Dallas Cowboys QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

I provided context to those stats. Out of those 105 yards in the first half, 16 of them came from YAC. Even if you take away the 45 yarder to Deebo, his efficiency stats in that game were still spectacular. So perhaps you missed that part of my post because you were so anxious to debunk my argument.

Data analysis is becoming more and more prevelant in today's NFL. Get used to it or atleast provide something we can all understand to back up your claims. I am all for watching film analysis but those who like to use film as proof never seem to provide any. Perhaps its because they aren't as fluent in film as they claim to be. Which is probably because they actually haven't a clue what they are even watching in the first place.

My argument isn't about using film analysis and not using stats. It's about you claiming to be a stat guy, but only actually using a select few of stats that are just as much team stats as individual stats, and using those selected stats to determine how an individual played.

If you're going to rely on statistics, grab as many of them as you can... not a select few. Use them in conjunction with film analysis. Doesn't have to be your own film watching either. There's a plethora of high level film analysis you can use in conjunction with stats, and what you think you see yourself.

I asked for this film since you claim to be a film guy but you have provided zero film to back up your claims. Talk about the pot calling the kettle. Atleast I provided data with context, may I add. The truth is that no matter how well Trey plays, you all will find a way to twist it around because you all have drawn your line in the sand and nothing that Trey does will ever be enough to change your mind.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Time is up. You have no idea what you even posted. Atleast I can tell you in my own words how they determine passer rating.

Passer rating is a formula that is based heavily around completion percentage and to a lesser extent TD% and INT%.

Congratulations!

I don't know what all went into building my car. I just drive it. Do you walk everywhere because you don't know how your car was built?

I don't know how this PC was built. I just type on it.

I don't know how my beer was brewed I just drink it.

I don't know how they tabulate QBR I just use it.

I'm not one of those people that needs everything broken down for me.

Congrats to you though!

If you didn't know how your car worked, you wouldn't be able to drive it. If you didn't know how your computer worked, you wouldn't be able to use it. If you don't know how a stat works, you shouldn't be able to use it.

The real issue is that you all spent all day trying to degrade a game that Trey played very well in. What that tells me is that no matter what Trey does, you all will find a way to twist it around because you all have made your allegiance and nothing and I mean absolutely nothing will change your mind.

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Who are they projecting as the qb? It's an honest question.

im not a Trey hater - just not a Trey believer. I want the guy to prove me wrong, there is a difference

Check Vegas odds and you'd find your answer. I've told you guys how this summer would play out prior to Brock's injury that we'd host a competition he'd be expected to win UNLESS he won the Super Bowl then Trey wouldn't even get to compete for the job

Once Brock got hurt I knew then that Trey would be favored to start because the injury gave Trey the leg up this offseason

We can have wishful thinking all we may but right now Trey is the odds on favorite to start week one. That would not be the case if Brock were able to compete for that job this offseason

Some of us have a very hard time admitting these things but I don't. I'm not betting on it though because I only bet on myself

Okay well from what I've read from Vegas predictions - it isn't Lance. That's why I ask. So if you have anything saying they're projecting Lance - please share it.

The other stuff I've seen has him as the same probability as Lance In week1. A majority of things I've read have lance only starting as week 1 and not the season.

i only ask cause you posted the 49ers projections as a season and i haven't seen anything that says lance all year. I was curious if you had anything I hadn't seen

Originally posted by YACBros85:
If you didn't know how your car worked, you wouldn't be able to drive it. If you didn't know how your computer worked, you wouldn't be able to use it. If you don't know how a stat works, you shouldn't be able to use it.

The real issue is that you all spent all day trying to degrade a game that Trey played very well in. What that tells me is that no matter what Trey does, you all will find a way to twist it around because you all have made your allegiance and nothing and I mean absolutely nothing will change your mind.

You can't say you all. I yesterday admitted to his play not being as bad as I remembered it. I had him as having 3-4 throws that should have been picks. When I rewatched his throws they weren't as blatantly off as I remembered. Now, there still were 2 or 3 that could've been picked. Just not as horrible throws as I remembered.

That said, I rewatched his 1st half plays again yesterday after your posts. I still seen a struggling Trey. You likely want to reference his completion % in the 1st half. And yes he completed a good % of his passes but we never really went anywhere.

Also that game you may have noticed that aside from his 2 TDs. The majority of his passes he struggled with was from under center. Did most of his damage in shotgun. When he had to turn his back to the defense it was a struggle.

That was supposed to be One of the reasons he was drafted. Because he ran Kyle's offense in college. While he wasn't as horrible as we make him sound in that game. He still struggled to run Kyle's offense.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
If you didn't know how your car worked, you wouldn't be able to drive it. If you didn't know how your computer worked, you wouldn't be able to use it. If you don't know how a stat works, you shouldn't be able to use it.

The real issue is that you all spent all day trying to degrade a game that Trey played very well in. What that tells me is that no matter what Trey does, you all will find a way to twist it around because you all have made your allegiance and nothing and I mean absolutely nothing will change your mind.

As for you stst reference. I know if I hit this button it's going to start. If I turn the wheel, the car will turn. I don't need to know how or why it works to use it. Same thing with the QBR stat. I don't need to know how or why it works to use it.

Originally posted by tankle104:
So far it's the wr, OL, and weathers fault. Lol :/ poor Trey

Let's just say it's all true, Trey also played poorly. Please explain to me that int that secured the bears victory?

context is important, we use it for everything else. Why not for that bears game? Cause it doesn't fit your narrative?

The OL played poorly, Deebo fumbled in the RZ, Jennings fell on what would have been a walk in TD (because of the field conditions). The defense gave up two TDs on blown coverages. These are all facts!

your reaction to that shows you can't have an objective debate about it. No one said Lance played amazing. He had his own issues for sure. You got no problem throwing whatever context there is to prove that lol…but when applying it to the whole team, nah it's an excuse.

Lance read the coverage wrong and the DB made a play. Let's stop pretending that Brock never read a coverage wrong and threw balls right at a DB….they just dropped it (a couple times). Same s**t with Jimmy. That's context and if you can't handle having that part of the conversation, then wtf are you even doing here?

ya'll are crucifying a 22yr old WK1 of the season AND we're not allowed to discuss/bring up anything about the rest of the team? A whole lot of narrative pushing man.

Originally posted by TreyDeyEeyDey:
It's Treys fault too but to say these factors have nothing to do with the outcome, is just silly. This entire conversation really is. Judging any player after a few games is just stupid.

This…we're not allowed to talk about anything else. Yet we listened to all of it for Jimmy for the past 5 years.

man you know how much these fans would have hated Allen/hurts/Lawrence over their first 100 passing attempts not saying he becomes a top end QB, it's just way to small of a sample size to form a decision either way…that's the common sense approach to it, and some people based off their own bias opinion refuse to use common sense.

Originally posted by tankle104:
Okay well from what I've read from Vegas predictions - it isn't Lance. That's why I ask. So if you have anything saying they're projecting Lance - please share it.

The other stuff I've seen has him as the same probability as Lance In week1. A majority of things I've read have lance only starting as week 1 and not the season.

i only ask cause you posted the 49ers projections as a season and i haven't seen anything that says lance all year. I was curious if you had anything I hadn't seen

You have everything you need and I've told you all you need to know. Now you need to decide whether you'll be rooting for our team to surpass 12 wins starting with Trey under center week 1 or not? I'll be rooting for this team and it's players

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by tankle104:
So far it's the wr, OL, and weathers fault. Lol :/ poor Trey

Let's just say it's all true, Trey also played poorly. Please explain to me that int that secured the bears victory?

context is important, we use it for everything else. Why not for that bears game? Cause it doesn't fit your narrative?

The OL played poorly, Deebo fumbled in the RZ, Jennings fell on what would have been a walk in TD (because of the field conditions). The defense gave up two TDs on blown coverages. These are all facts!

your reaction to that shows you can't have an objective debate about it. No one said Lance played amazing. He had his own issues for sure. You got no problem throwing whatever context there is to prove that lol…but when applying it to the whole team, nah it's an excuse.

