We have pretty well worn out discussion of the first round of the draft, and maybe you've grown tired of talking about the draft as a whole, but if not.....
There's been a lot in the media and on this site about the importance and results in the second round.
Assume the Giants' choice in the 2nd round was between replacing Big Hank and bolstering the offensive line.
Did they make the right decision, considering the players who were there at the time of the pick?
Bob
PS. My answer: They made the correct choice, both in the abstract and considering the players who they could have chosen. I liked both Tomlinson and Dawkins (as a tackle or guard) a lot, so that consideration was a "tie" IMO The deciding factors were (a) defense wins championships; (b) stopping the run is a top-three objective in every game plan; and (c) I don't believe any offensive lineman who remained on the board, as a first year player, would have helped the team more than experienced players (no matter what you think of them) Hart, Flowers and Fluker.
Bob,
I would suggest that the 2nd round ties to the third. What the Giants did with their 2nd and 3rd pick was get a solid replacement for Hankins and a QB to groom as Eli's replacement.
Now based on availability they could have also gone
2nd round- OT/OG Dion Dawkins (a player who I feel can start this year and can play every position but center)
3rd round- DT Vanderdoes, Eddie (who never seemed to recover from major injuries and was out of shape) or DT Adams, Montravius (who scouts questioned if he plays hard all the time)
So in hindsight does the team go (like they did) safer Hankins replacement and potential future starting QB OR do they go offensive line improvement and riskier Hankins improvement and no QB to groom for the future
That is how I see the fork in the road playing out
I like that thinking and suggest that anyone else who wants to weigh in consider Rich's reply as part of the original post.
If a later drafted DT like Ryan Glasgow becomes very good, then yes, he made a mistake, but as of now, no
I think the 2nd round pick was really the pivotal pick of the draft. It was no surprise that the Giants picked a DT in the second round, it was certainly our most glaring need, but I think it was a mistake taking Tomlinson there. Most people on the board appear to love the DT (Dalvin Tomlinson) pick as discussed in an earlier post, but to me he is going to have minimal game impact beyond, at best, holding the line of scrimmage, which is something any of the available free agents Jared Odrick, Jaye Howard, Dan Williams, Sen'Derrick Marks etc. could have provided.
My main issue with DT is, yes great personality, great wrestling background, but I just don't see any quickness or penetration off the line, I don't see his strength impacting the game at the next level.
Reportedly the Giants went off Zac Cunningham after his interviews, so thats fine, but if not a linebacker I would have preferred Moton or Dawkins to bolster the run game, or DEs Jordan Willis or Basham, to generate pass rush.
I think the ideal scenario was going TE, OL/DE, Big RB (Foreman or Perine)/CB. For DT we would have been better off taking a DT later in the fourth round, and adding some veteran depth.
I was fine with the QB in the 3rd, if they really like him, and its not just to have a body, but DT at 2 and then a QB at 3 really limited the impact of this draft for me. We had the opportunity to bolster a power run game, or add needed pass rushing or corner depth, and really did not accomplish that.
I didn't research DT's like I did many other positions (in particular, OT's, TE.s and QB's) so when the pick came in, I was neither excited or unhappy. I went to work finding out all I could. What I discovered is an incredible talent built on a foundation of being a three-time "state heavyweight wrestling champion" (that takes a combination of strength, agility, lightning quickness, and mental perseverance) as well as a goalie in soccer (requires great reflexes and the ability to move laterally or vertically in a heart-beating nano-second). Then I saw that he turned down a free ride at Harvard (who does that?). Found out he's a powerful run stopper who can play the 1 or 3-tech position and had limited sacks due to getting constant double teams which in turn allowed Jonathan Allen to shine, not to mention he played defensive end on the strong side on occasion. In fact, the other guys on the d-line said they couldn't have had the year they had if not for Dalvin, who required zero glory for doing the dirty work. And then reading his life story made me realize this guy is super intelligent, very humble, and has incredibly high character...and of course, we had a hole in the defensive line after big Hank left us. I felt we got a steal here. Love the pick and love the guy.
Jolly, he will be playing next to the ultimate blocker eater in the league in Snacks. While the guy to the right of him is not too shabby either.
I agree with your choice completely, Bob. =D> =D> =D> And, I agree with your joining it with pick # 3, Rich. =D>
Quote from: MP21WAYS2PAY on May 02, 2017, 01:01:23 PM
I think the 2nd round pick was really the pivotal pick of the draft. It was no surprise that the Giants picked a DT in the second round, it was certainly our most glaring need, but I think it was a mistake taking Tomlinson there. Most people on the board appear to love the DT (Dalvin Tomlinson) pick as discussed in an earlier post, but to me he is going to have minimal game impact beyond, at best, holding the line of scrimmage, which is something any of the available free agents Jared Odrick, Jaye Howard, Dan Williams, Sen'Derrick Marks etc. could have provided.
My main issue with DT is, yes great personality, great wrestling background, but I just don't see any quickness or penetration off the line, I don't see his strength impacting the game at the next level.
Reportedly the Giants went off Zac Cunningham after his interviews, so thats fine, but if not a linebacker I would have preferred Moton or Dawkins to bolster the run game, or DEs Jordan Willis or Basham, to generate pass rush.
I think the ideal scenario was going TE, OL/DE, Big RB (Foreman or Perine)/CB. For DT we would have been better off taking a DT later in the fourth round, and adding some veteran depth.
I was fine with the QB in the 3rd, if they really like him, and its not just to have a body, but DT at 2 and then a QB at 3 really limited the impact of this draft for me. We had the opportunity to bolster a power run game, or add needed pass rushing or corner depth, and really did not accomplish that.
MP: Your original post and Rich's reply to it were the impetuses for this thread. Thanks.
No one probably wants to hear this, but my answer to "why a defensive end" is this.... they may have worked backward from the fact that they really liked and wanted to put Tomlinson on their football team, and the fact is that DT was an area of need and there is no doubt Tomlinson deserved to go in about the 2nd round, so they took him. He's the kind of player they like, and they need one of what he was selling. The simple explanation will probably anger some (maybe you) but I'd bet that's the answer. He'll be easy to root for, he's a winner, he played for a coach pro personnel departments believe in, and who knows, the Giant may have even gotten an "insider's" perspective about the kid from Landon Collins.
Nice post, by the way. It could have happened just as you suggested, IMO, if the picks ahead of the Giants had gone differently.
Bob
Quote from: MP21WAYS2PAY on May 02, 2017, 01:01:23 PM
Most people on the board appear to love the DT (Dalvin Tomlinson) pick as discussed in an earlier post, but to me he is going to have minimal game impact beyond, at best, holding the line of scrimmage, which is something any of the available free agents Jared Odrick, Jaye Howard, Dan Williams, Sen'Derrick Marks etc. could have provided.
Odrick isn't a line of scrimmage holder and had a shoulder injury last year; Howard was put on IR last year with a hip injury and missed 9 games; Williams was cut by the Raiders who considered him a liability and only let him play on 35.3% of snaps; Marks hasn't been any good since he blew out a knee a couple of years ago and was only a backup in Jacksonville last year.
I get you don't like the pick but you're grasping at straws throwing out the names of players who are firmly on the downside of their careers. 31 teams don't consider them a priority signing, the other one cut them!
Quote from: Jolly Blue Giant on May 02, 2017, 01:14:55 PM
I didn't research DT's like I did many other positions (in particular, OT's, TE.s and QB's) so when the pick came in, I was neither excited or unhappy. I went to work finding out all I could. What I discovered is an incredible talent built on a foundation of being a three-time "state heavyweight wrestling champion" (that takes a combination of strength, agility, lightning quickness, and mental perseverance) as well as a goalie in soccer (requires great reflexes and the ability to move laterally or vertically in a heart-beating nano-second). Then I saw that he turned down a free ride at Harvard (who does that?). Found out he's a powerful run stopper who can play the 1 or 3-tech position and had limited sacks due to getting constant double teams which in turn allowed Jonathan Allen to shine, not to mention he played defensive end on the strong side on occasion. In fact, the other guys on the d-line said they couldn't have had the year they had if not for Dalvin, who required zero glory for doing the dirty work. And then reading his life story made me realize this guy is super intelligent, very humble, and has incredibly high character...and of course, we had a hole in the defensive line after big Hank left us. I felt we got a steal here. Love the pick and love the guy.
