Tankathon Mock draft

[T200]

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.

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.

[katkavage]

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.

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.

[T200]

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.

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.

[BluesCruz]

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.

Therein lay the puzzle.  Who can we acquire who is a "good Oline coach" or is anything better than Johnson?

[MightyGiants]

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.

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.

[BluesCruz]

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!

[Gmo11]

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. 

[Uni]

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.

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.

[DaveBrown74]

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.

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.

[MightyGiants]

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.

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

[DaveBrown74]

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

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).

[MightyGiants]

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).

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...

[DaveBrown74]

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...

Completely agree here. If you like a QB, you don't mess around with that. You only trade up, if anything at all.

[uconnjack8]

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).

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. 

[MightyGiants]

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.

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.