Doug Baldwin to be traded? (Colts, speculation)

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • Tate had 7 TD catches in his first year with Wilson, and an obvious chemistry. Lets see what we get this year before we decide he's not living up. I love DB, but I don't think I'd want him above GT.
    Image
    User avatar
    KARAVARUS
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2909
    Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:09 am
    Location: Omaha, NE


  • DavidSeven wrote:
    Doug is going to be featured heavily in our offense next year.


    You know this how?
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9153
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • To all of you wanting to trade Our man Baldwin: Stop Rosterbating.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10730
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Tech Worlds wrote:
    DavidSeven wrote:
    Doug is going to be featured heavily in our offense next year.


    You know this how?


    Well, you see, he had a ton of TDs on my most recent season of Madden.
    User avatar
    MrCarey
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1674
    Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:16 pm


  • Tech Worlds wrote:
    DavidSeven wrote:
    Doug is going to be featured heavily in our offense next year.


    You know this how?


    Don't know. Just my feeling given the variety of places Harvin can line up on the field and the way Seattle rotates its players.

    Wasn't intended to be anymore a statement of fact than those who say the Seahawks are going to great next year, Harvin will be a great fit in our offense, etc.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3559
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • Even if we aren't being optimistic about what his production will be, there's still not much reason to believe his trade value will exceed his value to us by enough to warrant a trade.
    BirdsCommaAngry
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 629
    Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:25 pm


  • NorthDallas40oz wrote:I actually think that if (big 'if') the Hawks and Colts are indeed in discussions about a trade for a WR (going to Indy), that it's in regards to Golden Tate and not Doug Baldwin. That would seem to make more sense on both sides, would be the bigger name that Irsay alluded to, and would entail a more complicated negotiation in terms of what Seattle would receive in return (not to mention a possible contract extension for Tate with the Colts), and it would coincide with the timing that Irsay alluded to last night when he mentioned that they'd been working on it for "5 days," which would back-date to last Monday, the day the Harvin trade was agreed to.


    Tate would make sense as he had his best season to date, he is coming up on FA next year and I already figure we will let him walk because we will have Baldwin for cheap and Tate is not that much better. This is a deep WR draft and we could add a more prototypical big WR for the outside. I was wanting to draft one anyways to uprade over Tate so if we can trade him I'll be happy. This reminds me of the Josh Wilson trade some. That is if it does happen.

    Do you think it is for a player or for draft picks. I hope at a min it's for a 3rd next year and a swap of 3rd's this year.
    Image
    User avatar
    Wenhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2125
    Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:
    RichNhansom wrote:
    Gotta agree with Davidseven here. If you think stats represent the quality of WR Baldwin is then you haven't watched the guy play. We like to say Tarvaris Jackson was tough but come on, compared to Baldwin Jackson is a girl scout. The man is purely fearless with amazing focus and above average talent.

    The problem is he is also often injured because of it. It is also why you cannot rely on his stats to tell you the Doug Baldwin story. Make no mistake, the guy has the focus of Steve Largent. If he were a little less reckless (and in the right system) he could possibly end up having a similar career to Steve. Truth is Harbaugh really screwed the pooch on Baldwin because he was close friends with Sherman. If Harbaugh gives him the opportunities he deserves and doesn't sell him short to draft scouts, he is either a Niner right now or someones 4th/5th round pick and making a name for himself in the league. He will get paid and if he lands in the right system and learns to protect himself, he will get paid well.

    Doug Baldwin posts here?!

    But seriously though, yes I have watched him play, so just stop right there. We are talking about production, what did Baldwin bring to the table last year?


    You're being ridiculous. Watch the video referenced in the link below, and you'll have your answer:
    49ers at Seahawks (12-23-12) full game on Youtube
    Escamillo
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 230
    Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:54 pm


  • Baldwin has two more years of cost control, his rookie contract next year and then eligible for a RFA tender after that. I would keep him.
    WestcoastSteve
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1150
    Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 1:00 pm


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:This seems to be a case in fans overvaluing their own players. I would LOVE it if we could get a 4th for Baldwin but that might be a stretch. Honestly, Badlwin is good-ish value for us as a 4th, but way better value to us if we could trade him for a 4th round pick.

    Baldwin's rookie year, he way out produced his UDFA status, but last year? He was just a guy, if that.


