The Brock Purdy Thread

[Pattersonca65]

I came across this yesterday from CBS's Jeff Kerr and I went ahead and checked it because I found it quite surprising:

"They decided to pay Purdy significantly more than what he's worth. When Christian McCaffrey, Trent Williams, Deebo Samuel, Brandon Aiyuk, and George Kittle all played, Purdy was 17-4 and threw 38 touchdowns to just eight interceptions. In any other game, Purdy was 10-11 with 30 touchdowns to 18 interceptions -- a significant drop off.

I doubted the numbers, but when I crunched them, I actually came up with slightly worse numbers for Purdy (19-4 with all those guys and I think 9-11 without). That said, I think those raw numbers are pretty skewed. In 2022 and 2023, he went 3-2 without one of those guys (he also lost the Browns game in which Trent and Deebo got hurt, though we missed what should have been a game-winning FG). Then we had last season when Purdy went 6-9. At no point did he have all of those guys playing at the same time, so the entire season falls into that metric and really skews the numbers.

I find last season to be a problematic analog for several reasons. First, although one of those guys was missing in every game, multiple players were missing in many of them. CMC only played four games - only had seven carries and two receptions in his last game - and wasn't himself when he was playing. Aiyuk only played seven games - really six and a bit of the seventh - and wasn't for most of that stretch. Trent missed the last seven games. Deebo and Kittle stayed mostly healthy, missing three Purdy games combined. Purdy ended the season 1-5 missing not just one of these players, but missing CMC, Aiyuk, and Trent. Losing Trent appears to have been the real death knell, as we went 1-7 after he went down.

Second, having impact players on the roster go down with injury is very different from not having them at all. If you go into the season without a guy - as we are doing this offseason without Deebo - you have an opportunity to plan for it and find a replacement. You almost certainly don't have as good an option, but you have a serviceable option who has had camp and the season to prepare for the role. We lost impact players and had to scramble to replace them.

CMC and Trent were replaced by late-round picks/UDFAs who played well given the situation, but are at best middle-of-the-pack players. I like Mason and he played well on balance, but his vision is poor and Purdy never trusted him as a pass-catcher. I'm still far from sold on Guerendo, who also lacks vision and couldn't stay healthy. Moore played well at LT, but I think the Chiefs may regret giving him the contract they did. Kyle is pretty good at covering OL liabilities. But having a left side of the OL be Moore-Banks-Brendel was devastating. Our offense scored 17 or more points in each of the ten games with a healthy Trent. After he went down, we had four of seven games with 17 or fewer points (Purdy did not start one of those). Any team with a pass rush just brutalized us.

We were better-situated to replace Aiyuk, but Deebo can't be the #1 receiver. He's too easy to game plan for if he's the guy. You can put your second- or third-best corner on him in man coverage and he's basically eliminated from the gameplan. He couldn't beat MLBs in coverage last year. Pearsall obviously and understandably took time to round into form. I love Jennings and he did yeoman's work all season, but he shouldn't ever be the #1 guy.

The result - on offense - was that we were trotting out a bad OL, mediocre RBs, and mediocre receivers for most of the season. And the stats largely back that up. Our receivers were at or near the bottom of the league in separation last year. We ran well between the 20s, but were awful in the red zone. Couple the offensive shortcomings with a complete collapse by the defense - largely fueled by just horrendous playcalling - and I think it's really hard to say Purdy bears the blame for that. Certainly there were times when he needed to play better. I posted a few weeks ago about his performance late in close games and it simply wasn't good enough. But this defense couldn't stop anything late in games.

Anyway, overly long post, but you can sum it up with this: Purdy probably isn't as good as the results looked in 2023, but he's not as bad as they looked in 2024. I have some real concerns about the contract we just signed him to, but too many people are taking low-hanging fruit on this.

It's a case of the QB gets too much credit when the team wins and too much blame when the team loses.

The CBS analysis is just lazy because it's just looking at names and no critical analysis. 2024 CMC, Samuel, and Aiyuk when they were in there were nowhere near their 2023 versions. The only guy that didn't drop off was Kittle.

They also completely ignore the other side of the ball when it comes to defenses. The Chiefs had the 4th best defense in points allowed so that didn't have any impact on how many wins Patrick Mahomes had? The 9ers having the 29th best defense in points allowed didn't impact the wins Purdy had?

There are completely fair criticisms to put onto Purdy but he was probably towards the middle of the list of the problems the team had last season. I keep pointing out but Mahomes is an easy 1st ballot HOF and the best QB in the league but as we've seen this past Super Bowl the QB can only overcome so much.

You can throw in special teams where if I remember correctly the 49ers ranked among the worst in the league and according to one stat was ranked as having cost the team games.

[Jikkle]

I think it can be added that Kyle isn't some genius passing game designer as well. He's above average when it comes to it but his passing game doesn't come close to his running game. He's like the inverse Andy Reid where he has a dynamic passing attack but a serviceable running game.

[CrimsonCrew]

You can throw in special teams where if I remember correctly the 49ers ranked among the worst in the league and according to one stat was ranked as having cost the team games.

Definitely. STs was a trainwreck. I think it cost us the first Rams game, and was significant in several other games that certainly could have gone differently with better play from that unit. Not an exhaustive list by any means, but below are some of the significant STs plays that contributed to winnable losses.

I think we lose the Minnesota game regardless, but the blocked punt in that game shifted momentum early and we never got it back. That and the long TD to Jefferson were arguably the two most decisive plays in the game, though Purdy's late turnovers certainly didn't help.

STs completely **** the bed in the first game against the Rams, and pretty clearly we win that one with even average STs play. They allowed a fake punt that directly resulted in the Rams' first TD and a 14-7 score at the half instead of 14-0. Late in the game, when it seemed at worst we would tie and go into OT, we missed a FG (granted a 55-yarder) and then allowed a 38-yard punt return when there were 55 seconds remaining and they didn't have a TO so they could get into FG range to win.

We almost certainly lose to the Chiefs regardless, but the game was 7-3 with about 10 minutes to go in the second quarter when we allowed a 55-yard punt return to our 30. They scored another TD on that drive and never looked back. It's worth noting that their offense was not good last year, and they didn't score another TD until the 4th quarter. Handing them 40+ yards of field position at that point was huge.

Somewhat less egregious than the colossal F-ups already discussed, but in the second Hawks game, we were winning 17-13 with 2:45 remaining when we punted through the endzone from their 42 for a 22-yard net. They had one TO remaining at the time, and scored the go-ahead TD with 12 seconds remaining - it took them 12 plays to march the field, averaging 6.67 yards per play, so an extra 10-20 yards was significant.

In the second Rams game, Flannigan-Fowles was called twice for the same alignment penalty on a punt. It certainly wasn't decisive as they still had to drive the field, but in a 12-6 game, any dumb mistake feels significant. And they kicked FGs on both of those ensuing drives.

Against Miami, we missed a 41-yard FG that would have made it 16-13 (Miami lead) in the third quarter. We later had the ball with less than two minutes remaining, trailing by five, when Purdy threw an INT (they scored a TD after the INT to make the game seem like more of a blowout than it was). Tough to chalk this up to STs as the INT was on 1st and 10 and we had three TOs, but a two-point lead is very different from a five-point lead in that situation. For that matter, in the 4th quarter we punted out of bounds and had a substitution penalty on the same play to lead to a 34-yard net punt that set up the 46-yard FG that put them up by five instead of two. That one is less significant, but in a game of inches where we had only allowed 19 points to that point, those mistakes have a way of adding up.

So yeah, poor STs play definitely a significant issue in terms of our record this past year. The upgrades at STs coordinator and DC are the biggest reasons for optimism this year, IMO. Though if we have injuries like last year, it could get ugly again.

[CrimsonCrew]

I think it can be added that Kyle isn't some genius passing game designer as well. He's above average when it comes to it but his passing game doesn't come close to his running game. He's like the inverse Andy Reid where he has a dynamic passing attack but a serviceable running game.

Yeah, particularly in the dropback game. He's really good with play action, but when we go away from that, he struggles. I'm not confident he's even top-half of the league in terms of playcalling in the pure passing game.

[Jikkle]

I think it can be added that Kyle isn't some genius passing game designer as well. He's above average when it comes to it but his passing game doesn't come close to his running game. He's like the inverse Andy Reid where he has a dynamic passing attack but a serviceable running game.

Yeah, particularly in the dropback game. He's really good with play action, but when we go away from that, he struggles. I'm not confident he's even top-half of the league in terms of playcalling in the pure passing game.

The argument in 2023 usually made to diminish Purdy was that CMC was more important to the offense which was true but it was because the offense is heavily a run-first team not because of the QB but by design.

