Quote from: DaveBrown74 on April 19, 2024, 06:58:09 PMI'm not claiming he would be, nor do I think that.
I know you are not. My point is just changing QBs will not make much of a difference til OL is performing.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Show posts MenuQuote from: DaveBrown74 on April 19, 2024, 06:58:09 PMI'm not claiming he would be, nor do I think that.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on April 19, 2024, 05:05:16 PMWell, no matter what people think, the bottom line is he'll probably be the starter again this year for much, most, or possibly all of the season if he can somehow stay healthy. The line has been materially invested in including a significant head coaching upgrade. So those who still feel unsure about him after five years will get a chance to watch him again in his sixth, with even more resources having been thrown at the line. So hopefully those folks will get some answers either way this year and won't need a 7th year.
Quote from: katkavage on April 19, 2024, 02:41:31 PMIf the Giants are not going to trade up for a quarterback they really want, then I really would like them to trade down to acquire picks. I don't know why, but I think Penix flies under the radar and could be the best of the bunch. Just a feeling, nothing more. How about Penix paired with Thomas or Pearsall or one of the other very good receivers out there this year?
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on April 19, 2024, 03:56:32 PMPleasure, and back at you.
Fair enough. Jones did face tougher competition in 2023 than the others, that is true. No argument from me there.
Ok, but Jones played two of his six games last year with Thomas active, and he looked utterly wretched in both games. He got hurt in the second quarter of one of them, so it's just one and change games (I get not a big sample), but there is no evidence that he was much better with Thomas last year than without him. And we have both seen him start plenty of games with Thomas at LT where Jones looked bad.
The team had some modest success in 2022 (9-7-1), although they were a bottom third passing offense. What was the other year that Jones was the starter in which the team had success?
I think offensive line play is very important and have certainly never suggested otherwise. Well all know the Giants have had very poor line play for a decade now. I don't think that gives Jones a full pass though, as some seem to. I think he has been bad, even taking that into account, and I would argue that last year was pretty telling in this regard.
Quote from: MightyGiants on April 19, 2024, 02:48:22 PMHere are the two rankings per PFF
Pass Blocking
2019- 16
2020- 32
2021- 31
2022- 24
2023- 32
Receiving
2019- 17
2020- 25
2021- 31
2022- 27
2023- 32
Quote from: sxdxca38 on April 19, 2024, 02:22:38 PMHere are the rankings:
- 2019 ranked 17th -
- 2020 ranked 31st -
- 2021 ranked 30th -
- 2022 ranked 18th -
- 2023 ranked 30th -
The two years the Giants had a decent offensive line was in 2019 and 2022.
In both of those years Daniel Jones had his best seasons, including making the playoffs and winning a game in 2022.
The three years the Giants had an awful offensive line were in 2020, 2021, and 2023, ranked 31st, 30th, and 30th.
In those three years Daniel Jones had his worst years as a player, and the teams record was 6-10, 4-13, and 6-11.
My questions to everyone here is:
A) What can we learn from this data?
And
B) How important is the offensive line to Daniel Jones' success, and the team's ability to win as a whole?
No right or wrong answer here as I am just curious everyone's opinion?
Quote from: MightyGiants on April 17, 2024, 01:21:04 PMIf you read the long ESPN article (the link is in my Bill Belichick post from today) it seems a big part of the reason Belichick didn't get another HC job is that the league is moving away from the powerful head coach model (yet the two SB teams are both teams with powerful HCs)
One thing I have noticed since Bowen replaced Martindale as the new DC is that both Daboll and Henderson talked about Bowen being a good teammate. This tracks with the Giant's accusations that Martindale didn't seek out input from his entire staff but only his trusted lieutenants.
These two things got me thinking. Which model is the more successful one? Are teams better off with a management style that is all about collaborations and agreement (sort of management by committee) or are teams better served with one or two powerful voices in the room?
My take is that the collaborative approach is sort of like buying many different types of stocks (diversify your portfolio) to protect from downturns. The shortcoming to that approach is you tend to mute the upside a bit for the same reason you are protecting your downside.
In other words, if you get the right one or two voices, a team will enjoy higher highs (and risk lower lows) than if they adopt the collaborative approach, which serves as a moderating influence for both good and bad.
I am curious what others think.
Quote from: MightyGiants on April 19, 2024, 09:43:34 AMJoe,
I think one way to see which way you lean is which type of draft trade you generally prefer.
1) Trade up to grab to grab a better prospect
2) Trade down to get more picks
Quote from: Jclayton92 on April 19, 2024, 09:34:48 AMWell he isn't making that mistake now because he already did that going into 2023.
Quote from: 4 Aces on April 18, 2024, 07:01:35 PMThat's a great way of articulating it.
I've been saying this for a long time, in "defense" of Jones.
You can get by with a bad OL and good skill players, or a good OL with bad skill players. But you won't get by with a bad OL & bad skills. NFL is too good for that.