September 25, 2018, 01:00:50 AM

Author Topic: Packers had a trade for Hundley  (Read 2909 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2310
Packers had a trade for Hundley
« on: March 09, 2018, 10:44:56 PM »

Online ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5385
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2018, 07:58:57 AM »
This is an unsourced rumor, and until there is some kind of corroboration from other sources, I'll take it as  speculation, not fact.

So far, there are further speculations in Tennessee and Oakland about such a deal. But both cite Jersey Al as a source. So, still speculation, IMO.

https://www.musiccitymiracles.com/2018/3/9/17103084/nfl-trade-rumors-2018-titans-brett-hundley-packers

https://www.silverandblackpride.com/2018/3/9/17102992/raiders-rumored-to-be-interested-in-acquiring-packers-quarterback-brett-hundley-in-trade 
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline Payne85

  • Rookie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #2 on: March 15, 2018, 10:31:58 AM »
Titans must have finally glanced at some tape.

Payne85

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2310
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #3 on: March 15, 2018, 10:38:51 AM »
Titans must have finally glanced at some tape.

Payne85

He actually is a very good fit to backup for the Titans. He can run the read option. 

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2310
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #4 on: March 28, 2018, 07:04:22 AM »
Tennessee Titans agree to terms with QB Blaine Gabbert. That is disappointing, I was hoping the Packers would get to use Hundley as a tradeup chip in the draft with the Titans.  Move up 5-10 spots in a later round for a player who slipped, but yet probably still wouldn't make it to were the Packers were sitting. The Packers are probably stuck going to camp with him.

Offline scoremore

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1515
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #5 on: March 28, 2018, 08:02:18 AM »
Too bad he totally flamed out last season.  Would have been nice to get something after a 3 year investment.  Not sure he'll even make the team if we can get something for him that would be nice but it's not looking good.  Gabbert would have been an interesting guy to bring in wonder if the Pack kicked the tires on him. 

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4579
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #6 on: March 28, 2018, 08:47:04 AM »
Tennessee Titans agree to terms with QB Blaine Gabbert. That is disappointing, I was hoping the Packers would get to use Hundley as a tradeup chip in the draft with the Titans.  Move up 5-10 spots in a later round for a player who slipped, but yet probably still wouldn't make it to were the Packers were sitting. The Packers are probably stuck going to camp with him.

Makes me wonder if they may use Kizer for they same sort of deal you just mentioned.

Packers could use Kizer to move up to get a player, and then still draft a QB in the draft to compete with Hundley/Callahan for the back up spot.

Offline craig

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3512
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #7 on: March 28, 2018, 11:02:56 AM »
Hundley at best had value to move up 5 spots in the 7th or 2 spots in the 6th, perhaps.  That's over-valueing him. 

Kizer is different, or at least is viewed differently by Gute/MM.  Gute and MM may be dumb evaluators, but I think trading a talented starting secondary guy for Kizer was a scouting/evaluation decision.  Wrightly or wrongly, they think he's got a shot to be good.  Until they have him through at least one full camp and season, I don't think there is any chance they will consider trading him. 

Until he proves them wrong. 

Kizer has a stronger arm than any of the backups they've had for some time, much stronger than Hundley, or Flynn or Brohm or Tolzein.  And he's a smart, intelligent guy.  I think they like the possibilities *IF* he can develop into an actual QB who can read defenses and pass accurately.  They'll give him at least a year to show whether there is still hope that he'll figure it out. 

Personally, I really, really want to have Gute prove to be a decision-maker who we can believe in.  *IF* Kizer were to move past the interceptions and prove out to be accurate and good, it would be so cool to say, "Man, Gute really knew what he was doing to look beyond the Cleveland interceptions.   The guy is pretty smart, he may deserve to be trusted in the evaluations he makes!"  And it would be really cool to have a backup QB who was talented, smart, and good. 

Online ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5385
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #8 on: March 28, 2018, 05:21:15 PM »
Makes me wonder if they may use Kizer for they same sort of deal you just mentioned.

