Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Trey Lance?


tukafan21
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

He barely played last year, but in 2 games as a starter and another playing part of the game, he was 58% completion for 603 yards, 5 TDs, 2 INTs, with another 168 yards rushing and a TD on the ground.

That's not terrible for a guy who didn't play his last year in college due to D2 shutting down for Covid and was always going to be a bit of a developmental prospect to begin with.

Then this year you can't count that first game that he played as it was in a literal monsoon and then he got hurt after going 2 for 3 in his second game of the year.

I agree those stats are definitely not bad for a rookie with limited playing time the year before due to COVID. He could be a good project if gotten for something decent. Someone on here made it sound as if he was abysmal in his playing time but those stats are absolutely something worth working with.

 

 

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

How many games did it take Purdy to look good in Shanahan's offense?

Not really a fair way to look at it

Purdy came into the league with significantly more experience at a higher level than Lance ever did.  Lance played what, 1 year of college football and then his junior year was cancelled and he went into the draft.

He didn't really look bad last year, he put up some solid numbers for a rookie who hadn't played football in 2 years and only had 1 season as a starter at D2.

And again, his game this year just doesn't count for anything as it was an actual monsoon out there, nobody could do anything in the game on either side.

  • Pie 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they are willing to do us a favor and give him away for a 4th round draft pick with CMC crushing it for them, I'll bite. I really liked him coming out of college and honestly think if he was the eagles QB, he would be putting up similar stats to Hurts. Lance definitely will rely on having a scheme that fits his traits - not sure we have a competent coaching staff for him..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we don't make a move for another QB before we're up with the Niners late 3rd round pick, and he was available in this draft at that point, I would 100% take him for that cost and I think anyone else here would as well.

So for say an additional 4th next year, I think that would be a cost I'd be willing to pay to see what he might be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tukafan21 said:

Not really a fair way to look at it

Purdy came into the league with significantly more experience at a higher level than Lance ever did.  Lance played what, 1 year of college football and then his junior year was cancelled and he went into the draft.

He didn't really look bad last year, he put up some solid numbers for a rookie who hadn't played football in 2 years and only had 1 season as a starter at D2.

And again, his game this year just doesn't count for anything as it was an actual monsoon out there, nobody could do anything in the game on either side.

In this hypothetical scenario, were talking about a team with a very quarterback friendly scheme who drafted a guy #3 overall (and traded significant resources to do so) giving up on that guy in his third season (even when one was injury shortened) in favor of sticking with 1) a guy taken last in the draft and 2) Jimmy Garoppolo.

If that doesn't scream "buyer beware", I'm not sure what would.

  • Pie 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

In this hypothetical scenario, were talking about a team with a very quarterback friendly scheme who drafted a guy #3 overall (and traded significant resources to do so) giving up on that guy in his third season (even when one was injury shortened) in favor of sticking with 1) a guy taken last in the draft and 2) Jimmy Garoppolo.

If that doesn't scream "buyer beware", I'm not sure what would.

Not at all

Jimmy was always going to be leaving after this year, no matter what else happened.

Beyond that, it's not giving up on a guy that was taken with the last pick of the draft, it's getting something in return while you can for a player with potential because someone else unexpectedly came from nowhere to look amazing.

Say the Patriots don't win that first SB with Brady but lost in the conference championship game or even lost the SB.  

Do you really think they would have moved on from him the next year?

To me it's more them recognizing that they can get some assets in return while Lance still has value, not giving up on him in any means. 

It's not like Purdy has just looked average, he's looked amazing for a rookie, draft position aside.  He's earned that job short of anything other than them signing Brady in the offseason which I think they very well still might do anyways.  And if that happens, there is even less of a reason for them to keep Lance and hurt his future trade value any further.

Edited by tukafan21
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

I liked Lance coming out and the Niners were willing to give up Jimmy G for him. I just don’t want another QB that some other team isn’t interested in anymore. We just need to draft one.  

Again, this to me just doesn't make sense and a couple people are saying it.

In what world is it them not being interested anymore in Lance?  This isn't a Zach Wilson situation by any means.

He looked decent in his limited playing time given him having only played one year in D2 and not having played at all the year before being drafted.  He's shown nothing to say he is more likely to be a bust than not and we're not talking about giving up early round picks for him either.

