Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:31 pm
  • 5 years and 40 million with Washington. That's only 8 million per season. Only 26 years old. I thought he was a real good player. Does the front office see something else?
    Hawker8989
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 81
    Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 7:00 pm


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:47 pm
  • He was ok.... Rather have Kearse. instead
    Last edited by poly1274 on Mon Jul 16, 2018 5:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 232
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:54 pm
  • Good player, not great player. Injury history, one year wonder. Even saying one year wonder is kind of a lot of credit, it was about expected output for a wr 2-3 depending on the team/scheme. You hope players step up into that, IE Lockett in this case.

    Paying almost double digits to non-elite players that also subsequently block a development spot for years is a quick way to kill cap and competition (depending on guarantees). We’ve made a number of these mistakes over the past few years.

    Richardson was fine, good for him he got 8m.
    User avatar
    Coug_Hawk08
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4321
    Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 9:26 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Mon Jul 16, 2018 5:11 pm
  • 8M per year actually isn't that much for a guy entering his prime. Drops were a problem with him last year, but he countered that with some ridiculous jump ball contested catches. I think we might regret losing Paul, but the thinking behind the decision to let him walk wasn't bad.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Mon Jul 16, 2018 5:34 pm
  • When he pulls his hammy in preseason the question will be answered.
    User avatar
    Smellyman
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4517
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:58 pm
    Location: Taipei


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Mon Jul 16, 2018 6:36 pm
  • Smellyman wrote:When he pulls his hammy in preseason the question will be answered.



    You can't pay big money to everyone on the roster. He's a bit frail to be giving that kind of money to IMO. Love his attitude but the Hawks really need to find some big tough receivers who can block and stay on the field. If it's important to regain a physical image then signing Richardson wasn't the way to go.
    Thomas Paine: To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead
    User avatar
    Seafan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5838
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:30 pm
    Location: Helotes, TX


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Mon Jul 16, 2018 8:14 pm
  • Hawker8989 wrote:5 years and 40 million with Washington. That's only 8 million per season. Only 26 years old. I thought he was a real good player. Does the front office see something else?



    I think he is a household name by end of the season. Loved his game from the first time I saw him play. Feel free to quote me later if I am wrong
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7303
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Mon Jul 16, 2018 8:27 pm
  • Bigger fish to fry in a reprioritization of the roster. Quite good at a specific skillset, but lacking in others. That kind of contract requires a good bet on ROI for the foreseeable future AND at a more versatile skillset. In summary, he wasn't worth the price that probably a few teams would pay.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    .NET Poster of the Month
     
    Posts: 4556
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 12:51 am
  • This fan base is seriously way to loyal and follow there hearts. No way Richardson is an $8 million a year guy and I'm still glad they let Kearse go. I'm OK when people question a high quality receiver like Golden Tate being let go but I understood. Can we remember how many people flipped out after Chris Matthews was let go? The guy had 1 good game in his career!
    peppersjap
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 773
    Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2014 1:44 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 2:36 am
  • mikeak wrote:
    Hawker8989 wrote:5 years and 40 million with Washington. That's only 8 million per season. Only 26 years old. I thought he was a real good player. Does the front office see something else?



    I think he is a household name by end of the season. Loved his game from the first time I saw him play. Feel free to quote me later if I am wrong


    Name one receiver that became s household name with Alex Smith throwing to him?
    seabowl
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2455
    Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 6:20 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 2:58 am
  • seabowl wrote:
    mikeak wrote:
    Hawker8989 wrote:5 years and 40 million with Washington. That's only 8 million per season. Only 26 years old. I thought he was a real good player. Does the front office see something else?



    I think he is a household name by end of the season. Loved his game from the first time I saw him play. Feel free to quote me later if I am wrong


    Name one receiver that became s household name with Alex Smith throwing to him?


    People know Tyreek Hill and Travis Kelce. It wouldn't surprise me if they are better known by the average fan than Doug Baldwin, as crazy as that sounds (though Kelce is a top 3 TE).
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:57 am
  • He cost more than he was worth, and he had troubles staying off of the IR lists. The guy couldn't stay healthy, plain and simple. Not worth shelling that much money out for a guy that never is on the field. His body of work is also extremely small.
    Spin Doctor
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2642
    Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 1:31 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 4:00 am
  • He's a guy who in four years had one year of decent WR2 production, and benefited from a greatly overheated WR market this off season.

    IMO the Hawks have bungled no shortage of decisions in the last four years, but this isn't one of them.
    User avatar
    Popeyejones
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4855
    Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:58 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 5:17 am
  • Hawker8989 wrote:5 years and 40 million with Washington. That's only 8 million per season. Only 26 years old. I thought he was a real good player. Does the front office see something else?


    The short answer is yes.

    Golden Tate departed for a big contract with Detroit. That conserved future cap room for Doug Baldwin. Now Washington has outbid Seattle for the services of Paul Richardson. That conserves future cap room for Tyler Lockett. I'll sincerely miss Paul's flying closures to the ball. But like Doug Baldwin, Tyler has a lot of highly valued intangibles in addition to what we see on game day. There is only so much cap room. Intangibles, team fit and chemistry collectively determine who is retained with a second contract and who cashes in elsewhere.
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 7857
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 5:22 am
  • Man, everyone is pretty much nailing it in this thread!
    Show us all the video of PRich pancaking opposing DBs on running plays and I, for one, will gladly reconsider.

    PRich may indeed light it up with Washington, and I wish him well there.
    He wasn't going to get it done here for what the team needs for that amount of money.
    2018 Adopt-A-Rookie: Rashaad Penny
    2018 BounceBack Bet: C.J. Prosise
    User avatar
    olyfan63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2083
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:03 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 5:33 am
  • I loved P Rich, but he's not nearly worth that contract. And, had they signed him to that same deal, a bunch of people would be laying in to the front office. More than normal that is.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 10028
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:33 am
  • The focus in this off-season was to improve the running game.

    Paul didn't figure into that movement one iota.

    He wasn't/isn't worth $8M/yr to the Hawks.
    Superbowl XLVIII Champions..."Can't keep everyone."
    User avatar
    onanygivensunday
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4053
    Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 8:59 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:35 am
  • Hawker8989 wrote: Does the front office see something else?


    Yes, they saw a slight often dinged up inconsistent WR that wasn't worth paying 8M a year for 5 years.

    Richardson flashed at times, but IMO nowhere near the consistency to warrant this kind of deal, especially when we're trying to get our cap right.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13384
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:17 am
  • The run game needed Kearse more then Richardson, Baldwin is a decent blocker and willing, Kearse was also, Richardson and Lockett not big or physical enough. Why those types are let go, also Richardson was more a Outside guy. We have those in the wings.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 24758
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 12:02 pm
  • peppersjap wrote:This fan base is seriously way to loyal and follow there hearts. No way Richardson is an $8 million a year guy and I'm still glad they let Kearse go. I'm OK when people question a high quality receiver like Golden Tate being let go but I understood.


    You've whittled away almost the entirety of Wilson's successful arsenal with this post. I'm wondering where you draw the line.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 15905
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 12:02 pm
  • seabowl wrote:
    mikeak wrote:
    Hawker8989 wrote:5 years and 40 million with Washington. That's only 8 million per season. Only 26 years old. I thought he was a real good player. Does the front office see something else?



    I think he is a household name by end of the season. Loved his game from the first time I saw him play. Feel free to quote me later if I am wrong


    Name one receiver that became s household name with Alex Smith throwing to him?


    Give me six months then see above......

    But regardless Kelce is known. Maybe not household but NFL household :)
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7303
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Tue Jul 17, 2018 12:12 pm
  • This is nonsense.

    poly1274 wrote:He was ok.... Rather have Kearse. instead
    "...and now they got a bicycle!"
    User avatar
    Sac
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 12810
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:51 pm
    Location: With your sister


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Wed Jul 18, 2018 8:44 am
  • I loved Richardson since we drafted him and he is a complete deep threat that could make a name for himself in the NFL. He is not the healthiest guy and giving him a long time deal is a a huge risk which I am glad the Seahawks didn't make.

    We have like $9.3 M in dead money this season. We can't afford anymore if we want to continue year in and year out.

    Lockett has had a couple injury season the past few years and wasn't playing at full strength last year. If he comes in 100%, he replaces Richardson deep threat. He has more upside. Baldwin continues to play the Slott and Marshall does it all.

    I wish Richardson all the best in Washington and hope he does become the star he played like last year. Always will be a fan of PRich. Wish he could of stayed, but Seahawks have a game plan and they need to follow it to make the team compete once again.
    Dang3Russ
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 21
    Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 12:35 pm


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Wed Jul 18, 2018 9:55 am
  • Richardson has potential, however that potential is limited by his health. The reality is we cant keep everyone and if Healthy Lockett can also be a deep threat, So there is some redundancy. We will see how it all works out.
    User avatar
    Hawk1217
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 135
    Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2018 11:37 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Wed Jul 18, 2018 8:15 pm
  • Richardson is just a guy.
    I'm fly
    I should be in the sky with birds
    User avatar
    Tical21
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3755
    Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:37 pm


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Wed Jul 18, 2018 8:21 pm
  • He was hurt all the time? Have you not watched Seahawks football from 2014-Now?
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2062
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Thu Jul 19, 2018 7:07 am
  • Couple of points of reflection ........

    The major injuries to both Richardson and Lockett were characterized as accidents. Both cases involved a pass that was accidentally under thrown combined with a defender who accidentally ran up on the back of the legs of a receiver. Both Richardson and Lockett suffered injury due to similar accidents.

    The current 2018 dead cap figure has grown to roughly 14.4 million dollars which ranks 11th highest. There is another 9 1/2 million tied up in Chancellor and 1 1/2 million tied up in McDowell. The Seahawk dead cap number is going to grow to something over 25 million. So 2018 has arrived as the year to pay up. Going forward ...... the Seahawks will easily climb into the top ten in dead cap money and possibly into the top 5.
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 7857
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Thu Jul 19, 2018 8:25 am
  • Jville wrote:Couple of points of reflection ........

    The major injuries to both Richardson and Lockett were characterized as accidents. Both cases involved a pass that was accidentally under thrown combined with a defender who accidentally ran up on the back of the legs of a receiver. Both Richardson and Lockett suffered injury due to similar accidents.


    Richardon's injury history is long and detailed, so I'm not cool with putting him into the same "accidental fluke" category like Tyler.

    Richardson tore his MCL and ACL in college, tore his ACL again against the Panthers in the playoffs, missed all of the 2015 season with a serious hamstring injury............and yes has only missed one game the past two years. But was dinged up quite a bit which caused him to disappear for large chunks of games being ineffective.

    All of this spells no thanks to 8M a year for five years. Has some serious flash, but NOWHERE near the consistency needed to give a 2nd contract too. Especially for a team desperate to shed cap.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13384
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Thu Jul 19, 2018 11:55 am
  • Because he was an injury prone, #3 quality WR who will make a crazy catch every now and then player?
    User avatar
    Steve2222
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1867
    Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 7:12 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Thu Jul 19, 2018 2:36 pm
  • I like him, he made big catches...The way the Seahawks play though, they can just get cheap FA players instead. Money needed else where.

    I think we may do the same for Lockett if Penny can return those punts.
    User avatar
    rcaido
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 506
    Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:47 pm


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Thu Jul 19, 2018 3:00 pm
  • rcaido wrote:I like him, he made big catches...The way the Seahawks play though, they can just get cheap FA players instead. Money needed else where.

    I think we may do the same for Lockett if Penny can return those punts.



    Penny will not be returning kicks after his first full game, if he is what we think he is they will not risk him getting hurt on a fluke cut and or tackle.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 24758
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Thu Jul 19, 2018 3:08 pm
  • chris98251 wrote:
    rcaido wrote:I like him, he made big catches...The way the Seahawks play though, they can just get cheap FA players instead. Money needed else where.

    I think we may do the same for Lockett if Penny can return those punts.



    Penny will not be returning kicks after his first full game, if he is what we think he is they will not risk him getting hurt on a fluke cut and or tackle.


    But they do with Lockett? Do you mean if Penny becomes a flat out stud RB? It'd be difficult to ascertain that after one game.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Thu Jul 19, 2018 5:31 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Jville wrote:Couple of points of reflection ........

    The major injuries to both Richardson and Lockett were characterized as accidents. Both cases involved a pass that was accidentally under thrown combined with a defender who accidentally ran up on the back of the legs of a receiver. Both Richardson and Lockett suffered injury due to similar accidents.


