|
|
|
| Quote: |
Giants’ needs in the draft Edge rusher: The Giants had two glaring weaknesses when free agency began: Wide receiver and edge rusher. They addressed their need for a No. 1 wide receiver by signing Kenny Golladay to a four-year, $72 million contract. They also filled their hole at No. 2 cornerback by signing Adoree’ Jackson to a three-year, $39 million contract. Meanwhile, they essentially ignored the edge position. The Giants have arguably the least accomplished collection of edge rushers in the league entering the draft (Lorenzo Carter leads the group with 9.5 career sacks). The Giants must upgrade the position in the draft. Offensive line: The Giants used three picks on offensive linemen in last year’s draft and they’re apparently intent on letting those young players step into starting roles this season. But they can’t view the position as a finished product. They need to continue adding talent to the line. Guard is the biggest need, with Shane Lemieux and Will Hernandez currently penciled in as starters. Neither showed enough last season to give the Giants comfort that the position is settled. Running back: Edge rusher and offensive line are clearly the biggest needs. A case can be made for just about every other position on the roster benefiting from an upgrade or needing more depth. But running back stands out because of the lack of NFL experience at the position. Saquon Barkley is coming back from a torn ACL, so he might not be ready to play his typical 80 percent of the snaps. Devontae Booker is a steady backup. Beyond that, the Giants have very little to speak of in the backfield. They could use some young legs to add depth and provide some upside. |
| Quote: |
11. New York Giants The pick: Rashawn Slater, OL, Northwestern Ideal pick: Slater, or trading down for another offensive lineman or edge rusher The strictly-need selection is a pass rusher. It’s a bummer for Big Blue that doing so maybe something of a stretch at No. 11, thus making the Giants a trade-up partner for teams in the Nos. 13-20 range. Eyeing another offensive lineman in the first round a year after selecting Andrew Thomas fourth could raise eyebrows, but Slater can play all over the line. Though he’s a tick undersized, one talent evaluator said Slater is one of the most technically sound offensive linemen he’s ever scouted. |
Edge is the gaping hole on this roster right now. All they have is a bunch of JAGS, and this team won’t be a legitimate contender until they add some legitimate edge talent.
This team won’t even get back to being a 9-8 team until the O line gets fixed, and being any kind of legitimate contender is nothing, but a pipe dream until it does. The edge is week, but not what is holding the team back. The O line is.
Similar arguments can accurately be made for other positions but edge rushers are generally a lot harder to find after the first round than WR or OL. It's all going to come down to which individual players the NYG has the strongest belief in more than position and IMO that's ideal.
I believe the Giants value a run defender/contain than pure speed rush. Paye may fit that but not so sure at #11, although he has climbed the mocks lately. They also went to UM pro day, if I remember right.
I believe the Giants value a run defender/contain than pure speed rush. Paye may fit that but not so sure at #11, although he has climbed the mocks lately. They also went to UM pro day, if I remember right.
I've been looking at Carlos Basham for that type of player in the second round, who's had some more production than Paye has. Impressed some at the Senior Bowl. Judging from an interview at his pro day he's trying to market himself as someone who can line up at defensive tackle, 4-3 end, and 3-4 rushbacker.
Did everyone not see this past SB with Mahomes running for his life, because of his bad, and injured line. That is NO BETTER example of what a O line means, and the Chiefs had all those weapons, which the Giants do not.
Quote:
imv
Did everyone not see this past SB with Mahomes running for his life, because of his bad, and injured line. That is NO BETTER example of what a O line means, and the Chiefs had all those weapons, which the Giants do not.
You pretty clearly don't understand draft optimization.
Your racket is familiar too, what was your prior handle(s)?
Quote:
imv
Did everyone not see this past SB with Mahomes running for his life, because of his bad, and injured line. That is NO BETTER example of what a O line means, and the Chiefs had all those weapons, which the Giants do not.
Did the NYG bring back Remmers to start at LT or something? I think the 2 situations are a little different.
+2. Great post. FA is for needs. The draft is BPA. Need might factor in if the grades on two potential draftees are extremely close.
Quote:
In comment 15217367 JonC said:
Quote:
imv
Did everyone not see this past SB with Mahomes running for his life, because of his bad, and injured line. That is NO BETTER example of what a O line means, and the Chiefs had all those weapons, which the Giants do not.
Did the NYG bring back Remmers to start at LT or something? I think the 2 situations are a little different.
The biggest difference is that the Giants have had a losing record for four years in a row, and so many people on here think this O line as is will just get better, and I don’t. I also don’t want to see their record of losing go to five years in a row, which will happen if the O line isn’t fixed. The best mock I have seen is CBS where Sewell falls to them at 11, which would be the best possible thing to happen.
Smith and Waddle would (presumably) be tougher to cover than Sheppard, Slaton, Ross, etc. which means DJ wouldn't need as much time to get the pass off.
It would also mean that the opposing D would be less likely to blitz and less likely to stack the box (which helps Barkley and the run game).
There are ways to help the OL (and the offense) without drafting another OL... especially if it means passing on more talented players in RD-1 to force an OL pick.
Smith and Waddle would (presumably) be tougher to cover than Sheppard, Slaton, Ross, etc. which means DJ wouldn't need as much time to get the pass off.
It would also mean that the opposing D would be less likely to blitz and less likely to stack the box (which helps Barkley and the run game).
There are ways to help the OL (and the offense) without drafting another OL... especially if it means passing on more talented players in RD-1 to force an OL pick.
I see it this way too. The NFL is about matchups and exploiting them - and teams have been teeing off on our QB in part because of the OLine, but also because we've had JAG's at RB when Barkley isn't there and absolutely 0 thread in the passing game. Golladay + Waddle/Smith mean you aren't as often stacking the box, it opens up play action, etc.
We 100% need more talent at WR.
Smith and Waddle would (presumably) be tougher to cover than Sheppard, Slaton, Ross, etc. which means DJ wouldn't need as much time to get the pass off.
It would also mean that the opposing D would be less likely to blitz and less likely to stack the box (which helps Barkley and the run game).
There are ways to help the OL (and the offense) without drafting another OL... especially if it means passing on more talented players in RD-1 to force an OL pick.
You mean like KC did in the SB??
Quote:
In comment 15217157 TommyWiseau said:
Quote:
BPA at 11. I don't are what position the player plays, we need to hit on this draft pick.
^^THIS^^
In 1981, the New Orleans Saints had the first pick in the draft and needed a running back. So they took George Rogers and filled a need for a couple of years. It led to nothing and they traded him in 1985 to the Redskins for a draft pick that resulted in filling another position of need - linebacker Alvin Toles. Who?
The Giants picked second in the 1981 draft and had an urgent need to get better on offense at a time when their 4-3 defense was strong led by their linebacker corps. But they took Lawrence Taylor, an outside linebacker who was best utilized as an edge rushing linebacker in a 3-4 defense. Why? Because he was unequivocally the best player in the draft pool. And then a certain defensive coordinator changed the scheme to fit their talent and they made the playoffs for the first time in the Super Bowl era that very same year. A cogent argument can be made that the subsequent legacy of four super bowl wins stem from this single decision and the recognition that 1) talent is more important than need and 2) talent must dictate scheme - not vice versa.
In subsequent rounds of that draft, the Giants addressed the offense with "need" picks like Dave Young, John Mistler, Cliff Chatman, Mel Hoover, Ed O'Neill, Louis Jackson, John Powers and Mark Reed. Even the most ardent Giants fans have a difficult time remembering any of these players. They did finally get Billy Ard in the eighth round, almost as an after thought, who turned out to be a mainstay on the 1986 Super Bowl team. Ard is among the best examples in Giants history of why there is NEVER a need to reach - he was there waiting to be taken at precisely the right moment.
The Giants cannot endure a third consecutive year of reaching for need at the top of the draft. The first three picks simply must be the best players available. Past is prologue - get this right!
Very good post, just one point. It was Edward O'Neal. Can be confusing because the actor Ed O'Neill (Modern Family, Married with Children) actually was also drafted in the NFL by the Steelers. He wasn't a RB and never scored 4 tds in a game to my knowledge though...
Awesome point - I never knew Al Bundy was an athlete! Perhaps a Freudian slip on my part. Good catch...
I'll gladly take the SB birth.
I have a feeling that the rd 2 and 3 WR grouping will be highly graded as well.
The WR group should get some reinforcements b/c this WR draft class is deep - it doesn't have to be at #11.
