Doug Baldwin to be traded? (Colts, speculation)

Hawkfan77 · Mar 18, 2013

MontanaHawk05":1umkjzx6 said:
Some people would trade Russell Wilson if it meant getting us a good draft pick.

Yes because Baldwin's (the 4th WR on the depth chart) value to this team is the same as our rookie pro-bowl QB making barely anything (NFL standards). Nice comparison...

Hawkfan77 · Mar 18, 2013

themunn":2s2ly02j said:
Hawkfan77":2s2ly02j said:

This seems to be a case in fans overvaluing their own players. I would LOVE it if we could get a 4th for Baldwin but that might be a stretch. Honestly, Badlwin is good-ish value for us as a 4th, but way better value to us if we could trade him for a 4th round pick.

Baldwin's rookie year, he way out produced his UDFA status, but last year? He was just a guy, if that.

Click to expand...

4th round wide receiver production in 2012

Chris Givens (2012) - 42 catches, 698 yards, 3 TDs
Travis Benjamin (2012) - 18 catches, 298 yards, 2 TDs
Joe Adams (2012) - 1 catch, 7 yards. 0 TDs
Devon Wylie (2012) - 6 catches, 53 yards, 0 TDs
Jarius Wright (2012) - 22 catches, 310 yards, 2 TDs
Keshawn Martin (2012) - 10 catches, 85 yards, 1 TD
Nick Toon (2012) - IR
Greg Childs (2012) - IR
Kris Durham (2011) - 8 catches, 125 yards, 1 TD
Clyde Gates (2011) - 16 catches, 224 yards, 0 TDs
Greg Salas (2011) - 0 catches, 0 yards, 0 TDs
Cecil Shorts (2011) - 55 catches, 979 yards, 7 TDs
Tandon Doss (2011) - 7 catches, 123 yards, 1 TD
Mardy Gilyard (2010) - 2 catches, 15 yards, 0 TDs
Mike Williams (2010) – 63 catches, 996 yards, 9 TDs
Marcus Easley (2010) – 0 catches, 0 yards, 0 TDs
Jacoby Ford (2010) – IR
Mike Thomas (2009) – 18 catches, 108 yards, 1 TD
Brian Hartline (2009) – 74 catches, 1083 yards, 1 TD
Louis Murphy (2009) – 25 catches, 336 yards, 1 TD
Austin Collie (2009) – 1 catch, 6 yards, 0 TDs
William Franklin (2008) – Out of the league
Marcus Smith (2008) – Out of the league
Arman Shields (2008) – Out of the league
Lavelle Hawkins (2008) – 5 catches, 62 yards, 0 TDs
Keenan Burton (2008) – Out of the league

Doug Baldwin – 29 catches, 366 yards, 3 TDs
All this in an injured season with a reduced role and a rookie quarterback.
26 wide receivers have been drafted in the 4th round in the past 5 years. Doug Baldwin outproduced 23 of them. Two of the three that outproduced him are their teams number 1 receiver, and the third (Shorts), outproduced the so called “number 1” (Blackmon).

Clearly he has better value than a 4th round pick.

Why would you assume that if Baldwin were traded for a 4th round pick that we would automatically draft a WR? Who said that?

jewhawk · Mar 18, 2013

T-Sizzle":1z8rb83j said:
Sorry, but I don't see why logically you could possibly feel the #4 WR on the depth chart would be featured heavily. That makes ZERO sense.

Harvin, Rice, and Tate have combined for 13 seasons in the NFL and only four of those have been full 16 game seasons. Chances are good that at least one of them will be banged up for a few games this year. Also, elite QBs tend to spread the ball around to more than just a couple targets. Denver and New England each had 5 players with at least 40 receptions in 2012. New Orleans had four with 65+ receptions and another with 39. Green Bay had four with 49+ receptions not including Jennings with 36 in 8 games.

DavidSeven · Mar 18, 2013

T-Sizzle":34bnvz9c said:
DavidSeven":34bnvz9c said:

Don't know. Just my feeling given the variety of places Harvin can line up on the field and the way Seattle rotates its players.

Wasn't intended to be anymore a statement of fact than those who say the Seahawks are going to great next year, Harvin will be a great fit in our offense, etc.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't see why logically you could possibly feel the #4 WR on the depth chart would be featured heavily. That makes ZERO sense.

Tell that to the Green Bay Packers.

Yeah, they pass more, but they also don't have a multi-purpose player like Harvin who they can lineup a bunch in the backfield.

FlyingGreg · Mar 18, 2013

It's not just "he's the 4th WR"". You also want to have good depth.

Doug stays...

MontanaHawk05 · Mar 18, 2013

Hawkfan77":2tp2ks8i said:
MontanaHawk05":2tp2ks8i said:

Some people would trade Russell Wilson if it meant getting us a good draft pick.

Click to expand...

Yes because Baldwin's (the 4th WR on the depth chart) value to this team is the same as our rookie pro-bowl QB making barely anything (NFL standards). Nice comparison...

Did you hear that?

...

