Los Angeles Chargers QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by tankle104:
I don't think it's fair to compare him to Josh Allen, I think Allen came into the league a much better player. Only comparisons are size and arm strength. Allen knows how to run the ball.

it just tells me that he's never had to work in a sophisticated passing system, read sophisticated defenses or anything like that. That's nuts. I knew he was raw but I never dug into how raw. Makes sense he has accuracy issues etc. he's literally learning how to play big boy football. Lol not just run run run over crap talent.

One of the yourubers that did a Trey draft breakdown literally stated how few times the defenses that he played changed coverages post snap. Said he played against the most vanilla defenses out of all the QBs. Which given level of competition it stands to reason.

That said, I don't think his problem is knowing where to go with the ball for the most part.

Originally posted by Wubbie:
Yeah, in a perfect world, we give Trey Lance 1500 snaps and the roster doesn't age and salary cap figures stay stable... But unfortunately, the reality is that players do get older and we can't afford to keep anyone. Our championship window is open now, and if it means Purdy is the best chance to win now & 2023, you go with him at the presumptive starter until Brock/Trey show otherwise.

I've been saying it though and will repeat it here ---Even though we roll with Purdy, we should NOT give up on Trey Lance and trade him away (unless someone trades a boatload of picks/capital for him). As this season has shown us, at the very least, we need two quality QB's. Purdy's not the biggest guy himself and already got banged up in his first start.

Bit I'm of the opinion that Trey Lance isn't as far behind as we think. I'm confident that Brock & Jimmy execute the passing offense much more efficiently, but because of what Trey brings with his perceived threat as a runner and his arm strength, it just opens up our offense quite a bit. I don't want to feature Trey as a runner because it got his ankle broken in Week 2, but Shanahan has voiced that that's a big reason why we drafted Trey. If he's in the lineup, we're going to run A LOT, and I think it'd be a fair bet to say that we'd have a great rushing scheme that opens up the play action. I don't really care about QB's passing numbers, so much as a care about the overall offense's productivity. If a Trey Lance-led offense means that we're able to rush for 175-200 yards a game, 150-200 yards of efficient passing and some chunk plays, and TD's in the red zone, win Time of Possession, minimal turnovers/bad plays, then that's good.

A perceived threat as opposed to an actual threat which he hasn't really demonstrated yet that he is. At least not in the vein of a Lamar Jackson or Kyler Murray. The other problem is that even though he may have a stronger arm than Brock or Jimmy he hasn't yet demonstrated that he is as efficient in the short game which seems to be a big part of Kyle's offense. The idea seems to be that, " well it's okay if we have a bunch of three and outs during the game because Lance will be able to hit more big plays own the field, which will be more exciting than running the offense in an efficient manner that moves the chains and controls the clock".

People seem to place an oversized emphasis on having a "stud" QB on the team. Jackson went down and the Ravens probably will end up going nowhere this year. Herbert is barely keeping the Charger's in the fight. In the meantime we are down to our third string QB and are still considered a legitimate Super Bowl contender because of what we don't ask our QB to do, which is to win games on his own but rather be a complimentary part of the offense. Be efficient, get the ball into the hands of your playmakers and avoid turnovers. I would much rather be in that position than have our seasons stand or fall on the health of one player which has been the case with Jimmy a lot and I think demonstrates his contributions to the team. With Purdy as the back-up we have been able to pretty much stay on track because he brings a lot of the same things that Jimmy brings, except he is a more mobile and fluid athlete and, so far, has been able to avoid some of Jimmy's turnovers.

Trey's challenge moving forward will be to show that he can be just as efficient as Jimmy and Brock in the short game and prove that he can bring some kind of added value in the deep game. The problem for him is that Purdy is showing that he is not only efficient but is also mobile and can hit some of those deep throws as well. It will be interesting to see how it all ends up working out.

Originally posted by tankle104:
Lol he had no business starting last year. He needed the reps but we still have a TEAM. This isn't the San Francisco Trey Lance's. It's always about what's best for the team and balancing that in the now and for the future. They actually did it right, he just got hurt in the second game. So anyone complaining about him not starting year 1…idk what to tell you. Lol makes no sense.

and when my team trades multiple first round picks and drafts in the top 3, I'm sorry if I expect to see flashes in the games he plays. Not have to literally teach football because most high school QBs have more reps and passing attempts than he does in his whole career combined. Lll

So let's complain about not seeing enough from Lance THEN Let's not let him play/develop and improve because we have a good roster lol. Sounds pretty ass backwards to me. We have a great roster that clearly isn't dependent on amazing QB play but hell no don't let him play lol.

Just say you didn't want to draft a QB man. If you didn't see any flashes then that's a you problem.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
I wanted him to play YR1. Kid needed reps. It's wild it's the same people saying he needed to sit because he wasn't ready and we had a Super Roster. Now it's the same people complaining about him not being more consistent, refusing to allow him to play (to actually improve again because we have a SB roster), and also being annoyed we don't have a better idea of who he is currently

How about this what if…what if Brock plays at a Jimmy G pace down the stretch and fans think he should be the starter next yr/then the FO trades Lance to someone for like a 2nd rd pick…he then is allowed to play and develops into a Hurts like QB while we have a Jimmy G 2.0 (not saying that's who he is). Now who's looking silly because they couldn't be patient for a yr? Also as far as injuries go, Brock got one start under his belt before getting banged up…

Lol he had no business starting last year. He needed the reps but we still have a TEAM. This isn't the San Francisco Trey Lance's. It's always about what's best for the team and balancing that in the now and for the future. They actually did it right, he just got hurt in the second game. So anyone complaining about him not starting year 1…idk what to tell you. Lol makes no sense.

and when my team trades multiple first round picks and drafts in the top 3, I'm sorry if I expect to see flashes in the games he plays. Not have to literally teach football because most high school QBs have more reps and passing attempts than he does in his whole career combined. Lll

Except that he HAS shown flashes in the games he plays. He IS a raw QB and he DOES need to be a better passer, but you're generalizing him as a non-functional QB. There are a number of plays where the plays broken down and he's moved outside of the pocket and attempted throws. He had the big 45 yard pass TD in the Texans game, throwing from across the field, where Deebo only needed to break an easy tackle for a QB. In the past two preseasons, he's hit two big TD bombs to Sherfield and Gray. Against the Cardinals, Texans, and Bears, with him at the helm, we've rushed for 168 total yards/game and overall, racked up 362 total yards/game.

Small sample size, but to put it in perspective--- the Ravens are second in the league with 164 rushing yards/game. And the 362 yards/game of total offense are in line with our 2022 offense, where we're ranked 7th in total offense.

We're definitely able to move the ball when he's in there. The next step are those advanced situations--- 3rd down and redzone, because I find those correlate more directly to points.

Originally posted by 49ers81:

Originally posted by Wubbie:
Yeah, in a perfect world, we give Trey Lance 1500 snaps and the roster doesn't age and salary cap figures stay stable... But unfortunately, the reality is that players do get older and we can't afford to keep anyone. Our championship window is open now, and if it means Purdy is the best chance to win now & 2023, you go with him at the presumptive starter until Brock/Trey show otherwise.

I've been saying it though and will repeat it here ---Even though we roll with Purdy, we should NOT give up on Trey Lance and trade him away (unless someone trades a boatload of picks/capital for him). As this season has shown us, at the very least, we need two quality QB's. Purdy's not the biggest guy himself and already got banged up in his first start.

Bit I'm of the opinion that Trey Lance isn't as far behind as we think. I'm confident that Brock & Jimmy execute the passing offense much more efficiently, but because of what Trey brings with his perceived threat as a runner and his arm strength, it just opens up our offense quite a bit. I don't want to feature Trey as a runner because it got his ankle broken in Week 2, but Shanahan has voiced that that's a big reason why we drafted Trey. If he's in the lineup, we're going to run A LOT, and I think it'd be a fair bet to say that we'd have a great rushing scheme that opens up the play action. I don't really care about QB's passing numbers, so much as a care about the overall offense's productivity. If a Trey Lance-led offense means that we're able to rush for 175-200 yards a game, 150-200 yards of efficient passing and some chunk plays, and TD's in the red zone, win Time of Possession, minimal turnovers/bad plays, then that's good.

A perceived threat as opposed to an actual threat which he hasn't really demonstrated yet that he is. At least not in the vein of a Lamar Jackson or Kyler Murray. The other problem is that even though he may have a stronger arm than Brock or Jimmy he hasn't yet demonstrated that he is as efficient in the short game which seems to be a big part of Kyle's offense. The idea seems to be that, " well it's okay if we have a bunch of three and outs during the game because Lance will be able to hit more big plays own the field, which will be more exciting than running the offense in an efficient manner that moves the chains and controls the clock".

People seem to place an oversized emphasis on having a "stud" QB on the team. Jackson went down and the Ravens probably will end up going nowhere this year. Herbert is barely keeping the Charger's in the fight. In the meantime we are down to our third string QB and are still considered a legitimate Super Bowl contender because of what we don't ask our QB to do, which is to win games on his own but rather be a complimentary part of the offense. Be efficient, get the ball into the hands of your playmakers and avoid turnovers. I would much rather be in that position than have our seasons stand or fall on the health of one player which has been the case with Jimmy a lot and I think demonstrates his contributions to the team. With Purdy as the back-up we have been able to pretty much stay on track because he brings a lot of the same things that Jimmy brings, except he is a more mobile and fluid athlete and, so far, has been able to avoid some of Jimmy's turnovers.

Trey's challenge moving forward will be to show that he can be just as efficient as Jimmy and Brock in the short game and prove that he can bring some kind of added value in the deep game. The problem for him is that Purdy is showing that he is not only efficient but is also mobile and can hit some of those deep throws as well. It will be interesting to see how it all ends up working out.

Yeah, I very specifically worded that his arm and legs are a perceived threat to the defense, but even if he hasn't technically demonstrated it in the way we'd like, the defense HAS to account for him. Our running game has done well with him in the offense.

Regarding Trey's big play ability vs. Brock/Jimmy's efficiency... there was a time where we were complaining that Jimmy was efficient, but not explosive. That we needed a QB who can hit big chunk plays. At this point in his development, I think Trey's in a place where the offense can be very boom-or-bust. The Texans game was a good example. He was a little slow starting in the first half, but then he started to really take off in the second half.

But agreed... Brock Purdy has kind of shown the best of both worlds in regards to efficiently moving the ball, and making the explosive plays when they present themselves. It's why I think it's fair to say he gives us the best chance to win games right now.

Originally posted by Wubbie:
Except that he HAS shown flashes in the games he plays. He IS a raw QB and he DOES need to be a better passer, but you're generalizing him as a non-functional QB. There are a number of plays where the plays broken down and he's moved outside of the pocket and attempted throws. He had the big 45 yard pass TD in the Texans game, throwing from across the field, where Deebo only needed to break an easy tackle for a QB. In the past two preseasons, he's hit two big TD bombs to Sherfield and Gray. Against the Cardinals, Texans, and Bears, with him at the helm, we've rushed for 168 total yards/game and overall, racked up 362 total yards/game.

Small sample size, but to put it in perspective--- the Ravens are second in the league with 164 rushing yards/game. And the 362 yards/game of total offense are in line with our 2022 offense, where we're ranked 7th in total offense.

We're definitely able to move the ball when he's in there. The next step are those advanced situations--- 3rd down and redzone, because I find those correlate more directly to points.

I saw good anticipatory throws in multiple games. I saw some great layered throws in multiple games. I saw him make the easy read. I saw him move around when pressured and make plays. Like you said it wasn't consistent and it never will be until he actually gets to play and learn….anyone saying there wasn't any flashes isn't being objective.

Originally posted by SinceXVI:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by SinceXVI:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Beating a blitz is more about anticipation and presnap awareness. I'm looking at his release/throwing motion just from yesterday and it's nothing special or even greatly different than Lance's, while making the same throw. this has nothing to do with hating on Brock and pointing out how much people s**t on Lance over something as stupid (and factually incorrect) as his slow release. Especially if you think Brock has a "quick" release.

outside of running a couple more read options/QB powers. What exactly didn't Lance run or what was he incapable of doing? We saw bootlegs, yankee concepts, in breaking routes, play action both under center and from the gun. People are trying to embellish/rewrite the past. Sure he wasn't amazing in a couple QRs of football. He wasn't consistent. It wasn't all s**t either.

Brock is doing is thing and I'm here to see how it plays out. I hope he becomes the next Drew Brees or whatever. There's a long way to determine that, 2 starts is just that. Two starts.

Can you even name a rookie QB having a more impressive first 3 games of their career (exclude KC garbage time, include the Dolphins game since he played all but first drive and the team was trailing when he got in the game)? Sure Aaron Rodgers and Jimmy Garoppolo had a great start in their career, but they were sitting on the bench for several seasons. Rookie QB? I can't think of any.

You made an argument how unready rookie QB are and that none of them are ready to play in the NFL right away. Well, we have Purdy, but you are not impressed by his performance. But you think Trey wasn't very bad. You think he was good here and there. Let me tell you this. The vast majority of 1st round bust QB can probably flash here and there.

This is a complete double standard.

Justin Herbert (Three 300 yards passing games), Cam Newton ( Two 400 yards passing games), Mac Jones, Andrew Luck, and Ben Roethlisberger, to name a few, had more impressive 3 game starts than Brock Purdy, especially given that they were week 1 starters.

Brock has played well, but it's prudent to temper expectations and to view his performance in the appropriate context of coaching, surrounding talent, competition (e.g. Miami's defense gives up 32 points on the road on avg.), and stepping in towards the end of the season when the team is clicking.

With that said, in my opinion (and it's just an opinion no matter how well supported or articulated), Purdy has less of an upside than Lance, but he's good enough to manage this offense to a SB under the right circumstances.

Justin Herbert:. 5TD, 3 int and 2 fumbles
Cam Newton:. 4TD, 4 INT
Mac Jones:. 2TD, 3INT plus 2 fumbles
Andrew Luck:. 5TD, 4 INT plus 1 fumble
Ben Rothlisberger:. 4TD, 3INT

I am not going to rewatch their games, but it unlikely any of them actually did better than Brock.

Mia defense is average, Seahawks is below average, Tamp Bay has a good defense.

Let's remembered, Tom Brady didn't really carried the team in his first season as a starter either. Drew Brees wasn't deemed in franchise QB after his 3rd full season.

Purdy has less upside than Trey. Base on the so call potential, he is only Drew Brees with better mobility and stronger arm. That is enough potential for me.

Like I said, context. The QBs mentioned were week 1 starters, and with the exception of Rothslisberger, had less talented teams than the current Niners.

I hope Brock wins #6 and they sort the long term QB1 issue out with a camp competition. Good problem to have.

There are always going to be differences in situation. Purdy got a few more months (but no practice reps in those few more months). That is certainly an advantage, but probably more than offset by not having 1st team reps during mini camp, training camp, and pre-season.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Lol he had no business starting last year. He needed the reps but we still have a TEAM. This isn't the San Francisco Trey Lance's. It's always about what's best for the team and balancing that in the now and for the future. They actually did it right, he just got hurt in the second game. So anyone complaining about him not starting year 1…idk what to tell you. Lol makes no sense.

and when my team trades multiple first round picks and drafts in the top 3, I'm sorry if I expect to see flashes in the games he plays. Not have to literally teach football because most high school QBs have more reps and passing attempts than he does in his whole career combined. Lll

So let's complain about not seeing enough from Lance THEN Let's not let him play/develop and improve because we have a good roster lol. Sounds pretty ass backwards to me. We have a great roster that clearly isn't dependent on amazing QB play but hell no don't let him play lol.

Just say you didn't want to draft a QB man. If you didn't see any flashes then that's a you problem.

Pretty much all 1st round pick QB who end up being a bust can flash here and there. These busts can end up from a quality back up NFL to be completely out of the league in a few years.

Flashing here and there is such a low pathetic standard IMO.

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Lol he had no business starting last year. He needed the reps but we still have a TEAM. This isn't the San Francisco Trey Lance's. It's always about what's best for the team and balancing that in the now and for the future. They actually did it right, he just got hurt in the second game. So anyone complaining about him not starting year 1…idk what to tell you. Lol makes no sense.

and when my team trades multiple first round picks and drafts in the top 3, I'm sorry if I expect to see flashes in the games he plays. Not have to literally teach football because most high school QBs have more reps and passing attempts than he does in his whole career combined. Lll

So let's complain about not seeing enough from Lance THEN Let's not let him play/develop and improve because we have a good roster lol. Sounds pretty ass backwards to me. We have a great roster that clearly isn't dependent on amazing QB play but hell no don't let him play lol.

Just say you didn't want to draft a QB man. If you didn't see any flashes then that's a you problem.

Pretty much all 1st round pick QB who end up being a bust can flash here and there. These busts can end up from a quality back up NFL to be completely out of the league in a few years.

Flashing here and there is such a low pathetic standard IMO.

That's what you want to see out of any young player - for them to flash, show that they aren't outmatched, and can make plays at the NFL level. Consistency comes from playing more, and showing the league whether the player has what it takes to be a consistent performer.

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by SinceXVI:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by SinceXVI:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Beating a blitz is more about anticipation and presnap awareness. I'm looking at his release/throwing motion just from yesterday and it's nothing special or even greatly different than Lance's, while making the same throw. this has nothing to do with hating on Brock and pointing out how much people s**t on Lance over something as stupid (and factually incorrect) as his slow release. Especially if you think Brock has a "quick" release.

outside of running a couple more read options/QB powers. What exactly didn't Lance run or what was he incapable of doing? We saw bootlegs, yankee concepts, in breaking routes, play action both under center and from the gun. People are trying to embellish/rewrite the past. Sure he wasn't amazing in a couple QRs of football. He wasn't consistent. It wasn't all s**t either.

Brock is doing is thing and I'm here to see how it plays out. I hope he becomes the next Drew Brees or whatever. There's a long way to determine that, 2 starts is just that. Two starts.

Can you even name a rookie QB having a more impressive first 3 games of their career (exclude KC garbage time, include the Dolphins game since he played all but first drive and the team was trailing when he got in the game)? Sure Aaron Rodgers and Jimmy Garoppolo had a great start in their career, but they were sitting on the bench for several seasons. Rookie QB? I can't think of any.

You made an argument how unready rookie QB are and that none of them are ready to play in the NFL right away. Well, we have Purdy, but you are not impressed by his performance. But you think Trey wasn't very bad. You think he was good here and there. Let me tell you this. The vast majority of 1st round bust QB can probably flash here and there.

This is a complete double standard.

Justin Herbert (Three 300 yards passing games), Cam Newton ( Two 400 yards passing games), Mac Jones, Andrew Luck, and Ben Roethlisberger, to name a few, had more impressive 3 game starts than Brock Purdy, especially given that they were week 1 starters.

Brock has played well, but it's prudent to temper expectations and to view his performance in the appropriate context of coaching, surrounding talent, competition (e.g. Miami's defense gives up 32 points on the road on avg.), and stepping in towards the end of the season when the team is clicking.

With that said, in my opinion (and it's just an opinion no matter how well supported or articulated), Purdy has less of an upside than Lance, but he's good enough to manage this offense to a SB under the right circumstances.

Justin Herbert:. 5TD, 3 int and 2 fumbles
Cam Newton:. 4TD, 4 INT
Mac Jones:. 2TD, 3INT plus 2 fumbles
Andrew Luck:. 5TD, 4 INT plus 1 fumble
Ben Rothlisberger:. 4TD, 3INT

I am not going to rewatch their games, but it unlikely any of them actually did better than Brock.

Mia defense is average, Seahawks is below average, Tamp Bay has a good defense.

Let's remembered, Tom Brady didn't really carried the team in his first season as a starter either. Drew Brees wasn't deemed in franchise QB after his 3rd full season.

Purdy has less upside than Trey. Base on the so call potential, he is only Drew Brees with better mobility and stronger arm. That is enough potential for me.

Like I said, context. The QBs mentioned were week 1 starters, and with the exception of Rothslisberger, had less talented teams than the current Niners.

I hope Brock wins #6 and they sort the long term QB1 issue out with a camp competition. Good problem to have.

There are always going to be differences in situation. Purdy got a few more months (but no practice reps in those few more months). That is certainly an advantage, but probably more than offset by not having 1st team reps during mini camp, training camp, and pre-season.

Eh. There's a lot of reasons why Purdy's doing so well:
Four year starter with plenty of experience. His skillset of being accurate, processing relatively quickly, and good pocket mobility meshes well with our playcalling. He has the best surrounding offensive cast we've fielded during the Shanahan era.

