QB Brett Hundley Traded To Seahawks

[Sgt. Largent]

I don't liker it either the reason is simple Hundley isn't any good.

Yet.

He got thrown into the fire last year, when everyone knew Hundley was the type of QB that needed time to develop and learn.

He's got some tangibles that Pete and John think they might be able to develop. Which is what this is about, instead of just having a veteran backup with zero upside, try to have backups that you can develop.

 

[kf3339]

It just amazes me that there is this much angst about a backup QB move by our front office. Every team is looking for some possible body that can fill that role who is reasonably cheap, decent and will work well in the locker room and QB room.

I look around the league and there just aren't that many places one can say those points above fit with the QB personnel for that team. It probably has to do with the simple fact that there just aren't that many "quality" QB's period, let alone a guy who can adequately fill the backup role.

So the front office gave up a "MAJOR 6th ROUND PICK" to take a shot. You know that pick which always guarantees us a Super Bowl game and win! :sarcasm_off:

So okay Hundley isn't perfect and still has work to do. He may never be a solid backup that everyone likes. He may not even make it thru this season as our backup. Who knows? But I will not argue that using a 6th round pick to see is a bad idea. That is just plain stupid IMO.

At least that is how I see it.

 

[TwistedHusky]

The problem is not the player kf.

It is a pattern of behavior that has hurt this team ever since reaching the SB, and most recently was responsible for losses last year. You can see it manifest again by looking at how many failed 1st round picks are on this roster now, that were picked somewhere else.

It is lazy. And it makes no sense. Continuing to do this means they are not learning from the mistakes.

Which means we are assured of seeing it again and likely again, even though each time it happens it does damage to the overall effectiveness of the team.

The crappy backup QB is not the problem, just a symptom of the problem.

Also, it is not costless. We are out the 6th round pick. Carson was a 7th. So losing late round picks is not a meaningless cost.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Luckily, the front office doesn't give a rip what the fans think about their moves. :2thumbs:

 

[PackerNation]

Loved the Jackson pick. That's who I was calling for when the Seahawks took Rashaad Penny, and then Jackson went like 20 picks later. Huge steal. Or maybe I just suck at player evaluation. I guess those two things aren't mutually exclusive.

I'm surprised Spriggs hasn't been better. I thought his athleticism was at least worthy of a second rounder.

It'll be interesting to see how Michael Dickson vs JK Scott works out in the future. Both were complete studs in college were 5th round picks.

I was surprised he was still on the board in the 2nd round. I honestly would have selected him with our 1st pick. Jaire is interesting but I think Jackson tuns out to be the best pick we made.

Spriggs just can't get strong. He has no strength at all and gets blown off the line. He's slow too. He should be much further ahead in his development by now. Makes me think he was taking PED's all throughout college .

I bet everyone wishes they had grabbed Arden Key when they had the chance. That guy looks like he is primed for a monster rookie season over in Oakland. Of course, he was going up against the Packer OL.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Also, it is not costless. We are out the 6th round pick. Carson was a 7th. So losing late round picks is not a meaningless cost.

This part is reaching. 6th and 7th rounders are something we typically have multiple of, and they are not hard to procure.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

In what world is a 6th rounder a big deal to a front office that ALWAYS trades to get extra picks in later rounds?

 

[pittpnthrs]

There will be much better options for a backup QB in the coming days but the FO ego strikes again.

This is how I feel. Why did we jump on Hundley of all people when better options are sure to come available for the same or better price?

Genuinely curious.

What QBs are going to be available on waivers that will be "much better options" or available in a trade for the last pick of the 6th rd?

I need names.

What Quarterbacks do you guys have in mind?

Genuinely curious.

Not sure as of yet (we'll find out next week), but was there such a demand for Hundley that the FO had to act now? I hardly think so. Dont get me wrong, this isnt Luke Joeckel bad, but I feel it was just unneeded. I dont see Hundley as being any better than who he replaced. If Pete and the staff think they can develop this guy who's already been in the league for 3 years, more so than the Packers staff,,,,,good luck I guess.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

And you know this how? None of the fans know what other offers happened and/or if other teams were trying to get him. But hey, this front office is clearly clueless right? :?

 

[pittpnthrs]

And you know this how? None of the fans know what other offers happened and/or if other teams were trying to get him. But hey, this front office is clearly clueless right? :?

