Trey Lance QB NDSU

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
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.

I think there are some other major differences as well:

1. Exponentially better coaching - on every level
2. Receivers who are better at route running - body control - adjusting to the ball in the air - catching the ball
3. Better run blocking for the QB - especially in the 49ers system where wide-outs can block too
4. Better protection from the refs for the QBs in the pro-game
5. Tackling is not all that great in the pro-game - so he may not be running over future salesmen - he'd still be running over a bunch of players who are allergic to tackling

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.

Agreed! I wasn't an Allen fan and not a Lance fan.

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.

We are talking about his accuracy issues at the age of 19? Also, he gets knocked down for playing in Div II but his Wrs were running pro-routes and had great body control to adjust to throws when the ball is in the air? I think a lot of top of the line WRs in college can make a QB look more accurate.

Lance's fault was - he was good enough at 19 to be the starting QB at his college.

Originally posted by krizay:

4. TREY LANCE, NORTH DAKOTA STATE
<Snip for brevity>
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.

I find this to be very lazy, clickbaity content which I wouldn't expect from PFF (that's where this is from right?).

The advanced metric On Target % or really any advanced metric which eliminates things out of the QB's control (drops, etc.) is a FAR better measurement:

On target %:
1) JLaw 85%
2) Jones 85%
3) Wilson 83%
4) Lance 77%
5) Fields 74%

In the book this is sourced from (2021 rookie handbook from SIS), consistent accuracy is listed as a concern for BOTH Fields and Lance. That being said, they have Fields as their #2 QB because accuracy isn't everything, obviously. Also Fields fares a bit better in some other advanced accuracy metrics compared to this one, FYI. Wilson is their #3, Lance is #4, but one reason I think Lance can be legitimately bumped up is because a huge knock was that his throwing motion was too elongated. The book was released before his Pro Day, however, and I believe his Pro Day showed that the work he's doing with Avery and Palmer is paying off. I thought his throwing motion looked cleaner, but I'm no scout either. I think the way he shot up mocks after the Pro Day seems to indicate that at least some scouts feel the same way.

Still think he's the guy even though I'd prefer Fields.

at least lance has a good, compact, quick throwing motion compared to field's retarded mechanics.

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
at least lance has a good, compact, quick throwing motion compared to field's retarded mechanics.

Damn dude, There's a list of QBs that have a dip in their throwing motion. It's not really that big of any issue

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
at least lance has a good, compact, quick throwing motion compared to field's retarded mechanics.

Damn dude, There's a list of QBs that have a dip in their throwing motion. It's not really that big of any issue

I think its fixable, its really noticeable when he's throwing check downs and shallow routes.

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
at least lance has a good, compact, quick throwing motion compared to field's retarded mechanics.

That is actually a good point. Lance has a better releaser and throwing motion. Fields motion is way to slow for NFL speed,

Originally posted by 4ML:
I think there are some other major differences as well:

1. Exponentially better coaching - on every level
2. Receivers who are better at route running - body control - adjusting to the ball in the air - catching the ball
3. Better run blocking for the QB - especially in the 49ers system where wide-outs can block too
4. Better protection from the refs for the QBs in the pro-game
5. Tackling is not all that great in the pro-game - so he may not be running over future salesmen - he'd still be running over a bunch of players who are allergic to tackling

You can apply the same conditions to any QB in this draft. Everyone will get better coaching in the NFL, everyone will be playing with better receivers, everyone will get protection from refs but you still don't want your expensive investment running with the football constantly.

In the end you're still going to want a quarterback that can win from the pocket, that if you need them to, they can sit back there and fire it off 25+ times if the run game isn't going. We've seen that from Fields, we've seen that from Lawrence, we've seen that from Mac Jones, we really haven't seen that from Lance. In the biggest game of his college career, he threw the football ten times and ran it thirty times.

Maybe he develops that ability, its certainly possible but as thl mentioned, if you draft Lance you're basically hoping he becomes Fields. Why not just draft Fields who has similar upside but is already much more proven?

Originally posted by 4ML:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
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.

I think there are some other major differences as well:

1. Exponentially better coaching - on every level
2. Receivers who are better at route running - body control - adjusting to the ball in the air - catching the ball
3. Better run blocking for the QB - especially in the 49ers system where wide-outs can block too
4. Better protection from the refs for the QBs in the pro-game
5. Tackling is not all that great in the pro-game - so he may not be running over future salesmen - he'd still be running over a bunch of players who are allergic to tackling

Did you really compare tackling in the FCS to the NFL?

Originally posted by 4ML:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
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.

I think there are some other major differences as well:

1. Exponentially better coaching - on every level
2. Receivers who are better at route running - body control - adjusting to the ball in the air - catching the ball
3. Better run blocking for the QB - especially in the 49ers system where wide-outs can block too
4. Better protection from the refs for the QBs in the pro-game
5. Tackling is not all that great in the pro-game - so he may not be running over future salesmen - he'd still be running over a bunch of players who are allergic to tackling

Some of this is DISadvantageous, not advantageous. He will have to process quicker now that both his wrs and the dbs covering them will be faster physically and mentally.

Lance already has plays where he sees an open guy but dances around to get a better lane. He's going to be in for a rude training camp welcome doing that. Hopefully it breaks him of the habit quickly and he learns how to better throw people open, anticipate better and throw over defenders in his line of sight better. Guys aren't open nearly as long.

But like I said, a few picks in training camp ought to be enough to break that habit. Hopefully (if he's a 49er; otherwise I hope he gets worse).

Originally posted by IceMan1763:

Originally posted by krizay:

4. TREY LANCE, NORTH DAKOTA STATE
<Snip for brevity>
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.

I find this to be very lazy, clickbaity content which I wouldn't expect from PFF (that's where this is from right?).

The advanced metric On Target % or really any advanced metric which eliminates things out of the QB's control (drops, etc.) is a FAR better measurement:

On target %:
1) JLaw 85%
2) Jones 85%
3) Wilson 83%
4) Lance 77%
5) Fields 74%

In the book this is sourced from (2021 rookie handbook from SIS), consistent accuracy is listed as a concern for BOTH Fields and Lance. That being said, they have Fields as their #2 QB because accuracy isn't everything, obviously. Also Fields fares a bit better in some other advanced accuracy metrics compared to this one, FYI. Wilson is their #3, Lance is #4, but one reason I think Lance can be legitimately bumped up is because a huge knock was that his throwing motion was too elongated. The book was released before his Pro Day, however, and I believe his Pro Day showed that the work he's doing with Avery and Palmer is paying off. I thought his throwing motion looked cleaner, but I'm no scout either. I think the way he shot up mocks after the Pro Day seems to indicate that at least some scouts feel the same way.

Got a link for that source? Any spot which has Fields last in accuracy needs a link.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by 4ML:
I think there are some other major differences as well:

1. Exponentially better coaching - on every level
2. Receivers who are better at route running - body control - adjusting to the ball in the air - catching the ball
3. Better run blocking for the QB - especially in the 49ers system where wide-outs can block too
4. Better protection from the refs for the QBs in the pro-game
5. Tackling is not all that great in the pro-game - so he may not be running over future salesmen - he'd still be running over a bunch of players who are allergic to tackling

You can apply the same conditions to any QB in this draft. Everyone will get better coaching in the NFL, everyone will be playing with better receivers, everyone will get protection from refs but you still don't want your expensive investment running with the football constantly.

In the end you're still going to want a quarterback that can win from the pocket, that if you need them to, they can sit back there and fire it off 25+ times if the run game isn't going. We've seen that from Fields, we've seen that from Lawrence, we've seen that from Mac Jones, we really haven't seen that from Lance. In the biggest game of his college career, he threw the football ten times and ran it thirty times.

Maybe he develops that ability, its certainly possible but as thl mentioned, if you draft Lance you're basically hoping he becomes Fields. Why not just draft Fields who has similar upside but is already much more proven?

Can't really apply that to QBs like Lawrence and Mac Jones - who have excellent coaching staffs and have some of the top Wrs.

Better protection from refs and better blocking from receivers is also something that's more helpful for a QB that is athletic - as they tend to keep the play alive longer.

And obviously - you draft Lance if you think he will be better than Fields.