Dallas Cowboys QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by dj43:
After six years of Lynch/Shanahan and York making a big deal of no leaks, this info did NOT come from the 49ers.

At this time of the year, teams are expected to put up all kinds of smokescreens to conceal their true intentions. There are too many scenarios to list on one page of why a team would want to tell Rap that they are calling the 49ers to ask about TL. Of course, Lynch will listen if only because he is diligent about maintaining a cordial relationship with other GMs around the league.

Yep, I flat out disagree with you. The inclusion of language that they were fielding calls but not making them, beyond the information that multiple teams are interested, serves nobody but SF. It is exactly the type of information a team would put out in the hopes of generating interest, or a bidding war, for a player they were willing to move.

I stand by the observation that the FO would not break with a major point of Lynch coming on board in the first place - STOP THE LEAKS. Remember the chaos of the Baalke days?

All it takes is for an agent, perhaps even Lance's agent, to call Rapaport and say the 49ers have been fielding calls about Lance. It puts pressure on other teams to try to make a deal for his (Lance's) client. That would fit with Lynch having said they will always talk about improving the team but it does not mean he is affirming the rumor.

I'll stay with that until proven otherwise.

The leaks are a good thing when you're trying to drive up player interest and trade value. The front office is playing this right

There is no evidence that the 49er FO has initiated any of those calls. All IR reported was that the 49ers were fielding calls - the FO was answering the calls from others.

They are "playing this right" by maintaining the 6-year history of no leaks.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

It's the same thing as having them battle, we get bad QB play. I think a 2 at least needs to be involved, but why would you need a deal you can't refuse when the end result is the same?

As Waterbear has pointed out repeatedly it is conjecture to assume that as we have too small a sample on the guy to know.

With Darnold we have a large sample of bad play coupled with having to learn a whole new offense to know he's unlikely to be very good week 1.

Not the same at all.

If they have their 3 firsts investment competing with Darnold, it's common sense that he sucks right now. Yes he needs time, this isn't the place for that with the limited amount of time he has left here

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:
And you are now taking this out of context. The guy I was replying to said why would a team give anything up for Trey and I told him why - They can afford to develop him and we can't. Now you're coming after me about Darnold when I'm not in favor of developing him either

You mentioned the 9ers window, that's referring to this season. THIS SEASON they'll have to develop one of them to not be terrible as Brock is likely going to miss 6 games at least imo.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by dj43:

After six years of Lynch/Shanahan and York making a big deal of no leaks, this info did NOT come from the 49ers.

At this time of the year, teams are expected to put up all kinds of smokescreens to conceal their true intentions. There are too many scenarios to list on one page of why a team would want to tell Rap that they are calling the 49ers to ask about TL. Of course, Lynch will listen if only because he is diligent about maintaining a cordial relationship with other GMs around the league.

Yep, I flat out disagree with you. The inclusion of language that they were fielding calls but not making them, beyond the information that multiple teams are interested, serves nobody but SF. It is exactly the type of information a team would put out in the hopes of generating interest, or a bidding war, for a player they were willing to move.

I stand by the observation that the FO would not break with a major point of Lynch coming on board in the first place - STOP THE LEAKS. Remember the chaos of the Baalke days?

All it takes is for an agent, perhaps even Lance's agent, to call Rapaport and say the 49ers have been fielding calls about Lance. It puts pressure on other teams to try to make a deal for his (Lance's) client. That would fit with Lynch having said they will always talk about improving the team but it does not mean he is affirming the rumor.

I'll stay with that until proven otherwise.

The leaks are a good thing when you're trying to drive up player interest and trade value. The front office is playing this right

There is no evidence that the 49er FO has initiated any of those calls. All IR reported was that the 49ers were fielding calls - the FO was answering the calls from others.

They are "playing this right" by maintaining the 6-year history of no leaks.

Yes other teams leaked this to drive up his price on themselves lol whatever helps you sleep

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

And you are now taking this out of context. The guy I was replying to said why would a team give anything up for Trey and I told him why - They can afford to develop him and we can't. Now you're coming after me about Darnold when I'm not in favor of developing him either

You mentioned the 9ers window, that's referring to this season. THIS SEASON they'll have to develop one of them to not be terrible as Brock is likely going to miss 6 games at least imo.

He's just a backup. They aren't winning anything with either of them. Super terrible, semi terrible, who cares? Get value for Trey if you can

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:
If they have their 3 firsts investment competing with Darnold, it's common sense that he sucks right now. Yes he needs time, this isn't the place for that with the limited amount of time he has left here

They haven't even hit the practice field yet so we don't who's competing yet.

Let's be real you'd take whatever deal was offered for Trey because you don't want him.

Holy crap, someone wants to challenge NY85 for # of posts in this thread.

Originally posted by SLCNiner:
Holy crap, someone wants to challenge NY85 for # of posts in this thread.

Until Trey is off the team he's never gonna sleep. Is what it is.

Originally posted by dj43:
I stand by the observation that the FO would not break with a major point of Lynch coming on board in the first place - STOP THE LEAKS. Remember the chaos of the Baalke days?

All it takes is for an agent, perhaps even Lance's agent, to call Rapaport and say the 49ers have been fielding calls about Lance. It puts pressure on other teams to try to make a deal for his (Lance's) client. That would fit with Lynch having said they will always talk about improving the team but it does not mean he is affirming the rumor.

I'll stay with that until proven otherwise.

I certainly remember them, and I still don't buy for a second that this team doesn't leak when they feel it's in their interest. Again, they will craft public statements to their benefit, including the idea that they 'don't leak' following a time period when they were getting crushed by fans, media, and former coaches, for doing just that. All teams leak, and this one is no exception.

Understanding that agents, instead of teams, can be the source of trade rumors or other information, I would question how the inclusion of the information I highlighted from Rapoport's report would actually benefit Lance if he was looking to be traded. This report neither casts Lance in a positive light, nor puts any actual pressure on the 49ers to trade him. Further, it would make very little practical difference to our situation going forward if Lance's agent believes we could trade him for the right price, and tries to drum up interest in this manner in the press.

Take the report and work backwards.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by dj43:
I stand by the observation that the FO would not break with a major point of Lynch coming on board in the first place - STOP THE LEAKS. Remember the chaos of the Baalke days?

All it takes is for an agent, perhaps even Lance's agent, to call Rapaport and say the 49ers have been fielding calls about Lance. It puts pressure on other teams to try to make a deal for his (Lance's) client. That would fit with Lynch having said they will always talk about improving the team but it does not mean he is affirming the rumor.

I'll stay with that until proven otherwise.

I certainly remember them, and I still don't buy for a second that this team doesn't leak when they feel it's in their interest. Again, they will craft public statements to their benefit, including the idea that they 'don't leak' following a time period when they were getting crushed by fans, media, and former coaches, for doing just that. All teams leak, and this one is no exception.

Understanding that agents, instead of teams, can be the source of trade rumors or other information, I would question how the inclusion of the information I highlighted from Rapoport's report would actually benefit Lance if he was looking to be traded. This report neither casts Lance in a positive light, nor puts any actual pressure on the 49ers to trade him. Further, it would make very little practical difference to our situation going forward if Lance's agent believes we could trade him for the right price, and tries to drum up interest in this manner in the press.

Take the report and work backwards.

It widens the market and allows him a greater range of choices.

Once a team starts leaking, it is hard to stop the leaks. The fact John made such an issue of it BEFORE he agreed to take the job tells me he isn't going back on the agreement. He doesn't have to. The world is his oyster right now. The QB room is covered and only an amazing offer is going to change anything.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

If they have their 3 firsts investment competing with Darnold, it's common sense that he sucks right now. Yes he needs time, this isn't the place for that with the limited amount of time he has left here

They haven't even hit the practice field yet so we don't who's competing yet.

Let's be real you'd take whatever deal was offered for Trey because you don't want him.

They've already told us there will be competition and I think we can get some team to give a 2nd so I wouldn't budge from that. I don't care if he's here or not, it's just smart to get something for him

Originally posted by dj43:
It widens the market and allows him a greater range of choices.

Once a team starts leaking, it is hard to stop the leaks. The fact John made such an issue of it BEFORE he agreed to take the job tells me he isn't going back on the agreement. He doesn't have to. The world is his oyster right now. The QB room is covered and only an amazing offer is going to change anything.

He said this publicly to a previously irate fanbase, after taking a job that nobody had him pegged for, following the team's well reported inability to successfully land any of their initial targets at the GM position. Potential candidates were refusing interviews and dropping out of the process. These guys are not PR geniuses, lol. They're open books.

I'm not disagreeing that it's going to take a good offer to take Lance off our hands. I've never felt otherwise. What I'm suggesting is they are looking for it. If Lance's agent wanted to force a trade, there's much better ways to do it. Lance wouldn't be in line for a new contract, he doesn't have control over his potential destination...

Originally posted by dj43:
There is no evidence that the 49er FO has initiated any of those calls. All IR reported was that the 49ers were fielding calls - the FO was answering the calls from others.

They are "playing this right" by maintaining the 6-year history of no leaks.

When they announced Brock has earned the right to start and is the leader in the clubhouse, they absolutely Knew that would result in teams calling and asking, what do you want for the other guy then. It's perfect. What are you offering? We'll log that, and see who's put in the highest bid by draft time, and make a decision if we want to let him go then.

We're not leaking, and we're not initiating calls. Once you talk to other teams and don't reject the conversations outright, that get's too disseminated for it to stay away from other teams and out of the press. And it puts us in the better bargaining position of receiving offers instead of trying to make a sale to someone that can feign disinterest. We can feign disinterest, and they must make the sale.

Stanford didn't raise no fool in Lynch.

Originally posted by BOI49er:
When they announced Brock has earned the right to start and is the leader in the clubhouse, they absolutely Knew that would result in teams calling and asking, what do you want for the other guy then. It's perfect. What are you offering? We'll log that, and see who's put in the highest bid by draft time, and make a decision if we want to let him go then.

We're not leaking, and we're not initiating calls. Once you talk to other teams and don't reject the conversations outright, that get's too disseminated for it to stay away from other teams and out of the press. And it puts us in the better bargaining position of receiving offers instead of trying to make a sale to someone that can feign disinterest. We can feign disinterest, and they must make the sale.

Stanford didn't raise no fool in Lynch.

Dissemination of that information only benefits us. It does not benefit a team actually trying to trade for him. It doesn't necessarily benefit Lance if he wants out.

Start with the assumption that we want to trade Lance and work backwards. What would be the types of things we'd do to put us in the best position to trade him.

- Let it be known in some fashion that we are willing to trade him.
- Talk up the asset publicly and privately.
- Highlight, or artificially attempt to create/increase, demand in an effort to get the best possible offer.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by BOI49er:

When they announced Brock has earned the right to start and is the leader in the clubhouse, they absolutely Knew that would result in teams calling and asking, what do you want for the other guy then. It's perfect. What are you offering? We'll log that, and see who's put in the highest bid by draft time, and make a decision if we want to let him go then.

We're not leaking, and we're not initiating calls. Once you talk to other teams and don't reject the conversations outright, that get's too disseminated for it to stay away from other teams and out of the press. And it puts us in the better bargaining position of receiving offers instead of trying to make a sale to someone that can feign disinterest. We can feign disinterest, and they must make the sale.

Stanford didn't raise no fool in Lynch.

Dissemination of that information only benefits us. It does not benefit a team actually trying to trade for him. It doesn't necessarily benefit Lance if he wants out.

Start with the assumption that we want to trade Lance and work backwards. What would be the types of things we'd do to put us in the best position to trade him.

- Let it be known in some fashion that we are willing to trade him.
- Talk up the asset publicly and privately.
- Highlight, or artificially attempt to create/increase, demand in an effort to get the best possible offer.

Another thing that puts us in position is signing a solid backup…….which they have also done