Hines Ward - 1st ballot Hall of Famer? (1 Viewer)

[Evilgrin 72]

I agree - with his "intangibles" so to speak, I think those #s would make him a lock.

If they don't predicate it on numbers, that helps Ward's case big time.  Seeing as he's now the franchise's all-time leading receiver, is considered one of the best (if not THE best) blocking WR to ever play, and has been a model of integrity and leadership his whole career, I'd think he would get a little more leeway on the statistics than many receivers currently not in the Hall, especially now that he has a ring and a SB MVP - just ornaments on the tree and one less thing a detractor could potentially point to.  The primary knocks on Art Monk (at least what I hear) are that :

1) He frequently wasn't the most dangerous receiver on his own team

2) He only made 3 Pro Bowls in 18 years.

Ward is clearly the most dangerous receiver on his team (and let's face it - always has been, Burress is a hump) and has been to 4 Pro Bowls already in only 7 years as a starter.

If anything, the numbers are likely going to be the weakest part of his resume, so I think if he can get to those statistical levels, he's a cinch.

His numbers better improve drastically, which is not likely, for him to have a chance at making it. Heck, the last five years would be considered the peak of his career and he has barely averaged over 1100 yards a season (and this has been lower with Roethlisberger, so the argument of not having a great QB before the last two years is not valid). As for being a leader, a great blocker, a great teammate, the all-time leading team receiver, etc., all of those can be applied to Rod Smith as well and most have said he is likely not a HoFer at this point, so I do not see any way Ward will be a HoFer unless he rips off a few 1400 or 1500 seasons to jack up his total. If he keeps piling up 1000 or 1100 yard seasons, then he will go down as another WR that was very good for most of his career, but never one of the best. And like it or not, WR's do have a tough time getting into the Hall.

I don't think his numbers need to improve much over the ones he's posted for the last 5 (his only 5 as a full-time starter and primary threat - his first three years he caught only 124 balls total) if he plays another 6-7 years. He's 29 now, if he can maintain his stats until age 35 (Rice did it until age 40, and Ward has a similar drive, work ethic, and intensity, and Rod Smith, as you mentioned, is still getting it done at that age), he'll be a shoo-in. For the last 5 years, he's averaged 90-1,095-8 - if he plays to 35 at that level, he would be at 1,114-13,600-100 (each of whch would likely be top-10 all-time.) Now, as David pointed out, there aren't a ton of guys who have posted such numbers after age 30, but as you pointed out, he doesn't have to maintain Marvin Harrison-level numbers, really he just needs to keep getting a lot of looks. If you keep catching 90 passes a year, the 1000-1100 yards and 8 TDs are likely to come. This year, he caught only 69 balls, so that number will have to come up, and I believe it will (progression to the mean is likely) - so, again, it all comes down to how long he wants to play, how well he avoids injury, and whether the Steelers continue to look his way 6-7 times a game.The answer really is, not right now, but we'll see.

As for Rod Smith, he'd likely be a candidate had he not gotten such a late start. he's 6 years older than Ward, and his career numbers are not much better. Ward, if he plays another 6 years, will dwarf Smith's stats.

 

[Tau837]

EvilGrin, all of your posts completely ignore the peer comparisons. How many WRs whose career's overlapped with Ward's do you expect to get in? That is where Ward's problem becomes evident.

WRs who will likely be inducted within the next 8 years or so will definitely include Carter, Rice, Brown and will probably include Irvin and Reed. And if Monk doesn't make it, I believe he would be the first WR to have been a finalist as many as 5 times (every year he has been eligible) and not make it... so he'll probably get in within that window as well.

Then you'll have the next wave including Harrison, Owens, Moss, and Holt.

How many WRs do you think will get into the HOF from the 1990s/2000s?

 

[Newman]

First ballot?

 

[jetpack]

EvilGrin, all of your posts completely ignore the peer comparisons. How many WRs whose career's overlapped with Ward's do you expect to get in? That is where Ward's problem becomes evident.

WRs who will likely be inducted within the next 8 years or so will definitely include Carter, Rice, Brown and will probably include Irvin and Reed. And if Monk doesn't make it, I believe he would be the first WR to have been a finalist as many as 5 times (every year he has been eligible) and not make it... so he'll probably get in within that window as well.

Then you'll have the next wave including Harrison, Owens, Moss, and Holt.

How many WRs do you think will get into the HOF from the 1990s/2000s?

Not a first balloter, if ever. My take as a Steeler homer: There's only 17 modern era WRs in the Hall right now going back to 1946. That's one every 3 years basically. With the back-log of great receivers out there right now and the increased emphasis on the position I'd expect MORE receievers to get in as we go forward, but more that will be worthy of induction. That will certainly push Ward down the ladder, especially since his main value to the Steelers is in intangibles - leadership, blocking, and dominating games. But he'll never have the raw numbers once all is said and done and other receivers quickly pass his numbers. Ward would be a nice Vets committee pick somewhere down the line but most likely will end up with the Art Monks and Henry Ellards, Herman Moores, and Harrold Charmichaels of the world. Nothing to be ashamed of at all.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

EvilGrin, all of your posts completely ignore the peer comparisons. How many WRs whose career's overlapped with Ward's do you expect to get in? That is where Ward's problem becomes evident.

WRs who will likely be inducted within the next 8 years or so will definitely include Carter, Rice, Brown and will probably include Irvin and Reed. And if Monk doesn't make it, I believe he would be the first WR to have been a finalist as many as 5 times (every year he has been eligible) and not make it... so he'll probably get in within that window as well.

Then you'll have the next wave including Harrison, Owens, Moss, and Holt.

How many WRs do you think will get into the HOF from the 1990s/2000s?

Carter, Rice, Brown, etc... are not "peers"Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, and Ward are the top 5 receivers of this "generation," IMO. Harrison is a cinch. Owens should be, but if he continues to act like a jackalope, he's going to blow it for himself. Moss should be able to amass numbers than make him a lock if he stays healthy, and same for Holt. Ward is a different type of receiver than those guys, and will never have the eye-popping numbers they do. It doesn't stop people from recognizing him as one of the top WR in the league.

To answer your question, I could see all 5 of those WRs entering the Hall of Fame one day. However, all are still in mid-career, so it's impossible to say what will happen. I've said that several times. Seems to me you're saying it is IMPOSSIBLE for Ward to get in... is that your contention? If not, then we agree - maybe, maybe not. I don't even think he has a great chance, but he does have a chance. it really depends on how long he wants to play and how long he can maintain his conditioning.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

EvilGrin, all of your posts completely ignore the peer comparisons.  How many WRs whose career's overlapped with Ward's do you expect to get in?  That is where Ward's problem becomes evident.

WRs who will likely be inducted within the next 8 years or so will definitely include Carter, Rice, Brown and will probably include Irvin and Reed.  And if Monk doesn't make it, I believe he would be the first WR to have been a finalist as many as 5 times (every year he has been eligible) and not make it... so he'll probably get in within that window as well.

Then you'll have the next wave including Harrison, Owens, Moss, and Holt.

How many WRs do you think will get into the HOF from the 1990s/2000s?

Not a first balloter, if ever. My take as a Steeler homer: There's only 17 modern era WRs in the Hall right now going back to 1946. That's one every 3 years basically. With the back-log of great receivers out there right now and the increased emphasis on the position I'd expect MORE receievers to get in as we go forward, but more that will be worthy of induction. That will certainly push Ward down the ladder, especially since his main value to the Steelers is in intangibles - leadership, blocking, and dominating games. But he'll never have the raw numbers once all is said and done and other receivers quickly pass his numbers. Ward would be a nice Vets committee pick somewhere down the line but most likely will end up with the Art Monks and Henry Ellards, Herman Moores, and Harrold Charmichaels of the world. Nothing to be ashamed of at all.

I think receivers will become more and more prevalent as time goes on. As the game has shifted towards bigger passing numbers over the past decade or so (Harrison is 3rd and Owens 4th on the all-time TD list, for crying out loud) - more WRs will be considered worthy. Just my opinion.

 

[David Yudkin]

I find it odd that I am compelled to be emroiled in threadson Hines Ward, but nonetheless . . .

Ward has has a very solid 5-year strentch the past few seasons. That in and of itself will not get him into the HOF. IMO, in this day and age you really need 10 years of high performance to get in, and as I have said several times we can only guess how Ward will do from here on out (starting at 30 years old).

However, here is how Ward stacks up in the 2001-2005 bracket . . .

