But talk about fucking up your allocation of resources. If he was taken, Barkley better be moved immediately. And who would trade for Barkley in this market?
I don't see it. I think he gets taken anyone before 20s. If he slips to 25, I'd consider a small trade back if a team behind us wanted to jump the teams just behind us.
he's a good player -- but the Giants have too, too many needs
If Barkley hasn't signed the tag and/or they have a contingent deal in place to trade him for more than a pretzel and a six pack, sure.
Assuming their other first-round targets are off the board, taking a blue-chip RB at #25 isn't a bad fallback, especially if they can salvage a Day Two pick for Barkley to get another shot at WR/CB/LB/DL/TE. I'd rather get Robinson than see them reach at a position of need.
I wouldn't want both Robinson and Barkley on the team, but I don't think anyone envisions that.
Is if Hyatt, Addison, JSN are off the board at WR, Gonzalez, Witherspoon, and Porter are all off the board at CB, and nobody unexpectedly drops
Just following up what I said above, if the above mentioned people are off the board Robinson would be on my short list along with the versatile North Dakota State OL (Cody Mauch), or addressing the front 7 of Defense with someone like Nolan Smith or Clemson's Bryan Bresee
Now, I can't say I'm surprised because many on this board were elated when we drafted Barkley. And since most of those same posters are still stuck in the 80s, they don't mind going back to the well.
No need to re-examine all of the obvious reasons why drafting a RB in the first round is a poor idea - the one caveat being it's a reasonable idea if you are a team like KC, Buffalo, etc - but the good news for all of you dinosaurs is this is a deeper than usual draft with RBs. So, there are going to be a lot of options.
I will be real pissed if Robinson ends up on the Cowboys
I would have to contemplate looking for a new team, but I don’t JS is an idiot. So I am not worried about it.
I’m not sure if there is any running back worth a first round pick unless you are team that has everything else. He are not even close to that situation.
He's still on the board at 25 in mock draft simulators
because the algorithms (correctly) predict most teams won't take a RB in the first, no matter how good he is. Robinson's supposed to be really, really good. But it's still true that most teams won't take a RB in the first, even one who's really, really good.
Says the guy who advocated trading for Wilson. Losing all those precious draft picks and paying guaranteed money when they had (still have) a bunch of holes. Brilliant allocation of resources!
because the algorithms (correctly) predict most teams won't take a RB in the first, no matter how good he is. Robinson's supposed to be really, really good. But it's still true that most teams won't take a RB in the first, even one who's really, really good.
^^^^^^
I agree with this. PFF comments on it too:
BEST RBS IN THE 2023 NFL DRAFT (PFF BIG BOARD RANK)
Bijan Robinson, Texas (27)
Jahmyr Gibbs, Alabama (51)
Zach Charbonnet, UCLA (60)
Devon Achane, Texas A&M (72)
DeWayne McBride, UAB (80)
Tank Bigsby, Auburn (83)
Kendre Miller, TCU (96)
Tyjae Spears, Tulane (98)
Deuce Vaughn, Kansas State (102)
Sean Tucker, Syracuse (119)
PFF’s big board is created with positional value already baked into the equation. But if it were simply a list of the highest-graded prospects, Bijan Robinson would potentially be a top-five player in this draft.
The Texas product is the best running back prospect to enter the league since PFF has been grading college football (2014), eclipsing the likes of Saquon Barkley, Leonard Fournette and Christian McCaffrey at the time they were drafted. Robinson is outstanding in all facets of play and broke 104 tackles on 257 carries last season, shattering the previous single-season record.
Robinson is good enough that it will test where the league currently is in terms of valuing the running back position and how highly they should be drafted.
....
Overall, this is one of the strongest running back classes to enter the league in a long time.
Says the guy who advocated trading for Wilson. Losing all those precious draft picks and paying guaranteed money when they had (still have) a bunch of holes. Brilliant allocation of resources!
🙄
What's that have to do with drafting a RB high in the draft?
