New York Giants Mailbag: Contemplations Edition

If you'd like to submit a question for the mailbag, please send it to nygiantsmaven@gmail.com. Note: We reserve the right to edit letters for clarity and conciseness.

From Scout: The worst scenario for the Giants is that this current O-line is no better than the previous few years. As a result, a year from now, the jury is still out on if Daniel Jones is our franchise quarterback. How will the Giants react?

How's it going, Scout? This is an easy one. The Giants will look at Jones's collective body of work. Did he grasp the playbook and make the right decisions? How quickly did he make his reads? Was he clean with his ball security?

There are plenty of other criteria the coaches can use in their assessment of Jones, I think. And I know one of the major sticking points with him has been one that we've written about here: he needs to sharpen up his mental processing and speed things up as he can't sit back there with the ball all day waiting for something to happen.

From Mark M.: Can you provide any insight into the off-season activity of Kyle Murphy? I have not heard any reports coming out of OTAs of what he did in the off-season or his progress. Would you know if he trained with the coaches in the off-season, or was he on his own? I am confused whether training at the Giants Facility is allowed or not, based on the Players Union agreement/contracts.

Hello Mark, and thank you for the kind words regarding the LockedOn Giants podcast. As I'm on a three-a-week show schedule and I'm not sure when the next mailbag will be (probably as we get closer to training camp), I've put your question here.

Regretfully, I don't have any new information for you regarding Kyle Murphy (and you're not the only one who has asked about him). I do know he was third-string offensive line which, as of right now, would suggest practice squad. Still, it's way too soon to make that call until the pads go on, as you can't tell with offensive linemen where they are in their development unless you see them every day and you see them in pads hitting.

(For what it's worth, Murphy is next up on our player profile series, and I did manage to find some info on him which aligns with the notes I had from last summer. That profile will be out today.)

As I don't know what Rob Sale has been teaching the offensive linemen, I can't say who's progressing and who isn't, and I won't e able to offer any kind of informed opinion until the pads go on in training camp.

Regarding training, players right now are allowed to work with coaches if they wish, but I believe there is a limitation as to how much can be done, which is why many guys go off and do their own thing. If they're smart, they have their personal trainers work in conjunction with the team's position coach to address the proper areas.

I'll do my best to get some updated information on Murphy this summer to include in my camp reports.

And regarding the point about the Giants not adding veterans because in part due to Murphy, I don't believe that's why they didn't add to the offensive line. They probably felt that what they had at every spot was sufficient both in starter and backup.

From Henry J. - I just read an article on potential nominees for the Giants' "Ring of Honor" & saw Jerry Reese suggested and nearly gagged on my morning coffee! Reese's ineptitude is the cause of the team's decline. Any success the team achieved while he slept in the G.M. chair was a carry-over from previous management.

What's up, Henry? I don't know what article you're referencing, and my opinion is probably going to surprise you, but I can see a case for Jerry to make the Ring of Honor.

You correctly note that any success the team achieved came under Ernie Accorsi. While Accorsi did have the final say, Reese ran the Giants drafts for a good portion of those years and deserved a great deal more credit than people give him.

With that said, Reese let this organization down in his decision to hire and retain Marc Ross after the drafts he ran turned out to produce very little fruit.

I remember not liking that hire at the time because every organization Ross had worked for before coming to the Giants (Eagles, 1996-2000 and Bills, 2004) hadn't been playoff teams.

I felt that the Giants held onto Ross, who began running the Giants' drafts in 2008, much longer than they should have, and that's on Reese as the team's general manager.

Now while I agree Reese is a slam dunk for the Ring of Honor--I'd like to see Leonard Marshall finally get in--I do believe he has a chance given his contributions as a scout (he scouted and ran that 2007 draft class which helped the team win its first Super Bowl of the Coughlin-Manning era).

From "Duke of Earl" (via E-mail), I would like clarification on how Coach Kitchens and Coach Garrett will have the final say on the offense. Who is in charge?

