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

Archived Thread

Three possibles for pick #25?

Milton : 1:50 am
My three guesses: Zay Flowers, Deonte Banks, Keion White.

Who are yours?
Agreed  
I like your 3.
Don’t think it will be White  
jeff57 : 4:50 am : link
Can see the other two.

I’d say Banks, Addison and Brian Branch.
I don't think they're going to pick at 25  
j_rud : 6:37 am : link
I think a corner or receiver is going to slip a bit to the late teens/early 20s and they're going to go get him. Would love it to be Smith-Njigba or Joey Porter Jr.
RE: I don't think they're going to pick at 25  
BillT : 7:09 am : link
In comment 16076706 j_rud said:
Quote:
I think a corner or receiver is going to slip a bit to the late teens/early 20s and they're going to go get him. Would love it to be Smith-Njigba or Joey Porter Jr.

Just don’t see the trade up in those situations. What? The team you’re trading with doesn’t want a JSN or a Porter. Guys they didn’t think they had a chance for. They want to give them to us for an extra 3rd. Anything is possible I guess.
I'll go Rogue...  
Cedric Tillman, Matthew Bergeron, Mazi Smith
The Giants have clear needs at every high-value position except QB/OT.  
So any WR, CB, ER or DL with a first round grade is plausible, aside from a few who will clearly be gone by the 25th pick. In that context, Banks, Flowers, and White are all reasonable guesses. So are Addison, Bresee, Van Ness, Porter, Ringo and others. Branch is an interesting one, because he fills a lower-value need (S) while offering some versatility at a higher-value target spot (CB). He’ll probably be better than Love in that role, so maybe they would consider it. Torrence is a possibility too, but the problem he solves (replacing Glowinski) might not be high on the agenda until 2024.

It won’t be a quarterback. A tackle would surprise me. So would a tight end. Hard to rule out anything else, aside from punter or placekicker.
RE: The Giants have clear needs at every high-value position except QB/OT.  
gidiefor : Mod : 7:46 am : link
In comment 16076724 Big Blue Blogger said:
Quote:
So any WR, CB, ER or DL with a first round grade is plausible, aside from a few who will clearly be gone by the 25th pick. In that context, Banks, Flowers, and White are all reasonable guesses. So are Addison, Bresee, Van Ness, Porter, Ringo and others. Branch is an interesting one, because he fills a lower-value need (S) while offering some versatility at a higher-value target spot (CB). He’ll probably be better than Love in that role, so maybe they would consider it. Torrence is a possibility too, but the problem he solves (replacing Glowinski) might not be high on the agenda until 2024.

It won’t be a quarterback. A tackle would surprise me. So would a tight end. Hard to rule out anything else, aside from punter or placekicker.


good post Blogs
The more I see of Banks the more I want that guy  
Our defense needs better CBs. I think he would be a great fit for this Defence.
RE: The more I see of Banks the more I want that guy  
Mike in NY : 7:56 am : link
In comment 16076733 Boatie Warrant said:
Quote:
Our defense needs better CBs. I think he would be a great fit for this Defence.


The big question to me with Banks is why wasn’t he more of a playmaker in college? I am wondering if he is more like Will Allen or Prince Amukamara where they are there to bat balls down but don’t generate impact turnovers.
Deonte Banks(seems to be a popular name around here,  
barens : 8:02 am : link
which means he most likely won't be the pick).
JSN in a trade up
Quentin Johnson(need a receiver they can throw the ball down the field to, his Pro Day on Thursday should be interesting).
RE: RE: I don't think they're going to pick at 25  
j_rud : 8:08 am : link
In comment 16076711 BillT said:
Quote:
In comment 16076706 j_rud said:


Quote:


I think a corner or receiver is going to slip a bit to the late teens/early 20s and they're going to go get him. Would love it to be Smith-Njigba or Joey Porter Jr.


Just don’t see the trade up in those situations. What? The team you’re trading with doesn’t want a JSN or a Porter. Guys they didn’t think they had a chance for. They want to give them to us for an extra 3rd. Anything is possible I guess.


Right, very difficult to envision teams valuing prospects differently, and there really isn't a history of players slipping/teams passing on guys thought to go higher.

The premise isn't really about the player. It's more about my belief that Schoen will act decisively in the event a guy slips and it creates an opportunity to marry need and value.
RE: The Giants have clear needs at every high-value position except QB/OT.  
BillT : 8:12 am : link
In comment 16076724 Big Blue Blogger said:
Quote:
So any WR, CB, ER or DL with a first round grade is plausible, aside from a few who will clearly be gone by the 25th pick. In that context, Banks, Flowers, and White are all reasonable guesses. So are Addison, Bresee, Van Ness, Porter, Ringo and others. Branch is an interesting one, because he fills a lower-value need (S) while offering some versatility at a higher-value target spot (CB). He’ll probably be better than Love in that role, so maybe they would consider it. Torrence is a possibility too, but the problem he solves (replacing Glowinski) might not be high on the agenda until 2024.

It won’t be a quarterback. A tackle would surprise me. So would a tight end. Hard to rule out anything else, aside from punter or placekicker.

While this is all true I’m not sure I think that is the way Schoen sees the draft. I think he has priorities about what positions he has wants to improve at this time. Just filling any need that exists doesn’t build a roster. It’s what DG failed to understand and why after his four years our OL still stunk. Schoen has both said what his priorities are and acted on that. I think he will continue to do that.
 
ryanmkeane : 8:19 am : link
Think we can say with near certainty that pick 25 will not be QB, DT, or OT. Every other position is on the table.

I think reading the tea leaves, they’d love for either JSN or Flowers to be there.
Assuming  
gameday555 : 8:45 am : link
That Banks is off the board, I would say Flowers, Addison and Cam Smith. I could see a worst-case-scenario pick for them being Bresee.

Also, it wouldn't surprise me if they're much higher on Josh Downs, UNC WR than most of the league/media.
Bill T: We might be using different words to express the same concept  
"Need" isn't always a glaring hole. It could be an opportunity for major improvement. I think CB, WR, EDGE, and DL enjoy a bit of a boost, all else being equal. But if the best value is elsewhere, and aligns with opportunities to strengthen the long-term core of the team, I'm sure Schoen will have an open mind about center, guard, safety, ILB, etc.
ryanmkeane: I wouldn't rule out DT/DL.  
The unit, based on current contracts, is thin in 2023, and non-existent in 2024.
RE: Bill T: We might be using different words to express the same concept  
BillT : 8:53 am : link
In comment 16076773 Big Blue Blogger said:
Quote:
"Need" isn't always a glaring hole. It could be an opportunity for major improvement. I think CB, WR, EDGE, and DL enjoy a bit of a boost, all else being equal. But if the best value is elsewhere, and aligns with opportunities to strengthen the long-term core of the team, I'm sure Schoen will have an open mind about center, guard, safety, ILB, etc.

Right. Agreed. But I just believe that Schoen will stick to his priorities. He did last year with the OL. There will be value players at his priority positions when we pick. The idea that he’ll be forced to take a say OG because of their greater value i believe is overrated.
It's very likely going to be  
JonC : 8:56 am : link
a WR or CB, and wouldn't be surprised if they moved up a few slots to secure their target.
My guess a month out  
AcesUp : 9:04 am : link
Based on players likely to be available, need, meetings, scheme fit and positional value are 1) Flowers 2) Addison 3) Banks in that order.
RE: …  
barens : 9:09 am : link
In comment 16076759 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
Think we can say with near certainty that pick 25 will not be QB, DT, or OT. Every other position is on the table.

I think reading the tea leaves, they’d love for either JSN or Flowers to be there.


I know they(Schoen) says otherwise, and i saw that they courted Flowers, but I do wonder if they would covet receivers they could throw the ball down the field to.
...  
ryanmkeane : 9:10 am : link
I don't think Schoen would value DT in round 1 unless there was an elite talent there. He has said publicly that if you can get the 5th year option on the higher paid positions, it gives you a big advantage with the cap. Specifically, he has mentioned WR and CB.
Milton I like your 3 choices  
-3 players at premium positions when Schoen has repeatedly said they stress positional value especially early in the draft .

-Those are arguably the highest needs at the premium positions. With a bigger bodied Edge being the type of player they would want likely to complement Thibs and Ojulari.

- Those first 2 names have been linked to Giants interest by multiple sources and seem to fit what they are looking for as a system fit.

*The only addendums I would include is possibly Addison in that mix and if JSN actually reaches the close to 20 area that his value would be high enough on our board that we would consider trading up to get him.
I'll go with:  
Anakim : 9:18 am : link
Drew Sanders, Quentin Johnston, Will McDonald IV
RE: ...  
AcesUp : 9:27 am : link
In comment 16076803 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
I don't think Schoen would value DT in round 1 unless there was an elite talent there. He has said publicly that if you can get the 5th year option on the higher paid positions, it gives you a big advantage with the cap. Specifically, he has mentioned WR and CB.


He actually mentioned IDL as a premium position in a recent interview and those contracts are exploding. We're going to see first hand shortly. I wouldn't value a space eating two gap DL the same as a interior pass rusher but there is a pretty strong shelf of those versatile 3/4i/5 tech types in the late 1 and Day 2 range. I think the tea leaves point pretty strongly towards WR/CB but if 8-9 of those guys fly off in front of us and we don't make a small jump, I could see them pivoting to DL to boost the rotation and replace LW in 2024.
I  
AcidTest : 10:04 am : link
hope they don't give up more than a third to move up for anyone. My guess is that they'd love JSN, but the cost to trade up for him will be prohibitive. I could see them trading up to get ahead of San Diego to get Flowers, although I wouldn't. Once JSN is taken, there might be a bidding war for Flowers that would drive up the cost of any compensation.

I would just stand pat and take the BPA at #25.
RE: I'll go with:  
AcidTest : 10:05 am : link
In comment 16076812 Anakim said:
Quote:
Drew Sanders, Quentin Johnston, Will McDonald IV


I'd be fine with any of those players.

Surprise pick: Gervon Dexter.
what the team is doing today  
Colin@gbn : 10:17 am : link
Actually Milton that's a pretty good list. Three good players at impact positions and if the Giants plan was to sit there and take the so-called bpa at #25 they'd essentially be the three guys I'd have. However, its just not the way teams draft. We're 30 days from the draft and I can pretty much guarantee that the Giants know what they want to accomplish at this year's draft. And almost all the indications are they want to come out of this thing with the best receiver they can get. And right now what the Giants are likely doing is something along the lines of mapping where in the first round each of the top receivers is likely to go; where they'd likely need to go to have a shot at each of the top guys; and what it would cost them.

I wonder if it who helpful to go back to the 2009 draft the last time the Giants went into a draft heavily focused on a WR. That was just after Plax shot himself leaving the Giants without a #1 guy and Amani Toomer's release.

The Giants had the 29th pick, but initially explored to possibility of moving up to get Derrius Heyward-Bey, but he went - somewhat surpisingly - to the Raiders at #7. Then they looked at Jeremy Macklin in the teens but couldn't get anything done and he went 21st to the Eagles. That left three receivers on the board - Percy Harvin, Kenny Britt and Hakeem Nicks - whom the Giants had similar grades on and were prepared to wait as long as two were still on the board. Harvin actually went two picks after Macklin, but at 29 Nicks and Britt were both still there. The Giants essentially flipped a coin and chose Nicks who ended up being the best of the bunch anyway. Somedays you luck out at the draft, most days you don't.

Most of the evidence at this time is that the Giants are currently going thru a process that is something closer to the above than the fairyland BPA stuff that so many on the board are babbling on about.
Throw away the draft Board and stop evaluating anything other than WR  
ThomasG : 10:51 am : link
since it’s all fairyland stuff and babbling.
RE: what the team is doing today  
AcidTest : 10:52 am : link
In comment 16076893 Colin@gbn said:
Quote:
Actually Milton that's a pretty good list. Three good players at impact positions and if the Giants plan was to sit there and take the so-called bpa at #25 they'd essentially be the three guys I'd have. However, its just not the way teams draft. We're 30 days from the draft and I can pretty much guarantee that the Giants know what they want to accomplish at this year's draft. And almost all the indications are they want to come out of this thing with the best receiver they can get. And right now what the Giants are likely doing is something along the lines of mapping where in the first round each of the top receivers is likely to go; where they'd likely need to go to have a shot at each of the top guys; and what it would cost them.

I wonder if it who helpful to go back to the 2009 draft the last time the Giants went into a draft heavily focused on a WR. That was just after Plax shot himself leaving the Giants without a #1 guy and Amani Toomer's release.

The Giants had the 29th pick, but initially explored to possibility of moving up to get Derrius Heyward-Bey, but he went - somewhat surpisingly - to the Raiders at #7. Then they looked at Jeremy Macklin in the teens but couldn't get anything done and he went 21st to the Eagles. That left three receivers on the board - Percy Harvin, Kenny Britt and Hakeem Nicks - whom the Giants had similar grades on and were prepared to wait as long as two were still on the board. Harvin actually went two picks after Macklin, but at 29 Nicks and Britt were both still there. The Giants essentially flipped a coin and chose Nicks who ended up being the best of the bunch anyway. Somedays you luck out at the draft, most days you don't.

