for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Gettleman 1+2

Hilary : 12/11/2019 6:31 am
DG not a popular man on this board. His first year free agent signings were poor and drafted players were looked at more favorably after year 1 than year 2. Last year's draft of Jones,Lawrence,Love, Slayton,Connelly looks good. Baker may or may not ultimately play well.Golden was an excellent signing.Vernon and Beckham trades good.

We need to consider

Year 1 he may not have had time to put scouts or assistants in place

Year 1 he was quite ill- receiving chemotherapy.

I do not know who they should replace him that will do better than he did last year.
Scouts were in place from the last administration  
ron mexico : 12/11/2019 7:04 am : link
And he has decided to keep them there so that excuse was out the window.
He took  
eugibs : 12/11/2019 7:24 am : link
over a 3-13 team, overhauled the entire roster, and now theyíre a 2-14 team. Pissing away the second pick in the draft on touched by god thick thighs is an all-time blunder. Come on. This isnít difficult.
IMO he took a bad team and drove it right into the fucking ground  
sb from NYT Forum : 12/11/2019 7:46 am : link
...because of bad trades for expensive, average players, horrible FA signings (even without considering Solder) and very question drafts.

He used two top-6 overall picks on a RB and QB and then picks only one OL in the top 3 rounds? Last year the draft was loaded with OL talent but he used 6 picks on DBs? And didnít draft an OL until round 7? And then protects our prized rookies with trash like Halapio and Remmers? WTF!
This years fiasco is all on the coaching staff.  
Spider56 : 12/11/2019 7:46 am : link
DG is not going anywhere, nor should he be ... The haters just donít understand building a roster takes time. His 1 big mistake was hiring PS.
2019 draft may be decent  
jeff57 : 12/11/2019 7:50 am : link
But he should have taken Nelson or Chubb in 2018, and the Williams trade is a total mind boggler.
For most years Reese's top of the drafts were good too  
jcn56 : 12/11/2019 7:57 am : link
the problem was the inability to build out using the later draft picks. Once his top underperformed, it became a glaring problem.

The productivity of the picks beyond round 2 hasn't improved. They're on the field, they're just not very good.

Belichick has said it's a 4 round draft - the Giants need to start getting ROI on RD3 and 4.
My working thesis is the same as Hilarys:  
cosmicj : 12/11/2019 8:09 am : link
That Gettleman had an absolutely lousy 2018 but has been much better in 2019. (I like the Williams trade - calling it mind boggling is just absolutely wrong.)

The question is which is a better indicator of future performance.
Jcn  
cosmicj : 12/11/2019 8:10 am : link
Later round picks, that just isnít true what you wrote. One of those guys just caught 2 TDS on Monday night and I think Love has promise.
RE: My working thesis is the same as Hilarys:  
jcn56 : 12/11/2019 8:11 am : link
In comment 14714076 cosmicj said:
Quote:
That Gettleman had an absolutely lousy 2018 but has been much better in 2019. (I like the Williams trade - calling it mind boggling is just absolutely wrong.)

The question is which is a better indicator of future performance.


That's an 'agree to disagree' point - believing that Leonard Williams is worthy of a contract in the 17M+ range, or that the Giants needed him badly enough to trade two picks to secure the rights to pay him that.

The team still doesn't have a single good edge rusher under contract next season, or an ILB worth anything.
RE: Jcn  
jcn56 : 12/11/2019 8:13 am : link
In comment 14714079 cosmicj said:
Quote:
Later round picks, that just isnít true what you wrote. One of those guys just caught 2 TDS on Monday night and I think Love has promise.


He's had a lot of those later picks - and Slayton has definitely exceeded expectations, but beyond him?

Lauletta - gone
a 4th and a 6th - traded for Ogletree
a 3rd and a 4th/5th - traded for Williams
Ximines, Carter, Beal

Connelly looked like he had some promise, but got hurt before you could tell what you had.

Again - not materially different from Reese, who was typically picking much lower in these rounds.
Part of the Williams thesis is that there will be no FAs  
cosmicj : 12/11/2019 8:15 am : link
Out there worth paying that money. Thatís my prediction. The FA market these days absolutely sucks.

Part of the weakness of the anti-Williams argument is the assumption that we could just as well spend the money elsewhere. My view is that we wonít be able to, on a player with comparable youth and talent.
2019 Was More of the Same, Not Better  
Jeffrey : 12/11/2019 8:17 am : link
No one should evaluate a draft after 13 games particularly when the team is so horrible that every draft choice has to play. But let's not forget that the "much better" year for DG in 2019 includes the incredibly poor coaching job by his head coach and staff, bringing in an ancient Bethea to play safety, the ridiculous Williams trade which no one but DG's staunchest supporters can tout, the utter failure to improve the OL or the LBs--yes I know about Connelly who played 2 games and is now anointed a savior, and the return of the most expensive backup QB in history. A better year than 2018? By what measure?
Come on  
cosmicj : 12/11/2019 8:18 am : link
You are just being unfair. I donít love 2018ís later round picks but the uptick in 2019 is very noticeable. Iím not claiming the final grade is in but these guys hold promise.
RE: Part of the Williams thesis is that there will be no FAs  
jeff57 : 12/11/2019 8:19 am : link
In comment 14714084 cosmicj said:
Quote:
Out there worth paying that money. Thatís my prediction. The FA market these days absolutely sucks.

Part of the weakness of the anti-Williams argument is the assumption that we could just as well spend the money elsewhere. My view is that we wonít be able to, on a player with comparable youth and talent.


Williams is not a pass rusher. But my problem with it is giving up an essentially late second round pick, who would be 4-5 younger and far cheaper, for a player who hasn't lived up to where he was drafted, and whose "best" years may be behind him.
Jeffery  
cosmicj : 12/11/2019 8:21 am : link
Again, thatís just not a fair evaluation. And the arguments against the Williams trade donít hold water. Your saying that because the 2019:team is lousy, the draft picks are lousy, too. Come on.

Thereís just way too much passion about this argument here these days.
RE: Jeffery  
jeff57 : 12/11/2019 8:23 am : link
In comment 14714096 cosmicj said:
Quote:
Again, thatís just not a fair evaluation. And the arguments against the Williams trade donít hold water. Your saying that because the 2019:team is lousy, the draft picks are lousy, too. Come on.

Thereís just way too much passion about this argument here these days.


Huh? Don't get your point.

Oh, and Williams has a grand total of 0 sacks this season
RE: Part of the Williams thesis is that there will be no FAs  
bw in dc : 12/11/2019 8:32 am : link
In comment 14714084 cosmicj said:
Quote:
Out there worth paying that money. Thatís my prediction. The FA market these days absolutely sucks.

Part of the weakness of the anti-Williams argument is the assumption that we could just as well spend the money elsewhere. My view is that we wonít be able to, on a player with comparable youth and talent.


Okay, let me be clear on this because I really donít like the LW trade. Spending money on DTs who arenít the rare, two-way breed who can get sacks (e.g. Aaron Donald, Warren Sapp, etc) is a colossal waste of money in my eyes. And LW is nowhere in that vicinity. Through five seasons heís averaging 3 sacks per year. Heís superfluous for us because heís essentially doing what our other inside guys are already doing. He flashes at times - sure. But there is more JAG than star.

You can find inside gap stuffers. They are fairly plentiful. So why over spend? Just because we happen to have the money?

Thatís a very strange strategy...
RE: Come on  
jcn56 : 12/11/2019 8:35 am : link
In comment 14714091 cosmicj said:
Quote:
You are just being unfair. I donít love 2018ís later round picks but the uptick in 2019 is very noticeable. Iím not claiming the final grade is in but these guys hold promise.


I'm ok with you saying it's unfair, but on which players?

Just saying 'they seem like they might be good someday' isn't really helping your case.
RE: Jeffery  
Jeffrey : 12/11/2019 8:46 am : link
In comment 14714096 cosmicj said:
Quote:
Again, thatís just not a fair evaluation. And the arguments against the Williams trade donít hold water. Your saying that because the 2019:team is lousy, the draft picks are lousy, too. Come on.

Thereís just way too much passion about this argument here these days.


Really? I don't see anywhere that I said the 2019 draft picks were lousy just that 13 games is too small a sample to judge by and that the fact that they play alot for a lousy team does not prove they are as great as touted. For what it's worth, I think Jones is promising, Lawrence a keeper, Baker has been a major disappointment. With the exception of Slayton, the jury is still out on the others.
Williams Trade  
Jeffrey : 12/11/2019 8:55 am : link
Additionally, why trade for Williams in the middle of a lost season and surrender what everyone knew was going to be a very high draft choice when you could have waited and tried to sign him later. He is good but is he really that much of an upgrade over what the Giants had? He has also pushed Hill to the bench--which is not good for his potential development, assuming that he is one of DG's 2018 picks that might have potential.
bw  
cosmicj : 12/11/2019 9:09 am : link
Thanks - to me that's a serious counterargument to Williams. I don't agree with you because I have a higher opinion of Williams, who I think is an active, accomplished player who stays on the field and demands attention in the blocking scheme.

I'll use your lingo - he will be a force multiplier once we have other players on the front 7 who can play. I'm already lining up Chase Young along Lawrence and Tomlinson and some better LBs in general. Williams has the chance to be part of a dominant unit and is young enough to enter his prime as part of this crew.
jcn/Jeff/Jeffrey  
cosmicj : 12/11/2019 9:13 am : link
The most you can expect from rookies on an awful team is that they show promise. I am excited about all the rookies and happy to see that my #1 concern, Deandre Baker, is starting to playing better. Not all these guys will be long-term starters but I'm counting 7 who have the potential to be. Grades aren't in, but based on what we've seen, this is good drafting.
RE: bw  
jcn56 : 12/11/2019 9:39 am : link
In comment 14714170 cosmicj said:
Quote:
Thanks - to me that's a serious counterargument to Williams. I don't agree with you because I have a higher opinion of Williams, who I think is an active, accomplished player who stays on the field and demands attention in the blocking scheme.

I'll use your lingo - he will be a force multiplier once we have other players on the front 7 who can play. I'm already lining up Chase Young along Lawrence and Tomlinson and some better LBs in general. Williams has the chance to be part of a dominant unit and is young enough to enter his prime as part of this crew.


It just seems to me that is the Giants usual way of thinking, and it doesn't work:

Player X is a good but not great player, but he's solid, and if we pay him and prop him next to better players, maybe he'll be better.

That's what people seem to miss about the Williams criticism. He's not a bad player. But is he a very good one? To date, no. So why would you pay him like one? And why would you trade picks to pay him like one?

If he were an edge rusher, I could at least see the desperation angle; it would be wrong (see Solder, Nate), but at least the logic would be easier to digest. Given that you're adding him to a position that already had resources allocated to it (a 2nd in Tomlinson, a 1st in Lawrence), and you're woefully deficient at OLB - why do this?

As for the rookies - the people who speak in favor of them tend to have conflicting opinions. They think the coaching staff is as bad as it gets, but that the rookies show promise. Their play doesn't reflect that promise, otherwise they wouldn't be 2-12. And if you think it does, then doesn't the coaching staff get a pass for the number of positions where they have little to no veteran leadership on the field?
RE: RE: bw  
chuckydee9 : 12/11/2019 9:43 am : link
In comment 14714225 jcn56 said:
Quote:
In comment 14714170 cosmicj said:


Quote:


Thanks - to me that's a serious counterargument to Williams. I don't agree with you because I have a higher opinion of Williams, who I think is an active, accomplished player who stays on the field and demands attention in the blocking scheme.

I'll use your lingo - he will be a force multiplier once we have other players on the front 7 who can play. I'm already lining up Chase Young along Lawrence and Tomlinson and some better LBs in general. Williams has the chance to be part of a dominant unit and is young enough to enter his prime as part of this crew.



It just seems to me that is the Giants usual way of thinking, and it doesn't work:

Player X is a good but not great player, but he's solid, and if we pay him and prop him next to better players, maybe he'll be better.

That's what people seem to miss about the Williams criticism. He's not a bad player. But is he a very good one? To date, no. So why would you pay him like one? And why would you trade picks to pay him like one?

If he were an edge rusher, I could at least see the desperation angle; it would be wrong (see Solder, Nate), but at least the logic would be easier to digest. Given that you're adding him to a position that already had resources allocated to it (a 2nd in Tomlinson, a 1st in Lawrence), and you're woefully deficient at OLB - why do this?

As for the rookies - the people who speak in favor of them tend to have conflicting opinions. They think the coaching staff is as bad as it gets, but that the rookies show promise. Their play doesn't reflect that promise, otherwise they wouldn't be 2-12. And if you think it does, then doesn't the coaching staff get a pass for the number of positions where they have little to no veteran leadership on the field?


Add to that that DG himself drafter Hill last year.. How many DTs/DE do we need who don't get sacks? and do we really need to use such high resources for non sacking DTs?

Also at this point last year Hill was looking good.. but where he at now? It feels like people simply want to justify DG staying here and they make up the optimism.. if the talent was actually good we won't be a 2 win team..
RE: This years fiasco is all on the coaching staff.  
Gatorade Dunk : 12/11/2019 9:52 am : link
In comment 14714053 Spider56 said:
Quote:
DG is not going anywhere, nor should he be ... The haters just donít understand building a roster takes time. His 1 big mistake was hiring PS.

You literally posted that word for word a few days ago and it was just as full of shit then.

Solder was an awful move, and has significant cap ramifications. Ogletree was an awful move, and RD proceeded to make his cap situation worse so that he could make other bad free agent signings which have contributed to the highest dead money total in the league this season.

The jury's still out on how the Leonard Williams trade will play out, but it's not looking like he's going to emerge with a contract in hand before free agency, so we either traded for the right to tag, or traded just to prevent LW from getting tagged/signed elsewhere before free agency - neither of those two supposed benefits are worth the 65th or 66th pick in the draft PLUS another draft pick.

Those are just his FA/trade acquisitions. He also stuck with Eli at least a year too long, including a season where he had already spent the #6 pick in the draft on his future QB. He spent the #2 overall pick on a RB when his team was just beginning a rebuild, or should have been.

That last point dovetails right into the next one - he didn't seem to realize the 2018 season should have been a rebuilding year from the start, and wasted an entire offseason of what could have been rebuilding, and instead actually set the rebuild back another full year on top of that because he had to use 2019 to get out from under his bad FA signings in 2018.

He promised to build a team that could run the ball, stop the run, rush the passer. So far he's 1 for 3, and had to use four draft picks (Lawrence, Hilll, and two picks for Williams) plus the incumbent 2nd round DL (Tomlinson) in order to achieve the one successful part. How many draft picks will it take for him to get the other two facets to work, and will we just have to repeat the cycle for a DL rebuild by the time he completes all three the first time around?

The idea that RD's ONLY big mistake was hiring Shurmur is absolutely insane. And the people who criticize RD aren't "the haters" - they're the people with functional brains.
RE: Part of the Williams thesis is that there will be no FAs  
Gatorade Dunk : 12/11/2019 9:55 am : link
In comment 14714084 cosmicj said:
Quote:
Out there worth paying that money. Thatís my prediction. The FA market these days absolutely sucks.

Part of the weakness of the anti-Williams argument is the assumption that we could just as well spend the money elsewhere. My view is that we wonít be able to, on a player with comparable youth and talent.

You don't HAVE to spend it if there aren't players worth spending it on. Overspending simply because the market sucks is not a reason to overspend.

You can roll your unused cap space forward and use it to lock up your own drafted players, assuming you ever get around to drafting players worth signing.
I disagree that Getts is as bad as jerry  
idiotsavant : 12/11/2019 10:00 am : link
Jerry drafted, consistently, players who didn't have the physical heft to play at the intended position.

David Wilson RB, great guy, too small, lots of defensive ends with too skinny base lack of power, etc. It was a very consistent theme for years.

I think Jones was a Mara thing, possibly great long term but also - we had that strong indication that this year was shot ...at that moment .

Expect linebackers , safeties and offensive linesmen - rinse repeat
RE: RE: Part of the Williams thesis is that there will be no FAs  
LakeGeorgeGiant : 12/11/2019 10:02 am : link
Quote:


Williams is not a pass rusher. But my problem with it is giving up an essentially late second round pick, who would be 4-5 younger and far cheaper, for a player who hasn't lived up to where he was drafted, and whose "best" years may be behind him.


I'm not a big fan of the trade either, but people keep saying this crap and it annoys the piss out of me.

It isn't a "essentially late second round pick" it's a third round pick. It's not among the first 64 selections is it? Being early in the third doesn't mean you can bump it up a round to make your argument sound better.

What the Williams thing probably indicates is that  
idiotsavant : 12/11/2019 10:05 am : link
They want to build from the front back. That they don't want to use any high picks on big DTs again this year, and therefore it's finally LB and FS time.

You guys should be happy. Back to Giants football.
Personally I'm not adverse to drafting a heavy low NT mid rounds  
idiotsavant : 12/11/2019 10:14 am : link
To nudge betch back towards rotating into a more traditional 3/4.

And admitting that I LOVED the betches one gapping 3/4 in concept , thinking that didn't have the right lbs for it yet. Also, didn't have a very deep defensive backs coaching staff list .

But now I'm trending towards a 4/2/5 which fields 3 big dts and one edge, two (2!) pass D lbs (draft) and 5 true defensive backs (draft FS).
Gatorade  
ColHowPepper : 12/11/2019 11:22 am : link
Agree with most of your points. However, in terms of DG's playing the long game, i.e., believing 2018j team could compete, therefore keeping Eli at least a year too long, then drafting Jones when that didn't work out, and all of the waterfall decisions flowing from the moronic, 2018 decision owed a substantial part of their genesis to Mara.

Now, you may say then what the hell any good is a GM who at his heart *might* take issue with his owner if he doesn't make the key decisions? Well one might ask, and that is at the core of the Giants' problems.
RE: Personally I'm not adverse to drafting a heavy low NT mid rounds  
Gatorade Dunk : 12/11/2019 11:36 am : link
In comment 14714305 idiotsavant said:
Quote:
To nudge betch back towards rotating into a more traditional 3/4.

And admitting that I LOVED the betches one gapping 3/4 in concept , thinking that didn't have the right lbs for it yet. Also, didn't have a very deep defensive backs coaching staff list .

But now I'm trending towards a 4/2/5 which fields 3 big dts and one edge, two (2!) pass D lbs (draft) and 5 true defensive backs (draft FS).

There's a major flaw in that reasoning, which is that Bettcher will have a chance to use any player they draft this offseason. There's a less than zero percent chance that he'll be back with the team next year.
RE: RE: Part of the Williams thesis is that there will be no FAs  
cosmicj : 12/11/2019 12:00 pm : link
In comment 14714272 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:

You don't HAVE to spend it if there aren't players worth spending it on. Overspending simply because the market sucks is not a reason to overspend.

You can roll your unused cap space forward and use it to lock up your own drafted players, assuming you ever get around to drafting players worth signing.
GD - I agree with you and think a rebuild demands rolling over cap capacity to help with future contracts. But the Giants can't roll over ALL their ample space - they need to spend some of it. Upcoming free agents in the 2020 offseason will be paid unreal amounts, so getting some free agents locked in through a trade is a good way to go.

Look at how there 49ers have been approaching this. They are building their talent through the draft and through trades. FA is a minor part of their effort.
BJ Hill was out there plenty on Monday night.  
cosmicj : 12/11/2019 12:01 pm : link
We need an active rotation out there, to the physical demands on the DL. Acquiring Williams isn't consigning Hill to the dustbin, it's adding to the defensive talent pool for a long NFL season.
RE: RE: RE: Part of the Williams thesis is that there will be no FAs  
Gatorade Dunk : 12/11/2019 12:14 pm : link
In comment 14714561 cosmicj said:
Quote:
In comment 14714272 Gatorade Dunk said:


Quote:



You don't HAVE to spend it if there aren't players worth spending it on. Overspending simply because the market sucks is not a reason to overspend.

You can roll your unused cap space forward and use it to lock up your own drafted players, assuming you ever get around to drafting players worth signing.

GD - I agree with you and think a rebuild demands rolling over cap capacity to help with future contracts. But the Giants can't roll over ALL their ample space - they need to spend some of it. Upcoming free agents in the 2020 offseason will be paid unreal amounts, so getting some free agents locked in through a trade is a good way to go.

Look at how there 49ers have been approaching this. They are building their talent through the draft and through trades. FA is a minor part of their effort.

I would agree with you if anything was actually locked in as it relates to Williams. Currently, they've only traded for the right to tag him and/or to prevent anyone else from tagging him. If they don't sign him before FA, they didn't really lock anything in via trade, depending on how you view the tag. With it starting at a minimum of $17M for LW, I'm not sure that's really saving any money vs. what the market would bear for LW in terms of AAV.
RE: What the Williams thing probably indicates is that  
jcn56 : 12/11/2019 12:18 pm : link
In comment 14714286 idiotsavant said:
Quote:
They want to build from the front back. That they don't want to use any high picks on big DTs again this year, and therefore it's finally LB and FS time.

You guys should be happy. Back to Giants football.


I'll be happy when they get to a point where they're deploying a properly balanced roster with average to good players at most positions. Clustering a single position with good to above average players, and then not having anyone who can rush the passer or guard a TE is the best way to get to 2-14 quickly.
The '80s were 30 years ago  
Go Terps : 12/11/2019 12:23 pm : link
"Giants football" is now characterized by blown assignments, talent deficiencies, and questionable effort.

Aren't we all tired of "Giants football"?
You can  
Les in TO : 12/11/2019 12:30 pm : link
Make a bunch of excuses for him but in the NFL there is one KPI that matters most; winning. And under his management the Giants are 7-24. Against teams playing starting QBs 4-28.

He will get more time and a large say in picking the next head coach. But if that KPI hasnít improved under a new coach then he wonít be long for his role.
RE: My working thesis is the same as Hilarys:  
GMen72 : 12/11/2019 4:03 pm : link
In comment 14714076 cosmicj said:
Quote:
That Gettleman had an absolutely lousy 2018 but has been much better in 2019. (I like the Williams trade - calling it mind boggling is just absolutely wrong.)

The question is which is a better indicator of future performance.


Like the William's trade? Why? Give up a 3rd and 5th round picks for no sacks and no wins when you have to pay him anyway after the season. How about keep your picks and just pursue him in free agency? When a GM is getting outsmarted by the Jets, it's a problem.
Back to the Corner