Dallas Cowboys QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by tankle104:
The fact that just about everyone agrees that a player that cost 3 first round picks and is going into his third year of a rookie scale contract with a possible fifth year option has a trade value of a second round pick at best… kind of tells you the player he has been. If he actually played well or showed promise in his few starts, someone would be willing to give up at least a first.

we can say what he currently is just based off of that analysis. We just don't know what he can become if he gets more playing time, he just needs a lot of playing time. He sort of has a double edged sword situation where he's on a very good team that needs to compete week in and out to win it all but he needs more playing time before he becomes reliable in that situation.

star players always find a way to shine, so if that's in him, we will see it this year in camp.

You don't even have to guess at what he would or wouldn't fetch on the trade market. That's really just pure speculation. Instead, look at the actions of the team. If your starting QB (Purdy) was injured and potentially going to miss the beginning of the season, but you believed you had a good player at backup (Lance), you don't go out and sign a veteran to an unprecedented 'QB3' contract and have them compete with QB2. If you believe in what a player currently is, you don't call a meeting with team leaders urging them to support him through coming growing pains, as they did last season, right after signing a guy they hoped to trade (who had no leverage in theory) to an unprecedented QB2 contract. These pieces of evidence, among many others, don't paint the picture that the team feels good about what Lance currently is. You cannot even find comparable examples to these moves with any other team in recent NFL history.

The writing has been on the wall and some just refuse to acknowledge the obvious. Has nothing to do with how fans feel. Try to be objective in analyzing how the team is operating.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by tankle104:
The fact that just about everyone agrees that a player that cost 3 first round picks and is going into his third year of a rookie scale contract with a possible fifth year option has a trade value of a second round pick at best… kind of tells you the player he has been. If he actually played well or showed promise in his few starts, someone would be willing to give up at least a first.

we can say what he currently is just based off of that analysis. We just don't know what he can become if he gets more playing time, he just needs a lot of playing time. He sort of has a double edged sword situation where he's on a very good team that needs to compete week in and out to win it all but he needs more playing time before he becomes reliable in that situation.

star players always find a way to shine, so if that's in him, we will see it this year in camp.

You don't even have to guess at what he would or wouldn't fetch on the trade market. That's really just pure speculation. Instead, look at the actions of the team. If your starting QB (Purdy) was injured and potentially going to miss the beginning of the season, but you believed you had a good player at backup (Lance), you don't go out and sign a veteran to an unprecedented 'QB3' contract and have them compete with QB2. If you believe in what a player currently is, you don't call a meeting with team leaders urging them to support him through coming growing pains, as they did last season, right after signing a guy they hoped to trade (who had no leverage in theory) to an unprecedented QB2 contract. These pieces of evidence, among many others, don't paint the picture that the team feels good about what Lance currently is. You cannot even find comparable examples to these moves with any other team in recent NFL history.

The writing has been on the wall and some just refuse to acknowledge the obvious. Has nothing to do with how fans feel. Try to be objective in analyzing how the team is operating.

Good post. I think he's in a similar boat with Mac. You want to know if he's a stud or dud. I feel CHI and JAX like where they are from that QB class. NYJ has at least enough info to change the direction of the franchise at that spot. NE and SF having open comps this summer is how I see it.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Waterbear:
This comment, along with a lot of takes in this thread, comes to the conclusion that Trey is currently not good enough. You're making a definitive statement about what he is NOT and that he's not going to perform at the level of we expected him to after trading 3 first round picks.

IDK how many times this needs to be repeated, but that's clear BIAS.

The most objective take on Lance IMO is that he's an unknown. Saying Lance will be a future star for this team or making claims like you just did stray further from the reality that we don't know yet.

So while yes, many people have argued Trey needs playing time to fulfill his potential, that's not an admission that he's incapable of getting the job done currently. You're making that claim.

Because you could also make the case that trading away a player you drafted with 3 first round picks for a 3rd round pick, shows just as much bias as the the other way around.

What I would say is that the limited evidence available points to him not being good enough while fully acknowledging that the evidence available to us isn't enough to form a definitive conclusion. On the other side of that coin, there is ZERO evidence (not a lot of evidence, not a limited amount) that points to the fact that he is currently good enough. This isn't bias. It's simply analyzing what is available.

The above, and your comments, are really beside the point anyway. It does not matter what you or I or any other fan thinks. The people in the building have a much larger picture of evidence as to what Lance is (not what he could become), than any of us fans do, and I think they have a clearer picture than some would realize. The signals coming out of that building are pretty clear. Some people are better at putting those pieces together than others.

I'm not trying to be confrontational or anything this kind of logic just bugs me. Over the last several months we've seen comments like, signing Sam Darnold means they're not confident in Trey, the front office doesn't believe in Trey, this comment from John Lynch means they want to trade Trey, Trey isn't respected by his teammates, Trey has no chance to become the starter since he needs reps… and it's all just a bunch of blind assumptions. We may find out these things are true, and it's a valid opinion, but it's not objectively true.

My problem is that you're trying to have it both ways and you can't do that. You can't say there's evidence to prove he's not good enough, and at the same time say there's zero evidence he's good enough.

You call out posters for their personal bias when you said, "The idea that we can't let him go because we have injury problems is colored by personal feelings about Lance."

but this one example you gave about evidence for or against Trey is way more biased IMO. Because unless you admit it's your opinion that there's no evidence Lance can perform well enough, then you're saying it's FACTS. And that's more biased then believing in keeping Trey due to the injuries we've had at the QB position.

It's you OPINION that there's zero evidence for Trey being the guy. Nothing about your statement is objective… it's about as subjective as it gets. Which to be fair, is about 95% of everyone's takes on Lance or Purdy. But you have to admit that.

Grant is an idiot. He was sitting on purdy all training camp. Now he has great mechanics?

The kids only extended playing time is against a bunch of white kids in the middle of Minnesota and a year on a team that wins the little league championship every season without him.

Now the people that invested three 1sts on him are almost making him an after thought going into his 3rd season.

I'm sorry, but combined with his film, I have a pretty good idea that he still wouldn't do well if thrown in there

Crazy trade of the Day

Florio - Straight up trade, Lance for Mac Jones

https://www.si.com/nfl/patriots/news/new-england-patriots-mac-jones-trade-trey-lance-san-francisco-49ers-idea

Thoughts??

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Crazy trade of the Day

Florio - Straight up trade, Lance for Mac Jones

https://www.si.com/nfl/patriots/news/new-england-patriots-mac-jones-trade-trey-lance-san-francisco-49ers-idea

Thoughts??

Yup I posted on that one..

I get it from the NE perspective, if they don't like Mac internally. From our perspective, it would be 100% awkward, as we obviously passed on Mac to select TL. It would be a huge admission that we had no idea what we were doing on draft day, and I don't see us doing it, given the guys making the call are still here. Not sure how Mac helps us either, I think KS is more interested in seeing what Sam can do. TL at least brings different talents to the room, which is probably part of the reason we selected him over Mac to begin with.

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Crazy trade of the Day

Florio - Straight up trade, Lance for Mac Jones

https://www.si.com/nfl/patriots/news/new-england-patriots-mac-jones-trade-trey-lance-san-francisco-49ers-idea

Thoughts??

No! I like Mac better as a backup to Brock than Trey. Though if I'm trading Trey I want to have the potential to flip him for a starter or at the very least an every week contributor.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by tankle104:
The fact that just about everyone agrees that a player that cost 3 first round picks and is going into his third year of a rookie scale contract with a possible fifth year option has a trade value of a second round pick at best… kind of tells you the player he has been. If he actually played well or showed promise in his few starts, someone would be willing to give up at least a first.

we can say what he currently is just based off of that analysis. We just don't know what he can become if he gets more playing time, he just needs a lot of playing time. He sort of has a double edged sword situation where he's on a very good team that needs to compete week in and out to win it all but he needs more playing time before he becomes reliable in that situation.

star players always find a way to shine, so if that's in him, we will see it this year in camp.

You don't even have to guess at what he would or wouldn't fetch on the trade market. That's really just pure speculation. Instead, look at the actions of the team. If your starting QB (Purdy) was injured and potentially going to miss the beginning of the season, but you believed you had a good player at backup (Lance), you don't go out and sign a veteran to an unprecedented 'QB3' contract and have them compete with QB2. If you believe in what a player currently is, you don't call a meeting with team leaders urging them to support him through coming growing pains, as they did last season, right after signing a guy they hoped to trade (who had no leverage in theory) to an unprecedented QB2 contract. These pieces of evidence, among many others, don't paint the picture that the team feels good about what Lance currently is. You cannot even find comparable examples to these moves with any other team in recent NFL history.

The writing has been on the wall and some just refuse to acknowledge the obvious. Has nothing to do with how fans feel. Try to be objective in analyzing how the team is operating.

1." you don't go out and sign a veteran to an unprecedented 'QB3"

Why not? When QB1 will be rehabbing all summer and you recently had to play QB4 in the NFC championship, and you have the cheapest QB room in the NFL, why wouldn't you try to bolster that group? You're jumping to the conclusion that its a sign they don't believe in Trey and its far from objectively true.

2. "you don't call a meeting with team leaders urging them to support him through coming growing pains, as they did last season,"

First of all, are you saying that coachess have never had meetings with their team about a QB situtaion? And do you know for sure the focus of that meeting was about supporting Trey? I would assume no one knows besides the players what the actual conversation was about and IMO they portrayed that meeting in the media as a coversation about how the team felt about Jimmy coming back, not Trey. Again, can't say for sure.

These are not examples of people refusing to acknowledge the obvious. These are obvious reaches.

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Crazy trade of the Day

Florio - Straight up trade, Lance for Mac Jones

https://www.si.com/nfl/patriots/news/new-england-patriots-mac-jones-trade-trey-lance-san-francisco-49ers-idea

Thoughts??

My thoughts are people are running out of content.

Originally posted by Waterbear:
I'm not trying to be confrontational or anything this kind of logic just bugs me. Over the last several months we've seen comments like, signing Sam Darnold means they're not confident in Trey, the front office doesn't believe in Trey, this comment from John Lynch means they want to trade Trey, Trey isn't respected by his teammates, Trey has no chance to become the starter since he needs reps… and it's all just a bunch of blind assumptions. We may find out these things are true, and it's a valid opinion, but it's not objectively true.

My problem is that you're trying to have it both ways and you can't do that. You can't say there's evidence to prove he's not good enough, and at the same time say there's zero evidence he's good enough.

You call out posters for their personal bias when you said, "The idea that we can't let him go because we have injury problems is colored by personal feelings about Lance."

but this one example you gave about evidence for or against Trey is way more biased IMO. Because unless you admit it's your opinion that there's no evidence Lance can perform well enough, then you're saying it's FACTS. And that's more biased then believing in keeping Trey due to the injuries we've had at the QB position.

It's you OPINION that there's zero evidence for Trey being the guy. Nothing about your statement is objective… it's about as subjective as it gets. Which to be fair, is about 95% of everyone's takes on Lance or Purdy. But you have to admit that.

I don't look at this as confrontational so no big deal. It's a conversation about a football team, so it's not personal to me.

Having said that I think you're misinterpreting what I'm saying, in some cases where I'm clearly saying something different. An easy example:

You stated 'You can't say there's evidence to prove he's not good enough, and at the same time say there's zero evidence he's good enough.'

What I actually stated was the evidence was limited and wasn't enough to form a definitive conclusion. Full stop. However, there is at least evidence that points in a direction, which is more than the opposing side of the argument has. Limited evidence makes a stronger argument than no evidence, or an argument made in the face of contrary limited evidence. I will say that maybe I shouldn't say no evidence. Is there evidence he could be successful? Maybe. But you really have to cherry pick what is already a limited picture, and omit the rest, to get there. The overall picture of the limited evidence is that he's not a very good QB right now, and our offense hasn't been successful when he's played.

And again, I'm really not trying to give you my personal opinion on Lance as a player as it does not matter. I'm arguing about how the team views him as a player, and there's more than limited evidence there. I understand people here don't view that evidence the same way, but those people aren't offering alternative explanations for the team's actions that actually make sense. It's like denial. I could use the bet you wanted to make that there was no way we would bring in a 3rd QB to compete with Lance, because we invested so much in him. That bet was lost within weeks. Are you going to reevaluate the evidence given your initial 'analysis' lead to an incorrect conclusion? I would hope so.

I'm also not calling people out for personal bias, other than to say it's the basis for arguments that would make absolutely no sense otherwise without it. Like we can't trade Lance because we have injury problems. You're only going to feel that way if you think highly about Lance. I do not care at all if you do or don't but that is an easily observable fact. If we trade Lance, we sign/draft another QB. Pretty basic.

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Crazy trade of the Day

Florio - Straight up trade, Lance for Mac Jones

https://www.si.com/nfl/patriots/news/new-england-patriots-mac-jones-trade-trey-lance-san-francisco-49ers-idea

Thoughts??

Adding a POS who cheap shots opponents can only F with the culture of the team. He brings nothing to the table that Brock hasn't shown he can do at a higher level, albeit briefly.

It's just another example of Florio never wanting to admit he was wrong.

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Crazy trade of the Day

Florio - Straight up trade, Lance for Mac Jones

https://www.si.com/nfl/patriots/news/new-england-patriots-mac-jones-trade-trey-lance-san-francisco-49ers-idea

Thoughts??

we should propose a similar deal to the CHI Bears.. see what happens

Originally posted by riverrunzthruit:

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:
Safe to say no consensus on Lance throwing mechanics lol

The more video we see of Trey Lance working out the easier it is to see his throwing motion hasn't changed. #49ers

— Jack Hammer (@JackHammer_NFL) April 12, 2023

Trey Lance Has Cleaned Up His Lower Half A Ton! No Longer Drops His Hips As He Is Throwing Which In Turn Keeps The Eye Level Even On His Targets. Should Help With Accuracy Cinsistency. pic.twitter.com/jYFhDzupya

— Jessie🎙 (@JNay_LSS) April 11, 2023

Still straightening his front leg before he releases the ball. Needs to keep working. pic.twitter.com/kDQIlLrFQX

— Grant Cohn (@grantcohn) April 12, 2023

Front leg is bent when the ball is released, then extended afterward. pic.twitter.com/qT5q6u0Ttv

— Grant Cohn (@grantcohn) April 12, 2023

At left: Trey Lance August 2022 (my video from camp)

At right: Trey Lance April 2023 (IG: prestonsmithphotography)

Huge difference in at least this one throw. Lance is holding/releasing the ball much higher and the motion is clearly quicker. Both fixes have been necessary pic.twitter.com/PeFhukUPcw

— David Lombardi (@LombardiHimself) April 6, 2023

Aesthetically pleasing as Vish would say- Purdy and Jimmy have pretty clean mechanics.

Lance loopy release and locked front leg might be why he had accuracy issues? When you seen him at camp?

— Javier Vega (@JavierVeg_) April 12, 2023

all this offseason overhaul on his mechanics... when under pressure of rushing DL they run home to mama and revert back to how they have always thrown the ball

True, only mechanics that matter are when live bullets fly not when in shorts.

Originally posted by Waterbear:
1." you don't go out and sign a veteran to an unprecedented 'QB3"

Why not? When QB1 will be rehabbing all summer and you recently had to play QB4 in the NFC championship, and you have the cheapest QB room in the NFL, why wouldn't you try to bolster that group? You're jumping to the conclusion that its a sign they don't believe in Trey and its far from objectively true.

2. "you don't call a meeting with team leaders urging them to support him through coming growing pains, as they did last season,"

First of all, are you saying that coachess have never had meetings with their team about a QB situtaion? And do you know for sure the focus of that meeting was about supporting Trey? I would assume no one knows besides the players what the actual conversation was about and IMO they portrayed that meeting in the media as a coversation about how the team felt about Jimmy coming back, not Trey. Again, can't say for sure.

These are not examples of people refusing to acknowledge the obvious. These are obvious reaches.

I'm not forming that conclusion based on one piece of evidence. I'm forming it based on many pieces and they're all tied together. I'm not saying they signed Sam to this f**ked up contract and that means they are hedging against Trey. I'm saying it based on many things, including that move. I'd also point out that once again, there isn't much evidence to argue the team DOES believe in Trey. The best argument (and It's not a remotely good one) is effectively that he was named the starter last year and nothing should have changed since then other than he got hurt.

Further, in regards to that one piece of evidence, you don't have to go back far in this thread to before we made this move and see people's arguments against it... and then see them spin it when it happens.