Monk V. Irvin

[sacase]

marvin harrison is one hell of a 'possession receiver'. he 'only' averages 13.3 YPC ....over 10 seasons and still in his prime. monks 16 year career average is 13.5.

and, i think your numbers are a little off as far as monk vs irvin. irvin had to retire 4 games into his 12th season- his numbers were declining. so did monks near the end of his career, so i think its fair to compare both through their first 12 seasons rather than taking monks 16 year career totals and using them to make comparisons. i did that below.




i'll break it down further.

over 12 seasons-

monk- 63.49 yards per game
irvin- 74.86 ypg

largent averaged about 65. swann and stallworth both averaged right around 50.

and swann, who you have argued for deserving of his spot in the hall, isnt even top 50 all time in yards, receptions, or receiving TD's.

another stat-

monk- .35 TD's per game
irvin- .41 TD's per game

is that a big difference to you? harrison averages .71, and rice averages .65. that would be a big difference to me, but .06 of a percentage doesnt seem like much.

my only point in bringing up these comparisons is that monk and irvin are alot closer statistically than some are making it seem. and again, who here would take monks qb's over aikman? ok.

again- both should be in. monk has the records, irvin doesnt. but, both were great.

Marvin Harrison also scored 110 TD's BIG difference as well as been to 7 Pro Bowls.

Why would you take the first 12 seasons? That makes NO sense. You divide the total number of TD's and yards by games played. Monk played in 65 more games. He had 65 more chances. Who knows what Irvin would have done with 65 more chances Quit trying to make the numbers say what you want.


Monk: 224 games 12721 yards and 68 TD's come out to:

56.79 YPG
.30 TD's Per Game

Irvin 159 Games 11904 yards and 65 TD's:

74.86 YPG
.40 TD's Per Game

Now if monk played in 159 games with those averages there here is what you get. This is the correct way to do it, not a biased way since monk had more chances to have good games.

9029 yards total
48 TD's

There is it. Monk just was not that good.

 

[riggo]

Marvin Harrison also scored 110 TD's BIG difference as well as been to 7 Pro Bowls.

Why would you take the first 12 seasons? That makes NO sense. You divide the total number of TD's and yards by games played. Monk played in 65 more games. He had 65 more chances. Who knows what Irvin would have done with 65 more chances Quit trying to make the numbers say what you want.


Monk: 224 games 12721 yards and 68 TD's come out to:

56.79 YPG
.30 TD's Per Game

Irvin 159 Games 11904 yards and 65 TD's:

74.86 YPG
.40 TD's Per Game

Now if monk played in 159 games with those averages there here is what you get. This is the correct way to do it, not a biased way since monk had more chances to have good games.

9029 yards total
48 TD's

There is it. Monk just was not that good.

the reason i broke it down to 12 seasons was that irvin was forced to retire 4 games into his 12th season. his numbers declined a bit- in part due to not having a QB of aikmans caliber- but he was on the downside of a great career. i think we can agree that had irvin played 4 more seasons, his numbers would not be what they were in his prime. it happens to everyone. it happened to monk. so if you use career totals to come up with a stat about how a WR did on a game by game basis, of course its to irvins benefit that he had to retire early before he had mediocre seasons. his averages will be better than if he continued to play. taking the first 12 seasons when one WR has retired at that point is a more accurate way to compare 2 WR's in this case.

 

[sacase]

the reason i broke it down to 12 seasons was that irvin was forced to retire 4 games into his 12th season. his numbers declined a bit- in part due to not having a QB of aikmans caliber- but he was on the downside of a great career. i think we can agree that had irvin played 4 more seasons, his numbers would not be what they were in his prime. it happens to everyone. it happened to monk. so if you use career totals to come up with a stat about how a WR did on a game by game basis, of course its to irvins benefit that he had to retire early before he had mediocre seasons. his averages will be better than if he continued to play. taking the first 12 seasons when one WR has retired at that point is a more accurate way to compare 2 WR's in this case.

Riggo, come off if it. Irvin still put up a 1000 yard season the year prior to him being hurt. Quit Trying to Cherry pick numbers to benifit Monk. He had more chances. Just because it didn't work into his favor doesn't mean you should ignore them. For all we know irvin could have put up 2 more 1000 yard seasons.

 

[riggo]

Monk's stats are padded because of his 16 years in the league plain and simple.

monk had 801 catches for almost 11,000 yards at the end of his 12th year. between his 13th and 16th seasons, he caught 139 balls for 1737 yards.

here are the all time leaders in yards-

1. J Rice 22895
2. T Brown 14934
3. J Lofton 14004
4. C Carter 13899
5. H Ellard 13777
6. A Reed 13198
7. S Largent 13089
8. I Fryar 12785
9. A Monk 12721
10. *M Harrison 12331

and the all time leaders in receptions.

1. J Rice 1549
2. C Carter 1101
3. T Brown 1094
4. A Reed 951
5. A Monk 940
6. *M Harrison 927
7. *J Smith 862
8. I Fryar 851
9. L Centers 826
10. *K McCardell 825

all but one of those players- largent- retired after monk. and all of those players, except largent and those still playing, played at least 16 seasons. monk would currently be 15th and 16th in those categories had he stopped playing after 12 seasons.

so, no, his stats arent padded due to his 16 years in the league.

 

[sacase]

Wether you like it or not Monk is considered a Modern Era reciever. He was a possesion reciever that no one had to game plan for and that no one feared. He didn't even score alot and he never came up big in the superbowl. He does not belong in the Hall of Fame.

 

[Vintage]

Doesn't matter.

Monk will go to the HOF befor Irvin does....there is so much uproar over Monk not going.

And I question whether or not Irvin gets in either...not that he isn't deserving, but bec. of politics involved.

 

[riggo]

Riggo, come off if it. Irvin still put up a 1000 yard season the year prior to him being hurt. Quit Trying to Cherry pick numbers to benifit Monk. He had more chances. Just because it didn't work into his favor doesn't mean you should ignore them. For all we know irvin could have put up 2 more 1000 yard seasons.

i dont disagree that irvin could have put up 2 more 1,000 yard season, but its unlikely given how he was playing before he got hurt- 4 games, 167 yards. when aikman retired the following year, he was having a very bad year.

i dont think you'll find a poster on this board who will agree with your position that monks 4+ extra years in the league can benefit him when analyzing WR's on a game by game average. its exactly the opposite. only barry bonds puts up better numbers in the latter stages of a sports career.

i've been arguing that monks and irvins #s are very similar thru the first 12 years of their career. thats not disputable. neither is the fact that irvin had a far better QB and RB- hall of famers- for nearly his entire playing career. not surprisingly, nobody has addressed that point.

again, i take nothing away from irvin. but to act like monk was so far beneath him, or to say the he is not hall of fame worthy goes against the stats and the facts.

 

[Vintage]

So wait, having Clark on your team hindered (stats wise) what Monk could have done...

But us having Emmitt, is a benefit?

Either having Clark helped Monk by creating more single coverages...and likewise, us having Emmitt helped create more opportunities for Irvin...

or...

Having Clark took away opportunities for Monk....and us having Emmitt took away opportunites for Irvin.

Its not pick and choose...its one or the other.

 

[riggo]

He didn't even score alot

i already posted the fact that he scored 60 TD's in 12 seasons. irvin scored 65. i guess irvin 'didnt even score alot'?

(and irvin wasnt even a possession guy, thus his numbers should be higher....)

you're just not going to get it.

 

[The30YardSlant]

i already posted the fact that he scored 60 TD's in 12 seasons. irvin scored 65. i guess irvin 'didnt even score alot'?

(and irvin wasnt even a possession guy, thus his numbers should be higher....)

you're just not going to get it.

Michael Irvin wasnt a possesion WR?

 

[riggo]

So wait, having Clark on your team hindered (stats wise) what Monk could have done...

But us having Emmitt, is a benefit?

Either having Clark helped Monk by creating more single coverages...and likewise, us having Emmitt helped create more opportunities for Irvin...

or...

Having Clark took away opportunities for Monk....and us having Emmitt took away opportunites for Irvin.

Its not pick and choose...its one or the other.

vintage, they're apples and oranges, but i do understand what youre saying.

having emmitt - a RB- certainly helped irvin. you have to bring up a safety or corner to account for him.

clark could take away coverage, which he did, but he could also take away receptions and yards just as he could add to them by taking away coverage. as far as arguing numbers, it could work either way. in reality, your speed guy- clark- is going to draw double coverage more often than your short guy. monk would likely have put up similar numbers no matter who else was on the other side as he wasnt the speed guy.

btw- i think irvin gets in before monk. too many monk haters on the voting committee.

 

[riggo]

Michael Irvin wasnt a possesion WR?

not in my opinion.

irvins worst season was equal to keyshawns best season as far as YPC.

so, no, irvin was not a possession guy.

 

[Vintage]

vintage, they're apples and oranges, but i do understand what youre saying.

having emmitt - a RB- certainly helped irvin. you have to bring up a safety or corner to account for him.

clark could take away coverage, which he did, but he could also take away receptions and yards just as he could add to them by taking away coverage. as far as arguing numbers, it could work either way. in reality, your speed guy- clark- is going to draw double coverage more often than your short guy. monk would likely have put up similar numbers no matter who else was on the other side as he wasnt the speed guy.

Yes, because when we built up first half leads and then just ran the ball in the second half....that didn't take away from Irvin at all.

Not one bit.

 

[The30YardSlant]

not in my opinion.

Plaxico Burress is not a posession receiver, not in my opinion anyway

 

[Vintage]

Riggo: I can't figure out if you actually believe what you are saying...or if you are trying to convince yourself as well as the rest of us (such as when I walk into a golf store and buy something, having to explain to whoever is with me that I need it for x,y,and z reasons, when in reality, I am just trying to convince myself to buy it).

 

[Vintage]

Plaxico Burress is not a posession receiver, not in my opinion anyway

What do you define as a possession reciever?

 

[sacase]

vintage, they're apples and oranges, but i do understand what youre saying.

having emmitt - a RB- certainly helped irvin. you have to bring up a safety or corner to account for him.

clark could take away coverage, which he did, but he could also take away receptions and yards just as he could add to them by taking away coverage. as far as arguing numbers, it could work either way. in reality, your speed guy- clark- is going to draw double coverage more often than your short guy. monk would likely have put up similar numbers no matter who else was on the other side as he wasnt the speed guy.

btw- i think irvin gets in before monk. too many monk haters on the voting committee.

Just like having Smith took away chances Irvin had to score.

 

[The30YardSlant]

What do you define as a possession reciever?

Sarcasm my friend

 

[Vintage]

Sarcasm my friend

No way.

It alluded me.

Seriously; what do you define as a possession reciever? I wasn't joking when I asked you to define it.

 

[Vintage]

not in my opinion.

irvins worst season was equal to keyshawns best season as far as YPC.

so, no, irvin was not a possession guy.

You too, what do you define as a possession WR?