I only drive 104mph in and out of traffic when Im sober…(and maybe a few times when I was chasing someone on the job…like from Indianapolis to Toronto…allegedly)
Overqualified, it is a bitch…
I was torn on Lance and liked Brock.
I don’t think anyone else on the board mentioned Brock besides me. I even started a thread about him.
Funny thing is Lance landed in the ideal situation. If he can’t make it in SF I doubt he can make it anywhere else.
3 Likes
2 Likes
This the biggest hurdle, not the draft compensation.
If I told you the Lions gave Lance a 2 year 20 million fully guaranteed contract how happy would you be? Now add the loss of draft picks.
For comparison; taking a project QB in the 3rd round is effectively a 4 year deal for 5 million over the course of the contract.
2 Likes
Nice ! I’m going to start listening to you lol
No fo real tho , Brock seems like a find.
1 Like
You could also have an offensive package for Lance, and it would force defensive coordinators to plan for the possibility of Lance coming in at any point during the game.
Now the issue is he’s going to be very expensive for a backup because he was picked so high in the draft. I believe he’s due like 20 mill over the next 2 seasons, that’s a lot of money for a clipboard holder. He’d be one of the most expensive backup QB’s in the league for sure. Maybe the most expensive actually.
Forget what I just said… now I’m interested for sure after reading this. He’s much cheaper than I thought. It would be 9 mill over 2 years. not bad at all.
While the Lions will have missed out on the first two years of Lance’s affordable rookie deal, they won’t carry any of the heavy signing bonus ($22 million). Lance only has salaries of $940,000 and $1.055 million left on his deal and roster bonuses of $2.8 in 2023 and $4.255 million in 2024. In other words, he’ll cost just north of $9 million over the next two seasons.
Not only should we NOT trade for Lance, we should take this as a useful lesson about burning high picks on a rookie QB when you already have a competent starter. I can’t say SF definitely would’ve won it all if they’d kept the 12th pick in 2021, and their 1st-round picks in 22 and 23, to bring in studs at other positions. But spending all those resources on Lance certainly didn’t make them any better.
DO NOT DRAFT AR/LEVIS. DO NOT TRADE HIGH PICKS FOR TREY LANCE.
8 Likes
That’s why our situation is so unique. We won’t be in this position again (drafting top 6) and don’t have to give up capital for a potential “blue chip” QB prospect. It’s something that should definitely be considered. I’m not advocating for it, but it makes a lot of sense.
The SF scenario isn’t a deterrent to not take a QB in this draft. It’s actually a reason why you should…takes zero draft capital to get one (potentially).
And again, it’s not what I want, but I would understand it.
1 Like
Lol…you do understand that nobody had a high grade on Brock including the 49ers.
2 Likes
I had him in several of my mock drafts early that year around the 6th to 7th round. I liked his footwork and his ability to get the ball out. However I thought his arm strength would be a problem in the NFL.
2 Likes
I’d rather have Hendon Hooker.
Pass.
2 Likes
The same nfl that had a high grade on lance. Including it sounds like Brad.
Lance was drafted as a developmental guy with high end skills , getting injured wasn’t the plan not being outplayed by Brock
I’d have an incomplete grade on n Trey where I’d only sell low if
1 a locker room revolt about to happen
2 he’s really not good
Otherwise he’s a cheap back up developmental guy for SF too
Given Brock injury too …
or unless they’re blown away by Darnold
Hate to be that guy, but tell that to the Chiefs, Packers, and Chargers who all did that exact thing semi-recently for likely hall of fame replacements.
Every circumstance is different. Speaking about this in absolutes doesn’t work.
My only issue with Hooker as a backup is if Goff got hurt this year, sure hope he doesn’t, Hooker probably isn’t going to be ready to play this year, maybe he would be ready mid-late in the season. I highly doubt he’s going to be ready for training camp and preseason. He’s more a 2024 plan. He tore his ACL in late November, I know the reports are positive but I bet he starts on PUP.
Even if he’s ready I’d expect the team that drafts him to take it slow, kinda like we did with Jamo. You wouldn’t invest a 1st or 2nd round pick in a guy and rush him back from a knee injury, at least I sure wouldn’t.
I don’t think this can be understated. If Kyle Shanahan is giving up on a QB, I’d recommend passing.
2 Likes
This is a faulty argument. The capital is the same either way.
Let’s say the pick is worth what the Chiefs paid to move up for Mahomes. A current-year first, current-year third, and next year’s first.
By using the pick instead of trading it, we’re giving up potentially having those picks by trading down. The opportunity cost is the same.
Imagine trading 3 first round picks and a 3rd rounder and giving up on the guy after 3 games. That would be pretty wild.
1 Like
I wouldn’t touch him if Shanny is giving up.
Hint to Brad on Sudfeld.
2 Likes
This logic doesnt work for me. Why wouldnt we be in this position again? Because we are too good? Well if we are so good, that seems like a good problem to have and likely due in large part to the play of the QB, the most important player on the field. So why would we move on from a player that makes us too good?