Rumor Of Bills Making Offer For #2

Not even close to enough.

12 is too for that little return.

Only thing 8 would consider is
12, 22 2018 2nd, and 2019 1st

I would tell them to start over...

or forget it. We would be forgoing our QB so have to have ammo next year to possibly move up and select one...

if the pick next year is a first. Think about it. We'd have 6 picks in the first 65, including #12 and #22. Maybe have to have not only next year's #1, but maybe a #3 too, but that's still a decent haul.

a 2019 first.

...and release the hounds.

is nuts. So that offer is not enough.

Add #1 and #2 in 2019.

I still think they stay put and grab Rosen, Darnold or Barkley.

and they can get that #1 next year instead of the #2, then they should pull the trigger. They can really restock the talent level on the team with so many pick.

In comment 13875254 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

if the pick next year is a first. Think about it. We'd have 6 picks in the first 65, including #12 and #22. Maybe have to have not only next year's #1, but maybe a #3 too, but that's still a decent haul.

3-13 to not even coming away with a blue chip player. Would be a disaster. All of those picks would not be hits.

The other 2018 second and third and 2019 second and that would be nice

a high pick.

Bills?

...one of its second-rounders this year.

But next year they gotta give us their #1. A second rounder in 2019 just doesn't cut it.

be willing to budge on that 2019 1st rounder

12/22/53/65 and a 2019 1st rounder

is at least getting us to the table IMO....at that point we can haggle over another player or a pick...

If we aren't planning on taking a QB I think we should consider trading down. I love Barkley I get it but this team has just too many holes.

And will put you out of the range of blue chippers in this draft. Next year's #1 needs to be in the deal.

but at the very least I'd want both of their 2nd rounders this year, if I don't get a first for next year. Going by the draft value chart.

12 (1,200)
22 (780)
53 (370)
56 (340)
65 (265)
+2019 2nd round (I believe the rule of thumb is to take the value of the mid point of the next round: i.e roughly about pick 82 (180)

I'd then offer the Colts 12 (1,200), 56(340) and our 3rd round pick 66(260) to move back up to 6(1600). That's more than fair value for the 6th pick and I think the Colts would take it.

in the 12 range were Flowers (9) and Apple (10), Beckham (12).

Of course Gettleman is not Reese, but assume for arguments sake that Gettleman = Reese that's a 33% chance of getting a good player with the higher first.

I'm not willing to move down with those odds.

I would do it.

The Bills are going to stink if they trade up for a QB.

Next year you would be able to get your next QB if needed.

To get that price up, you need to make them sweat it out though a little bit.

In comment 13875273 bigbluescot said:

Quote:

but at the very least I'd want both of their 2nd rounders this year, if I don't get a first for next year. Going by the draft value chart. 12 (1,200) 22 (780) 53 (370) 56 (340) 65 (265) +2019 2nd round (I believe the rule of thumb is to take the value of the mid point of the next round: i.e roughly about pick 82 (180) I'd then offer the Colts 12 (1,200), 56(340) and our 3rd round pick 66(260) to move back up to 6(1600). That's more than fair value for the 6th pick and I think the Colts would take it.

I should say in most scenarios, you'd still have one of Barkley, Chubb and Nelson available at 6, because it's very likely 4 QB's would be off the board.

At 12 and 22 you can go McGlinchy and Hernandez and the OL is rebuilt.

Pick up Michel with our original #2 and then turn the attention to the defense. Corner, edge rusher.

#1, then you likely are getting a pick around 12 again.

It would be tough to turn down the deal if it had next year's #1 and a #3.

We don't get a blue-chip guy possibly, but we pick up 6 picks in the first 65, which would go a long way to solidifying holes on the OL, LB and DB.

In comment 13875261 Sean said:

Quote:

In comment 13875254 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: if the pick next year is a first. Think about it. We'd have 6 picks in the first 65, including #12 and #22. Maybe have to have not only next year's #1, but maybe a #3 too, but that's still a decent haul. 3-13 to not even coming away with a blue chip player. Would be a disaster. All of those picks would not be hits.

We drafted Odell Beckham with the #12 pick.

The second round pick could potentially net some extra picks.

People assume all of these picks would be hits, and if just won’t be the case.

In comment 13875261 Sean said:

Quote:

In comment 13875254 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: if the pick next year is a first. Think about it. We'd have 6 picks in the first 65, including #12 and #22. Maybe have to have not only next year's #1, but maybe a #3 too, but that's still a decent haul. 3-13 to not even coming away with a blue chip player. Would be a disaster. All of those picks would not be hits.

You could always trade back up a little bit from 12.

In comment 13875279 Chris684 said:

Quote:

At 12 and 22 you can go McGlinchy and Hernandez and the OL is rebuilt. Pick up Michel with our original #2 and then turn the attention to the defense. Corner, edge rusher.

or FSU Safety Derwin James.

In comment 13875282 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

In comment 13875261 Sean said: Quote: In comment 13875254 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: if the pick next year is a first. Think about it. We'd have 6 picks in the first 65, including #12 and #22. Maybe have to have not only next year's #1, but maybe a #3 too, but that's still a decent haul. 3-13 to not even coming away with a blue chip player. Would be a disaster. All of those picks would not be hits. We drafted Odell Beckham with the #12 pick.

Also Ereck Flowers at 9, Eli Apple at 10 & we just let Pugh walk.

could be out of the top 10.....

In comment 13875285 BigBlueDownTheShore said:

Quote:

In comment 13875261 Sean said: Quote: In comment 13875254 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: if the pick next year is a first. Think about it. We'd have 6 picks in the first 65, including #12 and #22. Maybe have to have not only next year's #1, but maybe a #3 too, but that's still a decent haul. 3-13 to not even coming away with a blue chip player. Would be a disaster. All of those picks would not be hits. You could always trade back up a little bit from 12.

The point is to get the best players, not win the draft.

all the picks to be hits. But 6 picks in the first 65 players is pretty good odds you'll come away with at least 4 decent starters and possibly a superstar at 12.

Gettleman has been pretty good in hitting in his early draft picks.

So I wouldn’t count on seeing any breaking news in the near future.

If we are just talking about what it would take for Buffalo to move up the answer should be a lot more.

In comment 13875283 Sean said:

Quote:

The second round pick could potentially net some extra picks. People assume all of these picks would be hits, and if just won’t be the case.

You can argue the draft is essentially a numbers game. It's not unusual for 3 out of the top 10 to bust, and usually one of the top 5 do as well.

While it's a long shot, if you could say do a trade with the Bills and move back up to 6th, you could easily end up with

6 (with a strong likelihood that one of Chubb, Nelson or Barkley are still on the board)
22
34
53

+ a 2019 2nd rounder.

Unless you're taking a QB, that's awfully tempting.

If Giants pass on QB, they need to have the fire power to go up and get their guy next year.

In comment 13875281 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

#1, then you likely are getting a pick around 12 again. It would be tough to turn down the deal if it had next year's #1 and a #3. We don't get a blue-chip guy possibly, but we pick up 6 picks in the first 65, which would go a long way to solidifying holes on the OL, LB and DB.

thats what I"m saying. Just this year the draft value chart (which I know isn't gospel) but the value just from the Bills 2 1's, 1 2nd, and early 3rd...we would be getting 2,615 in value for our 2,200 pick. Consider you need to be blown away because of the QB factor.

Assuming the bills are a bottom half team (15 or worse) which is most likely with AJ Mccarron or a Rookie QB...we would be getting north of 3,600 pts in value for our 2nd overall pick...I think that would at least get us to the table...

whether or not we could haggle even more depends on how desperate they are.

In comment 13875287 Sean said:

Quote:

In comment 13875282 Brown Recluse said: Quote: In comment 13875261 Sean said: Quote: In comment 13875254 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: if the pick next year is a first. Think about it. We'd have 6 picks in the first 65, including #12 and #22. Maybe have to have not only next year's #1, but maybe a #3 too, but that's still a decent haul. 3-13 to not even coming away with a blue chip player. Would be a disaster. All of those picks would not be hits. We drafted Odell Beckham with the #12 pick. Also Ereck Flowers at 9, Eli Apple at 10 & we just let Pugh walk.

Well, yes. You can find players at any pick that worked out and players that didn't. The point is that you can absolutely get a great player at pick 12. Fletcher Cox was also the 12th pick.

I do like having the 1st and 2nd pick of 3rd day.

take out the emotion. We have a 37 year old QB & the 2nd pick in a QB rich draft. I don’t want sentimentality to ruin this rare chance at a franchise QB.

then you get:

3 #1s
1 #2
1 #3

for ONE pick. That is a good hall. And, the #1s are a #12 (near top third) and #22, which isn't way down.

What if they like Mayfield and he falls past Denver. They could possibly trade up with say Tampa and pick him up and still have extra picks.

I wouldn't trade below #5, gimme a blue chip impact player now.

the Browns. Then they don't need to pick between SD or Barkley. Currently, they still need to protect against the Giants on those 2 (as the BBI discussions indicate the top 2 players)

Draft then goes.

