The definition of a playmaker "is a player who controls the flow of the team's offensive play, and is often involved in passing moves which lead to goals, thanks to their vision, technique, ball control, creativity, and passing ability."[1]
Reese says he would take the playmaker over an OL. I would contend that an OL who controls the team's offensive flow and results in his team scoring points thanks to their blocking technique and helping the team to advance the chains is by this very definition, a "playmaker".
When the Giants turn comes up, I would hope they take whoever they feel can impact the team the most. I would contend that an offensive lineman who is involved in every offensive play may actually dictate the flow of the game more so than a WR or RB who is not in for every play. Same goes for a defensive lineman who is involved in every defensive play. I would not trade Beckham for anyone, but by definition, I think the offensive line is getting vastly unappreciated.
I do not believe a player who only comes in on 3rd down impacts the game more than an every down player. With that in mind, I believe the choice should come down to who will impact the game the most favorably for the Giants, and who has the best chance to be an all Pro player.
I think that choice is very likely to be a WR like Cooper or White, an OL like Scherff, or a DL like Shelton, or a full time edge rusher like Beasley. To me, finding a guy with a nasty streak who can dominate the opposition and push the defense backwards does dictate the flow of the game, and helps the Giants (for this year) more so than any other position except safety. Problem is, there isn't one worthy this year at number nine.
For last year, we needed to supply Eli with weapons. We did, and no one should regret not taking Martin. For this year, we need to fix the defense for sure, but also the run blocking. If the Giants believe that Scherff or whoever can drastically improve the offense more so than any defensive player available or any WR available, I believe they would take Scherff at #9 and not worry about whether he's a guard or a tackle or not a so called "playmaker".
Here is the reality.. The Giants have a value they place on positions particularly in premium rounds.. Those positions are QB,CB,DE (or edge rusher), LT and WR.
Simply put these position Impact more plays on the football than pretty much any other position.. AND they are also the most expensive positions in free agency to replace.
This does not mean that they will take a playmaker over a OL.. If the OL has a higher value then they will take the OL.
The reality is that on offensive line is the sum of its parts, especially along the interior. A single individual offensive lineman that is not a Left Tackle (because he protects the blind side of a right handed QB and protects against Edge rushers who impact the play of the QB and therefore the flow of the passing game), in general will not impact the flow of the game as much as say a QB, CB or WR.
I believe that if Taylor Lewan was available with the Giants last year they would have taken him over OBJ.. However since he was not they went with the higher rated player.
Look for youself.. Look at how much impact the emergence of Victor Cruz had on the Giants in 2011. Look at how much impact OBJ had on the offense last year at the WR position. Look at how much impact JPP as a pass rusher had on the defense. Look at how much Darrell Revis Impacts the game from the CB position..
The question to be answered however is where will the Giants eventually rate the players in this draft. Ultimately that will determine who gets picked where.
it is not a coincidence. If we need to use 9 pick to get an in prime snee or kmac then we should.
I don't think your definition of 'playmaker' is the only one. In fact, that looks like the soccer definition of a 'playmaker'.
They don't touch the ball.
And don't give me that "oh what about the center" nonsense.
its not about where we picked them... cruz was off the streets...
the point is we had one dominant team... that had the best OL in the league... but for some reason because we caught lightning in a bottle in 2011 with a bad D and bad run game... people think the OL doesn't need to be elite anymore.
A lineman is a play contributor, not a play maker.
Is this an actual question or are you just trying to say that an Olineman is valuable? Speak up, Slappy?
Addition by subtraction.
That said, I think there's a fairly good chance Scherff or Peat could be the pick at #9.
it is not a coincidence. If we need to use 9 pick to get an in prime snee or kmac then we should.
And yet the 08 team was derailed by it's star WR shooting himself in the foot.
The definition in football wont change because and offensive lineman by HIMSELF is not a playmaker. He has to work within the cohesion of the offensive line to be effective.
This is what I call the fallacy of the offensive line. That getting ONE player on an offensive line fixes it. On offensive line is a unit that has to work together in cohesion to be effective. It also doesnt necessarily need 2 round pick players at every position ( in fact it doesnt need one at ANY position ) to be effective. It is the sum of its parts that make the difference.
Guard while he needs to do his job effectively does not make plays directly on that ball. Examine last year.. The Giants were not very good in the interior of the OL.
Yet Eli had an excellent year as a QB throwing for over 4000 yards and 30 TD's.
They had a premier receiver step forward in OBJ.
Donnell actually had the best year as a tight end for a Giant in years.
The reality is this.. OL is not a playmaker position..
That said, I think there's a fairly good chance Scherff or Peat could be the pick at #9.
Hopefully Beasley drops to #9! He'd be perfect in the 07-08 Kiwi role (see Pierce thread).
Unfortunately you're probably right. Still think this team needs an edge rusher more than anything though and think there are some great OG prospects that'll be available in rd 2. I'd love a draft like this:
1. Best edge rusher
2. Best OL (excluding OC)
3. WR/S/CB
4. WR/S/CB
5. WR/S/CB
This is what I believe.. I see the Giants draft being between certain players..
Scherff
on the outside
Dupree
Parker
Peat
Best edge rusher in a 4-3, I think we could all be happy with. But, that's exactly the problem given most of them are projected to be best suited to 3-4 OLB, Beasley included. Perhaps, Dupree rises but not many options there otherwise.
blood, I think that's about right, though I think Parker might slip a little.
Best edge rusher in a 4-3, I think we could all be happy with. But, that's exactly the problem given most of them are projected to be best suited to 3-4 OLB, Beasley included. Perhaps, Dupree rises but not many options there otherwise.
blood, I think that's about right, though I think Parker might slip a little.
True, but most these guys projected as 3-4 OLB are far more suitable to play 4-3 OLB than Kiwi was. And several of them (Gregory, Beasley, etc.) could certainly line up with their hand in the dirt for "NASCAR" packages.
The other (perhaps more likely) scenario is OL in the first and then someone like OO in the 2nd. Though I'd hope any OL they choose would have the potential to shift to LT in 1-2 years (or RT at least with Pugh moving to LT).
If Spags can deploy said player in a Von Miller-type role, then it makes some sense. But, such a role is a bit of a conversion project for the available prospects, and not every player is capable of such.
its why the entire org - including reese - is on notice. "win or else". let's hope they mean it
The fallacy again is that ONE player fixes the OL.. Scherff is not going to come in here and MAGICALLY fix the OL.. They need to be healthy and consistent... the coaches also need to STOP tinkering.. Give the guy a position and let him develop and get GOOD there.. instead of trying to get plug and play guys all over the line.. Kevin Boothe was a rarity.. a guy who could actually play every position decently well..
The Giants will draft OL this year.. It just might not be round one..
Jon stop it. Let me pretend we get Beasley. I think he's got the goods to be a major star if used correctly. He will now go at 8 making it even worse for me.
The fallacy again is that ONE player fixes the OL.. Scherff is not going to come in here and MAGICALLY fix the OL.. They need to be healthy and consistent... the coaches also need to STOP tinkering.. Give the guy a position and let him develop and get GOOD there.. instead of trying to get plug and play guys all over the line.. Kevin Boothe was a rarity.. a guy who could actually play every position decently well..
The real problem is that the line is still full of questions w a 1 and 2 pick and a FA grab in Schwartz over the last two years. Pugh regressed before he was hurt. So does he get better? Move to OG? Richberg hasnt taken a snap a C. Beatty will be 30. The back up tackle they signed looks to be complete shit. Schwartz has barely played. Jerry. Ugh.
This line is still devoid of top tier talent and depth until proven otherwise. I don't care if they draft a WR first over an OL. My worry is that Reese and his staff just suck at evaluating OL talent Becuase he's yet in 9 years as a GM at this point found even one probowler at that postion.
The Giants will draft OL this year.. It just might not be round one..
The fallacy again is that ONE player fixes the OL.. Scherff is not going to come in here and MAGICALLY fix the OL.. They need to be healthy and consistent... the coaches also need to STOP tinkering.. Give the guy a position and let him develop and get GOOD there.. instead of trying to get plug and play guys all over the line.. Kevin Boothe was a rarity.. a guy who could actually play every position decently well..
The Giants will draft OL this year.. It just might not be round one..
The biggest mistake (more a failure) was not developing any of the mid-round OL guys they drafted as future OL replacements. Guys like Whimper, Brewer, Mosley, Hermann, Mccants, Petrus, Koets, etc. They needed to get at least a couple of Diehl/Seubert/O'Hara level players out of that group and got zilch. With the number of 4th-5th round guys in there, you'd expect to get at least 1 average starter out of the group.
The pass pro last year overall was pretty solid and will be even better if the OL stays togeather throughout the preseason and early on in the season. It's all about consistency and availability.
The running game is an attitude and a mentality that you develop over time,wich comes from playing togeather.
I've said before that you have to look at the past couple of years and see the big picture as to why they've struggled to run the ball. In 2013 as Mara stated,The offense is broken. Wich subsequently forced Gilbride into retirement. Not to mention the OL was blocking for the likes of Andre brown,Payton Hillis and Brandon Jacobs. 2 hasbeens and a never was.
Last year Jennings looked pretty good early on before being injured. He was 2nd in the league in rushing at one point. He had a career best 176 yards against the Texans,who have a pretty solid defense for the most part.
Once Jennings went down Andre Williams struggled adjusting to the NFL. He did show vast improvement towards seasons end. See the Tennessee and St. Louis games.
Could the Giants use an upgrade over Jerry? Sure they could,but I dn't believe it's any reason to panic and reach for a LT in college that's going to transition to G in the NFL.
They could certainly use more depth and competition at all 5 spots on the OL. Competition breeds success!!
In my opinion the value at G is in the 2nd or 3rd round,if that's the direction they decide to go. The safety position is in worse shape than what the OL is in my opinion,but I'm not clamouring to reach for Landon Collins at 9.
People seem to forget there's 7 rounds to the draft. 8 selections overall and rookie free agency after that. I think after it's all said and done we'll be in decent shape going into the season. If we can avoid the injury bug once again this season it should be a good year. I'm extremely confident it's going to be an excellent bounce back year!!