Player Spotlight: Darrell Jackson (1 Viewer)

[Jason Wood]

2006 Player Spotlight Series

Over the course of the offseason, we will be evaluating a multitude of players at every fantasy position. One such way we go about that is through the Player Spotlight series. Think of the Spotlights as a permanent record on some of the more intriguing players for the upcoming season. Each Spotlight will be featured in an article on the main website.

Thread Topic: Darrell Jackson, WR, Seattle Seahawks

Player Page Link: Darrell Jackson Player Page

Each article will include:

Detailed viewpoint from a Footballguys staff member
Highlighted member commentary from the message board threads
FBG Projections
Consensus Member ProjectionsThe Rules

In order for this thread to provide sustainable value, we ask that you follow a few simple guidelines:

Focus commentary on the player in question, and your expectations for said player
Back up your expectations in whatever manner you deem appropriate; avoid posts that simply say "I hate him" or "He's the best"
To be included in the final synopsis and consensus outlook, you MUST provide projections for the playerProjections should include (at a minimum):

For QBs: Passing Yards, Passing TDs, Ints, Rush Yards, Rush TDs
For RBs: Rushes, Rushing Yards, Rush TDs, Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDs
For WRs & TEs: Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDsBest of Luck and ENJOY!

 

[This_Is_Not_VRR]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

1. Jackson has never gone for 90 receptions, or 1200 yards, or 9 TDs ever in his career. Not only has he not accomplished those numbers, but he is also coming off an injury and getting his knee cleaned up this offseason again.

2. Seattle have too many weapons. Jackson, Burleson, Engram, Hackett and Stevens are all good targets and in the Holmgren WCO, Seattle will spread the ball around. Its how they win.

D. Jackson

14 games played

70 receptions

1015 receiving yards

7 TDs

 

[LHUCKS]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

1. Jackson has never gone for 90 receptions, or 1200 yards, or 9 TDs ever in his career. Not only has he not accomplished those numbers, but he is also coming off an injury and getting his knee cleaned up this offseason again.

That's because Jackson has never played a full season where Hasselback has had a full grasp of the offense.Jackson and Hasselbeck are both entering their prime which should mean career numbers for Jackson.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

1. Jackson has never gone for 90 receptions, or 1200 yards, or 9 TDs ever in his career. Not only has he not accomplished those numbers, but he is also coming off an injury and getting his knee cleaned up this offseason again.

That's because Jackson has never played a fulls season where Hasselback has had a full grasp of the offense.Jackson and Hasselbeck are both entering their prime which should mean career numbers for Jackson.

Jackson played 16 games in 2003 when Hasselbeck made the PRO-BOWL and also played 16 games. Are you trying to tell me that Hasselbeck didn't have a full grasp of the offense when he made the pro bowl and the Seahawks had their best season of the last 17 years? Jackson is coming of a knee injury and just went under the knife for the second time in under a year on that knee. I do not foresee a full season out of Jackson.

Even IF Jackson plays a full season, Seattle spreads the ball too much for Jackson to rake in over 90 receptions and 1300 yards. Not one Seattle WR in this history of their franchise has ever got over 1300 receiving yards and that includes the likes of Largent. You think that a WR who has knee problems and who has three viable targets in Engram, Burleson and Stevens on the field with him is going to produce franchise records?

 

[LHUCKS]

Are you trying to tell me that Hasselbeck didn't have a full grasp of the offense when he made the pro bowl and the Seahawks had their best season of the last 17 years?

That's exactly what I'm trying to tell you. And that's exactly what Holmgren said in a post game press conference in the postseason. But I'm sure you know more than Holmgren. :backatcha:

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Are you trying to tell me that Hasselbeck didn't have a full grasp of the offense when he made the pro bowl and the Seahawks had their best season of the last 17 years?

That's exactly what I'm trying to tell you. And that's exactly what Holmgren said in a post game press conference in the postseason. But I'm sure you know more than Holmgren. :backatcha:

New to coach speak I take it.

 

[LHUCKS]

Are you trying to tell me that Hasselbeck didn't have a full grasp of the offense when he made the pro bowl and the Seahawks had their best season of the last 17 years?  

That's exactly what I'm trying to tell you. And that's exactly what Holmgren said in a post game press conference in the postseason. But I'm sure you know more than Holmgren. :backatcha:

New to coach speak I take it.

Not to pile on, but here are Hasselbeck's career numbers. You'll notice the career high in completion percentage and TD/INT ratio. His overall QB rating also reached a career high last year. By almost every expert's account Hasselbeck's best year was last year.

                +---------------------------------------+-----------------+                 |              Passing                  |     Rushing     |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+| Year  TM |   G |  Comp   Att   PCT    YD   Y/A  TD INT |  Att  Yards  TD |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+| 1999 gnb |  16 |     3    10  30.0    41   4.1   1   0 |     6    15   0 || 2000 gnb |   4 |    10    19  52.6   104   5.5   1   0 |     4    -5   0 || 2001 sea |  13 |   176   321  54.8  2023   6.3   7   8 |    40   141   0 || 2002 sea |  14 |   267   419  63.7  3075   7.3  15  10 |    40   202   1 || 2003 sea |  16 |   313   513  61.0  3844   7.5  26  15 |    36   125   2 || 2004 sea |  14 |   279   474  58.9  3382   7.1  22  15 |    27    90   1 || 2005 sea |  16 |   294   449  65.5  3455   7.7  24   9 |    36   124   1 |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+|  TOTAL   |  93 |  1342  2205  60.9 15924   7.2  96  57 |   189   692   5 |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Are you trying to tell me that Hasselbeck didn't have a full grasp of the offense when he made the pro bowl and the Seahawks had their best season of the last 17 years?

That's exactly what I'm trying to tell you. And that's exactly what Holmgren said in a post game press conference in the postseason. But I'm sure you know more than Holmgren. :backatcha:

New to coach speak I take it.

Not to pile on, but here are Jacksons's career numbers...noice the career high in completion percentage and TD/INT ratio. His overall QB rating also reached a career high last year. By almost every experts account Hasselbecks best year was last year.
+---------------------------------------+-----------------+ | Passing | Rushing |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+| Year TM | G | Comp Att PCT YD Y/A TD INT | Att Yards TD |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+| 1999 gnb | 16 | 3 10 30.0 41 4.1 1 0 | 6 15 0 || 2000 gnb | 4 | 10 19 52.6 104 5.5 1 0 | 4 -5 0 || 2001 sea | 13 | 176 321 54.8 2023 6.3 7 8 | 40 141 0 || 2002 sea | 14 | 267 419 63.7 3075 7.3 15 10 | 40 202 1 || 2003 sea | 16 | 313 513 61.0 3844 7.5 26 15 | 36 125 2 || 2004 sea | 14 | 279 474 58.9 3382 7.1 22 15 | 27 90 1 || 2005 sea | 16 | 294 449 65.5 3455 7.7 24 9 | 36 124 1 |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+| TOTAL | 93 | 1342 2205 60.9 15924 7.2 96 57 | 189 692 5 |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

Whats your point? Hasselbeck made the Pro-Bowl in 2003 when jackson played all 16 games. You are acting as if Hasselebck didn't have a "grasp" of the offense at that point. Hass had more TDs and yards in that year yet Jackson didn't come close to lofty projections.

Hasselbeck's best year was last year, but that doesn't do anything to support your argument that Hass and Jackson haven't played a full season together.

 

[LHUCKS]

Whats your point?

As stated above, Jackson and Hasselbeck haven't played together for a full season whill both were in their prime.

Hasselbeck made the Pro-Bowl in 2003 when jackson played all 16 games. You are acting as if Hasselebck didn't have a "grasp" of the offense at that point.

I never said he didn't have a grasp...I stated he didn't have a full grasp, which is exactly what Holmgren stated in the press conference and the stats support the head coach's assertions.

Hass had more TDs and yards in that year yet Jackson didn't come close to lofty projections.

Jackson had 9 TDs and 1100 yards in only his 4th year in the NFL...only a handfull of WRs have done that well in their 4th year.

Hasselbeck's best year was last year, but that doesn't do anything to support your argument that Hass and Jackson haven't played a full season together.

I never asserted Jackson and Hassel have never played a full season together, I stated they haven't played a full season together while both were in their primes.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Whats your point?

As stated above, Jackson and Hasselbeck haven't played together for a full season whill both were in their prime.

Hasselbeck made the Pro-Bowl in 2003 when jackson played all 16 games. You are acting as if Hasselebck didn't have a "grasp" of the offense at that point.

I never said he didn't have a grasp...I stated he didn't have a full grasp, which is exactly what Holmgren stated in the press conference and the stats support the head coach's assertions.

Hass had more TDs and yards in that year yet Jackson didn't come close to lofty projections.

Jackson had 9 TDs and 1100 yards in only his 4th year in the NFL...only a handfull of WRs have done that well in their 4th year.

Hasselbeck's best year was last year, but that doesn't do anything to support your argument that Hass and Jackson haven't played a full season together.

I never asserted Jackson and Hassel have never played a full season together, I stated they haven't played a full season together while both were in their primes.

The bottomline is that Hass had his best year for fantasy in 2003 and a healthy Jackson still did not approach lofty projections of 90 receptions, 1300 yards and 11 TDs. There are just too many options this year for Hass for Jackson to churn out stats like that. The Seattle offense plays a very spread out game.

Hass getting better does not translate directly into better numbers for Jackson. Hass is now very efficient because he throws to the open WR, he avoids mistakes and doesn't lock onto targets. If you look at 2003, The Hawks had Engram, Robinson and Jackson with 600, 900 and 1100 yards. I expect the same this year with a group of Engram, Burleson, Jackson AND Stevens.

 

[LHUCKS]

Hass is now very efficient because he throws to the open WR, he avoids mistakes and doesn't lock onto targets.

Jackson's highest ppg for complete games started while healthy was in '05 Of course the dataset is small, but it looks like Jackson was going to erupt while entering a typical "prime year" for elite WRs.

Here are his games before he got injured where he was on pace for 1600+ yards.

+----------+--------+-------------+----+| WK  OPP  |  RSHYD |  REC   YD   | TD |+----------+--------+-------------+----+|  1  jax  |     0  |    6    65  |  1 ||  2  atl  |     0  |    8   131  |  0 ||  3  ari  |     0  |    8   125  |  0 |

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Hass is now very efficient because he throws to the open WR, he avoids mistakes and doesn't lock onto targets.

Jackson's highes ppg for complete games started was in '05

Seattle only went 2-2 in those first four games of the season as well.

 

[LHUCKS]

Hass is now very efficient because he throws to the open WR, he avoids mistakes and doesn't lock onto targets.

Jackson's highes ppg for complete games started was in '05

Seattle only went 2-2 in those first four games of the season as well.

Are we talking about Seattle's wins or Jackson's projected stats for '06?

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Hass is now very efficient because he throws to the open WR, he avoids mistakes and doesn't lock onto targets.

Jackson's highes ppg for complete games started was in '05

Seattle only went 2-2 in those first four games of the season as well.

Are we talking about Seattle's wins or Jackson's projected stats for '06?

Does Hasselbeck care about winning or Jackson's stats?

 

[LHUCKS]

Hass is now very efficient because he throws to the open WR, he avoids mistakes and doesn't lock onto targets.

Jackson's highes ppg for complete games started was in '05

Seattle only went 2-2 in those first four games of the season as well.

Are we talking about Seattle's wins or Jackson's projected stats for '06?

Does Hasselbeck care about winning or Jackson's stats?

I have no idea where you're going with this.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Hass is now very efficient because he throws to the open WR, he avoids mistakes and doesn't lock onto targets.

Jackson's highes ppg for complete games started was in '05

Seattle only went 2-2 in those first four games of the season as well.

Are we talking about Seattle's wins or Jackson's projected stats for '06?

Does Hasselbeck care about winning or Jackson's stats?

I have no idea where you're going with this.

Hasselbeck and Holmgren are going to do what will win games, and thats spreading the ball around.

 

[This_Is_Not_VRR]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

1. Jackson has never gone for 90 receptions, or 1200 yards, or 9 TDs ever in his career. Not only has he not accomplished those numbers, but he is also coming off an injury and getting his knee cleaned up this offseason again.

2. Seattle have too many weapons. Jackson, Burleson, Engram, Hackett and Stevens are all good targets and in the Holmgren WCO, Seattle will spread the ball around. Its how they win.

D. Jackson

14 games played

70 receptions

1015 receiving yards

7 TDs

1. Jackson had 87 receptions, 1,199 yards in 2004 and 7 TD's. As any Seahawks fan can tell you, he and Koren Robinson had a MAJOR case of the drops that season. He would have had well over 90 catches and 1,200 yards in 2004 if he and the other Seahawks WR's had just caught the damn football. And the year before that, he had 9 TD's. As far as I'm concerned, he's already proven that big numbers are not out of reach for him in the Seahawks offense. If he displays the great hands that he had last year and stays healthy, he'll be a tier 1 WR.

2. People get way too caught up in the number of weapons the Seahawks offense has. It doesn't matter. If Jackson's on the field and healthy, he's going to put up big numbers.

Look no further than his first 4 games of the year before he got injured:

In those 4 games (@ Jac, ATL, ARZ, @ WASH) he had a total of 29 receptions, 376 yards, and 2 TD's. Through 16 games that works out to 116 receptions, 1,504 yards, and 8 TD's. I'm sure most of you will dismiss those numbers because it's only over 4 games...But in keep in mind that he doesn't even have to keep up that pace because I'm not predicting that he'll have a 116 receptions or 1,500 yards.

If you look at the 4 relevant games (exluding the game against Indy, but including @ Tenn in the regular season, Wash, Carolina, and Pitt in the playoffs) he played in after returning from injury he had a total 26 receptions, 340 yards and 3 TD's. Through 16 games that average works out to 104 receptions, 1,360 yards, and 12 TD's.

Including the playoffs and Super Bowl, he played in 8 games last year (again, excluding the Indy game) resulting in a total of 55 receptions, 716 yards, and 5 TD's. Double those numbers for a 16 game season and that works out to 110 receptions, 1,432 yards, and 10 TD's.

I realize that coming up with accurate projections isn't even remotely as simple as I just made it out to be. But what I will say with complete and utter confidence is that Jackson wasn't playing over his head in those 8 games that had him on pace to have a 1,400+ yard season. He's fully capable of playing like that every time he steps out onto the field healthy.

Anyway...I'd say it's about time that we put the notion that Hasselbeck spreads the ball around too much for any one Seahawks WR to have a dominant fantasy season to rest. It's simply not true. Jackson had great numbers last year when he was healthy, and he had great numbers after returning from his knee injury.

The only thing Jackson owners should be worried about is his health. If that's enough to make you avoid him altogether, so be it. Just don't pass on him because you don't think he'll get enough touches. That will prove to be flat-out wrong.

 

[LHUCKS]

Upside Projection: 110 Receptions, 1525 yards, 11 TDs.

Low End Projection: 85 Receptions, 1125 Yards, 6 TDs

Middle Projection: 97 Receptions, 1290 Yards, 9 TDs

 

[ShotGunStyle]

88/1267/10

Really underrated because he doesn't run his mouth.

 

[rzrback77]

I am concerned about Jackson's injuries in 05. I have hesitations throwing out career year stat predictions following a year when he missed 10 games for a knee injury and had follow up surgery in March of this year. I could move him up following the pre-season, but not likely.

Seattle has resigned Shaun Alexander and he will likely be the focal point of the attack. But the Seahawks have also added Nate Burleson and have Bobby Engram, Peter Warrick, and D.J. Hackett all returning. I think that there will be more ball spread this season and Jackson's current ADP of 36, I doubt that he is on my team.

74 receptions for 1010 yards and 7 TDs with no rushing yards.

 

[nygiants56]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

1. Jackson has never gone for 90 receptions, or 1200 yards, or 9 TDs ever in his career. Not only has he not accomplished those numbers, but he is also coming off an injury and getting his knee cleaned up this offseason again.

2. Seattle have too many weapons. Jackson, Burleson, Engram, Hackett and Stevens are all good targets and in the Holmgren WCO, Seattle will spread the ball around. Its how they win.

D. Jackson

14 games played

70 receptions

1015 receiving yards

7 TDs

I'm not sure I'd be quick to call Burleson a 'weapon', or Stevens for that matter, or even Engram.SA lost Hutchinson, that will hurt the running ability of the offense.They scored a TON of TD's on the ground last year, and want to balance out the attack more, so the passing game is going to see an uptick in stats across the board.

you're prediction is still a good one, it looks like Jackson's career average, but this could be the one time that Seattle relies HEAVILY on the passing game, and Jackson could benefit the most from it..

90-1170-10

 

[fsufan]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

1. Jackson has never gone for 90 receptions, or 1200 yards, or 9 TDs ever in his career. Not only has he not accomplished those numbers, but he is also coming off an injury and getting his knee cleaned up this offseason again.

2. Seattle have too many weapons. Jackson, Burleson, Engram, Hackett and Stevens are all good targets and in the Holmgren WCO, Seattle will spread the ball around. Its how they win.

D. Jackson

14 games played

70 receptions

1015 receiving yards

7 TDs

Djax was on pace for 1500 yards and 8 TDs last year before he got hurt.he also did not lose a beat when he came back from injury

72 yards and 1 TD

34 yards

DNP

131 yards and 1 TD- playoffs

75 yards and 1 TD- playoffs

 

[Tau837]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

1. Jackson has never gone for 90 receptions, or 1200 yards, or 9 TDs ever in his career. Not only has he not accomplished those numbers, but he is also coming off an injury and getting his knee cleaned up this offseason again.

2. Seattle have too many weapons. Jackson, Burleson, Engram, Hackett and Stevens are all good targets and in the Holmgren WCO, Seattle will spread the ball around. Its how they win.

D. Jackson

14 games played

70 receptions

1015 receiving yards

7 TDs

1. Jackson had 87 receptions, 1,199 yards in 2004 and 7 TD's. As any Seahawks fan can tell you, he and Koren Robinson had a MAJOR case of the drops that season. He would have had well over 90 catches and 1,200 yards in 2004 if he and the other Seahawks WR's had just caught the damn football. And the year before that, he had 9 TD's. As far as I'm concerned, he's already proven that big numbers are not out of reach for him in the Seahawks offense. If he displays the great hands that he had last year and stays healthy, he'll be a tier 1 WR.

2. People get way too caught up in the number of weapons the Seahawks offense has. It doesn't matter. If Jackson's on the field and healthy, he's going to put up big numbers.

Look no further than his first 4 games of the year before he got injured:

In those 4 games (@ Jac, ATL, ARZ, @ WASH) he had a total of 29 receptions, 376 yards, and 2 TD's. Through 16 games that works out to 116 receptions, 1,504 yards, and 8 TD's. I'm sure most of you will dismiss those numbers because it's only over 4 games...But in keep in mind that he doesn't even have to keep up that pace because I'm not predicting that he'll have a 116 receptions or 1,500 yards.

If you look at the 4 relevant games (exluding the game against Indy, but including @ Tenn in the regular season, Wash, Carolina, and Pitt in the playoffs) he played in after returning from injury he had a total 26 receptions, 340 yards and 3 TD's. Through 16 games that average works out to 104 receptions, 1,360 yards, and 12 TD's.

Including the playoffs and Super Bowl, he played in 8 games last year (again, excluding the Indy game) resulting in a total of 55 receptions, 716 yards, and 5 TD's. Double those numbers for a 16 game season and that works out to 110 receptions, 1,432 yards, and 10 TD's.

I realize that coming up with accurate projections isn't even remotely as simple as I just made it out to be. But what I will say with complete and utter confidence is that Jackson wasn't playing over his head in those 8 games that had him on pace to have a 1,400+ yard season. He's fully capable of playing like that every time he steps out onto the field healthy.

Anyway...I'd say it's about time that we put the notion that Hasselbeck spreads the ball around too much for any one Seahawks WR to have a dominant fantasy season to rest. It's simply not true. Jackson had great numbers last year when he was healthy, and he had great numbers after returning from his knee injury.

The only thing Jackson owners should be worried about is his health. If that's enough to make you avoid him altogether, so be it. Just don't pass on him because you don't think he'll get enough touches. That will prove to be flat-out wrong.

 

[Tau837]

I am concerned about Jackson's injuries in 05. I have hesitations throwing out career year stat predictions following a year when he missed 10 games for a knee injury and had follow up surgery in March of this year. I could move him up following the pre-season, but not likely.

Seattle has resigned Shaun Alexander and he will likely be the focal point of the attack. But the Seahawks have also added Nate Burleson and have Bobby Engram, Peter Warrick, and D.J. Hackett all returning. I think that there will be more ball spread this season and Jackson's current ADP of 36, I doubt that he is on my team.

74 receptions for 1010 yards and 7 TDs with no rushing yards.

I don't disagree that health is the primary concern.But as to spreading the ball around, it seems to me that Jackson will be the clear WR1, and I assume Burleson will end up WR2 and Engram WR3. Do you really think Hackett and Warrick will be a factor if the top 3 guys are healthy? Jackson missed 10 games last season, yet those two only combined for 39/580/2 receiving. Warrick and Hackett each had 1 catch in the 6 games in which Jackson played. Yes, one catch. IMO they are irrelevant to Jackson's prospects.

If spreading the ball around is an issue, IMO you should focus on Jackson, Burleson, Engram, and Stevens as the main receiving threats. Engram & Jurevicius combined for 46/599/3 in Jackson's 6 games, compared to Jackson's own 38/382/3.

Now, Hasselbeck only attempted 449 passes last season, and the Seahawks as a team were 23rd in the league. But they had the #2 offense thanks to the running game. As someone already pointed out, the loss of Hutchinson will likely have an appreciable impact on the running game, which would logically lead to an increase in passing attempts. In 2004, with generally the same offensive cast as last year, the Seahawks attempted 59 more passes and were 14th in pass attempts. I'd look for a similar number this year, say around 530 attempts.

Over the past 4 years, Hasselbeck has completed 62.2% of his passes for 7.42 ypa. Last year, he completed 65.5% for 7.7 ypa. I'd look for a slight regression, to 64% at 7.5 ypa. That yields 339 completions for 3975 yards. In the past 3 years, Hasselbeck has averaged 1.57 TDs per game, which is 25 per 16 games.

So... spread 339 completions, 3975 yards, and 25 TDs among the receivers and what do you get?

Assuming all players play 16 games:

Stevens - 45/550/5 - same as last year

Other TEs - 15/110/1 - very slight uptick

RBs - 50/350/1 - very slight uptick

Jackson - 90/1200/10

Engram - 65/781/3 - very similar to last year

Burleson - 50/660/4 - almost splitting the difference of last 2 seasons in Minny

Hackett - 16/224/1 - probably too much given my assumption of 16 games for all

Warrick - 8/100/0 - probably too much given my assumption of 16 games for all

So. There is my strawman. Assuming health for all, what problems do you see with it? I don't see how Jackson doesn't dominate if he plays 16 games, so that is really the only question in my mind. And prior to last season, he had played in 79 of 82 possible games in his career, including 40 straight games. So he has a knee problem. Even if you predict injury, do you think he misses a couple games or 10 games? If the former, he's still worth a high draft pick. It is only if you predict him to miss major time again, like last year, that he isn't. And I don't see what basis anyone has for projecting that.

 

[Jon_Moore]

I'm on the Jackson bandwagon, and in a big way. His injury last year, and underrated play has made him a steal in virutally all leagues. I've targeted him in all of my keepers and dynasties, and acquired him in most. He's a guy i target in 1 year leagues as well. I'm very confident that he'll outdo his draft position, and is capable of posting top 5 stats for a receiver.

Someones already discussed the pre-injury #s from last year, so I won't beat it in, but I believe he was on the verge of being in the elite of the fantasy receivers. 87 catches 2 years ago was very nice. He was on pace for over 100 last year.

I think he woudl have slowed down some last year, but not a ton. Defenses have to respect one of the best rushing attacks in the NFL, and Jackson plays in the NFC West. The Rams, 49ers, Cardinals aren't exactly top defenses...the cardinals may be on the rise, but they're not great.

I expect him to get something right around 6 catches a game

96 receptions

1344 yards

9 TDs

 

[joffer]

87/1153/8

the knee still concerns me a bit, if he's not sitting out any days in TC i may bump that up a bit.

 

[Jon_Moore]

Hass is now very efficient because he throws to the open WR, he avoids mistakes and doesn't lock onto targets.

Jackson's highes ppg for complete games started was in '05

Seattle only went 2-2 in those first four games of the season as well.

Are we talking about Seattle's wins or Jackson's projected stats for '06?

Does Hasselbeck care about winning or Jackson's stats?

I have no idea where you're going with this.

Hasselbeck and Holmgren are going to do what will win games, and thats spreading the ball around.

I believe all quarterback are under the assumption that the way to win is to move the ball. Darrell Jackson got all those catches and yards because he was open, not because Hasselback was forcing it. If he's open, he'll get the ball, they wont force it to other guys to "spread the ball around". You win by moving the ball, if someones open, they're going to get the target.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

1. Jackson has never gone for 90 receptions, or 1200 yards, or 9 TDs ever in his career. Not only has he not accomplished those numbers, but he is also coming off an injury and getting his knee cleaned up this offseason again.

2. Seattle have too many weapons. Jackson, Burleson, Engram, Hackett and Stevens are all good targets and in the Holmgren WCO, Seattle will spread the ball around. Its how they win.

D. Jackson

14 games played

70 receptions

1015 receiving yards

7 TDs

I'm not sure I'd be quick to call Burleson a 'weapon', or Stevens for that matter, or even Engram.SA lost Hutchinson, that will hurt the running ability of the offense.They scored a TON of TD's on the ground last year, and want to balance out the attack more, so the passing game is going to see an uptick in stats across the board.

you're prediction is still a good one, it looks like Jackson's career average, but this could be the one time that Seattle relies HEAVILY on the passing game, and Jackson could benefit the most from it..

90-1170-10

Even if you don't think Burleson or Stevens are weapons, they will still get their fair share of yards. Burleson will get approx 800-1000 yards and Stevens will get 500-700 yards. They are both big targets as well and as witnessed last year with JJ, they will get looks in the redzone.Seattle will never have to RELY heavily on the passing game because they will have the lead in games. They have an underrated defense and an offense that can score on every drive. Seattle will play with the lead in most games and that means playing more conservatively.

 

[diesel7982]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

1. Jackson has never gone for 90 receptions, or 1200 yards, or 9 TDs ever in his career. Not only has he not accomplished those numbers, but he is also coming off an injury and getting his knee cleaned up this offseason again.

2. Seattle have too many weapons. Jackson, Burleson, Engram, Hackett and Stevens are all good targets and in the Holmgren WCO, Seattle will spread the ball around. Its how they win.

D. Jackson

14 games played

70 receptions

1015 receiving yards

7 TDs

I'm not sure I'd be quick to call Burleson a 'weapon', or Stevens for that matter, or even Engram.SA lost Hutchinson, that will hurt the running ability of the offense.They scored a TON of TD's on the ground last year, and want to balance out the attack more, so the passing game is going to see an uptick in stats across the board.

you're prediction is still a good one, it looks like Jackson's career average, but this could be the one time that Seattle relies HEAVILY on the passing game, and Jackson could benefit the most from it..

90-1170-10

Even if you don't think Burleson or Stevens are weapons, they will still get their fair share of yards. Burleson will get approx 800-1000 yards and Stevens will get 500-700 yards. They are both big targets as well and as witnessed last year with JJ, they will get looks in the redzone.Seattle will never have to RELY heavily on the passing game because they will have the lead in games. They have an underrated defense and an offense that can score on every drive. Seattle will play with the lead in most games and that means playing more conservatively.

Thats on the extreme high end for both of those players.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

1. Jackson has never gone for 90 receptions, or 1200 yards, or 9 TDs ever in his career. Not only has he not accomplished those numbers, but he is also coming off an injury and getting his knee cleaned up this offseason again.

2. Seattle have too many weapons. Jackson, Burleson, Engram, Hackett and Stevens are all good targets and in the Holmgren WCO, Seattle will spread the ball around. Its how they win.

D. Jackson

14 games played

70 receptions

1015 receiving yards

7 TDs

I'm not sure I'd be quick to call Burleson a 'weapon', or Stevens for that matter, or even Engram.SA lost Hutchinson, that will hurt the running ability of the offense.They scored a TON of TD's on the ground last year, and want to balance out the attack more, so the passing game is going to see an uptick in stats across the board.

you're prediction is still a good one, it looks like Jackson's career average, but this could be the one time that Seattle relies HEAVILY on the passing game, and Jackson could benefit the most from it..

90-1170-10

Even if you don't think Burleson or Stevens are weapons, they will still get their fair share of yards. Burleson will get approx 800-1000 yards and Stevens will get 500-700 yards. They are both big targets as well and as witnessed last year with JJ, they will get looks in the redzone.Seattle will never have to RELY heavily on the passing game because they will have the lead in games. They have an underrated defense and an offense that can score on every drive. Seattle will play with the lead in most games and that means playing more conservatively.

Thats on the extreme high end for both of those players.

Why do you say that? Stevens had 550 yards last season on 11 games started.

Burleson will take the place of Robinson of prior years.

 

[rzrback77]

I am concerned about Jackson's injuries in 05.  I have hesitations throwing out career year stat predictions following a year when he missed 10 games for a knee injury and had follow up surgery in March of this year.  I could move him up following the pre-season, but not likely.

Seattle has resigned Shaun Alexander and he will likely be the focal point of the attack.  But the Seahawks have also added Nate Burleson and have Bobby Engram, Peter Warrick, and D.J. Hackett all returning.  I think that there will be more ball spread this season and Jackson's current ADP of 36, I doubt that he is on my team.

74 receptions for 1010 yards and 7 TDs with no rushing yards.

I don't disagree that health is the primary concern.But as to spreading the ball around, it seems to me that Jackson will be the clear WR1, and I assume Burleson will end up WR2 and Engram WR3. Do you really think Hackett and Warrick will be a factor if the top 3 guys are healthy? Jackson missed 10 games last season, yet those two only combined for 39/580/2 receiving. Warrick and Hackett each had 1 catch in the 6 games in which Jackson played. Yes, one catch. IMO they are irrelevant to Jackson's prospects.

