This^^^. I actually like the idea of having a weapon like Waddle on this team, but I'm concerned with our ability to take of advantage of his skillset.
The guy is a warrior. He had no business playing in the NCG, but he had to be there. We could use that kind of spirit, especially when it comes with 4.3 speed.
Farley's is far more concerning to me than Waddle's. Farley missed the last 2 games of 2019 with back surgery, then opted out this past year. An ankle is a far safer bet, IMO.
The guy is a warrior. He had no business playing in the NCG, but he had to be there. We could use that kind of spirit, especially when it comes with 4.3 speed.
I agree, he’s a playmaker. Which we desperately need on offense especially.
Unless we hit it hard in FA. Starting with a bonafide #1 receiver.
If that doesn't happen or we have to settle for a Samuel or Corey Davis (though I like his upside). I would be surprised if we go D at 11. The need is too big and the grades on the top reciever options should be pretty close to the defenders. One of Waddle, Smith or Pitts will likely to make it to 11. I would agree that Parsons if he drops is likely BPA there but maybe not quite on a whole another tier. Even if he is, the need to help DJ might still be just too important.
I disagree, the talent on defense looks stronger and buildings towards being better value at #11. NYG has a big need for WR upgrades, but Waddle might be the only one who reaches #11, and I'm not a big fan of 5'10 180 wideouts with a pick that high. I want a big legit #1 picking this high. The OL other than Sewell I think are a reach, and we're not picking a QB. So, the talent on offense really doesn't seem to be lining up for NYG.
In FA either via FA or trade it would really free them up round 1 to go BPA. Last year many surmised NYG going LT because it was the gaping hole and there were some quality tackles who would be close to BPA when they pick.
RE: RE: It doesn't seem like there's a defender worthy of a pick at 11 other
I disagree, the talent on defense looks stronger and buildings towards being better value at #11. NYG has a big need for WR upgrades, but Waddle might be the only one who reaches #11, and I'm not a big fan of 5'10 180 wideouts with a pick that high. I want a big legit #1 picking this high. The OL other than Sewell I think are a reach, and we're not picking a QB. So, the talent on offense really doesn't seem to be lining up for NYG.
To me this reads as drafting for need rather than best player. They need WRs, sure, but what they really need is offensive playmakers. It would be difficult to argue that Waddle and Pitts are not that, and I haven't seen too many defensive players mocked into the top 10 this year.
I'm not even crazy about Pitts because it worries me that they won't know how to use him.
but I agree with John, Waddle's size can't be ignored when factoring in where we pick. And best player at 11 might be defense anyway even if Waddle is there.
waddle has game breaking speed which is valuable and compensates in his value for lack of size. i would not be hung up on that. i will say that i doubt garrett can take advantage of that and i worry that the offensive line won't hold up to let waddle shine, but that's too short-sighted to not pick waddle. the reason not to pick waddle is that there are plenty of good wrs that can he had rd 2-3 but they don't have his rare speed
i love parsons in this defense and think he can be a game wrecker. he is my preference with the pick. i also don't think this defense is far off from being a top 5 unit and getting parsons would really take this defense to a whole different level
There should be top talent still on the board at 11 in a few positions of need. BPA shouldn't be an issue as there will be a few players at different positions that could be at the top of the Giants board when they are on the clock. Waddle would be a good pick and would go along way towards getting DJ more weapons. But then we possibly go yet another year without getting a top notch ER. When Jerry R was GM he neglected the OL far too long (and we saw the results), I'm seeing the same with DG in respect to the Edge. Plus, if the team can't resign Williams, the pass rush is going to become an even bigger need.
time, I think he would be a true difference maker on our defense. People need to remember we have stud 3-4 DLmen- guys with very specific roles and duties. We lack second level play makers.. Parsons is that guy and he would make Martinez even better.
Rousseau scares the shit out of me. I want to say he is stiff but that means not flexible and seems flexible but he is VERY mechanical. I don't see natural physical ability tied to natural instincts. I just don't trust him enough and see him like a Kanavis McGhee. A guy who would be lost in between positions with us.
