I know what has happened here in recent years, so don’t witch hunt. I do have firsthand knowledge of this. Take it for what you will. Schoen and Poles are talking trade for the top pick. I don’t have parameters etc, but I know for a fact initial terms have been exchanged. The thinking is that QB will be the top 3 picks in the draft with Williams declaring officially.
Just thought I’d pass along…
Bought the good whisky
That way im prepared either way
I wonder which QB they like best.
ok skippy.. maybe you should watch some video of him. He's the best QB in this draft, by far. If/when we get him you'll be thrilled.
Big fan of having enough conviction to control your own destiny, mnake your move, and own it. Don't let the other teams draft strategy impact your moves.
Would tell us how many QBs they like.
No giving up a King’s Ransom on a QB crapshoot.
Ugh.
Eli Manning?
I think it would be maye.
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
Sounds like more smoke than I thought.
Absolutely! Thansk BLU!
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. If Joe is able pkg a deal and get Caleb, that would amp up this franchise. Obviously there’d be no guarantees of success, but to finally have an A+ QB prospect would be welcomed sight.
Sounds like more smoke than I thought.
Cat out of the bag?
Quote:
In comment 16365691 AcidTest said:
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
What do you think the Giants would have to give up to get to #1?
I'd imagine the most valuable players in trade are those on rookie deals: Thibodeaux, Banks, Hyatt come to mind.
Sounds like more smoke than I thought.
Grit...I've been following your posts.....Ive seen smoke about Nix....but i prefer this smoke much more lol.
What they actually did was decided at the time the pick came up.
WAY to early to claim someone knows what Schoen will do.
Not going to be cheap, but so needs to happen.
Acid... You (and others) might find the video linked below interesting, as it tends to support trading down, rather than trading up.
It also brings up a point that I hadn't considered. Since the average age of NFL owners is 75, they tend to support "win now" decisions, which may not be in the best long-term interests of their team.
Having said all that. Do it Joe! Go get Caleb!!
NFL Draft Video - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 16365691 AcidTest said:
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
Maybe, but given how it played out, how did that trade hurt the Giants? I wasn’t crazy with how Ernie handled that trade - I would have forced SD to commit before the pick was made - but in the end it worked out pretty well. We have no idea how Ben would have handled living in NY.
Quote:
Posted about his dream scenario is Giants getting the first overall pick in a trade up for Williams, I said mentioned there was smoke in this chimney.
Sounds like more smoke than I thought.
Cat out of the bag?
Hard to dispute that. Given the amount of regime changes top 5 I have a feeling Schoen would want a trade up done sooner rather than later even if he needs to overpay a bit. Don't give someone like Washington time to establish a board and make a move. If you love Williams (the Giants do) you make that move ASAP
Quote:
In comment 16365691 AcidTest said:
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
Manning cost two ones, a three and a five.
I believe there was, but it came from a troll Twitter account.
yep.. no guts, no glory.
It was a parody account on Twitter. Good ole Wes Steinberg
C'mon Joe, do your best to get it done.
No giving up a King’s Ransom on a QB crapshoot.
Ugh.
This!!!
BLUATHRT - thank you for the info.
Quote:
Posted about his dream scenario is Giants getting the first overall pick in a trade up for Williams, I said mentioned there was smoke in this chimney.
Sounds like more smoke than I thought.
Grit...I've been following your posts.....Ive seen smoke about Nix....but i prefer this smoke much more lol.
I keep some things close to vest, waiting a bit to share. Not good for a variety of reasons to immediately post some of the things I hear.
Its still really early. Its not necessarily that you get bad info but situations are always fluid.
Waiting for a temp check after they interview these guys.
If a trade up happens before then that tells you how convicted they are.
No giving up a King’s Ransom on a QB crapshoot.
Ugh.
And go into the season with Tyrod Taylor, Jones and who knows at QB?
Thats your ‘ugh’ right there.
Quote:
In comment 16365697 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
In comment 16365691 AcidTest said:
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
What do you think the Giants would have to give up to get to #1?
#6, #39, #47, 2025 #1, 2026 #1, and maybe a second or third round pick in 2025 or 2026. As I said, I would rather trade players than picks, but the Bears may want only picks.
There are a lot of factors that significantly increase the price:
(1) The whole league knows the Jones contract is one of the worst in the history of the NFL. Schoen is responsible for that contract. They know he needs to make a "big splash" to try and make up for that massive mistake.
(2) Washington and NE likely won't trade at all, which means the Bears are the only prospective trading partner for anyone who wants one of the "big three" QBs.
(3) The Bears would be giving up the chance to draft one of the "big three" QBs. Their GM would likely get fired if he did so and any of them became a franchise QB, or at last siginficantly outplayed Fields. He could also reset the QB rookie contract by drafting a QB and trading Fields, for whom he could likely get a second round pick.
Would tell us how many QBs they like.
Giants have more to offer especially if they are moving up further
Quote:
In comment 16365706 AcidTest said:
Quote:
In comment 16365697 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
In comment 16365691 AcidTest said:
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
What do you think the Giants would have to give up to get to #1?
#6, #39, #47, 2025 #1, 2026 #1, and maybe a second or third round pick in 2025 or 2026. As I said, I would rather trade players than picks, but the Bears may want only picks.
There are a lot of factors that significantly increase the price:
(1) The whole league knows the Jones contract is one of the worst in the history of the NFL. Schoen is responsible for that contract. They know he needs to make a "big splash" to try and make up for that massive mistake.
(2) Washington and NE likely won't trade at all, which means the Bears are the only prospective trading partner for anyone who wants one of the "big three" QBs.
(3) The Bears would be giving up the chance to draft one of the "big three" QBs. Their GM would likely get fired if he did so and any of them became a franchise QB, or at last siginficantly outplayed Fields. He could also reset the QB rookie contract by drafting a QB and trading Fields, for whom he could likely get a second round pick.
I think you are overvaluing that pick quite a bit. The Panthers move from 9 to 1 last year for a 23 & 24 1st, 2023 2nd and 2024 3rd + DJ Moore.
Quote:
In comment 16365697 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
In comment 16365691 AcidTest said:
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
Manning cost two ones, a three and a five.
Technically yes, but we got a one back from San Diego when we moved up for Manning. The #1 and the #4 cancelled each other out.
This isn’t a fucking video game or a vacuum. The only given here is what we know already; trading for Eli Manning won the franchise two Super Bowls and he won two Super Bowl MVPs.
JFC. Some people.
Quote:
In comment 16365713 GiantGrit said:
Quote:
Posted about his dream scenario is Giants getting the first overall pick in a trade up for Williams, I said mentioned there was smoke in this chimney.
Sounds like more smoke than I thought.
Grit...I've been following your posts.....Ive seen smoke about Nix....but i prefer this smoke much more lol.
I keep some things close to vest, waiting a bit to share. Not good for a variety of reasons to immediately post some of the things I hear.
Its still really early. Its not necessarily that you get bad info but situations are always fluid.
Waiting for a temp check after they interview these guys.
If a trade up happens before then that tells you how convicted they are.
100%, thats the way you should approach sharing info. Appreciate it! Its a long way til April. I'll be on the look out.
Because i'm antsy id love a deal to get done way before the draft. Wouldnt serve Chicago well to do so imo though.
I think they want to keep building with Fields.
People were saying the same thing about CJ Stroud last year. That worked out well.
We need him to confirm this lol.
Are you also part of the "Ohio State Never Produces Good NFL QBs Club", too?
We need him to confirm this lol.
Soti or gloveone?
The other unspoken key is that the Chargers got Philip Rivers back, the guy they preferred anyways. #1-3 dealing back to 6 means they probably won't get a top QB.
Quote:
name escapes me right now. From what ive been told it had to be someone in tom condons camp, very involved.
We need him to confirm this lol.
Soti or gloveone?
gloveone! Thats it. Always got a kick out of that story. I wasn't on BBI back then.
Quote:
In comment 16365800 The Dude said:
Quote:
name escapes me right now. From what ive been told it had to be someone in tom condons camp, very involved.
We need him to confirm this lol.
Soti or gloveone?
gloveone! Thats it. Always got a kick out of that story. I wasn't on BBI back then.
BBI was a wild place in 2004-2005.
I don't get the bust talk tied to a school when the coaches and schemes are completely different.
Carson Palmer had a good career, but that also has nothing to do with Caleb Williams and Lincoln Riley.
Quote:
In comment 16365691 AcidTest said:
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
The cost will be high but as I mentioned on another thread:
Our 2024 1, 3, 5, 2025 1 and 3 and KT would get us there.
That’s way too much draft capital.
Way.
Never gonna go down like that.
Never.
This has all been planned from the start.
ha ha ha ha (evil laugh)
USC
North Carolina
LSU
Each one of those schools has had busts at the QB position. Hard to just eliminate a school that way. Mahomes was knocked down some for play at TT. Stroud for the history of Ohio St QB's. Maye will have to over come the Trubisky bust pick stigma. LSU, yeah they had Joe Burrow and they also had JaMarcus Russell..
I say we deal with the now and the player, not the past and someone elses history!
LOL me. And I'm definitely not the real Danny Kanell.
The Bears traded their pick to the Panthers last season in early March. So that regime has a track record of not waiting until “the very last minute”.
If true, now is the time to discuss parameters. For all scenarios. It’s time to establish the market. Nothing will happen anytime soon.
If what the OP says is true, it just means we are exploring it. Which would be more than previous regimes would do.
I don't think they have to wait until the last minute to get their deal and a great offer(s). But seems like things like this heat up after the Combine and conclude no later than early April.
Quote:
In comment 16365706 AcidTest said:
Quote:
In comment 16365697 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
In comment 16365691 AcidTest said:
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
Manning cost two ones, a three and a five.
Technically yes, but we got a one back from San Diego when we moved up for Manning. The #1 and the #4 cancelled each other out.
Sorry, I see this logic more and more but it's just wrong. They don't cancel out. Pick one is way more valuable than pick 4. If pick one and four were equal they wouldn't have had to give up the other three picks. Pick 1 cancelled out two 1sts, a 3rd and a 5th. It was one pick in exchange for four picks, not three. This is an insane way to look at a trade. If they only gave up a 1, 3 and 5 for Manning that would mean they kept pick 4. SD would obviously not have made the trade without pick 4.
It's a weird way to try to make it sound like they gave up less. To put it another way, imagine if it was only players and it was Manning for Rivers and Barber. Would you say they only gave up Barber to get Manning? No.
Quote:
But as I stated earlier, why wouldn't Bears wait until the very last minute (April)? I guess OP didn't mention timing but just weird to pass along now..
The Bears traded their pick to the Panthers last season in early March. So that regime has a track record of not waiting until “the very last minute”.
