Hakeem Nicks

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver 0]

I am not sure why everyone is so high on him, so please persuade me. In dynasty drafts a lot of people are liking him over Maclin and Harvin, who by far have more pure athletic ability than Nicks. Here are my observations on Nicks:

 

Hakeem Nicks

 

1) Average NFL WR size - 6'1, 210 lbs is not all that impressive. Maclin is 6'0, 197 lbs - how is Nicks so much bigger?

2) Average NFL WR speed - 4.55 forty is not impressive

3) Good hands

4) Landed on an NFL team with a lot of average WR's, which is good for Nicks....but Hixon, Smith, Manningham, Moss and Barden are not slouches either. How does Nicks separate himself from them? Not talking this year, but long term?

5) Eli Manning at QB - good QB, but not elite. Spreads ball around in offense - again Nicks will not be zoned in as a target.

 

What I see here is a WR that is going to be average, but not great. If lucky he'll turn out to be Jerricho Cotchery, which would be good fantasy-wise. I don't see the Boldin comparisons everyone is making.

 

Not posting to upset anyone. How do you see this any different? Please convince me!!

[the_risen_demon 0]

I think you're understating his hands. When I looked at the tape (didn't see much UNC football during the season I'm afraid), I saw a guy who cleanly catches the ball, even in traffic. He secures the ball on the initial contact instead of bobbling the ball and giving the defensive back an opportunity to break up the play. He uses his body to catch passes when appropriate (e.g. shallow crossing routes), but otherwise rarely lets the ball get to his pads. It's difficult for me to get a feel for a player's route-running ability off of highlight reels, but the scouting reports have been very favorable in that area. The player comparison I would make is Chad Eightfive, who has similar size and hands, and ran only a 4.56 40-yard dash.

 

Edit: On the subject of spreading the ball around, Eli Manning targeted Plaxico Burress with 25.7% of his throws from the time he took over as starter until Burress was injured. By way of comparison, Tony Romo targeted Terrell Owens (a bona fide go-to wide receiver) 28.2% of the time in the 39 games they've played together. If Nicks becomes Manning's favorite target in the way that Burress was, he will see the ball plenty.

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver 0]

I think you're understating his hands. When I looked at the tape (didn't see much UNC football during the season I'm afraid), I saw a guy who cleanly catches the ball, even in traffic. He secures the ball on the initial contact instead of bobbling the ball and giving the defensive back an opportunity to break up the play. He uses his body to catch passes when appropriate (e.g. shallow crossing routes), but otherwise rarely lets the ball get to his pads. It's difficult for me to get a feel for a player's route-running ability off of highlight reels, but the scouting reports have been very favorable in that area. The player comparison I would make is Chad Eightfive, who has similar size and hands, and ran only a 4.56 40-yard dash.

 

Edit: On the subject of spreading the ball around, Eli Manning targeted Plaxico Burress with 25.7% of his throws from the time he took over as starter until Burress was injured. By way of comparison, Tony Romo targeted Terrell Owens (a bona fide go-to wide receiver) 28.2% of the time in the 39 games they've played together. If Nicks becomes Manning's favorite target in the way that Burress was, he will see the ball plenty.

 

Good points about Mannings target %. Where do you find that information? I'd like to see Calvin and Andre's trarget %'s.....and other elite WR's for that matter.

 

As far as underrating his hands....how? I said he has good hands...not average hands. I can't say he has elite hands until I see it. Good hands are good hands....means he can catch the catchable ball and has few drops. How am I underrating his hands?

[the_risen_demon 0]

You say good hands, I say best out of a particularly talented class. I also probably give more weight to hands than most evaluators, at the expense of measurables like height and speed. That's all I meant by understating. As for the stats, I just did a little math. Added up the number of targets Burress has had with the Giants (thanks, FFToday!) and divided by the number of attempts Eli threw in those games. Did the same for Owens and Romo. But since you asked so nicely:

 

Calvin Johnson was targeted 22.4% of the time over the last two years by a host of QB's too numerous to break down.

 

Andre Johnson has been targeted 26.1% of the time by Matt Schaub in the games in which they've both managed to stay healthy.

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver 0]

You say good hands, I say best out of a particularly talented class. I also probably give more weight to hands than most evaluators, at the expense of measurables like height and speed. That's all I meant by understating. As for the stats, I just did a little math. Added up the number of targets Burress has had with the Giants (thanks, FFToday!) and divided by the number of attempts Eli threw in those games. Did the same for Owens and Romo. But since you asked so nicely:

 

Calvin Johnson was targeted 22.4% of the time over the last two years by a host of QB's too numerous to break down.

 

Andre Johnson has been targeted 26.1% of the time by Matt Schaub in the games in which they've both managed to stay healthy.

 

Sweet! Thanks for the info. I personally hope Nicks, Harvin and Maclin work out.....I am just second guessing my draft. I took both Harvin and Maclin....passed on Nicks for both picks. Looking for others opinions.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

I am not sure why everyone is so high on him, so please persuade me. In dynasty drafts a lot of people are liking him over Maclin and Harvin, who by far have more pure athletic ability than Nicks. Here are my observations on Nicks:

 

Hakeem Nicks

 

1) Average NFL WR size - 6'1, 210 lbs is not all that impressive. Maclin is 6'0, 197 lbs - how is Nicks so much bigger?

