This Saturday morning may feel like a bit of a hangover for New York Giants fans. We had fun last night, getting a borderline first-round prospect in Round 2 in cornerback Colton Hood and then moving up to Round 3 to draft a big wide receiver, Malachi Fields. Today, though, we’re paying the price, having to sit there and watch other teams improve for about three hours and only getting the crumbs of three Round 6 picks late in the afternoon.

The question is whether the trade-up was worth it. The price seemed steep: This year’s fourth and fifth round picks plus next year’s fourth. The answer won’t be known for a few years. If Fields brings back memories of (pre-2008) Plaxico Burress, the answer will be yes.

One way of looking at the question is to remember why the Giants didn’t have a third round pick in the first place. Of course that’s because they used it to trade up for Jaxson Dart in last year’s draft. So the trade-up can in some long-term sense be viewed as giving up a third, two fourths and a fifth for Dart and Fields. If last year was any indication, and if Fields becomes a solid piece in the offense, I think I’d take that deal.

But there are objective ways of evaluating just this year’s trade-up. Interestingly, they give conflicting answers as to whether it was a good deal for the Giants or not. The immediate reaction to the price paid was negative, based on trade value charts…but it depends on which trade value chart you use. Doug Analytics had a dim view of it:

“The Giants are getting a 4th round comp pick next year” is not a valid defense of this trade https://t.co/cWvjbhdaPF

As you can see above, whether the Giants got good value or were fleeced by the Browns depends on which trade value chart you use. The traditional Jimmy Johnson and Rich Hill charts, which are thought to be the basis for how NFL teams actually value trades even though they clearly overemphasize high picks, grade the Giants as the winner (green) in the trade. More objective trade value charts based on historical performance of players see the Browns as being the clear winner in the trade, to the tune of receiving in effect an extra fourth round pick (No. 130, 106, or 118 depending on the chart used).

The last three 4th rounders the Giants have drafted are:Cam SkatteboTheo JohnsonDaniel Bellinger So I would respectfully disagree that the picks the Giants gave up, especially that 2027 4th, "are just special teamers".Now, I can appreciate the conviction on Malachi Fields.…

For a different take on things, let’s turn to Anthony Reinhard, another NFL analytics person. He has two relevant takes on the situation. First, he asks the practical question: How much teams should give up in a draft trade is one thing, but how much teams actually do give up in draft trades is another. For this particular type of trade-up, he finds:

When the Giants moved up for Malachi Fields, they paid 11.6% less than teams have paid in the past for similar trades. pic.twitter.com/FrBlOS0go8

In other words, the value the Giants got relative to previous similar trades was well above average. That’s not saying that they actually got good value, it’s just saying that they didn’t give up as much as many teams have in similar types of trades. It’s something like today’s inflated housing market in many parts of the United States. You can ask whether that $700,000 home for sale is really worth it, or you can just say, that’s the going price these days (it actually is in my supposedly middle class neighborhood on Long Island), either I pay it or I decide not to buy a house. And if I get it for $680,000 then in some strange way I feel like I got a good deal.

The other angle that Reinhard raises is whether a player was taken at a point in the draft at which he is considered good value or not. Here is his take:

3rd round picks based on where they sat on the consensus board when they were picked pic.twitter.com/QMJgbwrDfW

So according to his chart, Fields was taken by the Giants at a later point in the draft than his value as defined by the consensus big board suggested he should be taken, i.e., he was a bit of a “steal.”

Finally, Matt Harmon of Reception Perception shows Fields’ route chart:

Malachi Fields brings size to the table for New York but is a more developmental piece that might be a Big Slot possibility pic.twitter.com/2oWdmW7n99

— Reception Perception (@RecepPerception) April 25, 2026

It’s a strange chart in some ways. Fields was highly successful on corner routes…but Notre Dame didn’t run him on many corner routes. They did send him on a lot of go (nine) routes, but he was less successful than the average receiver on those. The one place where usage meets performance is curl routes – they threw him a lot of curls and he did well on them. So it will be interesting to see whether the Giants deploy him in a way that optimizes his skill set. Harmon elaborates on his potential as a “big slot”:

Malachi Fields to the New York Giants. Fits really well with Malik Nabers when he's healthy. Smart zone-beater who can move into the slot and play Z, but will also be a ball-winner for Jaxson Dart when he plays at the X. pic.twitter.com/1WLuEJ4hWK

My own subjective take is that this is a gamble, but a good one, for the Giants to take. Losing a fourth will hurt next year, just as it hurt this year to spend the evening after the early pick of Colton Hood knowing that the Giants would be sitting on the sidelines the rest of the evening. Until they didn’t. Worry about next year next year.