Very fair point
You also want time for the rumors to circulate that the Giants are looking to move up so that the QB hungry teams sitting at #2 and #3 start thinking about the need to move up to get their preferred guy. I am guessing most teams are not thinking "any one of Williams, Maye and Daniels is fine with us."
You also want time for the rumors to circulate that the Giants are looking to move up so that the QB hungry teams sitting at #2 and #3 start thinking about the need to move up to get their preferred guy. I am guessing most teams are not thinking "any one of Williams, Maye and Daniels is fine with us."
Yes. Build up some competitive tension, pick your stalking horse and then use that to see if anybody will overbid. And then you strike.
Or you can do the Gettleman Approach and turn off your cell phone.
I like Maye. What makes you think this?
it publicly? There will be many more claims announced by others
Quote:
In comment 16365744 k2tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 16365706 AcidTest said:
Quote:
In comment 16365697 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
In comment 16365691 AcidTest said:
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
Manning cost two ones, a three and a five.
Technically yes, but we got a one back from San Diego when we moved up for Manning. The #1 and the #4 cancelled each other out.
Sorry, I see this logic more and more but it's just wrong. They don't cancel out. Pick one is way more valuable than pick 4. If pick one and four were equal they wouldn't have had to give up the other three picks. Pick 1 cancelled out two 1sts, a 3rd and a 5th. It was one pick in exchange for four picks, not three. This is an insane way to look at a trade. If they only gave up a 1, 3 and 5 for Manning that would mean they kept pick 4. SD would obviously not have made the trade without pick 4.
It's a weird way to try to make it sound like they gave up less. To put it another way, imagine if it was only players and it was Manning for Rivers and Barber. Would you say they only gave up Barber to get Manning? No.
I understand what you're saying, but I think in this case I think #1 and #4 did cancel each other out because as someone else said, San Diego likely wanted Rivers all along, or at a minimum thought that Rivers plus the #1, #3, and #5 was better than Manning. They knew they could get Rivers in a trade with the Giants and also get all those extra picks. But the broader point is that we could have taken Ben R at #4 without giving up any picks. Eli had a great career but so did Ben R.
Quote:
In comment 16365744 k2tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 16365706 AcidTest said:
Quote:
In comment 16365697 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
In comment 16365691 AcidTest said:
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
Manning cost two ones, a three and a five.
Technically yes, but we got a one back from San Diego when we moved up for Manning. The #1 and the #4 cancelled each other out.
Sorry, I see this logic more and more but it's just wrong. They don't cancel out. Pick one is way more valuable than pick 4. If pick one and four were equal they wouldn't have had to give up the other three picks. Pick 1 cancelled out two 1sts, a 3rd and a 5th. It was one pick in exchange for four picks, not three. This is an insane way to look at a trade. If they only gave up a 1, 3 and 5 for Manning that would mean they kept pick 4. SD would obviously not have made the trade without pick 4.
It's a weird way to try to make it sound like they gave up less. To put it another way, imagine if it was only players and it was Manning for Rivers and Barber. Would you say they only gave up Barber to get Manning? No.
JFC you're being intentionally obtuse on this. They only cancel each other out because of the other picks, which is the entire point of saying that Manning cost a 1, a 3, and a 5, because obviously the delta between the canceled-out 1's is what they were buying. It's implied that whatever original pick from which the team is trading up is included in the package.
If the Giants had retained their #4 overall pick, and given up multiple future 1's, your insistence on the semantics would have merit. But the context of this conversation is very clearly what it would cost to trade up from #6 to #1, so it's again implied that the #6 pick will be included in whatever trade package the Giants would hypothetically give up.
I'm guessing Saquon's negotiating rights would be part of the deal. Bears have some talent at RB, but I think they would love Saquon.
I also wonder if they ask for Dexter to pair with Sweat and Walker.
I'm guessing:
#6, our second rounder, our first next year and Saquon.
+1
This is certainly a something burger. There was no guarantee that we'd be even interested in a QB.
That said I hope we don't do it.
If they have a WR like Nabers or Odunze with comparable grades to MHJ or if it gives them a chance to land an OT like Fashanu or Alt?
Honestly, it would be quite the rebuild. Bears would have two first top-10 picks, plus two first rounders next year, with their franchise QB in Fields and a rebuilt OL and WR corp.
I'm guessing Saquon's negotiating rights would be part of the deal. Bears have some talent at RB, but I think they would love Saquon.
I also wonder if they ask for Dexter to pair with Sweat and Walker.
I'm guessing:
#6, our second rounder, our first next year and Saquon.
free agency happens before the draft and the FT designation date is well in advance of then too.
So, unless you expect this trade to happen before FT date and free agency I doubt Saquon is included.
I assume since the GM doesn't have "Gettleman-brain" he's at least willing to listen to what the Giants (or any other team) have to offer.
Quote:
Maye and Caleb for a while now.
I'm guessing Saquon's negotiating rights would be part of the deal. Bears have some talent at RB, but I think they would love Saquon.
I also wonder if they ask for Dexter to pair with Sweat and Walker.
I'm guessing:
#6, our second rounder, our first next year and Saquon.
free agency happens before the draft and the FT designation date is well in advance of then too.
So, unless you expect this trade to happen before FT date and free agency I doubt Saquon is included.
Yep. TBH, I could see them being interested in Saquon. The Bears have a shit ton of cap space.
Quote:
dropped as far as 6.
If they have a WR like Nabers or Odunze with comparable grades to MHJ or if it gives them a chance to land an OT like Fashanu or Alt?
Honestly, it would be quite the rebuild. Bears would have two first top-10 picks, plus two first rounders next year, with their franchise QB in Fields and a rebuilt OL and WR corp.
Yep. It’s all on how they grade the WRs. Plus they’d get more in a trade down to 6 than an earlier pick
I think they want to keep building with Fields.
Couldn’t you make the same argument for Schoen and Daboll?
Quote:
In comment 16365911 Anakim said:
Quote:
Maye and Caleb for a while now.
I'm guessing Saquon's negotiating rights would be part of the deal. Bears have some talent at RB, but I think they would love Saquon.
I also wonder if they ask for Dexter to pair with Sweat and Walker.
I'm guessing:
#6, our second rounder, our first next year and Saquon.
free agency happens before the draft and the FT designation date is well in advance of then too.
So, unless you expect this trade to happen before FT date and free agency I doubt Saquon is included.
Yep. TBH, I could see them being interested in Saquon. The Bears have a shit ton of cap space.
So basically you think this trade happens in the next 6 weeks or the Giants use the FT on Saquon and trade him after that date. only way it can happen right?
Quote:
This is the biggest nothing burger of the day.
This is certainly a something burger. There was no guarantee that we'd be even interested in a QB.
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
We'll never know, but I wonder what would have happened if we held on to our picks (even traded back with Cleveland who wanted ours) and still gotten Rothelsberger and all those high picks.
The Panthers trade up was early last year if I recall.
They want to jump it because of the demand at the top for the top 3 QB’s. Atlanta is pushing hard.
Quote:
dropped as far as 6.
If they have a WR like Nabers or Odunze with comparable grades to MHJ or if it gives them a chance to land an OT like Fashanu or Alt?
Honestly, it would be quite the rebuild. Bears would have two first top-10 picks, plus two first rounders next year, with their franchise QB in Fields and a rebuilt OL and WR corp.
I think there is a qualitative gap with the other 2 WRs. We'll see what Sy says.
I assume since the GM doesn't have "Gettleman-brain" he's at least willing to listen to what the Giants (or any other team) have to offer.
The flip side of the QB comp argument is the Bears will have multiple number 1 picks on cheap rookie 5 year deals. Gives them a ton of flexibility for half a decade.
Quote:
Caleb Williams. Practically anyone else would be a better pick.
ok skippy.. maybe you should watch some video of him. He's the best QB in this draft, by far. If/when we get him you'll be thrilled.
Riiiight.
I’ll get on board, because I’m aware I’m not the GM, and I don’t have the info. What I do know is this Williams guy is overrated. Just like a number of 1st overall picks. The last truly good was Andrew Luck, and he’s not HOF. Caleb is fools gold.
Quote:
No trades could be made until the new league year starts. Now, you could agree in principal but not be finalized.
The Panthers trade up was early last year if I recall.
March 10 last year
Quote:
In comment 16365893 JonC said:
Quote:
dropped as far as 6.
If they have a WR like Nabers or Odunze with comparable grades to MHJ or if it gives them a chance to land an OT like Fashanu or Alt?
Honestly, it would be quite the rebuild. Bears would have two first top-10 picks, plus two first rounders next year, with their franchise QB in Fields and a rebuilt OL and WR corp.
I think there is a qualitative gap with the other 2 WRs. We'll see what Sy says.
Sy has already said there is not
Quote:
In comment 16365896 AnnapolisMike said:
Quote:
This is the biggest nothing burger of the day.
This is certainly a something burger. There was no guarantee that we'd be even interested in a QB.
. He is inquiry what it would cost to move up. Information he needs to know if he is to do his job. Nothing burger
Why would he want to move up if QB wasn't a need?
Quote:
would trade the overall #1 pick, as picking the QB of their choice resets the QB compensation timeline.
I assume since the GM doesn't have "Gettleman-brain" he's at least willing to listen to what the Giants (or any other team) have to offer.
The flip side of the QB comp argument is the Bears will have multiple number 1 picks on cheap rookie 5 year deals. Gives them a ton of flexibility for half a decade.
I hope you're right but, as you know, the QB position is by far the most expensive.
If Chicago stays with Fields next year they'll have to make a decision on his option before the 2025 season. And after 2025 they'll have to dump him or pay a mediocre QB $40-$50 million per.
If I were them, I'd take the better QB prospect and reset the QB compensation timeline.
Quote:
In comment 16365896 AnnapolisMike said:
Quote:
This is the biggest nothing burger of the day.
This is certainly a something burger. There was no guarantee that we'd be even interested in a QB.
. He is inquiry what it would cost to move up. Information he needs to know if he is to do his job. Nothing burger
Yea.. it's not as if the entire NFL knows the Giants need a QB and badly overpayed a mediocrity. Such a nothing.
Quote:
In comment 16365896 AnnapolisMike said:
Quote:
This is the biggest nothing burger of the day.
This is certainly a something burger. There was no guarantee that we'd be even interested in a QB.
. He is inquiry what it would cost to move up. Information he needs to know if he is to do his job. Nothing burger
Just like your posts in this thread. Dumbass.
Same
Agreed. I don't think he will succeed in the NFL
That's a steep price to pay, to watch Daniel Jones check it down to Wandale, and then have posters complain that Harrison is a bust when he fails to catch balls three feet over his head.
Quote:
Caleb Williams. Practically anyone else would be a better pick.
Agreed. I don't think he will succeed in the NFL
Fascinating. And what is your evaluation based on?
I'm guessing Saquon's negotiating rights would be part of the deal. Bears have some talent at RB, but I think they would love Saquon.
I also wonder if they ask for Dexter to pair with Sweat and Walker.
I'm guessing:
#6, our second rounder, our first next year and Saquon.
That’s quite a pivot from your declaration that it would take 3 first round picks just to start the conversation.
....but you'll still ride them hard if it doesnt work out :)
Quote:
In comment 16365713 GiantGrit said:
Quote:
Posted about his dream scenario is Giants getting the first overall pick in a trade up for Williams, I said mentioned there was smoke in this chimney.
Sounds like more smoke than I thought.
Cat out of the bag?
Hard to dispute that. Given the amount of regime changes top 5 I have a feeling Schoen would want a trade up done sooner rather than later even if he needs to overpay a bit. Don't give someone like Washington time to establish a board and make a move. If you love Williams (the Giants do) you make that move ASAP
How do you know the Giants love Williams?
Quote:
In comment 16365718 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
In comment 16365713 GiantGrit said:
Quote:
Posted about his dream scenario is Giants getting the first overall pick in a trade up for Williams, I said mentioned there was smoke in this chimney.
Sounds like more smoke than I thought.
Cat out of the bag?
Hard to dispute that. Given the amount of regime changes top 5 I have a feeling Schoen would want a trade up done sooner rather than later even if he needs to overpay a bit. Don't give someone like Washington time to establish a board and make a move. If you love Williams (the Giants do) you make that move ASAP
How do you know the Giants love Williams?
Most football people love Williams. He's has elite arm talent, creativity, leadership. He's going number one.
Quote:
Maye and Caleb for a while now.
I'm guessing Saquon's negotiating rights would be part of the deal. Bears have some talent at RB, but I think they would love Saquon.
I also wonder if they ask for Dexter to pair with Sweat and Walker.
I'm guessing:
#6, our second rounder, our first next year and Saquon.
That’s quite a pivot from your declaration that it would take 3 first round picks just to start the conversation.
If it's enough! Our first this year, a first next year, a second rounder plus Saquon. So it is kinda like 3 firsts.
Quote:
I found it very interesting how many times they visited Maye's games.
Same
100%. Maye fits the desired profile.
And I'm okay with Maye. He's underrated around here. Sure, he pulled back some this year, but the talent hasn't diminished.
I just hope Daniels is in the mix. It would be very disappointing otherwise.
Quote:
At least try!
....but you'll still ride them hard if it doesnt work out :)
No; I'll give them a hard time if it's clear early that they missed and they continue to chase a lost cause anyway. It's been 7 years of a self-imposed QB hell. Enough.
Might cause you to have many of the same cast on the offensive line . Same ole same ole at receiver. Robinson has emerged as a serious threat . The Edge probably doesn’t get fixed for a year . But If they are sold on one guy —not two-that’s important , trade with the Bears, while also staying close to the Cardinals . If , in fact , there are 2 guys that you are sold on .
Quote:
In comment 16365675 Go Terps said:
Quote:
At least try!
....but you'll still ride them hard if it doesnt work out :)
No; I'll give them a hard time if it's clear early that they missed and they continue to chase a lost cause anyway. It's been 7 years of a self-imposed QB hell. Enough.
Interestingly enough, the Giants have no problem doing this (right or wrong) with Head Coaches.
Williams won the heisman, we get it. That was a while ago, and I sure hope our football scouting isn’t “hey, bro…heisman and everyone loves him.”
You should be looking to upgrade every position, even QB.
I believe the chiefs like Alex smith and thought they could win with him, but went and got Mahomes because they thought he was at a whole other level.
If they see that special QB in the draft then go get him.
The Rams have shown that it is not about what picks you have but what you do with those picks.
Get your QB and fix your drafting.
Quote:
In comment 16365675 Go Terps said:
Quote:
At least try!
....but you'll still ride them hard if it doesnt work out :)
No; I'll give them a hard time if it's clear early that they missed and they continue to chase a lost cause anyway. It's been 7 years of a self-imposed QB hell. Enough.
Completely fair. The Steelers pulled the plug on Pickett in the middle of year two. Nobody gives their QB the leash that the giants do
Williams won the heisman, we get it. That was a while ago, and I sure hope our football scouting isn’t “hey, bro…heisman and everyone loves him.”
It's not Dan O. It's everybody. He has the most exciting tape in the field. Does it bother you that he paints his nails? He's unique, and is the closest thing to Mahomes. Let's hope we get him.
Quote:
In comment 16365672 knowledgetimmons said:
Quote:
Caleb Williams. Practically anyone else would be a better pick.
Agreed. I don't think he will succeed in the NFL
Fascinating. And what is your evaluation based on?
Same as yours. Watching film, games and highlights. I think he's got a ton of talent that won't necessarily translate in the NFL. He holds the ball for a very long time, throws most of his balls deep because he has WR's that get great separation. i don't see a lot of accurate throws over the middle into tight windows. I may be wrong as I'm not a professional scout either but that my opinion. Fascinated?
Quote:
In comment 16365697 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
In comment 16365691 AcidTest said:
Quote:
a fan of blockbuster trades for QBs. Most don't work out for the team trading up, and just leave it stripped of draft picks. But I would prefer trading players (anyone except Thomas or Lawrence) instead of picks. Maybe #6, KT, Neal, and another pick would be enough, but I'm not sure what the cap hits would be for trading KT and Neal.
Eli Manning?
