for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Garafolo on WFAN

Chris684 : 2/21/2018 4:18 pm
I thought he made a few interesting points re: Gettleman and what he might do at #2.

The question was presented to him that basically since the end of the season momentum has seemed to shift away from NYG taking a QB at 2. Carlin presented this and I'm sure he was referencing DG's comments about Eli in the last Philly game, his comments about being wrong when taking a QB high, etc.

Garafolo first mentioned how this is DG's first offseason in this role and how that might influence a trade down. Not only are you able to build your foundation along the OL/DL, but you build up some "equity" for the future. You have Eli this year, for which you add Nelson after a trade back, and then maybe with an additional #1 next year (from Denver for example) you have the flexibility to move up/around for a guy you like. Off the top of my head, I think Lynch did this in SF last year as an example. There are probably more.

The other thought relates to Barkley. MG mentioned how just this past year Gettleman took a highly touted RB in the top 10. Granted it was a lesser prospect in a lower slot, but it is interesting if you want to analyze track record. DG is not afraid to take a RB with a premium/top 10 pick.

Although very early and pre-combine, I think we are looking at 3 options right now and I like all of them.

Darnold @ 2
Barkley @ 2
Trade back

The way the board falls this year, the only other player who I see as a possibility for them (without moving back) is Chubb because NYG loves DE as much as any position on the field, but I doubt it.
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
RE: RE: unrealistic to pick Chubb  
gmen9892 : 2/21/2018 4:50 pm : link
In comment 13838450 est1986 said:
Quote:
In comment 13838440 Chip said:


Quote:


to many huge holes on the OL and RB on this team not to mention LB.



He is a rare DE. He reminds me of a more athletic more physical Derek Barnett from a year ago.. he could be special and when you are paying your current DE’s $15 million+ per year you have to at least consider it.


Another thing to consider in regards to what we already have a DE, apparently, both JPP and OV's contracts are easy to get out of after this year. Me thinks that if JPP has another down year this year, he may be a goner, which leave a huge hole at DE.
If we take Barkley at #2  
Essex : 2/21/2018 4:52 pm : link
it will be the biggest mistake in Giants history.
RE: If we take Barkley at #2  
Danny Kanell : 2/21/2018 5:03 pm : link
In comment 13838472 Essex said:
Quote:
it will be the biggest mistake in Giants history.


Lol
RE: If we take Barkley at #2  
gmen9892 : 2/21/2018 5:07 pm : link
In comment 13838472 Essex said:
Quote:
it will be the biggest mistake in Giants history.


Holy Overreaction.
RE: RE: If we take Barkley at #2  
Essex : 2/21/2018 5:14 pm : link
In comment 13838494 gmen9892 said:
Quote:
In comment 13838472 Essex said:


Quote:


it will be the biggest mistake in Giants history.



Holy Overreaction.

It would be a wasted pick at #2. How many times have we drafted that high? He won't run with our OL, by the time we build him one Eli will be done or close to it. We are going to have to pay OBJ and already have young offensive weapons that need a qb to get them the ball. It is a bad position to pick that high because usually running backs last about 5 premium years. Not to mention how many franchises get the opportunity to have continuity between two franchise qbs, we are staring at that in a draft loaded with qb talent (or there are at least two very promising ones) but we are going to throw it away for RB who we cant really use yet. Besides all those issues, it would be a great pick.
Using the McCaffrey logic  
Big Rick in FL : 2/21/2018 5:28 pm : link
Is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Yeah he took a RB, because they already have their franchise QB in the prime of his career. The Giants don't.


They didn't choose a RB over a QB.


Also them picking McCaffrey should show Gettleman why they shouldn't take a RB. The guy they drafted at 8 was 10th in rush yards behind guys that were drafted in the 3rd, 4th, 5th and even undrafted.
They better be smart and pick the franchise QB at 2  
Rflairr : 2/21/2018 5:31 pm : link
or end up like the Jets preparing to pay an average QB 60 mill guaranteed when Eli is finished
RE: Using the McCaffrey logic  
Peppers : 2/21/2018 5:36 pm : link
In comment 13838506 Big Rick in FL said:
Quote:
Is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Yeah he took a RB, because they already have their franchise QB in the prime of his career. The Giants don't.


They didn't choose a RB over a QB.


Also them picking McCaffrey should show Gettleman why they shouldn't take a RB. The guy they drafted at 8 was 10th in rush yards behind guys that were drafted in the 3rd, 4th, 5th and even undrafted.


I agree. Carolina had the OL, the QB, and the defense.

DG is in a different situation here.
I agree go with Rosen  
NikkiMac : 2/21/2018 5:39 pm : link
Forget about trade down this is not the pick to get cute and drafting a running back that high brings back memories of Tucker Fredrickson .....
AAARGGHH!!!  
Colin@gbn : 2/21/2018 5:40 pm : link
I know guys are sort of having fun with this and debate is free and all that, but one is really tempted to scream to the high heavens: STOP IT!

One never wants to say never in this business, but the absolutely stone cold most likely draft scenario for the Giants on April 26th is that they will take the LA QB - Darnold or Rosen - that the Browns don't. Its what NFL teams that need a QB do. (And the irony is that the only NFL team in that scenario that hasn't done that in recent years are the Browns and they're 1-31 for their troubles.)

It is still possible that the Giants could opt to pass on Rosen if they felt that he really wasn't committed to the game, although we aren't hearing those concerns from any other teams around the league at this point. And my guess is that if they did sour on Rosen that their next option at #2 would be Josh Allen. And in the very unlikely scenario that they did ultimately trade down it would be a few spots so that either Allen or Mayfield would still be in reach.

As I have said in a couple of other places, the really interesting element of the Giants draft will come at #34. With 5-6 QBs likely to go in round one, you will be in position to a get second first-round quality player that you can use to address your needs issues.
Let's rank the mistakes made in Giants history:  
bceagle05 : 2/21/2018 5:42 pm : link
1). (Possibly) drafting Saquon Barkley.
2). Letting Lombardi get away.
3). Letting Belichick get away.
4). Letting Landry get away.
5). Hiring Ray Handley
RE: This is third high profile  
mphbullet36 : 2/21/2018 5:50 pm : link
In comment 13838454 RAIN said:
Quote:
media guy tied to NY talk about us taking OL in round one.

Francesa said he heard Gettlemen wants to fix the OL, Peter King saying he's hearing the same thing, now Mike G.

That's three guys with good contacts talking us out of QB.
Trading down to 5 and taking Nelson, Barkley, Chubb or a QB that is left... and getting a #2 and #3, would be something to consider.



a 2nd and 3rd rounder in a draft where you can grab a big time QB is way to light. That isn't even value on the draft value chart. I assume we would pull higher than the average draft value chart because of the QB situation this draft.

I would need there 1 this year and there 1 next year just to start. Then we can haggle over if we can get a 2 this year or 3 this year as well.
RE: RE: unrealistic to pick Chubb  
Gatorade Dunk : 2/21/2018 5:54 pm : link
In comment 13838450 est1986 said:
Quote:
In comment 13838440 Chip said:


Quote:


to many huge holes on the OL and RB on this team not to mention LB.



He is a rare DE. He reminds me of a more athletic more physical Derek Barnett from a year ago.. he could be special and when you are paying your current DE’s $15 million+ per year you have to at least consider it.

The biggest problem with drafting (or mock drafting) Chubb, IMO, is that we don't really even know what defensive scheme Bettcher plans to run, and if it's a 30 front or even a 30 hybrid, it may not make sense to continue to add to the 4-3 DE position group.

If we are indeed considering a transition to the 3-4, one of the primary benefits of that defense is that OLB/edge rush tweeners are actually a good fit, and they can be had at least slightly lower in the draft.

