Could Andre Dillard be considered at 6?

at 17 yes if Taylor and Jonah Williams are gone.

So yes. He has very good feet, very good balance and is a very good pass protector. d

The one thing that may steer the Giants away from him is that he is not a strong run blocker. As it is setup now, the Giants will have a run first offense, so I'm not so sure he fits what Gettleman / Shurmur are building.

But my guess is the Giants won't have him graded as highly as some defensive players who should be available at #6.

I ask you which side of our line would be the strongest?

Solder/Hernandez or Zeitler/Dillard
I think a case could be made for the right.

Plug him at RT (rather have him than Remmers) then shift him to LT when Solder moves on.

tempting.

all indications are defense at #6.

In comment 14382246 The_Boss said:

Quote:

Plug him at RT (rather have him than Remmers) then shift him to LT when Solder moves on.

Dillard at 17 would be a dream. Tackles with his reps (see above) and skill set are in great demand as you would expect. Because of the difficulty in finding advanced, skilled tackles coming from the college ranks these days,I just can't believe that he will last that long. But that would be great at 17.

In comment 14382246 The_Boss said:

Quote:

Plug him at RT (rather have him than Remmers) then shift him to LT when Solder moves on.

I think the idea of drafting an OT, playing him at RT with an eye towards eventually moving him to LT is a mistake. You'd always be shuffling your line needlessly. Sure, versatility is a good thing, and ideally you'd like to have a swing-tackle who can back up both spots (just like you'd like to have interior OL who can fill in at C or OG), but if you've got a guy who's a very good RT - a Kareem McKenzie for example - just leave him there and let him do his thing. Same for LT. RT is no longer the lesser of two OT's (the blindside notwithstanding), not with pass-rushers coming from everywhere these days.

In comment 14382253 JonC said:

Quote:

all indications are defense at #6.

Jon, I believe you. I do wonder though, if Bosa, Williams and Allen are the only "blue Chippers", couldn,t we find red chip defensive players at 17 and 37?

NYG need defensive players badly. Unless a QB, I think they have to go D at #6.

It appears we'll have a shot at prospects like Oliver, Gary, White, and perhaps Q slips to us. #17 is where I think you'll see them consider an OT. We know they like Cody Ford.

Don't draft hungry.

scouts and others, that the Giants are going defense at #6

In comment 14382268 Klaatu said:

Quote:

In comment 14382246 The_Boss said: Quote: Plug him at RT (rather have him than Remmers) then shift him to LT when Solder moves on. I think the idea of drafting an OT, playing him at RT with an eye towards eventually moving him to LT is a mistake. You'd always be shuffling your line needlessly. Sure, versatility is a good thing, and ideally you'd like to have a swing-tackle who can back up both spots (just like you'd like to have interior OL who can fill in at C or OG), but if you've got a guy who's a very good RT - a Kareem McKenzie for example - just leave him there and let him do his thing. Same for LT. RT is no longer the lesser of two OT's (the blindside notwithstanding), not with pass-rushers coming from everywhere these days.

I have argued in the past that I prefer a player who is good at their respective position especially when chosen early. If it is a late round pick, they need to provide versatility to back-up multiple positions. Part of the reason why I was a big proponent of Hernandez. He is a LG. Never played anywhere else. Just plug him at LG and forget about it.

But our OL is not fixed. We have made strides especially with getting Zeitler. But we have a unique situation in that Hernandez and Zeitler have 3 years on their contract. We will be looking to make the two of them the highest paid guard tandem in the league. We also have Solder with 3 years left on his contract. I can't imagine DG wanting to make 3/5ths of the OL the highest paid at their respective position.

It would be great to have a RT like you mentioned that you plug in from day 1 and forget about it. But we also have to plan for a transition from Solder. I hope that we aren't picking at the top of the draft in 3 years where you can get a plug/play LT. So assuming we won't get a Blue Goose LT, we aren't going to draft and start a rookie LT. Having a player like Jonas, Dillard, or Taylor lock down RT for 2 years and pushing Solder off the roster and playing LT going forward would be ideal. Draft a true RT then.

might drop to 2nd round....could be pick #37.

might lend more credence to his pro upside being at OG, something to keep in mind.

they better not fall behind by double digits. Hopefully will have a stellar defense through the draft

In comment 14382286 JonC said:

Quote:

It appears we'll have a shot at prospects like Oliver, Gary, White, and perhaps Q slips to us. #17 is where I think you'll see them consider an OT. We know they like Cody Ford. Don't draft hungry.

I have to say, I love the "don't draft hungry" thing.

But I think its Defense with both #1's... DL & LB (White wont be there @17, but Bush would be Phenomenal).

In comment 14382363 Gatorade Dunk said:

Quote:

In comment 14382286 JonC said: Quote: It appears we'll have a shot at prospects like Oliver, Gary, White, and perhaps Q slips to us. #17 is where I think you'll see them consider an OT. We know they like Cody Ford. Don't draft hungry. I have to say, I love the "don't draft hungry" thing.

It's effective, got to keep value and upside in mind over "see hole, plug" hole.

1. Love the data, very cool to see.
2. Jonah Williams with that rating in the SEC strikes me as very impressive. Tons of great pass rushers in the SEC.
3. Can Dillard run block. He just wasn't tested there. To me, that's why Williams should be #1 and Dillard should be a toss up with Ford.

Risner is big time underrated it seems. I was shocked he didn't go round 1 in BBI mock.

In comment 14382379 Andy in Halifax said:

Quote:

1. Love the data, very cool to see. 2. Jonah Williams with that rating in the SEC strikes me as very impressive. Tons of great pass rushers in the SEC. 3. Can Dillard run block. He just wasn't tested there. To me, that's why Williams should be #1 and Dillard should be a toss up with Ford. Risner is big time underrated it seems. I was shocked he didn't go round 1 in BBI mock.

Good stuff.

In comment 14382314 Diver_Down said:

Quote:

In comment 14382268 Klaatu said: I think the idea of drafting an OT, playing him at RT with an eye towards eventually moving him to LT is a mistake. You'd always be shuffling your line needlessly. Sure, versatility is a good thing, and ideally you'd like to have a swing-tackle who can back up both spots (just like you'd like to have interior OL who can fill in at C or OG), but if you've got a guy who's a very good RT - a Kareem McKenzie for example - just leave him there and let him do his thing. Same for LT. RT is no longer the lesser of two OT's (the blindside notwithstanding), not with pass-rushers coming from everywhere these days. I have argued in the past that I prefer a player who is good at their respective position especially when chosen early. If it is a late round pick, they need to provide versatility to back-up multiple positions. Part of the reason why I was a big proponent of Hernandez. He is a LG. Never played anywhere else. Just plug him at LG and forget about it. But our OL is not fixed. We have made strides especially with getting Zeitler. But we have a unique situation in that Hernandez and Zeitler have 3 years on their contract. We will be looking to make the two of them the highest paid guard tandem in the league. We also have Solder with 3 years left on his contract. I can't imagine DG wanting to make 3/5ths of the OL the highest paid at their respective position. It would be great to have a RT like you mentioned that you plug in from day 1 and forget about it. But we also have to plan for a transition from Solder. I hope that we aren't picking at the top of the draft in 3 years where you can get a plug/play LT. So assuming we won't get a Blue Goose LT, we aren't going to draft and start a rookie LT. Having a player like Jonas, Dillard, or Taylor lock down RT for 2 years and pushing Solder off the roster and playing LT going forward would be ideal. Draft a true RT then.

That's a fair point, Diver, but suppose the Giants don't have Solder for another three years, for whatever reason? Say he gets hurt, or is skills decline enough that the Giants opt out in 2020 or 2021 and take the dead cap hit? I'd like to get someone in the pipeline now who could conceivably take his spot at LT without having to move the RT over. Someone with more of the proverbial "upside" than any OT currently on the roster. A later-round OT who isn't a "plug-and-play" guy, but who's worth developing, who might be ready to start in a year or two. Just some food for thought.

At 6 more and more every day. He just plays with such intensity and hunger. I REALLY want him at 6 if Q isnt there. Then give me Devin Bush or Burns to complete the revamping of our front 7, or Garrett Bradbury at 17.

Something tells me though if Jones is there at 8 we trade up with the Lions.

In comment 14382286 JonC said:

Quote:

It appears we'll have a shot at prospects like Oliver, Gary, White, and perhaps Q slips to us. #17 is where I think you'll see them consider an OT. We know they like Cody Ford. Don't draft hungry.

This. If he slips to 17 you look at his grades vs defenders or other OTs. Not at 6 where it's gonna be highly graded defender vs QB if all the recent "leaks" are mostly smoke.

