So I've been part of BBI for years now (old handle was nyjuggeranut before the BBI hacking incident). I normally don't start too many threads, moreso just chime in here and there but enjoy everything about the site and wanted to share some info.
Shortly after the 2009 draft Jerry Reese visited the church I attend. I started a post on his visit where he made several comments, one of which had to do with the Giants being extremely high on Darius Heyward-Bey. Well, I got talking to the person at my church yesterday who has connections with the Giants and set-up not only Jerry Reese's meeting, but Coach Spags visit as well a year prior to that. He told me how certain people within the organization are "ga-ga" (his words) over Todd Gurley. I asked him if Jerry Reese is one of them, and he said he wasn't sure where Reese stands but the people he knows are high on Gurley and have some influence on the draft selection. I then asked if Gurley is there at #9 and Schreff is too would the pick be Gurley? He responded by saying that if these guys had the final say then it would be Gurley hands down.
He then went on to talk about the philosophy of the organization when drafting in the 1st round and how they look for the best player, even if at times it goes against more crucial need (like OL is this year), and how he wouldn't be shocked if we heard Gurley's name being called when the Giants pick tonight.
Anyway, just wanted to pass along this little bit of info as I know Gurley's name was mentioned on here recently.
Here's hoping whomever we draft has a lengthy, impactful career with Big Blue!
Quote:
In comment 12258554 Victor in CT said:
Quote:
2015 has already been improved with Williams having a full year under his belt, Vereen signing here and Jennings hopefully healthy and staying that way with a reduced workload. The biggest problem in the run game last year was that the middle of the OL sucked, especially Walton
If Gurley was healthy, then I could live with it. Coming off an ACL, I can't see why they don't address either line first.
He alluded to our struggles in each of the last 2 seasons being because of the OL. The RB situation was pitiful in 2013 and I'd argue that had just as much to do with the complete ineptness of the offense as anything else did.
The RB situation is a lot better now than it was 2 years ago but none of these 3 guys are as talented as Todd Gurley.
And if he's not healthy, they wouldn't consider him. I'm sure they'd do their diligence in that regard.
I am sure Gurley is healthy in terms of being ready for camp or he wouldn't be talked about at 9. However, look at the odds of a person tearing a second ACL after tearing the first compared to a guy who never tore one before. It is astronomically different.
Yep
Quote:
In comment 12258554 Victor in CT said:
Quote:
2015 has already been improved with Williams having a full year under his belt, Vereen signing here and Jennings hopefully healthy and staying that way with a reduced workload. The biggest problem in the run game last year was that the middle of the OL sucked, especially Walton
If Gurley was healthy, then I could live with it. Coming off an ACL, I can't see why they don't address either line first.
He alluded to our struggles in each of the last 2 seasons being because of the OL. The RB situation was pitiful in 2013 and I'd argue that had just as much to do with the complete ineptness of the offense as anything else did.
The RB situation is a lot better now than it was 2 years ago but none of these 3 guys are as talented as Todd Gurley.
And if he's not healthy, they wouldn't consider him. I'm sure they'd do their diligence in that regard.
I am sure Gurley is healthy in terms of being ready for camp or he wouldn't be talked about at 9. However, look at the odds of a person tearing a second ACL after tearing the first compared to a guy who never tore one before. It is astronomically different.
I don't have concrete, medically accurate statistics on exactly what those odds are but I'd have to believe for Gurley to be a consideration, they aren't necessarily as "astronomical" as you might assume or think.
Also, each player is different. It's impossible to know exactly what a particular players chances are. And besides, it's football. Anyone can pop an ACL or get hurt on any given play.
- Adding a tremendous young RB talent won't help
Our OL stunk last year in the running game, but our RBs were awful at creating something out of nothing. Andre Williams is a Brandon Jacobs-type who is dependent on the OL to give him holes that he can power his way through. But he needs holes. Jennings is a little more shifty than Williams but he's kind of a JAG. Solid veteran but nothing special. Vereen brings something else to the table, but he's not a top runner.
Adding a RB who has power and vision and can create without having big holes would absolutely have a positive impact on this running game.
And we can still draft OL in the 2nd or 3rd. Scherff/Duke vs. Gurley/Tomlinson... that's a toss up depending on your feelings on those prospects. I'd personally be more excited with Gurley/Tomlinson.
when jennings was healthy he was one of the leading rushers in the NFL.
Our O-Line has already significantly improved with Schwartz in for Jerry + year 2 Richburg replacing Walton. we will add another piece in round 2 or 3, probably Marpet
RBs fully recover from ACLs now more than ever. He had pretty light wear in College too.
Chew on this for a moment:
1. Gurley (top offensive play-maker in draft)
2. Tomlinson or if one of Erving/Donovan Smith/Cedric Ogbeuhi/Fisher drop or are highly graded
3. Henry Anderson/Chris Conley(top CPM for WR in draft)/Justin Hardy
4. Adrian Amos
5. Eskridge/Drummond
That would make more sense to me. Teams think we want Scherff, Flowers, Peat as that is what people who are supposed to have inside info are saying. So they take the guy or other teams move in front of us to take them. Letting the player we want fall right into our laps.
Surgeon on ACL injuries - ( New Window )
Not when the comps are AP.
I didn't write that, Essex did.
No sweat Big Rick. All these replies get confusing after a while.
Yes, thank you x 10.
It will be a facepalm of epic proportions if we draft this guy. If there is one position where we are set, it is RB. No superstars there, but 3 very capable backs. I have to believe at #9, there will be a high quality player at an area of greater need.
If they feel Gurley is that caliber player, then how could you complain?
Study of reinjuring and ACL - ( New Window )
Really dude?
B) it has the word athlete
C) it has ACL
The Giants would be a great landing spot for him. He would hardly ever face 8 in the box, and he would be with a trio of RBs, which he would need at first, given his recovery from knee surgery. Have to keep the carries manageable.
I want the Giants to fix the OL too, but if Scherrf is gone at #9 and Gurley is there, you can't blame the Giants if the take a RB.
If anyone missed it, Bill Polian had an excellent interview with Gurley, The young man came away as very football savy and cleary spends time watching tape.
None of the RBs on our roster have ever had over 780 rushing yards, 460 receiving yards or 7 TDs in a season. That's a huge problem. If you can go out & get a guy that has potential to have 2,000 total yards & 10-15 TDs a year you take him.
But if you want to ignore evidence both anecdotal (Hixon, T2, Bradford, Casey Hampton, etc) and statistical, be my guest.
How has Derrick Rose been since he tore his ACL? But he is a basketball player.
I am glad you are not my doctor.
Really dude?
Female athletes tear their ACLs at a far greater frequency than male athletes. That's where I would start the study.
But if you want to ignore evidence both anecdotal (Hixon, T2, Bradford, Casey Hampton, etc) and statistical, be my guest.
How has Derrick Rose been since he tore his ACL? But he is a basketball player.
I am glad you are not my doctor.
How bout' the players who never re-torn their ACL? You listed 4 NFL players who have re-torn + and NBA player.
What do you expect us to do with that?
I wouldn't draft the ninth pick with him. And, if it was insignificant, how come he is not going third then?
I think this is what you are getting at from the article:
"And the odds of tearing a reconstructed ACL are just 2 percent, said orthopedic surgeon Harlan Selesnick, the Miami Heat’s team physician.
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/nfl/miami-dolphins/article19553817.html#storylink=cpy"
2% is far higher than the likelihood of initially tearing the ACL, so that's where the increased risk comes in. Still 2% is a pretty small risk. Advances in the angle of the graft, using autologous prp or stem cells as adjuvants also make the repair stronger. Of course the knee is never the same...
I went to UM, live/work about 20 mins. from campus which is right next to Salesnick's practice and have friends who are close to Salesnick. He is ridiculously highly respected down here and has the reputation as "the guy" to go to for knee surgeries down here. (Not that we don't have other capable orthos down here, that's just his reputation).
Where in Fla. are you, btw?
Hh,
- first, you're baiting, because you know there is no mathematical certainty to a question youo pose as if there were,
- second, at #9, it comes down to differences among Scherff (if he's there), Flowers, or Peat, three guys who were heavily scouted by us and for whom the scouts/FO have a strong feel and reasonable certainty that they can slide in and play, either G or RT, THIS YEAR
- third, at #40, yes, the draft is said to be deep at OL, ok; but we haven't done the same work on Erving (the guy I would want if we weren't going OL at 9), Tomlinson, Fisher, Marpet, etc. The term "plug in" has been thrown around a lot on these threads by certain posters who feel strongly that there is greater value at #9 at positions other than OL, but is it true? Are their experience and skill sets and talent really the functional equivalent of Scherff et. al, minus maybe a small dropoff? What's the level of conviction on this? Have we heard plug-and-play on these guys from the scouts? You mean like Sintim and Austin were on d (both second rounders, but lower)?
And we're talking 2015, this year: so, while your question is straightforward and simple, the answers are not. Maybe Gurley's talent and its gap between him and the alternatives is so great, in the minds of the scouts and GM, that you take the risk that the answer to your question at #40 is no. I certainly don't know the answer to that.
That actually depends. Sometimes they take a part of another tendon in your body, other times they use a ligament from a cadaver.
http://www.aaos.org/news/aaosnow/apr12/cover1.asp
It's still not as stable. It's a solder, not a weld.
Plus the scar tissue issues that can come up that are a complication of any surgery, especially knee surgeries.
It's still a risk. And if you do an autograft, you have a secondary injury/surgical site.
[quote] But I thought if we were to discuss the topic we should use the only study that is out there for the long term. Female athletes apparently tear it more often, but it is still useful. Plus, we have seen anecdotally about athletes having tons of issues after ACLS with there knee and other parts of their leg.
/quote]
Hamstring tears are very common after acl repairs, especially when the autograft comes from the hamstring tendon.
This article touches on it:
http://www.regenexx.com/2014/03/hamstrings-acl-surgery-complications/