The New York Giants need a quarterback. That much is obvious. But how they go about getting one remains the biggest question of the offseason. With the No. 3 overall pick in the 2025 NFL Draft, the Giants have a golden opportunity to select their next franchise passer. But recent buzz suggests another route could be in play—trading for Super Bowl champion Matthew Stafford.
NFL Draft expert Daniel Jeremiah recently floated the idea of the Giants landing Stafford without giving up the No. 3 pick. That caught the attention of NFL analyst Gregg Rosenthal, who doubled down, saying he’d be stunned if the Rams were able to get a top-five pick for Stafford. If that’s the case, what exactly would a realistic trade package look like?
it's not getting enough attention that Stafford appears way more likely than not gone. Also I'd be stunned if they got a top-5 pick for him https://t.co/Nd6B8mPLPG
— Gregg Rosenthal (@greggrosenthal) February 12, 2025
The Giants aren’t in a position to throw away premium assets, especially for a quarterback nearing the end of his career. But if they could land Stafford for a reasonable price while keeping their top picks intact, this idea gets a lot more interesting.
What should the Giants give up for Matthew Stafford?
First things first—there’s zero chance the Giants trade the No. 3 pick for Stafford. That’s not happening. While he’s still a high-level quarterback, his timeline doesn’t match up with a full-scale rebuild.
If a first-round pick is off the table, then what? The Rams don’t exactly have a ton of leverage here. If they’re looking to move on from Stafford, his contract situation complicates things. Any team trading for him would likely need to commit to giving him a raise, making his market even smaller.
Sports Illustrated’s Albert Breer recently referred to Matthew Stafford as "the big domino in this year’s quarterback market." According to Breer, the Rams made a key financial move last offseason by removing all future guaranteed money from Stafford’s contract while advancing $5 million to his 2024 salary. At the time, both sides agreed to revisit his situation after the season, leaving his future in Los Angeles up in the air.
"Two things, I think, will determine how this goes," Breer wrote. "The first will be how much [money] he wants. The second will be whether he's willing to commit to playing for just another year."
That uncertainty has teams across the league closely monitoring Stafford’s status. Beyond his contract demands and long-term commitment, the potential trade return could be a major factor in the Rams’ decision-making.
Breer further explained, "If Stafford wants a big contract adjustment, and someone is offering a first-round pick, and he's not sure if he can commit to 2026 … that's where I could see this getting interesting."
With that in mind, a trade could look something like this:
That type of deal makes sense for both sides. The Giants wouldn’t be mortgaging their future while still securing an experienced quarterback. The Rams, meanwhile, get a pretty good return while freeing themselves of Stafford’s contract as they transition to a new era.
If the Giants can land Stafford without giving up their top picks, it’s a move worth considering. They’d be getting a quarterback who, despite his age, can still compete at a high level. That would allow them to use their draft capital to build around him. The third overall pick becomes very interesting as a trade-back option to acquire assets back from those lost in the trade.
At the end of the day, it all comes down to cost. If the Rams’ asking price gets out of hand, the Giants should walk away. But if they can strike the right deal? Bringing in Stafford could realistically put this team in a position to compete in the NFC right away.