QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by tankle104:
I seriously was crying laughing as I was typing this up. I didn't realize it was that bad. He has touchdowns from when he would do trick packages with Jimmy but he's only got 2 touchdowns when he starts over three games.

He had two TDs in his half of play against Seattle in 21 when Jimmy got hurt. Stats are stats. They can tell you something but they can also be very misleading. I think that Texans game is a good example. His basic stat line was pretty good. His actual performance really wasn't. It's how you end up with statistical discrepancies like his passer rating being 116 and his QBR (which I know people s**t on) being 37.

Didn't Trey force two pass interference calls vs the Texans? If I remember right, those penalties flipped the field for us. With that in mind, wouldn't his stat line be worse than his actual performance?

Again, for the record. I'm completely content with Brock being the future. I still don't see the logic in diminishing Trey or hyping him up. He's an incomplete grade while Purdy has an A so far.

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by dcjm1981:
Unfortunately, Purdy will not be ready to begin the season and Shanahan will give Lance every opportunity to win the position so he can try and save his reputation for the horrendous draft of Lance. Hopefully Purdy is not out for too many games so Lance does not put the 49ers to far behind the 8 ball before they can bench him

I personally thinks Purdy has convinced kyle to realize that Purdy is the way to go and is going to do everything to make sure Purdy plays. I think treys lack of development over 2 years has frustrated him (although not all treys fault) and once he got a feel for the football chemistry between kyle and Purdy, he is convinced.

he won't give up on Lance but I don't think he is eager to get him in the starting role. He will say the right things though and nothing publically until probably towards end of camp - which is when we will all know if Purdy will be healthy enough to play week 1.

Exactly, tankle - great post, but I think the writing has been on the wall since Brock appeared before our eyes last year.

I really think that Purdy's injury hurt the fan base so much, and it's such a rare/unknown injury, that many accepted that he will never be the same and/or ready to play this upcoming season.

either way - we have an extremely talented QB room overall with Purdy, Lance, and Darnold. Reading about camp is going to be a blast

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by tankle104:
I seriously was crying laughing as I was typing this up. I didn't realize it was that bad. He has touchdowns from when he would do trick packages with Jimmy but he's only got 2 touchdowns when he starts over three games.

He had two TDs in his half of play against Seattle in 21 when Jimmy got hurt. Stats are stats. They can tell you something but they can also be very misleading. I think that Texans game is a good example. His basic stat line was pretty good. His actual performance really wasn't. It's how you end up with statistical discrepancies like his passer rating being 116 and his QBR (which I know people s**t on) being 37.

Didn't Trey force two pass interference calls vs the Texans? If I remember right, those penalties flipped the field for us. With that in mind, wouldn't his stat line be worse than his actual performance?

Again, for the record. I'm completely content with Brock being the future. I still don't see the logic in diminishing Trey or hyping him up. He's an incomplete grade while Purdy has an A so far.

Just to be clear, I don't think treys performance in his three starts defines who he will be as a player in this league. I've said it before, I think he will eventually be a good qb in this league, but just good.

his performance though does exemplify how raw he really is and should cause concern regarding how long will he need to get to being a decent qb. I feel like he needs 1.5-2 years of starts before he becomes effective enough to depend on him and not try to protect him. I really hope that doesn't happen

there is no way to chop it - he's thrown 2 touchdowns, 3 picks, extremely inaccurate with 55%, all against bad teams (edit: I was corrected. The cards weren't a bad team) while he has a stacked roster and great coaching. Team averages 14 PPG with him at the helm. He's had good plays here and there but they don't justify how many bad/poor plays he's had. I think it's important to look at it through this context because this is how he performed when the gameplan was designed for his skill set, he practiced it all week, and the other team prepped for him. His other stats were trick packages and/or the other team didn't expect him to play. I just don't understand what I'm missing and others are seeing and why they're so optimistic he will become great.

his ceiling is often talked about but no one mentions his floor, which so far, has been very low.

i personally don't want to see him on the field. It's really rough to watch as a whole.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by dcjm1981:
Unfortunately, Purdy will not be ready to begin the season and Shanahan will give Lance every opportunity to win the position so he can try and save his reputation for the horrendous draft of Lance. Hopefully Purdy is not out for too many games so Lance does not put the 49ers to far behind the 8 ball before they can bench him

I personally thinks Purdy has convinced kyle to realize that Purdy is the way to go and is going to do everything to make sure Purdy plays. I think treys lack of development over 2 years has frustrated him (although not all treys fault) and once he got a feel for the football chemistry between kyle and Purdy, he is convinced.

he won't give up on Lance but I don't think he is eager to get him in the starting role. He will say the right things though and nothing publically until probably towards end of camp - which is when we will all know if Purdy will be healthy enough to play week 1.

