Both QBs have strengths and weaknesses.
Goltz is athletic and still very raw. He's got good arm strength, allows us to run the zone-read, and makes good decisions. His accuracy issues are overstated here, in my opinion. For all the talk about it, he's two percentage points below Pierce and Hall. That is about about 1 completion difference per game if your QB throws the ball 30 times. I could go on and on about not relying on anecdotes like "Goltz one-hops the ball!" Dude made some bad throws. Overall the percentage still isn't that bad.
Hall played well for a rookie. Very composed, definitely a fit for a traditional offense. Compared to Goltz his arm is weaker and doesn't allow us to run zone-read (at least not well). His decision making was solid in the first half, not so great in the second. He chalked the INTs up to miscommunication with the receivers so maybe I'll pick up on it more when I re-watch the game. The benefit I see in Hall is that he pushes the ball down field. That was probably the most aggressive our offense has been with any of the three QBs. Accuracy was good, not great. Goltz at 57.7%, Hall at 60%, and Pierce at 60.4% means that the difference right now between any of the three is negligible.
I think there are building blocks for success in Goltz and Hall. Personally I'm a fan of the different things we can do with Goltz and for that reason I favour him, but I am really on team AnyoneButBuck. Both theses two QBs have positives and negatives. The only way to find out if either has long term staying power will be to play them and let them play even when their weaknesses appear.