Popeyejones
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2013
- Messages
- 5,525
- Reaction score
- 0
Scottemojo":3hf9iefl said:In our offense, the way it was being called then, 560 and 3 TDs is like 900 yards and 6 TDs in other NFL offenses. THus the excitement.Popeyejones":3hf9iefl said:He fell in the draft due to his inability to stay healthy in college, and that hasn't changed yet. The wear and tear of injuries (even once healthy again) can also build up over time, which might start to become a concern for him.
Nice fluid player in college, and definitely seems like he's invested in improving, though.
TBH tho, over those last five weeks of the season two years ago when he did play I didn't see in him what was getting some Hawks fans so excited. He looked decent enough, but not really like he was bringing anything that the rest of unit wasn't. Projected out across a whole year that "hot streak" of his would have resulted in about 560 receiving yards and 3 TDs over the whole season. Not always fair to just look at stats for young WRs, but I didn't see in him anything that I thought could make him really special moving forward (like say Tyler Lockett; the stats don't matter. He jumps off the screen at you).
I think the dream scenario for the Hawks is that he's able to stay healthy this year and contribute enough to justify letting Baldwin walk, and I think he's got a chance to do that (although I probably wouldn't put money on it at this point).
For years, some of us have said that Doug Baldwin would be better than Wes Welker in a Tom Brady offense. Last year, we got a glimpse of how good he could be. Point is, we have had to project WR talent in Seattle's offense for some time. Golden Tate showed that to be true as well.
I put in the note about Lockett because I figured this response was coming.
Re: Tate, I've been long on record as having seen the same thing in him that I see in Lockett from before the Hawks let him walk (a guy with the ability to explode in production in an offense that passed more).
Richardson could do it, but as I said above, in addition to not really doing much numerically I didn't get the sense from Richardson's five game stretch of quasi-effectiveness that there was much else going on (at least in that stretch). Again though, I could be wrong, and I'm just explaining what I saw over a stretch from over a year ago.
As for Brady, every NFL fan who likes a WR on their team who doesn't put up big stats says that their guy would put up big numbers if he was with Brady and the Pats. It's a NFL fan cliche that's said about 30-40 guys every year. I don't think it really means anything.