gmenroc

Bigblue -- same thing I mentioned to Jim about Hightower...don't see him getting past the Steelers if he's there. Jim brought up a good point about Chandler Jones...he's moving up draft boards and he was already a first rounder. Also, with the 49ers bringing in Manningham too, I don't see them going WR in the first. They could go OLine, backup QB, or DB. Crabtree, Manningham, and Moss...pretty good 3 WR set as it is..

Well, I wasn't going to pick that one apart, but if the Giants pick a WR in the first, I'll be very, very shocked...especially if the Richardson is the only RB taken and if Mike Adams is still available. Massie, I feel, would be a huge reach with the first.

I think it's all pretty reasonable, except that there needs to be some explanation as to why Miami wouldn't take Tannehill. Top 7, I agree with wholeheartedly...unless you want Cox or Poe for Jacksonville...either way Jacksonville addresses DLine. I think you might have Keuchly a bit low and DeCastro a bit high, but certainly not by much and certainly not to the realms of unquestionable. And if Poe is still around when the Steelers pick, I think he's the guy, but I don't know that he'll be there. If he's not, I can't see an organization that prides itself on its linebackers passing on Hightower. Aside from that, it's a nicely put together mock.

It seems it's all about the timing. Show the guy right after he was selected, but not before. Really, I like seeing their reactions too, but like the surprise/anticipation on each pick. I'm hoping that nobody is so eager to see who's selected to be plugged into twitter/all 3 draft coverages/internet all at the same time in order to get the announcement 3 seconds before everyone else.

For the same reasons we have, at times, used Tuck, Osi, and JPP all on the field at the same time. Tuck would drop down to DT with Osi and JPP on the outside. We'd do the same with Tuck, Kiwi, and JPP. Then, when we move Tuck back to DE, we could drop Kiwi back to LB. Kiwi would not start at DE, but would be part of the rotation in the same role as Osi is now. But given Kiwi's talent, the rotation would be from DE to LB...not DE to sideline.

The short turnaround is a concern, but I'm much happier having Carolina after that short time than having say, a division rival, Green Bay, the Saints, or another annually dominant team.

Cowboys, Redskins, Eagles...would all be favored, and rightfully so, in games over Bills, Dolphins, Jets. In comparing the Patriots to the Giants, these 6 games would account for 37.5% of the schedule. That alone makes up a lot of the OVERALL difference in strength of schedule every year.

Certainly seems that way, doesn't it...though it's on a rotational basis. Hell, I'd take the AFC East too, with Buffalo, NY Jets, and Miami. It's somewhat relative though, because our division opponents get the same deal.

It was Carolina that we opened the new stadium against, wasn't it? First half was fairly close and we pretty much dominated the second half. Moore threw 3 picks that game and finished with a sub-40 QB rating. I had to look a little of that up, but I really think that we've improved since then and that despite Cam Newton, Carolina hasn't gotten that much better as their defense and running backs have fallen off a bit.

Cam played well last season, there's no doubt, but I don't think he's the second coming that many are making him out to be. He's certainly not Tom Brady and the Panthers are certainly not the Patriots...and we beat the Pats twice last year. I think we can beat Carolina definitively, but we'll make it close, just because the Giants always seem to go that route. Schedule is tough, but it's doable. I'm not so confident to say we'll repeat, but I think the Giants, as manned right now, is a playoff contender. We should definitely come out with an above .500 record and if some of our wins are against division rivals, that could win the division for us.

I like the fact that we'll have some extra time to prepare for the Eagles the first time we play them and some extra time to prepare for/get healthy for the Packers when we play them. Looking at this, I think 8-2 is definitely possible pre-bye, but probably more likely 7-3. Post bye, I think we could go 3-3, maybe 4-2. I think 9 or 10 wins is definitely doable and we're certainly capable of winning the division.

1...this is the optional part of the offseason. There are lots of players not showing up leaguewide. It's nothing to get your panties ruffled for just yet. 2...Osi is an important part of our defense and his production, albeit in a shortened season for him, was pretty damn impressive. I'd like him to be re-signed too, but not anywhere remotely close to what Mario Williams got...and I don't see the league paying Osi that kind of money due to his lack of run support and his one-trick speed rush (though he gets an awful lot out of that one trick). So, what do we do. We have two options. Honestly, I'd be fine with either. Let him play out his contract this year, happy or not, knowing full well that if he fakes an injury, doesn't play well, or generally works the press as a malcontent...he's only hurting his teammates and is own value for next year. Despite wanting to be paid, I still think Osi is a good teammate. Trade him now. If we were to score a guy like Chandler Jones in the first round, I think this becomes more of an option than it is now. We lost Tollefson and didn't really fill the spot. So trading Osi out, even if we moved Kiwi back to DE, would put a hurting to the strength of our defense. If we get Jones, or someone of that calibur, then Osi becomes expendable at the right price, which the Giants should set at a high level and from which they shouldn't budge, knowing full well they could revert back to #1 above. But again, none of this is an issue until he starts skipping training camp.

I had Fleener, TE in the first; Massie, OT in the second; and Pierce, RB in the third. Could still be the way to go, but again, I'd be okay with moving RB up in draft priority. The problem with moving RB up to round 2, is that I really don't see too much difference between the RBs that'd be available at the end of Round 2 and the RBs available at the end of round 3. Sure there are differences, otherwise they wouldn't be ranked as such, but those differences seem to be minimal. So in round 2, you'd be sacrificing a significant amount of value for minimal difference in talent. That's kinda my take, which is why I think that if we go RB in the first 3 rounds, it'll be the 1st or 3rd round pick that we'd use. As for OT, I think we have some time to groom one, and it'd be more for depth purposes this year, as opposed to the RB who might actually see some carries given Jacob's leaving and not being replaced. So, I'd be okay moving OT to round 1 or 3 (from round 2 where I have it), but that begs the question, what do you take with the 2nd pick? So I move OT to round 1, and then have RB in round 3...what do you do with that 2nd pick? I honestly don't know about TE at the end of the 2nd round. I didn't go quite that far. If we go DE/DT in round 1, OT in round 2, RB in round 3, and TE in round 4...that could be interesting too. I think there are some interesting TE projects in the mid rounds, but they'll seemingly need time to develop. If the Giants think they can get the TE up to speed to start a year from now...I would be fine taking said project in the 4th or 5th. Because really, we don't need a TE to start until next year when Ballard and Bennett are both UFAs.

I don't know about that....I've walked on the field at Giants Stadium and it was all but spongy. When they have the field turf, with the rubber bits under it, it seemed far more giving than grass...especially after that grass/ground started getting cold in November/December. I agree that a lot of the concussions happen when the head hits the ground or when someone catches a random knee in their earhole.

Like I said, I think the injury settlement/end of old deal went hand in hand with the new deal the Giants gave him. Regardless, we got the better end of the deal as it's high potential, low risk

The Locklear signing made it significantly less necessary, I'll give you that. I haven't re-mocked my original from a month ago, perhaps tonight, but I had TE in round 1, OT in round 2, and RB in round 3. I wouldn't mind sticking to that, but with the signing of Locklear, I could stand to move RB up to round 2 and OT back to 3rd round. The argument for TE was lessened, to a lesser extent, by the signing of Bennett. That said, Bennett and Ballard are FA after 2012. Drafting the TE now, would create flexibility next year, and any production we got from the rookie, would be bonus. The same thought could give us DE Chandler Jones too in the first with Osi's potential departure/eventual free agency coupled with Tollefson's leaving. I guess what we can all take away from the process is that the Giants are able to draft in such a way that they're drafting in preparation of what contracts are up on the current team and at the same time, reaping benefits from the players in the interim.

I believe the renogiation was a condition of the trade. One went with the other. Had he not regotiated, we'd not have have traded and he'd have stayed with the Bengals. That's how I read it anyhow, given the last sentence of the article

I couldn't tell you the last OLineman we took in the first. Drafting an OT mid-round to develop to be able to run AND pass block efficiently...that's fine with me...but if we only have to coach up one of the two disciplines, and as a result, get a player that is good enough to start sooner in their career...I'm fine spending an earlier round draft pick for it.

Add in his forced fumbles and he was pretty productive over the past two seasons. I believe his value to other teams is as high as it's been as far as a potential trade and that rather than keeping him around for just one more season (where he'd split time with Tuck and JPP) and watching him walk next offseason getting nothing in return, that it could be beneficial to trade him now. I fully believe that Osi is still upset over not getting a bigger deal, but that he also realizes that bitching about it publicly isn't going to win him many big contracts from any team. I believe too, that if the Giants and another team were to offer him equal contracts next offseason, that he'd still walk. He might even take less money to go elsewhere for a full time starting position. Does starting games, or playing more often, with JPP/Canty/Tuck/Umenyiora this season soften his stance? Perhaps, but I still have my doubts

Well, R&D in general then...perhaps not the helmet itself. But again, I think that changing the game itself on such a large scale should be the last resort.

OTs are huge in setting the edge on a run to the outside. Running to the outside may very well have been more successful in the past few years for the sole fact that we'd check a OG in as a TE to help the OT set the edge. Not to mention, they need to be adept enough to push the DE up the field so that the DE can track the RB down from the back side of the play. With the athleticism of DEs nowadays, it happens a good bit. Mike Adams and Jonathon Martin are being thrown around as possibly being available. Both are recognized by sources who know far more about ranking football players than we, as 1st round talent. I'll take that confidently, should the Giants make one of these guys our #1 pick.

I believe Dayne broke the NCAA rushing record too, didn't he? He was a bust, but the pick was not a reach. There's a host of other teams that probably would've made the same selection. Overpaying a rookie isn't as much an issue anymore with the rookie wage scale.

Yeah, I know the cause of the concussion, but if the materials of the helmet absorbed more of the impact, there'd be less brain-sloshing. Again, I'm not saying there's an answer out there that's not being used, but shoveling some of the billions of dollars into the equipment/field surfaces/etc would be preferrable to changing the game as drastically as they have/plan

What about winning the superbowl the year prior? That a good thing? Lol. I believe Dayne was a mid-round pick too...don't believe he was top 10 anyhow, but could be wrong.

I'd hold off on claiming Jones, Herzlich, and Paysinger to be serious talent...I'll give you Williams. I agree though, that I'd be a bit surprised to see LB taken early given our youth at the position already. Jones, Herzlich, and Paysinger...with another year or two of development and tutelage under Boley, Kiwi, and maybe even Rivers...with Blackburn to back them up...LB in general, is not nearly the biggest hole. I still think one gets drafted, but very simply, not in the top 3 rounds.