if it came to it - steve smith, or roy williams

[ScipioCowboy]

agreed, but barring injury that's 2-3 years away. so the real question to me is who's a better fit for those 2 years.

a speedy glenn replacement more suited to the role?
a younger up and coming star who's not but will be here later. hopefully?

still thinking on my end, btw. i refuse to answer yet!

Smith is a better a complement for Owens over the next two years if the following circumstances remain constant for the next two years:

1) Both Smith and Owens maintain their current level of the play.

2) Williams remains stagnant.

In my opinion, the chance of both remaining unchanged is unlikely.

Now, consider these propositions:

1) Acquiring Smith provides potentially the best possible fix for the next two seasons.

2) Acquiring Williams provides potentially the second best possible fix for the next two years and the best possible fix for the next 7 or 8 years.

Which one is preferable?

 

[Idgit]

Smith is a better a complement for Owens over the next two years if the following circumstances remain constant for the next two years:

1) Both Smith and Owens maintain their current level of the play.

2) Williams remains stagnant.

In my opinion, the chance of both remaining unchanged is unlikely.

Now, consider these propositions:

1) Acquiring Smith provides potentially the best possible fix for the next two seasons.

2) Acquiring Williams provides potentially the second best possible fix for the next two years and the best possible fix for the next 7 or 8 years.

Which one is preferable?

I don't buy proposition 2, but I'd prefer one anyway.

 

[zack]

He's not faster then Smith.....

Are you kidding? Steve Smith. He is much better, would be an excellent compliment. RW is slower than TO.

 

[Romo2Dez4six]

Smith is great. Roy is above average. smith hands down

 

[PosterChild]

Smith is a better a complement for Owens over the next two years if the following circumstances remain constant for the next two years:

1) Both Smith and Owens maintain their current level of the play.

2) Williams remains stagnant.

In my opinion, the chance of both remaining unchanged is unlikely.

Now, consider these propositions:

1) Acquiring Smith provides potentially the best possible fix for the next two seasons.

2) Acquiring Williams provides potentially the second best possible fix for the next two years and the best possible fix for the next 7 or 8 years.

Which one is preferable?

I'd buy prop #1, but as I've said, dude is trouble. He's kinda scary.

Thus give me 2, please. He ain't T.O. and isn't the better compliment betwixt the two choices but he's still very good.

 

[djtavo]

I would go steve smith, i think his more physical and has great hands.

 

[BAT]

Even if you don't like Steve Smith's proven play, you still gotta love his contract.


Jerry would do back flips to get the guy, believe it.

 

[JohnL2288]

we don't just have a 2 year window......we have a young QB with many years ahead of him, young RBs with loads of potential, a star TE with several years left. The only position we ar "old" at is WR because of Owens.....Roy could replace him and hopefully we will have drafted a compliment for him by the time T.O. is ready to hang 'em up

 

[JohnL2288]

I would take either......but, my only concern would be that IMO Smith is an egotistical, selfish player who would have a difficult time playing second fiddle to T.O.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

I don't buy proposition 2, but I'd prefer one anyway.

So, in your view, there's no possible way that acquiring Williams would provide the best set of circumstances at receiver over the next seven or eight years?

I disagree.

Williams is one of the top young receivers in the league, and of all possible candidates, he seems the most attainable.

 

[RainMan]

The real question is what are you willing to give up for Smith? After failed attempts to land other stars (simply because they're not on the market), how much would you sweeten the pot to land Smith?

A first? A first and a third? Doubt this is the sort of scenario where Carolina would unload him for a deal that is favorable to us just for the sake of ridding themselves of him.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Steve Smith by a long margin. I'm sure quite a few, and I didn't read the five pages of replies so I don't know how many, if any, don't like Steve now cause of this recent fight with his teammate but I don't care about that particular situation because I wasn't there, I don't know what went on, and I'm not about to try and say it's all Smith's fault without knowing what went down and why he did what he did.

So, yeah, I'd take Steve over Roy any day.

 

[Dorsettfan4life]

Roy Williams...youth for the future!!!!

 

[jobberone]

Steve Smith

Receiving
Year Team G Rec Yds Avg Yds/G Lng TD 20+ 40+ 1st FUM
2007 Carolina Panthers 15 87 1,002 11.5 66.8 74T 7 9 4 43 1

2006 Carolina Panthers 14 83 1,166 14.0 83.3 72T 8 17 4 51 0

2005 Carolina Panthers 16 103 1,563 15.2 97.7 80T 12 22 7 70 1

2004 Carolina Panthers 1 6 60 10.0 60.0 15 0 0 0 4 0

2003 Carolina Panthers 16 88 1,110 12.6 69.4 67T 7 16 4 48 2

2002 Carolina Panthers 15 54 872 16.1 58.1 69 3 18 4 33 1

2001 Carolina Panthers 15 10 154 15.4 10.3 33 0 2 0 8 0

TOTAL 92 431 5,927 13.8 64.4 80 37 84 23 257 5



Roy Williams

Receiving
Year Team G Rec Yds Avg Yds/G Lng TD 20+ 40+ 1st FUM
2007 Detroit Lions 12 64 838 13.1 69.8 91T 5 11 4 34 2

2006 Detroit Lions 16 82 1,310 16.0 81.9 60T 7 24 3 66 2

2005 Detroit Lions 13 45 687 15.3 52.8 51T 8 12 4 31 0

2004 Detroit Lions 14 54 817 15.1 58.4 46 8 15 2 34 1

TOTAL 55 245 3,652 14.9 66.4 91 28 62 13 165 5

Williams 62TD 55games 1.13TD/game 1TD/4catches
Smith 92TD 92games 0.88TD/game 1TD/5Catches


Williams 245catches 3652yds 14.9yd/catch 66.4yd/game
Smith 431catches 5927yds 13.8yd/catch 64.4yd/game


Not a lot of difference in age. Williams born 12/81 and smith 5/79. Looks like Williams is the better receiver on paper. Surprised me.

 

[RainMan]

Steve Smith

Receiving
Year Team G Rec Yds Avg Yds/G Lng TD 20+ 40+ 1st FUM
2007 Carolina Panthers 15 87 1,002 11.5 66.8 74T 7 9 4 43 1

2006 Carolina Panthers 14 83 1,166 14.0 83.3 72T 8 17 4 51 0

2005 Carolina Panthers 16 103 1,563 15.2 97.7 80T 12 22 7 70 1

2004 Carolina Panthers 1 6 60 10.0 60.0 15 0 0 0 4 0

2003 Carolina Panthers 16 88 1,110 12.6 69.4 67T 7 16 4 48 2

2002 Carolina Panthers 15 54 872 16.1 58.1 69 3 18 4 33 1

2001 Carolina Panthers 15 10 154 15.4 10.3 33 0 2 0 8 0

TOTAL 92 431 5,927 13.8 64.4 80 37 84 23 257 5



Roy Williams

Receiving
Year Team G Rec Yds Avg Yds/G Lng TD 20+ 40+ 1st FUM
2007 Detroit Lions 12 64 838 13.1 69.8 91T 5 11 4 34 2

2006 Detroit Lions 16 82 1,310 16.0 81.9 60T 7 24 3 66 2

2005 Detroit Lions 13 45 687 15.3 52.8 51T 8 12 4 31 0

2004 Detroit Lions 14 54 817 15.1 58.4 46 8 15 2 34 1

TOTAL 55 245 3,652 14.9 66.4 91 28 62 13 165 5

Williams 62TD 55games 1.13TD/game 1TD/4catches
Smith 92TD 92games 0.88TD/game 1TD/5Catches


Williams 245catches 3652yds 14.9yd/catch 66.4yd/game
Smith 431catches 5927yds 13.8yd/catch 64.4yd/game


Not a lot of difference in age. Williams born 12/81 and smith 5/79. Looks like Williams is the better receiver on paper. Surprised me.

Smith's rookie season significantly weighs down his career averages, I would imagine. No disrespect, but I don't know that I buy the assertion that a guy who has had 1,000-yard season is "better on paper" than a guy who has posted four 1,000-yard seasons in the last five years. Smith had an uneventful and meaningless rookie season that throws your numbers comparison out of whack.

 

[sonnyboy]

Smith is a better a complement for Owens over the next two years if the following circumstances remain constant for the next two years:

1) Both Smith and Owens maintain their current level of the play.

2) Williams remains stagnant.

In my opinion, the chance of both remaining unchanged is unlikely.

Now, consider these propositions:

1) Acquiring Smith provides potentially the best possible fix for the next two seasons.

2) Acquiring Williams provides potentially the second best possible fix for the next two years and the best possible fix for the next 7 or 8 years.

Which one is preferable?

Roy Williams' DOB 12/20/1981

Steve Smith's DOB 5/12/1979

Now I'm no math expert, but I believe this means Smith is 2.5 years older than Williams.

So why is Williams expected to play 5 to 6 more years than Smith?

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Roy Williams' DOB 12/20/1981

Steve Smith's DOB 5/12/1979

Now I'm no math expert, but I believe this means Smith is 2.5 years older than Williams.

So why is Williams expected to play 5 to 6 more years than Smith?

You needn't be a math expert, but you do need to read the entire exchange in context.

When I assert that Smith "provides the best possible fix for the next two seasons," I'm accounting for the ages of both Smith and Owens, who will be in his late 30s after two years--the age that most receivers show a noticeable decline.

In my very next sentence, I make a similar statement regarding the pairing of Williams and Owens: "Acquiring Williams provides potentially the second best possible fix for the next two years and the best possible fix for the next seven or eight years." Once again, my statement accounts for the advancing age of Owens, and then considers the prospect of life post-Owens.

I never stated that Williams will play 5 to 6 years longer than Smith; I simply think Williams is more likely to play 7 or 8 more years than Smith for two reasons:

1) Williams will be 33/34 in 7 years while Smith will be 36/37.

2) Receivers such as Roy Williams, whose game is predicated largely on size and strength, seem to play at a higher level for a longer time period than receivers such as Steve Smith, whose game is predicated on speed and quickness. Case in point: Terry Glenn's career is probably finished while Owens is still playing very well.

 

[burmafrd]

Roy is younger and has more upside. He also is a better person and a better team mate.

 

[jobberone]

Smith's rookie season significantly weighs down his career averages, I would imagine. No disrespect, but I don't know that I buy the assertion that a guy who has had 1,000-yard season is "better on paper" than a guy who has posted four 1,000-yard seasons in the last five years. Smith had an uneventful and meaningless rookie season that throws your numbers comparison out of whack.

You have a good point. But others would comment I'm skewing the stats to favor the other guy if I don't include the rookie year for both. And there is a valid point there, too. There are ways to overcome that but basically they are pretty close on paper.

I haven't seen RW play enough to form a reasonable opinion at the fan level. To me Smith looks the better player on the field. Up pops the ole can't go solely by stats or subjective evaluation. You need as much input as you can get.

They're not that far apart IMO.

 

[Sarge]

When healthy, Steve Smith is a top 3 WR in the league. You couldn't pass that up. He has a good 4 years left in the tank as much as I like Roy Williams, Steve is proven, Roy not to the degree of Smith.

I'd take either as I have HUGE concerns for this team at WR.