Could Giants end up with extra depth that has trade value?

Don't really have any trade value because they have no NFL track record. Same with a guy like Deayon. They probably won't be claimed if waive or even stolen off the PS. Everybody has guys at the end of the roster they like who they hope will develop. The grass isn't always greener for NFL developmental players.

like in baseball - you have to cut them or try to stash them on the PS where other teams can sign them. So there's not a lot of incentive to trade for this level of player, when you know they'll be available for free.

unlikely. We couldn't even get a seventh for Marvin Austin several years ago, and I'd be surprised if anyone trades for a rookie UDFA like Lewis, Powe, or Deayon. The Giants also won't trade them if they play well during the preseason.

We did trade Ryan Grant to the Packers for a sixth, and got Wing for a conditional seventh. But both teams were desperate. The Packers had a rash of injuries at RB in the preseason, and we needed to replace Weatherford.

The end result is that we may well end up cutting some players who are signed by other teams, even though we can't trade them. Remember also that other teams have the same dilemma, and we may well benefit from their cuts.

always seems true in theory but very rarely actually amounts to much.

I think Ryan Grant was the only real example of this that I can remember.

stash, but I could see a team giving up a conditional 6th or 7th for some of our guys if they look really good in preseason and another team is desperate.

a possible but unrealistic offer from a team desperate for a TE for someone like Tye. I don't think Donnell is tradable at all coming off the neck, and of course LaCosse is worth nothing to anybody... But Tye maybe. Would the Giants give him up? I think not. They will cut one of LaCosse or Adams to get down to 3 TEs plus Johnson.

Unless someone of them ends up on IR, and they have 3 by default.

You can't get trade value for FA pickups by and large.

Maybe they could get a low pick for Jennings or Vereen.

Would you give either of them up for a 6th or 7th round draft pick?

In comment 13060826 BlueLou said:

Quote:

Maybe they could get a low pick for Jennings or Vereen. Would you give either of them up for a 6th or 7th round draft pick?

I highly doubt that we give up Jennings or Vereen.

In comment 13060826 BlueLou said:

Quote:

Maybe they could get a low pick for Jennings or Vereen. Would you give either of them up for a 6th or 7th round draft pick?

no way

Giant cuts, it's a hopeful sign that the roster depth is getting stronger. Trades, however, seem doubtful.

pops up around this time of year, every year...I think not. What starter level talent do you have that is in the 2 spot of the depth chart? What we do have, mainly at the corner back position, is needed depth.

Everything else we have is just an unproven prospect .

Jennings, Vereen or Tye. That nuts. Those are our starters. You're going to go with lesser talent at a starting position for even a mid much less a low draft choice?!?! WTF!

the point I was making?

Play some games first.

In comment 13060848 PEEJ said:

Quote:

Giant cuts, it's a hopeful sign that the roster depth is getting stronger. Trades, however, seem doubtful.

I think that's a really good point.
Trade value unsure but definitely a sign of a much deeper team. In the past we seemed to be the team looking for these types of players, it's nice to be on this side of the fence a little.

Really? Where?

Safety - nobody is proven
CB - two proven corners, a rookie and a vet who isn't the same player
LB - really?
DE - two starters and questions
DT - Nobody knows who can play the #3
C - one guy
G - one guy and a pass blocker who can't run block
OT - one guy and questions
QB - one guy and an unproven backup
HB - who knows who is the starter
WR - one GEM and a bunch of hope

13 wins in two years. There are barely enough starters let alone depth

No one is going to trade for undrafted players who don't make our roster. Also, you have to temper your expectations. Many of the backups make plays against other backups in camp plus little contact. It doesn't make them a league valued commodity.

....Then we should trade Andre Williams to whatever team is suckered by him looking great in preseason action.

Play a few downs before we start talking about what we do and don't have.

He is a veteran with 1.5 season track record and 4 years in the league I believe. I had noted on other threads that if we could find a team like say the Lions who I hear are hurting at TE for a starting RT, someone who is a clearcut upgrade for us at RT and allows Robert Newhouse to move down to swing tackle, well you pull the trigger there for a trade. But you must, I believe, do it after game 1 of pre-season, not too late.

A starting TE for a starting RT. If you need to give up a conditional 6- 7 th round pick then you do it too depending on quality of the guy you get.

I don't think guys like RB A. Williams, UDFA unprovens or the like are worth anything in a trade unless they are tossed in as "extra gravy" or something.

I'd be wary of a trade of Donnell though. I think he'll be our top redzone threat this year. He is a big body guy and big body guys catch the most TD's in the redzone.

is soft...id trade him for an upgrade at RT in a new york minute. we have tye(who has looked good in regular season action) lacosse who we have heard good things about and the rookie adams who many believe was a steal, id make the sacrifice of donnell there for an upgrade at RT which is a much bigger hole with way less depth

What a pig. If it was up to me, I'd ban your ass and send you for help.

In comment 13060976 BleedBlue said:

Quote:

is soft...id trade him for an upgrade at RT in a new york minute. we have tye(who has looked good in regular season action) lacosse who we have heard good things about and the rookie adams who many believe was a steal, id make the sacrifice of donnell there for an upgrade at RT which is a much bigger hole with way less depth

If you are talking a 6th year RT whose under contract for 3 more years and who is a clear cut upgrade over Newhouse (no question) yes you trade. Why? because if you can run to the right and have improved pass protection your offense becomes dynamic.

Now, this assumes that TE's Matt LaCosse and W. Johnson are ready for #2 and #3 TE action. Rookie J. Adams would also be on the 53 man roster rather than PS.

I just have no clue who'd we trade with? I'll leave that up to BBI'ers and better yet GM Jerry Reese. :)

...for Larry Donnell.
Donnell for a starting right tackle - ( New Window )

if you think anyone who is most likely to be cut from the bottom of the roster has ANY trade value

In comment 13060982 grizz299 said:

Quote:

What a pig. If it was up to me, I'd ban your ass and send you for help.

In comment 13061080 Milton said:

Quote:

...for Larry Donnell. Donnell for a starting right tackle - ( New Window )

If you throw in a conditional 6th or 7th round pick, 5th if he starts 14 or more games, sure they would. But he'd need to be quality and there aren't many of those, if any, for "sale" right now. Most teams will take their chances with waiver wire guys or youth.

In comment 13060982 grizz299 said:

Quote:

What a pig. If it was up to me, I'd ban your ass and send you for help.

In comment 13061315 SGMen said:

Quote:

If you throw in a conditional 6th or 7th round pick, 5th if he starts 14 or more games, sure they would.

No, they wouldn't. Because then they would need to find a starting quality right tackle themselves and if they tried to trade Larry Donnell and a conditional 6th round pick for one everyone would tell them....
Dream On! - ( New Window )

Is impossible some team could have a slew of injuries at HB, TE, or CB and need a vet the price might not big but even a conditional pick is a better value then just releasing a player.

When there are roster limit sizes, players who have value get cut. It happens every year to many teams.

It especially happens with veterans who can still play. Teams generally will keep younger talent and let older guys go.

While there is value, there is really no trade value

In comment 13060982 grizz299 said:

Quote:

What a pig. If it was up to me, I'd ban your ass and send you for help.

Hurry up Grizz...the Good Ship Lollipop is leaving!

...

In comment 13061371 stretch234 said:

Quote:

When there are roster limit sizes, players who have value get cut. It happens every year to many teams. It especially happens with veterans who can still play. Teams generally will keep younger talent and let older guys go. While there is value, there is really no trade value

Quite true, veteran "surprise" cuts happen every year when there is quality youth depth, cheaper depth rising up and the veteran has maybe a year or two of play left in them.

I'd say the odds of our trading a player and conditional draft choice for a starting RT are very slim, like 1 out of 32 chance if you get my drift. But it is interesting to discuss none-the-less, particularly since you are talking about trading a depth guy, a potential cut, and getting some value back in return.

Lets say a team got creamed at RB, TE and CB with injuries. Do we trade TE Donnell (new teams starter), RB Dwarka (has a little resume work, good camp so far) and CB T. Wade to them for a starting RT? Sure you do! But what are the odds of that happening? More like 1 out of 320.