Damarious Randall traded to the Browns for DeShone Kizer

[LacyIsGood]

25 minutes ago, DavidatMIZZOU said:

I agree in regards to Nelson, Cobb, and Clay.  Especially Nelson.  There were points in the season last year where he looked really old.  If that is the player that he is going to be now, I don't want him on the team at all, and I certainly don't want that player counting against the cap in 3 years.  I think we can all agree that Cobb and Clay are over paid for their production.  With Cobb, we can probably get some of his production out of other players that currently cost a lot less.  Clay still makes this team better.  The depth behind him is not very good.  Clay at his current salary is a better value than all of his back-ups.

I agree with you the most on Clay.  I don't think he actually gets restructured, but also has the most value to the team.  I think if the Packers and Nelson can agree on a redefined role and a future for him, I can see him getting extended and restructured.  Cobb, while being a great teammate, etc., is a pure slot guy with no "plus" attributes anymore.  With the amount of help the Packers could use on defense, they really need to find a way to move on.  They could do so much more with that money.

[Uffdaswede]

I was 24 hours late on the trade news due to a stomach flu that raged through the family. Taking care of puking grandchildren and young adults was almost as fun as reading 73 pages of this thread. I ran out of battery before I got through the whole thing.

 I usually side with the Packers FO with personnel moves given the rather safe assumption that they know more than me. So I was surprised by the vehemence of the negative reactions to the trade. As with most who view the trade somewhat favorably, I assume that DR was no longer functioning well as a team member and that, to the new regime, his negatives clearly outweighed his positives. In my mind, the Browns are the team that pushed for this trade. Their FO knows that the Packers wanted to move Randall so they cooked up the DR/DK trade. Flipping those draft picks must have been important to the Packers in getting the deal to work.

I will say that, TL/DR boat analogies notwithstanding, I do get the point that on paper moving DR reduces talent in our secondary. So what? Moving Brandon Bostick reduced talent in the tight end room, but he was never going to play for us again. DR was never going to play for us again. The evidence? This trade.

Here is the point that I will concede: now we need another CB in addition to others we will need. That sucks. And DK may upgrade the backup QB, but we pray that does little to help the team in the coming year.

I will be stunned if those flipped draft picks are not part of a strategy to move up or move back into the first or second round in this draft. I think they will, in retrospect, be a big part of why THIS trade happened and not some other inevitable trading away of Damarious Randall.

[St Vince]

I haven't read this entire thread so forgive me if this has already been said. Having a few hours to digest this trade I think it was Pettine influenced. I believed he watched a lot of tape of this defense and decided  Randall is not the guy he wants as his starting CB. I also believe Packers got a player in Kizer that was probably on their board but knew they wouldn't get the opportunity to draft him. The Hundley experiment is over. I believe the Packers will flip him for what ever they can get and move on with Kizer. I look for Bulaga to be cut and Cobb to restructure since he's the younger receiver, they'll just let Jordy play out his final year. those two moves will free up some money to get Mo Wilk and a couple of CB's in FA and on to the draft!

[sgtcheezwiz]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

If it's anything like the regular season, I think "fun" might be the wrong word. 

Ya no doubt, but will be 'fun' to see how they play after a season of meaningful reps. Excuse my awful wording in my op. 

[Haha21]

Now will we trade Hundley for a late round pick? I still don't want him backing up AR and I don't want Kizer backing up him either. Hope we sign a vet QB on a one year deal then hand the number 2 duties to Kizer next year. Derek Anderson would be someone I'd like to bring in.

[incognito_man]

2 minutes ago, Haha21 said:

Now will we trade Hundley for a late round pick? I still don't want him backing up AR and I don't want Kizer backing up him either. Hope we sign a vet QB on a one year deal then hand the number 2 duties to Kizer next year. Derek Anderson would be someone I'd like to bring in.

This is one of those times where someone saying they would bet their life this wouldn't happen would be perfectly safe from death

[pgwingman]

3 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

I don't understand the mindset of writing off Hundley. I get that watching him sucked. I get that he's been in a system for three years.

But game reps matter. He didn't have any coming into the season. 

I completely agree AG, but I also see him as a huge enigma. 

He's had virtually no reps before the season, but was in his third year. To me, that makes him a veteran. 

I honestly thought he was a decent backup. He was 3-6 as a starter with a 60% completion percentage. He had a couple of awful games, but two of those were after the packers were eliminated from playoff contention. That's not too bad for a backup on a weak roster.

 

I wonder how this trade would be viewed if the packers had recieved an OLB who can provide depth or situational pass rushing.

 

I guess the best case scenario is that Kizer and Hundley bring out the best in each other, with one being kept and the other being traded (but Hundley will probably just try free agency)

[Leader]

33 minutes ago, pgwingman said:

I honestly thought he (Hundley) was a decent backup. He was 3-6 as a starter with a 60% completion percentage. He had a couple of awful games, but two of those were after the packers were eliminated from playoff contention. That's not too bad for a backup on a weak roster.

I presume you're referring to the defense (?) cause the offense had all its WR's - meaning all of them and was down to its 2nd/3rd TE's. As the season wore on, we lost Monty (as usual) and Jones towards the end - but it didnt matter. D's werent respecting Hundley past 5 yards and were packing the box. The OL had some right side issues - but nothing that a 3rd year guy couldnt have overcome.

I was a proponent of holding on to Hundley as opposed to those that thought he was good trade fodder because I thought him a talented backup and value that need.

His performance changed my mind. I'm ready to move on. He was way too shaky for a 3rd year guy IMO and a preseason performance like his rookie season isnt going to sway me - unless he SERIOUSLY lights it up and does it against the other teams top D's.

[pgwingman]

9 minutes ago, Leader said:

I presume you're referring to the defense (?) cause the offense had all its WR's - meaning all of them and was down to its 2nd/3rd TE's. As the season wore on, we lost Monty (as usual) and Jones towards the end - but it didnt matter. D's werent respecting Hundley past 5 yards and were packing the box. The OL had some right side issues - but nothing that a 3rd year guy couldnt have overcome.

I was a proponent of holding on to Hundley as opposed to those that thought he was good trade fodder because I thought him a talented backup and value that need.

His performance changed my mind. I'm ready to move on. He was way too shaky for a 3rd year guy IMO and a preseason performance like his rookie season isnt going to sway me - unless he SERIOUSLY lights it up and does it against the other teams top D's.

But how shaky was he? Two of his worst games were after they'd been eliminated from playoff contention.

Asked another way, do you think Hundley has the tools (and mental makeup) to grow into the backup role? If he makes a few more plays last season, he's a 4-5 backup. I think that says you have some to work with.

I would agree that his dreams of becoming a franchise QB have probably set sail (boy, I remember people thinking he'd be worth two first round picks), but he doesn't look like the worst QB in the league.

I'm also having trouble understanding what Kizer gives you that Hundley doesn't. Kizer is younger, but has not shown much at all in terms of decision making.

 

[PossibleCabbage]

I mean, if we take "Randall wasn't going to be back" as a given (which is reasonable since he was nearly cut last year) then getting a quality QB prospect (who's still a knucklehead, but I digress) with 3 cheap years left is probably a better return on investment than a number of players selected before Randall in 2015.  Shelton (#12) was traded along with a 5th for a late 3rd, Erving (#15) was traded straight up for a 5th,  Peters (#18)  was traded with a 6th  for a 4th and a future 2nd, Laken Tomlinson (#28) was traded for a 2019 5th,  Philipp Dorsett (#29) was traded for a 3rd string QB, etc.

Personally I'd rather have Kizer than most of the things former 2015 first round picks have been traded for, thus far.

[sgtcheezwiz]

One thing nobody has mentioned about the McGinn article were the scouts who questioned Kizer's motivations and character. Has anybody seen this in his scouting reports or heard anything from his time in Cleveland?

[PossibleCabbage]

3 minutes ago, sgtcheezwiz said:

One thing nobody has mentioned about the McGinn article were the scouts who questioned Kizer's motivations and character. Has anybody seen this in his scouting reports or heard anything from his time in Cleveland?

Well, I would bet that being in a situation where he is absolutely  and unambiguously not QB1 and his job is to learn and prepare will do him a world of good.

[Packerraymond]

1 minute ago, sgtcheezwiz said:

One thing nobody has mentioned about the McGinn article were the scouts who questioned Kizer's motivations and character. Has anybody seen this in his scouting reports or heard anything from his time in Cleveland?

I dont think there is anything to worry about there. Knowing Bob McGinn his scout sources are probably the same old curmudgeons he is. I remember reading that they were concerned he was only in it for his "brand." Probably saying the same thing about this years top QBs in their scouting reports.

[pgwingman]

5 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I dont think there is anything to worry about there. Knowing Bob McGinn his scout sources are probably the same old curmudgeons he is. I remember reading that they were concerned he was only in it for his "brand." Probably saying the same thing about this years top QBs in their scouting reports.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/notre-dame-coach-brian-kelly-qb-deshone-kizer-shouldve-returned-to-school/

This might be what he's talking about. I'm probably reading too much into it, but it sounds like Kelly didn't like his attitude his senior year.

[Packer_ESP]

25 minutes ago, pgwingman said:

But how shaky was he? Two of his worst games were after they'd been eliminated from playoff contention.

He was "6 games below 60 passer rating" shaky. Even if you want to discount the last two games (and I don't think we should) he laid some absolute stinkers at NO, vs BAL and vs TB when things still mattered.