Don't teams usually get rid of their LEAST valuable players when cut time comes around?

Y'all sound like they cut from the top. Tate and Baldwin ain't goin' nowhere. Review the depth charts.

With his improve production last year, Golden Tate is going to want to get paid. How much, who knows for sure. But I can tell you for certain, he's going to want more than most of us think he's worth. I remember having the conversation with some friends during the season as to whether or not you re-sign Tate when his deal is up. Most agreed that they wouldn't mind having him back. But that his improved stats playing with Wilson would probably make him want too much for what he's truly worth. With Harvin on board, no way I see the Hawks re-signing Tate. We just got a better version of him.

JSeahawks wrote:Neither. They're both on their rookie contracts. There's absolutely no reason to get rid of either.

Its probably the end of Obamanu though.

Yep.

And if Tate and Baldwin want to earn big paydays when their deals are up, they will have to prove it on the field.

Harvin, Rice and Baldwin come with injury concerns. It would be foolish to get rid of any of the top-level depth at receiver. Keeping the four best WRs ensures that Seattle isn't put in a rough spot if anyone goes down. All four are on the roster next year, and I guarantee that depth is going to be crucial for Seattle at some point in the season.

I don't see either leaving. I think Obama-nu is outta here though. Not sure about Leon though. 50/50 in my mind.

DavidSeven wrote:Harvin, Rice and Baldwin come with injury concerns. It would be foolish to get rid of any of the top-level depth at receiver. Keeping the four best WRs ensures that Seattle isn't put in a rough spot if anyone goes down. All four are on the roster next year, and I guarantee that depth is going to be crucial for Seattle at some point in the season.

we should be covered at WR now, but I'll bet PC and JS still use a mid to late round pick on another one,...

I think we all agree that Obo is gone. However keep in mind that Obo was one of our best special teams players and will have to be replaced. You aren't going to put your starting WR's out there on Special teams to get hurt making tackles so that means the WR's you keep as backups need to be assets on Special teams. That doesn't bode well for Baldwin.

Rice
Harvin
Tate
Kearse
Bates
Williams

You have to have more than 3 WR's and you need depth. Baldwin was hurt last year and didn't really get going to late and he costs us next to nothing. I don't see Baldwin or Tate being in trouble.

After this season, I expect one of Baldwin or Tate to be gone. Tate seems more valuable and plays outside while Harvin plays more inside possibly leaving Baldwin as the odd man out

Davis Hsu made a good point on Twitter. The team still doesn't have that BIG tall wr threat that they like. Maybe they could add one in the draft. But who knows. Adding Harvin to a group that includes guys like Tate and Baldwin makes for a rather small wr corps. Who knows what they do this year. But I really can't see Harvin, Tate, and Baldwin as 3 of your top 4 wr's for too long. Be it this year or the next, I think we should expect to see the team add a wr that is a bit different than they guys they currently have.

Scottemojo wrote:Baldwin can get a RFA tag next year, so why is he part of this question? And Tate is going to want paid. But by the end of this year he just could warrant a good payday too. Tag him if need be.

Way too soon to start worrying about crap like this.

I imagine Seattle will place a 2nd round RFA tag on Baldwin next year and hope a team steps up to help them recoup that mid rounder from the Harvin trade.

SeaTown81 wrote:With his improve production last year, Golden Tate is going to want to get paid. How much, who knows for sure. But I can tell you for certain, he's going to want more than most of us think he's worth. I remember having the conversation with some friends during the season as to whether or not you re-sign Tate when his deal is up. Most agreed that they wouldn't mind having him back. But that his improved stats playing with Wilson would probably make him want too much for what he's truly worth. With Harvin on board, no way I see the Hawks re-signing Tate. We just got a better version of him.

If Seattle made this trade to upgrade over Tate, I'd hate it with a passion. You can have both Tate and Harvin on the field at the same time very easily. I also don't expect Tate to cost much money to retain.

kearly wrote:

Scottemojo wrote:Baldwin can get a RFA tag next year, so why is he part of this question? And Tate is going to want paid. But by the end of this year he just could warrant a good payday too. Tag him if need be.

Way too soon to start worrying about crap like this.

I imagine Seattle will place a 2nd round RFA tag on Baldwin next year and hope a team steps up to help them recoup that mid rounder from the Harvin trade.

Tate is going to be a restricted free agent as well I believe? Or will he be unrestricted? He'll be 4 years into his career, dont you need 5 to be unrestricted?

JSeahawks wrote:

kearly wrote:

Scottemojo wrote:Baldwin can get a RFA tag next year, so why is he part of this question? And Tate is going to want paid. But by the end of this year he just could warrant a good payday too. Tag him if need be.

Way too soon to start worrying about crap like this.

I imagine Seattle will place a 2nd round RFA tag on Baldwin next year and hope a team steps up to help them recoup that mid rounder from the Harvin trade.

Tate is going to be a restricted free agent as well I believe? Or will he be unrestricted? He'll be 4 years into his career, dont you need 5 to be unrestricted?

4. Tate will be unrestricted if not tagged. UDFA (Baldwin) are on 3 year deals, so end up restricted for that 4th year.

I don't think Ben Obomanu or Charly Martin will be on the roster next year.

Locks: Harvin, Rice, Tate, Baldwin
On The Bubble: Jermaine Kearse, Phil Bates, Stephen Williams

Put me down for neither. I don't know why everyone's saying stuff like this. Why get rid of your best talent. I think the FO figures this out without dropping any starters. It would reduce Harvins overall value to dump talent just because he signed.

Rice is more likely to be a casualty than Tate, who IMO ended the year as our number 1 receiver
but I don't think either would be cut. We needed to add receivers. After Tate, Baldwin and Rice who do we have? Jermaine Kearse, Charlie Martin and Ben Obomanu. Washington is more likely to be a casualty than the receivers, with Harvin either taking over return duty or splitting it with Tate. That affords us an extra receiver or running back (or, what i reckon is most likely, another tight end).

I'm looking forward to the greatest show on fieldturf

Both will be on the team.

Why would we want to go and weaken a position that we just shored up? Crazy talk.

Tate and Baldwin are in jeopardy. Either or both could be gone. The WR class is very thick this year so this move doesn't preclude them from still getting a Swope, etc in the draft. Plenty of decent receivers.

IMO, Obomanu was gone even before this trade occurred. He wouldn't have made it past training camp. Now he'll be gone before it (possibly by mini-camp).

Tech Worlds wrote:Both will be on the team.

Why would we want to go and weaken a position that we just shored up? Crazy talk.

You weaken the position by keeping too many of the same type of player. There are 3 different WR spots. With 3 different responsibilities and ideal attributes. You can't just keep all slot guys...

It's crazy talk to think that you can just throw a slot WR out as a flanker and be fine.

People realize there is a difference between a SS and a FS. You wouldn't play Kam Chancellor in Earls role. Well same with WR...

No. It will make both better.

I think both stay, but Tate has more playing time. Tate has made great strives and never quits. So long as he continues to develop, I hope he stays here a long time.

This is about making the offense all the more dangerous.

redhawk253 wrote:get somethin for tate while we can... he is now redundant as a poor mans harvin... plus we wont be able to pay him when his contract comes due...

A 4th round pick at best. No thanks, keep him and let's make a Super Bowl run this year. Our WR depth was not all that great this year after our top 3, Charly Martin, Braylon Edwards, Jermaine Kearse none of those guys was particularly impressive.

Keep all 4, if Tate walks after this season that's fine. I bet we'd get a nice compensatory pick for him.

DJrmb wrote:I think we all agree that Obo is gone. However keep in mind that Obo was one of our best special teams players and will have to be replaced. You aren't going to put your starting WR's out there on Special teams to get hurt making tackles so that means the WR's you keep as backups need to be assets on Special teams. That doesn't bode well for Baldwin.

Rice
Harvin
Tate
Kearse
Bates
Williams

Are you kidding, Baldwin is a stud receiver. Kearse hasn't shown any ability to consistently get open and catch the ball. Your #4 WR is primarily a receiver, the #5 guy is the special teamer.

Rice, Harvin, Tate, Baldwin. Kearse/Martin battle it out as the ST guy.

Missing_Clink wrote:After this season, I expect one of Baldwin or Tate to be gone. Tate seems more valuable and plays outside while Harvin plays more inside possibly leaving Baldwin as the odd man out

Baldwin is a RFA meaning they can give him a 1.5 million dollar second-round tender. Why would you get rid of him?

WestcoastSteve wrote:

DJrmb wrote:I think we all agree that Obo is gone. However keep in mind that Obo was one of our best special teams players and will have to be replaced. You aren't going to put your starting WR's out there on Special teams to get hurt making tackles so that means the WR's you keep as backups need to be assets on Special teams. That doesn't bode well for Baldwin.

Rice
Harvin
Tate
Kearse
Bates
Williams

Are you kidding, Baldwin is a stud receiver. Kearse hasn't shown any ability to consistently get open and catch the ball. Your #4 WR is primarily a receiver, the #5 guy is the special teamer.

Rice, Harvin, Tate, Baldwin. Kearse/Martin battle it out as the ST guy.

who's Martin? We still got Ruvell?

SeaTown81 wrote:Davis Hsu made a good point on Twitter. The team still doesn't have that BIG tall wr threat that they like. Maybe they could add one in the draft. But who knows. Adding Harvin to a group that includes guys like Tate and Baldwin makes for a rather small wr corps. Who knows what they do this year. But I really can't see Harvin, Tate, and Baldwin as 3 of your top 4 wr's for too long. Be it this year or the next, I think we should expect to see the team add a wr that is a bit different than they guys they currently have.

Rice is 6'4" how do we not have that big tall WR that we like?

DJrmb wrote:

Tech Worlds wrote:Both will be on the team.

Why would we want to go and weaken a position that we just shored up? Crazy talk.

You weaken the position by keeping too many of the same type of player. There are 3 different WR spots. With 3 different responsibilities and ideal attributes. You can't just keep all slot guys...

It's crazy talk to think that you can just throw a slot WR out as a flanker and be fine.

People realize there is a difference between a SS and a FS. You wouldn't play Kam Chancellor in Earls role. Well same with WR...

Tate is an outside receiver, Rice is an outside receiver.

Harvin and Baldwin are slot guys, how is that too many of the same player?

w00t wrote:

WestcoastSteve wrote:

DJrmb wrote:
who's Martin? We still got Ruvell?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/12813/charly-martin Don't forget the white guy

^ ah shoot i forgot bout Charly lol

With their minimal contracts, we get next to no salary cap relief by getting rid of either. Having too many good targets in the passing game is hardly a bad thing.

That being said, I'd listen to trade offers. I doubt we'd get more than a third for either, however, and that wouldn't be worth it. Tate is a clutch guy, and while Baldwin disappointed me somewhat last year, he's still useful.

JSeahawks wrote:

kearly wrote:

Scottemojo wrote:Baldwin can get a RFA tag next year, so why is he part of this question? And Tate is going to want paid. But by the end of this year he just could warrant a good payday too. Tag him if need be.

Way too soon to start worrying about crap like this.

I imagine Seattle will place a 2nd round RFA tag on Baldwin next year and hope a team steps up to help them recoup that mid rounder from the Harvin trade.

Tate is going to be a restricted free agent as well I believe? Or will he be unrestricted? He'll be 4 years into his career, dont you need 5 to be unrestricted?

They changed it in the new CBA, unrestricted after the 4th year. The bright side to that is you get to keep Baldwin for dirt cheap.

Basis4day wrote:It suggests to me that it's the end of Ben Obomanu and his 2.3 million contract next year.

This, Pete isn't going to screw around with the chemestry that Wilson and Tate have developed.
Why is bringing in Harvin an automatic assumption to canning a POSITIVE??
Obo will likely be shown the exit door, but Baldwin and Tate?, I'd say are safe at home.

I think Tate and Baldy stay in 2013.

However, if Harvin blows up the Seahawks offense, Superbowl or not, Bevell is going to be a head coach somewhere. Depeneding on the team that hires him, I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if Flynn and Tate or Baldy follow him.

thinking Idzik in New York, and the leash that Rex Ryan and Sanchez will be on, might be a destination.

There has to be someone out there that would give us a 1st for Flynn, Baldwin, Obo and Washington. C'mon...someone. We are a pass rush away from history. C'mon...someone.

After thinking about it, Tate will stay for a variety of reasons.

-To take over PR/KR duties from Leon (no I dont want Harvin doing PR/KR after signing a huge contract)
-Although Harvin is greatly a better WR than Tate, Tate is a better deep threat and the best deep threat on the team.

heard schneider is real big on the stephen williams kid... hes a big physical wr and wouldnt be surprised if hes part of the 53!!! I dont see us drafting a wr now, i see us addressing the d line, lb, off line, 3rd rb, and joker tight end!!

Both will be here...Obo out. IMHO

DJrmb wrote:

Tech Worlds wrote:Both will be on the team.

Why would we want to go and weaken a position that we just shored up? Crazy talk.

You weaken the position by keeping too many of the same type of player. There are 3 different WR spots. With 3 different responsibilities and ideal attributes. You can't just keep all slot guys...

It's crazy talk to think that you can just throw a slot WR out as a flanker and be fine.

People realize there is a difference between a SS and a FS. You wouldn't play Kam Chancellor in Earls role. Well same with WR...

Tate is not a slot guy. Just cause he's short doesn't make him a slot. Tate is a split end, end of story.

Harvin is multi-dimensional. He'll play flanker or split end in two WR sets. They'll even put him and Rice to one side opposite a TE. He'll move to the slot in three WR sets. He'll line up in the backfield and be a threat to run or receive.

Baldwin is a pure slot guy.