Mayock: "no offensive lineman worth top 25 pick

he's placed 1 O Lineman, Bolles, in top 20 - and another in top 30, Ryan Ramczyk

and he also likes Forest Lamp in the first round

on how many OLmen will be picked in the first 25?

Maycock says 0/1?

were a way of preparing everyone for the return of the same offensive line. The Giants assessed the free agent market and the draft, and likely aren't impressed with what they see, so they're trying to pump up last year's group. A scary thought.

He was calling Cam Robinson a guard which was ridiculous. Robinson did everything to show why not only is he a tackle, but a 1st round tackle. Forrest Lamp is also a 1st rounder and arguably you could get about 2 or 3 more in there too. It may be a weaker class than recent memory but there will be multiple and deserving 1st round lineman.

In comment 13379213 gidiefor said:

Quote:

he's placed 1 O Lineman, Bolles, in top 20 - and another in top 30, Ryan Ramczyk and he also likes Forest Lamp in the first round

sorry -- that's backwards - Ryan Ramczyk top 20, Bolles - top 30
Lamp - top O lineman in the draft class
Link - ( New Window )

?

?

in this draft Giants may be better off choosing a DE, DB, RB or TE in the first round or even a LB

the Giants are not the only team that needs O lineman and very likely that the top lineman will be taken before the Giants pick

don't think I misunderstood. But maybe I did.

his video on nil.com about it

No. 23 than OL. Number 23 is the place we should NOT look to fill the OL need.

In comment 13379344 Chris L. said:

Quote:

No. 23 than OL. Number 23 is the place we should NOT look to fill the OL need.

I agree. The only place imo. 2-7 there are guys who may be value picks. In 1, we can get a playmaker on O or D.

Although I worry that Bolles and NYC may not be a good fit. This is a guy who got himself into trouble in Utah.

at 23 then.

Rankings didn't stop us massively reaching for Flowers and Pugh. I think Giants would love to have their pick of the litter for oline at 23.

I'd not be surprised if the picked one in the first round because it is their biggest need by far. I always like the best talent available in first round but the need has gotten rediculous. Will have to wait and see how it plays out.

In comment 13379216 bceagle05 said:

Quote:

were a way of preparing everyone for the return of the same offensive line. The Giants assessed the free agent market and the draft, and likely aren't impressed with what they see, so they're trying to pump up last year's group. A scary thought.

I don't think so at all. And, if they have the same starting 5 next year, they are not improving as a team.

On mocks, he's just a little more pessimistic than they are but seems in line. I think the earliest pick is Robinson at 14/15 among Brooks,Casserly, Jeremiah.
If they all fall to us I'm not sure they jump on one if a good DT is there,especially if its a very good 3 technique or good 5 technique guy, presuming Hank is gone and not cheaply replaced.
I just have this feeling that the FO has a lot of unsurety about the LT picture and their ability to have a productive free agency to fix the OL in a WR and D-strong draft.

In comment 13379451 Matt M. said:

Quote:

In comment 13379216 bceagle05 said: Quote: were a way of preparing everyone for the return of the same offensive line. The Giants assessed the free agent market and the draft, and likely aren't impressed with what they see, so they're trying to pump up last year's group. A scary thought. I don't think so at all. And, if they have the same starting 5 next year, they are not improving as a team.

Agree with Matt M, since I think Ben's comments are a smoke screen. Eli had nothing to do with this OL's weak run blocking.

Or stupidity of the same proportions.

Reese tells us that Eli is on the "back nine" (implying that he's going down-hill) and Mac tells us that Manning has to "step up", so "go easy" on Flowers.

draft playmaker at WR/TE/RB ... best available.

In comment 13379216 bceagle05 said:

Quote:

were a way of preparing everyone for the return of the same offensive line. The Giants assessed the free agent market and the draft, and likely aren't impressed with what they see, so they're trying to pump up last year's group. A scary thought.

I think MxAdoo's Eli comments were a way of saying that Eli needs to play better. I'm not sure why anyone feels the need to read anything more into it than that. The Giants have certainly been doing their due diligence on the OL at the combine.

that mocked us taking Pugh

As of right now...Robinson (OG) is at 24. But the character issues are worrisome. Ramczyk is in the top 20 if the hip checks out. Bolles is 26.

The Giants take the first T off the board.
There is no possible way they could play worse than Flowers did last season, and no, it wasnt a down year, and no, he can't be coached up, I dont care how young he is. The guy is a Guard moving forward. It's Eli's fault, the running backs need to be better, BS! Not doing anything more serious than acquiring a John Jerry or a Marshall Newhouse in free agency is nothing less than absolute denial of the shit show performers they have playing 3 out of 5 OL positions.
If there is no T worthy of a top 23 pick, then what will they get at 55 or later?
Sometimes things are as simple as they seem. Giants need to address the O line in free agency and the draft.

Stupid to say no OL is worth a top 25 pick. Like if one goes 26 that's a OL if deal?

People harp on best a available player. It's bull. Neither Flowers or Pugh were the best available. Neither was David Wilson Anne he was grabbed. Teams try to marry need a value.

If your best OL is ranked 27 and he next best guy at another position is 23 and your need is greater on OL 4 spots is nothing. It's when u get a full whom you think is 15-20 spots higher falls u grab then. And that's early. RD 1 or 2. If the tackle position wasn't a shot show Flowers wouldn't babe be. The pick.

They pick 23rd. If they were rated in the top 25 the giants wouldn't have a shot at them. All this says is that they should have there pick of them all at 23. If that's what they want.

In comment 13379673 LauderdaleMatty said:

Quote:

Stupid to say no OL is worth a top 25 pick. Like if one goes 26 that's a OL if deal? People harp on best a available player. It's bull. Neither Flowers or Pugh were the best available. Neither was David Wilson Anne he was grabbed. Teams try to marry need a value. If your best OL is ranked 27 and he next best guy at another position is 23 and your need is greater on OL 4 spots is nothing. It's when u get a full whom you think is 15-20 spots higher falls u grab then. And that's early. RD 1 or 2. If the tackle position wasn't a shot show Flowers wouldn't babe be. The pick.

I agree with you.

If I have Cam Robinson graded as the 30th overall player...and he is there at 23...he likely is my pick. But there is a line that needs to be drawn on a scenario like that. Where that line is subjective...

What I usually do is add a point or 2 to a player of significant need.

Example...if Robinson grades at an 82...I shift him up to an 83 or 84. So if...say a cornerback is graded at 84...I still go Robinson.

In comment 13379695 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

If I have Cam Robinson graded as the 30th overall player...and he is there at 23...he likely is my pick.

Except what often happens is that there is a guy still available who was graded in your tope twenty overall still available at 23. So it's hard to justify taking the 30th ranked prospect over your 18th ranked prospect.

If I'm Jerry Reese, I might feel comfortable knowing in all likelihood one of the top three OL will still be available at pick 23, but I wouldn't pat myself on the back over it because there may be somebody I have ranked in my top ten who is still available. McCaffrey's name comes to mind.

In comment 13379695 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

In comment 13379673 LauderdaleMatty said: Quote: Stupid to say no OL is worth a top 25 pick. Like if one goes 26 that's a OL if deal? People harp on best a available player. It's bull. Neither Flowers or Pugh were the best available. Neither was David Wilson Anne he was grabbed. Teams try to marry need a value. If your best OL is ranked 27 and he next best guy at another position is 23 and your need is greater on OL 4 spots is nothing. It's when u get a full whom you think is 15-20 spots higher falls u grab then. And that's early. RD 1 or 2. If the tackle position wasn't a shot show Flowers wouldn't babe be. The pick. I agree with you. If I have Cam Robinson graded as the 30th overall player...and he is there at 23...he likely is my pick. But there is a line that needs to be drawn on a scenario like that. Where that line is subjective... What I usually do is add a point or 2 to a player of significant need. Example...if Robinson grades at an 82...I shift him up to an 83 or 84. So if...say a cornerback is graded at 84...I still go Robinson.

Thanks Sy. I an only assume that's what most front offices do?

I''m sure the what I've seen there very well may be a stud CB there at 23 but if the It's that close you can't pretend the need of
That starting OL isn't there.

what an asset to this site. thank you Sy

B in ALB knew of it as well.

Stupid autocorrect.

there is just a lot of value there. McCaffrey and one of the TE's are also a possibility IMO.. I just dont see any rookie Tackle walking in here and solidifying the OL

In comment 13379390 Mr. Nickels said:

Quote:

at 23 then. Rankings didn't stop us massively reaching for Flowers and Pugh. I think Giants would love to have their pick of the litter for oline at 23.

This BBI narrative that the Giants reached for Pugh is absolutely comical. Just freaking stop if you don't know what the hell youre talking about.

So there is that. Other than that I think Mayock is spot on as I mentioned in a post yesterday.

is no way the Giants sit tight on the OL......at least one FA is going to be signed. Much like our defensive improvements last year management won't start the season with the same cast of characters.

if the Giants weigh character issues as significant, Robinson may very well not be on their board -- at least in the first round. I find it hard to imagine that Reese would pick a tackle, who most see as a guard, with fairly significant character issues in the first round. I find that especially true if someone at another need position -- and we have several -- is available at #23. I'm thinking specifically of Njoku, McCaffrey, Marlon Humphrey, Haason Reddick, Malik McDowell.

as many fans would, especially given all the red flags regarding Robinson's character, for example.

I believe a playmaker will be there at #23.

reached for Pugh." He's a borderline pro bowl guard.

then watch BBI have a collective stroke

Quote:

The charges against Alabama football players Cam Robinson and Hootie Jones stemming from a traffic stop on April 17 have been dropped by the district attorney in Louisiana's 4th district. Robinson, the star left tackle for the Crimson Tide, was facing two misdemeanor charges for possession of marijuana and illegally carrying a firearm in addition to a felony charge of possession of a stolen firearm, while Jones -- a reserve defensive back -- was charged with two misdemeanors.

Did he get along with his teammates?
Did he get along with his coaches?
Does he have a violent temper?
Is he a drug addict?
Is he an alcoholic?
If the answers to the above questions are: yes, yes, no, no, no; I'm not concerned about his character.

In comment 13379700 Milton said:

Quote:

If I'm Jerry Reese, I might feel comfortable knowing in all likelihood one of the top three OL will still be available at pick 23, but I wouldn't pat myself on the back over it because there may be somebody I have ranked in my top ten who is still available. McCaffrey's name comes to mind.

If one of the top 10 players on your board dropped to 23 -- wouldn't it follow that you are going to pick that player? Not sure what you are saying here