MMQB: Haskins 14th ranked overall player, 2nd QB ranked

if we take him I�ll root like hell for the kid. Perfect situation to sit for the year or 10-12 games if we are out of the hunt

I could get down with using 17 to move up to get Bush, then a guy like Zach Allen at 37

the ONLY reason I posted yet another opinion on Haskins is that it�s from a different source and the write-up seemed quite reasonable to me.

Haskins is the most-overrated-QB-in-the-draft bandwagon until this recent wave of Daniel Jones mania. At least Haskins can drill it outside the hash marks.

It's been a long time since I have seen two more overrated QBs projected in the top 15 than these guys.

can you explain a little bit why you think haskins is overrated? He was a starter for 1 year and broke a ton of records. He hasn�t been playing QB long and seems to have a great grasp and Hes a great kid too.

In comment 14393627 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

the ONLY reason I posted yet another opinion on Haskins is that it�s from a different source and the write-up seemed quite reasonable to me.

It's interesting and I'm glad you posted it. I can totally see this being the scenario where they really like him and are smoke-screening. Another really interesting draft that is for sure.

How many times do I have to say it??? Rant over

In comment 14393634 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

can you explain a little bit why you think haskins is overrated? He was a starter for 1 year and broke a ton of records. He hasn�t been playing QB long and seems to have a great grasp and Hes a great kid too.

I like Haskins, just not in the top of the first round. Maybe the bottom of the first round...maybe.

But I don't really like any of these QBs as high first round prospects. So my opinions here extend past Haskins.

But back to Haskins. My point all along is he's very difficult to evaluate, and beyond the one year thing, because the offensive infrastructure around him was so good. His predecessor, JD Barrett, put up spectacular numbers, too. And he wasn't a passing QB.

OSU was loaded with very gifted WRs (three will get drafted this year; two will go in the first two rounds), their RB stable was outstanding, they have two future pro TEs, and their OL was very good. So Haskins had an incredible amount of time to throw and his receivers were constantly - and I mean constantly - creating great separation. It was QB Xanadu. And it goosed-up Haskins numbers. Plus, the Big Ten was very down this year outside of Columbus.

So I just can't say he's this special, gifted top QB considering when Haskins played in such a great environment. It's too hard to separate Haskins from that system. Which means making a high pick investment has more risk than most imagine...

I was listen to Big Blue Kick Off with Dan Csonka from Ourlads as one of the guests and Dan stated that he doesn't have Daniel Jones as a 1st round prospect. You hear stuff all over the place.

In comment 14393642 jtgiants said:

Quote:

How many times do I have to say it??? Rant over

How many times do you have to say what?

In comment 14393663 figgy2989 said:

Quote:

In comment 14393642 jtgiants said: Quote: How many times do I have to say it??? Rant over How many times do you have to say what?

That the Giants will NOT draft Haskins, at least at 6

is convinced no QB, especially at #6.

Starts w 17th pick

Up in the air with at least four different things they could do with that pick

In comment 14393672 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Up in the air with at least four different things they could do with that pick

Let me guess...

Pick a QB
Pick BPA
Trade it for Rosen
Trade it up or down

In comment 14393670 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Starts w 17th pick

I'm inclined to believe you and JonC more than any outsider, although I won't lambaste either of you if you are wrong and we do take a QB a #6. I've said before that I would trade #37 for Rosen, but accept that is extremely unlikely.

Any interest in Devin Bush?

That list isn't totally accurate ar all

Yes

In comment 14393672 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Up in the air with at least four different things they could do with that pick

The multitude of different scenarios proves that the draft is really a test of a team's ability to not only make correct decisions, but to do so under the pressure of severe time constraints.

They aren't going QB at all

In comment 14393682 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Yes

Thought so. He just seems so perfect for Betcher's defense.

I wouldn't take a qb this year. Giants wanted to go defense at 6 and qb at 17. They were convinced lock or jones would be there. They now believe they won't be able to stand pat at 17 and get a qb they like.

