Brett Hundley depreciation thread

[Green19]

6 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I don't think throwing receivers open and trusting what your reads tell you are things that develop over time, those are things you have or you don't.

Reading coverages, blitzes, audibles at the LOS, those are the types of things experience grants you.

I see Hundley as a Hoyer, McCown, Fitzpatrick, etc. Spot starter and a guy who can have a nice long career as a backup, but I don't see anyone ever giving up anything of value there.

I agree with your first statement. The fun thing is Brett has done those things... again all be it inconsistently. He has thrown to Adams before he has made his break and made him open. The problem is he only does it with Adams and it’s been inconsistent with him. But it’s there. Plus experience grants you muscle memory, throwing a quick slant to jordy is different than Adams, and is different than Cobb. Throwing a guy open takes understanding what that guy is thinking and will do in a certain spot. More so in this offense.

That takes time working with them... and gain real experience with them. Adams was a bust early until he got on the same page with Aaron. Adams talked about how he didn’t run a route all the way cause he knew he wasn’t getting the ball... what happened... Aaron wanted to go there, couldn’t, yelled at him and the coaches pulled Adams out of the game. Aaron can’t throw a guy open unless he trust that guy. Same with Hundley.

Only thing that hurts Hundley is he isn’t consistently accurate (on that 3rd and 1 that deep ball was the right read and he knew Adamswas pushing up field... he threw a bad ball) and has mental lapses with missing what the call is (missing pitching out to Jones for an easy 10yd TD run on that fourth down).

Again my point is I don’t think anyone can say after 7 games what Brett is. If he was the man going into next year for us and was still this inconsistent in his likes say 23rd career start I would be there right with you saying he doesn’t have it. 

[Packerraymond]

I'm not saying he doesn't have what it takes to play in the NFL. I'm just saying no team is going to look at those 7 games and hitch their wagon to Hundley.

He's certainly better than Mark Sanchez, Drew Stanton, Josh Johnson, Dan Orlovsky, etc.. all guys who have played a long time in this league. Brett will have a nice NFL career, I just don't think it will ever involve us getting nice compensation for him. Hell we may just resign him after next season if he comes cheap enough.

[Shanedorf]

21 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I'm not saying he doesn't have what it takes to play in the NFL. I'm just saying no team is going to look at those 7 games and hitch their wagon to Hundley.

 

23 NFL teams passed on Rodgers because they didn't think they could fix his flaws and didn't want to hitch their wagon to another Tedford bust.

[Packerraymond]

1 minute ago, Shanedorf said:

23 NFL teams passed on Rodgers because they didn't think they could fix his flaws and didn't want to hitch their wagon to another Tedford bust.

This is a trade vs draft scenario, also Mac fixed Rodgers, so if Hundley has had the best QB coaching, why would he get better without him?

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here?

[Pugger]

1 minute ago, Packerraymond said:

This is a trade vs draft scenario, also Mac fixed Rodgers, so if Hundley has had the best QB coaching, why would he get better without him?

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here?

Does Mac still have his QB school now with the present CBA?

[Green19]

1 minute ago, Pugger said:

Does Mac still have his QB school now with the present CBA?

He does... only issue it’s more classroom work than on field practice now because of the CBA.

[Norm]

2 minutes ago, Pugger said:

Does Mac still have his QB school now with the present CBA?

I believe he does but we discussed this a while back and some people said no or it's not the same or something like that

[Shanedorf]

19 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

 

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here?

I think I'm saying that nobody has the QB-projection thing figured out yet, and 23 teams passing on Rodgers is a testament to that situation. I think Hundley's future is still an unknown and relegating him to a Fitzpatrick ceiling at this stage is premature imo.

[skibrett15]

we have seen consistent improvement throughout Hundley's starts.  It's what I said we should look for at the top of this thread, and it's what we've seen.  He played his best games vs a couple of good Defenses in Chicago and Pit, and played a dang fine game vs Cleveland as well.

His implosion vs Baltimore was acceptable in the grand scheme of things given that's a top flight defense coming off a bye, but it's the play vs Tampa that has you the most concerned.

