Giants Reacts survey: Should the Giants be buyers or sellers at the trade deadline?

What do you want to see the Giants do over the next week?

There are a bunch of questions swirling around the New York Giants right now. But for our purposes here, there’s really only one question to be asked: How should the Giants approach the 2024 trade deadline?

1. Should they be sellers, and field calls (if not openly shop) the players who might have markets?
2. Should they be buyers and look to acquire talent to reinforce their roster for 2024 and possibly beyond?
3. Or should they just sit out, stand pat, neither waiving the white flag nor sacrificing assets in the hope of immediate improvement?

The names of the players who could be dealt are well known. Ed recently penned a piece advocating for the trade of Darius Slayton and Azeez Ojulari. Both players are still young and both on expiring contracts. Their good play in recent weeks has (potentially) increased their value to other teams beyond what it is for the Giants.

But while the Giants don’t have many assets, they aren’t bereft, either. Could, or should, they be listening to calls regarding Evan Neal and Tae Banks? Both are still young, have sky-high traits, and were recent first round picks. They might get an acceptable return if the Giants decide that one — or both — aren’t in their long-term plans.

Having a fire sale might send a poor message to the locker room, but it might also net some valuable draft capital if the Giants are forced to trade up for a quarterback in 2025. It’s also worth noting that we’ve been surprised by (and elated by the return from) trades of Kadarius Toney and Leonard Williams in 2022 and 2023, respectively.

On the other hand, Slayton, Ojulari, and Banks are all starters and helping the team now. The Giants could re-sign Slayton and Ojulari after the season, or let them leave for better comp picks in 2026 if they’re too expensive for the Giants. That’s the route advocated for by Art Stapleton and hinted at by Mike Garafolo. It’s also possible that the Giants’ refusal to play Evan Neal has more to do with giving him the time and space to properly develop that injury, circumstance, and perceived necessity denied him in 2022. Neal could well be in the Giants’ long-term plans as a bookend with Andrew Thomas, but feel that a combination of injury and poor coaching have allowed bad habits to creep into his technique. It takese time and effort to unlearn ingrained habits and, as Mark Schofield is want to say, development isn’t linear.

Finally, we have the flip side of the “sellers” coin, with being “buyers”. The Giants have obvious holes along their offensive line (including the depth), and in the defensive secondary. GMs often talk about pursuing every avenue to improve the team, and trading for under-the-radar veterans is a way to do so. It seems unlikely that the Giants would be able to add an impact...