Branch or Hackett back Week 9? (1 Viewer)

[BRETTSBUCKS]

Hackett's on my wire...

 

[the rover]

They're both supposed to be back, but Hackett was barely starting over Burleson week 1, and both Burleson and Engram have been relatively solid in his absence. Even if Hackett goes back to being the starting WR2 and Engram is in the slot, I'd expect Hackett and Burleson to split time.

 

[bigupsetter]

Hackett- when healthy- is a better producer that burl-brick any day of the week.

 

[MCguidance]

Most people and sites have touted Hackett as the better option. I am curious as to why as well. They are playing CLE next week, so I think he makes a solid play, actually.

 

[mad sweeney]

They're both supposed to be back, but Hackett was barely starting over Burleson week 1, and both Burleson and Engram have been relatively solid in his absence. Even if Hackett goes back to being the starting WR2 and Engram is in the slot, I'd expect Hackett and Burleson to split time.

That's completely false. hackett never came close to losing the job. There was a bunch of hoo ha about some coach speak but it was never in question. He was a GTD week 7, didn't play. He's good to go, practiced yesterday. And the coach made several commetns in the week before the Rams game about WRs needing to improve. They were thinly veiled pokes at Nate's inconsistent performances. Nate will be lucky to hang onto the #4 spot the way he and Obomanu were playing. Nate's had the dropsies and his poor route running skills have led to 2 of Matt's picks. If you've ever seen Hackett play, he plays hungry, goes after the ball, is a little taller and has plenty of speed. He's simply a better WR than Burleson. Branch didn't practice Monday but Holmgren said he was ok and would practice Wednesday's regular practice. I would say it's Branch and Hackett as "starters" with Engram in the slot and Burleson getting some reps in to spell Hackett and come in as the 4th WR. But I also expect to see Obomanu in there too, so where exactly that will happen will probably depend on how well Burleson practices.

 

[TheLastDispatch]

With Hackett back, how does this change the outlook on Engram?

 

[Da Guru]

They're both supposed to be back, but Hackett was barely starting over Burleson week 1, and both Burleson and Engram have been relatively solid in his absence. Even if Hackett goes back to being the starting WR2 and Engram is in the slot, I'd expect Hackett and Burleson to split time.

That's completely false. hackett never came close to losing the job. There was a bunch of hoo ha about some coach speak but it was never in question. He was a GTD week 7, didn't play. He's good to go, practiced yesterday. And the coach made several commetns in the week before the Rams game about WRs needing to improve. They were thinly veiled pokes at Nate's inconsistent performances. Nate will be lucky to hang onto the #4 spot the way he and Obomanu were playing. Nate's had the dropsies and his poor route running skills have led to 2 of Matt's picks. If you've ever seen Hackett play, he plays hungry, goes after the ball, is a little taller and has plenty of speed. He's simply a better WR than Burleson. Branch didn't practice Monday but Holmgren said he was ok and would practice Wednesday's regular practice. I would say it's Branch and Hackett as "starters" with Engram in the slot and Burleson getting some reps in to spell Hackett and come in as the 4th WR. But I also expect to see Obomanu in there too, so where exactly that will happen will probably depend on how well Burleson practices.

Nate has produced..but besides Branch they all are run of the mill WRs.

 

[Schrute]

They're both supposed to be back, but Hackett was barely starting over Burleson week 1, and both Burleson and Engram have been relatively solid in his absence. Even if Hackett goes back to being the starting WR2 and Engram is in the slot, I'd expect Hackett and Burleson to split time.

That's completely false. hackett never came close to losing the job. There was a bunch of hoo ha about some coach speak but it was never in question. He was a GTD week 7, didn't play. He's good to go, practiced yesterday. And the coach made several commetns in the week before the Rams game about WRs needing to improve. They were thinly veiled pokes at Nate's inconsistent performances. Nate will be lucky to hang onto the #4 spot the way he and Obomanu were playing. Nate's had the dropsies and his poor route running skills have led to 2 of Matt's picks. If you've ever seen Hackett play, he plays hungry, goes after the ball, is a little taller and has plenty of speed. He's simply a better WR than Burleson. Branch didn't practice Monday but Holmgren said he was ok and would practice Wednesday's regular practice. I would say it's Branch and Hackett as "starters" with Engram in the slot and Burleson getting some reps in to spell Hackett and come in as the 4th WR. But I also expect to see Obomanu in there too, so where exactly that will happen will probably depend on how well Burleson practices.

Nate has produced..but besides Branch they all are run of the mill WRs.

Burleson hasn't really produced. He's been very inconsistent. To me, there is no question that Hackett's upside is higher than Branch's. I don't think Branch is a No. 1 WR. Hackett could be.

 

[Max Power]

I guess I dont get it. Hackett has a good half a season as the teams #4 WR. Gets handed the #2 role in training camp where he barely keeps his job. Did next to nothing in the preseason. Hurts his ankle causing him to miss half a season. Now some expect him to shoot up the depth chart and fight for the "go to" WR role?

Please feel free to enlighten me.....

 

[mad sweeney]

They're both supposed to be back, but Hackett was barely starting over Burleson week 1, and both Burleson and Engram have been relatively solid in his absence. Even if Hackett goes back to being the starting WR2 and Engram is in the slot, I'd expect Hackett and Burleson to split time.

That's completely false. hackett never came close to losing the job. There was a bunch of hoo ha about some coach speak but it was never in question. He was a GTD week 7, didn't play. He's good to go, practiced yesterday. And the coach made several commetns in the week before the Rams game about WRs needing to improve. They were thinly veiled pokes at Nate's inconsistent performances. Nate will be lucky to hang onto the #4 spot the way he and Obomanu were playing. Nate's had the dropsies and his poor route running skills have led to 2 of Matt's picks. If you've ever seen Hackett play, he plays hungry, goes after the ball, is a little taller and has plenty of speed. He's simply a better WR than Burleson. Branch didn't practice Monday but Holmgren said he was ok and would practice Wednesday's regular practice. I would say it's Branch and Hackett as "starters" with Engram in the slot and Burleson getting some reps in to spell Hackett and come in as the 4th WR. But I also expect to see Obomanu in there too, so where exactly that will happen will probably depend on how well Burleson practices.

Nate has produced..but besides Branch they all are run of the mill WRs.

He's produced but he's also made a bunch of errors like I noted above. Hackett is way more consistent. Last year he caught 68% of his targets. Burleson catches 78% of the balls that hit him on both hands. I think Hackett's going to show some things, especially if other teams treat Branch like the main threat. I'm not sure that Hackett will get more catches than Branch, but he's a much better redzone target and is also capable of breaking big ones like Branch. Branch may end up with more catches and yards, but Hackett should lead in TDs. Just my opinion from watching him play back from his rookie year.

 

[mad sweeney]

I guess I dont get it. Hackett has a good half a season as the teams #4 WR. Gets handed the #2 role in training camp where he barely keeps his job. Did next to nothing in the preseason. Hurts his ankle causing him to miss half a season. Now some expect him to shoot up the depth chart and fight for the "go to" WR role? Please feel free to enlighten me.....

First off, he didn't get handed the role, he earned it last year as a starter for 5 games. Where he beat out Burleson for the job. He knows the system better than any of the other guys save Engram and if you watched him play you'd see he's not just some team's #4. Not every good WR starts out as a starter, some work their way up. He outproduced Branch last year when they were the starters. So there's plenty of evidence to think he'll do pretty well. And if Alexander keeps stinking it up they'll be throwing it a lot more, plus their upcoming schedule is pretty nice for FF stats.

 

[jaana1us]

hackett will out produce branch--game 1 game plan did not include branch- it was going to be mostly hackett-i am playing him over cj/curry-this week(buress on bye)

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Hackett- when healthy- is a better producer that burl-brick any day of the week.

Really? What can you possibly base this on?Here are Hackett's 2006 numbers...Week 1: 1/14Week 2: 0/0Week 3, 4, and 5: Apparently didn't suit upWeek 6: 3/66Week 7: 4/37Week 8: 3/25/1week 9: 4/58week 10: 3/20week 11: 2/19week 12: 5/67/1That is the regular season for most owners...25/300/2He had 300 yds and 2 TD for most owners last season...and during the playoffs he started week 13 with 1 catch for 13 yds, so I doubt anyone in their right mind started him the next week and missed out on his career game of 4/104/1. Please tell me you know that Burleson has actually had 1,000 yds and 9 TD in a season...I know he hasn't done a lot since but he has done it. And Engram is on pace for about 1,000 yds and 4 TD this year...I doubt he will hit it but that's what he is on pace for. I understand the enthusiasm for DJ Hackett...we all want to be right on prognosticating what will happen but DJ Hackett has not proven anything yet.

 

[the spanker]

Hackett- when healthy- is a better producer that burl-brick any day of the week.

Really? What can you possibly base this on?Here are Hackett's 2006 numbers...Week 1: 1/14Week 2: 0/0Week 3, 4, and 5: Apparently didn't suit upWeek 6: 3/66Week 7: 4/37Week 8: 3/25/1week 9: 4/58week 10: 3/20week 11: 2/19week 12: 5/67/1That is the regular season for most owners...25/300/2He had 300 yds and 2 TD for most owners last season...and during the playoffs he started week 13 with 1 catch for 13 yds, so I doubt anyone in their right mind started him the next week and missed out on his career game of 4/104/1. Please tell me you know that Burleson has actually had 1,000 yds and 9 TD in a season...I know he hasn't done a lot since but he has done it. And Engram is on pace for about 1,000 yds and 4 TD this year...I doubt he will hit it but that's what he is on pace for. I understand the enthusiasm for DJ Hackett...we all want to be right on prognosticating what will happen but DJ Hackett has not proven anything yet.

MOP! MOP! MOP! Breaking it down MOP!

 

[J R]

Burleson has a -26% DVOA and a 43% catch % so far this year.

Burleson had a -14% DVOA and a 49% catch % last year.

Hackett had a +36% DVOA and a 67% catch % last year.

 

[OCC]

Burleson has a -26% DVOA and a 43% catch % so far this year.Burleson had a -14% DVOA and a 49% catch % last year.Hackett had a +36% DVOA and a 67% catch % last year.

It's pointless to even argue with people who think Burleson is a good WR. He's not. Move on.

 

[Enforcer]

Hackett- when healthy- is a better producer that burl-brick any day of the week.

Really? What can you possibly base this on?

You keep staring at stats and boxscores. We'll continue to analyze the play on the field. Hackett has been a great producer when given opportunities. You don't want to get into a stats war when debating Burleson and Hackett. You're going to miss the most important aspect here: talent.I watched Burleson quit on his routes more than once. While everyone watching on national TV was wondering why Hasselbeck threw up that long jump ball in the Saints game that was a head scratching interception, I was wondering why Burleson quit running his route and starting slowly jogging. Its not something that shows up in the boxscore, and its not a one time thing we're talking about. The next week Burleson was having to share the split end job with Courtney Taylor. Who? Exactly. Was it because Taylor was so impressive in practice? Hardly. Seattle is excited to get Hackett back on the field so Burleson can go back to just returning kicks.

I understand why NFL fans across the country have doubts about Hackett. They haven't seen much of him. Seattle is rarely on national TV and Hackett was hurt when the were. Injuries happen and heal. It happens. Hopefully (as a Seattle fan) he'll be back on the field and producing at the same clip he was at the end of last season.

 

[Enforcer]

Hackett- when healthy- is a better producer that burl-brick any day of the week.

Really? What can you possibly base this on?Here are Hackett's 2006 numbers...Week 1: 1/14Week 2: 0/0Week 3, 4, and 5: Apparently didn't suit upWeek 6: 3/66Week 7: 4/37Week 8: 3/25/1week 9: 4/58week 10: 3/20week 11: 2/19week 12: 5/67/1That is the regular season for most owners...25/300/2He had 300 yds and 2 TD for most owners last season...and during the playoffs he started week 13 with 1 catch for 13 yds, so I doubt anyone in their right mind started him the next week and missed out on his career game of 4/104/1. Please tell me you know that Burleson has actually had 1,000 yds and 9 TD in a season...I know he hasn't done a lot since but he has done it. And Engram is on pace for about 1,000 yds and 4 TD this year...I doubt he will hit it but that's what he is on pace for. I understand the enthusiasm for DJ Hackett...we all want to be right on prognosticating what will happen but DJ Hackett has not proven anything yet.

MOP! MOP! MOP! Breaking it down MOP!

Good posting? Why on earth would you say that?

+----------+--------+-------------+----+| WK  OPP  |  RSHYD |  REC   YD   | TD |+----------+--------+-------------+----+|  1  det  |	 0  |	1	14  |  0 ||  2  ari  |	 0  |	0	 0  |  0 ||  6  stl  |	 0  |	3	66  |  0 ||  7  min  |	 0  |	4	37  |  0 ||  8  kan  |	 0  |	3	25  |  1 ||  9  oak  |	 0  |	4	58  |  0 || 10  stl  |	 0  |	3	20  |  0 || 11  sfo  |	 0  |	2	19  |  0 || 12  gnb  |	 0  |	5	67  |  1 || 13  den  |	 0  |	1	13  |  0 || 14  ari  |	 0  |	4   104  |  1 || 15  sfo  |	 0  |	8	87  |  0 || 16  sdg  |	 0  |	3	37  |  0 || 17  tam  |	 0  |	4	63  |  1 |+----------+--------+-------------+----+|  TOTAL   |	 0  |   45   610  |  4 |+----------+--------+-------------+----+

Hackett came on very strong late last year when given the chance to play. Why would you not just want to post his season stats, MOP? Do you have some sort of agenda trying to make the kid look bad?

 

[Diamond]

Hackett- when healthy- is a better producer that burl-brick any day of the week.

Really? What can you possibly base this on?Here are Hackett's 2006 numbers...Week 1: 1/14Week 2: 0/0Week 3, 4, and 5: Apparently didn't suit upWeek 6: 3/66Week 7: 4/37Week 8: 3/25/1week 9: 4/58week 10: 3/20week 11: 2/19week 12: 5/67/1That is the regular season for most owners...25/300/2He had 300 yds and 2 TD for most owners last season...and during the playoffs he started week 13 with 1 catch for 13 yds, so I doubt anyone in their right mind started him the next week and missed out on his career game of 4/104/1. Please tell me you know that Burleson has actually had 1,000 yds and 9 TD in a season...I know he hasn't done a lot since but he has done it. And Engram is on pace for about 1,000 yds and 4 TD this year...I doubt he will hit it but that's what he is on pace for. I understand the enthusiasm for DJ Hackett...we all want to be right on prognosticating what will happen but DJ Hackett has not proven anything yet.

I completely agree that DJ Hackett 'has not proven anything yet', but why did you lop off the stats from 3 of his 5 starts last year in your breakdown? Here are the rest of those stats:week 13: 1-13week 14: 4-104-1week 15: 8-87week 16: 3-37week 17: 4-63-1Hackett started weeks 8,12,14,16, and 17 and scored a TD in 4 of those games. And apparently the entire Seahawk team failed to suit up for their week 5 bye.

 

[J R]

Hackett- when healthy- is a better producer that burl-brick any day of the week.

Really? What can you possibly base this on?Here are Hackett's 2006 numbers...Week 1: 1/14Week 2: 0/0Week 3, 4, and 5: Apparently didn't suit upWeek 6: 3/66Week 7: 4/37Week 8: 3/25/1week 9: 4/58week 10: 3/20week 11: 2/19week 12: 5/67/1That is the regular season for most owners...25/300/2He had 300 yds and 2 TD for most owners last season...and during the playoffs he started week 13 with 1 catch for 13 yds, so I doubt anyone in their right mind started him the next week and missed out on his career game of 4/104/1. Please tell me you know that Burleson has actually had 1,000 yds and 9 TD in a season...I know he hasn't done a lot since but he has done it. And Engram is on pace for about 1,000 yds and 4 TD this year...I doubt he will hit it but that's what he is on pace for. I understand the enthusiasm for DJ Hackett...we all want to be right on prognosticating what will happen but DJ Hackett has not proven anything yet.

I completely agree that DJ Hackett 'has not proven anything yet', but why did you lop off the stats from 3 of his 5 starts last year in your breakdown? Here are the rest of those stats:week 13: 1-13week 14: 4-104-1week 15: 8-87week 16: 3-37week 17: 4-63-1Hackett started weeks 8,12,14,16, and 17 and scored a TD in 4 of those games. And apparently the entire Seahawk team failed to suit up for their week 5 bye.

Well MOP did say why he lopped off part of the season, it's just not a very good reason.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Hackett- when healthy- is a better producer that burl-brick any day of the week.

Really? What can you possibly base this on?Here are Hackett's 2006 numbers...Week 1: 1/14Week 2: 0/0Week 3, 4, and 5: Apparently didn't suit upWeek 6: 3/66Week 7: 4/37Week 8: 3/25/1week 9: 4/58week 10: 3/20week 11: 2/19week 12: 5/67/1That is the regular season for most owners...25/300/2He had 300 yds and 2 TD for most owners last season...and during the playoffs he started week 13 with 1 catch for 13 yds, so I doubt anyone in their right mind started him the next week and missed out on his career game of 4/104/1. Please tell me you know that Burleson has actually had 1,000 yds and 9 TD in a season...I know he hasn't done a lot since but he has done it. And Engram is on pace for about 1,000 yds and 4 TD this year...I doubt he will hit it but that's what he is on pace for. I understand the enthusiasm for DJ Hackett...we all want to be right on prognosticating what will happen but DJ Hackett has not proven anything yet.

I completely agree that DJ Hackett 'has not proven anything yet', but why did you lop off the stats from 3 of his 5 starts last year in your breakdown? Here are the rest of those stats:week 13: 1-13week 14: 4-104-1week 15: 8-87week 16: 3-37week 17: 4-63-1Hackett started weeks 8,12,14,16, and 17 and scored a TD in 4 of those games. And apparently the entire Seahawk team failed to suit up for their week 5 bye.

So after he has a brilliant week 1 playoff of 1 catch for 13 yards, how many owners in their right mind were wheeling him out the next week? Not many. And if those owners surived long enough to chase those week 14 points, in week 15 he gave a total of 8 points in non PPR leagues...yes there are leagues out there where they don't count receptions. OK, so then owners think they have found a meal ticket and what do they get in week 16? 3 big catches for a grand total of 37 yards...WOOHOO!!!Sorry if I am coming across a little pompous on this one...but everything about DJ Hackett so far is just hype to me. He has 1 game where he barely cleared 100 yards, and he has a few TD sprinkled in. Nate Washington had 4+ TD last year on his stats and he never started a game for Pittsburgh really. The arrogance of people that say "I watched him and I know talent"...please! None of you are scouting for any NFL teams so excuse me if I giggle when you guys start the DJ Hackett hype. Everyone of you either owns him in dynasty or for whatever reason have kept him stashed away in redraft leagues even though he has contributed Zero towards your team...not exactly unbiased opinions. I don't own Hackett, and I am not wishing I did right now. IMO he is at best the WR2 in Seattle when healthy and that position has gotten how many points over the last 5-10 years...anyone know? Here let me help you...Since Holmgren has been running the show...1999: Derrick Mayes 829/10...Sean Dawkins 992/7...this is promising2000: Sean Dawkins 731/5...DJax 713/62001: DJax 1,081/8...KRob 536/12002: KRob 1,240/5...DJax 877/42003: DJax 1,137/9...KRob 896/42004: DJax 1,199/7...Engram 499/22005: Jurevicius 694/10...Engram 778/32006: DJax 956/10...Branch 725/4Thea average stats for a WR2 in this offense is about 750 yds and 4 TD a year...and you all are saying that he might even split some time with Burleson...so the numbers might not be that good. Deion Branch is the #1 WR in Seatlle...no way around that. Hackett had a chance to shine when Branch was out but he himself was injured so we may never know. I really find it insulting that people are using the last 4 games which aren't even that great and using that as the barometer for the rest of this guy's career...he has a lot to prove.

 

[the rover]

They're both supposed to be back, but Hackett was barely starting over Burleson week 1, and both Burleson and Engram have been relatively solid in his absence. Even if Hackett goes back to being the starting WR2 and Engram is in the slot, I'd expect Hackett and Burleson to split time.

