Tech Worlds
Well-known member
Agreed.kearly":2o18vh1i said:Seattle supposedly offered Tate $4 million per, and Baldwin gets roughly $5.5 million per year in those two extra seasons when factoring his would-have-been $2 million 2014 salary. Seattle was willing to go $5 million a year on a longer deal.
I don't hate this deal, but why value Baldwin over Tate? If it's because he was more clutch or better in the playoffs, then that's kinda dumb. Tate brought huge value on special teams that will be difficult to replace, and he has more versatility, more overall production, more pure talent, and far more durability than Doug Baldwin.
My theory is that what tilted the scales in Baldwin's favor was his competitive nature at a time when Seattle wants to make competitiveness a focal point in the program more than ever. Losing one of your fiercest competitors would have a team-wide impact.
Especially the durability part. You just can't teach being out there week in and week out.
We are going to miss Tate.