Big Blue View mailbag: Deonte Banks, kickoff rule, Andrew Thomas, much more

Seth Weissman asks: Do you have any additional insight into what’s happening with Tae Banks? Is he a head case? Another Eli Apple? What do you make of his situation?

Ed says: Seth, I think it is natural for Giants fans to think about Eli Apple when they see things like what Deonte Banks did Sunday against the Philadelphia Eagles. The two players, though, are nothing alike.

Apple was an immature, coddled, self-absorbed player. He was disliked by his teammates — remember that Landon Collins called him a “cancer” in the locker room. He was disrespectful to, and disliked by, the media. He was disrespectful to his coaching staff, taking his complaints to the media rather than to them.

There is no excusing the “give up” Banks displayed on plays against the Dallas Cowboys and the Eagles. There is nothing to like about it, and no way to defend it. I think, though, that he is just a 23-year-old kid who let his frustrations get the best of him — especially Sunday against the Eagles.

Banks seems to be well-liked by his teammates. He seems to want to be a good player. He doesn’t like answering questions during media scrums. He is almost always in front of his locker during media availability, though, and he seems willing to chat.

He’s not a bad kid.

---

Rory Costello asks: From what I’ve seen this year, the so-called dynamic kickoff rule is not dynamic at all. It’s just touchback after touchback as usual. What are the stats league-wide showing?

—

Greg Hart asks: This question is about the new “dynamic” kick off rules. I recall the League initiated the change to reduce injuries and to promote more kickoff offense. I imagine the injuries attributed to kickoffs have declined since most teams take the touchback. The on-side kick has also disappeared. Have you heard anything about doing away with the new rules and going back to previous rules?

Ed says: Rory, I understand your frustration. There are far more touchbacks than the league had hoped for. The league, though, will point to the fact that there are more kickoffs being returned:

Looking specifically at the Giants, they returned only 13 kickoffs in all of the 2023 season. Thus far in 2024, the Giants have returned 16 kickoffs in seven games.

The bigger issue is that the play doesn’t seem to be “dynamic” at all. It generally seems to be boring. The kickoff returner brings the ball out, runs into the wave of defenders somewhere between the 25- and 30-yard line and gets tackled.

The creative blocking schemes and unique returns we were promised don’t seem to be happening.

Greg, the rule was approved for the 2024 season. The league will revisit it at year’s end. Whether they scrap it or modify it remains to be seen.

---

David Brenner asks: Probably a dumb question, but am wondering why Joe Schoen would bother to attend a college game in person when scouting players rather than just watch it on TV?

Ed says: David, why does any scout or GM attend games in person? There are a lot of reasons. One of that they get to be on the sideline before games, so they get to see players up close, how they look, how they move. Moving up to get him in the draft hasn’t worked, but Schoen said he could “feel” Jalin Hyatt’s speed when he watched him from field level before the Alabama game.

There is soooo much more to scouting than watching players on TV, or even watching their film. There is all of the information-gathering that can be done from being at a game or even at a practice. GMs and scouts get to talk to coaches and others in a program about players to learn how players work, how they conduct themselves, etc.

There is also the vantage point from the press box, where you can see every play unfold from above. When you know what you’re looking for you can see if players reacted correctly. That’s not always something you can see on TV.

In short, you’re not scouting if you are sitting in your office or your living room watching TV. The real work of scouting is getting around players, seeing them in person, talking to the players who know them best, digging into their backgrounds to find out what they are about. It’s not watching a guy make a good play on TV and thinking “that guy’s good. I want him.”

Most people who have worked in personnel tell you that most of the time when they miss on a player — and all personnel people do — they will tell you it’s not about the player’s talent. Rather, it is about because they didn’t get the person right.

---

Luke Midwinter asks: Considering the poor performances of multiple DTs vs Philadelphia is there a future starting role for Elijah Chatman? It is clear that the likes of Rakeem Nunez-Roches and DJ Davidson are not the answer next to Dex so why not use a younger and more promising player?

Ed says: Luke, you are right that the Giants need better defensive line talent to supplement Dexter Lawrence.

Rakeem Nunez-Roches is a good rotational defensive tackle. He is in his 10th year, and has always been a guy who play 35-45% of his team’s snaps. He has never played more than 49% of his team’s defensive snaps. This year, because the Giants don’t have enough depth, he has played 67%. That is asking far too much.

D.J. Davidson and Jordon Riley, fifth- and seventh-round picks, respectively, are not giving the Giants enough. Considering how low they were drafted, should they really be expected to?

That lack of depth/production is why veteran defensive tackle Armon Watts was added to the roster this week.

As for Chatman, I think the world of the kid. He has a great preseason and he deserves to be on the roster. He is a quality pass rusher for a defensive tackle, but even though he is strong enough to be nicknamed ‘Baby Bison’, he has not been consistent against the run to this point.

Thus, the Giants are using him primarily on passing downs. He’s rushed the passer 95 times and played only 40 snaps in run defense. Might that change? Maybe. But it is also possible that Chatman’s lack of size makes him a sub-package player rather than a full-time one.

---

Arun Avva asks: At least two of the Giants losses this season come down to really questionable game day personnel decisions. While team building is ideally a collaborative effort between a GM and head coach, the GM usually has final say over signing players to the team overall. Who has final say over who is in the game day roster? For example who does the buck stop with for the decision not to have a backup kicker on the game day roster after Gano had a hamstring issue? Or for relying on Ezeudu as the backup tackle when Thomas went down? I’m trying to divide responsibility for the disappointing season (thus far) between Schoen and Daboll.

Ed says: Arun, I would argue that in terms of game day personnel decisions, the Washington game is the one you can point to. Although the Giants probably win if Malik Nabers make a routine catch on fourth down in the final two minutes.

The Josh Ezeudu decision is one the organization made before the season began. He’s been the backup left tackle all along.

The roster is ultimately the GM’s responsibility. Game day is probably more on the coaching staff. Still, the thing with the Giants is that Schoen and Daboll are tied at the hip. I think they both have a hand in those decisions.

---

Scott Herrington asks: How close do you think John Mara is to blowing it all up during/after this season? The loss to the Eagles brings back BAD memories of the “The Fumble” game, after which the Maras finally changed direction by hiring George Young and embarking on a rebuild that led to Super Bowl victories. It is clear that John Mara desperately wanted to keep Saquon, for all the reasons that we saw on display yesterday. But he acceded to Joe Schoen’s plan — which sure doesn’t look very good today. Every team has injuries, but the Giants never seem to overcome theirs. I know that Jones has to be replaced, but I’m beginning to believe that Michael Lombardi was right when he said (essentially) that Schoen had no coherent plan for rebuilding the team. What do you think?

Ed says: Scott, I am going to answer this in reverse. When it comes to Michael Lombardi, he has been ripping into the Giants at every turn for years now. I can’t spend any time thinking about his opinions about the Giants. His feelings are so clear that, to me, he isn’t credible.

As fr Mara, I am simply going to refer to what he said Wednesday night. He believes in Schoen and Daboll and wants to exercise patience. Now, that could change if things go off the rails and the locker room turns on the coach. But, his intent is to see things through with the GM and coach he has.

---

Michael Stein asks: With all the talk about the Giants being sellers at the trade deadline, are there any players you’d like to see them target as buyers, and why?

Ed says: Michael, no, there are no players I would bang the table for. What the Giants need right now is draft capital. If they can acquire decent draft capital — fourth- or fifth-round picks for players like Darius Slayton or Azeez Ojulari — they should probably make those deals.

They will be in the quarterback market this offseason. If they need to move up in the draft they need draft capital teams will actually want in order to do that. Because of that, and because they are still building a young roster for the long term, they should not be in the business of giving up draft picks for short-term fixes.