2) Average NFL WR speed - 4.55 forty is not impressive

3) Good hands

4) Landed on an NFL team with a lot average WR's, which is good for Nicks....but Hixon, Smith, Manningham, Moss and Barden are not slouches either. How does Nicks separate himself from them? Not talking this year, but long term?

5) Eli Manning at QB - good QB, but not elite. Spreads ball around in offense - again Nicks will not be zoned in as a target.

 

What I see here is a WR that is going to be average, but not great. If lucky he'll turn out to be Jerricho Cotchery, which would be good fantasy-wise. I don't see the Boldin comparisons everyone is making.

 

Not posting to upset anyone. How do you see this any different? Please convince me!!

 

Pure athletic ability is often over rated. I think right now, Nicks has better WR skill than either Harvin or Maclin even tho he is a little less athletically gifted.

 

The other reason I am high on Nicks is because of his situation. He has a QB who will be missing Plaxico, and not much competition for catches on the team. I think he will be starting from day 1 and while it may take him a little while to adjust like it would any rookie WR, I think the early experience will be valuable.

 

I don't buy that Nicks wont be zoned in on as a target.. Perhaps not right away but look at when Eli had Plax in 2007. Plax caught 70 balls, Toomer had 59 as the second highest. Only Plax Toomer and Shockey had more than 26 catches.

 

Last year with Plax out and Shockey gone to NO, the ball was spread around ALOT more. 6 players caught 33 or more and the highest was only 57. But I think that was due to lacking a true go to guy or go to guys.... If Nicks can become that guy, I see no reason to think Eli inherently spreads the balls around.

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver 0]

Pure athletic ability is often over rated. I think right now, Nicks has better WR skill than either Harvin or Maclin even tho he is a little less athletically gifted.

 

The other reason I am high on Nicks is because of his situation. He has a QB who will be missing Plaxico, and not much competition for catches on the team. I think he will be starting from day 1 and while it may take him a little while to adjust like it would any rookie WR, I think the early experience will be valuable.

 

I don't buy that Nicks wont be zoned in on as a target.. Perhaps not right away but look at when Eli had Plax in 2007. Plax caught 70 balls, Toomer had 59 as the second highest. Only Plax Toomer and Shockey had more than 26 catches.

 

Last year with Plax out and Shockey gone to NO, the ball was spread around ALOT more. 6 players caught 33 or more and the highest was only 57. But I think that was due to lacking a true go to guy or go to guys.... If Nicks can become that guy, I see no reason to think Eli inherently spreads the balls around.

 

I think that most of you are making one major mistake in evaluating Nicks. You are high on him because he is a Giant, and because he ended up on a team that lost a good WR in Plaxico.......you are not in love with him because he is a great WR prospect. Had Maclin or Harvin ended up a Giant, you'd be even more excited about them as prospects than you are Nicks. Had Britt ended up a Giant...yet again, you'd be excited about Britt. That is just my observation when chatting to everyone about Nicks. In the end talent wins out. If Nicks is truely that talented, he'll be a great WR.....but I'll put my money on Harvin and Maclin.

[the_risen_demon 0]

I maybe adjust guys up or down a little based on where they are drafted, but the only league in which I play is a dynasty so I don't worry too much about that. I had Nicks rated as my #2 WR (behind Crabtree) prior to the NFL draft, and that's where he has remained.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

I think that most of you are making one major mistake in evaluating Nicks. You are high on him because he is a Giant, and because he ended up on a team that lost a good WR in Plaxico.......you are not in love with him because he is a great WR prospect. Had Maclin or Harvin ended up a Giant, you'd be even more excited about them as prospects than you are Nicks. Had Britt ended up a Giant...yet again, you'd be excited about Britt. That is just my observation when chatting to everyone about Nicks. In the end talent wins out. If Nicks is truely that talented, he'll be a great WR.....but I'll put my money on Harvin and Maclin.

 

Not really. I personally am more excited about Britt than any rookie WR. So you can toss that philosophy out the door.

 

What I do find funny though is that you cite Eli being a good but not great QB and spreading the ball around as reasons to not be high on Nicks yet Minny still has no QB.

 

anyways, Nicks right now is the better guy in terms of straight WR skills. He has better hands IMO and runs better routes. Harvin is the more athletic and dynamic of the 2 but the word dynamic scares me when players get to the NFL.. I hope he finds a legit role or as someone mentioned in the other thread he will become a good NFL player but not fantasy.

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver 0]

Not really. I personally am more excited about Britt than any rookie WR. So you can toss that philosophy out the door.

 

What I do find funny though is that you cite Eli being a good but not great QB and spreading the ball around as reasons to not be high on Nicks yet Minny still has no QB.

 

anyways, Nicks right now is the better guy in terms of straight WR skills. He has better hands IMO and runs better routes. Harvin is the more athletic and dynamic of the 2 but the word dynamic scares me when players get to the NFL.. I hope he finds a legit role or as someone mentioned in the other thread he will become a good NFL player but not fantasy.

 

Eli is NOT a great QB. Averaging 1.2 TD's per game over the last 4 years isn't lighting the world on fire by any means. You are overrating Nick's value because he is a Giant...plain and simple. I don't put much stock into QB's....talent alone, which is why I ended up with Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson, and Bowe as my dyansty WR's. If I had put stock into the teams and QB's, I would not have these guys the next 8 fantasy years.

[the_risen_demon 0]

You are overrating Nick's value because he is a Giant...plain and simple.

 

I don't think you're being fair to WhiteWonder. He's said that he values Nicks for his ability. If we've responded by mentioning the surrounding offense in New York it's because you brought it up in your original post. That said, if you drafted the Johnson brothers and Bowe as rookies, props to you.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

Eli is NOT a great QB. Averaging 1.2 TD's per game over the last 4 years isn't lighting the world on fire by any means. You are overrating Nick's value because he is a Giant...plain and simple. I don't put much stock into QB's....talent alone, which is why I ended up with Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson, and Bowe as my dyansty WR's. If I had put stock into the teams and QB's, I would not have these guys the next 8 fantasy years.

 

you didn't even read my post did you?

 

if you did you would clearly see me stating that I like Nicks for his abilities and shooting down your argument by telling you I actually like KENNY BRITT MORE

 

Eli is not a great QB, thats a fine argument against Nicks but if you are going to compare him to Harvin and pimp up Harvin.... then let me ask what great QB does Minny have? Fair question right?

 

now you can answer that you like Harvin regardless of his QB situation... and I can tell you the same thing about Nicks... see how this works?

 

also it doesnt take a FF genius to realize CJ and AJ are so talented their QB situations don't matter

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver 0]

you didn't even read my post did you?

 

if you did you would clearly see me stating that I like Nicks for his abilities and shooting down your argument by telling you I actually like KENNY BRITT MORE

 

Eli is not a great QB, thats a fine argument against Nicks but if you are going to compare him to Harvin and pimp up Harvin.... then let me ask what great QB does Minny have? Fair question right?

 

now you can answer that you like Harvin regardless of his QB situation... and I can tell you the same thing about Nicks... see how this works?

 

also it doesnt take a FF genius to realize CJ and AJ are so talented their QB situations don't matter

 

sorry if I sound like a ###### but you're not even paying attention.

 

No sir, you didn't read my post. QB doesn't matter that much long term. Talent is what matters. Cream of the Crop rises to the top. So bringing up "what QB MN has" doesn't matter at all. The Vikings will get a QB at somepoint. What QB did the Lions have for Calvin? What QB did the Texans have? What QB did the Chiefs have? Maclin and Harvin were considered by many top 10 WR talents....both taken in late teens early 20's. Many thought Nicks was a reach in the late 20's and the Giants only took him because he was "the leftover WR". If Harvin or Maclin had been there, the Giants would have went that route. In fact, the reason that Philly traded up to #19 to select Maclin was because the Giants were trying to do the same thing.

 

Funny....Giants perfered Maclin over Nicks as well. Hmmm? What does that say? It tells me that at least two teams had Maclin rated above Nicks....one was the team that drafted Nicks.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

No sir, you didn't read my post. QB doesn't matter that much long term. Talent is what matters. Cream of the Crop rises to the top. So bringing up "what QB MN has" doesn't matter at all. The Vikings will get a QB at somepoint. What QB did the Lions have for Calvin? What QB did the Texans have? What QB did the Chiefs have? Maclin and Harvin were considered by many top 10 WR talents....both taken in late teens early 20's. Many thought Nicks was a reach in the late 20's and the Giants only took him because he was "the leftover WR". If Harvin or Maclin had been there, the Giants would have went that route. In fact, the reason that Philly traded up to #19 to select Maclin was because the Giants were trying to do the same thing.

 

Funny....Giants perfered Maclin over Nicks as well. Hmmm? What does that say? It tells me that at least two teams had Maclin rated above Nicks....one was the team that drafted Nicks.

 

didn't you bring up Eli in your original post?

If QB's don't matter that much in the long term then why don't you erase those line about the Giants QB play?

 

5) Eli Manning at QB - good QB, but not elite. Spreads ball around in offense - again Nicks will not be zoned in as a target.

 

I guess I really just don't see what you are getting at. I know ive said 2 or 3 times now that I prefer Nick's skills as a WR. And I have admitted that guys like Harvin and Maclin (they will contrinute in the running and return game while Nicks won't)are superior athletes.. You brought up the Giants QB issues. I simply answered them.

 

You seem very hung up on it being the Giants.... I'm telling you I like his situation. Believe it or not the right situation can play an important part in a WR's development.

[Quickolas1 80]

the premise that talent is the only or most important factor is silly

 

who has more "talent": wes welker or lee evans/santonio holmes/braylon edwards ?

 

because wes welker outscored them all last year...(even in non-PPR)

 

charles rogers, peter warrick, david terrell, koren robinson, troy edwards & desmond howard all had great athletic skills as well

[the_risen_demon 0]

Carl, it seems what you really want is for someone to tell you you did the right thing by taking Maclin and Harvin over Nicks. Well, sorry but I'd have taken Nicks over either of them. But on the bright side, your guess is as good as mine.

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver 0]

didn't you bring up Eli in your original post?

If QB's don't matter that much in the long term then why don't you erase those line about the Giants QB play?

I guess I really just don't see what you are getting at. I know ive said 2 or 3 times now that I prefer Nick's skills as a WR. And I have admitted that guys like Harvin and Maclin (they will contrinute in the running and return game while Nicks won't)are superior athletes.. You brought up the Giants QB issues. I simply answered them.

 

You seem very hung up on it being the Giants.... I'm telling you I like his situation. Believe it or not the right situation can play an important part in a WR's development.

 

My initial 5 points were a list of things we do know about him and as well as a list of what most people would look at to make their assessment, but you are right I do not consider QB as much as most....if at all.

 

Fair enough...you like him talent-wise. Not saying you in this, but I think "most" people trick themselves into liking him more than they would have otherwise because he did land in a favorable situation in NY. All I am saying is that if Maclin was in NY, I think those same people would like Maclin as much as Nicks if not more......now people don't like Maclin as much because he ended up on a team with Jackson and Curtis already in place. Other people use the QB arugment about Harvin.....again if Harvin was a Giant, people would be freaking out over it. That is just my opinion on how I see people evaluating. I think talent wins out in the end. If Nicks is talented he'll be great.....if not, then a flop.

 

My worry about Nicks (and why I didn't draft him), is that he is not that big.....he has average size (6'1, 210 lbs). He is not that fast, so separation could be a problem....I guess we'll see. He has good hands, but that doesn't help him if he can't get open. I see him as a tweener.....not a burner, nor a big possession WR. I smell problems. I tried to buy into the "hype" on him, but couldn't pull the trigger when I had the opportunity to draft him.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

My initial 5 points were a list of things we do know about him and as well as a list of what most people would look at to make their assessment, but you are right I do not consider QB as much as most....if at all.

 

Fair enough...you like him talent-wise. Not saying you in this, but I think "most" people trick themselves into liking him more than they would have otherwise because he did land in a favorable situation in NY. All I am saying is that if Maclin was in NY, I think those same people would like Maclin as much as Nicks if not more......now people don't like Maclin as much because he ended up on a team with Jackson and Curtis already in place. Other people use the QB arugment about Harvin.....again if Harvin was a Giant, people would be freaking out over it. That is just my opinion on how I see people evaluating. I think talent wins out in the end. If Nicks is talented he'll be great.....if not, then a flop.

 

My worry about Nicks (and why I didn't draft him), is that he is not that big.....he has average size (6'1, 210 lbs). He is not that fast, so separation could be a problem....I guess we'll see. He has good hands, but that doesn't help him if he can't get open. I see him as a tweener.....not a burner, nor a big possession WR. I smell problems. I tried to buy into the "hype" on him, but couldn't pull the trigger when I had the opportunity to draft him.

 

fair enough, i would just say if one of your 5 observations about Nicks was that his QB is not great, then you can;t dismiss people saying Harvins QB isn't great. Call it one of the things we know about Harvin's situation, if you will.

[edjr 6,580]

Tate >>>>> Hicks

 

When all is said and done.

 

Obviously not this year, as Tate probably won't see the field.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

I think that most of you are making one major mistake in evaluating Nicks. You are high on him because he is a Giant, and because he ended up on a team that lost a good WR in Plaxico.......you are not in love with him because he is a great WR prospect. Had Maclin or Harvin ended up a Giant, you'd be even more excited about them as prospects than you are Nicks. Had Britt ended up a Giant...yet again, you'd be excited about Britt. That is just my observation when chatting to everyone about Nicks. In the end talent wins out. If Nicks is truely that talented, he'll be a great WR.....but I'll put my money on Harvin and Maclin.

 

I think that's a fair observation you make, although I rated Hicks pretty highly before the draft as well. I thought he was the second best "pure" WR behind Crabtree - although I agree that Harvin and Maclin are more athletically gifted.

 

All three ended up in pretty decent situations and now it just bolis down to personal preference. I think the Boldin comparisons come from the fact that 6'1", 212 is a pretty stout size for a WR and despite average top line speed he's very good after the catch.

 

I actually have Harvin rated slightly higher because I think he can be a game breaker and has a rare skill set that can allow him to be a star. I like Hicks a little more than Maclin - but I wouldn't call anyone who thinks the opposite crazy.

[Ray_T 753]

well, I'm not a giants fan, and I saw him play only once (outside of highlight reels)

 

His hands are excellent. I saw him make an amazing grab and he played a good game. got hit hard just after catching one, and hung onto the ball.

 

To me, that is a big time NFL type catch. The type you expect a receiver to make if he's gonna play in the NFL.

 

A big target with good hands makes up for a lot of athletic ability. My thought is that you can have all the athletic ability in the world, but if you cant hang onto the ball, you'll never make it. The one game I saw along with the scouting reports I saw raving about his good hands are more than enough for me. I dont question his hands at all.

 

I realize his speed isnt top end, but he will improve some with a good workout program, and if he becomes a good route runner, I dont think the speed issue will hurt him a ton.

 

I also agree that Manning isnt in the top Tier of QB's, but he also plays on a team that runs the ball more than some of the pass happy teams out there. With this being said, I am not about to compare him to his brother or to Brady, but I do think he is definitely good enough to take advantages of a receivers strengths. This is good enough for me.

 

given the choice, I'd take him, Crabtree, or Maclin and be happy to have any of them in a dynasty league.

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver 0]

Hmmm. From our friends at fftoday. com: - they are saying not to get too excited about Nicks either. He may have a tough time setting himself apart from Moss, Hixon, Manningham, and Smith. Does this take sounds familiar? Where have I heard this before? Oh yeah! I got it! I said the same thing yesterday in one of my posts above.

 

Hakeem Nicks and Ramses Barden are the new pass catchers who will be in Giants camp this season and the ones receiving the most hype in the fantasy football community right now. Steve Smith is entering his third year and has some buzz attached to his name (rightfully so in my opinion) and most people have Dominek Hixon on their radar as well after his decent run filling in for Plaxico Burris last season. However two forgotten young WRs in New York were also once highly coveted by dynasty owners before becoming afterthoughts. Third year WR Sinorice Moss and second year player Mario Manningham should have expanded roles for the Giants and have something the heralded rookies do not, experience in the system and experience with Eli Manning. During OTAs, in three WR sets, starter Steve Smith was moved to the slot while Moss lined up at flanker. Moss has shown some big play abilities in very limited action during his first two seasons and could surprise some if he takes the next step and advantage of his opportunity – there aren’t any veterans in this WR mix after all. Early word is more is expected out of Manningham as well and we know he was a very productive college player in a major conference. Admittedly these guys are long shots, but I just want to remind people that WRs don’t always burst on the scene and make an impact. Its’ a good idea to not just ignore pass catchers who haven’t done much in their early careers, as sometimes they take that next step.

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver 0]

Nicks is running with 3rd team. Source Rotoworld. LOL!.......Harvin is running with 1st team in MN and making big time plays already! Loving it!!! Like I said, Nicks is going to struggle against NFL CB's. He isn't fast enough nor big enough.

 

http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/football...volunteers.html

[madd futher mucker 36]

Who is ahead or behind after the 1st minicamp doesn't mean sh1t to me. All it means is that the Giants are not handing Nicks the starting job, he has to start at the bottom and earn it. That means he has to learn the playbook and all the defensive 'reads' before he moves up the depth chart. Hixon, Smith, Sinorice Moss and Manningham have beem in the system and Tom Coughlin is not going to throw a rookie who doesn't know the ropes ahead until he proves he is up to speed in the system. That's just the way it is done with Coughlin at NYG. On the other hand, Childress is like a kid with a new toy (Harvin). That's more a difference in coaching style than it is a reflection on the players involved. (Personally I've considered Coughlin's coaching ability to be vastly superior to Childress'.)

 

I know you can't be convinced anyway, but here goes. (and this is subscriber material only, but I'm pretty sure they won't mind if I share a 'free sample'.). Matt Waldman and Sigmond Bloom are my top two 'go-to' guys when it comes to rookie evaluations.

 

1st of all - Matt Waldman's final rookie rankings: (BTW in his pre-draft rookie scouting portfolio, Waldman had Harvin graded as an 86 and Nicks as an 85, and Maclin as an 84) But it is extremely interesting that Matt ranked BOTH Harvin and NICKS above Crabtree in his final post-draft ranking, which took into account the team and system they were drafted into.

 

1. Moreno

2. D. Brown

3. Nicks

4. Harvin

5. Wells

6. Crabtree

11. Maclin

 

Sigmond Bloom's final rankings: (note - this was before the latest OTA - Bloom has been very sceptical of Childress' creativity as a head coach to be able to use Harvin to optimum advantage. I also think he graded him down a little for the positive marijuana result - both were legitimate concerns.)

1. Moreno

2. D. Brown

3.Crabtree

4. Wells

5. McCoy

6. Nicks

10. Maclin

11. Harvin

 

You mentioned that Nicks is the same height (6'1") as Maclin and 210 (actually 212 at the combine compared to Maclin's 198. That 14# makes all the difference when it comes to LOS separation. Nicks is considerably stronger in the upper body and will absolutely get LOS separation where Maclin won't. He also probably runs close to the the best and most complete assortment of NFL routes of any of the elite receivers and probably has the about the best hands in the class (Robiskie may edge him out slightly in the route running category but does not have Nick's athletecism, and Crabtree has equally impressive hands IMO.)

 

Nicks is not a speedster but he is strong, quick and agile enough so that separation will not be a problem.

 

I have always been somewhat higher on Nicks than Harvin (and significantly higher on both than Maclin) mainly because I have felt that Harvin carried higher risk (I've recently re-evaluated him upward based on the mini-camp and a favorable article about his work ethic (but really how much trust should you put in a 'puff piece'?), but still am concerned with past and potential injury to his legs.) And, yes, I am very happy to have drafted Harvin at 1.10 but had both been available (I KNEW THAT WASN'T gonna happen) - I'd have taken Nicks. (I'm also ECSTATIC to have taken Donald Brown at 1.04.)

 

But there is no question in my mind that both of these guys have the talent to become an NFL stud WR. The question really is - do either have the COMMITMENT to be an NFL stud. (I've been watching Spike TV's 4th and Long - Michael Irvin's reality TV Football show. Irvin himself said that Nicks reminds him of a rookie version of himself. If you watch Irvin push the participant WRs and DBs on that show, you get some idea of the commitment it takes to be great, even if given great talent.)

 

Maclin is significantly more raw than either Nicks or Harvin. I expect his 1st year contribution to be mainly in the return game rather than as a receiver.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

Hmmm. From our friends at fftoday. com: - they are saying not to get too excited about Nicks either. He may have a tough time setting himself apart from Moss, Hixon, Manningham, and Smith. Does this take sounds familiar? Where have I heard this before? Oh yeah! I got it! I said the same thing yesterday in one of my posts above.

 

[madd futher mucker 36]

Referring to "Eye on the Future" I agree with the author's point but with very few of his examples. Specifically regarding the Giants. I'm ready to declare S. Moss and Manningham to be busts and no competition for Mr. Nicks. Manningham has talent, but an IQ just above moron level. Moss has not shown anything in two years.

 

Now Steve Smith and Hixon are receivers with some nice potential this year and, if not already rostered, are on just about everyone's 'watch list', but they are not the Plaxico Burress type of strong possession receiver that Nicks is. Smith is 5' 11 195 and Hixon is 6'2 but 180# soaking wet. IMO New York will use enough 3 receiver sets, and otherwise rotate Smith, Hixon and Nicks such that all 3 are not likely to be more than WR3-WR4 plays for fantasy this year.

 

That article names all those guys, but I don't think it means to imply that Nicks won't be a starter for the Gi'nts. In fact, while Smith and Hixon should already be rostered in dynasty leagues, I wouldn't waste my 22nd roster spot on either of the other two - Moss or Manningham (or Barden, for that matter).

 

But MOST of the names Mr Marcoccio mentioned in that article were "deep sleepers", and IMO he did not make a compelling case for any of them. If you mention enough names, it is akin to the saying that "even a blind squirrel can find an acorn once in a while." Without being overly critical of the article, I got just as good of information (and even more sleeper names) from Carl Eller's post My 3 WR Sleepers this Year, which got 43 responses so far.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

Referring to "Eye on the Future" I agree with the author's point but with very few of his examples. Specifically regarding the Giants. I'm ready to declare S. Moss and Manningham to be busts and no competition for Mr. Nicks. Manningham has talent, but an IQ just above moron level. Moss has not shown anything in two years.

 

Now Steve Smith and Hixon are receivers with some nice potential this year and, if not already rostered, are on just about everyone's 'watch list', but they are not the Plaxico Burress type of strong possession receiver that Nicks is. Smith is 5' 11 195 and Hixon is 6'2 but 180# soaking wet. IMO New York will use enough 3 receiver sets, and otherwise rotate Smith, Hixon and Nicks such that all 3 are not likely to be more than WR3-WR4 plays for fantasy this year.

 

That article names all those guys, but I don't think it means to imply that Nicks won't be a starter for the Gi'nts. In fact, while Smith and Hixon should already be rostered in dynasty leagues, I wouldn't waste my 22nd roster spot on either of the other two - Moss or Manningham (or Barden, for that matter).

 

But MOST of the names Mr Marcoccio mentioned in that article were "deep sleepers", and IMO he did not make a compelling case for any of them. If you mention enough names, it is akin to the saying that "even a blind squirrel can find an acorn once in a while." Without being overly critical of the article, I got just as good of information (and even more sleeper names) from Carl Eller's post My 3 WR Sleepers this Year, which got 43 responses so far.

 

That article is not designed to be a "name a sleeper" (that everyone knows about anyway), its designed for guys to keep an eye on in deep dynasty leagues that may pay off down the road.

 

It also didn't condemn Nicks like Carl Eller wanted to make it seem - if you read that paragraph it's intention was to show how people overvalue rookies and show no patience after those rookies have a "poor" season or two.

 

There have been hundreds of WRs that did nothing for their first season or two and then went on to be very productive - in fact many more than those that produced right away as rookies.

[listen2me 23 1,873]

I think that most of you are making one major mistake in evaluating Nicks. You are high on him because he is a Giant, and because he ended up on a team that lost a good WR in Plaxico.......you are not in love with him because he is a great WR prospect.

 

This is pretty wrong, most people liked Nicks a lot before the draft. Many People here had him 3rd behind Crabs and Maclin.

[listen2me 23 1,873]

Eli is NOT a great QB. Averaging 1.2 TD's per game over the last 4 years isn't lighting the world on fire by any means. You are overrating Nick's value because he is a Giant...plain and simple. I don't put much stock into QB's....talent alone, which is why I ended up with Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson, and Bowe as my dyansty WR's. If I had put stock into the teams and QB's, I would not have these guys the next 8 fantasy years.

 

Hey and you are overrating Harvin because you are a Vikes fan.

 

[listen2me 23 1,873]

Carl, it seems what you really want is for someone to tell you you did the right thing by taking Maclin and Harvin over Nicks. Well, sorry but I'd have taken Nicks over either of them. But on the bright side, your guess is as good as mine.

 

Really. I mean I am all for talking about players and having different opinions. But this Carl guy just wants people to say Harvin is the man.

[madd futher mucker 36]

This is pretty wrong, most people liked Nicks a lot before the draft. Many People here had him 3rd behind Crabs and Maclin.

 

Except for the many of us who had Nicks ranked higher than than both Harvin and Maclin almost from the beginning.

[Quickolas1 80]

it also doesnt make sense to assume a player will be better because a team had him graded higher (or traded up ahead to get so and so and nicks fell). just see the multitude of players who become busts...every single year.

 

nicks reminds me of eric moulds (i'm a bills fan). great hands and great route runner.

 

eddie kennison was picked before moulds in the tremendous wr draft of '96. i'm sure kennison had better measurables.

 

moulds had an inch (supposedly...espn had moulds height at 6'2'' but pretty sure he was closer to 6'0'') and about 15 pounds

an inch or two and 15 pounds sounds like nicks

 

moulds certainly didn't have blazing speed

he did however have 1368 yards and 8 tds in his 3rd year, leading the afc in yardage and going to the pro bowl

 

oh, and as a sidenote, marvin harrison was picked one spot after kennison

team situation/fit/opportunity does matter

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

it also doesnt make sense to assume a player will be better because a team had him graded higher (or traded up ahead to get so and so and nicks fell). just see the multitude of players who become busts...every single year.

 

nicks reminds me of eric moulds (i'm a bills fan). great hands and great route runner.

 

eddie kennison was picked before moulds in the tremendous wr draft of '96. i'm sure kennison had better measurables.

 

moulds had an inch (supposedly...espn had moulds height at 6'2'' but pretty sure he was closer to 6'0'') and about 15 pounds

an inch or two and 15 pounds sounds like nicks

 

moulds certainly didn't have blazing speed

he did however have 1368 yards and 8 tds in his 3rd year, leading the afc in yardage and going to the pro bowl

 

oh, and as a sidenote, marvin harrison was picked one spot after kennison

team situation/fit/opportunity does matter

 

 

but seriously the dude doesn't want to hear anything anyway.

[madd futher mucker 36]

I made two trades last nite - one very relevant to this discussion: I decided that the guy drafted Nicks at 1.06 (who is a reader) might have been drinking the same KoolAid Carl Eller's been drinkin'. I offered him Harvin (my 1.10 pick) for Nicks (his 1.06) and his 2010 3rd round rookie pick. He bit!.

 

I really believe that Nicks has lower risk and will get better coaching in NYG than Harvin will get at MINN. Starting a guy at 3rd string until he learns all the playbook and reads makes much more sense to me than 'annointing' Harvin a star before he played his 1st NFL game. IMO Coughlin is setting Nicks up for success; Childress may be setting Harvin up for failure.

Time will tell, but I'll take the extra 3rd.

 

My other trade - not to highjack here - is a blockbuster: I got Fitzgerald and Driver; I gave up my 2010 1st round pick, Edwards, and Evans.

I paid a lot, but I got the #1 WR in the draft who is only 25 years old. If Driver has 1 or 2 more solid years in the tank, I think I canme out ahead. If you want a Uber-stud, you gotta pay for 'em.

[Ray_T 753]

I made two trades last nite - one very relevant to this discussion: I decided that the guy drafted Nicks at 1.06 (who is a reader) might have been drinking the same KoolAid Carl Eller's been drinkin'. I offered him Harvin (my 1.10 pick) for Nicks (his 1.06) and his 2010 3rd round rookie pick. He bit!.

 

I really believe that Nicks has lower risk and will get better coaching in NYG than Harvin will get at MINN. Starting a guy at 3rd string until he learns all the playbook and reads makes much more sense to me than 'annointing' Harvin a star before he played his 1st NFL game. IMO Coughlin is setting Nicks up for success; Childress may be setting Harvin up for failure.

Time will tell, but I'll take the extra 3rd.

 

My other trade - not to highjack here - is a blockbuster: I got Fitzgerald and Driver; I gave up my 2010 1st round pick, Edwards, and Evans.

I paid a lot, but I got the #1 WR in the draft who is only 25 years old. If Driver has 1 or 2 more solid years in the tank, I think I canme out ahead. If you want a Uber-stud, you gotta pay for 'em.

That's a good deal for you. Edwards & Evans have always been more hype than anything.

 

Just like the draft conversation, their measureables are excellent. Good speed, good size etc. but both have underperformed. In return, you get a Stud of a WR who will likely be top 3(or close to it) in all receiving categories.

 

Driver is a nice throw in to the deal and allows you to draft a WR and give him a couple of years to develop.

 

as for the receivers, I'd say a good route runner in College is more likely to make the transition to NFL quickly as there is less 'Reprogramming' needed to get the guy up to speed. so Yeah, I agree. less risk for Nicks.

[DA BALLHOG 0]

Tate >>>>> Hicks

 

When all is said and done.

 

Obviously not this year, as Tate probably won't see the field.

 

 

 

Patriots got a steal there imo....I went to a few UNC games this year, Tate when healthy is a beast.

[xenophobe 1]

You are never going to convince the guys who draft based on the combine of the value of a guy like Nicks. But all you have to do is watch him play -they guy is a playmaker. He won't be a down field vertical guy, he's often compared to Boldin, but I see a lot of Hines Ward in him also.

 

The guy is a tremendous athelete. No, he's not a burner, but his body control, hands, strength are all very impressive, and the guy just plays with more intensity than the people around him. In the team's recent rookie mini camp he was extremely impressive by all accounts. He seems very confident without being cocky and doing/showing/and saying all the things you would hope to see. Here is what one of the team's beat writers wrote me about him:

 

"I did think he looked quicker than I expected. He looked explosive out of the blocks, which is important."

 

"Nicks burst off the line, had some excellent moves, and a second gear once he got by a corner. Of course, he's only running against rookies -- and low-round or UDFA rookies at that. But he looked like he was way out of their league, so that's good."

 

Its way too early to tell on most of these guys, but Nicks has been off to a very good start. I love Harvin by the way -skills off the chart- but would suggest he has a lot higher chance to bust than Nicks.

 

With both starting WR spots open, he'll get a shot to perform right away, but there are a lot of guys in the mix vying for those spots, so we'll have to see how things progress through the summer.

[dksmith17380 0]

UNC football homer here with some sorta inside info.

And yes I said UNC FOOTBALL FAN. And yes I go to the games (and watch them all) and yes I have even talked to multiple players on the team (from this year) specifically about Hakeem. You can say what you want about his ability, but the guy just is a playmaker. He really just has that "it" quality and that diva WR attitude about him and all teammates I talked to specifically brought this up (the it quality). Even at Carolina with subpar coaching most of his career (that was run first), subpar quarterbacks and very talented receivers surrounding him (3 UNC receivers were drafted this year- Foster and Tate) Nicks had great numbers and found his way into the first round only being a junior.

 

I even randomly ran into a NYG personnel guy on a flight a couple of months ago. It was predraft and I asked how they thought they would be drafting this year. No question in his mind he knew they wanted Nicks and was very confident about the pick and the fact he would fall to them. I think it is safe to say that NYG recently has been very on point with their personnel decisions and this is a good omen for Hakeem.

 

So my conclusion:

1 year leagues? - pass on Hakeem ( I think Steve Smith is the #1 target but they spread the ball around a lot)

 

Dynasty? I think he is #2 on my WR list behind Crabtree but and is deffenitely in the top 3. I think Maclin is the best talent but is stuck in Philly where they spread the ball around quite a bit. I think Nicks could actually be the safest option of the WR's this year (Crabtree has lots of downside with the QB/FO issues in SF).

[ROYALWITCHEESE 0]

I think you're understating his hands. When I looked at the tape (didn't see much UNC football during the season I'm afraid), I saw a guy who cleanly catches the ball, even in traffic. He secures the ball on the initial contact instead of bobbling the ball and giving the defensive back an opportunity to break up the play. He uses his body to catch passes when appropriate (e.g. shallow crossing routes), but otherwise rarely lets the ball get to his pads. It's difficult for me to get a feel for a player's route-running ability off of highlight reels, but the scouting reports have been very favorable in that area. The player comparison I would make is Chad Eightfive, who has similar size and hands, and ran only a 4.56 40-yard dash.

 

Edit: On the subject of spreading the ball around, Eli Manning targeted Plaxico Burress with 25.7% of his throws from the time he took over as starter until Burress was injured. By way of comparison, Tony Romo targeted Terrell Owens (a bona fide go-to wide receiver) 28.2% of the time in the 39 games they've played together. If Nicks becomes Manning's favorite target in the way that Burress was, he will see the ball plenty.

 

 

That has to be one of the worst comparisons I have ever seen. Chad is 6'1 190 soaking wet--and the fastest, quickest guy on the field almost every time out--AND and multiple Pro-Bowler.

 

If Nicks is 3/4 the player Chad is, he should thank his lucky stars--and I attend UNC, and really like his play. Nicks is 6'2 215, and will be nowhere near the fastest or quickest guy on the field. While he may have similar hands, he is no Chad Johnson. Neither are Anquan Boldin or Dwayne Bowe, who I think compare much more favorably.

 

I think if you want a legit comparison--look at the ex-Giant--Armani Toomer. Even Hines Ward...

[dhockster 0]

No sir, you didn't read my post. QB doesn't matter that much long term. Talent is what matters. Cream of the Crop rises to the top. So bringing up "what QB MN has" doesn't matter at all. The Vikings will get a QB at somepoint. What QB did the Lions have for Calvin? What QB did the Texans have? What QB did the Chiefs have? Maclin and Harvin were considered by many top 10 WR talents....both taken in late teens early 20's. Many thought Nicks was a reach in the late 20's and the Giants only took him because he was "the leftover WR". If Harvin or Maclin had been there, the Giants would have went that route. In fact, the reason that Philly traded up to #19 to select Maclin was because the Giants were trying to do the same thing.

 

Funny....Giants perfered Maclin over Nicks as well. Hmmm? What does that say? It tells me that at least two teams had Maclin rated above Nicks....one was the team that drafted Nicks.

 

I had heard the same thing about the Giants trading up to get Maclin. However, just because the Giants may have had Maclin rated higher does not mean Nicks won't end up being the better receiver. Back when the Eagles had Vermeil as coach he was devastated when the Buffalo Bills took Perry Tuttle (who?) right before the Eagles picked. The Eagles settled for Mike Quick. Ended up great for the Eagles.

 

I find this thread curious because you asked for opinions on the receivers in question. People made good, well thought out responses, and you seemed to want to tell them they were wrong. If you just want opinions that agree with yours, say that up front, and don't waste people's time.