Russell Wilson

[sonnyblack65]

Man, it's a good thing that you're here to defend Brady! Without ya everybody would think he was a total scrub.

Not trying to defend him just putting up facts, when someone says he has rings but other guy has stats, fail

 

[gohusk]

I think the question though is more geared towards did Seattle really have that bad of receivers especially when they had Tate as he put up top level #1 receiver type numbers when he actually got into a passing offense. Seattle fans keep talking about how Wilson just hasn't had the weapons in the pass game to really show what he can do as a passer yet at least with Tate it looked like he was at worst a top end #2 type receiver and possibly a #1 for quite a few teams in the league. Heck when Megatron went down with injury Tate's numbers just kept going so it wasn't just because he had a great receiver across from him.

It took Tate a while to develop and he certainly isn't a burner. The problem was that:

1. They didn't have anybody to stretch the field
2. They didn't really have a threat at TE. Willson's hands are poor, Miller is ok downfield but because the line was so decimated he was kept in to block when he was even able to play.
3. They tried to solve the problem by adding Percy Harvin but everybody knows how that turned out.

He has Graham now so that's going to solve a lot of problems.

 

[BobGnarly]

 

[Uhsplit]

I doubt the shit hits the fan on RW's negotiations but if it did, why wouldn't Seattle merely FT him? Even if the FT was $25M for 2016, that would be the same as a 2 year $26.5M fully guaranteed contract from Seattle's perspective figuring in RW's $1.5M salary for 2015.
That is a no brainer.

 

[flyerhawk]

Not a chance. Why in the world would Seattle do that?

This is nothing but media churn.

 

[gowazzu02]

Ahhh silly season.

Yes Seattle will let him go and not bother to franchise him the 3 years in a row they have the right to do! L O L

 

[flyerhawk]

Ahhh silly season.

Yes Seattle will let him go and not bother to franchise him the 3 years in a row they have the right to do! L O L

These guys are just trying to create buzz.

Regardless of whether Wilson is worth X number of dollars a year, the Seahawks aren't going to let him walk because they aren't going to have a replacement for him.

It isn't even something they are considering, IMO.

Right now this is just contract negotiations. Wilson wants the most money he can get. The Seahawks want to limit his cap damage. The Hawks have some leverage that they can give him a big bump immediately while he is under contract but Wilson isn't going to get low balled.

Report out that the Seahawks offered him a deal similar to Newton's deal.

It will get worked out. Could get a little contentious but I understand why both sides are doing what they are doing.

 

[Xponentialchaos]

I think the question though is more geared towards did Seattle really have that bad of receivers especially when they had Tate as he put up top level #1 receiver type numbers when he actually got into a passing offense. Seattle fans keep talking about how Wilson just hasn't had the weapons in the pass game to really show what he can do as a passer yet at least with Tate it looked like he was at worst a top end #2 type receiver and possibly a #1 for quite a few teams in the league. Heck when Megatron went down with injury Tate's numbers just kept going so it wasn't just because he had a great receiver across from him.

Exactly my point. Thanks cd.

 

[Xponentialchaos]

I just hear a lot of "Wilson's receivers aren't any good" arguments, mostly from Seahawk fans, but not always. It leaves me scratching my head a bit. I understand that it's usually being said to praise Wilson, as though to say that he's able to do so much for the offense without having much to work with outside of Lynch.

And don't get me wrong, Wilson is an awesome quarterback. But I think your receivers have been vastly underrated, and maybe even thrown under the bus. When Golden Tate was on the team, I heard the same arguments: "Seattle doesn't have any good receivers". I always liked him and thought he played exceptionally well given the system that he's in. The exact same thing can be said of Baldwin in my opinion. The dude can ball. If he was on a passing team, I can easily see him putting up big numbers.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I just hear a lot of "Wilson's receivers aren't any good" arguments, mostly from Seahawk fans, but not always. It leaves me scratching my head a bit. I understand that it's usually being said to praise Wilson, as though to say that he's able to do so much for the offense without having much to work with outside of Lynch.

And don't get me wrong, Wilson is an awesome quarterback. But I think your receivers have been vastly underrated, and maybe even thrown under the bus. When Golden Tate was on the team, I heard the same arguments: "Seattle doesn't have any good receivers". I always liked him and thought he played exceptionally well given the system that he's in. The exact same thing can be said of Baldwin in my opinion. The dude can ball. If he was on a passing team, I can easily see him putting up big numbers.

Yes Tate is a good #2 WR, to bad he had to the # 1 WR with the Seahawks. Baldwin a nice # 3 WR who should being playing the slot, not a outside receiver.
Right now Baldwin is our #1 WR, Kearse ( who should just be depth) is #2, not sure who # 3 is yet. Hope T. Lockett developed fast and P. Richardson recovers from his injury soon.

 

[JMR]

I just hear a lot of "Wilson's receivers aren't any good" arguments, mostly from Seahawk fans, but not always. It leaves me scratching my head a bit. I understand that it's usually being said to praise Wilson, as though to say that he's able to do so much for the offense without having much to work with outside of Lynch.

And don't get me wrong, Wilson is an awesome quarterback. But I think your receivers have been vastly underrated, and maybe even thrown under the bus. When Golden Tate was on the team, I heard the same arguments: "Seattle doesn't have any good receivers". I always liked him and thought he played exceptionally well given the system that he's in. The exact same thing can be said of Baldwin in my opinion. The dude can ball. If he was on a passing team, I can easily see him putting up big numbers.

I guess we get to see what JG brings to the team now, but I think if you had to rank receiving groups from the 2015 season (edit: I meant 2014) 1-32, where would you put Seattle? I would say they are a lot closer to the bottom than the top, but that's no the same as saying "Wilson's receivers aren't any good" or the other paraphrases you used.

 

[Xponentialchaos]

I guess we get to see what JG brings to the team now, but I think if you had to rank receiving groups from the 2015 season (edit: I meant 2014) 1-32, where would you put Seattle? I would say they are a lot closer to the bottom than the top, but that's no the same as saying "Wilson's receivers aren't any good" or the other paraphrases you used.

For the 2014 season, I think you guys lost a lot when Tate left and he proved my point in Detroit. But I still think you have a very solid guy in Baldwin and a decent guy in Kearse. I'd agree that you'd be closer to the bottom than the top though.

I just looked over the current depth charts for wide receivers and, off the top of my head, I'd put your starting WR's at about the early 20's or just past the halfway mark. Maybe even slightly above average when Tate was there. Am I off base with that?

This position certainly isn't something to brag about. It's not your strength. But imo it's nowhere near as bad as people make them out to be.

 

[Uhsplit]

For the 2014 season, I think you guys lost a lot when Tate left and he proved my point in Detroit. But I still think you have a very solid guy in Baldwin and a decent guy in Kearse. I'd agree that you'd be closer to the bottom than the top though.

I just looked over the current depth charts for wide receivers and, off the top of my head, I'd put your starting WR's at about the early 20's or just past the halfway mark. Maybe even slightly above average when Tate was there. Am I off base with that?

This position certainly isn't something to brag about. It's not your strength. But imo it's nowhere near as bad as people make them out to be.

No.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

For the 2014 season, I think you guys lost a lot when Tate left and he proved my point in Detroit. But I still think you have a very solid guy in Baldwin and a decent guy in Kearse. I'd agree that you'd be closer to the bottom than the top though.

I just looked over the current depth charts for wide receivers and, off the top of my head, I'd put your starting WR's at about the early 20's or just past the halfway mark. Maybe even slightly above average when Tate was there. Am I off base with that?

This position certainly isn't something to brag about. It's not your strength. But imo it's nowhere near as bad as people make them out to be.

Your a good poster Xponentialchaos ( think you could of picked some handle harder to type out!), but I got to disagree here. All Tate showed with the Lions is he can perform as a # 2 WR especially in a offense that passes more then the Seahawks. Hated to see him leave, but nobody is making Tate out to be a stud #1 WR, and he was the #1 WR for the Seahawks offense. In that role ( #1 WR) not nearly as impressive . Baldwin really is a slot WR forced to play the outside WR. Again not good. Kearse would be deep bench on a team with good WRs( for example the Packers), really nothing impressive about the Seahawks WRs over the last few years.

