If the Giants have a first round grade on someone like Bo Nix, Michael Penix or JJ McCarthy - is there a difference in taking him at 5th overall versus 20th overall?
I remember something Gettleman said in the 2019 pre draft press conference, paraphrasing - "If we have a first round grade on a QB, we love him." So, Jones went 6th overall. I was never bothered with the fact Jones went 6th and not 17th. My thinking was QB is so important, you need to ensure you get the QB. Now, you can argue Jones going 6th overall made the Giants commit longer to him hoping he would work out to support their decision.
But, if you hit on QB, does it matter where it is? For example, let's look at Bo Nix. If Schoen/Daboll like him enough to be a first round QB, is it worth risking trading back up and taking him or do you just take him at 5th overall? What if you can't trade back into the first and lose Nix all together?
I don't know. Is Nix (or any QB) a reach at 5 but acceptable at 20? And would he be worth the resources to trade back into the 1st (most likely both 2nd round picks at least)?
This is why teams often reach for QB's I suppose, but a first round grade is a first round grade for such an important position.
How would you handle it?
For example if you take Daniel Jones at pick #6 but you also own pick #17 and he would have very likely been available at #17 then yes it matters where he's drafted.
(this is a completely fictitious and made up scenario I know some people on here say they personally know GMs and coaches who would have picked Daniel Jones before #17)
Where it might matter is the opportunity cost when a team has multiple first round picks and chooses the QB based on positional value more than individual grade. Looking at DJ's draft, it's easy to dismiss the implications of taking DJ at #6 because Dex became a stud from the 17th slot. But if that pick had not gone as well, we might justifiably ask if the aggregate value of 6+17 would have been stronger with DJ at 17, even though that would include the risk of losing him.
But Dex has developed to the point where he'd easily be top five if that draft were to be re-run now, so it's hard to make the case that the Giants suffered any sort of knock-on hardship as a result of taking DJ at 6 instead of trying to wait until 17. And to the extent that waiting until 17 would have increased the risk of losing out on DJ, I think you'd have to ask the question the other direction also: at what point are you committed enough to a QB prospect that you won't risk losing him by trading down (or using a later pick), but not committed enough to trade up for that QB?
DG loved his soundbites, and most of the DJ explanation that year was just an excuse for DG to hear himself talk. After all, if he was in such full-bloom love, why would he risk letting DJ get picked somewhere in the top five?
And while we're on the subject, Nix is really beginning to interest me. I recommend listening to the "He's a Giant" podcast series on the 2024 college QBs. Nix is their 7th rated guy, but he projects to them as very high floor guy who is a great processor who is very accurate in the intermediate and short range. Sounds like Daboll/Kafka could execute a better version of the 2022 offense with him running the show (since he can also scramble), and he could be available either after a trade-down (if we're out of the Williams/Maye sweepstakes) or at their 2nd round pick.
For example if you take Daniel Jones at pick #6 but you also own pick #17 and he would have very likely been available at #17 then yes it matters where he's drafted.
(this is a completely fictitious and made up scenario I know some people on here say they personally know GMs and coaches who would have picked Daniel Jones before #17)
I love when people bring this up... So let me get this straight we draft Edge Josh Allen at 6 and then at 17 assuming Jones doesn't get drafted which he likely could have been we take him... So you just traded Dexter Lawerence for Edge Josh Allen. People need to let this go. We are lucky it worked out like it did.
And he is on my Board at 20, and I’ve got the #5 overall pick, I’d try to make a very modest trade down, and if not successful I definitely take Bo Nix at 5.
Yes, that's a big factor no doubt. The question becomes is it worth risking to lose Nix or some other QB if you have that grade on him.
And if you try the modest trade down, most teams who trade up do it trying to secure a QB.
And he is on my Board at 20, and I’ve got the #5 overall pick, I’d try to make a very modest trade down, and if not successful I definitely take Bo Nix at 5.
This is a very reasonable view.
And QB is the only position where it's even remotely defensible to take your own #20 prospect (as in, not worried about Kiper's "Big Board" rankings or whatever) at #5, and even then, it's obviously only even a consideration when need/roster dictates as such.