Meanwhile, I think my position with Wilson was we should at least call Seattle to check on his availability and what type of package it might require. And by various reports, that's exactly what Schoen did.
Not see how stupids this would be? Even if they didn’t tag saquon it would be a bad move. Running backs are devalued so less franchise one and pick one in the first round? How does it make any sense?
Not see how stupids this would be? Even if they didn’t tag saquon it would be a bad move. Running backs are devalued so less franchise one and pick one in the first round? How does it make any sense?
Look, the BBI landscape is littered with dinosaurs pining for the good old days when RBs were the centerpieces of NFL teams.
Smart organizations adapt with the evolution of the game and realize where the efficiencies are in the economics of the game. I really hope Schoen is there and not being dragged back into the dinosaur ages...
BW: Barkley was a misguided pick at #2 for a terrible team.
Would he have been an equally bad choice at #25 for low-end playoff team? Clearly not as bad, simply because of the lower cost. Any pick has to be viewed in context. If the Giants can salvage reasonable value by dealing Barkley, Robinson at #25 is at least defensible.
Serious question for BW and others who would rule out any RB at 25:
Were Josh Jacobs, Travis Etienne and Najee Harris bad picks? I’m not saying they were perfect picks, just that the last three teams to take a running back in the mid-twenties seem to have gotten what they could reasonably expect. Etienne did lose a season to injury, but a Lisfranc isn’t particularly a running back injury and he showed few effects once he got his legs under him this year. Jacobs is terrific, and Harris has been a workhorse in a dreary offense.
RE: Serious question for BW and others who would rule out any RB at 25:
Were Josh Jacobs, Travis Etienne and Najee Harris bad picks? I’m not saying they were perfect picks, just that the last three teams to take a running back in the mid-twenties seem to have gotten what they could reasonably expect. Etienne did lose a season to injury, but a Lisfranc isn’t particularly a running back injury and he showed few effects once he got his legs under him this year. Jacobs is terrific, and Harris has been a workhorse in a dreary offense.
IMO you are looking at this all wrong. The question as are they good players - yes sure they are. But where are they going to their team before they eventually wear down?
Jacobs is terrific as he is part of a rebuilding team. When the team is ready to contend, won't he probably be fading in terms of production? So, what is he adding? He is going to help ddrive his tema ot be at best mediocre, isn’t he?
The same geos with Harris. Where is he leading his team? It would be great if you could count on him to be ready when Pitt once again challenges, but they seem at least two years away. Harris has had 6 ankle/foot injuries the past 4 years.
With Etienne it's different. Jacksonville is now ready to contend. If the Giants had Trevor Lawrence and the Giants didn't have Barkley - then yeah the RB would be a good pick because we would be ready to contend. We aren't. SO, taking him along with having Barkley is completely moronic.
Not saying that’s likely, but it’s certainly plausible, at least until he signs the tag, and maybe thereafter. Anyway, if it’s “moronic” to add Bijan Robinson at #25, it also doesn’t make sense to pay Saquon Barkley $10-13MM per year when many of the terrible things you’re afraid will happen to a rookie running back have already happened to him. If shelf life is that big a concern, a multi-year deal for Barkley should scare you more than spending a late forst-rounder on a back who may be a better prospect than Saquon was five years ago.
As for where the Giants are in relation to the Jaguars: rightly or wrongly, the Giants think they have their QB. They may not be any farther from a championship than Jacksonville. They are probably closer than the Jaguars were when they drafted Etienne.
Says the guy who advocated trading for Wilson. Losing all those precious draft picks and paying guaranteed money when they had (still have) a bunch of holes. Brilliant allocation of resources!
🙄
What's that have to do with drafting a RB high in the draft?
Meanwhile, I think my position with Wilson was we should at least call Seattle to check on his availability and what type of package it might require. And by various reports, that's exactly what Schoen did.
Bull fucking shit - you full on advocated for the trade. Since the current - and now future - “sucked” from your perspective. Worse than several backups, as you - and others - said.
At least I hope you would be the only one. As for me, no, please no. If you ask me would I trade Barkly for him ... yes. But it doesn't work that way. Poor team building. On a team with many holes, we have a top tier player at a devalued position, move forward and do what you have to do to fill those holes with as much talent as you can get.
… for Robinson to make sense: no deal with Barkley (and/or a deal in place to trade him), every other player on the same tier of the Giants’ board gone, etc., etc. And he has to be there at #25, which seems unlikely anyway.
Keep in mind, though: the Giants have 11 picks. Half of them are quite late, but there will be a lot of opportunities to fill needs with decent prospects, either by trading up or staying put. They don’t have to reach. If Robinson is the clear BPA, and Barkley isn’t locked in, RB is a possibility. Then whichever pick you might prefer to use on Barkley’s successor - Third round? Fourth round? - can become a linebacker or tight end. Not ideal, just a scenario to cover in Schoen’s “what-if” analysis.
Not saying that’s likely, but it’s certainly plausible, at least until he signs the tag, and maybe thereafter. Anyway, if it’s “moronic” to add Bijan Robinson at #25, it also doesn’t make sense to pay Saquon Barkley $10-13MM per year when many of the terrible things you’re afraid will happen to a rookie running back have already happened to him. If shelf life is that big a concern, a multi-year deal for Barkley should scare you more than spending a late forst-rounder on a back who may be a better prospect than Saquon was five years ago.
As for where the Giants are in relation to the Jaguars: rightly or wrongly, the Giants think they have their QB. They may not be any farther from a championship than Jacksonville. They are probably closer than the Jaguars were when they drafted Etienne.
You're right. And I;ve made severla posts that
1-- I believe the Giants are going to take a step back this year.
2-- I wouldn't have signed Jones to $37.5m if what Eric is saying is accurate.
3-- I wouldn't have extend Barkley.
Because of 1.2 and 3 is that exact reason why I wouldn't take the RB or extend Barkley and why I didn't
t want Barkley with the number 2 pick years ago.
4-- You speak of Lawrence vs what Daboll thinks of Jones. Over the next couple of years, which QB do YOU think will be better? And if you were to guess, by how much? A little? a lot?
5-- Over the next two years which team do you think will have the better record? Jax or Giants?
6-- Consider the coach leading the charge to take Etienne that early who is now out of the NFL probably for good. He's probably down in jacksonville slipping dollars to strippers. That's about as close as we'll see him near the NFL It worked out but consider how much Petersen loves passing, would he have taken a QB that ealry? He didn't even have Etienne starting early. I doubt he would have.
I think our views are pretty close. Lawrence has all the tools to be great, and Jacksonville has the added advantage of a trash division. You're also right about the regime change after Etienne was drafted.
The oddity about the Giants' situation is that they are picking 25th, coming off a solid playoff season and committed (through 2024 at least, and probably longer) to Jones as their franchise QB. And yet... many of their fans, you and I included, suspect the upward trajectory is a mirage and that they are nowhere near the level where they should be drafting a running back in the first round. Even so, if Robinson is there and Schoen pulls the trigger, I'll just try to enjoy the ride, wherever it leads.
I think our views are pretty close. Lawrence has all the tools to be great, and Jacksonville has the added advantage of a trash division. You're also right about the regime change after Etienne was drafted.
The oddity about the Giants' situation is that they are picking 25th, coming off a solid playoff season and committed (through 2024 at least, and probably longer) to Jones as their franchise QB. And yet... many of their fans, you and I included, suspect the upward trajectory is a mirage and that they are nowhere near the level where they should be drafting a running back in the first round. Even so, if Robinson is there and Schoen pulls the trigger, I'll just try to enjoy the ride, wherever it leads.
I'm 100% with you here.
RE: RE: Giantstock: My premise was that Barkley is gone.
Not saying that’s likely, but it’s certainly plausible, at least until he signs the tag, and maybe thereafter. Anyway, if it’s “moronic” to add Bijan Robinson at #25, it also doesn’t make sense to pay Saquon Barkley $10-13MM per year when many of the terrible things you’re afraid will happen to a rookie running back have already happened to him. If shelf life is that big a concern, a multi-year deal for Barkley should scare you more than spending a late forst-rounder on a back who may be a better prospect than Saquon was five years ago.
As for where the Giants are in relation to the Jaguars: rightly or wrongly, the Giants think they have their QB. They may not be any farther from a championship than Jacksonville. They are probably closer than the Jaguars were when they drafted Etienne.
You're right. And I;ve made severla posts that
1-- I believe the Giants are going to take a step back this year.
2-- I wouldn't have signed Jones to $37.5m if what Eric is saying is accurate.
3-- I wouldn't have extend Barkley.
Because of 1.2 and 3 is that exact reason why I wouldn't take the RB or extend Barkley and why I didn't
t want Barkley with the number 2 pick years ago.
4-- You speak of Lawrence vs what Daboll thinks of Jones. Over the next couple of years, which QB do YOU think will be better? And if you were to guess, by how much? A little? a lot?
5-- Over the next two years which team do you think will have the better record? Jax or Giants?
6-- Consider the coach leading the charge to take Etienne that early who is now out of the NFL probably for good. He's probably down in jacksonville slipping dollars to strippers. That's about as close as we'll see him near the NFL It worked out but consider how much Petersen loves passing, would he have taken a QB that ealry? He didn't even have Etienne starting early. I doubt he would have.
+1
RE: Serious question for BW and others who would rule out any RB at 25:
Were Josh Jacobs, Travis Etienne and Najee Harris bad picks? I’m not saying they were perfect picks, just that the last three teams to take a running back in the mid-twenties seem to have gotten what they could reasonably expect. Etienne did lose a season to injury, but a Lisfranc isn’t particularly a running back injury and he showed few effects once he got his legs under him this year. Jacobs is terrific, and Harris has been a workhorse in a dreary offense.
I would be opposed to taking any of those backs at 25, and I would state the same thing about a TE. I am not saying a good running back is not a good asset for a team, but a first round pick is better spent, and a better value, at a more premium position.
For instance: WR, CB, DLineman, OLineman, and ER each represent a significantly better value than a RB picked in the first round. All you have to do is look at the franchise tag values at these positions compared to RB to come to this conclusion. Those premium positions are great cost controls over the life of a rookie contract.
If you look at Saquon alone, and I am not disputing that he has value, but he was paid almost like he was a franchise-tagged RB in every year since he was a rookie. A top WR, CB, DL, OL's veteran pay and/or franchise tag number dwarf the rookie slotted salaries for the same position significantly.
Not saying that’s likely, but it’s certainly plausible, at least until he signs the tag, and maybe thereafter. Anyway, if it’s “moronic” to add Bijan Robinson at #25, it also doesn’t make sense to pay Saquon Barkley $10-13MM per year when many of the terrible things you’re afraid will happen to a rookie running back have already happened to him. If shelf life is that big a concern, a multi-year deal for Barkley should scare you more than spending a late forst-rounder on a back who may be a better prospect than Saquon was five years ago.
As for where the Giants are in relation to the Jaguars: rightly or wrongly, the Giants think they have their QB. They may not be any farther from a championship than Jacksonville. They are probably closer than the Jaguars were when they drafted Etienne.
You're right. And I;ve made severla posts that
1-- I believe the Giants are going to take a step back this year.
2-- I wouldn't have signed Jones to $37.5m if what Eric is saying is accurate.
3-- I wouldn't have extend Barkley.
Because of 1.2 and 3 is that exact reason why I wouldn't take the RB or extend Barkley and why I didn't
t want Barkley with the number 2 pick years ago.
4-- You speak of Lawrence vs what Daboll thinks of Jones. Over the next couple of years, which QB do YOU think will be better? And if you were to guess, by how much? A little? a lot?
5-- Over the next two years which team do you think will have the better record? Jax or Giants?
6-- Consider the coach leading the charge to take Etienne that early who is now out of the NFL probably for good. He's probably down in jacksonville slipping dollars to strippers. That's about as close as we'll see him near the NFL It worked out but consider how much Petersen loves passing, would he have taken a QB that ealry? He didn't even have Etienne starting early. I doubt he would have.
Were Josh Jacobs, Travis Etienne and Najee Harris bad picks? I’m not saying they were perfect picks, just that the last three teams to take a running back in the mid-twenties seem to have gotten what they could reasonably expect. Etienne did lose a season to injury, but a Lisfranc isn’t particularly a running back injury and he showed few effects once he got his legs under him this year. Jacobs is terrific, and Harris has been a workhorse in a dreary offense.
I would be opposed to taking any of those backs at 25, and I would state the same thing about a TE. I am not saying a good running back is not a good asset for a team, but a first round pick is better spent, and a better value, at a more premium position.
For instance: WR, CB, DLineman, OLineman, and ER each represent a significantly better value than a RB picked in the first round. All you have to do is look at the franchise tag values at these positions compared to RB to come to this conclusion. Those premium positions are great cost controls over the life of a rookie contract.
If you look at Saquon alone, and I am not disputing that he has value, but he was paid almost like he was a franchise-tagged RB in every year since he was a rookie. A top WR, CB, DL, OL's veteran pay and/or franchise tag number dwarf the rookie slotted salaries for the same position significantly.
Excellent points...but I actually can make the case that a TE,if it's the guy Schoen is sold on,can be the correct play at #25.Additional blocking and a sure handed TE can create an interesting 2 TE style Offense for Kafka.
For this particular offense they need a smash mouth hard nose north south RB, and two or three receivers that can gain separation.
They also need to invest in the front lines on both defense and offense as well as the backfield at CB
I just can't se not investing the Giants First round pick in either a premier WR, CB or frontline player
This FO is too smart not to do that
Assuming their other first-round targets are off the board, taking a blue-chip RB at #25 isn't a bad fallback, especially if they can salvage a Day Two pick for Barkley to get another shot at WR/CB/LB/DL/TE. I'd rather get Robinson than see them reach at a position of need.
I wouldn't want both Robinson and Barkley on the team, but I don't think anyone envisions that.
Just following up what I said above, if the above mentioned people are off the board Robinson would be on my short list along with the versatile North Dakota State OL (Cody Mauch), or addressing the front 7 of Defense with someone like Nolan Smith or Clemson's Bryan Bresee
For this particular offense they need a smash mouth hard nose north south RB, and two or three receivers that can gain separation.
They also need to invest in the front lines on both defense and offense as well as the backfield at CB
I just can't se not investing the Giants First round pick in either a premier WR, CB or frontline player
This FO is too smart not to do that
I don’t disagree with Gidie, but when has Daboll ever had a smash mouth RB as a key contributor ?
Now, I can't say I'm surprised because many on this board were elated when we drafted Barkley. And since most of those same posters are still stuck in the 80s, they don't mind going back to the well.
No need to re-examine all of the obvious reasons why drafting a RB in the first round is a poor idea - the one caveat being it's a reasonable idea if you are a team like KC, Buffalo, etc - but the good news for all of you dinosaurs is this is a deeper than usual draft with RBs. So, there are going to be a lot of options.
I’m not sure if there is any running back worth a first round pick unless you are team that has everything else. He are not even close to that situation.
Says the guy who advocated trading for Wilson. Losing all those precious draft picks and paying guaranteed money when they had (still have) a bunch of holes. Brilliant allocation of resources!
🙄
But Saquon is back, may even get a multiple year extension (Saquon just turned 26 too so he should have a few good years left)
There are much bigger needs on this team, and RB is an easy position to fill on a year-to-year basis.