JBG: Yeah, his experience and personal story are top-notch.
When the Giants get a guy like Tomlinson, I pray for his success because there's no way I'm ever going to root against him (until they cut him after his rookie contract expires LOL).
Yeah, he's a zero-glory guy.... good thing he went to a team whose fans appreciate and understand the importance of zero-glory guys.
Bob
Quote from: UKGiantsFan on May 02, 2017, 02:42:15 PM
Odrick isn't a line of scrimmage holder and had a shoulder injury last year; Howard was put on IR last year with a hip injury and missed 9 games; Williams was cut by the Raiders who considered him a liability and only let him play on 35.3% of snaps; Marks hasn't been any good since he blew out a knee a couple of years ago and was only a backup in Jacksonville last year.
I get you don't like the pick but you're grasping at straws throwing out the names of players who are firmly on the downside of their careers. 31 teams don't consider them a priority signing, the other one cut them!
ceri: How about the "other half" of MP's point, that Tomlinson isn't the type of knifing or penetrating presence Spags wants next to Snacks? That has been raised by some of the "experts and gurus" and although you and I agree about Tomlinson, I was wondering if you saw anything in his film that would lead you to believe there is a dimension to Tomlinson's game that would allow him to stay on the field in passing situations. Bob
Quote from: Bob In PA on May 02, 2017, 02:49:07 PM
ceri: How about the "other half" of MP's point, that Tomlinson isn't the type of knifing or penetrating presence Spags wants next to Snacks? That has been raised by some of the "experts and gurus" and although you and I agree about Tomlinson, I was wondering if you saw anything in his film that would lead you to believe there is a dimension to Tomlinson's game that would allow him to stay on the field in passing situations. Bob
Actually I think they wanted two run pluggers in the middle just like last year as by taking up blockers they allow the likes of Landon Collins to have a free role and hide our deficiencies at LB. Penetrating players would change the way we play defense. I like the way it was played just fine!
Quote from: Bob In PA on May 02, 2017, 02:49:07 PM
ceri: How about the "other half" of MP's point, that Tomlinson isn't the type of knifing or penetrating presence Spags wants next to Snacks? That has been raised by some of the "experts and gurus" and although you and I agree about Tomlinson, I was wondering if you saw anything in his film that would lead you to believe there is a dimension to Tomlinson's game that would allow him to stay on the field in passing situations. Bob
I know this was addressed to Ceri, but I'd still like to take a shot at it.
Tomlinson spent his senior year at Alabama getting double teamed and he still got some sacks. There is no way they can double team him on the Giants line. They already do that to Snacks and have their hands full with JPP on one side and OV on the other. The guy who will draw the least amount of attention on that line is the new kid. I suspect he's finally going to get to manhandle single coverage and get into the backfield. Having that wrestling background makes him already inclined to use an opponents weight and strength against themselves. I think he'll have a heyday because Snacks will be getting what he got in college so that others get single coverage.
This is going to be one nasty defensive line. I doubt your going to see many RB's go up the middle - that's if they even bother trying. We got a serious wall on that side the trench
One of the things that does not seem to be mentioned is that the reason DT (2nd) and DE (5th) were needed in this draft is that two more of Reese's high picks Bromley and OO failed to live up to expectations. As a result, they are constantly trying to fill holes that should have been filled with previously drafted players. Until Reese starts to have a higher success rate with 1-3 round players, they will continue to need to spend draft picks on certain positions that could be better spent on the OL and LB.
Quote from: Jolly Blue Giant on May 02, 2017, 03:42:08 PM
I know this was addressed to Ceri, but I'd still like to take a shot at it.
Tomlinson spent his senior year at Alabama getting double teamed and he still got some sacks. There is no way they can double team him on the Giants line. They already do that to Snacks and have their hands full with JPP on one side and OV on the other. The guy who will draw the least amount of attention on that line is the new kid. I suspect he's finally going to get to manhandle single coverage and get into the backfield. Having that wrestling background makes him already inclined to use an opponents weight and strength against themselves. I think he'll have a heyday because Snacks will be getting what he got in college so that others get single coverage.
