I’m not someone who continuously slams Gettleman, but this is indefensible. The amount of recent draft picks and FA signings which have gone towards the offense should suggest much better production.
This makes me nervous as we head into FA where it is clear that DG & company will be addressing the offense, again.
Link - (
New Window )
But overall, your premise is correct.
Those fat Solder & Tate contracts have been a disaster. I hope those mistakes aren’t repeated in a few weeks.
Not to mention Barkley’s contract
It’s not the overall spend, it’s where and how you spend.
Objectively, measurably, the offense is terrible and not only includes the above noted FA contracts, which many here panned in real time, but also three top ten draft choices, which many here also panned irt. All these picks, all the money, and yet, the offense is horrible. Lets not forget, the offense isn’t just pathetic in terms of production, but Garrett is also a throw back coach who doesn’t appear to embrace many of the modern NFL concepts. And Getty boasts about his affinity for building a run first team. Maybe he’s right and the path to victory is on the back of Barks. And maybe DG defenders are right and this is all going to turn around this year. I hope so! But I don’t think so.
Objectively, measurably, the offense is terrible and not only includes the above noted FA contracts, which many here panned in real time, but also three top ten draft choices, which many here also panned irt. All these picks, all the money, and yet, the offense is horrible. Lets not forget, the offense isn’t just pathetic in terms of production, but Garrett is also a throw back coach who doesn’t appear to embrace many of the modern NFL concepts. And Getty boasts about his affinity for building a run first team. Maybe he’s right and the path to victory is on the back of Barks. And maybe DG defenders are right and this is all going to turn around this year. I hope so! But I don’t think so.
Not sure if i'm part of that club or not but regardless of who the GM is I don't really feel the need to come on every single thread and repeat the same criticisms over and over. That's not a defense, I simply don't enjoy it, i've read and heard it all several hundred times over by now. I'm willing to bet plenty of others fall into this category with a select few actually defending him tooth and nail.
His tenure hasn't been ideal but I'm hopeful that Judge's continued influence will tip the scales into getting players he specifically wants. They seem to work well together.
It’s not the overall spend, it’s where and how you spend.
The Saints? Kamara just signed a 5 yr/$75M extension. Their 2020 # just looks low because of the contract structure. But Kamara's cap hits starting 2022: $14.5M, $14M, $14.8M, $25M.
It’s not the overall spend, it’s where and how you spend.
Golden Tate's cap hit is a hair over Barkley for 2021 - goes to show how inflated WR contracts are. You can argue picking Barkley until you are blue in the face, he or his cost isn't preventing us from being better. Tate sucking, Shepard not playing, Solder sucking and not playing, the OL as a whole not playing decent football until the 2H of 2020, and Jones growing pains + injury are the real issues.
If 50% of the things I listed went from failure to average we'd be a playoff team in all likelihood.
1. Most cuts haven't been made (Tate alone drops them several spots)
2. FAs haven't been signed
3. Draft hasn't occurred (1st round picks can be significant)
4. The chart lacks context. Most rosters are close to the max now, but how much is camp fodder vs legit final 53 players? If you have 40 offensive guys, but 30 of them are minimum salary guys (missing starters and/or depth) its going to be a significant difference compared to a team with most starters/depth in place.
Seems like that would be up for debate.
1. Most cuts haven't been made (Tate alone drops them several spots)
2. FAs haven't been signed
3. Draft hasn't occurred (1st round picks can be significant)
4. The chart lacks context. Most rosters are close to the max now, but how much is camp fodder vs legit final 53 players? If you have 40 offensive guys, but 30 of them are minimum salary guys (missing starters and/or depth) its going to be a significant difference compared to a team with most starters/depth in place.
Ok . Your departure points are accurate . However let’s not lose sight of the fact that the Giants had the second worst offense in the league last season against an offensively unbalanced cap allocation . It’s an indictment, one that should have resulted in termination. It was an easy call.
Quote:
It's March 2nd, these #s are meaningless since:
1. Most cuts haven't been made (Tate alone drops them several spots)
2. FAs haven't been signed
3. Draft hasn't occurred (1st round picks can be significant)
4. The chart lacks context. Most rosters are close to the max now, but how much is camp fodder vs legit final 53 players? If you have 40 offensive guys, but 30 of them are minimum salary guys (missing starters and/or depth) its going to be a significant difference compared to a team with most starters/depth in place.
Ok . Your departure points are accurate . However let’s not lose sight of the fact that the Giants had the second worst offense in the league last season against an offensively unbalanced cap allocation . It’s an indictment, one that should have resulted in termination. It was an easy call.
The OP is about 2021 allocation. The Giants were 17th in offensive spending for 2020 (if I counted correctly). They allocated $89M to the offense and $76M to the D.
Then The Perfect Storm: the loss of saquon Barkley; no preseason for an offensive line that had never played together before; a new coaching Steph and scheme and the debulitating and changing drops of Evan.
In spite of that, they won five of their last eight games. As far as I'm concerned a franchise quarterback is in place and the offensive line has three very solid pieces. Barkley has to be turn and be effective and they have to find a play maker on the outside. They'd need a full camp together, that all seems doable.
Gates for nothing, Darius Slayton for a fifth, the potential of Matt Peart in the third. Show me more for less. Jones, Barclay and Andrew the precious pics, the same precious pics that produce a high rate of busts across the league.
The need driven carping acquires legitimacy if they don't produce next year, until then it has the impact and efficacy of flatulence in a hurricane.
It’s not the overall spend, it’s where and how you spend.
Seems like that would be up for debate.
Sure, you can say any player on this offense is preventing more wins, but we know he can produce when on the field, the others have been a roller coaster, some mostly bad. My point was in order of importance Barkley hasn't prevented us from upgrading the offense - we've spent money and other high picks and most of them haven't worked out well. Wouldn't you say that's a bigger issue than 1 player who's actually producing when he's playing?
But it's pretty startling how bad the offense is with the amount of resources allocated the last 3 years.
The presumptive offensive line based on resources should be Solder, Hernandez, Gates, Zeitler, Thomas.
Top 5 paid tackle, 2nd round guard, UDFA center, top 5 paid guard, 1st round tackle. And that might be the worst option right now.
But it's pretty startling how bad the offense is with the amount of resources allocated the last 3 years.
The presumptive offensive line based on resources should be Solder, Hernandez, Gates, Zeitler, Thomas.
Top 5 paid tackle, 2nd round guard, UDFA center, top 5 paid guard, 1st round tackle. And that might be the worst option right now.
The Giants haven't paid Zeitler as a top 5 OG. They've paid him $20M over 2 years (including $2.5M in bonus for 2021) and if he plays 2021 at $12M it would be $32M over 3 seasons.
$10.6M per year would be 8th among RGs and 13th among all OGs.
For that matter, Solder is no longer top 5 LT though at least with him the point is valid (massively overpaid given his production).
Quote:
as a rookie RB picked so high in the draft, the time he has missed due to injury and the replacement dollars spent on other backs aren't preventing the Giants from being better?
Seems like that would be up for debate.
Sure, you can say any player on this offense is preventing more wins, but we know he can produce when on the field, the others have been a roller coaster, some mostly bad. My point was in order of importance Barkley hasn't prevented us from upgrading the offense - we've spent money and other high picks and most of them haven't worked out well. Wouldn't you say that's a bigger issue than 1 player who's actually producing when he's playing?
Nobody else on this offense was drafted overall #2, and certainly nobody that high is missing as many games.
And not sure pointing to other players playing poorly is a compelling reason to suggest picking a RB at overall #2 isn't a questionable choice to upgrading the offense. NYG could have allocated their pick and dollar values on other positions or better players at the positions they ultimately wound up with, or simply drafted differently with #2.
Besides this year he's going to sign both FA DTs to contracts the Giants can work with and then be really smart with FA and sign under the radar up and coming players to bargain contracts who will turn into 2 or 3 immediate impact players and make great trade back in the draft trades to accumulate more assets which he's going to turn into 2 or 3 immediate impact players and all will be wonderful.
Quote:
It's March 2nd, these #s are meaningless since:
1. Most cuts haven't been made (Tate alone drops them several spots)
2. FAs haven't been signed
3. Draft hasn't occurred (1st round picks can be significant)
4. The chart lacks context. Most rosters are close to the max now, but how much is camp fodder vs legit final 53 players? If you have 40 offensive guys, but 30 of them are minimum salary guys (missing starters and/or depth) its going to be a significant difference compared to a team with most starters/depth in place.
Ok . Your departure points are accurate . However let’s not lose sight of the fact that the Giants had the second worst offense in the league last season against an offensively unbalanced cap allocation . It’s an indictment, one that should have resulted in termination. It was an easy call.
Using your logic, since the defense outperformed expectations while underfunded, DG should get promoted to minority owner/VP. Works both ways.
Cool everyone jets.....
Quote:
In comment 15164599 chick310 said:
Quote:
as a rookie RB picked so high in the draft, the time he has missed due to injury and the replacement dollars spent on other backs aren't preventing the Giants from being better?
Seems like that would be up for debate.
Sure, you can say any player on this offense is preventing more wins, but we know he can produce when on the field, the others have been a roller coaster, some mostly bad. My point was in order of importance Barkley hasn't prevented us from upgrading the offense - we've spent money and other high picks and most of them haven't worked out well. Wouldn't you say that's a bigger issue than 1 player who's actually producing when he's playing?
Nobody else on this offense was drafted overall #2, and certainly nobody that high is missing as many games.
And not sure pointing to other players playing poorly is a compelling reason to suggest picking a RB at overall #2 isn't a questionable choice to upgrading the offense. NYG could have allocated their pick and dollar values on other positions or better players at the positions they ultimately wound up with, or simply drafted differently with #2.