Thanks for the question. Garrett theoretically has the final say as the offensive coordinator, but as I understand things, the offense, like the defense, is developed as a collaborative effort. This isn't necessarily Garrett's offense or Kitchens' offense. The two are supposed to be collaborating with the rest of the assistant coaches to design an offense that fits the talent's strengths.

From Joe M. - In your opinion, who is/was more valuable to the Giants, Evan Engram or Dalvin Tomlinson? I lean towards Tomlinson because of his stellar play compared to Engram's inconsistency. Would a trade of Engram have provided the cap space to sign Tomlinson? If a team drafts a player in the top three as Tomlinson, every effort should be made to re-sign the player--known as player development.

What's up, Joe? I don't think you can compare Engram and Tomlinson--two different positions, so it's not an apples-to-apples comparison.

You could make the argument that trading Engram would have created cap space to re-sign Tomlinson, but then again, if the Giants re-sign Tomlinson, would they have been able to afford Leonard Williams Adoree' Jackson and Kenny Golladay? Probably not.

Look, I wasn't happy that they let Tomlinson walk, but that said, I think they feel they can get compatible production out of Danny Shelton if he is deployed as he was in New England. So I'm willing to give the decision the benefit of the doubt.

As for your statement, "If a team drafts a player in the top three (rounds), every effort should be made to re-sign the player," I don't think I need to tell you that in prior years the Giants have had some clunkers they drafted in the first three rounds. The reason for that wasn't necessarily that the coaches couldn't develop those guys but rather because some of the players didn't want to put the time in to hone their craft.

But when you get a gem like Tomlinson, while you'd like to see him re-signed, if you have a replacement lined up that can be just as productive, wouldn't it make more sense to use the money to sign a player at another area of need?

From Andrew G. - Which linebackers do see not making the roster, I could see Ximines as the odd man out? Also, if Daniel Jones isn't the answer this year, when will the team target another QB in the draft?

What's up, Andrew? Happy Independence Day to you and yours. I think Ryan Anderson has a better chance of being the odd man out at outside linebacker than Oshane Ximines. I can't see the Giants giving up on Ximines, though I could see his snaps potentially being affected.

Lorenzo Carter is in a contract year, and while I suspect they'd like to re-sign him, they're going to be squeezed good under the cap next year, so I wouldn't go tossing away homegrown talent like Ximines just because he hasn't flourished yet.

As for the quarterback situation, if Jones struggles this year and shows he's not the answer, I would think it makes the most sense to take advantage of all those draft assets the team accumulated this year to use on a new quarterback.

From Pat R. - One of my major concerns is the defensive line. I am no expert by any means, but it seems like they haven't replaced Tomlinson. He freed up Williams, Martinez, and Lawrence. I don't think they have replaced his production, and it will hurt Williams and the rest of the defense. And why haven't the Giants tried Engram at X-receiver? He has the size speed and runs really good vertical routes. I would think he would be a nightmare match-up for DBs.

What's up, Pat? Look, I didn't like losing Tomlinson either, but the more I study this, the more I think they can survive. I think they can get compatible production from Danny Shelton (who remember was productive for the Patriots). I also believe with the upgrade on the edges, Leonard Williams might not see as many double teams as you seem to think he'll face.

As for Evan Engram, he's not a fit for the X-receiver. For one, I don't believe he's ever run the entire route tree either in college or in the pros. He also isn't as precise as you'd need a receiver to be when it comes to running routes, and he doesn't get in and out of his breaks fast enough

The X needs should be able to fight off a jam, and Engram seems to have enough trouble fighting off jams. The X-receiver also needs to have enough quickness to get away from the corner, and he better be good coming off a press and the X is usually going to face man-to-man coverage unless he's running a shallow crossing route. Overall, I don't see Engram as a fit for the X.

Engram is at his best when he is sent up the seam--he is more of a match-up nightmare for linebackers and safeties in the middle of the field rather than technical cornerbacks whose footwork and arsenal of tricks give them the advantage.

Be sure to keep it locked on Giants Country all the time!

Sign up for our FREE digest newsletter
Follow and like us on Facebook
Submit your questions for our mailbag
Listen and subscribe to the daily LockedOn Giants podcast.

Add us as a preferred source on Google