Is Anthony Richardson worth pick 5?

ImTheScientist

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
3,725
Reaction score
64
I have been saying Richardson at #5 for months now. Funny you all are coming around. Welcome to the club, even though its a bit late.
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
9,450
Reaction score
3,996

TB is so sensitive to anyone who disagrees with him. He’s a nightmare in his comments. I watched the video and he’s not all wrong. Emory Hunt, who is an actual scout has had AR as his #1 QB for months and I tend to trust him over TB because historically he’s been awesome at grading players. I can’t wait to see what he does because he is so polarizing
 

Seahawker

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2018
Messages
3,423
Reaction score
1,116
Rather have Geno & Bijan Robinson/KWlll than Geno & Anthony Richardson for the next couple years.
 

AgentDib

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
5,478
Reaction score
1,262
Location
Bothell
My biggest concern with Richardson is how he'll improve without actual meaningful game reps. Assuming he sits out the first year. It's the number one reason he should have stayed in school. You can only improve so much by not playing. So whichever team drafts him is going to have to be extremely patient with him. There will be a lot of growing pains & struggles his first couple of years in the league as he gains experience. Fans will also have to be patient.
I really don't see Richardson as a low floor/high ceiling developmental prospect in the same way that some do. His ridiculous athleticism raises his floor significantly and you can absolutely play him as a rookie in the right system.

People forget, but Lamar Jackson had a 58% completion in his rookie season with poor passing fundamentals. His team still won 10 games largely due to his dual threat mobility bailing the offense out of situations that his lack of passing acuity put them into. It is going to be a roller coaster, but Richardson is going to have a very long leash and be able to make plays with his legs while his mechanics are a work in progress. His probable floor is higher than everybody but Stroud as a result, and he's not comparable to actual developmental prospects like Malik Willis last year or Clayton Tune this year.

In fact, it's more the ceiling where I have questions with Richardson simply because there is such a long way to go between his accuracy and touch and that of Stroud and Young. I'm sure he will improve, but will he ever close that gap entirely or take the lead there? I doubt it, and that lowers his probable ceiling somewhat despite his elite arm strength.

The main reason that I wouldn't want Richardson over Stroud in Seattle is that the offense needs to be designed around Richardson for him to be in position to succeed. Stroud is a much better comparison to Geno, would be a better fit as a backup, and would make an easier transition as a potential starter. I'm sure Waldron could figure out some RPO concepts but that isn't in his wheelhouse and I'd rather have a backup who can handle the same system that our starter can.
 

AgentDib

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
5,478
Reaction score
1,262
Location
Bothell
I wouldn't mind Hooker at a decent value, but I'm worried about trying to project anything for a QB playing in that offense which is beyond gimmicky. I do like his interviews and the fact that he showed up to the Senior Bowl even though he couldn't participate.

Maybe a good flier as a true project to sit behind Geno for a couple of years while he learns to analyze defenses and look at multiple reads.
 

SonicHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
12,245
Reaction score
4,053
I really don't see Richardson as a low floor/high ceiling developmental prospect in the same way that some do. His ridiculous athleticism raises his floor significantly and you can absolutely play him as a rookie in the right system.

People forget, but Lamar Jackson had a 58% completion in his rookie season with poor passing fundamentals. His team still won 10 games largely due to his dual threat mobility bailing the offense out of situations that his lack of passing acuity put them into. It is going to be a roller coaster, but Richardson is going to have a very long leash and be able to make plays with his legs while his mechanics are a work in progress. His probable floor is higher than everybody but Stroud as a result, and he's not comparable to actual developmental prospects like Malik Willis last year or Clayton Tune this year.

In fact, it's more the ceiling where I have questions with Richardson simply because there is such a long way to go between his accuracy and touch and that of Stroud and Young. I'm sure he will improve, but will he ever close that gap entirely or take the lead there? I doubt it, and that lowers his probable ceiling somewhat despite his elite arm strength.

The main reason that I wouldn't want Richardson over Stroud in Seattle is that the offense needs to be designed around Richardson for him to be in position to succeed. Stroud is a much better comparison to Geno, would be a better fit as a backup, and would make an easier transition as a potential starter. I'm sure Waldron could figure out some RPO concepts but that isn't in his wheelhouse and I'd rather have a backup who can handle the same system that our starter can.
Lamar Jackson was an absolute stud in college. Anthony Richardson threw for fewer yards in his college career than Wilson did in his senior season. Lamar Jackson threw for 30 tds and rushed for 21. He was insane in college. Lamar Jackson is infinitely better than Richardson. Jackson also had a 59% completion... Richardson had 53%. Lamar also threw for 3,500 yards two seasons in a row. Anthony Richardson started one year for 2,500 yards.

Stroud is infinitely better than Richardson. He is game ready now. Richardson will likely never be ready for the NFL.

His floor is out of football in 2 years. His ceiling is... what? Seriously, he doesn't compare to Newton. Cam Newton won a Heisman and a NC. Newton had a 66% completion rate and ran for 20 TDs. Richardson's ceiling is low. A serviceable QB who is a power runner?

I'd take Richardson in the 3rd round. His athleticism is undeniable, but he is an absolute waste in the first round.
 

SonicHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
12,245
Reaction score
4,053
I wouldn't mind Hooker at a decent value, but I'm worried about trying to project anything for a QB playing in that offense which is beyond gimmicky. I do like his interviews and the fact that he showed up to the Senior Bowl even though he couldn't participate.

Maybe a good flier as a true project to sit behind Geno for a couple of years while he learns to analyze defenses and look at multiple reads.
Hooker is a baller. If you can grab him in the late 2nd/3rd he's worth it.
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
9,450
Reaction score
3,996
I really don't see Richardson as a low floor/high ceiling developmental prospect in the same way that some do. His ridiculous athleticism raises his floor significantly and you can absolutely play him as a rookie in the right system.

People forget, but Lamar Jackson had a 58% completion in his rookie season with poor passing fundamentals. His team still won 10 games largely due to his dual threat mobility bailing the offense out of situations that his lack of passing acuity put them into. It is going to be a roller coaster, but Richardson is going to have a very long leash and be able to make plays with his legs while his mechanics are a work in progress. His probable floor is higher than everybody but Stroud as a result, and he's not comparable to actual developmental prospects like Malik Willis last year or Clayton Tune this year.

In fact, it's more the ceiling where I have questions with Richardson simply because there is such a long way to go between his accuracy and touch and that of Stroud and Young. I'm sure he will improve, but will he ever close that gap entirely or take the lead there? I doubt it, and that lowers his probable ceiling somewhat despite his elite arm strength.

The main reason that I wouldn't want Richardson over Stroud in Seattle is that the offense needs to be designed around Richardson for him to be in position to succeed. Stroud is a much better comparison to Geno, would be a better fit as a backup, and would make an easier transition as a potential starter. I'm sure Waldron could figure out some RPO concepts but that isn't in his wheelhouse and I'd rather have a backup who can handle the same system that our starter can.
I’ve been all over the place on these guys but stroud is getting forgotten. Him and Young feel super safe to me and if he surprised if they don’t hit.
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
9,450
Reaction score
3,996
Rob Staton is the same way.

I stopped reading his blog when I realized that he was deleting/editing comments that opposed his opinion.

I'm not a big fan of TB myself. I usually avoid the comments. But every now & then he'll put out some decent content.

My biggest concern with Richardson is how he'll improve without actual meaningful game reps. Assuming he sits out the first year. It's the number one reason he should have stayed in school. You can only improve so much by not playing. So whichever team drafts him is going to have to be extremely patient with him. There will be a lot of growing pains & struggles his first couple of years in the league as he gains experience. Fans will also have to be patient.

It's tough.

I liken it to Justin Fields & Chicago. It was pretty ugly early on.
I troll TB sometimes just for fun because he loses it.

I know others have said the same about Rob but to be fair to him he’s always been super nice to me so I have a different opinion.

Good post overall tho!
 

SonicHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
12,245
Reaction score
4,053
There's a pretty quick watches and the FSU game was one of his "better" performances. He's just plain bad at some points but a couple of beautiful deep balls. His best game was probably vs Utah.



Here's just a horrible performance vs Kentucky.

 

EverydayImRusselin

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
2,016
Reaction score
662
Lamar Jackson was an absolute stud in college. Anthony Richardson threw for fewer yards in his college career than Wilson did in his senior season. Lamar Jackson threw for 30 tds and rushed for 21. He was insane in college. Lamar Jackson is infinitely better than Richardson. Jackson also had a 59% completion... Richardson had 53%. Lamar also threw for 3,500 yards two seasons in a row. Anthony Richardson started one year for 2,500 yards.

Stroud is infinitely better than Richardson. He is game ready now. Richardson will likely never be ready for the NFL.

