victor cruz? (1 Viewer)

[Tango]

you linked to him being the 2nd highest pass-catcher today and the passes being front-loaded exactly as I had asserted. You proved my point. Thanks again.

No.Hi, are you new here?

I gotta run soon and take a break from this fun banter, but before I do..

I mentioned the Giants TEs not getting enough work or somesuch.

You called them a featured part of the offense today. (They weren't. 5 of 49 passes is not featured)

I posted the play by play rather than call you out

You quantified it as "for downfield plays" which is comically wrong too.

Also in the beginning you stated that they stopped using the TE once they were behind. That's not true either. Ballard had two catches and a score on their opening drive.

Thanks for this, I haven't been fishing in a while

sorry Im not part of your clique. Im so jealous. apparently, you being a veteran in some chat room is important to you. Super.you refuse to face the facts that Ballard was featured early and was the 2nd leading pass catcher today for the Giants becuase of that early emphasis. They went away from it for good reason. Live with it.

 

[Tango]

Talent is *super-awesome*; is he going to play on the majority of their snaps going fwd or not?

Did he please or dis-please the coaching staff today? He got mixed reviews at best.

Would you start him next week over somebody like Garcon or not?

-

the crickets on these questions from the hypesters sort of say it all. I like Cruz, but he wont be starting for anyone, including the Giants, until someone gets hurt (or perhaps a bye).

Ok so you quoted yourself.He plays in the slot and only starts depending on the first snap alignment. I get point for 161 yards receiving and 1 TD in FF, not for starts. That sounds pretty boring. How do you break a tie?

yes, because the hypesters refuse to face the complete set of facts on Cruz. Right now, Cruz is not very happy with himself and the coaching staff/writers have mixed emotions (http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2011/10/dalessandro_big_plays_--_both.html).I accept all the good stuff and think it's just swell, but Im not going to ignore that Cruz likes to make horrific plays that cost his team, isnt projected to have a high snap% except when the Giants are incomeback mode, wouldnt start over people like marginal starters like Garcon, etc. There is good and bad here. That's it.

and in case no one want to click over to the Cruz article, here are two money quotes:The good:

As for Cruz, you can see he is now locked in as the quarterback’s No. 2 target — if only because he always seems to be in the right place, whereas Mario Manningham cannot be trusted to do the same. For his part, Manning says, “He makes a lot of big plays and he’s understanding the offense.”



The bad (and ugly):

And just when we were all convinced that Cruz had twin magnets attached to his wrists and stardust in his future, he coughed up a fumble that put Seattle in position for the tying field goal, and then tipped a dangerous throw from Eli Manning into the arms of Brandon Browner, who ran it back 94 yards to clinch the Giants’ 36-25 humiliation.

“It’s tough, man,” Cruz said. “Just to go up and down like that — a lot of highs, with everyone cheering for you; and then lows — you fumble the ball. Then highs again, you make a third-down catch. Then lows, you get a tipped ball returned for a touchdown that puts the game out of reach. …”

 

[chinawildman]

For the past 3 weeks since he's been a part of the Giants offense, the guy has 17 catches, 370 yds, and 3 TDs. He's obviously not going away, and Manningham owners waiting for Cruz fall on his face shouldn't hold their breath.

 

[Bri]

you refuse to face the facts that Ballard was featured early and was the 2nd leading pass catcher today for the Giants becuase of that early emphasis. They went away from it for good reason. Live with it.

lolI was the one who stated that they went to him on that first drive, not you.Shortly after I posted a link to the play by play.Good reason you said was they were losing (implying what, I still don't know as teams losing by a lot generally pass more) yet he scored a TD on their first possession.So three times you've called Ballard their second leading pass catcher- Hakeem Nicks had four catches, Ballard had three.

 

[griff321]

Talent is *super-awesome*; is he going to play on the majority of their snaps going fwd or not?

Did he please or dis-please the coaching staff today? He got mixed reviews at best.

Would you start him next week over somebody like Garcon or not?

-

the crickets on these questions from the hypesters sort of say it all. I like Cruz, but he wont be starting for anyone, including the Giants, until someone gets hurt (or perhaps a bye).

Ok so you quoted yourself.He plays in the slot and only starts depending on the first snap alignment. I get point for 161 yards receiving and 1 TD in FF, not for starts. That sounds pretty boring. How do you break a tie?

yes, because the hypesters refuse to face the complete set of facts on Cruz. Right now, Cruz is not very happy with himself and the coaching staff/writers have mixed emotions (http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2011/10/dalessandro_big_plays_--_both.html).I accept all the good stuff and think it's just swell, but Im not going to ignore that Cruz likes to make horrific plays that cost his team, isnt projected to have a high snap% except when the Giants are incomeback mode, wouldnt start over people like marginal starters like Garcon, etc. There is good and bad here. That's it.

and in case no one want to click over to the Cruz article, here are two money quotes:The good:

As for Cruz, you can see he is now locked in as the quarterback’s No. 2 target — if only because he always seems to be in the right place, whereas Mario Manningham cannot be trusted to do the same. For his part, Manning says, “He makes a lot of big plays and he’s understanding the offense.”



The bad (and ugly):

And just when we were all convinced that Cruz had twin magnets attached to his wrists and stardust in his future, he coughed up a fumble that put Seattle in position for the tying field goal, and then tipped a dangerous throw from Eli Manning into the arms of Brandon Browner, who ran it back 94 yards to clinch the Giants’ 36-25 humiliation.

“It’s tough, man,” Cruz said. “Just to go up and down like that — a lot of highs, with everyone cheering for you; and then lows — you fumble the ball. Then highs again, you make a third-down catch. Then lows, you get a tipped ball returned for a touchdown that puts the game out of reach. …”

People do not listen to this guy, because he's clearly off his rocker.I've been STARTING Victor Cruz for three weeks now and he's about to lead me to three wins. Right now he's the #15 WR in my 1PPR dynasty league and he had a 0 week one followed by a 3.7 week two before he got opportunity from the Manningham injury. At what point do you wake up and smell the coffee!? Top 10!?

He's an electric playmaker, but yet he's still young and learning. What do you expect from prospects, perfection out of the door? Most guys need a few games to iron out inconsistencies and he's no different, but Tango would rather you wait until his value reaches nicks levels and he's untouchable. I'm sorry, but you're wrong. He may have a few clunkers down the road and that comes with learning, but we all know that incredible talent will not keep you in Coughlin's dog house for long. Cruz has IT in spades.

 

[Tango]

Talent is *super-awesome*; is he going to play on the majority of their snaps going fwd or not?

Did he please or dis-please the coaching staff today? He got mixed reviews at best.

Would you start him next week over somebody like Garcon or not?

-

the crickets on these questions from the hypesters sort of say it all. I like Cruz, but he wont be starting for anyone, including the Giants, until someone gets hurt (or perhaps a bye).

Ok so you quoted yourself.He plays in the slot and only starts depending on the first snap alignment. I get point for 161 yards receiving and 1 TD in FF, not for starts. That sounds pretty boring. How do you break a tie?

yes, because the hypesters refuse to face the complete set of facts on Cruz. Right now, Cruz is not very happy with himself and the coaching staff/writers have mixed emotions (http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2011/10/dalessandro_big_plays_--_both.html).I accept all the good stuff and think it's just swell, but Im not going to ignore that Cruz likes to make horrific plays that cost his team, isnt projected to have a high snap% except when the Giants are incomeback mode, wouldnt start over people like marginal starters like Garcon, etc. There is good and bad here. That's it.

and in case no one want to click over to the Cruz article, here are two money quotes:The good:

As for Cruz, you can see he is now locked in as the quarterback’s No. 2 target — if only because he always seems to be in the right place, whereas Mario Manningham cannot be trusted to do the same. For his part, Manning says, “He makes a lot of big plays and he’s understanding the offense.”



The bad (and ugly):

And just when we were all convinced that Cruz had twin magnets attached to his wrists and stardust in his future, he coughed up a fumble that put Seattle in position for the tying field goal, and then tipped a dangerous throw from Eli Manning into the arms of Brandon Browner, who ran it back 94 yards to clinch the Giants’ 36-25 humiliation.

“It’s tough, man,” Cruz said. “Just to go up and down like that — a lot of highs, with everyone cheering for you; and then lows — you fumble the ball. Then highs again, you make a third-down catch. Then lows, you get a tipped ball returned for a touchdown that puts the game out of reach. …”

People do not listen to this guy, because he's clearly off his rocker.I've been STARTING Victor Cruz for three weeks now and he's about to lead me to three wins. Right now he's the #15 WR in my 1PPR dynasty league and he had a 0 week one followed by a 3.7 week two before he got opportunity from the Manningham injury. At what point do you wake up and smell the coffee!? Top 10!?

He's an electric playmaker, but yet he's still young and learning. What do you expect from prospects, perfection out of the door? Most guys need a few games to iron out inconsistencies and he's no different, but Tango would rather you wait until his value reaches nicks levels and he's untouchable. I'm sorry, but you're wrong. He may have a few clunkers down the road and that comes with learning, but we all know that incredible talent will not keep you in Coughlin's dog house for long. Cruz has IT in spades.

Do you hypers not realize that I like Cruz and would be glad to have him? I simply refuse to go on here and pretend that there are not some significant prolems and Im not ready to start him every week; but I'd be glad to roster him. Instead, as usual, hypers prefer to (attempt to) ridiculeretty simple stuff here-

Please predict future snap%:

Future targets/game:

Who he is ranked just ahead of (or pls just say if you'd start him over Garcon or not):

And, if you really are interested in Cruz, the variance of the first two items above would be most important:

The projected forward snap% and targets are problematic while the most compelling thing about Cruz is his variance and that is worth buying on (I'd be curious if the previous poster even knows why the latter is important).

 

[Tango]

you refuse to face the facts that Ballard was featured early and was the 2nd leading pass catcher today for the Giants becuase of that early emphasis. They went away from it for good reason. Live with it.

lolI was the one who stated that they went to him on that first drive, not you.

Shortly after I posted a link to the play by play.

Good reason you said was they were losing (implying what, I still don't know as teams losing by a lot generally pass more) yet he scored a TD on their first possession.

So three times you've called Ballard their second leading pass catcher- Hakeem Nicks had four catches, Ballard had three.

Nope, you're incorrect again. I posted that he has featured early in post #83. You mentioned it after that. And, do you plan on accusing the writer of this article from early this morning of being Ballard's relative too?

Ballard Stepping Up For Giants

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/giants/post/_/id/7636/ballard-stepping-up-for-giants

Maybe you'll accuse this writer of being his agent?

Giants tight end Jake Ballard emerges as passing-game weapon

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2011/10/giants_tight_end_jake_ballard.html

 

[griff321]

These question marks are what makes Cruz such a good guy to target. People are not ready to jump off the Manningham bandwagon, but yet Cruz has shown to be more talented and the margin is growing as the season progresses. His targets are going up every week and by the time all the questions you have become clear he'll be untouchable. You have to look at the progression of emerging playmakers in offenses and it's fitting that line to a T. Sure some of us are overlooking some of the more negative aspects like the fumble and tip, but it's because we're seeing amazing talent on the field and we know that the cream rises to the top once opportunity presents itself.

Now if your still real high on Manningham then I understand, but I'm not at all and either are most Cruz owners. We see the production Cruz is giving as the #3 and it's absurd to even speculate for very long that Manningham holds onto the #2 for the entire season.

 

[Tango]

These question marks are what makes Cruz such a good guy to target. People are not ready to jump off the Manningham bandwagon, but yet Cruz has shown to be more talented and the margin is growing as the season progresses. His targets are going up every week and by the time all the questions you have become clear he'll be untouchable. You have to look at the progression of emerging playmakers in offenses and it's fitting that line to a T. Sure some of us are overlooking some of the more negative aspects like the fumble and tip, but it's because we're seeing amazing talent on the field and we know that the cream rises to the top once opportunity presents itself. Now if your still real high on Manningham then I understand, but I'm not at all and either are most Cruz owners. We see the production Cruz is giving as the #3 and it's absurd to even speculate for very long that Manningham holds onto the #2 for the entire season.

Not sure if you're addressing me or not, but I'll assume I will for this reply...We certainly agree that he's rosterable and buy-able trade-wise and has been for a while. Where he is vs Manningham is less of a fantasy question about Manningham for me (I've never owned him and probably never will), it has more to do with predicting Cruz's opportunity value (opportunity value equaling a mix of snap% and targets among other things). While we all agree it is trending upward (very much upward), it's difficult to interpret yesterday as a banner day for Cruz's future opportunity value and it deserves objective analysis.-

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

For a guy playing at UMass two seasons ago you'd have to say his upward arc has been pretty steep. He could be a flash in the pan, but so far he looks like a more explosive version of Steve Smith. Probably too late to buy.

