How cutting bait so quickly on UDFAs can hurt the Giants

Its not a big deal.

Isn't there anything more interesting to write about?

does it really matter?

on someone, they have a 90-man roster.

if they liked someone else more, you cut bait on the guy you like less.

Will there be a mistake occasionally? Probably, but I think you just live with that.

the bonuses they eat here are insignificant, aren't they?

and it isn't very high.

But I'm on the other side of this one - do we really want them to feel like they're required to stick with a guy because they gave him some of that limited bonus money? They worked these guys out, the coaching staff had a chance to see them up close and personal. That matters more to me than what someone had to offer a guy who was scouted and in demand to get them in the door.

Why would you feel any obligation to a guy in whom you have an insignificant financial investment, if you think there's a better option over HERE? Points to them for agility.

The hit rate on these UDFA's is so small, I'm hardly concerned that this is going to "hurt" the Giants.

and it turned out he was trash?

the UDRFA isn't a good fit for what they want. Remember, by cutting bait they get to bring in other UDRFAs to try out. Maybe they hit on one of those. Who knows.

In comment 12953505 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

The hit rate on these UDFA's is so small, I'm hardly concerned that this is going to "hurt" the Giants.

25 - 30% of the NFL is UDFA's (31% in 2013, around 25% in 2015). there are more UDFA's in the NFL than 1st round picks - obviously the pool of UDFA's dwarfs 1st round picks, but hitting on a UDFA is like winning the lottery.

you didn't have to use a draft pick to get the player and they make peanuts for three years.

but I agree with you, the hit rate of 3 in 10 doesn't count contribution. it's just "on the roster" and I'm not going to lose sleep over cutting the wrong one.

but they apparently like Daniels better.

Daniels has a unique skill set - QB, DB and STs.

Must be a slow day

they give out $20,000 like it's pocket change. And you wonder why a ticket costs $150 and a beer costs $15.

whom I generally like.

The whole premise of the article is dubious and his last paragraph totally undercuts his Giants are possibly 'hurting themselves' argument:

"Under McAdoo and his staff, the competition appears real. Let the best players stay, regardless of whether they're a tryout player or an undrafted free agent with a signing bonus or base salary guarantee."

In comment 12953519 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

In comment 12953505 arcarsenal said: Quote: The hit rate on these UDFA's is so small, I'm hardly concerned that this is going to "hurt" the Giants. 25 - 30% of the NFL is UDFA's (31% in 2013, around 25% in 2015). there are more UDFA's in the NFL than 1st round picks - obviously the pool of UDFA's dwarfs 1st round picks, but hitting on a UDFA is like winning the lottery. you didn't have to use a draft pick to get the player and they make peanuts for three years. but I agree with you, the hit rate of 3 in 10 doesn't count contribution. it's just "on the roster" and I'm not going to lose sleep over cutting the wrong one.

Yeah, I mean you'll find a bunch of UDFA guys who find spots on rosters.. but the amount who are actually difference makers has to be very small. I feel like the odds of us dumping one of these guys and them going on to become really valuable NFL regulars are so, so slim. This just isn't something I can get worked up over.

.

Most players who get cut do not turn into Cameron Wake or Ryan Grant. There are thousands of other undrafted players who never do anything noteworthy, and sometimes guys get cut multiple times before they get their shot. I think James Harrison was cut 3 times by the Steelers before he became a star.
Just because someone was heavily scouted and/or received a signing bonus, doesn't mean they can't be cut after one mini camp. They can only keep 90 players for training camp, and I am sure they scouted Daniels just as much as Woodrum. Mini-camp was the tryout, and Daniels beat out Woodrum. It's really that simple.

The man with the plan

Hopefully Woodrum stole a few towels

Quote:

That's Jerry ghost718 : 10:43 am : link : reply The man with the plan

So the GM is responsible for evaluating the player once he's here and then cutting him? That would be McAdoo.

More of the same from a totally useless poster.

Daniels might present more value to the team simply by being able to run a scout team and provide different looks with his running ability.

But we have seen this type of behavior in the past.More guys come in and out of here than Penn Station.You want to say it's McAdoo,I'd guess it's a combination of both,but whatever makes you and the click look good.

another Todd Christenson whom we waived in order to sign WR Dwight Scales/ Dwight had a stellar career.

In comment 12953655 ghost718 said:

Quote:

But we have seen this type of behavior in the past.More guys come in and out of here than Penn Station.You want to say it's McAdoo,I'd guess it's a combination of both,but whatever makes you and the click look good.

click=clique

Are about as enlightening as what you'd find after cracking open a fortune cookie.

At least fortune cookies give me some lucky numbers.

In comment 12953519 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

25 - 30% of the NFL is UDFA's (31% in 2013, around 25% in 2015).

I'd also wonder how the NFL arrived at that UDFA %.

Is the percentage from week 1 when almost all of the NFL players are still healthy...or is it from week 17 when all NFL teams have been hit with injuries and they've had to replace players from the pool of men not currently on a roster? Or do they somehow use a weighted average to take into account the rosters for all 17 weeks?

Quote:

Not gonna pretend to know the process ghost718 : 11:20 am : link : reply But we have seen this type of behavior in the past.More guys come in and out of here than Penn Station.You want to say it's McAdoo,I'd guess it's a combination of both,but whatever makes you and the click look good.

So you are going to comment about something you know jackshit about and then belittle others for taking a different stance. You are a jewel.

The GM provides the players. The coach decides which players make the roster and play. It isn't really some secret process at work.

because of this.

One day we read about how the Giants lost out on Leonard Floyd, and now cutting a third string undrafted rookie QB is going to cost the Giants? I don't get the hand wringing. The Bears trade up for Floyd, the Bucs trade down and blow a second rounder on a kicker. The Giants draft a talented CB, use their second rounder to add Shepard, and found a player they like better than the rookie at the 3rd QB spot. Having trouble seeing the downside ...

In comment 12953472 Curtis in VA said:

Quote:

Its not a big deal. Isn't there anything more interesting to write about?

Indeed.

none to report.

Unfortunate nature of the profession these days.

In comment 12953669 Jim in Tampa said:

Quote:

In comment 12953519 pjcas18 said: Quote: 25 - 30% of the NFL is UDFA's (31% in 2013, around 25% in 2015). I'd also wonder how the NFL arrived at that UDFA %. Is the percentage from week 1 when almost all of the NFL players are still healthy...or is it from week 17 when all NFL teams have been hit with injuries and they've had to replace players from the pool of men not currently on a roster? Or do they somehow use a weighted average to take into account the rosters for all 17 weeks?

See below:

Quote:

Undrafted players are more prevalent on the NFL landscape than ever before. In 2012, there were 608 undrafted players who appeared on active rosters for at least one game, or nearly 30 percent of all players, according to Elias Sports Bureau. Last year, the number was even greater -- 638, or 31.4 percent of the league's 2,026 total players. This year, there are 456 undrafted players on opening-week 53-man rosters, according to Elias, including 64 rookie free agents. Of those rookies, 36 weren't invited to the NFL Scouting Combine. The Steelers were one of only four teams this season who did not keep an undrafted rookie on the 53-man roster. The others were the Buffalo Bills, New York Jets and Oakland Raiders.

Undrafted Players Making up a Bigger Percent of Rosters - ( New Window )

In comment 12953677 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

So you are going to comment about something you know jackshit about and then belittle others for taking a different stance. You are a jewel. The GM provides the players. The coach decides which players make the roster and play. It isn't really some secret process at work.

Who exactly did I belittle in this thread?

rookie minicamp will prove a fractal of how they do everything. It feels like the scouts set up a value board, and the coaches used the camp to do their own small sample scouting. Carson and Boon are nothing special, and after attending multiple camps, they've learned what it takes to get signed. They have no upside, and should have been in for regular tryouts, not tryouts against undrafted and younger kids who may have more uspide.

Behind Eli, the QB situation is weird. Nassib has looked fine, but hasn't gotten a lot of work and will be a FA after this season. Thus it was becoming time to find, draft or develop a new backup. Last week it seemd the idea was Woodrum, which made a lot of sense because he wasn't going to be a threat to Nassib this year, but possibly could replace him next. Instead, they dump Woodrum and sign BJ Daniels, who's about the same age as Nassib, and should even be able to threaten for the backup job.

But it's Spring and the roster is set at 90, so why not keep all 4 QB's for now, pick the backup from between Nassib or BJ (barring a trade of either) and keep Woodrum around for development? There's still enough utter crap on the Giant roster to make room for 4 QBs right now.

Shifting so quickly from Woodrum to Daniels, and adding those crap receivers was mildly disconcerting and will be the cause for major concern if they keep selecting zero upside players over positive upside players. I did like the Williams and Smalley moves, and feel like those showeda proper use of minicamp. It shouldn't be a tryout for mid-20s street free agents.

and give him money that looks like it foreshadows starter money in a couple years.

I don't think this is any big deal but Giants did let a guy go after a few weeks and he went on to be an all-pro.

.

He can be inactive every week unless you are really thin at a position because of week to week injuries. He can back up QB and WR, maybe even RB or DB.

Meanwhile they can figure out what position he should really play.

In comment 12953730 Vanzetti said:

Quote:

I don't think this is any big deal but Giants did let a guy go after a few weeks and he went on to be an all-pro.

A bit more to it than that though. From the Giants, he went to the CFL for two years before getting to Miami.

Odds of the Colts cutting Woodrum sooner rather than later?

In comment 12953709 Phil in LA said:

Quote:

Behind Eli, the QB situation is weird. Nassib has looked fine, but hasn't gotten a lot of work and will be a FA after this season. Thus it was becoming time to find, draft or develop a new backup. Last week it seemd the idea was Woodrum, which made a lot of sense because he wasn't going to be a threat to Nassib this year, but possibly could replace him next. Instead, they dump Woodrum and sign BJ Daniels, who's about the same age as Nassib, and should even be able to threaten for the backup job. But it's Spring and the roster is set at 90, so why not keep all 4 QB's for now, pick the backup from between Nassib or BJ (barring a trade of either) and keep Woodrum around for development?

I see all these points, but suppose the Giants quickly felt that Woodrum was not in their future. Should they keep him for camp fodder? If everyone were open with each other, it could have been that the Giants cut him now so he has a better shot of sticking somewhere else. I know it sounds altruistic, and may not have gone down that way, but the situation does not sound like weakness on the part of the Giants.

concern that has continued is bringing in all these tryout players from Canada. Just what is the point of this??

Should we think a 6'2" 285 O lineman really has a shot
Should we think a running back that times 4.75 really has a shot
Should we think a 6'0" 212 linebacker really has a shot

These tryouts may be good for the Mara-Goodell relationship, but are we ever going to get a player that adds to the quality of the roster from this group? Not to date (and don't include Brett Jones, who is undersized, yet to contribute at Center, and was an individual-not group- tryout.

If this was such a good practice following every draft, why isn't any other NFL team doing it? I know we have a guy in the Front Office with Canadian roots, but I thought the goal was to put the best 90 players into a competitive camp.

That is my problem with their process. The scouts looked at Woodrum and made him a priority. That's how you find players: over time and by crosschecking. Woodrum got a total of two practices this weekend, and then became cannon fodder. That doesn't make sense, unless there's more to the story. And BJ Daniels, is versatile, but there was no restriction against keeping both for the time being. Unless there's something missing in the story, the decision was made hastily when it didn't need to be made now at all.

In comment 12953513 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

and it turned out he was trash?

And Rhett Bomar too

These men that were waived were signed after a hands-off evaluation. Yes, I am sure we looked at film and we worked them out to at least a minimum standard.

Now, the evaluators got to see them up close, and since other players were there, in not quite so much of a vacuum.

Could be simple. Question: Do you see any way in hell that this guy is a top 63 between now and final organization roster date? Answer: No - Next step seems obvious and hopefully stops some time wasting.

In comment 12953763 Phil in LA said:

Quote:

That is my problem with their process. The scouts looked at Woodrum and made him a priority. That's how you find players: over time and by crosschecking. Woodrum got a total of two practices this weekend, and then became cannon fodder. That doesn't make sense, unless there's more to the story. And BJ Daniels, is versatile, but there was no restriction against keeping both for the time being. Unless there's something missing in the story, the decision was made hastily when it didn't need to be made now at all.