Come on Soul. I know your the biggest optimist on the board and the franchise can do no wrong in your eyes, but even you cant believe there was any demand for Hundley. Have you read of any other teams being interested? The Packers were happy to get a 6th rounder and to be rid of him.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

They have done plenty wrong, just not as much as some people claim.
Walsh, Joekel and China Food were horrific choices.
At the same time, where is the credit for an amazing pick up of Coleman for a 7th round pick?
I don't care if there was a demand or not for Hundley. It's a damn 6th round pick, big deal. They will trade down in the draft and add one or two in the 6th anyway.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Its not the 6th rounder thats bothering people so much, its the fact that Hundley stinks. The fact that a 6th round draft pick was involved is icing on the cake. Hundleys just not a noticeable upgrade to what we already had.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Its not the 6th rounder thats bothering people so much, its the fact that Hundley stinks. The fact that a 6th round draft pick was involved is icing on the cake. Hundleys just not a noticeable upgrade to what we already had.

But he's developable.

Yes I feel more comfortable with a vet like Davis as our backup if Russell misses a game or two during the season. But if you think Hundley is a QB you can develop into a viable starter or longterm backup? Which obviously Pete and John think he is.

Then a 6th rounder isn't crazy.

 

[Maulbert]

People foaming at the mouth over a backup QB.

:roll:

The season can't get here fast enough.

 

[adeltaY]

Player acquisition is like the draft - a crap shoot. Clemons turned out really well for us as did signing Mike B and Cliff. Obviously different than Joke, Cheeseburger, and Blair Witch. Difference is Hundley doesn't cost us much at all so it doesn't matter if he sucks or not. Relax.

 

[Jville]

Spending a 6th round on rights to NFL experience at a talent shortage position of need is a no brainier.

It beats throwing darts on the third day of a draft for a inexperienced maybe at a position there might or might not be room for on a downstream roster.

Regardless of how it works out ...... well done.

 

[Uncle Si]

Still don't see on how giving up basically a 7th round pick for a guy they like more than Davis is somehow reflective of "arrogance" or "ignorance"

Yes, the FO, like all teams, have made bad decisions. Can't see how this one is somehow an extension of that. It's a low risk move moving into a year where they have a lot of draft capital. To that, if you're going to pick deals out of the air you don't like, best give credit to the ones that worked out (Coleman) instead of 4 paragraphs about how inept they are while ignoring the good work they do.

 

[adeltaY]

If anything, the "Unhappy Triad" of FA signings last season were far more indicative of FO arrogance than anything done this offseason.

 

[Ad Hawk]

To that, if you're going to pick deals out of the air you don't like, best give credit to the ones that worked out (Coleman) instead of 4 paragraphs about how inept they are while ignoring the good work they do.

I agree, Si.

But what you're going to hear in return is that our FO makes far more bad than good trades compared to other teams (read: "team", meaning, Patriots). This is just another bad one.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Si,

Coleman was actually a great trade. And somewhat of an outlier. (Also a player that many, including myself, have been very pleased, if not surprised, by how well he has done.)

But when you aggregate all the wasted $$$, wasted years, wasted opportunities - and garbage players like Lacey and Joekel that we dealt with....if the upside ON SUCCESSFUL DEALS...is getting a Coleman - then your non-drafted player acquisition strategy sucks, (excluding UDFA rookies)

The downside is something like dealing with $30M in lost cap space, maybe more. Is the upside apparently a very good slot corner? When it works out after every 5th or 6th blown big dollar FO move?

The cost of these misses vs the value of the hits is pretty poor. Which leads to the issue - it isn't the players picked but the strategy this FO uses in trying to score these players for potential trades and acquisitions. Too much on potential and not enough on actual ability.

Most of these terrible trades shoot for great athleticism. They were also often high draft picks that did not pan out. Coleman was a good trade for a player that was good at what he did. Much less of a 'shoot for potential' 3pt heave from mid-court the FO generally tries for.

(And again, the admittedly, the worst moves by this FO have been the guys they let walk, since the people we replaced them with eventually (in aggregate) end up costing us more anyway. )

Yes, the FO made a great move with Coleman but it is the tendency of this FO to swing for the fences that leads to trying to get the guy that led to Kam holding out, or Joekel costing us big dollars, or whatever else. But I stand by my assessment of this team's FO ability to make player acquisition moves because contrasting the # of losers + cost of the losers with the total aggregate value of the big winners in the past few years....Coleman is not going to make up for that.





TLDR (for those not into multiple paragraphs):
This team has a problem evaluating active players in the NFL. It also tends to overweight the value of being a high draft pick at one time. The very fact their big success in the past several years is Coleman, contrasted to their big failures, means they suck at this.