Packers could use Kizer to move up to get a player, and then still draft a QB in the draft to compete with Hundley/Callahan for the back up spot.

This idea is both Byzantine and Machiavellian in its breadth and scope. Trade for Kizer to re-trade him for a better draft pick? Fascinating. By the bye, I might find this unlikely, I find the intricacies of this idea interesting indeed.
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2310
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #9 on: April 08, 2018, 03:25:49 PM »
Hundley at best had value to move up 5 spots in the 7th or 2 spots in the 6th, perhaps.  That's over-valueing him. 

Kizer is different, or at least is viewed differently by Gute/MM.  Gute and MM may be dumb evaluators, but I think trading a talented starting secondary guy for Kizer was a scouting/evaluation decision.  Wrightly or wrongly, they think he's got a shot to be good.  Until they have him through at least one full camp and season, I don't think there is any chance they will consider trading him. 

Until he proves them wrong. 

Kizer has a stronger arm than any of the backups they've had for some time, much stronger than Hundley, or Flynn or Brohm or Tolzein.  And he's a smart, intelligent guy.  I think they like the possibilities *IF* he can develop into an actual QB who can read defenses and pass accurately.  They'll give him at least a year to show whether there is still hope that he'll figure it out. 

Personally, I really, really want to have Gute prove to be a decision-maker who we can believe in.  *IF* Kizer were to move past the interceptions and prove out to be accurate and good, it would be so cool to say, "Man, Gute really knew what he was doing to look beyond the Cleveland interceptions.   The guy is pretty smart, he may deserve to be trusted in the evaluations he makes!"  And it would be really cool to have a backup QB who was talented, smart, and good.

I think you are way undervaluing the trade value for Hundley. Cleveland just traded Kevin Hogan to Washington and moved up 17 picks in the 6th round. That for a 3rd string QB who had zero chance to even make the Browns roster. In a read-option offense Hundley would be a serviceable backup.

Carolina, Seattle or Dallas all may be landing spots in a draft day trade. Carolina has one other QB on their roster outside of Newton and that is Garrett Gilbert a street FA they have signed to throw in offseason workouts. Seattle only has Wilson on their roster. Dallas only has a UDFA (Cooper Rush) from last year on their roster backing up Prescott. What makes me think their is a market for him is the 2018 QB class. This years class is very strong at the top, but is not a deep draft in volume, their may well be more QB's taken in the first round then in the rest of the draft combined.
 
I believe it is something to atleast be aware of as a possibly if the right player would be slipping in the draft for the Packers. 
« Last Edit: April 08, 2018, 03:28:48 PM by RT »

Online Shinesman

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2066
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #10 on: April 08, 2018, 05:28:46 PM »
Hundley at best had value to move up 5 spots in the 7th or 2 spots in the 6th, perhaps.  That's over-valueing him. 

Kizer is different, or at least is viewed differently by Gute/MM.  Gute and MM may be dumb evaluators, but I think trading a talented starting secondary guy for Kizer was a scouting/evaluation decision.  Wrightly or wrongly, they think he's got a shot to be good.  Until they have him through at least one full camp and season, I don't think there is any chance they will consider trading him. 

Until he proves them wrong. 

Kizer has a stronger arm than any of the backups they've had for some time, much stronger than Hundley, or Flynn or Brohm or Tolzein.  And he's a smart, intelligent guy.  I think they like the possibilities *IF* he can develop into an actual QB who can read defenses and pass accurately.  They'll give him at least a year to show whether there is still hope that he'll figure it out. 

Personally, I really, really want to have Gute prove to be a decision-maker who we can believe in.  *IF* Kizer were to move past the interceptions and prove out to be accurate and good, it would be so cool to say, "Man, Gute really knew what he was doing to look beyond the Cleveland interceptions.   The guy is pretty smart, he may deserve to be trusted in the evaluations he makes!"  And it would be really cool to have a backup QB who was talented, smart, and good.

I think you are way undervaluing the trade value for Hundley. Cleveland just traded Kevin Hogan to Washington and moved up 17 picks in the 6th round. That for a 3rd string QB who had zero chance to even make the Browns roster. In a read-option offense Hundley would be a serviceable backup.

Carolina, Seattle or Dallas all may be landing spots in a draft day trade. Carolina has one other QB on their roster outside of Newton and that is Garrett Gilbert a street FA they have signed to throw in offseason workouts. Seattle only has Wilson on their roster. Dallas only has a UDFA (Cooper Rush) from last year on their roster backing up Prescott. What makes me think their is a market for him is the 2018 QB class. This years class is very strong at the top, but is not a deep draft in volume, their may well be more QB's taken in the first round then in the rest of the draft combined.
 
I believe it is something to atleast be aware of as a possibly if the right player would be slipping in the draft for the Packers.


Teams are willing to take risks on unproven talent. Huntley isnt unproven, he displayed to the world that he didn't have what it takes for 75% of a season. Teams don't want to spend any capital on a guy that bad
"Tradition! Just because we've always done it that way, doesn't mean that it isn't incredibly stupid."

Online marklawrence

  • Administrator
  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2811
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #11 on: April 08, 2018, 07:00:07 PM »
Teams are willing to take risks on unproven talent. Huntley isnt unproven, he displayed to the world that he didn't have what it takes for 75% of a season. Teams don't want to spend any capital on a guy that bad

Stop making sense.
I'm a Deplorable Freeloader, clinging to my Guns and Bible! And Proud of it!

Online Shinesman

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2066
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #12 on: April 11, 2018, 11:58:13 PM »
Teams are willing to take risks on unproven talent. Huntley isnt unproven, he displayed to the world that he didn't have what it takes for 75% of a season. Teams don't want to spend any capital on a guy that bad

Stop making sense.

Thanks Mark. I'll try lol
"Tradition! Just because we've always done it that way, doesn't mean that it isn't incredibly stupid."

Online ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5385
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #13 on: April 12, 2018, 05:26:33 AM »
Teams are willing to take risks on unproven talent. Huntley isnt unproven, he displayed to the world that he didn't have what it takes for 75% of a season. Teams don't want to spend any capital on a guy that bad

Stop making sense.

The Packers recently made a trade for Kizer, who played 15 of 16 games last year I  Cleveland, and won zero games. 
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Online Shinesman

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2066
Re: Packers had a trade for Hundley
« Reply #14 on: April 12, 2018, 11:15:48 PM »
Teams are willing to take risks on unproven talent. Huntley isnt unproven, he displayed to the world that he didn't have what it takes for 75% of a season. Teams don't want to spend any capital on a guy that bad

Stop making sense.

The Packers recently made a trade for Kizer, who played 15 of 16 games last year I  Cleveland, and won zero games.

This is true, but the comment I referred to was stating that Hundley was being undervalued and that a team had just taken a chance on an unproven guy so why not Hundley?

Also the nature of the trades. The packers from all reported Intel were looking to deal Randall, and they did while saving cap money and grabbing a guy under contract. And who was Kizer throwing to last year? Were they better as a collective than Nelson, Adam's, Cobb, Kendricks and Rodgers? What line protected him?  I didn't watch him play a ton, but he was in Cleveland, a team that dooms young QBs. Hundley was in Green Bay with 3 years to learn, and still didn't just underwhelm, he flat out murdered our hope and faith. Odds are he is out if they can't sucker someone for a pick.

Disclaimer: Cleveland is actually making some competent moves with new management. If they can acquire Barkley and Chubb in the first round, as well as Lamar Jackson early second, they may want 3-4 games. So under this new management they may stop abusing rookie QBs and use the stop gap strategy to be able to ease one in over the course if 2-3 seasons.
"Tradition! Just because we've always done it that way, doesn't mean that it isn't incredibly stupid."