Drafting a QB vs. best player available

Hope you are correct

was largely the product of Shurmur’s evaluation.

If he thought a qb was close to the bpa and he was high on him, he might go that way.

In comment 14275807 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

was largely the product of Shurmur’s evaluation.

Interesting comment. I'm sure that plays a big role.

Quote:

He also commented that last year the Giants were not high on any of the QBs

IIRC, what he said was that they couldn't reach a consensus on a QB. There were too many differing opinions on which was the best QB, meanwhile all agreed that SB was a generational talent.

That's not the same thing as saying they weren't high on any QB's.

In comment 14275809 Ira said:

Quote:

In comment 14275807 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: was largely the product of Shurmur’s evaluation. Interesting comment. I'm sure that plays a big role.

It makes total sense. Who was more qualified to judge QBs on film and from scouting reports than the highly respected QB guru?

If Shurmur told DG that any of these QBs are Peyton and Luck-worthy franchise guys, there would have been no Barkley, imo

but I don’t think it’s a good measuring stick for what DG will do. They tried making it work with Eli which was part of that decision. They may try that again this year, who knows. Either way I can’t point to Barkley being the BPA as any way to indicate what he will do in April.

the QB's not being good. It had to do with SB being the BPA at the #2 spot.

For whatever reason the Giants were concerned enough with last years class of QBs that they passed on them with the second pick.

The QBs in this year class come with baggage and similar potential to last years group.

I would say that Haskins,Jones,Murray,Grier, etc. are no better than last years crop, and they come with the same level of concern.

I guess the wild card is Schurmer. But he was also part of the process last year that selected Lauletta.

Going QB likely means reach.

In comment 14275829 Archer said:

Quote:

For whatever reason the Giants were concerned enough with last years class of QBs that they passed on them with the second pick. The QBs in this year class come with baggage and similar potential to last years group. I would say that Haskins,Jones,Murray,Grier, etc. are no better than last years crop, and they come with the same level of concern. I guess the wild card is Schurmer. But he was also part of the process last year that selected Lauletta.

Drafting a franchise-worthy QB with the #2 pick is far different than drafting a project like Lauletta in the 4th. Shurmur may have liked the QBs last year to whatever degree, but nowhere near deserving of the 2nd overall pick with SB there. Again, if Luck and Peyton were there, there’s your run up to the podium scenario as I see it

Gettleman was asked if the Browns had selected Barkley what he would have done.

He responded that the Giants would take the highest player on their board.

This could leave one to think that he would have taken Chubb, Nelson, or Ward.

If history is any indicator: I'd look for DG to bundle picks to trade up not trade down.

but because he was a generational player. Think back on his comments about him being "touched by the hand of God" and what not. Barkley was seen as the best RB prospect to come out since LaDanian Tomlinson and for some, the best they'd ever seen. Ever.

What player in this draft can be spoken of that highly? I don't see any. And for that reason, I think it'll be a lot easier for Gettleman to choose a QB if he likes one over some other position.

It seems to me: gets a lot more muddy and the draft goes on. Downwards as it were.

Another way of saying that is, top ten or so your looking for the one in a million. Your Lawrence Taylor's of the world.

So, past few years have been a different proposition as opposed to prior with regards to that.

Luck has it we may hit both at 6 w DL.

Even from 20 down, position becomes a greater factor. And fit.

20-60 you look for falling players. Great value. But, barring that, it's more position oriented. To me, it's always position, but that's just me.

60- the end, fit in unit specific to this, now, how.

The issue with the QB last year was that not all of the Giant Scouts/etc. could agree on who they liked the best. Since it wasn't a clear cut decision, Barkley was the easy choice.

If for whatever reason, the Giants clearly like a QB this year, then they will take him at #6.

I agree that selecting Lauletta has little to do with a selection of a QB this year.

However, Schurmer seems to prefer a type of QB with specific skill sets.

Schurmer does not value a strong arm as much as accuracy, timing, mobility, etc.

He has had great success with less prototypical type QBs, such as Foles and Keenum. Neither player a high draft pick.

This type of QB does not typically get selected with the 6th selection.

but I think Gettleman's process was this: with Eli's contract, they were committed to him in 2018, and possibly 2019 but that was up in the air. So let's take a HOF type player now in Barkley in the 1st round, and then pair him with our next franchise QB whether it be in 2019 or 2020. Majority of years, there are good QBs to be found whether at the top of the draft or top of the 2nd. His thought was that there won't be a Barkley for the next 5 years, but there will be a Darnold or a Rosen or a Mayfield.

Gettleman said that picking the wrong QB high in the first round is a five year mistake.

If you invest a high first round in a QB then you need to stick with him for years. If he is the wrong guy then he pulls you down.

...Gettleman will go QB with his first pick.

The Giants have a huge lingering problem: Eli no longer has what it takes to carry this team and make that crucial, spectacular play to win a critcal ballgame.

Translation: Eli is just a placeholder who -- if things turn out well along the O-line in 2019 -- could maybe take the Giants as high as 8-8 (or maybe 9-7).

And then after next year, the placeholder is gone with nothing behind him.

That's why Gettleman will go QB in Round One in April. He won't put himself in a position where there is nothing behind Eli Manning.

In comment 14275821 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

but I don’t think it’s a good measuring stick for what DG will do. They tried making it work with Eli which was part of that decision. They may try that again this year, who knows. Either way I can’t point to Barkley being the BPA as any way to indicate what he will do in April.

I think Barkley was BPA by a significant margin too. Forget about Peyton/Luck, I don't think any of last year's QBs were as highly regarded as Eli coming out, hence why there was no consensus on the top pick.

Barkley was a HOF type talent and great person, face of a franchise type guy. If they didn't have conviction on a QB, it would have been malpractice not to take Barkley in that spot.

Now that they have Barkley and are committed to beefing up the OL whether draft or FA, they can get a consensus on a QB.

if you think that was the only reason. Eli’s cap hit was a big reason too, IMO. They weren’t going to cut him and still might not. Comparing last years QBs to this years as a reason to discount a prospect is almost irrelevant.

If you want the QB of your choice - you will have to move up from #6. Reports are AZ and NYJ are trending to move down along with Oak and TB possible QB targets.

It is not the NYG MO to wait at 6 for "their guy" if indeed they want one or more of the QBs.

don't reach for a QB. If there's one you like take him or move heaven and earth to go up and get him, but you don't force the pick.

He's proven to be true to his word, so I feel like if they draft a QB at six, they will have really liked the guy and that makes me confident in the pick.

last year?



They obviously thought they could get by with Eli, a top RB prospect, and a rebuilt OL. Eli showed that he can still play. SB showed he was a top RB. The OL started out bad and trended upward to not quite as bad.

Fast forward to present. People are still assuming the Giants are in the market for a QB. The options are not as good as last year, nor as good as projected for next year. Eli remains an option for the short term. BBIers, for the most part, want a shiny new toy there, but it may be better to continue the OL rebuild, and work on the part of the team which needs the most upgrade: the D. Then, when BPA and need are closer together, you can reassess what position to take.

BPA vs need is, IMO, a myth. They are not opposite ends of the spectrum, occasionally intersecting. They are two factors in an equation, and the end decision is a mixture of the two.

.

'need' for some fans equates to " need stars, need QB, shiney toys, WRs"

Whereas for others it's a team building concept.

Getting run on late or not getting pass rush when needed.

Folks hate 'fat guys' basically

that Oakland and TB are possibly taking a QB? The GM and HC of each team has said they aren’t doing that.

In comment 14275912 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

that Oakland and TB are possibly taking a QB? The GM and HC of each team has said they aren’t doing that.

Why would you believe them?

I do not want to draft a QB unless the Giants are convinced that the QB has the potential to be a star.

I do not want to pass on a great talent for a need.

My biggest fear is that a QB is selected based upon need and is he is a marginal talent.

This would put the franchise back years.
The Giants scouts better have a firm conviction on the player this year.

that they saw Barkley as a generational impact player, otherwise I believe if DG had viewed the rankings in the pack to be very close, then Darnold would have been the pick. I don't know if there was another player in the draft viewed as generational.

In comment 14275943 Archer said:

Quote:

I do not want to draft a QB unless the Giants are convinced that the QB has the potential to be a star. I do not want to pass on a great talent for a need. My biggest fear is that a QB is selected based upon need and is he is a marginal talent. This would put the franchise back years. The Giants scouts better have a firm conviction on the player this year.

My concern as well. And, full disclosure, I think every draft eligible qb this year is a marginal talent.

on BBI will hate it.

Personally, I wish we could convert our pick into a bunch of first and second round picks. (The old Christmas present question: "What do you want...one big present, or a lot of little presents?")

is that he changes the equation. He could carry this team to a championship with the right parts around him. Like defense. I agree the Giants might not even be in the market for a QB at present unless the QB is BPA at six. Are any of the 2019 QB's?

Morning guys: Interesting analysis Archer. The only problem as I see is that it just isn't how the league works when it comes to drafting QBs. Rule #1 in the league is that you have to have a QB to have sustained success in the league and Rule #2 is that if you need a QB and you like one then you don't play BPA and cross your fingers and hope he's there when your pick comes but you go get the guy. What that means is that if the Giants really like a Haskins or a Murray, and I'm not saying they do or they don't because my guess is at this point they havn't decided themselves, then in all likelihood they'll have to move up to get him. If they like him then other teams are also likely to like the guy and are going to jump you to get him. I also really believe that the Giants will go into this draft with finding a QB their #1 priority, but they showed last year that they won't force a pick on the position (my understanding last year was that the only guy they really liked in terms of arm talent was Rosen but in the end didn't like the other ingredients especially the off-field intangibles.) This year they should be in a similar position if they don't like a QB as they will almost certainly get a shot at a very good defensive player at #6. And certainly the 2020 QB class looks to be better than this year's, but be forewarned the top guys next year are going to go very early - likely top 5 - and the Giants likely will be back in the same situation in that if they really like a guy they'll vert likely have to move up. Again its how the league works.

In comment 14275943 Archer said:

Quote:

I do not want to draft a QB unless the Giants are convinced that the QB has the potential to be a star. I do not want to pass on a great talent for a need. My biggest fear is that a QB is selected based upon need and is he is a marginal talent. This would put the franchise back years. The Giants scouts better have a firm conviction on the player this year.

Agree and the Giants did have a firm conviction on the player last year. (Barkley)

In comment 14275844 Archer said:

Quote:

I agree that selecting Lauletta has little to do with a selection of a QB this year. However, Schurmer seems to prefer a type of QB with specific skill sets. Schurmer does not value a strong arm as much as accuracy, timing, mobility, etc. He has had great success with less prototypical type QBs, such as Foles and Keenum. Neither player a high draft pick. This type of QB does not typically get selected with the 6th selection.

I read that Shurmur liked Allen the best.

Unless we pick #1 overall on the rare year where the QB is the best player in the class...IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. There are 31 other teams in the league trying to improve, they don't remain static while we build our roster. At some point you will have to be proactive in addressing the need, whether that means a trade up or "sacrificing value".

In comment 14275954 jsuds said:

Quote:

is that he changes the equation. He could carry this team to a championship with the right parts around him. Like defense. I agree the Giants might not even be in the market for a QB at present unless the QB is BPA at six. Are any of the 2019 QB's?

Barkley can carry a team to a title? That seems a reach for a couple reasons. First, he just had an incredible season and it didn't prevent the Giants from being one of the worst teams in the league... including having a pathetic offense for the first 8 games or so. How many yards is he going to have to have to carry this team to a title? 3,000?

Second, the good teams in the league aren't carried by running backs. The Pats aren't. The Rams made the Super Bowl despite Gurley being injured for the playoffs and being replaced by a chubby CJ Anderson. The Chiefs lost their running back mid season and still had a 1 seed.

Running backs don't carry teams, and they are easy to find. This was a universally accepted fact on BBI before we drafted Barkley.

Barkley may be the best running back in the league, and that's great How much that actually matters is a different story.

DG continues with BPA. I am confident we can score a good QB in the second

this year, so I wouldn't use last year as a guide. Barkley is just too talented to pass up.

This year, if a QB is rated close to their top rated player, I would go QB. Positional value is real

In comment 14275887 fkap said:

Quote:

last year? People are still assuming the Giants are in the market for a QB. The options are not as good as last year, nor as good as projected for next year. Eli remains an option for the short term. BBIers, for the most part, want a shiny new toy there, but it may be better to continue the OL rebuild, and work on the part of the team which needs the most upgrade: the D. Then, when BPA and need are closer together, you can reassess what position to take.

Or they might decide that a QB they like a lot is available and will use that pick to ultimately replace ELi while they continue to build up the OLine and after the 1st pick draft defense.

Maybe some BBI posters are content to keep playing with old toys even though they know deep down the old toy isn't leading to anything of significance and will continue to rust and rot with age? Maybe they don't want it crumbling before their eyes without an ability to get another quality toy in a quick manner?

"disliked" last year's QBs. It just that they thought Barkley was going to be something special that doesn't come along every year, so he was the obvious pick.

If a QB they believe is the next QB to start a new era of NYG football is there, they'll draft him.

If they don't see him, then stack up and stick to your board.

In comment 14275960 Colin@gbn said:

Quote:

Morning guys: Interesting analysis Archer. The only problem as I see is that it just isn't how the league works when it comes to drafting QBs. Rule #1 in the league is that you have to have a QB to have sustained success in the league and Rule #2 is that if you need a QB and you like one then you don't play BPA and cross your fingers and hope he's there when your pick comes but you go get the guy. What that means is that if the Giants really like a Haskins or a Murray, and I'm not saying they do or they don't because my guess is at this point they havn't decided themselves, then in all likelihood they'll have to move up to get him. If they like him then other teams are also likely to like the guy and are going to jump you to get him. I also really believe that the Giants will go into this draft with finding a QB their #1 priority, but they showed last year that they won't force a pick on the position (my understanding last year was that the only guy they really liked in terms of arm talent was Rosen but in the end didn't like the other ingredients especially the off-field intangibles.) This year they should be in a similar position if they don't like a QB as they will almost certainly get a shot at a very good defensive player at #6. And certainly the 2020 QB class looks to be better than this year's, but be forewarned the top guys next year are going to go very early - likely top 5 - and the Giants likely will be back in the same situation in that if they really like a guy they'll vert likely have to move up. Again its how the league works.

Colin:

Always great to hear from you. I agree completely that the Giants cannot play this nonsense of kick the can down the road at QB any longer. If they don’t like a QB prospect, that’s one thing. But they can’t say 2020 is better, so let’s just wait it out, because they have no idea where they will be picking. Even mediocre teams can win 6-8 games and pick outside the top 10, and then what are you looking at? Having to trade up to get a guy? But next year Oakland, Miami will certainly be looking QB. What if Winston flops in TB. Not only will they be picking high, but they’ll go QB. And if the teams picking in the top 5 need QBs, they aren’t trading down.

