The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Just curious. Are Cousins/Hankerson more familiar with each other because of how the team practices? Sure looked like they were on the same page yesterday.

Thanks for posting those comparison numbers to Thomas/Kelly. No doubt Hankerson has room to improve, but nice to see a WR we drafted growing and CONTRIBUTING.

DaveD1420 wrote:Hankerson still has 2 games left in his 2nd season, and he's already far surpassed (49/684/3) Devin Thomas's numbers (43/482/3) for his entire 6 year career.

He's also crushing Malcolm Kelly's 2 year numbers (28/365/0).

Count me as happy with Hank!

Again, it's all about standards. Holding ANY WR to the Thomas-Kelly standard should be a crime. They were COMPLETE BUSTS.

The mistake that I did make was that Hank was a 3rd rounder, not a second. As such, my expectations have been lowered.

Expectations (like standards) are subjective. Due to the fact Hank has been an under-performer, my expectations have been lowered. With these lowered expectations, Hank has put together 2 decent (for Hank) back-to-back games, which is nice to see. However, he needs to show more consistency. He has been basically a ghost in 7 games (or roughly half) this year. I still continue to have serious concerns with his "balance" issues and the fact he doesn't make "clean" (i.e., bobbles a ton of balls) catches. If he doesn't improve on those things (and show it) by the end of the year I wouldn't be surprised to see him gone next season.

Now, I have to say that I no longer consider him on my "most hated" list (in that I no longer yell when I see him in the game). That has temporarily been lifted --- but he still needs to improve on his balance and clean catches or else he may be unemployed next season.

markshark84 wrote:

DaveD1420 wrote:Hankerson still has 2 games left in his 2nd season, and he's already far surpassed (49/684/3) Devin Thomas's numbers (43/482/3) for his entire 6 year career.

He's also crushing Malcolm Kelly's 2 year numbers (28/365/0).

Count me as happy with Hank!

Again, it's all about standards. Holding ANY WR to the Thomas-Kelly standard should be a crime. They were COMPLETE BUSTS.

I agree that they were busts. That's the comparison, so thanks for explaining my post to me.

Nearly every draft and acquisition we've had for 10 years have been busts. To see a draftee actually progressing and starting to contribute is the point, and the only standard of comparison is the previous 2 "big" draft picks.

riggofan wrote:Just curious. Are Cousins/Hankerson more familiar with each other because of how the team practices? Sure looked like they were on the same page yesterday.

Thanks for posting those comparison numbers to Thomas/Kelly. No doubt Hankerson has room to improve, but nice to see a WR we drafted growing and CONTRIBUTING.

I don't think so --- after all Hank only caught the ball twice. The second TD could have been to anyone. It was a designed roll out.

KC was just on yesterday after his TD pass to Hank at the end of the first quarter. After that point he was:
4-4 to Josh Morgan
6-7 to Garcon*
5-6 to Moss
4-4 to Paulson (discounting the intentional grounding pass)
2-3 to Royster
1-2 to Hankerson

* KC was really 6-10 but I am discounting (1) the pass Garcon clearly caught that the refs got wrong, (2) the PI pass, and (3) the ball KC threw away in the end zone that was "attempted" to Garcon but really wasn't.

The KC-Hankerson connection wasn't really there. KC was actually connecting with the first team players even more effectively than Hankerson.

DaveD1420 wrote:

markshark84 wrote:

DaveD1420 wrote:Hankerson still has 2 games left in his 2nd season, and he's already far surpassed (49/684/3) Devin Thomas's numbers (43/482/3) for his entire 6 year career.

He's also crushing Malcolm Kelly's 2 year numbers (28/365/0).

Count me as happy with Hank!

Again, it's all about standards. Holding ANY WR to the Thomas-Kelly standard should be a crime. They were COMPLETE BUSTS.

I agree that they were busts. That's the comparison, so thanks for explaining my post to me.

Nearly every draft and acquisition we've had for 10 years have been busts. To see a draftee actually progressing and starting to contribute is the point, and the only standard of comparison is the previous 2 "big" draft picks.

Perhaps I am not sure what you are saying ---- is it that you believe Hankerson is not a bust AND therefore you are happy with him because he isn't a bust?

