So does hiring of Fred Graves have a ripple effect on draft day?

[Baschski]

Also, Green guys, can you please stop putting up arguments saying things like "You don't pass up on a talent like Green. Green is a better talent than any other WR we could pick up. Green will command double teams, etc." and then saying "You can find guys as talented as Fairley in the later rounds." Those are all statements that have no basis in reality. I've supported Fairley since day one but at no point have I been so ignorant or biased as to say that Green won't be great or that Fairley is guaranteed to be great and that we can't find talent like Fairley elsewhere. None of us know how either player will turn out or how other players at their position will turn out, so saying that "X will be great but Y is a dime a dozen" is just idiotic.

[bleys]

Actually no. If we addressed DT the way you just proposed, I would be calling for us to draft Patrick Peterson. He is just as legit a talent at CB as Green is at WR and we have more need at the CB position than at WR. The point is, I don't think WR is high on our priority list. It was last year and we addressed it with two very promising receivers in Lafell and Gettis. You can argue that Green is a BPA kinda guy and that you don't pass up talent like that, but I and most other people here would argue that guys like Fairley and Peterson are on Green's level in terms of talent. Disregarding my preference for Fairley or Peterson, I just can't see the FO taking a WR #1 overall after spending three draft picks on WR's last year.

well certainly Peterson is your #1 pick based on that.. there are options in FA for DT's, not so much for CB and WR.. as mentioned below regarding WR..

Peterson is the only pick that makes sense over anyone else..

but I think with Rivera's ability to produce top defenses, we'll find another CB next year as a worst case scenario.. with better pressure from recently added FA DT's, we'll be fine. not everything can be addressed this year. 4 legit receivers (1 on his way out in a few years) is something I would hang my hat on.

by no means would Green be a luxury pick, IMO..

to use 3 draft picks as an excuse when we have 1 old receiver and 2 who are #2 at best and 1 who never saw the field last year, I wouldn't make that my #1 excuse to call Green a luxury pick..

If we can get a top DT FA as per your argument, then why not a FA Wr? Rice, Jackson, etc are all avaible.

you are talking about WRs who are the main staple to their team.. those respective teams are most likely going to fight to retain them. I'd rather throw money at a DT and get a young, talented receiver than throw money at an older vet WR and draft a DT..

IMO, WR has more impact than DTs.. get a solid DT in and you'll find ways to get pressure. you can do a lot of things if you have a WR getting double teamed with the likes of Smitty, Gettis and LaFell on the field as well..

[bleys]

Also, Green guys, can you please stop putting up arguments saying things like "You don't pass up on a talent like Green. Green is a better talent than any other WR we could pick up. Green will command double teams, etc." and then saying "You can find guys as talented as Fairley in the later rounds." Those are all statements that have no basis in reality. I've supported Fairley since day one but at no point have I been so ignorant or biased as to say that Green won't be great or that Fairley is guaranteed to be great and that we can't find talent like Fairley elsewhere. None of us know how either player will turn out or how other players at their position will turn out, so saying that "X will be great but Y is a dime a dozen" is just idiotic.

here's the only thing I have to add on that...

I realize Suh is one hell of a disruption, but I would forfeit that over one hell of an offensive weapon..

you can have a great defense still... I see more benefit having a receiver that defenses have to double team leaving your other talented receivers 1 on 1, than a DT that offenses can run plays away from..

[MaineManPanther]

well certainly Peterson is your #1 pick based on that.. there are options in FA for DT's, not so much for CB and WR.. as mentioned below regarding WR..

Peterson is the only pick that makes sense over anyone else..

but I think with Rivera's ability to produce top defenses, we'll find another CB next year as a worst case scenario.. with better pressure from recently added FA DT's, we'll be fine. not everything can be addressed this year, and to pass up a top WR prospect isn't something I would do. 4 legit receivers (1 on his way out in a few years) is something I would hang my hat on.

by no means would Green be a luxury pick, IMO..

to use 3 draft picks as an excuse when we have 1 old receiver and 2 who are #2 at best and 1 who never saw the field last year, I wouldn't make that my #1 excuse to call Green a luxury pick..

you are talking about WRs who are the main staple to their team.. those respective teams are most likely going to fight to retain them. I'd rather throw money at a DT and get a young, talented receiver than throw money at an older vet WR and draft a DT..

IMO, WR has more impact than DTs on offense.. get a solid DT in and you'll find ways to get pressure. you can do a lot of things if you have a WR getting double teamed with the likes of Smitty, Gettis and LaFell on the field as well..

The DT's you mentioned are also big staples. Franklin is a very good player playing a position (NT) that is very difficult to find. Coefield is also a player that is integral for the Giants pass rush. He will be a top priority for them.

I think arguments can be made for both sides, as to what postion is more valuable. You can also do alot of things if you have a DT being double teamed, with the likes of Johnson, Hardy, etc on the field.

[pantherj]

I'm trying to think of another draft in which Fairley would be the #1 overall pick. None come to mind. Green, on the other hand, has extremely rare talent, but if the Panthers don't want another WR, then by Hurney trade down.

[Baschski]

here's the only thing I have to add on that...

I realize Suh is one hell of a disruption, but I would forfeit that over one hell of an offensive weapon..

you can have a great defense still... I see more benefit having a receiver that defenses have to double team leaving your other talented receivers 1 on 1, than a DT that offenses can run plays away from..

WR's production depends on QB play. DT's production is mainly dependent on their individual play. And you're really comparing apples to oranges here. Ask any team if they'd rather have Suh or Dez Bryant and I think most would pick Suh. Dominant linemen are more valuable than dominant skill players (other than QB's) in most cases.

[Baschski]

I'm trying to think of another draft in which Fairley would be the #1 overall pick. None come to mind. Green, on the other hand, has extremely rare talent, but if the Panthers don't want another WR, then by Hurney trade down.

I agree that Fairley wouldn't be #1 overall in most drafts. But neither would Green. Not last year, not the year before, and probably not even this year.

[pantherj]

I agree that Fairley wouldn't be #1 overall in most drafts. But neither would Green. Not last year, not the year before, and probably not even this year.

It might be a stretch to draft Green #1. I've had a bad feeling about this draft since the moment Luck decided to stay in school.

[bleys]

The DT's you mentioned are also big staples. Franklin is a very good player playing a position (NT) that is very difficult to find. Coefield is also a player that is integral for the Giants pass rush. He will be a top priority for them.

I think arguments can be made for both sides, as to what postion is more valuable. You can also do alot of things if you have a DT being double teamed, with the likes of Johnson, Hardy, etc on the field.

Giants will be hard pressed to keep Cofield... if we made him a priority, I beg to differ..

Franklin is me tossing him out there.. but he is far from guaranteed to be there next year. they slapped a franchise tag on him last year and if they do it again, they are going to have a disgruntled player on their hands. New coaching regime and no DC, there's nothing to say he'll be back there if we make a play for him..

besides, Cofield and draft a guy.. Landri will hold it down for a year..

WR's production depends on QB play. DT's production is mainly dependent on their individual play. And you're really comparing apples to oranges here. Ask any team if they'd rather have Suh or Dez Bryant and I think most would pick Suh. Dominant linemen are more valuable than dominant skill players (other than QB's) in most cases.

our offense depends on QB play, but we aren't punting on 3rd downs.. that's hardly an excuse to ignore a position we'll need in a couple years and the threat he'll provide before hand.

Austin's production wasn't nearly as good after Romo went down, and although Williams had some good play, Dez Bryant kept that Cowboy offense going. .. I don't think it's as cut and dry as you say.

Cowboys are a good example actually.. I'd rather take Dez Bryant. Tim Ratlif is highly under rated, but that defense has a very good pass rush without any Suh-like players.. (keep in mind all the turmoil the 1st half of the season)

[SorthNarolina]

nooooooooooooo Landri as 3rd option. I'm tied of crappy depth. Let him be 4th at best.

People are talking like Landri is still part of the team, I'm pretty sure he's a FA this year.

[Baschski]

Cowboys are a good example actually.. I'd rather take Dez Bryant. Tim Ratlif is highly under rated, but that defense has a very good pass rush without any Suh-like players.. (keep in mind all the turmoil the 1st half of the season)

Come on, isn't their pass rush highly attributable to Demarcus Ware? Yeah, if we had an elite pass rusher on the outside we would only need adequate DT play. But that's not the case here.

And my point about the QB thing was not that we should ignore the offense because we don't have a great QB right now. My point is that WR's are never great weapons in themselves. Their production depends much more on other players than does the production of DT's.

[bleys]

Come on, isn't their pass rush highly attributable to Demarcus Ware? Yeah, if we had an elite pass rusher on the outside we would only need adequate DT play. But that's not the case here.

And my point about the QB thing was not that we should ignore the offense because we don't have a great QB right now. My point is that WR's are never great weapons in themselves. Their production depends much more on other players than does the production of DT's.

I think our pass rush could be better than the Cowboys with solid DT play and Hardy/Johnson able to expand on last year..

and you're right, a DT doesn't rely on a timed rhythm of the passing game, nor the QB play..

I have to say Peterson is a bigger need overall, since there are less options for CB.. but make no mistake about it, I'll be happy with whoever we get.. even Cam Newton (because if that is the pick, then I trust the SD and coaches saw enough to take him)

[MaineManPanther]

Giants will be hard pressed to keep Cofield... if we made him a priority, I beg to differ..

Franklin is me tossing him out there.. but he is far from guaranteed to be there next year. they slapped a franchise tag on him last year and if they do it again, they are going to have a disgruntled player on their hands. New coaching regime and no DC, there's nothing to say he'll be back there if we make a play for him..

besides, Cofield and draft a guy.. Landri will hold it down for a year..

our offense depends on QB play, but we aren't punting on 3rd downs.. that's hardly an excuse to ignore a position we'll need in a couple years and the threat he'll provide before hand.

Austin's production wasn't nearly as good after Romo went down, and although Williams had some good play, Dez Bryant kept that Cowboy offense going. .. I don't think it's as cut and dry as you say.

Cowboys are a good example actually.. I'd rather take Dez Bryant. Tim Ratlif is highly under rated, but that defense has a very good pass rush without any Suh-like players.. (keep in mind all the turmoil the 1st half of the season)

Landri is not starting material. Under that argument just have Smith and the WR's hold the spot down for a year.

So the DT's we can possibly land "if we make an offer" but why can't the same argument be applied to the top WR's. Both DT's espciallly Franklin are going to be highly coveted and sought over by not only their teams but others.

[bleys]

Landri is not starting material. Under that argument just have Smith and the WR's hold the spot down for a year.

So the DT's we can possibly land "if we make an offer" but why can't the same argument be applied to the top WR's. Both DT's espciallly Franklin are going to be highly coveted and sought over by not only their teams but others.

I explained your DT question above..

you can draft Cam Newton too.. a lot of possibilities.. I think if we draft a DT, you solve the Landri issue. in a year or 2, we'll see how our coaching staff does..

if you prefer to do something else, that's cool too.. lol, as for the topic, it's been plenty discussed.. we could get Santonio Holmes and Aso, and draft Fairley.. I don't think that's the best route, but hey, we could..