Big Blue Huddle

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

Quote from: Ed Vette on April 21, 2024, 04:03:48 PMT minus 4.
I can't believe you guys don't feel the significance and the excite level of this draft. Not since the 2018 draft. The impact? In 2018 the Giants still had Eli. In 2024, they are riding on Daniel Jones.

Ed: I get it but IMO too many of us here view this year's draft in a QB-centric manner, while I personally tend to think the Giants will draft no QB at all. With only six picks (barring some move that lands us one or two extra) IMO it's at least highly doubtful they will even take one on day three. In summation, rather than getting excited, I'm "steeling" myself for the aftermath here if my prediction is correct.    Bob

In the NFL, there exists a "hump" and you're either over or under it.

It's rare to be exactly on the hump, but I believe the owners/GM/Head Coach of the Giants believe we're on it.

I hope they're right... and I don't have to take a poll here to know where our members stand on that issue.

Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 21, 2024, 10:19:18 AMBob,

For what it's worth, the rookie salary structure changed the drafting of the wrong QB narrative, in my opinion.  As long as the team drafting didn't give up too much draft capital (especially future draft capital), the swing and a miss don't cause the damage they once did, as a team can easily move on from their mistake.

Rich: What you said is true... but tell me the last time a team didn't give up "the ranch" to move up (for a QB). What you're really saying is that's it's even more dangerous for teams that move up for a QB than for teams that already own a top-3 pick. For one thing, bad drafting is likely the reason why the have a top-3 pick, so they are apt to pick the wrong guy anyways lol (adding to the danger). For another, no matter the salary rules, QB is still the most important pick so it's still the biggest mistake you can make. It's a near-death penalty rather than a death penalty. lol

Quote from: Philosophers on April 21, 2024, 10:12:27 AMRemember Mahommes was the 2nd QB drafted in 2017 and we all know he is now the best now.

Just because the Giants draft the 4th QB does not mean he wont be the best of the lot.

Phil: If you believed what I believe (i.e., none of the QB's this year is a sure-thing) then you also would have written what I wrote. I agree with your point, and that's what I mean by "lightning striking" (they Giants' view of which QB to take happens to coincide with reality a few years down the line, and not only does the "right" QB fall... they also pick him and hit the jackpot). The only way that happens is if there's a "sleeper" this year and the Giants know it AND they have the balls to pick him AND they're correct. Closest thing to the is Nix, just like @Ed Vette says (and I do not agree... at his age he should have elevated his college team this past season and he did not do so... and they were a better team than the Giants... probably lol). Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 21, 2024, 10:16:18 AMBob, I made my declaration with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.  I appreciate at the time the choice I illustrated was not the one being debated.

Rich: To my recollection, it indeed WAS for one of our members... the guy who started this thread!!! Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 21, 2024, 07:15:06 AMIn terms of impactful drafts, most involved hits throughout the draft at much higher hit rates.  Rarely have such historic drafts been identified at the time they were made.

https://www.si.com/nfl/2023/04/06/2023-nfl-draft-greatest-classes-for-every-team

Sadly, and I mean sadly, here's the conclusion about the Giants for those who don't want to look it up:

Despite their illustrious history, the Giants are without a signature draft class. Still, in 1956, New York found a Hall of Famer who inspired a documentary in linebacker Sam Huff. Huff, who earned enshrinement into the Hall of Fame, was arguably the most iconic defensive player of his era. Alongside Huff, the Giants also selected defensive end Jim Katcavage in the fourth round, who made two first-team All-Pro appearances and is credited with 92.5 unofficial sacks.

At least we have a handful of Super Bowl wins, but how sad is it that our favorite team has never nailed a draft in 100 YEARS of drafting?  Does anyone here want to be next-in-line after Schoen? lol

Bob

I don't think there's a story there, Rich. The narrative is the same as it has been since the Giants "earned" Pick Six by stinking up the stadium last year. Even we rank amateurs know how important QBs are (especially with today's rules), so any time you get a shot at someone in whom you have great confidence, conviction and belief, you act on it. 

It's always been clear that the Giants are close enough to the top that if lightning struck, they would be hit by it. If somehow a QB no one expects to fall to six does so, of course they will pounce. I would do it even if Tom Brady were my starting QB, because a proven QB is gold. 

It's just not going to happen because (1) only Daniels IMO is worth taking the shot; (2) no way he falls that far; (3) I seriously doubt the Giants believe ANY of this year's group is a sure thing, so even if they have a different favorite than mine, these points still apply; (4) the Giants can't fail with this pick (regardless of the position he plays) or like @Ed Vette says such a mistake can set a team back a decade; so (5) they will take a more "conservative" approach by taking seconds from the WR bin rather than thirds or fourth from the QB bin (which is the most dangerous pick a team can make, for obvious reasons).

Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 21, 2024, 07:15:06 AMYou could argue the 2018 draft was the most important in the sense that the Giants drafted Barkley instead of Josh Allen.

Rich: Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're NOT saying it has become known that the Giants' choice that year was between Barkley & Josh Allen.  In conjunction with the original post by @Ed Vette  you are giving an example of how one key decision in a draft (espeically if it involves a QB as one of the options) could theoretically have made a huge difference to the Giants' fortunes (and in their overall performance since the year that decision was made).  Bob

Quote from: Ed Vette on April 20, 2024, 07:12:23 PMThe most important draft for the NY Giants in 20 years. It will determine the fate of this team for the next decade.

Ed: I don't believe that.

They have six picks. Unless you see them getting a world-beating WR in the first round and pulling a rabbit out of their hat by trading up to the very-high-2nd or low-1st for one of the QB "leftovers" (who then turns out to stun the football world by becoming a phenomenal star), there is no pivot point to make such a statement. All drafts are important, but IMO this one is no more important than any other.

It sounds like you think the decision to go QB or WR in round one (accompanied by the decision to trade up or not trade up for a QB) are pivotal. I think the odds are very long for that scenario. I might see it differently if they ALREADY HAD Pick Three, but the fact is that they lack the draft capital to trade up without giving up one of their few star (or near-star) players in addition to future picks (and they just can't afford to do that right now, IMO).

Bob

Unless the Giants could get their top-rated QB in this draft w/Pick Three, the deal makes no sense for them either. Is it possible? It depends on which QB Washington selects. It's possible, though unlikely, that the one QB they believe is a perfect fit for Daboll's offense and can't-miss NFL star will still be there at Pick Three.

How would the Giants view the situation?  Reportedly, they want to contend NOW and see themselves as having fewer "holes" than we do. They believe that with a healthy Jones (and the few extra pieces they'll get with their six picks) they can contend. They see the Eagles and Cowboys weakening and an opportunity to make some noise.

Do I see it that way? No, but I do see how they could view the team in that manner... if (and only if) their publicly-stated beliefs about Jones are honestly-held.  Trading Jones for a rookie does not fit that scenario, because I seriously doubt they believe a rookie QB (or Lock to start the first few games, then the rookie) are capable of vaulting them into a position to win the division.

Bob

Quote from: Ed Vette on April 20, 2024, 12:47:33 PMLike Bo Nix. I keep telling you folks, don't discount Nix.

Ed: I'm too lazy to look it up, but I know there is one QB in the 1st-round-worthy chatter who spent "too many" years in college and is a few years older than the others.  Is Nix that guy?  Bob

Jolly: I would take it and be very unhappy not to have gotten one of the top WR's or QB's.

Arguably, Giants need both. To get neither would take that type of seriously unbalanced deal for me to go for it.

From Giants perspective it's "fair" while the Bronco fans (and GM) would probably think it way off-base.

Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 20, 2024, 08:04:17 AMBob,

As you know, I like to play with analytics myself.  Still, no matter how good a system sounds (or perhaps sounds flawed), I tend to step back and look how accurate the results look after all is said and done.

Here are the top 7 talented rosters per this author and his measures:

1. San Francisco 49ers
2. Kansas City Chiefs
3. Baltimore Ravens
4. Buffalo Bills
5. Philadelphia Eagles
6. Detroit Lions
7. Dallas Cowboys

With the possible exceptions of the Bills this seems to be a pretty reasonable ranking of roster talent (at least in my assessment)

It's a good list, and it at least partially justifies your interest in the analytics arena. Bob

Note how Daniels is at (or near) the top regardless of category.  I still don't know why Williams is the consensus top QB in this draft. Maybe someone who really really likes him can explain that to me. Bob