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.
Matt Lombardo
‏Verified account @MattLombardoNFL
3m3 minutes ago
Pat Shurmur on possibility trading back: “You can’t role out anything at this point. We’ll 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 can’t role out anything at this point. We’ll 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 don’t see [Andrew] Luck in this draft, and I don’t see Carson Wentz, who I liked a lot coming into the draft,” Payton told The MMQB. “I’d 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 can’t create ’em. I wouldn’t be surprised if only one of these guys is left standing in four or five years, and if so, I’d 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 aren’t 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 don’t 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.
Matt Lombardo
‏Verified account @MattLombardoNFL
3m3 minutes ago
Pat Shurmur on possibility trading back: “You can’t role out anything at this point. We’ll 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: ‘Don’t 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 can’t role out anything at this point. We’ll 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 don’t see [Andrew] Luck in this draft, and I don’t see Carson Wentz, who I liked a lot coming into the draft,” Payton told The MMQB. “I’d 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 can’t create ’em. I wouldn’t be surprised if only one of these guys is left standing in four or five years, and if so, I’d 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.