Sheldon richardson trade for hundley?

[GreenBaySlacker]

I read a bs article about the possibility of Sheldon Richardson, who the jets are actively trying to trade, for Hundley... filling the gaping hole they have at qb...

I personally have a high opinion of Hundley. So this seems possible to me...

Richardson is due 8 MIL in 2017, and it was said the packers want a pay cut, or extension and restructuring deal....which sounds like Ted to me...

The deal seems legit. Not only do the jets clear up cap space. They also get a starting qb on his rookie deal still. Able to watch him play for a year before they have to invest a bunch of money in him... glennon got 16 MIL! So to get Hundley to start, essentially gains 15mil cap space by not having to pay a qb like glennon or what ever back up qb they find to take starter money...

Greenbay has cap to spend, and Richardson would put our dline over the top...ripe to bring the 3-4 base back into effect.

Thoughts?

 

[Poppa San]

cite?

 

[Dantés]

I would rather let Hundley play this preseason and see if we can flip him for a pick down the road if he shows well than trade him for a year rental of Richardson. Would pay a mid round pick for Richardson though. But you have to understand that you're almost certainly getting 1 year and nothing more. The team that gives Richardson long term money is very likely to regret it.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

http://www.12up.com/posts/4989468-this-realistic-trade-could-fix-holes-for-the

Jets forum mentioned it too
http://forums.jetnation.com/topic/132340-why-not-trade-sheldon-richardson-for-brett-hundley/

 

[ExpatPacker]

It's an intriguing prospect. I'm not sure that the Packers are going to get a premium draft pick for Hundley. A 3rd rounder perhaps, but is a 3rd rounder to be valued over Richardson?

Richardson has not lived up to the hype of his first two years, but he's still good. If the Packers can negotiate a pay cut, the change of scenery may be what Richardson needs. I mean let's admit it, the Jets are one of the Black Holes of the NFL.

I realize that Richardson has only 1 year left, and it's by no means certain that the Packers would want to re-sign him. Doubtful is more like it unless he plays well. I guess the question is whether adding Richardson would solidify this DL to the point where it increases the prospect of the Packers being serious SB contenders.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

It's an intriguing prospect. I'm not sure that the Packers are going to get a premium draft pick for Hundley. A 3rd rounder perhaps, but is a 3rd rounder to be valued over Richardson?

Richardson has not lived up to the hype of his first two years, but he's still good. If the Packers can negotiate a pay cut, the change of scenery may be what Richardson needs. I mean let's admit it, the Jets are one of the Black Holes of the NFL.

I realize that Richardson has only 1 year left, and it's by no means certain that the Packers would want to re-sign him. Doubtful is more like it unless he plays well. I guess the question is whether adding Richardson would solidify this DL to the point where it increases the prospect of the Packers being serious SB contenders.

Someone mentioned that even if Richardson was a one year rental, we would get a comp pick when he left in free agency the following year...

Hundley is a very good young qb though...if we show case him this preseason, then come back and offer him in trade, we could get a lot more for him...

There's also the chance Rodgers gets injured, and Hundley shines... then GB is looking at a 1St Rounder in compensation...

I personally think the packers are offering Hundley to do two things...one, they are making room on the roster for Callahan.... two, they are letting Hundley go because they know they are holding him back...Hundley is ready to start...

 

[Patriotplayer90]

It's an intriguing prospect. I'm not sure that the Packers are going to get a premium draft pick for Hundley. A 3rd rounder perhaps, but is a 3rd rounder to be valued over Richardson?

Richardson has not lived up to the hype of his first two years, but he's still good. If the Packers can negotiate a pay cut, the change of scenery may be what Richardson needs. I mean let's admit it, the Jets are one of the Black Holes of the NFL.

I realize that Richardson has only 1 year left, and it's by no means certain that the Packers would want to re-sign him. Doubtful is more like it unless he plays well. I guess the question is whether adding Richardson would solidify this DL to the point where it increases the prospect of the Packers being serious SB contenders.

Nobody is trading anything for a mid round talent with no game experience. Maybe a late pick. Having a capable backup is more valuable than that.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Nobody is trading anything for a mid round talent with no game experience. Maybe a late pick. Having a capable backup is more valuable than that.

You obviously are spoiled by #12...
The jets need a qb. Badly. If we didn't have #12, would you want Hundley??? I definitely would.

Hundley 6'3 226 , 4.63 40. 120" broad jump. 36" vert. 6.93 3 come drill. 3.98 shuttle. He is quick for his size...

Then you watch his rookie preseason.
45 of 65 ,730 yards!!! 7 tds and only 1 int. And 129 passer rating...

Jami's Winston #1 overall pick went 23/47 for 311 yds, 0 tds and 2 ints.

Marcus Marita #2 overall went 21/30 326, 1 td, 1 int........

You can say it was only preseason but 730 yds on 65 attempts is great! 7/1 td/int ratio is great. Size and athletic ability is great...

Forget that he was a 5 th round steal. Forget his long bomb to finish a half was intercepted... this kid I would want badly if I was a jets fan...

