Here comes Braylon....

[BronxRik]

I'd still like to know what Edwards attempted catches to actual catches ratio was though.

 

He led the league in drops with 16. He caught 55. 55+16=(wait, I have to open the calculator) 71. So, Rik, he was thrown to 71 times, and out of those 71 times, he caught 55 of them for 873 yards, 3 of which were for TD's. Happy now?

 

[BronxRik]

He led the league in drops with 16. He caught 55. 55+16=(wait, I have to open the calculator) 71. So, Rik, he was thrown to 71 times, and out of those 71 times, he caught 55 of them for 873 yards, 3 of which were for TD's. Happy now?

Yes, thank you for the informative post.

[Money]

Right now. You have no idea, and neither do I, that if pressed, they wouldn't trade him.

 

Personally, I think they would be fools to not do it if Smith is what Cleveland wanted. 57 catches, 574 yards, and ONE TD. I would be OK with going with someone else to replace that massive production, while watching Eli throw touchdowns to Braylon every Sunday.

 

I have an excellent idea, actually. They don't want to trade him. They value him very highly.

 

And he put up those numbers (which, btw, are almost identical to Harrison's production) as the third receiver in a run-oriented offense that only passed for 3200 yards. He's being counted on to assume the role that Toomer had 05-07.

 

I'm as big a fan of Braylon as anyone. I've met him personally. He and I were college classmates. I suggested an Edwards-Giants pairing the day after our season ended, long before the national media or anyone else put two and two together. I would love to have him, but I understand the team's reluctance in giving up a valuable known commodity -- someone who had a pivotal role in our Super Bowl championship -- in addition to a mid-2nd round pick.

[Money]

He led the league in drops with 16. He caught 55. 55+16=(wait, I have to open the calculator) 71. So, Rik, he was thrown to 71 times, and out of those 71 times, he caught 55 of them for 873 yards, 3 of which were for TD's. Happy now?

 

His targets in 2008 were probably in the ballpark of 120, if I had to guess.

 

Courtesy of my handy Football Prospectus, he had 125 targets in '06 (61/884) and 153 targets in '07 (80/1289).

 

I'll see if I can find the '08 numbers online.

[BronxRik]

Right now. You have no idea, and neither do I, that if pressed, they wouldn't trade him.

 

Personally, I think they would be fools to not do it if Smith is what Cleveland wanted. 57 catches, 574 yards, and ONE TD. I would be OK with going with someone else to replace that massive production, while watching Eli throw touchdowns to Braylon every Sunday.

 

Yeah, but wasn't that massive production amassed in only 4 starts?

 

From the Giants’ perspective, with Plaxico Burress in limbo Smith is the best receiver they’ve got (57 catches, 574 yards, one touchdown last year, but with only four starts). I’m sure the Giants envisioned pairing Edwards with Smith, not swapping them. With two second-round picks, though, I wonder if there‘s a way to sweeten that offer and keep Smith out of it.

 

LINK (Money's link from a prior post)

 

What could he do in a full season?

[Money]

His targets in 2008 were probably in the ballpark of 120, if I had to guess.

 

Courtesy of my handy Football Prospectus, he had 125 targets in '06 (61/884) and 153 targets in '07 (80/1289).

 

I'll see if I can find the '08 numbers online.

 

Here you go, he had 138 targets in '08, which puts his catch rate at 40% -- which is awful. A lot of the blame can be attributed to poor QB play, but that's the lowest among all WRs that caught more than 50 passes.

 

Receiver stats

 

For what it's worth, Steve Smith had catch rate of 70%. Hixon 59%. Toomer 55%. Burress 53%. Sinorice Moss had a catch rate of 80%, but it's a limited sample -- we only threw him 15 passes.

[BronxRik]

Here you go, he had 138 targets in '08, which puts his catch rate at 40% -- which is awful. A lot of the blame can be attributed to poor QB play, but that's the lowest among all WRs that caught more than 50 passes.

 

Receiver stats

 

For what it's worth, Steve Smith had catch rate of 70%. Hixon 59%. Toomer 55%. Burress 53%. Sinorice Moss had a catch rate of 80%, but it's a limited sample -- we only threw him 15 passes.

Thanks, man, I suck at math. Probably why the IRS loves me.

[Money]

Yeah, but wasn't that massive production amassed in only 4 starts?

 

LINK (Money's link from a prior post)

 

What could he do in a full season?

 

To put it in quantative terms, the Giants threw to Smith only 82 times. The Colts threw to Marvin Harrison 107 times. The Rams threw to Torry Holt 119 times. The Broncos threw to Brandon Marshall 182 times, and he missed one game.

 

During that 05-07 time frame, Toomer got 6.6 targets per game, which amounts to 105 over the course of a 16-game season. At his current production rate, if Smith got 105 targets, we'd be looking at 74 catches for almost 850 yards (assuming a modest 11.0 yard per catch; his YPC is liable to improve by a larger margin just by virtue of playing outside and not being the slot receiver so often).

 

So if you wanted a Steve Smith 2009 projection, there it is. Third-year player, by the way.

[BronxRik]

To put it in quantative terms, the Giants threw to Smith only 82 times. The Colts threw to Marvin Harrison 107 times. The Rams threw to Torry Holt 119 times. The Broncos threw to Brandon Marshall 182 times, and he missed one game.

 

During that 05-07 time frame, Toomer got 6.6 targets per game, which amounts to 105 over the course of a 16-game season. At his current production rate, if Smith got 105 targets, we'd be looking at 74 catches for almost 850 yards (assuming a modest 11.0 yard per catch; his YPC is liable to improve by a larger margin just by virtue of playing outside and not being the slot receiver so often).

 

So if you wanted a Steve Smith 2009 projection, there it is. Third-year player, by the way.

 

That's interesting, thanks for taking the time to figure all that out. (I'm starting to feel like Jimmy Hoffa with all those #'s questions I asked).

 

So basically, if the Giants could get Edwards, keep Smith, and cut Plax, we'd be in a pretty good position to make another run, right?

[Money]

That's interesting, thanks for taking the time to figure all that out. (I'm starting to feel like Jimmy Hoffa with all those #'s questions I asked).

 

So basically, if the Giants could get Edwards, keep Smith, and cut Plax, we'd be in a pretty good position to make another run, right?

 

It would absolutely have Will's Stamp of Approval (and I really need someone to design that stamp).

 

Hixon would also be a very good #3 WR, and Manningham and Moss would provide capable competition.

[Allstarjim]

You can say Smith only had 4 starts, but he was pretty much taking over Amani's role all year. It's not as if Smith was your typical third WR in this offense. He was a big part of the game plan. I like Smith, too. But he's not untradeable.

[BronxRik]

You can say Smith only had 4 starts, but he was pretty much taking over Amani's role all year. It's not as if Smith was your typical third WR in this offense. He was a big part of the game plan. I like Smith, too. But he's not untradeable.

 

I was just saying that his numbers were based on 4 starts, and that they would probably be much higher if he actually got to start 16 games. But I was wrong in thinking he got those numbers in ONLY 4 games, obviously he played in more, but didn't start. I've already established I suck at math, and the IRS's love of my tax returns.

[Treehugger]

I was just saying that his numbers were based on 4 starts, and that they would probably be much higher if he actually got to start 16 games. But I was wrong in thinking he got those numbers in ONLY 4 games, obviously he played in more, but didn't start. I've already established I suck at math, and the IRS's love of my tax returns.

"Starts" is pretty irrelevant for a slot receiver though, right? He's still on the field for a good portion of the snaps.

[mws44]

You can say Smith only had 4 starts, but he was pretty much taking over Amani's role all year. It's not as if Smith was your typical third WR in this offense. He was a big part of the game plan. I like Smith, too. But he's not untradeable.

The problem with looking at those number is that it is only his second year and he isn't even a starter yet. BE started as the Browns No.1 receiver, which means he should be on the field for most of the offensive plays, and his numbers are only 55 rec. 873 yards and 3 TDs. Those numbers aren't all that impressive either. I know it was a down year for him, but SS hasn't even gotten the chance to start yet and he put up comparable numbers to a guy we are talking about trading him for. Not to mention the 2 picks. Edwards would be a great pickup as long as Smith isn't involved in the deal.

[Allstarjim]

The problem with looking at those number is that it is only his second year and he isn't even a starter yet. BE started as the Browns No.1 receiver, which means he should be on the field for most of the offensive plays, and his numbers are only 55 rec. 873 yards and 3 TDs. Those numbers aren't all that impressive either. I know it was a down year for him, but SS hasn't even gotten the chance to start yet and he put up comparable numbers to a guy we are talking about trading him for. Not to mention the 2 picks. Edwards would be a great pickup as long as Smith isn't involved in the deal.

 

 

MWS, if we are talking just statistics, it's probably not a good deal. But we're not. We're talking ability and a Giants need merging. The Giants NEED a player with Braylon's ability. They cannot sign a player like Braylon Edwards on the free agent market, because there are none. They can gamble in the draft and hope they get a top WR with Braylon's ability. I have been a proponent of Kenny Britt, because I think he'll be a star. But the bottom line is that any receiver in the draft is going to be a gamble.

