Paul Richardson....

[HawKnPeppa]

I am surprised how well small Paul has done lately. Still not sure how he will hold up as an everydown player over a full season.

I wonder about this though. Sure seems like small, quick guys almost never get hurt while the big guys are sure hurt a lot.

Is small guys not lasting and big guys staying healthy more perception than reality?

Yeah, he's T.Y. Hilton's size, and Hitton surprisingly stays healthy. I'd still be more comfy if he got a bit thicker.

 

[morgulon1]

Like I said, we all admire your dedication to your opinion. Most would have begun to change when the evidence proved them wrong, so good for you.

As has been pointed out, not entirely fair to compare those other guys considering the offense and role Richardson plays, but hey every opinion needs a devils advocate so there is that.

The dude has 212 yards receiving this year, I'm not going to praise him... Mike Evans nearly had that in a single game this year.

Your blinded by your 12 glasses, Richardson has done nothing to say 'man, he's exceptional' -- but he's just a rookie and he is improving.

Im not blinded by anything.

Too early to label Richardson anything at all.

The only person blinded here is the person struggling to maintain the narrative they established weeks ago. Its never fun to be proven wrong.

Good for you.

Richardson in a different offense could very well be like Benjamin or one of the other high profile receivers. I thought I
was clever figuring out Sonichawk's "angle" of arguing with posters but then I read his signature line . Duuurrrrhhhh :shock:

 

[olyfan63]

Richardson is already better than Percy Harvin ever will be. More WR draft picks, less losers from the Vikings

Amen and hallelujah, brother!

Only flaw here is that some of our WR draft picks haven't stuck. Whats-his-name from K-State I think, that went to the Niners and failed there too, supposedly going to be the next Boldin, but I think was only a 5th rounder.

 

[olyfan63]

Do you consider Sidney Rice a loser from the Vikings? He had a good season and a half for us, I thought. Or loser over the injury issue?

 

[peppersjap]

Norwood was inactive the last game so no chance of him making a contribution!

 

[Blitzer88]

I like what I have seen from Paul of late, he seems to be getting things put together. Hopefully he continues to improve each game and help us out on offense.

 

[Throwdown]

I just know dudes hands are ridiculous from what I've seen.

 

[Tokadub]

Wow just read this whole thread and it seems a bit ridiculous to me... :snack:

THERE IS NO RIGHT ANSWER!

It's WAY WAY WAY WAY WAY too early to say Richardson is the best receiver on the team!

It doesn't matter if you are looking at his stats, his talent, his improvement, or his potential... anyone taking a strong stance in this argument is going to sound foolish either way.

At this point if you put a gun to my head and I had to choose sides I'd say heck no he's not the best receiver Baldwin is. I don't think you can even possibly argue that given Richardson's incredibly small sample size. You guys are really arguing about that???

But honestly I don't think this should even be a discussion of who's the best receiver on our team. It should be how good could Richardson be in the future, a conversation entirely independent of our other guys.

The whole discussion and resulting debate has been downright insane in my humble opinion, although there were some very good facts and opinions presented so it's certainly a good post and worthwhile read.

I just think the conversation should be more focused on "could Richardson be one of our best receivers in the future", or "could Richardson be our #1 receiver next season?" that seems like the only sane thing right now considering his infinitesimally minuscule sample size.

So my whole thoughts on this is it's silly to argue either side of this debate because there's not enough evidence to make any strong conclusions. You'd be forced to jump the gun and prematurely declare how great Richardson is, or you'd take a stance that Richardson isn't that good yet and get bashed by everyone... Really the middle of those two extremes is the current reality.

I also think it's incredibly foolish to look too far into the stat comparison between Richardson and Golden Tate... in Tate's first years he was playing with these QB's:


2010:
Hasselbeck - 59.9% completion rate, 18 TD, 14 INT, 6.8 Y/A, 73.2 Passer Rating
Whitehurst - 57.6% completion rate, 2 TD, 3 INT, 5.1 Y/A, 65.5 Passer Rating

2011:
T. Jackson - 60.2% completion rate, 14 TD, 13 INT, 6.9 Y/A, 79.2 Passer Rating
Whitehurst - 48.2% completion rate, 1 TD, 1 INT, 5.3 Y/A, 62.9 Passer Rating


Then in comes Russell Wilson for Tate's 3rd and 4th years where he all the sudden becomes amazing, was that a coincidence?

2012:
Wilson - 64.1% completion rate, 26 TD, 10 INT, 7.9 Y/A, 100.0 Passer Rating

2013:
Wilson - 63.1% completion rate, 26 TD, 9 INT, 8.2 Y/A, 101.2 Passer Rating


I'm not trying to say the only reason Tate struggled his first 2 years was because he was playing with horrible Quarterbacks. My main point is that you can't possibly compare Tate and Richardson's 1st and 2nd seasons because if you aren't playing with Russell Wilson you might as well ride the bench because your team ain't going nowhere.

