Contract cost question if Jones disappoints

Be optimistic and don’t dwell on the negative what-ifs? Just sayin’

😎

Or rather, continues. I guess it’ll never end.

and should be relevant to all Giants fans.

In comment 16056526 SomeFan said:

Quote:

and should be relevant to all Giants fans.

Not really. We should all know (if you are all-in on Schoen, or mostly so) that Schoen and company protected themselves against negative
production..That’s probably why it took so long to get it done.

until the actual numbers come out. Need a little patience and there will be about a half dozen threads on the possibilities.

and stop with all BS speculation?

In comment 16056526 SomeFan said:

Quote:

and should be relevant to all Giants fans.

Maybe, maybe not but couldn’t it have been asked in one of the pinned DJ threads at the top of the page?

The never ending DJ threads are a nuisance.

on how the additional 12m in virtual guarantees apply to the contract. If it's your traditional year 3 and/or 4 roster bonuses, there's probably a painful but doable out after 2. If it vests after the first year, then its basically 94M fully guaranteed and its hard to reconcile how they would be able to get out of that on only a 4 year deal before the final year if the first year hit is 19M. Yes, it's BS speculation but it's just math on that front.

In comment 16056557 AcesUp said:

Quote:

on how the additional 12m in virtual guarantees apply to the contract. If it's your traditional year 3 and/or 4 roster bonuses, there's probably a painful but doable out after 2. If it vests after the first year, then its basically 94M fully guaranteed and its hard to reconcile how they would be able to get out of that on only a 4 year deal before the final year if the first year hit is 19M. Yes, it's BS speculation but it's just math on that front.

They should be able to get out no matter what after year 3, that's just a function of any NFL contract and how bonuses amortise unless someone is silly enough to put in massive non-conditional guaranteed salary in year 4.

I never said they couldn't. The distinction I made was whether they could have an out after year 2 which is probably dependent on how that additional 12M vests. Regardless, he's likely extended or cut before UFA even starts on the final year of his deal.

In comment 16056511 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

Be optimistic and don’t dwell on the negative what-ifs? Just sayin’ 😎

Aw, c'mon BB56, it's a fair enough question.

What if we signed Aaron Rodgers... ; )

In comment 16056530 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

In comment 16056526 SomeFan said: Quote: and should be relevant to all Giants fans. Not really. We should all know (if you are all-in on Schoen, or mostly so) that Schoen and company protected themselves against negative production..That’s probably why it took so long to get it done.

I agree on protecting against downside by Scheon but how he did that is certainly something that a Giants fan should have at least some interest in. I am not one to analyze contracts and never looked into how they work but I do have some curiosity about this contract. Probably more curiosity than any other player's contract since I have been a fan (which is too long to mention).

without knowing the details and structure of the contract. We want to see a smaller signing bonus and large salaries at the back end of the contract. Any team releasing a player will still get hit with the signing bonus, but they are not on the hook for the salaries.

In comment 16056603 SirLoinOfBeef said:

Quote:

In comment 16056511 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: Be optimistic and don’t dwell on the negative what-ifs? Just sayin’ 😎 Aw, c'mon BB56, it's a fair enough question. What if we signed Aaron Rodgers... ; )

😂

1. We know that the first year cap hit is around $19m.
2. We know that the total deal is $160m.
3. We know that the guaranteed money is $82m.

So we can make some rough assumptions. My guess is that there's one of two ways they could have handled it:

1. Stack the biggest cap hit into year 2, so that getting out after year 2 is not that bad.
2. Make the signing bonus bigger so that the cap hits increase progressively. If so it's more like a 3 year commitment.

Either way, cutting after year 3 would be fine based on what we know now. The tradeoff is when they want future flexibility.

My guess, fwiw, is that they are stacking a major cap hit into year 2 (50m) and then having the cap hits in years 3 and 4 being in the 40s.

If he decides to have a sex change after year one or two and starts loading up on estrogen? Is that considered a violation of the contract? Is estrogen a banned substance? Would it hurt his trade value? Will he start wearing dresses as all the edge rushers claim should now be required of quarterbacks?

If Jones somehow makes the leap and plays like one of the top QBs in the league in 2023, if you've stacked the cap hit into year 2 it's easy enough to restructure and defer more of it so that you can go all-in in 2024, if needed.