I just don't see investing ANOTHER first round pick in an RB (and pay him 1st round money), when this draft is LOADED with RBs.
^^^^^^
I agree with this. PFF comments on it too:
BEST RBS IN THE 2023 NFL DRAFT (PFF BIG BOARD RANK)
Bijan Robinson, Texas (27)
Jahmyr Gibbs, Alabama (51)
Zach Charbonnet, UCLA (60)
Devon Achane, Texas A&M (72)
DeWayne McBride, UAB (80)
Tank Bigsby, Auburn (83)
Kendre Miller, TCU (96)
Tyjae Spears, Tulane (98)
Deuce Vaughn, Kansas State (102)
Sean Tucker, Syracuse (119)
PFF’s big board is created with positional value already baked into the equation. But if it were simply a list of the highest-graded prospects, Bijan Robinson would potentially be a top-five player in this draft.
The Texas product is the best running back prospect to enter the league since PFF has been grading college football (2014), eclipsing the likes of Saquon Barkley, Leonard Fournette and Christian McCaffrey at the time they were drafted. Robinson is outstanding in all facets of play and broke 104 tackles on 257 carries last season, shattering the previous single-season record.
Robinson is good enough that it will test where the league currently is in terms of valuing the running back position and how highly they should be drafted.
....
Overall, this is one of the strongest running back classes to enter the league in a long time.
Quote:
of a poorer idea.
Says the guy who advocated trading for Wilson. Losing all those precious draft picks and paying guaranteed money when they had (still have) a bunch of holes. Brilliant allocation of resources!
🙄
What's that have to do with drafting a RB high in the draft?
Meanwhile, I think my position with Wilson was we should at least call Seattle to check on his availability and what type of package it might require. And by various reports, that's exactly what Schoen did.
Look, the BBI landscape is littered with dinosaurs pining for the good old days when RBs were the centerpieces of NFL teams.
Smart organizations adapt with the evolution of the game and realize where the efficiencies are in the economics of the game. I really hope Schoen is there and not being dragged back into the dinosaur ages...
IMO you are looking at this all wrong. The question as are they good players - yes sure they are. But where are they going to their team before they eventually wear down?
Jacobs is terrific as he is part of a rebuilding team. When the team is ready to contend, won't he probably be fading in terms of production? So, what is he adding? He is going to help ddrive his tema ot be at best mediocre, isn’t he?
The same geos with Harris. Where is he leading his team? It would be great if you could count on him to be ready when Pitt once again challenges, but they seem at least two years away. Harris has had 6 ankle/foot injuries the past 4 years.
With Etienne it's different. Jacksonville is now ready to contend. If the Giants had Trevor Lawrence and the Giants didn't have Barkley - then yeah the RB would be a good pick because we would be ready to contend. We aren't. SO, taking him along with having Barkley is completely moronic.
As for where the Giants are in relation to the Jaguars: rightly or wrongly, the Giants think they have their QB. They may not be any farther from a championship than Jacksonville. They are probably closer than the Jaguars were when they drafted Etienne.
Quote:
In comment 16059358 bw in dc said:
Quote:
of a poorer idea.
Says the guy who advocated trading for Wilson. Losing all those precious draft picks and paying guaranteed money when they had (still have) a bunch of holes. Brilliant allocation of resources!
🙄
What's that have to do with drafting a RB high in the draft?
Meanwhile, I think my position with Wilson was we should at least call Seattle to check on his availability and what type of package it might require. And by various reports, that's exactly what Schoen did.
Bull fucking shit - you full on advocated for the trade. Since the current - and now future - “sucked” from your perspective. Worse than several backups, as you - and others - said.
🙄
Revisionist history is your MO, of course.
