HawkShack.com

Broke a bone in his hand last night and could be lost for the season:

With only three weeks remaining, there is a legitimate concern that Lockett's finger injury could keep him out for the remainder of the season, though the team is holding out hope.

Carroll said Lockett is hoping to get back in two weeks, and said there is a chance he could return before the end of the year.

"There's a couple different ways that they can do the surgery, and one of the ways gives him a chance to be back. Remember Rashaad Penny had an injury, very similar, very similar. So they've already floated that thought and their going to talk about all the options and all that and we're going to love him up and take care of him. Whatever the right thing to do to take care of him, we're going to do."

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/new ... hjqwvw9cz7

Damn, and I have him on my fantasy team, too!

He's more important than the rest of this season. Get it done right.

Bummer
Better get creative he’s one of the top guys in the game and as big a security blanket for Geno as he was for Russ

I wonder if Eskridge can come back soon? Luckily, I have DK on my ffb team and not Lockett, but his ceiling really is pretty limited this year. Tyler is so damn solid he will be missed.

c_hawkbob wrote:He's more important than the rest of this season. Get it done right.

Absolutely! If there was one thing that was proven last night, it was that this team is not ready for Prime Time. Even if we get lucky and make the playoffs, we're not going far. Lockett's long-term health is far more important.

Lockett take the last three games to recover for next year. This is a done season.

They're saying he could return this season.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/seah ... er-report/

Aseahawkfan wrote:Lockett take the last three games to recover for next year. This is a done season.

It’s a bit early to say it’s done . That said Lockett is too valuable to
Injure his moneymaker further . But it’s done when the math says it’s done. You might be right . But the defense actually showed signs off life . If we just had a run game the team might do quite well with any amount of defense .
Let’s see . Not even sure who becomes #3 . What happened to our 3 tight end sets ? I haven’t noticed it. Might have to bring it back .

c_hawkbob wrote:They're saying he could return this season.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/seah ... er-report/

As little as one game even though he's having surgery. We do have a mini bye, so that should help some. Maybe we caught a break.

Hawktawk wrote:It’s a bit early to say it’s done . That said Lockett is too valuable to
Injure his moneymaker further . But it’s done when the math says it’s done. You might be right . But the defense actually showed signs off life . If we just had a run game the team might do quite well with any amount of defense .
Let’s see . Not even sure who becomes #3 . What happened to our 3 tight end sets ? I haven’t noticed it. Might have to bring it back .

The defense didn't show signs of life. They played a team with no QB missing their best offensive receiver and still got soundly beat at home.

Seattle isn't doing jack squat in the playoffs.

"]

Hawktawk wrote:It’s a bit early to say it’s done . That said Lockett is too valuable to
Injure his moneymaker further . But it’s done when the math says it’s done. You might be right . But the defense actually showed signs off life . If we just had a run game the team might do quite well with any amount of defense .
Let’s see . Not even sure who becomes #3 . What happened to our 3 tight end sets ? I haven’t noticed it. Might have to bring it back .

The defense didn't show signs of life. They played a team with no QB missing their best offensive receiver and still got soundly beat at home.

Seattle isn't doing jack squat in the playoffs.[/quote]

Your analysis of Brock Purdy is far outside the mainstream view around the league. He’s been almost perfect . We had a chance but Diggs dropped it . It was still a 1 score game late . The kid beat Tampa far worse then us 35-7. We forced a number of punts .when bad defense is good it tells you where we have been . It causes me to question this coaching staff .


You’re probably right about the Hawks .
I’m not sure they will make the postseason , odds say they won’t . To be relatively sure they need to win them all. Even 9-8 is iffy. I would not be surprised if they lose them all .
I won’t be shocked if they win them all either though starting next Saturday . KC hung on for dear life a week ago and likely has a big game Sunday . It’s the first team in forever that is not gonna run it up our yazoo . They are a throwing team . Let’s see . We are far better vs the pass, actually entered the game last night almost tied in passing yards per game given up.

. Losing Lockett is huge and should they sneak in somehow he’s critical to get back . I’ll write em off when it’s over . Not writing back yet . I remember hearing we had zero chance in beast quake in 2010 too .
It’s why they play the games .

Hawktawk wrote:Your analysis of Brock Purdy is far outside the mainstream view around the league. He’s been almost perfect.

Saying that Purdy has been almost perfect is a bit deceiving. Yes, he hasn't turned the ball over or made any critical mistakes, but he also has thrown for just 200 yards per game against us and the Bucs, which inflates his completion percentage and means that he's not being called on to do very much. He hasn't trailed in either of the two games he's started as the defense in those two games has been phenomenal. I think that's the point that ASF is making, that the Niners beat us without much of a contribution from their quarterback position. It's not a reflection on the player as it is how much better their entire team is than us if all they need to do to beat us is for the quarterback to hand off and complete some short range passes.

If people think Purdy is good, wait until we run into Jalen Hurts with the Eagles. Gonna be a buzzsaw. The what the Seahawks need this year is decent draft position to get more talent. A trip to the playoffs may be what fans want, but I'm good with draft position. Unless I see this team somehow beat the Chiefs, then I'm not seeing much of a point to playoff position this year.

Purdy, like Geno earlier in the season, is being limited to safe and conservative throws. Now we see Geno making more mistakes, more INTs, because they've let him open it up more. If they let Purdy open it up you will likely see the same.

The 49ers have a defense that can shutdown mistakes, unlike us.

Purdy rocking ONLY safe and conservative throws. His team is extremely stacked; most qbs can succeed in that offense. Shannahan is becoming a WCO guru, as hard as it is to admit. I can’t believe how WIDE OPEN Kittle was! It’s almost not fair

I’m becoming admittedly jealous of that team.

I pretty much concur with trents, ASF, and Stream Hawk. Purdy was inserted into an almost perfect environment for a rookie quarterback, a team that is stacked at almost every position except for quarterback. He is set up for success. It's quite a bit different than someone like Trevor Lawrence and the Jags. That's not to take away from his accomplishments. He's played well above expectations.

Riv, I never thought Lockett was that big a deal anyway, then I started looking at the numbers and wow, he compares with almost anyone. IF he was 6-3 210 with 4-4 speed he would be Ricesque!

After DK and Goodwin, I wonder who steps into the #3 WR spot. I would like to see what Dareke Young can do. Penny Hart has never impressed me much and I cringe when Eskridge touches the ball.

obiken wrote:Riv, I never thought Lockett was that big a deal anyway, then I started looking at the numbers and wow, he compares with almost anyone. IF he was 6-3 210 with 4-4 speed he would be Ricesque!

Lockett has been a solid receiver for us ever since he stepped on the field, IMO #2 receiver behind Largent ever to put on a Hawks uniform.

To me he's always been a sort of "Silent Assassin". You don't really notice him and then all of a sudden he hits a big TD or you look at the stats and he's got more than 10 TDs on the year.
I suspect it's because he isn't talked about much in the media.

RiverDog wrote:I pretty much concur with trents, ASF, and Stream Hawk. Purdy was inserted into an almost perfect environment for a rookie quarterback, a team that is stacked at almost every position except for quarterback. He is set up for success. It's quite a bit different than someone like Trevor Lawrence and the Jags. That's not to take away from his accomplishments. He's played well above expectations.

If you’re aunt had balls you know ? He’s been almost perfect in 3 games including a Geno like walk on the field after an injury and not miss a beat leading the team to a comfortable win . For the talk of a juggernaut the team lost 28-14 to Atlanta and 11-9 to Denver with Jimmy G . You’re all making the same mistakes you did with Geno . This kid is a stud , he’s going to be good , probably played us with broken ribs or separated cartilage . Missed one throw bad and Diggs dropped it . Every qb has those . Geno leads the league in those . We’re possibly looking at the starter for the next decade in SF.

It all comes back to luck. If the Panthers had drafted him we might never know who he was or if he went to the Eagles he would be stuck behind Hurts and their current backup never to be seen again.
The opportunity is there for him and he's taking a big grasp of the brass ring - and good for him.
As far as his play goes, he's doing what the coaching staff want him to do and not trying to do too much. That's good as the Offense there is simple from the QB perspective (but complex for defenses) and he gives them
the movement that they expected from Trey Lance and don't get from Jimmy G. If they go deep into the playoffs, it will be an interesting competition between he and Lance and could split the team next year, but that's far away at the moment.

His first start vs Tampa he had 2 TD passes and a rush TD playing most of the game with a rib injury . His qbr was119 which led the league . They embarrassed Tampa far worse than Seattle . I just get a feeling this kid has the juice and we’re gonna see him awhile . I hope to be wrong

He’s in a system that helps QBs do well. Nick Mullins and a few others have done well in Shanahan’s system for a short while but never caught on with other teams. But who knows at this point, maybe he’s a perfect fit for their Offense and becomes a long time starter.

RiverDog wrote:Lockett has been a solid receiver for us ever since he stepped on the field, IMO #2 receiver behind Largent ever to put on a Hawks uniform.

Better than Dougy or Bobby? Wow.

RiverDog wrote:Lockett has been a solid receiver for us ever since he stepped on the field, IMO #2 receiver behind Largent ever to put on a Hawks uniform.

Better than Dougy or Bobby? Wow.[/quote]
Yes . You talking Bobby Engram? He was a 3rd option .

Lockett has better numbers than ADB but Doug was a tougher nastier player . I think Brian Blades has some pretty good numbers too.
But Tyler can take the top off . He’s the #1 pff rated DVOA receiver in the league . It’s a huge loss .

RiverDog wrote:Lockett has been a solid receiver for us ever since he stepped on the field, IMO #2 receiver behind Largent ever to put on a Hawks uniform.

obiken wrote:Better than Dougy or Bobby? Wow.

Hawktawk wrote:Yes . You talking Bobby Engram? He was a 3rd option .

Lockett has better numbers than ADB but Doug was a tougher nastier player . I think Brian Blades has some pretty good numbers too.
But Tyler can take the top off . He’s the #1 pff rated DVOA receiver in the league . It’s a huge loss .

Lockett doesn't have quite the hands Largent had and Largent was the better route runner, but Lockett has just as good of footwork and more speed. IMO Lockett is the hands down #2 receiver. Although I really liked him, Engram isn't in the conversation, wasn't even a starter for part of his career, had just one 1,000 yard season, played for us for just 7 years. There's a half dozen Hawk WR's I'd put above him.

Lockett played an entire season catching every single pass Russ threw him , a 158.3 perfect passer rating for the season . I’ve seen him drop maybe 4 or 5 balls in his career . 2 were this year though If there’s a knock it’s that he gets out of bounds or under the carpet in traffic . My kid gets irritated like when he slid like a qb short of the sticks a few weeks ago . I get it . He has to live to fight another day . It’s hard to have better hands than he has and his Gumby toe taps are like ….how did he do than . He’s as good as anyone ever was at that .. Largent probably had bit better hands and an incredible route runner .
Honorable mention to Dougie. His edge was part of a championship run and his ability to leap for a short guy was amazing . He played with a broken collarbone in 2012. My guess he would be splinting it and taping it to another finger and going . I agree with Locketts decision. Just saying . Largent would tape it up too . Tough guy . Ask Mike Hardin

Hawktawk wrote:Lockett played an entire season catching every single pass Russ threw him , a 158.3 perfect passer rating for the season . I’ve seen him drop maybe 4 or 5 balls in his career . 2 were this year though If there’s a knock it’s that he gets out of bounds or under the carpet in traffic . My kid gets irritated like when he slid like a qb short of the sticks a few weeks ago . I get it . He has to live to fight another day . It’s hard to have better hands than he has and his Gumby toe taps are like ….how did he do than . He’s as good as anyone ever was at that .. Largent probably had bit better hands and an incredible route runner .
Honorable mention to Dougie. His edge was part of a championship run and his ability to leap for a short guy was amazing . He played with a broken collarbone in 2012. My guess he would be splinting it and taping it to another finger and going . I agree with Locketts decision. Just saying . Largent would tape it up too . Tough guy . Ask Mike Hardin

One of the reasons why I don't like engaging in comparisons like Largent vs. Lockett is because our memories of a player's feats tend to grow over time so that they favor the past over the present. But one thing I'll say about Largent that I can't say about Lockett, at least to the same degree, was that there seemed to be so many times when he was wide open without a defender within 10 yards of him. He had a knack for knowing exactly when the defender was at his weakest, when to make his cut. I also think that Largent was a better blocker, his tackle of Mike Hardin being a good example. BTW that tackle happened right in front of me, and I recognized the significance immediately.

