Which was the correct take BUT all of a sudden in order to put the Giants down, these same people (mostly in the media) have the take of how the Giants really screwed up by letting him go. Am I crazy or are we getting gaslit?
The draft pick was correctly criticized in terms of resource allocation and roster construction, but that was a sunk cost by the time the decision to let Barkley go was made.
I happen to agree with Schoen's decision to let Barkley walk, but I also do think the criticism about that decision (and let's be honest, it's largely because he went to a division rival) can be valid without contradicting the previous criticism about the draft pick, especially because it actually confirmed the initial criticism from 2018: Barkley would be gone from the Giants by the time they were competitive again.
for their comical and incompetent management of assets. Drafting a RB back #2 overall was a horrible use of available resources. Letting him walk out the door for zero return was just as horrible.
The people who are hiring the people who are mismanaging the assets are where the issue is.
losing teams get mocked for whatever they do bc they are losing teams
it's not that complicated. the inverse is also true, nobody is mocking philly for spending what they did on barkley, or sf for spending what they did on cmc even though it now may cost them aiyuk.
It was more of a thought process vs how good* the player
walk is out of character for the Giants. I think that and the division rival aspect mentioned above are the contributing factors. It was absolutely the right call and I think we'll be talking about how he's a prime example of the Ewing theory.
"The Media" is not a monolith that speaks with one collective voice. The Media doesn't say anything, members of the media do, and those members often have differing opinions. It's like when people complain that BBI said X and not BBI is saying Y, even though X and Y were said by completely different users.
Also, I don't think I have seen many people criticizing the Giants for not signing Saquon. I have seen the (valid and correct) criticism of letting him walk vs trading him at some point in the last 4 years, but that is a very different discussion.
Lastly, people are allowed to have opinions evolve and change as circumstances change and new information is gathered. For example, I thought drafting Dexter Lawrence was a mistake, and didn't think the Giants should spend a 1st on a one dimensional, run stuffing DT. My opinion has changed since 2019, due to the new information presented in the form of Dex being an absolute monster in both the run and passing game, and think that signing him to his massive deal was a fantastic move
RE: losing teams get mocked for whatever they do bc they are losing teams
it's not that complicated. the inverse is also true, nobody is mocking philly for spending what they did on barkley, or sf for spending what they did on cmc even though it now may cost them aiyuk.
Also, its a results driven biz. If Barkley doesn't work out and is oft injured, throw on philly sports talk and listen in. See what their comments are.
Barkley is a luxury for a team ready to win ASAP and with a strong OLine. Philly has both. But 26 million GTD could go a decent way in the secondary, LBs etc if the D is getting torched this year for example. They've won with a cycle of backs in the past, but went all in (superlative) on this one.
I don't think letting him go deserves to be mocked,
but there's a lot of room for it be true both that Barkley at #2 was a bad pick, and keeping Barkley at or near what the Eagles paid (or maybe less if a contract was worked out last year) would have been a good move.
I was 100% behind taking Barkley in 2018. I didn't like the QBs:
Darnold seemed to me like a low ceiling pick (proved correct)
Rosen seemed like a rich boy / not serious about football (proved correct)
Mayfield seemed like a "one year, one hit wonder" (he isn't a bust, but isn't a franchise QB. Not worth first overall pick)
Allen seemed to be a low floor, high ceiling guy that had a decent bust potential (got the high ceiling right, but I would have missed out on him).
Barkley seemed like a safe pick and the RB market, although down, wasn't where it is today. I thought Barkley could be the kind of player that McCaffery turned out to be.
Although not known at the time, Gettleman refusing to pick up the phone for a potential trade is worthy of the Giants being mocked. He likely could have accrued more picks and still drafted Barkley. With at least 4 QB being considered to 10 QB prospects, not picking up the phone was asinine.
He’s been our best offensive player. However, in the overall he’s been good but not a lot better than that. His production can be replaced. Building a roster takes smart allocation of resources. Paying him $12m isn’t that. Having money for OL and pass rushers is.
in a vacuum they made sense at the time or you can at least understand the thought process, but when you consider how national media pundits frame it:
"The Giants gave Daniel Jones $160M and let Saquon Barkley walk" it doesn't look as logical.
Also, were the Giants mocked for taking Barkley? I don't remember that blow back being anywhere near as bad as the Jones mocking the next year. Maybe I'm miss-remembering.
in a vacuum they made sense at the time or you can at least understand the thought process, but when you consider how national media pundits frame it:
"The Giants gave Daniel Jones $160M and let Saquon Barkley walk" it doesn't look as logical.
Also, were the Giants mocked for taking Barkley? I don't remember that blow back being anywhere near as bad as the Jones mocking the next year. Maybe I'm miss-remembering.
they were not. he was a pretty chalk-y pick at the time, and then he was a day 1 all pro. most of the second guessing came after that when the injuries hit and the losing kept piling up.
RE: I think it's slightly inconsistent, but it's not gaslightling.
The draft pick was correctly criticized in terms of resource allocation and roster construction, but that was a sunk cost by the time the decision to let Barkley go was made.
I happen to agree with Schoen's decision to let Barkley walk, but I also do think the criticism about that decision (and let's be honest, it's largely because he went to a division rival) can be valid without contradicting the previous criticism about the draft pick, especially because it actually confirmed the initial criticism from 2018: Barkley would be gone from the Giants by the time they were competitive again.
Yes, but he was a better prospect than pro, if he wasn't good enough as a generational prospect to go 2 overall then he shouldn't be good enough for a big contract.
Also, that criticism about him being gone before being competitive being valid is correct but the question is not whether the initial criticism was valid, it's whether after the initial criticism, the complete opposite criticism is valid.
for their comical and incompetent management of assets. Drafting a RB back #2 overall was a horrible use of available resources. Letting him walk out the door for zero return was just as horrible.
The people who are hiring the people who are mismanaging the assets are where the issue is.
I think this is a valid criticism but not the one I usually see. Usually it's either paying Jones and not paying Saquon or just not keeping Saquon. But for the former as average as Jones is these same people were all about positional value in 2018, now all of a sudden we're back in the 80s.
It takes half a brain to see they needed to move on
Unfortunately the Giants are an easy target and they have no one else to blame but themselves.
This.
The Giants have had to make numerous decisions in recent years that would determine the direction of the franchise. Far more often than not they made the wrong decisions in those key moments. What's left is what we see: a team in its window to compete with Daniel Jones at quarterback.
The Giants are basically sitting on the other side of this conversation...
I'm saying it to underscore that three planning process, if there ever was one, was deeply flawed. Drafting Bakery, then not trading him, the franchising him so they could keep both him and Jones.... it's just a series of sad errors that many of us were basically narrating as they occurred.
"The Media" is not a monolith that speaks with one collective voice. The Media doesn't say anything, members of the media do, and those members often have differing opinions. It's like when people complain that BBI said X and not BBI is saying Y, even though X and Y were said by completely different users.
Also, I don't think I have seen many people criticizing the Giants for not signing Saquon. I have seen the (valid and correct) criticism of letting him walk vs trading him at some point in the last 4 years, but that is a very different discussion.
Lastly, people are allowed to have opinions evolve and change as circumstances change and new information is gathered. For example, I thought drafting Dexter Lawrence was a mistake, and didn't think the Giants should spend a 1st on a one dimensional, run stuffing DT. My opinion has changed since 2019, due to the new information presented in the form of Dex being an absolute monster in both the run and passing game, and think that signing him to his massive deal was a fantastic move
Rich Eisen is just the one name that comes to mind. And as far as opinion changing, what did he do to change people's opinion in a positive way? He was considered a generational back and has merely been very good and just above average outside of two years. And we didn't win shit with him.
of Barkley at the time of that 2018 draft. Based on what has occurred this offseason, most of the media I watch/listen to were surprised NYG let "their best offensive player" leave.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
of Barkley at the time of that 2018 draft. Based on what has occurred this offseason, most of the media I watch/listen to were surprised NYG let "their best offensive player" leave.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
I definitely mocked them for it. You can imagine how it went over.
I was 100% behind taking Barkley in 2018. I didn't like the QBs:
Darnold seemed to me like a low ceiling pick (proved correct)
Rosen seemed like a rich boy / not serious about football (proved correct)
Mayfield seemed like a "one year, one hit wonder" (he isn't a bust, but isn't a franchise QB. Not worth first overall pick)
Allen seemed to be a low floor, high ceiling guy that had a decent bust potential (got the high ceiling right, but I would have missed out on him).
Barkley seemed like a safe pick and the RB market, although down, wasn't where it is today. I thought Barkley could be the kind of player that McCaffery turned out to be.
Although not known at the time, Gettleman refusing to pick up the phone for a potential trade is worthy of the Giants being mocked. He likely could have accrued more picks and still drafted Barkley. With at least 4 QB being considered to 10 QB prospects, not picking up the phone was asinine.
This is a side note. Did DG literally refuse to pick up the phone? I know he said it but he was kind of flamboyant in shit he said. Maybe it was his way to emphasizing how much he liked and believed in Barkley. "I liked this generational player so much that I didn't even pick up the phone when trade proposals came in". Isn't it more likely that he picked up the phone and just thought there wasn't enough value? But saying that wouldn't be very Gettleman like.
in a vacuum they made sense at the time or you can at least understand the thought process, but when you consider how national media pundits frame it:
"The Giants gave Daniel Jones $160M and let Saquon Barkley walk" it doesn't look as logical.
Also, were the Giants mocked for taking Barkley? I don't remember that blow back being anywhere near as bad as the Jones mocking the next year. Maybe I'm miss-remembering.
You actually may be right, it was probably not the general media. If it was anyone it was the lesser known analytics sites that value position more than the old school guys. So maybe that answers the question and explains the discrepancy.
of Barkley at the time of that 2018 draft. Based on what has occurred this offseason, most of the media I watch/listen to were surprised NYG let "their best offensive player" leave.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
I definitely mocked them for it. You can imagine how it went over.
I was thinking mostly about the media. Around here taking Barkley was definitely met with serious pushback by a few of us.
Sy, in his draft articles, thought Barkley at #2 would be a good choice. I don't remember many articles from other draft experts that thought it was totally wrong. The backlash came after that rookie year when he wasn't the sure-fire gold jacket player.
As for this year, they're crying that they got rid of their best player, but not if they are looking to go to a pass first offense. Plus, Singletary had a better YPC than Barkley last season and costs half the salary. Of course, it remains to be seen if this move is the correct one, but the logic appears to be solid.
When you get right down to it, the media are just fans with a microphone or publisher.
Never forget that Gettleman PUBLICLY said he wouldn't even entertain offers for the second pick in '18.
(Banging head on desk).
And then it was confirmed that he did not, in fact, respond to telephone calls when on the clock. He very well may have been able to trade down a few picks and still pick Barkley. Great GM.
I think Gettleman was THE worst hire in Giants history. By far. He was THAT bad. Throw in the fact that he was a complete jerk & it's not even close for me. Handley can rest easy in Lake Tahoe or wherever the hell he lives now.
I think Gettleman was THE worst hire in Giants history. By far. He was THAT bad. Throw in the fact that he was a complete jerk & it's not even close for me. Handley can rest easy in Lake Tahoe or wherever the hell he lives now.
I was too young to be a serious Giants fan for Handley, so this is an easy one for me. Gettleman was the Ian Allen of our front office, except unlike Ian Allen we were stuck with him for years and his mistakes still reverberate.
1) Hire the right coach
2) Construct a strong roster
He walked in the door with the number two pick, an aging quarterback, and a poor roster.
This is the PFR values for the 2018 class. I don't think approximate value metric is a perfect value measure, but it does show you if a player plays and is a strong contributor.
I look at that list and two things strike: I would have liked the Giants to get a couple of those guys. And there aren't many who are near the end of their career.
1) Hire the right coach
2) Construct a strong roster
He walked in the door with the number two pick, an aging quarterback, and a poor roster.
This is the PFR values for the 2018 class. I don't think approximate value metric is a perfect value measure, but it does show you if a player plays and is a strong contributor.
I look at that list and two things strike: I would have liked the Giants to get a couple of those guys. And there aren't many who are near the end of their career.
Gettleman not only failed with a terrible record, he left Schoen on CAP hell.
Bu the way, one of the reasons for not drafting a RB that high is the injury factor, Barkley has been durable lately but he missed lots of time in his first few years. At 27 now, he’s not the talent he was.
Letting him walk out the door for zero return was just as horrible.
Arnie, I would love to have received something in return for Barkley, but at the trade deadline.. he was not worth anything.
He is a guy with an expiring contract after the season AND everyone knew he turned down 14 million. We all thought that was too much.
So, why would a team trade for a guy who may walk or cost too much this year? It would ONLY be a team who thought Barkley was the missing piece to get them a Superbowl last year.
Who was that team?
Everyone here said he was not worth it. Not that good and can be replaced at half the cost.
This is the PFR values for the 2018 class. I don't think approximate value metric is a perfect value measure, but it does show you if a player plays and is a strong contributor.
You need to adjust those results with the Hand of God factor that Ty Siam developed that year.
When you are a losing team - everything get's criticized
of Barkley at the time of that 2018 draft. Based on what has occurred this offseason, most of the media I watch/listen to were surprised NYG let "their best offensive player" leave.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
I definitely mocked them for it. You can imagine how it went over.
You know why the Giants selected him don't you Terps? If you dont, then you really don't understand this franchise and where they were at that moment.
of Barkley at the time of that 2018 draft. Based on what has occurred this offseason, most of the media I watch/listen to were surprised NYG let "their best offensive player" leave.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
I definitely mocked them for it. You can imagine how it went over.
You know why the Giants selected him don't you Terps? If you dont, then you really don't understand this franchise and where they were at that moment.
If I remember correctly--and please let me know if I'm wrong--the overwhelming majority of the board did not think Eli was cooked at this point. He actually looked good in the 2016 season playoff game, but his receivers failed him.
That said, many here did want to draft his heir at QB anyway. Considering we likely would have drafted Darnold, I guess it would have been a failure either way.
People sometimes forget that the Josh Allen pick was mocked/panned at the time. And Lamar fell to the end of the first round.
The real REALISTIC winning move would have been to trade down and either draft Barkley anyway or Quentin Nelson. (This assumes we were not interested in Lamar or Josh Allen.)
