If Kenny Pickett is available at 7, I think the Giants have

Home run, moving down and getting somewhat of a kings ransom. I’d love a 2023 1st plus this years 1st

If Pitt moved up

for the 4th pick?

Assuming Houston doesn't go QB, Carolina is the most likely team to take one at 5, so wouldn't the logic be a team that wants a QB must trade up to 4?

In comment 15612239 Giantsfan79 said:

Quote:

for the 4th pick? Assuming Houston doesn't go QB, Carolina is the most likely team to take one at 5, so wouldn't the logic be a team that wants a QB must trade up to 4?

Yes, on nothing other than my gut though I think the Giants will have someone at 5 they dont want to move off from.

If you are hoping to get Pickett and think your evaluation of him as a top 10 QB is not unique to you, you would be pretty foolish to not try and get up to #5 with the Giants instead of #7.

Is the way to go. Higher return and saves more salary and the team trading to 5 and prob Carolina will be qbs so we get the same pick we wanted at 5

that scenario, we'll be more likely to trade pick #5 because as others have said, if someone wants Pickett, they will need to move ahead of Carolina.

I'm just not sure anyone is going to give up the draft capital necessary to move up to #5 for Pickett or any of these QBs. Doing so might well require trading a #1 next year.

we draft Pickett and trade Jones instead?

moving in front of them. We could get their 2nd this year or who know next year. It would make sense for both teams.

In comment 15612263 BigBlueDawg56 said:

Quote:

Is the way to go. Higher return and saves more salary and the team trading to 5 and prob Carolina will be qbs so we get the same pick we wanted at 5

If you think someone trades up to #5 to get a QB, and Carolina then takes a QB at #6, then you think multiple teams have top 10 grades on multiple QBs?

If you trade out of #5 there is a good chance the Giants are missing out on who you had planned there. You only do that trade if your values on #5 and #7 aren't that disparate.

I think a more likely (and beneficial to the Giants) scenario is that Carolina trades up into #5 to ensure they get their guy and we get an additional lower round pick and still get both guys we want at #6 and #7.

In comment 15612279 The Jake said:

Quote:

we draft Pickett and trade Jones instead?

Sounds good to me.

need a QB and the question will be what evaluation they make.

I think one thing that will factor into it is where the HC's stand in terms of job stability. The ones who are more secure won't be as prone to make a big jump unless they have a deep conviction.

we trade #5 to CAROLINA so they can stop ATLANTA from jumping them and they can pick WILLIS and we get #6 and a 2023 #1.

then we trade with ATLANTA so they can stop DENVER from jumping them for PICKETT and we get #8 and a 2023 #1.

then we trade with DENVER so they can stop WASHINGTON from jumping them for CORRAL and we get #9 and a 2023 #1.

then we trade with WASHINGTON so they can stop PITTSBURGH from jumping them for HOWELL and we get #11 and a 2023 #1.

And therefore we wind up with Washington's #11 and four additional first round picks in 2023. And Joe Schoen becomes a legend overnight and is the subject of a 30 for 30 in fifteen years about the draft that solidified the Giants' dynasty.

Some teams may prefer the upside of other QBs like Willis. This is a weird year for the QBs, not just because none of them are unanimous first rounders, but because practically any one of Picket, Corral, Willis, Howell, and Ridder could be the first QB selected.

In comment 15612258 Mike from Ohio said:

Quote:

If you are hoping to get Pickett and think your evaluation of him as a top 10 QB is not unique to you, you would be pretty foolish to not try and get up to #5 with the Giants instead of #7.

I agree, doubt his lasts to the 7th, maybe not even the 5th.

In comment 15612302 Producer said:

Quote:

we trade #5 to CAROLINA so they can stop ATLANTA from jumping them and they can pick WILLIS and we get #6 and a 2023 #1. then we trade with ATLANTA so they can stop DENVER from jumping them for PICKETT and we get #8 and a 2023 #1. then we trade with DENVER so they can stop WASHINGTON from jumping them for CORRAL and we get #9 and a 2023 #1. then we trade with WASHINGTON so they can stop PITTSBURGH from jumping them for HOWELL and we get #11 and a 2023 #1. And therefore we wind up with Washington's #11 and four additional first round picks in 2023. And Joe Schoen becomes a legend overnight and is the subject of a 30 for 30 in fifteen years about the draft that solidified the Giants' dynasty.

That would be beyond awesome, one can dream!

In comment 15612302 Producer said:

Quote:

we trade #5 to CAROLINA so they can stop ATLANTA from jumping them and they can pick WILLIS and we get #6 and a 2023 #1. then we trade with ATLANTA so they can stop DENVER from jumping them for PICKETT and we get #8 and a 2023 #1. then we trade with DENVER so they can stop WASHINGTON from jumping them for CORRAL and we get #9 and a 2023 #1. then we trade with WASHINGTON so they can stop PITTSBURGH from jumping them for HOWELL and we get #11 and a 2023 #1. And therefore we wind up with Washington's #11 and four additional first round picks in 2023. And Joe Schoen becomes a legend overnight and is the subject of a 30 for 30 in fifteen years about the draft that solidified the Giants' dynasty.

Now that would make it move!

no

not sign anyone in free agency, and then trade down

So many here say "cut everyone, no one is sacred" while also saying "we have no money to sign anyone in free agency"

The Giants would need to stay at 5 and 7 to get a RT and CB if they cut Bradberry and dont sign a RT in free agency

Which is why I keep advocating restructuring Bradberry and Martinez, and signing a RT in free agency. These moves free up being able to trade down

In comment 15612471 Snablats said:

Quote:

The Giants would need to stay at 5 and 7 to get a RT and CB if they cut Bradberry and dont sign a RT in free agency

If they traded down to mid-first as an example they can still get a RT and a CB.

1st next year.

for one of the other QB-needy franchises.

Our #7 pick would be in play immediately...

it's possible teams have only 1 QB they really like and are willing to trade up for. It's also possible maybe even probable that the 1 QB they really like will vary quite a bit from team to team. Pickett, Willis, Corral, could all be #1 QB depending on the team.

and they were much more highly regarded than Pickett. I don't see any way that someone offers us anything significant in a trade down. Draft is too deep and no QB is worthy of a top pick.

In comment 15612240 Jim in Forest Hills said:

Quote:

In comment 15612239 Giantsfan79 said: Quote: for the 4th pick? Assuming Houston doesn't go QB, Carolina is the most likely team to take one at 5, so wouldn't the logic be a team that wants a QB must trade up to 4? Yes, on nothing other than my gut though I think the Giants will have someone at 5 they dont want to move off from.

I think that's right. If Neal, Ekwonu, Thibodeaux or Hutchinson is on the board, they probably take him and not gamble he falls two more spots. But if they get a good enough offer...

In comment 15612544 BigBlueNH said:

Quote:

and they were much more highly regarded than Pickett. I don't see any way that someone offers us anything significant in a trade down. Draft is too deep and no QB is worthy of a top pick.

Someone traded for Fields.

In comment 15612608 giantstock said:

Quote:

In comment 15612544 BigBlueNH said: Quote: and they were much more highly regarded than Pickett. I don't see any way that someone offers us anything significant in a trade down. Draft is too deep and no QB is worthy of a top pick. Someone traded for Fields.

Has that been proven to be a mistake? Is the jury in on Justin Fields?

In comment 15612635 Mike from Ohio said:

Quote:

In comment 15612608 giantstock said: Quote: In comment 15612544 BigBlueNH said: Quote: and they were much more highly regarded than Pickett. I don't see any way that someone offers us anything significant in a trade down. Draft is too deep and no QB is worthy of a top pick. Someone traded for Fields. Has that been proven to be a mistake? Is the jury in on Justin Fields?

That has zero to do with anything. The point was someone traded for him not whether it was worth it or not

No quarterbacks go in the top 6 (which, I don't think will), then our 7th overall pick could be a good spot for a potential trade.

Denver 9th
Washington 11th
New Orleans 18th
Steelers 20th

Minnesota 12th could be in play as well. A team or teams might have their eyes set on one of the quarterbacks and would want to jump ahead of the broncos to get him.

In comment 15612513 giantstock said:

Quote:

In comment 15612471 Snablats said: Quote: The Giants would need to stay at 5 and 7 to get a RT and CB if they cut Bradberry and dont sign a RT in free agency If they traded down to mid-first as an example they can still get a RT and a CB.

The top right tackles will be gone if they trade too far down

In comment 15612608 giantstock said:

Quote:

In comment 15612544 BigBlueNH said: Quote: and they were much more highly regarded than Pickett. I don't see any way that someone offers us anything significant in a trade down. Draft is too deep and no QB is worthy of a top pick. Someone traded for Fields.

Fields would be the #1 undisputed QB in this draft.

In comment 15612655 eli4life said:

Quote:

In comment 15612635 Mike from Ohio said: Quote: In comment 15612608 giantstock said: Quote: In comment 15612544 BigBlueNH said: Quote: and they were much more highly regarded than Pickett. I don't see any way that someone offers us anything significant in a trade down. Draft is too deep and no QB is worthy of a top pick. Someone traded for Fields. Has that been proven to be a mistake? Is the jury in on Justin Fields? That has zero to do with anything. The point was someone traded for him not whether it was worth it or not

It has everything to do with it. What does someone trading up for Fields illustrate? Teams trade up for QBs all the time.