Is OT as big of a need as we think?

to learn and to grow into the position. He is the center of the NY Giants and he has to succeed for the Giants to succeed.

Not many. Giants won two SBs with Diehl at LT

Too many holes on defense to spend the number four pick on an OT unless you think the guy is a HOF talent

Jones can’t keep absorbing hits for his health sake and for his fumbling issues

and how many hits did he take during the season? Yes, they need a quality LT at the very least.

In comment 14853198 Vanzetti said:

Quote:

Not many. Giants won two SBs with Diehl at LT Too many holes on defense to spend the number four pick on an OT unless you think the guy is a HOF talent

You underestimate Diehl, he wasn't a HoFer but he provided quality play. He practiced against some of the best players in the NFL at that time and it showed during the season.

yes. At his best Solder is adequate, and we don’t currently have a right tackle who is a very good long term option.

You could argue it is our single biggest need on this team considering we have a young franchise QB.

but Titans had Lewan and Conklin at the tackle spots the past few years. It is why they’ve been able to run the ball and protect the QB, make playoff runs.

Have you watched Giants football the last 10 years?

Yes it is

No offense but you think overall yardage numbers tell us if we have a need at OT or not? Come on.

But for our future, for next hear and beyond... absolutely we need a OT, and we have needed them for a full decade now...

.

I'm not saying we don't need to upgrade offensive tackle, I'm saying is it our first need?

In comment 14853210 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

but Titans had Lewan and Conklin at the tackle spots the past few years. It is why they’ve been able to run the ball and protect the QB, make playoff runs.

If you want the Giants to be the Titans, then yeah spend two top picks on OT.

It's a bigger need than we think. (Unless you're Jerry Reese.)

Probably bigger. Huge in fact. We've invested massive resources in our young QB and RB. Our QB's were sacked, hit and harassed among the most in the NFL last season, Barkley got his yards ugly with little help from his blockers.

The O-line is a mess. A disaster right now.

You guys will be saying "WE NEED an OT NOW" in week 2 of next season! We haven't had a good OT here in a LONG TIME! It's time to stop procrastinating!!!!

In comment 14853221 BillT said:

Quote:

It's a bigger need than we think. (Unless you're Jerry Reese.)

This!!

Solder-Hernandez-Pulley-Zeitler-Fleming

We have DJ and Barkley behind them. Its like putting a 4 cylinder 200 hp engine in a Ferrari, we would be wasting our top 2 picks from the previous 2 drafts. If we could control the ball more, and score more points, our D wouldn't be on the field as much and wouldn't be put in negative field position as much.

In comment 14853209 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

yes. At his best Solder is adequate, and we don’t currently have a right tackle who is a very good long term option. You could argue it is our single biggest need on this team considering we have a young franchise QB.

. This is a valid statement which goes back 5/6 yr . Reese tried to upgrade the position in the draft and FA but failed miserably. Ruined the end of ELI's career under the influence of Ross. Then they thought we had the answer with the terrible pick of Flowers. Now we have a new group here that want to draft for need to fill the spot. Tough position to fill may have to cluster draft later in the draft and hope we find one. Thet do not live up ti their hype like other positions. Never take on in the top ten of a draft IMO.

to say we need even more help on D, BUT DG spent much of his FA money on defense, and this draft is deep at OT. It is a need, so might as well grab one now.

Kevin Zeitler provided the steady play at guard the Giants expected when they traded for him, grading above 70.0 as both a pass blocker and a run blocker this year. The tackle duo of Nate Solder and Mike Remmers hasn’t provided that same steady performance, however. Solder’s 57 pressures allowed this season are seven more than any other player (in the entire NFL!), and the 97 combined pressures allowed for the duo is the most in the NFL.

Yes we need OT help and OT help bad. And its BOTH sides. Since we failed in FA to pick up anything more than a possible RT stopgap in Fleming (please lets not confuse him for a high level starter) We need to at absolute minimum seal up one side (Left side much more ideal) with a plug and play top lineman.

You likely aren't getting that below the top 25 and after the top 4 which will go top 12-15 it will drop quite a bit.

So it’s not an outrageous thought.

I tend to worry more about Center than I do Tackle, for some reason. The NFC East and some wreckers in the interior and our offense needs to be built around Barkley.

In comment 14853198 Vanzetti said:

Quote:

Not many. Giants won two SBs with Diehl at LT Too many holes on defense to spend the number four pick on an OT unless you think the guy is a HOF talent

There's quality and then there's competent. Giants have a big need at OT.

This probably is direction coming from the top.

In comment 14853259 Ben in Tampa said:

Quote:

So it’s not an outrageous thought. I tend to worry more about Center than I do Tackle, for some reason. The NFC East and some wreckers in the interior and our offense needs to be built around Barkley.

Gates has more a chance at OC then he does at Center. Center also cam be addressed rd 2 or rd 3. Ruiz or Cushenberry rd 2, Nick Harris , Hennesey rd 3.

Then get a C in the 2nd. Not saying this is the only way to go, just saying the O line could use the love. For real. 2nd year QB and third year 2nd overall pick RB, who could be the biggest playmaker in the league? Focus for once on the Oline. If the Giants could run the ball, that wears down defenses, thereby not leaving our defense on the field too long.
I could see any position being the first pick, aside from QB, or any position that doesnt have a player player anywhere near value for where the Giants pick. SLayton gonna be a solid #1 WR? I like the possibility, but I wouldnt put too many eggs in his basket.

Than at LT...should read

The defense was the main culprit last season.You can draft one of these tackles in the first round, and still end up losing 10 games next year.A top defensive player will have more of an impact.

Some people only want defense when it's convenient,meaning a lot of draft hype surrounding a player.Aaron Donald was one that I remember and agreed with.Most of the time though,it's offensive line or bust.

Let's control the line of scrimmage, excel at running the ball, and keep our shitty defense off the field for as long as possible. All that, and a better chance of our quarterback playing well and staying healthy.

Yes, yes, yes...

Good luck.

And Center is actually an even bigger need.

In the last two years they have invested first round picks in a QB and an RB. But all the attempts to fix the OL with a combination of veteran FAs and draftees have failed for Gettleman just like they failed for Reese. That said, DG has done better than Reese by drafting Hernandez in the 2nd, trading for Zeitler, and finding Gates, an OFA, who could be the 6th OL. But his attempts to really fix the problem at OT have all come up short, and they are actually WORSE off at C because he got rid of a competent center in Richburg. Maybe Richburg had to go, but that is the one player removal move that DG has made that I really question.

Piss poor coaching from first McAdoo's staff and then Shurmur's staff has also been a major issue here, and we have to hope that has finally been fixed by bringing in Colombo.

There is no sensible alternative. OT in the first, C in the second. This is a better than average year for both. Anything else is gross incompetence from the front office.

I love defense, and I know that the G-men's D needs a ton of help, but it has to wait this time.

Oh, and one note on Simmons - remember how so many were so hot for Floyd? He's been released early by the team that drafted him. I am of the opinion that Simmons is Floyd all over again.

Ignores the 3 (maybe 4) defensive starters we got in FA this year, the 2, 1st round defensive draft choices we got in last year's draft or the 3, 3rd round and one 4th round defensive players we got in the last two drafts or the former 1st round defensive pick we got in the OBJ trade. Folks seem to want to ignore that DG has spent more premium resources on defensive players than offensive ones.

In comment 14853220 Vanzetti said:

Quote:

In comment 14853210 ryanmkeane said: Quote: but Titans had Lewan and Conklin at the tackle spots the past few years. It is why they’ve been able to run the ball and protect the QB, make playoff runs. If you want the Giants to be the Titans, then yeah spend two top picks on OT.

I'm not sure if your comment was meant in derision. But the way the Giants have performed over the past couple of seasons, we would be fortunate to have a Titans season.

To the OP - Daniel started 12 games and absorbed 38 sacks for a loss of 295 yards and 18 fumbles. Yes, OT is as big of a need as we think.

Still want a trade down with lac or Carolina, maybe even Jax
Would take 1&2 from Jax if next yr #1 included
Would take 3 & 4 for chargers too
Grab at least 2 oline. Maybe 3

.

In comment 14853295 BillT said:

Quote:

Ignores the 3 (maybe 4) defensive starters we got in FA this year, the 2, 1st round defensive draft choices we got in last year's draft or the 3, 3rd round and one 4th round defensive players we got in the last two drafts or the former 1st round defensive pick we got in the OBJ trade. Folks seem to want to ignore that DG has spent more premium resources on defensive players than offensive ones.

+1. And underrate the importance of a better DC and system. If Graham is that that will be a huge difference in itself. Secondly a lot of youth maturing at the same time. That will also make a big difference.

Is the defense was worse. Hard to deny that if you watched them play. Teams with multiple needs should draft with BPA being a big factor.

In comment 14853306 Payasdaddy said:

Quote:

Still want a trade down with lac or Carolina, maybe even Jax Would take 1&2 from Jax if next yr #1 included Would take 3 & 4 for chargers too Grab at least 2 oline. Maybe 3

. Nice plan except we have not been able to Identify any talented players at OL positions for years. we have to hope that with the addition of Garrett and Judge we have people who can evaluate talent that goes with our scheme. It is long overdue.

of anything retrospective. It’s massive because Giants need to plan for now and future at Tackle because:

- Don’t have a starting Right Tackle on roster
- Betting on an aging, breaking down Solder to play better at LT is foolish
- Even if Solder makes it thru 2020, his cap savings thru a cut is more significant than the value he provides
- Fleming is a decent enough fill-in swing tackle but unlikely he is a developmental resource
- The two most important assets we have to support and protect are Jones and Saquon

And the above issues don’t get any better by delaying this decision. At least the defense has some young developing assets that deserve their day in the sun.

Not going OT and Center in this draft with those early picks is simply egregious and resembles gross negligence to bring some drama to the situation.

but you have to draft into the inherent strengths of the draft. In other words, if there's no impact defender at #4 who trips your trigger but an OT carries the grade, pick the OT. And, vice versa.

Look at the big picture without bias leaking in.

In comment 14853331 JonC said:

Quote:

but you have to draft into the inherent strengths of the draft. In other words, if there's no impact defender at #4 who trips your trigger but an OT carries the grade, pick the OT. And, vice versa. Look at the big picture without bias leaking in.

Is it? We have a bunch of young defenders like Lawrence, Carter, Ximines, Baker, Beal, Love to which we've added Williams, Martinez, Bradbury to go with young vets like Peppers and Tomlinson.

On offense we have Jones and Barkley. The next tier is Hernandez, Shepard, and Slayton with vets like Zeitler and Tate. The O is short 3 starting OLs a starting TE (not an Engram fan) and a #1 WR.

There better numbers and potential on the D. The O needs bodies to fill empty spots with no one on the roster to fill them.

In comment 14853329 LBH15 said:

Quote:

of anything retrospective. It’s massive because Giants need to plan for now and future at Tackle because: - Don’t have a starting Right Tackle on roster - Betting on an aging, breaking down Solder to play better at LT is foolish - Even if Solder makes it thru 2020, his cap savings thru a cut is more significant than the value he provides - Fleming is a decent enough fill-in swing tackle but unlikely he is a developmental resource - The two most important assets we have to support and protect are Jones and Saquon And the above issues don’t get any better by delaying this decision. At least the defense has some young developing assets that deserve their day in the sun. Not going OT and Center in this draft with those early picks is simply egregious and resembles gross negligence to bring some drama to the situation.

Totally agreed and there are 2 OTs (Wills/Becton) that are in the same top tier as anyone not named Young or Burrow. Take.the.Tackle.

In comment 14853351 BillT said:

Quote:

In comment 14853331 JonC said: Quote: but you have to draft into the inherent strengths of the draft. In other words, if there's no impact defender at #4 who trips your trigger but an OT carries the grade, pick the OT. And, vice versa. Look at the big picture without bias leaking in. Is it? We have a bunch of young defenders like Lawrence, Carter, Ximines, Baker, Beal, Love to which we've added Williams, Martinez, Bradbury to go with young vets like Peppers and Tomlinson. On offense we have Jones and Barkley. The next tier is Hernandez, Shepard, and Slayton with vets like Zeitler and Tate. The O is short 3 starting OLs a starting TE (not an Engram fan) and a #1 WR. There better numbers and potential on the D. The O needs bodies to fill empty spots with no one on the roster to fill them.

Maturing youth, infusion in FA and hopefully a much better DC. D might be in better shape than we think.

We don't know how much of the problem is the players and how much is the coaching. All we know is that we've been bad at running the ball and protecting the passer for a looooong time -- and our two franchise players are a young running back and a young quarterback.

At a minimum, though, I think we need the best center we can find.

In comment 14853359 MeadowlandsMike said:

Quote:

In comment 14853351 BillT said: Quote: In comment 14853331 JonC said: Quote: but you have to draft into the inherent strengths of the draft. In other words, if there's no impact defender at #4 who trips your trigger but an OT carries the grade, pick the OT. And, vice versa. Look at the big picture without bias leaking in. Is it? We have a bunch of young defenders like Lawrence, Carter, Ximines, Baker, Beal, Love to which we've added Williams, Martinez, Bradbury to go with young vets like Peppers and Tomlinson. On offense we have Jones and Barkley. The next tier is Hernandez, Shepard, and Slayton with vets like Zeitler and Tate. The O is short 3 starting OLs a starting TE (not an Engram fan) and a #1 WR. There better numbers and potential on the D. The O needs bodies to fill empty spots with no one on the roster to fill them. Maturing youth, infusion in FA and hopefully a much better DC. D might be in better shape than we think.

Yep. They clearly need a Edge Rusher and a Free Safety worth a damn but it’s not like there aren’t guys to play. At OT and Center there is nothing.

In comment 14853379 CT Charlie said:

Quote:

We don't know how much of the problem is the players and how much is the coaching. All we know is that we've been bad at running the ball and protecting the passer for a looooong time -- and our two franchise players are a young running back and a young quarterback. At a minimum, though, I think we need the best center we can find.

You've been watching guys like Solder, Halapio, Remmers, play OL and you don't know if it's the players? I'm no expert but...

We had a similar debate before last season, I'd say it's clear I was right. The defense was awful. The defense has more drafted parts, many with promise, but the offense performed better on the field.

but there's no alpha, no impact Edge, it's a collection of I hope so.

In parallel, the OL needs help, obviously. Let's not overrate what we are right now on defense.

Draft where the talent takes you, regardless of bias.

it’s about what sets up the team best for success for 2020-2025.

If Offensive Line investment isn’t at the top of that list please fill me in as to what is?

But thanks for asking

and you go where the draft's strengths and your draft board take you.

In comment 14853258 MeadowlandsMike said:

Quote:

Kevin Zeitler provided the steady play at guard the Giants expected when they traded for him, grading above 70.0 as both a pass blocker and a run blocker this year. The tackle duo of Nate Solder and Mike Remmers hasn’t provided that same steady performance, however. Solder’s 57 pressures allowed this season are seven more than any other player (in the entire NFL!), and the 97 combined pressures allowed for the duo is the most in the NFL. Yes we need OT help and OT help bad. And its BOTH sides. Since we failed in FA to pick up anything more than a possible RT stopgap in Fleming (please lets not confuse him for a high level starter) We need to at absolute minimum seal up one side (Left side much more ideal) with a plug and play top lineman. You likely aren't getting that below the top 25 and after the top 4 which will go top 12-15 it will drop quite a bit.

Keep posting this.

The biases for other choices should dissipate with this logic.

It would be flat out stupid if they don't resign Golden. We were already borderline bad in pass rush and to lose the ONLY double digit sack guy on the team is ridiculous.

Fackrell as a bargain signing ain't cutting it.

With Golden and some of the youth hopefully improving we won't be praying we have to get a day 1 quality edge rush otherwise we are in big trouble (of course that would still be great even with Golden back).

solid player but a short term add, he won't likely be here when the needle is pointing up finally.

But I actually think the biggest issue is in run blocking. We have gotten zero push in up front in years. Biggest need is Edge then OT. I do t think either position is great value at 4. Several 1st round OTs but not 4 overall, IMO. OT on trade down is probably our best bet.

could get their wish, given the OTs at the top, the WR talent is deep, and they should be able to find a C. If this is how their board stacks up, I'm good with it.

At the same time, the defense needs more talent to rise from historically bad to competent, and then to solid, good, contender, etc. It too needs impact talent at key positions.

I think they have a world of talent and potential. Where we need the most help is in covering the deep middle. If we were to trade down and still land a guy like Wills and still get a Center on day two, I would love to get ILB-Kenneth Murray and one of the top 4 or 5 Safeties. Day 3 we'd need another OT, & a WR or two.

Does this have anything to do with drafting Isaiah Simmons at 4 and trying to fortify the OL at pick 36?

The players available at the top of round 2 like Cushenbury and Cleveland are not that far behind Ruiz, Wills and Becton. Can our scouts and GM decipher what the difference is in value to draft Wills, Becton or Wirfs at the top of round 1 compared to Cleveland, Niang, Jackson, Chushenbury and Biadasz in round 2?

Can a good OL be found outside of round 1? That is the Million dollar question. I do not see an Orlando Pace or Jonathan Ogden in this draft. In fact I see 4 OT prospects that there is NO consensus on. Are any worth a top 5 pick?

Tend to agree on the value at #4 for two huge needs.

In comment 14853392 JonC said:

Quote:

We had a similar debate before last season, I'd say it's clear I was right. The defense was awful. The defense has more drafted parts, many with promise, but the offense performed better on the field.

The defense was to a great part 1st and 2nd year players. Yes, they stunk. But the OL was completely AWOL. And the OL that we currently have is no better. At least they've spent resources on the D. That defensive player list I posted above is on our roster. The OL is still short 3 starters. It's not close.

In comment 14853455 JonC said:

Quote:

could get their wish, given the OTs at the top, the WR talent is deep, and they should be able to find a C. If this is how their board stacks up, I'm good with it. At the same time, the defense needs more talent to rise from historically bad to competent, and then to solid, good, contender, etc. It too needs impact talent at key positions.

Do you really see any of these OTs as best non-QB in draft behind Young, or more a function of going with a top 10 talent at position of great need? I see OT as the latter. Wills is the best to my eyes but @4 and quite possibly the 2nd non QB selected I wish he added a little more in run game.

In comment 14853464 BillT said:

Quote:

In comment 14853392 JonC said: Quote: We had a similar debate before last season, I'd say it's clear I was right. The defense was awful. The defense has more drafted parts, many with promise, but the offense performed better on the field. The defense was to a great part 1st and 2nd year players. Yes, they stunk. But the OL was completely AWOL. And the OL that we currently have is no better. At least they've spent resources on the D. That defensive player list I posted above is on our roster. The OL is still short 3 starters. It's not close.

If you're planning to draft for need, you have a leg to stand on. I'm not. And, if NYG is not drafting for need you're gonna be sore.

In comment 14853398 JonC said:

Quote:

Draft where the talent takes you, regardless of bias.

It's not bias. It's need and positional value.

In comment 14853465 UberAlias said:

Quote:

In comment 14853455 JonC said: Quote: could get their wish, given the OTs at the top, the WR talent is deep, and they should be able to find a C. If this is how their board stacks up, I'm good with it. At the same time, the defense needs more talent to rise from historically bad to competent, and then to solid, good, contender, etc. It too needs impact talent at key positions. Do you really see any of these OTs as best non-QB in draft behind Young, or more a function of going with a top 10 talent at position of great need? I see OT as the latter. Wills is the best to my eyes but @4 and quite possibly the 2nd non QB selected I wish he added a little more in run game.

I don't love any of the OTs at #4. If I did I'd be hoping to pick one. I'd agree it's the latter.

In comment 14853470 BillT said:

Quote:

In comment 14853398 JonC said: Quote: Draft where the talent takes you, regardless of bias. It's not bias. It's need and positional value.

Not for everyone beating the drum. Many want an OT no matter what.

In comment 14853469 JonC said:

Quote:

In comment 14853464 BillT said: Quote: In comment 14853392 JonC said: Quote: If you're planning to draft for need, you have a leg to stand on. I'm not. And, if NYG is not drafting for need you're gonna be sore.

I' not sure what you mean Jon. Could you clarify. Thanks.

In comment 14853478 JonC said:

Quote:

In comment 14853470 BillT said: Quote: In comment 14853398 JonC said: Quote: Draft where the talent takes you, regardless of bias. It's not bias. It's need and positional value. Not for everyone beating the drum. Many want an OT no matter what.

Well, I'b be among those unless Young drops to us. Otherwise, the OTs are in the conversation at #4 and need and positional value make those reasonable picks.

due to the dearth of defensive talent we also need, and that's what concerns me.

I see it the same way. Unfortunately I happen to share your concerns with Simmons. I know they lynch you here for thinking this way but I love Derrick Brown. Guy is a monster. If it meant dealing someone to make room, so be it.

In comment 14853491 JonC said:

Quote:

due to the dearth of defensive talent we also need, and that's what concerns me.

I'm not saying in any way the D is complete. But the OL is not just incomplete, it's virtually non existent. It has to be addressed with top level talent or watch Jones and Barkley struggle though another year.

Where I'm not sold is the OT talent being worthy at #4. I see alot of warts, RT skills and body types and athleticism.

In comment 14853500 JonC said:

Quote:

Where I'm not sold is the OT talent being worthy at #4. I see alot of warts, RT skills and body types and athleticism.

You would know better than I. Just don't know if I can watch the 8th or 9Th year in a row with no hope that the OL can even be competent much less a asset.b

In comment 14853494 UberAlias said:

Quote:

I see it the same way. Unfortunately I happen to share your concerns with Simmons. I know they lynch you here for thinking this way but I love Derrick Brown. Guy is a monster. If it meant dealing someone to make room, so be it.

I don’t disagree that Brown is a stud but you can’t play 7 DTs. Lol. I lie Simmons but get the concerns. Praying the Chargers or Jax trade up as think the Miami trades up. As in if layncash in it. Ross is getting up there and wants to win. So the only trade down and to be those two. Going lower is too dangerous. If they hadn’t made the stupid Willams trade o don’t think people would mind Brown

In comment 14853464 BillT said:

Quote:

In comment 14853392 JonC said: Quote: We had a similar debate before last season, I'd say it's clear I was right. The defense was awful. The defense has more drafted parts, many with promise, but the offense performed better on the field. The defense was to a great part 1st and 2nd year players. Yes, they stunk. But the OL was completely AWOL. And the OL that we currently have is no better. At least they've spent resources on the D. That defensive player list I posted above is on our roster. The OL is still short 3 starters. It's not close.

Extremely young D and a complex defense that wasn't a great fit. Not a good combination . New peices in FA, new coordinator, youth 1 year older.

We need to protect the top investments Jones and Barkley. OT makes the grade except in comparison to Young. Unless Young inexplicably drops,it needs to be OT.

Early round investments they made on D and even the lower guys who showed some promise the last 2 years. You got Lawrence (1st round), Ximenes and Carter (3rd round), Baker(1st rd), Beal(3rd rd) Love (early 4th but considered much higher), Connely (who showed great signs), Peppers (former 1st round pick), LW (former 1st round), BJ Hill (early 3rd).

You assume Graham is a better DC and will be of the philosophy akin to Judge in scheming to the players strength.

They'll be a year older but that is a decent amount of early talent.

and they remain our two biggest holes today. There just wasn't a strong enough UFA class to fix either. We plugged holes instead.

However, we chose not to over-pay for Golden and he remains, oddly, an UFA still! I want Golden back on a 3 year deal because he is our best pass rusher but I don't want to overpay for a team not yet ready to make that big leap with a big "player or two" via UFA'cy.

Giants need to draft BPA and get young guys who can play rather than those with "potential" and such.

Becton is intriguing but one thing scares me is that I read he has "air between his ears" and such. Just scares me to hear that kind of stuff.

In comment 14853557 SGMen said:

Quote:

and they remain our two biggest holes today. There just wasn't a strong enough UFA class to fix either. We plugged holes instead. However, we chose not to over-pay for Golden and he remains, oddly, an UFA still! I want Golden back on a 3 year deal because he is our best pass rusher but I don't want to overpay for a team not yet ready to make that big leap with a big "player or two" via UFA'cy. Giants need to draft BPA and get young guys who can play rather than those with "potential" and such. Becton is intriguing but one thing scares me is that I read he has "air between his ears" and such. Just scares me to hear that kind of stuff.

Get Golden done and potentially our biggest hole pending expected youth improvement maybe free Safety. Of course you can always add to pass rush.

Pick 4 should be bpa

its a big mistake. Have to take the best impact player available,regardless of position. Anything else is a mistake.

For example CBS Sports has 2 in the top 10 and 3 in the top 12. Others do too. My point is that grabbing an OT at #4 is not a reach. IMO, anyone ranked in the top 10 is up for discussion at #4 (can't be too fine grained on this).

In comment 14853331 JonC said:

Quote:

but you have to draft into the inherent strengths of the draft. In other words, if there's no impact defender at #4 who trips your trigger but an OT carries the grade, pick the OT. And, vice versa. Look at the big picture without bias leaking in.

All depends if you consider Simmons an impact player. Tough call between him & the OTs. I like Simmons but another year of Speedbump Solder is unacceptable.

In comment 14853655 OC2.0 said:

Quote:

In comment 14853331 JonC said: Quote: but you have to draft into the inherent strengths of the draft. In other words, if there's no impact defender at #4 who trips your trigger but an OT carries the grade, pick the OT. And, vice versa. Look at the big picture without bias leaking in. All depends if you consider Simmons an impact player. Tough call between him & the OTs. I like Simmons but another year of Speedbump Solder is unacceptable.

Not a fan of Simmons either. Between him and the OTs it has reduced my interest in the #4 pick.

In comment 14853637 PatersonPlank said:

Quote:

For example CBS Sports has 2 in the top 10 and 3 in the top 12. Others do too. My point is that grabbing an OT at #4 is not a reach. IMO, anyone ranked in the top 10 is up for discussion at #4 (can't be too fine grained on this).

Almost every pundit worth their salt has an OT no lower than 7 and that's counting the QBs that drop them lower. An OT is not a reach at 4. Flowers was most definitely a reach at 10.

Almost no one had him ranked that high and many saw his clunky uncoordinated pass sets despite his great size.

Not by any stretch of the imagination.

But they can't force the picks. If players at other positions represent better value, take them. Build the strongest core pissible through the draft, and do it yearvin and out. Thats how you turn this around. No shortcuts

that they know Giants desperately need to invest in Oline but can’t bring themselves to admitting you won’t find a better draft to do so or a better position to pick your choice.

Squabbling over a few draft spots when there is not an obvious alternative choice that would be better for this team’s future. Yes of course a trade down is optimum but we don’t have the GM in place that makes that a likely path.

A BBI favorite term...handwringing for no reason. Select the top Tackle on the board and do it again in Rd 2 or Rd 3.

It’s the logical choice.

Our LT still is playing below average, but being paid as a top OT. Our current RT is slight upgrade over a shitty RT. We need at least one solid OT and an anchor at OC.

In comment 14853733 Matt M. said:

Quote:

Our LT still is playing below average, but being paid as a top OT. Our current RT is slight upgrade over a shitty RT. We need at least one solid OT and an anchor at OC.

Below average is an understatement. 7 more pressures allowed than the next closest Tackle in the whole league.

With first pick. If that’s defense they have to go that way. I know the line needs to be rebuilt we actually need 3 olineman but I’ll take 2 center and tackle. You can do that in rounds 2 and 3.
Giants problems will take a while to fix.

With first pick. If that’s defense they have to go that way. I know the line needs to be rebuilt we actually need 3 olineman but I’ll take 2 center and tackle. You can do that in rounds 2 and 3.
Giants problems will take a while to fix.

In comment 14853203 Jack Stroud said:

Quote:

and how many hits did he take during the season? Yes, they need a quality LT at the very least.

Jack Stroud -- on the one hand, hard to disagree with your statement; on the other hand, a fair amount of hits on Daniel Jones was due to his holding onto the ball too long. Clearly, the Giants need better O-lineman, but it is also true that Daniel Jones needs to improve on the following negatives from NFL.com (written before last year's Draft):

"Incessant patting of the ball through progressions"

"Waits an extra step before cutting it loose too often"

"Average release speed slowed by small windup"

"Loose ball handling in face of pressure leads to fumbles"

I know I'm repeating myself, but they need a real CENTER desperately. As Matt said, a real "anchor C". And I will maintain that the OT play will look much better if the QB can step up into the pocket and allow the OTs to push rushers past the play. A huge part of the OT problem is the pocket collapsing from the middle. QB can't step up , has no choice but to run outside into the edge rushers.

may worse.

Parts of our D might be bigger needs, but we def need OT. I was kinda hoping Daryl Williams would have regained form and signed, but that is not looking likely I guess.

In comment 14853723 LBH15 said:

Quote:

that they know Giants desperately need to invest in Oline but can’t bring themselves to admitting you won’t find a better draft to do so or a better position to pick your choice. Squabbling over a few draft spots when there is not an obvious alternative choice that would be better for this team’s future. Yes of course a trade down is optimum but we don’t have the GM in place that makes that a likely path. A BBI favorite term...handwringing for no reason. Select the top Tackle on the board and do it again in Rd 2 or Rd 3. It’s the logical choice.

The consensus to this point is there are approx four blue chips in this draft, and none are OTs. Even many here who are desperate for OT at #4 realize the lesser value in doing so. Too, the only prospect many feel is a LT in the NFL is Andrew Thomas, so there is even more risk involved with the position and potentially wasting the #4 overall pick on panic.

These are valid points. I suggest losing the snark.

and still none are OTs. The draft is about talent and value.
I'm fine with picking a blue chip CB or DT if they're higher on the board than the OTs. The draft isn't solely or primarily about the 2020 season.

In comment 14853863 Andy in Halifax said:

Quote:

Parts of our D might be bigger needs, but we def need OT. I was kinda hoping Daryl Williams would have regained form and signed, but that is not looking likely I guess.

He settled for a 1yr prove-it deal in Buffalo. (terms aren't known, yet)

The only consensus is the boards of 32 teams which is not published.

It can be easily projected that Burrow and Young are truly the only blue-chips and everybody else are red-chips.

It's tough to pass on the logic of going Tackle no matter what color-coding you want to follow.

I'll stick with my time-proven logic.

OL or bust isn't valid.

.

Give me the time of possession. I bet our defense was out there all day. Improve the OL and you reduce that number and improve your defense. Look what Tenn was able to do with a mediocre QB and a decent OL and RB.

In comment 14853894 JonC said:

Quote:

I'll stick with my time-proven logic. OL or bust isn't valid.

It’s not OL or bust. No one here can say Simmons or Okudah or Brown are definitively BPA over any of the OL prospects.

In comment 14853996 WillVAB said:

Quote:

In comment 14853894 JonC said: Quote: I'll stick with my time-proven logic. OL or bust isn't valid. It’s not OL or bust. No one here can say Simmons or Okudah or Brown are definitively BPA over any of the OL prospects.

I'm referring to posters who want OT at #4 no matter what, and there are plenty of them.

OL or bust isn't applicable. There are OT's comparable to Okudah/Simmons/Brown. The idea there is no concensus who is the best OT is muddying the waters imo.

Jeremiah has Becton 6 overall. Huddle has Wirfs 7 overall.

The talent is there.

In comment 14853996 WillVAB said:

Quote:

In comment 14853894 JonC said: Quote: I'll stick with my time-proven logic. OL or bust isn't valid. It’s not OL or bust. No one here can say Simmons or Okudah or Brown are definitively BPA over any of the OL prospects.

For anyone who sees OL as the BPA, there is nothing to discuss. In that situation it's a no brainer. The question becomes meaningful when you are talking about taking an OLine who is a value in the 7, 8,9, or 10 range verses say the the 2nd best player in the draft behind Chase Young.

it is, could also grab a center too.

In comment 14853883 LBH15 said:

Quote:

The only consensus is the boards of 32 teams which is not published. It can be easily projected that Burrow and Young are truly the only blue-chips and everybody else are red-chips. It's tough to pass on the logic of going Tackle no matter what color-coding you want to follow.

Young, Burrow in a tier by themselves.

If Young falls the equation changes.

But OT arguably being the biggest team impact because of what it does for Jones and Barkley is the play IF the players around that OT are in the same tier/row even if they may have a slightly higher grade.

This is likely the scenario that will unfold at 4 and even moreso in a slight tradedown.

In comment 14853835 M.S. said:

Quote:

In comment 14853203 Jack Stroud said: Quote: and how many hits did he take during the season? Yes, they need a quality LT at the very least. Jack Stroud -- on the one hand, hard to disagree with your statement; on the other hand, a fair amount of hits on Daniel Jones was due to his holding onto the ball too long. Clearly, the Giants need better O-lineman, but it is also true that Daniel Jones needs to improve on the following negatives from NFL.com (written before last year's Draft): "Incessant patting of the ball through progressions" "Waits an extra step before cutting it loose too often" "Average release speed slowed by small windup" "Loose ball handling in face of pressure leads to fumbles"

Did Jones do those things last season, or was this just another door opening to interject your usual questions about DJ??

How did his release speed compare to other QB's, or are you just parroting the same mantra that DJ has a lot of problems?

but I believe we don't need superstars on OL -- solid players that can play well together.

Like Thomas a lot for this reason, but not at 4.

In comment 14853998 JonC said:

Quote:

In comment 14853996 WillVAB said: Quote: In comment 14853894 JonC said: Quote: I'll stick with my time-proven logic. OL or bust isn't valid. It’s not OL or bust. No one here can say Simmons or Okudah or Brown are definitively BPA over any of the OL prospects. I'm referring to posters who want OT at #4 no matter what, and there are plenty of them.

Plenty of posters (some on this thread) have given numerous reasons why one or more of the OTs would be an excellent choice at #4. Reasons relative to the players themselves, the position value and the need as of now and the future.

Just because some fans feel there is enough support behind their own views, and it doesn't align to yours, doesn't mean it's OT or bust.

also QB getting rid of ball faster and getting the protections called correctly, as well. QB can really help his Oline too. DJ held the ball looking downfield quite a bit last year. He admirably stood in there and took some hits, but any Oline would have problems pass protecting more then a few seconds. With that said, we do still need to improve talent there, but it doesn’t have to be a first rounder either. Also Center, IMO, is far more important to our inside running game and creating a pocket for passer to step up into, as well. Take BPA in first round, unless trading down, and draft for need in second, where position of need meets value (Edge or Oline).

In comment 14854125 LBH15 said:

Quote:

In comment 14853998 JonC said: Quote: In comment 14853996 WillVAB said: Quote: In comment 14853894 JonC said: Quote: I'll stick with my time-proven logic. OL or bust isn't valid. It’s not OL or bust. No one here can say Simmons or Okudah or Brown are definitively BPA over any of the OL prospects. I'm referring to posters who want OT at #4 no matter what, and there are plenty of them. Plenty of posters (some on this thread) have given numerous reasons why one or more of the OTs would be an excellent choice at #4. Reasons relative to the players themselves, the position value and the need as of now and the future. Just because some fans feel there is enough support behind their own views, and it doesn't align to yours, doesn't mean it's OT or bust.

I have pointed out numerous times OL or bust does not blanket all that support OL at #4. It's getting tiresome.

But you don't draft just on need. At # 4 - the HOF potential is not a bad metric.

Thing often lost or missing from these discussions is that teams may rate a player's value differently than the draft experts (Exhibit A: Daniel Jones). Player evaluation scales vary from team to team. So, while the common wisdom may be that Simmons is definitely worth the 4 spot, Giants and/or other teams may have a diffeent value on him.

Personally, I cannot wait to see how rest of free agnecy shakes out.

In comment 14854024 UberAlias said:

Quote:

In comment 14853996 WillVAB said: Quote: In comment 14853894 JonC said: Quote: I'll stick with my time-proven logic. OL or bust isn't valid. It’s not OL or bust. No one here can say Simmons or Okudah or Brown are definitively BPA over any of the OL prospects. For anyone who sees OL as the BPA, there is nothing to discuss. In that situation it's a no brainer. The question becomes meaningful when you are talking about taking an OLine who is a value in the 7, 8,9, or 10 range verses say the the 2nd best player in the draft behind Chase Young.

Definitely agree on Young. If he’s there he should be the pick.

After that all bets are off. No one can say the Giants passed on “BPA” for “need” if they go OT over one of the other players.

If NYG goes OT, I flat out hope you dudes are correct and I'm wrong. I wouldn't be pissed off if they valued Andrew Thomas as a left tackle and I do like Wirfs' potential. Becton is a project whose risk factor pushes down his value for me, and Wills ... well, we've gone over him enough.

In comment 14854166 bc4life said:

Quote:

But you don't draft just on need. At # 4 - the HOF potential is not a bad metric. Thing often lost or missing from these discussions is that teams may rate a player's value differently than the draft experts (Exhibit A: Daniel Jones). Player evaluation scales vary from team to team. So, while the common wisdom may be that Simmons is definitely worth the 4 spot, Giants and/or other teams may have a diffeent value on him. Personally, I cannot wait to see how rest of free agnecy shakes out.

There is no “common wisdom” on Simmons. He’s a huge gamble. No one knows where to play him and there were spots last year where he certainly didn’t look like a 4.3 guy. In the Championship game Burrows made him look like a 4.9 guy.

I have reservations about that athleticism translating into something special at the NFL level. He doesn’t play physical. He was also the beneficiary of playing for one of the best DC’s (and highest paid) in the country.

I want a guy at 4 that’s a plug and play cornerstone difference maker. Not a guy that comes with a bunch of caveats and “yea buts.”

yep.

+1 on Simmons

In comment 14854176 WillVAB said:

Quote:

Definitely agree on Young. If he’s there he should be the pick. After that all bets are off. No one can say the Giants passed on “BPA” for “need” if they go OT over one of the other players.

yep to this

In comment 14854182 JonC said:

Quote:

If NYG goes OT, I flat out hope you dudes are correct and I'm wrong. I wouldn't be pissed off if they valued Andrew Thomas as a left tackle and I do like Wirfs' potential. Becton is a project whose risk factor pushes down his value for me, and Wills ... well, we've gone over him enough.

Valid points but no one is can’t miss at 4. All things being equal might as well gamble on OT.

In comment 14854190 WillVAB said:

Quote:

In comment 14854182 JonC said: Quote: If NYG goes OT, I flat out hope you dudes are correct and I'm wrong. I wouldn't be pissed off if they valued Andrew Thomas as a left tackle and I do like Wirfs' potential. Becton is a project whose risk factor pushes down his value for me, and Wills ... well, we've gone over him enough. Valid points but no one is can’t miss at 4. All things being equal might as well gamble on OT.

It's a valid and good point.

In comment 14853996 WillVAB said:

Quote:

In comment 14853894 JonC said: Quote: I'll stick with my time-proven logic. OL or bust isn't valid. It’s not OL or bust. No one here can say Simmons or Okudah or Brown are definitively BPA over any of the OL prospects.

If Okudah is there at #4, and we can't trade down, well I still believe he'll be BPA and DG will take him despite the "OL screams" from fans.
Why? Cause Okudah is a blue-chipper and as close to "can't miss" at CB as we've seen the last 5 or more years. Simmons and every OT has question marks regardless of grades.
Bradberry & Okudah start with Baker in the slot playing a lot of snaps makes for a strong secondary with Pepper & Love (whom I believe starts even if we sign a veteran FS UFA soon).

blue chippers that everyone is using.

thanks