Hawkblogger: rumors of a 4 year contract for Tate

[HawkWow]

Much better. Starting to feel some love in here for our Golden boy. Another thing most are missing, either intentionally or not, is our 1,2,3 Tate, Badly and Kearse were thrust into those roles due to injury. With a healthy Harvin and Rice (as planned)...those guys are 3,4 and 5. I am overjoyed by what they gave us having to face the leagues best DBs while in the league's best division.

Are they the flashy 6'4" guys that are so coveted? Nope, they're not. But they are playmakers with and without the ball and have done so with a new QB. There's something to be said for continuity. Imagine the skills these guys picked up this year and the connection they now have with RW. I don't want to mess with such chemistry. Add Harvin to that mix (maybe Rice?), shore up the line to free up Miller and Willson (and ASJ?) and we have a set of ball catchers that are dangerous, well rounded, in tune with the system AND love this team.

I will say this again and kill me if I'm wrong...but I don't think we are in the SB without Tate's efforts this year. Pay the man and get RW some protection. I believe we will score twice as many points as we give up and do it with the guys that won us our 1st SB. What's not to love?

 

[bigcc]

I would be pretty happy with Harvin, Tate, Baldwin and Kearse.

I know some want the big, Calvin Johnson type. But I will take the human bat belt in Harvin. And Tate is awesome as a #2, especially when safeties will have to cheat toward #11. Tate is damn good 1 on 1. No homo

take that and add in say a Britt type player on the cheap and I'd be a happy camper

 

[Subzero717]

Yall sleepin on channel 83.

 

[plyka]

I really wish some people could look at statistics objectively when assessing a player's value.

The season that Golden Tate just had for us was pretty special. We're obviously a team that doesn't have an offense that will put up Madden-esque numbers, but Tate has gotten better each and every season that he has been here. In 2011, he caught all 35 catchable passes thrown his way. In 2013, his drop rate of 2 percent was only bested by Larry Fitzgerald, Keenan Allen, Marques Colston and Jordan Cameron (players with at least 64 receptions). He is as sure-handed as receivers come. He is a terror after the catch and is one of the best punt returners in the game. To say that he is a #4 receiver is absolutely laughable at best. You can call Harvin a #1 if you wish, but Golden Tate is durable and plays each week. For as much as I love me some Percy, he is not a traditional #1 and plays much better in the slot and in the backfield. Percy's career high in receiving yards is 967 yards, which means nothing, but how can he be a surefire #1 while Tate is reduced to a #4? Tate is obviously not as explosive as Percy, but the gap isn't that big. Sidney Rice is anything but durable (15 games missed in three seasons) and his production here has been extremely limited. His best season in Seattle was 150 yards less than what Tate had this past season. Not sure how he is two full spots ahead of Tate on the depth chart according to some here in this thread.

#4? Get out of here with that. On a team that doesn't finish second to last in passing attempts, Tate is good for 1,200+ yards quite easily. As a QB, you know that if you throw him a catchable ball, he is going to haul it in 98 percent of the time.

I think if we lost Tate, a lot of people here will wish like hell that we could have him back - even at $5 or $6M a season.

I love how in your first sentence you said: "I really wish some people could look at statistics objectively when assessing a player's value."

Then you came up with this gem: "On a team that doesn't finish second to last in passing attempts, Tate is good for 1,200+ yards quite easily"

So you went from talking about looking at statistics objectively to making up statistics out of thin air? Why not just make up a 2200+ yards quite easily? All you have to do is add a 2 instead of a 1 when you're writing the sentence.

A gentleman earlier in the thread cited Tate's return ability and how some may be overlooking that value. Add just 1 more yard to Tate's 11.8 YPR and Tate would be the 3rd best return man in the league. I don't recall him putting the ball on the carpet in over 50 returns and with many of those being rather dare-devilish.

.

An average is a mathematical term. Once you start adding or subtracting numbers from an average, then it no longer remains an average. At that point it's just a made up number.

 

[Rob12]

I really wish some people could look at statistics objectively when assessing a player's value.

The season that Golden Tate just had for us was pretty special. We're obviously a team that doesn't have an offense that will put up Madden-esque numbers, but Tate has gotten better each and every season that he has been here. In 2011, he caught all 35 catchable passes thrown his way. In 2013, his drop rate of 2 percent was only bested by Larry Fitzgerald, Keenan Allen, Marques Colston and Jordan Cameron (players with at least 64 receptions). He is as sure-handed as receivers come. He is a terror after the catch and is one of the best punt returners in the game. To say that he is a #4 receiver is absolutely laughable at best. You can call Harvin a #1 if you wish, but Golden Tate is durable and plays each week. For as much as I love me some Percy, he is not a traditional #1 and plays much better in the slot and in the backfield. Percy's career high in receiving yards is 967 yards, which means nothing, but how can he be a surefire #1 while Tate is reduced to a #4? Tate is obviously not as explosive as Percy, but the gap isn't that big. Sidney Rice is anything but durable (15 games missed in three seasons) and his production here has been extremely limited. His best season in Seattle was 150 yards less than what Tate had this past season. Not sure how he is two full spots ahead of Tate on the depth chart according to some here in this thread.

#4? Get out of here with that. On a team that doesn't finish second to last in passing attempts, Tate is good for 1,200+ yards quite easily. As a QB, you know that if you throw him a catchable ball, he is going to haul it in 98 percent of the time.

I think if we lost Tate, a lot of people here will wish like hell that we could have him back - even at $5 or $6M a season.

I love how in your first sentence you said: "I really wish some people could look at statistics objectively when assessing a player's value."

Then you came up with this gem: "On a team that doesn't finish second to last in passing attempts, Tate is good for 1,200+ yards quite easily"

So you went from talking about looking at statistics objectively to making up statistics out of thin air? Why not just make up a 2200+ yards quite easily? All you have to do is add a 2 instead of a 1 when you're writing the sentence.

A gentleman earlier in the thread cited Tate's return ability and how some may be overlooking that value. Add just 1 more yard to Tate's 11.8 YPR and Tate would be the 3rd best return man in the league. I don't recall him putting the ball on the carpet in over 50 returns and with many of those being rather dare-devilish.

.

An average is a mathematical term. Once you start adding or subtracting numbers from an average, then it no longer remains an average. At that point it's just a made up number.

Yes, because 300 extra yards is so unrealistic. Forget the statistics, then... Everything else I said stands and you calling Tate a #4 is still ridiculous.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

if Tate gets a long term deal done here its not because of what hes done in the past but because of what they project for the future.

Fact . . . Tate was a raw, athletic project as a 21 year old coming out of Notre Dame. Every one knew he would take time to develop.

Fact . . . Tates production, skills, and consistency have gotten better every year.

Projection . . . given Tates starting point and trajectory its not hard to surmise that the accendency will continue. The Seahawks will give him a contract based on their projections, not sentimentality.

Young, tough, durable elusive and improving each season? What's not to like (rhetorical question)? :mrgreen: The toughness alone stands out as a quality Pete holds dear to his heart, and the 'unique ability' is something this team continually searches for. Best try to hold onto that. Especially from a player who has bought into Pete's philosophy.