And the benefit of a good defense can't be understated. As an example, I point to the Rams. Last year in the NFCCG, the Rams were able to employ a steady, methodical short-passing offense where they can convert on third down at a high rate, particularly on passes to Cooper Kupp. They could afford to do that because the game situation was relatively within reach all game long. This year, especially the second game we played them, especially when they fell behind, that fell apart when they had to pass the ball on more intermediate throws. Our defense ate them alive.

Purdy's had the benefit of playing in a very neutral game situation the last couple games and has thrived. Shanahan can mix up run plays with our usual slants, screens, crossers for him, and then, to his credit, Purdy has hit the splash plays when Shanahan has dialed them up. We can win a lot of games like this.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Lol he had no business starting last year. He needed the reps but we still have a TEAM. This isn't the San Francisco Trey Lance's. It's always about what's best for the team and balancing that in the now and for the future. They actually did it right, he just got hurt in the second game. So anyone complaining about him not starting year 1…idk what to tell you. Lol makes no sense.

and when my team trades multiple first round picks and drafts in the top 3, I'm sorry if I expect to see flashes in the games he plays. Not have to literally teach football because most high school QBs have more reps and passing attempts than he does in his whole career combined. Lll

So let's complain about not seeing enough from Lance THEN Let's not let him play/develop and improve because we have a good roster lol. Sounds pretty ass backwards to me. We have a great roster that clearly isn't dependent on amazing QB play but hell no don't let him play lol.

Just say you didn't want to draft a QB man. If you didn't see any flashes then that's a you problem.

Pretty much all 1st round pick QB who end up being a bust can flash here and there. These busts can end up from a quality back up NFL to be completely out of the league in a few years.

Flashing here and there is such a low pathetic standard IMO.

That's what you want to see out of any young player - for them to flash, show that they aren't outmatched, and can make plays at the NFL level. Consistency comes from playing more, and showing the league whether the player has what it takes to be a consistent performer.

Yeah, Trey hasn't been able to show he's a consistent performer because we redshirted him in his rookie year, and then he broke his ankle in Week 2.
There's not a lot to go off of, so people really need to relax.

Trey should and will have his chance. He's been recognized as a smart player, so I hope he's been using his sideline time to recognize defenses and mentally be playing through his options based on those scenarios and the play call. Hopefully, he'll also be working on his accuracy and touch as soon as he can move naturally again. The way Purdy's been playing, Tre's going to have to be very motivated to overtake him, IMO.

Originally posted by WestCoastForever:
Trey should and will have his chance. He's been recognized as a smart player, so I hope he's been using his sideline time to recognize defenses and be playing through his options based on those scenarios and the play call. Hopefully, he'll also be working on his accuracy and touch as soon as he can move naturally again. The way Purdy's been playing, Tre's going to have to be very motivated to overtake him, IMO.

From what we've seen and heard, Trey's doing all the right things behind the scenes since he's gotten here.
Just needs to get healthy and I'm confident he and Brock will be a fantastic duo going into 2023, whoever should start the season as QB1.

Originally posted by Wubbie:
Actually, North Dakota State runs a pro-style offense, that features play action and a fullback. Not too dissimilar to our own offense.
To me, it's more the reps that he's lacking, as well as the jump from weaker competition to the NFL... and yes, he does need to refine his abilities as a passer.

Lol that's even worse! If he's played a similar system.

after 300 reps in a system, you should be pretty good at reads etc. you don't need 1500 reps like Purdy, alt bought it helps.

Originally posted by Wubbie:
Yeah, Trey hasn't been able to show he's a consistent performer because we redshirted him in his rookie year, and then he broke his ankle in Week 2.
There's not a lot to go off of, so people really need to relax.

The thing is Trey has shown flashes and IMO he has never looked overmatched in the games he has started in. It was just that his accuracy wasn't consistant and he was abit late on his throws but that will improve with playing time and experience. Trey didn't look any worse than any of the other rookie QB's from that class or this years class after their 1st few starts(minus Mac Jones who probally was already close to his ceiling). A matter of fact I would say Trey in his 1st 4 starts looked better than all of them minus Mac Jones. Heck, Lawrence, Z Wilson, And Fields were still struggling alot in their 10th+ start. Z Wilson is still struggling.