In any event, the 2018 draft set us up for years of failure and frustration. Thanks, Dave.
I was 100% behind taking Barkley in 2018. I didn't like the QBs:
Darnold seemed to me like a low ceiling pick (proved correct)
Rosen seemed like a rich boy / not serious about football (proved correct)
Mayfield seemed like a "one year, one hit wonder" (he isn't a bust, but isn't a franchise QB. Not worth first overall pick)
Allen seemed to be a low floor, high ceiling guy that had a decent bust potential (got the high ceiling right, but I would have missed out on him).
Barkley seemed like a safe pick and the RB market, although down, wasn't where it is today. I thought Barkley could be the kind of player that McCaffery turned out to be.
Although not known at the time, Gettleman refusing to pick up the phone for a potential trade is worthy of the Giants being mocked. He likely could have accrued more picks and still drafted Barkley. With at least 4 QB being considered to 10 QB prospects, not picking up the phone was asinine.
Allen was the real swing and miss. I remember thinking he was a cold weather QB who could be similar to Big Ben, without the rape-y stuff. Not saying I was totally opposed to SB either, I just thought that Allen was a very acceptable pick if TPTB at the time had done their homework on him. Gettleman thought Barkley was "touched by God" so there goes that homework, eaten by the dog I guess...
RE: RE: RE: RE: I don't recall all of this mocking...
If I remember correctly--and please let me know if I'm wrong--the overwhelming majority of the board did not think Eli was cooked at this point. He actually looked good in the 2016 season playoff game, but his receivers failed him.
Here is my opinion and as always it can be debated.
Gettleman missed badly with his three prior first round picks... Engram, Eli Apple, and Flowers. In fact, the second round picks all were better choices than the first round picks in those three years.
The Giants (and Dave) could not afford to miss on the pick this year regardless of whether we think we should have drafted a running back. It had to be a guy who was not going to be a bust like the other three.
I think they chose Barkley because they knew he was a cant miss prospect. Whether you like Barkley or not, he was the SAFE pick at that moment. Do you really trust Gettleman to pick a QB? Remember, all of the names we throw out there now is monday morning QB talk.
I wanted us to trade down and take an OL, then select Nick Chubb with our second pick. I think that would have been better for this team. I said it on draft day.
RE: I think it's slightly inconsistent, but it's not gaslightling.
The draft pick was correctly criticized in terms of resource allocation and roster construction, but that was a sunk cost by the time the decision to let Barkley go was made.
I happen to agree with Schoen's decision to let Barkley walk, but I also do think the criticism about that decision (and let's be honest, it's largely because he went to a division rival) can be valid without contradicting the previous criticism about the draft pick, especially because it actually confirmed the initial criticism from 2018: Barkley would be gone from the Giants by the time they were competitive again.
Just on this last part...I don't agree. Sure, they haven't been competitive again, but it didn't have to be this way. A far bigger reason for that was the guy who drafted Saquon was also drafting the heir apparent to Eli, and he blundered that immensely, the very next season. And sure, he did snag Big Dex in that draft, but he also traded up for De'Andre Baker, a nonsensical trade-up with similar corner talent on the board, while missing on the character eval, something that would repeat itself in 2021 with Kadarius Toney, after passing on the opportunity to draft Micah Parsons.
He could've waited in 2019, let Eli have his farewell tour, and drafted Justin Herbert the following season, (a strategy I advocated for that year) but he fell in love with Daniel Jones instead.
of Barkley at the time of that 2018 draft. Based on what has occurred this offseason, most of the media I watch/listen to were surprised NYG let "their best offensive player" leave.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
I definitely mocked them for it. You can imagine how it went over.
You know why the Giants selected him don't you Terps? If you dont, then you really don't understand this franchise and where they were at that moment.
Because they're run by people for whom nostalgia and sentimentality carry a greater weight than winning. Never mind that it damaged Eli's career and legacy...at least now they can put "Once a Giant, always a Giant" on the inside collar of the jersey.
"Once a Giant, always a Giant" is a load of bullshit.
whom I thought was the most talented QB in that draft, his so-called accuracy issues notwithstanding. Drafting Barkley reminded me of New Orleans passing on Lawrence Taylor and drafting George Rogers. The Giants were never going to win anything simply because they had Barkley, just as NO never won anything simply because they had Rogers, so it made no sense to me that Schoen didn't trade Barkley last year.
RE: Gettleman missed badly ... Engram, Apple, and Flowers
but I thought drafting a QB was a longshot with the Eli mandate. He was a hard sell as a sure bet franchise QB imv.
I thought trading back was a good move considering how bad Reese had destroyed the talent base of the franchise. Bigger disappointment with the SB pick was not getting the OL right to maximize his talent.
BBI. Spending on a RB is stupid. No one smart over pays for aRB.
Roseman Signs Barkley for millions s more than anyone else
BBI. Crickets.
Maybe it's important to note some context.
If you're a franchise that believes you're an impact RB away from winning the Super Bowl, the juice may be worth the squeeze.
If you're a franchise desperately clinging to the hope that you can win 9 games and sneak in the playoffs, maybe it's not such a good idea.
What needs no context is the error of drafting a RB #2 overall. That was a mistake from the time that buffoon of a GM unplugged the phones until the card was handed in.
RE: I was convinced the Giants were going to draft Josh Allen
whom I thought was the most talented QB in that draft, his so-called accuracy issues notwithstanding. Drafting Barkley reminded me of New Orleans passing on Lawrence Taylor and drafting George Rogers. The Giants were never going to win anything simply because they had Barkley, just as NO never won anything simply because they had Rogers, so it made no sense to me that Schoen didn't trade Barkley last year.
If you were 'convinced' that the Giants were going to take Josh Allen you must be some kind of savant because the Giants had shown very little interest in Allen to that point and nobody in the league was talking about him as being a potential #2 pick. And your little Rogers story is actually a terrible analogy. The Saints mistake as such was that they passed on the best player in the draft to fill a need. In Barkley the Giants did get the best player in that draft.
And the contention that the pick set the franchise back is just silly and thoughtless. Barkley was the best player on this team while he was here and the record showed they had a far better record when he played than when he didn't. The only thing that set the franchise back was that because of injuries he was never able to really duplicate and build on his great first year. In fact what did the set the franchise back was the injury to Odell as he was never the same. Just imagine this team the past 5 or so years, at least offense, with a healthy Odell and a healthy Saquon.
RE: RE: I was convinced the Giants were going to draft Josh Allen
for their comical and incompetent management of assets. Drafting a RB back #2 overall was a horrible use of available resources. Letting him walk out the door for zero return was just as horrible.
The people who are hiring the people who are mismanaging the assets are where the issue is.
I get it, but I've asked this on every thread about this lately.
What could the Giants have realistically gotten in return for Barkley at the trade deadline?
Just imagine this team the past 5 or so years, at least offense, with a healthy Odell and a healthy Saquon.
Unfortunately, that's pure fantasy and not relevant.
Beckham's season averages since he left the Giants reflect a player who is neither:
44 rec, 614 yds, 3.8 TDs
Aside from a brief period in 2021 when he flashed with Matthew Stafford (a HOF QB) and the Rams, he's been either injured or largely ineffective.
