Sam Howell is Geno's Backup!!

[Kamcussionator]

Not familiar with the Fitzgerald-Spielberger, but it seems more reasonable than the JJ chart which I always felt overvalued high picks.

e.g. the JJ chart says the #1 pick is worth more than 4 TOTAL picks in the 20-25 range while the F-S chart says it's worth 2 total picks.

I'm not sure which chart the draft simulators use, but the JJ chart kinda of explains how you can keep trading down from pick 16 until you can pick the entire 4th round...

 

[Seahawker]

John knew he couldn't get his guy in the 1st and saw Howell as a much better prospect than anyone who might be available in the 3rd round.
4M cheaper than Lock.
Young with starting experience.
Likely the best shot we'll have this offseason for a solid backup with potential to start. Let it play out, JS is a strike when the irons hot kinda guy.
The sky is not falling, this signing was a plus.

 

[Jac]

Not familiar with the Fitzgerald-Spielberger, but it seems more reasonable than the JJ chart which I always felt overvalued high picks.

e.g. the JJ chart says the #1 pick is worth more than 4 TOTAL picks in the 20-25 range while the F-S chart says it's worth 2 total picks.

I'm not sure which chart the draft simulators use, but the JJ chart kinda of explains how you can keep trading down from pick 16 until you can pick the entire 4th round...

I don't know which chart is the best but I will say that while Jimmy Johnson is the innovator on this, his chart came out in the early 90's. That's three decades and entire generations of football ago.

 

[xray]

Most in here seem to love Howell , and point out that , " hey , they got him cheap " . Most of the time you get what you pay for . IMO...the Hawks don't value the QB position as the most important position on the team .

 

[RiverDog]

Well we didnt have to.. I believe we chose to keep the "action" green instead of them

You're preaching to the choir. I would have much rather kept the wolf greys instead of the puke green.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Not familiar with the Fitzgerald-Spielberger, but it seems more reasonable than the JJ chart which I always felt overvalued high picks.

e.g. the JJ chart says the #1 pick is worth more than 4 TOTAL picks in the 20-25 range while the F-S chart says it's worth 2 total picks.

I'm not sure which chart the draft simulators use, but the JJ chart kinda of explains how you can keep trading down from pick 16 until you can pick the entire 4th round...

The Fitzgerald-Spielberger chart is absolutely insane if used for valuation purposes, and isn't meant for that. It isn't meant to be used as a valuation in terms of the market value of the picks, its a chart to quantify the expected value you get from the player you select.

The FS chart says that the 49th, 50th, and 51st overall are worth more than pick #1 overall.

The number 1 pick IS worth that much, depending on class. Just look at the recent trade for the number 1 pick. The Panthers traded a legit WR1 worth a first himself, 2 first rounders (9 overall and what ended up being #1 this year), and 2 second rounders.

And that was just to trade UP from pick 9. Not to acquire it outright.

FS cannot be used for the purpose of valuing picks for the purpose of trade. The FS chart is just an explicit endorsement for trading down and taking a volume approach to drafting, but it misses a lot of context.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Not familiar with the Fitzgerald-Spielberger, but it seems more reasonable than the JJ chart which I always felt overvalued high picks.

e.g. the JJ chart says the #1 pick is worth more than 4 TOTAL picks in the 20-25 range while the F-S chart says it's worth 2 total picks.

I'm not sure which chart the draft simulators use, but the JJ chart kinda of explains how you can keep trading down from pick 16 until you can pick the entire 4th round...

According to the FS chart, the Cardinals should be able to trade picks 68, 71, 104, 138, and 226 in return for number 1 overall in any given year. And they LOSE that trade on the chart.

And no, that's not to trade up from 3 to 1 overall. It is straight up 68, 71, 104, 138, and 226 in return for pick 1 overall.

Anyone peddling that chart as one that quantifies the value of these picks as tradeable assets is straight up misleading their followers on Twitter

 

[Natethegreat]

We got a quality back up on a cheap contract that is young and has a good arm to go along with being a tough football type guy as well.
We didn't even lose picks. We moved back on picks in the middle of the draft.
It's a great move. I think he has more upside than Geno did for sure on his third go round in the league.
Why people are wringing their hands over this I don't know.

