I still think we need another CB

draft..Dallas has no one..

Round 1.

If he's still around, then I'm quite sure the Giants see value in him.

I don't quite disagree, but it's like that at other positions too, positions where depth is a little scarier.

in this draft -- I think we have to come out of it with a CB or ER in round one -- and I think the draft talent pool has the depth for it with the edge (no pun intended) going to the CBs -- the Giants plunged when Wade came into the game in the playoffs -- that position is way more important than LB

the Giants can still get a damn good tight end later in the draft - and the Olineman in the later rounds have better history of production and potential than the ones being touted with first round grades

then we need DE more than CB.. our DEs had trouble getting rush against GB even when JPP played.. same with Pits game and many others.. we need someone to push up the middle or more DEs to give our DEs break.. But I agree that you can never have too many quality CB in the game today but I just think the statements holds more true for pass rushers than any other position..

Perhaps they draft a safety instead and go 3 safeties instead of the extra cb when we pull a linebacker. The uconn or wvu kid have good looking size to go along with speed

Eventual #3 CB after the second round.. How about we use that cursed third rounder on the bpa at CB. Wont be shocked if they went CB even earlier

The opponents went 4 wide and just picked on the Giants' 4th corner all season long.

What an opportunity to secure that dbackfield this draft with a 2nd or 3rd rounder that would be an immediate upgrade over Wade and/or Sensabaugh!

In comment 13422338 Giantsfan79 said:

Quote:

Perhaps they draft a safety instead and go 3 safeties instead of the extra cb when we pull a linebacker. The uconn or wvu kid have good looking size to go along with speed

No if one of rabbit, apple, but probably DRC, gets hurt we are in bad shape. Safties has nothing to do with our cover guys at corner.

although I think it applies to every team in the league.

probably be a smart selection, I'd be disappointed with CB in round 1. Just feels like the scope of our roster wouldn't have made much of an impact if we took CB in the first round.

But I certainly expect a corner drafted......Too deep a draft to not grab one....As talent will slip

than some think. And with both Jones and Moreau down it thins things a bit.

fine taking a CB in round one, or at least by the end of day two. This is a passing league. One of Hunter or Deayon might develop, but they were both UDFAs. The league certainly makes mistakes, but neither was drafted.

I know it's a deep CB group this year, so if they draft a CB in the 3rd who would go in the 2nd most other years I have no problem with it. But we need to go elsewhere in the first two rounds.

That year's CB class wasn't as deep as this year's, but it was still a good class. Naturally, I was surprised when the Giants didn't draft one. I hope I'm not similarly surprised this year.

But he can play safety RB and specials and it's reported the redskins are interested that's killing a lot of birds with one stone !

Depending on how the first half plays out I would like to see either a game changing TE or LB at least in the first round. With that said DRC is getting long in the tooth and as much as I love the guy he is one play away from missing 2-4 games at least from here on out and the drop off from him & Apple is huge.

I still believe losing DRC in the playoff game is what killed us, so depth at that position would be nice. I am not a draft guy like many here are but would like to see a LB or TE in the first and second rounds and then focus on O-line and DB’s. And maybe a DE if one falls our way? Not concerned about QB this year nor a fan of any of them in the draft.

there is room for a versatile DB who can move around and be a package player if Spags likes him. A jack-knife of sorts. Melifonwu is one of those guys but there are CBs like Desmond King too - the Giants usually like Thorpe Award winners.

on the board, especially in round 1. I really don't care that we have bigger needs, this would allow flexibility and more creativity for Spags. Having a wealth of talent at a premier position is a good thing.

1st rounder you're looking for an every down guy. stalwart. i'm not as position picky as some but the 1st round player does not come off the field.

At CB we have Jenkins and Apple for the next couple years at least. Even if DRC leaves after the year, the 3rd CB isn't an every down guy and for that reason I would be looking elsewhere in 1, if possible! From round 2, it's on.

Would be a great add
Can play on the outside or inside, just doubt he's available at 23

this draft. It's common knowledge that a team can't have enough good ones.

