I see him as a good but not great RT prospect, and a VERY good RG prospect. Maybe a Bulaga at RT, and Snee-light at RG. It makes me a bit less anxious for us to draft him at 10.
Isn't the sexy pick, but the value is there if we move down to 15 especially with his versatility. At ten, I'd rather a game-changer given the resources used on our O-line already from the draft.
but the Giants apparently put a high grade on him. I'd prefer Decker, I think there's higher upside and protects in case Flowers needs to switch to RT.
Conklin and he'd be a great fit at RT. Just not sure that's worthy of the #10 for right now/how they rank their tiers. If he's in the second tier, I'd be fine with that.
adn the position, just will he be a good player and mean something to this team. Conklin will certainly do that and provide some physicality to that Oline lacking on right side.
of playing 4 of the 5 spots on the OL. I think his best position may be inside at G but he'll be a very solid RT. He's a fighter, he'd fit right in with the guys from the O'Hara, Diehl, Snee, and Seubert days. Richburg too.
Decker is a very good run blocker but struggles pass blocking. I don't see him as an option at LT. He's got the size of Taylor Lewan but he's not close to being the athlete Lewan is and Lewan has struggled on the left side.
and think he'd make a great RT. He's a road grader and bull dozer that makes big holes, but quick enough on his feet to hold off the better pass rushers in the league. He's got a mean streak, which I personally like. The opposite of a Beatty type finesse player.
I like the nasty and the toughness. But most importantly, the need on the right side of the line is immense, and I don't see quality at this position available in the 2nd rd. on anybody's mocks.
of Tony Mandarich. Not going to live up to the hype. He won't be as bad as Tony because he has a great work ethic. But he is never going to be anything other than OK.
of Tony Mandarich. Not going to live up to the hype. He won't be as bad as Tony because he has a great work ethic. But he is never going to be anything other than OK.
Of all the comparisons that Conklin has drawn, Tony Mandarich has to be the most ridiculous.
As far as Zack Martin goes, Conklin is two inches taller and his arms are just over two inches longer.
But in all seriousness, I think you have to be careful about getting caught up in feel-good stories. It is heart warming to think about a guy who was a walk-on in college becoming an all-pro in the NFL. Who wouldn't want to see that? But it rarely happens.
I think he lacks the size to be a great RT and will ultimately wind up at guard where he will be Pugh-like. Good but not great
Mandarich was an arrogant, self-promoting, lazy, juiced-up douchebag. He is in no way comparable to Jack Conklin, and for you to make that comparison is, as I said, ridiculous, therefore, anything else you have to say about Conklin should be dismissed with extreme prejudice.
of Tony Mandarich. Not going to live up to the hype. He won't be as bad as Tony because he has a great work ethic. But he is never going to be anything other than OK.
Of all the comparisons that Conklin has drawn, Tony Mandarich has to be the most ridiculous.
As far as Zack Martin goes, Conklin is two inches taller and his arms are just over two inches longer.
I think that is why Martin was primarily pegged as a G in the draft process, but both were LT in college and both played for big programs, but don't project as LT's. Both bring similar traits as to their style of play (nasty, run blocker with solid pass protection skills). And both can play tackle and are versatile. And both projected to be mid-round firsts. The arms and height is the big difference, but I believe they bring similar results to the table.
Probably the player I want most at this point. Tough as nails and is going to bring an attitude we need on that line. Also, we need depth desperately. Hope they draft him.
I'm sure. Just dont want to take a RT at #10. Yes they took Flowers at 9 last year, but he made 2 positions better immediately and was to succeed Beatty, ended up doing that sooner than expected.
I think it has to be Elliott at 10 if he is somehow there. I think there are the least question marks about him.
I think Hargreaves would be next.
Would be surprised if the Giants took Jack based on his injury report.
I have wanted Lawson all along, and I think he will be good, but he doesnt have a super high ceiling IMO. About as exciting as taking Stanley or Conklin.
Giants trade down for the first time in forever, and get an extra 2nd or 3rd round pick. Like the Beach Boys said: Wouldn't it be Nice.
but would be fine with him at 10 even better after a trade back (titans?) and extra picks. RT is expensive in FA and cost controlled in the draft.would solve the OT positions for the next 4-5 years minimum absolutely worth the pick at 10 or anywhere in the first round in my book
beatty was a 2nd round pick and was flagged for holding too much, thats the risk you take if you wait till later in the draft. the giants have spent big in FA to fix the DL with vernon,harrison,jpp and to a less extent kerrigan,plus they have odi and bromley to improve the depth this heightens the need to fix the OL where they have jerry and newhouse starting and no plan b incase of a major injury either
fixing the OL would improve the running game which should prolong drives and rest the defence which could make the difference to improve the 4th qtr defence where they let so many games slip last year that alone makes the pick worth it
there is too many boom or bust,injury risks or flawed talents at other positions this is why for me OT is the safest pick. if they can achieve that by dropping back and taking conklin (or spriggs) plus adding extra picks that would be even better they need to hit big with every pick they have had too many high picks fail in recent drafts thats why they need to make this draft count so much
Not a proficient pass blocker.
Beat inside on speed many times
Never the first lineman to move at snap
awful footwork in pass pro. Kick slide is a mess
plays too tall in run block and pass protection
takes forever to get out of his stance
good
hes got some strength.
He consistently moves defenders in run blocks. Looks decent in a zone scheme where he can attack defedners at angles.
...the only player with a realistic chance to be there for the #10 pick that I'd take is Hargreaves. The logic:
-If Jack is there it means the knee scare is for real and I'd pass.
-I'm confused by Stanley...feet look good and wingspan is enormous but he plays less than the sum of his parts. I might regret it later but I'd pass on him at #10.
-I've never had a high enough grade on Elliot, Treadwell, Floyd or Conklin to draft them at #10.
-So be patient, hope Hargreaves is there and if not drop down if at all possible.
Back to the OP...If I can't move back my pick would be Conklin so to that extent I like him. For me he's a prototype RT. Mean, nasty and looking to win on every down...and if he can punch you in the mouth while doing it so much the better..
...the only player with a realistic chance to be there for the #10 pick that I'd take is Hargreaves. The logic:
-If Jack is there it means the knee scare is for real and I'd pass.
-I'm confused by Stanley...feet look good and wingspan is enormous but he plays less than the sum of his parts. I might regret it later but I'd pass on him at #10.
-I've never had a high enough grade on Elliot, Treadwell, Floyd or Conklin to draft them at #10.
-So be patient, hope Hargreaves is there and if not drop down if at all possible.
Back to the OP...If I can't move back my pick would be Conklin so to that extent I like him. For me he's a prototype RT. Mean, nasty and looking to win on every down...and if he can punch you in the mouth while doing it so much the better..
Torrag, I too am less than excited about the possibilities at 10.
I particularly agree with your thoughts on Stanley...just no killer instinct and desire to dominate physically.
I'm less negative on Floyd than you, as I think that Spags can find ways to give him mismatches where he will make big plays. But he has a lot of weaknesses...talk about a guy who isn't physical (and couldn't be when in college...he was skinny as hell with no upper body strength). Whether that has changed seems unlikely, considering he still hasn't done the bench press. What does that tell us?
I like Conklin better at RG than RT, but he can play both. Is he really worthy of the 10th pick? Not enough to inspire any enthusiasm on my part.
I like Elliot a lot, but would rather strengthen the OL than select a RB at 10.
Hargreaves is the best of the lot, but even he has his weaknesses.
...the only player with a realistic chance to be there for the #10 pick that I'd take is Hargreaves. The logic:
-If Jack is there it means the knee scare is for real and I'd pass.
-I'm confused by Stanley...feet look good and wingspan is enormous but he plays less than the sum of his parts. I might regret it later but I'd pass on him at #10.
-I've never had a high enough grade on Elliot, Treadwell, Floyd or Conklin to draft them at #10.
-So be patient, hope Hargreaves is there and if not drop down if at all possible.
Back to the OP...If I can't move back my pick would be Conklin so to that extent I like him. For me he's a prototype RT. Mean, nasty and looking to win on every down...and if he can punch you in the mouth while doing it so much the better..
Stanley has LT feet. He never gets them shuffled or together. His base is always there, his problem is that he got beat by Lawson who used power moves on him.
I think Stanley can be like Jake Matthews, put him against a speed guy, hes great, but if you match him against JPP whose got a blend of both, he's going to get walked down a lot in the first year as a LT.
Scherff was a far better prospect coming out. His kickslide was much better, Conklin can be found with his feet together in pass pro too many fucking times to even count, and hes so slow out of his stance its the same story every tape you put on. He's consistently, consistent.
He's strong, and when his feet are in there right position, you cant move the dude or get by him.
But his footwork sucks and he's slow as shit in his lower body.
He's not a r1 prospect because athletically he just doesnt cut it in his lower body.
How anyone can see him as a OT prospect is absolutely beyond me. Pugh has light and quick feet, and he still failed as a tackle. This dude? give me a fucking break, he's got no fucking chance as a OT his first 2 years. He'd fall faster on his face than Pugh did.
And to be honest, IF he was best suited as a guard (he's a tackle) and he's being projected as Zack Martin, yes I take him at 10.
I want a row of ass kickers....slobs who clap and trip up to the line with piss in their pants because they are too into the game to use the bathroom. Guys with shitty beards breathing hard and wanting to bury the opposition's D. A set of slobs that will drop their entire weight on top of a defensive player. Conklin is NOT a Guard.
And to be honest, IF he was best suited as a guard (he's a tackle) and he's being projected as Zack Martin, yes I take him at 10.
I want a row of ass kickers....slobs who clap and trip up to the line with piss in their pants because they are too into the game to use the bathroom. Guys with shitty beards breathing hard and wanting to bury the opposition's D. A set of slobs that will drop their entire weight on top of a defensive player. Conklin is NOT a Guard.
I want Jon Runyan
Cute, but in terms of how you plan on allocating cap space, drafting another OL at #10 is downright awful.
Decker is a very good run blocker but struggles pass blocking. I don't see him as an option at LT. He's got the size of Taylor Lewan but he's not close to being the athlete Lewan is and Lewan has struggled on the left side.
If we pick him, I will be a very happy camper!
He is just very solid and fills a need. Also, he can plug in a G if needed to. Reminds me a little of Zack Martin.
Of all the comparisons that Conklin has drawn, Tony Mandarich has to be the most ridiculous.
As far as Zack Martin goes, Conklin is two inches taller and his arms are just over two inches longer.
But in all seriousness, I think you have to be careful about getting caught up in feel-good stories. It is heart warming to think about a guy who was a walk-on in college becoming an all-pro in the NFL. Who wouldn't want to see that? But it rarely happens.
I think he lacks the size to be a great RT and will ultimately wind up at guard where he will be Pugh-like. Good but not great
Quote:
of Tony Mandarich. Not going to live up to the hype. He won't be as bad as Tony because he has a great work ethic. But he is never going to be anything other than OK.
Of all the comparisons that Conklin has drawn, Tony Mandarich has to be the most ridiculous.
As far as Zack Martin goes, Conklin is two inches taller and his arms are just over two inches longer.
I think that is why Martin was primarily pegged as a G in the draft process, but both were LT in college and both played for big programs, but don't project as LT's. Both bring similar traits as to their style of play (nasty, run blocker with solid pass protection skills). And both can play tackle and are versatile. And both projected to be mid-round firsts. The arms and height is the big difference, but I believe they bring similar results to the table.
However, he did play very well against Buckner, but he seemed to have difficulty with smaller speed rushers.
I think it has to be Elliott at 10 if he is somehow there. I think there are the least question marks about him.
I think Hargreaves would be next.
Would be surprised if the Giants took Jack based on his injury report.
I have wanted Lawson all along, and I think he will be good, but he doesnt have a super high ceiling IMO. About as exciting as taking Stanley or Conklin.
Giants trade down for the first time in forever, and get an extra 2nd or 3rd round pick. Like the Beach Boys said: Wouldn't it be Nice.
beatty was a 2nd round pick and was flagged for holding too much, thats the risk you take if you wait till later in the draft. the giants have spent big in FA to fix the DL with vernon,harrison,jpp and to a less extent kerrigan,plus they have odi and bromley to improve the depth this heightens the need to fix the OL where they have jerry and newhouse starting and no plan b incase of a major injury either
fixing the OL would improve the running game which should prolong drives and rest the defence which could make the difference to improve the 4th qtr defence where they let so many games slip last year that alone makes the pick worth it
there is too many boom or bust,injury risks or flawed talents at other positions this is why for me OT is the safest pick. if they can achieve that by dropping back and taking conklin (or spriggs) plus adding extra picks that would be even better they need to hit big with every pick they have had too many high picks fail in recent drafts thats why they need to make this draft count so much
Not a proficient pass blocker.
Beat inside on speed many times
Never the first lineman to move at snap
awful footwork in pass pro. Kick slide is a mess
plays too tall in run block and pass protection
takes forever to get out of his stance
good
hes got some strength.
He consistently moves defenders in run blocks. Looks decent in a zone scheme where he can attack defedners at angles.
hes not a OT.
We dont need an allstar OT
we dont even need an average OT.
we need a JAG.
You can't make this stuff up.
-If Jack is there it means the knee scare is for real and I'd pass.
-I'm confused by Stanley...feet look good and wingspan is enormous but he plays less than the sum of his parts. I might regret it later but I'd pass on him at #10.
-I've never had a high enough grade on Elliot, Treadwell, Floyd or Conklin to draft them at #10.
-So be patient, hope Hargreaves is there and if not drop down if at all possible.
Back to the OP...If I can't move back my pick would be Conklin so to that extent I like him. For me he's a prototype RT. Mean, nasty and looking to win on every down...and if he can punch you in the mouth while doing it so much the better..
What places? You might want to compare his Combine numbers with Zack Martin. You might be surprised.
-If Jack is there it means the knee scare is for real and I'd pass.
-I'm confused by Stanley...feet look good and wingspan is enormous but he plays less than the sum of his parts. I might regret it later but I'd pass on him at #10.
-I've never had a high enough grade on Elliot, Treadwell, Floyd or Conklin to draft them at #10.
-So be patient, hope Hargreaves is there and if not drop down if at all possible.
Back to the OP...If I can't move back my pick would be Conklin so to that extent I like him. For me he's a prototype RT. Mean, nasty and looking to win on every down...and if he can punch you in the mouth while doing it so much the better..
Torrag, I too am less than excited about the possibilities at 10.
I particularly agree with your thoughts on Stanley...just no killer instinct and desire to dominate physically.
I'm less negative on Floyd than you, as I think that Spags can find ways to give him mismatches where he will make big plays. But he has a lot of weaknesses...talk about a guy who isn't physical (and couldn't be when in college...he was skinny as hell with no upper body strength). Whether that has changed seems unlikely, considering he still hasn't done the bench press. What does that tell us?
I like Conklin better at RG than RT, but he can play both. Is he really worthy of the 10th pick? Not enough to inspire any enthusiasm on my part.
I like Elliot a lot, but would rather strengthen the OL than select a RB at 10.
Hargreaves is the best of the lot, but even he has his weaknesses.
Quote:
huygens20 : 4/18/2016 8:11 pm : link : reply
We dont need an allstar OT
we dont even need an average OT.
we need a JAG.
You can't make this stuff up.
We have more pressing needs at other positions.
Namely
LB
WR
We dont need to spend another 1st round pick on an OT.
-If Jack is there it means the knee scare is for real and I'd pass.
-I'm confused by Stanley...feet look good and wingspan is enormous but he plays less than the sum of his parts. I might regret it later but I'd pass on him at #10.
-I've never had a high enough grade on Elliot, Treadwell, Floyd or Conklin to draft them at #10.
-So be patient, hope Hargreaves is there and if not drop down if at all possible.
Back to the OP...If I can't move back my pick would be Conklin so to that extent I like him. For me he's a prototype RT. Mean, nasty and looking to win on every down...and if he can punch you in the mouth while doing it so much the better..
Stanley has LT feet. He never gets them shuffled or together. His base is always there, his problem is that he got beat by Lawson who used power moves on him.
I think Stanley can be like Jake Matthews, put him against a speed guy, hes great, but if you match him against JPP whose got a blend of both, he's going to get walked down a lot in the first year as a LT.
Scherff was a far better prospect coming out. His kickslide was much better, Conklin can be found with his feet together in pass pro too many fucking times to even count, and hes so slow out of his stance its the same story every tape you put on. He's consistently, consistent.
He's strong, and when his feet are in there right position, you cant move the dude or get by him.
But his footwork sucks and he's slow as shit in his lower body.
Taylor Decker is a superior OT prospect.
He's not a r1 prospect because athletically he just doesnt cut it in his lower body.
How anyone can see him as a OT prospect is absolutely beyond me. Pugh has light and quick feet, and he still failed as a tackle. This dude? give me a fucking break, he's got no fucking chance as a OT his first 2 years. He'd fall faster on his face than Pugh did.
Now, that doesn't surprise me at all.
Quote:
How anyone can see him as a OT prospect is absolutely beyond me.
Now, that doesn't surprise me at all.
Let me know when you actually construct an argument, and back it up with something other than personal attacks.
I'm actually sorry, because i'm not even sure you have the capability to do such a thing.
4/16. Troll.
And to be honest, IF he was best suited as a guard (he's a tackle) and he's being projected as Zack Martin, yes I take him at 10.
I want a row of ass kickers....slobs who clap and trip up to the line with piss in their pants because they are too into the game to use the bathroom. Guys with shitty beards breathing hard and wanting to bury the opposition's D. A set of slobs that will drop their entire weight on top of a defensive player. Conklin is NOT a Guard.
I want Jon Runyan
Quote:
I just heap as much scorn as possible on them.
4/16. Troll.
And to be honest, IF he was best suited as a guard (he's a tackle) and he's being projected as Zack Martin, yes I take him at 10.
I want a row of ass kickers....slobs who clap and trip up to the line with piss in their pants because they are too into the game to use the bathroom. Guys with shitty beards breathing hard and wanting to bury the opposition's D. A set of slobs that will drop their entire weight on top of a defensive player. Conklin is NOT a Guard.
I want Jon Runyan
Cute, but in terms of how you plan on allocating cap space, drafting another OL at #10 is downright awful.