He's not the kind of RB who sets the tempo of a game. He doesn't square his shoulders, run downhill, and run thru defenders. He doesn't keep the chains moving. He is hesitant, lacks vision, is afraid of contact, is flat out below average running between the Tackles, and is a poor blocker.
I see Saquon as just a more talented James White: A pass-catching back who will occasionally break off a couple big runs.
Then why spend a #2 and 7M on a runner like Barkley.... Shouldn't that capital have been spent making the OL better?
Sure... And most of those ways will fail...
Given the results we have had here. I think it is safe to say that getting a rusher like Barkley without having good OL players is a not one of the successful ways.
Absolutely. And a team and a GM with vision might have seen how good Quinton Nelson was.
You pay these guys not just to make the easiest decisions. As it turns out, Nelson was every bit as advertised and makes players around him better.
I didnt want a guard at #2. But I'm also not paid six figures to know better.
and clearly there is at least one wrong way...
I never expected this rebuild to be quick. I was predicting a 5 or 6 win season this year.
I was expecting some positive signs of the team moving in a good direction. While I would agree that the final results are not in yet. I think we can safely say that the results so far are way below expectations. Far enough below, that my opinion is that the team shouldn't wait for the final results. But, that's just my opinion.
The problem is that not all players at all positions have the same shelf life. So while there are multiple ways to build a team, and you're certainly correct that the results aren't final yet (are they ever?), I think we can validate to some extent the assertion that if you build your team in a general sequence that factors for and favors the dependent nature of certain positions and the varying length of time required for certain positions to reach their prime relative to other positions, you might be more effective in having the core of your team reach their prime at or around the same time.
RB is a position that relies on so many others to be truly excellent. And it's also a position where players tend to enter their prime almost immediately. Building your team around a highly drafted, highly paid RB at the very beginning of a rebuild is more than likely going to be an extremely inefficient use of finite resources.
It has always been clear that Gettleman - if we assume that he does have something even approaching full autonomy (and I feel strongly that it's an even bigger problem if he doesn't) - either willfully disregarded the fact that a RB needs a team to be more fully built before he can be effective, or did a miserable enough job of scouting his own roster that he didn't disregard that fact at all and simply thought that his team was better than it actually was. Either one is a troubling flaw in our GM.
I think we can all agree that people can learn and change their minds. Let’s at least allow the possibility that DG has learned from his first year back with the Giants.
Go back to the 1st half vs. GB. The Giants have a 3rd and 1 early in the game. Shurmur lines up with Jones under C in a formation that is tipping run from the start. No FB, no lead blocker of any kind. Slow-developing Inside zone (of course) hand-off to Barkley. And (of course) the LB looks like he knows the play better than the Giants do & shoots the gap, nailing Barkley as he takes the hand-off. Loss of 4 yards, Barkley looks like he wants to cry. But it's Shurmur.
It's the perfect storm - use him predictably AND between the tackles AND featured as a pass blocker AND not used in the passing game as a receiver.
If you're going to use him like Brandon Jacobs you'll be sorely disappointed.
Imagine what a beast he'd be for Andy Reid (for example). We wouldn't be hearing anything but how he's the greatest RB of all time. Coaching is everything in the NFL.
I think we can all agree that people can learn and change their minds. Let’s at least allow the possibility that DG has learned from his first year back with the Giants.
Fair enough. And I'd never expect someone as ahem, prideful, as DG to admit a mistake, but do you think he'd take Barkley again at #2 if he had it to do all over again, knowing that he was entering a protracted rebuild rather than trying to recapture their success of 2016? Or do you think he approaches that 2018 draft differently?
Unless you think he'd do it differently, I feel like his self-scouting of the roster in 2017 is almost irrelevant, isn't it?
Quote:
Think the results are in yet. Building a team typically takes time and various acquisitions.
The problem is that not all players at all positions have the same shelf life. So while there are multiple ways to build a team, and you're certainly correct that the results aren't final yet (are they ever?), I think we can validate to some extent the assertion that if you build your team in a general sequence that factors for and favors the dependent nature of certain positions and the varying length of time required for certain positions to reach their prime relative to other positions, you might be more effective in having the core of your team reach their prime at or around the same time.
RB is a position that relies on so many others to be truly excellent. And it's also a position where players tend to enter their prime almost immediately. Building your team around a highly drafted, highly paid RB at the very beginning of a rebuild is more than likely going to be an extremely inefficient use of finite resources.
It has always been clear that Gettleman - if we assume that he does have something even approaching full autonomy (and I feel strongly that it's an even bigger problem if he doesn't) - either willfully disregarded the fact that a RB needs a team to be more fully built before he can be effective, or did a miserable enough job of scouting his own roster that he didn't disregard that fact at all and simply thought that his team was better than it actually was. Either one is a troubling flaw in our GM.
Gatorare, I see what you're saying. I certainly understand where you are coming from. I've been in a wait and see mindset where I tried not to get too high on early results or too low on negative results, my thinking has shifted a bit since I feel Shurmur was a bad hire (if Gettleman approved he has to deal with consequences of not extending his life with a new coach). I feel this is a horribly coached team where players are not put into positions to succeed often enough. I feel that is very important. The easy thing to do is get rid of chrome and start again, but I'm often wary of the easy approach.
The question everyone wants to know is, why is this team so bad? There are multiple reasons, but there is an inhibitor that isn't allowing this team to grow. I don't think it's easy to answer that question, but I think coaching could be a major part of it.
How much patience do I have with Gettleman? Next year with a new coach there needs to be results that points to bad coaching being a major culprit. But, again maybe I'm wrong, I don't know anything about coaching which makes me think, "why am I so sure Shurmur is the culprit?" It's a guess, I'm guessing he is the main issue, like others are guessing Gettelman is the problem or Mara, or a combo of them.
One last thing. I care about the Giants, but they are lower on my life priority list than they used to be. I don't enter deep into these conversations much, because ultimately I'm not worried about what happens, I'm not worried about Barkley wearing down, I'm not worried about Daniel Jones being the next franchise qb. I hope it turns out for the best, but their philosophy on building and maintaining a team just don't worry me like it used to.
It’s too easy to project DG’s mistakes through October 2018 into the future. We really need to look it’s what he’s done since then. I am one of the apparent minority here who think the Williams trade was at least OK, so the one decision since that Oct 2018 change in viewpoint that really disturbs me is the trade up for DeAndre Baker, which I see as a violation of the philosophy Gettleman has been espousing (culture, line play). But I love the other first rounders he selected, so there that...
Speaking of new names you may need to change yours to 5Bowls...eventually!
It’s too easy to project DG’s mistakes through October 2018 into the future. We really need to look it’s what he’s done since then. I am one of the apparent minority here who think the Williams trade was at least OK, so the one decision since that Oct 2018 change in viewpoint that really disturbs me is the trade up for DeAndre Baker, which I see as a violation of the philosophy Gettleman has been espousing (culture, line play). But I love the other first rounders he selected, so there that...
GD laid out the point nicely that many of us have been making about the folly of picking a RB before you have built the OL.
Since you have brought up the issue of what he has done since that choice, the OL was clearly a problem... And if you agree with the principle that GD laid out than the OL should have been a priority to clear holes for your other worldly RB and protect your shiny new QB. So, he lets a competent RG (Jamon Brown is/was competant) walk in FA, trades the only ER on the team for a better RG, and signs a 31 stopgap with a bad back at RT. He rolls with the 31 yo LT that did not look good the year before, and with the now 28 year old failed guard converted to center that has 2 games of experience and is coming off a broken leg. That's hardly what I would call focus on a position group that should be the priority. A position group that was a dumpster fire the previous season, and you should be trying to fill it with young core guys that will come into their primes really soon. Like before you lose the window for your other worldly RB.
Instead, he spent a #1 on another DL, after spending 2 the previous year, and then he spends 2 more from next year to get an 8 game rental on yet another DL. Apparently, Dave was only referring to the DL when he said how much he likes Hog-Mollies.
I know that many here don't believe in statistical analysis, but the analysis shows that there is no correlation between winning and rushing yards, and winning and yards per rush. However, if we create an running efficiency metric that varies based on down and distance (usually at least 40% of necessary yards on 1st down, 50% on 2nd, and making a 1st on 3rd down), then we do find a correlation between rushing effieciency and winning.
Barkley is one of the least efficient runners in the NFL PERIOD. His running around in the backfield is hurting the Giants offense... Badly.
This is not saying that SB lacks of talent, but he has to learn to make better use of it. His failures have everything to do with his running style. SB wants to hit the homerun every time he gets the ball. He tries to do too much, rather than take what he can get and move on to the next play.
This has been a knock on him as a pro, and all throughout his college years.
Last year he was 41st out of 47 RB in rushing efficiency. This year he is 33rd (dead last out of qualifying candidates) in terms of rushing efficiency.
Of course the OL shared the responsibility of this poor performance. But if the RB is so dependent on the OL to look good. Then doesn't that belie the logic of spending so much resources on a RB rather than the OL...
Rushing Success 2018
Rk Player Suc
Rate
1 G.Edwards 63%
2 A.Kamara 58%
3 M.Ingram 57%
4 T.Gurley 57%
5 K.Hunt 55%
6 A.Jones 55%
7 C.McCaffrey 55%
8 M.Mack 54%
9 D.Martin 53%
10 S.Michel 53%
11 K.Johnson 53%
12 M.Gordon 53%
13 A.Ekeler 52%
14 M.Davis 52%
15 C.Carson 51%
16 D.Henry 51%
17 J.Howard 50%
18 J.Adams 50%
19 N.Chubb 50%
20 F.Gore 50%
21 E.Elliott 50%
22 J.Conner 49%
23 J.Mixon 49%
24 P.Lindsay 49%
25 T.J.Yeldon 48%
26 L.Fournette 47%
27 A.Collins 47%
28 A.Peterson 47%
29 R.Freeman 46%
30 L.Murray 46%
31 M.Breida 46%
32 J.Williams 45%
33 K.Drake 45%
34 P.Barber 44%
35 C.Ivory 44%
36 L.Miller 44%
27 T.Coleman 43%
38 A.Morris 41%
39 A.Blue 41%
40 D.Cook 41%
41 S.Barkley 41%
42 C.Hyde 39%
43 Da.Johnson 38%
44 L.Blount 37%
45 L.McCoy 37%
46 I.Crowell 36%
47 D.Lewis 34%
Rushing Success 2019
1 L.Murray 61%
2 M.Ingram 60%
3 A.Jones 59%
4 C.Carson 56%
5 C.Hyde 55%
6 A.Kamara 54%
7 E.Elliott 54%
8 M.Mack 53%
9 J.Howard 53%
10 P.Lindsay 51%
11 J.Jacobs 51%
12 T.Gurley 50%
13 D.Cook 50%
14 D.Henry 49%
15 M.Gordon 48%
16 F.Gore 47%
17 R.Jones 47%
18 C.McCaffrey 47%
19 M.Sanders 46%
20 A.Peterson 46%
21 S.Michel 46%
22 L.Bell 45%
23 J.Conner 45%
24 J.Mixon 45%
24 R.Freeman 45%
26 N.Chubb 45%
27 D.Montgomery 44%
28 P.Barber 44%
29 M.Breida 44%
30 D.Freeman 42%
31 L.Fournette 41%
32 T.Coleman 40%
33 S.Barkley 38%
Barkey is not a between the tackle type of RB so why are a majority of his plays running between the tackles? His is one of the best in space there is and yet we barely get him the ball in space. We dont use him the way we should. the guy is a legit talent and whether you liked the pick at #2 or not you cant deny that he is already one of the best RBs in the league but he is not a between the tackles guy like Elliott.
If SB was on Dallas he would be much better than Elliot is on Dallas and Elliot on the Giants would have more success than SB on the Giants. the way we run the ball we need an Elliott type, this is poor coaching and why Shurmur needs to go. Build the O around your players strengths dont force guys to do things they are not great at. we do the same thing with Engram, why do we ask him to block? He cant but we rely on him and he fails more often than not. Other coaches put players in position to succeed and limit teh amount of times they make a player do things they are not good at, Shurmur puts players in a position whether they are good at it or not.