belljr
Footballguy
Other than Ben the past couple years (not sure he is elite), name the elite QB Ward played withKordell Stewarts good year?
Kent Graham
Tommy Maddox
Charlie Batch
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Does Hines Ward belong in the Hall of Fame? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter The_Man
- Start date
Other than Ben the past couple years (not sure he is elite), name the elite QB Ward played withKordell Stewarts good year?
Kent Graham
Tommy Maddox
Charlie Batch
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
In all fairness, Ward has played with Roethlisberger for almost half of his career (5 of 11 seasons), and his best season came with Tommy Maddox, so you are not exactly helping your case here.
belljr
Footballguy
True but he said ELITE QB....And the first 2 seasons ben was allowed to do just enough.Hey I love Ward and all I was just confused about the elite QB comment. Even if his best #'s are with Maddox would you call Maddox an elite QB?In all fairness, Ward has played with Roethlisberger for almost half of his career (5 of 11 seasons), and his best season came with Tommy Maddox, so you are not exactly helping your case here.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Of course not, but Maddox did play extremely well that year, just like Testaverde did in '98. Neither are even close to being all-time elite QBs, obviously, but both had great seasons, and that contributed to the very good statistical years that Ward and Johnson had in those respective seasons.True but he said ELITE QB....And the first 2 seasons ben was allowed to do just enough.Hey I love Ward and all I was just confused about the elite QB comment. Even if his best #'s are with Maddox would you call Maddox an elite QB?In all fairness, Ward has played with Roethlisberger for almost half of his career (5 of 11 seasons), and his best season came with Tommy Maddox, so you are not exactly helping your case here.
no doubt, but Ward is still just 32 years old. Harrison is 36, Bruce is 36, and Owens is 35. All 3 of them seem to be much closer to retirement than Ward is right now. I don't expect him to catch those guys anyway, except for possibly Bruce. Ward is not catching Moss either. Holt is the same age and only 69 receptions and 2 TDs ahead of Ward.Ward is also very close to winning his 2nd Super Bowl ring as a #1 WR right now. Not many other elite WRs among his peers who can make the same claim (Deion Branch aside given his pedestrian career numbers and injury problems).
Last edited by a moderator:
Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
Branch's playoff resume (and regular season resume) doesn't compare to Ward's.11 games
49 receptions for 725 yards (14.8), 3 TD
belljr
Footballguy
Fair enough.... I agree Of course not, but Maddox did play extremely well that year, just like Testaverde did in '98. Neither are even close to being all-time elite QBs, obviously, but both had great seasons, and that contributed to the very good statistical years that Ward and Johnson had in those respective seasons.True but he said ELITE QB....And the first 2 seasons ben was allowed to do just enough.Hey I love Ward and all I was just confused about the elite QB comment. Even if his best #'s are with Maddox would you call Maddox an elite QB?In all fairness, Ward has played with Roethlisberger for almost half of his career (5 of 11 seasons), and his best season came with Tommy Maddox, so you are not exactly helping your case here.
The Jerk
Footballguy
Deion Branch? Are you talking about the same Deion Branch who scored in exactly two of 11 playoff games? I know Branch did perform better in the postseason than in the regular season, but I'd argue Lynn Swann over Deion Branch as second to Rice for the "when all eyes were watching and in the biggest games of a player's career" part. In Swann's 16 playoff games: 48 - 907 - 9 (18.9 ypc) -- scored a TD in 8 of 16 gamesIn Swann's 4 Super Bowls: 16 - 364 - 3 (22.8 ypc) -- scored a TD in 3 of 4 gamesNote that the Steelers were such a run-oriented team in 1974-75 that not one pass was thrown in Swann's direction in SB IX. In other words, Swann put up his numbers in only three games.In Branch's 11 playoff games: 49 - 725 - 3 (14.8 ypc) -- scored a TD in 2 of 11 gamesIn Branch's 2 Super Bowls: 21 - 276 - 1 (12.7 ypc) -- scored a TD in 1 of 2 gamesBranch clearly has the numbers in terms of receptions and slightly on yards. However, there needs to be some factoring as to the difference in the passing games of the 1970s vs. today. And Swann dwarfs Branch in the touchdown and yards per reception category (i.e., big plays). In addition, the Patriots were a pass-oriented team in all of Branch's seasons there, whereas the Steelers only became a balanced team (perhaps tilted toward the pass) starting with the 1978 season and the rule changes that opened up the passing game in the NFL.At the very least, Swann should be included alongside Branch. It's fairly well agreed that the main reason Swann is in the Hall of Fame is his postseason performance. (It helps that he made highlight reel catches and has four rings, too.)By the way, Branch's biggest yardage game (8-153-0) came in New England's loss at Denver in the 2005-06 playoffs.
Jason Wood
Zoo York
I figured there would be a few votes for the guy because he's seemingly well liked and is often credited as a teammate who does the "little things" that don't show up in a box score better than most at his position. But I was stunned to see how many people think he should be in the HOF. Ward is a good player, but he shouldn't even sniff the HOF IMHO.
dgreen
Footballguy
And 2,880 yards.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
the only way ward should ever get in the hall is like the rest of us, by paying
dgreen
Footballguy
26% stuns you? Half of that 26% are Steelers fans.
dgreen
Footballguy
Oops. I misread the poll.Still, I don't find 34% to be all that stunning.
yep.IMO, Ward is a great/complete football player who would have excelled in any era on any team. I can't say the same for some of his peers that seem to have stronger cases for the HOF.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Jerk
Footballguy
Also, concerning Deion Branch...
In John Stallworth's 17 playoff games: 57 - 1054 - 12 (18.5 ypc) -- scored a TD in 10 of 17 games
In John Stallworth's 4 Super Bowls: 11 - 268 - 3 (24.4 ypc) -- scored a TD in 2 of 4 games
It's even more interesting to break down Stallworth's numbers starting in 1978. Stallworth took longer to adjust to the pro game and/or gain playing time and Bradshaw's trust. Keep in mind that Bradshaw called his own plays...
John Stallworth's first seven playoff games (prior to 1978 rules changes): 15 - 184 - 1
John Stallworth's final ten playoff games (after rules changes): 42 - 870 - 11 (20.7 ypc) -- TDs in nine consecutive playoff games (9 of 10 games)
Think the rules changes and corresponding adjustment in Steelers offensive philosophy mattered?
In Branch's 11 playoff games: 49 - 725 - 3 (14.8 ypc) -- scored a TD in 2 of 11 games
In Branch's 2 Super Bowls: 21 - 276 - 1 (12.7 ypc)
So I basically owned myself. Stallworth belongs above both Swann and Branch in terms of playoff performance.
In John Stallworth's 17 playoff games: 57 - 1054 - 12 (18.5 ypc) -- scored a TD in 10 of 17 games
In John Stallworth's 4 Super Bowls: 11 - 268 - 3 (24.4 ypc) -- scored a TD in 2 of 4 games
It's even more interesting to break down Stallworth's numbers starting in 1978. Stallworth took longer to adjust to the pro game and/or gain playing time and Bradshaw's trust. Keep in mind that Bradshaw called his own plays...
John Stallworth's first seven playoff games (prior to 1978 rules changes): 15 - 184 - 1
John Stallworth's final ten playoff games (after rules changes): 42 - 870 - 11 (20.7 ypc) -- TDs in nine consecutive playoff games (9 of 10 games)
Think the rules changes and corresponding adjustment in Steelers offensive philosophy mattered?
In Branch's 11 playoff games: 49 - 725 - 3 (14.8 ypc) -- scored a TD in 2 of 11 games
In Branch's 2 Super Bowls: 21 - 276 - 1 (12.7 ypc)
So I basically owned myself. Stallworth belongs above both Swann and Branch in terms of playoff performance.
The Jerk
Footballguy
Final note concerning comparisons of era with regards to Swann and Stallworth vs. Deion Branch.
I looked at three six-game stretches, all of which resulted in Super Bowl victories, to see the average passing statistics of Bradshaw and Brady
The average game for each six-game stretch (rounded off for ease of viewing, except for TD and INT):
Group 1: Steelers 1974-75, 10 completions, 18 attempts, 153 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT
Group 2: Steelers 1978-79, 16 completions, 27 attempts, 258 yards, 2.33 TD, 1.33 INT
Group 3: Patriots 2004-05, 22 completions, 35 attempts, 230 yards, 1.67 TD, 0.33 INT
First, the difference between group 1 and group 2 shows the difference the rules changes/Bradshaw's maturity/change in philosophy/weaker defense had on the Steelers passing game number.
However, even the comparatively pass-happy Steelers complete 6 fewer passes on 8 fewer attempts per game than the 04-05 Patriots.
So you can see how Branch's reception numbers are boosted by the modern passing scheme and strategy compared to Swann and Stallworth.
I'll quit now so that the discussion can go back to Hines Ward. Sorry, but the Deion Branch talk needed to be addressed.
