Your Worst And Best 1st Round Giants Draft Scenarios

Worst: Giants trade out of top for a few extra mid roud picks

Best: Sam Darnold

Worst case scenario: Josh Allen.
Best case scenario: Pretty much anything else.

What I think will happen:

1. Saquon Barkley.
2. Tyrell Crosby.

Best = Rosen
Worst = No trade down and pick a player other than QB at 2

worst case is a tie between allen and barkley

best case is taking rosen

another reason to avoid using a top resource like the #2 pick on a rb

Best: Rosen

Worst: Chubb

Honorable Mention Worst: Mayfield

Worst - Trade back past 5 and take Davenport who winds up a bust, whiff on the extra picks you got in the trade

Best - Cleveland decides they really want Barkley and Darnold, gives us a slew up picks to move up from 4 to 2. We select Chubb who turns into the next LT. Davis Webb becomes the second coming of Tom Brady and the whole QB debate is put to rest.

Most likely - Barkley at 2 and best available OL in the second. Rest of the draft is DBs and pass rushers.

A deep 'Reach' with the #2 pick.
The best:
Multiple trades in round 1 that cost us none of our other picks, but land us any 2 of: our future QB, Barkley, Chubb, Nelson, or Ward for the next 5 years+. How, I have no clue!

Best: Moving down a couple of spots and still getting the QB they want. (Darnold)

Worst: Staying put (or worse yet moving up to #1) and drafting anything other than QB.

Best: they do believe one of these QBs is a franchise player.

I agree with Britt's thread last night: they're most likely going to get a helluva player here. As a franchise the best case scenario going forward is that it's a QB. But I won't be mad if it's Barkley or Chubb. Ofcourse there's always the chance a guy doesn't pan out. And that risk is probably higher for one of the QBs. But they hit right on a QB and we transition from one franchise QB to another, which is a rare, rare thing. If they hit right on one of the other guys you're talking a game changing back or the kind of DE a defense can hang its hat on. It might be optimistic but I really dont think think they whiff on this pick. I'm far from a homer, but I really think the odds say we land a game changer next Thursday.

the draft actually happens on time and these endless discussions end

worst - draft gets delayed by a power outage and we have to do this for another few hours

In comment 13922452 jintz4life said:

Quote:

worst case is a tie between allen and barkley best case is taking rosen another reason to avoid using a top resource like the #2 pick on a rb

# IR'd players by position:
2017
OLB - 52
WR - 69
CB - 61
RB - 46

2016
WR - 55
CB - 55
DE - 41
RB - 41

2015
WR - 58
CB - 54
RB - 40
DT - 39

Please make it stop

at the top of the draft, and they are just as injured if not more, than RB's.

Guess whatever fits your narrative passes for the truth though.

Worst:

Anyone outside of Barkley, Rosen or Darnold at #2 (big value drop after them)

Tolerable:

-Miss out on Rosen,Darnold,Barkley but get a ton of picks by a moderate trade-down

Better:

Barkley at #2 out-right

Best:

-Rosen or Darnold at #2
-Barkley after a slight trade down (getting more picks in the process).

In comment 13922506 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

In comment 13922452 jintz4life said: Quote: worst case is a tie between allen and barkley best case is taking rosen another reason to avoid using a top resource like the #2 pick on a rb # IR'd players by position: 2017 OLB - 52 WR - 69 CB - 61 RB - 46 2016 WR - 55 CB - 55 DE - 41 RB - 41 2015 WR - 58 CB - 54 RB - 40 DT - 39 Please make it stop

You realize they're are multiple players that play WR, CB and OLB on the field at a time, thus meaning there are more players at those positions in the league.

You're ignoring percentages for total numbers to fit your narrative.