Receptions

1 Marvin Harrison 514

2 Torry Holt 485

3 Hines Ward 450

4 Rod Smith 440

5 Derrick Mason 429

6 Randy Moss 408

7 Eric Moulds 400

8 Terrell Owens 397

9 Laveranues Coles 393

10 Joe Horn 392

Receiving Yards

1 Torry Holt 7064

2 Marvin Harrison 6777

3 Randy Moss 5984

4 Terrell Owens 5777

5 Derrick Mason 5684

6 Joe Horn 5603

7 Chad Johnson 5556

8 Hines Ward 5474

9 Rod Smith 5464

10 Jimmy Smith 5400

Receiving TD

1 Marvin Harrison 63

2 Terrell Owens 58

3 Randy Moss 55

4 Torry Holt 42

5 Hines Ward 41

6 Chris Chambers 39

7 Joe Horn 38

8 Chad Johnson 34

9 Tony Gonzalez 32

9 Derrick Mason 32

9 Rod Smith 32

Fantasy Points (Standard Scoring)

1 Marvin Harrison 1057.3

2 Torry Holt 960.9

3 Randy Moss 946.05

4 Terrell Owens 941.2

5 Hines Ward 831.5

6 Joe Horn 790.9

7 Chad Johnson 766.8

8 Derrick Mason 761.2

9 Rod Smith 759.4

10 Jimmy Smith 725.9

So for all those saying Ward has never really been a Top 5 WR, well, he has. And he has been over this 5 year stretch. Some of us have not been giving Ward his due, but again, he has to have another 5 years like this to really get into the category for serious HOF consideration.

HOWEVER, before we get all in a tizzy over this, it should be noted that Plaxico Burress ranks 12th on this list (683.8 fantasy points). I'm not really sure what that means, other than to me it looks like the Steelers tandem of WR may have benefitted from very little passing plays to RB and TE and limited other WR options.

 

[MarshallRob]

Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, and Ward are the top 5 receivers of this "generation," IMO. Harrison is a cinch. Owens should be, but if he continues to act like a jackalope, he's going to blow it for himself. Moss should be able to amass numbers than make him a lock if he stays healthy, and same for Holt. Ward is a different type of receiver than those guys, and will never have the eye-popping numbers they do. It doesn't stop people from recognizing him as one of the top WR in the league.

To answer your question, I could see all 5 of those WRs entering the Hall of Fame one day. However, all are still in mid-career, so it's impossible to say what will happen. I've said that several times. Seems to me you're saying it is IMPOSSIBLE for Ward to get in... is that your contention? If not, then we agree - maybe, maybe not. I don't even think he has a great chance, but he does have a chance. it really depends on how long he wants to play and how long he can maintain his conditioning.

Again, regular season numbers are important but they are not the only thing that matters. Don't discount how huge Ward's playoff performance could be to his future Hall of Fame chances. The Steelers pulled off a very improbable playoff run. Ward was his team's biggest offensive weapon. He scored a TD in 3 of his team's 4 postseason games, including the biggest play of the Super Bowl, and he won the Super Bowl MVP. Clutch play counts for a lot. A second big Super Bowl game down the line for Ward and he'd probably vault past just about all of his contemporaries other than Harrison, regardless of the numbers. Holt's got great numbers, and he's been a fine player, but is it because he's better than Ward or is it because of the different offenses each man has played in? Ward is kind of the flip side of Terrell Owens. Yeah, Owens' career numbers are a lot more impressive than Ward's but I don't think there's any way Owens would get more votes right now than Ward if could come down to a choice between the two of them. How many teams would rather have Owens right now than Ward if they could pick one or the other? Hall of Famers help their teams win games. Has any receiver ever done more to help their team lose games than Owens did last year? He was a big part of the reason a perennial Super Bowl contender collapsed. How many Hall of Famers can we say that about? I can't think of any. Writers remember stuff like that. Ward also has a reputation for taking a big hit in order to make a catch in contrast to Owens' occasional "alligator arms" moments.

 

[jetpack]

Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, and Ward are the top 5 receivers of this "generation," IMO.  Harrison is a cinch.  Owens should be, but if he continues to act like a jackalope, he's going to blow it for himself.  Moss should be able to amass numbers than make him a lock if he stays healthy, and same for Holt.  Ward is a different type of receiver than those guys, and will never have the eye-popping numbers they do.  It doesn't stop people from recognizing him as one of the top WR in the league.

To answer your question, I could see all 5 of those WRs entering the Hall of Fame one day.  However, all are still in mid-career, so it's impossible to say what will happen.  I've said that several times.  Seems to me you're saying it is IMPOSSIBLE for Ward to get in... is that your contention?  If not, then we agree - maybe, maybe not.  I don't even think he has a great chance, but he does have a chance.  it really depends on how long he wants to play and how long he can maintain his conditioning.

Again, regular season numbers are important but they are not the only thing that matters. Don't discount how huge Ward's playoff performance could be to his future Hall of Fame chances. The Steelers pulled off a very improbable playoff run. Ward was his team's biggest offensive weapon. He scored a TD in 3 of his team's 4 postseason games, including the biggest play of the Super Bowl, and he won the Super Bowl MVP. Clutch play counts for a lot. A second big Super Bowl game down the line for Ward and he'd probably vault past just about all of his contemporaries other than Harrison, regardless of the numbers. Holt's got great numbers, and he's been a fine player, but is it because he's better than Ward or is it because of the different offenses each man has played in? Ward is kind of the flip side of Terrell Owens. Yeah, Owens' career numbers are a lot more impressive than Ward's but I don't think there's any way Owens would get more votes right now than Ward if could come down to a choice between the two of them. How many teams would rather have Owens right now than Ward if they could pick one or the other? Hall of Famers help their teams win games. Has any receiver ever done more to help their team lose games than Owens did last year? He was a big part of the reason a perennial Super Bowl contender collapsed. How many Hall of Famers can we say that about? I can't think of any. Writers remember stuff like that. Ward also has a reputation for taking a big hit in order to make a catch in contrast to Owens' occasional "alligator arms" moments.

Wow. An outstanding point. I was just looking this up.Year Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

2001 bal W,27-10 | 1 6 0 | 3 37 0

2001 nwe L,17-24 | 1 -2 0 | 6 64 0

2002 cle W,36-33 | 1 4 0 | 11 104 1

2002 ten L,31-34 | 2 1 0 | 7 82 2

2004 nyj W,20-17 | 0 0 0 | 10 105 1

2004 nwe L,27-41 | 0 0 0 | 5 109 1

2005 cin W,31-17 | 0 0 0 | 2 10 1

2005 ind W,21-18 | 0 0 0 | 3 68 0

2005 den W,34-17 | 1 4 0 | 5 59 1

*2005 sea W,21-10 | 1 18 0 | 5 123 1

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 7 31 0 | 57 761 8

Add in an MVP and you have a real HOF resume booster. And we do know that the voting body absolutely looks at this stuff - re: Swann.

 

[Tau837]

However, all are still in mid-career, so it's impossible to say what will happen. I've said that several times. Seems to me you're saying it is IMPOSSIBLE for Ward to get in... is that your contention? If not, then we agree - maybe, maybe not. I don't even think he has a great chance, but he does have a chance. it really depends on how long he wants to play and how long he can maintain his conditioning.

I love the guy, but he just won't have the resume... Unless he plays considerably better going forward than he has to date. Not likely for a 30 year old WR who has already been his team's #1 WR for years.

 

[Tau837]

So for all those saying Ward has never really been a Top 5 WR, well, he has. And he has been over this 5 year stretch. Some of us have not been giving Ward his due, but again, he has to have another 5 years like this to really get into the category for serious HOF consideration.

I think we are in agreement here. In general, it is very unlikely for any player whose best career performance was 5th best at his position over a 5 year stretch to make the HOF.As I said, he will have to improve his play going forward to make it.

 

[jetpack]

So for all those saying Ward has never really been a Top 5 WR, well, he has.  And he has been over this 5 year stretch.  Some of us have not been giving Ward his due, but again, he has to have another 5 years like this to really get into the category for serious HOF consideration.

I think we are in agreement here. In general, it is very unlikely for any player whose best career performance was 5th best at his position over a 5 year stretch to make the HOF.As I said, he will have to improve his play going forward to make it.

Here's Marvin Harrison's Playoff StatsYear Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1996 pit L,14-42 | 0 0 0 | 3 71 0

1999 ten L,16-19 | 0 0 0 | 5 65 0

2000 mia L,17-23 | 0 0 0 | 5 63 0

2002 nyj L,0-41 | 0 0 0 | 4 47 0

2003 den W,41-10 | 0 0 0 | 7 133 2

2003 kan W,38-31 | 0 0 0 | 6 98 0

2003 nwe L,14-24 | 0 0 0 | 3 19 0

2004 den W,49-24 | 0 0 0 | 4 50 0

2004 nwe L,3-20 | 0 0 0 | 5 44 0

2005 pit L,18-21 | 0 0 0 | 3 52 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 45 642 2

 

[David Yudkin]

Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, and Ward are the top 5 receivers of this "generation," IMO.  Harrison is a cinch.  Owens should be, but if he continues to act like a jackalope, he's going to blow it for himself.  Moss should be able to amass numbers than make him a lock if he stays healthy, and same for Holt.  Ward is a different type of receiver than those guys, and will never have the eye-popping numbers they do.  It doesn't stop people from recognizing him as one of the top WR in the league.

To answer your question, I could see all 5 of those WRs entering the Hall of Fame one day.  However, all are still in mid-career, so it's impossible to say what will happen.  I've said that several times.  Seems to me you're saying it is IMPOSSIBLE for Ward to get in... is that your contention?  If not, then we agree - maybe, maybe not.  I don't even think he has a great chance, but he does have a chance.  it really depends on how long he wants to play and how long he can maintain his conditioning.

Again, regular season numbers are important but they are not the only thing that matters. Don't discount how huge Ward's playoff performance could be to his future Hall of Fame chances. The Steelers pulled off a very improbable playoff run. Ward was his team's biggest offensive weapon. He scored a TD in 3 of his team's 4 postseason games, including the biggest play of the Super Bowl, and he won the Super Bowl MVP. Clutch play counts for a lot. A second big Super Bowl game down the line for Ward and he'd probably vault past just about all of his contemporaries other than Harrison, regardless of the numbers. Holt's got great numbers, and he's been a fine player, but is it because he's better than Ward or is it because of the different offenses each man has played in? Ward is kind of the flip side of Terrell Owens. Yeah, Owens' career numbers are a lot more impressive than Ward's but I don't think there's any way Owens would get more votes right now than Ward if could come down to a choice between the two of them. How many teams would rather have Owens right now than Ward if they could pick one or the other? Hall of Famers help their teams win games. Has any receiver ever done more to help their team lose games than Owens did last year? He was a big part of the reason a perennial Super Bowl contender collapsed. How many Hall of Famers can we say that about? I can't think of any. Writers remember stuff like that. Ward also has a reputation for taking a big hit in order to make a catch in contrast to Owens' occasional "alligator arms" moments.

Wow. An outstanding point. I was just looking this up.Year Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

2001 bal W,27-10 | 1 6 0 | 3 37 0

2001 nwe L,17-24 | 1 -2 0 | 6 64 0

2002 cle W,36-33 | 1 4 0 | 11 104 1

2002 ten L,31-34 | 2 1 0 | 7 82 2

2004 nyj W,20-17 | 0 0 0 | 10 105 1

2004 nwe L,27-41 | 0 0 0 | 5 109 1

2005 cin W,31-17 | 0 0 0 | 2 10 1

2005 ind W,21-18 | 0 0 0 | 3 68 0

2005 den W,34-17 | 1 4 0 | 5 59 1

*2005 sea W,21-10 | 1 18 0 | 5 123 1

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 7 31 0 | 57 761 8

Add in an MVP and you have a real HOF resume booster. And we do know that the voting body absolutely looks at this stuff - re: Swann.

Swann was an EXTREME example, one that likely will not happen again any time soon. Give Ward 3 more rings and get back to me. I already said his postseason numbers would help, but they willn ot gethim in onthose alone and he would STILL need at least 5 more top seasons.Using the post-season proficiency argument, Deion Branch (Super Bowl MVP) and David Givens (TDs in 7 straight post-season games) would be high on the HOF food chain.

 

[David Yudkin]

So for all those saying Ward has never really been a Top 5 WR, well, he has.  And he has been over this 5 year stretch.  Some of us have not been giving Ward his due, but again, he has to have another 5 years like this to really get into the category for serious HOF consideration.

I think we are in agreement here. In general, it is very unlikely for any player whose best career performance was 5th best at his position over a 5 year stretch to make the HOF.As I said, he will have to improve his play going forward to make it.

Here's Marvin Harrison's Playoff StatsYear Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1996 pit L,14-42 | 0 0 0 | 3 71 0

1999 ten L,16-19 | 0 0 0 | 5 65 0

2000 mia L,17-23 | 0 0 0 | 5 63 0

2002 nyj L,0-41 | 0 0 0 | 4 47 0

2003 den W,41-10 | 0 0 0 | 7 133 2

2003 kan W,38-31 | 0 0 0 | 6 98 0

2003 nwe L,14-24 | 0 0 0 | 3 19 0

2004 den W,49-24 | 0 0 0 | 4 50 0

2004 nwe L,3-20 | 0 0 0 | 5 44 0

2005 pit L,18-21 | 0 0 0 | 3 52 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 45 642 2

What has this got to do with Hines Ward? Are you implying that Harrison should not be a HOFer because he only had 1 good game in the post-season?

 

[Tau837]

As I posted earlier, since 1968 17 WRs have been inducted into the HOF. That is 1 WR inducted per 2.2 years. 1 per 2 years is a reasonable rate to assume going forward, and accounts for a slight increase for WRs.

I believe that Rice, Brown, Carter, Irvin, Reed, Monk, and Harrison will all get in within the next 12 years or so, which would reflect this rate. If Ward plays 7 more seasons, to age 36 or so, he would become eligible around that time. Presumably, Owens and Moss would also be eligible or would become eligible shortly thereafter.

So to answer the direct thread question, I think this makes it extremely unlikely he gets in first ballot. And the longer he waits, the more other WRs will become eligible behind him. We cannot predict which of them (Steve Smith, Chad Johnson, Fitzgerald, Boldin, etc.) may have stronger cases than Ward.

This is exactly why being 5th best over a relatively short stretch for a HOF caliber career doesn't carry a lot of weight. Generations overlap, and the 5 year wait for eligibility allows others to make a player's accomplishments look less compelling in retrospect.

And in addition to other WRs, you also have to consider that he competes against all other positions. See the HOF schedule thread for an example of a large number of players who will be under consideration during the next 10 years or so to get a feel for how competitive it is.

All these things are why a player typically has to do one or more of the following to make the HOF:

1. Be a truly dominant player at his position (at least All Pro caliber) for a number of years (see Ray Lewis).

2. Accumulate elite career totals (see Tim Brown, Jerome Bettis).

3. Achieve a rare level of postseason success (see Tom Brady).

At this time, it is very unlikely that either 1 or 2 will be the case for Ward. And while he has a start on 3, he has a lot more work to do there if that is to carry his case.

 

[jetpack]

So for all those saying Ward has never really been a Top 5 WR, well, he has.  And he has been over this 5 year stretch.  Some of us have not been giving Ward his due, but again, he has to have another 5 years like this to really get into the category for serious HOF consideration.

I think we are in agreement here. In general, it is very unlikely for any player whose best career performance was 5th best at his position over a 5 year stretch to make the HOF.As I said, he will have to improve his play going forward to make it.

Here's Marvin Harrison's Playoff StatsYear Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1996 pit L,14-42 | 0 0 0 | 3 71 0

1999 ten L,16-19 | 0 0 0 | 5 65 0

2000 mia L,17-23 | 0 0 0 | 5 63 0

2002 nyj L,0-41 | 0 0 0 | 4 47 0

2003 den W,41-10 | 0 0 0 | 7 133 2

2003 kan W,38-31 | 0 0 0 | 6 98 0

2003 nwe L,14-24 | 0 0 0 | 3 19 0

2004 den W,49-24 | 0 0 0 | 4 50 0

2004 nwe L,3-20 | 0 0 0 | 5 44 0

2005 pit L,18-21 | 0 0 0 | 3 52 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 45 642 2

What has this got to do with Hines Ward? Are you implying that Harrison should not be a HOFer because he only had 1 good game in the post-season?

No, not implying Harrison isn't HOF worthy, that's absurd. I'm showing a dimension to the argument that is obviously weighed by the voting committee pretty heavily. Otherwise, how does Swann get into the Hall or even Stallworth? Would the voting commitee hold it against someone like Harrision because his stats aren't all that great? Absolutely not. But it clearly enhances the attractiveness of a candidate like a Ward or Deon Branch when all is said and done. 10 playoff games or more is like an entire season of premium games. Great stats in those games implies alot about how important you are to the team and how well you performed in critical games. Right? Ward clearly has an excellent track history in playoff games. It's already better than some recievers we consider shoe-ins for the HOF like Harrison and there's likely more to come. Sounds like a good argument for consideration to the HOF where most folks would look at regular season stats and say "no chance".

 

[ren hoek]

Right now, the notion of Hines Ward being a first ballot HOF'er is a joke.

 

[MarshallRob]

Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, and Ward are the top 5 receivers of this "generation," IMO.  Harrison is a cinch.  Owens should be, but if he continues to act like a jackalope, he's going to blow it for himself.  Moss should be able to amass numbers than make him a lock if he stays healthy, and same for Holt.  Ward is a different type of receiver than those guys, and will never have the eye-popping numbers they do.  It doesn't stop people from recognizing him as one of the top WR in the league.

To answer your question, I could see all 5 of those WRs entering the Hall of Fame one day.  However, all are still in mid-career, so it's impossible to say what will happen.  I've said that several times.  Seems to me you're saying it is IMPOSSIBLE for Ward to get in... is that your contention?  If not, then we agree - maybe, maybe not.  I don't even think he has a great chance, but he does have a chance.  it really depends on how long he wants to play and how long he can maintain his conditioning.

Again, regular season numbers are important but they are not the only thing that matters. Don't discount how huge Ward's playoff performance could be to his future Hall of Fame chances. The Steelers pulled off a very improbable playoff run. Ward was his team's biggest offensive weapon. He scored a TD in 3 of his team's 4 postseason games, including the biggest play of the Super Bowl, and he won the Super Bowl MVP. Clutch play counts for a lot. A second big Super Bowl game down the line for Ward and he'd probably vault past just about all of his contemporaries other than Harrison, regardless of the numbers. Holt's got great numbers, and he's been a fine player, but is it because he's better than Ward or is it because of the different offenses each man has played in? Ward is kind of the flip side of Terrell Owens. Yeah, Owens' career numbers are a lot more impressive than Ward's but I don't think there's any way Owens would get more votes right now than Ward if could come down to a choice between the two of them. How many teams would rather have Owens right now than Ward if they could pick one or the other? Hall of Famers help their teams win games. Has any receiver ever done more to help their team lose games than Owens did last year? He was a big part of the reason a perennial Super Bowl contender collapsed. How many Hall of Famers can we say that about? I can't think of any. Writers remember stuff like that. Ward also has a reputation for taking a big hit in order to make a catch in contrast to Owens' occasional "alligator arms" moments.

Wow. An outstanding point. I was just looking this up.Year Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

2001 bal W,27-10 | 1 6 0 | 3 37 0

2001 nwe L,17-24 | 1 -2 0 | 6 64 0

2002 cle W,36-33 | 1 4 0 | 11 104 1

2002 ten L,31-34 | 2 1 0 | 7 82 2

2004 nyj W,20-17 | 0 0 0 | 10 105 1

2004 nwe L,27-41 | 0 0 0 | 5 109 1

2005 cin W,31-17 | 0 0 0 | 2 10 1

2005 ind W,21-18 | 0 0 0 | 3 68 0

2005 den W,34-17 | 1 4 0 | 5 59 1

*2005 sea W,21-10 | 1 18 0 | 5 123 1

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 7 31 0 | 57 761 8

Add in an MVP and you have a real HOF resume booster. And we do know that the voting body absolutely looks at this stuff - re: Swann.

Swann was an EXTREME example, one that likely will not happen again any time soon. Give Ward 3 more rings and get back to me. I already said his postseason numbers would help, but they willn ot gethim in onthose alone and he would STILL need at least 5 more top seasons.Using the post-season proficiency argument, Deion Branch (Super Bowl MVP) and David Givens (TDs in 7 straight post-season games) would be high on the HOF food chain.

I get your point, but you yourself showed earlier how Ward has actually been a Top 5 receiver over the last 5 years. From that starting point, when you then add in his postseason success (better than I had realized) and "clutch" ability you can start to make the argument that Ward is close to being the best receiver in football. (I'm not saying that proposition is true, but at least you could make the argument). While Givens and especially Branch have had postseason success as well, to date they have no real regular season numbers to speak of to even get into a HOF discussion. His numbers don't look impressive today, but from 1975-1979 Swann was a Top 5 receiver himself. Swann was generally considered the best receiver of that time period while today most probably would not name Ward as the best receiver currently playing.

 

[David Yudkin]

So for all those saying Ward has never really been a Top 5 WR, well, he has.  And he has been over this 5 year stretch.  Some of us have not been giving Ward his due, but again, he has to have another 5 years like this to really get into the category for serious HOF consideration.

I think we are in agreement here. In general, it is very unlikely for any player whose best career performance was 5th best at his position over a 5 year stretch to make the HOF.As I said, he will have to improve his play going forward to make it.

Here's Marvin Harrison's Playoff StatsYear Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1996 pit L,14-42 | 0 0 0 | 3 71 0

1999 ten L,16-19 | 0 0 0 | 5 65 0

2000 mia L,17-23 | 0 0 0 | 5 63 0

2002 nyj L,0-41 | 0 0 0 | 4 47 0

2003 den W,41-10 | 0 0 0 | 7 133 2

2003 kan W,38-31 | 0 0 0 | 6 98 0

2003 nwe L,14-24 | 0 0 0 | 3 19 0

2004 den W,49-24 | 0 0 0 | 4 50 0

2004 nwe L,3-20 | 0 0 0 | 5 44 0

2005 pit L,18-21 | 0 0 0 | 3 52 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 45 642 2

What has this got to do with Hines Ward? Are you implying that Harrison should not be a HOFer because he only had 1 good game in the post-season?

No, not implying Harrison isn't HOF worthy, that's absurd. I'm showing a dimension to the argument that is obviously weighed by the voting committee pretty heavily. Otherwise, how does Swann get into the Hall or even Stallworth? Would the voting commitee hold it against someone like Harrision because his stats aren't all that great? Absolutely not. But it clearly enhances the attractiveness of a candidate like a Ward or Deon Branch when all is said and done. 10 playoff games or more is like an entire season of premium games. Great stats in those games implies alot about how important you are to the team and how well you performed in critical games. Right? Ward clearly has an excellent track history in playoff games. It's already better than some recievers we consider shoe-ins for the HOF like Harrison and there's likely more to come. Sounds like a good argument for consideration to the HOF where most folks would look at regular season stats and say "no chance".

If ever there were a stud in the playoffs, it was Terrell Davis . . .
Year Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD---------------------+-----------------+----------------- 1996 jax L,27-30 | 14 91 1 | 7 24 0 1997 jax W,42-17 | 31 184 2 | 4 11 0 1997 kan W,14-10 | 25 101 2 | 1 17 0 1997 pit W,24-21 | 26 139 1 | 1 2 0*1997 gnb W,31-24 | 30 157 3 | 2 8 0 1998 mia W,38-3 | 21 199 2 | 1 7 0 1998 nyj W,23-10 | 32 167 1 | 1 12 0*1998 atl W,34-19 | 25 102 0 | 2 50 0---------------------+-----------------+-----------------TOTAL | 204 1140 12 | 19 131 0For those of you scoring at home (or even if you're not), that's a tidy 159 yards of offense per game and 12 TD in 8 games played.If Davis doesn't get in, then IMO no one else will get in based on the strength of his post-season numbers.

 

[jetpack]

Right now, the notion of Hines Ward being a first ballot HOF'er is a joke.

I agree. Just having looked at Dave's numbers and the post-season #'s as well though, I would argue that if he plays like he has for another few years, he'll get consideration somewhere down the line - maybe like Harry Carson or the Vets committee. The guy's been clutch in the playoffs (clearly more than Harrison has) and has been top 5 material for the past few years and he'll have Roth throwing to him for the next five years. Looks like a good scenario for him.

 

[David Yudkin]

His numbers don't look impressive today, but from 1975-1979 Swann was a Top 5 receiver himself. Swann was generally considered the best receiver of that time period while today most probably would not name Ward as the best receiver currently playing.

In his 5 best years (75-79), Swann ranked 7th in receptions, 6th in receiving yards, 2nd in TD, and 2nd in fantasy points.But he had very little to offer beofre or after that. In today's game, 5 years even with great numbers in the post-season will not get a WR into the Hall.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

So for all those saying Ward has never really been a Top 5 WR, well, he has.  And he has been over this 5 year stretch.  Some of us have not been giving Ward his due, but again, he has to have another 5 years like this to really get into the category for serious HOF consideration.

I think we are in agreement here. In general, it is very unlikely for any player whose best career performance was 5th best at his position over a 5 year stretch to make the HOF.As I said, he will have to improve his play going forward to make it.

Here's Marvin Harrison's Playoff StatsYear Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1996 pit L,14-42 | 0 0 0 | 3 71 0

1999 ten L,16-19 | 0 0 0 | 5 65 0

2000 mia L,17-23 | 0 0 0 | 5 63 0

2002 nyj L,0-41 | 0 0 0 | 4 47 0

2003 den W,41-10 | 0 0 0 | 7 133 2

2003 kan W,38-31 | 0 0 0 | 6 98 0

2003 nwe L,14-24 | 0 0 0 | 3 19 0

2004 den W,49-24 | 0 0 0 | 4 50 0

2004 nwe L,3-20 | 0 0 0 | 5 44 0

2005 pit L,18-21 | 0 0 0 | 3 52 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 45 642 2

What has this got to do with Hines Ward? Are you implying that Harrison should not be a HOFer because he only had 1 good game in the post-season?

No, not implying Harrison isn't HOF worthy, that's absurd. I'm showing a dimension to the argument that is obviously weighed by the voting committee pretty heavily. Otherwise, how does Swann get into the Hall or even Stallworth? Would the voting commitee hold it against someone like Harrision because his stats aren't all that great? Absolutely not. But it clearly enhances the attractiveness of a candidate like a Ward or Deon Branch when all is said and done. 10 playoff games or more is like an entire season of premium games. Great stats in those games implies alot about how important you are to the team and how well you performed in critical games. Right? Ward clearly has an excellent track history in playoff games. It's already better than some recievers we consider shoe-ins for the HOF like Harrison and there's likely more to come. Sounds like a good argument for consideration to the HOF where most folks would look at regular season stats and say "no chance".

If ever there were a stud in the playoffs, it was Terrell Davis . . .
Year  Opp   Result  |  RSH    YD  TD  |  REC    YD  TD---------------------+-----------------+----------------- 1996  jax  L,27-30  |   14    91   1  |    7    24   0 1997  jax  W,42-17  |   31   184   2  |    4    11   0 1997  kan  W,14-10  |   25   101   2  |    1    17   0 1997  pit  W,24-21  |   26   139   1  |    1     2   0*1997  gnb  W,31-24  |   30   157   3  |    2     8   0 1998  mia  W,38-3   |   21   199   2  |    1     7   0 1998  nyj  W,23-10  |   32   167   1  |    1    12   0*1998  atl  W,34-19  |   25   102   0  |    2    50   0---------------------+-----------------+-----------------TOTAL                |  204  1140  12  |   19   131   0For those of you scoring at home (or even if you're not), that's a tidy 159 yards of offense per game and 12 TD in 8 games played.If Davis doesn't get in, then IMO no one else will get in based on the strength of his post-season numbers.

I don't think anyone is advocating that Ward will get in based on his postseason numbers. What they're saying is that it's an added boon to his chances when coupled with his career regular-season stats and his reputation as a leader.Incidentally - I realize this thread is about a first-ballot admission, but I have only been addressing whether he makes it or not, period. Just to clarify.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

However, all are still in mid-career, so it's impossible to say what will happen.  I've said that several times.  Seems to me you're saying it is IMPOSSIBLE for Ward to get in... is that your contention?  If not, then we agree - maybe, maybe not.  I don't even think he has a great chance, but he does have a chance.  it really depends on how long he wants to play and how long he can maintain his conditioning.

I love the guy, but he just won't have the resume...  Unless he plays considerably better going forward than he has to date.  Not likely for a 30 year old WR who has already been his team's #1 WR for years.

OK, so the only sticking point between what you're saying and what I'm saying is that you think he'll need to increase his statistical output going forward, while I believe that maintaining the averages he's posted since becoming a full-time starter for another 5-6 years will be good enough.

 

[jetpack]

So for all those saying Ward has never really been a Top 5 WR, well, he has.  And he has been over this 5 year stretch.  Some of us have not been giving Ward his due, but again, he has to have another 5 years like this to really get into the category for serious HOF consideration.

I think we are in agreement here. In general, it is very unlikely for any player whose best career performance was 5th best at his position over a 5 year stretch to make the HOF.As I said, he will have to improve his play going forward to make it.

Here's Marvin Harrison's Playoff StatsYear Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1996 pit L,14-42 | 0 0 0 | 3 71 0

1999 ten L,16-19 | 0 0 0 | 5 65 0

2000 mia L,17-23 | 0 0 0 | 5 63 0

2002 nyj L,0-41 | 0 0 0 | 4 47 0

2003 den W,41-10 | 0 0 0 | 7 133 2

2003 kan W,38-31 | 0 0 0 | 6 98 0

2003 nwe L,14-24 | 0 0 0 | 3 19 0

2004 den W,49-24 | 0 0 0 | 4 50 0

2004 nwe L,3-20 | 0 0 0 | 5 44 0

2005 pit L,18-21 | 0 0 0 | 3 52 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 45 642 2

What has this got to do with Hines Ward? Are you implying that Harrison should not be a HOFer because he only had 1 good game in the post-season?

No, not implying Harrison isn't HOF worthy, that's absurd. I'm showing a dimension to the argument that is obviously weighed by the voting committee pretty heavily. Otherwise, how does Swann get into the Hall or even Stallworth? Would the voting commitee hold it against someone like Harrision because his stats aren't all that great? Absolutely not. But it clearly enhances the attractiveness of a candidate like a Ward or Deon Branch when all is said and done. 10 playoff games or more is like an entire season of premium games. Great stats in those games implies alot about how important you are to the team and how well you performed in critical games. Right? Ward clearly has an excellent track history in playoff games. It's already better than some recievers we consider shoe-ins for the HOF like Harrison and there's likely more to come. Sounds like a good argument for consideration to the HOF where most folks would look at regular season stats and say "no chance".

If ever there were a stud in the playoffs, it was Terrell Davis . . .
Year  Opp   Result  |  RSH    YD  TD  |  REC    YD  TD---------------------+-----------------+----------------- 1996  jax  L,27-30  |   14    91   1  |    7    24   0 1997  jax  W,42-17  |   31   184   2  |    4    11   0 1997  kan  W,14-10  |   25   101   2  |    1    17   0 1997  pit  W,24-21  |   26   139   1  |    1     2   0*1997  gnb  W,31-24  |   30   157   3  |    2     8   0 1998  mia  W,38-3   |   21   199   2  |    1     7   0 1998  nyj  W,23-10  |   32   167   1  |    1    12   0*1998  atl  W,34-19  |   25   102   0  |    2    50   0---------------------+-----------------+-----------------TOTAL                |  204  1140  12  |   19   131   0For those of you scoring at home (or even if you're not), that's a tidy 159 yards of offense per game and 12 TD in 8 games played.If Davis doesn't get in, then IMO no one else will get in based on the strength of his post-season numbers.

That's incredibly clutch, but I don't think you can make a blanket statement about the overall impact of post-season #s from them. Davis's career was simply too brief. That fact probably outweighs (at least so far) his clear dominance in the regular and post season for voters. These #s are just from 3 years. So I don't think you could apply the same criteria to longer-lived players who also were clutch in the playoffs over a longer period of time. Just my 2 cents.

 

[MarshallRob]

His numbers don't look impressive today, but from 1975-1979 Swann was a Top 5 receiver himself. Swann was generally considered the best receiver of that time period while today most probably would not name Ward as the best receiver currently playing.

In his 5 best years (75-79), Swann ranked 7th in receptions, 6th in receiving yards, 2nd in TD, and 2nd in fantasy points.But he had very little to offer beofre or after that. In today's game, 5 years even with great numbers in the post-season will not get a WR into the Hall.

Right, so the Swann precedent for a receiver is five years near the top combined with tremendous performances in 3 Super Bowls. The Stallworth precedent is a bit more overall career production (but less consistency), combined with tremendous performances in 2 Super Bowls and a number of other great playoff games. So if Ward has just a couple more solid years combined with at least one more great postseason and Super Bowl, he'd be a very solid candidate. As for Terrell Davis, I don't think he'd even get HOF consideration if it wasn't for the playoffs. So that will be a positive factor, we just don't know right now if it will be enough to drag him over the goal line. (I think it will be).

Given that Irvin hasn't made it yet, it's crazy to suggest Ward's a first-ballot guy at this moment. He's got some work to do.

 

[David Yudkin]

So for all those saying Ward has never really been a Top 5 WR, well, he has.  And he has been over this 5 year stretch.  Some of us have not been giving Ward his due, but again, he has to have another 5 years like this to really get into the category for serious HOF consideration.

I think we are in agreement here. In general, it is very unlikely for any player whose best career performance was 5th best at his position over a 5 year stretch to make the HOF.As I said, he will have to improve his play going forward to make it.

Here's Marvin Harrison's Playoff StatsYear Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1996 pit L,14-42 | 0 0 0 | 3 71 0

1999 ten L,16-19 | 0 0 0 | 5 65 0

2000 mia L,17-23 | 0 0 0 | 5 63 0

2002 nyj L,0-41 | 0 0 0 | 4 47 0

2003 den W,41-10 | 0 0 0 | 7 133 2

2003 kan W,38-31 | 0 0 0 | 6 98 0

2003 nwe L,14-24 | 0 0 0 | 3 19 0

2004 den W,49-24 | 0 0 0 | 4 50 0

2004 nwe L,3-20 | 0 0 0 | 5 44 0

2005 pit L,18-21 | 0 0 0 | 3 52 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 45 642 2

What has this got to do with Hines Ward? Are you implying that Harrison should not be a HOFer because he only had 1 good game in the post-season?

No, not implying Harrison isn't HOF worthy, that's absurd. I'm showing a dimension to the argument that is obviously weighed by the voting committee pretty heavily. Otherwise, how does Swann get into the Hall or even Stallworth? Would the voting commitee hold it against someone like Harrision because his stats aren't all that great? Absolutely not. But it clearly enhances the attractiveness of a candidate like a Ward or Deon Branch when all is said and done. 10 playoff games or more is like an entire season of premium games. Great stats in those games implies alot about how important you are to the team and how well you performed in critical games. Right? Ward clearly has an excellent track history in playoff games. It's already better than some recievers we consider shoe-ins for the HOF like Harrison and there's likely more to come. Sounds like a good argument for consideration to the HOF where most folks would look at regular season stats and say "no chance".

If ever there were a stud in the playoffs, it was Terrell Davis . . .
Year  Opp   Result  |  RSH    YD  TD  |  REC    YD  TD---------------------+-----------------+----------------- 1996  jax  L,27-30  |   14    91   1  |    7    24   0 1997  jax  W,42-17  |   31   184   2  |    4    11   0 1997  kan  W,14-10  |   25   101   2  |    1    17   0 1997  pit  W,24-21  |   26   139   1  |    1     2   0*1997  gnb  W,31-24  |   30   157   3  |    2     8   0 1998  mia  W,38-3   |   21   199   2  |    1     7   0 1998  nyj  W,23-10  |   32   167   1  |    1    12   0*1998  atl  W,34-19  |   25   102   0  |    2    50   0---------------------+-----------------+-----------------TOTAL                |  204  1140  12  |   19   131   0For those of you scoring at home (or even if you're not), that's a tidy 159 yards of offense per game and 12 TD in 8 games played.If Davis doesn't get in, then IMO no one else will get in based on the strength of his post-season numbers.

That's incredibly clutch, but I don't think you can make a blanket statement about the overall impact of post-season #s from them. Davis's career was simply too brief. That fact probably outweighs (at least so far) his clear dominance in the regular and post season for voters. These #s are just from 3 years. So I don't think you could apply the same criteria to longer-lived players who also were clutch in the playoffs over a longer period of time. Just my 2 cents.

I'm not sure it matters if a player played 8 post-season games in a 10-year career or in a 5-year career. Either way, he played the same number of games.

 

[David Yudkin]

His numbers don't look impressive today, but from 1975-1979 Swann was a Top 5 receiver himself. Swann was generally considered the best receiver of that time period while today most probably would not name Ward as the best receiver currently playing.

In his 5 best years (75-79), Swann ranked 7th in receptions, 6th in receiving yards, 2nd in TD, and 2nd in fantasy points.But he had very little to offer beofre or after that. In today's game, 5 years even with great numbers in the post-season will not get a WR into the Hall.

Right, so the Swann precedent for a receiver is five years near the top combined with tremendous performances in 3 Super Bowls. The Stallworth precedent is a bit more overall career production (but less consistency), combined with tremendous performances in 2 Super Bowls and a number of other great playoff games. So if Ward has just a couple more solid years combined with at least one more great postseason and Super Bowl, he'd be a very solid candidate. As for Terrell Davis, I don't think he'd even get HOF consideration if it wasn't for the playoffs. So that will be a positive factor, we just don't know right now if it will be enough to drag him over the goal line. (I think it will be).

Given that Irvin hasn't made it yet, it's crazy to suggest Ward's a first-ballot guy at this moment. He's got some work to do.

Actually, I would say the prececident has been set that the minimum level of production FOR a 1970'S WIDE RECEIVER is what Swann posted. The game has lapped the 70s in terms of production, so IMO no way does someone with similar credentials at WR stand a chance with that in today's game.

 

[jetpack]

So for all those saying Ward has never really been a Top 5 WR, well, he has.  And he has been over this 5 year stretch.  Some of us have not been giving Ward his due, but again, he has to have another 5 years like this to really get into the category for serious HOF consideration.

I think we are in agreement here. In general, it is very unlikely for any player whose best career performance was 5th best at his position over a 5 year stretch to make the HOF.As I said, he will have to improve his play going forward to make it.

Here's Marvin Harrison's Playoff StatsYear Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1996 pit L,14-42 | 0 0 0 | 3 71 0

1999 ten L,16-19 | 0 0 0 | 5 65 0

2000 mia L,17-23 | 0 0 0 | 5 63 0

2002 nyj L,0-41 | 0 0 0 | 4 47 0

2003 den W,41-10 | 0 0 0 | 7 133 2

2003 kan W,38-31 | 0 0 0 | 6 98 0

2003 nwe L,14-24 | 0 0 0 | 3 19 0

2004 den W,49-24 | 0 0 0 | 4 50 0

2004 nwe L,3-20 | 0 0 0 | 5 44 0

2005 pit L,18-21 | 0 0 0 | 3 52 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 45 642 2

What has this got to do with Hines Ward? Are you implying that Harrison should not be a HOFer because he only had 1 good game in the post-season?

No, not implying Harrison isn't HOF worthy, that's absurd. I'm showing a dimension to the argument that is obviously weighed by the voting committee pretty heavily. Otherwise, how does Swann get into the Hall or even Stallworth? Would the voting commitee hold it against someone like Harrision because his stats aren't all that great? Absolutely not. But it clearly enhances the attractiveness of a candidate like a Ward or Deon Branch when all is said and done. 10 playoff games or more is like an entire season of premium games. Great stats in those games implies alot about how important you are to the team and how well you performed in critical games. Right? Ward clearly has an excellent track history in playoff games. It's already better than some recievers we consider shoe-ins for the HOF like Harrison and there's likely more to come. Sounds like a good argument for consideration to the HOF where most folks would look at regular season stats and say "no chance".

If ever there were a stud in the playoffs, it was Terrell Davis . . .
Year  Opp   Result  |  RSH    YD  TD  |  REC    YD  TD---------------------+-----------------+----------------- 1996  jax  L,27-30  |   14    91   1  |    7    24   0 1997  jax  W,42-17  |   31   184   2  |    4    11   0 1997  kan  W,14-10  |   25   101   2  |    1    17   0 1997  pit  W,24-21  |   26   139   1  |    1     2   0*1997  gnb  W,31-24  |   30   157   3  |    2     8   0 1998  mia  W,38-3   |   21   199   2  |    1     7   0 1998  nyj  W,23-10  |   32   167   1  |    1    12   0*1998  atl  W,34-19  |   25   102   0  |    2    50   0---------------------+-----------------+-----------------TOTAL                |  204  1140  12  |   19   131   0For those of you scoring at home (or even if you're not), that's a tidy 159 yards of offense per game and 12 TD in 8 games played.If Davis doesn't get in, then IMO no one else will get in based on the strength of his post-season numbers.

That's incredibly clutch, but I don't think you can make a blanket statement about the overall impact of post-season #s from them. Davis's career was simply too brief. That fact probably outweighs (at least so far) his clear dominance in the regular and post season for voters. These #s are just from 3 years. So I don't think you could apply the same criteria to longer-lived players who also were clutch in the playoffs over a longer period of time. Just my 2 cents.

I'm not sure it matters if a player played 8 post-season games in a 10-year career or in a 5-year career. Either way, he played the same number of games.

Yes, I agree. The # of clutch playoff games matters more than # of years over which the stats are accumulated. But if its a shorter window in which they're accumulated due to a short career, then there can't be the same amount of time to accrue regular season stats and accoldates. Seems that's what's kept Davis out of the Hall so far even though he seems to me to have at least as much reason to be there as Earl Campbell. I just wouldn't use Davis' post-season stats for any sort of barometer for the HOF unless the player had as brief a career as Davis.

 

[jetpack]

So for all those saying Ward has never really been a Top 5 WR, well, he has.  And he has been over this 5 year stretch.  Some of us have not been giving Ward his due, but again, he has to have another 5 years like this to really get into the category for serious HOF consideration.

I think we are in agreement here. In general, it is very unlikely for any player whose best career performance was 5th best at his position over a 5 year stretch to make the HOF.As I said, he will have to improve his play going forward to make it.

Here's Marvin Harrison's Playoff StatsYear Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1996 pit L,14-42 | 0 0 0 | 3 71 0

1999 ten L,16-19 | 0 0 0 | 5 65 0

2000 mia L,17-23 | 0 0 0 | 5 63 0

2002 nyj L,0-41 | 0 0 0 | 4 47 0

2003 den W,41-10 | 0 0 0 | 7 133 2

2003 kan W,38-31 | 0 0 0 | 6 98 0

2003 nwe L,14-24 | 0 0 0 | 3 19 0

2004 den W,49-24 | 0 0 0 | 4 50 0

2004 nwe L,3-20 | 0 0 0 | 5 44 0

2005 pit L,18-21 | 0 0 0 | 3 52 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 45 642 2

What has this got to do with Hines Ward? Are you implying that Harrison should not be a HOFer because he only had 1 good game in the post-season?

No, not implying Harrison isn't HOF worthy, that's absurd. I'm showing a dimension to the argument that is obviously weighed by the voting committee pretty heavily. Otherwise, how does Swann get into the Hall or even Stallworth? Would the voting commitee hold it against someone like Harrision because his stats aren't all that great? Absolutely not. But it clearly enhances the attractiveness of a candidate like a Ward or Deon Branch when all is said and done. 10 playoff games or more is like an entire season of premium games. Great stats in those games implies alot about how important you are to the team and how well you performed in critical games. Right? Ward clearly has an excellent track history in playoff games. It's already better than some recievers we consider shoe-ins for the HOF like Harrison and there's likely more to come. Sounds like a good argument for consideration to the HOF where most folks would look at regular season stats and say "no chance".

If ever there were a stud in the playoffs, it was Terrell Davis . . .
Year  Opp   Result  |  RSH    YD  TD  |  REC    YD  TD---------------------+-----------------+----------------- 1996  jax  L,27-30  |   14    91   1  |    7    24   0 1997  jax  W,42-17  |   31   184   2  |    4    11   0 1997  kan  W,14-10  |   25   101   2  |    1    17   0 1997  pit  W,24-21  |   26   139   1  |    1     2   0*1997  gnb  W,31-24  |   30   157   3  |    2     8   0 1998  mia  W,38-3   |   21   199   2  |    1     7   0 1998  nyj  W,23-10  |   32   167   1  |    1    12   0*1998  atl  W,34-19  |   25   102   0  |    2    50   0---------------------+-----------------+-----------------TOTAL                |  204  1140  12  |   19   131   0For those of you scoring at home (or even if you're not), that's a tidy 159 yards of offense per game and 12 TD in 8 games played.If Davis doesn't get in, then IMO no one else will get in based on the strength of his post-season numbers.

That's incredibly clutch, but I don't think you can make a blanket statement about the overall impact of post-season #s from them. Davis's career was simply too brief. That fact probably outweighs (at least so far) his clear dominance in the regular and post season for voters. These #s are just from 3 years. So I don't think you could apply the same criteria to longer-lived players who also were clutch in the playoffs over a longer period of time. Just my 2 cents.

I'm not sure it matters if a player played 8 post-season games in a 10-year career or in a 5-year career. Either way, he played the same number of games.

Yes, I agree. The # of clutch playoff games matters more than # of years over which the stats are accumulated. But if its a shorter window in which they're accumulated due to a short career, then there can't be the same amount of time to accrue regular season stats and accoldates. Seems that's what's kept Davis out of the Hall so far even though he seems to me to have at least as much reason to be there as Earl Campbell. I just wouldn't use Davis' post-season stats for any sort of barometer for the HOF unless the player had as brief a career as Davis.

Just to compare reg season and post season stats combined:Games Carries Yards tds Rec yds tds

Campbell 121 2,322 9,827 78 126 806 0

Davis 89 1,859 8,747 72 188 1,411 5

Plus Davis has the trophy. Wonder what the hold-up is?

 

[dgreen]

Seems that's what's kept Davis out of the Hall so far even though he seems to me to have at least as much reason to be there as Earl Campbell.

Actually, Campbell does have a longer career and peak. Not a lot longer, but it is longer.Campbell:

+--------------------------+-------------------------+ | Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1978 hou | 15 | 302 1450 4.8 13 | 12 48 4.0 0 || 1979 hou | 16 | 368 1697 4.6 19 | 16 94 5.9 0 || 1980 hou | 15 | 373 1934 5.2 13 | 11 47 4.3 0 || 1981 hou | 16 | 361 1376 3.8 10 | 36 156 4.3 0 || 1982 hou | 9 | 157 538 3.4 2 | 18 130 7.2 0 || 1983 hou | 14 | 322 1301 4.0 12 | 19 216 11.4 0 || 1984 nor | 8 | 50 190 3.8 0 | 0 0 0.0 0 || 1984 hou | 6 | 96 278 2.9 4 | 3 27 9.0 0 || 1985 nor | 16 | 158 643 4.1 1 | 6 88 14.7 0 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 115 | 2187 9407 4.3 74 | 121 806 6.7 0 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+Davis:

+--------------------------+-------------------------+                  |          Rushing         |        Receiving        |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year  TM |   G |   Att  Yards    Y/A   TD |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1995 den |  14 |   237   1117    4.7    7 |    49    367   7.5    1 || 1996 den |  16 |   345   1538    4.5   13 |    36    310   8.6    2 || 1997 den |  15 |   369   1750    4.7   15 |    42    287   6.8    0 || 1998 den |  16 |   392   2008    5.1   21 |    25    217   8.7    2 || 1999 den |   4 |    67    211    3.1    2 |     3     26   8.7    0 || 2000 den |   5 |    78    282    3.6    2 |     2      4   2.0    0 || 2001 den |  11 |   167    701    4.2    0 |    12     69   5.8    0 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+|  TOTAL   |  81 |  1655   7607    4.6   60 |   169   1280   7.6    5 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

Campbell's peak was six years, with a down year in '82, while Davis' was four years, without an overly impressive first year ('95) in that peak.Look how similar their last three years were. Pretty weird.

 

[dgreen]

Plus Davis has the trophy. Wonder what the hold-up is?

He's not eligible until next year.

 

[Tau837]

Plus Davis has the trophy.  Wonder what the hold-up is?

He's not eligible until next year.

And when he is, he shouldn't make it. IMO 3 elite seasons aren't enough, even with his postseason accomplishments. And it doesn't help that some other less than compelling RBs also dominated the league in the same offense as soon as Davis got hurt. In retrospect, it makes Davis's performance look a bit less impressive.EDIT: And the "player A is in and player B has similar stats/accomplishments, so player B should be in" argument is weak. Each player needs to make it on his own merit.

 

[Tau837]

His numbers don't look impressive today, but from 1975-1979 Swann was a Top 5 receiver himself. Swann was generally considered the best receiver of that time period while today most probably would not name Ward as the best receiver currently playing.

In his 5 best years (75-79), Swann ranked 7th in receptions, 6th in receiving yards, 2nd in TD, and 2nd in fantasy points.But he had very little to offer beofre or after that. In today's game, 5 years even with great numbers in the post-season will not get a WR into the Hall.

Right, so the Swann precedent for a receiver is five years near the top combined with tremendous performances in 3 Super Bowls. The Stallworth precedent is a bit more overall career production (but less consistency), combined with tremendous performances in 2 Super Bowls and a number of other great playoff games. So if Ward has just a couple more solid years combined with at least one more great postseason and Super Bowl, he'd be a very solid candidate. As for Terrell Davis, I don't think he'd even get HOF consideration if it wasn't for the playoffs. So that will be a positive factor, we just don't know right now if it will be enough to drag him over the goal line. (I think it will be).

Given that Irvin hasn't made it yet, it's crazy to suggest Ward's a first-ballot guy at this moment. He's got some work to do.

Actually, I would say the prececident has been set that the minimum level of production FOR a 1970'S WIDE RECEIVER is what Swann posted. The game has lapped the 70s in terms of production, so IMO no way does someone with similar credentials at WR stand a chance with that in today's game.

 

[MarshallRob]

Plus Davis has the trophy.  Wonder what the hold-up is?

He's not eligible until next year.

Can't argue with that.I would point out that the Oilers were perennial losers until they drafted Campbell. Then they went to two straight AFC title games. When Campbell declined, so did his team. On the other hand, while Davis led Denver to two Super Bowl wins his team was still able to regularly make the playoffs and run very effectively without him. There's no doubt Campbell in his prime would be successful on any team in any era. For 3 years he was as good as any running back has ever been in NFL history. I'm not sure the same is true for Davis.

 

[jurb26]

Haven't really read through this thread so sorry if it's been brought up already.... but. No, I don't see him getting in as of now. I don't think he ever was a dominating WR or was ever percieved that way. Even looking at his stats, nothing really jumps out at you with exception to 1 season:

|          Rushing         |        Receiving        |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year  TM |   G |   Att  Yards    Y/A   TD |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1998 pit |  16 |     1     13   13.0    0 |    15    246  16.4    0 || 1999 pit |  16 |     2     -2   -1.0    0 |    61    638  10.5    7 || 2000 pit |  16 |     4     53   13.2    0 |    48    672  14.0    4 || 2001 pit |  16 |    10     83    8.3    0 |    94   1003  10.7    4 || 2002 pit |  16 |    12    142   11.8    0 |   112   1329  11.9   12 || 2003 pit |  16 |    11     61    5.5    0 |    95   1163  12.2   10 || 2004 pit |  16 |     7     25    3.6    1 |    80   1004  12.6    4 || 2005 pit |  15 |     3     10    3.3    0 |    69    975  14.1   11 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+|  TOTAL   | 127 |    50    385    7.7    1 |   574   7030  12.2   52

I think he would need at least one more season on par with his 2002 season to get in and possibly more. The SB MVP will give him a great deal of leeway that other WRs will not get though. My vote was for not yet.

 

[Tau837]

I get your point, but you yourself showed earlier how Ward has actually been a Top 5 receiver over the last 5 years. From that starting point, when you then add in his postseason success (better than I had realized) and "clutch" ability you can start to make the argument that Ward is close to being the best receiver in football. (I'm not saying that proposition is true, but at least you could make the argument).

I know you aren't arguing that viewpoint... that's a good thing because that would be a difficult position to defend.First of all, are you saying the best WR in football right now or for the past 5 years or what other time period? Either way, I am confident that the notion can be dispelled.Ward has performed well, not at an elite level, but at the next performance tier below elite. He also is known to be very tough, a great blocker, a leader, and "clutch".OK, there are other WRs with better numbers and who also have proven to varying degrees to be tough, leaders, and clutch performers. Perhaps none of them are as good at blocking, but that alone won't overcome the gap that exists in the numbers.Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, Chad Johnson, and Steve Smith are examples that come to mind that are collectively better because their edge in receiving overcomes whatever edge Ward has over them. Heck, Keyshawn Johnson fits all of those criteria and has better numbers. Does anyone think he is headed for the Hall?

 

[dgreen]

There's no doubt Campbell in his prime would be successful on any team in any era. For 3 years he was as good as any running back has ever been in NFL history. I'm not sure the same is true for Davis.

Just speaking in FF terms, Campbell has position ranks of 2, 1, 2 his first three years and TD was 2, 2, 1 for a three-year stretch. But, Campbell also had an 8, 12, and 25 in his peak while TD only had a 12.I agree, though, that Campbell excels no matter where he is. And, TD will always have the "system" tag because of the success after he left.

 

[dgreen]

Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, Chad Johnson, and Steve Smith are examples that come to mind that are collectively better because their edge in receiving overcomes whatever edge Ward has over them.

Hold on. Steve Smith is not an example of someone having an edge in receiving. Smith has had two good years to talk about. Here they are:

Rec   Yards   Y/R   TD   Pos. Rank  88    1110  12.6    7       15103    1583  15.2   12        1

Here are Ward's top two seasons:

Rec   Yards   Y/R   TD   Pos. Rank112    1329  12.9   12       3  95    1163  12.2   10       6

 

[CalBear]

For the last 5 years, he's averaged 90-1,095-8 - if he plays to 35 at that level, he would be at 1,114-13,600-100 (each of whch would likely be top-10 all-time.)

Certainly 1100 receptions and 13600 receiving yards will not be in the top 10 in five years; they probably won't be in the top 15. 100 TDs might be good for #9 all time. Ward just isn't distinguished compared to his contemporaries.

 

[jurb26]

Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, Chad Johnson, and Steve Smith are examples that come to mind that are collectively better because their edge in receiving overcomes whatever edge Ward has over them.

Hold on. Steve Smith is not an example of someone having an edge in receiving. Smith has had two good years to talk about. Here they are:

Rec   Yards   Y/R   TD   Pos. Rank  88    1110  12.6    7       15103    1583  15.2   12        1

Here are Ward's top two seasons:

Rec   Yards   Y/R   TD   Pos. Rank112    1329  12.9   12       3  95    1163  12.2   10       6

I agree with this point. Smith however is no where near a HoFer at this point in time either though.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

For the last 5 years, he's averaged 90-1,095-8 - if he plays to 35 at that level, he would be at 1,114-13,600-100 (each of whch would likely be top-10 all-time.)

Certainly 1100 receptions and 13600 receiving yards will not be in the top 10 in five years; they probably won't be in the top 15. 100 TDs might be good for #9 all time. Ward just isn't distinguished compared to his contemporaries.

1114 receptions would rank #2 all-time right now, and 13,600 yards would be #6. You really think 9-14 receivers will eclipse 1,100 receptions and 5-10 receivers will surpass 13,600 yards in the next 5 years? There are only 7 active receivers with 10,000 yards and of those, 3 of them (McCardell, Rod Smith, and Jimmy Smith) are too old to likely get near 14,000. Likewise, there are only 7 active receivers with 700 catches and 4 of them (the 3 mentioned earlier and Isaac Bruce) are likely never going to hit 1,000 let alone 1,100.As to your last sentence, statistically, he's probably the #5 receiver of this generation when all is said and done. In terms of blocking, leadership, team play, and character, he's #1. And those latter qualities matter a great deal when it comes to HOF voting. He CAN get in, if he plays at this level until he's 35 or so.

 

[MarshallRob]

I get your point, but you yourself showed earlier how Ward has actually been a Top 5 receiver over the last 5 years.  From that starting point, when you then add in his postseason success (better than I had realized) and "clutch" ability you can start to make the argument that Ward is close to being the best receiver in football.  (I'm not saying that proposition is true, but at least you could make the argument).

I know you aren't arguing that viewpoint... that's a good thing because that would be a difficult position to defend.First of all, are you saying the best WR in football right now or for the past 5 years or what other time period? Either way, I am confident that the notion can be dispelled.

Ward has performed well, not at an elite level, but at the next performance tier below elite. He also is known to be very tough, a great blocker, a leader, and "clutch".

OK, there are other WRs with better numbers and who also have proven to varying degrees to be tough, leaders, and clutch performers. Perhaps none of them are as good at blocking, but that alone won't overcome the gap that exists in the numbers.

Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, Chad Johnson, and Steve Smith are examples that come to mind that are collectively better because their edge in receiving overcomes whatever edge Ward has over them. Heck, Keyshawn Johnson fits all of those criteria and has better numbers. Does anyone think he is headed for the Hall?

Believe me, I'm definitely not on the Hines Ward Hall of Fame bandwagon though it can be fun to play the contrarian and now that I've looked at the matter more closely I do think Ward brings more to the table than some people realize. It sure seems like he makes a lot of big plays in big games. Like it or not, his TD catch and 3rd-and-28 catch in the Super Bowl are going to forever be the highlights of the game going forward, just like Swann's catches in Super Bowls X and XIII (plus Jackie Smith's drop) encapsulate our memories of those games. Every year when Super Bowl highlights are rerun, you're going to see that play. We don't want to elevate intangibles and postseason play to a ridiculous level but they do have to count for something and Ward has more in those areas than any current receiver I believe with Owens now having the least. Owens has an enormous edge in raw numbers and had a fine Super Bowl himself but I honestly believe that the majority of NFL teams would rather have Ward right now and if that's true, how is Owens better? If it turns out the 2005 Steelers are a great team with another Super Bowl in them, that probably helps Ward tremendously since we know Hall of Fame voters like to honor players on great teams.Steve Smith had the very definition of a Hall of Fame season in 2005. A few more like it and it's going to be real easy to make a case for him someday. Chad Johnson did well but I also saw a lot of dropped passes. It's early for those guys though. Keyshawn's not really in the discussion. Harrison's in. Moss is close. Holt's certainly creating a resume.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

He'll get in on the first ballot if they can find a way to involve the refs from the game on Sunday.

 

[Tau837]

Harrison, Owens, Moss, Holt, Chad Johnson, and Steve Smith are examples that come to mind that are collectively better because their edge in receiving overcomes whatever edge Ward has over them.

Hold on. Steve Smith is not an example of someone having an edge in receiving. Smith has had two good years to talk about. Here they are:
Rec   Yards   Y/R   TD   Pos. Rank  88    1110  12.6    7       15103    1583  15.2   12        1Here are Ward's top two seasons:

Rec   Yards   Y/R   TD   Pos. Rank112    1329  12.9   12       3  95    1163  12.2   10       6

I agree with this point. Smith however is no where near a HoFer at this point in time either though.

Of course. I'm not saying Smith is a HOFer and obviously his track record isn't as long.But if you combine receiving, toughness, clutch play, blocking, and leadership TODAY, is Ward definitely better?

If you add their postseason performances into the two year comparison, Smith is better on numbers, 3524/27 in 39 games to 2886/25 in 34 games.

And then factor in that those two seasons for Smith were his past two seasons played, on an upward trend, whereas Ward is 2 years removed from his two best seasons and is on a downward trend.

And then note that Smith has played 3 fewer seasons than Ward.

Now, which one of them is better today? Which one would a team choose today?

 

[jurb26]

Of course. I'm not saying Smith is a HOFer and obviously his track record isn't as long.

But if you combine receiving, toughness, clutch play, blocking, and leadership TODAY, is Ward definitely better?

If you add their postseason performances into the two year comparison, Smith is better on numbers, 3524/27 in 39 games to 2886/25 in 34 games.

And then factor in that those two seasons for Smith were his past two seasons played, on an upward trend, whereas Ward is 2 years removed from his two best seasons and is on a downward trend.

And then note that Smith has played 3 fewer seasons than Ward.

Now, which one of them is better today? Which one would a team choose today?

I take Smith over Ward rather easily if I do not need to worry about health. The major reason being that he provides a much more dangerous deep threat and can stretch the field with the best of any NFL WRs. Close to, but not quite on par with Moss IMO.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

He'll get in on the first ballot if they can find a way to involve the refs from the game on Sunday.

Are you attempting to live up to your sig? It's the only explanation.

 

[dgreen]

Now, which one of them is better today? Which one would a team choose today?

If we're still doing some kind of comparison for HOF purposes, the word "today" is never relevant. Teams would take Steve Smith over Jerry Rice today. So what? Smith is currently trending up while Rice is trending down. So what?You seemed to be listing top notch receivers who had better receiving credentials than Ward. In Smith's case, that's just not true. It may one day be true, but it isn't right now.

 

[Tau837]

I can't believe how much I was drawn into this. If Ward retires right now, he has zero chance of making the HOF.

If his career ends in 5+ years and he has had great numbers and more stellar postseason performances, he will have a chance. How much of a chance depends on the details of those great numbers and postseason performances, as well as on his peers at WR and all other positions.

Oh yeah, and it would help if he made All Pro at least once.

The odds are stacked heavily against him. Anyone who says otherwise is refusing to look at the big picture.

 

[Tau837]

Now, which one of them is better today?  Which one would a team choose today?

If we're still doing some kind of comparison for HOF purposes, the word "today" is never relevant. Teams would take Steve Smith over Jerry Rice today. So what? Smith is currently trending up while Rice is trending down. So what?You seemed to be listing top notch receivers who had better receiving credentials than Ward. In Smith's case, that's just not true. It may one day be true, but it isn't right now.

I listed some WRs who have clearly been better and others who are well on their way to being better. EDIT: The fact that there are both receivers somewhat older than Ward who are better and somewhat younger than Ward who are better will hurt his chances, so I listed examples of both.And I originally responded to a post that contained this quote:

you can start to make the argument that Ward is close to being the best receiver in football

That sounds like a "today" kind of statement.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

He'll get in on the first ballot if they can find a way to involve the refs from the game on Sunday.

Are you attempting to live up to your sig? It's the only explanation.

Humor down?