Dallas Cowboys QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Chance:
All elite QBs have those balls, and you know it. But you don't lead the league in QB rating by just lucking out. The tape was elite. The numbers back that up. Like I said, he was arguably the best QB while he played.

This was all elite?

I present to you, every Brock Purdy interceptable pass pic.twitter.com/l3kJXi6lUg

— Parker (@ParkerLewes) January 26, 2023

now not all these throws are just on him, but some Niners fans have full on drank the kool-aid and all I'm saying is there's work to be done there. IMO the more he played he seemed to hold onto the ball a little longer. He's gotta work on that enteral clock and throw with more anticipation.

I want to also make this totally clear. I like Brock it was awesome to see the offense go with him. It wasn't all elite like you said though. I'm just keeping it real

Agenda driven and you know it. Argumentative fallacies:

• cherry picking
• strawman

You're better than this. I won't entertain this nonsense.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Chance:
Mahomes has a career passer rating 6 points below Brock's career passer rating. The difference, and an important one, is that Mahomes has sustained that level of play. Why are we pretending that 111 passser rating isn't HOF level play?

Lol wait you're comparing Mahomes over his whole career vs Bock's 5 starts? Come on dude.

I clearly qualify that Mahomes has sustained that level of play. My point was that 111 passer rating puts Brock among the elite while he has been on the field. That's the argument. Stick to it.

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by Chance:
I'm not saying he will sustain that level of play, but his only tape is elite HOF level QB play. The difference between Brock and HOF QBs is being able to sustain that level of play for many seasons, not just a handful of games. But the stats don't lie, he was sensational.

I agree near fully with this statement

I don't think he was playing at a HOF level.

If you build a long career at 111 passer rating, you will be a first ballot HOFer.

Passer rating is meaningless Matt Schaub is 10th all time in passer rating.

Originally posted by Chance:
Agenda driven and you know it. Argumentative fallacies:

• cherry picking
• strawman

You're better than this. I won't entertain this nonsense.

Lol showing you a plethora of throws that were bad is cherry picking? It's called being objective. I don't think he was playing at some HOF level or prime Montana. You making claims like that is the agenda here. You not keeping it real is the agenda.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Chance:
Mahomes has a career passer rating 6 points below Brock's career passer rating. The difference, and an important one, is that Mahomes has sustained that level of play. Why are we pretending that 111 passser rating isn't HOF level play?

Lol wait you're comparing Mahomes over his whole career vs Bock's 5 starts? Come on dude. Andy Dalton had a 107 passer rating one full year at Cinci. HOFer

Ok I just now realize we're in the Trey Lance thread discussing Brock Purdy as a HOFer. I almost forgot that I'm supposed to be 46 years old now

Originally posted by Chance:
I clearly qualify that Mahomes has sustained that level of play. My point was that 111 passer rating puts Brock among the elite while he has been on the field. That's the argument. Stick to it.

Andy Dalton had a 107 passer rating over a full season. Big deal. Passer rating is a weird stat to proclaim anything imo.

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Jcool:
I don't think he was playing at a HOF level.

Right? People love to exaggerate one way or the other.

Mahomes has a career passer rating 6 points below Brock's career passer rating. The difference, and an important one, is that Mahomes has sustained that level of play. Why are we pretending that 111 passser rating isn't HOF level play?

It's crazy to even try and compare Brock to Mahomes. Mahomes is a bigger and probably tougher athlete with better mobility and a far better arm. Mahomes has a much bigger resume. Over a long stretch, things like passer rating will tend to go up or down at h first until there is a big enough sample size. One or two good or bad games can have a huge effect on QBR when you have only played 7 games. JG looked great after his first 5 games but the more he played the more people saw his limitations and realized he wasn't more than a mid pack QB. Good but certainly not great.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by Chance:
I'm not saying he will sustain that level of play, but his only tape is elite HOF level QB play. The difference between Brock and HOF QBs is being able to sustain that level of play for many seasons, not just a handful of games. But the stats don't lie, he was sensational.

I agree near fully with this statement

I don't think he was playing at a HOF level.

If you build a long career at 111 passer rating, you will be a first ballot HOFer.

