http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer...ng-bids-for-giants-wide-receiver-hakeen-nicks Reality is with 2 teams in the discussion, they will get at least a 2nd rounder and other picks. If there are 3-4 teams going for him, I can see him bringing back a first. GM's big against each other and their competitiveness comes out. If Richardson got a 1 who isn't even that good, Nicks will do the same if there is a bidding war even if he's a UFA at the end of the season.
I've maintained all along that the Giants could get at least a #2 from the Patriots for Nicks, and seeing now that Gronk's status seems to be iffy, perhaps they could get a #1, OR a #2 and a #3. Throw in the 49ers as a possible trade partner, and I think a #1 and a #3 could be had. People forget that very good teams are DESPERATE to win the SB when they feel they have most pieces in place. The Giants have won 2 SBs recently when they've simply gotten freakishly hot at the end of those seasons, after under-performing for the majority of those seasons. For teams like the Patriots - it's been almost 10 years despite being right there each year; the 49ers almost 20 years.
Absolutely Vette. Especially a team like NE who knows it can't get to the SuperBowl with that crappy WR core and their QB is 37 with only a few years left. Not to mention a San Fran team who is going to have to pay a ton of players soon who they can't afford and will lose to FA. I really believe San Fran will target Nicks, offer up a first and 3rd, then go all out to sign him and dump Manningham and Crabtree in the off-season for picks. It's not a bad plan if they can sign him.
Packers had 2 receivers go down today - now there is a 3rd contending team that might make a deal for Nicks.
I'm telling you, teams will be in a feeding frenzy for him. The Giants are going to cleanup if they deal him.
Nicks and Rolle would be very attractive trade pieces right. We got 3 teams on this thread already that are really good and need a receiver like Nicks - think Denver would not want Rolle at S instead of that bum who gave up that 70 yard hail mary in the playoff loss to the Ravens last year? It's year's like this where the Giants can reload that much quicker if they don't stupidly talk themselves into thinking they are still in it.
Great QB but it's amazing how lucky the Pats are. Being in a crappy division for over a decade and some of these wins they get where teams shoot themselves in the foot. Mind boggling.
There are quite a few SIGNIFICANT differences between Richardson and Nicks though... 1.) Nicks has NEVER played a full season and is injury prone... You know it, I know it, the Giants know it, and it would be extremely naive to believe that the future team he hopefully get's traded to doesn't know it... Richardson has missed 1 game so far... 2.) Nicks has 10 games left this season... Richardson at the time of the trade had an almost a full 3 seasons left on his contract. 14 games for this year, 16 each for the next two years... 46 games vs 10... that is a significant difference. 3.) Richardson has already had the vast majority of his contract paid by Cleavland and was only due a remaining $6,602,671 (see below)($1,165,901 for the remainder of 2013, $2,252,708 for 2014, and $3,184,062 for 2015. Nicks on the other hand has a total of $3,705,000 this year... prorate that out to a remaining 10 games and he is still owed $2,315,625 ($231,562.50/game). So Richardson would get paid less for the 14 games this year or the 16 games next year compared to 10 for Nicks... 4.) Now NE has the cap space, Packers have the space, but 49ers may or may not depending on the reports you read... So 2 of 3 have the cap space, 1, not so sure... 5.) Richardson won't be getting a new deal until 2016 which is far too early to tell what it could be worth as it depends on 3 YEARS of performance.... Nicks has been reportedly seeking a deal worth ~$10M/year... According to http://overthecap.com/contract-year-serieshakeem-nicks/ "Competing for WR free agent money in the offseason will be Kenny Britt of the Tennessee Titans and Jeremy Maclin of the Philadelphia Eagles. If Nicks can put up a full season of solid production I can see him in the getting paid as a Top 10 WR. If the Giants choose to franchise him after the season, he will cost $11mm for one year. Even if he has a terrible season, given his age and talent, he will command a minimum of $6mm APY. Estimated New Contract: 5 years, $47.5mm" That would be $9.5M/year... So if they signed him to a long term deal, he'd make at the least $6M/year, and if not, at least $11M for a year... Nicks has been above average this year, yes, but not by all that much and quite a bit lower than the best... So you are asking a trade partner to take on $2,315,625 for this year with the possibility of anywhere between $6M and $11M/year if they were able to retain him or the possibility of not retaining him and you want a 1st and possibly more? REALLY??? Financial implications of the Richardson trade: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/financial-implications-trent-richardson-trade-170054556--nfl.html Nicks current contract breakdown: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-york-giants/hakeem-nicks/
I think you are overestimating Nicks as well as the ability of Jerry Reese to bring in something to the level you think will happen (if even anything at all) for Nicks. Should he get traded, absolutely... but again, we are talking about Jerry Reese here...
Hammer, lots of stats but pretty much all worthless information. There are only three facts that matter. One, Nicks is a top player at his position and Richardson until proven otherwise sucks at his. Two, Nicks dominated the playoffs when the Giants won the SuperBowl. Richards sucks at his position until proven otherwise. Three, this is a passing league and WR's have incredible value. Running backs don't and Richardson sucks until proven otherwise.
worthless stats? really? This league is ruled by money... Is Richardson top of his game? no, not even close, BUT Nicks had one great year... only 1 in which he had more than 10 TD's... only 2 seasons with more than 1000 yards... last year there were 19 receivers and 1 TE with 1000 or more yards... Nicks not among them... 10 players with 10 or more TD's last year, Nicks not among them... in 2011 there were 17 receivers and 2 TEs with 1000 or more yards... Nicks had 11 above him... 5 players with 10 or more TD's last year, Nicks not among them... in 2010 there were 16 receivers and 1 TE with 1000 or more yards... Nicks had 12 above him... 10 players with 10 or more TD's last year, Nicks not among them... Nicks in the 2011 post season had 4 TD's in 4 games... good, but not jaw dropping... 100+ yards/game, but 28 receptions in 43 targets.. that's 65%... again, not spectacular... a little better than his career rate of 58%... Nicks isn't even the best receiver on our team, let alone in the league... love him, want good things for him, but he ain't getting a #1
Hakeem Nicks on rumors: 'I'm a Giant' New York Giants wide receiver Hakeem Nicks said he is aware that his name has come up in trade rumors, but so far no one in the organization has said anything to him about it and, as of now, he expects to finish the season with the team. "I'm a Giant, and that's the only thing I can focus on right now," Nicks said after practice Monday morning. "I'm a Giant, and I love playing for the Giants. I'm a Giant right now, and I'm going to stand strong on that." Nicks is in the final year of his contract. The team signed wide receiver Victor Cruz to a long-term deal in the offseason and has made second-year wide receiver Rueben Randle a significant part of the passing game, even as he continues to develop. Randle has been targeted 43 times to Nicks' 46 and Cruz's 60. Read more http://espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/story/_/id/9824383/hakeem-nicks-new-york-giants-heard-trade-rumors
Re: Hakeem Nicks on rumors: 'I'm a Giant' Another example of Richardson sucking last night. Guy is pretty much worthless.
