Here are a couple of points of note...
- He believes in building the team from the inside out, not outside in. Wants to build sustained success.
- Feels the team is headed in the right direction. Team didn't quit, that's the start of turning it around.
- Realizes he needs to fix the defense. Giants had the worst defense in the division, giving up 25.6 ppg.
- Feels they finally settled or calmed down the offensive line.
- Giants offense scored more points than the rest of the teams in there division. Last eight games averaged 27.4 ppg.
- If you draft a QB for need instead of value. You're going to make a mistake. You do not force the pick. You take the best player available.
- Eli can still make all the throws, but has to watch film and sit down and talk this over with pro personnel. Shurmur knows QB's, and is still behind Eli.
- Saquon is a special talent.
After watching this, here is a "possibility" of what they may do. I don't think there gonna give up on Eli. After all the progress they finally made in the last 8 games of the season, they're not gonna throw that away. They're gonna build on that, and bring him back.
In my opinion, none of the QB's in this draft are the best players available. When you select, you must draft into the "strength" of the draft, and not just based on need.
So what is the strength of this draft?
Here is a breakdown of the positions with a 1st round grade.
There are...
5 Defensive Ends
8 Defensive Tackles
3 Linebackers
3 Cornerbacks
1 Free Safety
4 Offensive Tackles
4 Quarterbacks
3 Wide Receivers
1 Tight End
- That means 20/32 positions in the first round, are defensive players.
- Out of the first 10 picks, 9 defensive players have a top ten grade on them. There isn't one RB with a 1st round grade. The strength of this draft is in the defense.
Since Gettleman believes in building from the inside out, and unless one of the 4 OT's stands out, I believe they go with a defensive player with the #6 pick in the draft.
Not sure exactly who, but either a DE-DT-or-LB. I believe one of those positions will be our pick.
Curious your thoughts?
And for the record, Josh Jacobs in a RB that will be a first rounder. His upside is magnificent.
For now build up the defense - sure. And further improve cap availability for 2020.
I just hope they don't go after a qb in rd 2 only because with the prior thoughts that the offense would be fine in 2018 along with drafting LaUlETTA and maybe his belief his current OL is pretty good -- if all true he would scare me yet again. thus i'd have little confidence they could make a good QB selection in rd 2.
with all this said -- patience would be an okay play for 2019. lose again and then get your QB.
There's plenty of worthy players for that 37 slot, depends who shakes out.
And for the record, Josh Jacobs in a RB that will be a first rounder. His upside is magnificent.
But you would never draft him there as you have stated unequivocally ad nauseam that SB was a bad pick and that you can get quality RB's in the 4th and 5th round...
It was definitely the case last season, and true when they passed on a quarterback. Of course this argument almost always discounts “Positional Value”.
I wonder, how many who used this philosophy believe Eli in 04 fit the restrictive label of, BPA?
Unlike last year I will not be strongly convicted that they made a mistake. But that will have been two years in a row where at 2 and then 6 they passed on the most important position in sports. At the very least unusual moves for a team who has gone 8-24 in it s last two season with a quarterback in his late 30’s
Looking at your chart I think they will go defense at 6 and it might be the correct move. But boy oh boy, when do they get their next quarterback?
In here is no plan to secure the franchise QB, or even inclination to recognize it as something that is important. Unless they get lucky and one happens to fall to them (which will never happen because the rest of the league values QBs, so they are always overdrafted), they are committed to settling at the position, to the whimms of the draft. This does not exactly instill confidence.
I’m in the trade down camp ... get as many high picks as you can because there are risks in everyone.
they rank players in 'rows' and then take a player from the highest row, depending on need
they may have 5 players ranked in the 1st row, 10 in the 2nd row...
so its always a blend of BPA and Need
I’m in the trade down camp ... get as many high picks as you can because there are risks in everyone.
From the outlined, it's doubtful they entertain trade down options, and DGs history (never having done it) supports this.
If the defenders I know Josh Allen would be a starting OLB from day 1. I think Rashan Gary and Ed Oliver could be starting 5 Tech DE from day 1. Quinen Williams would probably move to a 3 Tech and would move BJ Hill back to the 5. I think White would start next to Ogletree from day 1.
Here is the thing with the 3 QB’s: they are all very different from each other.
Haskins has a small sample of playing time but his play improved through out the season. Lock had a great 2017 but not a great 2018 mainly because of installation of a different offense. Both have great size and arm strength. Murray is unique in that he is small but has a very strong arm and can throw on the run. He is also fast and can extend plays with his feet. I am not sold on him as being worth the 6th pick and it admittedly has to do with his size.
The NFL is changing though and I can see Murray having success because of the RPO and read option offenses. It will be interesting to see if Arizona takes Murray.
I think QB is more likely in RD2 or a trade up into late RD1, if it makes sense (Jones, Grier).
One other thing, we need to come away from the draft with a center of the future as well. Good ones can be had in rounds 2-4.
And for the record, Josh Jacobs in a RB that will be a first rounder. His upside is magnificent.
Agreed. I'd be happy if the picks they got for trading down were mostly next year. They could then use those picks to move up to get a QB if necessary.
It was definitely the case last season, and true when they passed on a quarterback. Of course this argument almost always discounts “Positional Value”.
I wonder, how many who used this philosophy believe Eli in 04 fit the restrictive label of, BPA?
Unlike last year I will not be strongly convicted that they made a mistake. But that will have been two years in a row where at 2 and then 6 they passed on the most important position in sports. At the very least unusual moves for a team who has gone 8-24 in it s last two season with a quarterback in his late 30’s
Looking at your chart I think they will go defense at 6 and it might be the correct move. But boy oh boy, when do they get their next quarterback?
I don't think that you can argue that the Giants don't understand positional value. Especially not last year. The added positional value and that value still did not get them close to the intrinsic player value, so they made the decision that they made.
they rank players in 'rows' and then take a player from the highest row, depending on need
they may have 5 players ranked in the 1st row, 10 in the 2nd row...
so its always a blend of BPA and Need
Remember DG changed everything ...
^^^This!
There is no one absolute philosophy going into the draft. What if BPA was a RB? There is no possible way they are taking one at #6 after spending #2 on SB last year. Inside out is the same thing. If there is a cornerback that jumps off the board at you, you don't pass on him because he plays outside.
Players are ranked in rows. When the team is on the board they consider who is available at positions of need and whether they are worth that draft slot, or if they can get them later and look to trade down. If there is one or two guys left and several teams picking ahead of them, they will possibly look to trade up. More often than not they likely take the guy in the highest row who fits the position of greatest need.
Maybe if folks will stop trying to pigeon hole what the "philosophy" is they will not be shocked every draft day that they didn't take their guy.
Chubb is a great player, but he isn't getting 12 sacks on this defense. When you play on the otherside of Von Miller you are going to be facing single teams all day with no help. If you want to go that route Nelson is a better example. He is the only other player in Barkley's class as a player.
Quote:
Chubb had 12 sacks in his rookie year and would've fit a major need on the Giants.
Chubb is a great player, but he isn't getting 12 sacks on this defense. When you play on the otherside of Von Miller you are going to be facing single teams all day with no help. If you want to go that route Nelson is a better example. He is the only other player in Barkley's class as a player.
On the other hand, Chubb is in rarefied company with only Jevon Kearse, Dwight Freeny, and Simeon Rice having more sacks in their rookie seasons.
I mean, if Chubb benefited from being across Von Miller, couldn't we say the same about Osi playing across Strahan in his breakout season in 2005?
There's no Von Miller on the other side here. He'd likely not have been as productive.
I do think he's an excellent player but since people love to do this... Denver only won 1 more game in 2018 than they did the year before. So, how much impact did Chubb truly provide?
(I hate this logic, but it seems to be a BBI staple, so...)
Barkley also ran behind one of the worst offensive lines in football for at least half the season.
Quote:
In comment 14293175 Lambuth_Special said:
Quote:
Chubb had 12 sacks in his rookie year and would've fit a major need on the Giants.
Chubb is a great player, but he isn't getting 12 sacks on this defense. When you play on the otherside of Von Miller you are going to be facing single teams all day with no help. If you want to go that route Nelson is a better example. He is the only other player in Barkley's class as a player.
On the other hand, Chubb is in rarefied company with only Jevon Kearse, Dwight Freeny, and Simeon Rice having more sacks in their rookie seasons.
I mean, if Chubb benefited from being across Von Miller, couldn't we say the same about Osi playing across Strahan in his breakout season in 2005?
It's like Aldon Smith and Justin Smith, who was the only player ver I felt uncomfortable watching us play against.
Aldon Smith was a terror and definitely set all kinds of records (for number of DUIs).
This.
The #6 pick is NYG’s best opportunity to get the impact D player we badly need.
They STILL need 3 OLmen......
If DG can get that accomplished we move onto the next step.
Quote:
this is a superior draft with defense, particularly Dline. It’s so deep with quality defenders it’s an ideal draft to trade down.
And for the record, Josh Jacobs in a RB that will be a first rounder. His upside is magnificent.
But you would never draft him there as you have stated unequivocally ad nauseam that SB was a bad pick and that you can get quality RB's in the 4th and 5th round...
Correct, I wouldn't. That's a philosophical position.
But Jacobs is a first round talent - for sure.
Looks like round one quality DL will be there.
Likely order:
6- DL
37- DL
40?- Pass defending linebacker
Your looking for game changers on Amy team in 6 and 38...and 'we currently lack and need" at 40 or similar.
Looks like round one quality DL will be there.
Likely order:
6- DL
37- DL
40?- Pass defending linebacker
Your looking for game changers on Amy team in 6 and 38...and 'we currently lack and need" at 40 or similar.
I;ve said I'm okay with doing this provided they don't like theQB that much.
With that said, can we agree that until the OLine is fixed and they get a good Qb that Barkley and OBJ aren't much "game changers' vs the very good teams? Maybe an isolated game but you get the point I think-- right?
If they don't get a Qb this year -- which I'm fine with-- then in 2020 they get one but how good will he be? More than likely he won't be ready until 2021. Which means we would have wasted 3 years of Barkley and OBJ, right?