I looked at three six-game stretches, all of which resulted in Super Bowl victories, to see the average passing statistics of Bradshaw and Brady
The average game for each six-game stretch (rounded off for ease of viewing, except for TD and INT):
Group 1: Steelers 1974-75, 10 completions, 18 attempts, 153 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT
Group 2: Steelers 1978-79, 16 completions, 27 attempts, 258 yards, 2.33 TD, 1.33 INT
Group 3: Patriots 2004-05, 22 completions, 35 attempts, 230 yards, 1.67 TD, 0.33 INT
First, the difference between group 1 and group 2 shows the difference the rules changes/Bradshaw's maturity/change in philosophy/weaker defense had on the Steelers passing game number.
However, even the comparatively pass-happy Steelers complete 6 fewer passes on 8 fewer attempts per game than the 04-05 Patriots.
So you can see how Branch's reception numbers are boosted by the modern passing scheme and strategy compared to Swann and Stallworth.
I'll quit now so that the discussion can go back to Hines Ward. Sorry, but the Deion Branch talk needed to be addressed.
Tau837
Footballguy
Like who? Are you suggesting guys like Harrison, Owens, Moss, and Holt would not have excelled in other eras? I'd like to know who you are referencing and get an explanation for why you think that.
Tau837
Footballguy
These are the players who have been selected as AP 1st Team All Pros during Ward's career:
David Boston
Cris Carter
Larry Fitzgerald
Antonio Freeman
Marvin Harrison
Torry Holt
Andre Johnson
Chad Johnson
Randy Moss
Muhsin Muhammad
Terrell Owens
Steve Smith
For all those who feel Ward's play has been good enough for him to merit HOF induction, why hasn't it been good enough to earn at least one 1st Team All Pro selection?
David Boston
Cris Carter
Larry Fitzgerald
Antonio Freeman
Marvin Harrison
Torry Holt
Andre Johnson
Chad Johnson
Randy Moss
Muhsin Muhammad
Terrell Owens
Steve Smith
For all those who feel Ward's play has been good enough for him to merit HOF induction, why hasn't it been good enough to earn at least one 1st Team All Pro selection?
Wadsworth
Footballguy
The question is how you define "great/complete" and how do you compare Ward to others in that aspect. At first glance it sounds like an opinion that cannot be proven, dis proven, or measured. But if we assume there are ways the Ward excels that don't show up in the stats, how much weight would you give these things?Ward had little opportunity his rookie season so let's give him a mulligan on that year. So in 10 seasons:Aaron Rudnicki said:
Ward:
785-9534-72
Jimmy Smith who also played on a none pass happy team over his 10 seasons of opportunity had:
Jimmy Smith
850-11999-67
So Smith averaged 6.5 more catches, 249 more yards and .5 fewer TDs a season. Also, his post season play compares well to Ward on a per game basis. So is that enough to balance out these other things that make him a superior football player?
The Jerk
Footballguy
I would vote NO for the HoF for Hines Ward, but the argument for Hines Ward will never be based on statistics, and especially not regular season statistics. The argument for Ward is that his intangibles are off the charts, in terms of blocking, team leadership, and clutch/tough catches, to name a few.Compared to Smith, Hines would be seen favorably by his team's 9-4 playoff record vs. Smith's 4-5, two SB appearances to none, one SB win, one SB MVP. However, on balance, I believe you make a pretty good argument in terms of Jimmy Smith being a contemporary receiver with better raw statistics. I disagree with the Jaguars being considered as not a pass-happy team. That's true now and it has been for 5-6 years, but it wasn't true for the first half of Smith's career. In Smith's first five seasons (1996-2000), the Jaguars ranked 1, 4, 20, 12, 9 in passing yards. By comparison, in Ward's first five seasons (1999-2003), the Steelers ranked 26, 29, 21, 7, 14 in passing yards. That's an average of 9th for the Jaguars and 19th for the Steelers. Over years 6-10 of each receiver's career, each team has averaged 20th in passing yards: (Jax 2001-2005: 18, 28, 15, 19, 19; Pitt 2004-2008: 28, 24, 9, 22, 17)
Last edited by a moderator:
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
The Jaguars passed for more yards in part because Jimmy Smith is a better receiver than Hines Ward.
Wadsworth
Footballguy
This is the argument that always comes up, and I agree that Ward plays hurt, goes over the middles, blocks very well and is a leader. But it always seems like the people supporting Ward act like no other WR does any of that. Ward might have an edge on the intangibles, but is it 250 yards a season edge? Smith had 9 seasons over a 1,000 yards including 7 in a row. Smith had 4 seasons over 1,200 yards. Wards has 5 and 1 of the same. I understand that there are intangibles in football that they are important. I can measure 950 yards per season average versus 1,200 yards per season. I'm not sure how to measure blocking, leadership, etc.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sheriff66
Footballguy
Aaron Rudnicki said:
Real football needs to be separated from fantasy football in this discussion, I think fantasy/stat geeks know Ward by what they see in the scoring of their fantasy leagues, and Ward play cannot be judged by just stats alone. The guy may be the most complete FOOTBALL player I have watched over the years, and I've been watching the NFL since the Steelers won SB14.
Last edited by a moderator:
Wadsworth
Footballguy
Then how would you select member?
Wadsworth
Footballguy
But how do you decide? Based on what? To the best of my recollection that guy that hasn't played in 5 years was pretty dang good? How many Jaguar games have you watched as opposed to Steeler game in the last 15 years? Did you know the Smith had arguably the best single game ever for a WR with 15 catches for 291 yards and 3 TDs against the Ravens great 2000 defense? Did you see that game? It was amazing to watch. Whenever you deviate from stats you get into opinion and opinion is naturally swayed by exposure and perception. Pittsburgh for example gets a lot more exposure than most NFL teams. Many more people have seen many more games Hines Ward has played. The stats are not swayed. And I think it's a crime that more linemen are not in the Hall and that Pro Bowls are a poor measure of a players greatness, just to answer your questions.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Jerk
Footballguy
Jimmy Smith might be a better statistical pass catcher than Hines Ward, but I will not agree that he is a better player at wide receiver. Furthermore, it's FAR more likely that the Jaguars passed for more yards because Jacksonville had Mark Brunell at QB while the Steelers had Kordell Stewart, Mike Tomczak, Kent Graham and Tommy Maddox at QB. The one year Maddox played over his head was the year the Steelers finished 7th in yardage.
The Jerk
Footballguy
It's a more subjective argument. I greatly respect Jimmy Smith as an opponent. He would have been a much bigger star had he been in any of the large media markets and/or had an even more pass-oriented offense to showcase his talents. I believe plenty of other wide receivers possess and use these "intangible" abilities, but very few take it to the level of Hines Ward. He almost never takes a play off, and with the Steelers predominantly a run-oriented team during his 11 seasons, blocking is more important for a Steeler receiver than with a team like Vermeil and Martz's Rams.Really, does one more catch for 15 more yards per game do more for a team in terms of winning a game than superior blocking on 30-35 running plays? There is no statistical or numerical way to answer this question, but an illuminating point is that the one more catch equals one more play in which the player had an impact, whereas the better blocker may spring a RB for an additional dozen yards several times during the game.
Wadsworth
Footballguy
12 yards several (which means at least 3 right?) times a game is 576 yards a year. You really think Ward's perceived superior blocking yields an extra 576 rushing yards a season over an average blocking NFL WR? And Ward isn't a deep threat WR, but players that are can force CBs to play deeper which is an advantage in the run game. How many rushing yards a seasons does someone like Moss benefit his team over the average NFL WR just based on his deep play ability? I don't know. I don't even know that Ward is a better run blocker than Jimmy Smith. I think he is, but Jimmy was a good run blocker and I've never sat and watched hours and hours of coaches tapes solely focusing on WR blocking. This gets back to opinion which as I said before is swayed by perception and exposure. The vast majority of people have been exposed to Hines Ward a good deal more than Jimmy Smith, which can sway opinion. I ask again, how many people watched Jimmy Smith put up 291 and 3 TDs against one of the best defenses of all time? Not very many at all I bet. But if they had I bet many of them would change their minds. Just one example of how exposure can effect opinion.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
I don't know what a statistical pass catcher is but he was a much better real life pass catcher.
Irish
Footballguy
Yes, but Ward is the better overall football player.
The Jerk
Footballguy
The exact yardage added on from a block is speculative on my part, just an example. I won't re-type the same post again. I've said multiple times in multiple ways that there are no ways to precisely measure the contributions made by players when considering blocking, leadership, etc. It is absolutely a subjective argument. I'm not attempting to force you to believe Hines Ward is a better player than Jimmy Smith. All I am trying to express is how someone might make that argument. I believe you have a point about Hines Ward having more exposure than Jimmy Smith; however, I'm not sure that is always a positive. Ward has gotten notoriety for his vicious blocks, to the point that those hits are the first thing many people think of him as a player. It probably overshadows his pass catching ability and even his play-to-play blocking ability. However, I don't think Ward's reputation as a good blocker is a media creation, either.
jonessed
Footballguy
He clearly wasn't a better real-life statistical run blocker though.
The Jerk
Footballguy
Cute comment. Nice job addressing my counterpoint. Was Smith helped by spending his first five years with Brunell? Since you're such a numbers guy, I've prepared the following for you.Difference between Hines Ward and Jimmy Smith their first five years as starters, per gameSmith (1996-2000): 5.70 - 83.5 - 0.42Ward (1999-2003): 5.12 - 60.1 - 0.46Smith, per game, had 0.58 - 23.4 - (-0.04) numbers better than Ward.Difference between Hines Ward and Jimmy Smith in their second five seasons:Smith (2001-2005): 5.13 - 71.0 - 0.41Ward (2004-2008): 5.07 - 63.9 - 0.47Smith, per game had 0.06 - 7.1 - (-0.06) numbers better than Ward.Most of the statistical difference between Smith and Ward occurred in the first five years of their career as starters, coinciding with the QB discrepancy I mentioned previously.
Wadsworth
Footballguy
Jimmy Smith was also 32 years old after his first 5 seasons as a starter, Ward was 27. Smith broke his leg before his career even started and then before he was recovered underwent an emergency appendectomy which led to a severe infection and was nearly fatal. As a street free agent he made the rounds until finally signing on with Jacksonville as a special teamer and working his way up to starter. Due to the health issues, he was 26 years old before he caught his first NFL pass yet still had over 12,000 yards and 850 catches. So not only was his career short by WR standards, but more than half his production years came after he was 30 years old. There are all kinds of intangibles.
The Jerk
Footballguy
It's fair to point out the relative ages. In addition, Leftwich was young and inexperienced for a couple of those seasons. Keep in mind that I am addressing Chase who didn't address the QB discrepancy. But... numbers are numbers. It's somewhat inconsistent for most of your argument to consist of numbers only until I bring one up that mitigates the statistical advantage, at least within the parameters I defined.I greatly admired Smith's toughness in recovering from his early adversity. Although I would not call it a benefit, those early years did at least avoid the overall bodily wear and tear. He was in some ways a less beat up 35 year old than some who played every year since college are at 35.It remains to be seen what kind of production Ward will have in his final seasons. Theoretically, he will have an advantage at QB compared to Smith's final seasons.One other debatable detail: did Smith have an advantage getting to play in Jacksonville and on a top-notch field compared to Ward in Pittsburgh's climate and surface? (It's more about weather than field, I believe.)
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Smith had 7 years of Brunell and 3 years of Leftwich while Ward had 5 years of Roethlisberger, 2 years of Maddox and 1 year of Stewart. A small but not enormous edge to Smith.
I've got Smith with a small but clear edge career to date. His '99 was better than Ward's '02, and his '01 was better than Ward's '05. His third, fourth, fifth and sixth best seasons rate out as slightly better than Ward's corresponding years. I've got Smith at 10 and Ward at 29, but Ward's career certainly isn't over. Ward was on teams that threw less frequently, but that's taken into account by my system. They've also had pretty comparably talented WR2s and TEs on their teams throughout.
I've got Smith with a small but clear edge career to date. His '99 was better than Ward's '02, and his '01 was better than Ward's '05. His third, fourth, fifth and sixth best seasons rate out as slightly better than Ward's corresponding years. I've got Smith at 10 and Ward at 29, but Ward's career certainly isn't over. Ward was on teams that threw less frequently, but that's taken into account by my system. They've also had pretty comparably talented WR2s and TEs on their teams throughout.
CalBear
Footballguy
Wait, weren't you just arguing that Jimmy Smith is a great receiver because he played on a run-first team? Isn't the same argument true for Bruce/Holt, that the Rams passed for more yards in part because they were better receivers than Jimmy Smith?
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
I argued Jimmy Smith was a great receiver because he was a great receiver. His stats are slightly deceiving because his team didn't pass that frequently. Bruce and Holt were on teams that passed frequently because they had two great WRs, a great pass catching RB and a great QB.
CalBear
Footballguy
Maybe if Jimmy Smith were a better receiver, his teams would have passed more often.
The Jerk
Footballguy
I forgot to address this statement. To me (and not necessarily to you or anyone else), when I think of WR intangibles, I'm thinking of what I've listed before: blocking, toughness, leadership, versatility (new), clutchness (is that a word?).Smith's late start to his career is not one I would call an intangible. Or at least it's a different kind of intangible. For example, Lynn Swann retired after nine seasons. Not an intangible to me, but a relevant detail in terms of discussing his career numbers.I find your unwillingness to cede even one point to Hines Ward quite interesting. In various posts, I believe you've argued that Smith was Ward's equal as a blocker, in terms of toughness, and now intangibles. It's fine for you to believe Jimmy Smith is a better player, but you don't seem to even acknowledge that an argument can be made for Ward. I can make the argument for Smith: In ten seasons as a starter, Smith had nearly 2500 more receiving yards, had 55 more catches, nearly as many touchdowns, nearly twice as many 1000 yard seasons (9 to 5), and one more Pro Bowl selection (5 to 4). He accomplished all of this despite coming out of a smaller college (Jackson State vs. Georgia), suffering a series of major physical setbacks, and playing for an expansion team.How am I doing?But, a case can be made for Ward as well: In ten seasons as a starter, Ward has only 55 fewer receptions, three double-digit TD seasons (to none for Smith), twice as many multiple-TD games (14 to 7), a Super Bowl MVP, wide recognition as the best blocking WR in his era, and enough versatility to rush for 400+ yards (and also to line up as a QB before it was in vogue). He accomplished all of this despite playing the first half of his career with mediocre QBs and with two first-round picks (Troy Edwards 1999 and Plaxico Burress 2000) drafted immediately after him to fight for receptions and contend with on the depth chart. The colder climate and power running game prevalent for most of his career have not helped him garner flashy statistics, but he has often been mentioned as among the best all-around WRs in football.If you don't want to go with the toughness and leadership, could you at least acknowledge the preceding paragraph as a valid argument for Ward. Smith has a clear statistical edge, but Ward has a more diverse resume.
Wadsworth
Footballguy
It is somewhat inconsistent. But I say look at the numbers and someone else say yea, but what about the intangibles? I think it's fair at that point to bring other non-number factors into the debate. Overall, as much as I'm an admitted Jaguar homer and Jimmy Smith fan, this debate to me is more about the difficulty of bringing intangibles into the debate in the first place. Every NFL player has a story and brings something to the table beyond the stats. But it's extremely difficult to measure beyond the stats. Better exposed players get more opportunity to get their intangibles noticed by more fans. For example, on Jimmy Smith's 27th birthday he had 22 cacthes for 288 yards. You could make a case that him adding more than 800 more catches and 12,000 more yards is one of the great accomplishments by an NFL player in the modern era. But that story gets no press. So yea, Ward's blocking and leadership benefit the Steeler beyond the stats. Randy Moss is constantly double teamed and defenses are force to game plan specifically to stop him. That benefits his team beyond the stats. Which one brings more benefit beyond the stats? I have no idea, but that's the point. Every time Hines ward comes up all you hear is about the intangibles. Every good player bring intangible benefit to his team. Trying to measure that advantage relies too much on perception, and perception is directly related to exposure.
Wadsworth
Footballguy
I freely acknowledge all of what you said about Ward. He's been one of the best WRs in the league for a decade. I love his willingness to play hurt, go across the middle and to block. And I said I thought Ward was the better blocker, but I didn't know how to prove it. Which is where the problem begins with me and intangibles. Part of it may be a that as a Jags fan I do have somewhat of a small market chip on my shoulder. I fully believe that if Jimmy had the exact same career with Dallas or Pittsburgh he'd be a sure fire HoFer. I also believe that as good as Ward has been, the perception of his greatness is increased due to his extreme exposure and the large and vocal Steeler fan base. If Ward played his whole career in Jacksonville, how many people would be talking about his intangibles?
The Jerk
Footballguy
You are leaving out two full years of Ward's career, but that's fine. I'm fuzzy on Brunell's exact pre-Jaguar days but I believe he was drafted by Green Bay, and spent two years basically with a clipboard before going to Jacksonville. 1996 was Brunell's fourth season as a pro and second season as a starter. Roethlisberger's 2004 is well known as his first season in the league. All seven of Smith's Brunell years were from Brunell's 4th-10th pro season, essentially his prime. The shackles didn't come off Ben until the playoffs after his second season. The QB advantage is not enormous, but it's there. I would recommend upgrading from small to medium.
The Jerk
Footballguy
I wasn't getting that from you; not that you should care what I think, really. I'm just a random message board geek. Anyway, the Hall of Fame vs. Hall of Great Stats debate is really what this is all about to me.The whole Hall of Fame argument for any player to me goes way beyond statistics. You are correct about the difficulty of measuring intangibles. The word itself means that it is something that is abstract and hard to define. This will sound pretty dumb to many people, but for me a Hall of Famer is a Hall of Famer because they are a Hall of Famer.What I mean is that when I think of a given player in any sport, there's an indescribable calculation of everything about that player that somehow results in a YES or NO in my brain. Part of it is statistical, but really everything is taken into account from consideration of team success to impact the player had on the sport as a whole, performances in the clutch, memorable plays, etc. I could never produce a system to account for that. Some, like probably Chase, would find this anathema to them. That's fine. However, any time I try to systematically rank players, I tend to find that by changing the weights of the various statistical parameters, I can greatly influence the ordering of players, teams, whatever. Ultimately, in a sense I need to trust my gut instinct.So if I think Hines Ward... brain processes it all and... NOIf I think Jimmy Smith... brain processes it all and... NONeither of them have that IT for me.You said that Smith would be a lock HoFer if he had played for Pittsburgh... I don't think so. I believe his numbers go down by 15-20% based on the style of play. As for the boost players get from playing on a team with postseason success... well, that's exactly how it works. Careers are shaped by as few as one game. If Dallas beats Pittsburgh in either SB X or SB XIII, there is no way the Steelers are even in the discussion for greatest dynasty in history and the 1970s Cowboys are arguably on even footing with them. Actually, championships and SB MVPs may be the closest thing to "measuring" intangibles, although that's an oxymoron.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
What's odd is that if Ward played in say the 50s (when there was more smashmouth football) or say the 70s (when receiving totals were pretty barren), Ward would probably have a much stronger case. But since he played in an era of video game statistics, I think he suffers in comparison to some of the other players already mentioned by many in this thread. They will only induct a limited number of WR from this era, and IMO there are already several other players from his time frame more deserving than Ward. Ward may be a better all around player, but in the game that's played today that may not be a total positive when compared to the other high production receivers.
Jason Wood
Zoo York
I'm sorry but this "real football vs. fantasy football" is such a tired and insulting argument. The Shark Pool has, since its inception, had great discussions that run the gamut from pure fantasy to pure NFL. So many of us are able to differentiate between the two, and speak intelligently about either, that it's a straw man to suggest that because people disagree with you, they're somehow only focusing on the fantasy.Hall of Fame eligibility is a long-standing topic around here. As it rational analysis of the most common criteria that go into induction based on who HAS gotten in already and who HAS NOT.Aaron Rudnicki said:Real football needs to be separated from fantasy football in this discussion, I think fantasy/stat geeks know Ward by what they see in the scoring of their fantasy leagues, and Ward play cannot be judged by just stats alone. The guy may be the most complete FOOTBALL player I have watched over the years, and I've been watching the NFL since the Steelers won SB14.
If you want to have a conversation about what you think SHOULD matter for HOF induction, that's your right. But if you want to discuss whether Ward is likely to be considered based on the criteria that WILL be used, that's entirely another conversation.
He's never made an All Pro team, not one
He hasn't made a Pro Bowl team in five seasons
He's never led the league in receptions, yards or TDs in ONE season, much less many
When you consider that he played in the most pass happy era in NFL history, he really has virtually very little shot at the Hall of Fame.
Stats matter, to pretend they don't is absurd. And that's got nothing to do with fantasy.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
I think you should reconsider both points.Jimmy Smith should be in the HOF, and comparing contemporaries is a very important part of declaring if someone should be a HOFer.I thought this was a thread about whether or not Hines Ward should be in the HOF, not a thread to compare Ward to Jimmy Smith. Jimmy Smith will not and should not be in the HOF, so comparing Ward to him really does not tell us anything relative to the point of the thread.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
I left those years out of Ward's career because they were meaningless seasons. Maybe the QB advantage was medium and not small, but it's worth remembering that during Ward's best season Tommy Maddox had a huge year. Smith's best season was during a pretty mediocre Mark Brunell season. Because of the way Brunell and Leftwich floundered outside of Jacksonville it's hard to say exactly how good those guys were without Jimmy Smith. I like Brunell and thought he was "good" but certainly not an outstanding QB.Once again, Jimmy Smith has had five years where he ranked in the top five of the league in receiving yards. That's only been done by HOFers, Randy Moss and pre-1960 players. To do that on a team that was not pass heavy and did not have a star QB is even more impressive. Even Marvin Harrison has only ranked in the top five four times.You are leaving out two full years of Ward's career, but that's fine. I'm fuzzy on Brunell's exact pre-Jaguar days but I believe he was drafted by Green Bay, and spent two years basically with a clipboard before going to Jacksonville. 1996 was Brunell's fourth season as a pro and second season as a starter. Roethlisberger's 2004 is well known as his first season in the league. All seven of Smith's Brunell years were from Brunell's 4th-10th pro season, essentially his prime. The shackles didn't come off Ben until the playoffs after his second season. The QB advantage is not enormous, but it's there. I would recommend upgrading from small to medium.
