... are very, very high IMO:
(1) Last season, there wasn't a defense in the NFL that honored the run once Giants entered Red Zone. The loss of such a threat destroyed Eli's effectiveness on a truncated field;
(2) Several games last year with a lead at the end, but the offense had no dependable running play to control down, distance, clock;
(3) Our current Right Tackle scares no defense in the NFL and they all shade our run game toward Richburg, Pugh and Flowers.
(4) Zero depth at offensive tackle and no full-season solution/replacement if a starter goes down;
(5) Our current Left Tackle's best position is Right Tackle;
(6) A run game will re-introduce the Giants to an effective play action package;
(7) And last but not least -- even if there are 3 or 4 defensive players with a comparable grade at #10, our best defense is an offensive line that controls the rhythm and tempo of the game when it really counts.
If it's not Ronnie Stanley, then I expect to hear Jack Conklin's name called at #10.
I think the only way we go OT is if Tunsil is there. If not then I feel Tunsil, Ramsey, Jack, Buckner, Bosa, Floyd & Hargreaves all have to be off the board for us to go OT.
With the rumors of Lynch going top 8 & the Titans wanting to get ahead of us for Stanley/Conklin then 1 of those 7 will be there. Also some people are saying the Fins could trade into the top 10 for Zeke. So most likely 2 of those guys from that list above will be there for us.
Our Offense was good enough .
four spots that can use an upgrade
RT #2WR TE RB
RT will improve what we have in running backs
will improve the passing game will help in
short yardage and Red Zone Scoring .
#2 WR will help the Passing Game .
Zeke will still get stymied when the play starts
and Newhouse is still in his stance .
Our Good enough #6 offense couldn't close out a game
even when our pathetic defense made a stop .
I believe Jack is going to slide down a little further then people think because he's not a pass rusher.
I'd love to see the Giants spend a 1st round pick on this kid man,and I believe he's one of the safest picks in the draft as well.
All the different packages Spag's could use this kid in would be unlimited,and I believe he could become an awesome bltler and even learn to put his hand in the dirt on occasion.
Not to mention the options you would have in short yardage/goal line situations.
If he makes it past the cowboys,Ravens and 49ers then he makes it to us and we pick him,but like I said,I believe he will fall right into the giants collective laps!
Secondly, the dropoff from the top 2 or 3 OT's to the next tier is not that big - some would say it's "negligible". We can get a starting tackle in the 2nd or even 3rd who may end up being one of the best of the bunch by the end of the season or surely in a year or two.
Thirdly, we've invested so heavily in the last 4 drafts using early picks on the offensive line. That means we'll have first and second round players across the board on the line, all ready for their big payday when their contracts start coming up year after year.
Lastly, tackles aren't game changing players that radically throw a monkey wrench into opposing teams who have no answer to one of our players. And it's not exactly like Eli is getting beat up and knocked around causing us to lose games. Our losses are due to a porous defense and an incredible number of injuries to key staff.
Holding the 10th spot in the draft is an opportunity to get a game changing stud of a player. Big name tackles are super-safe picks, but won't suddenly turn a team into a monster team that nobody wants to face.
??? I've consistently heard/read that after the top 3 OTs that there is a big drop off. The top 3 are "plug & play" guys. After that are guys that will take a few years to be coached up.
'Spent too many high picks on the line already.' I don't agree with this line of thinking. You're wasting precious time of Eli's limited window if you get a player that needs a couple years to be coached up. It's a waste of all those early picks the past few years if they go half-assed and don't finish the Oline.
Also people shouldn't be so adamant that Flowers will stay at LT. Remember last year days after the draft McAdoo said "As of right now, Justin Pugh is the starting right tackle on the New York Giants." Then 3 weeks later when OTAs started Pugh was lined up at LG.
Get your knife and fork ready.
Quote:
There is no starting caliber RT on this team, and there is essentially no other way of getting one after passing on/not wanting anyone available in FA. You can get a good OL later in the draft sure, but not one that can start from day 1, which is precisely the situation the Giants are in. OL in rd 1 or I eat my hat.
Get your knife and fork ready.
Exactly. The Giants aren't going to be forced into taking an OT because of need. If one is ranked as high as the other players that are left then it's a possibility. If not, they won't take an OT at 1.
Our Good enough #6 offense couldn't close out a game
even when our pathetic defense made a stop .
Exactly. Look at all the games lost last year because the team had to settle for FGs because the team couldn't convert 3rd and short, couldn't run the clock out by grinding the ball on the ground and stalled drives because little to no yardage was gained on 1st and 2nd down.
If Jacks falls, I think the Giants should take him. Though it appears that they didn't prepare for that possibility. They could also be screwed if Jacks and the 3 solid OTs are gone by the 10th pick.
I think those expecting Lynch to go in the top 10 are delusional.
(1) This very talented guy is a mauler whose game translates best against power and size. He can take on the biggest defensive end with ease and blow them up. In the NFL that usually means right tackle;
(2) I don't care if he was playing on a chronically bad ankle all last season. He will always have some issues cutting off speed from a wide angle;
(3) It takes a lot for this gigantic man to execute the proper kick-slide against elite pass rushers. And when he gets to the right spot with his kick-slide, that's when elite pass rushers can cut back up inside of him. He is not the most balanced left tackle which has everything to do with the sheer size/girth of this guy;
(4) That is what I saw in Ereck Flowers at Miami; that is what I saw in his promising first year in the NFL;
(5) There are just one or two BBIers on this thread who probably need to either see an anger management counselor or start their regimen of Happy Pills twice a day.
We weren't that bad last year as Eli stayed upright through most games and took very few hits. There was room for improvement of course, but no line can stop every rush.
Secondly, the dropoff from the top 2 or 3 OT's to the next tier is not that big - some would say it's "negligible". We can get a starting tackle in the 2nd or even 3rd who may end up being one of the best of the bunch by the end of the season or surely in a year or two.
Thirdly, we've invested so heavily in the last 4 drafts using early picks on the offensive line. That means we'll have first and second round players across the board on the line, all ready for their big payday when their contracts start coming up year after year. Keeping the unit together will make it the most expensive o-line in the NFL while the rest of our cap space will have to be used to bargain hunt for skill players and defense.
Lastly, tackles aren't game changing players that radically throw a monkey wrench into opposing teams who have no answer to one of our players. And it's not exactly like Eli is getting beat up and knocked around causing us to lose games. Our losses are due to a porous defense and an incredible number of injuries to key staff.
Holding the 10th spot in the draft is an opportunity to get a game changing stud of a player. Big name tackles are super-safe picks, but won't suddenly turn a team into a monster team that nobody wants to face.
A point you seem to have overlooked is the offensive design changed due to the loss of Beatty. Eli reduced his time before throw tremendously due to the deficiency at OT, the run game also suffered. Personally, I am hoping we find a way to trade down as I am not as comfortable with Stanley at #10 as I once was. I have no doubt he would be a good OT but I would prefer to get Decker at #15 and pick up another pick. I am beginning to think Decker will be the better blocker in pass protection and he is an excellent run blocker. JMHO.
I think the only way we go OT is if Tunsil is there. If not then I feel Tunsil, Ramsey, Jack, Buckner, Bosa, Floyd & Hargreaves all have to be off the board for us to go OT.
With the rumors of Lynch going top 8 & the Titans wanting to get ahead of us for Stanley/Conklin then 1 of those 7 will be there. Also some people are saying the Fins could trade into the top 10 for Zeke. So most likely 2 of those guys from that list above will be there for us.
I would be ecstatic to see Tennesee trade with us for #10! That would be ideal in that we should be able to get Decker @ #15, Ogbah (DE) along with Thomas (WR) in the 2nd. We need draft picks early to address glaring needs. That satisfies 3 specific personnel needs! IMHO.
...all there at 10.
Maybe Jerry Reese has such a high grade on Elliott that he selects him even with greater pressing needs elsewhere?!?
Floyd is so intriguing and his name has been bruited about so often that he will either become the clearest, most obvious choice... or the greatest smokescreen Jerry ever generated!
Conklin doesn't fit my own definition of moving Flowers over to Right Tackle (only Tunsil and Stanley fit that bill)... but Jack Conklin was such a solid, solid player for Mark Dantonio, he would be a much needed upgrade for the right side of our line.
In the context of these 3 possibilities -- Elliott, Floyd and Conklin -- I just don't see any crack in the door for a Laquon Treadwell to slip in at #10!
- The Giants have a history of taking risks on weapons in round 1.
- They have needs at many other positions.
- There is relatively a better chance of getting starting OT talent rounds 2/3 than at other positions.
Who knows what they will actually do? The closer this gets to draft day, the more importance I put on the success of rounds 2 through 6.
Adding a quality RT would add the play action pass back to the offense, improve 3rd and short, and goal line. I would be happy with Conklin at #10.
jacks knee injury is a concern,still very good player IF returns to 100% but its the if factor there
floyd is a bit of tweener and not a good fit for the giants,spags would have to alter his system and change his whole defence to shoehorn him into the lineup would make disguising the formation alot harder,his lack of size,length and speed also make his production questionable as he isnt fast enough for a pure LB or long and heavy enough to play DE at nfl level
jaylon smith who was figured to be the best defence player in the draft before his injury,now do you even risk it at all? see the 49ers tried that a few times and it hasnt worked out for any of the injured "stars" they took with the hope of a steals when healthy thus far at least to me you want clean injury free players that can start game 1 year 1 if you need/want them to
OT is the safest pick even if they arent upto nfl level at tackle they will most likely make long term starters at guard or worst case you get your 4-5 years rookie contract out of them and look for another OT and move them inside and considering the hole at RG also its a win win for the giants. yes not what you want from a top ten pick but this draft is weak of elite talent,plenty of solid starter types in the middle rounds but very few gamechangers and alot of them lack the overall size,speed,strength or weight to play 1 traditional position at nfl level and would need to be tweeners or situational guys
there is probably 4 or 5 probowl caliber OT in this draft had the trade ups not happened its very possible the first pick overall would have been at OT even after 2 trades tunsil figures to be the next player off the board and there is a very high chance both stanley,conklin and spriggs will go in the first round also possible the first 10 in the top 10-15 picks
in the first 15-20 picks
If both are gone they'll weigh drafting Conklin vs trading back.
i would hope for the titans to move up to 10 for stanley give us thier 2 second round picks (maybe a 3rd the following year since its around that for 5 spots)we could then add a wr (caroo?) and a cb,FS or DL with the other (bell,burns or kaufusi maybe)that would then free them up to use thier own picks more bpa vs need those extra picks would make a world of difference
they could then add a LB with thier pick in round 2 and an OG (glasgow who would give them the OG/C guy they like to have) add a slot CB in round 4,maybe add a DT or TE in round 5 (bryce williams big 6'5 pass catcher)
round the draft out with maybe a developmental QB as the extra picks would give them that freedom or the DT ideally a big NT type guy to plug the middle against the run
RT and RG are big time needs. I don't know what they will do about those 2 positions but they will not use their first pick on it again.
Quote:
In comment 12916995 JD in NC said:
Quote:
There is no starting caliber RT on this team, and there is essentially no other way of getting one after passing on/not wanting anyone available in FA. You can get a good OL later in the draft sure, but not one that can start from day 1, which is precisely the situation the Giants are in. OL in rd 1 or I eat my hat.
Get your knife and fork ready.
Exactly. The Giants aren't going to be forced into taking an OT because of need. If one is ranked as high as the other players that are left then it's a possibility. If not, they won't take an OT at 1.
There is a gargantuan difference between being forced into a pick, and planning to use a pick to fill a need. The Giants needed a stating OL and a starting Safety last year, and guess what they picked back to back with their 1st and 2nd round picks.
This year, there is a gaping hole at RT, and if we're being honest, the only reason RG isn't perceived as being an immediate need as well is because we all have a hard on for Bobby Hart, a 7th rounder who hasn't even started a full season.
If the Giants didn't plan on using the #10 pick on a RT, then they would have signed one in FA. My guess is that they went into FA with an open mind, and decided to wait and see if a good deal presented itself, but they were not going to overpay for mediocre talent, and were comfortable using their 1st round pick if no RT could be acquired via FA.
As I stated in my first response, you can get a good OL later in the draft, but you cannot afford the luxury of taking that chance when you do not have a capable starter at the position already. The only way you get as close to a guaranteed day 1 starter as possible, is by drafting them with your 1st round pick.
So I say again, OL in round 1, 100%.
A player like Von Miller is just as likely to come against at the QB from the right as he is the left..
You're the first blogger on this thread who makes sense.
Tell me that Flowers was BPA over Gurley last year and I have a bridge to sell to you in Brooklyn.
BTW, there is little chance that we're going to draft a ORT at #10 with almost similar OL talent probably available up to 50 picks later.