Also they talk about just dropping Richardson...

 

[texaspackerbacker]

Player for player trades hardly ever happen. In this case, I hope the Packers aren't even thinking about this. We don't really need a DE at this point, and it looks like Richardson's sack numbers have decreased over the last few years. We will eventually come to the point where Hundley is too expensive to keep as a back up, but as was said, it's better to wait a year and then hopefully get a decent draft pick for him.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I would be fine with the Packers acquiring Richardson for a mid round pick but there's no reason to trade Hundley as the team doesn't have another decent backup quarterback.

There's also the chance Rodgers gets injured, and Hundley shines... then GB is looking at a 1St Rounder in compensation...

You better hope Rodgers doesn't get injured as the Packers are doomed if he misses any significant time.

Then you watch his rookie preseason.
45 of 65 ,730 yards!!! 7 tds and only 1 int. And 129 passer rating...

Jami's Winston #1 overall pick went 23/47 for 311 yds, 0 tds and 2 ints.

Marcus Marita #2 overall went 21/30 326, 1 td, 1 int........

You can say it was only preseason but 730 yds on 65 attempts is great! 7/1 td/int ratio is great. Size and athletic ability is great...

You're putting way too much stock into Hundley's performance during the preseason two years ago.

 

[PikeBadger]

You obviously are spoiled by #12...
The jets need a qb. Badly. If we didn't have #12, would you want Hundley??? I definitely would.

Hundley 6'3 226 , 4.63 40. 120" broad jump. 36" vert. 6.93 3 come drill. 3.98 shuttle. He is quick for his size...

Then you watch his rookie preseason.
45 of 65 ,730 yards!!! 7 tds and only 1 int. And 129 passer rating...

Jami's Winston #1 overall pick went 23/47 for 311 yds, 0 tds and 2 ints.

Marcus Marita #2 overall went 21/30 326, 1 td, 1 int........

You can say it was only preseason but 730 yds on 65 attempts is great! 7/1 td/int ratio is great. Size and athletic ability is great...

Forget that he was a 5 th round steal. Forget his long bomb to finish a half was intercepted... this kid I would want badly if I was a jets fan...

Also they talk about just dropping Richardson...

Lol, well there you go. Wait till the Jets release him and invite him in to see if he fits.

Why waste a backup QB in trade if you don't need to?

 

[Patriotplayer90]

You obviously are spoiled by #12...
The jets need a qb. Badly. If we didn't have #12, would you want Hundley??? I definitely would.

Hundley 6'3 226 , 4.63 40. 120" broad jump. 36" vert. 6.93 3 come drill. 3.98 shuttle. He is quick for his size...

Then you watch his rookie preseason.
45 of 65 ,730 yards!!! 7 tds and only 1 int. And 129 passer rating...

Jami's Winston #1 overall pick went 23/47 for 311 yds, 0 tds and 2 ints.

Marcus Marita #2 overall went 21/30 326, 1 td, 1 int........

You can say it was only preseason but 730 yds on 65 attempts is great! 7/1 td/int ratio is great. Size and athletic ability is great...

Forget that he was a 5 th round steal. Forget his long bomb to finish a half was intercepted... this kid I would want badly if I was a jets fan...

Also they talk about just dropping Richardson...

The knock on Hundley in college wasn't his physical ability as a QB, just that he struggled with the mental aspects such as reading through progressions, instincts, pocket poise, etc. Things which don't really matter in the preseason since the defensive schemes are so vanilla, but will doom a QB when the games start to count.

 

[mongoosev]

I wouldn't bat an eye if we did trade him. not sure it's good to rely on callahan though. which is the only reason to keep him. tough call.

just imagine the witch hunt when hundley can't fill rod's shoe? it's going to be really hard no matter what qb we have to fill rod's shoes but I don't think hundley is the one.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I wouldn't bat an eye if we did trade him. not sure it's good to rely on callahan though. which is the only reason to keep him. tough call.

just imagine the witch hunt when hundley can't fill rod's shoe? it's going to be really hard no matter what qb we have to fill rod's shoes but I don't think hundley is the one.

It's completely unrealistic to expect any backup quarterback to adequately fill Rodgers' shoes. It would be awesome to have one capable of leading the team to a .500 record for a short period of time if #12 misses a few games. I'm not convinced Hundley fits that bill though.

 

[RRyder]

It's completely unrealistic to expect any backup quarterback to adequately fill Rodgers' shoes. It would be awesome to have one capable of leading the team to a .500 record for a short period of time if #12 misses a few games. I'm not convinced Hundley fits that bill though.

Im not convinced he fits that bill either. I'm also not convinced he doesn't.

It's pretty impossible to know at this point. I think Hundley has shown more to be hopeful for the latter rather then be pessimistic about the former though

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I would be fine with the Packers acquiring Richardson for a mid round pick but there's no reason to trade Hundley as the team doesn't have another decent backup quarterback.



You better hope Rodgers doesn't get injured as the Packers are doomed if he misses any significant time.



You're putting way too much stock into Hundley's performance during the preseason two years ago.