If spreading the ball around is an issue, IMO you should focus on Jackson, Burleson, Engram, and Stevens as the main receiving threats. Engram & Jurevicius combined for 46/599/3 in Jackson's 6 games, compared to Jackson's own 38/382/3.

Now, Hasselbeck only attempted 449 passes last season, and the Seahawks as a team were 23rd in the league. But they had the #2 offense thanks to the running game. As someone already pointed out, the loss of Hutchinson will likely have an appreciable impact on the running game, which would logically lead to an increase in passing attempts. In 2004, with generally the same offensive cast as last year, the Seahawks attempted 59 more passes and were 14th in pass attempts. I'd look for a similar number this year, say around 530 attempts.

Over the past 4 years, Hasselbeck has completed 62.2% of his passes for 7.42 ypa. Last year, he completed 65.5% for 7.7 ypa. I'd look for a slight regression, to 64% at 7.5 ypa. That yields 339 completions for 3975 yards. In the past 3 years, Hasselbeck has averaged 1.57 TDs per game, which is 25 per 16 games.

So... spread 339 completions, 3975 yards, and 25 TDs among the receivers and what do you get?

Assuming all players play 16 games:

Stevens - 45/550/5 - same as last year

Other TEs - 15/110/1 - very slight uptick

RBs - 50/350/1 - very slight uptick

Jackson - 90/1200/10

Engram - 65/781/3 - very similar to last year

Burleson - 50/660/4 - almost splitting the difference of last 2 seasons in Minny

Hackett - 16/224/1 - probably too much given my assumption of 16 games for all

Warrick - 8/100/0 - probably too much given my assumption of 16 games for all

So. There is my strawman. Assuming health for all, what problems do you see with it? I don't see how Jackson doesn't dominate if he plays 16 games, so that is really the only question in my mind. And prior to last season, he had played in 79 of 82 possible games in his career, including 40 straight games. So he has a knee problem. Even if you predict injury, do you think he misses a couple games or 10 games? If the former, he's still worth a high draft pick. It is only if you predict him to miss major time again, like last year, that he isn't. And I don't see what basis anyone has for projecting that.

Very well thought out response. You convinced me to reconsider, but I will wait on training camp and determine health better.

 

[Tau837]

Even if you don't think Burleson or Stevens are weapons, they will still get their fair share of yards.  Burleson will get approx 800-1000 yards and Stevens will get 500-700 yards.  They are both big targets as well and as witnessed last year with JJ, they will get looks in the redzone.

Seattle will never have to RELY heavily on the passing game because they will have the lead in games.  They have an underrated defense and an offense that can score on every drive.  Seattle will play with the lead in most games and that means playing more conservatively.

Thats on the extreme high end for both of those players.

That was my immediate reaction as well, particularly for Burleson. I think Stevens will hit the low end of the range stated above, as I projected earlier in the thread.It is worth noting, however, that Stevens had 21/247/3 in the 6 games he played with Jackson last year. That would project to 56/659/8 over 16 games. That said, I have a hard time justifying projecting him that high--that's TE6 territory. I think his targets could regress a bit with a more talented top 3 WRs, assuming the WRs stay healthy. Plus, a somewhat less effective running game could also open up fewer opportunities for the TE... heck, they might require him to block more or bring in another TE for that purpose more often.

 

[Tau837]

If he can just stay healthy, I think he's in for a monster season.

92 receptions, 1331 yards, 11 TD's.

1. Jackson has never gone for 90 receptions, or 1200 yards, or 9 TDs ever in his career. Not only has he not accomplished those numbers, but he is also coming off an injury and getting his knee cleaned up this offseason again.

2. Seattle have too many weapons. Jackson, Burleson, Engram, Hackett and Stevens are all good targets and in the Holmgren WCO, Seattle will spread the ball around. Its how they win.

D. Jackson

14 games played

70 receptions

1015 receiving yards

7 TDs

I'm not sure I'd be quick to call Burleson a 'weapon', or Stevens for that matter, or even Engram.SA lost Hutchinson, that will hurt the running ability of the offense.They scored a TON of TD's on the ground last year, and want to balance out the attack more, so the passing game is going to see an uptick in stats across the board.

you're prediction is still a good one, it looks like Jackson's career average, but this could be the one time that Seattle relies HEAVILY on the passing game, and Jackson could benefit the most from it..

90-1170-10

Even if you don't think Burleson or Stevens are weapons, they will still get their fair share of yards. Burleson will get approx 800-1000 yards and Stevens will get 500-700 yards. They are both big targets as well and as witnessed last year with JJ, they will get looks in the redzone.Seattle will never have to RELY heavily on the passing game because they will have the lead in games. They have an underrated defense and an offense that can score on every drive. Seattle will play with the lead in most games and that means playing more conservatively.

Thats on the extreme high end for both of those players.

Why do you say that? Stevens had 550 yards last season on 11 games started.

Burleson will take the place of Robinson of prior years.

Burleson was a complete bust last year, and is now on a new team learning a new offense. Meanwhile, Hasselbeck already has a great comfort level with Jackson, Engram, and Stevens.Looking at FBG rankings, his consensus ranking is WR40, and only 1 of 5 FBG staff projections have him at 800 yards or higher.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Burleson was a complete bust last year, and is now on a new team learning a new offense. Meanwhile, Hasselbeck already has a great comfort level with Jackson, Engram, and Stevens.

Looking at FBG rankings, his consensus ranking is WR40, and only 1 of 5 FBG staff projections have him at 800 yards or higher.

I don't think you can blame Burleson for season he had in Minny last year. Every player was a bust last year for Minny. I think you are going to see a break down this year similar to the Hawks of 2003 when Jackson had 1100, Robinson had 900 and Engram had 600.

I am of the that opinion because I do not think Jackson is going to get 1300 yards. Now for those who project Jackson with 1300 yards will not see it the way I do and have Burleson with fewer yards.

 

[Tau837]

Burleson was a complete bust last year, and is now on a new team learning a new offense.  Meanwhile, Hasselbeck already has a great comfort level with Jackson, Engram, and Stevens.Looking at FBG rankings, his consensus ranking is WR40, and only 1 of 5 FBG staff projections have him at 800 yards or higher.

I don't think you can blame Burleson for season he had in Minny last year. Every player was a bust last year for Minny.

Yet 6 players on the Vikings had more receiving yards than Burleson last year, including every WR who caught a pass.

I think you are going to see a break down this year similar to the Hawks of 2003 when Jackson had 1100, Robinson had 900 and Engram had 600.I am of the that opinion because I do not think Jackson is going to get 1300 yards. Now for those who project Jackson with 1300 yards will not see it the way I do and have Burleson with fewer yards.

I didn't project Jackson with 1300 yards, but I don't see Burleson with 800. I see them with 1200 & 660, respectively.

 

[Gopher State]

Not looking at DJAX's knee issue, I would also want to consider the fact that the Seahawks play in a weak division and the NFC. I can see the Hawks maybe having home field through out the play offs wrapped by as early as week 15, if everything goes as plan, and if they play as good as every one thinks they will. So how many quarters does Jackson sit, 2, 4 6 8? With his history(injury) I could see the hawks sitting him for 6 quarters if their is nothing to gain. So taking this into the mix, and I think their TE breaks out this year with TD's in the redzone, I give Jackson

1100 rec, 7 td's

 

[Sweetness_34]

I do not understand the folks who are bagging on DJax:

a) In 2003, DJax had Koren Robinson on the other side (who took a lot of his catches/TDs away). Now he has Burleson. How many WRs do well on a new team in their 1s year?? And Burleson showed he was not as good as the year he had 2 years back from his performance last year. The Vikings had crap for WR last year and still, Burleson did nothing. Can he do anything without Moss on the other side? (And pls do not point to the 4 games without Moss when he was injured 2 years back. I am tired of arguing how those 4 games had the Vikings going up against cream puff team passing defenses 3 out of those 4 games (one was NO)). Bobby Engram is one more year older.

b) DJax has a really easy schedule to go up against (NFC West twice and NFC North defenses and AFC West Passing defenses once???Are you kidding me?)

c) West coast offenses take time to learn. DJax and Hass are in their prime, loaded with knowledge of the system. And with Hutch gone, Shaun will not have the same #s he did last year, meaning more 2nd and 3rd and long situations.

Looking at the projection made for last year for DJax, I completely agree that DJax is in for a great year, if he can stay healthy

85 receptions; 1200 yards; 8 TDs easily

 

[fridayfrenzy]

I didn't project Jackson with 1300 yards, but I don't see Burleson with 800. I see them with 1200 & 660, respectively.

I see Jackson not lasting 16 games and ending in the 1000-1100 range and Burleson going for around 800 yards. It may just be Hass being nice, but he has commented on how well Burleson is doing in camps. With Burleson working his tail off and being back in his hometown, I see him doing well as a #2 WR for the Hawks.

Engram did well last year opposite of Jackson....

Week 1: 79 yards

Week 2: 77 yards

Week 3: 54 yards

Week 4: 106 yards

Week 15: 95 yards

Divisional: 11 yards

Conference: 34 yards

SB: 70 yards

I realize its a small data size due to Jackson not being healthy for too many games, but if you extrapolate those numbers over 16 games, thats 1,052 yards.

 

[Tau837]

I didn't project Jackson with 1300 yards, but I don't see Burleson with 800.  I see them with 1200 & 660, respectively.

I see Jackson not lasting 16 games and ending in the 1000-1100 range and Burleson going for around 800 yards. It may just be Hass being nice, but he has commented on how well Burleson is doing in camps. With Burleson working his tail off and being back in his hometown, I see him doing well as a #2 WR for the Hawks.

Engram did well last year opposite of Jackson....

Week 1: 79 yards

Week 2: 77 yards

Week 3: 54 yards

Week 4: 106 yards

Week 15: 95 yards

Divisional: 11 yards

Conference: 34 yards

SB: 70 yards

I realize its a small data size due to Jackson not being healthy for too many games, but if you extrapolate those numbers over 16 games, thats 1,052 yards.

You missed Engram's 1/13/0 game in week 16. That drops the scaled projection to 935 yards. Still, 935 > 800, so I doubt that changes your mind. We can agree to disagree.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

I didn't project Jackson with 1300 yards, but I don't see Burleson with 800. I see them with 1200 & 660, respectively.

I see Jackson not lasting 16 games and ending in the 1000-1100 range and Burleson going for around 800 yards. It may just be Hass being nice, but he has commented on how well Burleson is doing in camps. With Burleson working his tail off and being back in his hometown, I see him doing well as a #2 WR for the Hawks.

Engram did well last year opposite of Jackson....

Week 1: 79 yards

Week 2: 77 yards

Week 3: 54 yards

Week 4: 106 yards

Week 15: 95 yards

Divisional: 11 yards

Conference: 34 yards

SB: 70 yards

I realize its a small data size due to Jackson not being healthy for too many games, but if you extrapolate those numbers over 16 games, thats 1,052 yards.

You missed Engram's 1/13/0 game in week 16. That drops the scaled projection to 935 yards. Still, 935 > 800, so I doubt that changes your mind. We can agree to disagree.

My bad, although they sat their players sometime in the second half if I recall correctly.

 

[Musesboy]

Darrell Jackson got off to a very fast start last year. He was targeted 42 times in the first four games, and was on pace for 168. Only Anquan Boldin ended up with more (171). So it was easy to look at Jackson's start last year and get excited about what he might achieve this year if he were to play 16 games. But with such a small sample size, that would be a very dangerous approach.

After missing ten games least year, Jackson had knee surgery this past spring. Although he isn't expected to miss training camp, Jackson's health is starting to become a minor concern.

He won't be 28 until December and he is the clear number one receiving option for the Seahawks. Hasselbeck is one of the league's better QBs. It is unlikely that the Seahawks will win so many games this season. The 13 wins last season was a franchise record and is unlikely to be repeated. 474 pass attempts was their lowest since 2001, and they typically have over 500 attempts.

Jackson could be in for a nice season if he stays healthy. He is not an elite receiver, but he has made the top ten once and is a threat to return to it this year. The six divisional games should be productive ones for the Seattle passing game.

Prediction

84 catches 1150 yards 8 TDs

 

[Tau837]

Darrell Jackson got off to a very fast start last year. He was targeted 42 times in the first four games, and was on pace for 168. Only Anquan Boldin ended up with more (171). So it was easy to look at Jackson's start last year and get excited about what he might achieve this year if he were to play 16 games. But with such a small sample size, that would be a very dangerous approach.

Well, he has averaged 9.2 targets per game over the past two regular seasons, which scales to 148. Last season, only these WRs had more than 148 targets:Boldin - 171 - WR8

Chambers - 166 - WR7

Burress - 166 - WR11

Fitzgerald - 165 - WR2

Holt - 163 - WR6

Chad Johnson - 155 - WR4

Galloway - 152 - WR5

Steve Smith - 150 - WR1

That's not bad company. I'm pretty sure if I have him and he plays 16 games this year, I'll be pretty excited about the results.

 

[Musesboy]

Darrell Jackson got off to a very fast start last year. He was targeted 42 times in the first four games, and was on pace for 168. Only Anquan Boldin ended up with more (171). So it was easy to look at Jackson's start last year and get excited about what he might achieve this year if he were to play 16 games. But with such a small sample size, that would be a very dangerous approach.

Well, he has averaged 9.2 targets per game over the past two regular seasons, which scales to 148. Last season, only these WRs had more than 148 targets:Boldin - 171 - WR8

Chambers - 166 - WR7

Burress - 166 - WR11

Fitzgerald - 165 - WR2

Holt - 163 - WR6

Chad Johnson - 155 - WR4

Galloway - 152 - WR5

Steve Smith - 150 - WR1

That's not bad company. I'm pretty sure if I have him and he plays 16 games this year, I'll be pretty excited about the results.

He's just outside the elite in my rankings. I have him at 145 targets this year but I could be on the low side, I freely admit.

 

[This_Is_Not_VRR]

Darrell Jackson got off to a very fast start last year. He was targeted 42 times in the first four games, and was on pace for 168. Only Anquan Boldin ended up with more (171). So it was easy to look at Jackson's start last year and get excited about what he might achieve this year if he were to play 16 games. But with such a small sample size, that would be a very dangerous approach.

After missing ten games least year, Jackson had knee surgery this past spring. Although he isn't expected to miss training camp, Jackson's health is starting to become a minor concern.

He won't be 28 until December and he is the clear number one receiving option for the Seahawks. Hasselbeck is one of the league's better QBs. It is unlikely that the Seahawks will win so many games this season. The 13 wins last season was a franchise record and is unlikely to be repeated. 474 pass attempts was their lowest since 2001, and they typically have over 500 attempts.

Jackson could be in for a nice season if he stays healthy. He is not an elite receiver, but he has made the top ten once and is a threat to return to it this year. The six divisional games should be productive ones for the Seattle passing game.

Prediction

84 catches 1150 yards 8 TDs

Production wise, I think he can be every bit as good as Chad Johnson.

 

[Musesboy]

Production wise, I think he can be every bit as good as Chad Johnson.

He's very good and it's a fine distinction. I am not saying he can't break into that group but Johnson has considerably more yardage and higher TD numbers than Jackson, and has done better in the fantasy standings as a result.

Jackson still has to put it all together before I would call him elite. His best season seems to be Johnson's floor right now.

 

[This_Is_Not_VRR]

Production wise, I think he can be every bit as good as Chad Johnson.

He's very good and it's a fine distinction. I am not saying he can't break into that group but Johnson has considerably more yardage and higher TD numbers than Jackson, and has done better in the fantasy standings as a result.

Jackson still has to put it all together before I would call him elite. His best season seems to be Johnson's floor right now.

As good as Chad Johnson is, he has still only reached the 10 TD mark once. Jackson had 9 TD's in 2003 so he's not all that far behind when it comes to TD's production when he plays a full season. And as I've already stated, I think Jackson is fully capable of putting up huge yardage numbers if he stays healthy.If you go by the 8 games Jackson played in last year (including the playoffs and super bowl) he was on pace for 110 receptions, 1,432 yards, and 10 TD's. 8 games is a decent sample size... And more importantly 5 of those 8 games were against the best defenses in the NFL (Jags, Redskins twice, Panthers, Steelers). There's a lot to be excited about if you're a Jackson owner....

 

[Musesboy]

Production wise, I think he can be every bit as good as Chad Johnson.

He's very good and it's a fine distinction. I am not saying he can't break into that group but Johnson has considerably more yardage and higher TD numbers than Jackson, and has done better in the fantasy standings as a result.

Jackson still has to put it all together before I would call him elite. His best season seems to be Johnson's floor right now.

As good as Chad Johnson is, he has still only reached the 10 TD mark once. Jackson had 9 TD's in 2003 so he's not all that far behind when it comes to TD's production when he plays a full season. And as I've already stated, I think Jackson is fully capable of putting up huge yardage numbers if he stays healthy.If you go by the 8 games Jackson played in last year (including the playoffs and super bowl) he was on pace for 110 receptions, 1,432 yards, and 10 TD's. 8 games is a decent sample size... And more importantly 5 of those 8 games were against the best defenses in the NFL (Jags, Redskins twice, Panthers, Steelers). There's a lot to be excited about if your Jackson owner....

I would certainly rather take him than a guy like Andre Johnson. Even if Jackson has never produced at that level for 16 games, I agree that he could. Especially if the Seahawks can't put victories away so easily.

 

[This_Is_Not_VRR]

I should save the Darrell Jackson vs Chad Johnson debate for next year. As it stands now, Jackson provides great draft value and picking him doesn't mean passing over a stud WR like Johnson.

 

[Musesboy]

I should save the Darrell Jackson vs Chad Johnson debate for next year. As it stands now, Jackson provides great draft value and picking him doesn't mean passing over a stud WR like Johnson.

You are predicting a new level of output (16 game output at least) for a player. Any time you hit on that, you should get great value and it would be well deserved.Jackson is being drafted right around where Ward and Roy Williams are going. Ward or Jackson would be a close call but I would gladly take either over Williams.