DREAM DRAFT and OFF-SEASON ROSTERBATION!!!

[SDHawk]

I'm not going to follow the draft this year. But in the past it's often felt like I'm mind-melded to JS and I think the reason is because both of us seem more impressed than most by players making "wow" plays. Look for guys with "wow" qualities or who make "wow" plays (e.g. Bruce Irvin, Christine Michael, etc.). They usually don't bother with some of the more vanilla prospects until the very late rounds, if ever. Even guys like Bobby Wagner, who were vanilla on tape, had "wow" speed on the track.

When looking at linemen, look for dirtbags with run blocking skillsets, even if they have some issues. Guys like Nate Solder or Kyle Long. The more a prospect pancakes an opponent, the more likely Seattle will have him on their radar.

Thanks for the tips

 

[Mr.Hawkbrah]

Imo, Baldwin and kearse are nothing more than cheap stop gaps, the moment they arnt cheap I don't see it being worth it, they just arnt that good. Not irreplaceable good.

We'll just agree to disagree.

Tate and Harvin are two of the best YAC guys in the league which fits this offensive philosophy perfectly - that is, to make explosive results out of low risk plays.

Baldwin had a ridiculous catch rate of something like 70+%. Those are some of the surest hands in the league.

Tate would command something in the $5mm-$6.5mm range... which would be comparable to Nate Burleson or Brian Hartline... hardly overpaying for Tate's contributions, imo.

Not to sound mean, but I don't know how anyone could watch Baldwin in the postseason and think he wasn't a good player. I was a Baldwin skeptic, and was slower than most to accept him. But the guy was a total stud for Seattle over their last 4 games or so. Not just on 3rd downs, but on big plays and kickoffs too. He is so legit, and you can now understand why JS fielded so many trade offers for him last offseason.

i never said DB wasnt good, i said he wasnt THAT good, as in hes not a must sign guy. This time 3 years ago id say you should sign him, but when im comparing him to the other decisions we have to make his value just doesnt compare. Keep in mind this is in the context of a team that just won the superbowl, a team thats loaded top to bottom besides the oline so its not exactly a slight saying hes bad or not worthy, its called making the tough decisions. You dont build dynasty's signing good players, you build dynasty's by signing great players and drafting and developing new cheap talent.

Despite comments ive heard about how much we miss on wrs, its my opinion we have hardly tried loading up at wr, yet in a few years time we're worlds better, why do people not think we couldnt easily find a comparable talent to db? dude wasnt even drafted, obviously we have a good eye for talent... its almost like people think we got lucky finding these guys..i have more trust in the FO personally.

 

[SDHawk]

Despite comments ive heard about how much we miss on wrs, its my opinion we have hardly tried loading up at wr, yet in a few years time we're worlds better, why do people not think we couldnt easily find a comparable talent to db? dude wasnt even drafted, obviously we have a good eye for talent... its almost like people think we got lucky finding these guys..i have more trust in the FO personally.

Where would you rank DB in this list?

Sidney Rice
Braylon Edwards
Mike Williams
Deion Branch
Deon Butler
Ben Obomanu
Brandon Stokley
Nate Burleson
TJ Houshmandzadeh

 

[jlwaters1]

I would bet that Thurmond, Breno, and lem would all be let go. too expensive to resign when you've got young players who can do the job, such as lane, bowie, etc

 

[Mr.Hawkbrah]

Despite comments ive heard about how much we miss on wrs, its my opinion we have hardly tried loading up at wr, yet in a few years time we're worlds better, why do people not think we couldnt easily find a comparable talent to db? dude wasnt even drafted, obviously we have a good eye for talent... its almost like people think we got lucky finding these guys..i have more trust in the FO personally.

Where would you rank DB in this list?

