Thursday, January 31st, 2008...1:15 pm by Lee Gibbons
Art Monk vs Cris Carter
There are three wide receivers among the finalists for this year’s Pro Football Hall of Fame voting. Cris Carter is in his 1st year of eligibility while ex-Redskins Art Monk and Andre Reed (many have forgotten that Reed played for Washington late in his career) have been on the ballot for years. The Monk/Reed debate has raged on over the years (both probably should be in the Hall), but this year both have been shunted aside for the newcomer.
Cris Carter is seen by many as a shoe-in for the Hall, so I figured it would be interesting to pull out my old adjusted numbers spreadsheets and compare him with Monk to see if there is any reason for Carter to be considered an easy choice while Monk continues to be shunned.
Before we take a look at the adjusted numbers, here are the actual statistics for each player:
The actual numbers present a clear advantage to Carter. He has more catches, more yards and a lot more touchdowns. He had two years with 122 receptions which dwarves Monk’s record setting 106 catch season. In 1995, Carter peaked with 122 catches for 1371 yards and 17 touchdowns. Monk never hit double digits in TDs in any season in his career.
One interesting thing to note is that Monk’s yard per catch average is almost a full yard ahead of Carter’s. Monk averaged 13.5 ypc, while Carter had only 12.6 ypc. Monk’s 1984 yardage total of 1372 bests any total that Carter put up (granted by only one yard over Carter’s 1995 stats). All the complaints about Monk’s possession receiver status can be applied more so to Carter
However as we know, receiving stats exploding in the mid-90’s. Carter’s career peaked during a period where lesser receivers were putting up huge numbers. So using the same formulas as before, let’s adjust the stats and see what we come up with:
As we’ve seen previously, Monk’s numbers explode by adjusting. Carter’s stats actually improve as well. He spent the early portion of his career playing in the “pro-run” era of the late 80’s and early 90’s. But the adjustment still favors Monk.
He surpasses Carter is career receptions and yardage. In an average season (I excluded both of their final seasons where they collapsed), Monk had 8 additional catches and about 90 more yards. Carter still dominates the touchdown category, with an average of 3 more per season.
The touchdowns are obviously a huge consideration. Carter was one of the leagues best at catching TDs. But a lot of the difference can be attributed to differences in the teams’ philosophies. The Redskins were a running team in Monk’s era and when they got down to the goal-line, they were determined to punch it in with power. The Vikings were much more likely to pass for TDs than the Redskins. A simple comparison of each team’s rushing totals of each player’s peak shows a major discrepancy:
Over the eight years used here (93-00 for the Vikings and 84-91 for the Redskins), the Redskins averaged nearly 6 additional rushing touchdowns per year than the Vikings. It isn’t like the Vikings offense was garbage for these years and the Redskins just played scored more often. If you recall, the Vikings were a very high scoring team for most of the 90s, peaking with the 1998 team which finished with a 15-1 record.
There are other factors that come into play when the Hall of Fame voters get together. Carter played during an era with more coverage, so he tends to be remembered more (who can forget the ole “Cris Carter – All he does is catch touchdowns” every week on ESPN Primetime). Carter has also stayed in the limelight post career, with hosting duties on HBO’s “Inside the NFL”. If we are to consider off the field actions, Carter was released from the Eagles early in his career due to troubles with drugs and alcohol; Monk, on the other hand, was never in trouble. To Carter’s credit, he cleaned himself up after joining the Vikings and turned himself into a fine citizen. Monk also won three Super Bowls while Carter was shutout.
In the end, they rank out pretty similarly. Carter was a touchdown machine over his career and a deserving Hall of Famer. If I had a vote, I put him in. But the issue isn’t whether or not Carter deserves in; it’s why Monk does not? If Carter gets in, then Monk should be in. There isn’t enough between the two receivers to have one in, while the other gets shunned year after year. Its time the NFL Hall of Fame voters get it right; its time to put Monk where he belongs.
For further information on the Monk campaign and an explaination of the adjust statistics used. See The Case For Art Monk – Part One, Part Two, Part Three and Part Four
4 Comments
January 31st, 2008 at 1:16 pm
I know I promised this long ago, but the head coaching thing has got me down. Russ Grimm later today, Darrell Green tomorrow sometime.
August 3rd, 2008 at 4:30 pm
cris carter all the way!!!!!!!!!!!
October 8th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
2 other points in favor of Monk over Carter:
1) If you compare each guy’s top 5 game performances in receiving yardage in both the regular season and in the playoffs, Monk sweeps each comparison, adding up to a 10-0 win for Monk. Monk’s top 2 games in yardage are actually better than anything Carter put up. In 1985, Monk had 230 yards against the Bengals and in 1984, he had 200 yards against the 49ers. Carter never got into that territory in any game.
I figured that some folks might object, because TDs were not included in this comparison, so I did it again, using a fantasy football scoring system to rate each guy’s 5 best regular season and 5 best playoff performances. This comparison was a little closer, in that Carter’s stats actually tied Monk’s on three ocassions. The final score, though, is another Art Monk win: 7 wins, 0 losses, and 3 ties.
2) Vikings fans tend to object to the idea that Monk should receive credit for his team’s playoff successes, insisting that “the Hall of Fame is an individual honor.” I would side with them on this if this argument actually worked out for their man. It doesn’t.
You see, it’s not just a matter of Monk’s teams winning more often in the postseason than Carter’s (they did, Monk & ‘Skins: 10-5, Carter & Eagles/Vikings: 4-10). Those numbers only include games in which these players actually played, so Monk’s absence from some ‘Skins playoff games does not explain away the discrepancy. The facts are that Monk’s PERSONAL playoff stats are actually better than Carter’s (this is reinforced by the facts in #1 above). In fact, Monk’s personal playoff stats are better than those of Carter, Andre Reed, or Tim Brown. So it’s not just a matter of Monk playing on better teams; Monk himself actually out-performed Carter on the big stage of the NFL playoffs. When it counts.
2a) Monk and the ‘Skins played a higher level of competition than Carter’s teams did in those playoff games in which Monk put up better numbers than Carter. Just take a look at the teams they played and what is your gut reaction? Monk and the ‘Skins were constantly facing championship-level teams who had actually won recent Super Bowls. The teams Carter and his Eagles and Vikings faced in the postseason were not nearly as impressive. I invented a stat to prove this which I won’t enumerate here, but suffice it to say, my initial impulse on this matter was bourne out by the numbers. Monk’s ‘Skins faced a much higher percentage of teams with recent championship pedigree than did Carter and his teams. In fact, the ‘Skins and Monk NEVER lost a playoff game to a team that was more than 2 years away from their closest Super Bowl victory! Meanwhile, Carter’s teams NEVER beat a team that fits this description. (Carter’s teams only won 1 road playoff game during his NFL career. Monk and the ‘Skins won 3 road playoff games. While Monk’s teams lost only 1 home playoff game, Carter’s teams dropped 4 games at home in the playoffs)
In fact, if you average out the regular season records of the teams Monk and Carter faced in the playoffs, you will see that the overall quality of playoff foes Carter faced was much lower than those faced by Monk. Despite this, Monk’s teams won a lot more, and Monk himself put up better playoff numbers than Carter did.
P.S.- All of the above comparisons were made WITHOUT the benefit of the valid statistical adjustment mentioned in the above article. Monk does not always need this adjustment to show his quality in relation to Carter.
January 31st, 2009 at 4:19 pm
Another thought. While Jake Reed was very talented, let’s not forget that Cris Carter was the go to guy for the Vikings, whereas the Redskins had an amazing group of receivers when Monk played.
Leave a Reply