Jump to content
NBC Sports Edge Forums

Paul Richardson 2019 Outlook


Recommended Posts

A very bland player to consider and very late in the draft obviously, but he is their WR1. He went about 45/700/6 two years ago with the Seahawks. Can he improve on that with this motley crew enough to be worth a late pick?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I have Doctson and Trey Quinn ahead of him. In any case, that says enough about Washington 2019 I fear.

And that's the only reason I'm interested; the go-to guy on even a bad team should have SOME value due to touches if nothing else.

Obviously that depends on your league settings. In a 14-team/15 round draft, the WR50 has (some) value.

Posted Images

1 hour ago, bomont said:

A very bland player to consider and very late in the draft obviously, but he is their WR1.

I have Doctson and Trey Quinn ahead of him. In any case, that says enough about Washington 2019 I fear.

tenor.gif

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I really believed in Doctson coming into the league. I'm not sure why he didn't pan out, but I don't see him doing anything pretty much ever. Richardson has a low ceiling but I think a pretty high floor (for a Redskin). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I own him in a deeper dynasty league, but have zero confidence in him. I'll be keeping my eye on him, Cam Sims, and Kelvin Harmon this preseason since the WR position seems pretty unsettled for the Redskins (the only thing that I think we can count on is Trey Quinn in the slot) but in general, I think WA is a wasteland for fantasy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll need Haskins to figure it out fast if any skins WR is gonna pay off.  I'm not opposed to pretty much any free WR, especially if he's in line to get snaps.   Offenses turn corners all the time.  I personally dont know that i'll take the plunge here at the end of a draft, but i'll keep an eye on Haskins and see if he can progress a bit.     People will forget about this team if they struggle early- sort of like last year's Bills.   At the end of the year, Zay Jones and Robert Foster were free waiver guys in most leagues, and both had a few decent games during the stretch run.   

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, BrianM said:

They'll need Haskins to figure it out fast if any skins WR is gonna pay off.  I'm not opposed to pretty much any free WR, especially if he's in line to get snaps.   

And that's the only reason I'm interested; the go-to guy on even a bad team should have SOME value due to touches if nothing else.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bomont said:

the go-to guy on even a bad team should have SOME value due to touches if nothing else

No argument there. But why would Paul Richardson be that guy? Why not one of the TEs? Why not AP?

Link to post
Share on other sites

For receptions?  Rather doubt Peterson is going to be a primary target. :)  That's the thing, as lame as Richardson is, there isn't anyone better. Course it might be a spread-it-around deal where the "team leader" ends up with moderate TE type numbers along with 1 or 2 others.

OK so it was a bad idea, sue me! Just trying to assess and consider options for those late round picks (buys).

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, bomont said:

OK so it was a bad idea, sue me! Just trying to assess and consider options for those late round picks (buys).

Yeah, fair enough, and around pick #200(or #300 as I see now) it doesn't really matter if it doesn't work out. I'm just trying to assess your statement he'll be #1. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually don't subscribe to the theory that every team will have a pass catcher with some value, even if they're garbage..  Last year's Redskin team didnt even have a top 50 WR, and there's plenty of other examples in recent years of similar teams   Even in my deepest leagues i dont imagine Doctson was starting more than a few times out of desperation.   

I'm supportive of drafting a guy on this team because its possible that they strike gold and things pay off.   What I dont buy into is that they'll have a valuable WR even if they continue to suck.   This argument came last year around Kelvin Benjamin, which is laughable in hindsight, but plenty of people said he had to pay off somewhat because Buffalo had nobody else. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, BrianM said:

I actually don't subscribe to the theory that every team will have a pass catcher with some value, even if they're garbage..  Last year's Wahington team didnt even have a top 50 WR,

Obviously that depends on your league settings. In a 14-team/15 round draft, the WR50 has (some) value.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually you'd have to go down to WR65 in points per game to Crowder, and WR67 overall in Doctson.      Honestly this will be my closing counter-argument for the "every team must have a fantasy relevant WR" argument from now on.   

Back to the present though- it can't possibly be that bad again, right?   They lost Crowder too.  Ourlads has the current third WR as a third round rookie named Terry McClaurin.       I'd say the current leaders in the clubhouse for targets are Thompson and Reed, and we know the story with those guys and injury histories.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Boudewijn said:

Obviously that depends on your league settings. In a 14-team/15 round draft, the WR50 has (some) value.

 

This, Richardson probably isn't relevant in your standard 10-12 team leagues, but there are plenty of larger leagues out there.  I'm in a league that can have up to 100 total WR's starting each week, let alone what's on benches.  So for some, these turds can be gems.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
On 8/31/2019 at 7:07 PM, ajs723 said:

Ho hum, he's just unquestionably the number one WR on a team that will constantly be playing from behind. Why would he have any value? 

So I decided to take another look at that.
image.png.c763969c89c772d521f058eeddf92119.png

What you see here is the yardage of the WR1 of each team plotted against the team passing yards. The dotted line is the trendline, but it's also an interesting division; above the line you find the stud muffins that are trusted by their teams and receive a large chunk of the yardage; below the line you see players that either took some time off for various reasons (Edelman, Jeffery) or just aren't that good.

