Mario Manningham (1 Viewer)

[munygon2]

I see that he is still unrosted in my 10 team league, and has posted solid totals for two weeks now. Is he likely to have consistent production from here forward? I just haven't seen much talk about him with Nicks getting all the press. However I can see that he has had 2 very nice games so far.

 

[Sweet Love]

He is not the #1, but he did have 800+ yards and 5-6 TDs last year, so I am not sure why he was written off so strongly.

 

[tangfoot]

Hakeem Nicks was out most of the game. I don't think Manningham would have had that production this week if Nicks puts in his normal workload.

That said, watch the news this week about Nicks. If he's out or the injury is lingering, Manningham has huge value.

If healthy I see it as Smith 1, Nicks 2. Smith with more receptions, Nicks with more TDs.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

thats blasphemy around here.

but I think Nicks n Marios numbers after 16 games will be alot closer than people think. Nicks seems to be nicked up quite a bit

 

[Jayrod]

Hakeem Nicks was out most of the game. I don't think Manningham would have had that production this week if Nicks puts in his normal workload. That said, watch the news this week about Nicks. If he's out or the injury is lingering, Manningham has huge value.If healthy I see it as Smith 1, Nicks 2. Smith with more receptions, Nicks with more TDs.

Smith hasn't done crap yet. Nicks is clearly the #1 when healthy. And I own Smith, not Hicks.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Yes, Manningham is a definite pickup. He'll be at least "involved" all year. Think Legedu.

 

[tangfoot]

Hakeem Nicks was out most of the game. I don't think Manningham would have had that production this week if Nicks puts in his normal workload. That said, watch the news this week about Nicks. If he's out or the injury is lingering, Manningham has huge value.If healthy I see it as Smith 1, Nicks 2. Smith with more receptions, Nicks with more TDs.

Smith hasn't done crap yet. Nicks is clearly the #1 when healthy. And I own Smith, not Hicks.

In referring to them as 1 and 2, I was talking about their position in the pecking order. Smith is leading the team in targets (17), and I expect that he will continue to do so. I agree that Nicks should score more fantasy points, though.

 

[basher]

thats blasphemy around here.but I think Nicks n Marios numbers after 16 games will be alot closer than people think. Nicks seems to be nicked up quite a bit

This is what happens when you have 2-3 receivers on a team that for the most part are not significantly better then one another. Manningham is probably the best deep threat on the team, SS easily has the best hands and route running but is slow, Nicks is more of a blend of both.

 

[eoMMan]

He's the #3 behind Steve Smith and Hakeem Nicks.

 

[Andrew Garda]

Manningham had all of six targets. Nicks had five and he wasdn't in for most of the game. Smith had 9. Last week he had four to Smith/Nicks 8 each.

It's not the end all be all of stats but I think that tells you that no, Manningham is not the number one.

However as was said above, Nicks is banged up a lot and it wouldn't shock me to see him miss more time. So if you have room on your roster, Manningham is a really good player to stash. He might even function as a WR3 or 4 for you if he keeps up the solid work. The Giants will try to keep him involved - he just isn't consistent enough (yet) to depend on.

 

[eoMMan]

thats blasphemy around here.but I think Nicks n Marios numbers after 16 games will be alot closer than people think. Nicks seems to be nicked up quite a bit

This is what happens when you have 2-3 receivers on a team that for the most part are not significantly better then one another. Manningham is probably the best deep threat on the team, SS easily has the best hands and route running but is slow, Nicks is more of a blend of both.

I disagree. I think Nicks is the best deep threat on the team. Also, Nicks averaged 16.8 yards per reception in 2009 and Manningham averaged 14.4 yards per reception.