Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

The argument in favor of Barkley

.McL. : 4/16/2018 3:38 pm
I posted this in the other thread where I was arguing against Barkley based on positional value. However I am sure many of those who tried to debate it with won't bother.

But to show you that there is a valid argument and that I have considered other POVs, here is the argument that Barkley fans should be making in favor of taking him.

A few have started the argument by saying that the league is evolving and runners are coming back in "fashion".

That is a very lazy and incomplete argument. To make it you need to answer,

Why would the league evolve to more of a run based attack?

Right now there is a crisis in the NFL. Colleges are not producing offensive lineman capable of playing in the NFL.

There is a huge variation of talent level on the field at any given time in college. Offenses try to take advantage of the weak links on defense by dictating the flow. Get in and out of play so fast the defense can't substitute or adjust. This way the offense can force favorable matchups and repeatedly take advantage of them. This is the evolution of the spread offense, spread the defense out and isolate the weak links.

In this system what you are asking players to do is very limited, especially at QB and OL. OL players have spent there entire career in HS and college without ever going into a 3 point stance. They have not been trained in the basics of OL play. They haven't learned proper footwork, balance, leverage, hand positioning, technique for punching, etc.

With much less disparity in talent and much more sophistication, the College approach doesn't work in the NFL.

What this means is that when these players move from college to the Pros they need to be stripped down and retaught the basics. This can take a very long time, especially to teach both run blocking and pass blocking techniques. By the time you teach both, the player is probably coming off their rookie contract and you lose him. Its much easier and faster to teach run blocking and get these guy productive in that aspect. Pass blocking takes more time.

So, if there is a trend towards running the ball more this is the likely driver, and if true then RB are going to become much more valuable in the near future. WRs much less valuable.

I can add plenty of links detailing the demise of the offensive lineman and how it has affect OL play in the NFL, but I am assuming that everybody is aware of this by now.

This is the argument that those who wish to take Barkley should be making. Don't gush about how transcendent a player he, because history tells us that transcendent RBs don't correlate with wins. Don't talk about how having yet another skill player will open up defenses, because it won't until the line is fixed. Don't try discount the significance of what history has taught about devaluing the RB. These are emotional arguments based on seeing a human highlight reel, a bright shiny object that you want, and they are losing arguments.

Given the current situation, going forward it is going to be easier to teach the run game is a well reasoned argument with factual evidence to back it up.

Have at it Barkley lovers!
I think it has more to do  
Chip : 4/16/2018 3:47 pm : link
that the QBs all have flaws. Darnold turnover machine, Allen weak program and completion percentage is low, Rosen has had concussions and a shoulder injury. Leaves it down to Barkley or Chubb or trade down.

None of these qbs are Peyton or Luck coming out.
Did Barkley touch you inappropriately  
Mike from Ohio : 4/16/2018 3:54 pm : link
or in some other way hurt you? The time and effort you spend arguing against drafting him - to people who are not making that decision - is a little...weird.
I'm all in on Barkley  
SHO'NUFF : 4/16/2018 3:55 pm : link
just for the merchandise sales alone!
I'd take..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 4/16/2018 3:56 pm : link
a hard pass on Barkley.

He could contribute over 2000 yards and score a third of our points, but that would be a by product of the OL.

And if we didn't win the SB, it would just be a massive reason to overpay for production that is all due to the OL.....
I am challenged by the fact that you registered a few weeks ago  
George from PA : 4/16/2018 4:05 pm : link
I view that as a red flag.

I am agreeable to pretty much all the draft options.....except Nelson @2 as that should elicite a small trade down. I understand the logic of taking a QB as well as taking BPA.

Barkley has a world of talent Viewed by many as the top choice and He skillset matches up perfectly in Shurmur's play action offense.....and no one will deny a strong running game will help Eli in his twilight.

I am also not smart enough to argue the value of drafting one postion over the other....more voodoo economics. I will Abrams deal with that.....
Andrew Luck and Calvin Johnson  
JohnB : 4/16/2018 4:07 pm : link
those are two top level NFL players. If they weren't stuck on bad teams, they would have gotten SB rings, no doubt. They might be in the HoF despite the shitty organizations they got stuck with. But there is NO doubt about their talent and abilities.

Why bring them up? Sy56 said that they are the only two players he rated higher than Barkley, pre-draft. Barkley is in some fine company. If you get the chance to draft someone of that talent level, with no red flags and is a solid citizen, you take him.

Give me Barkley.
There is none in my opinion  
Rflairr : 4/16/2018 4:12 pm : link
Especially at 2. We better get a QB if picking 2.
The counter-argument could be  
Section331 : 4/16/2018 4:17 pm : link
when other teams zig, you zag. Go against the trends optimizing the passing game and build a strong running game. The problem is two-fold, I don't think that approach can work any more, and even if it could, I'm not sure Barkley is the right back for it. He will be best utilized in a balanced, if not pass-heavy attack. And finding OL who can execute a good running attack is always going to be a challenge.
How about I propose a different question  
UberAlias : 4/16/2018 4:19 pm : link
Let's say none of the available QBs make the grade. If they did, I think the decision is clear -you take the QB. The team may not have a conviction for any of them, then what?

What player, non-QB, do you see making a greater positive impact than Barkley? I say none, here's why:
1) In terms of positional value, Chubb fits. The problem is, I don't see elite pass rusher in him. Good, yes, and strong against the run as well, but elite in terms pass rushing? I personally don't see it.
2) Nelson? I don't see a guard, no matter how good, transforming an offense.
3) Barkley has two things I see huge in his favor -what he brings to the table as a pass catcher, in addition to his rushing, obviously, and the impact he would have on OBJ. As good as OBJ is, teams learned rather quickly how to minimize his impact playing over the top coverage. With Barkley, it becomes a pick your poison kind of deal. Put a safety over the top and your RB is facing 7 man fronts. Defense need to chose which of these superior athletes are they going to try to shut down, and in turn, one of them is going to face favorable situation.
RE: There is none in my opinion  
.McL. : 4/16/2018 4:19 pm : link
In comment 13916301 Rflairr said:
Quote:
Especially at 2. We better get a QB if picking 2.


I actually agree with you. I am opposed to Barkley, but when I make the case against him, the Barkley lovers pounce on me and say I am unwilling to see any other POV.

All they offer is that he is "different". That they want "more weapons" to open up the defense, and yada yada yada. None of them make anything more of their position than, "Man have you seen how great Barkley is? He would be great to have on our team!". In a world where we have infinite resources, yes I agree. But every player you have comes at a cost. You have to balance those costs effectively to produce a winning product. The Barkley lovers absolutely refuse to address this point. It is they who are completely incapable of seeing any other POV.

I put this out there, just to show that I do in fact entertain other POV.
The biggest argument  
QB Snacks : 4/16/2018 4:23 pm : link
is if the Giants are intent on sticking with Eli they need to get their running game going. Barkley, and a plug in and play guard at the top of rd 2 gives the offense potential to get going again.

The giants need to give no excuses to Eli to fail this year, IMO.
RE: There is none in my opinion  
Mike in NY : 4/16/2018 4:26 pm : link
In comment 13916301 Rflairr said:
Quote:
Especially at 2. We better get a QB if picking 2.


I am sure the Chargers thought the exact same when they took Ryan Leaf at 2, or the Bengals when they took Akili Smith at 3, or any number of other QB busts. All positions bust, so don't take this as I am targeting only QB's. My issue is that this team has too many holes to pigeonhole a specific position at any selection regardless of how the board ends up.
RE: I'd take..  
QB Snacks : 4/16/2018 4:28 pm : link
In comment 13916278 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
a hard pass on Barkley.

He could contribute over 2000 yards and score a third of our points, but that would be a by product of the OL.

And if we didn't win the SB, it would just be a massive reason to overpay for production that is all due to the OL.....


Are you saying it doesnt matter who your RB is? I'm not sure I want barkley either but you're basically saying any production from a RB is due to the OL?
RE: How about I propose a different question  
.McL. : 4/16/2018 4:28 pm : link
In comment 13916309 UberAlias said:
Quote:
Let's say none of the available QBs make the grade. If they did, I think the decision is clear -you take the QB. The team may not have a conviction for any of them, then what?

