Giants need to emphasize offense in the upcoming draft

The offense needs talent and depth all over. WR, OL, TE, RB. Yet, it seems there is some belief that we’re looking at defensive players with our top picks. CB is the one that is most confusing. Taking a CB at 11 means ether he it our new $13m CB will spend the majority of the season on the bench. Can’t make this stuff up..

I do think we need an EDGE/OLB in the first three rounds but after that we need depth & talent on the offensive side of the ball.

EE could be on his way out, Rudolph maybe has two years tops left in him a developmental 2-way TE would make sense.

Barkley may not be 100% at the start of the season and Booker is a veteran close to turning 30. A RB to add depth & develop makes sense.

Shepard is a concussion away from potential retirement. Was last year for Slaton a sign of things to come or just a sophomore slump? There really isn't anything behind Golladay, Shepard, and Slayton IMO. WR on Day 1 or Day 2 makes a ton of sense.

I like the potential for our tackles and I really like our center. I would like to see another guard brought in via the draft to develop and compete.

The Giants 1st Rd picks under DG.... Went all offense.


The 5 late RD picks last year cluster drafting LB/S which was really for special teams.

The Giants must go BPA and if talent is equal....go for need.

CB had better be off our board at 11 and I don't see any ER that I think Giants would pick here. It has to be WR or OL with this pick. Give Jones every chance to succeed this year. If he fails it will be next QB up.

I think your numbers are skewed. There is not just Offense and Defense on the Giants. There is also special teams and a lot of those players you have allocated to defense are also special teams. The current regime places a very high value on multiples. Also the vast majority of those "Defensive" picks were in rounds 6 and 7. I could be wrong, bt I don't think any of the Offensive picks in your analysis play special teams.

the last three drafts the first pick was Offense
the last draft, 3 of the first five picks were offense

so I really don't get what your point is, even a little

Based on points scored, only the Jets were worse on offense. Jones had 11 TD passes, after 24 the year before. Golladay will help, but we need more players that can get open. All the rest of the receivers are just guys.

You draft the best player, weighted by position of importance and team needs. The premise that there are clear differences in player quality among the top few remaining players (after you get past the top 6-8 picks) is nonsense. There are always at least 5 or 6 payers of near-equal ability to choose from, and the number grows as the draft progresses.

And whether we took offense in Rd1 (yes) but total # of picks skews defense (yes)... the point about being the 31st ranked offense holds very true

fix it

I don't care how

...BPA is what they should be drafting.

I’d be happy with Rashawn Slater. I understand the concept of BPA but it ignores the current composition of the team, the distribution of talent, the positional value and longevity of position data points. Not sure BPA is still the best draft strategy.

Here for instance, there’s lots of receivers available, pretty much every draft now. But athletic offensive linemen that can play any position on the line? They’re still rare. All NFL teams need a good O-line.
PFF Mock Draft - ( New Window )

In comment 15209476 gidiefor said:

Quote:

I think your numbers are skewed. There is not just Offense and Defense on the Giants. There is also special teams and a lot of those players you have allocated to defense are also special teams. The current regime places a very high value on multiples. Also the vast majority of those "Defensive" picks were in rounds 6 and 7. I could be wrong, bt I don't think any of the Offensive picks in your analysis play special teams. the last three drafts the first pick was Offense the last draft, 3 of the first five picks were offense so I really don't get what your point is, even a little

You make a good point about Special Teams, but I don't think my point is contradicted by the fact that our highest picks were on offense (such as Daniel Jones, Saquon Barkley and Andrew Thomas.

Fact is, the offense/defense numbers can be depicted several ways, including what I consider to be quite relevant, such as within the premium first three rounds -- in which case, the Giants still selected defenders ~2/3 of the time. In any event, the Giants should devote the majority of their picks to the offense.

RB #2 overall
QB #6 overall
OL #4 overall

in the last 3 years...in terms of skewed value the Giants have spent a lot more draft capital on offense then defense so I think this point is completely off base...cluster drafting defense on day 3 doesn't mean you are solely investing in the defense.

The giants haven't invested in edge since DG has got here. If the BPA by far is offense go offense...if there is value in trading down and addressing edge in the mid-later 1st round that should be heavily looked at as well.

In comment 15209458 George from PA said:

Quote:

The Giants 1st Rd picks under DG.... Went all offense. The 5 late RD picks last year cluster drafting LB/S which was really for special teams. The Giants must go BPA and if talent is equal....go for need.

As I noted to gidiefor, the offense/defense numbers can be depicted several ways, including what I consider to be quite relevant, such as within the premium first three rounds -- in which case, the Giants still selected defenders ~2/3 of the time. Our offense is crying out for significant attention in the 2021 Draft. And we only have 6 picks. I'd be shocked if we don't go offense at least 4 out of 6 picks. Preferably 5.

In comment 15209519 mphbullet36 said:

Quote:

RB #2 overall QB #6 overall OL #4 overall in the last 3 years...in terms of skewed value the Giants have spent a lot more draft capital on offense then defense so I think this point is completely off base...cluster drafting defense on day 3 doesn't mean you are solely investing in the defense. The giants haven't invested in edge since DG has got here. If the BPA by far is offense go offense...if there is value in trading down and addressing edge in the mid-later 1st round that should be heavily looked at as well.

Here's Gettleman's entire Giants Draft history (2018-2020). I expect him too go offense in a big way this April.

