PDA

View Full Version : I have to say it......



Pages : [1] 2

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:01 PM
Eric Winston is still out there and we NEED to sign him. We could get him for around $2MM/year right now. It would solidify our O line for the forseeable future and enable us to develop Pugh to play guard, where he needs to be.

Having Winston at RT with Beatty at LT would put us in great position to protect our QB, and have a stronger running game.
To me, this move is far more impactful than signing Cruz to a long term deal. Plus if Beatty gets hurt, Winston can slide to LT where he has played in the NFL.

In my view, RT is our most important hole to fill, even after the draft. To "assume" that Pugh will be ready to become a starting RT off the bat is a hugely risky proposition.

Sign Winston.....and solidify our O line for years to come.

talbot
05-21-2013, 03:03 PM
Why rush to sign him to a 2-3 million dollar deal right now? He hasn't been picked up by anyone, and Pugh has only participated in rookie camp. Wait until OTAs or training camp. He's unsigned for a reason.

rebelfan1966
05-21-2013, 03:03 PM
You did not really have to say it..... you just wanted to say it ;-)

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:04 PM
Why rush to sign him to a 2-3 million dollar deal right now? He hasn't been picked up by anyone, and Pugh has only participated in rookie camp. Wait until OTAs or training camp. He's unsigned for a reason.
Because he will probably be signed with someone else by then.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:05 PM
You did not really have to say it..... you just wanted to say it ;-)

...with all my heart.

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 03:05 PM
Pugh isn't strong enough to play guard at the nfl level

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:05 PM
Pugh isn't strong enough to play guard at the nfl level
Do they let them lift weights in the NFL?

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:07 PM
Pugh isn't strong enough to play guard at the nfl level

why is that?

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 03:09 PM
Do they let them lift weights in the NFL?Hes more ready to play rt than guard. As you very well know, we shouldn't have drafted this kid to begin with. I've done enough talking about how terrible our last two 1st round picks were.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:09 PM
why is that?
I understand that he was projected as a guard in the NFL by most teams. Plus, isn't strength a very important component in playing RT?

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 03:10 PM
why is that?Watch the game tapes in the draft forum. He is not going to be able to move 310 lb DL.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:11 PM
Hes more ready to play rt than guard. As you very well know, we shouldn't have drafted this kid to begin with. I've done enough talking about how terrible our last two 1st round picks were.
Putting the guard/tackle argument aside, do you really think Pugh is NFL ready right now to be the starting RT on a contending team? Not to mention that Brian Orakpo and Demarcus Ware are in our division.

gumby74
05-21-2013, 03:13 PM
i wouldn't be opposed to that idea actually.

DownWitJPP
05-21-2013, 03:14 PM
Watch the game tapes in the draft forum. He is not going to be able to move 310 lb DL. do u honestly believe that you know more about a player than our GM, scouts, coaching staff ? Pugh may have been drafted a little higher than his value but his talent warrants a late first round pick. Guard, center, right tackle I don't really care where he plays as long as he develops into a future starter on the line, then he was worth the first round pick

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:15 PM
Hes more ready to play rt than guard. As you very well know, we shouldn't have drafted this kid to begin with. I've done enough talking about how terrible our last two 1st round picks were.
you dont even know the out come of the these two first rounders yet.......so your speculation is well.....speculation. Fancy name for "just a guess"....

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:17 PM
do u honestly believe that you know more about a player than our GM, scouts, coaching staff ? Pugh may have been drafted a little higher than his value but his talent warrants a late first round pick. Guard, center, right tackle I don't really care where he plays as long as he develops into a future starter on the line, then he was worth the first round pick
No one thinks they know more than our FO, but drafts are a matter of judgement as well as knowledge. I think JR backed himself into a corner by not addressing the RT position in free agency.

Now he has a chance to make up for it by signing Winston and solidifying our O line. Then we can develop Pugh without throwing him to the wolves, possibly endangering our QB.

Sundown
05-21-2013, 03:20 PM
Him not bring signed yet is a red flag to me. Tackle is always a need for some team and if no one has signed him yet means something. I'd rather take my chances w Pugh. We haven't seen anything yet to say Pugh isn't ready.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:21 PM
Watch the game tapes in the draft forum. He is not going to be able to move 310 lb DL.
meh....he is still young and will improve with NFL training. I dont take those tapes as 100% of what a kid can give. Its a whole new ball game in the NFL from training to playing. Time will tell.

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 03:22 PM
Putting the guard/tackle argument aside, do you really think Pugh is NFL ready right now to be the starting RT on a contending team? Not to mention that Brian Orakpo and Demarcus Ware are in our division.I think he'll perform better this year than any of our RTs did last year.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:23 PM
I think he'll perform better this year than any of our RTs did last year.
and yet you think it was a terrible draft pick???

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:24 PM
I think he'll perform better this year than any of our RTs did last year.
I don't think he'll hold up this season if he's the starting RT. Its a HUGE gamble with Pugh at RT.

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 03:25 PM
do u honestly believe that you know more about a player than our GM, scouts, coaching staff ? Pugh may have been drafted a little higher than his value but his talent warrants a late first round pick. Guard, center, right tackle I don't really care where he plays as long as he develops into a future starter on the line, then he was worth the first round pickHis talent barely warranted a 2nd round pick. The need for his position by virtually every team in the league this year is what forced him into the first round. Starters on the OL are not worth first round picks, how often do teams trade a 1st rd pick for a guard center or right tackle?

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:26 PM
isnt the main purpose of the draft to 'fix" your team??

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:27 PM
Him not bring signed yet is a red flag to me. Tackle is always a need for some team and if no one has signed him yet means something. I'd rather take my chances w Pugh. We haven't seen anything yet to say Pugh isn't ready.
The reason he's not signed is that the cap is forcing these clubs to go young at certain positions, like RT. But now Winston's price has dropped considerably.
He's a great value at $2MM/season, especially since we really have no good option at RT other than an untested bench warmer (Brewer) or a guy who's been blocking Big East DE's.

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 03:27 PM
I don't think he'll hold up this season if he's the starting RT. Its a HUGE gamble with Pugh at RT.He's technically sound and ready to play, he just doesnt have a high ceiling, like a will beatty did coming out. Drafting a rt in the first round, the ****er better start from day 1.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:27 PM
isnt the main purpose of the draft to 'fix" your team??
The main purpose of the draft is to build your team. Free agency is for filling holes.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:28 PM
The main purpose of the draft is to build your team. Free agency is for filling holes.
either way....you draft for need. Either present or future depending on the player available......

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:28 PM
He's technically sound and ready to play, he just doesnt have a high ceiling, like a will beatty did coming out. Drafting a rt in the first round, the ****er better start from day 1.
I know that's their plan. I just thinbk its hugely risky for a contending team. If he is a weak link, Ware and Orakpo will find him.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:29 PM
I know that's their plan. I just thinbk its hugely risky for a contending team. If he is a weak link, Ware and Orakpo will find him.
Ware and Orakpo beat all pros too. They get there no matter what

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:30 PM
I know that's their plan. I just thinbk its hugely risky for a contending team. If he is a weak link, Ware and Orakpo will find him.
game plan more than an individual players keep those guys limited.

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 03:30 PM
isnt the main purpose of the draft to 'fix" your team??The purpose of the draft is to add as much talent as possible, preferably at positions that make a lot of money. Why? Because in doing so you are getting a good player at an important position, and it saves you cap space to either extend your own guys, or sign the best players at lesser valued positions.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:30 PM
either way....you draft for need. Either present or future depending on the player available......
That's fine but you don't reach into the second round to fill an immediate need at RT.
They should have drafted Rhodes and groomed him to replace Webby who has one year left on his deal. They should have signed a vet RT.
I said this a week into free agency and we are still in the same place.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:31 PM
The purpose of the draft is to add as much talent as possible, preferably at positions that make a lot of money. Why? Because in doing so you are getting a good player at an important position, and it saves you cap space to either extend your own guys, or sign the best players at lesser valued positions.
ok....so the Giants org thought RT was important enough to draft 1st.....case closed....
next

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:31 PM
Ware and Orakpo beat all pros too. They get there no matter what
So you're saying that since no one can block them, lets just put a crap player out there since he;s gunna get beat anyway?

That attitude will get your QB killed.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:32 PM
That's fine but you don't reach into the second round to fill an immediate need at RT.
They should have drafted Rhodes and groomed him to replace Webby who has one year left on his deal. They should have signed a vet RT.
I said this a week into free agency and we are still in the same place.
they have applications on line for the Giants front office....you should fill one out....lol

Sundown
05-21-2013, 03:33 PM
The reason he's not signed is that the cap is forcing these clubs to go young at certain positions, like RT. But now Winston's price has dropped considerably.
He's a great value at $2MM/season, especially since we really have no good option at RT other than an untested bench warmer (Brewer) or a guy who's been blocking Big East DE's.

Then cut deal Diehl? Seems like too much standing money for a year of insurance when we haven't even seen the kid go through practice yet. Regarding the salary cap, if a team needed a tackle hed be signed by now. Don't know man, not thrilled by it

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:33 PM
So you're saying that since no one can block them, lets just put a crap player out there since he;s gunna get beat anyway?

That attitude will get your QB killed.
no I never said Pugh was or will be a crap player. What I did say is that you limit players like that with game plan....not individual players for the most part....

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:34 PM
ok....so the Giants org thought RT was important enough to draft 1st.....case closed....
next
You are missing the point. The problem is that we had a roster hole at RT going into the draft, and they took whatever potential RT was on the board. I would have been good with Fluker if he was there. because he was NFL ready and an appropriate value at 19.
Pugh is most likely neither.

The error for JR was not addressing that hole at RT in free agency, forcing him to address it in round 1, even though there was far better value available to us.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:36 PM
Then cut deal Diehl? Seems like too much standing money for a year of insurance when we haven't even seen the kid go through practice yet. Regarding the salary cap, if a team needed a tackle hed be signed by now. Don't know man, not thrilled by it
They cut DD's salary by 80%. This demonstrates that they see him as a back up. He's valuable because he can play 4 positions on the O line.

Once they cut his pay that must, it was clear they did NOT see him as a starter anymore.

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 03:36 PM
ok....so the Giants org thought RT was important enough to draft 1st.....case closed....nextAnd it is an extremely counterintuitive decision

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:36 PM
You are missing the point. The problem is that we had a roster hole at RT going into the draft, and they took whatever potential RT was on the board. I would have been good with Fluker if he was there. because he was NFL ready and an appropriate value at 19.
Pugh is most likely neither.

The error for JR was not addressing that hole at RT in free agency, forcing him to address it in round 1, even though there was far better value available to us.
no...you are missing the point. It doesn't matter what you would "have been good with". Maybe he didnt like and FAs.......
You are making assuptions about Pugh. Assumptions you have no idea about.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:37 PM
And it is an extremely counterintuitive decision
I guess they just dont know what they are doing then....oh well..

I

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:37 PM
no I never said Pugh was or will be a crap player. What I did say is that you limit players like that with game plan....not individual players for the most part....
Guess what....defenses know how to gameplan as well. They also know how to exploit a weak link on the opposing O line.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:38 PM
Guess what....defenses know how to gameplan as well. They also know how to exploit a weak link on the opposing O line.
REALLY???....wow.
thanks for the heads up......

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:39 PM
I guess they just dont know what they are doing then....oh well..

I
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that they made a mistake and it started long before the draft. When you have a huge hole in the O line, you MUST deal with it in free agency unless you are sure your getting an NFL ready, blue chipped in the draft.

That's what KC did. They released Winston because they knew they were drafting either Fisher or Joekel. We were at 19, and had no idea who would be there when we drafted.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:40 PM
REALLY???....wow.
thanks for the heads up......
Stop.
They will exploit a weak tackle. You can't hide him with game planning.

slipknottin
05-21-2013, 03:41 PM
Winston was terrible last year. Id rather have Pugh start.

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 03:42 PM
I guess they just dont know what they are doing then....oh well..IThey have made mistakes before.

kfelgigiants
05-21-2013, 03:46 PM
cruz is one of the most important pieces in our offense. although that would help shore up the o line. jernigan wouldnt fill the void cruz would leave behind. pugh is one the smartest players in the draft class and might sit for a little and learn from vets like deihl and snee.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:48 PM
Winston was terrible last year. Id rather have Pugh start.
You would rather have a guy who so far has spent his career blocking Big East DE's?

Really Slippy? You're (dare I say it) "slipping".

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:49 PM
They have made mistakes before.
of course they have....

I guess I am different. I wont sit here say they made a mistake when I really dont know that they have....
Its yet to be determined if they made a mistake or not....IMO

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:49 PM
cruz is one of the most important pieces in our offense. although that would help shore up the o line. jernigan wouldnt fill the void cruz would leave behind. pugh is one the smartest players in the draft class and might sit for a little and learn from vets like deihl and snee.
So you are OK with DD at RT? Where he struggled at even in his prime. He's a bad RT. He was a decent LT and a decent LG, but he was NOT a good RT at all.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:50 PM
Stop.
They will exploit a weak tackle. You can't hide him with game planning.
how do you know that the RT spot will be weak???? You dont know for sure at all really....

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:51 PM
of course they have....

I guess I am different. I wont sit here say they made a mistake when I really dont know that they have....
Its yet to be determined if they made a mistake or not....IMO
Its my "opinion" that they made a huge mistake.

Its the Giants MB for God's sake. What's it for otherwise?

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:51 PM
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that they made a mistake and it started long before the draft. When you have a huge hole in the O line, you MUST deal with it in free agency unless you are sure your getting an NFL ready, blue chipped in the draft.

That's what KC did. They released Winston because they knew they were drafting either Fisher or Joekel. We were at 19, and had no idea who would be there when we drafted.
No guarantees for those two either....

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:52 PM
how do you know that the RT spot will be weak???? You dont know for sure at all really....
No one knows for sure either way.
I'm stating my opinion and responding to your post where you say that nobody stops Orakpo or Ware anyway.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:52 PM
Its my "opinion" that they made a huge mistake.

Its the Giants MB for God's sake. What's it for otherwise?
thats fine....I am not denying you your opnion. I dont have to agree with it and I can certainly think the Giants FO knows better then you...
right??

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:52 PM
No guarantees for those two either....
I agree. But the probability is MUCH higher given their college performances.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:53 PM
No one knows for sure either way.
I'm stating my opinion and responding to your post where you say that nobody stops Orakpo or Ware anyway.
saying that players like those two will make their mark almost every game. No matter what.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 03:53 PM
I agree. But the probability is MUCH higher given their college performances.
agreed.....

Eli TO Shockey
05-21-2013, 03:54 PM
David "Easy Pass" Deihl has been exploited for the past 3 seasons. All I know is we have an upgrade at RT with Pugh from day 1.

I like Winston too. But you have to wonder why no teams are biting. Especially considering we're not the only team with RT issues.