Most of the evidence at this time is that the Giants are currently going thru a process that is something closer to the above than the fairyland BPA stuff that so many on the board are babbling on about.


Drafting the BPA is not "fairyland." The mistake is doing what you advocate, namely becoming obsessed with a particular position group, or even worse, a particular player or players. At that point you are bidding against yourself, as the the Giants did with Golladay and Solder.

JSN is likely the #1 WR on most boards. My guess is that moving up for him would therefore cost at least a two and a three or next year's #1. That would apparently be fine with you, but it is basically a mini version of what Mike Ditka did when he traded his whole draft for Ricky Williams.

My hope is that the Giants disagree. Are they really willing to give up that much for a player who played only three games last year, especially when they have so many other needs, and there are so many other good WRs in the draft? I will admit I was wrong if it happens, but I'd be pretty upset if they did so.

As I have said, I think the most likely scenario is that they maybe give up a three to move up for Flowers. I wouldn't, but at least it's defensible given all of their day three picks.

This is only Schoen's second draft. Nobody has any idea how he will draft. What other teams do or don't do is irrelevant.
RE: what the team is doing today  
Thegratefulhead : 10:59 am : link
In comment 16076893 Colin@gbn said:
Quote:
Actually Milton that's a pretty good list. Three good players at impact positions and if the Giants plan was to sit there and take the so-called bpa at #25 they'd essentially be the three guys I'd have. However, its just not the way teams draft. We're 30 days from the draft and I can pretty much guarantee that the Giants know what they want to accomplish at this year's draft. And almost all the indications are they want to come out of this thing with the best receiver they can get. And right now what the Giants are likely doing is something along the lines of mapping where in the first round each of the top receivers is likely to go; where they'd likely need to go to have a shot at each of the top guys; and what it would cost them.

I wonder if it who helpful to go back to the 2009 draft the last time the Giants went into a draft heavily focused on a WR. That was just after Plax shot himself leaving the Giants without a #1 guy and Amani Toomer's release.

The Giants had the 29th pick, but initially explored to possibility of moving up to get Derrius Heyward-Bey, but he went - somewhat surpisingly - to the Raiders at #7. Then they looked at Jeremy Macklin in the teens but couldn't get anything done and he went 21st to the Eagles. That left three receivers on the board - Percy Harvin, Kenny Britt and Hakeem Nicks - whom the Giants had similar grades on and were prepared to wait as long as two were still on the board. Harvin actually went two picks after Macklin, but at 29 Nicks and Britt were both still there. The Giants essentially flipped a coin and chose Nicks who ended up being the best of the bunch anyway. Somedays you luck out at the draft, most days you don't.

Most of the evidence at this time is that the Giants are currently going thru a process that is something closer to the above than the fairyland BPA stuff that so many on the board are babbling on about.
You are currently my favorite poster. :) You are suggesting they have a plan. I would agree based on the last year of actions the front office has taken. If the Giants pick at 25 the cost to move up will have exceeded their predetermined limits or the draft fell perfectly for them.
RE: Throw away the draft Board and stop evaluating anything other than WR  
Colin@gbn : 11:13 am : link
In comment 16076925 ThomasG said:
Quote:
since it’s all fairyland stuff and babbling.


Thomas: I do have to watch myself at times because I will get caught up in hyperbole and as I should have learned by now the BBI is the place where things like nuance and context go to die! But i do not know what you call it when the Giants are pretty much telling you they're looking at WRs; when pretty much everything they're doing in the draft process is focused n receivers. And then somebody opens a thread on what the Giants are going to do at #25 and a rousing debate on a CB or a C breaks out.
RE: RE: what the team is doing today  
Colin@gbn : 11:34 am : link
In comment 16076927 AcidTest said:
Quote:
Drafting the BPA is not "fairyland." The mistake is doing what you advocate, namely becoming obsessed with a particular position group, or even worse, a particular player or players. At that point you are bidding against yourself, as the the Giants did with Golladay and Solder.

JSN is likely the #1 WR on most boards. My guess is that moving up for him would therefore cost at least a two and a three or next year's #1. That would apparently be fine with you, but it is basically a mini version of what Mike Ditka did when he traded his whole draft for Ricky Williams.

My hope is that the Giants disagree. Are they really willing to give up that much for a player who played only three games last year, especially when they have so many other needs, and there are so many other good WRs in the draft? I will admit I was wrong if it happens, but I'd be pretty upset if they did so.

As I have said, I think the most likely scenario is that they maybe give up a three to move up for Flowers. I wouldn't, but at least it's defensible given all of their day three picks.

This is only Schoen's second draft. Nobody has any idea how he will draft. What other teams do or don't do is irrelevant.


I am not sure where to start. Maybe see my comments to Thomas on 'fairylands'. And I have no idea what Golladay or Solder have to do with anything drafted related. And talk about hyperbole. Mike Ditka trade for Ricky Harrison, WTF!

Truth is I am not advocating anything here; I am just telling you based on my experience where I think the Giants are at. Take it for what its worth, In fact, I do not believe that the Giants would be willing to give up either their 2nd round picks in 2023 or 2024, but I would think a 3rd is definitely in play. Then you have 7 third day picks to sweeten any deal. Would they deal a 3rd, 4th and a 6 say for a JSN. Would be tempting if available. And as I suggested the giants will have a list of their top 5-6 WRs and where they would target them.

I am also really intrigued by what they are going to do in the second round and depending on what they do in the first I could also see them moving up in the second to get a player they really like especially a CB, edge rusher or even an OL like Cody Mauch.

I do not believe, and I suspect the Giants don't either, that you build a championship team by filling holes. You build a championship by adding good players and that's what I expect that Schoen and company are looking to do. Anyway time will tell; less than 30 days to go.
These guys appeal to me...  
bw in dc : 12:07 pm : link
at 25:

Nolan Smith and, assuming JSN isn't available, any of these WRs: Tillman, Downs, Flowers.

I like Hyatt, too, but I think his size has become an anchor tethered to his waist and his falling as much as any player.
Channelling buffalo picks  
GrMtWoods : 12:50 pm : link
Bryan Bresee, Lukas Van Ness, Keion White.

Dominant defense and Smurf receivers keeps Wink engaged
and fan base nostalgic and entertained.
RE: RE: RE: what the team is doing today  
AcidTest : 1:03 pm : link
In comment 16076981 Colin@gbn said:
Quote:
In comment 16076927 AcidTest said:


Quote:


Drafting the BPA is not "fairyland." The mistake is doing what you advocate, namely becoming obsessed with a particular position group, or even worse, a particular player or players. At that point you are bidding against yourself, as the the Giants did with Golladay and Solder.

JSN is likely the #1 WR on most boards. My guess is that moving up for him would therefore cost at least a two and a three or next year's #1. That would apparently be fine with you, but it is basically a mini version of what Mike Ditka did when he traded his whole draft for Ricky Williams.

My hope is that the Giants disagree. Are they really willing to give up that much for a player who played only three games last year, especially when they have so many other needs, and there are so many other good WRs in the draft? I will admit I was wrong if it happens, but I'd be pretty upset if they did so.

As I have said, I think the most likely scenario is that they maybe give up a three to move up for Flowers. I wouldn't, but at least it's defensible given all of their day three picks.

This is only Schoen's second draft. Nobody has any idea how he will draft. What other teams do or don't do is irrelevant.



I am not sure where to start. Maybe see my comments to Thomas on 'fairylands'. And I have no idea what Golladay or Solder have to do with anything drafted related. And talk about hyperbole. Mike Ditka trade for Ricky Harrison, WTF!

Truth is I am not advocating anything here; I am just telling you based on my experience where I think the Giants are at. Take it for what its worth, In fact, I do not believe that the Giants would be willing to give up either their 2nd round picks in 2023 or 2024, but I would think a 3rd is definitely in play. Then you have 7 third day picks to sweeten any deal. Would they deal a 3rd, 4th and a 6 say for a JSN. Would be tempting if available. And as I suggested the giants will have a list of their top 5-6 WRs and where they would target them.

I am also really intrigued by what they are going to do in the second round and depending on what they do in the first I could also see them moving up in the second to get a player they really like especially a CB, edge rusher or even an OL like Cody Mauch.

I do not believe, and I suspect the Giants don't either, that you build a championship team by filling holes. You build a championship by adding good players and that's what I expect that Schoen and company are looking to do. Anyway time will tell; less than 30 days to go.


Golladay and Solder are relevant because nobody but the Giants would have given those players the contracts we did. We bid against ourselves, as we would be if we were willing to trade a lot more draft capital than anyone else for JSN or Flowers.

You also mentioned the 2009 draft. That was 14 years and two GMs ago. I don't see how that is at all relevant to what Schoen might do now. But you are right. Reese did want to trade up for Derrius Hayward-Bey. Good thing that he wasn't able to do so because Nicks had a much better career. We would have traded draft picks for a player who had a worse career than the player we drafted by staying put. Reese also traded up in that same draft for Ramses Barden who did nothing in the NFL.

Reese was constantly looking to trade up. Trading a four and a seven to move up to take Landon Collins was fine, and I don't care that his trade up in the sixth round for Bisnowaty was a bust. But he also wanted to trade up in the fourth round for Andre Williams.

I think Reese's desire to constantly trade up was an implicit admission by him that we couldn't draft past the third round. Most of his drafts were frankly horrific, which is why he had to sign Harrison, Jenkins, and Vernon in one year. It's also one reason he was fired.

This isn't about wanting to "fill holes" instead of getting good players. It's about "filling holes" AND getting good players. I'm so tired of people claiming that most day three picks don't work out. Some teams find solid starters on day three. If your team isn't doing so on a regular basis, then fire your scouts. Failure really is not an option. Not in the multibillion-dollar business that is the NFL.

I'm not sure I'd trade a three, four, and six for JSN given that he only played in three games last year, but it wouldn't be disastrous to do so. But that scenario is again likely irrelevant because it will almost certainly cost a lot more than that to get him.

The Giants may explore a minor move up for Flowers. But a major move up for him or JSN is unlikely IMO. I think the signal Schoen has sent is that he's not obsessed with getting a WR in the first found. But as you note, we'll know in about a month.
I hate See Hole, Plug Hole  
JonC : 1:26 pm : link
It's counter-intuitive but it's also whackamole.

Pick the best talent and build the best roster.
I’ll be shocked if it’s not a CB or WR or ER in the 1st  
gersh : 1:32 pm : link
BPA will likely fit with one of those 3
I expect is it’s close it will be WR or CB over ER
Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
ThomasG : 1:35 pm : link
And acting in desperate fashion to pick the best WR they can get at #25 no matter all other options is just that, filling holes.

Putting a more dynamic receiving option on the roster is most certainly is one of Schoen’s strategies. Would be surprised if it’s his only though.

RE: Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
ChrisRick : 1:37 pm : link
In comment 16077102 ThomasG said:
Quote:
And acting in desperate fashion to pick the best WR they can get at #25 no matter all other options is just that, filling holes.

Putting a more dynamic receiving option on the roster is most certainly is one of Schoen’s strategies. Would be surprised if it’s his only though.


Good Take Chick310
It's worthwhile thinking of a DT at 25  
we're already thin and a semi-competent should already be looking to move on from Williams at some point.
RE: what the team is doing today  
In comment 16076893 Colin@gbn said:
Quote:
Actually Milton that's a pretty good list. Three good players at impact positions and if the Giants plan was to sit there and take the so-called bpa at #25 they'd essentially be the three guys I'd have. However, its just not the way teams draft. We're 30 days from the draft and I can pretty much guarantee that the Giants know what they want to accomplish at this year's draft. And almost all the indications are they want to come out of this thing with the best receiver they can get. And right now what the Giants are likely doing is something along the lines of mapping where in the first round each of the top receivers is likely to go; where they'd likely need to go to have a shot at each of the top guys; and what it would cost them.

I wonder if it who helpful to go back to the 2009 draft the last time the Giants went into a draft heavily focused on a WR. That was just after Plax shot himself leaving the Giants without a #1 guy and Amani Toomer's release.

The Giants had the 29th pick, but initially explored to possibility of moving up to get Derrius Heyward-Bey, but he went - somewhat surpisingly - to the Raiders at #7. Then they looked at Jeremy Macklin in the teens but couldn't get anything done and he went 21st to the Eagles. That left three receivers on the board - Percy Harvin, Kenny Britt and Hakeem Nicks - whom the Giants had similar grades on and were prepared to wait as long as two were still on the board. Harvin actually went two picks after Macklin, but at 29 Nicks and Britt were both still there. The Giants essentially flipped a coin and chose Nicks who ended up being the best of the bunch anyway. Somedays you luck out at the draft, most days you don't.

Most of the evidence at this time is that the Giants are currently going thru a process that is something closer to the above than the fairyland BPA stuff that so many on the board are babbling on about.



Love, love , love this analogy. And often times this is more or less how teams are thinking. Reese used to put it aptly: where need meets greatest value or something like that.

What I do know is there is a tiered system in place and generally the objective is to select a player in your highest remaining tier (finite range of grades) that fits your greatest need at an impact position. Value more or less equals grade (pure talent) of individual player x positional impact x system fit.

In our case the 3 positions of greatest need and at an impact position are WR, CB and Edge roughly in that order.

Now the 3 players Milton mentioned not only are likely highly graded players talent wise but also in theory excellent system fits as well at our highest needed impact positions .

In this case do we feel the WR is the greatest need of the 3? If so how aggressive will we be to trade up if only 1 like JSN is on the highest tier? If we dont get him and then only have Addison and Flowers on tier 2 lets say but don't get them either ...are now other WRs closely enough graded and enough of them that the better value would be a much higher graded CB at 25 and then wait until round 2 for a fairly closely graded WR where there are a bunch of sneaky good ones to be had in round 2 and also where a potential trade up would come at a much lower cost than doing it in round 1?

This is why my scenario nets out (at the moment ) with the following:

Rd 1 WR/CB
Rd 2 CB/WR/Edge/IOL
Rd 3 Edge/IOL
Rd 4 IOL/Edge/RB
Rd 5 RB/Edge/OL

I do agree that its likely aggressively persue WR round 1 but this draft doesn't have a bunch of blue chip or purple chip @WR. Its mostly high end red chip guys at the top and maybe only 2 or 3 depending on a teams draft board. If we are only left with a red chip by 25, would we pass up a high end red or purple chip CB for the WR? I can probably still get a red chip WR on my board in round 2 or at minumum get one with a trade up that costs less.
RE: RE: Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
Colin@gbn : 3:22 pm : link
In comment 16077104 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
In comment 16077102 ThomasG said:

And acting in desperate fashion to pick the best WR they can get at #25 no matter all other options is just that, filling holes.

Putting a more dynamic receiving option on the roster is most certainly is one of Schoen’s strategies. Would be surprised if it’s his only thought.


So let's review: 2009 was a bad example, because the Giants felt they needed a new WR with the loss of Plax and Toomer, ended up with Nicks who was other than Eli was THE most important player in the 2011 SB run. Yes I can see why that's a really precedent to follow!

Here's the fork in the road I go one way and lots of people go the other. Obviously, selecting a WR would be filling a need. In fact I would make the case its the only Giants need. There are other issues the Giants will certainly be addressing but none come close to being a 'need'.

I suspect Schoen/Daboll et al looked around the NFL and ascertained pretty quickly that every really good team in the league has a room full of really good receivers and if the Giants want to compete with those teams they are going to have to do the same. Conversely, the Giants can find all the good CBs, ERs and Cs in the world, but until they seriously upgrade their receiver room they ain't competing for a SB. It also can't be lost on them what getting a top receiver did almost instantly for Buffalo, Cincinnati, and Philadelphia when they went out and upgraded at WR. Too many instances to be chance. And how many other teams made the same kind of jump adding elsewhere. Well, none!
Some examples from the Accorsi era that came to light....  
Milton : 3:41 pm : link
Accorsi would target three prospects in the first round and once two of them were off the board he would trade up for the third one.

In 2001 his targets were Santana Moss, Nate Clements, and Will Allen. Santana was the first to go (pick #16 to the Jets). After Buffalo selected Clements with pick #21, Accorsi traded 3rd and 6th round picks (IIRC) to move up to #22 to select Will Allen (he later said if he had known Todd Heap would last until the end of round one, he would've held tight and taken Heap).

A year later, in 2002, Accorsi's three targets were reportedly Levi Jones, Donte Stallworth, and Jeremy Shockey (not necessarily in that order). Jones went #10 to Cincy, Stallworth went #13 to the Saints, and Accorsi gave up a 4th rounder to move up one spot (from #15 to #14) to get Shockey.

These are just two examples in which word leaked post-draft of the Giants thinking. You can take it for what it's worth, it's not like Accorsi publicly confirmed the reports. What it means for the upcoming draft, I don't know, but it strikes me as a sound strategy. In 2001, it seemed the Giants were targeting the CB position, but had a very high grade on Santana Moss (supposedly he was #2 overall on their draft board). In 2002, it appears the targets were focused on improving the passing game (a left tackle, a WR, and a pass-catching TE).
RE: RE: RE: Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
AcidTest : 3:52 pm : link
In comment 16077209 Colin@gbn said:
Quote:
In comment 16077104 ChrisRick said:


Quote:


In comment 16077102 ThomasG said:

And acting in desperate fashion to pick the best WR they can get at #25 no matter all other options is just that, filling holes.

Putting a more dynamic receiving option on the roster is most certainly is one of Schoen’s strategies. Would be surprised if it’s his only thought.



So let's review: 2009 was a bad example, because the Giants felt they needed a new WR with the loss of Plax and Toomer, ended up with Nicks who was other than Eli was THE most important player in the 2011 SB run. Yes I can see why that's a really precedent to follow!

Here's the fork in the road I go one way and lots of people go the other. Obviously, selecting a WR would be filling a need. In fact I would make the case its the only Giants need. There are other issues the Giants will certainly be addressing but none come close to being a 'need'.

I suspect Schoen/Daboll et al looked around the NFL and ascertained pretty quickly that every really good team in the league has a room full of really good receivers and if the Giants want to compete with those teams they are going to have to do the same. Conversely, the Giants can find all the good CBs, ERs and Cs in the world, but until they seriously upgrade their receiver room they ain't competing for a SB. It also can't be lost on them what getting a top receiver did almost instantly for Buffalo, Cincinnati, and Philadelphia when they went out and upgraded at WR. Too many instances to be chance. And how many other teams made the same kind of jump adding elsewhere. Well, none!


WR is definitely not the only need for the Giants. They also have needs at CB, LB, and Edge.

The one time I can remember Accorsi trading down was the year Kiwi was selected. The Giants traded from 19 to 31/32 with Pittsburgh IIRC. But what I do remember is that after having done so, Accorsi wanted to take Kelly Jennings, a CB from Miami. But everyone else in the room was screaming for Kiwi because he was the BPA. Accorsi wondered how he would get on the field since we already had Strahan, Tuck, and Osi. But that rotation of DEs helped us win a SB.

If the best player available at #25 is a WR then that should be the pick. If not, then take whoever is the BPA. That's how you build a good team. Not by becoming desperate to fill a "need" from a particular position group, or even worse, surrendering a ton of draft capital for a particular player. That's just "see hole, fill hole."

Football at all levels is still won in the trenches at the LOS. Our run defense was terrible last year and Jones was frequently running for his life because the OL couldn't pass block. Someone on another thread said the Giants thought that Slayton was open downfield on some plays last year but we couldn't get him the ball because the OL didn't pass block well enough. Despite what Reese or Ross said, the NFL isn't "basketball on grass."
RE: RE: RE: Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
ChrisRick : 4:06 pm : link
In comment 16077209 Colin@gbn said:
Quote:
In comment 16077104 ChrisRick said:


Quote:


In comment 16077102 ThomasG said:

And acting in desperate fashion to pick the best WR they can get at #25 no matter all other options is just that, filling holes.

Putting a more dynamic receiving option on the roster is most certainly is one of Schoen’s strategies. Would be surprised if it’s his only thought.



So let's review: 2009 was a bad example, because the Giants felt they needed a new WR with the loss of Plax and Toomer, ended up with Nicks who was other than Eli was THE most important player in the 2011 SB run. Yes I can see why that's a really precedent to follow!

Here's the fork in the road I go one way and lots of people go the other. Obviously, selecting a WR would be filling a need. In fact I would make the case its the only Giants need. There are other issues the Giants will certainly be addressing but none come close to being a 'need'.

I suspect Schoen/Daboll et al looked around the NFL and ascertained pretty quickly that every really good team in the league has a room full of really good receivers and if the Giants want to compete with those teams they are going to have to do the same. Conversely, the Giants can find all the good CBs, ERs and Cs in the world, but until they seriously upgrade their receiver room they ain't competing for a SB. It also can't be lost on them what getting a top receiver did almost instantly for Buffalo, Cincinnati, and Philadelphia when they went out and upgraded at WR. Too many instances to be chance. And how many other teams made the same kind of jump adding elsewhere. Well, none!


Colin, it sure is nice when need and best player available line up!
Btw, you may see ThomasG sniffing around your posts in the future since Chick got banned.
RE: RE: RE: RE: Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
Colin@gbn : 4:13 pm : link
In comment 16077244 ChrisRick said:
Quote:


Colin, it sure is nice when need and best player available line up!
Btw, you may see ThomasG sniffing around your posts in the future since Chick got banned.


No not chick too! I was pretty convinced he was Jimmy Coogs by another name!! Thanks for the heads up!!
chick is...  
Brown_Hornet : 4:14 pm : link
...jimmy googs.
RE: RE: RE: Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
ThomasG : 4:24 pm : link
In comment 16077209 Colin@gbn said:
Quote:
In comment 16077104 ChrisRick said:


Quote:


In comment 16077102 ThomasG said:

And acting in desperate fashion to pick the best WR they can get at #25 no matter all other options is just that, filling holes.

Putting a more dynamic receiving option on the roster is most certainly is one of Schoen’s strategies. Would be surprised if it’s his only thought.



So let's review: 2009 was a bad example, because the Giants felt they needed a new WR with the loss of Plax and Toomer, ended up with Nicks who was other than Eli was THE most important player in the 2011 SB run. Yes I can see why that's a really precedent to follow!

Here's the fork in the road I go one way and lots of people go the other. Obviously, selecting a WR would be filling a need. In fact I would make the case its the only Giants need. There are other issues the Giants will certainly be addressing but none come close to being a 'need'.

I suspect Schoen/Daboll et al looked around the NFL and ascertained pretty quickly that every really good team in the league has a room full of really good receivers and if the Giants want to compete with those teams they are going to have to do the same. Conversely, the Giants can find all the good CBs, ERs and Cs in the world, but until they seriously upgrade their receiver room they ain't competing for a SB. It also can't be lost on them what getting a top receiver did almost instantly for Buffalo, Cincinnati, and Philadelphia when they went out and upgraded at WR. Too many instances to be chance. And how many other teams made the same kind of jump adding elsewhere. Well, none!


WR is definitely a need and since it positionally aligns to where teams like to spend first rounds picks it makes a lot of sense at #25. The same argument can be made for CB for the Giants as well though. And sitting at the end of Rd 1 at a non-premium draft position could also allow the Giants to consider adding a top interior Offensive Lineman or LB/Edge in this particular draft at that spot.

The point being that drafting with desperation in mind and bypassing a better set of talented players because they just don't happen to be Wide Receivers isn't good business.
Team building  
I think the days are long gone when teams have long term plans. It is about now. Most people felt the Giants had one the very worst rosters in the NFL in 2021 and some horrible contracts to deal with for 2022.

Do not make me pull your comments mocking people who thought we could make the playoffs in 2022. We won a playoff game. The Giants are going in to this draft trying to complete this team. There are not taking a LT even if that player is the highest graded player on the board.

It is not happening.

Look, the Giants lack depth, so, there are a few positions they can draft into that would help the team in 2023. However, it won't be a BPA exclusive pick. NFW.

Take a look at the highest paying positions(most valued) in the NFL not OT or QB and we will probably draft those positions in rounds 1 and 2. It makes sense, if you hit on one of the premium positions it, can set your team up for a run if they turn out elite because of the positional value.
RE: RE: RE: RE: Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
Colin@gbn : 4:43 pm : link
In comment 16077232 AcidTest said:
Quote:
WR is definitely not the only need for the Giants. They also have needs at CB, LB, and Edge.

The one time I can remember Accorsi trading down was the year Kiwi was selected. The Giants traded from 19 to 31/32 with Pittsburgh IIRC. But what I do remember is that after having done so, Accorsi wanted to take Kelly Jennings, a CB from Miami. But everyone else in the room was screaming for Kiwi because he was the BPA. Accorsi wondered how he would get on the field since we already had Strahan, Tuck, and Osi. But that rotation of DEs helped us win a SB.

If the best player available at #25 is a WR then that should be the pick. If not, then take whoever is the BPA. That's how you build a good team. Not by becoming desperate to fill a "need" from a particular position group, or even worse, surrendering a ton of draft capital for a particular player. That's just "see hole, fill hole."

Football at all levels is still won in the trenches at the LOS. Our run defense was terrible last year and Jones was frequently running for his life because the OL couldn't pass block. Someone on another thread said the Giants thought that Slayton was open downfield on some plays last year but we couldn't get him the ball because the OL didn't pass block well enough. Despite what Reese or Ross said, the NFL isn't "basketball on grass."


Again let's review. I refer to WR as the team's one real need because the Giants are not going to be taking the step to the next level without upgrading their receiver room. Period. Clearly, they'd like to add another corner and an edge etc which will certainly improve the team, but they can win with what they have at those positions that is just not the case at receiver.

that is not at all how I recall the 2006 draft. The Giants had the 25th pick and were actually considering taking Sinorice Moss of Miami. Problem was when they got on the clock there was Kiwi, who they rated way higher. so they traded down with Pitt to 32, but there was Kiwi still on the board at #32. At that time, Accorsi uttered his famous 'well I guess you can't have too many pass rushers' remark and they took Kiwi. They then traded up in the second to get Moss.

