I know a lot of fans see prospects like Nabers and visualize him taking the top off the defense. They probably see the most electric offensive player this franchise has had since Beckham,
Harrison may be the safest player in the draft. He might not be as flashy as Nabers, but you plug him in as your WR1 for the next 5 years.
I see how fans would want either. But, it's year 3 of the Schoen/Daboll regime. Right now, there isn't much to show for it. I think most of us can agree that the success of 2022 led to some consequences. We can all debate how responsible Schoen was for the Jones contract, we can debate if Schoen hitched his wagon to Jones. What we can't debate are the actions Schoen took prior to the 2022 success and the hesitation to talk extension contract with him during the 2022 season.
I know a lot of fans like the idea of playing the long game, keep building. How long do these guys have? Again, it's year THREE. This really is the time for them to get their QB. If there is one thing the Burns trade really told me, Schoen is building this thing his way. Letting Barkley & McKinney walk coupled with trading for Burns is a big indicator of that imo.
Now, I think it's QB. This is when you start to really see Schoen's vision come together. Will it work? Who knows. But when you look at their regime in total, I think 2025 needs to be a very competitive season. And how are you competitive in 2025?
-Cheap QB (Maye or McCarthy)
-WR1 (probably via trade - maybe Aiyuk as we've seen Rickey speculate)
It's a vision. It's a build. And I really think by year 3 there needs to be that vision. And yes, the QB could bust. A lot of QBs do. But, that doesn't mean you keep starting Jones until that perfect QB comes along which is once a generation.
This is simply why I see QB tonight. I don't think these guys have all the time in the world here. Draft Nabers and project that scenario out. NYG finishes about the same next year and they are in the same exact QB predicament with their seats scorching hot. That's not a good place to be.
The QB stuff makes sense imo.
forget the evaluation, the guy got hurt. 1 major surgery to his legs and the other a part of the body that can lead to long term problem/retirement (for the 2nd time).
he is a player that takes a lot of hits as a running QB and it's the NFL - injuries happen. that's why contracts are usually only guaranteed for 2 years or less.
I think you under sell the mistake.
If the ceiling as you've pointed out to date far was middle of the road, then layer on prior injuries, the state of the line, and style of play -- the risk profile was pretty high.
When faced with two years or less, they should have gone with the less.
No we aren't. Use Detroit as an example. They brought in Campbell at HC and they started building a team identity. The moves they made were in a larger context of what they were building. They did not win instantly, but you can see the straight line between where they started and where they are.
What are the Giants building? Are we just trying to grab talent and plug them in wherever there are holes (which are everywhere)? What was the plan signing Jones to the extension and how did it fit with the intended future state of this team? If he was not the future, why sign him at all? Was Barkley part of the future? Why sign him for one year and then let him walk?
This team appears to many to be making decisions year to year, position by position, not building within some kind of framework. Maybe others see the direction, but I think most of us don't.
We can say, 'Admit your mistakes and move on' all we want, and that is what we should do here.
But what a disaster.
Agreed.
Oof, that fails. So don't trade but let Barkley leave for nothing, add blocking tight ends, and IOLs. Let the backup QB with legs leave, replace him with a big armed statute.
Quote:
forget the evaluation, the guy got hurt. 1 major surgery to his legs and the other a part of the body that can lead to long term problem/retirement (for the 2nd time).
he is a player that takes a lot of hits as a running QB and it's the NFL - injuries happen. that's why contracts are usually only guaranteed for 2 years or less.
I think you under sell the mistake.
If the ceiling as you've pointed out to date far was middle of the road, then layer on prior injuries, the state of the line, and style of play -- the risk profile was pretty high.
When faced with two years or less, they should have gone with the less.
with the way the market trended he is being paid the same as other middle tier starters who have been inconsistent, the biggest differentiator is injuries. at this moment baker mayfield has about the same amount guaranteed to him as jones, he's been effectively cut 2x. so had you tagged jones last year then moved on and signed baker as you had suggested a few months ago (pretending he had gotten to FA) to even a 1 year deal, you are paying out in total the same thing and imo not in a different position.
so if you wanted to have a starter level qb on the roster it was going to cost what it cost whether you guaranteed the 2nd year to get the upside of the extra 2 option years, or tagged then replaced with a different starter level qb this year.
the only way to save money would have been signing/trading for a backup level player for less (fields, minshew, tyrod, darnold, brissett, etc). or signing russ but there was no way to predict broncos would eat his contract and he'd be available for minimum. and even if there were he probably still picks steelers since they have the better roster.
It was an enormously stupid moment in the team's history the moment the contract was signed.
It was an enormously stupid moment in the team's history the moment the contract was signed.
I don't really agree with that take. I think his injuries at this point have pushed the Giants into making this call. He had to wear off the stink that was Judge/Garrett had a good year for us and we made the playoffs under Daboll...and the offensive line early in the year was just unplayable.
At this point they have to move on just because of the questions about his injuries and future but its football...that happens sometimes.
It was an enormously stupid moment in the team's history the moment the contract was signed.
Would you rather us keep compounding the mistake by throwing him out there just so we get more games for our investment? I am glad the organization is willing to admit a mistake and move on.
Nonetheless, Mara has a massive hard on for him. I'm sure Jones and his agent were talking to Mara throughout the negotiations- "Daniel wants nothing more than to be a Giant for life / Daniel is really hurt by the offers he's getting"
Mara leaned on JS. Jones and his team knew JS was over a barrel. And that's how a $10 M player gets $40 M per year.
Agreed 100%.
Quote:
Certainly not at 6. They're about to pay the guy $82M for 6 games.
It was an enormously stupid moment in the team's history the moment the contract was signed.
Would you rather us keep compounding the mistake by throwing him out there just so we get more games for our investment? I am glad the organization is willing to admit a mistake and move on.
is there a 3rd option to complain about both and pretend it would have been smarter to draft malik willis 80 picks higher than he went instead of thibs?
The question we are all facing as we follow the Giants pursuit of a QB is whether they are being opportunistic or desperate. You, obviously view the situation as desperate; I view it at opportunistic. It's not like I think Jones is the best thing since melted cheese on a burger, but I don't think he would've received the contract he did if Daboll didn't think he could win with him...and Daboll is a much better judge of QB talent than you and I combined, especially a QB he worked with day in and day out. Of course that was following Jones's sole injury-free season.
Quote:
Certainly not at 6. They're about to pay the guy $82M for 6 games.
I disagree. It's possible (maybe even likely) that Daboll and Schoen still believe they can win a Super Bowl with a healthy Jones, but recognize the injury risk with him and view having the 6th overall pick as an opportunity to fortify the most important position in sports. This is how I would view it if I were them.
The question we are all facing as we follow the Giants pursuit of a QB is whether they are being opportunistic or desperate. You, obviously view the situation as desperate; I view it at opportunistic. It's not like I think Jones is the best thing since melted cheese on a burger, but I don't think he would've received the contract he did if Daboll didn't think he could win with him...and Daboll is a much better judge of QB talent than you and I combined, especially a QB he worked with day in and day out. Of course that was following Jones's sole injury-free season.
It’s not “even likely”. They’ve scouted QBs in two straight drafts.
Burrow and Herbert suffered season ending injuries and there is zero consideration to draft a replacement. Cousins got a monster new deal off a major injury and 40 year old Rodgers is coming back off the same with zero talk of drafting their replacements.
They are looking for a replacement because of his poor play over 5 seasons, not because of injuries. I don't care how they spin it, thats the truth.
Burrow and Herbert suffered season ending injuries and there is zero consideration to draft a replacement. Cousins got a monster new deal off a major injury and 40 year old Rodgers is coming back off the same with zero talk of drafting their replacements.
They are looking for a replacement because of his poor play over 5 seasons, not because of injuries. I don't care how they spin it, thats the truth.
Completely. The injuries are how they save face on the evaluation and the contract, and let Jones down easy publicly, but if he was playing well before the injuries they would not be looking at the QBs the way they are.
Burrow and Herbert suffered season ending injuries and there is zero consideration to draft a replacement. Cousins got a monster new deal off a major injury and 40 year old Rodgers is coming back off the same with zero talk of drafting their replacements.
They are looking for a replacement because of his poor play over 5 seasons, not because of injuries. I don't care how they spin it, thats the truth.
you may be right but if that's the case then they will cut him as soon as he can pass a physical and before he steps on a practice field with the possibility of reinjuring himself and triggering an extra $23m.
Quote:
Certainly not at 6. They're about to pay the guy $82M for 6 games.
