Angry DB EXTENDED.

[DavidSeven]

Interesting tidbit:

Davis Hsu ‏@DavisHsuSeattle 38m
Clayton says SEA was willing to go 4 yrs $20M...Baldwin took the shorter deal

I love his confidence. Puts himself in a great position to get another deal at age 28. No doubt he's going to work his butt off during these next three years to prove himself. ADB gonna stay angry.

Win/win for everyone.

 

[HawkFan72]

Interesting tidbit:

Davis Hsu ‏@DavisHsuSeattle 38m
Clayton says SEA was willing to go 4 yrs $20M...Baldwin took the shorter deal

I love his confidence. Puts himself in a great position to get another deal at age 28. No doubt he's going to work his butt off during these next three years to prove himself. ADB gonna stay angry.

Win/win for everyone.

That is very interesting. He gets his security now, but takes less than he could have gotten because he knows he can make more later.

 

[TriCHawk]

Yessss!! I knew either he or Tate would be gone, if not both. Baldwin is the one I wanted to keep the most. Glad it happened. Best news of the day.

 

[Hawknballs]

meanwhile vernon davis is holding out.

#AboveReproach

 

[kearly]

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.

 

[Largent80]

To me, Baldwin just gets open better than Tate. Tate took 2 years to become what he now is, Baldwins ceiling has not been reached.

 

[DavidSeven]

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.

I don't necessarily think he got a higher value than Tate. While it's true that the "new money" averages out to around $5.5M in 2015/2016, the amount you're paying him between 2014-2016 averages out to $4-4.5M/yr. If Tate had signed a new deal with Seattle, it probably would've been the same or more over that same period.

I don't think it's a cheat to think of it this way since Doug will likely get a nice signing bonus, some portion of which will hit our cap this year. It's essentially a new deal in terms of actual dollars and cap hits (though technically a two year extension on an RFA year).

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

DID YOU SEE THAT CONTRACT EXTENSION CHRIS CARTER!!!!!!..........IF NOT YOU BETTER GOOGLE IT!!!

Nice. :lol:

 

[TriCHawk]

To me, Baldwin just gets open better than Tate. Tate took 2 years to become what he now is, Baldwins ceiling has not been reached.

And Doug is Mr. Steady. I like Tate and his playmaking ability, but he made some bonehead plays now and then. I can't recall ADB ever doing anything like that.

 

[Throwdown]

I'm happy we get to keep ADB for at least 2 more years, I would've been sad to see him go

 

[chimpanjesus]

just rewatched the NFC championship game last night. i forgot what a huge factor doug was in that game, massively clutch catches. it would've been a very different game without him. stoked he's locked up.

 

[-The Glove-]

Doug was clutch all season. I've been waiting all offseason for this news

 

[MB12]

YES YES YES. BEST OFFSEASON EVER

 

[EastCoastHawksFan]

I'm happy we get to keep ADB for at least 2 more years, I would've been sad to see him go

At least 3 more years

I am pretty happy about this. Baldwin is Clutch and always has been.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Glad to see this is done. It's not as long as I'd have liked it to be, but the money is about right and it gives Doug another opportunity to get a bigger deal down the road.

They tried but Doug wasn't going for it. So this means Wilson's WR corps is pretty locked up for the next 3-4 years. Excellent.

 

[AROS]

Mr. Clutch. SO glad I can get his jersey this year! :thirishdrinkers:

 

[KitsapGuy]

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

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.

Why become redundant with Tate really?

Harvin easily replaces Tate's ability in the short to intermediate passing/running game.

Kearse potentially replaces him as a deep threat jump ball WR with plus blocking ability.

Baldwin just provides something different, he's one-third Sidney Rice, one-third Bobby Engram, and one-third Brian Blades forged in the competitive fire that was Steve Largent.

 

[bjornanderson21]

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.

Im glad someone who is respected on this board made this comment. Only respected members get away with posting anything negative.

Yes, this deal will end up being frightfully close to what Tate was offered and it is questionable whether ADB deserves it more than Tate.

I personally like cheering for ADB more than tate, but if I was told that they would be paid the same and I was asked which one I would keep I would choose Tate.

Keeping Baldwin around a bit longer is something I wanted, but NEVER did I hear anyone saying that Baldwin will be paid like Tate just fewer years. The seahawks in no way are getting a bargain and in all likelihood they probably overpaid.

Im kinda bummed that the hawks found a way for me to not like them keeping a player I wanted them to keep.

 

[DavidSeven]

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.

Im glad someone who is respected on this board made this comment. Only respected members get away with posting anything negative.

Yes, this deal will end up being frightfully close to what Tate was offered and it is questionable whether ADB deserves it more than Tate.

I personally like cheering for ADB more than tate, but if I was told that they would be paid the same and I was asked which one I would keep I would choose Tate.

Keeping Baldwin around a bit longer is something I wanted, but NEVER did I hear anyone saying that Baldwin will be paid like Tate just fewer years. The seahawks in no way are getting a bargain and in all likelihood they probably overpaid.

Im kinda bummed that the hawks found a way for me to not like them keeping a player I wanted them to keep.

He's not getting paid like Tate. Tate is making $6.25M/year over 5 years with $13M+ guaranteed. His guarantees alone are higher than Baldwin's new money.

How exactly is a deal that averages $4.3M over the next three years "frightfully close" to Tate's deal? Even if you calculated the "new money" separately (which honestly makes no sense), Tate is still making more money in Detroit.

I'd argue they're comparable in value anyway, though, yes, Tate is probably at the higher end of that tier. And he was compensated accordingly. I don't really see your issue.