RichNhansom
Active member
- Joined
- May 25, 2011
- Messages
- 4,256
- Reaction score
- 5
Popeyejones":t9tt9d19 said:This is a lot of money for a guy who played out of his friggin mind for 5 games last year, but for the other 4 and 2/3rds years of his career has been between a decent #2 and decent #3.
That said, he's not making that much more than Marvin Jones, and like, Marvin Jones. :lol:
TBH I much prefer Tate as an all around player and thought his skillset better fit Wilson, but I don't think this is a bad signing or anything, and I understand both the logic of it and the dollar amount.
It will be a tougher pill to swallow if Baldwin goes back to the 700-800 yards and 3-5 TD guy he was for the first four years of his career and first two-thirds of last year. The 80% catch rate and his explosion to close out last season are totally unsustainable, but he doesn't need to sustain those level for this to be a good contract for the Hawks.
Final Verdict: like everything it comes with questions, which means it sounds pretty fair and about right.
Tate is an amazing talent and will have success in the league but he doesn't cross all the I's and dot all the T's when you consider what this regime is looking for in core players.
The philosophy of this FO is all about team work and buying in. Developing a core group of players that help to develop future core players is critical and is the only way to sustain success in the cap era.
From an outside point of view I can understand why someone would covet Tate over Baldwin but when applying the philosophy of our FO, Baldwin makes much more sense.
At the end of their careers I really don't think there will be a comparison between the two.