Manning cost a #1, #3, and a #5. Getting from #6 to #1 is going to cost a lot more. The two situations aren't even close to being remotely similar in terms of cost. And a plausible argument can be made that the Manning trade was a mistake given that we should have stayed at #4 and taken Ben R and saved our draft picks.
The cost will be high but as I mentioned on another thread:
Our 2024 1, 3, 5, 2025 1 and 3 and KT would get us there.
That’s misleading. They technically get our ‘24 #1 but we get theirs so it’s a wash. So we’re actually giving up 4 picks total
Quote:
In comment 16365742 GiantGrit said:
Quote:
In comment 16365718 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
In comment 16365713 GiantGrit said:
Quote:
Posted about his dream scenario is Giants getting the first overall pick in a trade up for Williams, I said mentioned there was smoke in this chimney.
Sounds like more smoke than I thought.
Cat out of the bag?
Hard to dispute that. Given the amount of regime changes top 5 I have a feeling Schoen would want a trade up done sooner rather than later even if he needs to overpay a bit. Don't give someone like Washington time to establish a board and make a move. If you love Williams (the Giants do) you make that move ASAP
How do you know the Giants love Williams?
Most football people love Williams. He's has elite arm talent, creativity, leadership. He's going number one.
That doesn't mean the Giants do. Most people like pizza but my wife hates it even though it's cheesy and delicious. See what I mean. You do not know that the Giants feel the same as you or anyone else.
I think that's fans connecting the dots. Joe Schoen has drafted players from UNC football and the program has developed NFL talent with some degree of regularity recently.
Quote:
In comment 16366068 JFIB said:
Quote:
In comment 16365742 GiantGrit said:
Quote:
In comment 16365718 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
In comment 16365713 GiantGrit said:
Quote:
Posted about his dream scenario is Giants getting the first overall pick in a trade up for Williams, I said mentioned there was smoke in this chimney.
Sounds like more smoke than I thought.
Cat out of the bag?
Hard to dispute that. Given the amount of regime changes top 5 I have a feeling Schoen would want a trade up done sooner rather than later even if he needs to overpay a bit. Don't give someone like Washington time to establish a board and make a move. If you love Williams (the Giants do) you make that move ASAP
How do you know the Giants love Williams?
Most football people love Williams. He's has elite arm talent, creativity, leadership. He's going number one.
That doesn't mean the Giants do. Most people like pizza but my wife hates it even though it's cheesy and delicious. See what I mean. You do not know that the Giants feel the same as you or anyone else.
Grit is plugged in and has provided good info in the past
Quote:
In comment 16366052 JFIB said:
Quote:
In comment 16365672 knowledgetimmons said:
Quote:
Caleb Williams. Practically anyone else would be a better pick.
Agreed. I don't think he will succeed in the NFL
Fascinating. And what is your evaluation based on?
Same as yours. Watching film, games and highlights. I think he's got a ton of talent that won't necessarily translate in the NFL. He holds the ball for a very long time, throws most of his balls deep because he has WR's that get great separation. i don't see a lot of accurate throws over the middle into tight windows. I may be wrong as I'm not a professional scout either but that my opinion. Fascinated?
Sure.. but he's very accurate and has the best arm into tight intermediate windows in the class. Plus he throws great on the run. And his WRs were no great shakes this season, unlike Daniels who was playing with two first round WRs.
That doesn't mean the Giants do. Most people like pizza but my wife hates it even though it's cheesy and delicious. See what I mean. You do not know that the Giants feel the same as you or anyone else.
I like pizza but I prefer shawarma. I never spoke for the Giants, but Williams is widely liked in football circles, among fans though, many are put off by his quirkiness, which I view as a bunch of bullshit
Then again if we just give Jones 5 more years he may be good
If you don't understand by now that the Giants have their own calculations for what they want at QB, that's on you.
At this stage I deeply doubt they know what they think about any of these guys yet, because a QB decision involves so much more than what happened on the field.
Quote:
In comment 16366070 Manhattan
That doesn't mean the Giants do. Most people like pizza but my wife hates it even though it's cheesy and delicious. See what I mean. You do not know that the Giants feel the same as you or anyone else.
I like pizza but I prefer shawarma. I never spoke for the Giants, but Williams is widely liked in football circles, among fans though, many are put off by his quirkiness, which I view as a bunch of bullshit
Wow, you’re right! My mind has been clouded by the fact that he apparently paints his nails and also wants to re negotiate the CBA so his diva ass can be part owner of a team contingent on his rookie deal.
And here I was thinking he’s not played any good teams and lost to some marginal ones in the vaunted. PAC 12. Right. It’s the nails.
I would be surprised if he wasn't talking about trading picks.
Unless the OP is saying that he "means it", not just due diligence.
Then again if we just give Jones 5 more years he may be good
He definitely has some Mahomes-like qualities, especially in the pocket. He also reminds me of Lamar Jackson in that regard. He keeps plays alive with all of his pocket movement.
He doesn't bail from the pocket nearly as much as Daniels, who is a one read and run QB oftentimes. Williams extends plays. I wouldn't call that bailing.
We definitely know that Caleb Williams would go running to his mommy arms crying.
Quote:
In comment 16366113 JFIB said:
Quote:
In comment 16366070 Manhattan
That doesn't mean the Giants do. Most people like pizza but my wife hates it even though it's cheesy and delicious. See what I mean. You do not know that the Giants feel the same as you or anyone else.
