I typically hate or at least disagree with the "What do you think about picking up Braylon Edwards / Shawne Merriman / Marshawn Lynch / etc." and the answer at BBV is usually NO.

But now I gotta be THAT GUY.

The Patriots may be looking to drop Logan Mankins in the next 5 days, Oct. 19 being the deadline. The guy's 28 and has a lot of talent -- pro bowler in 2008 and 2009. He's never missed a game in his career. I don't think he's a "cancer" or has "character issues." Here's the explanation of why he isn't playing:

Following the 2009 season, Mankins became a restricted free agent and was tendered at the highest possible level, $3.26 million. On June 15, 2010, with Mankins yet to sign his tender, the Patriots were able to lower Mankins' tender amount to 110% of his prior year salary, or $1.54 million. The Patriots did so, and Mankins reacted by publicly asking for a trade.

1. Would you give him a look if you were Reese?
2. If you liked what you saw, what would you offer?

They just gave up Moss for a 3rd. I'd drop a 3rd or a 4th in a heartbeat to get this guy.

Yes, I realize that we are almost stacked at guard: Snee, Andrews, Seubert, Petrus.
But I guess I'm thinking that McKenzie and Diehl are on their way out over the next season or two, and I am not too sure of how versatile these players are. For example, We'd be beastly with an O-Line of O'Hara at Center (of course we'd be looking for his replacement in the draft) flanked by Snee and Mankins at Guards (LG is Mankins natural position, he'd replace Seubert who reportedly we were looking to push into a backup role) and at Tackles we'd have Andrews (I know he's a guard but I'm not the first to speculate)  at Left and McKenzie at right.

At present the Giants carry:

RT: McKenzie ... / Andrews
RG: Snee ...        /    "
C: O'Hara ...        / Koets
LG: Seubert ...    / Petrus
LT: Diehl

And they have Beatty so that's nine O-linemen. With Mankins it might look like this:

RT: McKenzie
RG: Snee ...      / Petrus
C: O'Hara ...      / Koets
LG: Mankins ... / Diehl
RG: Andrews ... / Beatty

To me, that's pretty "beast," as the HS kids say. The drawback is that it doesn't really address our shortage at Tackle. Rather it assumes the ability of Andrews to play tackle. We'd still need to draft at T and C. Also I'm aware the plan was to have Beatty at LT and Diehl at LG where he may be more suited to play ... but hey that didn't work by the end of camp.

So I know it's not the best fit but to me the idea of replacing a position of weakness (according to coaching staff who wanted to push Seubert out) with an all-pro, in exchange for a 3rd-rounder, would be a nice move.