Two things that are paramount in this league are being able to rush the passer and being able to cover. We just watched a historically bad defense that could not do either and have clearly identified both as major needs going into this off-season. We signed Vernon and Jenkins, retained JPP and last night we bolstered the CB position by taking the best CB/player we had on our board at the time of our pick and a player who has the upside to be the best DB in the draft outside of Jalen Ramsey.
Tunsil was tempting but after getting burned by Will Hill, can you really blame the Giants brass for passing on a player with character concerns? I personally don't view the guy smoking weed as a huge deal or major red flag but the bottom line is that when you get caught doing it in this league, you get suspended. Maybe Tunsil learned his lesson and won't ever do it again but a #10 pick in a draft is a major investment and perhaps it was just too risky.
It's clear Myles Jack's knee is a major red flag for most teams in this draft. If it weren't, we never would have had the opportunity to take the player in the first place.
The "trade down!" crowd never seems to understand that to trade down you a) need a trade down partner and b) have to be satisfied with what that team is willing to give you to take your pick. As most know, Reese did say there was an offer but that offer was not good enough. He did the right thing by not taking it if that were the case.
And lastly, I can't help but think that a very large percentage of the posters who are outraged by this pick spent little to no time watching Apple play at OSU. I get the impression that had we taken Hargreaves instead, the approval rate would be much higher simply because Hargreaves was mentioned much more often going into the draft as a player who would be taken around our pick and became a "familiar" name. Our FO seems to believe that Apple is the better player and considering Reese's track record in the 1st rd, I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt for now.
Oh, and we still have picks left to address other needs. The draft doesn't end after the 1st round. Can we take a deep breath here?
When I reached out to the reps for the top potential picks to bring them in for an interview like most companies do, they wouldn't take my calls. I guess they were booked solid visiting all the outraged fans.
people get something in their head they expect to happen and when it doesn't they get outraged.
I'm more surprised at the people surprised there is outrage (LOL).
The tease of Tunsil and Jack probably distorted every one's view. Hard to believe Jack is still on the board.
He was played by Chicago and Tampa last night IMO
Regardless it's all banter. We won't know anything for a few seasons.
Both Eric and JonC have made direct/indirect posts that this is DRC's last year on the team. This pick pretty much confirms it. So Apple is looked as DRC's replacement. Now lets hypothetically speak on how good Apple becomes. If he is as good as DRC, we really didnt improve since basically the player replacement is a wash. Now if he turns into Champ Bailey or Revis - then awesome. However, the window with Eli (Manning) is about 4-5 years, and we did NOTHING so far this offseason to improve the offense.
Apple may very well turn out to be a great player - but relying on 2 guys to carry your offense is a very, very, very dangerous game to play.
And again, you fail to understand that to trade down, it has to make sense.
Apparently the Giants scouts disagree with you re: Hargreaves. I don't like to go the appeal to authority route all the time on this stuff but how much time did you really spend watching each player and marking their strengths and weaknesses to make a statement like that so definitively?
Both Eric and JonC have made direct/indirect posts that this is DRC's last year on the team. This pick pretty much confirms it. So Apple is looked as DRC's replacement. Now lets hypothetically speak on how good Apple becomes. If he is as good as DRC, we really didnt improve since basically the player replacement is a wash. Now if he turns into Champ Bailey or Revis - then awesome. However, the window with Eli (Manning) is about 4-5 years, and we did NOTHING so far this offseason to improve the offense.
Apple may very well turn out to be a great player - but relying on 2 guys to carry your offense is a very, very, very dangerous game to play.
I don't really follow your logic here. If DRC is on the way out, wouldn't having another CB be even more important? Apple will have a year to learn before he has to man a spot in the base defense (again, this is assuming DRC is even going anywhere..)
Had we not taken him and DRC is gone, we're left with Jenkins and....? To me, if you think you're going to be without DRC next year, this pick made even MORE sense. Not less.
Quote:
for what the Giants need. He's can step in and play on day 1. And, again, 10 years, not one trade down.
And again, you fail to understand that to trade down, it has to make sense.
Apparently the Giants scouts disagree with you re: Hargreaves. I don't like to go the appeal to authority route all the time on this stuff but how much time did you really spend watching each player and marking their strengths and weaknesses to make a statement like that so definitively?