Worst: Nelson/Chubb at 2 (despite them both being excellent prospects), I just don't think we have that luxury

Mid:

1 trade down w an attractive package coming back (but for this, I'd really like to hear/know that they have a conviction about Webb)

2 Barkley

Best: they get a QB they feel great about

In comment 13922518 ajr2456 said:

Quote:

In comment 13922506 Brown Recluse said: Quote: In comment 13922452 jintz4life said: Quote: worst case is a tie between allen and barkley best case is taking rosen another reason to avoid using a top resource like the #2 pick on a rb # IR'd players by position: 2017 OLB - 52 WR - 69 CB - 61 RB - 46 2016 WR - 55 CB - 55 DE - 41 RB - 41 2015 WR - 58 CB - 54 RB - 40 DT - 39 Please make it stop You realize they're are multiple players that play WR, CB and OLB on the field at a time, thus meaning there are more players at those positions in the league. You're ignoring percentages for total numbers to fit your narrative.

Most teams utilize 2-3 RBs as well.

Drafting Rosen at #2 or #5 or at all. Do not want Rosen.


Best:

Trade down with Buffalo and get:

12, 22, 53, 56, 96 a #1 next year and Lesean McCoy

Draft two OLinemen within first 4 picks. Pick at 12- Vita Vea and Mike McGlinchy at 22. 34- Grab Billy Price C/G..

In comment 13922522 Kevin in Annapolis said:

Quote:

In comment 13922518 ajr2456 said: Quote: In comment 13922506 Brown Recluse said: Quote: In comment 13922452 jintz4life said: Quote: worst case is a tie between allen and barkley best case is taking rosen another reason to avoid using a top resource like the #2 pick on a rb # IR'd players by position: 2017 OLB - 52 WR - 69 CB - 61 RB - 46 2016 WR - 55 CB - 55 DE - 41 RB - 41 2015 WR - 58 CB - 54 RB - 40 DT - 39 Please make it stop You realize they're are multiple players that play WR, CB and OLB on the field at a time, thus meaning there are more players at those positions in the league. You're ignoring percentages for total numbers to fit your narrative. Most teams utilize 2-3 RBs as well.

Teams carry 6 CBs, 6 WRs, and probably 4-6 OLBS.

The percentages were posted above, not sure why we would look at total numbers when the percentages are more telling.

Best: Taking Rosen.

Firstly, that bar graph is from almost 10 years ago. Second, there's a 3% difference between the top 4 (assuming the numbers on the pretty graph are even accurate). Thats nothing.

Talk about over-analyzation. You cannot predict injuries anymore than you can predict anything else. Do you really believe teams give two shits about how "injury prone" a position is when selecting a player?

They look at the individual player, not the position. At least not to the ridiculous extend people here do.

Point remains.

People think posting things like this makes them look so smart and validates their argument, but its the complete opposite.

In comment 13922536 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

Firstly, that bar graph is from almost 10 years ago. Second, there's a 3% difference between the top 4 (assuming the numbers on the pretty graph are even accurate). Thats nothing. Talk about over-analyzation. You cannot predict injuries anymore than you can predict anything else. Do you really believe teams give two shits about how "injury prone" a position is when selecting a player? They look at the individual player, not the position. At least not to the ridiculous extend people here do.

The percentage chart runs form 2007-2015. It's called a large sample size. Saying "more players get injured at these positions" is irrelevant because there are more players at those positions.

The reason nobody bitches about WR, CB, and DL going high is because

1) they don't have the shortest career length of any position
2) they aren't valued slightly above kickers when it comes to top 10 average salary
3) its more important to be good at passing the football and stopping the pass than it is to be good at running the football.

And the percentage difference is negligible. Its bullshit.
Injuries happen. Players get hurt. You can't forecast things like that. Teams don't care. They care more about the player than the position. And when you have a PLAYER as gifted as Barkley, dismissing him entirely simply because he plays RB is ridiculous.

In comment 13922560 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

And the percentage difference is negligible. Its bullshit. Injuries happen. Players get hurt. You can't forecast things like that. Teams don't care. They care more about the player than the position. And when you have a PLAYER as gifted as Barkley, dismissing him entirely simply because he plays RB is ridiculous.

If teams didn't care about the life span and injury rate of runningbacks, then why are they valued basically the same as kickers when it comes to contracts?

In comment 13922565 ajr2456 said:

Quote:

In comment 13922560 Brown Recluse said: Quote: And the percentage difference is negligible. Its bullshit. Injuries happen. Players get hurt. You can't forecast things like that. Teams don't care. They care more about the player than the position. And when you have a PLAYER as gifted as Barkley, dismissing him entirely simply because he plays RB is ridiculous. If teams didn't care about the life span and injury rate of runningbacks, then why are they valued basically the same as kickers when it comes to contracts?

If teams care about the life span and injury rate of runningbacks, why are they still drafting them in the top 10?

In comment 13922566 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

In comment 13922565 ajr2456 said: Quote: In comment 13922560 Brown Recluse said: Quote: And the percentage difference is negligible. Its bullshit. Injuries happen. Players get hurt. You can't forecast things like that. Teams don't care. They care more about the player than the position. And when you have a PLAYER as gifted as Barkley, dismissing him entirely simply because he plays RB is ridiculous. If teams didn't care about the life span and injury rate of runningbacks, then why are they valued basically the same as kickers when it comes to contracts? If teams care about the life span and injury rate of runningbacks, why are they still drafting them in the top 10?

Who said those teams were making the right move?

There's been 22 first round RB's the past decade compared to:

66 DB
42 WR
80 DL

When going to the top 10:

8 RB
23 DL
15 WR
12 DB

The salaries:

WR: $12.9M
IDL: $14.1M
EDGE: $16M
CB: $13.7M
RB: $7.1M

Which positions are valued more?

Link - ( New Window )

Worst would be either taking Nelson at 2 or the QB Allen.

The best would be trading down and still get either Rosen or Mayfield.

In comment 13922579 ajr2456 said:

Quote:

In comment 13922566 Brown Recluse said: Quote: In comment 13922565 ajr2456 said: Quote: In comment 13922560 Brown Recluse said: Quote: And the percentage difference is negligible. Its bullshit. Injuries happen. Players get hurt. You can't forecast things like that. Teams don't care. They care more about the player than the position. And when you have a PLAYER as gifted as Barkley, dismissing him entirely simply because he plays RB is ridiculous. If teams didn't care about the life span and injury rate of runningbacks, then why are they valued basically the same as kickers when it comes to contracts? If teams care about the life span and injury rate of runningbacks, why are they still drafting them in the top 10? Who said those teams were making the right move? There's been 22 first round RB's the past decade compared to: 66 DB 42 WR 80 DL When going to the top 10: 8 RB 23 DL 15 WR 12 DB The salaries: WR: $12.9M IDL: $14.1M EDGE: $16M CB: $13.7M RB: $7.1M Which positions are valued more?

Well, like you said before - teams carry more OL, WR's and DL than RB's...so I guess that could have an impact on why those other positions are drafted highly, more often.

Value is dependent on the team making the pick.

Here's a great idea. Why don't you have a meeting with Dave Gettleman, Jerry Jones, David Caldwell, and Les Snead...and tell them why they are wrong and you are correct. Show them all of your pretty little graphs and charts and see what they say.

I'd love to be a fly on that wall.

Worst: Barkley - I think using the #2 on a RB for a team that won't really compete for another 2 years or so, with only maybe 3-4 years left of his prime, is a waste.

Best: Darnold

In comment 13922595 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

In comment 13922579 ajr2456 said: Who said those teams were making the right move? There's been 22 first round RB's the past decade compared to: 66 DB 42 WR 80 DL When going to the top 10: 8 RB 23 DL 15 WR 12 DB The salaries: WR: $12.9M IDL: $14.1M EDGE: $16M CB: $13.7M RB: $7.1M Which positions are valued more? Well, like you said before - teams carry more OL, WR's and DL than RB's...so I guess that could have an impact on why those other positions are drafted highly, more often. Value is dependent on the team making the pick. Here's a great idea. Why don't you have a meeting with Dave Gettleman, Jerry Jones, David Caldwell, and Les Snead...and tell them why they are wrong and you are correct. Show them all of your pretty little graphs and charts and see what they say. I'd love to be a fly on that wall.