Round Selection Player Position
1 2 Barkley, Saquon RB
2 34 Hernandez, Will OG
3 66 Carter, Lorenzo OLB
3 69 Hill, BJ DT
4 108 Lauletta, Kyle QB
5 139 McIntosh, RJ DT
3 SUPP Sam Beal CB
1 6 Jones, Daniel QB
1 17 Lawrence, Dexter DT
1 30 Baker, Deandre CB
3 95 Ximines, Oshane DE
4 108 Love, Julian CB
5 143 Connelly, Ryan LB
5 171 Slayton, Darius WR
6 180 Ballentine, Corey CB
7 232 Asafo-Adjei, George OT
7 245 Slayton, Chris DT
1 4 Andrew Thomas OT
2 36 Xavier McKinney S
3 99 Matt Peart OT
4 110 Darnay Holmes CB
5 150 Shane Lemieux G
6 183 Cam Brown LB
7 218 Carter Coughlin OLB
7 238 T. J. Brunson LB
7 247 Chris Williamson CB
7 255 Tae Crowder LB

the giants had the league's *worst* offense last year. And an upper third defense.

Have they improved their offense? Yeah, a little bit. But, when you think about that improvement, much of it was in the receiving spot where they had the worst receiving corps (maybe in history). Some of that was inconsistency (Engram) and a lot of it was lack of separation (Shepard, Slayton) even against single coverage. So, now they get a guy. But, all the defense has to do is roll coverage over to Golladay and Jones is left with the same 2 guys who can't separate against single coverage.

Also, when we talk about our CB's, we say we need, like every team, a high quality 2nd CB. We talk about and strategize about, multiple receivers that need to be covered. That's why the Jackson signing is big. That's why people had Surtain and Farley as potential first picks, even with Bradberry on the team. Why would you think that other teams wouldn't feel the same way and build their defense the same way?

The mission, oft-stated is to provide Jones with enough weapons so that they can see what he really is. Golladay alone, simply does not do that. He doesn't change the WR quality (or at least doesn't change it enough). Jones desperately needs another top of the draft high quality receiver.

If Pitts/Chase/Smith/Waddle are there at #11, it would be near criminal not to select them.

The team seems to believe in their young line, other wise they would have looked harder in FA and rotated less last year. It's weapons they still need.

We had a good defense last year and it could easily be better this year. We had a terrible offense last year led by a terrible WR corps mediocre OL and bad TEs. We’ve made some progress and added some good players but it’s still not as good talent wise as the defense. We need better players on every unit.

If the Giants go EDGE at #11, they need the next 5 picks to be on offense.

(Unless you want to believe that some defenseman "miraculously" falls to us in later rounds.)

almost regardless of position.

they need to go BPA and follow their slotting. Don't take the lower grade to fill a need. If the EDGE is on the same level as the WR/CB/OL, that's fine, take him. Otherwise bring in the best player possible.

In comment 15209585 Jim in Forest Hills said:

Quote:

they need to go BPA and follow their slotting. Don't take the lower grade to fill a need. If the EDGE is on the same level as the WR/CB/OL, that's fine, take him. Otherwise bring in the best player possible.

I think that if Edge is of the same level as those other positions (heck, I'd say the same for CB anbd OL versus WR, then they must have already moved down into the early 20's.

as long as they are impactful.

In comment 15209582 Sneakers O'toole said:

Quote:

almost regardless of position.

Welp, that's just the problem: How to identify "impact" players? Some teams are good at that, and they are consistent play-off teams (like Baltimore, New Orleans.) But that wouldn't describe the Giants. IMO, better to cluster 5 out of our 6 picks on offense, and hope they find "impact."

And helping the offense in the draft is prudent.

I just do not think....it is a good idea to go into a draft with a pre-concieved agenda...drafting position....vs drafting players.

They must be ultra prepared...

They must maximize value...by going BPA and trading picks (up or down) when it makes sense.

This draft has higher risk....but will also offer higher rewards....

We know...

Kissing Zeitler hurts...

The TE, #1 WR, veteran G, Ross and even Solder ....are all helped.

And the corner, pass rushers,DT etc....has put the Giants in a non-desperate position....

Better/developmental WR, TE, OL, Edge, Corner, LBer, DT, RB can be used...great players anywhere would be nice

In comment 15209610 George from PA said:

Quote:

And helping the offense in the draft is prudent. I just do not think....it is a good idea to go into a draft with a pre-concieved agenda...drafting position....vs drafting players. They must be ultra prepared... They must maximize value...by going BPA and trading picks (up or down) when it makes sense. This draft has higher risk....but will also offer higher rewards.... We know... Kissing Zeitler hurts...

Is it his mustache?

The #2, #4, and #6 overall picks on offense and yet only the Gase Jets were worse. Wow.

In comment 15209621 FStubbs said:

Quote:

The #2, #4, and #6 overall picks on offense and yet only the Gase Jets were worse. Wow.

Giants don't Draft well -- probably Bottom 3 since last Super Bowl.

In comment 15209610 George from PA said:

Quote:

And helping the offense in the draft is prudent. I just do not think....it is a good idea to go into a draft with a pre-concieved agenda...drafting position....vs drafting players. They must be ultra prepared... They must maximize value...by going BPA and trading picks (up or down) when it makes sense. This draft has higher risk....but will also offer higher rewards.... We know... Kissing Zeitler hurts... The TE, #1 WR, veteran G, Ross and even Solder ....are all helped. And the corner, pass rushers,DT etc....has put the Giants in a non-desperate position.... Better/developmental WR, TE, OL, Edge, Corner, LBer, DT, RB can be used...great players anywhere would be nice

Overall, since last Super Bowl, the Giants have been miserable at identifying "Draft value." And given their offense is as bad as it gets, they need to cluster picks on that side of the ball. 5 of 6 picks on offense would not surprise me at all. Maybe they will get lucky and hit on a few.

just because we need more offense. value and grade has to match up. that being said - seems like WR and OL really do match up well with value in round 1 and 2 respectively

It would be hard not to emphasize offense if their board mirrors the strengths of the draft.

