Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: FL GMAN on March 31, 2024, 10:00:22 AMIf I were her I wouldn't do it. I say this as a fan of hers and someone rooting for her to be just as great in the WNBA. The simple fact is that a good H.S. basketball team would beat not only any college team but also any WNBA team. If she got humiliated it would hurt her image and jeapordize future earnings.

I thought he was expanding his league to include all women's teams that would face one another not having a woman playing against men, which IMHO would be foolish.

Quote from: Painter on March 30, 2024, 12:01:24 PMWould you say the same about Women's Football/ Soccer?

Cheers!

Absolutely. Why do you think the payout for winning the men's World Cup is four times what it is for the women?

Quote from: Bob In PA on March 29, 2024, 12:03:40 PMmadb: You may be correct that Nabers will be able to be an X in the NFL, but I'm uncertain about that. And from what I've read, I'm not alone.  That doesn't mean you're wrong, but (importantly, IMO) it means you don't take a guy that high in the draft who has that type of question-mark. The first example that occurs to me is drafting a guy who excelled in college as a left tackle and putting him at right tackle (Evan Neal?). Bob

It would be helpful to know who is saying they doubt he can play the X in the NFL and why. Everyone has an opinion, myself included, but when it comes to draft prospects 99% of them are either uninformed or ill informed. Those concerns could be well founded but he played the X at LSU and played it quite well in the conference with the most athletic corners.

Quote from: Philosophers on March 29, 2024, 11:16:48 AMThen wouldn't Nabers be redundant with Robinson?

Nabers is an X receiver and Robinson a slot. IMHO they're perfectly complimentary and one of the reasons why I hope the Giants draft him if they can't find a quarterback worth the 6th pick.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on March 29, 2024, 11:18:47 AMYeah I didn't mean to suggest it would come close to the NBA. I don't think that for a second. I meant more that I hoped it could gain more popularity than it currently has, which, prior to Clark, has been pretty close to zero, despite ESPN's efforts to equalize the narrative of the two sports.

Women's tennis might be a comp of what I would hope women's hoops could one day be (relative to its male counterpart).  With a major star like Caitlin Clark acting as something of a pioneer, I think the sport could gain some popularity over the coming decade.

Is women's tennis popular now that the William's sisters are retired? I think Clark will have a similar impact on womens basketball but once she's done I see the sports popularity regressing to the mean without her being the face of the sport. I find the open hatred towards Clark from current and former WNBA troubling. A rising tide lifts all boats yet they seem hell bent on sinking the boat.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on March 29, 2024, 11:11:48 AMExactly.

With that said, my hope is that she'll be a change agent for women's basketball. If anyone has the potential to do that, it's her.

I don't think women's sports will ever approach the popularity of the men's version of the sport. They're clearly talented but unless you love fundamentals more than pace of play there really is no reason to watch the WNBA over the NBA.

It isn't really hard to emphasize telling a guy like Daniels that he should avoid big hits in the open field. I think it's really a non issue. I'd rather draft a guy who I can tell that he needs to slide earlier than he wants to than to draft a guy who can't escape the pocket in the first place. Then again all of the top five or six guys in the draft are athletic enough to escape an NFL pocket with regularity.

Quote from: Philosophers on March 29, 2024, 09:36:53 AMMy fear with Nabers is his oroductivity is more from catching 4 yard oasses and getting YAC than catching 20 yard + deeper routes.  Anyone have any stats on the distribution of how far downfield he caught most of his passes?

Also how many catches did he make from X versus Z versus slot WR posituons?

Do we need him to be or is Hyatt and Slayton enough? IMHO at 4.35 and with his track record at LSU points to yes but I think we'd be just fine if he isn't. CeeDee Lamb isn't a big downfield threat but I'd take his production in a heartbeat.

Quote from: spiderblue43 on March 29, 2024, 09:27:46 AMShe is focusing on her brand image, which is into the millions. Don't think she'll do it. She's a pioneer already and doesn't need the cash spectacle.

Nope. WNBA players max salary is $235,000. She's gonna make 14 years worth of WNBA salary in one summer if she takes this deal. She'd be stupid to pass it up.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on March 28, 2024, 06:35:21 PMYeah I didn't understand either. Is this to play 10 games against him? Who are the 10 games again?

Sorry - I missed this story. I don't know anything about this. OP, can you please give some more detail?

He has a 3 on 3 league so the games would be in that framework. His league doesn't conflict with the WNBA so she can have her cake and at it too.

McCarthy, but I think the real big four is Williams, Daniels, McCarthy and Nix. Maye has serious flaws that are going to take a while to fix. He's much closer to Baker Mayfield than he is to CJ Stroud.

Quote from: Bill Brown on March 27, 2024, 06:56:49 PMIce cube has offered to pay her 5 million to play 10 games. The average Big3 player gets 100k to play 10.

Bill

If there's ever been a player who deserves it....

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on March 27, 2024, 06:37:07 PMWe still have the other 2nd round pick though and will be able to get a quality IOL with that pick if we want to. I get that it's easier if we have both 39 and 47, but it's not like we relinquished our opportunity to use a 2nd rounder (a location where you should be able to get an upper echelon guard) on O line. Even pick number 70 can be used on O line, and you'd have a pretty decent chance of getting someone who can potentially start in that draft spot. I know everyone has a bad taste in their mouths from Ezeudu, but early third round is not a bad spot for IOL.

If we use our second or third round pick on a guard, and then perhaps find someone in the 5th or 6th round we like, I would view the offseason in its totality as having solidly addressed the O line. Whether it all works out is another question entirely.

I was coming at it from the point of view that with a second round pick you are expecting to get a starter and most of us feel like we need to come out of this draft with a receiver and a quarterback. Without that second pick in the second round the odds of landing all three successfully went down when we sent one to the Panthers to get Burns. Like I said I'm fine with it but could see people not liking it as much.

If they land excellent players at both positions I'd be over the moon. It remains to be seen if they can.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on March 27, 2024, 05:57:00 PMI don't know what more we could have done to this point in FA. I guess we could have not done the trade for Burns and spent more on free agents, but I think it's hard to say we haven't addressed the O line when we haven't even seen the draft yet. We have thrown more than $15mm AAV a year at it already, we got what appears to be a material upgrade at the O line coaching position, and if we grab a couple more O line picks I'd say not only have we addressed it, but we have significantly addressed it. Whether it all works out is another story.

According to some folks here though our line wasn't even that bad last year EXCEPT when Jones was playing. Apparently they played decently well for the other two QBs. So maybe it's not as big of a problem as we think and Jones was just unlucky that they played really badly for only him.

The Burns trade had the secondary effect of costing us a high second round draft pick that could have been used on a guard or swing tackle who would be expected to start. I'm fine with the move because we can't spend all our capital on one position, but I could see why some people weren't happy with the deal.