If we're fully committed to a 4-3, then Chubb absolutely should be in the mix. But that's definitely an open question (at least for us, as we speculate) at this point.
RE: Let's rank the mistakes made in Giants history:  
Essex : 2/21/2018 5:55 pm : link
In comment 13838522 bceagle05 said:
Quote:
1). (Possibly) drafting Saquon Barkley.
2). Letting Lombardi get away.
3). Letting Belichick get away.
4). Letting Landry get away.
5). Hiring Ray Handley


It shows how little about Giants history you know. Lombardi, Landry, and Belichick had already left when there were head coaches still employed here who had won world titles. Ray Handley was a bad move, but the Giants hand was forced in May and it was two years, hardly a back breaking decision for a franchise who probably was on the decline anyway. You don't draft a franchise qb when you are supposed to you could have 10 bad years of football. But, yes carry on. Let's draft a RB we probably couldn't fully utilize for a year or two until we rebuild our offensive line (assuming we do, let him get beat up in the process and then we will have a 39 year old qb when we are ready to use him. Makes so much sense.
Just a little sarcasm.  
bceagle05 : 2/21/2018 6:01 pm : link
I want a QB too, but I can't go crazy about Barkley being the pick. If they evaluate him as the next Marshall Faulk, and the QB you like best goes to Cleveland at #1, it should be a legit consideration.
RE: RE: This is third high profile  
RAIN : 2/21/2018 6:30 pm : link
In comment 13838531 mphbullet36 said:
Quote:
In comment 13838454 RAIN said:


Quote:


media guy tied to NY talk about us taking OL in round one.

Francesa said he heard Gettlemen wants to fix the OL, Peter King saying he's hearing the same thing, now Mike G.

That's three guys with good contacts talking us out of QB.
Trading down to 5 and taking Nelson, Barkley, Chubb or a QB that is left... and getting a #2 and #3, would be something to consider.





a 2nd and 3rd rounder in a draft where you can grab a big time QB is way to light. That isn't even value on the draft value chart. I assume we would pull higher than the average draft value chart because of the QB situation this draft.

I would need there 1 this year and there 1 next year just to start. Then we can haggle over if we can get a 2 this year or 3 this year as well.


Yes, that may be the case. I'm going off of the draft chart, and any team coming up will have that as a rough guide. Getting a top five pick and moving down only three spots, and getting a 2 and 3, would ensure we still get a premium player this year. To get a bigger haul, we would have to have multiple suitors.
RE: RE: RE: This is third high profile  
adamg : 2/21/2018 6:32 pm : link
In comment 13838561 RAIN said:
Quote:
In comment 13838531 mphbullet36 said:


Quote:


In comment 13838454 RAIN said:


Quote:


media guy tied to NY talk about us taking OL in round one.

Francesa said he heard Gettlemen wants to fix the OL, Peter King saying he's hearing the same thing, now Mike G.

That's three guys with good contacts talking us out of QB.
Trading down to 5 and taking Nelson, Barkley, Chubb or a QB that is left... and getting a #2 and #3, would be something to consider.





a 2nd and 3rd rounder in a draft where you can grab a big time QB is way to light. That isn't even value on the draft value chart. I assume we would pull higher than the average draft value chart because of the QB situation this draft.

I would need there 1 this year and there 1 next year just to start. Then we can haggle over if we can get a 2 this year or 3 this year as well.



Yes, that may be the case. I'm going off of the draft chart, and any team coming up will have that as a rough guide. Getting a top five pick and moving down only three spots, and getting a 2 and 3, would ensure we still get a premium player this year. To get a bigger haul, we would have to have multiple suitors.


Giants traded 4th overall, a 3rd rounder, and next years 1st rounder for Eli. Minimum for a trade up for a QB is two 1s and other pieces.
RE: RE: unrealistic to pick Chubb  
Breeze_94 : 2/21/2018 6:34 pm : link
In comment 13838450 est1986 said:
Quote:
In comment 13838440 Chip said:


Quote:


to many huge holes on the OL and RB on this team not to mention LB.



He is a rare DE. He reminds me of a more athletic more physical Derek Barnett from a year ago.. he could be special and when you are paying your current DE’s $15 million+ per year you have to at least consider it.


Idk if I'd call him rare. Close to it but he isn't in the same class as Garrett or Clowney.
Comes down to  
Breeze_94 : 2/21/2018 6:38 pm : link
1. Darnold
2a. Barkley
2b. Trade down for OL (Nelson).
3. Rosen


If Trey Adams the OT from Washington didn't tear up his knee, I have a feeling he'd be the guy the Giants have their eyes on.
RE: RE: RE: unrealistic to pick Chubb  
Snacks : 2/21/2018 6:44 pm : link
In comment 13838535 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 13838450 est1986 said:


Quote:


In comment 13838440 Chip said:


Quote:


to many huge holes on the OL and RB on this team not to mention LB.



