who doesn't consider all factors while evaluating a trade?
Oh you know, this would be fair value if the player was healthy for the last 3 years but he's actually dead. I'm going to vote yes, it was fair value because I don't understand how polls, questions or word meanings work. Or value, what does value mean?
OBJ likely pulls an AB stunt and we are in the same boat the Steelers were in. And we end up with two mid draft picks. Leaving us in a worse situation than now, also eating more dead money.
Essentially received 2 first round picks (Peppers) and the 17th pick this year plus a 3rd round pick which will net us another top 100 player. I love OBJ talent as much as anyone, but we never won a thing with him and he clearly never embraced being a NYG like others have. Also seeing what Pittsburgh went thru with AB (and you can make a case that AB is the better player) and they only received 3rd and 5th round picks, I'd say we did just fine. I give DG a B grade on this trade (so far) and depending how he uses the draft capital, it could ultimately be an A.
I have been knocking Gettleman as loud as anyone, Â
but he is only partly to blame for the shitshow that was Beckham's career with NYG. The trade value itself, now in 2018, was fine. This is a player that, since the playoff game in Green Bay, has only played in 16 total games and has totaled 1400 yards receiving and 9 TDs.
If the Giants traded a #1, a #3, and a starting safety on a rookie deal for a guy with that production at $20M a year, this place would go apeshit.
The Giants made two fundamental mistakes, one of which Gettleman takes blame for and the other he doesn't:
1. They should have traded Beckham after the 2016 season. He had a big year that year but his immature act should have been clear to the front office by that point. You didn't have to be clairvoyant to guess that he'd only get more difficult to deal with once he got paid. They should have anticipated that and dealt him while the market was, at that point, very high. It would have been unpopular, but as we've seen the last couple days a lot of fans don't know what they're talking about. Gettleman wasn't around for that so he can't be blamed.
2. Paying Beckham last year was incredibly stupid, and that was on Gettleman's watch. If there was even the slightest notion that Beckham could be on thin ice then paying him made no sense. With that kind of contract a guy is either a long term pillar in the foundation of the team or he is not. There is no in between.
Those are the two major mistakes that led to the perception that the Giants got ripped off. They didn't get ripped off - they just held on to a depreciating asset for too long and, due to well documented front office shortcomings, not only failed to act at the right time but doubled down the error with the huge contract.
They should have gotten more for Beckham, but it should have happened years ago. As things stand, what we got in trade yesterday was better than keeping him, his contract, and his personality on the team.
don't you also thing that the way the Giants front office handled this whole thing also hurt the return?
I think that's the point that isn't addressed as much. When your owner attacks a guy publicly it makes it a little harder to at least feign that you are walking away from the table and willing to keep someone.
Don't think leaks about the team suspecting he sat out the games intentionally help much either.
I don't think you get a pass for failing to understand negotiating leverage when you get a sub par return.
I agree on your #2 although in some sense I think the situation was overcome by events. You had superstar NBA players start conspiring with each other to join up and there was no reason to think that this practice wasn't going to bleed over into football. After all, a lot of these guys travel in the same circles and know each other. Add to it AB's and Bell's examples, where they essentially forced Pittsburgh to unload them and then cashed in.
To a great player on a bad team, those examples would be hard to resist. I expect you will see more of it in the NFL.
we weren’t duped into trading him. It sounds like we didn’t have a choice and still got a solid haul. So unless you think Odell wanted to be here, and he and the Giants would have gotten along swimmingly, what exactly is the complaint?
I was a big supporter of Beckham, but he clearly wanted to leave. What else can you do?
RE: The Gettleman justification shuffle strikes again! Â
who doesn't consider all factors while evaluating a trade?
Oh you know, this would be fair value if the player was healthy for the last 3 years but he's actually dead. I'm going to vote yes, it was fair value because I don't understand how polls, questions or word meanings work. Or value, what does value mean?
Why are you so triggered some people disagree with you?
it's just tiring to see people make excuses with flimsy logic like people not taking into account factors when they evaluate things. The trade was universally panned by writers whose very job it is to weigh a wide array of factors.
What kind of comment is it to generalize that people aren't weighing items because they disagree with your view?
That view is annoying to me, it's annoying to me when people speak based on assumptions not rooted in logic.
got as much as they could for the bastard at this time.
The Giants received basically 2 1st round picks, a 3rd and a 5 to 4 reversal. Jabril Peppers was a first round pick and everyone knows the Giants desperately needed a very good center fielder on the cheap.
NGD - We're talking about a player that hasn't been an elite producer in over 2 years now. In 2018 he was 34th in the NFL in yards/catch (13.7), and 138th in the NFL in catch percentage (62.1%). He needed 124 targets to get to 1052 yards and 6 TDs. Is that worth $20+M?
Homer - it isn't hindsight because I was actually saying it then too. All anyone had to do was remove the blue glasses and the #13 throwback jerseys and they'd see things for what they were.
it's just tiring to see people make excuses with flimsy logic like people not taking into account factors when they evaluate things. The trade was universally panned by writers whose very job it is to weigh a wide array of factors.
What kind of comment is it to generalize that people aren't weighing items because they disagree with your view?
That view is annoying to me, it's annoying to me when people speak based on assumptions not rooted in logic.
Why is it not logical to wait and see how this plays out? What if he stays injured the rest of his career? What if we draft a stud at 17? What if Peppers ends up being unbelievable?
Maybe he stays healthy and dominates? Maybe we mess up the pick?
I don't get speaking in absolutes. We won't know the real impact of this trade for a bit of time.
it's just tiring to see people make excuses with flimsy logic like people not taking into account factors when they evaluate things. The trade was universally panned by writers whose very job it is to weigh a wide array of factors.
What kind of comment is it to generalize that people aren't weighing items because they disagree with your view?
That view is annoying to me, it's annoying to me when people speak based on assumptions not rooted in logic.
It’s because they are grading this based on solely the player and the compensation. If that’s all you care about then just say it. There were clearly other factors involved in making this deal, which is why we didn’t get top dollar.
So flame away if you want, but this isn’t a straight and simple scenario.
Given what some of these receivers get in the open market Â
Something like an extra 2 or 3 this year or dropping the 3 this year and adding a 1 next year.
I don't think the media is overrating him when they pan this trade. I think they know exactly what he is.
He is one of the more talented players athletically to come into this league in a while. I do think you can account for some of that lack of production being due to a bad oline and the Giants being a dumpster fire of leadership and stability.
I also don't think you can discount the report that they had a better offer in the NFC that they didn't want to take for emotional reasons. Also, with the window we need to compete a pick next year is way more valuable then Peppers. The Peppers thing doesn't even make much sense really as they are the ones that are trying to win now and it's possible we could have gotten more theoretical value long term for that reason.
it's just tiring to see people make excuses with flimsy logic like people not taking into account factors when they evaluate things. The trade was universally panned by writers whose very job it is to weigh a wide array of factors.
What kind of comment is it to generalize that people aren't weighing items because they disagree with your view?
That view is annoying to me, it's annoying to me when people speak based on assumptions not rooted in logic.
It’s because they are grading this based on solely the player and the compensation. If that’s all you care about then just say it. There were clearly other factors involved in making this deal, which is why we didn’t get top dollar.
So flame away if you want, but this isn’t a straight and simple scenario.
Writers aren't robots, they know these factors, they know the teams, that is their job. This isn't a point. They know it isn't simple.
I listened to several people on the radio that specifically describe the scenario and went I to detail about why the Giants should consider themselves lucky they got what they got.
So yeah, I don’t buy what you are selling. You want so badly for DG to be wrong at every point that you can’t get out of your own way.
this is an article where 9 different writers pan this trade.
Do you have anything like that to support your point?
I don't have an ax to grind with Gettleman. I think there is plenty of evidence he is doing a bad job and isn't willing to expand his processes to try to improve. This is from what he is doing. Not once have I come onto a thread without evidence or without new information that people seem to be ignoring about why he is doing a bad job. Writers Grade the Trade - ( New Window )
not a single ounce of critical thinking in any of those blurbs which is funny considering how much you harp on just that, or the lack there of.
“I though the giants would get more” is what they said, awesome fucking “analysis”, haha. I was prepared for the linked article to tell me something I didn’t know, I was wrong.
Typical ESPN trash, thanks for posting it!
RE: No it's you who is fitting this to your pro Gettleman narrative Â
this is an article where 9 different writers pan this trade.
Do you have anything like that to support your point?
I don't have an ax to grind with Gettleman. I think there is plenty of evidence he is doing a bad job and isn't willing to expand his processes to try to improve. This is from what he is doing. Not once have I come onto a thread without evidence or without new information that people seem to be ignoring about why he is doing a bad job. Writers Grade the Trade - ( New Window )
You have to remember that writers and fans do not know yet how that 1st and 3rd rounders will pan out. If they suck, well then it was a bad trade. If they land good talent the trade will obviously look better. I think many fans and writers just look at this as an amazing Beckham for a safety and a couple of draft picks trade.
I am convinced that the team needed to move on from Beckham due to some thing(s) that happened after he got his new contract.
I don't think any other GM given the same circumstances could do much better.
They got far more than Brown or Cooper fetched. It's arguable whether the Giants got more than the Mack trade. Would you rather two firsts or a first, Peppers, and a third? I think it's comparable.
Odell did not want to be a Giant anymore based on his actions. I am in the camp that thought Odell could have played in a couple of the final games last year. I still have vivid memory of him walking off the field before halftime.
Let’s see what we get with the 17th pick.
Oh you know, this would be fair value if the player was healthy for the last 3 years but he's actually dead. I'm going to vote yes, it was fair value because I don't understand how polls, questions or word meanings work. Or value, what does value mean?
More yes than I would have thought.
Quote:
.
More yes than I would have thought.
Yep
Coincidence. I haven't changed it in a year. I need to change it soon.
If the Giants traded a #1, a #3, and a starting safety on a rookie deal for a guy with that production at $20M a year, this place would go apeshit.
The Giants made two fundamental mistakes, one of which Gettleman takes blame for and the other he doesn't:
1. They should have traded Beckham after the 2016 season. He had a big year that year but his immature act should have been clear to the front office by that point. You didn't have to be clairvoyant to guess that he'd only get more difficult to deal with once he got paid. They should have anticipated that and dealt him while the market was, at that point, very high. It would have been unpopular, but as we've seen the last couple days a lot of fans don't know what they're talking about. Gettleman wasn't around for that so he can't be blamed.
2. Paying Beckham last year was incredibly stupid, and that was on Gettleman's watch. If there was even the slightest notion that Beckham could be on thin ice then paying him made no sense. With that kind of contract a guy is either a long term pillar in the foundation of the team or he is not. There is no in between.
Those are the two major mistakes that led to the perception that the Giants got ripped off. They didn't get ripped off - they just held on to a depreciating asset for too long and, due to well documented front office shortcomings, not only failed to act at the right time but doubled down the error with the huge contract.
They should have gotten more for Beckham, but it should have happened years ago. As things stand, what we got in trade yesterday was better than keeping him, his contract, and his personality on the team.
I think that's the point that isn't addressed as much. When your owner attacks a guy publicly it makes it a little harder to at least feign that you are walking away from the table and willing to keep someone.
Don't think leaks about the team suspecting he sat out the games intentionally help much either.
I don't think you get a pass for failing to understand negotiating leverage when you get a sub par return.
meh, no it probably will not show he was fleeced.
I agree on your #2 although in some sense I think the situation was overcome by events. You had superstar NBA players start conspiring with each other to join up and there was no reason to think that this practice wasn't going to bleed over into football. After all, a lot of these guys travel in the same circles and know each other. Add to it AB's and Bell's examples, where they essentially forced Pittsburgh to unload them and then cashed in.
To a great player on a bad team, those examples would be hard to resist. I expect you will see more of it in the NFL.
I was a big supporter of Beckham, but he clearly wanted to leave. What else can you do?
Oh you know, this would be fair value if the player was healthy for the last 3 years but he's actually dead. I'm going to vote yes, it was fair value because I don't understand how polls, questions or word meanings work. Or value, what does value mean?
Why are you so triggered some people disagree with you?
What kind of comment is it to generalize that people aren't weighing items because they disagree with your view?
That view is annoying to me, it's annoying to me when people speak based on assumptions not rooted in logic.
