Opinions on trading Barkley

a QB in the first round we are happy with. Even that wouldn't be enough though.

before a RB, I think

For a #1 but I don't think there is a Market for him that high.
If we are not going to sign him or franchise him you move him even for a 3rd round pick.
If he plays 17 games and has a Barkley year I think at minimum you franchise him for at least 1 year.

if the Bills offered a 1st and say James Cook (who this regime supposedly liked) that's something i think they'd do because it checks 2 boxes in terms of allowing them to put talent on the field this year and gain more in the future.

i personally doubt any team gives up a 1st for any rb. but you never know. the rams are aggressive traders and they need another weapon on offense.

if the packages get more into the realistic 2nd/3rd range then it more comes down to how much the current regime likes barkley and wants to keep him. the running back market is so weighed down if they can extend him similar to chubb it would be a good value if he finally stays healthy.

of his deal. RBs aren't worth it and Buffalo knows they have a competent backups in Cook and Moss.

Trading him for anything worth more than just keeping him would mean finding an "old school" team that thinks its a piece away. They don't exist.

but no one is trading a #1 for a RB that's heading into FA. If he plays well I can see a 2nd but even that I don't think is realistic. So now we are at a 3rd and while that is helpful to have, we don't really know what the Schoen/Daboll value just yet.

I'm in wait and see mode, depends on a number of factors including whether or not we are in the playoff hunt.

offered a first-round pick for a RB. The Bills have a decent cadre of RBs in place right now and they are in the top half of the league in rushing yards per game thus far.

In general, I would absolutely trade SB by the trade deadline. It's so much wiser to spend that money on other positions that are more critical to success and winning.

And I might do that trade even if we are in the playoff hunt. That's a tricky move, but I think we could replace his production by committee.

As for the comp, I'd take anything in terms of a pick(s) but insist on a player who could contribute for us, like a TE, OL, WR.

Position to find value in the 2nd or 3rd. If you get a 2 or 3 and reinvest it back into a RB.
It saves you probably 9 million on the cap next year.
It makes smart sense and Barkley after 400 touches this season is a big risk for 10 million+ in 2023.

but I am looking to the future, not expecting too much from this year. However, if the Giants have a shot at the playoffs, no matter how remote, I don't think ownership will move or buy off on a trade due to potentially seeing post-season revenue they haven't seen in many years. Your mileage may vary.

trade him for a #1. At this point in the teams development another #1 with a #2/#3 pick RB, would help us more than Barkley. If we don't get a #1, I would try to resign him if I could

ownership won't sign off on trading SB, unless it was an offer they simply couldn't refuse (unlikely for a RB), and the Schoen Reign managed to talk them into it (they need SB to help put arses in seats on gameday).

...but right now I'll take a wait and see attitude based on how good he's looked. Let's see if it continues.

General question: what's the highest pick the Giants could obtain if they lost SB simply to free agency - meaning just letting him walk.

In comment 15825052 BillKo said:

Quote:

...but right now I'll take a wait and see attitude based on how good he's looked. Let's see if it continues. General question: what's the highest pick the Giants could obtain if they lost SB simply to free agency - meaning just letting him walk.

Comp pick would be a 3rd but we have cap space next year and probably sign someone to neutralize that pick.

In comment 15825043 JonC said:

Quote:

ownership won't sign off on trading SB, unless it was an offer they simply couldn't refuse (unlikely for a RB), and the Schoen Reign managed to talk them into it (they need SB to help put arses in seats on gameday).

Hard to disagree, especially when we heard Mara saying he envisioned Barkley being a Giant for life.

Mara loves Barkley as the face of the organization. It's easy to see why. Great kid who puts team and organization first. And he moves merchandise.

If it was 1988, sure, keep him. But the economics of the modern NFL have started to make the high-profile RB extinct.

If the front office doesn't believe in Jones, I could see them wanting to keep Barkley around to help the next rookie QB. If they resign Jones I don't think they can afford the luxury of big dollars at the RB position, so trading him would likely be in the cards. Either way, we aren't getting a first, likely a third, or a very low second.

be stunned if anyone offered a #1 for Barkley. As someone said, he's a RB in the last year of his contract and his salary this year is $7.2M. The acquiring team would need a deal in place with him before making that trade. The whole position has been devalued in today's pass happy NFL.

I also don't see the Giants trading Barkley. He's basically the whole offense right now.

Barkley do against the Titans? No. Can anyone do what Barkley di against the Panthers yes. So my answer is if you get something decent for him I would. But as Jon C mentioned getting ownership to sign off on it could be tough. The want people in the stadium and signing off on a trade indicates the season is over.

I might be in the minority but I don’t want to trade Barkley.

Obviously I don’t want to pay him 15M a season. But I want a healthy Barkley on the Giants for the next 2-3 seasons

1. He’s the face of the franchise
2. He’s the centerpiece of the offense
3. Our young and inexperienced OL, which may even get younger next year without Feliciano, is better run blocking than pass blocking
4. If we are breaking in a new QB, a reliable run game will be even more important.
5. He is more than a RB, he is a receiving threat as well.
6. Top tier RBs cost significantly less than top tier WRs
7. It’s easier to find stud WRs in the draft, and we will probably draft one high.
8. Continuity. With a new QB and transitioning WR group, letting Barkley continue to gain familiarity with the developing OL bodes well for the next 3 year window.
9. We have plenty of cap space to resign our own, where we know how the players fit the scheme, and there is less uncertainty of personality fit as with outside free agents. Especially if we have a QB on a rookie deal for the length of his extension.
10. Barkley doesn’t seem like a diva, and I trust we won’t have to overpay to keep him. It’ll be mutually beneficial to keep him in NY.

but I think its likely the Giants are going to franchise him next year

Doubt anyone would offer a first. Would trade him for less than that.

They are so good and a healthy Barkley would add a lot of value there. This is a big, big year for the Bills. Allen gives them a long window, but this is the year where they have all the talent around him

1st round pick? Maybe not. But you can always sweeten on our side too. Say Buffalo 1st and 3rd for SB and our 2nd? Negotiate like that

unless they are out of the playoff hunt before the trade deadline.

I would not give Barkley a big contract to stay. Let him walk after the season and get compensatory picks.

It’s nice to have a winning start and hopefully the team will continue to learn to win and put the building blocks in place,
but we shouldn’t be franchising him next year, expensive RBs are topping off pieces for teams making a run, not foundational pieces on a rebuilding team. We’d save a chunk on the cap and get ammo for the inevitable move for a QB in the draft. The start makes it more complicated but it should still be a no brainer.

Barkley is a great piece for a team making a run, even with the winning start if there is interest we should cash in

In comment 15825103 Jerry in_DC said:

Quote:

They are so good and a healthy Barkley would add a lot of value there. This is a big, big year for the Bills. Allen gives them a long window, but this is the year where they have all the talent around him 1st round pick? Maybe not. But you can always sweeten on our side too. Say Buffalo 1st and 3rd for SB and our 2nd? Negotiate like that

Only issue here is their 1st and our 2nd might only be 10 picks apart (or less) which is 100/110 points. I'd rather just take their second but I get your point.

i'm a seller at 3-5 (or worse) but 4-4 or better and I really don't think its going to be worth it unless we are blown away with an offer.

in a second, for fair value, but no 2-0 team is trading their best player IMO.

And if the Giants start losing, your strategy only works if it's despite Barkley's stellar play. Otherwise his value drops.

The Giants have sucked for the better part of the last decade.

Barkley is the face of the franchise.

Giants already have 2 wins “in the bank” and their pre-trading deadline schedule features winnable games against the Cowboys (minus Dak), the Bears, Jags and Seahawks.

We’ve also been told for years that as much as Mara hates losing, he hates it even more when late November and December home games are either at less than capacity or filled with opposing fans.

Given that… Do you really think that Mara is going to trade Barkley by the deadline, thus sending a signal to fans that the season is over on Nov. 1st????

Barkley is not going anywhere.

I suspect Barkley would be here. Don't know if a new contract would follow like it did for Henry but it leaves us options. We have cap starting in 2023 (and beyond) and I don't see the guarantees being as high as people think.

tag numbers are for RBs, I think one needs to view Barkley as having 2 years under contract rather than as a rental. Back to back franchise tags should be in play (if the numbers he requires to sign a deal are too rich for RB allocation).

I'm only trading him for a package commensurate with that view.

for the future benefit. BUT, we lack anything else right now for fans to hang their hats on.

Now, if Robinson comes back and makes plays and Thibs gets on the field and makes play, now we have some young guys to grab attention.

Barkley for a 2nd and 5th would be a steal considering cost and contract status.

All of this talk about where we would need to get to in the draft order means nothing right now. Worry about where we need to be in the offseason. Having more ammo regardless is a big need.

.

But nobody is going to unless Gettleman is advising someone.

I’d move him for a 3rd unless the Giants are confident they can get him on a team friendly deal.

Because of being the only thing for fans to hang their hat on

because they need Barkley to be able to score points. They've only scored 72 points in two games against last year's Super Bowl Champion and last year's #1 seed in the AFC.

If your answer is draft pick, then it wouldn't be any earlier than 2053...

If the Giants want to make a serious run at Lamar Jackson next spring, it seems likely Baltimore will franchise tag him, and then try to trade him. They will likely want a first round pick for him (at least), so it'd be nice if we happen to have more than one of those in our pocket to offer up. If trading Barkley before the deadline gets us that second first-rounder, I say you make that deal and never look back.

I love Barkley, but the basic puzzle hasn't changed, much less been solved. When healthy, he's arguably a generational talent, but in today's NFL, you don't need a generational talent at the RB position to win a Super Bowl, and certainly not if he expects to be paid like one. And there's the quite salient fact that Barkley gets dinged with alarming frequency.

In comment 15825188 WillieYoung said:

Quote:

because they need Barkley to be able to score points. They've only scored 72 points in two games against last year's Super Bowl Champion and last year's #1 seed in the AFC.

while the Bills D has only given up 17 points.

In comment 15825175 Jints in Carolina said:

Quote:

.

LOL. No they don't and yes they would. Even if they did, they're not going to offer a pick high enough to make the trade worth it for the Giants. Barkley is worth more on the roster than he is as a 5th or 6th round pick, which is what you're getting for a guy with a severe knee injury in his past who has played one great and one average game this year.

And favored with the Dallas Cowboys coming in.

Ten years of lousy football, we finally as fans are enjoying some success, and some want to trade their best play maker.

I just don’t get it.

If the Giants are 2-5 and someone offers a 1st I think you take it. But I think the Giants will likely be 4-3 and it would be foolish to trade your starting RB while you are chasing a playoff spot. I know this is a rebuild, but don't discount how important a playoff spot would be for the franchise, the new regime and the fans. The franchise tag for Saquon would be ~$12M; that is not a lot for a guy who can change a game by himself.

Assuming he has as productive year as we expect, I'd like to see what they can do to keep him on this roster. He is a rare talent in the game and could help accelerate this rebuild if he can have 3-4 solid seasons.

In comment 15825216 mikeinbloomfield said:

Quote:

In comment 15825175 Jints in Carolina said: Quote: . LOL. No they don't and yes they would. Even if they did, they're not going to offer a pick high enough to make the trade worth it for the Giants. Barkley is worth more on the roster than he is as a 5th or 6th round pick, which is what you're getting for a guy with a severe knee injury in his past who has played one great and one average game this year.

Agree with much of what you say, except for 2 things.

Barkley's 2nd game was not just average. Most of his 72 rushing yards came in the second half and a case could be made that he was the difference maker in BOTH games.

And if Barkley only averaged 72 yards per game he would finish with 1,224 yards. (Only 2 RBs rushed for more yards than that last year.)

Also, if Barkley were playing well enough this year to get other teams interested in trading for him, the fact that Barkley had a "a severe knee injury" a few years ago would be irrelevant.

In comment 15825224 joeinpa said:

Quote:

And favored with the Dallas Cowboys coming in. Ten years of lousy football, we finally as fans are enjoying some success, and some want to trade their best play maker. I just don’t get it.

Because this is a rebuilding team probably without a franchise QB.

If you want a franchise QB, you're going to have to draft him and the Giants don't have enough draft capital to do so.

Plus, by the time the new QB is entering his prime, Barkley will be three years older.

.

2-0 for the first time in years, a favorable schedule, and our defense is absolutely balling without its 2 best edge rushers.


And yet here we are making threads about trading the guy that the offense literally runs through.

It seems like there’s a large contingent of giants fans who have let the draft become their favorite part of the season, rather than the actual game of football itself.

Looks like they have cap space next year

In comment 15825240 Jim in Tampa said:

Quote:

In comment 15825216 mikeinbloomfield said: Quote: In comment 15825175 Jints in Carolina said: Quote: . LOL. No they don't and yes they would. Even if they did, they're not going to offer a pick high enough to make the trade worth it for the Giants. Barkley is worth more on the roster than he is as a 5th or 6th round pick, which is what you're getting for a guy with a severe knee injury in his past who has played one great and one average game this year. Agree with much of what you say, except for 2 things. Barkley's 2nd game was not just average. Most of his 72 rushing yards came in the second half and a case could be made that he was the difference maker in BOTH games. And if Barkley only averaged 72 yards per game he would finish with 1,224 yards. (Only 2 RBs rushed for more yards than that last year.) Also, if Barkley were playing well enough this year to get other teams interested in trading for him, the fact that Barkley had a "a severe knee injury" a few years ago would be irrelevant.

Regardless, they are not going to get a premium pick for him. He is not going to be here for the next Giants' super bowl, but he is worth more to the Giants than a 5th or 6th round pick.

now that hes demonstrated hes recovered from injury Id keep him for 3-4 years. he actually has pretty good tread on tge tires still due to missing so much ball.

In comment 15825259 Breeze_94 said:

Quote:

2-0 for the first time in years, a favorable schedule, and our defense is absolutely balling without its 2 best edge rushers. And yet here we are making threads about trading the guy that the offense literally runs through. It seems like there’s a large contingent of giants fans who have let the draft become their favorite part of the season, rather than the actual game of football itself.

Do you want to be stuck with Daniel Jones next year?

In comment 15825291 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

In comment 15825259 Breeze_94 said: Quote: 2-0 for the first time in years, a favorable schedule, and our defense is absolutely balling without its 2 best edge rushers. And yet here we are making threads about trading the guy that the offense literally runs through. It seems like there’s a large contingent of giants fans who have let the draft become their favorite part of the season, rather than the actual game of football itself. Do you want to be stuck with Daniel Jones next year?

I don’t know that yet Eric. But I do know I am not ready to begin rooting for draft position after 2 weeks; I m betting you re not either

Yesterday.

The Giants are not going to win a Super Bowl again until they get a QB.

I'm not thinking a lot about this year other than the job that the coaching staff is doing.

Half this roster will likely be gone in 2023, including the QB, very possibly the RB via free agency if we don't trade him, and the entire WR corps.

The goal is not to be a .500 football team.

And if you don't think about trading current assets for futures ones, we won't catch the elite teams.

If someone offers a multi-pick trade for Barkley, including a #1, you have to listen.

that's an EASY decision to make, especially if you're replacing Jones.

we don't just need a QB, we need a starting CB, multiple WR's including a #1 and #2 WR, and more help on the offensive line.

In comment 15825300 islander1 said:

Quote:

that's an EASY decision to make, especially if you're replacing Jones.

Sure, but what if someone offers you a #1 now?

also throw this out there... Barkley is an injury-prone RB with a major knee injury in his profile.

It's great that he is doing so well now. It drives up his value. I posted about this three months ago.

In comment 15825302 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

In comment 15825300 islander1 said: Quote: that's an EASY decision to make, especially if you're replacing Jones. Sure, but what if someone offers you a #1 now?

It's not happening, but hypothetically? I'd trade him.

Face of the franchise or not, getting a 1st back at this point in his contract is fantastic value.

This franchise is presently mired in losing and a third rebuild now, but if we truly trust Daboll/Schoen then we do this and not look back.

Buffalo has a stable of backs that is NOT holding back this offense! Moreover, they are so loaded with talent that adding Saquon Barkley does not magically "put them over the top." Right now, the Bills are the best team in the NFL and a highly motivated one at that.

In comment 15825301 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

we don't just need a QB, we need a starting CB, multiple WR's including a #1 and #2 WR, and more help on the offensive line.