I like pizza but I prefer shawarma. I never spoke for the Giants, but Williams is widely liked in football circles, among fans though, many are put off by his quirkiness, which I view as a bunch of bullshit
Wow, you’re right! My mind has been clouded by the fact that he apparently paints his nails and also wants to re negotiate the CBA so his diva ass can be part owner of a team contingent on his rookie deal.
And here I was thinking he’s not played any good teams and lost to some marginal ones in the vaunted. PAC 12. Right. It’s the nails.
Nail painting has been a pussy slayer move since the 1970s.
Just a hint of gender transgression to entice the ladies.
The teams drafting after NE and Wash have no reason to move to 1. They have their QBs. If they were to move to 1 it would be for MHJ, which I would defeat the purpose of Chicago moving back to get him
He doesn't bail from the pocket nearly as much as Daniels, who is a one read and run QB oftentimes. Williams extends plays. I wouldn't call that bailing.
How do you know Daniels in a one-read QB?
Quote:
He bails from the pocket an awful lot and I'm not sold on his personality, but the productivity is absolutely beyond question...
He doesn't bail from the pocket nearly as much as Daniels, who is a one read and run QB oftentimes. Williams extends plays. I wouldn't call that bailing.
He really does bail out of the pocket quite a bit and I get that he is extending the play but I don't think that's sustainable in the NFL. In my opinion, it's the QB's who make quick reads and get the ball out quickly are the ones who succeed in the NFL. I haven't seen a ton of tape showing Williams go through his progressions quickly and making a decisive throw.
Quote:
He doesn't bail from the pocket nearly as much as Daniels, who is a one read and run QB oftentimes. Williams extends plays. I wouldn't call that bailing.
How do you know Daniels in a one-read QB?
I'm not saying he can't do it. But Daniels' game at LSU was often pass to designed read then take off. You're not rushing for 200 if running isn't a primary option
Quote:
No I'm saying Chi might only be willing to trade with NE and Wash so they don't miss out on MHjr.
If I'm Chicago and decide not to pick a QB there's no way I'm also missing out on MHJR. So Im talking trade with teams drafting after NE and Wash so I can bait one of those teams into a trade. No way Chicago doesn't come out of this draft with either a QB or MHjr.
The teams drafting after NE and Wash have no reason to move to 1. They have their QBs. If they were to move to 1 it would be for MHJ, which I would defeat the purpose of Chicago moving back to get him
Quote:
You’re talking out your hole, how many football people do you know? Or are you saying that Dan Orlovsky and his ilk loves him, what’s the basis bud? I love reading shit online too, it doesn’t make much for an object fact.
Williams won the heisman, we get it. That was a while ago, and I sure hope our football scouting isn’t “hey, bro…heisman and everyone loves him.”
It's not Dan O. It's everybody. He has the most exciting tape in the field. Does it bother you that he paints his nails? He's unique, and is the closest thing to Mahomes. Let's hope we get him.
And every year we here about how Xxx is the next LT.
If you think he has the most exciting tape you haven't watched Daniels much. Let's compare his tape against Florida to Williams tape versus ND.
The fact is none of us know what the people who count think.
Quote:
In comment 16366158 Go Terps said:
Quote:
He bails from the pocket an awful lot and I'm not sold on his personality, but the productivity is absolutely beyond question...
He doesn't bail from the pocket nearly as much as Daniels, who is a one read and run QB oftentimes. Williams extends plays. I wouldn't call that bailing.
He really does bail out of the pocket quite a bit and I get that he is extending the play but I don't think that's sustainable in the NFL. In my opinion, it's the QB's who make quick reads and get the ball out quickly are the ones who succeed in the NFL. I haven't seen a ton of tape showing Williams go through his progressions quickly and making a decisive throw.
It works for Mahomes. But hey, we don't know if any of these guys will pick up that part of the NFL game. None of them are asked to adapt to late shifting defenses and then go through full progressions. It just so happens that Stroud is a natural at it, and possibly not Bryce. This is an unknown for all QB prospects. But I will say Williams has the best arm, so like Allen, Mahomes, and Rodgers he has a bit more margin for error.
Quote:
In comment 16366098 knowledgetimmons said:
Quote:
You’re talking out your hole, how many football people do you know? Or are you saying that Dan Orlovsky and his ilk loves him, what’s the basis bud? I love reading shit online too, it doesn’t make much for an object fact.
Williams won the heisman, we get it. That was a while ago, and I sure hope our football scouting isn’t “hey, bro…heisman and everyone loves him.”
It's not Dan O. It's everybody. He has the most exciting tape in the field. Does it bother you that he paints his nails? He's unique, and is the closest thing to Mahomes. Let's hope we get him.
And every year we here about how Xxx is the next LT.
If you think he has the most exciting tape you haven't watched Daniels much. Let's compare his tape against Florida to Williams tape versus ND.
The fact is none of us know what the people who count think.
I've watched Daniels. He's exciting too. But i think Williams is better.
The trade out of the #1 and not land MHjr seems too risky, assuming they value him way above Nabors and Rome.
Quote:
If I'm Chicago and decide not to pick a QB there's no way I'm also missing out on MHJR. So Im talking trade with teams drafting after NE and Wash so I can bait one of those teams into a trade. No way Chicago doesn't come out of this draft with either a QB or MHjr.
The trade out of the #1 and not land MHjr seems too risky, assuming they value him way above Nabors and Rome.
Yeah that's what I'm saying but NE and Wash are picking QBs so they are the only teams Chicago will trade the 1 to.
Here is the challenge for Poles. Fields could very easily be developed into Josh Allen-lite. They have very similar skills.