He is a rare DE. He reminds me of a more athletic more physical Derek Barnett from a year ago.. he could be special and when you are paying your current DE’s $15 million+ per year you have to at least consider it.


The biggest problem with drafting (or mock drafting) Chubb, IMO, is that we don't really even know what defensive scheme Bettcher plans to run, and if it's a 30 front or even a 30 hybrid, it may not make sense to continue to add to the 4-3 DE position group.

If we are indeed considering a transition to the 3-4, one of the primary benefits of that defense is that OLB/edge rush tweeners are actually a good fit, and they can be had at least slightly lower in the draft.

If we're fully committed to a 4-3, then Chubb absolutely should be in the mix. But that's definitely an open question (at least for us, as we speculate) at this point.


You beat me to it. Was thinking the same thing since we have hired a 3-4 guy. Do the Giants still value DE as high as we did when running a 4-3?
He doesn't run traditional 3-4 on every down defense.  
Ten Ton Hammer : 2/21/2018 6:47 pm : link
.
RE: I don't see  
Milton : 2/21/2018 6:56 pm : link
In comment 13838451 Miamijints said:
Quote:
anything MG said as being any different then what has been bounced around this site for the last month, ijs.
+1
And it's not like he's any more informed than any of us.
I do think NYG wants a QB but only 1 they love  
Rjanyg : 2/21/2018 7:05 pm : link
And it's Darnold.

I think 2 scenarios are:

1. Cleveland take Darnold, NY takes Barkley
2. Cleveland takes Darnold, NY trades out.

The trade partners would be Denver or Cleveland. Ideally I would hope Cleveland offers a crap load of picks to get Barkley at pick 2. Pick 4, 33, 35 and the first pick of round 4 is a starting place. NYG could draft Nelson at 4, go after OT, RB and LB in round 2. Rounds 3 and 4 ( 4 picks total ) could help fortify DL, DB, OL. It could really turn out to change this roster.
How would we know they only feel strongly about one guy?  
Ten Ton Hammer : 2/21/2018 7:06 pm : link
.
I do think NYG wants a QB but only 1 they love  
Rjanyg : 2/21/2018 7:07 pm : link
And it's Darnold.

I think 2 scenarios are:

1. Cleveland take Darnold, NY takes Barkley
2. Cleveland takes Darnold, NY trades out.

The trade partners would be Denver or Cleveland. Ideally I would hope Cleveland offers a crap load of picks to get Barkley at pick 2. Pick 4, 33, 35 and the first pick of round 4 is a starting place. NYG could draft Nelson at 4, go after OT, RB and LB in round 2. Rounds 3 and 4 ( 4 picks total ) could help fortify DL, DB, OL. It could really turn out to change this roster.
Essex  
djm : 2/21/2018 7:18 pm : link
Somehow just stated that letting the three greatest head coaches leave the Giants wasn't a terrible mistake but drafting Barkley would be a terrible mistake. And handley, not a mistake.

Holy. Shit.
RE: Essex  
Essex : 2/21/2018 7:23 pm : link
In comment 13838610 djm said:
Quote:
Somehow just stated that letting the three greatest head coaches leave the Giants wasn't a terrible mistake but drafting Barkley would be a terrible mistake. And handley, not a mistake.

Holy. Shit.


Reading isn’t your strong suit.
RE: This is third high profile  
Milton : 2/21/2018 7:32 pm : link
In comment 13838454 RAIN said:
Quote:
media guy tied to NY talk about us taking OL in round one.

Francesa said he heard Gettlemen wants to fix the OL, Peter King saying he's hearing the same thing, now Mike G.

