Giants turned down three-pick offer from 49ers

we talked last week about the MMQB article, and that article said the 49ers were not offering their 3rd rounder for Seattle's 26th pick.

I know we were 3 picks higher than that, and I understand the point chart which may or may not still be indicative - but for whatever reason I got the sense from that article the 49ers were calling everyone to move up that night, but were not willing to make fair market offers... so at the end of the day, kind of a nuisance thing to do, and a rookie/immature thing to do, to other teams.

Glad to read Reese moved on quickly.

Look at BBI archives for posts that discuss links of Engram to NO and ATL? This is about one rung above worthless.

Not disputing Giants may have not wanted Njoku, but that is at #23. Later could have been different view.

Its okay for you to really like the Engram pick at #23. But why does it blind you that he could have gone later?

I just think the evidence suggests you are way off thinking he's there at 34.

And a 3rd rounder isn't crappy. Trading out of the first round and only getting a 3rd rounder as our awesome prize is worse than crappy its pathetic. The offer wasn't good whether you are using the value chart or the common sense chart. You don't lose out on a guy who you think can change your offense just to pick up an extra 3rd, a 3rd that wasn't even in the top of the round.

The value sucked, I don't know what else to tell you.

In comment 13470100 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

In comment 13470093 Jimmy Googs said: Quote: In comment 13470085 HomerJones45 said: Quote: so presumably, Jerry either said "nothing" or made a counter-offer which SF found unpalatable. It's only a big deal if Engram turns out to be a flop. Reports from Giant war room was they loved both OJ Howard and Bolles if made it to #23. They didn't. There was also good support for Davis, Harris and Engram. Engram was the only one left when it was their turn, and Reese doesn't trade down, so he was the pick. Nothing more than that... Unless you don't want to believe JonC who's right way more than he is wrong, he was told about Engram 5 hours before the draft started, sooo....

I am not disputing what jon reported. I think he said he was told Engram was (one) of the targets. Please don't suggest the Giants had one guy on their board...

In comment 13470126 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

I just think the evidence suggests you are way off thinking he's there at 34. And a 3rd rounder isn't crappy. Trading out of the first round and only getting a 3rd rounder as our awesome prize is worse than crappy its pathetic. The offer wasn't good whether you are using the value chart or the common sense chart. You don't lose out on a guy who you think can change your offense just to pick up an extra 3rd, a 3rd that wasn't even in the top of the round. The value sucked, I don't know what else to tell you.

What evidence?...i missed that in your posts I guess

Also go back to the OP. You are not even quoting the deal terms correctly.

Nothing about Njoku, and if I'm not mistaken, nothing about O-Linemen, either.

I'm the one who told you teams can covet multiple players when you were so adamant about the Falcons really wanting McKinley when they also wanted Engram.

Again, i'm not sure what you want here. You seem to think that there's a way to squeeze a value argument out of trading back and getting the pathetic haul we were offered. If you feel that strongly about it go nuts. My only issue is the repeated posts about Engram still being there when all signs say otherwise. There's almost no evidence to suggest this.

In comment 13470151 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

In comment 13470126 UConn4523 said: Quote: I just think the evidence suggests you are way off thinking he's there at 34. And a 3rd rounder isn't crappy. Trading out of the first round and only getting a 3rd rounder as our awesome prize is worse than crappy its pathetic. The offer wasn't good whether you are using the value chart or the common sense chart. You don't lose out on a guy who you think can change your offense just to pick up an extra 3rd, a 3rd that wasn't even in the top of the round. The value sucked, I don't know what else to tell you. What evidence?...i missed that in your posts I guess Also go back to the OP. You are not even quoting the deal terms correctly.

You are right, the deal in the OP is even worse than the one I misquoted.

I asked you about all this evidence you keep quoting. I mean other than some BBI thread you mentioned.

Atlanta, just like the Giants, probably had several on their short list too. You better at the end of the first round. They absolutely made their deal for an edge rusher so their short list had a favorite.

I don't care enough anymore to do the work for you. You think Reese left value on the table and still could have gotten Engram. Not only are you using hindsight but your hindsight is still a massive stretch.

I killed enough time for today on this one. Go Engram.

In comment 13470208 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

I don't care enough anymore to do the work for you. You think Reese left value on the table and still could have gotten Engram. Not only are you using hindsight but your hindsight is still a massive stretch. I killed enough time for today on this one. Go Engram.

I can't tell you how shocked I am at your reply...

Reese & Co. made their decision, and yes we locked up a really good TE. But not a massive stretch at all to think he might have been there later, or that we could have had a different and potentially better value play.

Its not ripping him or the organization to suggest that so maybe think a little bit beyond your big blue-colored glasses every now and then...

in general unless you are picking in the top 5 and there's a coveted QB that you don't need on the board and you are getting a kings ransom in return. I apply that to all teams not just the Giants.

I can disagree with you without having a Giants bias just like I don't think you disagreeing with me means you are anti Reese. I see absolutely no value in giving up a better player for middling extra picks. Again, that's not specific to the Giants.

Lynch got his offered turned down by multiple teams, clearly that package of pathetic picks to move up in the first wasn't highly thought of.

point about not needing an early QB and taking advantage of it thru a trade down, but I do think there are other times as well.

My example is this draft where many (including me) thought there were really only about 10 guys or so that were "first-round worthy" but a shit-load of "second round talent" guys. So to me stock-piling a bunch of picks in rounds 2-4 may have been a really good idea to really bolster a roster.

I still think Engram could have been had later, and am really hoping he is a stud...

Reuben Foster at 31 is fine with me, even with a worst case scenario redshirt.

hopefully he pans out

i think i would have made that deal, gone after an OL, (robinson) and grabbed a diff TE. Oh well, draft is over and we have who we have. engran will expand the offense. Lets go Blue.

In comment 13469769 Klaatu said:

Quote:

I'm glad they drafted him when they did.

TE Engram comes to the Giants with the one thing we really need for the middle of the field: deep speed. You MUST account for that with a safety cause there are very few LB's that can cover him and his 4.40 speed at 234 pounds.

I can see TE Engram taking on more and more of a role as the season progresses and he learns this NFL offense. He likely needs an off-season to add a few pounds of muscle and develop blocking technique but this year he'll add deep middle of the field speed & quickness. He can really move and Eli will LOVE him.