|
|
|
| Quote: |
I still think the most likely pick is Georgia linebacker Leonard Floyd. The Giants haven't taken a linebacker in the first round since Carl Banks in 1984, but all the things I wrote seven weeks ago about why Floyd could buck that trend hold up. He's a player the Giants' scouts and front office have loved for months, and there are people high up in the brain trust who believe he will and should be the pick. - That said, Floyd is a hot name recently, and I've heard him connected with Tampa Bay at No. 9, Cleveland at No. 8, San Francisco at No. 7 and even Jacksonville at No. 5. So there's a chance the Giants might not be able to get him at No. 10. - If Floyd is gone -- and possibly even if he's not -- the Giants could take an offensive player. Some in the brain trust have expressed the opinion that, after spending more than $100 million in guaranteed money on defensive free agents, it would be unwise for the Giants to also spend their top-10 pick on that side of the ball. Those people would prefer to take an offensive lineman in the top 10 for the second year in a row. The Giants' top-rated offensive lineman is Mississippi's Laremy Tunsil, but the odds are not good that he'll last until No. 10. I have been told their No. 2 offensive lineman is Michigan State's Jack Conklin, who could potentially start as a rookie at right tackle and allow the coaching staff to keep Flowers on the left side, where they believe he has elite upside. - Multiple people have told me the Giants will not select UCLA linebacker Myles Jack at No. 10. Concerns about the condition of Jack's knee, combined with the Giants' generally lukewarm feelings about first-round linebackers (remember, they view Floyd as a pass-rusher who happens to play linebacker), have slid him far enough down their board that they think No. 10 is too high. The most-injured team in the league the past three years, the Giants aren't up for a first-round injury risk. - I also don't expect them to take Ohio State running back Ezekiel Elliott, mainly because they think No. 10 is too high to take a running back when that's one of the few positions on their roster that has any depth and they have so many needs elsewhere. I can't get Elliott ruled out completely by people in the know, but I think a lot of weird things would have to happen in the top nine for him to be the pick at 10. - They liked Florida cornerback Vernon Hargreaves at one point in this process, and could still take him. But I have not heard a lot of serious buzz about him and the Giants in the past week. - If the Giants take an offensive player in the first round, a second-round name to keep an eye on could be Eastern Kentucky's Noah Spence |
He doesn't have to hit like Butkus. He's an excellent pass rusher, a phenomenal cover backer - BOTH area's of need. He's not going to break up double-team blocks. He will blow up screen passes, will respond and react quickly to underneath stuff (how many tackles last year?) - and finally, there would be an answer to TE's.
If he's spot on, I'm in big time..It's been way too flucking long
1. Floyd
2. Conklin
I would expect one of these 2 to be the pick tonight.
FWIW, (regardless of whether they take Floyd) I FULLY EXPECT them to draft AT LEAST one DL (probably a DE) in the first 3 rounds. That's where the draft is deepest.
They still don't have the kind of long-term pass rushing depth they want/need to be successful. And I think the odds are JPP is not on the team next year.
Yes....confirmed this again today.
When was the last time there were multiple reporters saying that the Giants specifically WEREN'T going to take a player? This has never happened.
I'm still hearing loud and clear Jack is the #3 player on their board behind Ramsey and Tunsil.
The only question now is whether he makes it to 10. This Ranaan/Graziano bit is leaked info from the Giants to dissuade a team from trading up to 9 to grab him.
In all likelihood it's a moot point. Jack isn't getting past 6 or 7 anyway.
The ultimate question is,"is Flowers our LT"? If yes, I would not see the value of #10 equating to a RT/RG.. I also question Conklin as the solution to a need for a LT. It may be a shocker come our pick, I believe Lawson is still being viewed as a BPA at #10. Remember how atrocious our DL was at getting pressure on QB's. Even with Vernon, JPP is on a (1) year contract and we can't know what we have in Odigi. I would really like to see a trade down to at least #15 to justify Decker/Spriggs (OT) and get another rd #2, at the least rd #3, pick. Decker/Spriggs will be better from day 1 in pass-protection and they are already above average run-blockers. JMHO.
Quote:
Smells like a smoke screen? perhaps to dissuade anyone from trading up in front of them.
Yes....confirmed this again today.
When was the last time there were multiple reporters saying that the Giants specifically WEREN'T going to take a player? This has never happened.
I'm still hearing loud and clear Jack is the #3 player on their board behind Ramsey and Tunsil.