That's completely false. hackett never came close to losing the job. There was a bunch of hoo ha about some coach speak but it was never in question. He was a GTD week 7, didn't play. He's good to go, practiced yesterday. And the coach made several commetns in the week before the Rams game about WRs needing to improve. They were thinly veiled pokes at Nate's inconsistent performances. Nate will be lucky to hang onto the #4 spot the way he and Obomanu were playing. Nate's had the dropsies and his poor route running skills have led to 2 of Matt's picks. If you've ever seen Hackett play, he plays hungry, goes after the ball, is a little taller and has plenty of speed. He's simply a better WR than Burleson. Branch didn't practice Monday but Holmgren said he was ok and would practice Wednesday's regular practice. I would say it's Branch and Hackett as "starters" with Engram in the slot and Burleson getting some reps in to spell Hackett and come in as the 4th WR. But I also expect to see Obomanu in there too, so where exactly that will happen will probably depend on how well Burleson practices.

Where do you sit for the games? I've been to just about every Seahawks home game the last two years (except the Saints this year and Christmas Eve against the Chargers last year), and just don't see the talent that you seem to think Hackett has. Maybe I need a different view.

 

[J R]

Hackett- when healthy- is a better producer that burl-brick any day of the week.

Really? What can you possibly base this on?Here are Hackett's 2006 numbers...Week 1: 1/14Week 2: 0/0Week 3, 4, and 5: Apparently didn't suit upWeek 6: 3/66Week 7: 4/37Week 8: 3/25/1week 9: 4/58week 10: 3/20week 11: 2/19week 12: 5/67/1That is the regular season for most owners...25/300/2He had 300 yds and 2 TD for most owners last season...and during the playoffs he started week 13 with 1 catch for 13 yds, so I doubt anyone in their right mind started him the next week and missed out on his career game of 4/104/1. Please tell me you know that Burleson has actually had 1,000 yds and 9 TD in a season...I know he hasn't done a lot since but he has done it. And Engram is on pace for about 1,000 yds and 4 TD this year...I doubt he will hit it but that's what he is on pace for. I understand the enthusiasm for DJ Hackett...we all want to be right on prognosticating what will happen but DJ Hackett has not proven anything yet.

I completely agree that DJ Hackett 'has not proven anything yet', but why did you lop off the stats from 3 of his 5 starts last year in your breakdown? Here are the rest of those stats:week 13: 1-13week 14: 4-104-1week 15: 8-87week 16: 3-37week 17: 4-63-1Hackett started weeks 8,12,14,16, and 17 and scored a TD in 4 of those games. And apparently the entire Seahawk team failed to suit up for their week 5 bye.

So after he has a brilliant week 1 playoff of 1 catch for 13 yards, how many owners in their right mind were wheeling him out the next week? Not many. And if those owners surived long enough to chase those week 14 points, in week 15 he gave a total of 8 points in non PPR leagues...yes there are leagues out there where they don't count receptions. OK, so then owners think they have found a meal ticket and what do they get in week 16? 3 big catches for a grand total of 37 yards...WOOHOO!!!Sorry if I am coming across a little pompous on this one...but everything about DJ Hackett so far is just hype to me. He has 1 game where he barely cleared 100 yards, and he has a few TD sprinkled in. Nate Washington had 4+ TD last year on his stats and he never started a game for Pittsburgh really. The arrogance of people that say "I watched him and I know talent"...please! None of you are scouting for any NFL teams so excuse me if I giggle when you guys start the DJ Hackett hype. Everyone of you either owns him in dynasty or for whatever reason have kept him stashed away in redraft leagues even though he has contributed Zero towards your team...not exactly unbiased opinions. I don't own Hackett, and I am not wishing I did right now. IMO he is at best the WR2 in Seattle when healthy and that position has gotten how many points over the last 5-10 years...anyone know? Here let me help you...Since Holmgren has been running the show...1999: Derrick Mayes 829/10...Sean Dawkins 992/7...this is promising2000: Sean Dawkins 731/5...DJax 713/62001: DJax 1,081/8...KRob 536/12002: KRob 1,240/5...DJax 877/42003: DJax 1,137/9...KRob 896/42004: DJax 1,199/7...Engram 499/22005: Jurevicius 694/10...Engram 778/32006: DJax 956/10...Branch 725/4Thea average stats for a WR2 in this offense is about 750 yds and 4 TD a year...and you all are saying that he might even split some time with Burleson...so the numbers might not be that good. Deion Branch is the #1 WR in Seatlle...no way around that. Hackett had a chance to shine when Branch was out but he himself was injured so we may never know. I really find it insulting that people are using the last 4 games which aren't even that great and using that as the barometer for the rest of this guy's career...he has a lot to prove.

As far as citing stats from last year goes, raw totals don't matter to the discussion as much because the situation changed once they traded away Darrell Jackson. Hackett's PT can only go up. That's why citing his week-to-week lines from last year seems unconvincing.Citing the history of Seattle's WR2 seems more compelling - to me at least. To counterargue in favor of Hackett, I would point out a few possible differences between 2007 and past seasons:first, there is evidence to suggest that Hackett is a better player than guys like Engram and Robinson. i'm not basing this on presumed scouting ability on my part, but on FO's rate stats, which are excellent for Hackett last season, and i also think his line scores from last year are pretty good for a guy who wasn't a starter.second, branch may be less of a WR1 than jackson. Jackson's DVOA in 2006 was significantly better than Branch's at least. i've always liked jackson - just my opinion. Or, maybe going along with the first reason, I should just say the talent difference between WR1 and WR2 isn't as great between Branch and Hackett as it has been in the past for Jackson and whoever.third, Hackett seems to be a good redzone WR, and Branch is 5-9 and has never scored more than 5 TDs in a season. Even if that history holds for yardage, I don't think it will for TDs.

 

[Enforcer]

Sorry if I am coming across a little pompous on this one...

No you're not. You're not sorry in the least. Especially when you follow it up with this.

The arrogance of people that say "I watched him and I know talent"...please! None of you are scouting for any NFL teams so excuse me if I giggle when you guys start the DJ Hackett hype.

Arrogance? NFL scout? No one has claimed any such thing. I told you what I've observed. Other Seattle homers have said similar things. You say you're sorry and then spout off like that? Are you always like this? Who's being arrogant? My perception is you're trying to convince someone you "know" when you are clearly guessing.If you want to discount the folks that have seen the guy play a lot, fine, but there's no need to be insulting like that. Just don't act like you've got the answers when you haven't seen near the amount of play on the field that the locals have. Most importantly, fans opinions don't carry near the weight of the coaching staff. Our opinions mean next to nothing when compared to Holmgren. He controls the playing time. I'm fine letting Holmgren determine where the talent lies. Further, I'm farily confident that Hackett starts ahead of Burleson as long as he's healthy. If I'm wrong, no sweat.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Sorry if I am coming across a little pompous on this one...

No you're not. You're not sorry in the least. Especially when you follow it up with this.

The arrogance of people that say "I watched him and I know talent"...please! None of you are scouting for any NFL teams so excuse me if I giggle when you guys start the DJ Hackett hype.

Arrogance? NFL scout? No one has claimed any such thing. I told you what I've observed. Other Seattle homers have said similar things. You say you're sorry and then spout off like that? Are you always like this? Who's being arrogant? My perception is you're trying to convince someone you "know" when you are clearly guessing.If you want to discount the folks that have seen the guy play a lot, fine, but there's no need to be insulting like that. Just don't act like you've got the answers when you haven't seen near the amount of play on the field that the locals have. Most importantly, fans opinions don't carry near the weight of the coaching staff. Our opinions mean next to nothing when compared to Holmgren. He controls the playing time. I'm fine letting Holmgren determine where the talent lies. Further, I'm farily confident that Hackett starts ahead of Burleson as long as he's healthy. If I'm wrong, no sweat.

Well, I think I'll let others vouch for my board credibility and let those bones fall where they may. I watch a lot of Seattle games for a variety of reasons...you know with that Direct TV stuff you don't have to be a local to watch the games bro. (Can you dial it down a touch too so we can have a real discussion)Now you completely ignored all the facts I put up which IMO discredits your posts...and you have a lot of obvious homerism for the Seahawks...and also your ability to be unbiased is low...you sound more like a fan that is selling me something. Now please don't take offense, but I have to acknowledge Rover who is a diehard Seahawks fan, but isn't a homer about it and can actually rate the Seahawks and their FF positional players. And also I want to emphasize that I own Hasselbeck in a lot of leagues, I think I have a good beat on that Seahawk passing attack, and from what I can see this season, it basically is the Matt Hasselbeck show. They lost DJax and his 1,100/8 TD a year, and they have replaced it with a mish mash of players that have been masking a skeleton crew of sorts at WR...having the WR1, and WR2 go down and still being able to win games and for the Qb to post pretty solid numbers along the way is quite a task. I don't think Hackett is anything special at the moment...you feel differently, fine. I invite you into the weekly Qb and RB threads I do each and every week...I have a feeling you read them already but if not, please drop in and post away, we(the SP) love for some heated debate in those threads...but don't take things in here so personal.

 

[Enforcer]

...you sound more like a fan that is selling me something.

Spare me. You're the one listing your resume. If anyone here is "selling" its you try to sell yourself and you're acumen. I'm guessing I'm not the first to tell you to get over yourself.Time will tell. I'm not the one that needs to bump threads to feel satisfaction, so don't expect an "I told ya so" if you were wrong. I'll leave that to your kind.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I want to add this into the discussion as well. I hated the Seahawks for trading DJax...i don't care what he has done in SF because the SF passing game is non existent with some of the worst Qb play in the league. Yeah sure Djax is hurt at the moment but he avg about 1,100-1,200 yds and 7-10 TD a season while in Seattle...those types of WR do not just grow on trees. They gave up a lot ot get a small WR in Branch who has never had more than 5 TD in a season...I just don't get it...and the SP was just gushing over DJ Hackett...and it doesn't seem like he is any better at staying on the field so far than DJax and that was everyone's complaint about DJax to being with.

Maybe that helps in my POV and where I am coming from.

Again, I'm not trying to insult people but I put up the WR2 stats since Holmgren took over in 1999...not sure what else I can do.

 

[Krewe]

Okay, I'm out-of-state but sort of a 'Hawks homer, came in for the Saints game (ugh) and the Rams game (better).

Bottom line, watching all of their games either on the tube or in person, this team could use both guys back but I am with MOP on this one..lots of hype for Hackett but to me, Branch is the man from here out.

Forget about Nate...not worth discussing, IMHO.

If Branch is back healthy, he's going to get targeted heavy by MH, with Hackett and Engram providing the secondary options.

That, coupled with a softer schedule and a cast-free SA should help seal the deal for Seattle atop a very lousy division.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

...you sound more like a fan that is selling me something.

Spare me. You're the one listing your resume. If anyone here is "selling" its you try to sell yourself and you're acumen. I'm guessing I'm not the first to tell you to get over yourself.Time will tell. I'm not the one that needs to bump threads to feel satisfaction, so don't expect an "I told ya so" if you were wrong. I'll leave that to your kind.

"You're one of my kind.."

 

[the rover]

Now please don't take offense, but I have to acknowledge Rover who is a diehard Seahawks fan, but isn't a homer about it and can actually rate the Seahawks and their FF positional players.

actually, I'm a Rams fan...I just live in the Seattle area and have access to free tickets.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Now please don't take offense, but I have to acknowledge Rover who is a diehard Seahawks fan, but isn't a homer about it and can actually rate the Seahawks and their FF positional players.

actually, I'm a Rams fan...I just live in the Seattle area and have access to free tickets.

Well that explains the unbiasedness on your part

 

[the rover]

Now please don't take offense, but I have to acknowledge Rover who is a diehard Seahawks fan, but isn't a homer about it and can actually rate the Seahawks and their FF positional players.

actually, I'm a Rams fan...I just live in the Seattle area and have access to free tickets.

Well that explains the unbiasedness on your part

Strangely enough, it results in me thinking Shaun Alexander is still a good running back, even though the entire northwest seems to have turned on him. Always struck me as odd that even when he was setting the TD record fans here thought he was soft, danced in the backfield too much and crumpled on contact. They gave all of the credit to the offensive line, and everyone seemed to assume that they could have plugged Maurice Morris in and he would have done just as well.

 

[Krewe]

Now please don't take offense, but I have to acknowledge Rover who is a diehard Seahawks fan, but isn't a homer about it and can actually rate the Seahawks and their FF positional players.

actually, I'm a Rams fan...I just live in the Seattle area and have access to free tickets.

Are you the guy in 215 I "accidently" spilled beer on last week? sorry...

 

[the rover]

Now please don't take offense, but I have to acknowledge Rover who is a diehard Seahawks fan, but isn't a homer about it and can actually rate the Seahawks and their FF positional players.

actually, I'm a Rams fan...I just live in the Seattle area and have access to free tickets.

Are you the guy in 215 I "accidently" spilled beer on last week? sorry...

134. I get free tickets on one condition...no rooting for anyone other than the 'Hawks. 15th row on the 38, I can live with those rules.

 

[Krewe]

Now please don't take offense, but I have to acknowledge Rover who is a diehard Seahawks fan, but isn't a homer about it and can actually rate the Seahawks and their FF positional players.

actually, I'm a Rams fan...I just live in the Seattle area and have access to free tickets.

Are you the guy in 215 I "accidently" spilled beer on last week? sorry...

134. I get free tickets on one condition...no rooting for anyone other than the 'Hawks. 15th row on the 38, I can live with those rules.

sweet seats on the 38, Rover. We had some Rams fans in front of us in 215 but they were cool. The flying beer happened on one of the Bulger sacks. Oh well.Nice thing about those seats is hopping into the wells fargo club for crab cakes. Beats the lukewarm hot dog anyday!Back to the subject...I agree with you on SA. Tons of hate--plenty of boo's at the two games I attended, but I like his chances to right the ship with the cast off the rest of the way. But I own a #37 jersey so yeah, I'm biased.