Wait til 2020 is not the answer, because there is too much uncertainty. If the Giants like a guy this year, they better take one now. And, honestly, I am struggling to see how a team can not like Murray or Haskins, with the exception being Murray’s height. I think you guys at GBN agree, given how highly you’ve ranked both those guys.

Draft what you need. Always.

If I go car shopping because I really need a car, I'm not going to stop at Tires Plus along the way and buy tires because I see this great mark down sale on tires.

Last year we needed a QB more than a RB, so drafting Barkley was really a waste at #2 (or trade down). And the decision was further compounded by the fact, as Terp mentions above, that RBs are everywhere. They are like buying tires.

We really need a QB, OL, pass rush, and cover guys. Let's come out of draft with most of that.

We like to think the Giants FO gives us clues into what they are going to do. Nothing they say publicly is for our benefit. We should ignore what Eli's agent,Eli DG or anyone connected to the situation SAYS. Focus instead on what they do. Eli's roster bonus.

Feb 4th is the beginning of the NFL waiver process. Let's see what we do there.

The combine starts on Feb 26th. Lets see what they do.

The Giants will have to get under the 2019 salary cap by 4 p.m. ET on March 13th when the new NFL league year officially begins. According to NFL.com, teams must exercise options for 2019 on all players who have option clauses in their 2018 contracts.

The 4 p.m. ET deadline is also important because it's the deadline for when teams must extend qualifying offers to their restricted and exclusive rights free agents. We broke down every restricted and exclusive rights Giants free agent earlier this offseason.

Exclusive rights free agents include:

Jon Halapio, center

Aldrick Rosas, kicker

Alex Tanney, quarterback

Eli Penny, fullback

Restricted free agents include:

Curtis Riley, safety

Corey Coleman, wide receiver

Spencer Pulley, center

Antonio Hamilton, special teams/defensive back

March 13th also signifies when the Giants can sign free agents from OTHER NFL teams and when other NFL teams can sign the Giants' unrestricted free agent players.

The Giants will have to decide on Manning by March 17th, 2019 -- the fourth day of the new league year. The reason why the Giants will have to make this decision by then is that Manning is due to receive a $5 million roster bonus on this day. If the Giants pick up his roster bonus, it is highly unlikely they will then release or trade him at a later date. Manning is due to receive a 2019 salary cap number of $23.2 million, but the Giants can save $17 million of that number if they release him this offseason prior to taking on his $5 million roster bonus.

March 17th is an important day for other Giants players than Manning. It is also the day where the following roster bonuses kick in, via Overthecap.com:

Janoris Jenkins: $1 million

Alec Ogletree: $6 million *Due March 15th

Kareem Martin: $1 million

Saquon Barkley: $1.32 million

Jonathan Stewart: $400,000 *Due March 15th

Connor Barwin: $250,000

Michael Thomas: $50,000

The Giants are likely to pick up the roster bonus option for every player listed above with the exception of Stewart and Barwin who are likely to be veteran cap casualties this offseason.

By March 17th we will know much about the Giants in 2019. Ignore words focus on actions.

https://247sports.com/nfl/new-york-giants/LongFormArticle/Giants-2019-Offseason-Key-dates-deadlines-everything-to-know-127456855/#127456855_7

but Dave Gettleman has not minced words since taking over the GM position, and pretty much did exactly everything he said he was going to do, including the draft.

In comment 14276002 JonC said:

Quote:

If a QB they believe is the next QB to start a new era of NYG football is there, they'll draft him. If they don't see him, then stack up and stick to your board.

I find it amusing that after the Giants selected Barkley last year, three teams - all of which traded up - drafted QBs that they believe usher in that new era. But Gettleman is smarter than they are, so he picked a RB - albeit a generational one - and passed on them.

But that RB made us no better, because well, RBs generally have a low impact on wins and losses. So here we are again, picking in the top 6. Now DG gets another bite at the apple, potentially, with Haskins and Murray. And if he passes on them, it will once again be, I know more than they do, so I picked a DL. You know, at some point the answer can’t keep being, who cares if we have no QB, let’s not address the problem.

Maybe that will be this year. Maybe it will be when DG knows his ass is on the line, so he has no choice but to get one. People will conveniently think that lines up with draft value, but it could just as easily be driven by the fact that Eli is left and he has nowhere else to turn and us completely desperate. DG is an all out Eli apologist, and it’s getting old, just as quickly as Eli is aging.

.

In comment 14276016 Giants38 said:

Quote:

In comment 14276002 JonC said: Quote: If a QB they believe is the next QB to start a new era of NYG football is there, they'll draft him. If they don't see him, then stack up and stick to your board. I find it amusing that after the Giants selected Barkley last year, three teams - all of which traded up - drafted QBs that they believe usher in that new era. But Gettleman is smarter than they are, so he picked a RB - albeit a generational one - and passed on them. But that RB made us no better, because well, RBs generally have a low impact on wins and losses. So here we are again, picking in the top 6. Now DG gets another bite at the apple, potentially, with Haskins and Murray. And if he passes on them, it will once again be, I know more than they do, so I picked a DL. You know, at some point the answer can’t keep being, who cares if we have no QB, let’s not address the problem. Maybe that will be this year. Maybe it will be when DG knows his ass is on the line, so he has no choice but to get one. People will conveniently think that lines up with draft value, but it could just as easily be driven by the fact that Eli is left and he has nowhere else to turn and us completely desperate. DG is an all out Eli apologist, and it’s getting old, just as quickly as Eli is aging.

? If that were true then DG would have said "Eli is our QB for 2019", and he's said nothing of the sort.

I'll make it plain ... a QB picked this high in the draft still carries roughly a 50% bust rate. You MUST believe in the prospect you're investing in, regardless of position.

You don't just pick a QB and voila your QB problems are solved. Alot of the pro-QB crowd here seems to miss this aspect of the draft, it's stupifying.

I don't think it's a huge gamble to suggest DG will make the right decision when the right QB surfaces.

In the meantime, they chose to invest in Shurmur to develop a QB or two to try and jumpstart the process for the longterm, rather than draft a QB, desperately.

If they didn't believe in any of the QBs last year I'd have serious questions about their ability to assess quarterbacks. That concern is reinforced by the debacle that Lauletta was in 2018.

I agree that a position shouldn't be picked just for the sake of picking it, but I don't think that concern applies to the Giants as it relates to last year's draft. If anything I could see that happening this year in a poorer QB draft, as a result of how badly they mis-assessed their roster last offseason.

In comment 14275847 M.S. said:

Quote:

...Gettleman will go QB with his first pick. The Giants have a huge lingering problem: Eli no longer has what it takes to carry this team and make that crucial, spectacular play to win a critcal ballgame. Translation: Eli is just a placeholder who -- if things turn out well along the O-line in 2019 -- could maybe take the Giants as high as 8-8 (or maybe 9-7). I agree with this all the way question to me is is it Haskins or Jones ? And then after next year, the placeholder is gone with nothing behind him. That's why Gettleman will go QB in Round One in April. He won't put himself in a position where there is nothing behind Eli Manning.

its by what he thinks. So if he takes A QB it is to him the best player available.

In comment 14276037 Go Terps said:

Quote:

If they didn't believe in any of the QBs last year I'd have serious questions about their ability to assess quarterbacks. That concern is reinforced by the debacle that Lauletta was in 2018. I agree that a position shouldn't be picked just for the sake of picking it, but I don't think that concern applies to the Giants as it relates to last year's draft. If anything I could see that happening this year in a poorer QB draft, as a result of how badly they mis-assessed their roster last offseason.

Debacle, really? You don't think that's just a tiny bit overdramatic?

In comment 14276037 Go Terps said:

Quote:

If they didn't believe in any of the QBs last year I'd have serious questions about their ability to assess quarterbacks. That concern is reinforced by the debacle that Lauletta was in 2018. I agree that a position shouldn't be picked just for the sake of picking it, but I don't think that concern applies to the Giants as it relates to last year's draft. If anything I could see that happening this year in a poorer QB draft, as a result of how badly they mis-assessed their roster last offseason.

Time will tell, Terps. We have no other way to know with certainty. I think their QB assessment and decision to pass had a lot to do character and ability to excel in NY, along with arm talent.

I do think they collectively overrated what Eli is and has left. I don't think they'll double down on the mistake and reach for one in April.

This rebuild was/is going to take some time.

I don't. He was arrested, and the head coach used him as a punchline to take a swipe at the media. And in a 5-11 season we somehow managed to learn almost nothing about him.

So yeah, debacle.

by adding "for the Giants". All teams are sometimes forced to address a glaring need in the draft when they can. If that is not the case then BPA is the way to go. He may not think getting a QB in this draft with our first pick is the way to go. That was the case last year. Maybe this year too. We will see.

You can not sit back and wait for the right guy to be there when you pick. It realistically may never happen. Especially at QB because of the value the rest of the league rightfully places on the position. Of course you don't jam the pick but at some point you have to start assuming more risk to address it. That could mean gambling on Haskins despite his lack of starts or rolling the dice on a Murray, trading back up into the first to grab a QB slider with our 2nd pick or bypassing a promising player to trade down and acquire some currency in next years class. There needs to be a real plan put in place and they need to start enacting it this offseasaon. Reactively waiting for the stars to align isn't a plan.

You may know nothing about Lauletta. He may suck but they see him in practice, film room, etc. Can’t tell from your posts anymore but I get the feeling you think you know as much as Gettleman and Shurmur.

In comment 14276064 AcesUp said:

Quote:

You can not sit back and wait for the right guy to be there when you pick. It realistically may never happen. Especially at QB because of the value the rest of the league rightfully places on the position. Of course you don't jam the pick but at some point you have to start assuming more risk to address it. That could mean gambling on Haskins despite his lack of starts or rolling the dice on a Murray, trading back up into the first to grab a QB slider with our 2nd pick or bypassing a promising player to trade down and acquire some currency in next years class. There needs to be a real plan put in place and they need to start enacting it this offseasaon. Reactively waiting for the stars to align isn't a plan.

Gettleman has said that if the right guy was there they would "move heaven and earth" to trade up to get him.

So it's not about sitting back and waiting for a guy to fall in your lap.

It is, and always has been, about having the conviction in the player your taking, so much so that you do anything possible to trade up and get him.

Eli didn't fall in our laps, either. They had the conviction to trade to get him.

In hindsight would we have been alright with Rivers or Ben, yes. But they had a conviction for one guy in particular and paid the price (a price too high many thought at the time).

The point is, you have to have the conviction.

In comment 14276101 Samiam said:

Quote:

You may know nothing about Lauletta. He may suck but they see him in practice, film room, etc. Can’t tell from your posts anymore but I get the feeling you think you know as much as Gettleman and Shurmur.

Based on their performance we all may know as much as they do.

at the beginning of the draft this past offseason, things may have turned out differently.

In comment 14276107 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

Eli didn't fall in our laps, either. They had the conviction to trade to get him. In hindsight would we have been alright with Rivers or Ben, yes. But they had a conviction for one guy in particular and paid the price (a price too high many thought at the time). The point is, you have to have the conviction.

Hopefully we'll have conviction about someone before Eli turns 50.

In comment 14276025 JonC said:

Quote:

I'll make it plain ... a QB picked this high in the draft still carries roughly a 50% bust rate. You MUST believe in the prospect you're investing in, regardless of position. You don't just pick a QB and voila your QB problems are solved. Alot of the pro-QB crowd here seems to miss this aspect of the draft, it's stupifying. I don't think it's a huge gamble to suggest DG will make the right decision when the right QB surfaces. In the meantime, they chose to invest in Shurmur to develop a QB or two to try and jumpstart the process for the longterm, rather than draft a QB, desperately.

Jon - why do people bring up the bust rate with QBs? I mean, I guess teams reach more for QBs than other positions, but selecting non-QBs does not guarantee a great player. Look at Greg Robinson, Trent Richardson, Reggie Bush, Blair Thomas, etc. In fact, I think someone posted a report last year that showed that plenty of RBs picked in the top 5 had not worked out well, but we selected Barkley anyway.

The point is - and I am in agreement with GoTerps here - is that all these other teams used high first round picks to select QBs (and traded other premium picks to move up), yet we did not feel they were worth it. That bothers me, because I do not believe DG is smarter than all these other GMs. And if we pass on Murray and Haskins - and they go high - two more GMs will have disagreed with DG’s assessments. After a while, you wonder if he’s gun shy about picking a QB, has no idea how to evaluate one, or he’s plain missing something. But somehow I doubt he’s smarter than all these other GMs.

You know what team punted on QB decisions for a while? The Browns. DG talks about QB he’ll. Well, not picking one can often be as bad as selecting the wrong one. At least when the Browns passed on QBs, they acquired additional draft capital. We are run by a GM who does not believe in trading down. Is he smarter than everyone else in that regard, too? He mocked use of analytics. Is he smarter than everyone who uses analytics?

After a while, you become concerned that the guy thinks he’s the smartest person to grace a front office. Those people are normally the dumbest, and they will drive your team into the ground. You better hope that’s not DG.

That's fine and it makes a great sound byte. But how are you moving heaven and earth without the bargaining power to do so?

Here's a realistic scenario - the Giants do nothing at QB this year, go BPA at their pick with every pick and win 8 games next year. Entering next year, they have a 38 year old QB with an expired contract and find themselves picking 16th. How are they moving up to the Top 5 to get their guy? You are light on ammo and trying to negotiate a trade from a place of desperation. If you plan on moving heaven and earth, you need to make some sacrifices to give yourself the tools to do that otherwise it's just hot air.

In comment 14276116 AcesUp said:

Quote:

That's fine and it makes a great sound byte. But how are you moving heaven and earth without the bargaining power to do so? Here's a realistic scenario - the Giants do nothing at QB this year, go BPA at their pick with every pick and win 8 games next year. Entering next year, they have a 38 year old QB with an expired contract and find themselves picking 16th. How are they moving up to the Top 5 to get their guy? You are light on ammo and trying to negotiate a trade from a place of desperation. If you plan on moving heaven and earth, you need to make some sacrifices to give yourself the tools to do that otherwise it's just hot air.

The Chiefs traded from 27 to 10 for Mahomes.

.

Was a flawed prospect.

what did the Jets give up? 3 second round picks to move to the 3rd pick.

The Bills gave up 2 second round picks go move from 12 to 7.

The Cardinals only spent a 3rd and a 5th to move up from 15 to 10.

None of those teams even costed the following years first round pick.

.

if DG sees a guy he likes, he'll have the collateral needed to make a move if it came to that.

In comment 14276123 AcesUp said:

Quote:

Was a flawed prospect.

They're all flawed, but the Chiefs had the conviction in the player to make that move.

In comment 14276126 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

what did the Jets give up? 3 second round picks to move to the 3rd pick. The Bills gave up 2 second round picks go move from 12 to 7. The Cardinals only spent a 3rd and a 5th to move up from 15 to 10. None of those teams even costed the following years first round pick.

Under the premise of a middling season, the Bills and Cardinals trades is where this team could realistically trade. They traded up for Rosen and Allen who I know you did not consider franchise prospects.

What?!

In comment 14276138 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

What?!

By you.

because he played in a more Pro Style offense.

Has no relevance to what the Giants did.

We need to see what we do before the draft. The general concepts has been use FA to fill holes and the draft is largely about the future. If DG does well before the draft he will be more inclined to draft a QB. That’s how he’s operated before. It’s what I expect this year as well.

In comment 14276132 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

In comment 14276123 AcesUp said: Quote: Was a flawed prospect. They're all flawed, but the Chiefs had the conviction in the player to make that move.

Maybe we should get some people with some conviction then.

In comment 14276149 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 14276132 Britt in VA said: Quote: In comment 14276123 AcesUp said: Quote: Was a flawed prospect. They're all flawed, but the Chiefs had the conviction in the player to make that move. Maybe we should get some people with some conviction then.

Well, if it was true that McAdoo was infatuated with Mahomes, then at least you can rest easy that we fired the guy that didn't have the balls to do it from a better starting point than what the Chiefs had.

in the player he rated as high as any player he's ever graded.

Just didn't happen to be the player you wanted.

In comment 14276157 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

in the player he rated as high as any player he's ever graded. Just didn't happen to be the player you wanted.

I'm going to say now what I've said since that pick: had Eli retired after 2017 the pick would have been Darnold.

Picking Barkley was as much about belief in Eli as anything else. That's where the conviction was.

He's not. Some seem to be bored with him and want a new shiny toy that can scramble. Whatever. That's fine, to each there own. Eli's time in NY may be up, but his NFL career isn't over unless he wants it to be. There are 32 teams in the league and i know i can't name 32 QB's that i'd rather have as my QB in 2019.

I also have no problem drafting a QB in the 1st round this year. It's an important position and the idea is to add talent everywhere.

and "I graded him out at 98, the same as Peyton Manning" sounds like pretty strong conviction to me. And that was pre-draft.

In comment 14276157 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

in the player he rated as high as any player he's ever graded. Just didn't happen to be the player you wanted.

I think this year's draft will be very telling. I believe DG had such a high grade on Barkley he couldn't pass him up. This year though we aren't looking at anyone like that. There are at least 1-2 franchise QBs coming out every year. It's time to have a conviction in someone now.

In comment 14276167 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

and "I graded him out at 98, the same as Peyton Manning" sounds like pretty strong conviction to me. And that was pre-draft.

And if he was telling the truth, he's a moron.

In comment 14276169 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 14276167 Britt in VA said: Quote: and "I graded him out at 98, the same as Peyton Manning" sounds like pretty strong conviction to me. And that was pre-draft. And if he was telling the truth, he's a moron.

Did Saquon not back the grade up?

In comment 14276166 rasbutant said:

Quote:

He's not. Some seem to be bored with him and want a new shiny toy that can scramble. Whatever. That's fine, to each there own. Eli's time in NY may be up, but his NFL career isn't over unless he wants it to be. There are 32 teams in the league and i know i can't name 32 QB's that i'd rather have as my QB in 2019. I also have no problem drafting a QB in the 1st round this year. It's an important position and the idea is to add talent everywhere.

What team can Eli plays for next year and what is the contract going to be? I'll save you the time, there's only like 5 teams not content with their qb situation and not one of them have the money to sign Eli what he will be looking for.

In comment 14276146 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

Has no relevance to what the Giants did.

It's relevant in providing context on the type of prospect that will be available to us in a tradeup. We're not going to be in a position to trade up for Andrew Luck. We'll have limited trade capital with either no QB under contract or a 39 yr old on an overpriced bridge deal. You're not negotiating against Madden AI, there will be another GM that will see the position we are in. So you can hope that a Mahomes is there, a flawed prospect that you outsmart the rest of the league on. I'd love it if they did that.
I also accept the reality that this is a game of small margins and we aren't that much smarter or luckier than every other team in the league. It's not likely to happen.

In comment 14276184 AcesUp said:

Quote:

In comment 14276146 Britt in VA said: Quote: Has no relevance to what the Giants did. It's relevant in providing context on the type of prospect that will be available to us in a tradeup. We're not going to be in a position to trade up for Andrew Luck. We'll have limited trade capital with either no QB under contract or a 39 yr old on an overpriced bridge deal. You're not negotiating against Madden AI, there will be another GM that will see the position we are in. So you can hope that a Mahomes is there, a flawed prospect that you outsmart the rest of the league on. I'd love it if they did that. I also accept the reality that this is a game of small margins and we aren't that much smarter or luckier than every other team in the league. It's not likely to happen.

Three of this year's so called "amazing" franchise QB class, the "best since 2004" did not require a first round pick in a trade up. For any of them.

When you are willing to trade next year's first, you have collateral.

Starting to not care anymore. IDGAF who the QB is anymore...I think Eli is finished and will get worse but I understand that I could be wrong. Beat the fucking Eagles, win some games that matter. Get to the bye with a winning record. Just do fucking better. We won 3 games with absolute fuckton of injuries including our best player out. We were much healthier this year, we had a better LT and added a RB touched by the hand of god that is in fact awesome. We won 2 whole more games. It is reasonable to expect more. I am not impressed.

Barkley's a great back. I like the guy. He had a great individual year.

And we saw the impact it had.

In comment 14276173 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

In comment 14276169 Go Terps said: Quote: In comment 14276167 Britt in VA said: Quote: and "I graded him out at 98, the same as Peyton Manning" sounds like pretty strong conviction to me. And that was pre-draft. And if he was telling the truth, he's a moron. Did Saquon not back the grade up?

Britt - you are missing the point. As good as Saquon is and will be, if we do not get a franchise QB, none of it will matter. And even though we played a garbage schedule and a slew of backup QBs, our record improved to a whopping 5-11. Franchise RBs don’t win you games in this league; franchise QBs do. If you needed any more proof of that, look at how KC kept motoring after they lost Hunt. Made absolutely no difference. Barkley is a luxury, not a necessity. A QB is the necessity.

GoTerps is correct; you make it sound so simple to move up and get a QB because other teams have done it in the past. Well, it’s not so easy if the teams drafting where you need to go also need QBs. If we want Tua, for example, you think Miami is going to trade their pick to us if they need a QB? Teams have been able to trade up when existing teams already had QBs or acted insanely idiotically (Titans has QB, Browns stupid). Last year, Colts, TB, Oakland all had QBs and were not in market for one. Simply put, the Giants cannot just assume they can get a QB next year if they want one. It doesn’t work that way.

For whatever reason, this team committed to Eli last year. Maybe it was Mara who required it. Maybe DG watched two games and thought he still had it. Either way, it is painfully obvious Eli cannot do what is necessary to win consistently anymore. You can ignore it - as you are seemingly doing - or embrace it and search for a new QB. Running it back is not the answer.

In comment 14276207 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Barkley's a great back. I like the guy. He had a great individual year. And we saw the impact it had.

It did have an impact, though. We scored a lot of damn points. He accounted for 2000 yards and 15 TD, including over 90 receptions! No fumbles, and only 3 drops!

Unfortunately, our defense couldn't hold leads. Unfortunately, we couldn't get the line together for the first half of the season to maximize it.

So no, did it translate to more a lot more wins, no. But to say it didn't improve the team? I don't know what to say.

No Barkley and Darnold starting might have actually been worse.

And it wouldn't have gotten better until we... fixed the defense and offensive line.

No way you are going to grab those guys unless you have the top pick or are in the top 3. Unlike many around here I think DG is laying the foundation of a strong roster. Lets say we don't go QB and go BPA. Probably put together another draft like last year and this team is 500. There is just no way we are going to be in a position to even trade for a BPA QB prospect like Tua or Lawrence. There's 1-2 franchise QB's coming out every year. Identify the guy and take him.

He had incredible stats and the offense still sucked.

It's convenient to just blame it all on the defense, but the defense want the reason we started 1-7.

Go back and look at the game logs, Sy's reviews, the game threads, it's all there.

If you think this was a good offense in 2018 you're out of your mind. You're equally out of your mind if you think Barkley is going to put up 2000 yards every year.

He a great player and we should absolutely build around him. But that's not what happened in 2018 and it's not what's going to happen going forward. The Giants didn't hire a supposed QB guru and pay Beckham top dollar to build around a running back.

They traded away young starting talent to move up. They proactively made moves to ensure they had the capital to move up. Exactly what I'm suggesting the Giants take measures to do.

Rosen slid and the Cards pounced. No argument there but they had 4th crack at QB after trading up. I don't think it's something the Giants should be banking on. They can and that's where the impasse is in the discussion is but I think it's a position that requires special attention and some foresight in planning.

I'm fine with that. Just don't reach.

I'm also fine that it didn't happen last year and think it turned out just fine.

In comment 14276231 Go Terps said:

Quote:

He had incredible stats and the offense still sucked. It's convenient to just blame it all on the defense, but the defense want the reason we started 1-7. Go back and look at the game logs, Sy's reviews, the game threads, it's all there. If you think this was a good offense in 2018 you're out of your mind. You're equally out of your mind if you think Barkley is going to put up 2000 yards every year. He a great player and we should absolutely build around him. But that's not what happened in 2018 and it's not what's going to happen going forward. The Giants didn't hire a supposed QB guru and pay Beckham top dollar to build around a running back.

Why can't he do it again next year?

With an improved offensive line, what if he's even better?

that phrase is overused and misused on this site...

The team was terrible in 2018 and is overpaying for an underperforming 38 year old quarterback.

That situation is anything but fine.

In comment 14276233 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

I'm fine with that. Just don't reach. I'm also fine that it didn't happen last year and think it turned out just fine.

I agree with you there actually. If Mayfield was there I think they should have taken him, but he wasn't. And that is because I think Mayfield is going to be a top 5 QB for the majority of his career. However, there is no positional prospect like Barkley at 6. Franchise QB's aren't reaches at 6. There's one/two in every draft. Personally I think Haskins and Murray are those guys this year.

he will continue to have a premium pick in Rd1 every year.

At least until we find a new GM...

In comment 14276244 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

that phrase is overused and misused on this site...

Only he knows that. And he's said a million times he won't do it, that he's going to trust his board.

I don't give a shit about Barkley's stats. They don't translate to wins. I don't care if he gets 4000 yards if we're winning 5 games.

.

In comment 14276232 AcesUp said:

Quote:

They traded away young starting talent to move up. They proactively made moves to ensure they had the capital to move up. Exactly what I'm suggesting the Giants take measures to do. Rosen slid and the Cards pounced. No argument there but they had 4th crack at QB after trading up. I don't think it's something the Giants should be banking on. They can and that's where the impasse is in the discussion is but I think it's a position that requires special attention and some foresight in planning.

We hired an old GM who is in love with Eli and thought he could run it back, all because he ignored a rebuild idea last year. With the exception of some really bad teams, just about every team has a chance to win between 6 and 8 games due to the parity of the league. But this notion that you just pick the BPA now, punt the decision to next year, is abject stupidity. When does it end? 2027 when Eli’s nephew is draft eligible and we can finally get another Manning? Part of the idea of drafting a QB now is to maximize the time the QB has with OBJ and Saquon. The more you punt that decision, the less they play together. And, again, I refuse to believe that the Giants are just so much smarter than every other franchise and can afford to ignore the QB position indefinitely, or that they have unique insight that all these QBs stink. What do you think is more likely: all the QBs we passed on stink, or we just misevaluated one or two, if not more?

What's insane is telling us that things are working out when there is nothing to indicate that it actually is.

didn't translate to wins? Those were just empty (MVP level) stats?

Did the Giants go 5-11 last year with Barkley putting up numbers?

Oh, and the Giants drafted Tiki in the second round. They didn't have to blow the second pick overall to get an excellent running back.

especially with a 1st round QB, you need to have conviction. If you do have conviction on a QB, pay what it takes to get him!

If not, then pass. Do you want to be the GM who gave up a lot or even just pick #6 for a so-so guy? Hell no! Look how many 1st round QBs bust.

I really believe if DG and PS believe there's a great QB prospect in 2019, they will do everything necessary to draft him.

How about LaDanian Tomlinson? Did he contribute to wins, or just stats?

Or is he just an empty stat man, too?

In comment 14276251 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

In comment 14276244 Jimmy Googs said: Quote: that phrase is overused and misused on this site... Only he knows that. And he's said a million times he won't do it, that he's going to trust his board.

Correct. Therefore it doesn’t need to be said by anyone on this board...it’s a given.

You want me to list the RBs that didn't have to be drafted #2 overall to contribute to winning titles? It'll be a long list. I could start with the Giants themselves...Joe Morris, Ottis Anderson, Brandon Jacobs, and Ahmad Bradshaw all fit the bill.

is in your philosophy in team building, you'd want to cut the QB at the end of year five to keep cost control down.

So all of this arguing is about a position which you'd cut by design at the end of five years anyway!

In comment 14276064 AcesUp said:

Quote:

You can not sit back and wait for the right guy to be there when you pick. It realistically may never happen. Especially at QB because of the value the rest of the league rightfully places on the position. Of course you don't jam the pick but at some point you have to start assuming more risk to address it. That could mean gambling on Haskins despite his lack of starts or rolling the dice on a Murray, trading back up into the first to grab a QB slider with our 2nd pick or bypassing a promising player to trade down and acquire some currency in next years class. There needs to be a real plan put in place and they need to start enacting it this offseasaon. Reactively waiting for the stars to align isn't a plan.

Really good post. I agree

and not Barkley they probably are still a 5 win team. One player doesn't turn around a shit roster unless it is a once in a generation QB. Good luck pinning your hopes on that.

In comment 14276284 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

is in your philosophy in team building, you'd want to cut the QB at the end of year five to keep cost control down. So all of this arguing is about a position which you'd cut by design at the end of five years anyway!

In my philosophy of team building I wouldn't pass on a top QB prospect because I know that his contract is a huge team building advantage. I certainly wouldn't pass on him to go forward with a 37 year old underperforming QB that is making over $20M a year. THAT is insane.

is the cost of having an average starting QB in the NFL these days, unless they are on their rookie deal.

Dak Prescott is about to get 28 million per, btw.

In comment 14276288 Zeke's Alibi said:

Quote:

and not Barkley they probably are still a 5 win team. One player doesn't turn around a shit roster unless it is a once in a generation QB. Good luck pinning your hopes on that.

You don’t know that at all so don’t surmise this...

What I can't get past is that before we took Barkley it was a universally accepted truth that:

- RBs are easy to find
- QBs are difficult to find
- QB is a more crucial position than RB

And yet since then there's been an attempt to flip those stances in order to align with the Giants' strategy in the past year.

THAT is true insanity. Or at the very least it's an incredible willingness to kid oneself into thinking the Giants are doing a great job...even if the results on the field tell a different tale.

In comment 14275847 M.S. said:

Quote:

...Gettleman will go QB with his first pick. The Giants have a huge lingering problem: Eli no longer has what it takes to carry this team and make that crucial, spectacular play to win a critcal ballgame. Translation: Eli is just a placeholder who -- if things turn out well along the O-line in 2019 -- could maybe take the Giants as high as 8-8 (or maybe 9-7). And then after next year, the placeholder is gone with nothing behind him. That's why Gettleman will go QB in Round One in April. He won't put himself in a position where there is nothing behind Eli Manning.

That's not at all accurate. Gettleman says time and time again you have to take a player that is worthy of the pick. If the grade isn't there, you don't take him. He's also said if you don't do that, and you reach for need, that's how you get in trouble. He's also said that you have to evaluate QBs not just in the current class, but historically.

You put that altogether and unless they feel that there is a franchise, championship-caliber QB at #6, they are not going to take a QB. Period.

Eli is the QB next year regardless, and you have to remember that signing a veteran QB such as Bridgewater or Fitzpatrick (this year) would be on the table for 2020 or any time Eli is no longer under contract. DG is not going to reach.

They ONLY won two more games even with Barkley running wild, better LT, blah, blah blah.

The bottom line for an offense is points scored. Well, they scored a fuckton more points this year over last; the offense was good enough to put the team in position to win 3 or 4 more games (at least). However, they had no semblance of a competent defense, so they didn't win any of those tight games.

The offense isn't perfect, but did its job - especially in the 2nd half, once the line jelled and Brown was added.

This team still has a lot of work to do, of course. But they have pieces in place on offenses; get a WR, RT and C and this offense can really do some damage.

Defense, however is a fucking mess...

The offense was pathetic until the season was effectively over at 1-7. I don't have it in front of me but I don't believe they even reached 20 PPG.

You could have the '99 Teams and it won't matter if you're starting in a 1-7 hole.

In comment 14275975 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 14275954 jsuds said: Quote: is that he changes the equation. He could carry this team to a championship with the right parts around him. Like defense. I agree the Giants might not even be in the market for a QB at present unless the QB is BPA at six. Are any of the 2019 QB's? Barkley can carry a team to a title? That seems a reach for a couple reasons. First, he just had an incredible season and it didn't prevent the Giants from being one of the worst teams in the league... including having a pathetic offense for the first 8 games or so. How many yards is he going to have to have to carry this team to a title? 3,000? Second, the good teams in the league aren't carried by running backs. The Pats aren't. The Rams made the Super Bowl despite Gurley being injured for the playoffs and being replaced by a chubby CJ Anderson. The Chiefs lost their running back mid season and still had a 1 seed. Running backs don't carry teams, and they are easy to find. This was a universally accepted fact on BBI before we drafted Barkley. Barkley may be the best running back in the league, and that's great How much that actually matters is a different story.

I can pretty much guarantee that the Rams have a hard time getting a 1st round BYE without Gurley. In fact, take Gurley away next season and let them run C.J. Sanderson for 16 games and they probably don’t make the playoffs.

I think you are severely discounting Gurleys impact. Hunts as well, it’s just Mahomes is that good (which is in part relatable to this thread).

.

In comment 14276114 Giants38 said:

Quote:

In comment 14276025 JonC said: Quote: I'll make it plain ... a QB picked this high in the draft still carries roughly a 50% bust rate. You MUST believe in the prospect you're investing in, regardless of position. You don't just pick a QB and voila your QB problems are solved. Alot of the pro-QB crowd here seems to miss this aspect of the draft, it's stupifying. I don't think it's a huge gamble to suggest DG will make the right decision when the right QB surfaces. In the meantime, they chose to invest in Shurmur to develop a QB or two to try and jumpstart the process for the longterm, rather than draft a QB, desperately. Jon - why do people bring up the bust rate with QBs? I mean, I guess teams reach more for QBs than other positions, but selecting non-QBs does not guarantee a great player. Look at Greg Robinson, Trent Richardson, Reggie Bush, Blair Thomas, etc. In fact, I think someone posted a report last year that showed that plenty of RBs picked in the top 5 had not worked out well, but we selected Barkley anyway. The point is - and I am in agreement with GoTerps here - is that all these other teams used high first round picks to select QBs (and traded other premium picks to move up), yet we did not feel they were worth it. That bothers me, because I do not believe DG is smarter than all these other GMs. And if we pass on Murray and Haskins - and they go high - two more GMs will have disagreed with DG’s assessments. After a while, you wonder if he’s gun shy about picking a QB, has no idea how to evaluate one, or he’s plain missing something. But somehow I doubt he’s smarter than all these other GMs. You know what team punted on QB decisions for a while? The Browns. DG talks about QB he’ll. Well, not picking one can often be as bad as selecting the wrong one. At least when the Browns passed on QBs, they acquired additional draft capital. We are run by a GM who does not believe in trading down. Is he smarter than everyone else in that regard, too? He mocked use of analytics. Is he smarter than everyone who uses analytics? After a while, you become concerned that the guy thinks he’s the smartest person to grace a front office. Those people are normally the dumbest, and they will drive your team into the ground. You better hope that’s not DG.

Historical bust rate is not exactly an unimportant fact, it just doesn't fit your agenda. It is to say that picking a QB using a "we need one no matter what" is a dangerous, uneducated roll of the dice, on its face.

If you want to dig into the debate beyond that, it has more teeth.

As for DG and your opinion of him ... he's the GM, and I don't think there's enough data to pass judgement on his tenure, at this point. It doesn't mean he won't (or isn't currently) a fail ... but, I don't have time to wring hands over it one year in.

In comment 14276318 Go Terps said:

Quote:

What I can't get past is that before we took Barkley it was a universally accepted truth that: - RBs are easy to find - QBs are difficult to find - QB is a more crucial position than RB And yet since then there's been an attempt to flip those stances in order to align with the Giants' strategy in the past year. THAT is true insanity. Or at the very least it's an incredible willingness to kid oneself into thinking the Giants are doing a great job...even if the results on the field tell a different tale.

Because it's easier for people to convince themselves of something that isn't true, especially because the truth sucks.

The truth is the Giants are currently an inept organization being held hostage by emotion and delusion.

In comment 14276253 Go Terps said:

Quote:

I don't give a shit about Barkley's stats. They don't translate to wins. I don't care if he gets 4000 yards if we're winning 5 games.

The worst part about this take is that the great Aaron Rodgers, one of the best to ever play the position won a whopping 1 more game than Barkley’s team did with a much easier schedule (one of the easiest in the whole league).

I do believe he was convinced that Eli/team were in better shape than he thought last spring (with help from likely group-think within the building and what he expected out of his Free Agents). Therefore, falling in love and selecting Barkley was an "easy" decision for him at the time.

Relative to this year, his early comments about Eli already tell you that he has changed his views a good bit. Eli may still wind up being on the 2019 roster, but it damn well better be a result of him seeing better QB draft value in 2020 vs 2019.

Otherwise, he is screwing this up...

In comment 14276336 Go Terps said:

Quote:

The offense was pathetic until the season was effectively over at 1-7. I don't have it in front of me but I don't believe they even reached 20 PPG. You could have the '99 Teams and it won't matter if you're starting in a 1-7 hole.

But they played a bunch of top defenses in the second half - without Odell - and still put up points. You're saying the offense stunk during the first half (true) but you're conveniently ignoring their improvement in the second half.

You also use the teams record as a justification that the Saquon pick was wrong. But you ignore how bad the defense was. Was the quarterback you wanted to take also going to play right guard or right tackle? How about free safety? maybe ILB next to Ogletree?

When are people going to realize there are multiple ways to build a team???

What is wrong with building a team whose identity is good defense and an elite run game?

It makes total sense to build a defense and a run game before playing a rookie QB. Aren't you the one whose in favor of taking advantage of a young quarterback on a rookie deal? Does it not make sense to build up the poor roster before that happens?

I don't see how after one year, you've reached the conclusions you've had. It just seems like you have a vengeance against these guys. Do you want the team to be good, or be good in your preferred style of roster management?

In comment 14276229 Zeke's Alibi said:

Quote:

No way you are going to grab those guys unless you have the top pick or are in the top 3. Unlike many around here I think DG is laying the foundation of a strong roster. Lets say we don't go QB and go BPA. Probably put together another draft like last year and this team is 500. There is just no way we are going to be in a position to even trade for a BPA QB prospect like Tua or Lawrence. There's 1-2 franchise QB's coming out every year. Identify the guy and take him.

See in theory this sounds real great. Problem is it's completely not true. It's just false. Here are the QBs drafted from 2013 - 2015. That's THREE consecutive draft classes of quarterbacks:

2015
Jameis Winston
Marcus Mariota
Bryce Petty
Garrett Grayson
Brett Hundley
Sean Mannion
Trevor Siemian

2014
Blake Bortles
Teddy Bridgewater
Derek Carr
Johnny Manziel
Jimmy Garoppolo
AJ McCarron
Logan Thomas
Zach Mettenberge
Tajh Boyd
Tom Savage
David Fales
Keith Wenning
Aaron Murray
Garrett Gilbert

2013
Geno Smith
Tyler Wilson
Zac Dysert
Matt Barkley
Mike Glennon
Ryan Nassib
EJ Manuel
Landry Jones
Brad Sorensen
Sean Renfree
B.J. Daniels

Where is the franchise QB? MAAAAAYBE 62nd overall pick Jimmy Garoppolo? Perhaps but we're not sure yet because he keeps getting hurt?

Jameis Winston? He has one more chance really and he hasn't proven he can win a big game.

Mariota? Fragile, and inconsistent when he's healthy.

Derek Carr? Who may be on his way out of Oakland?

All question marks, none of them are bonafide franchise quarterbacks to this point.

And that's why you don't reach, you don't take a guy because of his pre-draft projection, you MUST have a conviction on that player. Because out of that group, almost every one of those QBs that were drafted highly have set their franchises back and almost every one of them are or will be looking to replace those guys with another draft pick shortly.

Want to burn a 2nd round pick on a QB that MIGHT be that guy? Fine. But if you're going to use a first rounder, you need to get that one right.

In comment 14276376 allstarjim said:

Quote:

And that's why you don't reach, you don't take a guy because of his pre-draft projection, you MUST have a conviction on that player. Because out of that group, almost every one of those QBs that were drafted highly have set their franchises back and almost every one of them are or will be looking to replace those guys with another draft pick shortly. Want to burn a 2nd round pick on a QB that MIGHT be that guy? Fine. But if you're going to use a first rounder, you need to get that one right.

Exactly, Jim.

In comment 14276357 Default said:

Quote:

In comment 14276318 Go Terps said: Quote: What I can't get past is that before we took Barkley it was a universally accepted truth that: - RBs are easy to find - QBs are difficult to find - QB is a more crucial position than RB And yet since then there's been an attempt to flip those stances in order to align with the Giants' strategy in the past year. THAT is true insanity. Or at the very least it's an incredible willingness to kid oneself into thinking the Giants are doing a great job...even if the results on the field tell a different tale. Because it's easier for people to convince themselves of something that isn't true, especially because the truth sucks. The truth is the Giants are currently an inept organization being held hostage by emotion and delusion.

That is perfectly put. I love Eli and what he did for this organization. But he’s starting to piss me off now. And it’s not even his fault; it’s the nonsensical worshipping of the guy by the owners, front office, and decent portion of the fan base that unequivocally refuses to move on, even if we have a chance to get another franchise guy.

Britt: No one is saying RBs don’t matter at all. What we are saying is the following: 1) they matter far, far less than QBs; and 2) in connection with #1, RBs are therefore luxuries. No one is saying that exceptional RBs don’t help you win games. But put it this way, how many games do the Chiefs win with a replacement level QB and Hunt vs Mahomes and a replacement level RB. We actually saw the experiment play out, and the team did just fine without Hunt. But in today’s game - more than in past eras - RBs are of far less importance than they used to be.

The proof is in the pudding: Eagles lost Ajayi but got hot when Foles came in and Wentz played better. UDFA was their starter for a number of games. KC almost made the SB despite losing Hunt. LAR beat NO despite Gurley logging 4 carries.

Besides, you can get RBs anywhere in the draft. At least far more so than QBs. Kamara (3rd); Chubb (2nd); Cook (2nd); Hunt (3rd); Howard (5th); Connor (3rd); David Johnson (3rd); Carson (UDFA); Adams (UDFA); Ajayi (5th); Blount (4th); Kerryon Johnson (2nd); McCoy (2nd). Yes, some teams like the Giants, Jags, Cowboys, and Rams have relied on high first round picks at RB. Basically all other teams have not.

In comment 14276376 allstarjim said:

Quote:

In comment 14276229 Zeke's Alibi said: Quote: No way you are going to grab those guys unless you have the top pick or are in the top 3. Unlike many around here I think DG is laying the foundation of a strong roster. Lets say we don't go QB and go BPA. Probably put together another draft like last year and this team is 500. There is just no way we are going to be in a position to even trade for a BPA QB prospect like Tua or Lawrence. There's 1-2 franchise QB's coming out every year. Identify the guy and take him. See in theory this sounds real great. Problem is it's completely not true. It's just false. Here are the QBs drafted from 2013 - 2015. That's THREE consecutive draft classes of quarterbacks: 2015 Jameis Winston Marcus Mariota Bryce Petty Garrett Grayson Brett Hundley Sean Mannion Trevor Siemian 2014 Blake Bortles Teddy Bridgewater Derek Carr Johnny Manziel Jimmy Garoppolo AJ McCarron Logan Thomas Zach Mettenberge Tajh Boyd Tom Savage David Fales Keith Wenning Aaron Murray Garrett Gilbert 2013 Geno Smith Tyler Wilson Zac Dysert Matt Barkley Mike Glennon Ryan Nassib EJ Manuel Landry Jones Brad Sorensen Sean Renfree B.J. Daniels Where is the franchise QB? MAAAAAYBE 62nd overall pick Jimmy Garoppolo? Perhaps but we're not sure yet because he keeps getting hurt? Jameis Winston? He has one more chance really and he hasn't proven he can win a big game. Mariota? Fragile, and inconsistent when he's healthy. Derek Carr? Who may be on his way out of Oakland? All question marks, none of them are bonafide franchise quarterbacks to this point. And that's why you don't reach, you don't take a guy because of his pre-draft projection, you MUST have a conviction on that player. Because out of that group, almost every one of those QBs that were drafted highly have set their franchises back and almost every one of them are or will be looking to replace those guys with another draft pick shortly. Want to burn a 2nd round pick on a QB that MIGHT be that guy? Fine. But if you're going to use a first rounder, you need to get that one right.

No one is saying to select a QB for the sake of it. However, it’s ticking me off that DG seems blindly loyal to Eli and/or is absolutely scared to select a QB high. That annoys me to no end.

If we did not have Eli, people would want a QB. And I don’t mean if all we had was Tanney. If we had a QB of equal skill, there would be no blind faith to this guy, and we could move on.

In comment 14276318 Go Terps said:

Quote:

What I can't get past is that before we took Barkley it was a universally accepted truth that: - RBs are easy to find - QBs are difficult to find - QB is a more crucial position than RB And yet since then there's been an attempt to flip those stances in order to align with the Giants' strategy in the past year. THAT is true insanity. Or at the very least it's an incredible willingness to kid oneself into thinking the Giants are doing a great job...even if the results on the field tell a different tale.

