Zorn and Skins to pursue D. J. Hackett

As long as we don't break the bank on him I'm cool with it. I'd be happy with either Hackett or Johnson provided they don't get huge deals.

I see people saying that but looking at what he actually did I'm not very impressed. Here is what he did when he started (http://sportsline.com/nfl/players/player/gamelogs/2007/396163):

Pit: 4-40
Stl: 6-80
Car: 4-29
Cle: 6-56-1
Sea: 1-5-1
No: 2-35
Atl: 3-46

Pretty ho-hum numbers to me.

Huh, I felt like his numbers were better than that. Well, like Schneed said, he was never a #1 in that system. At least Johnson was healthy the whole year. Hackett missed 10 games due to injury. Santana can't seem to stay healthy, so getting a guy with Johnson's durability could really help.

Keep in mind he was the #2 WR during all of those games, because either Boldin or Fitz was always healthy and occupying the #1 position. Those are decent #2 WR numbers.

If anybody thinks they're getting a stud #1 WR with either Hackett (big games, but inconsistent) or Johnson (no big games, but consistent) then they're wrong. So you won't see better than #2 WR numbers from either of these guys.

Likewise, they would get paid like #2s: $12 million guaranteed, 6 years, $35 million total

Actually Boldin and Fitz sat out the Cleveland game, and both of them battled injuries most of the year and weren't 100% even when starting.

Johnson hasn't done much over the course of his career to show that he's capable of stepping in and being a big time guy, while Hackett has proved he's capable.

And what would be considered overpayment ? I'm not attacking you or anything but just asking. What would you, or anyone consider overpayment ?

Not sure on a figure, I would trust what people who's opinions I respect say about that one. I like Hackett, but I'm in love with James Hardy right now with our 1st round pick. Not a popular opinion right now but it's mine.

But if Zorn likes Hackett and wants him then the skins should go get him, sure he knows what DJ has better then any option out there. I'm looking at all the outrageous money flying around the league right now and hoping we don't get burned in a sellers market.

Between Hackett and Johnson though? Def Hackett without question

I see people saying that but looking at what he actually did I'm not very impressed. Here is what he did when he started (http://sportsline.com/nfl/players/player/gamelogs/2007/396163):

Pit: 4-40
Stl: 6-80
Car: 4-29
Cle: 6-56-1
Sea: 1-5-1
No: 2-35
Atl: 3-46

Pretty ho-hum numbers to me.

While I myself am not enamored with Johnson, you have to look closer at what constitutes a start. I'm confused as to if its counted as a start if the team opens up with a 3-Receiver set. Does a start mean that a player was in on the first snap of the game on thier respective side of the ball.

I would go with bryant for the reason the DJ cannot stay healthy. what the heck if this guy knows the system but cannot step on the field. we don't what another player to fill our IR room like last year.

While I myself am not enamored with Johnson, you have to look closer at what constitutes a start. I'm confused as to if its counted as a start if the team opens up with a 3-Receiver set. Does a start mean that a player was in on the first snap of the game on thier respective side of the ball.

I personally doubt that Boldin and Fitzgerald missed a combined 7 games and still put up 1,400 yards each.

Boldin (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/6390/gamelog;_ylt=ApOtbOsXOrv1Pe6Lza8mOr7.uLYF) missed 4 starts, Fitzgerald (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/6762/gamelog;_ylt=ApOtbOsXOrv1Pe6Lza8mOr7.uLYF) missed 1 start.

Both of them battled nagging injuries all year.

Boldin didn't put up 1400 yards, try 853.

Just a side note... In the 2003 combine Hackett was one of the top performers at WR

Vertical 41" (Would be the best overall in this years draft, one of the best all-time probably)

Broad Jump 10'11" (Would be 1 or 2 in this years draft)

40 yard dash 4.53

3-cone drill 6.80 (Would be 2nd in this years combine among WR)

D.J. Hackett, WR, Colorado - 2004 NFL Draft Scout Profile, Powered by The SportsXchange (http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/profile.php?pyid=58527)


Bryant ran a 4.57 40 and didn't do any agility or jumping

Wonderlic results:
16 Johnson
24 Hackett

Take what you want from all this... I'm impressed with Hackett's athleticism... did not know he was that kind of explosive athlete

Actually Boldin and Fitz sat out the Cleveland game, and both of them battled injuries most of the year and weren't 100% even when starting.

Johnson hasn't done much over the course of his career to show that he's capable of stepping in and being a big time guy, while Hackett has proved he's capable.

I don't know about that.

Hackett missed all but 6 games last year. In the two years before that, he also didn't manage to play a full season despite being used much more sparingly than he was last season.

He's had a few huge games. I see a few over 100 yard games on his resume. Of course he had Matt Hasselbeck throwing to him instead of the very green Matt Leinart and the very old Kurt Warner.

He toasted us for 101 yards on 6 catches in our playoff game against Seattle. But then when he went up against Al Harris and Charles Woodson, he was held to 2 catches for 15 yards against the Pack in the divisional round. That's indicative of his all-or-nothing kind of play. He's either way up or way down.

I'm of the mindset we need someone pretty consistent to give us a big target in the red zone, first and foremost, and help us move the chains. I think we've already got two big play guys.

For the record, and all that said, I'd still prefer Hackett simply because he knows Zorn and will know the playbook, which is huge when it comes to making an immediate impact. But I don't see a huge difference between him and Bryant Johnson from a talent perspective. We should get Hackett because of the familiarity with our coach, but I won't be disappointed with Bryant Johnson.

Hackett would IMO be a good addition provided he could remain healthy for an entire season.

There's no question he's been productive [when he's played] but the question with him is the same one we have with Moss, "accountability". I've said many times before, regardless of a players ability, if he's not there he can't be depended on.