Browns 1. SD
Bills 2. Rosen
Jets 3. Mayfield (Broadway Joe part Deux)
Browns 4. Barkley
Denver 5. Allen

In comment 13875261 Sean said:

Quote:

In comment 13875254 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: if the pick next year is a first. Think about it. We'd have 6 picks in the first 65, including #12 and #22. Maybe have to have not only next year's #1, but maybe a #3 too, but that's still a decent haul. 3-13 to not even coming away with a blue chip player. Would be a disaster. All of those picks would not be hits.

Some of you guys crack me up. Have you seen the Cap numbers? How can we fill A LOT of positions with quality players and still manage the CAP? LOTS of draft picks in the first three rounds, that is how! Jesus, you guys act like if we don't go QB we have to do this, like one player will be the difference. If we take a QB at #2, we get zero return this year. That means there was NO reason to keep ELI. Once they decided to keep ELI and with our fucking dreadfully thin roster, we have no choice but look at this draft as a restocking of the shelves. Keep in mind next year JPP, OV and even JJ might all be gone too. Replacements will be coming from where???

Oh a counter-offer. That's what we lawyers - I'm a lawyer - we lawyers call that a counter-offer. Lemme see...This is a tough decision you're givin' me here. Get my ass kicked or collect two hundred dollars. Hmmp. Let me think... I could use a good ass kickin', I'll be very honest with you... nah, I think I'll just go with the two hundred.

They may do it. However, who do we draft at number 12?

If the Giants want to trade back, they will wait until they are on the clock to make a move; that is unless another team really blows them away with an offer prior to the draft. With the QB hungry Jets at #3, I can see a few teams wanting the #2 spot; the offers will only increase if the Browns grab a QB at #1.

in Round 1,2,3 this draft & their #1 in 2019

In comment 13875325 TheMick7 said:

Quote:

in Round 1,2,3 this draft & their #1 in 2019

This has been my thought as well. The Giants might need to give something like a 2 or a 3 next year to balance the numbers out..

But if there is no #1 next year.. there should be no deal.

but not with the Browns moving to #2. Maybe the Browns trading with Buffalo and then Buffalo giving sweeteners to the Giants for the #2. And then having the Qb's go 1-3.

In comment 13875302 Sean said:

Quote:

take out the emotion. We have a 37 year old QB & the 2nd pick in a QB rich draft. I don’t want sentimentality to ruin this rare chance at a franchise QB.

Spoiler alert: it will.

DG I think passes on Rosen/Darnold and Eli continues to struggle moving forward.

To me, that’s the worst case scenario.

It's likely to be another 35 years before it happens again.

Statistically, there are likely 2-3 HOF players in this draft. If the Giants have a strong feeling on who those HOF players are, then IMO they should get the impact player.

I'd much rather have one Collins than 3 of Reese's mediocre picks. Give me the impact player. That's how you build a franchise.

that advocated keeping Collins & drafting Gallery.

In comment 13875333 baadbill said:

Quote:

It's likely to be another 35 years before it happens again. Statistically, there are likely 2-3 HOF players in this draft. If the Giants have a strong feeling on who those HOF players are, then IMO they should get the impact player. I'd much rather have one Collins than 3 of Reese's mediocre picks. Give me the impact player. That's how you build a franchise.

Sticky this!

its too far a drop by 12 all the QB's plus they drop barkley into clevelands lap,chubb,fitzpatrick and possibly nelson all go off the board im hoping the giants refused the jets trade because they already have a deal in place with cleveland that nets them a better haul and gives them a shot to come away with chubb,fitzpatrick,nelson or a second move back as there will still be allen on the board

I don't think a deal back is in play for the Giants if they grade 2 QBs as franchise guys. You can't ask for a better situation to transition to Eli's successor. If the Giants only see one guy, these deals may come into play if Cleveland takes their guy.

If the Giants don't see any of the QBs making the grade, they should be actively shopping the pick, unless they agree with others that Barkley is a "generational" player.

They're also reportedly talking to the Browns about # 1.

pound sand.

In comment 13875306 JonC said:

Quote:

I wouldn't trade below #5, gimme a blue chip impact player now.

Me too.

the Incarcarated Bob rumor? Yawn...

like Webb a lot they are taking Barkley. It's that simple.

.

I would think will be next years first. I would really like it of from there we would make a deal with Indy for the 6th giving up 12 and 22 and maybe a later round.

In comment 13875273 bigbluescot said:

Quote:

but at the very least I'd want both of their 2nd rounders this year, if I don't get a first for next year. Going by the draft value chart. 12 (1,200) 22 (780) 53 (370) 56 (340) 65 (265) +2019 2nd round (I believe the rule of thumb is to take the value of the mid point of the next round: i.e roughly about pick 82 (180)

I'd be happy with this. I'd stay with these picks and draft Guice at 12 and Wynn at 22.

But if you don’t want a QB, and that’s what a trade down would imply, the Giants would be getting essentially a top 8 player at 12 and so on. They’d have the rare opportunity to infuse the team w quality talent across the board even if they don’t get lucky with any of their mid/late rounders.

if we are not taking the QB.

In comment 13875254 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

if the pick next year is a first. Think about it. We'd have 6 picks in the first 65, including #12 and #22. Maybe have to have not only next year's #1, but maybe a #3 too, but that's still a decent haul.

^This. Make the 2019 second a first, and we can have a serious conversation. But that offer is a good starting point. I would still prefer not to drop that far.

In comment 13875375 Ira said:

Quote:

In comment 13875273 bigbluescot said: Quote: but at the very least I'd want both of their 2nd rounders this year, if I don't get a first for next year. Going by the draft value chart. 12 (1,200) 22 (780) 53 (370) 56 (340) 65 (265) +2019 2nd round (I believe the rule of thumb is to take the value of the mid point of the next round: i.e roughly about pick 82 (180) I'd be happy with this. I'd stay with these picks and draft Guice at 12 and Wynn at 22.

12 is way too high for Guice.

puts the feet of Denver and the Jets to the fire. The best offer the Giants get may come from Buffalo, than again this may just be the first real bid for pick number two.

In comment 13875273 bigbluescot said:

Quote:

but at the very least I'd want both of their 2nd rounders this year, if I don't get a first for next year. Going by the draft value chart. 12 (1,200) 22 (780) 53 (370) 56 (340) 65 (265) +2019 2nd round (I believe the rule of thumb is to take the value of the mid point of the next round: i.e roughly about pick 82 (180) I'd then offer the Colts 12 (1,200), 56(340) and our 3rd round pick 66(260) to move back up to 6(1600). That's more than fair value for the 6th pick and I think the Colts would take it.

I would pull the trigger on this only if we could somehow get the Browns 4 instead of the Colts 6. I still think Barkley is the pick and won't be there especially if the Browns hold onto 4

I want one, quality over quantity.

How about any potential deal with Buffalo starts with a PROVEN and useful piece Tradavious White! They’re desperate and this would add an absolute hammer to our secondary!

considered some other possible trade-down options with other teams. I'm sure Buffalo was one, but sounds like there are other inquiries out there as well.

In comment 13875389 JonC said:

Quote:

I want one, quality over quantity.

Agreed. Getting a ton of picks is great but odds are some of them will not pan out. Get 1 of the all pro level talent guys in this draft and then hit on either of our really high 2nd or 3rd round picks. Find a gem in the late rounds and call it a day.

In comment 13875377 WillVAB said:

Quote:

But if you don’t want a QB, and that’s what a trade down would imply, the Giants would be getting essentially a top 8 player at 12 and so on. They’d have the rare opportunity to infuse the team w quality talent across the board even if they don’t get lucky with any of their mid/late rounders.

Right. The Giants have probably already decided whether or not they want to draft a QB this year. If the answer is no, then trading back makes a lot of sense. Its a good opportunity to bring in young *core* talent that doens't cost $10m per season, which this team sorely needs.

If they've decided they want a QB, then all of this is moot. They aren't moving, and they shouldn't.

I think

In comment 13875389 JonC said:

Quote:

I want one, quality over quantity.

Agreed. I'm OK with a small trade down, but 12 is too far too drop. That having been said, if he haul is enormous, it won't be a remote thrower. But I'd really like us to get one of Barkley, Nelson, or Chubb. Twelve even puts Fitzpatrick out of range.

I do not believe the Giants want to drop out of the top 10. That's dropping 10 spots! and potentially missing out on a few Blue Chippers. Dropping to 5 with Denver would be a better situation and they could still possibly grab one of the top 4 QBs, at the same time.

In comment 13875382 jeff57 said:

Quote:

In comment 13875375 Ira said: Quote: In comment 13875273 bigbluescot said: Quote: but at the very least I'd want both of their 2nd rounders this year, if I don't get a first for next year. Going by the draft value chart. 12 (1,200) 22 (780) 53 (370) 56 (340) 65 (265) +2019 2nd round (I believe the rule of thumb is to take the value of the mid point of the next round: i.e roughly about pick 82 (180) I'd be happy with this. I'd stay with these picks and draft Guice at 12 and Wynn at 22. 12 is way too high for Guice.

I don't think there are any guarantees that Guice is there at #12. He's no slouch compared to Barkley(cue Caddyshack Quote).

Incarcerated Bob hasn't been right a day in his life. How anybody still follows him is beyond me.

In comment 13875291 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

all the picks to be hits. But 6 picks in the first 65 players is pretty good odds you'll come away with at least 4 decent starters and possibly a superstar at 12. Gettleman has been pretty good in hitting in his early draft picks.

The BBI entertainment value alone makes this deal with it, although the Giants should absolutely hold out for the 2019 first rounder. Hell, Skins gave up two future firsts to move up what, four slots to #2 for Griffin. Granted, they are stupid, but #12 is a huge drop.

Into the 6-10 range. None of those teams need QB’s. Colts, Bucs, Bears, Niners, Raiders. That suits us much better than dropping all the way to 12. They can keep their 3rd rounder, maybe a 2nd. Agree ‘19 needs to be a 1st.

could trade down and then trade up too.

moving up again to 6 with Indy is very likely. Ballard is on record saying they'd absolutely move down again.

In comment 13875404 AcidTest said:

Quote:

In comment 13875389 JonC said: Quote: I want one, quality over quantity. Agreed. I'm OK with a small trade down, but 12 is too far too drop. That having been said, if he haul is enormous, it won't be a remote thrower. But I'd really like us to get one of Barkley, Nelson, or Chubb. Twelve even puts Fitzpatrick out of range.

If they're determined to acquire a booty for #2, I won't complain. It's a valid strategy if they don't believe in the QBs or the blue chippers is enough to outweigh the booty.

In comment 13875306 JonC said:

Quote:

I wouldn't trade below #5, gimme a blue chip impact player now.

But Jon, do you see Chubb as that player? My fear is that the Giants grab Chubb and he is just an ok guy, especially in a defense that will rely on stand up outside guys and Chubb isn't that guy.

In comment 13875421 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

could trade down and then trade up too.

That is very true. I think we would be best served, assuming they are game, dropping to 4 so Cleveland gets QB and Barkley. We then could still get a QB (though I do not want one here) and would absolutely be able to get Nelson. If Buffalo moved to 6 prior and then wants to move to 4 then great.

It does not prevent the Giants from moving back down....to 7/8.....for Nelson, or another blue chipper.

Assuming
1-2-3-5 goes QB..4 Cleveland goes Barkley or Chubb. 6 Indy gets the other.

In comment 13875331 The_Boss said:

Quote:

In comment 13875302 Sean said: Quote: take out the emotion. We have a 37 year old QB & the 2nd pick in a QB rich draft. I don’t want sentimentality to ruin this rare chance at a franchise QB. Spoiler alert: it will. DG I think passes on Rosen/Darnold and Eli continues to struggle moving forward. To me, that’s the worst case scenario.

Indeed. This is the watershed moment - can Jints Central compartmentalize their sentiments for Eli and make a pure business decision?

That is really what’s at stake with the #2 pick...

In comment 13875337 Sean said:

Quote:

that advocated keeping Collins & drafting Gallery.

Keep in mind, in 04 it was looking like Manning was going #1. There was a big contingent and I was one of them that wanted Big Ben at 4.

In comment 13875285 BigBlueDownTheShore said:

Quote:

In comment 13875261 Sean said: Quote: In comment 13875254 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: if the pick next year is a first. Think about it. We'd have 6 picks in the first 65, including #12 and #22. Maybe have to have not only next year's #1, but maybe a #3 too, but that's still a decent haul. 3-13 to not even coming away with a blue chip player. Would be a disaster. All of those picks would not be hits. You could always trade back up a little bit from 12.

That would be my idea.

You can make that trade if you want. And then move up to say #6 with the Colts assuming the specific player (Nelson?) you may want is there.

According to the Value Chart, that would cost 400 points, or the equivalent of the 53rd pick (acquired from Buffalo) and a 5th round picks (#140 of the Giants). That comes out to 406.5 points.

Would everyone be down with that?

In comment 13875329 Bill L said:

Quote:

but not with the Browns moving to #2. Maybe the Browns trading with Buffalo and then Buffalo giving sweeteners to the Giants for the #2. And then having the Qb's go 1-3.

I second this

Then get on the horn with Denver....much rather trade back to 5 and accumulate premium picks at the top of round compared to moving back to 12.

Draft is still over a month away, no need to rush into a trade. The Colts did us a favor by trading out early. Our pick and leverage will only increase as we get closer to April 26th.

Of course, if they are high on one of the QB’s, then you don’t overthink it and stay put.

just because.

In comment 13875421 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

could trade down and then trade up too.

My thoughts exactly

or are we just spit ballin here?

In comment 13875422 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

moving up again to 6 with Indy is very likely. Ballard is on record saying they'd absolutely move down again.

The Bills have 12, 22, 53 and 56 and in the first two rounds, and also the first pick in the 3rd 65(265). They could package up

12 (1,200), 56 and 65 to the Colts to move to 6, and then offer the Giants 22, 53 and either 2nd or 1st next year to move to 2.

I mean it's convoluted, but it's doable.

So, Buffalo is willing to trade a ton of premium picks in two drafts to get the QB that we, somehow, don't want because we have a 37 year old QB and a 3rd round draft choice. I guess that's possible but I don't get it.

If they take that trade and Webb isn't a sensation the minute he walk on the field, Gettleman should be fired before Webb walks on the field the next time.

You could easily help the DBs, finish rebuilding the OL, and get a RB in the first 4 picks this year. All of this is contingent on not being sold on the top 2 QBs or that Barkley is a sure fire generational player.

the end result is I don't want to drop lower than the 6-8 range.

In comment 13875473 BillT said:

Quote:

So, Buffalo is willing to trade a ton of premium picks in two drafts to get the QB that we, somehow, don't want because we have a 37 year old QB and a 3rd round draft choice. I guess that's possible but I don't get it. If they take that trade and Webb isn't a sensation the minute he walk on the field, Gettleman should be fired before Webb walks on the field the next time.

BUffalo has AJ McCarron and nothing else. Other people's desperate need should not dictate what we should do.

In comment 13875421 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

could trade down and then trade up too.

This ^^

Maybe not that deal, there's still time to leverage some more value, but you move towards dealing with the Bills. Hell, that deal is fair by every objective measure, but with a QB being the target, you may be able to get more.

Yes, there probably are 4 blue chip non-QBs, but as has been stated, you can move back up to 7 or 8 or if you're deadset on getting one of those players. You certainly would have the equity to get a deal done and it becomes much easier to trade up once the QBs are off the board.

As it's also been stated, the flipside to saying that not all those picks will work out is that the blue chipper isn't a lock to succeed either. And the upside to connecting on a bounty of picks is huge, if you've locked in 4-6 starters on cost controlled contracts, with maybe one of them turning into a pro bowl player, you have the core to make a run for 4 years. I'd start at QB, but would pursue this if they don't have one of these guys graded high enough.

Statistically speaking the number 2 pick has a much greater chance of being a bust then the group we pull in from the trade.

for our #2 and then we will discuss the rest. We want an instant stater up front if we are losing out on Barkley. We will get one at #4 but maybe not at #12. MO

In comment 13875461 Emil said:

Quote:

or are we just spit ballin here?

I'm guessing this is just some writer speculating what it would take, nothing more.

In comment 13875480 jvm52106 said:

Quote:

In comment 13875473 BillT said: Quote: So, Buffalo is willing to trade a ton of premium picks in two drafts to get the QB that we, somehow, don't want because I guess that's possible but I don't get it. If they take that trade and Webb isn't a sensation the minute he walk on the field, Gettleman should be fired before Webb walks on the field the next time. BUffalo has AJ McCarron and nothing else. Other people's desperate need should not dictate what we should do.

And we have a 37 year old QB and a 3rd round draft choice. But that's not a big enough need? If you say so.

And you can still draft Lamar Jackson, who I think has the same chance of success as the supposed top prospects.

I don't trust Bob... and don't think he has any inside info... but I have little doubt other teams such as the Bills are talking to the Giants.

If you swap out next year's #2 for a #1, this would be very difficult to pass up. Anyone can be a bust, including the #2 pick. You bring in a haul like that and you can set up your team for a long time.

just stay at 2 and take rosen

having a franchise qb covers up a lot of warts

In comment 13875504 jintz4life said:

Quote:

just stay at 2 and take rosen having a franchise qb covers up a lot of warts

You're assuming the Giants see Rosen as a franchise QB. They may. They may not.

In comment 13875497 GFAN52 said:

Quote:

In comment 13875461 Emil said: Quote: or are we just spit ballin here? I'm guessing this is just some writer speculating what it would take, nothing more.

IB - ( New Window )

its already over the trade chart value not counting the 2nd round for next year

In comment 13875498 BillT said:

Quote:

In comment 13875480 jvm52106 said: Quote: In comment 13875473 BillT said: Quote: So, Buffalo is willing to trade a ton of premium picks in two drafts to get the QB that we, somehow, don't want because I guess that's possible but I don't get it. If they take that trade and Webb isn't a sensation the minute he walk on the field, Gettleman should be fired before Webb walks on the field the next time. BUffalo has AJ McCarron and nothing else. Other people's desperate need should not dictate what we should do. And we have a 37 year old QB and a 3rd round draft choice. But that's not a big enough need? If you say so.

