Personally, I am a diehard Seahawk fan. As I know all of the rest of you are. How would you feel about a Flynn/3rd Round flip for Harvin/Joe Webb (very hypothetical)? Harvin is a game changer and we all know what the Vikings were able to accomplish with Favre, Harvin, and Rice. Furthermore, I am very intrigued by the possibility of Harvin, Rice, and Wilson working together. I believe Harvin would immensely improve our team. Also, I am a slight Golden Tate fan but I think he is an obvious "poor man's" version to Harvin, just my opinion. I would love others thoughts.............Thanks!

With Wilson at QB Harvin would be deadly.
That would be a great move as long as they got another WR or drafted one as well.

I don't think we should spend money on another YAC Wide Receiver when we have Tate and Baldwin. While Harvin is on another talent level then those two, I'd still rather see the Seahawks sign a deep threat receiver instead if the Seahawks sign a big name WR during free agency.

Isnt Garvin a slot receiver? Wouldn't that make Baldwin the poor man's Harvin?

Harvin has some character issues that I would be worried about. He fought teammates and punched coaches in Florida, and everything hasn't exactly been kosher in Vikings. Percy Harvin may be an impact player, but I'm not sure if he risk is worth the reward that you get with him.

Doesn't Harvin have Migraine problems or something of that sort? But yes Havin in this Offense would be Awesome!

I love Percy Harvin but I really just don't see us doing THAT much in FA this year...

The Vikings seem pretty committed to Ponder for the time being, for some reason, so I doubt they'd do that deal. However, Harvin is only 24 and already one of the best wideouts in the game. I'd have no problem sending them our first rounder.

I prefer Tate and Baldwin than Harvin.

dunceface wrote:I love Percy Harvin but I really just don't see us doing THAT much in FA this year...

Percy Harvin ≠ win in Atlanta

Harvin is waaaaay better than Tate or Baldwin.

Harvin is not that much better than Tate, if at all.

I think it would cost too much to acquire him, he's a great athlete but I wouldn't give up a 2nd rounder for him and I'm sure that's what it's going to take.

The operative word in this thread title is "availability". When Harvin isn't experiencing migranes, and/or can stay on the field, he is definitely top notch. It's been suggested we pick him up (basically) to replace Tate. IMO, that would be a huge error and a huge step backwards with our O progress. We've spent a lot of time and money developing Tate and his recent success suggests that was time and money well spent. Add to that the fact he has a year with Wilson, building chemistry, and we'd be insane to even think about reducing his role.

I would definitely like to pick up a burner, but don't believe we absolutely need one. Not bad enough to mess with the current chemistry and not bad enough to dole out a fortune for. I'm hoping such money is spent on the D line, LB and an upgrade to the O line. I'm hopeful JS and PC have their sights set on some mid to late-round burner that we will cost us peanuts while developing. Regardless, Wilson is going to score us points, bank on that.

An article on why it might not be such a great idea: http://seahawksdraftblog.com/the-argume ... to-seattle

Oi, lads, anyone fancy a wee pisser-up?

Harvin is a #1.

Seattle has not had a true #1 WR since Steve Largent.

misfit wrote:Harvin is a #1.

Seattle has not had a true #1 WR since Steve Largent.

Rice is borderline #1 so this will mearly be a luxury roster addition. Can you make a role for a player like him? Absolutely. But it is completely a luxury and not a need what so ever.

How is an explosive offensive weapon a "luxury"? We need playmaking receivers.

So those who want Harvin think having to Crystal Glass end tables in a Punk music bar will make it thru a season?

Rat wrote:How is an explosive offensive weapon a "luxury"? We need playmaking receivers.

The Schnei said that he is very excited about WR's in this years draft class so dont expect any free agent players but rookies through the draft.

Axx wrote:

Rat wrote:How is an explosive offensive weapon a "luxury"? We need playmaking receivers.

The Schnei said that he is very excited about WR's in this years draft class so dont expect any free agent players but rookies through the draft.

And I prefer that. Our track record with acquiring vet WRs isn't the greatest.

Axx wrote:

Rat wrote:How is an explosive offensive weapon a "luxury"? We need playmaking receivers.

The Schnei said that he is very excited about WR's in this years draft class so dont expect any free agent players but rookies through the draft.

The Schnei says lots of things. You can never tell when these guys are being honest.

Rat wrote:

Axx wrote:

Rat wrote:How is an explosive offensive weapon a "luxury"? We need playmaking receivers.

The Schnei said that he is very excited about WR's in this years draft class so dont expect any free agent players but rookies through the draft.

The Schnei says lots of things. You can never tell when these guys are being honest.

Hopefully he's telling the truth this time, because I think we'd get a lot more bang for our buck with a couple of draft picks than trading for Harvin or spending big bucks on a free agent WR.

Zebulon Dak wrote:Harvin is not that much better than Tate, if at all.

THIS!, Plus, Tate and Wilson have already established a meshing, so why would you monkey with that?

Draft Tavon Austin. He's the younger, less injury prone, headache free, cheaper version of Percy Harvin, and should be available to the Hawks in the draft this year.

at this point, tate is better than harvin.

Basis4day wrote:I prefer Tate and Baldwin than Harvin.

You're kidding me right?

Harvin is 24 and a legit Top 10 WR. This would be a MAJOR coup.

HOWEVER... Harvin wants to get paid, there in lies the issue. Can we afford to give a Percy Harvin a deal he wants, while paying the others?

mrblitz wrote:at this point, tate is better than harvin.

No he's really not. And I love Golden Tate. Harvin is a bonafide star.. that said, he wants $$$$ .. basically like a Mike Wallace

Why trade all that for Harvin if he's on the last year of his contract?

