Los Angeles Chargers QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
I just don't think it's fair to put higher expectations on Trey because of the investment that was made in him. That blame goes to Kyle and CO. To expect a guy to come in and set the world on fire after missing the COVID year and having one full season at the FCS level is unrealistic. Most rookies take time and Trey was behind the average high level prospect in terms of development. He needs extended playing time to get better in my opinion. My expectations for him without that are pretty low.

As for Jimmy's contract, the team was just in a tough spot with his pending free agency. Ideally you don't pay a guy franchise QB level money and have him not reach expectations, but I was fine with the move at the time. I guess they could have tagged him, but that's an easier judgement in hindsight. Not only did he play well in 17, but he galvanized the team and the fanbase. That's going to be considered when making a decision to commit, and we still had outs in that contract at least. I also think Jimmy gave us a pretty solid return, even though we didn't reach the ultimate goal. His contract ended up being in line with what he was as a player in the later years, even though he was initially paid as a top guy. That said, I definitely felt it was best to try and improve the spot. He's an average player who can't stay healthy.

I was fine with the move at the time too. It was a mistake in hindsight. Just like I was fine with the trade up for a qb. Might be a mistake in hindsight. I know you have already decided it WAS a mistake but i'm willing to see how it plays out first.

This team CANNOT pay franchise money again to a QB and not get the return it got the last time. To expect to maintain the level of roster this team now has over the next 5 years is an extreme ask. We will need the QB to pull their weight.

Originally posted by genus49:
So what you're saying is 21 year old rookie is on the same expectation footing as an 8 year vet right?

Just want to get the main conversation piece in order.

Lol no. A 21 year old rookie who was a top 3 pick is on the same expectation level.

it's year three, how long are you gonna run with excuses if Lance doesn't perform up to Purdy's level??

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
I was fine with the move at the time too. It was a mistake in hindsight. Just like I was fine with the trade up for a qb. Might be a mistake in hindsight. I know you have already decided it WAS a mistake but i'm willing to see how it plays out first.

This team CANNOT pay franchise money again to a QB and not get the return it got the last time. To expect to maintain the level of roster this team now has over the next 5 years is an extreme ask. We will need the QB to pull their weight.

I'm willing to see it play out too (what choice do I have, lol), but we don't get the last two years back either.

It's at least mildly annoying that we spent 3 1st round picks to improve from Jimmy G and had Jimmy G QB'ing the bulk of the next two years, right? We didn't even give ourselves a real chance.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Lol no. A 21 year old rookie who was a top 3 pick is on the same expectation level.

it's year three, how long are you gonna run with excuses if Lance doesn't perform up to Purdy's level??

No he isn't under any circumstance

If the 9ers had traded up for Will Anderson you expect him to be equivalent to Nick Bosa day one? Patently absurd

My issue with things on here is some people blame everyone but Lance. I'm not saying everyone played great around him, but he still gets blame.

like the Bears game - Lance didn't play well AT ALL. Neither did a lot of other guys, like deebos fumble.

for example, the big missed TD early in the game to the back up TE and over threw him, it wasn't a good throw. The TE didn't stretch out for it, so we can blame him for it - but that's a tough ask on that field in that weather.

the weather wasn't good, but it didn't start pouring until like 8 minutes left in the fourth. It rained throughout the game but not poured. So when we get a guy with a cannon and great running ability, he should be able to help overcome that - he didn't do that at all. He should of been able to run around like fields did, which is really why we lost - fields used to legs to make plays.

i understand Lance wasn't the ONLY player to not play well, but Lance wasn't doing things to help them. He didn't play well either.

he wasn't being like Mahomes was in that super bowl where he was making awesome plays but his teammates let him down.

He didn't play well most of the Texans game, but got it together through the second half. In that game, the team carried him and gave him a shot (defense & special teams) - which is fine, very Jimmy-esqe at times.

the Arizona game - he didn't play well at all. The defense kept us in it and he couldn't get it together. He didn't play well. Idk how people thinks he played well overall. It's not even a big deal, I just push back on here when people act like nothings is lances fault.

he's young, very raw, very inexperienced - idk why anyone thought he would play well for the first couple years. Hence why I say all the time, I never understood why this team drafted him with where we were as an organization. Which is why I always say don't let Kyle in the war room. Lol

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
I was fine with the move at the time too. It was a mistake in hindsight. Just like I was fine with the trade up for a qb. Might be a mistake in hindsight. I know you have already decided it WAS a mistake but i'm willing to see how it plays out first.

This team CANNOT pay franchise money again to a QB and not get the return it got the last time. To expect to maintain the level of roster this team now has over the next 5 years is an extreme ask. We will need the QB to pull their weight.

I should add to my last post that they could have rectified the situation in other ways too. Turning away from Brady was a mistake in hindsight (I was fine with it at the time honestly) and that would have improved the position and got us out of the Jimmy G deal obviously.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
I'm willing to see it play out too (what choice do I have, lol), but we don't get the last two years back either.

It's at least mildly annoying that we spent 3 1st round picks to improve from Jimmy G and had Jimmy G QB'ing the bulk of the next two years, right? We didn't even give ourselves a real chance.

Injuries are annoying yes. No doubt about it.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
I should add to my last post that they could have rectified the situation in other ways too. Turning away from Brady was a mistake in hindsight (I was fine with it at the time honestly) and that would have improved the position and got us out of the Jimmy G deal obviously.

See I don't know the real story on Brady because the Dolphins were clearly tampering with the guy and Gronk said he wanted to go to Vegas. Might be more complicated than just the 9ers passed. But yes hindsight keeping Jimmy over Tom was a mistake if that indeed was a possibility.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Injuries are annoying yes. No doubt about it.

For three first round picks, Jimmy should have been replaced year 1. That's enough capital to land an established star at the position (in the rare case they're available). I see no scenario where Trey ever beats a player like Jimmy G out without the extended playing time coming first. It's not a fair expectation of him either.

To be clear, that doesn't mean I think the team should have played Trey right away. I don't. That would have been what's best for him, but the team is considered too. One thing I disagree with other people who were down on Jimmy is that it was impossible to win the SB with him.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
I should add to my last post that they could have rectified the situation in other ways too. Turning away from Brady was a mistake in hindsight (I was fine with it at the time honestly) and that would have improved the position and got us out of the Jimmy G deal obviously.

See I don't know the real story on Brady because the Dolphins were clearly tampering with the guy and Gronk said he wanted to go to Vegas. Might be more complicated than just the 9ers passed. But yes hindsight keeping Jimmy over Tom was a mistake if that indeed was a possibility.

Wasn't that the year Jimmy just took us to a super bowl? Yeah, In hindsight that was a huge mistake but I get why they did it.

we've made a ton of mistakes at QB, it's really the only position this regime has failed at over and over again.

- not drafting mahommes etc for cousins
- making jimmy the highest paid QB - which I really don't think is too much of a mistake but it was a huge gamble
- not going after Brady and keeping jimmy
- not trading jimmy

i won't call the Lance trade/draft a bust yet cause we don't know. He could play this season and ball and I'll eat my crow.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Furlow:
But Purdy also replaced my "binky," so why have I embraced him so much? To the point that I say that I realized it was indeed Jimmy (and yes the combo of Kyle/Jimmy) that was holding us back?

Why did I defend Trey so harshly that I got a two month timeout for doing so?

Sorry, your theory doesn't hold up.

And if it's not racism, then what "narrative" do you keep referring to? Man up and just outright say it.

I just told you want the narrative is. Anyone but Trey. That includes Brock and would've included Brock no matter how he played. Only difference is Brock played so well you couldn't realistically keep on the resign Jimmy path. Had Brock played average you still would've been beating the resign Jimmy drum just like you and the others were until he got hurt.

Same reason it includes Darnold now. It would include Jamarcus Russell if we signed him.

If you were legit about "realizing" it was Jimmy you wouldn't hedge. Kyle was never the issue. Kyle wont be the issue if Trey fails either.

The fact that you thought it referred to racism says more about your internal thoughts than anything.

Lol so weak, you're still avoiding answering. You made it VERY clear that there was un UNDERLYING "narrative" OTHER THAN the play of the QB's. Now you're saying it's only because Purdy is better that I'm not still backing Jimmy? Well, DUH. Jimmy was playing well and helping us win games in my opinion. Got us to two NFCCG's and a Super Bowl. No other Niners QB (including Trey) did anything close to that. Then Purdy got us to the NFCCG. I like QB's who play well and do well. Again, DUH.

Regarding Darnold vs Trey, I think Darnold fits Kyle's offense better. Purdy showed us all that Trey does not. I blamed Kyle for Trey's injuries, well Purdy showed me that Kyle was just calling what he felt Trey could handle. Same as Purdy showed me that Kyle didn't trust Jimmy to throw in certain situations and Jimmy wasn't willing to be aggressive when the situation called for it.

So again, if not racism, what NARRATIVE are you referring to that some of us view Trey as the odd man out?

Originally posted by tankle104:
My issue with things on here is some people blame everyone but Lance. I'm not saying everyone played great around him, but he still gets blame.

like the Bears game - Lance didn't play well AT ALL. Neither did a lot of other guys, like deebos fumble.

for example, the big missed TD early in the game to the back up TE and over threw him, it wasn't a good throw. The TE didn't stretch out for it, so we can blame him for it - but that's a tough ask on that field in that weather.

the weather wasn't good, but it didn't start pouring until like 8 minutes left in the fourth. It rained throughout the game but not poured. So when we get a guy with a cannon and great running ability, he should be able to help overcome that - he didn't do that at all. He should of been able to run around like fields did, which is really why we lost - fields used to legs to make plays.

i understand Lance wasn't the ONLY player to not play well, but Lance wasn't doing things to help them. He didn't play well either.

he wasn't being like Mahomes was in that super bowl where he was making awesome plays but his teammates let him down.

