Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Hakeem Nicks: Where does he rank?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Comparisons
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 10216
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nabbs4u wrote:


It is 3 less games for Nicks which speaks to his injury history considering that is one of the biggest knocks on Maclin, Health! There is a gap between the two I am not arguing that. There's just no way it is the 15-20 player gap many on this site seem to think. Nicks can't be a top 5 or 10 WR IMO with virtually the same production. Now if someone said Nicks is 15 Maclin 20 or Nicks is 10 Maclin was 15 then I could see it. But going from top 5-10 ranged to 30 is a joke and unsubstantiated. That's all.


So let me get this straight, nicks cant be considered a top 10 receiver because his stats are a bit similar to maclin? Youre ignoring the one thing, they dont face the same type coverage or attention for the lack of a better word.

Nicks is top 10 imo and maclin is probably just outside the top 20. But because they have similar production, there shouldnt be that big of a gap? Stats arent everything.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
minutemancl


Joined: 06 Jan 2007
Posts: 11710
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

At this point, anyone trying to justify Nicks in the top-10 and above Cruz is just wrong. When he is healthy, he is a top-10 receiver, but lately that has been far and in between. We've seen the kind of dominance he can display in a game and he is an incredibly tough guy, but he's got to go through one season completely healthy and put up the stats I know he can put up before I put him in the top-10 right now. He'd still be in my top-15 though.

Cruz, however, is easily in my top-10 right now. He does everything you want a wide receiver to do.
_________________
aceinthehouse wrote:
But why not maintain that dominance? You guys were there...

Let me give you my personal opinion, on what I think has happened.
It all started with the release of the coke machine in Brandon Jacobs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 10216
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 6:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

minutemancl wrote:
At this point, anyone trying to justify Nicks in the top-10 and above Cruz is just wrong. When he is healthy, he is a top-10 receiver, but lately that has been far and in between. We've seen the kind of dominance he can display in a game and he is an incredibly tough guy, but he's got to go through one season completely healthy and put up the stats I know he can put up before I put him in the top-10 right now. He'd still be in my top-15 though.

Cruz, however, is easily in my top-10 right now. He does everything you want a wide receiver to do.


Right now, i agree nicks isnt playing like a top 10 WR but you cant ignore what he has done in the past couple of seasons. The season isnt over yet, so lets see.Even Hakeem still plays like this for the rest of the year, i will still find it hard to leave hum out my top 10.

Cruz and Nicks are different. Although he is a unique slot WR, i still see them as different. I wanna see cruz improve his play on the outside before i put him top 10.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomRalph


Joined: 03 Apr 2009
Posts: 7713
Location: Revis Island
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wide Receivers cannot be compared statistically as the umbrella term 'Wide Receiver' has so much variance when looking at different types of players. It is usually a gut feeling that people have when ranking WR's which is why Maclin is underrated/Nicks is overrated.

The WR with the highest production since 2008 doesn't even get mentioned in Top 10 lists anymore. So that should tell you all you need to know about what statistics mean when judging WR's.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
EaglesFan5-36-81


Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 14502
Location: Sig by Eagles_808
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 9:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

reckless123 wrote:
Nabbs4u wrote:


It is 3 less games for Nicks which speaks to his injury history considering that is one of the biggest knocks on Maclin, Health! There is a gap between the two I am not arguing that. There's just no way it is the 15-20 player gap many on this site seem to think. Nicks can't be a top 5 or 10 WR IMO with virtually the same production. Now if someone said Nicks is 15 Maclin 20 or Nicks is 10 Maclin was 15 then I could see it. But going from top 5-10 ranged to 30 is a joke and unsubstantiated. That's all.


So let me get this straight, nicks cant be considered a top 10 receiver because his stats are a bit similar to maclin? Youre ignoring the one thing, they dont face the same type coverage or attention for the lack of a better word.

Nicks is top 10 imo and maclin is probably just outside the top 20. But because they have similar production, there shouldnt be that big of a gap? Stats arent everything.


If I may intergect on behalf of Nabbs, I don't think thats what he's saying at all. What I think he's saying is that the gap placed between Maclin and Nicks by fans and the national media is ridiculous given the production is nearly the same. Its certainly debateable to put Nicks in the top 10 and not out of the ordinary, but to say Maclin isn't even top 20-25 when the production is so similar is tough to do, especially considering Nicks has gotten the better and more consistent QB play.
_________________

Birdwatch: Mychal Kendricks
TCK:10 TFL:1 SCK:0 INT:0 FF:0 FR:1
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 10216
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 9:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

EaglesFan5-36-81 wrote:
reckless123 wrote:
Nabbs4u wrote:


It is 3 less games for Nicks which speaks to his injury history considering that is one of the biggest knocks on Maclin, Health! There is a gap between the two I am not arguing that. There's just no way it is the 15-20 player gap many on this site seem to think. Nicks can't be a top 5 or 10 WR IMO with virtually the same production. Now if someone said Nicks is 15 Maclin 20 or Nicks is 10 Maclin was 15 then I could see it. But going from top 5-10 ranged to 30 is a joke and unsubstantiated. That's all.


