Probably more realistic than most. Unless the Giants manage to get into the top 3 they are likely on the outside looking in when it comes to this draft's teir one QBs
Via Tankathon
1- Caleb Williams (QB)- Chicago Bears via Carolina Panthers
2- Drake Maye (QB)- Washington Commanders
3- Jayden Daniels (QB)- New England Patriots
4- Marvin Harrison Jr (WR)- Arizona Cardinals
5- Olu Fashanu (OT)- New York Giants
6- Joe Alt (OT)- Los Angeles Chargers
7- Malik Nabers (WR)- Tennessee Titans
8- Brock Bowers (TE)- New York Jets
9- Laiatu Latu (EDGE)- Atlanta Falcons
10- Rome Odunze (WR)- Chicago Bears
It's not obvious to me that the Bears will move on from Fields. They may well do so, but to me it is no given. They have been on a nice run with him of late, and he is still cost effective for two more years.
I agree that if they don't, and the Giants are not picking in the top three, and the top three are the Bears, Pats, and Commanders, then the Giants will likely have a tough time getting one of these premier QBs.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 02, 2024, 11:16:32 AMIt's not obvious to me that the Bears will move on from Fields. They may well do so, but to me it is no given. They have been on a nice run with him of late, and he is still cost effective for two more years.
I agree that if they don't, and the Giants are not picking in the top three, and the top three are the Bears, Pats, and Commanders, then the Giants will likely have a tough time getting one of these premier QBs.
Yes. How do you judge the 3 who have not played a snap against NFL players to a player who has not looked bad?
Quote from: Philosophers on January 02, 2024, 11:19:18 AMYes. How do you judge the 3 who have not played a snap against NFL players to a player who has not looked bad?
This is literally what scouts and decision makers get paid to do. No player going into the draft has played against NFL players.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 02, 2024, 11:16:32 AMIt's not obvious to me that the Bears will move on from Fields. They may well do so, but to me it is no given. They have been on a nice run with him of late, and he is still cost effective for two more years.
I agree that if they don't, and the Giants are not picking in the top three, and the top three are the Bears, Pats, and Commanders, then the Giants will likely have a tough time getting one of these premier QBs.
Most people seem to think it's a given that the Bears move on. Fields has not lit the NFL world on fire, and he has burned through 3 of his 4 cheap rookie seasons. Most believe that the top QBs have ceilings that are elite (I don't think anyone is suggesting Fields will prove to be elite).
Fields will also have considerable trade value which will help the Bears build a team around their new QB (along with their other high first-round pick).
At this point I would be shocked to see the Bears pass on an elite QB prospect with their number one pick.
I'm not opposed to going OL if it works out this way. I understand the arguments for and against it, legitimate points have been made on both sides.
I still think Nabers might be the BPA at #5. Will be tough to pass on him if it works out this way.
Still the QB issue is a problem if they draft Nabers or Harrison.
Realistically the best chance the Giants have of a first-round QB would be J.J. McCarthy declares and the Giants consider him in the first-tier. That would mean there would be 4 tier one QBs and you just have to hope the Cards pass on a QB
Fields is interesting. Last year he lit it up in the last 6 or so games of the year and looked like he turned a corner. This year he didn't pick up where he left off, but is again hitting his stride down the stretch.
I don't see him having good trade value depending on how you grade that. I could really see the Bears going either way with him and drafting a QB.
If Williams comes through the offseason still as the clear #1, and Chicago wants to make a go of it with Fields, they could trade down to 3 and still get the best weapon to help their QB. I do wonder how much the franchise is old or not on Fields. This is a franchise that still feels the burn for trading up to get Trubisky when they could have just drafted Mahomes.
I really think two of the teams in front of the Giants will win this weekend though.
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 02, 2024, 11:30:01 AMMost people seem to think it's a given that the Bears move on. Fields has not lit the NFL world on fire, and he has burned through 3 of his 4 cheap rookie seasons. Most believe that the top QBs have ceilings that are elite (I don't think anyone is suggesting Fields will prove to be elite).
Fields will also have considerable trade value which will help the Bears build a team around their new QB (along with their other high first-round pick).
