If the Giants are smart, which is obviously another debate in and of itself, they don’t draft any of these QBs in the first round.
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
I don't particularly like Jones, but you lose credibility when you call him a 3rd round prospect.
Giants or not he's getting picked in top 20. There's a disconnect on him. Nfl teams like him a lot more then pundits. I've stated for the Giants it's lock or jones from my understanding. That said, this board doesn't take jones seriously, nfl teams do
You get to work in a bash against:
- Eli
- Cutcliffe
- Jints Central
- Archie
- Jones himself
It's like the Perfect Storm for trolls.
He just loves to hear himself bitch. Good lord. He's brutal. According to him Jones is a 3rd round pick. Yet a HOF GM has him ranked as the 2nd QB and ranked 17th overall.
Giants or not he's getting picked in top 20. There's a disconnect on him. Nfl teams like him a lot more then pundits. I've stated for the Giants it's lock or jones from my understanding. That said, this board doesn't take jones seriously, nfl teams do
Dont you mean he is getting picked in the top 20? Or am I misreading your statement?
In last week or so. As for trade.....ill keep quiet on that but still very possible but we'll have to see.
Is it a draft trade or a player trade?
Can't they also trade a player on draft day? I'll let jt speak for himself. But if we look back at what was written regarding a possible trade, jt said that some players should rent not buy.
Now, we can interpret who would have the most trade value and it was commonly assumed that Shep was a possibility heading into the final year of his contract at the time. But with the recent extension, it wouldn't be likely that Shep is traded. Of course, "we didn't sign him to trade him" is the reason that no player is safe from trade.
But if you look at the rest of the roster, Engram could be a target for trade. He has 2 years remaining at cost controlled rookie salary. He is a good receiver and an awful blocker. But what he is good at, he isn't great. If a player is going to be one-dimensional, then they need to be great at what they do especially with a 1st round draft grade. He is a Jerry pick that emphasized a basketball on grass mentality. DG is building a run-first offense. Engram and the 17th pick for a move up for Hockenson?
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
I don't particularly like Jones, but you lose credibility when you call him a 3rd round prospect.
Why? I’ve tried every which way to like Jones as a top prospect. But I see absolutely nothing in his game that is a plus or plus-plus category to warrant a first round investment. So a third round grade seems very reasonable.
the 2019 draft eligible QB's would be in this order (Giants wise):
1) Drew Lock
2) Daniel Jones
3) Kyler Murray
4) Will Grier
Haskins is not a guy I want at all. Just seems like a guy who will be functional- ala David Garrard, Stan Humphries (after knee injury) etc.. Minimal escape ability.
In last week or so. As for trade.....ill keep quiet on that but still very possible but we'll have to see.
Is it a draft trade or a player trade?
Can't they also trade a player on draft day? I'll let jt speak for himself. But if we look back at what was written regarding a possible trade, jt said that some players should rent not buy.
Now, we can interpret who would have the most trade value and it was commonly assumed that Shep was a possibility heading into the final year of his contract at the time. But with the recent extension, it wouldn't be likely that Shep is traded. Of course, "we didn't sign him to trade him" is the reason that no player is safe from trade.
But if you look at the rest of the roster, Engram could be a target for trade. He has 2 years remaining at cost controlled rookie salary. He is a good receiver and an awful blocker. But what he is good at, he isn't great. If a player is going to be one-dimensional, then they need to be great at what they do especially with a 1st round draft grade. He is a Jerry pick that emphasized a basketball on grass mentality. DG is building a run-first offense. Engram and the 17th pick for a move up for Hockenson?
Makes sense.
I was thinking perhaps Jackrabbit to a contender who needs a CB for a day 3 pick. Putting Jenkins on a legit contender keeps him focused and motivated. I’m not sure how he’d perform here if the team is irrelevant come Columbus Day.
You get to work in a bash against:
- Eli
- Cutcliffe
- Jints Central
- Archie
- Jones himself
It's like the Perfect Storm for trolls.
It as if BW is writing a Mad-Libs with only the words you listed above to choose from to fill in the blanks. Being able to use all in a single post is the highlight of his morning crap session.
I will defer to the pros....who merits better draft grades Â
And I am sure some of it is analytical and some subjective....but Jones is not someone I am overly excited about....but then again, neither is Haskins.
You get to work in a bash against:
- Eli
- Cutcliffe
- Jints Central
- Archie
- Jones himself
It's like the Perfect Storm for trolls.
I’ve never bashed Eli in these Jones comparisons. I’ve said Jones can’t touch Eli’s arm talent. And that’s one of the reasons I find the comparisons to Eli absolutely laughable. At least Eli and Ole Miss, with less talent than the other top SEC programs at the time, were very competitive and won big games in the SEC.
And I am sure some of it is analytical and some subjective....but Jones is not someone I am overly excited about....but then again, neither is Haskins.
Very little thinking like this happens when fans are evaluating players. In this very thread there is an example of someone valuing their own evaluation skills over professionals. Not to say they(pros)can't be wrong, but who is more likely to be wrong? Good for you
You've said many times that Eli vouching for Jones, knowing him through the camps and through Cutcliffe is factoring into a decision on drafting him.
I don't like Jones, either, but I've never made any context of that to apply to the Giants. You've already created a narrative where he's drafted and playing in Blue.
I have said from day 1 it's defense at 6. I do think the Giants wanted lock or jones at 17. They will both be gone by then most likely. What that means is the Giants have some interesting decisions to make in the next 8 days. I believe they will take defense at 6 in the end.
You could be right. Who knows? However there are many people in the league who have jones as the second best qb in draft. Many think he's going to be really good. I can tell you the Giants like him ALOT
JT mentioned the Giants were considering trading a player who was close to OBJ and adopted some of his bad traits. Hence the should be renting instead of buying comment. We assumed it was Shepard, could it be Engram? Jus guessing here
and there wasnt the Eli connection, this board would be much more positive on him. just a fact.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
If the Giants are smart, which is obviously another debate in and of itself, they don’t draft any of these QBs in the first round.
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
Whew!! I was getting a little worried your tagline wouldn't make it into the post. :)
I have no idea what your talking about😂😂😂
No disrespect intended btw I appreciate the contributions you, JonC, hitdog, and others make, but I also take it with a grain of salt. I believe it more when it supports my own POV and less when it doesn't.
You've said many times that Eli vouching for Jones, knowing him through the camps and through Cutcliffe is factoring into a decision on drafting him.
I don't like Jones, either, but I've never made any context of that to apply to the Giants. You've already created a narrative where he's drafted and playing in Blue.
That’s not bashing the Eli. That’s bashing Jints Central.
and there wasnt the Eli connection, this board would be much more positive on him. just a fact.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
I totally agree. I happen to like Jones a lot. He was a player that definitely elevated his team at Duke. I get people not liking this guy, or liking some other guy, it’s all just a guess. However, the hate for the guy is just mob psychology at this point.
You could be right. Who knows? However there are many people in the league who have jones as the second best qb in draft. Many think he's going to be really good. I can tell you the Giants like him ALOT
Not a fan of Jones (or any of these QB’s to be honest) at all. Let someone else draft Jones and save the NYG from themselves. The fact that they like him as much as you claim, to me, is concerning. Better options were available last year and, by many accounts, the options next year should be better.
and there wasnt the Eli connection, this board would be much more positive on him. just a fact.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
If Jones played better and demonstrated higher level physical skills than he would be viewed more favorably.
The fact the Giants are intrigued with Jones because of those peripheral items - like attending the Manning’s camp - is very disconcerting.
You get to work in a bash against:
- Eli
- Cutcliffe
- Jints Central
- Archie
- Jones himself
It's like the Perfect Storm for trolls.
He just loves to hear himself bitch. Good lord. He's brutal. According to him Jones is a 3rd round pick. Yet a HOF GM has him ranked as the 2nd QB and ranked 17th overall.
Agreed. Always talks like he's smarter than everyone else and just comes off like an arrogant, smug asshole.
and there wasnt the Eli connection, this board would be much more positive on him. just a fact.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
I would add that if Daniel Jones was a Duke QB who wore number 17 we would also feel much better about him. A few of us from the mid 90's have some PTSD from Dave Brown.
I have said from day 1 it's defense at 6. I do think the Giants wanted lock or jones at 17. They will both be gone by then most likely. What that means is the Giants have some interesting decisions to make in the next 8 days. I believe they will take defense at 6 in the end.
Thanks again jt as always. And there does seem to be a groundswell for Jones. As we've said, I don't really like him and I don't want him on the Giants, but if the Giants are convinced he's going in the top 20, I've thought since the Odell trade that #17 was always a pivot point to move up to get a guy they like. They have all those extra picks to package to do so.
And I'm a million % on board with going with the best defensive player available at 6. There is nothing I hate more than watching a Giants team that has no defense. It's wrong. It's not the Giants. The only thing that was fun about 2016 was watching the defense gel late and stop teams to win games towards the end of the season. I think Gettleman or Shurmur mentioned the Giants need to "finish". That means defense. I am hoping to come out of this draft with no less than 2 starters and up to 4/5 contributors on defense as rookies. And to me that #6 pick has to be an impact defender.
I have said from day 1 it's defense at 6. I do think the Giants wanted lock or jones at 17. They will both be gone by then most likely. What that means is the Giants have some interesting decisions to make in the next 8 days. I believe they will take defense at 6 in the end.
This is solid asshattery. It's not the waiting at the airport and seeing someone get off the plane. But gives insight into their line of thinking.
RE: RE: if Jones didnt play for duke and cutcliffe Â
and there wasnt the Eli connection, this board would be much more positive on him. just a fact.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
If Jones played better and demonstrated higher level physical skills than he would be viewed more favorably.
The fact the Giants are intrigued with Jones because of those peripheral items - like attending the Manning’s camp - is very disconcerting.
So you assume the Giants view his physical skills exactly as you do so therefor they are just "intrigued" enough with his Manning connection to pull the trigger regardless of the fact that both you and the Giants view him in lockstep regarding his inferior physical QB traits? Are you a scout for the Giants?
and there wasnt the Eli connection, this board would be much more positive on him. just a fact.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
If Jones played better and demonstrated higher level physical skills than he would be viewed more favorably.
The fact the Giants are intrigued with Jones because of those peripheral items - like attending the Manning’s camp - is very disconcerting.
You do realize most of these guys attend the Manning passing academy right?
From just this draft class Lock, Kyle Shurmur, McSorley, Ryan Finley, Tyree Jackson, Stidham, Minshew, Easton Stick & more attended the event.
to compare media rankings of Jones to some unspecified experts in the NFL. Both the media (many of whom rely on current and former NFL talent evaluators) and NFL experts are wrong far more than they are right in evaluating talent. Giants need a young QB and have for a few years. Everyone agrees that the 2019 class is weaker than 2018 and 2020. It's a shame that the Giants are in this position, but arguing whether a flawed Jones is better than a flawed Haskins or Lock is what it has come down to and ultimately the odds are that the Giants will be "reaching" no matter who they choose.
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
I don't particularly like Jones, but you lose credibility when you call him a 3rd round prospect.
Why? I’ve tried every which way to like Jones as a top prospect. But I see absolutely nothing in his game that is a plus or plus-plus category to warrant a first round investment. So a third round grade seems very reasonable.
I disagree. I think the only thing NOT plus on him is his arm. Athleticism, decision making, going through progrssions, accuracy on short to intermediate throws are all plus IMO. Even arm strength on short to intermediate throws is close to plus. The only thing not plus is on deep balls.
to compare media rankings of Jones to some unspecified experts in the NFL. Both the media (many of whom rely on current and former NFL talent evaluators) and NFL experts are wrong far more than they are right in evaluating talent. Giants need a young QB and have for a few years. Everyone agrees that the 2019 class is weaker than 2018 and 2020. It's a shame that the Giants are in this position, but arguing whether a flawed Jones is better than a flawed Haskins or Lock is what it has come down to and ultimately the odds are that the Giants will be "reaching" no matter who they choose.
Every QB has flaws. Hell basically every prospect does. Darnold is a turnover machine. Josh Allen can't hit the ocean from a boat. Josh Rosen has attitude and injury issues. It's impossible to say last year was a stronger class then this year.
Most people said the 2017 class was weak. Yet Trubisky went 11-3 last year. Mahomes was the best QB in the NFL and Deshaun Watson went 11-5 with 26 TDs and 9 INTs.
I have said from day 1 it's defense at 6. I do think the Giants wanted lock or jones at 17. They will both be gone by then most likely. What that means is the Giants have some interesting decisions to make in the next 8 days. I believe they will take defense at 6 in the end.
First off, I will say I love JT's contributions to the board. But I am going to have to disagree with this assessment. If you like a QB as your franchise QB, you don't get cute. You take him at 6. Period. I don't want a guy they didn't like enough to take at 6.
The Giants are not taking a QB at 6 but they are interested in trading up from 17 to get one but it will most likely be Jones as Lock will force them to trade up inside the top 10.
I am not worried about Cincy or Miami taking Jones but I think Washington will take him if he is on the board unless they turn their sights back on Rosen. The Giants would have to trade up to 13 or 14 to get Jones. My buddy is a huge Phins fan and he has continues to say that Miami is 100% in on Tua next year and will not take one this year even if Lock, Haskins, and Jones fall to their pick. He also said that there are rumors that Miami wants to trade down in order to accumulate more picks in 2020 in case they need to move up for Tua.
I have said from day 1 it's defense at 6. I do think the Giants wanted lock or jones at 17. They will both be gone by then most likely. What that means is the Giants have some interesting decisions to make in the next 8 days. I believe they will take defense at 6 in the end.
First off, I will say I love JT's contributions to the board. But I am going to have to disagree with this assessment. If you like a QB as your franchise QB, you don't get cute. You take him at 6. Period. I don't want a guy they didn't like enough to take at 6.
I don't think they take a QB this year. I think they're going to build the team and then go all in on Herbert next year who is the guy they supposedly loved this year.
I have said from day 1 it's defense at 6. I do think the Giants wanted lock or jones at 17. They will both be gone by then most likely. What that means is the Giants have some interesting decisions to make in the next 8 days. I believe they will take defense at 6 in the end.
First off, I will say I love JT's contributions to the board. But I am going to have to disagree with this assessment. If you like a QB as your franchise QB, you don't get cute. You take him at 6. Period. I don't want a guy they didn't like enough to take at 6.
I don't think they take a QB this year. I think they're going to build the team and then go all in on Herbert next year who is the guy they supposedly loved this year.
I don't think they take a QB this year. I think they're going to build the team and then go all in on Herbert next year who is the guy they supposedly loved this year.
Then they should try like hell to get another 1st rounder during this draft for 2020.
I don't think they take a QB this year. I think they're going to build the team and then go all in on Herbert next year who is the guy they supposedly loved this year.
Then they should try like hell to get another 1st rounder during this draft for 2020.
This is why I loved the NE trading for 17 rumor. The offer was supposedly NE's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd to move up to 17 for a TE. I would prefer to get NE's 2020 1st instead of the 32nd pick this year.
I don't think they take a QB this year. I think they're going to build the team and then go all in on Herbert next year who is the guy they supposedly loved this year.
Then they should try like hell to get another 1st rounder during this draft for 2020.
This is why I loved the NE trading for 17 rumor. The offer was supposedly NE's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd to move up to 17 for a TE. I would prefer to get NE's 2020 1st instead of the 32nd pick this year.
I would absolutely love something like this. I feel like NYG have put off the 'next QB' thing for long enough that that now would be a silly time to force it with the stacked 2020 class staring them in the face.
At this point, I'd rather they do their 'we can win this year' thing (as much as I disagree with it) and make next year's draft all about getting one of the QBs.
And as for the rest...we all know the draft is a crapshoot. We all know that the guys being PAID as GMs, scouts, VPs of Football Ops, know it's a crapshoot. No one on the Giants' staff is enamored with Lock because he want to a passing camp or not. If they pick Lock, it's because they believe it's in the best interest of the franchise. And for better or worse, they're the ones paid to make that determination. We're all fans for a reason.
Just checking in. Have you heard any rumblings as of late?
Defense at #6 is all I've got right now. It sounds like they like Lock or Jones at #17. I'm curious if they would spend to trade up to the Bills spot at #9 for a QB.
Assuming the following - Giants go D at 6 and are unable to trade up - watching Lock and Jones go ahead of them at 17.
In that scenario - is there any interest in Haskins at 17? Is he basically off their board or does he just have a second (or later) round grade?
I appreciate hearing that they favor Lock & Jones but would love to hear where they think Haskins makes sense (if at all).
Thanks!
Clearly they have interest in Haskins regardless of what was said here. They had an Army to his pro day and had him in just yesterday for a top 30 visit.
and much more about the opportunity cost of using one of their top picks on him when there is excellent talent to be had in the top twenty of this draft. If Gettleman plays his cards right, he should be able to get two premier defenders in the first round that radically enhance the capability and speed of Bettcher's defense... Perhaps two of Allen, White, Sweat, Bush, Burns, Ferrell... In this context, taking any quarterback with either of these picks is extremely expensive in terms of the player they would be handing to one of their competitors...
The Giants need so much help everywhere on this team. They simply must get immediate starters with their first three picks and build quality depth with the rest of this draft. Then they will finally be at the starting line to go full throttle on quarterback succession...
The Browns have given us a beautiful thirty year road map of how not to do quarterback succession... Let's hope that the Giants have heeded the grueling lessons of their futility and make sensible choices starting next week. Reliving the folly of the Browns' mistakes over the next decade will make the past seven years seem like a blissful dream...
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
I don't particularly like Jones, but you lose credibility when you call him a 3rd round prospect.
Why? I’ve tried every which way to like Jones as a top prospect. But I see absolutely nothing in his game that is a plus or plus-plus category to warrant a first round investment. So a third round grade seems very reasonable.
I disagree. I think the only thing NOT plus on him is his arm. Athleticism, decision making, going through progrssions, accuracy on short to intermediate throws are all plus IMO. Even arm strength on short to intermediate throws is close to plus. The only thing not plus is on deep balls.
Even that is incorrect. He has a strong arm. Every scouting report says that short to intermediate his arm is strong, but he puts too much air under the ball on deep ones. So if his arm is strong on intermediate throws how is it not strong all over the field? This sounds like poor technique on deep balls, not arm strength. Your arm strength does not change on the length of the throw. Note the reports do not say strong "enough" on short and intermediate - they say strong.
I do not believe Haskins gets past Cincinnati.....
Right, but if the rumors are true that the NFL likes Jones better than the internet does, maybe they go with Jones or Lock and the guy who slips to 17 is Haskins.
I'm trying to figure out in that particular scenario, what do the asshats hear - would there be interest in Haskins @ 17 or do they think he's not really the future for them at QB?
Does not have a NFL caliber arm and his deep passes have too much air, he will be picked off deep by NFL secondaries. They all have elite speed, unlike college. If the NFL is in love with Jones it is fools gold and they are going to FORCE the pick.
Assuming the following - Giants go D at 6 and are unable to trade up - watching Lock and Jones go ahead of them at 17.
In that scenario - is there any interest in Haskins at 17? Is he basically off their board or does he just have a second (or later) round grade?
I appreciate hearing that they favor Lock & Jones but would love to hear where they think Haskins makes sense (if at all).
Thanks!
Clearly they have interest in Haskins regardless of what was said here. They had an Army to his pro day and had him in just yesterday for a top 30 visit.
Just checking in. Have you heard any rumblings as of late?
Defense at #6 is all I've got right now. It sounds like they like Lock or Jones at #17. I'm curious if they would spend to trade up to the Bills spot at #9 for a QB.
Question for Jon or jt. Whose their top QB? Lock or Jones? So if the Bills are on the clock. Lock, Jones & Haskins are available and they decide to trade up. Who do they take?
Thanks JonC. I agree with crooza guy that there is obviously some level of interest or they wouldn't be scouting him so hard, but I find it very curious that we aren't hearing ANYTHING about him through our asshats, meaning we're not hearing that they don't like him either, just that they have Lock/Jones ahead of him and that he's not a target at 6.
Often we hear a guy isn't liked, but not now. Makes me wonder why.
RE: I keep wondering whether Tomlinson might be available in a trade. Â
I'm not sure that he's the ideal guy in this defense.
Very well could be, but what value does he really hold? He has a cheap rookie contract and at the very least offers a solid rotation. What team would give anything of value for him?
Assuming the following - Giants go D at 6 and are unable to trade up - watching Lock and Jones go ahead of them at 17.
In that scenario - is there any interest in Haskins at 17? Is he basically off their board or does he just have a second (or later) round grade?
I appreciate hearing that they favor Lock & Jones but would love to hear where they think Haskins makes sense (if at all).
Thanks!
Clearly they have interest in Haskins regardless of what was said here. They had an Army to his pro day and had him in just yesterday for a top 30 visit.
Totally agree that they have interest in Haskins and I think Haskins is having a 2 day visit with us also so if they were not interested why would he be here for 2 days ?
Could he be brilliant enough to be feeding certain asshats with information intended to deflect his interest in Haskins at #6?
It’s common knowledge that some media regularly read Erics bbi and knowing how many media just regurgitate what they hear or read from “sources “.
It just seems weird that Haskins lack of foot speed or agility or whatever you want to call it would cause him to slide. Teams were impressed with his football IQ. Kid has a spotless background, great arm, leadership ability etc etc..... I’m not buying this slide for a minute
Could he be brilliant enough to be feeding certain asshats with information intended to deflect his interest in Haskins at #6?
It’s common knowledge that some media regularly read Erics bbi and knowing how many media just regurgitate what they hear or read from “sources “.
It just seems weird that Haskins lack of foot speed or agility or whatever you want to call it would cause him to slide. Teams were impressed with his football IQ. Kid has a spotless background, great arm, leadership ability etc etc..... I’m not buying this slide for a minute
The biggest myth is a guy "falling"... Just because the media and others say a guy is at this level, doesn't mean other teams feel that way. PLus, teams slot guys by position and by selection spot, against other players for that same selection spot. Not every player fits every scheme, regardless of perceived talent.
is this years Rosen. Last year two insiders said the same thing. Both hadn't heard a peep about the Giants having any interest in Rosen. Now it is confirmed that they aren't interested in him unless it is at an extreme discount. This year they haven't heard anything about Haskins which clearly suggests that they don't like.
I'd imagine this means there are at least 5 defensive players in this draft they love that they know they will only have a shot at with the 6th pick (Q, Bosa, Allen, Oliver, ?). I'd expect the 5th person on that list to be an edge just due to positional value of a pass rusher - so I'd guess either Sweat or Burns. There are valid arguments that either one of them has more upside than Josh Allen, though less well rounded.
The comparison to the 2017 QB class is a really good observation. Mahomes was a guy with a ton of talent, who started a lot of games, but viewed as needing time to adapt to the pro game - just like Lock. Watson had also started a lot of games and had a lot questions about his raw ability, but was a gamer. I see some similarities with Jones there, although at Clemson obviously Watson had the chance to prove himself on the big stage. I'd be happy with either QB if Shurmur thinks they fit what he wants to do.
I think we will see the Giants end up with 1 of those top 4 defensive players at #6 and then trade up to #12 or #13 to get either Lock or Jones. I think Denver takes either Haskins or Lock, probably with a trade up. Cincy, GB, and Miami could all be in the QB market, but I expect at least 1 of them is willing to listen to a trade down offer - and most likely it will be Miami. Last year Arizona had to trade #79 and #151 to move from #15 to #10. The Bills traded #22 and #65 for #16. So the price of moving up will likely be higher than #95 but not as high as #37 or next year's 1. I do wonder if they have to put 1 of those assets on the table while getting a lower 2nd/3rd back. Or perhaps give up next year's 2nd rounder.
Then why take a visit and send that many people to his pro day? Don't see the logic.
The piece you're missing is he could very well not be graded high enough for #6.
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
Any chatter on Darron Lee? Been disappointing for the jets, however, he's still young, a decent coverage backer and the Jets do not really have a spot for him. Can't imagine it would take more than one of our 5ths to grab him and he's still on his rookie deal so the cap hit is minimal.
Could he be a fit in the moneybacker role that we wanted D Bucannon for?
I'd be happy with either QB if Shurmur thinks they fit what he wants to do.
This is something that a lot of people (especially the prickish "QB experts" on this site) seem to forget. If the Giants are going to draft a QB, its not going to be solely based on what the QB is now. Its going to be based on what they think the QB can become and they have a guy in Shurmur who's done a pretty good job with development. Its an aspect of the evaluation process that no one outside the organization would even have the slightest insight into.
You disagreeing with it doesn't erase the rest. I can't definitively say "you're wrong", I can only go by track records from the past. I'll go with mine and jt's over yours, no offense.
just think it's going to be absolutely crazy on draft night, which of course is exciting. There are a lot of plausible scenarios that can't be executed until the draft begins.
I still say the Giants will stay at #6 and take the best defensive player, but I could see a small trade down to maybe #10.
As far as trading up from #17 to #9, I think that's extremely unlikely because of the cost compared to the talent level of Lock, Haskins, or Jones. Two of those three could also go to Denver and Cincinnati at #10 and #11. Teams may then start a bidding war to move up for the one who remains. I don't see DG being a participant. I'd rather trade #17 to NE for #32, and their second and third.
Then why take a visit and send that many people to his pro day? Don't see the logic.
Simple to scout him. The Giants took visits and personally visited Darnold, Rosen, and Allen last year. They even had dinner with Rosen. This is nothing new.
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
really wish I could embrace Shurmur as the coach. I do think my thought processes in general align with Gettleman (build the trenches, rush the QB, etc.) but I'm just not that big of a fan of Shurmur's offense. Despite the media driven BS of Jones being Eli 2.0 I don't see it at all other than in demeanor, coach & size. He is a rhythm passer w/ mobility who's weakness is the long ball. Eli has never been able to throw a swing pass; his best attribute historically has been the long ball and when he was in his prime he was good in the pocket at escaping pressure but would never be confused for being mobile. Now we see with Shurmur's offense the long ball really isn't part of the game, it is more of a rhythm passing game, and the WR corp on the roster goes to show it (none of them are deep threats, more possession slant type receivers). My biggest fear is we draft Jones who I do think fits Shurmur's ideal offense to a T, and then in two years time Shurmur ends up out as the coach and we are left with a niche QB who fit our previous coach nicely but may not fit the future of the franchise.
really wish I could embrace Shurmur as the coach. I do think my thought processes in general align with Gettleman (build the trenches, rush the QB, etc.) but I'm just not that big of a fan of Shurmur's offense. Despite the media driven BS of Jones being Eli 2.0 I don't see it at all other than in demeanor, coach & size. He is a rhythm passer w/ mobility who's weakness is the long ball. Eli has never been able to throw a swing pass; his best attribute historically has been the long ball and when he was in his prime he was good in the pocket at escaping pressure but would never be confused for being mobile. Now we see with Shurmur's offense the long ball really isn't part of the game, it is more of a rhythm passing game, and the WR corp on the roster goes to show it (none of them are deep threats, more possession slant type receivers). My biggest fear is we draft Jones who I do think fits Shurmur's ideal offense to a T, and then in two years time Shurmur ends up out as the coach and we are left with a niche QB who fit our previous coach nicely but may not fit the future of the franchise.
What sense would it make to hire a new coach that doesn't know how to be successful with the QB? I don't think it works like that.
really wish I could embrace Shurmur as the coach. I do think my thought processes in general align with Gettleman (build the trenches, rush the QB, etc.) but I'm just not that big of a fan of Shurmur's offense. Despite the media driven BS of Jones being Eli 2.0 I don't see it at all other than in demeanor, coach & size. He is a rhythm passer w/ mobility who's weakness is the long ball. Eli has never been able to throw a swing pass; his best attribute historically has been the long ball and when he was in his prime he was good in the pocket at escaping pressure but would never be confused for being mobile. Now we see with Shurmur's offense the long ball really isn't part of the game, it is more of a rhythm passing game, and the WR corp on the roster goes to show it (none of them are deep threats, more possession slant type receivers). My biggest fear is we draft Jones who I do think fits Shurmur's ideal offense to a T, and then in two years time Shurmur ends up out as the coach and we are left with a niche QB who fit our previous coach nicely but may not fit the future of the franchise.
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
I'm not criticizing anyone. I just stated my personal opinion on the matter. Lock, more than any other prospect, reminds me of Mahomes. I'd take that chance all day.
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
I'm not criticizing anyone. I just stated my personal opinion on the matter. Lock, more than any other prospect, reminds me of Mahomes. I'd take that chance all day.
IMO, Lock reminds me of Cutler and that worries me
1. QB coach/evaluator - I buy his ability here. He did a good job calling plays last year, he got a good year out of Eli past his prime, and the offense scored more points than it has in some time under him. What he did with Keenum is what you need from a coach these days. The year before that he got a good year out of Bradford - who is obviously limited. He was the OC in Philly with Foles the first time. And won 10 games the year they had to play Sanchez due to Foles' injury. Solid track record and encouraging performance year 1 with playcalling.
2. Gameday/Head Coach - jury is still out. Year 1 brought mixed results.
But fortunately #1 is what matters most right now for the draft.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: I haven't Haskins name Â
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
I'm not criticizing anyone. I just stated my personal opinion on the matter. Lock, more than any other prospect, reminds me of Mahomes. I'd take that chance all day.
IMO, Lock reminds me of Cutler and that worries me
I don't see that at all. Doesn't have Cutler's arm strength (few do), is bigger, more athletic, doesn't to my knowledge have bad leadership traits.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: I haven't Haskins name Â
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
I'm not criticizing anyone. I just stated my personal opinion on the matter. Lock, more than any other prospect, reminds me of Mahomes. I'd take that chance all day.
IMO, Lock reminds me of Cutler and that worries me
You do realize Cutler was who Mahomes was compared to also right? It was because of the gunslinger style of play.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: I haven't Haskins name Â
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
I'm not criticizing anyone. I just stated my personal opinion on the matter. Lock, more than any other prospect, reminds me of Mahomes. I'd take that chance all day.
IMO, Lock reminds me of Cutler and that worries me
I don't see that at all. Doesn't have Cutler's arm strength (few do), is bigger, more athletic, doesn't to my knowledge have bad leadership traits.
My mistake, I misread that and thought you meant Jones not Lock.
Well said. It sounds like our info matches up. I'd find it hard to believe all of a sudden the Giants were running a game of misdirection here. Anything is possible but I'd doubt it
Giants or not he's getting picked in top 20. There's a disconnect on him. Nfl teams like him a lot more then pundits. I've stated for the Giants it's lock or jones from my understanding. That said, this board doesn't take jones seriously, nfl teams do
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
As always, great to hear tidbits. My thoughts, in case anyone isn’t skipping over my post:
1) Bringing in Haskins could be misdirection to allow someone to fall to them at 6;
2) if they are going to give up a 2 or 3 to move up to 9 for a guy like Lock, it’s silly not to just pick the guy at 6. They are better off picking the QB at 6, D at 17, and then still having the 2 and 3 rather than picking D at 6, QB at 9, and having no 2. I’m not necessarily a quantity over quality guy, but when you need as much as the Giants do, giving up a second to move up is not smart business.
3) I really do hope old dogs are learning new tricks, because the more information that leaks about who they like, the worse it is for them.
As for Jones, I find the arguments counterintuitive. Everyone suggests GMs know more than laypeople like us, but then when it is suggested that NFL people like Jones more than we do, we say they don’t know.
What bothers me most about Jones is that no one actually talks about what Jones does well. It’s all about the coaching he receives, etc. it’s not about him doing this well or him doing that. It’s that there is a Cutcliffe and Eli connection.
Well said. It sounds like our info matches up. I'd find it hard to believe all of a sudden the Giants were running a game of misdirection here. Anything is possible but I'd doubt it
Jtg good stuff. To your point their thinking right now is very much in favor of D at 6. They likely want to give Eli every opportunity to succeed and arent even going to push him out at the end of the year if they feel he is still playing well. Taking a QB at 6 maybe even 17 , the investment is high enough that it almost has to mean this would be Elis last year.
Based on what they're saying I dont know if they want to commit to that. But a 2nd round QB or later is an entirely different scenario. That guy can sit for 2 years.
DG keeps talking about value. I dont see them taking a QBguy at 6 unless they are going to commit that this is Elis last year. And then all the media circus and eye on Eli for every time he struggles even a little calling for the backup to play. I just dont see it. Truthfully in the end I think they go the route of 2nd round QB or later .
Sure they take the 'hit' from the media upfront of not picking a QB sooner but if they really believe in Eli and want to win now its probably the most prudent thing to do.
There's countless commentary from NFL people about why they like jones. I really think it's funny. Non nfl people hate jones but I'm telling you people in the league really like him. He's going top 20 for sure
#1
6th pick one out of Q Williams, Josh Allen, or Nick Bosa fall to the Giants
Giants trade up from 17 to draft Lock or Jones
#2
6th pick one out of Q Williams, Josh Allen, or Nick Bosa fall to the Giants
The Giants trade down from 17 with NE acquiring their 2020 1st, 2019 2nd (64th) and 3rd(73).
There's countless commentary from NFL people about why they like jones. I really think it's funny. Non nfl people hate jones but I'm telling you people in the league really like him. He's going top 20 for sure
just a guess, but I think the people that hate jones don't understand the talent disparity between top tier CFB teams, teams that he played being in a major conference, and what he was surrounded by at Duke. It is the difference between being the starting QB on a bad expansion team and the 2007 NE Patriots times 10. He played against teams that were almost entirely pros - and not just pros, high draft picks - with a bunch of guys who are going pro in something other than sports. And he beat some of them, including back to back bowl games for the first time in Duke history, and left college with a winning record and a solid albeit unspectacular stat sheet. Not hard to theorize what it would have looked like had he played at one of the 20-30 schools that could have surrounded him with multiple pro talents, let alone one of the true top tier schools like Georgia, Bama, Clemson, OSU, OU etc.
I thought Jones's workout was clearly better than Haskins's and Lock's, each of whom have significant mechanical issues. Whether that makes Jones worthy of a first rounder is a different matter, but this just isn't a great QB class.
I also question the logic of picking a QB while Eli is on the roster and burning a year of his rookie contract. The supposed "Kansas City model" is actually just a strategic error on behalf of Kansas City. Instead of pointing to Mahomes's 2018 as a sign of validation, I think people should be asking, "Why wasn't Mahomes the starter in 2017?" The Chiefs paid Smith $17M to be the QB in 2017 when they had a superior alternative on their bench for $3M. That Chiefs team went 10-6 and lost a home playoff game to Tennessee. What would they have done with Mahomes at QB + $14M to spend elsewhere on the roster?
until I watched several video's of his. What is evident is the lack of talent he had to work with. The amount of deep throws that were dropped was alarming. There is plenty to like with Jones and I would be happy if the Giants draft him but I prefer Lock because of his huge upside.
I agree thinking and hearts can change last minute but thats why I think 6 is almost definitely out as a QB pick but 17 has slightly more chance.
But honestly Im betting at least some at the top are hoping to go QB later to not put any undue pressure on Eli. QB position is all about confidence. An aging QB hates having a really highly touted guy under him. Wheyher BBI agrees or not, Giants want to do right by their 2 time Super Bowl winner.
Look at Garapollo lol
So unless you want to send that message to Eli this is your last year its no QB at 6 and probably not a trade up from 17 either. Too much investment with a trade up from 17.
Do any of the 'old top QB guys' have some great QB under them? Brees, Brady, Roth, Rivers?
I think its second round or later with an outside chance at 17 if one of Jones or Lock drop.
Just my best stab as I throw all the tea leaves in a super computer algorithm blender!
I agree thinking and hearts can change last minute but thats why I think 6 is almost definitely out as a QB pick but 17 has slightly more chance.
But honestly Im betting at least some at the top are hoping to go QB later to not put any undue pressure on Eli. QB position is all about confidence. An aging QB hates having a really highly touted guy under him. Wheyher BBI agrees or not, Giants want to do right by their 2 time Super Bowl winner.
Look at Garapollo lol
So unless you want to send that message to Eli this is your last year its no QB at 6 and probably not a trade up from 17 either. Too much investment with a trade up from 17.
Do any of the 'old top QB guys' have some great QB under them? Brees, Brady, Roth, Rivers?
I think its second round or later with an outside chance at 17 if one of Jones or Lock drop.
Just my best stab as I throw all the tea leaves in a super computer algorithm blender!
Ironically both the Chargers and Patriots are two teams that have shown plenty of interest in trading for Rosen. NE also used an early 2nd round pick, their top pick that year, on Garoppolo. The Steelers have used a 4th and 3rd round picks on QB's the past two years to develop behind Roethlisberger. IF the Giants feel that one of these QB's have franchise upside then they would be crazy to pass on him even if they won't play for a year or even two.
RE: The two scenarios that I would be most happy with are the following Â
The Giants trade down from 17 with NE acquiring their 2020 1st, 2019 2nd (64th) and 3rd(73).
That would be an awful trade, especially since NE's as close to a lock to pick 25+ in 2020 as you'll get. So discounting that pick a year and looking at the trade value chart (not perfect, but close) you'd be trading 950 pts for ~800 pts (~300 pts + 270 pts + 225 pts).
If they're dealing #17 to NE, get #32, #64 (or #73) and their 2020 1st. That's ~1160 pts (590 + ~300 + 270) coming back. I'd even take their next lower pick instead of 64/73, but #32 and their 2020 1st would be the starting point.
As always, great to hear tidbits. My thoughts, in case anyone isn’t skipping over my post:
1) Bringing in Haskins could be misdirection to allow someone to fall to them at 6;
2) if they are going to give up a 2 or 3 to move up to 9 for a guy like Lock, it’s silly not to just pick the guy at 6. They are better off picking the QB at 6, D at 17, and then still having the 2 and 3 rather than picking D at 6, QB at 9, and having no 2. I’m not necessarily a quantity over quality guy, but when you need as much as the Giants do, giving up a second to move up is not smart business.
3) I really do hope old dogs are learning new tricks, because the more information that leaks about who they like, the worse it is for them.
As for Jones, I find the arguments counterintuitive. Everyone suggests GMs know more than laypeople like us, but then when it is suggested that NFL people like Jones more than we do, we say they don’t know.
What bothers me most about Jones is that no one actually talks about what Jones does well. It’s all about the coaching he receives, etc. it’s not about him doing this well or him doing that. It’s that there is a Cutcliffe and Eli connection.
It could also be, eliminating him buy a thorough evaluation.
One would hope the priority would be to do what gives them the best Â
to the sidelines in the NFL. He floats the ball out there. Some guys have learned to make it work, but to me I don't want to invest a high pick in someone like that. I get why NFL people like him though, tough, good mechanics, Cutcliffe. I just don't see a guy that is going to be worth a second contract and I don't see the point of drafting a guy like that to waste a year of his rookie contract to have him sit.
really wish I could embrace Shurmur as the coach. I do think my thought processes in general align with Gettleman (build the trenches, rush the QB, etc.) but I'm just not that big of a fan of Shurmur's offense. Despite the media driven BS of Jones being Eli 2.0 I don't see it at all other than in demeanor, coach & size. He is a rhythm passer w/ mobility who's weakness is the long ball. Eli has never been able to throw a swing pass; his best attribute historically has been the long ball and when he was in his prime he was good in the pocket at escaping pressure but would never be confused for being mobile. Now we see with Shurmur's offense the long ball really isn't part of the game, it is more of a rhythm passing game, and the WR corp on the roster goes to show it (none of them are deep threats, more possession slant type receivers). My biggest fear is we draft Jones who I do think fits Shurmur's ideal offense to a T, and then in two years time Shurmur ends up out as the coach and we are left with a niche QB who fit our previous coach nicely but may not fit the future of the franchise.
What sense would it make to hire a new coach that doesn't know how to be successful with the QB? I don't think it works like that.
Which is why the Cardinals-Murray connection is mind-boggling... and pretty stupid.
If the Giants like Lock or Jones, and so does the rest of the league Â
as is being said, then they should take them at 6. Good chance the blue chip on D are gone by that point anyway unless someone deals up for a QB.
If they don't like Lock or Jones enough to take at 6, they should prepare to make a legitimate run at one of the QBs next year i.e. - moving '19 draft assets to '20. Dealing 37 for an extra 1 next year would be an obvious move. All this insider talk, and neither of these options seem to be on the table.
Those who can't understand why some fans are frustrated, this is why. The appearance is of a short sighted strategy out of nostalgia where the likelihood of another ring in the next 1-2 years is highly unlikely.
really wish I could embrace Shurmur as the coach. I do think my thought processes in general align with Gettleman (build the trenches, rush the QB, etc.) but I'm just not that big of a fan of Shurmur's offense. Despite the media driven BS of Jones being Eli 2.0 I don't see it at all other than in demeanor, coach & size. He is a rhythm passer w/ mobility who's weakness is the long ball. Eli has never been able to throw a swing pass; his best attribute historically has been the long ball and when he was in his prime he was good in the pocket at escaping pressure but would never be confused for being mobile. Now we see with Shurmur's offense the long ball really isn't part of the game, it is more of a rhythm passing game, and the WR corp on the roster goes to show it (none of them are deep threats, more possession slant type receivers). My biggest fear is we draft Jones who I do think fits Shurmur's ideal offense to a T, and then in two years time Shurmur ends up out as the coach and we are left with a niche QB who fit our previous coach nicely but may not fit the future of the franchise.
Great post and conclusions.
RE: If the Giants like Lock or Jones, and so does the rest of the league Â
as is being said, then they should take them at 6. Good chance the blue chip on D are gone by that point anyway unless someone deals up for a QB.
If they don't like Lock or Jones enough to take at 6, they should prepare to make a legitimate run at one of the QBs next year i.e. - moving '19 draft assets to '20. Dealing 37 for an extra 1 next year would be an obvious move. All this insider talk, and neither of these options seem to be on the table.
Those who can't understand why some fans are frustrated, this is why. The appearance is of a short sighted strategy out of nostalgia where the likelihood of another ring in the next 1-2 years is highly unlikely.
You said it right when you said "appearance". And then you ascribed your own motivation for what they do to them. I have no doubt at all that their plans and reasons for those plans are more substantive and more in line with long-term team success.
I agree thinking and hearts can change last minute but thats why I think 6 is almost definitely out as a QB pick but 17 has slightly more chance.
But honestly Im betting at least some at the top are hoping to go QB later to not put any undue pressure on Eli. QB position is all about confidence. An aging QB hates having a really highly touted guy under him. Wheyher BBI agrees or not, Giants want to do right by their 2 time Super Bowl winner.
Look at Garapollo lol
So unless you want to send that message to Eli this is your last year its no QB at 6 and probably not a trade up from 17 either. Too much investment with a trade up from 17.
Do any of the 'old top QB guys' have some great QB under them? Brees, Brady, Roth, Rivers?
I think its second round or later with an outside chance at 17 if one of Jones or Lock drop.
Just my best stab as I throw all the tea leaves in a super computer algorithm blender!
Ironically both the Chargers and Patriots are two teams that have shown plenty of interest in trading for Rosen. NE also used an early 2nd round pick, their top pick that year, on Garoppolo. The Steelers have used a 4th and 3rd round picks on QB's the past two years to develop behind Roethlisberger. IF the Giants feel that one of these QB's have franchise upside then they would be crazy to pass on him even if they won't play for a year or even two.
Jay even more interesting is that ALL those picks were outside of the 1st round .
The ones being discussed for Rosen? Outside the first round .
Are you readying JT's posts? This is not me asserting what they will do or what is motivating them. Clearly. I'm responding to what's being reported by our resident asshat.
Are you readying JT's posts? This is not me asserting what they will do or what is motivating them. Clearly. I'm responding to what's being reported by our resident asshat.
I've read them. They're going defense (as they *should*) with their first pick. They're committed to Eli this year. They may (or may not take a QB (Lock or Jones) depending on value.
But that's all consistent with rational team-building. They're not *not* taking a QB at ^ because* of nostalgia. They are going for value. Not that the nostalgia thing would be contradicted by them being interested in Lock and jones or anything anyways...
But onpy as the 2nd pick. I think the arm strength thing is overblown. He jacked a couple that traveled 55 yards in the air during his pro day and while I realize that loft plays a role in that, there are plenty of players who cant up-down a ball. If he can get thru reads, can take a hit and continue to battle (a la Manning against the 49ers in '11), if he can make some plays with his legs (he's plenty fast), I can deal with him missing a few deep balls.
Joe Montana did not have a very strong arm. Cutcliffe says he throws it better than Peyton or Eli.
We can agree to disagree here. Reference Giantz_comeback post at 10:57 which jtGiants agrees with the assessment. That certainly doesn't sound like the priority is long term. That sounds a lot more like finding a solution that doesn't create controversy for the short term, which has been the MO the past few years.
There's countless commentary from NFL people about why they like jones. I really think it's funny. Non nfl people hate jones but I'm telling you people in the league really like him. He's going top 20 for sure
I’m not disagreeing with you that he’s going top 20. I think he undoubtedly will. All I’m saying is when I hear people talk about Murray, they discuss his all around game. Haskins it’s his arm talent. Lock - same thing - arm talent and ability to make plays outside the pocket. Jones: he learned from Cutcliffe.
And just because NFL people like him doesn’t give me the warm and fuzzies. NFL people let Mahomes and Watson slip to 10 and 12, respectively, and they are studs. NFL people drafted Locker and Gabbert inside the top 10 and Ponder at 13 - in the same draft. Gabbert and Locker received much of the same praise that Lock does now: strong arms, mobile, can make plays outside the pocket.
Much like you trust your eyes with Eli, I trust mine with Jones and Lock. I form my own opinions, and I am super high on Murray and Haskins and down on Jones and Lock. NFL people talking Jones up won’t change my opinion of him.
