I have been a big advocate of picking Schreff in the 1st round because he seems to rank in the top 10 (or close to it). My question is, how do the other guards in the draft rank after him? If we chose a guard in the 2nd round would it be a huge drop off? I would hate to pass on a guy like White if we can get someone comperable to Schreff in the 2nd.
A bunch of these guys carry high grades (one of my favorites is Erving -high football IQ,great size,good feet and extremely versatile).
I think a few would carry a close enough grade to Scherff and some with better LT versatility which is high on the Giants list of importance.
From what I've read, I like Erving too and suspect Clemmings will be gone by the time comes to our 2nd. But there are probably a lot of teams thinking the same way as you lay out, and like planning for battles, once the war begins, it rarely plays out as planned. And still far from a given that we won't go OL at #9, Bill2's sound logic notwithstanding.
Every year there are guys that get overlooked, fall into the later rounds and become solid starters at interior OL. A few I like.
Antoine Everett, McNeese St.
Greg Mancz, Toledo
Jon Feliciano, Miami
Mark Glowinski, WVU
John Miller, Louisville
Tackles who will move inside:
Tyrus Thompson, Okla.
Sean Hickey, Syracuse
Mitch Morse, Missouri
Andrew Donnal, Iowa
Laurence Gibson, Va. Tech
A bunch of these guys carry high grades (one of my favorites is Erving -high football IQ,great size,good feet and extremely versatile).
I think a few would carry a close enough grade to Scherff and some with better LT versatility which is high on the Giants list of importance.
Coach I love the list but I think Humphries, Flowers, Erving and Clemmings despite the Senior Bowl will be gone. Smith and Fisher wouldn't surprise me either. In fact, I think Fisher is arguably the top lineman in the class.
+1 - hit the nail on the head.
That is a really, really important question this year. Is he is 'overall league draft once in 10 years' as a guard...and 'nobody else is close.'
OR (and I have zero idea at all either way)
is he a maybe 17 out of 20 and the next 5 or what have you are maybe a 15 out of 20...with the scouts not agreeing on that....with our guards being tens or 11's as a comp. (again, dont know)
remember, the media puts any player in the 1st.... prior to the actual day.....and we don't know what the actual scouts and teams or coaches think.
The other question for me relates to Zac Martin. I don't think the Cowboys drafted him to be a guard. I think they expect him to be the RT of the future and that made him the 16th pick. If that's true, I don't see either Scherff or Collins drafted with the 9th pick depending on the answer to the Pugh question. You can get quality guards in this draft in the 2nd, 3rd and maybe 4th rounds.
and sherf is a potential 16 or maybe even 17 out of 20 but could also play ORT.
and there are 5 players looking to go in 2 that are about solid 15s at guard, but dont project to ORT.
I would prefer two 15s as opposed to the one 16-17 or ORT.
that changes your team quickly
Future star based upon what? He didn't suck as a rookie? Took a huge step back before he got hurt. Then when healthy was barely medicore?
Great kid but zero chance he will ever be a star
It is not unreasonable to think that they will wait until the 2nd round for an offensive lineman and it's also not unreasonable to hope to get an above average player who can start from day 1 there. I'd have no problem picking Collins or Scherff in round 1 if they think they are on another level (or just have the added flexibility to play T) or if they love a guy like Tomlinson or Fisher whom they expect to be available in the 2nd.
And I have no idea at all here. But measuring the drop off is the thing.
And maybe comparing that to the drop off at DT or even DE.
so you work the whole draft in your thinking.
but the scherf question is a bog one this year.
its all about the drop offs.
I have not hidden that I am a dork for the trade downs, but you have a good thread here.
OL on the other hand are regularly found anywhere, and generally speaking it's possible to get a premium non-LT prospect in the 2nd round. What is the drop-off from Scherff/Collins to Fisher/Tomlinson/Humphries/Erving/Cann/etc.?