If I hear you, you are saying that the issue here is not cutting him, but in having him rated highly in the first place. I can see that for sure. One would think that a player, properly evaluated, could be an immediate fail.

In comment 12953857 DonQuixote said:

Quote:

In comment 12953763 Phil in LA said: Quote:

Correction: "One would think that a player, properly evaluated, should not be an immediate fail.

In comment 12953744 YANKEE28 said:

Quote:

concern that has continued is bringing in all these tryout players from Canada. Just what is the point of this?? Should we think a 6'2" 285 O lineman really has a shot

Are we talking about the Center they signed?

Shaun O'Hara played at 6'3, 303 pounds. Centers are not monster-sized.

In comment 12953718 Bill L said:

Quote:

and give him money that looks like it foreshadows starter money in a couple years.

Pretty sure that's the Giants' desire. Not so sure if it's Nassib.

In comment 12953554 Jay in Toronto said:

Quote:

whom I generally like. The whole premise of the article is dubious and his last paragraph totally undercuts his Giants are possibly 'hurting themselves' argument: "Under McAdoo and his staff, the competition appears real. Let the best players stay, regardless of whether they're a tryout player or an undrafted free agent with a signing bonus or base salary guarantee."

I just laid out both sides.
1) Agents of future UDFAs might think twice about sending players to UDFAs
2) They Giants are only interested in who the best player is right now. No ifs, ands or buts

You can decide for yourself which is more important. I tried to lay it out fairly.

In comment 12954037 JordanRaanan said:

Quote:

In comment 12953554 Jay in Toronto said: Quote: whom I generally like. The whole premise of the article is dubious and his last paragraph totally undercuts his Giants are possibly 'hurting themselves' argument: "Under McAdoo and his staff, the competition appears real. Let the best players stay, regardless of whether they're a tryout player or an undrafted free agent with a signing bonus or base salary guarantee." I just laid out both sides. 1) Agents of future UDFAs might think twice about sending players to UDFAs 2) They Giants are only interested in who the best player is right now. No ifs, ands or buts You can decide for yourself which is more important. I tried to lay it out fairly.

obviously meant to say "sending players to Giants."

In comment 12954037 JordanRaanan said:

Quote:

In comment 12953554 Jay in Toronto said: Quote: whom I generally like. The whole premise of the article is dubious and his last paragraph totally undercuts his Giants are possibly 'hurting themselves' argument: "Under McAdoo and his staff, the competition appears real. Let the best players stay, regardless of whether they're a tryout player or an undrafted free agent with a signing bonus or base salary guarantee." I just laid out both sides. 1) Agents of future UDFAs might think twice about sending players to UDFAs 2) They Giants are only interested in who the best player is right now. No ifs, ands or buts You can decide for yourself which is more important. I tried to lay it out fairly.

The Giants are not hurting themselves if they evaluate players and communicate that to the players in a timely fashion. Woodrum is better off trying out for the Colts than he would be here in NY with no future. What's the problem? If I were an UDFA, I would appreciate that clarity...just saying.

Headline taking yet another swipe at Giants brass as incompetent from NJ,com

All NJCOM articles are clickthrough pages.

I will never open another one of their articles again.

Is he getting paid by Indy now?

In comment 12953472 Curtis in VA said:
[quote] Its not a big deal.

Isn't there anything more interesting to write about? [/quote


And then there was Cameron Wake.

In comment 12954059 DonQuixote said:

Quote:

In comment 12954037 JordanRaanan said: Quote: In comment 12953554 Jay in Toronto said: Quote: whom I generally like. The whole premise of the article is dubious and his last paragraph totally undercuts his Giants are possibly 'hurting themselves' argument: "Under McAdoo and his staff, the competition appears real. Let the best players stay, regardless of whether they're a tryout player or an undrafted free agent with a signing bonus or base salary guarantee." I just laid out both sides. 1) Agents of future UDFAs might think twice about sending players to UDFAs 2) They Giants are only interested in who the best player is right now. No ifs, ands or buts You can decide for yourself which is more important. I tried to lay it out fairly. The Giants are not hurting themselves if they evaluate players and communicate that to the players in a timely fashion. Woodrum is better off trying out for the Colts than he would be here in NY with no future. What's the problem? If I were an UDFA, I would appreciate that clarity...just saying.

