Shockwave Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 18 hours ago, Acgott said: But he does have those injury concerns. He’s a little bit older, somehow playing 4 injury seasons at Indiana before two at Washington. Despite a “fast” pro day 40, he never ran in college. We may have the worst roster in the NFL. Trading up in the late first for one is not a good use of resources. Yes but it's for those reasons he may be there in the late 1st to take.... otherwise he'd be going top 3. And to be honest I don't want him for his running ability I want him because he has elite arm talent and loves to air it out. The age is of no concern. He's 23 will turn 24 in May. Jayden Daniels is a whole 8 months younger. QB's can play well into their 30's. My only other concern is him being a lefty. Makes RT the blind side blocker and lessens Thomas a bit. But if we have the opportunity to get Nabers/Odunze and pair them with Penix... sign me the hell up. I'm so tired of watching this pathetic offense year in and year out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acgott Posted April 5 Author Share Posted April 5 2 hours ago, Shockwave said: Yes but it's for those reasons he may be there in the late 1st to take.... otherwise he'd be going top 3. And to be honest I don't want him for his running ability I want him because he has elite arm talent and loves to air it out. The age is of no concern. He's 23 will turn 24 in May. Jayden Daniels is a whole 8 months younger. QB's can play well into their 30's. My only other concern is him being a lefty. Makes RT the blind side blocker and lessens Thomas a bit. But if we have the opportunity to get Nabers/Odunze and pair them with Penix... sign me the hell up. I'm so tired of watching this pathetic offense year in and year out. We just do not have the roster nor the draft picks to make that move. We would need to trade at least our 4th, but probably our 3rd to make such a move from 47 to at least 32, but probably higher. This is a deep receiver draft. If that is their plan, they need to trade down from 6. Not up from 47. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shockwave Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 1 hour ago, Acgott said: We just do not have the roster nor the draft picks to make that move. We would need to trade at least our 4th, but probably our 3rd to make such a move from 47 to at least 32, but probably higher. This is a deep receiver draft. If that is their plan, they need to trade down from 6. Not up from 47. I disagree here too. On defense I think we have quite a talented roster that could be a very good unit if the offense would stop going three and out and giving them short fields. The offense is completely devoid of even one serious threat at this point. A true #1 and a gunslinger like Penix could make a world of difference. But again I don't think Penix is going to fall enough for it to even be a possibility so this whole discussion is probably moot. I don't think he makes it past Minny/Den. Bo Nix is the more probable name to still be on the board. I'm nowhere near as high on him. But if he's there at 47 I would consider it. My official prediction still stands though. I think McCarthy is their guy and I also think they are more then willing to move up to secure him. I don't agree with it but the writing seems to be on the wall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acgott Posted April 5 Author Share Posted April 5 11 minutes ago, Shockwave said: I disagree here too. On defense I think we have quite a talented roster that could be a very good unit if the offense would stop going three and out and giving them short fields. The offense is completely devoid of even one serious threat at this point. A true #1 and a gunslinger like Penix could make a world of difference. But again I don't think Penix is going to fall enough for it to even be a possibility so this whole discussion is probably moot. I don't think he makes it past Minny/Den. Bo Nix is the more probable name to still be on the board. I'm nowhere near as high on him. But if he's there at 47 I would consider it. My official prediction still stands though. I think McCarthy is their guy and I also think they are more then willing to move up to secure him. I don't agree with it but the writing seems to be on the wall. I went off these rankings, and while I disagree with the front 7 rankings, it’s hard to argue most of them. We need a lot of depth. https://g.espncdn.com/s/ffldraftkit/24/NFLDK2024_CS_ClayProjections2024.pdf Trading up for McCarthy I support, though don’t like. Be aggressive if you think he’s a top 3 QB this class. Not for a top 4 or 5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acgott Posted April 9 Author Share Posted April 9 @minutemancl Giants just do not have the assets nor the team to trade up from #47. If that is their plan, they need to trade down from #6. We cannot use two draft picks on the #6 QB. cc @vshank8182 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minutemancl Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 1 minute ago, Acgott said: @minutemancl Giants just do not have the assets nor the team to trade up from #47. If that is their plan, they need to trade down from #6. We cannot use two draft picks on the #6 QB. cc @vshank8182 Is this in reference to that one mock draft in the mock draft forum? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acgott Posted April 9 Author Share Posted April 9 50 minutes ago, minutemancl said: Is this in reference to that one mock draft in the mock draft forum? Yes, I thought it be a fun discussion we can have here, rather than there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minutemancl Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 1 minute ago, Acgott said: Yes, I thought it be a fun discussion we can have here, rather than there. I liked the trade proposed. It is an even 2 assets for 2 assets trade, which I'm a huge proponent of. Yes, of course we move back ~100 spots from pick 70, but it is still the same number of swings you had before, but we pick up a talented QB on a super cheap contract plus a 5th year option. That would be absolutely worth the trade back, to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acgott Posted April 9 Author Share Posted April 9 45 minutes ago, minutemancl said: I liked the trade proposed. It is an even 2 assets for 2 assets trade, which I'm a huge proponent of. Yes, of course we move back ~100 spots from pick 70, but it is still the same number of swings you had before, but we pick up a talented QB on a super cheap contract plus a 5th year option. That would be absolutely worth the trade back, to me. I just hate that we turned 5, top 100 picks into just two players. I can stomach it if it was for a top 3 QB, but we have too many holes to draft someone that will be on our bench all year. Daboll will surely be fired after the season with that move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minutemancl Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 3 minutes ago, Acgott said: I just hate that we turned 5, top 100 picks into just two players. I can stomach it if it was for a top 3 QB, but we have too many holes to draft someone that will be on our bench all year. Daboll will surely be fired after the season with that move. 5 picks into 2 players? We started with 6, 39, 47, 70, and 107. In the case his mock was 100% correct, 6 would be Nabers, 39 is Brian Burns, 47/70 would be Bo Nix, and we'd still have 107. That sounds pretty good to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acgott Posted April 9 Author Share Posted April 9 10 minutes ago, minutemancl said: 5 picks into 2 players? We started with 6, 39, 47, 70, and 107. In the case his mock was 100% correct, 6 would be Nabers, 39 is Brian Burns, 47/70 would be Bo Nix, and we'd still have 107. That sounds pretty good to me. For some reason I was thinking the 5th for Burns was a top 100 pick. If you want to trade up, do it in the first 5 picks. That’s where we should be aggressive. We shouldn’t be hoping a QB falls down to us. There is a much better percentage of that player hitting. If we had a better roster, I’ll feel better about it, but we are razor thin everywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minutemancl Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 1, 2, 3 are Caleb Williams, Drake Maye, Jayden Daniels in that order. Giants trade up to 4, giving up 47, to take JJ McCarthy. What are your thoughts/feelings? I'd like it. I think better QB play fixes a lot of problems we saw last year, and I think JJ McCarthy will be a good QB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shockwave Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 8 minutes ago, minutemancl said: 1, 2, 3 are Caleb Williams, Drake Maye, Jayden Daniels in that order. Giants trade up to 4, giving up 47, to take JJ McCarthy. What are your thoughts/feelings? I'd like it. I think better QB play fixes a lot of problems we saw last year, and I think JJ McCarthy will be a good QB. I honestly believe this is their plan. I'm not huge on it but I'd be ok with it. It's alot of capital to invest in a QB. I'd much rather stay put take Nabers and trade back up to get a Penix or Nix. Or trade down to 11 take Penix and use the extra draft equity to get a WR and fill some other holes. But if your Schoen and JJ is your guy you do what you have to do to get him and that probably means giving up 47. I'm just in love with the thought of Penix to Nabers but I know it's highly unlikely. I agree though QB moves the needle more then anything else. It's been 5 years and DJ just isn't the guy. Get a damn QB. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minutemancl Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 TE/FB Ben Sinnott at 107. You heard it here first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acgott Posted April 11 Author Share Posted April 11 10 hours ago, minutemancl said: 1, 2, 3 are Caleb Williams, Drake Maye, Jayden Daniels in that order. Giants trade up to 4, giving up 47, to take JJ McCarthy. What are your thoughts/feelings? I'd like it. I think better QB play fixes a lot of problems we saw last year, and I think JJ McCarthy will be a good QB. I won’t be excited and probably be disappointed, but I’ll understand the move. Just not happy about the #4 QB at #4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.