My friend, do you even begin to understand the word 'healthy'! 2014-16 Odell was quite literally the most dynamic player in the entire NFL. However, he's just as clearly been nowhere near the same player since breaking his leg early in the 2017 season.
Let me also address the rather sophomoric nobody should ever draft a RB that early. The Giants didn't draft Saquon because they wanted a RB;they drafted him because he was the best player in the draft and a potential dynamic game changing playmaker for a team that had no playmakers other than an injured Odell.
I also wanted to note that the old 'we have too many holes in the roster to justify taking a playmaker' is just such patent sophomoric nonsense. Teams that win in the NFL aren't teams with the deepest rosters or the fewest holes; they're the teams with the most dynamic playmakers.
RE: RE: RE: RE: I was convinced the Giants were going to draft Josh Allen
Just imagine this team the past 5 or so years, at least offense, with a healthy Odell and a healthy Saquon.
Unfortunately, that's pure fantasy and not relevant.
Beckham's season averages since he left the Giants reflect a player who is neither:
44 rec, 614 yds, 3.8 TDs
Aside from a brief period in 2021 when he flashed with Matthew Stafford (a HOF QB) and the Rams, he's been either injured or largely ineffective.
My friend, do you even begin to understand the word 'healthy'! 2014-16 Odell was quite literally the most dynamic player in the entire NFL. However, he's just as clearly been nowhere near the same player since breaking his leg early in the 2017 season.
Let me also address the rather sophomoric nobody should ever draft a RB that early. The Giants didn't draft Saquon because they wanted a RB;they drafted him because he was the best player in the draft and a potential dynamic game changing playmaker for a team that had no playmakers other than an injured Odell.
I also wanted to note that the old 'we have too many holes in the roster to justify taking a playmaker' is just such patent sophomoric nonsense. Teams that win in the NFL aren't teams with the deepest rosters or the fewest holes; they're the teams with the most dynamic playmakers.
Today's word of the day is apparently "sophomoric". Kudos to whoever buys your toilet paper.
I understand the word "healthy". But that's a fantasy. They were not healthy. I don't see how it's a relevant discussion to imagine a scenario that didn't happen.
I'm sure in your imagination, the trio of Daniel Jones, Saquon Barkley and Odell Beckham are responsible for a lethal Giants offense that justifies everything you believe to be true about all of them - especially Jones.
Was the equivalent of putting high performance brakes on a Citroen 2CV. Sure they'll stop the car faster, but it doesn't matter too much when you can't go over 55MPH anyway.
So given that notion of the brakes etc. should the Giants in fact have taken Lawrence Taylor in 1981. At the time he was drafted as a LB on a team the one strength was LB and they had at the time a dreadful offence (in fact worse than what we have now!) My gooodness what a luxury. And then they double down and take another LB with the 3rd pick in 1984. Now that is stupid.
And just to follow up on an earlier comment its hard to keep track. In 2019 the Giants blew it by passing on the higher rated impact player (the DE Allen) to reach a bit for a QB, then blew it again this year by taking the higher rated impact player instead of reaching for the QB. One's head spins!!
takes a running back with the #2 pick. Positional value. If he hadn't gone with Josh Allen, he would have traded down.
Again, another good example of the difference between your average fan in the street who tends to think positions and your average actual football person who thinks impact players at impact positions. I agree its high unlikely Schoen or anyone else these days would take a RB with the #2 pick overall. But the Giants didn't take a RB at @2, they took Saquon Barkley, the best player in the draft and to many the best non-qb prospect to come along in years.
PS the only way Schoen or anyone takes Josh Allen at #2 is if they've got 5-6 years of hindsight to work on. In all likellihood Schoen, if he'd taken a QB would have taken the USC guy because he was the next highest rated QB. And I also suspect that they only way Schoen trades down is if he gets a 2019 first rounder as part of the deal and that wasn't happening.
So given that notion of the brakes etc. should the Giants in fact have taken Lawrence Taylor in 1981. At the time he was drafted as a LB on a team the one strength was LB and they had at the time a dreadful offence (in fact worse than what we have now!) My gooodness what a luxury. And then they double down and take another LB with the 3rd pick in 1984. Now that is stupid.
And just to follow up on an earlier comment its hard to keep track. In 2019 the Giants blew it by passing on the higher rated impact player (the DE Allen) to reach a bit for a QB, then blew it again this year by taking the higher rated impact player instead of reaching for the QB. One's head spins!!
Lawrence Taylor was drafted nominally as a LB because the terminology of "edge rusher" didn't exist until 25 years later, but he was drafted where he was because of his potential impact on the game which included (among other things) a premium trait: elite pass rush.
Not only does your case fall apart by virtue of needing to go 40 years backward to make it, it's also just invalid on its face because LT would still be a premium prospect worthy of the #2 overall pick today.
Sometimes it feels like you go out of your way to be wrong.
So given that notion of the brakes etc. should the Giants in fact have taken Lawrence Taylor in 1981. At the time he was drafted as a LB on a team the one strength was LB and they had at the time a dreadful offence (in fact worse than what we have now!) My gooodness what a luxury. And then they double down and take another LB with the 3rd pick in 1984. Now that is stupid.
And just to follow up on an earlier comment its hard to keep track. In 2019 the Giants blew it by passing on the higher rated impact player (the DE Allen) to reach a bit for a QB, then blew it again this year by taking the higher rated impact player instead of reaching for the QB. One's head spins!!
Lawrence Taylor was drafted nominally as a LB because the terminology of "edge rusher" didn't exist until 25 years later, but he was drafted where he was because of his potential impact on the game which included (among other things) a premium trait: elite pass rush.
Not only does your case fall apart by virtue of needing to go 40 years backward to make it, it's also just invalid on its face because LT would still be a premium prospect worthy of the #2 overall pick today.
Sometimes it feels like you go out of your way to be wrong.
As usual, Gator you miss the point. Of course the Giants should have taken LT; he was by far the best player available, but so was Saquon and again by far. Were there other options? Yes. Was there a no-brainer other option. Not really. And my guess in the end if the other 31 GMs in the league had the same choice the large majority would have done the same thing.
As an aside my fave comment along these lines in that we shouldn't have taken Barkley because of positional value, but we should have taken Quentin Nelson, who in case anyone was paying attention plays at the one position of lower value than RB.
As an aside my fave comment along these lines in that we shouldn't have taken Barkley because of positional value, but we should have taken Quentin Nelson, who in case anyone was paying attention plays at the one position of lower value than RB.
1999 called, and he wants his opinion on guards back. LOL - ( New Window )
As an aside my fave comment along these lines in that we shouldn't have taken Barkley because of positional value, but we should have taken Quentin Nelson, who in case anyone was paying attention plays at the one position of lower value than RB.
1999 called, and he wants his opinion on guards back. LOL - ( New Window )
Interesting point. At the same time, though, since 1999, 18 RBs have been chosen with top 10 picks at the draft; half of them in the top 5. (IN fact RBs were chosen with top5 picks in both of the two drafts before 2018) In contrast, in the same period since 1999, exactly ONE OG was chosen in the top 10 - Nelson - and in fact an OG has not been chosen with a top 5 pick since the mid-1970s.
Did Barkley ever have a good o-line to run behind? If Barkley was running behind the Eagles or Dallas lines we'd have seen multiple 1000 seasons. I don't think our team was equipped to use Barkley to the best of his ability.
Did Barkley ever have a good o-line to run behind? If Barkley was running behind the Eagles or Dallas lines we'd have seen multiple 1000 seasons. I don't think our team was equipped to use Barkley to the best of his ability.
We did see multiple 1,000 yard rushing seasons from Barkley.
Did Barkley ever have a good o-line to run behind? If Barkley was running behind the Eagles or Dallas lines we'd have seen multiple 1000 seasons. I don't think our team was equipped to use Barkley to the best of his ability.
Clearly Saquon likely would have put up better numbers on a better team; after all it is a team game. My criticism is that the team itself didn't use Saquon to the best of his abilities. He was a scatback in a 230-pound body, but we tended to use him as a Derrick Henry type ram slamming into 9-10 man fronts. And all bringing in extra blockers did was allow defences to bring more people to the LOS to stop the run.
Saquon didn't need blocking; he needed a little space and he could make people miss. I would have liked the Giants to have taken almost the exact opposite approach. Spread the field, make the defence defend the whole field and try and defend the run with 5-6 people. We should also have been using Saquon as much as a decoy. If the defences played the run, pass the ball; if they dropped off, give it to Saquon aand let him find the creases. Unfortunately we'll never know.
Again I take something of different philosophical approach to team building. Get your impact players wherever you can and fill in the other spots rather than wasting valuable early picks essentially filling holes and hoping to add the impact players once the rest of the roster is filled out.
RE: RE: RE: ... should have taken a QB or trade down.
I was 100% behind taking Barkley in 2018. I didn't like the QBs:
Darnold seemed to me like a low ceiling pick (proved correct)
Rosen seemed like a rich boy / not serious about football (proved correct)
Mayfield seemed like a "one year, one hit wonder" (he isn't a bust, but isn't a franchise QB. Not worth first overall pick)
Allen seemed to be a low floor, high ceiling guy that had a decent bust potential (got the high ceiling right, but I would have missed out on him).
Barkley seemed like a safe pick and the RB market, although down, wasn't where it is today. I thought Barkley could be the kind of player that McCaffery turned out to be.
Although not known at the time, Gettleman refusing to pick up the phone for a potential trade is worthy of the Giants being mocked. He likely could have accrued more picks and still drafted Barkley. With at least 4 QB being considered to 10 QB prospects, not picking up the phone was asinine.
This is a side note. Did DG literally refuse to pick up the phone? I know he said it but he was kind of flamboyant in shit he said. Maybe it was his way to emphasizing how much he liked and believed in Barkley. "I liked this generational player so much that I didn't even pick up the phone when trade proposals came in". Isn't it more likely that he picked up the phone and just thought there wasn't enough value? But saying that wouldn't be very Gettleman like.
Picking Barkley was fine with me at the time IF WE WERE "FORCED" TO KEEP THE PICK. I wanted to trade down if we did not like the QBs. It seems like the pick would have had a lot of value with three QBs on the board. It seems like the Giants correctly assessed Rosen and Darnold but failed to capitalize.
I happen to agree with Schoen's decision to let Barkley walk, but I also do think the criticism about that decision (and let's be honest, it's largely because he went to a division rival) can be valid without contradicting the previous criticism about the draft pick, especially because it actually confirmed the initial criticism from 2018: Barkley would be gone from the Giants by the time they were competitive again.
The people who are hiring the people who are mismanaging the assets are where the issue is.
Think everyone thought Saquon had talent. But for the Giants off 2 wins? With an aging QB and holes everywhere?
Also, I don't think I have seen many people criticizing the Giants for not signing Saquon. I have seen the (valid and correct) criticism of letting him walk vs trading him at some point in the last 4 years, but that is a very different discussion.
Lastly, people are allowed to have opinions evolve and change as circumstances change and new information is gathered. For example, I thought drafting Dexter Lawrence was a mistake, and didn't think the Giants should spend a 1st on a one dimensional, run stuffing DT. My opinion has changed since 2019, due to the new information presented in the form of Dex being an absolute monster in both the run and passing game, and think that signing him to his massive deal was a fantastic move
Also, its a results driven biz. If Barkley doesn't work out and is oft injured, throw on philly sports talk and listen in. See what their comments are.
Barkley is a luxury for a team ready to win ASAP and with a strong OLine. Philly has both. But 26 million GTD could go a decent way in the secondary, LBs etc if the D is getting torched this year for example. They've won with a cycle of backs in the past, but went all in (superlative) on this one.
Darnold seemed to me like a low ceiling pick (proved correct)
Rosen seemed like a rich boy / not serious about football (proved correct)
Mayfield seemed like a "one year, one hit wonder" (he isn't a bust, but isn't a franchise QB. Not worth first overall pick)
Allen seemed to be a low floor, high ceiling guy that had a decent bust potential (got the high ceiling right, but I would have missed out on him).
Barkley seemed like a safe pick and the RB market, although down, wasn't where it is today. I thought Barkley could be the kind of player that McCaffery turned out to be.
Although not known at the time, Gettleman refusing to pick up the phone for a potential trade is worthy of the Giants being mocked. He likely could have accrued more picks and still drafted Barkley. With at least 4 QB being considered to 10 QB prospects, not picking up the phone was asinine.
"The Giants gave Daniel Jones $160M and let Saquon Barkley walk" it doesn't look as logical.
Also, were the Giants mocked for taking Barkley? I don't remember that blow back being anywhere near as bad as the Jones mocking the next year. Maybe I'm miss-remembering.
"The Giants gave Daniel Jones $160M and let Saquon Barkley walk" it doesn't look as logical.
Also, were the Giants mocked for taking Barkley? I don't remember that blow back being anywhere near as bad as the Jones mocking the next year. Maybe I'm miss-remembering.
they were not. he was a pretty chalk-y pick at the time, and then he was a day 1 all pro. most of the second guessing came after that when the injuries hit and the losing kept piling up.
I happen to agree with Schoen's decision to let Barkley walk, but I also do think the criticism about that decision (and let's be honest, it's largely because he went to a division rival) can be valid without contradicting the previous criticism about the draft pick, especially because it actually confirmed the initial criticism from 2018: Barkley would be gone from the Giants by the time they were competitive again.
Yes, but he was a better prospect than pro, if he wasn't good enough as a generational prospect to go 2 overall then he shouldn't be good enough for a big contract.
Also, that criticism about him being gone before being competitive being valid is correct but the question is not whether the initial criticism was valid, it's whether after the initial criticism, the complete opposite criticism is valid.
The people who are hiring the people who are mismanaging the assets are where the issue is.
I think this is a valid criticism but not the one I usually see. Usually it's either paying Jones and not paying Saquon or just not keeping Saquon. But for the former as average as Jones is these same people were all about positional value in 2018, now all of a sudden we're back in the 80s.
This.
The Giants have had to make numerous decisions in recent years that would determine the direction of the franchise. Far more often than not they made the wrong decisions in those key moments. What's left is what we see: a team in its window to compete with Daniel Jones at quarterback.
The Giants are basically sitting on the other side of this conversation...