That's three guys with good contacts talking us out of QB.
We all heard that Gettleman wants to fix the OL. He said it at his press conference. It's not inside information. It doesn't mean he's going to pass up a franchise QB when one is staring him the face.
p.s.--He also said there are the teams that have a QB and the teams that are in QB hell. And Eli's age isn't a well kept secret. There are reports of him being 37-years old and I believe them.
I just got off the phone with one of my contacts at Giants central...  
Milton : 2/21/2018 7:35 pm : link
And he told me what I've been hearing is in fact true, Eli is 37-years old.
Don't kill the messenger! - ( New Window )
RE: RE: This is third high profile  
RAIN : 2/21/2018 8:14 pm : link
In comment 13838614 Milton said:
Quote:
In comment 13838454 RAIN said:


Quote:


media guy tied to NY talk about us taking OL in round one.

Francesa said he heard Gettlemen wants to fix the OL, Peter King saying he's hearing the same thing, now Mike G.

That's three guys with good contacts talking us out of QB.


We all heard that Gettleman wants to fix the OL. He said it at his press conference. It's not inside information. It doesn't mean he's going to pass up a franchise QB when one is staring him the face.
p.s.--He also said there are the teams that have a QB and the teams that are in QB hell. And Eli's age isn't a well kept secret. There are reports of him being 37-years old and I believe them.


Franscesa, King, and Garafolo are saying he wants to do early in round one. I'm not a fan of this, but I thought it was interesting that three sources now are saying the same thing. Maybe he changes his mind from looking at tape? He also has his QB purgatory theory he's put out there.

Milton, don't shoot the messenger. I believe Garafolo, king (meh).. but he's been in the game awhile, and Francesa has better sources than I do. If its up to me, I really like Darnold.. and would take him in a heartbeat. He won't be there. Rosen comes with durability concerns , Allen scares me at #2, and Mayfield (no way)... It leaves us with multiple scenario's. I like trading down a bit to take Barkley, Nelson, Rosen, Allen, etc.. lots of options, lots of questions, it hasn't been written yet.
Who's to say Francesa has 'sources'?  
Ten Ton Hammer : 2/21/2018 8:23 pm : link
When did he start becoming a source for Giants information?
RE: RE: RE: This is third high profile  
Milton : 2/21/2018 8:25 pm : link
In comment 13838644 RAIN said:
Quote:

Milton, don't shoot the messenger. I believe Garafolo, king (meh).. but he's been in the game awhile, and Francesa has better sources than I do.
What they are saying doesn't appear to be based on having sources that we lack, but instead is merely their opinion based on the statements he made at his press conference. We all heard the press conference. And we all have our own opinion on what the Giants should do in the draft. Those who believe the Giants shouldn't draft a QB will used what Gettleman said about fixing the OL as confirmation bias. Those who believe that the Giants should draft a QB will use what he said about QB hell as confirmation bias.

Only Gettleman has inside information on what he will do. The rest is just opinion.
RE: RE: Let's rank the mistakes made in Giants history:  
Gatorade Dunk : 2/21/2018 9:09 pm : link
In comment 13838538 Essex said:
Quote:
In comment 13838522 bceagle05 said:


Quote:


1). (Possibly) drafting Saquon Barkley.
2). Letting Lombardi get away.
3). Letting Belichick get away.
4). Letting Landry get away.
5). Hiring Ray Handley



It shows how little about Giants history you know. Lombardi, Landry, and Belichick had already left when there were head coaches still employed here who had won world titles. Ray Handley was a bad move, but the Giants hand was forced in May and it was two years, hardly a back breaking decision for a franchise who probably was on the decline anyway. You don't draft a franchise qb when you are supposed to you could have 10 bad years of football. But, yes carry on. Let's draft a RB we probably couldn't fully utilize for a year or two until we rebuild our offensive line (assuming we do, let him get beat up in the process and then we will have a 39 year old qb when we are ready to use him. Makes so much sense.

If you're going to call someone out for their knowledge of Giants history, you should at least know it yourself. The Giants hand was not forced with Handley in the way you suggest, at least not in the way that you can dismiss both that and letting Belichick get away. George Young was on record that he'd have promoted Handley over Belichick even if BB was still on the staff.

And you obviously painted yourself into a corner with regard to Barkley, much like you did with Gettleman. Oddly, we haven't heard much from you about that since. I suspect we won't hear a peep from you if the Giants draft Barkley and he proves to be successful.
RE: RE: Essex  
Gatorade Dunk : 2/21/2018 9:13 pm : link
In comment 13838612 Essex said:
Quote:
In comment 13838610 djm said:


Quote:


Somehow just stated that letting the three greatest head coaches leave the Giants wasn't a terrible mistake but drafting Barkley would be a terrible mistake. And handley, not a mistake.