Amen.

Look, let's be honest. Many Giants fans, and some are here at BBI, love being able to say we have the "most exciting player" or "the best RB".

Barkley is comfort food. He helps take the place of winning. Sure, we stink; and have for nearly a decade now. But we can always have the Saquonberry Ice Cream and feel better for a few hours on Sunday...

In comment 14276357 Default said:

Quote:

In comment 14276318 Go Terps said: Quote: What I can't get past is that before we took Barkley it was a universally accepted truth that: - RBs are easy to find - QBs are difficult to find - QB is a more crucial position than RB And yet since then there's been an attempt to flip those stances in order to align with the Giants' strategy in the past year. THAT is true insanity. Or at the very least it's an incredible willingness to kid oneself into thinking the Giants are doing a great job...even if the results on the field tell a different tale. Because it's easier for people to convince themselves of something that isn't true, especially because the truth sucks. The truth is the Giants are currently an inept organization being held hostage by emotion and delusion.

It only sounds crazy if you convince yourself Sam Darnold was John Elway coming out of college. It only sounds crazy if you're so hung up on what position Saquon Barkley played that you've decided to ignore that he was the top overall prospect in the draft regardless of position.

I'm not going to waste my time repeating the issues with the available QBs from 2018 because people who wanted to draft a QB come hell or high water won't be swayed by any logic. However with Darnold, QBs who leave school as redshirt sophomores are highly unlikely to have long, successful NFL careers. So how could the Giants be interested in Dwayne Haskins? One major reason is that there's not going to be a Saquon Barkley, Bradley Chubb, Quentin Nelson, Joey Bosa, Jalen Ramsey, or Zeke Elliot available when they're thinking about selecting Haskins, Lock, etc.

You can't get so hung up on positions that you ignore individual prospects. It also works in the direction you're worried about because that's how Jake Locker gets drafted high. When you draft great players, you can't go wrong. The idea that the Giants were wrong because they drafted this already great player is ridiculous. The Giants' problem is that for years they haven't drafted enough average/solid/good/great players, not that they picked a RB over a QB in 2018.

In comment 14276385 Giants38 said:

Quote:

In comment 14276376 allstarjim said: Quote: In comment 14276229 Zeke's Alibi said: Quote: No way you are going to grab those guys unless you have the top pick or are in the top 3. Unlike many around here I think DG is laying the foundation of a strong roster. Lets say we don't go QB and go BPA. Probably put together another draft like last year and this team is 500. There is just no way we are going to be in a position to even trade for a BPA QB prospect like Tua or Lawrence. There's 1-2 franchise QB's coming out every year. Identify the guy and take him. See in theory this sounds real great. Problem is it's completely not true. It's just false. Here are the QBs drafted from 2013 - 2015. That's THREE consecutive draft classes of quarterbacks: 2015 Jameis Winston Marcus Mariota Bryce Petty Garrett Grayson Brett Hundley Sean Mannion Trevor Siemian 2014 Blake Bortles Teddy Bridgewater Derek Carr Johnny Manziel Jimmy Garoppolo AJ McCarron Logan Thomas Zach Mettenberge Tajh Boyd Tom Savage David Fales Keith Wenning Aaron Murray Garrett Gilbert 2013 Geno Smith Tyler Wilson Zac Dysert Matt Barkley Mike Glennon Ryan Nassib EJ Manuel Landry Jones Brad Sorensen Sean Renfree B.J. Daniels Where is the franchise QB? MAAAAAYBE 62nd overall pick Jimmy Garoppolo? Perhaps but we're not sure yet because he keeps getting hurt? Jameis Winston? He has one more chance really and he hasn't proven he can win a big game. Mariota? Fragile, and inconsistent when he's healthy. Derek Carr? Who may be on his way out of Oakland? All question marks, none of them are bonafide franchise quarterbacks to this point. And that's why you don't reach, you don't take a guy because of his pre-draft projection, you MUST have a conviction on that player. Because out of that group, almost every one of those QBs that were drafted highly have set their franchises back and almost every one of them are or will be looking to replace those guys with another draft pick shortly. Want to burn a 2nd round pick on a QB that MIGHT be that guy? Fine. But if you're going to use a first rounder, you need to get that one right. No one is saying to select a QB for the sake of it. However, it’s ticking me off that DG seems blindly loyal to Eli and/or is absolutely scared to select a QB high. That annoys me to no end. If we did not have Eli, people would want a QB. And I don’t mean if all we had was Tanney. If we had a QB of equal skill, there would be no blind faith to this guy, and we could move on.

Sorry but bullshit.

I responded to a poster that said there were 1-2 franchise QBs in every draft, to identify and take him. I demonstrated that's not true. You cannot just assume a good franchise QB is in every draft because there are years where there is not a single good franchise QB, and in those years, you are better off taking the best player possible. You guys are impatient. When they find the right QB that they are in a position to draft, they'll draft him, but they have to believe he's the right guy and someone that can lead a championship football team. They didn't feel that way about the guys available last year.

they need a qb, and they passed on one in what was clearly a deeper qb draft. if you take DG's statements at face value, it's almost impossible to see how he takes a qb at 6 - none of those guys will be the best player on the board, or anything close to can't miss. but then either you have no qb of the future, or you convince yourself the qb you take in round 2 (or trade back into round 1 to get at the cost of future draft capital) is somehow the answer.

for all his talk about not reaching, touched by the hand of god, perfect rating etc, the choice was rooted in his misunderstanding of the Giants talent level. let's try a hypothetical. it's the 2018 draft, DG has been hired not by the Giants but by the Jets, and it's the Jets with the 2nd pick in the draft. does anyone really think he drafts SB over a QB? or Bradley Chubb? he didn't think he was in total rebuild mode, he thought he had a serviceable team with a serviceable qb that he could improve in free agency, and get to the playoffs. the fact that he now denies that should give everyone some pause on the idea that he's totally honest open book

at some point the Giants need to increase their risk-profile as to selecting a QB early. Nobody wants to get it wrong but that is the reality of our QB depth chart right now.

Otherwise, we are going nowhere...

In comment 14276391 allstarjim said:

Quote:

In comment 14276385 Giants38 said: Quote: In comment 14276376 allstarjim said: Quote: In comment 14276229 Zeke's Alibi said: Quote: No way you are going to grab those guys unless you have the top pick or are in the top 3. Unlike many around here I think DG is laying the foundation of a strong roster. Lets say we don't go QB and go BPA. Probably put together another draft like last year and this team is 500. There is just no way we are going to be in a position to even trade for a BPA QB prospect like Tua or Lawrence. There's 1-2 franchise QB's coming out every year. Identify the guy and take him. See in theory this sounds real great. Problem is it's completely not true. It's just false. Here are the QBs drafted from 2013 - 2015. That's THREE consecutive draft classes of quarterbacks: 2015 Jameis Winston Marcus Mariota Bryce Petty Garrett Grayson Brett Hundley Sean Mannion Trevor Siemian 2014 Blake Bortles Teddy Bridgewater Derek Carr Johnny Manziel Jimmy Garoppolo AJ McCarron Logan Thomas Zach Mettenberge Tajh Boyd Tom Savage David Fales Keith Wenning Aaron Murray Garrett Gilbert 2013 Geno Smith Tyler Wilson Zac Dysert Matt Barkley Mike Glennon Ryan Nassib EJ Manuel Landry Jones Brad Sorensen Sean Renfree B.J. Daniels Where is the franchise QB? MAAAAAYBE 62nd overall pick Jimmy Garoppolo? Perhaps but we're not sure yet because he keeps getting hurt? Jameis Winston? He has one more chance really and he hasn't proven he can win a big game. Mariota? Fragile, and inconsistent when he's healthy. Derek Carr? Who may be on his way out of Oakland? All question marks, none of them are bonafide franchise quarterbacks to this point. And that's why you don't reach, you don't take a guy because of his pre-draft projection, you MUST have a conviction on that player. Because out of that group, almost every one of those QBs that were drafted highly have set their franchises back and almost every one of them are or will be looking to replace those guys with another draft pick shortly. Want to burn a 2nd round pick on a QB that MIGHT be that guy? Fine. But if you're going to use a first rounder, you need to get that one right. No one is saying to select a QB for the sake of it. However, it’s ticking me off that DG seems blindly loyal to Eli and/or is absolutely scared to select a QB high. That annoys me to no end. If we did not have Eli, people would want a QB. And I don’t mean if all we had was Tanney. If we had a QB of equal skill, there would be no blind faith to this guy, and we could move on. Sorry but bullshit. I responded to a poster that said there were 1-2 franchise QBs in every draft, to identify and take him. I demonstrated that's not true. You cannot just assume a good franchise QB is in every draft because there are years where there is not a single good franchise QB, and in those years, you are better off taking the best player possible. You guys are impatient. When they find the right QB that they are in a position to draft, they'll draft him, but they have to believe he's the right guy and someone that can lead a championship football team. They didn't feel that way about the guys available last year.

If you are drafting a Franchise QB it takes place in the top 10 picks on average.
About 6% of QB's taken after the first in the last 20 years become franchise QB's and that includes Brady, Wilson, and Brees. 195 QB's taken after the first and about 9 became "franchise QBs"
Also, very few after the 10th pick turn into Franchise QB's

In comment 14276397 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

at some point the Giants need to increase their risk-profile as to selecting a QB early. Nobody wants to get it wrong but that is the reality of our QB depth chart right now. Otherwise, we are going nowhere...

Yup and if they wait until next year and grab a QB that is a winning, franchise QB in the NFL it will be the right move over picking a guy just because he seems to fit the bill this year but isn't a franchise QB.

And I'm not saying that Dwayne Haskins or whoever isn't a franchise QB. I don't know. But I do know that this talk about raising risk profile, and must draft a QB this year because we don't have one, that's how you set your franchise back 5 years. That's how you get J.P. Losman, or Joey Harrington or Akili Smith.

That's why I am an advocate for trading down this year to get an extra 1st for next year...so that for one...we have two chances at a top pick, and two, if we don't get a top pick, we have two first rounders in ammunition to trade up. I do feel better about the 2020 class...and we'll see on Herbert. I think every one of those highly touted guys have something to prove. I'm actually really intrigued by K.J. Costello of Stanford.

But assessing your risk-profile cuts both ways...get it wrong and the next 5 years could be bad. Get it right and the next 5 years plus another 10 are good.

There are some certainties

The Giants need a Qb for now and the future
The Giants have many other needs in order to become competitive

To win the Giants need to resolve both the QB needs and the other needs
The Giants better have a firm conviction on the QB they select at 6 , because if they miss they will have find a QB in a following draft and they lose the opportunity to select a premier player at another position

The easiest way to QB hell is to overvalue a QB and to force a pick
Look at what Denver has done drafting Lynch and Osweiler.
They are still looking for their QB

What seems apparent is that last years draft had better prospects and next year will have at least three exceptional QBs
Hebert would be the first QB drafted this year and he may be third drafted next year behind Tua and Frome
Not all years will have a great selection of QBs

From my perspective I love Murray but I am not certain that he is worthy of the 6th pick due to his size limitations

is that we already lost our low 1st rounders from 2015 & 2016! Can't afford to do that soon again.

In comment 14276430 Archer said:

Quote:

There are some certainties The Giants need a Qb for now and the future The Giants have many other needs in order to become competitive To win the Giants need to resolve both the QB needs and the other needs The Giants better have a firm conviction on the QB they select at 6 , because if they miss they will have find a QB in a following draft and they lose the opportunity to select a premier player at another position The easiest way to QB hell is to overvalue a QB and to force a pick Look at what Denver has done drafting Lynch and Osweiler. They are still looking for their QB What seems apparent is that last years draft had better prospects and next year will have at least three exceptional QBs Hebert would be the first QB drafted this year and he may be third drafted next year behind Tua and Frome Not all years will have a great selection of QBs From my perspective I love Murray but I am not certain that he is worthy of the 6th pick due to his size limitations

"Hebert would be the first QB drafted this year and he may be third drafted next year behind Tua and Frome"

A) You're spinning your fantasy as if it's some kind of sure thing. Who says Herbert would be drafted ahead of Haskins or Lock? You?

I haven't paid any attention to Herbert cuz he's not coming out, period. But just looking at stats, which is cheap and easy if superficial, Herbert hasn't performed any better than Lock the past TWO years. And Lock appears to be improving, while Herbert has perhaps regressed? 2018 was Herbert's first full season stating when he attempted over 400 passes, and his % was less than Lock's and less than 60%. And he plays in a conference with far weaker defenses on average.

His stats are piss poor compared with Haskins, BTW. So on any whim of deeper analysis, Herbert could have ended up the 3rd QB taken this year too... That would ultimately be decided in GMs' inner chambers after the combine, pro days, and private workouts. I could go on with the stats comparison but that's not the way I like to judge players that I would make pronouncements about.

You are making lazy assumptions and positing them as fundamental truths.

In comment 14276440 mrvax said:

Quote:

is that we already lost our low 1st rounders from 2015 & 2016! Can't afford to do that soon again.

So we are already 10 years' behind the eight ball?

Is great at finding a great QB in the draft, but he has been very good at developing QBs he has been given.

QB drafted probably would fall in the 12 to 20 range.

And that would happen in most years.

When you have the #2 pick you want that gold-jacket type of player. Not every draft has one, and the drafts that do there are usually no more than 1 or 2 that people are confident will be future hall-of-famers. It's also rare to have a pick that high (we hadn't had one that high since drafting LT). Barkley was clearly that once-in-a-generation type of running back who many saw as having hall-of-fame level talent. I thought we were even lucky to get him without even having the #1 overall pick. If you have a chance to get a hall-of-fame player, regardless of position, you take him.

At #6, this year, I don't think we'll be able to get a "gold-jacket-type-player". Not saying the guy CAN'T go on to be a hall-of-famer, but it's not as much of a "lock" as Barkley was.

It was never about taking BPA simply because that was Gettleman's general draft philosophy, it was all about the fact that Barkley was the 1 guy (maybe 2 if you include Nelson) who everyone knew was a rare elite talent. I don't think we're getting one of those "gold jacket" guys this year (if there are any it's only 1 or 2 like I said) so what Gettleman said last year doesn't apply here.

Just my 2 cents.

I don’t know if Hebert is a better prospect than this years QBs
I am only reporting what I have read

In comment 14276474 Archer said:

Quote:

I don’t know if Hebert is a better prospect than this years QBs I am only reporting what I have read

No one knows for sure but my guess would be that Herbert would've been like Darnold last year. A guy who everyone penciled in as the top QB in the draft all year even though they regressed and didn't play up to that potential just because that's what was assumed for awhile. Then once the season ends and the scrutiny begins, that becomes less and less of a sure thing. Both guys have all the tools so like Darnold, Herbert would probably be one of the top 2 QB's taken although I think Haskins would be picked first by the time the draft rolls around.

In comment 14276339 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

In comment 14275975 Go Terps said: Quote: I think you are severely discounting Gurleys impact. Hunts as well, it’s just Mahomes is that good (which is in part relatable to this thread).