A lot more help with the offensive line, starting with a new Center.

not that long ago when Trent Richardson was traded for a 1st round pick??

In comment 15825311 M.S. said:

Quote:

In comment 15825301 Eric from BBI said: Quote: we don't just need a QB, we need a starting CB, multiple WR's including a #1 and #2 WR, and more help on the offensive line. A lot more help with the offensive line, starting with a new Center.

I honestly believe if we had a good center, the guard play wouldn't be exposed so much. Our problem is our tackles are fine enough, but the whole inside is erratic.

In comment 15825318 Everyone Relax said:

Quote:

not that long ago when Trent Richardson was traded for a 1st round pick??

oh gosh. It's too bad the Colts are set at RB.

In comment 15825259 Breeze_94 said:

Quote:

2-0 for the first time in years, a favorable schedule, and our defense is absolutely balling without its 2 best edge rushers. And yet here we are making threads about trading the guy that the offense literally runs through. It seems like there’s a large contingent of giants fans who have let the draft become their favorite part of the season, rather than the actual game of football itself.

If the Giants aren't going to win the Super Bowl this year, which they aren't, conversations about how to build a Super Bowl contender should be all that really matter.

It's great that the Giants are 2-0. It's also not relevant to any objective long term evaluation of the franchise.

Barkley is a very good player. He's not a unicorn. If they could get a first round pick for him, they should say yes and hang up the phone before the person on the other end changes their mind. That first round pick, even if it's #32 overall, could get you a cost-controlled player for the next 4-5 years.

That player might even be a RB. The Broncos got Javonte Williams at #35 in 2021. In 2020 you could have taken any of the following at #32: CEH, D'Andre Swift, Jonathan Taylor, Cam Akers, JK Dobbins, AJ Dillon, Antonio Gibson.

I'm sure I don't have to remind anyone that Nick Chubb was taken #35 overall in 2018, 33 picks after Barkley. All he's done is average 5.3 yards to carry and score 39 TDs in 60 games.

In comment 15825301 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

we don't just need a QB, we need a starting CB, multiple WR's including a #1 and #2 WR, and more help on the offensive line.

Yeah, I think the 2-0 start has made some people overestimate the talent on this roster. We could easily have lost both games, and most likely would have in previous years. Good coaching, especially by Wink, got us the wins. We do have some pieces, but need a lot more.

I don't see us trading Barkley unless someone offers a #1 or several day two picks, which seems extremely unlikely given that he is a RB and a FA after this season.

Anything that helps us get better at more important positions- QB/OL/CB/LB/WR I'm fine with.

Good player but just not that important moving forward.

In comment 15825006 I Love Clams Casino said:

Quote:

before a RB, I think

They just extended Dawson Knox.

In comment 15825308 M.S. said:

Quote:

Buffalo has a stable of backs that is NOT holding back this offense! Moreover, they are so loaded with talent that adding Saquon Barkley does not magically "put them over the top." Right now, the Bills are the best team in the NFL and a highly motivated one at that.

They do have plenty of backs but non have proven to be as good as Barkley at his best. The Bills are a very, very good team and Barkley would certainly make them even harder to defend come playoff time. A good defensive coordinator would have to choose who to stop because even a great defense would not be able to stop all of the weapons the Bills would have. Don’t forget the weather will be a factor at that time of year.

In comment 15825349 GiantMike92 said:

Quote:

In comment 15825308 M.S. said: Quote: Buffalo has a stable of backs that is NOT holding back this offense! Moreover, they are so loaded with talent that adding Saquon Barkley does not magically "put them over the top." Right now, the Bills are the best team in the NFL and a highly motivated one at that. They do have plenty of backs but non have proven to be as good as Barkley at his best. The Bills are a very, very good team and Barkley would certainly make them even harder to defend come playoff time. A good defensive coordinator would have to choose who to stop because even a great defense would not be able to stop all of the weapons the Bills would have. Don’t forget the weather will be a factor at that time of year.

You make an interesting argument. I wonder, however, if Saquon Barkley would even be on the Bills radar so long as they continue to devour their opponents. The way the Bills were flying around the field last night, it looked like someone threw a bucket of chum at a pack of hungry sharks.

There are 5 teams with two first round picks next year:

Eagles (from Saints)
Lions (from Rams)
Texans (from Browns)
Dolphins (from 49ers)
Seahawks (from Broncos)

Of course I would trade him for a 1.

but I guess strange things happen when teams have Superbowl aspirations. I would trade him in a heartbeat. I love what he did week 1, he definitely won the game. Week 2 was not great, just an average game.

My view is that he will want too much money for a long term deal with the Giants. The Bills pay their whole RB group less than what Barkley makes. He is going to want top RB money when the odds say he will not make it through based on injuries and RB history. Looking at the Big Picture the Giants should trade him if they get a 1 or a 2. If they are only getting a 3rd rounder or less they could possibly net that based on comp picks so I would hold him for the season.

In comment 15825109 US1 Giants said:

Quote:

unless they are out of the playoff hunt before the trade deadline. I would not give Barkley a big contract to stay. Let him walk after the season and get compensatory picks.

Pick. Compensatory pick - singular. You don't get multiple compensatory picks for a single player.

And they start at the 3rd round, and they're a year away. So Barkley signing elsewhere, even if it's for the largest contract in NFL history, will garner a 3rd round pick in 2024 (at best, and that's before factoring for whatever might be offset by the Giants' own FA signings from other teams).

Anything in the 3rd round or better in 2023 would be a more valuable trade return than letting SB walk. Add to that the incremental cap space gain from whatever is left of SB's salary at the time of the trade that would most likely roll over to 2023.

