Los Angeles Chargers QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by krizay:
This is why myself and others thought this offseason was the highest his value will ever be with us.

The talk on here is he needs reps to get better. Take our lumps as he develops. While also saying Brock's 7 game sample size isn't enough to evaluate.

So if Trey does get to play this year we are already resigned to the fact he's going to take his lumps. While also acknowledging that 7 games isn't enough to know what he is or isn't.

So how can he improve his value if he's "taking his lumps" in a year his 5th year option needs to be exercised?

Any team wanting him would have wanted him for the full offseason and regular season for their own evaluation.

He would have to do what even his biggest supporters don't think he can do. Which is come out and ball with no lumps taken. Even then, I find it hard to believe that Trey can get our offense clicking the way Brock had it clicking. He is a dead man walking as it relates to his time here.

I suppose it's possible to decline his 5th year option and roll with him as a backup in '24 as well. Though I'd expect him to request a trade by then.

I am just so tired of some posters talking about the lumps Trey will take, and being unwilling to do that.....while at the same time were totally ok with Jimmy's inconsistent play over the past few years. The QB position was almost never THE reason our team won with Jimmy as the starter, yet they arent ok with another QB being in the same position.

Hopefully Purdy regains his health and balls out so we never will have to find out. Just the inconsistent arguments from some posters are just maddening. Opinions on what we need/have at the QB position shouldnt change depending on QB. And thats exactly what happens on this board. Its maddening.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I am just so tired of some posters talking about the lumps Trey will take, and being unwilling to do that.....while at the same time were totally ok with Jimmy's inconsistent play over the past few years. The QB position was almost never THE reason our team won with Jimmy as the starter, yet they arent ok with another QB being in the same position.

Hopefully Purdy regains his health and balls out so we never will have to find out. Just the inconsistent arguments from some posters are just maddening. Opinions on what we need/have at the QB position shouldnt change depending on QB. And thats exactly what happens on this board. Its maddening.

1000%

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by krizay:
This is why myself and others thought this offseason was the highest his value will ever be with us.

The talk on here is he needs reps to get better. Take our lumps as he develops. While also saying Brock's 7 game sample size isn't enough to evaluate.

So if Trey does get to play this year we are already resigned to the fact he's going to take his lumps. While also acknowledging that 7 games isn't enough to know what he is or isn't.

So how can he improve his value if he's "taking his lumps" in a year his 5th year option needs to be exercised?

Any team wanting him would have wanted him for the full offseason and regular season for their own evaluation.

He would have to do what even his biggest supporters don't think he can do. Which is come out and ball with no lumps taken. Even then, I find it hard to believe that Trey can get our offense clicking the way Brock had it clicking. He is a dead man walking as it relates to his time here.

I suppose it's possible to decline his 5th year option and roll with him as a backup in '24 as well. Though I'd expect him to request a trade by then.

I am just so tired of some posters talking about the lumps Trey will take, and being unwilling to do that.....while at the same time were totally ok with Jimmy's inconsistent play over the past few years. The QB position was almost never THE reason our team won with Jimmy as the starter, yet they arent ok with another QB being in the same position.

Hopefully Purdy regains his health and balls out so we never will have to find out. Just the inconsistent arguments from some posters are just maddening. Opinions on what we need/have at the QB position shouldnt change depending on QB. And thats exactly what happens on this board. Its maddening.

SWH, JG I found very consistent. Here are his yearly ratings:

2017- 96
2018- 90
2019- 102
2020- 92
2021- 98
2022- 103

That's pretty consistent to me. You have to divide out JG into the play of JG, which was consistent and good. And the health of JG, who is a consistent injury risk. TLs play has been 'learning on the fly' to me, and his health has somehow been more of an issue, than JGs was. People, myself included, were on board with seeing what TL could do, as QB1 in 2022, he got injured. That opened it up to BP.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I am just so tired of some posters talking about the lumps Trey will take, and being unwilling to do that.....while at the same time were totally ok with Jimmy's inconsistent play over the past few years. The QB position was almost never THE reason our team won with Jimmy as the starter, yet they arent ok with another QB being in the same position.

Hopefully Purdy regains his health and balls out so we never will have to find out. Just the inconsistent arguments from some posters are just maddening. Opinions on what we need/have at the QB position shouldnt change depending on QB. And thats exactly what happens on this board. Its maddening.

