Just like most of us I've been reading, watching and listening to draft talk for months. I've heard so many different takes on the Giants pick at 11. I've fell in love with players watching highlights and imagining them in Blue like I do every year. But since ownership and us fans are all so sick of losing the biggest question is who would make the greatest immediate impact? I would have to think it would be a plug and play lineman. Slater or AVT would significantly upgrade our line and impact every offensive play. A case can be made for a blue chip WR that can impact the offense like OBJ or Micah Parsons who could give us a sideline to sideline playmaker but I'm so sick of watching our QB under pressure and Saquon running for his life as soon as he touches the ball. Let's take this line from improving to top 5-10 and watch this offense finally turn things around!
Assuming he's good to go.
(For the sake of board peacefulness, I’ll omit discussion of Jones.)
A playmaker is someone who can make a game changing play on defense (sack, fumble, int) on a consistent basis or someone who can score from anywhere on the field (special teams, short pass to the house, long pass, turn a none play into a big play).
Someone who gives your playmaker time. That would be mostly on offense be an oline. On defense it could be a strong dline that gives others the chance to make a play.
From what I have read, as a rookie, that is Waddle, Parsons, or one of the oline.
You can say the same about Slater. Normally, I'd say an interior OL (especially OG) has one of the smallest learning curves, but after a year off and minimal camp/preseason time, it's likely going to take a few games (at least) for him to get up to game speed.
I try to keep in mind that DG said he is not afraid to draft over another player meaning he would pick a great player even if he had a great player at the same position on his team. Do I think that any position is up for grabs to be honest. Dg also said you need to have depth and can't have to many great players at any position.
I think we need play makers period. OL is always a spot I would continue to add talent every draft. But we need a front 7 defender and or a speed big play WR.
Those 2 positions are where its at IMO. Smith, Waddle or Parsons is who I see as making the biggest impact.
This leans me toward a more impactful big guy....lineman, edge or linebacker.
I guess the same can happen to any draft pick.
My impact player would be Parsons. He is the big meanie we haven't had at LB since LT. He could be a game wrecker and that is what we need. Someone on D that wrecks games.
So I would be thrilled if Parsons was the pick.
CB - you can never have enough good CBs, but Bradberry and Jackson are the starters and Holmes was promising at slot.
OG - clearly a massive hole here that a 1st round pick could easily step into (and improve significantly)
LB/ER - grouping together since I can see Parsons filling the BUCK role or one of the other EDGE guys coming in and having an immediate impact, even if it's largely as a situational pass rusher. I do worry about Parsons' instincts and play speed after a year off (and not a long history at LB to start with).
We will have some really nice options at 11. Gotta get this damn pick right.
These (and Parsons and Sewell) are the only guys who are actually impactful.
The defense might not be what you want it to be, but it is miles and miles ahead of the offense, so any positive addition means a greater step up for the offense, simply because they have more room to improve.
Totally agree. His speed and ability to play the return game and a guy who could take pitches in the backfield or end arounds, slot or outside- just makes too much sense for what Judge wants from his players.
Like I’ve said before if the Giants had the #1 pick in the draft I would take Sewell, and not even think twice about it.
If GMs' in the Top 10 get Jerry Reese fever and get caught up with skill position players as more sexy than an o-lineman then yeah there is a chance Sewell drops.
I know the Giants have bigger needs but it’s exciting to envision a WR depth chart of Golladay, Smith, Slayton, Shepard, Ross, and Pettis.
Quote:
but he won't be around at 11 right?
If GMs' in the Top 10 get Jerry Reese fever and get caught up with skill position players as more sexy than an o-lineman then yeah there is a chance Sewell drops.
I do not think there is a player I wanted more than Sewell in a long, long time.
Thanks for the info Hawkman.
Has Kwitty ever played OLB in high school or was he a more traditional 4-3 DE?
Safety, CB, DL, C, QB, WR#1, WR#2, RB, TE - All have clear starters. We might not like them all but they have those positions on paper filled.
Where as OT,OG,Edge, ILB#2, WR#3 while they may have bodies they aren't players who have started consistently at those positions.
That said take the best player at any of those impact positions.
Since need is constantly changing because of injuries to starters and because many great players take a year or more to get their feet under them, I don't know who we should pick.
More to defense than Sacks. I get that. We have players that do those other things VERY well. We need SACKS.
If people are concerned about Waddle because of his ankle, wouldn't they be a hundred times more leery of Phillips? I know I am.
At Michigan Kwity played all Dline positions and also dropped in coverage at times....that is the main reason his sack total was down as he moved all over the field
I’m obviously biased towards Kwity and I want whatever is best for GMEN success....I was excited to see that Sy thinks Kwity is the real deal.
Smith/Waddle wouldn't start over Slayton? Paye wouldn't start over...over...who? Heck, Surtain or Horn might make a run at Jackson.
Honestly, almost anyone we could name as a legit #11 (not that I think Payer is that) would start over our incumbent. Maybe except Pitts. which is ironic.
Quote:
combination of Hernandez and Lemieux on the left. Slater and VT might be better than all 3 ... As a runner up nominee, Parsons and Collins could both start over Crowder / Ragland. I can’t see any other guys beating out an incumbent as a day 1 starter.
Smith/Waddle wouldn't start over Slayton? Paye wouldn't start over...over...who? Heck, Surtain or Horn might make a run at Jackson.
Honestly, almost anyone we could name as a legit #11 (not that I think Payer is that) would start over our incumbent. Maybe except Pitts. which is ironic.
The starting WRs are Golladay and Shepard. And from what I understand Paye is a hands in the dirt guy which is still a strength of the team. As for Waddle and Smith, I remember when the college hype on Ross and Pettis was nearly just as great. OG is the weak link for the team.
Quote:
In comment 15226997 Spider56 said:
Quote:
combination of Hernandez and Lemieux on the left. Slater and VT might be better than all 3 ... As a runner up nominee, Parsons and Collins could both start over Crowder / Ragland. I can’t see any other guys beating out an incumbent as a day 1 starter.
Smith/Waddle wouldn't start over Slayton? Paye wouldn't start over...over...who? Heck, Surtain or Horn might make a run at Jackson.
Honestly, almost anyone we could name as a legit #11 (not that I think Payer is that) would start over our incumbent. Maybe except Pitts. which is ironic.
The starting WRs are Golladay and Shepard. And from what I understand Paye is a hands in the dirt guy which is still a strength of the team. As for Waddle and Smith, I remember when the college hype on Ross and Pettis was nearly just as great. OG is the weak link for the team.
So WR is discounted because Smith and Waddle are akin to failed past picks but OG needs to be filled because Slater is a sure thing??
Waddle is the correct answer.
But mostly, I would bet that Daniel Jones would say it’s not his job to pick players but to work with the ones who get picked.