They need this kid back for game 1. If this is a long term injury, it might be wise to look into a Vet. I like the potential of the other rookies, but its going to take some time for them to develop good feel for the game.
Football causes so many injuries. It’s almost absurd.
You just hope it’s not your teams QB, main offensive weapon (Barkley for us), top lineman or top pass rusher (not relevant to giants as they don’t have one).
I’d rather have a DB be hurt. Many teams plug and play these guys now.
The results for the 2018 New York Giants completely counter that line of thinking.
The results for the 2018 Philadelphia Eagles don’t.
With all due respect, are you really going to start on how unimportant secondaries are again, after the GM of the Giants completely gutted and reinvested in the secondary? Or are you going to go on again about how none of the playoff teams had plus secondaries, when many of them had multiple All Pro players.
The Giants management certainly didn't think winging it with an awful secondary with no depth was a good call. Thankfully their roster building didn't amount to; the Eagles lucked out for a few games after their secondary was decemated and scraped together a 9-7 season, let's try that.
What playoff teams had “multiple all pro” players in their secondary?
I never said the secondary was unimportant. I said building a pass rush is more important and the foundation of a good defense.
Reported as a "sprain," but "strain," "sprain" and "tear" are all on the same spectrum. Fibers in the ligament are stretched and/or torn. So even if it's "just" a sprain it's something he and the Giants will have to manage going forward.
Reported as a "sprain," but "strain," "sprain" and "tear" are all on the same spectrum. Fibers in the ligament are stretched and/or torn. So even if it's "just" a sprain it's something he and the Giants will have to manage going forward.
Exactly. Our best hope is that this is an MCL injury as that can repair itself. Any other ligament and that could mean surgery now or possibly later.
Thankfully the Giants have something resembling depth in the secondary.
Ballentine, Haley, Jenkins (if finally healthy), Peppers, and Bethea is a great deal more compitent than the embarrassment trotted out there last year.
In 2018, the Bears and Chargers had 2 and 3 All Pro selections from their secondary.
In 2017 both the Titans and Jags had multiple All Pro selections from their secondaries.
So 2 of 12 each year and none made the Super Bowl. Sounds like a formula for success!
Having excellent players is certainly more of a formula than not. Not sure what the argument is here. The Giants don't have a good pass rush. They are counting on their secondary to perform.
I think the argument is based on a few misguided premises:
1) the Giants pass rush was awful (it wasn't, Giants ranked 14th in opposing drop backs under pressure in 2018)
2) the Giants didn't invest in the pass rush ( they did, it just appears Bettcher would rather create pressure from a bullying line and blitz, instead of the classic edge rush)
3) The Giants secondary was less important to address than the pass rush (it wasn't as evidenced by Gettleman's actions, and for instance the Giants giving up a frankly unbelievable higher TD rate when QBs were under pressure)
4) The outlying and extraordinarily weird season the 2018 Eagles had is a formula for future success
I agree that we don't have any proven pass rushers on this team Â
and that will hurt. But we got our running back, an improved o-line, d-line, and secondary. I expect that next year, we'll see the team either draft or sign more than one pass rusher in 2020.
which anyone who watched the games knows. Not sure how that can be argued. The secondary still has Jenkins starting and the current management was ok letting an all pro safety walk, so there's that.
and when they get there, they are too slow and the QB merely moves a little and he has another few seconds. But we have a back up QB now.
There has yet to be 1 meaningful snap in 2019. How bout we wait for real games to start before we declare something. Some of you dudes need to find something else to do during preseason. None of this shit matters unless its rookies and backups trying to win jobs.
I think the argument is based on a few misguided premises:
1) the Giants pass rush was awful (it wasn't, Giants ranked 14th in opposing drop backs under pressure in 2018)
That feels like mincing words. If people object to calling it awful, the best possible thing you can say is it was not effective.
That's a fantastic point actually, and really comes down to how you define success for a pass rush.
Did Giants generate a lot of sacks? No. Did the Giants Giants generate league average pressure? Yes.
No argument -- the Giants would be benifit from more sacks (we can get into the overall value of sacks, but maybe a different topic).
Did the Giants secondary give up a lot of catches and touch downs when the opposing QB was under pressure, absolutely. And that's hopefully what Gettleman addressed.
needs a stat to tell them how the Giants pass rush was I'd question if they even watched the games.
The pass rush was awful.
Might it be worth considering it was the result that was awful -- as in quarterbacks completed a lot of passes and threw a lot of TDs -- and the reason for that was largely the secondary?
I'd say the reaction points to that -- Gettleman rebuilt and invested mightily in the secondary, and the stats indicate that as well.
needs a stat to tell them how the Giants pass rush was I'd question if they even watched the games.
The pass rush was awful.
Sometimes stats are better than the eye test which is subjective and biased.
As are some stats, like QB pressures (subjective and biased)
Stats aren't perfect and usually need proper context but throwing them out because they don't match with what you "saw" is foolish. Different people see different things.
But what drives me crazy is these old school fans that seem threatened by change and by the suggestion that their football analysis skills aren't perfect and basically throw the baby out with bathwater and disregard stats completely.
needs a stat to tell them how the Giants pass rush was I'd question if they even watched the games.
The pass rush was awful.
Sometimes stats are better than the eye test which is subjective and biased.
And sometimes stats are skewered (especially advanced ones) that are based off the outcome of the play without recognizing the details that went into the play. And assessing a value based off a calculation (which is made up by the way) can also lead to a lot of misinterpretations.
When people use QB rating, QBR, PFF scores, or any stat that is "adjusted" - well tend to be wrong more often than right.
needs a stat to tell them how the Giants pass rush was I'd question if they even watched the games.
The pass rush was awful.
Sometimes stats are better than the eye test which is subjective and biased.
And sometimes stats are skewered (especially advanced ones) that are based off the outcome of the play without recognizing the details that went into the play. And assessing a value based off a calculation (which is made up by the way) can also lead to a lot of misinterpretations.
When people use QB rating, QBR, PFF scores, or any stat that is "adjusted" - well tend to be wrong more often than right.
Sure, but pjac's opinion less biased and subjective?
needs a stat to tell them how the Giants pass rush was I'd question if they even watched the games.
The pass rush was awful.
Might it be worth considering it was the result that was awful -- as in quarterbacks completed a lot of passes and threw a lot of TDs -- and the reason for that was largely the secondary?
I'd say the reaction points to that -- Gettleman rebuilt and invested mightily in the secondary, and the stats indicate that as well.
Well isn't it all related - pass rush and secondary? QB's with time (and who are good when pressured) will complete more passes.
But if you want to talk secondary stats (which I don't), the Giants allowed the 8th lowest passer rating against in the entire NFL.
I also don't know if it's really a correlation between the draft and the results of 2018. Outside of the top 3 rounds, you don't rely too much on rookie contributions.
The 1st 4 Giants picks (top 3 rounds): QB, DL, CB, DE
Reportedly the tipping point in the Beckham trade was Peppers, they signed Bethea, they traded a 2nd, 4th, and 5th for Baker. They picked Love with with a 4th, this after having forfeited their 3rd round pick for a corner in the supplemental draft.
It's quite hard to argue the Giants haven't heavily invested assets and money in improving the secondary.
This article has been posted many times, but is a terrific read.
Reportedly the tipping point in the Beckham trade was Peppers, they signed Bethea, they traded a 2nd, 4th, and 5th for Baker. They picked Love with with a 4th, this after having forfeited their 3rd round pick for a corner in the supplemental draft.
It's quite hard to argue the Giants haven't heavily invested assets and money in improving the secondary.
This article has been posted many times, but is a terrific read.
Link - ( New Window )
and when they get there, they are too slow and the QB merely moves a little and he has another few seconds. But we have a back up QB now.
Agree about the pass rush but saying we have a back up QB now is a little short sighted. We may just have the next future franchise QB and that can't be minimized.
of course my opinion is biased and subjective, but stats are not spread out over a season unless you are looking at weekly averages or standard deviations. For example, if the Giants get 10 sacks and 20 pressures one game, at the end of the season Christian can say, see the pass rush was mediocre, they had an average amount of pressures compared with the league. IOW stats can get skewed artificially.
but we who watched saw 15 other weeks where a QB had enough time to make a sandwich before throwing a pass (obvious hyperbole here, to illustrate a point)
of course my opinion is biased and subjective, but stats are not spread out over a season unless you are looking at weekly averages or standard deviations. For example, if the Giants get 10 sacks and 20 pressures one game, at the end of the season Christian can say, see the pass rush was mediocre, they had an average amount of pressures compared with the league. IOW stats can get skewed artificially.
but we who watched saw 15 other weeks where a QB had enough time to make a sandwich before throwing a pass (obvious hyperbole here, to illustrate a point)
Ok, I understand the concept of outliers, but do you have proof that these outliers existed for the Giants but not other teams or are you just grasping at straws because you want your opinion to be correct?
Reportedly the tipping point in the Beckham trade was Peppers, they signed Bethea, they traded a 2nd, 4th, and 5th for Baker. They picked Love with with a 4th, this after having forfeited their 3rd round pick for a corner in the supplemental draft.
It's quite hard to argue the Giants haven't heavily invested assets and money in improving the secondary.
This article has been posted many times, but is a terrific read.
Link - ( New Window )
But random BBI posters didn't like the pass rush.
That article is not saying the Patriots pass rush (or the Giants pass rush) was good. It's saying the Patriots secondary was good and the Giants wasn't.
It's a very different point and not one that I have disagreed with in any way - the Giants secondary was bad too.
Not sure why it can be true that both the Giants pass rush and secondary were poor units.
of course my opinion is biased and subjective, but stats are not spread out over a season unless you are looking at weekly averages or standard deviations. For example, if the Giants get 10 sacks and 20 pressures one game, at the end of the season Christian can say, see the pass rush was mediocre, they had an average amount of pressures compared with the league. IOW stats can get skewed artificially.
but we who watched saw 15 other weeks where a QB had enough time to make a sandwich before throwing a pass (obvious hyperbole here, to illustrate a point)
With all due respect, I'll trust the aggregated stats, and the team's obvious investment in the secondary over your observations.
I'm not saying the Giants had a good pass rush -- I'm saying they had an average pass rush -- and an awful secondary, specifically when the rush worked.
I think the pass rush will stay average, and but secondary will be much, much better. Let's see at the end of the year how it turns out.
of course my opinion is biased and subjective, but stats are not spread out over a season unless you are looking at weekly averages or standard deviations. For example, if the Giants get 10 sacks and 20 pressures one game, at the end of the season Christian can say, see the pass rush was mediocre, they had an average amount of pressures compared with the league. IOW stats can get skewed artificially.
but we who watched saw 15 other weeks where a QB had enough time to make a sandwich before throwing a pass (obvious hyperbole here, to illustrate a point)
Ok, I understand the concept of outliers, but do you have proof that these outliers existed for the Giants but not other teams or are you just grasping at straws because you want your opinion to be correct?
I do not want my opinion to be correct.
The Giants secondary (in a stat I already showed) allowed the 7th best passer rating against in the league.
So, by your stats are unbiased belief, wouldn't that mean the secondary was better than league average like the pressure stat shared?
All the emperical information should be used and analyzed, including passing success against (although passer rating has gone the way of the dodo it seems, but an argument for another day).
Quote:
In comment 14526872 christian said:
Quote:
In comment 14526839 giantsFC said:
Quote:
Football causes so many injuries. It’s almost absurd.
You just hope it’s not your teams QB, main offensive weapon (Barkley for us), top lineman or top pass rusher (not relevant to giants as they don’t have one).
I’d rather have a DB be hurt. Many teams plug and play these guys now.
The results for the 2018 New York Giants completely counter that line of thinking.
The results for the 2018 Philadelphia Eagles don’t.
With all due respect, are you really going to start on how unimportant secondaries are again, after the GM of the Giants completely gutted and reinvested in the secondary? Or are you going to go on again about how none of the playoff teams had plus secondaries, when many of them had multiple All Pro players.
The Giants management certainly didn't think winging it with an awful secondary with no depth was a good call. Thankfully their roster building didn't amount to; the Eagles lucked out for a few games after their secondary was decemated and scraped together a 9-7 season, let's try that.
What playoff teams had “multiple all pro” players in their secondary?
I never said the secondary was unimportant. I said building a pass rush is more important and the foundation of a good defense.
In 2017 both the Titans and Jags had multiple All Pro selections from their secondaries.
In 2017 both the Titans and Jags had multiple All Pro selections from their secondaries.
So 2 of 12 each year and none made the Super Bowl. Sounds like a formula for success!
Quote:
In 2018, the Bears and Chargers had 2 and 3 All Pro selections from their secondary.
In 2017 both the Titans and Jags had multiple All Pro selections from their secondaries.
So 2 of 12 each year and none made the Super Bowl. Sounds like a formula for success!
Well given that half of them made it farther than the 2018 Eagles, better odds than hoping a decimated secondary is going to get you there.
You can strengthen muscles. You cannot strengthen ligaments.
Quote:
.
Reported as a "sprain," but "strain," "sprain" and "tear" are all on the same spectrum. Fibers in the ligament are stretched and/or torn. So even if it's "just" a sprain it's something he and the Giants will have to manage going forward.
Exactly. Our best hope is that this is an MCL injury as that can repair itself. Any other ligament and that could mean surgery now or possibly later.
Ballentine, Haley, Jenkins (if finally healthy), Peppers, and Bethea is a great deal more compitent than the embarrassment trotted out there last year.
I never said the secondary was unimportant. I said building a pass rush is more important and the foundation of a good defense.
