for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Trading Saquon while we can

MeanBunny : 9/28/2022 2:50 pm
Gio and Boomer brought up a depressing BUT interesting point. -Saquon is healthy, doing well and at high value
-Giants are so far from being a contender that they still need to find more talent in the draft
-A few teams, including Bills(with a good relationship with Schoen)lack a running game and need to depressure Allen and are about as close to winning a SB as ever
-Jones is probably gone and with the WRs we have now, it's basically a Pop Warner team with Saquon wasting his time anyways
Take the draft pick trade and run? Stick with the fan fave for another season? Front office would get roasted for it but Saquon has no value if he gets hurt again. Its all poker now folks
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |  Next>>
I don’t agree with most of these premises about ‘modern football’  
aGiantGuy : 9/28/2022 5:37 pm : link
The adaptations to this new era of football just seem superfluous and non-productive. Trade a top 3 back in football for a 2nd Rd pick because he might not sign with you.. ok, but can we also acknowledge that we have the best chance out of any team to sign him at this moment.

Again, when you let a player go, you are simultaneously increasing the talent of your opposition and weakening yours.

This upcoming draft might have at best 5 all pro’s, but you’re gonna trade away an all-pro to save money on a talentless team.

We’re not the rams who need to be strategic with who they pay, we just need to stop paying average talent.

at the level he is playing we can get a late first for him  
Producer : 9/28/2022 5:40 pm : link
think Bills, Chiefs, Bucs, Cardinals. etc etc

I do that all day long.
Not that I would promote it, but if you flip Barkley for a 2nd rounder  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 5:41 pm : link
you can replace him with another RB as well. These rushing leaders in 2021 were all Rd 2 picks in recent years:

- Jonathan Taylor
- Nick CHubb
- Joe Mixon
- Dalvin Cook
- Derrick Henry

And you would have a much cheaper starter for the rebuild period...
RE: I don’t agree with most of these premises about ‘modern football’  
Producer : 9/28/2022 5:42 pm : link
In comment 15836905 aGiantGuy said:
Quote:
The adaptations to this new era of football just seem superfluous and non-productive. Trade a top 3 back in football for a 2nd Rd pick because he might not sign with you.. ok, but can we also acknowledge that we have the best chance out of any team to sign him at this moment.

Again, when you let a player go, you are simultaneously increasing the talent of your opposition and weakening yours.

This upcoming draft might have at best 5 all pro’s, but you’re gonna trade away an all-pro to save money on a talentless team.

We’re not the rams who need to be strategic with who they pay, we just need to stop paying average talent.


you don't tie up big dollars in RBs. you want to buck the trend because you think you are smarter than the best minds in the game? Or do you want to play the game in a manner that gives you the best chance of winning? I think every big investment in an RB over the last ten years has backfired.
RE: RE: Can someone educate me..  
aGiantGuy : 9/28/2022 5:44 pm : link
In comment 15836899 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
In comment 15836890 Sean said:


Quote:


As to why it’s so bad applying the tag to him? Everyone is so excited to move him for a third which could be another Matt Peart.

It’s funny how much less appealing draft picks are after the player is selected. I’m not trading Saquon for Matt Peart. I’ll apply the tag.



He makes over $7M now. Tag him and he'll cost over $12M.

Trade him for a 2nd and we can draft another potential core player and use the $12M on several moderately priced free agents to shore up WR and TE....


What you’re saying is that a David Njoku level player(11 mil per year TE) and another wandale Robinson would make the Giants a better team than Saquon Barkley would….


Robbie Anderson signed a 13 mil a year contract last free agency, so he would likely cost 15 next year, 2 years ago he was not a better player than Golladay.

This reasoning is just beyond me
RE: RE: I don’t agree with most of these premises about ‘modern football’  
aGiantGuy : 9/28/2022 5:46 pm : link
In comment 15836910 Producer said:
Quote:
In comment 15836905 aGiantGuy said:


Quote:


The adaptations to this new era of football just seem superfluous and non-productive. Trade a top 3 back in football for a 2nd Rd pick because he might not sign with you.. ok, but can we also acknowledge that we have the best chance out of any team to sign him at this moment.

Again, when you let a player go, you are simultaneously increasing the talent of your opposition and weakening yours.

This upcoming draft might have at best 5 all pro’s, but you’re gonna trade away an all-pro to save money on a talentless team.

We’re not the rams who need to be strategic with who they pay, we just need to stop paying average talent.




you don't tie up big dollars in RBs. you want to buck the trend because you think you are smarter than the best minds in the game? Or do you want to play the game in a manner that gives you the best chance of winning? I think every big investment in an RB over the last ten years has backfired.