Just out of curiosity (morbid perhaps) what order do you have the QB prospects in? Not other teams etc, just your ranking of the top 4 QB prospects.

In comment 13875297 mphbullet36 said:

Quote:

In comment 13875281 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: #1, then you likely are getting a pick around 12 again. It would be tough to turn down the deal if it had next year's #1 and a #3. We don't get a blue-chip guy possibly, but we pick up 6 picks in the first 65, which would go a long way to solidifying holes on the OL, LB and DB. thats what I"m saying. Just this year the draft value chart (which I know isn't gospel) but the value just from the Bills 2 1's, 1 2nd, and early 3rd...we would be getting 2,615 in value for our 2,200 pick. Consider you need to be blown away because of the QB factor. Assuming the bills are a bottom half team (15 or worse) which is most likely with AJ Mccarron or a Rookie QB...we would be getting north of 3,600 pts in value for our 2nd overall pick...I think that would at least get us to the table... whether or not we could haggle even more depends on how desperate they are.

Was re-thinking: the 12,22,53,they keep 56 to soften the impact of losing so many picks that they did have and keep negotiations flowing, but take their 4th, then 1 and 3 in '19, and 3 in '20(might be the 96 or the 65 at worst trade bait). Not dissimilar from the Eli deal in the old formula.

Rams and Eagles both dealt hauls to move up and select QBs in 2016. Since one jump was slightly less (8 to 2) and the other slightly more than what it would take for Buffalo to go from 12 to 2, it's instructive to look at those deals:

Rams received: #1 overall, 4th round pick, 6th round pick
Titans Received: #15 overall, two 2nd rounds picks (2016), 3rd round pick, 2017 1st round pick, 2017 3rd round pick

Eagles received: #2 overall, 4th round pick
Browns received: #8 overall, 3rd round pick, 4th round pick, 2017 1st round pick, 2018 second round pick

Neither team trading back received more than two first round picks in total and if there is any truth to the offer in the OP (doubtful if IB is the source), it's closer to the Rams-Titans deal if not even stronger:

#12 > #15
#22 > #43
#53 < #45
#65 > #76
2019 2nd < 2017 1st and 3rd

The question when comparing those deals is essentially: is the increased value of selecting 12 and 22 vs 15/43 greater than the value of 2017 1st? If the Giants had the #12 and #22 picks, would you trade them for the #15 and #43 picks + a 1st round pick next year?

In comment 13875509 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

In comment 13875497 GFAN52 said: Quote: In comment 13875461 Emil said: Quote: or are we just spit ballin here? I'm guessing this is just some writer speculating what it would take, nothing more. IB - ( New Window )

Good Lord, if there is a less reliable source for made up rumors it would be difficult to find one. Incarertaed Bob spews rumors all the time!

When has he ever been right? He's like a drunken hippy with a dart board

Who in their right mind would ever even confide in him?

In comment 13875504 jintz4life said:

Quote:

just stay at 2 and take rosen having a franchise qb covers up a lot of warts

I'm just putting this out there...what if the Giants really like Webb?

In comment 13875534 gidiefor said:

Quote:

When has he ever been right? He's like a drunken hippy with a dart board Who in their right mind would ever even confide in him?

He's spews NBA rumors with equal ineptness. This thread is fun to think about but has no basis in reality.

In comment 13875530 GFAN52 said:

Quote:

In comment 13875509 Brown Recluse said: Quote: In comment 13875497 GFAN52 said: Quote: In comment 13875461 Emil said: Quote: or are we just spit ballin here? I'm guessing this is just some writer speculating what it would take, nothing more. IB - ( New Window ) Good Lord, if there is a less reliable source for made up rumors it would be difficult to find one. Incarertaed Bob spews rumors all the time!

LOL! Incarcerated Bob makes shit up 100% of the time and you guys are talking about it like it's an actual offer.

In comment 13875538 mphbullet36 said:

Quote:

In comment 13875504 jintz4life said: Quote: just stay at 2 and take rosen having a franchise qb covers up a lot of warts I'm just putting this out there...what if the Giants really like Webb?

How dare you suggest such a thing. Its preposterous to assume the Giants like Webb. He hasn't played in a game and hasn't practiced with the first team.

More importantly though, they never even scouted him in college. In training camp and all throughout the season, he basically sat in a lawn chair drinking Bahama Mamma's while everyone else was practicing. Never threw a pass. Never received any coaching. They don't know anything about Davis Webb.

In comment 13875500 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

I don't trust Bob... and don't think he has any inside info... but I have little doubt other teams such as the Bills are talking to the Giants. If you swap out next year's #2 for a #1, this would be very difficult to pass up. Anyone can be a bust, including the #2 pick. You bring in a haul like that and you can set up your team for a long time.

My only issue with that, is next years draft class is looking like a down year for quarterbacks. I realize things can change in a year, but passing on a possible elite signal caller would be quite haunting.

In comment 13875325 TheMick7 said:

Quote:

in Round 1,2,3 this draft & their #1 in 2019

How do you sell THAT to fans when a) you had holes that could have been filled with the top 64, b) you now need a QB, c) you now need a LT and sold out of the opportunity by dumping you 21 already, and now losing the 22, and waiting to 53 for a LT if you get your QB@2?
IMO you are entering Ditka territory for a QB with little around him and little insight via the drafts.

In comment 13875548 Jim in Tampa said:

Quote:

In comment 13875530 GFAN52 said: Quote: In comment 13875509 Brown Recluse said: Quote: In comment 13875497 GFAN52 said: Quote: In comment 13875461 Emil said: Quote: or are we just spit ballin here? I'm guessing this is just some writer speculating what it would take, nothing more. IB - ( New Window ) Good Lord, if there is a less reliable source for made up rumors it would be difficult to find one. Incarertaed Bob spews rumors all the time! LOL! Incarcerated Bob makes shit up 100% of the time and you guys are talking about it like it's an actual offer.

For sure, Incarcerated Bob trolls the NBA and NFL forums all the time with his made-up BS on twitter.

In comment 13875504 jintz4life said:

Quote:

just stay at 2 and take rosen having a franchise qb covers up a lot of warts

Have you been watching the Giants last 6 years? They've had a franchise QB and a team of warts, it doesn't cover up any thing.

and i would say BOB might is just slightly more accurate then that. its one thing not to over react to what he says, but it doesn't make sense to completely dismiss it off hand... ive seen BOB call them right alot more times than some people on here would like to admit.

sounds very similar to the rumor that our friend Daddy M mentioned last week, what's that saying about smoke?

In comment 13875562 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

In comment 13875538 mphbullet36 said: Quote: In comment 13875504 jintz4life said: Quote: just stay at 2 and take rosen having a franchise qb covers up a lot of warts I'm just putting this out there...what if the Giants really like Webb? How dare you suggest such a thing. Its preposterous to assume the Giants like Webb. He hasn't played in a game and hasn't practiced with the first team. More importantly though, they never even scouted him in college. In training camp and all throughout the season, he basically sat in a lawn chair drinking Bahama Mamma's while everyone else was practicing. Never threw a pass. Never received any coaching. They don't know anything about Davis Webb.

what great about the NFL draft everyone has grades for everyone. SO DG and Shurmur graded out Webb last year and probably got reports about him this year...so they have plenty of knowledge on Webb.

If they believe Webb will be a good quality QB (Barkley or a trade down possibility are def in the cards)

lets assume a few things here

1. lets say DG and shurmurs grade on Webb is not far enough away from Darnold/Rosen.

2. lets say Barkley is the #1 rated player on there board (but considering the value in the league on RB's that high and longevity the giants aren't opposed to making a trade to a QB starving team like the bills to reap a lot of benifits

Ok so now we make the trade with the Bills. Lets says a reasonable offer is 12/22/53/65 and a 2019 1st rounder for the #2 pick and lets say a 5th round pick from the Giants.

So now the top of the draft looks like Browns/Bills/Jets

So we can assume in some order Darnold/Rosen/Allen/Mayfield will probably go in the top 5 or 6 picks

Add in Barkley and Chubb and that rounds out the top 6 most likely.

Now add in Quenton Nelson into that mix (that is prob your top 7).

If the giants are picking 12 (what top 5 guys would you rate for the giants).

I gotta think edmunds/smith/fitzpatrick might round out top 10.

So lets say the Giants draft: one of the CB's projected in that range Ward/Alexander/Jackson

plus Wynn or Hernandez with pick #22

Would you rather have Ward along with Wynn/Hernandez + 2 other day two picks + a 2019 1st or would you rather have Barkley?

Lets also put more names to the mix...lets say the giants select Billy Price with our early 2nd and Ronald Jones with the 53 pick from Buffalo.

Would you rather have Ward + Wynn/Hernandez + Billy Price + Ronald Jones + the first pick in the 3rd round and an additional 1st round pick in 2019.

When you look at it like that how in the word do you not make that trade if we aren't planning on drafting a QB. As much as I love Barkley...we fix the O-line with this draft + get a really good corner + get a good young RB...plus have the 2019 bills 1st rounder in our back pocket.

thinks IB is credible, but at some point it's difficult to ignore the same rumor when it's coming from multiple sources.

