Will Giants pass on a QB at 6 and take one at 17?

Getty Images

As the draft approaches, there’s been quite a bit of chatter that the Giants will take their quarterback of the future in the first round — but not with their own pick, No. 6 overall. Instead, the idea is that the Giants think one of the quarterbacks they like — Dwayne Haskins, Drew Lock or Daniel Jones — will drop to the 17th overall pick that they received in the Odell Beckham trade.

So will the Giants pass on a quarterback at 6 and take one at 17?

That would be an odd approach: If the Giants like one of those quarterbacks well enough that they think he’s the successor to Eli Manning, they should take him with the sixth overall pick, so as not to risk some other team taking him with Picks 7-16. And if the Giants don’t like a quarterback enough to take him sixth overall, then he’s not good enough to justify going 17th, either.

The latter point has been demonstrated by the Browns three times in recent years: In 2007, 2012 and 2014, the Browns had two first-round draft picks and took a quarterback all three times. Those quarterbacks — Brady Quinn, Brandon Weeden and Johnny Manziel — did not pan out. The lesson from the Browns is that if you’re not confident enough in a quarterback to take him high in the first round, there’s probably a reason for that.

Quarterback is, by far, the most important position in the NFL. If the Giants’ future franchise quarterback is available at Pick No. 6, they shouldn’t risk losing him by waiting for Pick No. 17.

49 responses to “Will Giants pass on a QB at 6 and take one at 17?

  1. If your guy is there at 6 you better take him. Qb’s normally dont “drop” that far. Without a Franchise under center you will never go far. Risk vs Reward, take the risk for a qb, the Browns may have ruined most their top qb’s with Poor Coaching.
    Either that or resign Eli for another 15 years and hope that he hold up!

  2. IMO Drew Lock is the best QB in this draft and the Giants should take him at 6.

    I compare Lock to Josh Allen. Very strong arm and with both some clueless people talk about low completion %. Both Allen and Lock’s completion % in college was affected by a lot of drops and poor WR corps.

    Allen showed in his rookie season that he is going to be a star and that the Bills found their franchise QB. Lock is Allen only smarter and a better locker room guy.

    Don’t think too much Giants. Take Lock at 6 and be happy you did.

  3. Wow if the Giants draft any of these QB’s in the first round it would be a huge mistake and reek of desperation, Josh Rosen will be available and he’s a much better QB, Trade your second and one of your fifth rounders for Rosen yesterday.

  4. If you don’t like one at 6 (or even move up) then you probably shouldn’t even take one at 17. Run with Kyle Lauletta as the backup/developmental QB. You can always find middle of the road backup/developmental QB’s in free agency and lower draft rounds. Waiting until 17 to see who no one really wants seems like a bad idea.

  5. Except the Browns could have had Carr or Garropolo instead of Johnny Rotten or Wilson or Foles instead of Weeden. And guys like Rodgers, Big Ben, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and the aforementioned Carr, Jimmy G, Wilson and Foles were all available later than six. Some of them were available after the first round.

    It’s who you pick, not when you pick them that really matters.

    Chasing middling talent, with a top end pick, is what kills teams.

  6. Same argument pundits made last year for the Browns. Take Barkley at #1 and then spend the 4th pick on whichever QB is left on the board. That’s not how it works, you take the QB first because chances are, the best ones won’t be there if you wait. Giants made a colossal mistake last year passing up on Darnold. Anyway you try to spin it, the Barkley selection was a bad one from a value perspective. The Giants are also a team with a ton of holes, thanks in part to poor drafting over the last 7 years and Gettleman adding fuel to the fire with his poor roster construction and bloated outlook of his team. They need an impact prospect at QB, a Dak Prescott midround pick won’t cut it for them, they do not have the infrastructure that Dallas had in place.

  7. Wouldn’t be surprised to see them trade up from 17 into the top 10 to get their guy. Good relationship with Buffalo’s GM and at 9 they would leapfrog Denver, Cincinnati, Miami and Washington, who all could be looking to take their preferred QB.

  8. In 2007 there wasnt a good QB in the entire draft and the Browns drafted Joe Thomas at #3. In 2012 all of the good future good Qb’s (wilson, foles, and cousins) were drafted in rounds 3 and 4 (Luck and RG3 were picked before the Browns made their first pick). In 2014 Bridgewater and Carr were still available when the picked Manziel.

    Basically, Not making a QB their top pick in those drafts didnt effect the Browns at all. 2007 was a HORRIBLE QB draft, in 2012 nobody had 1st round grades on Wilson, Foles or Cousins, and in 2014 the Browns just picked the wrong QB with their 2nd 1st rounder.

