Steve Smith - when all is said and done, HoF? (1 Viewer)

[spider321]

I am sorry, but there is no way that Steve Smith is more HOF-worthy than Bruce or Holt.

+1

 

[Tau837]

In my mind, it's a real shame that people can't see past his (impressive enough!) counting numbers to reward these facts. If it were me, I would enshrine Brown, Moss, Owens, Harrison, Calvin, Fitzgerald, Smith, and Andre from this generation. I know that that's a lot by historical standards, but the Hall has historically neglected receivers, and we're in one of the most pass-heavy eras in history, so the Hall should reflect that. I would leave out Holt, Bruce, Ward, et al. Also, I'd unenshrine Andre Reed while I was at it. He was a very good receiver, but nowhere near as good as these other guys.

I am sorry, but there is no way that Steve Smith is more HOF-worthy than Bruce or Holt.

 

[N Zone]

His career isn't even over. There's a reason they wait until 5 years after the player retires to evaluate for HOF, and then give them 15 years, I think, then senior HOF possibility too. Too soon to even evaluate. He's on pace to be worthy of a good chance to make the HOF in future years. Look at Andre Reed's stats and playoff stats, and I'm guessing most of you would have said NO HOF for Andre Reed too, but he's being inducted to the Hall of Fame this year.

 

[Tau837]

His career isn't even over. There's a reason they wait until 5 years after the player retires to evaluate for HOF, and then give them 15 years, I think, then senior HOF possibility too. Too soon to even evaluate. He's on pace to be worthy of a good chance to make the HOF in future years. Look at Andre Reed's stats and playoff stats, and I'm guessing most of you would have said NO HOF for Andre Reed too, but he's being inducted to the Hall of Fame this year.

Andre Reed retired in the top 5 all time in receptions, receiving yards, and receiving TDs. He was a key performer and leading receiver on one of the premier offenses of his era, on teams that made 4 straight Super Bowls.

Steve Smith's resume does not compare favorably to Reed's, and it is very unlikely his resume is going to improve going forward.

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

Steve Smith's agent says he's "not going to play for the Panthers next year."
"I know that," Smith's rep said. "I just don't know when that transaction is going to take place." By admitting the obvious, Smith's camp is putting the public onus on the Panthers to resolve the situation. The Panthers are trying to find a trade partner, but there aren't going to be any takers for a 35-year-old (in May) wideout who's due $7 million in 2014. It's time for both sides to move on.

Source: Associated Press

 

[Leroy's Aces]

Very classy move.

Steve Smith Salutes Panther fans in newspaper ad

 

[NCCommish]

Very classy move.

Steve Smith Salutes Panther fans in newspaper ad

Yeah that was very cool. I look forward to him retiring as a Panther.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

That was a hell of a game Sunday. He's not done yet.

 

[dickey moe]

Still no.

 

[Rick James]

Never a top 2 or 3 receiver for a long period of time. No HOF.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Never a top 2 or 3 receiver for a long period of time. No HOF.

First off, lots of receivers make the Hall of Fame without ever being a top 2-3 receiver for a long period. Of the 16 WRs and flankers in the Hall of fame, two receivers have more first-team AP All Pro awards than Steve Smith. Jerry Rice has 10 and Lance Alworth has 6. If you don't want to count Steve Smith's All Pro as a returner (which seems fair to me), then three more receivers move ahead of him: Cris Carter, Fred Biletnikoff, and Paul Warfield with two each. Otherwise, what Hall of Fame receiver was one of the top 2-3 guys at his position for a long period of time?

Second off, Steve Smith absolutely was a top 2-3 wide receiver from 2005-2008. During that span, he played 48 games with Jake Delhomme and put up 299/4686/38 receiving. That's an average of 100/1562/12.7 per 16 games (plus another 60 yards rushing) over three full seasons worth of games. And he did it on the team that threw the least passes in the NFL by a substantial margin. In 2005, Steve Smith averaged the most receiving yards per team pass attempt of any receiver in NFL history. In 2008, he averaged... the second most receiving yards per team pass attempt of any receiver in NFL history. Over the last three years, Calvin Johnson has averaged 111 receiving yards per game with a QB who attempted 42.2 passes per game. From 2005-2008 with Jake Delhomme, Steve Smith averaged 101.3 yards per game with a QB who attempted 28.5 passes per game. What would Smith's numbers have looked like if Jake Delhomme threw an extra 14 passes every game?

Steve Smith's numbers don't look out-of-this-world because he played in the most run-heavy offense in the league, missed a full season in his prime with a broken leg, missed two games in 2008 (and still put up Josh Gordon-like numbers in the 14-games he played), and got stuck with 30+ games with guys like Vinny Testeverde, David Carr, Matt Moore, Chris Wenke, and post-collapse Jake Delhomme at quarterback (how has Larry Fitzgerald done with quarterbacks who, quite frankly, haven't even been as bad as that list?) But when you adjust for context, Steve Smith's numbers are truly absurd. They're insane.

And oh, by the way, he's also one of the greatest playoff receivers in NFL history. His postseason numbers would pro-rate to 91/1522/14. Which is pretty good, historically speaking.

 

[renesauz]

First ballot IMO

 

[Bri]

Never a top 2 or 3 receiver for a long period of time. No HOF.

First off, lots of receivers make the Hall of Fame without ever being a top 2-3 receiver for a long period. Of the 16 WRs and flankers in the Hall of fame, two receivers have more first-team AP All Pro awards than Steve Smith. Jerry Rice has 10 and Lance Alworth has 6. If you don't want to count Steve Smith's All Pro as a returner (which seems fair to me), then three more receivers move ahead of him: Cris Carter, Fred Biletnikoff, and Paul Warfield with two each. Otherwise, what Hall of Fame receiver was one of the top 2-3 guys at his position for a long period of time?

Second off, Steve Smith absolutely was a top 2-3 wide receiver from 2005-2008. During that span, he played 48 games with Jake Delhomme and put up 299/4686/38 receiving. That's an average of 100/1562/12.7 per 16 games (plus another 60 yards rushing) over three full seasons worth of games. And he did it on the team that threw the least passes in the NFL by a substantial margin. In 2005, Steve Smith averaged the most receiving yards per team pass attempt of any receiver in NFL history. In 2008, he averaged... the second most receiving yards per team pass attempt of any receiver in NFL history. Over the last three years, Calvin Johnson has averaged 111 receiving yards per game with a QB who attempted 42.2 passes per game. From 2005-2008 with Jake Delhomme, Steve Smith averaged 101.3 yards per game with a QB who attempted 28.5 passes per game. What would Smith's numbers have looked like if Jake Delhomme threw an extra 14 passes every game?

Steve Smith's numbers don't look out-of-this-world because he played in the most run-heavy offense in the league, missed a full season in his prime with a broken leg, missed two games in 2008 (and still put up Josh Gordon-like numbers in the 14-games he played), and got stuck with 30+ games with guys like Vinny Testeverde, David Carr, Matt Moore, Chris Wenke, and post-collapse Jake Delhomme at quarterback (how has Larry Fitzgerald done with quarterbacks who, quite frankly, haven't even been as bad as that list?) But when you adjust for context, Steve Smith's numbers are truly absurd. They're insane.

And oh, by the way, he's also one of the greatest playoff receivers in NFL history. His postseason numbers would pro-rate to 91/1522/14. Which is pretty good, historically speaking.

Amazing.

People in the 50s wish they could twist like this, wow. Instead of comparing him to the top 2 or 3 WRs, you took an end around at the HOF and came back.

Sniff....beautifully done

 

[Adam Harstad]

Here's some more fodder for those who think he was never a top 2-3 receiver for any extended length of time: Steve Smith ranked 1st in fantasy points among WRs in 2005. He ranked 1st in fantasy points among WRs from 2005-2006. He ranked 2nd in fantasy points among WRs from 2005-2007. He ranked 2nd from 2005-2008. He ranked 2nd from 2005-2009. He ranked 4th from 2005-2010. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2011. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2012. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2013. And he ranks 2nd from 2005 through week one of 2014.

And unless anyone thinks that's just because that insane 2005 triple-crown season was propping up his totals (it certainly didn't hurt ), Smith ranked 5th from 2006 to 2008, behind Owens, Fitzgerald, Wayne, and Moss. And unless anyone thinks that Smith benefits from the fact that plenty of great WRs didn't play as many games during those stretches, Smith ranked 5th in points per game from 2005 to 2011, behind Calvin, Fitzgerald, Owens, and Andre. And that's including all the garbage QB play he had to work with in 2009 and 2010 (including the Jimmy Clausen era). It may not seem like it, but in his prime, Smith put up volume stats on par with all of the other WRs who are virtual locks to make it into Canton. He produced like a Moss or an Owens or a Calvin or a Fitzgerald or an Andre. He just didn't get the recognition for it.

Steve Smith should be a lock for the Hall of Fame. He probably won't be... but he should be.

 

[BassNBrew]

Smith is currently 18th on the all time rec yardage list. He should catch Monk and Fryar this year. If he plays next year and is healthy, he'll be knocking on top 10 status.

 

[Ghost Rider]

One thing that hurts Smith, just like Andre Johnson, is lack of touchdowns: this is his 14th NFL season and he has scored only 70 touchdowns (68 receiving, 2 rushing). To compare him to a peer, lack of touchdowns is sometimes used against Torry Holt, yet he scored 85 touchdowns in 11 seasons (which is far better than 70 in 13+), and Holt has the rep as being part of the greatest show on turf. Smith probably is worthy, but I can't say he is more worthy than Moss, Owens, Harrison, Holt or Bruce, and I suspect that by the time he is retired and eligible, some of the younger current WRs will have passed him up (Calvin, Fitz, Marshall, Green, etc.).

 

[Rick James]

Here's some more fodder for those who think he was never a top 2-3 receiver for any extended length of time: Steve Smith ranked 1st in fantasy points among WRs in 2005. He ranked 1st in fantasy points among WRs from 2005-2006. He ranked 2nd in fantasy points among WRs from 2005-2007. He ranked 2nd from 2005-2008. He ranked 2nd from 2005-2009. He ranked 4th from 2005-2010. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2011. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2012. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2013. And he ranks 2nd from 2005 through week one of 2014.

And unless anyone thinks that's just because that insane 2005 triple-crown season was propping up his totals (it certainly didn't hurt ), Smith ranked 5th from 2006 to 2008, behind Owens, Fitzgerald, Wayne, and Moss. And unless anyone thinks that Smith benefits from the fact that plenty of great WRs didn't play as many games during those stretches, Smith ranked 5th in points per game from 2005 to 2011, behind Calvin, Fitzgerald, Owens, and Andre. And that's including all the garbage QB play he had to work with in 2009 and 2010 (including the Jimmy Clausen era). It may not seem like it, but in his prime, Smith put up volume stats on par with all of the other WRs who are virtual locks to make it into Canton. He produced like a Moss or an Owens or a Calvin or a Fitzgerald or an Andre. He just didn't get the recognition for it.

Steve Smith should be a lock for the Hall of Fame. He probably won't be... but he should be.

Owens, Fitz, Wayne, Moss, Andre, Calvin-- 6 guys from the same era who are better than Steve Smith.

I don't think he gets in

 

[Fariq]

Here's some more fodder for those who think he was never a top 2-3 receiver for any extended length of time: Steve Smith ranked 1st in fantasy points among WRs in 2005. He ranked 1st in fantasy points among WRs from 2005-2006. He ranked 2nd in fantasy points among WRs from 2005-2007. He ranked 2nd from 2005-2008. He ranked 2nd from 2005-2009. He ranked 4th from 2005-2010. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2011. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2012. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2013. And he ranks 2nd from 2005 through week one of 2014.

And unless anyone thinks that's just because that insane 2005 triple-crown season was propping up his totals (it certainly didn't hurt ), Smith ranked 5th from 2006 to 2008, behind Owens, Fitzgerald, Wayne, and Moss. And unless anyone thinks that Smith benefits from the fact that plenty of great WRs didn't play as many games during those stretches, Smith ranked 5th in points per game from 2005 to 2011, behind Calvin, Fitzgerald, Owens, and Andre. And that's including all the garbage QB play he had to work with in 2009 and 2010 (including the Jimmy Clausen era). It may not seem like it, but in his prime, Smith put up volume stats on par with all of the other WRs who are virtual locks to make it into Canton. He produced like a Moss or an Owens or a Calvin or a Fitzgerald or an Andre. He just didn't get the recognition for it.

Steve Smith should be a lock for the Hall of Fame. He probably won't be... but he should be.

Owens, Fitz, Wayne, Moss, Andre, Calvin-- 6 guys from the same era who are better than Steve Smith.

I don't think he gets in

I am not sure Wayne and Johnson were better than Smith.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

Smith reminds me a lot of Derrek Mason...Rock solid, gets the most out of his game and ability, plays balls to the wall all of the time and a guy you want on your team. Both of these guys have better numbers than Irvin and Irvin is in.

 

[Banger]

very good wr but I don't know that he was ever the best wr in any year during his tenure....solid for years but not elite.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Here's some more fodder for those who think he was never a top 2-3 receiver for any extended length of time: Steve Smith ranked 1st in fantasy points among WRs in 2005. He ranked 1st in fantasy points among WRs from 2005-2006. He ranked 2nd in fantasy points among WRs from 2005-2007. He ranked 2nd from 2005-2008. He ranked 2nd from 2005-2009. He ranked 4th from 2005-2010. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2011. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2012. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2013. And he ranks 2nd from 2005 through week one of 2014.

And unless anyone thinks that's just because that insane 2005 triple-crown season was propping up his totals (it certainly didn't hurt ), Smith ranked 5th from 2006 to 2008, behind Owens, Fitzgerald, Wayne, and Moss. And unless anyone thinks that Smith benefits from the fact that plenty of great WRs didn't play as many games during those stretches, Smith ranked 5th in points per game from 2005 to 2011, behind Calvin, Fitzgerald, Owens, and Andre. And that's including all the garbage QB play he had to work with in 2009 and 2010 (including the Jimmy Clausen era). It may not seem like it, but in his prime, Smith put up volume stats on par with all of the other WRs who are virtual locks to make it into Canton. He produced like a Moss or an Owens or a Calvin or a Fitzgerald or an Andre. He just didn't get the recognition for it.

Steve Smith should be a lock for the Hall of Fame. He probably won't be... but he should be.

Owens, Fitz, Wayne, Moss, Andre, Calvin-- 6 guys from the same era who are better than Steve Smith.

I don't think he gets in

Wayne is not better than Smith.

very good wr but I don't know that he was ever the best wr in any year during his tenure....solid for years but not elite.

Smith was arguably the best WR in 2005, when he led the league in catches, yards and touchdowns, but that was probably the only season where he was the best.

However, from 2005-2008, he averaged 88-1,288-8. AVERAGED. That's not elite? That's only solid?

 

[Adam Harstad]

Here's some more fodder for those who think he was never a top 2-3 receiver for any extended length of time: Steve Smith ranked 1st in fantasy points among WRs in 2005. He ranked 1st in fantasy points among WRs from 2005-2006. He ranked 2nd in fantasy points among WRs from 2005-2007. He ranked 2nd from 2005-2008. He ranked 2nd from 2005-2009. He ranked 4th from 2005-2010. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2011. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2012. He ranked 3rd from 2005-2013. And he ranks 2nd from 2005 through week one of 2014.

And unless anyone thinks that's just because that insane 2005 triple-crown season was propping up his totals (it certainly didn't hurt ), Smith ranked 5th from 2006 to 2008, behind Owens, Fitzgerald, Wayne, and Moss. And unless anyone thinks that Smith benefits from the fact that plenty of great WRs didn't play as many games during those stretches, Smith ranked 5th in points per game from 2005 to 2011, behind Calvin, Fitzgerald, Owens, and Andre. And that's including all the garbage QB play he had to work with in 2009 and 2010 (including the Jimmy Clausen era). It may not seem like it, but in his prime, Smith put up volume stats on par with all of the other WRs who are virtual locks to make it into Canton. He produced like a Moss or an Owens or a Calvin or a Fitzgerald or an Andre. He just didn't get the recognition for it.

Steve Smith should be a lock for the Hall of Fame. He probably won't be... but he should be.

Owens, Fitz, Wayne, Moss, Andre, Calvin-- 6 guys from the same era who are better than Steve Smith.

I don't think he gets in

He's ahead of them on as many of those lists as he's behind him. Honestly, I think Smiff was clearly behind Owens, Moss, and Calvin, ahead of Wayne, and on par with Andre and Fitzgerald. And since I think Owens, Moss, and Calvin are first-ballot talents, and Andre and Fitzgerald are both deserving Hall of Famers, it only makes sense that I think Smith deserves enshrinement, too.

 

[Adam Harstad]

very good wr but I don't know that he was ever the best wr in any year during his tenure....solid for years but not elite.

You know who else was never the best WR in any year during his tenure? Anybody who played at the same time as Jerry Rice. Yet Irvin, Carter, and Brown are all still worthy HoFers.

Regardless, I think Smith was the best WR in the league in both 2005 and 2008. That 2008 season really flew under the radar, but it was obscenely good. It was also the only time between 2007 and 2010 when someone other than Andre Johnson led the league in receiving yards per game.

 

[jon_mx]

Owens, Moss, and Calvin are in the conversation for being in the top 5 WR of all-time though, with Moss and Calvin being possibly up with Rice-level for GOAT.

 

[Ghost Rider]

very good wr but I don't know that he was ever the best wr in any year during his tenure....solid for years but not elite.

You know who else was never the best WR in any year during his tenure? Anybody who played at the same time as Jerry Rice. Yet Irvin, Carter, and Brown are all still worthy HoFers.

Regardless, I think Smith was the best WR in the league in both 2005 and 2008. That 2008 season really flew under the radar, but it was obscenely good. It was also the only time between 2007 and 2010 when someone other than Andre Johnson led the league in receiving yards per game.

I can't say a WR who only scored 6 touchdowns was the best WR in the league in a particular season. I know he missed two games and had more yards per game than Fitz, but it's really hard to argue that Smith was better that year than him. Factor in what Fitz did in that postseason and I think it goes without saying that he was the best WR in the world in 2008. In 20 games that year, counting the playoffs, Fitz had 126-1,977-19.

 

[Fariq]

Smith reminds me a lot of Derrek Mason...Rock solid, gets the most out of his game and ability, plays balls to the wall all of the time and a guy you want on your team. Both of these guys have better numbers than Irvin and Irvin is in.

I saw Smith as being superior to Mason. Just my opinion. I will not back it up due to lack of time.

 

[Adam Harstad]

very good wr but I don't know that he was ever the best wr in any year during his tenure....solid for years but not elite.

You know who else was never the best WR in any year during his tenure? Anybody who played at the same time as Jerry Rice. Yet Irvin, Carter, and Brown are all still worthy HoFers.

Regardless, I think Smith was the best WR in the league in both 2005 and 2008. That 2008 season really flew under the radar, but it was obscenely good. It was also the only time between 2007 and 2010 when someone other than Andre Johnson led the league in receiving yards per game.

I can't say a WR who only scored 6 touchdowns was the best WR in the league in a particular season. I know he missed two games and had more yards per game than Fitz, but it's really hard to argue that Smith was better that year than him. Factor in what Fitz did in that postseason and I think it goes without saying that he was the best WR in the world in 2008. In 20 games that year, counting the playoffs, Fitz had 126-1,977-19.

Well, sure, if you're counting the playoffs no one can touch 2008 Fitzgerald. Of course, if you want to count playoffs, 2005 Steve Smith in 19 games had 130/1,898/15 receiving, 8/63/2 rushing, and 30 punt returns for 344 yards. With Jake Delhomme at his QB instead of Kurt Warner. Plus, I've never seen any defense devote more attention to a single player than the 2005 Seattle Seahawks devoted to Steve Smith in the NFCCG. Ever. Easily in the discussion for the greatest WR season in NFL history.

Also, if we're including playoffs, Smith's 2003 joins his 2005 and 2008 seasons as truly crazy-go-nuts years.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Okay, but we have to remember that the Panthers had lost their, what, top three or four RBs for that game, so it only made sense to throw all coverage to Smith since he was their only real threat since they were absent a running game and they had no real number 2 WR that year (which makes his overall season that much more impressive, yes).

 

[Adam Harstad]

Okay, but we have to remember that the Panthers had lost their, what, top three or four RBs for that game, so it only made sense to throw all coverage to Smith since he was their only real threat since they were absent a running game and they had no real number 2 WR that year (which makes his overall season that much more impressive, yes).

Yeah. I don't blame the Seahawks in the slightest. "Put 3 guys on Steve Smith all game long and just play 8-on-10 everywhere else" was a brilliant strategy. In hindsight, it was the right call. It was really crazy to watch happen live, though.

 

[Bri]

I don't think was the "nails" 3rd down WR that these other great WRs were. I think he was more about the big play.

In my mind, Welker has alot more 3rd down catches for a first down than Smith. Jimmy Smith, same thing, he'd have more.

This is not to say Steve didn't get a first down when he had a beautiful catch N run for 25 yards, of course he did. I mean 3rd and 7 and the QB needs to count on a WR that the D knows it's going to, but still they complete it...Steve is lacking here IMO.

Calvin, young Andre, young Moss...some of the WRs mentioned above....there have been games that I've wondered why they don't throw to them 50 times a game. They'll clearly catch anything and the D is nothing more than in the way. I never ever got that feeling from Smith.

Joey Galloway was a poorly publicized stud small WR. I do think Smith has some similarly dominant games and qualities as Joey did, but also...not a chain mover.

 

[Adam Harstad]

I don't think was the "nails" 3rd down WR that these other great WRs were. I think he was more about the big play.

In my mind, Welker has alot more 3rd down catches for a first down than Smith. Jimmy Smith, same thing, he'd have more.

This is not to say Steve didn't get a first down when he had a beautiful catch N run for 25 yards, of course he did. I mean 3rd and 7 and the QB needs to count on a WR that the D knows it's going to, but still they complete it...Steve is lacking here IMO.

Calvin, young Andre, young Moss...some of the WRs mentioned above....there have been games that I've wondered why they don't throw to them 50 times a game. They'll clearly catch anything and the D is nothing more than in the way. I never ever got that feeling from Smith.

Joey Galloway was a poorly publicized stud small WR. I do think Smith has some similarly dominant games and qualities as Joey did, but also...not a chain mover.

Since 2002, (as far back as my target data goes), 26.9% of Steve Smith's catches have come on 3rd or 4th down, and 43.3% of his targets went for a first down. Here's the data from some other notable names (again, only going back to 2002, since that's as far back as my data goes):

Steve Smith- 26.9% of receptions, 43.3% conversion

Terrell Owens- 26.3% of receptions, 42.9% conversion

Larry Fitzgerald- 24.8% of receptions, 44.0% conversion

Andre Johnson- 22.7% of receptions, 42.4% conversion

Randy Moss- 25.1% of receptions, 48.0% conversion

Calvin Johnson- 29.0% of receptions, 45.1% conversion

Looks fine to me. Worse on 3rd down than Moss and Calvin (though more involved than Moss). Better than Owens, Fitzgerald, and Andre. Reggie Wayne and Wes Welker were both better than Steve Smith, but then again Peyton Manning and Tom Brady and Jake Delhomme.

 

[moleculo]

on pace for 100-1716-12 so far...at age 35. With Joe Flacco throwing him the ball.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Since 2005, Reggie Wayne and Steve Smith have both played in 139 games. Here's their stats:

Wayne- 1289 targets, 809 receptions, 10,758 yards (rushing + receiving), 58 touchdowns, 8.35 yards per target

Smith- 1215 targets, 706 receptions, 10,728 yards (rushing + receiving), 62 touchdowns, 8.58 yards per target

Quarterbacks:

Wayne- Peyton Manning (96 games), Andrew Luck (27 games), Curtis Painter (8 games), Dan Orlovsky (5 games), Kerry Collins (3 games)

Smith- Delhomme (55 games), Newton (47 games), Matt Moore (12 games), Jimmy Clausen (8 games), Vinny Testaverde (5 games), David Carr (4 games), Joe Flacco (4 games), Chris Weinke (3 games), Brian St. Pierre (1 game)

To me, that looks like straight-up outperforming a consensus Hall of Famer in his prime. (Note: Smith was hurt and missed all of 2004, but he also straight-up outperformed Wayne from 2001-2003.)

So basically the difference between Steve Smith and Reggie Wayne's Hall of Fame candidacy is that Smith was straight-up better over his entire career, but in 2004 Smith broke his leg and Reggie Wayne played with Peyton Manning having a season so great that even Brandon Stokley went for 1,000 yards and 10 TDs.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I wouldn't call Reggie Wayne a consensus Hall of Famer, but Smith is definitely helping himself and his resume out this year. He is on pace to have a monster season, which will certainly help his candidacy down the road.

 

[Tau837]

Since 2005, Reggie Wayne and Steve Smith have both played in 139 games. Here's their stats:

Wayne- 1289 targets, 809 receptions, 10,758 yards (rushing + receiving), 58 touchdowns, 8.35 yards per target

Smith- 1215 targets, 706 receptions, 10,728 yards (rushing + receiving), 62 touchdowns, 8.58 yards per target

Quarterbacks:

Wayne- Peyton Manning (96 games), Andrew Luck (27 games), Curtis Painter (8 games), Dan Orlovsky (5 games), Kerry Collins (3 games)

Smith- Delhomme (55 games), Newton (47 games), Matt Moore (12 games), Jimmy Clausen (8 games), Vinny Testaverde (5 games), David Carr (4 games), Joe Flacco (4 games), Chris Weinke (3 games), Brian St. Pierre (1 game)

To me, that looks like straight-up outperforming a consensus Hall of Famer in his prime. (Note: Smith was hurt and missed all of 2004, but he also straight-up outperformed Wayne from 2001-2003.)

So basically the difference between Steve Smith and Reggie Wayne's Hall of Fame candidacy is that Smith was straight-up better over his entire career, but in 2004 Smith broke his leg and Reggie Wayne played with Peyton Manning having a season so great that even Brandon Stokley went for 1,000 yards and 10 TDs.

Wayne is a consensus HOFer? Whose consensus?

Per DD from 2005 to present:

Wayne had 1291 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

Smith had 1256 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

By neglecting to include rushing attempts, you make it seem like a wider gap in opportunities than existed.

Wayne had 577 first downs (rushing and receiving)

Smith had 475 first downs (rushing and receiving)

I don't see how you can say with a straight face that this data shows Smith clearly outperformed Wayne. Maybe it is because you conveniently left out the fact that Wayne had 102 more first downs. That is a huge edge in value.

Also, when it comes to HOF voting, there are other things that matter:

Wayne will finish his career in the top 10 all time in receptions and receiving yards. Smith will not.

Wayne has a ring. Smith does not and very likely will not get one.

Wayne will always be associated with Peyton Manning. Like it or not, that helps his candidacy. Smith does not have that.

With all that, IMO Wayne is not a HOF lock, and Smith's body of work will be judged to be less HOF worthy. I don't think Smith will or should make it.

 

[Blick]

No Hines no Smith.

 

[CalBear]

No Hines no Smith.

• Location:Pittsburgh

I knew to look for that after this comment. Hines Ward was never an All-Pro. Never was in the top-3 in receiving yards. Isn't in the top-20 in receiving yardage all time, and is only tied for 15th in TDs. There's no way he has a stronger resume than Steve Smith is going to end up with, especially if Smith plays out this season and finishes with good overall numbers.

That said, I don't think either of them deserve it. Ward may be more likely to get in via the vets committee because of the Pittsburgh factor.

 

[Tau837]

No Hines no Smith.

• Location:Pittsburgh

I knew to look for that after this comment. Hines Ward was never an All-Pro. Never was in the top-3 in receiving yards. Isn't in the top-20 in receiving yardage all time, and is only tied for 15th in TDs. There's no way he has a stronger resume than Steve Smith is going to end up with, especially if Smith plays out this season and finishes with good overall numbers.

That said, I don't think either of them deserve it. Ward may be more likely to get in via the vets committee because of the Pittsburgh factor.

Agree 100%.

 

[Ghost Rider]

No Hines no Smith.

• Location:Pittsburgh

I knew to look for that after this comment. Hines Ward was never an All-Pro. Never was in the top-3 in receiving yards. Isn't in the top-20 in receiving yardage all time, and is only tied for 15th in TDs. There's no way he has a stronger resume than Steve Smith is going to end up with, especially if Smith plays out this season and finishes with good overall numbers.

That said, I don't think either of them deserve it. Ward may be more likely to get in via the vets committee because of the Pittsburgh factor.

[steelersfan]But, but, he was the best blocking WR ever!![/steelersfan]



Anyway, I agree with most of what you said. Assuming Smith finishes this year strong (he won't keep up the pace he's on, but he'll still be good) and plays at least another year or two, he'll finish as a far more deserving candidate than Ward.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Wayne is a consensus HOFer? Whose consensus?

I don't know. I spend a lot of time talking about the Hall of Fame here, and on Football Perspective, and on Twitter. I'm one of those weird guys who is way, way more fascinated than anyone should be. You get this, because you're one of those guys, too. I don't have anything scientific on the subject, but the impression that I've always gotten from my interactions with people on the subject is that there is some sort of consensus that Reggie Wayne will get into the Hall of Fame.

If "consensus HoFer" irks you, we could always go with "consensus more deserving of enshrinement". I think that consensus is a lot easier to demonstrate empirically. Fair?

Per DD from 2005 to present:

Wayne had 1291 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

Smith had 1256 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

By neglecting to include rushing attempts, you make it seem like a wider gap in opportunities than existed.

The rushing attempts were pretty minor, and the "Yards per target" data was calculated with receiving yards only, but fair enough. If you want to add them in, it's not like an extra 41 opportunities for Smith (and 2 opportunities for Wayne) changes my conclusions in the slightest bit. I'm always pro-accuracy, so good improvement.

Wayne had 577 first downs (rushing and receiving)

Smith had 475 first downs (rushing and receiving)

I don't see how you can say with a straight face that this data shows Smith clearly outperformed Wayne. Maybe it is because you conveniently left out the fact that Wayne had 102 more first downs. That is a huge edge in value.

The "Smith clearly outperformed Wayne" part was not based on "Smith's numbers were clearly superior to Wayne's". It was based on the "Holy mother of Moses look at the garbage quarterbacks Smith played with and he still managed to put up comparable numbers to Reggie Wayne playing with the greatest quarterback in NFL history and with Marvellous Marvin on the other side tilting coverages clearly Smith was playing much better." And yeah, I'm going to go ahead and stand behind that.

Also, when it comes to HOF voting, there are other things that matter:

Wayne will finish his career in the top 10 all time in receptions and receiving yards. Smith will not.

Wayne has a ring. Smith does not and very likely will not get one.

Wayne will always be associated with Peyton Manning. Like it or not, that helps his candidacy. Smith does not have that.

With all that, IMO Wayne is not a HOF lock, and Smith's body of work will be judged to be less HOF worthy. I don't think Smith will or should make it.

Is/Ought distinction. I am making an "ought" argument ("Steve Smith was a better receiver than Reggie Wayne for his career and ought to be ahead of him in the pecking order"), and you're responding with an "is" claim ("Reggie Wayne ranks higher on the career leaderboards and is ahead of Smith in the pecking order").

With that said...

1. Smith only needs 1378 more yards to pass Lofton, which will almost certainly rank him in the top 10 in career receiving yards at the time of retirement (note: this assumes that Wayne and Andre Johnson will continue to gain yards at a reasonable rate, and that Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin don't suddenly have massive yardage explosions and gain ~1200 yards on Smith in the next year or two; I feel both assumptions are fair.) In fact, it's not at all inconceivable that Smith will catch Wayne before he retires. Smith is currently about 1250 yards behind, but he's playing better right now, and he's a year younger. And if he doesn't, again, the entire reason will be because in week 1 of the 2004 season, Steve Smith broke his leg. That's the entire difference between Smith and Wayne's career stats right now.

2. Smith may not have a ring, but he was one of the top 5 playoff wide receivers of all time. If we're including a "postseason success" category, the nod should go to Smith, not Wayne. (Take note: this is another is/ought distinction. I recognize that Wayne's ring *is* an advantage. I merely respond that it oughtn't be, given Smith's unbelievably sterling postseason performance.)

3. Another Is/Ought distinction. The association with Peyton Manning IS a blessing (debatebly so, though- it's just as possible that Wayne's association with Manning, Edge, and Harrison will be a drag in much the same way that the fact that Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce shared a field seems to hurt both of their candidacies as they cannibalize support from one another). Either way, it should not be a blessing. If anything, it should be a curse.

 

[Sweet Love]

One thing I will say is, that it does not hurt to have an elite season in your 30s in the eyes HOF voters. Curtis Martin is my favorite player of all-time, but without leading the league in rushing as a 31 year-old, he may still be on the ballot.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Since 2005, Reggie Wayne and Steve Smith have both played in 139 games. Here's their stats:

Wayne- 1289 targets, 809 receptions, 10,758 yards (rushing + receiving), 58 touchdowns, 8.35 yards per target

Smith- 1215 targets, 706 receptions, 10,728 yards (rushing + receiving), 62 touchdowns, 8.58 yards per target

Quarterbacks:

Wayne- Peyton Manning (96 games), Andrew Luck (27 games), Curtis Painter (8 games), Dan Orlovsky (5 games), Kerry Collins (3 games)

Smith- Delhomme (55 games), Newton (47 games), Matt Moore (12 games), Jimmy Clausen (8 games), Vinny Testaverde (5 games), David Carr (4 games), Joe Flacco (4 games), Chris Weinke (3 games), Brian St. Pierre (1 game)

To me, that looks like straight-up outperforming a consensus Hall of Famer in his prime. (Note: Smith was hurt and missed all of 2004, but he also straight-up outperformed Wayne from 2001-2003.)

So basically the difference between Steve Smith and Reggie Wayne's Hall of Fame candidacy is that Smith was straight-up better over his entire career, but in 2004 Smith broke his leg and Reggie Wayne played with Peyton Manning having a season so great that even Brandon Stokley went for 1,000 yards and 10 TDs.

Wayne is a consensus HOFer? Whose consensus?

Per DD from 2005 to present:

Wayne had 1291 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

Smith had 1256 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

By neglecting to include rushing attempts, you make it seem like a wider gap in opportunities than existed.

Wayne had 577 first downs (rushing and receiving)

Smith had 475 first downs (rushing and receiving)

I don't see how you can say with a straight face that this data shows Smith clearly outperformed Wayne. Maybe it is because you conveniently left out the fact that Wayne had 102 more first downs. That is a huge edge in value.

Also, when it comes to HOF voting, there are other things that matter:

Wayne will finish his career in the top 10 all time in receptions and receiving yards. Smith will not.

Wayne has a ring. Smith does not and very likely will not get one.

Wayne will always be associated with Peyton Manning. Like it or not, that helps his candidacy. Smith does not have that.

With all that, IMO Wayne is not a HOF lock, and Smith's body of work will be judged to be less HOF worthy. I don't think Smith will or should make it.

BOOM.

 

[BassNBrew]

Since 2005, Reggie Wayne and Steve Smith have both played in 139 games. Here's their stats:

Wayne- 1289 targets, 809 receptions, 10,758 yards (rushing + receiving), 58 touchdowns, 8.35 yards per target

Smith- 1215 targets, 706 receptions, 10,728 yards (rushing + receiving), 62 touchdowns, 8.58 yards per target

Quarterbacks:

Wayne- Peyton Manning (96 games), Andrew Luck (27 games), Curtis Painter (8 games), Dan Orlovsky (5 games), Kerry Collins (3 games)

Smith- Delhomme (55 games), Newton (47 games), Matt Moore (12 games), Jimmy Clausen (8 games), Vinny Testaverde (5 games), David Carr (4 games), Joe Flacco (4 games), Chris Weinke (3 games), Brian St. Pierre (1 game)

To me, that looks like straight-up outperforming a consensus Hall of Famer in his prime. (Note: Smith was hurt and missed all of 2004, but he also straight-up outperformed Wayne from 2001-2003.)

So basically the difference between Steve Smith and Reggie Wayne's Hall of Fame candidacy is that Smith was straight-up better over his entire career, but in 2004 Smith broke his leg and Reggie Wayne played with Peyton Manning having a season so great that even Brandon Stokley went for 1,000 yards and 10 TDs.

Wayne is a consensus HOFer? Whose consensus?

Per DD from 2005 to present:

Wayne had 1291 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

Smith had 1256 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

By neglecting to include rushing attempts, you make it seem like a wider gap in opportunities than existed.

Wayne had 577 first downs (rushing and receiving)

Smith had 475 first downs (rushing and receiving)

I don't see how you can say with a straight face that this data shows Smith clearly outperformed Wayne. Maybe it is because you conveniently left out the fact that Wayne had 102 more first downs. That is a huge edge in value.

Also, when it comes to HOF voting, there are other things that matter:

Wayne will finish his career in the top 10 all time in receptions and receiving yards. Smith will not.

Wayne has a ring. Smith does not and very likely will not get one.

Wayne will always be associated with Peyton Manning. Like it or not, that helps his candidacy. Smith does not have that.

With all that, IMO Wayne is not a HOF lock, and Smith's body of work will be judged to be less HOF worthy. I don't think Smith will or should make it.

BOOM.

BOOM is what's being lower on the NFL by Smitty this year with a serviceable QB.

 

[Ilov80s]

I would have said No at the start of the year, but if he continues as a top 5 WR this year, I might have to change my vote.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Since 2005, Reggie Wayne and Steve Smith have both played in 139 games. Here's their stats:

Wayne- 1289 targets, 809 receptions, 10,758 yards (rushing + receiving), 58 touchdowns, 8.35 yards per target

Smith- 1215 targets, 706 receptions, 10,728 yards (rushing + receiving), 62 touchdowns, 8.58 yards per target

Quarterbacks:

Wayne- Peyton Manning (96 games), Andrew Luck (27 games), Curtis Painter (8 games), Dan Orlovsky (5 games), Kerry Collins (3 games)

Smith- Delhomme (55 games), Newton (47 games), Matt Moore (12 games), Jimmy Clausen (8 games), Vinny Testaverde (5 games), David Carr (4 games), Joe Flacco (4 games), Chris Weinke (3 games), Brian St. Pierre (1 game)

To me, that looks like straight-up outperforming a consensus Hall of Famer in his prime. (Note: Smith was hurt and missed all of 2004, but he also straight-up outperformed Wayne from 2001-2003.)

So basically the difference between Steve Smith and Reggie Wayne's Hall of Fame candidacy is that Smith was straight-up better over his entire career, but in 2004 Smith broke his leg and Reggie Wayne played with Peyton Manning having a season so great that even Brandon Stokley went for 1,000 yards and 10 TDs.

Wayne is a consensus HOFer? Whose consensus?

Per DD from 2005 to present:

Wayne had 1291 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

Smith had 1256 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

By neglecting to include rushing attempts, you make it seem like a wider gap in opportunities than existed.

Wayne had 577 first downs (rushing and receiving)

Smith had 475 first downs (rushing and receiving)

I don't see how you can say with a straight face that this data shows Smith clearly outperformed Wayne. Maybe it is because you conveniently left out the fact that Wayne had 102 more first downs. That is a huge edge in value.

Also, when it comes to HOF voting, there are other things that matter:

Wayne will finish his career in the top 10 all time in receptions and receiving yards. Smith will not.

Wayne has a ring. Smith does not and very likely will not get one.

Wayne will always be associated with Peyton Manning. Like it or not, that helps his candidacy. Smith does not have that.

With all that, IMO Wayne is not a HOF lock, and Smith's body of work will be judged to be less HOF worthy. I don't think Smith will or should make it.

BOOM.

BOOM is what's being lower on the NFL by Smitty this year with a serviceable QB.

What does that have to do with this topic? BOOM.

 

[Ever Present Lurker]

Also, I'd unenshrine Andre Reed while I was at it. He was a very good receiver, but nowhere near as good as these other guys.

Well why would you go and do a thing like that? When he retired he had the 3rd most receptions all-time, 6th most receiving yards all-time and 6th most TDs receiving all-time. (He's still #11, #13 and #13 all-time in those categories despite the game shifting away from running to passing.) He made his living going over the middle and getting hammered. He still was a beast after the catch. Not to mention he played in 4 Superbowls, 5 AFC Championships, 7 Pro-Bowls. 14 team records. 13 seasons with 50+ catches. Guy was a stud!

 

[BassNBrew]

Since 2005, Reggie Wayne and Steve Smith have both played in 139 games. Here's their stats:

Wayne- 1289 targets, 809 receptions, 10,758 yards (rushing + receiving), 58 touchdowns, 8.35 yards per target

Smith- 1215 targets, 706 receptions, 10,728 yards (rushing + receiving), 62 touchdowns, 8.58 yards per target

Quarterbacks:

Wayne- Peyton Manning (96 games), Andrew Luck (27 games), Curtis Painter (8 games), Dan Orlovsky (5 games), Kerry Collins (3 games)

Smith- Delhomme (55 games), Newton (47 games), Matt Moore (12 games), Jimmy Clausen (8 games), Vinny Testaverde (5 games), David Carr (4 games), Joe Flacco (4 games), Chris Weinke (3 games), Brian St. Pierre (1 game)

To me, that looks like straight-up outperforming a consensus Hall of Famer in his prime. (Note: Smith was hurt and missed all of 2004, but he also straight-up outperformed Wayne from 2001-2003.)

So basically the difference between Steve Smith and Reggie Wayne's Hall of Fame candidacy is that Smith was straight-up better over his entire career, but in 2004 Smith broke his leg and Reggie Wayne played with Peyton Manning having a season so great that even Brandon Stokley went for 1,000 yards and 10 TDs.

Wayne is a consensus HOFer? Whose consensus?

Per DD from 2005 to present:

Wayne had 1291 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

Smith had 1256 opportunities (targets + rush attempts)

By neglecting to include rushing attempts, you make it seem like a wider gap in opportunities than existed.

Wayne had 577 first downs (rushing and receiving)

Smith had 475 first downs (rushing and receiving)

I don't see how you can say with a straight face that this data shows Smith clearly outperformed Wayne. Maybe it is because you conveniently left out the fact that Wayne had 102 more first downs. That is a huge edge in value.

Also, when it comes to HOF voting, there are other things that matter:

Wayne will finish his career in the top 10 all time in receptions and receiving yards. Smith will not.

Wayne has a ring. Smith does not and very likely will not get one.

Wayne will always be associated with Peyton Manning. Like it or not, that helps his candidacy. Smith does not have that.

With all that, IMO Wayne is not a HOF lock, and Smith's body of work will be judged to be less HOF worthy. I don't think Smith will or should make it.

BOOM.

BOOM is what's being lower on the NFL by Smitty this year with a serviceable QB.

What does that have to do with this topic? BOOM.

You have to account for Matt Moore, Jimmy Clausen, Vinny Testaverde, David Carr, Chris Weinke, and Brian St. Pierre when comparing Smith's stats to other WRs with stud QBs. BOOM.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Also, I'd unenshrine Andre Reed while I was at it. He was a very good receiver, but nowhere near as good as these other guys.

Well why would you go and do a thing like that? When he retired he had the 3rd most receptions all-time, 6th most receiving yards all-time and 6th most TDs receiving all-time. (He's still #11, #13 and #13 all-time in those categories despite the game shifting away from running to passing.) He made his living going over the middle and getting hammered. He still was a beast after the catch. Not to mention he played in 4 Superbowls, 5 AFC Championships, 7 Pro-Bowls. 14 team records. 13 seasons with 50+ catches. Guy was a stud!

He only had four 1,000-yard seasons, despite playing in a pass happy, no huddle offense.

Team records are meaningless. Are we gonna enshrine Donald Driver cause he retired as the leading WR in Packers history?

Reed was very good, but a great one? A Hall of Famer? I don't think so. I think he only got in cause of how fondly people remember those Bills teams that lost four straight Super Bowls.

 

[Hooper31]

Okay, but we have to remember that the Panthers had lost their, what, top three or four RBs for that game, so it only made sense to throw all coverage to Smith since he was their only real threat since they were absent a running game and they had no real number 2 WR that year (which makes his overall season that much more impressive, yes).

Yeah. I don't blame the Seahawks in the slightest. "Put 3 guys on Steve Smith all game long and just play 8-on-10 everywhere else" was a brilliant strategy. In hindsight, it was the right call. It was really crazy to watch happen live, though.

I remeber this like it was yesterday. Seattle lined up there backup linebacker (Lewis?) on Smith every down just to hit him at the snap with CB Ken Lucas playing behind. Yes, the same Lucas that Smith pummelled in practice after he became a Panther.

 

[Ever Present Lurker]

Also, I'd unenshrine Andre Reed while I was at it. He was a very good receiver, but nowhere near as good as these other guys.

Well why would you go and do a thing like that? When he retired he had the 3rd most receptions all-time, 6th most receiving yards all-time and 6th most TDs receiving all-time. (He's still #11, #13 and #13 all-time in those categories despite the game shifting away from running to passing.) He made his living going over the middle and getting hammered. He still was a beast after the catch. Not to mention he played in 4 Superbowls, 5 AFC Championships, 7 Pro-Bowls. 14 team records. 13 seasons with 50+ catches. Guy was a stud!

He only had four 1,000-yard seasons, despite playing in a pass happy, no huddle offense.

Team records are meaningless. Are we gonna enshrine Donald Driver cause he retired as the leading WR in Packers history?

Reed was very good, but a great one? A Hall of Famer? I don't think so. I think he only got in cause of how fondly people remember those Bills teams that lost four straight Super Bowls.

Pass happy? That offense ran through Thurman in it's glory days ... he was leading the NFL in yards from scrimmage repeatedly. If you don't like the team records, that's fine, but I listed several other factors, which were slightly more compelling. The guy's numbers remain amongst the greatest ever.