We have 3 guys that can play the boundary role we need some better 'quicks' inside. Depth is the big issue. Of course if a stud falls in your lap you have to look at him in any round.

Shaq Griffin in the 5th round or possibly 4th. Stud athlete who can be a 3rd cornerback when DRC goes

This draft is CB rich. Also a good hedge vs injury.

I just don't know that it will be early. I hear it is a deep CB draft just like TE and ER.

In comment 13422335 gidiefor said:

Quote:

in this draft -- I think we have to come out of it with a CB or ER in round one -- and I think the draft talent pool has the depth for it with the edge (no pun intended) going to the CBs

I don't get your logic. If the draft is deep at CB and ER and shallow at OT, shouldn't the Giants take an OT over a CB or ER in round 1 if they are of equal value? Not only is the need at OL much greater than it is at CB and ER, but the fact that the draft is deeper at the other two positions means it will be easier for the Giants to find quality talent at those positions on Day 2.

but that logic can become all pervasive because we could use more tackles, another pass rushing end, more safetys and more (and better) linebackers - and that's just the defense.
The offense needs tackles a right guard a TE a running back, a back up for the oft injured Pugh and a replacement for Eli.
And who knows, maybe King and Lewis are not good enough back ups for the starting three, so by all means let's draft a WR.
The logic of the OP is compelling...

In many peoples opinions they aren't. Of course if you're on the other side of the argument you don't see it this way. Hence the debate.

QB's and OT's get overdrafted and the wise teams don't fall into the trap but take the best talent. Our recent 1st Round picks at OT are Pugh and Flowers, one is a good guard and the other is one of the reasons you want to draft yet another OT in the 1st Round. Think about it.

For past several years our CB reserves are basically human bulls-eyes for the opposing QB. Not that it is uncommon for them to get beat, but our guys seldom hold up in coverage.

Just not worth a #1 pick this season

but what does it really mean? What does it mean that we 'need' another CB? Will our defense suck if we don't get another one? Does it mean we can't win a championship without one? Or that we can't be a .500 team without one?

Last year we sure as hell 'needed' more help on the OL...but yet we finished 11-5.

So sure, we 'need' another CB. But we also 'need' more OL help, a quality TE, another RB, a quality DT if Hankins doesn't re-sign, a starting Mike, another safety, etc. etc. etc.

Bottom line, the work 'need' is overused on BBI....when people really mean "it would be nice if we had...."

We lose DRC. They lose Jordy Nelson. they are able to go to their bench and continue rolling out quality receivers. We aren't able to match them. Rodgers goes off. We lose.

CB depth is a need, not a luxury.

In comment 13422451 Torrag said:

Quote:

We lose DRC. They lose Jordy Nelson. they are able to go to their bench and continue rolling out quality receivers. We aren't able to match them. Rodgers goes off. We lose. CB depth is a need, not a luxury.

But we went 11-5. So what do you mean by 'need'? We can't make playoffs without more CB depth? Can't with Super Bowl? Can't be competitive?

This draft is insanely deep at that position.

In comment 13422422 Torrag said:

Quote:

In many peoples opinions they aren't.

How can you say they aren't when you don't even know who is and isn't available yet when the Giants are on the clock? And those of us with a grasp on reality recognize that the Giants personnel department with their multimillion dollar budget and access to interviews and medical records is in a much better position to assess the value of each and every prospect in the draft. My only contention is that when they are on the clock and they have a "row" of three or four or five prospects with equal value, they will choose the OT if one is among them.

Quote:

QB's and OT's get overdrafted and the wise teams don't fall into the trap but take the best talent. Our recent 1st Round picks at OT are Pugh and Flowers, one is a good guard and the other is one of the reasons you want to draft yet another OT in the 1st Round. Think about it.

Passrushers and CBs get overdrafted too. And these days it's happening with WRs as well. Wise teams draft where BPA and need meet and they don't reach for talent. Period. It doesn't matter whether you have a need at OL or CB or WR or DE or wherever.

And I recall a lot of people clamoring for Davante Parker and Kevin White the year the Giants drafted Flowers. How have they done? And what about Agholor and Perryman, two other receivers taken in the first round. There are successes and failures at every position. The teams that draft well draft well and the teams that draft poorly draft poorly. Philosophy's got nothing to do with it.

That's not the goal. When you lose in the playoffs for a clear reason you address it on your roster. That's what I and everyone else saying we need better CB depth means.

In comment 13422459 Milton said:

Quote:

Philosophy's got nothing to do with it.

Oh yeah? Tell that to Bruce!

I don't have 1st Round grades on any OT in this class. And a lot of people feel the same.

Robinson might have snuck into the back end of the Round if he didn't have a gun arrest. Something I believe the Giants will take very, very seriously following their experience with Plex and the extremely tough NY gun laws.

As far as the Flowers draft I would have drafted Gurley, Shane Ray or Damarious Randall. Why? They were my BPA at the time.

In comment 13422477 Torrag said:

Quote:

I don't have 1st Round grades on any OT in this class. And a lot of people feel the same. Robinson might have snuck into the back end of the Round if he didn't have a gun arrest. Something I believe the Giants will take very, very seriously following their experience with Plex and the extremely tough NY gun laws. As far as the Flowers draft I would have drafted Gurley, Shane Ray or Damarious Randall. Why? They were my BPA at the time.

But you're putting together grades based on internet reports and youtube videos. Have you interviewed Robinson? The Giants have. They'll have a much more informed opinion on whether the arrest for possession of a stolen gun is something to be concerned about or whether it was just a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Their doctors will study Ramczyk's medical records to see if there is concern about the injury he is rehabbing.

You and I are just hobbyists at this. It's a fun distraction, but let's not kid ourselves that we are in a better position to judge these prospects than the Giants scouting department.

will draft 1 CB this year to upgrade Wade (He has been brutal).

Also, we will probably pick up a journeyman after the draft and Wade can be resigned at that point if needed.

This isn't science, it's NFL draft debate. Embrace it. It's opinion based. I don't couch my vewpoints in absolutes for to do so would be stupid. Hell the pros evaluations are opinion based. That's why they are so often wrong. No one knows how another human being is going to adapt to a new situation which is what these prospects are facing.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't engage in the conversation. You like Robinson. I get that. He could be a great player. I wouldn't draft him as high as you would and that's ok too. I think he projects best to RT which devalues his stock a bit and I have concerns about him off the field. That's not a fair analysis?

In comment 13422451 Torrag said:

Quote:

We lose DRC. They lose Jordy Nelson. they are able to go to their bench and continue rolling out quality receivers. We aren't able to match them. Rodgers goes off. We lose. CB depth is a need, not a luxury.

This has as much to do with the lack of pass rush. No JPP, no viable 3rd DE that can pressure. So maybe DE is more important?

who can contribute right away on ST

Someone who can be both a gunner and a return guy

Then draft another one!

In comment 13422408 Milton said:

Quote:

In comment 13422335 gidiefor said: Quote: in this draft -- I think we have to come out of it with a CB or ER in round one -- and I think the draft talent pool has the depth for it with the edge (no pun intended) going to the CBs I don't get your logic. If the draft is deep at CB and ER and shallow at OT, shouldn't the Giants take an OT over a CB or ER in round 1 if they are of equal value? Not only is the need at OL much greater than it is at CB and ER, but the fact that the draft is deeper at the other two positions means it will be easier for the Giants to find quality talent at those positions on Day 2.

My logic is that there will be several CBs and ERs available at 23 that have first round worthy grades on them and you can get a star at those positions who will have real impact -- whereas the OTs that will be available will not have first round grades, nor as much impact, and are deeply flawed talent wise, skill wise, experience wise and even size-wise. What's the logic in that in Round 1? It is more logical to wait till a later round to take a flyer on gambling on an OT in this draft. In fact I like a bunch of the late rounders better than the reach a team will have to take in the first round.

I always feel like we need another CB.

