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 )
You don't know what to expect from Randle, or any other WR on the roster.
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.
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
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.
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.
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..
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.
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.
This guy could easily be a bust.95% of the corners he will be matched up against in the NFL are better athletes.
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.
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.
Besides, seems like this draft is fairly deep re: wrs.
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.
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
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.
"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?
... 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.
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.
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 )
THIS!!!
I only like trading up in scenarios where the player acquired is significantly higher than the next desired player.
Colston was also a 7th rounder IIRC
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.
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.
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.
Having said that, of course it still comes down to what specific players are on the board at each slot. Du'oh.
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.
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.
What we've had is years of perseveration by fans who are obsessed with offensive linemen to the exclusion of all else.
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?
What we've had is years of perseveration by fans who are obsessed with offensive linemen to the exclusion of all else.
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.
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.
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.
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.