Draft Do-over: Round #2-Jordan Matthews or Paul Richardson

jake206

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2012
Messages
1,814
Reaction score
0
Jordan Matthews:
54 receptions, 84 targets, 686 yards, 7 tds, 6.1 YAC per reception;
6'3'', 33 1/3 arm length, 212 lbs, Hand size: 10 3/8
4.46 40, 35'' vert. jump, 21 reps bench, 120'' broad, 6.95 3 cone

Paul Richardson:
14 receptions, 21 targets, 102 yards, 0 tds, 2.1 YAC per reception;
6'0'', 32 5/8 arm length, 175 lbs, Hand size: 8 7/8
4.40 40, 38 vert. jump, 7.09 3 cone, 124'' broad

Though stats are meaningless, because the offense of the two teams are so different and small sample size. I still think Jordan Matthews body type fits our offense better than Paul Richardson. Seahawks run-dominant offense should value size, and blocking ability rather than pure speed for their WRs. Richardson still scares me, that he'll break like a stick on blocks and his speed seems less a significant factor in this offense.
 

hawknation2014

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,812
Reaction score
0
Absolutely Jordan Matthews as a 3rd down/red zone threat. Hopefully Richardson improves and becomes a threat in this offense over time.
 

Hawks46

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
7,498
Reaction score
0
Too early to tell. 54 targets to 21 targets tells you all you need to know right there.

And Richardson isn't 175 lbs, he's 185 now. He's not too fragile to block downfield, better than Baldwin and Kearse have been doing.
 

hawknation2014

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,812
Reaction score
0
Hawks46":44xoqf3n said:
Too early to tell. 54 targets to 21 targets tells you all you need to know right there.

And Richardson isn't 175 lbs, he's 185 now. He's not too fragile to block downfield, better than Baldwin and Kearse have been doing.

You have to get open to be targeted by a competent QB. Richardson has run 201 passing routes but has only been targeted 20 times total. Martavis Bryant, Donte Moncrief, Marqise Lee, and Philly Brown are all rookie receivers who have run fewer total routes than Richardson, and yet they all have more targets than Richardson. Overall, Richardson has the lowest target rate - and lowest WR rating - on the team.
 

Smellyman

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
1,034
Location
Taipei
Meh. What do you think Chip Kelly would be doing with Richardson right now?

I imagine he'd have some pretty dang good numbers.

and Matthews here........?
 

HawkWow

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Messages
6,740
Reaction score
0
Location
The 5-0
I wouldn't read too much into Richardson's targets at this stage. The receivers mentioned above didn't have a mental case to contend with, playing at the same position. Imagine the anxiety for a rookie WR. Now imagine the anxiety of Paul Richardson, when both he and Harvin knew he was drafted to replace Harvin. Had to be uncomfortable for the rook.

I also wouldn't read too much into QBs not throwing to receivers unless they are open. Great QBs throw their receivers open. Not knocking RW, but he's almost as guilty of his receivers not being open as they are. In Pete's lust for ball security, if a receiver's not wide open, Wilson is reluctant and immediately goes to plan B. The good news is Plan B is frequently a pretty good plan.

just saying it's very difficult to know for sure what Matthews etc would do on this team.
 

hawknation2014

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,812
Reaction score
0
HawkWow":3ezmf0jw said:
I wouldn't read too much into Richardson's targets at this stage. The receivers mentioned above didn't have a mental case to contend with, playing at the same position. Imagine the anxiety for a rookie WR. Now imagine the anxiety of Paul Richardson, when both he and Harvin knew he was drafted to replace Harvin. Had to be uncomfortable for the rook.

I also wouldn't read too much into QBs not throwing to receivers unless they are open. Great QBs throw their receivers open. Not knocking RW, but he's almost as guilty of his receivers not being open as they are. In Pete's lust for ball security, if a receiver's not wide open, Wilson is reluctant and immediately goes to plan B. The good news is Plan B is frequently a pretty good plan.

just saying it's very difficult to know for sure what Matthews etc would do on this team.