I do know this... the packers went with two qbs that year. #12, and the rookie Hundley...that tells the whole story right there

 

[Jerellh528]

I think hundley coming into the league was expected to be a bit of a project. His talent was there though. I think a couple seasons in our qb room with Rodgers and being coached by mm had to have raised his value by at least a round or two.

 

[OldSchool101]

GB clearly considered Hundley to be valued better than where he was drafted or we wouldn't have trade 2 picks to get him. Hence to assert we would trade for a day 3 pick is absurd IMO.
One of the primary reasons he didn't draft higher was that he would need more time to develop at the professional level. While Brett suffered a setback last year, I still believe the economics of us losing him through a trade as our solid #2 is not worth anything below a 1st or 2nd day pick and my guess is his value is currently a 3rd rounder while GB values him as a 2nd round trade hence a no deal in 2017.
His biggest downside in college was his lack of success throwing when flushed out of the pocket. He has since been paired with one of the best QBs to ever throw outside of the pocket. Its reasonable to conclude that by working in the current system he has already made significant progress.
Brett's value will obviously fluctuate based on his performance this year. If he repeats his rookie year stats or anything even close this preseason? His trade value will increase substantially next year.
The flipside is that QB position holds more weight than any position in the NFL so trading away a good backup is highly unlikely unless the terms are highly favorable for us. It would be unlikely we will trade him for a draft pick unless he pulls his value up to a top 50 type pick

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Im not convinced he fits that bill either. I'm also not convinced he doesn't.

It's pretty impossible to know at this point. I think Hundley has shown more to be hopeful for the latter rather then be pessimistic about the former though

It's absolutely possible that you are correct about being optimistic about Hundley's outlook but his performance in limited action during the regular season in 2016 wasn't promising by any means.

I do know this... the packers went with two qbs that year. #12, and the rookie Hundley...that tells the whole story right there

Well, you better double check that once again as Tolzien was the Packers backup quarterback during Hundley's rookie season. He was inactive for all 18 games in 2015.

Its reasonable to conclude that by working in the current system he has already made significant progress.
Brett's value will obviously fluctuate based on his performance this year. If he repeats his rookie year stats or anything even close this preseason? His trade value will increase substantially next year. It would be unlikely we will trade him for a draft pick unless he pulls his value up to a top 50 type pick

While it might be reasonable to assume that Hundley has significantly improved his weaknesses since being drafted there are a lot of quarterbacks who haven't been able to do that, even with the Packers.

I truly don't believe his trade value will significantly increase as long as he doesn't perform at a high level in a regular season game (think Rodgers at Dallas in 2007). As of right now there's no way another team gives up a top 50 in return for him.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

[QUOTE="captainWIMM]



Well, you better double check that once again as Tolzien was the Packers backup quarterback during Hundley's rookie season. He was inactive for all 18 games in 2015.
[/QUOTE]

I was remembering 2016 I guess. When he was the only back up even after being injured in the pre season...

 

[OldSchool101]

I truly don't believe his trade value will significantly increase as long as he doesn't perform at a high level in a regular season game (think Rodgers at Dallas in 2007). As of right now there's no way another team gives up a top 50 in return for him.

I respectfully disagree in that if he leads all QBs in preseason again or comes even close to the level of performance he had as a rookie it proves his quality play is not an anomoly and his stock will most certainly rise.
I 100% agree with the assertion that nobody offers us a top 50 pick because if they did we would have someone like TJ Watt in our uniform already to bolster our Defense.
I furthermore would like to state the inverse. There's no way GB let's Hundley walk for outside a top 50 or so draft pick trade. It would be better to stay pat on our hand and let the game develop and offer his stock a chance to rise while simultaneously filling our need of a solid #2

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I respectfully disagree in that if he leads all QBs in preseason again or comes even close to the level of performance he had as a rookie it proves his quality play is not an anomoly and his stock will most certainly rise.

I truly don't believe Hundley's trade value will significantly increase because of how he will perform against second or third stringers in preseason.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I truly don't believe Hundley's trade value will significantly increase because of how he will perform against second or third stringers in preseason.

I don't think Rodgers played much that preseason, if I'm not mistaken....
Meaning Hundley played against starters more than you make it sound... 1St and second stringers, fighting for a job in some cases, is closer to the truth.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't think Rodgers played much that preseason, if I'm not mistaken....
Meaning Hundley played against starters more than you make it sound... 1St and second stringers, fighting for a job in some cases, is closer to the truth.

Once again you're forgetting about Tolzien who entered three of the preseason games before Hundley resulting in the rookie entering the first two contests in the third quarter and the last one in the second, not facing any furst teamers. He played extensively against starters vs. the Eagles but that didn't work out that well. His impressive stats were mostly attributable to a four touchdown performance against the Saints in the finale while facing third stringers.

 

[thequick12]

Nobody is trading anything for a mid round talent with no game experience. Maybe a late pick. Having a capable backup is more valuable than that.

somebody will give up a 2nd or 3rd round pick for hundley. teams trade for qbs with little to no game experience all the time. Mark brunell, aaron Brooks, Matt hasselbach etc