In comment 13875639 AcidTest said:

Quote:

thinks IB is credible, but at some point it's difficult to ignore the same rumor when it's coming from multiple sources.

What multiple sources?

In comment 13875254 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

if the pick next year is a first. Think about it. We'd have 6 picks in the first 65, including #12 and #22. Maybe have to have not only next year's #1, but maybe a #3 too, but that's still a decent haul.

This, for me.

I think I'd be satisfied.

I still would like the Giants to draft Barkley at #2. But if this trade went down, I would still be excited. That's a lot of potential football talent walking through the door in Jersey.

In comment 13875644 GFAN52 said:

Quote:

In comment 13875639 AcidTest said: Quote: thinks IB is credible, but at some point it's difficult to ignore the same rumor when it's coming from multiple sources. What multiple sources?

If you google it, its been floating around in the news for well over a month.

would put this deal over the top and giants would be crazy not to accept it. I fully anticipate the bills will be right back at the top of the draft next year, even if they land 1 of the big 4 qbs.

That was a Jimmy Johnson 1993 developed document. Running every trade through it is pointless 25 years later.

It's like evaluating a QB today through the lens of whether he can play in a run and shoot.

As for that trade, I'd do it as is but if that 2019 2nd becomes a 1st you RUN to the fax machine to get that in to the league office. Don't be dumb first and second round picks are gold. Even if you hit on 2 first rounders and 1 second rounder out of that deal you have killed the draft.

making the trade you just stay put until you see what the Browns do at one. That could also increase the value of your pick at two. We hold all the cards now with the three spot being a QB.

In comment 13875644 GFAN52 said:

Quote:

In comment 13875639 AcidTest said: Quote: thinks IB is credible, but at some point it's difficult to ignore the same rumor when it's coming from multiple sources. What multiple sources?

DaddyM89? I also think some major news outlets have been speculating about a possible Giants Bills trade for weeks. But it wouldn't surprise me if it's all nothing, or just a brief inquiry that everyone blew out of proportion.

You improve the talent level on the team and next year you have the two #1’s to go get your QB. You only do this of course if there will be good signal callers next year. That’s what our scouting department is for. If not, go get the QB.

I would love the security of having our next franchise QB in the fold. I would also not complain if the Giants added a stud back like Barkley or even a top edge rusher like Chubb. Deep down, I would really love to find a way to get Nelson and add a mauler to the O line. Unfortunately, the Giants have holes to fill, serious depth problems and not a lot of money to spend. I don't see them making a real run until they upgrade the overall talent on the roster. If trading back offers the opportunity to add another building block to the O line (McGlinchey, Price, Hernandez, Wynn), one of the top corners AND a very good RB...I think the Giants have to seriously consider it.

In comment 13875266 M.S. said:

Quote:

...one of its second-rounders this year. But next year they gotta give us their #1. A second rounder in 2019 just doesn't cut it.

Why? We don't gotta let them keep anything. Want to trade up for a QB? Pay up.

I'm on record as saying I would draft the QB at #2.

But my spidey sense says the Giants are not going to draft a QB there.

If not, and you get offered that deal (with another #1), I would trade down.


********

ALL THAT SAID, I would not make a trade until I'm on the clock. Sweat everyone out.

In comment 13875829 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

I'm on record as saying I would draft the QB at #2. But my spidey sense says the Giants are not going to draft a QB there. If not, and you get offered that deal (with another #1), I would trade down. ******** ALL THAT SAID, I would not make a trade until I'm on the clock. Sweat everyone out.

I agree with this. it makes no sense to trade now. No advantage from it.

If you cant find what trade you want, take Barkley or a stud QB.

In comment 13875507 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

In comment 13875504 jintz4life said: Quote: just stay at 2 and take rosen having a franchise qb covers up a lot of warts You're assuming the Giants see Rosen as a franchise QB. They may. They may not.

My exact comment! Why do we absolutely assume that Rosen is a franchise QB? There are many different opinions from professionals about him.

In comment 13875829 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

I'm on record as saying I would draft the QB at #2. But my spidey sense says the Giants are not going to draft a QB there. If not, and you get offered that deal (with another #1), I would trade down. ******** ALL THAT SAID, I would not make a trade until I'm on the clock. Sweat everyone out.

Need to make it sooner if the Giants want to trade back UP after the deal. Anywhere in the top 8 would be fine.

when the GIANTS do not take a QB this year.

In comment 13875829 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

I'm on record as saying I would draft the QB at #2. But my spidey sense says the Giants are not going to draft a QB there. If not, and you get offered that deal (with another #1), I would trade down. ******** ALL THAT SAID, I would not make a trade until I'm on the clock. Sweat everyone out.

What if you wait too long and the proposing team moves on to someone else?

Tell them we were joking.
We will take the 6th pick and their three, 2nds.

i agree with waiting until we are on the clock, but if the bills add that 3rd 1 round pick (their 2019 pick) it means theyre most likely desperate and will continue shopping until someone agrees. in that case you do not wait. lock it up and let the top 10 unfold. with added pick ammo, they will have flexibility to move again either back into the top 10 or back into the end of the 1st, for their 3rd 1st rounder of the day.

DG has never traded down in a draft. He also has never selected a QB.

In comment 13875627 mphbullet36 said:

Quote:

lets assume a few things here 1. lets say DG and shurmurs grade on Webb is not far enough away from Darnold/Rosen. 2. lets say Barkley is the #1 rated player on there board (but considering the value in the league on RB's that high and longevity the giants aren't opposed to making a trade to a QB starving team like the bills to reap a lot of benifits Ok so now we make the trade with the Bills. Lets says a reasonable offer is 12/22/53/65 and a 2019 1st rounder for the #2 pick and lets say a 5th round pick from the Giants. So now the top of the draft looks like Browns/Bills/Jets So we can assume in some order Darnold/Rosen/Allen/Mayfield will probably go in the top 5 or 6 picks Add in Barkley and Chubb and that rounds out the top 6 most likely. Now add in Quenton Nelson into that mix (that is prob your top 7). If the giants are picking 12 (what top 5 guys would you rate for the giants). I gotta think edmunds/smith/fitzpatrick might round out top 10. So lets say the Giants draft: one of the CB's projected in that range Ward/Alexander/Jackson plus Wynn or Hernandez with pick #22 Would you rather have Ward along with Wynn/Hernandez + 2 other day two picks + a 2019 1st or would you rather have Barkley? Lets also put more names to the mix...lets say the giants select Billy Price with our early 2nd and Ronald Jones with the 53 pick from Buffalo. Would you rather have Ward + Wynn/Hernandez + Billy Price + Ronald Jones + the first pick in the 3rd round and an additional 1st round pick in 2019. When you look at it like that how in the word do you not make that trade if we aren't planning on drafting a QB. As much as I love Barkley...we fix the O-line with this draft + get a really good corner + get a good young RB...plus have the 2019 bills 1st rounder in our back pocket.

Great post. Thought provoking.

Trading down to twelve is way too far imv.

They would have to add another first to even make it plausible.

In comment 13875627 mphbullet36 said:

Quote:

lets assume a few things here 1. lets say DG and shurmurs grade on Webb is not far enough away from Darnold/Rosen. 2. lets say Barkley is the #1 rated player on there board (but considering the value in the league on RB's that high and longevity the giants aren't opposed to making a trade to a QB starving team like the bills to reap a lot of benifits Ok so now we make the trade with the Bills. Lets says a reasonable offer is 12/22/53/65 and a 2019 1st rounder for the #2 pick and lets say a 5th round pick from the Giants. So now the top of the draft looks like Browns/Bills/Jets So we can assume in some order Darnold/Rosen/Allen/Mayfield will probably go in the top 5 or 6 picks Add in Barkley and Chubb and that rounds out the top 6 most likely. Now add in Quenton Nelson into that mix (that is prob your top 7). If the giants are picking 12 (what top 5 guys would you rate for the giants). I gotta think edmunds/smith/fitzpatrick might round out top 10. So lets say the Giants draft: one of the CB's projected in that range Ward/Alexander/Jackson plus Wynn or Hernandez with pick #22 Would you rather have Ward along with Wynn/Hernandez + 2 other day two picks + a 2019 1st or would you rather have Barkley? Lets also put more names to the mix...lets say the giants select Billy Price with our early 2nd and Ronald Jones with the 53 pick from Buffalo. Would you rather have Ward + Wynn/Hernandez + Billy Price + Ronald Jones + the first pick in the 3rd round and an additional 1st round pick in 2019. When you look at it like that how in the word do you not make that trade if we aren't planning on drafting a QB. As much as I love Barkley...we fix the O-line with this draft + get a really good corner + get a good young RB...plus have the 2019 bills 1st rounder in our back pocket.

Solid post.

and the Jets counter with an offer of the #3 pick and a 2019 1st round pick, which offer do you favor! I myself would rather trade to 3 and keep options open for another deal or a premium pick.

In comment 13876052 wgenesis123 said:

Quote:

and the Jets counter with an offer of the #3 pick and a 2019 1st round pick, which offer do you favor! I myself would rather trade to 3 and keep options open for another deal or a premium pick.

