Passizle Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Yay... another injury waiting to happen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbnva Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Hackett signed with the 'Hawks for 5 years...... u have a link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTC228 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Go after Hackett, he was the 2nd best FA reciever in the market besides Moss, and if the injuries are a worry...its the NFL, any player is 1 play away from an injury on any play. We don't need a "big" reciever in the west coast offense, I think thats a big overblown, we just need someone over 6ft, but Hackett is 6'2", 208lbs which isn't too shabby. Remember, we have a tight end named Cooley who is going to be our leading reciever no matter what, especially in a west-coast offense. With Cooley working the middle, Moss and Randle-El able to stretch the defense, and Hackett running crip routes and catching everything that comes his way, our offense will be looking pretty good, not to mention C.P. and his ability to bust a long one on a screen at anytime. I think the upside here far outweighs the downside, here are just a few of his stats in the 33 games that he played(not counting post season).....16 cathes over 20 yards, 5 catches over 40 yards, and 66 catches for first downs, he's actually averaging a first down every catch-13.3 yards/rec. So if we sign Hackett, we wouldn't have to go after a reciever until the 3rd round, and there will still be talent there. If we can spend our first 2 picks on Defense that will be great. So I say lets bring in D.J. and see what he can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Go after Hackett, he was the 2nd best FA reciever in the market besides Moss Obviously the rest of the NFL scouts, coaches, and GMs don't agree with you seeing as how nobody has really gone after him and a bunch of other FA WRs have already been signed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CG Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Starting to turn from being heavily in favor of a Hackett signing to hoping we get away from it. He seems too fragile and it doesn't seem like he'll be able to keep active in the long run, and we need that big WR in on pretty much every play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Who cares about his first 5 seasons? They don't provide any indication for what his current health and probability of injury are. The more relevant stat is that Jansen has missed the entirety of 2 of the last 4 seasons. Thats 50%. Hacket meanwhile has played in 33 games over the last 3 seasons. Thats significantly more than 50%. You can try and skew the facts however you want but one thing holds true, Hackett was a rookie in 2004 from then through the 2007 season he has only started in 14 games. And what do you mean who cares about Jansen's first 5 seasons? That's 80+ games in a row without a miss. And what do you know about his injury probability? ANY player that would've been standing where he was in the Miami game last year would've went down with an injury that brutal, even the most athletic player can't bounce back from a broken and dislocated ankle of that severity. __ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmw2301 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 I'm not at all sold on Hackett, I think he might end up being the next Brandon Lloyd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meek Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 You can try and skew the facts however you want but one thing holds true, Hackett was a rookie in 2004 from then through the 2007 season he has only started in 14 games. And what do you mean who cares about Jansen's first 5 seasons? That's 80+ games in a row without a miss. And what do you know about his injury probability? ANY player that would've been standing where he was in the Miami game last year would've went down with an injury that brutal, even the most athletic player can't bounce back from a broken and dislocated ankle of that severity. __ Funny that you should accuse me of skewing facts when you're the one that seems to be doing most of the skewing around here. The fact that Hackett was on the practice squad his rookie year has nothing to do with his durability but yet you seem to be implying this with your 14 games started in 4 years stat. Likewise, the whole notion of games started is irrelevant when you're considering a player's durability. If he played in 33 games, then its safe to assume that he was healthy for these 33 games. The fact that he may have been a 2nd or 3rd stringer 3 years ago is completely irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1972FAN Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Yeah not to concened, if we get him it won't be for much. He'll have to go elseware for a big payday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Funny that you should accuse me of skewing facts when you're the one that seems to be doing most of the skewing around here. The fact that Hackett was on the practice squad his rookie year has nothing to do with his durability but yet you seem to be implying this with your 14 games started in 4 years stat. Likewise, the whole notion of games started is irrelevant when you're considering a player's durability. If he played in 33 games, then its safe to assume that he was healthy for these 33 games. The fact that he may have been a 2nd or 3rd stringer 3 years ago is completely irrelevant. Practice squad? He was placed on IR in 2004: 11/5/2004Placed WR Alex Bannister and WR D.J. Hackett on injured reserve. Signed WR Jerheme Urban and WR Taco Wallace from the practice squad to the active roster. http://www.seahawks.com/Team/Transactions.aspx?year=2004 Reinforcing my point that he has started only 14 games in 4 years and that tells me his his injury history is not favorable. __ __ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMike619 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 No kidding. If he was fragile in that division imagine how banged up he'll get in the NFC East. He will get eaten up in the NFC Beast. There is NOTHING about this guy that screams "Sign him". If anything I am looking at him like a risk that I am not interested in taking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Practice squad?He was placed on IR in 2004: http://www.seahawks.com/Team/Transactions.aspx?year=2004 Reinforcing my point that he has started only 14 games in 4 years and that tells me his his injury history is not favorable. :owned: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valenski Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 All i have to say is MALCOM KELLY!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbnva Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 All i have to say is MALCOM KELLY!!!! so will alot of people but do you REALLY think he will fall to 21? :no: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Get Pissed Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Yes, who cares about a guy who started in 82 straight games before getting hurt vs. a guy who has never been healthy in any of his years playing in the NFL? Funny that you should accuse me of skewing facts when you're the one that seems to be doing most of the skewing around here. The fact that Hackett was on the practice squad his rookie year has nothing to do with his durability but yet you seem to be implying this with your 14 games started in 4 years stat. Likewise, the whole notion of games started is irrelevant when you're considering a player's durability. If he played in 33 games, then its safe to assume that he was healthy for these 33 games. The fact that he may have been a 2nd or 3rd stringer 3 years ago is completely irrelevant. What fact's did mistertim skew?? Where do you people come up with this stuff??? One person says this guy is "fragile" and then next thing you know its caught on like wildfire. Let's look at the facts shall we...Aside from his rookie season when he was on the practice squad, Hackett appeared in 13 games in 2005 (which is just as many as Santana did this year for us) and 14 games in 2006. His only year where he was really bogged down by injuries was this past year where he only managed to play in 6 games. Yet despite playing in just 6 games, Hackett scored as many touchdowns as any of our receivers were able to in a full season of work. Meeks, I like how you withdrew from your original argument (which you comepletely lost) about Jansens durability versus Hacketts. Yet, you casually start comparing him to our wide receivers and then in your most recent post compare him to Santana specifically. I'll give you credit that it is a great idea to compare Hackett to our receivers, but man admit you lost the Jansen argument. I can't believe that you actually fail to give credit to Jansen for playing in 80+ games. To view this stat as irrelevant is simply foolish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaRonDontLikeUgly Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 ive heard he gets really bored in practice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbnva Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 from what i have seen looking online he has had the following injuries Hip Pointer knee injury 2 ankle sprains Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meek Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 What fact's did mistertim skew??Meeks, I like how you withdrew from your original argument (which you comepletely lost) about Jansens durability versus Hacketts. Yet, you casually start comparing him to our wide receivers and then in your most recent post compare him to Santana specifically. I'll give you credit that it is a great idea to compare Hackett to our receivers, but man admit you lost the Jansen argument. I can't believe that you actually fail to give credit to Jansen for playing in 80+ games. To view this stat as irrelevant is simply foolish. I didn't lose any Jansen argument. Jansen is done and has been for quite some time but a lot of people on here have a hard time coming to grips with that. That doesn't have anything to do with Hackett, though, and I only brought it up to draw a comparison between how the 2 are treated in the public opinion of ES. The bottom line is this. Hackett has only really been a player in this league for 3 years. Whether he was placed on IR in November 2004 because of a bona fide injury or just to protect him for getting snatched up by another team I don't have any way of knowing. I suspect that latter, but in either case he wasn't going to get on the field in Seattle his rookie season, injury or no injury. The fact that Hackett has only started 14 games in his career is irrelevant in the context of a discussion about his durability which is why I referred to it as skewing. Give the man credit for the 33 games in 3 years in which he appeared healthy. Also give him credit and recognize that in 2007, the one year in which he truly did battle injuries for an extended stretch of time, he still put up numbers that rivaled our wideouts in just 6 games of work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSF Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 14 games in 4 years......enough said! That's not even close to being accurate. Hackett has only played 3 seasons, and he's played in 33 games, not 14. He also lit us up in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Hackett is good when he's on the field, the problem is he is injury prone (to date). I wouldn't give too much for Hackett but in the right environment he could light it up. It would be a risk, however drafting any WR is a risk in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOSKINS_08 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 I'd take Hackett..I mean, we do need another WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRobi21 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Yeah not to concened, if we get him it won't be for much. He'll have to go elseware for a big payday. Your sig is hilarious. :laugh::laugh::laugh:\ Good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRobi21 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 ive heard he gets really bored in practice :laugh::laugh: No room for that laziness here in Washington! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTC228 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 No kidding. If he was fragile in that division imagine how banged up he'll get in the NFC East. If you all think the NFC East is too tough for a 3 year veteran, what makes you think that a kid coming out of college who has never taken an NFL hit will be able to make it? I'd rather take a chance on a guy who has shown he can produce, and just maybe had some bad luck than a 21 or 22 year old who doesnt have an NFL catch. I don't think there is any need to draft a WR in the first round when our D still needs to sure up. But it doesn't really matter what I think or anyone else on this board thinks, Zorn has experience with Hackett so if he thinks he's worth it then we will see DJ in the Burgundy and Gold. Maybe Hackett hasn't been shopping himself too much because he already has had talks with Zorn and Danny and they are just taking their time, no need to rush a signing. But in the end I have faith in our coaches and if we bring Hackett in, obviously they think he will be a asset, no matter what I think our offense will be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebowski Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Games started is irrelevant when you are talking about his health. He played in 33 games. There is no need to mention his 14 games started unless you want to argue that he wasn't good enough to start more (which I think would be a false argument). I am not holding his injuries against him. Injuries are a part of the game. They can happen to anybody. I just help our team stay healthy. Hackett looks like a perfect example of some players needing some time to develop. He has looked awesome recently and only looks to be getting better. But don't listen to me. Listen our head coach Jim Zorn. He has worked with him since he was a rookie. I he likes him, I like him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.