 

Now say we acquire Braylon and we don't trade Smith. And in the preseason, Smith tears an achilles and is lost like Osi was last year. But we still have Braylon.

 

Now say in the same scenario it's Braylon that blows the achilles, and Smith is still there. Going forward, under which scenario do you think the Giants are best able to recover from, and still has the greatest chance to win?

 

Right now, we have no big time playmaker that we need. Steve Smith is a very good player, but he's not a big time playmaker, he's a possession receiver. We all like him. But I know for sure that without a Braylon Edwards like talent, Steve Smith or no Steve Smith, we are not going to the SuperBowl this year. You HAVE to address that need of playmaker, somebody that the defense fears and somebody that can go the distance at any time.

 

The reason why in the above scenarios losing Braylon would be more catastrophic to the Giants chances than Steve Smith is because Steve Smith's production AND ABILITY is easier to replace than Edwards.

 

This is the reason, because of need meeting ability, that I would be open to trading even Steve Smith to get that kind of playmaker, because guys like Braylon do not grow on trees. There are a lot of players we can draft, promote, or sign, that would replace Smith's ability and production. For me, I remove the emotion out of it of being a Giants fan and just take an analytical view. I think many times because we are fans of that player, we lose our objectivity in evaluating their true worth and ability.

 

The amount of improvement Braylon would bring to the Giants outweighs what would be lost by replacing Steve Smith with say, Domenik Hixon, and that is why it would still be a good deal.

 

 

 

 

[NightFire]

MWS, if we are talking just statistics, it's probably not a good deal. But we're not. We're talking ability and a Giants need merging. The Giants NEED a player with Braylon's ability. They cannot sign a player like Braylon Edwards on the free agent market, because there are none. They can gamble in the draft and hope they get a top WR with Braylon's ability. I have been a proponent of Kenny Britt, because I think he'll be a star. But the bottom line is that any receiver in the draft is going to be a gamble.

 

Now say we acquire Braylon and we don't trade Smith. And in the preseason, Smith tears an achilles and is lost like Osi was last year. But we still have Braylon.

 

Now say in the same scenario it's Braylon that blows the achilles, and Smith is still there. Going forward, under which scenario do you think the Giants are best able to recover from, and still has the greatest chance to win?

 

Right now, we have no big time playmaker that we need. Steve Smith is a very good player, but he's not a big time playmaker, he's a possession receiver. We all like him. But I know for sure that without a Braylon Edwards like talent, Steve Smith or no Steve Smith, we are not going to the SuperBowl this year. You HAVE to address that need of playmaker, somebody that the defense fears and somebody that can go the distance at any time.

 

The reason why in the above scenarios losing Braylon would be more catastrophic to the Giants chances than Steve Smith is because Steve Smith's production AND ABILITY is easier to replace than Edwards.

 

This is the reason, because of need meeting ability, that I would be open to trading even Steve Smith to get that kind of playmaker, because guys like Braylon do not grow on trees. There are a lot of players we can draft, promote, or sign, that would replace Smith's ability and production. For me, I remove the emotion out of it of being a Giants fan and just take an analytical view. I think many times because we are fans of that player, we lose our objectivity in evaluating their true worth and ability.

 

The amount of improvement Braylon would bring to the Giants outweighs what would be lost by replacing Steve Smith with say, Domenik Hixon, and that is why it would still be a good deal.

 

Hell we could just re-sign Toomer to take Smith's spot. Anyway Braylon is still a crap shoot just like a drafted WR because he only had one year and then imploded. Other than 2007 he has been average and had a major case of the dropsies. If he had a 2007 season in 2008, or atleast close, then I think 2nd, 3rd and Smith would be fine but after last year I don't think it's a good deal.

[BlueInCanada]

MWS, if we are talking just statistics, it's probably not a good deal. But we're not. We're talking ability and a Giants need merging. The Giants NEED a player with Braylon's ability. They cannot sign a player like Braylon Edwards on the free agent market, because there are none. They can gamble in the draft and hope they get a top WR with Braylon's ability. I have been a proponent of Kenny Britt, because I think he'll be a star. But the bottom line is that any receiver in the draft is going to be a gamble.

 

Now say we acquire Braylon and we don't trade Smith. And in the preseason, Smith tears an achilles and is lost like Osi was last year. But we still have Braylon.

 

Now say in the same scenario it's Braylon that blows the achilles, and Smith is still there. Going forward, under which scenario do you think the Giants are best able to recover from, and still has the greatest chance to win?