(Note to Milton: I am going to comment on your thread a little later; it is interesting.) Which brings up to an interesting juxtaposition. In fact in the last 25 years the Giants have only chosen a true BPA three times. S Shawn Williams in 1998 (over Allan Faneca, although by all accounts the Giants were actually planning to take TE stephen Alexander); Kiwi in 2006 and Prince in 2011. Tell me again how all that worked out!!

In fact the whole whole reference above to BPA simply gets it wrong. The Giants could go BPA this year but it will only be because a player they had ranked pretty close to the top 15 slipped down. But that rarely happens. The Giants grade players in rows or levels and if they did get to 25 they will probably be looking at a group of anywhere from 10-30 players with the same grade. The likelihood that in a draft thick with receivers none of those players will be receivers is pretty small. And then it will be on the Giants for not having made a move up. At the same time, the likelihood that there is some special BPA guy in that group just aint how it works.

and lastly games are still won in the trenches! Tell that to KC which has been the best team in the league the past few years. Definitely because of their offensive and defensive lines. Fact is that trenches are a military option that were kind of famous back in WWI but which have since been made pretty obsolete by tanks and attack aircraft. Just saying!



BPA clarification  
Colin@gbn : 4:48 pm : link
Let me just clarify what I said about true BPAs. The Giants have always taken a player from their top row. Only three times did they end up taking a player who they really weren't thinking about but did slip down.
That KC reference is strange  
cosmicj : 4:50 pm : link
They’ve consistently had one of the best OLs in the league in recent years and have invested in their DL and front 7 with big contracts for Jones and Frank Clark. And their total cap hit for all WRs in 2022 was less than Golladay’s cap just by himself. They also just dealt Tyreek Hill rather than pay him a lot of money.

Did I misunderstand your point, Colin?
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
In comment 16077274 Colin@gbn said:
Quote:


In fact the whole whole reference above to BPA simply gets it wrong. The Giants could go BPA this year but it will only be because a player they had ranked pretty close to the top 15 slipped down. But that rarely happens. The Giants grade players in rows or levels and if they did get to 25 they will probably be looking at a group of anywhere from 10-30 players with the same grade. The likelihood that in a draft thick with receivers none of those players will be receivers is pretty small. And then it will be on the Giants for not having made a move up. At the same time, the likelihood that there is some special BPA guy in that group just aint how it works.






This draft has a rare depth at a couple positions of high to very high need for the Giants. Cornerback and Edge.

Edge dwindles because the Giants have two potentially very good but less stout guys in Thibs and Ojulari. That leaves only the bigger bodied edge setters with pass rush upside as the stronger possibility.

Which brings us back to CB. Do the Giants pass up a higher tiered CB for the lower tiered WR?

On the same tier , edge goes to the WR. Agreed.

But on different tiers? That's called a 'reach'!

Knowing how they usually like to play, think they don't give up a Deonte Banks for a Jalin Hyatt and would look at the strengths of each particular draft and factor that in their equation too. Round 2 has a big grouping of high potential WRs in this draft.

I'm not saying this means they go CB round 1 no matter what but if he were the higher tier they absolutely could....





RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
AcidTest : 6:06 pm : link
In comment 16077274 Colin@gbn said:
Quote:
In comment 16077232 AcidTest said:


Quote:


WR is definitely not the only need for the Giants. They also have needs at CB, LB, and Edge.

The one time I can remember Accorsi trading down was the year Kiwi was selected. The Giants traded from 19 to 31/32 with Pittsburgh IIRC. But what I do remember is that after having done so, Accorsi wanted to take Kelly Jennings, a CB from Miami. But everyone else in the room was screaming for Kiwi because he was the BPA. Accorsi wondered how he would get on the field since we already had Strahan, Tuck, and Osi. But that rotation of DEs helped us win a SB.

If the best player available at #25 is a WR then that should be the pick. If not, then take whoever is the BPA. That's how you build a good team. Not by becoming desperate to fill a "need" from a particular position group, or even worse, surrendering a ton of draft capital for a particular player. That's just "see hole, fill hole."

Football at all levels is still won in the trenches at the LOS. Our run defense was terrible last year and Jones was frequently running for his life because the OL couldn't pass block. Someone on another thread said the Giants thought that Slayton was open downfield on some plays last year but we couldn't get him the ball because the OL didn't pass block well enough. Despite what Reese or Ross said, the NFL isn't "basketball on grass."



Again let's review. I refer to WR as the team's one real need because the Giants are not going to be taking the step to the next level without upgrading their receiver room. Period. Clearly, they'd like to add another corner and an edge etc which will certainly improve the team, but they can win with what they have at those positions that is just not the case at receiver.

that is not at all how I recall the 2006 draft. The Giants had the 25th pick and were actually considering taking Sinorice Moss of Miami. Problem was when they got on the clock there was Kiwi, who they rated way higher. so they traded down with Pitt to 32, but there was Kiwi still on the board at #32. At that time, Accorsi uttered his famous 'well I guess you can't have too many pass rushers' remark and they took Kiwi. They then traded up in the second to get Moss.

(Note to Milton: I am going to comment on your thread a little later; it is interesting.) Which brings up to an interesting juxtaposition. In fact in the last 25 years the Giants have only chosen a true BPA three times. S Shawn Williams in 1998 (over Allan Faneca, although by all accounts the Giants were actually planning to take TE stephen Alexander); Kiwi in 2006 and Prince in 2011. Tell me again how all that worked out!!

In fact the whole whole reference above to BPA simply gets it wrong. The Giants could go BPA this year but it will only be because a player they had ranked pretty close to the top 15 slipped down. But that rarely happens. The Giants grade players in rows or levels and if they did get to 25 they will probably be looking at a group of anywhere from 10-30 players with the same grade. The likelihood that in a draft thick with receivers none of those players will be receivers is pretty small. And then it will be on the Giants for not having made a move up. At the same time, the likelihood that there is some special BPA guy in that group just aint how it works.

and lastly games are still won in the trenches! Tell that to KC which has been the best team in the league the past few years. Definitely because of their offensive and defensive lines. Fact is that trenches are a military option that were kind of famous back in WWI but which have since been made pretty obsolete by tanks and attack aircraft. Just saying!




OK. It looks like you are right about the 2006 draft. This article says that Accorsi wanted Kiwi all along. I had a vague recollection that he had to be talked out of taking Kelly Jennings. But if he did want Kiwi at #25, then why did he trade down and risk losing him for a third and a fourth? That's crazy IMO.