My authority is the ranking of the Giants drafts the last 5 year as near the bottom. Missing the playoffs 5 of the last 6 years and 3 non-winning seasons in a row.
As for the trading down, I wonder how many GMs have been around 10 years and never done it.
It's not that I have so much confidence in the FO in general, it's that the track record with the 1st round picks has been very good throughout the vast majority of Reese's tenure as GM. You can knock the Giants for the mid round picks and poor drafts but you can't deny that our 1st round picks have been mostly hits. I have no reason to believe they didn't know this player's strengths/weaknesses well enough to feel confident taking him @ 10.
Quote:
In comment 12931452 jeff57 said:
Quote:
for what the Giants need. He's can step in and play on day 1. And, again, 10 years, not one trade down.
And again, you fail to understand that to trade down, it has to make sense.
Apparently the Giants scouts disagree with you re: Hargreaves. I don't like to go the appeal to authority route all the time on this stuff but how much time did you really spend watching each player and marking their strengths and weaknesses to make a statement like that so definitively?
My authority is the ranking of the Giants drafts the last 5 year as near the bottom. Missing the playoffs 5 of the last 6 years and 3 non-winning seasons in a row.
As for the trading down, I wonder how many GMs have been around 10 years and never done it.
The obsession with trading down is just a thing some of you guys can't let go of I guess.
No one's saying the Giants have made all the right moves but again.. how much do you really know about Eli Apple? My guess is not a lot.
Yeah, the Giants might be picking 9-11 three years running.
I dont get the outrage either.
Quote:
And again, it really has nothing to do with Apple, it's more so the direction.
Both Eric and JonC have made direct/indirect posts that this is DRC's last year on the team. This pick pretty much confirms it. So Apple is looked as DRC's replacement. Now lets hypothetically speak on how good Apple becomes. If he is as good as DRC, we really didnt improve since basically the player replacement is a wash. Now if he turns into Champ Bailey or Revis - then awesome. However, the window with Eli (Manning) is about 4-5 years, and we did NOTHING so far this offseason to improve the offense.
Apple may very well turn out to be a great player - but relying on 2 guys to carry your offense is a very, very, very dangerous game to play.
I don't really follow your logic here. If DRC is on the way out, wouldn't having another CB be even more important? Apple will have a year to learn before he has to man a spot in the base defense (again, this is assuming DRC is even going anywhere..)
Had we not taken him and DRC is gone, we're left with Jenkins and....? To me, if you think you're going to be without DRC next year, this pick made even MORE sense. Not less.
For as good as DRC was the last 2 years, we still stunk - and a lot had to do with the offense not being able to finish games off.
Again, Apple could be a great pick - but picture be damned.... Tunsil was the best prospect in the draft. Having him on the left side and Flowers on the right side solidifies the line for 10 years. Our tackles were the worst in football last year. Just really worried about the offense. We really need this 2nd round pick to come in and contribute immediately.
Tone down your brilliance and/or stick with your day job.
Actually that's NOT true. VH3 doesn't fit The Giants profile as far as CB goes.mits quite obvious that while you feel he's the better player...The Giants disagree.
Apple is taller,faster and stronger. He's better suited to play on the outside and he's only 20 years old. We made the right pick!
I suspect at least 2 of the next 3 picks will be on the offensive side of the football. I'm sure we have our eye on guys like Boyd and Shepard.
I would've liked to see a trade down, but if the value wasn't there, I can see not doing it. we get a guy projected by nearly everyone to go in the 1st round and was the debatable 2nd best CB in the draft. Whether you get him at #10 or #20 really doesn't matter if you couldn't have gotten him at #40.
Floyd is better suited for a 3-4 defense, but if he turns out to be mediocre, we didn't lose here.
The problem isn’t taking Apple. The problem is doing so at #10. Trade down to twenty, where William Jackson or Vernon Butler would have been available.
Either player, a second round pick, and possibly another pick has more value than Apple. Apple is a classic Reese pick. He is an undeveloped product with athleticism, upside, and speed. But his technique is raw, and he grabs a lot.
Reese has repeatedly gone after these undeveloped “measureables” guys, most of which have failed. That is why the roster is so depleted.
They knew they'd get Apple or Hargreaves after moving down. If both were there they were taking Apple.
The draft is about finding future starters...The Giants got a good one last night. Relatively low risk...high reward. The Giants are not going to challenge of the Super Bowl this year.
