Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

NYG #1 draft capital: expect a couple trade ups

Pan-handler : 3/25/2019 4:21 pm
DG has never moved down but has moved up a few times for guys that were obvious BPA at a particular position dwindling down a few spots ahead of us.

Like when we moved up for Collins, I could see us move up from 37 for a guy like Cody Ford or a really highly ranked corner or ER left on our board. Could we do it at 6 or 17? Obviously, the price is exponentially higher that high up, so its possible with all our capital but much more likely round 2 and later.

Also in the middle rounds this could happen as well. This draft is super deep in intriguing high upside prospects and Gettleman seems to have guys he targets here and there and is willingly to move up for.
Anything is possible, for sure  
SGMen : 3/25/2019 4:24 pm : link
I'm not a fan of drafting up as I believe both Murray and Haskins will be take #1 to #4 range, leaving us with a shot at a blue-chip defensive player at #6 still. There are always surprises, and a trade down may be more likely IF we can fleece a team.
I highly doubt we make 12 picks  
UConn4523 : 3/25/2019 4:28 pm : link
i'm guessing 9 or 10. No idea when the trade ups will occur, but it be shocked if there aren't any.
I  
AcidTest : 3/25/2019 4:32 pm : link
also don't think we'll use all 12 picks, but I'd be surprised if we traded up in the first or second rounds. The cost would just be too high, and we have a ton of holes. Small trade ups late into day two and on day three are more likely.
Why can't we call them  
section125 : 3/25/2019 4:35 pm : link
draft picks anymore? Who came up with draft capital? Does it sound cooler to say capital instead of pick?

I would expect DG to try to move up in the third round from 95 to midway or get another 4th rounder.
I wish they'd trade down  
Go Terps : 3/25/2019 4:36 pm : link
Add a pick or two next year, as well. Of course you've got to find willing partners...
Last year  
Giantimistic : 3/25/2019 4:38 pm : link
If I am remembering correctly they thought about or tried to trade up for Carter but ended up getting him anyway.
I love how every year people say  
Dave on the UWS : 3/25/2019 4:42 pm : link
ďTrade downĒ like itís real easy. Hereís a point. At Six if Haskins is there, maybe a team wants to trade up for him? Well if heís good enough to trade up for then maybe WE should take him.
Drafting Haskins (or any other QB) at #6 would be foolish  
Go Terps : 3/25/2019 4:48 pm : link
I don't expect the Giants to be foolish.
RE: I love how every year people say  
UberAlias : 3/25/2019 4:48 pm : link
In comment 14356486 Dave on the UWS said:
Quote:
ďTrade downĒ like itís real easy. Hereís a point. At Six if Haskins is there, maybe a team wants to trade up for him? Well if heís good enough to trade up for then maybe WE should take him.
Teams looking to trade up for a QB are not going to contact NYG about it. We'd be one of the teams they would be looking to move ahead of.
RE: Why can't we call them  
Gatorade Dunk : 3/25/2019 4:51 pm : link
In comment 14356473 section125 said:
Quote:
draft picks anymore? Who came up with draft capital? Does it sound cooler to say capital instead of pick?

Doesn't "picks" really just tell you the aggregate number of selections each team has, whereas "capital" (whether or not you like the actual term) includes the total relative value of those selections, including which round, slot within the round, etc.?

I'm not defending the term itself, but simply referring to the number of picks does seem overly simplistic if you're trying to determine a team's ability to manipulate the draft in their favor.
RE: Drafting Haskins (or any other QB) at #6 would be foolish  
giantstock : 3/25/2019 5:08 pm : link
In comment 14356497 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I don't expect the Giants to be foolish.


You've got to be kidding, right? YOU of all people "dont expect GMEN to be foolish?" Just stop it.
RE: RE: Drafting Haskins (or any other QB) at #6 would be foolish  
Go Terps : 3/25/2019 5:09 pm : link
In comment 14356525 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 14356497 Go Terps said:


Quote:


I don't expect the Giants to be foolish.



You've got to be kidding, right? YOU of all people "dont expect GMEN to be foolish?" Just stop it.


They're having a great offseason. I'm trying to be optimistic that they finally have their shit together.
I think they'd have to trade up for Haskins. Not sure they'll  
yatqb : 3/25/2019 5:14 pm : link
do that, but I believe he's their top choice for 6.
Edit  
Go Terps : 3/25/2019 5:16 pm : link
I should have said, "They're having a good offseason". The decision to go forward with Eli at his cost is still mystifying.