1. Just punt qb and go Bpa. Defense or tackle most likely
2. Trade back up for qb but only if price is not outrageous which is unlikely
3. Trade back. Very possible. I promise u the Giants one way or another will pick after 37 and before 95.
4. trade pick for player. No not Rosen. I've heard interesting names but don't ask

alright dude...

In comment 14393679 jtgiants said:

Quote:

That list isn't totally accurate ar all

First, how could it possibly be anything else, he mentioned virtually every scenario (take a QB, take BPA, trade up or down, trade it for Rosen). For the list to not be remotely accurate would be a virtual impossibility.

Second, I refuse to let you throw cold water on my Haskins hope! 👍

In comment 14393642 jtgiants said:

Quote:

How many times do I have to say it??? Rant over

I appreciate your input, really, I value it. Please don't tell us we can't speculate on things you have told us will not happen. It's at least a little bit offensive. It feels like you are saying. "I already told you that isn't going to happen so you should stop talking about it." Not cool.

Maybe there good at misdirection now but unlikely.

Believe what you want. No problem but there's a ridiculous amount of threads on the same subject. I'm telling you I haven't even heard Haskins at all for them in terms of qb. It's all luck and jones

In comment 14393728 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Believe what you want. No problem but there's a ridiculous amount of threads on the same subject. I'm telling you I haven't even heard Haskins at all for them in terms of qb. It's all luck and jones

Andrew Luck?

In comment 14393711 jtgiants said:

Quote:

I wouldn't take a qb this year. Giants wanted to go defense at 6 and qb at 17. They were convinced lock or jones would be there. They now believe they won't be able to stand pat at 17 and get a qb they like. 1. Just punt qb and go Bpa. Defense or tackle most likely 2. Trade back up for qb but only if price is not outrageous which is unlikely 3. Trade back. Very possible. I promise u the Giants one way or another will pick after 37 and before 95. 4. trade pick for player. No not Rosen. I've heard interesting names but don't ask

Re: #4 - current NFL player?

You meant Lock

I could see Shurmur wanting him.

Jeff Driskel.

at #6, but I do like Haskins. Sure the Big 10 was down this year, but it wasn't Big 12 defences! The kid broke all kinds of passing records.
His last 3 games he threw for 1146 yds & 14 TDs. Those three games were vs Michigan, Northwestern, & Washington. Michigan & Washington were pretty good defences last year, ranked #2 & #12 respectively in total defence

say they switch it up ... it was a lock it was a Def at 6 and now if the top 3 doesn't fall they go QB... And I still think they have Haskins second at QB, but I could be wrong.

This was on my mind for several weeks....

We all agree that the Giants were not making 12 picks in the draft....assuming trade downs for targeted draftees.

I felt like Ogltree last year, picks for established players were also on the agenda. Now, who?

Similar to peppers. In terms of youth and upside with a very manageable contract. I've heard three names who could come for the pick along with a pick between 37 and 95 which gentleman really wants. FYI. I'll never say the players Giants are investigating for very obvious reasons

Then Gettleman has done a masterful job spreading misinformation. With that said I fully believe JonC and jtgiants that Haskins will not be the pick even with a trade up from 17.

In comment 14393728 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Believe what you want. No problem but there's a ridiculous amount of threads on the same subject. I'm telling you I haven't even heard Haskins at all for them in terms of qb. It's all luck and jones

Hey buddy.

Quote:

I'm telling you I haven't even heard Haskins at all for them in terms of qb. It's all luck and jones

Could that be smoke on their part?

In comment 14393726 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Maybe there good at misdirection now but unlikely.

We�ll see. I have a week to �Hope for Haskins�. I�m not stupid enough to expect him to be a Giant, but I can hope for it. And unless someone kills me, I will continue to hold onto that hope, however slight it may be in reality or in your mind.

No matter which way you look at it, the Giants actually have done an ok job this year with a smokescreen. People are all over the place, so they�ve disguised their pick(s) pretty well. Maybe it wasn�t a smokescreen that I�m hoping for, but it�s a step in the right direction.

In any event, I�ll stand by a comment I made before; if the Giants do not know who is leaking information, or are not doing anything to stop it (like the Raiders did), then they will continue to subject themselves to the same stuff that happened to them before. Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it. I suppose this just as easily applies to me, if I�m ignoring the Giants� past at leaking info.

In comment 14393745 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Similar to peppers. In terms of youth and upside with a very manageable contract. I've heard three names who could come for the pick along with a pick between 37 and 95 which gentleman really wants. FYI. I'll never say the players Giants are investigating for very obvious reasons

Hmm I�m wondering if one of them is Buckner from SF.

It could be. No way of knowing but I will be stunned if they take Haskins. Last year I told you no qb. This year I tell you qb is possible but if so it's lock or jones

In comment 14393750 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

In comment 14393745 jtgiants said: Quote: Similar to peppers. In terms of youth and upside with a very manageable contract. I've heard three names who could come for the pick along with a pick between 37 and 95 which gentleman really wants. FYI. I'll never say the players Giants are investigating for very obvious reasons Hmm I�m wondering if one of them is Buckner from SF.

Clowney maybe

In comment 14393745 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Similar to peppers. In terms of youth and upside with a very manageable contract. I've heard three names who could come for the pick along with a pick between 37 and 95 which gentleman really wants. FYI. I'll never say the players Giants are investigating for very obvious reasons

I'm sticking with Driskel. Young and a great contract.

Toss in Mullens and Brissett for kicks...

Giants don't see it as issue. They had a great draft last year and never hid interest n Barkley. They don't think it's an issue. Right or wrong

In comment 14393642 jtgiants said:

Quote:

How many times do I have to say it??? Rant over

If Haskins actually ends up being the pick at six, we went be seeing much of JT anymore!! Jk bud

In comment 14393711 jtgiants said:

Quote:

I wouldn't take a qb this year. Giants wanted to go defense at 6 and qb at 17. They were convinced lock or jones would be there. They now believe they won't be able to stand pat at 17 and get a qb they like. 1. Just punt qb and go Bpa. Defense or tackle most likely 2. Trade back up for qb but only if price is not outrageous which is unlikely 3. Trade back. Very possible. I promise u the Giants one way or another will pick after 37 and before 95. 4. trade pick for player. No not Rosen. I've heard interesting names but don't ask

Agreed. The price to trade up from #17 will likely be exorbitant, unless they are only moving up a few spots. This is especially true because we have a lot of holes. We have 12 picks, but most are on day three.

DG said at his pre-draft press conference that it was going to be very difficult to watch 58 good players come off the board between #37 and #95. He also said he had more players rated in rounds one through four this year than in any other draft in which he's been the GM.

Question: Would the Giants take Haskins at #17? (I assume they would take Lock or Jones but think both will be gone.)

In comment 14393728 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Believe what you want. No problem but there's a ridiculous amount of threads on the same subject. I'm telling you I haven't even heard Haskins at all for them in terms of qb. It's all luck and jones

Think that could be where they are. One should be there unless they go defense and wait till next year.

In comment 14393757 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Giants don't see it as issue. They had a great draft last year and never hid interest n Barkley. They don't think it's an issue. Right or wrong

If that�s the case it�s insanely idiotic. It got them jumped for Floyd and Conklin, and they landed Apple. How�d that work out? Last year they picked at 2. This year they don�t. If they don�t see that as an issue, that should tell you something about our front office. Teams are going through drastic measures to keep their rankings hidden? The Giants: putting them on blast.

I'm only saying two things. One I haven't heard his name at 6 one time. Two if he slips to 17 the conversation changes but there's a legit belief that by the time we pick at 17 Murray, Haskins, lock and jones are all gone

In comment 14393750 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

In comment 14393745 jtgiants said: Quote: Similar to peppers. In terms of youth and upside with a very manageable contract. I've heard three names who could come for the pick along with a pick between 37 and 95 which gentleman really wants. FYI. I'll never say the players Giants are investigating for very obvious reasons Hmm I�m wondering if one of them is Buckner from SF.

The Niners have a glut of talent on the DL, picking in a spot where the best players will be Bosa and Q. That's a good guess, although I would lean more towards Solomon Thomas.

