massari":170i60w4 said:
Popeyejones":170i60w4 said:
I think he'd be more valuable to a team that actually needs what he's good at (i.e. a return man).
I know Lockett hasn't had a return TD in the last fourteen days or so, but cut the kid some slack.
He has good potential as a WR and would be great insurance for Lockett on ST. Maybe even some special teams trick plays with Patterson and Lockett?
For a mid round pick I'd rather have him over Lockette, Kearse, Matthews, Daniels.
He'd be getting traded for a mid-to-late round pick beause he doesn't have much (if any) potential as a WR, and ST insurance isn't really a thing.
He lost his starting job last year because he has bad hands and can't run routes. So far this year he's even lost spot WR duty for the same reason.
As for your list of Seattle WRs:
Kearse: No. Kearse is a totally average NFL WR. Patterson is far below average.
Lockette: Lockette provides value on coverage units, and Patterson doesn't.
Matthews: Matthews isn't redundant as a receiver with Lockett and Richardson, and Patterson is (while being a vastly inferior version of them)
Daniels: Maybe, but teams don't really trade draft picks to fix "problems" at the 53rd spot on their roster.
Regardless though, even if he is available to be traded for, he'd be more valuable to someone who actually needs the thing he can do (ST returner). Paying the market rate in trade for something they don't need wouldn't make much sense.
