The Trey Lance thread

[CrimsonCrew]

Kind of a random thing, but through two years of his NFL career, John Lynch only had four starts. And only 10 after three years. You'd hope of all guys, he'd be sensitive to a guy maybe needing a little more time to develop.

[Pattersonca65]

So I was thinking about this Lance-Purdy thing, because, you know, I'm a crazy person. One thing that I think hasn't gotten quite enough attention is the state of the teams that they were playing with last year. Yes, many people have pointed out the McCaffrey addition, which was absolutely huge for Purdy as an absolutely rock-solid check-down that could result in big plays. Obviously McCaffrey's presence also really opened things up for the rest of the skill players, too.

But another thing that I think played a significant role in Lance's struggles was the OL play. Not that the OL was sensational when Purdy came in, but when Lance started those first two games, we were breaking in three new interior OL who had three combined starts going into the season: a late-round rookie, a second-year player, and a career backup. And those guys struggled early in the year. Chicago's mediocre (generously) defense was able to generate quite a bit of pressure as our guys weren't communicating well and were missing blocks.

Nothing dispositive about this by any means. I'm definitely not saying Lance would have been as good as or better than Purdy if the OL was better, but it is something that's relevant to consider when looking at their respective performances. Purdy was, objectively, in a better position. He came into a team in mid-season form that had just added an impact weapon and was poised to support a competent QB. And all credit to Purdy for being that as a rookie. Dude showed some serious poise. But I just can't help but think that it would be a huge mistake to effectively give up on Lance after four career starts given the investment we sunk into him and Purdy's limited track record and serious injury.

And, of course, we're looking at the same situation this year. Breaking in a new RT, though there's more stability elsewhere. It will be interesting to see how the OL performs early on.

I wouldn't judge Lance just based on those two games he played. But clearly since he came here you can see the inexperience and the rawness of a player who hadn't played much even in college. He needs time. Whether the 49ers are truly willing to give him that time is another matter. As far as his throwing motion goes, well see if it sticks. Kap once posted a video during the offseason of his shortened and compact throwing motion. It looked much better however it didn't last long going into the season.

[CrimsonCrew]

Yeah, no doubt Lance looked raw. But they had to know they were getting a raw player, and if they weren't going to be patient with him, you really have to question the pick. Granted he got hurt and Purdy played really well, but that shouldn't change the fundamental calculus behind the pick. You wanted a guy with special traits. Got to see what that guy can do in a string of live games before you give up on him, IMO.

[Bingo_AlphaMan]

Watch on YouTube

[Jikkle]

Watch on YouTube

Would like to hear from more than just the one source before I buy it.

I'm just not sold on the idea they'd be willing to give him up unless it was for a 1st when they have 0 certainties at the position at the moment.

Purdy is likely back early in the season but we don't know that for a fact and all it takes is one setback and he could be gone for a much longer period of time. And while his arm will likely be fine we don't know that for a fact either. I mean Kinlaw's knee was supposed to be the healthiest it's ever been this last offseason and we saw how that turned out.

Darnold's history to this point hasn't been good and maybe it's because he was in terrible situations or maybe he's just not good or maybe it's something in between. But they won't know that until he shows up and starts offseason work.

And let's not forget that this was a team that went through 4 QBs over the course of the season and does not have a history of keeping QBs healthy. Darnold isn't a model of health and even Purdy in his short time playing has been banged up and almost missed the Seattle game.

So even if Darnold and Purdy are on the up and up it's still not a bad idea to have depth.

[Pattersonca65]

I don't see Lance being traded at this point. It would seem to make sense to at least let this year play out before making a decision. Would have to see how Purdy comes back first. Darnold thus far in his career has not been a good starter. We don't know whether coming to SF improves his play. Lance's trade value probably isn't that good right now. The 49ers certainly aren't going to get back the draft capital they gave up for Lance. His salary isn't an issue. Might as well see what he looks like this year.

The only way I see Lance getting traded is if a team offers the 49ers a deal that is too hard to refuse or Darnold beats out Lance in camp and the 49ers feel Lance is not going to be their guy moving forward and want to just recoup whatever they can for him.