In the last 10 years there have been about 4 or 5 rb’s drafted in the top 10 . About 2 drafted in the top 5

So tell me exactly what trend you’re evaluating with that sample size.
RE: RE: RE: I don’t agree with most of these premises about ‘modern football’  
Producer : 9/28/2022 5:47 pm : link
In comment 15836912 aGiantGuy said:
Quote:
In comment 15836910 Producer said:


Quote:


In comment 15836905 aGiantGuy said:


Quote:


The adaptations to this new era of football just seem superfluous and non-productive. Trade a top 3 back in football for a 2nd Rd pick because he might not sign with you.. ok, but can we also acknowledge that we have the best chance out of any team to sign him at this moment.

Again, when you let a player go, you are simultaneously increasing the talent of your opposition and weakening yours.

This upcoming draft might have at best 5 all pro’s, but you’re gonna trade away an all-pro to save money on a talentless team.

We’re not the rams who need to be strategic with who they pay, we just need to stop paying average talent.




you don't tie up big dollars in RBs. you want to buck the trend because you think you are smarter than the best minds in the game? Or do you want to play the game in a manner that gives you the best chance of winning? I think every big investment in an RB over the last ten years has backfired.



In the last 10 years there have been about 4 or 5 rb’s drafted in the top 10 . About 2 drafted in the top 5

So tell me exactly what trend you’re evaluating with that sample size.


We're talking about big dollar contracts for RBs, not draft position.
the investments needed to sign a RB long terms  
UConn4523 : 9/28/2022 5:51 pm : link
keep course correcting. Since Gurley's injury the contracts have been fairly modest especially on the guaranteed money portion. Kinda funny to think Derrick Henry's $25m guaranteed is holding that team back.

Its fine if you never ever want to pay a RB but that doesn't make it correct. It depends on how you pay them and guys like Henry, Cook, Kamara, etc have really team friendly deals whether you want to admit it or not.
RE: RE: RE: Can someone educate me..  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 5:55 pm : link
In comment 15836911 aGiantGuy said:
Quote:
In comment 15836899 Jimmy Googs said:


Quote:


In comment 15836890 Sean said:


Quote:


As to why it’s so bad applying the tag to him? Everyone is so excited to move him for a third which could be another Matt Peart.

It’s funny how much less appealing draft picks are after the player is selected. I’m not trading Saquon for Matt Peart. I’ll apply the tag.



He makes over $7M now. Tag him and he'll cost over $12M.

Trade him for a 2nd and we can draft another potential core player and use the $12M on several moderately priced free agents to shore up WR and TE....



What you’re saying is that a David Njoku level player(11 mil per year TE) and another wandale Robinson would make the Giants a better team than Saquon Barkley would….


Robbie Anderson signed a 13 mil a year contract last free agency, so he would likely cost 15 next year, 2 years ago he was not a better player than Golladay.

This reasoning is just beyond me


Interesting how you selectively chose some over-valued players that got really bad contracts from those teams.

That is what we would be doing with Barkley...
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Is the paltry return  
section125 : 9/28/2022 6:06 pm : link
In comment 15836892 aGiantGuy said:
Quote:
In comment 15836798 section125 said:


Quote:


In comment 15836775 mikeinbloomfield said:


Quote:




More importantly, what is an RB worth coming off an injury and with only 13 games left in a contract? The Rams didn't trade for an RB though, and positions matter. The RB position is devalued because you can get relatively same production from non-premium picks.

No one is giving us a top pick for Barkley. We might as well keep him.



Coming off injury is irrelevant because he is playing at a high level. Many, many players get injured and return to play.
Barkley is not just some RB. He is a finish piece for a team like the Bills. We are talking about a top 5, closer to top 3, RB in the NFL.

We cannot assess what Buffalo or KC or Baltimore feels like they need to make a serious SB run. You may be correct and he doesn't help any of these teams. And maybe he would not return a 2nd or 3rd pick. But he would still need to resign with the Giants or else even passing on a 5th was a waste of an asset. Look at what not taking a 3rd for Bradberry ended up costing the Giants(yes Bradberry had a contract).
If RBs are so replaceable, as some suggest, then you get what you can for Barkley and draft a RB next year at a fraction of what it will cost to re-sign Barkley.

I would love to keep him, but what will it cost to re-sign him.



Dude, we get a 3rd if someone signs him in free agency.

Wake up.