So again comparing Tate and Richardsons rookie season is a mostly pointless exercise, especially given Richardsons incredibly small sample size and Tate wasn't even playing with Wilson.


I hope I made my point without sounding like too much of a (insert expletive), it's a good debate but just don't take it too far and make it personal because there's not nearly enough data/evidence with Richardson yet.

 

[bjornanderson21]

Do you consider Sidney Rice a loser from the Vikings? He had a good season and a half for us, I thought. Or loser over the injury issue?

Yes I consider Rice a loser as far as player acquisitons. As a person he seemed fine.

Even when Rice was healthy he was paid twice what he was worth, and he wasn't healthy very often. He wasn't completely useless like Harvin was, but Rice was not a good WR and he made all his money off of one good season w8th the Vikes.

Rice and Harvin BOTH only had one good season as a Viking and the hawks opened their wallet and GROSSLY overpaid for both (rice as a fa, harvin in trade) though Harvin was clearly a much much worse deal than Rice.

The Hawks are the best team in the NFL so luckily they can absorb some horrible moves, but the Harvin trade cost us a pefect 19-0 season.

If instead of getting harvin we signed PRETTY MUCH ANY FA WR we would have won every single game last year. All we needed was an AVERAGE wr to add to our WR corp and no team would've beat us.

So while Harvin fans like to pretend that his TD return in garbage time (entire 2nd half was garbage time) had any impact and thus "was worth it", when in fact we made it to the super bowl without his help and would easily win without him.

I know this started out about rice, but harvin cost us a 19-0 season which would have placed us in history.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

Wow just read this whole thread and it seems a bit ridiculous to me... :snack:

THERE IS NO RIGHT ANSWER!

It's WAY WAY WAY WAY WAY too early to say Richardson is the best receiver on the team!

It doesn't matter if you are looking at his stats, his talent, his improvement, or his potential... anyone taking a strong stance in this argument is going to sound foolish either way.

At this point if you put a gun to my head and I had to choose sides I'd say heck no he's not the best receiver Baldwin is. I don't think you can even possibly argue that given Richardson's incredibly small sample size. You guys are really arguing about that???

But honestly I don't think this should even be a discussion of who's the best receiver on our team. It should be how good could Richardson be in the future, a conversation entirely independent of our other guys.

The whole discussion and resulting debate has been downright insane in my humble opinion, although there were some very good facts and opinions presented so it's certainly a good post and worthwhile read.

I just think the conversation should be more focused on "could Richardson be one of our best receivers in the future", or "could Richardson be our #1 receiver next season?" that seems like the only sane thing right now considering his infinitesimally minuscule sample size.

So my whole thoughts on this is it's silly to argue either side of this debate because there's not enough evidence to make any strong conclusions. You'd be forced to jump the gun and prematurely declare how great Richardson is, or you'd take a stance that Richardson isn't that good yet and get bashed by everyone... Really the middle of those two extremes is the current reality.

I also think it's incredibly foolish to look too far into the stat comparison between Richardson and Golden Tate... in Tate's first years he was playing with these QB's:


2010:
Hasselbeck - 59.9% completion rate, 18 TD, 14 INT, 6.8 Y/A, 73.2 Passer Rating
Whitehurst - 57.6% completion rate, 2 TD, 3 INT, 5.1 Y/A, 65.5 Passer Rating

2011:
T. Jackson - 60.2% completion rate, 14 TD, 13 INT, 6.9 Y/A, 79.2 Passer Rating
Whitehurst - 48.2% completion rate, 1 TD, 1 INT, 5.3 Y/A, 62.9 Passer Rating


Then in comes Russell Wilson for Tate's 3rd and 4th years where he all the sudden becomes amazing, was that a coincidence?

2012:
Wilson - 64.1% completion rate, 26 TD, 10 INT, 7.9 Y/A, 100.0 Passer Rating

2013:
Wilson - 63.1% completion rate, 26 TD, 9 INT, 8.2 Y/A, 101.2 Passer Rating


I'm not trying to say the only reason Tate struggled his first 2 years was because he was playing with horrible Quarterbacks. My main point is that you can't possibly compare Tate and Richardson's 1st and 2nd seasons because if you aren't playing with Russell Wilson you might as well ride the bench because your team ain't going nowhere.

So again comparing Tate and Richardsons rookie season is a mostly pointless exercise, especially given Richardsons incredibly small sample size and Tate wasn't even playing with Wilson.


I hope I made my point without sounding like too much of a (insert expletive), it's a good debate but just don't take it too far and make it personal because there's not nearly enough data/evidence with Richardson yet.