The Niners know they have a window to win right now, what good does it do them to sit on a backup QB for another year or two and lose him for nothing when they could draft some players who can help them right now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

How many games did it take Purdy to look good in Shanahan's offense?

Some QBs blossom faster than others. Trey Lance did not have Christian McCaffrey, either. I'm not saying he is definitely destined for greatness, but he may be. There have been many QBs to have it click for them a little later. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

Not at all

Jimmy was always going to be leaving after this year, no matter what else happened.

Beyond that, it's not giving up on a guy that was taken with the last pick of the draft, it's getting something in return while you can for a player with potential because someone else unexpectedly came from nowhere to look amazing.

Say the Patriots don't win that first SB with Brady but lost in the conference championship game or even lost the SB.  

Do you really think they would have moved on from him the next year?

To me it's more them recognizing that they can get some assets in return while Lance still has value, not giving up on him in any means. 

It's not like Purdy has just looked average, he's looked amazing for a rookie, draft position aside.  He's earned that job short of anything other than them signing Brady in the offseason which I think they very well still might do anyways.  And if that happens, there is even less of a reason for them to keep Lance and hurt his future trade value any further.

I'm not that sold on Purdy just yet, but logically speaking, your own statements about him should actually serve as a huge red flag regarding Lance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I’m not necessarily advocating sticking with Bryce. His highs show the ability is there, but there’s enough bad film out there to doubt that he can consistently enough play at a high enough level. But this video from Brett Kollman is a pretty good argument to give it a bit more time, whether that be rolling with Bryce just next year or picking up his 5th year option (not extending him).      The gist is that the structural (wider hashes) and rule (3 yd vs 1 yd thresholds for intelligible offensive lineman downfield penalties) differences in the college and NFL have led to wildly different play calling and scheme diets in college. There is much more shotgun and RPO calls in college and screen/quick throws. This simply doesn’t set up young QBs to be able to play under center, which is more preferred in the NFL due to RBs being able to more effectively run out of that formation.  They don’t know how to do it and have to learn. Yes, the NFL has trended more toward college style offense in the last decade or so, but it isn’t that pronounced and is more out of necessity than desire. And on top of all that, they ask the young QBs to do all this learning with coaching and other personnel churn going on around them.  Bad results lead to coaches getting fired and new ones with different ideas on scheme and footwork and different terminology and playbooks coming in. It makes it harder on those young QBs to learn.     So we may drop Bryce for a young QB starter in the draft and be in a similar situation. With a QB who is going to take years to learn how to operate in an NFL style offense and will struggle along the way.  So you have to weigh whether the struggles we see from Bryce are more due to this learning process vs solely physical limitations on his part. It’s almost undoubtedly a bit of both, but the answer to that question I think dictates your strategy at QB over the next few years. And of course, you have to consider what the alternatives available are.    I’m neither a Bryce hater or a Bryce Stan and I don’t have an answer to that question. But I do fear that if we move on from him, unless it’s for an established player, we’re just in for continued frustration on the QB front because it’s going to take a few years for a college QB to develop (Drake Maye’s don’t grow on trees). 
    • The defense has pulled that feat off this season though.  Multiple times. offense has not had a single good first half all season.  Only and good opening scripted drive paired with disappointing play.  defense has been the actual unit you can measure real and consistent improvement IMO.  Still holes and flaws to it that aren’t going away until new bodies get here but they really are the story of the season IMO
    • One thing about RB's and LB's is they are going to get hurt. It's inevitable. Having a fresh Chuba is not a bad thing.  My only criticism of this entire situation is that I wish our staff would adjust personnel to matchup a little better. I think Chuba is a lot better than Rico against the stacked boxes we've seen the last two weeks. They are very different backs with very different strengths, and I love them both. Rico is so good at identifying the hole early, and hitting it full speed early. He's much better at breaking the big run. Chuba is a much more patient back, and finds 3 yards when there's nothing there better than Rico.  It's in no way a criticism of either, but I think Chuba would have had more success than Rico the way the Saints and Falcons attacked us from a Defensive standpoint.  When you put 9 in the box, often times there is no hole to attack. 
×
×
  • Create New...