 

[Hoosier16]

Pretty simple stuff here-Please predict future snap%:

Here is his game by game snap % so far this season:1 ---- 17%2 ---- 37%3 ---- 81%4 ---- 65%Here is Manningham's:1 ---- 88%2 ---- 42%3 ---- 04 ---- 69%Cruz is clearly increasing. I'd say he would likely get at least 65% of the snaps and up to 80% going forward.

Future targets/game:

That's a tough one to predict. One stat to look at is yards per pass route run, which gives an indication of a WRs productivity while on the field. For reference, last year's leaders were Britt, Lloyd, Harvin, White, AJ, Wallace, etc - you get the idea. They averaged around 2.50 to 3.00 yards per pass route. This year, Cruz ranks 8th at 2.96 yds/prr (Nicks at 2.61 and Manningham at 1.31). Again, for reference, the leaders above him are Welker, Wallace, AJ, Britt, Nelson, Smith, and Austin. Pretty good company. While this doesn't tell you how many targets he'll get, it does indicate his productivity and hopefully coaches will continue to target productive players.

 

[Tango]

Pretty simple stuff here-Please predict future snap%:

Here is his game by game snap % so far this season:1 ---- 17%2 ---- 37%3 ---- 81%4 ---- 65%Here is Manningham's:1 ---- 88%2 ---- 42%3 ---- 04 ---- 69%Cruz is clearly increasing. I'd say he would likely get at least 65% of the snaps and up to 80% going forward.

Future targets/game:

That's a tough one to predict. One stat to look at is yards per pass route run, which gives an indication of a WRs productivity while on the field. For reference, last year's leaders were Britt, Lloyd, Harvin, White, AJ, Wallace, etc - you get the idea. They averaged around 2.50 to 3.00 yards per pass route. This year, Cruz ranks 8th at 2.96 yds/prr (Nicks at 2.61 and Manningham at 1.31). Again, for reference, the leaders above him are Welker, Wallace, AJ, Britt, Nelson, Smith, and Austin. Pretty good company. While this doesn't tell you how many targets he'll get, it does indicate his productivity and hopefully coaches will continue to target productive players.

After re-watching the game yesterday; it looked like his snap percentage perfectly correlated to their use of 3 wide sets. Then, the use of 3 wide sets, ran as a near perfect correlation to situations when the Giants were not in the lead and/or not tied or 3rd and 5+. If those correlations hold, and they probably will, then Cruz's snap% will be tied significantly to when the Giants are behind on the scoreboard. For Cruz to compete for FF starting lineup time vs other guys in his grouping like Garcon, it would be nice for him to break that correlation; which, ultimately, has to do with him taking Manningham's job.Edited to add: Thanks for putting up those stats.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

you refuse to face the facts that Ballard was featured early and was the 2nd leading pass catcher today for the Giants becuase of that early emphasis. They went away from it for good reason. Live with it.

lolI was the one who stated that they went to him on that first drive, not you.

Shortly after I posted a link to the play by play.

Good reason you said was they were losing (implying what, I still don't know as teams losing by a lot generally pass more) yet he scored a TD on their first possession.

So three times you've called Ballard their second leading pass catcher- Hakeem Nicks had four catches, Ballard had three.

Nope, you're incorrect again. I posted that he has featured early in post #83. You mentioned it after that. And, do you plan on accusing the writer of this article from early this morning of being Ballard's relative too?

Ballard Stepping Up For Giants

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/giants/post/_/id/7636/ballard-stepping-up-for-giants

Maybe you'll accuse this writer of being his agent?

Giants tight end Jake Ballard emerges as passing-game weapon

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2011/10/giants_tight_end_jake_ballard.html

You two get a room.

 

[davearm]

Pretty simple stuff here-Please predict future snap%:

Here is his game by game snap % so far this season:1 ---- 17%2 ---- 37%3 ---- 81%4 ---- 65%Here is Manningham's:1 ---- 88%2 ---- 42%3 ---- 04 ---- 69%Cruz is clearly increasing. I'd say he would likely get at least 65% of the snaps and up to 80% going forward.

Future targets/game:

That's a tough one to predict. One stat to look at is yards per pass route run, which gives an indication of a WRs productivity while on the field. For reference, last year's leaders were Britt, Lloyd, Harvin, White, AJ, Wallace, etc - you get the idea. They averaged around 2.50 to 3.00 yards per pass route. This year, Cruz ranks 8th at 2.96 yds/prr (Nicks at 2.61 and Manningham at 1.31). Again, for reference, the leaders above him are Welker, Wallace, AJ, Britt, Nelson, Smith, and Austin. Pretty good company. While this doesn't tell you how many targets he'll get, it does indicate his productivity and hopefully coaches will continue to target productive players.

After re-watching the game yesterday; it looked like his snap percentage perfectly correlated to their use of 3 wide sets. Then, the use of 3 wide sets, ran as a near perfect correlation to situations when the Giants were not in the lead and/or not tied or 3rd and 5+. If those correlations hold, and they probably will, then Cruz's snap% will be tied significantly to when the Giants are behind on the scoreboard. For Cruz to compete for FF starting lineup time vs other guys in his grouping like Garcon, it would be nice for him to break that correlation; which, ultimately, has to do with him taking Manningham's job.Edited to add: Thanks for putting up those stats.

Curious how you think Cruz's usage pattern will differ from that of Steve Smith the last couple years. It seems to me the worst-case for Cruz is he works in the same slot role that Smith thrived in.Smith finished WR11 in 2009, and in 2010 he was on pace to finish in the mid-20s range before getting hurt.

 

[ready5]

3/110/2

6/98/0

8/161/1

yeah, it's just a fluke that he's averaging 100+ and a touchdown over three games. let's talk about tight ends.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Last week I dug up game logs to took a look at what happened in games where Nicks, Manningham and Steve Smith all played. I think the results are pretty interesting - especially given what Cruz has done in the last two weeks:

In 2009 and 2010 there were 19 games where all three of Nicks, Manningham and Smith played. In those 19 games here's what each guy did (PPR scoring)...

Nicks: 80-125-13 (14.9 ppg)

Manningham: 69-1003-7 (11.1 ppg)

Smith: 110-1308-7 (14.9 ppg)

Considering that Cruz seems to be more of a downfield threat than Smith was, I think there's an argument that Smith's #s represent a floor for Cruz as long as he's playing for the Giants and Eli is throwing the ball.

 

[Tango]

Last week I dug up game logs to took a look at what happened in games where Nicks, Manningham and Steve Smith all played. I think the results are pretty interesting - especially given what Cruz has done in the last two weeks:In 2009 and 2010 there were 19 games where all three of Nicks, Manningham and Smith played. In those 19 games here's what each guy did (PPR scoring)...Nicks: 80-125-13 (14.9 ppg)Manningham: 69-1003-7 (11.1 ppg)Smith: 110-1308-7 (14.9 ppg)Considering that Cruz seems to be more of a downfield threat than Smith was, I think there's an argument that Smith's #s represent a floor for Cruz as long as he's playing for the Giants and Eli is throwing the ball.

I'd add one wrinkle to make that a viable theory; that the Giants probably went 3 wide when they were tied/in the lead when they had Steve Smith...which they didnt so yesterday except in 3rd and long. So, the theory goes, that they start doing the same thing now with Cruz going well (except for the catastrophic turnovers of course).

 

[Boone22]

Until the Giants defense gets healthy and they can stop teams like Seattle from putting up 35 points, they will be playing from behind quite a bit.

 

[Hoosier16]

Pretty simple stuff here-Please predict future snap%:

Here is his game by game snap % so far this season:1 ---- 17%2 ---- 37%3 ---- 81%4 ---- 65%Here is Manningham's:1 ---- 88%2 ---- 42%3 ---- 04 ---- 69%Cruz is clearly increasing. I'd say he would likely get at least 65% of the snaps and up to 80% going forward.

Future targets/game:

That's a tough one to predict. One stat to look at is yards per pass route run, which gives an indication of a WRs productivity while on the field. For reference, last year's leaders were Britt, Lloyd, Harvin, White, AJ, Wallace, etc - you get the idea. They averaged around 2.50 to 3.00 yards per pass route. This year, Cruz ranks 8th at 2.96 yds/prr (Nicks at 2.61 and Manningham at 1.31). Again, for reference, the leaders above him are Welker, Wallace, AJ, Britt, Nelson, Smith, and Austin. Pretty good company. While this doesn't tell you how many targets he'll get, it does indicate his productivity and hopefully coaches will continue to target productive players.

After re-watching the game yesterday; it looked like his snap percentage perfectly correlated to their use of 3 wide sets. Then, the use of 3 wide sets, ran as a near perfect correlation to situations when the Giants were not in the lead and/or not tied or 3rd and 5+. If those correlations hold, and they probably will, then Cruz's snap% will be tied significantly to when the Giants are behind on the scoreboard. For Cruz to compete for FF starting lineup time vs other guys in his grouping like Garcon, it would be nice for him to break that correlation; which, ultimately, has to do with him taking Manningham's job.Edited to add: Thanks for putting up those stats.

Sunday's snap count is in:Cruz --------------- 58%Manningham --- 92%For yards/pass route, Cruz jumps to 2nd (behind Welker) at 3.54. Manningham remains at 63rd with 1.33.

 

[Tango]

Pretty simple stuff here-Please predict future snap%:

Here is his game by game snap % so far this season:1 ---- 17%2 ---- 37%3 ---- 81%4 ---- 65%Here is Manningham's:1 ---- 88%2 ---- 42%3 ---- 04 ---- 69%Cruz is clearly increasing. I'd say he would likely get at least 65% of the snaps and up to 80% going forward.

Future targets/game:

That's a tough one to predict. One stat to look at is yards per pass route run, which gives an indication of a WRs productivity while on the field. For reference, last year's leaders were Britt, Lloyd, Harvin, White, AJ, Wallace, etc - you get the idea. They averaged around 2.50 to 3.00 yards per pass route. This year, Cruz ranks 8th at 2.96 yds/prr (Nicks at 2.61 and Manningham at 1.31). Again, for reference, the leaders above him are Welker, Wallace, AJ, Britt, Nelson, Smith, and Austin. Pretty good company. While this doesn't tell you how many targets he'll get, it does indicate his productivity and hopefully coaches will continue to target productive players.

After re-watching the game yesterday; it looked like his snap percentage perfectly correlated to their use of 3 wide sets. Then, the use of 3 wide sets, ran as a near perfect correlation to situations when the Giants were not in the lead and/or not tied or 3rd and 5+. If those correlations hold, and they probably will, then Cruz's snap% will be tied significantly to when the Giants are behind on the scoreboard. For Cruz to compete for FF starting lineup time vs other guys in his grouping like Garcon, it would be nice for him to break that correlation; which, ultimately, has to do with him taking Manningham's job.Edited to add: Thanks for putting up those stats.

Sunday's snap count is in:Cruz --------------- 58%Manningham --- 92%For yards/pass route, Cruz jumps to 2nd (behind Welker) at 3.54. Manningham remains at 63rd with 1.33.

thanks again...good stuff.

 

[Ballstein]

Fluke

sorry for the long post

 

[ready5]

Flukesorry for the long post

flukiest three weeks of production ever. is hispanic heritage month over yet?

 

[the Hood]

Until the Giants defense gets healthy and they can stop teams like Seattle from putting up 35 points, they will be playing from behind quite a bit.

Take a look at the Giants schedule. It is BRUTAL. They will be behind plenty this year.

 

[wiscstlatlmia]

Well folks he made the roster ...Where do you guys think he stands on the depth chart? I am thinking hes pushing manningham for the 3rd spot right now.

 

[cvnpoka]

For the past 3 weeks since he's been a part of the Giants offense, the guy has 17 catches, 370 yds, and 3 TDs. He's obviously not going away, and Manningham owners waiting for Cruz fall on his face shouldn't hold their breath.

manningham had 9 targets yesterday, hes still very fantasy viable. when i did my giants projections in the preseason, something that jumped out to me was that whoever emerged as their wr3 had a great chance to be productive. well, i guess that is manninghams role.

 

[cvnpoka]

Do you hypers not realize that I like Cruz and would be glad to have him? I simply refuse to go on here and pretend that there are not some significant prolems and Im not ready to start him every week; but I'd be glad to roster him. Instead, as usual, hypers prefer to (attempt to) ridicule:

Pretty simple stuff here-

Please predict future snap%:

Future targets/game:

Who he is ranked just ahead of (or pls just say if you'd start him over Garcon or not):

And, if you really are interested in Cruz, the variance of the first two items above would be most important:

The projected forward snap% and targets are problematic while the most compelling thing about Cruz is his variance and that is worth buying on (I'd be curious if the previous poster even knows why the latter is important).

it seems his snap percentage is fine. he was in on 34 of 46 passing plays this week. last week it was 33 of 45. week 3 it was 25 of 26. he is on the field enough that he will get targeted 6-10 times a game and that is plenty to be startable.

 

[davearm]

Well folks he made the roster ...Where do you guys think he stands on the depth chart? I am thinking hes pushing manningham for the 3rd spot right now.

You don't see wrong predictions get bumped very often around here. Cruz didn't push Manningham at any point last year.

 

[Tango]

Do you hypers not realize that I like Cruz and would be glad to have him? I simply refuse to go on here and pretend that there are not some significant prolems and Im not ready to start him every week; but I'd be glad to roster him. Instead, as usual, hypers prefer to (attempt to) ridicule:

Pretty simple stuff here-

Please predict future snap%:

Future targets/game:

Who he is ranked just ahead of (or pls just say if you'd start him over Garcon or not):

And, if you really are interested in Cruz, the variance of the first two items above would be most important:

The projected forward snap% and targets are problematic while the most compelling thing about Cruz is his variance and that is worth buying on (I'd be curious if the previous poster even knows why the latter is important).

it seems his snap percentage is fine. he was in on 34 of 46 passing plays this week. last week it was 33 of 45. week 3 it was 25 of 26. he is on the field enough that he will get targeted 6-10 times a game and that is plenty to be startable.

Well, then we will be forced to look at their run/pass tendencies which adds a layer of complexity that we may not need unless they are consistently underdogs going fwd in high O/U situations; which, as others have pointed out, is a distinct possibility given their schedule. But be sure to take a quick look up at post 119 and a few others. They played 3-wide only when not winning and on 3rd and long; and that situation was true for much of the game. His production on his snaps are simple facts (as are his miscues), but as you obviously agree with given your analysis...projecting ahead requires us to look at these breakdowns.

 

[cvnpoka]

well, the way i project is to guess how many plays a team will run, guess the run/pass ratio and then guess who gets targeted. even giving beckham an optimistic looks, i concluded that the giants could very well support 3 wr. its bc they just throw a lot (well i guess everyone does nowadays) and they dont target the rbs very much. well now beckham is long gone and ballard aint getting many targets. id be happy to own any giant wr right now.

 

[Tango]

well, the way i project is to guess how many plays a team will run, guess the run/pass ratio and then guess who gets targeted. even giving beckham an optimistic looks, i concluded that the giants could very well support 3 wr. its bc they just throw a lot (well i guess everyone does nowadays) and they dont target the rbs very much. well now beckham is long gone and ballard aint getting many targets. id be happy to own any giant wr right now.

oh no, the resurrection of the Ballard issue! We've talked through that a bit in this thread with a little controversy (I was accused of being Ballard's relative). I was asserting that Ballard's subtle emergence yesterday was a more notable take-away than Cruz's continuation of his performance and that caused a flurry. It was nice to see a bunch of articles come out since then to support my not-so-adamant-assertion (just google ballard and you'll see the articles). All this being said...football decision makers on the Giants certainly werent thrilled with Cruz yesterday and it's difficult for me to project them running more 3-wides than when in 3rd+ and comeback-mode due to that element of dissatisfaction with Cruz's apparent carelessness with the football (perhaps there's a better word than carelessness, but you know what I mean).

 

[cvnpoka]

just to reiterate, my conclusion was that even if the te received an optimistic amount of targets, the giants wr3 still had a good chance to be viable as there were still plenty of targets left over.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Ballard catches 3 balls and somehow that's more noteworthy than Cruz catching 8...

 

[cobalt_27]

Ballard catches 3 balls and somehow that's more noteworthy than Cruz catching 8...

Seriously. So stupid.

 

[Tango]

just to reiterate, my conclusion was that even if the te received an optimistic amount of targets, the giants wr3 still had a good chance to be viable as there were still plenty of targets left over.

Yes, got it. Neither of us know for sure of course, but Im inclined to bet the other way and assume that their use of 3-wide wont stay at these levels nor head toward Steve Smith-era %s and/or that Cruz's production per route run isnt sustainable here. Their schedule and defense (400+ vs the Hawks) would be the case against that bet, or the possibility of an outright promotion to #2; so being inclined to go the other way doesnt mean that I discount the possibility of a different outcome. And, for what it's worth, it appears that the TE will be getting more and more targets (see previous links for quotes from Manning and others in the last 30 hours on that subject). He emerged nicely which was nice to see for him as he was getting nailed by many in the preseason and will probably continue to be by the less informed ff followers. He's moving toward-but-isnt-quite-yet a week-in-week-out starter; something the two of these guys have in common...except the latter's news is actually "more new".

 

[netnalp]

Well folks he made the roster ...Where do you guys think he stands on the depth chart? I am thinking hes pushing manningham for the 3rd spot right now.

You don't see wrong predictions get bumped very often around here. Cruz didn't push Manningham at any point last year.

Cruz being on IR for most of last season was probably a factor.

 

[Bri]

All this being said...football decision makers on the Giants certainly werent thrilled with Cruz yesterday and it's difficult for me to project them running more 3-wides than when in 3rd+ and comeback-mode due to that element of dissatisfaction with Cruz's apparent carelessness with the football (perhaps there's a better word than carelessness, but you know what I mean).

Absolutely. Cruz is lucky he doesn't get cut. It's just a rumor, mind you, but Ballard will supposedly play QB then run down the field and continue to catch TD passes. The key is for him to throw the ball high enough so he can get down field. It'll be tough, but being faster (game-speed of course) than Vick and CJ, Ballard should be able to pull it off.

 

[Tango]

All this being said...football decision makers on the Giants certainly werent thrilled with Cruz yesterday and it's difficult for me to project them running more 3-wides than when in 3rd+ and comeback-mode due to that element of dissatisfaction with Cruz's apparent carelessness with the football (perhaps there's a better word than carelessness, but you know what I mean).

Absolutely. Cruz is lucky he doesn't get cut. It's just a rumor, mind you, but Ballard will supposedly play QB then run down the field and continue to catch TD passes. The key is for him to throw the ball high enough so he can get down field. It'll be tough, but being faster (game-speed of course) than Vick and CJ, Ballard should be able to pull it off.

Fact:Cruz had some horrific plays yesterday that has sparked widespread criticism. Fact:Cruz had some circus-like great plays that has sparked widespread praise.Fact:Ballard doesnt play QB, he plays TE and was written-up since you claimed there was nothing-to-see-here by various local and national sports writers from real publications. Dont blame the messenger.

 

[Tango]

well, the way i project is to guess how many plays a team will run, guess the run/pass ratio and then guess who gets targeted. even giving beckham an optimistic looks, i concluded that the giants could very well support 3 wr. its bc they just throw a lot (well i guess everyone does nowadays) and they dont target the rbs very much. well now beckham is long gone and ballard aint getting many targets. id be happy to own any giant wr right now.

And it's odd that the thread seemed to be far more focused on analysis and links during your absence (an example is cited above) You're back and the superlatives and belittling start all over again. That's too bad...Anywayid anyone catch what Coughlin had to say about Cruz during today's presser?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

All this being said...football decision makers on the Giants certainly werent thrilled with Cruz yesterday and it's difficult for me to project them running more 3-wides than when in 3rd+ and comeback-mode due to that element of dissatisfaction with Cruz's apparent carelessness with the football (perhaps there's a better word than carelessness, but you know what I mean).

Absolutely. Cruz is lucky he doesn't get cut. It's just a rumor, mind you, but Ballard will supposedly play QB then run down the field and continue to catch TD passes. The key is for him to throw the ball high enough so he can get down field. It'll be tough, but being faster (game-speed of course) than Vick and CJ, Ballard should be able to pull it off.

Fact:Cruz had some horrific plays yesterday that has sparked widespread criticism. Fact:Cruz had some circus-like great plays that has sparked widespread praise.Fact:Ballard doesnt play QB, he plays TE and was written-up since you claimed there was nothing-to-see-here by various local and national sports writers from real publications. Dont blame the messenger.

Cruz didn't have "some".. "Horrific" plays... He had 1 bad play where he slipped and was still able to get a hand on the ball. He tried to make a play and the ball came off his hand... You are really making WAAAAYYY too much of this. Did you even see the play? You never want to give up the ball, in the endzone, or have it go back the other way.. But these things happen, and this will in no way cost Cruz playing time.Your argument is rather weak, and you seem to be the only one giving your "facts" or 'proof' any merit.. No one here is trying to call Cruz a top 10 WR, we are discussing the current value of his play and his potential. He certainly has proven more valuable from a FF perspective with 3 strong weeks than a one week, 3 catch performance by an unknown TE, likely 'one week wonder'How many starts do you see Cruz getting in FF this season vs. your TE? Which would you rather have on your roster?

 

[biggamer3]

All this being said...football decision makers on the Giants certainly werent thrilled with Cruz yesterday and it's difficult for me to project them running more 3-wides than when in 3rd+ and comeback-mode due to that element of dissatisfaction with Cruz's apparent carelessness with the football (perhaps there's a better word than carelessness, but you know what I mean).

Absolutely. Cruz is lucky he doesn't get cut. It's just a rumor, mind you, but Ballard will supposedly play QB then run down the field and continue to catch TD passes. The key is for him to throw the ball high enough so he can get down field. It'll be tough, but being faster (game-speed of course) than Vick and CJ, Ballard should be able to pull it off.

 

[davearm]

just to reiterate, my conclusion was that even if the te received an optimistic amount of targets, the giants wr3 still had a good chance to be viable as there were still plenty of targets left over.

Yes, got it. Neither of us know for sure of course, but Im inclined to bet the other way and assume that their use of 3-wide wont stay at these levels nor head toward Steve Smith-era %s and/or that Cruz's production per route run isnt sustainable here. Their schedule and defense (400+ vs the Hawks) would be the case against that bet, or the possibility of an outright promotion to #2; so being inclined to go the other way doesnt mean that I discount the possibility of a different outcome. And, for what it's worth, it appears that the TE will be getting more and more targets (see previous links for quotes from Manning and others in the last 30 hours on that subject). He emerged nicely which was nice to see for him as he was getting nailed by many in the preseason and will probably continue to be by the less informed ff followers. He's moving toward-but-isnt-quite-yet a week-in-week-out starter; something the two of these guys have in common...except the latter's news is actually "more new".

I have a hard time believing this Ballard guy is going to stand in the way of the Giants producing three startable fantasy WRs, when Kevin Boss did not.Basically everything else is the same from the Steve Smith era -- QB, coaches, RBs, Nicks and Manningham...What's changed is: 1) Cruz is more explosive but less dependable than Smith; 2) Boss became Ballard; 3) Manningham is having his struggles.I have a hard time plugging all of that into the equation and concluding that Cruz will be far less productive than Smith, who was a solid fantasy WR2 and an every-week starter.

 

[Tango]

Cruz didn't have "some".. "Horrific" plays... He had 1 bad play where he slipped and was still able to get a hand on the ball. He tried to make a play and the ball came off his hand... You are really making WAAAAYYY too much of this. Did you even see the play?

Cruz was the goat of the week. He was also the hero of the week. I realize they dont have X-thousand posts on a nifty bulletin board, but sports writers from real publications are posting those exact sentiments right now after I made that assertion here. I guess I was on to something...but it really wasnt that hard to figure that Cruz was a goat and a hero this past Sunday.

Your argument is rather weak, and you seem to be the only one giving your "facts" or 'proof' any merit..

No one here is trying to call Cruz a top 10 WR, we are discussing the current value of his play and his potential. He certainly has proven more valuable from a FF perspective with 3 strong weeks than a one week, 3 catch performance by an unknown TE, likely 'one week wonder'

Go back and read this thread again because my only argument in this entire thread with analysis behind it is that I'd be inclined to not project Cruz to sustain his target count and yards/target; sorry guy, but that is a valid argument with real reasons behind it that has generated real discussion and feedback. Those posts are right above here. Give them a read. The constructive posts in this thread are analyzing Cruz's projected snap %, targets, and production per target, etc. I brought Ballard up because people were treating Cruz's performance like it was his great coming out party, but not only was that one-sided...it was old news. Weeks-old news actually. And I, as a contrast, thought that Ballard's play was actually newer-news and something worth taking away from the game that we didnt really know very well before (and, guess what, hours later the press corps agreed with me yet again); I wouldnt suggest owning one over the other...the only league Im in doesnt pool TEs and WRs. That extrapolation by you and others came from a logical place, but it was an incorrect extrapolation. Apologies if I contributed to misleading you on that in the original post. I can go further into the reasons why Ballard's snap % was brought up, but it really isnt relevant. Cruz is a marginal starter in the range of a Garcon who has also emerged and I'd much rather start Garcon given my above assertions about Cruz's forward snap% and targets.

 

[Tango]

just to reiterate, my conclusion was that even if the te received an optimistic amount of targets, the giants wr3 still had a good chance to be viable as there were still plenty of targets left over.

Yes, got it. Neither of us know for sure of course, but Im inclined to bet the other way and assume that their use of 3-wide wont stay at these levels nor head toward Steve Smith-era %s and/or that Cruz's production per route run isnt sustainable here. Their schedule and defense (400+ vs the Hawks) would be the case against that bet, or the possibility of an outright promotion to #2; so being inclined to go the other way doesnt mean that I discount the possibility of a different outcome. And, for what it's worth, it appears that the TE will be getting more and more targets (see previous links for quotes from Manning and others in the last 30 hours on that subject). He emerged nicely which was nice to see for him as he was getting nailed by many in the preseason and will probably continue to be by the less informed ff followers. He's moving toward-but-isnt-quite-yet a week-in-week-out starter; something the two of these guys have in common...except the latter's news is actually "more new".

I have a hard time believing this Ballard guy is going to stand in the way of the Giants producing three startable fantasy WRs, when Kevin Boss did not.Basically everything else is the same from the Steve Smith era -- QB, coaches, RBs, Nicks and Manningham...

What's changed is: 1) Cruz is more explosive but less dependable than Smith; 2) Boss became Ballard; 3) Manningham is having his struggles.

I have a hard time plugging all of that into the equation and concluding that Cruz will be far less productive than Smith, who was a solid fantasy WR2 and an every-week starter.

Maybe we're confusing each other. Both are marginal starters at their respective positions; not in competition with one another. The only thing Ballard clearly will beat Cruz in (and this is not meant to drive any FF starting decision since they play different positions) is the mean and projected variance of snap%, projected target growth/contraction and variance of targets; and that was brought up only because Ballard's emergence in that area was a "more new" take-away from the Giants/Seahwaks game. It doesnt take away and/or should not be directly compared to Cruz. Apologies if I implied that it should.

 

[drew726]

3/110/26/98/08/161/1yeah, it's just a fluke that he's averaging 100+ and a touchdown over three games. let's talk about tight ends.

Once is an occurrence, twice is a coincidence, and three times is a pattern.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

(and, guess what, hours later the press corps agreed with me yet again)

Are you really patting yourself on the back for noticing the box score? lol... I've played FF long enough to know 1 weeks worth of production could be the start of many weeks to come, but more often is just blip, in this case for a TE, an already very inconsistent position.Are you so new to this that you don't understand how sports media works? We get 5ooo articles every off season about whether or not Brett Farve will play again. These guys write as if they are starved to break some new story.. A guy comes out of nowhere to post 70yrds and a TD, he's getting a write up.. That's just how it is. Doesn't mean he's the second coming.. On the other side of that coin, any bit of perceived negativity will generate an article as well. How many INT's do we have every week? SOMEONE is undoubtedly at fault for every single one of them, yet different from all other INT situations in the league, we should focus differently on the slip by Victor Cruz that puts him out of position to make the play... Sports writers love controversy, or drastic contrast.. They will build the story.. They ask all the right questions in order to get one response they can expound on, or exaggerate into what best writes a story for them. Cruz has been a dynamic play maker the last 3 weeks/the contrast is that slip on a timing route, that put him out of position to make a play, allowing the INT which along with a million other variables in the game contributed to the Giants loss...You seem to have a lot to say about a play you still haven't admitted to seeing yet.. Did you even see the play?Hilarious to me that you seem to suggest it'll be a toss up between Ballard and Cruz ..And the question I asked, that you conveniently dodged, Which would you rather have on your roster? Ballard as one of your TE (or WR if your league allows), or Cruz as one of your WR's..? You have 1 open roster spot, and they are your only available options on the waiver wire. Which do you pick?My contention with your debate here is that you don't seem to make a cogent argument that has any FF impact or merit.. You seem to, in a series of back peddling statements, have landed yourself on a platform of "Ballard will see more snaps".. You haven't provided anything substantial as fuel for this argument.. And you haven't made any clear statement about how this might effect FF.. Pretty much useless discussion..

 

[Hoosier16]

You seem to have a lot to say about a play you still haven't admitted to seeing yet.. Did you even see the play?

He's getting hammered for tipping the ball but the funny thing about that play is that if he hadn't tipped it, it would have been caught cleanly by the defender. I heard a radio guy (can't remember who) making the point that Manning was going to be upset at himself when he saw the film. Apparently, Bradshaw was wide open on the other side of the field. The positive for Cruz on that play was that Manning was looking for him in a crucial situation and threw into double coverage instead of looking for a better option.

 

[Tango]

(and, guess what, hours later the press corps agreed with me yet again)

Are you really patting yourself on the back for noticing the box score? lol... I've played FF long enough to know 1 weeks worth of production could be the start of many weeks to come, but more often is just blip, in this case for a TE, an already very inconsistent position.

Nope, sorry Im not. Yup, might be a blip. I said Ballard might crack a lineup.

Are you so new to this that you don't understand how sports media works? We get 5ooo articles every off season about whether or not Brett Farve will play again. These guys write as if they are starved to break some new story.. A guy comes out of nowhere to post 70yrds and a TD, he's getting a write up.. That's just how it is. Doesn't mean he's the second coming..

How do you get "second coming" from me asserting he might crack a lineup? Wow.

On the other side of that coin, any bit of perceived negativity will generate an article as well. How many INT's do we have every week? SOMEONE is undoubtedly at fault for every single one of them, yet different from all other INT situations in the league, we should focus differently on the slip by Victor Cruz that puts him out of position to make the play...

So what? he's a goat and a hero. The events that drive that label are worthy of discussion. Sorry...

Sports writers love controversy, or drastic contrast.. They will build the story.. They ask all the right questions in order to get one response they can expound on, or exaggerate into what best writes a story for them. Cruz has been a dynamic play maker the last 3 weeks/the contrast is that slip on a timing route, that put him out of position to make a play, allowing the INT which along with a million other variables in the game contributed to the Giants loss...

Look, he screwed up a couple/few times and he's a goat right now as much as he is a hero; if not more a goat because they lost. That doesnt mean he'll screw up again, but ignoring it as an aberration when it's happened two/three times is just silly. No different than ignoring his points produced over the last few weeks is silly.

You seem to have a lot to say about a play you still haven't admitted to seeing yet.. Did you even see the play?

Yes, of course in full live and in replay.

Hilarious to me that you seem to suggest it'll be a toss up between Ballard and Cruz ..

schtick? please read my last post very slowly for clarification or just skip down below.

And the question I asked, that you conveniently dodged, Which would you rather have on your roster? Ballard as one of your TE (or WR if your league allows), or Cruz as one of your WR's..? You have 1 open roster spot, and they are your only available options on the waiver wire. Which do you pick?

Not dodging this at all. Of course Cruz; you really need to go read the posts dude. You're wasting your time.

My contention with your debate here is that you don't seem to make a cogent argument that has any FF impact or merit.. You seem to, in a series of back peddling statements, have landed yourself on a platform of "Ballard will see more snaps".. You haven't provided anything substantial as fuel for this argument.. And you haven't made any clear statement about how this might effect FF.. Pretty much useless discussion..

For the love of god...READ...you're so off base here that it hurts. I'm sure your gleeful XX,000-post internet buddies will engage in some school-yard tantrums to support you, but if you dont read the posts then we arent going to get very far here. So instead Ill try to summarize the conclusions for you:

[*]I'm not starting Cruz every week as I think his snap%, targets and production/snap or /target will trend back downward

[*]The Ballard discussion has nothing to do with a fantasy comparison with Cruz, it had to do with the relative value of the news coming out of the Giants game;

There is all sorts of support for my opinion on #1 above, let's see if you can muster a decent argument for Cruz's snap%/targets/ and production per snap to stay close to steady or improve. There are plenty of valid arguments there for you to make, but I have a feeling you wont be going down that road...

 

[Carolina Hustler]

[*]I'm not starting Cruz every week as I think his snap%, targets and production/snap or /target will trend back downward

[*]The Ballard discussion has nothing to do with a fantasy comparison with Cruz, it had to do with the relative value of the news coming out of the Giants game;

Make a prediction.. All I read is wish wash.... Backed up with nothing...Cruz' targets will trend downward? From 11? LOL, is that such an incite-full prediction? Guess what, Cruz was able to produce over 100 yards and 2 TD's with only 5 targets week 3..

So, with only 5 targets Cruz is capable of producing 110 and 2 TD's.. Right? And in 5 games, he has 29 targets, equaling 5.8 targets per game. This includes 2 games at the start of the season, before his breakout, where he only received 2 targets in each game (game1 and game2)..

I think it's reasonable to assume his average will be around 5 targets a week based on the above, and I think it's reasonable to project an average of 5tgt 4rec 65yrd .5td

64rec on 80tgt for 1040yrd and 8TDs (numbers good enough to land him the WR18 spot in PPR leagues both in 2010, and 2009)

He's averaged 5.8 targets so far, you say he'll trend down, I'm taking that as you predicting Cruz will average less than 5.8 by the end of the season.. You predicting an injury? Trend down to what? 5? Are you really basing your argument on what could land Cruz the WR18 spot this season rather than WR10?

Your argument so far has produced nothing useful.. On top of lacking merit..

Edit to add:

If Ballard wasn't brought into the subject to debate Cruz' #'s, then maybe that's a subject for a different thread (a Ballard thread? NY Giants thread?, a TE thread?). You do see how someone might open a Cruz thread looking for info relating to Cruz', his stats, and his projected future starts right? So when you introduce Ballard to the Cruz thread, it's implied that you are in some way making a point on how it relates to or effects Cruz..

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Rotoworld's take on Ballard:

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/6310/jake-ballard

Ballard and Manning are starting to find a groove. He's slow, but is willing to push the seam and carried defenders a la Mark Bavaro today. However, Ballard's best trait is blocking and Travis Beckum will normally act as the Giants' pass-catching tight end. We're not making an add

 

[JuniorNB]

[*]I'm not starting Cruz every week as I think his snap%, targets and production/snap or /target will trend back downward

[*]The Ballard discussion has nothing to do with a fantasy comparison with Cruz, it had to do with the relative value of the news coming out of the Giants game;

Make a prediction.. All I read is wish wash.... Backed up with nothing...Cruz' targets will trend downward? From 11? LOL, is that such an incite-full prediction? Guess what, Cruz was able to produce over 100 yards and 2 TD's with only 5 targets week 3..

So, with only 5 targets Cruz is capable of producing 110 and 2 TD's.. Right? And in 5 games, he has 29 targets, equaling 5.8 targets per game. This includes 2 games at the start of the season, before his breakout, where he only received 2 targets in each game (game1 and game2)..

I think it's reasonable to assume his average will be around 5 targets a week based on the above, and I think it's reasonable to project an average of 5tgt 4rec 65yrd .5td

64rec on 80tgt for 1040yrd and 8TDs (numbers good enough to land him the WR18 spot in PPR leagues both in 2010, and 2009)

He's averaged 5.8 targets so far, you say he'll trend down, I'm taking that as you predicting Cruz will average less than 5.8 by the end of the season.. You predicting an injury? Trend down to what? 5? Are you really basing your argument on what could land Cruz the WR18 spot this season rather than WR10?

Your argument so far has produced nothing useful.. On top of lacking merit..

Edit to add:

If Ballard wasn't brought into the subject to debate Cruz' #'s, then maybe that's a subject for a different thread (a Ballard thread? NY Giants thread?, a TE thread?). You do see how someone might open a Cruz thread looking for info relating to Cruz', his stats, and his projected future starts right? So when you introduce Ballard to the Cruz thread, it's implied that you are in some way making a point on how it relates to or effects Cruz..

I highly doubt you'll get him to make a concrete prediction. Tango seems like he may be Manningham's lover and is bitter that Cruz is obvioulsly outplaying him.To suggest Cruz was the goat Sunday is ridiculous. Did he notice the guy's stats? And on the interception, Cruz slipped coming out of his break which caused Manning's pass to be too far in front of him. Cruz made a great effort to get a hand on it. Things happen. Nobody's fault.