I think it was Kearly who recognized early that Richardson has an issue with going up to get contested balls at the highest point. I didn't want to believe it when he first said that but it's proven to be true thus far. For whatever reason, Wilson does not trust Richardson as much as he does his other receiving options.
 

jlwaters1

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2010
Messages
2,986
Reaction score
86
This entire thread is ridiculous. Fans, have become so impatient with players it's disheartening. Most players take a few years to develop.

examples @ WR- look at Jermaine Kearse, Golden Tate, and Ricardo Lockette. None of these had any significant impact as rookies. Infact most saw the chances of Jermaine making the team in year 2 as minimal, but he improved significantly. Tate, wasn't a full-time contributor until year 3.

A lot of things change in 3 years. Look @ RG3 and Luck-- after year 1 RG3 was the talk of the NFL, Luck meanwhile was above average/good. Now we're in year 3 and Luck is clearly the elite talent most thought he would be and RG3 is flaming out spectacularly.

I wouldn't get carried away in comparison's, who know, a few of these "productive" rookies will underperform next year or struggle to take that next step. Other's will emerge as big time playmakers. I like both P-Rich and Norwood and expect them to make significant progress next year.

I agree with one poster who said it. Russell isn't pulling the trigger as often, This entire season reminded me of the last 4 games of 2013, when it seems our offense went into a shell, we seem to be so obsessed with not turning the ball over we never seem to take any chances.
2014 feels a lot like this.. We aren't seeing big plays consistently in the passing game, I think Russell misses Sydney Rice more than most would care to believe. We don't have that big security blanket for him. and for whatever reason he's not hitting as much on the intermediate routes. (RW has definitely played worse this year than last)

It seems bizarre we can't seem to get Richardson the ball in space via crossing routes more often. from what I have seen from our 2 rookies they both look like natural catchers and route runners. Richardson looks particularly smooth.
 

DavidSeven

New member
Joined
Jan 18, 2013
Messages
5,742
Reaction score
0
Jordan Matthews is the same guy he was in college, and I wasn't high on him then. However, I thought he could be productive in the right system. Philly is probably the best place he could have gone. He wouldn't be as successful here.

He still does his damage over the middle. He'll run a shallow cross or just sit somewhere deeper in the middle. He's built to take contact in that area; however, it has yet to be proven if Russell (or maybe the coaching staff) is willing or able to exploit those areas consistently. I still don't believe he is someone who will leap over someone in the corner of the endzone or win a redline battle on third down.

Truth be told, I think he'd be pretty invisible here. He is big, but doesn't play big in the way that matters to this offense. Personally, I loved Kelvin Benjamin and thought he would've been a better fit (though he was off the board obviously).
 

hawknation2014

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,812
Reaction score
0
Richardson's 28 snaps against SF were his fewest since Week 5. Since Week 7, he has had greater than 50% of the snaps until last week.
 

Rat

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
8,693
Reaction score
2,449
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
It's good that we got the worse wideout because we're a running team, and that means we should have lousy WRs for some reason. At least that's what I keep reading on here.
 

Smellyman

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
1,034
Location
Taipei
hawknation2014":2cad2tg9 said:
HawkWow":2cad2tg9 said:
I wouldn't read too much into Richardson's targets at this stage. The receivers mentioned above didn't have a mental case to contend with, playing at the same position. Imagine the anxiety for a rookie WR. Now imagine the anxiety of Paul Richardson, when both he and Harvin knew he was drafted to replace Harvin. Had to be uncomfortable for the rook.

I also wouldn't read too much into QBs not throwing to receivers unless they are open. Great QBs throw their receivers open. Not knocking RW, but he's almost as guilty of his receivers not being open as they are. In Pete's lust for ball security, if a receiver's not wide open, Wilson is reluctant and immediately goes to plan B. The good news is Plan B is frequently a pretty good plan.

just saying it's very difficult to know for sure what Matthews etc would do on this team.

I think it was Kearly who recognized early that Richardson has an issue with going up to get contested balls at the highest point. I didn't want to believe it when he first said that but it's proven to be true thus far. For whatever reason, Wilson does not trust Richardson as much as he does his other receiving options.

does he? got to throw it up to him first
 

Scottemojo

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
14,663
Reaction score
1
comping stats of a guy in that offense vs a guy in this offense is pointless.

Tell me what you see.
 

dumbrabbit

New member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
821
Reaction score
0
Why are we judging based off one season? How can you judge confidently? I'd rather wait 4 or 5 seasons...
 

therealjohncarlson

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
4,466
Reaction score
284
jlwaters1":1dx7aq2s said:
This entire thread is ridiculous. Fans, have become so impatient with players it's disheartening. Most players take a few years to develop.

examples @ WR- look at Jermaine Kearse, Golden Tate, and Ricardo Lockette. None of these had any significant impact as rookies. Infact most saw the chances of Jermaine making the team in year 2 as minimal, but he improved significantly. Tate, wasn't a full-time contributor until year 3.