Quote:
for what the Giants need. He's can step in and play on day 1. And, again, 10 years, not one trade down.
Actually that's NOT true. VH3 doesn't fit The Giants profile as far as CB goes.mits quite obvious that while you feel he's the better player...The Giants disagree.
Apple is taller,faster and stronger. He's better suited to play on the outside and he's only 20 years old. We made the right pick!
The Giants need a slot corner. Today. Hargreaves would be that. Put Apple in the slot, without the sideline to protect him, and it'll be yellow rain. And Hargreaves is the same height as Jenkins.
Quote:
for what the Giants need. He's can step in and play on day 1. And, again, 10 years, not one trade down.
Actually that's NOT true. VH3 doesn't fit The Giants profile as far as CB goes.mits quite obvious that while you feel he's the better player...The Giants disagree.
Apple is taller,faster and stronger. He's better suited to play on the outside and he's only 20 years old. We made the right pick!
Agree; obviously the Giants didn't feel he was the "better" player for the team or he would have been the pick.
As for the trade down and get him. It's been stated plenty MIA was very interested at 13, VH went at next pick (may been Apple if we took VH) & two more DBs (albeit S) went 14&17.
Trade down and got him talk is silly.
Also, they couldn't take the chance on Jack. Reese has to get a player is going to help this team now.
Because of the F-ink tape the Titans trade up and grab Conklin (instead of Tunsil). Did you all really want to trade up for Conklin? This board would have exploded even more.
So, I'm glad Reese didn't trade up for Floyd or Conklin. What does that leave? Treadwell or a CB. The Giants went with the CB, who was their highest rated CB on the board after Hargreaves. He must have been higher rated than Treadwell.
The thing we can be pissed about is that EVERY FUCKING PERSON IN THE DRAFT KNEW THE GIANTS TOP TWO TARGETS. Reese and the Owners need to be taking to town on that.
This is my problem as well. We had the answer and final peg to finally fill in our O-Line that has been ridiculously overlooked for so many years it took JR three drafts just to get half of it fixed. This would have finally gave us a o-line that can run the ball and pass protect and excel or offense
The Apple pick makes no sense with the number one rated guy who plays the number one positional team need falling to us. Some guys have it and some don't and when it comes to being a GM JR don't!
It is like people knock the GM for not trading down, without even seeing if the trade down strategy has really worked for others. Even look at the Pats draft record. They aren't really experts at it. they miss on a lot of picks, and they usually have a lot of picks because of trading down, amassing them more 5th-7th round picks than the norm. Picks they often whiff on.
For every Edelman, there are several guys who don't even make it past year 1.
When I reached out to the reps for the top potential picks to bring them in for an interview like most companies do, they wouldn't take my calls. I guess they were booked solid visiting all the outraged fans.
The outrage is because we spent money on the cornerback position already and while it is still a position of need, we have not remotely addressed our right side of our line. We have the 10th pick overall, we did not have to move or give up a dime to get who many had in the top 3 on their board at a position of urgent need and a guy who can come in and play right away. This has nothing to do with Apple, and to the extent you say that I have not broken down his film , you are right, I have not. However, I have seen him play a bunch of times and I really do hope he has an upside because he won't contribute this year. The point is that we had the chance to get outstanding value with a risk at a position of need (probably a small risk) versus taking a guy with little off the field risk but huge playing risk at 10. Drafting an NFL ready player versus a guy with upside is such a difference in talent risk it is not even funny. I have no idea if Apple will turn out to be a good player or not, but I do know that the chances that Tunsil will be a good player is much higher. The outrage is not about result, but about decision making by our front office. I feel like we drafted now the JPP of CBs.
The problem isn’t taking Apple. The problem is doing so at #10. Trade down to twenty, where William Jackson or Vernon Butler would have been available.
Either player, a second round pick, and possibly another pick has more value than Apple. Apple is a classic Reese pick. He is an undeveloped product with athleticism, upside, and speed. But his technique is raw, and he grabs a lot.
Reese has repeatedly gone after these undeveloped “measureables” guys, most of which have failed. That is why the roster is so depleted.
This doesn't make any sense. We weren't getting Apple if we traded down. Teams picking immediately after us were going to take him if we didn't. They identified that they wanted this player and in order to take him, they had to do it at 10.