If so, that is a little to simplified for my taste. I find that determining a player's worth is a little more complicated than: bust or not a bust.

And I'm not totally sure I would consider what Hankerson is doing as "progressing". Contributing --- yes, he had 2 TDs --- but not progressing. Progressing to me would be seeing Hankerson improve on the issues he currently has ---- which are balance/agility and his hands. Those issues are still at-large. He has talent, but he is not capitalizing on it because of his deficiencies.

Also, we can't compare anything that MS/BA has done during their tenure to the Danny/Vinny era. Because comparing things to the bottom of the class has no value --- as everything should be above those results. What MS/BA have done (and the players they have selected vs. the past selections by Danny/Vinny) should be superior in every way.

The Hogster wrote:

DaveD1420 wrote:Hankerson still has 2 games left in his 2nd season, and he's already far surpassed (49/684/3) Devin Thomas's numbers (43/482/3) for his entire 6 year career.

He's also crushing Malcolm Kelly's 2 year numbers (28/365/0).

Count me as happy with Hank!

Yeah, and at least he fell down into the end zone this time!

HAIL

He does seem to have balance issues doesn't he? He has caught a few passes lately when we needed it.

The Hogster wrote:

DaveD1420 wrote:Hankerson still has 2 games left in his 2nd season, and he's already far surpassed (49/684/3) Devin Thomas's numbers (43/482/3) for his entire 6 year career.

He's also crushing Malcolm Kelly's 2 year numbers (28/365/0).

Count me as happy with Hank!

Yeah, and at least he fell down into the end zone this time!

A little short, but he did make it there eventually.

Deadskins wrote:

The Hogster wrote:

DaveD1420 wrote:Hankerson still has 2 games left in his 2nd season, and he's already far surpassed (49/684/3) Devin Thomas's numbers (43/482/3) for his entire 6 year career.
He's also crushing Malcolm Kelly's 2 year numbers (28/365/0).
Count me as happy with Hank!

Yeah, and at least he fell down into the end zone this time!

A little short, but he did make it there eventually.

a great throw and a good catch - end result a Redskins TD = 6 points

there is no style points - good job Hank

markshark84 wrote:Obviously fan standards have gotten pretty low for Hankerson. We should be praising Morris or Garcon or RGIII or Riley or any of the other guys that
come in and compete day in and day out.

Obviously "fans", don't know enough about football that it takes WR's 3-4 years to mature in this league. What is this, his second year? He's improving.

Thanks to the OP for recognizing our young players for stepping up and producing. And to the typical ignorance of the negative Nancy's.

^This

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

markshark84 wrote:Obviously fan standards have gotten pretty low for Hankerson. We should be praising Morris or Garcon or RGIII or Riley or any of the other guys that
come in and compete day in and day out.

Obviously "fans", don't know enough about football that it takes WR's 3-4 years to mature in this league. What is this, his second year? He's improving.

Thanks to the OP for recognizing our young players for stepping up and producing. And to the typical ignorance of the negative Nancy's.

I'm an ignorant poster??????? On this board!!!!

I stated that Hankerson needed to improve before he could be relied on (as a #2) in the preseason when people were saying how well he was going to play this year. This still holds true.

What exactly was ignorant about my post? Was it the fact that I don't believe he is PROGRESSING (in that he still has the same issues he had last season)? Or the fact I was able to predict his progression (or lack thereof)? Or is ignorance just not thinking that every player on the skins is better than they actually are.

As I have said, I prefer to be truthful & accurate over popular & a homer.

Oh and thanks for the 3-4 year "stat"...... I guess the following must be exceptions:
- CJohnson, BMarshall, DBryant, VCruz, JJones, AJGreen, BHartline, MColston, DWayne, CShorts, EDecker, RCobb, ABoldin, MWallace, TorreySmith, JMaclin, SteveSmith, TYHilton, JNelson, DBess, JKerley, etc.

To you I guess negative = ignorant. Keep drinking the Hankerson kool-aid, I guess....... How's your boy JC doing by the way.......

People often mistake cantankerous and oppositional for truthful and accurate...


but, maybe that's just me...

DaveD1420 wrote:Hankerson still has 2 games left in his 2nd season, and he's already far surpassed (49/684/3) Devin Thomas's numbers (43/482/3) for his entire 6 year career.

He's also crushing Malcolm Kelly's 2 year numbers (28/365/0).

Count me as happy with Hank!

This is the lowest the bar can ever be.

Count me in as happy with Hanks development.

Come on the guy is contributing big time. He just caught two TDs in a game. Are we seriously questioning him?

What I have noticed is he is now making the plays when it counts. Cruicial third downs conversions and TDs when needed. Clutch plays when needed. Garcon does the same on more consistent basis. Hank is coming along fine. At this point I put Hank ahead of Morgan. Heck I think he has even outplayed Moss this season. All though I do like the effort Moss has put forth.

markshark84 wrote:I'm an ignorant poster??????? On this board!!!!

Well, you came off that way. Yes. If you want to talk about a forum member having low standards, don't be shocked when something is said to you.

markshark84 wrote:I stated that Hankerson needed to improve before he could be relied on (as a #2) in the preseason when people were saying how well he was going to play this year. This still holds true.

Well, he has been a solid #2... What's your point? He's been a mainstay in this lineup since week 1.

Josh Morgan 46 489 10.6 32 1
Santana Moss 37 525 14.2 77 7
Leonard Hankerson 36 521 14.5 68 3
Pierre Garcon 34 498 14.6 88 4
http://www.nfl.com/teams/statistics?team=WAS

markshark84 wrote:What exactly was ignorant about my post?

This...

markshark84 wrote:Obviously fan standards have gotten pretty low for Hankerson.

All the OP did was create a positive thread, thanking a player who has contributed this year. You question his standards...so, some of us question your eye sight.

markshark84 wrote:Was it the fact that I don't believe he is PROGRESSING (in that he still has the same issues he had last season)?

1. He's stayed healthy = progress
2. He has 3 TD's this year, last year he had 0 = progress
3. 521 yards > 163 yards
4. Being a starter > Coming off the bench

* Putting up good stats while surrounded by Garcon (our #1 WR), Morgan (leads our WRs in receptions), Moss (leads our WR's in TD), Fred (a fixture of the offense prior to injury). Despite all of that, he's still getting targeted and coming through.

markshark84 wrote:Or is ignorance just not thinking that every player on the skins is better than they actually are.

I think that ignorance is not realizing the things I've mentioned. Ignorance is not giving credit where it's due. Ignorance is being ignorant towards fans who are trying to be positive and joyous in the midst of a 5 game winning streak.

That's ignorance.

markshark84 wrote:CJohnson, BMarshall, DBryant, VCruz, JJones, AJGreen, BHartline, MColston, DWayne, CShorts, EDecker, RCobb, ABoldin, MWallace, TorreySmith, JMaclin, SteveSmith, TYHilton, JNelson, DBess, JKerley, etc.

Yes, let's compare Hankerson to WR's who were drafted onto teams with HOF QB's.

Let's compare Hankerson to the greatest WR since Jerry Rice.

Torrey Smith? LMFAO Torrey had 1 catch for 20 yards against us. Why? Because he can't run routes to save his life.

Boldin?

markshark84 wrote:To you I guess negative = ignorant. Keep drinking the Hankerson kool-aid, I guess....... How's your boy JC doing by the way.......

Yes, we're drinking the kool-aid by being appreciative of his progress...

You're being "truthful & accurate" by comparing him to Calvin Johnson.

And then you bring up Jason Campbell because you really have no point and just needed something else to say.

Countertrey wrote:People often mistake cantankerous and oppositional for truthful and accurate...


but, maybe that's just me...

Oh, and +1.

HEROHAMO wrote:Count me in as happy with Hanks development.

Come on the guy is contributing big time. He just caught two TDs in a game. Are we seriously questioning him?

What I have noticed is he is now making the plays when it counts. Cruicial third downs conversions and TDs when needed. Clutch plays when needed. Garcon does the same on more consistent basis. Hank is coming along fine. At this point I put Hank ahead of Morgan. Heck I think he has even outplayed Moss this season. All though I do like the effort Moss has put forth.

