| Author |
Message |
|
SDHawk
|
Post subject: Johnny Knox  Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:06 pm |
|
| NET Rookie |
 |
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm
Posts: 230
|
|
Any takers here on a bargain 4.3 receiver?
|
|
  |
|
 |
|
FortWorthSeahawk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:08 pm |
|
| USAF BadAss |
 |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:24 am
Posts: 954
Location: Charlottesville, VA
|
|
His back is shot, so not really.
_________________
Kam Chancellor: The Chancellor of Defense
Bruce Irvin: BruceMode
Tharold Simon: Humble Thug
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hawkcrazzed
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:09 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 8:55 am
Posts: 857
Location: Toronto Canada
|
|
who was the nasty knee injury that we played i thought it was knox he is not 4.3 if it is him.
_________________
God Bless America and God Bless the SEATTLE SEAHAWKS - TEZ
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sprfunk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:10 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:57 pm
Posts: 527
|
|
If he could pass a physical.
Hargrove(as a seahawk) bent him in half BACKWARDS!
I really didn't like seeing that, but it was not a cheap shot. None the less, hard to watch.
_________________
"When is the NFL going to start fining receivers for running routes across KAM’S MIDDLE?!?!"
-bpup33
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SDHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:10 pm |
|
| NET Rookie |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm
Posts: 230
|
|
Yeah he messed up his back but he seems to be rehabbed from it. I think its a low risk/high reward move that we should look at. If he still has that deep speed, he could be just what this offense needs. Also think we need to take a hard look at Jared Cook. 6'5 and 4.4 speed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Missing_Clink
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:11 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:53 am
Posts: 1106
|
|
Totally fine bringing him in to camp and seeing if he can still play. If not just move on. No risk.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sprfunk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:12 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:57 pm
Posts: 527
|
|
_________________
"When is the NFL going to start fining receivers for running routes across KAM’S MIDDLE?!?!"
-bpup33
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hawknballs
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:43 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am
Posts: 720
|
|
we have one injury risk receiver, half the point of bringing in any other receivers is insurance policy.
_________________ 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SDHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:46 pm |
|
| NET Rookie |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm
Posts: 230
|
Hawknballs wrote: we have one injury risk receiver, half the point of bringing in any other receivers is insurance policy. It seems ppl dont understand the concept of risk/reward
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Rat
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:46 pm |
|
| * NET Cynic * |
 |
|
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:42 pm
Posts: 3492
Location: St. Louis, MO
|
|
He was really good before the injury, and could also give us a boost on kickoff returns.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FortWorthSeahawk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:52 pm |
|
| USAF BadAss |
|
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:24 am
Posts: 954
Location: Charlottesville, VA
|
SDHawk wrote: Hawknballs wrote: we have one injury risk receiver, half the point of bringing in any other receivers is insurance policy. It seems ppl dont understand the concept of risk/reward If the Bears don't want to retain him (and they have a worse receiver situation than we do) what makes you think we'd want him?
_________________
Kam Chancellor: The Chancellor of Defense
Bruce Irvin: BruceMode
Tharold Simon: Humble Thug
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SDHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:55 pm |
|
| NET Rookie |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm
Posts: 230
|
FortWorthSeahawk wrote: SDHawk wrote: Hawknballs wrote: we have one injury risk receiver, half the point of bringing in any other receivers is insurance policy. It seems ppl dont understand the concept of risk/reward If the Bears don't want to retain him (and they have a worse receiver situation than we do) what makes you think we'd want him? Worse because they have Brandon Marshall? We'd want him because the risk/reward. He could be had for peanuts and if he can come in during situational downs and provide us a deep threat, that would be worth the perceived risks. Sorry, still waiting for a response that makes sense.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bipolar
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:58 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:58 pm
Posts: 724
Location: Minneapolis, MN (moving to Seattle in March 2013)
|
|
Johnny Knox was a good WR on a crappy team. if he is a vailable to come to Seattle and being singed on the cheap, it would be criminal not to "kick the tires" on him.
Jared Cook is a rock solid TE as well.
_________________
Cheesehead Seahawk Extraordinaire
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SDHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:59 pm |
|
| NET Rookie |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm
Posts: 230
|
Bipolar wrote: Johnny Knox was a good WR on a crappy team. if he is a vailable to come to Seattle and being singed on the cheap, it would be criminal not to "kick the tires" on him.
Jared Cook is a rock solid TE as well. Thank you, this is what I think as well.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SouthSoundHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:00 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:06 am
Posts: 672
|
SDHawk wrote: Yeah he messed up his back but he seems to be rehabbed from it. I think its a low risk/high reward move that we should look at. If he still has that deep speed, he could be just what this offense needs. Also think we need to take a hard look at Jared Cook. 6'5 and 4.4 speed. Let's see some video of his progress. Otherwise, it's just hearsay. If he's willing to take change and a year or two, I say why not. I'd rather see some kind of evidence that shows he's NFL ready or at the very least close to it.
_________________
Go Hawks.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SDHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:02 pm |
|
| NET Rookie |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm
Posts: 230
|
SouthSoundHawk wrote: SDHawk wrote: Yeah he messed up his back but he seems to be rehabbed from it. I think its a low risk/high reward move that we should look at. If he still has that deep speed, he could be just what this offense needs. Also think we need to take a hard look at Jared Cook. 6'5 and 4.4 speed. Let's see some video of his progress. Otherwise, it's just hearsay. If he's willing to take change and a year or two, I say why not. I'd rather see some kind of evidence that shows he's NFL ready or at the very least close to it. Not sure what you're arguing here. I'm pretty sure the FO would give him a physical before signing him to a contract. Are you saying we shouldn't even bother taking a look until we have "video of his progress"? This is a guy who had* the same Mike Wallace speed and can be had at less than 1/10th the price and on a shorter commitment. I don't see any issue with working him out and giving him a 1-year prove-it-to-me contract. He is a potential game changer.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FortWorthSeahawk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:05 pm |
|
| USAF BadAss |
|
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:24 am
Posts: 954
Location: Charlottesville, VA
|
|
I'd take our receiving corp over theirs in a heartbeat. So there's that.
And since he more than likely won't have 4.3 speed again, I don't see why taking a flyer on him would be that great. He has average, maybe above average hands and isn't very big and is an average route runner outside of go routes (better than Hester, but that's not saying much). We could get that in the 3-4th round this year without the major injury concerns. Maybe you're still waiting on someone to agree with you and that's the only response that "makes sense" but I tried to lay it out with reasons. We all have our opinions though, so I won't fault you for sticking to yours.
_________________
Kam Chancellor: The Chancellor of Defense
Bruce Irvin: BruceMode
Tharold Simon: Humble Thug
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SouthSoundHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:09 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
|
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:06 am
Posts: 672
|
|
Not arguing one bit...
I'm saying for the sake of this thread, lets see some video of the guy coming back from getting Baned. Then we'll know what we're dealing with, no one on this board has a say in whether or not this dude gets a workout...so I don't care about physicals, but we can watch video and evaluate him as fans of the 'hawks. Then form an opinion on him as the off season continues to unfold.
That's not asking for much.
If you want to play fantasy owner, sure bring him in...let the doctors give him a once over and let Sherm/BB/Kam/ET have at him for a few weeks.
_________________
Go Hawks.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MontanaHawk05
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:11 pm |
|
| * 17Power Blogger * |
 |
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 9708
|
SDHawk wrote: Sorry, still waiting for a response that makes sense. Comments like that are more likely to merely make people chuckle and put you onto their ignore list. _________________ GO HAWKS!!! Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!Follow me on Twitter at @17power
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SDHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Johnny Knox Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:15 pm |
|
| NET Rookie |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm
Posts: 230
|
FortWorthSeahawk wrote: I'd take our receiving corp over theirs in a heartbeat. So there's that.
And since he more than likely won't have 4.3 speed again, I don't see why taking a flyer on him would be that great. He has average, maybe above average hands and isn't very big and is an average route runner outside of go routes (better than Hester, but that's not saying much). We could get that in the 3-4th round this year without the major injury concerns. Maybe you're still waiting on someone to agree with you and that's the only response that "makes sense" but I tried to lay it out with reasons. We all have our opinions though, so I won't fault you for sticking to yours. So carrying a 3-4th round rookie for 3 years is less risk than taking a rehabbed Johnny Knox for 1 year? There are only 2 or 3 receivers in this class with Knox's speed and both Tavon Austin and Marquise Goodwin are under 5'10 and 180 lbs. Let's see those guys take a couple hits. You did lay out a couple reasons, I just don't think they are reasonable. There is obvious homerism when you say you'd take our receivers over Brandon Marshall and Alshon Jefferey. BMarsh had 1500 yds and 11 tds to Sidney Rice and Tates combined 1500 and 14 tds.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
