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

[Mac_MaloneV1]

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

What security? He got the same number of years as if they gave him a 5th-year. What Love gets is the chance to be a free agent after a year of starting.

The Packers are in the same stupid position Dallas would be, where they have a QB cap hit of $40+m and a QB who has never really played. The difference is that the Packers are a rebuilder right now, and acting as such, so they're willing to take the massive hit on Rodgers this year knowing that they won't be contending.

They don't have the second year of dead money with Rodgers, but if Love is good this year, they're going to have to give him the same $40m+ contract that all the other QBs get and he'll hold all of the leverage.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

That’s all I’m saying. They have NO NEED to force a contract extension at this point in time. So don’t.

Let 2023 play out.

If he earns it, PAY HIM.

If he doesn’t, DON’T.

The status quo is that his cap hit is untenable next year. That means they lose what little market leverage they have. It's not that simple.

 

[Stash]

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

You’re leaving out the part where just paying Dak makes it incredibly 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.

You’ve apparently closed the book on Trey Lance. I haven’t and clearly neither have the Cowboys.

 

[Stash]

The status quo is that his cap hit is untenable next year. That means they lose what little market leverage they have. It's not that simple.

But it is. They’re not locked into doing anything with Prescott’s contract. They have plenty of other deals to rework and money to move around. All of which is preferable to being obligated to throwing $200 million plus in a new contract if the player hasn’t earned it.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

You’re leaving out the part where just paying Dak makes it incredibly MORE EXPENSIVE.



You’ve apparently closed the book on Trey Lance. I haven’t and clearly neither have the Cowboys.

No it doesn't, not against the cap. Designating him a post June 1 and paying Lance to be the starter will be more expensive, especially in 2025. Total dollars doesn't matter, player salaries are a rounding error for this franchise.

No, I haven't. But he hasn't shown anything to suggest he's ready to be a starter on a contending team next year. The idea that he can do that in practice in 2023 is laughable.

 

[Stash]

No it doesn't, not against the cap.

You’ll have to explain this claim.

No, I haven't. But he hasn't shown anything to suggest he's ready to be a starter on a contending team next year.

How much have you seen from him? Short answer is not much.

The idea that he can do that in practice in 2023 is laughable.

For you maybe. Not for anyone else. In fact it’s how good teams make evaluations. You see what a young player does in practice and determine if and when they’re ready to start.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

You’ll have to explain this claim.


How much have you seen from him? Short answer is not much.


For you maybe. Not for anyone else. In fact it’s how good teams make evaluations. You see what a young player does in practice and determine if and when they’re ready to start.

I already explained it multiple times. Dak's $25m cap hit plus whatever you're paying other quarterbacks.

We haven't seen anything from him in three years, so the idea that he's going to somehow rapidly develop in year 4 without getting game reps is preposterous.

That's not true at QB. Game reps are all that matter. Besides, the issue isn't whether or not he can start in 2024, it's whether or not he can get a contract. If you do not extend him before 2024, he's going to command the same $250m deal you don't want to give Dak OR you walk and have no quarterback in 2025 - setting your franchise back to square 1 for no reason.

 

[TwistedL0g1k]

The problem with Dak's contract is the amount of money that was pushed out. The team has been kicking the can down the road, but now they have to pay the price for this decision. No restructure will reduce this cost. It can only redistribute it.

Again, this is not a criticism about the amount of money paid Dak. This is about the structure of the deal.

Watch the depth of this team disappear over the next few seasons. We've seen this before- top heavy rosters with fantastic top line talent, and horrible depth behind it. We've seen multi-year periods when the team had staggering amounts of dead money, putting them at a serious disadvantage. Bad restructures and market setting contracts will exact a cost.

 

[VaqueroTD]

I just like that for once, Dak does not feel 100% comfortable about his job. Never let people sit back and rest on their laurels. Lance has a long way to go to be NFL ready but it’s a clear sign that every position is always primed for an upgrade.

 

[Stash]

I already explained it multiple times. Dak's $25m cap hit plus whatever you're paying other quarterbacks.

You mean like the $50 million-plus a year you simply assume is a guarantee?

