Is WR a Smart Move at 6?

I'm going to talk about this on the podcast tomorrow.

We assume it isn't weird for the Cardinals and Chargers, two teams with a desperate need for WRs, to pass on the top three. But somehow it would be for the Giants.

True WR1s are not available in every draft. And when they are, there is no guarantee the team is in position to take one.

The strength of this draft is WR (with a clear top-3) and we have a glaring need for a WR1.

Sometimes the match is that easy and so don't overthink this Joe.

Stud WR or TE can open up an offensive. Tyreek Hill, Diggs, Chase, Jefferson, Kelce, AJ Brown have done wonders for their teams.

So I have no problem getting one of the top 3 at #6 if they can’t get the QB they want. You can’t plug holes for 2024 with the draft, you have to acquire talent.

I do hope if they don’t get a QB in the draft who can play this year, we at least get Lock under center. I think he will try to get the ball downfield which is something Jones doesn’t do. If you get a weapon like one of these guys you have to try and use it, especially if they draft a rookie in 2025 and that guy may also sit for a chunk of the year. Suddenly you have a lethal weapon at WR and for the first two years hold him back with below average QB play.

In comment 16470771 BigTymer said:

Quote:

True WR1s are not available in every draft. And when they are, there is no guarantee the team is in position to take one. The strength of this draft is WR (with a clear top-3) and we have a glaring need for a WR1. Sometimes the match is that easy and so don't overthink this Joe.

Actually, I would argue that quality WRs are coming out in ever increasing numbers.

You said the 2 WRs are elite. An elite player at a high value position is how you become successful. Elite players help other players become better. On O we have an elite OT.

.

In comment 16470771 BigTymer said:

Quote:

True WR1s are not available in every draft. And when they are, there is no guarantee the team is in position to take one. The strength of this draft is WR (with a clear top-3) and we have a glaring need for a WR1. Sometimes the match is that easy and so don't overthink this Joe.

Yeah, that's completely true. The draft is about long term roster building, not just 2024. You don't think taking 4 players in the top 50 instead of 2 could very reasonably help our roster much more?

Bill Walsh I believe it was who said WR is like the icing on the cake of a good football roster. Build the lines first, then QB/defense, then skill positions.

You're telling me you think Odunze and Melton would help this team in the long term more than Orhorhoro, Melton, Troy Franklin and Fautanu or Orhorhoro, Benson, Melton and Fautanu or Brian Thomas Jr, Beebe, Melton and Orhorhoro? This draft is really good in the top 100. I would much rather have 6-7 picks in the top 107 vs Odunze and picks 47, 70 and 107. I think it would definitely help the team much more in the long term too.

In comment 16470773 Giantsbigblue said:

Quote:

Stud WR or TE can open up an offensive. Tyreek Hill, Diggs, Chase, Jefferson, Kelce, AJ Brown have done wonders for their teams.

All those guys had QBs that put up more than a td per game. It's not a valid comparison. What had Garrett Wilson done to open up the Jets offense? That's a legit comparison.

A few recent WRs taken in the top 10:

2022: London and G Wilson - London looks to be an overdraft, Wilson was the right pick stuck in a bad situation

2021: Chase, Waddle, D Smith - instant impact pro bowl caliber WRs who have helped their teams to playoff runs

So, out of those 5, you could argue 4 of them are great picks. That's a pretty good outcome.

BleedBlue, you might have a different take on Wilson once Rodgers plays a full season.

Wilson had 1,000 yards with Zach Wilson throwing him the ball.

In comment 16470771 BigTymer said:

Quote:

True WR1s are not available in every draft. And when they are, there is no guarantee the team is in position to take one. The strength of this draft is WR (with a clear top-3) and we have a glaring need for a WR1. Sometimes the match is that easy and so don't overthink this Joe.

Amen to that brother!

In comment 16470785 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16470773 Giantsbigblue said: Quote: Stud WR or TE can open up an offensive. Tyreek Hill, Diggs, Chase, Jefferson, Kelce, AJ Brown have done wonders for their teams. All those guys had QBs that put up more than a td per game. It's not a valid comparison. What had Garrett Wilson done to open up the Jets offense? That's a legit comparison.

This is a very valid point. This is a great example of a very good WR being underutilized because the QB sucks.

I still am in favor of a WR at #6, just not with Jones under center.

Rather trade down and select one in the 10-20 range if we want to burn our first selection on one. Better value there and we get more draft capital.

Brian Thomas Jr. at 11-15 would be my preference if we go WR. We can obtain an extra second rounder and get an alpha type WR.

In comment 16470779 Rudy5757 said:

Quote:

You said the 2 WRs are elite. An elite player at a high value position is how you become successful. Elite players help other players become better. On O we have an elite OT.

Again, what has Garrett Wilson done for the Jets offense? An elite receiver is great for a team ready to utilize one or at least without half their positions with holes on the roster. I just don't think it's smart with our roster currently. Build the trenches, build the team from the inside out. CB and the trenches are more important than WR to me when you have no credible passing threat.

FYI, sy is really high on ‘25 WR prospects too.

Tree guys which is the offense have big time players at WR.
Mike Mcdaniel thought it was important to get Hill, Shanahan has both Deebo, Aiyuk, and Kittle. Ryans just traded for Diggs.

at any position. So, with the sole exception of QB (where good is the requisite), The alternate position also needs to be an elite prospect and at a premium position. We made major moves at edge over the last couple years, and they probably aren't ready to give up on Neal at OT.

What position would be a smarter move at 6, where elite prospect is available at a value position?

In comment 16470786 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

A few recent WRs taken in the top 10: 2022: London and G Wilson - London looks to be an overdraft, Wilson was the right pick stuck in a bad situation 2021: Chase, Waddle, D Smith - instant impact pro bowl caliber WRs who have helped their teams to playoff runs So, out of those 5, you could argue 4 of them are great picks. That's a pretty good outcome.

Notice the ones that haven't paid off are the ones without legit QB play? Build the roster from the inside out with a focus on defense and the trenches until we are ready to build up the passing game. Right now, we aren't ready for that step if you ask me.

In comment 16470787 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

BleedBlue, you might have a different take on Wilson once Rodgers plays a full season. Wilson had 1,000 yards with Zach Wilson throwing him the ball.

25 WRs had 1,000+ yards last year. Finding a 1,000 yard receiver isn’t hard

The Jets offense was still putrid.

You draft best player available. LT is the greatest positive example of this in NFL history. But in recent years, Josh Allen (edge), Justin Herbert and Micah Parsons are powerful negative examples of the Giants doing things for need rather than just sitting tight and selecting the best player available.

Just because we have a need does not make a draft choice a talented player. Certainly if two players are similarly graded, need is the differentiator. But you do not reach for need and neglect best player available. Ever.

In comment 16470794 Giantsbigblue said:

Quote:

Tree guys which is the offense have big time players at WR. Mike Mcdaniel thought it was important to get Hill, Shanahan has both Deebo, Aiyuk, and Kittle. Ryans just traded for Diggs.

Once again, they all have credible QBs. With our roster currently situated would you rather have 4 good players or a great receiver and a good player? Which would help us more in the long term?

however the amount of problems we have on our O-Line are of catastrophic proportions, run to the podium if Alt is available. WR can be had down the road.

Harrison, Rome, and Nabers are all graded at 90 or above.
That's "All Pro" projection for all 3.

Yes, drafting a WR at 6 is a smart move.

These aren't just any first round receivers.

If you can address one of your major needs at a premium position with a blue chip prospect, then you do it.

When it comes to needs, you don't burn high draft capital plugging them. The economics of it in a salary cap league dictate that. A premium first round pick needs to focus on the impact created by the individual pick because it is such a valuable commodity. When it comes to needs, you take the view of the entire draft, as well as free agency and future drafts.

The question here is QB because that's the position where a lesser valued player can have greater impact due to positional value. But the question of QB is where the impact rule doesn't always apply. I see so many people making this mistake --so and so is better than Jones. That may be true and it may be the case that a QB slightly above par could have a greater impact than an elite WR (initially) if you're that down on Jones. But it's not only about this year and if the QB we draft isn't a guy who's going to lead us to championships, then we've set the bar too low.

I continue to think the dime a dozen QBs get overrated because "it's a QB league. It's not. It's a top tier QB league. You don't win championships with mediocrity at QB in the league. Not anymore.

In comment 16470800 The Mike said:

Quote:

You draft best player available. LT is the greatest positive example of this in NFL history. But in recent years, Josh Allen (edge), Justin Herbert and Micah Parsons are powerful negative examples of the Giants doing things for need rather than just sitting tight and selecting the best player available. Just because we have a need does not make a draft choice a talented player. Certainly if two players are similarly graded, need is the differentiator. But you do not reach for need and neglect best player available. Ever.

So, you'd want Odunze over pick 11 and 23 from the Vikings? Or Odunze over pick 12, 76, 2025 1st and 2nd from Denver? Or pick 13, 44, 77 and 2025 1st from the Raiders?

Does it seem like the WR position has increasing numbers of solid/star established NFLers that are looking to be PITAs to sign/keep? Lamb and Jefferson are stars, but I expect they are going to hold out for $30+ million. (Personally, I didn’t like Jefferson’s statement last year that he wasn’t going to come back from injury until he was 100% when no player is 100% after week 1.) Aiyuk/Higgins want trades and likely massive $$. Adams, Hill, Diggs (2x), A Brown were traded. List could go on. It just seems that there is more instability at the top for WRs than other positions. It probably doesn’t change NYG decision at #6, but is it augur some change in valuation?

I know the NFL pays them like they are, but it's a position that is heavily reliant on the other offensive players. If the QB sucks, or if the OL is struggling, he might not get the ball on situations where he can make a difference.

Garrett Wilson is a great example. Excellent player and productive in 2023, but his offense was still terrible last year because of the problems at QB and OL.

Bill Walsh himself said WR is the last piece to add. Aaron Rodgers on the short-lived Bill Simmons HBO show said OL was more important to QB success than WR.

Add all that to the fact that college football is producing WRs in huge quantity, and I wonder if there is a market correction coming at the position in the next few years.

when the Giants pick. If there is a QB that the team rates very highly, then the QB should be the pick. Otherwise, one of the premier WRs is a good direction. Its more important not to reach when sitting at 6.

If the Giants don't pick QB at 6, my preference would be for Dallas Turner/Laitu Latu or Alt (on the condition they've ascertained he can play RT).

can get if you have so many needs, although QB is a different animal because of Uber-importance and limited choices.

that WR is such a huge need that it's a consolation prize for missing out on a QB prospect. The unfortunate thing is they would miss out on a QB prospect and have a potentially good WR wasted with no one to throw them the ball. Just like Andrew Thomas and Dex are being wasted on this team.

Tyler Smith or Lindebaum and Christian Watson instead of Garrett Wilson. If you utilize your draft picks wisely in a great top 100 like this year, you can build up the roster. Or you can take a potentially elite WR on an offense with no credible QB and a questionable o line like the Jets did.

In comment 16470816 Go Terps said:

Quote:

I know the NFL pays them like they are, but it's a position that is heavily reliant on the other offensive players. If the QB sucks, or if the OL is struggling, he might not get the ball on situations where he can make a difference. Garrett Wilson is a great example. Excellent player and productive in 2023, but his offense was still terrible last year because of the problems at QB and OL. Bill Walsh himself said WR is the last piece to add. Aaron Rodgers on the short-lived Bill Simmons HBO show said OL was more important to QB success than WR. Add all that to the fact that college football is producing WRs in huge quantity, and I wonder if there is a market correction coming at the position in the next few years.

Agree with every word of this statement.

In comment 16470811 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16470800 The Mike said: Quote: You draft best player available. LT is the greatest positive example of this in NFL history. But in recent years, Josh Allen (edge), Justin Herbert and Micah Parsons are powerful negative examples of the Giants doing things for need rather than just sitting tight and selecting the best player available. Just because we have a need does not make a draft choice a talented player. Certainly if two players are similarly graded, need is the differentiator. But you do not reach for need and neglect best player available. Ever. So, you'd want Odunze over pick 11 and 23 from the Vikings? Or Odunze over pick 12, 76, 2025 1st and 2nd from Denver? Or pick 13, 44, 77 and 2025 1st from the Raiders?

As a rule, I would not trade away blue chip quality for red chip quantity. Which is why I would not trade Odunze for the two Vikings picks. However, given where this team is and knowing how bad both the Broncos and Raiders will be in 2024, I would take both of those trades given the massive overpay in draft capital value there, primarily because the 2025 firsts will likely be top ten. Which would likely assure us of getting the quarterback of our choice in 2025.

In comment 16470770 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

I'm going to talk about this on the podcast tomorrow. We assume it isn't weird for the Cardinals and Chargers, two teams with a desperate need for WRs, to pass on the top three. But somehow it would be for the Giants.

Cards and Chargers have an established starter at QB, and the Giants do not.

In comment 16470821 Go Terps said:

Quote:

If the Giants don't pick QB at 6, my preference would be for Dallas Turner/Laitu Latu or Alt (on the condition they've ascertained he can play RT).

Trade down for a chance at Penix plus extra picks would be better than that to you no?

In comment 16470816 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Salaries say otherwise.

In comment 16470816 Go Terps said:

Quote:

I know the NFL pays them like they are, but it's a position that is heavily reliant on the other offensive players. If the QB sucks, or if the OL is struggling, he might not get the ball on situations where he can make a difference. Garrett Wilson is a great example. Excellent player and productive in 2023, but his offense was still terrible last year because of the problems at QB and OL. Bill Walsh himself said WR is the last piece to add. Aaron Rodgers on the short-lived Bill Simmons HBO show said OL was more important to QB success than WR. Add all that to the fact that college football is producing WRs in huge quantity, and I wonder if there is a market correction coming at the position in the next few years.

Good post. It's QB via 6 or trade down for me.

One of Nabers or Odunze plus the Bears 3rd rounder and a 2025 2nd.

I’m ok over drafting a QB but if thr 4th or 5th best guy isn’t someone we like, don’t take him. I feel like that’s stating the obvious but I get the feeling some want us to take a QB no matter what and I can’t get myself to that point.

So for me, how far is the talent gap between QB5 and QB7/8? If it’s not much then take the WR and grab the next tier of QB with 47.

In comment 16470829 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16470821 Go Terps said: Quote: If the Giants don't pick QB at 6, my preference would be for Dallas Turner/Laitu Latu or Alt (on the condition they've ascertained he can play RT). Trade down for a chance at Penix plus extra picks would be better than that to you no?

I would be fully onboard with a trade down from #6 to #11 to select Penix. I think the Jets can’t go QB without pissing off Rodgers. The only problem is trading back with a team that wants a QB because you have no idea if they are taking your guy.

In comment 16470836 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

I’m ok over drafting a QB but if thr 4th or 5th best guy isn’t someone we like, don’t take him. I feel like that’s stating the obvious but I get the feeling some want us to take a QB no matter what and I can’t get myself to that point. So for me, how far is the talent gap between QB5 and QB7/8? If it’s not much then take the WR and grab the next tier of QB with 47.

According to most scouts and pros, the gap between JJM/Penix/Nix and a Michael Pratt or Spencer Rattler is vast.

In comment 16470836 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

I’m ok over drafting a QB but if thr 4th or 5th best guy isn’t someone we like, don’t take him. I feel like that’s stating the obvious but I get the feeling some want us to take a QB no matter what and I can’t get myself to that point. So for me, how far is the talent gap between QB5 and QB7/8? If it’s not much then take the WR and grab the next tier of QB with 47.

I think the problem may be that QBs #1-#6 are gone before we pick in the second, and the rest of the QBs are not worth that high of a pick. I’d love to get Penix or Nix at #47 but I can’t see them lasting into the second with how many QB needy teams there are.

Food for thought, 11 receivers drafted last year went for 500+ yards and 6 went 700+.

Receivers are walking into the league and succeeding. I'm not sure the value charts and supply charts support big cap or draft investments.

And you are assuming that a team would want to trade up and give us an offer that we would accept (not pennies on the dollar). I am sure the giants will explore all of the options including trading up for the quarterback they want. If they can't get that quarterback, then they might explore trading down, but if they don't like what is offered, what do you suggest they do? Take it for the sake of taking it?

We have seen the impact odell Beckham Jr had coming in. We have seen the impact A.J Brown had on the eagles and I can go on and on. A true threat #1 wide receiver can impact a team.

In comment 16470837 Mike from Ohio said:

Quote:

In comment 16470829 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470821 Go Terps said: Quote: If the Giants don't pick QB at 6, my preference would be for Dallas Turner/Laitu Latu or Alt (on the condition they've ascertained he can play RT). Trade down for a chance at Penix plus extra picks would be better than that to you no? I would be fully onboard with a trade down from #6 to #11 to select Penix. I think the Jets can’t go QB without pissing off Rodgers. The only problem is trading back with a team that wants a QB because you have no idea if they are taking your guy.

And if somehow Penix gets taken then grab BTJ or Fuaga or Quinyon/Terrion or trade down again. We have so many needs, we need extra picks and I have faith in Schoen to do well with more top 100 picks this year vs an elite prospect at WR who probably won't reach his potential here until year 3-4 in his rookie contract at the earliest. What good is that?

In comment 16470828 Darwinian said:

Quote:

In comment 16470770 Eric from BBI said: Quote: I'm going to talk about this on the podcast tomorrow. We assume it isn't weird for the Cardinals and Chargers, two teams with a desperate need for WRs, to pass on the top three. But somehow it would be for the Giants. Cards and Chargers have an established starter at QB, and the Giants do not.

That's more of an argument to consider other positions than WR.

Again, I'll get into this tomorrow.

In comment 16470843 TrueBlue56 said:

Quote:

And you are assuming that a team would want to trade up and give us an offer that we would accept (not pennies on the dollar). I am sure the giants will explore all of the options including trading up for the quarterback they want. If they can't get that quarterback, then they might explore trading down, but if they don't like what is offered, what do you suggest they do? Take it for the sake of taking it? We have seen the impact odell Beckham Jr had coming in. We have seen the impact A.J Brown had on the eagles and I can go on and on. A true threat #1 wide receiver can impact a team.

Obviously, if there are no good trade down offers then it is what it is. I don't see that happening with elite LTs, WR and maybe a potential franchise QB on the board.

In comment 16470845 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

In comment 16470828 Darwinian said: Quote: In comment 16470770 Eric from BBI said: Quote: I'm going to talk about this on the podcast tomorrow. We assume it isn't weird for the Cardinals and Chargers, two teams with a desperate need for WRs, to pass on the top three. But somehow it would be for the Giants. Cards and Chargers have an established starter at QB, and the Giants do not. That's more of an argument to consider other positions than WR. Again, I'll get into this tomorrow.

I'm looking forward to that. Odunze or Nabers are very likely to not reach their potential until year 3 or 4 in their rookie contract at the earliest here. How does that benefit the long term future of NYG football?

In comment 16470801 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16470794 Giantsbigblue said: Quote: Tree guys which is the offense have big time players at WR. Mike Mcdaniel thought it was important to get Hill, Shanahan has both Deebo, Aiyuk, and Kittle. Ryans just traded for Diggs. Once again, they all have credible QBs. With our roster currently situated would you rather have 4 good players or a great receiver and a good player? Which would help us more in the long term?

Tua wasn't thought to be anything and Purdy has only played with those guys.

If you have a chance to get one at a controlled cost for 4 years, you do it...period, cause at some point in the team building process, you will need to find one and you may end up paying upwards of 30 mil to get one.
Check this off the list now.

In comment 16470792 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16470779 Rudy5757 said: Quote: You said the 2 WRs are elite. An elite player at a high value position is how you become successful. Elite players help other players become better. On O we have an elite OT. Again, what has Garrett Wilson done for the Jets offense? An elite receiver is great for a team ready to utilize one or at least without half their positions with holes on the roster. I just don't think it's smart with our roster currently. Build the trenches, build the team from the inside out. CB and the trenches are more important than WR to me when you have no credible passing threat.

Didn't we build the trenchs in FA? Some of the kids have to step up, they all cant be 1st rounders. If the 2 OGs work out and JMS gets better and Neal can some how be at least average. Then its fixed. If the QBs are not elite then why bother? Throwinmore mid tier talent is not going to fix the Giants. They need studs.

In comment 16470843 TrueBlue56 said:

Quote:

We have seen the impact odell Beckham Jr had coming in. We have seen the impact A.J Brown had on the eagles and I can go on and on. A true threat #1 wide receiver can impact a team.

Beckham is an interesting case to bring up. He exploded onto the scene his first three seasons:



Those are three highly, highly productive years. Now let's look at the Giants' scoring output and record those three years:

2014: 23.8 PPG, 6-10
2015: 26.3 PPG, 6-10
2016: 19.4 PPG, 11-5

Does that support the idea that WR is a premium position? I'm not sure.

But I can't ignore Sy's grading of JJM and when will we be this close again. Hopefully then go WR in the 2nd . I'd be willing to move up and lose our 3rd . So be it. BPA in the next three rounds(4-5-6). We 're not going to fill all the holes this year no matter how they go about it.

I say severalfold because it’s more than 2 or 3 fold lol. The Giants have so many needs for high end starters at multiple positions. QB, WR1, CB2, 3tech DT, TE, OL they can go on n any direction. So normally I’m all for a trade down, accumulate picks and take care of a few of those needs in the first couple of rounds. The only pick at 6 is QB, WR, or OL. The rest are worth a trade down.

But in the NFL 2024, it’s an offensive and passing league. We desperately need a true #1 WR. I know this is a deep WR draft and the last several years good quality WR have been coming out in bunches. But the Giants have lacked a legit #1 WR since OBJ, so when you have a chance to get one of these top 3 WR who are all legit #1s, it’s really hard to pass on them. They can’t afford to get another #2 or a slot WR. We’d have to make do if we take a QB at 6 or a trade up. Taking a QB in the first you sacrifice because it’s so hard to get a franchise QB.

Offense is such a pressing need on this team that CB2, 3t dt, S have to wait. You can sign a vet at those positions for a yr or 2 for now. But outside of QB, they need to take one of these 3 WR. So if it’s a trade down, I hope it’s only a few spots where we can still get Nabers or Odunze.