Also, I don't think I have seen many people criticizing the Giants for not signing Saquon. I have seen the (valid and correct) criticism of letting him walk vs trading him at some point in the last 4 years, but that is a very different discussion.
Lastly, people are allowed to have opinions evolve and change as circumstances change and new information is gathered. For example, I thought drafting Dexter Lawrence was a mistake, and didn't think the Giants should spend a 1st on a one dimensional, run stuffing DT. My opinion has changed since 2019, due to the new information presented in the form of Dex being an absolute monster in both the run and passing game, and think that signing him to his massive deal was a fantastic move
Rich Eisen is just the one name that comes to mind. And as far as opinion changing, what did he do to change people's opinion in a positive way? He was considered a generational back and has merely been very good and just above average outside of two years. And we didn't win shit with him.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
I definitely mocked them for it. You can imagine how it went over.
Darnold seemed to me like a low ceiling pick (proved correct)
Rosen seemed like a rich boy / not serious about football (proved correct)
Mayfield seemed like a "one year, one hit wonder" (he isn't a bust, but isn't a franchise QB. Not worth first overall pick)
Allen seemed to be a low floor, high ceiling guy that had a decent bust potential (got the high ceiling right, but I would have missed out on him).
Barkley seemed like a safe pick and the RB market, although down, wasn't where it is today. I thought Barkley could be the kind of player that McCaffery turned out to be.
Although not known at the time, Gettleman refusing to pick up the phone for a potential trade is worthy of the Giants being mocked. He likely could have accrued more picks and still drafted Barkley. With at least 4 QB being considered to 10 QB prospects, not picking up the phone was asinine.
This is a side note. Did DG literally refuse to pick up the phone? I know he said it but he was kind of flamboyant in shit he said. Maybe it was his way to emphasizing how much he liked and believed in Barkley. "I liked this generational player so much that I didn't even pick up the phone when trade proposals came in". Isn't it more likely that he picked up the phone and just thought there wasn't enough value? But saying that wouldn't be very Gettleman like.
"The Giants gave Daniel Jones $160M and let Saquon Barkley walk" it doesn't look as logical.
Also, were the Giants mocked for taking Barkley? I don't remember that blow back being anywhere near as bad as the Jones mocking the next year. Maybe I'm miss-remembering.
You actually may be right, it was probably not the general media. If it was anyone it was the lesser known analytics sites that value position more than the old school guys. So maybe that answers the question and explains the discrepancy.
Quote:
of Barkley at the time of that 2018 draft. Based on what has occurred this offseason, most of the media I watch/listen to were surprised NYG let "their best offensive player" leave.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
I definitely mocked them for it. You can imagine how it went over.
I was thinking mostly about the media. Around here taking Barkley was definitely met with serious pushback by a few of us.
As for this year, they're crying that they got rid of their best player, but not if they are looking to go to a pass first offense. Plus, Singletary had a better YPC than Barkley last season and costs half the salary. Of course, it remains to be seen if this move is the correct one, but the logic appears to be solid.
When you get right down to it, the media are just fans with a microphone or publisher.
(Banging head on desk).
(Banging head on desk).
And then it was confirmed that he did not, in fact, respond to telephone calls when on the clock. He very well may have been able to trade down a few picks and still pick Barkley. Great GM.
I was too young to be a serious Giants fan for Handley, so this is an easy one for me. Gettleman was the Ian Allen of our front office, except unlike Ian Allen we were stuck with him for years and his mistakes still reverberate.
1) Hire the right coach
2) Construct a strong roster
He walked in the door with the number two pick, an aging quarterback, and a poor roster.
This is the PFR values for the 2018 class. I don't think approximate value metric is a perfect value measure, but it does show you if a player plays and is a strong contributor.
I look at that list and two things strike: I would have liked the Giants to get a couple of those guys. And there aren't many who are near the end of their career.
1) Hire the right coach
2) Construct a strong roster
He walked in the door with the number two pick, an aging quarterback, and a poor roster.
This is the PFR values for the 2018 class. I don't think approximate value metric is a perfect value measure, but it does show you if a player plays and is a strong contributor.
I look at that list and two things strike: I would have liked the Giants to get a couple of those guys. And there aren't many who are near the end of their career.
Gettleman not only failed with a terrible record, he left Schoen on CAP hell.
Bu the way, one of the reasons for not drafting a RB that high is the injury factor, Barkley has been durable lately but he missed lots of time in his first few years. At 27 now, he’s not the talent he was.
Arnie, I would love to have received something in return for Barkley, but at the trade deadline.. he was not worth anything.
He is a guy with an expiring contract after the season AND everyone knew he turned down 14 million. We all thought that was too much.
So, why would a team trade for a guy who may walk or cost too much this year? It would ONLY be a team who thought Barkley was the missing piece to get them a Superbowl last year.
Who was that team?
Everyone here said he was not worth it. Not that good and can be replaced at half the cost.
This is the PFR values for the 2018 class. I don't think approximate value metric is a perfect value measure, but it does show you if a player plays and is a strong contributor.
You need to adjust those results with the Hand of God factor that Ty Siam developed that year.
Quote:
of Barkley at the time of that 2018 draft. Based on what has occurred this offseason, most of the media I watch/listen to were surprised NYG let "their best offensive player" leave.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
I definitely mocked them for it. You can imagine how it went over.
You know why the Giants selected him don't you Terps? If you dont, then you really don't understand this franchise and where they were at that moment.
Quote:
In comment 16554338 bw in dc said:
Quote:
of Barkley at the time of that 2018 draft. Based on what has occurred this offseason, most of the media I watch/listen to were surprised NYG let "their best offensive player" leave.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
I definitely mocked them for it. You can imagine how it went over.
You know why the Giants selected him don't you Terps? If you dont, then you really don't understand this franchise and where they were at that moment.
If I remember correctly--and please let me know if I'm wrong--the overwhelming majority of the board did not think Eli was cooked at this point. He actually looked good in the 2016 season playoff game, but his receivers failed him.
That said, many here did want to draft his heir at QB anyway. Considering we likely would have drafted Darnold, I guess it would have been a failure either way.
People sometimes forget that the Josh Allen pick was mocked/panned at the time. And Lamar fell to the end of the first round.
The real REALISTIC winning move would have been to trade down and either draft Barkley anyway or Quentin Nelson. (This assumes we were not interested in Lamar or Josh Allen.)
In any event, the 2018 draft set us up for years of failure and frustration. Thanks, Dave.
Darnold seemed to me like a low ceiling pick (proved correct)
Rosen seemed like a rich boy / not serious about football (proved correct)
Mayfield seemed like a "one year, one hit wonder" (he isn't a bust, but isn't a franchise QB. Not worth first overall pick)
Allen seemed to be a low floor, high ceiling guy that had a decent bust potential (got the high ceiling right, but I would have missed out on him).
Barkley seemed like a safe pick and the RB market, although down, wasn't where it is today. I thought Barkley could be the kind of player that McCaffery turned out to be.
Although not known at the time, Gettleman refusing to pick up the phone for a potential trade is worthy of the Giants being mocked. He likely could have accrued more picks and still drafted Barkley. With at least 4 QB being considered to 10 QB prospects, not picking up the phone was asinine.
Allen was the real swing and miss. I remember thinking he was a cold weather QB who could be similar to Big Ben, without the rape-y stuff. Not saying I was totally opposed to SB either, I just thought that Allen was a very acceptable pick if TPTB at the time had done their homework on him. Gettleman thought Barkley was "touched by God" so there goes that homework, eaten by the dog I guess...
If I remember correctly--and please let me know if I'm wrong--the overwhelming majority of the board did not think Eli was cooked at this point. He actually looked good in the 2016 season playoff game, but his receivers failed him.
Here is my opinion and as always it can be debated.
Gettleman missed badly with his three prior first round picks... Engram, Eli Apple, and Flowers. In fact, the second round picks all were better choices than the first round picks in those three years.
The Giants (and Dave) could not afford to miss on the pick this year regardless of whether we think we should have drafted a running back. It had to be a guy who was not going to be a bust like the other three.
I think they chose Barkley because they knew he was a cant miss prospect. Whether you like Barkley or not, he was the SAFE pick at that moment. Do you really trust Gettleman to pick a QB? Remember, all of the names we throw out there now is monday morning QB talk.
I wanted us to trade down and take an OL, then select Nick Chubb with our second pick. I think that would have been better for this team. I said it on draft day.
I happen to agree with Schoen's decision to let Barkley walk, but I also do think the criticism about that decision (and let's be honest, it's largely because he went to a division rival) can be valid without contradicting the previous criticism about the draft pick, especially because it actually confirmed the initial criticism from 2018: Barkley would be gone from the Giants by the time they were competitive again.
Just on this last part...I don't agree. Sure, they haven't been competitive again, but it didn't have to be this way. A far bigger reason for that was the guy who drafted Saquon was also drafting the heir apparent to Eli, and he blundered that immensely, the very next season. And sure, he did snag Big Dex in that draft, but he also traded up for De'Andre Baker, a nonsensical trade-up with similar corner talent on the board, while missing on the character eval, something that would repeat itself in 2021 with Kadarius Toney, after passing on the opportunity to draft Micah Parsons.
He could've waited in 2019, let Eli have his farewell tour, and drafted Justin Herbert the following season, (a strategy I advocated for that year) but he fell in love with Daniel Jones instead.
Quote:
In comment 16554338 bw in dc said:
Quote:
of Barkley at the time of that 2018 draft. Based on what has occurred this offseason, most of the media I watch/listen to were surprised NYG let "their best offensive player" leave.
If Barkley was mocked it was at the lowest of volumes compared to Jones.
I definitely mocked them for it. You can imagine how it went over.
You know why the Giants selected him don't you Terps? If you dont, then you really don't understand this franchise and where they were at that moment.
Because they're run by people for whom nostalgia and sentimentality carry a greater weight than winning. Never mind that it damaged Eli's career and legacy...at least now they can put "Once a Giant, always a Giant" on the inside collar of the jersey.
"Once a Giant, always a Giant" is a load of bullshit.
He could have accepted the multiple offers the Giants did make.
I have always felt he was overated.
Barkley was Gettleman’s first pick as Giants GM.
BBI. Spending on a RB is stupid. No one smart over pays for aRB.
Roseman Signs Barkley for millions s more than anyone else
BBI. Crickets.
Odell looked like an amazing pick early on. NO one was complaining about Barkley after year 1.
Now. Easy to say Martin Or Aaron Donald and much easier to say Allen over Saquon.
The media and this place are full of internet and keyboard hypocrites. Half this site wanted old and Rosen too.
Must be to season to never ever be honest or a least be objective
I thought trading back was a good move considering how bad Reese had destroyed the talent base of the franchise. Bigger disappointment with the SB pick was not getting the OL right to maximize his talent.
BBI. Spending on a RB is stupid. No one smart over pays for aRB.
Roseman Signs Barkley for millions s more than anyone else
BBI. Crickets.
Maybe it's important to note some context.
If you're a franchise that believes you're an impact RB away from winning the Super Bowl, the juice may be worth the squeeze.
If you're a franchise desperately clinging to the hope that you can win 9 games and sneak in the playoffs, maybe it's not such a good idea.
What needs no context is the error of drafting a RB #2 overall. That was a mistake from the time that buffoon of a GM unplugged the phones until the card was handed in.
If you were 'convinced' that the Giants were going to take Josh Allen you must be some kind of savant because the Giants had shown very little interest in Allen to that point and nobody in the league was talking about him as being a potential #2 pick. And your little Rogers story is actually a terrible analogy. The Saints mistake as such was that they passed on the best player in the draft to fill a need. In Barkley the Giants did get the best player in that draft.
And the contention that the pick set the franchise back is just silly and thoughtless. Barkley was the best player on this team while he was here and the record showed they had a far better record when he played than when he didn't. The only thing that set the franchise back was that because of injuries he was never able to really duplicate and build on his great first year. In fact what did the set the franchise back was the injury to Odell as he was never the same. Just imagine this team the past 5 or so years, at least offense, with a healthy Odell and a healthy Saquon.
Unfortunately, that's pure fantasy and not relevant.
Beckham's season averages since he left the Giants reflect a player who is neither:
44 rec, 614 yds, 3.8 TDs
Aside from a brief period in 2021 when he flashed with Matthew Stafford (a HOF QB) and the Rams, he's been either injured or largely ineffective.
The people who are hiring the people who are mismanaging the assets are where the issue is.
I get it, but I've asked this on every thread about this lately.
What could the Giants have realistically gotten in return for Barkley at the trade deadline?
Quote:
Just imagine this team the past 5 or so years, at least offense, with a healthy Odell and a healthy Saquon.
Unfortunately, that's pure fantasy and not relevant.
Beckham's season averages since he left the Giants reflect a player who is neither:
44 rec, 614 yds, 3.8 TDs
Aside from a brief period in 2021 when he flashed with Matthew Stafford (a HOF QB) and the Rams, he's been either injured or largely ineffective.
My friend, do you even begin to understand the word 'healthy'! 2014-16 Odell was quite literally the most dynamic player in the entire NFL. However, he's just as clearly been nowhere near the same player since breaking his leg early in the 2017 season.
Let me also address the rather sophomoric nobody should ever draft a RB that early. The Giants didn't draft Saquon because they wanted a RB;they drafted him because he was the best player in the draft and a potential dynamic game changing playmaker for a team that had no playmakers other than an injured Odell.
I also wanted to note that the old 'we have too many holes in the roster to justify taking a playmaker' is just such patent sophomoric nonsense. Teams that win in the NFL aren't teams with the deepest rosters or the fewest holes; they're the teams with the most dynamic playmakers.
Quote:
In comment 16554586 Snorkels said:
Quote:
Just imagine this team the past 5 or so years, at least offense, with a healthy Odell and a healthy Saquon.
Unfortunately, that's pure fantasy and not relevant.
Beckham's season averages since he left the Giants reflect a player who is neither:
44 rec, 614 yds, 3.8 TDs
Aside from a brief period in 2021 when he flashed with Matthew Stafford (a HOF QB) and the Rams, he's been either injured or largely ineffective.
My friend, do you even begin to understand the word 'healthy'! 2014-16 Odell was quite literally the most dynamic player in the entire NFL. However, he's just as clearly been nowhere near the same player since breaking his leg early in the 2017 season.
