Before the draft someone (sorry to not give credit to the poster, I don’t remember who) started a thread asking what we wanted to see out of this draft, my answer was evidence there is a long term strategy.
From what I saw here, there is. It may not be optimal for some, but we hired Schoen and either have to trust him or find a new team. I won’t root for another team so I’m going with the former.
My thoughts on the long term strategy:
Starting off with QB. While we didn’t acquire one in this draft, I think enough has been reported where we can comfortably say The Giants tried to trade up and draft Drake Maye. They would not have done this if they viewed Daniel Jones as the franchise QB or long term starter. Like it or not, right now Daniel is an expensive bridge QB. I would expect the same long hard look at QB’s next year that our front office did this year.
I believe they view the 3 seasons (and 2 drafts) left on Daniel’s contract as their timeframe to find another QB. I don’t think they’ll force a pick next year either unless things go even more awry than this season.
Moving on, for the offensive side of the ball we signed 5 OL in FA and drafted 0, in some way I view this as the organization conceding that they don’t evaluate college OL well. I wonder out loud if the scouting teams will be changed around to accommodate this, maybe bringing in a OL specialist. I’m thinking the plan is to play the vets while the young players we have develop.
On skill positions, Schoen wants to build a team with an even balance of fast and quick players. Nabers, Hyatt and even Theo Johnson can get vertical and stretch the field. If a QB has any time at all we have some hard guys to defend deep. This should complement and open things up for players like Robinson and our 5th RD pick Tracy who is fun to watch in space.
The strategy with defense is clear, rush the passer. So far Schoen’s biggest investments have been pass rushers, using his highest draft pick on Thibodeaux and making his biggest splash in FA (via trade) by acquiring Brian Burns. Clearly getting to the QB is priority, we have 3 guys that can do it, I’d still like another that can step up.
In the secondary he clearly values intellegence over athleticism in the middle of the field, guys like Okereke and Nubin fit this bill. I still can’t figure out what he looks for in a corner as the players we’ve drafted have been all over the map physically and athletically.
Regarding timing, I think winning in 2022 was the worst thing for this franchise. We started a rebuild and delayed it a year because we saw ourselves as further ahead than we were. While I saw one of the beats refer to Schoen’s draft as very “win now” I fully disagree. The Nabers pick may have been a need, but we may not have the chance at a blue chip WR like that for years. When I look at a lot of our other picks, they matched needs, but we had needs everywhere expect LT and Nose guard…
Either way, I don’t think this thing is going to turn around fast. They’re going to play Jones whether we like it or not, but the end is coming. Mara has no more excuses if he fails this year. We’ve added 5 OL and WR that’s far better than one he’s played with in his entire career. At the very least Schoen has taken away a lot of the excuses.
Quote:
it was going to be the "right QB" or Nabers via the draft.
That may be true but still walking a illogical path with QB risk. Avoiding drafting any one because they may not be the right one is only increasing the overall risk that Schoen can't turn around the team in time before his clock runs out.
Lock doesn't get Schoen any closer to the right guy in 2025 either.
Perhaps that greases the wheels to replace Schoen, ultimately.
Quote:
In comment 16499526 JonC said:
Quote:
it was going to be the "right QB" or Nabers via the draft.
That may be true but still walking a illogical path with QB risk. Avoiding drafting any one because they may not be the right one is only increasing the overall risk that Schoen can't turn around the team in time before his clock runs out.
Lock doesn't get Schoen any closer to the right guy in 2025 either.
Perhaps that greases the wheels to replace Schoen, ultimately.
We can all agree it's prolonging the agony, no doubt.
This is also why I beat the drum to draft Herbert in 2020, as I never liked Jones.
Quote:
"What impact is Nabers going to make with no one to get him the ball?"
Jones is not a good QB.
But's he not Zach Wilson or Mac Jones either.
If Jones can throw TD passes to Darius Slayton, he can do so with Malik Nabers.
Your bigger fear should be Malik making Jones look good.
But Jones can't throw touchdown passes to Slayton. I expect the Giants are at or near the bottom of the league in touchdown passes if you totaled up the past five years. I expect them to be at or near the bottom of the league again in 2024.
a 7 is better then a 5.
a 7 is better then a 5.
Or they think while he may be a 7, he will play down to a 5 with the current talent the Giants would have had without Nabers whereas in future years they think they are more likely to get a QB who is at least a 7 versus a WR of Nabers's caliber.
Quote:
that they don't view McCarthy as an upgrade over Jones should be setting off alarm bells for anyone watching them evaluate QB's.
a 7 is better then a 5.
Or they think while he may be a 7, he will play down to a 5 with the current talent the Giants would have had without Nabers whereas in future years they think they are more likely to get a QB who is at least a 7 versus a WR of Nabers's caliber.