Both were/are great receivers. Lockett likely won't get a lot of HOF consideration as the position today is so much more competitive than it was during Largent's day, he doesn't have a ring, and he doesn't play for the Cowboys. But he's still a fantastic receiver.

Lockett has more suddenness (to coin a phrase) and is sneaky fast but Largent played when it was more difficult for WRs to not be abused by defenders while running their routes. It's a different game for WRs today.

NorthHawk wrote:Lockett has more suddenness (to coin a phrase) and is sneaky fast but Largent played when it was more difficult for WRs to not be abused by defenders while running their routes. It's a different game for WRs today.

Largent wasnt fast but he was at full speed one step out of the break creating incredible separation. I saw him in the back of the end zone once once and he was in midair and the db got a finger on the ball and deflected it about 2 feet and mind you it was maybe 10 feet from largent when it happened. He somehow adjusted his body and hands to the complete opposite side if his body in a fraction of a second to squeeze it. Never say anything like it.

Had Lockett not been injured it's a cinch he and DK both would be well over 1 K this year. I was kinda wow when I read that.

NorthHawk wrote:Lockett has more suddenness (to coin a phrase) and is sneaky fast but Largent played when it was more difficult for WRs to not be abused by defenders while running their routes. It's a different game for WRs today.

Hawktawk wrote:Largent wasnt fast but he was at full speed one step out of the break creating incredible separation. I saw him in the back of the end zone once once and he was in midair and the db got a finger on the ball and deflected it about 2 feet and mind you it was maybe 10 feet from largent when it happened. He somehow adjusted his body and hands to the complete opposite side if his body in a fraction of a second to squeeze it. Never say anything like it.

Had Lockett not been injured it's a cinch he and DK both would be well over 1 K this year. I was kinda wow when I read that.

The other thing we have to keep in mind is that Largent played bare handed, even in cold weather. I once heard Kenny Easley talk about OBJ's one handed, behind the head catch, saying that if Largent were able to wear the gloves that modern receivers wear nowadays that "Largent could have caught that ball with one finger."

RiverDog wrote:The other thing we have to keep in mind is that Largent played bare handed, even in cold weather. I once heard Kenny Easley talk about OBJ's one handed, behind the head catch, saying that if Largent were able to wear the gloves that modern receivers wear nowadays that "Largent could have caught that ball with one finger."

Exactly (one main reason at least) why the only true means of comparison across era's is the relative standing of the players being compared with their piers in that era. Largent owned almost every major receiving record in the entire NFL at the time of his retirement.

RiverDog wrote:The other thing we have to keep in mind is that Largent played bare handed, even in cold weather. I once heard Kenny Easley talk about OBJ's one handed, behind the head catch, saying that if Largent were able to wear the gloves that modern receivers wear nowadays that "Largent could have caught that ball with one finger."

c_hawkbob wrote:Exactly (one main reason at least) why the only true means of comparison across era's is the relative standing of the players being compared with their piers in that era. Largent owned almost every major receiving record in the entire NFL at the time of his retirement.

You're preaching to the choir, bro. That's why I cringe every time someone refers to Tom Brady as the GOAT. Apples vs. oranges.

Oh come on Riv . I hate Brady , a bit less since he left the evil empire but you cannot deny he’s the greatest ever to play the position. If you want to talk most skilled , versatile etc ok we could argue . But it’s a game of championships . No change of era can account for it . Nobody’s been so good so long .

Hawktawk wrote:Oh come on Riv . I hate Brady , a bit less since he left the evil empire but you cannot deny he’s the greatest ever to play the position. If you want to talk most skilled , versatile etc ok we could argue . But it’s a game of championships . No change of era can account for it . Nobody’s been so good so long .

In the modern era, sure. But you can't compare him or any player with those that played in seasons nearly half as long, careers interrupted by military service, not to mention the differences in style of play, equipment, etc. The game itself is barely recognizable from what it was 60-70 years ago. Who's to say that Jim Brown, Jim Thorpe, or Otto Graham weren't just as good? Would Brady have played as long as he has in this century if he had to paly in a leather helmet with no face mask and getting paid peanuts? George Blanda, a league MVP, had to drive a beer truck in the offseason just to pay the bills.

I get all of that but in those days they all laced them up and played under apples to apples conditions . If Brady had gone 4-4 like Montana I’d say Montana because I consider him one of the greats . And he played when you could lay out the quarterback and blindside the receivers. But there wasn’t a blue tent either or Montana would have been in it and Young on the field vs Cincinnati in 89. The famous “ look there’s john candy “ from a concussed Montana who drove the team down the field anyway . But from about the 15 he bounced one right off the safeties chest . Like Diggs . Next throw he stuck it to John Taylor for the GWT.
But Brady’s been to 10 , won 7 . When he won the last few nobody but him was left off the earlier teams . Then he and Arians got each other one . What do you say ?

We would likely have 2 but our coach went crazy , against everything he ever believed and our qb failed to identify Butler pre snap . Might have 3 if the refs let us play or at least called the same ticky tack crap on both teams . Positive we’d have won XL.
It’s that close . Gotta be lucky and good . The greats get lucky too . Always have .

Hawktawk wrote:I get all of that but in those days they all laced them up and played under apples to apples conditions . If Brady had gone 4-4 like Montana I’d say Montana because I consider him one of the greats . And he played when you could lay out the quarterback and blindside the receivers. But there wasn’t a blue tent either or Montana would have been in it and Young on the field vs Cincinnati in 89. The famous “ look there’s john candy “ from a concussed Montana who drove the team down the field anyway . But from about the 15 he bounced one right off the safeties chest . Like Diggs . Next throw he stuck it to John Taylor for the GWT.
But Brady’s been to 10 , won 7 . When he won the last few nobody but him was left off the earlier teams . Then he and Arians got each other one . What do you say ?

We would likely have 2 but our coach went crazy , against everything he ever believed and our qb failed to identify Butler pre snap . Might have 3 if the refs let us play or at least called the same ticky tack crap on both teams . Positive we’d have won XL.
It’s that close . Gotta be lucky and good . The greats get lucky too . Always have .

Blacks weren't allowed to play until the 60's, and even then, it was in very small numbers compared to today. Heck, before the 60's, most players came from east of the Mississippi as there weren't any franchises out here. It was a 4 day train trip to travel between San Francisco and New York. Completely different country, completely different game.

My objection to Brady being called the GOAT has nothing to do with the man himself.

RiverDog wrote:Blacks weren't allowed to play until the 60's, and even then, it was in very small numbers compared to today. Heck, before the 60's, most players came from east of the Mississippi as there weren't any franchises out here. It was a 4 day train trip to travel between San Francisco and New York. Completely different country, completely different game.

My objection to Brady being called the GOAT has nothing to do with the man himself.

Brady's the GOAT at QB. There isn't an argument save by people who dislike him or just don't want to accept that there is no argument about who was allowed this or the different eras because it was literally easier to win multiple championships before Brady's Era, far, far easier. No one across any era has done what he has done in the NFL in the Super Bowl Era. The totality of his work makes him the best to ever play the QB position. If measured amongst his peers, he's so far ahead that it is laughable within the same era. The most any QB has in the same era as Brady is 2 SBs. Then when you look back at the Dynasty Eras where it was very easy to keep a team together and stockpile great talent, the closest to him is four Super Bowls. What Brady has done is so unprecedented and insane it will likely never be broken.

Given the importance of the QB position in the NFL, it's mind boggling the level of consistency he has maintained over the years and his ability to win in the postseason.

Sorry, your refusal to accept Brady as the GOAT QB is not rational nor logical. There is zero way to analyze what Brady has done across eras and his career whether comparing to the same era he has been in to past eras and see him as anything but the best to ever play the QB position when the goal as even you put it is to win a championship every year.

I'm not a Brady fan. I never really much liked watching New England. But I been watching football a long time like you. It was way easier to win multiple championships back in the days when you could hold a team like the 90s Cowboys or 80s Frisco or 70s Steelers together. Somehow in the modern salary cap era where you can barely win one Super Bowl, maybe two in the QBs or HCs career, Bill B and Brady won six together. Then Brady went to another team and won another one for a total of seven. You will never see that happen again in your lifetime. I doubt anyone will.