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.

_________________
RE-SIGN B.B

"We walked our (pedestrian) ass to the Super Bowl"
Angry Doug
"We're looking for grit"
Pete Carroll
"We got grit. That's it."
Earl Thomas.

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.

_________________
http://twitter.com/EJZ206

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.

_________________
"it'd be a newborn deer" - pehawk

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.

_________________
"I don't know what you're talking about." GT

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.

_________________
http://twitter.com/EJZ206

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.

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.

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.

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

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).

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...