NJ Online 2-round Giants projection

and Barkley goes to the Browns with their 1st pick.

In comment 13856025 johnnyb said:

Quote:

and Barkley goes to the Browns with their 1st pick.

The Browns could also luck out picking Darnold at 1, Giants go with Rosen at 2, Colts go with Nelson at 3, leaving Barkley to fall into the Browns lap with their 4th pick.

Barkley and OL in round 2 would be my perfect scenario

can't "quick start" the offense if they draft a franchise QB at #2. I really don't understand the thinking & think the "quick starting" can happen w/picks 2,3,4,5 along w/how DG addresses FA next week(I believe he's going to be very aggressive).It doesn't have to be one or the other-It really can be both the future & the present at the same time!

I'd be very surprised if we didn't take a QB at #2. I suppose that if they indeed took a position player at #2 with all the QBs still available it would suggest that the team is quite optimistic about Webb's future as our starter.

In comment 13856050 yatqb said:

Quote:

I'd be very surprised if we didn't take a QB at #2. I suppose that if they indeed took a position player at #2 with all the QBs still available it would suggest that the team is quite optimistic about Webb's future as our starter.

If we only knew about Webb and his capabilities, the decision would be so much easier. Not playing him turns this into a guessing game, which is why I believe you go QB with the 2nd pick.

with
Rosen or Darnold in round 1
Wynn, Hernandez, Smith, or O'Neill in round 2.

I understand QB are over valued based on need but I think it speaks volumes when people are talking about top 3 picks not being a QB.
This QB class has a lot of blemishes.

In comment 13856054 johnnyb said:

Quote:

In comment 13856050 yatqb said: Quote: I'd be very surprised if we didn't take a QB at #2. I suppose that if they indeed took a position player at #2 with all the QBs still available it would suggest that the team is quite optimistic about Webb's future as our starter. If we only knew about Webb and his capabilities, the decision would be so much easier. Not playing him turns this into a guessing game, which is why I believe you go QB with the 2nd pick.

I have never understood the circular logic that some go to to get to this conclusion. Think about what you are saying.

The argument becomes "since we never saw Webb play last year, we have no idea of what his NFL capability is. Therefore, our best course of action is to use the #2 pick in the draft on... a QB who we have no idea what his NFL capability is..."

That makes no sense whatsoever logically.

In comment 13856037 TheMick7 said:

Quote:

can't "quick start" the offense if they draft a franchise QB at #2. I really don't understand the thinking & think the "quick starting" can happen w/picks 2,3,4,5 along w/how DG addresses FA next week(I believe he's going to be very aggressive).It doesn't have to be one or the other-It really can be both the future & the present at the same time!

If we draft a QB at #2, I don't know how you're going to "quick start" the offense. Are you thinking like we draft Michel at #34, and then go OL in rounds 3 and 4? Even if we sign Norwell I'm not sure we can revamp the O-Line just with picks in rounds 3 and 4. I think we need that 2nd round pick to grab an OL who can start right away. And I don't think Sony Michel is going to be the "quick-start" answer, I think we would need an elite playmaker like Barkley for that.

In comment 13856071 larryflower37 said:

Quote:

I understand QB are over valued based on need but I think it speaks volumes when people are talking about top 3 picks not being a QB. This QB class has a lot of blemishes.

All QB classes have a lot of blemishes. The 2004 class had blemishes too, but the NFL Network had just launched, the combine was not covered live (and in its entirety) and Twitter didn't exist yet. In other words, we were nowhere near the saturation of coverage that we have now, so fans didn't have access to months and months of nitpicking of prospects and the incessant repeating of supposed flaws.

IMO, there's a better chance of two of the top three picks being QBs than there is of zero.

In comment 13856071 larryflower37 said:

Quote:

I understand QB are over valued based on need but I think it speaks volumes when people are talking about top 3 picks not being a QB. This QB class has a lot of blemishes.

It only speaks volumes if it actually happens. I've not seen one mock that didn't include a QB in the top 3 and can assure you it will not happen.

