D.J. Hackett > Roy Williams, Chad Johnson, etc.

[dizzinator53]

You even bother reading the first post? For Williams and Johnson, you will have to give up, at minimum, a 2nd round pick and a bigger contract than the one Hackett would get. Because of the new CBA, I'm willing to sig bet you that Hackett is going to get a 15 mil SB.

I'll take that bet..... You are wrong. A guy that could get cut gets a 15 million dollar signing bonus?

[A Real Mench]

its ok, hes named after a mediocore rapper and a terrible actor, im sure you guys will win your bets, i lol @ dj HACKett getting a 15 mil sb

[skinsince72]

Could any Seahawk make it in a tough division? He may look good out there but may be less than mediocre here.

[ceviker]

To really say Hackett is better than Williams and Johnson is plain madness and any such comment or even thought about it should lead to an unconditional commitment to a mental facility.

[JimmyConway]

Could any Seahawk make it in a tough division? He may look good out there but may be less than mediocre here.

They also throw the ball more than most teams.

Hackett is worth considering if the price right but if we're going to add a WR I would rather make a trade for a proven #1 (ie Williams > Ocho Cinco) OR take our chances in the draft. Also I wouldn't consider Hackett a possession receiver which is what we really need.

[dizzinator53]

Actually on second thought, I can't believe I responded to methodman. I forgot he posted this thread http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=227012&highlight=caron

His thought are is diluted at best.

[white_rasta]

I'll take that bet..... You are wrong. A guy that could get cut gets a 15 million dollar signing bonus?

He can't get cut he's a free agent

[white_rasta]

Could any Seahawk make it in a tough division? He may look good out there but may be less than mediocre here.

DJ Hackett is no slouch and will make a name for himself very soon. I don't think you guys realize how good he is going to be.

[e16bball]

Is he better than Roy Williams? No. Was that the point of this thread? No. The point here is that he's a better addition for us, considering the opportunity cost.

Sure, we could trade a 2nd round pick for Roy Williams. And we've have him. But we'd also be missing a chance to pick up a future impact player on our OL or DL. We'd also be forced to give him a long-term contract extension, which would be quite lucrative to say the least. Given our somewhat shaky cap situation, that would likely require that we let go of a Shawn Springs or a Cornelius Griffin or a Marcus Washington. And we certainly wouldn't be able to invest any kind of significant FA money in a DE or a CB or whatever else tickles our fancy.

So we could have Roy. But personally, I'd rather have a strong FA DL, a 2nd round OL, the ability to keep our current players, and a cheaper, less "elite" WR like Hackett instead.

Moreover, I'm not really sure what's with the DJ Hackett hate around here. The guy is a very good WR. In the 7 games he actually played this season (including postseason), he put up 39 catches for 493 yards and 4 TDs. That's an average per-game of 5.6 catches, 70.4 yards, and .57 TDs. Not half bad for a "4th WR." Looks pretty similar to, and in fact pretty clearly superior to, the career averages of that guy we keep arguing should be in the HOF [4.3 catches, 58.7 yards, .32 TDs]. I don't see any reason why we'd expect Hackett's numbers to decrease significantly in coming to play for us; while we might pass the ball less, and less effectively, you have to think he'd benefit from being a full-time guy.

We talk a lot about how we NEED a reliable possession receiver. We've got a big-play guy in Moss, but we need a guy to go over the middle and make the big catches and 3rd down to move the chains. Someone like Art Monk. I'm sure that sounds familiar to everyone. Well, take a moment, if you will, to check out Hackett's target vs. reception numbers over his career:

2005: 28 receptions 43 targets 65.1%

2006: 45 receptions 67 targets 67.2%

2007: 32 receptions 47 targets 68.1%

Every year since coming into the league he has caught over 65% of the balls thrown in his direction. I realize this is a not frequently-used statistic, so I'll try to offer some other players' numbers for comparison:

Deion Branch (in Seattle): 54.8%

Nate Burleson (in Seattle): 51.5%

Antwaan Randle El (in Washington): 58.8%

Santana Moss (in Washington): 57.1%

Brandon Lloyd (career): 43.9%

Chad Johnson: 56.5%

Roy Williams: 52.2%

Terrell Owens: 59.5%

Randy Moss: 56.7%

Wes Welker: 70.0%

Marvin Harrison: 61.9%

TJ Houshmandzadeh: 65.1%

Derrick Mason: 63.1%

In any case, I think it's pretty clear that Hackett is a highly reliable receiver, even in comparison to other elite WRs in the league. He is, in my estimation, pretty comparable to Houshmandzadeh. A big guy with some height and extremely reliable hands.

He'd fit very nicely in a WR corps with Moss and Randle El, providing the "possession" to their "big play." He doesn't have the speed to be a "game-breaking" number one, but having such a player is overrated. You simply have to have a WR corps that can let you do all the things you want, in terms of being able to make 3rd downs, being able to make big plays, being to succeed in the red zone, etc. With Hackett added to Moss, ARE, and Cooley, we'd have the ability to do all these things. And we'd be able to use our resources (big FA money, draft picks) elsewhere.

[dachozenone]

Is he better than Roy Williams? No. Was that the point of this thread? No. The point here is that he's a better addition for us, considering the opportunity cost.

Sure, we could trade a 2nd round pick for Roy Williams. And we've have him. But we'd also be missing a chance to pick up a future impact player on our OL or DL. We'd also be forced to give him a long-term contract extension, which would be quite lucrative to say the least. Given our somewhat shaky cap situation, that would likely require that we let go of a Shawn Springs or a Cornelius Griffin or a Marcus Washington. And we certainly wouldn't be able to invest any kind of significant FA money in a DE or a CB or whatever else tickles our fancy.

So we could have Roy. But personally, I'd rather have a strong FA DL, a 2nd round OL, the ability to keep our current players, and a cheaper, less "elite" WR like Hackett instead.

Moreover, I'm not really sure what's with the DJ Hackett hate around here. The guy is a very good WR. In the 7 games he actually played this season (including postseason), he put up 39 catches for 493 yards and 4 TDs. That's an average per-game of 5.6 catches, 70.4 yards, and .57 TDs. Not half bad for a "4th WR." Looks pretty similar to, and in fact pretty clearly superior to, the career averages of that guy we keep arguing should be in the HOF [4.3 catches, 58.7 yards, .32 TDs]. I don't see any reason why we'd expect Hackett's numbers to decrease significantly in coming to play for us; while we might pass the ball less, and less effectively, you have to think he'd benefit from being a full-time guy.

We talk a lot about how we NEED a reliable possession receiver. We've got a big-play guy in Moss, but we need a guy to go over the middle and make the big catches and 3rd down to move the chains. Someone like Art Monk. I'm sure that sounds familiar to everyone. Well, take a moment, if you will, to check out Hackett's target vs. reception numbers over his career:

2005: 28 receptions 43 targets 65.1%

2006: 45 receptions 67 targets 67.2%

2007: 32 receptions 47 targets 68.1%

Every year since coming into the league he has caught over 65% of the balls thrown in his direction. I realize this is a not frequently-used statistic, so I'll try to offer some other players' numbers for comparison:

Deion Branch (in Seattle): 54.8%

Nate Burleson (in Seattle): 51.5%

Antwaan Randle El (in Washington): 58.8%

Santana Moss (in Washington): 57.1%

Brandon Lloyd (career): 43.9%

Chad Johnson: 56.5%

Roy Williams: 52.2%

Terrell Owens: 59.5%

Randy Moss: 56.7%

Wes Welker: 70.0%

Marvin Harrison: 61.9%

TJ Houshmandzadeh: 65.1%

Derrick Mason: 63.1%

In any case, I think it's pretty clear that Hackett is a highly reliable receiver, even in comparison to other elite WRs in the league. He is, in my estimation, pretty comparable to Houshmandzadeh. A big guy with some height and extremely reliable hands.

He'd fit very nicely in a WR corps with Moss and Randle El, providing the "possession" to their "big play." He doesn't have the speed to be a "game-breaking" number one, but having such a player is overrated. You simply have to have a WR corps that can let you do all the things you want, in terms of being able to make 3rd downs, being able to make big plays, being to succeed in the red zone, etc. With Hackett added to Moss, ARE, and Cooley, we'd have the ability to do all these things. And we'd be able to use our resources (big FA money, draft picks) elsewhere.

Good Post. Where did you pull the target numbers from?

[e16bball]

Good Post. Where did you pull the target numbers from?

Thanks.

The target numbers are from their Sports Illustrated pages. Here is Hackett's, for example.

[A Real Mench]

Is he better than Roy Williams? No. Was that the point of this thread? No. The point here is that he's a better addition for us, considering the opportunity cost.

Sure, we could trade a 2nd round pick for Roy Williams. And we've have him. But we'd also be missing a chance to pick up a future impact player on our OL or DL. We'd also be forced to give him a long-term contract extension, which would be quite lucrative to say the least. Given our somewhat shaky cap situation, that would likely require that we let go of a Shawn Springs or a Cornelius Griffin or a Marcus Washington. And we certainly wouldn't be able to invest any kind of significant FA money in a DE or a CB or whatever else tickles our fancy.

So we could have Roy. But personally, I'd rather have a strong FA DL, a 2nd round OL, the ability to keep our current players, and a cheaper, less "elite" WR like Hackett instead.

Moreover, I'm not really sure what's with the DJ Hackett hate around here. The guy is a very good WR. In the 7 games he actually played this season (including postseason), he put up 39 catches for 493 yards and 4 TDs. That's an average per-game of 5.6 catches, 70.4 yards, and .57 TDs. Not half bad for a "4th WR." Looks pretty similar to, and in fact pretty clearly superior to, the career averages of that guy we keep arguing should be in the HOF [4.3 catches, 58.7 yards, .32 TDs]. I don't see any reason why we'd expect Hackett's numbers to decrease significantly in coming to play for us; while we might pass the ball less, and less effectively, you have to think he'd benefit from being a full-time guy.

We talk a lot about how we NEED a reliable possession receiver. We've got a big-play guy in Moss, but we need a guy to go over the middle and make the big catches and 3rd down to move the chains. Someone like Art Monk. I'm sure that sounds familiar to everyone. Well, take a moment, if you will, to check out Hackett's target vs. reception numbers over his career:

2005: 28 receptions 43 targets 65.1%

2006: 45 receptions 67 targets 67.2%

2007: 32 receptions 47 targets 68.1%

Every year since coming into the league he has caught over 65% of the balls thrown in his direction. I realize this is a not frequently-used statistic, so I'll try to offer some other players' numbers for comparison:

Deion Branch (in Seattle): 54.8%

Nate Burleson (in Seattle): 51.5%

Antwaan Randle El (in Washington): 58.8%

Santana Moss (in Washington): 57.1%

Brandon Lloyd (career): 43.9%

Chad Johnson: 56.5%

Roy Williams: 52.2%

Terrell Owens: 59.5%

Randy Moss: 56.7%

Wes Welker: 70.0%

Marvin Harrison: 61.9%

TJ Houshmandzadeh: 65.1%

Derrick Mason: 63.1%

In any case, I think it's pretty clear that Hackett is a highly reliable receiver, even in comparison to other elite WRs in the league. He is, in my estimation, pretty comparable to Houshmandzadeh. A big guy with some height and extremely reliable hands.

He'd fit very nicely in a WR corps with Moss and Randle El, providing the "possession" to their "big play." He doesn't have the speed to be a "game-breaking" number one, but having such a player is overrated. You simply have to have a WR corps that can let you do all the things you want, in terms of being able to make 3rd downs, being able to make big plays, being to succeed in the red zone, etc. With Hackett added to Moss, ARE, and Cooley, we'd have the ability to do all these things. And we'd be able to use our resources (big FA money, draft picks) elsewhere.

just about ever reciever you named on there would be a number one target, therfore they would have over 150 passes thrown to them, and would be covered by the teasm number 1 corner.... so please dont compare hackjob to any of them

[[[ghost]]]

hes not saying hackett is better

hes sayig hes cheaper, easier to get and has potential to be great

The ">" means "Greater than." He better change the thread title if he meant something else.

And regardless, a receiver who can't stay healthy is worthless.

And plus, if we brought Roy Williams in, Moss would put up the same numbers. Only he'd do it for about 14+ games a year, not 2 games.

[Truant]

just about ever reciever you named on there would be a number one target, therfore they would have over 150 passes thrown to them, and would be covered by the teasm number 1 corner.... so please dont compare hackjob to any of them

Good point on the number of pass attempts that would go to these other guys, but not because they are number one guys, but because Hackett hasn't been able to stay healthy.

Also of note, Seattle has a very efficient offense and Hass is pretty much an elite QB.

With that being said, his % is significantly higher than Branch and Burleson who play alongside of him.

Hackett probably won't be an all-pro, but he won't be a slouch either. He has a good frame and fantastic body control. When available he is a great 1a type of receiver. He's not better than RW or CJ, but he'd be cheaper and wouldn't require draftpick compensation.

I'd rank him a 7 out of 10. A 10 being a must sign and a 1 being a pass. We should definitely talk to him as the other FA wideouts are very mediocre.

(PS. Bryant Johnson is not a good fit. He's an underachiever. When given the opportunity to play in the absence of Boldin and/or Fitz he hasn't done anything. Also, in his limited role, he'd make the awful drop that would remind you of Rod Gardner. Pass in a big way. AZ isn't even interested in retaining him.)

[e16bball]

just about ever reciever you named on there would be a number one target, therfore they would have over 150 passes thrown to them, and would be covered by the teasm number 1 corner.... so please dont compare hackjob to any of them

Great point.

It certainly wouldn't be fair to mention that I included obviously not-number-one guys like Randle El, Lloyd, Burleson, Houshmandzadeh, Welker, etc. And I can see why you'd ignore my conclusion that Hackett is similar to Houshmandzadeh (a career #2) in order to make your assumption that I was concluding that he was superior to these various #1 receivers. In fact, it makes perfect sense that you'd assume there was some deep comparison between Hackett and elite #1 WRs, especially based on this statement:

He doesn't have the speed to be a "game-breaking" number one

In any case, your point does hold some water. Hackett isn't a #1 wideout, so you can't really compare his receptions/target numbers to guys who are the main focus of opposing passing games. I sort of figured people would understand that and temper their conclusions (perhaps reaching only the conclusion that I did, that Hackett is a very reliable target), but apparently that was not the case, at least with some.

With no further ado, here are a number of guys who are either career #2s, or who came into the league around the same time as Hackett and have played similar roles:

Reggie Wayne: 65.1%

Vincent Jackson: 49.3%

Amani Toomer (since Burress arrived): 54.4%

Kevin Curtis: 61.9%

Troy Williamson: 47.6%

Roddy White: 52.8%

Roscoe Parrish: 59.3%

Mark Bradley: 50.0%

Chris Henry: 53.9%

Brandon Jones: 52.2%

Roydell Williams: 55.3%

Mark Clayton: 55.2%

Michael Clayton: 59.2%

Reggie Williams: 56.5%

Bernard Berrian: 50.2%

Greg Jennings: 51.9%

Jerry Porter: 51.5%

Reggie Brown: 53.4%

Isaac Bruce (since Holt arrived): 69.3%

Anquan Boldin: 59.8%

Larry Fitzgerald: 59.2%

I think it should be sufficiently clear that compared to most of his peers, and compared to most secondary receivers in the league, Hackett is STILL more reliable than others. Only Isaac Bruce, a potential HOF candidate and one of the best #2 WRs in the history of the game, has caught more of the balls thrown his way than has Hackett.

As a possession receiver, what else can you ask for? He gets separation and secures the ball when its thrown at him. Used in concert with deep threats like Moss and Randle El and with another good intermediate target like Cooley, he'd be a terrific weapon. The Patriots have seen the benefit of a secondary receiver like Welker to go with Moss, and the Bengals have long enjoyed the reliability of a Houshmandzadeh alongside their big-play threat. Signing Hackett could very likely provide us with that 3rd down, red-zone, possession-type receiver.

[tml6157]

This is rediculous......im tired of being an 7-9, 8-8, or 9-7 team. I wanna be very good. its about time we start putting PLAYMAKERS on this team not questionable players like Archuletta and Lloyd. How can u not be all for pulling the trigger on Williams and Johnson. If we take another offseason and add character/question mark guys then we deserve to be average at best. What did NE do....added a playmaker in Moss and look at them. What did Dallas do.....added another playmaker and had the best record in the NFC. We need to add players that we know can ball. Trading a second round pick for a proven WR is much better then drafting one.

[S.T.real,lights,out]

Id rather have Roy. He can take over a game.

[method man]

This is rediculous......im tired of being an 7-9, 8-8, or 9-7 team. I wanna be very good. its about time we start putting PLAYMAKERS on this team not questionable players like Archuletta and Lloyd. How can u not be all for pulling the trigger on Williams and Johnson. If we take another offseason and add character/question mark guys then we deserve to be average at best. What did NE do....added a playmaker in Moss and look at them. What did Dallas do.....added another playmaker and had the best record in the NFC. We need to add players that we know can ball. Trading a second round pick for a proven WR is much better then drafting one.

You really are a hypocrite, are you not? Look at your sig, you are asking to draft all of those guys. One less second round pick means one less potential playmaker.

[method man]

Is he better than Roy Williams? No. Was that the point of this thread? No. The point here is that he's a better addition for us, considering the opportunity cost.

Sure, we could trade a 2nd round pick for Roy Williams. And we've have him. But we'd also be missing a chance to pick up a future impact player on our OL or DL. We'd also be forced to give him a long-term contract extension, which would be quite lucrative to say the least. Given our somewhat shaky cap situation, that would likely require that we let go of a Shawn Springs or a Cornelius Griffin or a Marcus Washington. And we certainly wouldn't be able to invest any kind of significant FA money in a DE or a CB or whatever else tickles our fancy.

So we could have Roy. But personally, I'd rather have a strong FA DL, a 2nd round OL, the ability to keep our current players, and a cheaper, less "elite" WR like Hackett instead.

Moreover, I'm not really sure what's with the DJ Hackett hate around here. The guy is a very good WR. In the 7 games he actually played this season (including postseason), he put up 39 catches for 493 yards and 4 TDs. That's an average per-game of 5.6 catches, 70.4 yards, and .57 TDs. Not half bad for a "4th WR." Looks pretty similar to, and in fact pretty clearly superior to, the career averages of that guy we keep arguing should be in the HOF [4.3 catches, 58.7 yards, .32 TDs]. I don't see any reason why we'd expect Hackett's numbers to decrease significantly in coming to play for us; while we might pass the ball less, and less effectively, you have to think he'd benefit from being a full-time guy.

We talk a lot about how we NEED a reliable possession receiver. We've got a big-play guy in Moss, but we need a guy to go over the middle and make the big catches and 3rd down to move the chains. Someone like Art Monk. I'm sure that sounds familiar to everyone. Well, take a moment, if you will, to check out Hackett's target vs. reception numbers over his career:

2005: 28 receptions 43 targets 65.1%

2006: 45 receptions 67 targets 67.2%

2007: 32 receptions 47 targets 68.1%

Every year since coming into the league he has caught over 65% of the balls thrown in his direction. I realize this is a not frequently-used statistic, so I'll try to offer some other players' numbers for comparison:

Deion Branch (in Seattle): 54.8%

Nate Burleson (in Seattle): 51.5%

Antwaan Randle El (in Washington): 58.8%

Santana Moss (in Washington): 57.1%

Brandon Lloyd (career): 43.9%

Chad Johnson: 56.5%

Roy Williams: 52.2%

Terrell Owens: 59.5%

Randy Moss: 56.7%

Wes Welker: 70.0%

Marvin Harrison: 61.9%

TJ Houshmandzadeh: 65.1%

Derrick Mason: 63.1%

In any case, I think it's pretty clear that Hackett is a highly reliable receiver, even in comparison to other elite WRs in the league. He is, in my estimation, pretty comparable to Houshmandzadeh. A big guy with some height and extremely reliable hands.

He'd fit very nicely in a WR corps with Moss and Randle El, providing the "possession" to their "big play." He doesn't have the speed to be a "game-breaking" number one, but having such a player is overrated. You simply have to have a WR corps that can let you do all the things you want, in terms of being able to make 3rd downs, being able to make big plays, being to succeed in the red zone, etc. With Hackett added to Moss, ARE, and Cooley, we'd have the ability to do all these things. And we'd be able to use our resources (big FA money, draft picks) elsewhere.

dude you are echoing my thoughts. and dizzinator ill take u up on that sig bet. you really are naive aren't you? when dockery got signed, everyone was surprised buffalo gave him a 15 mil SB. well, with the new cba, welcome to the new world of free agency. as the number one FA receiver out there probably after randy moss, this guy is going to get paid a ton. if not 15 mil, at least double digits. if there are gilbert arenas vs. clinton portis threads, why can't there be caron butler vs. jason campbell threads?

[dachozenone]

dude you are echoing my thoughts. and dizzinator ill take u up on that sig bet. you really are naive aren't you? when dockery got signed, everyone was surprised buffalo gave him a 15 mil SB. well, with the new cba, welcome to the new world of free agency. as the number one FA receiver out there probably after randy moss, this guy is going to get paid a ton. if not 15 mil, at least double digits. if there are gilbert arenas vs. clinton portis threads, why can't there be caron butler vs. jason campbell threads?