There's countless commentary from NFL people about why they like jones. I really think it's funny. Non nfl people hate jones but I'm telling you people in the league really like him. He's going top 20 for sure
I’m not disagreeing with you that he’s going top 20. I think he undoubtedly will. All I’m saying is when I hear people talk about Murray, they discuss his all around game. Haskins it’s his arm talent. Lock - same thing - arm talent and ability to make plays outside the pocket. Jones: he learned from Cutcliffe.
And just because NFL people like him doesn’t give me the warm and fuzzies. NFL people let Mahomes and Watson slip to 10 and 12, respectively, and they are studs. NFL people drafted Locker and Gabbert inside the top 10 and Ponder at 13 - in the same draft. Gabbert and Locker received much of the same praise that Lock does now: strong arms, mobile, can make plays outside the pocket.
Much like you trust your eyes with Eli, I trust mine with Jones and Lock. I form my own opinions, and I am super high on Murray and Haskins and down on Jones and Lock. NFL people talking Jones up won’t change my opinion of him.
The problem with your example is that the interest in Ponder, Locker and Gabbert was isolated to a few teams and they were all surprise picks. The interest in Jones is much more widespread.
AFC scout: "I think he has some upside although there are some things that are just ordinary about him."
NFC scout: "I think he has a good chance of being a bust. Just like every other Tedford-coached quarterback. Thing I struggle with him is he gets sacked a lot. He doesn't have great ability to change the release of the football. He's mechanically very rigid. Brett Favre can change his release point and find different windows. There will be more growing pains with Alex Smith but in the end he has a much better chance to be much better."
NFC scout: "The guys that Tedford has had, what have they developed into? They're too well-schooled. So mechanical. So robotic. I don't know if they become good pro players. I think Rodgers is in that same mold."
AFC scout: "I don't like him. He's a clone of Harrington and Boller. They all throw the same way. What have those guys done? Nothing. If you take him in the second round, fine. Heady guy. They do a marvelous job of coaching quarterbacks there. I don't think he's as good as the top quarterbacks coming out last year."
AFC scout: "I don't think he's in the class of the quarterbacks that came out last year. Strong arm. Pretty good athlete. Still has some holes in his game."
Bill Polian, Indianapolis: "I see a guy who has good arm strength. I see some athletic ability. I see a guy who was pretty good with a good team. I see a guy who's in a pretty efficient offense. Am I certain that he's going to come in and lead my team to the Promised Land? I can't say that. I'm not even sure I can say that about Alex Smith."
AFC scout: "He's a system quarterback. 3-, 5-, 7-step guy. Can't create on his own. Panics under pressure. Gets flustered easy. I don't think there's a quarterback in the draft worthy of a first-round pick. I'm dead serious. None of them are worth it."
Rich Snead, Tennessee: "I like him. I just don't know if he's maxed out. He's more accurate than (Kyle) Boller but probably not as athletic. He's a better player than Akili Smith. He's more athletic than (Trent) Dilfer was. He's a little more mobile than Joey Harrington. He had to go to a JC because no one would recruit him because they said he was too small. He's been busting his (expletive) his whole life to get to this point. I just don't know how much more he has to give."
Does some of that sound familiar? Now before anyone flames away I am not suggesting that Daniel Jones is the next Rodgers I just see a lot of the same comments.
as is being said, then they should take them at 6. Good chance the blue chip on D are gone by that point anyway unless someone deals up for a QB.
If they don't like Lock or Jones enough to take at 6, they should prepare to make a legitimate run at one of the QBs next year i.e. - moving '19 draft assets to '20. Dealing 37 for an extra 1 next year would be an obvious move. All this insider talk, and neither of these options seem to be on the table.
Those who can't understand why some fans are frustrated, this is why. The appearance is of a short sighted strategy out of nostalgia where the likelihood of another ring in the next 1-2 years is highly unlikely.
I don't think you can Plan on trading for 2020 picks. If the situation arises you can take advantage of it but no team is going to trade their 2020 1 for our #2 today
look at the hiring of Gettleman. Say what you want about if this was a good or bad decision but what it was was clearly emphasizing a quick or short term fix.
When hiring him you had to think you will be lucky to get 5 years out of this guy. How many teams hire a GM with that kind of attitude?
Fair enough. In truth I totally disagree. I don't like Haskins at all. I also think Murray will never last in the league. I do like lock and jones better. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
So you assume the Giants view his physical skills exactly as you do so therefor they are just "intrigued" enough with his Manning connection to pull the trigger regardless of the fact that both you and the Giants view him in lockstep regarding his inferior physical QB traits? Are you a scout for the Giants?
I don't think that. My opinion about Jones's physical attributes are mine and mine alone. I am connecting the dots why else the Giants may like Jones - Eli, Duke, Cutcliffe, etc.
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
Could he be brilliant enough to be feeding certain asshats with information intended to deflect his interest in Haskins at #6?
It’s common knowledge that some media regularly read Erics bbi and knowing how many media just regurgitate what they hear or read from “sources “.
It just seems weird that Haskins lack of foot speed or agility or whatever you want to call it would cause him to slide. Teams were impressed with his football IQ. Kid has a spotless background, great arm, leadership ability etc etc..... I’m not buying this slide for a minute
This. FWIW I also don't buy the Haskins "slide" and Giants "lack of interest." All the attention they've paid to him, including his visit this week, after they have dropped him down their list? Oh and Gil Brandt backed it up with his opinion re Jones vs. Haskins? Since when is Gil Brandt related to the Giants thought process?
FWIW McShay isn't buying it either, not 100%. He now thinks Haskins has slid on the Giants' draft board, but still rates him as the best QB in his class: most accurate passer, plus arm strength, tremendous improvement during only 1 year as a starter, team leader, played his best ball in the biggest games vs top defenses at the end of the the year, great kid, kills the white board stuff.
Haskins main issue, some footwork stuff, is exactly the kind of thing Shurmur and his staff should refine and improve. How about our asshats' are being fed disinfo re Jones or "defense only" at 6 (jtgiants or JonC)?
Unless there is fear re Haskins' conditioning that he will turn out to be another JaMarcus Russel... but his personality and chalkboard knowledge are nothing like Russel's who was famous for his total disdain for play diagram study or understanding.
If fact right off the bat that was Russel's biggest red flag IIRC. It's one of the Haskins' strong suits.
IMO we are witnessing a masterful job by DG and the FO disseminating disinformation. I am linking McShay's most recent interview re Haskins'. He acknowledges Haskins' slide on the Giants' board relative to some DL players (Oliver, Wilkins, Sweat) but still thinks Haskins is going to be a top 10 pick, and that some team will trade up to get him.
Of course McShay (and I) could be totally wrong. There will be one or another seductive D front 7 player sitting at 6, for sure.
But I still think the Giants want Haskins at 6; they just don't want anyone to trade up above them to get him first. McShay on Haskins, Giants - ( New Window )
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
Its amazing the lengths some people will go to keep supporting Â
a sneaking suspicion the Giants are going to be in on Rosen and go defense at #6 and #17.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
However, nothing at all is pointing to the Giants liking him. Everything, from the local media to BBI insiders with proven track records, are saying the same thing...defense at 6 and Lock/Jones with a pick involving 17 or more defense. If this is a carefully orchestrated smoke screen, then it will be the first one I've seen following the Giants drafts in the internet era.
RE: RE: You guys can choose to believe what you will Â
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
All that matters is who they expect at #6. I haven't heard Haskins name at all, which usually a good barometer of interest. Smokescreens are something this franchise hasn't been good at, if he was a prime target it would be out there in the media.
a sneaking suspicion the Giants are going to be in on Rosen and go defense at #6 and #17.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
Just MHO.
somebody's grabbing Haskins by pick 15, I think a bit higher. A new CBS mock has Washington jumping the giants to get him at 5. Just a week ago teams were described as over "the moon for him". Now nobody wants him? I don't buy it.
RE: RE: You guys can choose to believe what you will Â
QB and also Gettleman has said as much as he wouldn't mind trading up for a QB. To this I would say we can reach the following conclusions:
1) They don't see a QB worthwhile of the 6 pick. We can't say whether or not Murray would be that or they are just assuming he's gone but either way they don't really seem to be looking for a QB @ 6
2) It seems likely that at least one if not more of Lock, Jones, Haskins (I think perhaps even in that order) will be a pick they are happy to make at 17
3) At least one of those 3 mentioned above they would be willing to trade up from 17 at the right price
4) Very possible they are willing to sit tight and think that they can get another impact player if 4 QBs are drafted before 17 (Bush or Dexter Lawrence would be my guesses for guys they would be happy to take at 17)
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
Mayfield stock dropped when he was sacked by that cop so easily. Where was the speed and elusiveness. He was not clean at all.
a sneaking suspicion the Giants are going to be in on Rosen and go defense at #6 and #17.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
Just MHO.
Haskins possibly in the teens is my opinion. He could go to the Bengals, but I won't surprised if he's there even at #17.
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
Mayfield stock dropped when he was sacked by that cop so easily. Where was the speed and elusiveness. He was not clean at all.
Sorry in the eyes of fans and the media. No one thought with his question marks someone would risk pick #1 on him. Browns were willing to roll the dice and it seems to be paying off.
Last week he said he read heavily into the fact that Chris Mara left the owners' meetings to attend the Duke workout.
Piecing together what we've been hearing, a defensive player at #6 and a trade up in front of Miami at #13 to get Jones seems like a strong possibility. Remember also that Miami is coached by a Belichick disciple...they seem unlikely to trade up. And in any event, the rumor is they are targeting Tua next year.
Lots of ties to Jones:
- Gettleman mentioning "KC Model"
- Cutcliff connection
- Strong Giants contingent at Duke workout
- Kiper has Jones as top QB; Kiper's mentor is Ernie Accorsi
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
All that matters is who they expect at #6. I haven't heard Haskins name at all, which usually a good barometer of interest. Smokescreens are something this franchise hasn't been good at, if he was a prime target it would be out there in the media.
If your contact(JT answer this as well please) were to tell you, "The Giants are very interested in player XXXX and the Giants are afraid someone will jump in front of them to nab player XXXX" would you leak that the Giants are interested in Player XXXX or help the Giants with disinformation on player XXXX?
RE: I think they've been pretty clear that they aren't going to force Â
QB and also Gettleman has said as much as he wouldn't mind trading up for a QB. To this I would say we can reach the following conclusions:
1) They don't see a QB worthwhile of the 6 pick. We can't say whether or not Murray would be that or they are just assuming he's gone but either way they don't really seem to be looking for a QB @ 6
2) It seems likely that at least one if not more of Lock, Jones, Haskins (I think perhaps even in that order) will be a pick they are happy to make at 17
3) At least one of those 3 mentioned above they would be willing to trade up from 17 at the right price
4) Very possible they are willing to sit tight and think that they can get another impact player if 4 QBs are drafted before 17 (Bush or Dexter Lawrence would be my guesses for guys they would be happy to take at 17)
if this is true it is a weird way to approach the qb position. Letting a qb fall to you, is simply bizarre. in the modern nfl you have to make a decision about who you want and go after him. You are suggesting they are just meh on the position and will take whatever scraps are left over. if true i continue to worry that this front office does not know how to valuate the most important position in the game.
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Exactly because they had interest in them. Doesn't mean after they have spent as much time as they have on him to say they have zero interest doesn't add up for me. Doesn't mean they like him better than Daniel Jones or Lock or Murray for example. However to say zero interest with all we have done... Don't be shocked if he is the pick and don't be shocked if he isn't.
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Exactly because they had interest in them. Doesn't mean after they have spent as much time as they have on him to say they have zero interest doesn't add up for me. Doesn't mean they like him better than Daniel Jones or Lock or Murray for example. However to say zero interest with all we have done... Don't be shocked if he is the pick and don't be shocked if he isn't.
It was the same thing with Rosen last year. The Giants even went out to dinner with Rosen. I remember both JonC and hitdog mentioning how weird it was that they hadn't heard anything about Rosen from their sources.
That will probably be on the defensive side of the ball. He wants a difference maker with that pick on defense. The rest of the draft will play out the same way with BPAs till the 5th round. You can create a BPA by trading up or down as well.
That will probably be on the defensive side of the ball. He wants a difference maker with that pick on defense. The rest of the draft will play out the same way with BPAs till the 5th round. You can create a BPA by trading up or down as well.
That will probably be on the defensive side of the ball. He wants a difference maker with that pick on defense. The rest of the draft will play out the same way with BPAs till the 5th round. You can create a BPA by trading up or down as well.
BPA is a fallacy. Whether the Giants take a QB at 6 or pass on one, they are clearly targeting positions they perceive to represent their biggest needs. That’s just the way it is. No one picks via BPA in the draft. All drafting is need-based.
RE: RE: Think DG takes the BPA at #6 no matter what. Â
That will probably be on the defensive side of the ball. He wants a difference maker with that pick on defense. The rest of the draft will play out the same way with BPAs till the 5th round. You can create a BPA by trading up or down as well.
BPA is a fallacy. Whether the Giants take a QB at 6 or pass on one, they are clearly targeting positions they perceive to represent their biggest needs. That’s just the way it is. No one picks via BPA in the draft. All drafting is need-based.
It is a fallacy for a different reason. Smart teams factor in positional value, something DG has said he does not consider, because, you know, computers are stupid nerd things...
and there wasnt the Eli connection, this board would be much more positive on him. just a fact.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
I would add that if Daniel Jones was a Duke QB who wore number 17 we would also feel much better about him. A few of us from the mid 90's have some PTSD from Dave Brown.
Jon, By this statement I am going to assume that we want a Pass Rusher at 6 and a QB at 17 or a slight trade up ( Jones being the target )?
Sound about right?
The first part is what I'm hearing, second part is part tea leaves part opinion ... but I don't have a sense of Jones > Lock or vice versa, for example.
You people need to stop bothering jt, JonC, and the other asshats. Â
That will probably be on the defensive side of the ball. He wants a difference maker with that pick on defense. The rest of the draft will play out the same way with BPAs till the 5th round. You can create a BPA by trading up or down as well.
BPA is a fallacy. Whether the Giants take a QB at 6 or pass on one, they are clearly targeting positions they perceive to represent their biggest needs. That’s just the way it is. No one picks via BPA in the draft. All drafting is need-based.
It is a fallacy for a different reason. Smart teams factor in positional value, something DG has said he does not consider, because, you know, computers are stupid nerd things...
That’s another reason I can’t stand the guy. Knowledge us power, and he openly mocked a reporter who even suggested they look at analytics. When a person blatantly ignores open, free avenues of information, they are not suited for the job. I’m not suggesting you have to be bound by analytics. However, to ignore their existence is malpractice.
In any event, assuming JonC and JT are right, the fact that they are saying we are going this way at 6 and this way at 17 tells you they’re not going BPA. How could they possibly know what BPA will be at 17? They are focused on need and need alone. The D is horrid, and they are focused on getting players to help there. Now, could need align with value? Sure. But make no mistake about it: they are drafting for need and need alone.
DG made it very clear early on in the last draft. Â
He believes the draft should be BPA driven. No need picks. No QB in this draft may be the BPA at #6 in this draft. Believe what you choose. So far so good, with DG for me.
RE: DG made it very clear early on in the last draft. Â
He believes the draft should be BPA driven. No need picks. No QB in this draft may be the BPA at #6 in this draft. Believe what you choose. So far so good, with DG for me.
If you wait to draft a QB for BPA you'll never get one period. Unless you have a guy that you have rated differently than everyone else does. QBs as pure prospects get overdrafted and if you want one, you'll probably have to overdraft. Unless its 2021 and you have the 1st pick. In that case Lawrence may be the BPA.
RE: You people need to stop bothering jt, JonC, and the other asshats. Â
Just call Dave Gettleman directly. I'm sure he'll be happy to talk to you.
That is ridiculous ... You don't think Dave Gettleman is a little busy right now! Come on man. Maybe after the draft I will try and give him a call though.
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Exactly because they had interest in them. Doesn't mean after they have spent as much time as they have on him to say they have zero interest doesn't add up for me. Doesn't mean they like him better than Daniel Jones or Lock or Murray for example. However to say zero interest with all we have done... Don't be shocked if he is the pick and don't be shocked if he isn't.
It was the same thing with Rosen last year. The Giants even went out to dinner with Rosen. I remember both JonC and hitdog mentioning how weird it was that they hadn't heard anything about Rosen from their sources.
Right because we picked 2nd.... We could of had Rosen as 8th best player for all we know after scouting him. This year we have a second pick at 17. Making people like Haskins, Lock, Jones, and all the other players that may be there at 17 more likely than last year when it was Saquon, Sam Darnold, Bradley Chubb, or Nelson.
Right because we picked 2nd.... We could of had Rosen as 8th best player for all we know after scouting him. This year we have a second pick at 17. Making people like Haskins, Lock, Jones, and all the other players that may be there at 17 more likely than last year when it was Saquon, Sam Darnold, Bradley Chubb, or Nelson.
My point is that the two insiders have not heard a single report about the Giants liking Haskins just as two said last year in regard to Rosen. This means that after all the work they work they put into Rosen they didn't like him and obviously still don't if they can now get him for a 2nd round pick. They clearly don't like Haskins either but we do know that they like Lock and Jones.
Right because we picked 2nd.... We could of had Rosen as 8th best player for all we know after scouting him. This year we have a second pick at 17. Making people like Haskins, Lock, Jones, and all the other players that may be there at 17 more likely than last year when it was Saquon, Sam Darnold, Bradley Chubb, or Nelson.
My point is that the two insiders have not heard a single report about the Giants liking Haskins just as two said last year in regard to Rosen. This means that after all the work they work they put into Rosen they didn't like him and obviously still don't if they can now get him for a 2nd round pick. They clearly don't like Haskins either but we do know that they like Lock and Jones.
I don't think we know everything we think we know. But we will soon enough. one week and one day away!
RE: RE: RE: RE: Think DG takes the BPA at #6 no matter what. Â
That will probably be on the defensive side of the ball. He wants a difference maker with that pick on defense. The rest of the draft will play out the same way with BPAs till the 5th round. You can create a BPA by trading up or down as well.
BPA is a fallacy. Whether the Giants take a QB at 6 or pass on one, they are clearly targeting positions they perceive to represent their biggest needs. That’s just the way it is. No one picks via BPA in the draft. All drafting is need-based.
It is a fallacy for a different reason. Smart teams factor in positional value, something DG has said he does not consider, because, you know, computers are stupid nerd things...
That’s another reason I can’t stand the guy. Knowledge us power, and he openly mocked a reporter who even suggested they look at analytics. When a person blatantly ignores open, free avenues of information, they are not suited for the job. I’m not suggesting you have to be bound by analytics. However, to ignore their existence is malpractice.
In any event, assuming JonC and JT are right, the fact that they are saying we are going this way at 6 and this way at 17 tells you they’re not going BPA. How could they possibly know what BPA will be at 17? They are focused on need and need alone. The D is horrid, and they are focused on getting players to help there. Now, could need align with value? Sure. But make no mistake about it: they are drafting for need and need alone.
Drafting a soft Andy Daltonesque qb or literal hot trash QB with the 2nd pick over a HoFer is malpractice.
Just call Dave Gettleman directly. I'm sure he'll be happy to talk to you.
That is ridiculous ... You don't think Dave Gettleman is a little busy right now! Come on man. Maybe after the draft I will try and give him a call though.
He likes you. He told me he did. He'd never be too busy to take your call. Trust me.
One of his posts he mentioned the possibility of a trade. Didn't say who for who just a possibility.
One of his posts he mentioned the possibility of a trade. Didn't say who for who just a possibility.
Is it a draft trade or a player trade?
LOL. Come on folks.
LOL. Come on folks.
yeah no shit
Let me help you here.
If the Giants are smart, which is obviously another debate in and of itself, they don’t draft any of these QBs in the first round.
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
I don't particularly like Jones, but you lose credibility when you call him a 3rd round prospect.
Jones might rocket up his board if Giants were completely against him.
You get to work in a bash against:
- Eli
- Cutcliffe
- Jints Central
- Archie
- Jones himself
It's like the Perfect Storm for trolls.
You get to work in a bash against:
- Eli
- Cutcliffe
- Jints Central
- Archie
- Jones himself
It's like the Perfect Storm for trolls.
He just loves to hear himself bitch. Good lord. He's brutal. According to him Jones is a 3rd round pick. Yet a HOF GM has him ranked as the 2nd QB and ranked 17th overall.
Dont you mean he is getting picked in the top 20? Or am I misreading your statement?
Quote:
In last week or so. As for trade.....ill keep quiet on that but still very possible but we'll have to see.
Is it a draft trade or a player trade?
Can't they also trade a player on draft day? I'll let jt speak for himself. But if we look back at what was written regarding a possible trade, jt said that some players should rent not buy.
Now, we can interpret who would have the most trade value and it was commonly assumed that Shep was a possibility heading into the final year of his contract at the time. But with the recent extension, it wouldn't be likely that Shep is traded. Of course, "we didn't sign him to trade him" is the reason that no player is safe from trade.
But if you look at the rest of the roster, Engram could be a target for trade. He has 2 years remaining at cost controlled rookie salary. He is a good receiver and an awful blocker. But what he is good at, he isn't great. If a player is going to be one-dimensional, then they need to be great at what they do especially with a 1st round draft grade. He is a Jerry pick that emphasized a basketball on grass mentality. DG is building a run-first offense. Engram and the 17th pick for a move up for Hockenson?
Quote:
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
I don't particularly like Jones, but you lose credibility when you call him a 3rd round prospect.
Why? I’ve tried every which way to like Jones as a top prospect. But I see absolutely nothing in his game that is a plus or plus-plus category to warrant a first round investment. So a third round grade seems very reasonable.
1) Drew Lock
2) Daniel Jones
3) Kyler Murray
4) Will Grier
Haskins is not a guy I want at all. Just seems like a guy who will be functional- ala David Garrard, Stan Humphries (after knee injury) etc.. Minimal escape ability.
Quote:
In comment 14389548 jtgiants said:
Quote:
In last week or so. As for trade.....ill keep quiet on that but still very possible but we'll have to see.
Is it a draft trade or a player trade?
Can't they also trade a player on draft day? I'll let jt speak for himself. But if we look back at what was written regarding a possible trade, jt said that some players should rent not buy.
Now, we can interpret who would have the most trade value and it was commonly assumed that Shep was a possibility heading into the final year of his contract at the time. But with the recent extension, it wouldn't be likely that Shep is traded. Of course, "we didn't sign him to trade him" is the reason that no player is safe from trade.
But if you look at the rest of the roster, Engram could be a target for trade. He has 2 years remaining at cost controlled rookie salary. He is a good receiver and an awful blocker. But what he is good at, he isn't great. If a player is going to be one-dimensional, then they need to be great at what they do especially with a 1st round draft grade. He is a Jerry pick that emphasized a basketball on grass mentality. DG is building a run-first offense. Engram and the 17th pick for a move up for Hockenson?
Makes sense.
I was thinking perhaps Jackrabbit to a contender who needs a CB for a day 3 pick. Putting Jenkins on a legit contender keeps him focused and motivated. I’m not sure how he’d perform here if the team is irrelevant come Columbus Day.
You get to work in a bash against:
- Eli
- Cutcliffe
- Jints Central
- Archie
- Jones himself
It's like the Perfect Storm for trolls.
It as if BW is writing a Mad-Libs with only the words you listed above to choose from to fill in the blanks. Being able to use all in a single post is the highlight of his morning crap session.
jt do you think either Lock or Jones is the pick at 6? Thanks!
You get to work in a bash against:
- Eli
- Cutcliffe
- Jints Central
- Archie
- Jones himself
It's like the Perfect Storm for trolls.
I’ve never bashed Eli in these Jones comparisons. I’ve said Jones can’t touch Eli’s arm talent. And that’s one of the reasons I find the comparisons to Eli absolutely laughable. At least Eli and Ole Miss, with less talent than the other top SEC programs at the time, were very competitive and won big games in the SEC.
Very little thinking like this happens when fans are evaluating players. In this very thread there is an example of someone valuing their own evaluation skills over professionals. Not to say they(pros)can't be wrong, but who is more likely to be wrong? Good for you
You've said many times that Eli vouching for Jones, knowing him through the camps and through Cutcliffe is factoring into a decision on drafting him.
I don't like Jones, either, but I've never made any context of that to apply to the Giants. You've already created a narrative where he's drafted and playing in Blue.
I think it’s more mixed than you suggest, but, yes, there does seem to be some real first round interest in Jones.
So if you like a taller version of Andy Dalton, Jones is your guy.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
Quote:
Do you know how they rate lock vs Jones
Let me help you here.
If the Giants are smart, which is obviously another debate in and of itself, they don’t draft any of these QBs in the first round.
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
Whew!! I was getting a little worried your tagline wouldn't make it into the post. :)
Quote:
I’ve never bashed Eli in these Jones comparisons
You've said many times that Eli vouching for Jones, knowing him through the camps and through Cutcliffe is factoring into a decision on drafting him.
I don't like Jones, either, but I've never made any context of that to apply to the Giants. You've already created a narrative where he's drafted and playing in Blue.
That’s not bashing the Eli. That’s bashing Jints Central.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
I totally agree. I happen to like Jones a lot. He was a player that definitely elevated his team at Duke. I get people not liking this guy, or liking some other guy, it’s all just a guess. However, the hate for the guy is just mob psychology at this point.
Not a fan of Jones (or any of these QB’s to be honest) at all. Let someone else draft Jones and save the NYG from themselves. The fact that they like him as much as you claim, to me, is concerning. Better options were available last year and, by many accounts, the options next year should be better.
Not sure how to read this post. General statement or info in the tea leaves?
Are you at liberty to say you’ve heard similar rumblings or no? No details is understandable
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
If Jones played better and demonstrated higher level physical skills than he would be viewed more favorably.
The fact the Giants are intrigued with Jones because of those peripheral items - like attending the Manning’s camp - is very disconcerting.
If Jones is supposedly liked by many teams, are they all fixated on Jones attending the Manning's camp?
You continue to just fabricate shit out of thin air.
And
Its his job...to make Jones more valuable.
So, that info must be taken with a grain of salt.
Seems odd to me....that 4 QBs go
Arizona Murray
Denver Lock
Cincinnati Haskins
But who is targeting Jones?
Giants Jones
Washington Rosin
What other team?
Quote:
guy if you are a poster like bw.
You get to work in a bash against:
- Eli
- Cutcliffe
- Jints Central
- Archie
- Jones himself
It's like the Perfect Storm for trolls.
He just loves to hear himself bitch. Good lord. He's brutal. According to him Jones is a 3rd round pick. Yet a HOF GM has him ranked as the 2nd QB and ranked 17th overall.
Agreed. Always talks like he's smarter than everyone else and just comes off like an arrogant, smug asshole.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
I would add that if Daniel Jones was a Duke QB who wore number 17 we would also feel much better about him. A few of us from the mid 90's have some PTSD from Dave Brown.
Thanks again jt as always. And there does seem to be a groundswell for Jones. As we've said, I don't really like him and I don't want him on the Giants, but if the Giants are convinced he's going in the top 20, I've thought since the Odell trade that #17 was always a pivot point to move up to get a guy they like. They have all those extra picks to package to do so.
And I'm a million % on board with going with the best defensive player available at 6. There is nothing I hate more than watching a Giants team that has no defense. It's wrong. It's not the Giants. The only thing that was fun about 2016 was watching the defense gel late and stop teams to win games towards the end of the season. I think Gettleman or Shurmur mentioned the Giants need to "finish". That means defense. I am hoping to come out of this draft with no less than 2 starters and up to 4/5 contributors on defense as rookies. And to me that #6 pick has to be an impact defender.
Quote:
and there wasnt the Eli connection, this board would be much more positive on him. just a fact.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
If Jones played better and demonstrated higher level physical skills than he would be viewed more favorably.
The fact the Giants are intrigued with Jones because of those peripheral items - like attending the Manning’s camp - is very disconcerting.
So you assume the Giants view his physical skills exactly as you do so therefor they are just "intrigued" enough with his Manning connection to pull the trigger regardless of the fact that both you and the Giants view him in lockstep regarding his inferior physical QB traits? Are you a scout for the Giants?
Quote:
until they're on the clock, for many obvious reasons. This is something you should be ok waiting for.
Not sure how to read this post. General statement or info in the tea leaves?
Are you at liberty to say you’ve heard similar rumblings or no? No details is understandable
General statement, this info isn't likely to hit the Internet.
Quote:
and there wasnt the Eli connection, this board would be much more positive on him. just a fact.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
If Jones played better and demonstrated higher level physical skills than he would be viewed more favorably.
The fact the Giants are intrigued with Jones because of those peripheral items - like attending the Manning’s camp - is very disconcerting.
You do realize most of these guys attend the Manning passing academy right?
From just this draft class Lock, Kyle Shurmur, McSorley, Ryan Finley, Tyree Jackson, Stidham, Minshew, Easton Stick & more attended the event.
Quote:
In comment 14389575 JonC said:
Quote:
until they're on the clock, for many obvious reasons. This is something you should be ok waiting for.
Not sure how to read this post. General statement or info in the tea leaves?
Are you at liberty to say you’ve heard similar rumblings or no? No details is understandable
General statement, this info isn't likely to hit the Internet.
Thank you
Quote:
In comment 14389569 bw in dc said:
Quote:
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
I don't particularly like Jones, but you lose credibility when you call him a 3rd round prospect.
Why? I’ve tried every which way to like Jones as a top prospect. But I see absolutely nothing in his game that is a plus or plus-plus category to warrant a first round investment. So a third round grade seems very reasonable.
I disagree. I think the only thing NOT plus on him is his arm. Athleticism, decision making, going through progrssions, accuracy on short to intermediate throws are all plus IMO. Even arm strength on short to intermediate throws is close to plus. The only thing not plus is on deep balls.
Every QB has flaws. Hell basically every prospect does. Darnold is a turnover machine. Josh Allen can't hit the ocean from a boat. Josh Rosen has attitude and injury issues. It's impossible to say last year was a stronger class then this year.
Most people said the 2017 class was weak. Yet Trubisky went 11-3 last year. Mahomes was the best QB in the NFL and Deshaun Watson went 11-5 with 26 TDs and 9 INTs.
First off, I will say I love JT's contributions to the board. But I am going to have to disagree with this assessment. If you like a QB as your franchise QB, you don't get cute. You take him at 6. Period. I don't want a guy they didn't like enough to take at 6.
I am not worried about Cincy or Miami taking Jones but I think Washington will take him if he is on the board unless they turn their sights back on Rosen. The Giants would have to trade up to 13 or 14 to get Jones. My buddy is a huge Phins fan and he has continues to say that Miami is 100% in on Tua next year and will not take one this year even if Lock, Haskins, and Jones fall to their pick. He also said that there are rumors that Miami wants to trade down in order to accumulate more picks in 2020 in case they need to move up for Tua.
Quote:
I have said from day 1 it's defense at 6. I do think the Giants wanted lock or jones at 17. They will both be gone by then most likely. What that means is the Giants have some interesting decisions to make in the next 8 days. I believe they will take defense at 6 in the end.
First off, I will say I love JT's contributions to the board. But I am going to have to disagree with this assessment. If you like a QB as your franchise QB, you don't get cute. You take him at 6. Period. I don't want a guy they didn't like enough to take at 6.
I don't think they take a QB this year. I think they're going to build the team and then go all in on Herbert next year who is the guy they supposedly loved this year.
Quote:
In comment 14389613 jtgiants said:
Quote:
I have said from day 1 it's defense at 6. I do think the Giants wanted lock or jones at 17. They will both be gone by then most likely. What that means is the Giants have some interesting decisions to make in the next 8 days. I believe they will take defense at 6 in the end.
First off, I will say I love JT's contributions to the board. But I am going to have to disagree with this assessment. If you like a QB as your franchise QB, you don't get cute. You take him at 6. Period. I don't want a guy they didn't like enough to take at 6.
I don't think they take a QB this year. I think they're going to build the team and then go all in on Herbert next year who is the guy they supposedly loved this year.
Apparently they also have a hard on for Fromm.
Quote:
In comment 14389613 jtgiants said:
Quote:
I don't think they take a QB this year. I think they're going to build the team and then go all in on Herbert next year who is the guy they supposedly loved this year.
Then they should try like hell to get another 1st rounder during this draft for 2020.
Quote:
In comment 14389700 crooza172 said:
Quote:
In comment 14389613 jtgiants said:
Quote:
I don't think they take a QB this year. I think they're going to build the team and then go all in on Herbert next year who is the guy they supposedly loved this year.
Then they should try like hell to get another 1st rounder during this draft for 2020.
This is why I loved the NE trading for 17 rumor. The offer was supposedly NE's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd to move up to 17 for a TE. I would prefer to get NE's 2020 1st instead of the 32nd pick this year.
Thanks jt, I know a lot can change in the time leading up to the draft but I appreciate you sharing.
Quote:
In comment 14389704 Big Rick in FL said:
Quote:
In comment 14389700 crooza172 said:
Quote:
In comment 14389613 jtgiants said:
Quote:
I don't think they take a QB this year. I think they're going to build the team and then go all in on Herbert next year who is the guy they supposedly loved this year.
Then they should try like hell to get another 1st rounder during this draft for 2020.
This is why I loved the NE trading for 17 rumor. The offer was supposedly NE's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd to move up to 17 for a TE. I would prefer to get NE's 2020 1st instead of the 32nd pick this year.
I would absolutely love something like this. I feel like NYG have put off the 'next QB' thing for long enough that that now would be a silly time to force it with the stacked 2020 class staring them in the face.
At this point, I'd rather they do their 'we can win this year' thing (as much as I disagree with it) and make next year's draft all about getting one of the QBs.
Defense at #6 is all I've got right now. It sounds like they like Lock or Jones at #17. I'm curious if they would spend to trade up to the Bills spot at #9 for a QB.
In that scenario - is there any interest in Haskins at 17? Is he basically off their board or does he just have a second (or later) round grade?
I appreciate hearing that they favor Lock & Jones but would love to hear where they think Haskins makes sense (if at all).
Thanks!
In that scenario - is there any interest in Haskins at 17? Is he basically off their board or does he just have a second (or later) round grade?
I appreciate hearing that they favor Lock & Jones but would love to hear where they think Haskins makes sense (if at all).
Thanks!
Clearly they have interest in Haskins regardless of what was said here. They had an Army to his pro day and had him in just yesterday for a top 30 visit.
The Giants need so much help everywhere on this team. They simply must get immediate starters with their first three picks and build quality depth with the rest of this draft. Then they will finally be at the starting line to go full throttle on quarterback succession...
The Browns have given us a beautiful thirty year road map of how not to do quarterback succession... Let's hope that the Giants have heeded the grueling lessons of their futility and make sensible choices starting next week. Reliving the folly of the Browns' mistakes over the next decade will make the past seven years seem like a blissful dream...
So, no Haskins at 6 jt, and the preference is for Lock or Jones at 17, but if they aren't available and Haskins is - could he be in play?
ESPN - Jordan - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 14389573 section125 said:
Quote:
In comment 14389569 bw in dc said:
Quote:
If they stupidly do, then Lock is the much better prospect.
If they are galactically stupid, they draft Jones, a third round prospect, because they are stuck in that “Giants Way” mentality, and like that Jones is a Eli, 2.0. It’s a completely fake 2.0 but the Cutcliffe, Manning, etc parts completely fool the dopes at Jints Central...
I don't particularly like Jones, but you lose credibility when you call him a 3rd round prospect.
Why? I’ve tried every which way to like Jones as a top prospect. But I see absolutely nothing in his game that is a plus or plus-plus category to warrant a first round investment. So a third round grade seems very reasonable.
I disagree. I think the only thing NOT plus on him is his arm. Athleticism, decision making, going through progrssions, accuracy on short to intermediate throws are all plus IMO. Even arm strength on short to intermediate throws is close to plus. The only thing not plus is on deep balls.
Even that is incorrect. He has a strong arm. Every scouting report says that short to intermediate his arm is strong, but he puts too much air under the ball on deep ones. So if his arm is strong on intermediate throws how is it not strong all over the field? This sounds like poor technique on deep balls, not arm strength. Your arm strength does not change on the length of the throw. Note the reports do not say strong "enough" on short and intermediate - they say strong.
Right, but if the rumors are true that the NFL likes Jones better than the internet does, maybe they go with Jones or Lock and the guy who slips to 17 is Haskins.
I'm trying to figure out in that particular scenario, what do the asshats hear - would there be interest in Haskins @ 17 or do they think he's not really the future for them at QB?
Quote:
Assuming the following - Giants go D at 6 and are unable to trade up - watching Lock and Jones go ahead of them at 17.
In that scenario - is there any interest in Haskins at 17? Is he basically off their board or does he just have a second (or later) round grade?
I appreciate hearing that they favor Lock & Jones but would love to hear where they think Haskins makes sense (if at all).
Thanks!
Clearly they have interest in Haskins regardless of what was said here. They had an Army to his pro day and had him in just yesterday for a top 30 visit.
Yeah, that makes it crystal clear.
Quote:
Just checking in. Have you heard any rumblings as of late?
Defense at #6 is all I've got right now. It sounds like they like Lock or Jones at #17. I'm curious if they would spend to trade up to the Bills spot at #9 for a QB.
Question for Jon or jt. Whose their top QB? Lock or Jones? So if the Bills are on the clock. Lock, Jones & Haskins are available and they decide to trade up. Who do they take?
Thanks JonC. I agree with crooza guy that there is obviously some level of interest or they wouldn't be scouting him so hard, but I find it very curious that we aren't hearing ANYTHING about him through our asshats, meaning we're not hearing that they don't like him either, just that they have Lock/Jones ahead of him and that he's not a target at 6.
Often we hear a guy isn't liked, but not now. Makes me wonder why.
Very well could be, but what value does he really hold? He has a cheap rookie contract and at the very least offers a solid rotation. What team would give anything of value for him?
Quote:
Assuming the following - Giants go D at 6 and are unable to trade up - watching Lock and Jones go ahead of them at 17.
In that scenario - is there any interest in Haskins at 17? Is he basically off their board or does he just have a second (or later) round grade?
I appreciate hearing that they favor Lock & Jones but would love to hear where they think Haskins makes sense (if at all).
Thanks!
Clearly they have interest in Haskins regardless of what was said here. They had an Army to his pro day and had him in just yesterday for a top 30 visit.
It’s common knowledge that some media regularly read Erics bbi and knowing how many media just regurgitate what they hear or read from “sources “.
It just seems weird that Haskins lack of foot speed or agility or whatever you want to call it would cause him to slide. Teams were impressed with his football IQ. Kid has a spotless background, great arm, leadership ability etc etc..... I’m not buying this slide for a minute
JonC, old dogs can learn new tricks
It’s common knowledge that some media regularly read Erics bbi and knowing how many media just regurgitate what they hear or read from “sources “.
It just seems weird that Haskins lack of foot speed or agility or whatever you want to call it would cause him to slide. Teams were impressed with his football IQ. Kid has a spotless background, great arm, leadership ability etc etc..... I’m not buying this slide for a minute
The biggest myth is a guy "falling"... Just because the media and others say a guy is at this level, doesn't mean other teams feel that way. PLus, teams slot guys by position and by selection spot, against other players for that same selection spot. Not every player fits every scheme, regardless of perceived talent.
Quote:
He could be, but it would be a shift from past behavior.
JonC, old dogs can learn new tricks
Actions speak louder than words.
Then why take a visit and send that many people to his pro day? Don't see the logic.
The comparison to the 2017 QB class is a really good observation. Mahomes was a guy with a ton of talent, who started a lot of games, but viewed as needing time to adapt to the pro game - just like Lock. Watson had also started a lot of games and had a lot questions about his raw ability, but was a gamer. I see some similarities with Jones there, although at Clemson obviously Watson had the chance to prove himself on the big stage. I'd be happy with either QB if Shurmur thinks they fit what he wants to do.
I think we will see the Giants end up with 1 of those top 4 defensive players at #6 and then trade up to #12 or #13 to get either Lock or Jones. I think Denver takes either Haskins or Lock, probably with a trade up. Cincy, GB, and Miami could all be in the QB market, but I expect at least 1 of them is willing to listen to a trade down offer - and most likely it will be Miami. Last year Arizona had to trade #79 and #151 to move from #15 to #10. The Bills traded #22 and #65 for #16. So the price of moving up will likely be higher than #95 but not as high as #37 or next year's 1. I do wonder if they have to put 1 of those assets on the table while getting a lower 2nd/3rd back. Or perhaps give up next year's 2nd rounder.
Can’t wait till next week
Quote:
In comment 14389788 JonC said:
Quote:
He could be, but it would be a shift from past behavior.
JonC, old dogs can learn new tricks
Actions speak louder than words.
It's always darkest before the dawn.
Quote:
at all, not once.
Then why take a visit and send that many people to his pro day? Don't see the logic.
The piece you're missing is he could very well not be graded high enough for #6.
Quote:
In comment 14389788 JonC said:
Quote:
He could be, but it would be a shift from past behavior.
JonC, old dogs can learn new tricks
Actions speak louder than words.
Wouldn't Their actions indicate they're interested?
Quote:
In comment 14389749 JonC said:
Quote:
at all, not once.
Then why take a visit and send that many people to his pro day? Don't see the logic.
The piece you're missing is he could very well not be graded high enough for #6.
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
Quote:
In comment 14389793 Fast Eddie said:
Quote:
In comment 14389788 JonC said:
Quote:
He could be, but it would be a shift from past behavior.
JonC, old dogs can learn new tricks
Actions speak louder than words.
It's always darkest before the dawn.
Good job K
Could he be a fit in the moneybacker role that we wanted D Bucannon for?
Quote:
In comment 14389793 Fast Eddie said:
Quote:
In comment 14389788 JonC said:
Quote:
He could be, but it would be a shift from past behavior.
JonC, old dogs can learn new tricks
Actions speak louder than words.
Wouldn't Their actions indicate they're interested?
I'm referring to their actions to try and keep a lid on it.
This is something that a lot of people (especially the prickish "QB experts" on this site) seem to forget. If the Giants are going to draft a QB, its not going to be solely based on what the QB is now. Its going to be based on what they think the QB can become and they have a guy in Shurmur who's done a pretty good job with development. Its an aspect of the evaluation process that no one outside the organization would even have the slightest insight into.
I still say the Giants will stay at #6 and take the best defensive player, but I could see a small trade down to maybe #10.
As far as trading up from #17 to #9, I think that's extremely unlikely because of the cost compared to the talent level of Lock, Haskins, or Jones. Two of those three could also go to Denver and Cincinnati at #10 and #11. Teams may then start a bidding war to move up for the one who remains. I don't see DG being a participant. I'd rather trade #17 to NE for #32, and their second and third.
Quote:
at all, not once.
Then why take a visit and send that many people to his pro day? Don't see the logic.
Simple to scout him. The Giants took visits and personally visited Darnold, Rosen, and Allen last year. They even had dinner with Rosen. This is nothing new.
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
What sense would it make to hire a new coach that doesn't know how to be successful with the QB? I don't think it works like that.
+1 I'm trying to buy into PS, but struggling.
Quote:
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
I'm not criticizing anyone. I just stated my personal opinion on the matter. Lock, more than any other prospect, reminds me of Mahomes. I'd take that chance all day.
Quote:
In comment 14389817 crooza172 said:
Quote:
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
I'm not criticizing anyone. I just stated my personal opinion on the matter. Lock, more than any other prospect, reminds me of Mahomes. I'd take that chance all day.
IMO, Lock reminds me of Cutler and that worries me
What sense would it make to hire a new coach that doesn't know how to be successful with the QB? I don't think it works like that.
I dont know; ask the Cardinals. They just did it.
2. Gameday/Head Coach - jury is still out. Year 1 brought mixed results.
But fortunately #1 is what matters most right now for the draft.
Quote:
In comment 14389830 Jay on the Island said:
Quote:
In comment 14389817 crooza172 said:
Quote:
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
I'm not criticizing anyone. I just stated my personal opinion on the matter. Lock, more than any other prospect, reminds me of Mahomes. I'd take that chance all day.
IMO, Lock reminds me of Cutler and that worries me
I don't see that at all. Doesn't have Cutler's arm strength (few do), is bigger, more athletic, doesn't to my knowledge have bad leadership traits.
Quote:
In comment 14389830 Jay on the Island said:
Quote:
In comment 14389817 crooza172 said:
Quote:
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
I'm not criticizing anyone. I just stated my personal opinion on the matter. Lock, more than any other prospect, reminds me of Mahomes. I'd take that chance all day.
IMO, Lock reminds me of Cutler and that worries me
You do realize Cutler was who Mahomes was compared to also right? It was because of the gunslinger style of play.
Quote:
In comment 14389839 crooza172 said:
Quote:
In comment 14389830 Jay on the Island said:
Quote:
In comment 14389817 crooza172 said:
Quote:
Not missing that point since it seems every QB, according to sources here, are not graded high enough for 6....which I disagree with I might add. Lock is my guy at 6.
I want Lock also at 6 but the Giants obviously have players rated higher than him. Before you criticize them for not taking Lock at 6 let's wait to see what happens on draft day. From what it sounds you might get your wish but not at 6.
I'm not criticizing anyone. I just stated my personal opinion on the matter. Lock, more than any other prospect, reminds me of Mahomes. I'd take that chance all day.
IMO, Lock reminds me of Cutler and that worries me
I don't see that at all. Doesn't have Cutler's arm strength (few do), is bigger, more athletic, doesn't to my knowledge have bad leadership traits.
My mistake, I misread that and thought you meant Jones not Lock.
Quote:
What sense would it make to hire a new coach that doesn't know how to be successful with the QB? I don't think it works like that.
I dont know; ask the Cardinals. They just did it.
Well firstly, they haven't done anything yet. Until they announce they've drafted Murray, Rosen is still the QB.
Secondly, whens the last time the Cardinals did anything right? They're the exception...not the rule.
He does?
I question that.
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
1) Bringing in Haskins could be misdirection to allow someone to fall to them at 6;
2) if they are going to give up a 2 or 3 to move up to 9 for a guy like Lock, it’s silly not to just pick the guy at 6. They are better off picking the QB at 6, D at 17, and then still having the 2 and 3 rather than picking D at 6, QB at 9, and having no 2. I’m not necessarily a quantity over quality guy, but when you need as much as the Giants do, giving up a second to move up is not smart business.
3) I really do hope old dogs are learning new tricks, because the more information that leaks about who they like, the worse it is for them.
As for Jones, I find the arguments counterintuitive. Everyone suggests GMs know more than laypeople like us, but then when it is suggested that NFL people like Jones more than we do, we say they don’t know.
What bothers me most about Jones is that no one actually talks about what Jones does well. It’s all about the coaching he receives, etc. it’s not about him doing this well or him doing that. It’s that there is a Cutcliffe and Eli connection.
Care to elaborate on this? Laughing at a poster or info being posted? Thanks!
But the guy on the 5 minute youtube video says Haskins is really, really good
Jtg good stuff. To your point their thinking right now is very much in favor of D at 6. They likely want to give Eli every opportunity to succeed and arent even going to push him out at the end of the year if they feel he is still playing well. Taking a QB at 6 maybe even 17 , the investment is high enough that it almost has to mean this would be Elis last year.
Based on what they're saying I dont know if they want to commit to that. But a 2nd round QB or later is an entirely different scenario. That guy can sit for 2 years.
DG keeps talking about value. I dont see them taking a QBguy at 6 unless they are going to commit that this is Elis last year. And then all the media circus and eye on Eli for every time he struggles even a little calling for the backup to play. I just dont see it. Truthfully in the end I think they go the route of 2nd round QB or later .
Sure they take the 'hit' from the media upfront of not picking a QB sooner but if they really believe in Eli and want to win now its probably the most prudent thing to do.
6th pick one out of Q Williams, Josh Allen, or Nick Bosa fall to the Giants
Giants trade up from 17 to draft Lock or Jones
#2
6th pick one out of Q Williams, Josh Allen, or Nick Bosa fall to the Giants
The Giants trade down from 17 with NE acquiring their 2020 1st, 2019 2nd (64th) and 3rd(73).
just a guess, but I think the people that hate jones don't understand the talent disparity between top tier CFB teams, teams that he played being in a major conference, and what he was surrounded by at Duke. It is the difference between being the starting QB on a bad expansion team and the 2007 NE Patriots times 10. He played against teams that were almost entirely pros - and not just pros, high draft picks - with a bunch of guys who are going pro in something other than sports. And he beat some of them, including back to back bowl games for the first time in Duke history, and left college with a winning record and a solid albeit unspectacular stat sheet. Not hard to theorize what it would have looked like had he played at one of the 20-30 schools that could have surrounded him with multiple pro talents, let alone one of the true top tier schools like Georgia, Bama, Clemson, OSU, OU etc.
I also question the logic of picking a QB while Eli is on the roster and burning a year of his rookie contract. The supposed "Kansas City model" is actually just a strategic error on behalf of Kansas City. Instead of pointing to Mahomes's 2018 as a sign of validation, I think people should be asking, "Why wasn't Mahomes the starter in 2017?" The Chiefs paid Smith $17M to be the QB in 2017 when they had a superior alternative on their bench for $3M. That Chiefs team went 10-6 and lost a home playoff game to Tennessee. What would they have done with Mahomes at QB + $14M to spend elsewhere on the roster?
But honestly Im betting at least some at the top are hoping to go QB later to not put any undue pressure on Eli. QB position is all about confidence. An aging QB hates having a really highly touted guy under him. Wheyher BBI agrees or not, Giants want to do right by their 2 time Super Bowl winner.
Look at Garapollo lol
So unless you want to send that message to Eli this is your last year its no QB at 6 and probably not a trade up from 17 either. Too much investment with a trade up from 17.
Do any of the 'old top QB guys' have some great QB under them? Brees, Brady, Roth, Rivers?
I think its second round or later with an outside chance at 17 if one of Jones or Lock drop.
Just my best stab as I throw all the tea leaves in a super computer algorithm blender!
But honestly Im betting at least some at the top are hoping to go QB later to not put any undue pressure on Eli. QB position is all about confidence. An aging QB hates having a really highly touted guy under him. Wheyher BBI agrees or not, Giants want to do right by their 2 time Super Bowl winner.
Look at Garapollo lol
So unless you want to send that message to Eli this is your last year its no QB at 6 and probably not a trade up from 17 either. Too much investment with a trade up from 17.
Do any of the 'old top QB guys' have some great QB under them? Brees, Brady, Roth, Rivers?
I think its second round or later with an outside chance at 17 if one of Jones or Lock drop.
Just my best stab as I throw all the tea leaves in a super computer algorithm blender!
Ironically both the Chargers and Patriots are two teams that have shown plenty of interest in trading for Rosen. NE also used an early 2nd round pick, their top pick that year, on Garoppolo. The Steelers have used a 4th and 3rd round picks on QB's the past two years to develop behind Roethlisberger. IF the Giants feel that one of these QB's have franchise upside then they would be crazy to pass on him even if they won't play for a year or even two.
The Giants trade down from 17 with NE acquiring their 2020 1st, 2019 2nd (64th) and 3rd(73).
That would be an awful trade, especially since NE's as close to a lock to pick 25+ in 2020 as you'll get. So discounting that pick a year and looking at the trade value chart (not perfect, but close) you'd be trading 950 pts for ~800 pts (~300 pts + 270 pts + 225 pts).
If they're dealing #17 to NE, get #32, #64 (or #73) and their 2020 1st. That's ~1160 pts (590 + ~300 + 270) coming back. I'd even take their next lower pick instead of 64/73, but #32 and their 2020 1st would be the starting point.
You get to work in a bash against:
- Eli
- Cutcliffe
- Jints Central
- Archie
- Jones himself
It's like the Perfect Storm for trolls.
Don't forget that he's a Skins fan.
1) Bringing in Haskins could be misdirection to allow someone to fall to them at 6;
2) if they are going to give up a 2 or 3 to move up to 9 for a guy like Lock, it’s silly not to just pick the guy at 6. They are better off picking the QB at 6, D at 17, and then still having the 2 and 3 rather than picking D at 6, QB at 9, and having no 2. I’m not necessarily a quantity over quality guy, but when you need as much as the Giants do, giving up a second to move up is not smart business.
3) I really do hope old dogs are learning new tricks, because the more information that leaks about who they like, the worse it is for them.
As for Jones, I find the arguments counterintuitive. Everyone suggests GMs know more than laypeople like us, but then when it is suggested that NFL people like Jones more than we do, we say they don’t know.
What bothers me most about Jones is that no one actually talks about what Jones does well. It’s all about the coaching he receives, etc. it’s not about him doing this well or him doing that. It’s that there is a Cutcliffe and Eli connection.
It could also be, eliminating him buy a thorough evaluation.
Quote:
really wish I could embrace Shurmur as the coach. I do think my thought processes in general align with Gettleman (build the trenches, rush the QB, etc.) but I'm just not that big of a fan of Shurmur's offense. Despite the media driven BS of Jones being Eli 2.0 I don't see it at all other than in demeanor, coach & size. He is a rhythm passer w/ mobility who's weakness is the long ball. Eli has never been able to throw a swing pass; his best attribute historically has been the long ball and when he was in his prime he was good in the pocket at escaping pressure but would never be confused for being mobile. Now we see with Shurmur's offense the long ball really isn't part of the game, it is more of a rhythm passing game, and the WR corp on the roster goes to show it (none of them are deep threats, more possession slant type receivers). My biggest fear is we draft Jones who I do think fits Shurmur's ideal offense to a T, and then in two years time Shurmur ends up out as the coach and we are left with a niche QB who fit our previous coach nicely but may not fit the future of the franchise.
What sense would it make to hire a new coach that doesn't know how to be successful with the QB? I don't think it works like that.
Which is why the Cardinals-Murray connection is mind-boggling... and pretty stupid.
If they don't like Lock or Jones enough to take at 6, they should prepare to make a legitimate run at one of the QBs next year i.e. - moving '19 draft assets to '20. Dealing 37 for an extra 1 next year would be an obvious move. All this insider talk, and neither of these options seem to be on the table.
Those who can't understand why some fans are frustrated, this is why. The appearance is of a short sighted strategy out of nostalgia where the likelihood of another ring in the next 1-2 years is highly unlikely.
If they don't like Lock or Jones enough to take at 6, they should prepare to make a legitimate run at one of the QBs next year i.e. - moving '19 draft assets to '20. Dealing 37 for an extra 1 next year would be an obvious move. All this insider talk, and neither of these options seem to be on the table.
Those who can't understand why some fans are frustrated, this is why. The appearance is of a short sighted strategy out of nostalgia where the likelihood of another ring in the next 1-2 years is highly unlikely.
You said it right when you said "appearance". And then you ascribed your own motivation for what they do to them. I have no doubt at all that their plans and reasons for those plans are more substantive and more in line with long-term team success.
Quote:
I agree thinking and hearts can change last minute but thats why I think 6 is almost definitely out as a QB pick but 17 has slightly more chance.
But honestly Im betting at least some at the top are hoping to go QB later to not put any undue pressure on Eli. QB position is all about confidence. An aging QB hates having a really highly touted guy under him. Wheyher BBI agrees or not, Giants want to do right by their 2 time Super Bowl winner.
Look at Garapollo lol
So unless you want to send that message to Eli this is your last year its no QB at 6 and probably not a trade up from 17 either. Too much investment with a trade up from 17.
Do any of the 'old top QB guys' have some great QB under them? Brees, Brady, Roth, Rivers?
I think its second round or later with an outside chance at 17 if one of Jones or Lock drop.
Just my best stab as I throw all the tea leaves in a super computer algorithm blender!
Ironically both the Chargers and Patriots are two teams that have shown plenty of interest in trading for Rosen. NE also used an early 2nd round pick, their top pick that year, on Garoppolo. The Steelers have used a 4th and 3rd round picks on QB's the past two years to develop behind Roethlisberger. IF the Giants feel that one of these QB's have franchise upside then they would be crazy to pass on him even if they won't play for a year or even two.
Jay even more interesting is that ALL those picks were outside of the 1st round .
The ones being discussed for Rosen? Outside the first round .
I've read them. They're going defense (as they *should*) with their first pick. They're committed to Eli this year. They may (or may not take a QB (Lock or Jones) depending on value.
But that's all consistent with rational team-building. They're not *not* taking a QB at ^ because* of nostalgia. They are going for value. Not that the nostalgia thing would be contradicted by them being interested in Lock and jones or anything anyways...
Which is why the Cardinals-Murray connection is mind-boggling... and pretty stupid.
And as stupid and mind-boggling as it is, funny the media isn't killing them for it.
Joe Montana did not have a very strong arm. Cutcliffe says he throws it better than Peyton or Eli.
Id be cool with D at 6 and moving up 17.
I’m not disagreeing with you that he’s going top 20. I think he undoubtedly will. All I’m saying is when I hear people talk about Murray, they discuss his all around game. Haskins it’s his arm talent. Lock - same thing - arm talent and ability to make plays outside the pocket. Jones: he learned from Cutcliffe.
And just because NFL people like him doesn’t give me the warm and fuzzies. NFL people let Mahomes and Watson slip to 10 and 12, respectively, and they are studs. NFL people drafted Locker and Gabbert inside the top 10 and Ponder at 13 - in the same draft. Gabbert and Locker received much of the same praise that Lock does now: strong arms, mobile, can make plays outside the pocket.
Much like you trust your eyes with Eli, I trust mine with Jones and Lock. I form my own opinions, and I am super high on Murray and Haskins and down on Jones and Lock. NFL people talking Jones up won’t change my opinion of him.
Quote:
There's countless commentary from NFL people about why they like jones. I really think it's funny. Non nfl people hate jones but I'm telling you people in the league really like him. He's going top 20 for sure
I’m not disagreeing with you that he’s going top 20. I think he undoubtedly will. All I’m saying is when I hear people talk about Murray, they discuss his all around game. Haskins it’s his arm talent. Lock - same thing - arm talent and ability to make plays outside the pocket. Jones: he learned from Cutcliffe.
And just because NFL people like him doesn’t give me the warm and fuzzies. NFL people let Mahomes and Watson slip to 10 and 12, respectively, and they are studs. NFL people drafted Locker and Gabbert inside the top 10 and Ponder at 13 - in the same draft. Gabbert and Locker received much of the same praise that Lock does now: strong arms, mobile, can make plays outside the pocket.
Much like you trust your eyes with Eli, I trust mine with Jones and Lock. I form my own opinions, and I am super high on Murray and Haskins and down on Jones and Lock. NFL people talking Jones up won’t change my opinion of him.
The problem with your example is that the interest in Ponder, Locker and Gabbert was isolated to a few teams and they were all surprise picks. The interest in Jones is much more widespread.
NFC scout: "I think he has a good chance of being a bust. Just like every other Tedford-coached quarterback. Thing I struggle with him is he gets sacked a lot. He doesn't have great ability to change the release of the football. He's mechanically very rigid. Brett Favre can change his release point and find different windows. There will be more growing pains with Alex Smith but in the end he has a much better chance to be much better."
NFC scout: "The guys that Tedford has had, what have they developed into? They're too well-schooled. So mechanical. So robotic. I don't know if they become good pro players. I think Rodgers is in that same mold."
AFC scout: "I don't like him. He's a clone of Harrington and Boller. They all throw the same way. What have those guys done? Nothing. If you take him in the second round, fine. Heady guy. They do a marvelous job of coaching quarterbacks there. I don't think he's as good as the top quarterbacks coming out last year."
AFC scout: "I don't think he's in the class of the quarterbacks that came out last year. Strong arm. Pretty good athlete. Still has some holes in his game."
Bill Polian, Indianapolis: "I see a guy who has good arm strength. I see some athletic ability. I see a guy who was pretty good with a good team. I see a guy who's in a pretty efficient offense. Am I certain that he's going to come in and lead my team to the Promised Land? I can't say that. I'm not even sure I can say that about Alex Smith."
AFC scout: "He's a system quarterback. 3-, 5-, 7-step guy. Can't create on his own. Panics under pressure. Gets flustered easy. I don't think there's a quarterback in the draft worthy of a first-round pick. I'm dead serious. None of them are worth it."
Rich Snead, Tennessee: "I like him. I just don't know if he's maxed out. He's more accurate than (Kyle) Boller but probably not as athletic. He's a better player than Akili Smith. He's more athletic than (Trent) Dilfer was. He's a little more mobile than Joey Harrington. He had to go to a JC because no one would recruit him because they said he was too small. He's been busting his (expletive) his whole life to get to this point. I just don't know how much more he has to give."
Does some of that sound familiar? Now before anyone flames away I am not suggesting that Daniel Jones is the next Rodgers I just see a lot of the same comments.
Link - ( New Window )
If they don't like Lock or Jones enough to take at 6, they should prepare to make a legitimate run at one of the QBs next year i.e. - moving '19 draft assets to '20. Dealing 37 for an extra 1 next year would be an obvious move. All this insider talk, and neither of these options seem to be on the table.
Those who can't understand why some fans are frustrated, this is why. The appearance is of a short sighted strategy out of nostalgia where the likelihood of another ring in the next 1-2 years is highly unlikely.
I don't think you can Plan on trading for 2020 picks. If the situation arises you can take advantage of it but no team is going to trade their 2020 1 for our #2 today
When hiring him you had to think you will be lucky to get 5 years out of this guy. How many teams hire a GM with that kind of attitude?
I def thought Ponder was.
Quote:
The fact the Giants are intrigued with Jones because of those peripheral items - like attending the Manning’s camp - is very disconcerting.
If Jones is supposedly liked by many teams, are they all fixated on Jones attending the Manning's camp?
You continue to just fabricate shit out of thin air.
Uh, that's not my narrative. I've heard that from either Kiper or McShay. And I think one of this "insiders" here mentioned that it as a positive.
But your naivete to think those intangibles aren't possibly important to Jints Central is a bit laughable. I
You do realize most of these guys attend the Manning passing academy right?
From just this draft class Lock, Kyle Shurmur, McSorley, Ryan Finley, Tyree Jackson, Stidham, Minshew, Easton Stick & more attended the event.
I do. But, to clean up my point, how many of those guys have worked separately with the Mannings at Duke with Cutcliffe?
So you assume the Giants view his physical skills exactly as you do so therefor they are just "intrigued" enough with his Manning connection to pull the trigger regardless of the fact that both you and the Giants view him in lockstep regarding his inferior physical QB traits? Are you a scout for the Giants?
I don't think that. My opinion about Jones's physical attributes are mine and mine alone. I am connecting the dots why else the Giants may like Jones - Eli, Duke, Cutcliffe, etc.
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
It’s common knowledge that some media regularly read Erics bbi and knowing how many media just regurgitate what they hear or read from “sources “.
It just seems weird that Haskins lack of foot speed or agility or whatever you want to call it would cause him to slide. Teams were impressed with his football IQ. Kid has a spotless background, great arm, leadership ability etc etc..... I’m not buying this slide for a minute
This. FWIW I also don't buy the Haskins "slide" and Giants "lack of interest." All the attention they've paid to him, including his visit this week, after they have dropped him down their list? Oh and Gil Brandt backed it up with his opinion re Jones vs. Haskins? Since when is Gil Brandt related to the Giants thought process?
FWIW McShay isn't buying it either, not 100%. He now thinks Haskins has slid on the Giants' draft board, but still rates him as the best QB in his class: most accurate passer, plus arm strength, tremendous improvement during only 1 year as a starter, team leader, played his best ball in the biggest games vs top defenses at the end of the the year, great kid, kills the white board stuff.
Haskins main issue, some footwork stuff, is exactly the kind of thing Shurmur and his staff should refine and improve. How about our asshats' are being fed disinfo re Jones or "defense only" at 6 (jtgiants or JonC)?
Unless there is fear re Haskins' conditioning that he will turn out to be another JaMarcus Russel... but his personality and chalkboard knowledge are nothing like Russel's who was famous for his total disdain for play diagram study or understanding.
If fact right off the bat that was Russel's biggest red flag IIRC. It's one of the Haskins' strong suits.
IMO we are witnessing a masterful job by DG and the FO disseminating disinformation. I am linking McShay's most recent interview re Haskins'. He acknowledges Haskins' slide on the Giants' board relative to some DL players (Oliver, Wilkins, Sweat) but still thinks Haskins is going to be a top 10 pick, and that some team will trade up to get him.
Of course McShay (and I) could be totally wrong. There will be one or another seductive D front 7 player sitting at 6, for sure.
But I still think the Giants want Haskins at 6; they just don't want anyone to trade up above them to get him first.
McShay on Haskins, Giants - ( New Window )
is it your opinion that the Giants are out on Rosen?
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
Just MHO.
Quote:
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
All that matters is who they expect at #6. I haven't heard Haskins name at all, which usually a good barometer of interest. Smokescreens are something this franchise hasn't been good at, if he was a prime target it would be out there in the media.
Quote:
a sneaking suspicion the Giants are going to be in on Rosen and go defense at #6 and #17.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
Just MHO.
somebody's grabbing Haskins by pick 15, I think a bit higher. A new CBS mock has Washington jumping the giants to get him at 5. Just a week ago teams were described as over "the moon for him". Now nobody wants him? I don't buy it.
Quote:
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
is it your opinion that the Giants are out on Rosen?
I've heard nothing new indicating interest in Rosen.
?? at #17 (depends on how the draft goes)
- could be a QB like Lock or Jones, another D player, or OT
I think they'd like Lock or Jones, but they don't seem married to it. If the draft is falling a certain way, we may see a trade up or down with #17
Should be interesting
1) They don't see a QB worthwhile of the 6 pick. We can't say whether or not Murray would be that or they are just assuming he's gone but either way they don't really seem to be looking for a QB @ 6
2) It seems likely that at least one if not more of Lock, Jones, Haskins (I think perhaps even in that order) will be a pick they are happy to make at 17
3) At least one of those 3 mentioned above they would be willing to trade up from 17 at the right price
4) Very possible they are willing to sit tight and think that they can get another impact player if 4 QBs are drafted before 17 (Bush or Dexter Lawrence would be my guesses for guys they would be happy to take at 17)
Quote:
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
Mayfield stock dropped when he was sacked by that cop so easily. Where was the speed and elusiveness. He was not clean at all.
Quote:
a sneaking suspicion the Giants are going to be in on Rosen and go defense at #6 and #17.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
Just MHO.
Haskins possibly in the teens is my opinion. He could go to the Bengals, but I won't surprised if he's there even at #17.
Quote:
In comment 14389870 djm said:
Quote:
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
Mayfield stock dropped when he was sacked by that cop so easily. Where was the speed and elusiveness. He was not clean at all.
Sorry in the eyes of fans and the media. No one thought with his question marks someone would risk pick #1 on him. Browns were willing to roll the dice and it seems to be paying off.
Piecing together what we've been hearing, a defensive player at #6 and a trade up in front of Miami at #13 to get Jones seems like a strong possibility. Remember also that Miami is coached by a Belichick disciple...they seem unlikely to trade up. And in any event, the rumor is they are targeting Tua next year.
Lots of ties to Jones:
- Gettleman mentioning "KC Model"
- Cutcliff connection
- Strong Giants contingent at Duke workout
- Kiper has Jones as top QB; Kiper's mentor is Ernie Accorsi
Quote:
In comment 14390241 JonC said:
Quote:
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
All that matters is who they expect at #6. I haven't heard Haskins name at all, which usually a good barometer of interest. Smokescreens are something this franchise hasn't been good at, if he was a prime target it would be out there in the media.
1) They don't see a QB worthwhile of the 6 pick. We can't say whether or not Murray would be that or they are just assuming he's gone but either way they don't really seem to be looking for a QB @ 6
2) It seems likely that at least one if not more of Lock, Jones, Haskins (I think perhaps even in that order) will be a pick they are happy to make at 17
3) At least one of those 3 mentioned above they would be willing to trade up from 17 at the right price
4) Very possible they are willing to sit tight and think that they can get another impact player if 4 QBs are drafted before 17 (Bush or Dexter Lawrence would be my guesses for guys they would be happy to take at 17)
if this is true it is a weird way to approach the qb position. Letting a qb fall to you, is simply bizarre. in the modern nfl you have to make a decision about who you want and go after him. You are suggesting they are just meh on the position and will take whatever scraps are left over. if true i continue to worry that this front office does not know how to valuate the most important position in the game.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
Now I have my wet dream scenario that someone jumps ahead of them to take Jones too.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
Quote:
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Quote:
In comment 14390315 BigBlueCane said:
Quote:
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Exactly because they had interest in them. Doesn't mean after they have spent as much time as they have on him to say they have zero interest doesn't add up for me. Doesn't mean they like him better than Daniel Jones or Lock or Murray for example. However to say zero interest with all we have done... Don't be shocked if he is the pick and don't be shocked if he isn't.
Quote:
In comment 14390389 Amtoft said:
Quote:
In comment 14390315 BigBlueCane said:
Quote:
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Exactly because they had interest in them. Doesn't mean after they have spent as much time as they have on him to say they have zero interest doesn't add up for me. Doesn't mean they like him better than Daniel Jones or Lock or Murray for example. However to say zero interest with all we have done... Don't be shocked if he is the pick and don't be shocked if he isn't.
It was the same thing with Rosen last year. The Giants even went out to dinner with Rosen. I remember both JonC and hitdog mentioning how weird it was that they hadn't heard anything about Rosen from their sources.
Jon, By this statement I am going to assume that we want a Pass Rusher at 6 and a QB at 17 or a slight trade up ( Jones being the target )?
Sound about right?
BPA is a fallacy. Whether the Giants take a QB at 6 or pass on one, they are clearly targeting positions they perceive to represent their biggest needs. That’s just the way it is. No one picks via BPA in the draft. All drafting is need-based.
Quote:
That will probably be on the defensive side of the ball. He wants a difference maker with that pick on defense. The rest of the draft will play out the same way with BPAs till the 5th round. You can create a BPA by trading up or down as well.
BPA is a fallacy. Whether the Giants take a QB at 6 or pass on one, they are clearly targeting positions they perceive to represent their biggest needs. That’s just the way it is. No one picks via BPA in the draft. All drafting is need-based.
It is a fallacy for a different reason. Smart teams factor in positional value, something DG has said he does not consider, because, you know, computers are stupid nerd things...
Quote:
LOL.
Care to elaborate on this? Laughing at a poster or info being posted? Thanks!
The info being shared, Rick.. A lot of which is intentionally vague, simply not true, or guess work at best.
Quote:
and there wasnt the Eli connection, this board would be much more positive on him. just a fact.
for me he is a good player and adds the mobile quality that this offense needs to improve the OL and running game just by having a threat to release the pocket.
I would be fine with Jones at 17
I would add that if Daniel Jones was a Duke QB who wore number 17 we would also feel much better about him. A few of us from the mid 90's have some PTSD from Dave Brown.
WTF did you have to write his name
Quote:
some of you are trying to dig too deep.
Jon, By this statement I am going to assume that we want a Pass Rusher at 6 and a QB at 17 or a slight trade up ( Jones being the target )?
Sound about right?
The first part is what I'm hearing, second part is part tea leaves part opinion ... but I don't have a sense of Jones > Lock or vice versa, for example.
Quote:
In comment 14390435 TMS said:
Quote:
That will probably be on the defensive side of the ball. He wants a difference maker with that pick on defense. The rest of the draft will play out the same way with BPAs till the 5th round. You can create a BPA by trading up or down as well.
BPA is a fallacy. Whether the Giants take a QB at 6 or pass on one, they are clearly targeting positions they perceive to represent their biggest needs. That’s just the way it is. No one picks via BPA in the draft. All drafting is need-based.
It is a fallacy for a different reason. Smart teams factor in positional value, something DG has said he does not consider, because, you know, computers are stupid nerd things...
That’s another reason I can’t stand the guy. Knowledge us power, and he openly mocked a reporter who even suggested they look at analytics. When a person blatantly ignores open, free avenues of information, they are not suited for the job. I’m not suggesting you have to be bound by analytics. However, to ignore their existence is malpractice.
In any event, assuming JonC and JT are right, the fact that they are saying we are going this way at 6 and this way at 17 tells you they’re not going BPA. How could they possibly know what BPA will be at 17? They are focused on need and need alone. The D is horrid, and they are focused on getting players to help there. Now, could need align with value? Sure. But make no mistake about it: they are drafting for need and need alone.
If you wait to draft a QB for BPA you'll never get one period. Unless you have a guy that you have rated differently than everyone else does. QBs as pure prospects get overdrafted and if you want one, you'll probably have to overdraft. Unless its 2021 and you have the 1st pick. In that case Lawrence may be the BPA.
That is ridiculous ... You don't think Dave Gettleman is a little busy right now! Come on man. Maybe after the draft I will try and give him a call though.
Quote:
In comment 14390404 Jay on the Island said:
Quote:
In comment 14390389 Amtoft said:
Quote:
In comment 14390315 BigBlueCane said:
Quote:
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Exactly because they had interest in them. Doesn't mean after they have spent as much time as they have on him to say they have zero interest doesn't add up for me. Doesn't mean they like him better than Daniel Jones or Lock or Murray for example. However to say zero interest with all we have done... Don't be shocked if he is the pick and don't be shocked if he isn't.
It was the same thing with Rosen last year. The Giants even went out to dinner with Rosen. I remember both JonC and hitdog mentioning how weird it was that they hadn't heard anything about Rosen from their sources.
Right because we picked 2nd.... We could of had Rosen as 8th best player for all we know after scouting him. This year we have a second pick at 17. Making people like Haskins, Lock, Jones, and all the other players that may be there at 17 more likely than last year when it was Saquon, Sam Darnold, Bradley Chubb, or Nelson.
Right because we picked 2nd.... We could of had Rosen as 8th best player for all we know after scouting him. This year we have a second pick at 17. Making people like Haskins, Lock, Jones, and all the other players that may be there at 17 more likely than last year when it was Saquon, Sam Darnold, Bradley Chubb, or Nelson.
My point is that the two insiders have not heard a single report about the Giants liking Haskins just as two said last year in regard to Rosen. This means that after all the work they work they put into Rosen they didn't like him and obviously still don't if they can now get him for a 2nd round pick. They clearly don't like Haskins either but we do know that they like Lock and Jones.
Quote:
Right because we picked 2nd.... We could of had Rosen as 8th best player for all we know after scouting him. This year we have a second pick at 17. Making people like Haskins, Lock, Jones, and all the other players that may be there at 17 more likely than last year when it was Saquon, Sam Darnold, Bradley Chubb, or Nelson.
My point is that the two insiders have not heard a single report about the Giants liking Haskins just as two said last year in regard to Rosen. This means that after all the work they work they put into Rosen they didn't like him and obviously still don't if they can now get him for a 2nd round pick. They clearly don't like Haskins either but we do know that they like Lock and Jones.
I don't think we know everything we think we know. But we will soon enough. one week and one day away!
Quote:
In comment 14390481 Giants38 said:
Quote:
In comment 14390435 TMS said:
Quote:
That will probably be on the defensive side of the ball. He wants a difference maker with that pick on defense. The rest of the draft will play out the same way with BPAs till the 5th round. You can create a BPA by trading up or down as well.
BPA is a fallacy. Whether the Giants take a QB at 6 or pass on one, they are clearly targeting positions they perceive to represent their biggest needs. That’s just the way it is. No one picks via BPA in the draft. All drafting is need-based.
It is a fallacy for a different reason. Smart teams factor in positional value, something DG has said he does not consider, because, you know, computers are stupid nerd things...
That’s another reason I can’t stand the guy. Knowledge us power, and he openly mocked a reporter who even suggested they look at analytics. When a person blatantly ignores open, free avenues of information, they are not suited for the job. I’m not suggesting you have to be bound by analytics. However, to ignore their existence is malpractice.
In any event, assuming JonC and JT are right, the fact that they are saying we are going this way at 6 and this way at 17 tells you they’re not going BPA. How could they possibly know what BPA will be at 17? They are focused on need and need alone. The D is horrid, and they are focused on getting players to help there. Now, could need align with value? Sure. But make no mistake about it: they are drafting for need and need alone.
Drafting a soft Andy Daltonesque qb or literal hot trash QB with the 2nd pick over a HoFer is malpractice.
Quote:
Just call Dave Gettleman directly. I'm sure he'll be happy to talk to you.
That is ridiculous ... You don't think Dave Gettleman is a little busy right now! Come on man. Maybe after the draft I will try and give him a call though.
He likes you. He told me he did. He'd never be too busy to take your call. Trust me.