|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| There seems to be a very good chance that they'll take one with the sixth pick of the draft where quarterbacks like Ohio State's Dwayne Haskins, Missouri's Drew Lock, Duke's Daniel Jones and maybe even Oklahoma's Kyler Murray are possible options. Several others, like West Virginia's Will Grier, could be options on Day 2. The Giants could also use their second-round pick to trade back into the first round if one of those top-tier quarterbacks slips farther than they expect. So their options are open, but they do seem more serious about finding Manning's heir apparent than they were at this time last year. Manning, as SNY has been reporting, is expected to return as the starter for the 2019 season. But the Giants are hopeful that right behind him on the depth chart his eventual successor will be on board. |
Brees and Favre (off the top of my head), otherwise not a great track record for 2nd round QB's.
I still have major reservations about Murray, but I'm fine taking a shot on the talent and trying to hit a home run.
The one positive with Murray is he won't be a "QB Hell" type of guy.
We will know if he can swing it in the NFL pretty fast - he won't be a guy like Tannehill where you go back and forth constantly and can't figure out if the risk is greater in keeping him and spending money on him or letting him walk and potentially getting saddled with something worse.
That said - I still want Haskins, think he is the top guy in this class, and if NYG like him, I want them to be aggressive and go get him.
Yep, that's why I posted it. He was fairly spot on last year about intentions and hit on a bunch of their picks in previous years too.
It’s what they do, but there seems to be more of a consensus this year as opposed to last year that the giants are going qb or at least want to go qb relatively early in this draft.
We don't know that yet. I need more than a lukewarm report from Vacchiano.
If they really like Haskins or Murray and take one of them @ 6 or even move up for Haskins, I don't think that's forcing anything.
It's only forcing it if they don't actually like these guys much but take them anyway. I don't think Gettleman is going to take a QB if he's wishy-washy on him.
I still have major reservations about Murray, but I'm fine taking a shot on the talent and trying to hit a home run.
The one positive with Murray is he won't be a "QB Hell" type of guy.
We will know if he can swing it in the NFL pretty fast - he won't be a guy like Tannehill where you go back and forth constantly and can't figure out if the risk is greater in keeping him and spending money on him or letting him walk and potentially getting saddled with something worse.
That said - I still want Haskins, think he is the top guy in this class, and if NYG like him, I want them to be aggressive and go get him.
That’s exactly why I kind of want Murray, assuming he checks off the boxes after the combine, which to be fair is not a lock. I just think Murray isn’t going to need too much time here. We’re going to reap the rewards early or learn rather quickly whether he’s a pro qb.
I know it’s a pocket passer game in the playoffs. I still think Murray is worth investigating.
Now - you draft top 5, you pick a guy - and if he doesn't work out you're back in the same place 3 years later and you can try again.
Not saying it's ideal - but is it 'hell'? Punitive enough to make you completely overlook the possibility unless there's some sure fire candidate to select?
We still have one of the most amazing offensive talents in the game today. Let’s not forget that impact here. We have a piece.
The qbs last year were overrated. I’ll say that until the end of time, with maybe mayfield being the exception and we couldn’t pick him.
Last year’s class is akin to guys like Goff or trubisky or RG3. Talents to be sure. Guys you can win with to be sure. And guys you can lose with too. Sounds like someone else we know and love, just older.
You'd think that the narrative would be the one time he had to take a QB high he hit. Instead it is that he hasn't had to take a QB high since eli, so he'll shit the bed.
Just another made-up criticism that may not even fucking apply this year. So we should have drafted a QB last year because the choices are worst this year? Awesome way to go about the draft.
Well there isn’t one on it to be taken off
Now - you draft top 5, you pick a guy - and if he doesn't work out you're back in the same place 3 years later and you can try again.
Not saying it's ideal - but is it 'hell'? Punitive enough to make you completely overlook the possibility unless there's some sure fire candidate to select?
Liie most on here, you are not using Gettleman's definition of QB hell.
Quote:
Forcing a QB pick in a weak QB class, and the only experience Gettleman has had in his entire career taking a QB this high is when we got Eli.
You'd think that the narrative would be the one time he had to take a QB high he hit. Instead it is that he hasn't had to take a QB high since eli, so he'll shit the bed.
Just another made-up criticism that may not even fucking apply this year. So we should have drafted a QB last year because the choices are worst this year? Awesome way to go about the draft.
No, but I would say Goterps caution is correct, one would hope DG does not feel compelled to draft a qb high because he "must."
I think the answer lies in the middle. Good qb, but not the panacea that so many fans attach to the “young franchise qb” entity.
And the QBs last year aren’t even in Goff’s class yet. My god you guys overstate the value of a young so called franchise qb. And this coming from someone who wanted the giants to move heaven and earth to draft Eli.
The depth or strength of the "class" doesn't matter. What matters is if the guy you take is better than the guy you could've taken the previous year. If Haskins turns out to be as good or better than Rosen, Darnold, Allen and the rest of the QB's this year are out of the league in 5 years or backups then the 2018 class was better but it is totally meaningless to the team that takes Haskins. Ditto for Lock, Murray or Jones if that ends up being that guy.