---

Max Bernstein asks: Why do the Giants hate calling run plays?

This is the second week in a row that the Giants came out throwing on seemingly every down for the first half. And for the second week in a row all it led to was a bunch of quick punts. Both opponents are one that I would think the better strategy is to run the ball and try to keep their explosive offenses off the field.

Instead we just get to watch DJ miss a bunch of open receivers and then punt the ball away. What are we doing?

Ed says: Max, I don’t think they hate calling running plays. What’s true is that they were pass heavy at the beginnings of each of the last two games, probably too pass heavy. Daboll was asked about that after the Eagles game and simply said they thought there were opportunities in the passing game they wanted to try and attack.

I have always said Daboll and Schoen want to run a quarterback-centric program. Pass-first has been Daboll’s play-calling reputation for a long time now. Schoen paid the quarterback, not the running back.

I agree that they need to lean on the run game more. I’m not sure they will, especially since they believe their best playmakers are at wide receiver.

---

Matt Falconer asks: I heard an announcer of an NFL game this weekend state; “either you need a Hall of Fame Quarterback or a QB on a rookie contract.”

To me this makes perfect sense. If you are going to pay any QB a massive amount of money it takes away from the rest of the team. The QB must be great.

I am not a Daniel Jones hater, I love the guy. But the armchair GM in me believes we need to get a good QB on a rookie contract and QB proof our team.

Do you agree?

Ed says: Matt, I don’t know about “Hall of Fame quarterback”, but I do agree that the teams in the best positions have either top-tier veteran quarterbacks they know they can win with, or quarterbacks on a rookie contract.

The rookie contract means that you have more money to spend on ancillary parts to help that young quarterback, which makes your roster better. The young quarterback also gives you hope for future improvement. Or, if already know he’s the guy a longer runway to have sustained success.

---

Doug Mollin asks: He’s been our best player outside of Dex, but how do we honestly look at Andrew Thomas’ career so far and going forward?

• 2020 — played the whole season but not well. Rough rookie learning curve.
• 2021 — missed 3 games but played much better. PFF bounced from 62.4 to 78.9.
• 2022 — played all 16 games and had his best season, 89.1 PFF.
• 2023 — missed 6 games and slumped back down to 76.1.
• 2024 — will miss the final 11 games and stayed in that same range, 75.4.

Three seasons out of five with missed games. One year with an elite grade. One year as an All Pro. The return from Lisfranc injury is anything but certain.

It’s crazy to say but have we Giant fans been over-hyping Andrew Thomas’ Giant career?

Ed says: I don’t think Thomas has been over-hyped. I just think he’s been injured too often, and it’s been a while since we have seen him fully healthy.

I would disagree with the idea that he “slumped” last year. He missed seven games, and played the last half of the season with a knee injury that limited his mobility.

I would also say this. The Giants were right to sign him to a long-term contract. If you can sign a quality, young left tackle to an affordable long-term deal, that’s a no-brainer. It is fair to say they haven’t gotten what they paid for. And, yes, it is fair to worry about what kind of player he will be going forward.

---

Chris Hynes asks: Let me preface that I would categorize myself as Schoen fan and would like to see him and Daboll come back for next season if not next two seasons.

With that being said, was not obtaining a better backup quarterback a major fail on their regime? How bad is Lock, if Jones and his 99 passing yards gives the team their best chance of winning, and it is not even questioned? If Jones was not healthy at the start of the season following his ACL, would the Giants really be that worse than we currently are?

It’s honestly insulting to the fans that we are being told that Jones gives us the best chance to win?

Ed says: Chris, I understand your frustration. I see this ‘they should have signed a better backup quarterback’ chatter all the time.

So, let me ask. Who was that supposed to be? Tyrod Taylor wasn’t coming back after feeling slighted by the Giants a year ago. Jacoby Brissett, Sam Darnold, and Gardner Minshew went places where they knew they would get better opportunities. They weren’t going to get real chances to compete for the starting job with the Giants. Not in 2024. The Giants were not taking a $47 million cap hit to have Jones sit behind another placeholder quarterback.

Russell Wilson was never a realistic option. Is Jameis Winston better than Drew Lock? Were you going to pound the table for 39-year-old Joe Flacco, and pay him $9 million? Carson Wentz? Mason Rudolph?

Put Jones’ career numbers side by side with Drew Lock’s and tell me which player has been better.

Jones:

Lock:

No one is insulting you by telling you that Jones has been better than Lock throughout his career. They are telling you the truth.

Maybe Lock would play well for a short while. He is not the answer, though.

---

David Gray asks: I keep reading that the Giants need a no. 1 cornerback, but the defense gave up only 114 passing yards (with one TD) to the Eagles (and had five sacks), but they gave up 269 rushing yards at 6.0 ypc. The week before against the Bengals, the defense gave up 208 passing yards (no passing TDs) but 121 rushing yards at 6.1 ypc.

My question is this: Do they really need a no. 1 CB or could they use more help with the rush defense (DE/DT or ILB)?

Ed says: David, the Giants might need a No. 1 cornerback. I am not giving up on Tae Banks, but he may never be a real No. 1. We’ll see.

I talked about the lack of depth on the defensive line earlier, but I think that’s where the real problem is. There isn’t enough hand in the ground defensive line talent alongside Dexter Lawrence. Rakeem Nunez-Roches is playing too much. DJ Davidson and Jordon Riley are playing too much, and that’s an issue because Riley is barely playing at all. Elijah Chatman is an undrafted player who may never be an every-down guy.

A year ago the Giants had both Leonard Williams and A’Shawn Robinson on the roster. They haven’t really replaced either player.

---

Dave Nelson asks: I hate to use the word “bust” with a third round pick, but we did trade up for him. Will Hyatt ever be able to make it as a pro? He’s not even a consideration when Nabers was out for two weeks. What are the flaws in his game? Can he improve them or is the die cast at this point?

Ed says: Dave, I refuse to give up on a player midway through his second season in the league. That said, the Giants certainly haven’t gotten what they hoped for when they traded up to get him in the third round of the 2023 NFL Draft. He looked like a steal at the time. Now, you wonder if other teams were right to let him drop that far.

I disagree that Hyatt wasn’t a consideration when Malik Nabers was out. He played 112 snaps over those two weeks. He was targeted four times against the Cincinnati Bengals, with one catch for 6 yards. He’s now been targeted eight times this season with just that one catch.

What are his flaws? I’m no expert on wide receiver play. I do know he remains rail thin. He’s going to struggle against physicality, and he’s going to have a difficult time on contested balls.

How good is his route running? That was an area where development was needed when he was drafted. He is averaging 2.3 yards of separation, per NextGen Stats. That’s less than Wan’Dale Robinson (3.2), Malik Nabers (2.8) and Darius Slayton (2.5). Now, Deebo Samuel of the 49ers averages just 2.4 yards of separation. It is an indication, though, that the Giants’ other wide receivers have been creating more space.

Is the die cast? I don’t think so. I don’t think you give up on a player like Hyatt yet. I am going to be interested to see if the Giants trade Slayton by the Nov. 5 deadline, which would create an opportunity for Hyatt. If they give it to him, can he take advantage of it?

---

Julian Roberts asks: Since D.J. is not in their plans going forward, why not try to trade him for future draft picks?

Ed says: Julian, to whom? For what? If there is a trade market for Daniel Jones right now, that’s news to me. I suppose it’s possible, but what team is out there thinking ‘we need Daniel Jones’ right now? Also, the Giants have not said he is not in their plans. We are speculating as much, but they have not said it.

---

Submit a question

Have a Giants-related question? E-mail it to [email protected] and it might be featured in our weekly mailbag.