+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1

    Im gonna bet Reese doesnt take a TE or OL in first



    The last 5(however long Reese has been here) drafts have been BPA in the 1st, excluding 05, =we needed a LB or OL the last 2 drafts; DE and CB instead. Hes going to go BPA.




    What do you think would be the BPA at the position were in?




    Like Drafting Floyd, the best WR in the draft, at the 32nd would be a great pick at our position but drafting someone like Nick Toon would not be a good pick at our position, catch my drift?







    I think Trent Richardson might fall to us, not saying that RB is a need but he has amazing talent.


  2. #2

    Re: Im gonna bet Reese doesnt take a TE or OL in first

    Tight End.
    I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

  3. #3

    Re: Im gonna bet Reese doesnt take a TE or OL in first



    [quote user="Kruunch"]Tight End.[/quote]




    Dwayne Allen,Coby Fleener or Greene?




    I think Reese will draft late rounds for TEs, look at our TEs




    Boss 5th




    Beckum 3rd




    Ballard/ Hopkins Undrafted





  4. #4

    Re: Im gonna bet Reese doesnt take a TE or OL in first

    i think he's gonna look at one of these guys...
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eneI982oLQg

  5. #5

    Re: Im gonna bet Reese doesnt take a TE or OL in first

    [quote user="Third&12"]

    [quote user="Kruunch"]Tight End.[/quote]




    Dwayne Allen,Coby Fleener or Greene?




    I think Reese will draft late rounds for TEs, look at our TEs




    Boss 5th




    Beckum 3rd




    Ballard/ Hopkins Undrafted




    *

    [/quote]

    But TE is a big gaping hole right now and with talents such as fleener or allen we don't just pass that up. We had shockey when we drafted boss, beckum was an experiment, and we had boss already doing well for us when we took ballard. Ballard was under-used at Ohio St so Reese knew he could get him late im sure. TE was never as big of a hole for us as it is at this time. So to look at where we drafted previous TE's wouldn't exactly be relevant.

  6. #6

    Re: Im gonna bet Reese doesnt take a TE or OL in first

    Throw in the fact that we will probably lose manningham and throw in the fact of the ever-changing NFL game (mostly passing). Im sure they analyze the damage Eli can do with a threat such as allen or fleener at TE

  7. #7
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,033

    Re: Im gonna bet Reese doesnt take a TE or OL in first



    I love speculating on the draft and positions of need vs BPA and all that j***. My problem is all we know is what the perceived need is. We don't actually know at all what need is and nor does basically any expert out there who is not involved with the Giants. There are too many questions.




    Do we like Brewer's development? Petrus?




    Do we think that Herzlich, Williams will turn into good linebackers?




    Is Christian Hopkins really a suitable replacement at TE?




    Unless we were at practice all year we have no clue. So when Reese ends up taking whatever position he takes, its based on need/bpa. We just perceive our needs to be one way when most likely it is not that way.


  8. #8

    Re: Im gonna bet Reese doesnt take a TE or OL in first

    [quote user="Third&12"]

    [quote user="Kruunch"]Tight End.[/quote]




    Dwayne Allen,Coby Fleener or Greene?




    I think Reese will draft late rounds for TEs, look at our TEs




    Boss 5th




    Beckum 3rd




    Ballard/ Hopkins Undrafted




    *

    [/quote]

    I'm hoping for Fleener and I think he fits the Giants offense better (already plays tight against the tackles) and I love his size (6'6 vs. Allen's 6'4).

    However he pronged his ankle and won't be working out in the Combine, so if Allen shows up well at the Combine, chances are we take him.

    Allen will also be the #1 rated TE in the Draft (or Fleener will) and if you follow BPA > Need > Desire formula, then the Tight End pick makes the most sense since it traverses all three of those and in that order.

    This assumes we don't someone falling like crazy that we'd snag like we did with Price (if Adams, Glenn or possibly Richardson are available when we pick, we might end up with one of those).
    I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

  9. #9
    Veteran RagTime Blue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Carlstadt, NJ
    Posts
    4,078

    Re: Im gonna bet Reese doesnt take a TE or OL in first

    [quote user="Third&12"]

    The last 5(however long Reese has been here) drafts have been BPA in the 1st, excluding 05, =we needed a LB or OL the last 2 drafts; DE and CB instead. Hes going to go BPA.




    What do you think would be the BPA at the position were in?




    Like Drafting Floyd, the best WR in the draft, at the 32nd would be a great pick at our position but drafting someone like Nick Toon would not be a good pick at our position, catch my drift?







    I think Trent Richardson might fall to us, not saying that RB is a need but he has amazing talent.

    [/quote]

    Let's not forget what Reese did the April after we won the Super Bowl in 2008. We lost Butler to FA, and then went for Kenny Phillips. This is not the forum to say whether it was right or wrong, but to say he was BPA at the time. . .do you think?

    After a season like this one, it's about filling holes when possible. . .BPA after that. I could see us going with a nice blocking/catching TE in the first few rounds. Maybe even first.

    Not saying it's right. . .just pointing at history.
    We need our coaches to assign playing time based on something other than player salary.

  10. #10

    Re: Im gonna bet Reese doesnt take a TE or OL in first

    [quote user="Third&12"]

    The last 5(however long Reese has been here) drafts have been BPA in the 1st, excluding 05, =we needed a LB or OL the last 2 drafts; DE and CB instead. Hes going to go BPA.




    What do you think would be the BPA at the position were in?




    Like Drafting Floyd, the best WR in the draft, at the 32nd would be a great pick at our position but drafting someone like Nick Toon would not be a good pick at our position, catch my drift?







    I think Trent Richardson might fall to us, not saying that RB is a need but he has amazing talent.

    [/quote]

    That just flat out isnt true. Reese does NOT always pick BPA, at least not n the sense you are descibing.

    Ross was a need pick. In fact, I do not know 1 single analyst who said he was the BPA. At the time we picked him, Sam Madison was the oldest Cb in the league for 2 years running. Many felt Ross was a slight reach.

    KP was a huge need as well. I think there was value there, but you cannot deny that safety was the biggest hole on the defense. Furthermore, in 2008 almost every single pick of that draft was a pick of a position where we had someone 30+ playing the position, or someone coming off injury, of someone gong to FA. Can you tell me that is coincedence? That the BPA's just happened to be exactly at the same positions where we had old/departing were guys playing?

    The fact is Reese might weigh value more than other teams, but he does not ignore need and does pick need when it is necessary.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts