Dianna Russini
@diannaESPN
Spoke to a Giants source. He said the feeling in this building today is the Giants are looking to trade down. When I asked why? He said we have a ton of needs
NYG contemplating all options.
And we trade out of it to fill 'multiple (short term) needs' ... I will not be happy
That's if you think Sam Darnold is a future franchise QB. If you think he's going to be like Blake Bortles or JaMarcus Russell, then you trade with a team that believes in his talent.
I rather take Darnold, if he is there. If he is not, I rather trade down over taking Barkley, but they to hit on these picks, which is no sure thing given the recent draft history.
Realize, DG is not JR, but it is still a crapshoot.
IDK Eric. If a QB they feel could be the next franchise guy is there, they should just pull the trigger.
If they don't trading back makes more sense than taking a RB no matter how good he is at #2 or a DE that doesn't seem to be a great fit for the new defense we expect.
If they want a good back, Chubb will be a good one and available later.
If they can get 2 picks in the first and come away with both Notre Dame OL and Chubb later, that wil likely do more to solve the long term running game issues that Barkley alone.
That said, I would really enjoy watching that kid run for the Giants. OBJ, Barkley and Engram will provide some very exciting play together.
picking at 2 is a chance to get a game changer - A top QB, or a guy like SB, could very well be game changers.
I don't know how many times I hear this and get so grumpy about it. You have no idea who the Giants have listed as the best of the draft #1 and what the Giants feel is their best way to build and win now.
RE: Ideally, since the Broncos are supposedly interested in trading up,
"their guy" isn't there. So if their guy is Darnold perhaps this has some legs.
If the Jints don't have a "bang on the table" QB on their Board, I would be ecstatic trading with Denver.
I'm not sure I would take Barkley at 5 either. If someone in the top 10 then is desperate for Barkley, I might trade again, but doubt that 'don't get cute' DG would.
Eric: The question is why would the Giants not consider there to be a potential franchise out there when all 31 other teams in the NFL do and you have as many as a half dozen other teams all desperately trying to get up closer to the top 5 to get one of them. Just doesn't make sense that we'd be the one outlier.
RE: Sorry, but staring at 2 potential franchise QBs in the face
@JordanRaanan
41s41 seconds ago
More Jordan Raanan Retweeted Dianna Russini
Similar to what Ive been hearing, which doesnt bode well for the QB crew. #GiantsJordan Raanan added,
Dianna Russini
Verified account
@diannaESPN
Spoke to a Giants source. He said the feeling in this building today is the Giants are looking to trade down. When I asked why? He said we have a ton of needs
NYG contemplating all options.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Reply Retweet Like Direct message
Matt Lombardo
Verified account @MattLombardoNFL
3m3 minutes ago
Pat Shurmur on possibility trading back: You cant role out anything at this point. Well work through everything, but we expect to pick No. 2 #Giants #NFLDraft
IDK Eric. If a QB they feel could be the next franchise guy is there, they should just pull the trigger.
If they don't trading back makes more sense than taking a RB no matter how good he is at #2 or a DE that doesn't seem to be a great fit for the new defense we expect.
If they want a good back, Chubb will be a good one and available later.
If they can get 2 picks in the first and come away with both Notre Dame OL and Chubb later, that wil likely do more to solve the long term running game issues that Barkley alone.
That said, I would really enjoy watching that kid run for the Giants. OBJ, Barkley and Engram will provide some very exciting play together.
Trust me, if there is a franchise QB in this lot, they will RUN up to the podium. They have vetted the QB position far more than BBIers could possibly vet the position. If they pass it will speak volumes, regardless of possible meltdowns on here
Matt Lombardo
Verified account @MattLombardoNFL
3m3 minutes ago
Pat Shurmur on possibility trading back: You cant role out anything at this point. Well work through everything, but we expect to pick No. 2 #Giants #NFLDraft
He doesn't make that decision and what else would he say. Yep, we are trading.. We will take any deal... come on guys...
Eric: The question is why would the Giants not consider there to be a potential franchise out there when all 31 other teams in the NFL do and you have as many as a half dozen other teams all desperately trying to get up closer to the top 5 to get one of them. Just doesn't make sense that we'd be the one outlier.
"all 31 other teams"
Hmmmmm. I don't know about that, Colin. Remember what Sean Payton said?
"With regards to the quarterback class this year, this is just us, the Saints, the guy we had graded very high last year was Mahomes," Payton said. "I don't know that I see that player in this class."
I dont see [Andrew] Luck in this draft, and I dont see Carson Wentz, who I liked a lot coming into the draft, Payton told The MMQB. Id feel a little bit uneasy if I were at the top of this draft and I decided I had to have a quarterback. The pressure to get a quarterback is so great in this league, I get that. But we cant create em. I wouldnt be surprised if only one of these guys is left standing in four or five years, and if so, Id guess it would be Sam Darnold.
I'm fine with the trade down because I don't think there's a huge difference between the top 20 or so players. But if we do trade down I think it's important to use the draft to create the team's identity going forward as opposed to filling roster holes. Go draft four or five linemen, draft two edge rushers, or cluster draft secondary players, that kind of thing. Or go for really big air and draft Lamar Jackson, a running back, a receiver, and a couple mobile offensive linemen.
Or draft Darnold.
Either option is fine. But treat this draft as what it should be: the transition point between eras. It should NOT be treated as a tool for loading up for one more run with Eli.
IDK Eric. If a QB they feel could be the next franchise guy is there, they should just pull the trigger.
If they don't trading back makes more sense than taking a RB no matter how good he is at #2 or a DE that doesn't seem to be a great fit for the new defense we expect.
If they want a good back, Chubb will be a good one and available later.
If they can get 2 picks in the first and come away with both Notre Dame OL and Chubb later, that wil likely do more to solve the long term running game issues that Barkley alone.
That said, I would really enjoy watching that kid run for the Giants. OBJ, Barkley and Engram will provide some very exciting play together.
Trust me, if there is a franchise QB in this lot, they will RUN up to the podium. They have vetted the QB position far more than BBIers could possibly vet the position. If they pass it will speak volumes, regardless of possible meltdowns on here
Everyone looks at the team record and #2 overall pick and is saying the Giants are terrible and in total rebuild.
But, with a half decent Oline and a good coach, this team could have been anywhere from 8-8 to 11-5ish with the level of talent it had last year.