1. Check out the team receiving stats. They all have darn near the same stats. Garcon would have some amazing stats if he hadn't been injured.

2. Apparently this is what the fanbase expects...

- Garcon to put up gaudy numbers
- Hankers to put up Calvin Johnson numbers
- But for Kyle Shannahan to not pass so much...
- To continue leading the league in rushing

LMFAO

Yeah I think we have a nice WR corps developing. Another year and they should be all the more better. I am glad Hank is stepping up because Morgan has mental lapses.

Oh and can we give some love to the Oline yet? I think they played a fine game against CLeveland who has a good front seven.

not sure why anyone would want to point to player's not 'performing' to certain standards ...

this TEAM is playing games in December that could result in a divisional championship - how many times have we done that in the past 10 years


EVERYONE - players and coaches - deserve our respect for doing a better job than anyone here expected

well, better than those of us that have a clue, thought we could do


so, 'job well done' #85

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Well, you came off that way.

Why because it is my opinion (based on direct observation of Hankerson, his teammates, and other WRs in the league) that he is not performing to where he should be? You may disagree, but it isn't ignorance. Know the difference.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Well, he has been a solid #2... What's your point? He's been a mainstay in this lineup since week 1.

Again, opinion. I don't think he has been a solid #2. Besides, Garcon and Morgan are our 1-2.

Chris Luva Luva wrote: Obviously fan standards have gotten pretty low for Hankerson.[/color]

Then I guess all the others that agree are "ignorant" as well....

Chris Luva Luva wrote:All the OP did was create a positive thread, thanking a player who has contributed this year. You question his standards...so, some of us question your eye sight.

I don't think calling someone ignorant is "questioning their eye sight". Sorry.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:1. He's stayed healthy = progress
2. He has 3 TD's this year, last year he had 0 = progress
3. 521 yards > 163 yards
4. Being a starter > Coming off the bench

* Putting up good stats while surrounded by Garcon (our #1 WR), Morgan (leads our WRs in receptions), Moss (leads our WR's in TD), Fred (a fixture of the offense prior to injury). Despite all of that, he's still getting targeted and coming through.

Again, my opinions and expectations are different. I EXPECTED better. And sorry, but any medicore WR that actually plays more than 5 games should eclipse his 163 from last year.....

1) And I don't consider "staying healthy" as progressing.
2) So would one TD be "progress"?
4) Being a "starter" due to injury; then being immediately demoted once Garcon returned.
You had to really reach on those ones.......

Chris Luva Luva wrote: I think that ignorance is not realizing the things I've mentioned. Ignorance is not giving credit where it's due. Ignorance is being ignorant towards fans who are trying to be positive and joyous in the midst of a 5 game winning streak.

First, I thought of all of those things (in addition to injury recovery, YAC, total catches, drops, fumbles, route running, relationship with QB, agility, footwork, situational catches, penalties, etc.) --- I just don't CONSIDER a couple things and decide there has been PROGRESS. I don't like to pick and chose my stats. Regardless, read my initial post ---- I give credit WERE IT IS DUE. Hankerson hasn't had a breakout season like RGIII or Morris or Riley or Montgomery or Garcon (in that he's on a new team).

Chris Luva Luva wrote: Yes, let's compare Hankerson to WR's who were drafted onto teams with HOF QB's.

Right, because RGIII sucks? He's a top 7 QB in this league right now. Besides, those were direct examples showing what you said was wrong. You can spin it whatever way you want, but those are all guys that have played well within your 3-4 yr time frame. Usually a good WRs can help create good or great QBs.......

Chris Luva Luva wrote: Torrey Smith? LMFAO Torrey had 1 catch for 20 yards against us. Why? Because he can't run routes to save his life.

Torrey Smith is a very good WR. I don't care what he had against us. He also has SUPERIOR stats to Hankerson.

Chris Luva Luva wrote: Yes, we're drinking the kool-aid by being appreciative of his progress...

Again just have lower standards. Nothing wrong with that.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:And then you bring up Jason Campbell because you really have no point and just needed something else to say.

No, I bring up JC because I was critized for saying EXACTLY the same thing. You disagreed. I was right.

All in all, it is more our opinions that differ. Nothing more. My conclusions are not based on a lack of facts or understanding. So I would prefer that you wouldn't resort to name calling.

