Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ    Contact Us  Your donations are greatly appreciated! Donate  Chat Room

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 62 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Which starting WR would you bench (or release) so that the new guy could start?
Sidney Rice 2%  2%  [ 2 ]
Golden Tate 26%  26%  [ 24 ]
Doug Baldwin 72%  72%  [ 68 ]
Total votes : 94
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:58 am 
NET Practice Squad
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 8:47 am
Posts: 90
I'm more concerned with tight end. I'd lose Miller and Moore and keep McCoy. I might use a first round pick to get a potential superstar at that position. I'm actually pretty comfortable at WR. I'd pick a late round guy, somebody tall and let them compete. Let's see what Baldwin does for the rest of the season. He's now on shaky ground (kind of like BMW a year ago) I'd say while Tate and Rice have excellent job security.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:01 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm
Posts: 4250
I think this poll shows that our WR corps is a lot more solid than it gets credit for. I voted Tate because he still messes up his routes, but that's really a reason to vote not to bring in a high WR pick in the first place. He'll be two, three years away from getting comfortable with the route tree anyways. I'm for bringing in a high quality WR, because we need the competition, but I don't think the guy automatically bumps any of those three off the starting rotation. I'm glad Pete has the philosophy he does about competition.

_________________
Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:07 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:09 pm
Posts: 836
Location: Puyallup, WA
I still am not sold on Tate. Hard to say anything after the game he just had. I definitely do not question his heart and desire. I'd like to see another big receiver along side Rice and let Baldwin and Tate battle for the slot.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:16 am 
* NET Philistine *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 14120
Location: Portland, OR
I think it's been echoed in here, but of the three, only Golden Tate seems to remain on the field every game during the season. Think of a #1 WR as more of an insurance policy where Baldwin and Rice are your wild cards.

_________________
Super Bowl Champions XVLIII


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:26 am 
* NET News Scoop *
* NET News Scoop *
User avatar
Online

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:16 pm
Posts: 8919
If the WR is an upgrade over who we already have, then I'm good with replacing ANY of those listed. Frankly, we have GOT to stop over-valuing our own players, a trait this board is way to familiar with. thankfully, I don't believe our FO has that stance at all.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:28 am 
NET Starter
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:37 pm
Posts: 324
megamanflx1 wrote:
Why does he have to replace anyone? If we get a kid that's awesome, traditionally speaking he won't have =an impact until year 3 anyway. Why wouldn't he sit behind one of the options listed above, instead of getting toasted as a rook?

IMO, the choice is D) Sit him till year 3.


Umm you draft a reciever with your #1 pick he better have an impact and better not sit for three years.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:47 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:58 pm
Posts: 749
Location: Bellevue
Am I allowed to chose "all three"?

Rice is brittle (the kiss of death did not materialize this season, YET. knock on wood. twice).
Tate is both genious and inconsistent.
Baldwin is very talented, but probably not a starting caliber WR on most great NFL teams. and he is dinged.

the reality is that we still need to invest in an elite WR opposite of Rice to be in the superbowl conversation. hopefully a #1 WR in the draft, someone we can trade up to get and who would produce for years to come... someone of AJ Green or Julio Jones stature.

_________________
Cheesehead Seahawk Extraordinaire


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:50 am 
* NET Sage *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm
Posts: 4268
I'd love it if they were able to sign Mike Wallace, I think he's exactly what this offense is lacking.

It's a shame Marqise Lee is only a sophomore, good lord that kid is going to be good.

_________________
February 2, 2014... the day the dream was finally realized


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:57 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:08 pm
Posts: 2061
Location: Seattle
Tate has been playing great lately but we could still use an influx of talent to compete everywhere. None of the preseason WR threads speculated that Kearse and Martin would be on the field at the same time yesterday, but you need depth in the NFL.

Depth with high upside is the best of both worlds, and rookies are inexpensive these days. We can draft a promising WR in the mid-first round for $2 million/year. Every player we draft is going to be competing with current Seahawks for a job, and I don't understand why are posters here so protective of our receiver group in particular.

What position would you rather see taken in the first three rounds? Do you hate the Seahawks who play at that current position, or do you just want better talent everywhere with more competition?

_________________
"Check out my 2012 NFL Draft Grades. I just gave the worst grade ever to Seattle." - WalterFootball.com


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 11:26 am 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:46 am
Posts: 509
This is sort of a situation that depends on the offensive coordinator/philosophy. Just for the sake of conversation, having a burner at split end (Mike Wallace, for example - I'm not advocating paying the price he would command) would really open up the offense, imo. It would likely shift bracket coverage to that side of the field allowing Rice more 1:1 coverage. It would also give Tate and Miller more favorable match ups on the inside against linebackers and safeties. We would also force safeties to play back a little bit, helping our OL with fewer guys in the box. With our strong run game and subsequent play action success, our offense could be really deadly and tough to game plan for. Adding a possession guy (prime Mike Williams, for example) would help move the chains and with our consistency, but it allows teams to constrict the field and makes us more one dimensional.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 11:31 am 
* NET Moderator *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
Posts: 18457
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Though I love them both because they're Seahawks, neither TAte or Baldwin, brings anything more then 100 other WR's in the NFL bring. If we brought in a 1st round pick who was better then them i wouldnt think twice about replacing either of those guys.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 12:49 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Online

Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 10:40 am
Posts: 540
Location: Ireland!
T-Sizzle wrote:
Kelly.Orr wrote:
I would draft a true #1 or #2 guy and move Tate to the slot i think that is where he would perform best. Brandon Coleman anyone?

:13: I voted Baldwin for that exact reason.



Agreed, Robert Woods. For. The. Win. :thirishdrinkers:

_________________
"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." Mark Twain.

"Beast Mode is artist, puny Saints Defense merely his canvas!"

"When you die the only kingdom you'll see, will be two foot wide and six foot deep!"


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 12:53 pm 
* NET Philistine *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 14120
Location: Portland, OR
HawksSoc wrote:
T-Sizzle wrote:
Kelly.Orr wrote:
I would draft a true #1 or #2 guy and move Tate to the slot i think that is where he would perform best. Brandon Coleman anyone?

:13: I voted Baldwin for that exact reason.



Agreed, Robert Woods. For. The. Win. :thirishdrinkers:


I don't know, I think Woods is coasting off his 2011 season. He really hasn't been that impressive this year, IMO.

_________________
Super Bowl Champions XVLIII


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 12:55 pm 
* Master Chief *
* Master Chief *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
Posts: 7405
Location: CVN-68
I'm glad someone else brought up TE - because that's another position we could improve. I have no idea why they were so excited to get Evan Moore - not only does he not have a catch, but they rarely throw to him when he does get in. Very odd.

On the WR front, I've been more than vocal and repetitive that I think we need an upgrade - I still do. Mike Wallace would be ideal...the kind of receiver you MUST account for every single play. It's not just the plays he can make, it's the plays he opens up for others. Why do you think a guy like Antonio Brown has become such a threat for Pittsburgh? Yes, he is good - but he is taking advantage of the attention defenses have to show Wallace.

We need a Wallace, or an AJ Green/Julio Jones type. Either a barn burner (Wallace) or a big/physical receiver who can eat up defenders. Add a WR like that to Rice/Tate/Baldwin and we have something dangerous brewing. The upgrade would not come at the expense of the those guys, we would be replacing guys like Obo, Martin, Kearse, etc.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

Image

"I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 1:12 pm 
* Gangnameister *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 11076
Location: PoCompton, BC Canada
I think if Rice and Baldwin can stay healthy and Tate can find a way to play consistently at the level he played at for the last two games, we're pretty okay at WR. Just need to improve the depth. The fact that Kearse and Martin are on the active roster and TO is likely on speed dial is a sign that we have serious problems in the depth dept. Though I would be ALL FOR bringing in that Brandon Coleman kid that English is pumping the tires on, but I don't think WR is a huge glaring need right now. Coleman looks like a phenom (but likely won't even be on the board when we pick so it's moot).