The Jets offer, no question.

(1) Then that team risks us taking the player they would have drafted (unless they deal with the Browns for the #1 spot).

(2) You stay put and draft the guy you like the best.

IMO, the teams that wait usually are able to drive up the price.

In comment 13876054 Danny Kanell said:

Quote:

In comment 13876052 wgenesis123 said: Quote: and the Jets counter with an offer of the #3 pick and a 2019 1st round pick, which offer do you favor! I myself would rather trade to 3 and keep options open for another deal or a premium pick. The Jets offer, no question.

Danny- are you in the draft QB camp? I remember you feeling Eli was done on Thanksgiving in WSH last year.

In comment 13876066 Sean said:

Quote:

In comment 13876054 Danny Kanell said: Quote: In comment 13876052 wgenesis123 said: Quote: and the Jets counter with an offer of the #3 pick and a 2019 1st round pick, which offer do you favor! I myself would rather trade to 3 and keep options open for another deal or a premium pick. The Jets offer, no question. Danny- are you in the draft QB camp? I remember you feeling Eli was done on Thanksgiving in WSH last year.

I love Eli and i'm not saying he's done. That may have been an overreaction to the game but i'm in the draft a QB (If we like one at 2) camp. It's a rare opportunity. I'm not sold to any idea though. We're in a good position to go alot of different ways, if we so choose.

Gun to my head though, i'd prefer we draft on of the big 4. Preferably Darnold. He's been my guy throughout this process.

On Top 60 picks.

But I am starting to get a very strong feeling that Barkley is the guy, and I’m OK with it.

In comment 13875829 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

I'm on record as saying I would draft the QB at #2. But my spidey sense says the Giants are not going to draft a QB there. If not, and you get offered that deal (with another #1), I would trade down. ******** ALL THAT SAID, I would not make a trade until I'm on the clock. Sweat everyone out.

you are also on record for saying the Giants were acting like the Knicks

simple as that. I do hope it's one of the QB's, but I would not be disappointed if it were Barkley. And I must say, it would set Eli up for success if he's still got it in him.

I like too many of the players that are at the top of this draft to move beyond the top 5 area.

In comment 13875829 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

ALL THAT SAID, I would not make a trade until I'm on the clock. Sweat everyone out.

I agree with this 100 percent. I'm still surprised the Jets and Colts made that deal without knowing who came off the board first.

I don't think we're out of Knicks territory yet. This franchise has been in a free fall since 2011 with the exception of the 2016 season. Mara is not impressing me with his decision-making.

And we just made a guy who was considered the an above average left tackle the highest paid linemen in the NFL "because we had to."

Now the Giants are saying Eli has a lot left in the tank. If they are wrong about that, and don't draft the QB, we may be regretting that for years and years.

but you are nuts. You are nuts even putting the Knicks and Giants in the same sentence. Unless the sentence is....The Knicks and Giants are both NY teams, you have no business comparing them. It's actually insane to suggest it. Sort of sad actually.

No less than both Bills first rounders, their second rounder, their first next year, and their third this year.

Moving from 12 to 2 is going to be super expensive.

In comment 13876241 Keith said:

Quote:

but you are nuts. You are nuts even putting the Knicks and Giants in the same sentence. Unless the sentence is....The Knicks and Giants are both NY teams, you have no business comparing them. It's actually insane to suggest it. Sort of sad actually.

I see two mismanaged teams right now. Hopefully the Giants will return to being competitive.

Folks are not looking at the big picture. In 2007, Mara listened to Accorsi who told him to promote Reese over Gettleman. Ten years later, Reese has so destroyed this roster that he was fired before the season ended. So what does Mara do? He goes back and asks Accorsi who he should hire!

It may work out very nicely. But if you were to stand back as a non-Giants fan and read what I just wrote, you would think that isn't such a great idea.

That is just silly.

In comment 13876259 ZogZerg said:

Quote:

That is just silly.

Why are the Knicks the Knicks? I would argue one of the main reasons is that they have so botched their drafts that they are forced to make rash free agent moves.

Sounds like the Giants right now to me.

I won't argue the recent dysfunction with the Giants. I think it's a bit exagerrated right now, but even so, it's not in the same stratosphere as the Knicks. You obviously don't pay enough attention to the Knicks and what a disaster that is. It's not even close.

The Giants have been mismanaged, but there is a new regime in place. Let’s see how things play out before comparing them to arguably the worst franchise in all of sports.

In comment 13876253 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

In comment 13876241 Keith said: Quote: but you are nuts. You are nuts even putting the Knicks and Giants in the same sentence. Unless the sentence is....The Knicks and Giants are both NY teams, you have no business comparing them. It's actually insane to suggest it. Sort of sad actually. I see two mismanaged teams right now. Hopefully the Giants will return to being competitive. Folks are not looking at the big picture. In 2007, Mara listened to Accorsi who told him to promote Reese over Gettleman. Ten years later, Reese has so destroyed this roster that he was fired before the season ended. So what does Mara do? He goes back and asks Accorsi who he should hire! It may work out very nicely. But if you were to stand back as a non-Giants fan and read what I just wrote, you would think that isn't such a great idea.

The Giants won two superbowls since that time....

The Knicks haven't been competitive in my lifetime.

talk about mis management.
Giants certainly have issues and they botched McApoo, but they are not in same league of F-ups and mis management as the Knicks and Browns are. You need at least 10 more years of missery before we can go there...

#12: OT McGlinchy
#22 & #34: OG Hernandez and C Price/Daniels
#53: use #65 pick to trade up into early 2nd round and get Sony Michel.

Use all remaining picks on defense.

I also would only do this if we can have the Bills' 2019 first rounder. Don't need any other 2019 picks.

We would have three quality OL who will all likely start from Day 1 and our line will be set for 4-5 years. On top of that we'd have Michel, Beckham, Shep, Engram. I truly believe with that supporting cast Eli has enough left in the tank to make a run in the next 2 years.

If we suck again next year, and we still aren't sure about Webb after another year of development, we'd then likely have 2 high-1st round picks in 2019 to get the QB we want.

This deal would allow us to have the best of both worlds: Give Eli the best possible chance to make one more run, AND set our team up for a bright future with a rebuilt o-line and the opportunity to still get our franchise QB next year.

Thoughts?

but even the Browns aren't as bad as the Knicks. Ok, they are probably in the same stratosphere now, but still don't compare to the Knicks.

In comment 13876253 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

In comment 13876241 Keith said: Quote: but you are nuts. You are nuts even putting the Knicks and Giants in the same sentence. Unless the sentence is....The Knicks and Giants are both NY teams, you have no business comparing them. It's actually insane to suggest it. Sort of sad actually. I see two mismanaged teams right now. Hopefully the Giants will return to being competitive. Folks are not looking at the big picture. In 2007, Mara listened to Accorsi who told him to promote Reese over Gettleman. Ten years later, Reese has so destroyed this roster that he was fired before the season ended. So what does Mara do? He goes back and asks Accorsi who he should hire! It may work out very nicely. But if you were to stand back as a non-Giants fan and read what I just wrote, you would think that isn't such a great idea.

I can't say that wasn't the correct choice unless you think Gettleman wins us 4-5 Superbowls in that timeframe. 2 Superbowls in 10 years means overall the Reese era was a success.

You are correct about the length of dysfunction. But we're dangerously close to Browns territory right now, especially if we botch this draft. There is no room for error. We have five picks.

The Knicks issue was never using the draft because they'd trade all their picks.

They've actually drafted some quality NBA players. The issue is trading them away to chase winning or as a result of impatience.

In the last 15 NBA drafts, the Knicks had a first round pick in 11 of them and produced 10 players who went on to have legitimately decent or better NBA careers. Most of them not as Knicks.

Nene, Danilo, Ariza, KP, Hardaway, Shumpert, Frye, Lee, KP, Chandler.

We went way off course here though.

But in hindsight, was it a success DESPITE Reese? The 2007 Giants were largely built with Accorsi at the helm - although Reese's 2007 draft was a factor in the team's success that year.

I would argue that the 2011 team was an extremely flawed team that got incredibly hot at the right time.

Since then, the team has steadily deteriorated (again with the aberration being 2016).

In comment 13876283 Knee of Theismann said:

Quote:

#12: OT McGlinchy #22 & #34: OG Hernandez and C Price/Daniels #53: use #65 pick to trade up into early 2nd round and get Sony Michel. Use all remaining picks on defense. I also would only do this if we can have the Bills' 2019 first rounder. Don't need any other 2019 picks. We would have three quality OL who will all likely start from Day 1 and our line will be set for 4-5 years. On top of that we'd have Michel, Beckham, Shep, Engram. I truly believe with that supporting cast Eli has enough left in the tank to make a run in the next 2 years. If we suck again next year, and we still aren't sure about Webb after another year of development, we'd then likely have 2 high-1st round picks in 2019 to get the QB we want. This deal would allow us to have the best of both worlds: Give Eli the best possible chance to make one more run, AND set our team up for a bright future with a rebuilt o-line and the opportunity to still get our franchise QB next year. Thoughts?

I like getting a lot of picks from the Bills because this team has a lot of holes sand that 2019 Bills first rounder will be high.