Lance read the coverage wrong and the DB made a play. Let's stop pretending that Brock never read a coverage wrong and threw balls right at a DB….they just dropped it (a couple times). Same s**t with Jimmy. That's context and if you can't handle having that part of the conversation, then wtf are you even doing here?

ya'll are crucifying a 22yr old WK1 of the season AND we're not allowed to discuss/bring up anything about the rest of the team? A whole lot of narrative pushing man.

I've posted the cut up of all of Trey's plays in that game earlier in this post and asked these guys to look at it with fresh eyes and pay attention to the whole team. They don't want to deal with the truth because they prefer to just make generalized statements that Trey stunk cuz the box score isn't pretty and the team lost.

Somehow judging a 21/22 year old kid with limited experience with more detail and higher expectations than a QB in his 9th season in the NFL and his 6th with this team…

Originally posted by krizay:
You can't say you all. I yesterday admitted to his play not being as bad as I remembered it. I had him as having 3-4 throws that should have been picks. When I rewatched his throws they weren't as blatantly off as I remembered. Now, there still were 2 or 3 that could've been picked. Just not as horrible throws as I remembered.

That said, I rewatched his 1st half plays again yesterday after your posts. I still seen a struggling Trey. You likely want to reference his completion % in the 1st half. And yes he completed a good % of his passes but we never really went anywhere.

Also that game you may have noticed that aside from his 2 TDs. The majority of his passes he struggled with was from under center. Did most of his damage in shotgun. When he had to turn his back to the defense it was a struggle.

That was supposed to be One of the reasons he was drafted. Because he ran Kyle's offense in college. While he wasn't as horrible as we make him sound in that game. He still struggled to run Kyle's offense.

Could be cause it was his second start and he hadn't been practicing with the ones all year since that Arizona game in like week 5. The team still won and kept their playoff chances alive regardless even if it wasn't pretty.

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Waterbear:
It's easy to forget the players around them when Purdy had Kittle and CMC and Trey didn't.

If Trey had played a full season or the opposite situation happened, in that, Trey had Kittle and CMC but Purdy didn't. Or if Purdy started the season with multiple inexperienced offensive lineman and Trey came in later when they were more comfortable. I would think all of these points were valid.

If I was a betting man I'd still say Purdy will win the job, but it's still too soon.

A comparison between Trey and Brock shouldn't and doesn't have to rely on supporting cast around them... even though the cast directly affects the statistics people are arguing about.

Brock consistently showed poise under pressure, a good understanding of the offense, a willingness to pull the trigger on open reads, an ability to improvise and both kill bad plays and extend plays and turn potential losses into gains, good accuracy, good field vision, an ability to go through progressions quickly. These traits in conjunction with the supporting cast are what lead to success in terms of production and statistics. Only the production and statistics would directly suffer if the cast was different, but the individual play wouldn't necessarily change. You might see a QB try to do too much because he has to make up for subpar teammate performance however.

I'm not sure what everyone thinks Trey showed consistently in his limited time (we can have good arguments about it) but I would say it was mostly limited to an ability to attack a defense with his legs, solid vision, and the ability to stretch the defense with solid downfield accuracy. Beyond that it was inconsistent accuracy, frenetic play in the pocket, hesitation in pulling the trigger and in the run game, inconsistent timing. Are those things going to change with more experience? We all hope so. But they're not necessarily going to change if he has Kittle instead of Tyler Kroft, or CMC instead of Jeff Wilson Jr. If Trey didn't improve in those areas, some of these statistics could still improve because the impact the other players have on them would be different (because it would be better players).

What I do know is when Kyle makes an inevitable decision between the two, it won't be because of passer rating, YPA, or TD percentage. He's going to watch 'da philm' and judge it.

This. Brock lost Deebo in his first start so it kinda evens out, but it still doesn't matter, I know what I'm seeing. We can give Trey more weapons and they'll make a few more plays for him, but the offense will still be the same clunky mess that relies on Kyle getting a long developing deep shot open for him to score consistently

LMAO

Yeah Brock losing Deebo in the middle of a game that was already a blowout is the same thing as:

-No Kittle
-Jeff Wilson Jr. instead of Christian Mccaffrey
-60% of the OL playing for the first time
-playing in the rain on the road
-week 1

Yeah, totally even.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
My argument isn't about using film analysis and not using stats. It's about you claiming to be a stat guy, but only actually using a select few of stats that are just as much team stats as individual stats, and using those selected stats to determine how an individual played.

If you're going to rely on statistics, grab as many of them as you can... not a select few. Use them in conjunction with film analysis. Doesn't have to be your own film watching either. There's a plethora of high level film analysis you can use in conjunction with stats, and what you think you see yourself.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I asked for this film since you claim to be a film guy but you have provided zero film to back up your claims. Talk about the pot calling the kettle. Atleast I provided data with context, may I add. The truth is that no matter how well Trey plays, you all will find a way to twist it around because you all have drawn your line in the sand and nothing that Trey does will ever be enough to change your mind.

I'm going to re-up my last post, because you still don't seem to want to address what my argument is.

Your opinion that I've drawn a line in the sand with Trey is dead wrong. You asked me directly if I would be ok with Trey keeping the job if he played well and the team was winning, and I responded by telling you I hope it happens and I hope he dominates. That would be the best case scenario for our team. You apparently don't believe me because I don't accept your extremely shallow statistical analysis of his performance versus the Texans, and I've explained why I don't in detail. Moving on.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
My argument isn't about using film analysis and not using stats. It's about you claiming to be a stat guy, but only actually using a select few of stats that are just as much team stats as individual stats, and using those selected stats to determine how an individual played.

If you're going to rely on statistics, grab as many of them as you can... not a select few. Use them in conjunction with film analysis. Doesn't have to be your own film watching either. There's a plethora of high level film analysis you can use in conjunction with stats, and what you think you see yourself.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I asked for this film since you claim to be a film guy but you have provided zero film to back up your claims. Talk about the pot calling the kettle. Atleast I provided data with context, may I add. The truth is that no matter how well Trey plays, you all will find a way to twist it around because you all have drawn your line in the sand and nothing that Trey does will ever be enough to change your mind.

I'm going to re-up my last post, because you still don't seem to want to address what my argument is.

Your opinion that I've drawn a line in the sand with Trey is dead wrong. You asked me directly if I would be ok with Trey keeping the job if he played well and the team was winning, and I responded by telling you I hope it happens and I hope he dominates. That would be the best case scenario for our team. You apparently don't believe me because I don't accept your extremely shallow statistical analysis of his performance versus the Texans, and I've explained why I don't in detail. Moving on.

Its quite simple really. I pointed out a game that Trey started and finished where he played very well. His efficiency stats back that up. I even provided context with those stats. It was a game that the stakes of a playoff berth were on the line. You and a couple others spent the entire day trying to degrade his performance in that game and the only shred of evidence that you all could come up with was QBR. A stat that none of you can even define in your own words. You keep throwing out the word film in your defense but never actually provide any film. So you are attempting to tear a player down without any evidence to back it up. If Trey's performance in that game did not warrant any credit to him in your opinion, suffice to say that nothing Trey does will ever convince you to change you opinion of him. And no matter how well he performs when he gets his next opportunity you will be calling for him to be benched as soon as Brock is healthy. Deny it all you want but the proof is in the conversations that were going on in here yesterday.

Honestly, I am done with this debate and with the WZ for a while. You all can continue to police this thread and beat down every single post that points out any positive from Trey Lance. I don't really care anymore. I will see you all in a few months when there is something new to talk about.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

It's easy to forget the players around them when Purdy had Kittle and CMC and Trey didn't.

If Trey had played a full season or the opposite situation happened, in that, Trey had Kittle and CMC but Purdy didn't. Or if Purdy started the season with multiple inexperienced offensive lineman and Trey came in later when they were more comfortable. I would think all of these points were valid.

If I was a betting man I'd still say Purdy will win the job, but it's still too soon.

A comparison between Trey and Brock shouldn't and doesn't have to rely on supporting cast around them... even though the cast directly affects the statistics people are arguing about.

Brock consistently showed poise under pressure, a good understanding of the offense, a willingness to pull the trigger on open reads, an ability to improvise and both kill bad plays and extend plays and turn potential losses into gains, good accuracy, good field vision, an ability to go through progressions quickly. These traits in conjunction with the supporting cast are what lead to success in terms of production and statistics. Only the production and statistics would directly suffer if the cast was different, but the individual play wouldn't necessarily change. You might see a QB try to do too much because he has to make up for subpar teammate performance however.

I'm not sure what everyone thinks Trey showed consistently in his limited time (we can have good arguments about it) but I would say it was mostly limited to an ability to attack a defense with his legs, solid vision, and the ability to stretch the defense with solid downfield accuracy. Beyond that it was inconsistent accuracy, frenetic play in the pocket, hesitation in pulling the trigger and in the run game, inconsistent timing. Are those things going to change with more experience? We all hope so. But they're not necessarily going to change if he has Kittle instead of Tyler Kroft, or CMC instead of Jeff Wilson Jr. If Trey didn't improve in those areas, some of these statistics could still improve because the impact the other players have on them would be different (because it would be better players).

What I do know is when Kyle makes an inevitable decision between the two, it won't be because of passer rating, YPA, or TD percentage. He's going to watch 'da philm' and judge it.

This. Brock lost Deebo in his first start so it kinda evens out, but it still doesn't matter, I know what I'm seeing. We can give Trey more weapons and they'll make a few more plays for him, but the offense will still be the same clunky mess that relies on Kyle getting a long developing deep shot open for him to score consistently

LMAO

Yeah Brock losing Deebo in the middle of a game that was already a blowout is the same thing as:

-No Kittle
-Jeff Wilson Jr. instead of Christian Mccaffrey
-60% of the OL playing for the first time
-playing in the rain on the road
-week 1

Yeah, totally even.

I said kinda even, not totally. Also said it didn't matter because you can tell by watching (yes, in a small sample) that one is a big athlete while the other is a QB. I've also never seen CMC make a QB good.

We can give Trey CMC Kittle and Aiyuk. The QB play will still be bad

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

My argument isn't about using film analysis and not using stats. It's about you claiming to be a stat guy, but only actually using a select few of stats that are just as much team stats as individual stats, and using those selected stats to determine how an individual played.

If you're going to rely on statistics, grab as many of them as you can... not a select few. Use them in conjunction with film analysis. Doesn't have to be your own film watching either. There's a plethora of high level film analysis you can use in conjunction with stats, and what you think you see yourself.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

I asked for this film since you claim to be a film guy but you have provided zero film to back up your claims. Talk about the pot calling the kettle. Atleast I provided data with context, may I add. The truth is that no matter how well Trey plays, you all will find a way to twist it around because you all have drawn your line in the sand and nothing that Trey does will ever be enough to change your mind.

I'm going to re-up my last post, because you still don't seem to want to address what my argument is.

Your opinion that I've drawn a line in the sand with Trey is dead wrong. You asked me directly if I would be ok with Trey keeping the job if he played well and the team was winning, and I responded by telling you I hope it happens and I hope he dominates. That would be the best case scenario for our team. You apparently don't believe me because I don't accept your extremely shallow statistical analysis of his performance versus the Texans, and I've explained why I don't in detail. Moving on.

Its quite simple really. I pointed out a game that Trey started and finished where he played very well. His efficiency stats back that up. I even provided context with those stats. It was a game that the stakes of a playoff berth were on the line. You and a couple others spent the entire day trying to degrade his performance in that game and the only shred of evidence that you all could come up with was QBR. A stat that none of you can even define in your own words. You keep throwing out the word film in your defense but never actually provide any film. So you are attempting to tear a player down without any evidence to back it up. If Trey's performance in that game did not warrant any credit to him in your opinion, suffice to say that nothing Trey does will ever convince you to change you opinion of him. And no matter how well he performs when he gets his next opportunity you will be calling for him to be benched as soon as Brock is healthy. Deny it all you want but the proof is in the conversations that were going on in here yesterday.

Honestly, I am done with this debate and with the WZ for a while. You all can continue to police this thread and beat down every single post that points out any positive from Trey Lance. I don't really care anymore. I will see you all in a few months when there is something new to talk about.

You don't think a certain group being bitter about a 49er player playing great and making history isn't the root of the problem?