Why did we extend Josh Richardson?

[gouki88]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

Indeed. His 3pt shooting can be sporadic, but his effort sure isn’t. Plays hard all the time. Underrated defender too.

After tonight he’s shooting .357 from 3, which is above the current league average.

While true, I’d still use the word sporadic. He’ll hit four in a row then miss 7

[BruceBanner18]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

Indeed. His 3pt shooting can be sporadic, but his effort sure isn’t. Plays hard all the time. Underrated defender too.

After tonight he’s shooting .357 from 3, which is above the current league average.

While true, I’d still use the word sporadic. He’ll hit four in a row then miss 7

 My question is are we better with Richardson than Langford. Is Richardson holding back Langford's development? I'd like to see how Langford grows with more minutes. He's shown improved shooting and team defense.

[boscel33]

Trade bait!

[Vermont Green]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

Indeed. His 3pt shooting can be sporadic, but his effort sure isn’t. Plays hard all the time. Underrated defender too.

After tonight he’s shooting .357 from 3, which is above the current league average.

While true, I’d still use the word sporadic. He’ll hit four in a row then miss 7

 My question is are we better with Richardson than Langford. Is Richardson holding back Langford's development? I'd like to see how Langford grows with more minutes. He's shown improved shooting and team defense.

So we are 11 games in, Richardson having played in 9 of them.  People were ready to give up on him after 2 games.  We have a better picture of things after 9 games but I like the 20 game rule for any real conclusions.  That said, I think we are seeing what Richardson is going to be, which is just fine.  A good defender, good energy, scoring in general, but not a knock down 3-pt shooter.  I suspect he is still settling into coming off the bench vs. starting.  I envision more consistency as we move forward but not anything dramatically different than what we have seen in his better games.

As to holding back Langford, I don't see that as an issue or even a consideration.  If Langford can beat out Richardson for minutes, fine, play Langford and trade Richardson.  Right now, Richardson is clearly better and should play the role he has been playing.

[timpiker]

I agree.  Haven't seen crap out of him.  Big disappointment.

[Roy H.]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

I don’t have an issue with him being on the roster. Extending him was still stupid.

[wikkid1]

Richardson did look good last night.

He did, other than his handle.  Got sloppy with the ball a little too often but I think he’s figuring things out here.

[tstorey_97]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

Indeed. His 3pt shooting can be sporadic, but his effort sure isn’t. Plays hard all the time. Underrated defender too.

After tonight he’s shooting .357 from 3, which is above the current league average.

While true, I’d still use the word sporadic. He’ll hit four in a row then miss 7

 My question is are we better with Richardson than Langford. Is Richardson holding back Langford's development? I'd like to see how Langford grows with more minutes. He's shown improved shooting and team defense.

Richardson plays aggressive defense...which is why the team signed him right? Never been a bucket getter.

Romeo has become a three point shooter of sorts...we'll see.

Both Josh and Romeo can switch "well" which means they get minutes.

[Moranis]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

I don’t have an issue with him being on the roster. Extending him was still stupid.

But you are ok with paying Fournier significantly more money and more years.  That just doesn't make sense.  They've been basically a similar level of player for years. 

Fournier is playing about 6 more minutes than Richardson thus far this year.  He is attempting 5 more FG's a game, but only scoring 5.5 more points in part because Fournier has not been as good inside the arc and they've been very similar shooting the ball from deep.  Richardson is still a much better defender.  I'd much rather have Richardson than Fournier given their respective contracts and roles.  There isn't a sliver a doubt in my mind on that either. 

[Goldstar88]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

I don’t have an issue with him being on the roster. Extending him was still stupid.

Richardson will be making significantly less than both Smart and Fournier and he’s arguably playing as well as either of them. Seems like a pretty good deal to me.

[gouki88]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

I don’t have an issue with him being on the roster. Extending him was still stupid.

But you are ok with paying Fournier significantly more money and more years.  That just doesn't make sense.  They've been basically a similar level of player for years. 

Fournier is playing about 6 more minutes than Richardson thus far this year.  He is attempting 5 more FG's a game, but only scoring 5.5 more points in part because Fournier has not been as good inside the arc and they've been very similar shooting the ball from deep.  Richardson is still a much better defender.  I'd much rather have Richardson than Fournier given their respective contracts and roles.  There isn't a sliver a doubt in my mind on that either.

Well, no.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

I don’t have an issue with him being on the roster. Extending him was still stupid.

Gives you at worst a cost controlled trade asset we wouldn't otherwise have, what's stupid about it?

[Roy H.]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

I don’t have an issue with him being on the roster. Extending him was still stupid.

Gives you at worst a cost controlled trade asset we wouldn't otherwise have, what's stupid about it?

Because he’s not really a trade asset.

[Moranis]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

I don’t have an issue with him being on the roster. Extending him was still stupid.

But you are ok with paying Fournier significantly more money and more years.  That just doesn't make sense.  They've been basically a similar level of player for years. 

Fournier is playing about 6 more minutes than Richardson thus far this year.  He is attempting 5 more FG's a game, but only scoring 5.5 more points in part because Fournier has not been as good inside the arc and they've been very similar shooting the ball from deep.  Richardson is still a much better defender.  I'd much rather have Richardson than Fournier given their respective contracts and roles.  There isn't a sliver a doubt in my mind on that either.

Well, no.

Fournier is obviously a better scorer and shooter, but Richardson is better at basically everything else.  They are both role players who don't have a ton of real value and are generally fairly easy to replace.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Back to back solid games from Richardson and he has stepped up with more of a load in Brown's absence.

I don’t have an issue with him being on the roster. Extending him was still stupid.

Gives you at worst a cost controlled trade asset we wouldn't otherwise have, what's stupid about it?

Because he’s not really a trade asset.

A cost controlled rotation player is always a trade asset.