What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

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

BassNBrew

IBL Representative
Larry Fitzgerald > Steve Smith
Let's seize on this one for a moment. Larry Fitzgerald is a *phenomenal* wide receiver. He's another guy who I think is going to wind up in Canton one day. And he's put up some phenomenal stat lines. But in 2010, Larry Fitzgerald only put up 90/1137/6. That's 90 fewer yards and 3 fewer touchdowns than Steve Smith put up in his not-great 2006 season... in two more games of action. And don't even get me started on Fitzgerald's last three years. At age 29-31, when he should still be at the tail end of his prime, Larry Fitzgerald averaged 72/845/5 a year. For three years!

Now, of course the obvious counterargument is that this wasn't Larry Fitzgerald's fault. He was stuck with terrible quarterbacks like Max Hall and Ryan Lindley and John Skelton and Kevin Kolb. And now that he's getting good quarterback play again, his numbers have rebounded. The numbers he's putting up with halfway-decent quarterback play are much more representative of how good Larry Fitzgerald really is, right?

So let's extend Steve Smith that same courtesy. From 2005 to 2008- a four-year stretch- Steve Smith played 44 games with Jake Delhomme and 16 games with Chris Weinke, David Carr, and a 44-year-old Vinny Testaverde. Those guys are as bad as Skelton and Hall, right? So Smith should get a pass for his numbers with those brutal scrubs, just like Fitzgerald gets, right?

So let's look strictly at Steve Smith's numbers in his 44 games with Jake Delhomme. Again, this is over a 4-year span, not just his "one great season" in 2005. And over those four years with anything even resembling NFL-caliber quarterback play, Steve Smith averaged 1618 yards from scrimmage and 12 touchdowns per every 16 games. That's better than anything Larry Fitzgerald has ever done during his career with Kurt Warner or Carson Palmer... and Jake Delhomme is not as good of a quarterback as Kurt Warner or Carson Palmer! (And Carolina was one of the most run-heavy teams in the NFL while Arizona was one of the most pass-heavy.)

In Steve Smith's 16 games with those terrible quarterbacks, he put up 80/838/3. So pretty much right on par with what Larry Fitzgerald was doing with terrible quarterbacks.

Okay, so maybe Steve Smith wasn't a 1-year wonder. Maybe he was a 4-year wonder. What about after 2008? Well, Jake Delhomme seriously imploded in the playoffs after the 2008 season, and was never the same quarterback again. In 2009, he threw 8 TDs vs. 18 INTs and had a quarterback rating of 59.4. He was terrible. And then in 2010, Steve Smith's quarterback was Jimmy Clausen, who somehow managed to be even worse. Again, he was stuck with brutal quarterback play, and he wasn't able to rise above it any more than Larry Fitzgerald was.

Then, in 2011, with a raw rookie QB in Cam Newton who didn't even have an offseason to prepare, Steve Smith had 1450 yards from scrimmage and 7 touchdowns. And in 2012, at age 33, he added another 1200 yards from scrimmage. Again, Steve Smith with competent quarterback play was putting up huge numbers. Only three receivers, (Calvin, Brandon Marshall, and Wes Welker), had more yards from scrimmage over 2011 and 2012 than an old, past-his-prime Steve Smith playing with a raw rookie quarterback.

And then Steve Smith declined at age 34, (an age where Torry Holt and Randy Moss were already out of football), and Carolina let him go. And Smith went to Baltimore, where he once again had decent quarterback play, and where he once again set about turning in all sorts of records. Again, Steve Smith has only played a season and a half since his 35th birthday, but he already has more 100-yard games after turning 35 than any receiver in NFL history other than Jerry Rice.

So... Steve Smith. A guy who averaged 1600 yards and 12 touchdowns a year with even decent quarterback play in his prime. A guy who at 32 and 33 and playing with a raw young quarterback had the third most scrimmage yards in the NFL. A guy who in a year and a half has already had more big games at age 35 than anyone but Rice. He's dominated- yes, dominated- at every single age. And I don't need fancy statistics like "yards per team pass attempt" to show it, because simple statistics like "yards" and "100-yard games" and yes, even "touchdowns" tell that story well enough. And then on top of that, he's also going to finish as the second best playoff receiver in history, (feel free to argue that if you like), and also with one of the top ten yardage totals in history.

And the yardage total even understates his impact, because Smith is one of the most prolific *rushing* receivers in NFL history. He already ranks 9th in career yards from scrimmage, and will likely end this season at 6th. And, oh yeah, he was also an All-Pro return man, and he already ranks 3rd behind just Jerry Rice and Jim Brown in career all-purpose yards.

Peak? Longevity? Postseason performance? Steve Smith checks all the boxes. Yes, Steve Smith was "really special, a generational-type talent
Career all-purpose yards

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/all_purpose_yds_career.htm

1. Jerry Rice+ 23,546 1985-2004 3TM 2. Brian Mitchell 23,330 1990-2003 3TM 3. Walter Payton+ 21,803 1975-1987 chi 4. Emmitt Smith+ 21,564 1990-2004 2TM 5. Tim Brown+ 19,682 1988-2004 2TM 6. Marshall Faulk+ 19,190 1994-2005 2TM 7. LaDainian Tomlinson 18,456 2001-2011 2TM 8. Barry Sanders+ 18,308 1989-1998 det 9. Steve Smith (36) 18,221 2001-2015 2TM 10. Herschel Walker 18,168 1986-1997 4TMbut he's only 128th in career AV. ;) (tied with 3 HOFers)
I think he meant Tim Brown and WRs.

 

spider321

Footballguy
There have been 15 seasons by a WR of at least 100-1500-10 in a season. Besides Smith's 2005 season, there were three by Marvin Harrison, two by Jerry Rice, and one each by Antonio Brown, Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Michael Irvin, Brandon Marshall, Herman Moore, Randy Moss, Demaryius Thomas, and Reggie Wayne. How to people feel about inducting Torry Holt or Herman Moore?
Torry Holt had, AT LEAST, 1188 receiving yards EIGHT years IN A ROW during his injury shortened 11 year career,

Steve Smith has managed 1188 receiving yards or more only TWICE in his 15 year career.

 

Adam Harstad

Moderator
Larry Fitzgerald > Steve Smith
Let's seize on this one for a moment. Larry Fitzgerald is a *phenomenal* wide receiver. He's another guy who I think is going to wind up in Canton one day. And he's put up some phenomenal stat lines. But in 2010, Larry Fitzgerald only put up 90/1137/6. That's 90 fewer yards and 3 fewer touchdowns than Steve Smith put up in his not-great 2006 season... in two more games of action. And don't even get me started on Fitzgerald's last three years. At age 29-31, when he should still be at the tail end of his prime, Larry Fitzgerald averaged 72/845/5 a year. For three years!

Now, of course the obvious counterargument is that this wasn't Larry Fitzgerald's fault. He was stuck with terrible quarterbacks like Max Hall and Ryan Lindley and John Skelton and Kevin Kolb. And now that he's getting good quarterback play again, his numbers have rebounded. The numbers he's putting up with halfway-decent quarterback play are much more representative of how good Larry Fitzgerald really is, right?

So let's extend Steve Smith that same courtesy. From 2005 to 2008- a four-year stretch- Steve Smith played 44 games with Jake Delhomme and 16 games with Chris Weinke, David Carr, and a 44-year-old Vinny Testaverde. Those guys are as bad as Skelton and Hall, right? So Smith should get a pass for his numbers with those brutal scrubs, just like Fitzgerald gets, right?

