Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 21, 2024, 07:15:06 AMIn terms of impactful drafts, most involved hits throughout the draft at much higher hit rates.  Rarely have such historic drafts been identified at the time they were made.

https://www.si.com/nfl/2023/04/06/2023-nfl-draft-greatest-classes-for-every-team

Sadly, and I mean sadly, here's the conclusion about the Giants for those who don't want to look it up:

Despite their illustrious history, the Giants are without a signature draft class. Still, in 1956, New York found a Hall of Famer who inspired a documentary in linebacker Sam Huff. Huff, who earned enshrinement into the Hall of Fame, was arguably the most iconic defensive player of his era. Alongside Huff, the Giants also selected defensive end Jim Katcavage in the fourth round, who made two first-team All-Pro appearances and is credited with 92.5 unofficial sacks.

At least we have a handful of Super Bowl wins, but how sad is it that our favorite team has never nailed a draft in 100 YEARS of drafting?  Does anyone here want to be next-in-line after Schoen? lol

Bob

I don't think there's a story there, Rich. The narrative is the same as it has been since the Giants "earned" Pick Six by stinking up the stadium last year. Even we rank amateurs know how important QBs are (especially with today's rules), so any time you get a shot at someone in whom you have great confidence, conviction and belief, you act on it. 

It's always been clear that the Giants are close enough to the top that if lightning struck, they would be hit by it. If somehow a QB no one expects to fall to six does so, of course they will pounce. I would do it even if Tom Brady were my starting QB, because a proven QB is gold. 

It's just not going to happen because (1) only Daniels IMO is worth taking the shot; (2) no way he falls that far; (3) I seriously doubt the Giants believe ANY of this year's group is a sure thing, so even if they have a different favorite than mine, these points still apply; (4) the Giants can't fail with this pick (regardless of the position he plays) or like @Ed Vette says such a mistake can set a team back a decade; so (5) they will take a more "conservative" approach by taking seconds from the WR bin rather than thirds or fourth from the QB bin (which is the most dangerous pick a team can make, for obvious reasons).

Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 21, 2024, 07:15:06 AMYou could argue the 2018 draft was the most important in the sense that the Giants drafted Barkley instead of Josh Allen.

Rich: Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're NOT saying it has become known that the Giants' choice that year was between Barkley & Josh Allen.  In conjunction with the original post by @Ed Vette  you are giving an example of how one key decision in a draft (espeically if it involves a QB as one of the options) could theoretically have made a huge difference to the Giants' fortunes (and in their overall performance since the year that decision was made).  Bob

Quote from: Ed Vette on April 20, 2024, 07:12:23 PMThe most important draft for the NY Giants in 20 years. It will determine the fate of this team for the next decade.

Ed: I don't believe that.

They have six picks. Unless you see them getting a world-beating WR in the first round and pulling a rabbit out of their hat by trading up to the very-high-2nd or low-1st for one of the QB "leftovers" (who then turns out to stun the football world by becoming a phenomenal star), there is no pivot point to make such a statement. All drafts are important, but IMO this one is no more important than any other.

It sounds like you think the decision to go QB or WR in round one (accompanied by the decision to trade up or not trade up for a QB) are pivotal. I think the odds are very long for that scenario. I might see it differently if they ALREADY HAD Pick Three, but the fact is that they lack the draft capital to trade up without giving up one of their few star (or near-star) players in addition to future picks (and they just can't afford to do that right now, IMO).

Bob

Unless the Giants could get their top-rated QB in this draft w/Pick Three, the deal makes no sense for them either. Is it possible? It depends on which QB Washington selects. It's possible, though unlikely, that the one QB they believe is a perfect fit for Daboll's offense and can't-miss NFL star will still be there at Pick Three.

How would the Giants view the situation?  Reportedly, they want to contend NOW and see themselves as having fewer "holes" than we do. They believe that with a healthy Jones (and the few extra pieces they'll get with their six picks) they can contend. They see the Eagles and Cowboys weakening and an opportunity to make some noise.

Do I see it that way? No, but I do see how they could view the team in that manner... if (and only if) their publicly-stated beliefs about Jones are honestly-held.  Trading Jones for a rookie does not fit that scenario, because I seriously doubt they believe a rookie QB (or Lock to start the first few games, then the rookie) are capable of vaulting them into a position to win the division.

Bob

Quote from: Ed Vette on April 20, 2024, 12:47:33 PMLike Bo Nix. I keep telling you folks, don't discount Nix.

Ed: I'm too lazy to look it up, but I know there is one QB in the 1st-round-worthy chatter who spent "too many" years in college and is a few years older than the others.  Is Nix that guy?  Bob

Jolly: I would take it and be very unhappy not to have gotten one of the top WR's or QB's.

Arguably, Giants need both. To get neither would take that type of seriously unbalanced deal for me to go for it.

From Giants perspective it's "fair" while the Bronco fans (and GM) would probably think it way off-base.

Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 20, 2024, 08:04:17 AMBob,

As you know, I like to play with analytics myself.  Still, no matter how good a system sounds (or perhaps sounds flawed), I tend to step back and look how accurate the results look after all is said and done.

Here are the top 7 talented rosters per this author and his measures:

1. San Francisco 49ers
2. Kansas City Chiefs
3. Baltimore Ravens
4. Buffalo Bills
5. Philadelphia Eagles
6. Detroit Lions
7. Dallas Cowboys

With the possible exceptions of the Bills this seems to be a pretty reasonable ranking of roster talent (at least in my assessment)

It's a good list, and it at least partially justifies your interest in the analytics arena. Bob

Note how Daniels is at (or near) the top regardless of category.  I still don't know why Williams is the consensus top QB in this draft. Maybe someone who really really likes him can explain that to me. Bob

I note that Giants still outrank Eagles, despite the latter having several solid eras in the past 30-40 years. Bob

That type of analysis fails to consider that it is a team sport. 

The ratings of each player fail to account for the other players with whom they play.  They can't just be added together to get a final total.

A team is like a car motor. Every part must perform (and fit with the other parts) according to specifications or the engine (team) will not run efficiently.

Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 19, 2024, 02:27:25 PMThe other thing that struck me is that Jones has never had the opportunity to work with an offensive line that was in the top half (not top third, just half) of the league.  Talk about being in an unappealing position.

... or an elite NFL WR. Bob

Quote from: zephirus on April 19, 2024, 11:11:19 AMMost Giants fans (and fans in general) have such a fundamental lack of understanding of draft positioning and value I couldn't imagine why we would care what they think. Most fans seem to think the addition of a wide receiver is transformative, and it's typically not. The rest of the fans think Daniel Jones sucks, and he mostly does, but they're in such a rush to get his successor that they're not really concerned with who that is, or what the team might have to sacrifice to get there.  Trade up for JJ McCarthy?  It only takes one team, but I would imagine most draft boards have him nowhere near the top 10 in terms of value.

lee: I couldn't pass up a rare chance to slightly disagree with you. lol

In the case of the Giants, having a WR good enough to force the defense to put two men on him (A J Brown is an example from the recent past) can be transformative, by (1) giving the QB an outside "security blanket" and deep threat; and (2) by making it dangerious for defenses to blitz excessively and spy on running QBs. 

Although I agree adding a WR generally won't change as much as fans might believe, adding a true elite NFL WR seriously boosts an offense's ability to produce points, especially when the chips are down.

Bob

Rich: I don't want to choose between "star collecting" and "hole-filling."

Giants are high up enough in this draft to find a star to "collect" who also fills a hole.  That would be WR.

If they had Pick Two (or maybe Three), I'd also include QB in the equation... but they don't. Anyway, IMO they lack sufficient draft capital (picks this year and next) to make a decent offer for Pick Three. IMO they would have to throw in a decent to very good player (or two) as well, and we already have enough holes.

Bob

That's as close to what I think as it gets. 

Only one QB (Daniels for me) would make me think about trading up (if he got past Bears & Commodes).

It's clear to me Giants need an elite WR to make the rest of our receiving corps appear to belong in the NFL.

Bob