Someone said that there are a lot of red chip guards in this draft. I've read this isn't a great draft, so drafting in the middle rounds is especially important.
It is not unreasonable to think that they will wait until the 2nd round for an offensive lineman and it's also not unreasonable to hope to get an above average player who can start from day 1 there. I'd have no problem picking Collins or Scherff in round 1 if they think they are on another level (or just have the added flexibility to play T) or if they love a guy like Tomlinson or Fisher whom they expect to be available in the 2nd.
Eric on point. The reason why you don't go OL at 9 unless a prototype LT/RT lean/mean/elite feet machine like Tyron Smith is there. Is Peat that? I like his upside but not the ideal body type. Wouldn't be devastated if he was the pick but not if Cooper somehow makes it to 9. Passing up White and Parker would bother me, though not as much.
That's an unrealistic POV imo. Beatty was a 2nd round pick who has graded out as a top 10 LT 2 of the past 3 years according to PFF, starting 47/48 games over that period of time. Pugh was a 1st round pick who has started 30/32 games since entering the league, having a slightly positive grade his rookie season and then slightly negative second season.
Could either be upgraded? Sure. But any team could say that about most of their roster. There was maybe 1 RT upgrade in FA (signed for 7M/year) and it's debatable that there's any upgrade in the draft. With rookies there are no guarantees, as evidenced by Greg Robinson last year who was a hands down better prospect than anyone this year and had a really bad rookie year (-24 grade according to PFF).
I agree this line needs an infusion of premium talent, but I think you can add an anchor player at any position and it would elevate the unit as a whole. Beatty and Pugh in particular have proven they can be solid players, the last 2 years IMO have been more of an indictment of the over-the-hill/talentless stop gaps who've been put next to them the last 2 seasons. Diehl, Brewer, & Cordle played in over half of the games between those 2 guys in 2013 and last year we all know how Jerry/Richburg/Walton went.
its called data mining.
Pugh +2 (1000 snaps)
Beatty -11 (1000 snaps)
Boothe -10 (1000 snaps)
Cordle - 5 (400 snaps)
Brewer -10 (400 snaps)
Diehl -25 (700 snaps)
2014
Beatty +13 (1100 snaps) - 2nd highest rated offensive player behind OBJ
Pugh -2.6 (930 snaps)
RIchburg -14 (1000 snaps)
Jerry -16 (1100 snaps)
Walton -19 (1100 snaps)
its called data mining.
Yes, but most analysis that have been done have shown that premium OL picks tend to bust less than other positions. Here's 1 for example which looks at 1st rounders, but I think it's safe to assume a similar trend would hold for round 2. Again, I'm not arguing one way or another. I'd be happy with an OL in round 1 or round 2. Just saying that given history there's much more certainty that you can get an above average starter from day 1 at OL in round 2 vs. other positions - hence why the thread is an interesting topic to see analyzed, as to whether or not those that follow this stuff closely (not me) see a big difference between the tiers or not.
Also to the general point about OL being more able to start right away, all of the guys you named were obviously "pro bowl level talents" and 2 of them didn't even start a single game their rookie seasons. Took Jordy Nelson 4 years to have a big role on the Packers offense.
Which positions are the safest to draft in the first round? - ( New Window )
And if you want to widen the search to other letters of the alphabet, you have Sammie Coats, Jaelen Strong, the freakish Chris Conley, Breshad Perriman, Rashad Greene, Devin Smith, Nelson Agoholor (you can't go wrong with a guy named Nelson), Philip Dorsett, Devin Funchess, Dorial Greene-Beckam, and Justin Hardy.
Some of these guys will still be available on day three (that's how deep the WR position is) as opposed to the OL names you dropped of which half of them will be gone by the time the Giants are on the clock at #40 (do you really think Erick Flowers, Cameron Irving, TJ Clemmings, and Jake Fisher will still be in play?).
p.s.-- And at least half of the OL you named will be gone before 40.
