Giants View Barkley as Near Perfect Prospect

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

How much better is he than the 3 next RBs off the board?

[SouthNYfan]

13 hours ago, Chicken Boo said:

I think we'll trade up to #4 and I expect both Rosen and Darnold to still be available.

 

The Giants have quite a decision ahead of them.  It's either Barkley or Chubb.

 

Don't forget darnold (assuming browns take Allen)

I could see them taking him, sitting a year behind Eli, then having him take over when Eli rides off into the sunset.

That's also assuming shurmer doesn't look Webb, which word is he does, so who knows.

[FeelingOnYouboty]

We're not trading up to #2. Look at #4 through #7.

[CommonCents]

I'd say the odds are against Barkley having the best NFL career of any back from this class. The class is strong and deep, don't do the Sammy Watkins thing and lose your mind over the best college player.

[BuffaloHokie13]

Bills view this 'news' as an attempt to squeeze more out of us in a trade.

[NewEraBills]

14 hours ago, billspro said:

They are crazy if they think an RB is more valuable than picks. RBs probably get injured more than any other position and have short careers.

 

I just think this view is missing the complete picture.  As I've stated a month or so ago, it's not just about position, it's about playmaking ability.  You don't pass up on playmaking ability just because he plays what you think is a devalued position.  With a top 5 pick and a struggling offensive team, you take the best playmaker on the board who can change your team immediately and that guy is Barkley.  Of course, you can say well I would take the picks and take so and so later.  Let's be clear about one thing, there is something that you miss when you do that.  Just like people have QBs ranked in tiers and if you don't grab either Darnold, Rosen, Mayfield (and I hesitate to put Allen here but I will) you miss something, it's the same thing with other players that happen to play other positions.  If I'm Gettleman I'm not taking a QB (unless it is Darnold and even then I'd hesitate because I don't know what I have in Davis Webb) and I'm not taking a deal that moves me out of Barkley/Chubb/Nelson range.  If the Giants are committing to Eli and making a run for another two years, taking a QB doesn't move the needle for them one bit.  They need guys that can come in and help them win now and that starts by getting a playmaker on offense that will 1) take pressure off of Eli and 2) be a damn problem for defensive coordinators to plan for.

Edited April 16, 2018 by NewEraBills

[NewEraBills]

1 hour ago, dneveu said:

How much better is he than the 3 next RBs off the board?

 

I think the better question to ask is about how much playmaking ability he has shown vs other offensive talents in the draft, not just HBs.  You're not going to find many if any guys that have his playmaking ability and production (other than QB's).  We are talking about a guy that can run it and catch it.  I wouldn't say he's a bruiser like Zeke, but he's probably a much better receiver.  With Barkley, we're talking about a guy who could come in and give you potentially 1800 yards of offense (rushing and receiving).  He has that kind of ability.  You're not going to find many, IF any others (except QBs) with that.  Also, take into account the Giants have watched Zeke the last two years and they understand the impact a playmaker like that can have.  Pretty sure they'd like to even the odds on that front.

Edited April 16, 2018 by NewEraBills

[Chicken Boo]

3 hours ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

Don't forget darnold (assuming browns take Allen)

I could see them taking him, sitting a year behind Eli, then having him take over when Eli rides off into the sunset.

That's also assuming shurmer doesn't look Webb, which word is he does, so who knows.

 

That would be the smart thing to do, but I buy that they're riding with Eli for the foreseeable future.

[SouthNYfan]

4 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

That would be the smart thing to do, but I buy that they're riding with Eli for the foreseeable future.

 

Yeah, at least next year which would jive with darnold either way.

Taking Darnold means Eli is done after this year.

Taking Allen means they are okay with Eli for 2 years potentially.

 

I think trading jpp means they are gunning for chubb though, which is why I'm not sure they would trade back with us, since he won't be there at #12.

We would have to pry #4 from Cleveland, then trade #4 to the Giants (I don't think this is feasible, but that's what would prob have to be)

[dave mcbride]

13 hours ago, stuvian said:

going #2 overall means he's in the Eric Dickerson/Ladanian Tomlinson category. Is it really so?

Marshall Faulk was drafted #2 overall. He was worth it. 

I think Barkley's game is akin to Faulk's. 

[SouthNYfan]

5 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Marshall Faulk was drafted #2 overall. He was worth it. 

I think Barkley's game is akin to Faulk's. 

 

Yeah definitely.

I think he's gonna be really good.

13 hours ago, stuvian said:

going #2 overall means he's in the Eric Dickerson/Ladanian Tomlinson category. Is it really so?

 

Tomlinson was #5 but I get what you're saying.

 

RB first round draft history:

2017

#4 fournette

#8 mccaffery

 

2016

#4 Zeke

 

2015

#10 gurley

#15 Melvin Gordon

 

2014

(None)

 

2013

(None)

 

2012

#3 Trent Richardson

#31 Doug Martin

#32 David Wilson

 

2011

#28 Mark Ingram

 

2010

#9 Spiller

#12 Ryan Matthews

#30 jahvid best

 

2009

 

#12 knowshon Moreno

#27 Donald brown

#31 beanie Wells

 

2008

#4 Darren McFadden

#13 Johnathan Stewart

#22 Felix Jones

#23 rashard mendenhall

#24 Chris Johnson

 

2007

#7 Adrian Peterson

#12 marshawn Lynch

 

2006

#2 Reggie bush

#21 Laurence Maroney

#27 DeAngelo Williams

#30 Joseph addai

 

2005

#2 Ronnie brown

#4 Cedric Benson

#5 Cadillac Williams

 

2004

#24 Stephen jackson

#26 Chris Perry

#30 Kevin Jones

 

 

Could go on but yeah.

That's all the first round RBS taken since 2004

Not even making any inference from it, just sharing.

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

Running backs always a tough one to want to invest that much draft capital in.  They just get injured soooo often.  Whether they're actual games lost, or ineffectiveness due to playing with a lingering injury - it just seems like they're always banged up.  

[mannc]

19 hours ago, billspro said:

They are crazy if they think an RB is more valuable than picks. RBs probably get injured more than any other position and have short careers.

Not everyone even agrees that Barkley is the best RB in the draft.  It would be malpractice on a huge scale for NYG to not either (1) take a QB at 2 or (2) trade out of the pick.