The one defensive outlier is ER/OLB. As I've said earlier, when you consider their reported pursuit of Leonard Floyd coupled with the fact that both of their presumptive starters at OLB - Carter and Ximines - are coming off serious injuries, you can see why they might prioritize drafting an ER/OLB earlier than we might like. The hope is that they won't force a pick out of need. They did sign Ryan Anderson (after losing Fackrell) and that might lessen the need somewhat, but you never know.

the 2 may and probably will line up at some point based on the law of averages and the volume of highly athletic WRs + OL in this class (possibly the 2 deepest positions). I'd guess they will pick one of each between the first 2 days of the draft.

but they just as badly need more speed in the middle level of the defense, on the edges, and while this may drive some crazy, another fast CB wouldn't hurt either.

In comment 15209629 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

just because we need more offense. value and grade has to match up. that being said - seems like WR and OL really do match up well with value in round 1 and 2 respectively

You make perfect sense, and from what I've seen from various Draft Boards, there seems to be value at WR and OL when the Giants make their picks at 11 and 42. So, I'm all for that!

My biggest worry is that the Giants are terrible at matching draft "value and grade" and we have the lousy long term record to prove it. That is why they need to cluster offensive picks. When a team can't Draft, the next best thing is to cluster draft in the hope of landing one or two hits!

In comment 15209645 Eric on Li said:

Quote:

the 2 may and probably will line up at some point based on the law of averages and the volume of highly athletic WRs + OL in this class (possibly the 2 deepest positions). I'd guess they will pick one of each between the first 2 days of the draft. but they just as badly need more speed in the middle level of the defense, on the edges, and while this may drive some crazy, another fast CB wouldn't hurt either.

I hear you about overall team speed. It's a speed game, and that ain't the Giants.

By contrast the bottom 5 players from last year (all defensive players) have a combined draft value of 28.4. Counting draft picks does not reflect the Giants commitment to the offense and says nothing about what they should do this year. Another fun fact, the 3 highest defensive players drafted (Lawrence, Baker and McKinney) have a combined draft value of 2,110.

all 1st round picks for the offense.

BPA is the way to go with this draft. Keep in mind the strength of the draft may net a WR in round 2 and OL in round 3. A front 7 defender with speed is a must in this draft.

Most are offense with depth at linebacker/special teamer.

I have an eye on trading Engram for a late second round/early third round pick, but I don't know what he's worth.

Round 1: OG Rashawn Slater (11).
Round 2: Either Edges Carlos Basham or Patrick Jones. (42)
Trade: Trade Evan Engram to Rams for Pick no. 57 in second round or Jets or Texans for pick no. 66 or 67. Use to draft TE Pat Freiermuth (57) or TE Hunter Long (66 or 67).
Round 3: WR Sage Surratt (76).
Round 4: RB/FB Rhamondre Stevenson (116).
Round 6: ILB Nate Landman (196), OLB Sam Williams (201).

That's 4 of 7 draft picks used on offense: a versatile interior OL, an edge who can play anywhere from interior DL and 4-3 DE to stand-up edge (3-4 rushbacker), a two-way tight end, a taller, sure-handed wide receiver, a backup running back who can play fullback, and depth at linebacker who can play on special teams. I'm trying to be multiple here.

In comment 15209621 FStubbs said:

Quote:

The #2, #4, and #6 overall picks on offense and yet only the Gase Jets were worse. Wow.

And the #2, #4, and #6 overall picks got us three good players. And we've acquired a few more as well. However, it takes 11 to make a good offense. On the other hand, we have acquired at least 11 starting quality players plus some good depth players on defense as the performance of our defense last year showed.

In comment 15209660 WillieYoung said:

Quote:

By contrast the bottom 5 players from last year (all defensive players) have a combined draft value of 28.4. Counting draft picks does not reflect the Giants commitment to the offense and says nothing about what they should do this year. Another fun fact, the 3 highest defensive players drafted (Lawrence, Baker and McKinney) have a combined draft value of 2,110.

Barkley missed practically all of last season and several games the year before. Will he return to full form after a serious knee injury? And will he even make it to a second contract with the Giants?

Daniel Jones had a very fine rookie season and a bad sophomore season. He does some things well; others not so well; and no one knows for sure if he is the right QB.

Andrew Thomas stumbled out of the gate and then improved second half of season. Will he continue to grow in Year Two?

And Will Hernandez was over-drafted and he's a mediocre long-term answer at Guard. At best.

So, where does that 6,580 points of offensive draft board value leave the Giants? Behind the 8-ball with a desperate need to upgrade their offensive talent in the 2021 NFL Draft.

You don't fix that with 2 free agents and its not like we have 12 draft choices to spread around (although we squandered those when we had that many). Focus on the offense.

In comment 15209617 Bill L said:

Quote:

In comment 15209610 George from PA said: Quote: And helping the offense in the draft is prudent. I just do not think....it is a good idea to go into a draft with a pre-concieved agenda...drafting position....vs drafting players. They must be ultra prepared... They must maximize value...by going BPA and trading picks (up or down) when it makes sense. This draft has higher risk....but will also offer higher rewards.... We know... Kissing Zeitler hurts... Is it his mustache?

