PDA

View Full Version : Giants will be reaching between rounds 2 - 4



Shockeyitus
02-20-2012, 02:34 PM
With the last pick in each round, the Giants will be forced to reach for a few players. Dont be surpirsed if they pull the trigger on guys like this in round two (#64)</P>


RB - Victor Ballard, Bernard Pierce</P>


WR - Dwight Jones, Marvin McNutt</P>


TE - Michael Egnew, Ladarius Green</P>


O-Line - Bobby Massie, Nate Potter, Brandon Washington, Senio Kelemete</P>


D-Line - Mike Martin, Kendell Reyes</P>


LB - Bruce Irvin, Audi Cole, Bobby Wagner</P>


CB/S - Leonard Johson, Ryan Steed, Jayron Hosley, Aaron Henry, Trumaine Johnson. </P>

slipknottin
02-20-2012, 02:35 PM
I dont understand how this thread is logical.

Why would picking at 64 mean they have to reach?

Shockeyitus
02-20-2012, 02:40 PM
I dont understand how this thread is logical. Why would picking at 64 mean they have to reach?</P>


Guys that are projected to be third round picks that the Giants really like may not be around until pick #96. Therefore, they may consider grabbing someone with their 64th overall selection. Capeesh?</P>

Shockeyitus
02-20-2012, 02:40 PM
I dont understand how this thread is logical. Why would picking at 64 mean they have to reach?</P>


Guys that are projected to be third round picks that the Giants really like may not be around until pick #96. Therefore, they may consider grabbing someone with their 64th overall selection. Capeesh?</P>

slipknottin
02-20-2012, 02:44 PM
wouldnt that happen even if they were picking 1st in each round? At pick 33, a guy may not fall all the way to pick 65, so they take them at 33?

But if its a significant difference in value, then you trade down.

critters
02-20-2012, 03:40 PM
Nevermind. I was just trying to discuss mock drafts and how people will accuse someone of "reaching" in their mocks.

slipknottin
02-20-2012, 03:59 PM
No. If a guy is projected as a 2nd rounder and you get him with the first pick in the 2nd round you aren't reaching.

What? lol. NFL teams dont rank players based on what round they are supposed to go in.

FourthAndOne
02-20-2012, 04:27 PM
No. If a guy is projected as a 2nd rounder and you get him with the first pick in the 2nd round you aren't reaching. If a guy is projected to be a mid to late 3rd rounder and you pick last... you would have to take him in the 2nd round to get him. Point is when you pick last and say you think we should get player A in the 2nd round... people will say, he's a 3rd round guy. Well, for us to get him, we have to make him a 2nd round guy. Hence, reaching.


Whether you pick the mid to late 3rd rounder with your last 2nd round pick or your first 3rd round pick makes it a reach either way (let's say you probably won't be able to get the guy with the last 3rd round pick or the first 4th round pick). It's only one pick that separates the two.

GMENAGAIN
02-20-2012, 04:39 PM
This thread makes zero sense

critters
02-20-2012, 05:30 PM
Who is saying they rank players by what round they go in? I'm trying to explain to you what it means when people say "reaching" in regards to the draft. If you have never heard that term I have to assume you are new to keeping up with drafts. Players get grades/round projections/draft value all the time. You also see it in mock draft debates regularly. Someone will say take a guy in the 2nd round, and someone will respond by saying he's a not a 2nd round value guy. When you have the last pick, it blends those grades a bit so someone will defend their pick saying "we may have to reach a bit". If your strategy is best available, that obviously becomes irrelevant.

While on the subject... Do you not think that teams project when they can get players and just go in hoping they can get whoever they want whenever they want? When we wanted to get Phillip Dillard we almost took him in the 3rd round. Dillard was projected as a 4th - 5th round guy. If Rolando McClain had been available we would have gone MLB in the first round, so it was a definite need (to replace Antonio Pierce). Jerry said himself that they almost took Dillard in the 3rd round, but thought he would still be available in the 4th round. They didn't think Chad Jones would be, so despite having Dillard rated very high at a need position, they decided to take Chad Jones and hope they could get Dillard in the 4th.

critters
02-20-2012, 05:48 PM
I guess it just a matter of how far someone will say the reach is. It's really weird to me to hear an NFL fan not understand what the term reaching is. If you have a need position, you may have to "reach" to get a player much sooner than he would otherwise go in the draft... when that happens it is called reaching. Although that is really just in terms of how it is perceived by those outside of the organization. Teams will have their own draft value they use to decide who to pick when and if they should trade, etc.