Passer rating is meaningless Matt Schaub is 10th all time in passer rating.

If Matt Shaub had a 111 passer rating, he'd be in the HOF. Passer rating is not the be-all-end-all but it it's far from meaningless.

Deion Sanders would tell you that a HOF player is one you'd pay to see play and was must see TV when on the field. Brock has a little more to go before he gets to that level

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by Chance:
I know it sounds like hyperbole, but the point is that Brock has only put elite tape out there. This offense was a juggernaut under his QB play. I have a feeling there will be growing pains, but let's not mince words elite play is elite play. Please prove otherwise.

Purdy won battles Montana won wars and got the chip and had to beat Lawrence Taylor along the way. Brock played elite in my opinion but I kept hearing we had inferior QB play to our playoff opponents. We kept hearing Brock was a product of our system and the talent around him. I like Brock but we finished where we did with Jimmy who I also liked but I understand why we moved on from him

And elite tape is an exaggeration. We saw plenty of drop INTs, missed reads, floating balls etc. which is totally fine. He's a rookie s**t happens.

overall he played well beyond what anyone expected. Saying he was the best QB in the league is simply not true.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by Chance:
I know it sounds like hyperbole, but the point is that Brock has only put elite tape out there. This offense was a juggernaut under his QB play. I have a feeling there will be growing pains, but let's not mince words elite play is elite play. Please prove otherwise.

Purdy won battles Montana won wars and got the chip and had to beat Lawrence Taylor along the way. Brock played elite in my opinion but I kept hearing we had inferior QB play to our playoff opponents. We kept hearing Brock was a product of our system and the talent around him. I like Brock but we finished where we did with Jimmy who I also liked but I understand why we moved on from him

And elite tape is an exaggeration. We saw plenty of drop INTs, missed reads, floating balls etc. which is totally fine. He's a rookie s**t happens.

overall he played well beyond what anyone expected. Saying he was the best QB in the league is simply not true.

II dis agree that his tape doesn't show elite play. It's not the negative plays it's the positive plays that make an elite tape. And there was plenty of improvisational decision making that was clear and calm, plenty of instinctive shimmies that created time in the pocket and plenty of early recognition to get the ball downfield to playmakers who receive the ball in the end zone. That is all Elite tape. Regardless of the mistakes

You can argue about whether he's the best in the league or not but he performed as if he was one of the top 10 for sure.

The other part of the discussion is where is Trey at? That is a different discussion. Is Trey going to be ready to lead the team to wins next year? No one really knows. My guess is he would be around a 500 quarterback for us maybe a little more maybe a little less.

Is Jed going to roll with that with his 200 million dollar payroll? Probably not.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Chance:
Agenda driven and you know it. Argumentative fallacies:

• cherry picking
• strawman

You're better than this. I won't entertain this nonsense.

Lol showing you a plethora of throws that were bad is cherry picking? It's called being objective. I don't think he was playing at some HOF level or prime Montana. You making claims like that is the agenda here. You not keeping it real is the agenda.

You could make a cut up of any QB over a short stretch and make them look like a CFL third stringer. It's completely agenda driven, thus cherry-picking.

My argument has never been that Brock is perfect and every throw he makes is god's gift to man. That's a strawman.

That's as far as I'll go to entertain this nonsense.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Jcool:
I don't think he was playing at a HOF level.

Right? People love to exaggerate one way or the other.

Mahomes has a career passer rating 6 points below Brock's career passer rating. The difference, and an important one, is that Mahomes has sustained that level of play. Why are we pretending that 111 passser rating isn't HOF level play?

It's crazy to even try and compare Brock to Mahomes. Mahomes is a bigger and probably tougher athlete with better mobility and a far better arm. Mahomes has a much bigger resume. Over a long stretch, things like passer rating will tend to go up or down at h first until there is a big enough sample size. One or two good or bad games can have a huge effect on QBR when you have only played 7 games. JG looked great after his first 5 games but the more he played the more people saw his limitations and realized he wasn't more than a mid pack QB. Good but certainly not great.

I'm not comparing the two. I clearly qualify that.

