Giants Trade Pierre-Paul to Bucs [Merge]

[BProland85]

If Chubb is gone I'm willing to bet either Barkley or Nelson will be available at 6 overall. Or a top QB will still be on the board and you could trade down again and draft LB Roquon Smith or Tremaine Edmunds. 

[dgambill]

6 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

I still wonder if the Bills trade up to 2 with NY. But if Chubb is gone, I’ll take Tremaine Edmunds. Sam Hubbard in the 2nd round or just wait until 2019. Nick Bosa and Clelin Ferrell will be available.

I think NY is set to make a trade with Buffalo to move out of the spot. With their cap situation over the next several years they won't be able to make additions through the free agency. They will want to stock pile picks....they need OL help, DL help, RB help, and yes QB help. Trading Paul to me means they are ready to rebuild and get younger and if they are looking to do that then they need to do what we are doing and stock pile picks. I think Buffalo has been targeting moving up all along. I do think there is a scenario that all 3 Chubb to NY, Barkley to CLE, and Nelson to Den could play out but I really think NY is set to move back or take a qb. Guess time will tell.

[k9copinmd]

Do the Giants try to get Hankins back now on the cheap which would still leave them looking QB at 2?? Or do they take Chubb or trade back. This draft could go so many ways.

 

[ColtsBlitz]

22 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

At this point:

1.) Darnold

2.) Chubb

3.) Rosen

4.) Barkley

5.) Nelson/QB

6.) Nelson/wildcard/trade down

 

this is pretty accurate IMO as of now.

I think Fitzpatrick should be considered. He’s an elite player, Nelson is a need pick. Talented, but at 6 it’s too early. 

[Exodus]

32 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

If Barkley goes #1 and Chubb goes #2, the Jets could look like geniuses for moving to #3 and being able to get any of the QBs they want.  Frankly, I'm not concerned.  There will still be plenty of good talent available at #6, and it could even leave the door open to another trade down.

I called this in the "draft bold predictions" thread. This is why I would have LOVED for the Colts to have waited. If we got all that from the Jets a month before the draft, imagine a scenario on draft day if all the top QB's were on the board come #3.

 

I'm beginning to wonder if the Jets themselves didn't have a feeling something like this would happen, and traded so early to beat the rush.

[DaveA1102]

2 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Not sure Nelson makes it past Denver.

 

Yeah I can see that as a good fit for them. 

 

Although we would still be in a great position, if you assume Cleveland take QB1 and Barkley, Giants take Chubb, Jets QB2 and then Denver have Nelson. One of Rosen, Darnold and Allen are then available (likely Allen?) to sell to the highest bidder.

 

If not, then we go Edmunds, Fitzpatrick or Smith?  So many options for CB.

[Cynjin]

3 minutes ago, dgambill said:

I think NY is set to make a trade with Buffalo to move out of the spot. With their cap situation over the next several years they won't be able to make additions through the free agency. They will want to stock pile picks....they need OL help, DL help, RB help, and yes QB help. Trading Paul to me means they are ready to rebuild and get younger and if they are looking to do that then they need to do what we are doing and stock pile picks. I think Buffalo has been targeting moving up all along. I do think there is a scenario that all 3 Chubb to NY, Barkley to CLE, and Nelson to Den could play out but I really think NY is set to move back or take a qb. Guess time will tell.

 

I don't see the Giants trading out of #2.  I saw reports that the Jets tried to trade with the Browns and Giants before they traded with the Colts and that makes sense.  If they wanted to trade out of #2 they could have already.

[krunk]

I'd be really good with Edmunds, although Roquan Smith might be the better fit for a zone scheme.

[Yoshinator]

4 minutes ago, ColtsBlitz said:

I think Fitzpatrick should be considered. He’s an elite player, Nelson is a need pick. Talented, but at 6 it’s too early. 

The "term" wildcard pretty much meant Fitz, Roquan, Edmunds, and Ward could all be in play for us at 6 potentially if Barkley, Chubb, and Nelson go. Pretty much Ballard's highest ranked of those 4 guys if we stay put.

[DaveA1102]

4 minutes ago, Exodus said:

I called this in the "draft bold predictions" thread. This is why I would have LOVED for the Colts to have waited. If we got all that from the Jets a month before the draft, imagine a scenario on draft day if all the top QB's were on the board come #3.

 

I'm beginning to wonder if the Jets themselves didn't have a feeling something like this would happen, and traded so early to beat the rush.

 

I would disagree.  The Colts got a really good return for the trade and are still in an excellent position to trade back further if they should choose or get an elite player at #6. 

 

There were only so many teams that could have been in a bidding war for that #3 spot based on the amount of capital that would have been needed.

[ColtsBlitz]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The "term" wildcard pretty much meant Fitz, Roquan, Edmunds, and Ward could all be in play for us at 6 potentially if Barkley, Chubb, and Nelson go. Pretty much Ballard's highest ranked of those 4 guys if we stay put.

Just once I’d like to see Ballard’s draft board, even if it’s in 5 years from now who he had where in 2017 or 2018

[Fisticuffs111]

38 minutes ago, krunk said:

who said they are going 3-4?

 

https://giantswire.usatoday.com/2018/02/25/new-york-giants-james-bettcher-seeks-diversity-players-3-4-scheme

 

Giants fans are all talking about the switch too, in relation to this move. Seems like it'll possibly be more of a hybrid, and it doesn't mean Chubb WON'T fit, just something I threw in at the end of my post. I think the salary implications point more toward this move being made to have the money to re-sign Collins and OBJ next season.

I'll eat crow if I'm wrong but I fully believe the Giants are taking a QB, specifically Rosen.

[k9copinmd]

16 minutes ago, krunk said:

who said they are going 3-4?

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/giants-trade-jason-pierre-paul-to-buccaneers-in-blockbuster-trade-that-shakes-up-draft/

 

Well if this article is to be believed then it looks like they are switching to the 3-4 and eyeing Chubb. But who knows so much can change between now and draft day.

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, ColtsBlitz said:

Just once I’d like to see Ballard’s draft board, even if it’s in 5 years from now who he had where in 2017 or 2018

Same. It'd definitely be fun to see what he factors most into choosing a player, whether it be need, scheme, character, potential upside, or other factors. Especially 5 years from now when we know who hit and who missed.

[tweezy32]

If Chubb goes #2 barkley goes #1 or #4 and nelson goes #5..  I would definitely trade out no matter what if that's what happens.. Someone will try to trade up for that top qb and I would love to get more picks!! 

[csmopar]

1 hour ago, krunk said:

Not a good sign to me.   I wonder if the Giants have their eyes on Chubb?

I've said many times, Chubb is going to the Giants.

[BProland85]

17 minutes ago, ColtsBlitz said:

I think Fitzpatrick should be considered. He’s an elite player, Nelson is a need pick. Talented, but at 6 it’s too early. 

 

I think most of us on this board would rather have Nelson over Fitzpatrick. Fitz is best suited at S, which we're already set. Nelson is the higher graded prospect, and can hugely impact Indy's OL. I would argue a dominant OG would impact this team more than a great safety. 

[Fluke_33]

12 minutes ago, ColtsBlitz said:

Just once I’d like to see Ballard’s draft board, even if it’s in 5 years from now who he had where in 2017 or 2018

I’d love seeing any from the polian years too

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, BProland85 said:

 

I think most of us on this board would rather have Nelson over Fitzpatrick. Fitz is best suited at S, which we're already set. Nelson is the higher graded prospect, and can hugely impact Indy's OL. I would argue a dominant OG would impact this team more than a great safety. 

I admit I haven't done a lot of film study on Fitzpatrick, mostly because I thought there was little to no chance of getting him til now. Can he play SS at all? Or he is mainly just a FS?

[krunk]

3 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I admit I haven't done a lot of film study on Fitzpatrick, mostly because I thought there was little to no chance of getting him til now. Can he play SS at all? Or he is mainly just a FS?