At this point I would be shocked to see the Bears pass on an elite QB prospect with their number one pick.
I'm not saying it definitely won't happen. I just don't think it's a given. He is playing well right now and so is the team. He is clearly popular there and is bringing in crowds. No matter what "most people seem to believe", nobody knows, and nobody knows what Poles and his staff think of these QB prospects. It's pure speculation. All I'm disputing is the notion that it's a given.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on January 02, 2024, 11:43:18 AMFields is interesting. Last year he lit it up in the last 6 or so games of the year and looked like he turned a corner. This year he didn't pick up where he left off, but is again hitting his stride down the stretch.
I don't see him having good trade value depending on how you grade that. I could really see the Bears going either way with him and drafting a QB.
If Williams comes through the offseason still as the clear #1, and Chicago wants to make a go of it with Fields, they could trade down to 3 and still get the best weapon to help their QB. I do wonder how much the franchise is old or not on Fields. This is a franchise that still feels the burn for trading up to get Trubisky when they could have just drafted Mahomes.
I really think two of the teams in front of the Giants will win this weekend though.
So you don't think Fields has good trade value, but you believe the Bears value him so much they would pass on an elite QB prospect in the draft?
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 02, 2024, 11:45:55 AMSo you don't think Fields has good trade value, but you believe the Bears value him so much they would pass on an elite QB prospect in the draft?
Where did I say that I think the Bears value him so much they would pass on an elite prospect? By the way, unless the Bears are trading with themselves, their opinion of him doesn't really matter for a trade. It's what the other 31 teams think of him.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on January 02, 2024, 11:43:18 AMFields is interesting. Last year he lit it up in the last 6 or so games of the year and looked like he turned a corner. This year he didn't pick up where he left off, but is again hitting his stride down the stretch.
I don't see him having good trade value depending on how you grade that. I could really see the Bears going either way with him and drafting a QB.
If Williams comes through the offseason still as the clear #1, and Chicago wants to make a go of it with Fields, they could trade down to 3 and still get the best weapon to help their QB. I do wonder how much the franchise is sold or not on Fields. This is a franchise that still feels the burn for trading up to get Trubisky when they could have just drafted Mahomes.
I really think two of the teams in front of the Giants will win this weekend though.
and what do you consider good trade value? With a potential of 5 QBs being considered worthy of an early 1st rounder and guys like Penix and Nix not in that conversation, what draft capital do you think the Bears could get for him?
With one year left on a rookie deal, no on field time to judge him in person for the 5th year option, not a great body of work in the passing game and not consistent improvement, I don't think he will fetch much in the trade market.
Even if Bears don't want a QB, more likely that they trade the #1 pick for a haul (continuing the value from the trade to the Panthers last season). I don't see a way that pick isn't a QB. So we're still talking about 2 QBs in the top 2-3 picks and very possibly 3 depending on how Week 18 shakes out.
Quote from: H-Town G-Fan on January 02, 2024, 12:02:54 PMEven if Bears don't want a QB, more likely that they trade the #1 pick for a haul (continuing the value from the trade to the Panthers last season). I don't see a way that pick isn't a QB. So we're still talking about 2 QBs in the top 2-3 picks and very possibly 3 depending on how Week 18 shakes out.
Agreed although (at least in theory) it could be us they do the trade with.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 02, 2024, 11:45:39 AMI'm not saying it definitely won't happen. I just don't think it's a given. He is playing well right now and so is the team. He is clearly popular there and is bringing in crowds. No matter what "most people seem to believe", nobody knows, and nobody knows what Poles and his staff think of these QB prospects. It's pure speculation. All I'm disputing is the notion that it's a given.
What would you do if you were the Bear's GM?
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 02, 2024, 12:04:11 PMAgreed although (at least in theory) it could be us they do the trade with.
True. But I think the premium to move a few spots is going to be disproportionate. Giants have so many holes to fill I have a hard time seeing them putting things together long-term without keeping--if not increasing--their draft capital. Of course Schoen and Co. may find a particular prospect worth that risk.
