Has there been a Giants-Jets Pick Swap Thread?

[Dcronin]

Does that make sense?  We get into #2 to take Rosen or Darnold, Giants get Saquon at #3.

At what cost I don't know. Or, we just stay put.

DC

[Patriot Killa]

Darron Lee is what an article suggested.

[Jetfan13]

that makes no sense, if the G-Men want Barkley, why trade up with them and lose more picks if they still get the guy they targeted anyway?

[jamesr]

1 minute ago, Jetfan13 said:

that makes no sense, if the G-Men want Barkley, why trade up with them and lose more picks if they still get the guy they targeted anyway?

Prevents NYG trading with someone else ...

[johnnyjet]

The Giants Will NEVER help the Jets .  Ever. 

[Joe W. Namath]

7 minutes ago, johnnyjet said:

The Giants Will NEVER help the Jets .  Ever. 

Hell would freeze over b4 the Giants would help the Jets.

[slats]

24 minutes ago, jamesr said:

Prevents NYG trading with someone else ...

Bingo!

15 minutes ago, johnnyjet said:

The Giants Will NEVER help the Jets .  Ever. 

 

7 minutes ago, Joe W. Namath said:

Hell would freeze over b4 the Giants would help the Jets.

The Giants never would've traded with the Jets while they were at #6, but I think they'd happily trade with the Jets now that they're at #3 - provided that they're not also targeting a QB. Such a trade doesn't help the Jets nearly as much as it helps the Giants. They'd get to say, quite honestly, that they got to fleece the Jets for one spot down, and still got the guy they targeted all along. It would be a big win for them. 

[The Crusher]

7 hours ago, Dcronin said:

Does that make sense?  We get into #2 to take Rosen or Darnold, Giants get Saquon at #3.

At what cost I don't know. Or, we just stay put.

DC

If I’m the Giants and I’m sure they want Rosen I call Macc and demand next years one for him or threaten to take him myself . Even if I don’t want him Why  not try to fleece the Jets?  It’s a win/win for the Giants, especially if Barkley is their target. 

I thought of that waiting for my crab cakes for lunch in Annapolis yesterday. Maryland lump crabmeat is heavenly. 

[Ohio State NY Jets fan]

The front page of the Post will be magic if the Giants and Jets both draft QBs this year - that "competition" will feed the NY media for years

possibly the only reason for the Giants to trade down and/or or select a non-QB is to avoid the media circus that will follow the draft

[Sperm Edwards]

5 minutes ago, slats said:

Bingo!

 

The Giants never would've traded with the Jets while they were at #6, but I think they'd happily trade with the Jets now that they're at #3 - provided that they're not also targeting a QB. Such a trade doesn't help the Jets nearly as much as it helps the Giants. They'd get to say, quite honestly, that they got to fleece the Jets for one spot down, and still got the guy they targeted all along. It would be a big win for them. 

It could still happen if they’re both targeting a QB, so long as it isn’t the same QB. 

I think that’d have to wait until the #1 pick is in, though. The Giants would be smart to have trade deals worked out in advance, should certain scenarios arise. For example, say the Giants want Darnold at #2 or else they’d rather trade down. If Allen or Barkley go #1, there could still be a trade but only if the Jets assure them they’re targeting Rosen. (I have to believe teams - particularly business partner teams - wouldn’t like about this stuff or it’d be the last time anyone makes a trade with us).

They could tell us - if they haven’t already - they like Barkley at #2 but like him even better at #3 if they could get another free pick or more, and would be willing to move down a slot if the Jets will take Rosen. They’d also have to sell us on the idea they’d still be willing to trade down much lower (e.g. to the Bills) if it meant picking up that #12 pick, plus their other #1 pick, plus their #1 pick next year, plus maybe a rostered player or whatever else sweetens it further.

Maccagnan has shown he’s not above making a panic decision in the draft, as the behind-the-scenes leaks with the Hackenberg pick showed. So they absolutely could (as you put it) fleece the Jets for a free high pick, get the player they wanted all along, with the Jets paying a premium for the player they badly wanted but would’ve been there for them at #3 anyway (not unlike what was presumed to happen last year with Chicago’s move-up). 

