Hooker

[Jason_]

14 hours ago, 1959Colts said:

Just because Hooker plays FS doesn't give him a free pass from contact.

The Jaguars FS  (Tashaun Gipson)  was making plays and hard tackles all over the field today.

 

It helps to have even a mild understanding of NFL schemes...in particular knowing that not every team runs the same scheme.  Jacksonville isn't necessarily going to use their FS (Gipson) in the same way the Colts use their FS (Hooker).  

 

13 hours ago, compuls1v3 said:

I'm so tired of people saying he's playing his position and we're don't understand his position. Jackson from the Bears plays Free Safety and he's a game changer.  What I will say about Hooker is that I hope he gets better and I want him to succeed.  Also, I think he could (when healthy) make more plays IF he had other good players around him.  I think he could take more chances. 

 

See above.  The Bears are now running Vic Fangio's 3-4 defense so they won't necessarily use their FS the same way the Colts use Hooker.

[Superman]

The defense gave up six points, only 211 total yards of offense. Easily the best defensive performance all season. 

 

Hooker had a great game.

[The Fish]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 

Hooker had a great game.

Well, it's not like he was going to have a bad one, when the opposing QB wasn't trying to challenge the secondary.

 

 

[Superman]

6 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Well, it's not like he was going to have a bad one, when the opposing QB wasn't trying to challenge the secondary.

 

Which begs the question: If Hooker didn't have a bad game, why is this a thread?

[#12.]

If Eberflus twice doesn't give a 10 yard cushion on the edge of FG range, the game would have gone to overtime 0-0.  

 

That said, their defense was facing one of the best QBs and offenses in the league while our defense was facing a prehistoric offense.

[SteelCityColt]

28 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Which begs the question: If Hooker didn't have a bad game, why is this a thread?

 

Because if it doesn’t show up in the stat sheet or on plays of the week it didn’t happen.

[The Fish]

32 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Which begs the question: If Hooker didn't have a bad game, why is this a thread?

You'll get no argument from me. That he's not Ed Reed (yet) as projected doesn't mean he's bad, he's not and when he's not out there, the secondary is noticeably worse.

People forget the hot start last year too. 

[Blueblood23]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

The defense gave up six points, only 211 total yards of offense. Easily the best defensive performance all season. 

 

Hooker had a great game.

They could have put me back there for that game. I would have made no tackles or assists the same as Hooker.

[Superman]

1 minute ago, Blueblood23 said:

They could have put me back there for that game. I would have made no tackles or assists the same as Hooker.

 

So because Hooker had no tackles, your assumption is the defense basically played with just ten guys?

 

If you were playing free safety yesterday the defense would have given up 50 points.

[Blueblood23]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

So because Hooker had no tackles, your assumption is the defense basically played with just ten guys?

 

If you were playing free safety yesterday the defense would have given up 50 points.

Not if they ran exactly the same plays and everything was the same. How could that not be? Hooker did not have a great game with no interceptions, tackles, or assisted tackles.

[The Fish]

3 minutes ago, Blueblood23 said:

Not if they ran exactly the same plays and everything was the same. How could that not be? Hooker did not have a great game with no interceptions, tackles, or assisted tackles.

Not that it's apples to apples in total, but have you ever looked at a guy like Revis's stat line from when he was in his prime? Lot's of nothing there too. 

Not giving up big plays is a primary goal for the secondary and they didn't give any up yesterday. Call it great work or acknowledge that Kessler wasn't likely to push the ball up field much. I don't care how one looks at it.

 

[Superman]

11 minutes ago, Blueblood23 said:

Not if they ran exactly the same plays and everything was the same. How could that not be? Hooker did not have a great game with no interceptions, tackles, or assisted tackles.

 

Everything wouldn't be the same if the person playing free safety wasn't doing his job. You can't do Hooker's job, not even the way he did it yesterday, with no stats.

[Smoke317]

And Hooker almost had a pick (potential pick 6) but Desir (I believe) knocked it out of his hands before he could bring it in.  We didn't get many bounces but I find it hard to blame anyone on the defense in a game we lost 0-6.  Especially when the offense was in the red zone 3-4 times and walked away with 0 points not because of regular turnovers but turnovers on downs because we never took the field goal opportunities...

