Big Blue View mailbag: Draft scenarios, other NYG roster questions

The mail’s here!

Jeffrey Greenberg asks: With so much attention going to whether the Giants would trade up for a QB, here’s another thought: would they trade up for Marvin Harrison Jr.?

My rationale: He’s thought to be a generational talent, and some put him as the top player in the draft. With 4 QBs that may go in the top 5 picks (including by a team that may trade ahead of the Giants), getting MHJ could mean trading up just one or two spots, likely a modest day 2 or 3 pick in addition to #6. Would they and should they do this to get a foundational piece for years to come?

Ed says: Jeffrey, first of all I get really tired of the “generational talent” phrase. It is so overused that it just becomes silly. Harrison is a really good prospect, most believe the best receiver and perhaps best prospect in this class.

There is no chance I would endorse trading up for Harrison. I don’t think Joe Schoen would consider it, either. Truth is, I think that would be as bad as Dave Gettleman refusing to even find out what other teams were offering for the No. 2 pick when he selected Saquon Barkley.

Why trade up for Harrison when one or both Malik Nabers and Rome Odunze, guys who are expected to be No. 1 receivers as soon as they step on an NFL field, are also in this draft class? One or both will almost certainly be available at No. 6.

Is the difference between Harrison and Nabers/Odunze enough that you would give up a second-round pick you could really use this year and a first- or second-round pick in 2025 that you could use to put yourself in position to draft a quarterback next year? Nope.

In my view, giving up valuable draft capital — especially draft capital that might help land you a quarterback of the future — for Harrison would be malpractice. Go up for a quarterback, or don’t go up at all.

ctscan123 asks: With all the talk around quarterback and wide receiver, I feel like something is getting lost in the shuffle. Am I crazy or is our defensive back situation cause for deep, deep concern? I mean what is going on over there? Banks is penciled in as CB1 and he graded out at a 51 his rookie year. He was no world beater and he’s the top of the depth chart? Who the heck is playing CB2? Strong safety? Mills? that’s a pretty big step down from McKinney. I haven’t really heard any chatter about how we might address such a seemingly dire situation. What do you think?

Ed says: Yes, CT, the Giants need cornerback help. As I type this, there is an expectation they will meet with Tre’Davious White, former All-Pro cornerback with the Buffalo Bills. He isn’t that guy anymore, but if he is healthy can still play well enough to be a CB2 on an inexpensive deal.

I would suspect the Giants will prioritize cornerback in the draft, whether or not they sign White or another veteran. If the Giants were to trade back in Round 1, perhaps cornerback would be a target. We’ll see.

At safety, I would think Dane Belton will have a bigger role. I would also expect another safety to be drafted at some point if they are in position to grab one.

Roy Koeslag asks: Do you think the Giants will use running back by committee this season? It feels like that’s the plan with the players we have.

Ed says: Yes, that is fairly obvious. It is what most teams do now. Devin Singletary is a lead back and will get the most touches, but he has never handled the volume Barkley was accustomed to. The Giants are said to be in the market for another low-cost veteran to add depth to the position. They also have Eric Gray, who could get a bigger role this season. A mid- to late-round draft pick could also figure in.

Lawrence Kenney asks: So with the signing of Brian Burns to a very large contract, hopefully we’ve created a very good problem.

If Kayvon Thibodeaux continues his upward trajectory, he’ll be looking at Burns’ contract as his benchmark.

I realize salary caps change, but do you think it’s possible to pay two young edge rushers that kind of money at the same time?

Ed says: Lawrence, like you said that is a good problem to have. Sure it’s possible. There is always a cause and effect, and paying huge money to both Burns and Thibodeaux would cost them elsewhere, but it could be done.

Maybe by the time the Giants have to make that decision they will be building a roster around a quarterback on a cheaper rookie contract. There’s no way to know right now.

The Giants will cross that bridge when they get to it, but if they want to pay both guys big dollars they will figure out a way to do so.

Brian Misdom asks: As the mock drafts are pouring in, it seems almost taken for granted that one of the big 3 WRs will be available to the Giants at 6.

But what if a run on WRs goes picks 3-5? While unlikely given one of Maye/Daniels/Caleb would be available, it would remove the chance to secure what I see as one of the biggest remaining holes in this roster of a true WR1.

Maybe they like the QB that remains, but if not, how might you expect the Giants to pivot? The working assumption has been QB or WR for the pick but such a scenario might wreck those plans. What do you think?

Ed says: Brian, I don’t expect any sort of big pivot. I think it’s quarterback or wide receiver for the Giants at No. 6. That’s it. I think the quarterbacks they would really be interested in are Drake Maye or J.J. McCarthy. I think they would take either Malik Nabers or Rome Odunze if it’s wide receiver.

What they do if McCarthy and one or both of the wide receivers is there is the question. I would be lying if I said I knew the answer. If the top four quarterbacks are gone, could they trade down? Maybe, but passing on Nabers/Odunze would be a tough pill to swallow.

Edwin Gommers: I read your article about Simmons. Here is a thought. At Clemson Simmons played a LB/S hybrid role. I believe his coverage skills are decent. He’s rather fast based on his 40 and he’s tall. Would it make sense to move him to S as a replacement for the now departed McKinney?

Ed says: Edwin, I am not sure I understand why so many in the fan base are fascinated by Isaiah Simmons. Yes, he is a former first-round pick. He played one-third of the defensive snaps last season, and had very little true impact.

As for your question, no, moving him to safety does not make any sense. Simmons is not a safety. He is a 240-pound linebacker who is athletic enough to occasionally line up at safety in a sub-package or for a specific matchup. He has played 65 snaps there in four years. He is a linebacker with the skills to occasionally do other things.

If Simmons fits Shane Bowen’s defense in a part-time role and the price is right, the Giants will bring him back. If not, they won’t.

Jim Cardamone asks: Recent mock drafts and commentary from you and others have focused on QB and WR as the likely targets for the Giants at #6. The Giants need a big body true #1 WR, but I believe this class is deep enough to not use the #6 pick on that position and the top QBs are likely gone at #6. I wanted to get your opinion on the following scenario. What about firming up the O-Line with Joe Alt at #6 and then targeting a WR in the 2nd round. A few players to consider Ja’Lynn Polk, who has been dubbed as one of the best “go up and get it” contested catch receivers in this class or Troy Franklin who has smoothness and confidence in knowing how to win at the position or Roman Wilson, who has been said to bring NFL-level speed and NFL-level determination at the catch point and when blocking?

Ed says: Jim, like I said above in answer to Brian Misdom’s question I believe that if the Giants stay at No. 6 it is quarterback or wide receiver. That’s it. They heavily addressed the offensive line in free agency, adding two starters and five total players.

The left tackle is Andrew Thomas. The right tackle is going to be Evan Neal or Jermaine Eluemunor, with the other likely kicking inside to guard. I can see the Giants drafting a developmental tackle in the middle rounds, but I can’t see them passing on a potential No. 1 wide receiver or a quarterback for an offensive tackle they don’t need right now, especially one who would have to convert from left to right.

I can see them adding a guard who could potentially push for a starting role or be a quality backup on Day 2 or early on Day 3.

Nate Carter asks: After seeing Chris Simms QB rankings where he has Bo Nix rated as his number 3 QB in the “franchise” category, I couldn’t help but wonder; If you were Joe Schoen and Brian Daboll and your scouting department had the same analysis, how would you approach the draft? Can you justify Nix at 6? Would you swing a trade down? Interested in your thoughts.

Ed says: Me? No, I can’t justify taking Bo Nix at No. 6. I just don’t see the high ceiling. But, what do I know?

Listen, everyone has opinions. Everyone tries to judge traits and film the best they can. But, NOBODY knows. If they did, the hit rate on drafting quarterbacks in the first round would be a lot higher than the 30-40% rate where it sits for roughly the last 15 years.

Chris Simms knows more about quarterback play than I do. That’s why when I go to the NFL Scouting Combine I seek him out for his thoughts — he’s not inviting me on ‘PFT Live’ to share mine. That doesn’t mean he’s right. It doesn’t mean I’m right.

Could I see drafting Nix in a trade down scenario? Sure. If Schoen and Daboll love the guy and think he is a better long-term option than what they have.

Seth Friedman asks: There seems to be a ton of attention attached to J.J. McCarthy as an option for NYG at #6 in the draft. While QB is a question mark for NYG, there has been little talk that Schoen and company might be trying to misdirect attention away from what the Giants might decide in the first round.

Schoen and NYG benefit if there’s a belief NYG wants McCarthy at #6. Even if that may not be accurate. There is already substantial talk that the Vikings are seeking to leapfrog the Giants in Round 1. This could push more WR talent toward the Giants if the Vikings execute on this strategy.

Thoughts?

Ed says: Seth, it’s smokescreen season. We hear some chatter that the Giants could move up for McCarthy or Drake Maye. Some think they will sit tight at No. 6 and just see what happens. Some think they will trade down and add assets.

We will see. If the Giants are fine not getting a quarterback with their first pick then obviously enticing the Vikings to trade up in front of them would give them more options.

Vincent Moody asks: In recent weeks there has been a lot of buzz connecting JJ McCarthy to the Giants, with speculation they might even trade up to get him. I don’t quite understand how a quarterback who was viewed as a second- or third-round pick at the end of the college season can suddenly rocket up to possibly the 4th pick overall. His college tape hasn’t changed, so what has. And related, do you think the Giants are intentionally putting this stuff out so that maybe the Vikings or someone else jumps them to draft a quarterback to increase the odds they get the receiver they want. Or get a even better haul on a trade down?

Ed says: Vincent, as I said above it is smokescreen season. It is hard to know what is real and what isn’t. We will find out eventually.

