I get the whole ‘Move on from Gettleman’ argument. I do. He’s not here anymore. That said, we’re still digging ourselves out from under his mess. The worst hire in Giants history, and that isn’t even close IMO.
RE: They also passed on Sam Darnold and Josh Rosen
I get the whole ‘Move on from Gettleman’ argument. I do. He’s not here anymore. That said, we’re still digging ourselves out from under his mess. The worst hire in Giants history, and that isn’t even close IMO.
Also, let's not forget, he walked away without one critical interview and never accounted for any of his failures.
RE: RE: if the right quarterback isn’t there and you take
is an important thing to remember when it was obviously not the current front office that made those decisions?
It's when people reference a QB not being worth taken at #6. There's a good chance the 2nd best QB from the draft is available at 6. It rarely goes how people expect.
is an important thing to remember when it was obviously not the current front office that made those decisions?
It's when people reference a QB not being worth taken at #6. There's a good chance the 2nd best QB from the draft is available at 6. It rarely goes how people expect.
Oh, yeah, of course, but I don't see how those two are specifically relevant. Lamar went with pick 32.
The best QB in the draft may be available at 6.
Mahomes was the 2nd QB taken in his draft class and went 10th.
none of this is easy. and people get paid a lot of money to make these decisions and they all get a lot of them wrong.
The key is the collab between the scouting and coaching
And leadership has to limit the rationalization in the decision making process.
If Dabs absorbs the scouting intel and thinks he can run his offense better with one of these guys (without having to overrationalize to make that decision), then just pull the trigger already.
QB is multitudes more of a force multiplier than any other position. Multitudes. And we know for a fact, we don’t have any good ones now.
Pull the trigger.
The scary part is it would be realistic that only two of the
Top four QBs will be between good and franchise quarterback. And that's a better performance than almost every draft. Picking the right one is a crap shoot it seems.
RE: They also passed on Sam Darnold and Josh Rosen
Made the franchise a lot of money. Successful draft pick.
He was also phenomenal as a rookie. It sucks that he got injured year 2 and lost the ability to juke his way passed defenders. He truly could’ve been an all-time great.
Made the franchise a lot of money. Successful draft pick.
He was also phenomenal as a rookie. It sucks that he got injured year 2 and lost the ability to juke his way passed defenders. He truly could’ve been an all-time great.
His high ankle sprain had literally nothing to do with that
Made the franchise a lot of money. Successful draft pick.
He was also phenomenal as a rookie. It sucks that he got injured year 2 and lost the ability to juke his way passed defenders. He truly could’ve been an all-time great.
His high ankle sprain had literally nothing to do with that
You do remember him having an ACL?
I’m saying he looked great as a rookie and at the start of his 2nd year. Then he got injured and we haven’t seen the same player. Yes, the ACL was the following year, but he wasn’t fully healthy for more than a couple games in his second year.
RE: RE: They also passed on Sam Darnold and Josh Rosen
Oh, and we passed on Josh Allen and Brian Burns to take the quarterback by the name of Daniel Jones.
They did pass on Darnold/Rosen but they missed their best chance to draft a HoF QB also. They had a 50/50 shot and chose not to take a swing
They even could have drafted Barkley and Jackson with a small trade up from rd 2
Hindsite is 20/20. Years ago they could have had Brady in the 5th round. If they went QB in 2018 it was said it would have been Rosen or Darnold. Jackson went 32nd meaning every team passed on him except 1
Doesn’t seem like an important thing to remember heading into this draft
You're missing the point. Everyone projects where these QBs should go and it's always "don't force a QB", but whose to say Penix or Nix won't have strong NFL careers?
these rhetorical question threads are getting dumber by the day.
the important thing to remember is picking good players at the most premium positions possible.
no team should force a pick on a player they dont like purely because they are tied to a position. that gets you nowhere. well not nowhere, fired, so i guess worse than nowhere.
these rhetorical question threads are getting dumber by the day.
the important thing to remember is picking good players at the most premium positions possible.
no team should force a pick on a player they dont like purely because they are tied to a position. that gets you nowhere. well not nowhere, fired, so i guess worse than nowhere.
Again, the point is the pundits ranking of QBs rarely ends up being the order of their success.
Nobody is suggesting that they pass up on a target who projects
to be Josh Allen or Lamar Jackson. I don't think there's a single fan who would advocate for that.
Those players were passed up because of obvious risks they had. In hindsight it worked out, but they could have gone bust just as well. A big reason why they eventually emerged among the best in the league is because they possess elite physical traits which challenge defenses in unique ways. I'm all for taking a shot on Daniels or Maye if we can do so without being robbed blind. But I'm not considering a trade up for JJM. I think he can be a good QB, but a big part of the sell for him is the success he had --he's a winner, right? Except the NFL is a passing league and you don't win in the way Michigan did, at least not without an elite SF-level roster.
RE: RE: Something that happened six years ago under a different GM
Doesn’t seem like an important thing to remember heading into this draft
You're missing the point. Everyone projects where these QBs should go and it's always "don't force a QB", but whose to say Penix or Nix won't have strong NFL careers?
Who's to say Spencer Rattler won't? Or Michael Pratt? Or Joe Milton III?
One thing you can point to, is no team that ever trade up to the top 5 for a QB ever won a Superbowl. Not one. Most of the trades that were successful for QBs were good teams that needed a QB and traded up in the 1st but not into the expensive top 5.
Look at some of the best QBs in recent history and many were not even top 10 picks. Brady, Rodgers, Dak, Cousins, Hurts, lamar jackson, Farve.
But even that information is flawed. every year is a different situation with different players but in general, the team that trades up for a QB fails. If the best you are going to get is the 4th QB, possibly the 1st QB on the Giants board, why not just sit at 6? See what happens at 4 and 5 and you may still get the same QB without trading up. If the the draft goes QB 1-3 then the Giants are guaranteed at least the 3rd best positional player and there are players rated extremely high in this draft. Don't get got.
Yet the people never want to give up on Daniel Jones. Year 6.
Stupid take, absolutely stupid. The two are mutually exclusive. You can want to get away from Jones and yet, understand that the right QB is not available to you. The latter does not invalidate the former.
Not really a hard concept to understand and yet I see it daily. Yes I want another QB, but I also understand that if who they want is already taken before their spot or they are unable to obtain a trade at a reasonable/fair cost, then it is possible they only get a third tier QB late in the draft.
Some of you are bordering on cosmology trying to use draft position trends as a predictor of success. It's a very limited piece of subjective data, and not even close to a good reason to/not draft a player.
You'd be better off focusing on the objective qualities that successful quarterbacks have in common. Determining whether the prospect has those qualities, and then most importantly do they have more of those than Daniel Jones.
Some of you are bordering on cosmology trying to use draft position trends as a predictor of success. It's a very limited piece of subjective data, and not even close to a good reason to/not draft a player.
You'd be better off focusing on the objective qualities that successful quarterbacks have in common. Determining whether the prospect has those qualities, and then most importantly do they have more of those than Daniel Jones.
At this point, I am not sure that processing the field isn't the most important element for a QB. We know that is the one thing that is Jones downfall even more so than injury.
Yes, arm strength, pocket awareness and mobility are important. But I think being able to read the defense, pre and post snap trumps every other element.
Some of you are bordering on cosmology trying to use draft position trends as a predictor of success. It's a very limited piece of subjective data, and not even close to a good reason to/not draft a player.
You'd be better off focusing on the objective qualities that successful quarterbacks have in common. Determining whether the prospect has those qualities, and then most importantly do they have more of those than Daniel Jones.
At this point, I am not sure that processing the field isn't the most important element for a QB. We know that is the one thing that is Jones downfall even more so than injury.
Yes, arm strength, pocket awareness and mobility are important. But I think being able to read the defense, pre and post snap trumps every other element.
Processing the field is something you don’t know for sure until you actually put the guy you drafted on the field
Some of you are bordering on cosmology trying to use draft position trends as a predictor of success. It's a very limited piece of subjective data, and not even close to a good reason to/not draft a player.
You'd be better off focusing on the objective qualities that successful quarterbacks have in common. Determining whether the prospect has those qualities, and then most importantly do they have more of those than Daniel Jones.
At this point, I am not sure that processing the field isn't the most important element for a QB. We know that is the one thing that is Jones downfall even more so than injury.
Yes, arm strength, pocket awareness and mobility are important. But I think being able to read the defense, pre and post snap trumps every other element.
That's the type of data teams are studying. The scouting and quality control staff know what systems these prospects were in, what their reads were, and what their success rate by scenario etc.
And then what mitigating factors existed, like team talent and level of competition.
That's how you make an investment. Not "well quarterbacks picked in the top 5 don't succeed, so better not do that."
Processing the field is something you don’t know for sure until you actually put the guy you drafted on the field
I agree, you don't know how they're going to process your system. But you can analyze how they processed the system they were asked to manage in college.
Not a perfect analogue because of the differences in sophistication, but something you can use. When an amateur scout like Sy's can avail Jones doesn't have a quick mind, that's probably wildly obvious to a professional.
Some of you are bordering on cosmology trying to use draft position trends as a predictor of success. It's a very limited piece of subjective data, and not even close to a good reason to/not draft a player.
You'd be better off focusing on the objective qualities that successful quarterbacks have in common. Determining whether the prospect has those qualities, and then most importantly do they have more of those than Daniel Jones.
At this point, I am not sure that processing the field isn't the most important element for a QB. We know that is the one thing that is Jones downfall even more so than injury.
Yes, arm strength, pocket awareness and mobility are important. But I think being able to read the defense, pre and post snap trumps every other element.
That's the type of data teams are studying. The scouting and quality control staff know what systems these prospects were in, what their reads were, and what their success rate by scenario etc.
And then what mitigating factors existed, like team talent and level of competition.
That's how you make an investment. Not "well quarterbacks picked in the top 5 don't succeed, so better not do that."
Yep. The level of sophisticated scouting has gotten better.
to be Josh Allen or Lamar Jackson. I don't think there's a single fan who would advocate for that.
Those players were passed up because of obvious risks they had. In hindsight it worked out, but they could have gone bust just as well. A big reason why they eventually emerged among the best in the league is because they possess elite physical traits which challenge defenses in unique ways. I'm all for taking a shot on Daniels or Maye if we can do so without being robbed blind. But I'm not considering a trade up for JJM. I think he can be a good QB, but a big part of the sell for him is the success he had --he's a winner, right? Except the NFL is a passing league and you don't win in the way Michigan did, at least not without an elite SF-level roster.
This is where I am at. The thrust of the thread, however, until section injected the 'processing the field' element, which I agree with 100%, was draft whichever QB at any cost, because it's not an exact science and he could be Allen or Jackson. I don't think Schoen operates that way. We have no idea if they view him as worth an any cost move up. The other QBs won't be available at 6...we don't think.
And took Daniel Jones the next year. It's not like they passed on Rosen and Darnold because they know what they're doing - it was just pure happenstance that they were saved from themselves by the otherwise indefensible decision to draft a RB 2nd overall.
these rhetorical question threads are getting dumber by the day.
the important thing to remember is picking good players at the most premium positions possible.
no team should force a pick on a player they dont like purely because they are tied to a position. that gets you nowhere. well not nowhere, fired, so i guess worse than nowhere.
Again, the point is the pundits ranking of QBs rarely ends up being the order of their success.
if that's the point sure but that's not what the OP says?
