=== Is he a #1 WR? ===

He's not, no, at least not yet.  But the question is irrelevant.

Holmgren doesn't need a Terrell Owens.  He needs to turn his WR corps into a weapon, as opposed to a competent unit.  He did so.

The Seahawks' paradigm is not to add a home-run hitter, a franchise RBI player.  The Seahawks' paradigm is to make their passing game as a whole more dangerous.  The passing game was just upgraded, big time. 

Branch at 27 years of age has settled in as a 60-70 catch, 800-1000 yard receiver, 13 yards per ball type.  That is playing with a top QB in NE, as he also will be in Seattle.

He has a convincing record of playing well against top opposition, as you know, winning a Super Bowl MVP and catching 10/143 in another Super Bowl.  This matters.  A lot.  The fact that he is a big factor in "showdown", challenge games.

Right now I would consider Branch a little modest as the feature receiver … or a championship player as the #2 receiver. 

Paying Branch a cool $6m per, plus a #1 pick, despite the fact that he has his WR's already … there is little doubt that Mike Holmgren considers Branch a bigtime feature receiver. 

.

=== Comparables and Upside Dept. ===

In my day, John Stallworth was a very similar player, as the #2 behind Lynn Swann.  Some readers may remember John Taylor playing alongside Jerry Rice, though Taylor was a bit more of a gamebreaker than Branch.  That's where I see Branch's calling.

Of course the Seahawks don't have a Jerry Rice or a Lynn Swann for Branch to play behind.  …but the Stallworths and Taylors can have some monster seasons at times, since defenses cannot key on them.

We remember very well Stallworth's 80-catch, 1400-yard season in 1984, and wondering, "just how good *was* Pittsburgh in 1977-78?"

Branch is coming to an offense in which there is simply no way for a defense to key him. 

…………………..

In some ways, Branch reminds me of a poor man's Steve Smith, possibly without as much of a second gear in the open field, I dunno… 

=== Scouting Report Dept. ===

Here's one pro scout's report on Branch (Sporting News Ultimate Scouting Guide 2007): 

Strengths

Runs fluid routes, can separate from man coverage and is outstanding on quick hitches.

Seems more comfortable in the short-to-intermediate passing game.  

Has superb acceleration, explodes out of his cuts and is dangerous after the catch (cf John Taylor under Walsh, Dr. D).

Competitive on jump balls because of his leaping ability and toughness.

Weaknesses

Extremely undersized (5-9, 193, a little bigger than Steve Smith - Dr D).  Will never be great in the red zone (though Shaun Alexander is - Dr D) and offers little as a blocker.  Durability is a concern.

Bottom line

Branch's explosiveness, athleticism and drive are top-notch…  

Grade 7.5 (borderline All-Pro - Dr. D).

Exactly this same scouting report could be written on Steve Smith, line-for-line, except Smith has probably more breakaway speed.

Every line in that report is a perfect match for Holmgren's offense — the bread-and-butter 7-yard "sting" routes that Holmgren wants to hit with 80% consistency.  Deion Branch will make Hasselbeck's (and Holmgren's) job easy.

. 

=== 1st Round Pick? ===

Which in the Seahawks' case will be what, the #30 player in the draft?  Against a bona fide NFL impact player?

If you kept the #28 or #30 or #32, your fondest dream would be to get a "slide" who someday had the potential to become a near-Deion Branch level player.

Fans tend to regard these draft picks as worth about three times what they actually are…

In this case it is the $6m of cap room that is the real cost of Branch. 

.

=== Pass Protection Dept. ===

Just to get the first 10 posts out of the way, LOL, the ones complaining we don't have Hutchinson, so no addition will ever help … quick reminder that the Holmgren passing game is not based on deep drops and deep routes.

Hasselbeck was 25-for-30 yesterday, in a game that was the Seahawks' offense at its worst. 

Holmgren's offense has long since reached the point of being unstoppable.  A top-notch Bill Walsh offense is not based on the left guard.  It really isn't.  The LG is not the basis of the success of the concept.  Dart passes to unpredictable areas are the basis of the success of the concept.

There is no such thing as a receiver who does this job better than Deion Branch.  Hence the 6/$36m.  Branch is a lot more relevant to Holmgren's execution, than is the LG.

=== Dr. D's bottom line ===

The Seahawks' receiving corps before Branch was high-quality but workmanlike …

Some scouting services had their 1-2-3-4 WR's (with Hackett and Engram) as among the top 5 in the NFL.  But it is more a question of the WR's flourishing in the system, than the system flourishing because of them.

With Branch, the Seahawks' WR unit becomes a true 4-headed hydra that will be impossible to contain except through overwhelming collapses of the pocket right at the snap.  And Mike Holmgren is not known for passing games that get overwhelmed in the pocket.

The whole of the offense becomes greater than the sum of the parts.  The WR corps becomes a weapon that drives the offense, rather than the other way around.  The WR unit became one that you win because of, rather than one you win with.

…………………… 

Hasselbeck was 25-for-30 in a totally fouled-up offensive day against the Lions. 

Hasselbeck throwing Holmgren's game to these four receivers, with Alexander going for 1500+, you now have the weird possibility of an offense that is better than the 2005 crew.

.

=== So THAT's What It Looks Like to GO FOR THE THROAT ===

The Seahawks already HAD an excellent receiving corps and they already HAD a tremendous offense. 

Before Julian Peterson, the Seahawks already HAD a tough defense, and tough LB's.

………………………. 

But Mike Holmgren and Co. are NOT thinking, "we'll win 11 games a year, and win in the playoffs when we get lucky."

Mike Holmgren (and, of course, Tim Ruskell, we know, we know) is thinking about playoff games, and he's thinking, "what will make me the bully, and the Carolina Panthers the customers?"

You can visibly see the Seahawks thinking in terms of those playoff games, you can visibly see the Seahawks are obsessive about putting other elite teams in their back pockets.  The Seahawks are not defining success as being competitive.  The Seahawks are defining success as being dominant.

All kinds of goodness comes with that attitude. 

We like Mike,

Dr D