In comment 16470849 Giantsbigblue said:

Quote:

In comment 16470801 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470794 Giantsbigblue said: Quote: Tree guys which is the offense have big time players at WR. Mike Mcdaniel thought it was important to get Hill, Shanahan has both Deebo, Aiyuk, and Kittle. Ryans just traded for Diggs. Once again, they all have credible QBs. With our roster currently situated would you rather have 4 good players or a great receiver and a good player? Which would help us more in the long term? Tua wasn't thought to be anything and Purdy has only played with those guys.

Well then we can pray DJ or Lock is taken to new heights by a rookie WR taken with pick 6? If that doesn't happen, the WR will likely not be a huge difference maker until year 3-4 in their rookie contract.

Was a great coach but anything he said has no relevance to the current game.

In comment 16470859 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 16470843 TrueBlue56 said: Quote: We have seen the impact odell Beckham Jr had coming in. We have seen the impact A.J Brown had on the eagles and I can go on and on. A true threat #1 wide receiver can impact a team. Beckham is an interesting case to bring up. He exploded onto the scene his first three seasons: Those are three highly, highly productive years. Now let's look at the Giants' scoring output and record those three years: 2014: 23.8 PPG, 6-10 2015: 26.3 PPG, 6-10 2016: 19.4 PPG, 11-5 Does that support the idea that WR is a premium position? I'm not sure.

He had Eli Manning. It's not a pertinent comparison. WR is a premium position with an OL and QB. Otherwise, your looking at wasting a majority of that rookie contract if you ask me.

but an argument could be made that outside of picking a QB, the smartest pick here would be OT. If you're running it back with Jones, you have to maximize his weakness which is processing the field and pocket presence--so an elite offensive line is absolutely essential. Whether you have elite receivers matters less if the QB can't process where they are on the field.

Also, brining in a rookie QB next year with a strong offensive line is probably easier than doing one with an average line and a great WR.

What is the plan to identify/acquire the next QB?

I don't agree with the following ideas:

1) draft a QB next year; kicking the can down the road, not knowing where NYG would pick and knowing its a QB deficient draft in '25.

2) acquire one via trade or FA

3) stick w DJ

There are 4 quality QBs in this draft; 5 if you count Pennix (which I don't bc it reduces the importance of one our two top players; Andrew Thomas). Do what you have to do to get one of the 4.

In comment 16470861 DeVito32 said:

Quote:

I say severalfold because it’s more than 2 or 3 fold lol. The Giants have so many needs for high end starters at multiple positions. QB, WR1, CB2, 3tech DT, TE, OL they can go on n any direction. So normally I’m all for a trade down, accumulate picks and take care of a few of those needs in the first couple of rounds. The only pick at 6 is QB, WR, or OL. The rest are worth a trade down. But in the NFL 2024, it’s an offensive and passing league. We desperately need a true #1 WR. I know this is a deep WR draft and the last several years good quality WR have been coming out in bunches. But the Giants have lacked a legit #1 WR since OBJ, so when you have a chance to get one of these top 3 WR who are all legit #1s, it’s really hard to pass on them. They can’t afford to get another #2 or a slot WR. We’d have to make do if we take a QB at 6 or a trade up. Taking a QB in the first you sacrifice because it’s so hard to get a franchise QB. Offense is such a pressing need on this team that CB2, 3t dt, S have to wait. You can sign a vet at those positions for a yr or 2 for now. But outside of QB, they need to take one of these 3 WR. So if it’s a trade down, I hope it’s only a few spots where we can still get Nabers or Odunze.

I'd argue a franchise QB would do just fine with our current receivers and if Waller is done a TE like Sinnott in rd 2 or 3 plus a trade down from 6 if no QB would be better than Odunze at 6. We don't even know what Slayton, Hyatt and Wandale could be capable of with competent QB play let alone good QB play.

One of the worst arguments in pro sports is comparing Beckham's stats vs the Giants winning games.

Beckham was an exceptional receiver for years on the Giants. The reason the Giants didn't win during his tenure was that the OL was awful and other than 1 season, the defense was largely awful.

Beckham was an excellent draft pick.

In comment 16470863 Giantsbigblue said:

Quote:

Was a great coach but anything he said has no relevance to the current game.

Thank you - game has changed from Bill Walsh era.

2023 had no elite WRs. Maybe 2025 does (maybe not) but maybe we find we need a QB or there are better draft options on defense. In 2024, the strength is WR with no real top-10 options on defensive worth the pick. Pick the WR and while I prefer Nabers I don't care in the least if its any of the 3. More picks does not mean better picks so not interested in a trade down in a draft (that in my view) is top heavy.

In comment 16470869 LW_Giants said:

Quote:

but an argument could be made that outside of picking a QB, the smartest pick here would be OT. If you're running it back with Jones, you have to maximize his weakness which is processing the field and pocket presence--so an elite offensive line is absolutely essential. Whether you have elite receivers matters less if the QB can't process where they are on the field. Also, brining in a rookie QB next year with a strong offensive line is probably easier than doing one with an average line and a great WR.

Then trade down slightly and take Fuaga. He's as sure of a pick for RT as you'll find. Much better than converting a LT or any other options. Fuaga plus a 3rd and 2025 2nd? Great.

In comment 16470874 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

One of the worst arguments in pro sports is comparing Beckham's stats vs the Giants winning games. Beckham was an exceptional receiver for years on the Giants. The reason the Giants didn't win during his tenure was that the OL was awful and other than 1 season, the defense was largely awful. Beckham was an excellent draft pick.

And Daniel Jones is no Eli Manning.

In comment 16470876 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16470869 LW_Giants said: Quote: but an argument could be made that outside of picking a QB, the smartest pick here would be OT. If you're running it back with Jones, you have to maximize his weakness which is processing the field and pocket presence--so an elite offensive line is absolutely essential. Whether you have elite receivers matters less if the QB can't process where they are on the field. Also, brining in a rookie QB next year with a strong offensive line is probably easier than doing one with an average line and a great WR. Then trade down slightly and take Fuaga. He's as sure of a pick for RT as you'll find. Much better than converting a LT or any other options. Fuaga plus a 3rd and 2025 2nd? Great.

I want a QB this draft, but if that's not possible trading down to get a RT and some 2025 assets when we'll need to look for QB again would be ideal.

In comment 16470874 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

One of the worst arguments in pro sports is comparing Beckham's stats vs the Giants winning games. Beckham was an exceptional receiver for years on the Giants. The reason the Giants didn't win during his tenure was that the OL was awful and other than 1 season, the defense was largely awful. Beckham was an excellent draft pick.

That's makes my point. Beckham's high level performance didn't make a difference in W/L because more important areas weren't performing.

In comment 16470875 BigTymer said:

Quote:

In comment 16470863 Giantsbigblue said: Quote: Was a great coach but anything he said has no relevance to the current game. Thank you - game has changed from Bill Walsh era. 2023 had no elite WRs. Maybe 2025 does (maybe not) but maybe we find we need a QB or there are better draft options on defense. In 2024, the strength is WR with no real top-10 options on defensive worth the pick. Pick the WR and while I prefer Nabers I don't care in the least if its any of the 3. More picks does not mean better picks so not interested in a trade down in a draft (that in my view) is top heavy.

Les Snead for the Rams would beg to differ. If Schoen could get 4 Wandale quality guys vs Odunze and a Wandale quality guy I'm taking the 4 wandale quality guys.

In comment 16470859 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 16470843 TrueBlue56 said: Quote: We have seen the impact odell Beckham Jr had coming in. We have seen the impact A.J Brown had on the eagles and I can go on and on. A true threat #1 wide receiver can impact a team. Beckham is an interesting case to bring up. He exploded onto the scene his first three seasons: Those are three highly, highly productive years. Now let's look at the Giants' scoring output and record those three years: 2014: 23.8 PPG, 6-10 2015: 26.3 PPG, 6-10 2016: 19.4 PPG, 11-5 Does that support the idea that WR is a premium position? I'm not sure.

Again, a useless argument.

Giants defense ranked 29th and 30th in the league in 2014 and 2015. That is why they didn't win.

In 2016? They ranked 10th. Which is why they made the playoffs.

In comment 16470879 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 16470874 ryanmkeane said: Quote: One of the worst arguments in pro sports is comparing Beckham's stats vs the Giants winning games. Beckham was an exceptional receiver for years on the Giants. The reason the Giants didn't win during his tenure was that the OL was awful and other than 1 season, the defense was largely awful. Beckham was an excellent draft pick. That's makes my point. Beckham's high level performance didn't make a difference in W/L because more important areas weren't performing.

No, that doesn't make your point. Your point is not valid because Beckham was an exceptional player. If the Giants had better coaches and players on defense, they likely make the playoffs a lot more times during his tenure here.

.

In comment 16470883 Go Terps said:

Quote:

.

OK, i get it.

But that is not a reason to not draft an exceptional, all pro type player. You are drafting the player, not position.

If Rome Odunze becomes Larry Fitzgerald, nobody is going to care about positional value.

WR is a premium position and gets paid as such. To draft a stud #1 weapon and get a 5th year option for that player, is invaluable.

That of course, if they can't get Maye.

In comment 16470882 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

In comment 16470879 Go Terps said: Quote: In comment 16470874 ryanmkeane said: Quote: One of the worst arguments in pro sports is comparing Beckham's stats vs the Giants winning games. Beckham was an exceptional receiver for years on the Giants. The reason the Giants didn't win during his tenure was that the OL was awful and other than 1 season, the defense was largely awful. Beckham was an excellent draft pick. That's makes my point. Beckham's high level performance didn't make a difference in W/L because more important areas weren't performing. No, that doesn't make your point. Your point is not valid because Beckham was an exceptional player. If the Giants had better coaches and players on defense, they likely make the playoffs a lot more times during his tenure here.

Once again, we had Eli Manning playing some of the best football of his career then. The comparison is moot.

In comment 16470886 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

In comment 16470883 Go Terps said: Quote: . OK, i get it. But that is not a reason to not draft an exceptional, all pro type player. You are drafting the player, not position. If Rome Odunze becomes Larry Fitzgerald, nobody is going to care about positional value. WR is a premium position and gets paid as such. To draft a stud #1 weapon and get a 5th year option for that player, is invaluable. That of course, if they can't get Maye.

If we only get 2 years at the most of Odunze reaching his potential, how is that invaluable? If we take Odunze and don't get a better option at QB, then even if we get a good option in 2025 he won't be productive until 2026-27.

In comment 16470886 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

In comment 16470883 Go Terps said: Quote: . OK, i get it. But that is not a reason to not draft an exceptional, all pro type player. You are drafting the player, not position. If Rome Odunze becomes Larry Fitzgerald, nobody is going to care about positional value. WR is a premium position and gets paid as such. To draft a stud #1 weapon and get a 5th year option for that player, is invaluable. That of course, if they can't get Maye.

It wasn't invaluable to the Guests in 2014.

Vikings for some picks and then take Penix at 9 or 11...

.

In comment 16470888 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16470882 ryanmkeane said: Quote: In comment 16470879 Go Terps said: Quote: In comment 16470874 ryanmkeane said: Quote: One of the worst arguments in pro sports is comparing Beckham's stats vs the Giants winning games. Beckham was an exceptional receiver for years on the Giants. The reason the Giants didn't win during his tenure was that the OL was awful and other than 1 season, the defense was largely awful. Beckham was an excellent draft pick. That's makes my point. Beckham's high level performance didn't make a difference in W/L because more important areas weren't performing. No, that doesn't make your point. Your point is not valid because Beckham was an exceptional player. If the Giants had better coaches and players on defense, they likely make the playoffs a lot more times during his tenure here. Once again, we had Eli Manning playing some of the best football of his career then. The comparison is moot.

So if Eli was still playing great ball then drafting a QB is useless too.

In comment 16470897 Giantsbigblue said:

Quote:

In comment 16470888 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470882 ryanmkeane said: Quote: In comment 16470879 Go Terps said: Quote: In comment 16470874 ryanmkeane said: Quote: One of the worst arguments in pro sports is comparing Beckham's stats vs the Giants winning games. Beckham was an exceptional receiver for years on the Giants. The reason the Giants didn't win during his tenure was that the OL was awful and other than 1 season, the defense was largely awful. Beckham was an excellent draft pick. That's makes my point. Beckham's high level performance didn't make a difference in W/L because more important areas weren't performing. No, that doesn't make your point. Your point is not valid because Beckham was an exceptional player. If the Giants had better coaches and players on defense, they likely make the playoffs a lot more times during his tenure here. Once again, we had Eli Manning playing some of the best football of his career then. The comparison is moot. So if Eli was still playing great ball then drafting a QB is useless too.

We don't have Eli Manning now. Whats your point?

Aaron Donald or Zach Martin would have been better picks.

On a contending team. Maybe one of our OL since everyone can use OL. Our other WR would be role players/ WR 3.

On defense, Dex, Burns, Thibs, Okereke, Banks would be locks. Outside of Barkley, not one other player on our offense since OBJ remotely scares an opponent. The Giants are so desperately lacking offensive weapons it’s scary.

In comment 16470902 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16470897 Giantsbigblue said: Quote: In comment 16470888 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470882 ryanmkeane said: Quote: In comment 16470879 Go Terps said: Quote: In comment 16470874 ryanmkeane said: Quote: One of the worst arguments in pro sports is comparing Beckham's stats vs the Giants winning games. Beckham was an exceptional receiver for years on the Giants. The reason the Giants didn't win during his tenure was that the OL was awful and other than 1 season, the defense was largely awful. Beckham was an excellent draft pick. That's makes my point. Beckham's high level performance didn't make a difference in W/L because more important areas weren't performing. No, that doesn't make your point. Your point is not valid because Beckham was an exceptional player. If the Giants had better coaches and players on defense, they likely make the playoffs a lot more times during his tenure here. Once again, we had Eli Manning playing some of the best football of his career then. The comparison is moot. So if Eli was still playing great ball then drafting a QB is useless too. We don't have Eli Manning now. Whats your point? Aaron Donald or Zach Martin would have been better picks.

Why did you post a thread as a question if you don't want to see anyone else's view?

In Jones's "big" 2022, he had the 2nd fewest attempts over 20 yards by any starting QB. He had the 2nd fewest air yards per attempt among starters as well.

If the Giants go with Jones and pick a WR, they'll need someone to create the yards. Nabers had the higest YAC/R among the big 3 receivers and the highest avoided tackle rate.

If the Giants are looking for an OBJ impact, Nabers is the pick.

... Long answer, "no" with a "but.

In comment 16470771 BigTymer said:

Quote:

True WR1s are not available in every draft. And when they are, there is no guarantee the team is in position to take one.

So, are you saying these WRs - the "top three" - are sure things? If so, how do you know that?

Each draft is definitely independent of prior draft outcomes, but it's hard to ignore that the majority of the best WRs in the NFL right now are not day one picks.

Namely: Hill, both Browns, Aiyuk, Adams, Nacua, Kupp, Diggs...and on and on and one.

In comment 16470908 Giantsbigblue said:

Quote:

In comment 16470902 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470897 Giantsbigblue said: Quote: In comment 16470888 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470882 ryanmkeane said: Quote: In comment 16470879 Go Terps said: Quote: In comment 16470874 ryanmkeane said: Quote: One of the worst arguments in pro sports is comparing Beckham's stats vs the Giants winning games. Beckham was an exceptional receiver for years on the Giants. The reason the Giants didn't win during his tenure was that the OL was awful and other than 1 season, the defense was largely awful. Beckham was an excellent draft pick. That's makes my point. Beckham's high level performance didn't make a difference in W/L because more important areas weren't performing. No, that doesn't make your point. Your point is not valid because Beckham was an exceptional player. If the Giants had better coaches and players on defense, they likely make the playoffs a lot more times during his tenure here. Once again, we had Eli Manning playing some of the best football of his career then. The comparison is moot. So if Eli was still playing great ball then drafting a QB is useless too. We don't have Eli Manning now. Whats your point? Aaron Donald or Zach Martin would have been better picks. Why did you post a thread as a question if you don't want to see anyone else's view?

I want to see the light, but comparing OBJ with Eli to Odunze with DJ/Lock isn't doing it for me.

In comment 16470930 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16470908 Giantsbigblue said: Quote: In comment 16470902 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470897 Giantsbigblue said: Quote: In comment 16470888 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470882 ryanmkeane said: Quote: In comment 16470879 Go Terps said: Quote: In comment 16470874 ryanmkeane said: Quote: One of the worst arguments in pro sports is comparing Beckham's stats vs the Giants winning games. Beckham was an exceptional receiver for years on the Giants. The reason the Giants didn't win during his tenure was that the OL was awful and other than 1 season, the defense was largely awful. Beckham was an excellent draft pick. That's makes my point. Beckham's high level performance didn't make a difference in W/L because more important areas weren't performing. No, that doesn't make your point. Your point is not valid because Beckham was an exceptional player. If the Giants had better coaches and players on defense, they likely make the playoffs a lot more times during his tenure here. Once again, we had Eli Manning playing some of the best football of his career then. The comparison is moot. So if Eli was still playing great ball then drafting a QB is useless too. We don't have Eli Manning now. Whats your point? Aaron Donald or Zach Martin would have been better picks. Why did you post a thread as a question if you don't want to see anyone else's view? I want to see the light, but comparing OBJ with Eli to Odunze with DJ/Lock isn't doing it for me.

I did neither. I was just pointing out that having a good QB at the time made no difference when the team and Defense was garbage.

If you want to draft a QB at 6, just say it. I won't poo poo that opinion. I just think an alpha WR is very important and could improve an offense.

Your OP is an excellent question....
any of the 3 WR we could wind up with has a 90+ rating from SY
However,due to our QB/Ol situation...it may be a wasted pick.
If we go WR I am ok,but I would prefer trading back....for the exact reasons your question is even asked in the first place.

In comment 16470904 DeVito32 said:

Quote:

On a contending team. Maybe one of our OL since everyone can use OL. Our other WR would be role players/ WR 3. On defense, Dex, Burns, Thibs, Okereke, Banks would be locks. Outside of Barkley, not one other player on our offense since OBJ remotely scares an opponent. The Giants are so desperately lacking offensive weapons it’s scary.

All 3 of our receivers would be WR3/role players on the Chiefs, Browns, Ravens, Bills?

You should draft the safest, blue chip player and that may be Odunze.

Every team has a different board. Every team has different priorities.

Every team falls in love with players and as you know from the top 30 visits, we tend to draft quite a few from that list.

WR is a smart move if you have a deep conviction on the player and the person. Culture matters as does elite talent.

Imagine if OBJ wasn't a diva WR and still had all that talent. He was drafted at pick 12. Odunze is a high quality player, person, teammate. Off the charts work ethic.

A very clean player. If we select a WR at 6 I hope it is him.

In comment 16470932 Giantsbigblue said:

Quote:

In comment 16470930 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470908 Giantsbigblue said: Quote: In comment 16470902 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470897 Giantsbigblue said: Quote: In comment 16470888 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470882 ryanmkeane said: Quote: In comment 16470879 Go Terps said: Quote: In comment 16470874 ryanmkeane said: Quote: One of the worst arguments in pro sports is comparing Beckham's stats vs the Giants winning games. Beckham was an exceptional receiver for years on the Giants. The reason the Giants didn't win during his tenure was that the OL was awful and other than 1 season, the defense was largely awful. Beckham was an excellent draft pick. That's makes my point. Beckham's high level performance didn't make a difference in W/L because more important areas weren't performing. No, that doesn't make your point. Your point is not valid because Beckham was an exceptional player. If the Giants had better coaches and players on defense, they likely make the playoffs a lot more times during his tenure here. Once again, we had Eli Manning playing some of the best football of his career then. The comparison is moot. So if Eli was still playing great ball then drafting a QB is useless too. We don't have Eli Manning now. Whats your point? Aaron Donald or Zach Martin would have been better picks. Why did you post a thread as a question if you don't want to see anyone else's view? I want to see the light, but comparing OBJ with Eli to Odunze with DJ/Lock isn't doing it for me. I did neither. I was just pointing out that having a good QB at the time made no difference when the team and Defense was garbage. If you want to draft a QB at 6, just say it. I won't poo poo that opinion. I just think an alpha WR is very important and could improve an offense.

It could, but the question is it wise given our OL and QB situation recently?

In comment 16470944 Rjanyg said:

Quote:

You should draft the safest, blue chip player and that may be Odunze. Every team has a different board. Every team has different priorities. Every team falls in love with players and as you know from the top 30 visits, we tend to draft quite a few from that list. WR is a smart move if you have a deep conviction on the player and the person. Culture matters as does elite talent. Imagine if OBJ wasn't a diva WR and still had all that talent. He was drafted at pick 12. Odunze is a high quality player, person, teammate. Off the charts work ethic. A very clean player. If we select a WR at 6 I hope it is him.

Everyone keeps bringing up OBJ, but we had Eli Manning ballin then. We have Lock and DJ now.

Plus, the draft is more like poker than a crapshoot. Good GMs get good players in the top 100 like the 49ers and Rams and others.

Eli, the borderline HOF QB, was at the helm during the OBJ era.

So, a very good QB and a very good WR didn't lead to wins.

We should cross QB and WR off the chart at 6.

Is that there is not always talent where you want it. Saying that we have so many holes we just need more picks assumes that there is talent everywhere we need help. The fact of the matter is, once you are into the 3rd round you have no idea if that guy is going to play 5 years in the NFL. Each round after that it drops more.

In addition to QB we certainly need WR, Edge, OL, CB to name a few. But there is no guarantee that guys at those positions with those grades are there. We can identify for example that CB is a pressing need, but there may not be a CB sitting there in the second. More second round picks doesn’t help address that.

If you trust your scouts and your coaches you draft talent where ever it presents itself because that is the surest way to not end up with a bunch of JAGs you need to replace every 2-3 years.

I said that with colleges shifting towards the Spread offense, it would be harder to find OL and easier to find WR.

Guess what, that's happened.

Don't buy into the BS that WR1's are hard to find, they aren't. The Giants are just, really really bad at evaluating and identifying them.

If we have a QB on the board who carries a first round grade according to our scouting staff (keep in mind the number of players with 1st round grades by our scouting staff will be closer to 20 than 32) then it would be idiotic to take a WR.

If none of the QB's referenced above are available at 6 (and we could not work out a trade to get one) and there is an offer on the table that represents solid value for the pick while still keeping us in the "1st round talent" area of our board then it would be idiotic to take a WR.

If neither of the scenarios referenced above exist then drafting a WR may ending up netting us the best player. With an OL at 7 you better be getting a Quentin Nelson not a DJ Fluker, Evan Neal, Ereck Flowers, etc. That is easier said than done with how many young OL have struggled throughout the NFL.

Is very short sighted. He was all world his first three years and IF we had a better defense and some other talent around him - he would have been a MAJOR reason why we were so good - maybe even the single most reason. His play and the teams success have nothing to do with each other.

How about we do this exercise with BBIs favorite non-giant - Justin Herbert. No playoff wins. Top 5 pick this year. Maybe the chargers should look to get rid of him too? Since his success has not led to any team success whatsoever.

Maybe Jacksonville should get rid of Lawrence too. Hell guys like Prescott, Cousins, Mayfield, Watson should never gotten deals either since they have proven they can’t win in the playoffs. And of course there’s the whole Ravens situation where their franchise QBs chokes year after year in the playoffs with the leagues top defense nearly every year and a HOF coach.

Maybe they should move on from their QBs too.

In comment 16470973 fkap said:

Quote:

Eli, the borderline HOF QB, was at the helm during the OBJ era. So, a very good QB and a very good WR didn't lead to wins. We should cross QB and WR off the chart at 6.

They were effective together, but a good ER without a good QB could just waste most of the rookie wr contract. I'd rather stack 2nd round rounds picks and 2025 draft capital personally and I haven't seen anyone make me feel good about WR at 6 in this thread yet. This is coming from someone who was on board with WR at 6 if no qb before. After further contemplation, I don't think that would be wise.

In the NFL - talent wins. A stud WR goes a long way helping teams win. Yes you need the QB too. The ultimate goal is to find both as quickly as possible.

And if people want to use the Mahomes example of not having great WRs and still wins..
1) players like Mahomes rarely come around if ever.
2) he still has the best TE in the game who has dominated the NFL in the pass game.

Need playmakers on offense and we’ve got maybe one right now in WanDale. Odunze is a great receiver and has great intangibles and Nabers can take a slant to the house, ala OBJ. Either would be a great pick in Round 1. If we wait till Round #2, we can still get a pretty good receiver, but not a game changer, which we desperately need.

The more day 1 and 2 picks the better.

I won't be throwing anything if we take WR at 6. It's not like taking a RB or S or TE at 6. I just question if it's the best approach to take with our roster. That's all.

at 6 was not the best use of the pick if we dont have a QB currently that can take advantage of the new wideout. And then I read along on this thread throughout the day thinking that the argument makes less and less sense to me. The top VALUE positions to draft are the same ones that are the top VALUE positions for salaries in the game. And WR is one of the top earning positions in football PERIOD. We all agree QB is the most important and highest salaried position followed in some order that I don't profess to know of OT, Edge, WR, CB with IDL, IOL, LB, TE, RB and S all less valued. But you would not overlook taking a CB high in the draft with a 90 rating because you don't have a quality pass rusher. And you would not condition getting a great OT because you have lousy QB and RB on the current team. Drafting is about securing the most talented players you can throughout the draft and building your team for the future...not just the next year. With that in mind, I'd vote for taking the 90 plus rated WR at 6 rather than a low 80 ranked QB who might project to be awesome but might not. If you have roughly equal rated QB and WR available at 6, take the QB by all means. But if the gulf is big, then take the surer thing and plan to keep on the lookout for the next QB. I want a complete team...and to get there...we need lots of players who are better than what we currently have and we need difference makers on both sides of the ball. We do have some already IMV 2 good Edges, 1 great IDL, 1 promising CB, 1 very good ILB (okereke), we have almost none on the offensive side of the ball outside of 1 OT. That is where we need to start finding talent. More OL talent plus difference makers at WR, TE and RB

Penix somewhere between the end of rd1 and pick 47. I would be ecstatic. It's risky, but it would be one of the best uses of our top 2 picks possible in my mind.

In comment 16470951 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16470944 Rjanyg said: Quote: You should draft the safest, blue chip player and that may be Odunze. Every team has a different board. Every team has different priorities. Every team falls in love with players and as you know from the top 30 visits, we tend to draft quite a few from that list. WR is a smart move if you have a deep conviction on the player and the person. Culture matters as does elite talent. Imagine if OBJ wasn't a diva WR and still had all that talent. He was drafted at pick 12. Odunze is a high quality player, person, teammate. Off the charts work ethic. A very clean player. If we select a WR at 6 I hope it is him. Everyone keeps bringing up OBJ, but we had Eli Manning ballin then. We have Lock and DJ now. Plus, the draft is more like poker than a crapshoot. Good GMs get good players in the top 100 like the 49ers and Rams and others.

I don’t care who is throwing the ball in this discussion. If you are asking if drafting a solid blue chip WR with high character is worth the 6th pick I say yes if you have done the work and have a conviction.

Look, NFL teams spend shit loads of money scouting players and the process. Just look at the new video on the Giants high tech draft room. You don’t want to whiff on your first round pick. If Odunze is the pick or MHJ possibly, that wouldn’t be a wasted pick. We all know what a viable number 1 WR will do for an offense. We have other good young WR that would get open just by the presence of a top WR.

Odunze, Hyatt, Robinson, Slayton, Bellinger and Waller, assuming he plays, is a solid group.

The offensive line has a much better chance of being improved with the 5 linemen they have been signed along with the group we have.

Singletary is a solid back. I can see them drafting another back on day 2.

Jones, Lock and DeVito won’t scare anybody, I get it, but saying a great WR prospect won’t improve the offense along with an improved OL is just a massive unknown.

And I want a QB in round 1. So don’t think they I’m all in on WR.

In comment 16471145 Rjanyg said:

Quote:

In comment 16470951 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16470944 Rjanyg said: Quote: You should draft the safest, blue chip player and that may be Odunze. Every team has a different board. Every team has different priorities. Every team falls in love with players and as you know from the top 30 visits, we tend to draft quite a few from that list. WR is a smart move if you have a deep conviction on the player and the person. Culture matters as does elite talent. Imagine if OBJ wasn't a diva WR and still had all that talent. He was drafted at pick 12. Odunze is a high quality player, person, teammate. Off the charts work ethic. A very clean player. If we select a WR at 6 I hope it is him. Everyone keeps bringing up OBJ, but we had Eli Manning ballin then. We have Lock and DJ now. Plus, the draft is more like poker than a crapshoot. Good GMs get good players in the top 100 like the 49ers and Rams and others. I don’t care who is throwing the ball in this discussion. If you are asking if drafting a solid blue chip WR with high character is worth the 6th pick I say yes if you have done the work and have a conviction. Look, NFL teams spend shit loads of money scouting players and the process. Just look at the new video on the Giants high tech draft room. You don’t want to whiff on your first round pick. If Odunze is the pick or MHJ possibly, that wouldn’t be a wasted pick. We all know what a viable number 1 WR will do for an offense. We have other good young WR that would get open just by the presence of a top WR. Odunze, Hyatt, Robinson, Slayton, Bellinger and Waller, assuming he plays, is a solid group. The offensive line has a much better chance of being improved with the 5 linemen they have been signed along with the group we have. Singletary is a solid back. I can see them drafting another back on day 2. Jones, Lock and DeVito won’t scare anybody, I get it, but saying a great WR prospect won’t improve the offense along with an improved OL is just a massive unknown. And I want a QB in round 1. So don’t think they I’m all in on WR.

I never said it wouldn't improve the offense. I'm just questioning if a trade down would he wiser if we can't get a QB via pick 6.

In comment 16470770 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

I'm going to talk about this on the podcast tomorrow.

I didn't know there was a podcast. I'll have to look for it.

Taking a WR at 6 would be just as dumb as taking a RB at 2.

The Defense has a chance to be good this year. A lot of young developing players there and you can't have stars everywhere.

I'm hopeful the offensive line can improve with Neal and JMS and the 2 free agents and new line coach.

Is like getting a kick ass stereo for your car before fixing the engine

In comment 16471209 DefenseWins said:

Quote:

Is like getting a kick ass stereo for your car before fixing the engine

I'd argue it's much better to get the QB then work on skill positions. The QB is the engine of the offense, OL is the transmission, and skill position players are the stereo and aftermarket stuff.

In comment 16471214 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16471209 DefenseWins said: Quote: Is like getting a kick ass stereo for your car before fixing the engine I'd argue it's much better to get the QB then work on skill positions. The QB is the engine of the offense, OL is the transmission, and skill position players are the stereo and aftermarket stuff.

Not all skill positions are created equal. Having the WR1 who can allow others to face single coverage and prevent 7 and 8 man boxes goes a long way. Without spreading the field, our RB’s are always facing more in the box than blockers.

It has been said every year, but the fact of the matter is you have to have a team willing to trade up and be willing to pay that price. Most times you can get that value if there is a quarterback teams are vying for. I don't see that being the case.

The giants should not and will not trade down just for the sake of trading down. You do not get the value, just as you don't take a quarterback just because you have to take one.

If you don't have your quarterback available and you don't have a very good offer from another team to trade down, then you take the best player on your board.

As it looks right now it is most likely Rome or Nabers. Take the best player. The talk last year was that the Giants were looking at the wide receivers with their 1st round pick. They went off the board and they got banks. Nothing wrong with taking a wide receiver this year with their 1st round pick. It fills a need and the value is there.

In comment 16471232 TrueBlue56 said:

Quote:

It has been said every year, but the fact of the matter is you have to have a team willing to trade up and be willing to pay that price. Most times you can get that value if there is a quarterback teams are vying for. I don't see that being the case. The giants should not and will not trade down just for the sake of trading down. You do not get the value, just as you don't take a quarterback just because you have to take one. If you don't have your quarterback available and you don't have a very good offer from another team to trade down, then you take the best player on your board. As it looks right now it is most likely Rome or Nabers. Take the best player. The talk last year was that the Giants were looking at the wide receivers with their 1st round pick. They went off the board and they got banks. Nothing wrong with taking a wide receiver this year with their 1st round pick. It fills a need and the value is there.

If these WRs are seen by the NFL as elite as BBI sees them, someone will be willing to trade up for one. Plus, Joe Alt and other tackles.

In comment 16471214 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16471209 DefenseWins said: Quote: Is like getting a kick ass stereo for your car before fixing the engine I'd argue it's much better to get the QB then work on skill positions. The QB is the engine of the offense, OL is the transmission, and skill position players are the stereo and aftermarket stuff.

I actually meant to say getting the WR now... not QB

In comment 16471288 BleedBlue46 said:

Quote:

In comment 16471232 TrueBlue56 said: Quote: It has been said every year, but the fact of the matter is you have to have a team willing to trade up and be willing to pay that price. Most times you can get that value if there is a quarterback teams are vying for. I don't see that being the case. The giants should not and will not trade down just for the sake of trading down. You do not get the value, just as you don't take a quarterback just because you have to take one. If you don't have your quarterback available and you don't have a very good offer from another team to trade down, then you take the best player on your board. As it looks right now it is most likely Rome or Nabers. Take the best player. The talk last year was that the Giants were looking at the wide receivers with their 1st round pick. They went off the board and they got banks. Nothing wrong with taking a wide receiver this year with their 1st round pick. It fills a need and the value is there. If these WRs are seen by the NFL as elite as BBI sees them, someone will be willing to trade up for one. Plus, Joe Alt and other tackles.

It's not about seeing them as elite or not. The only position in regards to the draft that you can premium value to trade up is quarterback. You do not see that for any other positions, because a quarterback is that valuable.

As far as offensive tackles go, there isn't a demand to trade up. For instance, Sy has 5 offensive tackles ranked close together at the top. A team may view one of the offensive tackles above the rest, but they will like more than one. More than likely all 5 would still be on the board at 6. Teams will wait and see who might drop.

Is a force multiplier

But anything multiplied by zero is still zero, and right now our QB room is exactly that

In comment 16471322 TrueBlue56 said:

Quote:

In comment 16471288 BleedBlue46 said: Quote: In comment 16471232 TrueBlue56 said: Quote: It has been said every year, but the fact of the matter is you have to have a team willing to trade up and be willing to pay that price. Most times you can get that value if there is a quarterback teams are vying for. I don't see that being the case. The giants should not and will not trade down just for the sake of trading down. You do not get the value, just as you don't take a quarterback just because you have to take one. If you don't have your quarterback available and you don't have a very good offer from another team to trade down, then you take the best player on your board. As it looks right now it is most likely Rome or Nabers. Take the best player. The talk last year was that the Giants were looking at the wide receivers with their 1st round pick. They went off the board and they got banks. Nothing wrong with taking a wide receiver this year with their 1st round pick. It fills a need and the value is there. If these WRs are seen by the NFL as elite as BBI sees them, someone will be willing to trade up for one. Plus, Joe Alt and other tackles. It's not about seeing them as elite or not. The only position in regards to the draft that you can premium value to trade up is quarterback. You do not see that for any other positions, because a quarterback is that valuable. As far as offensive tackles go, there isn't a demand to trade up. For instance, Sy has 5 offensive tackles ranked close together at the top. A team may view one of the offensive tackles above the rest, but they will like more than one. More than likely all 5 would still be on the board at 6. Teams will wait and see who might drop.

If the trade down offers aren't there, then so be it, I still think a team would trade a good amount for Alt or Nabers or Odunze. Or if JJM is there and we don't want him.

Injuries. After his first three terrific years, in his fourth year, Beckham joined Barkley and many other skill players by fracturing an ankle and only playing in four games. After that, he was never as good. In his first three seasons, he scored 10 touchdowns or more, after that his high was six. His long gains his first three years were all over 75 yards, but after that in only one year did his long gain exceed 56 yards.

And worst of all, in his seventh, eighth, and ninth years, when an offensive lineman or tight end is still near peak performance helping the run and the pass, Beckham played in but seven, six and eight games.

George Young, in building the Giants, did not use a premium pick on a wide receiver until 1985 when he picked Stacey Robinson second. And two years later after the Giants won their first Super Bowl, and were pretty well set in the running game and the defense, did he use a first and a third to draft Ingram and Baker.

In comment 16470770 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

I'm going to talk about this on the podcast tomorrow. We assume it isn't weird for the Cardinals and Chargers, two teams with a desperate need for WRs, to pass on the top three. But somehow it would be for the Giants.

take the stud WR he makes your whole offense more effective. Giants have shored up the OL I would take A WR at one trade up and take a Nix or penix. They may even take a 2nd WR later.

In comment 16472391 Paulie Walnuts said:

Quote:

In comment 16470770 Eric from BBI said: Quote: I'm going to talk about this on the podcast tomorrow. We assume it isn't weird for the Cardinals and Chargers, two teams with a desperate need for WRs, to pass on the top three. But somehow it would be for the Giants. take the stud WR he makes your whole offense more effective. Giants have shored up the OL I would take A WR at one trade up and take a Nix or penix. They may even take a 2nd WR later.

If Schoen has some intel Penix will last into the end of rd1, then I'd be thrilled with Odunze at 6 and Penix later.