Cut every guy that gets injured and then suffers another injury? You would end up hard pressed to come up with 53 guys each year
They have to start changing things up - step 1 was the strength and conditioning guy. Next step should be adjusting to be a little more risk averse when drafting or signing players with injury histories. I know, you can't avoid them entirely, but I'm sure they've got a fairly complex weighting process, it's time to try to err on the side of caution and be a little more reluctant to go for guys with histories.
Last step, IMO - is cutting guys who have been injured more than once loose sooner. The cap plays a part, but with plenty of cap space now is the time to start jettisoning guys who just can't seem to stay healthy.
I think that works in Madden but in the real world of the NFL not so much. You think that they pick players with a hope and a prayer that they don't get reinsured? You think that things we obsess over aren't even discussed in the Giants front office. They go about their business on a wing and a prayer? Yeah the results of the last few seasons look like that, but I would be very content to earn annually the $$$$ they invest in each player's physiology studies
if you can get out there, you have to perform. Guy has an injury history, agree with those saying the Giants would be nuts to rely on him as a starter.
29 years old, played 13 games in 2 seasons at 6-6 340lbs with lower body injuries. Sound like anyone else we know? If Jon Beason couldn't make it back at his age and at his size, what on Earth makes the Giants think a 29 year old Schwartz, with the past two injury riddled years in a body that large and relatively out of shape will break the lower leg injury curse? Cut him, be done with players who can't take the field on a regular basis. It ties up cap $ and pushes the roster further from competing.
You sit and wait on Beatty and Cruz and Beason and you got zero out of all three. Now that money you wasted could have gone to get veteran depth or solid play but instead you end up perusing the scrap heap mid season instead of fortifying the roster in the off season. Now we face the exact same issue with Schwartz, cut him now, be done with a whiny 29 year old with lower leg problems who WILL NOT come back healthy regardless of what he thinks.
29 years old, played 13 games in 2 seasons at 6-6 340lbs with lower body injuries. Sound like anyone else we know? If Jon Beason couldn't make it back at his age and at his size, what on Earth makes the Giants think a 29 year old Schwartz, with the past two injury riddled years in a body that large and relatively out of shape will break the lower leg injury curse? Cut him, be done with players who can't take the field on a regular basis. It ties up cap $ and pushes the roster further from competing.
You sit and wait on Beatty and Cruz and Beason and you got zero out of all three. Now that money you wasted could have gone to get veteran depth or solid play but instead you end up perusing the scrap heap mid season instead of fortifying the roster in the off season. Now we face the exact same issue with Schwartz, cut him now, be done with a whiny 29 year old with lower leg problems who WILL NOT come back healthy regardless of what he thinks.
To realize it's a bad strategy to count on constantly injured players to be full time starters the following year without any contingency plan? It's become a hallmark of Reese.
We should only draft/sign player that never get hurt!
Stupid Reese!
No drkenneth, just not draft or sign guys who are CONSTANTLY hurt. Like Schwartz. There is no excuse on this one. The history was obvious for all to see. Then Reese compounded it by restructuring his contract.
jcn56, good point re GS being given clearance by the
We should only draft/sign player that never get hurt!
Stupid Reese!
I would hand back my degree Doc. You seem to have missed the very obvious point.
I get the point. He's always hurt. My frustration is with the BBI dipshits who think there is a pool of players that don't get hurt, but the Giants choose just the injured ones.
I know we've got top flight doctors. The Hospital for Special Surgery is one of the best in the world, and we've got access to some of their top people.
Now for the but.
But... Something ain't working. We changed the strength coach. Now it's time to look at methodology - what criteria do we use for clearing people, does it need to be adjusted? Is it possibly faulty?
It's time to go after this thing from all angles. I doubt it's purely one thing or the other, we're not likely to bounce to the top of the health list because we change our S&C regimen. But we need to start making adjustments that result in positive changes pronto, because it's long overdue.
This call to go over this from different angles, viewpoints, strategies is something you think they are not constantly reevaluating? Just because the results stink doesn't mean the strategy wasn't sound. Sitting back as a fan with no skin in the game, no reputation to defend or job to keep secure, it is easy to pontificate
Why shouldn't I believe him? He wants to get paid? Sure, but there are doctors that evaluate his health or lack thereof. You want to discard him for a new toy? Bully for you
That which you say I cannot hear, that which you do speaks volumes.
I'll take someone who has a history of being able to stay on the field.
That drafts/signs players that have injury histories. This is football. Everyone drafts/signs players that have injury histories. The Giants don't do it any more or less than anyone else. The BBI meme that this is unique to the Giants is without any factual basis.
He is a mediocre player even when healthy. Chances of his being healthy are very slim. Don't waste any more money on these guys who are perpetually injured.
This is the number one problem the last four years under Reese: Beason, Baas, Snee, Schwartz, Beatty, Cruz . . . the list goes one and on
seems like you covered most or all of the important guys that were reinjured over the last 4 years. It's your on and on I take issue with. Please dont name some scrub DB that had no impact
off the top of my head. Probably some others if I thought about it. Walton could go on the list because he was not the same player that he had been before missing two years.
Signing and/or keeping injured players on the roster has just killed the Giants. How many times has one of these perpetually or severely injured players come back and been a longterm, productive player? Steve Smith, Kenny Philips, Terrell Thomas--all these guys were done. Giants have to get better at analyzing the risk/reward of keeping guys. I'm not saying cut every single one. But Beatty is 31. What is the upside to keeping him?
Cruz might have a few years left. But really what are the chances he comes back as the Victor Cruz of old? Very slim imo. So, Cruz is probably a 3rd or 4th receiver. Don't pay him like a number one or two.
Injuries are a killer but don't make the situation worse by throwing cap space after these guys. Get rid of them, take the cap hit and move forward.
The team doesn't need cap space, there's no roster bonus to pay, and if Spotrac is right, his 2015 restructure committed the Giants to a small salary guarantee in 2016.
That said, JonC appears to have called the Schwartz situation correctly a year ago: Once a big man's feet and lower legs start to fail him, all the king's horses, all the king's men and the best surgeons at HSS are unlikely to extend his productive football career by very long.
My impression of Geoff Schwartz is that he'd be a great guy to have as a guest at your Memorial Day picnic, and a lousy guy to pencil into your opening day lineup.
RE: Folks here act like the Giants are the only team
That drafts/signs players that have injury histories. This is football. Everyone drafts/signs players that have injury histories. The Giants don't do it any more or less than anyone else. The BBI meme that this is unique to the Giants is without any factual basis.
Should the Giants have cut their losses on Canty and Phillips after their injuries in 2009? There's a Super Bowl XLVI Trophy in New Jersey that says no. Should Reese have let those guys walk after they got hurt again in 2012? Yeah, probably. Ditto Steve Smith after he tore up his knee in 2010.
Oh, wait... Reese DID let them walk, and he was right.
What you don't seem to consider is the cycle of each player's contract. When that factor is taken into account, the only move that really sticks out as stupid is re-signing Beason in 2014 and counting on him to stay healthy. The Schwartz signing wasn't good, but they made the best of a bad situation last year by reducing his salary.
his feet when engaged with DL --- plants his feet and gets overpowered and his ankles take all the weight ( his and the DL ).
for a large man he plays very soft and always did. He is an average OG and is overpaid ( even with the reduction from last year ),
The money is an issue because he is paid like a Starter and if he is not, than other backups want to be paid the same.
The more important issue is the Giants need a better Roster and he hold a Roster spot but will not get better --- his spot needs to go to a player that will improve.
Improving the right side of the line is a bigger need than many seem to think.
The idea of going with Beatty/Shwartz/Hart strikes me as a really poor idea.
One of Beatty/Shwartz really needs to go.
Consider this -- by cutting both of them, you save $7m on this year's cap, and they never hit your cap again. If you take those savings and invest an additional 3-4m of the large available cap space, I think you'll have a SIGNIFICANTLY improved OL. You could either add two players in the $5-6m range, or go for the big fish in a guy like Cordy Glenn and add a lesser-priced vet to compete with Hart for the guard spot.
And will cost much more than what's left on Beatty's contract. But he has never been injured so BBI is drooling over him. And you want to know what, there is no greater likelihood that Beaty gets injured next year than there is Glenn does. Beatty doesn't have chronic conditions, that I am aware of. He broke a leg and hurt his shoulder lifting.
And will cost much more than what's left on Beatty's contract. But he has never been injured so BBI is drooling over him. And you want to know what, there is no greater likelihood that Beaty gets injured next year than there is Glenn does. Beatty doesn't have chronic conditions, that I am aware of. He broke a leg and hurt his shoulder lifting.
Only on BBI are all injuries career ending.
I was using Glenn more as an example for the "big fish" route than someone is specifically advocate for. Kelechi Osemele probably would have been a better example of a personal preference (again, that is, IF they decide to go for the big fish).
But Glenn is a significantly better player than Beatty.
I also didn't suggest that they could land Glenn with Beatty savings. I said Beatty + Schwartz + reaching into their pocket.
The crowd that wants to see Beatty go isn't just wanting to
move on because of the injuries. He just hasn't been that good even when healthy. A respectable pass-blocker, but really generates no power or nastiness in the running game.
Our new OL coach likes big offensive linemen, and GS is sure that. And his mobility will be so much improved that he will be a force for us. I know it sounds funny, but for those 5 quarters that he played for us 2 years ago we had a running game. The OL before and after his injury was night and day; suddenly we couldn't move anyone off the LOS.
on the one hand bringing him to camp and seeing what he has doesn't cost much (25K workout bonus).
on the other hand, you're still in limbo on whether you should plan on him as a starter. I guess you could pencil him in as a backup - his defacto cost would be 2 mil (the savings you gain by cutting him, which you would then have to spend to replace him. high, but not outlandish for a backup)
I wouldn't count on GS moving forward, it's time to upgrade RG and move on, same as with Beason at MIKE. There's no reason to hold onto the past for either player.
Giants weren't happy Beatty chose to not play in 2015
They have to start changing things up - step 1 was the strength and conditioning guy. Next step should be adjusting to be a little more risk averse when drafting or signing players with injury histories. I know, you can't avoid them entirely, but I'm sure they've got a fairly complex weighting process, it's time to try to err on the side of caution and be a little more reluctant to go for guys with histories.
Last step, IMO - is cutting guys who have been injured more than once loose sooner. The cap plays a part, but with plenty of cap space now is the time to start jettisoning guys who just can't seem to stay healthy.
Headhunter : 9:29 am : link : reply
will decide whether Schwartz stays, or goes
Oh, crap......
You sit and wait on Beatty and Cruz and Beason and you got zero out of all three. Now that money you wasted could have gone to get veteran depth or solid play but instead you end up perusing the scrap heap mid season instead of fortifying the roster in the off season. Now we face the exact same issue with Schwartz, cut him now, be done with a whiny 29 year old with lower leg problems who WILL NOT come back healthy regardless of what he thinks.
You sit and wait on Beatty and Cruz and Beason and you got zero out of all three. Now that money you wasted could have gone to get veteran depth or solid play but instead you end up perusing the scrap heap mid season instead of fortifying the roster in the off season. Now we face the exact same issue with Schwartz, cut him now, be done with a whiny 29 year old with lower leg problems who WILL NOT come back healthy regardless of what he thinks.
BRAVO!!!!!
Stupid Reese!
Stupid Reese!
Stupid Reese!
Although I think Reese gets a bad rap re: injured players, this guy is one that should have come with a warning flag.
To be honest, though - I'm more upset that the medical staff would clear him given the prior injury history.
Stupid Reese!
No drkenneth, just not draft or sign guys who are CONSTANTLY hurt. Like Schwartz. There is no excuse on this one. The history was obvious for all to see. Then Reese compounded it by restructuring his contract.
Quote:
We should only draft/sign player that never get hurt!
Stupid Reese!
I would hand back my degree Doc. You seem to have missed the very obvious point.
I get the point. He's always hurt. My frustration is with the BBI dipshits who think there is a pool of players that don't get hurt, but the Giants choose just the injured ones.
Injuries are a problem league wide.
Quote:
We should only draft/sign player that never get hurt!
Stupid Reese!
Although I think Reese gets a bad rap re: injured players, this guy is one that should have come with a warning flag.
To be honest, though - I'm more upset that the medical staff would clear him given the prior injury history.
I can see saying there should've been red flags, but let's not leave out that he should've come cheaper than he did with that injury history!!
I know we've got top flight doctors. The Hospital for Special Surgery is one of the best in the world, and we've got access to some of their top people.
Now for the but.
But... Something ain't working. We changed the strength coach. Now it's time to look at methodology - what criteria do we use for clearing people, does it need to be adjusted? Is it possibly faulty?
It's time to go after this thing from all angles. I doubt it's purely one thing or the other, we're not likely to bounce to the top of the health list because we change our S&C regimen. But we need to start making adjustments that result in positive changes pronto, because it's long overdue.
That which you say I cannot hear, that which you do speaks volumes.
I'll take someone who has a history of being able to stay on the field.
I'll take a guard who hasn't missed most of the last 2 years - history says he'll miss more time, not less.
This is the number one problem the last four years under Reese: Beason, Baas, Snee, Schwartz, Beatty, Cruz . . . the list goes one and on
Signing and/or keeping injured players on the roster has just killed the Giants. How many times has one of these perpetually or severely injured players come back and been a longterm, productive player? Steve Smith, Kenny Philips, Terrell Thomas--all these guys were done. Giants have to get better at analyzing the risk/reward of keeping guys. I'm not saying cut every single one. But Beatty is 31. What is the upside to keeping him?
Cruz might have a few years left. But really what are the chances he comes back as the Victor Cruz of old? Very slim imo. So, Cruz is probably a 3rd or 4th receiver. Don't pay him like a number one or two.
Injuries are a killer but don't make the situation worse by throwing cap space after these guys. Get rid of them, take the cap hit and move forward.
That said, JonC appears to have called the Schwartz situation correctly a year ago: Once a big man's feet and lower legs start to fail him, all the king's horses, all the king's men and the best surgeons at HSS are unlikely to extend his productive football career by very long.
My impression of Geoff Schwartz is that he'd be a great guy to have as a guest at your Memorial Day picnic, and a lousy guy to pencil into your opening day lineup.
This.
Reese continuously backs himself into corners, and then overspends to fill holes he created....
Oh, wait... Reese DID let them walk, and he was right.
What you don't seem to consider is the cycle of each player's contract. When that factor is taken into account, the only move that really sticks out as stupid is re-signing Beason in 2014 and counting on him to stay healthy. The Schwartz signing wasn't good, but they made the best of a bad situation last year by reducing his salary.
Might be another case of the mind's willing but body is breaking down.
for a large man he plays very soft and always did. He is an average OG and is overpaid ( even with the reduction from last year ),
The money is an issue because he is paid like a Starter and if he is not, than other backups want to be paid the same.
The more important issue is the Giants need a better Roster and he hold a Roster spot but will not get better --- his spot needs to go to a player that will improve.
The idea of going with Beatty/Shwartz/Hart strikes me as a really poor idea.
One of Beatty/Shwartz really needs to go.
Consider this -- by cutting both of them, you save $7m on this year's cap, and they never hit your cap again. If you take those savings and invest an additional 3-4m of the large available cap space, I think you'll have a SIGNIFICANTLY improved OL. You could either add two players in the $5-6m range, or go for the big fish in a guy like Cordy Glenn and add a lesser-priced vet to compete with Hart for the guard spot.
Only on BBI are all injuries career ending.
Only on BBI are all injuries career ending.
I was using Glenn more as an example for the "big fish" route than someone is specifically advocate for. Kelechi Osemele probably would have been a better example of a personal preference (again, that is, IF they decide to go for the big fish).
But Glenn is a significantly better player than Beatty.
I also didn't suggest that they could land Glenn with Beatty savings. I said Beatty + Schwartz + reaching into their pocket.
The crowd that wants to see Beatty go isn't just wanting to
move on because of the injuries. He just hasn't been that good even when healthy. A respectable pass-blocker, but really generates no power or nastiness in the running game.
on the one hand bringing him to camp and seeing what he has doesn't cost much (25K workout bonus).
on the other hand, you're still in limbo on whether you should plan on him as a starter. I guess you could pencil him in as a backup - his defacto cost would be 2 mil (the savings you gain by cutting him, which you would then have to spend to replace him. high, but not outlandish for a backup)
He is clearly a better run blocker than any of our other folks not named Richburg.
And he certainly owes the Giants a 16 game season for christ sake...