I see some threads floating around about this guy and that guy or this position or that position but surprisingly many don't think we need a WR almost just based on just how good OBJ turned out to be.
Granted I like Peat and to a lesser extent Collins in theory as blindside protectors. However depending on how the draft falls and the Giants final evaluations of players, WR has a pretty good chance of being BPA when it's our turn at the podium.
Now Reese has also stated they choose when value meets need wherever possible and they don't draft for the short term only ( meaning with only next year in mind).
So let's take a brief look at the WR position:
-OBJ. Beast.
-Cruz. Major injury and Reese sounded very cautious discussing him in the post-season PC. May come back but will he be the same.
-Randle. The enigma. Maddeningly inconsistent. New offense should help him but once again emerged late in season many times disappearing early on. Clearly has talent, but is he dedicated enough to being the best he can be. Even more important this is a contract year. We've seen many inconsistent but talented types in all sports play like gangbusters for a new deal then become inconsistent again once they receive it.
-Parker. A third wide out who occasionally can have a solid play or two but not a guy you want to be your second WR.
-Harris/Washington. Liked what I saw in pre-season but entirely unproven.
So really in essensce the Giants have OBJ and a bunch of question marks. And if Randle should show well in his contract year perhaps due to all the immaturity and inconsistency, perhaps the Giants won't sign him if he gets big FA dollars elsewhere as he may not be worth the risk.
Now Colin who has some pretty good ties with the NFL and gets some good scuttlebutt regarding the Giants, says the Giants feel if Parker played the entire season he would be a stone-cold lock for top 5 in the entire draft.
When I re-watched some of his tape it looks like he made great strides in his game this season.
Parker's numbers throughout his career have been excellent but this last year in only 6 games he had staggering numbers: 43 catches, 855 yards 19.9 YPC...extrapolate that over 13 games and you have 93 catches, 1852 yards and 11 tds (and that's with 3 different QBs not named Bridgewater throwing the ball to him).
I still think his route running at times is sloppy (which in a way is encouraging as it shows even more room for improvement) but he pretty much has the whole package: size,speed,strength,good hands,and large catching radius.
Truthfully the only other guy I really like at 9 is Peat and he comes with some question marks himself. He has flashed dominant LT ability and has shutdown some premeire college edge rushers but has also looked foolish in pass pro at times as well. Is it simply a maturity issue? The physical ability as some scouts have said is close to Ogden. Man would it be great to have a shutdown LT in Eli's remaining prime years.
I am torn, but I'll say this: I trust Reese's draft record especially when it comes to round 1. And when it comes to receivers in the top 2 rounds he generally doesn't miss: Nicks, OBJ,Steve Smith (Senorice was EA's pick).
Randle won't be a Giant in 2016. This means that in Years 2-5 of Parker's rookie contract, Parker will be a featured wideout in our offense while facing tons of single coverage due to Beckham. You draft a player for the next 5-10 years, and Parker would be a very smart investment because he's going to produce a ton of yards and TDs opposite Beckham.
This puts a premium on the WR position.
In this offense you ideally want 3+ weapons at WR. We have 1 sure weapon. Not enough.
Look at the Packers. They used to have Jennings/Driver/Nelson/J.Jones/Cobb. Now they have Nelson/Cobb/Adams. Like I said, at least 3 weapons at WR.
This puts a premium on the WR position.
In this offense you ideally want 3+ weapons at WR. We have 1 sure weapon. Not enough.
Look at the Packers. They used to have Jennings/Driver/Nelson/J.Jones/Cobb. Now they have Nelson/Cobb/Adams. Like I said, at least 3 weapons at WR.
Great observation. WR depth is crucial for the McAdoo system.
I have no doubt he will be on the Giants short list, with a few others, at #9.
I would approve.
WE NEED OL.... Adopt the Cowboys model over the past few yrs... OL OL OL
I prefer White as well.. but the Giants rating is what will matter.
WE NEED OL.... Adopt the Cowboys model over the past few yrs... OL OL OL
You sign a LG in free agency. Plug that hole through FA then we can go BPA in the draft.
There are 4 clear-cut legit LG options in FA - Iupati, Franklin, Boling, Carpenter.
