Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: Jclayton92 on April 22, 2024, 09:51:14 AMTua and Jones aren't on the same boat and it's not close. Tua led the league in passing yards, while Jones can't execute a pass oriented offense.

Are you suggesting Tua didn't see a sizeable bump in his stats with the addition of Tyreek Hill?

Quote from: Ed Vette on April 22, 2024, 09:29:59 AMRich, my point really centers around whether they pick a QB or not and how that molds the future in the near term and long term. Think of the multi-Universe or Dimension theory, where there are many choices taking action and each action creates a reality and that reality can branch off into other realities or Dimensions. This is the year because of the timing with Jones' status and the deep QB Draft Class where one decision can have profound consequences both favorable and unfavorable. For example, those six picks can go down to 4 or five and impact the 2025 Draft if they move up. If they stay and pick a QB, if they stay and pick another position, if they trade back once or twice and the players they choose, QB included or not.

This is a pivotal Draft Year.

Ed,

I guess I just see the strong draft class as functionally an illusion owing to three QB needy teams drafting 1-3.   


The draft class of

Williams
Maye
Daniels
JJ
Penix
Nix

Sounds pretty impressive

The functional draft class (assuming the 3 QB needy teams draft 3 QBs) of

JJ
Penix
Nix

Seems a bit less impressive with the Giants drafting 3rd


I appreciate that the QB is far and away the most important position and drafting or not drafting players at that position are most impactful to teams, but I am just not that sure the QB talent that will be available to the Giants will be all that impactful, regardless of the move the Giants make or don't make.  Admittedly, from this vantage point in time, our vision is less than clear.  After all, no one was celebrating the Texans for drafting CJ Stroud.  Few people appreciated the Chiefs drafting Mahommes.  Even the Bills drafting the 3rd QB on the board or the Ravens sneaking back into round one to draft Lamar Jackson was met with much fanfare.

I guess while the draft is impactful, our witnessing it reminds me of bio-weapon attacks.   Bio-weapons have the potential to cause a great deal of death, suffering, and fear, yet the odd thing is that such an attack really isn't "witnessed"; rather it's the impact that is identified, as the deployment of such weapons usually is quite stealthy.  To some degree, that's what the draft is like.  Watching players being selected makes for great TV, as witnessed by the ratings, but the relatively unknown impact is what really matters.

Quote from: Ed Vette on April 22, 2024, 09:20:00 AMRich, your pound-for-pound analysis as suggested by @AYM got me thinking that by not having a first-round pick, the Scouts and Accorsi were able to concentrate their efforts more on players later in the draft. An enormous amount of time and effort is spent on scouting the first round, visiting schools, attending games, and interviews, and bringing them in for a visit. Even having a late first-round pick requires scouting more than half that class in the event they drop. What do you both think?

I am beginning to move toward that position.  It does seem that there is talent to be had in the later rounds, but teams are far too focused on round one.   When you look at the top 30 visits, as reported, roughly half the prospects brought in are projected to go round one.  There are 7 rounds in the draft (in the Giants case 6) so half the visits are devoted to round one and half the remaining visits are left for the next five picks.

https://x.com/McShay13/status/1781040208009384369

https://x.com/PFN365/status/1782397728628048026

While I understand Ed's point, I have a different take.   I think this is a case where the first batter is walking up to the plate in the bottom of the ninth with their team down 3 runs (and no one on base).  A good draft could be the start of a game-winning rally, but it just as easily could be the beginning of the end.

The reality is the team's talent level at the start of year three of Schoen's tenure doesn't seem all that different from the talent level he inherited.  While picking 6th is nice, only 6 picks is less than ideal, in light of all the teams remaining needs.

Quote from: kingm56 on April 22, 2024, 08:53:21 AMChanging coaching, teams, talent doesn't tangibly alter their trajectory. 

That claim is simply incorrect.  We witnessed the opposite with DJ in 2022.  We witnessed it with Mayfield in Tampa.  We saw it with Goff in Detroit.   We saw it with Geno Smith in Seattle.  We saw it with Tua in Miami.  Then there are all the college QBs where you saw the transfer portal change their paths with Daniels, Penix, and Bo Nix.

Quote from: Jclayton92 on April 22, 2024, 08:03:42 AMQbs are either able to lift up their team and the players around them or they cant.

So is Herbert a worse QB than what the Giants fielded, since he failed to raise his team and had a worse record than the Giants?

Quote from: AYM on April 21, 2024, 06:42:40 PMI don't know if I agree with this. The 2007 draft directly caused the team to win the Superbowl as every single player heavily contributed.

Going back a couple of years, the 2005 draft was light on picks but gave us Brandon Jacobs, Corey Webster, and Justin Tuck. That was a monster draft too.

The funny thing with the 2007 draft is it gave a great bump during their rookie season, but there wasn't much sustained success



1   CB Aaron Ross   
2   WR Steve Smith   
3   DT Jay Alford
4   LS Zak DeOssie   
5   TE Kevin Boss   
6   OL Adam Koets   
7   DB Michael Johnson   
7   RB Ahmad Bradshaw


Pick for pick I think the 2005 draft class was impressive (they were missing picks due to the Eli Manning trade.  When you look at this draft and the Rams draft classes, I wonder if teams spend too much time focusing on their first pick.  It seems like teams that don't have a first-pick draft are better in the other rounds.


2   Corey Webster   43   DB
3   Justin Tuck   74   DE   
4   Brandon Jacobs   110   RB   
6   Eric Moore   186   DE      

No. 1: San Diego → New York Giants. San Diego traded Manning to the New York Giants in exchange for Philip Rivers and the Giants' third round selection in this draft (#65) and their first- and fifth-round selections in 2005[5]


While the trade certainly wasn't a bad one, we will never know what Rivers or Big Ben (and the extra draft capital) would have done with the Giants.

Quote from: ozzie on April 22, 2024, 08:13:52 AMhttps://giantswire.usatoday.com/2024/04/21/bill-belichick-new-york-giants-lawrence-taylor-only-nfl-ready-day-1-rookie-ever/

According to Bill Belichik, LT has been the only rookie that was NFL ready on Day 1

This is absolutely true.   Rookies are not NFL-ready; they need to be developed (by quality coaching staff) into NFL players.   That's the part of the drafting equation so many ignore.

Quote from: kingm56 on April 21, 2024, 02:51:55 PMYou're assuming both QBs would have different trajectories, if paired with different teams.  You have absolutely no way of proving this; yet, you're spouting these theories as facts.  Its equally possible both players would  fail in different situations.  Kenny Pickens had a good situation in Pitt and failed, as do a lot of QBs drafted by good teams.  Perhaps Carr wasn't that good to begin with, which is why he failed to enjoy significant success after Hou. 

You are mixing things up a bit.  What I think is close to a fact is that a QB's development and performance are significantly impacted by the support they receive.  Given examples are just that, examples.  As for Pickens, his issue was character-related, not talent.  How much a given player can or were impacted is a matter of some speculation.

Pickens seems to lack a competitive drive and the toughness to handle adversity, based on what we saw transpire with him.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on April 21, 2024, 02:20:03 PMI explicitly said "Allen might have taken longer to develop on the Giants than on the Bills."

The support doesn't just speed up or slow down a QBs development it can change a QB's very trajectory.  Just ask David Carr and Daniel Jones.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on April 21, 2024, 01:42:28 PMCan you show me precisely where I said that?

I have to think you are aware of the concept of subtext.  If you no longer want to discuss the topic, that's okay with me. 

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on April 21, 2024, 01:22:36 PMI consider Josh Allen one of the top three or four QB talents in the league and he's still only 27. As of today, he still has more NFL football in his future than in his past. Maybe his development to being a top QB would have taken longer on the Giants, but as I mentioned earlier QBs are not RBs - you aren't drafting a high first round QB with the sense that you only have 5-7 years to work with with him. If you get a legitimately good one it's a 15 year horizon or more. We can agree to disagree on this if you wouldn't take Allen if given the chance to go back.

You can insist the support doesn't impact a QBs development, but the NFL is going the opposite way.  Listen to the podcast I linked in the Daniel Jeremiah 3 Ps of support thread.  The NFL is realizing just how important the support a QB has in terms of development and performance.

Also, I think you are framing our disagreement in a less-than-ideal manner.  Our disagreement is over the importance of a QB's support both in development and performance, not if the Giants would have drafted Josh Allen.   You assume he would be the same with the Giants that he was with the Bills, I contend that is an assumption that is more than likely wrong.