Not fair. They hit on not only Barkley but hill, Hernandez, carter etc. last year was a very good draft

In comment 14393773 AcesUp said:

Quote:

In comment 14393750 Jay on the Island said: Quote: In comment 14393745 jtgiants said: Quote: Similar to peppers. In terms of youth and upside with a very manageable contract. I've heard three names who could come for the pick along with a pick between 37 and 95 which gentleman really wants. FYI. I'll never say the players Giants are investigating for very obvious reasons Hmm I�m wondering if one of them is Buckner from SF. The Niners have a glut of talent on the DL, picking in a spot where the best players will be Bosa and Q. That's a good guess, although I would lean more towards Solomon Thomas.

Hopefully not. Solomon Thomas is TERRIBLE.

In comment 14393772 jtgiants said:

Quote:

I'm only saying two things. One I haven't heard his name at 6 one time. Two if he slips to 17 the conversation changes but there's a legit belief that by the time we pick at 17 Murray, Haskins, lock and jones are all gone

To each his own. Obviously, you�re a great and well-respected poster, so I�ll leave it at that. In a week the first round will be over and we�ll be discussing players, not projections.

In comment 14393773 AcesUp said:

Quote:

In comment 14393750 Jay on the Island said: Quote: In comment 14393745 jtgiants said: Quote: Similar to peppers. In terms of youth and upside with a very manageable contract. I've heard three names who could come for the pick along with a pick between 37 and 95 which gentleman really wants. FYI. I'll never say the players Giants are investigating for very obvious reasons Hmm I�m wondering if one of them is Buckner from SF. The Niners have a glut of talent on the DL, picking in a spot where the best players will be Bosa and Q. That's a good guess, although I would lean more towards Solomon Thomas.

I�m just trying to connect the dots. He fits jtgiants description and we know the Giants wanted him in a potential Odell deal.

In comment 14393772 jtgiants said:

Quote:

I'm only saying two things. One I haven't heard his name at 6 one time. Two if he slips to 17 the conversation changes but there's a legit belief that by the time we pick at 17 Murray, Haskins, lock and jones are all gone

Agreed. I think they will all be gone by #17 as well, simply because QBs get overvalued every year. It's a function of a desperate desire to get a franchise QB. This year is no different. It will just be interesting if Haskins is still available at #17.

Lets guess?
Team:
New England for one of the top TE@17?

For

1 of their 2 2nd picks?

3 young player : WR Dorsett/Paterson

Didnt we like Obi Melifonwu?

Anyone else?

In comment 14393772 jtgiants said:

Quote:

I'm only saying two things. One I haven't heard his name at 6 one time. Two if he slips to 17 the conversation changes but there's a legit belief that by the time we pick at 17 Murray, Haskins, lock and jones are all gone

I am coming to the conclusion that these QBs are not rated high enough to take at #6 but possibly at #17; however, they are not worth enough to trade up at a steep cost. This, in a nut shell, tells me that they are not really in love with this QB class at all.

In comment 14393777 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Not fair. They hit on not only Barkley but hill, Hernandez, carter etc. last year was a very good draft

The info that gets out there is much more about the first round. This year they have two picks in the first, so they should care what people know. If it doesn�t matter, they�d do us all a favor and just post their board on social media. I mean, if it makes no difference anyway, who cares, right?

sounds like the Giants are going to be big players throughout the draft, including possibly another trade involving picks and players. As a fan, I'm really excited. The only entity not excited is the BBI hamster.

I know you won't say it but I just saw that Seattle is looking to trade Frank Clark. Not sure if ue fits our D and not sure he fits the contract comment you made.

Not saying your wrong but it's never been a concern of theres

Say but there have been 3 names. All young vets in the mold of peppers

In comment 14393800 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Say but there have been 3 names. All young vets in the mold of peppers

Can you say if they are all on the defensive side of the ball or both sides?

Hasn't worked out in Chicago the way they had hoped and Chicago wants picks.

In comment 14393746 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

Then Gettleman has done a masterful job spreading misinformation. With that said I fully believe JonC and jtgiants that Haskins will not be the pick even with a trade up from 17.