That's what makes critiquing a QB in this system tricky because it's simply not an offense that's designed to function at a high level with volume passing. That's why I defended Jimmy G in that 2020 Packers playoff game where he had 8 attempts. Yeah there might've been some mistrust by Shanahan but Mosert had 29 carries for 220 yards with 7.6 yards a carry and 4 TDs so why would you pass the ball if you're running like that?

[CrimsonCrew]

Did a deeper trip down (bad) memory lane on Purdy's close games. Some notes:

L 23-10 vs. Vikings: It took a FG late to close to within six points. But Purdy had bad turnovers in the second half to get us to that point. He didn't see the closing defender who deflected a pass leading to an INT deep in our territory. And then he just lost the ball while throwing for a fumble on the next drive.

L 27-24 vs. Rams: Purdy played well in this one with a depleted cast, so I don't put this on him. We tried (and missed) a 55-yard FG leading by seven. Purdy hit Bell for what should have been a game-winning FG at a minimum, and Bell just flat-out dropped it. I thought on the ensuing 3rd down that he bailed from the pocket a little early, but hard to pin this one on him. He was our best player with the possible exception of Jennings.

L 24-23 vs. Cards: 1st and 10 from our 42 with 1:32 left and Purdy threw an INT. He was hit as he threw on a blitz. Looks like we didn't get the right call on the blocking. The Cards sent two, but we had six in to block. The DB came unblocked. Still, Purdy could have gotten a pass off to Kittle or just eaten the sack and lived for the next down. Largely on Purdy here.

W 30-24 vs. Cowboys: Niners win, but it was much closer than it should have been. We were up by 17 at the start of the 4th. From that point on, we generated 62 yards and 3 points to make this pretty uncomfortable. We went very run-heavy, but Purdy was 1-3 for six yards and no first downs on third downs in the 4th.

W 23-20 vs. Bucs: This game should not have been as close as it was. Moody missed 44- and 55-yard FGs late. The D gave up a late FG drive to allow TB to tie. And Purdy put together a nice drive to score the go-ahead points. Nice performance by him.

L 20-17 vs. Hawks: This one was pretty anticlimactic. We got the ball back leading by four with four minutes left. After an 11-yard CMC run on first down, we went three-and-out with Purdy failing to convert on second or third down. Seattle went down and scored late to seal it. On the crucial third down, Seattle sent a max blitz and we had no answers.

L 12-6 vs. Rams: Only six points through the game is a real indictment. Playoffs were still theoretically on the line. On 2nd and 10 from the Rams' 33 with five minutes left, Purdy threw an INT. He was pressured, but not immediately. He just threw up a prayer to Jennings, who was bracketed.

L 40-34 vs. Lions: We lost by 6, but scored a TD with 43 seconds left to get that close. That said, we had the ball, trailing by 6, on a first-and-ten from the Lions' 36 with 7:30 left in the game when Purdy threw an INT. Purdy was not pressured, telegraphed his throw, and the safety jumped in front of Pearsall and took it. Lions scored to go ahead by 13. Huge mistake that cost us the game.

Long story short, Purdy had opportunities to win close games, and he repeatedly wasn't up to it. He repeatedly struggled late.

Reducing it to numbers doesn't do full justice, but it's indicative of the issues last year. In the 4th quarter, Purdy had four TDs and six INTs. His passer rating fell to 65.3. In the fourth quarter of one-score games, he had three TDs, four INTs, and an 81 rating. He had one TD and two INTs in the final two minutes of games, and a 70.8 rating. He just wasn't good enough when it mattered the most.

None of that is to say that I want the team to walk away from him, but if it were me, I would draw a firm line at $45 million per season. You can argue that Purdy is better than Dak or Tua, but those guys never had losing seasons before their extensions. And those guys were grossly overpaid and are going to hold their teams back. That's not the benchmark we want to follow.

Ran across this article and immediately thought of this post from a few weeks back:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/49ers-brock-purdy-needs-to-work-on-this-one-specific-weakness-to-live-up-to-mega-contract/

[Jikkle]

Did a deeper trip down (bad) memory lane on Purdy's close games. Some notes:

L 23-10 vs. Vikings: It took a FG late to close to within six points. But Purdy had bad turnovers in the second half to get us to that point. He didn't see the closing defender who deflected a pass leading to an INT deep in our territory. And then he just lost the ball while throwing for a fumble on the next drive.

L 27-24 vs. Rams: Purdy played well in this one with a depleted cast, so I don't put this on him. We tried (and missed) a 55-yard FG leading by seven. Purdy hit Bell for what should have been a game-winning FG at a minimum, and Bell just flat-out dropped it. I thought on the ensuing 3rd down that he bailed from the pocket a little early, but hard to pin this one on him. He was our best player with the possible exception of Jennings.

L 24-23 vs. Cards: 1st and 10 from our 42 with 1:32 left and Purdy threw an INT. He was hit as he threw on a blitz. Looks like we didn't get the right call on the blocking. The Cards sent two, but we had six in to block. The DB came unblocked. Still, Purdy could have gotten a pass off to Kittle or just eaten the sack and lived for the next down. Largely on Purdy here.

W 30-24 vs. Cowboys: Niners win, but it was much closer than it should have been. We were up by 17 at the start of the 4th. From that point on, we generated 62 yards and 3 points to make this pretty uncomfortable. We went very run-heavy, but Purdy was 1-3 for six yards and no first downs on third downs in the 4th.

W 23-20 vs. Bucs: This game should not have been as close as it was. Moody missed 44- and 55-yard FGs late. The D gave up a late FG drive to allow TB to tie. And Purdy put together a nice drive to score the go-ahead points. Nice performance by him.

L 20-17 vs. Hawks: This one was pretty anticlimactic. We got the ball back leading by four with four minutes left. After an 11-yard CMC run on first down, we went three-and-out with Purdy failing to convert on second or third down. Seattle went down and scored late to seal it. On the crucial third down, Seattle sent a max blitz and we had no answers.

L 12-6 vs. Rams: Only six points through the game is a real indictment. Playoffs were still theoretically on the line. On 2nd and 10 from the Rams' 33 with five minutes left, Purdy threw an INT. He was pressured, but not immediately. He just threw up a prayer to Jennings, who was bracketed.

L 40-34 vs. Lions: We lost by 6, but scored a TD with 43 seconds left to get that close. That said, we had the ball, trailing by 6, on a first-and-ten from the Lions' 36 with 7:30 left in the game when Purdy threw an INT. Purdy was not pressured, telegraphed his throw, and the safety jumped in front of Pearsall and took it. Lions scored to go ahead by 13. Huge mistake that cost us the game.

Long story short, Purdy had opportunities to win close games, and he repeatedly wasn't up to it. He repeatedly struggled late.

Reducing it to numbers doesn't do full justice, but it's indicative of the issues last year. In the 4th quarter, Purdy had four TDs and six INTs. His passer rating fell to 65.3. In the fourth quarter of one-score games, he had three TDs, four INTs, and an 81 rating. He had one TD and two INTs in the final two minutes of games, and a 70.8 rating. He just wasn't good enough when it mattered the most.

None of that is to say that I want the team to walk away from him, but if it were me, I would draw a firm line at $45 million per season. You can argue that Purdy is better than Dak or Tua, but those guys never had losing seasons before their extensions. And those guys were grossly overpaid and are going to hold their teams back. That's not the benchmark we want to follow.

Ran across this article and immediately thought of this post from a few weeks back:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/49ers-brock-purdy-needs-to-work-on-this-one-specific-weakness-to-live-up-to-mega-contract/

He does need to play better in the 4th and I think the biggest issue is he needs to learn to balance being aggressive when it comes to taking chances and when to learn to dump the ball off and live to fight another day.

It's not to excuse Purdy but I will say this is area like the red zone is another area where Shanahan and the offense gets exposed badly. I mean Shanahan has a pretty terrible record when it comes to coming back from 4th quarter deficits and that's been a thing long before Purdy was QB.

The issue is when we're in situations where what we're going to do on offense is obvious the offense falls apart because the offensive line is almost completely reliant on all the smoke and mirrors Shanahan throws at defenses to function. Anytime we need the line to just stick their hand in the dirt and blow people off the ball to get a yard or to pass protect when the defense has their ears pinned back in full rush mode it falls apart. So yes there are definitely things 100% on Purdy but I still see the larger problem being the offensive line and Shanahan.

And at the risk of sounding like a Purdy homer this will only be his 3rd full year of starting so it's not like he's fully matured as a QB yet either. I mean he might not ever hit his 2023 highs but there are still things that he can clean up with his game and he's not a finished product yet. I mean Joe Burrow just had his best year as a passer 5 years in and Lamar Jackson had his 7 years in so it's a position that has long-term growth.