For example, everyone said the Vikings were "reaching" when they took Christian Ponder with their first pick: Mel Kiper: "The Vikings clearly need an answer at the quarterback position, but they reached for Ponder at No. 12. They clearly believe he's their guy long-term, but the draft is about
value too. When you saw Dalton land all the way down at No. 35, you had
to wonder if Ponder could have been had later. The Rudolph pick was a
pretty solid value and Ballard could be a good defensive lineman. The
Vikings also landed some needed help at cornerback and along the
offensive line. Minnesota reached for a quarterback, in my opinion, and
like Tennessee, still doesn't know who will start the season at
quarterback. However, the Vikings rebounded nicely on Days 2 and 3.

Here's a bleacher report article I just read the other day:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1018906-2012-nfl-draft-order-desperate-teams-who-will-reach-for-a-need


Teams reach for a need all the time in the NFL (http://bleacherreport.com/nfl) draft.</p>

Even
if they are selecting early in the first round, we've seen numerous
occasions where teams address a need regardless of the prospects
available.</p>

The Minnesota Vikings were a good example of that in 2011, when they drafted Christian Ponder at No. 12 overall.</p>

Here are three teams who I see reaching for a need in the 2012 NFL draft.....</p>


</p>

buddy33
02-20-2012, 05:48 PM
In the 1st 3 rounds after they won their last Super Bowl they picked KP, TT, and Manningham. Where they reaching then?

BlueSanta
02-20-2012, 05:56 PM
I dont understand how this thread is logical. Why would picking at 64 mean they have to reach?</p>


Guys that are projected to be third round picks that the Giants really like may not be around until pick #96. Therefore, they may consider grabbing someone with their 64th overall selection. Capeesh?</p>

Thats not how it works. Guys arent rated just round 1, round 2 , round 3, etc. They are rated in a much more finite manner than that.

critters
02-20-2012, 06:09 PM
In the 1st 3 rounds after they won their last Super Bowl they picked KP, TT, and Manningham. Where they reaching then?

No. And either way, it's hard to say when you don't know how the Giants rank players. We are known for going best available anyway.

RagTime Blue
02-20-2012, 06:17 PM
I dont understand how this thread is logical. Why would picking at 64 mean they have to reach?</p>


Guys that are projected to be third round picks that the Giants really like may not be around until pick #96. Therefore, they may consider grabbing someone with their 64th overall selection. Capeesh?</p>

Thats not how it works. Guys arent rated just round 1, round 2 , round 3, etc. They are rated in a much more finite manner than that.



Yeah, I think I remember Reese or Ross mentioning that they rank players according to "Rows". Or maybe that's just the example they used to make it easier for the layman to understand.

The scouting staff will place a certain number of players in the first row (not nec. 32). Maybe just 5 or 6. . .maybe 15 in the later rounds. Each row theoretically has players with similar desirability. When it's time to pick, Reese will look and see which player he likes best in the highest occupied row. This helps balance the whole "Need vs. BPA" debate.

This system also helps Reese deal with trades in the heat of the draft. If there's 10 players in the highest "occupied" row, then JR might not mind trading down 8 spots. He gets an extra pick without sacrificing quality of the draftee.

I'm sure if I'm even close to understanding this system, it's still used more as a guide than anything else. But it's a very well researched and thought-out guide.

critters
02-20-2012, 06:20 PM
I dont understand how this thread is logical. Why would picking at 64 mean they have to reach?</p>


Guys that are projected to be third round picks that the Giants really like may not be around until pick #96. Therefore, they may consider grabbing someone with their 64th overall selection. Capeesh?</p>

Thats not how it works. Guys arent rated just round 1, round 2 , round 3, etc. They are rated in a much more finite manner than that.






I don't think the guy is at all saying that is the way players are rated.

deekay7685
02-20-2012, 06:28 PM
keep an eye on wr- jordan white to be our new flanker in the middle rounds.
i also think slb prospects like nigel bradham or keenan robinson are better fits for our defense than the lb's listed.

slipknottin
02-20-2012, 06:48 PM
No. If a guy is projected as a 2nd rounder and you get him with the first pick in the 2nd round you aren't reaching. If a guy is projected to be a mid to late 3rd rounder and you pick last... you would have to take him in the 2nd round to get him. Point is when you pick last and say you think we should get player A in the 2nd round... people will say, he's a 3rd round guy. Well, for us to get him, we have to make him a 2nd round guy. Hence, reaching.


You make absolutely no sense what so ever.

What if a guy is projected as a mid to late 2nd rounder, and you are picking 1st overall (33rd pick)? Wouldnt you be reaching to select him there too?

Its the same for every team at every draft pick.

critters
02-20-2012, 07:23 PM
No. If a guy is projected as a 2nd rounder and you get him with the first pick in the 2nd round you aren't reaching. If a guy is projected to be a mid to late 3rd rounder and you pick last... you would have to take him in the 2nd round to get him. Point is when you pick last and say you think we should get player A in the 2nd round... people will say, he's a 3rd round guy. Well, for us to get him, we have to make him a 2nd round guy. Hence, reaching.


You make absolutely no sense what so ever.

What if a guy is projected as a mid to late 2nd rounder, and you are picking 1st overall (33rd pick)? Wouldnt you be reaching to select him there too?

Its the same for every team at every draft pick.

I'm not saying we'll be doing anything. I'm trying to explain to you what the term reaching means. I guess Mel Kiper also makes no sense whatsoever, because he talks about it all the time. I seriously can't believe you have never heard the term before. Perhaps my scenario wasn't the best example, just trying to give you a quick idea. It's not something teams do all the time. It's something teams will be accused of doing with certain picks, and like I said, it's mostly public perception. If a guy is viewed as a late 3rd round pick and a team picks him much earlier, it wil be deemed "reaching". And yes, any team at any pick can do it. If I mention us having a late pick it's because in mock drafts someone will say, that guy isn't a 3rd round round guy, he's a late 4th round guy (in case it's not obvious, I'm not saying how the Giants organization views it, I'm talking fans)... someone defending their mock will say we may have to reach here in order to get the guy we want. Everyone making mocks takes into consideration draft value and they're fun to deabate. That's why no one is saying we should take Casey Hayward with our first pick. He's not viewed as a first round value. Sorry if I'm not making this any easier to understand. I guess just watch drafts and wait for McShay and Kiper to go off about a team reaching with their pick because their pick doesn't match up with the value they put on the player.

rainierjef
02-20-2012, 07:50 PM
What slipknottin is probably trying to say is this.

what is a late 3rd round pick to mel kiper or other know draft analyst is probably not the same value to reese and scouting staff.

so while you might feel that player is a reach at 64 you have no clue on the inner working of how the giants organization ranks / rates and evaluates their draftees, so its mute to argue what a reach or not a reach cause we don't know.

the year where all those QB's came off the board early was due in part to NEED over BPA, so many teams needed a starting QB, so to that team it wasn't a reach its a reach to mel kiper cause he...HE rated ponder as a late 1st or second round talent, but the vikings knew that also Bengals / 49ers need QB's as well, So they drafted to need and by no means to them probably considered it a reach.

pure speculation as i don't know whats going on in these front offices but, like i said neither do you or mel keiper his ranking system is much more different and probably less complex than an NFL FO.

slipknottin
02-20-2012, 08:00 PM
really its simple.

Where you are picking has nothing to do with whether you reach for players or not.

Seducer
02-20-2012, 08:51 PM
really its simple.

Where you are picking has nothing to do with whether you reach for players or not.
You are blowing their mind. I don't think they're going to get it.

BlueSanta
02-20-2012, 09:01 PM
really its simple.