I think the biggest need as far as "skill position"* players goes would be a versatile H-Back. I think they know it too considering they brought in Kellen Winslow in the off season. Having a guy like that in the mix would open things up on offense big time. Just look what Hernandez was able to do to us (and what his presence allowed Welker and Gronk to do to us). I'd love to have a guy like that out there.


*I hate that term

_________________
I <3 Nunchucks


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 1:49 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:01 pm
Posts: 1856
Location: Vancouver, Wa
I think ultimately it would come down to Baldwin losing the most snaps and then Tate next. Not so much benching one or the other and assuming the new WR would take over that spot.

I'd love to draft a receiver with great route running ability, size, and the ability to play the slot as well as he plays the outside, similarly to how Rice is doing it. Rice would start and, if good enough, the New Guy would be #2.

Tate and New Guy would probably still split snaps in 2-wr sets, and you can still get Tate on the field, as an outside receiver in 3-wr sets, with one of the other two moving inside. Mostly, keep Tate on the outside. I have no faith with him at slot.

Baldwin will get his plays in the empty backfield sets out of the slot or even in 3-wr sets when precision routes are needed, taking out either Tate or the rookie.

_________________
I got passion for my Hawks and I ain't afraid to show it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 1:56 pm 
*TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
*TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Online

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:12 am
Posts: 6746
I'd have said Tate in a nanosecond, but then he had a really great game and I am once-again reminded of his play-making potential IF he could only learn about focus, discipline, and route running. Instead, I voted for Baldwin since he didn't even get drafted and those guys all suck.

But seriously, and I mean this, I think every one of our WRs is completely replaceable. Contracts set aside, I don't think any of them should really feel all that safe.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:04 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 4:32 pm
Posts: 525
Rice, Tate, and Baldwin are here to stay.

But to play, I said Rice. You only draft a WR high if that guy is going to be a number 1 WR, otherwise we can get a WR in the late rounds to compete for the other positions. If he isn't going to come in and compete to be the #1 guy then it's a waisted draft pick.

Edwards and Kearse are replaceable and if we draft someone later on it will be to compete for those spots.

I think we have decent WR's and need to solidy other positions before the WR position though. I still think we need to draft another person on the OL and DL before we take a WR.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:13 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 118
Wide receiver might not be my first choice for a high draft pick. We could certainly use an upgrade at the postion, but the same could be said about tight end, defensive tackle (as Branch and Jones are both free agents next year) and to a lesser extent linebacker as Leroy Hill isn't gettting any younger and I don't think I see his replacement on the roster. Also wouldn't mind seeing an upgrade at right tackle! Its a good team, but with room for improvement. I can see wide receiver taking a back seat to some of these other needs.
:3-1:


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:28 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:01 pm
Posts: 3174
We have a good #1 in Rice, if he stays healthy. He's making a push at the end of the year, and gaining chemistry with Wilson.

Tate is inconsistent. He can be a good #2, or he can totally disappear. I don't trust him to be the 2nd guy unless he gets better, but if he plays up to his potential, he'd work. Tate is very sturdy; the pounding he took yesterday would've put Baldwin out for 3 weeks, if Doug could've finished the game.

I voted Baldwin, but really, it's our 4th or 5th guy that would be gone. Edwards is done physically, Kearse doesn't seem to grab the opportunity when he gets it, and Martin is just average.

We could really use a dynamic WR, and there's room for one on the squad. I think Miller will improve as our OL improves, and as Wilson improves. We're fine there.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:36 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:34 am
Posts: 576
Location: Olympia, WA
We need a fast guy. We lack elite speed at WR. If we could get a guy who can Burn up and down the field at the #1 spot, we would get a lot better production out of Rice.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:38 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:35 pm
Posts: 810
Location: Canby, OR
Add to and let them compete. I am not for bringing in a big free agent. It just seems like it is so 50/50 when you do that. If we are bringing in a Dwayne Bowe for a 4th or 5th, fine, but only because it seems it is easy to pick up extra picks in that range. However, I don't want to bring in Bowe because he is going to want a big payday.

Draft is the only way to go, imo. I'm fine with the guys we have, I just want to add to them. A guy like Marquise Lee (however you spell it) from USC is the kind of guy that we need. Somebody they have to account for athletically and double or take their chances. It will open up the field.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:38 pm 
* Mr Random Thought *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 9805
Scottemojo wrote:
We have two real offensive needs: a really good TE, and and elusive player with silly speed at any of the 3 skill positions. If that is a WR, then so be it, we will run more 3 WR sets. We have silly speed with Turbin already, but with Lynch, Turbo is just not going to be on the field that much. Unless Bevell starts designing some two RB sets, which would be a good idea.


I knew there was a reason I get "future seahawk" vibes from Tavon Austin. You are right, this offense needs a slick speedster. My preference would still be for Wes Welker though. I don't even care that he's 32 next season. It will take him a few years still to lose that speed, and when he does he'll still be useful ala Brandon Stokely. The Patriots wouldn't let him hit UFA would they? Would they?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:44 pm 
* NET Philistine *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 14120
Location: Portland, OR
kearly wrote:
Scottemojo wrote:
We have two real offensive needs: a really good TE, and and elusive player with silly speed at any of the 3 skill positions. If that is a WR, then so be it, we will run more 3 WR sets. We have silly speed with Turbin already, but with Lynch, Turbo is just not going to be on the field that much. Unless Bevell starts designing some two RB sets, which would be a good idea.


I knew there was a reason I get "future seahawk" vibes from Tavon Austin. You are right, this offense needs a slick speedster. My preference would still be for Wes Welker though. I don't even care that he's 32 next season. It will take him a few years still to lose that speed, and when he does he'll still be useful ala Brandon Stokely. The Patriots wouldn't let him hit UFA would they? Would they?


If they do, I hope we stay far, far away from Welker. When's the last time the Patriots released an older player while he was still playing at a high to very high level?

_________________
Super Bowl Champions XVLIII


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:48 pm 
* NET Moderator *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
Posts: 18457
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Give me Tavon Austin in this years draft and Colt Lyerla in next years draft. (although i'd take Seffarian Jenkins too, but I think Lyerla will be a more dynamic pro). I think Lyerla is going to be a much better blocking version of Jimmy Graham, and Seffarian Jenkins is going to be Tony Gonzales, so you cant really go wrong with either one.

I'd also take Kenjon Barner to replace Leon Washington.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:50 pm 
* Mr Random Thought *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 9805
Sarlacc83 wrote:
If they do, I hope we stay far, far away from Welker. When's the last time the Patriots released an older player while he was still playing at a high to very high level?


Lawyer Milloy had a few good years left after New England parted ways. Richard Seymour did too, although he cost Oakland a 1st so I don't know if that counts.

Welker is 32 next May and presumably looking for a long term deal. He also looks nowhere close to declining yet. But the fear factor about his age could make things interesting. Personally, I'd throw a 5 year deal his way without blinking. Speedy players age more gracefully, and Welker is more than a fast player, he's an outstanding possession receiver too. And it's not like we have to keep him all 5 years if he starts sucking. If he produces for just two or three years like he is now, and then has two or three years of Brandon Stokely plus, he could justify $20 million guaranteed pretty easily. I like Welker because he is an upper tier WR that might become a market inefficiency. If Welker was 28 with his current track record, he'd never hit FA at all and would cost more than a 1st rounder to acquire. But as is, he might be under-rated because of his age and available for nothing more a Desean Jackson type contract.

AgentDib wrote:
Depth with high upside is the best of both worlds, and rookies are inexpensive these days. We can draft a promising WR in the mid-first round for $2 million/year. Every player we draft is going to be competing with current Seahawks for a job, and I don't understand why are posters here so protective of our receiver group in particular.


Good thinking. A mid round player would actually be much cheaper than that. Salary for a 4th rounder is around 500k a season. Even mid-2nd round picks only make about $1 million per year. I think an ideal situation would be snagging someone like Tavon Austin in round 2 for a bargain contract.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:11 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Online

Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am
Posts: 2227
oh god ....please no Welker. There is a reason the Pats are going to let him walk.

_________________
The artist formerly known as T-Sizzle


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 4:19 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Online

Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 10:40 am
Posts: 540
Location: Ireland!
Sarlacc83 wrote:
I don't know, I think Woods is coasting off his 2011 season. He really hasn't been that impressive this year, IMO.


REC YDS TD AVG LONG
59 656 10 11.1 41
Thats his numbers so far through nine, your right its a come down, but could be just enough of one to allow him to slip to us.

Thats alright for a coasting year I suppose, also hes more likely to fall to us in the late first then say Keenan Allen who's mocked to go higher. Though Tavon Austin in the second round would be nice instead, that'd allow us to go DT or TE (dare I hope for Tyler Eifert) in the 1st.

_________________
"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." Mark Twain.

"Beast Mode is artist, puny Saints Defense merely his canvas!"

"When you die the only kingdom you'll see, will be two foot wide and six foot deep!"


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 4:26 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm
Posts: 4250
Sarlacc83 wrote:
kearly wrote:
Scottemojo wrote:
We have two real offensive needs: a really good TE, and and elusive player with silly speed at any of the 3 skill positions. If that is a WR, then so be it, we will run more 3 WR sets. We have silly speed with Turbin already, but with Lynch, Turbo is just not going to be on the field that much. Unless Bevell starts designing some two RB sets, which would be a good idea.


I knew there was a reason I get "future seahawk" vibes from Tavon Austin. You are right, this offense needs a slick speedster. My preference would still be for Wes Welker though. I don't even care that he's 32 next season. It will take him a few years still to lose that speed, and when he does he'll still be useful ala Brandon Stokely. The Patriots wouldn't let him hit UFA would they? Would they?


If they do, I hope we stay far, far away from Welker. When's the last time the Patriots released an older player while he was still playing at a high to very high level?

You act as if New England releasing him suddenly MAKES him bad. He's an awesome player who makes a LOT of catches. Guy burned ET deep. Not many WR's can make that claim.

_________________
Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 5:09 pm 
NET Rookie
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:50 am
Posts: 116
Assuming everyone were healthy, I think we'd drop Tate from the starting list. While he's a fantastic playmaker with the ball in his hands, I think Baldwin is still a better all-day every-day slot option when he's healthy. I think we might be able to get Tate's current level of production by bringing him in off the bench to run the screens and other stuff that he's really good at.

Really, though, I'm not sure anyone needs to be replaced. Tate seems to be getting better at route running, and I think he might end up being a legitimate #2 receiver by the end of the season. But I'd still like to see another WR drafted and added to our stable. Right now we have no serious competition for Tate. Edwards, Obomanu, and Martin won't likely be on the team two years from now. Kearse could maybe step up, but we'd be foolish to count on it. Realistically, we need to increase the amount of talent at the position.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 5:50 pm 
* NET Draft Guru *
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:06 pm
Posts: 3589
Location: Bellingham, WA
I think I'd like to get a #1 or #1-2 WR and move Tate to the slot, and let him compete with Baldwin. All around depth would be improved quite a bit.