If he sucks, you bite the bullet in 2024 and be ready for 2025.

They signed him to a relatively short deal that appears to be at least somewhat front loaded. I don't think one has to be Columbo to suspect that:

-Schoen/Daboll like Jones and think he could continue to improve
-They aren't 100% sold on him, though
-They aren't enamored with any QBs in the draft, nor do they see an acceptable replacement in the FA crop
-They made a reasoned judgment that Jones was the best option for the immediate future, and worked to sign him to a deal that maximizes their ability to improve the roster around him
-If he doesn't get the job done over the next couple of years, they've put themselves in a position to replace him relatively painlessly

In comment 16056542 Eman11 said:

Quote:

In comment 16056526 SomeFan said: Quote: and should be relevant to all Giants fans. Maybe, maybe not but couldn’t it have been asked in one of the pinned DJ threads at the top of the page? The never ending DJ threads are a nuisance.

Maybe maybe not but couldn’t you have just scrolled past this thread you aren’t interested in?

In comment 16056775 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

They signed him to a relatively short deal that appears to be at least somewhat front loaded. I don't think one has to be Columbo to suspect that: -Schoen/Daboll like Jones and think he could continue to improve -They aren't 100% sold on him, though -They aren't enamored with any QBs in the draft, nor do they see an acceptable replacement in the FA crop -They made a reasoned judgment that Jones was the best option for the immediate future, and worked to sign him to a deal that maximizes their ability to improve the roster around him -If he doesn't get the job done over the next couple of years, they've put themselves in a position to replace him relatively painlessly

This.

In comment 16056780 RicFlair said:

Quote:

In comment 16056542 Eman11 said: Quote: In comment 16056526 SomeFan said: Quote: and should be relevant to all Giants fans. Maybe, maybe not but couldn’t it have been asked in one of the pinned DJ threads at the top of the page? The never ending DJ threads are a nuisance. Maybe maybe not but couldn’t you have just scrolled past this thread you aren’t interested in?

Sure but that doesn’t change the fact we have yet another DJ thread cluttering the first page.

Honestly it really is a bit much when we have and had more than enough already don’t you think? No reason this and others couldn’t be asked in any of the other many threads.

In comment 16056881 Eman11 said:

Quote:

In comment 16056780 RicFlair said: Quote: In comment 16056542 Eman11 said: Quote: In comment 16056526 SomeFan said: Quote: and should be relevant to all Giants fans. Maybe, maybe not but couldn’t it have been asked in one of the pinned DJ threads at the top of the page? The never ending DJ threads are a nuisance. Maybe maybe not but couldn’t you have just scrolled past this thread you aren’t interested in? Sure but that doesn’t change the fact we have yet another DJ thread cluttering the first page. Honestly it really is a bit much when we have and had more than enough already don’t you think? No reason this and others couldn’t be asked in any of the other many threads.

Let's get this straight. There are 20 I love Daniel Jones threads that aren't "too much" for you, that aren't cluttering the page for you, that you don't comment on. But one of the few threads that seeks actual information that will inform the strategy down the road, that's a bridge too far. Just say you don't like to see anything that isn't an emphatic endorsement of the deal. It would be more honest.

Let’s get it straight in case you missed my point. While your questions might be valid did we really need another DJ thread to answer them? I don’t think so.

As for why I didn’t comment on being tired of all the other DJ threads it’s because enough people have done so already. I was hoping with the deal now done, the forum might get back to not being cluttered with even more DJ threads but alas, it’s not to be.

Maybe tomorrow but somehow I doubt that.

In comment 16056699 Milton said:

Quote:

If he decides to have a sex change after year one or two and starts loading up on estrogen? Is that considered a violation of the contract? Is estrogen a banned substance? Would it hurt his trade value? Will he start wearing dresses as all the edge rushers claim should now be required of quarterbacks?

Thank you for a little levity.

In comment 16056699 Milton said:

Quote:

If he decides to have a sex change after year one or two and starts loading up on estrogen? Is that considered a violation of the contract? Is estrogen a banned substance? Would it hurt his trade value? Will he start wearing dresses as all the edge rushers claim should now be required of quarterbacks?

She becomes the first woman to play QB in the NFL?