Typical Jerry Reese joke aside, I really don't think you can ever have "too many"

Our defense thrived last year due in large part to how well our top 3 CB's played. We were fortunate that they all stayed healthy for the most part (save for incredibly bad timing on DRC getting hurt @ Lambeau)

Depth is crucial at that position.

In comment 13422562 gidiefor said:

Quote:

My logic is that there will be several CBs and ERs available at 23 that have first round worthy grades on them and you can get a star at those positions who will have real impact -- whereas the OTs that will be available will not have first round grades, nor as much impact, and are deeply flawed talent wise, skill wise, experience wise and even size-wise. What's the logic in that in Round 1? It is more logical to wait till a later round to take a flyer on gambling on an OT in this draft. In fact I like a bunch of the late rounders better than the reach a team will have to take in the first round.

My logic--as always--is that the Giants should draft BPA. They should never reach based on need. But if several prospects have equal grades and one of them is an OT, they should definitely take the OT. And all crystal balls aside, can we agree that that would be the right move? It's not like you value your draft board over the one the Giants scouting department is putting together, is it?

valuable resources in a 4th corner. Need to find one cheap. Late round in the draft or the waiver wire. What team has 4 terrific cover corners?

In comment 13422574 bluepepper said:

Quote:

valuable resources in a 4th corner. Need to find one cheap. Late round in the draft or the waiver wire. What team has 4 terrific cover corners?

New trends pop up all the time in the NFL, and usually, getting ahead of that trend is a good thing. Not saying we have to do this or I even want to do this, but a very legit case can be made for us taking CB early if its BPA. The amount of flexibility it would creative for the back 7 would be enormous.

In comment 13422571 Milton said:

Quote:

My logic--as always--is that the Giants should draft BPA. They should never reach based on need. But if several prospects have equal grades and one of them is an OT, they should definitely take the OT. And all crystal balls aside, can we agree that that would be the right move? It's not like you value your draft board over the one the Giants scouting department is putting together, is it?

Yes BPA -- but I have a very hard time believing any OTs will be BPA

In comment 13422499 Torrag said:

Quote:

This isn't science, it's NFL draft debate. Embrace it. It's opinion based. I don't couch my vewpoints in absolutes for to do so would be stupid. Hell the pros evaluations are opinion based. That's why they are so often wrong. No one knows how another human being is going to adapt to a new situation which is what these prospects are facing. That doesn't mean we shouldn't engage in the conversation. You like Robinson. I get that. He could be a great player. I wouldn't draft him as high as you would and that's ok too. I think he projects best to RT which devalues his stock a bit and I have concerns about him off the field. That's not a fair analysis?

It's not a question of whether it's fair or not, it's a question of whether it's informed. But it's no less informed than my opinion on Robinson. We are all entitled to our opinions and predictions, I was merely responding to gidiefor's assertion that "we have to come out of the first round with either a CB or ER" because those are the two deepest positions in the draft. That doesn't make sense to me. If all he is really saying is that the Giants should draft the BPA in the first round and he expects it to be a CB than that's how he should've worded it. Otherwise it's just a straw man argument.

I think I approach the draft differently than a lot of BBI. I want the Giants to draft Cam Robinson (for example) because it would mean that the BPA when the Giants were on the clock was exactly what they need most: an offensive tackle. If they were to draft Christian McCaffrey instead I would certainly support the choice because of his big play potential and all the ways he could help the team, but by the same token, I would be worried about the precarious situation along the OL and the fact that the team is running out of opportunities to improve it. And if they drafted Pat Mahomes, I would be excited despite the fact that he won't contribute at all in 2017 because I know that they wouldn't make a choice like that if they didn't have a really high grade on him.

hmmmmm

In comment 13422589 gidiefor said:

Quote:

In comment 13422571 Milton said: Quote: My logic--as always--is that the Giants should draft BPA. They should never reach based on need. But if several prospects have equal grades and one of them is an OT, they should definitely take the OT. And all crystal balls aside, can we agree that that would be the right move? It's not like you value your draft board over the one the Giants scouting department is putting together, is it? Yes BPA -- but I have a very hard time believing any OTs will be BPA

I have a hard time believing any of the big three will still be available when the Giants are on the clock.