Well, since the Giants decidedly can't count on their pass rush, let's hope their secondary remains as close to full strength as possible all season.
Quote:
In 2018, the Bears and Chargers had 2 and 3 All Pro selections from their secondary.
In 2017 both the Titans and Jags had multiple All Pro selections from their secondaries.
So 2 of 12 each year and none made the Super Bowl. Sounds like a formula for success!
Having excellent players is certainly more of a formula than not. Not sure what the argument is here. The Giants don't have a good pass rush. They are counting on their secondary to perform.
1) the Giants pass rush was awful (it wasn't, Giants ranked 14th in opposing drop backs under pressure in 2018)
2) the Giants didn't invest in the pass rush ( they did, it just appears Bettcher would rather create pressure from a bullying line and blitz, instead of the classic edge rush)
3) The Giants secondary was less important to address than the pass rush (it wasn't as evidenced by Gettleman's actions, and for instance the Giants giving up a frankly unbelievable higher TD rate when QBs were under pressure)
4) The outlying and extraordinarily weird season the 2018 Eagles had is a formula for future success
1) the Giants pass rush was awful (it wasn't, Giants ranked 14th in opposing drop backs under pressure in 2018)
That feels like mincing words. If people object to calling it awful, the best possible thing you can say is it was not effective.
There has yet to be 1 meaningful snap in 2019. How bout we wait for real games to start before we declare something. Some of you dudes need to find something else to do during preseason. None of this shit matters unless its rookies and backups trying to win jobs.
Agree. I don’t get it.....I don’t believe he ever got injured in college, and now this....
Quote:
I think the argument is based on a few misguided premises:
1) the Giants pass rush was awful (it wasn't, Giants ranked 14th in opposing drop backs under pressure in 2018)
That feels like mincing words. If people object to calling it awful, the best possible thing you can say is it was not effective.
That's a fantastic point actually, and really comes down to how you define success for a pass rush.
Did Giants generate a lot of sacks? No. Did the Giants Giants generate league average pressure? Yes.
No argument -- the Giants would be benifit from more sacks (we can get into the overall value of sacks, but maybe a different topic).
Did the Giants secondary give up a lot of catches and touch downs when the opposing QB was under pressure, absolutely. And that's hopefully what Gettleman addressed.
The pass rush was awful.
The pass rush was awful.
Sometimes stats are better than the eye test which is subjective and biased.
Quote:
needs a stat to tell them how the Giants pass rush was I'd question if they even watched the games.
The pass rush was awful.
Sometimes stats are better than the eye test which is subjective and biased.
As are some stats, like QB pressures (subjective and biased)
The pass rush was awful.
Might it be worth considering it was the result that was awful -- as in quarterbacks completed a lot of passes and threw a lot of TDs -- and the reason for that was largely the secondary?
I'd say the reaction points to that -- Gettleman rebuilt and invested mightily in the secondary, and the stats indicate that as well.
Quote:
In comment 14527283 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
needs a stat to tell them how the Giants pass rush was I'd question if they even watched the games.
The pass rush was awful.
Sometimes stats are better than the eye test which is subjective and biased.
As are some stats, like QB pressures (subjective and biased)
Stats aren't perfect and usually need proper context but throwing them out because they don't match with what you "saw" is foolish. Different people see different things.
Quote:
needs a stat to tell them how the Giants pass rush was I'd question if they even watched the games.
The pass rush was awful.
Sometimes stats are better than the eye test which is subjective and biased.
And sometimes stats are skewered (especially advanced ones) that are based off the outcome of the play without recognizing the details that went into the play. And assessing a value based off a calculation (which is made up by the way) can also lead to a lot of misinterpretations.
When people use QB rating, QBR, PFF scores, or any stat that is "adjusted" - well tend to be wrong more often than right.
Quote:
In comment 14527283 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
needs a stat to tell them how the Giants pass rush was I'd question if they even watched the games.
The pass rush was awful.
Sometimes stats are better than the eye test which is subjective and biased.
And sometimes stats are skewered (especially advanced ones) that are based off the outcome of the play without recognizing the details that went into the play. And assessing a value based off a calculation (which is made up by the way) can also lead to a lot of misinterpretations.
When people use QB rating, QBR, PFF scores, or any stat that is "adjusted" - well tend to be wrong more often than right.
Sure, but pjac's opinion less biased and subjective?
Quote:
needs a stat to tell them how the Giants pass rush was I'd question if they even watched the games.
The pass rush was awful.
Might it be worth considering it was the result that was awful -- as in quarterbacks completed a lot of passes and threw a lot of TDs -- and the reason for that was largely the secondary?
I'd say the reaction points to that -- Gettleman rebuilt and invested mightily in the secondary, and the stats indicate that as well.
Well isn't it all related - pass rush and secondary? QB's with time (and who are good when pressured) will complete more passes.
But if you want to talk secondary stats (which I don't), the Giants allowed the 8th lowest passer rating against in the entire NFL.
I also don't know if it's really a correlation between the draft and the results of 2018. Outside of the top 3 rounds, you don't rely too much on rookie contributions.
The 1st 4 Giants picks (top 3 rounds): QB, DL, CB, DE
One pass rusher, one db.
It's quite hard to argue the Giants haven't heavily invested assets and money in improving the secondary.
This article has been posted many times, but is a terrific read.
Link - ( New Window )
It's quite hard to argue the Giants haven't heavily invested assets and money in improving the secondary.
This article has been posted many times, but is a terrific read.
Link - ( New Window )
But random BBI posters didn't like the pass rush.
Agree about the pass rush but saying we have a back up QB now is a little short sighted. We may just have the next future franchise QB and that can't be minimized.
of course my opinion is biased and subjective, but stats are not spread out over a season unless you are looking at weekly averages or standard deviations. For example, if the Giants get 10 sacks and 20 pressures one game, at the end of the season Christian can say, see the pass rush was mediocre, they had an average amount of pressures compared with the league. IOW stats can get skewed artificially.
but we who watched saw 15 other weeks where a QB had enough time to make a sandwich before throwing a pass (obvious hyperbole here, to illustrate a point)
Quote:
.
of course my opinion is biased and subjective, but stats are not spread out over a season unless you are looking at weekly averages or standard deviations. For example, if the Giants get 10 sacks and 20 pressures one game, at the end of the season Christian can say, see the pass rush was mediocre, they had an average amount of pressures compared with the league. IOW stats can get skewed artificially.
but we who watched saw 15 other weeks where a QB had enough time to make a sandwich before throwing a pass (obvious hyperbole here, to illustrate a point)
Ok, I understand the concept of outliers, but do you have proof that these outliers existed for the Giants but not other teams or are you just grasping at straws because you want your opinion to be correct?
Quote:
Reportedly the tipping point in the Beckham trade was Peppers, they signed Bethea, they traded a 2nd, 4th, and 5th for Baker. They picked Love with with a 4th, this after having forfeited their 3rd round pick for a corner in the supplemental draft.
It's quite hard to argue the Giants haven't heavily invested assets and money in improving the secondary.
This article has been posted many times, but is a terrific read.
Link - ( New Window )
But random BBI posters didn't like the pass rush.
That article is not saying the Patriots pass rush (or the Giants pass rush) was good. It's saying the Patriots secondary was good and the Giants wasn't.
It's a very different point and not one that I have disagreed with in any way - the Giants secondary was bad too.
Not sure why it can be true that both the Giants pass rush and secondary were poor units.
Quote:
.
of course my opinion is biased and subjective, but stats are not spread out over a season unless you are looking at weekly averages or standard deviations. For example, if the Giants get 10 sacks and 20 pressures one game, at the end of the season Christian can say, see the pass rush was mediocre, they had an average amount of pressures compared with the league. IOW stats can get skewed artificially.
but we who watched saw 15 other weeks where a QB had enough time to make a sandwich before throwing a pass (obvious hyperbole here, to illustrate a point)
With all due respect, I'll trust the aggregated stats, and the team's obvious investment in the secondary over your observations.
I'm not saying the Giants had a good pass rush -- I'm saying they had an average pass rush -- and an awful secondary, specifically when the rush worked.
I think the pass rush will stay average, and but secondary will be much, much better. Let's see at the end of the year how it turns out.
Quote:
In comment 14527310 BestFeature said:
Quote:
.
of course my opinion is biased and subjective, but stats are not spread out over a season unless you are looking at weekly averages or standard deviations. For example, if the Giants get 10 sacks and 20 pressures one game, at the end of the season Christian can say, see the pass rush was mediocre, they had an average amount of pressures compared with the league. IOW stats can get skewed artificially.
but we who watched saw 15 other weeks where a QB had enough time to make a sandwich before throwing a pass (obvious hyperbole here, to illustrate a point)
Ok, I understand the concept of outliers, but do you have proof that these outliers existed for the Giants but not other teams or are you just grasping at straws because you want your opinion to be correct?
I do not want my opinion to be correct.
The Giants secondary (in a stat I already showed) allowed the 7th best passer rating against in the league.
So, by your stats are unbiased belief, wouldn't that mean the secondary was better than league average like the pressure stat shared?