In that way, it's a reach (by definition), but the scarcity of supply could motivate reaches behind you as well. And QB is important enough to justify the reach if you believe in the prospect.
End of the round trade-ups happen there.
And he is on my Board at 20, and I’ve got the #5 overall pick, I’d try to make a very modest trade down, and if not successful I definitely take Bo Nix at 5.
I think this is the way to play it.
Definitely worth pointing out.
As I firmly put on my Captain Obvious hat, the key really boils down to the evaluator (pre-draft) and the developer (post-draft).
What does this mean? 3 of the last 20 Super Bowls were won with a number one draft pick by the team that took them and 2 of those were us.
So 17 of 20 Super Bowl winners did not do it with a guy they took first overall. That's my view on whether or not its "take a QB at 1 or not at all".
Good players come from all over the draft. Mahomes, the best QB in the NFL, went 11th in his draft. Allen went 7th and Jackson 32nd in the same draft and the guy that went 1st is on his 4th team, the guy that went 4th is on his 3rd team, lets not even get into Josh Rosen who went 10th and 22 spots ahead of Lamar Jackson...
If I had the 37th pick, I'd be doing everything I can to get that to 20 pre-draft.
Even if you have an early 2nd round grade on a QB, getting him on round one and getting the 5th year option is worth the cost of moving up.
Said another way, I'd gladly give up my own 2nd and the Seattle 2nd to get in striking distance of a QB that dropped.
However, if the eval is good but not great then I wouldn't necessarily jump for my guy, but maybe just try and trade back into end of Round 1 if possible to still land him.
Too many times you see GMs on QB-needy teams overplay their hands and pull up QBs into Rd1 (or up within Rd1) because they are desperate or they don't create a fair evaluation for the moment. I think we all know a good example of this.
If I had the 37th pick, I'd be doing everything I can to get that to 20 pre-draft.
Even if you have an early 2nd round grade on a QB, getting him on round one and getting the 5th year option is worth the cost of moving up.
Said another way, I'd gladly give up my own 2nd and the Seattle 2nd to get in striking distance of a QB that dropped.
Fair. But, what if there is an earlier run on QB's? The question becomes are you comfortable coming out of the first two rounds with no QB?
I know you don't want to run a team desperate to fill a position, but I expect Schoen to feel urgency to get this addressed.
However, if the eval is good but not great then I wouldn't necessarily jump for my guy, but maybe just try and trade back into end of Round 1 if possible to still land him.
Too many times you see GMs on QB-needy teams overplay their hands and pull up QBs into Rd1 (or up within Rd1) because they are desperate or they don't create a fair evaluation for the moment. I think we all know a good example of this.
Good post. I'll add that if you have a QB prospect that checks every box and has very few doubts or blemishes on his profile, chances are you have him much closer to the top of your board anyway, especially if your grading system factors for positional value (and roster needs).
Need tends to make evaluators talk themselves into prospects, which usually includes a willingness to ignore certain flags or unchecked boxes in order to take a chance at filling the most important need in professional sports roster construction. But if there are truly no flags and the QB prospect does check all the boxes, and you need a QB, that prospect probably isn't #20 on your board.
Issue 2: Maximizing draft resources
With Issue 1, much depends on the scouting grades. Is there a big gap between Nix and the next QB? Is there no gap? What's the gap between Nix and the top 3 prospects?
Issue 2 depends a bit on inside info. Who are other GMs targeting, where do other teams stand with their QBs (ARI with Murray, CHI with Fields, etc.). This is a big reason you pay Joe Schoen.
Personally I care less this year about maximizing draft than I do getting the best QB prospect of the bunch according to the Giants' scouts and personnel evaluators. If Schoen and his people determine that any of Maye/Williams/Daniels is a top shelf franchise prospect, I want them to move heaven and earth to get that guy. There is no one on the roster that would be off limits in trade, including Thibodeaux.
Do not half ass this. If they identify one of these guys as a legit blue chip that forecasts into the Mahomes/Burrow/Allen/Jackson tier, they should do whatever it takes to get him.
However, if the eval is good but not great then I wouldn't necessarily jump for my guy, but maybe just try and trade back into end of Round 1 if possible to still land him.
Too many times you see GMs on QB-needy teams overplay their hands and pull up QBs into Rd1 (or up within Rd1) because they are desperate or they don't create a fair evaluation for the moment. I think we all know a good example of this.
Good post Thomas. I think viewing the three leading QB prospects right now, before you know their pro trajectory, is instructive.
Eg, Daniels: very accurate passer, great flick release, excellent runner. But can he read NFL defenses and does he know how to maneuver in the pocket to get the pass off and not simply take off running? The jury is out. Obvious talent but there are negatives that could prevent him from turning into a very good NFLer.
Except for Andrew Luck, there are risks associated with all these prospects.
If I had the 37th pick, I'd be doing everything I can to get that to 20 pre-draft.
Even if you have an early 2nd round grade on a QB, getting him on round one and getting the 5th year option is worth the cost of moving up.
Said another way, I'd gladly give up my own 2nd and the Seattle 2nd to get in striking distance of a QB that dropped.
Fair. But, what if there is an earlier run on QB's? The question becomes are you comfortable coming out of the first two rounds with no QB?
I know you don't want to run a team desperate to fill a position, but I expect Schoen to feel urgency to get this addressed.
Let's say in this hypothetical I am picking 5 and 37, and I can move from 37 to 20.
If I go into the fight with 5 and 20, I feel pretty comfortable I get my guy.
A lot is going to happen between now and draft night. It is still around six months away and there will be bowl games, championship games, combine, pro-days, QB's who go up the board, QB's who go down the board, QB's GM's will fall in love with and others that will be panned because they can't win a big game, engineer a winning drive, have a weak arm, have no accuracy, aren't good leaders, aren't good in the clubhouse.
Joe and scouts will need to cut through all the noise and make the best possible pick.
It may be high first round or it could be after a trade down. It could be second round. The question is do you trust Joe. I do. He has drafted pretty well.
If Joe thinks Bo is the guy...or Penix...or anyone....it will be interesting to see if ultimately it is the right choice.
Issue 2: Maximizing draft resources
With Issue 1, much depends on the scouting grades. Is there a big gap between Nix and the next QB? Is there no gap? What's the gap between Nix and the top 3 prospects?
Issue 2 depends a bit on inside info. Who are other GMs targeting, where do other teams stand with their QBs (ARI with Murray, CHI with Fields, etc.). This is a big reason you pay Joe Schoen.
Personally I care less this year about maximizing draft than I do getting the best QB prospect of the bunch according to the Giants' scouts and personnel evaluators. If Schoen and his people determine that any of Maye/Williams/Daniels is a top shelf franchise prospect, I want them to move heaven and earth to get that guy. There is no one on the roster that would be off limits in trade, including Thibodeaux.
Do not half ass this. If they identify one of these guys as a legit blue chip that forecasts into the Mahomes/Burrow/Allen/Jackson tier, they should do whatever it takes to get him.
Exactly this ^.
And then you operate in fast failure mode. We don't need years to figure this out. By the end of year two, we will know. If it turns out we have Zach Wilson, Bryce Young or Trey Lance, you move on immediately and begin again. If it turns out you have CJ Stroud, Jalen Hurts or Brock Purdy, you have your guy and he is under contract and controllable for three more years before worrying about allocating significant chunks of the cap to the position.
The key is you don't "get married" until you have a courtship with proven results, rather than pie in the sky nonsense...
Quote:
Issue 1: Getting a QB prospect you believe in
Issue 2: Maximizing draft resources
With Issue 1, much depends on the scouting grades. Is there a big gap between Nix and the next QB? Is there no gap? What's the gap between Nix and the top 3 prospects?
Issue 2 depends a bit on inside info. Who are other GMs targeting, where do other teams stand with their QBs (ARI with Murray, CHI with Fields, etc.). This is a big reason you pay Joe Schoen.
Personally I care less this year about maximizing draft than I do getting the best QB prospect of the bunch according to the Giants' scouts and personnel evaluators. If Schoen and his people determine that any of Maye/Williams/Daniels is a top shelf franchise prospect, I want them to move heaven and earth to get that guy. There is no one on the roster that would be off limits in trade, including Thibodeaux.
Do not half ass this. If they identify one of these guys as a legit blue chip that forecasts into the Mahomes/Burrow/Allen/Jackson tier, they should do whatever it takes to get him.
Exactly this ^.
And then you operate in fast failure mode. We don't need years to figure this out. By the end of year two, we will know. If it turns out we have Zach Wilson, Bryce Young or Trey Lance, you move on immediately and begin again. If it turns out you have CJ Stroud, Jalen Hurts or Brock Purdy, you have your guy and he is under contract and controllable for three more years before worrying about allocating significant chunks of the cap to the position.
The key is you don't "get married" until you have a courtship with proven results, rather than pie in the sky nonsense...
Think its a little too early to give up on young. That is a really bad team. Still need pieces around a QB to evaulate.
Plus their coach is going to get fired too at the end of the year.
If by the end of year 2 you don't know he's the guy, explore options. There are two real life examples to look at: Brock Purdy and Kenny Pickett. SF should feel great about where they are. Pittsburgh should be ready to move on and explore options this offseason.
1. GM/coach draft QB
2. Either GM or coach get fired and then new regime comes in to help the drafted QB.
3. If he's shown any kind of sign, by year 3 you load up the roster with weapons to try and make the next step.
We are seeing it with Fields and we saw it with Jones. This is the risk of a potential lame duck coach deciding on the QB. It's why Daboll winning games down the stretch is important.
Let Daboll and the new QB sink or swim together as opposed to firing Daboll after 2024 and hoping the next coach can work with the incumbent QB.
Quote:
In comment 16297050 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Issue 1: Getting a QB prospect you believe in
Issue 2: Maximizing draft resources
With Issue 1, much depends on the scouting grades. Is there a big gap between Nix and the next QB? Is there no gap? What's the gap between Nix and the top 3 prospects?
Issue 2 depends a bit on inside info. Who are other GMs targeting, where do other teams stand with their QBs (ARI with Murray, CHI with Fields, etc.). This is a big reason you pay Joe Schoen.
Personally I care less this year about maximizing draft than I do getting the best QB prospect of the bunch according to the Giants' scouts and personnel evaluators. If Schoen and his people determine that any of Maye/Williams/Daniels is a top shelf franchise prospect, I want them to move heaven and earth to get that guy. There is no one on the roster that would be off limits in trade, including Thibodeaux.
Do not half ass this. If they identify one of these guys as a legit blue chip that forecasts into the Mahomes/Burrow/Allen/Jackson tier, they should do whatever it takes to get him.
Exactly this ^.
And then you operate in fast failure mode. We don't need years to figure this out. By the end of year two, we will know. If it turns out we have Zach Wilson, Bryce Young or Trey Lance, you move on immediately and begin again. If it turns out you have CJ Stroud, Jalen Hurts or Brock Purdy, you have your guy and he is under contract and controllable for three more years before worrying about allocating significant chunks of the cap to the position.
The key is you don't "get married" until you have a courtship with proven results, rather than pie in the sky nonsense...
Think its a little too early to give up on young. That is a really bad team. Still need pieces around a QB to evaulate.
Plus their coach is going to get fired too at the end of the year.
I did say two years, so I agree he deserves at least another year. But the reality is, we know. Just like we knew almost instantly about Wilson and Lance. And Rosen. And DJ. They all deserve two years, but the truth is, that is mainly because it protects the credibility of the decision makers. The talent is fairly self-evident from the very start.
And the sooner the decision maker acknowledges it, as John Lynch did with Trey Lance, the better it is for the health of the franchise. Living in denial, and blowing smoke up the fans respective asses, as the Giants have done now for a decade, is the most certain way to destroy the credibility of the franchise.
1. GM/coach draft QB
2. Either GM or coach get fired and then new regime comes in to help the drafted QB.
3. If he's shown any kind of sign, by year 3 you load up the roster with weapons to try and make the next step.
We are seeing it with Fields and we saw it with Jones. This is the risk of a potential lame duck coach deciding on the QB. It's why Daboll winning games down the stretch is important.
Let Daboll and the new QB sink or swim together as opposed to firing Daboll after 2024 and hoping the next coach can work with the incumbent QB.