Can't imagine a player saying, 'Oh, thanks! You scouted me for months and recruited me hard to come there, then cut me a week later after 2 practices with mostly non-NFL players, including 20 or so CFL guys. But the clarity is appreciated.'

In comment 12954064 Bill L said:

Quote:

Is he getting paid by Indy now?

You should read the story. Not how it works. He didn't get $20K upfront signing bonus. He received nothing right now.

In comment 12954126 JordanRaanan said:

Quote:

In comment 12954064 Bill L said: Quote: Is he getting paid by Indy now? You should read the story. Not how it works. He didn't get $20K upfront signing bonus. He received nothing right now.

I did read it. You wrote "$20,000 guaranteed to Woodrum". Adn the context was that losing $20K wouldn't hurt the Giants. So now I'm confused; where does the money go then?

you can really fault the Giants for on Cameron Wake fka Derek Wake.

He was cut in the 2005 off-season before camp even started.

Was out of football for an entire season completely after that.

Spent two years in the CFL and I hate making the allegation, but reminds of say Jose Bautista who was a mediocre baseball player until he was 28 years old in Toronto (chemicals?)

and then after two years in the CFL where Wake dominated the Dolphins signed him.

I am going to go out on a limb and say the player Cameron Wake was in 2009, is not who the Giants had in camp as Derek Wake in 2005 (not literally, but figuratively obviously).

In comment 12954124 JordanRaanan said:

Quote:

Can't imagine a player saying, 'Oh, thanks! You scouted me for months and recruited me hard to come there, then cut me a week later after 2 practices with mostly non-NFL players, including 20 or so CFL guys. But the clarity is appreciated.'

This seems silly. While I'm sure a player would be disappointed and frustrated at being scouted and recruited, only to be quickly released, an intelligent player would recognize his chances of finding a spot elsewhere are likely greater early in the process rather than late. A player's agent surely realizes that as well. While they might not feel genuinely thankful to the Giants, I think'd recognize that the quick decision by the team was to their personal benefit and would at least be appreciative of that.

It sure is a weak one:

Quote:

How could this hurt the Giants? Two agents told NJ Advance Media that quick triggers likely wouldn't stop them from sending players to teams like the Giants, but they would keep this in mind and think twice next year.

A sample size of two agents claiming they would "keep this in mind" next year? Oh noz. And even if they did withhold players from us, the odds that any of them were going contribute in even a small capacity is very, very low.

But I don't even buy the initial argument. If you're an UDFA, I'm pretty sure you're instructing your agent to tell you about the first team that's interested in you. In fact, I'd appreciate the quick cut as it gives you an opportunity to know where you stand and look elsewhere. Even the actual example they used to articulate the point of the article involved a player who has already caught on with the Colts.

Silly article.

on players, they may be hesitant to sign with us.

Pat Kirwin went on a lengthy discussion with Jim about UDFA and PK did a analysis on teams who have the most UDFA’s in the league.
And continued with how many teams have starters in the league. The Seahawks have 9 UDFA Starters on the team that is a crazy number IMO but I am guessing that is where this article steamed from.

In comment 12954143 Mad Mike said:

Quote:

In comment 12954124 JordanRaanan said: Quote: Can't imagine a player saying, 'Oh, thanks! You scouted me for months and recruited me hard to come there, then cut me a week later after 2 practices with mostly non-NFL players, including 20 or so CFL guys. But the clarity is appreciated.' This seems silly. While I'm sure a player would be disappointed and frustrated at being scouted and recruited, only to be quickly released, an intelligent player would recognize his chances of finding a spot elsewhere are likely greater early in the process rather than late. A player's agent surely realizes that as well. While they might not feel genuinely thankful to the Giants, I think'd recognize that the quick decision by the team was to their personal benefit and would at least be appreciative of that.

+

That is what I was trying to say, you said it better.

who signed UDFA RB Christian Powell after the draft and released him already after two practices.

Just like the Giants did with Woodrum.