Hawken-Dazs wrote:Why trade all that for Harvin if he's on the last year of his contract?

Because any team that would trade for him would give him a new deal as part of the trade.

I don't know if I'd do it, and I like Shark's idea of Tavon Austin, but I would not complain at all if we did acquire Harvin. He'd instantly be our best offensive weapon and really open up the offense. He and Russell would be unbelievable together.

And for those of you who think Tate is better than Harvin: seriously? I love Tate, but that's ridiculous. That's like saying Shonn Greene is better than Marshawn Lynch. Greene is a solid player with some talent, but it's not even close.

misfit wrote:Harvin is a #1.

Seattle has not had a true #1 WR since Steve Largent.

I'm skeptical of calling a guy who has never had 1,000 yards a #1. Where did I see that before? Oh yeah Deon Branch.

FWIW: I think Harvin is better than Tate, but I don't think he's a necessity for our offense. He's 24 and about to get paid like a #1 receiver. I don't see how we could pay HARVIN and RICE.

I think the best way to upgrade our receiving core is to add a solid fourth option. The drop off from Baldwin to the other guys is pretty significant.

There is no doubt in my mind that Harvin is a better receiver than Balwin and Tate...and I don't think it's that close. He got injured this season but before he got injured he was tearing it up....catching everything in sight.

I think his migraine issue is also a thing of the past. I think it was a couple of years ago that he was having this issue and if I remember correctly, he said he learned how to take care of himself to avoid them and he didn't have any issues with it this year.

I would love for them to acquire him. WRs take so much to time to develop from draft. Harvin is young and has a lot of productive years in front of him...as long as his injury from last season checks out.

Mp

In Harvin's defense, he got hurt BY US. Yep. Week 9. He was getting me mega points on my fantasy league until then. I said it then, that Harvin's loss was a bigger issue for Minn not making the playoffs. He is that valuable.(and yes, I know what a big year AP had). The big question is how much he wants. I am telling you that he is way better than Tate and Baldwin, heck even Rice.

BigMeach wrote:Isnt Garvin a slot receiver? Wouldn't that make Baldwin the poor man's Harvin?

Baldwin is a nice story..but not Percy Harvin

Nice depth

BigMeach wrote:Isnt Garvin a slot receiver? Wouldn't that make Baldwin the poor man's Harvin?

A very, very poor man's...maybe.

mech.romance wrote:He punched coaches in Florida

Prove it...

I like him a ton as a player but I'd rather see us get more size at the position, especially if we are paying the top dollar that Harvin will want. We have enough short guys.

Hasselbeck wrote:

Basis4day wrote:I prefer Tate and Baldwin than Harvin.

You're kidding me right?

Harvin is 24 and a legit Top 10 WR. This would be a MAJOR coup.

HOWEVER... Harvin wants to get paid, there in lies the issue. Can we afford to give a Percy Harvin a deal he wants, while paying the others?

I'd check Football Outsiders on this one. Harvin a Top 10 WR? We get more production out of Baldwin and Tate and they don't cost nearly has much as Harvin does.

On the radio this morning they were speculating Harvin to New England, who would then let Wes Welker walk.

In a perfect world Harvin would'nt cost so much to acquire and would be happily reunited with Rice in Seattle. The reality is that we have limited passing plays because we are a run-oriented team and in acquiring Harvin we will take plays away from Tate who is now just starting to blossom into his own. If Hawks acquire Harvin we'd not only shell out big bucks but we'd likely force feed him to keep him happy. He's a playmaker no doubt but we have many playmakers who don't make nearly half what Harvin demands.

I'd rather sure-up some pass rushers first.

Plus (I'm only guessing here) that he won't want to change his number.

Don't forget that the Hawks pass less than 30 times a game. We are ranked near the bottom on pass attempts. Will we really get that much value out of him? Rice needs a solid backup. This the last year was the first in a while he has not missed a lot of time.

Happypuppy wrote:Don't forget that the Hawks pass less than 30 times a game. We are ranked near the bottom on pass attempts. Will we really get that much value out of him? Rice needs a solid backup. This the last year was the first in a while he has not missed a lot of time.

The Vikings are one of the most run-heavy teams in the league and has still gotten enormous value out of him.

But what does he do that Tate doesn't already do for us? Return kicks?

Zebulon Dak wrote:But what does he do that Tate doesn't already do for us? Return kicks?

Eat up cap space?

Wow... I con't believe poeple can convince themselves Tate is better than Harvin. If ESPN polled America who's better Harvin would get 99% of the votes.

I am a proponent of adding another weapon on offense this off season and was focusing on a big 6'2+ WR to play on the outside and/or back up Rice if/when he gets injured again, and I also think an athletic pass catching TE that can split out wide would be great addition too.

We have an amazing young QB but only a slightly above average WR/TE group for him to throw too. The hawks need a WR that can get open and I don't think it's crazy to think Harvin could be top 5 in the league in getting seperation. He has the speed and quicks off a smaller player but is still 5'11 185lbs and plays bigger. Not many rookies come in and make imediate contributions. What 2nd rd WR can you guarentee will make an immediate impcat and force team to scheme for them. A plaer like Harvin will open up a whole lot for an offense liek ours. He can play any WR position, RB, and return kicks. He is a one of a kind player and to think we could get him for a 2nd makes me laugh. This is exactly the type of screwd move JS would make.

Oh and I'd be fine with Giving Harvin whatever Mike Wallace gets, Harvin is a better plaer and has much more versatility. Walllace has speed, but Harvin has speed, quicks, hands, and much more.