Dude, you wake up

No they do not get a 3rd round pick, they may get a 3rd round pick. If a number of people get higher contracts than him, we may get a 4th, 5th or higher. Yes if there are not many signings of high value contracts, they could get a 3rd.
Plus you do not get it until 2024.
RE: RE: RE: I don’t agree with most of these premises about ‘modern football’  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 6:07 pm : link
In comment 15836912 aGiantGuy said:
Quote:
In comment 15836910 Producer said:


Quote:


In comment 15836905 aGiantGuy said:


Quote:


The adaptations to this new era of football just seem superfluous and non-productive. Trade a top 3 back in football for a 2nd Rd pick because he might not sign with you.. ok, but can we also acknowledge that we have the best chance out of any team to sign him at this moment.

Again, when you let a player go, you are simultaneously increasing the talent of your opposition and weakening yours.

This upcoming draft might have at best 5 all pro’s, but you’re gonna trade away an all-pro to save money on a talentless team.

We’re not the rams who need to be strategic with who they pay, we just need to stop paying average talent.




you don't tie up big dollars in RBs. you want to buck the trend because you think you are smarter than the best minds in the game? Or do you want to play the game in a manner that gives you the best chance of winning? I think every big investment in an RB over the last ten years has backfired.



In the last 10 years there have been about 4 or 5 rb’s drafted in the top 10 . About 2 drafted in the top 5

So tell me exactly what trend you’re evaluating with that sample size.


Wake up and look at last several years of first round picks on RBs...

2022 - Zero RBs taken
2021 - 2 RBs taken at #24 and #25
2020 - 1 RB taken at #32
2019 - 1 RB taken at #24

Now can you see the trend? Do you think the entire NFL is using that moron Dave Gettleman as an example of what not to do at the top of a draft with respect to RBs?
I get the RB argument..  
Sean : 9/28/2022 6:13 pm : link
But, you have to be careful trading these type of talents. How have the Giants done replacing Beckham’s production?
have you been watching the Giants the last 3 years?  
Producer : 9/28/2022 6:14 pm : link
Why on Earth would you give an injury-prone player who plays an injury-prone position big dollars? I hate to say it, but Barkley is going to get hurt again. The far smarter play is to do what the 49ers are doing, and the Rams post-Gurley. Get a few backs in the 3rd-4th-5th (sometimes 2nd) rounds that fit your system. They are cheaper and they are likely to be just as productive as the old school bell cow back. You don't need a top back to have a strong running game.
RE: I get the RB argument..  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 6:20 pm : link
In comment 15836940 Sean said:
Quote:
But, you have to be careful trading these type of talents. How have the Giants done replacing Beckham’s production?


Awful.

Gettleman also desperately tried to do it by acquiring WRs with 2-cent heads and other red flags like Tate, Golladay and Toney. And extending Shepard to an overpriced deal as well.

All of this was just trouble...
RE: I get the RB argument..  
Producer : 9/28/2022 6:21 pm : link
In comment 15836940 Sean said:
Quote:
But, you have to be careful trading these type of talents. How have the Giants done replacing Beckham’s production?


WR and RB are now completely different. It's a passing league now, more so than even 5 years ago. It used to be that WRs needed 3 years to mature. Now we have rookies coming into the league tearing it up. A high draft pick for WR is sensible. For RB it doesn't make sense to spend a high to mid first. Look at Garrett Wilson, Drake London and Olave. All three look to be great first round WR adds.

And when the Giants stop drafting gadget WRs like Toney and Wandale ahead of prototypical WRs like Bateman, E. Moore, Pickens, and Pierce we'll do better.
RE: have you been watching the Giants the last 3 years?  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 6:22 pm : link
In comment 15836942 Producer said:
Quote:
Why on Earth would you give an injury-prone player who plays an injury-prone position big dollars? I hate to say it, but Barkley is going to get hurt again. The far smarter play is to do what the 49ers are doing, and the Rams post-Gurley. Get a few backs in the 3rd-4th-5th (sometimes 2nd) rounds that fit your system. They are cheaper and they are likely to be just as productive as the old school bell cow back. You don't need a top back to have a strong running game.


Build a reliable OL and 1-2 decent blocking TEs and watch your middle and late round picks at RB do just fine...
RE: RE: have you been watching the Giants the last 3 years?  
Producer : 9/28/2022 6:23 pm : link
In comment 15836950 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
In comment 15836942 Producer said:


Quote:


Why on Earth would you give an injury-prone player who plays an injury-prone position big dollars? I hate to say it, but Barkley is going to get hurt again. The far smarter play is to do what the 49ers are doing, and the Rams post-Gurley. Get a few backs in the 3rd-4th-5th (sometimes 2nd) rounds that fit your system. They are cheaper and they are likely to be just as productive as the old school bell cow back. You don't need a top back to have a strong running game.



Build a reliable OL and 1-2 decent blocking TEs and watch your middle and late round picks at RB do just fine...


for sure.
If Buffalo offers a 1st Round Pick for Saquon  
90.Cal : 9/28/2022 6:24 pm : link
...
RE: RE: RE: RE: I don’t agree with most of these premises about ‘modern football’  
aGiantGuy : 9/28/2022 6:27 pm : link
In comment 15836934 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
In comment 15836912 aGiantGuy said:


Quote:


In comment 15836910 Producer said:


Quote:


In comment 15836905 aGiantGuy said:


Quote:


The adaptations to this new era of football just seem superfluous and non-productive. Trade a top 3 back in football for a 2nd Rd pick because he might not sign with you.. ok, but can we also acknowledge that we have the best chance out of any team to sign him at this moment.

Again, when you let a player go, you are simultaneously increasing the talent of your opposition and weakening yours.

This upcoming draft might have at best 5 all pro’s, but you’re gonna trade away an all-pro to save money on a talentless team.

We’re not the rams who need to be strategic with who they pay, we just need to stop paying average talent.




you don't tie up big dollars in RBs. you want to buck the trend because you think you are smarter than the best minds in the game? Or do you want to play the game in a manner that gives you the best chance of winning? I think every big investment in an RB over the last ten years has backfired.



In the last 10 years there have been about 4 or 5 rb’s drafted in the top 10 . About 2 drafted in the top 5

So tell me exactly what trend you’re evaluating with that sample size.



Wake up and look at last several years of first round picks on RBs...

2022 - Zero RBs taken
2021 - 2 RBs taken at #24 and #25
2020 - 1 RB taken at #32
2019 - 1 RB taken at #24

Now can you see the trend? Do you think the entire NFL is using that moron Dave Gettleman as an example of what not to do at the top of a draft with respect to RBs?


Good try. But that is not the same trend he was referring to. He said “you do not tie up big money in RB’s.” 1. You don't have the data to support that statement.

2. There are very few RB’s that have been regarded consensus top 3 overall talents in the draft.

And dude, I’m not saying your conclusion of trading Saquon is wrong, you can very well be right for reasons unbeknownst to you. But the premises used here to support this argument are not sound. It’s your choice if you want to acknowledge that.

My opinion is to keep Saquon and that’s just my opinion, but I’m not gonna make conclusions about what ‘trends’ exist in the NFL just to get you guys to agree with me. You’re free to disagree
I don't care if it's not the exact same trend mentioned. Even you  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 6:42 pm : link
were intimating that RBs were flying off the board in the Top 10 and that just isn't the case any longer.

The trend is what I showed you and it's indisputable.

You can be cute and do your little word pivot, or you can look at the facts and smarten up...
Barkley  
TommyWiseau : 9/28/2022 6:44 pm : link
Would put Buffalo’s and KCs offenses over the top. I doubt they offer a 1st for him but if we are serious about a rebuild and acquiring a QB in the draft then we are going to need all the assets we can muster.
...  
SFGFNCGiantsFan : 9/28/2022 7:13 pm : link
I see both sides of the argument. But man...we trade Saquon & the offensive cupboard goes from bare to nonexistent.
RE: I don't care if it's not the exact same trend mentioned. Even you  
aGiantGuy : 9/28/2022 7:32 pm : link
In comment 15836972 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
were intimating that RBs were flying off the board in the Top 10 and that just isn't the case any longer.

The trend is what I showed you and it's indisputable.

You can be cute and do your little word pivot, or you can look at the facts and smarten up...


That’s not what I was intimating. I’ll recapitulate what I said but my original statement is still there. If there are only 2 RB’s taken in the top 5 in 10 years. What valid statements can you make about the two teams that have these players and what conclusions about ‘trends’ in the NFL can they support… with a sample size of 2?

Your opinion is good for rhetoric but don’t pass it off as even introductory level analysis.

Most of the analytical premises you guys are using does not account for an outlier because analytics as a whole is created to make conclusions about the middle of the bell curve, not the end.

There isn’t enough sample size to make conclusions about outliers. If you want to argue about whether saquon is an outlier, start a new thread.

And to your point that there are less RB’s being taken in the top 10, that is exactly the chicken or the egg typa stuff that even introductory level statisticians avoid.

What was the prominent personnel grouping of hs football 20 years ago… 31 personnel. What is the prominent personnel grouping now? 11 personnel. If you were 5’8 160 twenty years ago, you were an RB, now those same kids are slot receivers. There is a much higher percentage of WR talent recruited into division 1 football than there was 20 years ago, for many reasons besides just personnel groupings. Have RB’s been devalued because of their role in top offenses or because of a supposed decrease in talent.

If you can’t without a doubt answer that research question with a sound argument, how can you begin to answer the questions you’re attempting to answer. Hint: Amazon is still trying to answer that question, so good luck.

Just stop using stats you know nothing about to make your opinion seem more substantial than others, it’s just an opinion
RE: ...  
UConn4523 : 9/28/2022 7:34 pm : link
In comment 15836991 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I see both sides of the argument. But man...we trade Saquon & the offensive cupboard goes from bare to nonexistent.


We play 5 more games until the deadline. 4-4 or better and I don't think you can trade him unless you are blown away with an offer. If its just a 3rd then there really isn't any point to the move - just finish up the season and tag him if you wish for an extra year with your play maker. But a 2nd piques my interest, adding in a conditional pick on top of it would be something i'd take seriously.
UConn.  
SFGFNCGiantsFan : 9/28/2022 7:41 pm : link
I'd be over the moon if we could get a 2nd for Saquon. Over the moon. Schoen would have to make that deal.

This team isn't winning a Super Bowl this season. Schoen has to think long term.
..  
sharp315 : 9/28/2022 7:44 pm : link
Saquon is the only redeeming quality of this offense. You completely crush the soul of this offense and this team if you dump him. Won't happen. Giants will give him a real contract offer this offseason or maybe even before. He won't play on the Franchise Tag. 10m to risk a career ending injury? Nope. Saquon is looking to get paid in what will likely be his only real Free Agency contract.
RE: UConn.  
Sean : 9/28/2022 7:50 pm : link
In comment 15837017 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I'd be over the moon if we could get a 2nd for Saquon. Over the moon. Schoen would have to make that deal.

This team isn't winning a Super Bowl this season. Schoen has to think long term.

A 2nd from the Bills is about the same as a 3rd. I think it’ll be nowhere near equal in production. Most of these 2nd/3rd round picks bust. *But* if that pick helps the Giants move up for a QB, I’d be all for it.

Saquon IS the offense. I get it’s easy to just dump all these players for picks, but it’s tough to replace the production. There have been posters suggesting trading Andrew Thomas too a few months back. At some point you have to keep the good players. Although I get the RB argument.

Saquon got a lot of shit which wasn’t fair. He’s healthy and playing fantastic right now.
we can get a 1st from a contender for Barkley  
Producer : 9/28/2022 7:53 pm : link
His play is spectacular right now. He would catapult some of those teams into favorite status. Could you imagine Mahomes + Barkley or Allen + Barkley.
Monday Morning QBs  
Paul326 : 9/28/2022 7:55 pm : link
& Armchair GMs are a dime a dozen in the Corner Forum.
RE: ..  
Producer : 9/28/2022 7:55 pm : link
In comment 15837023 sharp315 said:
Quote:
Saquon is the only redeeming quality of this offense. You completely crush the soul of this offense and this team if you dump him. Won't happen. Giants will give him a real contract offer this offseason or maybe even before. He won't play on the Franchise Tag. 10m to risk a career ending injury? Nope. Saquon is looking to get paid in what will likely be his only real Free Agency contract.


You can't get emotional about the decision. It's about what is in the best long term interest of the Giants. The Giants need first rounders in case they want to move up for a QB.
RE: we can get a 1st from a contender for Barkley  
Sean : 9/28/2022 7:57 pm : link
In comment 15837030 Producer said:
Quote:
His play is spectacular right now. He would catapult some of those teams into favorite status. Could you imagine Mahomes + Barkley or Allen + Barkley.

That’s what I’m thinking. A contender can give a late first for Saquon.
RE: RE: I don't care if it's not the exact same trend mentioned. Even you  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 7:58 pm : link
In comment 15837010 aGiantGuy said:
Quote:
In comment 15836972 Jimmy Googs said:


Quote:


were intimating that RBs were flying off the board in the Top 10 and that just isn't the case any longer.

The trend is what I showed you and it's indisputable.

You can be cute and do your little word pivot, or you can look at the facts and smarten up...



