Last time was 33 years ago. Eric Moore in 1988. Back then of course, the run game was a much bigger part of the game than it is now.
With the higher value placed on Edge and WR, coupled with the fact that we spent 3 of the 1st five picks last year on OL, I get the sense OL will not be the pick at 11 (save a blue chip OG/OT like Sewell inexplicably falling).
I don't think Slater makes the grade here either especially if a blue chip WR falls.
OL likely to be round 2 or even 3 which is in line with what many of those more in the know here have said.
If the grade on the WR is high at 11, I think we could see the Edge round 2 as that dries up very quick in this draft. And we know they like Oweh a lot but that may take a Baker like trade up to get him.
We will continue to be a bad offense without players at OL.
Everybody else was drafted to play Tackle.
There are no guarantees in the NFL, other than injuries, coach changes, and surprise victories and losses
Your question is a great one. They haven't as far as I can remember.
We will continue to be a bad offense without players at OL.
They had 48 games started by OL 25 years and younger last season. At some point you need to develop what you have into quality starters. Continuing to throw rookies into the equation if you're unable to develop them doesn't solve the problem.
We will continue to be a bad offense without players at OL.
+1. If you take a premier guard in the 1st round, maybe you can trade Hernandez to move up in the 2nd or 3rd. Get the ER in the 2nd then TE or maybe another OL in the 3rd. I would not use a day 1 or 2 pick on a WR. There should be quality receivers left at the top of the 4th.
the giants won two superbowls with a 5th rnd LT in diehl, UDFA LG in seubert, UDFA C in ohara, 2nd rnd RG in snee, and 3rd rnd FA right tackle in mckenzie.
i know nothing about slater or sewell or whoever but loading the line up with players drafted in the first or high second doesn't automatically mean it will be good (see flowers, pugh, richburg, hernandez).
However, they have moved numerous OTs drafted in the first round to Guard.
Quote:
I don't see how Edge is the higher value. I do think edge is going to be a need, but they were able to field a good defense with out a game-changer at edge.
We will continue to be a bad offense without players at OL.
They had 48 games started by OL 25 years and younger last season. At some point you need to develop what you have into quality starters. Continuing to throw rookies into the equation if you're unable to develop them doesn't solve the problem.
So what do you do when the guys you have don’t develop?
the giants won two superbowls with a 5th rnd LT in diehl, UDFA LG in seubert, UDFA C in ohara, 2nd rnd RG in snee, and 3rd rnd FA right tackle in mckenzie.
I agree and I'll add, though I generally agree it's best to win the battle of "the trenches", let's not forget our OL in '11 was not great (old and beat up).
How did we win the SB? Of course it's a team game, our D got healthy, etc., but the "shiny toys" (as some like to call WRs), Nicks and Cruz had a lot to do with it.
When was the last time the Giants drafted ANYBODY and they improved from one year to the next since being drafted?
Drafting and developing talent is the lifeblood of any good NFL organization. This has been a huge problem for the NYG in the past decade...huge.
So what do you do when the guys you have don’t develop?
I think the coaching staff has an idea if they will or won't develop.
From asshat rumors I've seen, the Giants don't see the OL to be the big disaster some BBIers seem to think it is.
No one is saying we shouldn't draft OL, many of us just think the need/value equation for OG, lines up better in rd 2 or 3 vs. 1.
If Giants take Slater @ 11 then they should let him compete for RT b/c there is no evidence that Peart or Solder are ready to start all 17 games in 2021. If Jones is not the long term solution at QB, the Giants still need the OL to be good enough to open running lanes for Barkley and protect whoever plays QB. If Slater is not a legit RT then they can slide him inside and keep building around this young group of players regardless.
At this point the Giants "have" their tackles and they need to develop them. Guard competition will likely come in round 2 or 3 imv.
I'm admittedly a novice, but I suspect that the highest ranked players on their board at 11 are very likely to be at the WR and CB positions.
Please no more reaching for OL to appease a fanbase that thinks it's the only position that matters.
And Scherff whom they also loved they would have drafted him with the full intention of playing him at Tackle first.
He's also an example of why you shouldn't draft by positional need. Next 4 guys off the board were perennial pro bowlers. Two WR (Irvin and Anthony Miller) TE (Keith Jackson) and LB (Ken Harvey). We had cluster drafted WR the year before and had Bavaro and were loaded at LB so no "need" at those positions but Irvin and Miller were way better than any of our 1987 draft guys and Bavaro got hurt in 1989 and you never have enough pass rushers.
Same thought.
Quote:
In comment 15221787 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
I don't see how Edge is the higher value. I do think edge is going to be a need, but they were able to field a good defense with out a game-changer at edge.
We will continue to be a bad offense without players at OL.