Most people have Berrian from Chicago as the number 1 receiver after Randy Moss.

[tml6157]

You really are a hypocrite, are you not? Look at your sig, you are asking to draft all of those guys. One less second round pick means one less potential playmaker.

can you read?? my sig says any COMBINATION of the above. it doesn't say all of them please. and losing a second round pick on a playmaker is ten times better then using that pick on a POTENTIAL playmaker. how are you not tired of adding players that have potential and never live up to it.

[method man]

can you read?? my sig says any COMBINATION of the above. it doesn't say all of them please. and losing a second round pick on a playmaker is ten times better then using that pick on a POTENTIAL playmaker. how are you not tired of adding players that have potential and never live up to it.

because second round picks are cheap and worth the risk. on average, they make less than a million a year for 4 or 5 years while a guy like roy williams will demand a 15 mil SB right off the bat.

[method man]

Most people have Berrian from Chicago as the number 1 receiver after Randy Moss.

I don't think so. Berrian played a full 16 games and did not even get a 1000 yards. Part of it was Rex, but a bigger part is that he is a pure deep threat.

[tml6157]

because second round picks are cheap and worth the risk. on average, they make less than a million a year for 4 or 5 years while a guy like roy williams will demand a 15 mil SB right off the bat.

so you would rather take a risk on a 2nd round WR who takes mostly likely 3 years to develop and might not even after that just because you arent paying him that much, instead of paying a player who is a proven WR that can change the game in favor of our team because you dont want to pay him?? Are you alright with being average for the next 3-4 years??

[e16bball]

so you would rather take a risk on a 2nd round WR who takes mostly likely 3 years to develop and might not even after that just because you arent paying him that much, instead of paying a player who is a proven WR that can change the game in favor of our team because you dont want to pay him?? Are you alright with being average for the next 3-4 years??

But we aren't functioning in a vacuum. If we didn't have to deal with a salary cap, Williams would be a phenomenal choice. Unfortunately, if we add him, we won't just have a regular team with one high-priced WR...we'll also have a high-priced RB, and two high-priced OTs, and a high-priced OG, and another couple of high-priced WRs, and a high-priced TE, and a high-priced DE, and a high-priced MLB, and a high-priced SS, and a trio of high-priced CBs. Which is not to mention the money we'll have to be giving to our young franchise QB soon. Under the constraints of the cap, you simply can't afford to throw big salaries at every position.

Given our current, relatively tenuous cap situation, we don't have the flexibility to go handing a number of big contracts; we might be able to find enough "cash over the cap" to finagle one, but I just can't see how we'd manage more than that. In other words, adding R. Williams very likely means, to take a name from your list, not adding Terrell Suggs.

And I just don't think Roy would make THAT big a difference. Teams with these young, "elite" WRs are not having success in general around the league. Look at the Lions...they have Roy AND CJ. Look at the Cardinals...they have Fitz AND Q. Look at the Bengals...they have 85 AND Housh. And yet they can't win ballgames. Why? Because their teams get pounded in the trenches. For every highlight reel catch and mindboggling TD these WRs provide, they're giving up more points because they can't stuff the run and rush the passer, and they're bogging down on offense because they can't carve out holes in the run game and they can't keep their QBs upright.

Sure, the Pats benefited from adding Moss, but Roy Williams is not Randy Moss. Randy Moss is one of the best WRs in the history of the game, and could easily have been the MVP of the league this season...Roy Williams is just very good. For what it's worth, here is an article that was written by a Sports Illustrated writer just recently on the absence of "top" WRs from the playoffs.

What do the two Super Bowl teams have in common? Well, first, they have effective, cohesive offensive lines. But even more importantly, they have terrific defensive lines. The Giants have probably the best 4-3 line in the league, and the Pats have probably the best 3-4 line. [Aside: 2nd best 4-3 line? Probably Green Bay. 2nd best 3-4 line? Probably San Diego.] They were the top 2 teams in the league in sacks. In fact, the top 5 teams in the league in sacks were NYG, NE, DAL, SEA, and SD. All of whom were still playing in the divisional round. Coincidence? I don't believe so.

Which I really think leads me to the key point here, again, that we really need to be upgrading along the lines, and trading high picks and huge contracts for more WRs will prevent us from being able to do that. We could add an elite DL in FA AND a very good young OL/DL prospect in the 2nd round AND Hackett instead of Roy Williams. And I think we'd be much better off that way.