They won't draft Shelton at #9 , here's why....

Giants will draft a playmaker.. that means a DE or WR


thats just my gut feeling..

disappointing season?

In comment 12109863 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

disappointing season?

Apparently, according to everyone but TMS.

How anyone could've watched this team last year and be stuck on LJ walking being a major problem is beyond me.

Our LB's suck. Put this guy and Hankins up front, it helps the D stop the run. And, both can rush the passer.

I don't think we should overlook this guy just because he is a DT if he's the best impact player available.

and not late 1st either, under Reese.

In comment 12109852 JonC said:

Quote:

It goes beyond that and I've repeatedly posted it on other threads in recent weeks. They simply do not value DTs that high in drafts. Late 1st? Historically no. They clearly slot DT value starting in the early 2nd round, and Reese has stated as such in the past. DT historically carries a high bust rate, and Reese has yet to hand a market rate contract to a drafted DT. Hankins figures to possibly be the first. Not definitive, but "unlikely" isn't unreasonable. They value premium positions (QB, DE, WR, LT, CB) at premium draft slots (evaluated per draft and indicated on their draft board), and Pugh and Wilson were both picked after the premiums didn't intersect, imv. Neither position (RT or RB) would have been picked in the true premium range of either draft.

Jon, didn't the Giants say after drafting Pugh that they believed he could play LT too?

I fully concur with the above. I see very little chance (unless they deviate from their drafting patterns) that they draft a non-LT OL at 9.

This is why we won't see Scherff here but possibly Collins,Peat, Flowers and a lesser chance of Clemmings (if too developmental)

As for DT,agreed the bust rate is high. However if they see that rare player who has a sky high value, can pass rush, and is as close to a 'sure thing' they may deviate. Don't know if Shelton fits that lofty standard.

DE's as have been discussed, don't seem to fit the Giant prototype for a top pick.

No CB seems to be a shutdown Corner to warrant the #9 nor a Safety.

Eli has a few more years and has been extremely durable, so still a year or two early to pull the trigger at QB.

So chances are barring trade-down, this is very likely a WR or Lineman with potential NFL LT ability.

He carried a first round grade in the top 20-25 of their draft board, according to Reese, in an obviously very ordinary first round crop of talent that year.

At that point, I'd agree it's clear they could look at non-premium positions, and we know for sure that NYG drafts men they really like and will even overdraft them.

there appeared to be close to 20 prospects in the premium grade range, and we picked a WR at #12, predictably.

I'd agree it's quite possible they just go OL or WR at #9, but there's plenty of evaluations coming soon.

what happens if the Giants decide to trade back with someone. This is a team in need of a talent infusion. The number nine slot in the draft gives some team out there a chance to move up in the top ten. Maybe they choose to make a move like that, if they feel they can target a player they like and get better value back a few spots.

in so much as history seems to be on his side when it comes to how the Giants tend to approach the first round when it comes to the DT position.

I'm not shilling for Shelton here, just sort of thinking outloud about what this draft may look like if the Giants do indeed find a trade partner and back out of the top ten.

In comment 12110099 JonC said:

Quote:

He carried a first round grade in the top 20-25 of their draft board, according to Reese, in an obviously very ordinary first round crop of talent that year. At that point, I'd agree it's clear they could look at non-premium positions, and we know for sure that NYG drafts men they really like and will even overdraft them.

You think they still see Pugh as a potential LT? He had a bit of a down year but it sounded like he was playing hurt (and all lineman struggled with the new offense for a while).

Also for all the talk of FA lineman, if they add one and pay him a starter's salary (Franklin, Iupati, Barksdale, Boling) I just don't envision how they could go OL at 9 unless they are cutting someone.

I believe Reese has mentioned they expect their first rounders to start from day 1 in some capacity.

Do they get a guy in Free Agency like Franklin who can play OG and RT, then if a highly rated LT falls to 9, cut Beatty after the draft? Or pick up a depth guy with eyes solely on a high round OG or OT likely in round 1 or 2.

Look for a FA RT, and very possible a LT at #9.

they wouldn't need to spend on a FA OG, (they're going to give Pugh and Schwartz every chance to succeed at the OGs in this scenario) and they will have drafted WB's successor.

In comment 12110139 JonC said:

Quote:

Look for a FA RT, and very possible a LT at #9.

OK so:

Beatty-Pugh-Richburg-Scwartz-FA RT

where does the #9 pick LT go?

In comment 12110143 JonC said:

Quote:

they wouldn't need to spend on a FA OG, (they're going to give Pugh and Schwartz every chance to succeed at the OGs in this scenario) and they will have drafted WB's successor.

I prefer this plan the most actually but would Gmen let their #9 pick essentially red-shirt his rookie year?

If they're really confident going OT at #9, perhaps they run the risk and skip the FA RT.

In comment 12110147 Coach Mason said:

Quote:

In comment 12110143 JonC said: Quote: they wouldn't need to spend on a FA OG, (they're going to give Pugh and Schwartz every chance to succeed at the OGs in this scenario) and they will have drafted WB's successor. I prefer this plan the most actually but would Gmen let their #9 pick essentially red-shirt his rookie year?

Not preferable, but a legit prospect might be able to unseat WB before very long.