If Seattle did invest in a WR, who would he replace?

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13

Which starting WR would you bench (or release) so that the new guy could start?

Sidney Rice
2
2%
Golden Tate
24
26%
Doug Baldwin
68
72%
 
Total votes : 94

  • There has been a lot of talk this year about how WR should be an offseason priority for the Seahawks. I don't actually share that opinion, but regardless, it's a possiblity that Seattle might go out and invest in a starting WR this offseason, either in free agency or with a high draft pick. If that happens, one of Rice, Tate, or Baldwin would lose their starting job. Tate and Baldwin are on cheap, team controlled contracts. Rice is owed $7 million next season. Personally, I would not feel great about investing big for a starting WR because I don't want to bench any of those three guys (unless it was for Wes Welker).

    But if it did happen, who would you bench to start him? Personally, I'd bench Baldwin- and only because I think he's our 3rd best WR right now.

    For the purposes of this poll, I'm leaving off the option for drafting/signing a backup WR and keeping our current trio- that's because I'm more curious about which player you'd feel most comfortable with upgrading on.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11202
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • I would draft a true #1 or #2 guy and move Tate to the slot i think that is where he would perform best. Brandon Coleman anyone?
    Kelly.Orr
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 324
    Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:37 pm


  • I voted Baldwin only because his injuries worry me. Golden is on the upswing and I'm willing to pay Sidney Rice his 7 million for the production that he has. Rice's connection with Russell will only get better and now that Sidney has put some meat on those bones, I think his injuries will be infrequent.
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Nobody *
     
    Posts: 8706
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


  • Dougie fresh is my vote. I want that Weaton kid in Oregon State.
    Image
    "Tracy Porter lost his manhood when Marshawn stiff armed him" some dude on youtube.
    User avatar
    suppaball
    *BRONZE SUPPORTER*
    *BRONZE SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 2841
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:17 pm
    Location: Oroville CA.


  • Rice has had 1.5 injury free seasons out of 6. just don't trust him to Stay healthy. I say you turn Tate into a slot guy and draft a serious number one guy, move Rice over to the number 2. Make Baldwin a situational Wr. (that gets used a lot.) We still don't have that #1 guy yet. We need that wr one the roster that is drafted to Complement RW3'S skillset, imo
    User avatar
    Smoke
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 595
    Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:34 am
    Location: Olympia, WA


  • I would also move Baldwin down the depth chart.I am also on board with WR being not the huge need some people think.I dont like taking WRs in round one.A day 2 type pick in rounds 2 through 4 would be fine for me.
    canzag
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 500
    Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:53 am


  • Take a wide out in rounds 2 and 4 I think you can get #2 from Oregon State in the 4th if lucky.
    Image
    "Tracy Porter lost his manhood when Marshawn stiff armed him" some dude on youtube.
    User avatar
    suppaball
    *BRONZE SUPPORTER*
    *BRONZE SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 2841
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:17 pm
    Location: Oroville CA.


  • Would you consider....two for one? Do not bring Kearse or Obo back, but instead get a 3rd Round Draft choice......6'5" with good hands and a strong brain.
    Bigpumpkin
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4823
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:13 pm
    Location: Puyallup, WA USA


  • Why does he have to replace anyone? If we get a kid that's awesome, traditionally speaking he won't have =an impact until year 3 anyway. Why wouldn't he sit behind one of the options listed above, instead of getting toasted as a rook?

    IMO, the choice is D) Sit him till year 3.
    "Your Seattle Seahawks, 2013-14 World Champions"
    Adopt A Rookie 2014-15 - Kevin Pierre-Louis
    Adopt-A-Red-Shirt 2014-15 Christine Micheal
    Previously known as megamanflx1
    User avatar
    Seahawkscrazy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 973
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:59 pm
    Location: Dallas, TX


  • Ideally we'd be drafting a number 1, so that would just move everyone 1 down the depth chart, NWR and Rice on the outsides, Tate playing slot or outside on WR heavy sets, Baldwin also playing slot - ideally rotating all of them to keep them fresh (and less prone to injury!)
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2514
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • That's the beauty of competition, the best players will play! I'd think Baldwin would get pushed aside a bit, seeing as this offense seems to favor bigger receivers on the outside. But I think if Tate can keep playing even at a fraction of what he played yesterday, He could easily change their minds about having a bigger receiver on the outside, we'll see though.
    Image
    3elieve
    User avatar
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 19206
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • Draft another big guy for the outside, let Tate and Baldwin work the inside and draft a late round speedy WR who can take some reps on the outside for the deep balls every now and then.
    Image
    User avatar
    Wenhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2180
    Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • I think we should keep all 3 guys and add another WR in the draft. If we let anyone go, it should be Martin or Kearse. Obo is a very valuable special teams player more so than a receiver. JMO.
    User avatar
    Seahwkgal
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 2502
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:27 pm


  • We have two real offensive needs: a really good TE, and and elusive player with silly speed at any of the 3 skill positions. If that is a WR, then so be it, we will run more 3 WR sets. We have silly speed with Turbin already, but with Lynch, Turbo is just not going to be on the field that much. Unless Bevell starts designing some two RB sets, which would be a good idea.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11231
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Kelly.Orr wrote:I would draft a true #1 or #2 guy and move Tate to the slot i think that is where he would perform best. Brandon Coleman anyone?

    :13: I voted Baldwin for that exact reason.
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2544
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


  • If we draft a wide receiver he won't be replacing anyone, he will be adding depth to the pool. I think we have less of a need at WR and more of a need for a good second TE to go with Miller. I'd rather try and draft a solid TE if one's available and pick up a WR in the later rounds.
    debevemos
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 104
    Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 6:45 am


  • On D, we could probably add another LB and DT.
    I do agree about a WR/TE as priorities though.
    User avatar
    Seahwkgal
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 2502
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:27 pm


  • debevemos wrote:If we draft a wide receiver he won't be replacing anyone, he will be adding depth to the pool. I think we have less of a need at WR and more of a need for a good second TE to go with Miller. I'd rather try and draft a solid TE if one's available and pick up a WR in the later rounds.


    Technically you are replacing someone...just not the three listed. I believe when he said "replace" the op was saying in the starting lineup....if you list the three in the poll at WR#1, #2, #3...and not literally kick the guy off the team.
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2544
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


  • I would keep Doug simply so he wouldn't go to the 9ers, actually, same goes for Tate.
    Image
    User avatar
    SNDavidson
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1441
    Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:22 pm


  • I fully understand the cost issue, but I just don't see this team going deep into the playoffs with its current receiving stable. We need an upgrade. It doesn't have to be in the first-round, and of course Pete and John will do all the scouting necessary to ensure that it DOESN'T come from the first-round. But the status quo isn't an option.
    GO HAWKS!!!

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

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11314
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • I'm more concerned with tight end. I'd lose Miller and Moore and keep McCoy. I might use a first round pick to get a potential superstar at that position. I'm actually pretty comfortable at WR. I'd pick a late round guy, somebody tall and let them compete. Let's see what Baldwin does for the rest of the season. He's now on shaky ground (kind of like BMW a year ago) I'd say while Tate and Rice have excellent job security.
    User avatar
    capncrunch
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 119
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 8:47 am


  • I think this poll shows that our WR corps is a lot more solid than it gets credit for. I voted Tate because he still messes up his routes, but that's really a reason to vote not to bring in a high WR pick in the first place. He'll be two, three years away from getting comfortable with the route tree anyways. I'm for bringing in a high quality WR, because we need the competition, but I don't think the guy automatically bumps any of those three off the starting rotation. I'm glad Pete has the philosophy he does about competition.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4759
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


  • I still am not sold on Tate. Hard to say anything after the game he just had. I definitely do not question his heart and desire. I'd like to see another big receiver along side Rice and let Baldwin and Tate battle for the slot.
    User avatar
    Shane Falco
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 844
    Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:09 pm
    Location: Puyallup, WA


  • I think it's been echoed in here, but of the three, only Golden Tate seems to remain on the field every game during the season. Think of a #1 WR as more of an insurance policy where Baldwin and Rice are your wild cards.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII

    RIP Radish: Check your PMs. Upper right corner.
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 15443
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


  • If the WR is an upgrade over who we already have, then I'm good with replacing ANY of those listed. Frankly, we have GOT to stop over-valuing our own players, a trait this board is way to familiar with. thankfully, I don't believe our FO has that stance at all.
    Image
    User avatar
    Jazzhawk
    * NET News Scoop *
    * NET News Scoop *
     
    Posts: 9010
    Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:16 pm


  • megamanflx1 wrote:Why does he have to replace anyone? If we get a kid that's awesome, traditionally speaking he won't have =an impact until year 3 anyway. Why wouldn't he sit behind one of the options listed above, instead of getting toasted as a rook?

