| Author |
Message |
|
GoHawks
|
Post subject: Non big name FA WR's  Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:25 pm |
|
| NET Starter |
 |
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:49 pm
Posts: 353
|
|
  |
|
 |
|
FlyingGreg
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:28 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
Posts: 5661
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
|
|
None. We need a game breaker.
_________________ @SeahawkGregYEAH, WE HAVE A DUDE NAMED CHRISTINE...DEAL WITH IT!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hawken-Dazs
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:29 pm |
|
| NET Starter |
 |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 5:50 pm
Posts: 407
|
|
I want Alexander, but I think he will be a restricted free agent.
_________________ 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
pinksheets
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:32 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:47 pm
Posts: 2502
Location: Seattle
|
|
It's likely Darrius Heyward-Bey will be released by Oakland as a cap casualty. Not sure what his market will be like since he's looked at as a "bust" (and he is for where he was drafted), but he's turned into a decent receiver and still has a ton of speed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hawkmanj
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:34 pm |
|
| NET Rookie |
|
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 10:50 am
Posts: 292
|
|
I think we should address DL and OL first...maybe even nickelback and linebacker too.
It our receivers are Rice, Tate, Baldwin and Miller at TE, it won't be the worst line up...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
thecycle
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:36 pm |
|
| NET Bench Warmer |
|
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 5:13 pm
Posts: 11
|
|
Louis Murphy could be a superstar with Russell throwing him the ball.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
McGruff
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:47 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 am
Posts: 564
Location: Blaine, WA
|
pinksheets wrote: It's likely Darrius Heyward-Bey will be released by Oakland as a cap casualty. Not sure what his market will be like since he's looked at as a "bust" (and he is for where he was drafted), but he's turned into a decent receiver and still has a ton of speed. I'd be very open to Bey or Murphy. _________________ <A>
<IMG></A>
|
|
| |
|
|
|
godawg
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:58 pm |
|
| NET Rookie |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 5:46 pm
Posts: 295
|
|
I'd love to get Ramses Barden. 6'6" with good hands. 4.55.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GCrow
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 6:01 pm |
|
| NET Starter |
 |
|
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 8:05 am
Posts: 326
Location: Canada
|
|
Wow never realized Louis Murphy was a UFA, would be game. Also would be quite intrigued by Heyward Bey if cut from Oakland
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BirdsCommaAngry
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 6:34 pm |
|
| NET Rookie |
|
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:25 pm
Posts: 230
|
|
What's so special about guys with BIG NAMES?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
seahawksfanatic000
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:22 pm |
|
| NET Starter |
 |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 372
|
BirdsCommaAngry wrote: What's so special about guys with BIG NAMES? ………well played
_________________
Russell Wilson doesn't do losing anymore -peachesenregalia, jan 5, 2013
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hawkfan77
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:28 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm
Posts: 1122
|
hawkmanj wrote: I think we should address DL and OL first...maybe even nickelback and linebacker too.
It our receivers are Rice, Tate, Baldwin and Miller at TE, it won't be the worst line up... The FO knows how to multitask...they don't have blinders on I would love DHB if he's cut. He would bring some serious speed to our WR corps.
_________________
Team Hansen
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Axx
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:33 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:37 pm
Posts: 733
|
|
I watched alot of Cowboy games this year and can say Ogletree is very good. He is dependable and catches everything thrown in his direction.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spleenhawk2.0
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:01 am |
|
| NET Rookie |
 |
|
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 7:45 am
Posts: 113
|
|
There is also Brian Hartline. I do not consider him a top tier WR option....maybe his stock has risen considerably this past year. He is not a burner but has decent size and speed (combine was about 4.45)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JSeahawks
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:16 am |
|
| * NET Moderator * |
 |
|
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
Posts: 15419
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
|
FlyingGreg wrote: None. We need a game breaker. This. I dont think we need to be spending money on a WR just to get a WR. We have plenty of good options. What we dont have is one guy who can take over a game and truely make the opposing D. Coordinator account for him. If we bring in a WR in the draft or free agency thats what I want. Not just to accumulate another body to add to the pile. _________________ 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kearly
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:23 am |
|
| * Mr Random Thought * |
 |
|
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 7225
|
|
I don't really think Seattle signs a free agent WR, but if they did, it would probably be someone off the street ala Ruvell Martin. Someone dirt cheap.
Danario Alexander had a hot finish to the season and Ogletree has a lot of ability, but none of these 2nd tier players are clear upgrades over Tate/Baldwin and would probably cost at least $4 or $5 million a year. Seattle might kick the tires on some of the big name WRs if their market dries up, but mostly, I expect Seattle to focus on defense in FA first.
_________________  "I believe there’s merit to the idea that once something in life becomes conventional, it’s no longer the safest path to success." -Matt Waldman "If everyone's thinking alike, no one's thinking." -Bill Walsh
|
|
| |
|
|
|
pinksheets
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:24 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
|
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:47 pm
Posts: 2502
Location: Seattle
|
JSeahawks wrote: FlyingGreg wrote: None. We need a game breaker. This. I dont think we need to be spending money on a WR just to get a WR. We have plenty of good options. What we dont have is one guy who can take over a game and truely make the opposing D. Coordinator account for him. If we bring in a WR in the draft or free agency thats what I want. Not just to accumulate another body to add to the pile. How many guys are there like that, though? I'm all for drafting a guy, but I mean, depending on the market, I wouldn't mind having a guy like DHB on the roster over Charly Martin and what not. I like Rice, Tate, Baldwin, but what if they get hurt? I want some roster churn at the bottom of that depth chat, mostly because I don't see a high priced FA WR in our future nor is it likely you find a guy who can start and produce at WR in year 1, at least not more than Rice and Tate.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
pinksheets
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:25 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
|
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:47 pm
Posts: 2502
Location: Seattle
|
kearly wrote: I don't really think Seattle signs a free agent WR, but if they did, it would probably be someone off the street ala Ruvell Martin. Someone dirt cheap.
Danario Alexander had a hot finish to the season and Ogletree has a lot of ability, but none of these 2nd tier players are clear upgrades over Tate/Baldwin and would probably cost at least $4 or $5 million a year. Seattle might kick the tires on some of the big name WRs if their market dries up, but mostly, I expect Seattle to focus on defense in FA first. If it's 4 or 5 mill then I'm with you, that's too significant of a chunk of our cap for what I have in mind.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Veilside
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:11 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 8:29 am
Posts: 513
|
|
I'd rather spend the $ on a DT and draft a WR in the 1st or 2nd. However, DHB may be worth the look if he's cheap enough.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
LoneHawkFan
|
Post subject: Re: Non big name FA WR's Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:48 am |
|
| NET Practice Squad |
 |
|
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:34 am
Posts: 67
|
Veilside wrote: I'd rather spend the $ on a DT and draft a WR in the 1st or 2nd. Agreed. If we spend any kind of money on one individual, my guess is that guy will be a DT. Everything else gets addressed in the draft. We have up to 10 picks so I wouldn't be surprised if we packaged Flynn with a pick or two to get an extra high-end pick. My dream would be to trade Flynn and our #25 and our 3rd rounder to the Jets for their #9. With which, we grab Cordarrelle Patterson. This guy will be a superstar.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