It was the sound of my sarcasm whooshing right over your head.

themunn · Mar 18, 2013

CurryStopstheRuns":1x7q2gpk said:
Doug Baldwin dropped the game winner against the Cardinals in week one. That catch would have given us the #2 seed and homefield.

The season isn't lost in week 1. We had 15 other opportunities to get homefield advantage. Russell Wilson threw three interceptions against the Rams. Maybe we should trade him.

He also caught a 24 yard TD and a 50 yard pass in the same drive against New England to give us 74 of our 85 yards and a TD in a game we won by a point.
He also caught a 12 yard pass on 3rd and 10 against the Bears in overtime which gave us 1st and 10 on the Chicago 13 and gave Rice the opportunity to win the game.

Baldwin was also the victim of our daft penalties at least once last year, most notable a 49 yard pass wiped out by a McCoy penalty. Take that into account and you have a 30 reception 400 yard season. Not magnificient, but for a guy hampered with injuries in a run-first offense where the leading receiver managed a paltry 50 catches (which didn't crack the top 50 WRs for receptions), it's not too bad either.

themunn · Mar 18, 2013

Hawkfan77":27h8m76x said:
Why would you assume that if Baldwin were traded for a 4th round pick that we would automatically draft a WR? Who said that?

That's not the point. What do you value players on? Production and future potential. Baldwin produced better than 88% of receivers drafted in the 4th round over the past 5 years. He's 24 years old and has plenty of future potential.
So how do you value him as a 4th round pick? By how 4th round outside linebackers produce? Or by guessing?

This is absolutely senseless. The last decade we've struggled to have a decent receiving corps, everyone spent the entirety of last season saying we needed to draft a receiver... but only so that we could get rid of one? Not the expensive one, but the cheapest one. Despite eerily similar production over the last 2 seasons (82 catches, 1232 yards, 9 TDs compared to 80 catches, 1154 yards, 7 TDs).

Would you accept a 4th round pick for the older, more injury prone, more expensive Sidney Rice?

BirdsCommaAngry · Mar 18, 2013

Baldwin lost teeth attempting that diving, potentially game-winning catch in week 1. There are good reasons to trade people but this isn't one of them.

ImTheScientist · Mar 18, 2013

DavidSeven":1w86nsc1 said:
T-Sizzle":1w86nsc1 said:

DavidSeven":1w86nsc1 said:

Don't know. Just my feeling given the variety of places Harvin can line up on the field and the way Seattle rotates its players.

Wasn't intended to be anymore a statement of fact than those who say the Seahawks are going to great next year, Harvin will be a great fit in our offense, etc.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't see why logically you could possibly feel the #4 WR on the depth chart would be featured heavily. That makes ZERO sense.

Click to expand...

Tell that to the Green Bay Packers.

Yeah, they pass more, but they also don't have a multi-purpose player like Harvin who they can lineup a bunch in the backfield.

Tell that to the Chiefs.

Hope you see why neither team has any relevance to the Seahawks. Fwiw, GB does have a multi-purpose player they line up a bunch in the backfield.

It would take multiple injuries before Baldwin is featured heavily, and at that point things wouldn't be looking good for the Hawks.

Blitzer88 · Mar 18, 2013

DavidSeven":35lzy9jt said:
T-Sizzle":35lzy9jt said:

DavidSeven":35lzy9jt said:

Don't know. Just my feeling given the variety of places Harvin can line up on the field and the way Seattle rotates its players.

Wasn't intended to be anymore a statement of fact than those who say the Seahawks are going to great next year, Harvin will be a great fit in our offense, etc.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't see why logically you could possibly feel the #4 WR on the depth chart would be featured heavily. That makes ZERO sense.

Click to expand...

Tell that to the Green Bay Packers.

Yeah, they pass more, but they also don't have a multi-purpose player like Harvin who they can lineup a bunch in the backfield.

Ah...yes they do and his name is Randall Cobb and he is one hell of a player at that.

DavidSeven · Mar 18, 2013

Blitzer88":2v0xehd2 said:
DavidSeven":2v0xehd2 said:

Yeah, they pass more, but they also don't have a multi-purpose player like Harvin who they can lineup a bunch in the backfield.

Click to expand...

Ah...yes they do and his name is Randall Cobb and he is one hell of a player at that.

Cobb rushed 10 times last season. Harvin rushed 22 times in 9 games. 52 times in 2011. So "ah"... not the same impact on an offense.

Hawkfan77 · Mar 18, 2013

MontanaHawk05":3fp3w1cz said:
Hawkfan77":3fp3w1cz said:

MontanaHawk05":3fp3w1cz said:

Some people would trade Russell Wilson if it meant getting us a good draft pick.

Click to expand...

Yes because Baldwin's (the 4th WR on the depth chart) value to this team is the same as our rookie pro-bowl QB making barely anything (NFL standards). Nice comparison...

Click to expand...

Did you hear that?

...

It was the sound of my sarcasm whooshing right over your head.

Whooosh... :34853_doh:

You got me!