Apple was rated higher than Jackson or Butler. Perhaps they felt this was better value.
And for the billionth time.. you have to have a viable trading partner to move down. If we weren't getting correct value, there was no reason to do it. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.
I would've liked to see a trade down, but if the value wasn't there, I can see not doing it. we get a guy projected by nearly everyone to go in the 1st round and was the debatable 2nd best CB in the draft. Whether you get him at #10 or #20 really doesn't matter if you couldn't have gotten him at #40.
Floyd is better suited for a 3-4 defense, but if he turns out to be mediocre, we didn't lose here.
!00% agree.
It is like people knock the GM for not trading down, without even seeing if the trade down strategy has really worked for others. Even look at the Pats draft record. They aren't really experts at it. they miss on a lot of picks, and they usually have a lot of picks because of trading down, amassing them more 5th-7th round picks than the norm. Picks they often whiff on.
For every Edelman, there are several guys who don't even make it past year 1.
The "I would have traded down" crew is unbearable. They clearly have little grasp on how the process works. It's like a badge of honor for the stupid.
The majority of these prospects have parts of their game that needs work. Especially a 20 year old. If you think the ceiling is as high as the Giants do and have faith in him getting there, you take him.
All of the speaking in absolutes about how he can't contribute this year or won't be as good as Hargreaves is baffling to me. Some of you guys seem to think a little too highly of your limited analysis.
No they couldn't have. Miami was going to take him at 13 if we didn't take him. Where were we supposed to move?
Must be too early for you. I didn't say draft for today. I said Hargreaves could come in and play right away. Just because you get a ready made player doesn't mean you're not drafting for the long-term.
It is not about the mocks, it is about every profile (plus I have seen him play a bunch--its not like this kid played at Montana State), says he is raw with football technique that needs to be improved. you cannot fault fans for fearing that he is a combine guy, i.e., a guy with great physical ability but questionable football ability, which is the guys we seem to take over and over again at various points of the draft.
It is like people knock the GM for not trading down, without even seeing if the trade down strategy has really worked for others. Even look at the Pats draft record. They aren't really experts at it. they miss on a lot of picks, and they usually have a lot of picks because of trading down, amassing them more 5th-7th round picks than the norm. Picks they often whiff on.
For every Edelman, there are several guys who don't even make it past year 1.
You could have gotten a 2 or a three from trading down. Even Reese has been able to hit on some of these.
Getting a 1st round talent is getting a 1st round talent whether at 10 or at 28. While debating the relative value is OK, it isn't like you can just trade down in a vacuum because you want to.
Let's say Reese was offered a trade down to #20 for a 4th rounder, and they felt at 20 Apple wouldn't be there or they wouldn't get a player at a position of need they liked, then you don't move down. It is fairly simple. The question to ask is: Is Apple a 1st round talent? If he is, then we got a 1st rounder.
Having it be at a position of need and that he's young with plenty of upside makes the pick even that better. It isn't like we took the 7th ranked CB at #10. It isn't like we took a Canadian OL guy or a K or P. We got 1st round value, and absent a legitimate offer to trade down, that's fine.
At that point, I'd like to know what the details of that offer were because unless it was a sack of footballs or similar, the offer of even ONE more pick, should have been acceptable.
This is a BAD roster, that needs a lot of help. They needed to stockpile picks and add a lot of players to this team. Standing pat means gambling most of their picks will turn out to be good players.
And the history is against the latter.
Throughout the last few seasons our injuries have been just off the charts. Yet, despite every conceivable medical red flag, the vast majority (of those who post) kept begging for Myles Jack to fall to us..Some actually said, if he's still there at 7 or 8, we need to trade up..People even wanted him over Floyd..Floyd has Flaws from what I understand, but even a "no- college player knowledge" guy such as myself, would rather him than a guy eho MIGHT make it through a year or two before microfracture surgery..
Guys went through Will Hill, yet STILL after the Tunsil video broke, touted his talent and tremendous upside..Until the rules change, you're gonna get in trouble with pot/drugs. Period.
Finally, as Polian has said innumerable times, if you have a strong feel/position on a guy(This is how Gil Brandt operated) you take him. You don't take the chance of losing him, even if the outside consensus is that it was too early..Too, there were reports that a few teams were set to take him before 15..