In comment 13856111 Gatorade Dunk said:

Quote:

In comment 13856071 larryflower37 said: Quote: I understand QB are over valued based on need but I think it speaks volumes when people are talking about top 3 picks not being a QB. This QB class has a lot of blemishes. All QB classes have a lot of blemishes. The 2004 class had blemishes too, but the NFL Network had just launched, the combine was not covered live (and in its entirety) and Twitter didn't exist yet. In other words, we were nowhere near the saturation of coverage that we have now, so fans didn't have access to months and months of nitpicking of prospects and the incessant repeating of supposed flaws. IMO, there's a better chance of two of the top three picks being QBs than there is of zero.

I'll be honest, I think a lot has to do with over analysis. You start breaking everything down into micro components and you lose the forest for the trees. Darnold and Rosen were damn good QBs when it was only about the games.

In comment 13856050 yatqb said:

Quote:

I'd be very surprised if we didn't take a QB at #2. I suppose that if they indeed took a position player at #2 with all the QBs still available it would suggest that the team is quite optimistic about Webb's future as our starter.

or that we have a 2+ year window to solve the problem and management isn’t as worried as we are.

and Eli Flounders there will be a QB controversy that will spilt the team apart just what we need as it is they will be calling for Webb the media in NY will go berserk the more and more I look at it they either say goodbye to Eli and then draft a QB or Staick with Eli and draft a RB ..... let’s face it they haven’t had a bell cow since Tiki..... so I say put together a decent line draft Barkley if they can ..... if not trade or release Eli draft Josh Rosen imo

+1

Actually, a trade down and still getting Barkley is a dream scenario, but so is me sharing a hot tub with Kate Upton and Charlotte McKinney; neither is going to happen.

In comment 13856071 larryflower37 said:

Quote:

I understand QB are over valued based on need but I think it speaks volumes when people are talking about top 3 picks not being a QB. This QB class has a lot of blemishes.

I don't there's any QB who checks off all the boxes like a Luck/P. Manning/Elway, but there's at least 4 good prospects. Heck, even Manning didn't check off all the boxes, slow and not a cannon arm. This group of QBs are a shade below Eli/Rivers/Rapelisberger class.

In comment 13856084 Knee of Theismann said:

Quote:

In comment 13856037 TheMick7 said: Quote: can't "quick start" the offense if they draft a franchise QB at #2. I really don't understand the thinking & think the "quick starting" can happen w/picks 2,3,4,5 along w/how DG addresses FA next week(I believe he's going to be very aggressive).It doesn't have to be one or the other-It really can be both the future & the present at the same time! If we draft a QB at #2, I don't know how you're going to "quick start" the offense. Are you thinking like we draft Michel at #34, and then go OL in rounds 3 and 4? Even if we sign Norwell I'm not sure we can revamp the O-Line just with picks in rounds 3 and 4. I think we need that 2nd round pick to grab an OL who can start right away. And I don't think Sony Michel is going to be the "quick-start" answer, I think we would need an elite playmaker like Barkley for that.

Which is why the combination of FA & the draft can do both. Don't need to draft a RB #2 to get a RB that elevates the offense.Alvin Kamala was a 3rd round pick. Hell,DG might sign McKinnon to compliment our RB situation. In any business,you look at your present,trying to make it the best it can be without compromising your future.Unless DG deems Webb the future,drafting a QB can be part of the overall plan to do both.

in this draft. The fact that 3 QBs will likely go in the top 6 picks in this draft, while Webb went late in the 3rd last year, suggests how all these QBs have been viewed by the pros. It's not as illogical as you suggest, imo.

As to Webb, what we have that other teams don't are the tapes of Webb's work with us last year, and a year's worth of information about his development as a prospect since last year. It would have been better if he had played last year, but we certainly have more information on him now than a year ago.

We obviously should be able to get a franchise guy there for the next 12 years.

But if that's the pick then we're starting the re-build because we're clearly not doing all we can to win in 2018. And that might be the right decision.

If we think we can fix some holes in the defense and the o-line to win in 2018, and if we think Eli is still a winning QB, Barclay should be the pick if he's there.