That’s not what I was intimating. I’ll recapitulate what I said but my original statement is still there. If there are only 2 RB’s taken in the top 5 in 10 years. What valid statements can you make about the two teams that have these players and what conclusions about ‘trends’ in the NFL can they support… with a sample size of 2?

Your opinion is good for rhetoric but don’t pass it off as even introductory level analysis.

Most of the analytical premises you guys are using does not account for an outlier because analytics as a whole is created to make conclusions about the middle of the bell curve, not the end.

There isn’t enough sample size to make conclusions about outliers. If you want to argue about whether saquon is an outlier, start a new thread.

And to your point that there are less RB’s being taken in the top 10, that is exactly the chicken or the egg typa stuff that even introductory level statisticians avoid.

What was the prominent personnel grouping of hs football 20 years ago… 31 personnel. What is the prominent personnel grouping now? 11 personnel. If you were 5’8 160 twenty years ago, you were an RB, now those same kids are slot receivers. There is a much higher percentage of WR talent recruited into division 1 football than there was 20 years ago, for many reasons besides just personnel groupings. Have RB’s been devalued because of their role in top offenses or because of a supposed decrease in talent.

If you can’t without a doubt answer that research question with a sound argument, how can you begin to answer the questions you’re attempting to answer. Hint: Amazon is still trying to answer that question, so good luck.

Just stop using stats you know nothing about to make your opinion seem more substantial than others, it’s just an opinion


I am not using stats...I don't even need to.

I am showing you the facts that teams are placing extremely low value on the RB position early in drafts over the past several years. And I am showing you that teams are finding very good value in RBs later in drafts where they should be selected.

It is not a position to build your team around or overextend value to because of the short shelf life, injury factor and heavy supply of replaceable talent each draft and free agent period.

The only thing dumber than placing too much value on a RB in the draft is placing too much value on one for a second contract.

But go find your outliers, quantify your sample sizes and figure out if its a chicken or an egg debate. It will only bring you right back to what I wrote above...
Nonsense thread  
adamg : 9/28/2022 8:01 pm : link
.
Sean...  
SFGFNCGiantsFan : 9/28/2022 8:04 pm : link
The shit he got for his performance in '21 was warranted. He danced too much, didn't run with authority, blocking sucked.

He's been great this season thus far. He also knows he's playing for a contract.
RE: RE: ..  
sharp315 : 9/28/2022 8:07 pm : link
In comment 15837034 Producer said:
Quote:
In comment 15837023 sharp315 said:


Quote:


Saquon is the only redeeming quality of this offense. You completely crush the soul of this offense and this team if you dump him. Won't happen. Giants will give him a real contract offer this offseason or maybe even before. He won't play on the Franchise Tag. 10m to risk a career ending injury? Nope. Saquon is looking to get paid in what will likely be his only real Free Agency contract.



You can't get emotional about the decision. It's about what is in the best long term interest of the Giants. The Giants need first rounders in case they want to move up for a QB.

The long term implications of dealing away your best players is to breed more losing and a losing mentality. You think sinking this season and probably next is worth a 1st rounder? You think the fans want ANOTHER 2 seasons of lifeless offense? Good luck. John Mara will clean house yet again because this team will be dead on arrival. You can move up for a QB without selling the farm.
So you think betting Long Term on Saquon is the thing to do?  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 8:14 pm : link
A RB that has had serious injuries in the NFL and will be now entering into his second contract period.

You think he will buck the trend that most RBs decline over time and he will actually be better in years 5-9 versus his first several years? Because that's what the contract price will assume you think...
Googs.  
SFGFNCGiantsFan : 9/28/2022 8:17 pm : link
If we franchise him, what's the hit? If it's not unreasonable, I'd consider it.
RE: UConn.  
UConn4523 : 9/28/2022 8:17 pm : link
In comment 15837017 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I'd be over the moon if we could get a 2nd for Saquon. Over the moon. Schoen would have to make that deal.

This team isn't winning a Super Bowl this season. Schoen has to think long term.


“We aren’t winning the Super Bowl” isn’t a good enough reason to trade him for a mid round pick. You do that enough times and you have no good players and better hit on all your picks or you’ll be getting fired after year 3.

SB or bust isn’t how NFL teams operate.
RE: Sean...  
ChrisRick : 9/28/2022 8:18 pm : link
In comment 15837041 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
The shit he got for his performance in '21 was warranted. He danced too much, didn't run with authority, blocking sucked.

He's been great this season thus far. He also knows he's playing for a contract.