That doesn't mean that the Giants will trade SB. They probably won't, for a variety of reasons. But the trade offers that they might receive between now and the trade deadline would have to be absolute dogshit to not be better than waiting for a 2024 compensatory pick.

In comment 15825361 RCPhoenix said:

Quote:

There are 5 teams with two first round picks next year: Eagles (from Saints) Lions (from Rams) Texans (from Browns) Dolphins (from 49ers) Seahawks (from Broncos)

The Dolphins forfeited their own pick. There's only four teams with multiple first round picks next year.

In comment 15825361 RCPhoenix said:

Quote:

There are 5 teams with two first round picks next year: Eagles (from Saints) Lions (from Rams) Texans (from Browns) Dolphins (from 49ers) Seahawks (from Broncos)

I could definitely see three of those teams looking for a QB too!

Keep him and sign him to a new contract

In comment 15825391 Simms11 said:

Quote:

In comment 15825361 RCPhoenix said: Quote: There are 5 teams with two first round picks next year: Eagles (from Saints) Lions (from Rams) Texans (from Browns) Dolphins (from 49ers) Seahawks (from Broncos) I could definitely see three of those teams looking for a QB too!

The three who will be looking for a QB will probably have their own pick in the top 4 though, with the exceptions of the Lions possibly.

And Barkley is a playmaker, especially when we have none of them at outside wide receiver

I've said this before, the teams that have success without star running backs are the teams that have Hall of Fame quarterbacks

And Barkley is a playmaker, especially when we have none of them at outside wide receiver

I've said this before, the teams that have success without star running backs are the teams that have Hall of Fame quarterbacks

5 of the top 6 rushers last year didn’t make the playoffs.

make this look like a tough call. But, the reality is neither Barkley or Jones will be here next year. So, if a team offers you a #1 for Barkley in a few weeks, you'd have to very seriously consider it, at the very least. I guess the only factor may be if the team builds on this start and actually keeps winning and has a shot at winning the division. Do you give that up?

I say yes, because it is probably better long term. And, this is coming from someone who wanted to draft Barkley, was happy they drafted Barkley, and has defended him until now. I still love him as a player and for what he has the potential to do. But, it is just not wise to consider re-signing him given his injury history.

I don't foresee any scenario in which Barkley or Jones play well enough individually to warrant 2nd deals or Franchise tags.

In comment 15825401 ajr2456 said:

Quote:

5 of the top 6 rushers last year didn’t make the playoffs.

Please quit making sense. That's a non-starter around here on this issue.

Who was the last, great/HoF-ish RB to be part of a SB winning team? Marshawn Lynch nearly a decade ago? I'd rather have a great K than a great RB.

In comment 15825401 ajr2456 said:

Quote:

5 of the top 6 rushers last year didn’t make the playoffs.

One time it happened. And the Patriots gave the Super Bowl away to them. The fact is teams with Hall of Fame quarterbacks are the ones that don't have star running backs

But as usual you miss the point. If you don't have a star Hall of Fame quarterback then you need Playmakers whether they are running backs or receivers

And what about the rest of their team, were they any good?

You need playmakers, and Barclay is a playmaker not just rushing but also receiving, especially on a team that has no good receivers

thinking short term.

If the Giants draft a QB in round one in April 2023, Barkley will be 26 years old with five years of mileage on his treads.

You can't really count on a young QB starting to "get it" before his third year.

So what is the value of having a 26 and 27 year old Barkley (again with a significant injury history) on a club that will still be rebuilding?

Wouldn't that cap space and hopefully additional draft capital be better spent?

Barkley would be great for a contending team.

We're not one of those. We won't be next year or 2024 either. Not unless Daniel Jones becomes a different QB.

short...

I still think Giants fans are living in denial.

In comment 15825446 Snablats said:

Quote:

In comment 15825401 ajr2456 said: Quote: 5 of the top 6 rushers last year didn’t make the playoffs. One time it happened. And the Patriots gave the Super Bowl away to them. The fact is teams with Hall of Fame quarterbacks are the ones that don't have star running backs But as usual you miss the point. If you don't have a star Hall of Fame quarterback then you need Playmakers whether they are running backs or receivers

Name another team without a HOF caliber QB and a superstar rusher to win the Super Bowl.

In comment 15825464 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

thinking short term. If the Giants draft a QB in round one in April 2023, Barkley will be 26 years old with five years of mileage on his treads. You can't really count on a young QB starting to "get it" before his third year. So what is the value of having a 26 and 27 year old Barkley (again with a significant injury history) on a club that will still be rebuilding? Wouldn't that cap space and hopefully additional draft capital be better spent? Barkley would be great for a contending team. We're not one of those. We won't be next year or 2024 either. Not unless Daniel Jones becomes a different QB.

So you should get rid of every high price player? And then what are you spending the money on?

In comment 15825389 Gatorade Dunk said:

Quote:

In comment 15825361 RCPhoenix said: Quote: There are 5 teams with two first round picks next year: Eagles (from Saints) Lions (from Rams) Texans (from Browns) Dolphins (from 49ers) Seahawks (from Broncos) The Dolphins forfeited their own pick. There's only four teams with multiple first round picks next year.

Apologies - I was going off of an old list.