I can see this point, although JJM seems like one of the QBs more likely to succeed with less than Penix or Nix. Nevertheless, I agree with your point and I think the fact that we still owe DJ 70 million minimum over the next two years was a factor too. We couldn't get the full benefit of the rookie deal, only 1/3-1/2 of it essentially.
Also, pretty sure he can read defenses, based on their actions in the draft just sayin’
Luv you guys :)
I think he can read defenses too, but in the same way my fifth grade son can read Ulysses.
Show him a diagrammed play on a chalkboard and I'm sure he can see elements that would elude all of us. But in real-time can he do it fast enough to take advantage? Doesn't seem like it.
The 7 in this case would also be cheaper and come with a sense of hope instead of despair.
Quote:
In comment 16498934 JT039 said:
Quote:
not drafting a QB who didnt meet the value - no plan
draft a QB at 8 who may sit at least 3 years - team with a plan.
Got it....
FLAG! Illegal strawman on the field.
No one here, to my knowledge at least, has admired the Falcons' pick. Maybe someone admired the player they picked, but has anyone said, "Damn, the Falcons sure know what they're doing!"
The Terps defender!!!!!
Is this what's bothering you that you say it even response to a post that had nothing to do with Terps? Shit, I'm sorry, when I feel up for defending someone who is very sensitive and makes witless insults I'll keep an eye out for your posts too.
The 7 in this case would also be cheaper and come with a sense of hope instead of despair.
But if they think they will have a shot at a 7 or better QB next year who will have Nabers versus taking the 7 this year and not thinking they will have that WR talent next year which is better in the long term? Coming with a sense of hope does nothing in terms of adding to win total.
Probably no Sanders, maybe no Ward, maybe no Milroe. Beck, Ewers, Dart, Leonard
Quote:
And will be debated endlessly on her for quite some time.
Equally concerning is the OL. This is a position group that hasn’t been solved for over a decade — across multiple GMs, HCs, and position coaches.
What was the solution this off-season? New OL coach and bargain FA band aid signings. Same playbook that’s been used in the past here multiple times. Then they leaned on that to avoid drafting OL in a deep class (fixed once and for all like Gettleman).
If they manage to get a QB in ‘25 or ‘26, most of these guys currently on the roster will be at or near the end of their respective contracts. So there’s a good chance we’ll be scrambling to fill out the OL depth chart at the same time we’re trying to bring on a new QB.
I can;'t figure out if you're not paying attention, trolling, or just this dense.
We can go with dense, because I’m not confident what they did this off-season sets the OL up for anything more than potential mediocrity and it sure as hell isn’t setting them up for the long term.
Green Bay and Oakland let our prized FA OL walk in FA for relatively cheap deals and added OL in the draft instead. What does that tell you?
Green Bay and Oakland let our prized FA OL walk in FA for relatively cheap deals and added OL in the draft instead. What does that tell you?
That's been a funny statement since the draft: the Giants are set along the offensive line. I could scarcely believe what I was reading in the thread about the Giants drafting no one in the trenches.
The Giants are set on the OL? OK...
So basically we have another rocket scientist playing the race card
Disgraceful
The time to move off Jones was after 2021.
I thought QB made sense this year since you could give him through 2025 and then reassess. This could align perfectly with a regime change too if it didn't work. The days of a 4 year runway are over. Look at Pickett.
Not to mention, this FO has shown repeatedly that they don't think a 7 is a clear upgrade over a 5 and I strongly suspect, they can't tell the difference between a 7 or a 5.
Quote:
Green Bay and Oakland let our prized FA OL walk in FA for relatively cheap deals and added OL in the draft instead. What does that tell you?
That's been a funny statement since the draft: the Giants are set along the offensive line. I could scarcely believe what I was reading in the thread about the Giants drafting no one in the trenches.
The Giants are set on the OL? OK...
Exactly. I know you’re laser focused on the QB position and rightfully so. But the OL has been the bigger problem for this franchise for well over a decade.
Their inability to get it right ruined the back half of Eli’s career and arguably got countless people fired. Regardless of what anyone thinks of Jones, the OL that’s been in place surely didn’t set him up to get the most out of him (whatever that is).
But the retort will be “but but but no one has spent more resources on the OL than the Giants.” Which is what was said 5 years ago, and 10 years ago. Which is a completely worthless and irrelevant talking point when you have a historically bad OL and arguably the worst OL in the league over the last decade.
What are you talking about?
That's been a funny statement since the draft: the Giants are set along the offensive line. I could scarcely believe what I was reading in the thread about the Giants drafting no one in the trenches.
The Giants are set on the OL? OK...
There were 55 OLs drafted across all positions. I believe the Giants were one of two teams in the draft who did not draft an OL. The other was Carolina. But they spent over $150M on Hunt and Lewis to fill their G issues.
Quote:
and keep that in mind when evaluating the QB's for next year. Mara has a type and anyone who can't pass that test won't be drafted by the team, regardless of talent.
So basically we have another rocket scientist playing the race card
Disgraceful
Not necessarily a race card. "Type" doesn't mean "race," and if Mara has a type, I would imagine that guys like Aaron Rodgers and Baker Mayfield don't fit.
Quote:
That's been a funny statement since the draft: the Giants are set along the offensive line. I could scarcely believe what I was reading in the thread about the Giants drafting no one in the trenches.
The Giants are set on the OL? OK...
There were 55 OLs drafted across all positions. I believe the Giants were one of two teams in the draft who did not draft an OL. The other was Carolina. But they spent over $150M on Hunt and Lewis to fill their G issues.
And the Giants spent $44 million on two OL starters and another $6 million on three veteran back-ups who have started. We'll see which was the smarter strategy.
It isn’t haircut. Mara wants milquetoast.
Care to clarify the racial angle ?
What are you talking about?
Relative to the rest of the market? Yes.
These moves weren’t that different than signing Feliciano and Glowinski a few years ago.
Feliciano was signed to 1-year, $3.25 million deal. Glowinksi was signed to a 3-year, $18 million deal.
There were 55 OLs drafted across all positions. I believe the Giants were one of two teams in the draft who did not draft an OL. The other was Carolina. But they spent over $150M on Hunt and Lewis to fill their G issues.
And the Giants spent $44 million on two OL starters and another $6 million on three veteran back-ups who have started. We'll see which was the smarter strategy.
Right.
I just noticed Washington had a similar investment strategy in free agency. They invested $44M on two starters and another $4.5M on two back-ups. But they drafted an OG in the third round, Brandon Coleman.
Giants #1 in OL Draft Capital Investment the past 5 yrs - ( New Window )
Feliciano was signed to 1-year, $3.25 million deal. Glowinksi was signed to a 3-year, $18 million deal.
Glowinski was 3 for 20 2 years ago. I think it’s a fair assumption that he’d be looking at 3 for 30 if he was hitting the market now vs then.
Quote:
In comment 16499991 bw in dc said:
There were 55 OLs drafted across all positions. I believe the Giants were one of two teams in the draft who did not draft an OL. The other was Carolina. But they spent over $150M on Hunt and Lewis to fill their G issues.
And the Giants spent $44 million on two OL starters and another $6 million on three veteran back-ups who have started. We'll see which was the smarter strategy.
Right.
I just noticed Washington had a similar investment strategy in free agency. They invested $44M on two starters and another $4.5M on two back-ups. But they drafted an OG in the third round, Brandon Coleman.
Redskins also cut some OL so they netted fewer OL than the Giants
Quote:
3-years, $30 million is a big investment for a guard.
Feliciano was signed to 1-year, $3.25 million deal. Glowinksi was signed to a 3-year, $18 million deal.
Glowinski was 3 for 20 2 years ago. I think it’s a fair assumption that he’d be looking at 3 for 30 if he was hitting the market now vs then.
Just take the loss.
You're dead wrong.
They have spent more draft capital on the position than any other team in the last five years (not opinion, statistical reality).
They have spent big money on the OL in the last 10 years.
It's not the commitment, it's the results.
But it doesn't fit your narrative so you keep saying the sky isn't blue.
Quote:
In comment 16500075 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
3-years, $30 million is a big investment for a guard.
Feliciano was signed to 1-year, $3.25 million deal. Glowinksi was signed to a 3-year, $18 million deal.
Glowinski was 3 for 20 2 years ago. I think it’s a fair assumption that he’d be looking at 3 for 30 if he was hitting the market now vs then.
Just take the loss.
You're dead wrong.
They have spent more draft capital on the position than any other team in the last five years (not opinion, statistical reality).
They have spent big money on the OL in the last 10 years.
It's not the commitment, it's the results.
But it doesn't fit your narrative so you keep saying the sky isn't blue.
Why does that matter?
Their OL is dogshit and has been dogshit for over a decade. What picks they’ve used or money they’ve spent in the past is completely irrelevant.
RIGHT NOW they’re coming off a historically bad OL season and their solution is to bargain shop vets and hope to coach up Neal. Zero added in the draft. If the OL sucks yet again, they deserve to be scrutinized for that just as much if not more as the QB decision.
The FO acknowledged the OL is a problem. The owner acknowledged it’s a problem. They’ve actually been more transparent about the shittiness of the OL than the QB position.
Going into Thursday, if I told you we would come out of this draft with no OLs or DLs, would you have believed me?
Quote:
Giants had six picks.
Going into Thursday, if I told you we would come out of this draft with no OLs or DLs, would you have believed me?
Yes. I wrote an article on it. I said the Giants had more needs than picks and six wasn't going to cover it. OL was an obvious candidate because of their free agent activity.
