According to Sy'56 draft rankings - We CRUSHED this draft

Again, not sure where he stands on this, but Kirwan and Jim Miller, to name a few love Lawrence, even better than Allen. Fwiw

In comment 14424040 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

Again, not sure where he stands on this, but Kirwan and Jim Miller, to name a few love Lawrence, even better than Allen. Fwiw

For sure. And it makes sense the Giants weren't lying that they had Jones at around the same ranking as Allen on their board. Not sure why we are getting drilled the way we are about Allen by the media. I wanted him as well, but look at the value we got without taking him... plus a potential franchise QB... I am elated.

He was much more down on Allen than most.

DG 2 for 2 in the draft and his FA moves look good on paoer as well . We could be looking at 10-12 starters, a new QB and lots of cap space. Pretty impressive performance so far MO.

You may bring some solace to this site post draft.

I can remember a few of JR's draft feeling that we had crushed it, only to find when the pads came on that there were more duds than studs.

In comment 14424073 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

He was much more down on Allen than most.

I read more than a few draft articles that weren't so high on him. From CBS Sports:

Quote:

His film doesn't feature a wide-ranging collection of pass-rushing moves. Occasionally, Allen swiped offensive tackles' hands away en route to the quarterback. Beyond that, Allen won with a good old-fashioned speed rush around the corner. NFL tackles are significantly better than SEC tackles. They'll sit on that speed rush and take it away. Also, as the combine showed, for his size, Allen isn't highly athletic. His three-cone time of 7.15 seconds placed him in just the 63rd percentile among players at his position over the past 20 years. It represents good, not otherworldly bendiness.

That's from a Buyer beware article... which had Haskins and Allen as two of the top "Buyer beware" prospects.

It looks like this draft has the potential to be reasonably productive, and that's all I can ask. No one assigns wins and losses based upon how well your draft coincides with what the NY sports media writes or says.

I liked Lock better than Jones, and whether Jones is better than Lock or Haskins remains to be determined. And whether either would be a better QB for the Giants is another and slightly different question. Gettleman wasn't just talking BS when he said that for a QB to succeed in NY you need a certain personality and mental make up. There are unique challenges to living with the NY media and dealing with the temptations NY offers.

I think Lawrence is a great pick that won't be able to be judged by sacks and pressures alone, as what he is will allow so many others to be more effective. A trio of Tomlinson, Hill and Lawrence will be problematic for OL's. Tomlinson is solid, and Hill showed even more potential, add Lawrence clogging the middle and these three will occupy enough blockers it will free OLB's and blitzing DB's. I hate to jinx it, but if this DL comes together, THINGS COULD GET INTERESTING!

the early picks he was higher than most on last year pre-draft included Baker Mayfield (86), Derwin James (90), Darius Leonard (86). He also nailed plenty of others who were more expected but also did well (Chubb, Barkley, Nelson, Payne, Ward etc).

People have gotten out of control out of the exact order of selection, when it appears we came away with four first-round quality picks (three on defense), and also a promising edge rusher in the 3d.

Can't wait for training camp...

In comment 14424040 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

Again, not sure where he stands on this, but Kirwan and Jim Miller, to name a few love Lawrence, even better than Allen. Fwiw

Lawrence is more of a blue chipper in that his floor is higher, he his basically flawless.

But if wasn’t as if he was Khali Mack 2.0, if he was he wouldn’t have made it past the Raiders.

Are positional values added into a player’s grade? I have no idea how the grading works but I would assume a QB with equal grade to pretty much any other position would have to be more valuable to a team because of the impact the position has on a game.

So let’s say as an example the Giants have the same grades on Allen and Jones as Sy has. Is it possible a QB positional value is +5 and a pass rusher value is +3, giving Allen and Jones the same value of 85 when factoring in position?

I honestly don’t know how positional value factors in and this could be completely off-base. Hoping someone smarter than me can respond

...it’s worth noting his view that the team made a huge mistake by passing on Josh Rosen. Sy’s optimal scenario was Jonah Williams at #6 combined with a trade of a lower pick for Rosen.

So I believe if you look at Sy's grades, he grades them out by how likely they are to start regardless of their respective position. He leaves it to the reader to add or subtract their own numbers based on how they value the position, etc.

90+: Elite, All Pro
85-89: Immediate starter, building block for a decade, franchise player
80-84: First round talent, starter and/or majority of the snaps each week
77-79: Day 2 pick, starter within their first 16-24 games as a pro
75-76: Fourth rounder, has starter traits but needs development
71-74: Fifth/Sixth rounder, should develop in to weekly contributor over rookie contract
68-70: Draftable, hopeful for special teams impact and long term development
67 and under: UDFA

I think he liked the draft - if I had to put words in Sy's mouth I'd say he thought it was solid - but we didn't get the better QB option (Rosen) and there were better options at #6.

Not sure that is a "crush"...

In comment 14424140 Big Blue Blogger said:

Quote:

...it’s worth noting his view that the team made a huge mistake by passing on Josh Rosen. Sy’s optimal scenario was Jonah Williams at #6 combined with a trade of a lower pick for Rosen.

Blogger, agreed.... and count me in on liking the idea of Rosen. However it's quite possible based on what we trade for Rosen we not only miss out on any number of those 3 defensive players, but we actually end up with less value from who we end up selecting. Plus it's clear to me the Giants had a higher grade on Jones over Rosen or they would have been more active in pursuing him.

In comment 14424052 Johnny5 said:

Quote:

In comment 14424040 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: Again, not sure where he stands on this, but Kirwan and Jim Miller, to name a few love Lawrence, even better than Allen. Fwiw For sure. And it makes sense the Giants weren't lying that they had Jones at around the same ranking as Allen on their board. Not sure why we are getting drilled the way we are about Allen by the media. I wanted him as well, but look at the value we got without taking him... plus a potential franchise QB... I am elated.

It's not just Allen, but Oliver and a couple of others who were there.

The press is creating a false narrative, though, about Jones being a second round talent to make a splash and pile on in the criticism of the Giants. But, most people were calling Jones a day 1 pick for weeks before the draft.

In comment 14424146 bw in dc said:

Quote:

I think he liked the draft - if I had to put words in Sy's mouth I'd say he thought it was solid - but we didn't get the better QB option (Rosen) and there were better options at #6. Not sure that is a "crush"...

Of course I read his recap. I am just basing this on good old fashioned value, mostly to talk people off the ledge and throw it in the face of most of the media pundits.

Clearly the Giants valued Jones over Rosen (and Haskins for that matter), whether that was correct or not remains to be seen.... however from a grade perspective, which is really just projecting where these players may end up using an expert opinion... I will argue everyday, in every way we absolutely crushed it.

Does it remain to be seen? Well yeah, of course. But I'm feeling pretty good about it.

but I am liking DG’s drafting strategy. He did a nice job last year as well, at least it looks that way based on early returns.

I mentioned this in a thread the other day, but I like the fact that he is building depth at key spots, such as the cluster drafting of CB’s. I felt like when Reese was here we were always an injury or two away from being doomed at certain positions because the cupboard was so bare.

If Jones is a franchise QB, it’s an enormous success. The fact that we have then paired Jones with Barkley for at least a decade (if healthy) is going to be exceptionally tough for Ds to plan for. Engram is a quality pass catching TE, and Shepard is a very good slot WR. We obviously still need to find a guy that can take the top off a D (I’m not banking on Slayton or Coleman there) and a guy who can win jump balls/make contested catches. But a Jones (if successful) and Barkley combo has the potential cause headaches for a long time.

