Talking smack: Who will be better in 5 years, Gardner or McCants

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

In a nearby thread (Spurrier: "Obviously you can't get four quarterbacks ready to play" -- QB cut coming? ), Art and I have been debating whether Gardner or McCants will be more productive as a receiver in five years.

McCants is the guy we drafted in the 5th round last year from Delaware State, a division I-AA school. He was inactive all last year. But he caught 4 passes in Osaka, including two TD passes, and looked extremely good. Like Gardner, he's a big, physical receiver, and he seems capable of breaking tackles in the secondary. Perhaps for this reason, *half* of his catches as a college senior went for TDs -- 36 catches, 18 TDs. This has prompted me to nickname him Touchdown McCants.

Gardner of course is our #1 pick from last year (#15 overall), who was second in the NFL for catches by a rookie WR last year.

Anyway, Art and I got sidetracked trying to establish the precise terms of a bet I was offering: namely, who will be the most productive receiver in five years, Gardner or McCants? We were discussing just the year 2006 (not cumulative stats), and we were defining "productive" as overall performance, spanning catches, yards and TDs. I was offering 5:1 odds on the bet -- if Gardner wins, Art gets $100; if McCants wins, I get $500.

So now I'm posing this same thought experiment to the forum. Note we are not talking real dollars -- it's Monopoly dollars, so don't show up as one big angry mob in five years, demanding your cash.

[codeorama]

:laugh:

[DC_Clone]

I still have lots of faith in Rod but given those odds I would throw down on mcCants. I don't think Rod is that much better.

[Nighthawk]

Since both will be playing in Spurriers system I'll say McCants.

[theposse]

Yeah, I think with the odds you've got to go with McCants. I think those who focus too much on Gardner's drops last year need to realize very few rookies just get thrown out there their 1st year as a starter, let alone the #1 guy. Also, those who say he had the 2nd best year of a rookie last year need to realize the exact same thing- who knows how many yards/TDs guys like Terrell or Koren Robinson would have had if they were starting?

McCants made a couple of big time plays in that preseason game. Yes they were against back-ups, but catching it and taking a hit and holding on to it on one of the TDs, and then breaking tackles like he did on the 2nd one tells me more than just beating a back-up guy deep. Obviously this is very little to go on, but it's enough to make me think I'd take the odds.

[DC_Clone]

If it was 2:1 odds I would go with Gardner though.

[SonnyJ]

Sorry, ASF, but this is just a silly proposition. As long as both are playing for the Skins, I want to see both do well.

If you want this to be just a mental exercise, it is clear that Gardner has demonstrated far more than McCants has at the NFL level, some good and some bad. McCants is an unknown. Based on this, Gardner would be my selection.

But, why would you want to lay odds and wager on such a thing? This gives you an incentive to root against a (hopefully) Redskin. Why would you do that?

Your dislike for Gardner aside, maybe a better bet would be McCants vs. Antonio Bryant. You could make some easy Cowboy money, then.

[redman]

The odds make this is a far easier pick than it's made out to be. The better debate is straight up.

The statistical evaluation is in essence, that if I believe Gardner has an 80% or higher chance of doing better statistically (in all receiving categories) than McCants in five seasons, then I take Gardner in the bet. If not, I take McCants. Frankly, given the odds I'd side with McCants in the bet.

But as I pointed out elsewhere, they should develop into two different WR's. In that regard, the more interesting comparison would be Thompson-McCants, who both are big WR's with speed.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by SonnyJ

why would you want to lay odds and wager on such a thing? This gives you an incentive to root against a (hopefully) Redskin. Why would you do that?

Well, that's a glass-half-empty view of the bet.

My *only* problem with Gardner is that I think he's overhyped. If he turns into one of the NFL's elite receivers, I'll be delighted. But the hype is an issue -- I question why we should somehow favor Gardner, just because he's a #1 pick and was Marty's favorite WR last year (getting the most passes thrown his way).

