Big Blue View mailbag, 4/11: It’s all about NFL Draft scenarios


The 2020 NFL draft is getting closer and New York Giants fans have a lot of questions. Let’s see what we can answer in our last Blue Big Mail Bag Mail.

Marcus Mewborn asks: I really liked Darius SlaytonRookie year and chemistry with DJ last year. It helped him stay on the ground and get more representatives. You mentioned that the Giants were picking up another WR in the larger body that could go up and get 50/50 balls on the field. Do you think adding another receiver will reduce Slayton’s reps and development? Or is it more to the way he continues to perform and could help him push it?

Ed says: Marcus, it can’t be about Slayton. The fact is, Golden Tate is aging and I doubt it will become a giant after 2020. Sterling Shepard missed a lot of time with several concussions last season. He has a wife and two young children. Another could be the end of his career. Giants must protect themselves on the wide receiver. They invested choice n ° 6 in Daniel Jones a year ago. They have to make sure he has quality guys, and at some point in this project, they have to add themselves to this group.

Austin Willis request: Most discussions about the Giants are negotiated in the project, there aren’t many discussions about the Giants who could trade to get another first-round pick. It seems to me to be a DG move, he did it last year when he picked Deandre Baker. In what scenarios would you see this happen? Are there any players in particular that you could see the Giants trading at the bottom of the first round to secure?

Ed says: Austin, I touched on it earlier in the week. The wide receiver is a screenplay, with Justin Jefferson and Denzel Mims being players I heard the Giants love. Another scenario could be an offensive tackle if they don’t have one with their first choice. One name to watch out for is Boise State’s Ezra Cleveland.

Matthew Grimes asks: Isaiah Simmons is undoubtedly a unique defense talent. I’m always in favor of choosing a OT in the first round (especially if it becomes possible to negotiate once or twice and accumulate choices from the second day). My question is about the players who can fill this type of Simmons role if the Giants go OT on turn 1. See someone on the giants list (like Jabrill Peppers) or elsewhere in the project (like Patrick Queen) who has skills similar to Simmons?

Ed says: Matthew, as you said, Simmons has a unique skill set. He is a linebacker who can be moved occasionally into safety roles or in the slot machine depending on the games. Peppers and anyone else you can think of is probably safeties that can sometimes be moved forward, rather than linebackers that can be moved backwards.

Versatility is versatility, however. Two guys who really intrigue me are small school safeties, Kyle Dugger (Lenoir-Rhyne) and Jeremy Chinn (Southern Illinois). Of course, without a choice from # 36 to # 99, it could be difficult for the Giants to get one of these guys.

Joel Story asks: Last year, the night before the repechage, I noticed a significant increase in the number of false draws that led the Giants to take Daniel Jones in the first round. In retrospect, I find this disturbing – not because the choice was Daniel Jones but because a lot of the media seemed to know the Giants’ plan plan. If I was an NFL GM, I would keep my cards close to the waistcoat to keep other GMs guessing until the last minute. Why would you want to show your cards and increase the risk that another team could trade in front of you and snatch your player, right?

So my question is, how and why is something as important as a team’s first favorite choice communicated to the media before the draft? Are members of the team organization speaking when they shouldn’t be, or is the release of this information to the media an intentional part of the team’s draft strategy? Or is there something completely different here?

Ed says: Joel, no organization wants their plans to be exposed. The point is, however, that there is a group of NFL media insiders with access to almost all coaches and GMs, and the more you have access to the more you can muster what you think a team could to do. Teams will occasionally plant misinformation with someone they know will speak. However, the more people you trust that “Team A likes player B”, the more you start to believe it.

What is happening near the actual draft is that analysts stop telling you what they think and start trying to be right. They start to tell you what they hear and what they really think the teams will do. It’s a huge signal when a whole group of better connected analysts start to merge around an idea.

do you want an example? Have you noticed Daniel Jeremiah’s recent draft? He has hit Mekhi Becton’s drum as OT1 in the draft class for months now. Suddenly, in his latest simulation, he had the Giants taking Tristan Wirfs from Iowa instead of Becton. Has his opinion about these players changed? No. What he hears about what the Giants think is probably what has changed.

For Jones, it was really no secret. Think back and this decision was easy to see months in advance, even if the Giants were trying to hide it. The GMs do not attend the Senior Bowl game. Do you remember Jones’ Pro Day? If you looked at it, the Giants were everywhere. They had a ton of people there. If they took a shift, it would always be Jones.

Here’s another example. Why do you think Tua Tagovailoa has slipped into some recent model projects? I think it’s a pretty safe bet that it’s because people with connections to dolphins hear that Miami, without being able to work Tagovailoa or give it a physical appearance, is worried that they would get. They can still select it, but it doesn’t seem like a lock.

Pb Dorfman asks: My question is why did Gettleman not use the transition tag on defensive tackles Leonard Williams instead of franchise label? My understanding is that the transition tag was around $ 13.3 million and the franchise tag was $ 16.6 million.

Williams recorded 34 tackles for the loss and 17.5 sacks in his first five seasons in the NFL. I can’t see another team offering more than the transition number and if they did, the Giants could still match.

It looks like Gettleman left over $ 3 million on the table for a player who is good but not great.

What is your opinion?

Ed says: PB, whether fans and the media agree or not, Gettleman (and apparently also new head coach Joe Judge and defensive coordinator Patrick Graham) appreciate this player. It is true that the use of the transition label rather than the franchise label would have saved the Giants $ 3 million on the salary cap. This is what I recommended. The Giants, however, did not want to risk losing the player. Marked players can still negotiate and sign with other teams. Under the transition tag if a player signs with another team and their current team decides not to match the offer, that team (the Giants in the case of Williams) receives no compensation. Under the franchise label if the current team of players does not match an offer they receive two first round picks as compensation. This is, of course, a monumental difference. Whether someone agrees or disagrees is immaterial. The Giants felt the $ 3 million was worth making sure they hadn’t lost the player.

Bryan Camacho asks: I was watching the “Top Remaining FA” and wondering if there were names that you think the Giants should consider for a short term deal? Specifically, I was wondering to sign Everson Griffen, Tony Jefferson, and Cordy glenn? I know they are trying to save money for the project, but do you see any of these names, or others, as an inexpensive investment?

Ed says: Bryan, it is possible that something may happen between now and the draft, but we generally don’t see much movement with the remaining free agents so close to the draft. What we will probably see are teams, including the Giants, who will return to the stop-gap player market if they look at their lists after the draft and realize that there are still positions where they have need options. That’s what the Giants did last year with Mike Remmers. It would be easier to assess who they could look at after the project was finished.

Bob Donnelly asks: With the changes to the coaching staff, there has been much talk of the Giants taking on more of the fundamentals Patriots.

When it comes to protecting yourself from the pass, there are two basic philosophies; go to the QB or defend the reception point. NE seems to be a system that values ​​the receiver rather than accessing the QB.

Both the HC and DC Giants are out of the NE system, suggesting that the defense will be more NE-style, but the GM believes you should go to QB. (his 3 keys: throw the ball, stop the race, join their QB). How do you see this evolution?

Ed says: Bob, that question seems to me that you’re looking for a wedge between the head coach and the general manager before they really get a chance to team up.

There is a lot of talk these days about the priority of rushing or pass coverage, with analysis sites like Pro Football Focus leading the cover charge.

There are certainly arguments for this position. The game is more horizontal now, with teams spread across the field, looking for match advantages, throwing the ball faster and shorter, and looking to create great games with a run after catch rather than shots to the bottom. Many times, teams will not focus on the field pass until they are a few points behind and time is running out. This puts a premium on the cover and emphasizes the importance and impact of the pass rush.

Disrupt the quarterback by moving it, hitting it, making it uncomfortable, throwing it sooner – or later – as it wishes, hitting passes at the line of scrimmage, getting bags remains important. It will always be so.

I don’t agree if you think New England doesn’t value the rush. Yes, they played a good defense for a few years when they didn’t have it. This is a credit to Bill Belichick and his coaches. There is more than one way to play and more than one way to disrupt the quarterback.

New England finished sixth in the league in sacks (47) and adjusted sack rates (8.1 percent) last season, despite the absence of a single player with more than 7.0 sacks. It’s hard to find great pass accelerators, and the Patriots have often been an example of how to play defenseless. They would like, I am sure, to have one if it worked. The Giants too.

I think the Giants will add as many good defensive players as possible, which they did in the free agency. It will then be up to Patrick Graham to make the most of everything he has. By the way, check out the amount of money and the project capital that the DOJ has invested in defense over the past two years. He understands the importance of quality cover guys.

Ed says: A Twitter question! And that? Yash, if the Giants could do that, I think Giants fans would want to run a parade for Dave Gettleman. I even played with this scenario because I got the wrong draft simulations.

The thing is, I don’t think it’s realistic. At least not in terms of the returns you expect from the Miami Dolphins and LA Chargers.

In the right circumstance, of course, Miami would trade its picks at # 4 with the Giants. They don’t give up another of their first round picks (18 or 26) to do it, however. More likely, the Dolphins would be ready to give up their second round pick (# 56) OR their third round pick (# 70). Using the Rich Hill Market Value Table, either is a victory for the giants in terms of point value by choice.

Now for part 2 of your scenario. I think going from # 5 to # 6 with LA would be tricky. If Miami skips the Giants and takes a quarterback, what real incentive do the Chargers have to ride? Who else is going to jump for a quarterback if that’s the direction they want to go?

For the sake of argument, let’s say they are ready to go from six to five. By using the Hill graph, again, you are going beyond in terms of what you are asking for. The Chargers are not giving up on their second and third round picks. The appropriate value to wait for is the Chargers’ third round pick, 71st overall. This, again, would be a victory for the Giants in terms of points and would essentially recapture the 68th pick they sent to the Jets for Leonard Williams.

Let’s say that Miami gave choice No. 70 to the Giants. This means that in this scenario, the Giants are left with choices 6-36-70-71-99. It would work.

Bruce Frazer asks: Suppose in the first round of the draft, the Giants take one of the first four tackles. If in the second round, they have the choice between a higher center such as Ruiz or Cushenberry, or Baun the linebacker, with whom would you go if you made the decision?

Ed says: Bruce, I would have no problem with the selection of Cesar Ruiz if he is still available. He is the top scoring center on most draft boards, and the Giants need a long-term response to this position.

Is it purely Baun against Ruiz? I’m taking Baun. I may want to have a center, but Baun is a child who could be moved around the top seven and have an impact in many ways. You’re not going to drop it and play it safe like you would for Isaiah Simmons, but there are many ways you can use it. It would be a great consolation prize for those who are disappointed if the Giants do not write Simmons. Again, Ruiz could be the starting center for week 1 of the Giants. So there is no wrong answer here.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here