Either way DG has done a masterful job. Now reports coming out on Jones being Giants #1 QB.
This is great!

In comment 14393817 ZogZerg said:

Quote:

In comment 14393746 Jay on the Island said: Quote: Then Gettleman has done a masterful job spreading misinformation. With that said I fully believe JonC and jtgiants that Haskins will not be the pick even with a trade up from 17. Either way DG has done a masterful job. Now reports coming out on Jones being Giants #1 QB. This is great!

Unless they actually pick him? :)

Too

In comment 14393779 Big Rick in FL said:

Quote:

Hopefully not. Solomon Thomas is TERRIBLE.

He's been underwhelming for sure although it could be argued he's playing out of position. May be a nice 5 tech in our scheme though.

Slightly underperforming guys a couple years into their rookie contracts would fit the "Peppers mold". I doubt SF would want to part with Buckner, unless there were cap considerations next year when he's due top 10 pick 5th yr option money at DE.

Leonard Floyd was a nice guess too considering the Bears don't have a 1st.

How often do you talk to the people in the know? Seems like you have conversations often.

3 young players and a early pick for #17.

It would need to be all from one team.

In comment 14393642 jtgiants said:

Quote:

How many times do I have to say it??? Rant over

I'm counting on you, JT, to be right!

In comment 14393838 George from PA said:

Quote:

3 young players and a early pick for #17. It would need to be all from one team.

I think you definitely are interpreting that wrong. It is a player and a pick between 37 and 90-something. But there are three potentially different trades.

What I also think is very interesting is the comment about wanting a pick between 37 and 90-something. Why? I know I am leaning towards what I want to believe but I think that increases the odds of getting Rosen.

In comment 14393856 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

In comment 14393838 George from PA said: Quote: 3 young players and a early pick for #17. It would need to be all from one team. I think you definitely are interpreting that wrong. It is a player and a pick between 37 and 90-something. But there are three potentially different trades. What I also think is very interesting is the comment about wanting a pick between 37 and 90-something. Why? I know I am leaning towards what I want to believe but I think that increases the odds of getting Rosen.

Send 17 to SF for Buckner + 3rd rounder
Giants send 37 to AZ for Rosen ...

This would be incredible. Everyone wins, SF takes Q Williams and lands 17th pick, AZ gets high round 2 pick for backup QB ... Giants fill 2 needs and get an earlier 3rd

if they take Q. Williams they have an abundance of DL and still need edge guys.

In comment 14393757 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Giants don't see it as issue. They had a great draft last year and never hid interest n Barkley. They don't think it's an issue. Right or wrong

One thing to show who you love at #2 than what it is at #6. Remember the Leonard Floyd and Jack Conklin fiasco?

I wonder if the Giants top brass (Ownership, Gettleman, Shurmur, maybe Shula) would want to keep their love for Haskins a secret to the point of spreading misinformation within the organization in case of any potential leaks.

I�d be pumped

If not and Murray is gone also, a solid defensive player will be there.

In comment 14393821 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

In comment 14393817 ZogZerg said: Quote: In comment 14393746 Jay on the Island said: Quote: Then Gettleman has done a masterful job spreading misinformation. With that said I fully believe JonC and jtgiants that Haskins will not be the pick even with a trade up from 17. Either way DG has done a masterful job. Now reports coming out on Jones being Giants #1 QB. This is great! Unless they actually pick him? :)

Not true. Other reports contradict this one. Everyone is confused on what the Giants are thinking.

In comment 14393728 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Believe what you want. No problem but there's a ridiculous amount of threads on the same subject. I'm telling you I haven't even heard Haskins at all for them in terms of qb. It's all luck and jones

Which means it�s Haskins.

In comment 14393725 Thegratefulhead said:

Quote:

In comment 14393642 jtgiants said: Quote: How many times do I have to say it??? Rant over I appreciate your input, really, I value it. Please don't tell us we can't speculate on things you have told us will not happen. It's at least a little bit offensive. It feels like you are saying. "I already told you that isn't going to happen so you should stop talking about it." Not cool.