[CrimsonCrew]

I agree that trading Lance at the draft just doesn't make sense. They've got a "starter" in Brock Purdy who has played a handful of games, struggled in his last full game against a defense with a good pass rush, and is coming back from a serious injury. Purdy was pretty amazing for a rookie, but at the end of the day, other than the Cowboys, the best passing D he faced by rating was Seahawks, who were 13th. In terms of passing TDs allowed, every team he played except the Cowboys was in the bottom half of the league.

As promising as Purdy's season was, it would be crazy to count on him being the future of the franchise right now. Darnold has never had sustained success in the NFL. We certainly can't count on him. Lance is the least certain of the three, but he also has the most upside. We've just got to see more of him, and I can't believe the FO doesn't feel the same way.

If we get past the draft, into camp, and Darnold is clearly ahead of him, then I guess you see what you can get for him. And sure, it doesn't help the team this year, but if his price is a second and a fourth now anyway, it doesn't seem like those picks are going to help the team all that much the way Shanahan operates. But man, even if Purdy really pans out, what a disaster the Lance saga would be. Selling the farm for a guy who you never showed any faith in at all, and giving up on him after four starts. It would be fairly unprecedented. Granted the injury played a huge part, but I just can't think of another guy who cost so much and was given less of a shot than Purdy has had.

[CrimsonCrew]

I agree that trading Lance at the draft just doesn't make sense. They've got a "starter" in Brock Purdy who has played a handful of games, struggled in his last full game against a defense with a good pass rush, and is coming back from a serious injury. Purdy was pretty amazing for a rookie, but at the end of the day, other than the Cowboys, the best passing D he faced by rating was Seahawks, who were 13th. In terms of passing TDs allowed, every team he played except the Cowboys was in the bottom half of the league.

As promising as Purdy's season was, it would be crazy to count on him being the future of the franchise right now. Darnold has never had sustained success in the NFL. We certainly can't count on him. Lance is the least certain of the three, but he also has the most upside. We've just got to see more of him, and I can't believe the FO doesn't feel the same way.

If we get past the draft, into camp, and Darnold is clearly ahead of him, then I guess you see what you can get for him. And sure, it doesn't help the team this year, but if his price is a second and a fourth now anyway, it doesn't seem like those picks are going to help the team all that much the way Shanahan operates. But man, even if Purdy really pans out, what a disaster the Lance saga would be. Selling the farm for a guy who you never showed any faith in at all, and giving up on him after four starts. It would be fairly unprecedented. Granted the injury played a huge part, but I just can't think of another guy who cost so much and was given less of a shot than Purdy has had.

Related, I had totally forgotten that we added Tim Patrick off waivers back in the day, kept him around through camp, then cut him in the fall before he joined the Broncos. He's a somewhat similar player in that tall, fast, straight-line mold. Mistake to let him go, anyway.

[Cactus Jack]

Read on Twitter

[CrimsonCrew]

They'd be silly not to listen to offers to get a sense of what the market is. But they'd also be absolutely insane to move Lance unless and until Purdy is back on the field at full strength. I can't see any team making a strong enough offer to effectively just give up on Lance during an uncertain period for Purdy - unless the team has truly given up on his prospects of becoming a franchise guy.

[CrimsonCrew]

Kind of some screwy talk going on with these rumors. Kreuger is attributing a statement to Rapoport that the Niners are actively shopping Lance because Darnold is their guy, but I think he's grossly misrepresenting what Rapoport said. Days/weeks ago, Rapoport spoke in a video that NFL Network posted with the label "Rapoport: Sam Darnold will 'more likely than not' be 49ers' starting QB in Week 1."

Only issue with that is that it's not quite what Rapoport said. Rapoport said, "We do not know what Trey Lance is going to become. If he continues the trajectory he's been on, certainly it seems more likely than not that Sam Darnold will more likely than not be the starter going into the start of the season." It seems like Kreuger just read the video title without actually listening to it.

Kind of a lot to unpack with that statement about Lance. What is his trajectory to date, and how do you most accurately view it? You can see Lance in a lot of different ways based on his extremely limited sample size to date. And sure, if we're talking about a 1-3 record in games in which he played enough to really affect the outcome, that's obviously not going to cut it. But I don't think you can reduce a guy like Lance to his win-loss record in four games, only two of which were played back-to-back, at this point. Particularly given how Shanahan has handled the playcalling with him under center.

