Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: T200 on Today at 10:45:15 AMI understand your point, Rich.

My point is that despite his being 10th in separation yards, that statistic did not contribute to his issues. If he had held onto the majority of the passes thrown his way, 1) he'd probably still be a Giant, and 2) his separation yards would not be discussed.

I won't disagree that his untimely drops certainly were a major issue for him.

I will say that if I were the GM, I suspect I would grab a new quarterback if available (without having to pay a premium in a trade).  I think @AZGiantFan made a compelling point about the odds of success when drafting a QB.  That would give me pause.  Ultimately, it would come down to the injury issues (a healthy season doesn't erase all those concerns, and that cheaper contract.  Those are two very compelling reasons in my mind.

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 10:40:30 AMTim,

When the Giants drafted Engram in round one, Reese talked about how he was going to be nearly impossible to cover with that 4.42 speed.  Yet, if you look at NFL's Next Gen stats, while Engram is the fastest (or top 3), his separation yardage puts him around 10th among NFL TEs. 

That was my issue. Engram was always undersized, and his hands were suspect, but we were sold on the idea that LBs and Safeties (who usually cover TEs) would never stand a chance against him (because of that 4.42 speed).

Here is a link to Next Gen Stats if you are interested.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/receiving/2021/REG/all#average-separation

I understand your point, Rich.

My point is that despite his being 10th in separation yards, that statistic did not contribute to his issues. If he had held onto the majority of the passes thrown his way, 1) he'd probably still be a Giant, and 2) his separation yards would not be discussed.

Quote from: H-Town G-Fan on Today at 10:37:33 AMYour conclusion about Engram may well-indeed be correct, but it's not supported by the 10-yard split metric and I think its pretty clear.

Since you put so much effort into trying to prove me wrong, I guess I should acknowledge your efforts.  Yes, it does take some digging to see how the 10-yard split indicates a lack of acceleration compared to his 40 times; you are correct. A look at the number with no other work being done wouldn't jump out at you in terms of there being a problem.   Congratulations
 

Quote from: Philosophers on Today at 10:33:06 AMI believe if DJ is top 10 but Giants are sub 0.500 he'll return in 2025.

I feel exactly the opposite because if they're picking higher via a bad record, a top QB is more likely to be within reach. Though, I'm viewing this top-10 season as being the result of efficiency (akin to 2022) rather than volume--I think the latter would make the decision to replace him harder, though not insurmountable depending on circumstances (that likely can't be anticipated at this time).

Quote from: T200 on Today at 10:33:27 AMI don't recall a single fan complaining about Engram's speed when he was here. It was his hands.

Tim,

When the Giants drafted Engram in round one, Reese talked about how he was going to be nearly impossible to cover with that 4.42 speed.  Yet, if you look at NFL's Next Gen stats, while Engram is the fastest (or top 3), his separation yardage puts him around 10th among NFL TEs. 

That was my issue. Engram was always undersized, and his hands were suspect, but we were sold on the idea that LBs and Safeties (who usually cover TEs) would never stand a chance against him (because of that 4.42 speed).

Here is a link to Next Gen Stats if you are interested.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/receiving/2021/REG/all#average-separation

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 10:28:11 AMYou are dealing with small numbers at 10 yards so even 0.1 is significant.  I hope you appreciate that while Egram's 10 yard split wasn't "bad" by RAS standards, what it is is slower than what one would expect from a 4.42 40 and shows Engram's acceleration wasn't that good, which is why he hasn't played like one would expect a TE with a 4.42 40 to play

.1 and .01 are different things entirely--the former being the difference between a 4.4 and a 4.5 (significant), and the latter being the difference between a 4.40 and 4.41 (negligible). We're dealing with the latter in your position that Engram's 10-yard split isn't actually impressive because it would only be "4th ranked TE 10-yard split" this combine, despite a discrete ranking not really being representative of his athleticism as I showed above. Engram's 10-yard split was faster than Wan'Dale's and he's well-regarded for his short-area quickness. Your conclusion about Engram may well-indeed be correct, but it's not supported by the 10-yard split metric and I think its pretty clear.

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 10:28:11 AMYou are dealing with small numbers at 10 yards so even 0.1 is significant.  I hope you appreciate that while Egram's 10 yard split wasn't "bad" by RAS standards, what it is is slower than what one would expect from a 4.42 40 and shows Engram's acceleration wasn't that good, which is why he hasn't played like one would expect a TE with a 4.42 40 to play

I don't recall a single fan complaining about Engram's speed when he was here. It was his hands.

Quote from: MightyGiants on May 07, 2024, 12:40:54 PMDoes anyone believe if Jones plays like a top 10 QB but the team has a losing season, the Giants will not pursue QB in next year's draft (assuming there is a good one and they are in a realistic position to acquire him).

I believe if DJ is top 10 but Giants are sub 0.500 he'll return in 2025.

Quote from: H-Town G-Fan on Today at 10:25:09 AMYes, I guess it would place him 4th... by .01 seconds:

You are dealing with small numbers at 10 yards so even 0.1 is significant.  I hope you appreciate that while Egram's 10 yard split wasn't "bad" by RAS standards, what it is is slower than what one would expect from a 4.42 40 and shows Engram's acceleration wasn't that good, which is why he hasn't played like one would expect a TE with a 4.42 40 to play