The Redskins have a disturbing history of ignoring some lesser-known players who go on and produce big for other teams. (Keenan McCardell, anyone?). I'm sure this happens to a lot of teams, but it's something to watch for.

The Gardner/McCants comparison is fascinating to me. Gardner was a #1 pick and played for a Division I team. McCants was a #5 pick and played for a Division I-AA team. But I think the reason Gardner was favored last year and McCants was inactive was simply due to hype -- Gardner was the #1 pick.

The draft serves a purpose -- allocating players among the league's teams. But after the draft, I wish people would just forget about draft order and look at the players themselves.

In the few glimpses I saw of McCants, I saw glimpses of greatness. Not just "better than Gardner", but the opportunity to be a dominating, elite NFL receiver.

Obviously, I could be very wrong. It was just one preseason game against SF's backups in a game SF apparently didn't take seriously. But I just have a good feeling about the guy.

In no way do I want Gardner to fare poorly. (Does everyone hear me?) But I also don't want Gardner's "status" -- #1 pick, incumbent starter -- to block a guy like McCants, if in fact McCants is the superior talent. That's all I'm saying -- I want our best receivers on the field.

[shamaran]

If Art says Gardner, I'll say McCants.:laugh:

Seriously, Gardner looks like he was a Marty-type rec., i.e., big, strong and takes away jump balls (supposedly); he doesn't seem adroit at the SS-type offense. I doubt he'll be around if SS is here for very long (a better question yet).

[Om]

What I think we need is a third thread about ASF/McCants vs. Art/Gardner (which this one will shortly, mark my words, turn into).

Can't get too much of a good thing. :cool:

[Thinking Skins]

You've also got to realize that McCants may be kinda like James Thrash was to us. Remember, he would light up games in the preseason, then come the regular season, he would just freeze up. I remember the first game he started, fans were talking about havign him released because he played so poorly. It took some time for him to adjust to the NFL level. I wouldnt be surprised if the same thing is true for McCants.

[MRMADD]

Nice odds... here's another one for you:

Who do you think will win Gulf War II?

(a) United States... you collect $1 if you win

( Iraq... you collect $1,000,000 if you win.

Lots of guys pick ( because the payoff is so big. It's like playing the lottery -- it's a tax on stupidity.

Gardner is ALREADY a better receiver. McCants had one big game -- when it didn't matter. How in the world can you think a 5th rounder who caught 36 passes in his final year in D-IAA is going to outperform a guy who was the second-best rookie wide receiver last year while playing for an offense led by TONY BANKS?

[SonnyJ]

Originally posted by Atlanta Skins Fan

Well, that's a glass-half-empty view of the bet.

My *only* problem with Gardner is that I think he's overhyped. If he turns into one of the NFL's elite receivers, I'll be delighted. But the hype is an issue -- I question why we should somehow favor Gardner, just because he's a #1 pick and was Marty's favorite WR last year (getting the most passes thrown his way).

The Redskins have a disturbing history of ignoring some lesser-known players who go on and produce big for other teams. (Keenan McCardell, anyone?). I'm sure this happens to a lot of teams, but it's something to watch for.

The Gardner/McCants comparison is fascinating to me. Gardner was a #1 pick and played for a Division I team. McCants was a #5 pick and played for a Division I-AA team. But I think the reason Gardner was favored last year and McCants was inactive was simply due to hype -- Gardner was the #1 pick.

The draft serves a purpose -- allocating players among the league's teams. But after the draft, I wish people would just forget about draft order and look at the players themselves.

In the few glimpses I saw of McCants, I saw glimpses of greatness. Not just "better than Gardner", but the opportunity to be a dominating, elite NFL receiver.

Obviously, I could be very wrong. It was just one preseason game against SF's backups in a game SF apparently didn't take seriously. But I just have a good feeling about the guy.

In no way do I want Gardner to fare poorly. (Does everyone hear me?) But I also don't want Gardner's "status" -- #1 pick, incumbent starter -- to block a guy like McCants, if in fact McCants is the superior talent. That's all I'm saying -- I want our best receivers on the field.

Passing on a 12th round rookie who didn't achieve success for another 5 years hardly qualifies as a "disturbing history". I can't understand why you're lamenting this. The Redskins were stocked at the position and didn't need the guy. He finally caught on with an expansion team. I can't recall any other big-time receivers that have slipped away from the team.

No offense buddy (and I really mean that), but if you can detect greatness from watching a guy for one half in a preseason game, I'd say you should reconsider your line of work if you aren't in the personnel office of some NFL team. What about his fumble? Correctable, perhaps, but he doesn't get the allowance for that like others who have the team made.

And, I can't believe you are so naive as to think that Gardner isn't going to be given every chance to excel. The team sank a $5M bonus into him. You'd do the same thing. If you had a $500 watch and a $10 one, and both had problems that could be fixed, would you fix both of them? No, you'd chuck the $10 watch and buy another one. But, you would fix the $500 watch. The analogy may be weak, but I think you get the idea.

And I've no doubt that Spurrier will ultimately play the superior performer. He'll try to make it work with Gardner, because that's best for the Redskins. But, whoever makes plays will be out there, regardless of any other factors. That's the way it should be.

[bulldog]

Gardner has made catches against first-team NFL defensive backs while playing with a quarterback that finished LAST in NFC passer rating

McCants has so far had one good half against backups in a preseason game overseas.

yeah, that shows they are about even and McCants will definitely move ahead down the road :laugh:

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by blakman211

It took some time for him to adjust to the NFL level. I wouldnt be surprised if the same thing is true for McCants.

....which is why I proposed a bet based on performance five years from now.

Here's my thinking. McCants has managed to stun me with his ability, despite some tremendous negatives -- Division I-AA school, 5th round pick, inactive all last year, played under Marty in his first year (that *has* to leave a WR confused).

I basically see this guy as someone with massive potential, but almost no help -- minor-league college, and not much help from the NFL coaches in his first year.

I figure that working under Spurrier for a few years, this guy is going to reach his full potential. He might do that right away and be our leading receiver in 2002. (I'm not expecting that, but it wouldn't shock me.) Or, it may take several years for him to develop his confidence and develop the team's confidence in making him a key receiver.

Also, it should still take a few more years for Gardner's "status" (#1 pick, one the leading rookie WRs last year, multi-year contract with the Redskins that still needs to be paid) to evaporate and for his performance on the field to reflect true ability and not a "pro Gardner" bias by the Redskins.

(Understand that the Redskins *are* biased toward playing Gardner, because they are on the hook for about $2.6M in salary cap hits over the next four years, reflecting Gardner's pro-rated signing bonus. If Gardner were to be cut or traded this year, that $2.6M would all hit the 2002 cap. So Spurrier doesn't have a lot of choice: either Gardner stays on the team, or team takes a big salary cap hit. I expect Spurrier to give Gardner loads of opportunities, because failure has negative consequences.)

Summing up, I picked five years as the point at which a truly fair comparison of Gardner/McCants performance could be achieved.

[Dickens]

I'll bet Gardener doesn't return after this contract is up. I have a feeling McCants may even surpass Gardener on the roster, just a hunch based on the fact that McCants is faster.

[Big Will]

IMHO, I think many people are making too much over some of the performances in Osaka. I'm high on McCants right now too but I'll wait to see if he can keep it up throughout the preseason. Hopefully Spurrier will give him some time against some opposing first-stringers. Your right though ASF, McCants does have massive potential but I'm not gonna bet my porn money away just yet:laugh:

[bulldog]

Atlanta Skins, I don't know how far back you followed the team but I remember a game in the mid-1990's where Olanda Truitt scored a long td on a throw that looked much like the one that McCants scored on in Japan. Desmond Howard also had a 60 yard td in that game.

my point? the perils of projecting performance based on such limited intelligence and surveillance :laugh:

and those performances of Truitt and Howard were against an NFL defense during the regular season

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by SonnyJ

Passing on a 12th round rookie who didn't achieve success for another 5 years hardly qualifies as a "disturbing history". I can't understand why you're lamenting this. The Redskins were stocked at the position and didn't need the guy. He finally caught on with an expansion team. I can't recall any other big-time receivers that have slipped away from the team.

No offense buddy (and I really mean that), but if you can detect greatness from watching a guy for one half in a preseason game, I'd say you should reconsider your line of work if you aren't in the personnel office of some NFL team. What about his fumble? Correctable, perhaps, but he doesn't get the allowance for that like others who have the team made.

And, I can't believe you are so naive as to think that Gardner isn't going to be given every chance to excel. The team sank a $5M bonus into him. You'd do the same thing. If you had a $500 watch and a $10 one, and both had problems that could be fixed, would you fix both of them? No, you'd chuck the $10 watch and buy another one. But, you would fix the $500 watch. The analogy may be weak, but I think you get the idea.

And I've no doubt that Spurrier will ultimately play the superior performer. He'll try to make it work with Gardner, because that's best for the Redskins. But, whoever makes plays will be out there, regardless of any other factors. That's the way it should be.

OK, fairly reasonable. A few things to add:

1. If you don't like McCardell as an example (I still do), how about Frank Wycheck? That guy left and instantly delivered for the Oilers (now Titans).

2. McCants's fumble. I dissed Skaggs for his fumble because it was a kickoff muff (no excuse) and Skaggs hasn't done anything positive of significance. The McCants fumble was when he was surging for extra yards, on a day when he was otherwise stunning. If there is any problem with his fumbling, I'm sure the team can work with him on it. The guy is huge and strong, so it's a technique/alertness issue.

3. Me as an NFL scout. Would love the job , but so far, no calls from the Redskins. :gus: (Actually, that's not true either. They keep calling me for other reasons, but so far no job offers.)

4. Redskin contract with Gardner. As they say, "follow the money". I'm well aware that the Redskins have a monetary incentive to make Gardner succeed. So he'll get many opportunities. And I'm sure -- oh I am sure -- that I'm going to get loads of snotty posts all year long from people who point out that Gardner made XX number of catches in the game of the week. I'll jump aboard the bandwagon only when I am convinced by the quality of his play, not the number of starts and catches. If I'm convinced, I'll jump on heartily.

5. I agree that Spurrier will ultimately play the superior performer. But the financial problem will tie his hands for a while. He'll never admit that, I suspect. But mark my words: in five years, we'll have our true answer.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by bulldog

Atlanta Skins, I don't know how far back you followed the team but I remember a game in the mid-1990's where Olanda Truitt scored a long td on a throw that looked much like the one that McCants scored on in Japan. Desmond Howard also had a 60 yard td in that game.

my point? the perils of projecting performance based on such limited intelligence and surveillance :laugh:

and those performances of Truitt and Howard were against an NFL defense during the regular season

Good points, bulldog.

But my belief in McCants is based on more than just watching the Osaka game, such as:

-- Spurrier made a comment after the game to the effect that the ball seems to "stick" to McCants's hands. Trust me, if you are evaluating receivers, such words are money itself. Most receivers, even in the NFL, don't catch most passes with their hands, or don't do it very reliably. They "body catch" passes. Trust me -- I was a WR. Only the very elite receivers have this ability for passes to seem to "stick" to their hands. We're talking Cris Carter types of receivers. Spurrier is a passing guru, and for him to use words like balls "sticking" to McCants is like some guy in the crow's nest on the Santa Maria saying, "Hey, Columbus. What's that on the horizon?"

-- McCants caught 4 passes and 2 TDs in Osaka. His senior year of college, he caught 36 passes for 18 TDs. That 50% TD ratio is so ridiculously off the scale, I can't even put words to it. Yes, it could be a fluke. But when I smell smoke coming from the kitchen, I don't just dismiss it. This guy may have a truly rare talent to run after the catch and bulldoze through secondaries. This is a Terrell Owens type of skill.