In comment 15825478 Snablats said:

Quote:

In comment 15825464 Eric from BBI said: Quote: thinking short term. If the Giants draft a QB in round one in April 2023, Barkley will be 26 years old with five years of mileage on his treads. You can't really count on a young QB starting to "get it" before his third year. So what is the value of having a 26 and 27 year old Barkley (again with a significant injury history) on a club that will still be rebuilding? Wouldn't that cap space and hopefully additional draft capital be better spent? Barkley would be great for a contending team. We're not one of those. We won't be next year or 2024 either. Not unless Daniel Jones becomes a different QB. So you should get rid of every high price player? And then what are you spending the money on?

It's one thing if a high priced player will still be part of your core when your team is ready to contend. If they're not, what's the point of keeping them instead of getting something in return that can be used to acquire players who will be?

With Barkley, it's not JUST that he's going to be an expensive luxury at a position that hardly requires it (although that's still part of it) and that the position he plays is littered with examples of players aging rapidly. It's also that he is likely more valuable on a team that's already a contender, and can be traded for assets. In that sense, him being high-priced doesn't even matter. It's simply that he could potentially serve the rebuild more as a trade piece than he can on the field.

It's about not committing a huge part of your cap to a player who won't be a part of the final rebuild product. When you allocate a huge chunk of cap space to a player, you can't spend it on other needs.

For anyone who thought Barkley was a dumb "luxury" pick in 2018, they should feel even more strongly about it now because the Giants still don't have their QB and Barkley's career is probably half over. (RBs rarely are very productive after 10 years).

In comment 15825465 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

short... I still think Giants fans are living in denial.

Mostly about what Barkley is worth, which is next to nothing. As long as we’re trading Barkley for a high pick why don’t we see if Buffalo will throw in Allen.

another great RB, Derrick Henry, tipping over into "another RB who has seen better days" category.

It's only two games, but he doesn't look like the same player. And if that ends-up being true, add his contract to the heap of wasteful cap dollars spent for RBs.

In comment 15825482 Gatorade Dunk said:

Quote:

In comment 15825478 Snablats said: Quote: In comment 15825464 Eric from BBI said: Quote: thinking short term. If the Giants draft a QB in round one in April 2023, Barkley will be 26 years old with five years of mileage on his treads. You can't really count on a young QB starting to "get it" before his third year. So what is the value of having a 26 and 27 year old Barkley (again with a significant injury history) on a club that will still be rebuilding? Wouldn't that cap space and hopefully additional draft capital be better spent? Barkley would be great for a contending team. We're not one of those. We won't be next year or 2024 either. Not unless Daniel Jones becomes a different QB. So you should get rid of every high price player? And then what are you spending the money on? It's one thing if a high priced player will still be part of your core when your team is ready to contend. If they're not, what's the point of keeping them instead of getting something in return that can be used to acquire players who will be? With Barkley, it's not JUST that he's going to be an expensive luxury at a position that hardly requires it (although that's still part of it) and that the position he plays is littered with examples of players aging rapidly. It's also that he is likely more valuable on a team that's already a contender, and can be traded for assets. In that sense, him being high-priced doesn't even matter. It's simply that he could potentially serve the rebuild more as a trade piece than he can on the field.

If you are doing a rebuild with a rookie QB, then what big free agent signee will still be there 3 years later when that QB is good? So you are supposed to surround the young QB with crap for his first 3 years?

And then you have to trade Leonard Williams, too, and everyone making more than a million or 2. You think McKinney will want to stick around for 3 years of crap football with no big name signees? How about Adoree Jackson? He would have to be traded, too

Lets get a rookie QB and give him crappy RBs and no good WRs to throw to

If you are going to a rookie QB, then you use his rookie salary as the cap space to build with, and you go sign good players to surround the rookie QB

In comment 15825484 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

It's about not committing a huge part of your cap to a player who won't be a part of the final rebuild product. When you allocate a huge chunk of cap space to a player, you can't spend it on other needs. For anyone who thought Barkley was a dumb "luxury" pick in 2018, they should feel even more strongly about it now because the Giants still don't have their QB and Barkley's career is probably half over. (RBs rarely are very productive after 10 years).

I m in the camp of thinking it was bad pick. I also cannot make A good argument against your other points. I trust this FO to do the right thing

In comment 15825465 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

short... I still think Giants fans are living in denial.

Some Eric. Not all.

But we're the meanie "haters"...

that is still a relatively good deal for us.

In comment 15825509 Snablats said:

Quote:

In comment 15825482 Gatorade Dunk said: Quote: In comment 15825478 Snablats said: Quote: In comment 15825464 Eric from BBI said: Quote: thinking short term. If the Giants draft a QB in round one in April 2023, Barkley will be 26 years old with five years of mileage on his treads. You can't really count on a young QB starting to "get it" before his third year. So what is the value of having a 26 and 27 year old Barkley (again with a significant injury history) on a club that will still be rebuilding? Wouldn't that cap space and hopefully additional draft capital be better spent? Barkley would be great for a contending team. We're not one of those. We won't be next year or 2024 either. Not unless Daniel Jones becomes a different QB. So you should get rid of every high price player? And then what are you spending the money on? It's one thing if a high priced player will still be part of your core when your team is ready to contend. If they're not, what's the point of keeping them instead of getting something in return that can be used to acquire players who will be? With Barkley, it's not JUST that he's going to be an expensive luxury at a position that hardly requires it (although that's still part of it) and that the position he plays is littered with examples of players aging rapidly. It's also that he is likely more valuable on a team that's already a contender, and can be traded for assets. In that sense, him being high-priced doesn't even matter. It's simply that he could potentially serve the rebuild more as a trade piece than he can on the field. If you are doing a rebuild with a rookie QB, then what big free agent signee will still be there 3 years later when that QB is good? So you are supposed to surround the young QB with crap for his first 3 years? And then you have to trade Leonard Williams, too, and everyone making more than a million or 2. You think McKinney will want to stick around for 3 years of crap football with no big name signees? How about Adoree Jackson? He would have to be traded, too Lets get a rookie QB and give him crappy RBs and no good WRs to throw to If you are going to a rookie QB, then you use his rookie salary as the cap space to build with, and you go sign good players to surround the rookie QB

You keep/extend the few good young core players you have. You find as many new ones as you can including a QB...and you move on. If it starts coming together quickly you might spend more in free agency...if it looks a little hazy then maybe you slow down some and take less risks on free agents or trades.