We haven't seen anything from him in three years, so the idea that he's going to somehow rapidly develop in year 4 without getting game reps is preposterous.

He got two years in San Francisco, not three. And even then just four starts.

That's not true at QB. Game reps are all that matter. Besides, the issue isn't whether or not he can start in 2024, it's whether or not he can get a contract.

Patently false.

If you do not extend him before 2024, he's going to command the same $250m deal you don't want to give Dak OR you walk and have no quarterback in 2025 - setting your franchise back to square 1 for no reason.

Patently false.

 

[Stash]

The problem with Dak's contract is the amount of money that was pushed out. The team has been kicking the can down the road, but now they have to pay the price for this decision. No restructure will reduce this cost. It can only redistribute it.

Bingo! The bill always comes due.

Again, this is not a criticism about the amount of money paid Dak. This is about the structure of the deal.

And getting stuck.

Watch the depth of this team disappear over the next few seasons. We've seen this before- top heavy rosters with fantastic top line talent, and horrible depth behind it. We've seen multi-year periods when the team had staggering amounts of dead money, putting them at a serious disadvantage. Bad restructures and market setting contracts will exact a cost.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

Hopefully they actually win something this time.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

That's the issue there. Well the issue for those that don't like Dak. The time frame is NOW for Lance to show enough to where they don't have to committ long term to Dak. The problem is......he's so far behind that he won't be able to show this any time soon.

Actually, we can lock him in 3 more years, ( this year, 2024 last year of his current deal, and 5th year option. So they can certainly redshirt him this year with an eye on the next 2 years.

What's interesting is how Dak and France wanted the current contract to be shorter when Jerry was pushing for 7 years but I honestly think that's reversed now. I think Jerry and Stephen will push for a shorter extension while Dak will prefer a longer IMO.


https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/trey-lance-72382/

 

[OGSixshooter]

For me, whether you love your QB or not, it would be incredibly short-sighted to not be continually looking down the road. No one plays forever. Some guys wash out. Some get priced out. Some just grow old and retire. But, not constantly looking forward as far as you can see at the most important position on the team would be really dumb.

I don't hate Dak or love him. I've been disappointed. But he's better than most of the QB's out there. Still, I'm one for drafting a mid-round QB every other year or so. I would never rest when it comes to looking for QB talent.

Picking up a 23 year old with enormous potential for next year's 4th? I want the team leveraging Dak's future.

I hate that I can't like posts yet. Wouldn't change a letter of this post.

 

[America's Cowboy]

 

[baltcowboy]

I keep hearing how Shanahan is the quarterback whisperer but what nobody wants to talk about what happens when you are in his dog house. I remember RG3 was drafted by Washington because of the owner Daniel Snyder.The Shanahans preferred Kirk Cousins so look what happened in Washington. I don’t think Lance was drafted by Kyle Shanahan. I believe the rumors that he wanted Matt Jones. Shanahan likes quarterbacks that have played in a system and have plenty of experience. Schaub, Ryan, Cousins, Jimmy G and Purdy fit what Shanahan’s system. I don’t think RG3 and Lance ever did. So I wish the kid luck in Dallas he will start at the bottom but hopefully by next preseason we can start dreaming that we might have stolen one.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

What security? He got the same number of years as if they gave him a 5th-year. What Love gets is the chance to be a free agent after a year of starting.

The Packers are in the same stupid position Dallas would be, where they have a QB cap hit of $40+m and a QB who has never really played. The difference is that the Packers are a rebuilder right now, and acting as such, so they're willing to take the massive hit on Rodgers this year knowing that they won't be contending.

They don't have the second year of dead money with Rodgers, but if Love is good this year, they're going to have to give him the same $40m+ contract that all the other QBs get and he'll hold all of the leverage.

He got a payday similiar to the 5th year option but less than what it would have paid if they just exercised it.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

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.

Cap hit and what you are paying a player are different. Cap hit backwards looking.

 

[PAPPYDOG]

Bon Appétit​

 

[morat1959]

He outplayed the Dallas Defense...while Dak was outplayed by the 49ers Defense....pretty sure Purdy wouldn't have done as well in Daks shoes.

To the contrary, swap QBs and we win the game.

 

[PAPPYDOG]

More mozzarella...............