In any case, Cole Beasley (DAL), Zay Jones (Buf),Danny Amendola (MIA), Josh Doctson (WAS) and Kendrick Bourne(SF) all had less than 700 yards, so that means WR4 or WR5 territory (even worse for Bourne). Obviously in a 14 team league with 3 WRs and a flex that still has some value, but there were quite a few #2 on other teams that outperformed them.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boudewijn said:

So I decided to take another look at that.
image.png.c763969c89c772d521f058eeddf92119.png

What you see here is the yardage of the WR1 of each team plotted against the team passing yards. The dotted line is the trendline, but it's also an interesting division; above the line you find the stud muffins that are trusted by their teams and receive a large chunk of the yardage; below the line you see players that either took some time off for various reasons (Edelman, Jeffery) or just aren't that good.

In any case, Cole Beasley (DAL), Zay Jones (Buf),Danny Amendola (MIA), Josh Doctson (WAS) and Kendrick Bourne(SF) all had less than 700 yards, so that means WR4 or WR5 territory (even worse for Bourne). Obviously in a 14 team league with 3 WRs and a flex that still has some value, but there were quite a few #2 on other teams that outperformed them.

Really great post, and cool graph. 

A few caveats for some of those guys in the second paragraph.

Bourne was crap as the "leading WR", but Kittle had 1300 yards. Even though he's a TE, he was the number one option on that team. The Skins don't have anyone who's going to dominate like that. Reed is a good TE, but he's already hurt, and even if he miraculously stays healthy, he's not putting up Kittle numbers. 

Danny Amendola led the Dolphins in receiving yards, but was he the number 1 on the Dolphins last year? I think the problem there is that they had different number ones at different points in the year. Gase didn't know what they hell he had, or what to do with it. Sometimes Stills was the guy. Before he got hurt, Wilson was the guy. Parker even had a brief moment where he shined. And, Amendola had his moments too. You could argue the same thing could happen with the Skins, but I think that team was just a uniquely fluid situation at WR last year in Miami.  

Doctson was only the number one for half the season. He was really the number 3 before Richardson and Crowder got hurt. And he sucks. He sucks so much the team just cut him. And he had Mark Sanchez and Colt Mccoy throwing him the ball when he was the default number one. Not the same as Paul Richardson starting the year as the number one.  

Cole Beasley gets a huge asterisk because of Amari Cooper being the star WR1 for half the year. Beasley was a WR3 before Amari was there, and Amari was a stud after that. 

Zay Jones is a solid comparison. He was the number 35 WR in PPR last year. So, back end WR3. 

 

Bottom line: Even if a team sucks, as long as they have a clearly defined, healthy, number one WR, that guy is going to be giving you WR3 production. Richardson of course could get hurt, or McLaurin could end up emerging as the teams number one. Otherwise, P Rich is going to have value.  

Edited by ajs723
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

7 minutes ago, ajs723 said:

Bottom line: Even if a team sucks, as long as they have a clearly defined, healthy, number one WR, that guy is going to be giving you WR3 production. Richardson of course could get hurt, or McLaurin could end up emerging as the teams number one. Otherwise, P Rich is going to have value.  

 

Yep, I don't disagree much with that, and as said before, "value" is completely relative to your league size and positions. But on the other hand, you're better off with the top-10 WR2s than the bottom 10 #1s:
- Antonio Brown    1297
- Brandin Cooks    1272
- Stefon Diggs    1083
- Amari Cooper    1025
- Sterling Shepard    905
- Mohamed Sanu    882
- Calvin Ridley    848
- Chris Godwin    842
- Adam Humphries    827
- DeSean Jackson    803
 

Edited by Boudewijn
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Boudewijn said:

 

 

Yep, I don't disagree much with that, and as said before, "value" is completely relative to your league size and positions. But on the other hand, you're better off with the top-10 WR2s than the bottom 10 #1s:
- Antonio Brown    1297
- Brandin Cooks    1272
- Stefon Diggs    1083
- Amari Cooper    1025
- Sterling Shepard    905
- Mohamed Sanu    882
- Calvin Ridley    848
- Chris Godwin    842
- Adam Humphries    827
- DeSean Jackson    803
 

That's 100% true. Hell, the Rams have 3 WRs I'd take way ahead of a crap default #1. 

The thing is though, the math is kind of funky. There aren't 10-12 guys who produce WR1 numbers. And 10-12 who produce WR2 numbers... etc. There are always a ton of guys in the WR3 category. The difference between DJ Moore and Taylor Gabriel last year was 5 fantasy points. So while you had to pay for Moore, you would have been smarter getting the same value from Gabriel for free.

That's my point with Richardson. You could use a pick on a guy like Humphries, Desean Jackson, Tyrell Williams, or Moncrief who should all provide solid WR3 production. Or, you could just grab Richardson for free later, and get the same production.

  • Like 1
Link to post
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.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...