Seems like a lot of hand-wringing over what will probably be nothing. I would be shocked if they trade him over draft weekend, but I guess we'll see soon enough.

[thesack12]

Man, who the hell knows what is going on with the 9ers current QB situation. It seems like a mess at the moment.

I agree that unless some team dumbfoundingly offers a massive haul for Lance, there isn't much sense in trading him right now.

Its just so incredibly frustrating that they used three 1's + a 3rd to draft a QB at 3rd overall (while sitting firmly in a Super Bowl window.) Then got incredible production from a very impressive 7th round rookie, who may not have the highest of upsides but showed some solid promise. Yet, we are sitting here with huge questions at the QB position. Hell, due to the type of injury Purdy suffered we really don't know if he'll ever be able to fully recover so there is a chance that we've already seen his best days.

What I do know is if the 9ers wind up trotting out Sam freakin Darnold as QB1 in week one, that's going to be downright depressing.

In any event, I can at least say the 49ers didn't draft Mac Jones.

[Big J]

It's insane to think that after 6 games of Purdy dumping the ball off to Deebo, CMC, & Kittle the team is willing to completely commit to him even after he tore up his elbow.

[CrimsonCrew]

It's insane to think that after 6 games of Purdy dumping the ball off to Deebo, CMC, & Kittle the team is willing to completely commit to him even after he tore up his elbow.

I think that pretty dramatically minimizes the impressiveness of what Purdy did last year as a rookie. He was preternaturally poised for a kid thrust into that position, and showed the game isn't too big for him. But I agree that there are still plenty of questions about Purdy's ability to excel in the league when he doesn't have an incredible supporting cast around him.

[Big J]

It's insane to think that after 6 games of Purdy dumping the ball off to Deebo, CMC, & Kittle the team is willing to completely commit to him even after he tore up his elbow.

I think that pretty dramatically minimizes the impressiveness of what Purdy did last year as a rookie. He was preternaturally poised for a kid thrust into that position, and showed the game isn't too big for him. But I agree that there are still plenty of questions about Purdy's ability to excel in the league when he doesn't have an incredible supporting cast around him.

I mean, didn't Jimmy go 6-0 in his first 6 niners starts with a significantly worse roster around him?

[CrimsonCrew]

It's insane to think that after 6 games of Purdy dumping the ball off to Deebo, CMC, & Kittle the team is willing to completely commit to him even after he tore up his elbow.

I think that pretty dramatically minimizes the impressiveness of what Purdy did last year as a rookie. He was preternaturally poised for a kid thrust into that position, and showed the game isn't too big for him. But I agree that there are still plenty of questions about Purdy's ability to excel in the league when he doesn't have an incredible supporting cast around him.

I mean, didn't Jimmy go 6-0 in his first 6 niners starts with a significantly worse roster around him?

Jimmy won his first five starts in 2017, and was arguably never that good again. He played really, really well on a bad team.

That said, a few distinctions with what Purdy did over the second half of last season.

Jimmy was a fourth-year pro at that point, not a green rookie. He had absolutely no pressure on him, coming into a team that was already out of playoff contention and had been helmed by CJ Beathard. I think there's a pretty strong argument that the first several teams the Niners played in that run underestimated them.

On the other hand, Purdy was a very late-round rookie who came into a super bowl favorite that was at risk of missing the playoffs. Under him, they not only held on to make the playoffs, the offense became noticeably more effective. He limited the mistakes that plagued Jimmy through his Niners career, and showed slightly more big-play ability.

The offense was surprisingly good under Jimmy in 2017, scoring 28.8 points, but there's a question of just how much of a catalyst Jimmy was, as he threw for six TDs and five INTs (and awfully lucky there weren't several more) in his five starts. He also had a rushing TD. In the first three starts, Robbie Gould had five, four, and six FGs. Those struggles in the red zone were a sign of things to come with Jimmy under center.

