THEREALTOR1 Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Then you should be able to explain how they moved. I would appreciate it if you did. I really think Hankerson is slowed from his hip injury. I think next season would be a better indicator of his progress. He wasn't cleared to participate in mini-camp was he? That hip can be a problem... hoping he gets more flexible and in great shape througout the season. He needs to improve. Clear enough? You've obviously been involved in enough debates on this board to know that some people on here can be the eternal optimist with regards to certain players, in the hopes that all the cosmic tumblers will fall into place, and that 3rd round wr(or (2) 2nd round wr's), (or even that 1st round QB) is actually a pro-bowler....they just need one more year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I'm personally done with patience, and banking on players becoming pro bowlers. I have no problem with holding onto Hankerson for depth, but we have to keep moving and adding receivers through free agency (both undrafted and veteran players) and the draft. This is Hankerson's time to step up and become a top receiver for us, and he's not rising to the challenge. Maybe he does at another time, maybe he doesn't. All that matters is that right now, we only have one threat at receiver in Garcon, and he's been hurt since week 1. Receiver is still a weakness for us, and we have to keep loading at the position to make sure we have enough weapons around our franchise QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Clear enough? You've obviously been involved in enough debates on this board to know that some people on here can be the eternal optimist with regards to certain players, in the hopes that all the cosmic tumblers will fall into place, and that 3rd round wr(or (2) 2nd round wr's), (or even that 1st round QB) is actually a pro-bowler....they just need one more year.Moving the goalpost implies that I shifted positions. How did I shift positions? All I see is that I didn't address that point at all. I replied to a different question asked by the same poster.As for whether the hip injury is a factor, In my judgment, it isn't. I'm looking at the same player I watched in August of last year. The quickness is still lacking, the body control is still lacking, he still poses no problem in single coverage. If Armstrong and Austin hadn't been cut, some of our members with burgundy blinders would be asking us to be patient with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I wasn't talking about separation. Cutler could toss the ball up even when Marshall appeared to be covered and he would come down with the ball. It was about body control and adjusting to the pass with the defender in his face. They are still doing it in Chicago. I don't think we want to see the INT numbers that we'd get if we started chucking the ball into coverage as much as Cutler does. Sure, they are still doing it in Chicago, while usually being in the top 10% in INT's, but their defense is top 5, ours isn't even BCS level defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I don't think we want to see the INT numbers that we'd get if we started chucking the ball into coverage as much as Cutler does. Sure, they are still doing it in Chicago, while usually being in the top 10% in INT's, but their defense is top 5, ours isn't even BCS level defense.Their top five defense is good, but they are also playing bend-but-don't-break which allows their opponents to play ball control and keep the Chicago offense off the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Hankerson isn't dumb, he just sometimes lacks a sense of awareness on the field. That will change with more targets and more game time. I have a lot of faith in Hank, I think he'll turn out to be good for this team. Patience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Moving the goalpost implies that I shifted positions. How did I shift positions? All I see is that I didn't address that point at all. I replied to a different question asked by the same poster. You said you 'hadn't seen that' when Hitman said that the only thing stopping Hankerson in single coverage was drops, implying you disagreed and that there was something else wrong with Hankerson's ability to beat single coverage. When Hitman responded that Hankerson has been getting separation and running open (this is basically true), you then started talking about the drops again and said you weren't talking about separation. That's not a particularly relevant response to the point being made, which is causing issues. Basically, some combination of the following three things is happening: The manner in which you are connecting the dots from one point to the next in this discussion is extremely unclear. You're doing a quite poor job of digesting the points made by others. You're intentionally dodging so that you don't have to address the points being made out of convenience. You may not have shifted positions but if you don't do a good job of expressing your position to begin with or are very vague about why you choose to respond to a particular post, it's awfully easy to interpret that as having happened. If Armstrong and Austin hadn't been cut, some of our members with burgundy blinders would be asking us to be patient with them. FWIW, I think there's cause to be patient with Hankerson. I was once cautiously optimistic about Armstrong and Austin but they had sufficient time to show that they'd reached their limits. I think Hankerson and Robinson have more potential than those two much in the same way that Helu and Royster had more potential than Portis and Hightower. That doesn't mean that they're the answer... but they're a step in the right direction and there's no use in throwing them under the bus until they clearly hit a developmental wall or we have something better. I can define for you the point where a receiver has hit a developmental wall if you'd really like as I suspect that's the point you'd be most keen to nitpick. It seems kind of unnecessary, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 You said you 'hadn't seen that' when Hitman said that the only thing stopping Hankerson in single coverage was drops, implying you disagreed and that there was something else wrong with Hankerson's ability to beat single coverage. When Hitman responded that Hankerson has been getting separation and running open (this is basically true), you then started talking about the drops again and said you weren't talking about separation. That's not a particularly relevant response to the point being made, which is causing issues.Basically, some combination of the following three things is happening: The manner in which you are connecting the dots from one point to the next in this discussion is extremely unclear. You're doing a quite poor job of digesting the points made by others. You're intentionally dodging so that you don't have to address the points being made out of convenience. You may not have shifted positions but if you don't do a good job of expressing your position to begin with or are very vague about why you choose to respond to a particular post, it's awfully easy to interpret that as having happened: Without changing a single word, here is my conversation with Hitman:Oldfan: I didn't get to see Roddy White much in his rookie year. I saw Brandon Marshall in his rookie year and, despite his drops, my reaction was : "How in the the hell did that guy drop to the fourth round!?" He couldn't be covered one on one. Hitman: Hank hasn't really been stopped in single coverage either. Oldfan: I haven't seen that. Hitman: I've seen him running open and in covered in double coverage. From what I've seen he's generally had 1 to 2 yards of separation, either running a route or sitting in a hole in the defense. Oldfan: I wasn't talking about separation. Cutler could toss the ball up even when Marshall appeared to be covered and he would come down with the ball. It was about body control and adjusting to the pass with the defender in his face. They are still doing it in Chicago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCClybun Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 FWIW, I think there's cause to be patient with Hankerson. I was once cautiously optimistic about Armstrong and Austin but they had sufficient time to show that they'd reached their limits. I think Hankerson and Robinson have more potential than those two much in the same way that Helu and Royster had more potential than Portis and Hightower. That doesn't mean that they're the answer... but they're a step in the right direction and there's no use in throwing them under the bus until they clearly hit a developmental wall or we have something better. It's also worth mentioning that Armstrong and Austin clearly had played themselves out of jobs. Armstrong's playing time decreased more and more as the season wore on as he dealt with a nagging hamstring, and then when he was on the field he wasn't effective, outside of his one touchdown catch in Seattle. Armstrong was also pushing 30, so I think the idea that people thought we should wait for Armstrong to develop is kind of silly. He had ample time to play, and eventually was replaced with Donte Stallworth and even David Anderson, before eventually being totally replaced by Hank. Then Hank got hurt and he still could only sparingly get on the field. Terrence Austin also had a full season to distinguish himself, and while I think a lot of people acknowledged some potential, I don't think anyone thought he was going to break out and be the number one guy. On top of that, they both played themselves out of jobs in training camp. Both of them had ample opportunity to step up and produce, and they flat out didn't. Hankerson has produced in his playing time. Not at some "OH MY GOD!" level, but at a level that's intriguing and consistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21cents Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 i miss gafney and armstrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCClybun Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 i miss gafney and armstrong Armstrong just got cut in Miami. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Without changing a single word, here is my conversation with Hitman: You didn't elaborate at all on your first reply and your last reply is practically a non sequitur, primarily because you made no effort to link it back to Hankerson. In other words, you seemed to dismiss the person you were replying to without actually addressing what he said both directly and clearly. i miss gafney and armstrong Armstrong just got cut in Miami. Gaffney was only recently signed by Miami after failing to make the Pats 53-man roster. He only has one reception on the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 You didn't elaborate at all on your first reply and your last reply is practically a non sequitur, primarily because you made no effort to link it back to Hankerson. In other words, you seemed to dismiss the person you were replying to without actually addressing what he said both directly and clearly.That's nit-picking nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21cents Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Gaffney was only recently signed by Miami after failing to make the Pats 53-man roster. He only has one reception on the season. I dont see how that has anything to do with their production here in washington. They were good fit for our system and made some great catches. Hankerson would be out of a job right now if he was on a decent team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCClybun Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I dont see how that has anything to do with their production here in washington. They were good fit for our system and made some great catches. Hankerson would be out of a job right now if he was on a decent team. You mean Armstrong's one year of production and his other year of jack squat? And Gaffney is playing on his 6th team now. Kind of says all you need to know about how the rest of the league views him. Ugh, why do I ever bother... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21cents Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 You mean Armstrong's one year of production and his other year of jack squat?And Gaffney is playing on his 6th team now. Kind of says all you need to know about how the rest of the league views him. Ugh, why do I ever bother... Just says how bad our wrs are. As bad as gaffney and armstrong were they were much more productive than hankerson and morgan and that is with a better qb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCClybun Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Just says how bad our wrs are. As bad as gaffney and armstrong were they were much more productive than hankerson and morgan and that is with a better qb ...Yeah, Anthony Armstrong with his 7 catches for 103 yards a touchdown totally outplayed all the receivers we have right now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwmayfield Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Here is a list of NFL Receivers with the most drops over the last 3 years. 2009-2011 Rank Player Current Team Drops 1 Brandon Marshall CHI (35) 2 Wes Welker NE (32) 3 Roddy White ATL (30) 4 Dwayne Bowe KC (26) 5 DeSean Jackson PHI (25) 6 Santana Moss WAS (24) 7 Pierre Garcon WAS (22) 7 Michael Crabtree SF (22) 7 Donald Driver GB (22) 10 Nate Burleson DET (21) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I also think that for a 3rd round pick, this is about what you get. You don't get size, speed, good hands and great route runner. Those guys go in the top 10-15 picks. What you get in the third round is some parts of that. So Hank has good size, ok rout running, below average hands, and ok speed. That's what you get there. Then you have to work with that player to improve aspects of their game so that they can be more productive. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. Expecting a 3rd round pick to come in and be Randy Moss in his rookie year is foolish. Good post VOR. What I don't get is, the guy has probably the largest hands ever. That ball should be vaccumed in every time. So, it has been crap here, you're right but we have had a FEW bright spots since 1992. Agreed. Alot of bright spots here and there, but when you had one of the posse catching 1,000 yards practically every year, it would be nice to have a guy that you can rely on to get 80+ catches and 1000 yards year in and year out. I think Garcon can sitll be that guy if he can get well. Carl Nicks, the Buccaneers offensive lineman, just had surgery on his toe and it looks to be the same injury as Garcons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cphil006 Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I said about Brandon Marshall as a rookie that I could see that he couldn't be covered one on one. It wasn't just about getting open. He would come down with balls even when he appeared well-covered. My point is that it is possible to see natural talent even in a rookie year that is not all that productive. OK. If Leonard Hankerson falls short of being Brandon Marshall, that doesn't mean he's bad, average, he could still be good. While he's not producing or playing this season like I had thought (without hip injury), he improved over the course of his rookie season. I will withold full assessment until next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Dude, forget Davis.Logan Paulsen 2013! That's what I am saying, Paulsen and Paul could easily develop at this point, both can block well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
authentic Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Dude, forget Davis.Logan Paulsen 2013! Come on now.. lets not go crazy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I dont see how that has anything to do with their production here in washington. They were good fit for our system and made some great catches. Hankerson would be out of a job right now if he was on a decent team. Do you think Shanahan would keep Hankerson on the field if he is as hopeless as you seem to think? Or does he see a young WR growing into his role? You think Hankerson is a bust, but I see the head coach giving a young player a chance to develop by showing him the patience many in this fanbase simply do not have. Will he be an elite WR one day? The better question is, does he have to be? Or will fans be happy with him being a good, solid contributor that helps the team move the chains and win games. Does Hankerson and players like him have to be an IMMEADIATE stand-out, elite pro-bowlers, or they are abject failures? Is that the standard now? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 OK. If Leonard Hankerson falls short of being Brandon Marshall, that doesn't mean he's bad, average, he could still be good. While he's not producing or playing this season like I had thought (without hip injury), he improved over the course of his rookie season. I will withold full assessment until next season.The Brandon Marshall point was to illustrate that natural talent can be spotted even if the production is just potential. I don't see the natural talent in Hank. It's an opinion. You are certainly just as entitled to yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinz4Life12 Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 he appears to get separation, he just needs to remove his head from his ass when it comes to being ready for the ball, catching the ball, and knowing where the first down marker is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.