Would you be happy if this was the Giants draft?

[katkavage]

If I were the Giants, how about this?

1) trade the 6th pick back to say 20th and use it to draft McCarthy in round 1 then I'd draft someone like Xavier Leggette the DK Metcalf 2.0 of the draft in round 2.  With the other second round pick I'd draft a Tanner Morgan, the very good OT from Arizona.  Since Thomas is always hurt and Neal as well, we need a swing taxkle.  Round 3 gets me Michael Hall or Kris Jenkins, both very athletic DTs.

I would definitely trade back if they can't trade up to get a QB. Get more picks.

[DaveBrown74]

If I were the Giants, how about this?

1) trade the 6th pick back to say 20th and use it to draft McCarthy in round 1 then I'd draft someone like Xavier Leggette the DK Metcalf 2.0 of the draft in round 2.  With the other second round pick I'd draft a Tanner Morgan, the very good OT from Arizona.  Since Thomas is always hurt and Neal as well, we need a swing taxkle.  Round 3 gets me Michael Hall or Kris Jenkins, both very athletic DTs.

I don't think any sound GM would move back 14 spots with the plan of drafting one single player. If the Giants like a player enough to take him at 20th you can't feel that confident someone won't take him sooner than that. You have teams like the Saints and Raiders in front of you if you make that move, plus there are teams picking later than 20 that could jump you.

I'm fine with moving down if they don't love any of the prospects available at 6 and they have a group of players they'd be happy to take at whatever spot they move down to, but moving down 14 spots to take the potential fourth QB off the board and not really have any other plan that you're happy with if someone else snags him seems like a questionable strategy to me.

[jgrangers2]

I don't think any sound GM would move back 14 spots with the plan of drafting one single player. If the Giants like a player enough to take him at 20th you can't feel that confident someone won't take him sooner than that. You have teams like the Saints and Raiders in front of you if you make that move, plus there are teams picking later than 20 that could jump you.

I'm fine with moving down if they don't love any of the prospects available at 6 and they have a group of players they'd be happy to take at whatever spot they move down to, but moving down 14 spots to take the potential fourth QB off the board and not really have any other plan that you're happy with if someone else snags him seems like a questionable strategy to me.

But also, you have to have a willing trade partner. It's hard to see anybody moving up that far to take anyone with the top 3 QBs very likely to be off the board. The trade down spots are probably in the 10-15 range if somebody falls in love with one of the tackles and wants their pick of them.

[Philosophers]

I don't think any sound GM would move back 14 spots with the plan of drafting one single player. If the Giants like a player enough to take him at 20th you can't feel that confident someone won't take him sooner than that. You have teams like the Saints and Raiders in front of you if you make that move, plus there are teams picking later than 20 that could jump you.

I'm fine with moving down if they don't love any of the prospects available at 6 and they have a group of players they'd be happy to take at whatever spot they move down to, but moving down 14 spots to take the potential fourth QB off the board and not really have any other plan that you're happy with if someone else snags him seems like a questionable strategy to me.

20 was just a random number with no science behind it on my part.  It can be 15.  The point is just move back some to get more picks then go solve the QB problem and get other positions solved.  With my idea, I didnt even use the picks I'd get from that trade yet.

[MightyGiants]

20 was just a random number with no science behind it on my part.  It can be 15.  The point is just move back some to get more picks then go solve the QB problem and get other positions solved.  With my idea, I didnt even use the picks I'd get from that trade yet.

If you are going to move down a significant amount with the idea of drafting a QB, like @DaveBrown74 suggested, you need to have more than one player targetted.  So a calculated risk might make sense if you have 3 QB prospects you like, but to move that far with only one target in mind creates a huge risk with minimal (compared to the risk) reward.

[Doc16LT56]

Agree that you can't trade down assuming one guy will automatically be there for you. What happens if he's not there.

Let's also not forget that the last time the Giants traded back in the first round was an unmitigated disaster (Kadarius Toney and Evan Neal). It isn't a given that more picks is automatically better. You have to know who's available and have a good understanding of their value.

[jgrangers2]

Sorry but the days of BPA should have ended a long time ago. When you have needs, you simply need to address them.

And how, at 6, did we force Jones onto this team? Jones was Gettleman's choice long before we moved up the mike to announce our pick. Most had Jones going mid to late rd 1, or even early round 2. I think that was Jones's biggest prpblem, his #5 draft #.

The Giants were all in on Herbert throughout that entire college season and only turned to Jones after Herbert decided to go back to school for another year. In general, Jones was viewed as a borderline first rounder or a day 2 pick that the Giants reached for at 6. He was the definition of ignoring BPA to reach for a position.

Also, BPA doesn't just mean taking the highest ranked player on the board. Once you get past the top 10 guys, you're generally not going to have one standout guy on your board unless somebody you really like magically slips. Of course need plays into it, but that doesn't mean you lock in on an individual position and pick it no matter what.

[Painter]

Sorry but the days of BPA should have ended a long time ago. When you have needs, you simply need to address them.

And how, at 6, did we force Jones onto this team? Jones was Gettleman's choice long before we moved up the mike to announce our pick. Most had Jones going mid to late rd 1, or even early round 2. I think that was Jones's biggest prpblem, his #5 draft #.

The Jones pick was forced because Gettleman ignored the one BPA rule that should never be violated which was his use of a first round pick, much less a No.2 overall, on a Running Back.

It may be true that Jones was ranked by most 'perts behind Haskins, a Bust and Lock, a Backup but  we can't even say for sure that they'd have been better off if they had traded up for Murray once  they learned that Herbert decided to stay in school and broke their heart.

Cheers!