JesterHawk · Mar 18, 2013

Baldwin is just the sort of guy that will let us shred a team that doesn't have a good nickel corner. Harvin in the backfield, Rice wide left, Tate wide right, Baldwin in the slot. Somebody is open.

He is solid, solid depth at the WR position too. You don't trade a guy like that who is cheap unless you think you have 0 chance of retaining him as an free agent after the season and you can get a good value for him (I think Doug is a FA after next year).

I just don't see the impetus behind a trade unless there is an amazing player we need coming from the Colts. Trading for a draft pick at this point seems silly. We don't need more draft capital, we're already looking at drafting mostly camp fodder hoping for a diamond in the rough. What good is another 4th round pick? I'd be more interested in a 2014 3rd, or a 2015 2nd or something.

CANHawk · Mar 18, 2013

DavidSeven":3hpn04r4 said:
T-Sizzle":3hpn04r4 said:

DavidSeven":3hpn04r4 said:

Don't know. Just my feeling given the variety of places Harvin can line up on the field and the way Seattle rotates its players.

Wasn't intended to be anymore a statement of fact than those who say the Seahawks are going to great next year, Harvin will be a great fit in our offense, etc.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't see why logically you could possibly feel the #4 WR on the depth chart would be featured heavily. That makes ZERO sense.

Click to expand...

Tell that to the Green Bay Packers.

Yeah, they pass more, but they also don't have a multi-purpose player like Harvin who they can lineup a bunch in the backfield.

Blitzer88":3hpn04r4 said:
Ah...yes they do and his name is Randall Cobb and he is one hell of a player at that.

Yeah, if Golden Tate is one player most frequently compared to Percy Harvin, Randall Cobb is the other.

sutz · Mar 18, 2013

It's kind of funny as people line up on two sides of an issue like this. I equate it to the argument about throwing games to get better draft position.

One camp thinks of Baldwin as an important contributor to the offense, more valuable to us than to other teams and unlikely to draw trade interest strong enough to make trading him a good deal.

The other side values deals and trades and player moves more than wins, apparently. To them, a player like Baldwin is more a bargaining chip, someone whose trade value may never be higher that we should move for his off the field value. Just as some people focus heavily on the draft and everything seems to bend towards that day in April, some people consider the games more important and winning the most important thing.

From my point of view, a lot of people just want trades like this to happen, because they seem to get more out of player moves and drafting than they do out of the games themselves. I don't understand it, really. IMHO, Baldwin is too valuable to trade off just for the joy of moving players. We won't get enough in exchange to make sense to me. The goal is to keep the team together, not continually churning the roster any more than necessary.

CurryStopstheRuns · Mar 18, 2013

We would be lucky to get anything of value for an undrafted, injury prone #4 wide receiver anyway. Baldwin is the new Obomanu.

CurryStopstheRuns · Mar 18, 2013

sutz":2qrwgpp5 said:
It's kind of funny as people line up on two sides of an issue like this. I equate it to the argument about throwing games to get better draft position.

One camp thinks of Baldwin as an important contributor to the offense, more valuable to us than to other teams and unlikely to draw trade interest strong enough to make trading him a good deal.

The other side values deals and trades and player moves more than wins, apparently. To them, a player like Baldwin is more a bargaining chip, someone whose trade value may never be higher that we should move for his off the field value. Just as some people focus heavily on the draft and everything seems to bend towards that day in April, some people consider the games more important and winning the most important thing.

From my point of view, a lot of people just want trades like this to happen, because they seem to get more out of player moves and drafting than they do out of the games themselves. I don't understand it, really. IMHO, Baldwin is too valuable to trade off just for the joy of moving players. We won't get enough in exchange to make sense to me. The goal is to keep the team together, not continually churning the roster any more than necessary.

You are very short-sighted.

Spokane · Mar 18, 2013

Sometimes what you have is more valuable to you then anyone else...D-fresh will be a seahawk next year

sutz · Mar 18, 2013

CurryStopstheRuns":1l5y0rzx said:
sutz":1l5y0rzx said:

It's kind of funny as people line up on two sides of an issue like this. I equate it to the argument about throwing games to get better draft position.

One camp thinks of Baldwin as an important contributor to the offense, more valuable to us than to other teams and unlikely to draw trade interest strong enough to make trading him a good deal.

The other side values deals and trades and player moves more than wins, apparently. To them, a player like Baldwin is more a bargaining chip, someone whose trade value may never be higher that we should move for his off the field value. Just as some people focus heavily on the draft and everything seems to bend towards that day in April, some people consider the games more important and winning the most important thing.

From my point of view, a lot of people just want trades like this to happen, because they seem to get more out of player moves and drafting than they do out of the games themselves. I don't understand it, really. IMHO, Baldwin is too valuable to trade off just for the joy of moving players. We won't get enough in exchange to make sense to me. The goal is to keep the team together, not continually churning the roster any more than necessary.

Click to expand...

You are very short-sighted.

Opinions vary.

Doug Baldwin to be traded? (Colts, speculation)

Active member

Active member

New member

New member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

New member

Active member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Similar threads