Watching Giants Off-Season Hard Knocks and Something is Crystallizing...

[MHS831]

in fairness to Dan, there are a lot of variables. I look at what he did with the money he saved--Hunt, Clowney were two signings that were about equal value...Clowney for 2 years at $10m per and Hunt for 5 years at $20m per.  Clowney should be pretty close to Burns, he simply lacks the upside.  Hunt fills a huge need and was a brilliant move if Corbett can play Center.  If so, he upgraded 2 OL positions and did not lose a lot of productivity at OLB.  The OL was priority one.  Furthermore, I think it is possible that Chaisson and Barno step up this season--if so, OLB as a unit could be better--it is a gamble that we had to take, however.  But let's say Clowney (at $18m less per season) gets 8 sacks per year here--that is about what Burns was doing--never was in double digits.  So you drop 1.5 sacks in productivity for Robert Hunt, one of the best RGs in football?  I like it.

I get your point--we could have played hardball and demanded at least a first, but I have no idea what the other variables were at the time.  Fitterer?  He was terrible--I cannot think of one move that he made that was better than another available option.  Morgan was entering a draft with huge holes and had something like 4 draft picks before this trade--I hated it, but I think they had him over a barrel.  But yes, he was worth a first.

[Wundrbread33]

1 hour ago, Tr3ach said:

I don't blame Dan at all for the Burns situation.   My biggest concerns for Dan that are entirely on him so far is the draft and personnel decisions feel exactly like fitterer.  Maybe that said these players will pan out but we will see.  I juat don't see the vision.  I hate taking old "raw" players anyways and then the players themselves don't seem to fit any vision or scheme.  It all just feels like a hodgepodge of different players thrown together that don't fit together. 

You may end up being proved correct. 
 

Hoping that’s not the case, but totally understandable. 

[mrcompletely11]

3 hours ago, Wundrbread33 said:

We just need to give Dan the benefit of the doubt until he shows he shouldn’t be GM. 
 

It’s my opinion that Burns can’t be held against him. 
 

I understand anything reminding us of Fitt/Rhule leaves a bad taste, and Morgan may end up a terrible GM, but I’m willing to give him a couple seasons with judgement aside. 
 

Naturally, we all can do what we want, and I absolutely could be coping/holding on to fandom of Dan the player; but it’s allowed me to enjoy the off-season more. And I have, outside of the bad feeling I have about the QB position.

Why can't burns be held against him he was for it.  As well as trading up for dj.  His list is already long and distinguished.  We know how this ends 

[WhoKnows]

7 hours ago, electro's horse said:

I swear to god turning down that rams trade for first two and three drafts in the future is going to live rent free in some peoples heads for the rest of their lives. 
 

It will, because that in combination with the Young trade up lost us so much talent it’s not even funny. Had we made the Burns trade with the intention of using those picks to do a QB trade up or to get weapons for a QB (if we didn’t win 7 and get pick 9), the Young pick wouldn’t sting so much.

I think we’d be OK even with the Young mistake if we traded Burns to the Rams. By taking Young and losing two 1sts for 1 more year of Burns, we doubled down on screwing up both game changing level trades.

[amcoolio]

Despite what you guys think the team isn't married to Bryce longer than this year. If they are picking top 5, they will pick a QB, unless they can swing a deal for Prescott or Hurts before the draft. Canales literally cannot be fired this year because Tepper can't fire three head coaches in a row, so this is a building year and make-or-break year for Bryce.

There's also recent precedent of teams giving up on their QB very quickly - Pickett, Wilson, Lance, Fields, Mac Jones, Ridder - so Tepper won't look bad ejecting Bryce after this year unless Bryce wins 8 or 9 games with noticeable improvement

[jayboogieman]

14 hours ago, Proudiddy said:

I'm going through massive change in my life

Hopefully, things work out for the best. Good luck!

[jayboogieman]

3 hours ago, frankw said:

Declining the Rams offer is a hindsight thing where obviously you look back with regret.

There were a few of us claiming the team needed to make that trade quickly when the news broke because we felt Burns wasn't worth a big new contract or what the Rams were offering.

[Navy_football]

18 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

There were a few of us claiming the team needed to make that trade quickly when the news broke because we felt Burns wasn't worth a big new contract or what the Rams were offering.

The thing is, no player is worth 2 first rounders and a second/third. Except a QB like Mahomes.

So just Mahomes. Since there isn't another QB like him.

[CanadianCat]

19 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

There were a few of us claiming the team needed to make that trade quickly when the news broke because we felt Burns wasn't worth a big new contract or what the Rams were offering.

Yeah, but at the time there was a feeling like he was an ascending player. Fitt and Rhule also kept saying we were 'one piece away'... 

And to be fair.. at the time we had a decent team.. If Darnold would have played to his 'potential' then it would have been a good move and we would have been instantly competitive. 

But he didn't and we threw everything into that gamble.

[CanadianCat]

1 minute ago, Navy_football said:

The thing is, no player is worth 2 first rounders and a second/third. Except a QB like Mahomes.

So just Mahomes. Since there isn't another QB like him.

I dont think thats right. 

I would trade 3 1st round picks for Mahomes. Throw in a 4th if we had to.. and KC would still not make that deal and that would be the right choice. 

[Navy_football]

1 minute ago, CanadianCat said:

I dont think thats right. 

I would trade 3 1st round picks for Mahomes. Throw in a 4th if we had to.. and KC would still not make that deal and that would be the right choice. 

Heck I'd see your 4 firsts and throw in a couple of second rounders. But yeah. They ain't trading him for anything. 

[jayboogieman]

11 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

The thing is, no player is worth 2 first rounders and a second/third. Except a QB like Mahomes.

So just Mahomes. Since there isn't another QB like him.

True, which is why we were saying take the trade. It was far above Burns' value and the once in a lifetime deal that you don't pass up.

[jayboogieman]

6 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

Heck I'd see your 4 firsts and throw in a couple of second rounders. But yeah. They ain't trading him for anything. 

I think they will once they've decided he's declining and they have his replacement ready because at some point his massive contract is going to outweigh his production.

[jayboogieman]

12 minutes ago, CanadianCat said:

Yeah, but at the time there was a feeling like he was an ascending player. Fitt and Rhule also kept saying we were 'one piece away'... 

And to be fair.. at the time we had a decent team.. If Darnold would have played to his 'potential' then it would have been a good move and we would have been instantly competitive. 

But he didn't and we threw everything into that gamble.

Not everyone thought Burns was an ascending player. We had already seen years of him not being able to stop the run or finish the sack or apply pressure when needed. There were non starting TEs stopping him at times. Some of us also knew Fitt and Rhule were full of poo when it came to being one piece away despite having a decent team talent wise.