Rice is a true starting WR, whether he is #1 or #2 I keep him at least another year since we look pretty good in terms of cap room next year. Remember, he's only 14 months older than Bruce Irvin, so he could finish his contract right at his prime, unlike most big free agent signings. Injuries worry me, but that's it.

Tate is coming around this year, but he still isn't the kind of starting WR coaches go to bed dreaming of. IMO, his skillset is more suited to the imagined Tavon Austin role than a normal starting WR. Not as fast, but similar RAC capability since Tate can run through contact, and Tate's ability to fight for the ball makes him a good vertical threat.

Baldwin is having a truly disappointing season, with his drops being more memorable than his catches. There's always the chance that 2011 was the aberration. I tend to believe that Baldwin will be a great slot guy for us for next year, but even if true, the way he gets up after a tackle, it seems like 1 hit could do him in.

IMO, if we picked up a starting WR, I let Tate and Baldwin fight it out in the slot, with the idea being that we need depth anyways and Tate would be worked in for certain packages no matter what happens.

_________________
Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:23 pm 
* NET Sage *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm
Posts: 4268
T-Sizzle wrote:
oh god ....please no Welker. There is a reason the Pats are going to let him walk.


He's expensive?

Welker is too good to flop. I'd be thrilled with him or Mike Wallace.

Like Tavon Austin a lot too.

_________________
February 2, 2014... the day the dream was finally realized


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:33 pm 
* 17Power Blogger *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 11206
I get another fast receiver in the second round, probably a tight end, and keep Rice, Baldwin, AND Tate. The latter two would be absolutely unhinged playing underneath the umbrella of Rice and a real deep threat. Yes, it's gonna require some budget creativity, but Baldwin is bloody cheap and Rice and Tate really aren't impossible to work around financially. How much is a defense-styming, impossible-to-defend-everyone, utterly wide-open offense worth to you?

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:59 pm 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10040
Sarlacc83 wrote:
kearly wrote:
Scottemojo wrote:
We have two real offensive needs: a really good TE, and and elusive player with silly speed at any of the 3 skill positions. If that is a WR, then so be it, we will run more 3 WR sets. We have silly speed with Turbin already, but with Lynch, Turbo is just not going to be on the field that much. Unless Bevell starts designing some two RB sets, which would be a good idea.


I knew there was a reason I get "future seahawk" vibes from Tavon Austin. You are right, this offense needs a slick speedster. My preference would still be for Wes Welker though. I don't even care that he's 32 next season. It will take him a few years still to lose that speed, and when he does he'll still be useful ala Brandon Stokely. The Patriots wouldn't let him hit UFA would they? Would they?


If they do, I hope we stay far, far away from Welker. When's the last time the Patriots released an older player while he was still playing at a high to very high level?

You have the Belichick fear too?

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:01 pm 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10040
MontanaHawk05 wrote:
I get another fast receiver in the second round, probably a tight end, and keep Rice, Baldwin, AND Tate. The latter two would be absolutely unhinged playing underneath the umbrella of Rice and a real deep threat. Yes, it's gonna require some budget creativity, but Baldwin is bloody cheap and Rice and Tate really aren't impossible to work around financially. How much is a defense-styming, impossible-to-defend-everyone, utterly wide-open offense worth to you?


Baldwin is a good player, but one thing the last two seasons has shown, he can't take the NFL abuse. Last year a couple of injuries, this year at least three, a pattern is developing.

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:03 pm 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10040
For all of you touting Welker: Beware the receiver coming from a team with an all world QB.

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:03 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
Posts: 1142
Location: Vancouver, WA
I'd like to see a wide out on the field that safeties constantly have to know where he is and that means true burner speed.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:22 am 
* NET Philistine *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 14120
Location: Portland, OR
Scottemojo wrote:
Sarlacc83 wrote:
kearly wrote:

I knew there was a reason I get "future seahawk" vibes from Tavon Austin. You are right, this offense needs a slick speedster. My preference would still be for Wes Welker though. I don't even care that he's 32 next season. It will take him a few years still to lose that speed, and when he does he'll still be useful ala Brandon Stokely. The Patriots wouldn't let him hit UFA would they? Would they?


