Zorn and Skins to Pursue Hackett

[Smoot Point Really]

ANOTHER point is that it makes sense to bring in a Quarterback when implementing a new offense, but it doesn't at all make sense to bring in a garden-variety Wide Receiver... This guy is nothing special.

[grego]

I bolded this portion because it's the entire point of my previous post. Lloyd DIDN'T have two solid years in SF...he had two TERRIBLE years. You may look at his overall numbers and assume that, heck, 48 catches and 700 yards is pretty darn solid, but it's NOT. They force-fed him balls out there in SF, to the tune of an average of 100 targets a year for 2003 and 2004. He caught about 45% of those passes (terrible) and averaged less than 7 yards per target (also terrible). A guy piling up mediocre numbers on #1-type target numbers is simply not impressive. At all.

good post about why you have to dig a little deeper than the obvious numbers.

(sorry- edited to fix below comment)

btw- am i the only one impressed with how football outsiders had hackett ranked in 2006? they dig, and they had him ranked #2 in the NFL in the adjusted (dvoa) category. #2 people!!!

modest incentive laden contract could be an absolute steal.

[EddiePleaseSayTheBaby]

If anyone watched hackett torch us in the playoffs last year there is no reason why we shouldn't go after him.

He played in the same system and was an upcoming star in that offense.

When he played he put up numbers and when he started he showed he was a capable #1 reciever in the WCO by catching those slant and short patterns and making something out of them consistantly.

Wasn't Springs let go by Seattle because he couldn't stay healthy?

He's still injury prone but has given us 15+ games in 3 of the 4 years he's been here and was a vital piece to our run last year.

[Peregrine]

Doing a little research on Hackett(I know little to nothing about him), last season he averaged 64 ypg in his limited action. Thats better than we have had at WR in years. He was on pace for 1000 yards. As a #3 WR, I think it would be realistic to expect him to put up 600-700 yards when healthy, which would be a huge improvement for us out of a #3 WR. He has a lot of explosive ability, but the major knock on him is health. He knows the WCO. As long as the price is not too expensive, I think hes a very good option. You cant expect every FA to be Randy Moss. Some people think that there are superstars just sitting on the market, who will sign for cheap. There arent. Instead you have to do your research, find someone with a lot of potential, and determine that whatever issue they have(in this case, injuries) can be overcome.

[DirtySkin21]

^^Peregrine, how come everytime someone asks you what your sig means, you never tell them? ive been waiting for you to tell them so I could find out without asking oyu but everytime, it seems you avoid it for some reason. What does your sig mean?

to me, it looks like a picture of carlos rogers with sean taylors name on the back of his jersey falling out of the sky onto conrete. thats all i get...

[FootballGuy2677]

Since when does a 6'2" player qualify as a "big" wide receiver?

Since when do we need a 6"6 guy? I know our recievers are small but come on. Were not gonna find a Randy Moss anytime soon.

[WVUforREDSKINS]

I'll trust Zorn. He obviously knows the guy.

I think he had over 100 yds receiving against us this past year as well.

[cmman848]

If we get him for cheap--- im all for it, if we could somehow get him and a "big-name" receiver i think we'd have a top 5 offense easily

[e16bball]

Do the names Ken Dorsey and Alex Smith ring a bell? He had to very solid years in San Francisco... DESPITE his quarterbacks. Please... If we get him, I wish him well... However, I won't be all that happy if we give him BLloyd money. It will show that we haven't really learned a thing from our past experiences.

I mean, you hit the nail on the head with wishing him well and all, but there's really no comparison.

Lloyd's QBs in 2004 may not have been particularly good, but they completed 57.9% of their passes. Lloyd caught 48.3% of the passes thrown to him. In 2005, they were even worse, and completed 52.4% of their passes. Lloyd caught 44.0% of the passes thrown to him. In other words, Lloyd was much LESS reliable than the rest of the group of bums the 49ers put out there. To demonstrate that he's pretty consistent in being unreliable, he was at 40.3% in 2006 with the Redskins, and an astonishing 18.1% in 2007 (which I won't hold against him).

Hackett's QBs were at 64.8% in 2005. He caught 65.1% of the passes thrown to him. In 2006, the Seattle QBs were down to 57.0%. Hackett, on the other hand, was at 67.2%. In 2007, the Seattle QBs were back up to 62.9%, and Hackett was at 68.1%. The guy is consistently reliable in this offense. You can put him in there and get all the results you expect from a "possession WR." He needs to stay healthy, and I'm the first to admit that, but when he's on the field, he's a much safer bet to be good than Brandon Lloyd.

[grego]

Doing a little research on Hackett(I know little to nothing about him), last season he averaged 64 ypg in his limited action. Thats better than we have had at WR in years. He was on pace for 1000 yards. As a #3 WR, I think it would be realistic to expect him to put up 600-700 yards when healthy, which would be a huge improvement for us out of a #3 WR. He has a lot of explosive ability, but the major knock on him is health. He knows the WCO. As long as the price is not too expensive, I think hes a very good option. You cant expect every FA to be Randy Moss. Some people think that there are superstars just sitting on the market, who will sign for cheap. There arent. Instead you have to do your research, find someone with a lot of potential, and determine that whatever issue they have(in this case, injuries) can be overcome.

exactly. btw- he got hurt in the first game on, i think, the 7th play. not saying thats a good thing, but his average ypg is a bit down cuz he barely played that game. besides that game, i believe he averaged 80+ yards per game and nearly 1 TD per game.

point is, when the guys plays, he scored TD's and makes plays.

i'm not even that concerned about his injuries- last year he was hampered by one injury to my knowledge. and its the same one that knocked out supremely in-shape, workout-warrior james thrash for 4 games initially before he reaggravated it week 17 and missed the wild card game. same exact thing happened to hackett.

the guy 1) scores 2) knows the system 3) knows the coach 4) will likely come very cheap 5) is probably better- when healthy- than any WR we have on the roster. and, did i mention??? football outsiders ranked him #2 in the entire freaking NFL in 2006 in VALUE PER PLAY. not sure i mentioned that, but just in case......

[DirtySkin21]

Doing a little research on Hackett(I know little to nothing about him), last season he averaged 64 ypg in his limited action. Thats better than we have had at WR in years. He was on pace for 1000 yards. As a #3 WR, I think it would be realistic to expect him to put up 600-700 yards when healthy, which would be a huge improvement for us out of a #3 WR. He has a lot of explosive ability, but the major knock on him is health. He knows the WCO. As long as the price is not too expensive, I think hes a very good option. You cant expect every FA to be Randy Moss. Some people think that there are superstars just sitting on the market, who will sign for cheap. There arent. Instead you have to do your research, find someone with a lot of potential, and determine that whatever issue they have(in this case, injuries) can be overcome.

ya there??? dont forget my question to you... i wanna know what your sig means and why people ask you what it means you ingore them?????pleaseeeeeeeee:laugh: