Draft summary

[Treehugger]

I've said it before, but Beatty is sitting on his couch right now. He wasn't playing up to the contract they gave him but I'd bring him back for more modest price.

[boohyah]

Evan Silva on Rotoworld gives us a C

 

Grade: C+

New York Giants

1 (10). Ohio State CB Eli Apple
2 (40). Oklahoma WR Sterling Shepard
3 (71). Boise State S Darian Thompson
4 (109). Clemson LB B.J. Goodson
5 (149). UCLA RB Paul Perkins
6 (184). South Carolina TE Jerell Adams

Overview: Struggling GM Jerry Reese's draft began with a disaster. Loose lips in the Giants' organization leaked Reese's love for Leonard Floyd, so Bears GM Ryan Pace leapfrogged New York to land Floyd at No. 9. Reese panicked and overdrafted Apple, a fringe first-round prospect who didn't address a pressing need on a roster littered with them. Shepard is a plug-and-play slot receiver and a high-floor pick. Although Thompson showed prolific ball skills in the Mountain West Conference, he has 4.69 speed and lacks the requisite range to solve New York's free safety woes. Goodson, Perkins, and Adams were all rock-solid day-three picks; Perkins in particular could be an early contributor in a Giants backfield that is long on quantity but short on quality. While I'm confident Reese came away with a few good football players here, the first-round panic pick of Apple hurts New York's draft grade. Reese further failed to address an offensive line that needs new starters at both right guard and right tackle.

[Tempest]

I've said it before, but Beatty is sitting on his couch right now. He wasn't playing up to the contract they gave him but I'd bring him back for more modest price.

 

I'd be shocked if they brought him back. Guys we are going into the season with Marshall Newhouse at RT.

[boohyah]

Not to be a complete downer, because the Sheppard pick might end up being the best in the draft. Peter King loves him also.

 

Sterling Shepard, WR, N.Y. Giants: This is, quite literally, my favorite player in this draft. I thought he was the second-best receiver in this class after Corey Coleman, but unlike Coleman, Shepard can make an immediate impact.

His floor is very good slot receiver, but I think he can survive outside the numbers. He’s not only quick in and out of cuts, but he has an exceptional feel for setting up routes. And those hands! For a little guy, he does that thing where instead of “digging out” low throws he just reaches down and clutches it like the ball came in chest high. I'm not sure why that makes me so giddy, but it does.

[Bigblue25]

I think with drafting Stanley the Ravens will release or trade Eugene Monroe

[K3VIN]

Are the Giants trying to field the shortest WR group?

[Nas]

I think with drafting Stanley the Ravens will release or trade Eugene Monroe

Not according to this:

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/04/29/report-ravens-not-exepected-to-cut-eugene-monroe/

[Allstarjim]

Evan Silva on Rotoworld gives us a C

 

Grade: C+

 

New York Giants

 

1 (10). Ohio State CB Eli Apple

2 (40). Oklahoma WR Sterling Shepard

3 (71). Boise State S Darian Thompson

4 (109). Clemson LB B.J. Goodson

5 (149). UCLA RB Paul Perkins

6 (184). South Carolina TE Jerell Adams

 

Overview: Struggling GM Jerry Reese's draft began with a disaster. Loose lips in the Giants' organization leaked Reese's love for Leonard Floyd, so Bears GM Ryan Pace leapfrogged New York to land Floyd at No. 9. Reese panicked and overdrafted Apple, a fringe first-round prospect who didn't address a pressing need on a roster littered with them. Shepard is a plug-and-play slot receiver and a high-floor pick. Although Thompson showed prolific ball skills in the Mountain West Conference, he has 4.69 speed and lacks the requisite range to solve New York's free safety woes. Goodson, Perkins, and Adams were all rock-solid day-three picks; Perkins in particular could be an early contributor in a Giants backfield that is long on quantity but short on quality. While I'm confident Reese came away with a few good football players here, the first-round panic pick of Apple hurts New York's draft grade. Reese further failed to address an offensive line that needs new starters at both right guard and right tackle.

 

It's hard not to laugh at the sheer stupidity of this clown. This fucktard actually gets paid to write this complete drivel.

 

He may, MAY be correct about the leaks. I tend to think that he probably was. It is plausible and possible that the leaks were intentional to throw off true intention. I guarantee this fucking idiot doesn't know. Regardless... GM's figure this out... Team A needs a LBer with cover skills. A LBer with cover skills is available at team's draft position. Team B knows that Team A needs a LB, Team B, who also covets this linebacker, makes the trade. It doesn't have anything to do with leaks, it's putting 2 and 2 together. It's not that complicated. Further, Tampa was also linked to Floyd, and there was no guarantee that Tampa doesn't take him anyway if the Bears don't trade up.

 

The Giants were linked to Myles Jack also... in fact, some of the "insider" info was that the pick would be Jack if he's there. Then they said he's off the board because of medical, then there was information that he was still the target. People said they were linked to Hargreaves, too.

 

Further, to suggest that Reese panicked is a complete work of unbelievable, un-intelligent, lazy fiction. Every team has a draft board. There's no panic, you just go to your board and see who's the next best guy available.

 

Next, to say Reese over-drafted Apple and that he is a "fringe first-round prospect" is to ignore the insider information that has been released since the draft... that the Miami Dolphins were poised to take Apple at 13, and, moreover, that the Los Angeles Rams had Apple as their top-rated corner (after Ramsey), and who said that he would've likely not been available had the Giants traded down. That means, multiple teams had Apple as their top corner, and that means he was not a fringe first-round prospect at all.

 

Further, to suggest that CB wasn't a pressing need is to ignore the stark reality that you must have 3 starting caliber corners in the NFL to compete, and the Giants had 2. Teams are in nickel 60-65% of the time, as has been stated many times. Corner is a premium position.

 

It's not hard to imagine Apple is a better prospect, and in particular, a better fit for NY... he is taller, longer arm-ed than Hargreaves, has better deep speed, and is a better press corner than Hargreaves, who is more of a zone coverage corner. The Giants are a press-man coverage defense primarily. Apple also had higher marks in terms of college production than Hargreaves, allowing a much lower percentage of passes completed against him.

 

I struggled mightily trying to justify Hargreaves as the top corner among the top tier group after Ramsey, because of those physical and timed measurables, as well as scheme fit for NY.

 

Silva is a fucking moron who is talking straight out of his ass.

[Bigblue25]

The team that just won the super bowl had Harris and Talib and still drafted Roby. Having three solid corners allows Miller and Ware to hunt while the corners play bump and run. This is the Giants exact plan

[Sephiroth]

I've said it before, but Beatty is sitting on his couch right now. He wasn't playing up to the contract they gave him but I'd bring him back for more modest price.

 

 

Rumor has it he's pissed that he got cut.

[Nas]

 

It's hard not to laugh at the sheer stupidity of this clown. This fucktard actually gets paid to write this complete drivel.

 

He may, MAY be correct about the leaks. I tend to think that he probably was. It is plausible and possible that the leaks were intentional to throw off true intention. I guarantee this fucking idiot doesn't know. Regardless... GM's figure this out... Team A needs a LBer with cover skills. A LBer with cover skills is available at team's draft position. Team B knows that Team A needs a LB, Team B, who also covets this linebacker, makes the trade. It doesn't have anything to do with leaks, it's putting 2 and 2 together. It's not that complicated. Further, Tampa was also linked to Floyd, and there was no guarantee that Tampa doesn't take him anyway if the Bears don't trade up.

 

The Giants were linked to Myles Jack also... in fact, some of the "insider" info was that the pick would be Jack if he's there. Then they said he's off the board because of medical, then there was information that he was still the target. People said they were linked to Hargreaves, too.

 

Further, to suggest that Reese panicked is a complete work of unbelievable, un-intelligent, lazy fiction. Every team has a draft board. There's no panic, you just go to your board and see who's the next best guy available.

 

Next, to say Reese over-drafted Apple and that he is a "fringe first-round prospect" is to ignore the insider information that has been released since the draft... that the Miami Dolphins were poised to take Apple at 13, and, moreover, that the Los Angeles Rams had Apple as their top-rated corner (after Ramsey), and who said that he would've likely not been available had the Giants traded down. That means, multiple teams had Apple as their top corner, and that means he was not a fringe first-round prospect at all.

 

Further, to suggest that CB wasn't a pressing need is to ignore the stark reality that you must have 3 starting caliber corners in the NFL to compete, and the Giants had 2. Teams are in nickel 60-65% of the time, as has been stated many times. Corner is a premium position.

 

It's not hard to imagine Apple is a better prospect, and in particular, a better fit for NY... he is taller, longer arm-ed than Hargreaves, has better deep speed, and is a better press corner than Hargreaves, who is more of a zone coverage corner. The Giants are a press-man coverage defense primarily. Apple also had higher marks in terms of college production than Hargreaves, allowing a much lower percentage of passes completed against him.

 

I struggled mightily trying to justify Hargreaves as the top corner among the top tier group after Ramsey, because of those physical and timed measurables, as well as scheme fit for NY.

 

Silva is a fucking moron who is talking straight out of his ass.

 

 

Jim, you are the fucking man bro.... I wish you can post this response on the web somewhere... it's well put and perfectly written.

[Herc]

Yeah stating that Reese "panicked" as a fact with nothing to back it up is unprofessional and the whole write up was just very surface level and lazy

[Sephiroth]

 

 

It's not hard to imagine Apple is a better prospect, and in particular, a better fit for NY... he is taller, longer arm-ed than Hargreaves, has better deep speed, and is a better press corner than Hargreaves, who is more of a zone coverage corner. The Giants are a press-man coverage defense primarily. Apple also had higher marks in terms of college production than Hargreaves, allowing a much lower percentage of passes completed against him.

 

 

 

I actually read somewhere that the Giants played much more zone last year than man coverage, but as a whole I think Spags tends to play more press than zone.

[Treehugger]

 

 

Rumor has it he's pissed that he got cut.

 

Well, he's had some time to sit and listen to the sound of a phone not ringing.

[gmenroc]

 

1st Rd: CB Eli Apple, Ohio State - hated this pick at first, not so much because the lack of filling a need, because I think CBs are much like pass-rushers in the sense that you can't have too many good ones, but because there were other guys there I preferred. I was a fan of Hargreaves, Tunsil (regardless of off-field stuff), Lee and Lawson. If possible, I'd have traded down to the Dolphins at 13 and taken Lawson or Lee. After reading a little more on Apple and seeing his comparisons with Hargreaves...I've come to really like the pick. Figure, I was okay with Hargreaves at 10 and Apple seems to be the better of the two according to many. So I'm good with Apple. I'd be lying though if I said there wasn't at least a part of me that would've rather had Lee or Lawson given our needs. I'd give this round a B+.

 

2nd Rd: WR Sterling Shepard, Oklahoma - Love this pick after reading about his abilities, especially his knack for getting open and creating separation. The comparisons to Steve Smith are exciting to me. I'd have loved Jason Spriggs though...and he was available. I do suppose there is credibility to the sentiment that Eli did stay fairly upright last year and the ball has been coming out quicker...so there is that argument to state that the complement to OBJ was more important than upgrading Newhouse in the 2nd. WR was a need I saw getting an answer in the draft, just not a 2nd rounder. I'd give this round an A-.

 

3rd Rd: FS Darian Thompson, Boise State - Can't argue with acquiring a ballhawk in the secondary, especially with DRC, JJ, and now Apple handling the CB work...but damn...how do you not go DE (Calhoun) or OT (Coleman, Clark) here? As with most of the picks, they were good players for where they were drafted, so there is value...it's just that there seemed to be value at positions of greater need and it's that lost opportunity that kinda makes you question the pick. I'd give this round a C-, but because of Thompson being the player he is, I'll give this round a C+.

 

4th Rd: MLB B.J. Goodson, Clemson - Here's our linebacker depth. I've read good things about him...for a 4th rounder anyways. But as with the first 3 rounds, how the hell DE depth and OT depth isn't addressed will boggle my mind for as long as I pay attention to this year's draft. Beavers and Hawkins were available. I'll give it a solid B...because we needed LB depth.

 

5th Rd: RB Paul Perkins, UCLA // 6th Rd: TE Jerell Adams, South Carolina - I'll combine these two because I'd give them both an A. Outside of maybe Christian Westerman or Joe Dahl, there wasn't really much OL to speak of that was going to make much difference I don't think. I think there is real value with both of these players and I think they infuse quite a bit of youth into our skill positions.

 

All in all, I'd give the draft a solid B+. I believe the players we got were value picks in the places we got them. The only issue was that there were places where we could've gotten equal value at positions of greater need. Now, if June 1st cuts yield an OT that can be a stopgap for 1 or 2 years that provides more than what Newhouse has, than I can't complain too much. If OO steps up and makes an impact on the DL, then I'll be more comfortable with the depth there. I just thought this draft went more skill position than front seven/offensive line than I would've thought.

 

 

 

[JMFP]

I will have to check out the grades on our prior drafts....trying to remember a single review since 2010 that didn't throw roses at our team.

 

I'm going to stand by my assertion that this draft was based on the belief that our pass rush is already fixed. That to me is a risky assertion.

 

And our other perennial need - OL - was not addressed at all.

 

The consensus is that Shepard and Perkins both represented high value for the positions they were picked. No issues with Perkins. Would have much preferred getting a pass rusher and offensive lineman in the first 3 rounds.

 

But again, if we have the same pass rush problems and the same right side collapses on the line, this draft will be graded very harshly.

[Treehugger]

I pretty much agree with everything you (gmenroc) said. I'd be happier if we were able to trade down in the 1st, still take Apple (or Lee) and have an extra 3rd for Le'Raven Clark, but obvioulsy that's a lot of moving parts and not necessarily a possiblity.

 

I'll have to trust that they see something great in Thompson but the reports suggest he won't have the range or speed to be the answer at FS. We'll see if he's better than the other four (five?) mid-round safeties we have on the roster. I'm also concerned that Perkins is basically the same player as Vereen, and we barely use Vereen. He might have been the BPA but Westerman would have potentially been the more useful pick.

[Sephiroth]

1st Rd: CB Eli Apple, Ohio State - hated this pick at first, not so much because the lack of filling a need, because I think CBs are much like pass-rushers in the sense that you can't have too many good ones, but because there were other guys there I preferred. I was a fan of Hargreaves, Tunsil (regardless of off-field stuff), Lee and Lawson. If possible, I'd have traded down to the Dolphins at 13 and taken Lawson or Lee. After reading a little more on Apple and seeing his comparisons with Hargreaves...I've come to really like the pick. Figure, I was okay with Hargreaves at 10 and Apple seems to be the better of the two according to many. So I'm good with Apple. I'd be lying though if I said there wasn't at least a part of me that would've rather had Lee or Lawson given our needs. I'd give this round a B+.

 

 

 

 

 

I think the problem with the Eli Apple pick is twofold from a fan's perspective:

 

1. It didn't fill a glaring need on the team (we already have two above-average corners).

 

2. He didn't seem like the best player available at the position.

 

Put those two together and you end up with a bit of a head-scratcher. Of course, most of us said the same thing about Justin Pugh and he's been a pretty darn good player for us, so we'll see.

[Sephiroth]

I pretty much agree with everything you said. I'd be happier if we were able to trade down in the 1st, still take Apple (or Lee) and have an extra 3rd for Le'Raven Clark, but obvioulsy that's a lot of moving parts and not necessarily a possiblity.

 

I'll have to trust that they see something great in Thompson but the reports suggest he won't have the range or speed to be the answer at FS. We'll see if he's better than the other four (five?) mid-round safeties we have on the roster. I'm also concerned that Perkins is basically the same player as Vereen, and we barely use Vereen. He might have been the BPA but Westerman would have potentially been the more useful pick.

 

I'm seeing the same thing about Thompson. People are saying he's more of a strong safety than free safety, so we spent a third round pick to add our fifth strong safety to the roster. Again, a bit of a head-scratcher.

[JMFP]

I pretty much agree with everything you said. I'd be happier if we were able to trade down in the 1st, still take Apple (or Lee) and have an extra 3rd for Le'Raven Clark, but obvioulsy that's a lot of moving parts and not necessarily a possiblity.

 

I'll have to trust that they see something great in Thompson but the reports suggest he won't have the range or speed to be the answer at FS. We'll see if he's better than the other four (five?) mid-round safeties we have on the roster. I'm also concerned that Perkins is basically the same player as Vereen, and we barely use Vereen. He might have been the BPA but Westerman would have potentially been the more useful pick.

Agreed.

 

I disliked the RB committee approach. I'm not a Williams hater, but feel he might be worth getting shipped out to a team that could use an insurance policy for a workhorse back. He is not getting the reps here, or else he is simply not as good as the other guys. Either way, Stuart, if he is that much of a stud, is going to bounce someone off the roster.

 

I confess I have not studied Goodson enough to assess his impact. I think he is a special teamer, and maybe short yardage specialist. I don't believe he is a pass rusher, which means I don't expect any improvement in our blitz this year.

 

This teams defense is going to live and die on the gamble that 4 down lineman will get to the passer.

 

It's been a couple days and I still think Dallas can beat this defense on the ground....maybe not inside, but to the edge.

 

I suppose with so many roster holes, it's unrealistic for me to think they can patch it all, though.

 

This team is going to need this draft class to drink the 2007 magic potion.

[Nas]

 

 

I think the problem with the Eli Apple pick is twofold from a fan's perspective:

 

1. It didn't fill a glaring need on the team (we already have two above-average corners).

 

2. He didn't seem like the best player available at the position.

 

Put those two together and you end up with a bit of a head-scratcher. Of course, most of us said the same thing about Justin Pugh and he's been a pretty darn good player for us, so we'll see.

 

The counter-arguments to your points are:

 

1. Nowadays you need 3 starting CBs.

2. The FO seems to disagree. They do believe he was the best which is why they passed on Hargreaves.

[Allstarjim]

 

 

I actually read somewhere that the Giants played much more zone last year than man coverage, but as a whole I think Spags tends to play more press than zone.

 

You are correct, but IMO that's more because they were forced to because they couldn't get pressure. I don't think that's the scheme or what they want to do. I'm pretty sure Spags wants the coverage to be more press-man oriented.

[Allstarjim]

The team that just won the super bowl had Harris and Talib and still drafted Roby. Having three solid corners allows Miller and Ware to hunt while the corners play bump and run. This is the Giants exact plan

 

Yup.

[BlueInCanada]

 

 

I think the problem with the Eli Apple pick is twofold from a fan's perspective:

 

1. It didn't fill a glaring need on the team (we already have two above-average corners).

 

2. He didn't seem like the best player available at the position.

 

Put those two together and you end up with a bit of a head-scratcher. Of course, most of us said the same thing about Justin Pugh and he's been a pretty darn good player for us, so we'll see.

 

I feel that since Spags defense is in the 4-2-5 nickle formation I would say 70% of the time in a game, that the team needs three starting CBs.

 

DRC is one of the best in the game, he's been playing at a top 5 level. Jenkins is an up and down corner, he plays all pro some plays then gives up a big play the next, wish that JR didn't guarantee him as much as he did but if Jenkins can be coached up the Giants will have the best CB combo in the league.

 

Apple fits into the equation due to the simple fact that outside of those two the Giants didnt have a single CB worth a damn on the roster IMO. Not to mention both DRC and Jenkins, are good to miss a game or two every season they needed someone to be able to come in a take on a teams #1 WR, that's what Apple can do. Plus he's young enough to take the reigns from DRC when he eventually leaves/retires.

 

If Stanley or Conklin were sitting at 10, I'm sure JR would of been walking home with a shiny new Oline player, but the Titans had the picks to deal to go get Conklin.

 

People can say what they want about Apple vs Hargraves but reading up on it, some had Apple higher then Hargraves, some had it the other way, who knows though in three years time the better player will be known.

 

I hated the Apple pick, I think that was pretty obvious from the draft day thread, though it was reach and didnt have any intimidate impact.

 

However after thinking about it, I don't know who the Giants would of taken a swing at 10 instead of a starting caliber CB. Maybe Tunsil but the Giants have a history of not wanting excess baggage with players, Lee is a scheme player I don't know what he would of fit into in a 4-3 in Spags defense.

 

Maybe Lawson but then you have a guy that you need to decide he's either a DE or strong side LB who cant really play the pass.

 

So the Giants went with a CB who has a crazy high ceiling and can learn from one of the best in the game DRC and contribute in Spags love of playing 5 secondary players on the field.

 

DRC, Jenkins, Apple, Collins, Thompson to me sounds a lot better than DRC, Jenkins, Wade, Collins, whoever.

[Mr. P]

Also you don't just draft for this year, DRC is 30 years old, takes himself out of the game quite a bit, and has remaining cap hits of $8million, $8.5, and $8.5.