Where you are picking has nothing to do with whether you reach for players or not.
You are blowing their mind. I don't think they're going to get it.I know I certainly dont understand the logic of the OP, so I guess that evens things out.

buddy33
02-20-2012, 10:09 PM
In the 1st 3 rounds after they won their last Super Bowl they picked KP, TT, and Manningham. Where they reaching then?

No. And either way, it's hard to say when you don't know how the Giants rank players. We are known for going best available anyway.



Right, so going BPA is the exact opposite of reaching.

FourthAndOne
02-20-2012, 10:27 PM
I get what Slip is saying. Say that there's this guy, Mark Smith, who is projected to go in the mid to late 2nd round.

It doesn't matter if you're picking first or last, if you want to get the guy you're probably going to have to reach (whether it's using the 32nd pick of the first round or the 1st pick of the second round). Yeah, sure the 1st pick of the second round is technically a second round pick, but it's just as much of a reach as using the 32nd pick of the 1st round.

If the Giants are picking 1st they probably won't be able to get someone expected to go in the 16 through 32 picks (without trading/reaching). If the Giants are picking 16th they probably won't be able to get someone expected to go 1-15 in the second round. If the Giants go 28th they probably won't be able to get a guy expected to go 12-27 in the second round. For every pick there's a set of draft picks, where if you feel that Player A is going to go, you probably won't be able to get Player A unless you trade or reach.

gmen0820
02-20-2012, 10:58 PM
I like Bobby Massie in the 3rd, he could be a pretty solid RT, maybe even right away.

myles2424
02-20-2012, 11:13 PM
Dude BPA whenever we pick, end of story.......this makes no sense

critters
02-21-2012, 10:52 AM
really its simple.

Where you are picking has nothing to do with whether you reach for players or not.
You are blowing their mind. I don't think they're going to get it.

Yes. My mind is blown because I said any team at any pick can be accused of reaching and this guy just informed me that where you pick has nothing to do with whether you reach for players or not.

And yes, I've already pointed out that reaching is based on public perception because no one knows how organizations grade players or where other teams grade the player in question. Saying back to me exactly what I have stated is not going to blow my mind.

Perhaps this is a foreign concept to some on here because the Giants are known for going BPA. That's why even though we wanted Dillard in the 3rd we didn't take him cause we thought there was a chance he'd still be available in the 4th. We know we graded him very highly and used draft value to decide when to get him. We didn't reach. GO GIANTS.

p.s. you guys should go into the mock draft threads or Chandler Jones thread and tell them that they don't know what they're talking about.. cause I see a lot of people using the term "reaching".

Raptor22
02-21-2012, 11:25 AM
Reaching or stealing is pretty subjective. Mel Kiper might have a guy rated around 90 overall, but Reese and the Giants scouting department might have the same guy rated as 35 over-all on their big board.

So, come pick 64, it would look like a big reach going by Kiper's board, but it would be a tremendous value going by JR's board.

Look at JPP, for example. He was 6 overall on the Giants' board, but considerably lower than that on a lot of other boards. Given that and the Giants' perceived depth at that position, it looked like a BAD pick. How's it look now? I don't think there are 5 guys from that draft who have played better.

Jaquain Williams is another example. NOBODY knew who he was (IIRC, the Bears are the only other team that even LOOKED at him), and that pick was pretty much universally criticized... but looking back, he played as well as any rookie LB not named Von Miller, regardless of draft position. I'd say that's tremendous value.

My point being, the Giants' scouting department sets its big board, and JR sticks to that, and picks the highest rated player remaining. They don't get enamored by names or positions the same way fans do. The genius in JR's drafting is in the scouting department's evaluation and setting up their big board, and taking the best talent available. They let other teams reach and let the draft come to them.

critters
02-21-2012, 11:39 AM
Reaching or stealing is pretty subjective. Mel Kiper might have a guy rated around 90 overall, but Reese and the Giants scouting department might have the same guy rated as 35 over-all on their big board.

So, come pick 64, it would look like a big reach going by Kiper's board, but it would be a tremendous value going by JR's board.

Look at JPP, for example. He was 6 overall on the Giants' board, but considerably lower than that on a lot of other boards. Given that and the Giants' perceived depth at that position, it looked like a BAD pick. How's it look now? I don't think there are 5 guys from that draft who have played better.