I'm demonstrating that a modern era QB thought of as one of the best starts to any QB's career, who has the highest passer rating in the history of the game at 105 is still under Purdy's passer rating of 111. Meaning, Purdy has been elite while he's been on the field. Not that Purdy will be as good as Mahomes, just that his tape thusfar is elite. This should not be a difficult concept to digest and argue in good-faith.

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by Chance:
I'm not saying he will sustain that level of play, but his only tape is elite HOF level QB play. The difference between Brock and HOF QBs is being able to sustain that level of play for many seasons, not just a handful of games. But the stats don't lie, he was sensational.

I agree near fully with this statement

I don't think he was playing at a HOF level.

If you build a long career at 111 passer rating, you will be a first ballot HOFer.

Passer rating is meaningless Matt Schaub is 10th all time in passer rating.

If Matt Shaub had a 111 passer rating, he'd be in the HOF. Passer rating is not the be-all-end-all but it it's far from meaningless.

No its pretty meaningless. Matt Schaub, Chad Pennington & Daunte Culpepper have a high QB rating then Dan Marino, Warren Moon, Jim Kelly, Brett Favre and John Elway.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by Chance:
I'm not saying he will sustain that level of play, but his only tape is elite HOF level QB play. The difference between Brock and HOF QBs is being able to sustain that level of play for many seasons, not just a handful of games. But the stats don't lie, he was sensational.

I agree near fully with this statement

I don't think he was playing at a HOF level.

If you build a long career at 111 passer rating, you will be a first ballot HOFer.

Passer rating is meaningless Matt Schaub is 10th all time in passer rating.

If Matt Shaub had a 111 passer rating, he'd be in the HOF. Passer rating is not the be-all-end-all but it it's far from meaningless.

No its pretty meaningless. Matt Schaub, Chad Pennington & Daunte Culpepper have a high QB rating then Dan Marino, Warren Moon, Jim Kelly, Brett Favre and John Elway.

Modern QBs in general have higher QB ratings. It's a product of a changing game. It's why I used Mahomes as a standard and not someone like Brady. I'm fully aware of the imperfection of QB rating. All that said, my argument is that if a QB has a career QB rating of 111 sustained over many seasons, then they'd be a HOFer. It's not a very controversial take. 111 QB rating is elite any way you slice it.

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Jcool:
I don't think he was playing at a HOF level.

Right? People love to exaggerate one way or the other.

Mahomes has a career passer rating 6 points below Brock's career passer rating. The difference, and an important one, is that Mahomes has sustained that level of play. Why are we pretending that 111 passser rating isn't HOF level play?

It's crazy to even try and compare Brock to Mahomes. Mahomes is a bigger and probably tougher athlete with better mobility and a far better arm. Mahomes has a much bigger resume. Over a long stretch, things like passer rating will tend to go up or down at h first until there is a big enough sample size. One or two good or bad games can have a huge effect on QBR when you have only played 7 games. JG looked great after his first 5 games but the more he played the more people saw his limitations and realized he wasn't more than a mid pack QB. Good but certainly not great.

I'm not comparing the two. I clearly qualify that.

I'm demonstrating that a modern era QB thought of as one of the best starts to any QB's career, who has the highest passer rating in the history of the game at 105 is still under Purdy's passer rating of 111. Meaning, Purdy has been elite while he's been on the field. Not that Purdy will be as good as Mahomes, just that his tape thusfar is elite. This should not be a difficult concept to digest and argue in good-faith.

I still have to question that thinking. Purdy has been very good in his brief time. He's showed the ability to run Kyle's offense without making mistakes but it's a small sample size. Passer rating is only one stat and it's not the best way to evaluate a QB. QBR is a little better but still relies too much on numbers and not the actual performance. Things like how difficult were the throws? Who were the receivers? What teams were they facing? What type's of passes were the 2 asked to make? These are just a few things that go into evaluating a QB.

If Purdy can continue to play like he did then he will indeed be in the upper echelon but right now he's still somewhat of a question mark. We don't know if he can continue to play like he did or will defenses recognize his weaknesses. Will he be okay after surgery or will he struggle for awhile? We don't know yet. I'm not ready to go all in on a guy that has physical limitations based on what I saw in 7 games. It was encouraging but I've been encouraged too many times only to get burned.