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Glad I wasn't taking a sip of coffee

If we don't have see good value at #11 I would love to trade down twice. Once with Miami for #18, #50, #81 and a 5th round pick for #11 and #116, and then trade down once again with the Jets giving up #18, #201, TE-Evan Engram plus a 2022 4th round pick for picks #23 & #34.

We would end up with #23, #34, our own #42, #50, our own #76, #81, & #196

My dream draft if we can't get Kyle Pitts at 11:

23) T/G-Teven Jenkins
34) RB-Najee Harris
42) TE-Pat Freiermuth
50) G/C-Quinn Meinerz
76) WR-Nico Collins
81) TE-Hunter Long
196) DL-Tadarrell Slaton

It sets the tone for our culture as a tough team. We have the bolts now we need the nuts. I thought the value just wasn't there from 10 to 22 or so. I got rid of Engram the coach killer, and with a late 1st rounder, three 2nd round picks and two 3rd round picks I knew we'd be loaded up to take advantage of the value and depth on the O-line. I went after two guys who are talented, versitile, and mean as hell.

It was also a goal to position us to be able to restock our TE group with the only two 2-way TEs in this draft who are both in the 6-5 255 range and from two of our favorite north east schools. Tight Ends are so important for a run based offense and it's about time we got some real 2-way threats. With Rudolph and Toilolo as seasoned vet teachers we'd be in good shape with Freiermuth, Long, and Smith as understudys.

Najee Harris gives us everything we'd want in a backup for Saquon, including being a viable replacement as our feature back without having such a pronounced drop-off inn talent should SB not make it back, goes down again, or just needs a breather. It also gives us a fallback option should Barkley choose to sign elsewhere next year. Our RB coach had him at Alabama and he is a great guy to have on the team. 6-2 235 with a lot of talent.

Nico Collins would give us a guy that could be used like Golladay if he can't go. Lots of size and talent to work with.

Tadarrell Slaton gives us a guy who is almost as big as Dexter Lawrence. He can occupy blockers. Glad they signed Danny Shelton because I don't ever want to see Lawrence at NT for any length of time.

I’m not sure.

In comment 15209887 LeonBright45 said:

Quote:

If we don't have see good value at #11 I would love to trade down twice. Once with Miami for #18, #50, #81 and a 5th round pick for #11 and #116, and then trade down once again with the Jets giving up #18, #201, TE-Evan Engram plus a 2022 4th round pick for picks #23 & #34. We would end up with #23, #34, our own #42, #50, our own #76, #81, & #196 My dream draft if we can't get Kyle Pitts at 11: 23) T/G-Teven Jenkins 34) RB-Najee Harris 42) TE-Pat Freiermuth 50) G/C-Quinn Meinerz 76) WR-Nico Collins 81) TE-Hunter Long 196) DL-Tadarrell Slaton It sets the tone for our culture as a tough team. We have the bolts now we need the nuts. I thought the value just wasn't there from 10 to 22 or so. I got rid of Engram the coach killer, and with a late 1st rounder, three 2nd round picks and two 3rd round picks I knew we'd be loaded up to take advantage of the value and depth on the O-line. I went after two guys who are talented, versitile, and mean as hell. It was also a goal to position us to be able to restock our TE group with the only two 2-way TEs in this draft who are both in the 6-5 255 range and from two of our favorite north east schools. Tight Ends are so important for a run based offense and it's about time we got some real 2-way threats. With Rudolph and Toilolo as seasoned vet teachers we'd be in good shape with Freiermuth, Long, and Smith as understudys. Najee Harris gives us everything we'd want in a backup for Saquon, including being a viable replacement as our feature back without having such a pronounced drop-off inn talent should SB not make it back, goes down again, or just needs a breather. It also gives us a fallback option should Barkley choose to sign elsewhere next year. Our RB coach had him at Alabama and he is a great guy to have on the team. 6-2 235 with a lot of talent. Nico Collins would give us a guy that could be used like Golladay if he can't go. Lots of size and talent to work with. Tadarrell Slaton gives us a guy who is almost as big as Dexter Lawrence. He can occupy blockers. Glad they signed Danny Shelton because I don't ever want to see Lawrence at NT for any length of time.

Works for me! This is the kind of draft we can dream of as far as I’m concerned. But, hard to see it happening.

If you're hellbent on drafting the best offensive player, when the actual BPA could well be defense, you're drafting for need and shorting yourself on talent.

If the top receivers are gone at #11, the BPA well could be several defenders. Do you still draft offense and stay narrow with your strategy?

In comment 15209902 JonC said:

Quote:

If you're hellbent on drafting the best offensive player, when the actual BPA could well be defense, you're drafting for need and shorting yourself on talent. If the top receivers are gone at #11, the BPA well could be several defenders. Do you still draft offense and stay narrow with your strategy?

I would then go defense as bpa, but I feel like even bpa is not valued right at #11 if the pass-catchers are gone. I would then be eager to move down and pick among a slew of equivalent bpas

In comment 15209902 JonC said:

Quote:

If you're hellbent on drafting the best offensive player, when the actual BPA could well be defense, you're drafting for need and shorting yourself on talent. If the top receivers are gone at #11, the BPA well could be several defenders. Do you still draft offense and stay narrow with your strategy?

I would agree on defense in this case. But the idea that there will be a singular BPA at 11 is a question as well. Likely, even at 11, they will have 2 or 3 players they rank closely enough for any to be "BPA" given all of these rankings are subjective at some level. That may give them the flexibility to stay with their priorities.