On the other hand, Purdy was electric in terms of scoring. They scored 33.5 points per game during the regular season, and he accounted for a big chunk of that with 13 passing TDs and one rushing TD over six games (almost an additional TD per game compared to Garoppolo). He only threw three INTs (also got lucky on a few, though not as many).

Now, Purdy got a disproportionate number of games at home (four of six at home), and didn't face any particularly good defenses, but he rose to the challenges when confronted with them. He struggled against Dallas in the playoffs, though he brought home the win.

As said, I think there are still major questions about Purdy as the long-term answer at QB, but he was really darn impressive for a rookie thrust into a high-pressure situation. I think he's already shown more upside than Jimmy, as his arm strength is comparable, but his vision and escapability are markedly better. Jimmy's mistakes were the thing that kept him from deserving that contract he got, in my view. And as a rookie, we've got to assume Purdy has room to improve. I would be furious if they traded Lance at this point, even though I still have some pretty serious reservations about him, in large part because we need to see Purdy do it for longer. But there are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about Purdy going forward.

[thesack12]

Short of being biased against him (which for whatever reason a sizable contingent of the fanbase sure seems to quickly develop bias against 49er QB's, which is a trend that goes back quite awhile), I don't know how anyone can't be impressed with Brock Purdy last season.

What Purdy was able to accomplish from both an individual and team standpoint would have been highly regarded for any rookie. Yet, Purdy was a 7th rounder and literally the last player picked in the draft. A lot of 7th round rookies don't even make the practice squad, let alone survive final cuts. Yet Purdy got the team to a 6-0 regular season record, and got the team to the NFCCG where he got seriously injured early in the 1st quarter. Super rare for a rookie QB, and completely unprecedented for such a late drafted rookie.

For further reference, since 2000 there have 44 QB's drafted in the 7th round only 7 of which have even made 1 career start: Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Cassel, Matt Flynn, Tim Rattay, Ben Dinucci, Skylar Thompson, and Brock Purdy.

Purdy was the first 7th round rookie QB to start a playoff game since 1950. Overall, QB's drafted in the 7th round have an all time playoff record of 2-5. Brock Purdy's playoff record is 2-1. So that means in the entire history of the NFL no other 7th round QB has won a playoff game, and there has only been 4 other playoff starts not made by Brock Purdy.

As for Brock's play specifically, he showed remarkable poise. His first several games defenses relentlessly blitzed trying to rattle him, and not only did he handle the pressure but he mostly thrived facing it. He consistently got the ball out quickly and with good placement, and many other times he escaped the initial pressure to extend plays and keep the offense moving. For me, his ability to constantly make defenses pay for sending extra pressure, was the most impressive thing.

As for his supporting cast, of course the talent around him helped him. However, please tell me one QB who doesn't benefit from and play better with good talent around them.

Just because Brock might not have a super high ceiling, doesn't mean he's not incredibly impressive.

It remains to be seen whether or not he is the best option at QB moving forward, but you are kidding yourself (or again just biased against him) if you don't think he hasn't deservedly catapulted himself firmly into that equation.

[Bingo_AlphaMan]

Watch on YouTube

[CrimsonCrew]

Watch on YouTube

Some interesting points, and probably some truth behind the optics of a white, underdog QB from middle America pulling himself up by the bootstraps through sheer grit and with the help of his brilliant offensive coach. Though I think it's hard to cast Lynch and Shanahan as caring all that much about their QB's race as they're the team that brought Lance in to begin with, and they have been probably the best organization in the league in terms of advancing the careers of people of color off the field.

Moving on from Kaepernick wasn't about race IMO, it was about the spectacle of Kaepernick off the field combined with the steadily worsening performance on it. Kap was about as far from the ideal Shanahan QB as you can get. Slow processor (on the field; Kaepernick is highly intelligent, but it just never seemed to click for him as a passer/field general), inconsistent/inaccurate passer, excels out of structure, never really improved any of his areas of struggle. He would have made Shanahan literally insane. That said, going to Hoyer was a bizarre move, and backing him up with Beathard is also a real head-scratcher.

This FO has obviously done a lot of great things, but they've gotten some real passes, too, especially if Lance doesn't pan out and they don't pay a price for it. With nothing but Hoyer at QB, they passed on the best QB of his generation in the draft. They went into a season with Hoyer and Beathard. They gave up tons of resources to add Lance, and may move on from him without really giving him a chance. Cohn and that other dude were absolutely right that it would go down as one of, if not the worst, trade up in NFL history. The only saving grace is that, because they made the NFC Championship both future years, they didn't end up giving up a crazy amount of value in picks relative to some other similar moves.

The contrast between SF and Philly was an interesting one and made me chuckle. My wife was born and raised in the Bay Area, then went to college in the Philly area. She got there and was like, "There are a lot more black people in Philadelphia than in the Bay Area." Meanwhile, one of her best friends was from Alabama and was like, "Where are all the black people?" Amusing anecdote, and there are plenty of reasons to question the FO's handling of Lance, but at the end of the day, I don't think it's a race thing.

[Pattersonca65]

Watch on YouTube

Some interesting points, and probably some truth behind the optics of a white, underdog QB from middle America pulling himself up by the bootstraps through sheer grit and with the help of his brilliant offensive coach. Though I think it's hard to cast Lynch and Shanahan as caring all that much about their QB's race as they're the team that brought Lance in to begin with, and they have been probably the best organization in the league in terms of advancing the careers of people of color off the field.

Moving on from Kaepernick wasn't about race IMO, it was about the spectacle of Kaepernick off the field combined with the steadily worsening performance on it. Kap was about as far from the ideal Shanahan QB as you can get. Slow processor (on the field; Kaepernick is highly intelligent, but it just never seemed to click for him as a passer/field general), inconsistent/inaccurate passer, excels out of structure, never really improved any of his areas of struggle. He would have made Shanahan literally insane. That said, going to Hoyer was a bizarre move, and backing him up with Beathard is also a real head-scratcher.

This FO has obviously done a lot of great things, but they've gotten some real passes, too, especially if Lance doesn't pan out and they don't pay a price for it. With nothing but Hoyer at QB, they passed on the best QB of his generation in the draft. They went into a season with Hoyer and Beathard. They gave up tons of resources to add Lance, and may move on from him without really giving him a chance. Cohn and that other dude were absolutely right that it would go down as one of, if not the worst, trade up in NFL history. The only saving grace is that, because they made the NFC Championship both future years, they didn't end up giving up a crazy amount of value in picks relative to some other similar moves.

The contrast between SF and Philly was an interesting one and made me chuckle. My wife was born and raised in the Bay Area, then went to college in the Philly area. She got there and was like, "There are a lot more black people in Philadelphia than in the Bay Area." Meanwhile, one of her best friends was from Alabama and was like, "Where are all the black people?" Amusing anecdote, and there are plenty of reasons to question the FO's handling of Lance, but at the end of the day, I don't think it's a race thing.

Lot of great points. Regarding Kap/Hoyer, at the point Shanahan/Lynch had just taken in over and were looking at rebuilding the roster and installing a new offense/defense. It wasn't about which QB could get a couple more wins on a rebuilding team. For all the reasons mentioned Kap is an awful fit for the type of offense that Shanahan runs and he doesn't even know that offense. He would be trying to figure it out himself. Shanahan could have played a Pistol type offense with Kap and maybe get a couple more wins but that would have been counterproductive. Hoyer did not work out but I understand why he brought Hoyer in. At that time Shanahan wanted to bring someone in who knew his system and can get other players up to speed. It wasn't about winning games. Hoyer had his best year starting under Shanahan. Would have been crazy to think of Hoyer even matching that but they were hoping he could transition. He ended up not even being able to do that. So he was worse than even the middle of the pack play they were hoping for. As far as Lance goes when you give up three firsts and take a QB near the top of the draft their is going to be alot of scrutiny placed on you with high expectations. That is just the way it is. If Lance was a free seventh round draft pick this wouldn't be happening. My biggest question after they drafted Lance was how they were going to handle bringing along a raw inexperienced prospect on a team that doing everything it can to win now. At 20 years old during draft time there shouldn't have been a rush to make him the franchise. guy. Maybe if they had an elite level QB ahead of Lance who still had a couple of years left it would have been a better transition but they knew Jimmy was not their franchise QB when they drafted Lance.