What player, non-QB, do you see making a greater positive impact than Barkley? I say none, here's why:
1) In terms of positional value, Chubb fits. The problem is, I don't see elite pass rusher in him. Good, yes, and strong against the run as well, but elite in terms pass rushing? I personally don't see it.
2) Nelson? I don't see a guard, no matter how good, transforming an offense.
3) Barkley has two things I see huge in his favor -what he brings to the table as a pass catcher, in addition to his rushing, obviously, and the impact he would have on OBJ. As good as OBJ is, teams learned rather quickly how to minimize his impact playing over the top coverage. With Barkley, it becomes a pick your poison kind of deal. Put a safety over the top and your RB is facing 7 man fronts. Defense need to chose which of these superior athletes are they going to try to shut down, and in turn, one of them is going to face favorable situation.


Personally, I am not bowled over by this class of QBs. I am not opposed to taking a QB , as long as the Giants see something special.

If as you say none of the QBs make the grade, clearly the greatest value obtained from the #2 pick will be trading down with to a team that wants one of them.

That said, whether its at 2 or after a trade down, the choice is not an easy one. Chubb may not even fit the scheme the Giants are planning on defense. Its hard to envision picking either a RB or a Guard that high. Its not an easy position to be in. Thus the polarizing nature of this whole discussion. There doesn't seem to be any good choices for the Giants.
RE: Andrew Luck and Calvin Johnson  
QB Snacks : 4/16/2018 4:29 pm : link
In comment 13916295 JohnB said:
Quote:
those are two top level NFL players. If they weren't stuck on bad teams, they would have gotten SB rings, no doubt. They might be in the HoF despite the shitty organizations they got stuck with. But there is NO doubt about their talent and abilities.

Why bring them up? Sy56 said that they are the only two players he rated higher than Barkley, pre-draft. Barkley is in some fine company. If you get the chance to draft someone of that talent level, with no red flags and is a solid citizen, you take him.

Give me Barkley.


SY 56 isnt a bible. I read through some of his stuff from last year and he couldnt have been more wrong about the team.

He had one particular blurb about Perkins being the best RB since Tiki Barber.

I respect and enjoy his work but he's not an argument swayer
I'm undecided on selecting him at 2  
Rocky369 : 4/16/2018 4:30 pm : link
would love to have an extra weapon, but the line is still suspect. I would not be in love with the idea of the amount of dollars NYG would have to spend at RB. At the same time, couldn't selecting 1 RB, improve the output of the 5 players blocking for him? Not to mention suggested improvement from QB, to include play action plays or as a receiver himself?
Sy is hardly the only scout who has Barkley rated as the best  
Mike from Ohio : 4/16/2018 4:33 pm : link
player in the draft. You only have to go down a few links to see Gil Brandt does also. Many scouts do.

I would rather see the Giants grab a QB at #2. But if they don't see a franchise QB in the group that is there, take the best talent in the draft which I think is Barkley.
RE: RE: I'd take..  
.McL. : 4/16/2018 4:37 pm : link
In comment 13916326 QB Snacks said:
Quote:
In comment 13916278 FatMan in Charlotte said:


Quote:


a hard pass on Barkley.

He could contribute over 2000 yards and score a third of our points, but that would be a by product of the OL.

And if we didn't win the SB, it would just be a massive reason to overpay for production that is all due to the OL.....



Are you saying it doesnt matter who your RB is? I'm not sure I want barkley either but you're basically saying any production from a RB is due to the OL?

fatman is being his usual obnoxious and sarcastic self. He is mocking my argument against Barkley.

In a nutshell, my argument against Barkley or any other RB is that they simply are not worth high draft picks or high salaries/cap hits. Period.

For a RB to be successful no matter how good they are, the OL has to reach a critical level of competency. Once the OL has reached that level of competency, you can get the vast majority of production that a "star" RB gives you paying far fewer resources. Since its a passing league, you increase your probability of winning by focusing on improving the pass, and not incremental returns on the run.

They chose to use Gurley as an argument against that case. However if there was ever player that supports the argument it is Gurley. In 2016 when the Rams line was suspect Gurley did nothing to help the Rams. Last year the Rams had one of the best OLs in football. Rams Rbs gained a whopping 1.97 yards before contact. Its pretty clear to me at least that Gurley's impact has a lot more to do with the improvement of the Rams line than with Gurley himself.

But this is an argument that angers certain people and goes over their heads.
RE: I'm all in on Barkley  
GFAN52 : 4/16/2018 4:37 pm : link
In comment 13916276 SHO'NUFF said:
Quote:
just for the merchandise sales alone!


Without a doubt.

RE: RE: RE: I'd take..  
GFAN52 : 4/16/2018 4:40 pm : link
In comment 13916346 .McL. said:
Quote:
In comment 13916326 QB Snacks said:


Quote:


In comment 13916278 FatMan in Charlotte said:


Quote:


a hard pass on Barkley.

He could contribute over 2000 yards and score a third of our points, but that would be a by product of the OL.

And if we didn't win the SB, it would just be a massive reason to overpay for production that is all due to the OL.....



Are you saying it doesnt matter who your RB is? I'm not sure I want barkley either but you're basically saying any production from a RB is due to the OL?


fatman is being his usual obnoxious and sarcastic self. He is mocking my argument against Barkley.

In a nutshell, my argument against Barkley or any other RB is that they simply are not worth high draft picks or high salaries/cap hits. Period.

For a RB to be successful no matter how good they are, the OL has to reach a critical level of competency. Once the OL has reached that level of competency, you can get the vast majority of production that a "star" RB gives you paying far fewer resources. Since its a passing league, you increase your probability of winning by focusing on improving the pass, and not incremental returns on the run.

They chose to use Gurley as an argument against that case. However if there was ever player that supports the argument it is Gurley. In 2016 when the Rams line was suspect Gurley did nothing to help the Rams. Last year the Rams had one of the best OLs in football. Rams Rbs gained a whopping 1.97 yards before contact. Its pretty clear to me at least that Gurley's impact has a lot more to do with the improvement of the Rams line than with Gurley himself.

But this is an argument that angers certain people and goes over their heads.


For sake of argument though, if the Giants improved the OL this year and next year, they may never have a chance to draft a dynamic runner like Barkley in a year or two from now.
If they draft Barkley. Great.  
Brown Recluse : 4/16/2018 4:40 pm : link
If they draft Darnold. Great.

I'll even learn to love the Chubb pick.

I get the logic behind either decision and will enjoy watching them play.
RE: RE: RE: I'd take..  
QB Snacks : 4/16/2018 4:42 pm : link
In comment 13916346 .McL. said:
Quote:
In comment 13916326 QB Snacks said:


Quote:


In comment 13916278 FatMan in Charlotte said:


Quote:


a hard pass on Barkley.

He could contribute over 2000 yards and score a third of our points, but that would be a by product of the OL.

And if we didn't win the SB, it would just be a massive reason to overpay for production that is all due to the OL.....



Are you saying it doesnt matter who your RB is? I'm not sure I want barkley either but you're basically saying any production from a RB is due to the OL?


fatman is being his usual obnoxious and sarcastic self. He is mocking my argument against Barkley.

In a nutshell, my argument against Barkley or any other RB is that they simply are not worth high draft picks or high salaries/cap hits. Period.

For a RB to be successful no matter how good they are, the OL has to reach a critical level of competency. Once the OL has reached that level of competency, you can get the vast majority of production that a "star" RB gives you paying far fewer resources. Since its a passing league, you increase your probability of winning by focusing on improving the pass, and not incremental returns on the run.

They chose to use Gurley as an argument against that case. However if there was ever player that supports the argument it is Gurley. In 2016 when the Rams line was suspect Gurley did nothing to help the Rams. Last year the Rams had one of the best OLs in football. Rams Rbs gained a whopping 1.97 yards before contact. Its pretty clear to me at least that Gurley's impact has a lot more to do with the improvement of the Rams line than with Gurley himself.

But this is an argument that angers certain people and goes over their heads.


Gotcha. Apologies to fatman. Didnt pick up on your sarcasm.

You make some good points. That being said a RB can certainly make your offensive line better. We saw it with Tiki Barber. I'm not sure I want barkley though.
ďIt goes over their headsĒ  
UConn4523 : 4/16/2018 4:47 pm : link
fuck off. Your stance is fine but save the sanctimonious bullshit, the smartest guy in the room but is old.
RE: Did Barkley touch you inappropriately  
Brown Recluse : 4/16/2018 4:48 pm : link
In comment 13916275 Mike from Ohio said:
Quote:
or in some other way hurt you? The time and effort you spend arguing against drafting him - to people who are not making that decision - is a little...weird.


This. I mean, how many threads do you need to start about the same thing? This isn't an election. You don't get any points for swaying voters. We know how you feel and at this point I doubt anyone is changing their mind.