Love the insight, but kind of agree

Maybe Giants have the same kind of all-in conviction on Haskins or Lock or Jones or even Rosen as they had on Eli. If so, go get him at 6 (or make the Rosen trade.) Waiting and hoping a guy who you think doesn't stink may be available at 17 isn't the same thing. But then again, I don't know anything either.

Hmmmmm. Giants are likely to going defense at 6 and might go QB at 17 or not if they are all taken. I already knewthis and I have no inside info.

Regarding potential trade on draft day

You saying the giants would swap 1st round picks with a team while also adding a player and an extra 2nd or 3rd?

They wouldn�t just give up pick 17 for a player and extra 2nd or 3rd, correct?

In comment 14393777 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Not fair. They hit on not only Barkley but hill, Hernandez, carter etc. last year was a very good draft

This is dogma on BBI but is it real? Barkley is incredible but everyone and their brother knew that. I give credit for drafting him at 2 though.

Otherwise we have no idea how good Hernandez, Hill & Carter will be. Plenty of guys have had solid year 1s and flashed like they did at points. Many people thought Jerry Reese was an amazing drafter after year 1 with Steve Smith, Kevin Boss, Aad Bradshaw, Aaron Ross, Jay Alford & Zak DeOssie.

Time will tell on everyone but Barkley.

These discussions... But bw sums it up well about Haskins.

Much the same can be said about Murray...

It all about the risk with these players. They have red flags in their game, but except for Murrya's size, the other issues are too difficult to judge because there just isn't enough of a body of work to properly evaluate. Is whatever issue we are seeing due to lack of experience and can be coached away, or is it a permanent fixture of their game? Is the success due to the system and the surrounding team, or the player? Not enough information to tell.

In comment 14393642 jtgiants said:

Quote:

How many times do I have to say it??? Rant over

JT, like others I value your insider input and try to read everything you write.

But your response above is obnoxious, inappropriate, and frankly screams :"the lady doth protest too much!"

Often, the more fervently one declares something the less likely it is to be heeded. This latest from you makes me doubt the veracity of your info. Why bother again interrupting a countering opinion. If you are confident your info is good and correct, let it rest on the table.

I don't mean to be harsh but I don't care if you doubt the veracity of my info. Believe it or not. Up to you. I've been here a long time. My info or anyone else's is never 100% but my track records damn good. I'm telling you what I know to be true. Could I be wrong. Sure. Am I. I don't think so

Pros:
Because he ticks off almost all of the boxes the Giants historically prioritize for the QB position:

High character and poise both at the microphone off the field, in the huddle and in the pocket.

He possesses plus arm talent with a quick and technically sound delivery.

Played a high level of comp so they are comparing apples to apples in the evaluation.

High completion percentage(even for a top program).

Elite 50:8 TD/INT ratio.

Good height and size. Respectable athlete.

Cons:
Only 14 starts(like Trubisky and Murray)

Not fleet of foot(slow Combine 40)

Will they draft him over an elite defender at #6? I don't know. It may depend on exactly how the board falls to them. Either way we'll be adding another very talented component to our roster build.

In comment 14393745 jtgiants said:

Quote:

Similar to peppers. In terms of youth and upside with a very manageable contract. I've heard three names who could come for the pick along with a pick between 37 and 95 which gentleman really wants. FYI. I'll never say the players Giants are investigating for very obvious reasons

Well, smack dab in the middle between pick 37 and 95 is the 9ers pick at 67. Also rumor has it they are looking to unload crazily athletic but mostly unproductive DE Solomon Thomas, the #3 overall pick in 2017, and might be looking for pick 17 to have the puck of the litter among this year's WR crop, after whiffing on the OBJ deal. Meanwhile, the take ER Bosa or Allen at 2 to supplant Thomas.

Thomas seems more slated to work at 5 or 3 tech as a bookend to BJ Hill. He's not working out as an ER for SF.

Is Thomas plus 67 in the discussion for 17? I think he has a rep as a ++ citizen, and like Peppers has a potential 3 years left on his rookie deal.

As they were already discussing players/trade with each other.....

Know nothing about the player(s)?

enjoyable.