This is going to be one nasty defensive line. I doubt your going to see many RB's go up the middle - that's if they even bother trying. We got a serious wall on that side the trench
JBG: There's no penalty for "butting in" at the Big Blue Huddle. LOL ..... at least none that I know of.... I'd better check my bank account to see if Rich has been levying any fines on me... I do that all the time. Bob
Quote from: BayAreaGiant on May 02, 2017, 03:52:42 PM
One of the things that does not seem to be mentioned is that the reason DT (2nd) and DE (5th) were needed in this draft is that two more of Reese's high picks Bromley and OO failed to live up to expectations. As a result, they are constantly trying to fill holes that should have been filled with previously drafted players. Until Reese starts to have a higher success rate with 1-3 round players, they will continue to need to spend draft picks on certain positions that could be better spent on the OL and LB.
Bay: You're right, and the point should not be forgotten, but If we're giving Flowers a pass I suppose OO and Bromley should also get one. You may be in the camp that want to line all of them up for a firing squad, but it's easy to get "spoiled" when a player like Beckham comes along and makes the near-impossible look routine. Instant NFL success is a relative rarity. On the other hand, two years of waiting is enough!!! Bob
Quote from: UKGiantsFan on May 02, 2017, 03:14:48 PM
Actually I think they wanted two run pluggers in the middle just like last year as by taking up blockers they allow the likes of Landon Collins to have a free role and hide our deficiencies at LB. Penetrating players would change the way we play defense. I like the way it was played just fine!
ceri: I agree with that and believe it is so.
I also read at least one article indicating that the team isn't "worried" about the possibility that Tomlinson's game might lack that element.
And I can add one more factor.... the Giants needed not only to replace Hankins, but also a BACKUP for Snacks.
Tomlinson is a two-fer IMO.
Bob
Ceri, given what a fan you were of Motons, I am glad you prefer Tomlinson for the pick. Personally, I don't see the dynamism in Tomlinsons game, he looks slow off the snap, and I don't see him having a greater impact on the game than if we had picked up a later round big body, paired with a free agent vet. Our 2nd round picks have been guys like Strahan, Barber, Osi, Collins, Snee, hopefully DT lives up to that billing. Also, even as needs go, I think it would have been easier to find a gap plugger, than a 3rd DE, or a capable starting guard.
Anyway, given that Im clearly in the minority on this one, and also hopefully wrong about it, I was not planning to raise it again, but Bob went stirring up the pot again!
Quote from: MP21WAYS2PAY on May 02, 2017, 04:35:31 PM
Ceri, given what a fan you were of Motons, I am glad you prefer Tomlinson for the pick. Personally, I don't see the dynamism in Tomlinsons game, he looks slow off the snap, and I don't see him having a greater impact on the game than if we had picked up a later round big body, paired with a free agent vet. Our 2nd round picks have been guys like Strahan, Barber, Osi, Collins, Snee, hopefully DT lives up to that billing. Also, even as needs go, I think it would have been easier to find a gap plugger, than a 3rd DE, or a capable starting guard.
Anyway, given that Im clearly in the minority on this one, and also hopefully wrong about it, I was not planning to raise it again, but Bob went stirring up the pot again!
MP: As of today, no one is right or wrong.
Let's see how he does when they play the games.
In fact, the point I was exploring with this thread was my belief that the answer to the question "2nd round: DL or OL?" might depend on how much you like Tomlinson, moreso than on the position he plays.
Bob
As I've been reading this thread's posts, I'm becoming more & more convinced that we might have the best D Line in the League.
Bob -
Far from giving Flowers a pass, I believe that they should have already cut bait on him. Going all the way back to the Moss days, Reese tends to stay far too long with his draft picks that are misses as opposed to hits. Although this may have been a down year for OLs, you cannot tell me that there were not at least 2 players out there in the 2nd and 3rd rounds that would not have been significant improvement over what presently exists. I am a strong proponent of the theory that games are won in the trenches. Average backs and QBs can win behind a strong OL. Having a weak line screws up the entire offense. Until they fix the line, I do not see the Giants rising to the next level.
Quote from: BayAreaGiant on May 02, 2017, 05:23:24 PM
Bob -
Far from giving Flowers a pass, I believe that they should have already cut bait on him. Going all the way back to the Moss days, Reese tends to stay far too long with his draft picks that are misses as opposed to hits. Although this may have been a down year for OLs, you cannot tell me that there were not at least 2 players out there in the 2nd and 3rd rounds that would not have been significant improvement over what presently exists. I am a strong proponent of the theory that games are won in the trenches. Average backs and QBs can win behind a strong OL. Having a weak line screws up the entire offense. Until they fix the line, I do not see the Giants rising to the next level.
BA: Yes, Moss was a lemon. Luckily, he wasn't drafted in the top ten of the 1st round. In the salary-cap era, it's very expensive to "throw away" a player drafted high in the 1st-round before his rookie contract expires. For that and other reasons, I think the decision to give Flowers another year is/was correct. A GM's responsibility involves football AND salary cap management (a built-in conflict, which is very apparent when situations like this Flowers thing arise). Bob
I think the Giants were set to Pick Webb in the 3rd, if he was there... That probably dictated taking Tomlinson, who imo was the best DT available at that spot, with our second pick, since by our 4th pick all the starting quality DT prospects would be gone. Based on that thinking, to me if they were set on picking the QB in the 3rd, then they must not have had OT as a need at all! For those of us who viewed OT as an essential need then we either had to grab one in the 1st, or 2nd (where Dawkins was luckily available)... I personally would have gone Robinson in the 1st, highest rated CB and DT in the next 2 rounds and highest rated RB and TE in the 4th and 6th.
Based on my " Need-Position depth " Value board our picks would have been:
1- OT C. Robinson (R2-34 JAGUARS)
2- DT D. Tomlinson (R2-55 GIANTS)
3- CB R. Douglas (R3-99 EAGLES)
4- TE J. Butt (R5-145 Broncos)
5- RB B. Hill (R5-156 FALCONS)
6- DE B. Cox ( UDFA PANTHERS)
7- DL J. Ivie (R7-228 COWBOYS)
Of course personally I like my would-be picks better, but only time would tell and my hope is Reese and our Giants scouting team know better and they got us much better outcome.
Quote from: Bob In PA on May 02, 2017, 12:41:17 PM
We have pretty well worn out discussion of the first round of the draft, and maybe you've grown tired of talking about the draft as a whole, but if not.....
There's been a lot in the media and on this site about the importance and results in the second round.
Assume the Giants' choice in the 2nd round was between replacing Big Hank and bolstering the offensive line.
Did they make the right decision, considering the players who were there at the time of the pick?
Bob
PS. My answer: They made the correct choice, both in the abstract and considering the players who they could have chosen. I liked both Tomlinson and Dawkins (as a tackle or guard) a lot, so that consideration was a "tie" IMO The deciding factors were (a) defense wins championships; (b) stopping the run is a top-three objective in every game plan; and (c) I don't believe any offensive lineman who remained on the board, as a first year player, would have helped the team more than experienced players (no matter what you think of them) Hart, Flowers and Fluker.
I would add one other factor in DT's favor, likelihood of fitting the need. Dawkins may turn out to be a tackle, and maybe even a left tackle, but there are certainly serious questions about that and he may end up as a guard. He could end up a successful NFL player but be a bad fit, since we have lots of guards. He would still help the team but not as much as he would if he was able to play tackle. So there is some positional downside risk with Dawkins.
While we may have questions about what kind of DT DT becomes, if he is a successful NFL player then we know exactly what he will play and it is a position of absolute need. There is no positional risk with DT whatsover. If anything there is some positional upside, since there is at least a possibility that he can be more of a 3-tech than Hank was, which would help the already excellent pass rush.
Quote from: COGiantFan on May 02, 2017, 07:56:42 PM
I would add one other factor in DT's favor, likelihood of fitting the need. Dawkins may turn out to be a tackle, and maybe even a left tackle, but there are certainly serious questions about that and he may end up as a guard. He could end up a successful NFL player but be a bad fit, since we have lots of guards. He would still help the team but not as much as he would if he was able to play tackle. So there is some positional downside risk with Dawkins.
While we may have questions about what kind of DT DT becomes, if he is a successful NFL player then we know exactly what he will play and it is a position of absolute need. There is no positional risk with DT whatsover. If anything there is some positional upside, since there is at least a possibility that he can be more of a 3-tech than Hank was, which would help the already excellent pass rush.
CO: Yes, I agree. And I hadn't noticed until your post that Tomlinson's initials are DT just like the position he plays. Bob
Quote from: Bob In PA on May 03, 2017, 09:27:42 AM
CO: Yes, I agree. And I hadn't noticed until your post that Tomlinson's initials are DT just like the position he plays. Bob
If ever a guy was born to be a defensive tackle.....
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 03, 2017, 09:28:58 AM
If ever a guy was born to be a defensive tackle.....
Not to beat a dead horse but...
Tomlinson had 6 tackles for a loss combined in the past 2 seasons, Jarron Jones had 6 TFLs in one game last season vs. Miami.
Anyway, I am all for both of those guys now, no more draft related negativity from me .... although I do wonder if JJ has a chance to be a better pro.....arghh I did it again!
Quote from: MP21WAYS2PAY on May 03, 2017, 09:55:11 AM
Not to beat a dead horse but...
Tomlinson had 6 tackles for a loss combined in the past 2 seasons, Jarron Jones had 6 TFLs in one game last season vs. Miami.
Anyway, I am all for both of those guys now, no more draft related negativity from me .... although I do wonder if JJ has a chance to be a better pro.....arghh I did it again!
MP,
When it comes to drafting defensive linemen, I tend to give the Giants the benefit of the doubt. Admittedly they swung and missed on DT Austin (more like gambled and lost). The pair of third rounders (Odiggy and Bromley) at best have been disappointing. However, when you consider this is the team that drafted JPP, Osi, Linval Joseph, Hankinson, and Tuck as well as professionally knew enough to spend big on Vernon and Snacks, I think the front office and coaching staff are pretty good at vetting and developing D-line talent.
If there's one area of the team I'll give the Giants the benefit of the doubt? D-line.
Let us not forget when the Giants let Christian Peter walk and plugged in Cornelius Griffin to supposedly give more of a pass rush. The run d suffered.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Quote from: TONKA56 on May 03, 2017, 11:23:45 AM
Let us not forget when the Giants let Christian Peter walk and plugged in Cornelius Griffin to supposedly give more of a pass rush. The run d suffered.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Points for the age of your reference. Tonka you have a better memory than I do =D>
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 03, 2017, 11:26:53 AM
Points for the age of your reference. Tonka you have a better memory than I do =D>
Tonka: I seriously envy your outstanding memory. Bob
Quote from: TONKA56 on May 03, 2017, 11:23:45 AM
Let us not forget when the Giants let Christian Peter walk and plugged in Cornelius Griffin to supposedly give more of a pass rush. The run d suffered.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
"His workouts were unbelievable. We saw him as a certain first-rounder", said Giants General Manager Ernie Accorsi
Selection of a DT in the second round was a must have. I was not in favor of resigning Hankins. Good run stuffer, but that's it. He wasn't a good fit as a three technique DT. I was hoping that somebody would come along and give him the ridiculous contract he was insisting on. I really was starting to lose faith until the Colts gave him what I couldn't believe my ears was. We were offering supposedly 6 mil per? How the Colts believe he's worth ten per, good luck. So I was happy when he was gone. Absent upgrade alternatives for a 3-technique DT in FA, I knew our only alternative was the Draft. So when we took a DT with the 55th overall selection I was stoked. Wormley was my choice in my Mock for the second round. But I have to say, JR and Co. r pretty good when it comes to drafting DL so, I acquiesce to their selection.
But there's another reason why I'm happy to find a plug-in 3 technique DT in the draft. Even if we had signed Hankins it would have been for 6 mil per. Now we're paying our starting DT, what 800k? Gotta like that math! I would however like to find a Cap friendly backup DT when the cuts occur. Because, our current depth won't cut the mustard. :goteam:
2nd round player ?? Chase Winovich
i like cameron brown from ohio state in 2nd rnd