What would you trade for Tate?

Sports Hernia

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
44,755
Reaction score
3,378
Location
The pit
Maulbert":1f6zsqu9 said:
Tate is a knucklehead we only remember fondly because of the Harvin debacle. We'll be fine at receiver without him. I'd rather trade for competent o-linemen.
The last sentence I agree with.
 

SchadenfreudeHawk

Active member
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Messages
231
Reaction score
47
I'd send over a 5th. Not because of his ball catching skills but cause he would start hookin up with Ciara and Russel would concentrate on football again.
 

Hawkfan77

Active member
Joined
Feb 27, 2011
Messages
3,280
Reaction score
0
That shipped sailed a long time ago. Don't want him back, don't need him back
 

Attyla the Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
Messages
2,559
Reaction score
47
Spin Doctor":1ew8x5tj said:
I keep hearing this narrative, and quite frankly it confuses me. Tate, at this moment is a better receiver than Lockett. He's one of the best after the catch in the league, and he plays much bigger than his size. Even though he is short, he is great at high pointing the ball, and boxing out defenders.

I would agree with this. Although Lockett is already better than Tate was at the end of his second year. Tate started showing signs of quality in the last month or so in year two and carried that over to year three.

Tate's first year and a half though were absolutely littered with inconsistency. Even at the end of year one, he was looking like a potential bust pick. Lockett could be Tate's peer by as soon as the end of this year given the polish he walked into the door with and the improvement he's already shown in just a few games.

Today Tate > Lockett. I doubt that'll be true by Christmas though.
 

WilsonLegend

New member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Russel Wilson, that's the only way i see us trading for Tate.
Wilson and Tate can't be on the same team.
Most of you know why....
 
Top