Holy. Shit.



Reading isn’t your strong suit.

Posting isn't yours, so who's to know where the problem lies?
RE: He doesn't run traditional 3-4 on every down defense.  
Gatorade Dunk : 2/21/2018 9:24 pm : link
In comment 13838581 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
.

That's fair, but are you going to take a guy at #2 who would be a 3rd DE when they're in a 40 front, and a tweener in a 30 front? Are you going to stand him up in the 30 and put his hand in the dirt in the 40? Or have him play the Kiwanuka role when they're in the 40 so he can stick to developing as an OLB? It's just a really high pick for those questions, especially when DE is already a position group that has a lot of money tied to it.

The point I was trying to make about the 3-4 is that one of the biggest positive aspects of it is that you can find edge rushers a little bit later in the draft, especially compared to prototypical 4-3 DEs, who typically go very high. If you're running even a hybrid 3-4, you're pissing away one of your advantages by then drafting an ER at #2 overall.
Do Not  
section125 : 2/21/2018 9:24 pm : link
dismiss Rosen. He is clearly the most ready NFL ready QB. It is not even close. Darnold may never get to Rosen's level. Do others have possibly better athletic ability, yes, I suppose. But possible doesn't mean will.
RE: Do Not  
GFAN52 : 2/21/2018 9:27 pm : link
In comment 13838686 section125 said:
Quote:
dismiss Rosen. He is clearly the most ready NFL ready QB. It is not even close. Darnold may never get to Rosen's level. Do others have possibly better athletic ability, yes, I suppose. But possible doesn't mean will.


But if he's going to sit behind Eli for at least a year, the "NFL Ready" aspect might be out-weighed by the higher upside of a Darnold.
Impact!!  
DavidinBMNY : 2/21/2018 9:54 pm : link
Does anyone remember who went #1 when we picked LT @ #2?

George Rogers. Good player. RB.

The reason LT was the superior pick isn't position. It was how ELITE he was.

What that tells me is whoever can make the biggest impact in a way that really confounds are opponents is the player to pick. I like Barkley and Fitzpatrick as the 2 players that could really alter the side of the ball they play on and change the entire dimension of that side.

Or else trade back if there's a willing trade partner but do not drop out of the top level of prospects.

Conversely my least favorite draft years for the giants are the years they drafted in rd1:

*Cedric Jones
*Eli Apple

2 players that were picked after the impact players were all gone.

I
RE: I do think NYG wants a QB but only 1 they love  
Ed A. : 2/21/2018 11:09 pm : link
In comment 13838600 Rjanyg said:
Quote:
And it's Darnold.

I think 2 scenarios are:

1. Cleveland take Darnold, NY takes Barkley
2. Cleveland takes Darnold, NY trades out.

The trade partners would be Denver or Cleveland. Ideally I would hope Cleveland offers a crap load of picks to get Barkley at pick 2. Pick 4, 33, 35 and the first pick of round 4 is a starting place. NYG could draft Nelson at 4, go after OT, RB and LB in round 2. Rounds 3 and 4 ( 4 picks total ) could help fortify DL, DB, OL. It could really turn out to change this roster.


Darnold throws too many interceptions for me.
RE: RE: RE: Essex  
Essex : 2/22/2018 6:38 am : link
In comment 13838677 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 13838612 Essex said:


Quote:


In comment 13838610 djm said:


Quote:


Somehow just stated that letting the three greatest head coaches leave the Giants wasn't a terrible mistake but drafting Barkley would be a terrible mistake. And handley, not a mistake.

Holy. Shit.



Reading isn’t your strong suit.


Posting isn't yours, so who's to know where the problem lies?


Coming from you I consider that a badge of honor.
RE: Do Not  
Brown Recluse : 2/22/2018 6:55 am : link
In comment 13838686 section125 said:
Quote:
dismiss Rosen. He is clearly the most ready NFL ready QB. It is not even close. Darnold may never get to Rosen's level. Do others have possibly better athletic ability, yes, I suppose. But possible doesn't mean will.


Rosen may never get to Rosen's level either if he ends up in a body bag.

Darnolds issues can be correct. Rosen's cannot.

Rosen may very well end up having a long career, but I'll go with Darnold and trust Pat Shurmur can turn him into a winner, as he has done with lesser talent.
maybe this about the giant's learning their lesson  
PerpetualNervousness : 2/22/2018 8:59 am : link
and making sure no one actually has a clue what they're going to do at the draft.
LOL..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/22/2018 9:10 am : link
Quote:
If we take Barkley at #2
Essex : 2/21/2018 4:52 pm : link : reply
it will be the biggest mistake in Giants history.


It is like the offseason just empowers morons to take a stand.

Hyperbole. Shitty take. Terrible poster.

Roll them all up into one in a pithy sentence!
RE: LOL..  
Essex : 2/22/2018 9:48 am : link
In comment 13838923 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:


Quote:


If we take Barkley at #2
Essex : 2/21/2018 4:52 pm : link : reply
it will be the biggest mistake in Giants history.



It is like the offseason just empowers morons to take a stand.

Hyperbole. Shitty take. Terrible poster.

Roll them all up into one in a pithy sentence!

I know just like my shitty take that based on the Garafolo tweets the Giants were likely to pick a GM from those they had already interviewed. You wasted a morning of my life arguing with me I didn't know the rules when it was clear that had nothing to do with it and I never said it. Then you argued some absurd definition of due diligence as the reason why they interviewed certain people, not even realizing that it is a legal term. You are the prototypical "genius in his own mind." I won't engage with your stupidity anymore. I backed up why I think it would be colossal error (not with why I will be right or wrong--I might be wrong but I gave my reasons) and need not do it anymore with you.
Love the..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/22/2018 9:56 am : link
revisionist history:

Quote:
I know just like my shitty take that based on the Garafolo tweets the Giants were likely to pick a GM from those they had already interviewed.


Your take wasn't that - it was any choice for GM was uninspiring and would be a mouthpiece for the owners, along with a whining about how they only interviewed 4 candidates and none of them were any good and that they needed to expand the search ASAP.

How's that take look now? Pretty fucking shitty.
My take was to be bold  
Essex : 2/22/2018 10:00 am : link
I said Gettleman would be the best of the four, but I was not sure about him and still am not. So your take is that my post was wrong because Gettleman has done what so far?
RE: My take was to be bold  
Gatorade Dunk : 2/22/2018 12:30 pm : link
In comment 13838971 Essex said:
Quote:
I said Gettleman would be the best of the four, but I was not sure about him and still am not. So your take is that my post was wrong because Gettleman has done what so far?

You can claim until the cows come home that you knew the rules, but you still have yet to give any examples of who they should have or even could have interviewed at that time, which was the context of your B&M session.

And due diligence is more than just a legal term. It's common in business and any other situation where a particular standard/obligation is exercised. But by all means, keep puffing out your chest as though you're somehow correct. You weren't then, you aren't now, and it remains to be seen whether you will be in the future, but with your propensity for favoring "bold" over "prudent" it's unlikely.
since we have so many needs on the team  
Jersey55 : 2/23/2018 4:36 pm : link
it would seem that trading down in rd 1 for more picks is the smart way to go, at least for this year it is..
RE: since we have so many needs on the team  
GFAN52 : 2/23/2018 4:56 pm : link
In comment 13840807 Jersey55 said:
Quote:
it would seem that trading down in rd 1 for more picks is the smart way to go, at least for this year it is..


Or not, if they have a strong conviction for a specific QB and he's available at #2.
RE: since we have so many needs on the team  
Bill L : 2/23/2018 6:57 pm : link
In comment 13840807 Jersey55 said:
Quote:
it would seem that trading down in rd 1 for more picks is the smart way to go, at least for this year it is..
this would be my least favorite route. Even if I don’t want a meh QB, I’d take one, as opposed to trading down. Really believe you do better with concentrated greatness as opposed to a quantity of mediocrity. Singular transcendence versus a quantity of solid is my preference.
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner