POLL: Most Productive Receiver This Year?

[Seahawkfan80]

You should change the thread title, too.

"Most productive" I suspect will be Lockett and possibly P-Rich, as in most TD's and higher YPC.

"Most catches for yards" I'm a little unsure exactly what that means, but given their years together and fact that they're both in their primes, I voted Baldwin, as in most overall catches and raw yardage.

Do I get an award for using they're/their correctly the most times in a single sentence today?

Ya....you get the IRO award of excellence. But lose it by requesting it. That is just the way things go man.

What is this IRO award thing? You should of had one also for could of and should of because of they're are people on this board who could of known better that their is no such correct phrases as could of and should of, if their were an award to point out they're errors.

Could have and should have should of been expressed as the contractions "could've" and "should've". I probably should of known better than to post this here. Grammar is overrated. Except not my Grammer. My Grammer's chocolate chip cookies were the best. I know you could care less. I except your apologies for unintentionally disrespecting my Grammer. An don't be disrespecting my Jimmy Grammer either. Carry on.

Uh oh....someone gets it. Rats.

 

[olyfan63]

What is this IRO award thing?
....
Grammar is overrated. Except not my Grammer. My Grammer's chocolate chip cookies were the best. I know you could care less. I except your apologies for unintentionally disrespecting my Grammer. An don't be disrespecting my Jimmy Grammer either. Carry on.

Uh oh....someone gets it. Rats.

Like I was saying, grammer and speling are overrated. And I did include at least one fully correct sentence in that rant. Anyway, back on topic.

I expect ADB to be the most productive receiver this year in terms of yards, edging out Lockett. I say that only because Baldwin will have a *monster* year, and Lockett will merely have a Pro Bowl year. Kearse will continue making timely catches like he always does. What we will get from Jimmy... now *that* is a wildcard. No idea. Certainly not more production than Baldwin, in any case.

 

[dogorama]

Interesting, Baldwin and Lockett were running neck and neck but now Baldwin has pulled ahead. Graham got five votes and even P-Rich w/a couple. Virtually nobody gives Kearse a shot at it.

With Baldwin and Lockett running so close together, and the possibility that we might pass more given last year's success, could it possible to see two receivers w/1000 yd seasons this year? That would be cool.

 

[aawolf]

I drafted ADB in both my fantasy leagues as my No. 1 receiver (around 4th round), so I hope its him.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

Baldwin is in his prime, still the #1 and has his big contract. And still Wilson's favorite target. Lockett will be electrifying, but Baldwin will have another pro bowl caliber year.

This is why it'll be close between Baldwin and Lockett. Lockett will get the long yards, but Baldwin will get the steady yards. Both will be (barring injury...) fairly close in yardage and touchdowns. Baldwin has been the clutch number one guy, but Lockett showed tremendous growth the past year, and will surpass Baldwin if he keeps it up.

I say Lockett by a hair, but it could go either way. And we'll be happy with both.

 

[Hawkstorian]

Kearse zero votes. Haha.

 

[kearly]

I know everybody wants Lockett to be Antonio Brown and catch 100, but we aren't there yet, not by a longshot. Baldwin is the go-to guy.

Ditto.

Lockett's time will come. But for now, he's not even seeing the field all that much on 2 WR sets.

 

[Overseasfan]

It's between Baldwin and Graham. Kearse, Lockett and Richardson will have to split snaps between them so even though I expect big things from all three I doubt any of them becomes our leading receiver this year.

Baldwin will probably be the number 1 again but if Graham plays like he did before his injury from week 1 onwards then I feel like he's the most likely to lead our receivers.

 

[hawknation2016]

The way this is written, it sounds like you are referring to only those receptions that result in yards, as in one-or-more-yard receptions and not zero or negative-yard receptions. I think you intended to write "receiving yards" or "yards from receiving."

I would have to say Baldwin just because Russell is going to be looking for him first on most passing plays. But it wouldn't be a shock if Lockett did lead in receiving yards. He is a highly skilled and polished receiver.

 

[brimsalabim]

It will be Lockett followed by the TE group including Jimmy when he is healthy. Russell is going to have to get rid if the ball in 3 seconds or less behind this line. The other guys won't be able to get separated in that time. So that leaves Lockett and the tall guys.

 

[dogorama]

The way this is written, it sounds like you are referring to only those receptions that result in yards, as in one-or-more-yard receptions and not zero or negative-yard receptions. I think you intended to write "receiving yards" or "yards from receiving."

I would have to say Baldwin just because Russell is going to be looking for him first on most passing plays. But it wouldn't be a shock if Lockett did lead in receiving yards. He is a highly skilled and polished receiver.

It's because I started out thinking it would be "most receptions" and then changed it to be most yds.

 

[XxXdragonXxX]

You should change the thread title, too.

"Most productive" I suspect will be Lockett and possibly P-Rich, as in most TD's and higher YPC.

"Most catches for yards" I'm a little unsure exactly what that means, but given their years together and fact that they're both in their primes, I voted Baldwin, as in most overall catches and raw yardage.

Do I get an award for using they're/their correctly the most times in a single sentence today?

Ya....you get the IRO award of excellence. But lose it by requesting it. That is just the way things go man.

What is this IRO award thing? You should of had one also for could of and should of because of they're are people on this board who could of known better that their is no such correct phrases as could of and should of, if their were an award to point out they're errors.

Could have and should have should of been expressed as the contractions "could've" and "should've". I probably should of known better than to post this here. Grammar is overrated. Except not my Grammer. My Grammer's chocolate chip cookies were the best. I know you could care less. I except your apologies for unintentionally disrespecting my Grammer. An don't be disrespecting my Jimmy Grammer either. Carry on.

Im pretty sure you meant "you could care fewer," not less.

 

[scutterhawk]

Listening to the radio this morning, the host is making his "bold" predictions for the year. One that caught my interest was that he predicted that Tyler Lockett would have more receptions that Baldwin. I thought that might make for a good poll but given that Baldwin has a built-in advantage, I adjusted the poll to be "most receptions for yards." So, you are basically voting for most yds by a receiver.

I think Lockett will have less receptions, but more yardage and TD's.

Fewer. Please, for the love of all that is holy, fewer. Not less.

Now I'm confused.....I could care fewer? :lol:

 

[dogorama]

Thanks everyone, as the poll comes to an end at one o'clock it looks like Baldwin is voted most likely to be the most productive w/Lockett not far behind. Really good poll with 103 votes!

 

[Evil_Shenanigans]

I would like to vote that we replace Kearse in this poll with McEvoy! 8)

 

[dogorama]

I would like to vote that we replace Kearse in this poll with McEvoy! 8)

Well maybe next year because even though no one voted for Kearse, I don't think anyone discounts the enormous contributions he has made to this team. In fact, w/o those great timely catches in '13 and '14 I don't think we go to those Super Bowls.