In today's NFL with all it's parity, if you have a good QB, you're never more than a year or two away from competing. This team is not nearly as bad as it's being made out to be.
If Darnold is there at #2 and NYG arent going to pick him (I would), then trading down for a team that will pick him is the only way to maximize the value of their pick. Fingers crossed.
as far as quantity goes, but we also have a need for elite-caliber players. And no matter how many picks we acquire in a trade down, we're very unlikely to adequately fill most of our needs in one single draft.
I can get behind a trade down, but hopefully we'd capitalize better than some other teams that have recently traded down for a big haul have.
But if we dont land a franchise QB or one of Barkley, Chubb or Nelson.. than I have no faith in DG
Question, if he drafts a QB (becuase you say they are franchise guys) and he fails, would you still be ok with DG as a GM? Give me a break. These QB's are wickedly flawed.
I'd like to see the Giants trade down and be able to grab Nelson or get the big haul of picks from Buffalo. Those are my ideal scenarios.
My gut has the Giants sticking with Eli for two more years and getting the QB in 2020. But you can't do that unless you give Eli the protection he needs to be effective.
Still get a top bluechipper Barkley, Chubb and Nelson....in that order
And
Of course, the Giants see potentially franchise QBs in this draft but they also see they have a franchise QB for 2 to 3 more years and a young gun who shows potential....and do not have the privilege to use #2 pick on someone holding a clip board for several years
but it's not like the Chargers and Rams built dynasties off the Eli and RGIII trades. The days of the Herschel Walker trade are over.
But we are empty on the Oline (near empty), thin at CB and S, WR is very shallow, LB still a need, DL a need... How do you fill those with 5 picks if you spend one on a QB who will sit? The drafting a franchise guy was out the window the second we committed to Eli and then made a trade for a LB, signed a VET RB.. We made moves to be better now. The draft has to be about the future with production right off though..
but it's not like the Chargers and Rams built dynasties off the Eli and RGIII trades. The days of the Herschel Walker trade are over.
Especially when they're not winning a championship in the next couple of years, and we'll definitely need a QB by then. Those should be fun times on here.
And maybe have say a Lamar Jackson rated as high as Darnold? Then it makes sense to move back to 12 and pick him while having #22 and a 1st next year plus more? I'm not saying I like Jackson but who knows what they are thinking.
but it's not like the Chargers and Rams built dynasties off the Eli and RGIII trades. The days of the Herschel Walker trade are over.
But we are empty on the Oline (near empty), thin at CB and S, WR is very shallow, LB still a need, DL a need... How do you fill those with 5 picks if you spend one on a QB who will sit? The drafting a franchise guy was out the window the second we committed to Eli and then made a trade for a LB, signed a VET RB.. We made moves to be better now. The draft has to be about the future with production right off though..
I want to trade down but I want 2019 capital, not 2018 picks so that I can draft my franchise qb in 2019. If you truly believe there is not a franchise qb in this class, then you trade 2 for future 1s and then bundle them to get you where you need to be for next years crop. The name of this game is getting a QB, we have a unique opportunity, if we pass, then we better pass with some options for recovering that opportunity in the years ahead.
Imagine if the Rams stood pat at 6 and took Luke Kuechly or Fletcher Cox in 2012. Then in 2013 they took Xavier Rhodes or Deandre Hopkins.
And perhaps most damning, what if in 2014, the Rams took Khalil Mack instead of Greg Robinson?
Fair enough, but we'll make mistakes, too. Nobody hits on all picks. I'd rather build the team around a good QB on a rookie deal - like the Seahawks did with Wilson, Rams with Goff, etc.
but it's not like the Chargers and Rams built dynasties off the Eli and RGIII trades. The days of the Herschel Walker trade are over.
But we are empty on the Oline (near empty), thin at CB and S, WR is very shallow, LB still a need, DL a need... How do you fill those with 5 picks if you spend one on a QB who will sit? The drafting a franchise guy was out the window the second we committed to Eli and then made a trade for a LB, signed a VET RB.. We made moves to be better now. The draft has to be about the future with production right off though..
I want to trade down but I want 2019 capital, not 2018 picks so that I can draft my franchise qb in 2019. If you truly believe there is not a franchise qb in this class, then you trade 2 for future 1s and then bundle them to get you where you need to be for next years crop. The name of this game is getting a QB, we have a unique opportunity, if we pass, then we better pass with some options for recovering that opportunity in the years ahead.
The thing is, the QB's next year are nowhere near as good or plentiful as the QB's this year.
odell was picked 12th...consider who was making the picks no when you are picking. There are good guys all over the draft. If you have the right scouting you can find them.
This idea that trading down wont get us really good players is ridiculous. The offer has to be good enough but to say sticking @2 is the only way to get a HOF type player is so ridiculous.
And we trade out of it to fill 'multiple (short term) needs' ... I will not be happy
"Short term needs"? What the hell does this mean? Would you draft anyone in any round hoping they're only around for 2-3 years?
It simply means needs today aren't necessarily the case in a few years. We're not going to fix a 3-13 mess in one offseason and one draft. This needs to be a multi year process.
If darnold is taken 1, I'm in favor of trading down. If not, I'd prefer the team trade him.
And I've also read all the 'defer to the authorities' posts above - this team has 3 division titles in 15 years despite Eli not missing a season. Yes there are some new faces in charge now - thankfully - but some old guard remains too and it's not the patriots trust we're challenging here.
And maybe have say a Lamar Jackson rated as high as Darnold? Then it makes sense to move back to 12 and pick him while having #22 and a 1st next year plus more? I'm not saying I like Jackson but who knows what they are thinking.
And we trade out of it to fill 'multiple (short term) needs' ... I will not be happy
Why do you think the picks taken will be short term? Some of them might last 10+ years. Jerry Reese is gone ....
RBs - Barry sanders lasted 10 years, Peterson played 8 healthy seasons in Minnesota. And those are the extreme outliers.
It's extremely rare you will find a player not a qb who lasts 10+ years for you. Guys get hurt, they are busts, they sign for huge money elsewhere, etx
Surprises me. While not my first choice at the QB, everything leading up to now has said Darnold or bust at QB and he just fits the profile for what I think the Giants look for in the position. You have to wonder if the Giants just aren't prioritizing the position, which would be a mistake. Trading down and getting QB value > a single skill position player, but I hope the Giants aren't passing on a QB with a high grade just so they can make one last run with Eli.
but it's not like the Chargers and Rams built dynasties off the Eli and RGIII trades. The days of the Herschel Walker trade are over.
But we are empty on the Oline (near empty), thin at CB and S, WR is very shallow, LB still a need, DL a need... How do you fill those with 5 picks if you spend one on a QB who will sit? The drafting a franchise guy was out the window the second we committed to Eli and then made a trade for a LB, signed a VET RB.. We made moves to be better now. The draft has to be about the future with production right off though..
That is the problem with the anti-QB crew. You actually think this team has a chance at a SB in the next 2 years. They are top heavy, with some very good-great players, however they are paper thin, have an average, old QB, a dog shit O-line even with Solder, and no pass rush.
2018 can simply be a transition year where the rookie and Webb develop and Eli gets thrown to the wolves. The NFC is stacked with great teams, and the schedule is brutal. They can easily get out of Eli's contract after this season and use that $17M in cap space to build the team up more.
They are not going to hit on all of their draft picks and have them all contribute to a SB season in 2018. Not happening.
Imagine if the Rams stood pat at 6 and took Luke Kuechly or Fletcher Cox in 2012. Then in 2013 they took Xavier Rhodes or Deandre Hopkins.
And perhaps most damning, what if in 2014, the Rams took Khalil Mack instead of Greg Robinson?
Fair enough, but we'll make mistakes, too. Nobody hits on all picks. I'd rather build the team around a good QB on a rookie deal - like the Seahawks did with Wilson, Rams with Goff, etc.
Inevitably, but the point is that you trust your scouts enough (and your own abilities as an evaluator) to be able to pick out the flowers from the weeds. The Rams, however sucked at it.
And yes, a QB on a rookie deal would be nice, but if you don't believe that QB is going to be a franchise QB, there's no point.
that the guys that who are now referred to as "franchise QBs" had when they started out.
Look at the players around those QBs and the situation they joined when they started out. The Giants don't look anything remotely close to those teams.
Taking Barkley with Rosen and Darnold on the board wouldn't.
There are 62 Million reasons why your rationale does not make any sense. Mara & Tisch did not spend their PSL money imprudently to look two or more years down the road. Moreover, Eli has four to five productive years remaining given that he is provided with a supporting cast around him: i.e., a solid running game and offensive line.
Many of you might not believe it, and may be yearning for the Giants to draft a QB @ #2 to replace Eli. But you and I don't count. What counts is what Mara/Tisch/Gettleman & Shurmur think. And they have no doubt that Eli is top shelf if provided with better protection and a running game to boost this offense!
The only other scenario is the Giants trading down and drafting Nelson in the top 6, and then grabbing one of the other talented RBs in Rd. 2.
Either scenario, we will come out of this draft with a fortified O-Line.
And we trade out of it to fill 'multiple (short term) needs' ... I will not be happy
Why do you think the picks taken will be short term? Some of them might last 10+ years. Jerry Reese is gone ....
RBs - Barry sanders lasted 10 years, Peterson played 8 healthy seasons in Minnesota. And those are the extreme outliers.
It's extremely rare you will find a player not a qb who lasts 10+ years for you. Guys get hurt, they are busts, they sign for huge money elsewhere, etx
Well, Barry could've lasted longer, but that's a fair concern. However, given Saquon's insane workout regimen and modern science, I don't know when or even if he'll slow down.
If they don't like any of the QBs, then it makes sense
But if Darnold is there and they pass on him, they will regret it. The NY media and every Jets fans will be rubbing it in our faces for the next decade.
Just try it out. There's so much reflexivity in this:
Giants talking to DEN,MIA,NO,AZ,BUF,NE,NO,SD,CIN,JAX for#2
Browns talking to DEN,MIA,NO,AZ,BUF,NE,NO,SD,CIN,JAX for#4
All those teams know that the #4 is devalued if someone else trades into the #2 or Giants take a QB. So teams are forced to wait on trading with CLE to see what NYG do with the #2. NYG will wait on the #2 until they know what CLE is doing.
So in order for CLE to get the most value for the #4, it would make sense for them to trade the #1 to NY. Now CLE can take the QB they probably want and still get a ransom for the #4.
Point is if NYG KNOW they don't like any of the QBs they probably would have traded out already. Tells me they are thinking a specific QB.
Everyone looks at the team record and #2 overall pick and is saying the Giants are terrible and in total rebuild.
But, with a half decent Oline and a good coach, this team could have been anywhere from 8-8 to 11-5ish with the level of talent it had last year.
In today's NFL with all it's parity, if you have a good QB, you're never more than a year or two away from competing. This team is not nearly as bad as it's being made out to be.
Thank you, Jerz. One of the few who makes sense.
It was like everyone picked Philadelphia last year to win and Dallas in 2016. There is a different division champ each year in the NFL East. Nobody knows who is going to win because the teams are closely matched. One or two key injuries (OBJ - last year) can make all of the difference!
Would someone within the building who works for the Giants, reveal their gameplan to a reporter. Makes no sense. These guys all have their jobs on the line. The scouts themselves are fearful for their jobs after the draft. I have spoken to their head west coast scout about this. I just cant bekieve anything that is being reported today.
Is there room to field a big offer? I hope so but I can't believe a guy with his experience is not locked in with Plan A and prepared for Plan B if the Browns do something crazy.
RE: I can't believe Gettleman is not set on this pick
Is there room to field a big offer? I hope so but I can't believe a guy with his experience is not locked in with Plan A and prepared for Plan B if the Browns do something crazy.
If he isnt, he shouldnt have this job
RE: I can't believe Gettleman is not set on this pick
Is there room to field a big offer? I hope so but I can't believe a guy with his experience is not locked in with Plan A and prepared for Plan B if the Browns do something crazy.
I'm sure he has several plans in place.... this isn't his first rodeo.
But if the powers that be dont have any conviction on a QB then why force that pick? Who knows what our FO thinks of the QBs. If they like one then take him but if any doubt why force it? Move back some and gain some capital and take the guy you like.
Once again,I want a franchise Qb and would run to podium for Darnold but I'm a fan and if DG does not like him then why force that pick?
RE: RE: I can't believe Gettleman is not set on this pick
Is there room to field a big offer? I hope so but I can't believe a guy with his experience is not locked in with Plan A and prepared for Plan B if the Browns do something crazy.
If he isnt, he shouldnt have this job
lets be real, guys. I am sure they have plan a, b, c, d, and E already lined up. He has absolutely nothing to gain by saying that. They wont tip their hand at all until their on the clock or they lose all their leverage.
at a price. They will trade down if it good for team. If not they will make pick. DG seems to have eye for talent, by Friday am, it will be in the books. Based on them backing Eli really doubt they take QB. Then you must wonder @ 2 whats the best pick outside of QB? I sell wood products from Brazil, I do not evaluate talent in NFL. But I must say great running back with our current cast of other weapons might be what the Dr. ordered. Who Knows? but 11-5 to 3-13 who saw that coming.I imagine we can go right back to 11-5, with the right Coaching. But I'm a Homer.
I have a hard time believing any rumors from secondary reporters today. Even the main insiders are suspect, although I would think Schefter, Glazer, Garafolo, etc would due their due diligence before reporting it.
These scouts could be canned next week. They may know what the consensus is in the room, but I doubt they know where Gettleman and Mara are leaning.
Trade down into 4-8 range, adding more picks. Would love Nelson as the pick as O-line is decimated. Giants might win 3-4 games this year with poor roster and tough schedule. Add more bodies and draft well this year and next. Then grab your QB in next draft. Management wants Eli to play this year, a wasted year for the #2 pick if QB sits.
Trade down into 4-8 range, adding more picks. Would love Nelson as the pick as O-line is decimated. Giants might win 3-4 games this year with poor roster and tough schedule. Add more bodies and draft well this year and next. Then grab your QB in next draft. Management wants Eli to play this year, a wasted year for the #2 pick if QB sits.
Only problem with that is there are no good QB's next year.
like stud QB prospects are available in aisle 10 of your local grocery store. Flaws and all, this current crop of prospects is likely the most talented group we'll have access to in the next several years. If the Browns do take Mayfield, the guy we like the best (allegedly) will be sitting right there for us - just have to write his name on a piece of paper. I feel like every other franchise - if put in our exact circumstance - would take Darnold at #2.
Trade down into 4-8 range, adding more picks. Would love Nelson as the pick as O-line is decimated. Giants might win 3-4 games this year with poor roster and tough schedule. Add more bodies and draft well this year and next. Then grab your QB in next draft. Management wants Eli to play this year, a wasted year for the #2 pick if QB sits.
Such short term thinking
RE: If they don't like any of the QBs, then it makes sense
But if Darnold is there and they pass on him, they will regret it. The NY media and every Jets fans will be rubbing it in our faces for the next decade.
The one they end up regretting might be Rosen.
He's been torn apart, and yes, carries some injury risk, but he is the best passer easily.
card immediately... with no hesitation... or take time and trade back ... what I don't want to see is the Giants use 9+ minutes and then make a selection.
RE: RE: RE: RE: At least that would make some sense
card immediately... with no hesitation... or take time and trade back ... what I don't want to see is the Giants use 9+ minutes and then make a selection.
This is usually how Gettleman operates, so you'll likely get your wish unless we're entertaining trade down offers while we're on the clock.
RE: What I want more than anything ... is to see the Giants turn in their
card immediately... with no hesitation... or take time and trade back ... what I don't want to see is the Giants use 9+ minutes and then make a selection.
Why? I would rather they take their time to make sure they get the best offer in and then weigh it verse the player they want. Picking fast never made any sense to me. What does it prove?
RE: For those that know ...trading back to #5 what is that worth
According to this, it's a difference of 900 points in value. So, swapping picks and then either next year's 1st, or this year's and next year's 2nd or 3rd. Something like that.
When the Bears moved up from 3 to 2 with the 49ers last year, they gave up last year's 3rd and this year's 3rd and 4th. Draft pick value chart - ( New Window )
RE: RE: What I want more than anything ... is to see the Giants turn in their
card immediately... with no hesitation... or take time and trade back ... what I don't want to see is the Giants use 9+ minutes and then make a selection.
Why? I would rather they take their time to make sure they get the best offer in and then weigh it verse the player they want. Picking fast never made any sense to me. What does it prove?
It proves they have so much confidence in the value of the player they are selecting that there isn't any trade offer that would change their minds. That the player they want is so important to the future of the franchise, that they aren't interested in considering any alternative. That's what I want.
Or I want them to trade back because the kind of value I just described doesn't exist at #2.
What I don't want ... is for them to be wishy washy ... might trade might not ... and then end up taking a player after almost trading the pick away.
Aditi Kinkhabwala
@AKinkhabwala
For weeks now, weve been reading that an RB is not worth the no. 2 pick. Is any RB worth more than TWO first round picks? Thats one of the questions being asked in #Giants HQ today.
the logical long term solution is to trade down.
Rumors are Giants can get 2 1st ,2nd &3rd this year from Buffalo. Good start.
Broncos are looking to trade also
If Giants can get at least 2 1st, 2-2nd and maybe extra 2nd or 3rd in next 2 drafts .
the logical long term solution is to trade down.
Rumors are Giants can get 2 1st ,2nd &3rd this year from Buffalo. Good start.
Broncos are looking to trade also
If Giants can get at least 2 1st, 2-2nd and maybe extra 2nd or 3rd in next 2 drafts .
But if we dont land a franchise QB or one of Barkley, Chubb or Nelson.. than I have no faith in DG
Question, if he drafts a QB (becuase you say they are franchise guys) and he fails, would you still be ok with DG as a GM? Give me a break. These QB's are wickedly flawed.
yes i would - you take your shot
Trading would go against DG and the Giants history....
Aditi Kinkhabwala
@AKinkhabwala
For weeks now, weve been reading that an RB is not worth the no. 2 pick. Is any RB worth more than TWO first round picks? Thats one of the questions being asked in #Giants HQ today.
1:44pm 26 Apr 2018
I love it. This is an excellent question and exactly what the team should be discussing.
Actually, they would be discussing this if they have an offer of two first round picks on the table. That sounds good to me.
You trade down based on what your draft board tells you, not based on what your depth chart tells you. I'm not opposed to trading down, but only if it is motivated by the quality of prospects available, not the quantity of holes on the roster. As George Young used to say, don't bring your depth chart into the war room (or something like that).
but ask yourself how many great players the Pats have after Brady? How many household names?