    Richardon's injury history is long and detailed, so I'm not cool with putting him into the same "accidental fluke" category like Tyler.

    Richardson tore his MCL and ACL in college, tore his ACL again against the Panthers in the playoffs, missed all of the 2015 season with a serious hamstring injury............and yes has only missed one game the past two years. But was dinged up quite a bit which caused him to disappear for large chunks of games being ineffective.

    All of this spells no thanks to 8M a year for five years. Has some serious flash, but NOWHERE near the consistency needed to give a 2nd contract too. Especially for a team desperate to shed cap.



    I agree on all but he part where he was “dinged up” which caused him to disappear

    He was a casualty of Bevell’s incompetence and got very little playing time 2 seasons ago until he came in late in the season. Two games left they suddenly had to play him and he caught four passes back to back and had 40 yards in each game and a TD. His lack of production prior was due to coaching and scheming. In the Arizona game he had his first catch in the second half after Tyler L. Was injured at the end of the half

    Then in 2017 he was a starter and featured more in the running game
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7303
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Thu Jul 19, 2018 5:44 pm
  • adeltaY wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:
    rcaido wrote:I like him, he made big catches...The way the Seahawks play though, they can just get cheap FA players instead. Money needed else where.

    I think we may do the same for Lockett if Penny can return those punts.



    Penny will not be returning kicks after his first full game, if he is what we think he is they will not risk him getting hurt on a fluke cut and or tackle.


    But they do with Lockett? Do you mean if Penny becomes a flat out stud RB? It'd be difficult to ascertain that after one game.


    Your 1st round pick and assumed bell cow back is not going to be doing a lot that, I will add however, I liked what I saw of him returning kicks, and the new Rules may make the risk less.


    Traditionally though your not going to put that much on him trying to learn the offense, blocking assignments as well as route trees of a new offense.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 24758
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Thu Jul 19, 2018 7:16 pm
  • Ah I figured Carson would start or split carries pretty evenly so Penny would be fresh to return kicks
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Thu Jul 19, 2018 9:13 pm
  • Tical21 wrote:Richardson is just a guy.


    You trolling? He is more than just a guy, but he has been hurt 4 of the last 6 yrs of his College & Pro career. You can't pay a guy 8-9M APY when he is that consistently injured, while also being that damn slender.

    I forecasted exactly what he ended up getting even before the '17 season started (8-9M APY), and I didn't want the Seahawks to re-sign him either if he found a way to stay healthy. Let another team take that risk.

    In a proper non Bevell/Cable ran offense he is a 50-60 catch, 800-1000 yd, 8 TD, take the top off the defense X. That isn't a JAG. The catch is he is brittle.

    Alex Smith is his QB though so he is probably screwed if he stays healthy. Alex Smith is a check down artist who occasionally throws to the TE. PRich's chances of being successful are very low being paired with Alex Smith. That would be like trading for Jimmy Graham and asking him to block. Dumb.

    So you may end up looking right on the surface level of things when it is all said & done. Fun fact: Alex Smith went a whole 594 days in a row (Damn near 2 seasons.) without throwing a TD to a WR during a stretch of his career with the KC Chiefs.
    User avatar
    Fade
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1678
    Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 3:26 am
    Location: Truth Ray


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Fri Jul 20, 2018 1:13 am
  • Fade wrote:
    Tical21 wrote:Richardson is just a guy.


    You trolling? He is more than just a guy, but he has been hurt 4 of the last 6 yrs of his College & Pro career. You can't pay a guy 8-9M APY when he is that consistently injured, while also being that damn slender.

    I forecasted exactly what he ended up getting even before the '17 season started (8-9M APY), and I didn't want the Seahawks to re-sign him either if he found a way to stay healthy. Let another team take that risk.

    In a proper non Bevell/Cable ran offense he is a 50-60 catch, 800-1000 yd, 8 TD, take the top off the defense X. That isn't a JAG. The catch is he is brittle.

    Alex Smith is his QB though so he is probably screwed if he stays healthy. Alex Smith is a check down artist who occasionally throws to the TE. PRich's chances of being successful are very low being paired with Alex Smith. That would be like trading for Jimmy Graham and asking him to block. Dumb.