The point is often times there are QBs available who can be franchise changing, NYG will never get them if they don't draft them.
We heard the same crap in 2018, "can't force a QB pick." "Saquon is too good." "Figure out QB later."
Think how much joy that pick brought….and still brings!
Think how much joy that pick brought….and still brings!
Quote:
Oh, and we passed on Josh Allen and Brian Burns to take the quarterback by the name of Daniel Jones.
The point is often times there are QBs available who can be franchise changing, NYG will never get them if they don't draft them.
We heard the same crap in 2018, "can't force a QB pick." "Saquon is too good." "Figure out QB later."
The actions if Gettleman have nothing to do with the actions of Schoen
And what if they can’t get a QB?
Yet the people never want to give up on Daniel Jones. Year 6.
On or Zack Wilson.
Also, let's not forget, he walked away without one critical interview and never accounted for any of his failures.
Quote:
a quarterback for the sake of taking a quarterback, then you have Daniel Jones all over again.
Yet the people never want to give up on Daniel Jones. Year 6.
Not disagreeing with you there. They should cut bait. At least Drew Lock will throw it down the field.
It's when people reference a QB not being worth taken at #6. There's a good chance the 2nd best QB from the draft is available at 6. It rarely goes how people expect.
Of course they can get a QB, but is the QB THEY like obtainable.
Quote:
is an important thing to remember when it was obviously not the current front office that made those decisions?
It's when people reference a QB not being worth taken at #6. There's a good chance the 2nd best QB from the draft is available at 6. It rarely goes how people expect.
Oh, yeah, of course, but I don't see how those two are specifically relevant. Lamar went with pick 32.
The best QB in the draft may be available at 6.
Mahomes was the 2nd QB taken in his draft class and went 10th.
none of this is easy. and people get paid a lot of money to make these decisions and they all get a lot of them wrong.
If Dabs absorbs the scouting intel and thinks he can run his offense better with one of these guys (without having to overrationalize to make that decision), then just pull the trigger already.
QB is multitudes more of a force multiplier than any other position. Multitudes. And we know for a fact, we don’t have any good ones now.
Pull the trigger.
They did pass on Darnold/Rosen but they missed their best chance to draft a HoF QB also. They had a 50/50 shot and chose not to take a swing
They even could have drafted Barkley and Jackson with a small trade up from rd 2
Quote:
Oh, and we passed on Josh Allen and Brian Burns to take the quarterback by the name of Daniel Jones.
They did pass on Darnold/Rosen but they missed their best chance to draft a HoF QB also. They had a 50/50 shot and chose not to take a swing
They even could have drafted Barkley and Jackson with a small trade up from rd 2
You can play this game with every team in every draft.
31 teams passed on Tom Brady.
Quote:
Made the franchise a lot of money. Successful draft pick.
He was also phenomenal as a rookie. It sucks that he got injured year 2 and lost the ability to juke his way passed defenders. He truly could’ve been an all-time great.
His high ankle sprain had literally nothing to do with that
You do remember him having an ACL?
Quote:
In comment 16467779 Bob in VA said:
Quote:
Made the franchise a lot of money. Successful draft pick.
He was also phenomenal as a rookie. It sucks that he got injured year 2 and lost the ability to juke his way passed defenders. He truly could’ve been an all-time great.
His high ankle sprain had literally nothing to do with that
You do remember him having an ACL?
Quote:
Oh, and we passed on Josh Allen and Brian Burns to take the quarterback by the name of Daniel Jones.
They did pass on Darnold/Rosen but they missed their best chance to draft a HoF QB also. They had a 50/50 shot and chose not to take a swing
They even could have drafted Barkley and Jackson with a small trade up from rd 2
Hindsite is 20/20. Years ago they could have had Brady in the 5th round. If they went QB in 2018 it was said it would have been Rosen or Darnold. Jackson went 32nd meaning every team passed on him except 1
We would have looked a lot different with Barkley and Lavar together.