Jaquain Williams is another example. NOBODY knew who he was (IIRC, the Bears are the only other team that even LOOKED at him), and that pick was pretty much universally criticized... but looking back, he played as well as any rookie LB not named Von Miller, regardless of draft position. I'd say that's tremendous value.

My point being, the Giants' scouting department sets its big board, and JR sticks to that, and picks the highest rated player remaining. They don't get enamored by names or positions the same way fans do. The genius in JR's drafting is in the scouting department's evaluation and setting up their big board, and taking the best talent available. They let other teams reach and let the draft come to them.


This is 100% correct. I think the Giants are one of the one best teams when it comes to establishing draft value and getting the best picks.

buddy33
02-21-2012, 12:11 PM
Reaching or stealing is pretty subjective. Mel Kiper might have a guy rated around 90 overall, but Reese and the Giants scouting department might have the same guy rated as 35 over-all on their big board.

So, come pick 64, it would look like a big reach going by Kiper's board, but it would be a tremendous value going by JR's board.

Look at JPP, for example. He was 6 overall on the Giants' board, but considerably lower than that on a lot of other boards. Given that and the Giants' perceived depth at that position, it looked like a BAD pick. How's it look now? I don't think there are 5 guys from that draft who have played better.

Jaquain Williams is another example. NOBODY knew who he was (IIRC, the Bears are the only other team that even LOOKED at him), and that pick was pretty much universally criticized... but looking back, he played as well as any rookie LB not named Von Miller, regardless of draft position. I'd say that's tremendous value.

My point being, the Giants' scouting department sets its big board, and JR sticks to that, and picks the highest rated player remaining. They don't get enamored by names or positions the same way fans do. The genius in JR's drafting is in the scouting department's evaluation and setting up their big board, and taking the best talent available. They let other teams reach and let the draft come to them.


This is 100% correct. I think the Giants are one of the one best teams when it comes to establishing draft value and getting the best picks.



Ok, so then why say they would be reaching? If you believe that is how they draft then they are not reaching. If Reese picks a guy it's because that is who he wants. Don't look at all the "experts" boards and what they say during the draft. Reese has 2 rings doing what he does. If he picks a guy, it is not reaching.

critters
02-21-2012, 01:47 PM
It was his opinion. Perhaps he thinks we have to be a little more specific with our picks because of position needs (like TE for example). In which case we wouldn't be able to wait and see who is best available and may have to bypass the draft board value to get players at certain positions. Take the Dillard situation I was referring to. We didn't take him in the 3rd like we wanted and went value instead. If we were really desperate for a MLB, maybe we would have taken him in the 3rd round instead of gambling that he would still be there in the 4th... which in hindsight we see wouldn't have been the best way to do it.

I personally don't think we will change our methods. I think we'll go BPA according to our boards and use free agency to fill any glaring holes.

wideright91
02-22-2012, 04:06 AM
really its simple.

Where you are picking has nothing to do with whether you reach for players or not.
You are blowing their mind. I don't think they're going to get it.

Yes. My mind is blown because I said any team at any pick can be accused of reaching and this guy just informed me that where you pick has nothing to do with whether you reach for players or not.

And yes, I've already pointed out that reaching is based on public perception because no one knows how organizations grade players or where other teams grade the player in question. Saying back to me exactly what I have stated is not going to blow my mind.

Perhaps this is a foreign concept to some on here because the Giants are known for going BPA. That's why even though we wanted Dillard in the 3rd we didn't take him cause we thought there was a chance he'd still be available in the 4th. We know we graded him very highly and used draft value to decide when to get him. We didn't reach. GO GIANTS.

p.s. you guys should go into the mock draft threads or Chandler Jones thread and tell them that they don't know what they're talking about.. cause I see a lot of people using the term "reaching".


Yes, thank you for spelling this out. Jacquain Williams is the perfect example--no one had heard of him, so we waited until late in the draft to take him.

As for having the last pick: if anything, I'd think it's probably a little tougher to predict specific scenarios or target specific guys--you have to wait and see what 31 other teams do with their first round picks--but other than that, it seems like any other pick. If there's a guy you want that you might not get, trade up. If there's no one you feel merits the slotted pick, trade out. And apart from that, just stick to the board, no?

nycsportzfan
02-22-2012, 07:38 AM
I like Bobby Massie in the 3rd, he could be a pretty solid RT, maybe even right away. I like Bobbie Massie in the 2nd.. Hes a guy who was ranked as a 1st rder by some coming into this season, and Ole Miss was pretty good at not allowing sacks and rushing offfense and thats about it.. Bobbie Massie actually reminds me some of a young Kareem Mckenzie, and James Brewer could use himself some competiton, as our giants could also use the depth... </P>


</P>


I woulden't be shocked to see the giants try and trade up for Mike Adams to be honest.. I was thinking about who the giants would possibly trade up for, and i believe Mike Adams would be a guy they'd go 10picks up or so to get... Mike Adams is defeinetly a player Reese is gonna covet, i think...</P>

Kruunch
02-22-2012, 09:58 AM
With the last pick in each round, the Giants will be forced to reach for a few players. Dont be surpirsed if they pull the trigger on guys like this in round two (#64)</P>


RB - Victor Ballard, Bernard Pierce</P>


WR - Dwight Jones, Marvin McNutt</P>


TE - Michael Egnew, Ladarius Green</P>


O-Line - Bobby Massie, Nate Potter, Brandon Washington, Senio Kelemete</P>


D-Line - Mike Martin, Kendell Reyes</P>


LB - Bruce Irvin, Audi Cole, Bobby Wagner</P>


CB/S - Leonard Johson, Ryan Steed, Jayron Hosley, Aaron Henry, Trumaine Johnson. </P>

I agree that if we choose any of those players in the second round we'd be reaching.

I doubt we pick any of those players in the second.

(of course your title says Rds 2-4 so lol)

Kruunch
02-22-2012, 09:59 AM
keep an eye on wr- jordan white to be our new flanker in the middle rounds.
i also think slb prospects like nigel bradham or keenan robinson are better fits for our defense than the lb's listed.

I like Keenan Robinson a lot for the Giants.

4th or 5th round pick there.

critters
02-22-2012, 11:50 AM
keep an eye on wr- jordan white to be our new flanker in the middle rounds.
i also think slb prospects like nigel bradham or keenan robinson are better fits for our defense than the lb's listed.

I like Keenan Robinson a lot for the Giants.

4th or 5th round pick there.

I agree. Big guy with good speed. Could (and probably would) be a great player in our system.

buffyblue
02-22-2012, 12:02 PM
NY Giants may reach a little bit to fill a need or the best available that they feel wont be around if they dont grab him then.

Remember JPP was a little bit of a reach. He was our third choice when we drafted him. We wanted Rolondo McLain but Oakland snagged him. Then we wanted CJ Spiller but Buffalo grabbed him. Lot of folks were surprised at the JPP pick. When they showed the back flips, I knew all was good.

BlueSanta
02-22-2012, 12:16 PM
NY Giants may reach a little bit to fill a need or the best available that they feel wont be around if they dont grab him then.

Remember JPP was a little bit of a reach. He was our third choice when we drafted him. We wanted Rolondo McLain but Oakland snagged him. Then we wanted CJ Spiller but Buffalo grabbed him. Lot of folks were surprised at the JPP pick. When they showed the back flips, I knew all was good.

No, JPP was the opposite of a reach. He was a BPA pure and simple. BPA is, by definition, not a reach.

Shockeyitus
02-22-2012, 12:40 PM
NY Giants may reach a little bit to fill a need or the best available that they feel wont be around if they dont grab him then. Remember JPP was a little bit of a reach. He was our third choice when we drafted him. We wanted Rolondo McLain but Oakland snagged him. Then we wanted CJ Spiller but Buffalo grabbed him. Lot of folks were surprised at the JPP pick. When they showed the back flips, I knew all was good.

No, JPP was the opposite of a reach. He was a BPA pure and simple. BPA is, by definition, not a reach.


</P>


Derrick Morgan was the top DE in that draft according to Kiper and McShay... Looks like the Giants made a fantastic decision. </P>

Kruunch
02-22-2012, 12:51 PM
NY Giants may reach a little bit to fill a need or the best available that they feel wont be around if they dont grab him then.

Remember JPP was a little bit of a reach. He was our third choice when we drafted him. We wanted Rolondo McLain but Oakland snagged him. Then we wanted CJ Spiller but Buffalo grabbed him. Lot of folks were surprised at the JPP pick. When they showed the back flips, I knew all was good.

It wasn't a reach ... JPP was a first round talent (slotted around 22 or so).

It wasn't even a surprising pick since he was on their radar from the get go.

McClain not being available was a bigger surprise.

BlueSanta
02-22-2012, 12:58 PM
NY Giants may reach a little bit to fill a need or the best available that they feel wont be around if they dont grab him then. Remember JPP was a little bit of a reach. He was our third choice when we drafted him. We wanted Rolondo McLain but Oakland snagged him. Then we wanted CJ Spiller but Buffalo grabbed him. Lot of folks were surprised at the JPP pick. When they showed the back flips, I knew all was good.

No, JPP was the opposite of a reach. He was a BPA pure and simple. BPA is, by definition, not a reach.


</p>


Derrick Morgan was the top DE in that draft according to Kiper and McShay... Looks like the Giants made a fantastic decision. </p>

It depended on what "expert" you went by. There were multiple reports that the Titans(who got Morgan) wanted JPP. Mayock also had JPP &gt; Morgan.

buffyblue
02-24-2012, 01:19 AM
NY Giants may reach a little bit to fill a need or the best available that they feel wont be around if they dont grab him then. Remember JPP was a little bit of a reach. He was our third choice when we drafted him. We wanted Rolondo McLain but Oakland snagged him. Then we wanted CJ Spiller but Buffalo grabbed him. Lot of folks were surprised at the JPP pick. When they showed the back flips, I knew all was good.

No, JPP was the opposite of a reach. He was a BPA pure and simple. BPA is, by definition, not a reach.


</P>


Derrick Morgan was the top DE in that draft according to Kiper and McShay... Looks like the Giants made a fantastic decision. </P>

You are absolutely right. NY Giants made a great decision and one that was not very popular at the time.

greenca190
02-24-2012, 01:56 AM
keep an eye on wr- jordan white to be our new flanker in the middle rounds.
i also think slb prospects like nigel bradham or keenan robinson are better fits for our defense than the lb's listed.

I like Keenan Robinson a lot for the Giants.

4th or 5th round pick there.

I'd take him in the 2nd. But that's not a reach or anything. That's just my organizations perspective on things in comparison to how the masses feel.

I can't believe I read this whole thread. What a waste.

Kruunch
02-24-2012, 09:44 AM
keep an eye on wr- jordan white to be our new flanker in the middle rounds.
i also think slb prospects like nigel bradham or keenan robinson are better fits for our defense than the lb's listed.

I like Keenan Robinson a lot for the Giants.

4th or 5th round pick there.

I'd take him in the 2nd. But that's not a reach or anything. That's just my organizations perspective on things in comparison to how the masses feel.

I can't believe I read this whole thread. What a waste.

Taking a borderline 4th round pick in the second is the definition of reach.

If you really wanted him *and* you had intel that another team was going to jump that pick, then that's a different story ... but it would still be considered a reach by the masses.

greenca190
02-24-2012, 03:54 PM
keep an eye on wr- jordan white to be our new flanker in the middle rounds.
i also think slb prospects like nigel bradham or keenan robinson are better fits for our defense than the lb's listed.

I like Keenan Robinson a lot for the Giants.

4th or 5th round pick there.

I'd take him in the 2nd. But that's not a reach or anything. That's just my organizations perspective on things in comparison to how the masses feel.

I can't believe I read this whole thread. What a waste.

Taking a borderline 4th round pick in the second is the definition of reach.

If you really wanted him *and* you had intel that another team was going to jump that pick, then that's a different story ... but it would still be considered a reach by the masses.

Oh my god it was complete sarcasm, dude. That, while making fun of how stubborn some people on this board can be with semantics.