He didn't play well most of the Texans game, but got it together through the second half. In that game, the team carried him and gave him a shot (defense & special teams) - which is fine, very Jimmy-esqe at times.

the Arizona game - he didn't play well at all. The defense kept us in it and he couldn't get it together. He didn't play well. Idk how people thinks he played well overall. It's not even a big deal, I just push back on here when people act like nothings is lances fault.

he's young, very raw, very inexperienced - idk why anyone thought he would play well for the first couple years. Hence why I say all the time, I never understood why this team drafted him with where we were as an organization. Which is why I always say don't let Kyle in the war room. Lol

All of this. Kyle is not a good talent evaluator in terms of translating to the NFL. When he's smiling in the war room and excited about a pick, I know we're about to overdraft the hell out of someone lol.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

One player, the 9ers gave up a s**tload of draft picks for not to mention three possible franchise 1st rounders. And he's someone who should have no excuses right out the gate for what they spent to get him. The 8th year vet, has limitations and is injury prone, but when healthy the 9ers win. Not to mention they only gave up a measly 2nd round pick to get him. So yes, they should be held to the same standards. Lets also not forget Trey Lance has shown he's been just as injury prone as the guy he was replacing.

Um they gave 137 million dollars to keep him. Something that is far more valuable than draft picks. To suggest all Jimmy cost us is a 2 is ridiculous.

So a young player who you trade lots of picks for gets no excuses from the jump but a guy who pay franchise qb money to gets years worth?

Okay and whats the difference, they also gave Trey Lance $30 million. Both aren't making peanuts and expectations were/are high on both. It was the same way with Alex Smith, expectations were he could step right in and look at least more promising than the guy he's replacing.

And the guy they gave $137 million to at least help guide the 9ers to a Super Bowl. The best you guys can tell me about Trey Lance is that he beat a weak ass Houston team.

So what you're saying is 21 year old rookie is on the same expectation footing as an 8 year vet right?

Just want to get the main conversation piece in order.

Could also mean we know our 8 year vet isn't any better than a rookie.

Originally posted by tankle104:
My issue with things on here is some people blame everyone but Lance. I'm not saying everyone played great around him, but he still gets blame.

like the Bears game - Lance didn't play well AT ALL. Neither did a lot of other guys, like deebos fumble.

for example, the big missed TD early in the game to the back up TE and over threw him, it wasn't a good throw. The TE didn't stretch out for it, so we can blame him for it - but that's a tough ask on that field in that weather.

the weather wasn't good, but it didn't start pouring until like 8 minutes left in the fourth. It rained throughout the game but not poured. So when we get a guy with a cannon and great running ability, he should be able to help overcome that - he didn't do that at all. He should of been able to run around like fields did, which is really why we lost - fields used to legs to make plays.

i understand Lance wasn't the ONLY player to not play well, but Lance wasn't doing things to help them. He didn't play well either.

he wasn't being like Mahomes was in that super bowl where he was making awesome plays but his teammates let him down.

He didn't play well most of the Texans game, but got it together through the second half. In that game, the team carried him and gave him a shot (defense & special teams) - which is fine, very Jimmy-esqe at times.

the Arizona game - he didn't play well at all. The defense kept us in it and he couldn't get it together. He didn't play well. Idk how people thinks he played well overall. It's not even a big deal, I just push back on here when people act like nothings is lances fault.

he's young, very raw, very inexperienced - idk why anyone thought he would play well for the first couple years. Hence why I say all the time, I never understood why this team drafted him with where we were as an organization. Which is why I always say don't let Kyle in the war room. Lol

Simply put, It's better to analyze the QB's play individually and rely less on team results. Obviously it's all connected, but if you're judging a guy on wins and losses you're going to have a very incomplete picture of the quality of player. Jimmy G won at a comparable rate to teams with elite QB's but he wasn't ever close to that individually.

We can analyze Trey or any other QB's play without relying on who surrounds them, what kinds of plays they are and are not making etc… with maybe some exception for god awful line play and play calling.

Originally posted by Furlow:
Lol so weak, you're still avoiding answering. You made it VERY clear that there was un UNDERLYING "narrative" OTHER THAN the play of the QB's. Now you're saying it's only because Purdy is better that I'm not still backing Jimmy? Well, DUH. Jimmy was playing well and helping us win games in my opinion. Got us to two NFCCG's and a Super Bowl. No other Niners QB (including Trey) did anything close to that. Then Purdy got us to the NFCCG. I like QB's who play well and do well. Again, DUH.

Regarding Darnold vs Trey, I think Darnold fits Kyle's offense better. Purdy showed us all that Trey does not. I blamed Kyle for Trey's injuries, well Purdy showed me that Kyle was just calling what he felt Trey could handle. Same as Purdy showed me that Kyle didn't trust Jimmy to throw in certain situations and Jimmy wasn't willing to be aggressive when the situation called for it.

So again, if not racism, what NARRATIVE are you referring to that some of us view Trey as the odd man out?

Lol. Good luck. This been his shtick for a while. Then gets in uproar when you assume he's discussing race. You would think one would change what/how he's delivering it if MULTIPLE people is assuming the same thing.

But that says more about him than anything