Are the Steelers no longer either a UDFA destination?

How can money be guaranteed but he gets nothing? What exactly is being guaranteed?

With him that we don't know about. That's just as much a probability as they decided he couldn't play.

Any UDFA is a long shot to make the team. 14 were signed. 2 made it last year, 1 out of necessity on an awful roster.

My only comment is the NYG don't have time to futz around. If they're making a quick decision, something little Bill does all the time, in my mind it's a good thing.

In comment 12953709 Phil in LA said:

Quote:

rookie minicamp will prove a fractal of how they do everything. It feels like the scouts set up a value board, and the coaches used the camp to do their own small sample scouting. Carson and Boon are nothing special, and after attending multiple camps, they've learned what it takes to get signed. They have no upside, and should have been in for regular tryouts, not tryouts against undrafted and younger kids who may have more uspide. Behind Eli, the QB situation is weird. Nassib has looked fine, but hasn't gotten a lot of work and will be a FA after this season. Thus it was becoming time to find, draft or develop a new backup. Last week it seemd the idea was Woodrum, which made a lot of sense because he wasn't going to be a threat to Nassib this year, but possibly could replace him next. Instead, they dump Woodrum and sign BJ Daniels, who's about the same age as Nassib, and should even be able to threaten for the backup job. But it's Spring and the roster is set at 90, so why not keep all 4 QB's for now, pick the backup from between Nassib or BJ (barring a trade of either) and keep Woodrum around for development? There's still enough utter crap on the Giant roster to make room for 4 QBs right now. Shifting so quickly from Woodrum to Daniels, and adding those crap receivers was mildly disconcerting and will be the cause for major concern if they keep selecting zero upside players over positive upside players. I did like the Williams and Smalley moves, and feel like those showeda proper use of minicamp. It shouldn't be a tryout for mid-20s street free agents.

Tend to agree. But Woodrum was a UDFA rookie. The Giants signed him based on recommendations from the scouts. The coaches thought quickly he wasn’t good enough. I agree that minicamp should mostly be for UDFAs, but some veterans are always going to be invited.

this is supposed to be going.

Quote:

Can't imagine a player saying, 'Oh, thanks! You scouted me for months and recruited me hard to come there, then cut me a week later after 2 practices with mostly non-NFL players, including 20 or so CFL guys. But the clarity is appreciated.'

Is a UDFA supposed to sit back once he get's an offer and assume he made the team? The odds are extremely long to make the NFL. If you are an UDFA you either appreciate every chance given to you and work your ass off to make the team or you quickly become just a memory of fanatic college football fans.

If I read what you are saying, it is almost as if you think the Giants looking for the best players is somehow a reason to criticize them. Are other teams bringing in UDFA and making them feel like they have a home for the next several years?

It is a very odd stance.

Are the Giants not supposed to cut UDFA if they don't see them as a good fit?

Oh noez, an agent says that his unemployed client might not want a shot at making an NFL team. Give me a break Jordan.

Hmmm... I can see why he would be sour for the cut if he devoted so much time to Woodrum and he can't even make it out of rookie training camp.

In comment 12954689 Mason said:

Quote:

Hmmm... I can see why he would be sour for the cut if he devoted so much time to Woodrum and he can't even make it out of rookie training camp.

Maybe that's part of it. I think he (maybe not him, but a few others) wrote articles on Lang as well and he was mentioned in this putative shortsightedness. The articles were pretty random at the time...human interest pieces on a couple random long, long-shots among legions of them.

In comment 12954265 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

who signed UDFA RB Christian Powell after the draft and released him already after two practices. Just like the Giants did with Woodrum. Are the Steelers no longer either a UDFA destination?

I don't pay attention to other teams transactions this time of year but I would assume it's pretty standard practice and not at all unique to the Giants.

There was interest from a bunch of other teams, none of which signed him after the Giants cut him.

I'm sure future UDFA's could decide to go elsewhere if this becomes a trend, we'll find out next year when it matters. Lot of pieces to work with this year and yeah some of them really don't look like they fit at all. Doesn't have to make sense to me and I'm sure it will all come together in September.

At this point I'm done reading his articles till the preseason.