|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| The Giants got their man in the NFL draft. Indeed, all roads led to Saquon Barkley. Still, there was intrigue involved in this long, detailed evaluation process. Here is what The Post learned before, during and especially after all the picks were in: Crushed it: As Dave Gettleman so profoundly put it, no team (at least publicly) finishes up the draft, scans the piece of paper listing all its picks and says, “We just drafted crap.’’ Each year brings about a different sensibility, though. Relief. Accomplishment. Satisfaction. Rarely have the Giants been this thrilled — “ecstatic’’ is the word one insider used — to get one specific player as the Giants were and are to land Saquon Barkley. The last time the room felt so energized to get a player in the first round of a draft? Jeremy Shockey in 2002. Quarterback was never an option: It is not as if the Giants viewed this quarterback class as trash. They liked three of them — Baker Mayfield was not in the discussion very long — a great deal but in order to justify the No. 2 overall pick, there had to be love, of which there was none. Most troubling, and telling, was there was no true consensus among the Giants coaches, scouts and front office as to the pecking order. Some liked Sam Darnold best. Others liked Josh Allen best. Darnold, Allen. Allen, Darnold. Around and around it went, and then, a little Josh Rosen sprinkled in. What does that tell you? Pat’s pick: If Barkley was gone, defensive end Bradley Chubb would have been the pick. The assumption that if the Giants were adamant about taking a quarterback it would have been Darnold is faulty. In fact, Pat Shurmur preferred Allen, believing he has the most upside. This is surprising, based on his assessment of why he likes Kyle Lauletta, the fourth-round selection. “Really, arm strength is about fourth on the list,’’ Shurmur said. “You have to be a good decision-maker, you have to have a sense of timing and you have to throw an accurate ball.’’ Allen, the gunslinger out of Wyoming, has the strongest arm and displayed the worst accuracy of the top prospects. This is further evidence Shurmur does not project greatness out of this group. Grading game: To state the Giants are smitten with Barkley is an understatement. To say they graded him top in this draft class is inaccurate. When the evaluation process was complete, the Giants assigned the same grade to Barkley and Chubb. On the draft board, though, Barkley was stacked ahead of Chubb. |
He is calm, cool and collected. I hope he can deliever.
Quote:
When the evaluation process was complete, the Giants assigned the same grade to Barkley and Chubb.
Are we to believe that Chubb also received a perfect 9.0 from Gettleman???
Not touched by the entire hand of god.
NFW.
To say they graded him top in this draft class is inaccurate. When the evaluation process was complete, the Giants assigned the same grade to Barkley and Chubb. On the draft board, though, Barkley was stacked ahead of Chubb.
The article says that they didn't grade Barkley at the top of the draft class and then it states that they did put he was joined at the top of the draft class with Chubb.
Either Barkley was at the top or he wasn't, you can't have both.
To say they graded him top in this draft class is inaccurate. When the evaluation process was complete, the Giants assigned the same grade to Barkley and Chubb. On the draft board, though, Barkley was stacked ahead of Chubb.
The article says that they didn't grade Barkley at the top of the draft class and then it states that they did put he was joined at the top of the draft class with Chubb.
Either Barkley was at the top or he wasn't, you can't have both.
They tied, but it was in alphabetical order by last name, duh...
NFW.
I always thought it was fishy since that's easily the best #1 overall pick maybe ever. So it doesn't sound like he's lying like if he said he had Aaron Rodgers up there and he sounds competent like if he said he had Jamarcus Russell up there.
Yea this confused me as well. Me thinks there might be some conjecture in this article.
That part does not add up at all in regards to Gettleman’s quotes. I really doubt that he gave Chubb the same grade as Peyton Manning. Maybe the writer meant that he was just up there as a top of the first-round pick over the quarterbacks along with Barkley and not the literal grade that was assigned to them?
He is calm, cool and collected. I hope he can deliever.
Just because Gettleman gave Barkley a 9.0 doesn’t mean that everyone in the room did. I doubt the grade is determined by one guy, it’s possible that other members of the staff had Chubb rated higher than or equal to Barkley, so when coming to a consensus they put them on equal footing.
Shurmur has given some insight to this. He’s stated the running game doesnt just benefit the offense, it helps the whole team. Running out the clock, controling the pace of the game, etc. if you listen to DG and PS, it’s obvious the both see running game immensely important.
Yeah - I get it. On the other hand, you have to get the ball to control the clock. So being able to apply pressure in this era of ridiculous lax passing rules is certainly crucial - I know you get it.
So it's back to the supply question. What's easier to find RBs or DEs? In this draft, by far RBs.
The Browns had one of the most unsatisfying drafts in history, assuming you are a Browns fan and not a Giants or Broncos fan... and they picked first in each round!
Quote:
said that Barkley was only the second player he gave a perfect grade of 9.0, the other being Peyton Manning. So how could Barkley and Chubb have had the same grade?
Just because Gettleman gave Barkley a 9.0 doesn’t mean that everyone in the room did. I doubt the grade is determined by one guy, it’s possible that other members of the staff had Chubb rated higher than or equal to Barkley, so when coming to a consensus they put them on equal footing.
Possibly. In any event, it is an excellent article.
You have to take everything that DG says with a grain of salt.
Barkman and Angry Angus we know plenty about. The Zo Carter nuggets and Shurmur stuff I liked best.
Most QB pressures and hits than almost anyone in draft including Chubb? Thats good stuff and quite encouraging.
Great article, despite the confusing sentence about Barkley and Chubb. (That might simply be an editing issue, and it doesn't matter much.)
Shurmur picking up the tab for the scouts' dinner is a nice detail. I wonder if maybe - like a certain other coach with NYG on his resume - Shurmur learned a few things during his first head-coaching stint in Cleveland about taking care of the "little people".
If the Giants were surprised that Hernandez lasted until Day 2, they must have been floored to see Cleveland pick a different offensive lineman at #33. Apparently, the Browns differ from the prevailing view that Corbett will have to move inside as a pro.
The Giants and Browns also seem to have very different impressions of Baker Mayfield. For all the talk about Josh Allen and Josh Rosen as "polarizing" prospects, Mayfield really seems to have divided the League. Or maybe, in the Giants' case, Mayfield just didn't make sense because his pro-readiness wasn't amajor selling point for a team already committed to Eli Manning for at least one more year.
a. future performance grade
b. position value
c. need value (ie how soon could the player start?)
Based on salaries alone there is little doubt that an ER position is worth at least 1.3 times a RB.
The Giants current need value of a RB over a ER is about the same -- ie a very good player will likely start immediately at both positions for the Giants in 2018.
Conclusion: Barkley's performance grade would need to be 1.3 times greater than a top edge rusher for his draft tier value to be greater.
DG obviously says it was.
Based on Sy's performance rating of 94 for Barkley, Chubb would have had to have a performance rating of 72 or less to put Barkley higher on the draft tier.
Chubb was rated much higher than 72. So it is likely that DG probably made the wrong choice based on analytics alone.
for the off-season Superbowl
On top of all that, the Edge rusher they really wanted was still there in the 3rd. In fact, they wanted him so much that they tried to trade up and couldn't. They had to ecstatic with their first 3 picks and the way the draft fell to them.
a. future performance grade
b. position value
c. need value (ie how soon could the player start?)
Based on salaries alone there is little doubt that an ER position is worth at least 1.3 times a RB.
The Giants current need value of a RB over a ER is about the same -- ie a very good player will likely start immediately at both positions for the Giants in 2018.
Conclusion: Barkley's performance grade would need to be 1.3 times greater than a top edge rusher for his draft tier value to be greater.
DG obviously says it was.
Based on Sy's performance rating of 94 for Barkley, Chubb would have had to have a performance rating of 72 or less to put Barkley higher on the draft tier.
Chubb was rated much higher than 72. So it is likely that DG probably made the wrong choice based on analytics alone.
The flaw in your decision matrix is your multiplier. Barkley can not be graded as a pure RB which is what the driver of that salary scale is. Since most RBs arent elite pass catchers and special teams aces, the salary doesnt do him justice. He has to looked at as an offensive weapon more on line with top WRs.
Lawrence Taylor is at a lower average salary position at LB. But you better bet of there was an LT his draft he is going in the top few picks. Why? He does things that very few LBs can do including elite pass rush.
if you have to fit some vague "needs are about the same" term into an equation.
Basically, you can fudge anything and that just ain't math.
is that besides the earlier excellent point that Chubb does pretty much one thing with excellence whereas Barkley rushes with excellence, blocks with excellence, catches with WR excellence and basically should count as 3 different players...
is that people describe Barkley as being the best RB to come out since..pretty much in recent memory..and comp him to all-time greats.
OTOH, I have heard Chubb is the best this year.
I've never heard anyone say he's better or speak of him in the same breath as even some of the recent top DE's.
Name some recent guys, name some all-time great pass rushers...how do you feel Chubb compares?
However, the comparison should be the net between Barkley and Gallman/Perkins versus the net between Chubb and Vernon.
It's a fact that they spent considerable time/resources scouting the QBs. So, by definition, they absolutely were looking at QB. Clearly, none of the QBs came close to Barkley on their board, but it wasn't for lack of scouting.
That should be reflected in the player's future performance ranking.
Ie Chubb's performance rating as a 3-4 OLB could well have been discounted to below 72.
Or as you suggest a separate 4th factor needs to be inserted to produce a draft tier rating: fit with the cuurent scheme.
This is an idiotic statement.
And when.
For example in need rating say a Qb say Rosen: for need you would look at the value replacing Eli in say 2020 ie a need factor of say 0.8. If you thought Eli needed to be replaced now, the need factor would be say 1.0.
Another example: say you had a bad nickel CB, say Gay. You needed only an avg CB to replace him. That would make the need factor 1.0.
etc.
That goes into your decision implicitly anyway,
Analytics just forces you to be explicit and see the consequences.