FS, CB

[CR91]

looks like barkley 1 chubb 2 is all but done

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, krunk said:

FS, CB

Ok, how about this. If we draft Fitzpatrick at FS, could Hooker play SS?

[TheMarine]

god id LOVE to know if Ballard had an idea that this was going to happen, thus the certainty of trading back 3 positions to get the guy they wanted. Ive been pretty certain that the Giants would take BPA, regardless of position. If the Browns take Barkely, the Giants will take Chubb. If the Browns take QB, Giants take Barkley

[Yoshinator]

Just now, CR91 said:

looks like barkley 1 chubb 2 is all but done

I think the Browns will grab a QB at 1 and then Barkley at 4, but it's basically the same thing.

[Cynjin]

1 minute ago, CR91 said:

looks like barkley 1 chubb 2 is all but done

 

IMO, the Browns will go with a QB #1.

[krunk]

12 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Ok, how about this. If we draft Fitzpatrick at FS, could Hooker play SS?

Hooker ain't physical like that.   If we draft Fitz it's for corner and just overall position versatility if we needed him to play FS.  I think they are good with Geathers at SS.

[Defjamz26]

23 minutes ago, krunk said:

I'd be really good with Edmunds, although Roquan Smith might be the better fit for a zone scheme.

Edmunds fits in any scheme though. And we need a true MLB more than we need a WILL. We can get a coverage WILL later.

[dgambill]

29 minutes ago, Cynjin said:

 

I don't see the Giants trading out of #2.  I saw reports that the Jets tried to trade with the Browns and Giants before they traded with the Colts and that makes sense.  If they wanted to trade out of #2 they could have already.

Yep...that's likely. Or the Jets weren't willing to pay what they were asking. The Jets moved up without having to give up any future first rd picks....so that would definitely had been a pre-requisite I'm sure for the Giants. I hope its because they have a qb identified....guess we just have to wait and see. Nothing may have changed or everything may have changed. It could just be that Paul's play has fallen off (and it has) and he was too expensive to keep. The Giants were very cap strapped and this might have been their best option to free some up. They changed staff and maybe they just decided to go a different direction. It does put Chubb right in their wheel house though. If Chubb, Barkley, and Nelson are all gone at 6 I hope a trade back to Buffalo is available. I've had my heart set on Chubb for awhile...I'm not going to lie it hurts right now.

[krunk]

7 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Edmunds fits in any scheme though. And we need a true MLB more than we need a WILL. We can get a coverage WILL later.

I think he could play in our scheme no doubt, but my feel on him is more 3-4 ILB man to man coverage type of thing.

[krunk]

17 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Edmunds fits in any scheme though. And we need a true MLB more than we need a WILL. We can get a coverage WILL later.

I don't have any doubts Roquan could play very well at Mike.   Don't care which one of them we get to be honest.  It's not a which one I think we should get versus the other thing.

[Fisticuffs111]

38 minutes ago, Cynjin said:

 

I don't see the Giants trading out of #2.  I saw reports that the Jets tried to trade with the Browns and Giants before they traded with the Colts and that makes sense.  If they wanted to trade out of #2 they could have already.

Yeah, I don't see the Giants being so adamant not to trade back (or also likely, asking for an insane return) unless they were pretty much set on drafting a QB.

[Cynjin]

3 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Yep...that's likely. Or the Jets weren't willing to pay what they were asking. The Jets moved up without having to give up any future first rd picks....so that would definitely had been a pre-requisite I'm sure for the Giants. I hope its because they have a qb identified....guess we just have to wait and see. Nothing may have changed or everything may have changed. It could just be that Paul's play has fallen off (and it has) and he was too expensive to keep. The Giants were very cap strapped and this might have been their best option to free some up. They changed staff and maybe they just decided to go a different direction. It does put Chubb right in their wheel house though. If Chubb, Barkley, and Nelson are all gone at 6 I hope a trade back to Buffalo is available. I've had my heart set on Chubb for awhile...I'm not going to lie it hurts right now.