Slater seems like he’s going to be a good pro. But we aren’t drafting a guard at 11. And we also aren’t drafting an OT at 11 unless he’s truly a superior prospect to any of the playmakers, which Slater is absolutely not. I don’t even think he’s that much better or a prospect than Paye, and we all know that we would likely take the edge over the OL because of the resources we’ve spent recently, if all things were equal in the draft room
I have a feeling that the rd 2 and 3 WR grouping will be highly graded as well.
The WR group should get some reinforcements b/c this WR draft class is deep - it doesn't have to be at #11.
It doesn't have to be #11, but at #11 you might be able to get a top end prospect with traits of serious longevity (Smith) whos graded out far above whoever else will be there. I also think we should look to add 2 WR's because Shepard is an easy cut next year.
Having a deep class is great, but it still doesn't trump top end talent. They will be mid round picks for a reason.
We are trying to get to a championship contending team. We have high picks invested at OT, we hopefully found our C of the future, and some draft picks at OG that are still coming together. Find some 2nd round/day 3 OG gems and see if they are a better solution to what we have.
Slater seems like he’s going to be a good pro. But we aren’t drafting a guard at 11. And we also aren’t drafting an OT at 11 unless he’s truly a superior prospect to any of the playmakers, which Slater is absolutely not. I don’t even think he’s that much better or a prospect than Paye, and we all know that we would likely take the edge over the OL because of the resources we’ve spent recently, if all things were equal in the draft room
You won’t have ANY playmakers without a good O line, so Smith, Pitts, and Waddle over Sewell, or Slater all you want.
If passes the character test with Judge, Parsons @11 wouldn’t be bad either, imv.
I have a feeling that the rd 2 and 3 WR grouping will be highly graded as well.
The WR group should get some reinforcements b/c this WR draft class is deep - it doesn't have to be at #11.
Of course we don't know how the Giants see it... but to me, the talent drop-off from Smith/Waddle in RD-1 to whatever WRs are left in RD-2 and 3 is GREATER than the talent dropoff on any OL not named Sewell from rounds 1 to 2 and 3.
Yes, the Giants can possibly still get a "good" WR in rounds 2 or 3, but I prefer that they pick a GREAT one in RD-1... (and I'd rather not pass up that chance to settle for a G at 11.)
Its really the way it should be. We can grab another G in the 3rd and he will likely be a good player. WR/EDGE at 11.
Im also pretty surprised at how down on Paye everybody is.
Quote:
In comment 15217173 The Mike said:
Quote:
In comment 15217157 TommyWiseau said:
Quote:
BPA at 11. I don't are what position the player plays, we need to hit on this draft pick.
^^THIS^^
In 1981, the New Orleans Saints had the first pick in the draft and needed a running back. So they took George Rogers and filled a need for a couple of years. It led to nothing and they traded him in 1985 to the Redskins for a draft pick that resulted in filling another position of need - linebacker Alvin Toles. Who?
The Giants picked second in the 1981 draft and had an urgent need to get better on offense at a time when their 4-3 defense was strong led by their linebacker corps. But they took Lawrence Taylor, an outside linebacker who was best utilized as an edge rushing linebacker in a 3-4 defense. Why? Because he was unequivocally the best player in the draft pool. And then a certain defensive coordinator changed the scheme to fit their talent and they made the playoffs for the first time in the Super Bowl era that very same year. A cogent argument can be made that the subsequent legacy of four super bowl wins stem from this single decision and the recognition that 1) talent is more important than need and 2) talent must dictate scheme - not vice versa.
In subsequent rounds of that draft, the Giants addressed the offense with "need" picks like Dave Young, John Mistler, Cliff Chatman, Mel Hoover, Ed O'Neill, Louis Jackson, John Powers and Mark Reed. Even the most ardent Giants fans have a difficult time remembering any of these players. They did finally get Billy Ard in the eighth round, almost as an after thought, who turned out to be a mainstay on the 1986 Super Bowl team. Ard is among the best examples in Giants history of why there is NEVER a need to reach - he was there waiting to be taken at precisely the right moment.
The Giants cannot endure a third consecutive year of reaching for need at the top of the draft. The first three picks simply must be the best players available. Past is prologue - get this right!
Very good post, just one point. It was Edward O'Neal. Can be confusing because the actor Ed O'Neill (Modern Family, Married with Children) actually was also drafted in the NFL by the Steelers. He wasn't a RB and never scored 4 tds in a game to my knowledge though...
Awesome point - I never knew Al Bundy was an athlete! Perhaps a Freudian slip on my part. Good catch...