Sidney Rice
Braylon Edwards
Mike Williams
Deion Branch
Deon Butler
Ben Obomanu
Brandon Stokley
Nate Burleson
TJ Houshmandzadeh

number 1.
if were playing madden and turning off injuries id take sidney rice over him no doubt.
id also take a healthy and in shape mike williams over db, but thats drifting even further into fantasy land.

im not sure if thats a test for how much you think i under value db or how crap our wrs used to be..
if its the latter, my point still holds true imo, we havent tried that hard to improve our wr core up until percy and i think that had more to do with petes man crush on him than overall philosophy of developing cheap home grown talent.

 

[chris98251]

How much cheaper can you get then a UDFA that starts, Kearse and Baldwin both were money in the playoffs and are still on the upswing.

The NFL minimum is about as cheap as you get with contractual up ticks per year of service; championship teams are built keeping your core guys and replacing guys systematically not fire sales. Harvin is our dynamic guy, but to keep him dynamic you can't give him the ball 20 times a game. Baldwin, Kearse, Tate are all guys that can catch and run, Baldwin while more slight has proven durable, Tate and Kearse are very solid physically.

Based on your theory of wasted money on expensive players we should cut Turbin, Rice, Baldwin, Tate, Miller, Lynch, Breno, Ungar, Okung, Carpenter, Maragos, Maxwell, Thomas, Chancellor, Sherman, Breno, Mebane, Big Red, McDaniel’s, McDonald, Bennett, Avril, I'll add Russell Wilson cause he is going to be expensive next year.

Lets Start here.

He isn't starting so he has to be a second tier guy.
Rice to injury prone and will cost too much, even though he is the legit #1 we have
Baldwin, pedestrian WR pick another one off the street and we will be fine, they must be a dime a dozen
Tate, we have Harvin, don't need a Tate
Miller to old and slow and cost too much
Lynch cost too much, can find running backs anywhere; also he has to be passed his prime
Breno, average Tackle, get a cheaper one in FA or the draft
Ungar, injury prone and too expensive
Okung injury prone and too expensive, Lineman can be found anywhere
Carpenter, isn't starter material and cost to much to sit
Maragos, you can find cheap back ups anywhere
Maxwell, Chancellor, Thomas, Sherman, cut or trade them all, Safeties are a dime a dozen and these guys were all later round picks expect Thomas and he's to small to defend bigger receivers, JS got these guys late he can do it again.
Mebane Big Red older vet that cost too much, we can get wide bodies all day,
McDaniel’s, McDonald, Bennett, all are the same as Mebane, expensive and we can draft and bring in other guys.
Avril we have a lot of guys that can rush the passer, this guy is going to cost too much, maybe trade him and get a 7th
Wilson, best get something while he's hot, bigger stronger QB's are in this draft and he's going to want way to much money now, after all if we got him in the 3rd we should be able to grab someone usable again, besides we have BJ Daniels.

Yes it's ridiculous, but you can take that unload everyone that has salary or is not an all pro across the board everywhere. We spread the ball around and don't allow the opposition to be able to shut us down if the target one or two guys to shut down. That’s the value of most of the members of this team.

 

[Mr.Hawkbrah]

chris,

one time is accident, and I understand just as well as anyone people get carried away to prove their point, but if every time you reply you need to manipulate what I say to prove your point its not a good look on your part.

Theres many factors that play into my opinion about how to handle DB. His desire to stay here/his value he offers us vs his value around the league/ how much he'll need to get paid. he was undrafted, right now we currently can make a major come up and pick up draft capitol that we never spent, business wise that is a great deal considering I think he'd prefer to play elsewhere and im not the only one who thinks this. He has one year left being cheap, and in the context of this conversation, it was about resigning him like you generally do to players that have one year left and severely under paid so no, he wont be dirt cheap any longer, at least for the sake of this argument.

and again, no..based on my logic, you keep the most essential pieces that make your team tick, i never said get rid of everyone you have to pay.. hopefully that make sense to you and i think it does, i just think your agenda is showing very obviously here which is why im going to cut this reply short.

 

[SDHawk]

im not sure if thats a test for how much you think i under value db or how crap our wrs used to be..

Both

if its the latter, my point still holds true imo, we havent tried that hard to improve our wr core up until percy and i think that had more to do with petes man crush on him than overall philosophy of developing cheap home grown talent.