Would I bet my house on McCants? Of course not. But if you removed the cap issues with Gardner and forced me to keep either Gardner or McCants, I would pick McCants. Call me crazy, but at least wait a few years before doing so.

[Awesome]

My gut says McCants

Love Gardner, but McCants was sensational last weekend

[GURU]

This is an absurd debate.

Why is the debate about Gardner and McCants? What about Derrius Thompson? He had an even bigger game. He capitalized on a cornerback's mistake on the first TD, and he made the biggest play of the game by catching that TD pass on 4th and 1. Plus, he's the same size and faster than than both Gardner and McCants.

Where are the props for Thompson?

And Chris Doering? He didn't catch a TD, but almost single handedly kept a couple of drives alive with big catches in traffic for first downs, including a beauty on 3rd and 17.

Where are the props for Doering? He might be more like Chris Carter than anyone on the roster.

The thing about Spurrier's offense is that passes are supposed to go to the receivers who aren't covered, or have single coverage. On Rosenfels' first two incompletions, the coverage had rolled towards Gardner, but Sage tried to force it in there, anyway. When he started finding the open receiver, things started to click.

This is a stupid debate. There should be plenty of opportunity for every receiver to make big plays. Gardner proved he could do that last regular season. It's nice to see that Thompson, McCants, and Doering have flashed some ability, too.

The more the merrier.

[SonnyJ]

Originally posted by Atlanta Skins Fan

OK, fairly reasonable. A few things to add:

1. If you don't like McCardell as an example (I still do), how about Frank Wycheck? That guy left and instantly delivered for the Oilers (now Titans).

Doesn't wash. Wychek was let go for non-performance reasons. I also don't like hearing this "we should have kept this guy" stuff because it reeks of hindsight. Yeah, Wychek showed flashes when here, but who knew he would wind up becoming a security blanket for a young QB?

2. McCants's fumble. I dissed Skaggs for his fumble because it was a kickoff muff (no excuse) and Skaggs hasn't done anything positive of significance. The McCants fumble was when he was surging for extra yards, on a day when he was otherwise stunning. If there is any problem with his fumbling, I'm sure the team can work with him on it. The guy is huge and strong, so it's a technique/alertness issue.

I agree, but guys trying to make the team like Skaggs and McCants can't do stuff like that. If McCants fumbled as often as Davis, how quickly would he be gone?

3. Me as an NFL scout. Would love the job , but so far, no calls from the Redskins. :gus: (Actually, that's not true either. They keep calling me for other reasons, but so far no job offers.)

I'm sure it's just an oversight.

4. Redskin contract with Gardner. As they say, "follow the money". I'm well aware that the Redskins have a monetary incentive to make Gardner succeed. So he'll get many opportunities. And I'm sure -- oh I am sure -- that I'm going to get loads of snotty posts all year long from people who point out that Gardner made XX number of catches in the game of the week. I'll jump aboard the bandwagon only when I am convinced by the quality of his play, not the number of starts and catches. If I'm convinced, I'll jump on heartily.

What have you seen in McCants that you haven't seen in Gardner, and vice versa? Is this a case of familiarity breeding contempt?

5. I agree that Spurrier will ultimately play the superior performer. But the financial problem will tie his hands for a while. He'll never admit that, I suspect. But mark my words: in five years, we'll have our true answer.

ASF, I think it's cool that you demonstrate the courage of your convictions with your bold opinions. Forgive me, though, for stating that you seem a little flighty with your instant proclamations of greatness and mediocrity. I hope for two things: 1) that the coaches aren't nearly as hasty as you, and, 2) you keep up your hasty proclamations. They make for a lively forum.

[Art]

Well, it would seem since Sage didn't complete those first two passes to Gardner, and because Spurrier said balls stick to McCants hands, he's the guy who'll break out. I hope Atlanta is correct. I also hope the other guys do too.