the Giants traded him because they didn't like his skills, I think they felt he was a locker room problem.
I agree, his public comments about not wanting to be a leader were odd and not a good look for him. He could have given much more canned responses than that even if he felt that way behind the scenes. Hell of a player, but I think locker room issues compounded with the wear and tear on his body made him expendable on a team that desperately needed to rebuild from the ground up.
the Giants traded him because they didn't like his skills, I think they felt he was a locker room problem.
I don’t think that’s fully correct. They also didn’t want to pay top dollar for a 2 down defender that’s on the decline. The attitude likely helped make the decision to trade him easier but he was costly and not worth the money anymore. He was going to be cut that offseason, IMO.
the Giants traded him because they didn't like his skills, I think they felt he was a locker room problem.
I think that was a big part of it, especially as the season started going downhill and they had Tomlinson there to step in. Harrison's knees also started acting up and I think Gettleman knew he was going to release him after the season and tried to get anything for him (similar to Apple).
the Giants traded him because they didn't like his skills, I think they felt he was a locker room problem.
I think that was a big part of it, especially as the season started going downhill and they had Tomlinson there to step in. Harrison's knees also started acting up and I think Gettleman knew he was going to release him after the season and tried to get anything for him (similar to Apple).
And the Giants knew he wanted a new contract (hiring Rosenhaus shortly after the trade). Gettleman cut bait.
Harrison said he was contemplating retirement after he played through a multitude of injuries and "wasn't able to ever get back to the form I'm used to." Harrison, who turned 31 in November, said if he felt he couldn't return to being the player he had been in prior seasons, he would walk away.
It definitely was a win for Gettleman. If only he had done the same with Collins and Jenkins, when it was clear as day that their attitudes were shit and they weren't a part of the Giants' future.
I pounded Dave for this trade when it happened so I gotta be fair.
Detroit releasing Snacks makes our GM's 9 wins in two years look soooo much better. Am I reading that right?
JFC Gettleman apologists here are In Reese We Trust 2.0
Intelligent post....
This was a good trade the second it happened and anyone who didn’t like it is hopefully waking up to why it was a smart move. But this thread is about this one trade and nothing more. But Gettleman won other trades too (Vernon and Apple) and didn’t do well with Ogeltree and possibly Williams. Believe it or not people can actually applaud and criticize, strange concept right?
So hard up to be negative that calling a trade a win is "grasping".
Taking a victory lap a season and a half later for netting out pretty evenly seems weird to me. Seems like being "hard up" for things to be positive about.
I'd completely agree if the take was: Gettleman got a lot flack for the trade at the time, and it turns out it wasn't the tragedy some made it out to be.
Detroit releasing Snacks makes our GM's 9 wins in two years look soooo much better. Am I reading that right?
JFC Gettleman apologists here are In Reese We Trust 2.0
Intelligent post....
This was a good trade the second it happened and anyone who didn’t like it is hopefully waking up to why it was a smart move. But this thread is about this one trade and nothing more. But Gettleman won other trades too (Vernon and Apple) and didn’t do well with Ogeltree and possibly Williams. Believe it or not people can actually applaud and criticize, strange concept right?
Then I guess Sy’s and LakeGeorgeGiant’s posts were equally unintelligent. They’re basically saying that criticism of Gettleman is unreasonable, not thought out or knee-jerk negativity. Which is a bullshit premise because the posts I’ve seen that are critical of Gettleman are pretty well laid out based on facts.
how nothing that Gettleman can do, even if good, will get anyone that doesn’t like him to admit it. What’s so hard to grasp about that?
And it didn’t take a year and a half, it was a good move the second it happened. IMO he was 100% being cut, and it was a lost season. We got a pick back for him and cleared cap room.
Is this really taking a victory lap? Jesus Christ. It was a smart move, that’s it.
It certainly was not a loss despite what was said at the time of the trade by the same folks downplaying it now.
So yes, it was a good trade. Not earth shaking, but no trade should ever really be earth shaking - should work for both teams. To get anything for a degenerating health, high income, questionable character(lockerroom) guy is a good deal, especially when he was going to be cut anyway.
Yes, JJ and LC could/should have been traded, also (but people scoffed at KCs supposed offer for a 3rd rounder for LC). But they were not part of the Snacks trade, they were separate and need to be viewed as separate. So don't down play the Snacks trade because LC and JJ weren't traded - they are not qualifiers for the effectiveness of the Snacks trade.
The victim act surrounding Gettleman is silly. He's made plenty of positive, plenty of negative, and plenty to be determined moves as the GM.
When you run up 9 and wins in two years, your moves are going to get scrutinized. When you flat out admit you misread the landscape and need to do a much better job at your job, you're performance is going to get scrutinized.
This isn't the type of move that proves anything, and certainly isn't a moment to evoke the sarcasm that we're not allowed to talk about good things Gettleman has done.
While I'm not ready to call it a win - they did have a good run
between posters that want to talk about Gettleman and his moves and posters that don't want to hear anything bad about him any longer.
Thats your take? Very odd. The thread is about Snacks getting cut, something we would have done a year ago if not for the trade. For some reason that triggered those who don't like the job he's done.
Why can't you talk about the trade and move on? If you need to talk about the trades that didn't workout for him, go right ahead. But none of that changes this specific transaction in the OP. Or just start a thread specifically about all of the franchises failings - i'm sure it will be productive.
Personally I don't find much value in constantly talking about things that didn't work out. Whether its the moves Reese or DG made that didn't work out, stupid coaching by Shurmur, or players that didn't live up to their contract. There's nothing I can do about any of it so i'll look forward and to hopefully better things to come.
RE: It proves that there is a pretty big dividing wall
how nothing that Gettleman can do, even if good, will get anyone that doesn’t like him to admit it. What’s so hard to grasp about that?
Because posts like that don’t exist, or are so infrequent and by such a small minority of posters that attributing them to BBI as a whole is just ridiculous. It’s building a straw man argument to make any legit criticism of Gettleman seem irrational.
how nothing that Gettleman can do, even if good, will get anyone that doesn’t like him to admit it. What’s so hard to grasp about that?
Because posts like that don’t exist, or are so infrequent and by such a small minority of posters that attributing them to BBI as a whole is just ridiculous. It’s building a straw man argument to make any legit criticism of Gettleman seem irrational.
how nothing that Gettleman can do, even if good, will get anyone that doesn’t like him to admit it. What’s so hard to grasp about that?
Because posts like that don’t exist, or are so infrequent and by such a small minority of posters that attributing them to BBI as a whole is just ridiculous. It’s building a straw man argument to make any legit criticism of Gettleman seem irrational.
It isn't straw-man at all. Just read this very thread. A victory lap? Jesus, its called acknowledging something that worked out well....that's it.
And the problem is that "the small minority" is the loudest and on every thread with the sole purpose of derailing it into belligerence. Sorry that you have to read people liking a move the guy made.
Go ahead and criticize him, he's done enough things that didn't work out that its warranted and i've never said otherwise. Like I said earlier just start a thread about it and go nuts - I promise I won't be on it making any straw-man arguments, i'll be far too busy taking my victory lap.
to constantly post about how other fans should feel about something. If people think it worked out well (and it did), so be it. However minor or major its impact it doesn't change that the trade was good.
to constantly post about how other fans should feel about something. If people think it worked out well (and it did), so be it. However minor or major its impact it doesn't change that the trade was good.
No, the trade was inconsequential either way. It's a feather in the cap of people who need SOMETHING to support a dogshit GM.
1) I would be a lot more negative on DG but I have read so many unbalanced and so often magical thinking based screeds that it led me over time to look to find re-balance - for I know few stories so all negative can be truth.
2) There are always waste of space posters who fall into laughable irrelevance over some topics and themes. Ignoring and avoiding them is part of staying on the site over time. Sometimes that's hard for their stuck on stupid lack of self awareness and personal neediness is too easy to smack down. To no avail
3) This topic has unbalanced over time some posters I always liked as good analysts with the ability to rise above common denominator, consider and parse. That to me is the saddest part of watching this
4) It has helped me re-realize I root for the team and players (for decades) to do well and not against FO people I don't know how or what they had to consider/cant clearly pin and need more time to judge then one can a coach.
Making decisions in an industry where the ten year average performance per team is 50%, careers last 4 years, injuries or varying debilitation hit 20% of the roster per game and the penalty for doing better is a harder draft slot and schedule the following year...is not easy and is littered with GM decision records that cant break 50/50 for any team or owner.
The average line player/RB/TE and LB absorbs the equivalent of a 35mph car crash on every play. You try guessing better than 50% over time. Yet second guessing after the fact is always feels like 100%
The decline and transition of every franchise QB is loaded with shortsighted emotional and doubting second guessing fans. Usually takes a few years.
Weaving through these times and remaining a fan takes seeing broadly and patiently. I see this particular dip taking some prior good thinkers into its maw.
Sure hope a more watchable year ahead allows some of them to get back on beam
Bill, at the risk of sentimentality, in the not so distant past this team had an eight year stretch:
- without a losing season, 4 double digit win seasons, 5 playoff appearances, 2 championships
All of the risks and variables pointed out above existed, and general management and coaching combatted well. Maybe some lessons to learn from then, who knows? Basic general management didn't feel like wins, wins felt like wins.
Giants have lost 23 games in last two years. Most over two years since '73/'74. These are bad times. Gettleman's been a really good professional administrator before, I won't be surprised if he does a good job moving forward. Story isn't written.
1. We were not great against the run the year leading up to his trade. Not saying it was his fault.
2. He was not a 3 down player and I thought the money he was looking for was a bit much for a guy who was not playing on 3rd down.
3. He was one of my favorite players on the team
Some people always look to "win" a trade when in reality it should always seem to be even from the outside looking in. The locker room or leadership issues we will never know about but those things make a huge difference.
and they got him for virtually nothing
and
and
and
everything
+1 Bingo was his name-o
I agree, his public comments about not wanting to be a leader were odd and not a good look for him. He could have given much more canned responses than that even if he felt that way behind the scenes. Hell of a player, but I think locker room issues compounded with the wear and tear on his body made him expendable on a team that desperately needed to rebuild from the ground up.
This is why I love this place.lol
We deal in absolutes here. Gettleman did it, therefore it's bad.
I don’t think that’s fully correct. They also didn’t want to pay top dollar for a 2 down defender that’s on the decline. The attitude likely helped make the decision to trade him easier but he was costly and not worth the money anymore. He was going to be cut that offseason, IMO.
I think that was a big part of it, especially as the season started going downhill and they had Tomlinson there to step in. Harrison's knees also started acting up and I think Gettleman knew he was going to release him after the season and tried to get anything for him (similar to Apple).
Quote:
the Giants traded him because they didn't like his skills, I think they felt he was a locker room problem.
I think that was a big part of it, especially as the season started going downhill and they had Tomlinson there to step in. Harrison's knees also started acting up and I think Gettleman knew he was going to release him after the season and tried to get anything for him (similar to Apple).
And the Giants knew he wanted a new contract (hiring Rosenhaus shortly after the trade). Gettleman cut bait.
.
Quote:
But we aren't allowed to say that here
.
But we only got a 5th for him.....
It was a salary clearing move. What was the "win" in the trade?
Quote:
But we aren't allowed to say that here
It was a salary clearing move. What was the "win" in the trade?
The fact that he got a pick for a guy he was going to cut. It’s ok to point out the good every once in a while.
Fair enough. In retrospect it was an even trade. Late round pick for a player on his last legs, and ate the dead money.
Smart to cut bait a year early. But a win? Seems like grasping.
Quote:
In comment 14815152 Sy'56 said:
Quote:
But we aren't allowed to say that here
It was a salary clearing move. What was the "win" in the trade?
The fact that he got a pick for a guy he was going to cut. It’s ok to point out the good every once in a while.
It was a good trade. Trading him for any pick was solid. He didn’t do much of anything for Detroit.
So hard up to be negative that calling a trade a win is "grasping".
It definitely was a win for Gettleman. If only he had done the same with Collins and Jenkins, when it was clear as day that their attitudes were shit and they weren't a part of the Giants' future.
JFC Gettleman apologists here are In Reese We Trust 2.0
JFC Gettleman apologists here are In Reese We Trust 2.0
It didn't work for the team who acquired him, did it? It was the best move to make.
JFC Gettleman apologists here are In Reese We Trust 2.0
Intelligent post....
This was a good trade the second it happened and anyone who didn’t like it is hopefully waking up to why it was a smart move. But this thread is about this one trade and nothing more. But Gettleman won other trades too (Vernon and Apple) and didn’t do well with Ogeltree and possibly Williams. Believe it or not people can actually applaud and criticize, strange concept right?
So hard up to be negative that calling a trade a win is "grasping".
Taking a victory lap a season and a half later for netting out pretty evenly seems weird to me. Seems like being "hard up" for things to be positive about.
I'd completely agree if the take was: Gettleman got a lot flack for the trade at the time, and it turns out it wasn't the tragedy some made it out to be.
Quote:
Detroit releasing Snacks makes our GM's 9 wins in two years look soooo much better. Am I reading that right?
JFC Gettleman apologists here are In Reese We Trust 2.0
Intelligent post....
This was a good trade the second it happened and anyone who didn’t like it is hopefully waking up to why it was a smart move. But this thread is about this one trade and nothing more. But Gettleman won other trades too (Vernon and Apple) and didn’t do well with Ogeltree and possibly Williams. Believe it or not people can actually applaud and criticize, strange concept right?
Then I guess Sy’s and LakeGeorgeGiant’s posts were equally unintelligent. They’re basically saying that criticism of Gettleman is unreasonable, not thought out or knee-jerk negativity. Which is a bullshit premise because the posts I’ve seen that are critical of Gettleman are pretty well laid out based on facts.
And it didn’t take a year and a half, it was a good move the second it happened. IMO he was 100% being cut, and it was a lost season. We got a pick back for him and cleared cap room.
Is this really taking a victory lap? Jesus Christ. It was a smart move, that’s it.
It was probably Jonathan Stewart who snitched on him.
Dumping Harrison and eating the dead money for a late round pick a year and a half ago is deep on the shelf, and not very compelling.
It's not a very powerful example of anything other than a very average move that gained little net value for the Giants.
If this a notable "win" for Gettleman, yeesh. Thankfully it's not.
So yes, it was a good trade. Not earth shaking, but no trade should ever really be earth shaking - should work for both teams. To get anything for a degenerating health, high income, questionable character(lockerroom) guy is a good deal, especially when he was going to be cut anyway.
Yes, JJ and LC could/should have been traded, also (but people scoffed at KCs supposed offer for a 3rd rounder for LC). But they were not part of the Snacks trade, they were separate and need to be viewed as separate. So don't down play the Snacks trade because LC and JJ weren't traded - they are not qualifiers for the effectiveness of the Snacks trade.
When you run up 9 and wins in two years, your moves are going to get scrutinized. When you flat out admit you misread the landscape and need to do a much better job at your job, you're performance is going to get scrutinized.
This isn't the type of move that proves anything, and certainly isn't a moment to evoke the sarcasm that we're not allowed to talk about good things Gettleman has done.
Thats your take? Very odd. The thread is about Snacks getting cut, something we would have done a year ago if not for the trade. For some reason that triggered those who don't like the job he's done.
Why can't you talk about the trade and move on? If you need to talk about the trades that didn't workout for him, go right ahead. But none of that changes this specific transaction in the OP. Or just start a thread specifically about all of the franchises failings - i'm sure it will be productive.
Personally I don't find much value in constantly talking about things that didn't work out. Whether its the moves Reese or DG made that didn't work out, stupid coaching by Shurmur, or players that didn't live up to their contract. There's nothing I can do about any of it so i'll look forward and to hopefully better things to come.
Again - you are a 2/20 poster who almost exclusively has posted about Gettleman in the last 20 days.
A poster who created a handle for that sole reason and was doing the same thing under another handle prior.
The dividing wall is that you don't have idiots creating handles to come to a board for the sole purpose of propping up the GM.
I notice you are on them a lot as well doing your best to defend his honor. Albeit struggling.
See you on the next thread yelling at somebody.
Because posts like that don’t exist, or are so infrequent and by such a small minority of posters that attributing them to BBI as a whole is just ridiculous. It’s building a straw man argument to make any legit criticism of Gettleman seem irrational.
Quote:
how nothing that Gettleman can do, even if good, will get anyone that doesn’t like him to admit it. What’s so hard to grasp about that?
Because posts like that don’t exist, or are so infrequent and by such a small minority of posters that attributing them to BBI as a whole is just ridiculous. It’s building a straw man argument to make any legit criticism of Gettleman seem irrational.
You're kidding, right?
Quote:
how nothing that Gettleman can do, even if good, will get anyone that doesn’t like him to admit it. What’s so hard to grasp about that?
Because posts like that don’t exist, or are so infrequent and by such a small minority of posters that attributing them to BBI as a whole is just ridiculous. It’s building a straw man argument to make any legit criticism of Gettleman seem irrational.
It isn't straw-man at all. Just read this very thread. A victory lap? Jesus, its called acknowledging something that worked out well....that's it.
And the problem is that "the small minority" is the loudest and on every thread with the sole purpose of derailing it into belligerence. Sorry that you have to read people liking a move the guy made.
Go ahead and criticize him, he's done enough things that didn't work out that its warranted and i've never said otherwise. Like I said earlier just start a thread about it and go nuts - I promise I won't be on it making any straw-man arguments, i'll be far too busy taking my victory lap.
It's minor development, that supports a minor trade from more than a year ago, and some immediate reactions are:
and they got him for virtually nothing
and
and
and
everything
and
It's strange and insecure.
Quote:
But we aren't allowed to say that here
We deal in absolutes here. Gettleman did it, therefore it's bad.
No, we can absolutely identify when a blind squirrel find a fucking nut.
No, the trade was inconsequential either way. It's a feather in the cap of people who need SOMETHING to support a dogshit GM.
1) I would be a lot more negative on DG but I have read so many unbalanced and so often magical thinking based screeds that it led me over time to look to find re-balance - for I know few stories so all negative can be truth.
2) There are always waste of space posters who fall into laughable irrelevance over some topics and themes. Ignoring and avoiding them is part of staying on the site over time. Sometimes that's hard for their stuck on stupid lack of self awareness and personal neediness is too easy to smack down. To no avail
3) This topic has unbalanced over time some posters I always liked as good analysts with the ability to rise above common denominator, consider and parse. That to me is the saddest part of watching this
4) It has helped me re-realize I root for the team and players (for decades) to do well and not against FO people I don't know how or what they had to consider/cant clearly pin and need more time to judge then one can a coach.
Making decisions in an industry where the ten year average performance per team is 50%, careers last 4 years, injuries or varying debilitation hit 20% of the roster per game and the penalty for doing better is a harder draft slot and schedule the following year...is not easy and is littered with GM decision records that cant break 50/50 for any team or owner.
The average line player/RB/TE and LB absorbs the equivalent of a 35mph car crash on every play. You try guessing better than 50% over time. Yet second guessing after the fact is always feels like 100%
The decline and transition of every franchise QB is loaded with shortsighted emotional and doubting second guessing fans. Usually takes a few years.
Weaving through these times and remaining a fan takes seeing broadly and patiently. I see this particular dip taking some prior good thinkers into its maw.
Sure hope a more watchable year ahead allows some of them to get back on beam
- without a losing season, 4 double digit win seasons, 5 playoff appearances, 2 championships
All of the risks and variables pointed out above existed, and general management and coaching combatted well. Maybe some lessons to learn from then, who knows? Basic general management didn't feel like wins, wins felt like wins.
Giants have lost 23 games in last two years. Most over two years since '73/'74. These are bad times. Gettleman's been a really good professional administrator before, I won't be surprised if he does a good job moving forward. Story isn't written.
1. We were not great against the run the year leading up to his trade. Not saying it was his fault.
2. He was not a 3 down player and I thought the money he was looking for was a bit much for a guy who was not playing on 3rd down.
3. He was one of my favorite players on the team
Some people always look to "win" a trade when in reality it should always seem to be even from the outside looking in. The locker room or leadership issues we will never know about but those things make a huge difference.