[ZachEY]

8 hours ago, Patriot Killa said:

Darron Lee is what an article suggested.

So, the Giants move down and they get Lee... What do the Jets give up?

[ChuckkieB]

I think if the Giiants are NOT planning on drafting a QB,  they're in a prime position to squeeze a free pick and/or player out of the Jets. Mac did great to get up to #3, but might have to go all in and sacrifice whatever the Giants want in order to move up and get his guy. 

[Thai Jet]

59 minutes ago, Jetfan13 said:

that makes no sense, if the G-Men want Barkley, why trade up with them and lose more picks if they still get the guy they targeted anyway?

Because it's a giant poker match. "What if somebody ELSE trades with the Giants and steals a QB at #2" Stuff like that runs thru GM's minds at this time of year. I think we'll just stay put at #3.

[#27TheDominator]

FWIW, to move from 3 to 2 last year the Bears gave up #3, their 3rd, 4th and next year's 3rd. 

[#27TheDominator]

While we are on the history lesson

1981, the Jets picked third and got Freeman McNeil.  The Giants picked second and got a crack addled LB that was likely the greatest of all time.

[Thai Jet]

7 minutes ago, ChuckkieB said:

I think if the Giants are NOT planning on drafting a QB,  they're in a prime position to squeeze a free pick and/or player out of the Jets. Mac did great to get up to #3, but might have to go all in and sacrifice whatever the Giants want in order to move up and get his guy. 

Agreed I think the G-Men pick Barkley and hold off on Eli's replacement till later. I feel they want to try to win now with perhaps only a 2 yr. window to do that with Eli. Barkley gives Eli a great weapon to get that done now. I'm thinking Macc stays put at #3.

[TopCop]

Imo, since Macc reached out to the Browns and Giants to inquire about moving up, it’s a high probability that Macc had long conversations with them and without them coming out and telling Macc who they’re picking, Macc probably got a good sense on who their picking and feels confident about getting his QB at 3.

Also, like an earlier poster said, Macc probably told the Giants to check with him if they’re going  to trade out with another team and honestly the only teams I see the Giants trading with is the Browns at 4 and Broncos at 5

[Dcronin]

that makes no sense, if the G-Men want Barkley, why trade up with them and lose more picks if they still get the guy they targeted anyway?

To prevent Bills from sneaking in front of us


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[bgivs21]

9 minutes ago, TopCop said:

Imo, since Macc reached out to the Browns and Giants to inquire about moving up, it’s a high probability that Macc had long conversations with them and without them coming out and telling Macc who they’re picking, Macc probably got a good sense on who their picking and feels confident about getting his QB at 3.

Also, like an earlier poster said, Macc probably told the Giants to check with him if they’re going  to trade out with another team and honestly the only teams I see the Giants trading with is the Browns at 4 and Broncos at 5

I totally agree. The Giants are in a tough spot in regards to the direction they want to go with their franchise. They have a ton of talent & still have Eli who has some football left in him. If they decide to go the route of sticking w/ Eli & surrounding him w/ talent so he only has to manage the game by getting the ball into players like OBJ, Engram, Shep then they will not trade with the Bills to go all the way down to 11 (Or Cards). They will either trade with the Broncos (who are in a similar position i.e win now talent on roster) or Browns which I see as more the more likely scenario. If they trade down I expect them to take Nelson if Barkley is not there. If they stay put, I expect them to take Barkley if the Browns don't take him #1 overall.

[Pcola]

2 hours ago, Jetfan13 said:

that makes no sense, if the G-Men want Barkley, why trade up with them and lose more picks if they still get the guy they targeted anyway?

The only thing a trade with the Giants accomplishes is a massive reduction of angst and anxiety with Jet Fans who can only assume doom and disaster come April 26.  