CBS Sportline Prospect Rankings - ( New Window )
The OL available at 40 IMO are less risks than the receivers coupled with some very high blue-chip/near blue-chip grades on 2 or 3 receivers at the top.
Cooper/White/Parker + OL@40 in this draft is likely much greater than vice versa.
The OL available at 40 IMO are less risks than the receivers coupled with some very high blue-chip/near blue-chip grades on 2 or 3 receivers at the top.
Cooper/White/Parker + OL@40 in this draft is likely much greater than vice versa.
I and some others here see it differently. I am in the minority with a very high grade on Parker but most posters here also place a top 5-10 grade on Cooper and White. I think all the potential OL are a bit below that, with no true elite LT versatile one in the bunch (which history has shown is what the Giants usually prefer this high).
Could that change in this draft? I don't know. Could they see Peat as that elite LT (though he doesn't exactly fit the leaner/quick footed mold of a Tyron Smith and Lewan?)
All great questions but I just see the percentages differently than you do.
That said...he is NOT far above Laken Tomlinson or Tre Jackson. The latter two offer better value in round 2 than Scherff does at #9 overall.
My biggest objection to Milton's comments are NOT being able to find starting quality G at 40. I am pretty confident Gmen can.
So to that point, WR at 9 and OG at 40 likely yields two starting caliber players. Not true IMHO other way around. May be right or maybe wrong but I think most draft analysts would concur re value in this draft.
1. OL Scherff or La'el Collins
2. DE Preston Smith
3. WR Tyler Lockett
How would that feel to you?
Two offensive players would be great value but damn!
...what about that generationally bad D from last year. Spags may be good but could use a few horses too.
Strah, Osi and Tuck and then Tuck, Osi JPP is our Lombardi formula...So we have a long way to go to get to that standard I fear ...ugh....maybe Moore steps up and Selvie continues his improvement so with Ayers we can bring some pressure but not so sure.
I think Eli and the O are good enough to win it all...not close on D!
I am arguing out of both sides of my mouth as I can make a case to skip WR in premium rounds as I think we are good there for now...short of injuries.
But we all know the draft is not a need game, but a value add game for next 2-4 years.
If I follow my own line of preference I like the idea of Shelton, OG and maybe CB...but your draft of top OL then DE etc is going to be fine IMO...shades of grey a bit
That is where I'm leaning as well.
However:
Cooper
Cam Erving
Henry Anderson or Odi (who could drop like Tuck did with the medical)
or
Cooper
Preston Smith
Ali Marpet
I'd prefer either scenario b/c Cooper is simply one of the most sure fire things in this draft and the impact player Reese talks about. Cooper and OBJ would be cost controlled the next 3-4 years together and would likely be the top WR tandem in the NFL.
Can't wait for the season....have a good feeling this year...and that may mean 9-7 but we have done some damage before with such teams!
Perfect health last year and we weren't that far away...but we never got to really know re Beason, Thurmond, McBridge, DRC, Prince etc...that unit has to deliver this year. Ugh!
1) Short
2) Thin with little muscle mass
3) Short arms
4) Small hands
5) marginal catch radius
6) fights the ball
7) runs before he catches it
8) can be knocked off route easily ( this was in college)
9) struggles to win contested passes
10) Goes down easily
11) not a blocker
12) Fumbles a lot
13) Durability issues
why wait to 74? Why not draft any WR...that would be more sound then picking another Moss or Jernigan...we need to find an actual contributor on the first four slots.
I think its a depressingly bad draft. Cooper is the 4th receiver in last years draft by comparison?
that all said I do get the emotional appeal of a OG for the Giants. Collins or anyone else they had conviction for at LT is fine imho at 9. Or a defensive player they have a conviction and a plan to use. ( they all seem like experiments given what 4-3 defense have played in the past) So is an OG like Faneca, Will Shields, Bruce Matthews, Tom Mack or Larry Allen.
We badly need another elite and difficult player to handle. In 2015, I cant find the facts to support OG at 9. cant find the player. Cant find the impact. I grant the Giants have a mess on their hands.
that's my other concern about OG not a bona fide above average OT certainty at 9. We have no margin for error with a 9 slot.
just imho
To me I would consider not drafting a WR in the first 5 rounds if not a difference maker. Its impact we are after...not just a position.
we have Ogletree, Harris and Parker and a project in Washington. I would not add JAG to that group....id say we have a problem in 2016...but we could not solve it well in 2015.
To me I am not sure about Parker as a draftee. Its a 9 slot difference maker or pass for 2015.
imho
We could have Reese declare now so we can reduce thousands of posts in the next five weeks.
The productivity and GDP of the tri-state area would go up
1) Short
2) Thin with little muscle mass
3) Short arms
4) Small hands
5) marginal catch radius
6) fights the ball
7) runs before he catches it
8) can be knocked off route easily ( this was in college)
9) struggles to win contested passes
10) Goes down easily
11) not a blocker
12) Fumbles a lot
13) Durability issues
And according to other scouts like Drew Boylhart....
80% of line is comprised of top 2 round picks and one of top FA OGs . All these guys flashed a bit when healthy and later in season when learning curve subsided a bit. Would another quality draft pick help? Certainly , but I don't think the line falls apart without it.
With that said, I'd still like a guy at 40 or latest round 3.
As for WR, most here love Cooper and White and rightfully so. I also think these guys are special talents. Maybe not Watkins/Evans level but honestly I think they are pretty damn close. And I consider Cooper a bona-fide blue-chip receiver and safest pick in the draft. Not one OL has that special grade to overtake the playmakers in my opinion.
Don't know the player but see why you love him...as does Boylehard...wow
I like Boylehart too but let's not treat everything he says as gospel either.
btw...given the DB play in his competition it was quite noted that he was rarely hit until after he caught the ball....and when he was it was a problem. That's not going to be true in the NFL. kinda sheds light on a factor Boylhart did not incorporate into his summary ( I dunno Milton...I think Boylhart is one source to consider...I get thrown by the emoting instead of rigor on some players)
I don't wish to go back and forth on this player by player. The truth is that if Cooper/White is there and so is say Collins (who from what I read is more likely a prospect at OT than Scherf) and they pick Collins because of his future as a OT...I would bow to professional folks who know better how to guess right on this subject then I do. Anyway is happens my preference after a draft is to let it go and just watch and root for all Giants to do well
Cooper/White/Parket 1st Rd. Erving rd 2....
Were the WRs gone, I think the guy who best fits our short and long-term needs is Scherff, who will be an excellent OG and likely could be an excellent RT as well. (I like him better than Collins, but for those who like Collins better, OL still meets our needs better than the alternatives, imo.)
Malcom Brown would be the second best fit on that list for me, but I'd be shocked if we selected him since this draft is deep in 3-technique DTs.
Were we to go for someone like Parker, it's more of a low floor/high ceiling pick for us, the type we've tried to shy away from in recent years.
And if either Cooper or White fell to us, you'd likely have to take them, but then would have a problem, since imo you'd need to land a starting OG and a starting S in the next two rounds, not the easiest thing to pull off.
As for the OGs in Round 2, Tomlinson's lack of mobility doesn't fit us, Tre Jackson although a really big man seems to be a MUCH better Boothe (and that's a good thing, imo) and guys like Flowers and Erving will be long gone, and Cann just doesn't do much for me...he seems like an OG who is mostly a straight ahead type. So for me it's Tre Jackson or nothing in Round 2 if we don't go OL in Round 1.
That's my argument for an OG at 9. It allows you to go DL (whether DE or DT) and S in the next two rounds. It also allows us to rely upon the WRs we have now, with a passing game that has already been augmented by Vereen, and with Cruz as a bonus when/if he returns to anywhere close to past form. Imo our passing attack will continue to be lethal whether we add a WR at 9 or not.
And, guys, I'm a huge fan of Preston Smith, so much so that I fear he may not be there for us at 40.
Sorry for the long post, and I'm gone for much of the evening, but I'll check back in to read more of this interesting discussion.
Cooper/White/Parket 1st Rd. Erving rd 2....
total lack of team-building vision
I'd only consider on OL at 9 if they had the projection to play T as well (if they start at LG that's fine).
With the 1st 2 picks they need to hit on them, so if there's a player they have conviction on, then you do it, no questions asked. My preference for first 3 picks would be some combo of OL, pass rusher, DB.
Main point of disagreement would be Cooper being the 4th best WR last year. You would be hard pressed to find a guy with a more comparable resume to Sammy Watkins in the entire NFL database, and he was the undisputed #1 WR last year even according to Reese. Their measurements and combine drills were almost identical, total college receptions, TDs, yards, YPC, minor injury concerns, both 5 star HS prospects from Florida, both 20 year old juniors at draft (ironically both with Birthdays in June).
Yes, an OG is needed, but unless you are guaranteed a guy who will be top 3 or 4 at his position, you wait.
I think C. Nicks, J, Evans, M. Yanda, J. Sitton and recent others prove this
total lack of team-building vision
Because a passing offense shouldn't have WRs to put pressure on the defense?
2) You think differently
3) I fully understand why and do not think it is at all diffecient thinking to propose OL
4) I did so without putting you or your capacity down.
Like Beasley and Gregory the most but that may be in a non-traditional 4-3 DE role that the staff would be willing to deploy AND have confidence that either could be effective in that role.
HT-------------6'1------------------6'1
WT------------211------------------211
ARM-----------32------------------31.5
HAND---------9.5-------------------10
CaYDS-------3391-----------------3463 (both in 3 same aged seasons)
CaREC-------240-------------------228
CaTD----------27--------------------31
40-------------4.43-----------------4.42
VERT----------34--------------------33
3 CONE------6.95-------------------6.71
BROAD-------126-------------------120
20SHUT------4.43-------------------3.98
I personally don't expect Cooper to be there at 9, but if he is I don't know how he doesn't carry a top 5 grade in what is a relatively weak class.
And besides, I'm not advocating OG with the 9th pick, I'm advocating OL. I'll leave it up to the Giants scouts to project the potential of La'el Collins and Branden Scherff. If neither is BPA when the Giants are on the clock, then neither should be the pick. What I will say is that the Giants moves in free agency seem to suggest that they believe there will be an OL for them to select with the 9th pick that will be BPA.
He is short
He has small hands
He is light.
He is thin without the bone structure to add much weight
He has had several injuries
He fumbles
He goes down on contact
He drops a lot running before the ball is caught.
Those are all factual matters of record. No emotion or opinion applies.
Boylhart has seen tape and likes him.
Out of that imho...no he is not almost as good as Cooper or White but magically available at 40 or 74. I am sorry I don't think you intend to torture the data into confessing the desired outcome. Half way through round two the bottom drops out of this draft for just about all positions. Sadly.
We hope for depth after that and hopefully one starter for a year or two before upgrading some how. most likely, imho.
again, if available that's who I would take to make the most difference on the team. If half of Browns field goals in two games were TD in the green zone...we would be 8-8. If all defensive players had to wait half a step and be more spread out....we make more 3rd downs running or throwing. No guard available in 2015 makes that happen. imho.
As Yat points out this may be all academic and the two clear floor and difference making WR may be gone...so which ever rusher or OT potential is left is the best choice...imho.
Milton, keep fighting the good fight.
Milton, keep fighting the good fight.
Do you trust them to pick one at 40 when they have picked up the likes of Chris Snee among others and there should be a strong selection of options?
Quote:
The argument you lay out for an OL at #9 is why.I prefer that approach combined with the fact I don't believe in the organization's ability to identify OL talent in the later rounds and the fact there is a precipitous drop in talent after the second round.
Milton, keep fighting the good fight.
Do you trust them to pick one at 40 when they have picked up the likes of Chris Snee among others and there should be a strong selection of options?
Let's just put it this way. I understand the argument for a WR and if they were to select Cooper I would be fine with it. Parker and white less so. However the later they wait to go OL, the less confidence I have.
I phrased it wrong. Cooper was the only G picked inside the top 10. L. Davis was drafted as a LT
I just don't want to pass up the opportunity to potentially draft a top level WR, cost controlled for 5 years, if that was available
BTW, Parker IS interesting to me. He reminds me of a slower Dez Bryant, without the route-running ability but with the physicality to get the contested balls. He's more of a long strider than I like as a WR, but he can sure go up and get them. Just not sure if he's worth the risk at 9.
I think taking a WR first and then solidifying both lines looks a sensible way to go.
Sy'56 : 3/22/2015 4:13 pm : link : reply
Unless you consider La'el Collins a guard as well.
That said...he is NOT far above Laken Tomlinson or Tre Jackson. The latter two offer better value in round 2 than Scherff does at #9 overall.''
To me, that supports the trade down. Keep trading down until you have some sort of mix of second and third round picks.
many here use the word 'starter'
You should be able to come away with a starting quality defensive tackle, a starting quality defensive end, a guard and maybe even also a safety.
all before you reach the 4th round. this is a team approach.
Further the crop that will be available at 40 will very likely be a more talented selection than most years.
I don't see that as taking an unnecessary risk at all as the grade on the first round OL aren't drastically higher than some of these guys that will be there top half of round 2.
total lack of team-building vision
Your post infers you prefer draft by pure need. Do we really have to have that discussion?
is it a good idea to use our #9 overall on another WR? fuck no.
you disagree. fine.......more than one way to win. in a 250+ player draft u can't tell me the WR is that much better than somebody at a trench position on either side of the ball. its bullshit
We can look at OGs at #40, value and grade will figure to be better at #40 rather than probably committing a reach for an OG or RT at #9.
is it a good idea to use our #9 overall on another WR? fuck no.
you disagree. fine.......more than one way to win. in a 250+ player draft u can't tell me the WR is that much better than somebody at a trench position on either side of the ball. its bullshit
AJ, If there were edge-rushers that fit our visions for the new system that carried similar grades or near blue-chip LT versatile tackles then your argument has merit.
But if the play-maker/WR at 9 is BPA by a significant margin , you go WR plain and simple.
We can look at OGs at #40, value and grade will figure to be better at #40 rather than probably committing a reach for an OG or RT at #9.
Yes sir. So even though WR is 3rd on the list , it may be the one with highest value and fit.
It runs rampant in the gifted wide-outs who think they are God's gift and don't work quite as hard at their craft b/c in college they are so much more talented than everyone else.
However if the Giants feel this kid will work on becoming a better route-runner, he has more upside than White and could be the best WR talent-wise this entire draft (sans DGB who I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole).
When you watch the film he pulls away from DBs a whole lot more than White does and at times just looks like he is toying with the defense. For lack of a better way to put it, White does it by 'working' harder.
That said, Scherff has been my guy since last year. He is a bigger, stronger, nastier and more athletic version of Chris Snee and that ain't bad. He would bring an attitude and personality to the offense that is currently woefully lacking. The Giants don't need a LT. Beatty had a decent year and Pugh can also play that position which, frankly, he's probably more suited for. They need a road grading OG/RT. That is Scherff.
It's more of a reach/risk projecting edge rushers with a 3-4 scheme profile into our current 4-3 defense(Ray/Gregory/Dupree).
Giants do seem to value 3 cone highly since it can indicate c.o.d ability.
We curiously didn't get that last starter via FA. I don't know if they'd still take him if they think he is a pure OG but if they think he has some tackle versatility , I guess it's possible. Probably depends on who falls to 9 as well.