But they've done well to trade Beckham and Vernon, as well as staying out of the expensive FA market.
I Think You Could Almost Bet On It  
pa_giant_fan : 3/25/2019 5:16 pm : link
I don't think 6 or 17 unless someone blows them away, 37 probably, but more likely 95 with a 4th and 5th, to move up to the top of the 3rd is more likely
RE: RE: Why can't we call them  
adamg : 3/25/2019 5:17 pm : link
In comment 14356502 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 14356473 section125 said:


Quote:


draft picks anymore? Who came up with draft capital? Does it sound cooler to say capital instead of pick?


Doesn't "picks" really just tell you the aggregate number of selections each team has, whereas "capital" (whether or not you like the actual term) includes the total relative value of those selections, including which round, slot within the round, etc.?

I'm not defending the term itself, but simply referring to the number of picks does seem overly simplistic if you're trying to determine a team's ability to manipulate the draft in their favor.


That's the first valid explanation for the use of draft capital I've seen. That makes sense actually.
Trading up to go #5 or higher...  
bw in dc : 3/25/2019 5:23 pm : link
for Haskins or Murray is GM malfeasance.

Staying at #6 to take a QB is not as bad, but it's still bad.

The best play is to trade out of #6 or #17.

The next best play is to use use those slots to take any of the two excellent defenders that will be available at those slots.
RE: Edit  
Klaatu : 3/25/2019 5:27 pm : link
In comment 14356534 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I should have said, "They're having a good offseason". The decision to go forward with Eli at his cost is still mystifying.

But they've done well to trade Beckham and Vernon, as well as staying out of the expensive FA market.


Ummm...what about the Tate signing?

Oh, and I've missed you, Game of Terps.
Prediction  
Professor Falken : 3/25/2019 5:29 pm : link
We package our late third rounder with one of our fourth rounders to move up in the third to draft Wisconsin OL Michael Deiter.
RE: Trading up to go #5 or higher...  
Giants38 : 3/25/2019 5:35 pm : link
In comment 14356542 bw in dc said:
Quote:
for Haskins or Murray is GM malfeasance.

Staying at #6 to take a QB is not as bad, but it's still bad.

The best play is to trade out of #6 or #17.

The next best play is to use use those slots to take any of the two excellent defenders that will be available at those slots.


Thatís ridiculous. Either you believe the QB is worth it, or you donít. Pretty simple. You donít think they are, so you hate it. But if you think youíre getting a franchise QB, you do what it takes.
RE: Prediction  
uther99 : 3/25/2019 5:37 pm : link
In comment 14356551 Professor Falken said:
Quote:
We package our late third rounder with one of our fourth rounders to move up in the third to draft Wisconsin OL Michael Deiter.


Makes sense, any trading up will be in later rounds is my guess
I think your right.  
RAIN : 3/25/2019 5:39 pm : link
Ideally, I'd trade up to get our guy or guys in the first.

I hope Q. Williams falls to us. He is a wrecker of double teams and would fit at end or inside on passing downs. Allen is another guy we should have our eyes on with our need for rush.

We do not have a defensive identity. We need a feature here. Hopefully this person falls to us, if they don't I hope we get them. I'm not sold on Sweat or White (after hearing him refer to himself in the third person) to be that guy.

Klaatu  
Go Terps : 3/25/2019 5:42 pm : link
I think you're in a small group there.

I'm not bothered by the Tate contract. It's really just a two year deal and the cap hit is only really higher than his worth in year two.
RE: Klaatu  
Klaatu : 3/25/2019 5:58 pm : link
In comment 14356564 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I think you're in a small group there.


We haven't agreed on much since the Shockey trade, but we've had some real good debates. It's always been fun.
RE: I think your right.  
Pan-handler : 3/25/2019 6:15 pm : link
In comment 14356560 RAIN said:
Quote:
Ideally, I'd trade up to get our guy or guys in the first.

I hope Q. Williams falls to us. He is a wrecker of double teams and would fit at end or inside on passing downs. Allen is another guy we should have our eyes on with our need for rush.

We do not have a defensive identity. We need a feature here. Hopefully this person falls to us, if they don't I hope we get them. I'm not sold on Sweat or White (after hearing him refer to himself in the third person) to be that guy.


Q.Will would be very hard to pass up. Best player in the draft 2 years in a row? Wow.

If we move up to 4, he might be there for us. Though I think Niners go Q.Will.
RE: Prediction  
Pan-handler : 3/25/2019 6:17 pm : link
In comment 14356551 Professor Falken said:
Quote:
We package our late third rounder with one of our fourth rounders to move up in the third to draft Wisconsin OL Michael Deiter.


Could be. Im sure Gettleman has a few Hog Mollies who have caught his attention. Cody Ford , Tytus Howard and Dieter seem to be 3 of them.
RE: Anything is possible, for sure  
Pan-handler : 3/25/2019 6:20 pm : link
In comment 14356454 SGMen said:
Quote:
I'm not a fan of drafting up as I believe both Murray and Haskins will be take #1 to #4 range, leaving us with a shot at a blue-chip defensive player at #6 still. There are always surprises, and a trade down may be more likely IF we can fleece a team.


If some of the rumors that Lock could also go top 5 happens then one of QWill, Bosa or Allen will be there. That would be a big time score because all 3 of those guys are instant impact players for next year. We need a big turnaround on D and that would help alot.
RE: RE: Trading up to go #5 or higher...  
bw in dc : 3/25/2019 6:34 pm : link
In comment 14356555 Giants38 said:
Quote:
In comment 14356542 bw in dc said:


Quote:


for Haskins or Murray is GM malfeasance.

Staying at #6 to take a QB is not as bad, but it's still bad.

The best play is to trade out of #6 or #17.

The next best play is to use use those slots to take any of the two excellent defenders that will be available at those slots.



Thatís ridiculous. Either you believe the QB is worth it, or you donít. Pretty simple. You donít think they are, so you hate it. But if you think youíre getting a franchise QB, you do what it takes.


Normally I would agree. But there is not QB in this draft that has enough quality to make that investment - in my opinion.
RE: RE: RE: Trading up to go #5 or higher...  
Pan-handler : 3/25/2019 6:41 pm : link
In comment 14356606 bw in dc said:
Quote:
In comment 14356555 Giants38 said:


Quote:


In comment 14356542 bw in dc said:


Quote:


for Haskins or Murray is GM malfeasance.

Staying at #6 to take a QB is not as bad, but it's still bad.

The best play is to trade out of #6 or #17.

The next best play is to use use those slots to take any of the two excellent defenders that will be available at those slots.



Thatís ridiculous. Either you believe the QB is worth it, or you donít. Pretty simple. You donít think they are, so you hate it. But if you think youíre getting a franchise QB, you do what it takes.



Normally I would agree. But there is not QB in this draft that has enough quality to make that investment - in my opinion.


QB is a very polarizing topic . Finding the Lucks and Peyton Mannings are few and far between. The no brainer QB that is.

It is true this draft does not have any of those no doubter types. However there are a ton of NFL translatable qualites in the top 3 of Murray, Haskins and Lock.

The chances you draft a no doubter QB unless you tank a season are quite slim. Our plan is not tanking next year. Get the QB now while we pick high.
I agree that trade-ups are likely, but  
81_Great_Dane : 3/25/2019 6:42 pm : link
mainly with the Day 3 picks. Too many late picks -- it doesn't make to have 12 picks with three 5ths, a 6th and a 7th -- and that's without UDFAs. It's hard to keep 12 rookies, and those late picks are going to be at a severe disadvantage.

The Giants would be better off flipping 2-3 of those Day 3 picks for an earlier pick or for 2020 picks. Nine or 10 draft picks seems about right, plus UDFAs.
RE: Why can't we call them  
TyreeHelmet : 3/25/2019 6:53 pm : link
In comment 14356473 section125 said:
Quote:
draft picks anymore? Who came up with draft capital? Does it sound cooler to say capital instead of pick?

I would expect DG to try to move up in the third round from 95 to midway or get another 4th rounder.


I hate this term too...

Unless one of the elite pass rushers falls, Iíd like to trade down and pick up more picks in 2020.
My ultimate scenario.  
Saos1n : 3/25/2019 6:59 pm : link
Stay at 6 (no trade up) and take Haskins.

If he and Murray are gone, take QWilliams, JAllen or BBurns at 6

Andre Dillard or Cody Ford at 17

Small trade up back into the 1st from 37 for Hakeem Butler
If the pundits are to be believed  
RAIN : 3/25/2019 6:59 pm : link
the Niners are all but dialed into the #2 for Bosa.
.  
idiotsavant : 3/25/2019 7:15 pm : link
Stay at;

6 (DL or OLB)
17 (ILB or DL)
37 (DL/LB/FS)

I would expect a trade up into somewhere between #25 and #64, if at all.