So, if you like the odds that that can happen with the right resources, it's very tempting to keep him.
According to Sy Penix throws very well in bad weather. I heard on the Athletic his hands are 10+ inches.
Why not try to get the 2nd pick as well?
Did you read the post? He claims to have firsthand knowledge...
Personally, not a fan of trading up. Though if Williams is Mahomes 2.0, it’s well worth it.
It shouldn’t cost more than Carolinas trade last year. Deeper draft class + Giants have a higher pick.
Quote:
In comment 16365911 Anakim said:
Quote:
Maye and Caleb for a while now.
I'm guessing Saquon's negotiating rights would be part of the deal. Bears have some talent at RB, but I think they would love Saquon.
I also wonder if they ask for Dexter to pair with Sweat and Walker.
I'm guessing:
#6, our second rounder, our first next year and Saquon.
That’s quite a pivot from your declaration that it would take 3 first round picks just to start the conversation.
If it's enough! Our first this year, a first next year, a second rounder plus Saquon. So it is kinda like 3 firsts.
Shades of the RGIII trade. Probably would be just as successful, too.
Quote:
In comment 16366056 Manhattan said:
Quote:
In comment 16366052 JFIB said:
Quote:
In comment 16365672 knowledgetimmons said:
Quote:
Caleb Williams. Practically anyone else would be a better pick.
Agreed. I don't think he will succeed in the NFL
Fascinating. And what is your evaluation based on?
Same as yours. Watching film, games and highlights. I think he's got a ton of talent that won't necessarily translate in the NFL. He holds the ball for a very long time, throws most of his balls deep because he has WR's that get great separation. i don't see a lot of accurate throws over the middle into tight windows. I may be wrong as I'm not a professional scout either but that my opinion. Fascinated?
Sure.. but he's very accurate and has the best arm into tight intermediate windows in the class. Plus he throws great on the run. And his WRs were no great shakes this season, unlike Daniels who was playing with two first round WRs.
His accuracy is way overblown by you. In fact, his 68.6% passing is bolstered by a lot of screen passes.
He has a big arm, I'll give you that. I don't see great poise under pressure, though. I see some panicky shit, some terrible decisions at times. His hero ball is going to cost him some games and if he doesn't learn from it and progress he will be a bust. There are times he doesn't feel or see the pressure coming when he should.
I watched Oregon and Colorado and yes, you see the high end positive plays, but there are also really bad ones...I mean really bad that you shake your head.
It's not enough that you can make highlight reel plays, you have to avoid mistakes, too. He does both and that concerns me.
If you still think Williams is more of an accurate passer than Jayden it's because you haven't watched enough film. Daniels is more accurate, and it's not just the stats supporting this. Even on completed passes, Daniels' ball placement, from my study, is superior to Williams.
That said, if it's true, it's an indication that Schoen and Daboll want to draft a quarterback. A good sign.
Personally, think Chicago should keep the pick and draft their own preferred quarterback. Hard to believe they will stick with Fields.
At #1 I would take Daniels. I like all 3 QB's quite a bit but Daniels is the best of the bunch imo. I'm not sure how well Williams would handle the NY media and I also just think Daniels is the better prospect physically.
That said, if it's true, it's an indication that Schoen and Daboll want to draft a quarterback. A good sign.
Personally, think Chicago should keep the pick and draft their own preferred quarterback. Hard to believe they will stick with Fields.
If you really believe the QB picked at #1 is a true franchise QB, there's no price that would be prohibitive. Obviously no team is ever oging to give up like 5 first rounders in a row or anything like that but any realistic trade possibility if the guy is an actual franchise QB there's no such thing as an overpay.
Giants can not go another year with this QB situation. Get a stud and finally give this franchise hope for the first time since hurricane sandy
I’d do something like this years first and a second and next years first.
Quote:
It's January. Schoen does his homework for the draft and is investigating what the price is for moving up, and it's likely to be prohibitive. He will have noted how things are for Carolina.
That said, if it's true, it's an indication that Schoen and Daboll want to draft a quarterback. A good sign.
Personally, think Chicago should keep the pick and draft their own preferred quarterback. Hard to believe they will stick with Fields.
If you really believe the QB picked at #1 is a true franchise QB, there's no price that would be prohibitive. Obviously no team is ever oging to give up like 5 first rounders in a row or anything like that but any realistic trade possibility if the guy is an actual franchise QB there's no such thing as an overpay.
Giants can not go another year with this QB situation. Get a stud and finally give this franchise hope for the first time since hurricane sandy
No team is giving up 5 first rounders bc the price would be too prohibitive. I don't think you can spend 3 firsts plus for the #1 pick this year (which I still maintain will be selected by the Bears). Two firsts plus filler, not three. None of the top 3 are without some warts or concern, and I Believe a prospect costing 3 firsts must have none.
There's also a good chance Chicago decides to keep the pick. You can't force them to trade it if that's their ultimate decision.
I dont know what foolishness this is, but you must have a very low opinion of the Giants to think they're "all in" on an 18 year old kid with 5 total pass attempts in college.
Quote:
Awesome, be great to secure Marvin Harrison Jr. for Daniel Jones and finally give him a #1 receiver.
That's a steep price to pay, to watch Daniel Jones check it down to Wandale, and then have posters complain that Harrison is a bust when he fails to catch balls three feet over his head.
Dude, can you find a new talking point. Please?
There would be at least 3 posters who would get a heart attack reaching for the remote to throw