Dave Gettleman talks a lot, has a bunch of one liners but common sense tell us that if we feel any of these guys are a franchise QB and we let him go at 6 and pick him at 17 our conviction of him being that person isnt that high if you would gamble letting other teams taking him. In other words, prioritize the franchise QB or dont pick one at all in the first round because if you pick him at 17 I know you didnt love him and that is not who I want as my franchise QB.
17- C. Wilkins- slides to here
trade for Rosen.
Why risk it!!! If this is the guy for ten years or fifteen years your qb, you are going to let eleven slots stand between you and him possibly? Never heard of prioritizing and edge rusher over a franchise QB. Dont care if we dont take a QB but it will tell me a lot if we dont take one first
Ian Rapoport
Verified account @RapSheet
2m2 minutes ago
The back part of the first round could be fascinating tonight. Picks 21-26 the #Seahawks to the #Colts have shown an interest in trading back, Im told. If the #Giants dont get a QB at 6 or 17, they may trade back into the 1st for one.
17- C. Wilkins- slides to here
trade for Rosen.
That's like a wet dream
Quote:
you can get the guy you love with a lower pick, I don't see the problem.
Why risk it!!! If this is the guy for ten years or fifteen years your qb, you are going to let eleven slots stand between you and him possibly? Never heard of prioritizing and edge rusher over a franchise QB. Dont care if we dont take a QB but it will tell me a lot if we dont take one first
maybe they have conviction in two or more of the QBs and are also willing to trade up if it gets down two one.
I made fun of the Eagles trading up to #2 and being happy with whomever the Rams didn't take (the chocolate vs vanilla comment by peterson) but it worked out for them.
Quote:
In comment 14405249 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
you can get the guy you love with a lower pick, I don't see the problem.
Why risk it!!! If this is the guy for ten years or fifteen years your qb, you are going to let eleven slots stand between you and him possibly? Never heard of prioritizing and edge rusher over a franchise QB. Dont care if we dont take a QB but it will tell me a lot if we dont take one first
maybe they have conviction in two or more of the QBs and are also willing to trade up if it gets down two one.
I made fun of the Eagles trading up to #2 and being happy with whomever the Rams didn't take (the chocolate vs vanilla comment by peterson) but it worked out for them.
They said that, but they knew it was Goff to the Rams.
For example, in this draft with 12 picks I'd want them to pick two or even three quarterbacks (if Eli weren't here). Develop them and let them fight it out for the starting job. Keep the competition going every year.
The next guy isn't gonna be Eli Manning. I don't think we can be thinking in 10-15 year timescales.
Eric: the point is the draft is never certain. The Giant cant posdibly know if the QB they want will still be there at 17, so you cant risk it. There are no guarantees. If a team wants a player, the team has to draft that guy or risk losing him. And I think the point everyone is making is, if you dont care about losing the QB, you dont have a real conviction about him, and hes not worth the pick.
Moving up from 37 to the back end of the first to draft a guy like Grier would be horrific.
17- C. Wilkins- slides to here
trade for Rosen.
This is what I am hoping for as well.
17- C. Wilkins- slides to here
trade for Rosen.
I'd be extremely pleased that. Doubt Wilkins is there then, but what about Dexter Lawrence instead of Wilkins?
Youre citing the exception to the rule. 2nd round QBs and later rarely work out; DG even acknowledged this. And my point was that you dont pass on a guy thinking, no worries, hes guaranteed to slip to us at 17. No, hes not.
Quote:
you can get the guy you love with a lower pick, I don't see the problem.
Why risk it!!! If this is the guy for ten years or fifteen years your qb, you are going to let eleven slots stand between you and him possibly? Never heard of prioritizing and edge rusher over a franchise QB. Dont care if we dont take a QB but it will tell me a lot if we dont take one first
Its a tolerable risk if theres more than 1 QB you like.
The best QB should not be mistaken as the ~only~ QB
Also, this is not the final year of the NFL draft. If The Org misses out on this years class, they can repurpose assets for next year when more likable QBs will enter the league.
Bingo
[quote] you can get the guy you love with a lower pick, I don't see the problem. [/]
I think the issue is that you don't really love him if you're willing to wait to get him in the second half of the first round and risk not getting him at all when you could have gotten him sooner. That doesn't equate to being a QB you are "in love with." If you really love the player, even if not a QB, you take him as soon as you have the chance, or even trade up for him if you have the capital and you think he's really worth it.
Separately, it's fine to say they love him for 17, but not for 6, but who really wants a QB that the front office loves as a mid-late first round pick but didn't think was worth spending an early first round pick on? That's fine for almost any other position, but not for QB. The statistical chances of success for late first round picks, even after 12 or so, is pretty bad. It could be coincidence, but there is probably has some rational correlation with the fact that at least 5+ other QB-needy teams passed on him because they didn't grade him as a top 10 quality player/QB.
Quote:
since they didn't select him until the 2nd round.
Youre citing the exception to the rule. 2nd round QBs and later rarely work out; DG even acknowledged this. And my point was that you dont pass on a guy thinking, no worries, hes guaranteed to slip to us at 17. No, hes not.
And Drew Brees was short when height really, really mattered for a QB, and didn't have a John Elway arm. He was objectively viewed as deficient in important traits that disqualified him from first round consideration for most teams. That was a reasonable decision. The guy was accurate as hell, but lacked the ideal tools. His production was so impressive though that it was worth taking a risk on him--with a second round pick, not a first.
Quote:
since they didn't select him until the 2nd round.
Youre citing the exception to the rule. 2nd round QBs and later rarely work out; DG even acknowledged this. And my point was that you dont pass on a guy thinking, no worries, hes guaranteed to slip to us at 17. No, hes not.
Ok how about Brady, Favre, Wilson or Jackson?
This thread is about having conviction on a QB and not selecting him with the highest pick you have. If teams do their homework on the players, along with understanding the other teams in the league and who fits there plans, they can probably figure out the value of the player and when to select him. If he is not there then they move on to the next player.
The Giants may like 6 QB's and their values could all be different.