    4th round wide receiver production in 2012

    Chris Givens (2012) - 42 catches, 698 yards, 3 TDs
    Travis Benjamin (2012) - 18 catches, 298 yards, 2 TDs
    Joe Adams (2012) - 1 catch, 7 yards. 0 TDs
    Devon Wylie (2012) - 6 catches, 53 yards, 0 TDs
    Jarius Wright (2012) - 22 catches, 310 yards, 2 TDs
    Keshawn Martin (2012) - 10 catches, 85 yards, 1 TD
    Nick Toon (2012) - IR
    Greg Childs (2012) - IR
    Kris Durham (2011) - 8 catches, 125 yards, 1 TD
    Clyde Gates (2011) - 16 catches, 224 yards, 0 TDs
    Greg Salas (2011) - 0 catches, 0 yards, 0 TDs
    Cecil Shorts (2011) - 55 catches, 979 yards, 7 TDs
    Tandon Doss (2011) - 7 catches, 123 yards, 1 TD
    Mardy Gilyard (2010) - 2 catches, 15 yards, 0 TDs
    Mike Williams (2010) – 63 catches, 996 yards, 9 TDs
    Marcus Easley (2010) – 0 catches, 0 yards, 0 TDs
    Jacoby Ford (2010) – IR
    Mike Thomas (2009) – 18 catches, 108 yards, 1 TD
    Brian Hartline (2009) – 74 catches, 1083 yards, 1 TD
    Louis Murphy (2009) – 25 catches, 336 yards, 1 TD
    Austin Collie (2009) – 1 catch, 6 yards, 0 TDs
    William Franklin (2008) – Out of the league
    Marcus Smith (2008) – Out of the league
    Arman Shields (2008) – Out of the league
    Lavelle Hawkins (2008) – 5 catches, 62 yards, 0 TDs
    Keenan Burton (2008) – Out of the league


    Doug Baldwin – 29 catches, 366 yards, 3 TDs
    All this in an injured season with a reduced role and a rookie quarterback.
    26 wide receivers have been drafted in the 4th round in the past 5 years. Doug Baldwin outproduced 23 of them. Two of the three that outproduced him are their teams number 1 receiver, and the third (Shorts), outproduced the so called “number 1” (Blackmon).

    Clearly he has better value than a 4th round pick.
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2362
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • Doug Baldwin dropped the game winner against the Cardinals in week one. That catch would have given us the #2 seed and homefield.
    I am a firm believer in luck, and I found that the harder I work the more I have of it.
    CurryStopstheRuns
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2120
    Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:52 pm


  • Some people would trade Russell Wilson if it meant getting us a good draft pick.
    GO HAWKS!!!

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

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11245
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • CurryStopstheRuns wrote:Doug Baldwin dropped the game winner against the Cardinals in week one. That catch would have given us the #2 seed and homefield.

    He also got his teeth knocked out on the play.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10730
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Scottemojo wrote:
    CurryStopstheRuns wrote:Doug Baldwin dropped the game winner against the Cardinals in week one. That catch would have given us the #2 seed and homefield.

    He also got his teeth knocked out on the play.




    I know this, but that happened after the drop.
    I am a firm believer in luck, and I found that the harder I work the more I have of it.
    CurryStopstheRuns
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2120
    Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:52 pm


  • CurryStopstheRuns wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:
    CurryStopstheRuns wrote:Doug Baldwin dropped the game winner against the Cardinals in week one. That catch would have given us the #2 seed and homefield.

    He also got his teeth knocked out on the play.




    I know this, but that happened after the drop.


    Nope. It happened on the jam he got from the corner at the line of scrimmage. Corner got his hands up under the facemask and hit Baldwin in the mouth. That corner knew not replacement ref was going to throw a flag at that moment.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10730
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • There are really only three reasons to trade players:
    1) Their roster spot is in jeopardy based on their (and their backups) performance
    2) Their salary (or impending salary if their contract is up soon) is too high to justify keeping them
    3) Another team offers something that provides more value than the player is worth

    Obviously #1 and #2 don't apply to Baldwin so the team shouldn't be actively shopping him, and the only question is if the Colts would overpay for him. There's no reason to get rid of him for a mid-round pick.
    jewhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 551
    Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:39 pm


  • Scottemojo wrote:
    CurryStopstheRuns wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:He also got his teeth knocked out on the play.




    I know this, but that happened after the drop.


    Nope. It happened on the jam he got from the corner at the line of scrimmage. Corner got his hands up under the facemask and hit Baldwin in the mouth. That corner knew not replacement ref was going to throw a flag at that moment.


    That is difficult to believe. To hit someone with that much force and have nobody notice seems a little out there. Seems like a convenient excuse.


    edit: after watching the video, your claim is bs. Baldwin was not even jammed off of the line. The CB opened up and Baldwin went by him with minimal contact.
    I am a firm believer in luck, and I found that the harder I work the more I have of it.
    CurryStopstheRuns
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2120
    Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:52 pm


  • CurryStopstheRuns wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:
    CurryStopstheRuns wrote:

    I know this, but that happened after the drop.


    Nope. It happened on the jam he got from the corner at the line of scrimmage. Corner got his hands up under the facemask and hit Baldwin in the mouth. That corner knew not replacement ref was going to throw a flag at that moment.


    That is difficult to believe. To hit someone with that much force and have nobody notice seems a little out there. Seems like a convenient excuse.


    edit: after watching the video, your claim is bs. Baldwin was not even jammed off of the line. The CB opened up and Baldwin went by him with minimal contact.

    You are right, I got the story wrong. http://blog.seahawks.com/2012/09/12/wednesday-in-hawkville-baldwin-bounces-back-smiling/

    His helmet got moved by the corner according to Baldwin, but it was the impact to the ground that broke the teeth. And Baldwin calls it a drop. My apologies.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10730
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am



  • DavidSeven wrote:
    Tech Worlds wrote:
    DavidSeven wrote:
    Doug is going to be featured heavily in our offense next year.


    You know this how?


    Don't know. Just my feeling given the variety of places Harvin can line up on the field and the way Seattle rotates its players.

    Wasn't intended to be anymore a statement of fact than those who say the Seahawks are going to great next year, Harvin will be a great fit in our offense, etc.


    Sorry, but I don't see why logically you could possibly feel the #4 WR on the depth chart would be featured heavily. That makes ZERO sense.
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2452
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:Some people would trade Russell Wilson if it meant getting us a good draft pick.

    Yes because Baldwin's (the 4th WR on the depth chart) value to this team is the same as our rookie pro-bowl QB making barely anything (NFL standards). Nice comparison...
    Last edited by Hawkfan77 on Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1660
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


  • themunn wrote:
    Hawkfan77 wrote:This seems to be a case in fans overvaluing their own players. I would LOVE it if we could get a 4th for Baldwin but that might be a stretch. Honestly, Badlwin is good-ish value for us as a 4th, but way better value to us if we could trade him for a 4th round pick.

    Baldwin's rookie year, he way out produced his UDFA status, but last year? He was just a guy, if that.


    4th round wide receiver production in 2012

    Chris Givens (2012) - 42 catches, 698 yards, 3 TDs
    Travis Benjamin (2012) - 18 catches, 298 yards, 2 TDs
    Joe Adams (2012) - 1 catch, 7 yards. 0 TDs
    Devon Wylie (2012) - 6 catches, 53 yards, 0 TDs
    Jarius Wright (2012) - 22 catches, 310 yards, 2 TDs
    Keshawn Martin (2012) - 10 catches, 85 yards, 1 TD
    Nick Toon (2012) - IR
    Greg Childs (2012) - IR
    Kris Durham (2011) - 8 catches, 125 yards, 1 TD
    Clyde Gates (2011) - 16 catches, 224 yards, 0 TDs
    Greg Salas (2011) - 0 catches, 0 yards, 0 TDs
    Cecil Shorts (2011) - 55 catches, 979 yards, 7 TDs
    Tandon Doss (2011) - 7 catches, 123 yards, 1 TD
    Mardy Gilyard (2010) - 2 catches, 15 yards, 0 TDs
    Mike Williams (2010) – 63 catches, 996 yards, 9 TDs
    Marcus Easley (2010) – 0 catches, 0 yards, 0 TDs
    Jacoby Ford (2010) – IR
    Mike Thomas (2009) – 18 catches, 108 yards, 1 TD
    Brian Hartline (2009) – 74 catches, 1083 yards, 1 TD
    Louis Murphy (2009) – 25 catches, 336 yards, 1 TD
    Austin Collie (2009) – 1 catch, 6 yards, 0 TDs
    William Franklin (2008) – Out of the league
    Marcus Smith (2008) – Out of the league
    Arman Shields (2008) – Out of the league
    Lavelle Hawkins (2008) – 5 catches, 62 yards, 0 TDs
    Keenan Burton (2008) – Out of the league


    Doug Baldwin – 29 catches, 366 yards, 3 TDs
    All this in an injured season with a reduced role and a rookie quarterback.
    26 wide receivers have been drafted in the 4th round in the past 5 years. Doug Baldwin outproduced 23 of them. Two of the three that outproduced him are their teams number 1 receiver, and the third (Shorts), outproduced the so called “number 1” (Blackmon).

    Clearly he has better value than a 4th round pick.

    Why would you assume that if Baldwin were traded for a 4th round pick that we would automatically draft a WR? Who said that?
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1660
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


  • T-Sizzle wrote:Sorry, but I don't see why logically you could possibly feel the #4 WR on the depth chart would be featured heavily. That makes ZERO sense.

    Harvin, Rice, and Tate have combined for 13 seasons in the NFL and only four of those have been full 16 game seasons. Chances are good that at least one of them will be banged up for a few games this year. Also, elite QBs tend to spread the ball around to more than just a couple targets. Denver and New England each had 5 players with at least 40 receptions in 2012. New Orleans had four with 65+ receptions and another with 39. Green Bay had four with 49+ receptions not including Jennings with 36 in 8 games.
    jewhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 551
    Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:39 pm


  • T-Sizzle wrote:
    DavidSeven wrote:
    Don't know. Just my feeling given the variety of places Harvin can line up on the field and the way Seattle rotates its players.

    Wasn't intended to be anymore a statement of fact than those who say the Seahawks are going to great next year, Harvin will be a great fit in our offense, etc.


    Sorry, but I don't see why logically you could possibly feel the #4 WR on the depth chart would be featured heavily. That makes ZERO sense.


    Tell that to the Green Bay Packers.

    Yeah, they pass more, but they also don't have a multi-purpose player like Harvin who they can lineup a bunch in the backfield.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3559
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • It's not just "he's the 4th WR"". You also want to have good depth.

    Doug stays...
    @SeahawkGreg

    Image

    "I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan
    User avatar
    FlyingGreg
    * Master Chief *
    * Master Chief *
     
    Posts: 7444
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
    Location: CVN-68


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:
    MontanaHawk05 wrote:Some people would trade Russell Wilson if it meant getting us a good draft pick.

    Yes because Baldwin's (the 4th WR on the depth chart) value to this team is the same as our rookie pro-bowl QB making barely anything (NFL standards). Nice comparison...


    Did you hear that?

    ...

    It was the sound of my sarcasm whooshing right over your head. ;)
    GO HAWKS!!!

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

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11245
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • CurryStopstheRuns wrote:Doug Baldwin dropped the game winner against the Cardinals in week one. That catch would have given us the #2 seed and homefield.


    The season isn't lost in week 1. We had 15 other opportunities to get homefield advantage. Russell Wilson threw three interceptions against the Rams. Maybe we should trade him.

    He also caught a 24 yard TD and a 50 yard pass in the same drive against New England to give us 74 of our 85 yards and a TD in a game we won by a point.
    He also caught a 12 yard pass on 3rd and 10 against the Bears in overtime which gave us 1st and 10 on the Chicago 13 and gave Rice the opportunity to win the game.

    Baldwin was also the victim of our daft penalties at least once last year, most notable a 49 yard pass wiped out by a McCoy penalty. Take that into account and you have a 30 reception 400 yard season. Not magnificient, but for a guy hampered with injuries in a run-first offense where the leading receiver managed a paltry 50 catches (which didn't crack the top 50 WRs for receptions), it's not too bad either.
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2362
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:Why would you assume that if Baldwin were traded for a 4th round pick that we would automatically draft a WR? Who said that?


    That's not the point. What do you value players on? Production and future potential. Baldwin produced better than 88% of receivers drafted in the 4th round over the past 5 years. He's 24 years old and has plenty of future potential.
    So how do you value him as a 4th round pick? By how 4th round outside linebackers produce? Or by guessing?

    This is absolutely senseless. The last decade we've struggled to have a decent receiving corps, everyone spent the entirety of last season saying we needed to draft a receiver... but only so that we could get rid of one? Not the expensive one, but the cheapest one. Despite eerily similar production over the last 2 seasons (82 catches, 1232 yards, 9 TDs compared to 80 catches, 1154 yards, 7 TDs).

    Would you accept a 4th round pick for the older, more injury prone, more expensive Sidney Rice?
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2362
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • Baldwin lost teeth attempting that diving, potentially game-winning catch in week 1. There are good reasons to trade people but this isn't one of them.
    BirdsCommaAngry
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 629
    Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:25 pm


  • DavidSeven wrote:
    T-Sizzle wrote:
    DavidSeven wrote:
    Don't know. Just my feeling given the variety of places Harvin can line up on the field and the way Seattle rotates its players.

    Wasn't intended to be anymore a statement of fact than those who say the Seahawks are going to great next year, Harvin will be a great fit in our offense, etc.


    Sorry, but I don't see why logically you could possibly feel the #4 WR on the depth chart would be featured heavily. That makes ZERO sense.


    Tell that to the Green Bay Packers.

    Yeah, they pass more, but they also don't have a multi-purpose player like Harvin who they can lineup a bunch in the backfield.


    Tell that to the Chiefs.

    Hope you see why neither team has any relevance to the Seahawks. Fwiw, GB does have a multi-purpose player they line up a bunch in the backfield.

    It would take multiple injuries before Baldwin is featured heavily, and at that point things wouldn't be looking good for the Hawks.
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2452
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


  • DavidSeven wrote:
    T-Sizzle wrote:
    DavidSeven wrote:
    Don't know. Just my feeling given the variety of places Harvin can line up on the field and the way Seattle rotates its players.

    Wasn't intended to be anymore a statement of fact than those who say the Seahawks are going to great next year, Harvin will be a great fit in our offense, etc.


    Sorry, but I don't see why logically you could possibly feel the #4 WR on the depth chart would be featured heavily. That makes ZERO sense.


    Tell that to the Green Bay Packers.

    Yeah, they pass more, but they also don't have a multi-purpose player like Harvin who they can lineup a bunch in the backfield.


    Ah...yes they do and his name is Randall Cobb and he is one hell of a player at that.
    Image
    User avatar
    Blitzer88
    * NET Eeyore *
     
    Posts: 10902
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
    Location: Pasco, WA


  • Blitzer88 wrote:
    DavidSeven wrote:Yeah, they pass more, but they also don't have a multi-purpose player like Harvin who they can lineup a bunch in the backfield.


    Ah...yes they do and his name is Randall Cobb and he is one hell of a player at that.


    Cobb rushed 10 times last season. Harvin rushed 22 times in 9 games. 52 times in 2011. So "ah"... not the same impact on an offense.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3559
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    Hawkfan77 wrote:
    MontanaHawk05 wrote:Some people would trade Russell Wilson if it meant getting us a good draft pick.

    Yes because Baldwin's (the 4th WR on the depth chart) value to this team is the same as our rookie pro-bowl QB making barely anything (NFL standards). Nice comparison...


    Did you hear that?

    ...

    It was the sound of my sarcasm whooshing right over your head. ;)

    Whooosh... :34853_doh:

    You got me!
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1660
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


  • Baldwin is just the sort of guy that will let us shred a team that doesn't have a good nickel corner. Harvin in the backfield, Rice wide left, Tate wide right, Baldwin in the slot. Somebody is open.

    He is solid, solid depth at the WR position too. You don't trade a guy like that who is cheap unless you think you have 0 chance of retaining him as an free agent after the season and you can get a good value for him (I think Doug is a FA after next year).

    I just don't see the impetus behind a trade unless there is an amazing player we need coming from the Colts. Trading for a draft pick at this point seems silly. We don't need more draft capital, we're already looking at drafting mostly camp fodder hoping for a diamond in the rough. What good is another 4th round pick? I'd be more interested in a 2014 3rd, or a 2015 2nd or something.
    President of the Perfect Parents Society - est. 2013
    User avatar
    JesterHawk
    * Smackmeister *
     
    Posts: 7003
    Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:56 pm


  • DavidSeven wrote:
    T-Sizzle wrote:
    DavidSeven wrote:
    Don't know. Just my feeling given the variety of places Harvin can line up on the field and the way Seattle rotates its players.

    Wasn't intended to be anymore a statement of fact than those who say the Seahawks are going to great next year, Harvin will be a great fit in our offense, etc.


    Sorry, but I don't see why logically you could possibly feel the #4 WR on the depth chart would be featured heavily. That makes ZERO sense.


    Tell that to the Green Bay Packers.

    Yeah, they pass more, but they also don't have a multi-purpose player like Harvin who they can lineup a bunch in the backfield.

    Blitzer88 wrote:
    Ah...yes they do and his name is Randall Cobb and he is one hell of a player at that.


    Yeah, if Golden Tate is one player most frequently compared to Percy Harvin, Randall Cobb is the other.
    So you're admitting I'm a celeb...
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11219
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • It's kind of funny as people line up on two sides of an issue like this. I equate it to the argument about throwing games to get better draft position.

    One camp thinks of Baldwin as an important contributor to the offense, more valuable to us than to other teams and unlikely to draw trade interest strong enough to make trading him a good deal.

    The other side values deals and trades and player moves more than wins, apparently. To them, a player like Baldwin is more a bargaining chip, someone whose trade value may never be higher that we should move for his off the field value. Just as some people focus heavily on the draft and everything seems to bend towards that day in April, some people consider the games more important and winning the most important thing.

    From my point of view, a lot of people just want trades like this to happen, because they seem to get more out of player moves and drafting than they do out of the games themselves. I don't understand it, really. IMHO, Baldwin is too valuable to trade off just for the joy of moving players. We won't get enough in exchange to make sense to me. The goal is to keep the team together, not continually churning the roster any more than necessary.
    Talent can get you to the playoffs.
    It takes character to win when you get there.

    SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS
    User avatar
    sutz
    USMC 1970-77
     
    Posts: 9971
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Monroe, WA


  • We would be lucky to get anything of value for an undrafted, injury prone #4 wide receiver anyway. Baldwin is the new Obomanu.
    I am a firm believer in luck, and I found that the harder I work the more I have of it.
    CurryStopstheRuns
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2120
    Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:52 pm


  • sutz wrote:It's kind of funny as people line up on two sides of an issue like this. I equate it to the argument about throwing games to get better draft position.

    One camp thinks of Baldwin as an important contributor to the offense, more valuable to us than to other teams and unlikely to draw trade interest strong enough to make trading him a good deal.

    The other side values deals and trades and player moves more than wins, apparently. To them, a player like Baldwin is more a bargaining chip, someone whose trade value may never be higher that we should move for his off the field value. Just as some people focus heavily on the draft and everything seems to bend towards that day in April, some people consider the games more important and winning the most important thing.

    From my point of view, a lot of people just want trades like this to happen, because they seem to get more out of player moves and drafting than they do out of the games themselves. I don't understand it, really. IMHO, Baldwin is too valuable to trade off just for the joy of moving players. We won't get enough in exchange to make sense to me. The goal is to keep the team together, not continually churning the roster any more than necessary.



    You are very short-sighted.
    I am a firm believer in luck, and I found that the harder I work the more I have of it.
    CurryStopstheRuns
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2120
    Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:52 pm


  • Sometimes what you have is more valuable to you then anyone else...D-fresh will be a seahawk next year
    Spokane
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 700
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:35 am


  • CurryStopstheRuns wrote:
    sutz wrote:It's kind of funny as people line up on two sides of an issue like this. I equate it to the argument about throwing games to get better draft position.

    One camp thinks of Baldwin as an important contributor to the offense, more valuable to us than to other teams and unlikely to draw trade interest strong enough to make trading him a good deal.

    The other side values deals and trades and player moves more than wins, apparently. To them, a player like Baldwin is more a bargaining chip, someone whose trade value may never be higher that we should move for his off the field value. Just as some people focus heavily on the draft and everything seems to bend towards that day in April, some people consider the games more important and winning the most important thing.

    From my point of view, a lot of people just want trades like this to happen, because they seem to get more out of player moves and drafting than they do out of the games themselves. I don't understand it, really. IMHO, Baldwin is too valuable to trade off just for the joy of moving players. We won't get enough in exchange to make sense to me. The goal is to keep the team together, not continually churning the roster any more than necessary.



    You are very short-sighted.

    Opinions vary. ;)
    Talent can get you to the playoffs.
    It takes character to win when you get there.

    SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS
    User avatar
    sutz
    USMC 1970-77
     
    Posts: 9971
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Monroe, WA


  • Indeed.
    I am a firm believer in luck, and I found that the harder I work the more I have of it.
    CurryStopstheRuns
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2120
    Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:52 pm


  • Baldwin does everything he is asked!!! How many threads have popped up about "butter fingers Baldwin"? None. Keep him!
    Spokane
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 700
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:35 am


  • CurryStopstheRuns wrote:
    sutz wrote:It's kind of funny as people line up on two sides of an issue like this. I equate it to the argument about throwing games to get better draft position.

    One camp thinks of Baldwin as an important contributor to the offense, more valuable to us than to other teams and unlikely to draw trade interest strong enough to make trading him a good deal.

    The other side values deals and trades and player moves more than wins, apparently. To them, a player like Baldwin is more a bargaining chip, someone whose trade value may never be higher that we should move for his off the field value. Just as some people focus heavily on the draft and everything seems to bend towards that day in April, some people consider the games more important and winning the most important thing.

    From my point of view, a lot of people just want trades like this to happen, because they seem to get more out of player moves and drafting than they do out of the games themselves. I don't understand it, really. IMHO, Baldwin is too valuable to trade off just for the joy of moving players. We won't get enough in exchange to make sense to me. The goal is to keep the team together, not continually churning the roster any more than necessary.



    You are very short-sighted.


    Funnily enough that's exactly what I think of your idea to trade Baldwin for a draft pick.
    And not exactly a 1st or 2nd rounder, but a 4th rounder aka the first "backup" round, where you hope the players you draft make the team as backups, and if they make it as a starter you've "hit".
    And whilst before I listed all WRs that have been taken in the past 5 years, I thought I'd use the last 3 years for this one since they're Pete Carroll and John Schneider selections.

    Walter Thurmond
    EJ Wilson
    Kris Durham
    KJ Wright
    Robert Turbin
    Jaye Howard

    Those are the 6 picks they've made in the 4th round.
    1 starter. 1 perennially injured cornerback. 2 backups. 2 players no longer with the team.

    That's the success rate of arguably the best drafting FO over the last 3 years in the 4th round. And you want to give up a proven commodity to roll the dice and hope we get a KJ Wright again?
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2362
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • themunn wrote:
    CurryStopstheRuns wrote:
    sutz wrote:It's kind of funny as people line up on two sides of an issue like this. I equate it to the argument about throwing games to get better draft position.

    One camp thinks of Baldwin as an important contributor to the offense, more valuable to us than to other teams and unlikely to draw trade interest strong enough to make trading him a good deal.

    The other side values deals and trades and player moves more than wins, apparently. To them, a player like Baldwin is more a bargaining chip, someone whose trade value may never be higher that we should move for his off the field value. Just as some people focus heavily on the draft and everything seems to bend towards that day in April, some people consider the games more important and winning the most important thing.

    From my point of view, a lot of people just want trades like this to happen, because they seem to get more out of player moves and drafting than they do out of the games themselves. I don't understand it, really. IMHO, Baldwin is too valuable to trade off just for the joy of moving players. We won't get enough in exchange to make sense to me. The goal is to keep the team together, not continually churning the roster any more than necessary.



    You are very short-sighted.


    Funnily enough that's exactly what I think of your idea to trade Baldwin for a draft pick.
    And not exactly a 1st or 2nd rounder, but a 4th rounder aka the first "backup" round, where you hope the players you draft make the team as backups, and if they make it as a starter you've "hit".
    And whilst before I listed all WRs that have been taken in the past 5 years, I thought I'd use the last 3 years for this one since they're Pete Carroll and John Schneider selections.

    Walter Thurmond
    EJ Wilson
    Kris Durham
    KJ Wright
    Robert Turbin
    Jaye Howard

    Those are the 6 picks they've made in the 4th round.
    1 starter. 1 perennially injured cornerback. 2 backups. 2 players no longer with the team.

    That's the success rate of arguably the best drafting FO over the last 3 years in the 4th round. And you want to give up a proven commodity to roll the dice and hope we get a KJ Wright again?


    Did you forget the success we have had in the 5th and even 7th rounds? We would not have Kam, Sweezy, or Sherman to name a few.
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2452
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


  • i dont think this makes sense.. baldwin brings a different skill set to the table than a lot of our receivers.. he runs excellent routes catches almost everything and reminds me of bobby engram with more potential. dont get all up in a tuff.. but i think if trading any receiver on our team makes sense it would be golden tate.. he has very similar skill set to percy.. just not as fast essentially. front office obviously already invested the team in percy so if somebody is gona go.. it would make sense that its a guy thats contract is gona be up soon and is going to want to be paid pretty well which we wont be able to afford.. get somethin for him while we can.. i dont think baldwin will cost nearly as much to sign as tate and just offers a different look.

    on the other hand.. if baldwin goes to indy.. all his autographed rookie cards that i have will probably double in price nearly instantly.
    redhawk253
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 201
    Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 2:43 pm


  • Trade him for a seventh. We need more help on the Oline.
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9153
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • Honestly, if I could get a 3rd for Baldwin, I'd do it and it would be an easy call.

    -Baldwin enters next year as a #4 receiver, and if additions like Stephen Williams or draft picks (from a loaded WR class) do well, it's possible that Baldwin could end up on the bubble by the time he hits UFA in a couple years.

    -Baldwin is a good receiver, but he's had trouble staying healthy.

    -Baldwin is a "short" WR, and Seattle could soon be in a situation where too many of their receivers are 5'10" depending on who they draft.

    -A 3rd round pick in this draft would probably look something like Ryan Swope or Stedman Bailey. Not only are they likely to be better receivers (in my opinion), but they are younger and cheaper for longer. That's why I'd be a little surprised if a team actually offered a 3rd for Baldwin. If they did, it's an easy "yes." I doubt it would happen, so this is all an exercise to see if it makes sense from our point of view, and probably meaningless.

    On the flipside, if we keep Baldwin and RFA him next year, then lose him to free agency in 2015, by then he'd probably accrue enough contribution to be worth a decent comp pick in the formula. Comp picks are really hard to bank on- we got screwed out of a nice pick from Matt Hasselbeck thanks to Ben Hamilton, but in theory, just keeping Baldwin for a couple years will automatically get us a pick of some kind down the road.

    MontanaHawk05 wrote:Some people would trade Russell Wilson if it meant getting us a good draft pick.


    Besides Hasselbeck, who exactly?
    Last edited by kearly on Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 10531
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • T-Sizzle wrote:
    Did you forget the success we have had in the 5th and even 7th rounds? We would not have Kam, Sweezy, or Sherman to name a few.


    Of course not, but when you say "to name a few", you mean "to name all of them"

    Mark Legree, Dexter Davis, Jameson Konz, Korey Toomer, Lazarius Levingston. A slewth of backups to go with them. My point is that there's no guarantee of quality in the draft (and that gets emphasised even more in the later rounds), even with great evaluators of talent on the team. You can trade Baldwin for a 4th and maybe you pick up the next Geno Atkins or maybe you get the next EJ Wilson (taken 8 places apart). You trade away your proven players for low round draft picks when your team is aging, needs rebuilt or you can't afford the player any more.

    Not because you think you might be able to get someone better. Doing that leads you to trade away Julian Peterson and draft Aaron Curry.

    People simply have been spoiled by the success rate of our FO over the last 3 years and think they can pick Richard Sherman every time in the 5th round.
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2362
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • People are missing the point that the others (those that would trade Baldwin) are trying to make. I don't believe anyone is trying to say Baldwin sucks or that he's no good. Also no one is trying to say you're going to get equal value out of a pick.

    But it's more like the Major League Baseball approach. Baldwin is only under contract 1 more year, possibly 2 if they decided to Tender him as a RFA but that may prove too rich for them to even do. Plus you're going to get more trade value out of a guy if a team knows they have control over him for 2 years rather than 1. Why not trade him and get what you can now? Especially since you absolutely do not need him (a 4th/5th WR is a total luxury). It'd be different if he was your #1 or even a starter, but he's not... Is he really that imperative to the success of this team that it's better to keep him and get nothing when he walks?

    He's not going to start for this team, he's just not good enough. Harvin, Rice, and Tate are above him and you factor in that the team wants to run more 2 TE sets and will likely always have at least 1 TE on the field. Baldwin will never see the field.

    He probably wants to move on himself to go somewhere he has an opportunity to start. Isn't it the classier thing to do rather than force him to stay here as depth when there are plenty more guys that can fill his role?

    This team already has multiple guys with similar skill sets and that are best in the same position as Baldwin. You are only keeping 5 WR's, you want those 5 guys each to bring a unique talent if possible. You don't just keep a guy because he's good. It's funny that you guys got so pissed off they kept 2 kickers because they thought they were both talented but you're being hypocritical on this.

    You wouldn't keep 5 QB's would you? - Even if they could all be starters???
    2 kickers? - but what if they are some of the best kickers in the league???
    2 punters? - but what if they are some of the best punters in the league???


    So it comes down to these two main points:

    1. Why not trade him for something rather than letting him walk for nothing after this year or next year?
    2. Why waste a roster spot for someone that will likely never see the field and doesn't offer a skill set that's not already offered by someone above him?
    DJrmb
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 174
    Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:53 pm


  • DJrmb wrote:So it comes down to these two main points:

    1. Why not trade him for something rather than letting him walk for nothing after this year or next year?
    2. Why waste a roster spot for someone that will likely never see the field and doesn't offer a skill set that's not already offered by someone above him?

    1. Why do you assume he is going to walk? He will be restricted next year, and you silly little model leaves out the possibility of a second contract.

    2. Go watch the 2008 season again. Really, do it. Then write a report on what a lack of roster depth does to a team.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10730
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


PreviousNext


It is currently Wed Aug 20, 2014 4:44 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online