As a fan, I would have preferred we spent the money given to Jenkins and gotten Winston. However, when we signed Jenkins, FA hadnt started yet and Winston was asking considerably more than he is now.

As of today,we dont have the money to dish out 2 mil to winston without doing some restructing/cuts.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:56 PM
thats fine....I am not denying you your opnion. I dont have to agree with it and I can certainly think the Giants FO knows better then you...
right??
Yeah but I hate the argument that some posters make sometimes that since the FO knows better, my (or anyone else's) opinion is to be dismissed.
Its a bad argument. we can say if we think the team has made a big mistake. And that's what I'm doing. I appreciate the fact that you disagree and that you explain why. But the blanket response that "the FO knows better than you" is ridiculous.

No one is arguing that they know more than anyone here. I'm sure we can find opinions of yours out there where you have diagreed with something JR or TC did. It doesn't mean you think you know better than they do. Does it?

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 03:57 PM
David "Easy Pass" Deihl has been exploited for the past 3 seasons. All I know is we have an upgrade at RT with Pugh from day 1.

I like Winston too. But you have to wonder why no teams are biting. Especially considering we're not the only team with RT issues.

As a fan, I would have preferred we spent the money given to Jenkins and gotten Winston. However, when we signed Jenkins, FA hadnt started yet and Winston was asking considerably more than he is now.

As of today,we dont have the money to dish out 2 mil to winston without doing some restructing/cuts.

We actually do since we were looking at Hightower and Woodson. There will be more cuts. And doing it for a legit RT for the next few years is well worth it to me.

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 03:59 PM
of course they have....I guess I am different. I wont sit here say they made a mistake when I really dont know that they have....Its yet to be determined if they made a mistake or not....IMOIts a positional value notion that I hold. Even if rhodes ends up being a terrible player and pugh turns into an all pro, the selection is still a bad decision at the time it was made.

To elaborate, I would venture to say that the giants had rhodes rated higher than pugh or very closely to him. Rhodes plays cornerback and we have 2 corners that are guaranteed to be on the roster next year, one of whom has proven to be quite good, while the jury is still out on the other one. Generally speaking, it is very unusual for a rookie cornerback to do well his first year, so if we wanted a cheap, quality starter next year at cb then it makes sense to draft rhodes this year.

Whereas, with the situation we are in now, next year we will have to invest money into a good corner or rely on a rookie to play well for us. I would much rather have a continuous weakness at RT than EVER have a weakness at cornerback.

I apply this logic to DL, pass rushers, WRs and QBs alike. It is seemingly very intuitive and allows for a team to maximize its chances of having a good player at every position.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 04:00 PM
Yeah but I hate the argument that some posters make sometimes that since the FO knows better, my (or anyone else's) opinion is to be dismissed.
Its a bad argument. we can say if we think the team has made a big mistake. And that's what I'm doing. I appreciate the fact that you disagree and that you explain why. But the blanket response that "the FO knows better than you" is ridiculous.

No one is arguing that they know more than anyone here. I'm sure we can find opinions of yours out there where you have diagreed with something JR or TC did. It doesn't mean you think you know better than they do. Does it?
when you say they out and out made a mistake and you have suggestion that you think would be better. Yes...at that point you think you know better. But thats OK. I am just disagreeing with it. I am so far removed from the process an NFL FO goes through that I all I can do is say or hope they know better then any of us here on this board. At least I hope they do....

NYGabriel
05-21-2013, 04:03 PM
Pugh needs to be ready to start. If anything the FO should have cut RT/Human Turnstile Diehl and signed Winston. He's a good player but a luxury right now.

Eli TO Shockey
05-21-2013, 04:03 PM
We actually do since we were looking at Hightower and Woodson. There will be more cuts. And doing it for a legit RT for the next few years is well worth it to me.

Hightower wont get much more than minimum. I'm sure Woodson will only come here if he prefers to play for a contender. Money wise he'll get more from OAK. There are obviously red flags with Winston. There's a reason why no one is biting. Do you actually know the type of money hes asking for or are you just speaking out of your *** when you say 2 mil?

GameTime
05-21-2013, 04:03 PM
Its a positional value notion that I hold. Even if rhodes ends up being a terrible player and pugh turns into an all pro, the selection is still a bad decision at the time it was made. To elaborate, I would venture to say that the giants had rhodes rates higher than pugh or very closely to him. Rhodes plays cornerback and we have 2 corners that are guaranteed to be on the roster next year, one of whom has proven to be quite good, while the jury is still out on the other one. Generally speaking, it is very unusual for a rookie cornerback to do well his first year, so if we wanted a cheap, quality starter next year at cb then it makes sense to draft rhodes this year. Whereas, with the situation we are in now, next year we will have to invest money into a good corner or rely on a rookie to play well for us. I would much rather have a continuous weakness at RT than EVER have a weakness at cornerback.
great explaination. I see what you are saying. I would rather protect my QB with a stron OL and have a weakness at CB. The Giants tend to want a top notch DL and they sacrifice at CB somewhat from what I have seen over the last several years. So what they are doing kind of goes with their MO.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:04 PM
when you say they out and out made a mistake and you have suggestion that you think would be better. Yes...at that point you think you know better. But thats OK. I am just disagreeing with it. I am so far removed from the process an NFL FO goes through that I all I can do is say or hope they know better then any of us here on this board. At least I hope they do....
Look....I didn't call JR a name or anything. I said that I disagreed and I went into a lot of detail as to why I disagree. I think that's what a poster should do on a football MB.
I think in this case, JR's judgement was the wrong one. I also think TC's judgement was wrong about benching Wilson for the fumble in the Dallas game. But I don't for a second think that I know one tenth the football TC knows. I just think he was being stubborn.

Kruunch
05-21-2013, 04:04 PM
You are missing the point. The problem is that we had a roster hole at RT going into the draft, and they took whatever potential RT was on the board. I would have been good with Fluker if he was there. because he was NFL ready and an appropriate value at 19.
Pugh is most likely neither.

The error for JR was not addressing that hole at RT in free agency, forcing him to address it in round 1, even though there was far better value available to us.

Couple of things:

1) Where did you get the idea we could get Winston for $2M/year? He wants double that last time I checked, which is presumably why the Giants didn't go that direction. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/09/eric-winston-wants-3-4-million-calls-free-agent-market-frustrating/

2) Pugh is considered an NFL ready tackle (that was one of his upsides). He's considered less of a liability in pass protection than Fluker (Fluker's big knock). While Pugh can play any position on the line (another one of his upsides), he's being looked at as the RT, whereas Fluker was projected to move inside to OG (which we don't need currently).

I agree with you in the sense that had I had the choice, I would have rather the Giants signed Winston and go elsewhere in the first round (Xavier Rhodes?). However, now that we've drafted Pugh, signing Winston would just be wasteful (especially considering the MASH unit our LBer corps currently is).

And Pugh at RT is far from worrisome. I'm looking forward to seeing him in action ... chances are he'll turn out better than Winston.

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 04:05 PM
No one is arguing that they know more than anyone hereI am.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 04:05 PM
Look....I didn't call JR a name or anything. I said that I disagreed and I went into a lot of detail as to why I disagree. I think that's what a poster should do on a football MB.
I think in this case, JR's judgement was the wrong one. I also think TC's judgement was wrong about benching Wilson for the fumble in the Dallas game. But I don't for a second think that I know one tenth the football TC knows. I just think he was being stubborn.
I know you wern't name calling. Never said you were...
We all have our opnions........

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:06 PM
great explaination. I see what you are saying. I would rather protect my QB with a stron OL and have a weakness at CB. The Giants tend to want a top notch DL and they sacrifice at CB somewhat from what I have seen over the last several years. So what they are doing kind of goes with their MO.
But you see....I agree. I think protecting Eli is of paramount importance. That's why we should have signed a solid vet at RT in free agency and not rolled the dice in the draft.
Winston and Rhodes is better than Pugh and $2MM extra dollars.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:06 PM
I am.
Except Lawl...........

Hahahahaha!!!!

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:07 PM
I know you wern't name calling. Never said you were...
We all have our opnions........
I know that. i was responding to the notion that you presume I think I know more than JR. I don't for a second think I do.
But I DO disagree with him on this.

Eli TO Shockey
05-21-2013, 04:08 PM
Winston was asking 3-4 mil a month ago. Which isnt too much money for a "top notch RT who will hold it down on the right side for years". Yet, no one is biting. RT is a very important position in the NFL. Just look at what happened in the draft. Winston isn't the player you think he is. (MH)

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/09/eric-winston-wants-3-4-million-calls-free-agent-market-frustrating/

GameTime
05-21-2013, 04:08 PM
I know that. i was responding to the notion that you presume I think I know more than JR. I don't for a second think I do.
But I DO disagree with him on this.
so you admit it....you dont know what you're talking about...lol...
just goofing..
all good...

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 04:10 PM
great explaination. I see what you are saying. I would rather protect my QB with a stron OL and have a weakness at CB. The Giants tend to want a top notch DL and they sacrifice at CB somewhat from what I have seen over the last several years. So what they are doing kind of goes with their MO.The top 5 corners on the team were drafted by us in the first 3 rds. Two 1st rders, 2 2nd rders, and 1 3rd rounder.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:12 PM
Winston was asking 3-4 mil a month ago. Which isnt too much money for a "top notch RT who will hold it down on the right side for years". Yet, no one is biting. RT is a very important position in the NFL. Just look at what happened in the draft. Winston isn't the player you think he is. (MH)

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/09/eric-winston-wants-3-4-million-calls-free-agent-market-frustrating/
Everyone wants to go young and cheap at all O line positions except LT.
Its the consequence of the reduced cap with the new CBA.
But every team also has its own situation, Our situation is that we essentially have no starting RT on the roster except a rookie who we reached into the second round for and a bench warmer who's played next to no snaps in an NFL game.

Given that, I would say we would benefit as much or more than anyone else from signing Eric Winston.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 04:17 PM
The top 5 corners on the team were drafted by us in the first 3 rds. Two 1st rders, 2 2nd rders, and 1 3rd rounder.
ok....did they draft them as "value" players so they could start in their second year? Just asking because I do not know.....

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:19 PM
ok....did they draft them as "value" players so they could start in their second year? Just asking because I do not know.....
Webby didn't start. Prince didn't start. Hosely didn't start, Ross didn't start and I don't think TT started either.
With the exception of injury situations and maybe playing the slot in nickel packages.

I doubt Rhodes would have started either, but our future would have looked very bright at corner.

slipknottin
05-21-2013, 04:21 PM
Id rather have Diehl start than Winston.

Kruunch
05-21-2013, 04:21 PM
ok....did they draft them as "value" players so they could start in their second year? Just asking because I do not know.....

Giants usually throw their CBs right into the mix. Ross, Webster, Prince and T2 all had starts and/or extensive playing time their rookie years.

TheEnigma
05-21-2013, 04:22 PM
It seemed obvious to me that a lot of teams just wanted to go the safer route in round 1 by taking prospects that would mesh well with team chemistry and guys that didn't have as many technical flaws. I saw more gambles consistently occur in the late 2nd to 3rd round range this year since the talent pool was deeper there. All the scouts raved about how smart and mature Pugh was. Some even said it was like having an additional coach on the field so I'm sure that's what bumped him up on actual team boards vs the expert mock drafts. Hopefully he only has to play T for one season and then kicks inside when he gains more muscle. I'd say he has a higher ceiling on the inside as a pull/trap specialist to open holes for Wilson/Brown than as an elite edge protector.

Kruunch
05-21-2013, 04:23 PM
Webby didn't start. Prince didn't start. Hosely didn't start, Ross didn't start and I don't think TT started either.
With the exception of injury situations and maybe playing the slot in nickel packages.

I doubt Rhodes would have started either, but our future would have looked very bright at corner.

The only one out of that bunch that didn't start a game in their rookie year was Prince (and he still had extensive playing time after being side lined the first half of the season with a broken foot).

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 04:23 PM
Webby didn't start. Prince didn't start. Hosely didn't start, Ross didn't start and I don't think TT started either.With the exception of injury situations and maybe playing the slot in nickel packages.I doubt Rhodes would have started either, but our future would have looked very bright at corner. Yea, so there was a precedent in place. Not to mention, Rhodes is big, fast, and had good tape.

Eli TO Shockey
05-21-2013, 04:23 PM
Id rather have Diehl start than Winston.

While I agree Winston is overrated by us fans. He cant be worse than Deihl. Wait, is that even possible?

Kruunch
05-21-2013, 04:23 PM
Id rather have Diehl start than Winston.


I'm a DD fan but whaaaaaaaaaaaa ??

Eli TO Shockey
05-21-2013, 04:25 PM
Everyone wants to go young and cheap at all O line positions except LT.
Its the consequence of the reduced cap with the new CBA.
But every team also has its own situation, Our situation is that we essentially have no starting RT on the roster except a rookie who we reached into the second round for and a bench warmer who's played next to no snaps in an NFL game.

Given that, I would say we would benefit as much or more than anyone else from signing Eric Winston.

And what im saying is that Winston isnt the player you think he is. 3mil is not a lot of money for a "top notch" rt in the nfl.

Mercury
05-21-2013, 04:30 PM
I think Pugh will do well against Ware and Orakapo. His greatest advantages are his footwork and ability to recover and re-anchor. That's what you need vs. these guys, someone who can get in the way and stay in the way. IE - not DD, not Winston.

Pugh played LT in college and that should translate well to the NFL level at RT. If their plan was to make him our LT, I'd be more worried.

GameTime
05-21-2013, 04:32 PM
Webby didn't start. Prince didn't start. Hosely didn't start, Ross didn't start and I don't think TT started either.
With the exception of injury situations and maybe playing the slot in nickel packages.

I doubt Rhodes would have started either, but our future would have looked very bright at corner.
Jury still out on Hosley...maybe he is the reason they didnt go CB. Also I think TT is a non factor. They have Prince and Webster. Of course Webster may or may not be done. ...

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:34 PM
While I agree Winston is overrated by us fans. He cant be worse than Deihl. Wait, is that even possible?
I'm not saying that Winston is a top tackle. I am saying that he is a very solid vet. And tht's what we need.
For Slippy to say that he'd rather have DD than Winston is...............well I don't have words. (and that's rare)

Kruunch
05-21-2013, 04:38 PM
I'm not saying that Winston is a top tackle. I am saying that he is a very solid vet. And tht's what we need.
For Slippy to say that he'd rather have DD than Winston is...............well I don't have words. (and that's rare)

He's been a top 10 (top 5 in some cases) RT in each year that's he's been a full starter from 2007-2011.

In 2012 he was less than stellar but look at the team he played on (the 2-14 Chiefs).

Everyone is prone to going to extremes of one side of the debate or another. :rolleyes:

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:41 PM
Jury still out on Hosley...maybe he is the reason they didnt go CB. Also I think TT is a non factor. They have Prince and Webster. Of course Webster may or may not be done. ...
I think Hosley is a player but probably a slot guy....which these days is important.

TCHOF
05-21-2013, 04:41 PM
Why does Pugh "need to be" at guard? The guy hasn't stepped foot onto an NFL field yet.

Eric Winston has short arms for a tackle and, according to numerous posts on this board, that means that he cannot play tackle in the NFL :D

In all seriousness, I like Winston, but can't imagine that he would want to sign with a team that just selected their projected RT in the first round, and just signed their young LT to a new deal.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:43 PM
Why does Pugh "need to be" at guard? The guy hasn't stepped foot onto an NFL field yet.

Eric Winston has short arms for a tackle and, according to numerous posts on this board, that means that he cannot play tackle in the NFL :D

In all seriousness, I like Winston, but can't imagine that he would want to sign with a team that just selected their projected RT in the first round, and just signed their young LT to a new deal.


Wanna bet? A chance to play for the Giants.....a winner?
And know that he is the starter this season? I would think this is great spot for him.

TheEnigma
05-21-2013, 04:45 PM
Winston might want to wait for the offseason to play out a little more before rushing into a new contract. Dwight Freeney certainly benefited from the injury to Melvin Ingram so there is a decent chance one of the various RTs in the NFL suffers a serious injury to open up a door for Winston.

TCHOF
05-21-2013, 04:46 PM
Wanna bet? A chance to play for the Giants.....a winner?
And know that he is the starter this season? I would think this is great spot for him.

So the Giants would promise him a starting position before their shiny new first round pick even steps out onto the field? Hmmm

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:47 PM
So the Giants would promise him a starting position before their shiny new first round pick even steps out onto the field? Hmmm
God I hope they would.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:48 PM
Winston might want to wait for the offseason to play out a little more before rushing into a new contract. Dwight Freeney certainly benefited from the injury to Melvin Ingram so there is a decent chance one of the various RTs in the NFL suffers a serious injury to open up a door for Winston.
heard him on NFL Sirius today and he expressed his frustration that he hasn't been signed yet. He didn't sound like a guy content to wait and see if someone gets hurt.

TheEnigma
05-21-2013, 04:52 PM
heard him on NFL Sirius today and he expressed his frustration that he hasn't been signed yet. He didn't sound like a guy content to wait and see if someone gets hurt.

He might have no choice but to do exactly that unless he is content with a vet min sort of deal. FA has significantly slowed down for the most part and there isn't much interest buzzing around him. Heck, even Richard Seymour can't find work as of now.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 04:55 PM
He might have no choice but to do exactly that unless he is content with a vet min sort of deal. FA has significantly slowed down for the most part and there isn't much interest buzzing around him. Heck, even Richard Seymour can't find work as of now.
I guarantee that Seymour wants too much.
This is a product of the new cap with the CBA.
Teams have to go young at certain positions. RT is definitely one of them for cost reasons. Its a perfect opportunity to pick the kid up at a discount and solidify our O line.

slipknottin
05-21-2013, 04:57 PM
I'm a DD fan but whaaaaaaaaaaaa ??

DD last year at RT was better than Winston was.

And we all know I am no fan of DD at all.

pino
05-21-2013, 05:01 PM
You guys crack me up.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 05:07 PM
DD last year at RT was better than Winston was.

And we all know I am no fan of DD at all.
Here's PFF's ratings. They have the Chiefs as the #12 ranked O line in the league in 2012. and list Winston as the "stud" of the line.



12. Kansas City Chiefs (16)

PB – 14th, RB – 9th, PEN – 15th
Stud: By his own admission, Eric Winston (+15.9) and the Chiefs fans didn’t exactly hit it off. While he wasn’t exactly perfect this year, he was the most balanced player they had on their line.
Dud: The hope is that Jeff Allen (-19.6) improves after a disastrous rookie year. Given that there were signs of improvement in the second half of the 2012, we’d bet on it [Editors note: well we would with Khaled's money anyway].
Summary: Injuries hurt this line, which was something of a shame. They got strong play from all the guys who were penciled into start, but the problem came when rookies Allen and Donald Stephenson were forced into the lineup. Too much too soon.



Not sure what you're talking about Slippy!

gumby74
05-21-2013, 05:11 PM
He might have no choice but to do exactly that unless he is content with a vet min sort of deal. FA has significantly slowed down for the most part and there isn't much interest buzzing around him. Heck, even Richard Seymour can't find work as of now.

Teams (or at least some) are getting smarter about spending money.

slipknottin
05-21-2013, 05:12 PM
Here's PFF's ratings. They have the Chiefs as the #12 ranked O line in the league in 2012. and list Winston as the "stud" of the line.

lol! which explains why he got released one season into his multi year deal, doesnt it.

He was nowhere close to as good as PFF thinks. Just like PFF thinks Evan Mathis is the 6th best player in the entire league.

gumby74
05-21-2013, 05:14 PM
lol! which explains why he got released one season into his multi year deal, doesnt it.

He was nowhere close to as good as PFF thinks. Just like PFF thinks Evan Mathis is the 6th best player in the entire league.

either way, signing him for a cheap 1 year deal as depth, isn't the worst thing in the world.

slipknottin
05-21-2013, 05:15 PM
either way, signing him for a cheap 1 year deal as depth, isn't the worst thing in the world.

And have 4 guys at RT? why? What value is there in that?

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 05:29 PM
lol! which explains why he got released one season into his multi year deal, doesnt it.

He was nowhere close to as good as PFF thinks. Just like PFF thinks Evan Mathis is the 6th best player in the entire league.
He got released for the same reason a lot of players do........the cap.
Teams are making decisions today that have much more to do with economics, than play on the field.
Ask Amhad Bradshaw if that's true.

slipknottin
05-21-2013, 05:33 PM
He got released for the same reason a lot of players do........the cap.

No, releasing him cost the chiefs cap space. He got released because he wasent very good.

and bradshaw didnt get released to save cap space either, that may have been part of it, but he got released because he has two busted feet.

jintsfan666
05-21-2013, 05:38 PM
That's fine but you don't reach into the second round to fill an immediate need at RT.
They should have drafted Rhodes and groomed him to replace Webby who has one year left on his deal. They should have signed a vet RT.
I said this a week into free agency and we are still in the same place.

Would have made sense to me. We'd be starting Winston or the guy Miami go at right tackle and cultivating Rhodes at CB. Time will tell.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 05:39 PM
No, releasing him cost the chiefs cap space. He got released because he wasent very good.

and bradshaw didnt get released to save cap space either, that may have been part of it, but he got released because he has two busted feet.
It saved them space in the long run. They knew they were drafting a tackle with the first pick. They were also shopping Albert. Its all about the cap.
Winston was fine last year.

slipknottin
05-21-2013, 05:40 PM
It saved them space in the long run. They knew they were drafting a tackle with the first pick. They were also shopping Albert. Its all about the cap.
Winston was fine last year.

Ive heard otherwise from scouts/people who are on teams. It seems to me you are entirely basing your opinion off PFF.

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 05:49 PM
Ive heard otherwise from scouts/people who are on teams. It seems to me you are entirely basing your opinion off PFF.
I'm basing it on the fact that he's been a good football player in this league.

To say that you would rather have DD than Winston is ridiculous. And I'm a big DD admirer. So you lose all credibility when you make statements like that.

JesseJames
05-21-2013, 06:08 PM
I live in the Houston area and have seen a lot of Winston and I know that he's a damn good tackle, unless he has an injury I would like to see us pick him up and let Pugh develop slowly.. I also agree that Pugh may not be big enough to play guard unless he gets into a weight program and adds at least another 25 pounds...I know we needed a RT and IMO the Giants did exactly what they say they never do, they reached for Pugh in round 1..

Drez
05-21-2013, 07:01 PM
He's technically sound and ready to play, he just doesnt have a high ceiling, like a will beatty did coming out. Drafting a rt in the first round, the ****er better start from day 1.Will Beatty was rated as on of the better LTs in the NFL last season. Horribly low ceiling he has.

gmen0820
05-21-2013, 07:02 PM
Will Beatty was rated as on of the better LTs in the NFL last season. Horribly low ceiling he has.I think Lawl is saying that Beatty did have a high ceiling coming out of college.

Drez
05-21-2013, 07:05 PM
I think Lawl is saying that Beatty did have a high ceiling coming out of college.Ahh... Yes, it appears that way upon re-reading.

Imgrate
05-21-2013, 07:17 PM
Will Beatty was rated as on of the better LTs in the NFL last season. Horribly low ceiling he has. Re-read it. I said he did have a high ceiling. Poorly phrased, perhaps.

Drez
05-21-2013, 08:16 PM
Re-read it. I said he did have a high ceiling. Poorly phrased, perhaps.Yeah, it wasn't very clear, especially since I wasn't reading too closely.

giantsfan420
05-21-2013, 10:30 PM
1rst, he handled Irving from Seattle, Nick Perry from GB, both 1rst rd picks, and Chandler Jones at practice everyday as a LT. If you notice the trends with our offense, we have been getting further and further away from the run oriented nature TC traditionally instilled and have gone to a more pass oriented team. whether thats bc the run game has struggled or bc we have a premier franchise QB, its a matter of opinion. But, Pugh certainly fits the mold as a "pass protecting RT", he isn't going to be a mauling RT like DJ Fluker, nor would we want a RT like that imo anyways. Pugh, Day 1, certainly would give us more pass blocking stability than DD. Maybe even Eric Winston for that matter. You people hating on the pick are severely underrating his footwork, and upbringing. kid was raised playing hockey, and as an OL from jump street. there was never the delusion he was a QB or WR and switched 2 yrs into college. He's been raised his whole life beating people up and being competitive. all reports already state how the competitiveness exudes from this dude already.
And, you guys act like "strength needs to be improved on" is this knock ONLY on Pugh when in reality, almost every OT aside from a top 3 pick (even L.Johnson needs to improve his "core strength") is gonna be pegged with that, bc the talent pool in the NFL rises dramatically, I mean cmon simple stuff.

One offseason lifting with this kid, I'd be more than confident he could at the very least be an impact swing tackle in heavy formations to the point he will earn a starting spot early in the yr if its not Day 1.

but again, his footwork puts DD to shame (at this stage in his career and thats apparent) and, DD played hurt apparently so I'll let the fact he too had big problems out"stronging" his matchup, dude got pushed back worse than any OL ive ever seen. So, no way Pugh is as weak as DD played last yr, no offense to DD.

I mean do u guys realize he allowed ZERO SACKS IN FOUR(edit-could be 2 yrs, confuse this often) YRS AND 1/2 A PRESSURE HIS SNR YR? People tried pointing to the game tape and how there wasnt much of Pugh mauling DLmen, well, I also saw an uncanny ability (which was also analyzed in more respected scouting reports) to reset and regain leverage after a DL got inside his grill and stood him up. Once his strengthening is up to par, which could be after this offseason I suspect, his game is gonna fit our offense like a glove at RT, G or even spot LT if need be...u guys are gonna be singing a diff tune about Pugh, I am way confident enough to say that and honestly would say so were I aware of him if he was drafted by another team.

one thing I noticed in big OL prospects who falter, they almost always are like QBs or pass catching TE's who are converted and have only a few yrs of collegiate competition where often times the player is superior physically which is why he is moved to OL, then they get to the NFL and are completely overwhelmed by the physicality of DL who been doing DL stuff there whole lives and are grown man strong...u kinda gotta be brought up in a certain way to handle that, Pugh was.

giantsfan420
05-21-2013, 10:33 PM
id say, in terms of getting a starter in rd 1 for years, Pugh is as good a pick you could make. @ 15 and up really, ur expecting contributor/starter hoping all pro.id say wilson and pugh represent that perfectly and are excellent picks in that regard

Morehead State
05-21-2013, 11:05 PM
id say, in terms of getting a starter in rd 1 for years, Pugh is as good a pick you could make. @ 15 and up really, ur expecting contributor/starter hoping all pro.id say wilson and pugh represent that perfectly and are excellent picks in that regard
You simply don't know that. Nor could anyone.
My point is that the hole in our roster should have been filled in free agency and still can be. You don't fill immediate needs with the draft. You build your team with the draft.
And you don't do it especially if you have a contending team where the protection and the safety of your QB is in question.

I have to respectfully disagree. It was a bad move if what they were looking for was an immediate starter.

B&RWarrior
05-21-2013, 11:38 PM
Hes more ready to play rt than guard. As you very well know, we shouldn't have drafted this kid to begin with. I've done enough talking about how terrible our last two 1st round picks were.

Wow, who did you want over Wilson? I wanted Levonte David.

BlueSanta
05-21-2013, 11:52 PM
You simply don't know that. Nor could anyone.
My point is that the hole in our roster should have been filled in free agency and still can be. You don't fill immediate needs with the draft. You build your team with the draft.
And you don't do it especially if you have a contending team where the protection and the safety of your QB is in question.

I have to respectfully disagree. It was a bad move if what they were looking for was an immediate starter.

You can literally make the exact same argument, that "you simply do not know", about any draft pick by any team in the NFL. So by your criteria nobody in the draft did well, because nobody truly addressed a need. Nobody who drafted a RT in this draft did well because Winston was still available then?


But more importantly, you are ignoring a very important point about both our Oline and Pugh, and that point is the reason he was our selection. We have an aging Oline. We all know that. As Mayock has pointed out numberous times, what is dangerous about our situation specifically is that they are all(cept beatty) about the same age and aging together. So, unless we want to find ourselves having to replace 4 guys along the line in 1 year, we have to begin addressing it now. Pugh's greatest asset is that he is a VERY safe pick for us because while he may not work out at tackle, he might work out at guard or center, or the other tackle. The chances of him failing at all the possible positions of need for this Giants team are MUCH smaller than any other draft pick made by any other team because quite literally we might have addressed any 1 of 4 needs with this 1 pick. What other team can say if their pick doesn't work out at his 1st position, he knows how to play 3 other positions. I think it is VERY safe to say that right now Pugh is likely as good if not better than someone along our Oline. Maybe it is DD(I hope) but then again maybe it is Baas, or perhaps it is Boothe in 1 year when his contract expires. But he WILL be the best option for us at some position along that line and it is likely going to be either this year or next year. That makes him about the safest pick in the entire draft(barring injury.)

giantsfan420
05-21-2013, 11:57 PM
You can literally make the exact same argument, that "you simply do not know", about any draft pick by any team in the NFL. So by your criteria nobody in the draft did well, because nobody truly addressed a need. Nobody who drafted a RT in this draft did well because Winston was still available then?


But more importantly, you are ignoring a very important point about both our Oline and Pugh, and that point is the reason he was our selection. We have an aging Oline. We all know that. As Mayock has pointed out numberous times, what is dangerous about our situation specifically is that they are all(cept beatty) about the same age and aging together. So, unless we want to find ourselves having to replace 4 guys along the line in 1 year, we have to begin addressing it now. Pugh's greatest asset is that he is a VERY safe pick for us because while he may not work out at tackle, he might work out at guard or center, or the other tackle. The chances of him failing at all the possible positions of need for this Giants team are MUCH smaller than any other draft pick made by any other team because quite literally we might have addressed any 1 of 4 needs with this 1 pick. What other team can say if their pick doesn't work out at his 1st position, he knows how to play 3 other positions. I think it is VERY safe to say that right now Pugh is likely as good if not better than someone along our Oline. Maybe it is DD(I hope) but then again maybe it is Baas, or perhaps it is Boothe in 1 year when his contract expires. But he WILL be the best option for us at some position along that line and it is likely going to be either this year or next year. That makes him about the safest pick in the entire draft(barring injury.)nice post my thoughts exactly

pino
05-22-2013, 02:27 AM
nice post my thoughts exactly

I agree. Well said BlueSanta.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 09:14 AM
You can literally make the exact same argument, that "you simply do not know", about any draft pick by any team in the NFL. So by your criteria nobody in the draft did well, because nobody truly addressed a need. Nobody who drafted a RT in this draft did well because Winston was still available then?


But more importantly, you are ignoring a very important point about both our Oline and Pugh, and that point is the reason he was our selection. We have an aging Oline. We all know that. As Mayock has pointed out numberous times, what is dangerous about our situation specifically is that they are all(cept beatty) about the same age and aging together. So, unless we want to find ourselves having to replace 4 guys along the line in 1 year, we have to begin addressing it now. Pugh's greatest asset is that he is a VERY safe pick for us because while he may not work out at tackle, he might work out at guard or center, or the other tackle. The chances of him failing at all the possible positions of need for this Giants team are MUCH smaller than any other draft pick made by any other team because quite literally we might have addressed any 1 of 4 needs with this 1 pick. What other team can say if their pick doesn't work out at his 1st position, he knows how to play 3 other positions. I think it is VERY safe to say that right now Pugh is likely as good if not better than someone along our Oline. Maybe it is DD(I hope) but then again maybe it is Baas, or perhaps it is Boothe in 1 year when his contract expires. But he WILL be the best option for us at some position along that line and it is likely going to be either this year or next year. That makes him about the safest pick in the entire draft(barring injury.)
Fisher, Joekel, Womack, Cooper and maybe Fluker are safe picks. (at least as safe as any prospect can be) After that its far less certain that a guy can be an NFL O linemen.
And that's my point. You draft guys in the hopes that you can develop them based on all the qualities in them you identify. Maybe Pugh is a good prospect. Its nothing against the kid. My problem isn't Pugh really. Its drafting the 6th rated O lineman. to start immediately. That's my problem with this.
These are prospect you are drafting. Not NFL players. You draft them in the hopes that they will become solid NFL players. That's why you fill immediate needs in free agency, and build your team in the draft.

Amani Toomer is the all time best WR in Giants history. It took him years to develop into an NFL player. Michael Strahan is a great Giants DE, he did nothing early in his career.

JR has put this team in the position where our supposed starting RT for 2013, has never blocked an NFL defender. It's THAT, that I have a problem with.

Diamondring
05-22-2013, 09:32 AM
Watch the game tapes in the draft forum. He is not going to be able to move 310 lb DL.Not all 310 pound men are strong either even in the NFL.

Imgrate
05-22-2013, 10:35 AM
Wow, who did you want over Wilson? I wanted Levonte David. Kendall reyes, jerel worthy, janoris jenkins, cordy glenn, andre branch, among others.

TCHOF
05-22-2013, 10:47 AM
Kendall reyes, jerel worthy, janoris jenkins, cordy glenn, andre branch, among others.

Janoris Jenkins in the first round . . . lol

Imgrate
05-22-2013, 11:58 AM
Janoris Jenkins in the first round . . . lol Borderline rookie of the year. Pretty hilarious.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:04 PM
Janoris Jenkins in the first round . . . lol
Jenkins was pretty darned good last year.

SimmsandLT
05-22-2013, 12:10 PM
Borderline rookie of the year. Pretty hilarious.

Not even close considering he'd have to leap frog 3 QB's, Morris in Washington, and Luke Kuechly plus your boy Lavonte David among others.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:11 PM
Fisher, Joekel, Womack, Cooper and maybe Fluker are safe picks. (at least as safe as any prospect can be) After that its far less certain that a guy can be an NFL O linemen.
And that's my point. You draft guys in the hopes that you can develop them based on all the qualities in them you identify. Maybe Pugh is a good prospect. Its nothing against the kid. My problem isn't Pugh really. Its drafting the 6th rated O lineman. to start immediately. That's my problem with this.
These are prospect you are drafting. Not NFL players. You draft them in the hopes that they will become solid NFL players. That's why you fill immediate needs in free agency, and build your team in the draft.

Amani Toomer is the all time best WR in Giants history. It took him years to develop into an NFL player. Michael Strahan is a great Giants DE, he did nothing early in his career.

JR has put this team in the position where our supposed starting RT for 2013, has never blocked an NFL defender. It's THAT, that I have a problem with.see, this reasoning is flawed so the whole argument becomes baseless. Fluker had as many issues as Pugh. The other players u listed went WAAAAYYYY before us.
further, your using YOUR ranking of Pugh, which is flawed bc its not the FO's ranking obviously. Further, I saw respectable analysts report on how there were acttually teams that ranked Pugh ahead of Johnson (the Eagles 4th overall) on their big boards when the analysts were given access to the info. Its how a guy like Irving is projected a 2nd round pick, and Seattle takes him like 16th overall and he plays lights out. Its up to the teams to do way more due diligence than the casual fan. You can dislike the player and pick, but when I see faulty reasoning support ur stance of course it makes for debate.


and you made another odd comment earlier about how teams dont draft for immediate need...um, in todays nfl, thats 10000% wrong. many teams, esp teams picking top 10, are looking for an immediate starter at min. and if their research was on point, an all pro. granted, teams who can push the starting of a 1rst rd pick off will do so but thats a luxury few teams have, we USED to be one of those teams. as been erpeated, we arent anymore with an OL all aging together and getting past their prime.
I've already listed why Pugh is a legit pick above. Imo, theres no disputing that anymore. And, ur underesimating JR when he says the versatility was huge. We have a need at RT, that doesnt mean Pugh is starting there guaranteed. the coaches will play him where its suited best. we'll know soon enough how "bad or good" a pick this is.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:12 PM
Not even close considering he'd have to leap frog 3 QB's, Morris in Washington, and Luke Kuechly plus your boy Lavonte David among others.
Fine but the kid had a heck of a season. Its really about the poster laughing at the notion of us taking him at 32. He went #39 and had a huge year.

Imgrate
05-22-2013, 12:14 PM
Not even close considering he'd have to leap frog 3 QB's, Morris in Washington, and Luke Kuechly plus your boy Lavonte David among others.1. There's droy and oroy

2. I haven't mentioned lavonte david in any of my posts.

3. Jenkins finished 4th in the voting, ahead of david.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:14 PM
and i cant even begin to say how baseless it is to compare completely different players (generational AND positional) based on rd selection. The game was way diff when Toomer and stray were selected. And, the team needs/issues were way different. i think the issue is ur trying to bend history and the facts around ur opinion of Pugh and dude, honestly, its just not been a very good argument so far.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:16 PM
1rst, he handled Irving from Seattle, Nick Perry from GB, both 1rst rd picks, and Chandler Jones at practice everyday as a LT. If you notice the trends with our offense, we have been getting further and further away from the run oriented nature TC traditionally instilled and have gone to a more pass oriented team. whether thats bc the run game has struggled or bc we have a premier franchise QB, its a matter of opinion. But, Pugh certainly fits the mold as a "pass protecting RT", he isn't going to be a mauling RT like DJ Fluker, nor would we want a RT like that imo anyways. Pugh, Day 1, certainly would give us more pass blocking stability than DD. Maybe even Eric Winston for that matter. You people hating on the pick are severely underrating his footwork, and upbringing. kid was raised playing hockey, and as an OL from jump street. there was never the delusion he was a QB or WR and switched 2 yrs into college. He's been raised his whole life beating people up and being competitive. all reports already state how the competitiveness exudes from this dude already.
And, you guys act like "strength needs to be improved on" is this knock ONLY on Pugh when in reality, almost every OT aside from a top 3 pick (even L.Johnson needs to improve his "core strength") is gonna be pegged with that, bc the talent pool in the NFL rises dramatically, I mean cmon simple stuff.

One offseason lifting with this kid, I'd be more than confident he could at the very least be an impact swing tackle in heavy formations to the point he will earn a starting spot early in the yr if its not Day 1.

but again, his footwork puts DD to shame (at this stage in his career and thats apparent) and, DD played hurt apparently so I'll let the fact he too had big problems out"stronging" his matchup, dude got pushed back worse than any OL ive ever seen. So, no way Pugh is as weak as DD played last yr, no offense to DD.

I mean do u guys realize he allowed ZERO SACKS IN FOUR(edit-could be 2 yrs, confuse this often) YRS AND 1/2 A PRESSURE HIS SNR YR? People tried pointing to the game tape and how there wasnt much of Pugh mauling DLmen, well, I also saw an uncanny ability (which was also analyzed in more respected scouting reports) to reset and regain leverage after a DL got inside his grill and stood him up. Once his strengthening is up to par, which could be after this offseason I suspect, his game is gonna fit our offense like a glove at RT, G or even spot LT if need be...u guys are gonna be singing a diff tune about Pugh, I am way confident enough to say that and honestly would say so were I aware of him if he was drafted by another team.

one thing I noticed in big OL prospects who falter, they almost always are like QBs or pass catching TE's who are converted and have only a few yrs of collegiate competition where often times the player is superior physically which is why he is moved to OL, then they get to the NFL and are completely overwhelmed by the physicality of DL who been doing DL stuff there whole lives and are grown man strong...u kinda gotta be brought up in a certain way to handle that, Pugh was.can u claim anything stated above is inaccurate?

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:18 PM
see, this reasoning is flawed so the whole argument becomes baseless. Fluker had as many issues as Pugh. The other players u listed went WAAAAYYYY before us.
further, your using YOUR ranking of Pugh, which is flawed bc its not the FO's ranking obviously. Further, I saw respectable analysts report on how there were acttually teams that ranked Pugh ahead of Johnson (the Eagles 4th overall) on their big boards when the analysts were given access to the info. Its how a guy like Irving is projected a 2nd round pick, and Seattle takes him like 16th overall and he plays lights out. Its up to the teams to do way more due diligence than the casual fan. You can dislike the player and pick, but when I see faulty reasoning support ur stance of course it makes for debate.


and you made another odd comment earlier about how teams dont draft for immediate need...um, in todays nfl, thats 10000% wrong. many teams, esp teams picking top 10, are looking for an immediate starter at min. and if their research was on point, an all pro. granted, teams who can push the starting of a 1rst rd pick off will do so but thats a luxury few teams have, we USED to be one of those teams. as been erpeated, we arent anymore with an OL all aging together and getting past their prime.
I've already listed why Pugh is a legit pick above. Imo, theres no disputing that anymore. And, ur underesimating JR when he says the versatility was huge. We have a need at RT, that doesnt mean Pugh is starting there guaranteed. the coaches will play him where its suited best. we'll know soon enough how "bad or good" a pick this is.

Well I really don't think so about Fluker. Its all opinion but Fluker is a prototypical RT. And the guy played and dominated in the SEC.

But putting all that aside you are missing my primary point. You can't enter the draft with a huge hole at RT. Not on a contending team. You have to deal with that in free agency. So we can go BPA and be willing to develop that player and not be forced to start him week 1.

And I agree about teams picking early drafting immediate starters. But that's because they are bad teams and have huge immediate needs. But that's not us.

To me..Rhodes, Winston is better than Pugh and an extra $2MM.
That was the choice that JR made. We could have had a proven, quality RT for the next several years and a great corner prospect.
I just think we put ourselves in the position to draft the 7th rated O lineman and "hope" he can be NFL ready immediately. That's poor use of the draft in my opinion.

SimmsandLT
05-22-2013, 12:19 PM
Fine but the kid had a heck of a season. Its really about the poster laughing at the notion of us taking him at 32. He went #39 and had a huge year.
Yeah he had a good year, but I fail to see why we spend so much time complaining about our own picks, and think that picks that did well for other teams would come here and have the same year.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:19 PM
can u claim anything stated above is inaccurate?
Its just too long to read it all. You really need to work on your concision.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:21 PM
Yeah he had a good year, but I fail to see why we spend so much time complaining about our own picks, and think that picks that did well for other teams would come here and have the same year.
Are you saying our coaching isn't as good as the Rams?

I have no idea what kind of season anyone would have. What I can say is that Jenkins appears very worthy of the 32 pick. And for one poster to laugh that notion off, is misguided given the kids demonstrated ability in the NFL.

SimmsandLT
05-22-2013, 12:21 PM
1. There's droy and oroy

2. I haven't mentioned lavonte david in any of my posts.

3. Jenkins finished 4th in the voting, ahead of david.

Okay i'll apologize for #2, got you confused with B&R. As for the other two, he didn't win droy or rookie of the year. I don't discount the kid, just disagreeing that he was borderline rookie of the year.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:22 PM
and Chicago has just as many issues as us; aging DL, OL, LB core, in fact, they could be confused for us if u think about it. Ton of turnovers but had a ton of trouble getting stops, aside from Briggs, they have serious question ? at LB. Their DL, once revered, also needs heavy retooling. Also, while they do have capable corner play, both their corners are old as funk, and they also have holes at safety (something we dont have)...point being, one could easily state chicago coulda gone a number of different ways. I think its telling they would have taken Pugh the next pick. I also think its telling Dallas planned on drafting him, but felt there original selection was a bit too high and opted on hoping he slid. there were teams who wanted him is my point, who picked in front and behind us...how that could be neglected in favor of how Rhodes and Floyd were these far superior talents and it was obvious even tho they lasted essentially 6 more selections, well thats beyond me.

SimmsandLT
05-22-2013, 12:23 PM
Are you saying our coaching isn't as good as the Rams?

I have no idea what kind of season anyone would have. What I can say is that Jenkins appears very worthy of the 32 pick. And for one poster to laugh that notion off, is misguided given the kids demonstrated ability in the NFL.
Well i'm not that poster. Let's just see how OUR players perform this year before we get all doom and gloom around here. We haven't even made it to training camp yet!

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:24 PM
and Chicago has just as many issues as us; aging DL, OL, LB core, in fact, they could be confused for us if u think about it. Ton of turnovers but had a ton of trouble getting stops, aside from Briggs, they have serious question ? at LB. Their DL, once revered, also needs heavy retooling. Also, while they do have capable corner play, both their corners are old as funk, and they also have holes at safety (something we dont have)...point being, one could easily state chicago coulda gone a number of different ways. I think its telling they would have taken Pugh the next pick. I also think its telling Dallas planned on drafting him, but felt there original selection was a bit too high and opted on hoping he slid. there were teams who wanted him is my point, who picked in front and behind us...how that could be neglected in favor of how Rhodes and Floyd were these far superior talents and it was obvious even tho they lasted essentially 6 more selections, well thats beyond me.

Protecting Cutler is their #1 priority. That offense has been handcuffed by bad O line play since he got there. They are desperate for O line help.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:26 PM
Well i'm not that poster. Let's just see how OUR players perform this year before we get all doom and gloom around here. We haven't even made it to training camp yet!
Imgrate has a view that you don't draft RB;s in round 1. He offered legit other choices when he was challenged.
I disagree about RB's in Rd 1, but I understand his view. and he DID offer Jenkins as a good alternative to Wilson.

TCHOF
05-22-2013, 12:26 PM
see, this reasoning is flawed so the whole argument becomes baseless. Fluker had as many issues as Pugh. The other players u listed went WAAAAYYYY before us.
further, your using YOUR ranking of Pugh, which is flawed bc its not the FO's ranking obviously. Further, I saw respectable analysts report on how there were acttually teams that ranked Pugh ahead of Johnson (the Eagles 4th overall) on their big boards when the analysts were given access to the info. Its how a guy like Irving is projected a 2nd round pick, and Seattle takes him like 16th overall and he plays lights out. Its up to the teams to do way more due diligence than the casual fan. You can dislike the player and pick, but when I see faulty reasoning support ur stance of course it makes for debate.


and you made another odd comment earlier about how teams dont draft for immediate need...um, in todays nfl, thats 10000% wrong. many teams, esp teams picking top 10, are looking for an immediate starter at min. and if their research was on point, an all pro. granted, teams who can push the starting of a 1rst rd pick off will do so but thats a luxury few teams have, we USED to be one of those teams. as been erpeated, we arent anymore with an OL all aging together and getting past their prime.
I've already listed why Pugh is a legit pick above. Imo, theres no disputing that anymore. And, ur underesimating JR when he says the versatility was huge. We have a need at RT, that doesnt mean Pugh is starting there guaranteed. the coaches will play him where its suited best. we'll know soon enough how "bad or good" a pick this is.

Do you have a link to support this?

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:28 PM
MS, so you say bad teams are the ones that need their picks to start early. We aren't, thus, we should have addressed a diff area with the pick bc Pugh isn't an immediate starter in your eyes...well, I dont understand what your issue is? your saying that its a poor use of a pick bc he isn't a day 1 starter while claiming good teams don't draft a player to be an immediate starter...wouldn't the selection of Pugh than FIT your claim then? If he's not ready day 1 in ur eyes, it means we drafted him for the future (what other assumption can be made, the team wouldnt take a dive with their pick).
Maybe your assuming too strongly that the coaches are gonna force him into being a RT even if its not his best spot. The coaches will play him where he is best, when has TC shown otherwise really (aside from the whole kiwi debate)? again just a very confusing argument ur making, it could be just as simple as u dont like the pick.
thats fine ya know. u dont have to be able to elevate ur stance over anothers, at the risk of using faulty logic. ur opinion can be ur opinion and it dont matter what anyone says, and i respect that. just dont get ur supporting reasons for disliking the pugh pick.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:28 PM
Do you have a link to support this?
OMG!! I didn't read that. He is actually suggesting that someone had Pugh rated higher than Lane Johnson?

I know it wasn't us because I know that JR loved Lane Johnson but knew he wouldn't be there for us.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:29 PM
Do you have a link to support this?read it on an article posted here, and on a website like espn or something, draft time was a while ago. i can understand if u dont believe the claim was made. im not gonna go digging for a link, but that was reported.

SimmsandLT
05-22-2013, 12:30 PM
Imgrate has a view that you don't draft RB;s in round 1. He offered legit other choices when he was challenged.
I disagree about RB's in Rd 1, but I understand his view. and he DID offer Jenkins as a good alternative to Wilson.

The end of Rd 1 is practically the 2nd, but to each his own. The reason Jenkins was steered clear of by some teams is his off field history. Like Ogletree this year. The Rams took a chance and it paid off for them last year.

Time to get back to work now..

TCHOF
05-22-2013, 12:30 PM
Borderline rookie of the year. Pretty hilarious.

Not a single NFL team would have taken that guy in the first round at the time of the draft. You can't now go back and change history since you now know that the guy had one good season (during which he was suspended for a game by his coach I might add).

Using that reasoning, we should have selected Burfict in the first round that year.

TCHOF
05-22-2013, 12:31 PM
read it on an article posted here, and on a website like espn or something, draft time was a while ago. i can understand if u dont believe the claim was made. im not gonna go digging for a link, but that was reported.

Not doubting you at all, just would be interested to read it.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:31 PM
and the exact reasoning was Johnson was actually a QB in college. 2 yrs left, he was switched to OL. Some scouts are going to look at that with serious red flags. You can get away with doing something like that bc Johnson is a superior athlete at the collegiate level. but with only 2 yrs of experience at OL, some teams worried he would not be able to handle the physicality of being an NFL OL. you kinda gotta be raised a certain way, unless ur just a physical beast. DUnno if Johnson is at an NFL level. Now that I been called out, Ill go digging for the links.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:32 PM
MS, so you say bad teams are the ones that need their picks to start early. We aren't, thus, we should have addressed a diff area with the pick bc Pugh isn't an immediate starter in your eyes...well, I dont understand what your issue is? your saying that its a poor use of a pick bc he isn't a day 1 starter while claiming good teams don't draft a player to be an immediate starter...wouldn't the selection of Pugh than FIT your claim then? If he's not ready day 1 in ur eyes, it means we drafted him for the future (what other assumption can be made, the team wouldnt take a dive with their pick).
Maybe your assuming too strongly that the coaches are gonna force him into being a RT even if its not his best spot. The coaches will play him where he is best, when has TC shown otherwise really (aside from the whole kiwi debate)? again just a very confusing argument ur making, it could be just as simple as u dont like the pick.
thats fine ya know. u dont have to be able to elevate ur stance over anothers, at the risk of using faulty logic. ur opinion can be ur opinion and it dont matter what anyone says, and i respect that. just dont get ur supporting reasons for disliking the pugh pick.


I swear to God you have to shorten your posts, or at least use paragraphs better.

To respond to your first few sentences (which is all anyone can read) , I have no problem addressing need in the draft as long as the conditions I described are honored.
1. We aren't passing on far superior prospects that fall to us
2. They are at or close to the grade consistent with our pick

Both were violated in my view.
And drafting need is different then looking for an immediate starter. We are a contending team, looking to the middle of the 1st round to find a starter for week 1.

That's just bad drafting 420. It just is.

TCHOF
05-22-2013, 12:33 PM
Are you saying our coaching isn't as good as the Rams?

I have no idea what kind of season anyone would have. What I can say is that Jenkins appears very worthy of the 32 pick. And for one poster to laugh that notion off, is misguided given the kids demonstrated ability in the NFL.

Was Jenkins worthy of the 32nd pick at the time of the draft? That's the only thing that matters.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:34 PM
Not doubting you at all, just would be interested to read it.yeah. it had nothing to do with an athleticism/measurement standpoint, or even game tape. it was the transitioning to the NFL level and whether he would actually be able to handle it. For how much talent he does have, he still is a risky project type prospect. he has to work on technique.

both those aspects, athelticism (footwork) Pugh is just as gifted and in the case of technique, Pugh trumps him. Further, Pugh was raised playing hockey and as an OL from when he was a kid. In his, day 1, he was OL. He has been raised beating people up and being physical. Whereas Johnson spent most of his career AVOIDING contact...there were some teams that ranked pugh ahead based on that i guess. thats what i remember reading, and how could I know that if I didnt ya know im not just making this up. but ill be back gonna go lookin

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:34 PM
Not a single NFL team would have taken that guy in the first round at the time of the draft. You can't now go back and change history since you now know that the guy had one good season (during which he was suspended for a game by his coach I might add).

Using that reasoning, we should have selected Burfict in the first round that year.
He went 39 and we had the 32nd pick.
It seems illogical that you would say that given that fact.

TCHOF
05-22-2013, 12:36 PM
He went 39 and we had the 32nd pick.
It seems illogical that you would say that given that fact.

Well that would be a reach according to your standards, right?

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:36 PM
I swear to God you have to shorten your posts, or at least use paragraphs better.

To respond to your first few sentences (which is all anyone can read) , I have no problem addressing need in the draft as long as the conditions I described are honored.
1. We aren't passing on far superior prospects that fall to us
2. They are at or close to the grade consistent with our pick

Both were violated in my view.
And drafting need is different then looking for an immediate starter. We are a contending team, looking to the middle of the 1st round to find a starter for week 1.

That's just bad drafting 420. It just is.dude, thats 2 paragraphs. if thats too difficult, i wouldnt admit it 1, and 2, wouldnt continue to try and converse if ur not even gonna attempt to read it. u just look and think ugh, if u actually read it, itd be like how I would say it were i speaking to u f2f.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:37 PM
Was Jenkins worthy of the 32nd pick at the time of the draft? That's the only thing that matters.
Well his rookie season was far more impactful that Wilson. And you are talking to the #1 supporter of drafting Wilson last year. I got huge congrats on getting it right on the draft thread, 2012.
I was actually a tad disappointed with Wilson. I didn't see the wiggle I thought he had. He just has a lot of straight line speed. I did see more power than I realized but in general he was a slight disappointment to me.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:39 PM
dude, thats 2 paragraphs. if thats too difficult, i wouldnt admit it 1, and 2, wouldnt continue to try and converse if ur not even gonna attempt to read it. u just look and think ugh, if u actually read it, itd be like how I would say it were i speaking to u f2f.
I'm just giving you some advice. I like to read your views. Its just tough when you type these walls of words. I'm sure I;m not the only one.
You don't have to take it if you don't want but it was offered in good faith.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 12:41 PM
Well that would be a reach according to your standards, right?
7 picks?...No not really. And you can't tell by where they get picked. Every team has their own needs. Clearly though, the Rams got tremendous value at 39 with Jenkins.

Imgrate
05-22-2013, 12:48 PM
Not a single NFL team would have taken that guy in the first round at the time of the draft. You can't now go back and change history since you now know that the guy had one good season (during which he was suspended for a game by his coach I might add).Using that reasoning, we should have selected Burfict in the first round that year.The names I mentioned, I mentioned the day of the draft...Notice that I did not mention other players like lavonte and bobby wagner because I did not mention them at the time of the draft

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:51 PM
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/04/24/high-soaring-justin-pugh-should-go-early-in-the-nfl-draft/

heres an article done on Pugh where it lists Joekel and Fisher as being the elite OT prospects, with Pugh and Johnson topping the next grouping.
Further, I also have found just in a few minutes, how many teams were concerned with Johnsons technique, and lack of NFL strength due to being a QB and TE his whole life except for his final 2 yrs in college.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:53 PM
and, it was repeated often how he is a risky pick, but his athleticism and measurements could be too hard to overlook. he is a prospect who was drafted based on measurements and athleticism moreso than anything else, and usually, those are the guys who end up busting at the highest percentages...

TCHOF
05-22-2013, 12:54 PM
7 picks?...No not really. And you can't tell by where they get picked. Every team has their own needs. Clearly though, the Rams got tremendous value at 39 with Jenkins.

A little early for that assessment, I think. He's been in the league one year, and that year was not entirely trouble-free. If he continues his first year level of play for 3 years without incident, I will agree with you.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 12:55 PM
http://liveballsports.com/2013/04/23/2013-nfl-draft-analysis-premium-positions-will-fly-on-thursday/

another one where Pugh and Johnson are grouped together in the same category with Fisher and Joekel being ranked at a higher level.

TCHOF
05-22-2013, 12:56 PM
Well his rookie season was far more impactful that Wilson. And you are talking to the #1 supporter of drafting Wilson last year. I got huge congrats on getting it right on the draft thread, 2012.
I was actually a tad disappointed with Wilson. I didn't see the wiggle I thought he had. He just has a lot of straight line speed. I did see more power than I realized but in general he was a slight disappointment to me.

I can't wait to see what he does this year, because I liked what I saw in him last year. Just a weird year for him, getting in the doghouse riaght away and all.

Imgrate
05-22-2013, 01:01 PM
http://liveballsports.com/2013/04/23/2013-nfl-draft-analysis-premium-positions-will-fly-on-thursday/another one where Pugh and Johnson are grouped together in the same category with Fisher and Joekel being ranked at a higher level.They're mock draft had Johnson in the top 5 and menelik watson going before pugh......

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 01:04 PM
http://www.nj.com/times-sports/index.ssf/2013/04/eagles_hope_theyve_bested_the.html


Pugh is discussed in the article, where some personnel feel he is better than Johnson.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 01:05 PM
They're mock draft had Johnson in the top 5 and menelik watson going before pugh......i didnt link to any mock draft, i linked an article.

MattMeyerBud
05-22-2013, 01:05 PM
I understand that he was projected as a guard in the NFL by most teams. Plus, isn't strength a very important component in playing RT?

just happy that your valuing other teams scouting department over ours.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 01:06 PM
Early on though, it’s not the quarterbacks who are going to drive the activity in the draft, it’s going to be the offensive tackles. Both Luke Joeckel and Eric Fisher, the top two offensive tackles and perhaps the top two players in the draft, will be gone no later than the third pick in the draft. The top five or six pass rushers: Bjorn Werner, Tank Carradine, Barkevious Mingo, Jarvis Jones, Dion Jordan, and Ziggy Ansah, will go in the top 20, maybe 25 picks. And every other offensive tackle with a first-ish round grade (Lane Johnson, DJ Fluker, Menelik Watson, and Justin Pugh) could easily be gone by the end of the round.


thats a team independent mock used as reference, not the authors mock. notice how he grouped johnson, fluker, watson, and pugh in one grouping, and clearly stated joekel and fisher were in a more elite tier...which would support my statement "this article has fisher and joekel in one grouping with Pugh and Johnson in a lower tier."dont straw man me lol and make it about a point not relevant at all

Imgrate
05-22-2013, 01:08 PM
i didnt link to any mock draft, i linked an article.Scroll to the end of the article.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 01:09 PM
http://www.nj.com/times-sports/index.ssf/2013/04/eagles_hope_theyve_bested_the.html


Pugh is discussed in the article, where some personnel feel he is better than Johnson.
OK...both of these articles are local Philly puff peices for a local guy who's from the Philly area, in Pugh.

You really have to find more objective sources.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 01:10 PM
just happy that your valuing other teams scouting department over ours.

OK good Matt....Thanks.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 01:12 PM
i've found 3 sources, with accurate respectable articles, backing my claim. sorry if it still doesnt meet ur standards, but its clear there were SOME personnel and scouts who ranked Pugh ahead of Johnson. and imo, its not hard to see why. Where Johnson trumps Pugh in athleticism (outside of footwork, most recognize Pugh has as good if not better footwork) and measurements like arm length, Pugh trumps Johnson in upbringing(always been an OL, not a QB/TE converted to OL out of necessity 2 yrs into college), technique, and understanding/instincts.
Dont quite get how one could question Pugh being a safer pick when its so widely recognized Johnson has to not only gain strength same as Pugh, but actually has to learn to play OT...he's actually a HUGE risk @ 4th overall...way more than Pugh @ 19.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 01:17 PM
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/19657916-606/bears-hold-private-workout-for-syracuse-offensive-lineman-justin-pugh.html

After Luke Joeckel and Eric Fisher, Pugh is considered by some in the next tier of offensive tackles along with Oklahoma’s Lane Johnson, Alabama’s D.J. Fluker and Florida State’s Menelik Watson.

GameTime
05-22-2013, 01:17 PM
wow....you guys are WAYYYY to into this...lol
the draft is what it it is. The Giants org handles it the way they did. After a year or so we will all know if they were right or wrong in their assessment of the players they chose....until then its all bull**** and speculation.....:)

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 01:18 PM
do i need to continue? i think i've supported my claims beyond necessary. still didnt find the article i remember reading...but, my memory isnt top notch so maybe im just combining diff articles and remembering it as 1

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 01:20 PM
i've found 3 sources, with accurate respectable articles, backing my claim. sorry if it still doesnt meet ur standards, but its clear there were SOME personnel and scouts who ranked Pugh ahead of Johnson. and imo, its not hard to see why. Where Johnson trumps Pugh in athleticism (outside of footwork, most recognize Pugh has as good if not better footwork) and measurements like arm length, Pugh trumps Johnson in upbringing(always been an OL, not a QB/TE converted to OL out of necessity 2 yrs into college), technique, and understanding/instincts.
Dont quite get how one could question Pugh being a safer pick when its so widely recognized Johnson has to not only gain strength same as Pugh, but actually has to learn to play OT...he's actually a HUGE risk @ 4th overall...way more than Pugh @ 19.

You aren't getting me. I think I have been clear.
We drafted Pugh to be an immediate starter when we should have dealt with RT in free agency. If you're point is that Johnson is risky too?....OK fine. I know that JR loved him. But that aside, unless a guy is a solid blue chipper. A near "can't miss" kind of player, you should not draft with the NEED for him to start right away. Not if you are a contending team with a franchise QB. Especially an immobile QB. Its a huge risk.

This entire thread is about my view that Eric Winston and Xavier Rhodes is a much better option than, Justin Pugh and $2MM.

MattMeyerBud
05-22-2013, 01:22 PM
You aren't getting me. I think I have been clear.
We drafted Pugh to be an immediate starter when we should have dealt with RT in free agency. If you're point is that Johnson is risky too?....OK fine. I know that JR loved him. But that aside, unless a guy is a solid blue chipper. A near "can't miss" kind of player, you should not draft with the NEED for him to start right away. Not if you are a contending team with a franchise QB. Especially an immobile QB. Its a huge risk.

This entire thread is about my view that Eric Winston and Xavier Rhodes is a much better option than, Justin Pugh and $2MM.

so if Pugh doesn't start right away or if he does start and produces solidly that would mean your opinion was wrong correct?

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 01:25 PM
so if Pugh doesn't start right away or if he does start and produces solidly that would mean your opinion was wrong correct?
If the Giants address RT before the season and they groom Pugh to be a starter down the road, then all is forgiven as far as I'm concerned. I accept that they like the kid, reach or not.
BUT, if they have to start DD, or Brewer and have a huge hole at RT because Pugh couldn't beat them out, then that will be a huge problem.

MattMeyerBud
05-22-2013, 01:28 PM
If the Giants address RT before the season and they groom Pugh to be a starter down the road, then all is forgiven as far as I'm concerned. I accept that they like the kid, reach or not.
BUT, if they have to start DD, or Brewer and have a huge hole at RT because Pugh couldn't beat them out, then that will be a huge problem.

your hedging your bet here

so if he starts right away, we drafted for need and not BPA

if he doesn't start right away, the Giants blew it because he should be starting right away.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 01:33 PM
your hedging your bet here

so if he starts right away, we drafted for need and not BPA

if he doesn't start right away, the Giants blew it because he should be starting right away.
Not what I'm saying. DD is clearly not seen as a starter, since they dropped his pay by 80%. I also have to assume that they have no confidence in Brewer either since they passed on Rhodes to draft Pugh. That makes no sense otherwise.
My opinion is that the intention of the Pugh pick was to plug him in immediately at RT, since we have no starter there right now. If he can't earn the spot from DD, who they see as a back up, they will have clearly swung and missed. If they sign a guy like Winston and bring along Pugh as a a prospect, which is what his rating would suggest he is, then I am fine with all of it.

GameTime
05-22-2013, 01:37 PM
Not what I'm saying. DD is clearly not seen as a starter, since they dropped his pay by 80%. I also have to assume that they have no confidence in Brewer either since they passed on Rhodes to draft Pugh. That makes no sense otherwise.
My opinion is that the intention of the Pugh pick was to plug him in immediately at RT, since we have no starter there right now. If he can't earn the spot from DD, who they see as a back up, they will have clearly swung and missed. If they sign a guy like Winston and bring along Pugh as a a prospect, which is what his rating would suggest he is, then I am fine with all of it.
Pugh is also versital. So far Beatty has had health issues, so has Baas, and now Snee too. There was more to them drafting Pugh then just being a starting RT from day 1.

BlueSanta
05-22-2013, 01:38 PM
Fisher, Joekel, Womack, Cooper and maybe Fluker are safe picks. (at least as safe as any prospect can be) After that its far less certain that a guy can be an NFL O linemen.
And that's my point. You draft guys in the hopes that you can develop them based on all the qualities in them you identify. Maybe Pugh is a good prospect. Its nothing against the kid. My problem isn't Pugh really. Its drafting the 6th rated O lineman. to start immediately. That's my problem with this.
These are prospect you are drafting. Not NFL players. You draft them in the hopes that they will become solid NFL players. That's why you fill immediate needs in free agency, and build your team in the draft.

Amani Toomer is the all time best WR in Giants history. It took him years to develop into an NFL player. Michael Strahan is a great Giants DE, he did nothing early in his career.

JR has put this team in the position where our supposed starting RT for 2013, has never blocked an NFL defender. It's THAT, that I have a problem with.

As I said, we have 4 needs along the Oline and we drafted a guy who can potentially play any 1 of those 4 positions. That is a FAR safer pick than anyone else you mentioned. People hound DD for his poor play last year but without him and his positional versatility we likely don't win either of the last 2 Superbowls. He has been a gold mine of value since coming to the Giants. Pugh has even more versatility than that. It cannot be understated how a guy who can be moved around the line can help a team patchwork holes in the Oline when they arise.

Again, I would point out the flaw in your argument: You don't like that we have been put in a position to play a guy who hasn't blocked a NFL defender. So tell me , which rookie Olineman coming in to camp has blocked a NFl defender? By your measuring stick DD is more valuable than the #1 overall pick in the draft.



Lastly, we do have a RT who has played in the NFL in DD. He is likely going to start day 1, but will prolly end up as depth. It is also very likely that at some point in the 2013 season an offensive lineman is going to be hurt and may miss some time. That isn't a wild assertion due to the age of our line. We now have 2 guys with positional versatility to help plug in at various positions and patchwork where needed. So we got both a potiential starter and potential depth at other positions. That invaluable.

TheEnigma
05-22-2013, 01:38 PM
Not what I'm saying. DD is clearly not seen as a starter, since they dropped his pay by 80%. I also have to assume that they have no confidence in Brewer either since they passed on Rhodes to draft Pugh. That makes no sense otherwise.
My opinion is that the intention of the Pugh pick was to plug him in immediately at RT, since we have no starter there right now. If he can't earn the spot from DD, who they see as a back up, they will have clearly swung and missed. If they sign a guy like Winston and bring along Pugh as a a prospect, which is what his rating would suggest he is, then I am fine with all of it.

I don't think Pugh ultimately has that much to do with the RT spot and the likes of Brewer and Diehl as you may believe. They probably just wanted a safe selection in a 1st round that had too many uncertainties and wanted to give Beatty a partner going forward with the future of this Oline. Pugh WILL be a long term starter on this team but how good he actually will be is a fair question. Will he be a top 20 esque player like we drafted him?

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 01:45 PM
As I said, we have 4 needs along the Oline and we drafted a guy who can potentially play any 1 of those 4 positions. That is a FAR safer pick than anyone else you mentioned. People hound DD for his poor play last year but without him and his positional versatility we likely don't win either of the last 2 Superbowls. He has been a gold mine of value since coming to the Giants. Pugh has even more versatility than that. It cannot be understated how a guy who can be moved around the line can help a team patchwork holes in the Oline when they arise.

Again, I would point out the flaw in your argument: You don't like that we have been put in a position to play a guy who hasn't blocked a NFL defender. So tell me , which rookie Olineman coming in to camp has blocked a NFl defender? By your measuring stick DD is more valuable than the #1 overall pick in the draft.



Lastly, we do have a RT who has played in the NFL in DD. He is likely going to start day 1, but will prolly end up as depth. It is also very likely that at some point in the 2013 season an offensive lineman is going to be hurt and may miss some time. That isn't a wild assertion due to the age of our line. We now have 2 guys with positional versatility to help plug in at various positions and patchwork where needed. So we got both a potiential starter and potential depth at other positions. That invaluable.

1..Pugh is a safe pick IF we don't intend on starting him at RT. If we do (and I think we do) its a highly risky pick.
2. There is no way TC or the FO see DD as a starter right now. They dropped his pay by 80%. They can't justify that if they saw him as a starter. No way they could sell that to him.

If DD ends up the starter, I would say that would indicate that they missed on the Pugh pick. And as for your "what rookie has blocked an NFL dfender" thing. We are a CONTENDING team. Teams who are picking at the top of the draft are much more inclined to start guys taken early in round 1. Contending teams with good QB's have to be much more careful with that kind of thing.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 02:04 PM
your hedging your bet here

so if he starts right away, we drafted for need and not BPA

if he doesn't start right away, the Giants blew it because he should be starting right away.exactly. this was the point i tried making a few posts ago. its confusing logic. i can respect if MS dislikes the Pugh selection, its just his supporting reasoning is invalid and confusing imho

BlueSanta
05-22-2013, 02:06 PM
1..Pugh is a safe pick IF we don't intend on starting him at RT. If we do (and I think we do) its a highly risky pick.
2. There is no way TC or the FO see DD as a starter right now. They dropped his pay by 80%. They can't justify that if they saw him as a starter. No way they could sell that to him.

If DD ends up the starter, I would say that would indicate that they missed on the Pugh pick. And as for your "what rookie has blocked an NFL dfender" thing. We are a CONTENDING team. Teams who are picking at the top of the draft are much more inclined to start guys taken early in round 1. Contending teams with good QB's have to be much more careful with that kind of thing.

You are now changing your argument. So "having blocked an NFL defender" isn't your criteria now?

Pugh was not drafted to play RT. He was drafted to play where he is needed. That could be RT today and RG or center next year. Stop ignoring his versatility as if Reese himself didn't cite it as 1 of the main reasons we drafted Pugh.

Furthermore, Pugh could completely suck this year and guess what, he could still go on to be an all time great Giant. You know why? Well let me quote someone you might recognize:


Amani Toomer is the all time best WR in Giants history. It took him years to develop into an NFL player. Michael Strahan is a great Giants DE, he did nothing early in his career.


Every year fans on this board try to evaluate a pick based on 1 year in the league and every year they end up looking silly. You draft for the future, not just tomorrow.

JPP was a non factor his rookie year. Eli was a non factor his rookie year, Toomer basically didn't play his 1st year.

Pugh could stink for 12 months and it has almost no bearing on whether or not the pick "was a good pick."

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 02:07 PM
Not what I'm saying. DD is clearly not seen as a starter, since they dropped his pay by 80%. I also have to assume that they have no confidence in Brewer either since they passed on Rhodes to draft Pugh. That makes no sense otherwise.
My opinion is that the intention of the Pugh pick was to plug him in immediately at RT, since we have no starter there right now. If he can't earn the spot from DD, who they see as a back up, they will have clearly swung and missed. If they sign a guy like Winston and bring along Pugh as a a prospect, which is what his rating would suggest he is, then I am fine with all of it.this is another flawed aspect. u continually assume Pugh will be forced as the RT. Why? IF he is the best RT, he will be RT. if he isnt a good RT, its not like the coaches will force him into being the RT. His versatility is as big a reason as any for the selection. If not at RT, then at G or C. The pick was so good imo bc he actually fulfilled both things, an immediate need AND a player who can be developed and plugged in.
he will compete for the RT spot. He wont lose to DD id bet my life on it. Perhaps Brewer. But the great thing, even if he did lose out to DD, that wouldnt mean the pick wasnt an awesome pick, he could be an awesome G just as probably.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 02:10 PM
As I said, we have 4 needs along the Oline and we drafted a guy who can potentially play any 1 of those 4 positions. That is a FAR safer pick than anyone else you mentioned. People hound DD for his poor play last year but without him and his positional versatility we likely don't win either of the last 2 Superbowls. He has been a gold mine of value since coming to the Giants. Pugh has even more versatility than that. It cannot be understated how a guy who can be moved around the line can help a team patchwork holes in the Oline when they arise.

Again, I would point out the flaw in your argument: You don't like that we have been put in a position to play a guy who hasn't blocked a NFL defender. So tell me , which rookie Olineman coming in to camp has blocked a NFl defender? By your measuring stick DD is more valuable than the #1 overall pick in the draft.



Lastly, we do have a RT who has played in the NFL in DD. He is likely going to start day 1, but will prolly end up as depth. It is also very likely that at some point in the 2013 season an offensive lineman is going to be hurt and may miss some time. That isn't a wild assertion due to the age of our line. We now have 2 guys with positional versatility to help plug in at various positions and patchwork where needed. So we got both a potiential starter and potential depth at other positions. That invaluable.whats so comical is he actually has defended 2 of the leagues more promising up n comer pass rushers; Irving and Chandler Jones. Held Irving and Perry to zero pressures and from what i've read, from chandler jones himself, was that Pugh is exceptional at beating the pass rusher to his spot. 1/2 pressure all his final year, and 0 sacks as a OT in either 2 or 3 yrs...DAMN impressive. also, Syracuse ran a similar offense to NO, so its good he has experience in an nfl type system (their coach was a NO guy)

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:11 PM
exactly. this was the point i tried making a few posts ago. its confusing logic. i can respect if MS dislikes the Pugh selection, its just his supporting reasoning is invalid and confusing imho
I think its very clear.
1. I believe they drafted Pugh to plug him in week 1 at RT. If I am right, I think this is terrible drafting.
2. If they address RT with a solid vet like Winston before camp, then I am OK with Pugh as a prospect.

In other words, I don't hate the Pugh pick if they don't need him to start right away. That is if they address RT with a vet before the season. ( I don't like it, but I don't hate it)
I don't like the Pugh pick at all if they drafted him with the intention of starting him because we have a hole at RT.

The reality is that if we had truly gone BPA it should not have been Pugh. He was far from the BPA. Since they reached for him there, its clear that they are desperate to fill the RT position immediately.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 02:13 PM
You are now changing your argument. So "having blocked an NFL defender" isn't your criteria now?

Pugh was not drafted to play RT. He was drafted to play where he is needed. That could be RT today and RG or center next year. Stop ignoring his versatility as if Reese himself didn't cite it as 1 of the main reasons we drafted Pugh.

Furthermore, Pugh could completely suck this year and guess what, he could still go on to be an all time great Giant. You know why? Well let me quote someone you might recognize:


Every year fans on this board try to evaluate a pick based on 1 year in the league and every year they end up looking silly. You draft for the future, not just tomorrow.

JPP was a non factor his rookie year. Eli was a non factor his rookie year, Toomer basically didn't play his 1st year.

Pugh could stink for 12 months and it has almost no bearing on whether or not the pick "was a good pick."well said. i have no qualm withj someone disliking the pugh pick. i just disagree with ur reasoning MS. its all flawed, ur trying to bend and alter history and the situation to fit around ur opinion and its just a weak presentation.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:14 PM
You are now changing your argument. So "having blocked an NFL defender" isn't your criteria now?

Pugh was not drafted to play RT. He was drafted to play where he is needed. That could be RT today and RG or center next year. Stop ignoring his versatility as if Reese himself didn't cite it as 1 of the main reasons we drafted Pugh.

Furthermore, Pugh could completely suck this year and guess what, he could still go on to be an all time great Giant. You know why? Well let me quote someone you might recognize:


Every year fans on this board try to evaluate a pick based on 1 year in the league and every year they end up looking silly. You draft for the future, not just tomorrow.

JPP was a non factor his rookie year. Eli was a non factor his rookie year, Toomer basically didn't play his 1st year.

Pugh could stink for 12 months and it has almost no bearing on whether or not the pick "was a good pick."
If they sign a solid vet for RT, I am fine with all of it. DD is not that guy because they wouldn't have cut his pay so much if they thought he was.

All this leads me to believe that they chased need with Pugh to start him at RT. If I am right its a very bad move.
But you say they didn't draft him for that purpose. If you are right...who do you think is our starting RT right now?

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 02:15 PM
your hedging your bet here

so if he starts right away, we drafted for need and not BPA

if he doesn't start right away, the Giants blew it because he should be starting right away.so this is accurate then? ok.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 02:16 PM
I think its very clear.
1. I believe they drafted Pugh to plug him in week 1 at RT. If I am right, I think this is terrible drafting.
2. If they address RT with a solid vet like Winston before camp, then I am OK with Pugh as a prospect.

In other words, I don't hate the Pugh pick if they don't need him to start right away. That is if they address RT with a vet before the season. ( I don't like it, but I don't hate it)
I don't like the Pugh pick at all if they drafted him with the intention of starting him because we have a hole at RT.

The reality is that if we had truly gone BPA it should not have been Pugh. He was far from the BPA. Since they reached for him there, its clear that they are desperate to fill the RT position immediately.except TC and JR and Ross have stated that Pugh WAS actually their BPA. You may disagree personally, but thats how THEY, and apparently, several other teams felt.

Eli TO Shockey
05-22-2013, 02:16 PM
I think its very clear.
1. I believe they drafted Pugh to plug him in week 1 at RT. If I am right, I think this is terrible drafting.
2. If they address RT with a solid vet like Winston before camp, then I am OK with Pugh as a prospect.

In other words, I don't hate the Pugh pick if they don't need him to start right away. That is if they address RT with a vet before the season. ( I don't like it, but I don't hate it)
I don't like the Pugh pick at all if they drafted him with the intention of starting him because we have a hole at RT.

The reality is that if we had truly gone BPA it should not have been Pugh. He was far from the BPA. Since they reached for him there, its clear that they are desperate to fill the RT position immediately.

He wasnt a reach for us. He was on top of our draft board. Had we not drafted him he would have went to chicago at 20. How is that a reach? Wait, I know...because you're a talent scout? you've read too many Kiper mock drafts. i'll trust our front office and their talent scouts thank you very much.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:18 PM
well said. i have no qualm withj someone disliking the pugh pick. i just disagree with ur reasoning MS. its all flawed, ur trying to bend and alter history and the situation to fit around ur opinion and its just a weak presentation.
I am looking at all the facts, and I draw the conclusion that JR entered this draft committed to drafting a guy to start week 1 at RT.
There are several objective reasons for me to draw this conclusion.
1. He did NOT address RT in free agency
2. They cut DD's pay by 80%, which suggests they see him only as a back up.
3. They passed on far superior prospects to draft Pugh. (even if they liked him, you can't reasonably argue there wasn't better talent available)

Now I draw my conclusions based on this. You can draw a different conclusion if you want. But my reasoning is sound.

Eli TO Shockey
05-22-2013, 02:19 PM
I am looking at all the facts, and I draw the conclusion that JR entered this draft committed to drafting a guy to start week 1 at RT.
There are several objective reasons for me to draw this conclusion.
1. He did NOT address RT in free agency
2. They cut DD's pay by 80%, which suggests they see him only as a back up.
3. They passed on far superior prospects to draft Pugh. (even if they liked him, you can't reasonably argue there wasn't better talent available)

Now I draw my conclusions based on this. You can draw a different conclusion if you want. But my reasoning is sound.

lol superior prospects according to who??!?!!?!

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:20 PM
except TC and JR and Ross have stated that Pugh WAS actually their BPA. You may disagree personally, but thats how THEY, and apparently, several other teams felt.
What are they going to say? "Well there were better players on our board but we had put ourselves in a bad position with no starting RT, that we had to pick the kid".

Every GM says every pick is BPA. Usually its BS.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 02:20 PM
i could go into detail on why rhodes and ogeltree were extremely more risky picks and not actually BPA based on talent. but simply put, as ur request; Rhodes has good straight line speed, TERRIBLE lateral speed. Poor instincts as well. Good prospect dont get me wrong, NEVER a top 10 prospect and most of the way a 2nd rd prospect actually.
Ogeltree, takes terrible angles, bad instincts, ton of missteps, off field moron, not a stack n shed LB, more Will atm, Mike years down the line.

So how were those 2 players, just quick examples Im using based on who u claim were "apparent much better players", so obvious over pugh at 19 and better talents/pick than him?

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:20 PM
lol superior prospects according to who??!?!!?!

You don't think Floyd and Rhodes are better prospects?

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:21 PM
i could go into detail on why rhodes and ogeltree were extremely more risky picks and not actually BPA based on talent. but simply put, as ur request; Rhodes has good straight line speed, TERRIBLE lateral speed. Poor instincts as well. Good prospect dont get me wrong, NEVER a top 10 prospect and most of the way a 2nd rd prospect actually.
Ogeltree, takes terrible angles, bad instincts, ton of missteps, off field moron, not a stack n shed LB, more Will atm, Mike years down the line.

So how were those 2 players, just quick examples Im using based on who u claim were "apparent much better players", so obvious over pugh at 19 and better talents/pick than him?

For the record I think Ogeltree would have been a terrible pick. Don't see his size and skill level translate to the NFL well at all.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 02:23 PM
keep in mind, I also have demonstrated there were personnel/scouts who had Pugh actually ranked higher than Johnson, who was taken at 4.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 02:24 PM
Floyd, who was such a better prospect than Pugh, who went several picks after even with teams who had big needs at DT? Floyd is a risky pick. Theres no way u can claim hes this obviously better talent...cmon.

Eli TO Shockey
05-22-2013, 02:26 PM
You don't think Floyd and Rhodes are better prospects?

They are the sexier picks. I didnt interview them. I didnt see them at the combine. I didnt have 5+ scouts analyze every little detail of these players. So my opinion of a few youtube clips/ scouting reports holds no water compared to the research done by the scouting team.

Eli TO Shockey
05-22-2013, 02:27 PM
Floyd, who was such a better prospect than Pugh, who went several picks after even with teams who had big needs at DT? Floyd is a risky pick. Theres no way u can claim hes this obviously better talent...cmon.

But wait...Floyd was mocked to go #4 by kiper!

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:28 PM
keep in mind, I also have demonstrated there were personnel/scouts who had Pugh actually ranked higher than Johnson, who was taken at 4.
Not really true. You showed local puff pieces from Philly area papers. Where Pugh is from.
And even if you are right. Its not that they had Pugh high, its that they had Johnson low.

If we had a starting RT on the roster I would be far more comfortable with this pick. But the mere fact that the only position that we don't have a starter on the roster HAPPENS to be the position of our first round draft pick should at least raise eyebrows here.
Combine with at least the discussion that he was taken way too high.
Its just too much of a coincidence.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:29 PM
Floyd, who was such a better prospect than Pugh, who went several picks after even with teams who had big needs at DT? Floyd is a risky pick. Theres no way u can claim hes this obviously better talent...cmon.

Everyone was chasing O line. Every year there are players who drop because teams are chasing need, especially at the top of the draft.
Does Aaron Rodgers come to mind? How about Rodney Hampton?

GameTime
05-22-2013, 02:30 PM
You don't think Floyd and Rhodes are better prospects?
not at OL they are not.....:)
really the thought process on Pugh, IMO, is that he is versital. Beatty, Snee, Baas, have all shown injuries issues and Pugh can play all along the line.I htink that played a big part in this draft.

Eli TO Shockey
05-22-2013, 02:30 PM
Not really true. You showed local puff pieces from Philly area papers. Where Pugh is from.
And even if you are right. Its not that they had Pugh high, its that they had Johnson low.

If we had a starting RT on the roster I would be far more comfortable with this pick. But the mere fact that the only position that we don't have a starter on the roster HAPPENS to be the position of our first round draft pick should at least raise eyebrows here.
Combine with at least the discussion that he was taken way too high.
Its just too much of a coincidence.

Pugh was on top of our draft board according to our GM. When was the last time JR drafted need in the 1st? Based on JRs track record, ill take his word for it and not call him a liar. This is essentially what you're saying right? that JR lied to everyone when he said he drafted the BPA with Pugh.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 02:30 PM
Not really true. You showed local puff pieces from Philly area papers. Where Pugh is from.
And even if you are right. Its not that they had Pugh high, its that they had Johnson low.

If we had a starting RT on the roster I would be far more comfortable with this pick. But the mere fact that the only position that we don't have a starter on the roster HAPPENS to be the position of our first round draft pick should at least raise eyebrows here.
Combine with at least the discussion that he was taken way too high.
Its just too much of a coincidence.poster another couple links from Chicago paper and a FL paper.
ur also claiming we have this huge hole at RT when thats not the case either. we have 3 players not including Pugh on the roster taken as RT...could it be u may be over marginalizing the situation at RT and why we picked Pugh?

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:30 PM
But wait...Floyd was mocked to go #4 by kiper!
Everyone throws out that Mayock had Pugh as a first round talent. He had Floyd as the best DT in the draft.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:32 PM
ur also claiming we have this huge hole at RT when thats not the case either. we have 3 players not including Pugh on the roster taken as RT...could it be u may be over marginalizing the situation at RT and why we picked Pugh?
Pugh was not on our roster before the draft. That should seem obvious.
Is it your view that DD is the starter going in to the draft? Or Brewer?
A guy who's pay they cut to shreds, or a two year bench warmer who essentially has never seen the field.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:35 PM
not at OL they are not.....:)
really the thought process on Pugh, IMO, is that he is versital. Beatty, Snee, Baas, have all shown injuries issues and Pugh can play all along the line.I htink that played a big part in this draft.
Which is my exact point.
They were going to draft an O lineman in round one no matter what. All because we had a hole at RT.
Instead of taking advantage of the fact that other teams were chasing need and great talent fell right into our laps......which we foolishly passed on.

GameTime
05-22-2013, 02:38 PM
Which is my exact point.
They were going to draft an O lineman in round one no matter what. All because we had a hole at RT.
Instead of taking advantage of the fact that other teams were chasing need and great talent fell right into our laps......which we foolishly passed on.
no my point is not that....my point is OL is/was a bigger need in their minds then CB or DL or whatever. Pugh gave them a very versital pick. Something they valued more than a CB or another position at the time
With Pugh they covered the whole OL with eyes on him being a RT....most likely

BlueSanta
05-22-2013, 02:38 PM
If they sign a solid vet for RT, I am fine with all of it. DD is not that guy because they wouldn't have cut his pay so much if they thought he was.

All this leads me to believe that they chased need with Pugh to start him at RT. If I am right its a very bad move.
But you say they didn't draft him for that purpose. If you are right...who do you think is our starting RT right now?


Either Pugh, DD or Brewer. Whoever proves most capable in camp.

My problem is you are connecting 2 dots that do not connect.

1) Reese said clearly the positional versatility of Pugh was a major factor in the pick. That is basically saying the opposite of what you are: that Pugh was NOT drafted to play RT. He may play there but he was drafted to play wherever he is needed along the line. So when you say we drafted him to play RT, you are just flat wrong.


2) Signing Winston and drafting Pugh are not at all related. Pugh is a versatile guy who, even if we did sign Winson, would still be incredibly a valuable because of his versatility.


Lastly, Winston is asking $3-4 mil a year. He turns 30 this season and this will likely be his last contract so he wants a payday. I am not saying he isn't a good player and we couldn't use him. But, how do you propose we pay for him and how does he address the Giants problem that in the next 2-4 years we need to replace every single player on our Oline except perhaps 1(Beatty.) Winston does nothing for the later problem, in fact he makes it worse.

So, taking Winston out of the equation for a sec, do you see my point that the Giants had to address those 4 positional upcoming needs before it became an immediate need? If you measure the 1 current need for a RT against the potential for having 4 Olineman retire all at once, you clearly have to see the value in the Pugh pick, Winston or no Winston.

gumby74
05-22-2013, 02:41 PM
How many posters had Pugh "rated" this high BEFORE we drafted him. I'd venture not too many. The fact that he's now a giant shouldn't change that either.

If Pugh doesn't start day 1, as big a JR homer as I am, I'm going to be scratching my head.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 02:48 PM
Either Pugh, DD or Brewer. Whoever proves most capable in camp.

My problem is you are connecting 2 dots that do not connect.

1) Reese said clearly the positional versatility of Pugh was a major factor in the pick. That is basically saying the opposite of what you are: that Pugh was NOT drafted to play RT. He may play there but he was drafted to play wherever he is needed along the line. So when you say we drafted him to play RT, you are just flat wrong.


2) Signing Winston and drafting Pugh are not at all related. Pugh is a versatile guy who, even if we did sign Winson, would still be incredibly a valuable because of his versatility.


Lastly, Winston is asking $3-4 mil a year. He turns 30 this season and this will likely be his last contract so he wants a payday. I am not saying he isn't a good player and we couldn't use him. But, how do you propose we pay for him and how does he address the Giants problem that in the next 2-4 years we need to replace every single player on our Oline except perhaps 1(Beatty.) Winston does nothing for the later problem, in fact he makes it worse.

So, taking Winston out of the equation for a sec, do you see my point that the Giants had to address those 4 positional upcoming needs before it became an immediate need? If you measure the 1 current need for a RT against the potential for having 4 Olineman retire all at once, you clearly have to see the value in the Pugh pick, Winston or no Winston.

I said months before the draft that O line had to be our #1 priority. But in this case they chased that need right into the second round. I promise you, if we had a solid RT, Pugh would not have been the pick.
Corner BTW..IS a big need for us. Rhodes would have been a great pick. We could groom him under Webby this season and have Rhodes and Prince for the forseeable future.

I've warmed up to Hankins, I love Moore and Taylor and don't like Nassib at all.
Generally the draft is fine with me except round 1.

TCHOF
05-22-2013, 03:03 PM
Everyone throws out that Mayock had Pugh as a first round talent. He had Floyd as the best DT in the draft.

There is no way that Mayock didn'thave inside info on the Giants pick. He mocked Pugh to us the night before the draft, when basically no other mock draft had us taking him.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 03:08 PM
There is no way that Mayock didn'thave inside info on the Giants pick. He mocked Pugh to us the night before the draft, when basically no other mock draft had us taking him.
I completely agree with that.
Which again.....suggests that we were always going O Tackle in round 1 no matter what.
Its doesn't prove it, but it does suggest it.

TheEnigma
05-22-2013, 03:10 PM
How many posters had Pugh "rated" this high BEFORE we drafted him. I'd venture not too many. The fact that he's now a giant shouldn't change that either.

If Pugh doesn't start day 1, as big a JR homer as I am, I'm going to be scratching my head.

I actually made a thread in the draft section talking about how Mayock had Pugh mocked to us at 19th the day before the draft and most of the posters there laughed at the notion of taking him that high. People didn't mind him coming to the Giants but it was mainly discussed as a 2nd or 3rd round selection. Now had the Cowboys taken Pugh at 18th overall and we took...Kyle Long at 19th for example...would this board talk about how great Kyle Long is and how the Cowboys reached for Pugh? I understand that they are Giants now but there is tendency here to overhype our new players for whatever reason.

Wilson was supposed to be a 1k+ yard rusher last year and steal the job from Bradshaw.
Hosley was light years ahead of Prince and was going to outshine him.

Those are just some examples.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 03:12 PM
I actually made a thread in the draft section talking about how Mayock had Pugh mocked to us at 19th the day before the draft and most of the posters there laughed at the notion of taking him that high. People didn't mind him coming to the Giants but it was mainly discussed as a 2nd or 3rd round selection. Now had the Cowboys taken Pugh at 18th overall and we took...Kyle Long at 19th for example...would this board talk about how great Kyle Long is and how the Cowboys reached for Pugh? I understand that they are Giants now but there is tendency here to overhype our new players for whatever reason.

Wilson was supposed to be a 1k+ yard rusher last year and steal the job from Bradshaw.
Hosley was light years ahead of Prince and was going to outshine him.

Those are just some examples.

Its all true.

kfelgigiants
05-22-2013, 03:28 PM
no not really but cruz would leave a much bigger hole than the RT situation. maybe it wouldnt be so much of a hole but having one of the best recievers in the nfl as a no. 2 is too much to let go. i agree w the diehl statement though he was miserable last year, so lets get one of the young guys in there and keep cruz. am i ******ed? lol

kfelgigiants
05-22-2013, 03:29 PM
r e t a r d e d* ^

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 03:32 PM
r e t a r d e d* ^
Thanks for elevating the conversation.

BlueSanta
05-22-2013, 03:44 PM
I said months before the draft that O line had to be our #1 priority. But in this case they chased that need right into the second round. I promise you, if we had a solid RT, Pugh would not have been the pick.
Corner BTW..IS a big need for us. Rhodes would have been a great pick. We could groom him under Webby this season and have Rhodes and Prince for the forseeable future.

I've warmed up to Hankins, I love Moore and Taylor and don't like Nassib at all.
Generally the draft is fine with me except round 1.

Now you have changed your opinion to be based on pure conjecture and opinion about the picks themselves. It is your opinion he isn't a good pick because of a bunch of new reasons completely irrelevant to Eric Winston. Well, am not saying I loved the Pugh pick but I understand it and most of all I have accepted it now and have moved on. Perhaps you should too.

Furthermore, your "promises" about what we would have done mean absolutely nothing. We had a CLEAR age problem on the oline. they are all aging together. Winston doesn't address that in fact he adds to it. You keep ignoring that and changing the subject when I bring it up. He is going into his last contract same as every other player on our Oline save 1. Players on their last contract tend to miss FAR more playing time than younger players playing to earn future money. We have 4 guys approaching retirement. Winston does nothing to address that. Pugh does.

All the other potential draft picks you mentioned are guys I liked very much. But, they also do not address the biggest problem facing the organization going forward, that we have 4 of 5 Olineman rapidly approaching retirement and we have no serious guys behind them to develop. Even if we had Winston on this team we would still have that problem and Pugh would still be a valuable pick.

Either way, this is now the 3rd time you have changed the point of your argument. In light of that and how many more times you could change it going forward, I am going to stop here. Good day

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 04:18 PM
Now you have changed your opinion to be based on pure conjecture and opinion about the picks themselves. It is your opinion he isn't a good pick because of a bunch of new reasons completely irrelevant to Eric Winston. Well, am not saying I loved the Pugh pick but I understand it and most of all I have accepted it now and have moved on. Perhaps you should too.

Furthermore, your "promises" about what we would have done mean absolutely nothing. We had a CLEAR age problem on the oline. they are all aging together. Winston doesn't address that in fact he adds to it. You keep ignoring that and changing the subject when I bring it up. He is going into his last contract same as every other player on our Oline save 1. Players on their last contract tend to miss FAR more playing time than younger players playing to earn future money. We have 4 guys approaching retirement. Winston does nothing to address that. Pugh does.

All the other potential draft picks you mentioned are guys I liked very much. But, they also do not address the biggest problem facing the organization going forward, that we have 4 of 5 Olineman rapidly approaching retirement and we have no serious guys behind them to develop. Even if we had Winston on this team we would still have that problem and Pugh would still be a valuable pick.

Either way, this is now the 3rd time you have changed the point of your argument. In light of that and how many more times you could change it going forward, I am going to stop here. Good day


I just don't agree at all with what you're saying. Eric Winston (or another solid vet) would suggest that we are NOT looking for Pugh to start at RT this season.
Again, if we didn't have a hole in our roster at RT I would be less bothered by the pick. We could groom the kid and he could very well be a good player for us. But the fact that we have no RT, and we drafted what seems to be a RT in round 1, suggests that we are drafting him to start week one, this season. And THAT I have a problem with.
If we sign Winston, that is no longer the case.
My position is what it is. You can disagree if you want, but I have no reason to change it, or the criteria to support it.

GameTime
05-22-2013, 04:42 PM
r e t a r d e d* ^

with a comment like that ....you just described yourself.....good job

byron
05-22-2013, 09:03 PM
Not what I'm saying. DD is clearly not seen as a starter, since they dropped his pay by 80%. I also have to assume that they have no confidence in Brewer either since they passed on Rhodes to draft Pugh. That makes no sense otherwise.
My opinion is that the intention of the Pugh pick was to plug him in immediately at RT, since we have no starter there right now. If he can't earn the spot from DD, who they see as a back up, they will have clearly swung and missed. If they sign a guy like Winston and bring along Pugh as a a prospect, which is what his rating would suggest he is, then I am fine with all of it. your argument assumes a lot man... and Matts right you are hedging your opinion... I guess its really important to be right... to the point that you assume all your assumptions are correct ...even with JR and TC stating the contrary ....have fun man

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 09:28 PM
your argument assumes a lot man... and Matts right you are hedging your opinion... I guess its really important to be right... to the point that you assume all your assumptions are correct ...even with JR and TC stating the contrary ....have fun man
Please explain how I'm hedging anything. You just can't say it without describing why you think its true.

giantsfan420
05-22-2013, 09:51 PM
u r hedging ur bet tho. "if pugh is some one we are going to groom, i have no issue with the pick,. We have a huge hole at RT, if he's not the starter, it proves the pick failed. Its a bad selection if he's our starting RT"...

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 10:00 PM
u r hedging ur bet tho. "if pugh is some one we are going to groom, i have no issue with the pick,. We have a huge hole at RT, if he's not the starter, it proves the pick failed. Its a bad selection if he's our starting RT"...
Come on folks. Its not complicated.
Its my view that we drafted Pugh to start this season....week 1, at RT. I say this because:
1. We have no starter right now at RT since we cut DD by 80%, suggesting that the FO sees him as a back up.
2. We did NOT address RT in free agency (where it should have been addressed.)

If we go out and sign a legit vet at RT, then clearly they see that its bad policy to do what I suggest they are doing. That would make it easier to groom the kid to either play RT down the road, or another position on the O line.

Why is this hard to understand?

B&RWarrior
05-22-2013, 10:08 PM
Its a positional value notion that I hold. Even if rhodes ends up being a terrible player and pugh turns into an all pro, the selection is still a bad decision at the time it was made.

To elaborate, I would venture to say that the giants had rhodes rated higher than pugh or very closely to him. Rhodes plays cornerback and we have 2 corners that are guaranteed to be on the roster next year, one of whom has proven to be quite good, while the jury is still out on the other one. Generally speaking, it is very unusual for a rookie cornerback to do well his first year, so if we wanted a cheap, quality starter next year at cb then it makes sense to draft rhodes this year.

Whereas, with the situation we are in now, next year we will have to invest money into a good corner or rely on a rookie to play well for us. I would much rather have a continuous weakness at RT than EVER have a weakness at cornerback.

I apply this logic to DL, pass rushers, WRs and QBs alike. It is seemingly very intuitive and allows for a team to maximize its chances of having a good player at every position.

O_o

byron
05-22-2013, 10:21 PM
Come on folks. Its not complicated.
Its my view that we drafted Pugh to start this season....week 1, at RT. I say this because:
1. We have no starter right now at RT since we cut DD by 80%, suggesting that the FO sees him as a back up.
2. We did NOT address RT in free agency (where it should have been addressed.)

If we go out and sign a legit vet at RT, then clearly they see that its bad policy to do what I suggest they are doing. That would make it easier to groom the kid to either play RT down the road, or another position on the O line.

Why is this hard to understand? Its not hard to understand.... you think the FO totally ****ed up with this pick ....and when they sign a FART you will have your proof ....that is hedging your bet

B&RWarrior
05-22-2013, 10:22 PM
I like the Pugh pick. We needed a long term solution on the O-line. Pugh can play RT and slide over to G when Snee retires. I think Snee is gone in 2 years. He's exactly what we needed. The only thing I don't like is he is not a mauler and it's questionable if he will improve our run blocking.

I didn't like Rhodes and love the Pugh pick over Rhodes.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 10:24 PM
Its not hard to understand.... you think the FO totally ****ed up with this pick ....and when they sign a FART you will have your proof ....that is hedging your bet
Huh? What does "sign a fart" mean?
Is this Maine talk B?

byron
05-22-2013, 10:31 PM
Huh? What does "sign a fart" mean?
Is this Maine talk B? haha .....FART..... free agent right tackle/ old FART ......we are trying to get young on the line not stay old...... oh yeah if you sign a fart your gonna have to cut a fart.....just saying

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 10:35 PM
haha .....FART..... free agent right tackle/ old FART ......we are trying to get young on the line not stay old
We have a win now team Byron. Winston is 29. He's hardly old. I'm fine with grooming O linemen for the future. I'm not fine with drafting the 7th reated O lineman in the draft to be a starter, week 1. That's bad drafting.
You fill immediate holes with free agency and you build your team with the draft.
Beatty is young as well and even Snee isn't old at all. Its not about youth vs. age. Its about drafting a prospect to start week 1. I'm fine with getting younger, as long as our QB is protected.

byron
05-22-2013, 11:00 PM
We have a win now team Byron. Winston is 29. He's hardly old. I'm fine with grooming O linemen for the future. I'm not fine with drafting the 7th reated O lineman in the draft to be a starter, week 1. That's bad drafting.
You fill immediate holes with free agency and you build your team with the draft.
Beatty is young as well and even Snee isn't old at all. Its not about youth vs. age. Its about drafting a prospect to start week 1. I'm fine with getting younger, as long as our QB is protected. We always have a win now team or that should be the mentality... and you have to bring the young guys in if the kid can't go week one old DD will hold it down or die trying till he is ready .....I got to tell ya I wasn't all that crazy about our 9/7 missed the playoffs season .....Changes had to be made and I'm all for younger healthier players.. they liked this kid that's good enough for me...

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 11:03 PM
We always have a win now team or that should be the mentality... and you have to bring the young guys in if the kid can't go week one old DD will hold it down or die trying till he is ready .....I got to tell ya I wasn't all that crazy about our 9/7 missed the playoffs season .....Changes had to be made and I'm all for younger healthier players.. they liked this kid that's good enough for me...
There is a big difference between "liking a kid" and believing he will be NFL ready week 1.
A BIG difference.

They liked JPP and he didn't start week 1. They liked Toomer and he didn't start for years. They liked Strahan and he didn't start at all his first year.

byron
05-22-2013, 11:15 PM
There is a big difference between "liking a kid" and believing he will be NFL ready week 1.
A BIG difference.

They liked JPP and he didn't start week 1. They liked Toomer and he didn't start for years. They liked Strahan and he didn't start at all his first year. Well yeah.... Did I say he was going to be ready week one ? I don't think I did....

B&RWarrior
05-22-2013, 11:22 PM
There is a big difference between "liking a kid" and believing he will be NFL ready week 1.
A BIG difference.

They liked JPP and he didn't start week 1. They liked Toomer and he didn't start for years. They liked Strahan and he didn't start at all his first year.

Not one player you named was deemed a great technician when they were drafted. Pugh will have his lumps but he is good enough to stay in there and not cause us to lose games all by himself. Against college competition multiple scouts describe his technique as flawless and say he was almost never out of position. This is a sign that a player is NFL ready.

Morehead State
05-22-2013, 11:22 PM
Well yeah.... Did I say he was going to be ready week one ? I don't think I did....
OK Byron....I must not be explaining myself well here.
My point is that I believe, given all the objective facts I have laid out several times, that JR chased need and drafted Pugh because he desperately NEEDS him to start week 1.
Why? Because w have no starting RT on the roster right now.