Totally disagree. We threw millions after millions at those receivers I listed. That's a list of notable receivers we've had here the last 5 years.... It took 5 years to acquire/develop a talent like DB. It's not as easy as you make it out to be.

All this is a moot point anyway. We are going to place a 2nd round tender on DB and I don't think anyone outside of maybe the Colts will pay that kind of price. The real question is how the Seahawks value Tate vs. how Tate values himself.

 

[Mr.Hawkbrah]

Totally disagree. We threw millions after millions at those receivers I listed. That's a list of notable receivers we've had here the last 5 years.... It took 5 years to acquire/develop a talent like DB. It's not as easy as you make it out to be.

All this is a moot point anyway. We are going to place a 2nd round tender on DB and I don't think anyone outside of maybe the Colts will pay that kind of price. The real question is how the Seahawks value Tate vs. how Tate values himself.

what... a lot of those guys were here pre-pete its not even a relevant point. Not to mention the exaggeration of throwing millions at those guys, we may have paid millions, but in the context of what nfl players make none of them except one were invested heavily into, every single one of those players were arguably ones nobody else wanted outside of sidney rice. We spent one 2nd on tate...then what? a couple 4th rounders? am i mistaken here..not sure how you can validate your argument enough to say you TOTALLY disagree, on that point at least. Its pretty clear our FO number one priority was to create a defensive powerhouse and not a team built around airing the ball out, common sense would tell me if they planned to do that why wouldnt wr be one of their least priority's?

I really dont think its easy, i just have confidence in their player evaluation skills and development, my arguments are less about DB as a player and more about my appreciation for how good our FO is at finding guys they want..give me 2 kearses on the team instead of db and we still win the superbowl. its not saying kearse is better or worse, its saying the difference that it makes to the team is negligible in the big picture of how good we are and especially when considering how cap effects teams.

the real question is how much both tate and db value themselves, cause neither are worth (to our offense not implying skill set) over 5 mill a year that a lot of number 2s go for. our team will survive without 5 tds a year from either of them imo.

 

[SDHawk]

Heres a nice read

http://www.seahawks.com/news/articles/a ... a376b7e89c

Relevant nuggets:

"A closer look at how the Seahawks converted seven of 12 third-down situations against the Broncos supports that assessment.

Wilson completed seven of his eight third-down passes for 83 yards – to four receivers – and the only incompletion was the pass to Jermaine Kearse in the end zone that Broncos linebacker Nate Irving broke up in the second quarter"

If you read the entire article, you realize how CRITICAL Doug Baldwin was to our success in converting 3rd downs. He caught all 5 passes to lead the team in rec and yards for the Superb Owl.

 

[chris98251]

Baldwin is Engram in this offense, we saw how the offense tanked without a go to guy for the 3rd down effected things with Hass, we saw improvement when Baldwin came in right away. Tate has ability but his skill set isn't finding holes in a zone and Dougs instincts for seeing a breakdown in protection and come back routes is under appreciated.

Tates biggest strength is breaking out on the edge and then run after catch breaking tackles and playing more physical.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Baldwin is Ingrum in this offense, we saw how the offense tanked without a go to guy for the 3rd down effected things with Hass, we saw improvement when Baldwin came in right away. Tate has ability but his skill set isn't finding holes in a zone and Dougs instincts for seeing a breakdown in protection and come back routes is under appreciated.

Tates biggest strength is breaking out on the edge and then run after catch breaking tackles and playing more physical.

I suppose you mean Bobby Engram.

I disagree in your assessment in that Baldwin has the ability to play more than just the slot versus Engram was primarily a slot guy with the Hawks.

 

[chris98251]

My bad I default to my sisters last name spelling so much when I talk about him. I'll fix it.

As far as comparisons, no they are not exact replicas but are close to what they mean as far as contributions on third downs, Baldwin will only get better as well, he has improved greatly from one season to the next. By the time Bobby came here he was already a seasoned vet counting down to his last days and still put in several good years.