Quote:
Giants going BPA is a complete fallacy. There is no such thing. They put guys in tiers and pick the BPA at a NEED position for that tier. It all depends on how their tiers are setup.
You're the first blogger on this thread who makes sense.
Tell me that Flowers was BPA over Gurley last year and I have a bridge to sell to you in Brooklyn.
BTW, there is little chance that we're going to draft a ORT at #10 with almost similar OL talent probably available up to 50 picks later.
Flowers very well might have been the BPA on the GIANTS board.. fans need to just accept that the Giants board has nothing to do with what we see other do..
Also its very obvious that the Giants grade on a curve.. particularly when it comes to Edge Rushers, Left Tackles, Wide Receivers and Cornerbacks...
How true!
I want Elliot, who would make our offense very difficult to stop.
However, I see JR passing on him and making the same mistake two years in a row (I.e., foregoing the best RB in the draft).
Just remember guys (for those with a short memory); we were leading the division going into a key matchup with the Skins in Wk 12 last year. Although the Skins got out to a 17-0 lead, our best RB (Jennings) was only able to muster 14 yards on the ground.
A better running attack would improve our passing game and provide us with better clock control in the 4th quarter (when we get the lead).
We lost 7 games last year in the 4th quarter!
Of course we still need to address the OL as well as other areas; it's not all going to get fixed this year!
BPA and need are two completely different perspectives. The Giants drafted Flowers and Collins at 1 & 2 strictly out of need (I.e., there were better players available at the time of both selections). Several years ago, e.g., David Wilson was a BPA.
There' was an entire article written about this a week ago.
I'll try to access the link and forward regarding JR's tendencies to go BPA vs. need.
Quote:
because BPA always factors in need.. A player who is very good but that doesnt fit your scheme is not as valuable..
BPA and need are two completely different perspectives. The Giants drafted Flowers and Collins at 1 & 2 strictly out of need (I.e., there were better players available at the time of both selections). Several years ago, e.g., David Wilson was a BPA.
There' was an entire article written about this a week ago.
I'll try to access the link and forward regarding JR's tendencies to go BPA vs. need.
You cant access the GIANTS BPA unless you actually see the Giants value board.. without that.. no one and no article can access that..
Its not about who Mike Mayock. Mel Kiper. McShay.. or anyone else see as BPA.. and for the 100th time its not a list from 1-100.. you could very easily have players with EQUAL GRADES on the same tier.. and in that case YES you would take a player that fills a need..
The Giants have repeatedly stated that they value Pass Rush. Impact offensive players, Corners and what Reese has called the " Blue Goose " left tackles as premium picks in the first round.. therefore they place a HIGHER VALUE on those players..
In your case.. Collins most likely had a first round grade.. as many other people would have had on him.. now he falls into the second round.. He is still most likely one of the highest rated players on the Giants board.. so they draft a player that has a high rating AND fills a need....
In many people minds the two are mutually exclusive..in reality they are not necessarily so.
Check it out. It clearly shows a distinction as well as JR's predilections!
Not Best Player who fits in our system.
In your terminology or JR's, BPA is a non-sequitur! In other words, it's meaningless.
Thus, my point..............
Not Best Player who fits in our system.
In your terminology or JR's, BPA is a non-sequitur! In other words, it's meaningless.
Well you just assume that it means what you WANT it to mean.. even when its been explained 100 times how the Giants draft.. how they set up their draft board.. how they value and grade players.. people STILL want to make it mean something it DOESNT mean...
I dont know how many times this bears repeating.. the Giants draft board is constructed in ROWS of players.. not a column.. fans look at columns because its what they see when they look at NFL Draft or where ever they look and they see a list of players from top to bottom.
The Giants dont do that..
re: JR's BPA or need pick.
Check it out. It clearly shows a distinction as well as JR's predilections!
I agree with his count, but some of his reasoning is very flawed.
Oh, and for the umpteenth time, Eric and others here knew about the Wilson pick well before Tampa Bay moved ahead of us to draft Martin. Why people keep repeating this nonsense when it's been debunked from the get-go is beyond me.
lets get the maximum out of the RB already on the roster and give eli more time to throw first that will make a huge difference,any decent RT (and/or RG for that matter) will have a big impact on the team,could have the greatest impact for them of any position they could draft
they made this mistake when they drafted wilson before they had a good OL to open the way for him first and we all saw how that ended
It might not be sexy but a nasty OT would take this OL to great heights. We'd be good to go.