Jump to content
Acgott

Giants to pick #6 in 2019 NFL draft

Recommended Posts

I disagree. I think while Eli statistically is still looking kinda ok-ish. He really limits what you guys are able to do scheme wise. I think Tannehill improves you guys by 2-3 wins over Eli.

I also feel like Tannehill was a scapegoat in Miami. The team was blaming him for their front offices shortcomings.

Edited by Danger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Danger said:

I disagree. I think while Eli statistically is still looking kinda ok-ish. He really limits what you guys are able to do scheme wise. I think Tannehill improves you guys by 2-3 wins over Eli.

I also feel like Tannehill was a scapegoat in Miami. The team was blaming him for their front offices shortcomings.

True, although with that strategy its going to put us just at the border of the playoffs, still in QB hell. We would have an old injury prone QB. The Giants need to do something drastic and giving Tannehill starter money isn't the answer when we aren't getting enough cap relief to fix the team. 

The Giants need to fail this year in order to succeed in 2020 and Tannehill is just another stall tacit in this scenario. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Acgott said:

True, although with that strategy its going to put us just at the border of the playoffs, still in QB hell. We would have an old injury prone QB. The Giants need to do something drastic and giving Tannehill starter money isn't the answer when we aren't getting enough cap relief to fix the team. 

I mean. AAV of $12-15 Million isn't really "starter money" in today's NFL. It's more than backup money, but less than your typical starter. 

I would propose that you frontload his guaranteed money something along the lines of $15 MM guaranteed this season. $2 Million signing bonus. Then next year it'd be $10 MM with $1.5 MM guaranteed. Then you're only on the hook for $2.5 MM in dead cap if you want to part ways.

Essentially this gives Tannehill the ability to come in and "prove it". But still make a good chunk of change this season with the ability to do so again next year  if he performs well. If he doesn't you can draft a QB next year, keep Tannehill to teach the new kid the ropes if you want, or just cut him and start the rookie right out of the gate. Trial by fire style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Danger said:

Best veteran on the market if you ask me. And he never had half the supporting cast that the Giants have now. Just invest heavily into the offensive line again through FA and the draft. Sign Tannehill. You guys will be a good team.

I've always sincerely liked Tannehill. The problem is he is injury prone, which will not fly here, after having Ironman Eli for 14 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Danger said:

I mean. AAV of $12-15 Million isn't really "starter money" in today's NFL. It's more than backup money, but less than your typical starter. 

I would propose that you frontload his guaranteed money something along the lines of $15 MM guaranteed this season. $2 Million signing bonus. Then next year it'd be $10 MM with $1.5 MM guaranteed. Then you're only on the hook for $2.5 MM in dead cap if you want to part ways.

Essentially this gives Tannehill the ability to come in and "prove it". But still make a good chunk of change this season with the ability to do so again next year  if he performs well. If he doesn't you can draft a QB next year, keep Tannehill to teach the new kid the ropes if you want, or just cut him and start the rookie right out of the gate. Trial by fire style.

I just don't see the benefit in this situation. It improve our team, but put us at a "worst" future situation. Better to just go all in with Eli and fail forward for a better pick. Its just stalling. The Giants need a fire cleansing, not some energy drinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Danger said:

Best veteran on the market if you ask me. And he never had half the supporting cast that the Giants have now. Just invest heavily into the offensive line again through FA and the draft. Sign Tannehill. You guys will be a good team.

Well, perhaps- but there remains the Lone Voice in the Wildnerness, crying out in his anguish, a plea for understanding in a forgetful world: Geno Smith! Forget ye not Geno Smith!

I, too, once dismissed Geno Smith as a bust and a non-starter- until my eyes were opened by the relentless rhetoric of the Lone Voice. And I began to believe in Geno Smith! And I await- we all should await- for the next impassioned harrangue singing the praises of Geno Smith. Sign, as a free agent, Geno Smith! Trade- the #6-overall pick, if need be- for Geno Smith!

And I wonder if he isn't right. The gaudy stats amassed by Geno Smith for the Chargers this past season fairly leap off the page as confirmation of the man's Greatness: 4 passing attempts. 1 completion. 25% avg. 8 passing yards. 0 TD's, 0 INT's. 39.6 QB Rating. 8 rushing attempts. 2 yd. 0.3 avg.

Tannehill? Okay, maybe. I get it. -But, a small lone voice whispers,  there still is Geno Smith!

Image result for geno smith

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the news of Murray committing to the combine and NFL, who did you guys prefer for the Giants: Murray or Haskins?

Both excellent passers with adequate arm strength and very accurate. Haskins is more of the traditional pocket passer with ideal size whereas Murray is an electric runner and undersized. Murray coming out is very good news for us as it makes it much more likely that we will be able to come away with a top QB. It's just a matter of who the FO falls in love with and what they're willing to do to make sure they get him.

Personally, I'm leaning towards Haskins as I think the traditional pocket passer is more sustainable. He also has enough mobility to work the pocket and create extra time. But admittedly the idea of an electric QB like Murray paired up with the most dynamic tandem in the NFL (Barkley and Beckham) in a Shurmur offense is tantalizing.

Or do you think it's irrelevant because we should go with a defensive playmaker in an extremely generous pool of defensive talent? Or perhaps somewhere else (offensive line)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, w4rrior723 said:

With the news of Murray committing to the combine and NFL, who did you guys prefer for the Giants: Murray or Haskins?

Both excellent passers with adequate arm strength and very accurate. Haskins is more of the traditional pocket passer with ideal size whereas Murray is an electric runner and undersized. Murray coming out is very good news for us as it makes it much more likely that we will be able to come away with a top QB. It's just a matter of who the FO falls in love with and what they're willing to do to make sure they get him.

Personally, I'm leaning towards Haskins as I think the traditional pocket passer is more sustainable. He also has enough mobility to work the pocket and create extra time. But admittedly the idea of an electric QB like Murray paired up with the most dynamic tandem in the NFL (Barkley and Beckham) in a Shurmur offense is tantalizing.

Or do you think it's irrelevant because we should go with a defensive playmaker in an extremely generous pool of defensive talent? Or perhaps somewhere else (offensive line)?

Both of them scare me, because of their lack of experience, but I can only judge off that because I don't follow college football.

A new report came out today that Giants aren't considering Murray because of his lack of size.

Personally I believe someone will jump ahead of the Giants and pick Haskins. The Giants can't trade up for a QB. The best move outside of releasing Eli, will be drafting a pass rusher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Acgott said:

Both of them scare me, because of their lack of experience, but I can only judge off that because I don't follow college football.

A new report came out today that Giants aren't considering Murray because of his lack of size.

Personally I believe someone will jump ahead of the Giants and pick Haskins. The Giants can't trade up for a QB. The best move outside of releasing Eli, will be drafting a pass rusher.

I don't follow college football either. But based on the research I've done on Haskins, which involves watching his tape and reading scouting reports - his lack of starting experience doesn't seem to be an issue for a few of reasons:

1. Everyone around him praises his football IQ and work ethic. He appears to be dedicated to putting in whatever time is required to master his craft.

2. He is mentored by several pro and former pro NFL players which has helped him become "pro ready."

3. Whenever he faced a more difficult opponent or the stakes were higher, he performed even better. He also carried an offense with no running game and a mediocre defense. This shows that he's a leader and the fact that he was able to do this is in just his first year says a lot about his maturity and leadership abilities.

I wouldn't disagree with you about your stance on the draft. I'm not necessarily a fan of trading up, especially when we have so many needs - particularly on the defensive side in a strong defensive draft. But on the other hand, the QB position is one of those "X factor" situations where if you feel you found your guy there's almost no amount that is too much to give up and get him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's just say you did sign Tannehill. Who do you then take at #6? Clelin Ferrell? Ed Oliver? Devin White? Greedy Williams?

I'm personally hoping you guys take Rashaan Gary if you don't go QB, but I'm hoping you go QB. Haskins, Murray, Jones, Lock. All crap. Please commit to one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Jeezla said:

Let's just say you did sign Tannehill. Who do you then take at #6? Clelin Ferrell? Ed Oliver? Devin White? Greedy Williams?

I'm personally hoping you guys take Rashaan Gary if you don't go QB, but I'm hoping you go QB. Haskins, Murray, Jones, Lock. All crap. Please commit to one.

I'm hoping we just draft Barkley again, and everyone can be miserable together. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, w4rrior723 said:

I don't follow college football either. But based on the research I've done on Haskins, which involves watching his tape and reading scouting reports - his lack of starting experience doesn't seem to be an issue for a few of reasons:

1. Everyone around him praises his football IQ and work ethic. He appears to be dedicated to putting in whatever time is required to master his craft.

2. He is mentored by several pro and former pro NFL players which has helped him become "pro ready."

3. Whenever he faced a more difficult opponent or the stakes were higher, he performed even better. He also carried an offense with no running game and a mediocre defense. This shows that he's a leader and the fact that he was able to do this is in just his first year says a lot about his maturity and leadership abilities.

I wouldn't disagree with you about your stance on the draft. I'm not necessarily a fan of trading up, especially when we have so many needs - particularly on the defensive side in a strong defensive draft. But on the other hand, the QB position is one of those "X factor" situations where if you feel you found your guy there's almost no amount that is too much to give up and get him.

If we trade up, we would have no other picks in the first 3 rounds and probably lose a high pick next year. Get a defensive player, cut Eli and play for 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Acgott said:

If we trade up, we would have no other picks in the first 3 rounds and probably lose a high pick next year. Get a defensive player, cut Eli and play for 2020.

True, but we put ourselves in a similar situation with Eli - and that obviously worked out pretty darn well. And Eli isn't even that great of a QB. Just goes to show the value of having a franchise QB at the helm for 15~ years. Giving up several high picks for even just a good and not great QB can be an excellent move for a franchise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, w4rrior723 said:

True, but we put ourselves in a similar situation with Eli - and that obviously worked out pretty darn well. And Eli isn't even that great of a QB. Just goes to show the value of having a franchise QB at the helm for 15~ years. Giving up several high picks for even just a good and not great QB can be an excellent move for a franchise.

Going from 6-1 is going to cost us a lot more. If we can do well will a good QB, wouldn’t it make sense just to draft someone later and build an amazing team around him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kyler Murray is going #1, which means Giants, Jags, Broncos, Dolphins, and Washington are going to be fighting to get into the top 3 to grab Haskins. Stay put at 6 and grab a top-4 defensive player. Bosa, Quinnen Williams, Josh Allen, or Oliver/White.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×