In comment 15209916 BillT said:

Quote:

In comment 15209902 JonC said: Quote: If you're hellbent on drafting the best offensive player, when the actual BPA could well be defense, you're drafting for need and shorting yourself on talent. If the top receivers are gone at #11, the BPA well could be several defenders. Do you still draft offense and stay narrow with your strategy? I would agree on defense in this case. But the idea that there will be a singular BPA at 11 is a question as well. Likely, even at 11, they will have 2 or 3 players they rank closely enough for any to be "BPA" given all of these rankings are subjective at some level. That may give them the flexibility to stay with their priorities.

Understood, but if we accept the info out there it suggests they are targeting receivers, all of whom could be gone at #11. Possibly Waddle is there because of the ankle, for example. Their choice is very likely between Waddle and Edge, unless Surtain is there somehow and is too hard to pass up. I don't think any other position on offense will factor in at #11, given what we think we know. OL factors in at #42, a lot of good corners could be there in the 3rd.

that either Smith or Waddle will be there. going backwards, i don't see Dallas, Denver, or Carolina taking either of them based on their current roster. That leaves Detroit, Miami, Cincy, and Atlanta.

Detroit seems incredibly possible, as they really don't have a young starting caliber WR on the current roster. Miami could very well take one. Cincy badly needs OL, and Atlanta doesn't seem like they will go WR, their defense is atrocious and if anything, Pitts is a better fit there

In comment 15209928 JonC said:

Quote:

In comment 15209916 BillT said: I would agree on defense in this case. But the idea that there will be a singular BPA at 11 is a question as well. Likely, even at 11, they will have 2 or 3 players they rank closely enough for any to be "BPA" given all of these rankings are subjective at some level. That may give them the flexibility to stay with their priorities. Understood, but if we accept the info out there it suggests they are targeting receivers, all of whom could be gone at #11. Possibly Waddle is there because of the ankle, for example. Their choice is very likely between Waddle and Edge, unless Surtain is there somehow and is too hard to pass up. I don't think any other position on offense will factor in at #11, given what we think we know. OL factors in at #42, a lot of good corners could be there in the 3rd.

I think that's exactly right. I think Waddle is going to be really good and available at 11 so Waddle or Edge and it's Waddle for me. I don't think CB is in play at all at 11 no matter who.

In FA and they’ve invested several premium picks on offense in the last few years. These investments need to pay off. They shouldn’t have to focus on offense in the draft.

Judge and Gettelman have to look at where the team is today; if you're going to be backwards looking, that's as bad as drafting for need alone.

Getting a difference maker at ER is a missing piece for this defense--but that is a need as well--I say fill it. But the offense as a whole, as the OP points out, is across many positions a disaster area, vix. its next-to-worst placement 2020. So, there are many needs; get the BPAs at those spots.
Fully with Klaatu that neither of the team's Leonard Floyds-in-waiting is a Leonard Floyd, eminently expendable.

In comment 15209902 JonC said:

Quote:

If you're hellbent on drafting the best offensive player, when the actual BPA could well be defense, you're drafting for need and shorting yourself on talent. If the top receivers are gone at #11, the BPA well could be several defenders. Do you still draft offense and stay narrow with your strategy?

Don't lose sight of this. BPA in round 1, that high, is the way to go.

Good thread M.S. with interesting comments. And given 2020 what you are suggesting certainly makes a ton of sense, but given a) the info that GoDeep provided on another thread a couple of days ago, combined with b) that literally every pro day visit made a senior Giants rep this year were to programs in which all the top prospects played defense, its not to get the feeling the Giants themselves are thinking D, with the proviso at least at #11 that they'd take one of the top receivers if they made it that.

The sense I get is that the Giants themselves believe that any major improvement in the offense in 2021 is going to come from in-house. Jones has to play better; guys like Saquon, Shep and Slater have to get healthy; the young OTs have to hold up etc. and there really isn't a whole lot in that the picks from this year's draft are going to necessarily impact. The only position in which there might be a major upgrade would be OG, but is adding another rookie to the OL really going to move the goalposts all that far, especially after the opening round.

One of the things we have been trying to do this year is to get people thinking less about positions per and more about what it takes to be a championship team in the NFL. And just about everyone will tell you you have to be able the throw the ball and you have to be able to rush the passer to some extent.

And yeah the defense played well enough last year but it was in many ways deceptive in that their approach was a very soft, vanilla bend but don't break type approach that didn't result in many turnovers or 3 and outs with the result far too many times in games where their opponents didn't necessarily score a lot of points, the Giants still lost the time of possession and field position battles.

And in 2020 not only did the Giants not have a much of a pass rush, especially late in games when you really needed one, but they really don't have any players, maybe outside Williams, even with any realistic potential to rush the passer. And the thing with edge rushers if you don't get one early in the draft you aren't likely to get one later unless you get really lucky and hoping ain't a plan!

totally agree and would add it's not about drafting a position, it's about drafting the player who will be part of a championship winning formula.

In the past two drafts, the Giants drafted the QB and LT they probably felt were the best options available to them in the draft. I think they reached on both, relative to other prospects/positions/talent available. It's why I hate drafting for need. Simply seeing hole/filling hole rarely delivers maximum output in the NFL.

Thank you

Be interesting to see if they add CB/DB help to make it harder to pass against them and add an EDGE in the first two rounds

or just Edge/OL/Wr in some array

Something tells me their late second dip into the FA market for a McCourty or a Trai Turner/other OL will give us a clue.

