April 8, 2007
Should we have kept Luke Petigout?
I continue to wonder about cutting Luke. There was the injury risk, but he was a good left tackle and those are hard to replace. The Bucs seem happy (probably unrealistically happy) they got him.
Posted by James Trotta at April 8, 2007 3:48 PMI was also surprised when he was let go. Maybe it was all the untimely false starts. Or it could be that they saw more health issues coming. There does seem to be a greater resolve lately to acquire and keep more durable players.
Maybe we'll get lucky and some one will come out of nowhere to be the next great left tackle. Without one the Giants will have fewer offensive options, as witnessed last year when Tiki had to stay in to keep the wolves off Eli.
Posted by: tom cuddy at April 8, 2007 8:40 PMit is hard to say at this point because we can not foretell how well the replacement will perform
if they were to compare linemen like hockey and kept a plus and minus yardage it would have been interesting on luke's value. HAPPY EASTER
We always make some hasty changes. Makes you wonder if the organization was looking for a quick fix or giving Luke the heave ho...I think he was still a keeper and at LTackle, who's going to fill that mess?
Posted by: Joe at April 8, 2007 9:48 PMI'd have to say our releasing him was from a combination of both factors, health and all his missed games, added to all the false starts. Lets face it, even if you have the best lef tackle in the world on your team, he isn't any help if he isn't on the field because he's hurt, the Giants have played without him enough that this isn't going to be as tremendous a loss as everyone seems to think.
Posted by: Michael at April 9, 2007 1:15 AMHey, Dan Murphy, formerly of Giants 101.
"Unrealisticlly" happy is right. I am not going to start spitting out sour grapes because he is no longer a Giant. But how long does it take to "get it". Luke is a good, I repeat, good LT; anything further than that is hyperbole.
Further, I am really starting to believe in the general direction that Reese wants to take this team. I know as vague a choice of words that is, I love the open door policy: If you are injury prone, old, or (like Luke) stupid, there's the door. News has it that we have contacted the Panthers about Jenkins. Word is that Reese might be prepared to offer a 5th or 6th round pick for him. The Panters are shopping him around and Reese, slowly but surely, is showing me that he is the right man for the job. We will acquire another big-name player through a trade this offseason. Who's it going to be? That, unlike the "missing Luke stories" is the question. It was the right move for Reeese, Luke, Eli, and this franchise.
Posted by: Dan Murphy at April 9, 2007 12:02 PMNothing kills a drive like a penalty by a lineman and Luke excelled in that regard . AS for replacements there will be many available by the time this is over. The prima donnas playing football have no team loyalty whatsoever. so when the draft is completed there will be a lot available. Looking at Giants history on injuries to its linebacking corps , it might be wise to draft several of them . Plus a good defensive end . The other position depth can be filled by the waiver wire or trades .
Go big blue
Stan