I totally agree with your overall assessment of Richardson, but I had to lol (not at you) because your reasoning is the exact opposite of mine. I look at Baldwin, who exploded his rookie year, and see a natural talent who's one of the leagues unsung best WR's. Richardson is not a Baldwin and maybe never will be. The great WR's in the league make their impact known right away. But GOOD WR's might take up until their third year to learn everything they need to know to take it to the NFL level. Tate is an excellent example of that. yeah, he had crappy QB's throwing to him and didn't take off until Wilson came along, but Baldwin had the same crap QB's throwing to him and he was our leading WR his rookie year and he thrived before and after Wilson, excluding the injury year. Tate's problems were that he couldn't run a route for the life of him. Now he's a good WR because he took the time to up his game.

Richardson has the route running aspect down. He's being knocked off his routes because he's very light and easy to push around. What he needs is to learn his breaks so he can get past the initial contact that's slowing him down and once he learns that, then he'll be a very good WR. If he doesn't learn that, he'll always be a #3 WR. But it's way too early to tell if he will or if he won't. I think he probably will. Guys who are such good route runners tend to be guys who put a lot of work into their game. And he's shown some improvement.

The fact he doesn't have a lot of data says as much about him as if he had a lot of data. Carroll hasn't been putting him on the field to get that data and when he's on the field he's not gotten the targets. Hopefully, he's putting in the work and will make the step up to the NFL level, learn to get past that initial disruption and stay on his route. He's already got way more data than Lockette, who's been here longer. And we've all seen Lockette make big plays. For a very small data set, Lockette makes a huge amount of big plays. So I have high hopes for Richardson.

 

[pehawk]

Richardson played extremely well again today. More targets may be in order.

 

[SonicHawk]

Richardson played extremely well again today. More targets may be in order.

Agreed. I have no problem being wrong about PRich.

 

[sutz]

Richardson played extremely well again today. More targets may be in order.

Agreed. I have no problem being wrong about PRich.

No doubt. Nice time for a rookie WR to start getting hot. He's a bit of an unknown going into the playoffs. Most of our potential opponents haven't seen anything of him.

 

[SomersetHawk]

The best thing about 'that' catch today imo? The route. Blew by Jenkins with really impressive burst and got himself some great separation before adjusting really well to the underthrown ball (maybe Russ didn't want to lead him into the safety, or maybe he underestimated Richardson, I dunno, great play nonetheless). Now if Richardson can start to do that with consistency we've got a wonderful weapon on our hands.

Jenkins is obviously the guy that Tate had success on whilst here, but Tate never got that kind of separation.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

Richardson played extremely well again today. More targets may be in order.

Agreed. I have no problem being wrong about PRich.

No doubt. Nice time for a rookie WR to start getting hot. He's a bit of an unknown going into the playoffs. Most of our potential opponents haven't seen anything of him.

That's Pete Carroll's version of "trickeraton"

 

[sutz]

The best thing about 'that' catch today imo? The route. Blew by Jenkins with really impressive burst and go himself some great separation before adjusting really well to the underthrown ball (maybe Russ didn't want to lead him into the safety, or maybe he underestimated Richardson, I dunno, great play nonetheless). Now if Richardson can start to do that with consistency we've got a wonderful weapon on our hands.

Jenkins is obviously the guy that Tate had success on whilst here, but Tate never got that kind of separation.

The kind of timing you're suggesting takes quite a few games and practices to build up. Still very much a work in progress, but the improvement we've seen bodes well for the future, both immediate and over the next few years.

 

[JesterHawk]

I'm excited to see more PRich. He definitely needs more game time. PRich on the outside, Kearse on the other side, Baldwin in the slot seems perfect. Norwood looks like a TE after the catch too, I wouldn't mind him seeing more playing time but I have a feeling that might happen next year.

 

[scutterhawk]

The point is, Richardson was slow to get on the field. It doesn't mean he can't be great, it just means that he isn't there [hopefully] yet.

The Offensive map, was to plan plays around Percy Harvin, thus hastening, and therefore keeping Richardson from getting on the field for his development as a Rookie.

 

[scutterhawk]

The best thing about 'that' catch today imo? The route. Blew by Jenkins with really impressive burst and go himself some great separation before adjusting really well to the underthrown ball (maybe Russ didn't want to lead him into the safety, or maybe he underestimated Richardson, I dunno, great play nonetheless). Now if Richardson can start to do that with consistency we've got a wonderful weapon on our hands.

Jenkins is obviously the guy that Tate had success on whilst here, but Tate never got that kind of separation.

The kind of timing you're suggesting takes quite a few games and practices to build up. Still very much a work in progress, but the improvement we've seen bodes well for the future, both immediate and over the next few years.

Yep, there are too many expecting instant gratification, as they keep bringing up the names of other Receivers that have had some success that were taken in PRiche's Draft Class, and they won't take reasoning for an answer.

 

[hawkfan68]

Richardson played extremely well again today. More targets may be in order.

Agreed. Give him Luke "Hands of Stone" Willson's targets. Richardson was the best receiver out there today. He really stepped up.