Mark affirms all logically possible stances. Mark has responded for himself on these. Nor is it likely, from the apparent nature of the Thomas text, that it was intended as a passive copy of one of the Synoptics, or a harmony of all of them. That process does not totally obliterate the original wording in all cases, and in one case it does not obliterate evidence that the saying in question can only have been derived from Luke. Thomas and synoptics take the same verbatim phrases from oral tradition.
Verbatim agreement implies text relations.
This, as far as I know the history of the subject, is the foundation principle on which the mutual relationship of the Synoptics themselves is predicated. Another route remains theoretically possible in other instances, but pending argument for that other route, the default presumption would now seem to be in favor of the Synoptics as the more plausible sources in the other instances also. Th is demonstrated in one instance, and at a minimum the opposite direction of relationship is not plausible in the other instances. Chronologically speaking, Thos cannot be at once earlier and later than Luke, and Mark's demonstration of directionality also places Thomas as later than Luke. So far as I know, no one has proposed this.