Trey Lance?

[mrcompletely11]

2 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I disagree about Lance looking "abysmal." I think that's way over the top. Lance was way more raw, younger, and simply less experienced than most QBs when he entered the NFL. And yet, one of the brightest minds in the game gave up a king's ransom to acquire him. That's because he sees a lot of potential---maybe unmatched potential in the kid. And, just like Corral, Lance really hasn't had hardly any opportunity to show what he has. What, a couple of regular season games? Are y'all kidding me? Seriously? 

All that being said, the 49ers will never get the compensation back that they spent to acquire him (nor should they) if they put him on the trade block. If they decide to trade him, it will be more about Brock Purdy's surprising---some might even say sensational--ascension than Lance being or "trending towards being" a bust. Shanahan has supported Lance consistently and completely, and has honestly refuted any unsubstantiated rumors about Lance being unfit for the job. As far as that goes, I think that he still believes in him, but he likely believes in Purdy now also.

So, if they decide to trade Lance, it will not be about Lance being a bust, but for any suitors it will be about the compensation. Just like any young QB with upside, if you can get Lance for a relative song and dance---basically at a value, then you should probably do that. The Devil is in the details. 

Dave is most certainly the worst.  

[Mr. Scot]

19 minutes ago, top dawg said:

So, if they decide to trade Lance, it will not be about Lance being a bust, but for any suitors it will be about the compensation. Just like any young QB with upside, if you can get Lance for a relative song and dance---basically at a value, then you should probably do that. The Devil is in the details. 

That's some world class rationalization there.

If they move on from a guy they gave up that much to get in just his third year when they've barely seen him play, yeah they think he's a bust.

[La Pantera]

They will end up moving on from Lance. Maybe not this season, but it'll happen. Purdy will be the guy. I honestly think the kid may win the SB this year.

[45catfan]

6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

That's some world class rationalization there.

If they move on from a guy they gave up that much to get in just his third year when they've barely seen him play, yeah they think he's a bust.

The 49ers won't move on from Lance this coming year.  They have seen enough our of Purdy they finally cut the apron strings on Jimmy G and roll with those two.  However, if Lance can't stay healthy next season or doesn't produce, then he could potentially be considered a bust.  Sitting behind an successful incumbent QB in year 1 as a "growth year" and and getting hurt early on in year 2 doesn't necessarily mean he's a bust.  Year three will be super important to the rest of his career though.

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

The 49ers won't move on from Lance this coming year.  They have seen enough our of Purdy they finally cut the apron strings on Jimmy G and roll with those two.  However, if Lance can't stay healthy next season or doesn't produce, then he could potentially be considered a bust.  Sitting behind an successful incumbent QB in year 1 as a "growth year" and and getting hurt early on in year 2 doesn't necessarily mean he's a bust.  Year three will be super important to the rest of his career though.

I don't think they'll move on this year but that's the hypothetical scenario this thread is based on.

I do think they'll ultimately move on without much of anything much to show for him. It just might not be this year.

[top dawg]

38 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

That's some world class rationalization there.

If they move on from a guy they gave up that much to get in just his third year when they've barely seen him play, yeah they think he's a bust.

I think that's a simply a simplistic perspective, and I seriously doubt that Shanahan and the 49ers are looking at it that way. They have a good problem based upon circumstance.

If you're telling me that you would get rid of what you really wanted even though it dropped into your lap, just because you paid more for something that you believed that you could develop into what you want, I'm going to think that you have some screws loose. 

[Mr. Scot]

12 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I think that's a simply a simplistic perspective, and I seriously doubt that Shanahan and the 49ers are looking at it that way. They have a good problem based upon circumstance.

If you're telling me that you would get rid of what you really wanted even though it dropped into your lap, just because you paid more for something that you believed that you could develop into what you want, I'm going to think that you have some screws loose. 

If it turned out that "what I really wanted" wasn't very good, yeah I'd move on from it.

It'd be foolish not to.

[top dawg]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

If it turned out that "what I really wanted" wasn't very good, yeah I'd move on from it.

It'd be foolish not to.

Yeah, but that's not really what's going on in the case of the 49ers.

[Panthers Fan 69]

16 hours ago, tukafan21 said:

at any cost?

I wouldn't give up anything as high as a 2nd for him, but if he could be had for say a 3rd and maybe a future 3rd or 4th, is that not worth kicking the tires on and at worst we have a backup QB who can run an option based offense if whoever the starter is gets injured?

Stop trading picks for projects or busts. Just draft until you hit. 

[Mr. Scot]

4 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Yeah, but that's not really what's going on in the case of the 49ers.

None of us here knows what's "really going on" inside the 49ers.

What we know from the outside is that they're winning (big) with Brock Purdy and Lance is an afterthought right now.

[top dawg]

5 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

None of us here knows what's "really going on" inside the 49ers.

What we know from the outside is that they're winning (big) with Brock Purdy and Lance is an afterthought right now.

Sure, we don't know if in fact that Lance will even be put on the block, but we do know what Shanahan has said about Lance, and we do know that he has consistently stated that he still believes in him.

Edited January 15, 2023 by top dawg

[Mr. Scot]

10 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Sure, we don't know if in fact that Lance will even be put on the block, but we do know what Shanahan has said about Lance, and we do know that he has consistently stated that he still believes in him.

The Pope is always perfectly healthy until he's dead.

Likewise, coaches always 100% believe in a guy right up till they cut or trade him.

Edited January 15, 2023 by Mr. Scot

[ForJimmy]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

That's some world class rationalization there.

If they move on from a guy they gave up that much to get in just his third year when they've barely seen him play, yeah they think he's a bust.

I don’t think it’s that simple. It would be more like they have found their guy in an unlikely place and can use Lance to get more assets to build a team around their (potentially proven) young QB. 
An extreme example would be the Pats trading Bledsoe for a 1st when Brady came out of no where to prove he is the guy. They didn’t think Bledsoe was bad or washed up, just knew they had their future QB by dumb luck and could get a return for their other QB. 
With that said I would keep Lance for at least one more year if I were them to make sure Purdy keeps up his play and you can put him in blowouts/preseason to let the league see how he has developed to drive up his value. Keep feelers out there and you also have a young backup with huge potential in the mean time.

[ForJimmy]

17 minutes ago, Panthers Fan 69 said:

Stop trading picks for projects or busts. Just draft until you hit. 

Who should we draft at 9?