I read the Giants have about 4.5 million left in cap space. I'm sure they could create more with more restructuring, but the more I think about it, the more it makes logical sense to trade down -- perhaps twice--to build more depth, possibly acquire picks for 2022, and keep the cap number of our top picks lower. There is a fairly significant downward slope amongst the higher picks (for example pick #11, Becton had a cap hit of $3.3 in year 1, whereas pick 20, K'Lavon Chaisson, had 2.4, and pick 30 had 1.9 cap hit.
Gettleman for the first time -- during his March 18th press conference -- I have ever heard him publicly contemplate this; he talked about the potential reasoning for possibly trading down and picking up picks in the 2022 draft, because of the inability to full vet all the prospects.
| "So you can make that argument for that, you can make that argument to trade back, accumulate picks for next year." |
| "The other problem you’re going to have is that critical face-to-face contact, you’re not going to be able to have it because even at these pro days you’re not going to be allowed to have one-on-ones with the players. It’s going to be different. I’ve had conversations with people in other leagues and how they’ve handled it and I’ll continue those conversations, but really and truly there’s always unknowns and there’s just more unknowns this year." |
Since Judge is so focused on culture building, it might make more sense to spread out the risk among multiple players, collect draft picks for next year, and not put all your eggs in one basket with a player like Parsons.
Also you have several free agents after this season such as Engram, Peppers, Hill, Carter that depending on the years they have might need to be replaced; as well as extensions for Jones and Barkley.
So if you think about the long-term, we can still compete at a high level given our free agent additions, but also spread the risk around, collect depth both this year and next as we consolidate cap space with our star players.
It just makes a lot of sense to me, to look past BPA and look towards strategically stocking our depth, and hopefully hitting on a player to be a star.
Im not sure this is the year trade downs from slot 11 will be very attractive enough to get much of a haul.
But with 32 teams there is always somebody who falls in love with a player.
We shall see
I will give you that this is a deep draft and that favors your argument. But I am mindful of the last time we drafted in this position, in 2014. The Giants were on the clock with the 12th pick and on the board were Aaron Donald, obj and Zack Martin. And then the fall off. Good and very good players can be found in the NFL, but it takes a scattering of great players to build a championship team. And in spite of exceptions, generally speaking, those players are in the top 15.
If only the Giants were up a little higher in the draft then trading down could be a viable strategy to build out the roster in a more efficient & effective manner. Say something like the #2, #4 or #6 overall pick...
The last time there where 5 first round caliber QBs in the draft, DG had a golden opportunity to trade down a few spots and pick up more draft picks (at least 3 2nd rounders), but he stood pat at #2 to take Barkley. Just like he stayed put at #6 and #4. I don't think DG is going to change his philosophy at #11 and looking at the various mock drafts I am not opposed to staying put this year b/c the value of player after 15 is going to fall off sharply.
Remember, teams like the Pats are trading out of the 20's to get extra second and third day picks. Giants don't have that luxury of passing on low end first round talent to get a few more guys in 2nd and 3rd round talent.
I will give you that this is a deep draft and that favors your argument. But I am mindful of the last time we drafted in this position, in 2014. The Giants were on the clock with the 12th pick and on the board were Aaron Donald, obj and Zack Martin. And then the fall off. Good and very good players can be found in the NFL, but it takes a scattering of great players to build a championship team. And in spite of exceptions, generally speaking, those players are in the top 15.
I'm not sure I'm in favor of tradedown any more. But if you're so desperate to hold on to the 11th pick and yet you speak of championship teams-- the last three years Giants have drafted before the 11th pick and so far how many have shown to be all-pro superstar caliber? For example, Barkley has played 1.5 seasons. What has he done for the Giants? Looking back wouldn't a tradedown have been better?
And didn't I read for example that Thomas was regarded as the 3rd bets OT this past year?
And would you say Jones as the 6th pick is equal in terms of impact to the players you previously mentioned in so far comparing 1st couple of years?
So where is the assuredness with the 11th pick?
I am happy though with what they did in FA. So I am okay either way. I fear though we are going to take Kwity Paye with the 11th pick and as a result having this same discussion next year. Kwity Paye is not "bad." But just like many other Giants picks - it would be a bit underwhelming vs where they drafted.
I think this is really the key point, but it goes both ways, IMO: if five QBs get taken before the Giants are on the clock, there is going to be an outstanding prospect or two available to them at #11. If fewer than five QBs go in the top 10, there's a chance that the Giants could be shut out of their top tier of prospects, but it might enhance the trade market for them if someone behind them is targeting the remaining QB(s).
The situation that would be the worst outcome would be if only 3-4 QBs go in the top 10, and the Giants find themselves in the second tier of their board, and either can't find a trade partner or just talk themselves into one of the remaining prospects because they don't want to risk ending up in their third tier.
I will say that the front office appears to have taken such a different approach this offseason that I don't want to simply rely on their history of NOT trading down as some sort of predictor of what they'll do this year. But the flip side to that is that trading down is an inherently careful maneuver, and the Giants appear to be viewing this offseason as an opportunity to be aggressive while much of the league gets passive.
This is a year where trading down makes a ton of sense, but it's also a year where there just might not be a lot of teams looking to trade up, so it could prove to be irrelevant.
I'd be thrilled to be proven wrong.
Realy? Judge values the fact they went to Alabama over all other factors?