Oh definitely a DT in a 4-3 - just wonder what there opinions of him are as a player. He was arguably a Top 5 pick before the season started, but now people are saying he's a borderline first rounder
Should be the answer to all of this silliness. Answer? Who knows, it's way too early and we have no idea what the Giants really think. NO ONE had Apple at 10 last year, no one and our top two guys were gone and we still got a good player so why are you all dousing your drawers with worry in the middle of February?
It's not worry for me, Joey. Just the enjoyment of talking draft, and seeing what others think they'd do in various scenarios. This is FUN, buddy!
It's a deep group in the 1st round, a premium position in our scheme, DRC is on his final year and our depth after our starters is garbage(Wade/Snsabaugh)so we have a need there.
about one of the QBs. I have the feeling that Watson, unconventional in some ways as he is, could become a pretty special QB, though both he and Kizer seem like risky picks to me. But if the scouts had a conviction on either I'd bow to that.
yatqb I hear you and if that happens it happens...
...but I hope not. I think we're close and a good year from a 1st round pick could make the difference between winning a title or not. Example: Aaron Ross, not a great pick or player(I would have chosen Dwayne Bowe) but in hindsight I don't believe we would have won that title without him. Some might counter that we could have possibly drafted Eric Wright in Round 2 but the whole draft changes with every pick and that's far from certain.
So I'm in win now mode because I think it's there for the taking if we play our cards right this offseason. A QB isn't going to offer us anything in that regard.
Very true, although it might secure our future for a decade or more
The "row" system the Giants use wouldn't have any trouble coping with the situation where the top two TEs, the top OT and the three top WRs are gone.
They rank players in rows. Presumably there only one or a few players in their top row. The rows presumably get bigger as you move along. (Because you're starting at one end of a bell curve of talent and moving toward the middle.) By the time you get to the later rounds, I expect those rows are pretty large.
If they get to pick 23 and there's one guy left from row 4, two from row 5, and five from row 6, they're going to take the guy from row 4, pretty much regardless of position. At this point, they probably would even take a QB if he were a row or two above the other prospects, knowing a rookie QB would probably not play at all in 2017.
The key thing is: They spent months preparing their board, and they follow it. They don't start sweating and going "BUT WE NEED A LEFT TACKLE!!!" or "CRAP, THE TIGHT ENDS ARE GONE" and drop down to row 7 or 8 to get a player at a position of need.
If they get to pick 23 and there are 5 guys from row 6, and nobody from a higher row, then there are 5 guys they can choose from. Need breaks the tie. For example, if they need a tackle most, and there's a tackle in their top row, they'll take the tackle. (I don't know how they'd break a tie between two tackles in the same row. I assume Reese makes that call in the first round.)
Since no one here has access to their board or is privy to the conversations that go on in the war room this is entirely academic.
Reese can and will say anyone they pick was the highest guy on their board. Anything else would be spun as a need or panic pick.
I doubt it's as simple as sticking to their board. Need will be a factor. Different scouts and personnel will lobby hard for their guy on draft day. They may think a particular position is strong and they can find a comparable guy later. They may have a feel for who teams will be looking at and gamble on a guy falling to their next pick. I think it's a lot more dynamic than just sticking to a spreadsheet.
Need may not be a factor depending on the situation.
Quote:
.
Looks like a 3-4 DE (4-3 DT).
Oh definitely a DT in a 4-3 - just wonder what there opinions of him are as a player. He was arguably a Top 5 pick before the season started, but now people are saying he's a borderline first rounder
Quote:
Should be the answer to all of this silliness. Answer? Who knows, it's way too early and we have no idea what the Giants really think. NO ONE had Apple at 10 last year, no one and our top two guys were gone and we still got a good player so why are you all dousing your drawers with worry in the middle of February?
It's not worry for me, Joey. Just the enjoyment of talking draft, and seeing what others think they'd do in various scenarios. This is FUN, buddy!
So I'm in win now mode because I think it's there for the taking if we play our cards right this offseason. A QB isn't going to offer us anything in that regard.
I too lean toward the win now option, but If you can land a franchise QB that's a rare opportunity.
They rank players in rows. Presumably there only one or a few players in their top row. The rows presumably get bigger as you move along. (Because you're starting at one end of a bell curve of talent and moving toward the middle.) By the time you get to the later rounds, I expect those rows are pretty large.
If they get to pick 23 and there's one guy left from row 4, two from row 5, and five from row 6, they're going to take the guy from row 4, pretty much regardless of position. At this point, they probably would even take a QB if he were a row or two above the other prospects, knowing a rookie QB would probably not play at all in 2017.
The key thing is: They spent months preparing their board, and they follow it. They don't start sweating and going "BUT WE NEED A LEFT TACKLE!!!" or "CRAP, THE TIGHT ENDS ARE GONE" and drop down to row 7 or 8 to get a player at a position of need.
If they get to pick 23 and there are 5 guys from row 6, and nobody from a higher row, then there are 5 guys they can choose from. Need breaks the tie. For example, if they need a tackle most, and there's a tackle in their top row, they'll take the tackle. (I don't know how they'd break a tie between two tackles in the same row. I assume Reese makes that call in the first round.)
Since no one here has access to their board or is privy to the conversations that go on in the war room this is entirely academic.
Reese can and will say anyone they pick was the highest guy on their board. Anything else would be spun as a need or panic pick.
I doubt it's as simple as sticking to their board. Need will be a factor. Different scouts and personnel will lobby hard for their guy on draft day. They may think a particular position is strong and they can find a comparable guy later. They may have a feel for who teams will be looking at and gamble on a guy falling to their next pick. I think it's a lot more dynamic than just sticking to a spreadsheet.