The Freakiest RB in the 2023 draft - ( New Window )
Keep in mind, though: the Giants have 11 picks. Half of them are quite late, but there will be a lot of opportunities to fill needs with decent prospects, either by trading up or staying put. They don’t have to reach. If Robinson is the clear BPA, and Barkley isn’t locked in, RB is a possibility. Then whichever pick you might prefer to use on Barkley’s successor - Third round? Fourth round? - can become a linebacker or tight end. Not ideal, just a scenario to cover in Schoen’s “what-if” analysis.
Fully agree. Have they re-signed Barkley? Has he signed the tag? He’s not a free agent, but he’s not under contract either.
As for where the Giants are in relation to the Jaguars: rightly or wrongly, the Giants think they have their QB. They may not be any farther from a championship than Jacksonville. They are probably closer than the Jaguars were when they drafted Etienne.
You're right. And I;ve made severla posts that
1-- I believe the Giants are going to take a step back this year.
2-- I wouldn't have signed Jones to $37.5m if what Eric is saying is accurate.
3-- I wouldn't have extend Barkley.
Because of 1.2 and 3 is that exact reason why I wouldn't take the RB or extend Barkley and why I didn't
t want Barkley with the number 2 pick years ago.
4-- You speak of Lawrence vs what Daboll thinks of Jones. Over the next couple of years, which QB do YOU think will be better? And if you were to guess, by how much? A little? a lot?
5-- Over the next two years which team do you think will have the better record? Jax or Giants?
6-- Consider the coach leading the charge to take Etienne that early who is now out of the NFL probably for good. He's probably down in jacksonville slipping dollars to strippers. That's about as close as we'll see him near the NFL It worked out but consider how much Petersen loves passing, would he have taken a QB that ealry? He didn't even have Etienne starting early. I doubt he would have.
The oddity about the Giants' situation is that they are picking 25th, coming off a solid playoff season and committed (through 2024 at least, and probably longer) to Jones as their franchise QB. And yet... many of their fans, you and I included, suspect the upward trajectory is a mirage and that they are nowhere near the level where they should be drafting a running back in the first round. Even so, if Robinson is there and Schoen pulls the trigger, I'll just try to enjoy the ride, wherever it leads.
The oddity about the Giants' situation is that they are picking 25th, coming off a solid playoff season and committed (through 2024 at least, and probably longer) to Jones as their franchise QB. And yet... many of their fans, you and I included, suspect the upward trajectory is a mirage and that they are nowhere near the level where they should be drafting a running back in the first round. Even so, if Robinson is there and Schoen pulls the trigger, I'll just try to enjoy the ride, wherever it leads.
I'm 100% with you here.
Quote:
Not saying that’s likely, but it’s certainly plausible, at least until he signs the tag, and maybe thereafter. Anyway, if it’s “moronic” to add Bijan Robinson at #25, it also doesn’t make sense to pay Saquon Barkley $10-13MM per year when many of the terrible things you’re afraid will happen to a rookie running back have already happened to him. If shelf life is that big a concern, a multi-year deal for Barkley should scare you more than spending a late forst-rounder on a back who may be a better prospect than Saquon was five years ago.
As for where the Giants are in relation to the Jaguars: rightly or wrongly, the Giants think they have their QB. They may not be any farther from a championship than Jacksonville. They are probably closer than the Jaguars were when they drafted Etienne.
You're right. And I;ve made severla posts that
1-- I believe the Giants are going to take a step back this year.
2-- I wouldn't have signed Jones to $37.5m if what Eric is saying is accurate.
3-- I wouldn't have extend Barkley.
Because of 1.2 and 3 is that exact reason why I wouldn't take the RB or extend Barkley and why I didn't
t want Barkley with the number 2 pick years ago.
4-- You speak of Lawrence vs what Daboll thinks of Jones. Over the next couple of years, which QB do YOU think will be better? And if you were to guess, by how much? A little? a lot?
5-- Over the next two years which team do you think will have the better record? Jax or Giants?
