[msqueri]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/MlFootballStats/status/1522224153037873153[/tweet]

Passer rating isn't a good stat, and it's a terrible stat for a player in an offense/system with the advantages the Niners provide. Jimmy G had a higher passer rating last year than Patrick Mahomes and Justin Herbert. Nobody should think Jimmy was better than those two. Total QBR is a much better stat. In games with 15+ attempts Lance had QBRs of 31.4, 25.9, and 40.6 and his season QBR was 33.4. If he qualified that would have been 29th of 32 NFL QBs. Jimmy, on a much bigger sample, was 13th.

And Lance was a rookie, youngest NFL player in 2021, with the least experience of any rookie QB. He will absolutely be better in year 2 than year 1, and likely better in year 3 than 2. The question is how much better, and will it turn out to have been worth what was given up to get him. Based on what we have seen so far, and his background, no credible argument can be made that he wasn't worth it.  And I would argue there are more reasons to believe he will be than won't, they are:

1. The Niners are ready to part with Garoppolo.  
2. Lance was much, much better in the 2nd half of his 2nd start than the first half of his first start.
3. Positive things Niners players have said about Lance and the fact no disparaging things have been leaked about him.
4. The way he has handled himself and been a professional with no attitude or drama.

All he has to be is a slightly better than Garoppolo for the trade to have been worth it because getting QBs even that good is exceptionally difficult.

I think DC 86 and I have both made some very "credible" arguments but to each his own. I co-sign his response to you.

I find your last sentence a bit more compelling than DC 86 does. I do question whether this particular trade is the most prudent way to get a QB slightly better than Garoppolo, but I do share your sense that getting a marginal improvement over Garoppolo would be massively valuable. The question is whether Lance gets there. I certainly hope so. I think the track record with picks like him is not super encouraging, but I also think he has an extremely enviable situation very much unlike the situation essentially any #3 pick has ever had. He has the coach and supporting cast to make him look good, if a #3 pick ever did. I certainly don't rule it out.

While DC 86 and I have made our point clear, for the sake of argument let's operate with the standard you posit of Lance being perceptibly better than Garoppolo. Just for the sake of some objectivity/discipline in evaluating Lance going forward, Garoppolo's Total QBR rankings in his two qualifying years were #12 and #13. I'd want Lance to hopefully be a top 10 QB, which is really pretty elite when you think about who those ten are. However, it's only fair to Lance to also note that Garoppolo only had two qualifying years. Availability (health) was a major problem for him. If Lance could be a top 12/13 QB consistently but actually play the seasons out unlike his predecessor, that's worth quite a bit of draft capital (though the question would remain of whether it's better than Mac Jones or Davis Mills or others we could have gotten much cheaper).

To be colloquial about it, the standard you are arguing for of slightly better than Garoppolo is basically that Lance play on the level of a Dak Prescott/Derek Carr/Joe Burrow for years on end. I think that's a lot easier said than done and would bet against it. But certainly possible.

[msqueri]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/MlFootballStats/status/1522224153037873153[/tweet]

Passer rating isn't a good stat, and it's a terrible stat for a player in an offense/system with the advantages the Niners provide. Jimmy G had a higher passer rating last year than Patrick Mahomes and Justin Herbert. Nobody should think Jimmy was better than those two. Total QBR is a much better stat. In games with 15+ attempts Lance had QBRs of 31.4, 25.9, and 40.6 and his season QBR was 33.4. If he qualified that would have been 29th of 32 NFL QBs. Jimmy, on a much bigger sample, was 13th.

And Lance was a rookie, youngest NFL player in 2021, with the least experience of any rookie QB. He will absolutely be better in year 2 than year 1, and likely better in year 3 than 2. The question is how much better, and will it turn out to have been worth what was given up to get him. Based on what we have seen so far, and his background, no credible argument can be made that he wasn't worth it.  And I would argue there are more reasons to believe he will be than won't, they are:

1. The Niners are ready to part with Garoppolo.  
2. Lance was much, much better in the 2nd half of his 2nd start than the first half of his first start.
3. Positive things Niners players have said about Lance and the fact no disparaging things have been leaked about him.
4. The way he has handled himself and been a professional with no attitude or drama.

All he has to be is a slightly better than Garoppolo for the trade to have been worth it because getting QBs even that good is exceptionally difficult.

I think DC 86 and I have both made some very "credible" arguments but to each his own. I co-sign his response to you.

I find your last sentence a bit more compelling than DC 86 does. I do question whether this particular trade is the most prudent way to get a QB slightly better than Garoppolo, but I do share your sense that getting a marginal improvement over Garoppolo would be massively valuable. The question is whether Lance gets there. I certainly hope so. I think the track record with picks like him is not super encouraging, but I also think he has an extremely enviable situation very much unlike the situation essentially any #3 pick has ever had. He has the coach and supporting cast to make him look good, if a #3 pick ever did. I certainly don't rule it out.

While DC 86 and I have made our point clear, for the sake of argument let's operate with the standard you posit of Lance being perceptibly better than Garoppolo. Just for the sake of some objectivity/discipline in evaluating Lance going forward, Garoppolo's Total QBR rankings in his two qualifying years were #12 and #13. I'd want Lance to hopefully be a top 10 QB, which is really pretty elite when you think about who those ten are. However, it's only fair to Lance to also note that Garoppolo only had two qualifying years. Availability (health) was a major problem for him. If Lance could be a top 12/13 QB consistently but actually play the seasons out unlike his predecessor, that's worth quite a bit of draft capital (though the question would remain of whether it's better than Mac Jones or Davis Mills or others we could have gotten much cheaper).

To be colloquial about it, the standard you are arguing for of slightly better than Garoppolo is basically that Lance play on the level of a Dak Prescott/Derek Carr/Joe Burrow for years on end. I think that's a lot easier said than done and would bet against it. But certainly possible.