DJrmb wrote:Also I will again reiterate that if Baldwin is anywhere near as good as you all think then why wouldn't he walk? If he doesn't and he has starting talent he's a chump. I know we're all Seahawks fans and I'm sure we would all say we'd stay a Seahawk as a backup but Baldwin doesn't have "fan loyalty" like that to Seattle and his agent definitely doesn't. He needs to, and will look out for his own best interest, which means going to a team to be a starter.

Tate is entering his contract year. If he has a big year, he will want to get paid, and with the salary cap there isn't a prudent way to keep 3 high priced WRs so someone (Rice or Tate) would have to go. It would be easier to withstand the blow of losing one of them next year if we have Baldwin on a cheap RFA tender to step back into the starting lineup.

Tech Worlds wrote:Why do people always want to weakin a position that we finally have bolstered up?

Same goes for the qb position.

The answer is pretty simple---Change For Change Sake ---It's Something To Do In The Off Season.

Baldwin is a stud when he's healthy. We should see a healthy Baldwin this year and I can't see them trading a proven producer at his price.

Tate is entering his contract year. If he has a big year, he will want to get paid, and with the salary cap there isn't a prudent way to keep 3 high priced WRs so someone (Rice or Tate) would have to go. It would be easier to withstand the blow of losing one of them next year if we have Baldwin on a cheap RFA tender to step back into the starting lineup.

I don't think Baldwin could start at either of the split end positions. Slot? Sure! Baldwin at X or Z? No thanks... So that probably plays into why I'd lean towards trading him. Its just my opinion, but if I'm right then you'd still need another WR even if you have Baldwin...

Baldwin is a stud when he's healthy. We should see a healthy Baldwin this year and I can't see them trading a proven producer at his price.

I hope so, I hope he plays out of his mind if he's a Seahawk this year!

Now trading Doug doesn't make sense to me unless we have a guy just as good ready to take his place, because I think having 3 reliable WRs besides Percy to allow him to move all over the field is a big deal. I really wouldn't be content with Kearse taking that role or anything.

I can definitely see your side on this. Tate was never as good as Baldwin in the Slot we used to run. However what I am thinking is that Pete and John brought Harvin in here to be a feature part of the offense. They will surely design some of the offense around him. Doug and Harvin are very different players. If you stick Doug in there in the event of Percy going down you have to throw out half of your plays designed for Harvin. Where Tate is a better fit for how most of us believe they'll use Harvin out of the slot.

I don't know why some folks compare Baldwin to Kearse. Kearse is more of a split end or flanker type except without very good hands and not enough speed to consistently separate. Baldwin is far better at attacking downfield as a slot receiver than Kearse is in the X or Z. Anyway, they play different roles, and Kearse cannot step in as a reliable WR on the outside or the inside in case of injury, IMO.

I also don't see why some people are concerned about getting a big-bodied receiver. Golden Tate is a better X than a slot receiver because he can actually go up and get the ball despite being 5'10 or whatever. His vert is fantastic. If Stephen Williams can be developed into that guy in the future, fine, but right now, we need a guy who can move the chains and who can come in and be consistent in 4-WR sets. Baldwin is that guy.

Phil Bates, I have no opinion on. I really haven't seen the guy play enough even in the pre-season to have an informed opinion.

Baldwin is only tradeable if someone overpays because in this offense, he is REALLY important to us unless you think that Sidney Rice will definitely play 16+ games this year. If Rice goes down, Tate and Harvin on the outside and Baldwin in the slot is not too much of a step down. That's a better trio of WRs than some teams have already. Unless someone is offering a high-second or better, Baldwin means more to Seattle because he could bridge some gaps where injuries occur and help our team win it all.

I hope this doesnt happen. I bought a Baldwin jersey several months ago and i seriously wanna get him to sign it at some point. It'd be 10X more difficult to do that if he gets traded.

Guy's a work horse. See what he went through last year? Good god. the guy gets injured but he plays through it. Shatters teeth but no biggy, he'll practice the next day. Dude's hardcore. Now i'd like him to stay and i think he's a unsung leader of that offense.

I'd rather him stay. I think he's a bigger cog than most people think.

Smelly McUgly wrote:Baldwin is only tradeable if someone overpays because in this offense, he is REALLY important to us unless you think that Sidney Rice will definitely play 16+ games this year. If Rice goes down, Tate and Harvin on the outside and Baldwin in the slot is not too much of a step down. That's a better trio of WRs than some teams have already. Unless someone is offering a high-second or better, Baldwin means more to Seattle because he could bridge some gaps where injuries occur and help our team win it all.

Now that is the best argument I have heard on this by far. I fully agree we don't have many X and Z WR's (though I really do like Kearse). A scenario with Rice going down for an extended amount of time would be much easier to weather if Baldwin stepped into the Slot and Harvin and Tate played X and Z as you put. Nice post bro!

I'm not advocating trading Baldwin, but some act like he's untradeable...

DJrmb wrote:If Harvin goes down Tate can slide into that position better than anyone. How long have people been saying he's the poor mans Percy Harvin? Then you play an Outside WR in Tate's old spot not a slot guy. Thats why Kearse and Williams are guys I'd keep, they're both more of your Outside WR than Baldwin.

People seem to be low on Kearse here but he's shown some flashes and is one of the few guys that could play Sidney's role in a pinch.

Tate is NOT a slot receiver. Doesn't have the skills for it. He's an outside guy only.

If Harvin went down, Tate would play outside and Baldwin would play slot.

Hawkfan77 wrote:I'm not advocating trading Baldwin, but some act like he's untradeable...

Nah, I'd quite happily trade him for a mid-2nd round pick.
But a 4th?

Baldwin's not going anywhere soon.

I can't imagine any team wanting to trade for him at his current value.

ivotuk wrote:

Smelly McUgly wrote:Add to this that I think Jim Irsay is unstable and needs to be removed from Twitter

This is an excellent idea!

Irsay's ignorant and juvenile tweet's only further prove Smelly's point:

“ColtFans, we already past the cap cash wise/ we’re working on a deal, 1 we’ve been workin on for 5 days/ we’re very,very close 2 making it work.’’


“Everyone stand buy,pour strong drink…do ur voodoo,Colts need the strength and it’s nation to get this wopper in the boat! DO U UNDERSTAND!?”

Maybe all of this was about signing Hasselbeck?

McGruff wrote:

DJrmb wrote:If Harvin goes down Tate can slide into that position better than anyone. How long have people been saying he's the poor mans Percy Harvin? Then you play an Outside WR in Tate's old spot not a slot guy. Thats why Kearse and Williams are guys I'd keep, they're both more of your Outside WR than Baldwin.

People seem to be low on Kearse here but he's shown some flashes and is one of the few guys that could play Sidney's role in a pinch.

Tate is NOT a slot receiver. Doesn't have the skills for it. He's an outside guy only.

If Harvin went down, Tate would play outside and Baldwin would play slot.

I know, I keep hearing this thought that Tate is some slot guy repeated over and over but it just doesn't add up. You have to be a precise route runner to be a slot guy, and Tate's biggest knock has always been his lack of precise route running. No, Tate has made his money on the outside. Watch his hilights. He's a "go get it" kind of reciever and every good catch I remember him making ocurred near the sideline.

Calling Tate a slot guy because he's short is just a lazy analysis...

Not judging anyone, but why is this thread 9 pages long?

SNDavidson wrote:Not judging anyone, but why is this thread 9 pages long?

Because of posts like yours and mine.

CALIHAWK1 wrote:

SNDavidson wrote:Not judging anyone, but why is this thread 9 pages long?

Because of posts like yours and mine.

+1