They had 48 games started by OL 25 years and younger last season. At some point you need to develop what you have into quality starters. Continuing to throw rookies into the equation if you're unable to develop them doesn't solve the problem.
So what do you do when the guys you have don’t develop?
Everyone knows that when that happens, you trade the #11 pick for the #50 pick straight up and hope for the best.
At this point the Giants "have" their tackles and they need to develop them. Guard competition will likely come in round 2 or 3 imv.
I'm admittedly a novice, but I suspect that the highest ranked players on their board at 11 are very likely to be at the WR and CB positions.
Please no more reaching for OL to appease a fanbase that thinks it's the only position that matters.
It must be all those victories and that fantastic offense that's making us get so distracted that we can't see how decent the OL actually is.
Do you even watch games?
This is accurate, and many of the mock draft "experts" around the web are convinced that Andrew Thomas is already an effective bust and that the Giants need to reload again. It's lunacy.
At this point the Giants "have" their tackles and they need to develop them. Guard competition will likely come in round 2 or 3 imv.
I'm admittedly a novice, but I suspect that the highest ranked players on their board at 11 are very likely to be at the WR and CB positions.
Please no more reaching for OL to appease a fanbase that thinks it's the only position that matters.
They did not spend close to 200m dollars this offseason on defensive and offensive skill players to play wait and see while the kids learn on the job and Bradberry and Martinez waste their prime years. I am all for developing the players you draft, but I'm also for competition and they should have to earn it.
At this point the Giants "have" their tackles and they need to develop them. Guard competition will likely come in round 2 or 3 imv.
I'm admittedly a novice, but I suspect that the highest ranked players on their board at 11 are very likely to be at the WR and CB positions.
Please no more reaching for OL to appease a fanbase that thinks it's the only position that matters.
It's probably our biggest need next to Edge and if we're looking at the consensus value instead of speculating on what you think the Giants draft board looks like, guys like Sewell and Slater aren't reaches. That's why people are in favor of OL. Couple that with the stakes involved in the Barkley and Jones investments...yes, some people (not all BBI posters), are in favor of an OL prospect at 11. It may not be your preference, but this isn't rocket science.
Granted we went to 4-3 and guys like C.Jones, Kiwanuka and Pierre-Paul were first round picks at DE.
As far as LBs Pepper Johnson was a 2nd rounder in 86' & Ryan Phillips, Marcus Buckley, and Gerris Wilkerson were all 3rd round picks.
If Parsons checks out from a personality standpoint as far as the culture we want to establish here he would be a welcomed addition that would give us tremendous versatility in showing multiple looks on D and rolling coverages the way Graham likes to do to create INTs.
The value at Guard is in rounds 2 & 3
Quote:
view the OL about 50% worse than it actually is. They've been obsessed with drafting OL early as long as I've been here, and ironically they usually want to pull the plug on those high draft picks if they dont have an immediate impact.
At this point the Giants "have" their tackles and they need to develop them. Guard competition will likely come in round 2 or 3 imv.
I'm admittedly a novice, but I suspect that the highest ranked players on their board at 11 are very likely to be at the WR and CB positions.
Please no more reaching for OL to appease a fanbase that thinks it's the only position that matters.
It's probably our biggest need next to Edge and if we're looking at the consensus value instead of speculating on what you think the Giants draft board looks like, guys like Sewell and Slater aren't reaches. That's why people are in favor of OL. Couple that with the stakes involved in the Barkley and Jones investments...yes, some people (not all BBI posters), are in favor of an OL prospect at 11. It may not be your preference, but this isn't rocket science.
There is a very good argument for OL at 11. As there will be some good ones there and it's an area we could definitely use an upgrade. But it doesn't seem to be the Giants are thinking about this as per some of the things our insiders are saying.
When was the last time the Giants drafted ANYBODY and they improved from one year to the next since being drafted?
Drafting and developing talent is the lifeblood of any good NFL organization. This has been a huge problem for the NYG in the past decade...huge.
I totally agree with this.
What’s more, one could argue that last years free agents overperformed expectations, and that could mean the Giants chose well (thanks DG) or it could mean some coach as well (thanks JJ). There are some guys on defense having career years (Martinez, Williams, Ryan, Bradberry) ... the naive optimist in me suggests there is some coaching in those FA stories that might bode well for the future.
Quote:
In comment 15221787 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
I don't see how Edge is the higher value. I do think edge is going to be a need, but they were able to field a good defense with out a game-changer at edge.
We will continue to be a bad offense without players at OL.
They had 48 games started by OL 25 years and younger last season. At some point you need to develop what you have into quality starters. Continuing to throw rookies into the equation if you're unable to develop them doesn't solve the problem.
So what do you do when the guys you have don’t develop?