 

Jax played like the all time great defense they were last season, and Frank (and analytics) didn't give them enough respect to take the points that were there.  I guess that's the gift and the curse of an offensive minded head coach who's showing he's a slave to analytics.  I hope Frank (who I'm a BIG fan of) can find a balance between taking the field goal opportunities and following the analytical playbook of always going for it on 4th down going forward.  There's a time and a place for everything.  Yesterday should have been Vinny and the Defense's day because it clearly wasn't Luck and Frank's.  By trying to force it to be the latter, it ended up being the Jag's day...

[Jason_]

2 hours ago, Blueblood23 said:

Not if they ran exactly the same plays and everything was the same. How could that not be? Hooker did not have a great game with no interceptions, tackles, or assisted tackles.

 

If you're in the backfield instead of Malik Hooker then there's a 100% chance that most of the Jags playcalling changes and then we would have seen the 50+ points that Superman suggested.

[NannyMcafee]

Are people forgetting that this team is learning a new scheme on both sides of the ball? The colts have majorly overachieved this year

[Defjamz26]

21 hours ago, The Fish said:

You'll get no argument from me. That he's not Ed Reed (yet) as projected doesn't mean he's bad, he's not and when he's not out there, the secondary is noticeably worse.

People forget the hot start last year too. 

Yup. The Colts don’t give up big plays Down the field. But what was the one game they did and the secondary really got lit up? Oakland. And who was out that game? None other than Malik Hooker. Weird how that works

[BleedBlu8792]

22 hours ago, aaron11 said:

i dont agree, he used to make plays all over the secondary, especially in college 

 

/sigh

 

Again, as it's been pointed out, different schemes will put guys in different position to make plays. While running a lot more man last year teams would throw deep more often thus allowing Hooker more opportunities to make plays on the ball. And again, as it was pointed out, playing zone and with below average corners, teams are taking the easy route and throwing shorter. This scheme directly protects against the deep ball for the most part, which Hooker directly affects. 

 

As @Surge89 pointed out correctly above your post, when we have corners who can protect the  boundaries and funnel guys to the middle of the field, like what Hooker played with at OSU in Conley and Lattimore (1st round corners), Hooker will begin having better opportunities to make plays on the ball. So yes he made plays in college, but he had elite talent on the outside who could funnel receivers and the ball to him. QB's have no reason to test downfield (Hooker) when the lower risk play is against average corners in soft zone coverage. We'll get there eventually.

 

[compuls1v3]

18 hours ago, NannyMcafee said:

Are people forgetting that this team is learning a new scheme on both sides of the ball? The colts have majorly overachieved this year

I will be the first to admit some of my frustration with Hooker is that he looked incredible when he started and hasn't been the same since.  Many on here have made good points, as you have, that he is playing well, and the Colts ARE overachieving this year.   I guess he's just not the flashy guy I am wanting, but he is doing a good job, as many others on the board have pointed out as well.

[aaron11]

19 minutes ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

/sigh

 

Again, as it's been pointed out, different schemes will put guys in different position to make plays. While running a lot more man last year teams would throw deep more often thus allowing Hooker more opportunities to make plays on the ball. And again, as it was pointed out, playing zone and with below average corners, teams are taking the easy route and throwing shorter. This scheme directly protects against the deep ball for the most part, which Hooker directly affects. 

 

As @Surge89 pointed out correctly above your post, when we have corners who can protect the  boundaries and funnel guys to the middle of the field, like what Hooker played with at OSU in Conley and Lattimore (1st round corners), Hooker will begin having better opportunities to make plays on the ball. So yes he made plays in college, but he had elite talent on the outside who could funnel receivers and the ball to him. QB's have no reason to test downfield (Hooker) when the lower risk play is against average corners in soft zone coverage. We'll get there eventually.

 

your point about scheme and talent is noted

 

as for the bolded, that is exactly why i think its fair to question taking a safety like him in the first round.  hes a good player, but if teams dont need to challenge him then hes isnt doing much besides taking away a zone they were not going to throw to anyway.   also if they do have a good receiver that they want to throw deep to, they will just send him to the other deep zone 

 

this reminds me of when the bucs brought in revis on a big contract, then put him in zone coverage.  he did a good job guarding his area, but teams just avoided him.  id rather see hooker in a cover 3 if we are going to use a first on him and eventually pay him 

[a06cc]

I knew once we lost threads would pop up. Hooker isn’t healthy. However what I do like that even at say 75% he is out there playing. 

[jameszeigler834]

On ‎12‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 8:08 PM, bravo4460 said:

He started like usual.