I suspect the list of who they talk to and visit will be all over the map of positions...as it should be

Bill: I was actually thinking about adding a para or two along those lines. GoDeep suggested that the Giants are thinking they would consider trading back up into the late first to get an edge if one of the receivers was there at #11. One he didn't was what would be the plan if the Giants did get an edge early.It certainly wouldn't shock me if the thy took a corner at that point. Fact is you need 3-4 good corners in this day and age because so many teams run multiple receiver sets at you and with the Giants there is a big drop-off after Bradberry and Jackson.

I don't want to read too much into it, but it was interesting to note that when Chris Petitt went to the Georgia pro day everyone kind of lasered on Az Ojulari, but the guy who went with Petitt wasn't the DL or LB coach it was the DB coach and UGA has a couple of really good second round type CB prospects in Eric Stokes and Tyson Campbell.

The good news we'll find out for sure in what now 24 days!!

Really good nugget about the Giants and the UGa pro day. Thanks.

You say above that the Giants probably reached for both Jones and Thomas the last two years. Who did you like last year at #4? Who do you think represented the best value?

I wanted Josh Allen (Edge) or Devin Bush at #6 in 2019 (was good with the Dexter pick, saw it coming a mile away), and Justin Herbert at #4 in 2020.

were actually very interested in Ben Cleveland at Guard.

In comment 15210183 JonC said:

Quote:

I wanted Josh Allen (Edge) or Devin Bush at #6 in 2019 (was good with the Dexter pick, saw it coming a mile away), and Justin Herbert at #4 in 2020.

Too bad you're not making the picks. Damn.

In comment 15210199 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 15210183 JonC said: Quote: I wanted Josh Allen (Edge) or Devin Bush at #6 in 2019 (was good with the Dexter pick, saw it coming a mile away), and Justin Herbert at #4 in 2020. Too bad you're not making the picks. Damn.

I was leaning Rashan Gary instead of Dexter, but good with the pick.

In comment 15210183 JonC said:

Quote:

I wanted Josh Allen (Edge) or Devin Bush at #6 in 2019 (was good with the Dexter pick, saw it coming a mile away), and Justin Herbert at #4 in 2020.

Prior to the draft I said that same thing almost (Herbert or someone body not in 2019) and everyone got mad and said that there was no way we could count on getting a QB in 2020, so take the one (Haskins, I think) while you could.

In comment 15210224 Bill L said:

Quote:

In comment 15210183 JonC said: Quote: I wanted Josh Allen (Edge) or Devin Bush at #6 in 2019 (was good with the Dexter pick, saw it coming a mile away), and Justin Herbert at #4 in 2020. Prior to the draft I said that same thing almost (Herbert or someone body not in 2019) and everyone got mad and said that there was no way we could count on getting a QB in 2020, so take the one (Haskins, I think) while you could.

Once we paid Eli that bonus in 3/19 taking a QB made no sense. The scenario JonC paints is completely realistic; imagine if we'd gone that way.

I had the same argument with many re: both picks. And, this is why simply picking the best available at a position of desperate need isn't a great strategy. Don't shop for groceries starving and desperate.

The good news is, Jones and Thomas have time to prove themselves worthy of staying put.

trying to relive and alter the past?

especially for a struggling franchise.

he's done that.

and also that the perspective regarding drafting improves.

Because filling holes in 2021 that would holes in 2018-2020 is torture.

in Free Agency and the Giants turning away from where they have traditionally looked, I think we'll be ok.

I would prefer Edge or OL over a WR at this point.

But we'll see.

really beyond 2016...the Giants weren’t good enough around him for the team to really compete. So if they didn’t have balls to end it with him, the best thing would have been to start building a talented O & D and just let him play out his deal. And when the franchise QB came into focus, jump for him.

But what did Giants do?

They ignored trade opportunities, highlighted an early RB pick with a poor roster, and then couldn’t wait and reached for Jones. I kind of chuckle at the posters that cheered DG having such conviction in 2019 to take DJ. He may certainly do okay but certainly didn’t need to go #6.

Paying Eli and picking Jones...Really??

Interesting insights, including where the Giants are scouting and who is actually attending sessions! Definitely suggests going defense.

And for sure our pass rush was scary last season, and not in a good way. So, maybe we do go EDGE at #11. Makes sense.

My obsession with offense this Draft is 3-fold:

(1) Despite high draft picks devoted to QB, OT and RB, Gettleman didn't hit it out of the ballpark with Daniel Jones and Andrew Thomas (although time will tell.) And injury has derailed the Saquon Barkley train.

(2) Gettleman's Drafts have yielded only 1/3 of players on the offensive side of the ball, which is too skewed IMO, and a bottom-rung offense is crying for an infusion of young new Draft talent;

(3) A pretty good Giants defense will get even better without changing a thing -- so long as the offense plays competent ball and gains some semblance of rhythm thus regaining control of the time clock.

I would argue that it is: aside from the fact that Giants' d lacks a bona fide, consistent pass rusher (unless you want to classify LW as such, a stretch imo), getting an OLB or other ER with that skill set arguably completes a strong defense, making all the other positions that much more productive. To me in that sense, it's a desperate need two ways. Yet the admonition is not to draft that way, simply take BPA, which could boil down to a Parsons (or gosh, a CB?), let's say, even with his baggage.

Then of course we have the other positions of desperate need on offense, WR, OL. What I'm struggling to say is that: by all means avoid the default going for the 'desperate need' is not as black and white as it sounds, real time in the draft room, shades of gray.

I think it's a clear yes, but the skill set looks different. They want extra athleticism, to flip the hips, change of direction abilities to cover and back pedal. If he's also able to play downhill and pressure the passer, then he brings the multiple they're looking for.