Exactly, tankle - great post, but I think the writing has been on the wall since Brock appeared before our eyes last year.

I really think that Purdy's injury hurt the fan base so much, and it's such a rare/unknown injury, that many accepted that he will never be the same and/or ready to play this upcoming season.

either way - we have an extremely talented QB room overall with Purdy, Lance, and Darnold. Reading about camp is going to be a blast

This has got to best time to be a Niner fan since Joe, Ronnie and Dwight and the 80's teams. I'm jacked.

Originally posted by Waterbear:
Didn't Trey force two pass interference calls vs the Texans? If I remember right, those penalties flipped the field for us. With that in mind, wouldn't his stat line be worse than his actual performance?

Again, for the record. I'm completely content with Brock being the future. I still don't see the logic in diminishing Trey or hyping him up. He's an incomplete grade while Purdy has an A so far.

That's certainly something that wouldn't be reflected in his stat line. My argument is that stat lines can be misleading. That obviously works both ways.

The Texans game was just a broad example of that. If you look at the basic stats most people use like total yardage, completion percentage, yards per attempt, passer rating, etc, you might think Trey had a great performance. In reality the game was a slog offensively for the better part of 3 quarters and his performance was uneven at best. I would say he looked to settle a bit as the game went on... thankfully, lol.

Originally posted by mayo49:
This has got to best time to be a Niner fan since Joe, Ronnie and Dwight and the 80's teams. I'm jacked.

Weirdly, I'm very excited to see the havoc our d line wreaks this year. I don't think people realize how ridiculously effective Bosa-Gravedigger- armstead - Jackson(?) Will be. It's insane lol

then you factor in C Ward, Huff, Greenlaw, Warner, Gipson (reliable and at least catches the pics), demmonaire (how ever the hell it spelled haha) showed huge growth at the end of the season.

i really think this defense has a chance to challenge the 2013 Seahawks for how dominant it was

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Waterbear:
Didn't Trey force two pass interference calls vs the Texans? If I remember right, those penalties flipped the field for us. With that in mind, wouldn't his stat line be worse than his actual performance?

Again, for the record. I'm completely content with Brock being the future. I still don't see the logic in diminishing Trey or hyping him up. He's an incomplete grade while Purdy has an A so far.

That's certainly something that wouldn't be reflected in his stat line. My argument is that stat lines can be misleading. That obviously works both ways.

The Texans game was just a broad example of that. If you look at the basic stats most people use like total yardage, completion percentage, yards per attempt, passer rating, etc, you might think Trey had a great performance. In reality the game was a slog offensively for the better part of 3 quarters and his performance was uneven at best. I would say he looked to settle a bit as the game went on... thankfully, lol.

It was very boom or bust. Very choppy and inefficient. Now he def played better in that game than any other, I was very happy to see that, but if Texans were a better team - I'm not so sure we would have won.

but we did - so kudos to Trey. He can only play who's in front of him. It kept our playoff hopes Alive to, which was great.

Originally posted by tankle104:
It was very boom or bust. Very choppy and inefficient. Now he def played better in that game than any other, I was very happy to see that, but if Texans were a better team - I'm not so sure we would have won.

but we did - so kudos to Trey. He can only play who's in front of him. It kept our playoff hopes Alive to, which was great.

I wanted him to look great. Would have been awesome to supplant injured Jimmy G going into a win or take all week 17 game with the Rams, and into the playoffs where Jimmy would get further injured.

Jimmy G is a great example of statistical performance not necessarily matching quality of play. Top 5 in such and such stat. Not close to top 5 quarterback.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by tankle104:
I seriously was crying laughing as I was typing this up. I didn't realize it was that bad. He has touchdowns from when he would do trick packages with Jimmy but he's only got 2 touchdowns when he starts over three games.

He had two TDs in his half of play against Seattle in 21 when Jimmy got hurt. Stats are stats. They can tell you something but they can also be very misleading. I think that Texans game is a good example. His basic stat line was pretty good. His actual performance really wasn't. It's how you end up with statistical discrepancies like his passer rating being 116 and his QBR (which I know people s**t on) being 37.

Didn't Trey force two pass interference calls vs the Texans? If I remember right, those penalties flipped the field for us. With that in mind, wouldn't his stat line be worse than his actual performance?

Again, for the record. I'm completely content with Brock being the future. I still don't see the logic in diminishing Trey or hyping him up. He's an incomplete grade while Purdy has an A so far.