JSN is likely to be one of the players in the top row for the Giants and most other teams. I'm not willing to give up the draft capital required to get him, and hope the Giants agree.

I simply don't agree with your conclusion that WR is a greater need than edge, LB, OL, CB. But even if it is, it isn't so much more of a "need" than those other positions that it justifies trading a boatload of draft capital for JSN, Flowers, or any other WR. That is especially true given that this draft is "thick" in WRs. The most that I would do is trade a third to move up for either. I wouldn't move up at all for Johnston, Addison, or Hyatt.

I also certainly don't think the Giants can win with what they have at CB. Look what happened when Jackson was injured last year.

If the Giants have two or more players at #25 with very close grades, and the lowest graded is a WR, I'm fine with them taking the WR. But they shouldn't take a WR instead of a player at a different position who has a much higher grade. I'd rather take them take the highest rated OL (Torrence) than their fourth or even third rated WR.

Link - ( New Window )
RE: That KC reference is strange  
Colin@gbn : 6:54 pm : link
In comment 16077281 cosmicj said:
Quote:
They’ve consistently had one of the best OLs in the league in recent years and have invested in their DL and front 7 with big contracts for Jones and Frank Clark. And their total cap hit for all WRs in 2022 was less than Golladay’s cap just by himself. They also just dealt Tyreek Hill rather than pay him a lot of money.

Did I misunderstand your point, Colin?


Cos: Maybe a little bit. The point is that KC has not been the best team in the league that past 4-5 years because of their OL or their. They win because they have the NFL's best QB throwing to an excellent room of receivers and everything else is if not window dressing at least just complimentary. It is interesting that they let Hill and I believe it directly affected their offensive production, but they went out and got some other people to at least fill in the gaps.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
Colin@gbn : 8:03 pm : link
In comment 16077317 AcidTest said:
Quote:
OK. It looks like you are right about the 2006 draft. This article says that Accorsi wanted Kiwi all along. I had a vague recollection that he had to be talked out of taking Kelly Jennings. But if he did want Kiwi at #25, then why did he trade down and risk losing him for a third and a fourth? That's crazy IMO.

JSN is likely to be one of the players in the top row for the Giants and most other teams. I'm not willing to give up the draft capital required to get him, and hope the Giants agree.

I simply don't agree with your conclusion that WR is a greater need than edge, LB, OL, CB. But even if it is, it isn't so much more of a "need" than those other positions that it justifies trading a boatload of draft capital for JSN, Flowers, or any other WR. That is especially true given that this draft is "thick" in WRs. The most that I would do is trade a third to move up for either. I wouldn't move up at all for Johnston, Addison, or Hyatt.

I also certainly don't think the Giants can win with what they have at CB. Look what happened when Jackson was injured last year.

If the Giants have two or more players at #25 with very close grades, and the lowest graded is a WR, I'm fine with them taking the WR. But they shouldn't take a WR instead of a player at a different position who has a much higher grade. I'd rather take them take the highest rated OL (Torrence) than their fourth or even third rated WR. Link - ( New Window )


This shall be my final word on the topic. In particular what sort of comes to mind is a phrase from English lit (Jonathan Swift I beleive; probably first time he's been quoted on BBI!)

"there is none so blind as those who will not see!'

And quite frankly I don't think I can help anymore. The Giants have pretty much told you want they're thinking, or at least pretty much what they want to do (or at least any team does). They have shown you (again as much as any team does) what they want to do; and I have to the best of my ability tried to explain why they think that way.

And still there are people pounding tables all over the place screaming 'no, no, no! that's not what they're going to do!' So I'm just tired of pounding my head against the wall. People want to live in denial be my guest!
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Good GMs certainly don’t build championship teams filling holes.  
AcidTest : 9:11 pm : link
In comment 16077394 Colin@gbn said:
Quote:
In comment 16077317 AcidTest said:


Quote:


OK. It looks like you are right about the 2006 draft. This article says that Accorsi wanted Kiwi all along. I had a vague recollection that he had to be talked out of taking Kelly Jennings. But if he did want Kiwi at #25, then why did he trade down and risk losing him for a third and a fourth? That's crazy IMO.

JSN is likely to be one of the players in the top row for the Giants and most other teams. I'm not willing to give up the draft capital required to get him, and hope the Giants agree.

I simply don't agree with your conclusion that WR is a greater need than edge, LB, OL, CB. But even if it is, it isn't so much more of a "need" than those other positions that it justifies trading a boatload of draft capital for JSN, Flowers, or any other WR. That is especially true given that this draft is "thick" in WRs. The most that I would do is trade a third to move up for either. I wouldn't move up at all for Johnston, Addison, or Hyatt.

I also certainly don't think the Giants can win with what they have at CB. Look what happened when Jackson was injured last year.

If the Giants have two or more players at #25 with very close grades, and the lowest graded is a WR, I'm fine with them taking the WR. But they shouldn't take a WR instead of a player at a different position who has a much higher grade. I'd rather take them take the highest rated OL (Torrence) than their fourth or even third rated WR. Link - ( New Window )



This shall be my final word on the topic. In particular what sort of comes to mind is a phrase from English lit (Jonathan Swift I beleive; probably first time he's been quoted on BBI!)

"there is none so blind as those who will not see!'

And quite frankly I don't think I can help anymore. The Giants have pretty much told you want they're thinking, or at least pretty much what they want to do (or at least any team does). They have shown you (again as much as any team does) what they want to do; and I have to the best of my ability tried to explain why they think that way.

And still there are people pounding tables all over the place screaming 'no, no, no! that's not what they're going to do!' So I'm just tired of pounding my head against the wall. People want to live in denial be my guest!


You are 100% certain that the Giants will not only trade up for a WR, but that they will spend a boatload of draft capital to do so. Not 99% certain. 100% certain. How can you be a 100% sure what the Giants or any team will do?

Quote:
“The Giants have pretty much told you want they're thinking, or at least pretty much what they want to do (or at least any team does). They have shown you (again as much as any team does) what they want to do.”


What exactly have they “shown?” Schoen in fact has stated that people are placing too much emphasis on the WR group.

However much I do not want the Giants to trade anything more than a third to move up for anyone, I at least acknowledge that you might be right, and that the Giants might trade a boatload of draft capital to move up for a WR.

Just because you want the Giants to trade multiple draft picks to move up for a WR, doesn't mean they will. Just because I don't want them to do so doesn't mean they won't. But even acknowledging that this is the "lying season," I certainly hope you are wrong. The Giants are not "one player away," and I don't think WR is any more important than any other position group.
Back to the Corner