 

From what I have read, their D is going to be more of a 3-4 than 4-3.  So maybe JPP didn't fit with their new scheme.  I agree that Chubb may be who they are targeting, my only hesitation is that it seems to me that Chubb is more of a fit for a 4-3 defense.

[SP_21]

39 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The "term" wildcard pretty much meant Fitz, Roquan, Edmunds, and Ward could all be in play for us at 6 potentially if Barkley, Chubb, and Nelson go. Pretty much Ballard's highest ranked of those 4 guys if we stay put.

I'm really starting to like Ward. He's way more physical than I thought. Almost Davis like when he gets a clean shot. 

[SP_21]

3 minutes ago, krunk said:

I don't have any doubts Roquan could play very well at Mike.   Don't care which one of them we get to be honest.

I give the edge to Roquan because he has superior instincts IMO. Edmunds is a freak athlete though

[COLTS449]

1 hour ago, Jared Cisneros said:

We can either be the big losers, or the big winners to come out of this, depending on what happens with the Broncos before us. I believe Ballard will take Nelson or trade down if he's gone now. The chances of Chubb being there if the Giants pick are almost 0 now IMO. Someone could trade up for a QB, but the options are trade down or take Nelson IMO now.

 

Yes. You're exactly right Jared. It could go either way. What will determine the "Winner" of our trade back with the Jets depends on the talent we come out with. If we land 2 big time players in RD2 and still get a blue chip beast at 6 we win that trade even if the Jets get their man at QB.

[TdungyW/12]

1 hour ago, buccolts said:

Later, or next year?

Chubb SEEMS fairly obvious right now.

They told everyone they were comfy with Eli, and we're famous for ignoring what we're told, and acting shocked when they do what they told us........ Just ask Mr. Ballard.

They need one NOW! But could afford to let one sit behind manning for a year. Eli is not their answer .... he’s not getting better or even maintaining he’s getting worse. His numbers/velocity/accuracy are all getting worse every year. But whatever not my franchise or $ .... of Nelson is available or Barkley im good just had my heart set on chubb

[Archer]

If Chubb is gone, I’d be torn between Nelson and Roquon.  Might prefer Roquon (but what was he red-flagged for?)

[Hoose]

I honestly do NOT see Chubb being taken when the Giants have a chance to get the QB of the future right now. They likely won't be in this position again. And I'm sorry, but Eli has most definitely slipped. I know his team crumbled around him last year, but he's making mistakes he never made in the past. His window is slamming quickly. The Giants would be nuts to lose this chance. THE most important player, bar none. is the QB. It impacts the entire future of the franchise. Chubb is not that kind of game changer.

 

I fully expect the first three picks to be QBs, with Barkley going to the Browns at 4, and then Denver as the wild card. At worst, the Colts will have a shot at either Nelson or Chubb. I'd take either of them and be delighted. 

[COLTS449]

1 hour ago, Jared Cisneros said:

At this point:

1.) Darnold

2.) Chubb

3.) Rosen

4.) Barkley

5.) Nelson/QB

6.) Nelson/wildcard/trade down

 

this is pretty accurate IMO as of now.

 

I could see Allen going before Rosen personally. He's a true boom or bust, but he has a much higher ceiling than Rosen. It all depends on what the team thinks about he and Rosen. If they feel they can correct Allen's weaknesses, etc then I think he goes before JR. And also, the Jets have Teddy for a year, so they may feel they could roll with him as the starter and let Allen sit and develop for a year and take over in his second season. I'm interested to see how that plays out.

[Reboot]

3 minutes ago, Archer said:

If Chubb is gone, I’d be torn between Nelson and Roquon.  Might prefer Roquon (but what was he red-flagged for?)

Size is it I think.  I don't see any history of injury or off field issues.  He flipped from UCLA to Georgia in commitments, but most kids do these days - change their minds, I mean.  The "knock" on him is he is undersized, and the quote is, "...you'd love to play him on the inside but he may have to slide to WILL."