can apply old Giants tactics to this draft. We sure as hell couldn't do it to this FA period.
Blue Blood  
jc in c-ville : 4/25/2014 4:02 pm : link
If you can't seperate how both lines won the SB for the Giants in 07/12, not the 3 Wr's- You're an idiot.

Again, revist in your mind the problems of last year. Was it an extra stud WR/TE or the lines? and, the likiehood TC plugs a rookie WR/TE into the starting lineup week 1, and is a factor also- minimal?

Sorry, this team nneds to protect the QB and get to the QB first priority.

I think JC scored a bingo above.  
BlueLou : 4/25/2014 4:32 pm : link
Those focusing on what this FO HAS DONE in the past several drafts as if the pattern of valuing skill positions and specifically WRS are missing the point that the team badly still needs replenshiment and an infusion of young talent on the LOS. They cannot continue hoping mid rounders are going to fill that need. John Mara has said as much.

Having said that, of course it still comes down to what specific players are on the board at each slot. Du'oh.
The OL won 2011/SB46 for them?  
Riggies : 4/25/2014 4:52 pm : link
The year Eli was the most pressured QB in the NFL, they were arguably the worst running team that regular season, and SFO put a historic ass kicking (given the way they play now) on the QB in the NFCCG?

They absolutely need to fix the OL, but let's not revision history here to argue that that they do, as one of the most concerning aspects of how bad the OL situation is is that it wasn't like their problems popped up overnight. They managed to win in spite of them once, but they've had years of issues there now and we're still not to a point where there's clearly brighter days ahead, as they're likely going to have major concerns at RG (or LG, if they move Schwartz to his best position if/when Snee goes down), C, and LT this season, barring some miracle draft.
RE: The focus on  
HomerJones45 : 4/25/2014 5:09 pm : link
In comment 11638727 Shockeyisthebest80 said:
Quote:
to a complete lack of talent in other areas. The Giants always assumed they could coach up players at the OL and TE spots and now those are the weakest links of the entire team. It turns out Pope and Flaherty couldn't turn dogshit into NFL caliber players. Some of us have been begging the Giants to draft an o-lineman early for 4-5 years. They finally did and 12 months later he's their best o-lineman by a mile.

Look at what they did to the CB position in FA. I just don't know if we can apply old Giants tactics to this draft. We sure as hell couldn't do it to this FA period.
"Some of you" don't know what the hell you are talking about and are living the NFL circa 1985.
Disagree on the trade up idea.  
Randy in CT : 4/25/2014 5:11 pm : link
There will be several top-notch players there at 12. And we need all our picks.
Year of problems?  
HomerJones45 : 4/25/2014 5:15 pm : link
Please. We've had one losing season in 9 years during which we won 2 championships and made 5 playoff appearances.

What we've had is years of perseveration by fans who are obsessed with offensive linemen to the exclusion of all else.
Riggies  
jc in c-ville : 4/25/2014 5:25 pm : link
That SB 46 team put pressure on the QB.

Whether it is a quality LT or DT the fact remains that the main area of need for the Giants is on the line- either one.

With such a deep draft at WR, after what we all witnessed last year, plus the addition of Randle just two years ago, why on earth are we going WR at #12? WHY?
RE: Year of problems?  
Randy in CT : 4/25/2014 5:28 pm : link
In comment 11638963 HomerJones45 said:
Quote:
Please. We've had one losing season in 9 years during which we won 2 championships and made 5 playoff appearances.

What we've had is years of perseveration by fans who are obsessed with offensive linemen to the exclusion of all else.
Eh homer, we've clearly let the line go to heck in a handbasket.
Right, the Giants' DL got after opposing QBs, at least during some  
Riggies : 4/25/2014 5:50 pm : link
big stretches.

The Giants' OL spent most of that year being terrible and it was only because the QB and those receivers that you're downplaying playing big time that they didn't sink the entire season.
Riggies  
jc in c-ville : 4/25/2014 6:32 pm : link
The fact that that O was able to do what they did in 2011 was the exception, not the rule given the state of the O line.

If you base every year going forward based on an outlier such as 2011 which was the exception, than you you will be left with the product of 2013, or a little better- if you don't address the line with draft picks. Free agent plug ins ( with the exception of Swartz) aren't going to do it.
in a perfect world  
CGiants07 : 4/25/2014 6:53 pm : link
both evans and Watkins were available at 8 id trade up then
No where did I say they don't need to add to the OL.  
Riggies : 4/25/2014 7:08 pm : link
I flat out said they did and that its current state is especially concerning because of how long things have been going off the rails there.

I'm just saying calling people idiots because they don't see how the OL won them success in the 2011 season run to SB 46 -- like you did -- is, well, idiotic because the OL that year mostly functioned as an obstacle the QB and the pass catchers you seem to want to undervalue had to overcome. Citing that year, run, if anything, is evidence for the other side, not yours.
How anyone thinks that WR talent was the downfall of the 201  
Shockeyisthebest80 : 4/25/2014 7:29 pm : link
bereft of talent and really not comparable to the 2011 version at all wasn't the downfall of last season makes no sense to me. Do people honestly believe that "WR talent" is the difference between having the 7th best offense in 2011 (according to fo.com) versus the 2nd worst offense in the entire sport in 2013? (Thanks Jacksonville!)
Damn, I wish we had an edit button.  
Shockeyisthebest80 : 4/25/2014 7:34 pm : link
I meant to say I don't understand how anyone thinks lack of talent at the WR position was the downfall of the 2013 NY Giants offense.

2011 - 7th best offense (fo.com)
2013 - 2nd worst offense (only JAX was worse)

Despite not being a good running team in 2011, they still were middle of the pack in negative runs. In 2013, they were 2nd worst in the NFL in negative runs. In 2011, they still managed a top 10 adjusted sack rate. In 2013, they dropped to the bottom half of the league.
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner