I've read a lot of viewpoints, seen mocks till my eyes hurt and listened to enough morons aping (or is it apeing?) the same old analysis they've heard elsewhere. Like most of you, I'm pretty tired of it. In spite of the above, here's my wish for #9.
I don't care if OBJ redux is out there I don't want a receiver. I don't care if L.T.'s clone is available, no defenders for # 9. We NEED - and screw the BPA bullshit - WE NEED to solidify this line. It's broken. We do not have, in my opinion, an offensive line coach capable of teaching guys with potential. Yeah, yeah, yeah, he's untouchable. So we need a player to step right in and make this fairly young line whole. A second day player might have worked when Flaherty was younger and better but not now. I want a guy to step in and be one of those fingers in the glove.
Please keep in mind that an outstanding O Line makes the defense better by letting them have a breather. The O Line makes the receivers better by giving them some time. The O Line makes it all better, Another second or third rounder, while good, is not good enough.
I want Peat.
Make no mistake - from a strategic planning point of view the Giants have needs at WR and OLB besides OL which are both positions where the value may intersect with the need at #9.
Giants have to compare apples to oranges and make a Big Board type of decision.
I do agree with those that feel the OL would benefit from some of the nastiness Scherff or Flowers would bring but to me DE is a bigger need.
Would also not be surprised if Reese traded down as the value just not being there based on who is left by the time they pick.
I want a million dollars.
Quote:
.
I want a million dollars.
Think your wish has a better chance of coming true.
having said that if the Giants have Flowers rated there also, and think he is the guy, I'm ok.
Yeah I'm gonna disagree
I assume the LT redux comment was hyperbole. If you polled 1,000 knowledgeable football people whether they wanted one of these OL or LT, I am sure 1,000 of them would pick LT, even if they only had four OL on the roster.
This team does not pick this high often. You need to come away with a potential game changer, regardless of position. That may be an OL in this draft, but you can't go in focused on only one position. It's not smart.
Now, other than Leonard Williams (who will be long gone), I'm not sure there are any defensive players worth taking with the #9 pick. If Cooper or Williams drops, I think you have to grab either one. Other than that, I think it will be OL.
Scherff is less likely to be able to play LT, but is a mauling run blocker, who can also play RT. He also had trouble with speed rushers against Maryland IIRC, and has an injury history.
Like Scherff, Flowers can play G and RT, and is an excellent run blocker who gets out to the second level very well. He may also have a greater chance of being able to play LT in the future. But he had trouble against Gregory and Harold, and needs work in pass protection.
Everyone has warts. I'd still probably take Scherff over Peat, but it's close. I'd take both over Flowers. I think #9 is a little high for Flowers, but it's defensible.
In my opinion it would be a horrible waste of resource to not take the BPA in the first round.
I appreciate the thought, but passing up another L.T. to address a need, would be just about the worst move in the history of this franchise, and that would include drafting Rocky Thompson # 1
Skill positions are a luxury - and usually last for a few short years before injuries pile up or big money kills their drive. Skill players are also the highest risk players for going bust and skill players need a great trench to allow them to flourish.
If we settle for 3rd or 4th players to build the best line in the NFL, it's not going to be the best line in the NFL short of a miracle - sorta like discovering that Mosely is a pro-bowl guard and one of the best in the country.
Peat, Flowers, or Scherff fits - personally, I would go with Peat.
You mean like the 2007/2008 OL which was full of late round picks and FA pickups? You mean like that?
Our middle round OL picks have been worthless.
Our middle round OL picks have been worthless.
True. But any way you slice it: 4/5 starters are set. You can get that starter @ #40. That's all anyone is saying.
Injuries have played a big part as well.
I can't take your take seriously. Even if it's hyperbole you lost me.
If the difference in ability is negligible at best and maybe we are talking A- ability at WR vs B++ ability at OT--fine, I could live with the OT even if his potential is slightly slightly less than the WR. But passing up a potential legend ? You're nuts.
And why are people ignoring that the draft is 7 ROUNDS?? What if I told you that you could get the A- WR or DE at 9 and then get the B- OL at pick 40? Wouldn't that work? OR you could take the B+ OL at 9 and settle for the B- DE at 40. Do the math...you'd be better off taking BPA at 9.
And we are still one short, not including the eventual summer time injuries that will hit this squad as well creating more holes.
We need more...
While I could see an OT picked at #9 winning a starting job, I doubt NYG will cluster draft OL early. Going OT at #9, OR an OG at #40, could happen. Beyond that, another OL is going to sit on the bench more than likely.
And use the other pick at any one of those other areas (DE, WR or CB) when best suited.
Shelton is the guy I want, but I doubt they take him.
Focusing on playmakers early in a draft is a very good strategy. However, in a weak draft year, investments in the lines should be carefully weighed.
Drafting better is only part of it.
Best case scenario (and what the Giants wish for) is guy who's AS GOOD AS or BETTER than Beckham at his position -- at whatever that position is.
I'm thinking they will pick another OL in the fourth or fifth. They still certainly need depth.
Failure to fix problems like this is why they have missed the playoffs for three consecutive seasons. Fix the effing OL!
I could see them taking White and leaving Cooper on the board, White seems like a guy they will like. Just my opinion.
While I could see an OT picked at #9 winning a starting job, I doubt NYG will cluster draft OL early. Going OT at #9, OR an OG at #40, could happen. Beyond that, another OL is going to sit on the bench more than likely.
Was going to say that I didn't think the OP was advocating cluster drafting at OL, but then saw Jimmy Googs post. I agree, I think if OL is drafted at 1 or 2, it will be one and done.
Assuming neither White nor Cooper is there at #9, and given the post today that there are 12 WRs deserving of first round grades, you have to bet that Giants go OL at #9 unless a Beasley or Williams is there, and then the pick at #40 becomes really interesting to watch OL vs. WR.
We don't know who will be there from the DL and WR positions and No Gurley is not an option. Can we really afford to spend the number 9 pick on a guy who can't even run yet? The WR's position is going to be key early and often during this 1st round followed by the OL and DL how it all pans out is very close being done.
his way .