Do We Re-Sign Tate?

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 9:39 am
  • Hold on, Let me check what popular opinion is on here and tell you if your wrong.

    But serious...money aside, I'd keep tate over Baldwin. Tate has a more unique skill set and arguably elite yac ability. Look Back at Petes track record all the way back at usc, he's very good at developing and finding talent at wr. If both of them walked I wouldn't lose any sleep, assuming we spend Draft Capitol sprucing it up this year. I just don't think (wisely so) P&j have focused on wr much during this rebuilding process, this could be the year.

    I do hope we keep tate and hope if doesn't command much money. I think Baldwin is overrated on here and he disappear just as much as Tate or comparably at least.
    Mr.Hawkbrah
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 348
    Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 4:50 pm


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 10:13 am
  • Is Jeremy Maclin a FA..? I'll take him over Tate.
    User avatar
    dopeboy206
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 592
    Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 9:47 am


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 10:17 am
  • I would say if they can re-sign Tate for top number 2 WR money then I'm all for it, but he is NOT a true #1. I say this not because of his size or speed, but for the fact for every big game he has (think Rams game three weeks ago), he follows it up with a disappearing act (Saints game) or 3-5 straight games of average #2 WR like games (40-80 yards per game and maybe 2-3 TD's in that span).

    I do LIKE Tate and I hope he can be re-signed for a decent price, but I would'nt break the bank for the guy. I think keeping Baldwin and Kearse and having a healthy Percy will be fine. I also have to believe that even if Tate is brought back the team will draft a WR in the first three rounds (even if they have to move back into the 3rd round for someone they like this year). TE and WR are needs in this next offseason and they will make some moves to get taller guys for Wilson to throw to.
    NorCalSeahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1237
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:54 pm


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 10:50 am
  • I really think we'd be foolish not to sign Tate if he can be had in the $4-5/year range. If Wes Welker signed a 2 year - $12 million deal (so he's making 6/year) in March, I don't see Tate, who is also a #2 WR, getting paid more than that or commanding that much in FA. Wes Welker was a pretty big name and all he got was 6/year.

    Considering the Seahawks appear to be contenders for a couple years and what other #2 WRs have gotten in FA lately, I think we see a little bit of a discount. $4 million/year sounds just about right.

    Comparing him to Angry Doug Baldwin, I don't see Dougie asking for any more than what Tate will get. I think Tate has a more unique skill set, great at jump balls, great at YAC, adds to the return game and he should be the priority when it comes to resigning WRs. ADB should command a little less than Tate, even with his circus catches and clutch pass catching ability he has provided us with the last year. We'll end up having a decent WR corps (obviously we need to draft a #1 or Rice needs a big pay cut) for the price. I'm not sure what other teams get by with less expensive WRs and how they compare to ours.

    If we can get a big young guy in the draft in the top three rounds that can be a deep/jump ball threat, that will absolutely take the top off of defenses. With someone like that it will open up more room for Percy, Tate and ADB.

    Profit.
    User avatar
    JGfromtheNW
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1088
    Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:37 am
    Location: Bellinghome


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 10:55 am
  • Mr.Hawkbrah wrote:Hold on, Let me check what popular opinion is on here and tell you if your wrong.

    But serious...money aside, I'd keep tate over Baldwin. Tate has a more unique skill set and arguably elite yac ability. Look Back at Petes track record all the way back at usc, he's very good at developing and finding talent at wr. If both of them walked I wouldn't lose any sleep, assuming we spend Draft Capitol sprucing it up this year. I just don't think (wisely so) P&j have focused on wr much during this rebuilding process, this could be the year.

    I do hope we keep tate and hope if doesn't command much money. I think Baldwin is overrated on here and he disappear just as much as Tate or comparably at least.


    I think we could resign Baldwin for 2-3 million a year.

    Let's be honest, we all love Doug but how much demand do you think there is for a smallish 50 reception a year receiver on the free agent market? Doug might be smarter than most of them, but the fact remains he's a #3 receiver on THIS team, which means he's more of a #4 on other teams. So I'm not worried about resigning both Tate and Baldwin, I think you could resign both for 7 million a year, or less.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4044
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 10:56 am
  • RCATES wrote:It depends on what kind of money he demands. If he want's #1 WR money then I say let him walk. He is a good #2 WR at best and a good punt returner.

    :13:
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    ImageImage

    Proud member of the 38 club
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13693
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 10:58 am
  • Tate will likely take less money to stay here in Seattle. That will become more realistic if the team wins the Superb Owl.
    User avatar
    CallMeADawg
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 600
    Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:24 am


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 11:01 am
  • Gotta sign him. He'll get 5.5-6.5m in this offseason.

    He fits our philosophy and our toughness model going forward. He just led the league in yardage after contact by a WR and he doesn't catch a ton of passes.

    He's beastmode in a WR. He's a solid #2 WR and he'll get paid as such.

    Think about the toughness on this offense. Lynch, Tate and arguably Harvin (he's been very tough to tackle in the past, loves contact). Gotta be disheartening to defenses to go up against that offense that won't go down and relishes the contact.

    We'll draft a big #1 WR, Tate as our #2 and Harvin as our #3 or slot receiver and that's a pretty imposing offense imo especially considering we're a run first offense. Play action get really interesting with that line up.
    User avatar
    jblaze
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 976
    Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:38 am


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 11:12 am
  • In a word .. YES
    ImageImageImage

    "You kept believing, you kept fighting, you kept clawing and scratching
    and look what you freakin' did. Put that freakin' trophy up again!" - Pete Carroll
    User avatar
    tom sawyer
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1420
    Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 8:31 am


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 11:26 am
  • Gotta keep Tate.. He is the Golden one.
    User avatar
    Inspector
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 53
    Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:07 am


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 12:15 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Mr.Hawkbrah wrote:Hold on, Let me check what popular opinion is on here and tell you if your wrong.

    But serious...money aside, I'd keep tate over Baldwin. Tate has a more unique skill set and arguably elite yac ability. Look Back at Petes track record all the way back at usc, he's very good at developing and finding talent at wr. If both of them walked I wouldn't lose any sleep, assuming we spend Draft Capitol sprucing it up this year. I just don't think (wisely so) P&j have focused on wr much during this rebuilding process, this could be the year.

    I do hope we keep tate and hope if doesn't command much money. I think Baldwin is overrated on here and he disappear just as much as Tate or comparably at least.


    I think we could resign Baldwin for 2-3 million a year.

    Let's be honest, we all love Doug but how much demand do you think there is for a smallish 50 reception a year receiver on the free agent market? Doug might be smarter than most of them, but the fact remains he's a #3 receiver on THIS team, which means he's more of a #4 on other teams. So I'm not worried about resigning both Tate and Baldwin, I think you could resign both for 7 million a year, or less.


    I must not be part of the club cause I don't love Baldwin, I do love him while he's making peanuts though.
    But I agree, it shouldn't break the bank to keep both but at some point somethings gotta give...every time one of these threads pop up everyone wants to keep everyone, 7mill for bald and tater, re sign rice for 3-4, keep Bennet ect ect, no amount of a hometown discount will give us more cap space, people Will be gone next year it's just a matter of who.

    Imo wr will be the easiest to revamp through the draft, at least 1 if not all 3 of our top wrs Could be gone and I wouldn't care personally. I'd much rather let our solid players walk to keep exceptional players like Bennet on the team. If we attack the wr position like we have other positions and Draft/sign a few young wrs, And assume we find one stud/solid player I just don't see it being worth even a few mill to keep Baldwin ect ad his talent level won't be that superior to anyone not labeled a dud.

    This is completely my opinion and I don't have anything substantial to back it but Baldwin Also strikes me as a guy who also wants more attention and balls to catch, which he won't be getting here.
    Mr.Hawkbrah
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 348
    Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 4:50 pm


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 12:20 pm
  • The Hawks will try to keep him but Tate will want to stay here.
    Until we develop a pass rush that will cause opposing teams to be forced to scheme to defend it we will never be able to completely take the final step. That was done and the final step was taken. The OLine still needs work.

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions at last after 38 seasons. Awesome!!!
    jammerhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2000
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:13 pm


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 12:21 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:I think we could resign Baldwin for 2-3 million a year.

    So I'm not worried about resigning both Tate and Baldwin, I think you could resign both for 7 million a year, or less.

    I agree... but I'll add that I recall hearing that Baldwin, who is a Restricted Free Agent at the end of this year, will be offered a 2nd Round tender. In 2013, a 2nd Round tender equated to a $2.023M salary.

    Factoring that up for the increase in the salary cap in 2014 ($126.3M) over that of 2013 ($123M), a 2nd Round tender for the 2014 season should be about $2.08M.
    your Superbowl XLVIII Champion Seattle Seahawks.. how sweet is that!!
    User avatar
    onanygivensunday
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3149
    Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 8:59 am


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 1:51 pm
  • Well, yeah, if we can. Two sides to the negotiations, with a greedy agent thrown in who gets a cut and the more Tate makes, the more he makes.

    I think I'll put this off til Feb or so. After all, if he catches the game winner in the SB, his price will go up. ;)
    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: 10495
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Monroe, WA


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 1:52 pm
  • I would say yes.
    Image
    User avatar
    Blitzer88
    * NET Eeyore *
     
    Posts: 11315
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
    Location: Pasco, WA


Re: Do We Re-Sign Tate?
Thu Jan 16, 2014 2:23 pm
  • The league views him as a No.2 with some upside. I've even heard some pundits go as far as saying he's a No.3 receiver at best, which seems like a huge slap in the face (obviously they don't watch the games and go off stats).

    This is great news for Seattle, because now they won't have to break the bank getting the guy.
    Image

    Go Hawks.
    User avatar
    SouthSoundHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2235
    Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:06 am




It is currently Sat Dec 20, 2014 2:22 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information