+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. #11
    The only vacuum is your list of players, completely void of the context surrounding each pick. Barden pick was made in 2009 after the team had lost both Plaxico Burress and Amani Toomer. Manningham and Steve Smith had yet to emerge. They secured their top WR in Nicks who was still a rookie himself, but got Barden as insurance. You may not have liked the pick, but it fit your criteria as a glaring need that you just posted above.

    Canty was a prime candidate to be a cap casualty given his number within the Giants' cap issues. It's the main reason why he never restructured. Had Austin, who was a phenomenal talent in UNC which has produced a gutload of NFL talent which hardly suggests "project", panned out, it would have been the perfect transition. Now, they were put in a position where they have a 34 year old 3T to fill the void.

    Donald does fit a need. Jenkins is 34 years old. His 5 sacks sound like a great number for his position, but that hardly tells the story of his ineffectiveness at pressuring the quarterback in the first 8 games. Even if DE is more of a need, you're still suggesting to take the lesser player because of it. I don't see how Reese's strategy is questionable while that one is suggested.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Toadofsteel View Post
    My original argument is that Donald doesn't fit our needs as much as a guy like Crichton does. We HAVE a pass rushing DT on the roster already. We DON'T HAVE an every-down left DE (unless you want to turn back time and tell JR to offer a 2 year/8million to Tuck).

    You simply CAN'T make decisions in a vacuum. Drafting in the first 3 rounds merely upon player measurables and college highlights without having a clear plan how he fits into the system is what got us into this mess to begin with (which is why I listed the names I did). If we could snag both Donald and Crichton, great. But Crichton will give us a more immediate improvement to our front 4 than Donald will (whose improvement would only be realized upon release or injury of Jenkins). If Jenkins can get us through another year, we can pick up an early DT in next year's FA or draft.

    Great point. I've read alot about how Seattle defined what role they wanted players to fill, and then found guys who had that strength. Maybe Seattle got lucky with a lot of their picks, but they certainly seem more logical in their approach than Reese's BPA mantra. Wilson is fine example of an incredible athlete who doesn't fit Giants system.

  3. #13
    The way I see it, our starting DL could be:

    Crichton-Jenkins-Hankins-JPP
    with Kiwi, Moore, Patterson as depth.

    Putting Donald in the mix means either Jenkins plays DE permanently, or either Donald or Jenkins rides the bench and Kiwi starts, which really makes me shudder.


    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckKnoxx View Post
    Whatever [Tom Quinn] says to keep a near decade long job has to be truly inspirational for him not to be working at IKEA right now.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Toadofsteel View Post
    The way I see it, our starting DL could be:

    Crichton-Jenkins-Hankins-JPP
    with Kiwi, Moore, Patterson as depth.

    Putting Donald in the mix means either Jenkins plays DE permanently, or either Donald or Jenkins rides the bench and Kiwi starts, which really makes me shudder.
    Again, you're looking through a very narrow window. That is one year. The question you should always be asking is who do you believe to be the better NFL player, not who will be able to start immediately. How often is it that a rookie that isn't a QB is the defining player in a team's success or failure?

  5. #15
    If we trade back and take a DE -- my preference is Ealy.

    I think he and not Crichton is a better Tuck replacement.

    That said - would not mind a Donald #1 and Crichton #2 start to the draft. I don't think Donald would be a back-up -- I think he'd just be part of our very nice rotation.

  6. #16
    All-Pro BigBlueBoricua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Lake Worth, Florida
    Posts
    5,543
    I also agree that DE is more of a priority than DT at the moment.
    1927, 1934, 1938, 1956, 1986, 1990, 2007, 2011

  7. #17
    All-Pro Captain Chaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Alexandria, Va
    Posts
    10,002
    Quote Originally Posted by BigBlueBoricua View Post
    I also agree that DE is more of a priority than DT at the moment.
    Agreed!

  8. #18
    All-Pro BigBlueBoricua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Lake Worth, Florida
    Posts
    5,543
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Chaos View Post
    Agreed!
    We need at least 2 legit threats that can go day one imo.
    1927, 1934, 1938, 1956, 1986, 1990, 2007, 2011

  9. #19
    All-Pro slipknottin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    36,825
    I posted this in the other thread, but with the players the giants have right now, they have no commitment to any system.

    They are equally adept at any formation they want right now. Player selection in the draft will probably decide which direction they want to go.

    But if they were building on the system they ran last year (a 4-3 under very similar to what seattle ran)

    Then this is what they will look to add.

    A 3t or a 5t, Cullen can play one or the other, they need either a DT or a DE to play the other spot.,

    For a 3t you are looking at Donald, Easly, or Sutton.

    For a 5t you are looking at Martin, Stinson, Urban, Hart. (or aaron lynch before he decided he wanted to be skinny).


    Then they need to find edge rushers, Seattle has a double Leo package, which the giants could copy and utilize on passing downs.

    In general a Leo is 250 pounds or so, but is pure explosion. Dee Ford, Marcus Smith, DeMarcus Lawrence.


    Crichton, in my opinion, is a very poor fit in a 4-3 under. But like I said before, there is no real commitment right now to running a 4-3 under, other than the giants running it last year, and running it quite well.

  10. #20
    All-Pro TheAnalyst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    7,570
    I like Donald and Martin... Good boost to the DLine.
    "Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."

Posting Permissions

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