In comment 14424040 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

Again, not sure where he stands on this, but Kirwan and Jim Miller, to name a few love Lawrence, even better than Allen. Fwiw

Me too. Agree 100%. I wanted a DT. Thought it was a bigger need. #1 Stop the run and #2 rush the passer. I felt this does #1 and certainly helps #2

Gave them a D- which was the worst in the league.

I don’t think it’s useful to grade drafts until they play. Rating the draft now is pretty useless. That said, I like the emphasis on the CB but would have preferred more big guy types on both lines. It bothers me big time we didn’t address the OL until so late which reminds me of Reese’s Engram draft

Lawrence can get penetration but he is not known as a lass rusher and most have said he will probably come out on sure-passing downs. The only rusher we added was Ximines and there are huge questions about his measurable and the level of competition he went against (personally, if a guy went against weaker competition I would prefer he at least have good measurables, or if he has bad measurables I would at least like to know he can hold his own against top competition... combination of the weak competition and weak measurables is not good IMO).

Furthermore Eli Manning was sacked 47 times last year (career-high) and somehow we didn’t take an o-lineman until round 7 despite having 12 picks to start out.

At the end of the day I’m happy we got some great value (Baker and Love will go a long way in helping this secondary) but you have to come out of this draft thinking we did still don’t have a team that can win or compete in this division. You can argue that 2019 was already a lost cause but IMO I prefer the idea of building from within the trenches to out, drafting BPA in all situations when you have as many holes as the Giants did, and building the team to a point where the QB is the final piece to an already clearly put together puzzle (seemed like the 2020 class was coming at the exact right time for that in our rebuild). I’m not an NFL GM though so I guess we’ll see, this is just my opinion.

I’m on my phone

Dexter Lawrence turns out to be a better football player than Josh Allen.

By most accounts, we got good value on nine of our ten picks, but we failed to address the O-Line until the 7th Round and didn't take an Edge Rusher until late in the 3rd.

We did reinforce the Secondary, where we were ridiculously thin.

In comment 14424516 Leg of Theismann said:

Quote:

Furthermore Eli Manning was sacked 47 times last year (career-high) and somehow we didn’t take an o-lineman until round 7 despite having 12 picks to start out.

We'll see about the pass rush, but as to the OL you are overlooking that we traded for a very good RG and appear to be signing a servicable RT in free agency, so I don't think the draft was as critical there.

In comment 14424169 Matt M. said:

Quote:

In comment 14424052 Johnny5 said: Quote: In comment 14424040 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: Again, not sure where he stands on this, but Kirwan and Jim Miller, to name a few love Lawrence, even better than Allen. Fwiw For sure. And it makes sense the Giants weren't lying that they had Jones at around the same ranking as Allen on their board. Not sure why we are getting drilled the way we are about Allen by the media. I wanted him as well, but look at the value we got without taking him... plus a potential franchise QB... I am elated. It's not just Allen, but Oliver and a couple of others who were there. The press is creating a false narrative, though, about Jones being a second round talent to make a splash and pile on in the criticism of the Giants. But, most people were calling Jones a day 1 pick for weeks before the draft.

Jones was a draft riser as discussed on this site. It's the low information ESPN sports personality and unhinged Francessa that are completely triggered by the pick.

In comment 14424122 BSIMatt said:

Quote:

But if wasn’t as if he was Khali Mack 2.0, if he was he wouldn’t have made it past the Raiders.

Reports were jets were not too enamored either. So Sy, Chucky and Woody Johnson agreed.

My take was F the noise, just look at his production. Production for QB and RB is often misleading, but for other more one one one positions like ER, specially from a smaller scholl going against topcompetition, it's very compelling.

In comment 14424180 Johnny5 said:

Quote:

In comment 14424146 bw in dc said: Quote: I think he liked the draft - if I had to put words in Sy's mouth I'd say he thought it was solid - but we didn't get the better QB option (Rosen) and there were better options at #6. Not sure that is a "crush"... Of course I read his recap. I am just basing this on good old fashioned value, mostly to talk people off the ledge and throw it in the face of most of the media pundits. Clearly the Giants valued Jones over Rosen (and Haskins for that matter), whether that was correct or not remains to be seen.... however from a grade perspective, which is really just projecting where these players may end up using an expert opinion... I will argue everyday, in every way we absolutely crushed it. Does it remain to be seen? Well yeah, of course. But I'm feeling pretty good about it.

Good post but the the guys who liked other QBs will not. Prepare for criticism. Agree, love the Jones pick especially . DG knocked out of the park again this year. In the draft and FA, and we have cap space next year to boot. OBJ who.

In comment 14424515 Samiam said:

Quote:

Gave them a D- which was the worst in the league. I don’t think it’s useful to grade drafts until they play. Rating the draft now is pretty useless. That said, I like the emphasis on the CB but would have preferred more big guy types on both lines. It bothers me big time we didn’t address the OL until so late which reminds me of Reese’s Engram draft

I don't pay much attention to 'grades', and I think a few of the media 'experts' really didn't take into consideration why these kids were taken where they were.

comparing his picks versus who we picked. We had none in common but yet his rating system had us doing well. Hope he is right.

on this till he fails. Think he had another great year in the draft and FA. We will see. !0 or more starters in two years works for me. If Jones is the real deal it would be an incredible performance. We will be back in competition.

I don’t understand why this point isn’t brought up more. Let’s say the Giants draft Allen at 6, they are not waiting until 17 for Jones. We know now that was not an option.

I would think they would attempt trading 17 & 37 to Denver to draft Jones at 10. Taking Jones at 6 still allowed us to draft 2 very good defensive prospects.

That’s really the only pick I hear about (and personally hated).

I’m over it at this point, though. He’s gonna be our next QB. Hope he kills it.

I thought DG’s other picks were pretty good for the most part.

defense is about DL/Secondary play - not a dominant edge defender.

The pressure is schemed with diverse fronts. The DL occupy the OL (Lawrence) and penetrate (Hill) in front of CBs in press man coverage (guess what Baker and Love excel in).

Disrupt the OL, jam the WRs, scheme pressure to the QB.

This was likely a determining factor in Jones v Allen at 6, aside from the “conviction” or “blooming love” they had for Jones.

Not sure how he got away the first time? Carolina's loss ...

In comment 14424516 Leg of Theismann said:

Quote:

Lawrence can get penetration but he is not known as a lass rusher and most have said he will probably come out on sure-passing downs. The only rusher we added was Ximines and there are huge questions about his measurable and the level of competition he went against (personally, if a guy went against weaker competition I would prefer he at least have good measurables, or if he has bad measurables I would at least like to know he can hold his own against top competition... combination of the weak competition and weak measurables is not good IMO). Furthermore Eli Manning was sacked 47 times last year (career-high) and somehow we didn’t take an o-lineman until round 7 despite having 12 picks to start out. At the end of the day I’m happy we got some great value (Baker and Love will go a long way in helping this secondary) but you have to come out of this draft thinking we did still don’t have a team that can win or compete in this division. You can argue that 2019 was already a lost cause but IMO I prefer the idea of building from within the trenches to out, drafting BPA in all situations when you have as many holes as the Giants did, and building the team to a point where the QB is the final piece to an already clearly put together puzzle (seemed like the 2020 class was coming at the exact right time for that in our rebuild). I’m not an NFL GM though so I guess we’ll see, this is just my opinion.

It is true, we were 30th in sacks but we were 10th in presuming the qb, which I think is even more important. This article has been cited before but needs to be cited again. I think this gives me the most hope that we do have a plan and we d9nt necessarily have to be in the top 10 with sacks.

Lastly, hoping Golden, Carter, and Xman can help though with sacks, especially with the Beast, DLawrence, wrecking havoc inside.
Cornerbacks - ( New Window )