Considering we had our best record ever since SB was drafted, and then he basically missed the entire season, it's very hard to justify a significant win share difference.
I'll say maybe 1 more.
DCs were obviously daring Jones to beat them in the first two games by focusing on SB. My guess is that would have continued...
I would think SB would have made a huge difference in each of those games.
I would say 9-7 beating eagles(lost by 1) cowboys(lost by 3) and bucks(lost by 2).
Might be able to throw the bears in there too. SB was playing well before the injury...7yd avg
Lets not forget Chicago and LA. I think a healthy Saquon adds at least 8 TDs to the season. I think we win both against Philly and Dallas, the Bears, LA because we were with that team and their front 7 gets upfield. I also think we beat Arizona based on how they were playing down the stretch. They were selling out on pass rush against us and Saquon would have made some plays.
instead of Evan Engram, so I’d like to think it would have meant at least 1 more win and we’d be playing Saturday night.
Jones has plenty of options he can’t see wide open receivers anyway. for something like an RB in the flat or over the middle d Lewis is open lots of times
instead of Evan Engram, so I’d like to think it would have meant at least 1 more win and we’d be playing Saturday night.
Jones has plenty of options he can’t see wide open receivers anyway. for something like an RB in the flat or over the middle d Lewis is open lots of times
What was your previous handle? Or are you another of Producers handles?
He saw nothing but 9 man fronts and he went nowhere -- and that's not his fault. Teams were focussed on stopping him. And why not Jones and the WRs didn't scare anyone.
The running game only got going once he was out and the 9 man fronts went away.
Also, the OL was worse early on than later. Barkley didn't get a chance to run behind the OL as it got better. Hopefully the OL gets better and that improves things for Barkley.
But until they figure out how to make teams pay for the 9-man fronts, I don't think Barkley makes a big difference in the win total.
If they can ever create a situation where they're a power running team again like Dallas with Zeke, Barkley could be league MVP.
But that's not what's winning in today's NFL. You need to be able to average 30 points a game regularly to win against the KC's and GBs these days, and RBs --even dynamic ones -- don't do that. RBs control the clock.
Barkley hasn't made a difference to the W/L yet (when he was playing), and I doubt he will once healthy. But that's more on how the league is set up than that is on Barkley or any other RB.
That's why some people take issue drafting an RB that high.
1 game better or maybe a few as that is far more subjective.
Don’t believe it’s much though as we have seen the last few years and 1) the Giants don’t win too often even when Barkley plays great and 2) the Giants struggle taking advantage of teams that try to shut down Barkley.
I say this being a huge SB fan. He ran with a crappy OL, but one thing I enjoyed w/ WG was his N/S style of running. Perhaps Saquon would have altered his style once they finally opened up holes for him. I'm sure he could have taken more to the house.
I think next season we will have to be patient with him. He took a massive injury and will have to not only work through physical hurdles, but mental ones to get back to his normal pace. I'm hoping we can draft or get a good RB to help spread the load.
Could have been the difference in the first Eagles game , and , possibly, the Bucs . The 2-point conversion possibilities . Get it into OT . Who knows ? The Giants didn’t even begin to have a semblance of reliable offensive line play until the 2nd quarter of the Rams game . But the line did get better . Barkley would have improved with them -no question .
He wasn’t catching 90 passes in Garrett’s offense , however .
RE: Comparing previous losing seasons in saying SB
One thing that I think is a positive is that, unlike in past year, I have faith in our coaching staff to guide and teach him what is needed to make the shift.
On a more positive note - I am sure he will enjoy not getting hit 2 yards in the backfield on every freakin' carry.
you might want to find another sport to pay attention to if you don’t think Barkley is a difference maker. I mean seriously. That might be the most obtuse comment in BBI history.
maybe that pass that went off Engram’s fingertips would have been a pass to Saquan for a first down and we would have won one more game. That was all we needed.
you might want to find another sport to pay attention to if you don’t think Barkley is a difference maker. I mean seriously. That might be the most obtuse comment in BBI history.
McL has a lot of stats to back up his point, which I agree with if Barkley had continued his boom or bust ways.
I think one of those close games would've gone our way if Barkley adjusted his running style, but he is right, a superlative RB doesn't make a lot more difference than an average one.
even lousy ones, can usually game-plan to stop ONE guy. And that's what we saw when Barkley played this year.
Until the Giants can beat teams with the passing game, Barkley will remain a non-factor.
When the Giants become a balanced team, Barkley should become a serious weapon. But as long as he's the ONLY player other teams worry about, he'll not be much of a factor in the W/L column.
He saw nothing but 9 man fronts and he went nowhere -- and that's not his fault. Teams were focussed on stopping him. And why not Jones and the WRs didn't scare anyone.
The running game only got going once he was out and the 9 man fronts went away.
Also, the OL was worse early on than later. Barkley didn't get a chance to run behind the OL as it got better. Hopefully the OL gets better and that improves things for Barkley.
But until they figure out how to make teams pay for the 9-man fronts, I don't think Barkley makes a big difference in the win total.
If they can ever create a situation where they're a power running team again like Dallas with Zeke, Barkley could be league MVP.
But that's not what's winning in today's NFL. You need to be able to average 30 points a game regularly to win against the KC's and GBs these days, and RBs --even dynamic ones -- don't do that. RBs control the clock.
Barkley hasn't made a difference to the W/L yet (when he was playing), and I doubt he will once healthy. But that's more on how the league is set up than that is on Barkley or any other RB.
That's why some people take issue drafting an RB that high.
I'd have to agree.. MAYBE they win 1 extra game and have 7... May have even lost one or 2 more becuase of the dedication to him.
you might want to find another sport to pay attention to if you don’t think Barkley is a difference maker. I mean seriously. That might be the most obtuse comment in BBI history.
2018: Barkley plays all 16 games and the Giants win 5 games.
2019: Barkley plays only 13 games and the Giants win 4 games.
2020: Barkley plays less than 2 full games and the Giants win 6 games.
Not sure why the statement that Barkley is not a difference maker when it comes to winning football games is obtuse. Where is the correlation to him playing more resulting in more wins?
He is not the only variable, but there is also no objective evidence showing the Giants win more when Barkley plays.
The New York Islanders won more games after their best player left and not replaced by a similar talent. Sometimes an individual talent alone does not make a team better.
you might want to find another sport to pay attention to if you don’t think Barkley is a difference maker. I mean seriously. That might be the most obtuse comment in BBI history.
2018: Barkley plays all 16 games and the Giants win 5 games.
2019: Barkley plays only 13 games and the Giants win 4 games.
2020: Barkley plays less than 2 full games and the Giants win 6 games.
Not sure why the statement that Barkley is not a difference maker when it comes to winning football games is obtuse. Where is the correlation to him playing more resulting in more wins?
He is not the only variable, but there is also no objective evidence showing the Giants win more when Barkley plays.
The New York Islanders won more games after their best player left and not replaced by a similar talent. Sometimes an individual talent alone does not make a team better.
Agreed. Those are objective facts.
RE: Looking at the opponents I say at least 10 wins
to soften up the defense, and a reliable WR that can get separation and stretch the field a little, Barkley will make a huge difference and provide a change of pace that can really wear a defense down.
I would start out with both Barkley and a power runner in the line up and let the power runner start things off -- and then build the plays from there.
That the run game GOT BETTER when Barkley was out.
Should conclude from that that Gallman is better than Barkley? No. We should realize that Gallman wasn't facing 9-man front defenses designed to stop him. Barkley was.
As are most of the discussions here because very few posters have open minds. They argue based on emotion and insecurity and, ultimately, insults.
I think people just see things differently which is fine, but I’ve taken a break trying to defend my stance because it’s ultimately meaningless.
To me “difference maker” is a goal post that gets moved a lot. To me he’s absolutely a difference maker - in 2018 we have even an average defense Barkley effected the games enough to make a huge “difference” despite a pretty cooked Eli. 2019, even worse defense. But no, he’s not going to make an awful team average - why would anyone think that?
There’s a lot of players like him throughout history - stuck in bad situations. Was Calvin Johnson not a difference maker or was it that his QB was usually trash followed by a usually bad defense?
Arguing Barkley being the right fit in 2018 is a much more reasonable argument. Saying he isn’t a difference maker is a convo I just walk away from in most cases.
Difference of opinion make for good conversation. We just have too many people who can't tell the difference between their opinion and facts.
My point was exactly what you said. In basketball you have to have an elite talent because they can often carry teams almost by themselves. That isn't the case in football where complementary football is much more important.
I added the Islanders example because I think that could possibly be the case with the Giants. I think an elite QB equates directly to more wins. I don't know that a RB or WR have the same impact.
Some of think so some of us don't. He just hasn't played in enough winning games for me to justify the premise that we would have won more games. He does other things. What if he missed a key pass block here and there in key moments?
how they use Barkley. Gives him 30 carries. Give him 16 and 8 targets in the passing game.
But we are way, way, way more dynamic on offense with him. Stop this nonsense.
The nonsense is what you post.
There is overwhelming data that supports both the notion that RBs are not impactful players. Also that consistency is paramount to any positive impact they might have. Boom or bust is not helpful.
If you read and understand the data detailed analysis then you might reconsider your position.
That said let me make a quick argument for you that should make some sense. I think we can all agree that touches by WRs are far more valuable in terms of yards and scoring than are RB touches. It turns out that staticially, WR touches are overwhlmingly more valuable than RB touches and that include both rushes and the passes. The YPA for RBs is typically 2.5 - 3 yards less than WRs. So the bottom line cannibalizing WRs touches and giving those to your RB is going to hurt your offense.
You advocating all these RB touches is the exact opposite of what the overwhelming amount of data tells us.
I think we get to 8-8 but I don't think we do any better than 9-7 even with a healthy Saquon all season. We were still well short of weapons in the passing game even with him there
Regardless, it likely gives the Giants at least one more win which appears would have been enough to win the NFC East.
I would say 9-7 beating eagles(lost by 1) cowboys(lost by 3) and bucks(lost by 2).
Might be able to throw the bears in there too. SB was playing well before the injury...7yd avg
I'll say maybe 1 more.
DCs were obviously daring Jones to beat them in the first two games by focusing on SB. My guess is that would have continued...
I would say 9-7 beating eagles(lost by 1) cowboys(lost by 3) and bucks(lost by 2).
Might be able to throw the bears in there too. SB was playing well before the injury...7yd avg
Lets not forget Chicago and LA. I think a healthy Saquon adds at least 8 TDs to the season. I think we win both against Philly and Dallas, the Bears, LA because we were with that team and their front 7 gets upfield. I also think we beat Arizona based on how they were playing down the stretch. They were selling out on pass rush against us and Saquon would have made some plays.
Jones has plenty of options he can’t see wide open receivers anyway. for something like an RB in the flat or over the middle d Lewis is open lots of times
Ditto.
Quote:
instead of Evan Engram, so I’d like to think it would have meant at least 1 more win and we’d be playing Saturday night.
Jones has plenty of options he can’t see wide open receivers anyway. for something like an RB in the flat or over the middle d Lewis is open lots of times
What was your previous handle? Or are you another of Producers handles?
Haha, if Engram misses the year, what's our record?
The running game only got going once he was out and the 9 man fronts went away.
Also, the OL was worse early on than later. Barkley didn't get a chance to run behind the OL as it got better. Hopefully the OL gets better and that improves things for Barkley.
But until they figure out how to make teams pay for the 9-man fronts, I don't think Barkley makes a big difference in the win total.
If they can ever create a situation where they're a power running team again like Dallas with Zeke, Barkley could be league MVP.
But that's not what's winning in today's NFL. You need to be able to average 30 points a game regularly to win against the KC's and GBs these days, and RBs --even dynamic ones -- don't do that. RBs control the clock.
Barkley hasn't made a difference to the W/L yet (when he was playing), and I doubt he will once healthy. But that's more on how the league is set up than that is on Barkley or any other RB.
That's why some people take issue drafting an RB that high.
Don’t believe it’s much though as we have seen the last few years and 1) the Giants don’t win too often even when Barkley plays great and 2) the Giants struggle taking advantage of teams that try to shut down Barkley.
Why does it matter?
With the improvements in the OL and defense this year if you add a healthy SB they easily improve to 9-7 or 8-8...
I think next season we will have to be patient with him. He took a massive injury and will have to not only work through physical hurdles, but mental ones to get back to his normal pace. I'm hoping we can draft or get a good RB to help spread the load.
He wasn’t catching 90 passes in Garrett’s offense , however .
With the improvements in the OL and defense this year if you add a healthy SB they easily improve to 9-7 or 8-8...
Exactly, anyone with half a brain understands this.
I agree with this, maybe 9-7, I’ll give us the Rams game too.
One thing that I think is a positive is that, unlike in past year, I have faith in our coaching staff to guide and teach him what is needed to make the shift.
On a more positive note - I am sure he will enjoy not getting hit 2 yards in the backfield on every freakin' carry.
Yea..kamara fid nothing to help his team win this year when a TE was playing QB 🙄
This comment is one of the dumbest thinga ive read here to date. Hoping like hell it waa sarcasm because of other dumb bbiers sayong this dumb shit
And 15-1 only because we had already lost the Pittsburgh game with him.. if some way we can have that back we would be 16-0 with Barkley..
McL has a lot of stats to back up his point, which I agree with if Barkley had continued his boom or bust ways.
I think one of those close games would've gone our way if Barkley adjusted his running style, but he is right, a superlative RB doesn't make a lot more difference than an average one.
Until the Giants can beat teams with the passing game, Barkley will remain a non-factor.
When the Giants become a balanced team, Barkley should become a serious weapon. But as long as he's the ONLY player other teams worry about, he'll not be much of a factor in the W/L column.
The running game only got going once he was out and the 9 man fronts went away.
Also, the OL was worse early on than later. Barkley didn't get a chance to run behind the OL as it got better. Hopefully the OL gets better and that improves things for Barkley.
But until they figure out how to make teams pay for the 9-man fronts, I don't think Barkley makes a big difference in the win total.
If they can ever create a situation where they're a power running team again like Dallas with Zeke, Barkley could be league MVP.
But that's not what's winning in today's NFL. You need to be able to average 30 points a game regularly to win against the KC's and GBs these days, and RBs --even dynamic ones -- don't do that. RBs control the clock.
Barkley hasn't made a difference to the W/L yet (when he was playing), and I doubt he will once healthy. But that's more on how the league is set up than that is on Barkley or any other RB.
That's why some people take issue drafting an RB that high.
I'd have to agree.. MAYBE they win 1 extra game and have 7... May have even lost one or 2 more becuase of the dedication to him.
2018: Barkley plays all 16 games and the Giants win 5 games.
2019: Barkley plays only 13 games and the Giants win 4 games.
2020: Barkley plays less than 2 full games and the Giants win 6 games.
Not sure why the statement that Barkley is not a difference maker when it comes to winning football games is obtuse. Where is the correlation to him playing more resulting in more wins?
He is not the only variable, but there is also no objective evidence showing the Giants win more when Barkley plays.
The New York Islanders won more games after their best player left and not replaced by a similar talent. Sometimes an individual talent alone does not make a team better.
Quote:
you might want to find another sport to pay attention to if you don’t think Barkley is a difference maker. I mean seriously. That might be the most obtuse comment in BBI history.
2018: Barkley plays all 16 games and the Giants win 5 games.
2019: Barkley plays only 13 games and the Giants win 4 games.
2020: Barkley plays less than 2 full games and the Giants win 6 games.
Not sure why the statement that Barkley is not a difference maker when it comes to winning football games is obtuse. Where is the correlation to him playing more resulting in more wins?
He is not the only variable, but there is also no objective evidence showing the Giants win more when Barkley plays.
The New York Islanders won more games after their best player left and not replaced by a similar talent. Sometimes an individual talent alone does not make a team better.
I'm misread this terribly. Im talking about next year already...
I would start out with both Barkley and a power runner in the line up and let the power runner start things off -- and then build the plays from there.
Should conclude from that that Gallman is better than Barkley? No. We should realize that Gallman wasn't facing 9-man front defenses designed to stop him. Barkley was.
But we are way, way, way more dynamic on offense with him. Stop this nonsense.
That being said, 8-8. Maybe they beat Chicago and Philly.
I think people just see things differently which is fine, but I’ve taken a break trying to defend my stance because it’s ultimately meaningless.
To me “difference maker” is a goal post that gets moved a lot. To me he’s absolutely a difference maker - in 2018 we have even an average defense Barkley effected the games enough to make a huge “difference” despite a pretty cooked Eli. 2019, even worse defense. But no, he’s not going to make an awful team average - why would anyone think that?
There’s a lot of players like him throughout history - stuck in bad situations. Was Calvin Johnson not a difference maker or was it that his QB was usually trash followed by a usually bad defense?
Arguing Barkley being the right fit in 2018 is a much more reasonable argument. Saying he isn’t a difference maker is a convo I just walk away from in most cases.
Vs with the OL performing as above, without Saquon at all, but rather a continuation of the gruesome threesome of Gallman, Morris and Lewis at RB?
Vs with the OL performing as above, without Saquon at all, but rather a continuation of the gruesome threesome of Gallman, Morris and Lewis at RB?
Ok, djm.
My point was exactly what you said. In basketball you have to have an elite talent because they can often carry teams almost by themselves. That isn't the case in football where complementary football is much more important.
I added the Islanders example because I think that could possibly be the case with the Giants. I think an elite QB equates directly to more wins. I don't know that a RB or WR have the same impact.
But we are way, way, way more dynamic on offense with him. Stop this nonsense.
The nonsense is what you post.
There is overwhelming data that supports both the notion that RBs are not impactful players. Also that consistency is paramount to any positive impact they might have. Boom or bust is not helpful.
If you read and understand the data detailed analysis then you might reconsider your position.
That said let me make a quick argument for you that should make some sense. I think we can all agree that touches by WRs are far more valuable in terms of yards and scoring than are RB touches. It turns out that staticially, WR touches are overwhlmingly more valuable than RB touches and that include both rushes and the passes. The YPA for RBs is typically 2.5 - 3 yards less than WRs. So the bottom line cannibalizing WRs touches and giving those to your RB is going to hurt your offense.
You advocating all these RB touches is the exact opposite of what the overwhelming amount of data tells us.
I think we get to 8-8 but I don't think we do any better than 9-7 even with a healthy Saquon all season. We were still well short of weapons in the passing game even with him there