The only question now is whether he makes it to 10. This Ranaan/Graziano bit is leaked info from the Giants to dissuade a team from trading up to 9 to grab him.
In all likelihood it's a moot point. Jack isn't getting past 6 or 7 anyway.
This would qualify as an unprecedented smokescreen for the Giants, if true. I'm not saying your sources are incorrect but the Giants just don't do smokescreens very well and, if what you're saying is correct, that means that not one but two of Raanan's trusted sources have either been totally out of the know or blatantly lied to him for the good of the organization. It will be very interesting to say the least...
Quote:
Smells like a smoke screen? perhaps to dissuade anyone from trading up in front of them.
Yes....confirmed this again today.
When was the last time there were multiple reporters saying that the Giants specifically WEREN'T going to take a player? This has never happened.
I'm still hearing loud and clear Jack is the #3 player on their board behind Ramsey and Tunsil.
The only question now is whether he makes it to 10. This Ranaan/Graziano bit is leaked info from the Giants to dissuade a team from trading up to 9 to grab him.
In all likelihood it's a moot point. Jack isn't getting past 6 or 7 anyway.
With all due respect, as you've been a great resource, I can't remember the last time a guy started a sure fire top five pick with no chance of falling to us, then after medical re-check that same player was uncovered to have a degenerative condition where each medical team had to make its own conclusions. This situation has warranted more digging by the media to see where each team stands, hence the flow of late information as teams boards and "sub-boards" (injured players) were being set.
Quote:
Smells like a smoke screen? perhaps to dissuade anyone from trading up in front of them.
Yes....confirmed this again today.
When was the last time there were multiple reporters saying that the Giants specifically WEREN'T going to take a player? This has never happened.
I'm still hearing loud and clear Jack is the #3 player on their board behind Ramsey and Tunsil.
The only question now is whether he makes it to 10. This Ranaan/Graziano bit is leaked info from the Giants to dissuade a team from trading up to 9 to grab him.
In all likelihood it's a moot point. Jack isn't getting past 6 or 7 anyway.
Man I hope you are right, because that would mean they are good with his knee.
Knee sounds legit, but if they thought he would be physically OK, not taking an LB that high sounds like bunk.
Then take Jalen Mills in the 3rd and a WR in the 4th and we're rolling.
I don't think they care about anyone in the media, nor should they..
I've wondered about that for a while now. The kid has tons of pass rush potential, and seems to have gotten his head on straight. He'd be much more likely to succeed in a 3rd down pass rush specialist position than the guys (e.g., Moore) whom we've tried of late.
There are a lot of teams showing a lot of interest.
Quote:
He doesn't have to hit like Butkus. He's an excellent pass rusher, a phenomenal cover backer - BOTH area's of need. He's not going to break up double-team blocks. He will blow up screen passes, will respond and react quickly to underneath stuff (how many tackles last year?) - and finally, there would be an answer to TE's.
If he's spot on, I'm in big time..It's been way too flucking long
This is exactly why I don't get the negativity surrounding Floyd.
I'd prefer we take OT (conklin?) over hargraves. players like buckner, jack, ramsey (no shot) etc are the obvious pick if they somehow fall, but i'm not as down on floyd's skillset as other fans. this is 2016... physicality from the lb spot is overrated, a 3 down linebacker barely exists outside of a few select players, and TEs (and RBs to a lesser degree) are more athletic than ever. You need an athletic LB, and if you have one that can excel in coverage AND rush the passer, he's just as good as a "3 down LB" considering how often teams are in the nickel. people are sour on floyd cause he isn't physical.... like I said, this is 2016 NFL. it's tough to be mad if he's the pick, unless they pass over a projected top 5 player (also, i know high picked RBs dont usually turn out well but nobody would get me more immediately stoked than zeke)
Can I get a few names of successful LB's who aren't particularly physical?
Pass on the better player so we don't gave to move Flowers?
How does Eli feel about this?
I'm sure they like Floyd, I'm just not convinced he's #1.
I do think they love Conklin.
Pass on the better player so we don't gave to move Flowers?
How does Eli feel about this?
I view Conklin as the better prospect personally. The guy is more physical, plays tough, mean, etc... Stanley is supposedly the better athlete.
People act as if they wouldn't draft Jon Runyan 10th overall. I would.
Yeah, the idea that it needs to be defense is idiotic fanboy bullcrap. It makes him sound uninformed.