In comment 13856073 rich in DC said:

Quote:

In comment 13856054 johnnyb said: Quote: In comment 13856050 yatqb said: Quote: I'd be very surprised if we didn't take a QB at #2. I suppose that if they indeed took a position player at #2 with all the QBs still available it would suggest that the team is quite optimistic about Webb's future as our starter. If we only knew about Webb and his capabilities, the decision would be so much easier. Not playing him turns this into a guessing game, which is why I believe you go QB with the 2nd pick. I have never understood the circular logic that some go to to get to this conclusion. Think about what you are saying. The argument becomes "since we never saw Webb play last year, we have no idea of what his NFL capability is. Therefore, our best course of action is to use the #2 pick in the draft on... a QB who we have no idea what his NFL capability is..." That makes no sense whatsoever logically.

+1000000000000000!!!!!

This is exactly what I've been saying as well! I don't get it either. You're saying you're using the #2 pick on a QB because the QB you currently have on the roster is an unknown.

So how exactly does that make the unknown QB you pick at #2 any better?

In comment 13856163 NikkiMac said:

Quote:

and Eli Flounders there will be a QB controversy that will spilt the team apart just what we need as it is they will be calling for Webb the media in NY will go berserk the more and more I look at it they either say goodbye to Eli and then draft a QB or Staick with Eli and draft a RB ..... let’s face it they haven’t had a bell cow since Tiki..... so I say put together a decent line draft Barkley if they can ..... if not trade or release Eli draft Josh Rosen imo

Agree with this as well.

In comment 13856239 yatqb said:

Quote:

in this draft. The fact that 3 QBs will likely go in the top 6 picks in this draft, while Webb went late in the 3rd last year, suggests how all these QBs have been viewed by the pros. It's not as illogical as you suggest, imo.

With all due respect (cuz you know you're one of my faves), so? None of those NFL scouts still don't KNOW how any of the QBs who are selected in this draft will perform once the hitting starts. I just don't agree that because Webb was a third round pick that makes him automatically a worse option to be Eli's successor than a guy who gets picked at #2... and base that decision simply because no one except the team has seen him play.

Would be a quick fix to make the team win now. As talented and great as Barkley can and will be, we need to build for the long term. We need a true franchise played at an impact position. QB, DE, or LT.

In comment 13856305 JoeyBigBlue said:

Quote:

Would be a quick fix to make the team win now. As talented and great as Barkley can and will be, we need to build for the long term. We need a true franchise played at an impact position. QB, DE, or LT.

Respectfully disagree. Why can't Barkley be considered as a long term investment? I've also seen it repeatedly stated that we shouldn't select Barkley because of the relatively shorter shelf life of RBs... but that doesn't pertain to all RBs and the truly great ones (which most everyone is expecting Barkley to be) can last 10 years easily. Especially ones that are built like him.

In comment 13856232 TheMick7 said:

Quote:

In comment 13856084 Knee of Theismann said: Quote: In comment 13856037 TheMick7 said: Quote: can't "quick start" the offense if they draft a franchise QB at #2. I really don't understand the thinking & think the "quick starting" can happen w/picks 2,3,4,5 along w/how DG addresses FA next week(I believe he's going to be very aggressive).It doesn't have to be one or the other-It really can be both the future & the present at the same time! If we draft a QB at #2, I don't know how you're going to "quick start" the offense. Are you thinking like we draft Michel at #34, and then go OL in rounds 3 and 4? Even if we sign Norwell I'm not sure we can revamp the O-Line just with picks in rounds 3 and 4. I think we need that 2nd round pick to grab an OL who can start right away. And I don't think Sony Michel is going to be the "quick-start" answer, I think we would need an elite playmaker like Barkley for that. Which is why the combination of FA & the draft can do both. Don't need to draft a RB #2 to get a RB that elevates the offense.Alvin Kamala was a 3rd round pick. Hell,DG might sign McKinnon to compliment our RB situation. In any business,you look at your present,trying to make it the best it can be without compromising your future.Unless DG deems Webb the future,drafting a QB can be part of the overall plan to do both.

This team went 3-13 last year. It's already going to be hard to turn this into a playoff team in one year. And if you use the #2 overall pick on a guy who isn't going to play in 2018, it's going to be even harder to turn this into a playoff team. We may have $20M in cap space, but we literally don't have an offensive line right now, and we'd only have 4 draft picks left after grabbing our (hopefully) future franchise QB.

