Big Blue Huddle

I am asking this question to those on this forum who have better knowledge of these players than I do .

Should the Giants have signed Hunter instead of trading for Burns ? Hunter signed for 2 years $49 million and Burns contract is 5 years and $141 million which could become $150 million , plus we gave upo 2 draft picks .

Who is the better player ?

Thank you

Burns is younger. Plus, there's no guarantee Hunter wanted to come here. Seemed like Burns had a ton of interest being with the NYG.

It was the right move.

Hunter does not quite have Burns A+ speed/bend but is a much more rounded player with better hand use, more power and better edge set vs. run. He is also 4 years older and had more injuries.

Right now Hunter is the better player. In two or three years time that might look different. Burns has been acquired as a foundational piece. Hunter would be more of a bridge.

Quote from: londonblue on March 13, 2024, 06:16:56 AMHunter does not quite have Burns A+ speed/bend but is a much more rounded player with better hand use, more power and better edge set vs. run. He is also 4 years older and had more injuries.

Right now Hunter is the better player. In two or three years time that might look different. Burns has been acquired as a foundational piece. Hunter would be more of a bridge.

Spot on. You also have to factor in the residual effect with Thibs. Makes the DL a real threat for the opposition. Burns was in pass coverage too much with the Panthers. Wide nine him a lot and let him attack.

Perhaps the question should be Burns (who cost draft capital) and Josh Allen (who likely will sign a deal similar to BB's)

Thank you all for your responses . I appreciate them

Quote from: Brooklyn Dave on March 13, 2024, 04:16:36 AMI am asking this question to those on this forum who have better knowledge of these players than I do .

Should the Giants have signed Hunter instead of trading for Burns ? Hunter signed for 2 years $49 million and Burns contract is 5 years and $141 million which could become $150 million , plus we gave upo 2 draft picks .

Who is the better player ?

Thank you

I'm not going to lie - I love Danielle Hunter. I think he's a terrific player. But he also turns 30 this season. That doesn't mean he's not good now, but he's obviously not going to have the shelf life from here on that Burns will.

Since the Giants are a rebuilding team that is virtually certain to not contend this year, it makes a lot more sense to get a foundational piece like Burns who can potentially be with this franchise for the better part of the next decade if things go well.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on March 15, 2024, 06:57:37 PMI'm not going to lie - I love Danielle Hunter. I think he's a terrific player. But he also turns 30 this season. That doesn't mean he's not good now, but he's obviously not going to have the shelf life from here on that Burns will.

Since the Giants are a rebuilding team that is virtually certain to not contend this year, it makes a lot more sense to get a foundational piece like Burns who can potentially be with this franchise for the better part of the next decade if things go well.

Exactly. The question the Giants likely asked themselves isn't who is the better player today, it's who can be part of the long-term future for this team.

Quote from: londonblue on March 13, 2024, 06:16:56 AMHunter does not quite have Burns A+ speed/bend but is a much more rounded player with better hand use, more power and better edge set vs. run. He is also 4 years older and had more injuries.

Right now Hunter is the better player. In two or three years time that might look different. Burns has been acquired as a foundational piece. Hunter would be more of a bridge.

Exactly. The Giants are betting that Burns is on a trajectory that over the next 4-5 years yields production on par with what we've seen from Hunter the last 5-6