The thing is, our 2019 first rounder is going to be high as well. This team isn't making another run in 2019, not with this horrible roster.

Moreover, we're past the point of constructing a team with the idea of "making another run with Eli". Great if it happens, but you can't plan for that anymore.

I will really be pissed. The whole organization needs to hold individuals accountable. This loyalty thing (though nice) went out in the 1950’s.

In comment 13876289 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

You are correct about the length of dysfunction. But we're dangerously close to Browns territory right now, especially if we botch this draft. There is no room for error. We have five picks.

5 picks. LOL. People need to stop saying this. and every keeps parroting it "the Giants have only 5 picks". So what?

If they had 12 picks it wouldn't change anything, if they're the ones they're missing.

UDFA's have a better chance at becoming successful NFL players than 5th, 6th or 7th round picks.

they really have 3 consequential picks, like any other year.

if you're relying on a 4th or 5th round pick to step in and contribute as a rookie (or even ever) you are delusional.

the odds of a 4th or 5th round pick becoming an NFL starter for even half their games is remote. The odds are better they will be useless to their drafting team.

I'm dating myself but I still remember taking turds like Weiss from France.

It does matter... many rosters in the NFL are filled with low level picks...these guys are at least special teams contributors.

The Giants have a bunch of holes. Right now they have many more missing pieces than assets.

on one hand you are criticizing Accorsi for recommending Reese, but on the other hand you are saying 2007 was built by Accorsi, not Reese. Can’t have it both ways with Accorsi.

.

In comment 13876308 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

It does matter... many rosters in the NFL are filled with low level picks...these guys are at least special teams contributors. The Giants have a bunch of holes. Right now they have many more missing pieces than assets.

the Giants are without their 6th and 7th round pick, which gives them only 5 picks.

it does not matter.

In fact, I'd argue they're better off with UDFA's than draft picks so the GM doesn't feel pressured to keep a player they drafted over a UDFA.

The Giants do not need to fill out their roster with 6th and 7th round picks.

You have to go back to 2007 to find a meaningful contribution from a 6th or 7th round pick for the Giants.

How far do you need to go back for a UDFA contribution?

I'll take the chance.

And as some have speculated/advised I definitely WOULD NOT trade down because of "only" having 5 draft picks. That's absolutely ridiculous.

acquired. Even if they "got hot at the right time", the regular season games against New England, San Francisco, and Green Bay showed that the team had the talent to compete with (and eventually beat) the best teams in the sport.

In comment 13876283 Knee of Theismann said:

Quote:

#12: OT McGlinchy #22 & #34: OG Hernandez and C Price/Daniels #53: use #65 pick to trade up into early 2nd round and get Sony Michel. Use all remaining picks on defense. I also would only do this if we can have the Bills' 2019 first rounder. Don't need any other 2019 picks. We would have three quality OL who will all likely start from Day 1 and our line will be set for 4-5 years. On top of that we'd have Michel, Beckham, Shep, Engram. I truly believe with that supporting cast Eli has enough left in the tank to make a run in the next 2 years. If we suck again next year, and we still aren't sure about Webb after another year of development, we'd then likely have 2 high-1st round picks in 2019 to get the QB we want. This deal would allow us to have the best of both worlds: Give Eli the best possible chance to make one more run, AND set our team up for a bright future with a rebuilt o-line and the opportunity to still get our franchise QB next year. Thoughts?

If our first pick ends up being fucking McGlinchy I will be pissed beyond measure.

In comment 13876316 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

In comment 13876308 Eric from BBI said: Quote: It does matter... many rosters in the NFL are filled with low level picks...these guys are at least special teams contributors. The Giants have a bunch of holes. Right now they have many more missing pieces than assets. the Giants are without their 6th and 7th round pick, which gives them only 5 picks. it does not matter. In fact, I'd argue they're better off with UDFA's than draft picks so the GM doesn't feel pressured to keep a player they drafted over a UDFA. The Giants do not need to fill out their roster with 6th and 7th round picks. You have to go back to 2007 to find a meaningful contribution from a 6th or 7th round pick for the Giants. How far do you need to go back for a UDFA contribution? I'll take the chance. And as some have speculated/advised I definitely WOULD NOT trade down because of "only" having 5 draft picks. That's absolutely ridiculous.

You're forgetting Da'rel Scott :-)

In comment 13876312 Sean said:

Quote:

on one hand you are criticizing Accorsi for recommending Reese, but on the other hand you are saying 2007 was built by Accorsi, not Reese. Can’t have it both ways with Accorsi.

I think Accorsi was a decent GM and I think Reese was a decent director of college scouting. I don't think Reese was cut out to be a GM and I think Reese made a horribly decision to hire Ross. Different skills.

We'll have to see about Gettleman. Remember, the Panthers just fired him.

Again, one of the reasons why the Giants are in the position they are in is that they have drafted so poorly in EVERY round.

In comment 13876359 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

Again, one of the reasons why the Giants are in the position they are in is that they have drafted so poorly in EVERY round.

League wide, 6th and 7th round picks historically are rare to ever contribute and even more rare to contribute as rookies.

I'll trade a 4th round comp pick and 6th round pick every single time I have them for Alec Ogletree and he only needs to be below average to make it a huge win for a trade.

Maybe that's the point you're missing, not sure. But the Giants used those picks to get Ogletree (this year) and Cockerell last year.

I'll trade a 6th and/or 7th round pick EVERY SINGLE YEAR for players like Ogletree or Cockerell.

It's almost like you'd prefer to have the 4th and 6th round pick back and not have Ogletree, so you can draft someone who will in all likelihood be a lot worse than Ogletree (or Cockerell) to fill out the bottom of the roster.

I think the Giants can more effectively fill the roster with UDFA's or dumpster dive for FA's than a 6th and 7th round pick.

Not sure why the strange obsession fans have with the "lost" 2 picks.

While not yet the Knicks, John Mara has done nothing to prove that he is even decent at evaluating or selecting leaders. (One of Dolan's biggest flaws) Let's review how every big leadership decision has either been objectively bad or concerning.

1. Choosing Reese over Gettleman (can't go further to show how poor this decision was than hiring Gettleman 10 years later)

2. Choosing Reese over Coughlin. There were plenty of fans that viewed Reese as more of the problem than TC. What was abundantly clear is that Reese had a habit of ignoring certain positions or areas with glaring lacks of talent even going into the season.

3. The timing of choosing Gettleman. I hope he works out great, he was a "safe" pick but there are several serious concerns in the thinking behind hiring him.

A. Loyalty to a regime that hasn't shown it can amass a well rounded team. They brought in Accorsi as a consultant, this was always going to be a guy in the current inner Giants circle. Sure Ross and Reese are out. But the idea that they are the only ones responsible for the current state is flawed logic. If you are missing as much as we did in rounds 3-7 it is not just decision making that is flawed but information too.

B. What makes A even more concerning is that they didn't seem interested at all in even HEARING new ideas or being open to the thought that their whole approach might need to be changed.

C. At a time when news about the Patriots advanced software system is surfacing and the Eagles long known for being pioneers in advanced analytics won the super bowl we hire a guy that seems as old school in a scouting approach as you can get. He talks about a qualitative evaluation of personalities. I agree this is vital but if you are not approaching this from a data science perspective as well as a look a guy in the eye approach you are not doing it correctly. Even the Steelers as old school as it gets brought in someone 3 years ago to tackle the problem of finding ways to blend the old and new.

D. Even if Gettleman is "safe" from the vantage point that he has been successful using old school methods in the past he's rubbed some people the wrong way. Explain it away all you want but getting fired from your last job shouldn't be ignored. Beckham does not seem like the kind of guy that takes to being strong armed and we might have just brought in someone that plays a role in losing our most talented player IMO since LT. It seems like we were so desperate to find a **clean** talent evaluation leader that was in the Giants family that we were sold every aspect of Gettleman's personality as a positive. Being tough with players and their value cuts both ways and in everything I've read it has been characterized as an asset to him.

E. Lastly, as we were looking for GM and coach I kept on seeing this logic that they needed NFL experience and success to be seriously considered, seemingly as a backlash for MacAdoo and possibly even Reese. Nothing wrong with citing experience for a reason to hire someone but the idea that Mara and Co might be rejecting the idea of hiring an up and comer just because they failed to properly evaluate leadership in the past is a scary premise. It's important to take lessons with you and learn from mistakes but if those mistakes cause you to question your own ability to identify a rising talent maybe you shouldn't be the one evaluating said talent.

...it's really that simple. I'll throw back our 5th rounder this season to give a dog a bone.

We don't need this trade.

In comment 13876355 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

In comment 13876312 Sean said: Quote: on one hand you are criticizing Accorsi for recommending Reese, but on the other hand you are saying 2007 was built by Accorsi, not Reese. Can’t have it both ways with Accorsi. I think Accorsi was a decent GM and I think Reese was a decent director of college scouting. I don't think Reese was cut out to be a GM and I think Reese made a horribly decision to hire Ross. Different skills. We'll have to see about Gettleman. Remember, the Panthers just fired him.