You are making a different argument. I said already if you want to argue drafting him some more, go nuts, but I won't be participating.
I responded to the cap allocation and siting RB, but it hasn't prevented us from spending big time picks on the OL, spending money on the OL, and spending money at WR. Much of that hasn't worked out - if it has, even a couple of the players, we'd be in a lot better shape.
These three years have been catastrophic.
The problem is the Giants are in a similar position today. Tate is gone and Solder and Zeitler will likely either be restructured or cut, creating some cap space. DG has a mandate to make this team competitive this year or he's gone. My guess is the Giants are going to do whatever it takes to get a #1 WR in FA and will look to draft another in the first round.
Poor pick and dollar allocations is indeed preventing the Giants from doing things they otherwise would this free agent period. It is talked about every day on this site as of late.
Poor pick and dollar allocations is indeed preventing the Giants from doing things they otherwise would this free agent period. It is talked about every day on this site as of late.
Of course, but again, my position on this is had Jones, or Tate, or Shepard, or Solder, or Zeitler, or Hernandez or Engram, etc lived up to their draft slot and/or cost, we wouldn't be chasing the roster so heavily in FA.
It’s not the overall spend, it’s where and how you spend.
wut?
Saints just gave Kamara a massive contract
KC drafted a RB in the first round
Indy drafted Taylor in the 1st half of the 2nd round
As always you try to cherry pick a stat to fit your narrative and then fall flat on your face.
the secondary is a second example. the team has poured countless resources in the draft to fix the CB position and they have next to nothing to show for it. baker, beal, ballentine, love. all suck or were terds. and here we are this offseason with CB as a major need.
these are premium positions that the team has used premium resources on trying to fill and they have failed miserably. and that's on the GM
Quote:
you draft high and the ones that need to be addressed via free agency. They both contribute to cap consequences. There is also the plain and simple supply argument by position.
Poor pick and dollar allocations is indeed preventing the Giants from doing things they otherwise would this free agent period. It is talked about every day on this site as of late.
Of course, but again, my position on this is had Jones, or Tate, or Shepard, or Solder, or Zeitler, or Hernandez or Engram, etc lived up to their draft slot and/or cost, we wouldn't be chasing the roster so heavily in FA.
So if everybody else on the Offense just played better than picking Barkley would have been fine. The Giants could have absorbed this poor decision.
I agree.
I responded to the cap allocation and siting RB, but it hasn't prevented us from spending big time picks on the OL, spending money on the OL, and spending money at WR. Much of that hasn't worked out - if it has, even a couple of the players, we'd be in a lot better shape.
There's a $14M difference between the team spending the most on RB and the least. By far the smallest differential of the offensive positional groups with TE 2nd ($14.5M) and the only close:
QB: $45M
RB: $14M (1-2 starters, 4-5 roster spots)
WR: $33M (2-3 starters, 5-6 roster spots)
TE: $17M (1-2 starters, 3 roster spots)
OL: $36M (5 starters, 8 roster spots)
And more importantly, here's the % of cap the 1st/last team in each positional spending group allocates (uses 2020 cap of $198M):
QB: 23.7% / 1.1%
RB: 8.2% / 1.2%
WR: 18.7% / 2.5%
TE: 10% / 1.2%
OL: 26.8% / 8.6%
These three years have been catastrophic.
Do you have any idea on how the draft works?
Quote:
In comment 15164650 chick310 said:
Quote:
you draft high and the ones that need to be addressed via free agency. They both contribute to cap consequences. There is also the plain and simple supply argument by position.
Poor pick and dollar allocations is indeed preventing the Giants from doing things they otherwise would this free agent period. It is talked about every day on this site as of late.
Of course, but again, my position on this is had Jones, or Tate, or Shepard, or Solder, or Zeitler, or Hernandez or Engram, etc lived up to their draft slot and/or cost, we wouldn't be chasing the roster so heavily in FA.
So if everybody else on the Offense just played better than picking Barkley would have been fine. The Giants could have absorbed this poor decision.
I agree.
Yeah that’s typically how teams work, their investments work out FA not working out.
I’m not going back 4 years and using that as the line in the sand of why we stink. We spent plenty of picks and money since then but I guess it makes complete sense to go right back to Barkley. It’s an agenda at this point and it’s very uninteresting. The horse has been beaten several lifetimes over at this point.
1.) N. Solder $16.5 mil
2.) K. Zeitler $14.5 mil
3.) S. Barkley $10 mil
4.) G. Tate $10.8 mil
5.) S. Shepard $9 mil
There's your top 5 cap hits on the offensive side of the ball....which guy there is performing up to his contract?
Quote:
It's not just the 15-33; there's also very little to reasonably expect going forward. The roster is still poor and nowhere near serious contention.
These three years have been catastrophic.
Do you have any idea on how the draft works?
I do. The Giants don't seem to.
Call me crazy but let's just give it slightly more time with these guys.