Oh so now that point matters. You're such a tool.

...Giants find Eli's replacement: Josh Rosen with the #2 selection.

Worst scenario: Giants stay put at #2 and fail to draft a QB.

All of your numbers and pretty colorful graphs don't hold up because in the real world, NFL teams (you know, the real professionals who do this for a living?) are still drafting RB's high when the value presents itself and the player is projected to warrant it.

Let me know when you have that meeting. Can't wait to hear how you've changed their minds.

injury percentages.

The Giants carried 5 RBs last year, I think. Many other teams also carried a multitude of backs. If one gets hurt it is not a season killing decision to IR them and free up a roster spot. So that number get skewed due to the number of backs, plus the ability of most clubs to be able to IR the #3 back without any real penalty.

Now at QB, there are 32 starters, 32 clipboard holders and maybe another 32 paycheck collectors. Teams will be very hesitant to IR the starter unless it is a serious injury. The chance of injury for 2/3s of those players is pretty close to 0.

Would you wait 4 weeks for Eli to heal or IR him? It's simple you'd wait. If Perkins has a 4 week injury, IR'ing him is not as big a deal. As such the injury percentages will show how RBs are IR'd more, and not take into account that there are a hell of a lot more players actually playing the game at RB. While at QB you are looking at a ton of players who just hang out with the team.

Best: Rosen
Worst: Trade back into teens

In comment 13922610 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

All of your numbers and pretty colorful graphs don't hold up because in the real world, NFL teams (you know, the real professionals who do this for a living?) are still drafting RB's high when the value presents itself and the player is projected to warrant it. Let me know when you have that meeting. Can't wait to hear how you've changed their minds.

First off they aren't my charts. I did not post them. I just simply called you out for dropping total numbers that aren't relevant because percentages matter more than total numbers because there aren't the same number of players at each of those positions on a team.

ah the appeal to authority about guys who have been doing this for a living

thats always a real winning argument
Moneyball: Science vs scouts - ( New Window )

The bottom line is this: You're saying RB's don't carry enough value to be drafted this high when, just last year 2 RB's were drafted in the top 8 and the year before another one was drafted at 4.

Clearly, you are wrong.

And as it happens, the RB at the head of this draft class is projected to be better than all of those others.

So like I said, you tell those GM's why they're wrong and you're right. Enlighten them.

In comment 13922628 jintz4life said:

Quote:

ah the appeal to authority about guys who have been doing this for a living thats always a real winning argument Moneyball: Science vs scouts - ( New Window )

So is using Hollywood to prove your point. Next.

In comment 13922640 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

The bottom line is this: You're saying RB's don't carry enough value to be drafted this high when, just last year 2 RB's were drafted in the top 8 and the year before another one was drafted at 4. Clearly, you are wrong. And as it happens, the RB at the head of this draft class is projected to be better than all of those others. So like I said, you tell those GM's why they're wrong and you're right. Enlighten them.

and one of those RB's averaged 3.9 ypc, good for 31st in the league and the other rushed for 400 yards and was a glorified slot receiver.

I don't have a worst. Look all the QBs have marks but all are extremely talented. They are legit prospects and worthy of #2. Barkley is a stud. Nelson is a stud. Chubb is a stud. A trade down would bring huge returns.

Take Allen and he has the most upside in the draft. His arm and play making ability is amazing. He is ultra competitive and his accuracy issues is being blowout of proportion. To me he is Brett Favre.

Take Darnold and this is probably my least liked QB, but he is talented and poised. He is a leader. High character.

