except QB, TE and RB. I dont think there will be a WR that will be rated that high. I think you will see OL and DL. You should see one or two CB's and the LB;s depend on the health of Jack and Smith. I wouldnt have an issue if they went OL either..
except QB, TE and RB. I dont think there will be a WR that will be rated that high. I think you will see OL and DL. You should see one or two CB's and the LB;s depend on the health of Jack and Smith. I wouldnt have an issue if they went OL either..
In general yes, but if the next Jason Witten or Barry Sanders is sitting there at 10....
You can't take a WR there. I get what Eric is saying, but with the high picj in ODB and cruz contract you can't tie up so many resources in 1 position - besides QB that is.
No value in a RB there (IMO) and no TE worth the pick - from the looks of things.
OL wouldn't drive me crazy - (but i think Beatty is 1 of our starting tackles next year so that mitigates need)
Really you gotta go defense there. If there is an offensive player so highly rated that you can't pass, then you should do well in a trade down.
if your personnel department says you have a difference-maker offensive talent at #10 or a really good but nothing special defensive player, you will take the latter?
In 1981 and 1984, the Giants didn't "need" linebackers.
if your personnel department says you have a difference-maker offensive talent at #10 or a really good but nothing special defensive player, you will take the latter?
In 1981 and 1984, the Giants didn't "need" linebackers.
Totally agree . I remember when they drafted Banks really high and I said to my dad, why? That makes no sense to me! He said watch and you'll see why. Now they have bookends at OLB and they're both gonna kill it. Sure enough, he called it.
If Treadwell is there at 10, the Giants would be crazy not to take him. In fact they should be running that pick up to the commish.
if your personnel department says you have a difference-maker offensive talent at #10 or a really good but nothing special defensive player, you will take the latter?
In 1981 and 1984, the Giants didn't "need" linebackers.
I know what you are saying. Game changing talent cannot be ignored. but it's rare that a "sure thing" gamebreaker is available at 10. I agree 2nd WR is a huge need. and by May we SHOULD have a better idea about Cruz, and that can def. change things. one way or the other
I know trade down is a popular phrase that is rarely done. I will say this new breed GM def. trades picks in the 1 st round more often then the old guard. I think that is the move if possible.
Defense is a priority by such a distance it's absurd. We had what 6 / 7 offense? 32nd D. A middle of the pack Defense this year and the giants would have made the playoffs.
FA will shape things, and i agree that O should not be ignored, but Defense is where we need the most help
ODB is special, but not a no brainer at the time. not the 1st WR taken, and really - a generational talent. That was a lottery win right there. Like LT, almost, but crazier because he was a lower pick.
No one would pass that up. I'd never advocate that, but that is rare, and at 10 it's more rare. At 10 you get great prospects.
The Defense literally made me sick this year. I was ill when they took the field. esp at the end of a game with the outcome in the balance. There are zero playmakers - Maybe half- DRC is a .5 playmaker.
Hopefully it works out that there is a special player at 10, and he plays Defense.
If they do enough with their 50-60 or more in FA before the draft
You can't take a WR there. I get what Eric is saying, but with the high picj in ODB and cruz contract you can't tie up so many resources in 1 position - besides QB that is.
What resources do we have tied up at WR again? All we have is Beckham (on his rookie contract), Harris and a bunch of scrubs, most of whom don't have contracts at the moment. Cruz will either be making a lot less coin or he will be gone.
The Giants need WR help bad. They wont hesitate if WR is at the top of the board, even at #10.
I've noticed a trend on BBI recently. A lot of posters are so concerned about the defense that they want to ignore the offense this offseason. I've read several posts about "drafting all defense". That would be a foolish mistake.
Lots of holes on D, but we also need offensive help. WR is in shambles. We probably need a RT and/or RG, and I hate to break it to you guys but our RBs were horrific this season.
I wanted Amari Cooper last year, but the Raiders actually were smart
unless an offensive player with very good value falls to the Giants.
I'd try to fill the offensive needs through FA (not many #2 WR, TE, OG), hopefully sign 2-3 defensive FAs (in addition to JPP), and rebuild the defense through the draft.
If they can get 2-3 good players out of the draft, in addition to the FA's, the defense should look considerably better.
RE: If they do enough with their 50-60 or more in FA before the draft
You can't take a WR there. I get what Eric is saying, but with the high picj in ODB and cruz contract you can't tie up so many resources in 1 position - besides QB that is.
What resources do we have tied up at WR again? All we have is Beckham (on his rookie contract), Harris and a bunch of scrubs, most of whom don't have contracts at the moment. Cruz will either be making a lot less coin or he will be gone.
The Giants need WR help bad. They wont hesitate if WR is at the top of the board, even at #10.
I agree Giants need a solid #2 WR, but they need him to contribute immediately. I'd rather sign an FA than draft one. They need a proven commodity who they know from his previous NFL experience can do the job they want him to at a reasonably high level. And Giants need a play maker on defense, first round pick has to go for defense IMO.
I also wouldnt renegotiate Cruz or Beatty this year. Giants dont need the additional cap. How many good FA's will become available? Most of the good ones will be extended by their current teams. If they're lucky they'll get 1 or 2 very good players, the rest should be solid/good players, average to above average priced.
Leave Cruz & Beatty at their current contracts knowing there's a chance they dont live up to them anymore. If they don't, then renegotiate or cut them in 2017 to create cap for further improvements based on 2016 performance.
Quote:
I've noticed a trend on BBI recently. A lot of posters are so concerned about the defense that they want to ignore the offense this offseason. I've read several posts about "drafting all defense". That would be a foolish mistake.
Lots of holes on D, but we also need offensive help. WR is in shambles. We probably need a RT and/or RG, and I hate to break it to you guys but our RBs were horrific this season. [/quote]
In addition to signing JPP, Giants need 5-6 new players on defense. They need a DE, 2 LBs, a CB (would let Prince walk), a FS & possibly a DT. How many of those need can you fill through FA? Giants wont have $50m of cap space every year... How are you going to manage the cap with so many FA pick ups? They need good players playing on rookie contracts.
Build through the draft & fill needs through FA. Giants dont need to rebuild the whole team, but they definitely need to rebuild the defense. If they can fill their offensive needs through FA, hopefully have some money left to sign a couple of guys on defense, rebuilding the defense through the draft isnt "foolish" IMO.
He's finished. 2 years of injuries..,they should just release him. Let's not get all excited again when we hear he's working out and posting on Instagram.
If a playmakong WR is there at 10 i would be happy to get him.
the Giants will be very active in free agency and will bring in a number of defensive players as veterans. They are going to want leadership help almost immediately. I would see them going after guys like Weddle and Wilkerson. Assuming the money is right, I think Weddle will be a Giant. They were interested in him before and he's not going back to SD.
The draft with the 10th pick you get the best player available and I'm sure they will prioritize defense, but you go after the best value. If there is a stud WR or RB there, you take him. The only position I don't take there is a QB. Everything else is on the table. This team is not 1 or 2 players away.
You can't pass judgement on any draft picks until...
...the free agent process plays out. If our FO acquires several quality starters before the draft it may open the door to consider a WR or OT with the #10 slot.
I'll probably still prioritize defense but I'll keep an open mind for now.
opposing defenses, who make make something out of nothing, but plays well within the Giants' run-blocking scheme - that would have to help out the passing game.
on aside note, wonder where Cruz is re: recovery?
Id be fine with a WR, or any skill position, at 10
In my novice opinion, don't think there is a WR in this year's class that would represent BPA there. I like Treadwell, but I don't think the upside is there to justify #10.
you target are hopeful to get, are likely to be franchised, transition tagged, etc etc. Then you wind up with lower tier FA's. Thus, hoping you use FA's to then go BPA in draft becomes a different story. Plus, when it comes time to draft, you usually have impact player or two taken off the board before you pick.
some of you guys are like kids in a candy store this time of year
to field a winning team...and, on a team that has a 'generationally' unbalanced roster to start with, including possibly the worst historic defensive roster given relative rosters?
and what were you guys doing LAST NIGHT when
Julien Eddleman (7th rounder)
Danny Amendola (UDFA)
Keyshawn Martin (4th round)
etc
Cemented themselves as part of the greatest dynasty in all of football history?
Oh, sorry, I forgot, those guys are too short, have no talent, were not hyped at big colleges and highlight reels, don't have shoe deals or crazy haircuts ....
Beforehand all candy and sugar and plums dancing through their head thinking and wanting the best things for Christmas, only to wake Christmas morning and unwrapping just a pair of socks.
Seriously, "Ask again later". Right now they would have to take almost any BPA outside of QB. Let's see how FA goes first. If they pickup Cordy Glenn and Alshon Jeffrey in FA (extreme example which I really doubt) then their first pick better be on defense IMHO. I'm hoping a dominant DE or DT is available at #10. Also hoping Jerry in Cowboys land takes a QB to develop with their 1st pick to help the cause.
its like you have ingrained the FO inability to find gems in mid-late
to the extent that you have adjusted your entire view on the game to compensate for it
small, shifty, small school slot wrs that caught 50 gazillion passes in college (and free agency plays here as well, its not a vacuum) can help balance a roster when you already have 1 all around great wr and some tall, straight running types on the roster.
with the usual caveat that Reese allows himself to move horizontally along a row of similar grades to match need to pick. But never vertically dropping a row to reach on a pick. Beckham was his own row, it has been said.
By the way, McAdoo's comments cement Reese's primacy in personnel matters. He said he will coach the players Reese gets for him. This should defuse the opinion of the rabble who had Coughlin as a manipulator in the process. But it won't. Reese fucked up, aided and abetted by Mara requiring his imprimatur sanctioning each fart. And the Giants still tend to utilize a fundamentalist (cheap) interpretation of the cap. However, I back Reese 100%. I am convinced that he will have a hugely successful 16.
Mara affirmed that they must get McAdoo many good players. Hurrah!
all defensive linesmen across the board at 10. If that's not 'best' enough for you, I don't know what to say.
For sure, there is hype driven player value inflation risk, especially at DE and LB.
But, the argument that 'we can get one lower down' is just very weak - when you need more than one!
Last year and the year before at this time I warned of the 'cascading effect on the rest of the draft' of ignoring DL/OL early. I mean we all love Odell, but that trend of never catching up on the value drop / needs ratio for the other 6 picks has been going on for about 5 years, and the seasons have played out exactly as I said.
RE: if the top wide receiver is still on the board at 10
why would you barf if they took him? #needmorethanodell
Because if one has done even a cursory review of the talent available at the top of the draft you would be aware there is no Amari Cooper available this year
Secondly there is a lot of defensive talent available at the 10 spot.
Lastly the defense is a disaster. I could live w Stanley the top OLT as he's a top 5 talent.
And I lost all faith in Reese Ross and Mara already. If you are a Griant fan You will Pray that they get someone to help the defense not be one of the worst in NFL history again.
Thinks or the rest of the board but if a guy like Stanley is gone and Treadwell is available - I'm taking him. Treadwell and Beckham out there - are you kidding me?
The draft is very very deep at the DL and DE position. But the key is - is there a special enough talent to take there at 10? I would have said Nkemdiche until these recent events - what the hell is the guy thinking?
it goes to that the NFL is about entertainment. Giants still have a large contingent of defense minded fans who cut their fan teeth on the idea that the D line (and lbs during the 3/4 days) could ruin the day for any team that walked on the field.
that entertains the giants fan base. The giants fan base got it when parcells hogged the ball on O and then when the DL wreaked havoc. Remember, Tom was WRs coach during those days, not a D coach, and was busy with that up close and would not have been able to sit back and enjoy the other aspects.
I did make that comment, in line with a heavy investment in role players on O through free agency. which makes sense give that O has a system 'progress not revolution', eli is getting old and needs specific types to work with now, and the D line can go any way needs to accommodate new drafted talent now that they have a clean slate to work with as alluded to by Colin.
Preston Smith, Markus Golden, Eric Kendricks...all these guys went in the 2nd round last year. Point is, reaching at 10 would be a huge mistake. As Eric said, you need special talent that high in the draft, and then taking guys graded out like Richburg in the 2nd who you hope turn into awesome players. I can see us going OL or WR at 10 and then really adding some defense in rounds 2-4. Would love that draft.
No worries. Its almost impossible to miss on this pick
since there should be about 10 or so open slots for starters on next year's opening lineups.
And building some depth wouldn't hurt either except I am not sure their is a roster position, other than QB and maybe Center, that the 10th overall pick wouldn't immediately find a home as a starter.
Thinks or the rest of the board but if a guy like Stanley is gone and Treadwell is available - I'm taking him. Treadwell and Beckham out there - are you kidding me?
The draft is very very deep at the DL and DE position. But the key is - is there a special enough talent to take there at 10? I would have said Nkemdiche until these recent events - what the hell is the guy thinking?
And that would be another reason why this team will suck forever. You can get WRs everywhere I the draft. Brown from AZ. That stiff from Pitt. Brown he's kind of good for a 7th rounder.
So guy named Edleman played last night. Bet they Pats are glad they grabbed him early in the first. Martaveous Bryant was also a first rounder too as a compliment for Brown in Pitt wasn't he? Not.
Alshon Jeffry. First rounder again right?
The insane mentality that you have to grab a WR early has gotten this team nowhere. Meanwhile there will be top tier defensive talent at 10 but the new mentality seems to be it's better to lose games like the Saints one than win ones w any semblance of defense
ryan, correct me if I am wrong, but those guys went prior to our 2pick
In addition, and this is something people may be missing:
We may have been hamstrung for many years by the narrow view of "we need a 1 tech" ..or "we need a 3 tech"
Whereas, if you look at it, being relieved of an internal policy regarding DL play mechanisms (Colin comments on TC) we can now go for the best DL'er overall regardless of that narrow window, and coach will adjust (which multiplicity he showed us in the Pats game, which we almost won - working with practice squadders).
So, for me, its down to measuring hype vs true NFL ability and then grabbing two of them early. DTs possibly.
Preston Smith, Markus Golden, Eric Kendricks...all these guys went in the 2nd round last year. Point is, reaching at 10 would be a huge mistake. As Eric said, you need special talent that high in the draft, and then taking guys graded out like Richburg in the 2nd who you hope turn into awesome players. I can see us going OL or WR at 10 and then really adding some defense in rounds 2-4. Would love that draft.
To me the rally really interesting scenario is if Ronnie Stanley is there at #10. Not that I have lost faith in Flowers but you have a chance to solidify the OL for a decade if you take Stanley and move Flowers to RT. I don't know if it's the right play but it's an intriguing one.
It is true that the ratio of successful WR to total WR drafted late is better than other positions, but it is still lower than the ratio early in the draft. The Giants have a lot of needs and I hope we use Free Agency effectively so we can go BPA in the draft
Thinks or the rest of the board but if a guy like Stanley is gone and Treadwell is available - I'm taking him. Treadwell and Beckham out there - are you kidding me?
The draft is very very deep at the DL and DE position. But the key is - is there a special enough talent to take there at 10? I would have said Nkemdiche until these recent events - what the hell is the guy thinking?
And that would be another reason why this team will suck forever. You can get WRs everywhere I the draft. Brown from AZ. That stiff from Pitt. Brown he's kind of good for a 7th rounder.
So guy named Edleman played last night. Bet they Pats are glad they grabbed him early in the first. Martaveous Bryant was also a first rounder too as a compliment for Brown in Pitt wasn't he? Not.
Alshon Jeffry. First rounder again right?
The insane mentality that you have to grab a WR early has gotten this team nowhere. Meanwhile there will be top tier defensive talent at 10 but the new mentality seems to be it's better to lose games like the Saints one than win ones w any semblance of defense
Brown and Edelman yes, but that's 2 players out of 1,700 players in the NFL. You realize that's an extremely rare case right? Pro Bowl caliber players don't routinely get taken in rounds 4-7. It's just a fact, and any other argument to combat that is just plucking a star player out of thin air and saying "see - it can happen!!"
I have no problem at all with taking defense at 10. But, if there's a star player they think is better value at 10 on offense and then we can take really good defensive players the rest of the way, I'm fine with it.
Also, we've taken exactly 2 receivers in the 1st round in Reese's tenure. One of them happens to be quite possibly the best receiver the NFL has ever seen. The other - only the guy who single handedly dominated the playoffs in 2011 and was a main reason we won a super bowl. So I understand the need to take defense, but the argument that "this team will suck forever if we take a WR in round 1" is simply without merit and not factual.
Preston Smith, Markus Golden, Eric Kendricks...all these guys went in the 2nd round last year. Point is, reaching at 10 would be a huge mistake. As Eric said, you need special talent that high in the draft, and then taking guys graded out like Richburg in the 2nd who you hope turn into awesome players. I can see us going OL or WR at 10 and then really adding some defense in rounds 2-4. Would love that draft.
To me the rally really interesting scenario is if Ronnie Stanley is there at #10. Not that I have lost faith in Flowers but you have a chance to solidify the OL for a decade if you take Stanley and move Flowers to RT. I don't know if it's the right play but it's an intriguing one.
Stanley is a classic blue goose prospect with amazing feet. I don't think the Giants would pass him up at 10. You could move Flowers over to right tackle, or put Stanley there. I agree this would be very intriguing. If Stanley grades out as a top 5 player in the draft and he's there at 10, how do you pass?
Yes, Preston Smith and Goldman went before our pick this year but Kendricks and Golden didn't.
Guess what I was trying to say was, elite players don't grow on trees, but very solid and good players do in rounds 2-4. Plenty of defensive players jn this years draft will be available in the top 100.
for any number of years I made the exact same arguent regarding
O guard; i.e. that if you go 'skill position' early, that you will never get back around to building the TYPE OF OL that THIS team needs to win. Because the value drop was greater than hoped for, teams drafting linesmen earlier than expected by our group.
And, once again, the 2015 seasons first downs numbers and touchdowns types numbers proved that this was exactly the case. High risk sometimes high rewards, very poor possession stats O.
Now, same for DT/DE.
With the caveat, that we still need that guard and ORT and will by necessity need to get them in free agency, due to even larger, more glaring needs at DL.
Pick exemplifies what rounds 2-4 should be. Not reaching or drafting on upside. Just taking guys that are really good players who will help your team hopefully immediately, but definitely within 2 years.
In 1981 and 1984, the Giants didn't "need" linebackers.
I remember being upset about the Banks selection. Andy Headen was a very good young OLB, I saw no reason to use the 3rd pick in the draft on a replacement for him. It made no sense. At the time.
The offense was #6 in the NFL...The defense was #32.
I think we all know which side of the ball is going to be allotted the lions share of the teams offseason free agent and draft resources.
We currently need to upgrade 6 defensive starting positions, seven if you include nickel corner back...the only holdovers being Hankins, DRC, Collins, Kennard and Bromley. Pass rushers and CB's are the priorities with FS and MIKE backer nipping at their heels.
We'll have to get a lot done in defensive free agency to make the luxury of an offensive pick a reality.
It's too important a pick to do anything but what your draft board tells you to do. If there is one blue chip player left, you take him no matter the position. If there are two or more blue chip players in the mix, then you consider position as well.
and I think he is alluding to that one cannot really get that done in free agency (the D), since nobody lets those guys go, and we need actual play makers there.
there is opportunity in every situation.
for O, the advent of ODB allows you to look for slot players and tight ends. Elis age and the ability of the mac O to make big plays within the context of poor possession stats almost dictates finding those in free agency or low rounds given the state of the D.
Selection of only a "skill" position player with a top 10 pick
More often than not, teams picking in that range have fundamental issues with their rosters (except for the occasional instance where a team lost their starting QB and the whole season went south).
OF course, you're looking for impact with that pick but just because there are not stats such as receptions, tds, sacks attached to many roster positions doesn't mean Guard, RT, LB or Free Safety for instance cannot have a meaningful impact.
. given the D needs and that there appear to be a number of DLers in the mix, a short trade down might allow the building of a dominant unit as in the days of yore.
...but an early look at the draft indicates that unless the Notre Dame OT drops(he won't) the offensive and defensive talent is comparable at #10. It will be defense unless Reese pulls off a miraculous defensive coup in free agency.
the 2 best pass rushing all around defensive tackles with two first round picks.
in round two, that crazy bastard being still there (the DT who fell off a roof) draft him as well and play him at left end, putting JPP at right end again.
rounds 3-7 look for free safeties and linebackers, maybe a slot wr or tight end or fullback in the mix late.
free agency is for guard/te/slot.
RE: surpirsed nobody brought up the trade down thing
. given the D needs and that there appear to be a number of DLers in the mix, a short trade down might allow the building of a dominant unit as in the days of yore.
I like the thought. But I would be remiss if didn't give some pause to Reese & Co screwing up finding good quality after Round 1.
...but an early look at the draft indicates that unless the Notre Dame OT drops(he won't) the offensive and defensive talent is comparable at #10.
It's really too early to tell how the top ten or twelve prospects are going to shake out. Last year at this time Randy Gregory was considered out of reach with the 10th pick and Erik Flowers was considered a late first/early second round prospect.
And as others have said, I expect the Giants to focus a lot on defense in free agency. So things won't appear as desperate on defense once draft day roll around.
top of the line WR in OBJ already. We also have too many other needs to take another one if he was available. ELI just needs a sure handed possession WR who runs precise routes to compliment OBJ. We can get that in FA or later in the draft. At #10 we need a instant starter preferably on defense.
In a perfect world, the BPA would be a pass rusher and
you pick him regardless of what was done in FA. But you have no control over the picks ahead of you. So if the best is an offense player so be it.
Our defense unit is just plain dreadful and offense obvious better, but if you don't think offense couldn't use another "player" your kidding yourself. Our offense is Eli, OBJ, and three offensive lineman. The rest are good complimentary players or just average.
Just want the pick at ten to end up being a difference maker.
RE: I wanted Amari Cooper last year, but the Raiders actually were smart
CBS, for example, has 11 Defensive Linesmen in the first 32 overall.
11.
But, nobody expects more than 1/3rd of all picks in the first 32 to be DL.
Some people draw from that the following conclusion:
'ergo we get one lower down'.
Wrong IMHO. To me, that is, and has been proven to be, the logic of mediocrity.
Rather, I suggest, when you have a situation like that, you take the first two, the highest two, the most valuable 'best' two ...or even three, that you can get, regardless of technique or spot within DL.
Football is won by dominating units, not by decent rosters.
(now, you could say the same for the wr 'unit', fine...do that in 2017, certainly this year is too early for that move)
This is a passing league and they desperately need another good WR
Lawson DE, Ogbah DE, Billings DT, Robinson DT, CB Ramsey, CB Alexander, CB Hargreaves.
I would imagine most on this list will have a similar grade to WR Treadwell and anywhere from 2-5 of the aforementioned defensive players will be available at the 10th pick projecting the 2 QBs, Bosa, Stanley and Tunsil will be off the board before the Giants pick.
I did make that comment, in line with a heavy investment in role players on O through free agency. which makes sense give that O has a system 'progress not revolution', eli is getting old and needs specific types to work with now, and the D line can go any way needs to accommodate new drafted talent now that they have a clean slate to work with as alluded to by Colin.
I'm just saying that you can't go into the draft with a plan to ignore one side of the ball.
We all know the Giants. They look at CB, DE, and WR in the first. All 3 of those positions are a need at the moment. I'd say BPA at one of those three positions is a safe bet.
Thinks or the rest of the board but if a guy like Stanley is gone and Treadwell is available - I'm taking him. Treadwell and Beckham out there - are you kidding me?
The draft is very very deep at the DL and DE position. But the key is - is there a special enough talent to take there at 10? I would have said Nkemdiche until these recent events - what the hell is the guy thinking?
And that would be another reason why this team will suck forever. You can get WRs everywhere I the draft. Brown from AZ. That stiff from Pitt. Brown he's kind of good for a 7th rounder.
So guy named Edleman played last night. Bet they Pats are glad they grabbed him early in the first. Martaveous Bryant was also a first rounder too as a compliment for Brown in Pitt wasn't he? Not.
Alshon Jeffry. First rounder again right?
The insane mentality that you have to grab a WR early has gotten this team nowhere. Meanwhile there will be top tier defensive talent at 10 but the new mentality seems to be it's better to lose games like the Saints one than win ones w any semblance of defense
Agree with this. Defense BPA, most likely a DE or LB, unless they let Prince go, then could be CB. There will be some very good pass rushers, hopefully a guy like Shaq Lawson is there. We need energy and relentlessness at DE and he looks like the deal. WR can wait. There's guys like Caroo, that will be available in the 2 or 3 rounds. We need guys that can separate themselves from coverage and make tough catches.
I would guess they are targetting defensive end right now
and my only reservation is that, if there is (and I have no idea) a clearly better value at DT - will they have the discipline to do that instead, especially if that DT can get after it.
and will they also have the discipline to continue with that trend into rounds 2 and 3.
Of position. This roster is in dire need of talent.....everywhere. I don't care if it's Stanley at OT creating a conundrum where we have to move Flowers to RT, or Treadwell at WR, or Ogbah/Lawson at DE, Robinson from Alabama, the CB from Florida, or the damn RB from Ohio State. Get a player. Period.
Preston Smith, Markus Golden, Eric Kendricks...all these guys went in the 2nd round last year. Point is, reaching at 10 would be a huge mistake. As Eric said, you need special talent that high in the draft, and then taking guys graded out like Richburg in the 2nd who you hope turn into awesome players. I can see us going OL or WR at 10 and then really adding some defense in rounds 2-4. Would love that draft.
To me the rally really interesting scenario is if Ronnie Stanley is there at #10. Not that I have lost faith in Flowers but you have a chance to solidify the OL for a decade if you take Stanley and move Flowers to RT. I don't know if it's the right play but it's an intriguing one.
Stanley is a classic blue goose prospect with amazing feet. I don't think the Giants would pass him up at 10. You could move Flowers over to right tackle, or put Stanley there. I agree this would be very intriguing. If Stanley grades out as a top 5 player in the draft and he's there at 10, how do you pass?
Unfortunately, Reese has screwed up the defense so bad that we can't afford to draft anything but defense there. Need impact players on Defense now. Oline is in fairly good shape. Keep in mind you will probably have Beatty, Schwartz and Hart coming back too. Jerry will probably be in the mix and Jones, from the CFL, will also be back in the fold. Offense is top 10 right now. Defense very bottom of league. You can figure out where they'll look to upgrade immediately.
I just hope they have the good sense to go BPA and not force any
It doesn't gibe with their preferred salary structure. It's possible but unlikely imo.
A far as doubling up on the position early? They have starters in place with Hankins and Bromley. Don't hold your breath, it's not going to happen.
How much of that is a function of draft position, though?
We drafted Marvin Austin in the 2nd round. 1st round, when we did pick high, we were typically outside the 'disruptive DT' range. Those guys tend to go higher than 10.
Given the average draft position, I don't think it's necessarily a function of 'the Giants don't draft DTs high', it's more a matter of BPA and the better DTs being gone by that point.
RE: The Giants haven't drafted a DT in the 1st Round in over a decade
It doesn't gibe with their preferred salary structure. It's possible but unlikely imo.
A far as doubling up on the position early? They have starters in place with Hankins and Bromley. Don't hold your breath, it's not going to happen.
And that last DT was William Joseph. Right now except for QB and C due to who we currently have and RB, K or P due to nobody being worthy of #10 pick in there is no position that I would place off limits based on current needs
They prioritize DE's, CB's, WR's and OT's in their schemes and salary structure. The last pick that wasn't from those positions was Wilson and he was essentially a 2nd Rounder as was Kenny Phillips the only other top pick since 2005 that isn't one of those four premium positions.
It isn't a coincidence. Plus I didn't way it was impossible just unlikely. Now two DT's to start the draft I'll go with impossible.
Of missing this pick, despite the idea that you can't screw up a top ten pick. Trust me, he can. Don't assume this is a no brainer no matter who their #1 pick is. Guy could be out for the season in preseason. As McAdoo said and I agree... The best players are the smartest players. Hopefully he will impose his philosophy on that.
We have one legit weapon who scares anyone - Beckham. What if he tears his ACL?
You take the best player available.
Other than OBJ (and maybe JPP, for two years of his career) the Giants rarely take the BPA. This FO's drafts are mostly need driven because of the multi-year failures in stocking NFL caliber players.
RE: RE: The Giants haven't drafted a DT in the 1st Round in over a decade
It doesn't gibe with their preferred salary structure. It's possible but unlikely imo.
A far as doubling up on the position early? They have starters in place with Hankins and Bromley. Don't hold your breath, it's not going to happen.
How much of that is a function of draft position, though?
We drafted Marvin Austin in the 2nd round. 1st round, when we did pick high, we were typically outside the 'disruptive DT' range. Those guys tend to go higher than 10.
Given the average draft position, I don't think it's necessarily a function of 'the Giants don't draft DTs high', it's more a matter of BPA and the better DTs being gone by that point.
Historically, actually not alot of DT taken in the first round. Last 10 drafts only 27 in total taken in the 1st. Only 8 were top 10. NYG not out of step with rest of the league. Think it's safe to say unless a "Suh", Reese is not picking a DT at 10.
I love these type of players yet am more and more confused as teams appear focussed on top picks contributing immediately rather than waiting for a position, like DT, to develop into better contributors over time.
They prioritize DE's, CB's, WR's and OT's in their schemes and salary structure. The last pick that wasn't from those positions was Wilson and he was essentially a 2nd Rounder as was Kenny Phillips the only other top pick since 2005 that isn't one of those four premium positions.
It isn't a coincidence. Plus I didn't way it was impossible just unlikely. Now two DT's to start the draft I'll go with impossible.
Let's look at the drafts starting at 2006:
2006 - 32nd, picked Kiwi - last DT picked at 26, next one is picked in RD3
2007 - 20th, picked Ross - last DT picked at 16, next one picked at 33 (Alan Branch)
2008 - 32nd, picked Phillips - last DT picked at 7, next one picked at 48
2009 - 29th, picked Nicks - last DT picked at 9, next one picked at 32 (Ziggy Hood)
2010 - 15th picked JPP, DTs went 3 and 10, and again at 26 (Dan Williams)
2011 - 19th picked Prince, DTs went at 3 and 13, and again at 21 (Philip Taylor)
2012 - 32nd picked Wilson - DT heavy 1st round, going 11, 12 and 14. Next DT picked at 36 (Derek Wolfe)
2013 - 19th, picked Pugh - DT goes at 14 and 23 (Sharif Floyd)
2014 - 12th, picked OBJ - DT famously goes right after (Donald) and at 29 (Easley)
2015 - 9th, picked Flowers. DT heavy here too, with 6, 12, 17 and 32 overall all going to DTs.
Looking at the data, it seems like you either pick top 10-15 in order to get one of the better DTs, or you pick one later on. The Giants weren't in position to get in on the better pass rushing DTs that were selected, so it's unfair to state authoritatively that they would or wouldn't have picked them when they never had a shot.
In the few instances (like Donald vs. OBJ), where they did have a chance at either, it's fair enough to say that they came back with a player that performed better than the one they passed on. Donald is a dynamic player, but I don't think he would provide the same impact that OBJ does.
In 1981 and 1984, the Giants didn't "need" linebackers.
[Eman11]
Totally agree . I remember when they drafted Banks really high and I said to my dad, why? That makes no sense to me! He said watch and you'll see why. Now they have bookends at OLB and they're both gonna kill it. Sure enough, he called it.
If Treadwell is there at 10, the Giants would be crazy not to take him. In fact they should be running that pick up to the commish.
I don't know that much about Treadwell, but I sure as hell vividly remember the 1984 draft--I believe back then it was held during weekdays, and late morning (if I recall accurately) when the Giants drafted Banks, I was ecstatic, because we were getting stronger, on the way to a dominant d. I loved me BP and BB.
That was some draft day: I don't recall how, but we wound up with two first round picks, using the second to draft William Roberts, who turned out to be solid, but not light it up solid.
Fwiw, I think Roberts is a fairly good comparator for Beatty in terms of their build and style of play, more technique and finesse than powerful and controlling his man.
Cruz should be healthy next year. The giants need to add some depth at WR but i do not see them drafting a WR at #10. No way. The defense needs to be rebuilt and you cannot do it just through FA.
I believe the giants will and should draft defense in the early rounds.
There are about a half dozen DE who could go in the top 15. I think that is where they will go unless somebody falls to them that they just can't pass up.
RE: You can't pass judgement on any draft picks until...
...the free agent process plays out. If our FO acquires several quality starters before the draft it may open the door to consider a WR or OT with the #10 slot.
I'll probably still prioritize defense but I'll keep an open mind for now.
Looking at the data, it seems like you either pick top 10-15 in order to get one of the better DTs, or you pick one later on. The Giants weren't in position to get in on the better pass rushing DTs that were selected, so it's unfair to state authoritatively that they would or wouldn't have picked them when they never had a shot....
[/quote]
jcn, hello,
that's an interesting snapshot in terms of selection and positioning, but it does not necessarily reveal whether it reflects overall successful strategy without looking at careers to date of the selections--and I am not suggesting that you (or I) prepare that. (: But, as a for instance, when we picked Prince @ 19, Wilkerson went at #30. As I think most of us can agree, it's not an exact science, but the body of work--and maybe draft philosophy re. targeting certain positions at the expense of others--might suggest the NYG are not excelling.
Best player available for one of the numerous holes we have on this team. If multiple selections are there for those various needs you go with the most important spot down
True,but I would wait an see what wehave with Cruz before
They prioritize DE's, CB's, WR's and OT's in their schemes and salary structure. The last pick that wasn't from those positions was Wilson and he was essentially a 2nd Rounder as was Kenny Phillips the only other top pick since 2005 that isn't one of those four premium positions.
It isn't a coincidence. Plus I didn't way it was impossible just unlikely. Now two DT's to start the draft I'll go with impossible.
Let's look at the drafts starting at 2006:
2006 - 32nd, picked Kiwi - last DT picked at 26, next one is picked in RD3
2007 - 20th, picked Ross - last DT picked at 16, next one picked at 33 (Alan Branch)
2008 - 32nd, picked Phillips - last DT picked at 7, next one picked at 48
2009 - 29th, picked Nicks - last DT picked at 9, next one picked at 32 (Ziggy Hood)
2010 - 15th picked JPP, DTs went 3 and 10, and again at 26 (Dan Williams)
2011 - 19th picked Prince, DTs went at 3 and 13, and again at 21 (Philip Taylor)
2012 - 32nd picked Wilson - DT heavy 1st round, going 11, 12 and 14. Next DT picked at 36 (Derek Wolfe)
2013 - 19th, picked Pugh - DT goes at 14 and 23 (Sharif Floyd)
2014 - 12th, picked OBJ - DT famously goes right after (Donald) and at 29 (Easley)
2015 - 9th, picked Flowers. DT heavy here too, with 6, 12, 17 and 32 overall all going to DTs.
Looking at the data, it seems like you either pick top 10-15 in order to get one of the better DTs, or you pick one later on. The Giants weren't in position to get in on the better pass rushing DTs that were selected, so it's unfair to state authoritatively that they would or wouldn't have picked them when they never had a shot.
In the few instances (like Donald vs. OBJ), where they did have a chance at either, it's fair enough to say that they came back with a player that performed better than the one they passed on. Donald is a dynamic player, but I don't think he would provide the same impact that OBJ does.
I wonder if we can say pretty much the same at LB..Everyone laments our inability to get a "stud" but when were they ever within easy reach of us?
I know taking two guys from the same school seems unlikely but Clemson and Alabama are going to dominate the first 50 picks.
Lawson showed me a lot by playing on a bad knee. He basically had one move and then could not push. Don't believe the stuff about him dropping. This guy is going at the top of the draft.
Alexander might be gone by the time the Giants pick, but what a coup it would be getting these two guys. Top of the second round is loaded in this draft, so Giants will get a good layer regardless.
As someone else said, other than QB or C (unless great OC / OG player), any other position worth a top 10 first round pick (i.e. likely not P or K, SLB or SS) is fair game.
IF worth the value at that pick, a LT, WR, RB on offense or DE, DT, LB, CB or FS on defense are all fine.
anecdotally, further to DT discussion (and also drafting of Banks when
Kawaan Short, who is helping to destroy Seattle this afternoon, drafted @ 13 in Round 2, after Carolina picked Lolutelei in Round 1, the first DT picked in the 2013 draft. Sharif Floyd at #23 (Vikings) and Sylvester Williams @28 (Broncos) were the only other DTs picked to that point. Hankins went to us with the 49th pick, after we took Justin Pugh at 19.
Seems like the Panthers knew what they were doing.
I know taking two guys from the same school seems unlikely but Clemson and Alabama are going to dominate the first 50 picks.
Lawson showed me a lot by playing on a bad knee. He basically had one move and then could not push. Don't believe the stuff about him dropping. This guy is going at the top of the draft.
Alexander might be gone by the time the Giants pick, but what a coup it would be getting these two guys. Top of the second round is loaded in this draft, so Giants will get a good layer regardless.
Picking in the 1st round is RELATIVELY easier than picking in the latter rounds. Reese has been very good at the former not so much at the latter.
My fear is that if a Kuechly-type LB and a super WR are available. He is organically incapable of selecting a LB.
Picking in the 1st round is RELATIVELY easier than picking in the latter rounds. Reese has been very good at the former not so much at the latter.
My fear is that if a Kuechly-type LB and a super WR are available. He is organically incapable of selecting a LB.
There isn't a LB even remotely close to Keuchly in this draft.
Stats of course can be misleading. In a passing league, being worst in rushing defense is not fatal.
Important stat: The Giants had 23 sacks this season. In 2011 the number was 48 for the regular season and another 11 in the post-season. They had three legitimate pass rushers in JPP, Tuck and Osi and a good blitzing linebacker in Boley. Osi, you probably remember missed the first seven games of the season but in nine games played had nine sacks, and three and a half more in the postseason, including that strip sack of Rodgers.
That 2011 defense also had Antrel Rolle, Kenny Phillips, and Linval Joseph. Even Chris Canty, who was a yawner to most Giant fans, chipped in with 4 sacks in 2011, and after leaving the Giants after 2012 was the starting right end for the Ravens for two years before injuries caught up with him.
You look at the Giants' defensive roster in 2011 and look at the roster in 2015 and just wonder what the hell hit us?
Cruz should be healthy next year. The giants need to add some depth at WR but i do not see them drafting a WR at #10. No way. The defense needs to be rebuilt and you cannot do it just through FA.
I believe the giants will and should draft defense in the early rounds.
Cruz healthy ? The guy may never play again, its against the odds big time. one of Reese's worst moves last offseason was not getting some backup if Cruz didn't return.
RE: some of you guys are like kids in a candy store this time of year
Look at it this very basic way ... would you bypass a future All Pro WR or CB simply because you perceived a huge need at *insert your biased choice here*? That's how perennial losing teams operate.
...from a 'row' to choose from. Prospect grades tend to group in clusters.
All thing being equal, and without considering free agent activity, the odds to me are skewed to a defensive player being a probable selection this year in the 1st round. An OT or WR are possibilities. We'd have to do a lot in free agency to balance the odds here imo. The Giants have demonstrated that need is a factor for them on draft day when plucking payers from their board.
Yes, and if a DE and or CB are graded in a cluster with the WR
we know they'd most likely pick the DE to build the defense around. But, it's looking lean at DE when talking about the #10 pick of this draft. CB is looking more likely from this crop, at this still relatively early glance.
Ehh it's still early to be ranking position strengths for me
There are some DE's that intrigue, some CB's as well. I'll let the process play out until after the combine and do some more study on these guys before setting my jaw.
But, all positions (except QB) needs help.
You take the best player available.
Giants...27th in defense.
Giants...32nd in rushing.
Eli + Cruz + Nicks = 9-7 record.
In general yes, but if the next Jason Witten or Barry Sanders is sitting there at 10....
No value in a RB there (IMO) and no TE worth the pick - from the looks of things.
OL wouldn't drive me crazy - (but i think Beatty is 1 of our starting tackles next year so that mitigates need)
Really you gotta go defense there. If there is an offensive player so highly rated that you can't pass, then you should do well in a trade down.
Defense all day. maybe a guard in the 3/4 round
In 1981 and 1984, the Giants didn't "need" linebackers.
It's why we just fired our head coach and have three losing seasons in a row.
Our second best WR was Rueben Randle.
In 1981 and 1984, the Giants didn't "need" linebackers.
Totally agree . I remember when they drafted Banks really high and I said to my dad, why? That makes no sense to me! He said watch and you'll see why. Now they have bookends at OLB and they're both gonna kill it. Sure enough, he called it.
If Treadwell is there at 10, the Giants would be crazy not to take him. In fact they should be running that pick up to the commish.
In 1981 and 1984, the Giants didn't "need" linebackers.
I know what you are saying. Game changing talent cannot be ignored. but it's rare that a "sure thing" gamebreaker is available at 10. I agree 2nd WR is a huge need. and by May we SHOULD have a better idea about Cruz, and that can def. change things. one way or the other
I know trade down is a popular phrase that is rarely done. I will say this new breed GM def. trades picks in the 1 st round more often then the old guard. I think that is the move if possible.
Defense is a priority by such a distance it's absurd. We had what 6 / 7 offense? 32nd D. A middle of the pack Defense this year and the giants would have made the playoffs.
FA will shape things, and i agree that O should not be ignored, but Defense is where we need the most help
ODB is special, but not a no brainer at the time. not the 1st WR taken, and really - a generational talent. That was a lottery win right there. Like LT, almost, but crazier because he was a lower pick.
No one would pass that up. I'd never advocate that, but that is rare, and at 10 it's more rare. At 10 you get great prospects.
The Defense literally made me sick this year. I was ill when they took the field. esp at the end of a game with the outcome in the balance. There are zero playmakers - Maybe half- DRC is a .5 playmaker.
Hopefully it works out that there is a special player at 10, and he plays Defense.
OBJ: HOF talent
KP: Would have been a perennial pro bowler
Nicks: Top 10-15 WR in the game
Pugh and Flowers look like quality players
JPP: dominant DL slowed by injuries
Wilson and Ross were his only "misses" and neither one was a terrible pick. Just average
So, I have complete faith in Jerry in the first round. The latter rounds not quite as much. But he has killed the first round
What resources do we have tied up at WR again? All we have is Beckham (on his rookie contract), Harris and a bunch of scrubs, most of whom don't have contracts at the moment. Cruz will either be making a lot less coin or he will be gone.
The Giants need WR help bad. They wont hesitate if WR is at the top of the board, even at #10.
I've noticed a trend on BBI recently. A lot of posters are so concerned about the defense that they want to ignore the offense this offseason. I've read several posts about "drafting all defense". That would be a foolish mistake.
Lots of holes on D, but we also need offensive help. WR is in shambles. We probably need a RT and/or RG, and I hate to break it to you guys but our RBs were horrific this season.
I'd try to fill the offensive needs through FA (not many #2 WR, TE, OG), hopefully sign 2-3 defensive FAs (in addition to JPP), and rebuild the defense through the draft.
If they can get 2-3 good players out of the draft, in addition to the FA's, the defense should look considerably better.
This
Quote:
You can't take a WR there. I get what Eric is saying, but with the high picj in ODB and cruz contract you can't tie up so many resources in 1 position - besides QB that is.
What resources do we have tied up at WR again? All we have is Beckham (on his rookie contract), Harris and a bunch of scrubs, most of whom don't have contracts at the moment. Cruz will either be making a lot less coin or he will be gone.
The Giants need WR help bad. They wont hesitate if WR is at the top of the board, even at #10.
I agree Giants need a solid #2 WR, but they need him to contribute immediately. I'd rather sign an FA than draft one. They need a proven commodity who they know from his previous NFL experience can do the job they want him to at a reasonably high level. And Giants need a play maker on defense, first round pick has to go for defense IMO.
I also wouldnt renegotiate Cruz or Beatty this year. Giants dont need the additional cap. How many good FA's will become available? Most of the good ones will be extended by their current teams. If they're lucky they'll get 1 or 2 very good players, the rest should be solid/good players, average to above average priced.
Leave Cruz & Beatty at their current contracts knowing there's a chance they dont live up to them anymore. If they don't, then renegotiate or cut them in 2017 to create cap for further improvements based on 2016 performance.
Lots of holes on D, but we also need offensive help. WR is in shambles. We probably need a RT and/or RG, and I hate to break it to you guys but our RBs were horrific this season. [/quote]
In addition to signing JPP, Giants need 5-6 new players on defense. They need a DE, 2 LBs, a CB (would let Prince walk), a FS & possibly a DT. How many of those need can you fill through FA? Giants wont have $50m of cap space every year... How are you going to manage the cap with so many FA pick ups? They need good players playing on rookie contracts.
Build through the draft & fill needs through FA. Giants dont need to rebuild the whole team, but they definitely need to rebuild the defense. If they can fill their offensive needs through FA, hopefully have some money left to sign a couple of guys on defense, rebuilding the defense through the draft isnt "foolish" IMO.
If a playmakong WR is there at 10 i would be happy to get him.
Also, it is not that I believe our RB situation is great, just that I think we can win with the guys we have so would not waste a 1st rounder on a RB.
The draft with the 10th pick you get the best player available and I'm sure they will prioritize defense, but you go after the best value. If there is a stud WR or RB there, you take him. The only position I don't take there is a QB. Everything else is on the table. This team is not 1 or 2 players away.
I'll probably still prioritize defense but I'll keep an open mind for now.
on aside note, wonder where Cruz is re: recovery?
In my novice opinion, don't think there is a WR in this year's class that would represent BPA there. I like Treadwell, but I don't think the upside is there to justify #10.
I've been thinking that Ogbah will be our guy.
It would have won us a few additional games when you think of the Parker fuckups and all early on
spit up my coffee, thanks
two 'generational' wrs
to field a winning team...and, on a team that has a 'generationally' unbalanced roster to start with, including possibly the worst historic defensive roster given relative rosters?
and what were you guys doing LAST NIGHT when
Julien Eddleman (7th rounder)
Danny Amendola (UDFA)
Keyshawn Martin (4th round)
etc
Cemented themselves as part of the greatest dynasty in all of football history?
Oh, sorry, I forgot, those guys are too short, have no talent, were not hyped at big colleges and highlight reels, don't have shoe deals or crazy haircuts ....
Another of those guys in second round would be ok too.
small, shifty, small school slot wrs that caught 50 gazillion passes in college (and free agency plays here as well, its not a vacuum) can help balance a roster when you already have 1 all around great wr and some tall, straight running types on the roster.
By the way, McAdoo's comments cement Reese's primacy in personnel matters. He said he will coach the players Reese gets for him. This should defuse the opinion of the rabble who had Coughlin as a manipulator in the process. But it won't. Reese fucked up, aided and abetted by Mara requiring his imprimatur sanctioning each fart. And the Giants still tend to utilize a fundamentalist (cheap) interpretation of the cap. However, I back Reese 100%. I am convinced that he will have a hugely successful 16.
Mara affirmed that they must get McAdoo many good players. Hurrah!
For sure, there is hype driven player value inflation risk, especially at DE and LB.
But, the argument that 'we can get one lower down' is just very weak - when you need more than one!
Last year and the year before at this time I warned of the 'cascading effect on the rest of the draft' of ignoring DL/OL early. I mean we all love Odell, but that trend of never catching up on the value drop / needs ratio for the other 6 picks has been going on for about 5 years, and the seasons have played out exactly as I said.
Because if one has done even a cursory review of the talent available at the top of the draft you would be aware there is no Amari Cooper available this year
Secondly there is a lot of defensive talent available at the 10 spot.
Lastly the defense is a disaster. I could live w Stanley the top OLT as he's a top 5 talent.
And I lost all faith in Reese Ross and Mara already. If you are a Griant fan You will Pray that they get someone to help the defense not be one of the worst in NFL history again.
The draft is very very deep at the DL and DE position. But the key is - is there a special enough talent to take there at 10? I would have said Nkemdiche until these recent events - what the hell is the guy thinking?
That's what the first pick should be.
that entertains the giants fan base. The giants fan base got it when parcells hogged the ball on O and then when the DL wreaked havoc. Remember, Tom was WRs coach during those days, not a D coach, and was busy with that up close and would not have been able to sit back and enjoy the other aspects.
And building some depth wouldn't hurt either except I am not sure their is a roster position, other than QB and maybe Center, that the 10th overall pick wouldn't immediately find a home as a starter.
But let me know if you all feel differently...
The draft is very very deep at the DL and DE position. But the key is - is there a special enough talent to take there at 10? I would have said Nkemdiche until these recent events - what the hell is the guy thinking?
And that would be another reason why this team will suck forever. You can get WRs everywhere I the draft. Brown from AZ. That stiff from Pitt. Brown he's kind of good for a 7th rounder.
So guy named Edleman played last night. Bet they Pats are glad they grabbed him early in the first. Martaveous Bryant was also a first rounder too as a compliment for Brown in Pitt wasn't he? Not.
Alshon Jeffry. First rounder again right?
The insane mentality that you have to grab a WR early has gotten this team nowhere. Meanwhile there will be top tier defensive talent at 10 but the new mentality seems to be it's better to lose games like the Saints one than win ones w any semblance of defense
In addition, and this is something people may be missing:
We may have been hamstrung for many years by the narrow view of "we need a 1 tech" ..or "we need a 3 tech"
Whereas, if you look at it, being relieved of an internal policy regarding DL play mechanisms (Colin comments on TC) we can now go for the best DL'er overall regardless of that narrow window, and coach will adjust (which multiplicity he showed us in the Pats game, which we almost won - working with practice squadders).
So, for me, its down to measuring hype vs true NFL ability and then grabbing two of them early. DTs possibly.
To me the rally really interesting scenario is if Ronnie Stanley is there at #10. Not that I have lost faith in Flowers but you have a chance to solidify the OL for a decade if you take Stanley and move Flowers to RT. I don't know if it's the right play but it's an intriguing one.
Quote:
Thinks or the rest of the board but if a guy like Stanley is gone and Treadwell is available - I'm taking him. Treadwell and Beckham out there - are you kidding me?
The draft is very very deep at the DL and DE position. But the key is - is there a special enough talent to take there at 10? I would have said Nkemdiche until these recent events - what the hell is the guy thinking?
And that would be another reason why this team will suck forever. You can get WRs everywhere I the draft. Brown from AZ. That stiff from Pitt. Brown he's kind of good for a 7th rounder.
So guy named Edleman played last night. Bet they Pats are glad they grabbed him early in the first. Martaveous Bryant was also a first rounder too as a compliment for Brown in Pitt wasn't he? Not.
Alshon Jeffry. First rounder again right?
The insane mentality that you have to grab a WR early has gotten this team nowhere. Meanwhile there will be top tier defensive talent at 10 but the new mentality seems to be it's better to lose games like the Saints one than win ones w any semblance of defense
Brown and Edelman yes, but that's 2 players out of 1,700 players in the NFL. You realize that's an extremely rare case right? Pro Bowl caliber players don't routinely get taken in rounds 4-7. It's just a fact, and any other argument to combat that is just plucking a star player out of thin air and saying "see - it can happen!!"
I have no problem at all with taking defense at 10. But, if there's a star player they think is better value at 10 on offense and then we can take really good defensive players the rest of the way, I'm fine with it.
Also, we've taken exactly 2 receivers in the 1st round in Reese's tenure. One of them happens to be quite possibly the best receiver the NFL has ever seen. The other - only the guy who single handedly dominated the playoffs in 2011 and was a main reason we won a super bowl. So I understand the need to take defense, but the argument that "this team will suck forever if we take a WR in round 1" is simply without merit and not factual.
Quote:
Preston Smith, Markus Golden, Eric Kendricks...all these guys went in the 2nd round last year. Point is, reaching at 10 would be a huge mistake. As Eric said, you need special talent that high in the draft, and then taking guys graded out like Richburg in the 2nd who you hope turn into awesome players. I can see us going OL or WR at 10 and then really adding some defense in rounds 2-4. Would love that draft.
To me the rally really interesting scenario is if Ronnie Stanley is there at #10. Not that I have lost faith in Flowers but you have a chance to solidify the OL for a decade if you take Stanley and move Flowers to RT. I don't know if it's the right play but it's an intriguing one.
Stanley is a classic blue goose prospect with amazing feet. I don't think the Giants would pass him up at 10. You could move Flowers over to right tackle, or put Stanley there. I agree this would be very intriguing. If Stanley grades out as a top 5 player in the draft and he's there at 10, how do you pass?
Guess what I was trying to say was, elite players don't grow on trees, but very solid and good players do in rounds 2-4. Plenty of defensive players jn this years draft will be available in the top 100.
And, once again, the 2015 seasons first downs numbers and touchdowns types numbers proved that this was exactly the case. High risk sometimes high rewards, very poor possession stats O.
Now, same for DT/DE.
With the caveat, that we still need that guard and ORT and will by necessity need to get them in free agency, due to even larger, more glaring needs at DL.
The offense was #6 in the NFL...The defense was #32.
I think we all know which side of the ball is going to be allotted the lions share of the teams offseason free agent and draft resources.
We currently need to upgrade 6 defensive starting positions, seven if you include nickel corner back...the only holdovers being Hankins, DRC, Collins, Kennard and Bromley. Pass rushers and CB's are the priorities with FS and MIKE backer nipping at their heels.
We'll have to get a lot done in defensive free agency to make the luxury of an offensive pick a reality.
there is opportunity in every situation.
for O, the advent of ODB allows you to look for slot players and tight ends. Elis age and the ability of the mac O to make big plays within the context of poor possession stats almost dictates finding those in free agency or low rounds given the state of the D.
More often than not, teams picking in that range have fundamental issues with their rosters (except for the occasional instance where a team lost their starting QB and the whole season went south).
OF course, you're looking for impact with that pick but just because there are not stats such as receptions, tds, sacks attached to many roster positions doesn't mean Guard, RT, LB or Free Safety for instance cannot have a meaningful impact.
in round two, that crazy bastard being still there (the DT who fell off a roof) draft him as well and play him at left end, putting JPP at right end again.
rounds 3-7 look for free safeties and linebackers, maybe a slot wr or tight end or fullback in the mix late.
free agency is for guard/te/slot.
I like the thought. But I would be remiss if didn't give some pause to Reese & Co screwing up finding good quality after Round 1.
Here's a harbinger of the future: they want in on Weddle, a 31 year old safety on a crappy defense who has picked one pass in the last 2 years. Wow.
And as others have said, I expect the Giants to focus a lot on defense in free agency. So things won't appear as desperate on defense once draft day roll around.
Our defense unit is just plain dreadful and offense obvious better, but if you don't think offense couldn't use another "player" your kidding yourself. Our offense is Eli, OBJ, and three offensive lineman. The rest are good complimentary players or just average.
Just want the pick at ten to end up being a difference maker.
As did I.
11.
But, nobody expects more than 1/3rd of all picks in the first 32 to be DL.
Some people draw from that the following conclusion:
'ergo we get one lower down'.
Wrong IMHO. To me, that is, and has been proven to be, the logic of mediocrity.
Rather, I suggest, when you have a situation like that, you take the first two, the highest two, the most valuable 'best' two ...or even three, that you can get, regardless of technique or spot within DL.
Football is won by dominating units, not by decent rosters.
(now, you could say the same for the wr 'unit', fine...do that in 2017, certainly this year is too early for that move)
Giants...27th in defense.
Giants...32nd in rushing.
Eli + Cruz + Nicks = 9-7 record.
And Cruz was a UDFA pickup and Manningham the last pick of the 3rd round.
Which is how you should manage with WRs don't invest too many high draft choices on them.
Lawson DE, Ogbah DE, Billings DT, Robinson DT, CB Ramsey, CB Alexander, CB Hargreaves.
I would imagine most on this list will have a similar grade to WR Treadwell and anywhere from 2-5 of the aforementioned defensive players will be available at the 10th pick projecting the 2 QBs, Bosa, Stanley and Tunsil will be off the board before the Giants pick.
It's still early in the process...
I'm just saying that you can't go into the draft with a plan to ignore one side of the ball.
We all know the Giants. They look at CB, DE, and WR in the first. All 3 of those positions are a need at the moment. I'd say BPA at one of those three positions is a safe bet.
Quote:
Thinks or the rest of the board but if a guy like Stanley is gone and Treadwell is available - I'm taking him. Treadwell and Beckham out there - are you kidding me?
The draft is very very deep at the DL and DE position. But the key is - is there a special enough talent to take there at 10? I would have said Nkemdiche until these recent events - what the hell is the guy thinking?
And that would be another reason why this team will suck forever. You can get WRs everywhere I the draft. Brown from AZ. That stiff from Pitt. Brown he's kind of good for a 7th rounder.
So guy named Edleman played last night. Bet they Pats are glad they grabbed him early in the first. Martaveous Bryant was also a first rounder too as a compliment for Brown in Pitt wasn't he? Not.
Alshon Jeffry. First rounder again right?
The insane mentality that you have to grab a WR early has gotten this team nowhere. Meanwhile there will be top tier defensive talent at 10 but the new mentality seems to be it's better to lose games like the Saints one than win ones w any semblance of defense
Agree with this. Defense BPA, most likely a DE or LB, unless they let Prince go, then could be CB. There will be some very good pass rushers, hopefully a guy like Shaq Lawson is there. We need energy and relentlessness at DE and he looks like the deal. WR can wait. There's guys like Caroo, that will be available in the 2 or 3 rounds. We need guys that can separate themselves from coverage and make tough catches.
and will they also have the discipline to continue with that trend into rounds 2 and 3.
"Draft Angry" is this years motto.
I tend to go a bit overboard to make the point of emphasis.
-and to try to negate the obvious trends of past years that have left us short.
that said, work done on O value may help strategize trades?
(hehe)
Quote:
In comment 12772589 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
Preston Smith, Markus Golden, Eric Kendricks...all these guys went in the 2nd round last year. Point is, reaching at 10 would be a huge mistake. As Eric said, you need special talent that high in the draft, and then taking guys graded out like Richburg in the 2nd who you hope turn into awesome players. I can see us going OL or WR at 10 and then really adding some defense in rounds 2-4. Would love that draft.
To me the rally really interesting scenario is if Ronnie Stanley is there at #10. Not that I have lost faith in Flowers but you have a chance to solidify the OL for a decade if you take Stanley and move Flowers to RT. I don't know if it's the right play but it's an intriguing one.
Stanley is a classic blue goose prospect with amazing feet. I don't think the Giants would pass him up at 10. You could move Flowers over to right tackle, or put Stanley there. I agree this would be very intriguing. If Stanley grades out as a top 5 player in the draft and he's there at 10, how do you pass?
Unfortunately, Reese has screwed up the defense so bad that we can't afford to draft anything but defense there. Need impact players on Defense now. Oline is in fairly good shape. Keep in mind you will probably have Beatty, Schwartz and Hart coming back too. Jerry will probably be in the mix and Jones, from the CFL, will also be back in the fold. Offense is top 10 right now. Defense very bottom of league. You can figure out where they'll look to upgrade immediately.
A far as doubling up on the position early? They have starters in place with Hankins and Bromley. Don't hold your breath, it's not going to happen.
A far as doubling up on the position early? They have starters in place with Hankins and Bromley. Don't hold your breath, it's not going to happen.
How much of that is a function of draft position, though?
We drafted Marvin Austin in the 2nd round. 1st round, when we did pick high, we were typically outside the 'disruptive DT' range. Those guys tend to go higher than 10.
Given the average draft position, I don't think it's necessarily a function of 'the Giants don't draft DTs high', it's more a matter of BPA and the better DTs being gone by that point.
A far as doubling up on the position early? They have starters in place with Hankins and Bromley. Don't hold your breath, it's not going to happen.
And that last DT was William Joseph. Right now except for QB and C due to who we currently have and RB, K or P due to nobody being worthy of #10 pick in there is no position that I would place off limits based on current needs
It isn't a coincidence. Plus I didn't way it was impossible just unlikely. Now two DT's to start the draft I'll go with impossible.
You take the best player available.
Other than OBJ (and maybe JPP, for two years of his career) the Giants rarely take the BPA. This FO's drafts are mostly need driven because of the multi-year failures in stocking NFL caliber players.
Quote:
It doesn't gibe with their preferred salary structure. It's possible but unlikely imo.
A far as doubling up on the position early? They have starters in place with Hankins and Bromley. Don't hold your breath, it's not going to happen.
How much of that is a function of draft position, though?
We drafted Marvin Austin in the 2nd round. 1st round, when we did pick high, we were typically outside the 'disruptive DT' range. Those guys tend to go higher than 10.
Given the average draft position, I don't think it's necessarily a function of 'the Giants don't draft DTs high', it's more a matter of BPA and the better DTs being gone by that point.
Historically, actually not alot of DT taken in the first round. Last 10 drafts only 27 in total taken in the 1st. Only 8 were top 10. NYG not out of step with rest of the league. Think it's safe to say unless a "Suh", Reese is not picking a DT at 10.
I love these type of players yet am more and more confused as teams appear focussed on top picks contributing immediately rather than waiting for a position, like DT, to develop into better contributors over time.
It isn't a coincidence. Plus I didn't way it was impossible just unlikely. Now two DT's to start the draft I'll go with impossible.
Let's look at the drafts starting at 2006:
2006 - 32nd, picked Kiwi - last DT picked at 26, next one is picked in RD3
2007 - 20th, picked Ross - last DT picked at 16, next one picked at 33 (Alan Branch)
2008 - 32nd, picked Phillips - last DT picked at 7, next one picked at 48
2009 - 29th, picked Nicks - last DT picked at 9, next one picked at 32 (Ziggy Hood)
2010 - 15th picked JPP, DTs went 3 and 10, and again at 26 (Dan Williams)
2011 - 19th picked Prince, DTs went at 3 and 13, and again at 21 (Philip Taylor)
2012 - 32nd picked Wilson - DT heavy 1st round, going 11, 12 and 14. Next DT picked at 36 (Derek Wolfe)
2013 - 19th, picked Pugh - DT goes at 14 and 23 (Sharif Floyd)
2014 - 12th, picked OBJ - DT famously goes right after (Donald) and at 29 (Easley)
2015 - 9th, picked Flowers. DT heavy here too, with 6, 12, 17 and 32 overall all going to DTs.
Looking at the data, it seems like you either pick top 10-15 in order to get one of the better DTs, or you pick one later on. The Giants weren't in position to get in on the better pass rushing DTs that were selected, so it's unfair to state authoritatively that they would or wouldn't have picked them when they never had a shot.
In the few instances (like Donald vs. OBJ), where they did have a chance at either, it's fair enough to say that they came back with a player that performed better than the one they passed on. Donald is a dynamic player, but I don't think he would provide the same impact that OBJ does.
Giants...27th in defense.
Giants...32nd in rushing.
Eli + Cruz + Nicks = 9-7 record.
And Cruz was a UDFA pickup and Manningham the last pick of the 3rd round.
Which is how you should manage with WRs don't invest too many high draft choices on them.
Unfortunately, QB and Center are it. Was thinking the same.
In 1981 and 1984, the Giants didn't "need" linebackers.
[Eman11]
Totally agree . I remember when they drafted Banks really high and I said to my dad, why? That makes no sense to me! He said watch and you'll see why. Now they have bookends at OLB and they're both gonna kill it. Sure enough, he called it.
If Treadwell is there at 10, the Giants would be crazy not to take him. In fact they should be running that pick up to the commish.
I don't know that much about Treadwell, but I sure as hell vividly remember the 1984 draft--I believe back then it was held during weekdays, and late morning (if I recall accurately) when the Giants drafted Banks, I was ecstatic, because we were getting stronger, on the way to a dominant d. I loved me BP and BB.
That was some draft day: I don't recall how, but we wound up with two first round picks, using the second to draft William Roberts, who turned out to be solid, but not light it up solid.
Fwiw, I think Roberts is a fairly good comparator for Beatty in terms of their build and style of play, more technique and finesse than powerful and controlling his man.
I believe the giants will and should draft defense in the early rounds.
I'll probably still prioritize defense but I'll keep an open mind for now.
This makes a lot of sense to me too
Let's look at the drafts starting at 2006:
....
Looking at the data, it seems like you either pick top 10-15 in order to get one of the better DTs, or you pick one later on. The Giants weren't in position to get in on the better pass rushing DTs that were selected, so it's unfair to state authoritatively that they would or wouldn't have picked them when they never had a shot....
[/quote]
jcn, hello,
that's an interesting snapshot in terms of selection and positioning, but it does not necessarily reveal whether it reflects overall successful strategy without looking at careers to date of the selections--and I am not suggesting that you (or I) prepare that. (: But, as a for instance, when we picked Prince @ 19, Wilkerson went at #30. As I think most of us can agree, it's not an exact science, but the body of work--and maybe draft philosophy re. targeting certain positions at the expense of others--might suggest the NYG are not excelling.
Quote:
They prioritize DE's, CB's, WR's and OT's in their schemes and salary structure. The last pick that wasn't from those positions was Wilson and he was essentially a 2nd Rounder as was Kenny Phillips the only other top pick since 2005 that isn't one of those four premium positions.
It isn't a coincidence. Plus I didn't way it was impossible just unlikely. Now two DT's to start the draft I'll go with impossible.
Let's look at the drafts starting at 2006:
2006 - 32nd, picked Kiwi - last DT picked at 26, next one is picked in RD3
2007 - 20th, picked Ross - last DT picked at 16, next one picked at 33 (Alan Branch)
2008 - 32nd, picked Phillips - last DT picked at 7, next one picked at 48
2009 - 29th, picked Nicks - last DT picked at 9, next one picked at 32 (Ziggy Hood)
2010 - 15th picked JPP, DTs went 3 and 10, and again at 26 (Dan Williams)
2011 - 19th picked Prince, DTs went at 3 and 13, and again at 21 (Philip Taylor)
2012 - 32nd picked Wilson - DT heavy 1st round, going 11, 12 and 14. Next DT picked at 36 (Derek Wolfe)
2013 - 19th, picked Pugh - DT goes at 14 and 23 (Sharif Floyd)
2014 - 12th, picked OBJ - DT famously goes right after (Donald) and at 29 (Easley)
2015 - 9th, picked Flowers. DT heavy here too, with 6, 12, 17 and 32 overall all going to DTs.
Looking at the data, it seems like you either pick top 10-15 in order to get one of the better DTs, or you pick one later on. The Giants weren't in position to get in on the better pass rushing DTs that were selected, so it's unfair to state authoritatively that they would or wouldn't have picked them when they never had a shot.
In the few instances (like Donald vs. OBJ), where they did have a chance at either, it's fair enough to say that they came back with a player that performed better than the one they passed on. Donald is a dynamic player, but I don't think he would provide the same impact that OBJ does.
I wonder if we can say pretty much the same at LB..Everyone laments our inability to get a "stud" but when were they ever within easy reach of us?
I know taking two guys from the same school seems unlikely but Clemson and Alabama are going to dominate the first 50 picks.
Lawson showed me a lot by playing on a bad knee. He basically had one move and then could not push. Don't believe the stuff about him dropping. This guy is going at the top of the draft.
Alexander might be gone by the time the Giants pick, but what a coup it would be getting these two guys. Top of the second round is loaded in this draft, so Giants will get a good layer regardless.
IF worth the value at that pick, a LT, WR, RB on offense or DE, DT, LB, CB or FS on defense are all fine.
Kawaan Short, who is helping to destroy Seattle this afternoon, drafted @ 13 in Round 2, after Carolina picked Lolutelei in Round 1, the first DT picked in the 2013 draft. Sharif Floyd at #23 (Vikings) and Sylvester Williams @28 (Broncos) were the only other DTs picked to that point. Hankins went to us with the 49th pick, after we took Justin Pugh at 19.
Seems like the Panthers knew what they were doing.
I know taking two guys from the same school seems unlikely but Clemson and Alabama are going to dominate the first 50 picks.
Lawson showed me a lot by playing on a bad knee. He basically had one move and then could not push. Don't believe the stuff about him dropping. This guy is going at the top of the draft.
Alexander might be gone by the time the Giants pick, but what a coup it would be getting these two guys. Top of the second round is loaded in this draft, so Giants will get a good layer regardless.
Alexander is going top 10-20...
My fear is that if a Kuechly-type LB and a super WR are available. He is organically incapable of selecting a LB.
We only have 6 picks as it is. I'm not expecting to trade any.
Given the state of the team I wouldn't be opposed to a trade down, but I don't think that will happen either.
My fear is that if a Kuechly-type LB and a super WR are available. He is organically incapable of selecting a LB.
There isn't a LB even remotely close to Keuchly in this draft.
After Combine and interviews are done, the top 10 will be set.
When Beckham came out, who had him in top 10 in January?
Giants...27th in defense.
Giants...32nd in rushing.
Eli + Cruz + Nicks = 9-7 record.
Stats of course can be misleading. In a passing league, being worst in rushing defense is not fatal.
Important stat: The Giants had 23 sacks this season. In 2011 the number was 48 for the regular season and another 11 in the post-season. They had three legitimate pass rushers in JPP, Tuck and Osi and a good blitzing linebacker in Boley. Osi, you probably remember missed the first seven games of the season but in nine games played had nine sacks, and three and a half more in the postseason, including that strip sack of Rodgers.
That 2011 defense also had Antrel Rolle, Kenny Phillips, and Linval Joseph. Even Chris Canty, who was a yawner to most Giant fans, chipped in with 4 sacks in 2011, and after leaving the Giants after 2012 was the starting right end for the Ravens for two years before injuries caught up with him.
You look at the Giants' defensive roster in 2011 and look at the roster in 2015 and just wonder what the hell hit us?
Giants...27th in defense.
Giants...32nd in rushing.
Eli + Cruz + Nicks = 9-7 record.
/well said
I believe the giants will and should draft defense in the early rounds.
Cruz healthy ? The guy may never play again, its against the odds big time. one of Reese's worst moves last offseason was not getting some backup if Cruz didn't return.
and what were you guys doing LAST NIGHT when
Julien Eddleman (7th rounder)
Danny Amendola (UDFA)
Keyshawn Martin (4th round)
etc
Cemented themselves as part of the greatest dynasty in all of football history?
I was watching who may go down as the best TE in league history carve up the opposing defense.
Get Eli more weapons.
Look at it this very basic way ... would you bypass a future All Pro WR or CB simply because you perceived a huge need at *insert your biased choice here*? That's how perennial losing teams operate.
All thing being equal, and without considering free agent activity, the odds to me are skewed to a defensive player being a probable selection this year in the 1st round. An OT or WR are possibilities. We'd have to do a lot in free agency to balance the odds here imo. The Giants have demonstrated that need is a factor for them on draft day when plucking payers from their board.
we need strength up the middle.
we currently have mediore DTs, bad LBs, and bad FSs.
a defense cannot function that way especially in the new NFL