 

[chris98251]

the real question is how much both tate and db value themselves, cause neither are worth (to our offense not implying skill set) over 5 mill a year that a lot of number 2s go for. our team will survive without 5 tds a year from either of them imo.

I disagree, 5 TD's is huge since our offense is not one of the high scoring offenses in the league and we tend to have a lot of close games. Tate and Baldwin have been both instrumental in winning those and Tate with a tendency for the dramatic.

My biggest thought is both have bought in and will sell out there bodies for a play, in this day and age that isn't common place. Look at New York and the Giants for the worst case of not wanting to be physical and give it up. It was brutal on Manning and his turnover margin.

Yes you can't pay everyone with a cap as the best in the league, but Baldwin knows he is a specific type of receiver and I don't thing has illusions he will be Jerry Rice, Tate is a bit different as far as mentality, I think we could keep him, but I also think he wants a bigger spotlight as well. Dallas, San Francisco, New York, type atmospheres.

 

[Mr.Hawkbrah]

the real question is how much both tate and db value themselves, cause neither are worth (to our offense not implying skill set) over 5 mill a year that a lot of number 2s go for. our team will survive without 5 tds a year from either of them imo.

I disagree, 5 TD's is huge since our offense is not one of the high scoring offenses in the league and we tend to have a lot of close games. Tate and Baldwin have been both instrumental in winning those and Tate with a tendency for the dramatic.

My biggest thought is both have bought in and will sell out there bodies for a play, in this day and age that isn't common place. Look at New York and the Giants for the worst case of not wanting to be physical and give it up. It was brutal on Manning and his turnover margin.

Yes you can't pay everyone with a cap as the best in the league, but Baldwin knows he is a specific type of receiver and I don't thing has illusions he will be Jerry Rice, Tate is a bit different as far as mentality, I think we could keep him, but I also think he wants a bigger spotlight as well. Dallas, San Francisco, New York, type atmospheres.

I guess its just a matter of different value systems, in the same sense of me saying our offense doesnt rely on passing a lot to justify the need, youre saying thats why it makes it that much more important to have guys you can count of for those moments we need them. I think the biggest thing that separates our opinion in reality is just what we perceive these guys might demand in money. in the end all we can do is speculate. for whatever reason i feel like DB has a boulder on his shoulder too big to be filled in our system, but thats all it really is admittedly, speculation. Not to take away from part of what gave them success here in the first place, but i think a large part of selling out their body's can be attributed to pete as well, all our players are gritty like that and seems to be something we breed around here. all in all, its hard to say whos right until this all shakes out. im going to be stoked on our roster either way.

 

[chris98251]

Agreed to disagree on the perceptions we have. We will see here shortly what the teams value is and know.

 

[olyfan63]

...give me 2 kearses on the team instead of db and we still win the superbowl. its not saying kearse is better or worse, its saying the difference that it makes to the team is negligible in the big picture of how good we are and especially when considering how cap effects teams. ...cause neither are worth (to our offense not implying skill set) over 5 mill a year that a lot of number 2s go for. our team will survive without 5 tds a year from either of them imo.

The problem is that we would not have made it to the Super Bowl in the first place with 2 Kearses and no Baldwin. We would have lost 2 more games during the regular season that were Baldwin-only plays. We would have been a wild card. Then we would have stood a good chance of losing to San Fran in the conference championship, playing them at their house.
We also would not have made it to the Super Bowl without the emergence of Kearse picking up some of the slack for Sidney Rice. But 2 Kearses and no Baldwin--that combination leaves us at home watching the 49ers pounding the Broncos in the Super Bowl. Probably also true for 2 Baldwin's and no Kearse.
Baldwin is the quickest, cut-on-a-dime-est player on the Seahawks. Not the flat-out-speed fastest, but the quickest at the 3-cone time on the team, of all the ones I looked at. And he has developed chemistry with Russell Wilson. Not saying he can't be replaced, just saying he is a higher value to this team than some people are giving him credit for. We'd pretty much need to have a 2nd round pick to be assured of getting a comparable talent. And then there is the risk factor of drafting a bust, plus the ramp-up-speed risk factor of having a new WR take 2 years to get familiar with the system and making plays, like the 2 years it took Golden Tate to get to being a productive receiver.