Love Waddle, but the ankle is a concern and can be long term concern look at OBJ. Ankle led to further injuries. I do think they need to get Jones a weapon for him to succeed and am not downplaying Waddle. He could end up as one of the best WR in this class and be a very good WR for the next 10 years. If Slater is still available, would be very hard to pass on him even if he’s an OG in the NFL. He can be another Nelson and that would help Barkley and Jones immensely especially with their injury concerns.
so if we go Pitts or Waddle I'm reminding myself its a longterm move and longterm Garrett won't be here anymore. Maybe the Kitchens promotion will pay early dividends? Either way I wouldn't really factor Garrett into who we pick - i think 2021 is his last season here regardless of performance (fired or leaving to HC).
He fits a bit into what I see Judge wants in his offensive talent/scheme and I could see Garrett actually using him properly right away. He's got the Alabama pipeline too to get the scoop on him.
I think Devonta goes top 6 or 8 and it's not inconceivable even Waddle is gone by 11 either. Alabama pedigree carries a ton of weight (especially the WR talent and coachability).
If Smith/Waddle are off board i can see them pivot to defense and go WR in Round 2. They won't force an offense weapon pick if the defender is high there.
He fits a bit into what I see Judge wants in his offensive talent/scheme and I could see Garrett actually using him properly right away. He's got the Alabama pipeline too to get the scoop on him.
I think Devonta goes top 6 or 8 and it's not inconceivable even Waddle is gone by 11 either. Alabama pedigree carries a ton of weight (especially the WR talent and coachability).
If Smith/Waddle are off board i can see them pivot to defense and go WR in Round 2. They won't force an offense weapon pick if the defender is high there.
God I hope so, their drafting under DG just isn't doing it for me.
He fits a bit into what I see Judge wants in his offensive talent/scheme and I could see Garrett actually using him properly right away. He's got the Alabama pipeline too to get the scoop on him.
I think Devonta goes top 6 or 8 and it's not inconceivable even Waddle is gone by 11 either. Alabama pedigree carries a ton of weight (especially the WR talent and coachability).
If Smith/Waddle are off board i can see them pivot to defense and go WR in Round 2. They won't force an offense weapon pick if the defender is high there.
God I hope so, their drafting under DG just isn't doing it for me.
Agreed - but I think there's been a little more deference/collaboration for the coaches and scouts working together on the college scouting side recently. We'll see.
They need to have some impact from these first few Judge drafts or the team is going to be stuck in purgatory potentially, with difficult decisions/costly ones possibly at QB and RB.
and also need to see more from Andrew Thomas. All of their cornerstone picks really need to get the motor engaged and propel the team forward, same for their #2's.
He's like a young Antonio Brown or Tyreek Hill. One of those aggressive, joystick style players with great hands that is a major pain in the ass to defend.
He's not my personal favorite style of WR, but he would help this team tremendously at what it sucks at.
they will have the perfect (on paper) pieces for a spread offense with waddle, barkley, engram (i know he sucks but his athletic ability is such where he would be best in a spread offense), and slayton, yet their offensive coach doesn't run that type of system
they will have the perfect (on paper) pieces for a spread offense with waddle, barkley, engram (i know he sucks but his athletic ability is such where he would be best in a spread offense), and slayton, yet their offensive coach doesn't run that type of system
That is an interesting point. Spitballing...What if that is why they "promoted" Kitchens? To "suggest" more spread looks. I think Jones is better suited to that too... I feel it could speed up his decision making up a bit. Would forcing things on Garret make him quit?...
Waddle with a 10 foot pole. Maybe I'm paranoid after everything the Giants have been through, but if there is even a slight injury history I am passing. Cruz tears his knee apart, Odell breaks his ankle, Saquon tears his ACL...Every single big playmaker we have suffers a traumatic career-dampening injury. I want no part of that anymore. Give me guys that play every game.
I like Parsons, but I'm curious as to whether there are maturity issues with him. He's had a few hiccups the past 3 years.
It has to be investigated for sure, as would Waddle's ankle, etc. Each pick NYG doesn't score a direct hit on at this point in time really can stall progress on the overall plan. For the record, there's maturity with most of these young men. They rarely hear the word no, they've got fat wallets and access to everything and anything, and they're still not entirely out of the collegiate echo chamber yet.
But y'know, the Giants have one of the worst receiver groups in the league, they are desperate for playmakers, they lack speed and elusiveness.
So if Jaylen Waddle falls to the Giants, take a linebacker?
I understand the concerns about Waddle's ankle and his size. I would prefer Chase (HIGHLY unlikely) or Smith (Almost as unlikely, but possible if someone else takes Waddle first). If Pitts and Waddle are both on the board (also unlikely, but more likely than Smith and Waddle), I can understand preferring Pitts.
But don't overthink this: When a big part of the solution to your O problem falls to you, just take it. And if you don't have a conviction on Waddle, trade down, because someone else will, and you need picks.
Besides, there's no clear consensus on any of these guys once you get past the first few picks. Lawrence, Sewell, Wilson, maybe Chase, then opinions diverge. Some people love Parsons, some don't. Same with Rousseau, Surtain, Horn. The Giants' board will probably look very different from GBN or PFN or DraftNetwork or Walter Football or CBS. No matter. I figure, attack your biggest problem right away.
Yes, there will probably be great value on WRs in the 3rd-5th rounds. Agree 100% on that. If you're hung up on picking for value, you could gamble and wait. But it's a gamble, even in a draft with a ton of WR talent.
who I think will definitely not be a bust, and not only that I think his upside is an all pro type talent similar to Hill. He’s got incredible athletic ability, he’s tough, great hands, can run circles around defenses especially in short space. The Natl Champ game showed me a lot about him and I’m willing to bet the older GMs who have been around awhile really respected that.
I disagree, the talent on defense looks stronger and buildings towards being better value at #11. NYG has a big need for WR upgrades, but Waddle might be the only one who reaches #11, and I'm not a big fan of 5'10 180 wideouts with a pick that high. I want a big legit #1 picking this high. The OL other than Sewell I think are a reach, and we're not picking a QB. So, the talent on offense really doesn't seem to be lining up for NYG.
The thing is 5'11 180 is probably not a reach which you are saying.
But y'know, the Giants have one of the worst receiver groups in the league, they are desperate for playmakers, they lack speed and elusiveness.
So if Jaylen Waddle falls to the Giants, take a linebacker?
I understand the concerns about Waddle's ankle and his size. I would prefer Chase (HIGHLY unlikely) or Smith (Almost as unlikely, but possible if someone else takes Waddle first). If Pitts and Waddle are both on the board (also unlikely, but more likely than Smith and Waddle), I can understand preferring Pitts.
But don't overthink this: When a big part of the solution to your O problem falls to you, just take it. And if you don't have a conviction on Waddle, trade down, because someone else will, and you need picks.
Besides, there's no clear consensus on any of these guys once you get past the first few picks. Lawrence, Sewell, Wilson, maybe Chase, then opinions diverge. Some people love Parsons, some don't. Same with Rousseau, Surtain, Horn. The Giants' board will probably look very different from GBN or PFN or DraftNetwork or Walter Football or CBS. No matter. I figure, attack your biggest problem right away.
Yes, there will probably be great value on WRs in the 3rd-5th rounds. Agree 100% on that. If you're hung up on picking for value, you could gamble and wait. But it's a gamble, even in a draft with a ton of WR talent.
I'm definitely okay taking a WR. Definitely Waddle for example. But I'd also love Parsons.
Then rd 2 you can get a very good WR as well.
For offense we have this supposed one-of-a-kind" rb that has never been properly utilized. It's possible to bypass the WR- draft a 2nd rounder and along with Barkley you are ok.
This week....Giants go Waddle.
This^^^. I actually like the idea of having a weapon like Waddle on this team, but I'm concerned with our ability to take of advantage of his skillset.
NYG could have one of Parsons/Farley/Surtain/Rousseau added to the ranks, and that's a big win.
I agree, he’s a playmaker. Which we desperately need on offense especially.
Rousseau looks like the most non-explosive DE I've seen on film in the last 4 years. His a second or third round talent IMHO.
It might just be an offense-heavy year.
If that doesn't happen or we have to settle for a Samuel or Corey Davis (though I like his upside). I would be surprised if we go D at 11. The need is too big and the grades on the top reciever options should be pretty close to the defenders. One of Waddle, Smith or Pitts will likely to make it to 11. I would agree that Parsons if he drops is likely BPA there but maybe not quite on a whole another tier. Even if he is, the need to help DJ might still be just too important.
NYG could have one of Parsons/Farley/Surtain/Rousseau added to the ranks, and that's a big win.
If it plays out this way, who’s your preference?
NYG could have one of Parsons/Farley/Surtain/Rousseau added to the ranks, and that's a big win.
This. Do not reach for need just because it is offense.
It might just be an offense-heavy year.
I disagree, the talent on defense looks stronger and buildings towards being better value at #11. NYG has a big need for WR upgrades, but Waddle might be the only one who reaches #11, and I'm not a big fan of 5'10 180 wideouts with a pick that high. I want a big legit #1 picking this high. The OL other than Sewell I think are a reach, and we're not picking a QB. So, the talent on offense really doesn't seem to be lining up for NYG.
Quote:
than Surtain or the other CB.
It might just be an offense-heavy year.
I disagree, the talent on defense looks stronger and buildings towards being better value at #11. NYG has a big need for WR upgrades, but Waddle might be the only one who reaches #11, and I'm not a big fan of 5'10 180 wideouts with a pick that high. I want a big legit #1 picking this high. The OL other than Sewell I think are a reach, and we're not picking a QB. So, the talent on offense really doesn't seem to be lining up for NYG.
To me this reads as drafting for need rather than best player. They need WRs, sure, but what they really need is offensive playmakers. It would be difficult to argue that Waddle and Pitts are not that, and I haven't seen too many defensive players mocked into the top 10 this year.
I'm not even crazy about Pitts because it worries me that they won't know how to use him.
i love parsons in this defense and think he can be a game wrecker. he is my preference with the pick. i also don't think this defense is far off from being a top 5 unit and getting parsons would really take this defense to a whole different level
farley and surtain would be fine as well
Rousseau scares the shit out of me. I want to say he is stiff but that means not flexible and seems flexible but he is VERY mechanical. I don't see natural physical ability tied to natural instincts. I just don't trust him enough and see him like a Kanavis McGhee. A guy who would be lost in between positions with us.
He fits a bit into what I see Judge wants in his offensive talent/scheme and I could see Garrett actually using him properly right away. He's got the Alabama pipeline too to get the scoop on him.
I think Devonta goes top 6 or 8 and it's not inconceivable even Waddle is gone by 11 either. Alabama pedigree carries a ton of weight (especially the WR talent and coachability).
If Smith/Waddle are off board i can see them pivot to defense and go WR in Round 2. They won't force an offense weapon pick if the defender is high there.
Quote:
wouldn't surprise me if they picked him.
He fits a bit into what I see Judge wants in his offensive talent/scheme and I could see Garrett actually using him properly right away. He's got the Alabama pipeline too to get the scoop on him.
I think Devonta goes top 6 or 8 and it's not inconceivable even Waddle is gone by 11 either. Alabama pedigree carries a ton of weight (especially the WR talent and coachability).
If Smith/Waddle are off board i can see them pivot to defense and go WR in Round 2. They won't force an offense weapon pick if the defender is high there.
God I hope so, their drafting under DG just isn't doing it for me.
Quote:
In comment 15161174 JonC said:
Quote:
wouldn't surprise me if they picked him.
He fits a bit into what I see Judge wants in his offensive talent/scheme and I could see Garrett actually using him properly right away. He's got the Alabama pipeline too to get the scoop on him.
I think Devonta goes top 6 or 8 and it's not inconceivable even Waddle is gone by 11 either. Alabama pedigree carries a ton of weight (especially the WR talent and coachability).
If Smith/Waddle are off board i can see them pivot to defense and go WR in Round 2. They won't force an offense weapon pick if the defender is high there.
God I hope so, their drafting under DG just isn't doing it for me.
Agreed - but I think there's been a little more deference/collaboration for the coaches and scouts working together on the college scouting side recently. We'll see.
They need to have some impact from these first few Judge drafts or the team is going to be stuck in purgatory potentially, with difficult decisions/costly ones possibly at QB and RB.
He's not my personal favorite style of WR, but he would help this team tremendously at what it sucks at.
I like Parsons, but I'm curious as to whether there are maturity issues with him. He's had a few hiccups the past 3 years.
Quote:
.
I like Parsons, but I'm curious as to whether there are maturity issues with him. He's had a few hiccups the past 3 years.
It has to be investigated for sure, as would Waddle's ankle, etc. Each pick NYG doesn't score a direct hit on at this point in time really can stall progress on the overall plan. For the record, there's maturity with most of these young men. They rarely hear the word no, they've got fat wallets and access to everything and anything, and they're still not entirely out of the collegiate echo chamber yet.
So if Jaylen Waddle falls to the Giants, take a linebacker?
I understand the concerns about Waddle's ankle and his size. I would prefer Chase (HIGHLY unlikely) or Smith (Almost as unlikely, but possible if someone else takes Waddle first). If Pitts and Waddle are both on the board (also unlikely, but more likely than Smith and Waddle), I can understand preferring Pitts.
But don't overthink this: When a big part of the solution to your O problem falls to you, just take it. And if you don't have a conviction on Waddle, trade down, because someone else will, and you need picks.
Besides, there's no clear consensus on any of these guys once you get past the first few picks. Lawrence, Sewell, Wilson, maybe Chase, then opinions diverge. Some people love Parsons, some don't. Same with Rousseau, Surtain, Horn. The Giants' board will probably look very different from GBN or PFN or DraftNetwork or Walter Football or CBS. No matter. I figure, attack your biggest problem right away.
Yes, there will probably be great value on WRs in the 3rd-5th rounds. Agree 100% on that. If you're hung up on picking for value, you could gamble and wait. But it's a gamble, even in a draft with a ton of WR talent.
Quote:
than Surtain or the other CB.
It might just be an offense-heavy year.
I disagree, the talent on defense looks stronger and buildings towards being better value at #11. NYG has a big need for WR upgrades, but Waddle might be the only one who reaches #11, and I'm not a big fan of 5'10 180 wideouts with a pick that high. I want a big legit #1 picking this high. The OL other than Sewell I think are a reach, and we're not picking a QB. So, the talent on offense really doesn't seem to be lining up for NYG.
The thing is 5'11 180 is probably not a reach which you are saying.
For me Rousseau is a reach at 11.
I'd love Parsons for sure.
So if Jaylen Waddle falls to the Giants, take a linebacker?
I understand the concerns about Waddle's ankle and his size. I would prefer Chase (HIGHLY unlikely) or Smith (Almost as unlikely, but possible if someone else takes Waddle first). If Pitts and Waddle are both on the board (also unlikely, but more likely than Smith and Waddle), I can understand preferring Pitts.
But don't overthink this: When a big part of the solution to your O problem falls to you, just take it. And if you don't have a conviction on Waddle, trade down, because someone else will, and you need picks.
Besides, there's no clear consensus on any of these guys once you get past the first few picks. Lawrence, Sewell, Wilson, maybe Chase, then opinions diverge. Some people love Parsons, some don't. Same with Rousseau, Surtain, Horn. The Giants' board will probably look very different from GBN or PFN or DraftNetwork or Walter Football or CBS. No matter. I figure, attack your biggest problem right away.
Yes, there will probably be great value on WRs in the 3rd-5th rounds. Agree 100% on that. If you're hung up on picking for value, you could gamble and wait. But it's a gamble, even in a draft with a ton of WR talent.
I'm definitely okay taking a WR. Definitely Waddle for example. But I'd also love Parsons.
Then rd 2 you can get a very good WR as well.
For offense we have this supposed one-of-a-kind" rb that has never been properly utilized. It's possible to bypass the WR- draft a 2nd rounder and along with Barkley you are ok.
That SCREAMS difference maker, which is Waddle.
Fill up this squad with game wreckers and you’ll end up with winners.