News: PFT: Cowboys clearly traded for Trey Lance with an eye toward Dak Prescott's future

[Mac_MaloneV1]

Then show me one other QB contract where the team is on the hook for a $35M cap hit in the year(s) after the player is no longer under contract.

Just one?

Jalen Hurts has 4 void years. Lamar Jackson when he inevitably restructures.

But that's immaterial to the point, which is that every quarterback holds all the leverage.

 

[noshame]

Did the guy really have to try and figure out? Mika Parsons versus Dak Prescott? God help him.
And I'm sure Burger King is hiring. In case this analyst gig doesn't work out.

 

[Stash]

Nope, already showed you the numbers.

Then how is Trey Lance worth it? You're going to be paying Lance AND Dak in 2025 when Lance hasn't done a single thing.

That’s what the next year is about.

Evaluating BOTH Prescott and Lance.

After this season, you make an informed decision.

This isn’t that hard to understand.

 

[john van brocklin]

Well this should be an interesting thread to monitor.

Yep , any Dak thread is good for 20 pages, once the bickering gets going.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

That’s what the next year is about.

Evaluating BOTH Prescott and Lance.

After this season, you make an informed decision.

This isn’t that hard to understand.

What are you talking about? It is extremely hard to understand because you're saying you can make a decision about giving Lance a contract without him ever playing regular season games. The idea that he is going to show anything in practice to warrant naming him a starter after 2023 - let alone giving him a lot of money - makes no sense, especially when your standard for giving a big contract is tied solely to playoff success. How you can say "Dak doesn't deserve a contract because he hasn't done enough in the playoffs, but Lance can show enough in practice" is beyond me.

You have to decide on Lance's 5th year by May 2024, before he's ever played regular season games (assuming Dak is gone). If you don't, then, based on 2024, you decide Lance sucks and have no quarterback in 2025 (while still paying Dak) or you have to give Lance a $50m contract to be your starter (while still paying Dak) all while still trying to maintain positoin as a contender. It makes no sense.

 

[DallasInDC]

Dallas defense holds SF to 19 points of which Dak's 2 INT's led to 6 SF points and cost Dallas 3 points.....that was the difference between winning and losing.

So you could easily Argue that the defense allowing them to score also contributed to the loss. There are a lot of things that happen over the course of a game that contributr toa win or loss...somewhere are aware of and see...some we do not. I am a firm believer, no single player in a team sports is 100% directly responsible for a win or loss...even if that player is the QB...the pitcher...or whatever.

 

[USArmyVet]

You're spending more against the cap by releasing him than you are extending him.

Not necessarily as you take the dead money 'hits' for 3 years (see below as actually it's savings for 2 of 3 seasons) versus extending him and going through the BS 3-4 years later at what will of course be a much higher price tag (his current listed 'market value' is $49.7M/AAV which translates into a possible deal, based on a signed 5-year deal, similar to that of Justin Herbert's 5-year 262.5M w/$218M guaranteed) to Dallas by way of Dak's agents. If that kind of deal is signed, just look at Herbert's cap hits: 2024 $19.4M 2025 $37.3M 2026 $46.3M 2027 $58.3M 2028 $71.1M. Herbert's contract is in essence untouchable until 2027 so in my thinking, if Dak underperforms or fails to bring the Cowboys to an NFCCG then better to move on and actually 'save' money in 2024 & 2025 then go through all the crap again with contract talks in 3 years.

Post-June 1st release means the following:

2024: $25.46M dead money hit $34M savings
2025: $25.46M dead money hit $11.005M savings
2026: $11.005M dead money hit $0 savings

 

[plymkr]

It's not dead money if the player is actually on the team. 10th is near the top, and that's before any of the QBs above that restructure. It will likely be closer to top 5.

Yes, you are. Just saying "if he proves it" is flawed logic, because he can't do that until 2024. In which case, you've already committed to him in 2025 via 5th-year or massive contract extension.

This is what you're trying to do:

2023: Dak + Lance ($28m)
2024: Lance + Dead Money ($30m)
2025a: Lance 5th year + Dead Money ($45m) - assumes 5th year $20m value
2025b: Rookie + Dead Money ($30m+)
2025c: UFA + Dead Money ($50m)

Letting Dak go is a commitment to Lance because you either have to exercise his 5th-year next May or be prepared to pay him something like $40m per year in 2025. You're never saving money by cutting Dak, but you are committing to Lance because you'd have no flexibility to do anything otherwise.

Here’s a question I have. Can the Cowboys extend Trey to avoid his 5th year option? Or is the rookie contract locked in?

Before anyone gets upset I’m not advising, advocating or encouraging an extension for Trey. I’m asking about rookie contract rules and if it’s possible to redo his contract to avoid the 5th year option. And before anyone says “Trey would be stupid to do that”, I know that. I’m asking about the rules and if it’s possible.

 

[Stash]

What are you talking about? It is extremely hard to understand because you're saying you can make a decision about giving Lance a contract without him ever playing regular season games. The idea that he is going to show anything in practice to warrant naming him a starter after 2023 - let alone giving him a lot of money - makes no sense, especially when your standard for giving a big contract is tied solely to playoff success. How you can say "Dak doesn't deserve a contract because he hasn't done enough in the playoffs, but Lance can show enough in practice" is beyond me.

It’s not that difficult to understand unless you’re being willfully ignorant about it.

If Dak plays well enough to get this team to a Championship Game, all bets are off. You pay him.

If he struggles again, he has no excuses. You then look for alternatives. Starting with Lance.

If he shows through meeting and practice that he’s developing and worth keeping, that’s what you do.

I hope you now understand.

You have to decide on Lance's 5th year by May 2024, before he's ever played regular season games (assuming Dak is gone). If you don't, then, based on 2024, you decide Lance sucks and have no quarterback in 2025 (while still paying Dak) or you have to give Lance a $50m contract to be your starter (while still paying Dak) all while still trying to maintain positoin as a contender. It makes no sense.

And May of 2024 is after this season. And the year of evaluation that I’ve talked about. You’ll then definitely know what you want to do with Prescott.

 

[KJJ]

I said the day we made the trade, you don’t trade a fourth round pick for a QB if you’re thinking strictly backup QB.

 

[Stash]

Here’s a question I have. Can the Cowboys extend Trey to avoid his 5th year option? Or is the rookie contract locked in?

Before anyone gets upset I’m not advising, advocating or encouraging an extension for Trey. I’m asking about rookie contract rules and if it’s possible to redo his contract to avoid the 5th year option. And before anyone says “Trey would be stupid to do that”, I know that. I’m asking about the rules and if it’s possible.

I think you can do it as early as after the player’s third season.

 

[Big_D]

Here’s a question I have. Can the Cowboys extend Trey to avoid his 5th year option? Or is the rookie contract locked in?

Before anyone gets upset I’m not advising, advocating or encouraging an extension for Trey. I’m asking about rookie contract rules and if it’s possible to redo his contract to avoid the 5th year option. And before anyone says “Trey would be stupid to do that”, I know that. I’m asking about the rules and if it’s possible.

They can decide not to pick up the 5th year option and try to either work out a long term deal after year 3 or let him hit free agency at the end of 4.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

It’s not that difficult to understand unless you’re being willfully ignorant about it.

If Dak plays well enough to get this team to a Championship Game, all bets are off. You pay him.

If he struggles again, he has no excuses. You then look for alternatives. Starting with Lance.

If he shows through meeting and practice that he’s developing and worth keeping, that’s what you do.

I hope you now understand.



And May of 2024 is after this season. And the year of evaluation that I’ve talked about. You’ll then definitely know what you want to do with Prescott.

You are leaving out the part where you have to pay Lance and make your QB room more expensive.

You're saying it's ok to pay Lance without him ever playing games, let alone winning them, but setting an arbitrary ultimatum line for Dak.

That's not even mentioning the fact that you think it's possible that Lance could somehow show in practice he's capable of being a starter on a contender in practice, when he couldn't even beat out Sam Darnold for a backup role elsewhere. There is just no logic to it.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

Not necessarily as you take the dead money 'hits' for 3 years (see below as actually it's savings for 2 of 3 seasons) versus extending him and going through the BS 3-4 years later at what will of course be a much higher price tag (his current listed 'market value' is $49.7M/AAV which translates into a possible deal, based on a signed 5-year deal, similar to that of Justin Herbert's 5-year 262.5M w/$218M guaranteed) to Dallas by way of Dak's agents. If that kind of deal is signed, just look at Herbert's cap hits: 2024 $19.4M 2025 $37.3M 2026 $46.3M 2027 $58.3M 2028 $71.1M. Herbert's contract is in essence untouchable until 2027 so in my thinking, if Dak underperforms or fails to bring the Cowboys to an NFCCG then better to move on and actually 'save' money in 2024 & 2025 then go through all the crap again with contract talks in 3 years.

Post-June 1st release means the following:

2024: $25.46M dead money hit $34M savings
2025: $25.46M dead money hit $11.005M savings
2026: $11.005M dead money hit $0 savings

Idk I'm not reading all this.

You also have to pay other quarterbacks while you do that.

 

[OmerV]

The trade serves several purposes. Sure it sends the signal that Dak can't get comfortable. It may also provide at least some leverage for the Cowboys in negotiating with Dak. But ultimately, even if Dak excels, Lance still may be a better solution as the backup. After all, despite how well Rush has done, there will always be physical limitations.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

Here’s a question I have. Can the Cowboys extend Trey to avoid his 5th year option? Or is the rookie contract locked in?

Before anyone gets upset I’m not advising, advocating or encouraging an extension for Trey. I’m asking about rookie contract rules and if it’s possible to redo his contract to avoid the 5th year option. And before anyone says “Trey would be stupid to do that”, I know that. I’m asking about the rules and if it’s possible.

Yes they can execute his 5th year. It would probably be near a ~$20m cap hit and you'd have to make that decision without him playing any games.

You can't redo a rookie contract but they could theoretically extend before next year.

 

[plymkr]

Yes they can execute his 5th year. It would probably be near a ~$20m cap hit and you'd have to make that decision without him playing any games.

You can't redo a rookie contract but they could theoretically extend before next year.

Ok, thanks for the info

 

[Toruk_Makto]

If you let Dak go, you're paying top money anyway AND don't have a QB.

Even if they were to make Dak a June 1 cut next year, he'd cost ~$25m per year against he cap for the next two.

In 2024, you'd be paying him and Trey Lance ~$30m on the cap and, if Lance is good, closer to $40m the next year, before giving Lance a monster deal (assuming he's any good).

There's just no realistic scenario in which Dak is not extended.

This is not how you should think about the cap. Money owed to Dak is already paid and or guarantees are guarantees. But if you cut him m(not advocating for that) you would save money against the cap that was salary but not yet guaranteed.

What you're talking about is the accounting.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Yes they can execute his 5th year. It would probably be near a ~$20m cap hit and you'd have to make that decision without him playing any games.

You can't redo a rookie contract but they could theoretically extend before next year.

Jordan Love didn't get his 5th year but got some security whiel also saving the team money.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

This is not how you should think about the cap. Money owed to Dak is already paid and or guarantees are guarantees. But if you cut him m(not advocating for that) you would save money against the cap that was salary but not yet guaranteed.

What you're talking about is the accounting.

What? The ~$25m number is directly what he would count against the cap in 2024 and 2025 if he was a June 1 cut next offseason and accounts for prorated bonus. It's not accounting, it's hard numbers against the cap.