If Brock Bowers is the pick at 6, how would you feel?

[Ed Vette]

Hard to know what is going through the minds of Schoen and his insiders, but I suspect they are deep diving into character traits on all of them. They might pass on one of the top guys because they know he smokes weed and tends to party too much...or simply doesn't have the right type of personality that fits neatly with the team they are trying to build. They've all got tremendous athletic skills, but what kind of person are they going to be once they're millionaires and having cameras and mikes shoved in their face wherever they go? Are they "football first and foremost", or will they be "soaking up the glamour and non-football activities that have become available"?

Interestingly, the Giants have shown zero interest in Bowers...according to media reports and player visits. That could be telling in itself as the clandestine nature of Schoen is highly secretive, and he doesn't give away any clues as to what he's thinking

Ric, if Calib Williams somehow fell to the Cards at four, do you think Schoen moves up to take him if Daniels, Maye and JJ are gone?

[Jolly Blue Giant]

Ric, if Calib Williams somehow fell to the Cards at four, do you think Schoen moves up to take him if Daniels, Maye and JJ are gone?

I haven't a clue. The more I study, the more I realize how much I don't know. Personally, I don't think the Giants are QB shopping and will be more surprised than anyone on this board if we go QB in the first. I think they have more faith in Jones than much of the fan base and are interested primarily in getting a receiving target for DJ who will be a long term solution for the air game. Whatever the case, I'm pretty sure they want a day 1 starter who will be a starter for the next half decade. But again, I simply do not know what's going through their minds, which is comforting in its own way...to me anyway 

[AZGiantFan]

Gronk was a second rounder and Kelce was a third rounder.  Just sayin'.

[Rosehill Jimmy]

Gronk was a second rounder and Kelce was a third rounder.  Just sayin'.

And LaPorta (second rd), Schultz(4 rd), Knox (3 rd), Andrews (3rd), Hockenson & Kincaid (late 1st)

Hard pass for me

[AZGiantFan]

And LaPorta (second rd), Schultz(4 rd), Knox (3 rd), Andrews (3rd), Hockenson & Kincaid (late 1st)

Hard pass for me

And Kyle Pitts was taken with the #4 pick, and has hardly lived up to the pick.  And was more highly rated than Bowers is, going into HIS draft.

[DaveBrown74]

None of the above examples mean Bowers will be a bad pick.

To be clear, I'm not advocating taking Bowers. Based on my own observations and sense of value, I would prefer any of the receivers over him. What I am not on board with is dismissing the idea of picking him completely out of hand, based purely on his being a TE and the others being receivers. If Schoen and his scouts rated Bowers as a distinctly better prospect than the WRs available when they pick, and they aren't going with a different position, then I would not want them to hold back and go with the inferior prospect in this case based purely on position. That is all.

[Ed Vette]

I haven't a clue. The more I study, the more I realize how much I don't know. Personally, I don't think the Giants are QB shopping and will be more surprised than anyone on this board if we go QB in the first. I think they have more faith in Jones than much of the fan base and are interested primarily in getting a receiving target for DJ who will be a long term solution for the air game. Whatever the case, I'm pretty sure they want a day 1 starter who will be a starter for the next half decade. But again, I simply do not know what's going through their minds, which is comforting in its own way...to me anyway 

You just said something interesting. A QB has a shelf life of 10-15 years (To Phil Simm's point), an OT about 8-12 years, and a WR about 5-6 years. There are exceptions of course. The Giants rarely pick this high although more so of late. The last three first-round WR's picked by the Giants were Toney-20, Odell-12 and Hilliard-8 in '97. Interestingly enough, that '97 Draft had one of the worst QB classes of all time. Jake Plummer was the 42nd pick as the first QB taken. They picked Mike Cherry in the 6th Round. Danny Kanell did ok for them in '97. My point is that '97 was the only year they didn't have a Franchise QB when they drafted a WR in the first round. fwiw

Edit_ Hakeem Nicks at 29.

[PSUBeirut]

None of the above examples mean Bowers will be a bad pick.

To be clear, I'm not advocating taking Bowers. Based on my own observations and sense of value, I would prefer any of the receivers over him. What I am not on board with is dismissing the idea of picking him completely out of hand, based purely on his being a TE and the others being receivers. If Schoen and his scouts rated Bowers as a distinctly better prospect than the WRs available when they pick, and they aren't going with a different position, then I would not want them to hold back and go with the inferior prospect in this case based purely on position. That is all.

Interesting!  So are these the same thoughts you had about Saquon being selected #2 overall?  Or do you just feel differently about the TE position than you do RB?

For me personally, a TE at 6, no matter the prospect, is a waste.  At least until one of these uber athletic, generational TE prospects actually produces like that on the field. 

[DaveBrown74]

Interesting!  So are these the same thoughts you had about Saquon being selected #2 overall?  Or do you just feel differently about the TE position than you do RB?

For me personally, a TE at 6, no matter the prospect, is a waste.  At least until one of these uber athletic, generational TE prospects actually produces like that on the field. 

Actually yeah, I do feel differently about TE than I do RB. First, TE is a more expensive position than RB in terms of average salary. It is not as expensive as receiver, which I very clearly alluded to in my post, but it is pricier than RB. Secondly, the league is a passing league, so if you do happen to have a weapon like Gronk, Kelce, Gates etc it has a greater impact on an offense in today's NFL than having a Derrick Henry or Jonathan Taylor does.

I understand TE is not as valuable a position as receiver, QB, OT, and CB. I have also made it clear (twice now) that I am not advocating for taking Bowers. Nor do I think the Giants will. I was simply highlighting the low probability scenario where they have him graded as a much better prospect than the other options they're considering with that pick. My own personal opinion is that he is not a superior prospect to the big three receivers, but unlike some here who clearly believe they are better talent evaluators than NFL front offices, I am happy to defer to Schoen and his team on this matter.

Would I be happy with the pick if they took him? Since I am hoping we somehow get a QB the front office likes, and since I like all three of these receivers quite a bit as well as Joe Alt, probably not, but I'll make up my mind more firmly about that once I have watched him play for a year or two.

[Jclayton92]

The best teams in the league currently have phenomenal TEs 49ers, Eagles, KC, Ravens etc... so if you think there's a generational TE there, why wouldn't you take them? Having a great TE allows you to do so much with your Wrs.

[Philosophers]

Let's not forget all the round 1 WR busts or later round WR successes

[Jolly Blue Giant]

The best teams in the league currently have phenomenal TEs 49ers, Eagles, KC, Ravens etc... so if you think there's a generational TE there, why wouldn't you take them? Having a great TE allows you to do so much with your Wrs.

It's interesting that the only TE they've had in for a visit is Theo Johnson (that I've seen listed anyway). A big and fast traditional type TE who show exceptional athleticism at the combine

[PSUBeirut]

It's interesting that the only TE they've had in for a visit is Theo Johnson (that I've seen listed anyway). A big and fast traditional type TE who show exceptional athleticism at the combine

I believe Theo will be a better pro than he was a college player.  IMO he was misused in the offense last year and should have been a more-featured weapon.  I could see him being one of those mid-round gems for someone.  He's got a lot of great tools and good intangibles as well.

[PSUBeirut]

Interesting!  So are these the same thoughts you had about Saquon being selected #2 overall?  Or do you just feel differently about the TE position than you do RB?

For me personally, a TE at 6, no matter the prospect, is a waste.  At least until one of these uber athletic, generational TE prospects actually produces like that on the field. 

Actually yeah, I do feel differently about TE than I do RB. First, TE is a more expensive position than RB in terms of average salary. It is not as expensive as receiver, which I very clearly alluded to in my post, but it is pricier than RB. Secondly, the league is a passing league, so if you do happen to have a weapon like Gronk, Kelce, Gates etc it has a greater impact on an offense in today's NFL than having a Derrick Henry or Jonathan Taylor does.

I understand TE is not as valuable a position as receiver, QB, OT, and CB. I have also made it clear (twice now) that I am not advocating for taking Bowers. Nor do I think the Giants will. I was simply highlighting the low probability scenario where they have him graded as a much better prospect than the other options they're considering with that pick. My own personal opinion is that he is not a superior prospect to the big three receivers, but unlike some here who clearly believe they are better talent evaluators than NFL front offices, I am happy to defer to Schoen and his team on this matter.

Would I be happy with the pick if they took him? Since I am hoping we somehow get a QB the front office likes, and since I like all three of these receivers quite a bit as well as Joe Alt, probably not, but I'll make up my mind more firmly about that once I have watched him play for a year or two.

All good.  I respect that.  Just found it interesting that almost the exact same (opposite) verbiage was used by folks who were 100% against taking a RB that high - ie, our GM (and the vast majority of NFL folks, draftniks, etc.) considered Barkley to be the top or at least top 3 overall prospect in that draft, regardless of position.  So when you say "I would not want them to hold back and go with the inferior prospect in this case based purely on position." it piqued my interest- as many folks who didn't want Saquon at #2 used the opposite of this logic in their arguments- ie, that the GM SHOULD draft an inferior prospect on their board solely based on position. 

Me, personally- I don't think either a TE --OR-- a RB should ever be taken that high- And I actually feel more strongly on the TE piece than the RB- as long as the RB is a multi-dimensional threat....because they're gonna touch the ball a whole lot more than a TE ever would.

[jgrangers2]

Gronk was a second rounder and Kelce was a third rounder.  Just sayin'.

Part of this concept is self selection. Since few tight ends get drafted in the first, most of the great ones are going to come from later rounds. A lot of wide receivers get drafted early and yet 4 of the 7 1st or 2nd team all pro wide receivers were drafted outside the first round and two were drafted in the 5th. And that doesn't include others like Davante Adams (2nd), Cooper Kupp (3rd) and Stefon Diggs (5th) who became top tier WR from outside the 1st round.

What it comes down to is simply what level of production you can get from Bowers. If you think he can produce like a Travis Kelce (i.e. WR1 level production) then the fact that he's labeled a tight end shouldn't matter. Once they're on the field, they're all just eligibile receivers.