Rashawn Slater OL Northwestern

in round 1.

Just like it doesn't matter how good the Receivers and TE's are when the OL can't hold up in pass pro, it doesn't matter how good the OL is when you don't have anyone who can get a yard of separation.

or after a unicorn like DG trade down.

this time last year there were sure fire end of 1st early second round guys getting drafted into the 4th round(buddy of mine went nuts we kept passing on Zach Baun lol)

another name I just can't see making out of the first but i'm hearing will be around in the second is last years potential top OC/G Creed Humphrey

In comment 15127413 Breeze_94 said:

Quote:

in round 1. Just like it doesn't matter how good the Receivers and TE's are when the OL can't hold up in pass pro, it doesn't matter how good the OL is when you don't have anyone who can get a yard of separation.

Very shallow viewpoint.

Many are saying Slater only falls because of his sitting out the 20 season. He was very highly regarded coming out of '19.

Personally, I would prefer D in the first (Surtain, Parsons, Barmore, Rousseau in that order...for now), and then MAYBE Pitts. But if we took Slater at 11, its insurance in case Peart (or Thomas) doesnt work out. The loser either gets traded or plays Guard.

Im sick of not dominating the lines of scrimmage. There are plenty of WRs to target in FA as well as who will be available in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. No more drafting for need.

I qould prefer Wyatt Davis. He is out of his mind.

In comment 15127431 chopperhatch said:

Quote:

I qould prefer Wyatt Davis. He is out of his mind.

plays the right side, could be an instant replacement for Zeitler.

In comment 15127441 Platos said:

Quote:

In comment 15127431 chopperhatch said: Quote: I qould prefer Wyatt Davis. He is out of his mind. plays the right side, could be an instant replacement for Zeitler.

Not to mention and upgrade. Wyatt Davis has John Randle's attitude as a Guard. Thats fucking awesome

"you don't draft RB's early".
Of course, I don't agree with that - at least not as an absolute. You "normally" don't draft a RB early, but you might if there's no bett4er alternative that year (Darnold/Rosen) and if the running back projects to be something special.
I'd say the same thing about the guard position - only stronger(see 2014 when we picked at about he same position and Aaron Donald, Zack Martin and OBJ were available). Just a couple spots further down and a guard would make more sense.
IOW"s, I think they'll be a player just as good or better at a more critical or more needed position. Would I pick Q. Nelson if he were there? Even so, would depend on the althernatives. Every case is different and there should be almost no absolutes.

People like Daniel Jeremiah think he’s better than Sewell. You could plug him in at RT and he has the advantage of being able to play guard as well. The O line still has holes.

In comment 15127431 chopperhatch said:

Quote:

I qould prefer Wyatt Davis. He is out of his mind.

Also has a balky knee.

Following his injury in the first half, Davis was seen later in the game on the sideline with crutches. He has left games previously due to knee injuries and head coach Ryan Day said after the game that Davis had reinjured his knee during the national title game.

No problem with continuing to add to the OL but not with our 1. It’s time to upgrade our skill positions which are in worse shape than the OL. You can certainly get good OL talent on day 2.

If certain guys are not there at 11, there is nothing wrong with an OL. It is never a glamour pick. If that is the best value at 11 you get it. Davis is a natural RG, so it could make a lot of sense.

because of that, I think people see the RT position as solved and I am not there yet.

It would be great if we got three starting OL out of the 2020 draft but we may have a starter and two really good depth players - which would be fine!

If Slater is #1 on your board at 11, you take him.

have a few OL in the pipeline that look promising. They need more of them but I like to add them in round 2 and later and preferably in the rounds 4-7 and then UFA. Other teams build very good lines this way but it requires good drafting, numbers and then development. Giants have to get good at this. This will lead to long term success as a franchise.

Use your 1st rounders on high impact positions that are much harder to find in later rounds. This draft I am hoping for corner first. I would settle for front seven or WR/TE talent if no corner available.

DG is NOT going to use the pick at 11 on an OL - book it!

Unless, yeah, Sewell drops because of a gas mask & bong photo I suppose.

Round 2, sure if an OL with a top.15 grade on their board drops to 42...

I mean you just heard Mara talking about adding offensive weapons. That's NOT an OL who might end up starting at guard...

BTW, I doubt Peart would get moved inside to OG, too tall!!!

Adding weapons doesnt mean round 1. There something called free agency. If I’m drafting I highly consider a tackle if he’s ranked high on my board. I don’t shy away from RT, corner or edge just to fill a need in round 1.

I expect chase and smith off the board. We would likely be looking at waddle who, IMO, is the only WR I’d consider at 11 after the first 2 I named. If Medical’s check out I’d assume he’s in play also Pitts who I’m not a fan of. If somehow toney lasts to round 2 would be an excellent move. Wishful thinking

In comment 15127563 Tuckrule said:

Quote:

Adding weapons doesnt mean round 1. There something called free agency. If I’m drafting I highly consider a tackle if he’s ranked high on my board. I don’t shy away from RT, corner or edge just to fill a need in round 1. I expect chase and smith off the board. We would likely be looking at waddle who, IMO, is the only WR I’d consider at 11 after the first 2 I named. If Medical’s check out I’d assume he’s in play also Pitts who I’m not a fan of. If somehow toney lasts to round 2 would be an excellent move. Wishful thinking

I mostly agree, and I don't think Mara's comment meant "pick at 11 will be offensive weapon". But I think it will be either an O weapon or D weapon, and won't be an OL both because of Peart and because it's a very deep OL draft.

People talk about DG's draft history derisively, but he's had a ton of success picking OL in mid to later rounds, and most recently with UDFA Gates and 5th rounder Lemieux. There will be a "weapon" type of player at 11 that does not play OL.

Giants.com recently posted an article with a laundry list of possible picks at 11 by various media draft pundits. I don't think any of them (well maybe one) predicted an OL to the Giants at 11...

Just sayin' its VERY HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

If Sewell drops to us because he is caught with a gasmask bong, we still draft him at 11.

Everyone on board?

It’s probably a stretch at #11, but Judge values versatility and Slater could be a very good T or G. And let’s not act like this OL isn’t still a problem.

A lot has to be done to this offense to determine if Jones is the solution. If he needs even more time to make decisions than we need to build a better wall.

In comment 15127589 Capt. Don said:

Quote:

If Sewell drops to us because he is caught with a gasmask bong, we still draft him at 11. Everyone on board?

Anyone good with photoshop on here? I kid I kid

In comment 15127592 bw in dc said:

Quote:

It’s probably a stretch at #11, but Judge values versatility and Slater could be a very good T or G. And let’s not act like this OL isn’t still a problem. A lot has to be done to this offense to determine if Jones is the solution. If he needs even more time to make decisions than we need to build a better wall.

Agree with everything.

OL has been so bad for so long that we as fans just want to declare it a finished product just because it got better. I hope Peart is the answer at RT but that is far from a sure thing as is Lemieux/Hernandez at LG and Zeitler is not the long term answer at RG.

Slater could come in and compete with Peart for RT. If Peart shows out, Slater could slide into guard and then we would really have something, IMO.

I wont pretend to know if Slater is worth the #11 pick but if the scouts have him evaluated that high, I would be completely fine with it.

In comment 15127589 Capt. Don said:

Quote:

If Sewell drops to us because he is caught with a gasmask bong, we still draft him at 11. Everyone on board?

+1

Agree the OL is far from fixed, but given their recent draft trends and the long list of premium needs, I doubt they go OL at #11.

before the #11 pick can really take shape.

It is clear from their media sessions that they are committed to Daniel Jones but are adamant they need to put more playmakers on the field to give him/offense a chance to succeed. This is their top goal otherwise it really puts risk on Jones regressing, the offense continuing to flounder, a losing record again, and likely a new GM and QB getting inserted.

With that, reliable playmakers (WRs and TEs as they presume Saquon recovers) have to come from Free Agency because Giants cannot rely on how Draft falls and that rookie(s) will have the necessary and early enough impact. Maybe not all have to come from Free Agency but certainly some.

So in order for that to occur, the Giants have to clear a good amount of cap space in order to ensure they are very active and high bidders for free agent playmakers. This brings into play numerous issues including monies needed to keep DL intact and whether to make tough decisions on Zeitler and Engram. Tate, Solder and a few others are actually easy decisions if you believe the above #1 goal.

If this occurs and a couple of new receiving targets are signed in free agency, then the Giants have more flexibility with #1 pick and don't have to reach. It does however increase risk the NYG overpay for guys not worth the squeeze (as one would say).

But if they don't make the proper cap cuts & don't outbid other teams for playmakers in FA, then assume DG will get desperate with his Day 1 and Day 2 picks which is never a good thing either.

imv

In comment 15127593 Everyone Relax said:

Quote:

In comment 15127589 Capt. Don said: Quote: If Sewell drops to us because he is caught with a gasmask bong, we still draft him at 11. Everyone on board? Anyone good with photoshop on here? I kid I kid

Haha!

In comment 15127620 JonC said:

Quote:

Agree the OL is far from fixed, but given their recent draft trends and the long list of premium needs, I doubt they go OL at #11.

Last year the prognosticators said Wirfs looked more like a Guard. Slater is valuable because he apparently can play anywhere on the OL.

All of a sudden Colin at Great Blue North has Slater as his #6 overall prospect! Just yesterday he had Slater somewhere in the 16-24 range (I forget exactly but it was later than #15). I wonder what he heard last night from someone in the scouting community.

In comment 15127620 JonC said:

Quote:

Agree the OL is far from fixed, but given their recent draft trends and the long list of premium needs, I doubt they go OL at #11.

Until we see what's done (and not done) in free agency, it's premature to count out OL, especially since there are two spots open to competition on the right side and it's not as if OLG is settled either.

There will be a prospect who falls to the 11th spot that the Giants have in the top five on their draft board. If it's an OL, so be it. If it's a CB so be it. If it's a WR so be it. If it's an ER/LB so be it. And if by chance the draft has already been picked clean of blue chip prospects on their board, they will be in a good position to trade down with a team looking to grab a QB.

on the OL currently and TBH, the second half of the season they played well, I'd expect them to add to the mix in rounds 3-5. Even if Slater is there, I don't think we would take him over a top 15 WR or CB type, or even Edge. I'd also expect we sign a decently priced OL in FA.

Get more guys like Lemieux and Peart in the mid rounds, and hit on the skill player in round 1 or 2.

maybe a future Cowboy?

Milton et al: Since you mentioned our ranking, indeed, what we are picking up from sources around the league is that a growing number of teams have slater rated ahead of Sewell. Slater gets knocked down a bit because he's a little short for an OT although he certainly appears to have enought length to at least have a shot at RT. Otherwise he's a very physical athletic guy. The whole scenario is kind of interesting as we started to pick up some stuff about sewell may be slipping a way back in August - he's not the most physical guy out there - but then it kind of died away when the different conferences either were playing or they weren't.

And Slater would be a great add to the Giants OL a he is so versatile. The problem is at what cost, in particular, having to pass on potential impact players at receiver, in the secondary and along the DL which is what the team needs to get to a championship level. Time will tell!!

not interested in taking a "good" OL who can play all over the line at pick 11. We can save those picks for rounds 3-5. At 11 I want a pro bowl talent with elite upside.

In comment 15128081 Colin@gbn said:

Quote:

Milton et al: Since you mentioned our ranking, indeed, what we are picking up from sources around the league is that a growing number of teams have slater rated ahead of Sewell. Slater gets knocked down a bit because he's a little short for an OT although he certainly appears to have enought length to at least have a shot at RT. Otherwise he's a very physical athletic guy. The whole scenario is kind of interesting as we started to pick up some stuff about sewell may be slipping a way back in August - he's not the most physical guy out there - but then it kind of died away when the different conferences either were playing or they weren't. And Slater would be a great add to the Giants OL a he is so versatile. The problem is at what cost, in particular, having to pass on potential impact players at receiver, in the secondary and along the DL which is what the team needs to get to a championship level. Time will tell!!

Very interesting insight. And I agree he is very physical. I wonder how much opting-out is going to ding him.

There is a lot of chatter about his game against Young. I watched it and Slater did look good. It wasn't totally lopsided - as some have suggested - but Slater did acquit himself very well.

In comment 15127523 jeff57 said:

Quote:

In comment 15127431 chopperhatch said: Quote: I qould prefer Wyatt Davis. He is out of his mind. Also has a balky knee. Following his injury in the first half, Davis was seen later in the game on the sideline with crutches. He has left games previously due to knee injuries and head coach Ryan Day said after the game that Davis had reinjured his knee during the national title game.

Did not know that. Hard pass at 11 then.

In comment 15127611 Capt. Don said:

Quote:

In comment 15127592 bw in dc said: Quote: It’s probably a stretch at #11, but Judge values versatility and Slater could be a very good T or G. And let’s not act like this OL isn’t still a problem. A lot has to be done to this offense to determine if Jones is the solution. If he needs even more time to make decisions than we need to build a better wall. Agree with everything. OL has been so bad for so long that we as fans just want to declare it a finished product just because it got better. I hope Peart is the answer at RT but that is far from a sure thing as is Lemieux/Hernandez at LG and Zeitler is not the long term answer at RG. Slater could come in and compete with Peart for RT. If Peart shows out, Slater could slide into guard and then we would really have something, IMO. I wont pretend to know if Slater is worth the #11 pick but if the scouts have him evaluated that high, I would be completely fine with it.

While I KINDA get your point about fans selling themselves on an OL being complete because of promise, but Peart showed a lot more than any of us forecasted before the season when we were saying he was a project and likely wouldnt see the field.

Instead, he saw quite a bit of action, impressed more than disappointed, moves incredibly well and may turn out to be the most mammoth one of them all!

I would be very reluctant to draft another OT rd 1. The only exception being that all of the following are gone:

- WRs Smith, Chase, Bateman

- Pitts
- Parsons
- Surtain
- Barmore
- Rousseau
- Zaven Colins

We should be able to grab at least 1 of the above before having to take Slater (assuming no trade down of course).