    IMO, the choice is D) Sit him till year 3.


    Umm you draft a reciever with your #1 pick he better have an impact and better not sit for three years.
    Kelly.Orr
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 324
    Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:37 pm


  • Am I allowed to chose "all three"?

    Rice is brittle (the kiss of death did not materialize this season, YET. knock on wood. twice).
    Tate is both genious and inconsistent.
    Baldwin is very talented, but probably not a starting caliber WR on most great NFL teams. and he is dinged.

    the reality is that we still need to invest in an elite WR opposite of Rice to be in the superbowl conversation. hopefully a #1 WR in the draft, someone we can trade up to get and who would produce for years to come... someone of AJ Green or Julio Jones stature.
    Cheesehead Seahawk Extraordinaire
    User avatar
    Bipolar
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 749
    Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:58 pm
    Location: Bellevue


  • I'd love it if they were able to sign Mike Wallace, I think he's exactly what this offense is lacking.

    It's a shame Marqise Lee is only a sophomore, good lord that kid is going to be good.
    February 2, 2014... the day the dream was finally realized
    User avatar
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 5114
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm


  • Tate has been playing great lately but we could still use an influx of talent to compete everywhere. None of the preseason WR threads speculated that Kearse and Martin would be on the field at the same time yesterday, but you need depth in the NFL.

    Depth with high upside is the best of both worlds, and rookies are inexpensive these days. We can draft a promising WR in the mid-first round for $2 million/year. Every player we draft is going to be competing with current Seahawks for a job, and I don't understand why are posters here so protective of our receiver group in particular.

    What position would you rather see taken in the first three rounds? Do you hate the Seahawks who play at that current position, or do you just want better talent everywhere with more competition?
    "Check out my 2012 NFL Draft Grades. I just gave the worst grade ever to Seattle." - WalterFootball.com
    User avatar
    AgentDib
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2199
    Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:08 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • This is sort of a situation that depends on the offensive coordinator/philosophy. Just for the sake of conversation, having a burner at split end (Mike Wallace, for example - I'm not advocating paying the price he would command) would really open up the offense, imo. It would likely shift bracket coverage to that side of the field allowing Rice more 1:1 coverage. It would also give Tate and Miller more favorable match ups on the inside against linebackers and safeties. We would also force safeties to play back a little bit, helping our OL with fewer guys in the box. With our strong run game and subsequent play action success, our offense could be really deadly and tough to game plan for. Adding a possession guy (prime Mike Williams, for example) would help move the chains and with our consistency, but it allows teams to constrict the field and makes us more one dimensional.
    MeenReen
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 509
    Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:46 am


  • Though I love them both because they're Seahawks, neither TAte or Baldwin, brings anything more then 100 other WR's in the NFL bring. If we brought in a 1st round pick who was better then them i wouldnt think twice about replacing either of those guys.
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18602
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


  • T-Sizzle wrote:
    Kelly.Orr wrote:I would draft a true #1 or #2 guy and move Tate to the slot i think that is where he would perform best. Brandon Coleman anyone?

    :13: I voted Baldwin for that exact reason.



    Agreed, Robert Woods. For. The. Win. :thirishdrinkers:
    "Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." Mark Twain.

    "Beast Mode is artist, puny Saints Defense merely his canvas!"

    "When you die the only kingdom you'll see, will be two foot wide and six foot deep!"
    User avatar
    HawksSoc
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 643
    Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 10:40 am
    Location: Ireland!


  • HawksSoc wrote:
    T-Sizzle wrote:
    Kelly.Orr wrote:I would draft a true #1 or #2 guy and move Tate to the slot i think that is where he would perform best. Brandon Coleman anyone?

    :13: I voted Baldwin for that exact reason.



    Agreed, Robert Woods. For. The. Win. :thirishdrinkers:


    I don't know, I think Woods is coasting off his 2011 season. He really hasn't been that impressive this year, IMO.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII

    RIP Radish: Check your PMs. Upper right corner.
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 15443
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


  • I'm glad someone else brought up TE - because that's another position we could improve. I have no idea why they were so excited to get Evan Moore - not only does he not have a catch, but they rarely throw to him when he does get in. Very odd.

    On the WR front, I've been more than vocal and repetitive that I think we need an upgrade - I still do. Mike Wallace would be ideal...the kind of receiver you MUST account for every single play. It's not just the plays he can make, it's the plays he opens up for others. Why do you think a guy like Antonio Brown has become such a threat for Pittsburgh? Yes, he is good - but he is taking advantage of the attention defenses have to show Wallace.

    We need a Wallace, or an AJ Green/Julio Jones type. Either a barn burner (Wallace) or a big/physical receiver who can eat up defenders. Add a WR like that to Rice/Tate/Baldwin and we have something dangerous brewing. The upgrade would not come at the expense of the those guys, we would be replacing guys like Obo, Martin, Kearse, etc.
    @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: 7534
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
    Location: CVN-68


  • I think if Rice and Baldwin can stay healthy and Tate can find a way to play consistently at the level he played at for the last two games, we're pretty okay at WR. Just need to improve the depth. The fact that Kearse and Martin are on the active roster and TO is likely on speed dial is a sign that we have serious problems in the depth dept. Though I would be ALL FOR bringing in that Brandon Coleman kid that English is pumping the tires on, but I don't think WR is a huge glaring need right now. Coleman looks like a phenom (but likely won't even be on the board when we pick so it's moot).

    I think the biggest need as far as "skill position"* players goes would be a versatile H-Back. I think they know it too considering they brought in Kellen Winslow in the off season. Having a guy like that in the mix would open things up on offense big time. Just look what Hernandez was able to do to us (and what his presence allowed Welker and Gronk to do to us). I'd love to have a guy like that out there.


    *I hate that term
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11430
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • I think ultimately it would come down to Baldwin losing the most snaps and then Tate next. Not so much benching one or the other and assuming the new WR would take over that spot.

    I'd love to draft a receiver with great route running ability, size, and the ability to play the slot as well as he plays the outside, similarly to how Rice is doing it. Rice would start and, if good enough, the New Guy would be #2.

    Tate and New Guy would probably still split snaps in 2-wr sets, and you can still get Tate on the field, as an outside receiver in 3-wr sets, with one of the other two moving inside. Mostly, keep Tate on the outside. I have no faith with him at slot.

    Baldwin will get his plays in the empty backfield sets out of the slot or even in 3-wr sets when precision routes are needed, taking out either Tate or the rookie.
    I am Godzilla, you are Japan!
    User avatar
    Recon_Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2095
    Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:01 pm
    Location: Vancouver, Wa


  • I'd have said Tate in a nanosecond, but then he had a really great game and I am once-again reminded of his play-making potential IF he could only learn about focus, discipline, and route running. Instead, I voted for Baldwin since he didn't even get drafted and those guys all suck.

    But seriously, and I mean this, I think every one of our WRs is completely replaceable. Contracts set aside, I don't think any of them should really feel all that safe.
    User avatar
    MysterMatt
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 6908
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:12 am


  • Rice, Tate, and Baldwin are here to stay.

    But to play, I said Rice. You only draft a WR high if that guy is going to be a number 1 WR, otherwise we can get a WR in the late rounds to compete for the other positions. If he isn't going to come in and compete to be the #1 guy then it's a waisted draft pick.

    Edwards and Kearse are replaceable and if we draft someone later on it will be to compete for those spots.

    I think we have decent WR's and need to solidy other positions before the WR position though. I still think we need to draft another person on the OL and DL before we take a WR.
    Schadie001
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 539
    Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 4:32 pm


  • Wide receiver might not be my first choice for a high draft pick. We could certainly use an upgrade at the postion, but the same could be said about tight end, defensive tackle (as Branch and Jones are both free agents next year) and to a lesser extent linebacker as Leroy Hill isn't gettting any younger and I don't think I see his replacement on the roster. Also wouldn't mind seeing an upgrade at right tackle! Its a good team, but with room for improvement. I can see wide receiver taking a back seat to some of these other needs.
    :3-1:
    canfan
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 129
    Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 12:11 pm


  • We have a good #1 in Rice, if he stays healthy. He's making a push at the end of the year, and gaining chemistry with Wilson.

    Tate is inconsistent. He can be a good #2, or he can totally disappear. I don't trust him to be the 2nd guy unless he gets better, but if he plays up to his potential, he'd work. Tate is very sturdy; the pounding he took yesterday would've put Baldwin out for 3 weeks, if Doug could've finished the game.

    I voted Baldwin, but really, it's our 4th or 5th guy that would be gone. Edwards is done physically, Kearse doesn't seem to grab the opportunity when he gets it, and Martin is just average.

    We could really use a dynamic WR, and there's room for one on the squad. I think Miller will improve as our OL improves, and as Wilson improves. We're fine there.
    Hawks46
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3733
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:01 pm


  • We need a fast guy. We lack elite speed at WR. If we could get a guy who can Burn up and down the field at the #1 spot, we would get a lot better production out of Rice.
    User avatar
    Smoke
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 595
    Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:34 am
    Location: Olympia, WA


  • Add to and let them compete. I am not for bringing in a big free agent. It just seems like it is so 50/50 when you do that. If we are bringing in a Dwayne Bowe for a 4th or 5th, fine, but only because it seems it is easy to pick up extra picks in that range. However, I don't want to bring in Bowe because he is going to want a big payday.

    Draft is the only way to go, imo. I'm fine with the guys we have, I just want to add to them. A guy like Marquise Lee (however you spell it) from USC is the kind of guy that we need. Somebody they have to account for athletically and double or take their chances. It will open up the field.
    User avatar
    Starrman44
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 814
    Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:35 pm
    Location: Canby, OR


  • Scottemojo wrote:We have two real offensive needs: a really good TE, and and elusive player with silly speed at any of the 3 skill positions. If that is a WR, then so be it, we will run more 3 WR sets. We have silly speed with Turbin already, but with Lynch, Turbo is just not going to be on the field that much. Unless Bevell starts designing some two RB sets, which would be a good idea.


    I knew there was a reason I get "future seahawk" vibes from Tavon Austin. You are right, this offense needs a slick speedster. My preference would still be for Wes Welker though. I don't even care that he's 32 next season. It will take him a few years still to lose that speed, and when he does he'll still be useful ala Brandon Stokely. The Patriots wouldn't let him hit UFA would they? Would they?
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11202
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • kearly wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:We have two real offensive needs: a really good TE, and and elusive player with silly speed at any of the 3 skill positions. If that is a WR, then so be it, we will run more 3 WR sets. We have silly speed with Turbin already, but with Lynch, Turbo is just not going to be on the field that much. Unless Bevell starts designing some two RB sets, which would be a good idea.


    I knew there was a reason I get "future seahawk" vibes from Tavon Austin. You are right, this offense needs a slick speedster. My preference would still be for Wes Welker though. I don't even care that he's 32 next season. It will take him a few years still to lose that speed, and when he does he'll still be useful ala Brandon Stokely. The Patriots wouldn't let him hit UFA would they? Would they?


    If they do, I hope we stay far, far away from Welker. When's the last time the Patriots released an older player while he was still playing at a high to very high level?
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII

    RIP Radish: Check your PMs. Upper right corner.
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 15443
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


  • Give me Tavon Austin in this years draft and Colt Lyerla in next years draft. (although i'd take Seffarian Jenkins too, but I think Lyerla will be a more dynamic pro). I think Lyerla is going to be a much better blocking version of Jimmy Graham, and Seffarian Jenkins is going to be Tony Gonzales, so you cant really go wrong with either one.

    I'd also take Kenjon Barner to replace Leon Washington.
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18602
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


  • Sarlacc83 wrote:If they do, I hope we stay far, far away from Welker. When's the last time the Patriots released an older player while he was still playing at a high to very high level?


    Lawyer Milloy had a few good years left after New England parted ways. Richard Seymour did too, although he cost Oakland a 1st so I don't know if that counts.

    Welker is 32 next May and presumably looking for a long term deal. He also looks nowhere close to declining yet. But the fear factor about his age could make things interesting. Personally, I'd throw a 5 year deal his way without blinking. Speedy players age more gracefully, and Welker is more than a fast player, he's an outstanding possession receiver too. And it's not like we have to keep him all 5 years if he starts sucking. If he produces for just two or three years like he is now, and then has two or three years of Brandon Stokely plus, he could justify $20 million guaranteed pretty easily. I like Welker because he is an upper tier WR that might become a market inefficiency. If Welker was 28 with his current track record, he'd never hit FA at all and would cost more than a 1st rounder to acquire. But as is, he might be under-rated because of his age and available for nothing more a Desean Jackson type contract.

    AgentDib wrote:Depth with high upside is the best of both worlds, and rookies are inexpensive these days. We can draft a promising WR in the mid-first round for $2 million/year. Every player we draft is going to be competing with current Seahawks for a job, and I don't understand why are posters here so protective of our receiver group in particular.


    Good thinking. A mid round player would actually be much cheaper than that. Salary for a 4th rounder is around 500k a season. Even mid-2nd round picks only make about $1 million per year. I think an ideal situation would be snagging someone like Tavon Austin in round 2 for a bargain contract.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11202
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • oh god ....please no Welker. There is a reason the Pats are going to let him walk.
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2544
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


  • Sarlacc83 wrote:I don't know, I think Woods is coasting off his 2011 season. He really hasn't been that impressive this year, IMO.


    REC YDS TD AVG LONG
    59 656 10 11.1 41
    Thats his numbers so far through nine, your right its a come down, but could be just enough of one to allow him to slip to us.

    Thats alright for a coasting year I suppose, also hes more likely to fall to us in the late first then say Keenan Allen who's mocked to go higher. Though Tavon Austin in the second round would be nice instead, that'd allow us to go DT or TE (dare I hope for Tyler Eifert) in the 1st.
    "Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." Mark Twain.

    "Beast Mode is artist, puny Saints Defense merely his canvas!"

    "When you die the only kingdom you'll see, will be two foot wide and six foot deep!"
    User avatar
    HawksSoc
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 643
    Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 10:40 am
    Location: Ireland!


  • Sarlacc83 wrote:
    kearly wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:We have two real offensive needs: a really good TE, and and elusive player with silly speed at any of the 3 skill positions. If that is a WR, then so be it, we will run more 3 WR sets. We have silly speed with Turbin already, but with Lynch, Turbo is just not going to be on the field that much. Unless Bevell starts designing some two RB sets, which would be a good idea.


    I knew there was a reason I get "future seahawk" vibes from Tavon Austin. You are right, this offense needs a slick speedster. My preference would still be for Wes Welker though. I don't even care that he's 32 next season. It will take him a few years still to lose that speed, and when he does he'll still be useful ala Brandon Stokely. The Patriots wouldn't let him hit UFA would they? Would they?


    If they do, I hope we stay far, far away from Welker. When's the last time the Patriots released an older player while he was still playing at a high to very high level?

    You act as if New England releasing him suddenly MAKES him bad. He's an awesome player who makes a LOT of catches. Guy burned ET deep. Not many WR's can make that claim.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4759
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


  • Assuming everyone were healthy, I think we'd drop Tate from the starting list. While he's a fantastic playmaker with the ball in his hands, I think Baldwin is still a better all-day every-day slot option when he's healthy. I think we might be able to get Tate's current level of production by bringing him in off the bench to run the screens and other stuff that he's really good at.

    Really, though, I'm not sure anyone needs to be replaced. Tate seems to be getting better at route running, and I think he might end up being a legitimate #2 receiver by the end of the season. But I'd still like to see another WR drafted and added to our stable. Right now we have no serious competition for Tate. Edwards, Obomanu, and Martin won't likely be on the team two years from now. Kearse could maybe step up, but we'd be foolish to count on it. Realistically, we need to increase the amount of talent at the position.
    User avatar
    aku
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 116
    Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:50 am


Next


It is currently Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:20 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online