So let's look strictly at Steve Smith's numbers in his 44 games with Jake Delhomme. Again, this is over a 4-year span, not just his "one great season" in 2005. And over those four years with anything even resembling NFL-caliber quarterback play, Steve Smith averaged 1618 yards from scrimmage and 12 touchdowns per every 16 games. That's better than anything Larry Fitzgerald has ever done during his career with Kurt Warner or Carson Palmer... and Jake Delhomme is not as good of a quarterback as Kurt Warner or Carson Palmer! (And Carolina was one of the most run-heavy teams in the NFL while Arizona was one of the most pass-heavy.)

In Steve Smith's 16 games with those terrible quarterbacks, he put up 80/838/3. So pretty much right on par with what Larry Fitzgerald was doing with terrible quarterbacks.

Okay, so maybe Steve Smith wasn't a 1-year wonder. Maybe he was a 4-year wonder. What about after 2008? Well, Jake Delhomme seriously imploded in the playoffs after the 2008 season, and was never the same quarterback again. In 2009, he threw 8 TDs vs. 18 INTs and had a quarterback rating of 59.4. He was terrible. And then in 2010, Steve Smith's quarterback was Jimmy Clausen, who somehow managed to be even worse. Again, he was stuck with brutal quarterback play, and he wasn't able to rise above it any more than Larry Fitzgerald was.

Then, in 2011, with a raw rookie QB in Cam Newton who didn't even have an offseason to prepare, Steve Smith had 1450 yards from scrimmage and 7 touchdowns. And in 2012, at age 33, he added another 1200 yards from scrimmage. Again, Steve Smith with competent quarterback play was putting up huge numbers. Only three receivers, (Calvin, Brandon Marshall, and Wes Welker), had more yards from scrimmage over 2011 and 2012 than an old, past-his-prime Steve Smith playing with a raw rookie quarterback.

And then Steve Smith declined at age 34, (an age where Torry Holt and Randy Moss were already out of football), and Carolina let him go. And Smith went to Baltimore, where he once again had decent quarterback play, and where he once again set about turning in all sorts of records. Again, Steve Smith has only played a season and a half since his 35th birthday, but he already has more 100-yard games after turning 35 than any receiver in NFL history other than Jerry Rice.

So... Steve Smith. A guy who averaged 1600 yards and 12 touchdowns a year with even decent quarterback play in his prime. A guy who at 32 and 33 and playing with a raw young quarterback had the third most scrimmage yards in the NFL. A guy who in a year and a half has already had more big games at age 35 than anyone but Rice. He's dominated- yes, dominated- at every single age. And I don't need fancy statistics like "yards per team pass attempt" to show it, because simple statistics like "yards" and "100-yard games" and yes, even "touchdowns" tell that story well enough. And then on top of that, he's also going to finish as the second best playoff receiver in history, (feel free to argue that if you like), and also with one of the top ten yardage totals in history.

And the yardage total even understates his impact, because Smith is one of the most prolific *rushing* receivers in NFL history. He already ranks 9th in career yards from scrimmage, and will likely end this season at 6th. And, oh yeah, he was also an All-Pro return man, and he already ranks 3rd behind just Jerry Rice and Jim Brown in career all-purpose yards.

Peak? Longevity? Postseason performance? Steve Smith checks all the boxes. Yes, Steve Smith was "really special, a generational-type talent
Career all-purpose yards

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/all_purpose_yds_career.htm

1. Jerry Rice+ 23,546 1985-2004 3TM 2. Brian Mitchell 23,330 1990-2003 3TM 3. Walter Payton+ 21,803 1975-1987 chi 4. Emmitt Smith+ 21,564 1990-2004 2TM 5. Tim Brown+ 19,682 1988-2004 2TM 6. Marshall Faulk+ 19,190 1994-2005 2TM 7. LaDainian Tomlinson 18,456 2001-2011 2TM 8. Barry Sanders+ 18,308 1989-1998 det 9. Steve Smith (36) 18,221 2001-2015 2TM 10. Herschel Walker 18,168 1986-1997 4TMbut he's only 128th in career AV. ;) (tied with 3 HOFers)
I mentioned "receivers" in the first sentence, and both of the following rankings were strictly among WRs. Among wide receivers (and tight ends, though that really only matters for Gonzo), Smith ranks 13th in receiving yards, 9th in yards from scrimmage, and 3rd in all-purpose yards.

(Also, "Jim Brown" was a typo and should have read "Tim Brown".)

 

moleculo

Footballguy
There have been 15 seasons by a WR of at least 100-1500-10 in a season. Besides Smith's 2005 season, there were three by Marvin Harrison, two by Jerry Rice, and one each by Antonio Brown, Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Michael Irvin, Brandon Marshall, Herman Moore, Randy Moss, Demaryius Thomas, and Reggie Wayne. How to people feel about inducting Torry Holt or Herman Moore?
Torry Holt had, AT LEAST, 1188 receiving yards EIGHT years IN A ROW during his injury shortened 11 year career,

Steve Smith has managed 1188 receiving yards or more only TWICE in his 15 year career.
Torry Holts offenses were top 5 in passing attempts in 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006.

Steve Smiths offenses were bottom 5 in passing attempts in 2002, 2003, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2013.

If Smith played for the rams, there is no doubt in my mind he would have as much (or more) production than Holt. I can't say the same for Holt in Smiths situation.

Of course, the HoF isn't about what a player might have done, it is about what a player actually did. So, if you are hung up on stats, you are keeping Smith out.

 

renesauz

IBL Representative
I gotta say, Adam has me convinced (I was admittedly on the fence before, not firmly against). Just owning this thread

 

Fariq

Footballguy
I hate these debates mainly because there is always somebody who has no idea what the Hall of Fame is and believes it should hold only 100 players/the most obvious of the obvious (Montana, Lawrence Taylor, Unitas, etc.). That Spider guy is the one here.

It is a museum. If it is for only 100 players, there is not going to be a money-making event each summer. Oh, but you can kick a guy out, you say? Oh, that will go over real, real well with that guy's family and friends and his NFL team(s). Hey, Marcus Allen, go #### yourself, buddy. You are out!

 

spider321

Footballguy
It will never happen, but I almost wish that there could be no more than 100 guys in the Hall of Fame. If you want to vote a guy in, you have to vote a guy out.
I hate these debates mainly because there is always somebody who has no idea what the Hall of Fame is and believes it should hold only 100 players/the most obvious of the obvious (Montana, Lawrence Taylor, Unitas, etc.). That Spider guy is the one here.

It is a museum. If it is for only 100 players, there is not going to be a money-making event each summer. Oh, but you can kick a guy out, you say? Oh, that will go over real, real well with that guy's family and friends and his NFL team(s). Hey, Marcus Allen, go #### yourself, buddy. You are out!
I see that reading comprehension is not your strong suit, Fariq.

 

Just Win Baby

Footballguy
moleculo said:
spider321 said:
Anarchy99 said:
There have been 15 seasons by a WR of at least 100-1500-10 in a season. Besides Smith's 2005 season, there were three by Marvin Harrison, two by Jerry Rice, and one each by Antonio Brown, Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Michael Irvin, Brandon Marshall, Herman Moore, Randy Moss, Demaryius Thomas, and Reggie Wayne. How to people feel about inducting Torry Holt or Herman Moore?
Torry Holt had, AT LEAST, 1188 receiving yards EIGHT years IN A ROW during his injury shortened 11 year career,

Steve Smith has managed 1188 receiving yards or more only TWICE in his 15 year career.
Torry Holts offenses were top 5 in passing attempts in 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006.

Steve Smiths offenses were bottom 5 in passing attempts in 2002, 2003, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2013.

If Smith played for the rams, there is no doubt in my mind he would have as much (or more) production than Holt. I can't say the same for Holt in Smiths situation.

Of course, the HoF isn't about what a player might have done, it is about what a player actually did. So, if you are hung up on stats, you are keeping Smith out.
Holt averaged 9 targets per game in his career. Smith has averaged 8.6 targets per game since 2002 (the season he became a starting WR). That delta scales to 6 more targets per 16 games for Holt. BFD.

 

BassNBrew

IBL Representative
Fariq said:
I hate these debates mainly because there is always somebody who has no idea what the Hall of Fame is and believes it should hold only 100 players/the most obvious of the obvious (Montana, Lawrence Taylor, Unitas, etc.). That Spider guy is the one here.

It is a museum. If it is for only 100 players, there is not going to be a money-making event each summer. Oh, but you can kick a guy out, you say? Oh, that will go over real, real well with that guy's family and friends and his NFL team(s). Hey, Marcus Allen, go #### yourself, buddy. You are out!
The NFL could hire Trump to say you're fired and then push the bust off a 10 story building ala Letterman.

 

BassNBrew

IBL Representative
moleculo said:
spider321 said:
Anarchy99 said:
There have been 15 seasons by a WR of at least 100-1500-10 in a season. Besides Smith's 2005 season, there were three by Marvin Harrison, two by Jerry Rice, and one each by Antonio Brown, Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Michael Irvin, Brandon Marshall, Herman Moore, Randy Moss, Demaryius Thomas, and Reggie Wayne. How to people feel about inducting Torry Holt or Herman Moore?
Torry Holt had, AT LEAST, 1188 receiving yards EIGHT years IN A ROW during his injury shortened 11 year career,

Steve Smith has managed 1188 receiving yards or more only TWICE in his 15 year career.
Torry Holts offenses were top 5 in passing attempts in 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006.

Steve Smiths offenses were bottom 5 in passing attempts in 2002, 2003, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2013.

If Smith played for the rams, there is no doubt in my mind he would have as much (or more) production than Holt. I can't say the same for Holt in Smiths situation.

Of course, the HoF isn't about what a player might have done, it is about what a player actually did. So, if you are hung up on stats, you are keeping Smith out.
Holt averaged 9 targets per game in his career. Smith has averaged 8.6 targets per game since 2002 (the season he became a starting WR). That delta scales to 6 more targets per 16 games for Holt. BFD.
Slight difference between Delhomme skipping those targets to Smith, Newton sending them 2 yards over his head, and Warner/Green hitting you between the numbers.

 

Fariq

Footballguy
spider321 said:
It will never happen, but I almost wish that there could be no more than 100 guys in the Hall of Fame. If you want to vote a guy in, you have to vote a guy out.
Fariq said:
I hate these debates mainly because there is always somebody who has no idea what the Hall of Fame is and believes it should hold only 100 players/the most obvious of the obvious (Montana, Lawrence Taylor, Unitas, etc.). That Spider guy is the one here.

It is a museum. If it is for only 100 players, there is not going to be a money-making event each summer. Oh, but you can kick a guy out, you say? Oh, that will go over real, real well with that guy's family and friends and his NFL team(s). Hey, Marcus Allen, go #### yourself, buddy. You are out!
I see that reading comprehension is not your strong suit, Fariq.
I read it correctly the first time. My over-the-top post was done to illustrate the difference in fans' thought processes on what the HOF is or should be. You have a vastly different opinion on what it should be vs most of the rest of fans. On another board, I could never get anywhere in the Hall debates because one of the chief debaters could not even grasp how Joe Namath or Art Monk or Michael Strahan or Howie Long would even get considered for the Hall of Fame let alone be inducted. He wasn't arguing about induction. He was arguing about those guys having even garnered consideration!

You cannot discuss Steve Smith, Rod Smith, Isaac Bruce, Dwight Freeney, Aeneas Williams (you know, real world candidates who are not automatics like Tom Brady and Charles Woodson) with somebody that out of touch.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Just Win Baby

Footballguy
moleculo said:
spider321 said:
Anarchy99 said:
There have been 15 seasons by a WR of at least 100-1500-10 in a season. Besides Smith's 2005 season, there were three by Marvin Harrison, two by Jerry Rice, and one each by Antonio Brown, Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Michael Irvin, Brandon Marshall, Herman Moore, Randy Moss, Demaryius Thomas, and Reggie Wayne. How to people feel about inducting Torry Holt or Herman Moore?
Torry Holt had, AT LEAST, 1188 receiving yards EIGHT years IN A ROW during his injury shortened 11 year career,

Steve Smith has managed 1188 receiving yards or more only TWICE in his 15 year career.
Torry Holts offenses were top 5 in passing attempts in 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006.

Steve Smiths offenses were bottom 5 in passing attempts in 2002, 2003, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2013.

If Smith played for the rams, there is no doubt in my mind he would have as much (or more) production than Holt. I can't say the same for Holt in Smiths situation.

Of course, the HoF isn't about what a player might have done, it is about what a player actually did. So, if you are hung up on stats, you are keeping Smith out.
Holt averaged 9 targets per game in his career. Smith has averaged 8.6 targets per game since 2002 (the season he became a starting WR). That delta scales to 6 more targets per 16 games for Holt. BFD.
Slight difference between Delhomme skipping those targets to Smith, Newton sending them 2 yards over his head, and Warner/Green hitting you between the numbers.
Sure, but that wasn't the point of the exchange I responded to here. Also, Holt played less than 1/3 of his career games with Warner/Green. He played many more games with Bulger, and there is not a significant difference between Bulger and Delhomme/Newton.

 

spider321

Footballguy
spider321 said:
It will never happen, but I almost wish that there could be no more than 100 guys in the Hall of Fame. If you want to vote a guy in, you have to vote a guy out.
Fariq said:
I hate these debates mainly because there is always somebody who has no idea what the Hall of Fame is and believes it should hold only 100 players/the most obvious of the obvious (Montana, Lawrence Taylor, Unitas, etc.). That Spider guy is the one here.

It is a museum. If it is for only 100 players, there is not going to be a money-making event each summer. Oh, but you can kick a guy out, you say? Oh, that will go over real, real well with that guy's family and friends and his NFL team(s). Hey, Marcus Allen, go #### yourself, buddy. You are out!
I see that reading comprehension is not your strong suit, Fariq.
I read it correctly the first time. My over-the-top post was done to illustrate the difference in fans' thought processes on what the HOF is or should be.You have a vastly different opinion on what it should be vs most of the rest of fans. On another board, I could never get anywhere in the Hall debates because one of the chief debaters could not even grasp how Joe Namath or Art Monk or Michael Strahan or Howie Long would even get considered for the Hall of Fame let alone be inducted. He wasn't arguing about induction. He was arguing about those guys having even garnered consideration!

You cannot discuss Steve Smith, Rod Smith, Isaac Bruce, Dwight Freeney, Aeneas Williams (you know, real world candidates who are not automatics like Tom Brady and Charles Woodson) with somebody that out of touch.
I can agree with your post to a point.

Yes, I do have a different opinion on what The Hall of Fame should be vs you, Harstad, and anyone who thinks Steve Smith is deserving.

...and, yes, I do think the Hall of Fame should only be guys who are pretty darned "automatic".

That would probably make a good poll topic.

Do most fans think that only the "best of the best" should be inducted or do most fans believe that "guys who were pretty good for a long time" be inducted, too?

The poll question, imo, should be "Who SHOULD be included?" not "Who IS included?" We all know that "compilers" like Steve Smith are already in the Hall.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Fariq

Footballguy
spider321 said:
It will never happen, but I almost wish that there could be no more than 100 guys in the Hall of Fame. If you want to vote a guy in, you have to vote a guy out.
Fariq said:
I hate these debates mainly because there is always somebody who has no idea what the Hall of Fame is and believes it should hold only 100 players/the most obvious of the obvious (Montana, Lawrence Taylor, Unitas, etc.). That Spider guy is the one here.

It is a museum. If it is for only 100 players, there is not going to be a money-making event each summer. Oh, but you can kick a guy out, you say? Oh, that will go over real, real well with that guy's family and friends and his NFL team(s). Hey, Marcus Allen, go #### yourself, buddy. You are out!
I see that reading comprehension is not your strong suit, Fariq.
I read it correctly the first time. My over-the-top post was done to illustrate the difference in fans' thought processes on what the HOF is or should be.You have a vastly different opinion on what it should be vs most of the rest of fans. On another board, I could never get anywhere in the Hall debates because one of the chief debaters could not even grasp how Joe Namath or Art Monk or Michael Strahan or Howie Long would even get considered for the Hall of Fame let alone be inducted. He wasn't arguing about induction. He was arguing about those guys having even garnered consideration!

You cannot discuss Steve Smith, Rod Smith, Isaac Bruce, Dwight Freeney, Aeneas Williams (you know, real world candidates who are not automatics like Tom Brady and Charles Woodson) with somebody that out of touch.
I can agree with your post to a point.

Yes, I do have a different opinion on what The Hall of Fame should be vs you, Harstad, and anyone who thinks Steve Smith is deserving.

...and, yes, I do think the Hall of Fame should only be guys who are pretty darned "automatic".

That would probably make a good poll topic.

Do most fans think that only the "automatics" should be inducted or do most fans believe that "guys who were pretty good for a long time" be inducted, too?

The poll question, imo, should be "Who SHOULD be included?" not "Who IS included?" We all know that "compilers" like Steve Smith are already in the Hall.
My opinion is that we know who the automatics are and if the Hall is only for them, there would be years with no inductees and the whole idea of a Hall of Fame is kind of boring.

 
Isaac Bruce > Steve Smith

Torry Holt > Steve Smith

Marvin Harrison > Steve Smith

Reggie Wayne > Steve Smith

Terrell Owens > Steve Smith

Randy Moss > Steve Smith

Larry Fitzgerald > Steve Smith

Andre Johnson > Steve Smith

Calvin Johnson > Steve Smith

Brandon Marshall > Steve Smith

Demaryius Thomas > Steve Smith

Antonio Brown > Steve Smith

Dez Bryant > Steve Smith

A.J. Green > Steve Smith

Julio Jones > Steve Smith
Of those, I believe only Bruce, Holt and Harrison are actually HOF eligible, right?

Do you think that Holt is merely "pretty good" because he struggled to score touchdowns?

Question for you. Not trying to dis (and there's nothing wrong with being young), but were you an adult watching football when S.S. was tearing up the league in ~2005? I agree the statistics don't look amazing, but he was just dominant. You rarely see a player that good on a team that bad outside of the Detroit Lions.

 

spider321

Footballguy
Question for you. Not trying to dis (and there's nothing wrong with being young), but were you an adult watching football when S.S. was tearing up the league in ~2005? I agree the statistics don't look amazing, but he was just dominant. You rarely see a player that good on a team that bad outside of the Detroit Lions.
Yes, I was an adult watching NFL football in 2005.

I'm not sure exactly where I'd place him, but Steve Smith is not in the top 20 WR's I've seen in my 30 years or so of paying attention to the NFL.

He had 1 or 2 great seasons, but imo, Steve Smith is the definition of a compiler.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

CalBear

Footballguy
Question for you. Not trying to dis (and there's nothing wrong with being young), but were you an adult watching football when S.S. was tearing up the league in ~2005? I agree the statistics don't look amazing, but he was just dominant. You rarely see a player that good on a team that bad outside of the Detroit Lions.
Yes, I was an adult watching NFL football in 2005.

I'm not sure exactly where I'd place him, but Steve Smith is not in the top 20 WR's I've seen in my 30 years or so of paying attention to the NFL.

He had 1 or 2 great seasons, but imo, Steve Smith is the definition of a compiler.
Please. You might not want him to be in, but there's no way he's the definition of a compiler. In fact three of the last 5 WRs inducted are much more compilers than Steve Smith has been--T.Brown, A.Reed, A.Monk, none of whom ever led the league in receiving yardage or finished in the top 4 in TDs.

 

spider321

Footballguy
spider321 said:
It will never happen, but I almost wish that there could be no more than 100 guys in the Hall of Fame. If you want to vote a guy in, you have to vote a guy out.
Fariq said:
I hate these debates mainly because there is always somebody who has no idea what the Hall of Fame is and believes it should hold only 100 players/the most obvious of the obvious (Montana, Lawrence Taylor, Unitas, etc.). That Spider guy is the one here.

It is a museum. If it is for only 100 players, there is not going to be a money-making event each summer. Oh, but you can kick a guy out, you say? Oh, that will go over real, real well with that guy's family and friends and his NFL team(s). Hey, Marcus Allen, go #### yourself, buddy. You are out!
I see that reading comprehension is not your strong suit, Fariq.
I read it correctly the first time. My over-the-top post was done to illustrate the difference in fans' thought processes on what the HOF is or should be.You have a vastly different opinion on what it should be vs most of the rest of fans. On another board, I could never get anywhere in the Hall debates because one of the chief debaters could not even grasp how Joe Namath or Art Monk or Michael Strahan or Howie Long would even get considered for the Hall of Fame let alone be inducted. He wasn't arguing about induction. He was arguing about those guys having even garnered consideration!

You cannot discuss Steve Smith, Rod Smith, Isaac Bruce, Dwight Freeney, Aeneas Williams (you know, real world candidates who are not automatics like Tom Brady and Charles Woodson) with somebody that out of touch.
I can agree with your post to a point.

Yes, I do have a different opinion on what The Hall of Fame should be vs you, Harstad, and anyone who thinks Steve Smith is deserving.

...and, yes, I do think the Hall of Fame should only be guys who are pretty darned "automatic".

That would probably make a good poll topic.

Do most fans think that only the "automatics" should be inducted or do most fans believe that "guys who were pretty good for a long time" be inducted, too?

The poll question, imo, should be "Who SHOULD be included?" not "Who IS included?" We all know that "compilers" like Steve Smith are already in the Hall.
My opinion is that we know who the automatics are and if the Hall is only for them, there would be years with no inductees and the whole idea of a Hall of Fame is kind of boring.
Maybe so, but I believe there are way too many guys getting in the way things are now.

I'm sure it will never change.

"Good" players will keep getting in.

Even so, there is a long list of better WR's than Steve Smith waiting to get in, and playing in the league right now.

 

spider321

Footballguy
Question for you. Not trying to dis (and there's nothing wrong with being young), but were you an adult watching football when S.S. was tearing up the league in ~2005? I agree the statistics don't look amazing, but he was just dominant. You rarely see a player that good on a team that bad outside of the Detroit Lions.
Yes, I was an adult watching NFL football in 2005.

I'm not sure exactly where I'd place him, but Steve Smith is not in the top 20 WR's I've seen in my 30 years or so of paying attention to the NFL.

He had 1 or 2 great seasons, but imo, Steve Smith is the definition of a compiler.
In fact three of the last 5 WRs inducted are much more compilers than Steve Smith has been--T.Brown, A.Reed, A.Monk, none of whom ever led the league in receiving yardage or finished in the top 4 in TDs.
If true, that is a great point.

I was too young to really pay attention to majority of those guys' careers, so I probably would have opposed their induction, too.

You guys are right.

The Hall of Fame, counter to my own wishes, is not really the best of the best NFL players.

Steve Smith belongs after all. :thumbup:

 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
If Smith retires after this season and we look at WR whose careers overlapped Smith's by 5 years, that leaves a data set that includes:

Marvin Harrison

Terrell Owens

Reggie Wayne

Andre Johnson

Isaac Bruce

Hines Ward

Randy Moss

Anquan Boldin

Larry Fitzgerald

Derrick Mason

Torry Holt

Wes Welker

Rod Smith

Brandon Marshall

Calvin Johnson

Antonio Brown

Demaryius Thomas

Dez Bryant

Chad Johnson

AJ Green

Julio Jones

That's a group of 20+ other players (not all HOF worthy), but guys that have enough cross over that they could almost be considered being from a similar era. How many of these guys are going to get into the HOF?

I included Derrick Mason mostly for kicks, but he played on two run focused teams with so so QBs (Steve McNair never threw for more than 3350 yards or more than 24 TD and Mason also had Boller and a young Flacco in BAL). Should Mason be rewarded because Eddie George got a zillion carries a season? As I see it, Mason is one 2005 Steve Smith season from being Steve Smith. Their other seasons and totals are pretty similar.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

CalBear

Footballguy
If Smith retires after this season and we look at WR whose careers overlapped Smith's by 5 years, that leaves a data set that includes:

Marvin Harrison

Terrell Owens

Reggie Wayne

Andre Johnson

Isaac Bruce

Hines Ward

Randy Moss

Anquan Boldin

Larry Fitzgerald

Derrick Mason

Torry Holt

Wes Welker

Rod Smith

Brandon Marshall

Calvin Johnson

Antonio Brown

Demaryius Thomas

Dez Bryant

Chad Johnson

AJ Green

Julio Jones

That's a group of 20+ other players (not all HOF worthy), but guys that have enough cross over that they could almost be considered being from a similar era. How many of these guys are going to get into the HOF?

I included Derrick Mason mostly for kicks, but he played on two run focused teams with so so QBs (Steve McNair never threw for more than 3350 yards or more than 24 TD and Mason also had Boller and a young Flacco in BAL). Should Mason be rewarded because Eddie George got a zillion carries a season? As I see it, Mason is one 2005 Steve Smith season from being Steve Smith. Their other seasons and totals are pretty similar.
Derrick Mason never topped 100 yards in the postseason, and only had 2 TDs in 17 postseason games. Smith was over 100 yards in 5 of his 11 postseason games, and scored 9 TDs. He also had 5 Pro Bowls (maybe 6 after this year) and 2 All Pros to Mason's 2 and 1--and Mason's All-Pro was as a returner, not a WR.

 

Just Win Baby

Footballguy
Do you think that Holt is merely "pretty good" because he struggled to score touchdowns?
I don't think Holt struggled to score TDs. He scored 71 TDs in 142 games in his first 9 seasons, which is particularly impressive given that Faulk scored 80 TDs in Holt's first 5 seasons. Holt's TDs tailed off drastically in his last 2 seasons, when he basically fell off a cliff.

Regardless, Holt had 74 receiving TDs in 173 career games, which is quite a bit better than Smith's 76 receiving TDs in 203 career games.

 

cockroach

Footballguy
If Smith retires after this season and we look at WR whose careers overlapped Smith's by 5 years, that leaves a data set that includes:

Marvin Harrison

Terrell Owens

Reggie Wayne

Andre Johnson

Isaac Bruce

Hines Ward

Randy Moss

Anquan Boldin

Larry Fitzgerald

Derrick Mason

Torry Holt

Wes Welker

Rod Smith

Brandon Marshall

Calvin Johnson

Antonio Brown

Demaryius Thomas

Dez Bryant

Chad Johnson

AJ Green

Julio Jones

That's a group of 20+ other players (not all HOF worthy), but guys that have enough cross over that they could almost be considered being from a similar era. How many of these guys are going to get into the HOF?

I included Derrick Mason mostly for kicks, but he played on two run focused teams with so so QBs (Steve McNair never threw for more than 3350 yards or more than 24 TD and Mason also had Boller and a young Flacco in BAL). Should Mason be rewarded because Eddie George got a zillion carries a season? As I see it, Mason is one 2005 Steve Smith season from being Steve Smith. Their other seasons and totals are pretty similar.
Derrick Mason never topped 100 yards in the postseason, and only had 2 TDs in 17 postseason games. Smith was over 100 yards in 5 of his 11 postseason games, and scored 9 TDs. He also had 5 Pro Bowls (maybe 6 after this year) and 2 All Pros to Mason's 2 and 1--and Mason's All-Pro was as a returner, not a WR.
It's also the Hall of Fame... not the Hall of Stats or the Hall of Greatness. Smith stood out. Little and loud, just always bigger than the package he was put in. He's got my vote.

 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
If Smith retires after this season and we look at WR whose careers overlapped Smith's by 5 years, that leaves a data set that includes:

Marvin Harrison

Terrell Owens

Reggie Wayne

Andre Johnson

Isaac Bruce

Hines Ward

Randy Moss

Anquan Boldin

Larry Fitzgerald

Derrick Mason

Torry Holt

Wes Welker

Rod Smith

Brandon Marshall

Calvin Johnson

Antonio Brown

Demaryius Thomas

Dez Bryant

Chad Johnson

AJ Green

Julio Jones

That's a group of 20+ other players (not all HOF worthy), but guys that have enough cross over that they could almost be considered being from a similar era. How many of these guys are going to get into the HOF?

I included Derrick Mason mostly for kicks, but he played on two run focused teams with so so QBs (Steve McNair never threw for more than 3350 yards or more than 24 TD and Mason also had Boller and a young Flacco in BAL). Should Mason be rewarded because Eddie George got a zillion carries a season? As I see it, Mason is one 2005 Steve Smith season from being Steve Smith. Their other seasons and totals are pretty similar.
Derrick Mason never topped 100 yards in the postseason, and only had 2 TDs in 17 postseason games. Smith was over 100 yards in 5 of his 11 postseason games, and scored 9 TDs. He also had 5 Pro Bowls (maybe 6 after this year) and 2 All Pros to Mason's 2 and 1--and Mason's All-Pro was as a returner, not a WR.
It's also the Hall of Fame... not the Hall of Stats or the Hall of Greatness. Smith stood out. Little and loud, just always bigger than the package he was put in. He's got my vote.
I am arbitrarily saying you can only vote for 10 guys on my list. If you are voting for Smith, which other 9 guys get your vote (meaning that everyone else does not)?

 

ZWK

Footballguy
spider321 said:
Anarchy99 said:
There have been 15 seasons by a WR of at least 100-1500-10 in a season. Besides Smith's 2005 season, there were three by Marvin Harrison, two by Jerry Rice, and one each by Antonio Brown, Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Michael Irvin, Brandon Marshall, Herman Moore, Randy Moss, Demaryius Thomas, and Reggie Wayne. How to people feel about inducting Torry Holt or Herman Moore?
Torry Holt had, AT LEAST, 1188 receiving yards EIGHT years IN A ROW during his injury shortened 11 year career,

Steve Smith has managed 1188 receiving yards or more only TWICE in his 15 year career.
1188 is of course a convenient cutoff for Torry, as is the choice to leave out rushing yards.

Steve Smith has 6 seasons with at least 1150 yards from scrimmage, compared to Torry Holt's 8. Move the cutoff up to 1200 YFS, and Holt's edge shrinks to 6-5.

If we look at Holt's 8 best seasons (in terms of total yards from scrimmage), he averaged 1411 YFS and 8.3 offensive TDs per 16 games, on 159 targets+carries. In Smith's 8 best seasons (by the same metric), he averaged 1328 YFS and 7.7 offensive TDs per 16 games, on 150 targets+carries. So, per 16 games, Holt gained an extra 83 yards and 0.6 TDs on an extra 9 targets+carries. A bit more total production for Holt, and basically identical per-touch efficiency.

That is the gap between them before you start to look at the surrounding talent, scheme, etc.

 

spider321

Footballguy
spider321 said:
Anarchy99 said:
There have been 15 seasons by a WR of at least 100-1500-10 in a season. Besides Smith's 2005 season, there were three by Marvin Harrison, two by Jerry Rice, and one each by Antonio Brown, Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Michael Irvin, Brandon Marshall, Herman Moore, Randy Moss, Demaryius Thomas, and Reggie Wayne. How to people feel about inducting Torry Holt or Herman Moore?
Torry Holt had, AT LEAST, 1188 receiving yards EIGHT years IN A ROW during his injury shortened 11 year career,

Steve Smith has managed 1188 receiving yards or more only TWICE in his 15 year career.
1188 is of course a convenient cutoff for Torry, as is the choice to leave out rushing yards.
I know. I just wanted to use Harstad's tactics against him. :D

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Adam Harstad

Moderator
I can agree with your post to a point.

Yes, I do have a different opinion on what The Hall of Fame should be vs you, Harstad, and anyone who thinks Steve Smith is deserving.

...and, yes, I do think the Hall of Fame should only be guys who are pretty darned "automatic".

That would probably make a good poll topic.

Do most fans think that only the "best of the best" should be inducted or do most fans believe that "guys who were pretty good for a long time" be inducted, too?

The poll question, imo, should be "Who SHOULD be included?" not "Who IS included?" We all know that "compilers" like Steve Smith are already in the Hall.
I do think there's a philosophical difference. I mentioned I consider myself a storyteller. Some have called me an amateur historian. I really love the details and the contour of the NFL through the years. And I think the Hall of Fame is the perfect tool to highlight those. Precious few people know who Bobby Layne is, as it is, (think: Tim Tebow, except really, really good at football). If we started kicking him out of the Hall of Fame, nobody would remember him. And that would be a shame.

The Hall of Fame should stand as a tribute to greatness and a talking point for those who have come before. If we start booting out Elroy Hirsch, who is going to remember his 1951, (for my money, perhaps the most dominant season by anyone at any position ever)? Tom Fears might be a borderline guy, but including him gives us more reason to talk about those dominant 1950s Rams offenses. Bob Waterfield and Norm Van Brocklin might not make many modern fans' "top 100", (though Van Brocklin was unequivocally one of the 20 greatest quarterbacks to ever play), but how about that ridiculous QBBC on one of the greatest offenses the league has ever seen? And Jim Thorpe... what more needs to be said? Perhaps the greatest athlete in North American sports history. Also a national champion ballroom dancer.

I'm not saying let everyone in. I think it's a joke that Jerome Bettis made it. Charlie Joiner is my favorite hobby horse. Paul Hornung's inclusion defies reason. But at the end of the day, I don't think we should be narrowing our scope of what we consider historic. We lose so much that way.

 

Adam Harstad

Moderator
If Smith retires after this season and we look at WR whose careers overlapped Smith's by 5 years, that leaves a data set that includes:

Marvin Harrison

Terrell Owens

Reggie Wayne

Andre Johnson

Isaac Bruce

Hines Ward

Randy Moss

Anquan Boldin

Larry Fitzgerald

Derrick Mason

Torry Holt

Wes Welker

Rod Smith

Brandon Marshall

Calvin Johnson

Antonio Brown

Demaryius Thomas

Dez Bryant

Chad Johnson

AJ Green

Julio Jones

That's a group of 20+ other players (not all HOF worthy), but guys that have enough cross over that they could almost be considered being from a similar era. How many of these guys are going to get into the HOF?

I included Derrick Mason mostly for kicks, but he played on two run focused teams with so so QBs (Steve McNair never threw for more than 3350 yards or more than 24 TD and Mason also had Boller and a young Flacco in BAL). Should Mason be rewarded because Eddie George got a zillion carries a season? As I see it, Mason is one 2005 Steve Smith season from being Steve Smith. Their other seasons and totals are pretty similar.
Derrick Mason never topped 100 yards in the postseason, and only had 2 TDs in 17 postseason games. Smith was over 100 yards in 5 of his 11 postseason games, and scored 9 TDs. He also had 5 Pro Bowls (maybe 6 after this year) and 2 All Pros to Mason's 2 and 1--and Mason's All-Pro was as a returner, not a WR.
Smiff actually had 11 postseason touchdowns. He added one rushing and one via punt return.

(Also, one of Smiff's two first-team All Pros was as a returner, too.)

 

Adam Harstad

Moderator
Do you think that Holt is merely "pretty good" because he struggled to score touchdowns?
I don't think Holt struggled to score TDs. He scored 71 TDs in 142 games in his first 9 seasons, which is particularly impressive given that Faulk scored 80 TDs in Holt's first 5 seasons. Holt's TDs tailed off drastically in his last 2 seasons, when he basically fell off a cliff.

Regardless, Holt had 74 receiving TDs in 173 career games, which is quite a bit better than Smith's 76 receiving TDs in 203 career games.
Smiff averaged one touchdown for every 181.5 yards. Holt averaged one for every... 181.6 yards.

Also, receiving touchdowns misses Smiff's two rushing scores and 6 scores via kick returns. I'd say they were pretty comparable at scoring touchdowns.

 

Just Win Baby

Footballguy
Do you think that Holt is merely "pretty good" because he struggled to score touchdowns?
I don't think Holt struggled to score TDs. He scored 71 TDs in 142 games in his first 9 seasons, which is particularly impressive given that Faulk scored 80 TDs in Holt's first 5 seasons. Holt's TDs tailed off drastically in his last 2 seasons, when he basically fell off a cliff.

Regardless, Holt had 74 receiving TDs in 173 career games, which is quite a bit better than Smith's 76 receiving TDs in 203 career games.
Smiff averaged one touchdown for every 181.5 yards. Holt averaged one for every... 181.6 yards.

Also, receiving touchdowns misses Smiff's two rushing scores and 6 scores via kick returns. I'd say they were pretty comparable at scoring touchdowns.
Agree they were comparable. Holt averaged 0.43 TDs per game compared to Smith's 0.41 (through last week).

In my post you quoted, I compared their receiving TDs, since as WRs their primary job is receiving, not rushing or returning. I am happy to concede that Smith was a better rusher and better returner than Holt, but I believe Holt was a better receiver, which is pretty important in the context of the discussion in this thread.

 

Adam Harstad

Moderator
Agree they were comparable. Holt averaged 0.43 TDs per game compared to Smith's 0.41 (through last week).

In my post you quoted, I compared their receiving TDs, since as WRs their primary job is receiving, not rushing or returning. I am happy to concede that Smith was a better rusher and better returner than Holt, but I believe Holt was a better receiver, which is pretty important in the context of the discussion in this thread.
Re the bolded: I don't think so. Should you just compare Darren Sproles' rushing numbers to Michael Turner's when determining which of LaDainian Tomlinson's backups was the better RB? Should we ignore Le'Veon Bell's 80 receptions and 800 yards receiving when discussing how great he was last year? Or compare Cam Newton's passing stats to Jameis Winston's? Because they're actually pretty comparable, and a quarterback's primary responsibility is passing the football.

For a particularly extreme example, in 1961, flanker Lenny Moore was a unanimous first-team AP All Pro despite ranking 18th in receiving yards. Why? Because he also chipped in another 92/648/7 rushing.

An NFL player's job is to help his team win. The primary means of accomplishing that is gaining marginal yards. Traditionally, the bulk of a receiver's contributions are going to come via receiving, but that doesn't mean receiving contributions should be privileged over other types of contributions. All contributions are contributions. I see no reason why we should ignore Steve Smith's 57/387/2 rushing or his six return touchdowns, (and his first-team AP All Pro returner award).

Torry Holt's contributions were more stereotypical of what we'd expect from a receiver, but that doesn't mean they were greater in magnitude, or that he was by extension a better wide receiver, in my opinion.

Edit to add: I love when football season comes back and I get to chat Hall of Fame stuff with you again, JWB.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Just Win Baby

Footballguy
If Smith retires after this season and we look at WR whose careers overlapped Smith's by 5 years, that leaves a data set that includes:

Marvin Harrison

Terrell Owens

Reggie Wayne

Andre Johnson

Isaac Bruce

Hines Ward

Randy Moss

Anquan Boldin

Larry Fitzgerald

Derrick Mason

Torry Holt

Wes Welker

Rod Smith

Brandon Marshall

Calvin Johnson

Antonio Brown

Demaryius Thomas

Dez Bryant

Chad Johnson

AJ Green

Julio Jones

That's a group of 20+ other players (not all HOF worthy), but guys that have enough cross over that they could almost be considered being from a similar era. How many of these guys are going to get into the HOF?
IMO:

Group 1 - Locks to make HOF:

Marvin Harrison
Terrell Owens
Randy Moss

Group 2 - Very likely to make HOF:
Isaac Bruce
Torry Holt
Larry Fitzgerald
Calvin Johnson
Andre Johnson

Group 3 - Not deserving of HOF:
Hines Ward
Anquan Boldin
Derrick Mason
Wes Welker
Rod Smith
Chad Johnson
Devin Hester

Group 4 - Too early to tell:
Brandon Marshall
Antonio Brown
Demaryius Thomas
Dez Bryant
AJ Green
Julio Jones

Group 5 - On the HOF bubble:
Steve Smith
Reggie Wayne

I assume no one disagrees that the guys in Group 1 are locks and are more deserving than Smith.

IMO all of the guys in Group 2 are more deserving than Smith. I could see some arguments here from the pro-Smith crowd, so here we can distinguish between SHOULD and WILL. IMO all of the guys in this group will get in.

Even though I think everyone in Group 3 is undeserving, I could see Ward making it. I wouldn't vote for him, but it wouldn't shock me if the voters put him in eventually.

At least a couple guys in Group 4 will probably make it, we just can't tell who yet.

So I could see 11+ of these guys making it, meaning Smith making it would make 12+. Seems like a lot, and I think this illustrates why Smith will have a hard time getting in.

ETA: Added Hester and Wayne, along with Group 5. Also accidentally had Wayne in Group 1, which was a cut and paste error.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Just Win Baby

Footballguy
Agree they were comparable. Holt averaged 0.43 TDs per game compared to Smith's 0.41 (through last week).

In my post you quoted, I compared their receiving TDs, since as WRs their primary job is receiving, not rushing or returning. I am happy to concede that Smith was a better rusher and better returner than Holt, but I believe Holt was a better receiver, which is pretty important in the context of the discussion in this thread.
Re the bolded: I don't think so. Should you just compare Darren Sproles' rushing numbers to Michael Turner's when determining which of LaDainian Tomlinson's backups was the better RB? Should we ignore Le'Veon Bell's 80 receptions and 800 yards receiving when discussing how great he was last year? Or compare Cam Newton's passing stats to Jameis Winston's? Because they're actually pretty comparable, and a quarterback's primary responsibility is passing the football.

For a particularly extreme example, in 1961, flanker Lenny Moore was a unanimous first-team AP All Pro despite ranking 18th in receiving yards. Why? Because he also chipped in another 92/648/7 rushing.

An NFL player's job is to help his team win. The primary means of accomplishing that is gaining marginal yards. Traditionally, the bulk of a receiver's contributions are going to come via receiving, but that doesn't mean receiving contributions should be privileged over other types of contributions. All contributions are contributions. I see no reason why we should ignore Steve Smith's 57/387/2 rushing or his six return touchdowns, (and his first-team AP All Pro returner award).

Torry Holt's contributions were more stereotypical of what we'd expect from a receiver, but that doesn't mean they were greater in magnitude, or that he was by extension a better wide receiver, in my opinion.

Edit to add: I love when football season comes back and I get to chat Hall of Fame stuff with you again, JWB.
I don't find your examples to be particularly comparable. Regardless, I'm not saying Smith doesn't deserve credit for his non-receiving production. I just don't think his rushing and returning are going to get him into the HOF; those are marginal accomplishments compared to his receiving resume. I mean, I realize he got a 1st team All Pro selection as a returner, but a player could get several All Pro selections as a returner and I would not expect him to make the HOF unless he was making it mainly for accomplishments on offense/defense (example: Devin Hester). IMO whether or not Smith makes it will be determined by the voters' view of him as a WR.

By the way, if there are those who feel Hester warrants consideration, he should be added to Anarchy's list, since he was technically a WR.

Regarding the bolded: :thumbup:

 
Last edited by a moderator:

kOOk

Footballguy
Hello stat junkies, this isn't baseball, it's football. He can only "compile" what the team around him allows. The guy is better than a lot of them you're comparing him to. Torry Holt? Please. Great WR, but if Steve Smith got to play for the greatest show on turf, I have no doubt he would have at least done what Torry did.

 

spider321

Footballguy
Hello stat junkies, this isn't baseball, it's football. He can only "compile" what the team around him allows. The guy is better than a lot of them you're comparing him to. Torry Holt? Please. Great WR, but if Steve Smith got to play for the greatest show on turf, I have no doubt he would have at least done what Torry did.
I don't think you realize how great Torry Holt was. As previously posted, Holt played the majority of his career with Marc Bulger at QB.

Imo, if Torry Holt had played in Steve Smith's place, those offenses would have thrown the ball more.

eta...

NFL records

  • Consecutive seasons with at least 1,300 yards receiving (6).
  • Consecutive seasons with 90+ receptions (6).
  • Seasons with 1,600 yards receiving (2). -tied with Marvin Harrison and Calvin Johnson
  • Ranked first in the NFL from 2000-08 with 817 receptions for 11,872 yards and 562 first downs during that span
  • Fastest Player to reach 11,000 career receiving yards.(130 games)
  • Receptions in a single decade (868, 2000–2009)
  • Receiving yards in a single decade (12,594, 2000–2009)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

kOOk

Footballguy
If Smith retires after this season and we look at WR whose careers overlapped Smith's by 5 years, that leaves a data set that includes:

Marvin Harrison

Terrell Owens

Reggie Wayne

Andre Johnson

Isaac Bruce

Hines Ward

Randy Moss

Anquan Boldin

Larry Fitzgerald

Derrick Mason

Torry Holt

Wes Welker

Rod Smith

Brandon Marshall

Calvin Johnson

Antonio Brown

Demaryius Thomas

Dez Bryant

Chad Johnson

AJ Green

Julio Jones

That's a group of 20+ other players (not all HOF worthy), but guys that have enough cross over that they could almost be considered being from a similar era. How many of these guys are going to get into the HOF?
IMO:

Group 1 - Locks to make HOF:

Marvin Harrison
Terrell Owens
Reggie Wayne
Randy Moss

Group 2 - Very likely to make HOF:
Isaac Bruce
Torry Holt
Larry Fitzgerald
Calvin Johnson
Andre Johnson

Group 3 - Not deserving of HOF:
Hines Ward
Anquan Boldin
Derrick Mason
Wes Welker
Rod Smith
Chad Johnson

Group 4 - Too early to tell:
Brandon Marshall
Antonio Brown
Demaryius Thomas
Dez Bryant
AJ Green
Julio Jones

I assume no one disagrees that the guys in Group 1 are locks and are more deserving than Smith.

IMO all of the guys in Group 2 are more deserving than Smith, and I don't think it is difficult to make that case for any of them.

Even though I think everyone in Group 3 is undeserving, I could see Ward making it. I wouldn't vote for him, but it wouldn't shock me if the voters put him in eventually.

At least a couple guys in Group 4 will probably make it, we just can't tell who yet.

So I could see 12+ of these guys making it, meaning Smith making it would make 13+. Seems like a lot, and I think this illustrates why Smith will have a hard time getting in.
The common denominator in most is the system, and obviously their QB. That's what many stat-mongers in football fail to see. Again, this isn't baseball where you have like 10X the sample size / data. You can't knock a guy for playing in Carolina throughout most of his career. Unless you're trying to make an argument against, of course. I look at it like who would you rather have in their prime (forget their situation, which dictates a lot of this). I see it differently but that's just me.

Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt or Steve Smith. I would take Smith over both on your second tier.

 
I am arbitrarily saying you can only vote for 10 guys on my list. If you are voting for Smith, which other 9 guys get your vote (meaning that everyone else does not)?
OK, I'll bite. If I'm starting a franchise, and I get to pick one 22 year old player, out of that list, I'd go:

Clearly above S.S.:

Calvin

Randy

TO

Antonio

Andre

Fitz


Roughly same league:

Bruce

Holt

Marvin

Brandon Marshall


Probably above S.S., but will want to see how the rest of their careers pan out:

Dez

Julio

AJ Green

DT

Clearly below S.S.
Chad Johnson (he's in my top 2 best Santa Monica College receivers though)
Boldin (love the guy though)
Hines Ward (ditto)
Reggie Wayne
Derrick Mason
Wes Welker
Rod Smith
 

Just Win Baby

Footballguy
Group 3 - Not deserving of HOF:
Hines Ward
Anquan Boldin
Derrick Mason
Wes Welker
Rod Smith
Chad Johnson
Chad Johnson deserves more respect - he fell off a cliff but no one had more yards between 2003 and 2009.

If Chad had been drafted by the Colts instead of Wayne he would be the one going to the HOF.
Do you feel he is more deserving than any of the guys I listed in my Groups 1, 2, and 5? If so, who? If not, what's your point?

 

solorca

Footballguy
I really think he'll be on the outside looking in, but I hope I'm wrong. This is a guy who was 5'9, getting double teamed by corners for a majority of his career, and still put up great numbers year in and year out with Jake Delhomme throwing him the ball.

I do know that if he gets in, I'll be in Canton to see it.

 

BassNBrew

IBL Representative
Hello stat junkies, this isn't baseball, it's football. He can only "compile" what the team around him allows. The guy is better than a lot of them you're comparing him to. Torry Holt? Please. Great WR, but if Steve Smith got to play for the greatest show on turf, I have no doubt he would have at least done what Torry did.
I don't think you realize how great Torry Holt was. As previously posted, Holt played the majority of his career with Marc Bulger at QB.

Imo, if Torry Holt had played in Steve Smith's place, those offenses would have thrown the ball more.

eta...

NFL records

  • Consecutive seasons with at least 1,300 yards receiving (6).
  • Consecutive seasons with 90+ receptions (6).
  • Seasons with 1,600 yards receiving (2). -tied with Marvin Harrison and Calvin Johnson
  • Ranked first in the NFL from 2000-08 with 817 receptions for 11,872 yards and 562 first downs during that span
  • Fastest Player to reach 11,000 career receiving yards.(130 games)
  • Receptions in a single decade (868, 2000–2009)
  • Receiving yards in a single decade (12,594, 2000–2009)
For those down on Bulger, he had a 3% higher completion rate than Delhomme and averaged 26 more yards per game. Just that marginal improvement in QB and imagine where Smith's all time numbers would be.

 

renesauz

IBL Representative
Hello stat junkies, this isn't baseball, it's football. He can only "compile" what the team around him allows. The guy is better than a lot of them you're comparing him to. Torry Holt? Please. Great WR, but if Steve Smith got to play for the greatest show on turf, I have no doubt he would have at least done what Torry did.
I don't think you realize how great Torry Holt was. As previously posted, Holt played the majority of his career with Marc Bulger at QB.

Imo, if Torry Holt had played in Steve Smith's place, those offenses would have thrown the ball more.

eta...

NFL records

  • Consecutive seasons with at least 1,300 yards receiving (6).
  • Consecutive seasons with 90+ receptions (6).
  • Seasons with 1,600 yards receiving (2). -tied with Marvin Harrison and Calvin Johnson
  • Ranked first in the NFL from 2000-08 with 817 receptions for 11,872 yards and 562 first downs during that span
  • Fastest Player to reach 11,000 career receiving yards.(130 games)
  • Receptions in a single decade (868, 2000–2009)
  • Receiving yards in a single decade (12,594, 2000–2009)
For those down on Bulger, he had a 3% higher completion rate than Delhomme and averaged 26 more yards per game. Just that marginal improvement in QB and imagine where Smith's all time numbers would be.
I get your point, but nothing can be fairly judged in a vacuum. Better WRs lead to better/easier QB targets. Elite WR's catch balls that marginal WRs don't. Such a small difference (3%) is nowhere close to enough to mean anything on its own. DEPTH at the WR position is an enormous factor in QB completion %. How did the 3rd, 4th, 5th WRs stack up against each other?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top