The only real bad thing I could point out the Accorsi did was taking that Vandy kicker in the 5th rd 2001 draft that no one ever scouted in person.

.

Look, I "like" Rosen at #2, I really do. But I also have a good feeling about C. Webb and Eli being able to play 2 more years at a very good level, a level that an move them into the playoffs should they do really well in the draft & catch some breaks this year with an easy early schedule & great health.

Or maybe the Bills have a player they can add to the mix that we'd really like to have?

:)

In comment 13876381 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

In comment 13876359 Eric from BBI said: Quote: Again, one of the reasons why the Giants are in the position they are in is that they have drafted so poorly in EVERY round. League wide, 6th and 7th round picks historically are rare to ever contribute and even more rare to contribute as rookies. I'll trade a 4th round comp pick and 6th round pick every single time I have them for Alec Ogletree and he only needs to be below average to make it a huge win for a trade. Maybe that's the point you're missing, not sure. But the Giants used those picks to get Ogletree (this year) and Cockerell last year. I'll trade a 6th and/or 7th round pick EVERY SINGLE YEAR for players like Ogletree or Cockerell. It's almost like you'd prefer to have the 4th and 6th round pick back and not have Ogletree, so you can draft someone who will in all likelihood be a lot worse than Ogletree (or Cockerell) to fill out the bottom of the roster. I think the Giants can more effectively fill the roster with UDFA's or dumpster dive for FA's than a 6th and 7th round pick. Not sure why the strange obsession fans have with the "lost" 2 picks.

+1

In comment 13876381 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

In comment 13876359 Eric from BBI said: Quote: Again, one of the reasons why the Giants are in the position they are in is that they have drafted so poorly in EVERY round. League wide, 6th and 7th round picks historically are rare to ever contribute and even more rare to contribute as rookies. I'll trade a 4th round comp pick and 6th round pick every single time I have them for Alec Ogletree and he only needs to be below average to make it a huge win for a trade. Maybe that's the point you're missing, not sure. But the Giants used those picks to get Ogletree (this year) and Cockerell last year. I'll trade a 6th and/or 7th round pick EVERY SINGLE YEAR for players like Ogletree or Cockerell. It's almost like you'd prefer to have the 4th and 6th round pick back and not have Ogletree, so you can draft someone who will in all likelihood be a lot worse than Ogletree (or Cockerell) to fill out the bottom of the roster. I think the Giants can more effectively fill the roster with UDFA's or dumpster dive for FA's than a 6th and 7th round pick. Not sure why the strange obsession fans have with the "lost" 2 picks.

Great post. 6th rounders like Bisnowaty (who they traded up for) are never going to be markedly different in terms of talent than a UDFAs like Wheeler/Halapio. After the top 150-200 picks, the rest are crap shoots. Or else they would have been picked in the first 150-200.

Yes some will still hit, the same way some UDFA's hit every year. Guys fall through the cracks. But 6th/7th round picks are basically meaningless. In the 4th round you should get a contributor like Gallman, or BJ Goodson, but it would seem to me that it's a no-brainer to add an impact talent like Ogletree.

then they have to pay. Throw out the chart.Give us your two # 1's, 2nd and 3rd 2018,and 1st ,2nd,and 3rd in 2019 and you got a deal.Nothing less, if they want their franchise QB,Pay the price,and we set the price.

but I did not have my login/password with me. So home now and finally getting to say what I have wanted to say all day...

I really don't care what the Bills are offering. We do NOT need a pile of draft picks. We need the next franchise QB to be Eli's replacement.

Even if in the deal we get the Bills' first pick next year. That pick most likely will not be a top 10. So, we will end up having to deal those picks AND MORE back to get to the top 5 to possibly grab whichever QB we like next year. We could end up having to give up a ransom just like we did for Eli. Plus, the teams near the top may want that QB and wont make a deal with us.

When we traded with San Diego, we gave up a lot to get Eli and at the time people were thinking we gave up too much. Fast forward to 2018 and I dont think anyone wants all of those draft picks back. Well, that is exactly what the Bills are trying to do now. 15 years from now those 3-4 picks will mean nothing. Let's not be the fools who let the Bills draft our next franchise QB.

** The Browns were collecting draft picks over the past few years. It got them a winless season because they do not have a QB.

As an example of why it's not a good idea to trade back and gain picks

Shit, lets just give away all of our draft picks because the #2 is the only one worth anything. Forget it, there’s no way any of those players will amount to squat

Could very easily be a top 5 pick. Especially if they pick and start a rookie QB in 2018.

It is the Bills after all.

This is the draft scenario I'm crossing my fingers for.

In comment 13876236 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

I don't think we're out of Knicks territory yet. This franchise has been in a free fall since 2011 with the exception of the 2016 season. Mara is not impressing me with his decision-making. And we just made a guy who was considered the an above average left tackle the highest paid linemen in the NFL "because we had to." Now the Giants are saying Eli has a lot left in the tank. If they are wrong about that, and don't draft the QB, we may be regretting that for years and years.

No shit Sherlock. Welcome to the dark side.

This mess did not need to happen. It took serial mismanagement on the part of the two genetic lottery winners in the owners box to bring us to this point. And we won't get out of it until those two stop their meddling into football personnel matters.

I made that comparison a few months ago - as a diehard Knicks fan, I noticed the symptoms right away.

We're gonna continue to go round and round on this draft pick over the next few weeks, but if we don't find our franchise QB we might be headed back to the 1970s. Bradley Chubb sure as shit won't stop it.

In comment 13876491 GFAN52 said:

Quote:

:)

What's to say the Giants didn't leak it to get Denver to bite? Denver may have signed Keenum but he is still just a very good backup. Elway has been all over Josh Allen. Denver jumps up, leaves the Giants #5 (Barkley, Nelson, Chubb?) and a couple other high picks and maybe #1 next year.

In comment 13876832 IIT said:

Quote:

Could very easily be a top 5 pick. Especially if they pick and start a rookie QB in 2018. It is the Bills after all. This is the draft scenario I'm crossing my fingers for.

Talk about kicking the can down the road. We already have a top 2 pick with multiple prospects who line up well with the rebuilding of our roster. But let's back out of that, pass on the blue chip prospects, stock up on red chips, and hope that Buffalo gifts us the pick next year that we should just take for ourselves this year.

In comment 13876832 IIT said:

Quote:

Could very easily be a top 5 pick. Especially if they pick and start a rookie QB in 2018. It is the Bills after all. This is the draft scenario I'm crossing my fingers for.

Talk about kicking the can down the road. We already have a top 2 pick with multiple prospects who line up well with the rebuilding of our roster. But let's back out of that, pass on the blue chip prospects, stock up on red chips, and hope that Buffalo gifts us the pick next year that we should just take for ourselves this year.

In comment 13876891 Gatorade Dunk said:

Quote:

In comment 13876832 IIT said: Quote: Could very easily be a top 5 pick. Especially if they pick and start a rookie QB in 2018. It is the Bills after all. This is the draft scenario I'm crossing my fingers for. Talk about kicking the can down the road. We already have a top 2 pick with multiple prospects who line up well with the rebuilding of our roster. But let's back out of that, pass on the blue chip prospects, stock up on red chips, and hope that Buffalo gifts us the pick next year that we should just take for ourselves this year.

LOL, so true. These fans crack me up.

Cleveland stockpiled picks and did not get a franchise QB. In fact, they were crowned the winners of the draft a year or two ago if I remember correctly.

This past season they were winless because they did not have a franchise QB.

You can keep your picks. We should not trade down and we must select our next franchise QB this year.

If we don't then DG Is Reese 2.

In comment 13876932 EricJ said:

Quote:

Cleveland stockpiled picks and did not get a franchise QB. In fact, they were crowned the winners of the draft a year or two ago if I remember correctly. This past season they were winless because they did not have a franchise QB. You can keep your picks. We should not trade down and we must select our next franchise QB this year. If we don't then DG Is Reese 2.

How about the Bills? Last year they traded down and stockpiled picks & now are desperately trying to trade back up.

would have nothing to do with Reese. Although I find it hard to believe, he may simply not like any of them enough to take at 2. Reese also never had the #2 pick (or close to it) or needed to draft Eli’s successor during his tenure - don’t see the comparison at all.

In comment 13876938 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

would have nothing to do with Reese. Although I find it hard to believe, he may simply not like any of them enough to take at 2. Reese also never had the #2 pick (or close to it) or needed to draft Eli’s successor during his tenure - don’t see the comparison at all.

Something people aren’t talking about - Accorsi is a huge believer in QB’s, and always had the belief you need to take one when the opportunity arises.

especially if you don’t love a prospect. I’ll reserve judgement until things play out - so much can and will happen by draft day.

In comment 13876935 Sean said:

Quote:

In comment 13876932 EricJ said: Quote: Cleveland stockpiled picks and did not get a franchise QB. In fact, they were crowned the winners of the draft a year or two ago if I remember correctly. This past season they were winless because they did not have a franchise QB. You can keep your picks. We should not trade down and we must select our next franchise QB this year. If we don't then DG Is Reese 2. How about the Bills? Last year they traded down and stockpiled picks & now are desperately trying to trade back up.

exactly my point..