Big Blue Huddle

Strands #113
"Fine print"
💡🔵💡🔵
🔵🔵💡🔵
💡🔵🟡

Connections
Puzzle #379
🟨🟨🟨🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟦🟦🟦🟦
🟪🟪🟪🟪

Quote from: katkavage on June 23, 2024, 06:16:14 PMOffensive line, defensive pass rush, depth at receiver. But again injuries change everything.

All makes sense.

Quote from: katkavage on June 23, 2024, 04:41:38 PMI think the team will be better.

I don't really disagree with you, but I'm curious what exactly makes you say that. Can you pinpoint why you feel that way? We certainly added some interesting players but we also lost two of our best players, and our QB (who was bad last year before he got hurt) is coming off an ACL injury. Why would this team be better than last year's?

Again - not trying to argue because I can see some marginal improvement myself, but I'm just curious why you feel that way.

Whom do you feel more optimistic about overall as a player moving forward: Jalin Hyatt or Wan'Dale Robinson?

Why?

Also bad job by every adult sitting nearby (particularly the guys) in not coming to that kid's defense and insisting he be given the ball. The mother maybe didn't feel comfortable confronting three guys in that situation. Someone should have helped her out.

Bad look all around.

Major douche move, but not the first time we have seen that type of thing.

Quote from: Philosophers on June 23, 2024, 12:49:54 PMCan someone answer this question for me?  When was the last time the Giants had an outstanding offense but a really bad defense?

To save myself some time, I asked ChatGPT, and this is what came back:


"The last time the New York Giants had a top ten offense and a bottom ten defense in the same season was in 2015. During that year, their offense ranked eighth in the league, while their defense ranked thirtieth in total yards allowed. The Giants had a prolific offense led by quarterback Eli Manning, but their defensive struggles contributed to their six-win season, missing the playoffs."

Quote from: nb587 on June 23, 2024, 11:48:30 AMIt seems that the Giants generally went 0-4 against them & both of these teams generally win
3-4 division games locked in virtually every year. I'm not so sure it repeats this year. 

Do you think the win against Philly means anything given they wanted the game and we had nothing to play for and we beat their starters pretty badly?  Does that tell you anything at all?

I never make broad, sweeping conclusions about any team based on a single game. That same Giants team lose three games in a row before that game (including to the Eagles).

The final game in which the Giants beat them was in the midst of a major Eagles collapse. There was talk of the coach being fired, and they were just a complete mess.

Does it tell me anything at all? I guess it reminds me that any team can beat any other team on any given day in this league, although I knew that before that game.

Quote from: Jolly Blue Giant on June 23, 2024, 11:00:26 AMI never realized how cheap the Knicks have been the last few years. They've avoided the luxury tax and kept salaries way down. Now they are going to have to pony up in order to keep OG and IHart. Good article" https://nypost.com/2024/06/22/sports/knicks-must-pay-luxury-tax-toll-if-they-want-to-keep-team-together/

I can sort of understand not wanting to overspend when you're not remotely a contender. This is the first season that the Knicks (when healthy) have felt like a bona fide top 3 team in the East. With an even mildly healthier team, they were for sure going to the ECF.

We need to remember that, while the general view of Knicks fans is that they're iffy at best about Randle overall, the guy was beasting out this year before he got hurt.

With a fully healthy roster I think the Knicks are still one cut below being championship caliber, but they're getting a lot closer.

Quote from: nb587 on June 23, 2024, 11:00:30 AMI think the path to the playoffs is a little different than most takes here.  For one, I dont think Dallas and Philly are all that strong, not nearly as as strong as in the past.  I think the way the Giants beat them badly in a game Philly needed last year means something.  Dallas run game is definitely weaker.  Two, I think Daboll made mistakes last year that young coaches make that are correctable.  Third, the injury bug might just come back to the mean and the Giants do have more depth in certain places that were lacking last year. 

Interesting take on Dallas and Philly. Since we're talking about the Giants' path to the playoffs, are you suggesting the Giants might be able to win the NFC East? Or do you just mean they may go 2-2 or 3-1 against those teams instead of 1-3?

Quote from: Hadron on June 23, 2024, 10:59:33 AMYeah. I remember that press conference where Gettleman was mocking analytics. Shurmur was sitting there, half asleep, but even he gave Gettleman a look of 'seriously bro?' or something of the ilk.

Yup. He mocked analytics, and he also scoffed at the concept of positional value with comments like "a good player is a good player", etc. He further pushed back on the comment that RBs have a shorter shelf life than other players, and he used Jonathan Stewart as an example of an RB who is "still Jonathan Stewart after all these years." Stewart, then 31, had 17 yards on 6 attempts for us that season and never saw an NFL field again after that.

Quote from: nb587 on June 23, 2024, 10:35:53 AMDid the Giants go backwards in the analytics department when they hired Gettleman?  Didn't seem like he had much use for analytics?  (But that could just be my anti Getty bias)

Gettleman was overtly anti-analytics. He scoffed at it and used to mock it regularly. When he finally acquiesced and they brought in some sort of small group of individuals to begin to try to get the Giants more up to speed on analytics, he referred to them as "computer folks."

Quote from: Philosophers on June 23, 2024, 10:04:24 AMThe mystery one is the OL.  The staff did not have a Plan B for the OL after the Dallas opening season game.  It was a complete failure.  What are they doing differently this offseason?

New (and hopefully much improved) coach and some veteran additions that include players who have played at a solid to good level on other teams. On paper this line looks deeper than last year's.

Quote from: Philosophers on June 23, 2024, 10:04:24 AMHow is it that six months after their last game Neal is still not healthy?

I'm done being surprised about the propensity for hurt guys to stay hurt on this team. I have no faith in the Giants' ability to keep its players healthy.

As for Neal himself, the guy is just simply a bust unless he stunningly proves otherwise. Thankfully though, the Giants are not nearly as dependent on him this year as they were last year. Eleumenor can play RT at a solid level, and they seemingly have more solid guards on this team this year than they did last year. So if Neal stinks again or can't get well, or both, it's less of a disaster for the Giants than it was last year.

Quote from: Philosophers on June 23, 2024, 10:04:24 AMUnless they have a Plan B at RT that they are willing to implement, do they let it be a turnstile for them?

They definitely have a plan B at RT this year in Eleumenor. I frankly think he should probably be plan A, but even if he's plan B, as long as they don't continue to live in denial with Neal and pray that he turns things around while he continues to be a disaster every week, I think they have a solid solution. Eleumenor was totally solid at RT for the Raiders (under Bricilo) last year. So there is no reason to think he won't be able to do the same thing here, if/when called upon.

Quote from: Philosophers on June 23, 2024, 10:04:24 AMWhat good is AT if he cant stay healthy?

Not much. He needs to be healthy this year for this O line to have any chance of taking a material step forward. Again, with our track record of keeping our players healthy, I can't say I'm oozing with confidence that that will happen with Thomas. It's more hope than confidence.

Quote from: Bob In PA on June 23, 2024, 10:17:33 AM@uconnjack8 and Rich: The difference, IMO, between actual analytics and PFF, of course, is that analytics analyze data, and data is FACTS, whereas (to a noteworthy extent) PFF "data" is a mixture of fact and opinion (or evaluation), so it's not IMO true data. Bob

Completely agree. With PFF there is an element of subjectivity. With pure analytics, hard data are being analyzed in a variety of ways. The conclusions then drawn the work done may be up for subjective interpretation and contextual explanation, but the actual data itself is not.