News Archives

New York Giants’ Victor Cruz Projected to Be a Top 20 Fantasy Wide Receiver in 2013

June 24th, 2013 at 10:30 AM
By Dan Benton

As football season nears, so to does fantasy football season. With that comes endless discussion about who has fantasy value and who does not; who can translate their on-field success to off-field money for the casual fan. One such player is New York Giants wide receiver Victor Cruz, whom the National Football Post feels will be a top 20 fantasy wide receiver in 2013.

12. Victor Cruz, New York Giants: Amassed a respectable stat line (86-1,092-10) in 2012 despite playing three games without the benefit of having Hakeem Nicks on the opposite side of the field. Add a Super Bowl hangover to the mix and you can see why Cruz fell just short of the lofty expectations set by many entering last season. The contract situation is worth monitoring this summer, but the Giants are a first class organization. They’ll have it all figured out well before Week 1.

As NFP alludes to, a lot of Cruz's value is tied up in the ongoing contract negotiations with the Giants. If he's there week one — and if Hakeem Nicks is healthy alongside of him — then the value is absolutely there. If, however, negotiations linger late into training camp or become a distraction during the season, or if Nicks is unhealthy and unable to play, Cruz's value could, potentially, drop significantly.

Speaking of Nicks, you'll notice he is absent from this list. In fact, he's not even a sleeper or honorable mention. And that's just fantasy football for you.

Given that he's been able to play a full 16 game season, missed all of the team's Organized Team Activities (OTAs), has lingering injury (foot) concerns and may also be negotiating a long-term deal, he's not a "sure enough" bet for all the hardcore fantasy players out there.

Odds are quarterback Eli Manning won't be on many "top whatever" fantasy lists, either. But you can bet Tony Romo will be near the top!

photo credit: Football Schedule via photopin cc

Also…

Tags: Football, Hakeem Nicks, New York, New York Giants, NFL, Victor Cruz

No related posts.

18 Responses to “New York Giants’ Victor Cruz Projected to Be a Top 20 Fantasy Wide Receiver in 2013”

  1.  Krow says:

    That’s 3 games without Nicks … and much of the rest of the time with a hobbled Nicks.

  2.  GOAT56 says:

    Repost:

    fanfor55years says:
    June 24, 2013 at 10:40 AM
    The Packers WANTED Bishop. It’s just that they wanted him at less than the $3.2MM he would have been owed under his contract. If he’d been willing to restructure he’d still be in Green Bay. IF he is healthy (and I assume the Giants would make sure he is before thinking about signing him) then he is a darned good player and could help us win THIS YEAR.

    In the NFL you cannot worry about next year. Things happen. You try to be competitive this season and then worry about the next one (except in regard to the draft and development of “projects”). I like Herzlich. I think he may be the long-term answer at MIKE (I’m not saying he IS, just that he might be and that the Giants hope he is exactly that defensive quarterback they desire). But if Bishop is healthy there’s no question in my mind he can help us win in 2013, and that’s the heart of the matter, not whether Herzlich is ‘set back” or whom we’ll draft next April. That old “NFL = Not For Long” applies to teams’ championship chances as well as players’ careers. One serious injury to He Who Shall Not Be Named and 2014 could be a write-off no matter who plays linebacker. Al Davis’ famous saying should really have been “Just Win Now, Baby.”

    •  Krow says:

      Good post by the way.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      How much did GB want him to restructure? I mean I guessing he was losing half or more. With the market for LBs already established a player isn’t going just give up money. This is more like the KP situation. We wanted him back but at something so cheap compared to how the player has performed int he past that the player declined.

      Competition is good but it’s not always good. Sometimes a player that’s just a little better is not better for the rest of the until to play better. Look at Shockey as an example.

      You have to worry about next year as well as this year. Having two vet basically stop gap players makes little sense to me. If Bishop is better fine then cut Conner and let Bishop compete with Herzlich. Neither Bishop or Conner is knocking Herzlich off the roster as a backup because of Herzlich special teams play.

      Al Davis way hasn’t really worked in the last quarter century.

      •  GOAT56 says:

        They wanted Bishop back but at something so cheap compared to how he has performed in the past that Bishop declined

        •  Krow says:

          Of course how he performed in the recent past was IR.

          •  GOAT56 says:

            Could say the same about Andre Brown. There seems to be more concern than that he just had an injury. Reminds me some of what happened to Goff. Bishop has done more but it’s similar because with how Goff played if he was the same player he should have been re-signed by us. But I think we knew something was off and I worry that GB feels the same about Bishop.

            •  Krow says:

              Andre Brown. Who also didn’t get $3,500,000. Yeah, it’s the injury concern. Year off … ripped up … can’t blame teams for being skittish. He’s not getting much of a guarantee over minimum.

              •  GOAT56 says:

                Andre is getting over 2 mil from us though. I’m fairly sure Bishop would have taken 2 mil if offered because he’s likely going to get much less than that now. My point is GB offered a drastic reduction in salary for a reason.

  3.  JimStoll says:

    right now the “fantasy” is that he signs a long-term deal prior to the start of the season

  4.  GIANTT says:

    Again , does anyone know how the Giants pay for Leach and Bishop and sign the rest of their draft picks with 3.3 mill cap space ? Much as I would like to see both Leach and Bishop , I dont see how !

    •  Krow says:

      They’re all going to play for the minimum … or for free.

      •  JimStoll says:

        I like free

        •  rlhjr says:

          Maybe the “Peanuts” cast (Lucy and Charlie Brown) have it right…..”Five Cents”. Everything should be five cents. LOL

          As for Cruz, “fantasy” is the operative word. As in if he doesn’t get his rear end in camp, his value and ability to contribute will be all about fantasy, like in a dream.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      Pugh and Nassib are already slotted. We basically know their cap hit now, they are negotiating over little things. Nassib likely won’t even make our top 51 to count against the cap. By the current numbers at http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-york-giants/cap-hit/ Moore doesn’t even count as a top 51 player cap hit wise. Pugh will take up some space but let’s say his cap hit is 2 mil that’s not the amount he counts extra against the cap. Pugh would be replacing someone in the 500k range in the top 51 so his signing would only reduce our cap space by 1.5 mil. This same practice would be for vet min players. I think the vet min only counts 620k against the cap and that replacing a 500k contract means we can still sign quite a few vet min players because it’s only increasing our cap by 100k or so.

  5.  fanfor55years says:

    GOAT, you’re not looking at this correctly. You want to think about the future (as all GMs do while knowing that they also have to try to win EVERY year that they have the luxury of a true franchise quarterback)? Fine. With what of the following do you disagree:

    1) A healthy Bishop is likely to be better than both Herzlich and Connor in 2013;

    2) Playing some snaps in games and a lot of practice snaps against the offense as the season progresses will make Herzlich a better player and readier to take over the on-field control of the defense in 2014;

    3) Limiting Herzlich’s production makes his value as a free agent less so he becomes far easier to sign as a long-term MIKE if the coaches have decided he’s their guy for the next 5-6 years (especially with another year of learning under his belt);

    4) Bishop is likely willing to play for the Giants for LESS than he was willing to play for the Packers because players tend to dislike management of their current team when asked to take big pay cuts (“they disrespected me”) and because he thinks he can win the hearts and minds of the Giants’ staff (because he’s better than their other options) and get a solid multi-year contract from them after this season going as their best option at MIKE for the next 3-4 years.

    Bishop’s interest in the Giants, and theirs in him, is not only understandable, but a reasonable risk for both sides. That deal could very well happen.

  6.  fanfor55years says:

    btw, I’m glad we’re not discussing Cruz at this point. I hope he’s a member of the Giants for the next five years. Otherwise I’m totally done thinking about the guy.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: