At what cost do you keep Sidney Rice?

For me, keeping Rice is dependent upon whether or not he can beat out the 3rd WR or higher on the depth chart. Even if we carry 6 wide receivers, any spot lower than 3rd on the depth chart is only seeing situational looks, and you could be progressing a rookie in that situation, instead of hanging on to a marginally better veteran who is injury prone, IMO. What do you guys think? Keep him even if he has to be in back up duty, occupying a developmental WR prospects spot? Is his experience and leadership worth it? Or do you cut him unless he earns a starting/significant role?

Ideally he starts the season on PUP allowing 6 weeks to evaluate the other WR on the roster. You still get to keep Rice while also taking a look at the other WR on the roster in a real game environment.

At no cost. Re-signing Rice to a one-year non-guaranteed deal with just a $150K signing bonus was a good pre-draft insurance policy, and he'll be an excellent veteran influence on the younger receivers both on the field and in the film room during OTA's and training camp. But barring a complete rash of injuries at the position he's got no shot (IMO) of making the 53 man roster. Harvin, Baldwin, Kearse and Richardson are mortal locks to be on the 53, so in reality Rice is battling (at a minimum) Lockette and Norwood for one or possibly (and at absolute most) two roster spots....with those two being cheaper, having special teams value (Rice has none), and not having an injury history longer than Greg Scruggs' arms.

He's making next to nothing, so we have options if he can't make the final roster. We could put him on the PUP list and bring him back mid season if someone's hurt.

So if Rice returns to form and has a great camp and pre-season? He makes the team. If he struggles or gets injured? Then we can go to him and say "we can release you so you can try and catch on with another team..........or put you on the PUP and maybe bring you back mid season."

Sgt. Largent":a2m72wvb said:

If he struggles or gets injured? Then we can go to him and say "we can release you so you can try and catch on with another team..........or put you on the PUP and maybe bring you back mid season."

Click to expand...

You can't put a player on the PUP list after that player has practiced in camp. The PUP list is not an injured reserve list for players who get hurt during camp. It's for players who arrive to camp with a pre-existing injury situation which has rendered them unable to practice (ex: Harvin last season).

It seems people just assume a rookie WR can step in and be Golden Tate or 2012 Sidney Rice right away.

The fact is that a lot of rookie WRs end up fairly useless their rookie years. Patton (4th round) had a good pre-season for San Francisco, but he was a complete non-factor during the season, even though he got ample opportunity with Crabtree injured. AJ Jenkins (1st round) was an utter bust for them the year before him.

Lockette isn't a reliable all-game option and probably never will be. He is a gunner and good for an occasional catch. So, unless our rookies shine even though most don't, where are we going to get depth if Harvin or Baldwin go down with injury? We don't have Golden to save us anymore. Do you really want to trot out Kearse, Lockette, and two rookies who may not be physically or mentally prepared to impact the game?

Anyway, it's the same conversation over and over. People forget what Rice can do and naively believe every rookie is going to light up the world from game 1. I specifically remember last year when people thought we'd cut Doug Baldwin after we drafted Chris Harper. There were actually threads on that topic. I'm not saying Rice's spot is assured, but his odds are certainly better than what's being speculated in this thread right now.

That being said, if he's knee's not right or he's actually lost a step, then obviously they have some room to move on. However, I don't believe this notion that he has to beat out Kearse just to make the roster.

I think they keep Rice. He's a proven red zone threat. Of the other players on the roster, only Miller has proven to be a reliable red zone threat. We hope Kearse, Norwood, Willson, etc. will develop into reliable red zone threats, but that is TBD. You can never have too many red zone threats (I.e. the closers). Our red zone conversion percentage declined after Rice went down.

DavidSeven":2u9wkdcv said:

It seems people just assume a rookie WR can step in and be Golden Tate or 2012 Sidney Rice right away.

Click to expand...

Nobody said that. Those are your words not ours. But the Hawks are not going to invest a roster spot for a 5th or 6th WR on a broken down player with shot knees who has no special teams value at the expense of a premier ST's player (Lockette) or a rookie 4th round pick with a bright future AND special teams value (Norwood). You say that "people forget what Rice can do," but you're forgetting that Rice "did that" a long time and multiple major injuries ago. Sidney Rice 2014 isn't Sidney Rice 2012, and Sidney Rice 2012 wasn't Sidney Rice 2009.

I think it would be wrong to have Rice on the 53 man roster unless:

1. He practices and plays in preseason games at full speed without getting hurt.
2. He not only beats out the other WRs in a competition but he actually beats them badly enough that his injury risk could be deemed somewhat reasonable.

If Rice is neck and neck with another WR for the last spot then I would much rather go with the younger and healthier WR who can maybe be developed further.

:vodka:

NorthDallas40oz":3rsq2226 said:

DavidSeven":3rsq2226 said:

It seems people just assume a rookie WR can step in and be Golden Tate or 2012 Sidney Rice right away.

Click to expand...

Nobody said that. Those are your words not ours. But the Hawks are not going to invest a roster spot for a 5th or 6th WR on a broken down player with shot knees who has no special teams value at the expense of a premier ST's player (Lockette) or a rookie 4th round pick with a bright future AND special teams value (Norwood). You say that "people forget what Rice can do," but you're forgetting that Rice "did that" a long time and multiple major injuries ago. Sidney Rice 2014 isn't Sidney Rice 2012, and Sidney Rice 2012 wasn't Sidney Rice 2009.

Click to expand...

Truth

NorthDallas40oz":274gcx2l said:

DavidSeven":274gcx2l said:

It seems people just assume a rookie WR can step in and be Golden Tate or 2012 Sidney Rice right away.

Click to expand...