Deion Branch shouldn't be anywhere in this thread - that's just silly.
Lynn Swann can be argued - but he was a game changer and back then that is about all WR's did. They also got murdered every week. The Steelers 4 SB dominance did have something to do with that though - so he scraped in I guess.
I remember when Hines was drafted - wasn't he a QUARTERBACK in college some. First pic I saw in camp was a diving catch - those eyes were OPEN and he was demonstrating one of the best the best cradle type catch moves we will see for a while. Wasn't that other fancy guy drafted in round 1 that year?
I won't look at one single stat - I just think about what I see when I watch the game. Getting the ENTIRE Ravens defense completely off track - the second best defense of our era for YEARS - to the point of getting bounties and causing league intervention. That's called CHANGING the game - and that's what great players do. Every DB that had to line up thought about it - and somehow still many of them ended up on their back. And Ward has missed very little time.
Owens changes the game w/ his YAC - Moss w/ his stupendous athleticism - and Harrison w/ his precision. IMO - invent #### and you shall be recognized.
I'm a Steeler fan - but no not yet. Win the SB w/ a big day PLAYING HURT AGAIN on Sunday and your a big leap closer. Remain productive - and I mean Steeler productive not passing style offense productive - for maybe 2-3 more years and it'll be hard to say no.
Jimmy Smith? Definitely a talent but I dunno - short career is an issue as is playing for a mediocre team. Ward's ability to step up in the playoffs and make you forget about Plaxico or Santonio or whomever -that's large. Even more so when you remember - he's short AND slow pretty much.
More so is the fact that he turns the tables on the defense making them run w/ their head on a swivel. When I want to show someone what determination is - he's the guy. Lots of other guys like that - Emmit, Fran Tarkenton, and the ex Miami LB I can't remember name of.
If you are a Steelers fan or like the Steelers - you love him for all that. If you hate the Steelers - he is the face - and it makes you crazy - "How did that guy BEAT ME?...ARGHHH!" He's 'that guy' - simple as that. He's always there - wearing you down and playing harder.
Imagine if he had Steve Young, Jeff Garcia, D McNabb, D Bledsoe and T Romo throwing him the ball btw....
Thinking about Moss's QB's - this actually puts a pretty serious downgrade on TO and Marvin
Lynn Swann can be argued - but he was a game changer and back then that is about all WR's did. They also got murdered every week. The Steelers 4 SB dominance did have something to do with that though - so he scraped in I guess.
I remember when Hines was drafted - wasn't he a QUARTERBACK in college some. First pic I saw in camp was a diving catch - those eyes were OPEN and he was demonstrating one of the best the best cradle type catch moves we will see for a while. Wasn't that other fancy guy drafted in round 1 that year?
I won't look at one single stat - I just think about what I see when I watch the game. Getting the ENTIRE Ravens defense completely off track - the second best defense of our era for YEARS - to the point of getting bounties and causing league intervention. That's called CHANGING the game - and that's what great players do. Every DB that had to line up thought about it - and somehow still many of them ended up on their back. And Ward has missed very little time.
Owens changes the game w/ his YAC - Moss w/ his stupendous athleticism - and Harrison w/ his precision. IMO - invent #### and you shall be recognized.
I'm a Steeler fan - but no not yet. Win the SB w/ a big day PLAYING HURT AGAIN on Sunday and your a big leap closer. Remain productive - and I mean Steeler productive not passing style offense productive - for maybe 2-3 more years and it'll be hard to say no.
Jimmy Smith? Definitely a talent but I dunno - short career is an issue as is playing for a mediocre team. Ward's ability to step up in the playoffs and make you forget about Plaxico or Santonio or whomever -that's large. Even more so when you remember - he's short AND slow pretty much.
More so is the fact that he turns the tables on the defense making them run w/ their head on a swivel. When I want to show someone what determination is - he's the guy. Lots of other guys like that - Emmit, Fran Tarkenton, and the ex Miami LB I can't remember name of.
If you are a Steelers fan or like the Steelers - you love him for all that. If you hate the Steelers - he is the face - and it makes you crazy - "How did that guy BEAT ME?...ARGHHH!" He's 'that guy' - simple as that. He's always there - wearing you down and playing harder.
Imagine if he had Steve Young, Jeff Garcia, D McNabb, D Bledsoe and T Romo throwing him the ball btw....
Thinking about Moss's QB's - this actually puts a pretty serious downgrade on TO and Marvin
Similar threads