A lot of things change in 3 years. Look @ RG3 and Luck-- after year 1 RG3 was the talk of the NFL, Luck meanwhile was above average/good. Now we're in year 3 and Luck is clearly the elite talent most thought he would be and RG3 is flaming out spectacularly.

I wouldn't get carried away in comparison's, who know, a few of these "productive" rookies will underperform next year or struggle to take that next step. Other's will emerge as big time playmakers. I like both P-Rich and Norwood and expect them to make significant progress next year.

I agree with one poster who said it. Russell isn't pulling the trigger as often, This entire season reminded me of the last 4 games of 2013, when it seems our offense went into a shell, we seem to be so obsessed with not turning the ball over we never seem to take any chances.
2014 feels a lot like this.. We aren't seeing big plays consistently in the passing game, I think Russell misses Sydney Rice more than most would care to believe. We don't have that big security blanket for him. and for whatever reason he's not hitting as much on the intermediate routes. (RW has definitely played worse this year than last)

It seems bizarre we can't seem to get Richardson the ball in space via crossing routes more often. from what I have seen from our 2 rookies they both look like natural catchers and route runners. Richardson looks particularly smooth.

I dont get it.... You're using Lockette and to a lesser extent Kearse to prove your point? Why?
 

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
I had a ranking of all the draftable receivers this Spring, I tried to watch at least four games of every one of them. Just my opinion of course, and college tape analysis is only worth so much. But I wasn't very enamoured with either of these guys. Both looked soft, neither played like big receivers, and both were kind of vanilla in a general sense... lacking in defining characteristics. I liked Matthews' vocal skills and attitude, but the chip on the shoulder rhetoric didn't match his finesse on the field demeanor. In this way Matthews reminded me a lot of Quinton Patton, who I was also non-plussed by in the previous year's draft.

But sometimes, you see a player you love who goes to exactly the wrong team, and you know he's screwed. Geno Smith would probably be a better QB in Philly than any of the guys they have there right now, but he went to the Jets instead. Boned. Kelvin Benjamin would have probably flamed out in Seattle where our team is less forgiving of WR mistakes and offers very little opportunity for stats. Carolina's situation was the perfect opposite, and in a lot of ways Benjamin's catch radius was the perfect fit for Cam's inconsistent accuracy, and they needed a guy they could give tons of reps to. It's not about which player a team drafts, it's about which team drafts that player.

I still think the Richardson pick is a head scratcher. Getting a guy who can ace short routes is not what our offense needed. That said, I have been very impressed with Richardson's polish, and I think with some work on the deep game, he could be a very similar player to Emmanuel Sanders at some point, maybe in a couple years. He has changed my mind some. I think he's a good player to wait and see with.

Matthews seems so dead average to me, even in the games he did well it seemed like the QB was staring him down, probably because the defensive matchup dictated it. I also think Maclin is the epitome of average, put both those guys on Seattle and I'll show you two receivers that might not add up to 1000 yards. If Seattle traded for either one of them, it would make fans romanticize the Deion Branch deal a few years down the line, I'd put it that way.
 

Hawknballs

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
4,430
Reaction score
837
People seem pretty quick to completely overlook the fact that we had a guy on the team named Harvin to start the season.

Richardson never got the work in training camp that he would have if we knew we'd be finishing the season with him as our WR3 instead of Kearse. We would have seen much more of him in pre-season games, otherwise. Meanwhile, Matthews was heavily targeted in Philly and had 100 yard pre-season games.
 

olyfan63

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2012
Messages
5,652
Reaction score
1,684
therealjohncarlson":z79b0wcj said:
I dont get it.... You're using Lockette and to a lesser extent Kearse to prove your point? Why?

I totally get his examples, sans Lockette, are you just being difficult for some reason?

After all, he's also using Golden Tate to make that point, and it's Tate who makes it best. Tate did hardly anything his first couple years, and then in year 3 had a huge leap, and in year 4 even better, a contract year, and got a big payday. Tate went from a #5 receiver to a #2.

