The Best Fantasy Football Player And Sleeper: Seattle Seahawks

by faketeams on Aug 28, 2008 9:02 AM EDT in Football Comment 10 comments

John Morgan of Field Gulls offers some fantasy tips on the Seattle Seahawks.

I don't even know what sleeper means anymore. The guy autodraft ignores? Or the one where your buddy, wonderin' where Shaun Alexander went, never heard of? And is the best fantasy option the one who will score the most points or the one who is more valuable than their projected draft slot? Anyway, I'm tired and curmudgeonly. Don't mind me. How about then we look at Seattle's best and best sleeper with an eye to value over projected round. I can do that.

Seattle's "Best" Fantasy Option: Matt Hasselbeck

Projected Round in a 12 team league: Y! 6-7, ESPN 5

Value: 7-9

I like Hasselbeck, but his stock suffers because of the depth of talent at QB. Though an improved running attack and improved offensive line will help his actual performance, those two factors should also ensure Seattle avoids abandoning the running game. He's not likely to push 4,000 yards again, nor is he likely to improve upon the 28 touchdowns he threw last season. With players like McNabb, Rivers, Cutler and Schaub falling into the mid to late rounds, it's probably not worth it to reach for Hasselbeck.

Seattle's Best Fantasy "Sleeper": Julius Jones

Projected Round: Y! 6, ESPN 4

Value: 3-4

Jones takes a knock in league's that emphasize touchdowns over all other stats. It's hard to be sure Jones will get most of the looks in the red zone. Mike Holmgren is a traditionalist, and with a back like TJ Duckett in the mix, Jones might cede carries within the 10. Jones gets a boost in points per receptions leagues. Holmgren is enamored with his newfound ability to pass to his backs, and after last year's intimate look at his play card, we know he's wanted to "just call" screen passes.

Either way, despite some recent hype and ubiquitous "sleeper" status, Jones is a safe value in almost every league. Seattle's combination of strong D and a good projected record means the Hawks will find themselves protecting a lot of leads. Remember the golden rule: Winning teams produce good fantasy rushers.

0 recs | Comment 10 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I admit I am not high at all on any Seahawks because I see this team collapsing to a last place finish. Without any WRs to speak of and a running game that has Maurice Morris as an integral part, I can easily see this team dropping to 4-12/3-13.

Hasselbeck threw for nearly 4,000 yards last season, and that is an excellent total given his supporting cast, but I wonder if his last four games weren’t the beginning of the end. Given the yards and TDs (28) were career highs, I can’t stop myself from thinking, “Dead cat bounce.”

Fake Teams - a proud member of the SB Nation

by faketeams on Aug 28, 2008 9:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Wha?

This isn’t even…an argument. It’s like a set of hunches attached to—Sweet tap dancing Lucifer! I hope the reasoning behind your fantasy advice is less…illogical.

You think Seattle will go 3-13 because you don’t know the team’s wide receivers? And you are aware that a “dead cat bounce” is not a method of deduction, right? Funny enough, you used the phrase incorrectly, too. A dead cat bounce refers to a slight rebound after a major collapse, not a career season. Ever. And where’s the major collapse to begin with? And what last four games being the beginning of the end? His only real bad game all season was against the Steelers.

Are you actually advising people against drafting Seahawks because of the above argument? Because…uh…you want to take this to a fantasy league? Not to say the fantasy columnist has no RBs, but…

by John Morgan on Aug 28, 2008 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Huh?

Including play-offs, MH averaged 244 ypg yards per game. In the last four games (final two in regular season/two play-off games) , that dropped 21% to 192. That wasn’t that hard to see. At 33, wondering whether Elizabeth’s brother-in-law has seen his best seems reasonable.

While you may think dead cat bounce was misused, I see a plummet in passing yards from ~3500 in 2006 to ~2400 in 2007. His bounce back to a level never before accomplished would be a dead cat one if his 2008 efforts drop back to the levels set in 2006. Quibble over percentages if you must.

WR Nate Burleson is the undisputed #1 WR with no clear #2. Last year’s 50 receptions was the career high of his five-year career. Has he suddenly become the 75+ reception #1 MH needs or is he more likely to be the player he has been?

WR – A wing and a prayer. When he emerges, you can use him. Just remember every team has a #2 WR so finding one who gets 700 yards and 50-60 receptions does not a play-off contender make. He’ll have to be near 1,000 yards for me to alter that assessment.

As for RBs, age matters, and self-delusion uses “workload” to dismiss it. JJ steadily declined from his promising 8-game rookie season in 2004, and his proven ability to catch passes is not apparent in his stats.

Pinning hopes on any of the skills players on Seattle says more about your homerism than my hunches or fantasy acumen.

Fake Teams - a proud member of the SB Nation

by faketeams on Aug 28, 2008 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Matt Hasselbeck only played half the game against Atlanta and Seattle was up 21-0 before halftime against the Ravens.

The fact that you didn’t know that or bother to look into it more or less finishes my argument.

by John Morgan on Aug 28, 2008 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No it doesn't

But I can’t argue against homerism. Ignore his skills players. Then again, you needn’t do anything but drink Seahawks Kool-aid so I understand.

Fake Teams - a proud member of the SB Nation

by faketeams on Aug 28, 2008 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Seattle fans

are very similar to Eagles fans. I went to the Seattle-Washington playoff game 3 years ago. That one game was all I needed to place their fans in the same conversation as Eagles fans. They talked alot of junk to the Skins fans there…as if they needed to. No, they didn’t, but……it is in their blood…like Eagle fans.

raygu

by raygu on Aug 28, 2008 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs