Plaxico
10 Games / 9 Starts
35 receptions
454 yards
13 yards per catch avg.
4 TD's
Hixon
16 games / 7 Starts
43 receptions
596 yards
13.9 yards per catch avg.
2 TD's
There are those that say those stats don't matter because after Plax went down, Hixon didn't do anything in our last six games...
Hixon's last six games at #1
@ Washington: 5 catches, 71 yards, 14.2 avg., long of 18
Philly (his worst): 3 catches, 30 yards, 10 avg., long of 17 (one HUGE drop)
@ Dallas: 6 catches, 60 yards, 10 avg., long of 19
Carolina: 4 catches, 71 yards, 17.8 avg., long of 40
@ Minny: 4 catches, 62 yards, 15.5 avg. 23 yard (TD)
Philly: 2 catches, 37 yards, 18.5 avg., long of 32
Plaxico's last six games as a Giant (I'll make it 7, because Plaxico didn't start against Pitt)
Cincy: 3 catches, 45 yards, 15 avg., long of 28
@ Cleveland: 4 catches, 58 yards, 14.5 avg., long of 25, TD
San Fran: 3 catches, 24 yards, 8 avg., long of 14, TD
@ Pitt (did not start): 3 catches, 15 yards, 5 avg., long of 8
Dallas: 3 catches, 34 yards, 11.3 avg., long of 22
@ Philly: 1 catch, 17 yards, TD
Baltimore: 3 catches, 43 yards, 15.7 average, long of 21
I also threw out his last game vs. Arizona because he really didn't play at all, even though he started. He may have played one series.
Okay, so now, the averages.
Hixon's per game average over the last six games
4 catches per game
55 yards per game
.16 TD's per game
Plaxico's per game average over his last 7 games
2.85 catches per game (less than Hixon)
33.71 yards per game (significantly less than Hixon)
.428 TD's per game
Keep in mind, that both Hixon and Plaxico had monster games, Plaxico vs. the Skins, and Hixon vs. the Seahawks that are not included, so you get a better look at the overall view. Believe it or not, Plaxico was becoming somewhat non-existant well before he shot himself.
There seems to be a strong opinion here, some would say fact, that the team dropped off BECAUSE of the loss of Plaxico. I think these stats dispute that. There is also a strong opinion that Plaxico being double covered was what opened things up for the rest of the offense. That may be true, but it should be noted that Eli threw for the most yards (301) against Washington w/out Plaxico, and we ran for the most yards of the season (over 300) against Carolina.
I think the main thing that sticks out here are the TD's. Hixon is really good between the 20's, and moves the chains. However, where Eli really missed Plaxico was in the redzone. I think this supports the argument that we don't really need a "stretch the field" reciever as much as we need a "big redzone target". I think a trade for Tony Gonzalez would create the exact same double coverage and mismatches that we got with Plaxico Burress down inside the 20.
Overall, I think Hixon gets a lot of the blame for our late season collapse, with some of you going as far to say that our recievers are number 3's or 2's at BEST, and that they've already hit their ceiling. I would argue that Hixon can in fact be this team's number one, and could quite possibly be a very good one. Having a 6'5 WR is not the only way to get mismatches and double teams.
Therefore, I'm going to go with myth. Big, overblown myth.
Flame on.
and you cant throw out plax's stats this year to support your reasoning...gilbride even mentioned on just having plax on the field was huge because of the coverages and it opens a lot of room for the other players on the field
The defense's strategy would change once Burress was out. We saw a lot mroe 8 men in the box without Plax.
Eagles use to think Todd was a #1 WR too.
With Eli's ability to change the play at the line, why not attack where the opposing personnel is weakest? If the defense has big people on the field, throw the ball more...if they have small people, run it.
If it's 3rd and goal from the 5, I like our chances with Jacobs running up the middle against 1 or 2 LBs.
but when we had to play harder defenses we could not adjust properly..........ie the eagles......if we have a plax type player vs the eagles im pretty sure we would win
I know it's only one sample, but one reporter watched game tapes of our games against Philly, the first with Plax, the 2nd without. He estimated that Plax was doubled on 75% of the Giants' offensive plays, while Hixon was doubled only 7% in the 2nd game.
Again, only one sample, but I'd be interested in hearing from some who analyze game tape more closely than I to see if this was a pattern. Personally, I have a hard time believing it wasn't.
really?
Todd Pinkston weighed the same as Hixon and was a inch taller.
They both have the same frame, Todd Pinkston couldn't gain weight, which is exactly what I think is going to happen to Hixon. Making him a limited guy where he run on the field.
Todd Pinkston blew up his 3rd year too.
798 rec yrds 7 TD's
Britt in VA : 11:11 am
to be good defenses?
what did the passing game do vs Carolina? Minnesota doesnt count as we had already clinched and were very vanilla and the backups played a lot
eli through for 305 against washington but 75 of it was some nice YAC yardage from Derrick Ward
A couple times we hit Darcy Johnson for 1 yard TD passes...I love that play. Why not run similar plays more often?
That said, you can't discount what the Eagles coaches and players said about the loss of Plax and how it changed the defensive strategy against the Giants. I'd love Edwards on this team, but I think the return of Osi and another full season for Kiwi at DE is more important.
I do think Plax's height helped in the red zone, and his absence contributed greatly to the Giants' red zone problems after he was out.
Link - ( New Window )
Burress didn't screw the season. Throughout his career, he's followed up great seasons with average ones, and what he was on pace for in 2008 was right in line with an average season after a monster one. It fits the pattern. Guys don't change at some late date in their career, very often.
Pinkston
Hixon
Just because they weigh the same, doesn't mean they are similar in strength.
I just want to see us exercise some patience and perspective. I want to see what our talented WRs can do given an entire offseason of reps and coaching out of Plax and Toomer's shadow. I think we'd be pleasantly surprised, I really do.
It's quite another to implement an entire scheme that's going to last you over a season. I mean, you have mini camps, OTA's, and an entire training camp to do that.
Plax's numbers weren't that great by any means but what he brought to the offense was on and off the stat sheet. Thats why we need that #1 WR
Look at Hixon's shoulders, he must have the smallest shoulder's I've ever seen on a football player. His frame is very small, where does he have more room in his frame to gain weight without losing speed.
Only reason Hixon looks bigger is cause he's shorter than Pinkston. They both weighed the same weight, but Hixon is 6'2, Pinkston 6'3. Pinkston had more mass on his body for his weight to fill up
This has been a very good football thread including posts from both sides.
As usual, I believe the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
We certainly missed Plaxico. He's a physical freak and scares the hell out of DCs.
We spent two years developing tendencies that were ripe to be changed and those changes would have exploited defenses.
Suddenly, we were left with a different identity, with inadequate time to develop a new identity, a new set of tendencies and consequently we struggled.
Take away a team's security blanket and they all struggle.
But, the big question is whether we can win long term without him or another physical freak at WR.
My opinion is yes and I believe that most of BBI is going to be bitterly disappointed by Saturday night.
For the record, I have no insight as to what the staff is thinking, but I have a strong hunch there will be a change to the offense even if we trade for Edwards.
Our identity is going to change from less individual matchups on the passing side, to more of a "create space" scheme.
If that's the direction we indeed take, I'll write a post clarifying the difference between the two philosophies.
I don't see this quote from Jacobs as being the same thing. I could be wrong, but I don't see why the front office would tell him to say that they didn't have enough time to alter their offense.
That direction would be welcomed by me, regardless of what happens this weekend.
We can change our team to suit the strengths of what we have, and when that's in place, that will be harder to defend.
Our identity is going to change from less individual matchups on the passing side, to more of a "create space" scheme.
What in Coughlin's 13 year Pro resume(with the exception of the expansion year)leads you to believe that he will depart from his #1 WR oriented Offense that opened up everything for his O's through the years?
I just don't see him changing all that much...Tweaking? Sure, but his O has been dependant on a #1 forever...Why is he suddenly going to change? There's no attitude or tone to my written words here, just an honest question that I have yet to receive a reasonable answer to IIRC..
You can tell the difference in their build clear as day, if you look at their arms. Hixons arms are twice the size of Pinkstons. They are not built the same.
And of course it was easier. But they (Eagles coaches and players) weren't just stating the obvious, they were scared to death of Plax and for years couldn't find a way to stop him, and they basically were saying our offense wasn't very difficult to stop without him, not that it was just a little "easier". They put that extra man in the box and dominated the LOS
We didn't throw the ball into the endzone alot from what I remember. Everything was like parallel or short of the endzone with the intention of our guy supposed to break tackles and score that way. One play I remember was in the Pittsburgh game where we were in the redzone and throw to plax 1 or 2 yards from the LOS, and expected him to break tackles to score, but we were forced to kick a FG. When we did score, we finally threw to Boss into the endzone, where he was wide open. I def. want to see more of that, and even sprint or rollout, like Eli did in the first game. No one was open so he dove in.
But I expect us to use that draw play, which is designed very well, and worked wonders. I think we can get better production with Bradshaw with the skill set he has over Ward. So I am interested to see that this season.
So, the Eagles got us. It just wasn't our year. But they are one team, not the entire NFL.
Ask Washington if we were easier to defend w/out Plaxico when Eli put up three hundy on em'.
We exploited it and rightfully so. However, after reviewing the season, I think we became to damned reliant on that mismatch. I believe the staff will come to the same conclusion.
Remember Coughlin's offensive tenet...balance. We became unbalanced and he's going to change something regardless who lines up at X.
We can not allow ourselves to become so reliant on one player, unless that player is a QB. It's unavoidable in that situation.
This is all opinion. I've received no tidbits this year to back anything up.
;]
Please?
Has it had a number 1 all these years? I guess so. I just don't see how that somehow suggest he wouldn't be satisfied adjusting the O with the guys he has.
I'd been obnoxious in the other debates because of the pessimistic view. It's reaching. No chance at a SB without '#1'. Why would Reese intentionally leave the team in a condition that would have them not contending? If he doesn't blink on BE he obviously feels he could win as is
All I see is that it just so happens that he's been lucky enough to have one.
And Smith developed into one, he was not one right away. Plax I'd argue also developed into one
The Giants running game:
with Plax: 7 games with 150+ yards including 5 with 200+.
without Plax: 1 game with 150+ yards against Carolina.
So sure the WR's are facing one less defender and may be putting up similar stats, but that extra defender is now impacting the running game.
All you need to do is to watch the Eagles games to see the difference. In the Plax-less games, Quentin Mikell is taking out the lead blocker at the LOS or in the backfield all game.
I don't see why any of our present guys shouldn't be given a chance to develop into something similar considering they have potentially elite physical abilities.
Because, TC has always been "#1 oriented." If he changes that, I'd be surprised. That's all I'm saying
I believe that's one of the few pessimistic views I've offered on here since Fassel left, except for my negative opinions on Accorsi...I've been accused of drinking the Kool-Aid by a bunch on here...GMANinDC calls me the "pom-pom" guy for my unconditional support of TC and Reese...I really don't believe we will strongly contend for the SB without a true #1...Of course(and hope) I could be wrong...Regardless, it doesn't merit the attitude towards me imo
rtc : 12:14 pm
The Giants running game:
with Plax: 7 games with 150+ yards including 5 with 200+.
without Plax: 1 game with 150+ yards against Carolina.
So sure the WR's are facing one less defender and may be putting up similar stats, but that extra defender is now impacting the running game.
All you need to do is to watch the Eagles games to see the difference. In the Plax-less games, Quentin Mikell is taking out the lead blocker at the LOS or in the backfield all game.
In that scheme, asking Hixon to BE Plaxico, yes.
In a new scheme favoring Hixon's strengths, possibly not.
We were very dependent on the size advantage that Plaxico enjoyed.
So much so, that when he wasn't there, we were not prepared to deal with his absence in such a short time frame.
I've watched Tom coach since he was at RIT, so I'm pretty well aware of how willing and able he is to making adjustments to his system.
I know he hates being unprepared for any situation more than anything, and will address this flaw in one way or another, so that if we lose an X, we can still be competitive through a more balanced approach.
I'll go into it further at another time, but I'm going to lunch and as much as I like talking football, I like to eat once in a while too!
I take all this desperation for a new guy as a slight to manning. (while acknowledging what even he said in the press)
That still doesn't mean that being without Plax was the only problem with the team down the stretch.
geemanfan : 12:18 pm
Is not a #1 WR and it's as easy as that.
Based on what. That was his second year.
Stats are for dorks, watch the fucking games.
Go Terps- You are persistent, but dead wrong.
I don't think anyone looks at our WR's and says the same thing. Maybe Hixon will develop into that guy, but I'm not convinced. We need more talent at the position.
Our WR's don't get separation, don't make big plays, and as a result our offense is significantly easier to slow down by stuffing everyone in the box to stop the run game. The Eagles game was this in a nutshell. Sure we'll still beat up on the weak teams with a great OL and run game, plus the WR's will do solid against bad secondaries...but when facing playoff-caliber Defenses...we need a #1 WR and there is not a doubt in my mind about that.
Then I think it is YOU who was not watching.
When did we get so impatient?
Against Philly, the first time, Hixon beat everybody by 10 yards and dropped an easy 80 yard TD pass. It happens, but he got seperation.
The second time against Philly, Steve Smith was wide open and Eli couldn't hit him. TONS of seperation throughout that game. Eli and the wind were more of a problem then seperation
Against Minny, who was fighting for their playoff lives, he had a 23 yard TD catch.
Britt...you saw Hixon, Smith, Toomer, and Boss running free down the field a lot? I'll point to the Dallas Sunday night game where we didn't do a FUCKING THING on offense as well as the Philly playoff game and respectfully disagree.
If we listen to Jerry Reese(GM's pre-draft conference) we hear that. We also hear what is being done to address the concerns. We have greatly improved our defense. We should have a good rotation on the DL. We have many picks to improve the offense and defense. A WR is on everyone's mind. But, teams have won titles without a big receiver like Plax. Perhaps a WR, another S, LB, and some Big OLs are on the horizon.
Finally, I think the shock of Plax shooting himself and all the media kerfluffle did great damage to the team's psyche. The mental shock was tough to overcome and affected the physical play on the field.
Well, there's my two cents. Now we shall wait for Mr. Reese to solve all our problems on Saturday.
Mike fr Warwick : 4/6/2009 12:01 pm
people considering some of the options as far as tailoring the passing game to the skill set of our recivers. Been posting this for 2 weeks now.
The WRs that
Mike fr Warwick : 4/4/2009 2:39 pm
are on the team now have a different skill set than Toomer and Plax. Most of the base and 3 WR schemes last year were designed for Toomer and Plax. Very few here have accounted for that. You saw curls,hitches,ins,outs, back sholger fades and comebacks. Patterns that require the QB to stick the ball in there are not conducive to YAC. The Giants were among the weaksest at YAC.
These are not the best patterns for recivers like Smith,Moss Hixon and Manningham.
Next year the passing shemes will be tailored to what this group of recivers will excell at. I expect a huge improvement in YAC and Eli to have easier throws resulting in a higher comp.%.
Again most people here a judging 2nd year WRs in a scheme that is not best for them.
I expect patterns based on mesh routes,legal picks,slants,posts,flags and double moves like slogo,ans stop and fly. We will see recievers with DBs chasing due to being impeeded and runnig to space that has been cleared.
This means new read progressions and passing trees for the Wrs and QB. Also new timing on the developement of the routes. This offense is a way to ensure safeties sit high.
BTW I think the easier throws part gets overlooked.
Btw you bastid, did you notice I've not capitalized once in a week or two since you made that comment(I think it was you)?
And I'm always gentle, check the Mets game thread...even those fuckers love me now!
It's apparent that he could take it (at his price only) or leave it, to me.
When Plax was a Giant we moved the ball up and down the field, after he left, we had some absolute clunkers.
I could be a little softer, but the idea that you can take a #1 WR (with nothing in the way of meaningful NFL production behind him) off of a team whose bread and butter is the running game and the downfield passing game in tandem is absolutely ridiculous to me. I cannot believe that some people think we are fine with our WR corp as is.
Do you really fucking think I didn't watch the games? I haven't missed a Giants game in 17 fucking years.
That's like calling names when you don't have anything to back your argument up.
I posted my reasons, let's see yours... You know, besides the "I watch the games and you do not..." argument.
The proof is in the pudding, we couldn't do a thing against Dallas or Philly (twice) when it mattered, point out Hixon's drop on a blown coverage all you want, our offense was different without Plax there, and it sure as hell wasn't for the better.
Britt in VA : 12:34 pm
Jerry would have given up the number one by now. That's what's simple.
Why? Is training camp starting anytime soon? How does waiting to see if you can lower the price anything more than good GM-ship? He can always give that #29 pick to the Browns...Why does it have to be yesterday? And, why does that indicate anything?
I think the main thing that sticks out here are the TD's. Hixon is really good between the 20's, and moves the chains. However, where Eli really missed Plaxico was in the redzone. I think this supports the argument that we don't really need a "stretch the field" reciever as much as we need a "big redzone target". I think a trade for Tony Gonzalez would create the exact same double coverage and mismatches that we got with Plaxico Burress down inside the 20.
Overall, I think Hixon gets a lot of the blame for our late season collapse, with some of you going as far to say that our recievers are number 3's or 2's at BEST, and that they've already hit their ceiling. I would argue that Hixon can in fact be this team's number one, and could quite possibly be a very good one. Having a 6'5 WR is not the only way to get mismatches and double teams.
Hixon was cut by Denver about 1.5 yrs ago, I know guys that get released sometimes turn out to be very good...and he's been much more than we ever expected...but he's not a #1 WR.
You people who think you can tell what a guy's functional strength is like by a few snapshots are hilarious. The handles change, but the stupid remains unchanged.
Watch how the guys play, instead of ogling their physiques like a bunch of homos.
There's really no comparison between Hixon and Pinkston, as NFL WR's.
1 game dominated by the running attack, passing was decent- Carolina
1 game where the starters played about 1+ quarters- Minnesota
3 games where the offense, as a whole, completely, and utterly, shit the bed- Philly, Dallas, Philly.
We were a top 3-4 offense before Plax left, and were nothing better than league average (I'd argue we were less than that) after he left. Say what you want about players improving, a full offseason without him, we need a #1.
As Dorgan pointed out, they weren't able to ever really do that by the time Plax was completely unavailable.
I still think the season was lost moreso by the DL injury situation than by Burress, but certainly the confluence of the two really made it a steep hill to climb.
And as much as I mostly think he's contrary for no reason at all, GoTerps has a chance of being right that one of Smith/Manningham/Hixon/Moss could easily emerge without Toomer/Burress on the roster. Particularly when you factor the continuing development of Boss in year two as a starter.
So, factor in more reps throughout the offseason for the healthy "kids" at WR, development by Boss, and a re-factoring of the playbook to their particular skillsets by Manning/Gilbride/Coughlin, and there's no reason to panic.
Which is why Reese hasn't simply met the Browns demands for Edwards already. Reese isn't the sort to leave things to chance. If he felt that Edwards was the indispensible missing piece (after what he did with the defense in FA), he'd have acted decisively and left no chance for Philly or some other team to snatch Edwards from under them. Either Reese is supremely confident that Mankok is going to blink and that there are no other serious suitors, OR Reese simply believes that getting Edwards isn't vital in the pursuit of the XLIV Lombardi.
BigBlueBrethren : 12:42 pm
You mentioned what any obvious supporter of getting Braylon's argument would be, and completely discounted it by using stats and pointing to Hixon's potential as a #1 which I think you are as high as a kite to be seeing.
Hixon was cut by Denver about 1.5 yrs ago, I know guys that get released sometimes turn out to be very good...and he's been much more than we ever expected...but he's not a #1 WR.
YET. He's not a number on, yet. Maybe he never will be, but you saying that he can't be is just as assinine a statement and prediction as you think me saying he can be is.
Secondly, I support getting Braylon Edwards at the right price, dictated by Jerry Reese.
This was more of an argument to point out to those that are predicting a 7-9 to 8-8 season for us, if we don't get Edwards, that it was only a small part of the problem at the end of the season.
We were worn out and used up.
We have attempted to address that.
We became too reliant on the X position.
We'll attempt to address that.
Is there any sane reason to think that one or several of Hixon (age 24), Smith (23), Manningham (22), Moss (25) and Boss (24) won't make substantial progress next year?
Again, my present mindset(I'm open to being objective, certainly)is that without that #1 and all that that person would bring to the table, I believe we're definitely playoff caliber, just not SB contending...I pray I'm incorrect about this
This is not a Braylon Edwards Lover (there are a lot of you out there) bashing thread. It's about the slight on Eli and our current WR's that are being made out to be a bunch of bums... Well, not Eli.
And to those saying we'll change our offense this year, thank god, off with Gilbrides head
Fully agree
I also point out that the folks insisting that Plax drew the double team "all the time" are not correct. Different teams did different things under different downs and distances.
Witness the 300 yards at Carolina or Ware running in Minny or or or
I don't want Braylon Edwards at any price. Two years ago he had an excellent season and went to the Pro Bowl. Last year he dropped 16 balls, none of them difficult catches. He has a history of dropping too many balls throughout college and his time in the league.
He's very early in his career and it's unusual for a team to unload a 1st round pick with lots of talent so soon. There's something going on there. Like maybe the coaches are sick to death of watching him drop balls in practice.
and doubt that he'll ever make another Pro Bowl.
But, in answer to your question, if Braylon had a year like 2007 he'd be a big help.
Outside of the Carolina game, where we played a very average defense who was missing their big run stuffing DT, we couldn't do anything
210 minutes of football against the Eagles, Cowboys and Vikings (in the one half the starters did play) the offense did not score a Touchdown, outside of a garbage time TD trailing Philly 20-7 with 10 seconds left in week 14. And we shouldn't even count that
The depth on the DL was a hit but not the biggest culprit. They allowed essentially 16 points against the Eagles in the playoff game, the Eagles scored a TD on a one yard drive when Eli threw a pick to set them up for another score, and i can't hang that on the defense. They weren't the biggest reason our offense couldn't sniff the endzone against any halfway decent D
For all intents and purposes our offense scored 6 points in that playoff game. 2 were on a safety and 3 were on a FG which was basically a 10 yard drive off the Robbins INT
I really can't hang that loss on the DL.
The second thing I want to discuss is the excuse I've heard sports announcers and Pitt. fans use and that is the punter and longsnapper excuse for that loss. We were about the get the ball back anyway and turned around and scored a TD, so tell me again how those injuries altered the outcome?
It was most evident against the better defenses. The passing game looked inept vs. DAL and PHI late in the year, as their excellent CBs pushed our WRs around. No one stepped up. Hixon is one of my favorites but he showed he wasn't ready for prime time last year.
I still have high hopes for Mario Manningham - he's got the goods to be a Pro Bowl #1 WR. A sick talent - and he looked good in the season finale vs. MIN. Tons of separation.
So we didn't get Edwards. Big deal. I'm loving our WR core:
Hixon
Smith
Nicks
Manningham
Barden 6'6
Boss
Beckum 6'4
Two big Redzone targets. Exactly what we needed.
We're good between the 20's, we just need guys to go up and get it. Nicks attacks the ball, and will fight for it. The other guys, specifically Beckam, are tall and play like WR's. Reese played it perfectly, IMO.
Nobody wants to hear it, but we didn't need Edwards. He was a luxury, not a neccessity.
Our difference is that with no trade or "need" as you put it for an Edwards or #1 vet WR, we are left with nothing but hope...I don't see it manifesting into much in 2009 beyond a playoff appearance...Apparently you do...Which one of us do you think I hope is right?
Ok, movin' on...:o)
5 games does not make a career.
All of them: young and hungry. No divas, nobody feeling like they're owed something. All of them trying to earn their spot and make a name for themselves. All of them at every workout, every conditioning session, every OTA.
Eli's never, ever had that before here. Eli and the WR's are going to be the sharpest this year they've been in years. I'm telling you.
Defense is going to be absolutely sick and the O is looking much better now. The competition is gonna be fun.
Now, one last thing. Please god keep our team healthy. Please!
In the end we are fans...and we hope
Fortunately, unlike fans for most teams in the NFL, over the next couple of years, we have rational support for hoping.
Edwards could've easily come here and posted another 800-yard underwhelming season.
Reese obviously was not poo pooing the need for getting Eli weapons like many were. He attacked this weakness about as strong as anyone could attack a weakness in the draft.
They obviously didn't agree - as they used 2 premium draft picks at the position - 1 on a guy who is almost a carbon copy of Plax physically.
Hixon's best role on this team is as a backup WR and special teams ace. KR/PR and coverage.
We should be able to score more than the 16 that the D gave them.
What we need is a WR that is going to draw a double team....plain and simple. He doesn't even have to be as productive as Burress. He just has to scare defenses.