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

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

  • Sidney Rice

    Votes: 2 2.1%
  • Golden Tate

    Votes: 24 25.5%
  • Doug Baldwin

    Votes: 68 72.3%

  • Total voters
    94

capncrunch

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
355
Reaction score
4
Location
Vienna, VA
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.
 

SalishHawkFan

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
5,872
Reaction score
0
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.
 

Shane Falco

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
1,093
Reaction score
191
Location
Puyallup, WA
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.
 

Sarlacc83

Active member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,110
Reaction score
1
Location
Portland, OR
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.
 

Jazzhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2009
Messages
10,237
Reaction score
68
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.
 

Kelly.Orr

New member
Joined
Sep 11, 2012
Messages
324
Reaction score
0
megamanflx1":39dkbkg4 said:
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.
 

Bipolar

New member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
749
Reaction score
0
Location
Bellevue
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.
 

Hasselbeck

New member
Joined
May 2, 2009
Messages
11,397
Reaction score
3
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.
 

AgentDib

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
5,455
Reaction score
1,215
Location
Bothell
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?
 

MeenReen

New member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
513
Reaction score
0
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.
 

JSeahawks

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
24,093
Reaction score
1
Location
Milwaukie, Oregon
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.
 

HawksSoc

New member
Joined
Jun 30, 2012
Messages
968
Reaction score
0
Location
Ireland!
T-Sizzle":31nc5fb5 said:
Kelly.Orr":31nc5fb5 said:
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:
 

Sarlacc83

Active member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,110
Reaction score
1
Location
Portland, OR
HawksSoc":pd312n14 said:
T-Sizzle":pd312n14 said:
Kelly.Orr":pd312n14 said:
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.
 

FlyingGreg

Active member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
9,515
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado
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.
 

CANHawk

New member
Joined
Oct 4, 2009
Messages
12,041
Reaction score
0
Location
PoCompton, BC Canada
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
 

Recon_Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
3,294
Reaction score
448
Location
Vancouver, Wa
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.
 

MysterMatt

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
7,242
Reaction score
0
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.
 

Schadie001

New member
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
736
Reaction score
0
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.
 

canfan

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
454
Reaction score
0
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:
 

Hawks46

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
7,498
Reaction score
0
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.
 

Latest posts

Top