Would You Rather...Victor Cruz or Hakeem Nicks?
There's a very good chance the New York Giants will keep both Victor Cruz and Hakeem Nicks for many years to come, but with both players possessing contracts that are in flux, there's also a small chance that at least one gets away.
Nicks has just one year left on his rookie deal, and Cruz is slated to become a restricted free agent on March 12. Considering how strapped for cap space the Giants are, that means both talented receivers could have contract years on the table in 2013.
Giants co-owner John Mara said this week at the NFL Scouting Combine that the team isn't prioritizing one player over another, but should they be?
I see no reason why Nicks would be a priority. If anything, the team's sole focus should be on Cruz, who is more dynamic and versatile and who has been much better at staying healthy. Since he became a prominent member of the offense in Week 3 of the 2011 season, he's been significantly more productive than all of his peers, including Nicks.
Nicks was a first-round pick and Cruz went undrafted. Plus, there's a perception that Nicks is a better deep threat. That's false, but Nicks has the reputation and two 1,000-yard seasons under his belt. He was the man before Cruz came along, and that might be warping the team's perception of his value.
Who would you keep?
Cruz is one year older but has had a clean slate of health ever since getting back from a hamstring injury suffered during his rookie season. Nicks was hampered this past season by knee and foot injuries and has yet to make it through a complete season in his four years in the league.
So to wrap up hypothetical Friday here on the Bleacher Report NFC East Blog, I want to know who you'd prefer the Giants keep if push were to come to shove in the near future, Hakeem Nicks or Victor Cruz?
In my mind, it's not even close.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?