If they do, I hope we stay far, far away from Welker. When's the last time the Patriots released an older player while he was still playing at a high to very high level?

You have the Belichick fear too?


You know it. And no offense to kearly, but Lawyer Milloy doesn't inspire much confidence when the Patriots released Randy Moss a couple seasons after he set an NFL record, ya know?

_________________
Super Bowl Champions XVLIII


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:55 am 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 12:06 pm
Posts: 523
Location: Spokane
I just love reading posts that state we need to go get a #1 WR and maybe a speed guy, etc, like you are going to the store to fill out a shopping list. It's not that easy to just go out and get a guy to fill a hole. IMHO, WR might be one of the hardest positions to fill. It is one of those positions that rarely sees a guy play well, let alone dominate in his 1st year. I am one that believes there is a need for another WR. Could the position be upgraded? Hell yes! Will it be easy? Who knows? A highly touted WR could be drafted in the 1st round. High draft status does not guarantee production or success. (See Aaron Curry). The only way a WR, drafted or FA replaces anyone already on the roster is if they earn it in camp and on the field. (see Russell Wilson).

_________________
Go Hawks!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:11 am 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:01 pm
Posts: 3174
Moss is actually a very good example to use for NE. He was very good, but even other players in the league (Revis) called him out for taking plays off that he knew weren't going his way. He's always had an attitude problem, and the Pats don't deal with that.

When they released him, he pouted. His lack of effort doing just about everything was obvious, and it took him being out of the league a year to clean his act up. There was nothing physically wrong with him, or him being "washed up", it was a poor worth ethic and lack of being a good team mate.

Welker is the opposite of that. He has a great attitude and work ethic. He dared to want one more good contract and Belichick tried to bench him, being the egomaniac that he is (ok, ok, he's earned his ego but he was wrong here). You noticed the Pats offense really suffered for it. He didn't start the first 3 games of the season, and he still is close to leading the league in receptions. He opens the deep stuff up by forcing teams to watch the underneath stuff, since Welker is quick and will break tackles.

Also look at the body type; he's way thicker and stockier than a Baldwin is. He's also way sturdier and has missed far less games. He can take the beating, but yet, you rarely ever get a good shot at Welker. You never see him really getting lit up, which is why that Browner hit was so special. I think Welker has still got gas in the tank, but you have to look at our offense, and our QB, and see if he would mesh with us. If so, I'd do it.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:29 pm 
* NET Draft Guru *
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:06 pm
Posts: 3589
Location: Bellingham, WA
oldhawkfan wrote:
I just love reading posts that state we need to go get a #1 WR and maybe a speed guy, etc, like you are going to the store to fill out a shopping list. It's not that easy to just go out and get a guy to fill a hole. IMHO, WR might be one of the hardest positions to fill.


Sure, but it's even harder to fill if you don't try ;)

_________________
Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?
 Post Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 11:32 pm 
* Mr Random Thought *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 9805
Sarlacc83 wrote:
You know it. And no offense to kearly, but Lawyer Milloy doesn't inspire much confidence when the Patriots released Randy Moss a couple seasons after he set an NFL record, ya know?


No offense taken. Randy Moss looked done long before they let go of him. At the time that trade went down, the general reaction was of shock that any team would give up a 3rd rounder for Moss who was clearly past his prime.

Welker isn't there yet. The way he looks right now, he might not be there for a while. The fact that he's 32 next year makes him a risk, but if he wasn't risky he wouldn't be available in the first place. Maybe he still won't be available even considering his age. Maybe New England franchises him or locks him up.

As far as getting WRs from other elite QBs, I'm not too worried about that. Welker was a special player before Tom Brady.


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 62 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]



 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.