Zorn and Skins to pursue D. J. Hackett

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

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:

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.

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

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

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.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

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.

[bertoskins2]

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.

[erik2680]

Originally Posted by bertoskins2

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.

I think he has only been hurt once

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by erik2680

I think he has only been hurt once

He's been hurt each of his 3 seasons. Although his first two seasons they were just small nagging injuries.

[HOGTIMUS PRIME]

New coach same old personnel philosophy, here we are making a big deal about 2 WR's who are nothing special, did we learn nothing from the Brandon Lloyd signing? I find it hard to believe we can't find a WR in the draft to at least come close to the talent level of these NFL giants? I guess Anthony Mix is nothing more than a special teams guy.

Hackett is an average WR in a very good offensive scheme, the west coast offense has made average WR's look good, and very good WR's look great. But at last we have to have this guy, why? Because Vinny and co. couldnt spot a talented player beyond the top 10 of the draft if their lives depended on it!

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by HOGTIMUS PRIME

New coach same old personnel philosophy, here we are making a big deal about 2 WR's who are nothing special, did we learn nothing from the Brandon Lloyd signing? I find it hard to believe we can't find a WR in the draft to at least come close to the talent level of these NFL giants? I guess Anthony Mix is nothing more than a special teams guy.

Hackett is an average WR in a very good offensive scheme, the west coast offense has made average WR's look good, and very good WR's look great. But at last we have to have this guy, why? Because Vinny and co. couldnt spot a talented player beyond the top 10 of the draft if their lives depended on it!

No one is saying we have to have this guy. And as for your last sentence about Vinny and co. not being able to spot a talented player beyond the top 10, several of us have pointed out enough times the complete fallacy in that statement that it doesn't need to be repeated.