In '98 I wanted Faneca, but the Giants chose Shaun Williams even though they already had Garnes, Wooten, and Ellsworth, but were very weak along the OL. I supported the choice because they said he was the BPA by a wide margin and in fact was in their top ten. Faneca was being compared to Kevin Gogan, but Williams was compared to Ronnie Lott. And you don't pass up Ronnie Lott for Kevin Gogan no matter how deep you are at safety and shallow along the OL. It didn't work out the way the Giants hoped, but that's the way it goes. Nobody has a crystal ball, not even the professionals with their multimillion dollar scouting department. You can only make decisions based on the data you have at the time.

Flash forward to the 1999 draft and with the Giants still hurting along the OL, I had my eye on Aaron Gibson and LJ Shelton, but I didn't think either would last until the Giants pick. Go figure, they were both still available when the Giants were on the clock, but instead the Giants chose Petitgout. I didn't mind at all that the chose an OL different from the two I liked because at least my two guys were there for the choosing and if the Giants chose Petitgout over them at least he wasn't the consolation prize, he was their first choice.

And that's kind of how I always look at it. I just want to see my guy available when they are on the clock. If they choose someone else, I accept the fact they know better than me. It's when my guy gets taken on slot in front of their pick that I'm bummed. Although it turned out alright when my guy Taylor Lewan was taken one spot in front of OBJ.

And I give them the benefit of the doubt when they say BPA met need and so and so was an easy choice. They've been doing this long enough that they know not to reach. Never take your depth chart into the war room, George Young used to day. Which was overstating it, but we all got the point.

That's a crock. It's a BBI community discussion. As long as the poster has an interest and isn't just trolling they could contribute something to the discussion. The Giants scouts aren't logging in to tell us what the team thinks. You have opinions and share them, as do I and many others.

That's the whole point of having a Giants fan discussion board. So if you want to argue that the team should draft Cam Robinson or anyone else and explain your reasoning don't go railing that other peoples opinions aren't 'informed'. It serves no purpose.

Drafting a guy and counting on him to contribute is risky. And anyone that writes off "4th CB" as an area of low priority didn't understand what they were watching last year.

In comment 13423010 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Drafting a guy and counting on him to contribute is risky. And anyone that writes off "4th CB" as an area of low priority didn't understand what they were watching last year.

We did add a CB in free agency, just not a very good one. And, no, we weren't going to spend $30 million to sign Logan Ryan. Sorry.

Will we draft a CB? I think it's very likely. How much they'd contribute is anybody's guess.

"How much they'd contribute is anybody's guess."

Exactly. I'd just as soon be in a position where we didn't have to guess.

In comment 13423039 Go Terps said:

Quote:

"How much they'd contribute is anybody's guess." Exactly. I'd just as soon be in a position where we didn't have to guess.

How much a veteran would contribute would be anybody's guess, too.

and begin coaching him up. If one of ours goes down, be prepared for some on the job training. The CB pick of 2017 is really about the future, perhaps replacing DRC.

In comment 13422911 Torrag said:

Quote:

That's a crock. It's a BBI community discussion. As long as the poster has an interest and isn't just trolling they could contribute something to the discussion. The Giants scouts aren't logging in to tell us what the team thinks. You have opinions and share them, as do I and many others. That's the whole point of having a Giants fan discussion board. So if you want to argue that the team should draft Cam Robinson or anyone else and explain your reasoning don't go railing that other peoples opinions aren't 'informed'. It serves no purpose.

You completely misunderstood me.

Need picks. You guys want to pick guys like Njoku (all athlete, who drops balls and is still learning the position) because we see teams that have guys like Gronk, Graham, Olsen and Jordan Reed. You guys want to pick Zach Cunningham (questionable tackler, apparently is easily blocked and pass rush ability that is just not evident) and Jarrad Davis (can't seem to stay on the field and plays a position we just drafted a promising player to fill the position he is best at) because we play against guys like Kuechly, Sean Lee, and Vontez Burfict. And you want us to draft a guy with hardly any tape to speak of and injury in Ryan Ramczyk, and other tackles which would push Flowers over to a position he has NEVER played before. All because we happen to have 3 good corners.

This is THE best draft for corners ever and given how there might be 4 possible QBs (Watson, Kizer, Mahomes, Trubisky), we have a chance to grab a truly blue chip corner.

I love Haason Reddick for this team. I am somewhat intrigued by Njoku because of his athletic ability. I like McCaffrey, I like Cam Robinson. But if any of these top flight corners falls to where the Giants pick, I would be ecstatic with the pick. Fuck needs. And as mentioned before, we DO have plenty of need at corner with DRC almost guaranteed to miss time (especially important time like the playoffs), his contract almost being up and the drop off after Apple. Another great corner to add to this D line and our corps of LBs that can suddenly cover? We wouldnt need to rely on our offense putting up huge numbers every game.

The need stuff NEEDS to stop. We finally started building a damn good squad through the draft and people worrying about shit like drafting the same position a couple years in a row...hell even 3.

makes a lot of sense. Drafting a corner high gives us needed depth and is a hedge against DRC being injured or leaving in 2018.
I'd be very happy with a guy like Desmond King from Iowa. Can play corner, safety and be a return guy.

In the later rounds of the draft. Not to worried.

of helping at Safety would be a windfall.

Spags would the most fortunate DC in the league...

We already had three good corners.

Depth in Draft for this critical position of CB means if there is CB at RD1 you think could be a Blue chipper you grab him and then there is a CB at RD 4 who you think has promise you grab him as well.

Some things to keep in mind:

1) Last year's draft seems like a very good one. We need one more just like it so in Eli's last year's we have many ways to win.


2) We were a close 11 win team. Razor close. Which can revert to the mean in the tougher schedule ahead. And in NFL terms we were fortunate on injuries last year.

3) We have a lot of needs and we have a lot of cap room we need for OBJ and Collins and we have some recent starters who could leave ( Pugh and DRC)

All in all we need a very good draft for the three to five years ahead.

Selecting into the particular strengths of each draft for the next 3 years matters a lot

We did it at LB for years in the 80s. OLB wasn't a need the year we drafted LT...nor was it really the year we drafted Banks.

As many others have posted above, if this team wants to beat offenses like the Packers (and Patriots?) in the playoffs, CB is always a need.

And next year DRC is likely gone, would be nice to have another stud CB ready to step in along with JJ and Apple

In comment 13424781 mfsd said:

Quote:

We did it at LB for years in the 80s. OLB wasn't a need the year we drafted LT...nor was it really the year we drafted Banks. As many others have posted above, if this team wants to beat offenses like the Packers (and Patriots?) in the playoffs, CB is always a need. And next year DRC is likely gone, would be nice to have another stud CB ready to step in along with JJ and Apple

On the other hand, the 80's ended with the Giants going OL with their first two picks in both '88 and '89 with the result being a Super Bowl victory in 1990 (technically 1991). They committed to fixing the OL and it paid off.

In comment 13424917 Milton said:

Quote:

In comment 13424781 mfsd said: Quote: We did it at LB for years in the 80s. OLB wasn't a need the year we drafted LT...nor was it really the year we drafted Banks. As many others have posted above, if this team wants to beat offenses like the Packers (and Patriots?) in the playoffs, CB is always a need. And next year DRC is likely gone, would be nice to have another stud CB ready to step in along with JJ and Apple On the other hand, the 80's ended with the Giants going OL with their first two picks in both '88 and '89 with the result being a Super Bowl victory in 1990 (technically 1991). They committed to fixing the OL and it paid off.

Yup very good point. The ultimate question is, do the Giants have conviction there are OL prospects of the quality needed to upgrade our OL? I'm not the draftnik several other good posters are here, but the chatter seems to be this draft is very strong at CB, RB, TE, and perhaps DE...hence the thought of drafting where there is talent available, whether it's our primary need or not