Jump to content

Trey Lance might be the best QB prospect in the 2021 NFL Draft...


Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Klomp said:

Carson Wentz started for 1.5 years against the same "inferior competition" and was drafted No. 2 overall despite playing just 1 FCS opponent (2014 Iowa State, 2-10) in his career. Not sure why folks think it's crazy idea that Lance could be rated highly.....

Senior bowl helped carson though trey wouldnt have that luxury. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ET80 said:

Nobody is saying that, from what I'm seeing. Everyone is saying that that Trevor Lawrence is a better prospect.

Lance could go #2. I highly doubt he goes #1.

I see. Sorry for misconstruing. I guess people were talking specifically about the thread title and comparing to Lawrence, when it felt more like an overall statement of how they feel about Lance in general.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Klomp said:

I see. Sorry for misconstruing. I guess people were talking specifically about the thread title and comparing to Lawrence, when it felt more like an overall statement of how they feel about Lance in general.

No worries, happens to the best of us. Lance is in position to make a run at Justin Fields as the next guy off the board, however. This being said, Fields is also a very intriguing prospect. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, ET80 said:

Nobody is saying that, from what I'm seeing. Everyone is saying that that Trevor Lawrence is a better prospect.

Lance could go #2. I highly doubt he goes #1.

I think he also goes #2 overall.  The Trevor Lawrence hype is too much for anyone to overcome especially a kid who doesn't play in the FBS.  With that said, its not out of the realm of possibility he has a better NFL career.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ET80 said:

simply put, he's the greatest prospect I've seen (regardless of position) since Adrian Peterson in 2007. 

I must say that's kinda crazy.  I can see you saying he's the best QB prospect.  But best prospect regardless of position?  Really?  You think he's more of a sure thing than Myles Garrett and Saquon Barkley?

To me the best prospects regardless of position I've seen since Adrian Peterson are Myles Garrett and Saquon Barkley.  Derek Stingley Jr. is about to join them in two years.

Those 3 prospects are the only guys I have seen where I was sure they would be All-Pro/Future Hall of Fame caliber players with zero doubt. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VanS said:

I must say that's kinda crazy.  I can see you saying he's the best QB prospect.  But best prospect regardless of position?  Really?  You think he's more of a sure thing than Myles Garrett and Saquon Barkley?

Yep. A lot of it is positional value - if I have the greatest QB prospect and the greatest RB prospect, the QB will get the nod simply because the position is more valuable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ET80 said:

Yep. A lot of it is positional value - if I have the greatest QB prospect and the greatest RB prospect, the QB will get the nod simply because the position is more valuable. 

Well then that's a different argument you are making.  He's not the greatest prospect you've seen, he's just the most valuable.  That is understandable.

When I read your statement the first time I thought you were arguing Trevor Lawrence was a better QB prospect than Saquon Barkley was a RB prospect.  And that is what shocked me.  Picking Trevor Lawrence over Saquon Barkley in a draft if both are available is hardly controversial. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, VanS said:

Well then that's a different argument you are making.  He's not the greatest prospect you've seen, he's just the most valuable.  That is understandable.

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that he's the greatest prospect I've seen. It just so happens he's also the most valuable, but that's not exclusive to this discussion.

2 hours ago, VanS said:

When I read your statement the first time I thought you were arguing Trevor Lawrence was a better QB prospect than Saquon Barkley was a RB prospect

Ultimately, I do think this as fact. It's not a wide difference (if Saquan grades as a 99, Lawrence grades at a 99.1 - the difference is miniscule at best, but it exists). Rounding up or down on that figure is subjective, and really a waste of time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, VanS said:

I must say that's kinda crazy.  I can see you saying he's the best QB prospect.  But best prospect regardless of position?  Really?  You think he's more of a sure thing than Myles Garrett and Saquon Barkley?

To me the best prospects regardless of position I've seen since Adrian Peterson are Myles Garrett and Saquon Barkley.  Derek Stingley Jr. is about to join them in two years.

Those 3 prospects are the only guys I have seen where I was sure they would be All-Pro/Future Hall of Fame caliber players with zero doubt. 

Ummm Peyton Manning, Sean Taylor, Julius Peppers, Larry Fitzgerald, Charles Woodson, Champ Bailey, Luke Kuechly  Maurkice Pouncey, Vince Wilfork, Earl Thomas etc were about as cannot miss as you can get from their positions.  

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, VanS said:

I think he also goes #2 overall.  The Trevor Lawrence hype is too much for anyone to overcome especially a kid who doesn't play in the FBS.  With that said, its not out of the realm of possibility he has a better NFL career.   

Of course.  And that I won't fight you on.  Lawrence is almost 100% set to be a better prospect than Lance, but so many things change in the NFL.  The "best" prospect doesn't always have the best career.  Things like that are hard to quantify.  Patrick Mahomes is a good example.  IMO (and his career hasn't changed it), he wasn't a great prospect.  He came from an offensive system that didn't ask QBs to do much that the NFL does, and until him, a system that hadn't produced a quality NFL starter, and he didn't lead his team to any big victories.  But he's already had a great career and may end up being one of the all time greats.  That doesn't necessarily mean he was a great prospect that a lot of people miffed on.

I had both Trubisky and Watson ranked well ahead of him.  Now Trubisky I was just wrong on, but Watson I will still argue was a better prospect.  He'd had moments of greatness against higher level competition, he'd shown the ability, repeatedly, to go on game winning drives, high intangibles, etc.  So far though, he's been stuck with a crappy coach/GM that's squandered his talent, while Mahomes went to the best QB guru in the NFL and was able to sit a year and learn.  And that maximized his potential.

3 hours ago, ET80 said:

Yep. A lot of it is positional value - if I have the greatest QB prospect and the greatest RB prospect, the QB will get the nod simply because the position is more valuable. 

See, I actually still have Lawrence under Andrew Luck as far as QBs I've looked at.  He has another big season where he looks great and leads his team to the playoffs, he'll probably leapfrog Luck.  Lawrence is easily the best since Luck, and it's not very close.  Hell, probably the third would be Cam Newton (this only goes back to like 2008 for me, and 2010 I didn't spend very much time on football).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Daniel said:

See, I actually still have Lawrence under Andrew Luck as far as QBs I've looked at. 

I didn't buy Andrew Luck's mechanics - thought he had too much of a wind-up when he had to get a ball into a tight spot. It wasn't Byron Leftwich bad (his throwing motion was probably the worst I've seen, took him two days to set up to throw deep). If I'm being honest, it wasn't bad at all... it was being nitpicky (which is what happens when someone gets too hyped up). 

This being said, Lawrence has textbook mechanics, capable of throwing from every arm slot with a varied amount of velocity or touch. He can do so from multiple bases as well, rolling in either direction as well as backpedaling (which is something no QB should do, but Lawrence can pull it off).

I'm sure there is going to be some manufactured flaws soon, but I'm not seeing them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ET80 said:

I didn't buy Andrew Luck's mechanics - thought he had too much of a wind-up when he had to get a ball into a tight spot. It wasn't Byron Leftwich bad (his throwing motion was probably the worst I've seen, took him two days to set up to throw deep). If I'm being honest, it wasn't bad at all... it was being nitpicky (which is what happens when someone gets too hyped up). 

This being said, Lawrence has textbook mechanics, capable of throwing from every arm slot with a varied amount of velocity or touch. He can do so from multiple bases as well, rolling in either direction as well as backpedaling (which is something no QB should do, but Lawrence can pull it off).

I'm sure there is going to be some manufactured flaws soon, but I'm not seeing them.

I guess we just had different evals of Luck.  I thought he was a generational, does literally everything well talent.  I'm not gonna pretend to be an expert on throw mechanics: I can spot a really bad one, but that's about it.  But I will say that the differences in Luck and Lawence are 1: Luck, despite playing for a great Stanford team, had much less talent around him than Lawrence.  2. Though they're both in the prototype range for size, Luck was two inches shorter, but 14 lbs heavier than Lawrence's listed size.  Lawrence kinda looks like a scarecrow out there.  I don't think it's a big issue, but if I was an NFL team, I'd want him to fill out that frame a tad more, just to be on the safe side.  And 3. I'm not about to crap on Lawrence's intangibles (I honestly don't know where on earth people are getting concern for that, and I don't think anyone has cited anything other than their lower colon for where it came from), but Luck had god-level intangibles and mental capabilities: team leader from the get-go, crazy smart, well liked by everyone who every interacted with him, football family, and seemingly an encyclopedic knowledge of plays.  I don't expect Lawrence's to be anything less than great, but it's hard to get better than what Luck was working with.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...