Peter King takes shot at DG

Pointing out a fact is a shot now?

down if the players picked can contribute to the vision of the team, roster construction and the building of a winningnprofessional football program.

Now, he may fail miserably at that, but in and of itself, who cares if he trades down.

I thought Peter King retired.

calls your professional work negligent, yeah I'd call that a shot.

In comment 14817035 Default said:

Quote:

Pointing out a fact is a shot now?

Well he did say negligent ... which is not a complementary word.

In comment 14817035 Default said:

Quote:

Pointing out a fact is a shot now?

Calling Gettleman borderline negligent simply for not trading down would be considered taking a shot.

Personally, I'm more concerned about the quality players drafted whether or not a GM trades down or not. The next valuable insight Peter King has may be his first.

there was someone who posted that there were several GM's who had never traded down and several who had never traded up.

But the spotlight seems to shine brightest on Gettleman, not just that he hasn't done it, but the perception is that he's adamant against doing so.

King calls not trading done negligent - so is reporting as if Gettleman has refused to trade down.

to say all that, talking in the roundabout way that he does, name dropping along the way. We get it PK, you are an insider, but yet some of your overly profound statements, really aren't that big of a deal.

are why fans are convinced trading down is a great strategy. He lauds Seattle for trading down because it yielded Metcalf, but if you look at that draft, Metcalf might be the only player that ends up being a decent one.

So trading down 6 times to accumulate 6 picks likely yielded worse results than not trading down at all.

It works if you are in a range where you see a huge clump of similarly rated players, but another team has someone they are targeting. That is what Seattle had in 2019.
Beyond that you are not likely to get the necessary value. I remember one year the Dallas Cowboys traded down so much they had like 11 or 12 picks from Rounds 3 to 7 and none of them received a second contract with Dallas. In 2019 and 2018 the Giants were not in a position to trade down. 2019 because they needed a QB and could not chance losing out on the one they liked, 2018 because the teams who had the most interest in #2 would have required the Giants trading back too far. If you look at who was desperate to move, the one real team was Buffalo who had the 12th overall pick. You trade back that far who are you taking? Vita Vea? With McGlinchey going at 9 it really would have been a worst case scenario for the Giants as he probably would have been who they were gambling on if they traded down. Unless we were talking about multiple 1st Round picks plus later picks would Vea + picks = Barkley?

written about George Young, and tell me you don't see parallels to the conversations around Gettleman now 25 years later:

Quote:

"Why don't you write what you want to write, that we can't draft? I'm not going to respond to that. Why do I have to make an excuse for our drafts? I'm tired of it. We draft the guys when we draft guys. They don't come injury-proof or anything else. I'm a dummy on the cap and I'm a dummy on the drafts, too," Young said. It didn't take long for Young to calm down. "Don't write that in Baltimore, or at least leave out the bleeps," Young said. "He picked a bad day [to call]. I was irritated. It gets tiresome at times." OK, George, we'll leave out the bleeps, but the outburst was an indication that being an NFL GM these days isn't a day at the beach. Young has built a couple of Super Bowl championship teams, but he knows his record is only as good as his last victory. "People saw me after we won the Super Bowls and they don't think I was very excited. I said, 'Don't worry, I'll be dumb next year.' I was correct," Young said. "I learned this living in Baltimore; all the geniuses are from out of town. I'm not a genius. I don't pretend to be. I'm a working stiff trying to do the best I can. I've got a track record. I haven't changed much. Maybe it's a drawback. It doesn't show much growth." Young figures that criticism goes with the job. He remembers that the fans booed when he made Phil Simms his first draft pick in 1979. The cameramen even asked then-commissioner Pete Rozelle to announce the pick a second time so they could get the boos on film. "They went through the whole thing again and they booed more. Pete even started to smile because he knew what was coming, and they said even he was laughing at the Giants' pick," he said. Despite all that, Young has stood the test of time. When he arrived in New York, all the sports teams had different executives than they do now. He's still on the job, conducting his 17th draft this weekend and trying to avoid listening to the roar of the crowd. "You have to look at the draft as a whole, but the writers, fans, TV guys and agents put the emphasis on the first round. Some teams react to the public pressure of 'How can you pass up this guy?' You get into that sometimes. In the other rounds, you're not as affected by the outside influences."

Young had his trouble after the Parcells core aged and fell apart and he had trouble with the cap. But what's lost is that before he left, he built the new core of the team that won the division in 1997 (with Ernie along his side as assistant GM) and ultimately his fingerprints were on the team that went to the Super Bowl in 2000.

Let's see how things play out this year with a new coaching staff.

DG better use the draft and FA pretty well this year and show massive improvement in talent and dare I say put a winning team on the field or he's definitely gone.

He never trades down, made a joke about analytics and made a passing reference to God when talking about Barkley's talents.

He is a despicable creature!

In comment 14817041 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

there was someone who posted that there were several GM's who had never traded down and several who had never traded up. But the spotlight seems to shine brightest on Gettleman, not just that he hasn't done it, but the perception is that he's adamant against doing so. King calls not trading done negligent - so is reporting as if Gettleman has refused to trade down.

Dave’s an easy target. He’s not liked in the media. He’s not liked by a pocket of players. And he’s not liked by, I don’t know, somewhere between maybe 25-40% of his own fan base. He’s brought a lot of that upon himself.

In comment 14817043 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

are why fans are convinced trading down is a great strategy. He lauds Seattle for trading down because it yielded Metcalf, but if you look at that draft, Metcalf might be the only player that ends up being a decent one. So trading down 6 times to accumulate 6 picks likely yielded worse results than not trading down at all.

Never mind that Seattle supposedly has a top 5 QB who’s prime seems to be being wasted. Sound familiar? Seattle has done a good job overall but takes like this are silly. Did King tell us about Starbucks and his daughters too or has he stopped that stupid shit finally. Stopped reading him long ago. Miss guys like Dr Z and Joel B who actually knew what the fuck they were talking about

And not to be a downer but that usually means the current vets on the roster are not good.

Remember the days when it was shocking if a rookie started on offense or defense?

Just because Gettlemen hasn't traded down doesn't mean he won't.

Have traded down a lot, the Eagles, and the Seahawks, it is an excellent strategy when you know how and when to do it, but if you stay where you are all the time but draft well that also works, the Steelers are a good example, no matter what your strategy, the key is always drafting well.

He pointed out 1 GM who successfully traded down. Its lazy reporting. Give us some facts about trading down and the which team fairs better narrative. you really can't kill DG for his drafts. He did draft some good players over the years. If his drafts were a disaster then you can kill him.

If you think of it, the Giants drafts were pretty bad when he left except for a few 1st round hits.

They gave the Patriots the 8th and 10th overall picks for the 3rd overall pick. With picks 8 and 10 the Patriots selected Chris Singleton and Ray Agnew. With the 3rd overall pick the Seahawks selected Cortez Kennedy. Enough said.

by execs and fans because despite all the analytics and work that they do on these kids, you just never know who's going to end up being a player. If you listen to the PFF podcast, or some other pundits, they'll admit that part of it is more art than science. So the more chances you get, the better.

I don't really care if he doesn't trade down. What I do care about is when I hear him say that he doesn't initiate conversations with teams or doesn't take calls. Conviction is fine, but pick up the phone/take a phone call.

...the Giants sucked long before Gettleman returned.

be the prudent thing to do. Nobody knows how the OT’s will work out, hitting on Wirfs at 4th or 9th are both crapshoots, but at least you have another pick to hedge your bet. I am sure DG will come up with strange superlatives to justify his pick, but that doesn’t mean we have to like it. If he misses he’s gone and we have to suffer for it. Of course, we don’t who will entrench himself as the fourth best prospect until the combines and we don’t know whom DG likes yet, but based on the current projections we need to trade out of the 4th spot if both OSU defenders are gone.

The only way to win a crapshoot is to have more chances. Everyone misses, but not every team has the same number of chances.

Smart teams figured this out a while ago. Look at the rosters of the teams that do everything to get more draft picks and then look at the rosters of the teams that stand pat.


Not trading down indicates Gettleman doesn't get this yet. That's negligent.

After having the 2nd, 4th and 6th pick in the last 3 drafts... and was never truly salary cap "handicapped" so to speak... then I see know reason to keep trying to rebuild with you. So if this team doesn't "compete for a playoff spot" this year, DG should be removed before the end of the season... if we are out of it before Thanksgiving then a change of GM should not just be considered but done, period

We could make a playoff push in year 1 with Judge.

In comment 14817061 Jan in DC said:

Quote:

by execs and fans because despite all the analytics and work that they do on these kids, you just never know who's going to end up being a player. If you listen to the PFF podcast, or some other pundits, they'll admit that part of it is more art than science. So the more chances you get, the better. I don't really care if he doesn't trade down. What I do care about is when I hear him say that he doesn't initiate conversations with teams or doesn't take calls. Conviction is fine, but pick up the phone/take a phone call.

The draft is like a scratch off lottery. Each year you have a certain number of cards and you are trying to reach a certain dollar value. The higher numbered cards are more likely to contain the money needed to reach your desired goal, but it is by no means a guarantee. Trading down to get more cards gives you more leeway to reach your desired dollar value, but since no card is a lock you could be trading a card that would have given you that value for multiple zonks.

also never traded down. The last time the Giants traded down was in 2006, when Accorsi did so in the first round with Pittsburgh and took Kiwi.

My view on this is split. I think it's strange the Giants have never traded down in any round since 2006. But each year is different. Not having traded down since 2006 doesn't mean we should do so this year. But this year does seem to present a good chance to do so. We need more picks, especially after the Williams trade. Other teams may also want to move up to get a QB.

The problem is that I don't see DG trading down from a top five pick, not unless he's offered a ton.

I think the chance of a trade down is about 50/50 right now.

that I'm proven wrong I'm certain the Giants will make the #4 selection in this draft. There's too much evidence to indicate otherwise.

In comment 14817072 Mike in NY said:
The draft is like a scratch off lottery. Each year you have a certain number of cards and you are trying to reach a certain dollar value. The higher numbered cards are more likely to contain the money needed to reach your desired goal, but it is by no means a guarantee. Trading down to get more cards gives you more leeway to reach your desired dollar value, but since no card is a lock you could be trading a card that would have given you that value for multiple zonks. [/quote]

Yup. I agree with you. I'd be happy if a trade was there and he traded down. But if he doesn't it's not the end of the world. We honestly don't know what is being offered so it's hard to judge these things.

I'm just saying that what I need from my GM is 100% due diligence in exploring options.

he's the one who makes the decision,there's a mass brain filter that ignores the fact.

When asked about trading down with the #2 overall in 2018, JM said he would want to know the players NYG would be getting with the picks acquired.

Unless you're on the clock and only trading down one spot,that is an impossible standard to meet.

The Giants never traded down with Reese as GM and now they haven't traded down with DG as GM.

JM has been the consistent factor, apart from DG's own history.

newday 3/26/18 - ( New Window )

In comment 14817042 smshmth8690 said:

Quote:

to say all that, talking in the roundabout way that he does, name dropping along the way. We get it PK, you are an insider, but yet some of your overly profound statements, really aren't that big of a deal.

I’m a fan because he gets very good guests but what you said is 100 percent the truth. Just rambles on when it could be said in a fraction of the time

Does not even pick up the phone, then he is an idiot, but how would we know that. As far as him getting critisized, he earned that with his big mouth and not knowing when to shut it. I hope he can turn this around, but my hopes are more on Judge and him bringing something more to the table.

were -
Round 1) Jones, Lawrence, Baker
Round 3) Ximines
Round 4) Love
Round 5) Connelly, D Slayton
Round 6) Ballentine
Round 7) George, C Slayton

Can an intelligent person complain about that draft? How many teams did better?

increased desire to trade down may be at least partially attributable to a desire to do something different as a way of trying to correct the losing. But we can't let panic or the past influence our decision.

Most player evaluations haven't been done. We also don't know what will happen with the draft, especially with Detroit.

But what I don't want to hear is DG dismissing the idea immediately, and saying he wasn't even considering trading down.

Should they have traded down?

The point is that there is no absolute. Gettleman should be open to all options and do the best he can to choose the best option

if you have a conviction on a player you take them. If the players are all crap at 4 - it does not follow logically that they won't all be crap if you get a lower pick.


if Seattle trades down with one pick, gets 6 picks, and one of those picks is a very good player why is that being a genius -- that's like saying here you pick from this pile -- you can touch each one of them and pick out a good one - or I'll remove half of the contents of the barrel, everyone else getting their choice of the best ones in there, and then you can pick 6 of the left-overs. If you find a good one - then you're a genius/

In comment 14817061 Jan in DC said:

Quote:

by execs and fans because despite all the analytics and work that they do on these kids, you just never know who's going to end up being a player. If you listen to the PFF podcast, or some other pundits, they'll admit that part of it is more art than science. So the more chances you get, the better. I don't really care if he doesn't trade down. What I do care about is when I hear him say that he doesn't initiate conversations with teams or doesn't take calls. Conviction is fine, but pick up the phone/take a phone call.

This is a very good take, IMO.

The problem with Gettleman isn't so much that he has never traded down - of course that can be circumstantial as much as systemic. But Gettleman has also said a few oddball things about trades, both in draft day trades and in player trades, that should be fair game when wondering whether Gettleman may inadvertently have a negotiating style that simply doesn't lend itself well to trading down.

So that may not exactly be the same thing as refusing to trade down, but for all intents and purposes, it achieves the same result. Whether it's by choice or by style, it's not an unfair question to wonder why Gettleman has never traded down and if there's a reason that may suggest that he'll always be unlikely to do so.

And trading down is not always the right move. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. But it's a tool that's available to NFL executives, and to willingly proceed without ever using that tool seems like a voluntary disadvantage.

Much like his bravado in speaking with the media, I think this is a situation where DG would improve with some genuine reflection and self-evaluation. Is there something about his negotiating style that impedes the opportunity to trade down in drafts, and negates what may sometimes be the best option available.

In comment 14817117 gidiefor said:

Quote:

if you have a conviction on a player you take them. If the players are all crap at 4 - it does not follow logically that they won't all be crap if you get a lower pick. if Seattle trades down with one pick, gets 6 picks, and one of those picks is a very good player why is that being a genius -- that's like saying here you pick from this pile -- you can touch each one of them and pick out a good one - or I'll remove half of the contents of the barrel, everyone else getting their choice of the best ones in there, and then you can pick 6 of the left-overs. If you find a good one - then you're a genius/

I don't think you're looking at it the right way, gidie.

If every player is crap at 4, trading down AND GETTING ADDITIONAL PICKS, while netting that same crap at a lower pick PLUS ADDITIONAL PICKS TO CHOOSE MORE PLAYERS is what makes it better in the instances where it may indeed be the favorable move.

kind of arrogance to never trade down...a character trait that both Reese and DG seem to have in common.

have last year? Why would they need to accumulate more?

.

It's the players you end up drafting that is meaningful.

If the players Seattle's GM picked up last year by trading down are crap and do nothing in the NFL, then the trade down was a useless.

It's what you do with the picks you make.

is a way to receive praise during draft time,and it takes some of the focus off the players you selected.

It can be a magic act.

If you select good players,most of the time it doesn't matter.

In comment 14817128 barens said:

Quote:

have last year? Why would they need to accumulate more?

They left themselves pretty handcuffed for a long stretch between the Baker and Ximines picks, where a number of OL prospects came off the board. And then they only wound up spending one pick on OL, very late and very developmental. Perhaps some additional picks could have been used to maneuver the middle rounds a bit more to pick up an additional OL prospect?

That's a very specific example, but the worst reason to discount the value of additional picks is to count the picks you already have. The only counter argument that really works is considering the cost in trading back to acquire picks comes at the cost of presumably the best prospect in the trade (because if you're trading back, you're giving up the higher pick).

Having plenty of picks already is basically irrelevant if the underlying scenario at that moment still suggests that trading back is the strongest possibility for a successful outcome.

The Barkley pick was the time to trade back for a haul and DG blew the second overall pick on a scatback that does not move the chains. He has made some solid draft picks but none of them matter with a weak OL and no pass rush. If he goes for a DB at four he should be fired before second rd pick.

So the Giants themselves aren’t completely averse to the process. Granted that was 14 years ago, but it happened.

In comment 14817156 averagejoe said:

Quote:

The Barkley pick was the time to trade back for a haul and DG blew the second overall pick on a scatback that does not move the chains. He has made some solid draft picks but none of them matter with a weak OL and no pass rush. If he goes for a DB at four he should be fired before second rd pick.

LOL

"scatback that does not move the chains."

I love this place sometimes.

Quote:

That is borderline negligent. Maybe not even borderline. I am incredulous about that.

Give the First Take and McShay/Kiper crowd credit for actually taking a side and sticking to their guns. PK is apparently not in their league.

There has never been a pundit so afraid of actual prognostication, so adept at circumlocution and heding, as the great Peter King. Wtf does "borderline negligent" even mean? Are you trying to convince us that he's not negligent... By saying the opposite?

His smarmy signature "Ten things I think I think" column is supposed to sound cute, but it actually disguises exactly this- that he's afraid to put an opinion out there. You're in the wrong business, Peter.

You do what your draft board tells you to do. And all draft boards are different, sometimes significantly different.

Gettleman is aggressive by nature. But it's a mistake to compare his track record when drafting outside the top ten with his track record drafting inside the top five, because they are two very different animals. Each situation is unique and the Giants current situation is as unique as it gets (if you were to try to find a similar situation in Gettleman's past). Gettleman is a poker player and he won't be opposed to accumulating more chips as long as it doesn't mean passing on a prospect of which he is in full bloom love.

ahahahaha

In comment 14817162 Chris684 said:

Quote:

In comment 14817156 averagejoe said: Quote: The Barkley pick was the time to trade back for a haul and DG blew the second overall pick on a scatback that does not move the chains. He has made some solid draft picks but none of them matter with a weak OL and no pass rush. If he goes for a DB at four he should be fired before second rd pick. LOL "scatback that does not move the chains." I love this place sometimes.

He might have a point.

Those 17 career TD's in two seasons aren't getting us 1st downs!!!