I’m reading many predicting 4-5 wins. That is totally illogical.
We won 6 last year…6 with all the Injuries we had. We could have won 8 if we even had a healthy kicker. See the Jets and Rams games. Think about that….8 wins or 9 if you include the Bills game…..
Yet look at the cards dealt to us:
- playing with 3 QBs;
- no Andrew Thomas for 5-6 games.;
- the worst OL by far last year giving up a million sacks;
- not to mention the trading away of a great DT, Leonard Williams, which led to teams running wild against us after his departure.
-And don’t forget how difficult the schedule was for us.
So from the last game until now, don’t you think we have improved considerably? I do- many “wise so called experts” are praising us for our draft picks and even our free agency transactions which of course includes the great BBurns. Not to mention all the coaching changes, which I think many of us agree, are upgrades and should coach up our players better.
So how do you forecast 4-5 wins after all of this? How can you forecast us doing worse than last year?
Too many Debbie Downers on this site. Go Big Blue!
Nothing would shock me good or bad in any given year.
The Leonard Williams comment above was funny as well.
The schedule was supposedly hard last year and outside a couple, really wasn't. The NFL is mostly average outside a select number of teams. I don't buy DAL and PHI in that category right now. Philly got thumped, when trying, against this Giants team and got thumped by a mediocre Bucs squad.
Should 6-11? 7-10? You could make an argument given the actions of the regime.
But, I think Vegas is right on the number. That 6.5 hasn't seen much action either side which shows the public agrees.
The over/under for wins is 6.5 I think. That represents the point where Vegas can get the most people on both sides of the equation. It's a consensus view. That doesn't mean it is right, but it is also a realistic view of how many see this team outside of a fan base that may know the team better, but also tend to expect more positive outcomes than unbiased observers.
It is not unrealistic to think this team can win 8-9 games if they have health and some good luck. It is also not unreasonable to see a 4-6 win team with some injuries and poor luck.
- Same quarterback with durability issues and a less accomplished back up
- Downgrade in the running game
- Upgrade is pass targets
- Moderate upgrades in the offensive line talent
- Downgrade in the defensive line
- Upgrade in the pass rush
- Downgrade in the secondary
Adjusting for average luck, why would anyone think the team is destined to be better?
Could the Giants be in that mix? Sure. Could the Giants be more like the Chargers who won 5 or the Titans who won 6? Sure.
There is really no substantive difference between the teams who win 8 or 9 vs the teams who win 6 or 7. It's just injuries and high leverage plays in close games.
Could the Giants be in that mix? Sure. Could the Giants be more like the Chargers who won 5 or the Titans who won 6? Sure.
There is really no substantive difference between the teams who win 8 or 9 vs the teams who win 6 or 7. It's just injuries and high leverage plays in close games.
I was going to post this exact thing. Sure, NFL = Not For Long, so stranger things have happened. If the OL and D gel quickly, and Jones plays with efficiency, they could sneak a couple of wins ala 2022. My main concern is that 2 of the most winnable games on the schedule are the first 2. If they don’t gel quickly they could be 0-2 heading into a good Cleveland team.
- Same quarterback with durability issues and a less accomplished back up
- Downgrade in the running game
- Upgrade is pass targets
- Moderate upgrades in the offensive line talent
- Downgrade in the defensive line
- Upgrade in the pass rush
- Downgrade in the secondary
Adjusting for average luck, why would anyone think the team is destined to be better?
FWIW:
- Same quarterback with durability issues and a less accomplished back up
*** Wash - if healthy, Jones is an upgrade to Jones. I like TT but Lock is an upgrade just staying healthy
- Downgrade in the running game
*** you double dipped here - RB is separate from QB. On paper Barkley is better, agree. In reality he did not play that well last year - dropped passes, less speed. In this offense, Tracey may be an upgrade in passing game. But I will agree on paper.
- Upgrade is pass targets
***agree
- Moderate upgrades in the offensive line talent
*** agree, but upgrade at OL coach likely huge. I really believe Johnson did a horrible job. Players seemed to get worse under him
- Downgrade in the defensive line
*** disagree - at worst a wash (are you including LW) I think Riley improves.
- Upgrade in the pass rush
*** agree
- Downgrade in the secondary
*** TBD - Banks, Pinnock and Belton more experience . Nubin TBD. Not sure Adoree was that good, seemed to be mailing it in so CB2 may not be degraded. Phillips TBD at Slot. Flott TBD at CB2
Falcons
Wash at home
Panthers overseas
Steal one of the others
Eagirls last game with starters resting
I don't see any more wins there with the abysmal way they've played recently. I'd happily be wrong though.
For the record, I am terrible at picking game outcomes weekly.
Anyone who is expecting this team to be years away, or a bottom-dweller, is missing the boat. Expectations should be a decent team on the upswing.
Falcons
Wash at home
Panthers overseas
Steal one of the others
Eagirls last game with starters resting
I don't see any more wins there with the abysmal way they've played recently. I'd happily be wrong though.
For the record, I am terrible at picking game outcomes weekly.
You keep saying the abysmal way they played. I called you out on this yesterday. The 23 season never got off the ground due to injuries. Unless you're expecting a massive run of injuries to guys we can't afford to lose, I don't see how last year has much relevance.
- Same quarterback with durability issues and a less accomplished back up
*** Wash - if healthy, Jones is an upgrade to Jones. I like TT but Lock is an upgrade just staying healthy
- Downgrade in the running game
*** you double dipped here - RB is separate from QB. On paper Barkley is better, agree. In reality he did not play that well last year - dropped passes, less speed. In this offense, Tracey may be an upgrade in passing game. But I will agree on paper.
- Upgrade is pass targets
***agree
- Moderate upgrades in the offensive line talent
*** agree, but upgrade at OL coach likely huge. I really believe Johnson did a horrible job. Players seemed to get worse under him
- Downgrade in the defensive line
*** disagree - at worst a wash (are you including LW) I think Riley improves.
- Upgrade in the pass rush
*** agree
- Downgrade in the secondary
*** TBD - Banks, Pinnock and Belton more experience . Nubin TBD. Not sure Adoree was that good, seemed to be mailing it in so CB2 may not be degraded. Phillips TBD at Slot. Flott TBD at CB2
RE: the run game, Jones is coming off the torn ACL, Lock has markedly less run ability than Taylor, and even a diminished Barkley is a better running back than Singletary.
RE: DL, Robinson and Williams logged 875 snaps for the Giants last year. I don't think you can say with a straight face Riley and Phillips are a wash for those 875 snaps.
RE: Secondary, I also don't think you can say with a straight face any of the young players will walk into McKinney's role and equal his production.
Quote:
But "could" is accurate. The Raiders and Broncos won 8 last year. Those teams are not good. The Saints, Colts, Jags won 9. Heck, the Jets won 7.
Could the Giants be in that mix? Sure. Could the Giants be more like the Chargers who won 5 or the Titans who won 6? Sure.
There is really no substantive difference between the teams who win 8 or 9 vs the teams who win 6 or 7. It's just injuries and high leverage plays in close games.
I was going to post this exact thing. Sure, NFL = Not For Long, so stranger things have happened. If the OL and D gel quickly, and Jones plays with efficiency, they could sneak a couple of wins ala 2022. My main concern is that 2 of the most winnable games on the schedule are the first 2. If they don’t gel quickly they could be 0-2 heading into a good Cleveland team.
Yeah it seems like football does something weird to people where lot of fans do not understand the randomness of close game
In baseball, people are never like - well the Mets won 73 games, but they had 20 1-run losses. If we won 15 of them we'd make the wild card easily. Remember we had 2nd and 3rd in the 9th against the Pirates in June and Alonso hit one real hard right at the 3rd baseman....
IMO here's a list of things that need to "click":
- DJ plays somewhat consistently for the entire season
- DJ stays healthy for the entire season
- Drew Lock rejuvenates his career in Blue
- the OL gels quickly and plays at least consistently average after a decade of futility
- AT stays healthy the entire season
- Evan Neal improves to at least mediocre
- JMS improves to at least mediocre
- some of the OL FAs bring some level of consistency to the OL
- the new set of RBs can replace the best, most explosive offensive player the Giants have had the last 5 years
- Nabers, as a rookie WR, is the real deal - as in close to Pro-Bowl caliber
- Waller - I don't even know what to type about him at this point
- someone in the TE group can block consistently this year
- WDR stays healthy the entire season and continues to develop as a threat underneath
- they get some production from a WR #2 be it Slayton or Hodgins or someone else
- when called upon, the offensive depth steps up and outperforms expectations
I'm too tired from typing to do defense.
What separates the consistently good teams from those that rise and fall with the tides of luck -- is often some combination of a very good and durable quarterback, a great head coach, or outstanding depth.
I'm not sure the Giants have any of those three things. So I guess it's down to hoping for luck.
By opening day the stench of last season will be gone and the team will be completely different. It has to be - - no Barkley and no Wink, plus a new high-impact player on each side of the ball. I also think people are sleeping on WDR and Hyatt and just how explosive our WRs can be, and Singletary is a better fit for what we need now than Barkley. STs addressed in advance. Enough experienced and flexible OL depth that the line should be functional in any circumstance.
I expect the opening day media narrative will be maybe the Giants don't suck after all.
That's your answer to the win prediction.
What separates the consistently good teams from those that rise and fall with the tides of luck -- is often some combination of a very good and durable quarterback, a great head coach, or outstanding depth.
I'm not sure the Giants have any of those three things. So I guess it's down to hoping for luck.
Terrific post here. Well stated.
What separates the consistently good teams from those that rise and fall with the tides of luck -- is often some combination of a very good and durable quarterback, a great head coach, or outstanding depth.
I'm not sure the Giants have any of those three things. So I guess it's down to hoping for luck.
I’m certainly not going to argue that Daboll is a great HC, but I think he is a very good one. I think too many of us overlook the job he did last year. Getting 6 wins while playing a UDFA rookie QB for 6 starts, with all of those injuries, is nothing short of miraculous. And he was COTY the year prior.
I do have continuing concerns with them being able to build a high quality running game (with the RB's) and stopping the run on D. If they have both addressed they can have a good season with better health.
Yeah - find me what team is predicted to win 14 games.
Best Chances - Chiefs, Ravens, 49ers...and in AFCN I think 11 or 12 wins that division..
If the OL can give Jones time, and he can be the guy we saw vs Minnesota in 2022 or AZ last year, then they’ll be able to score some points. Especially with all the speed and YaC ability at WR.
Defensively, I think they’ll be top half of the league. Front 7 is good. Have top level talent in Dex, Burns, Okereke + young guys who I think will become high level starters in KT, Banks, and Nubin. Solid starters like Pinnock, McFadden + strong rotational / sub package pieces like Simmons, Ojulari, and Jordan Phillips. CB group and IDL depth have some questions which could burn them, or could take their ceiling even higher…we’ll see.
Right now I think they are a 7 or 8 win team.
While I certainly agree about the oline, and their importance cannot be overstated, I think 8-9 is possible but certainly not probable.
Thats not very hard to replace. And lets not act like he was some awesome run defender either. He made some tackles. But so did Love and other players from our past.
Quote:
You don't see anyone saying the Giants could go 14-3.
Yeah - find me what team is predicted to win 14 games.
Best Chances - Chiefs, Ravens, 49ers...and in AFCN I think 11 or 12 wins that division..
Why even bother with him? Just a blowhard at this point.
They drafted an elite WR talent, and took steps to upgrade both the offensive and defensive lines.
Their coach and GM are in their third season.
Point blank go win some damn games already.
For the record, I have no expectation that they will do this, but that SHOULD be the expectation.
Quote:
In comment 16522909 Go Terps said:
Quote:
You don't see anyone saying the Giants could go 14-3.
Yeah - find me what team is predicted to win 14 games.
Best Chances - Chiefs, Ravens, 49ers...and in AFCN I think 11 or 12 wins that division..
Why even bother with him? Just a blowhard at this point.
Terps has good ideas if you read past the Jones issues.
IMO here's a list of things that need to "click"
- AT stays healthy the entire season
- Evan Neal improves to at least mediocre
- JMS improves to at least mediocre
- some of the OL FAs bring some level of consistency to the OL
- the new set of RBs can replace the best, most explosive offensive player the Giants have had the last 5 years
- Nabers, as a rookie WR, is the real deal - as in close to Pro-Bowl caliber
- someone in the TE group can block consistently this year
- WDR stays healthy the entire season and continues to develop as a threat underneath
- they get some production from a WR #2 be it Slayton or Hodgins.
I will comment on some of these great points you made….
1. Pray Andrew Thomas doesn’t miss one game
2. Man hertz and Stoll are two TEs we picked in FA. They both are beasts at blocking. We are good here.
3. Nabers will make everyone here glad we selected him over that QB from Michigan.
4. WDR showed us why we were smart to move up to pick him in the draft. Love him
5. Slayton will be there but don’t forget Hyatt too. Watch for a UDFA named Jiles….he might be the real deal. Unbelievable length and catch point.
6. Singletarry+Tracy> Saquon
7. As for Neal and JMS improving….let us pray again….but we seem to have very capable backups in place should they falter- Schlottmann and Eluemunor.
Thats not very hard to replace. And lets not act like he was some awesome run defender either. He made some tackles. But so did Love and other players from our past.
These are some popular measurements shared around the time of UFA.
2023
PPF 91.2 coverage grade (1st)
PFF 89.1 tackling grade (4th)
PFF 87.8 overall grade (4th)
53 passer rating when targeted
3 INTs
116 tackles
11 PBUs
100% of snaps played (1128)
I think the defense is especially thin. We will problably carry two guys on defense, LB Oujulari and CB Robinson, who are walking injuries, so we will be starting out in the hole on defense.
When you are bad, you have a high turnover rate. The result is that the reserve players, even if a vets, will probably not have a lot of experience with the team or with the new defensive scheme. Regardless of a player's talent, inexperience will result in lots of mistakes and generally poor play.
6.5 wins looks about right.
I believe it can improve, but can it improve enough to get beyond 5 wins?
I'm not a football expert so I can't speak to that with any substance.
As a fan, I'd hope so. I also would be happy to see Jones play as well as he has at his best. That could most certainly earn a few more wins, but better football minds than mine don't seem to predict that.
As stated I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
In comment 16522890 mittenedman said:
You keep saying the abysmal way they played. I called you out on this yesterday. The 23 season never got off the ground due to injuries. Unless you're expecting a massive run of injuries to guys we can't afford to lose, I don't see how last year has much relevance.
They drafted an elite WR talent, and took steps to upgrade both the offensive and defensive lines.
Their coach and GM are in their third season.
Point blank go win some damn games already.
For the record, I have no expectation that they will do this, but that SHOULD be the expectation.
Agree. If the offense can't perform this year, it is fair to ask Schoen and Daboll what they need to succeed that they have not been given. This is their team, with their selected franchise QB. There is only so long you keep getting credit for winning in year 1 with the roster you inherited.
By opening day the stench of last season will be gone and the team will be completely different. It has to be - - no Barkley and no Wink, plus a new high-impact player on each side of the ball. I also think people are sleeping on WDR and Hyatt and just how explosive our WRs can be, and Singletary is a better fit for what we need now than Barkley. STs addressed in advance. Enough experienced and flexible OL depth that the line should be functional in any circumstance.
I expect the opening day media narrative will be maybe the Giants don't suck after all.
I like your logic here. I especially agree Singletary+Tracy will make us forget that kids name from Penn State. I have such a good feeling about Tracy…I think many here don’t know him well enough…but he will soon win them over.
As for OL, I know Neal “has to get first crack at RT” because of his draft status, but Eluemunor graded out well enough last year, so I feel pretty confident that he will replace Neal if the latter is struggling again.
Here's the problem with that argument: every team feels they got better this time of year.
And some, if not most, actually did, and a few will be significantly better.
The Commanders got Jayden Daniels, who is a nightmare to defend. One of the most not-talked-about-enough aspects of the coming season is that Daniels is going to transform that team and that the Giants are now probably behind the Commanders.
But forget the fact that Daniels is going to step into the league and be one of the most dangerous QBs as a runner in the NFL on day 1, but what ehe can do with McLaurin, Dotson, Ben Sinnott, and Luke McCaffrey... that's a dangerous, not to mention Austin Ekeler and Zack Ertz, I think the Commanders have not just moved ahead of the Giants but Dallas as well.
Underestimate Daniels and his impact at your own peril.
Quote:
You don't see anyone saying the Giants could go 14-3.
Yeah - find me what team is predicted to win 14 games.
Best Chances - Chiefs, Ravens, 49ers...and in AFCN I think 11 or 12 wins that division..
Fine - I don't see anyone saying they can win 12 games.
The expectation should be 10 wins, minimum.
Here's the problem with that argument: every team feels they got better this time of year.
And some, if not most, actually did, and a few will be significantly better.
The Commanders got Jayden Daniels, who is a nightmare to defend. One of the most not-talked-about-enough aspects of the coming season is that Daniels is going to transform that team and that the Giants are now probably behind the Commanders.
But forget the fact that Daniels is going to step into the league and be one of the most dangerous QBs as a runner in the NFL on day 1, but what ehe can do with McLaurin, Dotson, Ben Sinnott, and Luke McCaffrey... that's a dangerous, not to mention Austin Ekeler and Zack Ertz, I think the Commanders have not just moved ahead of the Giants but Dallas as well.
Underestimate Daniels and his impact at your own peril.
Daniels will not have the extreme advantage at WR he had at LSU over almost all teams. I think you are vastly overrating the Commanders WRs. I think the Giants now have better receivers.
Yes Daniels can run. That will be abig upgrade for them. But let's not put JD on the Pro Bowl Team yet.
Jayden Daniels may struggle in year one, or he may have a breakout rookie season like Stroud did. The Commanders and their fans certainly believe they got better and might even be counting two wins against the Giants this year. It's fair to be optimistic but that is not a straight line because the Giants may have also gotten better.
What I am seeing that seems a bit much is the talk about Tracy. There are a lot of very high expectations some of you seem to have for a 5th round RB. I hope they are true, but expecting much from a 5th round player in his rookie year seems a little over the top.
Jayden Daniels may struggle in year one, or he may have a breakout rookie season like Stroud did. The Commanders and their fans certainly believe they got better and might even be counting two wins against the Giants this year. It's fair to be optimistic but that is not a straight line because the Giants may have also gotten better.
What I am seeing that seems a bit much is the talk about Tracy. There are a lot of very high expectations some of you seem to have for a 5th round RB. I hope they are true, but expecting much from a 5th round player in his rookie year seems a little over the top.
I think, based on what I’ve read, that 5th round is misleading. He only played RB for one year and he is an older player coming out- 25. I think both of these factored in him being a lower draft pick. I couldn’t care less that he is 25. I will be happy if he only plays for his 5 year rookie contract, much like Saquon……especially if he plays like his potential shows.
So tired of 5 months of foolish optimism only to be doing mock drafts early October but if that's your thing then by all means have at it.
in 2023 the team o/u was 7.5 wins, they got 6.
their 2 year o/u was 14.5.
their 2 year win total was 15.
one year they got all the breaks, one year all the breaks went against them.
in 2024 the natural progression of this team should be something like 8+ wins. it is year 3, the coaching staff and FO should be another year more experienced and had another full draft class to add to the talent base. they were able to spend more money on the team this year, not less. the schedule is easier than 2023 though not as easy as 2022.
as the thread implies, the amount of regression mainstream regression being baked is irrational. It is fear combined with recency bias (plus some longer term bias that should have no bearing on this regime).
Keep the first 2 seasons outcomes exactly the same but reverse them chronologically and this team's O/U would be right around HOU (9.5), GB (9.5), JAX (8.5), IND (8.5).
Quote:
In comment 16522909 Go Terps said:
Quote:
You don't see anyone saying the Giants could go 14-3.
Yeah - find me what team is predicted to win 14 games.
Best Chances - Chiefs, Ravens, 49ers...and in AFCN I think 11 or 12 wins that division..
Fine - I don't see anyone saying they can win 12 games.
The expectation should be 10 wins, minimum.
Quote:
"So we should win more games next year."
Here's the problem with that argument: every team feels they got better this time of year.
And some, if not most, actually did, and a few will be significantly better.
The Commanders got Jayden Daniels, who is a nightmare to defend. One of the most not-talked-about-enough aspects of the coming season is that Daniels is going to transform that team and that the Giants are now probably behind the Commanders.
But forget the fact that Daniels is going to step into the league and be one of the most dangerous QBs as a runner in the NFL on day 1, but what ehe can do with McLaurin, Dotson, Ben Sinnott, and Luke McCaffrey... that's a dangerous, not to mention Austin Ekeler and Zack Ertz, I think the Commanders have not just moved ahead of the Giants but Dallas as well.
Underestimate Daniels and his impact at your own peril.
Daniels will not have the extreme advantage at WR he had at LSU over almost all teams. I think you are vastly overrating the Commanders WRs. I think the Giants now have better receivers.
Yes Daniels can run. That will be abig upgrade for them. But let's not put JD on the Pro Bowl Team yet.
It's a mistake to assume his success was even mostly related to his receivers. He broke records. McLaurin and Dotson can get open. He will get them the ball. And McCaffrey has some real quickness to get free in the slot. I think McCaffrey would've been talked about a lot more as a slot receiver draft prospect is Ladd McConkey wasn't getting all the attention he did.
Sinnott has drawn a ton of comparisons to LaPorta.
When I studied Daniels, he made tons of throws that were right in the basket or in tight spots with good coverage where only his receiver could make the play. He's not a slouch as a passer. If they had a lot of contested catch guys on that team I would say there may be more concern about him going into the year. But the trio of receivers they have at the top are quick and fast separators, this will play into his strengths.
in 2023 the team o/u was 7.5 wins, they got 6.
their 2 year o/u was 14.5.
their 2 year win total was 15.
one year they got all the breaks, one year all the breaks went against them.
in 2024 the natural progression of this team should be something like 8+ wins. it is year 3, the coaching staff and FO should be another year more experienced and had another full draft class to add to the talent base. they were able to spend more money on the team this year, not less. the schedule is easier than 2023 though not as easy as 2022.
as the thread implies, the amount of regression mainstream regression being baked is irrational. It is fear combined with recency bias (plus some longer term bias that should have no bearing on this regime).
Keep the first 2 seasons outcomes exactly the same but reverse them chronologically and this team's O/U would be right around HOU (9.5), GB (9.5), JAX (8.5), IND (8.5).
You are correct and that’s about where we should be right now.
in 2023 the team o/u was 7.5 wins, they got 6.
their 2 year o/u was 14.5.
their 2 year win total was 15.
one year they got all the breaks, one year all the breaks went against them.
in 2024 the natural progression of this team should be something like 8+ wins. it is year 3, the coaching staff and FO should be another year more experienced and had another full draft class to add to the talent base. they were able to spend more money on the team this year, not less. the schedule is easier than 2023 though not as easy as 2022.
as the thread implies, the amount of regression mainstream regression being baked is irrational. It is fear combined with recency bias (plus some longer term bias that should have no bearing on this regime).
Keep the first 2 seasons outcomes exactly the same but reverse them chronologically and this team's O/U would be right around HOU (9.5), GB (9.5), JAX (8.5), IND (8.5).
The reason the O/U win totals are conservative is because, as you said, unpredictability is a factor. A few bounces here and there can make a difference and elevate (what I think was) a bad 2022 Giants team to 9 wins.
If we're talking about the Vegas numbers for the 2024 Giants what do you think can be inferred from the following:
1. The O/U total is lower in 2024 than it was in each of 2022 and 2023.
2. Only four teams (DEN +12000, TEN +15000, NE +15000, CAR +25000) have longer odds to win the Super Bowl. NYG (+10000) has the same odds as WAS, LV, and ARI.
3. The odds to win the NFC East are PHI +115, DAL +130, WAS +800, NYG +1200. Only ARI (+1300), DEN (+1500), and NE (+2500) are longer shots to win their respective divisions.
I don't get the feeling Vegas thinks this is a team somewhere in the middle of the pack.
betting against the giants has been a smart bet for a long time combined with recency bias toward last year where they came in under.
Quote:
DJ while not great can be "good" enough if given protection or Lock can for that matter. Either of them can get us to 8+ wins with a competent OL. 10+ if the OL really comes together and surprises(not betting on that). Any reasonable uptick from last years OL DEBACLE should get us to 8+ wins though.
While I certainly agree about the oline, and their importance cannot be overstated, I think 8-9 is possible but certainly not probable.
8-9 wins possible/probable(imo) ONLY IF the OL comes together meaningfully, otherwise all best are off
it is year 3 for this regime, why should the over/under be lower than years 1 & 2 (which they cumulatively exceeded)?
it's what i said above - recency bias combined with 10+ years of this franchise sucking. most of that 10+ years has nothing to do with this FO/coach though. the mainstream opinion is basically ignoring 2022 as if it didnt happen when it is half of this regime's sample size.
in 2024 the natural progression of this team should be something like 8+ wins. it is year 3, the coaching staff and FO should be another year more experienced and had another full draft class to add to the talent base. they were able to spend more money on the team this year, not less. the schedule is easier than 2023 though not as easy as 2022.
as the thread implies, the amount of regression mainstream regression being baked is irrational. It is fear combined with recency bias (plus some longer term bias that should have no bearing on this regime).