Why did he dance too much in 21? Why did he not run with authority in 21?

What were the primary reasons for those things happening?
RE: Googs.  
sharp315 : 9/28/2022 8:24 pm : link
In comment 15837050 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
If we franchise him, what's the hit? If it's not unreasonable, I'd consider it.

Franchise Tag for RB was 9.5m this year so it will probably be 10m for 2023. But more importantly is what makes you think Saquon will play on a 10m contract?
RE: So you think betting Long Term on Saquon is the thing to do?  
OBJ_AllDay : 9/28/2022 8:30 pm : link
In comment 15837047 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
A RB that has had serious injuries in the NFL and will be now entering into his second contract period.

You think he will buck the trend that most RBs decline over time and he will actually be better in years 5-9 versus his first several years? Because that's what the contract price will assume you think...


Saquons injury with stepping on the foot was a fluke injury. The guy is a workout warrior. I have faith that his injury problems are behind him.
Name a player that’s sat out successfully  
UConn4523 : 9/28/2022 8:32 pm : link
Barkley will have no choice but to play if tagged.
UConn.  
SFGFNCGiantsFan : 9/28/2022 8:32 pm : link
A second isn't a mid round pick. If we could get a second for Saquon, we'd have to do it.
RE: Googs.  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 8:39 pm : link
In comment 15837050 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
If we franchise him, what's the hit? If it's not unreasonable, I'd consider it.


Over the Cap is estimating RB franchise tag next year at $12.5M

Which in my view is about twice as much as Saquon is worth...
RE: RE: Googs.  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 8:40 pm : link
In comment 15837063 sharp315 said:
Quote:
In comment 15837050 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:


Quote:


If we franchise him, what's the hit? If it's not unreasonable, I'd consider it.


Franchise Tag for RB was 9.5m this year so it will probably be 10m for 2023. But more importantly is what makes you think Saquon will play on a 10m contract?


Not what is being reported in Over The Cap...
RE: RE: So you think betting Long Term on Saquon is the thing to do?  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 8:42 pm : link
In comment 15837066 OBJ_AllDay said:
Quote:
In comment 15837047 Jimmy Googs said:


Quote:


A RB that has had serious injuries in the NFL and will be now entering into his second contract period.

You think he will buck the trend that most RBs decline over time and he will actually be better in years 5-9 versus his first several years? Because that's what the contract price will assume you think...



Saquons injury with stepping on the foot was a fluke injury. The guy is a workout warrior. I have faith that his injury problems are behind him.


Oh, so then we are good. You have the faith...
RE: RE: RE: Googs.  
sharp315 : 9/28/2022 8:44 pm : link
In comment 15837085 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
In comment 15837063 sharp315 said:


Quote:


In comment 15837050 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:


Quote:


If we franchise him, what's the hit? If it's not unreasonable, I'd consider it.


Franchise Tag for RB was 9.5m this year so it will probably be 10m for 2023. But more importantly is what makes you think Saquon will play on a 10m contract?



Not what is being reported in Over The Cap...

K. 10m or 12m - big difference. Vs 30-35m guaranteed if he holds out and gets to Free Agency like Lev Bell did.
RE: RE: UConn.  
Jimmy Googs : 9/28/2022 8:47 pm : link
In comment 15837051 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
In comment 15837017 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:


Quote:


I'd be over the moon if we could get a 2nd for Saquon. Over the moon. Schoen would have to make that deal.

This team isn't winning a Super Bowl this season. Schoen has to think long term.



“We aren’t winning the Super Bowl” isn’t a good enough reason to trade him for a mid round pick. You do that enough times and you have no good players and better hit on all your picks or you’ll be getting fired after year 3.

SB or bust isn’t how NFL teams operate.


You are right, that isn’t enough.

Saquon becoming a free agent next year, the franchise tag being over $12m for RBs, his injury history, and that he is in a very fungible position though is more than enough reasons.

Ignoring those facts enough times and you’ll be getting fired after year 3...
RE: RE: RE: I don't care if it's not the exact same trend mentioned. Even you  
aGiantGuy : 9/28/2022 8:50 pm : link
In comment 15837036 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
In comment 15837010 aGiantGuy said:


Quote:


In comment 15836972 Jimmy Googs said:


Quote:


were intimating that RBs were flying off the board in the Top 10 and that just isn't the case any longer.

The trend is what I showed you and it's indisputable.

You can be cute and do your little word pivot, or you can look at the facts and smarten up...



