What would you trade for Tate?

[Maulbert]

Tate is a knucklehead we only remember fondly because of the Harvin debacle. We'll be fine at receiver without him. I'd rather trade for competent o-linemen.

 

[HuskerHawk]

A dozen maple bars and Krisjin Sokoli.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Tate is a knucklehead we only remember fondly because of the Harvin debacle. We'll be fine at receiver without him. I'd rather trade for competent o-linemen.

The last sentence I agree with.

 

[SchadenfreudeHawk]

I'd send over a 5th. Not because of his ball catching skills but cause he would start hookin up with Ciara and Russel would concentrate on football again.

 

[Hawkfan77]

That shipped sailed a long time ago. Don't want him back, don't need him back

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

I keep hearing this narrative, and quite frankly it confuses me. Tate, at this moment is a better receiver than Lockett. He's one of the best after the catch in the league, and he plays much bigger than his size. Even though he is short, he is great at high pointing the ball, and boxing out defenders.

I would agree with this. Although Lockett is already better than Tate was at the end of his second year. Tate started showing signs of quality in the last month or so in year two and carried that over to year three.

Tate's first year and a half though were absolutely littered with inconsistency. Even at the end of year one, he was looking like a potential bust pick. Lockett could be Tate's peer by as soon as the end of this year given the polish he walked into the door with and the improvement he's already shown in just a few games.

Today Tate > Lockett. I doubt that'll be true by Christmas though.

 

[WilsonLegend]

Russel Wilson, that's the only way i see us trading for Tate.
Wilson and Tate can't be on the same team.
Most of you know why....