His floor is out of football in 2 years. His ceiling is... what? Seriously, he doesn't compare to Newton. Cam Newton won a Heisman and a NC. Newton had a 66% completion rate and ran for 20 TDs. Richardson's ceiling is low. A serviceable QB who is a power runner?

I'd take Richardson in the 3rd round. His athleticism is undeniable, but he is an absolute waste in the first round.
The difference is, they played multiple years in college. Richardson hasn't. If he went back to school this year and showed tremendous improvement and was in the Heisman race, he would be the #1 overall pick next year. That is why we even have the chance to pick him this year.
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
9,450
Reaction score
3,996
There's a pretty quick watches and the FSU game was one of his "better" performances. He's just plain bad at some points but a couple of beautiful deep balls. His best game was probably vs Utah.



Here's just a horrible performance vs Kentucky.


But he's only had 13 starts. Mahomes, Burrow and others weren't good in their first 13 starts either. I think Richardson is just so hard to evaluate because scouts don't have a ton of college tape to go on. I don't disagree though, Richardson is a massive risk/reward guy. I've seen some scouts say his innacuracy is footwork related which is easier to coach up and fix? Not sure if that's true or not. Stroud,Young on tape seem about as safe as you can be. Even Levis who everyone hates here has at least put out some good tape. He was pretty good in 2021 with no supporting cast. I trust John to scout the right guy and I think Seattle is the perfect place for a young QB to develop so if they grab any of the 4 at #5 I'll be pumped about it.
 
OP
OP
FrodosFinger

FrodosFinger

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2022
Messages
2,312
Reaction score
2,320
I think Richardson would ball out in a controlled system. Shane might add a wrinkle in the playbook for him because he can also split out wide in certain formations as a decoy or double pass etc. First of all we need healthy running backs for a complete season for the offense to really click no matter who the quarterback is
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,616
Did you watch tape on this guy?


Yessir. Quite a bit, and most of his combine videos.

Insane measurables
Cannon for an Arm
Tough

But yes, raw, lack of experience and accuracy issues. Nothing that would scare away a QB needy team from drafting him high.

Now if Richardson had some questionable character or maturity issues? Yeah, I could see him dropping down into the late teens or 20's. But nothing I've read that'd scare off a lot of these teams.
 

SonicHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
12,245
Reaction score
4,053
But he's only had 13 starts. Mahomes, Burrow and others weren't good in their first 13 starts either. I think Richardson is just so hard to evaluate because scouts don't have a ton of college tape to go on. I don't disagree though, Richardson is a massive risk/reward guy. I've seen some scouts say his innacuracy is footwork related which is easier to coach up and fix? Not sure if that's true or not. Stroud,Young on tape seem about as safe as you can be. Even Levis who everyone hates here has at least put out some good tape. He was pretty good in 2021 with no supporting cast. I trust John to scout the right guy and I think Seattle is the perfect place for a young QB to develop so if they grab any of the 4 at #5 I'll be pumped about it.
That's a crazy excuse. Mahomes threw for 5000 yards his junior season, 4600 his sophomore season. His freshman season he played in 7 games and was 16/4. Burrow won a title. Neither of them should have been picked in the first round prior to showing their talents.

It's not easy to fix anything.

It's insane to me that you'd promote spending a top 5 pick on a guy who hasn't proven a damn thing. A lot of guys aren't good in their first 13 games and then suck for the rest of their games.
 

SonicHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
12,245
Reaction score
4,053
The difference is, they played multiple years in college. Richardson hasn't. If he went back to school this year and showed tremendous improvement and was in the Heisman race, he would be the #1 overall pick next year. That is why we even have the chance to pick him this year.
That's a whole bunch of speculation.
 

toffee

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2016
Messages
10,906
Reaction score
7,065
Location
SoCal Desert
Hooker is a baller. If you can grab him in the late 2nd/3rd he's worth it.
I am in on that, come to think of it, Hooker has a lot in common with Geno. Lol Geno would be amazed that we drafted a Geno light.
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
9,450
Reaction score
3,996
Well we will see how "insane" it is come draft time. I think the league values him higher than you do. I think he's probably a little too much risk but I trust John when it comes to scouting the position and if he likes him enough to take him then I think he's probably right to do so.

Point is he's not the first QB to struggle only to figure it out. Accuracy issues have been fixed with guys like Richardson. Allen had it as did others and they're just fine now so its not impossible. Risky? Sure, impossible no.

I think Stroud, Young and Levis are guys who can play right away, Richardson I wouldn't.
 
Top