What O are they running at Oklahoma?





Hogwarts?

However we just spent 15 million on nate and I think we can address RT in rd 4 with 2 picks along with wheeler and remmers. We need studs on D so so badly. I want the 2 best defensive players we have on the board with 6 and 17. Hope it's not dillard this year.

Edge and LB, although not necessarily in that order.

Right Tackles can be found later on in this draft. But speed, athleticism, and pursuit among players in the front seven tend to be found early on.

In comment 14382850 BlueLou'sBack said:

Quote:

What O are they running at Oklahoma? Hogwarts?

The data is skewed to meet their definition of a Pass Set.

Quote:

True pass sets in our data defined as passes with 4+ pass-rushers, straight QB drop to 7+ yards, no play action, no screens, and took over 2 seconds for QB to throw

So no passes from the shotgun. QB has to be from under center and drop straight back for more than 7 yards with no play action.

It's just amazing to me the about face the board has taken regarding our number 1 perceived issue over the last 7 years... the OLine.

This draft is loaded with defensive talent. However, if the draft falls as expected the Blue Chippers will be gone by 6. Red chippers are expected to last into the 3rd round. Yet, the majority opinion seems to be take a red chip defensive player over the top Tackle. It's cool, I will be happy with Oliver, Sweat, White or any other top defensive talent.

I'm just surprised BBI is not more adamant about fixing the OLine first, when we fully expect red chip defensive talent through the second round.

Personally, I would be thrilled with Dillard, Wilkins, Rapp, Murphy or whoever.

would love to trade down if possible but don't think Dillard should be considered at 6 at all. I'd take a sub par trade down package before I did that (like a 3rd rounder to move from 6 to 10)

that looks like defense at #6.

The last time we shopped hungry for an OT, we picked Flowers. Look at some of the better players who were still available at that pick ...

I'm not sure I like the defensive players that figure to be there at 6. Feels like Gary in that spot, assuming Williams and Allen are gone. I don't know about picking Gary there.

I think some other defenders could sneak up if the blue chippers are gone. Could have a choice of Oliver, Gary, White, for example. I don't see an OT worthy of #6, not even Jonah, imv.

.

He's not a Jonathan Ogden type sure thing talent at OT.

In comment 14383046 JonC said:

Quote:

that looks like defense at #6. The last time we shopped hungry for an OT, we picked Flowers. Look at some of the better players who were still available at that pick ...

Jon, I get it. I'm not suggesting one way or the other. I think red chip Oline talent may be on the same tier as red chip defensive talent. Are you of the opinion that the red chip Tackles are not of equal caliber to the red chip defensive prospects? I don't think Flowers is anywhere near the talent of Dillard, Taylor, or even Risner technically (from what I read).

In comment 14383062 GFAN52 said:

Quote:

He's not a Jonathan Ogden type sure thing talent at OT.

Nobody is suggesting that any of the tackles are on Ogden's Blue Chip level. Just saying the blue chip defensive talent may be gone, leaving red chippers on defense that may be on the same tier as the top tackle talent.

and there's a ton of red chip defensive front seven talent to be had, and a few the Giants like that could be there at #17 as well as #6.

I think they roll the dice and go for an OT at #37.

I think that's the right play in this situation. There are several prospects for RT that should be in our window at #37. Including Little, Lindstrom and Risner, all of whom imo are plug-n-play talents on the right side.

a right tackle at #6 overall.. NO

In comment 14383081 JonC said:

Quote:

and there's a ton of red chip defensive front seven talent to be had, and a few the Giants like that could be there at #17 as well as #6. I think they roll the dice and go for an OT at #37.

Another example - Dexter Lawrence is probably a better prospect with a higher ceiling than ANY or the OL in this draft class. Good chance he;s still on the board at 17, maybe even 37.

For Risner at 37

Ideally for me

Allen or QWilliams at 6

Bush or Burns at 17

Risner at 37

This makes the most sense, and be ready if there is still blue chipper such as Oliver at 17. Or Laurence, or the other DT, Wilkins or whomever, if they take Allen at 6.

For me, I see RT and C in rounds 4-5, but 37 is not crazy either. Just be ready to see value elsewhere position wise.

.

more likely at 17. I'd prefer Jawaan Taylor, but he's probably gone by then.