Kearse is a good example because he sucked at first, and worked his ass off on the practice squad and improved to the point of becoming a legit NFL receiver, albeit a #4 receiver, a #3.5 when you include special teams and run blocking play. Kearse went from a #9 receiver (not on roster) to a #4.

Lockette... I really can't say he's done much. But the other two, Tate and Kearse, in two years with Seattle, went 3 rungs and 5 rungs up the ladder, respectively. So clearly, the Seattle coaches do an excellent job of develop good receivers. Detroit would massively agree with this right now.

Also, as a receiver, I have been floored by Cooper Helfet's play this year. He was just one of those dudes hanging around the practice squad, not getting any roster time or game time, and they bring him up to the big team in an emergency situation, and BOOM! He lights it up in the receiving department. Sure, he's not the classic "outside tackle" TE the Seahawks love, but Russell clearly trusts him in the passing game, and Helfet delivers.

Our rooks, Richardson and Norwood, are worthy of the same opportunity to get reps and improve. I still hope and expect Richardson to have some huge plays this year down the stretch. Norwood, just needs to stay healthy and keep working. If they progress at a similar rate, they could go from #5 and #6 right now, to #2 and #3.

Which makes the point that we will still need a legit #1 receiver. And I bet Pete goes after that. Or Pete's vision could be that 3 #2 receivers is better than a #1, #2, #3 receiver. Only Pete knows for sure. We won SB48 without a true #1 receiver, and at best a pair of #2 receivers in Tate and Baldwin.

If I had a draft do-over... forget Matthews vs. Richardson. The jury's still out, and will be for a while, about who is the better pick, long term. Do-over: Let's trade up and get Kelvin Benjamin.
 

Pandion Haliaetus

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
3,836
Reaction score
757
Boo Hoo.

1. Who in our offense is really getting consistent deep ball passes off of designed plays?

2. Seems to me that the Seahawks recognize that their O-Line has a legitamate pass-protection weakness and Wilson is developing happy feet... so the deep passing game has been minimal compared to prior years.

3. Not only that it seems Defensive Coordinatoors also have learned their lesson with Seattle and have come prepared in stifling the Seahawks deep ball antics off of play-action with smart, discilplined football as well as being more aggressive in man-coverage while exploiting pass-protection and harassing Wilson.

4. Yeah it sucks not having Tate, Rice, and Miller... those guys are crucial chain-movers and Red Zone targets but let's not act like Jordan Mathews is going to come in here and save the day. Norwood is very comparable to Mathews both in size and skill... its not like Norwood is tearing it up here. Lockette's is a big boy and super athletic... way under-utilize in this system.

5. Seahawks tend to baby their WRs as well as hold them to a gold standard. For whatever reasons, they don't like rookies WRs taking too much on all at once but at the same time they want them to compete up to the standard they've set.

Baldwin got it right away... big chip on his shoulder...attitude and guts...hardwork.

It took Tate two years to develop.

Guys like Durham and Harper didn't make the cut. Etc.

6. Different coaching styles/different systems

One thing I've noticed about Pete Carroll is, when their coaching staff is great at what it does especially identifying weaknesses and allowing the opportunities for players to sink or swim.

Point in case, everyone knew the pass-protection was horrible but the only way to get better is through experience. Its probably why they forced the passing at times during the first half of the season.

You can name a lot of young players on this team where the Seahawks just kind of threw them in a position that allowed their weaknesses to be exploited and allowed them to learn from their mistakes.

So, I'm reading in between on Paul Richardson, and its possible that they love his long game but they don't trust the chemistry just yet. But they know the potential he has... so instead of pushing him to be a downfield threat at a time where Russ can't even analyze the field for a couple of seconds before getting chased... they work on the areas of Richardson' game where they want to strengthen: blocking and getting off the jam on short to intermediate routes...and I feel he's getting there and making progress with very little opportunity he's has to get game experience especially when Russell has time.

Patience is a Virtue. Lot of anxious fans these days who feel top picks need to be immediate stars... some of these guys are work in progress developmental picks that have to be molded and sculpted into the system before they find success.

Check out how much hate mail Bruce Irvin gets on a week to week basis but save for a PF, 2 NZI, and a blown sack or two... the kid has been tearing it up this year and playing solid to awesome football. Just people want him to be a dominant stand-out from year 1... and they care more about what his stat line says then what his developmental progress says or his what his assignment on the field is.
 

Latest posts

Top