Fantasy Rankings: Seattle Seahawks' Matt Hasselbeck
The Seahawks struggle with Injuries
Seattle started off on the wrong foot as an offense from week one of the season on.
Their struggles were due in large part to injuries, as Deion Branch missed all but one game, in the first 9 weeks of the season. Receiver Nate Burlson tore his acl early in the year at Buffalo.
Matt Hasselbeck had problems as well with a back injury last year and struggle to play most of the season.
With key injuries to the team it is easy to understand why the Seahawks fell to a 4 and 12 record. This down fall allowed the Cardinals to win the division with only a 9 and 7 record.
Hasselbeck is now healthy and has a new N0.1 target
This spring Matt is back to his former self, zipping the ball around and showing no signs of back issues.
Wide Receiver TJ Houshmanzada is now signed with the Seahawks, this gives them a true No.1 on the team. Matt will also benefit from 2nd year tight end John Carlson. Throw in Branch and Burlson coming back and you have a good passing game.
Plus this team does not have a stud running back so they will need No. 8 to lead the team as a pass first, run second team offense.
Matt Hasselbeck's Fantasy Football Value
The Seahawks captain is just one year removed from his career best season when he had almost 4,000 yards passing and 28 touchdowns.
With a solid No. 1 receiver that has a history of being healthy in his resume, look for Matt to feel a rejuvenated urge to be aggressive with the football in 2009.
I believe Seattle will make a run at the Cardinals this year, for the NFC West Title.
Take Matt in your fantasy football draft as a top end, back up quarterback. This is the kind of guy that is worth stashing away in case your starter (Like Palmer or Brady last year) fails.
- Good Receiving Group
- In an Offense that should let him succeed
- Touchdown Maker
- Needs to stay healthy
- Needs his Receivers to stay healthy
- Rains a lot in Seattle
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?