All of your posts were "the Giants ignore the trenches."
The good news is we've landed at dense as the answer.
Redskins also cut some OL so they netted fewer OL than the Giants
I get it. It just seems the entire league is always chasing OLs and keeping that pipeline lined with young prospects is a good idea.
Quote:
Redskins also cut some OL so they netted fewer OL than the Giants
I get it. It just seems the entire league is always chasing OLs and keeping that pipeline lined with young prospects is a good idea.
Didn’t we draft McKathean, Ezuedu, Neal, and JSS the last two drafts?
How many OL should we have? After signing something like 7 this offseason?
It’s like people ignore facts here.
All of your posts were "the Giants ignore the trenches."
The good news is we've landed at dense as the answer.
If you can’t see the point I’m making then that’s your problem. But carry on, I’ll be looking forward to your empty “but the giants spend so much on the OL” after yet another year of shitty OL play. The same boilerplate retort you’ve been saying for a decade.
Quote:
In comment 16500087 Mike in NY said:
Quote:
Redskins also cut some OL so they netted fewer OL than the Giants
I get it. It just seems the entire league is always chasing OLs and keeping that pipeline lined with young prospects is a good idea.
Didn’t we draft McKathean, Ezuedu, Neal, and JSS the last two drafts?
How many OL should we have? After signing something like 7 this offseason?
It’s like people ignore facts here.
How many are actually worth a shit? If Schoen signed you tomorrow as OG depth, should we feel better about the OL because he added another body?
You're also not listening.
Bad combination.
FFS, there are other positions of need.
Didn’t we draft McKathean, Ezuedu, Neal, and JSS the last two drafts?
How many OL should we have? After signing something like 7 this offseason?
It’s like people ignore facts here.
While it is true we have drafted a lot and signed a lot, I'm not sure why that would preclude us from shopping for more. Especially with all of the duds we have landed trying to fix the problem for a decade.
I don't recall all of the pre-draft discussions, but many were about finding other OLs in this draft.
When I saw we were one of two teams that didn't draft one, that surprised me. So, I raised it. I would not have imagined wondering why we didn't draft more OL would suddenly be considered taboo around here.
They had six picks.
They had significant needs at QB, RB, WR, TE, OL, DL, CB, S.
They had six picks.
They had significant needs at QB, RB, WR, TE, OL, DL, CB, S.
I cede the point on the six picks.
It's not as incredulous as not drafting a QB, but it is amazing to me that that was the outcome. With our history over the last decade trying to solve that grouping, I still would have thought we would grab one.
They had six picks.
They had significant needs at QB, RB, WR, TE, OL, DL, CB, S.
Eric, to bw’s point, we had offer(s) to trade down and still get what we had graded as a first round talent although maybe not quite as high as Nabers. Brian Thomas Jr. or our choice of defensive players plus other picks might prove better than Nabers alone if we determined that no QB was worth #6 after Maye was drafted. Additionally, in Round 6 while you aren’t getting elite talent, someone like Christian Mahogany or Michael Pratt might have helped more than our actual pick who was the type of player teams sign as UDFA.
Quote:
they would have loved to have added offensive linemen. They would have loved to added 5 new players at every position.
They had six picks.
They had significant needs at QB, RB, WR, TE, OL, DL, CB, S.
Eric, to bw’s point, we had offer(s) to trade down and still get what we had graded as a first round talent although maybe not quite as high as Nabers. Brian Thomas Jr. or our choice of defensive players plus other picks might prove better than Nabers alone if we determined that no QB was worth #6 after Maye was drafted. Additionally, in Round 6 while you aren’t getting elite talent, someone like Christian Mahogany or Michael Pratt might have helped more than our actual pick who was the type of player teams sign as UDFA.
Our 6th round pick is supposedly an excellent special teams player and a very good coverage LB. Two areas of need on the team.
Quote:
In comment 16500227 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
they would have loved to have added offensive linemen. They would have loved to added 5 new players at every position.
They had six picks.
They had significant needs at QB, RB, WR, TE, OL, DL, CB, S.
Eric, to bw’s point, we had offer(s) to trade down and still get what we had graded as a first round talent although maybe not quite as high as Nabers. Brian Thomas Jr. or our choice of defensive players plus other picks might prove better than Nabers alone if we determined that no QB was worth #6 after Maye was drafted. Additionally, in Round 6 while you aren’t getting elite talent, someone like Christian Mahogany or Michael Pratt might have helped more than our actual pick who was the type of player teams sign as UDFA.
Our 6th round pick is supposedly an excellent special teams player and a very good coverage LB. Two areas of need on the team.
I will give you special teams, but in terms of coverage his lack of size and speed make him more of a 2 down run stuffer versus someone you want in space against TE from the scouting reports I saw. That makes him more like Micah McFadden.