He improved SIGNIFICANTLY in terms of his pocket presence, since the minnesota and NO games, but he still has work to do there.  His ability to identify coverages and find hot throws was also something that improved, but not dramatically.  He stopped throwing completely boneheaded balls to covered receivers (like the Allison INT vs Minnesota), but he also failed to make a ton of plays which showed he knew exactly where to go to vs a certain look.

He also showed playmaking ability, and ability to make plays late in the down whether via his legs or throwing to guys who are freeing up.  This team is decidedly NOT full of separators at WR and the skills outside of Adams, but he made it all work with the help of a good running game and a couple strong game plans from Mac and the staff.  On a team with better skill positions like Denver, he would probably look better than here in GB.

 

so, to summarize the good: 

1. he's on an ascending path, growing in production and command of the offense as he gains experience.
2. demonstrated playmaking ability with his legs, without sacrificing complete pocket/dropback passer ability
3. improved leadership
4. demonstrated ability to make NFL throws

The bad side is that he hasn't shown that he is especially accurate, and I think he's definitively proven that he's NOT an anticipation passer a la Rivers or Peyton.  He needs to "see it" and then he will cut it loose.  He hasn't shown improvement in play recognition, or processing speed.

 

At this stage, I would say the optimistic view on Hundley is someone thinks they could have Ryan Tannehill on their hands (who is a top athlete at QB when healthy).  The low end of his evaluation is a kind of Alex Smith in San Francisco type player.  Good Athlete who is conservative and never able to handle a full plate of concepts.

[skibrett15]

8 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

I think I'm saying that nobody has the QB-projection thing figured out yet, and 23 teams passing on Rodgers is a testament to that situation. I think Hundley's future is still an unknown and relegating him to a Fitzpatrick ceiling at this stage is premature imo.

he's nothing like fitzpatrick, who has extremely limited NFL tools.  Fitzpatrick has to rely entirely on pre-snap diagnosis, and anticipation passing, which gets him into a ton of trouble if the defense knows where he is going with the ball.

Hundley has a big enough arm and can make the sideline throws that Fitz can't.

Hundley's legs alone make him a much greater threat than Fitz.

[wgbeethree]

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

I see Hundley as a Hoyer, McCown, Fitzpatrick, etc. 

I feel like Hundley is just so much more physically gifted than Hoyer and Fitzpatrick.

McCown is a really good comparison. He's actually a pretty solid quarterback. He's put up some respectable numbers despite playing with some historically bad teams. 

Alex Smith is a pretty spot on comparison tool wise IMO. 

 

[Packerraymond]

53 minutes ago, wgbeethree said:

I feel like Hundley is just so much more physically gifted than Hoyer and Fitzpatrick.

McCown is a really good comparison. He's actually a pretty solid quarterback. He's put up some respectable numbers despite playing with some historically bad teams. 

Alex Smith is a pretty spot on comparison tool wise IMO. 

 

I'm not talking tools, he's nothing alike any of those 3.

I'm talking career projection. Those 3 are coveted backup/spot starter QBs and have been most of their careers. I see Hundley the same way. I don't think any team will ever want Hundley as their franchise QB, but I see him playing a long time in this league as a backup to one. 

[skibrett15]

42 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I'm not talking tools, he's nothing alike any of those 3.

I'm talking career projection. Those 3 are coveted backup/spot starter QBs and have been most of their careers. I see Hundley the same way. I don't think any team will ever want Hundley as their franchise QB, but I see him playing a long time in this league as a backup to one. 

yeah I think that's the most likely outcome, and I got what your sentiment was but then people started mis-interpreting that I think so tried to give some player comps.

 

I'd project hundley as an acceptable to below average starter.

[incognito_man]

Hundley is going to get a legit chance to start somewhere. I have zero doubt about that.

[Packerraymond]

9 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Hundley is going to get a legit chance to start somewhere. I have zero doubt about that.

In a Mike Glennon role? Sure. We're talking jobs on the line here, no coach/GM is going to put their career on the line for Hundley like Lynch/Shanny just did with Jimmy G. I could see a team with a top 5 pick next year offering Brett 2/16 or 3/24 to come in a be a bridge to a franchise guy. Would you put your job on the line for what you saw for the last 7 weeks??