I wanted to address the ‘what does the NFL see in McCarthy?’ part of this. I say this over and over, including in the video mailbag you can find embedded in this post. There is a lot more that goes into this than the highlights you can find on YouTube. Hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of evaluation from multiple sources. Conversations we will never know about with anyone who can give a team information about a kid. In-person meetings and watching a kid throw and move up close, like at the Combine and pro days. The fact that the kid has won the biggest possible team prize in both high school and college — he’s a winner.

The tape, by the way, to my eyes, shows that he can make every throw, has athleticism to play off-script, has accuracy to hit guys in stride and can make key plays at key times. He’s also just 21, which means there is a lot of time and room for development.

Ron Corcillo asks: It seems that Shane Bowen primarily utilized a 4-3 defense in Tennessee. But the Giants’ personnel seems better suited to a 3-4. Dexter Lawrence plays best as a nose tackle, and Burns and Thibodeaux seem best as stand-up rushers from the OLB position, as opposed to lining up as DEs. Do you think Bowen will keep the Giants in a 3-4, or switch to a 4-3? If he goes with a 4-3, how does that affect personnel? Would Thibodeaux and Burns become DEs? Would we need to add more OLBs?

Ed says: Ron, the Titans were a base 3-4 team under Bowen. That is what the Giants will be. Kayvon Thibodeaux and Brian Burns are 3-4 outside linebackers who can, and will, occasionally play with their hand in the ground as a defensive end. The Giants wouldn’t have made the massive investment in Burns if he didn’t fit how Bowen wants to structure his front seven.

Mendy asks: Why do you think the Giants didn’t put the franchise tag on McKinney or Barkley then try to trade one of them to get draft picks? That’s how they got Burns. Obviously there were teams willing to pay either one of them more than the franchise salary, so they probably would have given up draft picks too. I think this was especially true of McKinney.

Ed says: The Giants and Saquon Barkley’s reps agreed they weren’t going to tag Barkley again. It would have just angered him, and there is no guarantee they would have gotten trade offers worth it. You can be certain they had gauged the market before making the decision.

In terms of McKinney, the four-year, $67 million contract he got from the Green Bay Packers was an outlier in a down safety market financially. The franchise tag would have been $17.123 million, which is what the Packers are paying him annually. I don’t think anyone else was going there.

No chance the Giants wanted to be stuck with McKinney at that price tag if they couldn’t find a trade. Again, they probably knew there wouldn’t be a market.

Chris Fiegler asks: Will the Giants receive compensatory picks in 2025 for signings of Saquon Barkley to the Philadelphia Eagles, Xavier McKinney to the Green Bay Packers and Tyrod Taylor to the New York Jets?

Ed says: We won’t know the official answer to that until next offseason, but it doesn’t look that way. The formula is based on compensatory free agents lost and gained, and what the Giants added looks like it has cancelled out what they lost. Here is the estimate from Over The Cap, not including the signing of Matt Peart by the Denver Broncos:

Jerry Agostisi asks: Hi Ed. I’ve been following the mailbag since I discovered it. I find myself agreeing with almost all of your opinions. I find it hard to believe that I could be the first writer with a question or comments about Saquon’s signing with the Eagles. It seems quite obvious that the Giants had no interest in matching the Eagles offer. I’ve been a huge fan since 1960s and lived though the worst of it without ever losing hope. Now, though, I wondering if there’s really any good reason to watch any games this year. Saquon has always offered some hope of excitement and now I don’t see any likelihood of anyone, including any possible draft pick supplying that. I don’t see any of the free agent signings radically improving pass protection and negating the possibility that a stud receiver will be capable of having an immediate impact. Actually, by surrendering the run game there’s only going to be far greater pressure on the passing game. The best teams have to have both. I’m tired of reading and hearing that Jones had a really bad year in ‘23 or Barkley has lost a step. No one in the league could have done better than either of them behind that line. They have been playing behind a terrible offensive line since both joined the team. It’s a miracle either of them can still walk. The passing game will not do well by surrendering the running game. For the first time ever, I’m not sure I’ll be watching too many games this year. We’ll see if the league agrees with me when they release the prime time game schedule. The team should have matched the Eagles offer to Saquon, at least there would be hope.

What’s your opinion?

Ed says: Down off the ledge, Jerry. I’m pretty sure that things have been worse during your fanhood than they are now. I’m also pretty sure Saquon Barkley wasn’t the only reason you root for the Giants.

The Giants didn’t give up on the running game. They simply chose to allocate their resources a different way. They chose to spend their money on the pass rush and the offensive line, and I for one would like to stand up and applaud that decision.

Devin Singletary has three straight seasons of 800 or more yards rushing. He isn’t Barkley, but he is a good back. The Giants will add help for Singletary.

They added five offensive linemen in free agency, including two solid starters. They added two of the best blocking tight ends in the game. Wherever Evan Neal plays, the line will be better. They added a terrific player in Brian Burns.

I don’t know if the Giants will be good or bad in 2024. I think, though, that there is plenty of reason for hope. GM Joe Schoen reset the path they were on, and I’m fine with it.

Submit a question

Have a Giants-related question? E-mail it to bigblueview@gmail.com and it might be featured in our weekly mailbag.