PDA

View Full Version : A Big Reason to Keep Nicks Longterm



giantsfan420
01-12-2013, 07:27 PM
In watching the Baltimore game, I can't help but see similarities with Boldin and Nicks. Both are extremely physical and understand how to use their bodies to get separation, especially in jump ball/contested pass situations.

The only thing, Nicks is a more viable downfield threat, bc I feel Nicks has better downfield speed, and a bit more quickness. So how does that equate into signing Nicks long term? Well Nicks will be good even with age, similar with Toomer and how he was able to still be relevant into real old age in his case lol. Nicks gives us an awesome downfield/possession wr, which is similar to Toomer as well when toomer was younger. When Nicks loses a step or two over the years, he won't lose effectiveness.

I think thats a huge reason we gotta keep Nicks long term. Maybe more so than Cruz even.

RoanokeFan
01-12-2013, 07:57 PM
Nicks is giong to have a full season to show two things: 1 - he is healthy; 2 - he is the same player he was before his knee injury. He does that, we'll be talking about him being worth it this time next year as we are about Cruz this year.

Flip Empty
01-12-2013, 09:06 PM
You need to keep him because he's a damn good player.

Mlerman17
01-12-2013, 09:08 PM
He is a top priority injury concerns or not.

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 09:12 PM
Top 5 wr when healthy, big hands, big body, most physical WR in the NFL and is a gift Eli wants badly.

G-Men Surg.
01-12-2013, 09:55 PM
Nicks is giong to have a full season to show two things: 1 - he is healthy; 2 - he is the same player he was before his knee injury. He does that, we'll be talking about him being worth it this time next year as we are about Cruz this year.
The issue and we talked about it some days ago is if Nicks keeps proving him self he will command a huge payday and there's going to be a lot of suitors lined up. Its implied that Reese is thinking the same about Nicks playing his rookie contract out and see if health won't be an issue down the road but the danger here is that Nicks will earn his right to listen to outside offers. That been said Nicks future contract like it or not depends in how much Cruz gets aside of how the WR market shapes up next year.

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 09:58 PM
Nicks is definitely a better WR than Cruz when healthy and may command more money, the injury history will come in though and I hope he recognizes that and takes a bit less money than a team like the Bills would give him so he could play with Eli and get a few more SBs.

giantsfan420
01-12-2013, 10:09 PM
im starting to believe nicks, when healthy, is the better wr. since hes not, and cruz has played 2 straight seasons with no issues, at the moment i can understand ranking cruz ahead.

but i firmly believe now nicks could be a beast out of the slot too. just in a diff. way than cruz is. more of a m.colston/boldin/athletic TE mold...so for me, that means ur getting the most value for the buck, bc 5 yrs from now, even if nicks loses a step, he can still be a viable component of the offense. and if he stays his usual self, he's a dominant wr on the outside. i wouldnt break the bank on cruz if it mean i couldnt re-sign nicks...thats for damn sure. maybe i tag cruz, let both fight it out for the contract, develop RR and JJ, and possibly draft a WR if the values there to develop this year (sayonara barden unfortunately the nyg just wont use u) just because I feel Nicks can be effective a multitude of ways.


that said, i cant really lie, i also feel cruz has the skill set where it'll be good with time. but only thing, if he loses a step, he could be effective but more in a stokely type way. generally, the guys like the marvin harrisons, stokelys, the smaller explosive type wrs, generally when they lose that step/quickness, they become ineffective. stokely makes plays but its always almost based on a deception/veteran savvy type move. so while i could see cruz being effective, if his athleticism starts to decline, he doesnt have that physicality of nicks to where he could overcome it, imo.

gmen46
01-12-2013, 11:14 PM
im starting to believe nicks, when healthy, is the better wr. since hes not, and cruz has played 2 straight seasons with no issues, at the moment i can understand ranking cruz ahead.

but i firmly believe now nicks could be a beast out of the slot too. just in a diff. way than cruz is. more of a m.colston/boldin/athletic TE mold...so for me, that means ur getting the most value for the buck, bc 5 yrs from now, even if nicks loses a step, he can still be a viable component of the offense. and if he stays his usual self, he's a dominant wr on the outside. i wouldnt break the bank on cruz if it mean i couldnt re-sign nicks...thats for damn sure. maybe i tag cruz, let both fight it out for the contract, develop RR and JJ, and possibly draft a WR if the values there to develop this year (sayonara barden unfortunately the nyg just wont use u) just because I feel Nicks can be effective a multitude of ways.


that said, i cant really lie, i also feel cruz has the skill set where it'll be good with time. but only thing, if he loses a step, he could be effective but more in a stokely type way. generally, the guys like the marvin harrisons, stokelys, the smaller explosive type wrs, generally when they lose that step/quickness, they become ineffective. stokely makes plays but its always almost based on a deception/veteran savvy type move. so while i could see cruz being effective, if his athleticism starts to decline, he doesnt have that physicality of nicks to where he could overcome it, imo.

No doubt about it. We need to keep Nicks, and for most of the reasons you laid out.

I think Cruz and Nicks bring different attributes to the game, and we've seen how Giants offense is a different animal when both are healthy and on the field, as opposed when only one of them is on the field. We need them both

I think next season Randle will also bring a 3rd dimension to the receiving posse that will--along with a healthy Nicks--make our offense the fearsome animal it was at the end of 2011.

giantsfan420
01-12-2013, 11:37 PM
No doubt about it. We need to keep Nicks, and for most of the reasons you laid out.

I think Cruz and Nicks bring different attributes to the game, and we've seen how Giants offense is a different animal when both are healthy and on the field, as opposed when only one of them is on the field. We need them both

I think next season Randle will also bring a 3rd dimension to the receiving posse that will--along with a healthy Nicks--make our offense the fearsome animal it was at the end of 2011.
unfortunately, and i say that bc i really have them 1a and 1b, the most economical way (and thats 99% of the equation id assume) to handle this is to tender Cruz with a 1rst and 3rd RFA tag, take one more season MAX (meaning making the decision before either hits FA has to be how we go about it, imagine losing both of them??), re-sign 1 long term and make sure you had developed RR and JJ/a rookie WR in the mean time...

God i hope cruz takes some sorta team friendly deal with the stipulation it means keeping nicks. something like cruz takes 6 if and only if nicks gets the same deal and both can retire giants

RagTime Blue
01-12-2013, 11:42 PM
A) Do we pay him like a Top-10 receiver if we expect him to suit up for 11 games and play like "Hakeem Nicks" in 5?
B) Will someone else??

I know those questions won't make me popular, but I assure you it's the TYPE OF THING Reese is (will be) thinking about.

gmenfan0488
01-12-2013, 11:44 PM
Sadly, there's no way we keep both Nicks and Cruz. It's not possible with the cap.

dakotajoe
01-13-2013, 01:34 AM
Well Nicks will be good even with age, similar with Toomer and how he was able to still be relevant into real old age in his case lol. When Nicks loses a step or two over the years, he won't lose effectiveness.

I think thats a huge reason we gotta keep Nicks long term. Maybe more so than Cruz even.

Given the injuries he's already had, I don't understand how he wouldn't lose effectiveness over the years. I hope he remains healthy for the rest of his career but what he has gone through already is alarming.

I love Nicks and the physicality he brings to the offense. I'm not ready to call him a top 5 WR though, not with just one 10+ TD season and no seasons over 1200 yards. That's not top 5 stats.

Randle and Nicks seem to have a similar skill set. I don't know to what extent but I'm sure we'll learn about their similarities or differences next season.