3rd Overall Pick - Trey Lance vs Justin Fields (with bonus third poll option)

[757-NINER]

 

[49ersfan]

@J-ALL-DAY Albert Breer agrees with your analysis

Quote

2) Obviously, the possibility that Jones would be in play has led to a lot of intrigue with the Niners at No. 3. The team’s brass is still swearing to other teams that they haven’t made a final decision on what they plan to do. Seem impossible? Sure it does, until you really think about it. Of course, Kyle Shanahan had a leaning when the trade was made. He’d done two months of work on those guys. It’d be hard not to have one at that point. But what if, for argument’s sake, Shanahan came to a comfort level with one of the three quarterbacks (beyond Lawrence and Wilson) that the Niners saw as first-rounders? And what if he said, I can see Mac Jones being my quarterback for the next 15 years? And what if he was also intrigued by Lance and Fields, but used Jones as the baseline, the I know I’m going to like what I get at No. 3 regardless guy? And what if that was just the starting point for a month of work to get to know all three and make the best call? That, it seems to me, would be a smart approach for a smart organization. And honestly, I think it is their approach.

Also found this interesting...general comment from Breer, but definitely applies to us...

Quote

For related reasons, this is setting up to be a year when teams may lean on their relationships at the college level more than ever

https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/04/19/mmqb-nfl-draft-primer-20-things-to-know-offseason-workout-squabble

 

[49ersfan]

Also, as per Breer's article, the Bears, WFT, & Panthers will NOT attend Lance's pro day 

The Falcons, Pats, & Broncos are only sending assistant coaches or executives. None of those teams are sending their GM or HC to Lance's 2nd pro day. In fact, i believe we're the only team sending our GM & HC

I know its a 2nd pro day, but if you're investing a top pick in a QB, you'd think the decision makers would show up just to get some face time with your potential QBOTF, maybe run a few throws too (i'm sure we're not the only team who can request that)

Edited April 19, 2021 by 49ersfan

[J-ALL-DAY]

23 minutes ago, 49ersfan said:

Also, as per Breer's article, the Bears, WFT, & Panthers will NOT attend Lance's pro day 

The Falcons, Pats, & Broncos are only sending assistant coaches or executives. None of those teams are sending their GM or HC to Lance's 2nd pro day. In fact, i believe we're the only team sending our GM & HC

I know its a 2nd pro day, but if you're investing a top pick in a QB, you'd think the decision makers would show up just to get some face time with your potential QBOTF, maybe run a few throws too (i'm sure we're not the only team who can request that)

I think the difference may be that those teams attended his first pro day while our top guns did not? And looks like Lance is pretty much running Shanny's script for this pro day so that may have something to do with it.

Either way, it is pretty clear the only reason Lance/Fields are having or had their second pro day is due to Shanny's request of wanting to see them throw in person.; 

[Forge]

Mac is coming, baby

[J-ALL-DAY]

1 minute ago, Forge said:

Mac is coming, baby

The thing is all those things mentioned by Sage and others are correct. Like Mac really is a fast processor and just knows where to go with the ball every single play. He's also super accurate allowing for YAC opportunities for his receivers. 

So like I get ALL that, I really do. I DO get the thinking behind getting Mac.........BUT, a lot of these QBs who are smart and accurate end up falling a bit in the playoffs, such as Brees in recent years. You really have to have insane IQ to succeed in certain weather games if your arm isn't elite. Mac's arm isn't bad by any means, it just isn't anything special. 

Mac can give about everything Jimmy can with better decision making and an actual deep ball. The offense will likely be top 10 for most years, and in some years top 5....As long as the talent is relatively strong. 

However, when the talent isn't all that great? Then what? Fields and Lance have the ability to raise the level of those teams better than Mac and I feel like THAT is what you should gun for in a top 3 pick.

 

[J-ALL-DAY]

55 minutes ago, 49ersfan said:

@J-ALL-DAY Albert Breer agrees with your analysis

Also found this interesting...general comment from Breer, but definitely applies to us...

https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/04/19/mmqb-nfl-draft-primer-20-things-to-know-offseason-workout-squabble

 

It just makes a lot of sense. You HAVE to be okay taking one of those QBs when you make the trade but don't necessarily need to make your final decision. There are certain things you may need to see from the high potential QBs before officially locking into them. Remember, Shanny at the time of the trade really couldn't have talked much to any of the QBs. He couldn't have possibly made a final decision without at least talking to the QBs and seeing how quickly they pick up certain things or knowing what they see on certain plays. 

[Forge]

4 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

The thing is all those things mentioned by Sage and others are correct. Like Mac really is a fast processor and just knows where to go with the ball every single play. He's also super accurate allowing for YAC opportunities for his receivers. 

So like I get ALL that, I really do. I DO get the thinking behind getting Mac.........BUT, a lot of these QBs who are smart and accurate end up falling a bit in the playoffs, such as Brees in recent years. You really have to have insane IQ to succeed in certain weather games if your arm isn't elite. Mac's arm isn't bad by any means, it just isn't anything special. 

Mac can give about everything Jimmy can with better decision making and an actual deep ball. The offense will likely be top 10 for most years, and in some years top 5....As long as the talent is relatively strong. 

However, when the talent isn't all that great? Then what? Fields and Lance have the ability to raise the level of those teams better than Mac and I feel like THAT is what you should gun for in a top 3 pick.

 

Honestly, given his struggles going from a first to second read, I question the processor thing. Thats why I've said over and over that I don't think that his floor is as high as people think and that people are acting like that mental part of his game just transitions over with no problems. The "fast processing" could just as easily be him making pre determined throws, thats why things like that are so hard to evaluate. 

[J-ALL-DAY]

2 minutes ago, Forge said:

Honestly, given his struggles going from a first to second read, I question the processor thing. Thats why I've said over and over that I don't think that his floor is as high as people think and that people are acting like that mental part of his game just transitions over with no problems. The "fast processing" could just as easily be him making pre determined throws, thats why things like that are so hard to evaluate. 

The example Orlovsky and others have shown is what I mean by fast processor. I don't care about the "going through the second read" stuff. You have to diagnose how the defense is playing certain routes and have to quickly make the right decision. Jones does that almost every single time and really knows how to hold the safety with his eyes. Making nothing but predetermined throws would lead to more INTs or near INTs as we have seen with Jimmy. 

His floor isn't the question with me, it is his ceiling....Especially with less than ideal circumstances. Someone like Wilson was able to still keep the Seahawks relevant when he didn't have the best WRs or the OL was shaky or the run game was mediocre. Will Jones be able to do the same? If not, is THAT worth a top 3 pick? You better be confident in your ability to continue putting together a top level roster if the answer is no. 

[Forge]

6 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

The example Orlovsky and others have shown is what I mean by fast processor. I don't care about the "going through the second read" stuff. You have to diagnose how the defense is playing certain routes and have to quickly make the right decision. Jones does that almost every single time and really knows how to hold the safety with his eyes. Making nothing but predetermined throws would lead to more INTs or near INTs as we have seen with Jimmy. 

He had a ton of dropped interceptions though.  I'm just saying...do not be surprised at all if none of this carries over to the next level. Won't matter much for the niners because he's just going to be Jimmy regardless and Kyle will likely make anyone competent, but I I don't think he's nearly as safe or as high floored as people want to believe. 

 

[J-ALL-DAY]

1 minute ago, Forge said:

He had a ton of dropped interceptions though.  I'm just saying...do not be surprised at all if none of this carries over to the next level. Won't matter much for the niners because he's just going to be Jimmy regardless and Kyle will likely make anyone competent, but I I don't think he's nearly as safe or as high floored as people want to believe. 

How many INTs did he have dropped opposed to other QBs in the class?

[Forge]

Just now, J-ALL-DAY said:

How many INTs did he have dropped opposed to other QBs in the class?

Good question. Suppose it depends on who you ask. Ian Wharton gave him credit for 8, where as Fields had about 3, Lawrence 6, and Lance 5. Wilson was the one who was charted without many. 

Whether you want to trust those numbers or not is another question. Hard to say. I've seen a number of the Mac Jones INT drops, games like UK, but haven't watched everything for him and for everyone else. I've seen a number of the Trey Lance ones as well, but that doesn't bother me much given the age and all. I would expect some inconsistencies there. 

Fields compensates for dropped INTs with fumbles though, so suppose that is all the same. 

[J-ALL-DAY]

Just now, Forge said:

Good question. Suppose it depends on who you ask. Ian Wharton gave him credit for 8, where as Fields had about 3, Lawrence 6, and Lance 5. Wilson was the one who was charted without many. 

Whether you want to trust those numbers or not is another question. Hard to say. I've seen a number of the Mac Jones INT drops, games like UK, but haven't watched everything for him and for everyone else. I've seen a number of the Trey Lance ones as well, but that doesn't bother me much given the age and all. I would expect some inconsistencies there. 

Fields compensates for dropped INTs with fumbles though, so suppose that is all the same. 

Okay, let's say those numbers are true. So he had four INTs along with 8 more potential INTs in 13 games. That's actually really really solid, especially with how many deep balls he throws. No QB will ever get all those passes INT and in most cases it is around half or even a little less that get caught. 

The question is what kind of throws that were completed that would potentially be INT on the next level? I think that is far more important. 

[Forge]

Just now, J-ALL-DAY said:

Okay, let's say those numbers are true. So he had four INTs along with 8 more potential INTs in 13 games. That's actually really really solid, especially with how many deep balls he throws. No QB will ever get all those passes INT and in most cases it is around half or even a little less that get caught. 

The question is what kind of throws that were completed that would potentially be INT on the next level? I think that is far more important. 

You consider 12 Ints in 13 games with 35% of his throws coming behind the line to be solid? 

[Forge]

I will say that one thing I was expecting when watching Mac that didn't happen as much as I thought was that he didn't always throw to the wide side of the field. I was expecting him to throw there much more often than he did.