The Giants received basically 2 1st round picks, a 3rd and a 5 to 4 reversal. Jabril Peppers was a first round pick and everyone knows the Giants desperately needed a very good center fielder on the cheap.
Homer - it isn't hindsight because I was actually saying it then too. All anyone had to do was remove the blue glasses and the #13 throwback jerseys and they'd see things for what they were.
What kind of comment is it to generalize that people aren't weighing items because they disagree with your view?
That view is annoying to me, it's annoying to me when people speak based on assumptions not rooted in logic.
Why is it not logical to wait and see how this plays out? What if he stays injured the rest of his career? What if we draft a stud at 17? What if Peppers ends up being unbelievable?
Maybe he stays healthy and dominates? Maybe we mess up the pick?
I don't get speaking in absolutes. We won't know the real impact of this trade for a bit of time.
Why would he not take all of that guaranteed money after coming off a broken ankle?
What kind of comment is it to generalize that people aren't weighing items because they disagree with your view?
That view is annoying to me, it's annoying to me when people speak based on assumptions not rooted in logic.
It’s because they are grading this based on solely the player and the compensation. If that’s all you care about then just say it. There were clearly other factors involved in making this deal, which is why we didn’t get top dollar.
So flame away if you want, but this isn’t a straight and simple scenario.
And i'm not saying exactly that it's way off.
Something like an extra 2 or 3 this year or dropping the 3 this year and adding a 1 next year.
I don't think the media is overrating him when they pan this trade. I think they know exactly what he is.
He is one of the more talented players athletically to come into this league in a while. I do think you can account for some of that lack of production being due to a bad oline and the Giants being a dumpster fire of leadership and stability.
I also don't think you can discount the report that they had a better offer in the NFC that they didn't want to take for emotional reasons. Also, with the window we need to compete a pick next year is way more valuable then Peppers. The Peppers thing doesn't even make much sense really as they are the ones that are trying to win now and it's possible we could have gotten more theoretical value long term for that reason.
Quote:
it's just tiring to see people make excuses with flimsy logic like people not taking into account factors when they evaluate things. The trade was universally panned by writers whose very job it is to weigh a wide array of factors.
What kind of comment is it to generalize that people aren't weighing items because they disagree with your view?
That view is annoying to me, it's annoying to me when people speak based on assumptions not rooted in logic.
It’s because they are grading this based on solely the player and the compensation. If that’s all you care about then just say it. There were clearly other factors involved in making this deal, which is why we didn’t get top dollar.
So flame away if you want, but this isn’t a straight and simple scenario.
Writers aren't robots, they know these factors, they know the teams, that is their job. This isn't a point. They know it isn't simple.
So yeah, I don’t buy what you are selling. You want so badly for DG to be wrong at every point that you can’t get out of your own way.
Do you have anything like that to support your point?
I don't have an ax to grind with Gettleman. I think there is plenty of evidence he is doing a bad job and isn't willing to expand his processes to try to improve. This is from what he is doing. Not once have I come onto a thread without evidence or without new information that people seem to be ignoring about why he is doing a bad job.
Writers Grade the Trade - ( New Window )
“I though the giants would get more” is what they said, awesome fucking “analysis”, haha. I was prepared for the linked article to tell me something I didn’t know, I was wrong.
Typical ESPN trash, thanks for posting it!
Do you have anything like that to support your point?
I don't have an ax to grind with Gettleman. I think there is plenty of evidence he is doing a bad job and isn't willing to expand his processes to try to improve. This is from what he is doing. Not once have I come onto a thread without evidence or without new information that people seem to be ignoring about why he is doing a bad job. Writers Grade the Trade - ( New Window )
You have to remember that writers and fans do not know yet how that 1st and 3rd rounders will pan out. If they suck, well then it was a bad trade. If they land good talent the trade will obviously look better. I think many fans and writers just look at this as an amazing Beckham for a safety and a couple of draft picks trade.
I am convinced that the team needed to move on from Beckham due to some thing(s) that happened after he got his new contract.
I don't think any other GM given the same circumstances could do much better.
Like this???
Let’s see what we get with the 17th pick.
Based on his physical gifts and production alone - I would say no.