Take Rosen and you get a super talented thrower. Best pure passer in the class with a good arm and super accurate.

Take Mayfield and you get another ultra competitor who is accurate with a good arm. Makes plays with his feet and on the run.

Take Barkley and you get a high character hard working stud RB. Great hands to help receiving and TD waiting to happen.

Take Chubb and you get a legit pass rusher who works his butt off on every play. Strong against the run and disruptive.

Take Nelson and you get the best OL in the draft. Great run blocker and very good pass blocker. Your OL is much better at both and he starts day one with pro bowl ability. Could be an all pro year one he is that good.

Trade down and you load up with tons of picks.. .high picks with multiple first, second, and third rounds to really help replace talent on this roster.

Worst case is we do none of these, but that just won't happen. So no matter what I will be happy on Draft day.

You are drowning. Just stop.

Landanian Tomlinson averaged 3.9 yards per carry once.

So did Marshall Faulk. So has pretty much everyone.

Guess those two aren't worth a high draft pick either.

In comment 13922708 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

You are drowning. Just stop. Landanian Tomlinson averaged 3.9 yards per carry once. So did Marshall Faulk. So has pretty much everyone. Guess those two aren't worth a high draft pick either.

Tomlinson was drafted 22nd, and the year he averaged 3.9 he led the league in rushing TDs.

So no stat matters for you? Not injuries, not production. Got it.

In comment 13922512 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

at the top of the draft, and they are just as injured if not more, than RB's. Guess whatever fits your narrative passes for the truth though.

On every play there are 2 if not 3 WR on the field.. same with CB and DL.. but most teams only put out 1 rb on every play.. may be 2 if you count a FB.. so the overall numbers of IR'd players needs to account for this.. and if you do that then you realize that RBs are really hurt much more often..

In comment 13922715 ajr2456 said:

Quote:

In comment 13922708 Brown Recluse said: Quote: You are drowning. Just stop. Landanian Tomlinson averaged 3.9 yards per carry once. So did Marshall Faulk. So has pretty much everyone. Guess those two aren't worth a high draft pick either. Tomlinson was drafted 22nd, and the year he averaged 3.9 he led the league in rushing TDs. So no stat matters for you? Not injuries, not production. Got it.

Tomlinson was drafted 5th not 22nd.

In comment 13922715 ajr2456 said:

Quote:

In comment 13922708 Brown Recluse said: Quote: You are drowning. Just stop. Landanian Tomlinson averaged 3.9 yards per carry once. So did Marshall Faulk. So has pretty much everyone. Guess those two aren't worth a high draft pick either. Tomlinson was drafted 22nd, and the year he averaged 3.9 he led the league in rushing TDs. So no stat matters for you? Not injuries, not production. Got it.

It doesn't matter where Tomlinson was drafted. Thats not the point. But you're so caught up in your "PFF Universe of Numbers" that you can't see anything else.

Enjoy your meeting.

Best we trade down get multiple picks and still get Barkley
Worst we take Mayfield or Chub at #2
Wouldn't want to trade out of the top 5 a trade down would be in our best interests if were not Sold on available QB at #2 but if were drafting that high and staying put it's Barkley .

Best we trade back to 4th for all of Cleveland’s 2nd rd picks (3 of them)

But my worst is drafting Allen @2. Next worst is drafting Allen anywhere else after trading down.

Worst: We draft Darnold, but his thumbs are short and stumpy :^(

Next best: we trade down for a minimum of 2018 2nd & 3rd rounders plus a 2019 1st rounder.

Next next best: we draft Saquon Barkley

Next next next best: we draft Nelson

Next next next next best: we draft Chubb

These are all winning scenarios imo just some are more winning than others

Worst-Allen at #2

Best - Anybody but Rosen

Worst - Rosen

Best: Sam Darnold

Worst: A PK from Devry U

Best - trade down - get additional 1st &2nd 2018 min. 1st & 2nd or 3rd 2019 min.
Worst QB or RB at #2