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 02, 2024, 11:30:01 AMMost people seem to think it's a given that the Bears move on. Fields has not lit the NFL world on fire, and he has burned through 3 of his 4 cheap rookie seasons. Most believe that the top QBs have ceilings that are elite (I don't think anyone is suggesting Fields will prove to be elite).
Fields will also have considerable trade value which will help the Bears build a team around their new QB (along with their other high first-round pick).
At this point I would be shocked to see the Bears pass on an elite QB prospect with their number one pick.
Fields now has three years of NFL experience. I'm in favor of Schoen trading our first round pick to Chicago for Fields. This would give Chicago 3 picks in the top 10.
Fields is the type of QB Daboll can work with. Not as big as Allen, but more athletic.
Quote from: T200 on January 02, 2024, 12:11:46 PMFields now has three years of NFL experience. I'm in favor of Schoen trading our first round pick to Chicago for Fields. This would give Chicago 3 picks in the top 10.
Fields is the type of QB Daboll can work with. Not as big as Allen, but more athletic.
Can't trade the 1st round pick for a possible 1 year rental...but if you're saying the Giants give up a 2nd round pick for Fields...given how he looks right now...I think they have to do it. This assumes of course they end up outside of the top 4 meaning they can't get a Top QB in the draft.
McCarthy has not impressed me all season but I will say he looked pretty darn good this weekend. He'd have to do it again in the championship game before I started looking at him in the same category as the Big 3 QBs this year. Currently I'd have him in the mix with Penix and Nix and before this weekend I had him 3rd of that tier.
Quote from: T200 on January 02, 2024, 12:11:46 PMFields now has three years of NFL experience. I'm in favor of Schoen trading our first round pick to Chicago for Fields. This would give Chicago 3 picks in the top 10.
Fields is the type of QB Daboll can work with. Not as big as Allen, but more athletic.
Fields has not played a full season in his three seasons in the NFL (and has a substantial college injury history). The primary reason why I am in favor of moving on from Jones his penchant for being injured.
Fields would not be an upgrade in that regard (nor is he an upgrade statistically)
https://www.draftsharks.com/fantasy/injury-history/justin-fields/10754
For those saying the Bears will stick with Fields: This season
He is 22nd in QBR
He is 23rd in QB rating
He is 20th (50% of 680 snaps or 25th (20% of 680 snaps) per PFF
I am not sure how those sorts of numbers in year three would make any GM or HC want to pass on an elite QB prospect.
Quote from: Gmo11 on January 02, 2024, 12:19:47 PMCan't trade the 1st round pick for a possible 1 year rental...but if you're saying the Giants give up a 2nd round pick for Fields...given how he looks right now...I think they have to do it. This assumes of course they end up outside of the top 4 meaning they can't get a Top QB in the draft.
McCarthy has not impressed me all season but I will say he looked pretty darn good this weekend. He'd have to do it again in the championship game before I started looking at him in the same category as the Big 3 QBs this year. Currently I'd have him in the mix with Penix and Nix and before this weekend I had him 3rd of that tier.
Typically, yes, you're right. I think there is enough film on Fields for Daboll to know if he can work with him or not.
We shall see.
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 02, 2024, 12:05:45 PMWhat would you do if you were the Bear's GM?
I would trade the number one pick for a haul. The Bears have a good young foundation that includes Fields. They are a team on the rise. Getting rid of Fields and plugging in a rookie QB could hurt their momentum and probably stall their growth as a team. Getting more draft picks, including another number one next year keeps fortifying them with solid players (if they draft well).
If the Giants stay put at number 5 and the QBs they want are gone, I would try to trade the pick and acquire more picks. Picking up an OL at 5 is as much a crap shoot as QB and unlike QBs, the possibility of finding solid offensive linemen in the later rounds, especially the 2nd and 3rd is just as good. I'm not Schoen, but considering the financial investment in the OL the past few years, taking another first rounder I believe would be a mistake.
Here is an article that cites 7 NFL GMs. They all say the Bears should move on from Fields
https://sports.yahoo.com/bears-trading-justin-fields-gms-explain-why-its-the-best-route-and-where-compensation-could-land-153257987.html?guccounter=1
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 02, 2024, 12:30:35 PMHere is an article that cites 7 NFL GMs. They all say the Bears should move on from Fields
https://sports.yahoo.com/bears-trading-justin-fields-gms-explain-why-its-the-best-route-and-where-compensation-could-land-153257987.html?guccounter=1
Easy for them to day. They aren't making the decision. It's a huge risk in many ways.
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 02, 2024, 12:30:35 PMHere is an article that cites 7 NFL GMs. They all say the Bears should move on from Fields
https://sports.yahoo.com/bears-trading-justin-fields-gms-explain-why-its-the-best-route-and-where-compensation-could-land-153257987.html?guccounter=1
It makes the most sense to move on so you can get equal or greater play from a guy making significantly less money than he's about to make after this season. From a front office standpoint it's pretty cut and dry. The one X factor is that this team that is suddenly playing well LOVES Fields. And most of these guys are gonna be around next year. So you do run the risk of losing the team if they draft a guy and it turns out he's either awful or just not great as most rookies are.
If it were me I love Caleb Williams so much as a prospect I'm taking him immediately and telling the vets...be mad now...but just watch this kid throw a football and talk to me in camp. I'm just not 100% sure the Bears will do it too. Especially if they get some sort of Godfather offer for that 1st pick.
Either way...Williams is gonna be the #1 pick and Maye is basically locked in at #2. Daniels and Harrison will be 3 and 4 in some order depending on who ends up where. After that it's a crap shoot. So the Giants kinda have to get into that top 4 to have a realistic shot at a huge QB.
Quote from: katkavage on January 02, 2024, 12:35:00 PMEasy for them to day. They aren't making the decision. It's a huge risk in many ways.
From the article
"When you pass on talented quarterbacks to lean into a guy's development, which the Bears did when they traded No. 1 last year, you have to be completely sure of that decision to do it a second time," another AFC general manager said. "They might not have taken C.J. Stroud with the first pick last [offseason], but he was there for them to do it. Caleb Williams is a no-brainer, and if they get the top pick, he's there for them.
Sometimes the gamble is continuing to pass on players. Fields doesn't get over the hump, you don't want to be the guys that passed on both Stroud and Caleb Williams."
If the Bears do not feel good enough about Fields to use the 5th year option, they should draft a QB. That's how I see it.
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 02, 2024, 12:37:01 PMFrom the article
"When you pass on talented quarterbacks to lean into a guy's development, which the Bears did when they traded No. 1 last year, you have to be completely sure of that decision to do it a second time," another AFC general manager said. "They might not have taken C.J. Stroud with the first pick last [offseason], but he was there for them to do it. Caleb Williams is a no-brainer, and if they get the top pick, he's there for them. Sometimes the gamble is continuing to pass on players. Fields doesn't get over the hump, you don't want to be the guys that passed on both Stroud and Caleb Williams."
If they think Williams is that good, then it is a no-brainer. If you listen the the scouts on this board, because he hugged and cried to his mother after a loss, there's no way you would take him. So there's that. I see little reminders of 2004 when the Chargers traded Brees to get Rivers.
Quote from: katkavage on January 02, 2024, 12:40:12 PMIf they think Williams is that good, then it is a no-brainer. If you listen the the scouts on this board, because he hugged and cried to his mother after a loss, there's no way you would take him. So there's that. I see little reminders of 2004 when the Chargers traded Brees to get Rivers.
This discussion reminds me more of the Chiefs drafting Mahommes, even though they had former first overall pick Alex Smith
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 02, 2024, 12:44:06 PMThis discussion reminds me more of the Chiefs drafting Mahommes, even though they had former first overall pick Alex Smith
I don't see that at all. They didn't trade Smith. They were able to pick a rookie who wasn't the first pick in the draft and play a pick up who's previous team discarded him.
Quote from: katkavage on January 02, 2024, 12:40:12 PMIf they think Williams is that good, then it is a no-brainer. If you listen the the scouts on this board, because he hugged and cried to his mother after a loss, there's no way you would take him. So there's that. I see little reminders of 2004 when the Chargers traded Brees to get Rivers.