I just think the choice is simple: you can shoot for trying to win in 2018 and 2019 by either grabbing Barkley or trading down and grabbing Nelson/Chubb/Fitz while accumulating premium picks in '18 and '19, or you can take your Franchise QB who will sit for 1-2 years and watch the team meddle in mediocrity until Eli's gone and he's ready to lead the team.

I doubt just adding Barkley and Norwell would result in a playoff caliber team... if we're trying to win the super bowl in Eli's last 2 years I think the choice would be to trade down and get Nelson and pick up a bunch of premium picks in the process (which is very doable in a year where you have 5 potential franchise QBs who will be drafted in the top 10-15).

But it is doubtful that he will have the greatest impact of all players drafted. That honor will likely go to one if the QBs.

In comment 13856334 UberAlias said:

Quote:

But it is doubtful that he will have the greatest impact of all players drafted. That honor will likely go to one if the QBs.

Long-term I agree a QB would likely have the greatest impact. But given that the drafted QB is likely to sit and watch behind Eli for at least a year, than Barkley would have a greater short-term impact.

But I never suggested that Webb is a worse choice than a QB at 2. I said that if the Giants have a choice of all the QBs in the draft and still don't pick one, they must feel pretty confident that Webb is their guy (considering that Eli's 37 years old and they're not likely to be picking #2 in the draft again any time soon).

In comment 13856285 T-Bone said:

Quote:

In comment 13856073 rich in DC said: Quote: In comment 13856054 johnnyb said: Quote: In comment 13856050 yatqb said: Quote: I'd be very surprised if we didn't take a QB at #2. I suppose that if they indeed took a position player at #2 with all the QBs still available it would suggest that the team is quite optimistic about Webb's future as our starter. If we only knew about Webb and his capabilities, the decision would be so much easier. Not playing him turns this into a guessing game, which is why I believe you go QB with the 2nd pick. I have never understood the circular logic that some go to to get to this conclusion. Think about what you are saying. The argument becomes "since we never saw Webb play last year, we have no idea of what his NFL capability is. Therefore, our best course of action is to use the #2 pick in the draft on... a QB who we have no idea what his NFL capability is..." That makes no sense whatsoever logically. +1000000000000000!!!!! This is exactly what I've been saying as well! I don't get it either. You're saying you're using the #2 pick on a QB because the QB you currently have on the roster is an unknown. So how exactly does that make the unknown QB you pick at #2 any better?

If the Giants believe Darnold, Rosen or whoever is a franchise type QB you have to take them... Franchise QB's are rare and it's the most important position on the team by far! Barkley is the sexy pick but not the smart one "IF" there is a strong reason to believe one of these QB's could serve us well into the future...

In comment 13856502 yatqb said:

Quote:

But I never suggested that Webb is a worse choice than a QB at 2. I said that if the Giants have a choice of all the QBs in the draft and still don't pick one, they must feel pretty confident that Webb is their guy (considering that Eli's 37 years old and they're not likely to be picking #2 in the draft again any time soon).

That I can agree with.

In comment 13856529 Thinblueline said:

Quote:

In comment 13856285 T-Bone said: Quote: In comment 13856073 rich in DC said: Quote: In comment 13856054 johnnyb said: Quote: In comment 13856050 yatqb said: Quote: I'd be very surprised if we didn't take a QB at #2. I suppose that if they indeed took a position player at #2 with all the QBs still available it would suggest that the team is quite optimistic about Webb's future as our starter. If we only knew about Webb and his capabilities, the decision would be so much easier. Not playing him turns this into a guessing game, which is why I believe you go QB with the 2nd pick. I have never understood the circular logic that some go to to get to this conclusion. Think about what you are saying. The argument becomes "since we never saw Webb play last year, we have no idea of what his NFL capability is. Therefore, our best course of action is to use the #2 pick in the draft on... a QB who we have no idea what his NFL capability is..." That makes no sense whatsoever logically. I also don’t disagree with this. You’re right, if the Giants feel confident that any of the QBs will develop into a top QB in this league they have to take him. It’s just me personally (and I have no problem saying they know infinitely more than I do), I don’t see it and Barkley is my pick. +1000000000000000!!!!! This is exactly what I've been saying as well! I don't get it either. You're saying you're using the #2 pick on a QB because the QB you currently have on the roster is an unknown. So how exactly does that make the unknown QB you pick at #2 any better? If the Giants believe Darnold, Rosen or whoever is a franchise type QB you have to take them... Franchise QB's are rare and it's the most important position on the team by far! Barkley is the sexy pick but not the smart one "IF" there is a strong reason to believe one of these QB's could serve us well into the future...