Come on backwards St Albans.,.you have been on here long enough to figure out a path to success. Or did you just argue with rebuild logic back then too?

In comment 15825465 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

short... I still think Giants fans are living in denial.

Denial about what? This has been the worse team in the league for the past 5 years. Enjoying some moderate success is not denial.

Every year in the NFL is its own entity, I try to enjoy each one. You make a good case for trading Barkley, I understand all your pts

I just don’t get why that would be anyone s focus at this pt in the season. Trading deadline is still a few weeks away

In comment 15825986 joeinpa said:

Quote:

In comment 15825465 Eric from BBI said: Quote: short... I still think Giants fans are living in denial. Denial about what? This has been the worse team in the league for the past 5 years. Enjoying some moderate success is not denial. Every year in the NFL is its own entity, I try to enjoy each one. You make a good case for trading Barkley, I understand all your pts I just don’t get why that would be anyone s focus at this pt in the season. Trading deadline is still a few weeks away

Well, it could be because the title of the thread is "Opinions on trading Barkley." Wouldn't you expect the replies to focus on that?

May be a good partner. I think it kind of flew under the radar but Mahomes had his weakest season last year since becoming a starter. He’s been playing well so far this season and adding Barkley to the lineup may be one way to put them over the top.

Giving away a low 2nd rounder for SB? Not so illogical for KC.

Going to let Schoen trade Barkley? Is Mara going to let Schoen not resign Jones? If he interferes with them, then we, as a fanbase, are fucked. You have to let these guys go about their business. If you get an offer from Buffalo for their first round pick, you must do it. Is it impossible, nope, despite what others say. It's possible if they believe this player takes them over the top to win a Super Bowl. Would Barkley? I believe he would put them over the top.

In comment 15825989 Klaatu said:

Quote:

In comment 15825986 joeinpa said: Quote: In comment 15825465 Eric from BBI said: Quote: short... I still think Giants fans are living in denial. Denial about what? This has been the worse team in the league for the past 5 years. Enjoying some moderate success is not denial. Every year in the NFL is its own entity, I try to enjoy each one. You make a good case for trading Barkley, I understand all your pts I just don’t get why that would be anyone s focus at this pt in the season. Trading deadline is still a few weeks away Well, it could be because the title of the thread is "Opinions on trading Barkley." Wouldn't you expect the replies to focus on that?

Yea, that’s my point. You probably should have been able to figure that out by yourself, but happy to clarify for you

Its funny, before the season and large majority of Giants fans wanted Barkley released or traded for a late round pick. It made no sense for this reason. You let him build his value.

I would trade Barkley for a 1st or 2nd rounder right now. He looks great, but he's proven to be injury prone and its just not a position that a rebuilding team should be spending crazy money on.

All that being said, I highly doubt anyone is giving the Giants a 1st rounder for Barkley.

In comment 15825333 rsjem1979 said:

Quote:

In comment 15825259 Breeze_94 said: Quote: 2-0 for the first time in years, a favorable schedule, and our defense is absolutely balling without its 2 best edge rushers. And yet here we are making threads about trading the guy that the offense literally runs through. It seems like there’s a large contingent of giants fans who have let the draft become their favorite part of the season, rather than the actual game of football itself. If the Giants aren't going to win the Super Bowl this year, which they aren't, conversations about how to build a Super Bowl contender should be all that really matter. It's great that the Giants are 2-0. It's also not relevant to any objective long term evaluation of the franchise. Barkley is a very good player. He's not a unicorn. If they could get a first round pick for him, they should say yes and hang up the phone before the person on the other end changes their mind. That first round pick, even if it's #32 overall, could get you a cost-controlled player for the next 4-5 years. That player might even be a RB. The Broncos got Javonte Williams at #35 in 2021. In 2020 you could have taken any of the following at #32: CEH, D'Andre Swift, Jonathan Taylor, Cam Akers, JK Dobbins, AJ Dillon, Antonio Gibson. I'm sure I don't have to remind anyone that Nick Chubb was taken #35 overall in 2018, 33 picks after Barkley. All he's done is average 5.3 yards to carry and score 39 TDs in 60 games.

And Chubb is as dumb as a box of rocks. He goes down on the 1 instead of scoring his team is 2-0. Not the 1st time he has done something like this.

No you do not trade Barkley.

Extending an injury prone Rb makes zero sense. If they were offered a first and turned it down my fear that Mara’s meddling days aren’t behind us would prove to be true

In comment 15826402 Maryland Blows said:

Quote:

In comment 15825333 rsjem1979 said: Quote: In comment 15825259 Breeze_94 said: Quote: 2-0 for the first time in years, a favorable schedule, and our defense is absolutely balling without its 2 best edge rushers. And yet here we are making threads about trading the guy that the offense literally runs through. It seems like there’s a large contingent of giants fans who have let the draft become their favorite part of the season, rather than the actual game of football itself. If the Giants aren't going to win the Super Bowl this year, which they aren't, conversations about how to build a Super Bowl contender should be all that really matter. It's great that the Giants are 2-0. It's also not relevant to any objective long term evaluation of the franchise. Barkley is a very good player. He's not a unicorn. If they could get a first round pick for him, they should say yes and hang up the phone before the person on the other end changes their mind. That first round pick, even if it's #32 overall, could get you a cost-controlled player for the next 4-5 years. That player might even be a RB. The Broncos got Javonte Williams at #35 in 2021. In 2020 you could have taken any of the following at #32: CEH, D'Andre Swift, Jonathan Taylor, Cam Akers, JK Dobbins, AJ Dillon, Antonio Gibson. I'm sure I don't have to remind anyone that Nick Chubb was taken #35 overall in 2018, 33 picks after Barkley. All he's done is average 5.3 yards to carry and score 39 TDs in 60 games. And Chubb is as dumb as a box of rocks. He goes down on the 1 instead of scoring his team is 2-0. Not the 1st time he has done something like this. No you do not trade Barkley.

Maryland Blows doing his normal impersonation of a box of rocks on the site.

Not trading Barkley, given a good opportunity, is actually dumb.

And Chubb did the right thing as he is RB1 on my fantasy team...far more imprortant than a silly win for Cleveland...

In comment 15826336 joeinpa said:

Quote:

In comment 15825989 Klaatu said: Quote: In comment 15825986 joeinpa said: Quote: In comment 15825465 Eric from BBI said: Quote: short... I still think Giants fans are living in denial. Denial about what? This has been the worse team in the league for the past 5 years. Enjoying some moderate success is not denial. Every year in the NFL is its own entity, I try to enjoy each one. You make a good case for trading Barkley, I understand all your pts I just don’t get why that would be anyone s focus at this pt in the season. Trading deadline is still a few weeks away Well, it could be because the title of the thread is "Opinions on trading Barkley." Wouldn't you expect the replies to focus on that? Yea, that’s my point. You probably should have been able to figure that out by yourself, but happy to clarify for you

Your point (besides the one on top of your head) is what it always is, regardless of the topic. You don't want to hear anything negative about any Giants player.

A question was asked in the OP. Replies were answers to that question. You probably should have been able to figure that out - it really wasn't much of a mystery - but obviously you preferred to ignore that in favor of mewling about why the question was asked in the first place.

In comment 15826492 Klaatu said:

Quote:

In comment 15826336 joeinpa said: Quote: In comment 15825989 Klaatu said: Quote: In comment 15825986 joeinpa said: Quote: In comment 15825465 Eric from BBI said: Quote: short... I still think Giants fans are living in denial. Denial about what? This has been the worse team in the league for the past 5 years. Enjoying some moderate success is not denial. Every year in the NFL is its own entity, I try to enjoy each one. You make a good case for trading Barkley, I understand all your pts I just don’t get why that would be anyone s focus at this pt in the season. Trading deadline is still a few weeks away Well, it could be because the title of the thread is "Opinions on trading Barkley." Wouldn't you expect the replies to focus on that? Yea, that’s my point. You probably should have been able to figure that out by yourself, but happy to clarify for you Your point (besides the one on top of your head) is what it always is, regardless of the topic. You don't want to hear anything negative about any Giants player. A question was asked in the OP. Replies were answers to that question. You probably should have been able to figure that out - it really wasn't much of a mystery - but obviously you preferred to ignore that in favor of mewling about why the question was asked in the first place.

Besides the one on top of my head? How about or are you, 15?

In comment 15825020 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

but no one is trading a #1 for a RB that's heading into FA. If he plays well I can see a 2nd but even that I don't think is realistic. So now we are at a 3rd and while that is helpful to have, we don't really know what the Schoen/Daboll value just yet. I'm in wait and see mode, depends on a number of factors including whether or not we are in the playoff hunt.

A team like the bills that is built to win right this minute is precisely the type of team to give up a 1st. They are stacked. You add the best RB prospect of the last 10 years and you see that he still has it, a team like the bills makes a move. The end goal is to win it all. The goal of Mcdermit is to win the super bowl. If that trade set them back because SB gets injured then that’s on them not us.

Problem is, the bills don’t look at him as a missing link. But if hit

In comment 15827100 bradshaw44 said:

Quote:

In comment 15825020 UConn4523 said: Quote: but no one is trading a #1 for a RB that's heading into FA. If he plays well I can see a 2nd but even that I don't think is realistic. So now we are at a 3rd and while that is helpful to have, we don't really know what the Schoen/Daboll value just yet. I'm in wait and see mode, depends on a number of factors including whether or not we are in the playoff hunt. A team like the bills that is built to win right this minute is precisely the type of team to give up a 1st. They are stacked. You add the best RB prospect of the last 10 years and you see that he still has it, a team like the bills makes a move. The end goal is to win it all. The goal of Mcdermit is to win the super bowl. If that trade set them back because SB gets injured then that’s on them not us. Problem is, the bills don’t look at him as a missing link. But if hit

Problem is, IF the bills don’t look at him as the missing link, they won’t make any offer. But if the Rams do then we can take their first. Problem there is they are probably tapped out after doing this type of move every year since McVeigh arrived at their door.

give up a 1st or 2nd for him, I am in. (even a 3rd)

I am now starting to question were Dabs and Schoen are at with Barkley. Dabs seems to love him. I was certain he was gone, either via trade or FA. But I think there is a smallish chance Dabs may want to keep him.

But if that plays into their calculus of future value then they are making a mistake to hold onto him if a reasonable offer comes calling…