This often winds up being a player who's less Khalil Mack and more Kyle Van Noy (or insert Patriots or Rams Edge players here).

In comment 15210018 ColHowPepper said:

Quote:

Judge and Gettelman have to look at where the team is today; if you're going to be backwards looking, that's as bad as drafting for need alone. Getting a difference maker at ER is a missing piece for this defense--but that is a need as well--I say fill it. But the offense as a whole, as the OP points out, is across many positions a disaster area, vix. its next-to-worst placement 2020. So, there are many needs; get the BPAs at those spots. Fully with Klaatu that neither of the team's Leonard Floyds-in-waiting is a Leonard Floyd, eminently expendable.

The Giants are married to a bunch of guys on offense whether we like it or not. These guys were either drafted to be core players or given a boatload in FA to be impact players. They need to show up and produce.

This teams needs at least 1, really 2 edges in the worst way. I wouldn’t be opposed to drafting two ER’s in the draft at some point. They’re not going to fill that in FA and they’re not going to magically scheme pressure like some people continue to claim they will. They also could use a talented replacement for Tomlinson and another LB.

Look, I’m not opposed to drafting offense later in the draft when the value is there. They need OL help. They could use a backup RB and TE. They could use another WR.

But if they burn a premium pick on Waddle or Smith, what was the point of paying Golloday 18 mil per? If you draft Pitts, what’s the point of Engram and overpaying Rudolph? The same logic applies to Surtain on the defensive side considering what they paid Bradberry and what they just paid Jackson.

Edge makes the most sense early. It’s a glaring need with no solution on the horizon and they’ll likely have their choice of any ER in the class.

In comment 15209902 JonC said:

Quote:

If you're hellbent on drafting the best offensive player, when the actual BPA could well be defense, you're drafting for need and shorting yourself on talent. If the top receivers are gone at #11, the BPA well could be several defenders. Do you still draft offense and stay narrow with your strategy?

\

The problem is

1-- Many of us like Slater who seems to be in that range of a little before 11 or a little after.

2-- So much so many of lean slightly toward Slater being BPA vs the Edges.

3-- Many of us are concerned with statements like "The Giants seems satisfied with their OL" as asshat pointed out. As a result, they may very well bypass BPA for need by taking the Edge.

4-- The Giants 1st round picks have been very underwhelming the last 3 years considering the positions they've drafted in. It doesn't mean it has sucked . . . yet - and it could wind up being very good . . . but right now it's bene underwhelming.

SO we have a natural fear they are going to make another underwhelming pick as they have shown that pension the last 3 years.
------------------------------

****Hopefully they get it right. But sorry to the OP and other Giant fans hopeful for offense being drafted in round 1-- imo it looks like Kwity Paye as asshat suggested too. And they are one trillion more in the know than I ever can. But this Kwity Paye has "conservative type of Giants pick" written all over it. We don't seem to get lucky when an extremely high player most of us love falls into our laps.

In comment 15210072 Colin@gbn said:

Quote:

The sense I get is that the Giants themselves believe that any major improvement in the offense in 2021 is going to come from in-house. Jones has to play better; guys like Saquon, Shep and Slater have to get healthy; the young OTs have to hold up etc. and there really isn't a whole lot in that the picks from this year's draft are going to necessarily impact. The only position in which there might be a major upgrade would be OG, but is adding another rookie to the OL really going to move the goalposts all that far, especially after the opening round. One of the things we have been trying to do this year is to get people thinking less about positions per and more about what it takes to be a championship team in the NFL. And just about everyone will tell you you have to be able the throw the ball and you have to be able to rush the passer to some extent.

Possibly yes drafting a terrific guard would. Why wouldn't it? IF IF IF he is highly valued then he locks down a guard position. Now at the other guard position you have several players competing.

So we're pretty good at LT and Center. And if you have confidence in Peart/Solder being okay then how doesn't this help Barkley and Jones near exponentially?

IF IF IF IF Slater is a very highly rated guard why wouldn't this help Barkley immensely? Wouldn't giving Barkley a much better OLINE make him among the most feared RB's in the NFL vs the current mediocre line in terms of you could break him out? He is someone who needs space, doesn't he? SO if we aren't going to build up the inside with nothing but hope and even our RT is nothing but hope what's the chance of success?

In comment 15210818 giantstock said:

Quote:

In comment 15210072 Colin@gbn said: Quote: The sense I get is that the Giants themselves believe that any major improvement in the offense in 2021 is going to come from in-house. Jones has to play better; guys like Saquon, Shep and Slater have to get healthy; the young OTs have to hold up etc. and there really isn't a whole lot in that the picks from this year's draft are going to necessarily impact. The only position in which there might be a major upgrade would be OG, but is adding another rookie to the OL really going to move the goalposts all that far, especially after the opening round. One of the things we have been trying to do this year is to get people thinking less about positions per and more about what it takes to be a championship team in the NFL. And just about everyone will tell you you have to be able the throw the ball and you have to be able to rush the passer to some extent. Possibly yes drafting a terrific guard would. Why wouldn't it? IF IF IF he is highly valued then he locks down a guard position. Now at the other guard position you have several players competing. So we're pretty good at LT and Center. And if you have confidence in Peart/Solder being okay then how doesn't this help Barkley and Jones near exponentially? IF IF IF IF Slater is a very highly rated guard why wouldn't this help Barkley immensely? Wouldn't giving Barkley a much better OLINE make him among the most feared RB's in the NFL vs the current mediocre line in terms of you could break him out? He is someone who needs space, doesn't he? SO if we aren't going to build up the inside with nothing but hope and even our RT is nothing but hope what's the chance of success?

Slater is a Tackle ... He could suck at Guard for all we know.

Or trade down and go BPA.

You don't chase needs with early draft picks

In comment 15210851 LeonBright45 said:

Quote:

In comment 15210818 giantstock said: Quote: In comment 15210072 Colin@gbn said: Quote: The sense I get is that the Giants themselves believe that any major improvement in the offense in 2021 is going to come from in-house. Jones has to play better; guys like Saquon, Shep and Slater have to get healthy; the young OTs have to hold up etc. and there really isn't a whole lot in that the picks from this year's draft are going to necessarily impact. The only position in which there might be a major upgrade would be OG, but is adding another rookie to the OL really going to move the goalposts all that far, especially after the opening round. One of the things we have been trying to do this year is to get people thinking less about positions per and more about what it takes to be a championship team in the NFL. And just about everyone will tell you you have to be able the throw the ball and you have to be able to rush the passer to some extent. Possibly yes drafting a terrific guard would. Why wouldn't it? IF IF IF he is highly valued then he locks down a guard position. Now at the other guard position you have several players competing. So we're pretty good at LT and Center. And if you have confidence in Peart/Solder being okay then how doesn't this help Barkley and Jones near exponentially? IF IF IF IF Slater is a very highly rated guard why wouldn't this help Barkley immensely? Wouldn't giving Barkley a much better OLINE make him among the most feared RB's in the NFL vs the current mediocre line in terms of you could break him out? He is someone who needs space, doesn't he? SO if we aren't going to build up the inside with nothing but hope and even our RT is nothing but hope what's the chance of success? Slater is a Tackle ... He could suck at Guard for all we know.

Many places that I'm reading are saying he'll be a guard in the NFL. .

For all we know any player can suck or take a hit and it's all over.

In comment 15210809 giantstock said:

Quote:

In comment 15209902 JonC said: Quote: If you're hellbent on drafting the best offensive player, when the actual BPA could well be defense, you're drafting for need and shorting yourself on talent. If the top receivers are gone at #11, the BPA well could be several defenders. Do you still draft offense and stay narrow with your strategy? \ The problem is 1-- Many of us like Slater who seems to be in that range of a little before 11 or a little after. 2-- So much so many of lean slightly toward Slater being BPA vs the Edges. 3-- Many of us are concerned with statements like "The Giants seems satisfied with their OL" as asshat pointed out. As a result, they may very well bypass BPA for need by taking the Edge. 4-- The Giants 1st round picks have been very underwhelming the last 3 years considering the positions they've drafted in. It doesn't mean it has sucked . . . yet - and it could wind up being very good . . . but right now it's bene underwhelming. SO we have a natural fear they are going to make another underwhelming pick as they have shown that pension the last 3 years. ------------------------------ ****Hopefully they get it right. But sorry to the OP and other Giant fans hopeful for offense being drafted in round 1-- imo it looks like Kwity Paye as asshat suggested too. And they are one trillion more in the know than I ever can. But this Kwity Paye has "conservative type of Giants pick" written all over it. We don't seem to get lucky when an extremely high player most of us love falls into our laps.

Based on every tea leaf I've come across, they're not looking OL at #11 unless Sewell somehow falls. They're not satisfied with the OL, it remains unfinished. It's just the prospects don't line up with #11, despite the fan love for Slater.

OL should be in the mix starting at #42.

I agree their two most recent premium picks have been mostly average, at best, and I fear Paye would extend the streak.

In comment 15211208 JonC said:

Quote:

In comment 15210809 giantstock said: Quote: In comment 15209902 JonC said: Quote: If you're hellbent on drafting the best offensive player, when the actual BPA could well be defense, you're drafting for need and shorting yourself on talent. If the top receivers are gone at #11, the BPA well could be several defenders. Do you still draft offense and stay narrow with your strategy? \ The problem is 1-- Many of us like Slater who seems to be in that range of a little before 11 or a little after. 2-- So much so many of lean slightly toward Slater being BPA vs the Edges. 3-- Many of us are concerned with statements like "The Giants seems satisfied with their OL" as asshat pointed out. As a result, they may very well bypass BPA for need by taking the Edge. 4-- The Giants 1st round picks have been very underwhelming the last 3 years considering the positions they've drafted in. It doesn't mean it has sucked . . . yet - and it could wind up being very good . . . but right now it's bene underwhelming. SO we have a natural fear they are going to make another underwhelming pick as they have shown that pension the last 3 years. ------------------------------ ****Hopefully they get it right. But sorry to the OP and other Giant fans hopeful for offense being drafted in round 1-- imo it looks like Kwity Paye as asshat suggested too. And they are one trillion more in the know than I ever can. But this Kwity Paye has "conservative type of Giants pick" written all over it. We don't seem to get lucky when an extremely high player most of us love falls into our laps. Based on every tea leaf I've come across, they're not looking OL at #11 unless Sewell somehow falls. They're not satisfied with the OL, it remains unfinished. It's just the prospects don't line up with #11, despite the fan love for Slater. OL should be in the mix starting at #42. I agree their two most recent premium picks have been mostly average, at best, and I fear Paye would extend the streak.

All of the mocks I have seen show A TON of good IOL prospects available for us at 42. As a mater of fact I haven't seen where there wasn't. That's why I am off OL at 11. To be honest, I like bigger IOLs and there are going to be big ones available at 42. Sit pretty and go BPA at 11. I think we let this one come to us.

really good value there on big, powerful OL, from big school programs.