I see a ton of fans talking about tanking and picking early in next year's draft. And I saw this last year, the year before, and the year before. Here's my question...
If picking early gets you better players, why do the team that pick early year after year after year still suck?
Giants
Raiders
Chicago
Carolina
Arizona
And the reverse is true....
The Eagles, Cowboys, Bills, Baltimore, Kansas City, San Fran, etc. all pick low and are good year after year.
It's not where you draft. The draft is a crap-shoot. It's your culture, your QB and your coaching staff that produces winners. Tanking does NOTHING to help your team....
I'm not even going to deride them by calling them the "DJFC" but it would be interesting if we polled that group of posters anonymously and see how many of them actually want the Giants to end up out of the running for the top 2 QBs.
I have little doubt that the overwhelmingly majority of the DJFC members want Jones to have audition #6. And they prefer the draft is used to bring in more offensive assets to help Jones.
Frankly, we should brace ourselves that Mara/Schoen/Daboll may feel similarly.
Quote:
I'm not even going to deride them by calling them the "DJFC" but it would be interesting if we polled that group of posters anonymously and see how many of them actually want the Giants to end up out of the running for the top 2 QBs.
I have little doubt that the overwhelmingly majority of the DJFC members want Jones to have audition #6. And they prefer the draft is used to bring in more offensive assets to help Jones.
Frankly, we should brace ourselves that Mara/Schoen/Daboll may feel similarly.
Is there a reason you continue to use DJFC? You are far to good a poster to bring back a stupidily annoying phrase just to piss people off. I think it is beneath you.
And I think Jones is done and will be replaced in the draft.
Quote:
in a draft than move down from a team's current position?
Two reasons.
The odds are better.
The earlier you pick the fewer teams pick before you who might take who you want.
It's kind of like insurance.
The "odds are better" yet the same teams pick at the top every year.... makes no sense.
There are a lot of variables when it comes to drafting.
But paramount is the quality of the draft especially in key positions at the top of the draft.
If there are exceptional players available in key positions available then tanking may make sense.
If the Giants believe that there are three franchise altering players available then you do not want to be drafting 4th.
In this draft if a team wants a potentially great QB, they want to draft #1-#2.
Acquiring a franchise QB changes the dynamics of the team for the next 10 years.
Can you not make the reverse case for a dozen teams. Sure you can cherry pick a few cases, but the bottom line is those that draft early seem to always draft early. It's not about that....
Culture, QB, Coach, etc are incredibly important. Duh.
I think there is a cost to tanking in terms of culture. Whether it is worth paying for the higher picks is a reasonable question.
But the OP's point is dumb.
I gave you proof that the OP is not "dumb." If the same teams pick the better players every year why do they all still suck year after year. Maybe you're the dumb-ass....
Quote:
In comment 16282419 ThomasG said:
Quote:
in a draft than move down from a team's current position?
Two reasons.
The odds are better.
The earlier you pick the fewer teams pick before you who might take who you want.
It's kind of like insurance.
The "odds are better" yet the same teams pick at the top every year.... makes no sense.
Houston picked 2nd last season. They won’t be anywhere near that this season. Why? What changed?
The Jags picked first overall just a couple seasons ago. Now they are contenders. Why? What changed?
You need a freakin QB. And all you guys can whine that QBs fail all you want. But you literally need one and the best way to do it is at the top of the draft. Nothing in life is guaranteed. Of course not all QBs taken high succeed. But neither do OTs taken high. Or WRs. Or edge players
Cosmicj/BBS nailed it.
This is just asinine. The game is completely different than it was in the ‘80’s when you could win with an elite defense and a running game. Aside from the fact Lawrence Taylor’s aren’t exactly readily available. Also, Phil Simms was pretty damn good. Oh, and Eli Manning is a borderline Hall of Famer.
You may have been watching this team for over 65 years but that is part of the problem. You refuse to admit how much the game has changed and are somehow under the impression that you can still win consistently with 3 yards and a cloud of dust. And trying to build a juggernaut with All Pros all over the roster to make up for mediocre QB play. That’s just not sustainable with the CBA/salary cap that didn’t exist in the past. These are different times. Nobody cares about 65 years ago. Or even 20 years ago.
And wouldn't you be in big trouble if you got caught? You might be drafting 32d for the next five years as punishment.
It's not like doping horses. Ex players would spill the beans.
The two guys that led those teams to the 4 championships were no slouches. Oh, and they were both picked at/near the top of their respective drafts.
Maybe watch a little closer to the TV?
Do you have any examples of these posters? Name some that have said they don’t trust Schoen and then say they want to tank.