95 (FS or LB)

5ths (OLx3)
RE: If the pundits are to be believed  
Pan-handler : 3/25/2019 7:25 pm : link
In comment 14356636 RAIN said:
Quote:
the Niners are all but dialed into the #2 for Bosa.


Did they not take Dee Ford?
RE: My ultimate scenario.  
Pan-handler : 3/25/2019 7:26 pm : link
In comment 14356635 Saos1n said:
Quote:
Stay at 6 (no trade up) and take Haskins.

If he and Murray are gone, take QWilliams, JAllen or BBurns at 6

Andre Dillard or Cody Ford at 17

Small trade up back into the 1st from 37 for Hakeem Butler


The offense would be so set up if we did that. Then basically the entire rest of the draft for D lol.
Trade Ups  
WillVAB : 3/25/2019 7:40 pm : link
I can see a trade up in round 2. DG talked about trying to trade up for Hernandez last year.

A trade up in round 3 is possible as well. Someone they really love could be there early round 3.
RE: RE: If the pundits are to be believed  
RAIN : 3/25/2019 8:07 pm : link
In comment 14356661 Pan-handler said:
Quote:
In comment 14356636 RAIN said:


Quote:


the Niners are all but dialed into the #2 for Bosa.

They have Buckner, Armstead, and Solomon Thomas .. all top ten picks at the position. They are thinner on the edge.



Did they not take Dee Ford?
RE: I highly doubt we make 12 picks  
Ivan15 : 3/25/2019 8:55 pm : link
In comment 14356461 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
i'm guessing 9 or 10. No idea when the trade ups will occur, but it be shocked if there aren't any.


I think the over/under is 8
RE: Why can't we call them  
djm : 3/25/2019 9:09 pm : link
In comment 14356473 section125 said:
Quote:
draft picks anymore? Who came up with draft capital? Does it sound cooler to say capital instead of pick?

I would expect DG to try to move up in the third round from 95 to midway or get another 4th rounder.


Yes, it sounds cooler to say draft capital. Iím sticking with it!
RE: I Think You Could Almost Bet On It  
BlueLou'sBack : 3/25/2019 9:26 pm : link
In comment 14356535 pa_giant_fan said:
Quote:
I don't think 6 or 17 unless someone blows them away, 37 probably, but more likely 95 with a 4th and 5th, to move up to the top of the 3rd is more likely


I don't think the Giants have enough value in every single remaining pick to move up from 95 to 65, so they are NOT moving up "to the top" of the 3rd round. They could move up maybe 20 slots to 75, and not burn up the entire remainder of their draft.

More likely they make a series of moves to try to get a mid 4th round pick instead of those 7th, 6th and 5th rounders that aren't typically much better than UDFAs.

I think this draft has some depth of potential starters who'll last until the 4th round, and read that opinion elsewhere among the pundits.
Blue Lou has the right idea.  
Big Blue Blogger : 3/25/2019 9:43 pm : link
The Giants' last seven picks aren't likely to command much value on the first two days of the Draft. They are mostly fodder for moving around on Day Three.

Gettleman might try to move from 37 to 33 if a player the Giants love falls out of the first round. On the other hand, the fans of 30 other teams are probably thinking the same thing.
BTW, I kind of like having a couple of seventh round picks.  
Big Blue Blogger : 3/25/2019 9:45 pm : link
The players might not be much better than the UDFA pool; but at least with draft picks you don't have to compete with 31 other teams to sign the ones your really want.
BBB I keep thinking - 12 picks is simply too many!  
BlueLou'sBack : 3/25/2019 10:10 pm : link
How do you even incorporate that many rookies onto a squad and keep the squad competitive? Then I look at the roster depth, and yeah we could easily have 10 rookies on this team with a couple of them stashed on IR or the PS.

We're all gonna get frustrated as hell watching the picks go by between 37 and 95, many of our "best laid plans" will evaporate in those few hours! Especially among WRs, CBs, and OLs.
Seattle only has four picks (21, 84, 124, 159)...  
Milton : 3/25/2019 10:20 pm : link
A natural trade that fits with the trade value chart would be the Giants give up the 95th (120 points), 143rd (35 points), and 180th (19 points) picks in exchange for the 84th pick (170 points). The trade would leave the Giants with ten picks nicely spread out (6, 17, 37, 84, 108, 132, 142, 171, 232, 245).
RE: Seattle only has four picks (21, 84, 124, 159)...  
Pan-handler : 3/25/2019 11:39 pm : link
In comment 14356783 Milton said:
Quote:
A natural trade that fits with the trade value chart would be the Giants give up the 95th (120 points), 143rd (35 points), and 180th (19 points) picks in exchange for the 84th pick (170 points). The trade would leave the Giants with ten picks nicely spread out (6, 17, 37, 84, 108, 132, 142, 171, 232, 245).