In comment 14393711 jtgiants said:

Quote:

I wouldn't take a qb this year. Giants wanted to go defense at 6 and qb at 17. They were convinced lock or jones would be there. They now believe they won't be able to stand pat at 17 and get a qb they like. 1. Just punt qb and go Bpa. Defense or tackle most likely 2. Trade back up for qb but only if price is not outrageous which is unlikely 3. Trade back. Very possible. I promise u the Giants one way or another will pick after 37 and before 95. 4. trade pick for player. No not Rosen. I've heard interesting names but don't ask

Regarding your third point, getting a pick between 37 and 95 may be because they think that's an area to get a decent big receiver.

Soloman Thomas has been a complete bust

He played out of position first couple years but I can�t see any
Way possible giants would consider giving up early pick for him.

A late round pick, sure.

If the over under on Haskins is 14 I'd bet my house on the under. He'll go top ten for sure.

In comment 14394579 jtgiants said:

Quote:

I don't mean to be harsh but I don't care if you doubt the veracity of my info. Believe it or not. Up to you. I've been here a long time. My info or anyone else's is never 100% but my track records damn good. I'm telling you what I know to be true. Could I be wrong. Sure. Am I. I don't think so

Please don�t let the crybabies deter you from posting. You�re insight is greatly appreciated. I�m sure you mean to be helpful, and it can get frustrating when you have to repeatedly say the same thing to quell the hysteria at times.

Thank you for the info, seriously.

In comment 14393771 Giants38 said:

Quote:

In comment 14393757 jtgiants said: Quote: Giants don't see it as issue. They had a great draft last year and never hid interest n Barkley. They don't think it's an issue. Right or wrong If that�s the case it�s insanely idiotic. It got them jumped for Floyd and Conklin, and they landed Apple. How�d that work out? Last year they picked at 2. This year they don�t. If they don�t see that as an issue, that should tell you something about our front office. Teams are going through drastic measures to keep their rankings hidden? The Giants: putting them on blast.

Everybody knew we were weak at linebacker and oline on 2016. The rumor that we got jumped becausr of a leak is just that....a rumor.
And Apple is a starting cb on one of the top teams in the league.

Buckner is of Giants interest ... if they are trading 17 it better be for him, I like Arik Armstead too. They are loaded on DL

In comment 14394990 Giants_Rock said:

Quote:

In comment 14393771 Giants38 said: Quote: In comment 14393757 jtgiants said: Quote: Giants don't see it as issue. They had a great draft last year and never hid interest n Barkley. They don't think it's an issue. Right or wrong If that�s the case it�s insanely idiotic. It got them jumped for Floyd and Conklin, and they landed Apple. How�d that work out? Last year they picked at 2. This year they don�t. If they don�t see that as an issue, that should tell you something about our front office. Teams are going through drastic measures to keep their rankings hidden? The Giants: putting them on blast. Everybody knew we were weak at linebacker and oline on 2016. The rumor that we got jumped becausr of a leak is just that....a rumor. And Apple is a starting cb on one of the top teams in the league.

I don't know what to tell you other than that JTGIants literally said that the Giants know that information leaks and they do not care about it. Look up his posts if you want to.

I don�t see Buckner being a player based on JT stating think in terms of Peppers with nice contract. Buckner on last year of deal

Armstead not worth 17 by any stretch

In comment 14395037 jayg5 said:

Quote:

I don�t see Buckner being a player based on JT stating think in terms of Peppers with nice contract. Buckner on last year of deal Armstead not worth 17 by any stretch

Sorry didn�t mean armstead for 17, just as a player I�d take in a deal. They have a glut of DL talent, which is nice but sitting at 2 doesn�t really align with their �need�. I�m sure they�d love a WR at 17 ... i just know Buckner was heavily discussed in Odell negotiations, so maybe they revisit? He could be extended with the cap next year and beyond.

Buckner would be a dream in Bettcher�s scheme

For another�s team 1st, extra 2nd or 3rd I would think of a player like Trae Waynes maybe based on JT comments.

I could obviously be way off but fun to think about

In a heartbeat for sure