Nobody said that. Those are your words not ours. But the Hawks are not going to invest a roster spot for a 5th or 6th WR on a broken down player with shot knees who has no special teams value at the expense of a premier ST's player (Lockette) or a rookie 4th round pick with a bright future AND special teams value (Norwood). You say that "people forget what Rice can do," but you're forgetting that Rice "did that" a long time and multiple major injuries ago.

Click to expand...

How do you define Lockette as a premier special teams player? By his total of two tackles last season or by his total of zero return yards?

NorthDallas40oz":19ef6kwq said:

DavidSeven":19ef6kwq said:

It seems people just assume a rookie WR can step in and be Golden Tate or 2012 Sidney Rice right away.

Click to expand...

Nobody said that. Those are your words not ours. But the Hawks are not going to invest a roster spot for a 5th or 6th WR on a broken down player with shot knees who has no special teams value at the expense of a premier ST's player (Lockette) or a rookie 4th round pick with a bright future AND special teams value (Norwood). You say that "people forget what Rice can do," but you're forgetting that Rice "did that" a long time and multiple major injuries ago. Sidney Rice 2014 isn't Sidney Rice 2012, and Sidney Rice 2012 wasn't Sidney Rice 2009.

Click to expand...

They cut a 4th rounder last year for Stephen Williams, a 27 year old WR who had zero ST value and could literally only run one route. So, I laught at this response.

Competition reigns.

Great question. I could see it making far more sense to keep a rookie with 3 or 4 years left on a dirt cheap contract over Rice. If you keep Rice you may only have him for 1 year, and that 1 year may be injury filled. If a young guy with a very team-favorable contract shows enough promise, I could definitely see them wanting to hang on to that player over Rice if there is not the extra roster spot. Rice will really need to show he is all the way back and ready to contribute.

Missing_Clink":6xu7zdfy said:

Great question. I could see it making far more sense to keep a rookie with 3 or 4 years left on a dirt cheap contract over Rice. If you keep Rice you may only have him for 1 year, and that 1 year may be injury filled. If a young guy with a very team-favorable contract shows enough promise, I could definitely see them wanting to hang on to that player over Rice if there is not the extra roster spot. Rice will really need to show he is all the way back and ready to contribute.

Click to expand...

Assuming Harvin, Baldwin, Kearse, Richardson, and Norwood all make it, that leaves Lockette, who is also on the final year of his deal. Lockette has not been a real contributor to the point, and he's attracted negative attention over the off-season for reckless Spring Break partying with Colin Kaepernick. If it's between Lockette and Sidney Rice, who is playing on a cap friendly deal while providing a proven red zone threat, I don't think it's much of a competition.

He needs to obviously be healthy all offseason. Furthermore, he will need to earn a starting spot alongside Percy.

I, by no means, think he does not have a chance at this. His biggest problem is that he will not be viewed as a special teams option. So, if he doesn't start he gets cut.

The only certain locks on this team (IMO) are Harvin and Baldwin. Yep, just those two. Probably Richardson too, but Pete's a honey badger. He don't care. Earn it fellaz.

Right now all things considering the depth chart looks like this:

1. Harvin
2. Baldwin
3. Kearse
4. Richardson
5. Norwood
6. Lockette
7. Rice

I think the Seahawks will carry 6.

I like the idea of putting Rice on the PUP roster, I doubt he needs to practice much in Bevell's system so he could miss trainng camp but still be involved with the team helping to coach up the youngsters, in this scenario you almost guarantee a full recovery and who knows by that time a WR will be hurt or you can just cut Lockette, when you get replacement gunners more confortable. I think Kevin Pierre-Louis would dominant as a gunner. Also, remember we did play without Lockette for the first half of the season and he has some very nice special teams plays but its not like we absolutely need him on the roster.

But yeah Rice is going to be hard-pressed to make the roster... getting both Richardson and Norwood in the draft put him on the bubble... especially when you look at Norwood and notice similar qualities to their game. Length w/ long arms and big hands, deceptive speed bc of long strides, clutch especially in traffic, great jump ball skills, and plays big in big games, big moments.

bjornanderson21":24x15p42 said:

I think it would be wrong to have Rice on the 53 man roster unless:

1. He practices and plays in preseason games at full speed without getting hurt.
2. He not only beats out the other WRs in a competition but he actually beats them badly enough that his injury risk could be deemed somewhat reasonable.

If Rice is neck and neck with another WR for the last spot then I would much rather go with the younger and healthier WR who can maybe be developed further.

Click to expand...

I agree with this-- Pete is all about competition, however I think there's some limit to that when you have to factor in their contract (team control) status. It makes little sense to keep a vet with no future years if he only marginally is better than the rookie. I think PC would go with the younger guy in hopes he continues to develop.

IMO Norwood is much more polished as a route runner than either Harper, Durham were and is probably a better WR than Lockette is currently. I CANT WAIT until the preseason gets here and we can see these guys in live action.

The competition for the last spot ( whether it be 6 or 7), barring a miracle, will be between Rice and Lockette. Neither will beat out Norwood. Kearse, Richardson, Harvin and ADB are obvious locks. I like Rice and hope he makes the last spot but his willingness to sign for peanuts with us, tells me nobody else was interested (even at that miniscule pay). Where there's smoke there's fire and with that, I give the edge to Lockette only because he can play STs and lacks Rice's laundry list of injuries.

Many are suggesting we should expect very little form Richardson and Norwood this year. I think the numbers at year's end will show otherwise. Richardson will be impactful before he catches his first pass and Norwood is going to surprise many as a utility type receiver. Also, I anticipate more passing this year than we've seen thus far in the Wilson era. I think our run to pass ratio will drop very close to 50-50. That will help both of these young receivers. .

With the recent draft I don't think he makes the team.