 

[JMR]

For the 2014 season, I think you guys lost a lot when Tate left and he proved my point in Detroit. But I still think you have a very solid guy in Baldwin and a decent guy in Kearse. I'd agree that you'd be closer to the bottom than the top though.

I just looked over the current depth charts for wide receivers and, off the top of my head, I'd put your starting WR's at about the early 20's or just past the halfway mark. Maybe even slightly above average when Tate was there. Am I off base with that?

This position certainly isn't something to brag about. It's not your strength. But imo it's nowhere near as bad as people make them out to be.

I think that's fair. I was a Tate fan, and I agree we lost a lot when we wasn't re-signed because it was a blow to both our receiving group and our return game. As a position group, our WRs are probably the weakest or at least it's a close call with OL. Tyler Lockett appears to be a Tate replacement, but if he develops no faster than Tate did, we're looking at 2018 or so before get see it happen.

 

[NWPATSFAN]

Ahhh silly season.

Yes Seattle will let him go and not bother to franchise him the 3 years in a row they have the right to do! L O L

Seattle will not franchise him for three years. That would cost them more than the contract he's likely to sign.

 

[cdumler7]

Your a good poster Xponentialchaos ( think you could of picked some handle harder to type out!), but I got to disagree here. All Tate showed with the Lions is he can perform as a # 2 WR especially in a offense that passes more then the Seahawks. Hated to see him leave, but nobody is making Tate out to be a stud #1 WR, and he was the #1 WR for the Seahawks offense. In that role ( #1 WR) not nearly as impressive . Baldwin really is a slot WR forced to play the outside WR. Again not good. Kearse would be deep bench on a team with good WRs( for example the Packers), really nothing impressive about the Seahawks WRs over the last few years.

I guess what makes you say he has only proven with the Lions that he is a good #2? I mean in the games that Calvin Johnson was out this past season Golden Tate was putting up close to 150 yards a game in receiving. So I don't think he is just a product of being across from possibly the best WR in the game. I think he showed that when called upon to be the #1 WR he did just fine.

 

[flyerhawk]

I guess what makes you say he has only proven with the Lions that he is a good #2? I mean in the games that Calvin Johnson was out this past season Golden Tate was putting up close to 150 yards a game in receiving. So I don't think he is just a product of being across from possibly the best WR in the game. I think he showed that when called upon to be the #1 WR he did just fine.

His production was largely the same in teams of efficiency and impact. He was target 50% more than in Seattle which isn't surprising given their offensive style.

But his reception to target ratio was the same. YPA was the same. TDs were the same.

So basically he was the same in Detroit he just had more targets.

 

[cdumler7]

His production was largely the same in teams of efficiency and impact. He was target 50% more than in Seattle which isn't surprising given their offensive style.

But his reception to target ratio was the same. YPA was the same. TDs were the same.

So basically he was the same in Detroit he just had more targets.

Right I agree that the more target opportunities the more he is going to put up production. Which is somewhat my point of he put up #1 WR stats this past year so can we really call him a #2 WR? I mean he put up depending on the stat you are using something like 7th best stats of any WR in the NFL. So again when people say that Wilson has never had anybody to pass to in my opinion at one point he had a guy that could put up top-10 stats to throw to. I would say that is a pretty darn good weapon to have.

 

[flyerhawk]

Right I agree that the more target opportunities the more he is going to put up production. Which is somewhat my point of he put up #1 WR stats this past year so can we really call him a #2 WR? I mean he put up depending on the stat you are using something like 7th best stats of any WR in the NFL. So again when people say that Wilson has never had anybody to pass to in my opinion at one point he had a guy that could put up top-10 stats to throw to. I would say that is a pretty darn good weapon to have.

Arguing about whether he is No. 1 or No. 2 is really academic.

Do you consider Tate to be a guy that commands double coverage?

I would argue that his 4 TDs suggest that he really isn't a true No. 1 receiver. He is a damn good receiver that can make big time catches, especially in jump ball situations.