Jump to content

Redskins to Sign WR Paul Richardson


e16bball

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, Vladimir L said:

I dont like Richardson not a proven wr and expensive.

To be fair, Garcon wasn't really proven and he was expensive relative to his production.

The question is whether the Redskins can get the same sort of performance-to-contract value from Richardson. Time will tell.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vladimir L said:

I dont like Richardson not a proven wr and expensive.

Proven vets tend to be near or over 30 and are usually on the downside of their careers.

Getting a player coming off his rookie contract that you project to get better based off of what he did the previous year or previous few years is a much better plan for signing free agents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Woz said:

To be fair, Garcon wasn't really proven and he was expensive relative to his production.

The question is whether the Redskins can get the same sort of performance-to-contract value from Richardson. Time will tell.

Garcon was coming off an almost 1000 yard season on a crappy offense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Vladimir L said:

Garcon was coming off an almost 1000 yard season on a crappy offense

On 70 catches.

In Richardson's first meaningful starting time, he got 703 yards on 44 catches.

It's a gamble due to the injury risk, but that was the going rate for receivers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know that any 1 (high paid) offensive receiver will match production versus contract. My guess is that the ball gets spread around to all... so at the end of the season.. the individual production numbers might very well be.. underwhelming. Paul Richardson's value is as much or more about stretching the field for others.. as it is to actually be the primary target. If this holds true, and he's effective at the role, I won't judge him on the tangible stats he collects.

Edited by oldman9er
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Woz said:

On 70 catches.

In Richardson's first meaningful starting time, he got 703 yards on 44 catches.

It's a gamble due to the injury risk, but that was the going rate for receivers.

I mean, we could of just retained DJax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Vladimir L said:

Could have been a play off team with Kirk working with these guys.

No we wouldn’t have been; our offensive line and defense fell apart because of injury and Reed missed 1/2 the year.

There is no way that having just those two WRs gives the team 3 more victories and a wildcard playoff appearance, on top of that we couldn’t afford to keep both Garçon and Djax.

Edited by turtle28
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, e16bball said:

Only in the Redskins forum can a team take a pounding for not giving $20M+ a year to two 31-year-old WRs who barely combined for 1000 yards in the first (read: likely best) season of their multi-year deals.

Ya but they both went to crappy QB situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...