Where would you rank DB in this list?

Sidney Rice
Braylon Edwards
Mike Williams
Deion Branch
Deon Butler
Ben Obomanu
Brandon Stokley
Nate Burleson
TJ Houshmandzadeh

Slot WR's:
1. Baldwin
2. Stokely/Branch
3. Butler ("sort of" a slot guy)

WR Overall Value to Seahawks (during their Seahawks tenure, including WR and special teams)
1. Sidney Rice
2. Doug Baldwin
3. Mike Williams (for that part of one glorious year he had)
4. Nate Burleson
5. Brandon Stokely
6. Deion Branch (injured so much it's hard to recall his contributions)
6. Braylon Edwards (for that part of one season)
6. Ben Obomanu (special teams factor)
7. Nearly all the remaining, including Housh,
8. Deon Butler, at the bottom

Recall that we also let 4th rounder Chris Harper walk, T.O. failed to make the team, and cut Kris Durham after a year, and he became a starting WR for the Lions.
Baldwin came in as a rookie and was instantly productive, even with TJack throwing to him.

Are we assuming relative to where each was when they came to the Seahawks?
If so, really his competition is Branch, Butler, Stokely, and sort-of-but not-really Obomanu.
Rice, Williams, Burleson, Braylon, and Housh are all different types of receivers.

Of the slot guys, I would put DB at the top, just barely above both Branch and Stokely as Seahawks. Branch was good when he had Tom Brady throwing to him. When Hasselbeck was throwing to him, Branch wasn't as good, plus he was injured a lot in Seattle IIRC. Stokely seems like a fair comparison, and I'd put DB slightly above Stokely.

In terms of overall value to the team, the only guys above Baldwin would be Rice (when healthy) and Mike Williams during the prime of his one good year, but obviously not now. Housh sucked as a Seahawk. Burleson had his moments, but as a Seahawk, I don't recall him making nearly as many key plays as Baldwin.

Does the world end if Baldwin leaves? No, but he is a key part of the machine, and we should do everything we reasonably can to keep him, at least long enough to have another high quality slot receiver ready to step in. I think it would be better to keep Baldwin + Kearse and let Tate go, if push comes to shove. Tate and Kearse have some overlap in their game. Baldwin's abilities and role are a little more distinct and unique within the Seattle WR personnel group.

Again, remember the typical 2-year learning curve for many rookie WR's... We need to keep Baldwin at least until his replacement is ready.
If push comes to shove, keep Baldwin if we can make a good deal with him, and let Tate get paid elsewhere.

 

[Mr.Hawkbrah]

I am not here to argue DB isnt good or didnt contribute to our success, but wow, wouldnt of made it to the superbowl without him? you sound pretty sure of that opinion of yours, perhaps your right, but imo thats not how football works, you cant make assumptions like that and assume it would/or wouldnt work out differently. RW is well on his way to proving himself as one of the most clutch qbs in the league, thats a huge x factor to count out when saying we'd lose without someone else making a play.

But i guess if I wanted to play that game id say maybe we would have won in both of our close late season losses if doug baldwin wouldnt of disappeared for a combines 4 catches, 44 yards and 0 tds in those games. Did he essentially lose those games for us by that logic?

I would gladly say DB has added much more overall during his career here than sidney rice has. rice is the epitome of a bad contract, hes like the hot girl you sleep with, wake up to realize how bad of beer goggles you had on and have immediate regret that you cant take back.

 

[Throwdown]

I don't see how Tate is a better option over Baldwin.

Baldwin is a lot more consistent, and pretty much smarter than Tate.

Tate can be a game breaker, but I'm not trusting Tate on 3rd down in anyway. I'd take Rice & Baldwin, and to a certain extent Kearse over Tate in a situation where something needs to happen. I'm pretty apathetic whether Tate leaves or goes, I don't think he's a vital part. I really feel differently about Baldwin though, dude is money in the clutch.

 

[olyfan63]

I am not here to argue DB isnt good or didnt contribute to our success, but wow, wouldnt of made it to the superbowl without him? you sound pretty sure of that opinion of yours, perhaps your right, but imo thats not how football works, you cant make assumptions like that and assume it would/or wouldnt work out differently. RW is well on his way to proving himself as one of the most clutch qbs in the league, thats a huge x factor to count out when saying we'd lose without someone else making a play.

But i guess if I wanted to play that game id say maybe we would have won in both of our close late season losses if doug baldwin wouldnt of disappeared for a combines 4 catches, 44 yards and 0 tds in those games. Did he essentially lose those games for us by that logic?

I would gladly say DB has added much more overall during his career here than sidney rice has. rice is the epitome of a bad contract, hes like the hot girl you sleep with, wake up to realize how bad of beer goggles you had on and have immediate regret that you cant take back.

Of course you, me, and everyone else is certainly entitled to hold and espouse any opinion we want.

I say we are +2 in games this year we wouldn't have won, because of situational, game-changing plays Doug Baldwin made that are unique to him. You could also say that about Sherman, Bennett, Wilson, Earl, Kam, KJ, and M. Smith. The truth is, the margin for winning in the NFL is so razor thin sometimes. Of course, there's nothing to say the team wouldn't have responded in some favorable way, like beating Arizona and SF at the end instead of losing those 2 games. We are +1 on Tate's account from the 2nd Rams game, and that play he made. Last year, we were +2 for the season on Tate. Having players make key, game-changing plays sure beats 2 years of 7-9, doesn't it?

A couple games we should have lost, but instead won, and put us over the top for HFA this year:
- Houston, down 20, Baldwin was only 3 for 29 yards but they were the key first downs. Russell Wilson had a QB rating of 49 that game and got sacked 5 times, J.J. Watt & friends.
- Tampa Bay, down 21 at home, Baldwin is the leading receiver, with 6 for 75.
Both those games, IIRC, Baldwin made freakin' amazing sideline tippy toe catches that very few other humans could make, in at least one case where the replay overruled the on-field call.

Those 2 games are why we had HFA through the playoffs. Sure, maybe we beat the Cards at home if we *need* to. Maybe we play to win at the 49ers if we needed to.

I don't think I'd say Baldwin disappeared vs. the Cards and 49ers; more like our will to attack offensively disappeared at the level of Pete and Bevell. Against SF, Baldwin was targeted 4 times and caught 3. I'll somewhat give you disappeared on the Cards game; 6 targets and 1 catch. Wilson was running for his life most of that game. Did the O-Line disappear too? Even then, look at what it says: Wilson has a comfort zone with Baldwin, and when he's under pressure, near panic, his reflexive reaction is, "where's Doug?"

It seems we agree Baldwin has value; I'm going one further and saying that Baldwin provides a *unique* value, at this time, for this team, with this system, with this quarterback (chemistry), that's harder to replace than people are giving credit for. We can't bank on finding a player who would provide that, and the chemistry and system fit would take time to develop. Baldwin, right now, is Russell Wilson's security blanket when he's scrambling.

I say they more likely re-sign Baldwin than Tate. I hope they re-up both. But if we only get 1, I think Pete and John keep Baldwin.
Tate has a serviceable replacement in Kearse. Plug in Kearse, and use Tate's would-be big money to sign a tall, physically dominant receiver, the player that Sidney Rice was intended to be.

Rice hasn't been a bust. He's just been a $4M receiver in an $8M receiver's contract, with injury issues that knock him down another $1M or so in value. He's been good. We just can't afford to have him be good; at $8M, we need "dominant". If we can bring Rice back on an incentive-laden 2 year deal with a cap number of $3M a year or so, we should.

Now the fun begins. Shall we save a PM taunt based on what Pete and John actually do? Baldwin stays, Tate goes = I win. Both stay = Push. Baldwin goes = you win.