  9. Just because the Browns drafted poorly doesn’t necessarily mean their theory was wrong. You would be bashing them even more if they drafted them with the 1st of their 2 picks.

    I also think coaching makes a difference, especially early in the career. Take Jeff Fischer, one of the worst coaches in modern times, only challenged by Hue Jackson in terms of not being held accountable.

    Jeff Fischer consistently was a coaching trainwreck (but the media loved him unconditionally). I can’t think of a young QB that could’ve overcome his coaching to succeed.

  10. A desperate team, over-drafting a QB at 17, does not mean they should have taken the player at 6.

  11. This is an obvious smoke screen. The giants are leaking this information with hopes that other team doesnt feel the need to trade ahead of 6.

  12. The Giants obviously believe Manning has many good years left and have made it pretty clear that they intend to continue to build around him. So I expect them to go defense and o-line in round 1.

  13. I’m not sure any of the QB’s in this draft are truly franchise QB’s. I would load up this year on O-Line and Defense and sell the farm in next years draft for Jake Fromm or Tua or Justin Herbert. But that’s just me.

  14. None of the QB’s my Browns drafted had a chance. The team was so dysfunctional that none of them really stood a chance of being successful. Look at the QB’s before Baker Mayfield. I don’t see a lot of success there.

  15. Unless they dont have a top 10 grade on any QB. Gettleman is very loyal to his draft board and likely won’t deviate from it. He wants a blue chip player at 6 and if he doesn’t think any of the QBs are great, or only Murry is, then he’ll pass for the best player.

    Gettleman has a mixed bag drafting, but there have been several QBs taken near the middle of the 1st who have been great and plenty taken in the top 10 who are horrible. The inverse is also true.

    NFL transition from college is too hard to project to lose sleep over.

  16. Nah just draft QB next year. I don’t think they’re going to draft a QB this year, particularly in the 1st. No reason to force a pick on a QB if you can wait one more year.

  17. It feels like the Giants don’t really have a plan per se… I suppose they’ll just a MMQB articles on the way to the draft and decide when they’re on the clock

  18. Not necessarily true. This year’s list of draft hopefuls is loaded at the top with defensive stars. When you look at the needs of the teams who draft 1 – 16 and the players available with those high picks, one or more of the “hot” QB’s could easily be available later. In fact, I think that the Giants will have their man at #17, Daniel Jones.

  19. The lesson from the Browns is that if you’re not confident enough in a quarterback to take him high in the first round, there’s probably a reason for that.
    ————————
    Don’t take lessons from the Browns, they’d struggle to pick their own nose. There are many great SB winning QBs who weren’t first round at all, let alone high firsts.

  20. If they don’t like him enough to take him at 6 they shouldn’t like him enough to take him at 17? That’s odd reasoning. Presumably the guy who goes 17 was valued less by most teams than the guy who’s goes 6…. but what do I know? I’m just a casual fan.

  21. Brady, Wilson, Montana, Favre, Brees, Warner, Moon, Tarkenton, Theismann, Staubach, Stabler, Unitas, Starr… So these guys that did not even get picked in the first round probably would not have been worth a teams initial first round pick since the teams did not have enough confidence in them.

    However JaMarcus Russel, who had a team willing to take him 1st overall…Ponder to the Vikings, Harrington to the Lions…all of these guys were smart picks because the team drafting them had confidence in them enough to take them right away.

    Its never a sure thing for a quarterback. If you feel more confident in a defensive line player being great, but realize an upside gamble on a QB it could still make sense to take that player at 6 consider the QB at 17.

  22. Quarterbacks are probably the hardest position in football to coach up. If your guy isn’t an NFL-ready pro-style quarterback in college, there is no point drafting him as anything other than a late-round flyer. The sport and its rules are designed for tall, strong, accurate passers. Occasionally you get a somewhat shorter guy who succeeds like Wilson or Brees, but they’re the exception, not the rule, and they’re both very good passers. Being exciting doesn’t win championships. Being multi-dimensional rarely wins championships. Being an accurate passer wins championships, and if you’re not accurate at 21, after throwing a football for the last 10 years through your youth, you’re not going to suddenly become so just because now you’re rich. It doesn’t happen.

  23. If you like all three similarly it would be absurd to use the number 6 pick on the qb position. should there be a run on qbs and the board dries up there will be plenty of opportunity to trade up from 17.

  24. If the Giants decide they want to go with Will Grier should they pick him at 6? I don’t think so. They could get Grier later and pick a blue-chipper at 6. The only lesson learned from the Browns is they weren’t good at evaluating talent/QBs.

