Mr. Lindsay ends his 1,100-word essay with these two sentences:
"The NFL is a passing league and you need guys that can run and catch passes, guys that can run and get after the QB, and guys that run and cover the other guy’s fast guys that can run and catch passes. It ain’t rocket science."
We're talking of course about the Giants here, so keep it civil, eh.
Link - (
New Window )
They found gems like Kevin Boothe, Domenik Hixon, Bear Pascoe, and Dave Tollefson who could play roles and be depth players who had slipped through the cracks around the league.
It seems like very few players they bring in have a place on an NFL roster. Its either a success, or the guy is so terrible he doesn't belong on the field. No in-between.
Quote:
In comment 15009717 .McL. said:
Quote:
In comment 15009356 JonC said:
Quote:
not seeing much production from your top 4 overall picks is crucial, and as I warned before UFA started last year, don't be so certain that they'll fix things spending up to the cap. $60M in cap space spent and not much to show for it on the whole.
I have posted many times over the past 2 years how poorly the cap space is used by this FO. I have shown howas much as 95 million just went *POOF* and we had nothing to show for. I predicted the same would happen to this years 60+ million. This FO has no idea how to acquire players and effectively use their cap space. It's disastrous.
The NFL FA kind of sucks. I don't want to over simplify but the players that are allowed to hit FA are there for a reason. They are asking for too much money or have issues. The places we have been deficient don't exactly come at a bargain prices. ER LT CB ect. Many teams need that. We drafted extremely poorly for a long period of time so we always seem to be negotiating from a position of weakness. In my opinion, it is why we have overpaid for FAs. Also, there seems to be a correlation with getting that Giant paycheck and not being as hungry as you were to earn it. We are only getting out of this through the draft and we are not doing that well...
Very much agree. Doesn't mean you don't ignore free agency as is it there to fix immediate holes and some experienced depth but it should not be part of a longer term plan...that's when you will undoubtedly overpay and/or get underperformance.
If you grab somebody in free agency for reasonable dollars and get reasonable play...pat yourself on the back.
Of course I agree with both of you...
The thing is, it isn't surprising how this team misuses cap dollars, and FA. It is key to understand what players hit FA. As GratefulHead said, they are usually there for a reason. The teams they come from know them up close. They can scout them better than anybody else. They know better what the player was coached to do, what the play calls were, what the assignments were, what reads should have been etc. If the have a player who is effective, they aren't going to let him hit FA, especially at higher value positions. Which brings me to my next point. This FO has no clue what positional value is or means. So it shouldn't be too surprising that they waste cap dollars on lower value positions, like say run stuffing DLs and MLBs, blocking TEs, slot WR, and lest we not forget RB, etc. OL are all high value positions (whether some on this site want to believe it or not). It is extremely rare that good OL hit FA. When they do its because they are asking for too much money (as TGH said). GMs cannot plan to use FA to find top end players to fill holes at these positions. The only plan to fill them should be through the draft. There are rare occasions where a top end play does become available at a position of need. That should be viewed as luck and taken advantage of opportunistically. Don't plan to build an OL through FA, don't plan to find a QB through FA, don't plan to get a game changing sack artist in FA, don't plan to find a shutdown CB in FA... On the other hand, there are decent players at positions like DL, RB, S, ILB, and to a lesser extent TE, and WR that are available every year. Plus there is depth available. The general plan should be to mostly draft the high value positions, and fill the rest with middle to lower drafts and/or FA. Spend the cap dollars to maintain your core players at key positions, the ones you most likely drafted (if you are drafting well).
Having missed on so many draft picks over the years, guys who didn't warrant a second contract has had the team trolling the FA market and killing themselves. It needs to stop. However the approach to FA shouldn't change just because your team sucks. The approach should remain the same, fill in the lower value positions and depth, and use the draft to start raising the overall tide. Even if that means you don't use all of your cap space.
Quote:
In comment 15009794 Thegratefulhead said:
Quote:
In comment 15009717 .McL. said:
Quote:
In comment 15009356 JonC said:
Quote:
not seeing much production from your top 4 overall picks is crucial, and as I warned before UFA started last year, don't be so certain that they'll fix things spending up to the cap. $60M in cap space spent and not much to show for it on the whole.
I have posted many times over the past 2 years how poorly the cap space is used by this FO. I have shown howas much as 95 million just went *POOF* and we had nothing to show for. I predicted the same would happen to this years 60+ million. This FO has no idea how to acquire players and effectively use their cap space. It's disastrous.
The NFL FA kind of sucks. I don't want to over simplify but the players that are allowed to hit FA are there for a reason. They are asking for too much money or have issues. The places we have been deficient don't exactly come at a bargain prices. ER LT CB ect. Many teams need that. We drafted extremely poorly for a long period of time so we always seem to be negotiating from a position of weakness. In my opinion, it is why we have overpaid for FAs. Also, there seems to be a correlation with getting that Giant paycheck and not being as hungry as you were to earn it. We are only getting out of this through the draft and we are not doing that well...
Very much agree. Doesn't mean you don't ignore free agency as is it there to fix immediate holes and some experienced depth but it should not be part of a longer term plan...that's when you will undoubtedly overpay and/or get underperformance.
If you grab somebody in free agency for reasonable dollars and get reasonable play...pat yourself on the back.
Of course I agree with both of you...
The thing is, it isn't surprising how this team misuses cap dollars, and FA. It is key to understand what players hit FA. As GratefulHead said, they are usually there for a reason. The teams they come from know them up close. They can scout them better than anybody else. They know better what the player was coached to do, what the play calls were, what the assignments were, what reads should have been etc. If the have a player who is effective, they aren't going to let him hit FA, especially at higher value positions. Which brings me to my next point. This FO has no clue what positional value is or means. So it shouldn't be too surprising that they waste cap dollars on lower value positions, like say run stuffing DLs and MLBs, blocking TEs, slot WR, and lest we not forget RB, etc. OL are all high value positions (whether some on this site want to believe it or not). It is extremely rare that good OL hit FA. When they do its because they are asking for too much money (as TGH said). GMs cannot plan to use FA to find top end players to fill holes at these positions. The only plan to fill them should be through the draft. There are rare occasions where a top end play does become available at a position of need. That should be viewed as luck and taken advantage of opportunistically. Don't plan to build an OL through FA, don't plan to find a QB through FA, don't plan to get a game changing sack artist in FA, don't plan to find a shutdown CB in FA... On the other hand, there are decent players at positions like DL, RB, S, ILB, and to a lesser extent TE, and WR that are available every year. Plus there is depth available. The general plan should be to mostly draft the high value positions, and fill the rest with middle to lower drafts and/or FA. Spend the cap dollars to maintain your core players at key positions, the ones you most likely drafted (if you are drafting well).
Having missed on so many draft picks over the years, guys who didn't warrant a second contract has had the team trolling the FA market and killing themselves. It needs to stop. However the approach to FA shouldn't change just because your team sucks. The approach should remain the same, fill in the lower value positions and depth, and use the draft to start raising the overall tide. Even if that means you don't use all of your cap space.
What did we expect when we went from a 4-3 defense to a 3-4? They pared all the players who did not fit, Kennard, Goodson, (nice after 3rd picks, btw), Okwara (UDFA), and JPP. So now you have to rebuild you squad to a 4-3. Did good with the inside but how the hell do yo not get a DE?? Gambled on Golden, who was let go, killed here, and welcomed back with open arms. Gettleman was a genius for that move, remember. What has he done?
You trade your best WR and get back pretty much nothing. I do like Lawrence. And you replace him with a older slot receiver, which duplicated what you had in Shep..
I wish I knew how to post old threads. I would love to see the reaction of posters when Tate was signed!
Relating this back to the Draft and positional value, it just seems Guards and Right Tackles need to be given higher rankings in the tiers than maybe they used to historically. A top prospect at LT to me is still a step above, but the days of passing on an elite Guard (ie, Nelson) or RT just because you are in the upper part of round one is actually a somewhat questionable strategy.
Relating this back to the Draft and positional value, it just seems Guards and Right Tackles need to be given higher rankings in the tiers than maybe they used to historically. A top prospect at LT to me is still a step above, but the days of passing on an elite Guard (ie, Nelson) or RT just because you are in the upper part of round one is actually a somewhat questionable strategy.
Agreed, historically it just hasn't been done, but I think that should change. It should still be rare in the top 5, but we should start seeing more G going 6-15 than in the past.
I wanted to respond to this before, but got an error when I tried to post...
While I agree that the team (any team for that matter) has has limited resources. Given that fact, and the fact that entering the 2018 offseason the team knew the following:
1) It had to replace 80% of the OL, and the only remaining player was being moved in an experiment that was likely to fail, so they needed to plan for 100% turnover on the OL
2) The had other needs on offense at #2WR, RB and eventaully QB
3) The LBs were weak and needed upgrading
4) Most of the bickering was in the secondary, they needed a FS, andt a slot CB, they needed get control of that situation, plan to replace JJ, anf possibly Apple as well.
With all these needs going into that off season, why in gods name would you compund the problem by adding to that list by switching to a 3-4. Now you need to completely retool the DL, dump all your LB (weak as they were) and get a whole new group that had the 3-4 skill sets.
Apparently I'm not smart enough to make any sense of that decision whatsoever.
;)
Your post reminded me of what I had wanted to post earlier...
Lots of teams passed on lots of players. Groupthink is rampant in the NFL. If anything I think you have more to gain doing things differently than the same. This is true in any business but especially true when there is as much groupthink as in the NFL
Lots of teams passed on lots of players. Groupthink is rampant in the NFL. If anything I think you have more to gain doing things differently than the same. This is true in any business but especially true when there is as much groupthink as in the NFL
If you do things differently, you better be right!
DG does things differently, that hasn't worked out too well.
That being said, I think the team would have a ton of slack for any attempts to invest more resources in the OL even if it's above where a G investment normally shakes out.
Personally, I don't even understand the idea that draft value is viewed differently than salary cap allocation. To me, if you can take a RB at #2 and teams allocate to G's at a higher rate, and less elite G's hit FA the problem is in the wisdom of taking a G at 2 not that everyone is getting that right.
That being said, I think the team would have a ton of slack for any attempts to invest more resources in the OL even if it's above where a G investment normally shakes out.
Personally, I don't even understand the idea that draft value is viewed differently than salary cap allocation. To me, if you can take a RB at #2 and teams allocate to G's at a higher rate, and less elite G's hit FA the problem is in the wisdom of taking a G at 2 not that everyone is getting that right.
In general, yes Guards should have more draft value than they are given. I don't think RBs should be taken at #2. Guards are still easier to get than Tackles. And a lot of failed tackles move inside to guard. So that depresses the value of guards a little. So I tend to think guards should only very rarely go top 5, which is infinitely more often than RBs should go in the top 5! ;)
G wouldn't be my preference in top 5 but that year, staying at 2 (if I had to) Nelson would have been my guy given the roster the Giants had.
And yeah I'd say a big different with a G is you can get elite ones in the second round and passable starters in later rounds. Even the project tackles with higher upside are for the most part gone by round 4. So total agreement there.
Quote:
...
Your post reminded me of what I had wanted to post earlier...
Great minds.
And i don;t want to this to turn into a bash Gettleman thread. Because he is a product of the problem in this organization. It's the committee that is the issue..
Quote:
In comment 15009968 GManinDC said:
Quote:
...
Your post reminded me of what I had wanted to post earlier...
Great minds.
And i don;t want to this to turn into a bash Gettleman thread. Because he is a product of the problem in this organization. It's the committee that is the issue..
I do believe that the organization as a whole is crap and the Maras have much to do with that, the hired DG and I think they meddle in the team building process.
That said. A strong GM should be able to keep the Maras at bay and push his own agenda and not be led by the nose by bafoons. GY and later EA wer able to that with Wellington. Somebody needs to do it with John and Chris.
It's like Jones and Snyder. Mara is the same. He's just been very quiet about it and no ones really has questioned him or others on the Mara's role in football operations..
It's like Jones and Snyder. Mara is the same. He's just been very quiet about it and no ones really has questioned him or others on the Mara's role in football operations..
A truly horrifying thought would be that Abrams is made the GM, but in reality it's not Judge getting more power in the personnel decisions, its really Chris. Chris becomes the defact/behind the scenes GM, a position he has always coveted. I hope Tisch pushes back hard on such a scenario.
I do think being familiar with the way the Giants do business is important. This is why I’d put my money on Abrams getting it.
I do think being familiar with the way the Giants do business is important. This is why I’d put my money on Abrams getting it.
No, he won't have the title.
That is why I said defacto...
That said, if I were to have to wager at this moment, I would bet that DG will be gone after the season because of a complete and total failure of the team's performance under his leadership.
I think you have to take an orbital view of a GM, because of that, they need time. I feel 3 years is the minimum. When you try to debate an individual move, you can talk your self into it being correct because so much is subjective. It is what gets us into silly arguments. There isn't anything anyone can say to defend DG that can't be laughed at when you use the Giants W/L record to criticize him.
Wins and losses matter. OFC we knew this team was going to stink this year. But in year 3, there is NO WAY NO WAY NO WAY THIS TEAM SHOULD BE THIS BAD.
With that said saying "Fire him NOW" is a lotta noise. However, at the end of the season, many of expect that this team will show that DG was one miserable GM and should be canned unless he retires first.
At week 16 there's more evidence to see. In football many different things can happen.
Why is the fact that having an O-Line that can pass and run block which is the foremost part of being able to accomplish the rest (minus the pass-rush aspect) ignored?
Now, at 0 -5 and seeing the lack of talent we have, I believe DG will be forced to "retire" at season's end and Abrams will be promoted, retaining Judge and staff.
I am praying right now that "post-bye" we see this team put it together (undersanding the system, developing young players) and Judge is seen as a Respected leader of the future who was hurt by a lack of pre-season and lack of talent.
As a fan, you have to hope that D. Jones shows us he is a true #1. You have to hope the OL gels and we see enough from the youth to believe the 2021 OL may just be:
Thomas-Hernandez-Gates-Lemiuex-Peart cause that would mean the young guys are upgrades.
The purge will happen the day after game 16 and this team will be shaped in the image of Judge & staff. The rebuild will begin in 2021, year one.
And just like you would be wise to pay down that debt in a particular sequence to minimize interest and maximize the reach of what you can afford to pay each month, there still are efficiencies to be found in the way you approach your roster construction, and penalties for getting player evaluations way wrong (like missing a payment for your debt analogy).
It's as if DG is trying to use payday loans to cover his previous debt and incurring more debt with steeper interest in the process.
Quote:
If you have big guys who can block for them. We’ve been watching the Giants for the better part of a decade not be able to execute basic blocking assignments and the results of that failure. Eli, DJ, Barkley and whoever we lined up at WR all virtually worthless because we couldn’t block. First things first.
And criticizing the Giants for what they have done in the secondary is a bit strange. If DG has done anything its acquire DBs. Baker, Beal, Peppers,, McKinney, Ballentine, Holmes, Ryan, Love. Lewis. If he’d been as dedicated in acquiring OL we’d be in far better shape I think.
Exactly. And if Baker had turned out even remotely like the player he appeared to be at UGA it would be largely a different narrative and conversation.
Well, that and having to use the #4 pick on Thomas after handing Solder a massive contract, and having to sign Martinez after trading for Ogletree, and trading for Zeitler after signing Omameh. The redundant allocation of finite resources is a good way to preclude yourself from addressing other holes on the roster.
Quote:
"The NFL is a passing league and you need guys that can run and catch passes, guys that can run and get after the QB, and guys that run and cover the other guy’s fast guys that can run and catch passes. It ain’t rocket science."
Why is the fact that having an O-Line that can pass and run block which is the foremost part of being able to accomplish the rest (minus the pass-rush aspect) ignored?
I think it's just assumed teams have a functioning one.
In other words, it's so fundamental its easier than even saying it ain't rocket science.