I'm not advocating for the Giants to trade for a WR, so this isn't another thread about going after Michael Thomas.
However, if the Giants beat the Eagles convincingly on Thursday, and the front office becomes more confident that there is a chance to actually win the division, are there any WRs worth a trade, who won't cost the team an arm and a leg, that can help out our WR corps?
Now, "worth a trade" is separate from "available for trade," so let's only point out WRs that are both available and worthy of trade.
Also, how high of a draft pick would you trade?
Don't quote me on the %s but if someone has the facts throw it out here to see if I am in the zip code.
Middle and late round picks seem like they matter when building a team and a roster.
Because he's still a better option than drafting a guy that is in jail already for all I know.
1 for 19. Even if you add Michael Johnson, it's 2 for 19.
6th round pick? I guess Tyree in 2003, maybe Sash.
1 for 20 or 2 for 20 if you count both, and I add Tyree for the SB catch and ST contributions, but let's all agree he was not a starter.
5th round?
Obviously we have more success here. Slayton, the Giants best WR was a 5th round pick. Expanding for the entire Eli era:
Slayton (2019)
Gibril (2004)
Boss (2007)
Kennard (2014)
Lemieux (TBD) to be fair all 2020 picks should be TBD.
But none of those eligible got a 2nd contract with the Giants which is important especially to the comment about roster building.
These picks are not as valuable as some of you think outside of the top 3 rounds. It's not just the Giants league-wide statistics support me on this.
I'd do the 4th round but I'm out of time, need to head to hockey practice, I will revisit this thread though.
Just because the Giants have been shitty at drafting doesn’t mean the picks have little value. Good teams draft well.
1. We need to give Daniel Jones the opportunity to prove whether he is the guy this year or not. I think loading up on offensive line was the right choice but we need to give him more receiving options.
2. This year with a lot of college players opting out this year, I think the draft will be a bigger crapshoot than normal.
What I would be looking for is not an impending free agent but a team that is looking to unload a higher priced veteran who is viewed as a luxury due to the influx of talent of WR in this year's draft.
Quote:
“We missed out on that guy” list? He’s done nothing.
Because he's still a better option than drafting a guy that is in jail already for all I know.
That might make sense if we actually drafted the guy while he was in jail.
I notice that Baker was used to wonder what WR's we could have picked and not Lawrence . Not shocking to understand why
Apparently, we should have drafted a WR instead of a guy in jail
Want to list his arrests or allegations against him in college??
The narrative that Baker was a well-known felon in the making and that everyone scouting him knew there were major issues has taken on a life of its own since he was arrested.
He had a flag raised on work ethic. It isn't like he was a sociopath that people shunned.
It's gotten beyond absurd.
Quote:
but he was a scumbag.
Want to list his arrests or allegations against him in college??
The narrative that Baker was a well-known felon in the making and that everyone scouting him knew there were major issues has taken on a life of its own since he was arrested.
He had a flag raised on work ethic. It isn't like he was a sociopath that people shunned.
It's gotten beyond absurd.
You have no idea. Neither do I. That's ok.
The Giants had no idea. That's not ok.
But thinking gets us all in trouble here.
But thinking gets us all in trouble here.
If you can find a thread below that draft with me calling him a scumbag you'd have a point. Like I said, I had no idea at the time. It's pretty obvious the Giants had no idea at the time either - that's the problem.
Even for you this is obtuse. Maybe stick to picking on dupes or whatever it is you do.
Draft day debate - ( New Window )
How does lazy ass translate to pulling a gun at a card game. Cmon thats a fucking stretch and thats coming from someone that hates we drafted someone like that to begin with Byron Murphy on the board.
Quote:
extra picks for red flags = failure Draft day debate - ( New Window )
How does lazy ass translate to pulling a gun at a card game. Cmon thats a fucking stretch and thats coming from someone that hates we drafted someone like that to begin with Byron Murphy on the board.
It doesn’t, but why wouldn’t we at least consider the whole person approach as a bare minimum?
Sorry for misinterpreting this as you saying he was a scumbag when he was drafted.
I have to work on my reading comprehension if I can overcome the obtuseness....
homer?
From your link...
Would love to know the guy who supported Murphy-Bunting because he looks like the real deal down in Tampa. That would be quite the tandem tight now with Bradberry and Murphy-Bunting.
I didn't think the unlikelihood of that needed explanation. I guess it did.
Quote:
Might be the John Jerry troll. Dude was a homer too.
homer?
Maybe they write Claypool on the paperwork by accident, we can dream right?
As an aside, man is he electric. He kind of reminds me of Randy Moss.
Quote:
In comment 15016313 adamg said:
Quote:
Might be the John Jerry troll. Dude was a homer too.
homer?
giants sycophant
Quote:
significant contribution the Giants got from a 7th round pick is Bradshaw. Drafted in 2007. If you go all the way back to the Eli era, so starting in 2004 the list expands to still just Bradshaw.
1 for 19. Even if you add Michael Johnson, it's 2 for 19.
6th round pick? I guess Tyree in 2003, maybe Sash.
1 for 20 or 2 for 20 if you count both, and I add Tyree for the SB catch and ST contributions, but let's all agree he was not a starter.
5th round?
Obviously we have more success here. Slayton, the Giants best WR was a 5th round pick. Expanding for the entire Eli era:
Slayton (2019)
Gibril (2004)
Boss (2007)
Kennard (2014)
Lemieux (TBD) to be fair all 2020 picks should be TBD.
But none of those eligible got a 2nd contract with the Giants which is important especially to the comment about roster building.
These picks are not as valuable as some of you think outside of the top 3 rounds. It's not just the Giants league-wide statistics support me on this.
I'd do the 4th round but I'm out of time, need to head to hockey practice, I will revisit this thread though.
Just because the Giants have been shitty at drafting doesn’t mean the picks have little value. Good teams draft well.
There is data that supports my point. League wide.
Quote:
In comment 15016355 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
significant contribution the Giants got from a 7th round pick is Bradshaw. Drafted in 2007. If you go all the way back to the Eli era, so starting in 2004 the list expands to still just Bradshaw.
1 for 19. Even if you add Michael Johnson, it's 2 for 19.
6th round pick? I guess Tyree in 2003, maybe Sash.
1 for 20 or 2 for 20 if you count both, and I add Tyree for the SB catch and ST contributions, but let's all agree he was not a starter.
5th round?
Obviously we have more success here. Slayton, the Giants best WR was a 5th round pick. Expanding for the entire Eli era:
Slayton (2019)
Gibril (2004)
Boss (2007)
Kennard (2014)
Lemieux (TBD) to be fair all 2020 picks should be TBD.
But none of those eligible got a 2nd contract with the Giants which is important especially to the comment about roster building.
These picks are not as valuable as some of you think outside of the top 3 rounds. It's not just the Giants league-wide statistics support me on this.
I'd do the 4th round but I'm out of time, need to head to hockey practice, I will revisit this thread though.
Just because the Giants have been shitty at drafting doesn’t mean the picks have little value. Good teams draft well.
There is data that supports my point. League wide.
The data shows that the best long-term strategy in the draft is to have as many picks as possible. In any given year you can make an argument that a single 7th round pick is not worth a ton, but over time giving up picks, even lower ones, is not a great bet.
Quote:
In comment 15016418 WillVAB said:
Quote:
In comment 15016355 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
significant contribution the Giants got from a 7th round pick is Bradshaw. Drafted in 2007. If you go all the way back to the Eli era, so starting in 2004 the list expands to still just Bradshaw.
1 for 19. Even if you add Michael Johnson, it's 2 for 19.
6th round pick? I guess Tyree in 2003, maybe Sash.
1 for 20 or 2 for 20 if you count both, and I add Tyree for the SB catch and ST contributions, but let's all agree he was not a starter.
5th round?
Obviously we have more success here. Slayton, the Giants best WR was a 5th round pick. Expanding for the entire Eli era:
Slayton (2019)
Gibril (2004)
Boss (2007)
Kennard (2014)
Lemieux (TBD) to be fair all 2020 picks should be TBD.
But none of those eligible got a 2nd contract with the Giants which is important especially to the comment about roster building.
These picks are not as valuable as some of you think outside of the top 3 rounds. It's not just the Giants league-wide statistics support me on this.
I'd do the 4th round but I'm out of time, need to head to hockey practice, I will revisit this thread though.
Just because the Giants have been shitty at drafting doesn’t mean the picks have little value. Good teams draft well.
There is data that supports my point. League wide.
The data shows that the best long-term strategy in the draft is to have as many picks as possible. In any given year you can make an argument that a single 7th round pick is not worth a ton, but over time giving up picks, even lower ones, is not a great bet.
Please share data that supports your claim that late round picks used in the current draft are more valuable (IOW lead to success - defined by the studies I have seen as simply starting half your games - so a very low bar) than established players.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/2015/05/22/tracking-nfl-draft-efficiency-how-contingent-is-success-to-draft-position/#5a8ebe757495
Giants should be able to get a 3rd and 5th for LW...no?
Quote:
fine. Do NOT trade draft picks. I can't go through another million posts about the latest Leonard Williams type trade.
Giants should be able to get a 3rd and 5th for LW...no?
Try it. If you can I'd be all about it.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/2015/05/22/tracking-nfl-draft-efficiency-how-contingent-is-success-to-draft-position/#5a8ebe757495
you think that link advocated for keeping 4th - 7th round draft picks (and I'd even remove 4th round since I think that's probably the tipping point) instead of trading those picks for established starters?
Quote:
In comment 15016492 Bavaro_the_Mafioso said:
Quote:
extra picks for red flags = failure Draft day debate - ( New Window )
How does lazy ass translate to pulling a gun at a card game. Cmon thats a fucking stretch and thats coming from someone that hates we drafted someone like that to begin with Byron Murphy on the board.
It doesn’t, but why wouldn’t we at least consider the whole person approach as a bare minimum?
Listen I don’t like it, but people here act like it’s an obvious conclusion from A to B. Most people I know work ethic issues are generally good people, better than most actually. Where as people in the C-Suite are much more likely to be sociopaths. Unless you have some past history of outburst and violent behavior you just can’t connect the dots there
Quote:
some thoughts in here consistent to what I was trying to suggest above that a big % of starting players come from beyond Rd 3. They broke it out for All-Pros as well.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/2015/05/22/tracking-nfl-draft-efficiency-how-contingent-is-success-to-draft-position/#5a8ebe757495
you think that link advocated for keeping 4th - 7th round draft picks (and I'd even remove 4th round since I think that's probably the tipping point) instead of trading those picks for established starters?
I think we are talking past each other. My theme is they are valuable because teams find a good % of their starters (and team) in those rounds.
If you think can consistently put a starting team (and 53 man roster) on field by dealing these picks to teams that will keep giving up their starters then you should absolutely be a GM.
As for building a roster it's not one size fits all.
I'd absolutely trade a pick for an established young starter at a position of need. You need young players from the draft to keep the salary cap in control and the trade off of trading a pick for an established young player is that you lose cost control (at a low-er $$ amount), but you also (in theory) no longer have the risk of a bust.
The Giants are clearly not a model franchise but of the 22 starters on the Giants 1 came from their own 5th - 7th round picks. Slayton.
1 out of 22.
Who is a good drafting team? Ravens?
4 out of 22, so yeah more, but still not significant, especially when you consider of the 4, none are rookies or even 2nd year or even 3rd year - they've been coached up over time which is a whole different discussion about coaching and system stability.
using your own late round picks and expecting significant contribution from those players (especially early), is not a recipe for success IMO.
Yes, higher, but not much higher.
UDFA's (to my point earlier about UDFA's being more valuable than later round draft picks) make up pretty close to the same percent of starters from the 5th, 6th, and 7th rounds combined.
And I didn't look too closely to confirm but I don't think this study looks at if the player is on the same team who drafted him. IOW, was player a 5th, 6th, or 7th round pick for example and cut by the team who drafted him and now starting elsewhere. Darren Waller for example.
5th-7th: 15.5%
UDFA: 13.6%
from your link.
A few years old, but article says only 60% of starters come from Rd 1-3. Imv, I gather as many draft picks I can get my hands on if I were a GM.
A few years old, but article says only 60% of starters come from Rd 1-3. Imv, I gather as many draft picks I can get my hands on if I were a GM.
Add the 14% for UDFA and it's now 74% of starters don't come from rounds 4 - 7. And since I consider round 4 the tipping point if you include it for arguments sake add another 10% so 85% of starters are from rounds 1 - 4 or UDFAs.
and as we know, simply starting is a low bar for success.
it just seems obvious to me, instead of gathering as many picks as you can for a 15% chance at hitting on a starter, I'd trade as many of those picks as I can if there was a player available for those picks who I knew could start for me.
Quote:
In comment 15016496 Zeke's Alibi said:
Quote:
In comment 15016492 Bavaro_the_Mafioso said:
Quote:
extra picks for red flags = failure Draft day debate - ( New Window )
How does lazy ass translate to pulling a gun at a card game. Cmon thats a fucking stretch and thats coming from someone that hates we drafted someone like that to begin with Byron Murphy on the board.
It doesn’t, but why wouldn’t we at least consider the whole person approach as a bare minimum?
Listen I don’t like it, but people here act like it’s an obvious conclusion from A to B. Most people I know work ethic issues are generally good people, better than most actually. Where as people in the C-Suite are much more likely to be sociopaths. Unless you have some past history of outburst and violent behavior you just can’t connect the dots there
brother man, if you're gonna invest in something, you have to mitigate risk. The risk was there evidently, and we doubled down.
I would not trade away any draft picks.
+1
This is where "being in contention for the division" is problematic thinking for me, it's much more likely they win 3-4 games and pick top 5.
NYG needs a ton of talent, even some of the talent they have now will be gone by the time they properly build the foundation and it begins to reflect on the football field.
Quote:
which makes sense to compile the numbers.
A few years old, but article says only 60% of starters come from Rd 1-3. Imv, I gather as many draft picks I can get my hands on if I were a GM.
Add the 14% for UDFA and it's now 74% of starters don't come from rounds 4 - 7. And since I consider round 4 the tipping point if you include it for arguments sake add another 10% so 85% of starters are from rounds 1 - 4 or UDFAs.
and as we know, simply starting is a low bar for success.
it just seems obvious to me, instead of gathering as many picks as you can for a 15% chance at hitting on a starter, I'd trade as many of those picks as I can if there was a player available for those picks who I knew could start for me.
Oh so the 14% UDFA gets added into the other group now. I guess they are more valuable than rds 4-7 :-)