In comment 13856163 NikkiMac said:

Quote:

and Eli Flounders there will be a QB controversy that will spilt the team apart just what we need as it is they will be calling for Webb the media in NY will go berserk the more and more I look at it they either say goodbye to Eli and then draft a QB or Staick with Eli and draft a RB ..... let’s face it they haven’t had a bell cow since Tiki..... so I say put together a decent line draft Barkley if they can ..... if not trade or release Eli draft Josh Rosen imo

This is dumb.

It’s a good possibility this could happen take off the rose colored glasses

Why do you think the team was going to bat for Davis Webb ?

I’ll tell you why because they know if the giants draft a rookie

They have no chance to make the playoffs in they’re mind not saying it can’t happen

What do you think is going to happen if they start out 0@3 and Eli

Is throwing interceptions the media is going to be calling for the rookie

And once they make a change then the possibility of a QB controversy will be possible and could get quite messy if the rookies throwing good some of the players might want him the others thinking stay with Eli.....

Im not saying this could definitely happen but jus maybe .....

Anyway my friend I’m in the camp of thinking build a line stick with Eli/Webb

And somewhere draft a top Rb Wr lb OL FS and make one more run with Eli ....... the days of Aaron Rodgers sitting for 4years behind Brett Farve are gone ..... most first rounders are expected to play right away imo I don’t thing that bridge stuff works...........

In comment 13856701 NikkiMac said:

Quote:

It’s a good possibility this could happen take off the rose colored glasses Why do you think the team was going to bat for Davis Webb ? I’ll tell you why because they know if the giants draft a rookie They have no chance to make the playoffs in they’re mind not saying it can’t happen What do you think is going to happen if they start out 0@3 and Eli Is throwing interceptions the media is going to be calling for the rookie And once they make a change then the possibility of a QB controversy will be possible and could get quite messy if the rookies throwing good some of the players might want him the others thinking stay with Eli..... Im not saying this could definitely happen but jus maybe ..... Anyway my friend I’m in the camp of thinking build a line stick with Eli/Webb And somewhere draft a top Rb Wr lb OL FS and make one more run with Eli ....... the days of Aaron Rodgers sitting for 4years behind Brett Farve are gone ..... most first rounders are expected to play right away imo I don’t thing that bridge stuff works...........

Because you don't not draft players because they might steal the job midseason from a 37 year old QB.

#2 draft a QB that everything is going to be hunkey dory and go smooth as silk With The transition from Vet to Rookie... We are all hoping that’s the case but you never know GFAN52.

In comment 13856054 johnnyb said:

Quote:

In comment 13856050 yatqb said: Quote: I'd be very surprised if we didn't take a QB at #2. I suppose that if they indeed took a position player at #2 with all the QBs still available it would suggest that the team is quite optimistic about Webb's future as our starter. If we only knew about Webb and his capabilities, the decision would be so much easier. Not playing him turns this into a guessing game, which is why I believe you go QB with the 2nd pick.

I’ve said this before but even if Webb played 2-3 games last year we wouldn’t know enough today. Even in the unlikely event that Webb lit it up in those games we wouldn’t know enough today. And you know damn well Webb wasn’t lighting anything up on that 2017 team.

We would not have seen enough of Webb in 2017 to formulate any long term plan. Yea he probably should have played especially if mcadoo just had to bench Eli like the madman that he was but still, it wouldn’t have mattered today. Giants still wouldn’t know about Webb. Not by a long shot.

pass pro evaluation sounds like Flowers