Jump to content

JPP traded to Tampa


WizardHawk

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, WizardHawk said:

Was just looking up dead money. That's a pretty big chunk of change.

It is; Giants only save 2.5 million on this years cap thanks to the 15 million in dead money. However, for next year now, regardless of what happens with Eli, we have the money to sign Landon Collins and OBJ, the 2 homegrown cornerstones on offense and defense, to long term deals. That is huge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, minutemancl said:

We hired James Bettcher, former Arizona DC, to be our DC. He utilizes a blitz heavy, attacking, one gap 3-4 base defense. I was wondering where JPP would fit in. Olivier Vernon is better rushing the passer from a 2 point stance than a 3 point stance and is fast enough to play one OLB spot. The closest fit JPP had was as a 5 technique, but even then he is a little undersized for that. Guess the Giants thought the same thing. Given his contract, the compensation is decent. 

Then why trade for Alec Ogletree, who struggled in the 3-4 last year?

Kinda puzzling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheKillerNacho said:

Then why trade for Alec Ogletree, who struggled in the 3-4 last year?

Kinda puzzling.

Wade had him playing inside. I think the Giants plan on playing him outside. Nothing is certain yet, but from what Ive heard and put together, I think Bettcher really desired the blitzing prowess and sideline to sideline speed and chase down ability that Ogletree has. 

It is a little puzzling, but Bettcher knows what kind of players he needs for his defense to work, and a few months ago he briefed the entire Giants front offense for multiple hours about it as well. All defensive acquisitions, or subtractions, have a very specific motive behind them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, indifference said:

Licht must of got intel that Chubb was not going past pick 6. Rather give up a third for JPP than to throw multiple picks away for Bradley Chubb. Although he will be a good player wherever he lands.

Maybe they want to draft Quenton Nelson or Saquon Barkley at #7.  Even if Chubb wasn't going to be there, Davenport would have been.  

 

5 minutes ago, minutemancl said:

Wade had him playing inside. I think the Giants plan on playing him outside.

From what I understand, Wade had Ogletree playing more as a run stopper which wasn't his forte and the Giants will probably use him in the Haasan Reddick inside/outside role. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BowlesDawgDX said:

Is it crazy that I think the Giants are more likely to trade down after this? Be it to 5, 11, or 12. I don't think this locks Chubb in at 2 is all I'm getting at

No, but it makes taking Chubb at 1.2 entirely justifiable.

And, no I don't think Tampa had any shot at Chubb at 1.7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BowlesDawgDX said:

Is it crazy that I think the Giants are more likely to trade down after this? Be it to 5, 11, or 12. I don't think this locks Chubb in at 2 is all I'm getting at

I think trade down was always potentially a move and still is. I'm not sure this trade means it is more or less likely to happen now, though. If anything, with an added third round pick, this makes trading up back into the tail end of the first more likely if we pass on a QB early and Lamar Jackson is available late day 1. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really can't see the Giants trading back with Buffalo/Miami/Arizona. There's a difference between the players being projected to go in the top 8 vs. those projected go after. Same reason why the Colts didn't want to trade too far back. The Colts will still get a premium player. Have to imagine the Giants feel the same way. The Giants are either picking a player at 2 or they are trading back with the Broncos. Do the Broncos want to trade up? There haven't been many rumors of them looking to trade up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...