Yup, drafted by the Steelers but cut in training camp. I believe he played DT.
Quote:
is his NFL upside as a pass rusher is a big question mark. He is multiple, very coachable, and plays the run at a high level, so perhaps the coaches feel it's enough, relative to the other talent available.
Any other EDGE in consideration besides Paye?
Can't share names right now but figure a trade down would be preferred first.
I feel the pass rush issue. But on this line he might have more chances to finish. The guy seems like a player. This defense seems more into guys who push the line.
Honest question, does Tuck have the effect he did playing without guys like Osi, Strahan,Kiwi, Cofield, Canty and Pierre-Paul?
I am one of the few that would be okay with Paye. Although, given the position differences, would prefer Ojulari. After a trade down would be a home run.
Quote:
I'm so sick of seeing the same topic rehashed over and over and over again. Please make it stop!
Did I do that right?
The HUGE difference, is that the Athletic is a subscription item and thus many do not have access. Yes, it’s the same stuff, but mocks and needs are welcomed because for many of us who do not want to wade through tomes of draft guide material, it is a good learning source..This time of year, mocks and needs are discussed the most..
Posting another Daniel Jones thread when there are 50 others on the front page is nothing new and fields the SAME opinions, from the SAME posters ad nauseam.. The mocks and needs come from different sources throughout the internet and it’s nice to compare and discuss..Not the same with DJ because it’s the same old, same old by THIS forum.
Sarcasm. Look it up.
But you've missed the point entirely - who the hell are you to tell other people what to post or not to post? What. Because you've been here for 30 years, gives you that right? With respect, don't think so pal.
I also see an assumption that Smith/Waddle are clearly superior players compared to Slater. But when I look at many people's top ratings (not predicted draft), they are clearly bunched together in many people's estimations. Dane Brugler has a good reputations and puts Slater/Smith at #6 and #7 respectively. Jeremiah has Waddle ahead of Smith and Slater only ranked 3 places lower.
Likewise (for example) NFL.com has Sewell and Slater rated almost identically.
Just some food for thought. I'll be interested to compare Sy's ratings for these three (and others).
Quote:
In comment 15217136 Bricktop said:
Quote:
I'm so sick of seeing the same topic rehashed over and over and over again. Please make it stop!
Did I do that right?
The HUGE difference, is that the Athletic is a subscription item and thus many do not have access. Yes, it’s the same stuff, but mocks and needs are welcomed because for many of us who do not want to wade through tomes of draft guide material, it is a good learning source..This time of year, mocks and needs are discussed the most..
Posting another Daniel Jones thread when there are 50 others on the front page is nothing new and fields the SAME opinions, from the SAME posters ad nauseam.. The mocks and needs come from different sources throughout the internet and it’s nice to compare and discuss..Not the same with DJ because it’s the same old, same old by THIS forum.
Sarcasm. Look it up.
But you've missed the point entirely - who the hell are you to tell other people what to post or not to post? What. Because you've been here for 30 years, gives you that right? With respect, don't think so pal.
And another supposed “new poster” without the courage to stay with his original handle..With respect.
BPA--as a SINGLE player--I continue to argue is a myth. The Giants have their rows and there may well be three in their top row left to select at #11. At that point it becomes not BPA but MVP, depending on relative deltas between each player left and his positional competition, roster construction, and, yes, need.
Quote:
In comment 15217233 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
In comment 15217136 Bricktop said:
Quote:
I'm so sick of seeing the same topic rehashed over and over and over again. Please make it stop!
Did I do that right?
The HUGE difference, is that the Athletic is a subscription item and thus many do not have access. Yes, it’s the same stuff, but mocks and needs are welcomed because for many of us who do not want to wade through tomes of draft guide material, it is a good learning source..This time of year, mocks and needs are discussed the most..
Posting another Daniel Jones thread when there are 50 others on the front page is nothing new and fields the SAME opinions, from the SAME posters ad nauseam.. The mocks and needs come from different sources throughout the internet and it’s nice to compare and discuss..Not the same with DJ because it’s the same old, same old by THIS forum.
Sarcasm. Look it up.
But you've missed the point entirely - who the hell are you to tell other people what to post or not to post? What. Because you've been here for 30 years, gives you that right? With respect, don't think so pal.
And another supposed “new poster” without the courage to stay with his original handle..With respect.
Wrong. Again.