Just to be clear, I don't think treys performance in his three starts defines who he will be as a player in this league. I've said it before, I think he will eventually be a good qb in this league, but just good.

his performance though does exemplify how raw he really is and should cause concern regarding how long will he need to get to being a decent qb. I feel like he needs 1.5-2 years of starts before he becomes effective enough to depend on him and not try to protect him. I really hope that doesn't happen

there is no way to chop it - he's thrown 2 touchdowns, 3 picks, extremely inaccurate with 55%, all against bad teams while he has a stacked roster and great coaching. Team averages 14 PPG with him at the helm. He's had good plays here and there but they don't justify how many bad/poor plays he's had. I think it's important to look at it through this context because this is how he performed when the gameplan was designed for his skill set, he practiced it all week, and the other team prepped for him. His other stats were trick packages and/or the other team didn't expect him to play. I just don't understand what I'm missing and others are seeing and why they're so optimistic he will become great.

his ceiling is often talked about but no one mentions his floor, which so far, has been very low.

i personally don't want to see him on the field. It's really rough to watch as a whole.

The Cardinals were the hottest team in the league when Trey got his first start. Seems a bit disingenuous to say they were a "bad team".

We've also only seen Trey with Kittle in one game and he's played zero games with CMC. Purdy had them both the entire time he played.

That's fine if you want to remove the plays where he was subbed into the game on the goal line. I guess I really don't put too much stock into those 3 games like you do. Because the context I see is that he was 21 years old for two of those starts and the 3rd game had pretty rough conditions. I feel like any honest assessment of his play has to mention that, although it's also not fair to say the rain was THE REASON he played poorly.

Originally posted by Waterbear:
The Cardinals were the hottest team in the league when Trey got his first start. Seems a bit disingenuous to say they were a "bad team".

We've also only seen Trey with Kittle in one game and he's played zero games with CMC. Purdy had them both the entire time he played.

That's fine if you want to remove the plays where he was subbed into the game on the goal line. I guess I really don't put too much stock into those 3 games like you do. Because the context I see is that he was 21 years old for two of those starts and the 3rd game had pretty rough conditions. I feel like any honest assessment of his play has to mention that, although it's also not fair to say the rain was THE REASON he played poorly.

They were definitely hot at that time, but man that game was primed to win. Defense put the shackles on the Cardinals and we could only muster 10 points offensively.

The feeling I got watching that game was that Kyle came out pretty aggressive and then turtled a bit once Trey threw the opening possession interception. It was rough. Kyle definitely got crushed for his play-calling by fans and fan media.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by mayo49:
This has got to best time to be a Niner fan since Joe, Ronnie and Dwight and the 80's teams. I'm jacked.

Weirdly, I'm very excited to see the havoc our d line wreaks this year. I don't think people realize how ridiculously effective Bosa-Gravedigger- armstead - Jackson(?) Will be. It's insane lol

then you factor in C Ward, Huff, Greenlaw, Warner, Gipson (reliable and at least catches the pics), demmonaire (how ever the hell it spelled haha) showed huge growth at the end of the season.

i really think this defense has a chance to challenge the 2013 Seahawks for how dominant it was

Great defense to go along with a great offense. We are stacked, bro - and, we're young still.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by tankle104:
I seriously was crying laughing as I was typing this up. I didn't realize it was that bad. He has touchdowns from when he would do trick packages with Jimmy but he's only got 2 touchdowns when he starts over three games.

He had two TDs in his half of play against Seattle in 21 when Jimmy got hurt. Stats are stats. They can tell you something but they can also be very misleading. I think that Texans game is a good example. His basic stat line was pretty good. His actual performance really wasn't. It's how you end up with statistical discrepancies like his passer rating being 116 and his QBR (which I know people s**t on) being 37.

Didn't Trey force two pass interference calls vs the Texans? If I remember right, those penalties flipped the field for us. With that in mind, wouldn't his stat line be worse than his actual performance?

Again, for the record. I'm completely content with Brock being the future. I still don't see the logic in diminishing Trey or hyping him up. He's an incomplete grade while Purdy has an A so far.

Just to be clear, I don't think treys performance in his three starts defines who he will be as a player in this league. I've said it before, I think he will eventually be a good qb in this league, but just good.

his performance though does exemplify how raw he really is and should cause concern regarding how long will he need to get to being a decent qb. I feel like he needs 1.5-2 years of starts before he becomes effective enough to depend on him and not try to protect him. I really hope that doesn't happen

there is no way to chop it - he's thrown 2 touchdowns, 3 picks, extremely inaccurate with 55%, all against bad teams while he has a stacked roster and great coaching. Team averages 14 PPG with him at the helm. He's had good plays here and there but they don't justify how many bad/poor plays he's had. I think it's important to look at it through this context because this is how he performed when the gameplan was designed for his skill set, he practiced it all week, and the other team prepped for him. His other stats were trick packages and/or the other team didn't expect him to play. I just don't understand what I'm missing and others are seeing and why they're so optimistic he will become great.

his ceiling is often talked about but no one mentions his floor, which so far, has been very low.

i personally don't want to see him on the field. It's really rough to watch as a whole.