That's one group. There's another group that has very strong feelings that he is the best prospect in a long time.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on January 02, 2024, 12:53:42 PMThat's one group. There's another group that has very strong feelings that he is the best prospect in a long time.
It's also worth noting how the 7 actual GMs thought of CW, which was quite highly
You don't pass on a potential talent like Williams. Draft Williams first, then use your other high first rounder for a playmaker or olineman. Have Williams and Fields fight for the starting position unless of course the Bears already know Fields has peaked. Then trade Fields.
Quote from: sooners56 on January 02, 2024, 01:03:37 PMYou don't pass on a potential talent like Williams. Draft Williams first, then use your other high first rounder for a playmaker or olineman. Have Williams and Fields fight for the starting position unless of course the Bears already know Fields has peaked. Then trade Fields.
If they draft Wiliams they will do everything in their power to trade Fields.
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 02, 2024, 12:37:01 PMSometimes the gamble is continuing to pass on players. Fields doesn't get over the hump, you don't want to be the guys that passed on both Stroud and Caleb Williams."
Yeah, I don't see how sticking with Fields would be less of a gamble than drafting Caleb. They're making a choice either way. Doing nothing at the QB position is a choice with consequences.
Quote from: H-Town G-Fan on January 02, 2024, 12:06:18 PMTrue. But I think the premium to move a few spots is going to be disproportionate. Giants have so many holes to fill I have a hard time seeing them putting things together long-term without keeping--if not increasing--their draft capital. Of course Schoen and Co. may find a particular prospect worth that risk.
Totally fair take, and not one I would argue with, except to say basically what you said at the end: if they happen to covet a particular QB prospect and have as high a conviction view as one can that said prospect will be elite in the NFL, then it's totally plausible to me they could deem that worthy of paying up for.
Given a great QB can be a 15 year (or more) investment, hurting yourself a bit for the subsequent two years draft-capital wise, while not in any way meaningless, is more than justified if you get that pick right. It goes without saying there is major risk involved too, but the cost of settling for long term mediocrity and never taking a shot on one of these top QB prospects is arguably higher.
Quote from: katkavage on January 02, 2024, 12:40:12 PMIf they think Williams is that good, then it is a no-brainer. If you listen the the scouts on this board, because he hugged and cried to his mother after a loss, there's no way you would take him. So there's that. I see little reminders of 2004 when the Chargers traded Brees to get Rivers.
Quote from: katkavage on January 02, 2024, 12:35:00 PMEasy for them to day. They aren't making the decision. It's a huge risk in many ways.
So you have 2 groups on either side of the discussion, but neither is making the pick. Do you lean on the experience of those who have had to make the decisions previously, or thise who have never done it?
The Bears have until May 3rd to exercise Fields 5th-year option. He won't even have 3000 yards this season and never did in the NFL. 40 TD's to 30 Interceptions. They should pass on the 5th year option and keep him another season for the $6 million. It's Tyrod Taylor Money. If the Rookie starts mid-season, they can trade or let his contract expire and get a comp pick. I don't see him fetching more than a second anyway. If they believe in him, they can exercise the option.
I'm starting to warm to the idea of taking Rome Odunze or MHJ if he slips a spot with the first round pick and taking McCarthy or Penix in the second if there's no way to trade up for one of the top three QB.
I know Ed would rather have Nix at that spot.
I think the bears draft the clear cut HOF prospect in Marv and pair him with Moore. Fields has been the entire offense. I'd likely take fields over Williams. Fields has a better makeup but I'm hoping the Giants grab Daniels.
Quote from: Uni on January 02, 2024, 04:03:09 PMI'm starting to warm to the idea of taking Rome Odunze or MHJ if he slips a spot with the first round pick and taking McCarthy or Penix in the second if there's no way to trade up for one of the top three QB.
I know Ed would rather have Nix at that spot.
Just between you and me, I believe Bo Nix and Penix are the most NFL ready QB's in this draft. Bo has even been in other units coaching rooms sharing his input. His football IQ is very high. Solid arm and makes all the throws even across his body on the run, reads the field and the Defense well, a high level leader and motivator and an all team player. He was the only QB who didn't need a Bowl game but did it for his teammates and because he wanted to go out a winner. Just between you and me.