Why wait until the draft to shore up the OL when it can easily be done in FA with guys that you know can play?
WE NEED OL.... Adopt the Cowboys model over the past few yrs... OL OL OL
This is a fallacy.. Eli was not sacked very much this year.. the new offense predicates itself on getting the ball out quickly..
And exactly what has the Cowboys model won them recently.. NOTHING..
WE NEED OL.... Adopt the Cowboys model over the past few yrs... OL OL OL
Not saying they don't have a good OL, but... the Cowboys model has produced how many championships?
I sure am glad we have OBJ instead of Martin.
Love Lockett as I think he is one of the best route runners in this entire draft and will contribute from day 1. As mentioned by many before, this is a loaded red-chip WR draft. For a little perspective last year, Marquis Lee( who picked it up late last year and should be really good if he can stay healthy), Devante Adams,Jordan Matthews, and Jarvis Landry were all round 2. I'd have no issue going LT and then WR/TE rd 2 or 3. We can probably maximize value that way if the Giants have high grades on one of the LTs.
Bottomline is that the Giants are not going to select a #2 WR with the 9th pick. It just ain't gonna happen. Sure, if a WR was the clearcut BPA, they would select him, but a WR isn't going to be the clearcut BPA. There may be one in the mix of prospects they consider, but ultimately they are going to pick the BPA who plays OL or DL.
If I'm wrong, I will eat a tuna salad sandwich on rye!
Coach, imo a player a little below Ngata would be a great fit for us. I want someone who can take on the double teams of Frederick and Martin and leave our MLB clean. Pair Shelton with Hankins and those runs through the middle of the line go way down (at least if Beason comes back or we find another MLB who can be effective there). And I'm not sure we need him to pass rush like Donald. All he and Hankins would need to do is collapse the pocket routinely and let our DEs (and the DTs) get those team sacks that come from everyone meeting at the QB.
DT - Sign 1 of Fairley/Odrick/Knighton/Paea
DE - Resign JPP
Shelton is a very risky pick. #1 - DTs have a very high bust rate in general when taken early. #2 - You don't take a non-penetrating 2-gapper in the Top 10.
Beckham was a sure thing. This pick HAS to be a sure thing as well.
Could I see Shelton becoming a JAG in the NFL? Absolutely.
Could I see Parker becoming a JAG in the NFL? Doubtful. He checks off all the boxes. Size, speed, athleticism, ball skills, catch radius, YAC, production (despite terrible QB play).
Ira, he's leting himself off easy...smart play, Milton...like that shotgun draw we used to run.
Quote:
Now Colin who has some pretty good ties with the NFL and gets some good scuttlebutt regarding the Giants, says the Giants feel if Parker played the entire season he would be a stone-cold lock for top 5 in the entire draft.
Colin didn't say that the Giants feel Parker would've been a top 5 pick sans injury, he said that his sources felt that way. He doesn't say whether those sources are from within the Giants organization. Also, what makes you say that Colin has "pretty good ties" within the NFL. Nothing against Colin, but we don't know anything about his sources and it's not like he has a track record of correctly predicting who the Giants will select.
Bottomline is that the Giants are not going to select a #2 WR with the 9th pick. It just ain't gonna happen. Sure, if a WR was the clearcut BPA, they would select him, but a WR isn't going to be the clearcut BPA. There may be one in the mix of prospects they consider, but ultimately they are going to pick the BPA who plays OL or DL.
If I'm wrong, I will eat a tuna salad sandwich on rye!
It amazes me that people dont get this.. The Giants are going by THEIR draft board.. not what everyone elses says or
thinks.
Jerry Reese is ON RECORD as saying if the choice is between a OL or a playmaker.. HE IS TAKING THE PLAYMAKER..
Last year.. everyone was screaming for a OL or DT.. and the Giants took the highest rated player on their board.... which was a WR...
The Giants stick to the value board.. if the value of the WR according to the GIANTS is higher.. they will go with a WR..
Quote:
Now Colin who has some pretty good ties with the NFL and gets some good scuttlebutt regarding the Giants, says the Giants feel if Parker played the entire season he would be a stone-cold lock for top 5 in the entire draft.
Colin didn't say that the Giants feel Parker would've been a top 5 pick sans injury, he said that his sources felt that way. He doesn't say whether those sources are from within the Giants organization. Also, what makes you say that Colin has "pretty good ties" within the NFL. Nothing against Colin, but we don't know anything about his sources and it's not like he has a track record of correctly predicting who the Giants will select.
Bottomline is that the Giants are not going to select a #2 WR with the 9th pick. It just ain't gonna happen. Sure, if a WR was the clearcut BPA, they would select him, but a WR isn't going to be the clearcut BPA. There may be one in the mix of prospects they consider, but ultimately they are going to pick the BPA who plays OL or DL.
If I'm wrong, I will eat a tuna salad sandwich on rye!
Any WR is going to be a #2 WR playing with Beckham. That is a dumb argument because even if Parker becomes a true #1 wideout in his own right, he will always be the #2 here with Beckham.
Wouldn't it be great to have not 1, but TWO #1 WRs on the outside? It makes the passing game that much more dynamic, while opening up the running game as well.
Not everyone agrees with you that "he checks off all the boxes" (and by the way, you left out some boxes).
Boylhart had this to say about him...
Quote:
Now Colin who has some pretty good ties with the NFL and gets some good scuttlebutt regarding the Giants, says the Giants feel if Parker played the entire season he would be a stone-cold lock for top 5 in the entire draft.
Colin didn't say that the Giants feel Parker would've been a top 5 pick sans injury, he said that his sources felt that way. He doesn't say whether those sources are from within the Giants organization. Also, what makes you say that Colin has "pretty good ties" within the NFL. Nothing against Colin, but we don't know anything about his sources and it's not like he has a track record of correctly predicting who the Giants will select.
Bottomline is that the Giants are not going to select a #2 WR with the 9th pick. It just ain't gonna happen. Sure, if a WR was the clearcut BPA, they would select him, but a WR isn't going to be the clearcut BPA. There may be one in the mix of prospects they consider, but ultimately they are going to pick the BPA who plays OL or DL.
If I'm wrong, I will eat a tuna salad sandwich on rye!
Start munchin', Milton ;).
Another threat at WR helps open up the running game...
The offensive line, linebacker, safety and DE are in desperate need of an upgrade. I don't care what anybody says, when you have that many places with a big need you don't pick a BPA that doesn't fill one of those needs.
The offensive line, linebacker, safety and DE are in desperate need of an upgrade. I don't care what anybody says, when you have that many places with a big need you don't pick a BPA that doesn't fill one of those needs.
Randle won't be a Giant in 2016.
Why we drafted Hankins when we still had Joseph/Jenkins...because Joseph was going to leave 1 year later. Hankins was drafted 1 year ahead of time to be his replacement.
You don't draft a 1st round player for his 1st year, you draft a player for the next 5-10 years.
Quote:
is that they are decent there. They've got the OROY, Pro-Bowler. Hopefully, Cruz can come back. Randall is decent #3.
The offensive line, linebacker, safety and DE are in desperate need of an upgrade. I don't care what anybody says, when you have that many places with a big need you don't pick a BPA that doesn't fill one of those needs.
Randle won't be a Giant in 2016.
Why we drafted Hankins when we still had Joseph/Jenkins...because Joseph was going to leave 1 year later. Hankins was drafted 1 year ahead of time to be his replacement.
You don't draft a 1st round player for his 1st year, you draft a player for the next 5-10 years.
I don't think that philospohy is so true any more. I would say that the players drafted in the top three rounds should be counted on to contribute right away. NFL careers are short and normally the second contract is the one that they are trying to get their payday on and so you really only have these players for a good 4 years until they hit the market or are costing your team a ton against the cap. We need players to come in and contribute right away and I suspect with TC on his last year of his contract that he would want that to apply, as well.
To me the chalk at 9 would likely be guys like Shelton, Peat, White and Scherff. Only a few of them will be there when we pick, and indeed a WR might be the only one of those still there when we pick. Do we then go for Collins, Flowers or a DL when we think that they are inferior players to White (or Parker, if they like him better)?
The Giants OL was an above average pass-blocking unit in 2014. Top 10 pass-blocking OL when you take away the negative grades of Charles Brown and James Brewer.