    So you may end up looking right on the surface level of things when it is all said & done. Fun fact: Alex Smith went a whole 594 days in a row (Damn near 2 seasons.) without throwing a TD to a WR during a stretch of his career with the KC Chiefs.





    https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/p ... mpaign=nfl

    It wasn't just a high efficiency thing either, he finished with the most deep passing yards and tied for most deep passing TDs with 12.

    Now, I still think he needs to be in a great offensive scheme, but that's exactly what Jay Gruden will offer him. Richardson, Crowder, Doctson, Reed, and Chris Thompson is a hell of a pass-catching crew. Not to mention the fountain of youth that is Vernon Davis.

    And you're absolutely right. Maybe Tical has a different definition of JAG than we do, but there's no way Richardson qualifies as that.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:26 am
  • mikeak wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Jville wrote:Couple of points of reflection ........

    The major injuries to both Richardson and Lockett were characterized as accidents. Both cases involved a pass that was accidentally under thrown combined with a defender who accidentally ran up on the back of the legs of a receiver. Both Richardson and Lockett suffered injury due to similar accidents.


    Richardon's injury history is long and detailed, so I'm not cool with putting him into the same "accidental fluke" category like Tyler.

    Richardson tore his MCL and ACL in college, tore his ACL again against the Panthers in the playoffs, missed all of the 2015 season with a serious hamstring injury............and yes has only missed one game the past two years. But was dinged up quite a bit which caused him to disappear for large chunks of games being ineffective.

    All of this spells no thanks to 8M a year for five years. Has some serious flash, but NOWHERE near the consistency needed to give a 2nd contract too. Especially for a team desperate to shed cap.



    I agree on all but he part where he was “dinged up” which caused him to disappear

    He was a casualty of Bevell’s incompetence and got very little playing time 2 seasons ago until he came in late in the season. Two games left they suddenly had to play him and he caught four passes back to back and had 40 yards in each game and a TD. His lack of production prior was due to coaching and scheming. In the Arizona game he had his first catch in the second half after Tyler L. Was injured at the end of the half

    Then in 2017 he was a starter and featured more in the running game


    I love that we're still blaming Bevell. Awesome.

    Richardson was in the same offense as Jimmy, Doug and Tyler...........those players didn't seem to have a hard time catching balls and getting on the field. Why just Paul?

    He wasn't on the field because he didn't earn it. He was SUPPOSE to be what Locket turned into, a dependable deep threat that could stretch the defense.

    It was his wild inconsistency and injuries that kept him off the field his first two years, not Bevell.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13384
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Fri Jul 20, 2018 10:56 am
  • Richardson was a lot better than a few people around here realize. His efficiency stats last year were comparable to stars like Antonio Brown and that's why he got paid despite his injury history. If he stays healthy he could absolutely light it up next year.

    That being said, he was a luxury that we couldn't afford due to the way other things shook out the last two years. We have quite a lot of dead money hitting the cap this year, particularly when you include Kam's contract. We restructured Baldwin and Wilson last year to try to stay competitive. Unfortunately, the only way to sustain success in the NFL is to let some of your good players walk and replace them with high value rookie contracts.

    We replaced Richardson with a much cheaper version in Jaron Brown. Our receiver corps is worse for it right now but it gives us our best chance to succeed next year by introducing the chance that we could get great value out of one of Moore, Grayson, Stringfellow, Johnson, Brown, Reynolds, etc.
    User avatar
    AgentDib
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3502
    Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:08 pm
    Location: Seattle


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Fri Jul 20, 2018 10:38 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    mikeak wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Jville wrote:Couple of points of reflection ........

    The major injuries to both Richardson and Lockett were characterized as accidents. Both cases involved a pass that was accidentally under thrown combined with a defender who accidentally ran up on the back of the legs of a receiver. Both Richardson and Lockett suffered injury due to similar accidents.


    Richardon's injury history is long and detailed, so I'm not cool with putting him into the same "accidental fluke" category like Tyler.

    Richardson tore his MCL and ACL in college, tore his ACL again against the Panthers in the playoffs, missed all of the 2015 season with a serious hamstring injury............and yes has only missed one game the past two years. But was dinged up quite a bit which caused him to disappear for large chunks of games being ineffective.

