Take a look at the difference in the number of receptions/drop vs. the wide receivers though. A top WR shouldn't be compared to a RB or TE in terms of hands ... The better receivers are generally over 8 receptions per drop. Edwards was at 3.44 and 6.67. Terrible. edit: corrected number edit2: Remember how much bitching we heard about Coles' drops this season? He had a drop per 8.75 receptions. Edwards was far, far worse than that. He dropped more than twice as many balls per reception. The masses would be killing Edwards. Even in '07 when Edwards went to the probowl he had a 6.67 drop/reception rate.
Putting a safety over the top means that safety is going to be late coming up in run support. Look what happened to the Giants running game when Burress went out and opposing defenses started committing that 8th man to the box. Edwards can have the same impact (which is why I would like him on the Giants).
Before you call someone an idiot, you may want to read your own posts, or make an attempt at editing. When did the draft go to 17 rounds, exactly? I'd sure as hell give a 17th round pick for Edwards...if such a thing existed. You wouldn't? He drops a ball for every 2.5 receptions? Why bother using such a precise number if you're simply going to engage in hyperbole? It was every 3.5 receptions, by far his worst season. It's not a matter of skill, or lack thereof; it's a matter of concentration. That's fixable. His athleticism is not. True, there's a chance that he doesn't fix the concentration issue. Who would you say is a more surefire prospect available at 17 or below? You suggest trading down. I believe the phrase was "we should just trade down", implying that it's the easiest thing in the world. Perhaps you could tell me who would be interested in trading up? Philly perhaps comes to mind, but that's about it. I can't see anyone else desperately trying to get ahead of Denver and Tampa, etc. I'd love to trade back, but I haven't been able to come up with a likely partner that would still put us in position for someone like Kenny Britt. So, we may end up reaching at 17 or delaying our WR pick until later (which I have no problem with. I've been very vocal about being happy with the idea of Louis Murphy in that round). However, it's rather silly to suggest that we simply have to raise our hand and teams will jump at the chance to snag the 17th pick.
Again, there's no question that it's a risk. However, I don't see what receiver option isn't a risk at that spot. We know that Edwards can succeed in the NFL if he corrects the concentration issue. I don't see how that issue outweighs the uncertainty of some of these other prospects. I'd be quite happy with our first rounder going to Moreno, and a later pick being used on a receiver. I'd be happy with seeing Clowney get a chance in TC as a result. However, I do think Edwards is also a viable option for the spot and that his value outweighs the risk involved. He's not currently a top 10 receiver. We also wouldn't be able to grab a 26 year old top 10 receiver for the #17 overall pick.
If the plan is to draft a receiver at #17 then it makes more sense. If the concentration issue isn't fixed it would amount to a horrible trade though. For years we'd be hearing about all the stars we could have drafted at #17 instead of trading for a receiver that cannot catch. The upside does have a lot of value, I'll give you that.
Agreed. Personally, I'm more in favor of drafting a different position at 17. I do love the idea of trading down, but I just don't see who wants our spot. Hopefully, someone can prove me wrong on draft day. Trading down for Nicks and taking Shonn Greene in the 2nd with another pick to use on defense really is our best option right now, but it requires the participation of another team. I just don't understand the complete negativity towards the idea of a BE trade. Your particular position, on the other hand, is a sound one.
Jason Cole says the Giants are probably getting Braylon. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_y...giantspursueedwards041409&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
It has been 2 years, 2 months, and 8 days or to put it another way 798 days since Bob Sanders has brought a championship to Indianapolis.
Ignatius, i completely agree with you. The giants might want to trade up if a guy like Cushing or Clay are available. I agree with the first for Moreno, however, he might not be available when we pick and the problem is, if the Browns are saying another team has a first rounder already on the table, that means we would have to make an offer before the draft most likely. But good points, and i think his value definitely outweighs the risk, when we have a solid WR coach that will obviously work with him on the concentration part of it.
No, it means that you cannot conceive of sarcasm and you just stumble into threads like a drunk man wandering into a movie theatre asking what the movie is about 20 minutes before the credits are going to roll.
Edwards is a steal if we trade #17 pick and Brad Smith or a 5th do you remember him in college and seen some of his pro catches the guy's physical attributes are amazing and he is the exact type of reciever we are looking for. He can stretch the field make the difficult catch and demands both corner and saftey respect every play. taking the 8th man out of the box. He is exactly what this team needs and we will not find any better reciever in the draft unless DHB some how turns out to be amazing which most of us agree he wont. i love edwards and he would be a young quarterbacks best friend. Tanny get it done!!!
Well, that would take the Giants out of the "please trade up for our spot" sweepstakes. It would give Cleveland those 2 low round picks. Anyone think they become willing to package the Giants' pick with their 2nd and move up to 17? If there are two players they want in that range, it's at least a possibility. I'm not sure who they're targeting, though, aside from some new players for the 3-4. I'd think they hang back with that second one and look to grab Nicks or Britt.
