This seems to be a hot topic lately about going OL in round 1. While initially was a big proponent of this, my feelings have shifted a bit. I wouldn't have minded a guy with elite LT ability due to the premium placed on great LT's along with the difficulty to find one in FA.
However though I thought that player might be Peat, I have cooled on him a bit since the combine. I still think he's the OL with the best LT upside but carries a little too much risk now (thought he would test a little better and didn't love his mobility in drills).
Further reading the tea leaves , it's a very strong possibility we pick up a high-level starter in FA like Franklin or Newton. If we do our OL looks like:
Beatty-Pugh-Richburg-Schwartz-FA/RT
-or-
Beatty-FA/OG-Richburg-Schwartz-Pugh
All 5 are either top 2 round draft picks or quality FA signings. Point being, all guys who Giants have invested a premium pick or decent cap money in and expected to perform at a high level.
Would the Giants spend another pick at 9 for a guy who likely won't even start over the five already in place? The only way that seems logical (to me anyways), is an LT who could replace Beatty in 2016-7 and save us 8 million is cap space.
So unless Peat or even Scherff are that guy, I don't see that kind of OL investment in the top 10 of the draft with the talent we'd be passing up in arguably higher need areas.
Of course, if Giants by-pass adding that quality starter in FA that would change the dynamic considerably.
Schwartz who missed practically the entire year... Richburg being moved to C with another offseason under his belt... And the FA lineman...
+ it frees up the 1st and 2nd rounders to go BPA
thats what u call *bang for buck*
Orlando Franklin would be another great option. He brings a little more position versatility, and possibly a slightly lesser price tag since he played guard this past season.
It sounds like both of those players' former teams are up against the cap so I think it's very likely Reese will be bidding on both of them. Land one and all of a sudden the OL need is very different. No longer need a day 1 starter, but rather a high end developmental type who can hopefully backup multiple positions (particularly Schwartz and Beatty since both have been somewhat injury prone).
2. Signing Franklin completes the starting Oline for 2015.
Beatty-Schwartz-Righburg-Franklin-Pugh
3. Grab another Oline guy in the 2nd or 3rd to re-stock and expect him to play soon.
4. Now the 9th pick can truly be BPA. Best playmaker available.
----------------------------------------------------------
If they get a good FA guard and still draft Oline at #9, which of the above players will sit out in 2015?
I would hope for a defender in round one for the front 7, hopefully a pass rusher, one of Beasley, Ray or Gregory.
In round 2 maybe Fisher the OT from Oregon would be a good value and fit.
Exactly. Franklin belongs here. We have no idea if Pugh makes a decent guard being he has never played guard in his college or NFL career. (actually he took a few snaps at guard in his senior bowl but that's it.)
If Pugh gets kicked to guard, that sort of implies Reese didn't do too well taking Pugh when he did. I'm hoping Pugh eventually displaces Beatty at LT.
I think it will be BPA on their top tier at that point. If it's an OL so be it, but Reese would likely go in another direction.
I would hope for a defender in round one for the front 7, hopefully a pass rusher, one of Beasley, Ray or Gregory.
In round 2 maybe Fisher the OT from Oregon would be a good value and fit.
100% agree
Franklin would be the one "big name" FA I would expect the Giants to take a serious look at. He has everything they like in an OL. It would be money well spent as it improves both the starting 5 OL, adds depth, and frees up the draft to truly be BPA. If you anticipate the Giants will part was with Beatty in a year or two, you could front load Franklin's contract with bonus money and essentially pay Franklin what you were going to pay Beatty in cap after two years or so.
I'm no capologist but makes sense to me.
The talk was Kennard moving to ILB which means we have flexibility on LB. Depending on Dupree's bench #'s at his pro-day, he could be our #9.
There are answers available to this problem in both Free Agency(Franklin/Boling et al) and the Draft(Scherff/Tomlinson et al). It just depends on which route we take to solve it.
Right? I don't get it. It's as if we can only add one player in the offseason.
I think can upgrade anywhere on roster except for QB. So if a WR is there staring at us at 9, then I am more than happy of adding another skill player for Eli. Right now, except for OBJ, I don't trust anyone on offense. Cruz in terms of talent, I do, but he is coming from back from injury. So from that standpoint it's a OBJ game.. Forget it's a cruz and nicks game. Right now it's a 1 man show, and that's OBJ.
we need this line rebuilt and backed up
I disagree with him. I hardly agree with him when it comes to Giants football. I am not investing 3 of our 6 picks on OL. BPA and see how it falls from there. Use FA as well to fill needs.
If we don't go OL in FA and say Peat and Cooper are on the same tier (though Cooper may have a slightly higher grade) it'd likely be Peat.
I think if we go with a quality OL in FA the only way we take an OL is if he is BPA by a considerable margin (and likely in a higher tier) than the other options.
This would be my preferred approach with Beasley included (should they believe in his ability to play LB).
You usually don't spend a top 10 pick on an OL that's just going to sit on the bench.
Only semi-logical thinking would be a versatile OL that can become an elite LT that could then take over for Beatty and save us 8 mill in 2016-17. Aside from that an OL investment only makes sense in later rounds.
I just don't see that elite LT worthy of the 9 pick (unless they really like Peat).
I think that, like many observers want to conclude that the rig count reductions are going to cause price of crude to snap back hard, there's too much complacency here, a new conventional wisdom, as to how much a one-piece improvement will mean by dominoe effect across the OL. We've been bad there a long time.
It's too narrow in scope as an approach. UFA is intended to plug as many urgent holes as possible. Chances are, "needs" and prospects available in the draft won't necessarily match in terms of value. Bad football teams reach in this manner, as do those with tunnel vision. Resist!
This year, I think he would prefer to bring in a proven high quality vet lineman to fill the LG hole, but if the price is too high, he'll be forced to draft the best guy he can with the #9 pick, simple as that ...
The other hole, that's about to happen is safety (where Rolle is most likely gone), If he can grab Franklin, for example, he can use that first pick to replace Rolle.
Best case scenario - he signs a first tier LG & safety then drafts the BPA out of a receiver or defensive end (where the draft is very rich in the top 10 choices).
I qualified above that if there is an OL that projects as an eventual elite LT then by all means as he could replace Beaty and his 8 mill in 2016-17.
If not, it just doesn't make much sense and would seem contrary to our (up to this point) draft M.O. under Reese.
If we don't go OL in FA and say Peat and Cooper are on the same tier (though Cooper may have a slightly higher grade) it'd likely be Peat.
I think if we go with a quality OL in FA the only way we take an OL is if he is BPA by a considerable margin (and likely in a higher tier) than the other options.
True, you are correct. It's a nice balance of the two. However it is annoying when you read mock drafts and people have us go by need every year, hence the yearly LB to the Giants pick.
I wonder if Peat and Cooper are in the same tier. I would guess Cooper to be in a higher tier than Peat. I guess it depends on how our guys grade the players.
I find this draft to be interesting in that way. Possible 3 Wrs and then trench players with 2 QBs. Picking at 9, we will get a good prospect no matter what.
Either OL prospect, or Wrs would be fine by me. I do like the possibility of adding more skill player talent to surround Eli. I am not sold on our offensive talent except for OBJ.
Quote:
Reese has often said they draft where need meets value. It's not a strict BPA approach.
If we don't go OL in FA and say Peat and Cooper are on the same tier (though Cooper may have a slightly higher grade) it'd likely be Peat.
I think if we go with a quality OL in FA the only way we take an OL is if he is BPA by a considerable margin (and likely in a higher tier) than the other options.
True, you are correct. It's a nice balance of the two. However it is annoying when you read mock drafts and people have us go by need every year, hence the yearly LB to the Giants pick.
I wonder if Peat and Cooper are in the same tier. I would guess Cooper to be in a higher tier than Peat. I guess it depends on how our guys grade the players.
I find this draft to be interesting in that way. Possible 3 Wrs and then trench players with 2 QBs. Picking at 9, we will get a good prospect no matter what.
Either OL prospect, or Wrs would be fine by me. I do like the possibility of adding more skill player talent to surround Eli. I am not sold on our offensive talent except for OBJ.
AP, Colin supposedly has mentioned that he's hearing Giants aren't high on Peat. Whether he is right or not, the OL Giants routinely been interested in high or mid-round 1 of draft, all were LT potential guys and most have that tall,wiry strong frame,with the long arms Lewan,Solder,Beatty (along with superior triangle numbers esp. 3-cone).
Pugh was a slight departure considering arm length but was a year NYG desperately needed OL and still believed he projected well to LT and JR said as much post-draft.
Schwartz was a solid guy and while a good signing he barely played. Beatty is a JAG at best and going to be 30. Pugh hasn't proven he's a sure thing ant any OL spot as badly as he regressed. And there is no sure fire evidence it was due to injury(in part or fully) as many people wanted to insist upon.
The reality is there may be more Only one or two guys even on the roster two years from now out of the current ones now under contract. This line is paper thin and softer than Mr Staypuff. Even with a top tier Afa Signing of they can afford one there is HUGE need. Sadly one can say that about almost every other position on the roster.
Schwartz was a solid guy and while a good signing he barely played. Beatty is a JAG at best and going to be 30. Pugh hasn't proven he's a sure thing ant any OL spot as badly as he regressed. And there is no sure fire evidence it was due to injury(in part or fully) as many people wanted to insist upon.
The reality is there may be more Only one or two guys even on the roster two years from now out of the current ones now under contract. This line is paper thin and softer than Mr Staypuff. Even with a top tier Afa Signing of they can afford one there is HUGE need. Sadly one can say that about almost every other position on the roster.
Though Mara was more judicious in his post-season comments he still made a point about bringing up the OL. OL along with S, are going to be top priorities in FA.
Also there are enough guys out there that Giants ( with or without JPP tag) will likely have ability to add a FA quality starter.
The notion that we can draft a player and that will fix the OL overnight is also misguided. The OL is sadly probably a 2 year project, the best we can probably hope for this year is an average line. It will be Richburg's first season at center, Schwartz coming off an injury, pugh possibly moving. I think some FA depth is in order in addition to drafting some help. It doesn't have to be a 1st round pick either.
Quote:
Not the only team looking for OL help. They are up against the cap but w JPP as a possible franchise tag and needs at plenty of other spots the assumption you can justsign someone and problem solved is sadly misguided
The notion that we can draft a player and that will fix the OL overnight is also misguided. The OL is sadly probably a 2 year project, the best we can probably hope for this year is an average line. It will be Richburg's first season at center, Schwartz coming off an injury, pugh possibly moving. I think some FA depth is in order in addition to drafting some help. It doesn't have to be a 1st round pick either.
Truthfully I think with the right vet FA signing it is not a two year project. The learning curve for the new offense is pretty much taken care of and alot of the young guys are a year older. With a little health, I think this line can be somewhere between above average to very good.
It's strange. There's no such thing as a sure thing.
The first big step in this riddle may come in the next couple weeks. Right now I'm hoping it's either Franklin or Newton. Both young tackle eligible players who performed at a high level last year.