Also, no matter if you trust the GM or not, there is no debate that the number 1 pick is better than the 10th pick. I don’t give a shit if Gettleman is the GM. Higher picks are better than lower picks. Is this even debatable?
I just don't see how anyone can counter this. Look at the franchise health of the Jaguars and Jets right now.
I just don't see how anyone can counter this. Look at the franchise health of the Jaguars and Jets right now.
Yeah but you can just go out and draft 15 Pro Bowl caliber players at all the other positions and then you don’t need an elite QB!
It’s amazing. People are afraid to take a shot at a QB because they may bust but then think it’s plausible to just build around an inept QB by drafting studs all over the roster. The Giants have been drafting at the top of the draft for a decade and have two franchise worthy players on the roster. How many more years would it take to draft enough good players to build around a bad QB? Another two decades?
Quote:
Picking higher gets you better players. Duh.
Culture, QB, Coach, etc are incredibly important. Duh.
I think there is a cost to tanking in terms of culture. Whether it is worth paying for the higher picks is a reasonable question.
But the OP's point is dumb.
I gave you proof that the OP is not "dumb." If the same teams pick the better players every year why do they all still suck year after year. Maybe you're the dumb-ass....
Whatever you say, Tim. How did that Kyle Rudolph signing work out for us?
Go enjoy your trust fund and leave the personnel decisions to Schoen.
Quote:
Bengals sucked for years, get Burrow - perennial contender
Jax sucked for years, gets Lawrence - playoff team
Houston sucked for years, gets Stroud and now they are a .500 team trending up
The Colts sucked for Luck and became a playoff team again once they got him,
Giants, sucked for Eli, became a perennial contender once they got him.
Obviously the draft isn’t a perfect science, but if you believe Williams and Maye are what the scouts are saying they are, then they will completely alter the trajectory of this franchise. The teams you mentioned all missed out on QB’s or didn’t pick the right one. Sure it’s a crapshoot, but odds of getting a great QB are much higher when you pick near the top of the draft.
Of the 16 QBs who went no. 1 overall since 1994, only 7 can be considered "franchise" QBs, and fewer became top 5 guys. The scouts said Jemarcus Russell was one of the best QB prospects in a decade. A sure franchise QB. Here's a sampling of comments before the draft.
"The workout Russell had was Star Wars. It was unbelievable." Then-Tampa Bay Bucs coach Jon Gruden
"The film that we've watched has impressed more and more. The guy can wing it but seems to have that real feel for the game, and a presence. He looks like he could come into any system and be ready.'' -- Then-Detroit Lions coach Rod Marinelli
"I can't remember being in such awe of a quarterback in my decade of attending combines and pro days. Russell's passing session was the most impressive of all the pro days I've been to. His footwork for such a big quarterback was surprising. He was nimble in his dropbacks, rolling out and throwing on the run. The ball just explodes out of his hands." -- ESPN's Todd McShay
"JaMarcus Russell, my man. The Raiders finally get their big arm. And he's a good kid, strong kid, smart kid. He'll be a big-time player. If I'm the Raiders, that's who I pick. That's pretty easy." -- FOX's Terry Bradshaw
There are obviously busts at #1 overall, but the risk of a QB busting increases with each sequential selection. The fact that there have been busts at #1 overall is meaningless. What is significant about having as high a pick as possible is having options. If the Saints had taken LT at #1 overall in 1981, the Giants never get the chance to select him. That he was available for the Giants was a scouting failure by New Orleans and a stroke of luck for the Giants. But if they had been sitting at #1 overall instead, they would not have relied on the Saints getting it wrong.
Similarly, think back to Peyton Manning and Ryan Leaf. Both the Colts and Chargers may have had similar grades on the two QB prospects, but only the Colts had the option to choose between them; the Chargers were stuck taking whoever the Colts didn't take. So they weren't only dependent on their own scouting to get the decision correct, they also would have needed the Colts to get it wrong. The Colts only had to get their own decision right.
The post hoc rationalization is silly.
Quote:
In comment 16282658 Breeze_94 said:
Quote:
Bengals sucked for years, get Burrow - perennial contender
Jax sucked for years, gets Lawrence - playoff team
Houston sucked for years, gets Stroud and now they are a .500 team trending up
The Colts sucked for Luck and became a playoff team again once they got him,
Giants, sucked for Eli, became a perennial contender once they got him.
Obviously the draft isn’t a perfect science, but if you believe Williams and Maye are what the scouts are saying they are, then they will completely alter the trajectory of this franchise. The teams you mentioned all missed out on QB’s or didn’t pick the right one. Sure it’s a crapshoot, but odds of getting a great QB are much higher when you pick near the top of the draft.
Of the 16 QBs who went no. 1 overall since 1994, only 7 can be considered "franchise" QBs, and fewer became top 5 guys. The scouts said Jemarcus Russell was one of the best QB prospects in a decade. A sure franchise QB. Here's a sampling of comments before the draft.
"The workout Russell had was Star Wars. It was unbelievable." Then-Tampa Bay Bucs coach Jon Gruden
"The film that we've watched has impressed more and more. The guy can wing it but seems to have that real feel for the game, and a presence. He looks like he could come into any system and be ready.'' -- Then-Detroit Lions coach Rod Marinelli
"I can't remember being in such awe of a quarterback in my decade of attending combines and pro days. Russell's passing session was the most impressive of all the pro days I've been to. His footwork for such a big quarterback was surprising. He was nimble in his dropbacks, rolling out and throwing on the run. The ball just explodes out of his hands." -- ESPN's Todd McShay
"JaMarcus Russell, my man. The Raiders finally get their big arm. And he's a good kid, strong kid, smart kid. He'll be a big-time player. If I'm the Raiders, that's who I pick. That's pretty easy." -- FOX's Terry Bradshaw
There are obviously busts at #1 overall, but the risk of a QB busting increases with each sequential selection. The fact that there have been busts at #1 overall is meaningless. What is significant about having as high a pick as possible is having options. If the Saints had taken LT at #1 overall in 1981, the Giants never get the chance to select him. That he was available for the Giants was a scouting failure by New Orleans and a stroke of luck for the Giants. But if they had been sitting at #1 overall instead, they would not have relied on the Saints getting it wrong.
Similarly, think back to Peyton Manning and Ryan Leaf. Both the Colts and Chargers may have had similar grades on the two QB prospects, but only the Colts had the option to choose between them; the Chargers were stuck taking whoever the Colts didn't take. So they weren't only dependent on their own scouting to get the decision correct, they also would have needed the Colts to get it wrong. The Colts only had to get their own decision right.
The post hoc rationalization is silly.
It really is incredible, isn’t it? These clowns are actually trying to rationalize that the first or second pick aren’t more valuable than later picks. It’s mind boggling. It’s almost as if every GM in NFL history has been doing it wrong. Someone needs to tell them that higher picks aren’t worth more than lower picks. The reason being not every player picked first has success…
The broad point is true. Any pick can miss. But the odds of hitting on a player decrease with every pick you go down the line. And to say otherwise is just dumb.
What if the Giants attempt to trade up and the other team says no thank you?
I think GD is right. Cousin Tim doth protest too much.
Quote:
Bengals sucked for years, get Burrow - perennial contender
Jax sucked for years, gets Lawrence - playoff team
Houston sucked for years, gets Stroud and now they are a .500 team trending up
The Colts sucked for Luck and became a playoff team again once they got him,
Giants, sucked for Eli, became a perennial contender once they got him.
Obviously the draft isn’t a perfect science, but if you believe Williams and Maye are what the scouts are saying they are, then they will completely alter the trajectory of this franchise. The teams you mentioned all missed out on QB’s or didn’t pick the right one. Sure it’s a crapshoot, but odds of getting a great QB are much higher when you pick near the top of the draft.
Of the 16 QBs who went no. 1 overall since 1994, only 7 can be considered "franchise" QBs, and fewer became top 5 guys. The scouts said Jemarcus Russell was one of the best QB prospects in a decade. A sure franchise QB. Here's a sampling of comments before the draft.
"The workout Russell had was Star Wars. It was unbelievable." Then-Tampa Bay Bucs coach Jon Gruden
"The film that we've watched has impressed more and more. The guy can wing it but seems to have that real feel for the game, and a presence. He looks like he could come into any system and be ready.'' -- Then-Detroit Lions coach Rod Marinelli
"I can't remember being in such awe of a quarterback in my decade of attending combines and pro days. Russell's passing session was the most impressive of all the pro days I've been to. His footwork for such a big quarterback was surprising. He was nimble in his dropbacks, rolling out and throwing on the run. The ball just explodes out of his hands." -- ESPN's Todd McShay
"JaMarcus Russell, my man. The Raiders finally get their big arm. And he's a good kid, strong kid, smart kid. He'll be a big-time player. If I'm the Raiders, that's who I pick. That's pretty easy." -- FOX's Terry Bradshaw
Now go look at the super bowl winning QBs since 1994 and the vast majority of them are first rounders with most of the first rounders in the top 10.
So picking a QB high dramatically increases your chances of winning a super bowl. The caveat being you have to pick the right QB. Some years it doesn't seem to make sense to pick a QB high because the talent doesn't match the draft slot. But when it does, it makes sense to take the risk.