Quote from: Ed Vette on January 02, 2024, 07:04:25 PMJust between you and me, I believe Bo Nix and Penix are the most NFL ready QB's in this draft. Bo has even been in other units coaching rooms sharing his input. His football IQ is very high. Solid arm and makes all the throws even across his body on the run, reads the field and the Defense well, a high level leader and motivator and an all team player. He was the only QB who didn't need a Bowl game but did it for his teammates and because he wanted to go out a winner. Just between you and me.
I might agree. Though NFL ready might not mean franchise or elite. They both are extremely accurate passers.
I know our desperate need for OL help but I would cringe at taking an OL at #1 when we so desperately need a QB. We have 2 #2s and I would use them for help on the OL. Look what happened the last time we used a very high pick for Neal.
We need playmakers--desperately.
Quote from: Ed Vette on January 02, 2024, 07:04:25 PMJust between you and me, I believe Bo Nix and Penix are the most NFL ready QB's in this draft. Bo has even been in other units coaching rooms sharing his input. His football IQ is very high. Solid arm and makes all the throws even across his body on the run, reads the field and the Defense well, a high level leader and motivator and an all team player. He was the only QB who didn't need a Bowl game but did it for his teammates and because he wanted to go out a winner. Just between you and me.
Everyone else can see your private conversation :doh:
Doesn't Penix have a history of knee problems? I can't agree with drafting a player who has a significant injury profile.
Quote from: T200 on January 02, 2024, 10:28:46 PMEveryone else can see your private conversation :doh:
Doesn't Penix have a history of knee problems? I can't agree with drafting a player who has a significant injury profile.
Two ACLs already.
Buyer beware.
Quote from: T200 on January 02, 2024, 10:28:46 PMEveryone else can see your private conversation :doh:
Doesn't Penix have a history of knee problems? I can't agree with drafting a player who has a significant injury profile.
You see, this is why you shouldn't read other people's conversations. Have you no scruples? ;)
I never said they should draft Penix. I said he and Bo were the most NFL ready. Now between you and me, I think the Giants should consider Nix and depending on how high they are, they may be able to trade down, get Nix and a Receiver and an Olineman by their first round two pick. Lots of Receivers in this Draft. Mum's the word.
As for Penix, is there any evidence to support that a player with 2 ACL's would be susceptible to a third? He's not runner. I guess you're thinking injury prone.
Quote from: Ed Vette on January 02, 2024, 11:04:36 PMYou see, this is why you shouldn't read other people's conversations. Have you no scruples? ;)
I never said they should draft Penix. I said he and Bo were the most NFL ready. Now between you and me, I think the Giants should consider Nix and depending on how high they are, they may be able to trade down, get Nix and a Receiver and an Olineman by their first round two pick. Lots of Receivers in this Draft. Mum's the word.
As for Penix, is there any evidence to support that a player with 2 ACL's would be susceptible to a third? He's not runner. I guess you're thinking injury prone.
You're right ... you didn't say to draft him. But Schoen and Dabs may be as unscrupulous as I am and read your publicly private conversation with Kat ;)
Of course, there is no way of telling if/when a player is going to be injured. Our line isn't fixed and just as I blame the line for Saquon being less than ideal in health and performance, the line will be a liability for our rookie QB, even more so if it's Penix.
Quote from: T200 on January 02, 2024, 11:13:12 PMYou're right ... you didn't say to draft him. But Schoen and Dabs may be as unscrupulous as I am and read your publicly private conversation with Kat ;)
Of course, there is no way of telling if/when a player is going to be injured. Our line isn't fixed and just as I blame the line for Saquon being less than ideal in health and performance, the line will be a liability for our rookie QB, even more so if it's Penix.
I must have missed that private conversation. Again, can a top QB be picked along with fixing the Oline? Me thinks and hopes Schoen can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Quote from: katkavage on January 03, 2024, 05:18:12 AMI must have missed that private conversation. Again, can a top QB be picked along with fixing the Oline? Me thinks and hopes Schoen can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Ed and I were just having fun about his response to you when he said, "Just between you and me..."
The QB situation can be fixed by drafting a top QB, hiring a new QB coach and OC.
The offensive line can be fixed by hiring a new OL coach and picking up a vet or two for experience and depth.
Quote from: T200 on January 03, 2024, 07:31:20 AMEd and I were just having fun about his response to you when he said, "Just between you and me..."
The QB situation can be fixed by drafting a top QB, hiring a new QB coach and OC.
The offensive line can be fixed by hiring a new OL coach and picking up a vet or two for experience and depth.
Therein lay the puzzle. Who can we acquire who is a "good Oline coach" or is anything better than Johnson?
Quote from: Ed Vette on January 02, 2024, 11:04:36 PMYou see, this is why you shouldn't read other people's conversations. Have you no scruples? ;)
I never said they should draft Penix. I said he and Bo were the most NFL ready. Now between you and me, I think the Giants should consider Nix and depending on how high they are, they may be able to trade down, get Nix and a Receiver and an Olineman by their first round two pick. Lots of Receivers in this Draft. Mum's the word.
As for Penix, is there any evidence to support that a player with 2 ACL's would be susceptible to a third? He's not runner. I guess you're thinking injury prone.
Ed,
The problem with a trade-down is that it works if you have multiple targets. When you trade down with a single target in mind, there is always a chance the guy you are targeting gets drafted before you pick.
I think Gardiner Minshew is a free agent. If Taylor is truly leaving, Id sign and start Minshew until the inevitable return of the dump off king. Bah Humbug!
I love the way Penix plays and his accuracy is exceptional but the two ACL injuries really hurt him. Literally and figuratively. If he gets another it might end his career. Typically 2 will severely harm an elite athlete like that. Though he seems to have been able to move pretty well in the pocket this season.
If he's a middle round flyer or even one of the two second round picks I could understand that just because they didn't have many other options picking 5th if they don't trade up. Plus, if he can avoid that knee blowing out he'd be pretty good value for 2nd round...but that shouldn't be Plan A. Too risky.
Quote from: Ed Vette on January 02, 2024, 11:04:36 PMAs for Penix, is there any evidence to support that a player with 2 ACL's would be susceptible to a third? He's not runner. I guess you're thinking injury prone.
Penix didn't missed a down in 2 seasons with the Huskies. So injury history? Yes. Injury prone? Not seeing it. BTW, he tore the same ACL twice.
I am concerned about the fact that Penix is a lefty, which makes RT a more important position, and the unconventional, almost side arm throwing motion. But I had my doubts about Phillips Rivers for the same reason, and it seemed to matter little. Penix can sling it all over the field. And he made Indiana a bowl contender when he played there, and he was the primary reason they had any success. The program turned into trash after he left.
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 03, 2024, 09:09:52 AMEd,
The problem with a trade-down is that it works if you have multiple targets. When you trade down with a single target in mind, there is always a chance the guy you are targeting gets drafted before you pick.
True. I guess the exception is if the guy you want is likely a substantial reach (relative to what you think others think) and you assess the risk of him being taken in front of where you move down to to be very small and hence acceptable. I feel like Schoen kind of did that when he moved down a handful of spots in the second round in 2022 and took Wan'Dale. Maybe he had a plan B, but I suspect he wanted Wan'Dale and was willing to gamble that nobody else would take him if he moved down a small handful of spots.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 03, 2024, 11:53:22 AMTrue. I guess the exception is if the guy you want is likely a substantial reach (relative to what you think others think) and you assess the risk of him being taken in front of where you move down to to be very small and hence acceptable. I feel like Schoen kind of did that when he moved down a handful of spots in the second round in 2022 and took Wan'Dale. Maybe he had a plan B, but I suspect he wanted Wan'Dale and was willing to gamble that nobody else would take him if he moved down a small handful of spots.
Jeff,
I think you need to consider the stakes as well. Missing out on a slot/gadget receiver is not as impactful as missing out on a QB.
I will also share a rule of life I live by. Always assume your opponents are as smart if not smarter than yourself. If you see value in a particular player, especially a QB, you simply have to assume there are others who see it as well. Considering there were another 5 WRs picked in the 15 picks after the Giants took Won'Dale, I have to think there was a good chance the Giants have plan B at WR and possibly other positions as well. I don't think any GM (at least a good one) would trade down with a single target in mind with no plan B, C etc
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 03, 2024, 11:59:01 AMJeff,
I think you need to consider the stakes as well. Missing out on a slot/gadget receiver is not as impactful as missing out on a QB.
I will also share a rule of life I live by. Always assume your opponents are as smart if not smarter than yourself. If you see value in a particular player, especially a QB, you simply have to assume there are others who see it as well. Considering there were another 5 WRs picked in the 15 picks after the Giants took Won'Dale, I have to think there was a good chance the Giants have plan B at WR and possibly other positions as well. I don't think any GM (at least a good one) would trade down with a single target in mind with no plan B, C etc
I agree, but I think there are likely justifiable scenarios where the plan A is preferable to the plan B but the assessed risk of missing on plan A is low enough to still warrant the gamble and obtain the return of the trade-down. Especially for a bad team that needs a lot of picks and a lot of help. I agree it makes no sense to do it if you literally only like one single player, but that's seldom the case with these GMs in any draft. Most of them have buckets of players at any given value point.
I mean if you were to be fixated on a single player so much, and you really don't want to risk him being taken, I would argue you should consider trading up in those situations (which we have seen Schoen do, such as with Hyatt).
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 03, 2024, 12:04:06 PMI agree, but I think there are likely justifiable scenarios where the plan A is preferable to the plan B but the assessed risk of missing on plan A is low enough to still warrant the gamble and obtain the return of the trade-down. Especially for a bad team that needs a lot of picks and a lot of help. I agree it makes no sense to do it if you literally only like one single player, but that's seldom the case with these GMs in any draft. Most of them have buckets of players at any given value point.
I mean if you were to be fixated on a single player so much, and you really don't want to risk him being taken, I would argue you should consider trading up in those situations (which we have seen Schoen do, such as with Hyatt).
The problem is trading down for QB is a bit of a special case. If you miss out on another position, teams can usually find a solution that will not kneecap a season. QB on the other hand...
Quote from: MightyGiants on January 03, 2024, 12:05:38 PMThe problem is trading down for QB is a bit of a special case. If you miss out on another position, teams can usually find a solution that will not kneecap a season. QB on the other hand...
Completely agree here. If you like a QB, you don't mess around with that. You only trade up, if anything at all.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 03, 2024, 12:04:06 PMI agree, but I think there are likely justifiable scenarios where the plan A is preferable to the plan B but the assessed risk of missing on plan A is low enough to still warrant the gamble and obtain the return of the trade-down. Especially for a bad team that needs a lot of picks and a lot of help. I agree it makes no sense to do it if you literally only like one single player, but that's seldom the case with these GMs in any draft. Most of them have buckets of players at any given value point.
I mean if you were to be fixated on a single player so much, and you really don't want to risk him being taken, I would argue you should consider trading up in those situations (which we have seen Schoen do, such as with Hyatt).
People have posted here a typical draft board that some teams use. I would guess that when a trade back offer comes in, they look where they are trading to on their board and see if there is enough guys still available that they will be able to select someone they really like.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on January 03, 2024, 12:09:20 PMPeople have posted here a typical draft board that some teams use. I would guess that when a trade back offer comes in, they look where they are trading to on their board and see if there is enough guys still available that they will be able to select someone they really like.
I heard one GM (I forget which) say the ideal scenario is you have at least one more target than the number of slots you are dropping. In other words, if you move back four spots, you have five choices. Obviously, that's not always possible, so sometimes, if you have enough targets, you gamble a bit. If you lose the gamble you either draft a lesser prospect or perhaps trade again.
If Fields helps knock out the Packers at Lambeau..it may seal the deal in Chicago. Think about if they draft Harrison with DJ Moore and Cole Kmet, that's a terrific grouping.
I'm leaning Fields keeps his job.