Quote:
In comment 15217565 Bricktop said:
Quote:
In comment 15217233 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
In comment 15217136 Bricktop said:
Quote:
I'm so sick of seeing the same topic rehashed over and over and over again. Please make it stop!
Did I do that right?
The HUGE difference, is that the Athletic is a subscription item and thus many do not have access. Yes, it’s the same stuff, but mocks and needs are welcomed because for many of us who do not want to wade through tomes of draft guide material, it is a good learning source..This time of year, mocks and needs are discussed the most..
Posting another Daniel Jones thread when there are 50 others on the front page is nothing new and fields the SAME opinions, from the SAME posters ad nauseam.. The mocks and needs come from different sources throughout the internet and it’s nice to compare and discuss..Not the same with DJ because it’s the same old, same old by THIS forum.
Sarcasm. Look it up.
But you've missed the point entirely - who the hell are you to tell other people what to post or not to post? What. Because you've been here for 30 years, gives you that right? With respect, don't think so pal.
And another supposed “new poster” without the courage to stay with his original handle..With respect.
Wrong. Again.
Well, it around 1:25 EST, how about yet another DJ thread? I am not telling you, just pleading. Thanks
BPA--as a SINGLE player--I continue to argue is a myth. The Giants have their rows and there may well be three in their top row left to select at #11. At that point it becomes not BPA but MVP, depending on relative deltas between each player left and his positional competition, roster construction, and, yes, need.
I tend to agree with this given the depth at WR in this draft. While I feel like we would be overdrafting Ojulari, I think he would fill a role for which we dont have concrete personnel. Carter is a question mark even though he was starting to show last year before Dallas, Ximenes is a role player at best IMO.
I have no doubt Ojulari is a nice player as a pass rusher. His value dramatically increases if he can cover and would be certainly worth 11. If he is like Anthony Barr in that regard, I would love that pick.
Quote:
In comment 15217565 Bricktop said:
Quote:
In comment 15217233 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
In comment 15217136 Bricktop said:
Quote:
I'm so sick of seeing the same topic rehashed over and over and over again. Please make it stop!
Did I do that right?
The HUGE difference, is that the Athletic is a subscription item and thus many do not have access. Yes, it’s the same stuff, but mocks and needs are welcomed because for many of us who do not want to wade through tomes of draft guide material, it is a good learning source..This time of year, mocks and needs are discussed the most..
Posting another Daniel Jones thread when there are 50 others on the front page is nothing new and fields the SAME opinions, from the SAME posters ad nauseam.. The mocks and needs come from different sources throughout the internet and it’s nice to compare and discuss..Not the same with DJ because it’s the same old, same old by THIS forum.
Sarcasm. Look it up.
But you've missed the point entirely - who the hell are you to tell other people what to post or not to post? What. Because you've been here for 30 years, gives you that right? With respect, don't think so pal.
And another supposed “new poster” without the courage to stay with his original handle..With respect.
Wrong. Again.
Seriously, post what you care to..Not worth arguing over.. I won’t interfere again.
Quote:
In comment 15217576 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
In comment 15217565 Bricktop said:
Quote:
In comment 15217233 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
In comment 15217136 Bricktop said:
Quote:
I'm so sick of seeing the same topic rehashed over and over and over again. Please make it stop!
Did I do that right?
The HUGE difference, is that the Athletic is a subscription item and thus many do not have access. Yes, it’s the same stuff, but mocks and needs are welcomed because for many of us who do not want to wade through tomes of draft guide material, it is a good learning source..This time of year, mocks and needs are discussed the most..
Posting another Daniel Jones thread when there are 50 others on the front page is nothing new and fields the SAME opinions, from the SAME posters ad nauseam.. The mocks and needs come from different sources throughout the internet and it’s nice to compare and discuss..Not the same with DJ because it’s the same old, same old by THIS forum.
Sarcasm. Look it up.
But you've missed the point entirely - who the hell are you to tell other people what to post or not to post? What. Because you've been here for 30 years, gives you that right? With respect, don't think so pal.
And another supposed “new poster” without the courage to stay with his original handle..With respect.
Wrong. Again.
Seriously, post what you care to..Not worth arguing over.. I won’t interfere again.
Sounds good. Have a great day and thanks for understanding.
I’m not comparing anything only to say without a good O line it doesn’t matter how many other weapons you have, because you won’t be able to use them, and the SB was the best example of that.