Browns lose pushing the Giants to 4th pick

[MightyGiants]

https://x.com/albertbreer/status/1873520557192532354?s=46&t=1vcQIN8GqF5J2oLdxEVEJQ


https://x.com/rydunleavy/status/1873520748377350213?s=46&t=1vcQIN8GqF5J2oLdxEVEJQ

[sooners56]

To Banks, yes a deal can be made. However, if they wouldn't have won no deal would be needed and no loss of desperately needed draft capital.

[MightyGiants]

[Doc16LT56]

Carl Banks every year...

[ViewFromSection129]

I swear the talking heads on WFAN are clueless.  It's not about a deal being made or not... it's about the draft capital wasted because of a stupid,  worthless week 17 win. If the giants wanted to play so hard, why not the past ten weeks?

[kartanoman]

I swear the talking heads on WFAN are clueless.  It's not about a deal being made or not... it's about the draft capital wasted because of a stupid,  worthless week 17 win. If the giants wanted to play so hard, why not the past ten weeks?

It's always been about draft capital and its potential to be converted into 2026 draft capital, as well as extra capital for 2025 and still a damned great position in the top five (in my opinion; I wouldn't have moved lower than that).

#4, provided they stay there, will get them the best offensive tackle, cornerback, defensive edge or defensive tackle in the nation. The Giants need help in all of these areas and would benefit upgrading any of these critical spots.

At this point, trading to move up is not in their best interest if they are to partake in landing their franchise QB in 2026. Now, if they draft one this spring, outside the two big names, they're still going to sign a bridge QB and that discussion continues.

So, apart from the draft capital conversion potential of the #1 overall pick, with no guarantees anyone would want to trade with them for that spot, had they still possess it, I feel they've knocked an albatros off their back by moving out of it. The only thing worse than owning the #1 overall pick is selecting someone with it who ends up being wrong for your organization and sets your team progress back.

This one will be debated for a while; however, I'm not sure there was much to debate to begin with.

Peace!

[Bob In PA]

Even assuming it works out like Banks said (in one of the posts above, regarding a possible trade up with New England), victories like ours yesterday still cost the Giants more draft capital. 

It's nice to see our guys play up to their potential for a change, and nice to see a QB who makes his throws on-time and with reasonable accuracy, but you've got to weigh the "fun" against the cost.

Since I figure (after years of "experience") the Giants are unlikely to make the correct choice anyway, on one hand, I'm more than willing to just stay put and take what's left. On the other hand, we always seem to be just one or two picks short of getting a sure-fire player (which even our "ace" scouting department and meddling owners can't screw up) and instead, we have to settle for a "maybe he'll be good" guy (Evan Neal comes to mind - oy!!!).

Bob

[spiderblue43]

I don't think it was playing up to their potential. I played the game on losing teams and there's pride, always. No one in that locker wanted that historical mark-they were on fire yesterday to remove that, no question against a team that has no leadership..starting qb tapping out.