1000%

Well seeing that we almost always lost without jimmy, I would say he was THE reason. People don't give his efficiency and leadership enough credit. He helped us get to a super bowl.

was he the main reason we were scoring? No. He wasn't Rodgers or Brady out there, he didn't carry us, but he constantly put the team in position to convert downs, get YAC, score. Etc. That stuff is extremely important to winning.

it indirectly impacts the defense/special teams. Let's the defense rest, have good field position, make sure the punt team isn't always backed up, reasonable field goal distance.

my main concern with Trey is he hasn't been able to do that. So when I personally say "lumps", I'm talking scoring 10 a game and the defense is exhausted because they're always on the field.

if Trey was more efficient, the argument would make more sense. Trey turned the ball over more than he scored, very inefficient, very inaccurate (50% completion), etc. THATS the main problem with Lance.

people talk too much about what Lance BRINGS and not enough what he DOESNT BRING. What he doesn't bring is the real issue - accuracy, efficiency, scoring, first downs, leadership etc. if he can get those down, he will be a good qb. But let's not act like he has. He's only done that for 1.5 quarters of one game.

id bet anything that Kyle is uncomfortable with Lance starting right now because of what he isn't currently bringing - which begs the question, how much experience does he need before he gets that stuff down? No one knows but it isn't a couple games.

every single down, is new to Lance. He's most likely never experienced any of it in football. He's really really green.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I am just so tired of some posters talking about the lumps Trey will take, and being unwilling to do that.....while at the same time were totally ok with Jimmy's inconsistent play over the past few years. The QB position was almost never THE reason our team won with Jimmy as the starter, yet they arent ok with another QB being in the same position.

Hopefully Purdy regains his health and balls out so we never will have to find out. Just the inconsistent arguments from some posters are just maddening. Opinions on what we need/have at the QB position shouldnt change depending on QB. And thats exactly what happens on this board. Its maddening.

Jimmy is clearly a better QB than Trey based on all available evidence to us. We might not have won games because of Jimmy… he's an average QB. He also wasn't a complete anchor and our offense was better than functional most of the time he played.

There's no inconsistency where you're seeing it. These are not plug and play pieces.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by genus49:
Flave is a tool. I can't take anyone seriously using his posts as a message.

And I watched the video. It was from 6 years ago and as I said lots has changed and RG3 and Trey are not the same. Kyle selected him and you're going to tell me he didn't think Trey could run his offense?

RG3 wasn't a Shanahan pick. They made that work until the guy got injured. Shanahan has been talking about wanting to play 11 on 11 football and talking about scheme advantage someone who can do that can provide but because of an interview about a backup former QB they'd have to sign in FA…we want to take that and ignore all the recent stuff? You think Shanahan hasn't adapted since then?

And you think that's logical?

So just cause he's a tool, that what that post was about has no merit? I think a lot of things you post are foolish, you see me throwing a fit?

and RG3 was picked by kyles dad and Kyle. They both were running the team. Regardless of if reports that they wanted him or ownership, they picked him.

If you can't see the relation between his comments about RG3 in 2017 and lances situation in 2023, then Idk what to tell you. Lol go sit and think about it some more.

Seems like you are throwing a fit if someone doesn't have your thought process.

RG3 was the pick pushed on the Shanahan's by ownership. That is not what happened with Lance and technically Kyle wanted Russell Wilson, which means even then he liked a QB who could run with the football.

I put a lot more stock into Kyle's recent comments and moves. You go ahead and base your analysis on a throw away interview when Kyle was basically talking out of his ass for bringing in QBs like Hoyer, Matt Barkey and CJ Beathard. He had the same talking point with why we cut Kaepernick.

I guarantee you that Shanahan isn't making that move to 3 and taking Trey Lance if he didn't believe(right or wrong) that Lance could run HIS offense without crazy adjustments. So the issue here is you think Lance can't run the same offense as Purdy and right now that's nothing but speculation since we haven't seen Lance run that type of offense.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by genus49:
Flave is a tool. I can't take anyone seriously using his posts as a message.

And I watched the video. It was from 6 years ago and as I said lots has changed and RG3 and Trey are not the same. Kyle selected him and you're going to tell me he didn't think Trey could run his offense?

RG3 wasn't a Shanahan pick. They made that work until the guy got injured. Shanahan has been talking about wanting to play 11 on 11 football and talking about scheme advantage someone who can do that can provide but because of an interview about a backup former QB they'd have to sign in FA…we want to take that and ignore all the recent stuff? You think Shanahan hasn't adapted since then?

And you think that's logical?

So just cause he's a tool, that what that post was about has no merit? I think a lot of things you post are foolish, you see me throwing a fit?

and RG3 was picked by kyles dad and Kyle. They both were running the team. Regardless of if reports that they wanted him or ownership, they picked him.

If you can't see the relation between his comments about RG3 in 2017 and lances situation in 2023, then Idk what to tell you. Lol go sit and think about it some more.

Seems like you are throwing a fit if someone doesn't have your thought process.

RG3 was the pick pushed on the Shanahan's by ownership. That is not what happened with Lance and technically Kyle wanted Russell Wilson, which means even then he liked a QB who could run with the football.

I put a lot more stock into Kyle's recent comments and moves. You go ahead and base your analysis on a throw away interview when Kyle was basically talking out of his ass for bringing in QBs like Hoyer, Matt Barkey and CJ Beathard. He had the same talking point with why we cut Kaepernick.

I guarantee you that Shanahan isn't making that move to 3 and taking Trey Lance if he didn't believe(right or wrong) that Lance could run HIS offense without crazy adjustments. So the issue here is you think Lance can't run the same offense as Purdy and right now that's nothing but speculation since we haven't seen Lance run that type of offense.

Lol Lance def wasn't running the same offense as jimmy or Brock. It wasn't even close.

there are numerous comments from Kyle talking about 11-11. Him drawing up plays for Lance and his skill set.

if you would of just watched the video.. of Kyle. You'd realize everything your saying is wrong. Lol Kyle, HIMSELF, is saying the opposite of what you are saying. You're giving your opinion (because it makes you feel better and right) but kyle is saying the opposite

Originally posted by tankle104:
Yeah, I don't agree with that. Lance isn't losing first team reps because of Brock (right now). He's losing that for other reasons. We don't know exactly what they are, but it's pretty easy to speculate.

if they really felt good and confident in Lance, they wouldn't be taking reps away from him right now. They would be cramming as many as they could his way to develop him and see how he looks. Instead, they're doing the opposite.

to me, it's very obvious the team is nervous about what they've seen from Lance over the last two years and have lost confidence in the potential they thought he had. To the point where they're not even fully trying to develop him anymore. Taking reps from him is massive. That's a big surprise to me. Says a lot

They're alternating reps in OTAs and we also only got an idea of what's happening in 1 out of 3 practices. We'll have a better understanding of the rep split when training camp gets here.

You guys keep making generalized statements fueled by speculation but until that speculation is proven with facts then why act like you know something that hasn't happened yet?

Trey just needs reps and whether he's getting 1st string reps or 2nd team reps they're reps. Now I certainly wish they'd let him just stick with the first string offense but for the betterment of the team it does make sense to spread them around. Whoever is QB1/2/3 you want them to be ready to play with the bulk of the roster.

But yes obviously the team isn't thrilled with how things went with Lance and how last year went they know they better get their QB room right. But I don't see them acting like they don't want to develop him anymore.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Yeah, I don't agree with that. Lance isn't losing first team reps because of Brock (right now). He's losing that for other reasons. We don't know exactly what they are, but it's pretty easy to speculate.

if they really felt good and confident in Lance, they wouldn't be taking reps away from him right now. They would be cramming as many as they could his way to develop him and see how he looks. Instead, they're doing the opposite.

to me, it's very obvious the team is nervous about what they've seen from Lance over the last two years and have lost confidence in the potential they thought he had. To the point where they're not even fully trying to develop him anymore. Taking reps from him is massive. That's a big surprise to me. Says a lot

They're alternating reps in OTAs and we also only got an idea of what's happening in 1 out of 3 practices. We'll have a better understanding of the rep split when training camp gets here.

You guys keep making generalized statements fueled by speculation but until that speculation is proven with facts then why act like you know something that hasn't happened yet?

Trey just needs reps and whether he's getting 1st string reps or 2nd team reps they're reps. Now I certainly wish they'd let him just stick with the first string offense but for the betterment of the team it does make sense to spread them around. Whoever is QB1/2/3 you want them to be ready to play with the bulk of the roster.

But yes obviously the team isn't thrilled with how things went with Lance and how last year went they know they better get their QB room right. But I don't see them acting like they don't want to develop him anymore.

I clearly said it's my opinion & interpretation.

Typically around this time, one player gets a bulk of the first team reps - specially during camp. I personally expected all of that go to Lance for his development. I'm just surprised they're not doing that. They're splitting them with Lance.

i expected them to give Lance every opportunity to close the gap with Brock, while he is out, not try and catch darnold up and see who would do better between darnold & Lance. That's all I'm saying. To me, I interpret that as a big negative for Lance. It surprised me

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I am just so tired of some posters talking about the lumps Trey will take, and being unwilling to do that.....while at the same time were totally ok with Jimmy's inconsistent play over the past few years. The QB position was almost never THE reason our team won with Jimmy as the starter, yet they arent ok with another QB being in the same position.

Hopefully Purdy regains his health and balls out so we never will have to find out. Just the inconsistent arguments from some posters are just maddening. Opinions on what we need/have at the QB position shouldnt change depending on QB. And thats exactly what happens on this board. Its maddening.

1000%

Well seeing that we almost always lost without jimmy, I would say he was THE reason. People don't give his efficiency and leadership enough credit. He helped us get to a super bowl.

was he the main reason we were scoring? No. He wasn't Rodgers or Brady out there, he didn't carry us, but he constantly put the team in position to convert downs, get YAC, score. Etc. That stuff is extremely important to winning.

it indirectly impacts the defense/special teams. Let's the defense rest, have good field position, make sure the punt team isn't always backed up, reasonable field goal distance.

my main concern with Trey is he hasn't been able to do that. So when I personally say "lumps", I'm talking scoring 10 a game and the defense is exhausted because they're always on the field.

if Trey was more efficient, the argument would make more sense. Trey turned the ball over more than he scored, very inefficient, very inaccurate (50% completion), etc. THATS the main problem with Lance.

people talk too much about what Lance BRINGS and not enough what he DOESNT BRING. What he doesn't bring is the real issue - accuracy, efficiency, scoring, first downs, leadership etc. if he can get those down, he will be a good qb. But let's not act like he has. He's only done that for 1.5 quarters of one game.

id bet anything that Kyle is uncomfortable with Lance starting right now because of what he isn't currently bringing - which begs the question, how much experience does he need before he gets that stuff down? No one knows but it isn't a couple games.

every single down, is new to Lance. He's most likely never experienced any of it in football. He's really really green.

Stopped reading right there. I thought we have been over this 10000 times. We have always had TRASH backups to Jimmy up until 2022. Everyone knows Jimmy is better than CJ Beathard, Brian Hoyer, Nick Mullens, etc. That doesnt mean he is THE reason we won. You are better than this Tank.

Originally posted by genus49:
They're alternating reps in OTAs and we also only got an idea of what's happening in 1 out of 3 practices. We'll have a better understanding of the rep split when training camp gets here.

You guys keep making generalized statements fueled by speculation but until that speculation is proven with facts then why act like you know something that hasn't happened yet?

Trey just needs reps and whether he's getting 1st string reps or 2nd team reps they're reps. Now I certainly wish they'd let him just stick with the first string offense but for the betterment of the team it does make sense to spread them around. Whoever is QB1/2/3 you want them to be ready to play with the bulk of the roster.

But yes obviously the team isn't thrilled with how things went with Lance and how last year went they know they better get their QB room right. But I don't see them acting like they don't want to develop him anymore.

To me development is the job of the player. It's not a function of the team. The team's job, is to win games. It's TLs job to show he has a role to play in that.

I would grade our coaching staff, and offensive talent, as probably #1 in the NFL. In that sense, there is no better environment, to grow and figure it out, as a QB imo.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
If it comes down to just running the offense and not doing anything stupid, give me Trey over Darnold 100/100 times.

Exactly. All the Darnold takes are crazy to me. More experience doesn't automatically make Darnold better when he's shown to put some awful games out there - games that can doom a great team.

Lance's mistakes haven't been of that variety. He also knows the offense better. What good is experience when the guy who has it, has it in another offense and still makes bonehead errors with all that experience?

I am curious to see how training camp unfolds though. Darnold definitely does better when he knows he can't get hit though so that is a plus for him. We'll see how Trey looks with the work he's put through.

Should be an interesting camp to follow for sure. Can't wait...

At the end of the day, Sam has made too many horrendous mistakes while under no pressure for me to be on his hype train. Not saying he's peaked, but just because he's been in the NFL longer doesn't mean he'd be better.

If anything, Lance has seen first hand from Purdy how all you need to do is trust the system and then let your athletic instincts do the rest if things break down. In the small action he had, he never looked panicked to me. The issues we saw were more being off the mark on some throws and being late sometimes due to his inexperience -- something even Brock did at times.

Darnold's habit of forcing things that aren't there, or holding it too long and getting stripped I think would drive Shanahan insane.

Both Lance and Darnold have been disappointing for different reasons. Lance because injuries have kept him from getting the reps he needs to get better. Darnold because he's played for 2 teams with poor talent around him and bad coaches. Lack of a supporting cast and poor coaching has destroyed more than one promising QB. Some are able to improve if they move on and get in the right situation but some never do. Once they lose that confidence and get beat up a little they never recover.

Once again...why are we excusing Darnold so much?

Yes Shanahan is obviously much better offensive mind than anyone Darnold played with but scheme doesn't help pocket presence, decision making and ability to see the field. Kyle can make things easier but he can't work miracles. Same thing when people were blaming Shanahan for Matt Ryan coughing up the ball in the SB loss to the Pats - guaranteed Tom Brady doesn't do the same thing with the same playcalls.

I'm also pretty confident that if the playcalling was similar to what Trey saw in the Arizona and Chicago games that Darnold wouldn't do any better.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I am just so tired of some posters talking about the lumps Trey will take, and being unwilling to do that.....while at the same time were totally ok with Jimmy's inconsistent play over the past few years. The QB position was almost never THE reason our team won with Jimmy as the starter, yet they arent ok with another QB being in the same position.

Hopefully Purdy regains his health and balls out so we never will have to find out. Just the inconsistent arguments from some posters are just maddening. Opinions on what we need/have at the QB position shouldnt change depending on QB. And thats exactly what happens on this board. Its maddening.

1000%

Well seeing that we almost always lost without jimmy, I would say he was THE reason. People don't give his efficiency and leadership enough credit. He helped us get to a super bowl.

was he the main reason we were scoring? No. He wasn't Rodgers or Brady out there, he didn't carry us, but he constantly put the team in position to convert downs, get YAC, score. Etc. That stuff is extremely important to winning.

it indirectly impacts the defense/special teams. Let's the defense rest, have good field position, make sure the punt team isn't always backed up, reasonable field goal distance.

my main concern with Trey is he hasn't been able to do that. So when I personally say "lumps", I'm talking scoring 10 a game and the defense is exhausted because they're always on the field.

if Trey was more efficient, the argument would make more sense. Trey turned the ball over more than he scored, very inefficient, very inaccurate (50% completion), etc. THATS the main problem with Lance.

people talk too much about what Lance BRINGS and not enough what he DOESNT BRING. What he doesn't bring is the real issue - accuracy, efficiency, scoring, first downs, leadership etc. if he can get those down, he will be a good qb. But let's not act like he has. He's only done that for 1.5 quarters of one game.

id bet anything that Kyle is uncomfortable with Lance starting right now because of what he isn't currently bringing - which begs the question, how much experience does he need before he gets that stuff down? No one knows but it isn't a couple games.

every single down, is new to Lance. He's most likely never experienced any of it in football. He's really really green.

Stopped reading right there. I thought we have been over this 10000 times. We have always had TRASH backups to Jimmy up until 2022. Everyone knows Jimmy is better than CJ Beathard, Brian Hoyer, Nick Mullens, etc. That doesnt mean he is THE reason we won. You are better than this Tank.

I didn't say you couldn't plug in another good qb and not get wins. If you look at our rosters over that time period, he was the player that helped us get those wins. Without him, we don't, we didn't have any other player who could do it.

so you can't say he isn't the main reason we won in those situations.

our defense carried a lot of it, our run game carried a lot of it, but when you're talking those aspects couldn't carry us to wins without him - it's strange to say he wasn't the missing piece on those teams.

same players, same coaches, different results without him. So you can't act like he wasnt a huge part of the success.

jimmy isn't manning. Jimmy wasn't putting the team on his back. But that same defense and run game, great coaching, wasnt winning without him. We didn't have another player who could do what he was doing. There are others around the league but Jimmy did a lot of things at an elite level, he just wasn't a well rounded elite qb. The things he did at a very high level are 1) hard to find in aQB. 2) very important to winning.

you could also simultaneously say we didn't win it all because of his. But we won a lot of games because of how he ran the offense. He just wasn't good enough to overcome the rest of the team not having a good day.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Jimmy is clearly a better QB than Trey based on all available evidence to us. We might not have won games because of Jimmy… he's an average QB. He also wasn't a complete anchor and our offense was better than functional most of the time he played.

There's no inconsistency where you're seeing it. These are not plug and play pieces.

yes Jimmy Gesus >>>> than TL

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Stopped reading right there. I thought we have been over this 10000 times. We have always had TRASH backups to Jimmy up until 2022. Everyone knows Jimmy is better than CJ Beathard, Brian Hoyer, Nick Mullens, etc. That doesnt mean he is THE reason we won. You are better than this Tank.

I probably shouldn't of said THE reason. I'd say he was the missing piece on those teams, based on the pieces we had.

i don't think it's fair to say "THE" for anything on our team at the time cause we needed quality play from all groups to win with that style of ball.

I should of said "jimmy was a key piece to us winning". We needed him and didn't have anyone else that could do what he was doing for us. Fair?