2010 NFL Draft

Originally Posted by ArteEtLabore14

Click to expand...

I don't know if you watch the Pac-10 at all, but I'm an Oregon State fan so I've seen Locker play once a year for the past 3 (I think) years, and he's been excellent. I believe he has the capability of being a great QB at the NFL level, but imo he would do best brought along slowly.

I live in Seattle. Of course I've seen Jake Locker play. Being brought along slowly doesn't really mean anything as far as where and who will draft him at this point of the year.

It's not like If the Seahawks drafted Jake Locker next year, we'd throw his ass in the fire right away or anything. As of right now, Jake Locker would be behind Hasselbeck and Whitehurst. Next year, at least one of those two guys is going to start unless something catastrophic happens.

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

Click to expand...

I live in Seattle. Of course I've seen Jake Locker play. Being brought along slowly doesn't really mean anything as far as where and who will draft him at this point of the year.

It's not like If the Seahawks drafted Jake Locker next year, we'd throw his ass in the fire right away or anything. As of right now, Jake Locker would be behind Hasselbeck and Whitehurst. Next year, at least one of those two guys is going to start unless something catastrophic happens.

Let's be honest, no one is going to be behind Charlie Whitehurst for very long. And I wouldn't be surprised if the same could be said of Hasselbeck as well.

Originally Posted by ArteEtLabore14

Click to expand...

Let's be honest, no one is going to be behind Charlie Whitehurst for very long. And I wouldn't be surprised if the same could be said of Hasselbeck as well.

A: As far as I know, you aren't an NFL scout. Neither am I. Neither one of us really knows jack **** about Charlie Whitehurst. He could potentially be pretty good. There are a lot of very highly paid, football smart people who think he has potential to be at least a good NFL QB, and they think he's worth paying for. From what I saw of him in mini camp he throws a nice looking ball, he has a quick release, and a fairly strong arm. He needs to learn the routes and the timing, and maybe polish his footwork up a bit, but I bet that's more than you knew about him five minutes ago. He's also very hairy.




B: A person who knew what they were talking about could see that Hasselbeck has a few years left in him, assuming of course that he has an offensive line to play behind. Peyton Manning/Tom Brady/Drew Brees couldn't do any better than Hasselbeck has done with what he's gotten the past few years, with the injuries to literally every single one of his WR's, the collapse of the O Line, having to learn his third offense in three years, and playing 12 games with two broken ribs on the throwing side of his body.

I have never in my life seen a QB get hit so quickly, and so often as Hasselbeck did last year. I saw him get plastered on the first step of his drop a dozen times or so last season. I'm hoping the line gets fixed this year. Hasselbeck deserves a chance. He's an elite West Coast style QB.

For the record, Hasselbeck completed 60% of his passes for over 3000 yards and 17 touchdowns last year in the 14 games he played. And that was with some of the worst pieces around him in the NFL.

He may be getting "old" but he's still relatively fresh. He was holding a clipboard behind Favre for what, the first four years of his career? Kinda like Charlie Whitehurst...

Originally Posted by NorCal

Click to expand...

Really? Why is that? Seems like two good QB's just fell into their lap and with Favre getting old and only having one or two season at best if he even plays at all it would seem that they would want to draft a QB.
See, not going to happen...

Originally Posted by ArteEtLabore14

Click to expand...

I don't know if you watch the Pac-10 at all, but I'm an Oregon State fan so I've seen Locker play once a year for the past 3 (I think) years, and he's been excellent. I believe he has the capability of being a great QB at the NFL level, but imo he would do best brought along slowly.

Good to see another Beaver fan on this forum, since we seem to be few and far between. I agree with Locker, he has the skillset, but he hasn't fully put it all together for an entire season. I think this extra year with Sarkisian will do wonders for him though and improve his play quite a bit.

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

Click to expand...

A: As far as I know, you aren't an NFL scout. Neither am I. Neither one of us really knows jack **** about Charlie Whitehurst. He could potentially be pretty good. There are a lot of very highly paid, football smart people who think he has potential to be at least a good NFL QB, and they think he's worth paying for.

While this is true of Whitehurst, the same was also true of every failed QB in NFL history. Nobody ever drafts/trades for/signs a QB and thinks "this guy isn't going to be any good". I'm willing to give Schneider/Carroll the benefit of the doubt based on their awesome drafting, but Charlie Whitehurst couldn't beat out Billy Volek to back up Philip Rivers.

Hasselbeck was worth 20.9% less per play than an average NFL QB last season. In 2008, 34.2% less. He's been done for awhile.

Originally Posted by kwiteaboy

Click to expand...

While this is true of Whitehurst, the same was also true of every failed QB in NFL history. Nobody ever drafts/trades for/signs a QB and thinks "this guy isn't going to be any good". I'm willing to give Schneider/Carroll the benefit of the doubt based on their awesome drafting, but Charlie Whitehurst couldn't beat out Billy Volek to back up Philip Rivers.

Yeah, those Tom Bradys, Steve Youngs, Kurt Warners, and etc. too. Don't forget them. Bench-sitting, clipboard carrying, undrafted, career backup, Arena League playing, bastards of the world... None of them have ever been any good.

Hasselbeck was worth 20.9% less per play than an average NFL QB last season. In 2008, 34.2% less. He's been done for awhile.

Click to expand...

This is not true. Statistically, it may be accurate, but it is not true. You are blaming the QB for the failure of the offensive line to block and the WR's to stay healthy, run routes, and catch balls. You are also looking at statistics from when Hasselbeck was injured. Without just parroting **** you hear or talking out your ass, I don't understand how you think this is Hasselbeck's fault.

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

Click to expand...

This is not true. Statistically, it may be accurate, but it is not true. You are blaming the QB for the failure of the offensive line to block and the WR's to stay healthy, run routes, and catch balls. You are also looking at statistics from when Hasselbeck was injured. Without just parroting **** you hear or talking out your ass, I don't understand how you think this is Hasselbeck's fault.

It's not his fault that the O-line can't block and the WRs have been injured, but it's also not his fault that he simply can't make NFL throws anymore. There's always a chance he'll be back to 2005 form, but that seems pretty unlikely for a guy who had a relatively weak arm to begin with. With the draft of Golden Tate and the trade for Leon Washington, it looks like they're going to try to set up the offense for YAC-heavy plays, which could work for him. But he's still not an elite quarterback anymore.

Originally Posted by kwiteaboy

Click to expand...

It's not his fault that the O-line can't block and the WRs have been injured, but it's also not his fault that he simply can't make NFL throws anymore.
I don't know what you are watching, but for a guy with two broken ribs on his throwing side, he threw pretty damn well last year. What's the first thing you are going to do as an NFL QB when you break your ribs? Alter your throwing motion. I honestly didn't see him shortening his motion, or trying to wrist flick too many passes last year. Did he throw a ton of deep balls? No. but he had two broken ribs. Can he make the throws he needs to make? Yeah, because A: he's never had to throw deep balls, or balls across his body. He's a west coast QB who spreads the ball around and is amongst the most accurate QB's in the league. and B: he was throwing balls to the right spots last year, and there were no receivers there. Carlson had to block 90% of the year (which he's not great at) Branch is an inconstant piece of crap, Burleson was playing for the first time in two years, and Housh likes to break off his routes and improvise because he feels like he can't separate. (which he usually can't). An extra year of learning Housh's tendencies will probably do Matt a whole lot of good. Also, not having important bones in your body broken that affect how you can throw the ball. That would help too.

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

Click to expand...

A: As far as I know, you aren't an NFL scout. Neither am I. Neither one of us really knows jack **** about Charlie Whitehurst. He could potentially be pretty good. There are a lot of very highly paid, football smart people who think he has potential to be at least a good NFL QB, and they think he's worth paying for. From what I saw of him in mini camp he throws a nice looking ball, he has a quick release, and a fairly strong arm. He needs to learn the routes and the timing, and maybe polish his footwork up a bit, but I bet that's more than you knew about him five minutes ago. He's also very hairy.

B: A person who knew what they were talking about could see that Hasselbeck has a few years left in him, assuming of course that he has an offensive line to play behind. Peyton Manning/Tom Brady/Drew Brees couldn't do any better than Hasselbeck has done with what he's gotten the past few years, with the injuries to literally every single one of his WR's, the collapse of the O Line, having to learn his third offense in three years, and playing 12 games with two broken ribs on the throwing side of his body. I have never in my life seen a QB get hit so quickly, and so often as Hasselbeck did last year. I saw him get plastered on the first step of his drop a dozen times or so last season. I'm hoping the line gets fixed this year. Hasselbeck deserves a chance. He's an elite West Coast style QB. For the record, Hasselbeck completed 60% of his passes for over 3000 yards and 17 touchdowns last year in the 14 games he played. And that was with some of the worst pieces around him in the NFL. He may be getting "old" but he's still relatively fresh. He was holding a clipboard behind Favre for what, the first four years of his career? Kinda like Charlie Whitehurst...
Charlie Whitehurst was a flop for the Chargers, and there's no reason to suspect it won't be the same for the Seahawks. Granted, there's always the chance that he'll turn it around and do well, but IMO I don't think that's going to happen. As for Hasselbeck, you can qualify his bad play however you want, but it gets to a point where they just can't play anymore. Take Marc Bulger. He went from being a Pro Bowl QB to being a pile of dog poop. Even when he was healthy, and being protected, the last couple of seasons the man simply could not play. I would not be surprised if the Seahawks experienced something similar (albeit probably less pronounced) with Matt Hasselbeck. Only time will tell... EDIT: As for your original point, there were also a lot of "very highly paid, football smart people" who thought Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith, JaMarcus Russell, etc were going to be good players. So that kinda shoots that point to ****... Football is a crap shoot, and as much as you may analyze something there's no way to know for sure how a player is going to perform.

Originally Posted by ArteEtLabore14

Click to expand...

Charlie Whitehurst was a flop for the Chargers, and there's no reason to suspect it won't be the same for the Seahawks.
He was a third round draft pick. How much of a flop is he if he's not immediately better than Philip Rivers and Billy Volek? Volek would be the starting QB for the Tennessee Titans right now if he and Jeff Fischer could get along. He's probably the best backup QB in the NFL... Kurt Warner couldn't beat out Tony Banks and Steve Bono his first year, and Trent Green his second year.

Granted, there's always the chance that he'll turn it around and do well, but IMO I don't think that's going to happen.

Click to expand...

Why? Gut feeling? It's obviously not an "educated decision".

As for Hasselbeck, you can qualify his bad play however you want, but it gets to a point where they just can't play anymore. Take Marc Bulger. He went from being a Pro Bowl QB to being a pile of dog poop. Even when he was healthy, and being protected, the last couple of seasons the man simply could not play. I would not be surprised if the Seahawks experienced something similar (albeit probably less pronounced) with Matt Hasselbeck.

Click to expand...

Well, I eagerly await a healthy, well protected Matt Hasselbeck so that we will be able to find out. Until then, you are speculating on the worst without any evidence to support it, and in fact, evidence to the contrary.

EDIT: As for your original point, there were also a lot of "very highly paid, football smart people" who thought Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith, JaMarcus Russell, etc were going to be good players. So that kinda shoots that point to ****... Football is a crap shoot, and as much as you may analyze something there's no way to know for sure how a player is going to perform.

Click to expand...

You are conflating how high a person is drafted to how many people think they are going to do well. And how many people think they have the potential to do well, given the right scenario - and then how many people think they will succeed in Oakland, or Detroit, or wherever the worst case scenario is. They are not the same things.

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

Click to expand...

He was a third round draft pick. How much of a flop is he if he's not immediately better than Philip Rivers and Billy Volek? Volek would be the starting QB for the Tennessee Titans right now if he and Jeff Fischer could get along. He's probably the best backup QB in the NFL... Kurt Warner couldn't beat out Tony Banks and Steve Bono his first year, and Trent Green his second year. Why? Gut feeling? It's obviously not an "educated decision". Well, I eagerly await a healthy, well protected Matt Hasselbeck so that we will be able to find out. Until then, you are speculating on the worst without any evidence to support it, and in fact, evidence to the contrary.

You are conflating how high a person is drafted to how many people think they are going to do well. And how many people think they have the potential to do well, given the right scenario - and then how many people think they will succeed in Oakland, or Detroit, or wherever the worst case scenario is. They are not the same things.
The Chargers drafted him as a project, to back up Rivers and push him for his spot (but not take it, just make the guy work harder). He couldn't do that, couldn't beat out Volek and so they dealt him and took some dude in the 5th. He didn't perform well enough that the Chargers wanted to keep him, and so they traded him for a fourth (or fifth? Not quite sure) round pick. So they clearly didn't have faith in him to be an adequate backup or starter if Rivers went down. You can call it a "gut feeling" if you'd like, and to some extent I guess it is that, but also any time I watched him play I wasn't that impressed. It's as simple as that. I also look forward to this. And when Matt Hasselbeck plays adequately, neither winning nor losing the Seahawks games, I will chuckle a bit. Then when he gets injured, but toughs it out and continues to play, and then starts to lose for the Seahawks, I will laugh more. Either way, we won't know until the middle of the season (probably). At that time if Hasselbeck is back to Pro Bowl form, feel free to quote this conversation in its own thread (preferably DT) and laugh at my foolishness.

nb4dum

Originally Posted by ArteEtLabore14

Click to expand...

You can call it a "gut feeling" if you'd like, and to some extent I guess it is that, but also any time I watched him play I wasn't that impressed. It's as simple as that.
Whitehurst has the following stat line in the NFL. 2 rushing attempts, 13 yards, 0 passes, 1 TD. And here it is. One would then assume that you are talking about the preseason. Lets say that actually means something. Which set of stats would you rather have? 2008 preseason: 26 of 53 for a 49.1 percent completion ratio, 251 yards, 83.7 yards per game, 1 TD, 0 INT, 3 passes of 20+ yards, 5 sacks, and a 69.0 passer rating. OR 35 of 67 for a 52.2 percent completion percentage, 284 yards, 71 yards per game, 1TD, 0 INT, 2 passes of 20+ yards, 6 sacks, and a 68.3 passer rating? OR 15 of 22 for a 68.2 completion percentage, 200 yards, 100 yards a game, 2 TD's, 0 INT, 3 passes of 20+ yards, 0 sacks, and a 127.1 passer rating Trick Question. Charlie Whitehurst Joe Flacco Tarvaris Jackson

A quick history review: • In 2001, Seattle gave up its first-round pick (No. 10) and a third-round pick (No. 72) for Matt Hasselbeck and Green Bay's first-round pick (No. 17) overall. The trade was made in March. In August, before Hasselbeck had played a real game for Seattle, he signed a five-year contract worth as much as $24 million with a $2 million signing bonus.

Click to expand...

Worked out pretty well for us.

I also look forward to this. And when Matt Hasselbeck adequately, neither winning nor losing the Seahawks games, I will chuckle a bit. Then when he gets injured, but toughs it out and continues to play, and then starts to lose for the Seahawks, I will laugh more. Either way, we won't know until the middle of the season (probably). At that time if Hasselbeck is back to Pro Bowl form, feel free to quote this conversation in its own thread (preferably DT) and laugh at my foolishness.

Click to expand...

Oh, I will.

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

Click to expand...

Whitehurst has the following stat line in the NFL. 2 rushing attempts, 13 yards, 0 passes, 1 TD.
And here it is.


One would then assume that you are talking about the preseason.

Lets say that actually means something. Which set of stats would you rather have?

2008 preseason:

26 of 53 for a 49.1 percent completion ratio, 251 yards, 83.7 yards per game, 1 TD, 0 INT, 3 passes of 20+ yards, 5 sacks, and a 69.0 passer rating.

OR

35 of 67 for a 52.2 percent completion percentage, 284 yards, 71 yards per game, 1TD, 0 INT, 2 passes of 20+ yards, 6 sacks, and a 68.3 passer rating?

OR

15 of 22 for a 68.2 completion percentage, 200 yards, 100 yards a game, 2 TD's, 0 INT, 3 passes of 20+ yards, 0 sacks, and a 127.1 passer rating

Trick Question.

Charlie Whitehurst
Joe Flacco
Tarvaris Jackson



Worked out pretty well for us.



Oh, I will.

The difference being that Joe Flacco and TJ both have real NFL experience and Whitehurst doesn't, therefore he is judged solely on his pre-season appearances ("relevant" or not). Anyways, this debate is academic anyway because there's no way for either of us to prove ourselves right (or the other wrong) until the season actually starts.