Yea I would say something like that makes sense. Or a bigger jump to get using 108 if there is a player that they really love.

And of course Shep to the Pats for 64 was a rumor we heard.
'expect a couple trade ups'...  
Torrag : 3/25/2019 11:43 pm : link
I agree and it should be one of the more entertaining Giants Drafts since 2004.
RE: BTW, I kind of like having a couple of seventh round picks.  
CromartiesKid21 : 3/26/2019 12:32 am : link
In comment 14356766 Big Blue Blogger said:
Quote:
The players might not be much better than the UDFA pool; but at least with draft picks you don't have to compete with 31 other teams to sign the ones your really want.


Caveat is teams that are done early with their drafts get on the phones quickly with potential UDFAs and start locking them up verbally even before the draft has concluded in case they aren't selected
Milton, nicely done!  
BlueLou'sBack : 3/26/2019 3:29 am : link
Does DG have you on speed dial yet?
RE: Why can't we call them  
joeinpa : 3/26/2019 6:45 am : link
In comment 14356473 section125 said:
Quote:
draft picks anymore? Who came up with draft capital? Does it sound cooler to say capital instead of pick?

I would expect DG to try to move up in the third round from 95 to midway or get another 4th rounder.


We do this in all sports. Used to be in golf I could get a good read on how a putt might break on the green if a player before me had a similar putt; now it s a ďteachĒ
Iíd be open to a QB at 37..  
Sean : 3/26/2019 6:58 am : link
I see no issue with taking fliers on guys later on in the draft, there could be value at 37. But, 6 & 17 should be used on BPA. Iím not crazy about trading up with all the needs on this team.
RE: Iíd be open to a QB at 37..  
Diver_Down : 3/26/2019 7:07 am : link
In comment 14356864 Sean said:
Quote:
I see no issue with taking fliers on guys later on in the draft, there could be value at 37. But, 6 & 17 should be used on BPA. Iím not crazy about trading up with all the needs on this team.


If there is consideration of taking a player at such a key position at the top of the 2nd, then DG needs to trade up into the bottom of the 1st to gain the 5th year option on that player.
RE: RE: Why can't we call them  
section125 : 3/26/2019 7:55 am : link
In comment 14356861 joeinpa said:
Quote:
In comment 14356473 section125 said:


Quote:


draft picks anymore? Who came up with draft capital? Does it sound cooler to say capital instead of pick?

I would expect DG to try to move up in the third round from 95 to midway or get another 4th rounder.



We do this in all sports. Used to be in golf I could get a good read on how a putt might break on the green if a player before me had a similar putt; now it s a ďteachĒ


We still call it a read...
RE: Seattle only has four picks (21, 84, 124, 159)...  
GeoMan999 : 3/26/2019 10:15 am : link
In comment 14356783 Milton said:
Quote:
A natural trade that fits with the trade value chart would be the Giants give up the 95th (120 points), 143rd (35 points), and 180th (19 points) picks in exchange for the 84th pick (170 points). The trade would leave the Giants with ten picks nicely spread out (6, 17, 37, 84, 108, 132, 142, 171, 232, 245).


I like the thinking, but this would extend their already huge gap between picks 21 and 84 by another 11. Isnít it more likely that they trade down with their first round pick to get more selections? I do see the Giants moving up from 95 to get in an earlier third round pick.
RE: RE: Seattle only has four picks (21, 84, 124, 159)...  
Milton : 3/26/2019 5:18 pm : link
In comment 14357071 GeoMan999 said:
Quote:
In comment 14356783 Milton said:


Quote:


A natural trade that fits with the trade value chart would be the Giants give up the 95th (120 points), 143rd (35 points), and 180th (19 points) picks in exchange for the 84th pick (170 points). The trade would leave the Giants with ten picks nicely spread out (6, 17, 37, 84, 108, 132, 142, 171, 232, 245).



I like the thinking, but this would extend their already huge gap between picks 21 and 84 by another 11. Isnít it more likely that they trade down with their first round pick to get more selections?
That is certainly possible, I guess it all depends on who is or isn't available with the 21st pick. And also with the 84th pick. If I'm not mistaken, they traded down twice in the first round in 2017. I was paying attention to them that year because they needed an OL as badly as the Giants did yet traded down rather than select either Robinson or Ramczyk.
Back to the Corner