Jump to content
Duke5217

What are the G-Men doing at #2?

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Kip Smithers said:

They don’t know he is the future or not, but they are willing to bypass an opportunity to draft a QB because in part they’d like to see what they have in him. Like people act like if we don’t draft a QB now, we’re doomed. Far from the truth. It really depends on how you view the player. Bringing up those examples completely ignores the evaluation of the players. It is very much possible that you draft a QB lower than what you graded. Each case is different.

And that's why mediocre franchises stay mediocre.  They're waiting for a statistical anomaly to happen in order to develop the future of their franchise.  Since 2005, 34 QBs have been drafted on Day 2 of the NFL Draft.  Of those 34, only four have been viable starting QBs: Derek Carr, Jimmy Garoppolo, Russell Wilson, and Andy Dalton.  That's a success rate at less than 12%.  Of those four, only Jimmy Garoppolo didn't show significant promise as a rookie.  What makes you think Davis Webb is one of those four, and not one of the other 30 QBs taken in that same range?  Aside from blind homerism that is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CWood21 said:

And that's why mediocre franchises stay mediocre.  They're waiting for a statistical anomaly to happen in order to develop the future of their franchise.  Since 2005, 34 QBs have been drafted on Day 2 of the NFL Draft.  Of those 34, only four have been viable starting QBs: Derek Carr, Jimmy Garoppolo, Russell Wilson, and Andy Dalton.  That's a success rate at less than 12%.  Of those four, only Jimmy Garoppolo didn't show significant promise as a rookie.  What makes you think Davis Webb is one of those four, and not one of the other 30 QBs taken in that same range?  Aside from blind homerism that is.

I don’t see the harm in giving Webb a shot to see what he has before we delve into franchise QB sweepstakes. If the Giants don’t believe Webb can be that guy then fine. Blind homerism? Yes because I am exclusively referring to my team lol. But if the team see the potential there and don’t feel the pressing need to address the QB then fine. This is your problem, you think I’m saying that  as soon as Eli is gone, Webb is now the franchise QB. No I’m saying give him a shot see what you have with him before you make that judgement particularly if you see the potential there. Like this isn’t hard to grasp. Oh yeah that list you of QBs you mentioned excludes Tyrod, Kirk, Dak, Keenum. But go on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Kip Smithers said:

I don’t see the harm in giving Webb a shot to see what he has before we delve into franchise QB sweepstakes. If the Giants don’t believe Webb can be that guy then fine. Blind homerism? Yes because I am exclusively referring to my team lol. But if the team see the potential there and don’t feel the pressing need to address the QB then fine. This is your problem, you think I’m saying that  as soon as Eli is gone, Webb is now the franchise QB. No I’m saying give him a shot see what you have with him before you make that judgement particularly if you see the potential there. Like this isn’t hard to grasp. Oh yeah that list you of QBs you mentioned excludes Tyrod, Kirk, Dak, Keenum. But go on...

There isn't a single GM whose going to pass over a QB because of Davis Webb.  Point blank.  Webb doesn't prevent you from drafting another QB, especially not in the first round.  It'd be one thing if Webb had played well in relief of Eli, but he didn't play any meaningful snaps.  If the Giants truly believed he was their franchise QB, they wouldn't have waited until the end of the 3rd round to select him.  That's where developmental-types go in the draft, not potential franchise QBs.

And you want to include more QBs in your list, but you'll ignore the other flops around them.  Go ahead and look at the QBs drafted from 2005 and look at the success rate.  The later in the draft, the worst the success rate.  This isn't rocket science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Kip Smithers said:

Oh yeah that list you of QBs you mentioned excludes Tyrod, Kirk, Dak, Keenum. But go on...

He's stating specifically day 2, which is round 2 and 3. The guys you mentioned are Rd 4 and after. If you add in rounds 4-7 and the guys who get drafted there, I'm reasonably sure that would hurt the percentage, not help it, since you then have to add in all the other quarterbacks that didn't work out. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Forge said:

He's stating specifically day 2, which is round 2 and 3. The guys you mentioned are Rd 4 and after. If you add in rounds 4-7 and the guys who get drafted there, I'm reasonably sure that would hurt the percentage, not help it, since you then have to add in all the other quarterbacks that didn't work out. 

I mean, he tried arguing that David Bakhtiari was injury-prone and average...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I mean, he tried arguing that David Bakhtiari was injury-prone and average...

Wait, what lol? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Forge said:

He's stating specifically day 2, which is round 2 and 3. The guys you mentioned are Rd 4 and after. If you add in rounds 4-7 and the guys who get drafted there, I'm reasonably sure that would hurt the percentage, not help it, since you then have to add in all the other quarterbacks that didn't work out. 

 

Oh I know that he said day 2. The reason I brought those up was not to say there is some high rate of this happening but to just to show that it can happen. Low rate or not, there is enough precedence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Kip Smithers said:

Wait, what lol? 

You right.  My bad.  That was someone else.

Share this post


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

Oh I know that he said day 2. The reason I brought those up was not to say there is some high rate of this happening but to just to show that it can happen. Low rate or not, there is enough precedence. 

You're looking at the statistical anomaly and trying to use it validate your argument.  My argument isn't that Webb could be that statistical anomaly.  I'm arguing that he's done nothing to suggest he will be that.

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/2/20/8072877/what-the-statistics-tell-us-about-the-draft-by-round

It's a little outdated, but you'd have to imagine that it probably hasn't changed a whole lot since then.  You have a a 63% chance of finding a starter in the 1st round, 27% chance in the second round, 17% success rate in the 3rd round, etc.  What makes you think Webb is the exception to the general rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, CWood21 said:

You're looking at the statistical anomaly and trying to use it validate your argument.  My argument isn't that Webb could be that statistical anomaly.  I'm arguing that he's done nothing to suggest he will be that.

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/2/20/8072877/what-the-statistics-tell-us-about-the-draft-by-round

It's a little outdated, but you'd have to imagine that it probably hasn't changed a whole lot since then.  You have a a 63% chance of finding a starter in the 1st round, 27% chance in the second round, 17% success rate in the 3rd round, etc.  What makes you think Webb is the exception to the general rule?

I don’t know or am definitively sure he will be, we can apply that to everybody. I’m not saying he’s the guy and never have. All I have said is give him a shot to see what he has, particularly if you see potential there. Yes I know he hasn’t done anything to suggest so, neither has any QB drafted #1 overall. It’s all projection. He has potential which hasn’t been able to be displayed. So I don’t know if he is the exception. You seem to act like it’s sure fire, we know what he will be Solely based on history even though there is precedent for a 3rd rounder manifesting himself into a viable. Again I’m not saying he is will. You don’t know what he will be any more or less than I do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Wait til 2045 until they can find the mystical unicorn QB who's a guaranteed Hall of Famer in the third round.

Or they could take a QB in a class full of worthy QBs (in the first round) and they can sign one of the top Guards that are available in FA seemingly ever year

Brandon Brooks, Kevin Zeitler, Kelechi Osemele...all more proven then a rookie guard, only cost decent $. Heck if they were so valuable than their original teams would let let them leave so often.

At #2 you go for a franchise-defining player. The guys you rarely find anywhere else.

Edited by redsoxsuck05

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its surprising how many people have run with the "Giants won't take a QB" angle. The only reason to possible skip on a QB is if you truly do not like any of the prospect available at 2. The NFC is loaded and too many people are overrating last seasons' team and not having an honest look at the NFC picture. Eagles, Rams, Packers, Vikings, Saints, Falcons, Panthers all look to be strong moving forward and 49ers, Seahawks (Wilson), Lions, Bucs, Cowboys aren't slouches either. Going all in for a 2018 run is short sighted. Now if you dislike the QBs and don't find a trade down you like, that is fine, but not going Barkley just because you can "win now." You didn't get the number 2 pick because of flukes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I see it, you HAVE to have a good QB to succeed in this league.  The other positions are almost luxury picks in comparison.  For example, it wasn't long ago that the Vikings had the following players on their roster AT THE SAME TIME:

RB - Adrian Peterson - future Hall of Famer
OG - Steve Hutchinson - future a Hall of Famer
EDGE - Jared Allen - maybe not HOF, but darn close

With the second overall pick in this year's draft, the Giants could possibly take a prospect that is as good as one of the three players listed above.  Any one of Barkley, Nelson, or Chubb will likely be excellent players.  The only problem is that I don't think any of them play a position that is important enough to justify using the #2 overall pick in the draft - IF you need a quarterback.  The reason I say this is because, even though the Vikings had all three of those Hall of Fame caliber players on their team, they also had one other player on their team:

QB - Christian Ponder

Where did the Vikings end up with their team?  I can sum it up with a Jared Allen quote from the end of one of the Christian Ponder seasons: "I guess it's time to embrace the suck."  That pretty much sums it up.

The Giants could choose to fill one position with their #2 overall pick.  Eli MIGHT be ok for a year or so, but his time is getting short.  In my opinion, unless you already have the QB position locked up for a long time, you absolutely have to take a QB when you have the chance.  Good ones don't come along all that often, and even when they do, you may not be in a position to get them.  The only smart decision for the Giants at #2 is to take a QB if they feel there is one they like. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't Webb drafted by the previous gm? I doubt the current regime sees him as the guy

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



×