Doug Baldwin to be traded? (Colts, speculation)

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • Why do people always want to weakin a position that we finally have bolstered up?

    Same goes for the qb position.
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9712
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


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

    Same goes for the qb position.



    I suspect it is because they are used to the Seahawks being this good. I agree Baldwin is a stud ( remember the 1st AZ game and his teeth greeting knocked out ) and to have all this talent going to waste if Wilson goes down ? Makes no sense to me either , unless it is a killer offer
    User avatar
    Happypuppy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1897
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 5:40 pm


  • DJrmb wrote:You're the one wanting to hang onto yet another midget WR that we already have similar players to. If I am Ruskell then you are Mora...

    You could possibly have to let go another "Michael Bennett" type guy for your "depth". You act like Baldwin went to a probowl or something. He's not even as good as the inconsistent Tate, what does that say?

    Obo offered something on special teams. He was one of our best ST players. Baldwin is not.


    Surely of all the teams in the league to be a fan of, as a Seahawk fan you should know that HEIGHT DOES NOT DEFINE YOUR SKILLSET.

    Baldwin makes plays. That's what matters
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2521
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • Man, I like Baldwin I really do but you guys are making me be the bad guy...

    Baldwin is not as good as some of you think. I swear some of you would put him in the RoH tomorrow if you could lol.

    I'd rather keep Kearse, Bates, and maybe even Stephen Williams over Baldwin (if I could trade him for a mid round pick, like I said, I wouldn't cut Baldwin).

    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.

    So you might as well get something for the guy if he's going to be gone. Of course assuming he'll be gone is just that "an assumption" but so is assuming he'll stay to be a backup...
    DJrmb
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 185
    Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:53 pm


  • DJrmb wrote:I'd rather keep Kearse, Bates, and maybe even Stephen Williams over Baldwin.


    What?

    I could maybe see Williams considering we just don't know what we have with him yet and Fitzgerald spoke highly of him....but Kearse and Bates.....?!

    If Harvin goes down then we need Baldwin for that slot position. Nothing wrong with having a good 4th WR to throw in the mix. A backup QB hopefully never sees the field, a 4th WR will usually see the field plenty.
    "If the opportunity presents itself, we're going to come get you. You’re part of the family. You're part of us. You helped us start this thing." - John Schneider before releasing Michael Robinson
    User avatar
    Veilside
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 710
    Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 8:29 am


  • DJrmb wrote:Man, I like Baldwin I really do but you guys are making me be the bad guy...

    Baldwin is not as good as some of you think. I swear some of you would put him in the RoH tomorrow if you could lol.

    I'd rather keep Kearse, Bates, and maybe even Stephen Williams over Baldwin (if I could trade him for a mid round pick, like I said, I wouldn't cut Baldwin).

    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.

    So you might as well get something for the guy if he's going to be gone. Of course assuming he'll be gone is just that "an assumption" but so is assuming he'll stay to be a backup...


    "Backup" at WR isn't the same as "Backup" at just about any other position in the game.
    Reasons he might prefer to stay at Seattle -
    His close friend from Stanford Richard Sherman
    The other 31 teams in the league overlooked him, Seattle made him feel most wanted when he went undrafted
    He thinks Seattle offers him the best opportunity to win a Superbowl Ring
    He believes he can be the number 1 receiver in Seattle

    That last point is the most important and completely true. And not outwith the realms of possibility. In fact, I'd be surprised if there's a single player on the roster that doesn't think they're capable of being the number 1 guy on the depth chart. It's what Pete Carroll's entire philosophy is based on.

    Baldwin clearly isn't as bad as you think. Even last year he had 29 receptions, which is only 16 less than Golden Tate managed, despite numerous injuries and less playing time.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J6rLwb78og

    Plus he averages a TD a game against the 49ers (4 in 4). I'd keep anyone on the roster for that alone.
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2521
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • 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.
    DJrmb
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 185
    Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:53 pm


  • Plus he averages a TD a game against the 49ers (4 in 4). I'd keep anyone on the roster for that alone.

    Haha, that is awesome! Thats a definite plus to his resume! :thirishdrinkers:
    DJrmb
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 185
    Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:53 pm


  • 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.


    Or you can just put Baldwin in the slot where he's effective rather than being forced to play a scrub on the outside.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3928
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


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

    Same goes for the qb position.



    I suspect it is because they are used to the Seahawks being this good. I agree Baldwin is a stud ( remember the 1st AZ game and his teeth greeting knocked out ) and to have all this talent going to waste if Wilson goes down ? Makes no sense to me either , unless it is a killer offer

    I think where the disconnect is is that many of us believe that the talent will go to waste if Wilson goes down even with Flynn. It's far from consensus that he's a good QB that could take us anywhere.

    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.
    User avatar
    pinksheets
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2836
    Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:47 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • 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.
    jewhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 551
    Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:39 pm


  • 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.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3647
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • 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.
    CEHawk
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 89
    Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 4:49 pm


  • 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.
    DJrmb
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 185
    Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:53 pm


  • 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.
    "If given the opportunity without fear of incarceration, I would honestly beat the living **** out of Jerry Rice."

    --Internet tough guy HawkWow being a MAN on the internet
    User avatar
    Smelly McUgly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3754
    Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:30 pm
    Location: God's Country AKA Cascadia AKA The Pacific Northwest


  • 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.
    Image
    User avatar
    tubbs51
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 320
    Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:10 pm
    Location: Spokane, Washington


  • 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!
    DJrmb
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 185
    Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:53 pm


  • I'm not advocating trading Baldwin, but some act like he's untradeable...
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1675
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


  • 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.
    <A>
    <IMG></A>
    User avatar
    McGruff
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 1607
    Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 am
    Location: Elma, WA


  • 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?
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2521
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • Baldwin's not going anywhere soon.

    I can't imagine any team wanting to trade for him at his current value.
    your Superbowl XLVIII Champion Seattle Seahawks.. how sweet is that!!
    User avatar
    onanygivensunday
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3106
    Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 8:59 am


Re: Doug Baldwin to be traded?
Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:38 pm
  • 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? :D
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Nobody *
     
    Posts: 8729
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


  • 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...
    WAR BEAVER!!
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11446
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • Not judging anyone, but why is this thread 9 pages long?
    Image
    User avatar
    SNDavidson
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1441
    Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:22 pm


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


    Because of posts like yours and mine.
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9294
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • CALIHAWK1 wrote:
    SNDavidson wrote:Not judging anyone, but why is this thread 9 pages long?


    Because of posts like yours and mine.


    +1 :thirishdrinkers:
    User avatar
    Starrman44
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 814
    Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:35 pm
    Location: Canby, OR


PreviousNext


It is currently Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:55 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information