Great players cover up so much shit. The Giants have THREE pretty high picks AFTER the 2nd overall pick. They have the second rounder and the two third rounders. Rome wasn't built in a day but if they hit on 3-4 picks here that's a great start, assuming you added a generational talent at pick 2 or a big time QB.
Everyone loves getting tons of picks just remember one cold hard fact--you WON'T hit on all of them. You probably won't hit on half of them.
but ask yourself how many great players the Pats have after Brady? How many household names?
Great players cover up so much shit. The Giants have THREE pretty high picks AFTER the 2nd overall pick. They have the second rounder and the two third rounders. Rome wasn't built in a day but if they hit on 3-4 picks here that's a great start, assuming you added a generational talent at pick 2 or a big time QB.
Everyone loves getting tons of picks just remember one cold hard fact--you WON'T hit on all of them. You probably won't hit on half of them.
But selling the #2 pick can give you 3 years worth of "just the hits" in two years.
Nelson, Chubb, and Barkley are the only blue chip players at the top of this draft.
Just because ESPN is focused on those guys doesn't mean there the only players on the board. Just go check out SY'56 ratings. Look for 90 and above. And that's just one guy's view. Point is, there's more players worthy of attention who would be far more than "meh".
Aditi Kinkhabwala
@AKinkhabwala
For weeks now, weve been reading that an RB is not worth the no. 2 pick. Is any RB worth more than TWO first round picks? Thats one of the questions being asked in #Giants HQ today.
Got it.
You and me both
I agree completely..
And, if we really have multiple needs, what the heck are we doing even considering a RB
And with Darnold being available at #2, we should be able to get a king's ransom
That's if you think Sam Darnold is a future franchise QB. If you think he's going to be like Blake Bortles or JaMarcus Russell, then you trade with a team that believes in his talent.
And with Darnold being available at #2, we should be able to get a king's ransom
Better include a 2019 1st at a minimum.
Realize, DG is not JR, but it is still a crapshoot.
Amen.
But if the Giants are not convinced there is such a guy there, they have a ton of holes: RB, WR, OL, DL, LB, DB.
Verified account
@OptimumScouting
IF the Browns take Mayfield, and Jets will take QB at 3...
#Giants could trade with the #Broncos (who want Sam Darnold), drop down to #5, and still land Saquon Barkley.
This is my hope.
IDK Eric. If a QB they feel could be the next franchise guy is there, they should just pull the trigger.
If they don't trading back makes more sense than taking a RB no matter how good he is at #2 or a DE that doesn't seem to be a great fit for the new defense we expect.
If they want a good back, Chubb will be a good one and available later.
If they can get 2 picks in the first and come away with both Notre Dame OL and Chubb later, that wil likely do more to solve the long term running game issues that Barkley alone.
That said, I would really enjoy watching that kid run for the Giants. OBJ, Barkley and Engram will provide some very exciting play together.
I don't know how many times I hear this and get so grumpy about it. You have no idea who the Giants have listed as the best of the draft #1 and what the Giants feel is their best way to build and win now.
I've read they're interested in trading down.
Verified account
@OptimumScouting
IF the Browns take Mayfield, and Jets will take QB at 3...
#Giants could trade with the #Broncos (who want Sam Darnold), drop down to #5, and still land Saquon Barkley.
Barkley could go to the Browns at 4 though. So it could be Chubb as well.
Or a QB who starts for 10+ years.
Or a DE who has a shot to break Strahan's sack record.
Yeah, not sure I'm taking this 'report' seriously, tbh.
The Cleveland Browns say hi.
Again, don't make the assumption they love a QB. They might. They might not.
Or we could wind up like the Browns
If the Jints don't have a "bang on the table" QB on their Board, I would be ecstatic trading with Denver.
I'm not sure I would take Barkley at 5 either. If someone in the top 10 then is desperate for Barkley, I might trade again, but doubt that 'don't get cute' DG would.
Jordan Raanan
Verified account @JordanRaanan
2m2 minutes ago
Pat Shurmur on the draft: Dont rule out anything. Then adds #Giants expect to pick at No. 2
Yes, but if DG doesn't BELIEVE they are franchise QBs, why would he take them? You have to be in love with your guy.
Verified account
@JordanRaanan
41s41 seconds ago
More Jordan Raanan Retweeted Dianna Russini
Similar to what Ive been hearing, which doesnt bode well for the QB crew. #GiantsJordan Raanan added,
Dianna Russini
Verified account
@diannaESPN
Spoke to a Giants source. He said the feeling in this building today is the Giants are looking to trade down. When I asked why? He said we have a ton of needs
NYG contemplating all options.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Reply Retweet Like Direct message
Matt Lombardo
Verified account @MattLombardoNFL
3m3 minutes ago
Pat Shurmur on possibility trading back: You cant role out anything at this point. Well work through everything, but we expect to pick No. 2 #Giants #NFLDraft
Jordan Raanan
Verified account @JordanRaanan
2m2 minutes ago
Pat Shurmur on the draft: Dont rule out anything. Then adds #Giants expect to pick at No. 2
Sorry Dianna.
Quote:
If we had a "like" button, I would click it.
IDK Eric. If a QB they feel could be the next franchise guy is there, they should just pull the trigger.
If they don't trading back makes more sense than taking a RB no matter how good he is at #2 or a DE that doesn't seem to be a great fit for the new defense we expect.
If they want a good back, Chubb will be a good one and available later.
If they can get 2 picks in the first and come away with both Notre Dame OL and Chubb later, that wil likely do more to solve the long term running game issues that Barkley alone.
That said, I would really enjoy watching that kid run for the Giants. OBJ, Barkley and Engram will provide some very exciting play together.
Trust me, if there is a franchise QB in this lot, they will RUN up to the podium. They have vetted the QB position far more than BBIers could possibly vet the position. If they pass it will speak volumes, regardless of possible meltdowns on here
Matt Lombardo
Verified account @MattLombardoNFL
3m3 minutes ago
Pat Shurmur on possibility trading back: You cant role out anything at this point. Well work through everything, but we expect to pick No. 2 #Giants #NFLDraft
He doesn't make that decision and what else would he say. Yep, we are trading.. We will take any deal... come on guys...
"all 31 other teams"
Hmmmmm. I don't know about that, Colin. Remember what Sean Payton said?
"With regards to the quarterback class this year, this is just us, the Saints, the guy we had graded very high last year was Mahomes," Payton said. "I don't know that I see that player in this class."
