FargoHawk
New member
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2009
- Messages
- 912
- Reaction score
- 0
Kearse would be no better than a 3rd WR (and that's a BIG stretch) on any other team. He's just not that good.
FargoHawk":lk6zbj5m said:Kearse would be no better than a 3rd WR (and that's a BIG stretch) on any other team. He's just not that good.
scutterhawk":3v080l71 said:With almost every single one of the answers that I've read here, I'm getting the vibe that Russell Wilson just shouldn't expect to have a true #1 type Receiver, because some of Y'all don't believe that the Seahawks will part with the money, should one become available?
Wenhawk":1rwpfeil said:With all of Golden Tate's success in Detroit, does anyone think Kearse is being underutilized on this team? Could you imagine him in another offense putting up big numbers. I could see him being successful in SD, GB, NO, DAL, even Denver?
Kearse will be a restricted FA after this season. Is he worth a 2nd round pick traded to us from another team?
If we tender him at 2nd rd money and get no bites, what do you think he will fetch on the open market in 2016?
Isn't that how most pitchers are evaluated? Not by W-L, but by ERA?kearly":3mtbmdde said:Ergo, it's kind of silly to judge a WR only by production. It would be like judging a pitcher by ERA.
kearly":32ru13sz said:If I had to compare Kearse to a different active WR, my first inclination would be Davante Adams in Green Bay. Similar size and speed, and both have excellent possession WR skills including a very good ability to attack the deep ball and also to make something happen after the catch. Both have a similar tendency to drop the easy ones, but catch the tough ones.
I don't think Adams is an elite talent. I do think that next year he'll have 1100 yards and 7 TDs. With the exception of maybe a dozen WRs in this league, the offense they play in will dictate their production more than anything else.
Ergo, it's kind of silly to judge a WR only by production. It would be like judging a pitcher by ERA.
Vetamur":1g7qdjdz said:If we still need Kearse next year then its indicative of another bad draft at the WR position.
We are keeping Baldwin. Richardson should, in his second year as a 2nd round pick, be ready to start opposite him. Norwood should be the 3rd WR. Kearse would then be 4th, but we wont be willing to pay as much as someone will for essentially his resume. Next year the 4th and 5th WRs will be new late or mid round picks or UDFAs. WR just isnt a position you have to spend much money on.
ZagHawk":2r8j92z8 said:FargoHawk":2r8j92z8 said:Kearse would be no better than a 3rd WR (and that's a BIG stretch) on any other team. He's just not that good.
This. He went undrafted for a reason. Hell if Sidney Rice didn't get injured (and then retired), he would not be on the field. Don't get me wrong, I loved some of the big plays he does, but sadly he's just inconsistent. I do not watch college football, but according to my UW friends he would have huge plays and huge drops. Over the past 1.5 years I see what they mean.
kearly":p22i9p0h said:If I had to compare Kearse to a different active WR, my first inclination would be Davante Adams in Green Bay. Similar size and speed, and both have excellent possession WR skills including a very good ability to attack the deep ball and also to make something happen after the catch. Both have a similar tendency to drop the easy ones, but catch the tough ones.
I don't think Adams is an elite talent. I do think that next year he'll have 1100 yards and 7 TDs. With the exception of maybe a dozen WRs in this league, the offense they play in will dictate their production more than anything else.
Ergo, it's kind of silly to judge a WR only by production. It would be like judging a pitcher by ERA.
HawkHack":2bxbzjve said:Isn't that how most pitchers are evaluated? Not by W-L, but by ERA?kearly":2bxbzjve said:Ergo, it's kind of silly to judge a WR only by production. It would be like judging a pitcher by ERA.