 

Dropped an interception.

 

Thats about it. Not terrible. Hasn’t really done anything all year besides miss a bunch of tackles. Hopefully that will change next year.

He seem fragile this season suffered that injury last year and he seems to be turning into another sanders.

[BleedBlu8792]

16 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

your point about scheme and talent is noted

 

as for the bolded, that is exactly why i think its fair to question taking a safety like him in the first round.  hes a good player, but if teams dont need to challenge him then hes isnt doing much besides taking away a zone they were not going to throw to anyway.   also if they do have a good receiver that they want to throw deep to, they will just send him to the other deep zone 

 

this reminds me of when the bucs brought in revis on a big contract, then put him in zone coverage.  he did a good job guarding his area, but teams just avoided him.  id rather see hooker in a cover 3 if we are going to use a first on him and eventually pay him 

 

He was taken at that spot 2 years due to a) value and b) he was a direct scheme fit for Pagano's defense. There is nothing to question why Ballard did what he did, under the circumstances, 2 years ago. From what I'm seeing, and what he's really wanting to do with this defense, I believe he's wanting to model that Seattle Cover 3, when they were at their peak, from 2-5 years ago. The problem is, we just don't have the corners yet. I think Wilson is a great first step, especially in being able to run more man coverage within the scheme, but we really need another big physical corner, who can also play man, opposite him. Maybe Jalen Collins is that guy, but until he's on the field and playing we don't really know. 

 

People just need to have patience and let Ballard develop this team. We are having to limit our coverage scheme due to the limitations of the players. Once those deficiencies are strengthened I have no doubts the pass rush and coverage will be a lot better. 

[MikeCurtis]

He is still getting healthy

 

Many people that have the surgery he has take 1 to 2 years to get back

 

I think (HOPE) that next year he comes back a little faster

 

A little may make all the differnce

[Shive]

In Eberflus' press conference, he was asked about Hooker's lack of stats. His response was that Hooker did exactly what he was supposed to do and was in the places he was supposed to be all game.

 

Ballard said at the roundtable that Hooker looks to be hitting his stride and looks way more comfortable physically (in returning from his ACL tear). He said that the timetable is generally 9 months, but it can take a year and a half or 2 years to get back 100%. He too seems to be happy with where Hooker is.

[Superman]

51 minutes ago, Shive said:

Ballard said at the roundtable that Hooker looks to be hitting his stride and looks way more comfortable physically (in returning from his ACL tear). He said that the timetable is generally 9 months, but it can take a year and a half or 2 years to get back 100%. He too seems to be happy with where Hooker is.

 

Yup. Players are coming back from ACL tears in a few months, but that doesn't mean they're 100%. I feel like the first year back is a throwaway year, most often. It isn't until the second year that the player should be expected to really be back to form.

 

And in Hooker's case, we've never seen him fully healthy. He played through injury his last year at Ohio State, he was rehabbing from surgery last year, and he's still in recovery mode this year.

 

It's fair to question whether he'll ever be 100%, but right now it doesn't make sense to act like he should be 100%.

[compuls1v3]

For what it's worth, I found this to be a good article about Hooker.  At least he owns that touchdown against the Dolphins.  Maybe Houston will test him ;D!  https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2018/12/05/complicated-sophomore-season-indianapolis-colts-safety-malik-hooker/2213748002/

[Nobody]

On 12/2/2018 at 5:08 PM, bravo4460 said:

He started like usual.

 

Dropped an interception.

 

Thats about it. Not terrible. Hasn’t really done anything all year besides miss a bunch of tackles. Hopefully that will change next year.

This isn’t true at all lol. Last I checked a couple weeks ago, PFF had him with an elite tackling grade and having allowed 3 receptions all season. He’s not been tested and he’s been very good in run defense.

[Bravo]

19 minutes ago, Nobody said:

This isn’t true at all lol. Last I checked a couple weeks ago, PFF had him with an elite tackling grade and having allowed 3 receptions all season. He’s not been tested and he’s been very good in run defense.

 

 

Hmm. Well I don’t have a membership to PFF but if you have the ability and watch the games back on NFL.com he sure does miss a lot of tackles (1 on 1) that come his way. He also had a whopping 0 in the JAX game while Geathers has 7 (I understand he plays up a lot).

 

I’m not saying Hooker is bad but he isn’t the game wrecker he was last year and his tackling isn’t impressive. It’s not all his fault either.