Golden Tate or Julian Edelman?

[Brady'sButtBoy]

Considering Tate may come much cheaper, I'd be comfortable with signing Tate over Edelman.

Tate's 2 years younger, he's an even better punt returner (which is really saying something because Edelman is very, very good) and is certainly more of a legit down field threat. Tate has a WR's pedigree too, in that he's been doing it since before college and there's something to be said for a natural WR over a learned one. Tate is a hustler, plays for the team's best interest, blocks, and can play the slot very well. And, he's missed ONE game in the last 3 seasons.

If you could get Tate for $6M guaranteed, versus Edelman's $8M (minimum), and turn him loose with TB12, wouldn't you do it as GM of the Pats?

So many teams are looking to the draft for WR's since this is called the best year for WR's in a long time an underestimated dude like Tate could easily slip through the first wave of signings and then be even cheaper.

FWIW here's Tate's assessment from NFL.com who list him as a FA bargian-

1. Golden Tate, WR, Seattle Seahawks: Instead of pointing out what Tate isn't (a No. 1 receiver), appreciate him for what he is. Although his counting stats have been artificially deflated in the league's run-heaviest offense, Tate led all NFL receivers in forced missed tackles and yards after catch per reception, while doubling as the most effective punt returner in the league. He's a willing blocker, excels on bubble screens and crossing routes, is able to beat cornerbacks deep and has improved every season.

 

[supafly]

I'd probably much rather have Edelman just stay here and try to build on his good 2013 season, but Tate should be considered if Edelman isn't an option next week.

 

[strngplyr]

I'd probably much rather have Edelman just stay here and try to build on his good 2013 season, but Tate should be considered if Edelman isn't an option next week.

Agreed, Brady has enough on his plate getting better in sync with last years draft class at the position, I'd much rather his best friend and someone with 5 years in the system return.

If JE is a goner though, I have absolutely no issues going after Tate or another receiver.

 

[jah]

Why is Tate seen as a bargain signing (I've noticed this on a few sites) when he's gone on the record saying he doesn't do hometown discounts? If you feel the need to declare such a thing, you probably think you're worth a good amount of money.

 

[BradyBranch39]

I'd rather have the guy who we know can pick up the offense. But why in the world does anyone think Tate will be cheap?

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

Well, it may not be up to Tate - like so often - how much teams will offer him.

I'd like to see Edelman build on what he did this year but I'm very worried about his injury history which seems to suddenly be a thing of the distant past for many.

Given Tate's ability to get deeper and his almost complete lack of serious injury, I'd rather spend a little less on him than JE. Edelman will get more because of those 105 catches and 1000+yds.

 

[patsfan-1982]

Golden Tate was the Seahawks #1 WR and he had a career year of 64 rec for 898 yards and 5 TD's if its him VS Edelman I take Edelman every time

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Tate would be very good in this offense.

 

[woolster22]

I'd like Edelman strictly for familiarity. However, if he is priced out of our options and Tate is there, I'm all for it.

 

[JoeSixPat]

All things being equal you stick with the guy Brady has a rapport with - Edelman

All things being less than equal with Edelman being more expensive than Tate, you go with Edelman

All things being REALLY less than equal with Edelman MUCH more expensive (potentially because an AFC East team would be wise to make him a high offer) you go with Tate

 

[dales804]

Golden Tate was the Seahawks #1 WR and he had a career year of 64 rec for 898 yards and 5 TD's if its him VS Edelman I take Edelman every time

Tate was targeted 98 times last year; Edelman was targeted 151. Tate caught 65.3% of those targets. Expand that to 151 targets Edelman got, since Tate plays in a run first offense, and Tate has the following projections:

98.6 REC
1380 YDS (using Tate's 14.0 YPC)
7.7 TD

Tate won't come cheap but neither will Edelman, I think. I said in another thread a few weeks back that Tate would be one of my top WR picks in the FA class. I think Tate could do quite well in NE.

 

[supafly]

Tate was targeted 98 times last year; Edelman was targeted 151. Tate caught 65.3% of those targets. Expand that to 151 targets Edelman got, since Tate plays in a run first offense, and Tate has the following projections:

98.6 REC
1380 YDS (using Tate's 14.0 YPC)
7.7 TD

You could also use the same to project Danny Amendola's stats as well, since he had the same reception rate as Tate (around 65-66%), and was actually targeted 16 times less.

Of course, the fact is that Tate has been healthier--but we just don't know if that will continue moving forward, or if Amendola can have a healthy season as Edelman finally did last year.

I agree with you that he could be a potential addition to the WR corps, but I highly doubt that he'd be coming cheap. The word is that he's expecting something at or near Riley Cooper's 5/22.5 deal, which seems quite reasonable all things considered.

 

[GratefulOne]

Tate is a very underrated player. Even with the run first offense, there is also the fact that Wilson favors no one. He never gets in with one guy and spreads the ball around with the 25 attempts he makes a game.

I remember a bunch of Niner fans mocking the Hawks because they don't do 1000 yard receivers. They will never have a 1000 yard receiver because even if the run game isn't producing big yards Carroll never goes away from it unless they are in catch up mode. Actually, Tate and Edelman are very similar, Tate is especially dangerous after the catch, but even under 6 feet he brings down the jump balls. I would not mind Edelman in Seattle one bit though. He reminds me of a utility guy with decent speed. Tate is a very consistent PR also, always gets the Hawks good field position and holds onto the ball.

He is a lot like Harvin, but even with decent speed Harvin is clearly faster with the ball in his hands.

 

[BobDigital]

If even i will take Edelman. If Tate is cheaper give me Tate.

I think they are very similar players generally. I would say he is probably a better WR than Edelman but Edelman is more familiar with our offense so it is a complete wash.

 

[rjw]

Would Tate even be that much cheaper? I think at this point I'd stick with Edelman. He knows the offense, Brady and Bill like him, so he would make more sense, right? Getting both would be nice too though.

 

[BradyToAmendola]

Got to go with Edelman.

 

[Sciz]

I don't agree at all that his receiving stats were "artificially deflated" because the running game. Sure, the Seahawks didn't pass much, but Tate also benefited a ton from the threat of the running game. The Seahawks ran a lot of play action passes to Tate in the flat when the defense was flowing the other way to defend the run. He's exceptional with the ball in his hands, but I'm not sold on his ability to get open on those underneath, YAC-accumulating routes without the most threatening play action game in the NFL.

Tate only had 12 receptions past 10 yards last season and those were two of them, so I wouldn't agree with "is able to beat cornerbacks deep" either. For comparison, Amendola had 10, Dobson had 10, Thompkins had 12, and Edelman had 22.

He's an outside receiver who was mediocre in the slot earlier in his career. He's not an elite in/out change of direction receiver like the Pats have typically had. He forces a ton of tackles and doesn't drop passes, but he also is schemed open underneath a lot and isn't what I'd call a deep or even intermediate threat. He's perfect in Seattle where they have the running game to use play action to get him open underneath and then break tackles. He would not be a top target of mine for a more "straight-up" passing game.

 

[Kontradiction]

Tate. Not only is he more physically gifted and talented than Edelman but Edelman just played his first full, healthy season. Tate, on the other hand, has been more durable throughout his career. Tate can consistenly work outside the numbers and Edelman, while capable, has shown that he's better able to work inside the numbers. Tate also just put up 868 yards receiving in an offense that was primarily run first. So yeah, I would go with Tate on this one.

That said, Tate is not my first option in FA for a WR. I would love... LOVE for the team to bring in James Jones.

 

[Ring 6]

Considering Tate may come much cheaper, I'd be comfortable with signing Tate over Edelman.

Tate's 2 years younger, he's an even better punt returner (which is really saying something because Edelman is very, very good) and is certainly more of a legit down field threat. Tate has a WR's pedigree too, in that he's been doing it since before college and there's something to be said for a natural WR over a learned one. Tate is a hustler, plays for the team's best interest, blocks, and can play the slot very well. And, he's missed ONE game in the last 3 seasons.

If you could get Tate for $6M guaranteed, versus Edelman's $8M (minimum), and turn him loose with TB12, wouldn't you do it as GM of the Pats?

So many teams are looking to the draft for WR's since this is called the best year for WR's in a long time an underestimated dude like Tate could easily slip through the first wave of signings and then be even cheaper.

FWIW here's Tate's assessment from NFL.com who list him as a FA bargian-

1. Golden Tate, WR, Seattle Seahawks: Instead of pointing out what Tate isn't (a No. 1 receiver), appreciate him for what he is. Although his counting stats have been artificially deflated in the league's run-heaviest offense, Tate led all NFL receivers in forced missed tackles and yards after catch per reception, while doubling as the most effective punt returner in the league. He's a willing blocker, excels on bubble screens and crossing routes, is able to beat cornerbacks deep and has improved every season.

Do you really mean to suggest Julian Edelman is going to get $8 mill a year?
I think there is no way on Earth that happens. I'm think you are at least double what he will get.
Also, I willl predict here that Tate ends up with a larger contract this offeseason than Edelman gets.

 

[mayoclinic]

I think the question being asked is wrong. The question should be "if Julian Edelman walks, would you rather have Golden Tate or Emanuel Sanders?"