[Pcola]

1 hour ago, Dcronin said:

 

To prevent Bills from sneaking in front of us


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

 

We have to assume that if the #1 or #2 pick was attainable, Macc would have made that trade instead of settling for #3.  If the cost of the number 2 pick was so high just to move back to 6, we have to assume it would not be possible for a team like Buffalo to move up from 12.  

The Giants are probably locked in with either Rosen or Barkley.  

[Patriot Killa]

3 hours ago, TeddEY said:

So, the Giants move down and they get Lee... What do the Jets give up?

It said —

NYJ:

Darron Lee, 2019 3rd-4th

NYG:

#2

[ZachEY]

4 minutes ago, Patriot Killa said:

It said —

NYJ:

Darron Lee, 2019 3rd-4th

NYG:

#2

Think about my comment again, except in a sarcastic way 

[JetsFanatic]

3 hours ago, The Crusher said:

If I’m the Giants and I’m sure they want Rosen I call Macc and demand next years one for him or threaten to take him myself . Even if I don’t want him Why  not try to fleece the Jets?  It’s a win/win for the Giants, especially if Barkley is their target. 

I thought of that waiting for my crab cakes for lunch in Annapolis yesterday. Maryland lump crabmeat is heavenly. 

There is no way the Jets or any team would trade 1st rounder to move from 3 to 2 in the draft.  It would likely cost a 4th rounder to move one spot.  For the record, I wouldn't do it.  Just stay at 3.  

[Sonny Werblin]

3 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

FWIW, to move from 3 to 2 last year the Bears gave up #3, their 3rd, 4th and next year's 3rd. 

Mac should probably do this but only if his rankings have a big drop-off from the #2 QB to the #3 QB.

Is it just me or would this stuff be a whole lot easier if, like the GM's, we got to sit in on the player interviews and blackboard sessions? 

[Warfish]

3 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

FWIW, to move from 3 to 2 last year the Bears gave up #3, their 3rd, 4th and next year's 3rd. 

Oh, lets totally do that!

Then we can say our new QB cost us:

2018 1st (#6)
2018 2nd
2018 2nd
2018 3rd
2018 4th
2019 2nd
2019 3rd

THAT my friends is how champions are built! 

Macc woulda just screwed up those picks (but NOT The QB pick!) anyway, amirite?

Anything for a QB!  Any QB.  As long as he's alive and breathing!

Super Bowls, here we come!

This borders on Saints/Ricky Williams levels of lunacy......

[Greenseed4]

Bills-Giants trade scenario:

 

Bills get:

1st round/#2 overall (2600 pts),

4th round/#102 (92 pts)

...2692 total

 

Giants get:

1st round/#12 overall (1200 pts)

1st round/ #21 overall (780 pts)

2nd round/#53 (370 pts)

2nd round/#56 (340 pts)

...2690 total 

 

[#27TheDominator]

18 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Oh, lets totally do that!

Then we can say our new QB cost us:

2018 1st (#6)
2018 2nd
2018 2nd
2018 3rd
2018 4th
2019 2nd
2019 3rd

THAT my friends is how champions are built! 

Macc woulda just screwed up those picks (but NOT The QB pick!) anyway, amirite?

Anything for a QB!  Any QB.  As long as he's alive and breathing!

Super Bowls, here we come!

This borders on Saints/Ricky Williams levels of lunacy......

I am not advocating to do it, or not to do it.  I think that your post has an internal inconsistency.  You take any of the top 3 QBs because you want "any QB" but a GM that knows what a franchise QB is worth does what he has to do to get the right one.  I have not been satisfied with Maccagnan's choices, but I understand that.  A top QB costs $28M per, a top CB/WR $16M.  When it is a QB it is worth it to get it right.  It's' not like choosing between Bruce Irvin and Coples or Revis and Aaron Ross and even in those circumstances it may have been worthwhile.  

[Warfish]

9 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

I am not advocating to do it, or not to do it.  I think that your post has an internal inconsistency.  You take any of the top 3 QBs because you want "any QB" but a GM that knows what a franchise QB is worth does what he has to do to get the right one.  I have not been satisfied with Maccagnan's choices, but I understand that.  A top QB costs $28M per, a top CB/WR $16M.  When it is a QB it is worth it to get it right.  It's' not like choosing between Bruce Irvin and Coples or Revis and Aaron Ross and even in those circumstances it may have been worthwhile.  

Trading two full years of all our top draft picks for Macc's choice at QB?  No, I don't trust his evaluation skills enough to support that.

I also don't want my team to have nothing to help build the future with for the next two years.  

The only thing that will make Macc's trade to #3 worse is if we turn around and trade multiple upper-mid round picks to get to #2.

Wheels are coming off this organization big time, and I simply don't have any faith this organization will draft and then properly develop a legitimate franchise QB. 

Far FAR more likely we draft the next and latest Ryan Leaf/Tim Couch/Jeff George/Sam Bradford/Akili Smith.

[Patriot Killa]

29 minutes ago, Greenseed4 said:

Bills-Giants trade scenario:

 

Bills get:

1st round/#2 overall (2600 pts),

4th round/#102 (92 pts)

...2692 total

 

Giants get:

1st round/#12 overall (1200 pts)

1st round/ #21 overall (780 pts)

2nd round/#53 (370 pts)

2nd round/#56 (340 pts)

...2690 total 

 

I just don’t see it. As I mentioned earlier in another thread, when the Jets traded with the Colts, they overpriced the market. They overpaid by 600-some points. The Giants have to look at that and be thinking that they either can get more or there is no reason to take less. The Bills definitely are trying their hardest to move up but if it takes too much out of them...they are best suited to stay put and draft BPA. 

They can get themselves Falk or Rudolph to go along with their 80 2,3,4th round picks.

[#27TheDominator]

5 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Trading two full years of all our top draft picks for Macc's choice at QB?  No, I don't trust his evaluation skills enough to support that.

I also don't want my team to have nothing to help build the future with for the next two years.  

The only thing that will make Macc's trade to #3 worse is if we turn around and trade multiple upper-mid round picks to get to #2.

Wheels are coming off this organization big time, and I simply don't have any faith this organization will draft and then properly develop a legitimate franchise QB. 

Far FAR more likely we draft the next and latest Ryan Leaf/Tim Couch/Jeff George/Sam Bradford/Akili Smith.

It is up to him to pick the right guy.  Like you, I am skeptical.  OTOH, sitting and waiting is not the way to go.  That I know.  

I am not sure how this is "2 full years of all our top draft picks."  We would still have our 2019 1st, which is pretty much worth the same as all the other picks combined.  Trading next year's first and a first to move up for a QB is fairly standard -see 2016 Eagles, 2017 Chiefs and Texans.  Are you that worried about a couple of third rounders that you are going to take whoever falls?  I'm not. 

[Warfish]

5 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

It is up to him to pick the right guy.  Like you, I am skeptical.  OTOH, sitting and waiting is not the way to go.  That I know.  

Drafting Watson last year was the way to go.

Firing Macc and Bowles this offseason was the way to go.

I have no idea what the way to go is now.  Truly.  I like Mayfield, not enough to all-in-obsess over getting him.  I don't really like any of the top 3 tbqh, think they're all quite overhyped/overrated due to the QB scarcity right now in the NFL.

But I believe in drafting and building a team, and we've already traded a bunch of starter-level draft picks away, and many want to trade 3-4 more picks away to get to #2 or #1.  

Some days I feel like either I've gone crazy, or all of you have.

5 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

I am not sure how this is "2 full years of all our top draft picks."

Do I need to report the hypothetical list of what it takes to get to #2 and what we gave to get to #3 already?

5 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

We would still have our 2019 1st, which is pretty much worth the same as all the other picks combined.  Trading next year's first and a first to move up for a QB is fairly standard -see 2016 Eagles, 2017 Chiefs and Texans.  Are you that worried about a couple of third rounders that you are going to take whoever falls?  I'm not. 

On this team?  YES!  We're one of the least talented rosters in the NFL right now.  A single QB prospect, especially one that won't be ready for at least a year (sound familiar, Hackshirting Allen inbound!) will not solve that, nor will Teddy Wounded Knee.  

What solves talent weakness is the draft and doing it well.  Using your picks to get new starters at positions of need, the Mangolds, Bricks, and the like.

In this draft class, I swear, I think I'd rather have Luke Falk (or Mason Rudolph or whomever 2nd tier prospect) and all my picks in 2018 and 2019 than Josh Allen and nothing draft-wise to put around him.  

At this point, if the Jets want to do it, I oppose it.  They've earned that level of disdain and distrust.

 

[Scoop24]

Giants are not giving the Jets a Franchise QB . Much less trading with us 

[#27TheDominator]

3 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Drafting Watson last year was the way to go.

Firing Macc and Bowles this offseason was the way to go.

I have no idea what the way to go is now.  Truly.  I like Mayfield, not enough to all-in-obsess over getting him.  I don't really like any of the top 3 tbqh, think they're all quite overhyped/overrated due to the QB scarcity right now in the NFL.

But I believe in drafting and building a team, and we've already traded a bunch of starter-level draft picks away, and many want to trade 3-4 more picks away to get to #2 or #1.  

Some days I feel like either I've gone crazy, or all of you have.

Do I need to report the hypothetical list of what it takes to get to #2 and what we gave to get to #3 already?

On this team?  YES!  We're one of the least talented rosters in the NFL right now.  A single QB prospect, especially one that won't be ready for at least a year (sound familiar, Hackshirting Allen inbound!) will not solve that, nor will Teddy Wounded Knee.  

What solves talent weakness is the draft and doing it well.  Using your picks to get new starters at positions of need, the Mangolds, Bricks, and the like.

In this draft class, I swear, I think I'd rather have Luke Falk (or Mason Rudolph or whomever 2nd tier prospect) and all my picks in 2018 and 2019 than Josh Allen and nothing draft-wise to put around him.  

At this point, if the Jets want to do it, I oppose it.  They've earned that level of disdain and distrust.

 

I get where you are coming from.  This regime has not earned any benefit of the doubt or trust.  OTOH, whining about picking Allen before they pick Allen seems kind of bitchy.  I think they know they need a QB and they know that you have to make moves to get one.  IMO, that shows more than I had seen up until this point.  This GM is betting on who he gets.  We don't owe him anything, but the guy should get a year to bust before we lose our minds. 

If he picked Watson, he got hurt and we went 4-12 you would feel better about this GM?  I'm not buying it.

[Warfish]

1 hour ago, #27TheDominator said:

I get where you are coming from.  This regime has not earned any benefit of the doubt or trust.  OTOH, whining about picking Allen before they pick Allen seems kind of bitchy.  I think they know they need a QB and they know that you have to make moves to get one.  IMO, that shows more than I had seen up until this point.  This GM is betting on who he gets.  We don't owe him anything, but the guy should get a year to bust before we lose our minds. 

If he picked Watson, he got hurt and we went 4-12 you would feel better about this GM?  I'm not buying it.

Yes I would absolutely feel better about the GM.  

He drafted, and missed, on Petty.  On resigning Fitz. 

He then drafted and missed, badly, overreachingly, on Hack.  

He picks McCown, and somehow even that screws up, better than expected, not bad enough to help us.

Then he had a legit franchise #1 QB, with character to boot, sitting in front of him.....and he passed.  For a Safety.  No Safety is worth that, none in the history of the NFL.

Then he doubles down on McCown for more than twice what a young, still-with-potential AJ McCrayon gets.  

And he signs Teddy Wounded Knee, a JAG everyone wants to talk up as a future HOF'er cut down in his developing prime, lol, and not the less good Sanchez he actually was production and play wise.  

Now we're expected to believe this same guy, who has swing and missed, badly, at every QB decision he's made since the day he arrived.....should be trusted when he sells a goodly chunk of our draft assets to get to #3, and perhaps more to get to #2?  And then picks "his guy".

As you say, no benefit of the doubt or trust has been earned.