Should the Giants trade WR Hakeem Nicks before the deadline?

[truebluefan]

Should the Giants trade WR Hakeem Nicks before the deadline?

 

[Hammerojustice]

Absolutely! But again, I believe it's naive to believe he'll bring a 1st round pick. I would love that, I just don't see that happening...

Now if he isn't traded, the team seriously needs to reevaluate Reece's role with the team...

 

[cagedlion]

Football players are like cars....as soon as you buy it/ sign him .....his value diminishes!

 

[dumpstralmannow]

If the Giants are smart, they get him in front of ownership and tell him the following. We need to trade you to get picks. However, we want to sign you immediately in the off-season. Don't sign with the team we trade you to. Give us the chance to sign you back. You will have a better career here if we can draft a good OL or LB with those picks.

That's the way I would play it. There will be a bidding war for Nicks and they very well might get a first for him. Remember, 95% of all GM's are stupid. They are little children who get in these moronic competitions for players they consider prizes. They also get fired when they don't win. So, they really don't care as much about the future as you think. They care more about saving their job.

 

[Hammerojustice]

If the Giants are smart, they get him in front of ownership and tell him the following. We need to trade you to get picks. However, we want to sign you immediately in the off-season. Don't sign with the team we trade you to. Give us the chance to sign you back. You will have a better career here if we can draft a good OL or LB with those picks.

That's the way I would play it. There will be a bidding war for Nicks and they very well might get a first for him. Remember, 95% of all GM's are stupid. They are little children who get in these moronic competitions for players they consider prizes. They also get fired when they don't win. So, they really don't care as much about the future as you think. They care more about saving their job.

Can they do that?

 

[dumpstralmannow]

Sure, why not? He's an UFA next year. He's Giants property now. They can tell him whatever they want to. He doesn't have to do it.

 

[Hammerojustice]

I was just curious as to if that would be considered tampering...

 

[dumpstralmannow]

It would only be tampering if they had that conversation after they traded him and he was no longer their property.

 

[vette322]

Nicks is losing $$$ by the game now. 3 drops on Monday night, no lift, no ability to get separation. It's gonna be hard for him to command #1 receiver $$$ this off-season unless he has a renaissance these last 9 games.

And I did vote to trade him, hoping the Giants can get the Packers, 49ers, and Patriots bidding against each other for him.

 

[dumpstralmannow]

I'm starting to get the sense that the Giants don't think Nicks is that good any longer and have no desire to pay him what he is looking for. I think they deal him.

 

[vette322]

I'm starting to get the sense that the Giants don't think Nicks is that good any longer and have no desire to pay him what he is looking for. I think they deal him.

Yea, there is little to no chance that Nicks returns next year. If they don;t trade him, he'll end up leaving via FA. Giants can't afford to invest more, significant $$$ in cap space on WR - too many other holes to be filled. They'll go with Cruz and Randle next year, and maybe use a 4th rounder on a receiver.

Just shows how bad using 3 3rd round picks on Jernigan, Barden, and Beckum the last few years has been. These guys should be on the roster and contributing, meaning letting a guy like Nicks go is a no-brainer.