That’s not what I was intimating. I’ll recapitulate what I said but my original statement is still there. If there are only 2 RB’s taken in the top 5 in 10 years. What valid statements can you make about the two teams that have these players and what conclusions about ‘trends’ in the NFL can they support… with a sample size of 2?

Your opinion is good for rhetoric but don’t pass it off as even introductory level analysis.

Most of the analytical premises you guys are using does not account for an outlier because analytics as a whole is created to make conclusions about the middle of the bell curve, not the end.

There isn’t enough sample size to make conclusions about outliers. If you want to argue about whether saquon is an outlier, start a new thread.

And to your point that there are less RB’s being taken in the top 10, that is exactly the chicken or the egg typa stuff that even introductory level statisticians avoid.

What was the prominent personnel grouping of hs football 20 years ago… 31 personnel. What is the prominent personnel grouping now? 11 personnel. If you were 5’8 160 twenty years ago, you were an RB, now those same kids are slot receivers. There is a much higher percentage of WR talent recruited into division 1 football than there was 20 years ago, for many reasons besides just personnel groupings. Have RB’s been devalued because of their role in top offenses or because of a supposed decrease in talent.

If you can’t without a doubt answer that research question with a sound argument, how can you begin to answer the questions you’re attempting to answer. Hint: Amazon is still trying to answer that question, so good luck.

Just stop using stats you know nothing about to make your opinion seem more substantial than others, it’s just an opinion



I am not using stats...I don't even need to.

I am showing you the facts that teams are placing extremely low value on the RB position early in drafts over the past several years. And I am showing you that teams are finding very good value in RBs later in drafts where they should be selected.

It is not a position to build your team around or overextend value to because of the short shelf life, injury factor and heavy supply of replaceable talent each draft and free agent period.

The only thing dumber than placing too much value on a RB in the draft is placing too much value on one for a second contract.

But go find your outliers, quantify your sample sizes and figure out if its a chicken or an egg debate. It will only bring you right back to what I wrote above...

You used “teams” as the subject of your conclusion which does not equal to “all teams”, so the outlier argument still hasn’t been touched.

But let’s talk facts since you wanna go there. The team that spends the most money on analytics rn with their own in-house analytical department is the Rams. Great example since they’re the most recent winners of the Super Bowl. One of their analytical conclusions they implemented was the value of RB vs replacement level was lower than that of other positions but also carried the highest injury risk and lowest shelf life.

So they applied this change to their roster building strategy and reallocated that money to other positions while using mid rd draft picks to draft and trade for RB. But they didn’t win any Super Bowls using this philosophy, they got close, lost to the Patriots and were a shit show the next year.

But then they implemented a new analysis based conclusion that the only players with higher value than 1st round draft picks were blue chip players still in their prime.

They then traded two 1sts for Jalen Ramsey, disgruntled player still in his prime, two 1sts for Matthew Stafford, still in his prime. After these two actions, they immediately won the next super bowl.

Now you can look at these results and say, look, they only acquired players with high positional value, and while no one could say you’re wrong, it also doesn’t mean you’re right.

But by trading saquon Barkley, a blue chip player in his prime… for a 2nd rd pick… while the Rams are throwing away 1st rd picks to acquire blue chip players, might just be the only thing “dumber than giving an RB a 2nd contract” because it is the opposite philosophy that arguably won the Rams the Super Bowl.

Then you can argue but hey, they only gave away those picks for high positional value players. That whole positional value metric is based on how likely it is that your replacement will have the same production as the starter. They still haven’t replaced Gurley’s production.

And when Gurley was shot, only then did they realize the true value of Jared Goff and some of the other pieces they valued. It took them gaining a star cornerback, a star QB, a star pass rusher Von Miller, and the top edge from FA, Leonard Floyd, to climb the hump and actually win it.

And here you are trying to build your team with less stars because your following the Joneses(The Rams). But they’re never going to share their analytical conclusions with you or me because they paid way too much money in data scientist and data engineer salaries to acquire it.

You can claim that your NFL analyses are just as good as theirs are, sure, but to claim that your opinion ( value judgement, or belief) about the positional VALUE of RB’s just shows me this whole conversation is lost on you. But that’s just my opinion.

When you imitate the team that sets the trend, you’re already behind the curve.
RE: UConn.  
UConn4523 : 9/28/2022 8:51 pm : link
In comment 15837070 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
A second isn't a mid round pick. If we could get a second for Saquon, we'd have to do it.


I know, I said above I’d consider it. I’m talking about a 3rd or worse and just don’t see a point to it.
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |  Next>>
Back to the Corner