oh, marvin……………

So, it has been publicly denied, that means it’s true, right?

Though we agree with the notion that the Niners aren’t planning to try to swing a trade for Houshmandzadeh, we disagree with the two reasons Lewis has provided.

First, it’s not tampering for a team to engage in internal discussions regarding a possible trade for a player under contract with another franchise. Tampering arises only if the team has communications with the player or his agent aimed at enticing him to join that team.

Second, plenty of teams in their right mind would trade for a player who is going to be an unrestricted free agent. As part of the deal, the team would sign the player to a long-term contract.

In fact, the second point made by Lewis underscores the absurdity of the tampering case against the Niners from a year ago. Bears linebacker Lance Briggs was playing pursuant to a franchise tender that applied only through the end of the year, pursuant to a contract that prevented the use of the franchise tag on him again. The Niners got in trouble for talking to Briggs’ agent, Drew Rosenhaus, regarding a possible extension. But what the hell did the Bears think the Niners were going to do? Send a first-round pick to Chicago for a ten-game rental and the chance of signing him to a new contract even though the franchise rules prevented him from signing a new deal until the start of the 2008 league year?

Anyway, Lewis is right — the Niners don’t want Houshmandzadeh. But the coach’s reasoning has more holes than his team’s roster.