| In the first half of the season, the struggles of rookie left tackle Andrew Thomas were very well-documented and outright mystifying to those who saw him play at the University of Georgia. Pro Football Focus credited him with surrendering 36 pressures and a lowly 45.3 pass blocking grade, and the eye test showed him to be a pass protection liability frequently beat by inside moves. But over the last four games, Pro Football Focus now notes that Thomas has shown significant improvement: He has allowed only eight pressures in the last four games, and his pass blocking grade has improved to 69.6. |
Nice little article on our first round draft pick.
Thomas Improvement - (
New Window )
One Gettleman bark that he didn’t make that bothers me to this day is the trade up for that loser DeAndre Baker. He could have stayed put and picked Jawaan Taylor, who has been starting for the Jags for two years now. Taylor was available at a position if critical need and DG opted to bypass him. Ooops.
The real test is whether Thomas is better than the three other OL that were being ranked in that area (or as good if one of the others is excellent). That’s the test of real success.
To some degree, yes. Are all the top OTs playing Left Tackle...not sure but didn't think so.
For example, the selection of McKinney, coming from a program which knows talent and where Judge will have excellent connections, makes me optimistic about that pick. To me, that is like Saban reaching into the giants’ war room.
Maybe because it's a 247sports article.
Or because people were wondering what an "improvement article" was? Is it like an oxford comma? A past participle?
What I think is funny is that you somehow gain no intelligence over time.
the OL seems to be heading in the right direction. Everyone has wanted to see resources pumped into the OL and that's what they did.
in the remaking of the defense the priorities have been on a big physical front and coverage in the secondary - drafting Lawrence and Baker high was indicative of those priorities. the pass rush by committee approach wasn't popular but they didn't force a move that may not have been there.
Those are high level philosophical decisions made pretty early on in the rebuild - and while neither unit (OL + D) is at the final destination yet imo we are seeing that there was a soundness to the strategy. When the OL protects the QB and opens running lanes, and the defense stops the run and prevent big plays in the secondary, the games are highly competitive. They haven't done all of those things in every game and in particular had trouble protecting the QB early in the year but the story of this season has been progress in each of those areas.
The entire NYG FO deserves credit that the areas where there has been progress are the areas where they have made their biggest investments and the coaching staff deserves credit for generating return on those investments. Andrew Thomas is one piece of that but it really goes beyond him.
In your hypothetical, if there is a big enough spread then I would agree. But general rule of thumb is LT is more valuable, and Thomas can play both.
Quote:
In comment 15066342 fireitup77 said:
Quote:
In comment 15066324 LBH15 said:
Quote:
In comment 15066321 fireitup77 said:
Quote:
Drafted 3 ol in 2018? Okay please tell us which players he should have drafted then.
Orchestrate a trade down from overall #2, accumulate extra picks and do it. This is how you efficiently rebuild broken teams.
I presume decent OL were available after #2 spot, so I will let you hypothetically determine who was worthy if it matters.
And if there are no trades to be had? My point is you don't go into a draft with the mindset that I have to get X amount of OL this year. And you don't make a bad trade just to trade.
You do realize that there were other parts of the needed help too.
Go research whether DG had a trade available to him and whether it was reasonable.
And yes, lots of parts were needed...so that is why you accumulate picks. Assuming OL could be some portion of them.
And like I said you don't trade just to trade. There were no offers of value.
DG himself admitted that there was at least one fair trade offer. He had likely already built his shrine to Saquon at that point, so the trade offer was probably moot, but it did exist according to DG himself.
the OL seems to be heading in the right direction. Everyone has wanted to see resources pumped into the OL and that's what they did.
in the remaking of the defense the priorities have been on a big physical front and coverage in the secondary - drafting Lawrence and Baker high was indicative of those priorities. the pass rush by committee approach wasn't popular but they didn't force a move that may not have been there.
Those are high level philosophical decisions made pretty early on in the rebuild - and while neither unit (OL + D) is at the final destination yet imo we are seeing that there was a soundness to the strategy. When the OL protects the QB and opens running lanes, and the defense stops the run and prevent big plays in the secondary, the games are highly competitive. They haven't done all of those things in every game and in particular had trouble protecting the QB early in the year but the story of this season has been progress in each of those areas.
The entire NYG FO deserves credit that the areas where there has been progress are the areas where they have made their biggest investments and the coaching staff deserves credit for generating return on those investments. Andrew Thomas is one piece of that but it really goes beyond him.
What refusal to acknowledge...
Do you have eyes, can you read? Have you actually read the things that Terp, bw, GD, TTH, christian, JonC, LBH, NGD, myself and others have been writing lately. EVERYBODY has acknowledged the improvement and expressed some level of hope. It remains that as currently constituted the Giants are beating the dregs of the league, but still losing to the good teams. TO this point, they have not beaten a team with more than 4 wins this year. That means the Giants are still a below average team. We will start doing back flips when they next appear in the Super Bowl. Until then we are cautiously optimistic. But measured optimism isn't good enough for you over the barrel cheerleaders. Give it a rest for a change, wait and see how things play out before you pronounce the Giants "fixed" and can take their place among the NFL elite.
To keep LW he will probably increase his cap hit ~20% and Tomlinson will get a big raise to keep him. If we pay Saquon i'm just not sure the Patriots model of building throw the middle will work. You can't ignore that the Patriots model included one of the best QBs of all time playing at a discount. You can't necessarily build the same way as them. The D gave up some 4th Q leads and we don't really have good data to say this strategy we are pursuing works from a resource allocation standpoint.
We've definitely heard in some of the modernization and technology conversations in the past that the Giants look at it as a budget issue, in terms of spending in these uncapped ways, they don't seem willing to spend like other teams. To me the big concern is this, the Mara's aren't like Robert Kraft. There is plenty of evidence that there isn't enough knowledge of innovation in the building with Judge as the stark exception. The salary that DG makes, it's kind of a waste to spend that as someone that isn't a good innovation partner for Judge as what, a pension? A lifetime achievement award?
No doubt if the Giants were ahead of the curve and willing to overspend, sure, keep DG around. I don't think smart people with different perspectives are ever a bad thing. However, if you want to maximize the potential of Judge it would seem that they'd be way better off spending that money on a GM that wasn't an administrator.
And that's really even the unification of my last post and this one. I'm not sure how much room there is for success in limited resources when you weigh sentimental things as much as the Giants have shown to recently.
Said so loud and clear, went out an selected for that, fired for that cause, spent for it, increased the size of the staff for it and seem to have evidence of progress.
Given that human organizations improve when the degree of change per year is about 15-30% ( this truism is present in the writings of Frederick Taylor, Maslow, Alfred Sloan...so its not new news and its experientially true in a modern career) and slide into chaos when the number of required adjustments slides higher than that, selecting one lever to change and changing it - is long proven sound.
If they made another major change to an organizational lever its in the area of rigor per player and game preparation and per selection. This combined with selection process changes is one hell of a lot of overhaul per organizational year. Especially when considering the number of new people who have to be bought in and oriented.
Three organizational levers that were pulled:
- Dedication to Development
- Rigor prior to decisions
- Selection Process
Have there been other efforts of all different kinds? Of course. But by strategy or because humans absorb only so much at a deep level and the rest is fleeting or picked up by only a few...three major initiatives seems the boundary of large scale change efforts in all kinds of organizations.
If we focus on chosen improvement levers and not just personalities, we wind up with a picture of where progress is being made. If we focus on scores, we focus on lag indicators of progress. As each year goes by, our balance between lead and lag indicators should shift. (So should the organizations).
Progress should get faster when the first improvement levers are foundational and established habits. The weaknesses and potential impact of each top org person gets rounded down as process and practice weave their input into less impact per warlord and more impact per culture
As always, its up to each fan to see what they see and play out fandom by their core emotive needs.
You wanted change of personalities based on a sense you have?
You wanted change via the way modern change management is done?
Or you wanted to continue to show you knew better?
Clearly see him side step more smoothly and handle the inside pass rush move better than he did in early weeks. He and the Guard(s) are recognizing and picking up stunts quicker. Still would like to see him anchor a bit sooner versus giving up space, and stop getting caught riding his man around the backside of the QB (although nice recovery effort here). Strength-training will be a priority this offseason.
Be nice if the Tackles can keep McCoy clean today as we might need to actually score touchdowns versus FGs to stay in this game.
What refusal to acknowledge...
Do you have eyes, can you read? Have you actually read the things that Terp, bw, GD, TTH, christian, JonC, LBH, NGD, myself and others have been writing lately. EVERYBODY has acknowledged the improvement and expressed some level of hope. It remains that as currently constituted the Giants are beating the dregs of the league, but still losing to the good teams. TO this point, they have not beaten a team with more than 4 wins this year. That means the Giants are still a below average team. We will start doing back flips when they next appear in the Super Bowl. Until then we are cautiously optimistic. But measured optimism isn't good enough for you over the barrel cheerleaders. Give it a rest for a change, wait and see how things play out before you pronounce the Giants "fixed" and can take their place among the NFL elite.
1. Never said the NYG are "fixed". In fact I clearly stated the opposite that there is more work to be done even in the areas for optimism.
2. I think we have different definitions of measured/cautious optimism. When I see things trending in the right direction, absent an egregious failing I generally don't also think replacing key leadership.
I can literally hear some DG detractors typing their replies to the words "egregious failing" now before even submitting this reply, and I'd hopefully like to spare everyone from the same ground being recycled for the millionth time and just say few of them project "cautious or measured optimism" (imo).
3rd bonus thought - I'm not saying there haven't been moves worthy of criticism. Most everything from 2018 didn't work out. Just that some can't bring themselves to ever say "Gettleman did a good job with _______" without defensive caveats. Especially re anything pre-Judge because that then impacts the narrative. And the 2019 offseason looks pretty good in hindsight.
For about the 10th time.
If we focus on chosen improvement levers and not just personalities, we wind up with a picture of where progress is being made. If we focus on scores, we focus on lag indicators of progress. As each year goes by, our balance between lead and lag indicators should shift. (So should the organizations).
The bolded part not only resonates with whatever macro (non-personality driven) progress being made at the organizational level, but also on the macro field level.
I recall a stat from last week's game that it was the team's 6th game in a row with 100 yards rushing and that was the first time that happened since 2010. If we could all step back from arguing individual personalities - whether it's Thomas, Barkley, Hernandez, etc. - I think we'd see while there may have been some non-ideal selections along the way the sum of the parts is starting to generate aggregate production that could setup the foundation of success for this next 2-4 year window. The TO differential is improving, pass rush improving, coverage units improving, clock management, etc.
There is good going on if we can accept that it's not perfect.
For about the 10th time.
Now do LW!
(jk pls dont)
Quote:
Bradberry and Martinez.
For about the 10th time.
Now do LW!
(jk pls dont)
I would if it was a good move. Is he signed yet to a market contract?
Quote:
In comment 15066977 LBH15 said:
Quote:
Bradberry and Martinez.
For about the 10th time.
Now do LW!
(jk pls dont)
I would if it was a good move. Is he signed yet to a market contract?
He's under contract at the 5th highest cap # for a DT this year, so yes. And they have the option to keep him at the same number again next year.
Quote:
You’re relentless on anything dg has done with the OL yet we have what appears to be a very good young unit. Spin it any frickin way you want thems the facts. It’s been 2.5 years since DG took over not 10. Assuming this OL holds up here and stays on this trajectory you and everyone else needs to tip your hat and move the hell on. You’re treating every positive move with a negative slant. Kidding me.
So finally in the 3rd off-season DG does what he should have done in his first and we are supposed to praise him... Sorry, no can do.
About as far as I can is to say that, I am glad he finally came around. He is still a lousy GM. And Yes, perhaps some of his new found success has something to do with Judge. The fact that Judge may have a positive influence seems more likely than DG suddenly got a clue.
He’s also rebuilt the D. Added a young qb and drafted a franchise talent at RB who has suffered bad luck injuries the last two years.
DG will never receive any credit from you and others because you are so dug in. It’s comical to watch some of you spin.
Reminder, it’s year 3. And the roster wasn’t exactly ripe for a rebuild when the ashes and soot started to settle in January 2018.
After 2 years the team is taking shape but in your world “gross negligence for years”
3rd year. Not the 5th. And the above average defense here would like to remind you that the nyg D from 2014-2017 was a complete shit show. Now we have a pro unit in place with room for upside and growth.
Exhausting.
The official moment this rebuild started was halfway through 2018 when the season was all but lost. That’s when DG flipped the entire team upside down. Here we are 2 years later from that moment.
You hate the guy and want him out. Sorry, you’re gonna lose this one. At least the team is on the way back. Could be worse, you could have been right.
That being said, especially within the scope of managing resources, it never hurts to have more people testing new things without putting them into production or interfering with the process of running the business. We had this discussion when talking about bringing on a CTO in the past. Plenty of room for R&D without interfering with the day to day.
And that's where spending money on an "administrator" comes in. I think it becomes more of a question of how productive that person for a very high salary? How much are they adding? Let's say they are just rolling out more high tech new processes with Judge, how valuable is DG to that process vs. someone that might be able to be more additive to the process of implementing the new things Judge wants to? I'd argue that someone who types on fake keyboards to make fun of advanced math among other things we've seen from him wouldn't be super additive to that process. I'd also argue that someone that seems as allergic to trading down as DG isn't super additive to a drafting process.
I'm guessing you would also feel Belicheck is not super additive because he's mocked aspects of analytics in the past too.
That being said, especially within the scope of managing resources, it never hurts to have more people testing new things without putting them into production or interfering with the process of running the business. We had this discussion when talking about bringing on a CTO in the past. Plenty of room for R&D without interfering with the day to day.
And that's where spending money on an "administrator" comes in. I think it becomes more of a question of how productive that person for a very high salary? How much are they adding? Let's say they are just rolling out more high tech new processes with Judge, how valuable is DG to that process vs. someone that might be able to be more additive to the process of implementing the new things Judge wants to? I'd argue that someone who types on fake keyboards to make fun of advanced math among other things we've seen from him wouldn't be super additive to that process. I'd also argue that someone that seems as allergic to trading down as DG isn't super additive to a drafting process.
I do not believe Gettleman made an explanation or was even asked to explain what he meant with his air keyboard reaction. So, we are only guessing what he meant. I feel this benign gesture (in my view) spoiled a lot of the math people against him even if they are only guessing that he was mocking mathematics. That is unfortunate, because even if he was mocking mathematics, it is still possible for him to repent of that thinking, it is also unfortunate because I feel people's guesses as to what he was mocking have become concrete to consistently be certain that Gettleman thinks math and numbers are foolish.
In my view he was more than likely mocking those who insinuate that football problems can be easily solved by inputting (air keyboard) a formula and the problem to instantly retrieve a solution to a football problem that has stumped many which is now retrievable through analytics.
Handling small and large issues with the NFL departments, agents, lawyers and 31
other front offices is all hidden from us.
Yet part of the job you don't want to burden the HC.
A well functioning whole FO is what you want and thats hard to evaluate ànd personalities inside a functioning whole are very hard to isolate well enough to be certain of individual contribution.
I think thats easier under prior times example: DG before this set of scouts and coaches and agreements on Mara's role and harder now. Imo
I don’t even want to get ahead of things yet there still important football to be played. The OL and defense still have much more to prove but they are on their way the last couple of months.
How anybody can spin his first 2 as anything but atrocious, I have no clue. Heck, DG publicly admitted that his first 2 years were not good. So, when DG himself says it was bad, how can the apologist turn around and say it was good.
I think everybody agrees that there was something different this year.
Let's see, what changed this year... Oh yeah, Judge came in, and DG admitted that some of his responsibility was stripped.
So, we are supposed to suddenly say he has been a good GM, when he admitted that he hadn't been good his first 2 years, was stripped of power. Then after a new coaching staff, and a new philosophy top to bottom we see improvement and it is supposedly attributable to DG. That's some really sound logic there.
I'm with Bill2. The trial on DG already happened. He was stripped and we don't know exactly to whom we should apportion credit for the improvement, but it's doubtful that it's DG.
How anybody can spin his first 2 as anything but atrocious, I have no clue. Heck, DG publicly admitted that his first 2 years were not good. So, when DG himself says it was bad, how can the apologist turn around and say it was good.
I think everybody agrees that there was something different this year.
Let's see, what changed this year... Oh yeah, Judge came in, and DG admitted that some of his responsibility was stripped.
So, we are supposed to suddenly say he has been a good GM, when he admitted that he hadn't been good his first 2 years, was stripped of power. Then after a new coaching staff, and a new philosophy top to bottom we see improvement and it is supposedly attributable to DG. That's some really sound logic there.
I'm with Bill2. The trial on DG already happened. He was stripped and we don't know exactly to whom we should apportion credit for the improvement, but it's doubtful that it's DG.
Whatever works. The team is on the right track. I’ve seen this song and dance before now we’re saying dg isn’t even making decisions anymore.
I don’t give two shits anymore I’m just loving this. DG has rebuilt the D and OL and we’re a few adds away from fielding something with serious staying power. Judge is huge. So what. DG helped.