Mahomes is a great player in great offense. An offense that was pretty damn good last year with Alex Smith. Losing Hunt hurt, but much less so when you have Mahomes, Kelce, and Watkins to a lesser degree, making it easier for a guy like D. Williams to fill in admirably at RB in that offense.

In comment 14276484 Fox said:

Quote:

In comment 14276339 UConn4523 said: Quote: In comment 14275975 Go Terps said: Quote: I think you are severely discounting Gurleys impact. Hunts as well, it’s just Mahomes is that good (which is in part relatable to this thread). Mahomes is a great player in great offense. An offense that was pretty damn good last year with Alex Smith. Losing Hunt hurt, but much less so when you have Mahomes, Kelce, and Watkins to a lesser degree, making it easier for a guy like D. Williams to fill in admirably at RB in that offense.

Well that leads to a different discussion about the quality of our coaching staff, which is terrible. But that doesn't make drafting a running back at 2 a good move over a blue chip QB.

I went back in the archives earlier today and looked at the thread for the 2016 draft. After the Cowboys took Elliott at 4 there was a lot of "can't take a running back at 4". I guess that doesn't apply if the Giants do it, though.

In comment 14276497 Go Terps said:

Quote:

I went back in the archives earlier today and looked at the thread for the 2016 draft. After the Cowboys took Elliott at 4 there was a lot of "can't take a running back at 4". I guess that doesn't apply if the Giants do it, though.

You can't take a running back at #4 when the other guy is Jalen Ramsey. A lot of people thought Ramsey was the best prospect in that draft. No one said take Eli Apple over Zeke.

A lot of this discussion is based on your inflated opinion of Sam Darnold as a prospect. I liked Darnold. I would've drafted Darnold. The difference between us is you act like Darnold was Andrew Luck. THAT is a blue chip prospect. Saquon Barkley is a blue chip prospect. Sam Darnold is a guy with talent who might be great one day. But he had enough flaws as a prospect that drafting the actual best prospect shouldn't be seen as the disaster you make it out to be.

let alone 2 overall. I hated the David Wilson pick. Hated it.

But Barkley is not just a great RB. He's a great player.

I mean, he tied Odell Beckham's rookie receiving record, in addition to everything he did as a RB.

He's more than a RB. He's a great FOOTBALL PLAYER.

In comment 14276497 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Well that leads to a different discussion about the quality of our coaching staff, which is terrible. But that doesn't make drafting a running back at 2 a good move over a blue chip QB. I went back in the archives earlier today and looked at the thread for the 2016 draft. After the Cowboys took Elliott at 4 there was a lot of "can't take a running back at 4". I guess that doesn't apply if the Giants do it, though.

It was the convention at the time that RBs aren't drafted top 10.
Then again without Elliott, do the Cowboys win the NFCE this year? I doubt it. Are they even contenders the last 3 years. I doubt it.

And FWIW, I believe JonC said had the Browns taken Barkley at #1, the Giants would have taken Chubb. Sorry if I'm misremembering.
I really think the Giants did not have those QBs rated in their top 3 picks. (Barkley, Chubb, Nelson)

As for this year, I'm still not sure any QB is worth a top 10 pick. Perhaps a trade back (and I am loath to even mention that) is the right thing to do and pick one up later in the 1st. Or an ER and an OL.

2000 yards from scrimmage by a rookie.

Look at this list of greatest rookie RB seasons in NFL history published in 2015. Saquon is second only to Dickerson and Edgerrin James.

He's in amazing company as a player already. HOF company. Isn't that what you want with your 2nd overall pick? A homerun?

Link - ( New Window )

.

is that there are people on this board that have openly stated that if Saquon Barkley made the HOF and that Darnold was just an average to above average QB for ten years, that Saquon was a bad pick. How can you even reason with that?

In comment 14276511 Go Terps said:

Quote:

.

Would you still be going bolistic months later over passing on Darnold if they took Chubb or Nelson?

In comment 14276511 Go Terps said:

Quote:

.

Meh, not better. A notch below, but still damn fine players and I really like Nelson.

.

In comment 14276497 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 14276484 Fox said: Quote: In comment 14276339 UConn4523 said: Quote: In comment 14275975 Go Terps said: Quote: I think you are severely discounting Gurleys impact. Hunts as well, it’s just Mahomes is that good (which is in part relatable to this thread). Mahomes is a great player in great offense. An offense that was pretty damn good last year with Alex Smith. Losing Hunt hurt, but much less so when you have Mahomes, Kelce, and Watkins to a lesser degree, making it easier for a guy like D. Williams to fill in admirably at RB in that offense. Well that leads to a different discussion about the quality of our coaching staff, which is terrible. But that doesn't make drafting a running back at 2 a good move over a blue chip QB. I went back in the archives earlier today and looked at the thread for the 2016 draft. After the Cowboys took Elliott at 4 there was a lot of "can't take a running back at 4". I guess that doesn't apply if the Giants do it, though.

If it were up to me the Giants would have drafted Darnold, but they didn't.

Football is a sport where one guy can't do it by himself, but of any position QB is the closest thing to that idea. Obviously, that's what makes a good one so valuable. My issue is with diminishing the value a RB, especially one who is an excellent receiver, can bring to a team.

Barkley's production didn't translate to more wins because the Giants suck all over. But with roster improvements elsewhere his production certainly can lead to wins in the future (though I'd obviously rather have our future QB). A great running back is still a valuable asset.

A guy like Kamara would certainly be taken in the top half of round 1 if teams knew how productive he would turn out. Teams had questions about him at the NFL level, so he fell. Not so with Zeke, Saquon and Gurley (even with the knee).

In comment 14276497 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Well that leads to a different discussion about the quality of our coaching staff, which is terrible. But that doesn't make drafting a running back at 2 a good move over a blue chip QB. I went back in the archives earlier today and looked at the thread for the 2016 draft. After the Cowboys took Elliott at 4 there was a lot of "can't take a running back at 4". I guess that doesn't apply if the Giants do it, though.

Who is the 'blue chip QB'? Crowned Darnold already?
Elliott was considered a very good prospect, not all-time great like Barkley.

In comment 14276515 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

In comment 14276511 Go Terps said: Quote: . Would you still be going bolistic months later over passing on Darnold if they took Chubb or Nelson?

No. I would have been fine with it.

In comment 14276521 mrvax said:

Quote:

In comment 14276497 Go Terps said: Quote: Well that leads to a different discussion about the quality of our coaching staff, which is terrible. But that doesn't make drafting a running back at 2 a good move over a blue chip QB. I went back in the archives earlier today and looked at the thread for the 2016 draft. After the Cowboys took Elliott at 4 there was a lot of "can't take a running back at 4". I guess that doesn't apply if the Giants do it, though. Who is the 'blue chip QB'? Crowned Darnold already? Elliott was considered a very good prospect, not all-time great like Barkley.

Crowning Barkley an all time great already?

I think we know that now with hindsight.

Had we gone QB, we would have had to take the 2nd best QB. Instead, we took the best player.

I'm not cool with second best anything when you pick at 2. That's how I view it.

while participating in this thread (sick kid).

Rich Eisen specifically said while the Giants were on the clock, "what do the Jets do now that the player they supposedly coveted, Baker Mayfield, has now been taken?"

The Jets settled for second best if that rumor was true. We didn't.

In comment 14276511 Go Terps said:

Quote:

.

Why does Chubb get a pass for his teams dreadful season? I guess Barkley is the only rookie in the history of the sport that was supposed to put a 3-13 team on his back and lead them to the playoffs, otherwise he’s a failure. Chubb put up great stats and the Broncos still sucked ass. I guess he was a wasted pick too? Sam “The Legend” Darnold team is picking ahead of Barkley’s Giants. The Jets were atrocious, so, wasted pick. Rosen’s team is picking first overall. Another wasted pick...

Barkley is literally the only rookie I’ve ever seen talked about as being a wasted pick because he didn’t single handedly lead his team to the playoffs in year one. Why do the fucking Jets, Cardinals, Broncos, etc all get time to put a team around their rookies but the Giants don’t? Oh that’s right, some of you clowns think Barkley’s shelf life ends after 3 seasons...

.

In comment 14276524 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 14276521 mrvax said: Quote: In comment 14276497 Go Terps said: Quote: Well that leads to a different discussion about the quality of our coaching staff, which is terrible. But that doesn't make drafting a running back at 2 a good move over a blue chip QB. I went back in the archives earlier today and looked at the thread for the 2016 draft. After the Cowboys took Elliott at 4 there was a lot of "can't take a running back at 4". I guess that doesn't apply if the Giants do it, though. Who is the 'blue chip QB'? Crowned Darnold already? Elliott was considered a very good prospect, not all-time great like Barkley. Crowning Barkley an all time great already?

I can honestly say,'yes'. It takes a QB longer to see where they shake out. RBs can be successful right away.

In comment 14276526 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

I think we know that now with hindsight. Had we gone QB, we would have had to take the 2nd best QB.

How the hell has that been established after 16 games?

In comment 14276543 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

In comment 14276526 Britt in VA said: Quote: I think we know that now with hindsight. Had we gone QB, we would have had to take the 2nd best QB. How the hell has that been established after 16 games?

The same way that Barkley has been established as one of the greatest running backs in history already.

it screams of posting based on an agenda

I would have been fine with Darnold at 2, or Rosen at 2, and said so before the draft, and after the draft.

I was, and am, happy with Barkley too.

?

with the second best of anything...

Look in the mirror sometime when you accuse somebody of having an agenda.

In comment 14276556 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

with the second best of anything...

Did I misquote you?

I freely admit mine is pointing out how and why the Giants are a bad football team in the hopes that I'll be part of a larger enough like-minded group that eventually ownership takes notice and gets its shit together.

In comment 14276543 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

In comment 14276526 Britt in VA said: Quote: I think we know that now with hindsight. Had we gone QB, we would have had to take the 2nd best QB. How the hell has that been established after 16 games?

What’s the answer to my question?

same posts, rinse, repeat. Don’t you guys get tired of having the same argument on every thread?

and you're going to hang every thing on that one sentence.

I'll spell it out for you. C-O-N-V-I-C-T-I-O-N. That's all I want when Dave Gettleman makes his pick. Had he taken Sam Darnold 2 overall, I would have been fine with it, why? Because he had conviction.

He said it a million times. I've said it a million times.

He went by his board. Was Baker Mayfield over Saquon? I doubt it. So at the very least, anybody but Barkley would have been Gettleman's second choice, we do know that.

In comment 14276562 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

same posts, rinse, repeat. Don’t you guys get tired of having the same argument on every thread?

Have to talk about something, and it ain't gonna be the quality football being played.

This is the dominant Giants story of the past year, and as the draft approaches I think it's still very relevant.

Good for him. Bad for us.

especially your post about getting enough of us to agree with you so the Giants do what “we” want them to do.

I got the conviction thing so move on. Name me one GM who said he picked his first round pick and didn’t have conviction in the pick.

You said Mayfield was the best QB, and therefore why go second best with the #2 pick when SB is sitting there.

Correct?

to get over passing on a QB as an alternate way to look at it.

That's it. I should realize that people will never get over it.

In comment 14276567 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Good for him. Bad for us.

I cannot agree with that unless Darnold becomes a very good, not mediocre, QB. He just may but I'll give him a good 3 years.

I too wanted Darnold or Rosen but...I knew that I could not possibly grade the QBs correctly from a highlight video. You can see what they are capable of and that's it. So, I left the decision to the guys that do this professionally. If Darnold becomes a very good QB, then yes, DG would have shat the bed here.

We aren't there yet.

In comment 14276572 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

to get over passing on a QB as an alternate way to look at it. That's it. I should realize that people will never get over it.

Oh, I knew this would happen as soon as Barkley's name was called.

because you can’t separate from Eli. You hedge your bets by posting with caveats or with what would have been fine for you but it’s not what you want.

And you avoiding my questions for the very reasons I mention above.

If I am missing it then just answer my questions.

In comment 14276529 BigBlueShock said:

Quote:

In comment 14276511 Go Terps said: Quote: . W Oh that’s right, some of you clowns think Barkley’s shelf life ends after 3 seasons...

These are the type of exaggerations we see from posters such as yourself that dont' want to hear anything but your own opinion.

Sure EVERYONE that complains thinks Barkley has a 3 year shelf life. SURE.

You and fatman and others need to push this make believe about three years to justify your opinion as the only that is valid.

In comment 14276559 Go Terps said:

Quote:

I freely admit mine is pointing out how and why the Giants are a bad football team in the hopes that I'll be part of a larger enough like-minded group that eventually ownership takes notice and gets its shit together.

In actuality, it is more a of diatribe to the point of being annoying.
Not saying your POV is wrong or is full of invalid points, but you can tone the rants down because nobody on BBI is going to form a like-minded group to make the ownership to wake up. I sort of think they know the team sucks.
Besides, there are only a handful of posters that agree with you that a QB last year would have been better than Barkley (and I was a Rosen supporter.)

and the march to Mara’s front gate in protest!

In comment 14276567 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Good for him. Bad for us.

His strategy is to build a team that runs the ball, stops the run, and rushes the passer. That’s a team building philosophy that’s held up through every era and was pretty much exhibited by every winning team in the playoffs this year.

He drafted in accordance with that philosophy and hit on almost every pick. That’s a hell of a lot more than anyone can say for the prior regime who had no discernible team building philosophy and ran shit drafts for the better part of 10 years.

I was a strong advocate for a trade down netting Chubb and OL players. That said, I have no problem with a draft that nets 4 or 5 quality players in line with a sound roster building strategy — even if the positional value doesn’t justify a pick along the way.

If DG keeps having drafts like last year the Giants will be contenders sooner rather than later.

In comment 14276506 section125 said:

Quote:

In comment 14276497 Go Terps said: Quote: Well that leads to a different discussion about the quality of our coaching staff, which is terrible. But that doesn't make drafting a running back at 2 a good move over a blue chip QB. I went back in the archives earlier today and looked at the thread for the 2016 draft. After the Cowboys took Elliott at 4 there was a lot of "can't take a running back at 4". I guess that doesn't apply if the Giants do it, though. It was the convention at the time that RBs aren't drafted top 10. Then again without Elliott, do the Cowboys win the NFCE this year? I doubt it. Are they even contenders the last 3 years. I doubt it. And FWIW, I believe JonC said had the Browns taken Barkley at #1, the Giants would have taken Chubb. Sorry if I'm misremembering. I really think the Giants did not have those QBs rated in their top 3 picks. (Barkley, Chubb, Nelson) As for this year, I'm still not sure any QB is worth a top 10 pick. Perhaps a trade back (and I am loath to even mention that) is the right thing to do and pick one up later in the 1st. Or an ER and an OL.

I remember those discussions and it wasn't so much that BBI thought taking a RB that high was wrong. A lot of the discussion was why take him that high when they had a good RB and had other needs.

In comment 14276528 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

while participating in this thread (sick kid). Rich Eisen specifically said while the Giants were on the clock, "what do the Jets do now that the player they supposedly coveted, Baker Mayfield, has now been taken?" The Jets settled for second best if that rumor was true. We didn't.

so who do the Giants have at QB now? A 7-9 QB

In comment 14276611 WillVAB said:
[quote] In comment 14276567 Go Terps said:


Quote:


Good for him. Bad for us.



His strategy is to build a team that runs the ball, stops the run, and rushes the passer. That’s a team building philosophy that’s held up through every era and was pretty much exhibited by every winning team in the playoffs this year.

He drafted in accordance with that philosophy and hit on almost every pick. That’s a hell of a lot more than anyone can say for the prior regime who had no discernible team building philosophy and ran shit drafts for the better part of 10 years.

/quote]

This is bullshit. Teams nowadays also need to pass. They can run because the defense cant stack the run like they could with the Giants. DG is not wrong to bypass a QB last year. But if he doesnt get a QB his team will eventually fail on a consistent level. Then he;'ll be gone.

And btw- when you speak of pass rush-- Neew England was THIRTIETH in sacks.

coming out because he's excellent in all three phases of the game, including running routes. He's not just another RB. This is the future of the RB position and why its value is returning. Barkley is that but somehow a better athlete. A once in a lifetime athlete.

AP to me is the most overrated RB of all time and there's a reason he never carried his team to anything. Can't pass block, fumbler, and couldn't catch. When he's in the game your telegraphing your running the ball. Now he was such a great runner he overcame that, but it held his teams back

... they aren’t the same. Not in the least. Plus, there’s pretty much no Barkley in this draft or at least there sure as shit won’t be a Barkley falling to pick 6.

It’s fair to assume the giants passed on qbs they probably had ranked in the 80s (maybe upper 80s but not as high as barkley) while Barkley was ranked in the 90s, so to speak. Perhaps this this year the giants still see a guy they like in that 80s range but the other players available at 6 aren’t 90s type talents in their eyes. Or maybe I have no clue.

Really with this shit again??

Quote:

the misjudgment of the team was DG's original sin PerpetualNervousness : 4:54 pm : link : reply they need a qb, and they passed on one in what was clearly a deeper qb draft. if you take DG's statements at face value, it's almost impossible to see how he takes a qb at 6 - none of those guys will be the best player on the board, or anything close to can't miss. but then either you have no qb of the future, or you convince yourself the qb you take in round 2 (or trade back into round 1 to get at the cost of future draft capital) is somehow the answer. for all his talk about not reaching, touched by the hand of god, perfect rating etc, the choice was rooted in his misunderstanding of the Giants talent level. let's try a hypothetical. it's the 2018 draft, DG has been hired not by the Giants but by the Jets, and it's the Jets with the 2nd pick in the draft. does anyone really think he drafts SB over a QB? or Bradley Chubb? he didn't think he was in total rebuild mode, he thought he had a serviceable team with a serviceable qb that he could improve in free agency, and get to the playoffs. the fact that he now denies that should give everyone some pause on the idea that he's totally honest open book

Gettleman picked Barkley because he had a historically high draft grade. Showed exactly why he had that draft grade and still posters cling to the notion of picking him to make one last run with Eli?

It is like people didn't watch 2018 and just stick with the same fucking comments they made after the draft. That's the misjudgement that's taking place, and it pretty much happens daily here.

Every year. And even hitting on a good QB means jack shit if you don’t build a team around then. Matt Stafford has really changed Detroit. Sure. Tampa and the Titans any closer to looking like a SB Challenger? Last years stud Watson isn’t taking the Texans anywhere deep I the lost season any time soon despite people thinking a few solod games last year made him a home run pick whose future is assured.


And now we get the same people insisting we draft a HS sized QB in one breath or salivating over Foles in-the next. It’s crazy to draft a QB at 6 even if he’s not on the same zip code as the guys there. Now if they really trade out close due to the real need you grab the QB. Fine, but most objective scouting experts seem to think this isn’t a good year at all for a QB. Some team is going to trade a ton to jump before the Giants to get Haskins

In comment 14276619 uther99 said:

Quote:

In comment 14276528 Britt in VA said: Quote: while participating in this thread (sick kid). Rich Eisen specifically said while the Giants were on the clock, "what do the Jets do now that the player they supposedly coveted, Baker Mayfield, has now been taken?" The Jets settled for second best if that rumor was true. We didn't. so who do the Giants have at QB now? A 7-9 QB

Yes the Gmen have a QB combined with an OL that is "7--9."

What you have here are certain posters that don';t want to hear anything negative about DG or Eli. They invent their own narrative of exaggerations to justify their stance that they just don't want to hear alternate points of view.

You can provide quotes to them and show them stats and explain how the team has sucked for a long time etc but all that doesn;t matter, The most important thing to them is that they just don;t want to hear it, so if you provide data you don;t want to hear you become "tiresome" and then the invent their own delusional justification to try to show that you are wrong.

For example there is a poster on here that complained ot me on another thread that nearly everyone on here has complained about ELi. I mean the guy has to be living under a rock to not expect that. But he just doesn;t want to hear it-- so somehow anyone that complain is the bad guy etc. And when yo complain about ELi he is under the delusion it really means you are complaining about Barkley. Just delusional. You give the guy a quote and then he goes and makes up an alternate conversation that never happened to justify his opinion. I kid you not.

with the bad QB class nonsense. We aren’t taking about multiple players. They are drafting 1 player at 6. A player they will believe in, if the QBs as a whole are not as good as last years, who gives a shit. You talk about 1 player. Whoever he is, you don’t take a QB or pass on a QB based on the average score of 5 guys. It’s one player. Who knows who we select, but whoever we do will have nothing to do with the rest of the players at that position.

The Giants might have been worse with Darnold.

I don’t think there is a singular comment on this site that under scores more a lack of understanding why those of us who wanted a quarterback felt that way.

The idea that we believed Darnold could win more games last season is no more relevant than the idea that the Giants would be better with Eli than Warner back in 04

In comment 14276854 joeinpa said:

Quote:

The Giants might have been worse with Darnold. I don’t think there is a singular comment on this site that under scores more a lack of understanding why those of us who wanted a quarterback felt that way. The idea that we believed Darnold could win more games last season is no more relevant than the idea that the Giants would be better with Eli than Warner back in 04

And what you seem to fail to understand is that there are multiple ways to build a team that don't begin with drafting the QB. The Giants had a pretty solid foundation when Eli took over for Warner in 2004, that started the season 5-2. They weren't a finished product, but they had a solid o-line, great running game, and solid D-line.

exactly. A good rookie QB can still struggle, but he doesn't elevate a team by himself. Teams don't just succeed because they draft a QB. Pittsburgh didn't just start winning because Ben was drafted. They also had a great running game and defense.

It is about building the component parts around a franchise QB that brings team success. If the Jets don't build around Darnold, he won't have success, just like we saw how when the team eroded around Eli, we haven't had success.

I don't know why some posters don't grasp this.

In comment 14276901 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

exactly. A good rookie QB can still struggle, but he doesn't elevate a team by himself. Teams don't just succeed because they draft a QB. Pittsburgh didn't just start winning because Ben was drafted. They also had a great running game and defense. It is about building the component parts around a franchise QB that brings team success. If the Jets don't build around Darnold, he won't have success, just like we saw how when the team eroded around Eli, we haven't had success. I don't know why some posters don't grasp this.

They do get it. They just don't like it. Why? Couldn't tell you.

In comment 14276854 joeinpa said:

Quote:

The Giants might have been worse with Darnold. I don’t think there is a singular comment on this site that under scores more a lack of understanding why those of us who wanted a quarterback felt that way. The idea that we believed Darnold could win more games last season is no more relevant than the idea that the Giants would be better with Eli than Warner back in 04

Well that’s because several posters on here continue to piss and moan that Barkley was a wasted pick because the Giants only 5 games in his rookie year. It’s comical that Barkley was supposed to lead a shitty team to the playoffs all by himself yet the Darnold crowd gets to sit back and wait 5 years for the Jets to build around him before making rash judgements. Why aren’t we giving Barkley and the Giants the same opportunity? Jeezus man. They will get a QB. And when they do the team around him will hopefully be much better. Wasting prime rookie contract years on a QB isn’t necessarily the best or only way to go about this. But I know I’m wasting my breathe. Your mind has been made up since they passed on the legendary Sam Darnold

years draft. There was a clear choice franchise running back in last years draft. If the choice had been as simple as franchise QB vs franchise RB and you need both, you take the QB. You don't just take a QB because you want one. Cleveland could have taken Barkley number one and still got one of the QB's at pick 4. Certainly whoever they took at pick 4 would have a better chance to succeed handing off the ball to Barkley. They didn't do that because if you really like a QB, you have to take him. Conversely if you are not in love with a QB, you take Barkley and never look back. Right or wrong you can not afford to look back, your search for a QB is in front of you, not behind you. Find him this year or next and let him hand off to Barkley.

Do any of you have a firm conviction that there is a franchise QB available in this draft?

Franchise as defined that the QB who can have a 10 year career, has pro bowl potential , and the ability to win a Super Bowl?

Who would that be ?

and with that luxury and the view that really good running backs were going to be available later, Cleveland went QB and CB with its premium picks.

Hell, RB Chubb was the 4th player they took. And he only ripped off a 1000 yard year after barely touching the ball in the first half of the season.

This isn't to debate that Barkley isn't a complete stud and a better player (because he most certainly is), its just to toss out the view that RB production is far more easily available and found throughout a draft.

In comment 14276892 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

In comment 14276854 joeinpa said: Quote: The Giants might have been worse with Darnold. I don’t think there is a singular comment on this site that under scores more a lack of understanding why those of us who wanted a quarterback felt that way. The idea that we believed Darnold could win more games last season is no more relevant than the idea that the Giants would be better with Eli than Warner back in 04 And what you seem to fail to understand is that there are multiple ways to build a team that don't begin with drafting the QB. The Giants had a pretty solid foundation when Eli took over for Warner in 2004, that started the season 5-2. They weren't a finished product, but they had a solid o-line, great running game, and solid D-line.

What you don't seem to understand is that there ARE multiple ways to build a contender team. Not just your preferred way.

In comment 14276928 BigBlueShock said:

Quote:

In comment 14276854 joeinpa said: Quote: The Giants might have been worse with Darnold. I don’t think there is a singular comment on this site that under scores more a lack of understanding why those of us who wanted a quarterback felt that way. The idea that we believed Darnold could win more games last season is no more relevant than the idea that the Giants would be better with Eli than Warner back in 04 Well that’s because several posters on here continue to piss and moan that Barkley was a wasted pick because the Giants only 5 games in his rookie year. It’s comical that Barkley was supposed to lead a shitty team to the playoffs all by himself yet the Darnold crowd gets to sit back and wait 5 years for the Jets to build around him before making rash judgements. Why aren’t we giving Barkley and the Giants the same opportunity? Jeezus man. They will get a QB. And when they do the team around him will hopefully be much better. Wasting prime rookie contract years on a QB isn’t necessarily the best or only way to go about this. But I know I’m wasting my breathe. Your mind has been made up since they passed on the legendary Sam Darnold

Your extremism to exaggerate to justify your opinion knows no bounds ("mind being made up to pass on the legendary Sam Darnold." Give me a break with that nonsense.).

And just because you are okay with a GM that blindly thought we could win NOW as he wasted money/draft picks on SOldier, Omameh, Ogeltree and Stewart - and as a result just bury your head in the sand with these awful moves to try to win now doesn't mean others have to.

No idea that there are other ways to build a team. Lol

I watched Tittle and Tarkington be difference makers for the Giants

I was simply making the point that at the time of the draft the Giants being immediately better with Darnold was not part of the equation for wanting him, at least not for me

I have stated several times since I m thrilled to have Barkley to root for.

Some of you guys just can’t handle a dissenting point of view without getting irritated to the point you have to frame the dissenting poster to fit a narrative.

I wanted a young quarterback, still do, that doesn’t make me wrong, it s just an opinion.

.

In comment 14276901 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

exactly. A good rookie QB can still struggle, but he doesn't elevate a team by himself. Teams don't just succeed because they draft a QB. Pittsburgh didn't just start winning because Ben was drafted. They also had a great running game and defense. It is about building the component parts around a franchise QB that brings team success. If the Jets don't build around Darnold, he won't have success, just like we saw how when the team eroded around Eli, we haven't had success. I don't know why some posters don't grasp this.

Agree mostly with the theme here.

But lets be clear that with Ben at QB he did basically elevate a consistently good team to one that was competing in the superbowl 3 times in his first several years.

In comment 14276892 Britt in VA said:

Quote:

In comment 14276854 joeinpa said: Quote: The Giants might have been worse with Darnold. I don’t think there is a singular comment on this site that under scores more a lack of understanding why those of us who wanted a quarterback felt that way. The idea that we believed Darnold could win more games last season is no more relevant than the idea that the Giants would be better with Eli than Warner back in 04 And what you seem to fail to understand is that there are multiple ways to build a team that don't begin with drafting the QB. The Giants had a pretty solid foundation when Eli took over for Warner in 2004, that started the season 5-2. They weren't a finished product, but they had a solid o-line, great running game, and solid D-line.

And people forget Warner was horrible in those games. They were 5-2 because the schedule was cupcake up to that point. We than threw Eli in against like the 5 best NFL defenses in a row.

In comment 14276983 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

and with that luxury and the view that really good running backs were going to be available later, Cleveland went QB and CB with its premium picks. Hell, RB Chubb was the 4th player they took. And he only ripped off a 1000 yard year after barely touching the ball in the first half of the season. This isn't to debate that Barkley isn't a complete stud and a better player (because he most certainly is), its just to toss out the view that RB production is far more easily available and found throughout a draft.

And the Browns wanted Barkley. They talked with the Giants to trade up to 2. They wanted Mayfield though and didn't want to risk that he wouldn't be there at 4. Which he wouldn't have been because the Jets would have taken him.

Around him to be successful. But you don’t always have the luxury of doing that. Sometimes you have to grab the guy when the opportunity is there, like the Giants did when they took Simms

In comment 14276994 giantstock said:

Quote:

In comment 14276928 BigBlueShock said: Quote: In comment 14276854 joeinpa said: Quote: The Giants might have been worse with Darnold. I don’t think there is a singular comment on this site that under scores more a lack of understanding why those of us who wanted a quarterback felt that way. The idea that we believed Darnold could win more games last season is no more relevant than the idea that the Giants would be better with Eli than Warner back in 04 Well that’s because several posters on here continue to piss and moan that Barkley was a wasted pick because the Giants only 5 games in his rookie year. It’s comical that Barkley was supposed to lead a shitty team to the playoffs all by himself yet the Darnold crowd gets to sit back and wait 5 years for the Jets to build around him before making rash judgements. Why aren’t we giving Barkley and the Giants the same opportunity? Jeezus man. They will get a QB. And when they do the team around him will hopefully be much better. Wasting prime rookie contract years on a QB isn’t necessarily the best or only way to go about this. But I know I’m wasting my breathe. Your mind has been made up since they passed on the legendary Sam Darnold Your extremism to exaggerate to justify your opinion knows no bounds ("mind being made up to pass on the legendary Sam Darnold." Give me a break with that nonsense.). And just because you are okay with a GM that blindly thought we could win NOW as he wasted money/draft picks on SOldier, Omameh, Ogeltree and Stewart - and as a result just bury your head in the sand with these awful moves to try to win now doesn't mean others have to.

Wasted money on the above average left tackle and ILB? How was that a waste?

I'm still waiting for the people that complain about the Omameh and Stewart signings to explain how those moves are going to hold the team back for years to come. He missed on them. Everyone sees that. There is also a reason they were able to get out of Omameh's contract during the season.

In comment 14276998 joeinpa said:

Quote:

Some of you guys just can’t handle a dissenting point of view without getting irritated to the point you have to frame the dissenting poster to fit a narrative.

If people are going to continuously whine about not taking a quarterback without seeing the logic on the other side, keep expecting people to get annoyed. It is completely reasonable for posters to be tired of this topic.

I didn't want Saquon. I wanted Mayfield. It didn't happen. Time will tell how the move plays out. Discussing this topic ad nauseum does nothing.

Is ALWAYS a smart pick. Best player available does not apply to franchise QV|B's. LOL!! It is hard to believe what you read here.

In comment 14277106 joeinpa said:

Quote:

Around him to be successful. But you don’t always have the luxury of doing that. Sometimes you have to grab the guy when the opportunity is there, like the Giants did when they took Simms

And Dave Brown.

In comment 14277168 GiantGrit said:

Quote:

In comment 14276994 giantstock said: Quote: In comment 14276928 BigBlueShock said: Quote: In comment 14276854 joeinpa said: Quote: The Giants might have been worse with Darnold. I don’t think there is a singular comment on this site that under scores more a lack of understanding why those of us who wanted a quarterback felt that way. The idea that we believed Darnold could win more games last season is no more relevant than the idea that the Giants would be better with Eli than Warner back in 04 Well that’s because several posters on here continue to piss and moan that Barkley was a wasted pick because the Giants only 5 games in his rookie year. It’s comical that Barkley was supposed to lead a shitty team to the playoffs all by himself yet the Darnold crowd gets to sit back and wait 5 years for the Jets to build around him before making rash judgements. Why aren’t we giving Barkley and the Giants the same opportunity? Jeezus man. They will get a QB. And when they do the team around him will hopefully be much better. Wasting prime rookie contract years on a QB isn’t necessarily the best or only way to go about this. But I know I’m wasting my breathe. Your mind has been made up since they passed on the legendary Sam Darnold Your extremism to exaggerate to justify your opinion knows no bounds ("mind being made up to pass on the legendary Sam Darnold." Give me a break with that nonsense.). And just because you are okay with a GM that blindly thought we could win NOW as he wasted money/draft picks on SOldier, Omameh, Ogeltree and Stewart - and as a result just bury your head in the sand with these awful moves to try to win now doesn't mean others have to. Wasted money on the above average left tackle and ILB? How was that a waste? I'm still waiting for the people that complain about the Omameh and Stewart signings to explain how those moves are going to hold the team back for years to come. He missed on them. Everyone sees that. There is also a reason they were able to get out of Omameh's contract during the season.

First off- we have to come to a common ground. We have to agree on the common ground statement--> "The Giants are in rebuild mode."
DO you agree?

SO if we agree- - You mean spending money on an OLDER LT that was slightly above average for a rebuilding team isn;t a waste? In 2091 they aren;t going anywhere. SO the 1st year they have ANY possibility of doing anything is 2020 and that may slip into 2021. At that point he will be 32/33 years old. HE WILL BE DECLINING AS THE GMEN BECOME A THREAT. How is that smart?

As for Ogeltree- we gave up draft picks didn't we? WHy should we give up draft picks fora mediocre LB when we are rebuilding? Ogeltree's salary cap hit in 2019 is $11.75m.

As for Omammeh and Stewart -- we could have used the Solder/Omammeh/Stewart money to get TWO you OLinemen in Hubbard (Tackle) and Fulton (Guard). Instead of going nuts with ON quality but OLD OL and one that wasnt good.
Isn;t getting TWO young QUALITY OL better than getting one older one and a guy like Brown?
--
NOW we still NEED TWO OLINEMEN and on defense we need to build more of our front 7 especially with pass rushing. Without spending on Ogletree too your money available for THIS YEAR - you would have only needed ONE more QUALITY Olinemen instead of 2 (Its okay ot have 4 good OLinemen and work through the 5th Olinemen).

If we would have gotten TWO quality OL last year we'd only need one in free agency this year AND we'd be able to offer one high quality PASS RUSHER in FA for the DEFENSE. **NOW imagine if we get a quality pass rusher in FA along with the 6th pick you get a pass rusher and rd 2 you take the bets player available on defense either a FS or ILB etc and you've started to build your defense pretty well, haven't you?

I didn’t bring up the quarterback argument, I addressed the idea that the Giants not being better with Darnold as irrelevant, because it is.

Explaining a past position in response to another poster who brought up Darnold is a far cry from what you suggest, but whatever

In comment 14277174 GiantGrit said:

Quote:

In comment 14276998 joeinpa said: Quote: Some of you guys just can’t handle a dissenting point of view without getting irritated to the point you have to frame the dissenting poster to fit a narrative. If people are going to continuously whine about not taking a quarterback without seeing the logic on the other side, keep expecting people to get annoyed. It is completely reasonable for posters to be tired of this topic. I didn't want Saquon. I wanted Mayfield. It didn't happen. Time will tell how the move plays out. Discussing this topic ad nauseum does nothing.

To be honest I get frustrated with posters such as yourself who seem to think getting guys like Solder and Ogeltree was okay for a team in rebuild mode.

I mean do you understand what "rebuild means?" If you do, how can you justify so much for Ogeltree whom i was being nice by calling him average - he was graded as below average in 2017. And an older LT in Solder? Are you serious?

Or are you one that excuses DG for everything? Even though the team was expected to lose from those of us that understood of which our GM didnt - when will you ever hold this guy accountable for anything? We're supposed ot stink so he gets a pass on EVERYTHING? You know he was initially going after Norwell, right? SO this garbage "that we had to do something about LT" wasn't going to be a part of DG's plan more than likely, was it?"

Or the delusional ones like DG who thought we were going to win this year thus spent all this money causing for these two guys $28m cap hit for 2019 knowing very well SOlder is going to start ot decline in 2020 time frame. WHy not spend it on YOUTH when you are REBUIDLING?!!!

In comment 14276282 Go Terps said:

Quote:

You want me to list the RBs that didn't have to be drafted #2 overall to contribute to winning titles? It'll be a long list. I could start with the Giants themselves...Joe Morris, Ottis Anderson, Brandon Jacobs, and Ahmad Bradshaw all fit the bill.

How many Qbs didn't get drafted #2 overall to contribute to winning titles? Ever heard of Tom Brady? Joe Montana? Drew Brees? Brett Favre? Need we go on?

always seems to center on the idea that there were several franchise QB's we passed on:

Quote:

A franchise QB PaulN : 1/26/2019 4:32 pm : link : reply Is ALWAYS a smart pick. Best player available does not apply to franchise QV|B's. LOL!! It is hard to believe what you read here.

History may show that none of the QB's taken after Barkley are franchise guys.

In comment 14277643 DeepBlueJint said:

Quote:

In comment 14276282 Go Terps said: Quote: You want me to list the RBs that didn't have to be drafted #2 overall to contribute to winning titles? It'll be a long list. I could start with the Giants themselves...Joe Morris, Ottis Anderson, Brandon Jacobs, and Ahmad Bradshaw all fit the bill. How many Qbs didn't get drafted #2 overall to contribute to winning titles? Ever heard of Tom Brady? Joe Montana? Drew Brees? Brett Favre? Need we go on?

Great. Let's hope for one of them to fall in our lap. Happens all the time.

And even if we got that lucky it wouldn't matter because Eli has to be the quarterback until he's 50.

Uh...who specifically was an available decent young LT or LB?????

great argument. Totally agree that better younger guys would be better. We are in violent agreement.

Except without an alternative solution its pointless.

Critique is forever. But decisions have to happen in the time and choice realities at that time.

Id like a great young incredible QB as well. Who was available?

And we agree that young QBs were available.

But we need and would love a great young QB on a weak OL and weak running game and weak team...thats not quite so simple to assure without risk based on the choices from last years draft.

Or maybe we can afford to win more with a good QB and a stronger team.

Its easy to critique when we dismiss risk and forget to mention the choices available.


This is not a defense of DG. Far from it. This is a defense of reasonable expectations given the choices at the time.


We were badly fucked way before DG. BB and Lombardi and Walsh and Shula combined with Landry into one super GM/Coach could not make a franchise QB plus a OL plus a RB and a defense within one offseason. Could the Super Combo GM/Coach get back one year faster than DG is likely to? yes.


But most of those guys are dead so its not a choice we had

In comment 14277768 Bill2 said:

Quote:

Uh...who specifically was an available decent young LT or LB????? great argument. Totally agree that better younger guys would be better. We are in violent agreement. Except without an alternative solution its pointless. Critique is forever. But decisions have to happen in the time and choice realities at that time. Id like a great young incredible QB as well. Who was available?

Last year I felt Gmen shoudl have went with Chris Hubbard
at OT and Zach Fulton at OG. Then as sy had indicated I was on board wiht drafting BradenSMith out of AUburn in rd 2. Thus I owuld have bene ableot try two guys at LT in Hubbard and SMith. If theyy falied then what did I lose in a REBUILDINGYEAR? Both Hubbard or SMith can also play guard so I could slot one in for guard and one for RT - and yeah in a rebuidling year my LT would suck IF BOTH FAILED. But so what?

In 2019 go after a free agent Left Tackle -- I'd consider Darly Williams too. He;s a RT now But I read he can probably play LT. Or draft a LT. In 2019 Gmen aren;t going to win.

As for LB-- Bostic who is playing for Steelers now. A lot chepaer in 2019 and was cheaper in 2018.

Thank you. that is at least a concrete proposal.

How many draft picks in the first 4 rounds would that be. I counted 3 in 2 rounds?

how well did those three do this year?

Any a starter? a starting LT?

Are those 3 better than Barkley and Hernandez?

It's not such an easy set of choices that we can dismiss the option of a Solder in FA? Especially the non injured mid season to end of season player.

( personally, I think we badly need more developmental LT potential players out of our lower round picks this year)

Hubbard the Ex Steeler? The guy who was benched this year for being unable to play LT for the Browns ( despite a mobile QB)???

now I see how you got 3 ol with 2 draft slots
...one was a FA ( who got badly overpaid on a 5 year contract)

Now we all know PFF is not yet the most accurate metrics on OL performance but Fulton was ranked the 61 guard and below average in the NFL based on 2018 performance.

my point is not to debate a thoughtful alternative as you proposed but to point out that it ain't easy to turnaround a team and it isnt easy to pick correctly in the NFL.


what I dont think folks realize is that the 3 and 13 season of 2017 actually hid 3 games of a bouncing football masking the worst talent in the league in 2017. and on defense in 2018 that talent ranking was at the deep bottom. imo.

good talking to you

I think if we were a "truer" 0 and 16 in 2017 then folks would realize it was a 3 to 4 year climb back to win the NFL East. That's if we had no further first 2 round busts or injuries to existing difference .Akers. to me 2018 was year one and we have 2 to 3 years to go if we pick well in the draft.


IMO - in our situation, it's not the FA decisions; its the next 3 drafts

In comment 14276506 section125 said:

Quote:

In comment 14276497 Go Terps said: Quote: Well that leads to a different discussion about the quality of our coaching staff, which is terrible. But that doesn't make drafting a running back at 2 a good move over a blue chip QB. I went back in the archives earlier today and looked at the thread for the 2016 draft. After the Cowboys took Elliott at 4 there was a lot of "can't take a running back at 4". I guess that doesn't apply if the Giants do it, though. It was the convention at the time that RBs aren't drafted top 10. Then again without Elliott, do the Cowboys win the NFCE this year? I doubt it. Are they even contenders the last 3 years. I doubt it. And FWIW, I believe JonC said had the Browns taken Barkley at #1, the Giants would have taken Chubb. Sorry if I'm misremembering. I really think the Giants did not have those QBs rated in their top 3 picks. (Barkley, Chubb, Nelson) As for this year, I'm still not sure any QB is worth a top 10 pick. Perhaps a trade back (and I am loath to even mention that) is the right thing to do and pick one up later in the 1st. Or an ER and an OL.

You are correct, that's what I'd heard and it was later corroborated (or parroted) by the local beat writers. There was very few whispers at all about the QBs, other than Darnold was apparently the only one near the top on their board, which I heard really late in the scouting season.

comment here.

In comment 14277880 Bill2 said:

Quote:

Now we all know PFF is not yet the most accurate metrics on OL performance but Fulton was ranked the 61 guard and below average in the NFL based on 2018 performance. my point is not to debate a thoughtful alternative as you proposed but to point out that it ain't easy to turnaround a team and it isnt easy to pick correctly in the NFL. what I dont think folks realize is that the 3 and 13 season of 2017 actually hid 3 games of a bouncing football masking the worst talent in the league in 2017. and on defense in 2018 that talent ranking was at the deep bottom. imo. good talking to you

Fulton was ranked as the 17th best guard by PFF in 2017. You want to believe he is 61st so be it. He started 13 games for a playoff team with a 12-4 record. I've read PFF not having SBarkley in their top 2 or 3 players on teh Giants so I tend to think whether he is 17th or 61st PFF isn't much of a source. You want to use them to justify Fulton isn;t any good that's up to you. For me if he;s young - which he is-- and if he is talented- which he is - one year he gets his ass kicked playing for the Ginats is no problem. . That;s why I said take the young guy.

***But I think you are being way too harsh. Take a look at Houston's Oline from 2017 to 2018. That was a major overhaul from one year to the next. And we know sometimes it takes more than just that season for OLines to gel. They need cohesion. In fact that;s the reason why several people for example on here want the Gmen to get the Oline done 1st with time to gel. DO you disagree with them on that point?

Point 2 - you mentioned about hubbard being "benched?" He started all the games. SO where did you hear / read he was benched? Secondly I have an article here that states Hubbard was struggling mightily. After 9 games Browns had 35 sacks. When I look at the end of year sacks they only got 38. SO you can google "Chris Hubbard has been improving" and you can see article from 247sports.

SO yeah -- when it comes to Fulton and Hubbard still looks promising while long-term what are we going to get out of SOlder when team starts to peak as a contender? SO yeah it is easy. By the way, how long did Omameh last with DG? And how well was his assessment that the Gmen were a win-now team? I guess it;s pretty easy comparing whta i would have done vs DG when it comes to FA OL.

the posts were not insults or a challenge to your football IQ. the players were not the point of the posts. the difficulty of narrow choices and guessing right was the point. debatable choices. if you wish to be right then by all means be right. dont care. take care.