Hoyers value is based, not on his ability, but on what the other 31 GMs think of him and are willing to pay.
They hardly know him. He has hardly played and never played in big situations.
Unless they have the power of psychic projection for an undrafted player, how could they set a value on him?
It doesn't really matter what 30 GMs think so long as 1 believes he's worth a pick. GMs make projections all the time for players, and sometimes they're right and sometimes they're wrong.
I'm not suggesting that a GM should trade a 3rd or 4th for Hoyer. I'm not even suggesting it's likely going to happen. I'm simply saying teams have done it in the past for QBs who have done less than Hoyer. That is all.
I never said that a huge part of Hoyers' "true value" is based on his draft status. His true value is how good he is. He's presumably a much better player than his draft status indicates--he is at least a decent player or else BB wouldn't have kept him as the number two QB. The Pats know quite a bit about his true value because they watch him practice 60 hours a week so they can make an informed decision about whether he's better than KOC.
The question is what is his "trade value" (i.e. what he's worth to another team) to teams that don't see him practice 60 hours a week. Those teams have to rely on the information he has-his combine workouts, some mop-up duty in live games, some decent pre-season games, and his college career including his senior year when he threw 9 tds and 9 ints and a 51% completion rating as a senior.
Put it this way. Brady, Hoyer, Mallett and Crompton all get hit by a truck tomorrow. What would you trade for Chase Daniel and Curtis Painter, who on paper are almost identical to Hoyer?
The undrafted thing keeps coming up so I think it does factor into evaluations. If he had been drafted in the 3rd despite atrocious college stats, like Whitehurst, would you think he had more trade value?
As for what his value actually is, like I mentioned above, a lot of it is projection and guessing and sometimes a leap of faith. I'm not saying there's a guaranteed 2 or 3 out there either. But teams do reach for QBs.
Yes, Hoyer had a rough senior season. But it's still on par with the best season Whitehurst could manage. I'd take Hoyer's 4 years over Whitehurst's 2. In terms of college performance, pre-season performance, limited playing time, Hoyer holds the edge in all.
As for your hypothetical, I think Painter's inclusion is puzzling. He's been absolutely terrible whenever he plays, even in the pre-season. Maybe you mentioned him because he had a mediocre college career like Hoyer, but since the draft, he's been pretty terrible.
As for Daniel, I haven't watched him a ton but I could see someone trading a mid-round pick for him. It's a projection, maybe even a crazy guess, but he was very accurate in university, he's performed well in the pre-season, he's learned under Drew Brees the past two seasons, and he's probably better than the type of QB I could get in the draft in the 4th round.
If you look at the rookie QBs drafted in the mid-rounds (3 to 5), most don't amount to anything. A quick look at QBs taken in this range from the 5-year period of 2004 to 2008 shows 23 total draft picks, 1 starter, and 4 or 5 decent back-ups. If you can get a guy who has several years experience, has proven they can make a roster, and still has the potential to grow, that's well worth the pick.
Bottom line is if you think the guy is capable of being a starter, he's worth a decent pick.
