Trey Lance QB NDSU

Originally posted by Ezekiel38:

Originally posted by roasthawg:

Originally posted by ninerFate:

Originally posted by IGSXIII:
As great of an athlete as Lance is, to me the most compelling part of him as a prospect is his brain. The fact that he was able to coordinate a pro-style offense at such a young age, establish himself as the team leader as a freshman, has the smarts to actively improve his mechanical flaws, and reportedly obsesses over football is super impressive. This is why I think he's the target.

I'm fine with either Lance or Fields. The main reason why I give Fields the edge is his toughness, ability to elevate his game/be clutch in a game, and having gone through adversity which has showed up on film ie Clemson and Alabama. More of an It factor. If Lance also has that, I hope they pick it up through film and interviewing him etc.

I don't think Fields is part of the equation. My guess at Shannahans board is Lawrence>Lance>Wilson>Jones

If that's really his board the move to 3 makes even more sense.

I'm not convinced it is. I don't think anyone has a clue what his board looks like and any attempt to say so is mere speculation.

I'm just going to wait until draft night and be happy with whoever we get.

Definitely... I'm in the camp of excited with whoever we get too. I'm having fun trying to figure it out as we go through. I could be dead wrong and Jones or Wilson or even Fields could be the target. No way to know for sure, just an educated guess. Lance coming from that offense with that skill set with the jets looking like they're sights are set on Wilson... That fits the puzzle nicely with the move to three.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by 4ML:

Originally posted by MrNineSeven:
Fields > Lance

You may be right. But, Lance has already played in a system similar to Kyle's and I think he's better suited for his offense. Having said that - I'll be very happy with Fields or Lance.

Aside the head start of familiarity, is there really any benefit in the medium to long run of what system a QB is in or expected to learn if we believe he can be good regardless?

What I mean is Lance may pick it up faster, but there comes a point where you know the system. Mullens knew it, but he didn't have the physical ability so he's a backup etc.

Couple that with the idea the rookie will sit the first year (at least that's what we are told at this point in time lol) and I don't think Lance's current exposure to more pro concepts than Fields matters much.

I like Lance, but I'm of the opinion Fields > Lance. Imo Lance is the biggest unknown. It's obvious Fields and Lance's athleticism and arm talent far surpass Jones. So for me it's which player does Kyle think has it best between the ears.

Basically it comes down to - you've seen a player play that style and excel at it. So it's less of a risk for that system. He understands the plays - the coverages - and he was just 19! Imagine what he can do with that system at 23.

The risk that comes from drafting Lance is - he has played only 1 year and he played on the best team by far in Division II.

But I'm on the opinion that - he played that one year in a similar system - that's less of a risk than someone who played 2 years in a college system.

Originally posted by 4ML:
Basically it comes down to - you've seen a player play that style and excel at it. So it's less of a risk for that system. He understands the plays - the coverages - and he was just 19! Imagine what he can do with that system at 23.

The risk that comes from drafting Lance is - he has played only 1 year and he played on the best team by far in Division II.

But I'm on the opinion that - he played that one year in a similar system - that's less of a risk than someone who played 2 years in a college system.

Agreed, and it's the same thing with Jones (yet people don't talk about it as much) He played in only 1 yr BUT it was also a COVID messed up season. IMO superior talent was by far more important than in past seasons.

Originally posted by 4ML:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by 4ML:

Originally posted by MrNineSeven:
Fields > Lance

You may be right. But, Lance has already played in a system similar to Kyle's and I think he's better suited for his offense. Having said that - I'll be very happy with Fields or Lance.

Aside the head start of familiarity, is there really any benefit in the medium to long run of what system a QB is in or expected to learn if we believe he can be good regardless?

What I mean is Lance may pick it up faster, but there comes a point where you know the system. Mullens knew it, but he didn't have the physical ability so he's a backup etc.

Couple that with the idea the rookie will sit the first year (at least that's what we are told at this point in time lol) and I don't think Lance's current exposure to more pro concepts than Fields matters much.

I like Lance, but I'm of the opinion Fields > Lance. Imo Lance is the biggest unknown. It's obvious Fields and Lance's athleticism and arm talent far surpass Jones. So for me it's which player does Kyle think has it best between the ears.

Basically it comes down to - you've seen a player play that style and excel at it. So it's less of a risk for that system. He understands the plays - the coverages - and he was just 19! Imagine what he can do with that system at 23.

The risk that comes from drafting Lance is - he has played only 1 year and he played on the best team by far in Division II.

But I'm on the opinion that - he played that one year in a similar system - that's less of a risk than someone who played 2 years in a college system.

Fair points. It's a crapshoot, I actually like a lot of the qb in this class. As someone else said. Many daily because they go to obviously bad teams up at the top JG the draft and or bad systems where they can't develop properly.

I think with our team and situation whoever we draft is being setup to succeed which is why I like fields-Lance-Jones (my opinion in their ability etc)

Originally posted by FredFlintstone:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by All_Knowing:
I'm still Lance at #3. Question for everyone saying they needed more film/games. Do people really believe that he wouldn't have gotten even better or perform the same that he had been? Also let's not make out like there's not enough film on him to access his potential and his traits. I honestly feel like if he had played more he wouldn't even be a question for us at #3 or even perhaps the Jets at #2.

He played one game this year vs some of the best competition he's faced. It was one of his worst games and the only game he had a turnover in.

Why wouldn't people question what happens if he played more and vs better competition? Justin Fields had almost no bad tape on him after his first season at OSU.

He plays during this crazy season and suddenly people have issues with him.

The more QBs play means not everything improves. Some guys come out of nowhere, some guys take a nose dive.

You don't think him knowing he only had 1 game to show out he didn't try to do too much? I'm not putting stock in 1 game and I highly doubt he would've regressed this year if he played a whole season. Matter fact I would be willing to bet he would've been in consideration for the Jets

Of course...but isn't that a good indicator how a guy reacts to extreme pressure/stress?

You're making an assumption that he would improve but fact is without seeing it...you have no idea. He wouldn't' be the only guy whose stock went down with more playing time.

That's the benefit of not having to play...if your stock is already high people don't have anything new to get worried about. That's why Justin Fields coming back to play despite being the #2 guy behind Lawrence is so impressive as far as his character is concerned.

Originally posted by genus49:
Of course...but isn't that a good indicator how a guy reacts to extreme pressure/stress?

You're making an assumption that he would improve but fact is without seeing it...you have no idea. He wouldn't' be the only guy whose stock went down with more playing time.

That's the benefit of not having to play...if your stock is already high people don't have anything new to get worried about. That's why Justin Fields coming back to play despite being the #2 guy behind Lawrence is so impressive as far as his character is concerned.

There are two potential definitions for "extreme pressure/stress".
1) Big game pressure
2) Being pressured in the pocket

Let me address both:
1) Undefeated and won a National Championship where he played well and won the game MVP award
2) If you read most scouting reports, you will find something like this quote: "Lance shows zero fear with bodies around him in the pocket.". The stats also back it up.

Originally posted by IceMan1763:
There are two potential definitions for "extreme pressure/stress".
1) Big game pressure
2) Being pressured in the pocket

Let me address both:
1) Undefeated and won a National Championship where he played well and won the game MVP award
2) If you read most scouting reports, you will find something like this quote: "Lance shows zero fear with bodies around him in the pocket.". The stats also back it up.

He played well running the football. I've watched that game multiple times. I've seen little that translated to the NFL overall. The main difference between the FCS and the NFL is that in the NFL, Lance won't be able to run over future insurance salesmen.

Originally posted by IceMan1763:

Originally posted by genus49:
Of course...but isn't that a good indicator how a guy reacts to extreme pressure/stress?

You're making an assumption that he would improve but fact is without seeing it...you have no idea. He wouldn't' be the only guy whose stock went down with more playing time.

That's the benefit of not having to play...if your stock is already high people don't have anything new to get worried about. That's why Justin Fields coming back to play despite being the #2 guy behind Lawrence is so impressive as far as his character is concerned.

There are two potential definitions for "extreme pressure/stress".
1) Big game pressure
2) Being pressured in the pocket

Let me address both:
1) Undefeated and won a National Championship where he played well and won the game MVP award
2) If you read most scouting reports, you will find something like this quote: "Lance shows zero fear with bodies around him in the pocket.". The stats also back it up.

What are you addressing exactly? His competition basically throws a wrench into both things you're trying to address.

What happens when he's in the NFL and everyone is much bigger, faster and stronger and he may not be playing on the best team in the league?

Why is this one game just discounted? You think 1 game in covid season is somehow less pressure than playing in the SB?

Easton Stick had an undefeated season and won a National Championship as well. Lance won his national championship throwing for 72 yards...we still remember the sh*t Jimmy got for throwing for only 77 vs GB? And sure Lance's 166 yards rushing is impressive but running over James Madison is a bit different than running over NFL teams, even the bad ones.

Now I don't want to make it sound like i'm all out on Lance, I'm not. I think his potential is top notch and we've seen other guys make the jump and play well in the NFL. However my preference would be to take a guy who has all the same potential, better accuracy vs better competition. I'm confident Fields could clean up any mechanical flaws(much how Lance did during his time off) and master the pro offense.

Originally posted by genus49:
He played one game this year vs some of the best competition he's faced. It was one of his worst games and the only game he had a turnover in.

Why wouldn't people question what happens if he played more and vs better competition? Justin Fields had almost no bad tape on him after his first season at OSU.

He plays during this crazy season and suddenly people have issues with him.

The more QBs play means not everything improves. Some guys come out of nowhere, some guys take a nose dive.

Don't get me wrong I will be okay if we take Fields, I just would rather Trey at the moment. Fields having almost no bad tape is subjective, Lance had more responsibility setting/reading the offense than Fields did. Lance in his system in college is basically a beginner version of our offense here and he did remarkable.

Originally posted by genus49:
What are you addressing exactly? His competition basically throws a wrench into both things you're trying to address.

What happens when he's in the NFL and everyone is much bigger, faster and stronger and he may not be playing on the best team in the league?

Why is this one game just discounted? You think 1 game in covid season is somehow less pressure than playing in the SB?

Easton Stick had an undefeated season and won a National Championship as well. Lance won his national championship throwing for 72 yards...we still remember the sh*t Jimmy got for throwing for only 77 vs GB? And sure Lance's 166 yards rushing is impressive but running over James Madison is a bit different than running over NFL teams, even the bad ones.

Now I don't want to make it sound like i'm all out on Lance, I'm not. I think his potential is top notch and we've seen other guys make the jump and play well in the NFL. However my preference would be to take a guy who has all the same potential, better accuracy vs better competition. I'm confident Fields could clean up any mechanical flaws(much how Lance did during his time off) and master the pro offense.

I'm addressing the notion that Trey doesn't perform well under pressure. To quote something I just read... I think it's from SIS's 2021 Rookie Handbook... "Pressure is Pressure". The passage was discussing what abilities (based on significant research) translate to the NFL from college for QBs. Handling pocket pressure well is one of them. Funny thing, whether a player played at the FCS or FBS doesn't seem to make a difference. "Pressure is Pressure". Incidentally, I think it's fair to say that applies to National Championship Games too, even at the FCS level. NDSU was an underdog in that game and I really don't think his receivers were open all that much. He had to use his legs and now you seem to want to indict him for not throwing more. What if he didn't have many plays where he could have thrown it beyond the ones he did?

Easton Stick clearly wasn't the athlete that Lance is. If college success correlated directly to NFL success, Tebow would be on about his 6th Super Bowl right now, but no one serious thought he would translate to the NFL. What Lance has displayed on the field a significant number of scouts clearly believe will translate.

To be clear as well, I have Fields and Lance basically tied. I prefer Lance, but Fields should be in every discussion certainly. One reason I prefer Lance is that I don't necessarily love to give SO much credence to just "flat" statistics. Context matters... that's why I prefer advanced statistics/analytics. When you dig into those, the evaluation gets a lot closer. One thing that convinced me that Fields isn't quite as accurate as his statistics would indicate is that his WRs hauled in I believe 20% of his off target passes. That doesn't mean I dislike him as a prospect or think he's "worse" than Lance, but I hope you see my point in being a bit wary of using just "flat" statistics. Incidentally, in the showcase game Lance's WR dropped a 50+ yard touchdown pass that was perfectly thrown and hit him in the hands. Add that play and his admittedly pretty modest throwing stats suddenly look quite a bit better (200 yards 3 passing TDs).

4. TREY LANCE, NORTH DAKOTA STATE
Biggest pro: Physical tools
Lance boasts a cannon for an arm in addition to an ability to carve defenses up on the ground — the modern-day NFL's dream traits at the quarterback position. He can sling it to all levels of the field with ease and is a monster in the designed run game. We saw it in his showcase game this past fall as well as throughout his 2019 campaign.

Lance found the endzone for 10-plus yard touchdown runs on 10 occasions in his time starting at NDSU, which is double that of any quarterback on this list despite him playing just one game in 2020. Lance also averaged an impressive 13.4 yards per designed run. Obviously, the level of competition has a lot to do with that, but it goes to show what he can accomplish on the ground with his athleticism.

Biggest con: Accuracy
Some quarterbacks on this list have only minor or moderate weaknesses, but this is a massive concern for Lance. It isn't like Trevor Lawrence, who has flashed bouts of inaccuracy every once in a while; Lance has consistently been inaccurate.

Over the past two seasons, he ranks dead last in percentage of accurate throws beyond the line of scrimmage (44.1%) among the quarterbacks on this list. Not only is that the lowest mark, but it's the worst by a country mile — 7.5 percentage points. Comparing that to all first-round quarterbacks since 2017, it'd still rank last by a comfortable margin. And Lance did this by throwing to a tight or closing window at the lowest rate among that group.

Accuracy is king, and Lance is going to need to have an anomalous turnaround, akin to that of Josh Allen this past season, to overcome this flaw.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 4ML:
Basically it comes down to - you've seen a player play that style and excel at it. So it's less of a risk for that system. He understands the plays - the coverages - and he was just 19! Imagine what he can do with that system at 23.

The risk that comes from drafting Lance is - he has played only 1 year and he played on the best team by far in Division II.

But I'm on the opinion that - he played that one year in a similar system - that's less of a risk than someone who played 2 years in a college system.

Agreed, and it's the same thing with Jones (yet people don't talk about it as much) He played in only 1 yr BUT it was also a COVID messed up season. IMO superior talent was by far more important than in past seasons.

For sure.

Originally posted by genus49:
Of course...but isn't that a good indicator how a guy reacts to extreme pressure/stress?

You're making an assumption that he would improve but fact is without seeing it...you have no idea. He wouldn't' be the only guy whose stock went down with more playing time.

That's the benefit of not having to play...if your stock is already high people don't have anything new to get worried about. That's why Justin Fields coming back to play despite being the #2 guy behind Lawrence is so impressive as far as his character is concerned.

This is where I think talking and interviewing the guy is crucial. If he has all the physical tools as seen on the film and you interview him and throw different concepts at him and he is grasping them quickly - it'd seem like he also has mental tools. Also, having a good grasp of pro-offense at age 19 is also pretty impressive.

Then you find out what kind of work ethic he has and you talk to the ppl around him and maybe ask him for a 2nd pro day.

He was 19 when he last played. I think it's fair to say - if all of the above boxes check out - he has potential to drastically improve and quite possibly more than any other QB in this draft.

Originally posted by krizay:

4. TREY LANCE, NORTH DAKOTA STATE
Biggest pro: Physical tools
Lance boasts a cannon for an arm in addition to an ability to carve defenses up on the ground — the modern-day NFL's dream traits at the quarterback position. He can sling it to all levels of the field with ease and is a monster in the designed run game. We saw it in his showcase game this past fall as well as throughout his 2019 campaign.

Lance found the endzone for 10-plus yard touchdown runs on 10 occasions in his time starting at NDSU, which is double that of any quarterback on this list despite him playing just one game in 2020. Lance also averaged an impressive 13.4 yards per designed run. Obviously, the level of competition has a lot to do with that, but it goes to show what he can accomplish on the ground with his athleticism.

Biggest con: Accuracy
Some quarterbacks on this list have only minor or moderate weaknesses, but this is a massive concern for Lance. It isn't like Trevor Lawrence, who has flashed bouts of inaccuracy every once in a while; Lance has consistently been inaccurate.

Over the past two seasons, he ranks dead last in percentage of accurate throws beyond the line of scrimmage (44.1%) among the quarterbacks on this list. Not only is that the lowest mark, but it's the worst by a country mile — 7.5 percentage points. Comparing that to all first-round quarterbacks since 2017, it'd still rank last by a comfortable margin. And Lance did this by throwing to a tight or closing window at the lowest rate among that group.

Accuracy is king, and Lance is going to need to have an anomalous turnaround, akin to that of Josh Allen this past season, to overcome this flaw.

He doesn't throw often and when he does, he's too often off the mark. He could be another Josh Allen but Josh Allen himself was a glitch in the Matrix. Historically, QBs like Allen that struggled with their accuracy in college tend to bust at a high rate.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
He doesn't throw often and when he does, he's too often off the mark. He could be another Josh Allen but Josh Allen himself was a glitch in the Matrix. Historically, QBs like Allen that struggled with their accuracy in college tend to bust at a high rate.

Hell, Josh Allen's 2020 season could turn out to be a glitch in the matrix. Let's see him do it again before we crown him.