2018 class consisted of quantity. Not one qb other than maybe mayfield was concsidered csnt miss. Not one was even close to the level of an Andre luck or even an Eli Manning 2004. There were lots of guys. Woopee. In this year’s class there are less guys. Doesn’t mean we can’t get the same caliber of talent. I still say Haskins is every bit the prospect rosen and darnold were and the draft will show this to be true because he’s going top ten barring a last second bong video.
Quote:
off the table! Just sayin
Well there isn’t one on it to be taken off
So, you are Dave G's Counsel I guess...
His definition is paying a QB a lot and having a team competitive enough that they aren't in position in the draft to take one high while not being good enough to win a championship.
Fair point, and it remains to be seen if it was the right decision in the long term. You could argue the gap in talent of Saquon vs. any RB in the near future and he's a generational talent that you don't pass. And if they land Haskins (for argument sake). Haskins is probably just as good a prospect as Darnold, Rosen, and Allen. So I'll reserve judgement on the QB hell argument until we see what happens this year.
Quote:
but he's had a pretty good track record as far as the draft is concerned IIRC.
Yep, that's why I posted it. He was fairly spot on last year about intentions and hit on a bunch of their picks in previous years too.
Agreed. RV has a pretty good track record with picks. I'm on record as not wanting any QB at #6, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if the Giants took a QB with that pick. I'd much rather trade the #6 pick for Rosen, but would probably prefer not to do that either.
Your like a broken record. You were wrong last year, Giants drafted the best player in the draft. In fact, in case you missed it he won rookie of the year. They thought they did a better job with the OL they didn't. This year that will be addressed better Eli will be the QB and this team will be better. If by some miracle this team wins it all next year you will be the 1st to say yeah, we won but we could have set ourselves up better for the future if we had drafted Darnold or Rosen. Barkley was the right choice and he proved it, get over it.
But we sat out a draft on the level of 83 or 04? That is based on absolutely nothing so far.
Meanwhile if our guy strings together a bunch of seasons like his Rollie year all he’ll do is go to the HOF.
The Vikes, Skins, Broncos, Lions, whoever is dumb enough to trade for Foles, etc.
Why was last year the year to take a QB high, and this year is "forcing" it? Do you see how your own personal biases are merging into things you present as facts?
Maybe Gettleman and Shurmur view Haskins or one of the other QBs as being on par with Darnold or Rosen? There is this narrative forming that last year's QB class was can't miss, but that hardly seems the case. The only one who has separated himself so far is Mayfield, and he was off the board before the Giants picked.
If the Giants don't like one of the QBs I think there is little chance they "force" the pick anyway. That is a fan's view of the game, not a professional's.
I disagree, and since your opinion is different than mine that means you are an idiot :)
Quote:
Now is when we feel the impact of last year's draft decision. Forcing a QB pick in a weak QB class, and the only experience Gettleman has had in his entire career taking a QB this high is when we got Eli.
Fair point, and it remains to be seen if it was the right decision in the long term. You could argue the gap in talent of Saquon vs. any RB in the near future and he's a generational talent that you don't pass. And if they land Haskins (for argument sake). Haskins is probably just as good a prospect as Darnold, Rosen, and Allen. So I'll reserve judgement on the QB hell argument until we see what happens this year.
My big disagreement there would be with Haskins being as good a prospect as those three guys. I don't see it, and I think he's a reach at 6.
Yeah we're not likely to come across another Barkley any time soon, but you don't have to have a Barkley to have a good offense...and as we saw in 2018 your offense can still stink with him on it.
People bring up QB hell; that's where we are right now. We're vastly overpaying at the position and we seem hesitant to make the change needed...keeping Eli on the roster is a ridiculous decision.
But we sat out a draft on the level of 83 or 04? That is based on absolutely nothing so far.
Meanwhile if our guy strings together a bunch of seasons like his Rollie year all he’ll do is go to the HOF.
Don't make this a dishonest ripjob on BBI. The QBs last year were universally well-rated and expected to go high. And judging them based on one year is dumb.
...is quite serious.
If they like a particular QB at #6 they better snatch him.
And if they think this QB could go two or three slots higher, they better trade up.
Of course, the Giants are one of the last teams in the NFL that can afford to give up premium picks, but there's always an exception to that rule:
When a team has no long term answer at QB.
You cannot force a player to be that guy if he doesn't have that in him. But you had better believe there is a sense of urgency here that was not there a year ago.
+1,000,000,000,000,000
Seems to me if they were interested in drafting a QB at six, it makes no sense to let anyone know.
Allen literally did nothing better than Haskins did throwing the football. His numbers were worse, his competition was worse, his completion % was about 20% lower.
Josh Allen is a big arm, measurables guy - and the best thing he did as a rookie was run the ball. He generally sucked throwing it.
I can buy Mayfield, Darnold or even Rosen... even though I'm not sure I even agree that Darnold or Rosen were better prospects, but it would at least be a reasonable stance.
Quote:
.
His definition is paying a QB a lot and having a team competitive enough that they aren't in position in the draft to take one high while not being good enough to win a championship.
That's a pretty shitty definition - it basically implies that any team that's not good enough to win a championship is in QB hell. According to that, we've been in QB hell since 2012.
Championships are great, and the ultimate goal - but only one team per year gets one. Most teams go decades between wins, and some haven't won at all. The objective should be to be in position to compete for a championship every year, and the easiest metric is entry to the playoffs.
/thread because this is absolutely 100% true.