What you fail to realize is that this isn't an either/or situation. There is more than one way the Giants can go, and they are all reasonable.
RE: RE: There is none in my opinion  
the mike : 4/16/2018 5:00 pm : link
In comment 13916312 .McL. said:
Quote:
In comment 13916301 Rflairr said:


Quote:


Especially at 2. We better get a QB if picking 2.



I actually agree with you. I am opposed to Barkley, but when I make the case against him, the Barkley lovers pounce on me and say I am unwilling to see any other POV.

All they offer is that he is "different". That they want "more weapons" to open up the defense, and yada yada yada. None of them make anything more of their position than, "Man have you seen how great Barkley is? He would be great to have on our team!". In a world where we have infinite resources, yes I agree. But every player you have comes at a cost. You have to balance those costs effectively to produce a winning product. The Barkley lovers absolutely refuse to address this point. It is they who are completely incapable of seeing any other POV.

I put this out there, just to show that I do in fact entertain other POV.


It is not other BBI posters - every professional scouting and media organization in the sport has Barkley head and shoulders above anyone else... The reason you are getting attacked here is that you keep thinking that if you can swat away some pesky BBI posters that you have won your argument. The experts vehemently disagree with your point of view and they should be your target, not us.

But at the risk of spitting into the wind, I will continue the good fight. Even if you pick the best WR/RB combination in the NFL your case doesn't work - Brown and Bell. And as much as I believe that Antonio Brown may be the best wide receiver I have ever seen, Leveon Bell may be the more valuable player to that team right now at about half of Brown's cost!!! Why? Because he participates equally in the offense as a great runner and a great pass receiver... and forces defenses to pay constant attention to him which helps Brown, Roethlisberger, Shuster-Smith etc. Your saying that a Wayne Gallman/Antonio Brown combination would be interchangeable and equally successful as Bell/Brown simply undermines your entire credibility.

And oh by the way, if they could ever live up to their hype and potential, Barkley and Beckum could be even better than Bell and Brown...
I Want Emit Smith  
EB222 : 4/16/2018 5:14 pm : link
Having watched him carve up the Giants in the fourth quarter of
every Cowboys v. Giants game growing up. The Georgia backs
are closer in type and much cheaper.

Barkley is the best decathlete I've ever seen in a football uniform.
But, the NFL isn't the Olympics.

Pass.
RE: RE: RE: There is none in my opinion  
.McL. : 4/16/2018 5:18 pm : link
In comment 13916369 the mike said:
Quote:
In comment 13916312 .McL. said:


Quote:


In comment 13916301 Rflairr said:


Quote:


Especially at 2. We better get a QB if picking 2.



I actually agree with you. I am opposed to Barkley, but when I make the case against him, the Barkley lovers pounce on me and say I am unwilling to see any other POV.

All they offer is that he is "different". That they want "more weapons" to open up the defense, and yada yada yada. None of them make anything more of their position than, "Man have you seen how great Barkley is? He would be great to have on our team!". In a world where we have infinite resources, yes I agree. But every player you have comes at a cost. You have to balance those costs effectively to produce a winning product. The Barkley lovers absolutely refuse to address this point. It is they who are completely incapable of seeing any other POV.

I put this out there, just to show that I do in fact entertain other POV.



It is not other BBI posters - every professional scouting and media organization in the sport has Barkley head and shoulders above anyone else... The reason you are getting attacked here is that you keep thinking that if you can swat away some pesky BBI posters that you have won your argument. The experts vehemently disagree with your point of view and they should be your target, not us.

But at the risk of spitting into the wind, I will continue the good fight. Even if you pick the best WR/RB combination in the NFL your case doesn't work - Brown and Bell. And as much as I believe that Antonio Brown may be the best wide receiver I have ever seen, Leveon Bell may be the more valuable player to that team right now at about half of Brown's cost!!! Why? Because he participates equally in the offense as a great runner and a great pass receiver... and forces defenses to pay constant attention to him which helps Brown, Roethlisberger, Shuster-Smith etc. Your saying that a Wayne Gallman/Antonio Brown combination would be interchangeable and equally successful as Bell/Brown simply undermines your entire credibility.

And oh by the way, if they could ever live up to their hype and potential, Barkley and Beckum could be even better than Bell and Brown...