The Cardinals were the hottest team in the league when Trey got his first start. Seems a bit disingenuous to say they were a "bad team".

We've also only seen Trey with Kittle in one game and he's played zero games with CMC. Purdy had them both the entire time he played.

That's fine if you want to remove the plays where he was subbed into the game on the goal line. I guess I really don't put too much stock into those 3 games like you do. Because the context I see is that he was 21 years old for two of those starts and the 3rd game had pretty rough conditions. I feel like any honest assessment of his play has to mention that, although it's also not fair to say the rain was THE REASON he played poorly.

Actually, you're right regarding the cards. - I remembered them missing the playoffs and started colt McCoy (I mixed up the games that colt started - he started against jimmy), they still finished 11-6 - so I take it back that they were a bad team. That's my bad.it was the 10 points/turnover/accuracy.

i was super excited to watch him play though and was hoping he would supplement Jimmy - like another poster said. That game just left me with a really uneasy and Unconfident feeling

We can do that with Purdy too though. He didn't have deebo most of his games.", that's huge for our offense. I wouldn't say I put A LOT of stock into these games, but I do think they're the best information we have to date -
Which sucks and doesn't necessarily mean much. I just think it's more cause for alarm than optimism. Just my opinion though.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Waterbear:
The Cardinals were the hottest team in the league when Trey got his first start. Seems a bit disingenuous to say they were a "bad team".

We've also only seen Trey with Kittle in one game and he's played zero games with CMC. Purdy had them both the entire time he played.

That's fine if you want to remove the plays where he was subbed into the game on the goal line. I guess I really don't put too much stock into those 3 games like you do. Because the context I see is that he was 21 years old for two of those starts and the 3rd game had pretty rough conditions. I feel like any honest assessment of his play has to mention that, although it's also not fair to say the rain was THE REASON he played poorly.

They were definitely hot at that time, but man that game was primed to win. Defense put the shackles on the Cardinals and we could only muster 10 points offensively.

The feeling I got watching that game was that Kyle came out pretty aggressive and then turtled a bit once Trey threw the opening possession interception. It was rough. Kyle definitely got crushed for his play-calling by fans and fan media.

Well if you remember that game we were starting drives with penalties quite often. I think it was 1st and 20 on several drives.

For years the standard for play was Jimmy's. And although I think Jimmy's a good QB, I never thought Trey couldn't eventually get to that level.

IMO Purdy has elevated that standard. And maybe he never plays that well again due to his injury, but I admit this new standard might be too much for Trey to overcome.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Waterbear:
The Cardinals were the hottest team in the league when Trey got his first start. Seems a bit disingenuous to say they were a "bad team".

We've also only seen Trey with Kittle in one game and he's played zero games with CMC. Purdy had them both the entire time he played.

That's fine if you want to remove the plays where he was subbed into the game on the goal line. I guess I really don't put too much stock into those 3 games like you do. Because the context I see is that he was 21 years old for two of those starts and the 3rd game had pretty rough conditions. I feel like any honest assessment of his play has to mention that, although it's also not fair to say the rain was THE REASON he played poorly.

They were definitely hot at that time, but man that game was primed to win. Defense put the shackles on the Cardinals and we could only muster 10 points offensively.

The feeling I got watching that game was that Kyle came out pretty aggressive and then turtled a bit once Trey threw the opening possession interception. It was rough. Kyle definitely got crushed for his play-calling by fans and fan media.

Well if you remember that game we were starting drives with penalties quite often. I think it was 1st and 20 on several drives.

For years the standard for play was Jimmy's. And although I think Jimmy's a good QB, I never thought Trey couldn't eventually get to that level.

IMO Purdy has elevated that standard. And maybe he never plays to that well again due to his injury, but I admit this new standard might be too much for Trey to overcome.

I agree about the Jimmy comment. I figured once Lance got a little experience he could operate the offense at least close to the efficiency of Jimmy but with the added bonus of deep shots and scrambling.

Like you said, once I saw Purdy do it over that stretch - I don't see the reason to not start him if he's healthy. That isn't a knock on lance, it's a credit to Purdy. To be honest, maybe outside of 3-4 other QBs in the league, I would start Purdy to see if it's real or not.

Originally posted by Waterbear:
Well if you remember that game we were starting drives with penalties quite often. I think it was 1st and 20 on several drives.

For years the standard for play was Jimmy's. And although I think Jimmy's a good QB, I never thought Trey couldn't eventually get to that level.

IMO Purdy has elevated that standard. And maybe he never plays that well again due to his injury, but I admit this new standard might be too much for Trey to overcome.

I think the team basically put Trey in a no win situation given how raw he is. I think James Wiseman is a pretty good parallel and that's in a league where you have 82 games to play with, lol.

I mostly post things that would appear negative about him, especially to his die-hard believers, but I am rooting for him. Just wouldn't bet on him.