    All of this spells no thanks to 8M a year for five years. Has some serious flash, but NOWHERE near the consistency needed to give a 2nd contract too. Especially for a team desperate to shed cap.



    I agree on all but he part where he was “dinged up” which caused him to disappear

    He was a casualty of Bevell’s incompetence and got very little playing time 2 seasons ago until he came in late in the season. Two games left they suddenly had to play him and he caught four passes back to back and had 40 yards in each game and a TD. His lack of production prior was due to coaching and scheming. In the Arizona game he had his first catch in the second half after Tyler L. Was injured at the end of the half

    Then in 2017 he was a starter and featured more in the running game


    I love that we're still blaming Bevell. Awesome.

    Richardson was in the same offense as Jimmy, Doug and Tyler...........those players didn't seem to have a hard time catching balls and getting on the field. Why just Paul?

    He wasn't on the field because he didn't earn it. He was SUPPOSE to be what Locket turned into, a dependable deep threat that could stretch the defense.

    It was his wild inconsistency and injuries that kept him off the field his first two years, not Bevell.


    Look at last two years and show me wild inconsistency

    He wasn’t featured at all. Hen suddenly he was given playing time and was very consistent
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7303
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Sat Jul 21, 2018 9:58 am
  • Yeah, when was Richardson not a part of the passing game when healthy? The only thing that kept him off the field was injuries.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Sat Jul 21, 2018 1:44 pm
  • They will need Paul’s cash when they cave in and reup Earl
    User avatar
    brimsalabim
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4128
    Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:50 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Sat Jul 21, 2018 2:29 pm
  • mikeak wrote:
    Look at last two years and show me wild inconsistency

    He wasn’t featured at all. Hen suddenly he was given playing time and was very consistent


    He was out there for 817 snaps, compare that to Doug Baldwin’s 857.

    If he was consistently amazing and/or more amazing than other players, he would have been featured as the first or second option on the majority vs perceived minority. I don’t know who can accurately chart all reads though, so it’s tough to say where that all netted out.

    Either way, Russ spreads it out and threw the ball 553 times, 6th most in the league. There was tons of opportunity last year for Richardson. He did OK.
    User avatar
    Coug_Hawk08
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4321
    Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 9:26 am


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Sat Jul 21, 2018 4:46 pm
  • Salary cap, salary cap, salary cap... bad year to be a free agent for the Seahawks. We are paying Kam to not play, A lot of dead money releasing Sherman and I believe Avril retiring also. We had to let people walk... P Rich got way more than we could afford to give him, same with Sheldon R. Just no money.
    Schadie001
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 726
    Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 4:32 pm


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Sun Jul 22, 2018 12:31 am
  • Coug_Hawk08 wrote:
    mikeak wrote:
    Look at last two years and show me wild inconsistency

    He wasn’t featured at all. Hen suddenly he was given playing time and was very consistent


    He was out there for 817 snaps, compare that to Doug Baldwin’s 857.

    If he was consistently amazing and/or more amazing than other players, he would have been featured as the first or second option on the majority vs perceived minority. I don’t know who can accurately chart all reads though, so it’s tough to say where that all netted out.

    Either way, Russ spreads it out and threw the ball 553 times, 6th most in the league. There was tons of opportunity last year for Richardson. He did OK.



    You said he was inconsistent. I am asking - when he got playing time - show me when?

    He was consistent. I am not saying performed like a superstar but a good NFL player who was consistent. Still don’t understand why it took Tyler getting injured to put PRich on the field.

    This season will show if he was underutilized. Look at Kearse numbers with the freaking Jets last year....
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7303
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Sun Jul 22, 2018 12:41 pm
  • Yeah Kearse had some games where he went off this year - the chiefs game sticks out to me. Very happy for him.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Why wasn't Paul Richardson retained?
Sun Jul 22, 2018 12:55 pm
  • Assuming both are healthy, other than being taller, I am not convinced Richardson is better Lockett. In fact when both were active in 2016, Richardson was rookie Lockett's backup.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    ++ You can call me a homer, but I am not the only one ++
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    toffee
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1088
    Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 7:44 pm




It is currently Tue Oct 23, 2018 8:53 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online