Gettleman screwed up by not moving Engram before deadline

Selling a third low gets much less return than giving up on a 1st... see Leonard Williams.
Also, Tuck was a playmaker, so that's two reasons to hang onto him.

EE is not half the playmaker Tuck was. I can't ever remember EE creating a mismatch, in a game, for the opponent and being a difference maker. Maybe the potential really is there, but that's an indictment on the coaches.

I wish we could pick players like 31 other NFL teams, who can find a way to flash in spite of their coaches.

Doesn't matter about this year.

In comment 14717649 NoPeanutz said:

Quote:

Selling a third low gets much less return than giving up on a 1st... see Leonard Williams. Also, Tuck was a playmaker, so that's two reasons to hang onto him. EE is not half the playmaker Tuck was. I can't ever remember EE creating a mismatch, in a game, for the opponent and being a difference maker. Maybe the potential really is there, but that's an indictment on the coaches. I wish we could pick players like 31 other NFL teams, who can find a way to flash in spite of their coaches.

Tampa game this year...

but the bigger mistake was not trying to get something for Jack Rabbit.

I'm fine with letting the Engram situation play out. We need all the talent we can get and he is relatively cheap.

In comment 14717682 ron mexico said:

Quote:

but the bigger mistake was not trying to get something for Jack Rabbit. I'm fine with letting the Engram situation play out. We need all the talent we can get and he is relatively cheap.

I hear you, but if there was a first on the table for a guy who can't stay on the field 33% of the time, you have to cut ties and take the comp.

It's time to move on from this geek in the offseason. So tired of seeing his name on the injured list. My God, how is this guys CONSTANTLY injured?

.

a 4.4 h-back instead of a starting OL.

of an offer of a first is not a reason to declare it a mistake. It seems like sometimes people only believe the "media" when it supports their argument.

So we have a hypothesis that we should have traded EE because we could have gotten a first. And then we can take it to the next level - the Pats miss Gronk so I bet it was them! So then we can move to the next level. Belichick could get something out Engram and he was willing to give up a first for him. So we get to shit on the player, the GM, and the coach all based on one unsubstantiated kernel in the news where almost everyone lies to the press all the time.

There were numerous teams who had contacted the Bucs about OJ Howard. Apparently the Bucs asking price was unrealistic given Howard has been considered a disappointment thus far in his career (passed by Brate on the depth chart).

If all of those reports were true, you have to think there was a number of TE hungry teams out there. Not saying you would have gotten a first, but it is simple supply and demand at that point. You would have to think that a 2nd would not be an unrealistic return for Engram.

Problem is now, he has that "oft injured" label. No way you can trade him this off season and expect to get any kind of return.

In comment 14717760 figgy2989 said:

Quote:

There were numerous teams who had contacted the Bucs about OJ Howard. Apparently the Bucs asking price was unrealistic given Howard has been considered a disappointment thus far in his career (passed by Brate on the depth chart). If all of those reports were true, you have to think there was a number of TE hungry teams out there. Not saying you would have gotten a first, but it is simple supply and demand at that point. You would have to think that a 2nd would not be an unrealistic return for Engram. Problem is now, he has that "oft injured" label. No way you can trade him this off season and expect to get any kind of return.

So he did not have the oft injured label before this?

In comment 14717735 mittenedman said:

Quote:

a 4.4 h-back instead of a starting OL.

Imagine having Ramczyk and Kittle instead of Engram?

You could just end the sentence right there.

No he definitely did, but at the trade deadline, I believe was healthy at that point?

The point I was trying to make is at this years deadline, I believe whatever we would have been offered was probably the best we were ever going to get. With the inquiries for Howard out there, there was a market for Engram.

In comment 14717166 djm said:

Quote:

In comment 14717126 bw in dc said: Quote: that we may have been offered a first round pick at the trade deadline, I�ve been sick to stomach. But hey, we traded for the $17M+ Man instead...LW. Do you truly believe that some other team offered the giants a first rounder for Engram? I have a bridge in Brooklyn that you might like, the area is booming, good investment if you�re interested. Cmon people. �Might have been offered a first round pick� is like me saying �I might crap golden eggs� Bollocks.

The Giants definitely deserve the benefit of the doubt.

In comment 14717758 Chris in Philly said:

Quote:

of an offer of a first is not a reason to declare it a mistake. It seems like sometimes people only believe the "media" when it supports their argument. So we have a hypothesis that we should have traded EE because we could have gotten a first. And then we can take it to the next level - the Pats miss Gronk so I bet it was them! So then we can move to the next level. Belichick could get something out Engram and he was willing to give up a first for him. So we get to shit on the player, the GM, and the coach all based on one unsubstantiated kernel in the news where almost everyone lies to the press all the time.

❗👊

In comment 14717169 djm said:

Quote:

In comment 14717158 LawrenceTaylor56 said: Quote: Gettleman would have just traded away for an 8 game rental player. Clearly. I mean it�s not like the giants and DG have stockpiled draft picks the last 2 years or anything. This place blows lately. Everyone just posts the same sarcastic shit that it rooted in exaggerations and myth.

Stockpiled? Is that what you call it when a team trades veterans for pennies on the dollar and never actually trades down to accumulate additional picks?

The latter is stockpiling picks. The former is holding a fire sale.

You think it's myth and exaggeration? This fucking team is 2-11. Is that an exaggeration?

Get off your fucking high horse, and put away your pom-poms. Terps said it best - Gettleman could trade a first round pick for swine flu and you'd defend the move.

In comment 14717794 crick n NC said:

Quote:

In comment 14717758 Chris in Philly said: Quote: of an offer of a first is not a reason to declare it a mistake. It seems like sometimes people only believe the "media" when it supports their argument. So we have a hypothesis that we should have traded EE because we could have gotten a first. And then we can take it to the next level - the Pats miss Gronk so I bet it was them! So then we can move to the next level. Belichick could get something out Engram and he was willing to give up a first for him. So we get to shit on the player, the GM, and the coach all based on one unsubstantiated kernel in the news where almost everyone lies to the press all the time. ❗👊

Well, we all know that the only conspiracies that really ever truly exist are that of the media against the NY Giants...

The only thing reported was that the giants weren't interested in ANY offers. I don't know where this 1st round offer came from.

In comment 14717806 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

In comment 14717794 crick n NC said: Quote: In comment 14717758 Chris in Philly said: Quote: of an offer of a first is not a reason to declare it a mistake. It seems like sometimes people only believe the "media" when it supports their argument. So we have a hypothesis that we should have traded EE because we could have gotten a first. And then we can take it to the next level - the Pats miss Gronk so I bet it was them! So then we can move to the next level. Belichick could get something out Engram and he was willing to give up a first for him. So we get to shit on the player, the GM, and the coach all based on one unsubstantiated kernel in the news where almost everyone lies to the press all the time. ❗👊 Well, we all know that the only conspiracies that really ever truly exist are that of the media against the NY Giants...

👎

Is a swing of 4 mid to high round picks.. is significant draft capital and big miss.

If BBI can see Engram's flaws, don't you think other GMs can?

DG may very well have tried to move him but only got lowball offers--like a 6th round pick--and decided it was better to keep him

That DG told him he wasn�t trading him.

He isn't built for that position.

In comment 14717300 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

years, Engram hasn't played a full 16 game-season. He's missed 15 games and counting the last two years. He can't run block on a team that drafted Saquon Barkley. The Giants told teams before the trade deadline they would not trade him. There was at least one report the Giants were offered a #1 pick.

Agreed. This team has been going nowhere, this year has even regressed, and the fire sale should have continued.

I would be very surprised if they extended him and if anything he balls out and they franchise him.

In comment 14717471 KWALL2 said:

Quote:

His problem is health. If he�s 100%, he�s can be an impact player.

No.. he is a tweener who is not a good TE and is not a good WR.

Even when healthy, he is only impactful occasionally.

The guy is a liability in the running game and does not have good hands. We see him outrun a linebacker with the ball in his hands on occasion but we also see that from many other TEs in the game who are not limited in other areas of the game.

I personally dont care if we trade him for a 4th rounder at this point.

Come the f--k on.

Yeah, and every day, Gal Gadot calls and begs me to take her out on a date. But I tell her I have no time because I have to post on BBI.

In comment 14717300 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

years, Engram hasn't played a full 16 game-season. He's missed 15 games and counting the last two years. He can't run block on a team that drafted Saquon Barkley. The Giants told teams before the trade deadline they would not trade him. There was at least one report the Giants were offered a #1 pick.

It was a major screw up, and another reason to fire DG. We were already out of contention. He and Jenkins should have been traded. We should have been sellers like last year. Instead, we were stupidly buyers.

the other trade. Regardless a 2nd would be fine. Even a 3rd and 5th I�d do given the state of our team and all the holes.

I think Jenkins should have fetched a 4th bare minimum. Probably a 3rd.

Instead we are short stacked in the draft.

The fact that DG clearly AGAIN and rather inconsequentially mortgaged the future to cover his own ass is why he shouldn�t get anymore time.

gotten something for EE. I doubt a 1st. It's a no brainer taking that offer. The problem with EE, aside from the injury is that he's only occasionally on his game. But when he is, he's well worth having on the field. It's a risk keeping him and hoping he'll be more consistent and more healthy. Those times of production are mighty tempting.

I doubt anyone offered much for Jenkins. Too expensive for what he offers.

In comment 14718224 NoGainDayne said:

Quote:

the other trade. Regardless a 2nd would be fine. Even a 3rd and 5th I�d do given the state of our team and all the holes. I think Jenkins should have fetched a 4th bare minimum. Probably a 3rd.

More evidence that crack smokers still exist...

could see the Patriots offering a #1 for Engram. Their defense is incredible, but Brady is faltering, and his weapons are limited. Engram could help them make one final SB run against Baltimore and an otherwise stacked AFC.

At the time EE was playing well and was not injured and we were all hoping that he finally is healthy and able to perform. He got injured after the trade deadline. Besides, we could always trade him this offseason.

In comment 14718246 AcidTest said:

Quote:

could see the Patriots offering a #1 for Engram. Their defense is incredible, but Brady is faltering, and his weapons are limited. Engram could help them make one final SB run against Baltimore and an otherwise stacked AFC.

If Lil Bill suffered a stroke before he called the Giants, I too could see this.

Some peeps will believe anything.

Sure, move him. But I�m not buying it with him, too injured and too inconsistent. But he strikes me as a guy that you will never receive enough value for to warrant a trade. He has potential to be an absolute stud, probably a luxury piece but a guy that can be a monster when healthy and playing in a functional offense. He isn�t a guy I�d be giving away, he�s more a guy that you exercise every ownership right, from the option to the tag, trying to see if you can get to a place to take advantage of his skill set.

In comment 14718247 5BowlsSoon said:

Quote:

At the time EE was playing well and was not injured and we were all hoping that he finally is healthy and able to perform. He got injured after the trade deadline. Besides, we could always trade him this offseason.

The off-season began at the trade deadline... ;)

In comment 14717566 WillVAB said:

Quote:

Said it when he was drafted. Just a dumb luxury pick at the time and even worse now considering how he�s underachieved. He�s never going to be a �game changer�. He�s an injury prone tweener.

Jordan Reed actually produced on the field....for a season or so.

the Pats giving up a 1 (based only on intuition) is fine. But it is not evidence that they did and thus should not enter into the determination of whether not moving him for a hypothetical pick from a hypothetical team was a mistake or not.

a team did or didn't offer any pick isn't really the issue. The issue is that the Giants apparently told everyone they wouldn't consider any offers.

In comment 14718390 AcidTest said:

Quote:

a team did or didn't offer any pick isn't really the issue. The issue is that the Giants apparently told everyone they wouldn't consider any offers.

I don�t believe that is what actually occurred. But we�ll never know.

in football outside of RB. I don't get the complaints about him not staying healthy, when keeping their TE healthy is a challenge that almost every team in the league deals with every year.

If the Pats are offering a first then you do have to question the wisdom of letting a talent like that walk. EE can win you games with huge plays.

Flip side is of course you'd trade him for a first if you knew he'd be back on IR in 2 weeks time. A second in the off- season would be tough to turn down.

To play the Ramczyk card. Cherry picking drafts years later is the easiest game to play but also remember a lot of teams had a red flag on RR's hip. He fell quite a bit if memory serves.

In comment 14718632 English Alaister said:

Quote:

To play the Ramczyk card. Cherry picking drafts years later is the easiest game to play but also remember a lot of teams had a red flag on RR's hip. He fell quite a bit if memory serves.

Yep, good job here as this is correct. With that said, he was still one of the top OL candidates in that draft and within the grasp of a team in desperate need of them...

It was reported that the Giants rejected a first round pick.

The Pats were a guess by me based on their needs. They used a second for Sanu. He�s a big target and solid, but most would agree the Pats overpaid because they were desperate for help. So why wouldn�t they possibly overpay for a younger TE with upside at a position they have a big need?

Not having a good TE, and not being able to guard a TE.

Perhaps more so that the run game issue

he is young and talented, was making plays when healthy. Do I think he's part of the ultimate future? Who knows.

At this point his value is low. I'd start fresh next year with him and see if he plays well. If he does, look to move him at the trade deadline if the Giants are out of it again.

that a 1st rounder was offered for EE.

let's come back to reality.