The Giants already have 3 pretty darn good weapons on offense, Beckham, Shepard and Engram. Adding another weapon will bring only incremental value. However, building up the offensive line will be transformational. Going back to the Rams is the perfect example of this, they replaced some linemen went from crappy line play to one of the best, 1.13 points per drive to 2.33.

Plugging holes at CB, Edge Rusher, and to a lesser extent FS and LB can be equally transformational to the defense.

The argument that nobody seems to want to address is that building a football team is a zero sum game. You don't have infinite resources. If you put resources into more skill position weapons, then you leave holes elsewhere. More skill position players will have incremental impact, spending resources on other areas of the team can be transformational.

Barkley may represent good value if the Giants were a team that was set in other areas but had huge holes in skill position players. That is not the case.
You keep telling us we fail to address an argument  
UConn4523 : 4/16/2018 5:23 pm : link
than no one is even refuting. At this point you are creating your own arguments and projecting it on the rest of us.

We simply disagree with you. Is that allowed?
RE: RE: RE: There is none in my opinion  
.McL. : 4/16/2018 5:24 pm : link
In comment 13916369 the mike said:
Quote:
In comment 13916312 .McL. said:


Quote:


In comment 13916301 Rflairr said:


Quote:


Especially at 2. We better get a QB if picking 2.



I actually agree with you. I am opposed to Barkley, but when I make the case against him, the Barkley lovers pounce on me and say I am unwilling to see any other POV.

All they offer is that he is "different". That they want "more weapons" to open up the defense, and yada yada yada. None of them make anything more of their position than, "Man have you seen how great Barkley is? He would be great to have on our team!". In a world where we have infinite resources, yes I agree. But every player you have comes at a cost. You have to balance those costs effectively to produce a winning product. The Barkley lovers absolutely refuse to address this point. It is they who are completely incapable of seeing any other POV.

I put this out there, just to show that I do in fact entertain other POV.



It is not other BBI posters - every professional scouting and media organization in the sport has Barkley head and shoulders above anyone else... The reason you are getting attacked here is that you keep thinking that if you can swat away some pesky BBI posters that you have won your argument. The experts vehemently disagree with your point of view and they should be your target, not us.

But at the risk of spitting into the wind, I will continue the good fight. Even if you pick the best WR/RB combination in the NFL your case doesn't work - Brown and Bell. And as much as I believe that Antonio Brown may be the best wide receiver I have ever seen, Leveon Bell may be the more valuable player to that team right now at about half of Brown's cost!!! Why? Because he participates equally in the offense as a great runner and a great pass receiver... and forces defenses to pay constant attention to him which helps Brown, Roethlisberger, Shuster-Smith etc. Your saying that a Wayne Gallman/Antonio Brown combination would be interchangeable and equally successful as Bell/Brown simply undermines your entire credibility.

And oh by the way, if they could ever live up to their hype and potential, Barkley and Beckum could be even better than Bell and Brown...


You seem to think I am arguing against Barkley the prospect. I'm not... I have never said that Barkley is not a good prospect. I do have some issues with his style of running, but the guy is electric. I am willing to grant what the experts are saying that he is a fantastic prospect. Being a fantastic prospect does not make him a good pick. Not at RB.

The Positional Value doesn't warrant it, and the makeup of the Giants doesn't warrant it.
RE: You keep telling us we fail to address an argument  
Mike from Ohio : 4/16/2018 5:28 pm : link
In comment 13916402 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
than no one is even refuting. At this point you are creating your own arguments and projecting it on the rest of us.

We simply disagree with you. Is that allowed?


You are trying to argue religion with a zealot. It can't be done. He isn't looking for a discussion and he doesn't understand differences of opinion. He believes he has the only right answer and he is looking for validation for some reason.
This is where you dropped the mike....  
the mike : 4/16/2018 5:47 pm : link
The Giants already have 3 pretty darn good weapons on offense, Beckham, Shepard and Engram. Adding another weapon will bring only incremental value

I will morph now into the BBI ether....
In my view, the trend at RB  
Giantfan in skinland : 4/16/2018 5:58 pm : link
isn't about evolving back towards running the ball and it doesn't make WRs less valuable. The trend is in line with the general trend in the NFL. Teams want to throw the ball.