I have higher standards for Hankerson. That said, I still believe that he has improved over the course of the season. Is he where I would like him to be, NO -- but I have more hope in his progression than I did in JCs.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

HEROHAMO wrote:Count me in as happy with Hanks development.

Come on the guy is contributing big time. He just caught two TDs in a game. Are we seriously questioning him?

What I have noticed is he is now making the plays when it counts. Cruicial third downs conversions and TDs when needed. Clutch plays when needed. Garcon does the same on more consistent basis. Hank is coming along fine. At this point I put Hank ahead of Morgan. Heck I think he has even outplayed Moss this season. All though I do like the effort Moss has put forth.

1. Check out the team receiving stats. They all have darn near the same stats. Garcon would have some amazing stats if he hadn't been injured.

2. Apparently this is what the fanbase expects...

- Garcon to put up gaudy numbers
- Hankers to put up Calvin Johnson numbers
- But for Kyle Shannahan to not pass so much...
- To continue leading the league in rushing

LMFAO

You can't be that stupid. Even if in a mocking tone. Really. Get a clue.

Sorry you were called out for being wrong. Don't make a mockery of it.

Instead of Calvin Johnson why don't we replace that with Hartline, TSmith, RCobb, TYHilton, CShorts, or MWallace. That would be more appropriate. Exaggerate much????????????????????

Not sure how you could even elude to the other 3 (whether mocking or otherwise)............ Keep reaching..........

As I said before, he has had a good past 2 games. I have been happy with those --- it the prior 5 I was unhappy with............... I prefer consistency.

markshark84 wrote:I don't think calling someone ignorant is "questioning their eye sight". Sorry.

Calling someone ignorant just means they lack knowledge. It's not an insult.

markshark84 wrote:Why because it is my opinion (based on direct observation of Hankerson, his teammates, and other WRs in the league) that he is not performing to where he should be? You may disagree, but it isn't ignorance. Know the difference.

Stopped reading when I saw this. Don't let fact gets in the way of your "opinions".

http://www.nfl.com/teams/washingtonredskins/statistics?team=WAS

markshark84 wrote:You can't be that stupid. Even if in a mocking tone. Really. Get a clue.

Clearly it was sarcasm... Yet you felt the need to reply.

Deadskins wrote:

markshark84 wrote:I don't think calling someone ignorant is "questioning their eye sight". Sorry.

Calling someone ignorant just means they lack knowledge. It's not an insult.

I don't see it that way. That's why I take such offense to it.

The definition of "ignorant" is someone that lacks knowledge or training --- being unlearned. The opinions I post very rarely are not backed up by stats, experience, or a general football understanding. I believe my posts regarding Hankerson were backed up by such information/circumstances/traits for WHY I believe he has not progressed. As such, whether this is correct or incorrect --- it is NOT ignorant. My post(s) were not from lack of knowledge or training --- more a difference of opinion.

And when someone says that I "lack knowledge" because we have a difference of opinion ----- the hypocrisy of that very statement makes me

I have no problem if CLL disagrees with me. I couldn't care less. Many have --- and many will continue to disagree with me. That is what this board is for --- to discuss/argue things. Right? That is why I chose this board to post on above the others (and this was after previous posters claimed that the "inside circle" will just gang up on you"). I have strong opinions, but NONE of them are without reasoning, thought, or ample background information to support them. I was not ignorant. CLL was incorrect in saying so. I get upset when people resort to name-calling because they can't back up their statements otherwise.

markshark84 wrote:The definition of "ignorant" is someone that lacks knowledge or training --- being unlearned.

Yeah, for someone who is such a "learned" football expert , you overly critizize a WR who is essentially playing his rookie campaign due to last years injury.

A "learned" football expert would know that it takes MOST WR's 2-3 years to find their way in the NFL.

So that would insinuate a lack of knowledge, thus ignorance on the subject. Especially when you comment in such a condescending tone towards a poster who was celebrating.

markshark84 wrote:I don't see it that way.

Apparently, that's been an issue for you for the past few pages.

I disagree with you, CounterTrey, about 3 people and NFL.com. Who's the common denominator in this situation?