 

[mad sweeney]

They're both supposed to be back, but Hackett was barely starting over Burleson week 1, and both Burleson and Engram have been relatively solid in his absence. Even if Hackett goes back to being the starting WR2 and Engram is in the slot, I'd expect Hackett and Burleson to split time.

That's completely false. hackett never came close to losing the job. There was a bunch of hoo ha about some coach speak but it was never in question. He was a GTD week 7, didn't play. He's good to go, practiced yesterday. And the coach made several commetns in the week before the Rams game about WRs needing to improve. They were thinly veiled pokes at Nate's inconsistent performances. Nate will be lucky to hang onto the #4 spot the way he and Obomanu were playing. Nate's had the dropsies and his poor route running skills have led to 2 of Matt's picks. If you've ever seen Hackett play, he plays hungry, goes after the ball, is a little taller and has plenty of speed. He's simply a better WR than Burleson. Branch didn't practice Monday but Holmgren said he was ok and would practice Wednesday's regular practice. I would say it's Branch and Hackett as "starters" with Engram in the slot and Burleson getting some reps in to spell Hackett and come in as the 4th WR. But I also expect to see Obomanu in there too, so where exactly that will happen will probably depend on how well Burleson practices.

Where do you sit for the games? I've been to just about every Seahawks home game the last two years (except the Saints this year and Christmas Eve against the Chargers last year), and just don't see the talent that you seem to think Hackett has. Maybe I need a different view.

Usually on my couch, I was unaware I had to sit in the stands to watch and evaluate players. Although I did see them in AZ last year. In that game I was about 27 rows up from the 30 yard line. I have watched every game for the last 6 years and with TiVo have rewatched plenty of the games, probably with better angle, views, proximityh and commentary than your stadium seats btw. Last year he caught 67% of the passes thrown towards him. 67%. That's an incredible target to catch ratio. I saw a team of WRs with dropsies, escept Hackett. I saw a team of guys that tried to catch the ball with style (Jackson and his yearly appearance in the top 5 of drops), or just tried ta catch it period (Burleosn). And then I saw HAckett who played with more hunger than any of them, who knew the offense better than any of them from his years in the offense and a guy that flat out went after the ball more than any of the other WRs. And he hung onto it, I remember one drop and one TD that was the stupid 2 feet down isn't possession if the ball jiggles while you hit the ground rule. He got another TD two plays later. Even if he's not a physical upgrade over Burleson, which he is, his catch % is indiciative of his consistency. MoP, I realize his stats are not noteworthy for the FF regular season last year. However he wasn't the starter until Jackson went down. Before that he was covering the slot for Engram as an injury bump and then went about beating out Burleson for Jackson's position. So at worst he does no worse than Burleson has thus far which many have said was serviceable. However this week he will be the starter and he was almost ready to start against the Rams but they wisely gave his ankle two more weeks to rest. He is a better redzone target with his extra few inches and his ability to go up for the ball. Especially more this season with Stevens gone and now Pollard out.

I'll admit to homer bias, but I have watched him since he was a practice squader and after watching WR after WR drop pass after pass, when I see Hackett out there and the ball going to him, I know it's going to be caught. He has the ability to break a long one and to make tough catches over the middle. True he hasn't been in for a full season so his durability isn't known, but he had a LB (I think) roll on his ankle on his 2nd target of the 1st drive of the season. I don't think you can label him as injury prone for that kind of injury. Prior to that he has not had any injury concerns. The first target he was wide open over the middle but an LB made a great leap to bat the pass. So Hass came out targeting Hackett on the first drive. When Hackett makes a catch, Hass goes back to him. He did that in AZ and TB for sure, although how I would know that without attending the game, I don't know...

And I made sure to keep him from last year but had to stash him on my IR earlier this year so I have no reason to let FF hopefulness cloud my objectivity. Although I think that it's a pretty weak counter argument to use ownership as a detraction.

I have repeatedly said before the season and now that Branch will get more receptions and probably more yards, but Hackett will get more TDs and back them up with yardage gains. He is a better receiver than Burleson, period. At worst he'll be a solid WR3, if not WR2 for the rest of the season assuming Hass continues his pretty good season. And please note the number of times the team has thrown inside the 5 on account of Shaun Crumpler's soft running. Although again, how I would know that from watching at home I dunno.

 

[mad sweeney]

Now please don't take offense, but I have to acknowledge Rover who is a diehard Seahawks fan, but isn't a homer about it and can actually rate the Seahawks and their FF positional players.

actually, I'm a Rams fan...I just live in the Seattle area and have access to free tickets.

Well that explains the unbiasedness on your part

Strangely enough, it results in me thinking Shaun Alexander is still a good running back, even though the entire northwest seems to have turned on him. Always struck me as odd that even when he was setting the TD record fans here thought he was soft, danced in the backfield too much and crumpled on contact. They gave all of the credit to the offensive line, and everyone seemed to assume that they could have plugged Maurice Morris in and he would have done just as well.

SA always had a nose for the redzone, moreso than most RBs it seemed. Man of the fans I talk to and my feelings on it were that no one was going to go in there and get all of SA's numbers. But I'd be glad to have someone in there who could get 80% of SA's stats but would actually fall forward on 3rd and 1. I was really hoping they would've made a run at Chester Taylor instead of re-signing SA.Morris has always done well spelling SA but IMO he was never a real candidate for the full time starter's job.

 

[Krewe]

They're both supposed to be back, but Hackett was barely starting over Burleson week 1, and both Burleson and Engram have been relatively solid in his absence. Even if Hackett goes back to being the starting WR2 and Engram is in the slot, I'd expect Hackett and Burleson to split time.

That's completely false. hackett never came close to losing the job. There was a bunch of hoo ha about some coach speak but it was never in question. He was a GTD week 7, didn't play. He's good to go, practiced yesterday. And the coach made several commetns in the week before the Rams game about WRs needing to improve. They were thinly veiled pokes at Nate's inconsistent performances. Nate will be lucky to hang onto the #4 spot the way he and Obomanu were playing. Nate's had the dropsies and his poor route running skills have led to 2 of Matt's picks. If you've ever seen Hackett play, he plays hungry, goes after the ball, is a little taller and has plenty of speed. He's simply a better WR than Burleson. Branch didn't practice Monday but Holmgren said he was ok and would practice Wednesday's regular practice. I would say it's Branch and Hackett as "starters" with Engram in the slot and Burleson getting some reps in to spell Hackett and come in as the 4th WR. But I also expect to see Obomanu in there too, so where exactly that will happen will probably depend on how well Burleson practices.

Where do you sit for the games? I've been to just about every Seahawks home game the last two years (except the Saints this year and Christmas Eve against the Chargers last year), and just don't see the talent that you seem to think Hackett has. Maybe I need a different view.

Usually on my couch, I was unaware I had to sit in the stands to watch and evaluate players. Although I did see them in AZ last year. In that game I was about 27 rows up from the 30 yard line. I have watched every game for the last 6 years and with TiVo have rewatched plenty of the games, probably with better angle, views, proximityh and commentary than your stadium seats btw. Last year he caught 67% of the passes thrown towards him. 67%. That's an incredible target to catch ratio. I saw a team of WRs with dropsies, escept Hackett. I saw a team of guys that tried to catch the ball with style (Jackson and his yearly appearance in the top 5 of drops), or just tried ta catch it period (Burleosn). And then I saw HAckett who played with more hunger than any of them, who knew the offense better than any of them from his years in the offense and a guy that flat out went after the ball more than any of the other WRs. And he hung onto it, I remember one drop and one TD that was the stupid 2 feet down isn't possession if the ball jiggles while you hit the ground rule. He got another TD two plays later. Even if he's not a physical upgrade over Burleson, which he is, his catch % is indiciative of his consistency. MoP, I realize his stats are not noteworthy for the FF regular season last year. However he wasn't the starter until Jackson went down. Before that he was covering the slot for Engram as an injury bump and then went about beating out Burleson for Jackson's position. So at worst he does no worse than Burleson has thus far which many have said was serviceable. However this week he will be the starter and he was almost ready to start against the Rams but they wisely gave his ankle two more weeks to rest. He is a better redzone target with his extra few inches and his ability to go up for the ball. Especially more this season with Stevens gone and now Pollard out.

I'll admit to homer bias, but I have watched him since he was a practice squader and after watching WR after WR drop pass after pass, when I see Hackett out there and the ball going to him, I know it's going to be caught. He has the ability to break a long one and to make tough catches over the middle. True he hasn't been in for a full season so his durability isn't known, but he had a LB (I think) roll on his ankle on his 2nd target of the 1st drive of the season. I don't think you can label him as injury prone for that kind of injury. Prior to that he has not had any injury concerns. The first target he was wide open over the middle but an LB made a great leap to bat the pass. So Hass came out targeting Hackett on the first drive. When Hackett makes a catch, Hass goes back to him. He did that in AZ and TB for sure, although how I would know that without attending the game, I don't know...

And I made sure to keep him from last year but had to stash him on my IR earlier this year so I have no reason to let FF hopefulness cloud my objectivity. Although I think that it's a pretty weak counter argument to use ownership as a detraction.

I have repeatedly said before the season and now that Branch will get more receptions and probably more yards, but Hackett will get more TDs and back them up with yardage gains. He is a better receiver than Burleson, period. At worst he'll be a solid WR3, if not WR2 for the rest of the season assuming Hass continues his pretty good season. And please note the number of times the team has thrown inside the 5 on account of Shaun Crumpler's soft running. Although again, how I would know that from watching at home I dunno.

 

[the rover]

They're both supposed to be back, but Hackett was barely starting over Burleson week 1, and both Burleson and Engram have been relatively solid in his absence. Even if Hackett goes back to being the starting WR2 and Engram is in the slot, I'd expect Hackett and Burleson to split time.

That's completely false. hackett never came close to losing the job. There was a bunch of hoo ha about some coach speak but it was never in question. He was a GTD week 7, didn't play. He's good to go, practiced yesterday. And the coach made several commetns in the week before the Rams game about WRs needing to improve. They were thinly veiled pokes at Nate's inconsistent performances. Nate will be lucky to hang onto the #4 spot the way he and Obomanu were playing. Nate's had the dropsies and his poor route running skills have led to 2 of Matt's picks. If you've ever seen Hackett play, he plays hungry, goes after the ball, is a little taller and has plenty of speed. He's simply a better WR than Burleson. Branch didn't practice Monday but Holmgren said he was ok and would practice Wednesday's regular practice. I would say it's Branch and Hackett as "starters" with Engram in the slot and Burleson getting some reps in to spell Hackett and come in as the 4th WR. But I also expect to see Obomanu in there too, so where exactly that will happen will probably depend on how well Burleson practices.

Where do you sit for the games? I've been to just about every Seahawks home game the last two years (except the Saints this year and Christmas Eve against the Chargers last year), and just don't see the talent that you seem to think Hackett has. Maybe I need a different view.

Usually on my couch, I was unaware I had to sit in the stands to watch and evaluate players. Although I did see them in AZ last year. In that game I was about 27 rows up from the 30 yard line. I have watched every game for the last 6 years and with TiVo have rewatched plenty of the games, probably with better angle, views, proximityh and commentary than your stadium seats btw. Last year he caught 67% of the passes thrown towards him. 67%. That's an incredible target to catch ratio. I saw a team of WRs with dropsies, escept Hackett. I saw a team of guys that tried to catch the ball with style (Jackson and his yearly appearance in the top 5 of drops), or just tried ta catch it period (Burleosn). And then I saw HAckett who played with more hunger than any of them, who knew the offense better than any of them from his years in the offense and a guy that flat out went after the ball more than any of the other WRs. And he hung onto it, I remember one drop and one TD that was the stupid 2 feet down isn't possession if the ball jiggles while you hit the ground rule. He got another TD two plays later. Even if he's not a physical upgrade over Burleson, which he is, his catch % is indiciative of his consistency. MoP, I realize his stats are not noteworthy for the FF regular season last year. However he wasn't the starter until Jackson went down. Before that he was covering the slot for Engram as an injury bump and then went about beating out Burleson for Jackson's position. So at worst he does no worse than Burleson has thus far which many have said was serviceable. However this week he will be the starter and he was almost ready to start against the Rams but they wisely gave his ankle two more weeks to rest. He is a better redzone target with his extra few inches and his ability to go up for the ball. Especially more this season with Stevens gone and now Pollard out.

I'll admit to homer bias, but I have watched him since he was a practice squader and after watching WR after WR drop pass after pass, when I see Hackett out there and the ball going to him, I know it's going to be caught. He has the ability to break a long one and to make tough catches over the middle. True he hasn't been in for a full season so his durability isn't known, but he had a LB (I think) roll on his ankle on his 2nd target of the 1st drive of the season. I don't think you can label him as injury prone for that kind of injury. Prior to that he has not had any injury concerns. The first target he was wide open over the middle but an LB made a great leap to bat the pass. So Hass came out targeting Hackett on the first drive. When Hackett makes a catch, Hass goes back to him. He did that in AZ and TB for sure, although how I would know that without attending the game, I don't know...

And I made sure to keep him from last year but had to stash him on my IR earlier this year so I have no reason to let FF hopefulness cloud my objectivity. Although I think that it's a pretty weak counter argument to use ownership as a detraction.

I have repeatedly said before the season and now that Branch will get more receptions and probably more yards, but Hackett will get more TDs and back them up with yardage gains. He is a better receiver than Burleson, period. At worst he'll be a solid WR3, if not WR2 for the rest of the season assuming Hass continues his pretty good season. And please note the number of times the team has thrown inside the 5 on account of Shaun Crumpler's soft running. Although again, how I would know that from watching at home I dunno.

This is pretty much what I expected. You realize that the Hawks are down from 7.5 plays per game in the red zone over the last two years to just over 3 this year? Not a lot of opportunities to run there. First three games were all solid.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Usually on my couch, I was unaware I had to sit in the stands to watch and evaluate players. Although I did see them in AZ last year. In that game I was about 27 rows up from the 30 yard line. I have watched every game for the last 6 years and with TiVo have rewatched plenty of the games, probably with better angle, views, proximityh and commentary than your stadium seats btw. Last year he caught 67% of the passes thrown towards him. 67%. That's an incredible target to catch ratio. I saw a team of WRs with dropsies, escept Hackett. I saw a team of guys that tried to catch the ball with style (Jackson and his yearly appearance in the top 5 of drops), or just tried ta catch it period (Burleosn). And then I saw HAckett who played with more hunger than any of them, who knew the offense better than any of them from his years in the offense and a guy that flat out went after the ball more than any of the other WRs. And he hung onto it, I remember one drop and one TD that was the stupid 2 feet down isn't possession if the ball jiggles while you hit the ground rule. He got another TD two plays later. Even if he's not a physical upgrade over Burleson, which he is, his catch % is indiciative of his consistency.

Also for the record if anyone thinks they are seeing more of a football game while sitting in a stadium as opposed to watching it on TV is not very wise. Hackett was never in jeopardy of losing his job to Burleson, not then...not now. He is by far the team's best red zone target and the offense gets that much better with him on the field with or without Branch because Hackett runs solid ten to 15 yard routes and makes tough catches. The Seahawks offense has been bogged down because they have difficulty running. They have difficulty running because they have trouble getting receivers open. They can't get receivers open because the receivers suck. If you watch them regularly you see teams playing a nickle defense with all 11 defenders in a ten yard box. Without Branch there is no deep threat, without Hackett there isn't a guy besides Engram who doesn't have Hackett's physical ability who can get open in that 10 to 20 yard range which plays to Hasselbeck's and the offenses strengths. With both back the running lanes will open, Hasselbeck will have more rhythm, and the offense can get back to being a decent unit again.

 

[KellysHeroes]

all these Hackett lovers are blinded by the fact that they have fell for the hype and they now realize that they have reached for him in there drafts.

The only WR worth owning there in Engram... and thats a WR#3 at best

 

[Doctor Detroit]

all these Hackett lovers are blinded by the fact that they have fell for the hype and they now realize that they have reached for him in there drafts.The only WR worth owning there in Engram... and thats a WR#3 at best

Or they actually watch football. Have you ever seen Hackett play? What about his game do you not like? I'll hang up and listen.

 

[SayWhat?]

Well, I think I'll let others vouch for my board credibility and let those bones fall where they may.

You have got to be kidding me. Board cred? Please.

 

[bigupsetter]

Hackett- when healthy- is a better producer that burl-brick any day of the week.

Really? What can you possibly base this on?Here are Hackett's 2006 numbers...Week 1: 1/14Week 2: 0/0Week 3, 4, and 5: Apparently didn't suit upWeek 6: 3/66Week 7: 4/37Week 8: 3/25/1week 9: 4/58week 10: 3/20week 11: 2/19week 12: 5/67/1That is the regular season for most owners...25/300/2He had 300 yds and 2 TD for most owners last season...and during the playoffs he started week 13 with 1 catch for 13 yds, so I doubt anyone in their right mind started him the next week and missed out on his career game of 4/104/1. Please tell me you know that Burleson has actually had 1,000 yds and 9 TD in a season...I know he hasn't done a lot since but he has done it. And Engram is on pace for about 1,000 yds and 4 TD this year...I doubt he will hit it but that's what he is on pace for. I understand the enthusiasm for DJ Hackett...we all want to be right on prognosticating what will happen but DJ Hackett has not proven anything yet.

Not so much high on Hackett as I am low on Burleson- luckiest contract in NFL IMO. Burleson did have a 1000 yd season, in 04 playing opposite Moss, hasnt cracked 500 since. My observation is based on actually watching these two play and have seen Burleson drop many easy balls and seen Hackett make hard grabs. Burleson has been mediocre, at best, with his opportunities.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I said before the 2004 NFL Draft that Braylon Edwards was the second best receiver I had ever seen play college football behind Randy Moss. What separates Braylon and Moss from everyone else is their ability to create separation and their ability to adjust to the ball while it's in the air.

DJ Hackett is probably the best WR the Seahawks have had since Brian Blades when it comes to adjusting to the ball while it's in the air. DJAX created separation, Branch does as well, but neither adjust to the ball like Hackett. Hackett has limited game experience but in the games he has played he has shown the ability to create space between the hash marks and out of bounds which gives the QB a bigger window to throw into and also allows DJ to use his good physical ability and hands to make catches at the sideline. Burleson doesn't create space, he doesn't adjust well at all to the ball in the air, and he pretty much has to depend on the QB hitting him in the chest with the ball. He is fast and elusive thus making him a good kick and punt returner, but his skills as a receiver are at best average and normally below average. Hackett is an above average receiver because he understands trajectory and has good instincts to go with his tall frame.

Will he be a star? No probably not but as far as skill he is the best of the Seattle receivers. But he is much closer to Moss and Edwards than he is to Desmond Howard or the Deion Sanders that played WR. Burleson is a cut above Desmond Howard as a receiver but not by much. He runs sloppy patterns, doesn't settle into space, and must rely on the QB to make a good read and throw to get him the ball. With Hackett you can throw the ball into a zone and be quite certain he will make a play on it. People doubting him need to give him a chance. He's really only been a central player in the offense for a total of 4 or 5 games in his career. From what I've seen from him he has a very high ceiling as a WR.

ETA: Sometimes when reading these threads I realize people are only cared about stats and not football. Football is not an individual statistic centered sport like baseball and outside of fantasy football and milestone statistcs like 200 yards rushing in a seaosn, 4000 yards passing, and throwing 40 TDs measuring players current football abilities by past statistical history is questionable. With baseball you can do this because the number of games and conditions give you a better sample size for statistical evaluation. Rant over.

 

[Nigel Tufnel]

If the question is simply "Branch or Hackett?" the answer is Branch.

 

[Enforcer]

If the question is simply "Branch or Hackett?" the answer is Branch.

No one disagrees with this. The real question is Burleson or Hackett (right now).Also, the original question is incomplete. Branch or Hackett right now? or long term? I think we all know what we're getting from Branch, but Hackett is still a question mark in the long term.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

If the question is simply "Branch or Hackett?" the answer is Branch.

Please start your own thread at the AC guy.

 

[infantsam]

At the end of the day you want to start neither unless you are in a deep league - they are simply not up to game speed - it's mid-season.

If you have to start 1 you start Branch - his experience should get him back in the flow more rapidly.

Hackett might be the next little baby Jesus - but he's not a solid starter yet. Any WR on that team could end up leading the stat sheet Sunday.

 

[Nigel Tufnel]

If the question is simply "Branch or Hackett?" the answer is Branch.

No one disagrees with this.

I'm not sure this is true.