I think you have to be a little more careful with the pattern analysis before labeling them as statistics (if your implication is they are significant, maybe you're not).
1) The breaks, luck etc. are not evenly distributed over time or predictable by definition so there's no reason to believe 2024 will/won't be on the receiving end of bad luck.
2) I'm sure we can come up with some anecdotal examples of year 3 being positive for a staff, as I'm sure we can find counter examples. I don't think there is good stat sig data that supports time spent in seat is causal.
3) Did they spend more money this year than last? They paid Thomas, Lawrence, Okereke, and Jones last year. Maybe they spent more money on new players?
If I had to completely guess, the most correlative factors in no order when doing a post mortem would be
1) Quarterback performance in the previous year (as a signal of future success)
2) Real strength of schedule (exit not entrance results)
3) Percent of games missed by opening day starters due to injury
I think there are some big bumps in there that don't align with an natural progress (if that's even a thing).
So tired of 5 months of foolish optimism only to be doing mock drafts early October but if that's your thing then by all means have at it.
Mock drafts in October with the inevitable "there are no generational qbs in this class", statement that accompanies that analysis every year.
betting against the giants has been a smart bet for a long time combined with recency bias toward last year where they came in under.
Thank you. The Vegas line represents market wisdom. It is a deep market with many skilled bettors putting their own money on the line. Ignore it at your peril.
They are just rolling out the same failed plan. It seems their strategy is to do the same until a great franchise QB falls into their laps, which takes them out of the race to score a surprise breakout like the 49ers with Purdy.
Quote:
one year they got all the breaks, one year all the breaks went against them.
in 2024 the natural progression of this team should be something like 8+ wins. it is year 3, the coaching staff and FO should be another year more experienced and had another full draft class to add to the talent base. they were able to spend more money on the team this year, not less. the schedule is easier than 2023 though not as easy as 2022.
as the thread implies, the amount of regression mainstream regression being baked is irrational. It is fear combined with recency bias (plus some longer term bias that should have no bearing on this regime).
I think you have to be a little more careful with the pattern analysis before labeling them as statistics (if your implication is they are significant, maybe you're not).
1) The breaks, luck etc. are not evenly distributed over time or predictable by definition so there's no reason to believe 2024 will/won't be on the receiving end of bad luck.
2) I'm sure we can come up with some anecdotal examples of year 3 being positive for a staff, as I'm sure we can find counter examples. I don't think there is good stat sig data that supports time spent in seat is causal.
3) Did they spend more money this year than last? They paid Thomas, Lawrence, Okereke, and Jones last year. Maybe they spent more money on new players?
If I had to completely guess, the most correlative factors in no order when doing a post mortem would be
1) Quarterback performance in the previous year (as a signal of future success)
2) Real strength of schedule (exit not entrance results)
3) Percent of games missed by opening day starters due to injury
I think there are some big bumps in there that don't align with an natural progress (if that's even a thing).
most of these are factors (injuries, real sos) that determine what DOES happen (results) - not what SHOULD happen (expectations).
in this case, year 3 SHOULD be a progressive season for all the reasons we know contextually with this regime - they didn't pivot from their chosen QB, they've spent more money on NEW players each successive year, they've added a 3rd draft class to 2 full classes that are more experienced. Paying players that were already here different amounts isn't necessarily predictive of those players performances (raw talent is basically constant).
the nfl has proven to be very hard to predict what will happen, im commenting on what the expectations should be which i think ive posted fairly consistently since before the new league year - the bar for this regime should be set at 8+ wins. and that was mostly based on the resources they had to improve the team prior to knowing which players they would ultimately choose in FA/draft.
Quote:
they want the action even on both sides they aren't predicting a win number, they are picking the midpoint of where they will balance the actions of the mainstream public.
betting against the giants has been a smart bet for a long time combined with recency bias toward last year where they came in under.
Thank you. The Vegas line represents market wisdom. It is a deep market with many skilled bettors putting their own money on the line. Ignore it at your peril.
i dont ignore it, but the majority dont win so the majority opinion is at least as much noise as signal. the sharps make their money betting big when the majority pushes lines to illogical places based on mistaken general consensus.
i dont have any data to back this up but i think the nfl is also a lot harder to predict than mlb, nba, or nhl. there have probably been 5 or 6 win o/u teams win 10-12 games (it may even happen close to once a year?). i think it's a lot rarer for an MLB o/u at 60-65 wins ending up winning 95-100.
betting against the giants has been a smart bet for a long time combined with recency bias toward last year where they came in under.
Vegas is in the prediction business. And they are very good at it. They predict the Giants are likely a 6-win team. Seems you might be trying to put lipstick on a pig.
Quote:
they want the action even on both sides they aren't predicting a win number, they are picking the midpoint of where they will balance the actions of the mainstream public.
betting against the giants has been a smart bet for a long time combined with recency bias toward last year where they came in under.
Vegas is in the prediction business. And they are very good at it. They predict the Giants are likely a 6-win team. Seems you might be trying to put lipstick on a pig.
thats cute but vegas is in the money making business. they dgaf about any prediction being right or wrong, only however much money they can get people to wager on it.
Quote:
In comment 16523136 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
they want the action even on both sides they aren't predicting a win number, they are picking the midpoint of where they will balance the actions of the mainstream public.
betting against the giants has been a smart bet for a long time combined with recency bias toward last year where they came in under.
Vegas is in the prediction business. And they are very good at it. They predict the Giants are likely a 6-win team. Seems you might be trying to put lipstick on a pig.
thats cute but vegas is in the money making business. they dgaf about any prediction being right or wrong, only however much money they can get people to wager on it.
Don't be an imbecile just because you backed yourself into a corner. I know you are smarter than that.
"in the money making business" is a tautology and means nothing. Every business is in the money making business.
This is the sentiment I disagree with the most. Maybe the better way to describe this are there are some signals that could indicate positive outcomes.
I am not sure I've ever seen data indicating year 3 of a staff, 3 years of draft classes, YoY spending to correlate with more wins.
Not saying it doesn't exist, but if time correlated with wins, the win curve for coaches in years 1-3 would grow at the expense of more tenured coaches since the number of games is static. I don't think that's true.
I feel like these are examples of things that better happen, or else. Not necessarily statistical signals of likelihood.
Quote:
i think there are some very simple statistical methods to determine what the realistic expectations should be regardless of anyone's choice of side
This is the sentiment I disagree with the most. Maybe the better way to describe this are there are some signals that could indicate positive outcomes.
I am not sure I've ever seen data indicating year 3 of a staff, 3 years of draft classes, YoY spending to correlate with more wins.
Not saying it doesn't exist, but if time correlated with wins, the win curve for coaches in years 1-3 would grow at the expense of more tenured coaches since the number of games is static. I don't think that's true.
I feel like these are examples of things that better happen, or else. Not necessarily statistical signals of likelihood.
you are looking for data that i dont think is necessary and may exist, but would be incredibly hard to correctly identify sample.
the parameters are pretty simple and all of them SHOULD be positively correlative.
having more draft picks,
more money spent,
players chosen to extend at big $,
are all things that SHOULD be positive. it is hard to sort/filter that which is why we dont have data on it but more is more. or at least it should be. i dont think we need data to tell us more shouldnt be less.
Quote:
optimism many have here in the offseason. As posted above, every team thinks they are better this year than last. Some will be right and some will be wrong. The Giants getting better immediately equating to more wins means the rest of the league all stayed flat, which is an inaccurate assumption.
Jayden Daniels may struggle in year one, or he may have a breakout rookie season like Stroud did. The Commanders and their fans certainly believe they got better and might even be counting two wins against the Giants this year. It's fair to be optimistic but that is not a straight line because the Giants may have also gotten better.
What I am seeing that seems a bit much is the talk about Tracy. There are a lot of very high expectations some of you seem to have for a 5th round RB. I hope they are true, but expecting much from a 5th round player in his rookie year seems a little over the top.
I think, based on what I’ve read, that 5th round is misleading. He only played RB for one year and he is an older player coming out- 25. I think both of these factored in him being a lower draft pick. I couldn’t care less that he is 25. I will be happy if he only plays for his 5 year rookie contract, much like Saquon……especially if he plays like his potential shows.
All of those facts were known to other teams. If most looked at his tape and said "this guy is good and come in and produce immediately" he would have likely gone higher. He went in the 5th round because nobody thought he was a better prospect than the guy they took in the 4th and the 3rd.
Lines are based on reading public sentiment and expectation, not making predictions. Vegas isn't predicting anything. They are reflecting the collective view of the betting community.
you are looking for data that i dont think is necessary and may exist, but would be incredibly hard to correctly identify sample.
the parameters are pretty simple and all of them SHOULD be positively correlative.
having more draft picks,
more money spent,
players chosen to extend at big $,
are all things that SHOULD be positive. it is hard to sort/filter that which is why we dont have data on it but more is more. or at least it should be. i dont think we need data to tell us more shouldnt be less.
I think we're in a semantics impasse, but not far from each other. I think I'm interpreting your view as a prediction vs. an expectation. Reading back that's not what you're saying.
My view, independent of everything we've traded thoughts on, is that time in seat is probably not an indicator of success. I don't think pulling that data would be that hard. Coaches and GMs since year X, in years 1-3, W/L record curve.
In the abstract 3 years of drafts, 3 years of experience, 3 years of veteran acquisition/retention -- should lead to success.
I am not sure I agree 3 years of Schoen's drafts, 3 years of Daboll at HC, and 3 years of Schoen's veteran acquisitions/retentions -- will produce 8+ wins.
Vegas: OK. Go ahead and bet the over
They are just rolling out the same failed plan. It seems their strategy is to do the same until a great franchise QB falls into their laps, which takes them out of the race to score a surprise breakout like the 49ers with Purdy.
Only if Jones was from Manhattan. He would be such a better producer, right?
They have sharps who make predictions and then they shift lines to mitigate risk. They are very good at it, better than any keyboard warrior on BBI, but as we know predicting football games and win totals is basically impossible.
But if they opened the line on Giants wins at 6.5 it is because they think the Giants will most likely win 6 or 7 games, not 8 or 9 as the OP opines. Furthermore, there is a statistical concept called *median*. I speak carefully here, and gently, because based on this exchange I can't take anything for granted, and the point of the line is that it is a median expectation of how the Giants will finish. And median is dead center - the middle expected value. Which in statistical terms means the Giants are expected to have as many possible outcomes above 6.5 as below it. So 8 wins will be as likely 5 wins, in general terms.
Vegas: OK. Go ahead and bet the over
precisely
While I would agree that with year three the new regime is on the hot seat to produce, the Giants best players (AT/Dex) are NOT from this regime, nor is the most important player on the team.
It's rather obtuse to stick to a two year window when considering the Giants win total for the upcoming season and simply dismissing anything beyond that window as bias.
It is a best guess by highly compensated sharps who work in a competitive $15B industry to produce guesses on competitive outcomes. They try to get it right. And the line moves to mitigate risk based on the action.
It is a best guess by highly compensated sharps who work in a competitive $15B industry to produce guesses on competitive outcomes. They try to get it right. And the line moves to mitigate risk based on the action.
What did Vegas predict in 2022? How did that work out for them?
Besides, Who really cares what Vegas says?
So you think if most of the betting public believes the Giants will win 8 games, but the Vegas "prediction" is 6.5, they set the line at 6.5? You realize what happens then, right?
Tons of money flows in on the over until Vegas adjusts the line to 8.5.
Not a prediction. Wrong term. They are estimating the median of public expectations.
They have sharps who make predictions and then they shift lines to mitigate risk. They are very good at it, better than any keyboard warrior on BBI, but as we know predicting football games and win totals is basically impossible.
But if they opened the line on Giants wins at 6.5 it is because they think the Giants will most likely win 6 or 7 games, not 8 or 9 as the OP opines. Furthermore, there is a statistical concept called *median*. I speak carefully here, and gently, because based on this exchange I can't take anything for granted, and the point of the line is that it is a median expectation of how the Giants will finish. And median is dead center - the middle expected value. Which in statistical terms means the Giants are expected to have as many possible outcomes above 6.5 as below it. So 8 wins will be as likely 5 wins, in general terms.
They don’t make predictions as much as gauge public sentiment. The public (understandably) thinks the Giants will suck, so Vegas sets the O/U accordingly. They could care less if they are right about the number of wins.
NFC EAST (2-4)
Commanders x2
Cowboys x2
Eagles x2
NFC SOUTH (3-1)
Panthers
Bucs
Saints
Falcons
NFC NORTH (2-2)
Browns
Bengals
Steelers
Ravens
Outsiders (1-2)
Vikings
Seahawks
Colts
I believe they will lose almost all their division games, and probably win 4-6 overall, thanks to a relatively soft non-divisional schedule. Assuming normalized injuries.
NFC EAST (2-4)
Commanders x2
Cowboys x2
Eagles x2
NFC SOUTH (3-1)
Panthers
Bucs
Saints
Falcons
NFC NORTH (2-2)
Browns
Bengals
Steelers
Ravens
Outsiders (1-2)
Vikings
Seahawks
Colts
One of the more reasonable predictions. Yeah maybe we go 1-2 against the AFC North but we can potentially go 2-1 against the last group. Its not anything to do with being overly optimistic. More to the fact that we can compete against some of these team and so much can happen between now and the games.
Quote:
do they consistently make money because all of their predictions come true or because they are balancing the predictions of others?
Lines are based on reading public sentiment and expectation, not making predictions. Vegas isn't predicting anything. They are reflecting the collective view of the betting community.
that's exactly what i said (the post above was for pro-darwin-ucer who said vegas is making predictions).
In the abstract 3 years of drafts, 3 years of experience, 3 years of veteran acquisition/retention -- should lead to success.
I am not sure I agree 3 years of Schoen's drafts, 3 years of Daboll at HC, and 3 years of Schoen's veteran acquisitions/retentions -- will produce 8+ wins.
on both of these comments we are in 100% agreement, and i was not looking to imply more than that.
i understand why vegas isnt putting the o/u at 8.0, but that doesnt mean we should lower our standards of what should be expected of this regime in year 3. either they show me something in the next 6-8 months or id be calling belichick or vrabel.
Quote:
In the abstract 3 years of drafts, 3 years of experience, 3 years of veteran acquisition/retention -- should lead to success.
I am not sure I agree 3 years of Schoen's drafts, 3 years of Daboll at HC, and 3 years of Schoen's veteran acquisitions/retentions -- will produce 8+ wins.
on both of these comments we are in 100% agreement, and i was not looking to imply more than that.
i understand why vegas isnt putting the o/u at 8.0, but that doesnt mean we should lower our standards of what should be expected of this regime in year 3. either they show me something in the next 6-8 months or id be calling belichick or vrabel.
No thanks on Vrabel. It would be a terrible missed opportunity with Daboll if he gets fired and only had Jones to work with. He is an alleged QB whisperer. We should make sure he gets at least one young, high-ceiling QB to mold into his offense.
favored 3 games
even in 1 game
underdog +3 or less in 2 games
underdog +3 to +6 in 8 games
underdog +6 or more in 3 games
If you go by the line, 6 games is what the numbers are saying that NY will probably win.
Quote:
There is give and take, but this is my rough estimate
NFC EAST (2-4)
Commanders x2
Cowboys x2
Eagles x2
NFC SOUTH (3-1)
Panthers
Bucs
Saints
Falcons
NFC NORTH (2-2)
Browns
Bengals
Steelers
Ravens
Outsiders (1-2)
Vikings
Seahawks
Colts
One of the more reasonable predictions. Yeah maybe we go 1-2 against the AFC North but we can potentially go 2-1 against the last group. Its not anything to do with being overly optimistic. More to the fact that we can compete against some of these team and so much can happen between now and the games.
There is a lot of ifs so I am tempering my hopes, but 8 seems reasonbly attainable. I think we can ever be better than that, but I learned my lesson and wait til I see it.
I also think we more critical on our own team and don't do the same critiques on the competition.
NFC South does not have elite QBs
AFC North is a little overated, they had soft competition last year, so their records were high, Steelers QB not great, Browns QB not great, and Burrow is coming a relative serious surgery on on his wrist
And our outsiders are not powerhouses, the Viking we get week 1 with a rookie or Darnold.
We need to stay healthy, line needs to be average, some of the young players need to take a step up, Nabers be legit. There plenty of ifs and they need to prove it, but a lot of this is reasonably possible.
I know some here will just bitch about DJ and they have plenty of evidence, but looking at our opponents there a lot of QBs that can be had just as easily using that as the barometer. Most are either young QBs who have not proven it either or a QB with past injuries or some QB who was the Daniel Jones of their first team.
This statement is almost meaningless.
Last 10 years = 3 GMs and 4 Head coaches, too many coordinators and position coaches to count, and completly different rosters.
I think we all know we have sucked but every shit team starts winning before they become a a great team. This regime had a great year 1 and a terrible year 2. You should learn how detrimental resetting clocks can be devesating, and hope this regime gets thing going on the right direction or be prepared for another 10 years. Every regime makes mistakes but the good ones gives themselves outs and pivot correctly. You can hate the QB situation but that does not mean the team is not being rebuilt and getting better overall.
Nabors/WdR/JH/etc are as good as we’ve had in, forever - make them make plays. Saquan is going to be missed but let’s face it, he was not inadequate in protection and short yardage situations. Maybe Tracy is the guy, maybe Gray is the guy, if not, Singletary is gonna ball as a professional. I just don’t see a large enough drop-off to believe RB affects what DJ can/will do.
OL must be better this year. Loads better. Bricillo must be as advertised and Tierney/Kafka must step up. Assuming reasonable health, DJ shouldn’t have any excuses this year and neither should the staff. DJ is good… better than good, but needs time to go thru progressions and make plays. I believe that he will.
REGARDLESS of the O, 40-60yo Big Blue fans remember how the GMen D-Fence once dominated. Sure the game is different now but who wouldn’t give their left nut for a D that dominates our division foes like we did in our Super Bowl years? Burns, Tibs, Dex, Okereke, Banks, etc/etc is a good start but others must step up.
I see +30 point differential (370/340) with 8 wins minimum, 10 wins max - let’s get it. Also... Eric in Li info rules/Terps info drools.
Quote:
I also think we more critical on our own team and don't do the same critiques on the competition.
NFC South does not have elite QBs
AFC North is a little overated, they had soft competition last year,
IMO it’s exactly opposite and the creation and comments made by the OP on this thread highlights this along with the comments you make above.
IMO there is an obvious tendency for many Giants fans on here to overrate their team's overall talent while unjustifiably knocking the opposing team's talent just as you have done.There is a certain badge of honor some probably feel by fighting the naysayers.As a rabid fan, you don't have to be fair.
They can get to 8 wins but they are also a team that can go much lower which if I were to bet it would be in the range as last year because of our QB being injury prone. So, it would be in 6-7 range with 5 or 8 as shots.
No thanks on Vrabel. It would be a terrible missed opportunity with Daboll if he gets fired and only had Jones to work with. He is an alleged QB whisperer. We should make sure he gets at least one young, high-ceiling QB to mold into his offense.
They had an opportunity to give him someone else. Apparently he's only a "QB whisperer" to an exceptionally limited number of QBs, and none of the three QBs sitting there at #6 were on that list.
Quote:
In comment 16523427 Bruner4329 said:
Quote:
I also think we more critical on our own team and don't do the same critiques on the competition.
NFC South does not have elite QBs
AFC North is a little overated, they had soft competition last year,
IMO it’s exactly opposite and the creation and comments made by the OP on this thread highlights this along with the comments you make above.
IMO there is an obvious tendency for many Giants fans on here to overrate their team's overall talent while unjustifiably knocking the opposing team's talent just as you have done.There is a certain badge of honor some probably feel by fighting the naysayers.As a rabid fan, you don't have to be fair.
They can get to 8 wins but they are also a team that can go much lower which if I were to bet it would be in the range as last year because of our QB being injury prone. So, it would be in 6-7 range with 5 or 8 as shots.
The question that I was determining was 8 possible, so I was agreeing that 8 is possible. That does not mean I do not think 2 wins is also possible. We still have very limited depth. Our QB situation is terrible. We have as new defensive scheme and our secondary is complete question marks as a whole. I also said in my post that there were a lot of "if's"
The OP's post was looking at positives so I was sticking to that theme. I was saying you can look at almost every NFL team an pick them apart as much as the naysayers pick apart the Giants. We are not the only team with a lot of question marks.
I personally think the real question is do you trust this regime?
It is fair for naysayers not feel trust with the DJ contract, not drafting a QB if you think they were worth drafting, and Evan Neal/the OL in general being competent being the biggest issues.
It is also fair for the Giants faithful. JS has been savvy getting players added to the roster that have been improvements or over-performed their original expectations like Pinnock, Okereke, and Hodgins. If you like the Daboll hiring as a coach with the belief he knows QB's, then you have to trust the fact that he did not like the QBs that we did not draft. Overall I think the faithful believe we are going in right direction and still correcting the hole that Gettleman dug us into. He ruined this team in his 4 years, and we are only going into year three of repair and 1 of those years we got to the playoffs.
Quote:
.
This statement is almost meaningless.
Last 10 years = 3 GMs and 4 Head coaches, too many coordinators and position coaches to count, and completly different rosters.
I think we all know we have sucked but every shit team starts winning before they become a a great team. This regime had a great year 1 and a terrible year 2. You should learn how detrimental resetting clocks can be devesating, and hope this regime gets thing going on the right direction or be prepared for another 10 years. Every regime makes mistakes but the good ones gives themselves outs and pivot correctly. You can hate the QB situation but that does not mean the team is not being rebuilt and getting better overall.
It is not meaningless. A pretty smart coach believed in "you are what your record says you are".
By all means give Schoen and Daboll a chance to fix it. They've had two years so far. One successful year followed by the same misery thats haunted this team for 10 years. After year 1 of Joe Judge and year 1 of Shurmur most people said the same thing: team is trending up and doing the right things, give it time.
This pattern has not been broken yet.
A pretty smart coach believed in "you are what your record says you are".
what is dabolls record (winning%) through 2 years?
how many wins does that equate to over 17 games?
is there any reason his 3rd year shouldnt be expected to trend better?
where do those answers take you?
Quote:
A pretty smart coach believed in "you are what your record says you are".
what is dabolls record (winning%) through 2 years?
how many wins does that equate to over 17 games?
is there any reason his 3rd year shouldnt be expected to trend better?
where do those answers take you?
Fans have been projecting this team to "trend better" in the offseason for years. Each year many love the free agent acquisitions and the draft and expect the team will improve.
2022 was an unexpected surprise. 2023 was a disappointment by all standards. Not sure what "trend" you see that you expect to continue, or why an average win % of those two years is somehow predictive when no team in the league - including the Giants - are on some predictable trend line.
Quote:
In comment 16523828 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
A pretty smart coach believed in "you are what your record says you are".
what is dabolls record (winning%) through 2 years?
how many wins does that equate to over 17 games?
is there any reason his 3rd year shouldnt be expected to trend better?
where do those answers take you?
Fans have been projecting this team to "trend better" in the offseason for years. Each year many love the free agent acquisitions and the draft and expect the team will improve.
2022 was an unexpected surprise. 2023 was a disappointment by all standards. Not sure what "trend" you see that you expect to continue, or why an average win % of those two years is somehow predictive when no team in the league - including the Giants - are on some predictable trend line.
try re-reading mike, nothing ive said is "prediction". you want to lower your expectations or be pessimistic out those are perfectly fine personal choices you can make.
just because the giants have sucked for a decade+ it shouldnt mean the expectations are lowered than for any other regime in year 3.
Thats not very hard to replace. And lets not act like he was some awesome run defender either. He made some tackles. But so did Love and other players from our past.
For me the fear is not that McKinney was so good. It is more that Dane Belton is SO BAD! He could sink the season all by himself. He's below average at coverage (although he does have good hands for the INT), and an absolute joke at tackling. That man couldn't bring down a lady bug if you gave him a running start and three tries....
The Giants 2024 record is not an equation to be solved. And whether someone is optimistic (like you are) or pessimistic (like I am) is not something to get so stressed about.
Sorry to upset you, man. Thought you were interested in a discussion, not a pat on the head. My bad.
Serious question.
Serious question.
You are right. Joe Judge massive success leaving the Giants hs been unmatched.
Quote:
In the abstract 3 years of drafts, 3 years of experience, 3 years of veteran acquisition/retention -- should lead to success.
I am not sure I agree 3 years of Schoen's drafts, 3 years of Daboll at HC, and 3 years of Schoen's veteran acquisitions/retentions -- will produce 8+ wins.
on both of these comments we are in 100% agreement, and i was not looking to imply more than that.
i understand why vegas isnt putting the o/u at 8.0, but that doesnt mean we should lower our standards of what should be expected of this regime in year 3. either they show me something in the next 6-8 months or id be calling belichick or vrabel.
I agree with this.
If I'm the owner my expectation is 10 wins, split with Philly and Dallas, and go to the playoffs. Anything less and everyone can go find a new job. This is their shot. This is the team they wanted to build.
That's an expectation of what SHOULD happen. An expectation of what WILL happen (more of the same bad football, 5-8 wins) can be quite different.
The Giants 2024 record is not an equation to be solved. And whether someone is optimistic (like you are) or pessimistic (like I am) is not something to get so stressed about.
Sorry to upset you, man. Thought you were interested in a discussion, not a pat on the head. My bad.
the only thing upsetting is your inability to understand that different words mean different things. for example i expected you to reply with something stupid, but wouldn't have predicted anything as stupid as pretending 2 different words mean the same thing. so it appears we are both victims of setting low expectations.
Quote:
In comment 16523214 christian said:
Quote:
In the abstract 3 years of drafts, 3 years of experience, 3 years of veteran acquisition/retention -- should lead to success.
I am not sure I agree 3 years of Schoen's drafts, 3 years of Daboll at HC, and 3 years of Schoen's veteran acquisitions/retentions -- will produce 8+ wins.
on both of these comments we are in 100% agreement, and i was not looking to imply more than that.
i understand why vegas isnt putting the o/u at 8.0, but that doesnt mean we should lower our standards of what should be expected of this regime in year 3. either they show me something in the next 6-8 months or id be calling belichick or vrabel.
I agree with this.
If I'm the owner my expectation is 10 wins, split with Philly and Dallas, and go to the playoffs. Anything less and everyone can go find a new job. This is their shot. This is the team they wanted to build.
That's an expectation of what SHOULD happen. An expectation of what WILL happen (more of the same bad football, 5-8 wins) can be quite different.
how bad is it for your brand if Mike accuses you of being an angry upset stressed optimist for agreeing with me?
Quote:
Of course the Giants 2024 record is a prediction. You are trying to estimate a future outcome with a myriad of variables in play. Why so angry about that word?
The Giants 2024 record is not an equation to be solved. And whether someone is optimistic (like you are) or pessimistic (like I am) is not something to get so stressed about.
Sorry to upset you, man. Thought you were interested in a discussion, not a pat on the head. My bad.
the only thing upsetting is your inability to understand that different words mean different things. for example i expected you to reply with something stupid, but wouldn't have predicted anything as stupid as pretending 2 different words mean the same thing. so it appears we are both victims of setting low expectations.
You are one angry dude, Eric. Hope you enjoy the long weekend.
I have no interest in discussing it further with you. I questioned something you said and you responded with insults instead of dialog. That's the type of person I usually avoid.
I'm not telling you how to live your life or post on this board. I just don't have any interest in exchanging any more words with someone with your posting style. Not a big deal. I doubt you will miss me.
Quote:
it doesnt seem like anyone else in this thread is having trouble understanding the definitions of 2 different words Mike, so maybe take a little PTO from your side gig as message board diagnostician?
I have no interest in discussing it further with you. I questioned something you said and you responded with insults instead of dialog. That's the type of person I usually avoid.
I'm not telling you how to live your life or post on this board. I just don't have any interest in exchanging any more words with someone with your posting style. Not a big deal. I doubt you will miss me.
all fine with me but id suggest you re-read the exchange you jumped into. i was on the subject at hand until you decided to play dr melfi in your reply to the bold below. still not quite sure where you saw anger in this reply, but if this triggered you i agree maybe our styles just dont fit.
In comment 16523885 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 16523850 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 16523828 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
A pretty smart coach believed in "you are what your record says you are".
what is dabolls record (winning%) through 2 years?
how many wins does that equate to over 17 games?
is there any reason his 3rd year shouldnt be expected to trend better?
where do those answers take you?
Fans have been projecting this team to "trend better" in the offseason for years. Each year many love the free agent acquisitions and the draft and expect the team will improve.
2022 was an unexpected surprise. 2023 was a disappointment by all standards. Not sure what "trend" you see that you expect to continue, or why an average win % of those two years is somehow predictive when no team in the league - including the Giants - are on some predictable trend line.
try re-reading mike, nothing ive said is "prediction". you want to lower your expectations or be pessimistic out those are perfectly fine personal choices you can make.
just because the giants have sucked for a decade+ it shouldnt mean the expectations are lowered than for any other regime in year 3.
Quote:
A pretty smart coach believed in "you are what your record says you are".
what is dabolls record (winning%) through 2 years?
how many wins does that equate to over 17 games?
is there any reason his 3rd year shouldnt be expected to trend better?
where do those answers take you?
Since the bye in 2022, the Giants are 10-17-1.
There's a clear inflection point in the trend of this teams performance.
Quote:
In comment 16523828 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
A pretty smart coach believed in "you are what your record says you are".
what is dabolls record (winning%) through 2 years?
how many wins does that equate to over 17 games?
is there any reason his 3rd year shouldnt be expected to trend better?
where do those answers take you?
Since the bye in 2022, the Giants are 10-17-1.
There's a clear inflection point in the trend of this teams performance.
i dont think the quote was "you are what your record is minus 8 weeks".
if you believe this regime is a .370 winning%, would you have have fired daboll or schoen or both this past offseason?
Quote:
In comment 16523850 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 16523828 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
A pretty smart coach believed in "you are what your record says you are".
what is dabolls record (winning%) through 2 years?
how many wins does that equate to over 17 games?
is there any reason his 3rd year shouldnt be expected to trend better?
where do those answers take you?
Since the bye in 2022, the Giants are 10-17-1.
There's a clear inflection point in the trend of this teams performance.
i dont think the quote was "you are what your record is minus 8 weeks".
if you believe this regime is a .370 winning%, would you have have fired daboll or schoen or both this past offseason?
I would have fired them and hired either Belichick or Vrabel. That would have been less about Schoen's/Daboll's performance and more about my belief that Belichick or Vrabel would represent a significant upgrade. It's rare to have the opportunity to add a coach of their quality and it shouldn't be passed up.
And, I wouldn’t be surprised that all the guys here who mocked this thread probably said the exact things then (before 2022 season) that they said here today. And It wouldn’t surprise to know this- all the Debbie Downers predicting 6 or less wins are probably all or mostly Jones haters.
Quote:
In comment 16523850 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 16523828 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
A pretty smart coach believed in "you are what your record says you are".
what is dabolls record (winning%) through 2 years?
how many wins does that equate to over 17 games?
is there any reason his 3rd year shouldnt be expected to trend better?
where do those answers take you?
Since the bye in 2022, the Giants are 10-17-1.
There's a clear inflection point in the trend of this teams performance.
i dont think the quote was "you are what your record is minus 8 weeks".
if you believe this regime is a .370 winning%, would you have have fired daboll or schoen or both this past offseason?
You want to talk about trends and there is a clear and sustained downward trend since week 9 2022.
Would I have fired them this off season? No, though there are some who did suggest it. Another.370 season and yes I would. Which that's almost exactly what Vegas has them pegged at.
Since the bye in 2022, the Giants are 10-17-1.
There's a clear inflection point in the trend of this teams performance.
i dont think the quote was "you are what your record is minus 8 weeks".
if you believe this regime is a .370 winning%, would you have have fired daboll or schoen or both this past offseason?
You want to talk about trends and there is a clear and sustained downward trend since week 9 2022.
Would I have fired them this off season? No, though there are some who did suggest it. Another.370 season and yes I would. Which that's almost exactly what Vegas has them pegged at.
i think the only trend reference i've mentioned on this thread is that by year 3 the trend SHOULD be up (not that it is or isnt). that is a general comment id make about pretty much any regime in year 3 in most circumstances. more time + more resources should = better results.
which is why i agree with you that if they dont get that job done id be looking at new coaches in the offseason. apparently we just have different base expectations since you don't count 8 weeks while im i guess more traditional in my interpretation of "you are what your record is" without qualifiers.
Quote:
In comment 16524005 Scooter185 said:
Quote:
In comment 16523850 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 16523828 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
A pretty smart coach believed in "you are what your record says you are".
what is dabolls record (winning%) through 2 years?
how many wins does that equate to over 17 games?
is there any reason his 3rd year shouldnt be expected to trend better?
where do those answers take you?
Since the bye in 2022, the Giants are 10-17-1.
There's a clear inflection point in the trend of this teams performance.
i dont think the quote was "you are what your record is minus 8 weeks".
if you believe this regime is a .370 winning%, would you have have fired daboll or schoen or both this past offseason?
I would have fired them and hired either Belichick or Vrabel. That would have been less about Schoen's/Daboll's performance and more about my belief that Belichick or Vrabel would represent a significant upgrade. It's rare to have the opportunity to add a coach of their quality and it shouldn't be passed up.
I'd rather have an offensive mind and QB expert for today's game than an overall culture guy like Vrabel. I didn't see Vrabel solve any QB problems in Tennessee. In fact, he ignored young QBs, as Rivera did in Washington. No thanks to that kind of coach. What has Vrabel proven in the NFL? He can put together a very good team that punched a bit above its weight.
Quote:
In comment 16524005 Scooter185 said:
Quote:
In comment 16523850 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 16523828 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
A pretty smart coach believed in "you are what your record says you are".
what is dabolls record (winning%) through 2 years?
how many wins does that equate to over 17 games?
is there any reason his 3rd year shouldnt be expected to trend better?
where do those answers take you?
Since the bye in 2022, the Giants are 10-17-1.
There's a clear inflection point in the trend of this teams performance.
i dont think the quote was "you are what your record is minus 8 weeks".
if you believe this regime is a .370 winning%, would you have have fired daboll or schoen or both this past offseason?
You want to talk about trends and there is a clear and sustained downward trend since week 9 2022.
Would I have fired them this off season? No, though there are some who did suggest it. Another.370 season and yes I would. Which that's almost exactly what Vegas has them pegged at.
An average team with an average strength of schedule wins half its games, +/- 2-3 games a year for a typical standard deviation. How many games should the Giants have won of those 28 based on the talent on the field and the opponents they played? And why 28 instead of 36?
Quote:
Since the bye in 2022, the Giants are 10-17-1.
There's a clear inflection point in the trend of this teams performance.
i dont think the quote was "you are what your record is minus 8 weeks".
if you believe this regime is a .370 winning%, would you have have fired daboll or schoen or both this past offseason?
You want to talk about trends and there is a clear and sustained downward trend since week 9 2022.
Would I have fired them this off season? No, though there are some who did suggest it. Another.370 season and yes I would. Which that's almost exactly what Vegas has them pegged at.
i think the only trend reference i've mentioned on this thread is that by year 3 the trend SHOULD be up (not that it is or isnt). that is a general comment id make about pretty much any regime in year 3 in most circumstances. more time + more resources should = better results.
which is why i agree with you that if they dont get that job done id be looking at new coaches in the offseason. apparently we just have different base expectations since you don't count 8 weeks while im i guess more traditional in my interpretation of "you are what your record is" without qualifiers.
If a relief pitcher had a 1.00 era for the first month and then a 7 era for the next 4, are you going to throw them out there in a must win game? After all they once had a 1.00 era.
If a relief pitcher had a 1.00 era for the first month and then a 7 era for the next 4, are you going to throw them out there in a must win game? After all they once had a 1.00 era.
the proportions of your analogy are a little off.
8 games is is not 1/5 of their career here, it's more like 1/4. and they didnt have a 7 era for the 3 quarters after the first half of 2022. last year they finished 4-3 after a 2-8 start. we can call that 2nd half 4-4 to keep the math simple. or should we throw that half out too because only the bad halves fit your beliefs?
chronologically/in sum they have had:
1st half 2022 +4 above .500,
2nd half 2022 -1.5 below .500 (3-5-1 with 1 loss resting starters is not exactly a "7 era", especially since they then went 1-1 in playoffs),
1st half 2023 -5 below .500,
2nd half 2023 at .500.
it's almost like we should consider the sum of their 2 year record exactly as it is without any qualifiers, a handful of games under .500 (16-19-1 counting postseason). year 1 they stayed mostly healthy and got more good breaks than bad, especially prior to the self inflicted ATV accident/Adoree punt return. year 2 they didn't, especially when thomas and barkley were out at the same time.
tldr i believe they are what their record is, which is why i think unlike shurmur/judge, daboll deserved a 3rd year.
<snip>
tldr i believe they are what their record is, which is why i think unlike shurmur/judge, daboll deserved a 3rd year.
Excellent post.
Quote:
If a relief pitcher had a 1.00 era for the first month and then a 7 era for the next 4, are you going to throw them out there in a must win game? After all they once had a 1.00 era.
the proportions of your analogy are a little off.
8 games is is not 1/5 of their career here, it's more like 1/4. and they didnt have a 7 era for the 3 quarters after the first half of 2022. last year they finished 4-3 after a 2-8 start. we can call that 2nd half 4-4 to keep the math simple. or should we throw that half out too because only the bad halves fit your beliefs?
chronologically/in sum they have had:
1st half 2022 +4 above .500,
2nd half 2022 -1.5 below .500 (3-5-1 with 1 loss resting starters is not exactly a "7 era", especially since they then went 1-1 in playoffs),
1st half 2023 -5 below .500,
2nd half 2023 at .500.
it's almost like we should consider the sum of their 2 year record exactly as it is without any qualifiers, a handful of games under .500 (16-19-1 counting postseason). year 1 they stayed mostly healthy and got more good breaks than bad, especially prior to the self inflicted ATV accident/Adoree punt return. year 2 they didn't, especially when thomas and barkley were out at the same time.
tldr i believe they are what their record is, which is why i think unlike shurmur/judge, daboll deserved a 3rd year.
I agree they are what they're record says they are, but with a downward trend. I full expect a 5 win or less team this year, again Bec they've been trending down
Anyone trying to convince themselves of the opposite is kidding themselves.
Anyone trying to convince themselves of the opposite is kidding themselves.
let's say we agree on that, what should the EXPECTATION be for whoever is coach in their 3rd year assuming they've been able to continue adding to the roster all 3 years?
should they be EXPECTED to improve?
or should the expectation be bottom dweller forever because they've been a bottom dweller?
if they don't improve should daboll come back for a 4th year just because they've been a bottom dweller for a decade?
I can expect a 3-year-old roof not to leak. I can also expect my living room to get flooded during the next storm, because it has 1 of the 2 last seasons.
In the abstract, I think a regime should have a team competing for the division in year 3. I don't think the Giants will.
My guess is the quarterback play and running game are near the league bottom and the fatal flaws for the team.
I can expect a 3-year-old roof not to leak. I can also expect my living room to get flooded during the next storm, because it has 1 of the 2 last seasons.
In the abstract, I think a regime should have a team competing for the division in year 3. I don't think the Giants will.
My guess is the quarterback play and running game are near the league bottom and the fatal flaws for the team.
if your 3 year old roof leaks my guess is you are finding a new roofing guy to fix it next time.
These are all the coaches hired in the 5-year period 2018-2022. Green is still HC, red is fired, yellow is retired.
The average win total in year 3 for a coach to get a year 4 is 10. No coach in that period got a year 4 with fewer than 7 wins. Saleh and Stefanski did so with 7-win campaigns and with their QB missing significant time.
Statistically Daboll gets fired with a healthy Jones and 7 wins next year. This is why I would prefer 4 wins to 7. If they are both going down, at least leave the next guy in a position to pick a new QB.
These are all the coaches hired in the 5-year period 2018-2022. Green is still HC, red is fired, yellow is retired.
The average win total in year 3 for a coach to get a year 4 is 10. No coach in that period got a year 4 with fewer than 7 wins. Saleh and Stefanski did so with 7-win campaigns and with their QB missing significant time.
Statistically Daboll gets fired with a healthy Jones and 7 wins next year. This is why I would prefer 4 wins to 7. If they are both going down, at least leave the next guy in a position to pick a new QB.
this is great info that probably deserves its own thread.
when we've talked about this before saleh is the only coach i could think of who got the 4th year (and i think that was a mistake, even if jets have a good year i think he will hold them back and possibly waste a good year with a bad coach). stefanski had done more with less and his 7 win year had watson's suspension, so i think that was the right call (and he has proven that to be the case winning 11).
re Daboll, maybe we are rorschach testing ourselves but as ive said before i think any season that isn't progressive probably gets him fired. i think a progressive season is probably playoffs but certainly at least 8 or 9 wins.
i dont think you need to worry about jones piggybacking to a new coach. if there is regime change the decision is on that new coach, who will also probably have another top 10 pick and chance to get themselves their own rookie qb.
if they need a new coach id contribute to a go fund me for belichick just so we can altogether enjoy threads speculating on mara sock puppeting belichick.
No offence Christian but what an effing loser's mentality.
and maybe a cumulative year 1 + year 2 column? or you could do cumulative win% in years 1 + 2 and sort on that. that would be interesting "power ranking" of the decisions each org had at the time.
the craziest thing on that chart is reich and vrabel having gotten fired. being a hc is a shitty gig.
No offence Christian but what an effing loser's mentality.
You're boring.
and maybe a cumulative year 1 + year 2 column? or you could do cumulative win% in years 1 + 2 and sort on that. that would be interesting "power ranking" of the decisions each org had at the time.
the craziest thing on that chart is reich and vrabel having gotten fired. being a hc is a shitty gig.
Good suggestions. I'll start a new thread and make some adjustments.