I dont see [Andrew] Luck in this draft, and I dont see Carson Wentz, who I liked a lot coming into the draft, Payton told The MMQB. Id feel a little bit uneasy if I were at the top of this draft and I decided I had to have a quarterback. The pressure to get a quarterback is so great in this league, I get that. But we cant create em. I wouldnt be surprised if only one of these guys is left standing in four or five years, and if so, Id guess it would be Sam Darnold.
Or draft Darnold.
Either option is fine. But treat this draft as what it should be: the transition point between eras. It should NOT be treated as a tool for loading up for one more run with Eli.
Quote:
In comment 13933362 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
If we had a "like" button, I would click it.
IDK Eric. If a QB they feel could be the next franchise guy is there, they should just pull the trigger.
If they don't trading back makes more sense than taking a RB no matter how good he is at #2 or a DE that doesn't seem to be a great fit for the new defense we expect.
If they want a good back, Chubb will be a good one and available later.
If they can get 2 picks in the first and come away with both Notre Dame OL and Chubb later, that wil likely do more to solve the long term running game issues that Barkley alone.
That said, I would really enjoy watching that kid run for the Giants. OBJ, Barkley and Engram will provide some very exciting play together.
Trust me, if there is a franchise QB in this lot, they will RUN up to the podium. They have vetted the QB position far more than BBIers could possibly vet the position. If they pass it will speak volumes, regardless of possible meltdowns on here
+1
"Short term needs"? What the hell does this mean? Would you draft anyone in any round hoping they're only around for 2-3 years?
Ideally, it should be an RG3 type of haul because that's the precedent
But, with a half decent Oline and a good coach, this team could have been anywhere from 8-8 to 11-5ish with the level of talent it had last year.
In today's NFL with all it's parity, if you have a good QB, you're never more than a year or two away from competing. This team is not nearly as bad as it's being made out to be.
Verified account
@OptimumScouting
IF the Browns take Mayfield, and Jets will take QB at 3...
#Giants could trade with the #Broncos (who want Sam Darnold), drop down to #5, and still land Saquon Barkley.
Oh hell yeah. This years 2nd (40 overall) and next years 1st.
I can get behind a trade down, but hopefully we'd capitalize better than some other teams that have recently traded down for a big haul have.
I'm fully expecting the worst here. Trade back for more picks to screw up on and pass on multiple Pro Bowl QB's. That seems like Giants type draft.
I still don't love that idea.
Trade down would be much more preferable if we stayed in the top 10.
Barkley-Nelson-Chubb.
Question, if he drafts a QB (becuase you say they are franchise guys) and he fails, would you still be ok with DG as a GM? Give me a break. These QB's are wickedly flawed.
They didn't, but they could have.
Imagine if the Rams stood pat at 6 and took Luke Kuechly or Fletcher Cox in 2012. Then in 2013 they took Xavier Rhodes or Deandre Hopkins.
And perhaps most damning, what if in 2014, the Rams took Khalil Mack instead of Greg Robinson?
My gut has the Giants sticking with Eli for two more years and getting the QB in 2020. But you can't do that unless you give Eli the protection he needs to be effective.
And
Still get a top bluechipper Barkley, Chubb and Nelson....in that order
And
Of course, the Giants see potentially franchise QBs in this draft but they also see they have a franchise QB for 2 to 3 more years and a young gun who shows potential....and do not have the privilege to use #2 pick on someone holding a clip board for several years
But we are empty on the Oline (near empty), thin at CB and S, WR is very shallow, LB still a need, DL a need... How do you fill those with 5 picks if you spend one on a QB who will sit? The drafting a franchise guy was out the window the second we committed to Eli and then made a trade for a LB, signed a VET RB.. We made moves to be better now. The draft has to be about the future with production right off though..
Especially when they're not winning a championship in the next couple of years, and we'll definitely need a QB by then. Those should be fun times on here.
Quote:
but it's not like the Chargers and Rams built dynasties off the Eli and RGIII trades. The days of the Herschel Walker trade are over.
But we are empty on the Oline (near empty), thin at CB and S, WR is very shallow, LB still a need, DL a need... How do you fill those with 5 picks if you spend one on a QB who will sit? The drafting a franchise guy was out the window the second we committed to Eli and then made a trade for a LB, signed a VET RB.. We made moves to be better now. The draft has to be about the future with production right off though..
I want to trade down but I want 2019 capital, not 2018 picks so that I can draft my franchise qb in 2019. If you truly believe there is not a franchise qb in this class, then you trade 2 for future 1s and then bundle them to get you where you need to be for next years crop. The name of this game is getting a QB, we have a unique opportunity, if we pass, then we better pass with some options for recovering that opportunity in the years ahead.
Imagine if the Rams stood pat at 6 and took Luke Kuechly or Fletcher Cox in 2012. Then in 2013 they took Xavier Rhodes or Deandre Hopkins.
And perhaps most damning, what if in 2014, the Rams took Khalil Mack instead of Greg Robinson?
Fair enough, but we'll make mistakes, too. Nobody hits on all picks. I'd rather build the team around a good QB on a rookie deal - like the Seahawks did with Wilson, Rams with Goff, etc.
Quote:
In comment 13933496 bceagle05 said:
Quote:
but it's not like the Chargers and Rams built dynasties off the Eli and RGIII trades. The days of the Herschel Walker trade are over.
But we are empty on the Oline (near empty), thin at CB and S, WR is very shallow, LB still a need, DL a need... How do you fill those with 5 picks if you spend one on a QB who will sit? The drafting a franchise guy was out the window the second we committed to Eli and then made a trade for a LB, signed a VET RB.. We made moves to be better now. The draft has to be about the future with production right off though..
I want to trade down but I want 2019 capital, not 2018 picks so that I can draft my franchise qb in 2019. If you truly believe there is not a franchise qb in this class, then you trade 2 for future 1s and then bundle them to get you where you need to be for next years crop. The name of this game is getting a QB, we have a unique opportunity, if we pass, then we better pass with some options for recovering that opportunity in the years ahead.
The thing is, the QB's next year are nowhere near as good or plentiful as the QB's this year.
to throw out the book and get cute, very, very cute.
This could be an amazing opportunity to accelerate the rebuild.
odell was picked 12th...consider who was making the picks no when you are picking. There are good guys all over the draft. If you have the right scouting you can find them.
This idea that trading down wont get us really good players is ridiculous. The offer has to be good enough but to say sticking @2 is the only way to get a HOF type player is so ridiculous.
Quote:
And we trade out of it to fill 'multiple (short term) needs' ... I will not be happy
"Short term needs"? What the hell does this mean? Would you draft anyone in any round hoping they're only around for 2-3 years?
It simply means needs today aren't necessarily the case in a few years. We're not going to fix a 3-13 mess in one offseason and one draft. This needs to be a multi year process.
If darnold is taken 1, I'm in favor of trading down. If not, I'd prefer the team trade him.
And I've also read all the 'defer to the authorities' posts above - this team has 3 division titles in 15 years despite Eli not missing a season. Yes there are some new faces in charge now - thankfully - but some old guard remains too and it's not the patriots trust we're challenging here.
Why do you think the picks taken will be short term? Some of them might last 10+ years. Jerry Reese is gone ....
^^ THIS ^^
Quote:
And we trade out of it to fill 'multiple (short term) needs' ... I will not be happy
Why do you think the picks taken will be short term? Some of them might last 10+ years. Jerry Reese is gone ....
RBs - Barry sanders lasted 10 years, Peterson played 8 healthy seasons in Minnesota. And those are the extreme outliers.
It's extremely rare you will find a player not a qb who lasts 10+ years for you. Guys get hurt, they are busts, they sign for huge money elsewhere, etx
Exactly. The huge haul thing sounds nice, but rarely do teams actually improve meaningfully as a result of them.
Quote:
but it's not like the Chargers and Rams built dynasties off the Eli and RGIII trades. The days of the Herschel Walker trade are over.
But we are empty on the Oline (near empty), thin at CB and S, WR is very shallow, LB still a need, DL a need... How do you fill those with 5 picks if you spend one on a QB who will sit? The drafting a franchise guy was out the window the second we committed to Eli and then made a trade for a LB, signed a VET RB.. We made moves to be better now. The draft has to be about the future with production right off though..
That is the problem with the anti-QB crew. You actually think this team has a chance at a SB in the next 2 years. They are top heavy, with some very good-great players, however they are paper thin, have an average, old QB, a dog shit O-line even with Solder, and no pass rush.
2018 can simply be a transition year where the rookie and Webb develop and Eli gets thrown to the wolves. The NFC is stacked with great teams, and the schedule is brutal. They can easily get out of Eli's contract after this season and use that $17M in cap space to build the team up more.
They are not going to hit on all of their draft picks and have them all contribute to a SB season in 2018. Not happening.
Quote:
They didn't, but they could have.
Imagine if the Rams stood pat at 6 and took Luke Kuechly or Fletcher Cox in 2012. Then in 2013 they took Xavier Rhodes or Deandre Hopkins.
And perhaps most damning, what if in 2014, the Rams took Khalil Mack instead of Greg Robinson?
Fair enough, but we'll make mistakes, too. Nobody hits on all picks. I'd rather build the team around a good QB on a rookie deal - like the Seahawks did with Wilson, Rams with Goff, etc.
Inevitably, but the point is that you trust your scouts enough (and your own abilities as an evaluator) to be able to pick out the flowers from the weeds. The Rams, however sucked at it.
And yes, a QB on a rookie deal would be nice, but if you don't believe that QB is going to be a franchise QB, there's no point.
Look at the players around those QBs and the situation they joined when they started out. The Giants don't look anything remotely close to those teams.
Haha, 'tis the season for smokescreens
There are 62 Million reasons why your rationale does not make any sense. Mara & Tisch did not spend their PSL money imprudently to look two or more years down the road. Moreover, Eli has four to five productive years remaining given that he is provided with a supporting cast around him: i.e., a solid running game and offensive line.
Many of you might not believe it, and may be yearning for the Giants to draft a QB @ #2 to replace Eli. But you and I don't count. What counts is what Mara/Tisch/Gettleman & Shurmur think. And they have no doubt that Eli is top shelf if provided with better protection and a running game to boost this offense!
The only other scenario is the Giants trading down and drafting Nelson in the top 6, and then grabbing one of the other talented RBs in Rd. 2.
Either scenario, we will come out of this draft with a fortified O-Line.
Quote:
In comment 13933353 MetsAreBack said:
Quote:
And we trade out of it to fill 'multiple (short term) needs' ... I will not be happy
Why do you think the picks taken will be short term? Some of them might last 10+ years. Jerry Reese is gone ....
RBs - Barry sanders lasted 10 years, Peterson played 8 healthy seasons in Minnesota. And those are the extreme outliers.
It's extremely rare you will find a player not a qb who lasts 10+ years for you. Guys get hurt, they are busts, they sign for huge money elsewhere, etx
Well, Barry could've lasted longer, but that's a fair concern. However, given Saquon's insane workout regimen and modern science, I don't know when or even if he'll slow down.
First time for everything :)
Giants talking to DEN,MIA,NO,AZ,BUF,NE,NO,SD,CIN,JAX for#2
Browns talking to DEN,MIA,NO,AZ,BUF,NE,NO,SD,CIN,JAX for#4
All those teams know that the #4 is devalued if someone else trades into the #2 or Giants take a QB. So teams are forced to wait on trading with CLE to see what NYG do with the #2. NYG will wait on the #2 until they know what CLE is doing.
So in order for CLE to get the most value for the #4, it would make sense for them to trade the #1 to NY. Now CLE can take the QB they probably want and still get a ransom for the #4.
Point is if NYG KNOW they don't like any of the QBs they probably would have traded out already. Tells me they are thinking a specific QB.
But, with a half decent Oline and a good coach, this team could have been anywhere from 8-8 to 11-5ish with the level of talent it had last year.
In today's NFL with all it's parity, if you have a good QB, you're never more than a year or two away from competing. This team is not nearly as bad as it's being made out to be.
Thank you, Jerz. One of the few who makes sense.
It was like everyone picked Philadelphia last year to win and Dallas in 2016. There is a different division champ each year in the NFL East. Nobody knows who is going to win because the teams are closely matched. One or two key injuries (OBJ - last year) can make all of the difference!
If he isnt, he shouldnt have this job
I'm sure he has several plans in place.... this isn't his first rodeo.
Once again,I want a franchise Qb and would run to podium for Darnold but I'm a fan and if DG does not like him then why force that pick?
