Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: londonblue on Today at 08:10:46 AMWe were a bad team before we picked Nabers. We are still a bad team after the pick. We are a battered, rusting heap with an engine operating at half power (DJ), two good tires (AT, Dex), a nice stereo pass rush duo and an enhanced selection of shiny WR hood ornaments.

I am not sure there is much to be happy about as we are still a long way from competing. Getting another good player is nice but hardly cause for bunting and a parade.

london: Although I disagree at least a bit with your sentiment, I "liked" your post because no one has to my knowledge ever used the word "bunting" here other than with reference to baseball. lol

Quote from: katkavage on Today at 07:51:54 AMI don't see what you see in the QB s that's the issue.

kat: That's ok. The issue will now be decided one way or another. By the end of this year, you'll see it... or I'll be tipping my hat to you. I think they have enough on offense that, even if the run-game can't do much (Nabers and Robinson will contribute), this year Jones will demonstrate that he can play small ball and long ball. Bob

Quote from: TONKA56 on Today at 07:49:49 AMOne thing we are going to see this year is disrespect for our running attack until it proves itself. Teams will focus on taking the deep ball away. This will be a great departure to what we've seen in previous years.

Tonka: Completely agree, but this year IMO they have the answer. Both Robinson and Nabers can contribute in the run-game, and Singletary is a proven NFL-caliber RB. Gray will no longer be a rookie and maybe he's ready to contribute. I think to address your point directly, this year the pass-attack will open it up for the run-game. Daboll/Kafka are not traditional coaches... they prefer the "newfangled" pass-first offenses, and whether we like it or not there will be very little (if any) "Giants' football" on offense and a lot more open attack. Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 07:17:42 AMBob,

I think there is enough positional flexibility that I can envision a 4 man WR rotation of Slayton, Hyatt, Robinson, and Nabers.

Nabers has played mostly slot and flanker, but he has shown enough ability to defeat press coverage that he could be a slit-end (x) receiver as well.  I think Hyatt will be trained for the X and the Y (flanker).  Slayton is a natural X.  Robinson is the slot.

Rich: That is not how I see it ending, but like I said... we have to see where the pieces fall when the "dust" finally settles. IMO you could be closer to the "truth" at first (rookies don't get a lot of trust right away) but I know Robinson can play RB and I know Nabers will be most effective from the slot against man defenses. Against zone, they're better off using him as a flanker rather than as a traditional split-end, because it gives him a chance to touch the ball in the run-game.  Bob

Quote from: katkavage on Today at 07:43:30 AMI have no doubt Nabers is an exceptional talent. But he won't move the needle much for the Giants as they are presently constructed. So it's nice to have a potentially all star caliber player on the roster, wide receivers don't have the impact without other pieces in place, particularly the QB. I'll be happy if I'm wrong, but that won't be evident for a long time.

kat: I don't see it that way. I see Nabers as the final piece to the puzzle on offense. I'm assuming they already have the running backs they need to do the offense the way THEY want to do it, not the way the fans want to see them do it. The Giants will now be a pass-first (modern NFL?) offense, not the traditional type you and I favor. Give them a chance. It won't be "Giants' football" on offense... but hopefully it will be winning football. Bob

Quote from: uconnjack8 on Today at 07:31:28 AMRich,
I was surprised by some of the reaction here.  I wanted Odunze but think very highly Nabers ability, just hope the attitude stuff is overblown. 

uconn: I understand the reaction.  Odunze is a more traditional typw of WR. Nabers is the exact opposite. In the long run, I initially thought they would be better off with Odunze too, but in the modern era where it's almost all about the passing attack, Nabers gives them far more options and variations. In fact, I have reason to think Schoen/Daboll would have taken Nabers even if Harrison was still available. Nabers is THEIR type of guy, and it's THEIR necks on the chopping block, so if they fail it makes more sense to fail with the guy(s) they want. Bob

Rich: I was going to start a new thread but this is as good as any a place to make my point.

The Giants now have the personnel to put together two completely different game plans on offense - one for teams that like to pressure the QB, and one for teams that play mostly zone. Likewise, they can plan to either possess the ball or try to out-score the opponent, which is something they haven't been able to do for a long, long time.

They have all the parts, if they can stay healthy.

Bob

Quote from: Uncle Mickey on April 24, 2024, 04:56:20 PMHi all!

Uncle Mickey here but you can just call me Mickey. 

Mickey: Welcome to this site. It's a great time of year for you to join us. Bob

Other than @MightyGiants point involving adding depth, I see this whole thing differently.

The question to answer is how adding Nabers affects Wan'Dale Robinson, not Slayton. Nabers has the potential to be elite, and one position he can play is WR, and he will be paid like a #1 WR, but these coaches will not deploy him as a traditional #1 WR. 

I can't say how where all the pieces will be when the "dust" settles, but recall that Robinson played mostly out of the backfield in college, and Nabers spent a whole lot of time at LSU in the slot. I expect the Giants to move Nabers and Robinson around a lot and we'll see Robinson being used more like Barkley was. To get full value out of Nabers, they'll have to scheme him open (a lot more than if they had taken Odunze, for example). They can't just flank him out wide on every play.

Bob

PS. Ideally, (once Nabers has his feet on the ground, and assuming no injuries), Hyatt and Slayton will split time torturing defenses deep and one or both of them hopefully will have a big year (fingers crossed).

One of the smart ones.

But I'd have to meet them all to decide who I'm talking about... looks would be secondary.

If you find that difficult to believe, I don't blame you... but I'm serious.

Bob

Luckily, I had too much work to do this week and couldn't have participated in that stuff even if I wanted to. Bob

Nice job, Ceri !!!!  And thank you for offering/sharing this information. Bob

IMO the chart in the original post shows why you take Harrison over the other "good ones" if you have a choice. Bob

Jolly: IMO he's worth the money. Wish he were on the Giants. Bob

Quote from: AYM on April 21, 2024, 06:42:40 PMI don't know if I agree with this. The 2007 draft directly caused the team to win the Superbowl as every single player heavily contributed.

Going back a couple of years, the 2005 draft was light on picks but gave us Brandon Jacobs, Corey Webster, and Justin Tuck. That was a monster draft too.

AY: Great observation. I can agree that that draft was pivotal in producing a championship. But before that draft IMO Giants were already 'over the hump' and just needed to make solid selections (which they did) without trying to his any home runs, in order to finish the job of putting a Super-Bowl-capable squad around Eli. Bob