 

Right now, we have no big time playmaker that we need. Steve Smith is a very good player, but he's not a big time playmaker, he's a possession receiver. We all like him. But I know for sure that without a Braylon Edwards like talent, Steve Smith or no Steve Smith, we are not going to the SuperBowl this year. You HAVE to address that need of playmaker, somebody that the defense fears and somebody that can go the distance at any time.

 

The reason why in the above scenarios losing Braylon would be more catastrophic to the Giants chances than Steve Smith is because Steve Smith's production AND ABILITY is easier to replace than Edwards.

 

This is the reason, because of need meeting ability, that I would be open to trading even Steve Smith to get that kind of playmaker, because guys like Braylon do not grow on trees. There are a lot of players we can draft, promote, or sign, that would replace Smith's ability and production. For me, I remove the emotion out of it of being a Giants fan and just take an analytical view. I think many times because we are fans of that player, we lose our objectivity in evaluating their true worth and ability.

 

The amount of improvement Braylon would bring to the Giants outweighs what would be lost by replacing Steve Smith with say, Domenik Hixon, and that is why it would still be a good deal.

 

I'm just glad you dont work with the Giants FO then, the Giants said no to dealing Smith and thats that, no need to be "analytical" about it.

 

We want to give them our extra second and fifth round pick which should easily be enough to get a player who has a history of dropping passes along with being banged up throughout the season. However the Browns ask for Smith the only WR currently on the Giants roster who has big game experience and has shown he can move the chains which IMO is hard to find in alot of WRs regardless of your idea that a free agent can just step in and fill his spot. The Giants don't want to give Smith up in the deal, he is young, obviously has good reputation with Eli and will easily be a Giants for the rest of his career outside of some career altering injury.

 

So we countered the Browns with Hixon who has shown he "could" start or even Manninggam who at one point was projected to be a first round talent. The Browns are stupid for not taking our end of the agreement in my opinion, they get two draft picks plus a WR who could develope into something in Manningham or Hixon who can be atleast a #2 on their team.

 

Look at it this way, we get Braylon and trade away Smith. More then likely we wont be signing a WR though FA and would be drafting some kid in the later rounds just to bulk up our WR core. Lets say Braylon gets banged up which heading into the later part of his career could happen. So he's down we're then left with Hixon/Moss/Manningham/Tyree/Draft pick. Do you think we could actually win with that WR core? I'd be much happier with at least Smith/Moss/Tyree/Draft pick/Hixon or Manningham whoever we trade away if the situation came around to it. Smith has game time experience and at this point is probably the best WR on the team(if Plax isnt back) so why trade him away. He has chemistry with Eli and knows this offense and has been bread into our #2 guy. To me to throw away all that work would be beyond idiotic for the Giants to do.

 

Dont get me wrong if this Plax thing goes down the shitter and he is gone I would love to have Edwards, but not at the cost of our #2 guy with a roster of WRs who have shown nothing yet. Heck throw in an extra second round pick in my opinion or even our third which should seal the deal, but the Giants wont be trading Smith and I would take the expert opinion of the Giants FO over ANYONES opinion on an internet forum.

[fringe]

That's interesting, thanks for taking the time to figure all that out. (I'm starting to feel like Jimmy Hoffa with all those #'s questions I asked).

 

So basically, if the Giants could get Edwards, keep Smith, and cut Plax, we'd be in a pretty good position to make another run, right?

i support this strategy as well.

[NeMesiS]

They won't sign any of those guys. And Smith won't be dealt. It's a moot point.

I'm sorry, I don't mean to correct you. But don't you mean it's a Mooo point?

[boohyah]

I'm sorry, I don't mean to correct you. But don't you mean it's a Mooo point?

 

 

No, he meant moute point, right Fish?

[BIGBLUE01]

I'm sorry, I don't mean to correct you. But don't you mean it's a Mooo point?

 

Don't have a cow man.......

[NeMesiS]

No, he meant moute point, right Fish?

Moute point? I thought it was a Mooo Point. It's like a Cow's opinion... it doesn't matter... It's mooo.

[MakeMeSomeFoodHo]

there are like 50 Targets up and down Route 9 in New Jersey, just in my area.

 

 

how may targets are there in New Jersey? Id guess around 300

[fringe]

Moute point? I thought it was a Mooo Point. It's like a Cow's opinion... it doesn't matter... It's mooo.

why doesn't a cow's opinion matter?- that's udderly ridiculous

[BIGBLUE01]

Moute point? I thought it was a Mooo Point. It's like a Cow's opinion... it doesn't matter... It's mooo.

Oh shit, you were serious??? I've never heard Mooos point! lol