So let me get this straight, nicks cant be considered a top 10 receiver because his stats are a bit similar to maclin? Youre ignoring the one thing, they dont face the same type coverage or attention for the lack of a better word.

Nicks is top 10 imo and maclin is probably just outside the top 20. But because they have similar production, there shouldnt be that big of a gap? Stats arent everything.


If I may intergect on behalf of Nabbs, I don't think thats what he's saying at all. What I think he's saying is that the gap placed between Maclin and Nicks by fans and the national media is ridiculous given the production is nearly the same. Its certainly debateable to put Nicks in the top 10 and not out of the ordinary, but to say Maclin isn't even top 20-25 when the production is so similar is tough to do, especially considering Nicks has gotten the better and more consistent QB play.


I just said maclin is outside the top 20 meaning top 25. I know what he is saying but you cant take numbers for face value. He literally said that you cant put nicks top 10 because the production gap between him and maclin. Look if this thread was made to suggest that the gap between nicks and maclin isnt as big as people like to think then this thread is rather unneeded because who is better between the two isnt debatable and isnt close.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
EaglesFan5-36-81


Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 14502
Location: Sig by Eagles_808
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

reckless123 wrote:
EaglesFan5-36-81 wrote:
reckless123 wrote:
Nabbs4u wrote:


It is 3 less games for Nicks which speaks to his injury history considering that is one of the biggest knocks on Maclin, Health! There is a gap between the two I am not arguing that. There's just no way it is the 15-20 player gap many on this site seem to think. Nicks can't be a top 5 or 10 WR IMO with virtually the same production. Now if someone said Nicks is 15 Maclin 20 or Nicks is 10 Maclin was 15 then I could see it. But going from top 5-10 ranged to 30 is a joke and unsubstantiated. That's all.


So let me get this straight, nicks cant be considered a top 10 receiver because his stats are a bit similar to maclin? Youre ignoring the one thing, they dont face the same type coverage or attention for the lack of a better word.

Nicks is top 10 imo and maclin is probably just outside the top 20. But because they have similar production, there shouldnt be that big of a gap? Stats arent everything.


If I may intergect on behalf of Nabbs, I don't think thats what he's saying at all. What I think he's saying is that the gap placed between Maclin and Nicks by fans and the national media is ridiculous given the production is nearly the same. Its certainly debateable to put Nicks in the top 10 and not out of the ordinary, but to say Maclin isn't even top 20-25 when the production is so similar is tough to do, especially considering Nicks has gotten the better and more consistent QB play.


I just said maclin is outside the top 20 meaning top 25. I know what he is saying but you cant take numbers for face value. He literally said that you cant put nicks top 10 because the production gap between him and maclin. Look if this thread was made to suggest that the gap between nicks and maclin isnt as big as people like to think then this thread is rather unneeded because who is better between the two isnt debatable and isnt close.


I wasn't talking about you with that top 20 comment, more the Eagles fanbase that makes it sound like Maclin is absolute garbage. Its really tough to rank receivers though because after the top 4 or 5 it gets cloudy fast with a ton of guys within striking distance of eachother.
_________________

Birdwatch: Mychal Kendricks
TCK:10 TFL:1 SCK:0 INT:0 FF:0 FR:1
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nabbs4u


Moderator
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Posts: 22121
Location: North Carolina Kiltman on the Sig
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nabbs4u wrote:
Nicks can't be a top 5 or 10 WR IMO with virtually the same production. Now if someone said Nicks is 15 Maclin 20 or Nicks is 10 Maclin was 15 then I could see it. But going from top 5-10 ranged to 30 is a joke and unsubstantiated. That's all.


Thought I was pretty clear reckless123 actually. I think this post says it best

TomRalph wrote:
Wide Receivers cannot be compared statistically as the umbrella term 'Wide Receiver' has so much variance when looking at different types of players. It is usually a gut feeling that people have when ranking WR's which is why Maclin is underrated/Nicks is overrated.

The WR with the highest production since 2008 doesn't even get mentioned in top 10 lists anymore. So that should tell you all you need to know about what statistics mean when judging WR's.

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 10216
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

EaglesFan5-36-81 wrote:
reckless123 wrote:
EaglesFan5-36-81 wrote:
reckless123 wrote:
Nabbs4u wrote:


It is 3 less games for Nicks which speaks to his injury history considering that is one of the biggest knocks on Maclin, Health! There is a gap between the two I am not arguing that. There's just no way it is the 15-20 player gap many on this site seem to think. Nicks can't be a top 5 or 10 WR IMO with virtually the same production. Now if someone said Nicks is 15 Maclin 20 or Nicks is 10 Maclin was 15 then I could see it. But going from top 5-10 ranged to 30 is a joke and unsubstantiated. That's all.


So let me get this straight, nicks cant be considered a top 10 receiver because his stats are a bit similar to maclin? Youre ignoring the one thing, they dont face the same type coverage or attention for the lack of a better word.

Nicks is top 10 imo and maclin is probably just outside the top 20. But because they have similar production, there shouldnt be that big of a gap? Stats arent everything.


If I may intergect on behalf of Nabbs, I don't think thats what he's saying at all. What I think he's saying is that the gap placed between Maclin and Nicks by fans and the national media is ridiculous given the production is nearly the same. Its certainly debateable to put Nicks in the top 10 and not out of the ordinary, but to say Maclin isn't even top 20-25 when the production is so similar is tough to do, especially considering Nicks has gotten the better and more consistent QB play.


I just said maclin is outside the top 20 meaning top 25. I know what he is saying but you cant take numbers for face value. He literally said that you cant put nicks top 10 because the production gap between him and maclin. Look if this thread was made to suggest that the gap between nicks and maclin isnt as big as people like to think then this thread is rather unneeded because who is better between the two isnt debatable and isnt close.


I wasn't talking about you with that top 20 comment, more the Eagles fanbase that makes it sound like Maclin is absolute garbage. Its really tough to rank receivers though because after the top 4 or 5 it gets cloudy fast with a ton of guys within striking distance of eachother.


i never thought maclin was garbage, in fact it wasnt long ago that i said maclin is probably a better wide receiver than desean jackson. If youre point is that Maclin is better than people think then fine go ahead but that shouldnt lead to hakeem nicks being ranked lowe because maclin seems to be better than it appears.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 10216
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nabbs4u wrote:
Nabbs4u wrote:
Nicks can't be a top 5 or 10 WR IMO with virtually the same production. Now if someone said Nicks is 15 Maclin 20 or Nicks is 10 Maclin was 15 then I could see it. But going from top 5-10 ranged to 30 is a joke and unsubstantiated. That's all.


Thought I was pretty clear reckless123 actually. I think this post says it best

TomRalph wrote:
Wide Receivers cannot be compared statistically as the umbrella term 'Wide Receiver' has so much variance when looking at different types of players. It is usually a gut feeling that people have when ranking WR's which is why Maclin is underrated/Nicks is overrated.

The WR with the highest production since 2008 doesn't even get mentioned in top 10 lists anymore. So that should tell you all you need to know about what statistics mean when judging WR's.


But the underappreciation of maclin should have no bearings on how nicks is ranked in this case. Like i said before, dont take the numbers for face value. Just because you see the numbers as closer than you wouldve thought its not a reflection of the gap imo.

Dont ignore what you said previously. You uttered the words, nicks cant be top 5 or top 10 and maclin be so low. If Nicks is considered top 10 then it doesnt mean that maclin should be 15 or 20. Judge him based on what you see and dont look at the stats for face value.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nabbs4u


Moderator
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Posts: 22121
Location: North Carolina Kiltman on the Sig
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

reckless123 wrote:
Nabbs4u wrote:
Nabbs4u wrote:
Nicks can't be a top 5 or 10 WR IMO with virtually the same production. Now if someone said Nicks is 15 Maclin 20 or Nicks is 10 Maclin was 15 then I could see it. But going from top 5-10 ranged to 30 is a joke and unsubstantiated. That's all.


Thought I was pretty clear reckless123 actually. I think this post says it best

TomRalph wrote:
Wide Receivers cannot be compared statistically as the umbrella term 'Wide Receiver' has so much variance when looking at different types of players. It is usually a gut feeling that people have when ranking WR's which is why Maclin is underrated/Nicks is overrated.

The WR with the highest production since 2008 doesn't even get mentioned in top 10 lists anymore. So that should tell you all you need to know about what statistics mean when judging WR's.


But the underappreciation of maclin should have no bearings on how nicks is ranked in this case. Like i said before, dont take the numbers for face value. Just because you see the numbers as closer than you wouldve thought its not a reflection of the gap imo.

Dont ignore what you said previously. You uttered the words, nicks cant be top 5 or top 10 and maclin be so low. If Nicks is considered top 10 then it doesnt mean that maclin should be 15 or 20. Judge him based on what you see and dont look at the stats for face value.


Thats the point though , I am. What I see is a WR that can not produce any better then a WR regarded by many on this site (especially his own fan base) as a WR in the 25-30 range. Your the one not seeing it. You keep saying statistics don't tell the whole story yet in general all fans including Giants do it all the time. They did it all last season when saying Eli almost threw for 5000 yds, Cruz had 1500yds, JPP had 16 1/2 sacks all as bench marks to rank them among the top tier players in the NFL. I find it funny now that the stats are being used in this scenario they are so easily dismissed or excuses are being made. FACT is for what ever the reasoning Hakeem Nicks with all of his god like talent has produced not much better on the field then Jeremy Maclin. Whether people like it, don't like it, agree, disagree it's not my problem. It is still an undeniable fact whether you or others choose to admit it or not. Nicks has been placed on a pedestal he frankly just doesn't deserve IMO. This has absolutely nothing to do with hate and or rival fan BS but overall production when compared to his peers. Thats all.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 10216
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nabbs4u wrote:


Thats the point though , I am. What I see is a WR that can not produce any better then a WR regarded by many on this site (especially his own fan base) as a WR in the 25-30 range. Your the one not seeing it. You keep saying statistics don't tell the whole story yet in general all fans including Giants do it all the time. They did it all last season when saying Eli almost threw for 5000 yds, Cruz had 1500yds, JPP had 16 1/2 sacks all as bench marks to rank them among the top tier players in the NFL. I find it funny now that the stats are being used in this scenario they are so easily dismissed or excuses are being made. FACT is for what ever the reasoning Hakeem Nicks with all of his god like talent has produced not much better on the field then Jeremy Maclin. Whether people like it, don't like it, agree, disagree it's not my problem. It is still an undeniable fact whether you or others choose to admit it or not. Nicks has been placed on a pedestal he frankly just doesn't deserve IMO. This has absolutely nothing to do with hate and or rival fan BS but overall production when compared to his peers. Thats all.


Youre looking at it as well, There stats dont seem to be far apart thus the gap is not as big as it should be. What youre doing is looking at it for face value. You havent asked yourself why the gap isnt as big as it should be.

Im not dismissing stats, sometimes they can tell the whole story, sometimes they dont. And this is one of the cases where it isnt. Like i said, Maclin probably has never been doubled teamed or bracketed at one stage in his NFL career, while nicks sees it plenty. this season it has decreased mainly due to the fact of cruz. I dont know why youre choosing to ignore the scenarios. Its pretty simple. The notion that nicks and maclin should be pretty close when ranking the 2 is nonsense and that nicks shouldnt be regarded as a top 10 receiver if Maclin is not regarded highly. When one receiver has had back to back 1000 yard seasons despite not playing all 16 games at one stage and one receiver has yet to have a 1000 yard season in their career. And that receiver who has had back to back 1000 yard seasons despite not playing all 16 games for either of them is getting much more attention from defenses and gets double teamed, there's a reason why theyre not considered close.

Youre basically collecting the stats and then leaving it at that.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wackywabbit


Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 6169
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't care if Giants' fans don't agree, Cruz>>Nicks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
baconrad3


Joined: 27 Apr 2010
Posts: 7346
Location: Tempe, AZ
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The problem is Nabbs...that you're using stats blindly while ignoring/not accounting for other variables that come into play here.


Aj Green barely broke 1000 yds last year and had only 7 tds.....not an. elite season righr? Its not as impressive just looking at his stats alone..
.but when you consider other variables like QB play, the coverage he faced, etc..it is actually incrediby impressive.

You're jist blindly throwing out stats with NO other reasonin as to why Maclin is close to Nicks in ranks
_________________


#OfficialBlakeBortlesHypeTrain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 10216
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

baconrad3 wrote:
The problem is Nabbs...that you're using stats blindly while ignoring/not accounting for other variables that come into play here.


Aj Green barely broke 1000 yds last year and had only 7 tds.....not an. elite season righr? Its not as impressive just looking at his stats alone..
.but when you consider other variables like QB play, the coverage he faced, etc..it is actually incrediby impressive.

You're jist blindly throwing out stats with NO other reasonin as to why Maclin is close to Nicks in ranks


Appreciate the logic.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Comparisons All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group