You're missing the point. Everyone projects where these QBs should go and it's always "don't force a QB", but whose to say Penix or Nix won't have strong NFL careers?
the important thing to remember is picking good players at the most premium positions possible.
no team should force a pick on a player they dont like purely because they are tied to a position. that gets you nowhere. well not nowhere, fired, so i guess worse than nowhere.
the important thing to remember is picking good players at the most premium positions possible.
no team should force a pick on a player they dont like purely because they are tied to a position. that gets you nowhere. well not nowhere, fired, so i guess worse than nowhere.
Again, the point is the pundits ranking of QBs rarely ends up being the order of their success.
Those players were passed up because of obvious risks they had. In hindsight it worked out, but they could have gone bust just as well. A big reason why they eventually emerged among the best in the league is because they possess elite physical traits which challenge defenses in unique ways. I'm all for taking a shot on Daniels or Maye if we can do so without being robbed blind. But I'm not considering a trade up for JJM. I think he can be a good QB, but a big part of the sell for him is the success he had --he's a winner, right? Except the NFL is a passing league and you don't win in the way Michigan did, at least not without an elite SF-level roster.
Quote:
Doesn’t seem like an important thing to remember heading into this draft
You're missing the point. Everyone projects where these QBs should go and it's always "don't force a QB", but whose to say Penix or Nix won't have strong NFL careers?
Who's to say Spencer Rattler won't? Or Michael Pratt? Or Joe Milton III?
We would have looked a lot different with Barkley and Lavar together.
Lavar?
Quote:
the miss was not necessarily taking Barkley. It was taking Barkley and missing the chance to do what the Ravens did and trading up for Lavar.
We would have looked a lot different with Barkley and Lavar together.
Lavar?
It was finally coming together in that Dallas game!
One thing you can point to, is no team that ever trade up to the top 5 for a QB ever won a Superbowl. Not one. Most of the trades that were successful for QBs were good teams that needed a QB and traded up in the 1st but not into the expensive top 5.
Look at some of the best QBs in recent history and many were not even top 10 picks. Brady, Rodgers, Dak, Cousins, Hurts, lamar jackson, Farve.
But even that information is flawed. every year is a different situation with different players but in general, the team that trades up for a QB fails. If the best you are going to get is the 4th QB, possibly the 1st QB on the Giants board, why not just sit at 6? See what happens at 4 and 5 and you may still get the same QB without trading up. If the the draft goes QB 1-3 then the Giants are guaranteed at least the 3rd best positional player and there are players rated extremely high in this draft. Don't get got.
Quote:
Yet the people never want to give up on Daniel Jones. Year 6.
Stupid take, absolutely stupid. The two are mutually exclusive. You can want to get away from Jones and yet, understand that the right QB is not available to you. The latter does not invalidate the former.
Not really a hard concept to understand and yet I see it daily. Yes I want another QB, but I also understand that if who they want is already taken before their spot or they are unable to obtain a trade at a reasonable/fair cost, then it is possible they only get a third tier QB late in the draft.
You'd be better off focusing on the objective qualities that successful quarterbacks have in common. Determining whether the prospect has those qualities, and then most importantly do they have more of those than Daniel Jones.
You'd be better off focusing on the objective qualities that successful quarterbacks have in common. Determining whether the prospect has those qualities, and then most importantly do they have more of those than Daniel Jones.
At this point, I am not sure that processing the field isn't the most important element for a QB. We know that is the one thing that is Jones downfall even more so than injury.
Yes, arm strength, pocket awareness and mobility are important. But I think being able to read the defense, pre and post snap trumps every other element.
Quote:
Some of you are bordering on cosmology trying to use draft position trends as a predictor of success. It's a very limited piece of subjective data, and not even close to a good reason to/not draft a player.
