can you give the masses some comfort that they are rethinking handing the reigns to Abrams in the offseason? At least that would be something good to come out of this
But if he’s still entertaining the notion of being a fucking buyer at 1-6 (should be 0-7) with a likely loss on tap the next time they take the field, somebody has to step in and ask what the fuck is going on here??
Happened to waiting until the actual details come out before deciding good or bad about something?
Fair point and Golladay makes more sense than Leonard Williams did last year, but we only have 5 picks in the 2021 Draft and we're not making the Playoffs...again. We can't afford to be trading draft picks. You build through the draft.
But if he could’ve gotten Golladay(a young up and coming WR1) I’d like to see what he would’ve gave up for him. Let’s not act like DG is ever parting with a 1 or 2. So what have we drafted in round 3 that would be as good as Golladay. Sometimes people think picks means good players it doesn’t always work out that way. You think Pittsburgh is sweating their number 1 they gave up for Minkah? I think DG has to go but not everything he does is stupid
Hopefully it didn't happen because Mara and Tisch stood up and said no
if DG made a trade without Judge being on board at this point. Maybe a possible Golladay deal was looked into because of Judge's connection with Patricia?
But if he could’ve gotten Golladay(a young up and coming WR1) I’d like to see what he would’ve gave up for him. Let’s not act like DG is ever parting with a 1 or 2. So what have we drafted in round 3 that would be as good as Golladay. Sometimes people think picks means good players it doesn’t always work out that way. You think Pittsburgh is sweating their number 1 they gave up for Minkah? I think DG has to go but not everything he does is stupid
Golladay will be 28 next season. And would require a big contract.
However, for a 4th rounder I'd be all over it. Need to get DJ some help. Golladay is likely better than anyone you'd find in day 3 of the draft.
Happened to waiting until the actual details come out before deciding good or bad about something?
If it were true you and the other DG defenders wouldn't care anyway. You'd tell everyone "patience" until after the season. And then after the season is a disaster you'd tell others that they couldn't have possibly known that the team would be so bad and you'd preach patience and say how bright the future looks.
I'd said not long ago DG might look to buy when he should be selling. It fits his past actions. Stockpiling might be the only way he looks like he's got a clue right now, imo.
with the williams trade and Williams is probably our best front 7 player. Williams wasn't win now as much as he was just a need. We'd be worse today if we didn't make the trade. I don't see the problem with that move at all. And I wouldn't see a problem if we were able to land a WR that is part of the plan moving forward.
How are we going to land a good outside WR this offseason? Any guarantees we get a good player at a good cost? What if we traded for that same WR in March? What's the difference? We need VET star power. We need guys that aren't afraid to win a fucking game here. Fuck this team and it's bs approach. Keep on building guys. Maybe in 2030 we will be in win now mode.
The issues with the LW trade have been beaten to death here
basically, the trade left them with no leverage to re-sign him, and seemingly DG the only one who didn't see it. So, why trade two draft picks in that scenario.
He can't keep giving away draft pickS on players who aren't difference makers. That's desperation.
Happened to waiting until the actual details come out before deciding good or bad about something?
If it were true you and the other DG defenders wouldn't care anyway. You'd tell everyone "patience" until after the season. And then after the season is a disaster you'd tell others that they couldn't have possibly known that the team would be so bad and you'd preach patience and say how bright the future looks.
Until you can accurately read and comprehend what my viewpoints are (I feel I have been pretty clear) please find other posters to inaccurately respond to.
with the williams trade and Williams is probably our best front 7 player. Williams wasn't win now as much as he was just a need. We'd be worse today if we didn't make the trade. I don't see the problem with that move at all. And I wouldn't see a problem if we were able to land a WR that is part of the plan moving forward.
How are we going to land a good outside WR this offseason? Any guarantees we get a good player at a good cost? What if we traded for that same WR in March? What's the difference? We need VET star power. We need guys that aren't afraid to win a fucking game here. Fuck this team and it's bs approach. Keep on building guys. Maybe in 2030 we will be in win now mode.
Yes teams that are 1-6 should always be in win now mode because when else is there a time to get good players. How about the draft that was chockfull of good WR talent? Maybe there? Instead of drafting 5 LBs?
But if he could’ve gotten Golladay(a young up and coming WR1) I’d like to see what he would’ve gave up for him. Let’s not act like DG is ever parting with a 1 or 2. So what have we drafted in round 3 that would be as good as Golladay. Sometimes people think picks means good players it doesn’t always work out that way. You think Pittsburgh is sweating their number 1 they gave up for Minkah? I think DG has to go but not everything he does is stupid
He'll be 27 next month, and needs a new contract. He led the NFL in TD receptions last year, so I'm not sure "up and coming" is quite accurate - he's already here.
Sure, a 3rd rounder probably won't be as good as Gollaway, but we don't know if a 3rd would get him (EXTREMELY doubtful), and he'll add $$$ to the cap, when we could probably just sign him as a FA. Trading for him at 1-6 is a horrible waste of resources, but the DG sycophants here will never acknowledge that.
with the williams trade and Williams is probably our best front 7 player. Williams wasn't win now as much as he was just a need. We'd be worse today if we didn't make the trade. I don't see the problem with that move at all. And I wouldn't see a problem if we were able to land a WR that is part of the plan moving forward.
How are we going to land a good outside WR this offseason? Any guarantees we get a good player at a good cost? What if we traded for that same WR in March? What's the difference? We need VET star power. We need guys that aren't afraid to win a fucking game here. Fuck this team and it's bs approach. Keep on building guys. Maybe in 2030 we will be in win now mode.
Sure, let's keep trading assets for good players who need new contracts. That's a great fucking plan.
basically, the trade left them with no leverage to re-sign him, and seemingly DG the only one who didn't see it. So, why trade two draft picks in that scenario.
He can't keep giving away draft pickS on players who aren't difference makers. That's desperation.
What is this thing about no leverage? How is that even proven? Doesn't it stand to reason that if we don't make the trade, we don't have Williams today since we had no leverage to sign him in the first place?
Guys get signed based on market value. This leverage talk is just that, talk. It's a made up narrative that gained steam based on fans wanting to find a reason to blast the trade. Yet if we won 2 games this season that we had NO business losing, we'd be all alone in first with a good DL.
If the Giants don't trade for Williams they don't have Williams on the DL. Giants didn't sign him long term because they want him to prove he's worth the long term money. How on earth is this a bad thing?
Williams is in an extremely risky position right now. His career and chance to get a multiyear contract done are always a split second from evaporating forever. The tag that DG had and used is a very effective negotiating leverage on the team side.
But don’t want to grande for him in the last year of his contract.
Agreed. He'll also want a big deal. It's like Williams all over again. Why are we trading away draft assets when we're 1 - 6, or even 1 - 5, which I assume is when this was investigated?
basically, the trade left them with no leverage to re-sign him, and seemingly DG the only one who didn't see it. So, why trade two draft picks in that scenario.
He can't keep giving away draft pickS on players who aren't difference makers. That's desperation.
What is this thing about no leverage? How is that even proven? Doesn't it stand to reason that if we don't make the trade, we don't have Williams today since we had no leverage to sign him in the first place?
Guys get signed based on market value. This leverage talk is just that, talk. It's a made up narrative that gained steam based on fans wanting to find a reason to blast the trade. Yet if we won 2 games this season that we had NO business losing, we'd be all alone in first with a good DL.
If the Giants don't trade for Williams they don't have Williams on the DL. Giants didn't sign him long term because they want him to prove he's worth the long term money. How on earth is this a bad thing?
Huh? Gettleman wanted him long term which is why he traded for him. He isn't waiting for him to prove it.
RE: I disagree on the Giants and Williams' contract leverage
Williams is in an extremely risky position right now. His career and chance to get a multiyear contract done are always a split second from evaporating forever. The tag that DG had and used is a very effective negotiating leverage on the team side.
I just don't understand this point of view.
Yeah, Williams really screwed this one up. DG played it masterfully.
basically, the trade left them with no leverage to re-sign him, and seemingly DG the only one who didn't see it. So, why trade two draft picks in that scenario.
He can't keep giving away draft pickS on players who aren't difference makers. That's desperation.
What is this thing about no leverage? How is that even proven? Doesn't it stand to reason that if we don't make the trade, we don't have Williams today since we had no leverage to sign him in the first place?
Guys get signed based on market value. This leverage talk is just that, talk. It's a made up narrative that gained steam based on fans wanting to find a reason to blast the trade. Yet if we won 2 games this season that we had NO business losing, we'd be all alone in first with a good DL.
If the Giants don't trade for Williams they don't have Williams on the DL. Giants didn't sign him long term because they want him to prove he's worth the long term money. How on earth is this a bad thing?
The deal was done with the belief LW would sign for something in the $12-13M per year ballpark. Not only did it not happen, but DT contracts are now clearing $20M per.
Using the tag on him controls his rights, but accomplished nothing else. NOW, they're going to have to go big open market dollars, or tag him and play the game (poorly) for another offseason.
Where's the leverage? Hint : not with the Giants.
RE: I disagree on the Giants and Williams' contract leverage
Williams is in an extremely risky position right now. His career and chance to get a multiyear contract done are always a split second from evaporating forever. The tag that DG had and used is a very effective negotiating leverage on the team side.
I just don't understand this point of view.
I hear you, but there's been no fear of it shown by LW to this point. Seems the risk is ok. I don't see ANY leverage here for DG, except the tag, which only increases the pricetag.
Happened to waiting until the actual details come out before deciding good or bad about something?
Chances are, the actual details will never come out about a trade that didn't happen.
And while some posters will infuse their own brand of aggressiveness into pretending they're not defending DG (not referring to you, crick), is there anything about DG's actions throughout his tenure here - or about Rico's credibility, for that matter - that makes this rumor particularly difficult to believe?
It's not like those guys have been winning and should feel they don't need Golladay.
It's hard to wrap our heads around sometimes, because our GM doesn't apply this sort of logic, but often, teams that are losing will sell off assets in-season rather than try to reinforce a really bad roster without hope of playoff contention.
It's not like those guys have been winning and should feel they don't need Golladay.
It's hard to wrap our heads around sometimes, because our GM doesn't apply this sort of logic, but often, teams that are losing will sell off assets in-season rather than try to reinforce a really bad roster without hope of playoff contention.
I guess Apple and Snacks just magically disappeared?? Outside of Williams, what other players have we traded for mid-season to bolster a losing squad.
And if I recall, trading Snacks and Apple was met with derision too.
How are we going to land a good outside WR this offseason? Any guarantees we get a good player at a good cost? What if we traded for that same WR in March? What's the difference? We need VET star power. We need guys that aren't afraid to win a fucking game here. Fuck this team and it's bs approach. Keep on building guys. Maybe in 2030 we will be in win now mode.
Golladay is a UFA this offseason. If the Giants like him, sign him then. If they're trading for him this year, he's not going to be any cheaper as a FA and we only gain the tag as incremental value. So, very much like LW in that regard.
But Golladay, while a good player, isn't really worthy of the tag - for us or for Detroit - so what exactly are you trading for? You can have Golladay AND keep your draft picks, as long as you're honest with yourself about not contending this season.
Purely my own view, but the only reason why DG would even try to make this trade for an impending FA is to try to bolster his chances to keep his job again this offseason. And in that sense, if it's about DG doing what's best for him and not what's best for the long-term interests of the franchise, it's time to turn in the keycard.
It's not like those guys have been winning and should feel they don't need Golladay.
It's hard to wrap our heads around sometimes, because our GM doesn't apply this sort of logic, but often, teams that are losing will sell off assets in-season rather than try to reinforce a really bad roster without hope of playoff contention.
I guess Apple and Snacks just magically disappeared?? Outside of Williams, what other players have we traded for mid-season to bolster a losing squad.
And if I recall, trading Snacks and Apple was met with derision too.
Oh, that's a very narrow parameter, but since you're not a DG defender, I'll just assume that was accidental.
What if we widened the net just a bit? Could we consider moves that were absolutely inconsistent with the state of the roster in general? Or can we only look for exactly similar examples of in-season trades for impending free agents?
applying the tag to LW or a Golladay inflates their cost, but not their actual football value. It doesn't mean they're franchise talents, it just means you paid for the right to negotiate with them as if they are.
Instead of saying a GM doesn't think a certain way, wouldn't the narrow parameter apply to you?
Or better yet, just don't use hyperbole here. DG traded for Williams in a losing season. The previous year, he let go of quite a few vets and made trades before the deadline to get assets.
Why does every take have to be considered a defense of Gettleman?? Just get basic facts correct.
It's hard to wrap our heads around sometimes, because our GM doesn't apply this sort of logic, but often, teams that are losing will sell off assets in-season rather than try to reinforce a really bad roster without hope of playoff contention.
Looking at it from Detroit's perspective,three straight losing years is probably the end of Matt and Bob.Trading away one of your top receivers for a draft pick would be doing a favor to the next coach,or maybe Judge.
Why does every take have to be considered a defense of Gettleman?? Just get basic facts correct.
Back to Gollady, what hypothetical trade would make sense to you? You seem to be implying that we're all jumping the gun on criticizing the attempted trade if it's true. What parameters would make this in the best interests of the Giants?
I think Williams has the same leverage now that he would have had anywhere. If he wants to play here he likely signs here. the Giants will try and get him on the cheapest contract possible and it will be up to Williams and his agent whether he decides to stay. He obviously feels ok playing in this area so we have that shred of leverage, and Williams has the leverage dependent on his perceived value from one or more other NFL teams. The tag kicked the can down the road for both parties. There were inherent risks for both but the Giants did get something out of the tag, they have WIlliams on the team. That's something. And if they do decide he's good enough and sign him long term and he plays well here for the next 3-4 years? How is that a bad thing?? We are overthinking this player and move. HE's good. We need good. Lets add to guys like Williams. Lets add GREAT to this DL and front 7 and turn it from pretty good into very good. Why can't we do that?
While just a rumor, would it really be difficult to contemplate DG
trading for a veteran receiver like Golladay mid year?
Gettleman has a WR unit that was either forgotten about during the last offseason or wildly overestimated in terms of their expectations. Jones is struggling with lack of weapons around him and the futures of both Jones and Gettleman are linked very close together on Jones succeeding. And Gettleman has acted in desperation on numerous transaction moves that don't seemingly fit a team looking to build for its longer term future.
If it is difficult to believe, you're in denial mode.
only if it's worth the contract. I don't wanna over pay Williams either and ruin the cap again but he seems very very safe to me. Even on his worst day Williams is solid and he now looks to even better than that. I think he's a bit better than Chris Canty was here but maybe that's wrong, just my eyes tell me he makes more plays. HE'd be worth a long term big contract that falls in line with what other very good DTs earn.
Golladay would be an interesting target depending on
I think Williams has the same leverage now that he would have had anywhere. If he wants to play here he likely signs here. the Giants will try and get him on the cheapest contract possible and it will be up to Williams and his agent whether he decides to stay. He obviously feels ok playing in this area so we have that shred of leverage, and Williams has the leverage dependent on his perceived value from one or more other NFL teams. The tag kicked the can down the road for both parties. There were inherent risks for both but the Giants did get something out of the tag, they have WIlliams on the team. That's something. And if they do decide he's good enough and sign him long term and he plays well here for the next 3-4 years? How is that a bad thing?? We are overthinking this player and move. HE's good. We need good. Lets add to guys like Williams. Lets add GREAT to this DL and front 7 and turn it from pretty good into very good. Why can't we do that?
That's a good question for the front office, and why they cannot. I like LW, was one of the loudest here to say nice move. But, the window to get the deal done when it made sense relative to the trade is long gone. So, now the optics, parameters, value, etc are different and not advantageous. He's not a $20M per player, and the roster is not good enough to be overspending. That's the difference now as I see it.
If they get it done, so be it. I'm just not one to leak away resources, and safe to say DG's perspective is perhaps closer to yours.
only if it's worth the contract. I don't wanna over pay Williams either and ruin the cap again but he seems very very safe to me. Even on his worst day Williams is solid and he now looks to even better than that. I think he's a bit better than Chris Canty was here but maybe that's wrong, just my eyes tell me he makes more plays. HE'd be worth a long term big contract that falls in line with what other very good DTs earn.
Gettleman and the Giants disagree as to his value, otherwise he would be signed.
Happened to waiting until the actual details come out before deciding good or bad about something?
Chances are, the actual details will never come out about a trade that didn't happen.
And while some posters will infuse their own brand of aggressiveness into pretending they're not defending DG (not referring to you, crick), is there anything about DG's actions throughout his tenure here - or about Rico's credibility, for that matter - that makes this rumor particularly difficult to believe?
Dunk, you're more than likely right about the specific details coming out.
As for the rumor itself, it isn't difficult to believe, I just prefer not coming to a conclusion regarding a situation with nonspecific and unconfirmed details. I feel this is a good practice if one is allowed the time to wait for more information which we have.
Perhaps, I shouldn't be so concerned that others see things the same way I do, which is probably a good practice as well.
Was an offer definitely made, or was it more exploratory talks to see if he is gettable? And did trade offers stop between the 2 teams or is it still possible?
Beat me to it.
Fixed
Though I would gladly take Golladay in the offseason. He'd be a great asset to this team.
Sounds good to me.
Rico has been one of if not the best insiders we have.
Quote:
???
Rico has been one of if not the best insiders we have.
Oh i see
Jesus this fucking guy....
I fixed it for you
His tenure here has been an absolute utter disaster. I don't know how anyone can argue against that?
We could've, true...but we had to trade a Day 2 pick for an impending UFA and we had to take 15 linebackers on Day 3.
For the record, we only have five heading into the 2021 draft.
Unless you were offloading some of our scrubs instead, which I doubt.
That's not the way it works around here.
This will work its way into becoming gospel by Tuesday
Fair point and Golladay makes more sense than Leonard Williams did last year, but we only have 5 picks in the 2021 Draft and we're not making the Playoffs...again. We can't afford to be trading draft picks. You build through the draft.
This is more fun. Just run with it...what’s the harm...the Giants stink anyway.
Maybe Detroit didn't want to do it. And it was Gettleman who was the aggressor.
Did he spike their drinks and put on NFL Crunch Course?
Engram, Zeitler, Tate, Williams, Tomlinson, Golden, Ryan, Peppers, Hernandez and even Shepard...
see what you can get for these guys
Golladay will be 28 next season. And would require a big contract.
However, for a 4th rounder I'd be all over it. Need to get DJ some help. Golladay is likely better than anyone you'd find in day 3 of the draft.
But if it was just giving up picks for Gollaway than it's another it's another example of why Gettleman is unfit for the job.
I'd love to know the full details and the backdrop on this...
If it were true you and the other DG defenders wouldn't care anyway. You'd tell everyone "patience" until after the season. And then after the season is a disaster you'd tell others that they couldn't have possibly known that the team would be so bad and you'd preach patience and say how bright the future looks.
Hope so. Maybe they can finally do some good and not let Gettleman make any moves.
Will they take Engram?
Will they take Engram?
That would be grand but Detroit has Hockenson and James.
How are we going to land a good outside WR this offseason? Any guarantees we get a good player at a good cost? What if we traded for that same WR in March? What's the difference? We need VET star power. We need guys that aren't afraid to win a fucking game here. Fuck this team and it's bs approach. Keep on building guys. Maybe in 2030 we will be in win now mode.
He can't keep giving away draft pickS on players who aren't difference makers. That's desperation.
And it's because that's where you need a top Edge Rusher on the field to step up, not another run-stuffing DT.
Quote:
Happened to waiting until the actual details come out before deciding good or bad about something?
If it were true you and the other DG defenders wouldn't care anyway. You'd tell everyone "patience" until after the season. And then after the season is a disaster you'd tell others that they couldn't have possibly known that the team would be so bad and you'd preach patience and say how bright the future looks.
Until you can accurately read and comprehend what my viewpoints are (I feel I have been pretty clear) please find other posters to inaccurately respond to.
How are we going to land a good outside WR this offseason? Any guarantees we get a good player at a good cost? What if we traded for that same WR in March? What's the difference? We need VET star power. We need guys that aren't afraid to win a fucking game here. Fuck this team and it's bs approach. Keep on building guys. Maybe in 2030 we will be in win now mode.
Yes teams that are 1-6 should always be in win now mode because when else is there a time to get good players. How about the draft that was chockfull of good WR talent? Maybe there? Instead of drafting 5 LBs?
He'll be 27 next month, and needs a new contract. He led the NFL in TD receptions last year, so I'm not sure "up and coming" is quite accurate - he's already here.
Sure, a 3rd rounder probably won't be as good as Gollaway, but we don't know if a 3rd would get him (EXTREMELY doubtful), and he'll add $$$ to the cap, when we could probably just sign him as a FA. Trading for him at 1-6 is a horrible waste of resources, but the DG sycophants here will never acknowledge that.
How are we going to land a good outside WR this offseason? Any guarantees we get a good player at a good cost? What if we traded for that same WR in March? What's the difference? We need VET star power. We need guys that aren't afraid to win a fucking game here. Fuck this team and it's bs approach. Keep on building guys. Maybe in 2030 we will be in win now mode.
Sure, let's keep trading assets for good players who need new contracts. That's a great fucking plan.
It can also indicate the belief that stockpiling low round draft picks doesn't really do that much.
The Baker miss was a huge blow though to this team. We really need a CB 2.
He can't keep giving away draft pickS on players who aren't difference makers. That's desperation.
What is this thing about no leverage? How is that even proven? Doesn't it stand to reason that if we don't make the trade, we don't have Williams today since we had no leverage to sign him in the first place?
Guys get signed based on market value. This leverage talk is just that, talk. It's a made up narrative that gained steam based on fans wanting to find a reason to blast the trade. Yet if we won 2 games this season that we had NO business losing, we'd be all alone in first with a good DL.
If the Giants don't trade for Williams they don't have Williams on the DL. Giants didn't sign him long term because they want him to prove he's worth the long term money. How on earth is this a bad thing?
I just don't understand this point of view.
Agreed. He'll also want a big deal. It's like Williams all over again. Why are we trading away draft assets when we're 1 - 6, or even 1 - 5, which I assume is when this was investigated?
Mara should be asking Judge for a list of five GM candidates he would like to work with side by side, and interview them immediately.
Quote:
basically, the trade left them with no leverage to re-sign him, and seemingly DG the only one who didn't see it. So, why trade two draft picks in that scenario.
He can't keep giving away draft pickS on players who aren't difference makers. That's desperation.
What is this thing about no leverage? How is that even proven? Doesn't it stand to reason that if we don't make the trade, we don't have Williams today since we had no leverage to sign him in the first place?
Guys get signed based on market value. This leverage talk is just that, talk. It's a made up narrative that gained steam based on fans wanting to find a reason to blast the trade. Yet if we won 2 games this season that we had NO business losing, we'd be all alone in first with a good DL.
If the Giants don't trade for Williams they don't have Williams on the DL. Giants didn't sign him long term because they want him to prove he's worth the long term money. How on earth is this a bad thing?
Huh? Gettleman wanted him long term which is why he traded for him. He isn't waiting for him to prove it.
I just don't understand this point of view.
Yeah, Williams really screwed this one up. DG played it masterfully.
You want young talent that can contribute on rookie deals.
Quote:
basically, the trade left them with no leverage to re-sign him, and seemingly DG the only one who didn't see it. So, why trade two draft picks in that scenario.
He can't keep giving away draft pickS on players who aren't difference makers. That's desperation.
What is this thing about no leverage? How is that even proven? Doesn't it stand to reason that if we don't make the trade, we don't have Williams today since we had no leverage to sign him in the first place?
Guys get signed based on market value. This leverage talk is just that, talk. It's a made up narrative that gained steam based on fans wanting to find a reason to blast the trade. Yet if we won 2 games this season that we had NO business losing, we'd be all alone in first with a good DL.
If the Giants don't trade for Williams they don't have Williams on the DL. Giants didn't sign him long term because they want him to prove he's worth the long term money. How on earth is this a bad thing?
The deal was done with the belief LW would sign for something in the $12-13M per year ballpark. Not only did it not happen, but DT contracts are now clearing $20M per.
Using the tag on him controls his rights, but accomplished nothing else. NOW, they're going to have to go big open market dollars, or tag him and play the game (poorly) for another offseason.
Where's the leverage? Hint : not with the Giants.
I just don't understand this point of view.
I hear you, but there's been no fear of it shown by LW to this point. Seems the risk is ok. I don't see ANY leverage here for DG, except the tag, which only increases the pricetag.
Chances are, the actual details will never come out about a trade that didn't happen.
And while some posters will infuse their own brand of aggressiveness into pretending they're not defending DG (not referring to you, crick), is there anything about DG's actions throughout his tenure here - or about Rico's credibility, for that matter - that makes this rumor particularly difficult to believe?
It's hard to wrap our heads around sometimes, because our GM doesn't apply this sort of logic, but often, teams that are losing will sell off assets in-season rather than try to reinforce a really bad roster without hope of playoff contention.
Quote:
It's not like those guys have been winning and should feel they don't need Golladay.
It's hard to wrap our heads around sometimes, because our GM doesn't apply this sort of logic, but often, teams that are losing will sell off assets in-season rather than try to reinforce a really bad roster without hope of playoff contention.
I guess Apple and Snacks just magically disappeared?? Outside of Williams, what other players have we traded for mid-season to bolster a losing squad.
And if I recall, trading Snacks and Apple was met with derision too.
Golladay is a UFA this offseason. If the Giants like him, sign him then. If they're trading for him this year, he's not going to be any cheaper as a FA and we only gain the tag as incremental value. So, very much like LW in that regard.
But Golladay, while a good player, isn't really worthy of the tag - for us or for Detroit - so what exactly are you trading for? You can have Golladay AND keep your draft picks, as long as you're honest with yourself about not contending this season.
Purely my own view, but the only reason why DG would even try to make this trade for an impending FA is to try to bolster his chances to keep his job again this offseason. And in that sense, if it's about DG doing what's best for him and not what's best for the long-term interests of the franchise, it's time to turn in the keycard.
Quote:
In comment 15020938 ghost718 said:
Quote:
It's not like those guys have been winning and should feel they don't need Golladay.
It's hard to wrap our heads around sometimes, because our GM doesn't apply this sort of logic, but often, teams that are losing will sell off assets in-season rather than try to reinforce a really bad roster without hope of playoff contention.
I guess Apple and Snacks just magically disappeared?? Outside of Williams, what other players have we traded for mid-season to bolster a losing squad.
And if I recall, trading Snacks and Apple was met with derision too.
Oh, that's a very narrow parameter, but since you're not a DG defender, I'll just assume that was accidental.
What if we widened the net just a bit? Could we consider moves that were absolutely inconsistent with the state of the roster in general? Or can we only look for exactly similar examples of in-season trades for impending free agents?
Not wise.
Instead of saying a GM doesn't think a certain way, wouldn't the narrow parameter apply to you?
Or better yet, just don't use hyperbole here. DG traded for Williams in a losing season. The previous year, he let go of quite a few vets and made trades before the deadline to get assets.
Why does every take have to be considered a defense of Gettleman?? Just get basic facts correct.
Looking at it from Detroit's perspective,three straight losing years is probably the end of Matt and Bob.Trading away one of your top receivers for a draft pick would be doing a favor to the next coach,or maybe Judge.
Back to Gollady, what hypothetical trade would make sense to you? You seem to be implying that we're all jumping the gun on criticizing the attempted trade if it's true. What parameters would make this in the best interests of the Giants?
I wouldn't trade for any player right now mid-season. I would unload a couple if we can get some draft picks.
Let's not act as if that's something that's never happened though, just because Williams was traded for last season.
Gettleman has a WR unit that was either forgotten about during the last offseason or wildly overestimated in terms of their expectations. Jones is struggling with lack of weapons around him and the futures of both Jones and Gettleman are linked very close together on Jones succeeding. And Gettleman has acted in desperation on numerous transaction moves that don't seemingly fit a team looking to build for its longer term future.
If it is difficult to believe, you're in denial mode.
That's a good question for the front office, and why they cannot. I like LW, was one of the loudest here to say nice move. But, the window to get the deal done when it made sense relative to the trade is long gone. So, now the optics, parameters, value, etc are different and not advantageous. He's not a $20M per player, and the roster is not good enough to be overspending. That's the difference now as I see it.
If they get it done, so be it. I'm just not one to leak away resources, and safe to say DG's perspective is perhaps closer to yours.
Gettleman and the Giants disagree as to his value, otherwise he would be signed.
Quote:
Happened to waiting until the actual details come out before deciding good or bad about something?
Chances are, the actual details will never come out about a trade that didn't happen.
And while some posters will infuse their own brand of aggressiveness into pretending they're not defending DG (not referring to you, crick), is there anything about DG's actions throughout his tenure here - or about Rico's credibility, for that matter - that makes this rumor particularly difficult to believe?
Dunk, you're more than likely right about the specific details coming out.
As for the rumor itself, it isn't difficult to believe, I just prefer not coming to a conclusion regarding a situation with nonspecific and unconfirmed details. I feel this is a good practice if one is allowed the time to wait for more information which we have.
Perhaps, I shouldn't be so concerned that others see things the same way I do, which is probably a good practice as well.
Skillset-wise he's exactly what we need, I just don't trust him.
Sure, let's keep trading assets for good players who need new contracts. That's a great fucking plan.
Do the results not speak for themselves??