I agree that, if I'm keeping Daboll I'm wiping the slate clean. Alternatively, fire him and start over. I don't really care. Just be aligned.
What does this mean? 3 of the last 20 Super Bowls were won with a number one draft pick by the team that took them and 2 of those were us.
So 17 of 20 Super Bowl winners did not do it with a guy they took first overall. That's my view on whether or not its "take a QB at 1 or not at all".
Good players come from all over the draft. Mahomes, the best QB in the NFL, went 11th in his draft. Allen went 7th and Jackson 32nd in the same draft and the guy that went 1st is on his 4th team, the guy that went 4th is on his 3rd team, lets not even get into Josh Rosen who went 10th and 22 spots ahead of Lamar Jackson...
Rodgers went 24th, Brees went 32nd, Flacco went 18th, Wilson went 75th, Foles went 88th, Brad Johnson (SB2002) 227th.
You have to decide if you want to leave Brady in the equations. I've presented the data here both ways. You then have to decide if having Archie Manning's Y chromosome is important. I've also presented that data both ways.
Stalin said it didn't matter who voted, but who counted the votes. The NFL version is, it doesn't matter where you pick, it matters a lot who does the picking.
Some guy the other day said "bad teams are bad because they don't have a QB picked high in the first round". No, actually, bad teams are bad because they suck at talent evaluation, and they take Ryan Leaf, Michael Vick, RG III, JaMarcus Russell, Mitchell Trubisky, Cam Newton, etc, etc.
Quote:
Those are your first overall picks to win a Super Bowl in the last 20 years. Stafford did it with a second team and Peyton did 1 of two with his original team.
What does this mean? 3 of the last 20 Super Bowls were won with a number one draft pick by the team that took them and 2 of those were us.
So 17 of 20 Super Bowl winners did not do it with a guy they took first overall. That's my view on whether or not its "take a QB at 1 or not at all".
Good players come from all over the draft. Mahomes, the best QB in the NFL, went 11th in his draft. Allen went 7th and Jackson 32nd in the same draft and the guy that went 1st is on his 4th team, the guy that went 4th is on his 3rd team, lets not even get into Josh Rosen who went 10th and 22 spots ahead of Lamar Jackson...
Rodgers went 24th, Brees went 32nd, Flacco went 18th, Wilson went 75th, Foles went 88th, Brad Johnson (SB2002) 227th.
You have to decide if you want to leave Brady in the equations. I've presented the data here both ways. You then have to decide if having Archie Manning's Y chromosome is important. I've also presented that data both ways.
Stalin said it didn't matter who voted, but who counted the votes. The NFL version is, it doesn't matter where you pick, it matters a lot who does the picking.
Some guy the other day said "bad teams are bad because they don't have a QB picked high in the first round". No, actually, bad teams are bad because they suck at talent evaluation, and they take Ryan Leaf, Michael Vick, RG III, JaMarcus Russell, Mitchell Trubisky, Cam Newton, etc, etc.
Ctrl+V.
Reaching on a QB to guarantee yourself and extra year or two of job security is BS. If you need a QB, it takes guts to pass on one to take the best available player.
Or you need to be strong enough in your conviction that you make a bold move to get your guy.
At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter where the Giants pick, if they are convinced one of the prospects is 'the guy' they should do whatever it takes to secure the proper draft position to secure that prospect.
the draft is about talent evaluation, not draft position.
it's about getting the right guys. i hope schoen figures that part out (who to get). that's the important thing.
For everyone else, even the great Tom Brady, once he was off the board, no one else behind that pick could choose him.
Getting hung up on whether the guy was a bust or not, or if your measure of success is whether he won a Super Bowl or not, whatever - that is unrelated to the draft slot. That is a function of scouting prowess, evaluation skills, competitive/industry insight (bordering on corporate espionage, to some degree), etc. If every NFL evaluator knew in advance whether a player was going to be a success or failure, they'd only draft the successes. That's not data, and it's not analysis.
What is relevant is the fact that once a player is drafted, he can no longer be drafted by anyone else. It doesn't matter who votes, who counts the votes, who is picked or who does the picking. Once a player is chosen, he can't be chosen by anyone else.