 

[Natethegreat]

I say this as someone who hated both the Harvin trade and the Jamal Adams trade the moment they went down. I'm not a guy who wants to trade just to trade.
This trade makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[sutz]

I'm pretty sure every team has their own draft pick value chart that they use. The commonly available ones are good for general comparisons, but they are all largely opinion based.

 

[CallMeADawg]

He's 23. His career is just getting going.

 

[hawkfan68]

He'll always get slack/kudos due to drafting Wilson in the 3rd round. I do wish they had been bold and drafted qb's to develop under Wilson but who knows how Wilson would have responded.

It shouldn't matter how Wilson felt. They should have drafted for what is in the best interest of the franchise moving forward. Drafting only Alex McGough was not that. This was the PC/JS management part I didn't like. Catering to some of the players too much at the expense of the team. Favre wasn't happy Rodgers was drafted but the Packers did it anyway. Then they did the same thing with Love and Rodgers. Look at the success they are having with that.

 

[WarHawks]

John knew he couldn't get his guy in the 1st and saw Howell as a much better prospect than anyone who might be available in the 3rd round.

That's the problem though. They never put themselves in a position to get their guy in the 1st, so they keep trying to turn coal into diamonds.

 

[Glasgow Seahawk]

It shouldn't matter how Wilson felt. They should have drafted for what is in the best interest of the franchise moving forward. Drafting only Alex McGough was not that. This was the PC/JS management part I didn't like. Catering to some of the players too much at the expense of the team. Favre wasn't happy Rodgers was drafted but the Packers did it anyway. Then they did the same thing with Love and Rodgers. Look at the success they are having with that.

Absolutely agree. I appreciated T-Jack as he probably helped Wilson develop and was in a similar situation to Geno Smith now as a bridge but Boykin, Austin Davis, Drew Lock- we could have drafted and possibly developed a QB during that time, possibly saved some money too. If they had promise but couldn't supplant Wilson at the time then you may have at least got draft picks from it. Best case they supplant Wilson back then.

 

[pittpnthrs]

There's too much being put into this. After the initial confusion of the draft picks wore off, all they did was replace a backup QB with a cheaper backup QB. He isn't going to challenge Geno for the starting position, but he should be serviceable if called upon. He went 21 td's to 21 int's last season. Any talk of him supplanting Smith as the starter is craziness. That's never going to happen.

 

[Maulbert]

That's the problem though. They never put themselves in a position to get their guy in the 1st, so they keep trying to turn coal into diamonds.

This is the first year without Carroll since 2009, and draft capital was already slim because of the Williams trade. We can cut Schneider some slack his first year running the show solo. I'd rather wait a year than mortgage next year and/or 2026 to move up for a guy you aren't 100% sold on. If we struggle this year, our pick will be better next year. And for now, Howell isn't a guy we gave up the farm for, and has shown flashes. I like it.

 

[Maulbert]

There's too much being put into this. After the initial confusion of the draft picks wore off, all they did was replace a backup QB with a cheaper backup QB. He isn't going to challenge Geno for the starting position, but he should be serviceable if called upon. He went 21 td's to 21 int's last season. Any talk of him supplanting Smith as the starter is craziness. That's never going to happen.

And yet, people thought Lock might be the QBotF, who is worse than Howell while being 4 years older.

 

[Natethegreat]

Writing off Howell is premature imo. If Geno can resurrect his career after years of failing for bad teams I'll give Howell a chance after having a mixed start for a horrible organization.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Writing off Howell is premature imo. If Geno can resurrect his career after years of failing for bad teams I'll give Howell a chance after having a mixed start for a horrible organization.

Howell will need to sit behind 2 or 3 HOF QB's for several years first just like Geno did then. He isn't off to good start with his present situation.

 

[Natethegreat]

Howell will need to sit behind 2 or 3 HOF QB's for several years first just like Geno did then. He isn't off to good start with his present situation.

I realize he had a lot of turnovers but he also had some quality starts and he made a lot of great throws as well. Things fell apart at the end of the year and he had some melt down games. But the talent is there.
Writing him off is silly but whatever. Do what you want.