You'd be better off focusing on the objective qualities that successful quarterbacks have in common. Determining whether the prospect has those qualities, and then most importantly do they have more of those than Daniel Jones.
At this point, I am not sure that processing the field isn't the most important element for a QB. We know that is the one thing that is Jones downfall even more so than injury.
Yes, arm strength, pocket awareness and mobility are important. But I think being able to read the defense, pre and post snap trumps every other element.
Processing the field is something you don’t know for sure until you actually put the guy you drafted on the field
You'd be better off focusing on the objective qualities that successful quarterbacks have in common. Determining whether the prospect has those qualities, and then most importantly do they have more of those than Daniel Jones.
At this point, I am not sure that processing the field isn't the most important element for a QB. We know that is the one thing that is Jones downfall even more so than injury.
Yes, arm strength, pocket awareness and mobility are important. But I think being able to read the defense, pre and post snap trumps every other element.
That's the type of data teams are studying. The scouting and quality control staff know what systems these prospects were in, what their reads were, and what their success rate by scenario etc.
And then what mitigating factors existed, like team talent and level of competition.
That's how you make an investment. Not "well quarterbacks picked in the top 5 don't succeed, so better not do that."
I agree, you don't know how they're going to process your system. But you can analyze how they processed the system they were asked to manage in college.
Not a perfect analogue because of the differences in sophistication, but something you can use. When an amateur scout like Sy's can avail Jones doesn't have a quick mind, that's probably wildly obvious to a professional.
Quote:
Some of you are bordering on cosmology trying to use draft position trends as a predictor of success. It's a very limited piece of subjective data, and not even close to a good reason to/not draft a player.
You'd be better off focusing on the objective qualities that successful quarterbacks have in common. Determining whether the prospect has those qualities, and then most importantly do they have more of those than Daniel Jones.
At this point, I am not sure that processing the field isn't the most important element for a QB. We know that is the one thing that is Jones downfall even more so than injury.
Yes, arm strength, pocket awareness and mobility are important. But I think being able to read the defense, pre and post snap trumps every other element.
That's the type of data teams are studying. The scouting and quality control staff know what systems these prospects were in, what their reads were, and what their success rate by scenario etc.
And then what mitigating factors existed, like team talent and level of competition.
That's how you make an investment. Not "well quarterbacks picked in the top 5 don't succeed, so better not do that."
Yep. The level of sophisticated scouting has gotten better.
Those players were passed up because of obvious risks they had. In hindsight it worked out, but they could have gone bust just as well. A big reason why they eventually emerged among the best in the league is because they possess elite physical traits which challenge defenses in unique ways. I'm all for taking a shot on Daniels or Maye if we can do so without being robbed blind. But I'm not considering a trade up for JJM. I think he can be a good QB, but a big part of the sell for him is the success he had --he's a winner, right? Except the NFL is a passing league and you don't win in the way Michigan did, at least not without an elite SF-level roster.
This is where I am at. The thrust of the thread, however, until section injected the 'processing the field' element, which I agree with 100%, was draft whichever QB at any cost, because it's not an exact science and he could be Allen or Jackson. I don't think Schoen operates that way. We have no idea if they view him as worth an any cost move up. The other QBs won't be available at 6...we don't think.
And took Daniel Jones the next year. It's not like they passed on Rosen and Darnold because they know what they're doing - it was just pure happenstance that they were saved from themselves by the otherwise indefensible decision to draft a RB 2nd overall.
And sit behind Manning for more than 2 games. Darnolds situation with the Jets wasn't really great. Rosen I'm not sure it would have mattered
Quote:
these rhetorical question threads are getting dumber by the day.
the important thing to remember is picking good players at the most premium positions possible.
no team should force a pick on a player they dont like purely because they are tied to a position. that gets you nowhere. well not nowhere, fired, so i guess worse than nowhere.
Again, the point is the pundits ranking of QBs rarely ends up being the order of their success.
if that's the point sure but that's not what the OP says?