At running back, this means finding guys that can be functional in the running game and assets in the passing game. Matt Forte, Leveon Bell, Alvin Kamara, Christian McCaffrey, the Patriots backs, the Eagles backs, Todd Gurley, Kareem Hunt. That's where teams are heading more and more. Teams want guys that can create mismatches in the passing game against linebackers and run routes like a WR. IMO, that's why you're taking Barkley high...because of what he can do for your passing offense, not because the Giants want to become a ground and pound offense to take the pressure off the OL. That's also not really who Barkley is.

I ultimately think the argument against him is the depth at the position. That said, I don't think you've really captured the real essence of what a team might be thinking in taking him high.
You take Barkley because he is the best player in the draft  
Peter from NH (formerly CT) : 4/16/2018 6:04 pm : link
and if you are the Giants and you don't agree with that, you take someone else.

But great job setting up a straw man argument. It is tedious.
I think of trying to select a high draft pick in this manner.  
DonnieD89 : 4/16/2018 6:29 pm : link
After a good portion of us experienced the entire career of Lawrence Taylor, I reflect back on how he changed the opposing offensesí game plan. A single football player flipped to a team that was a perrenial loser for an entire decade in a perrenial I remember 1981 with the Giants going to the playoffs for the first time in over that decade. That certain player was the main reason for the successful year. Giants build further around LT, which lead to 2 Super Bowls. LT made everyone better. That is what a transcendent player is. Now, I am not saying that Saquon Barkley is definitely going to be a transcendent player; however, we can very much project him to be that type of player. He could be that player to make the Giants offense that much better. Thatís the argument for taking him at #2. Itís not because he is a running back. It is because he can change how opposing defensive coordinators plan for the Giants offense.
Letís do a thought experiment  
markky : 4/16/2018 6:37 pm : link
The career of an all pro RB is shorter than an all pro QB, G or DE.
I donít know how much shorter off top of my head, but letís say 5 years vs 12

If the RB career was 1 year would you take him? No

2 years? No

3? No

Whereís the line? 5? 6?

Thatís why you take a QB or Chubb. This doesnít even consider the QB touching the ball on every play, calling every protection, etc.

My heart says Barkley. My head knows better.
RE: I Want Emit Smith  
Stan in LA : 4/16/2018 6:40 pm : link
In comment 13916392 EB222 said:
Quote:
Having watched him carve up the Giants in the fourth quarter of
every Cowboys v. Giants game growing up. The Georgia backs
are closer in type and much cheaper.

Barkley is the best decathlete I've ever seen in a football uniform.
But, the NFL isn't the Olympics.

Pass.


THIS^^^.
The arguement for Barkley to me is one of  
Motley Two : 4/16/2018 6:46 pm : link
of the easiest you get from a prospect this time of year. The eyeball test. It's impossible to watch his highlight clips and not want the guy suiting up for your team. There's always a chance your pick doesn't work out, but when you look at his best plays, what grade would you give him on those plays? He has a ton of A+ plays

RE: Letís do a thought experiment  
chopperhatch : 4/16/2018 6:54 pm : link
In comment 13916471 markky said:
Quote:
The career of an all pro RB is shorter than an all pro QB, G or DE.
I donít know how much shorter off top of my head, but letís say 5 years vs 12

If the RB career was 1 year would you take him? No

2 years? No

3? No

Whereís the line? 5? 6?

Thatís why you take a QB or Chubb. This doesnít even consider the QB touching the ball on every play, calling every protection, etc.

My heart says Barkley. My head knows better.


Very good post
RE: In my view, the trend at RB  
Joe in CT : 4/16/2018 7:09 pm : link
In comment 13916438 Giantfan in skinland said:
Quote:
isn't about evolving back towards running the ball and it doesn't make WRs less valuable. The trend is in line with the general trend in the NFL. Teams want to throw the ball.

At running back, this means finding guys that can be functional in the running game and assets in the passing game. Matt Forte, Leveon Bell, Alvin Kamara, Christian McCaffrey, the Patriots backs, the Eagles backs, Todd Gurley, Kareem Hunt. That's where teams are heading more and more. Teams want guys that can create mismatches in the passing game against linebackers and run routes like a WR. IMO, that's why you're taking Barkley high...because of what he can do for your passing offense, not because the Giants want to become a ground and pound offense to take the pressure off the OL. That's also not really who Barkley is.

I ultimately think the argument against him is the depth at the position. That said, I don't think you've really captured the real essence of what a team might be thinking in taking him high.


To further this point on why you choose a Barkley is because many teams are also looking for BALANCE. Not just ground and pound, not just a mid/deep passing game but having both creates more mismatches and hence a better overall OFF unit.

Yes, we all know the OL needs to be addressed and it's a WIP, but already we see signs that it should be better than the cast of characters we ran out there in 2017.
I am told the only way Barkley isn't wearing Blue on draft day...  
Slade : 4/16/2018 7:37 pm : link
is if Cleveland takes him @ 1.
RE: I am told the only way Barkley isn't wearing Blue on draft day...  
GFAN52 : 4/16/2018 7:42 pm : link
In comment 13916579 Slade said:
Quote:
is if Cleveland takes him @ 1.


RE: I am told the only way Barkley isn't wearing Blue on draft day...  
Strahan91 : 4/16/2018 7:44 pm : link
In comment 13916579 Slade said:
Quote:
is if Cleveland takes him @ 1.


welp... now we know Barkley won't be a Giants. I guess it's QB, Chubb or trade down.
I want Vita Vea our short yardage RB.  
CT Charlie : 4/16/2018 7:47 pm : link
Nobody'll bring him down on 3rd and 2.
RE: I am told the only way Barkley isn't wearing Blue on draft day...  
Rjanyg : 4/16/2018 9:41 pm : link
In comment 13916579 Slade said:
Quote:
is if Cleveland takes him @ 1.


I'd be fine with this. Can hit the home run, catch, block, return kicks.
I would be happy with Barkley  
Knee of Theismann : 4/17/2018 12:13 am : link
As long as we go OL both in round 2 and with one of our round 3 picks. I think in this draft class we can get a day 1 starter at #34 and in the 3rd round can get a guy who can at least compete for a starting job in his first year.

I believe Eli deserves one more shot at a title in the last 2 years of his contract. He hasnít had an offensive line nor a real running game in about 5 years. I think 2 super bowl MVPs justifies giving him the benefit of the doubt and allowing him to get one more shot at making a run before we go into full rebuild mode. Call me a homer but I really believe with a healthy receiving corps, Engram with one more year of experience, a fully improved o-line, one more dynamic threat like Barkley, and a defense reinvigorated by a new scheme (I love Bettcher btw), this team has a shot at the playoffs, and with Eli Manning at the helm I will always believe we have a shot at winning it if we just get in the tournament.

If DG and PS like one of the QBs A LOT, by all means take him, you donít get an opportunity to draft a franchise QB every year. But if they donít, I am extremely excited to see Saquon Barkley in blue and watching Eli go for one last Lombardi trophy before he rides off into the sunset. Something about the way he plays, itís when you think all is lost that he steps up and proves everyone wrong, and this year is the perfect situation for that. Life is short anyway, why not go for broke and bet it all on a guy whoís taken you to The promised land twice before???
happy with chubb or barkley  
msh : 4/17/2018 8:27 am : link
i think barkley gives them the biggest boost thats why i want him it will allow eli not to carry the team single handed and make his sucession far easier once the time comes he is perfect for shurmur's playaction/screen system and he can run WR routes as well allowing a huge amount of flexibility from a base offence personnel that makes it extremely hard for defences to scheme against

it will dictate the need for teams to pull defenders out of deep coverage which will open things up for the WR's and engram to make plays as well,fix the well documented T.O.P deficit and extend plays that will allow the defence to be fresher making them better on defence too

this draft is deep at RB with good ones available upto the 3rd and possibly 4th round so its reasonable to argue that you take chubb who is the best DE prospect in the draft and take a RB,OL and CB with the next 3 picks too both are valid choices the next tier of RB's are not as good at blocking and receiving as barkley which is why i want barkley over the others this team needs a fast start to stay competitive in the division

as long as they have a clear plan of who they pick and why they are picking them where they do,i will be happy i can even live with taking darnold if cleveland take allen he is the only QB i would take of those 4 and according to reports from several sources there is only 1 QB in this draft the giants would be willing to take at 2 my guess is its darnold

if cleveland messes up and takes allen then they give DG a tougher choice he already has a hard one selecting between barkley/chubb or a move down they could even move down (if not too far) and still land one of those 2 guys thou if they move past 4 barkley is gone to cleveland thou and denver could take chubb at 5 so that is a risk the reward would need to be good enough to take
Back to the Corner