6-- Consider the coach leading the charge to take Etienne that early who is now out of the NFL probably for good. He's probably down in jacksonville slipping dollars to strippers. That's about as close as we'll see him near the NFL It worked out but consider how much Petersen loves passing, would he have taken a QB that ealry? He didn't even have Etienne starting early. I doubt he would have.
+1
I would be opposed to taking any of those backs at 25, and I would state the same thing about a TE. I am not saying a good running back is not a good asset for a team, but a first round pick is better spent, and a better value, at a more premium position.
For instance: WR, CB, DLineman, OLineman, and ER each represent a significantly better value than a RB picked in the first round. All you have to do is look at the franchise tag values at these positions compared to RB to come to this conclusion. Those premium positions are great cost controls over the life of a rookie contract.
If you look at Saquon alone, and I am not disputing that he has value, but he was paid almost like he was a franchise-tagged RB in every year since he was a rookie. A top WR, CB, DL, OL's veteran pay and/or franchise tag number dwarf the rookie slotted salaries for the same position significantly.
Quote:
Not saying that’s likely, but it’s certainly plausible, at least until he signs the tag, and maybe thereafter. Anyway, if it’s “moronic” to add Bijan Robinson at #25, it also doesn’t make sense to pay Saquon Barkley $10-13MM per year when many of the terrible things you’re afraid will happen to a rookie running back have already happened to him. If shelf life is that big a concern, a multi-year deal for Barkley should scare you more than spending a late forst-rounder on a back who may be a better prospect than Saquon was five years ago.
As for where the Giants are in relation to the Jaguars: rightly or wrongly, the Giants think they have their QB. They may not be any farther from a championship than Jacksonville. They are probably closer than the Jaguars were when they drafted Etienne.
You're right. And I;ve made severla posts that
1-- I believe the Giants are going to take a step back this year.
2-- I wouldn't have signed Jones to $37.5m if what Eric is saying is accurate.
3-- I wouldn't have extend Barkley.
Because of 1.2 and 3 is that exact reason why I wouldn't take the RB or extend Barkley and why I didn't
t want Barkley with the number 2 pick years ago.
4-- You speak of Lawrence vs what Daboll thinks of Jones. Over the next couple of years, which QB do YOU think will be better? And if you were to guess, by how much? A little? a lot?
5-- Over the next two years which team do you think will have the better record? Jax or Giants?
6-- Consider the coach leading the charge to take Etienne that early who is now out of the NFL probably for good. He's probably down in jacksonville slipping dollars to strippers. That's about as close as we'll see him near the NFL It worked out but consider how much Petersen loves passing, would he have taken a QB that ealry? He didn't even have Etienne starting early. I doubt he would have.
Good post. I agree on all points.
Quote:
Were Josh Jacobs, Travis Etienne and Najee Harris bad picks? I’m not saying they were perfect picks, just that the last three teams to take a running back in the mid-twenties seem to have gotten what they could reasonably expect. Etienne did lose a season to injury, but a Lisfranc isn’t particularly a running back injury and he showed few effects once he got his legs under him this year. Jacobs is terrific, and Harris has been a workhorse in a dreary offense.
I would be opposed to taking any of those backs at 25, and I would state the same thing about a TE. I am not saying a good running back is not a good asset for a team, but a first round pick is better spent, and a better value, at a more premium position.
For instance: WR, CB, DLineman, OLineman, and ER each represent a significantly better value than a RB picked in the first round. All you have to do is look at the franchise tag values at these positions compared to RB to come to this conclusion. Those premium positions are great cost controls over the life of a rookie contract.
If you look at Saquon alone, and I am not disputing that he has value, but he was paid almost like he was a franchise-tagged RB in every year since he was a rookie. A top WR, CB, DL, OL's veteran pay and/or franchise tag number dwarf the rookie slotted salaries for the same position significantly.
Excellent points...but I actually can make the case that a TE,if it's the guy Schoen is sold on,can be the correct play at #25.Additional blocking and a sure handed TE can create an interesting 2 TE style Offense for Kafka.