Quote:
Is there room to field a big offer? I hope so but I can't believe a guy with his experience is not locked in with Plan A and prepared for Plan B if the Browns do something crazy.
If he isnt, he shouldnt have this job
lets be real, guys. I am sure they have plan a, b, c, d, and E already lined up. He has absolutely nothing to gain by saying that. They wont tip their hand at all until their on the clock or they lose all their leverage.
this is pretty simple, imo.
These scouts could be canned next week. They may know what the consensus is in the room, but I doubt they know where Gettleman and Mara are leaning.
Only problem with that is there are no good QB's next year.
Such short term thinking
The one they end up regretting might be Rosen.
He's been torn apart, and yes, carries some injury risk, but he is the best passer easily.
Moreover, Eli has four to five productive years remaining
By what measure?
Quote:
In comment 13933378 jeff57 said:
Moreover, Eli has four to five productive years remaining
By what measure?
Dog years.
Quote:
In comment 13933633 royhobbs7 said:
Quote:
In comment 13933378 jeff57 said:
Moreover, Eli has four to five productive years remaining
By what measure?
Dog years.
that was funny...
This is usually how Gettleman operates, so you'll likely get your wish unless we're entertaining trade down offers while we're on the clock.
Why? I would rather they take their time to make sure they get the best offer in and then weigh it verse the player they want. Picking fast never made any sense to me. What does it prove?
According to this, it's a difference of 900 points in value. So, swapping picks and then either next year's 1st, or this year's and next year's 2nd or 3rd. Something like that.
When the Bears moved up from 3 to 2 with the 49ers last year, they gave up last year's 3rd and this year's 3rd and 4th.
Draft pick value chart - ( New Window )
Quote:
card immediately... with no hesitation... or take time and trade back ... what I don't want to see is the Giants use 9+ minutes and then make a selection.
Why? I would rather they take their time to make sure they get the best offer in and then weigh it verse the player they want. Picking fast never made any sense to me. What does it prove?
It proves they have so much confidence in the value of the player they are selecting that there isn't any trade offer that would change their minds. That the player they want is so important to the future of the franchise, that they aren't interested in considering any alternative. That's what I want.
Or I want them to trade back because the kind of value I just described doesn't exist at #2.
What I don't want ... is for them to be wishy washy ... might trade might not ... and then end up taking a player after almost trading the pick away.
@AKinkhabwala
For weeks now, weve been reading that an RB is not worth the no. 2 pick. Is any RB worth more than TWO first round picks? Thats one of the questions being asked in #Giants HQ today.
1:44pm 26 Apr 2018
Agreed. QB or trade down.
Gain multiple 2nd and 3rd round picks
Get Barkley, Chubb, or Nelson with the 6th pick.
Rumors are Giants can get 2 1st ,2nd &3rd this year from Buffalo. Good start.
Broncos are looking to trade also
If Giants can get at least 2 1st, 2-2nd and maybe extra 2nd or 3rd in next 2 drafts .
GO FOR IT
#2 picks it would give us more needs and ammo to move up
if needed .
Rumors are Giants can get 2 1st ,2nd &3rd this year from Buffalo. Good start.
Broncos are looking to trade also
If Giants can get at least 2 1st, 2-2nd and maybe extra 2nd or 3rd in next 2 drafts .
GO FOR IT
Agree - ( New Window )
BHAHAHAHHAh
Quote:
But if we dont land a franchise QB or one of Barkley, Chubb or Nelson.. than I have no faith in DG
Question, if he drafts a QB (becuase you say they are franchise guys) and he fails, would you still be ok with DG as a GM? Give me a break. These QB's are wickedly flawed.
yes i would - you take your shot
@AKinkhabwala
For weeks now, weve been reading that an RB is not worth the no. 2 pick. Is any RB worth more than TWO first round picks? Thats one of the questions being asked in #Giants HQ today.
1:44pm 26 Apr 2018
I love it. This is an excellent question and exactly what the team should be discussing.
Actually, they would be discussing this if they have an offer of two first round picks on the table. That sounds good to me.
Great players cover up so much shit. The Giants have THREE pretty high picks AFTER the 2nd overall pick. They have the second rounder and the two third rounders. Rome wasn't built in a day but if they hit on 3-4 picks here that's a great start, assuming you added a generational talent at pick 2 or a big time QB.
Everyone loves getting tons of picks just remember one cold hard fact--you WON'T hit on all of them. You probably won't hit on half of them.
Would you rather have Michael Strahan or MArshall Faulk vs 2-3 players like Hankins, Richburg, Ruben Randle and Brandon Jacobs and Phillip Sparks?
Great players cover up so much shit. The Giants have THREE pretty high picks AFTER the 2nd overall pick. They have the second rounder and the two third rounders. Rome wasn't built in a day but if they hit on 3-4 picks here that's a great start, assuming you added a generational talent at pick 2 or a big time QB.
Everyone loves getting tons of picks just remember one cold hard fact--you WON'T hit on all of them. You probably won't hit on half of them.
But selling the #2 pick can give you 3 years worth of "just the hits" in two years.
Just because ESPN is focused on those guys doesn't mean there the only players on the board. Just go check out SY'56 ratings. Look for 90 and above. And that's just one guy's view. Point is, there's more players worthy of attention who would be far more than "meh".
94 Barkley , Saquon , RB , Penn State
90 James , Derwin , S , Florida State
89 Rosen , Josh , QB , UCLA
87 Vea , Vita , DL , Washington
87 Fitzpatrick , Minkah , S , Alabama
86 Jackson , Josh , CB , Iowa
86 Oliver , Isaiah , CB , Colorado
86 Ward , Denzel , CB , Ohio State
86 Payne , Da'Ron , DL , Alabama
86 Chubb , Bradley , Edge , North Carolina State
86 Mayfield , Baker , QB , Oklahoma
86 Leonard , Darius , LB , South Carolina State
85 Hughes , Mike , CB , Central Florida
85 Nelson , Quinton , OG , Notre Dame
85 Smith , Braden , OG , Auburn
@AKinkhabwala
For weeks now, weve been reading that an RB is not worth the no. 2 pick. Is any RB worth more than TWO first round picks? Thats one of the questions being asked in #Giants HQ today.
1:44pm 26 Apr 2018
Spoiler alert:
The answer is no.