So if you have a conviction on the player, you take him where you can take him - ideally, you take a player precisely one selection ahead of where someone else would take him. But you can only work with the info you have, you can only choose with the draft slots you have (or can acquire), and you must make the choice using the scouting detail you have compiled.
Obviously, the key element is being good at talent evaluation so that you avoid drafting busts. I don't know why the same poster insists on trying to tie the risk of a player busting with the slot in which that player was drafted. The risk of them busting has nothing to do with their draft slot. It has a lot to do with poor scouting.
But even if you're great at scouting, you can only choose from among the players who are available when it's your turn to pick. The Giants could not have chosen Lawrence Taylor if the Saints took him instead of George Rogers. The Patriots would not have had Tom Brady if any of the other NFL teams took him with the 198 picks that preceded his selection.
You can only choose from the players who are available. The higher you choose, the more players that are available. That does not mean that scouting doesn't matter - of course it matters. But so does the depletion of the draft pool, one player at a time, with each pick that comes off the board. And if there are only X number of great players available, hidden within a stack of yet-to-be-identified busts, it's obviously better to have more options available to choose from.
Can we stop mentioning Archie Manning's chromosomes now?
QBs that fall out of the top 5, fall for a *reason*, either real or perceived.
Lamar Jackson "should play WR" even though he put up shocking numbers as a thrower in college.
Patrick Mahomes never won anything in college.
Aaron Rodgers was a system QB
Will Levis was just a big-armed thrower, not a QB
Josh Allen was just a big-armed thrower, not a QB
So you can't sell me that if the Giants take a QB at 20, people are going to be thrilled. It will be a QB that precisely doesn't check all the boxes and needs development.
You don't get that Harrison's bust rate is probably like .5% and QBs o matter what all the draft genius' say about the next crop is like 60%.
I'd rather get a freak player who has a chance to be an all pro over the next Sam Darnold 10 out of 10 times. I'll you guys who want to trade 3 firsts for the because QB can feel they way. Not me. You all love analytics til they tell you something you don't like. Taking a QB in Rd 1 has been destroying teams for years. Jets and Cards any better for spending two top 5 picks ?
Do you think the Giants since 2018 have been any better than a team that missed on a Quarterback?
Quote:
you take him. That is why I don’t get the “draft Harrison, get a QB later” talk. You never know what team is going to decide the QB you think will make it to you in the 2nd round is their guy. It’s too important a position to get cute with.
You don't get that Harrison's bust rate is probably like .5% and QBs o matter what all the draft genius' say about the next crop is like 60%.
I'd rather get a freak player who has a chance to be an all pro over the next Sam Darnold 10 out of 10 times. I'll you guys who want to trade 3 firsts for the because QB can feel they way. Not me. You all love analytics til they tell you something you don't like. Taking a QB in Rd 1 has been destroying teams for years. Jets and Cards any better for spending two top 5 picks ?
Like Kevin White? Or Charles Rogers, Peter Warrick, Henry Ruggs, or Justin Blackmon? How about Reggie Williams, Braylon Edwards, Ashley Lelie, Darrius Heyward-Bey, or Jon Baldwin?
I'd rather get a freak player who has a chance to be an all pro over the next Sam Darnold 10 out of 10 times. I'll you guys who want to trade 3 firsts for the because QB can feel they way. Not me. You all love analytics til they tell you something you don't like. Taking a QB in Rd 1 has been destroying teams for years. Jets and Cards any better for spending two top 5 picks ?
I'll go out on a limb, and guess the people who love analytics would have something to say about the numbers you've seemingly come up with out of thin air.
Player-wise, there's no such thing as a can't miss prospect. Even the ones with insane numbers and performance.
Team-wise, you have X draft capital to allocate which normally includes 1 first round pick. It's either top X (2-4, depending on the draft) or not, and if it's not the cost to move into that tier can be exorbitant.
So outside a few teams, you typically need to take the QB inside your draft tier that you like most. EG drafting a guy at 7 who might be there at 15 cause your pick is your pick and neither trades nor availability are guaranteed. Then you hope for the best just like the team that got the "can't miss" at 1 or 2.