Let me also address the rather sophomoric nobody should ever draft a RB that early. The Giants didn't draft Saquon because they wanted a RB;they drafted him because he was the best player in the draft and a potential dynamic game changing playmaker for a team that had no playmakers other than an injured Odell.
I also wanted to note that the old 'we have too many holes in the roster to justify taking a playmaker' is just such patent sophomoric nonsense. Teams that win in the NFL aren't teams with the deepest rosters or the fewest holes; they're the teams with the most dynamic playmakers.
Today's word of the day is apparently "sophomoric". Kudos to whoever buys your toilet paper.
I understand the word "healthy". But that's a fantasy. They were not healthy. I don't see how it's a relevant discussion to imagine a scenario that didn't happen.
I'm sure in your imagination, the trio of Daniel Jones, Saquon Barkley and Odell Beckham are responsible for a lethal Giants offense that justifies everything you believe to be true about all of them - especially Jones.
And just to follow up on an earlier comment its hard to keep track. In 2019 the Giants blew it by passing on the higher rated impact player (the DE Allen) to reach a bit for a QB, then blew it again this year by taking the higher rated impact player instead of reaching for the QB. One's head spins!!
Again, another good example of the difference between your average fan in the street who tends to think positions and your average actual football person who thinks impact players at impact positions. I agree its high unlikely Schoen or anyone else these days would take a RB with the #2 pick overall. But the Giants didn't take a RB at @2, they took Saquon Barkley, the best player in the draft and to many the best non-qb prospect to come along in years.
PS the only way Schoen or anyone takes Josh Allen at #2 is if they've got 5-6 years of hindsight to work on. In all likellihood Schoen, if he'd taken a QB would have taken the USC guy because he was the next highest rated QB. And I also suspect that they only way Schoen trades down is if he gets a 2019 first rounder as part of the deal and that wasn't happening.
And just to follow up on an earlier comment its hard to keep track. In 2019 the Giants blew it by passing on the higher rated impact player (the DE Allen) to reach a bit for a QB, then blew it again this year by taking the higher rated impact player instead of reaching for the QB. One's head spins!!
Lawrence Taylor was drafted nominally as a LB because the terminology of "edge rusher" didn't exist until 25 years later, but he was drafted where he was because of his potential impact on the game which included (among other things) a premium trait: elite pass rush.
Not only does your case fall apart by virtue of needing to go 40 years backward to make it, it's also just invalid on its face because LT would still be a premium prospect worthy of the #2 overall pick today.
Sometimes it feels like you go out of your way to be wrong.
Quote:
So given that notion of the brakes etc. should the Giants in fact have taken Lawrence Taylor in 1981. At the time he was drafted as a LB on a team the one strength was LB and they had at the time a dreadful offence (in fact worse than what we have now!) My gooodness what a luxury. And then they double down and take another LB with the 3rd pick in 1984. Now that is stupid.
And just to follow up on an earlier comment its hard to keep track. In 2019 the Giants blew it by passing on the higher rated impact player (the DE Allen) to reach a bit for a QB, then blew it again this year by taking the higher rated impact player instead of reaching for the QB. One's head spins!!
Lawrence Taylor was drafted nominally as a LB because the terminology of "edge rusher" didn't exist until 25 years later, but he was drafted where he was because of his potential impact on the game which included (among other things) a premium trait: elite pass rush.
Not only does your case fall apart by virtue of needing to go 40 years backward to make it, it's also just invalid on its face because LT would still be a premium prospect worthy of the #2 overall pick today.
Sometimes it feels like you go out of your way to be wrong.
As usual, Gator you miss the point. Of course the Giants should have taken LT; he was by far the best player available, but so was Saquon and again by far. Were there other options? Yes. Was there a no-brainer other option. Not really. And my guess in the end if the other 31 GMs in the league had the same choice the large majority would have done the same thing.
As an aside my fave comment along these lines in that we shouldn't have taken Barkley because of positional value, but we should have taken Quentin Nelson, who in case anyone was paying attention plays at the one position of lower value than RB.
1999 called, and he wants his opinion on guards back.
LOL - ( New Window )
Quote:
As an aside my fave comment along these lines in that we shouldn't have taken Barkley because of positional value, but we should have taken Quentin Nelson, who in case anyone was paying attention plays at the one position of lower value than RB.
1999 called, and he wants his opinion on guards back. LOL - ( New Window )
Interesting point. At the same time, though, since 1999, 18 RBs have been chosen with top 10 picks at the draft; half of them in the top 5. (IN fact RBs were chosen with top5 picks in both of the two drafts before 2018) In contrast, in the same period since 1999, exactly ONE OG was chosen in the top 10 - Nelson - and in fact an OG has not been chosen with a top 5 pick since the mid-1970s.
We did see multiple 1,000 yard rushing seasons from Barkley.
Clearly Saquon likely would have put up better numbers on a better team; after all it is a team game. My criticism is that the team itself didn't use Saquon to the best of his abilities. He was a scatback in a 230-pound body, but we tended to use him as a Derrick Henry type ram slamming into 9-10 man fronts. And all bringing in extra blockers did was allow defences to bring more people to the LOS to stop the run.
Saquon didn't need blocking; he needed a little space and he could make people miss. I would have liked the Giants to have taken almost the exact opposite approach. Spread the field, make the defence defend the whole field and try and defend the run with 5-6 people. We should also have been using Saquon as much as a decoy. If the defences played the run, pass the ball; if they dropped off, give it to Saquon aand let him find the creases. Unfortunately we'll never know.
Again I take something of different philosophical approach to team building. Get your impact players wherever you can and fill in the other spots rather than wasting valuable early picks essentially filling holes and hoping to add the impact players once the rest of the roster is filled out.
Quote:
I was 100% behind taking Barkley in 2018. I didn't like the QBs:
Darnold seemed to me like a low ceiling pick (proved correct)
Rosen seemed like a rich boy / not serious about football (proved correct)
Mayfield seemed like a "one year, one hit wonder" (he isn't a bust, but isn't a franchise QB. Not worth first overall pick)
Allen seemed to be a low floor, high ceiling guy that had a decent bust potential (got the high ceiling right, but I would have missed out on him).
Barkley seemed like a safe pick and the RB market, although down, wasn't where it is today. I thought Barkley could be the kind of player that McCaffery turned out to be.
Although not known at the time, Gettleman refusing to pick up the phone for a potential trade is worthy of the Giants being mocked. He likely could have accrued more picks and still drafted Barkley. With at least 4 QB being considered to 10 QB prospects, not picking up the phone was asinine.
This is a side note. Did DG literally refuse to pick up the phone? I know he said it but he was kind of flamboyant in shit he said. Maybe it was his way to emphasizing how much he liked and believed in Barkley. "I liked this generational player so much that I didn't even pick up the phone when trade proposals came in". Isn't it more likely that he picked up the phone and just thought there wasn't enough value? But saying that wouldn't be very Gettleman like.
Picking Barkley was fine with me at the time IF WE WERE "FORCED" TO KEEP THE PICK. I wanted to trade down if we did not like the QBs. It seems like the pick would have had a lot of value with three QBs on the board. It seems like the Giants correctly assessed Rosen and Darnold but failed to capitalize.