  25. The biggest problem with choosing your QB at 17 instead of 6 is the bruised ego that results. It’s all about “respect” with these guys.

  26. I agree with sentiment that if you want a certain player as a potential QB you better be taking him as soon as possible! If Gettlemen does this he is doing the Giants an injustice! He is self promoting himself as being satisfied with his resume , so if serious about a QB , the move is obvious, or should be!

  27. thetooloftools says:
    April 21, 2019 at 8:27 am
    None of the QB’s my Browns drafted had a chance. The team was so dysfunctional that none of them really stood a chance of being successful. Look at the QB’s before Baker Mayfield. I don’t see a lot of success there.

    —————
    A viable QB would have helped the end prior dysfunction. Those QBs didn’t fail because the team. They failed because they weren’t very good QBs

  28. I think what you are seeing with the Giants is a form of tanking. The QBs coming out this year are very meh and they know it. Maybe there is someone next year they really like. They know they’re going to be a horrible team with no O-line, QB, WR, or D so why not pick some other players this year,

  29. Quarterback is the most important position, no argument, but if a team already has a franchise quarterback making 20 million or more for several years, then can they justify picking a quarterback early in the first round if they need help elsewhere? For this reason, many teams will simply not pick a quarterback at all, let alone on the first round and early in the first round. Therefore chances are that, at least for this draft, a good quarterback will still be available in the middle of the first round. The Giants and other teams will need to decide whether the teams drafting ahead of them will likely pick a quarterback in the first round. Arizona, Oakland, and Buffalo are more likely to pick a quarterback than, say, the Jets, Jaguars and Lions.

  30. Ron Geremy says:

    April 21, 2019 at 7:37 am

    Same argument pundits made last year for the Browns. Take Barkley at #1 and then spend the 4th pick on whichever QB is left on the board. That’s not how it works, you take the QB first because chances are, the best ones won’t be there if you wait. Giants made a colossal mistake last year passing up on Darnold. Anyway you try to spin it, the Barkley selection was a bad one from a value perspective. The Giants are also a team with a ton of holes, thanks in part to poor drafting over the last 7 years and Gettleman adding fuel to the fire with his poor roster construction and bloated outlook of his team. They need an impact prospect at QB, a Dak Prescott midround pick won’t cut it for them, they do not have the infrastructure that Dallas had in place.
    ———–
    You make the perfect point for why what the giants did was right. Let’s just say they draft a qb last year they likely would have been just as bad or worse. Now your qb is 1 year into his rookie deal and your trying to build the team around him before he gets too expensive. Or worse the qb end up making you a little better then your stuck with midround picks to surround your qb and you end up with good not great talent. Build the team then get your qb on a rookie deal unless there’s a generational qb talent like Peyton was.

  31. So, you mean to tell me Manziel, Weeden and Brady Quinn would have magically played better had they been drafted higher than the middle/end of round 1?

    I get that QB is the most important position, but unless you REALLY need a certain guy, no need to trade up or force a bad pick.

  32. If the Giants don’t take a QB at 6 ,… Lock won’t be there at 17. Maybe Haskins will be gone too.
    There are 4 teams in between that are in the market for a future franchise QB. I’m pretty sure GB is listening to trade offers. You can have 12 for 17, 95, 108. You move up ahead of Miami and Washington who we know for sure need a QB for the near future.

  33. Really i dont think they should tale a qb with either pick. They have so many needs to fill. Furthermore I really dont think any Qb in this draft is a franchise type player. Take grier later rounds. Theyre are better prospects entering next yrs draft

  34. In my opinion the G-Men should address non-QB needs throughout, and trade down.
    Emulate the Patriots and stack late 1st round and 2nd/3rd round future picks.
    As Eli breaks down, an eventual 3-13 season will open the door to a top-3 pick and THAT is when you grab your franchise QB. THEN, you’ll have a couple seasons of loading up on early round talent for less $$$…and a dynasty can begin.

  35. Giants 17 + 37 (1480) = Lions 8 + 111 (1472)

    At Nos. 6 & 8, NYG get the best of both worlds–edge defender & QB.

    Thereafter, Giants still have 95, 108, 111, and 132.

  36. The Giants want to trade the pick for more picks. They just want a team who is QB hungry right now to trade for it. I think they are hoping Arizona won’t take Kyler Murry to make their spot more sweet if someone wants a QB.

  37. Give the Cardinals #17 for Rosen and cardinals 5th rounder. He makes peanuts for a Qb and hes exactly what the giants need in a qb and he’s better than all the QBs in this draft short of Murray and that’s closer than people think. Rosen is tough as nails and proved durable after the colossal beating he took last season

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!