I disagree. It's possible (maybe even likely) that Daboll and Schoen still believe they can win a Super Bowl with a healthy Jones, but recognize the injury risk with him and view having the 6th overall pick as an opportunity to fortify the most important position in sports. This is how I would view it if I were them.
The question we are all facing as we follow the Giants pursuit of a QB is whether they are being opportunistic or desperate. You, obviously view the situation as desperate; I view it at opportunistic. It's not like I think Jones is the best thing since melted cheese on a burger, but I don't think he would've received the contract he did if Daboll didn't think he could win with him...and Daboll is a much better judge of QB talent than you and I combined, especially a QB he worked with day in and day out. Of course that was following Jones's sole injury-free season.
I can't get myself there. Nothing points to Schoen and Daboll believing they can win a Superbowl with Jones. Maybe you can point to that last year, when they made a colossal mistake giving him that contract. But it's clear they have realized their mistake and are ready to move on.
Only question now is if they can maneuver the draft to get their guy.
Burrow and Herbert suffered season ending injuries and there is zero consideration to draft a replacement. Cousins got a monster new deal off a major injury and 40 year old Rodgers is coming back off the same with zero talk of drafting their replacements.
They are looking for a replacement because of his poor play over 5 seasons, not because of injuries. I don't care how they spin it, thats the truth.
ACL injury is different than two neck injuries. The Colts moved on after Peyton suffered his and landed the top pick. This isn't too crazy.
The Giants are moving on because the structure of his contract enables an out and the previously mentioned neck injuries.
Quote:
Please stop with the Jones injuries excuses. They are moving on from him because of his play, not because of his injuries.
Burrow and Herbert suffered season ending injuries and there is zero consideration to draft a replacement. Cousins got a monster new deal off a major injury and 40 year old Rodgers is coming back off the same with zero talk of drafting their replacements.
They are looking for a replacement because of his poor play over 5 seasons, not because of injuries. I don't care how they spin it, thats the truth.
ACL injury is different than two neck injuries. The Colts moved on after Peyton suffered his and landed the top pick. This isn't too crazy.
The Giants are moving on because the structure of his contract enables an out and the previously mentioned neck injuries.
You really think the primary reason the Giants are looking to move on is because of the neck injuries?
Quote:
Certainly not at 6. They're about to pay the guy $82M for 6 games.
It was an enormously stupid moment in the team's history the moment the contract was signed.
Would you rather us keep compounding the mistake by throwing him out there just so we get more games for our investment? I am glad the organization is willing to admit a mistake and move on.
I'd rather they not not sign backup JAGs to $82M contracts.
Quote:
In comment 16485715 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Certainly not at 6. They're about to pay the guy $82M for 6 games.
It was an enormously stupid moment in the team's history the moment the contract was signed.
Would you rather us keep compounding the mistake by throwing him out there just so we get more games for our investment? I am glad the organization is willing to admit a mistake and move on.
I'd rather they not not sign backup JAGs to $82M contracts.
What's done is done. We can only look at what is best for the team going forward.
What's done is done. We can only look at what is best for the team going forward.
I don't agree. I'm going the beat reporters hold the Giants' feet to the fire. That contract has broad impacts and doesn't just go away when they draft a QB.
The 2022 offense wanted to run the ball out of the read option, and complete a high volume of short passes.
The 2024 offense wants to ....
When I look at the roster, I don't think there is an answer.
I see an identity forming, actually.
Schoen is modernizing the offense by using fewer financial resources at running back. While we may still add another piece in the draft, this group looks to have a nice balance of styles.
The signing of Lock tells me that want a QB who had the ability to get more vertical and wider. Lock can throw lasers outside the numbers in the medium and long areas.
If they actually move off Jones tonight with another QB like Maye/JMac, they are re-affirming they want a QB who can attack more areas of the field in the passing game (like Lock).
I'll wait to see if we add another WR, but the current stable of WRs look like they have the ability to give a QB those options in an expansive passing attack.
Finally, I know Dabka have a very expansive playbook. If the above pans out, they are building an offense to have an identity that will take more advantage of the modern rules/game.
*17 games. Durability matters. The signing was awful, but it's not 6 games. It's 17 games where he was only available for 4 for the full game.
Nonetheless, Mara has a massive hard on for him. I'm sure Jones and his agent were talking to Mara throughout the negotiations- "Daniel wants nothing more than to be a Giant for life / Daniel is really hurt by the offers he's getting"
Mara leaned on JS. Jones and his team knew JS was over a barrel. And that's how a $10 M player gets $40 M per year.
I don't give Schoen a pass on the Jones contract. It's too convenient to simply say it was all Mara. And I always consider the Mara factor.
Schoen could have totally misinterpreted what Jones did in 2022 as the beginning of bigger things to come. And felt comfortable doling out that contract. So many of Schoen's statements pre and post the contract absolutely support that.
And while Schoen was an outside hire, which many on the board praised, Mara could have still found a GM who was fond of Jones as a prospect.
We also should admit that the O Line has been an issue for a long time. It takes time to build it with talent and it takes time for the 5 to gel together. Schoen sign'ed 5 OL this offseason, to provide starters, depth and competition. I think we are heading in the right direction there.
There is definitely a shift in how money is allocated on this roster. JS let Barkley and McKinney go get paid insane amounts of money and instead invested in a young pass rusher, which is a very smart move.
The talk of a potential trade for Aiyuk is a sign that JS is thinking of getting a proven vet and plugging ing a need with a trade. Let's see if this gets done.
And then the QB. JS didn't draft Jones. They let him play out his 4th year without the 5th year option. Jones had a good year and stayed healthy. Daboll utilized all of Jones' talents to put him in a position to succeed and it worked.
The biggest issue I have had and that Eric has pointed out was we should have tagged Jones in 2023 and let Barkley test free agency.
The Jones signing is looking like a bad decision but the silver lining is there is an out after this season. So now that NYG is picking in the top 6 of the draft, let Schoen and Daboll have THEIR QB.
Quote:
In comment 16485715 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Certainly not at 6. They're about to pay the guy $82M for 6 games.
It was an enormously stupid moment in the team's history the moment the contract was signed.
Would you rather us keep compounding the mistake by throwing him out there just so we get more games for our investment? I am glad the organization is willing to admit a mistake and move on.
I'd rather they not not sign backup JAGs to $82M contracts.
if it's fair to acknowledge signing a JAGs to $82m was a mistake is it fair to acknowledge that drafting a worse-than-JAG at #5 overall, 80 picks higher than the rest of the league, would have been a mistake? a top 10 pick is way more valuable to not waste than cap space.
or are mistakes only mistakes if you didn't endorse them?
The offseason following 2022 was a disaster. Sugarcoat it all you want. These guys went around with their heads as big as haystacks over their playoff win on the road*. Well, they had their heads handed to them this past season. Schoen and Daboll both need to be better- a lot better.
*a/k/a the greatest playoff win of all time
with the way the market trended he is being paid the same as other middle tier starters who have been inconsistent, the biggest differentiator is injuries.
I think the biggest differentiator was real commitment of real guaranteed dollars.
The Giants had the option to keep him at a 1/32M floor, and chose to keep him at a 2/82M floor. The option years at the time were nebulous and now in retrospect are worthless. As we've discussed relentlessly, the floor in the Geno Smith deal was markedly lower. The floor in the Carr deal was marginally lower.
The Geno Smith deal was such a better model. They guaranteed him one year, and because he didn't implode, they had a choice to give him year two. At least with Carr he had a few middle of the road seasons on his belt. Jones had one.
It's such a simple hypothetical to me - tag Jones and go into the 2024 UFA period with 50M fewer dollars guaranteed to him.
Every one of these scenarios guarantees fewer real dollars than what they actually did.
- Baker Mayfield, 3/100M 40M real guarantees
- Gardner Minshew - 2/25M, 15M real guarantees
- Tyrod Taylor - 2/12M, 8.5M real guarantees
Quote:
In comment 16485728 Mike in NY said:
Quote:
In comment 16485715 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Certainly not at 6. They're about to pay the guy $82M for 6 games.
It was an enormously stupid moment in the team's history the moment the contract was signed.
Would you rather us keep compounding the mistake by throwing him out there just so we get more games for our investment? I am glad the organization is willing to admit a mistake and move on.
I'd rather they not not sign backup JAGs to $82M contracts.
if it's fair to acknowledge signing a JAGs to $82m was a mistake is it fair to acknowledge that drafting a worse-than-JAG at #5 overall, 80 picks higher than the rest of the league, would have been a mistake? a top 10 pick is way more valuable to not waste than cap space.
or are mistakes only mistakes if you didn't endorse them?
You keep hauling on Malik Willis, and I'll repeat that we'd have been better off picking him at the expense of Thibodeaux or Neal and letting Jones walk than what actually ended up occurring. I'd happily trade either of them for $82M in cap space.
Barkley's gone and soon Jones will be too. Our collective Giants nightmare of stupidity is almost over. Be happy!
Quote:
When faced with two years or less, they should have gone with the less.
with the way the market trended he is being paid the same as other middle tier starters who have been inconsistent, the biggest differentiator is injuries.
I think the biggest differentiator was real commitment of real guaranteed dollars.
The Giants had the option to keep him at a 1/32M floor, and chose to keep him at a 2/82M floor. The option years at the time were nebulous and now in retrospect are worthless. As we've discussed relentlessly, the floor in the Geno Smith deal was markedly lower. The floor in the Carr deal was marginally lower.
The Geno Smith deal was such a better model. They guaranteed him one year, and because he didn't implode, they had a choice to give him year two. At least with Carr he had a few middle of the road seasons on his belt. Jones had one.
It's such a simple hypothetical to me - tag Jones and go into the 2024 UFA period with 50M fewer dollars guaranteed to him.
Every one of these scenarios guarantees fewer real dollars than what they actually did.
- Baker Mayfield, 3/100M 40M real guarantees
- Gardner Minshew - 2/25M, 15M real guarantees
- Tyrod Taylor - 2/12M, 8.5M real guarantees
I think part of the issue with that is Schoen/Daboll were not 100% sold that Jones was the long term answer. If we had a repeat of 2022 in 2023 Mara would have pushed for a long term deal with Jones with more than $50M guaranteed. I also think Tampa will look dumb for what they gave to Baker Mayfield.
Quote:
When faced with two years or less, they should have gone with the less.
with the way the market trended he is being paid the same as other middle tier starters who have been inconsistent, the biggest differentiator is injuries.
I think the biggest differentiator was real commitment of real guaranteed dollars.
The Giants had the option to keep him at a 1/32M floor, and chose to keep him at a 2/82M floor. The option years at the time were nebulous and now in retrospect are worthless. As we've discussed relentlessly, the floor in the Geno Smith deal was markedly lower. The floor in the Carr deal was marginally lower.
The Geno Smith deal was such a better model. They guaranteed him one year, and because he didn't implode, they had a choice to give him year two. At least with Carr he had a few middle of the road seasons on his belt. Jones had one.
It's such a simple hypothetical to me - tag Jones and go into the 2024 UFA period with 50M fewer dollars guaranteed to him.
Every one of these scenarios guarantees fewer real dollars than what they actually did.
- Baker Mayfield, 3/100M 40M real guarantees
- Gardner Minshew - 2/25M, 15M real guarantees
- Tyrod Taylor - 2/12M, 8.5M real guarantees
the extra years weren't nebulous at the time they made they deal. they wanted them. they publicly and very descriptively explained why they wanted them. they took a shot on a player they thought was ascending and he descended (then got hurt). that is how things go.
taking a shot on malik willis wouldnt have been any different except for the fact that through 2 years he has only descended. and the opportunity cost would have been greater if you agree a 5th overall pick is more valuable than cap space. if buying an extra top 10 pick was as easy as eating $40m of cap space, I could get nyg (and about half the league) an extra top 10 pick in about 5 minutes on the OTC calculator.
taking a shot now, this year, also won't be much different except for that same equation - the opportunity cost is higher than the shot taken on jones because with the 6th overall pick in this draft the alternative is 5 potential prime years of an all pro WR on a rookie scale contract. the next jamarr chase is a lot more valuable than whatever $40m buys in FA.
we all agree with taking that shot tonight despite the risks correct? they liked jones, they took a shot they perceived to have less opportunity cost. it shouldnt be so hard to make peace with a few less overpaid players from UFA with those bust rates as high as they are.
if he sucks then gets hurt after 6 games that 4k/28/10 season will bring them just as much comfort as jones' 4k combined rushing/pass yards, 22 combined rushing/passing tds, and 6 ints that all came with better advanced metrics (QBR/EPA). none. only difference will be the lack of the 2nd year.
and you know what they will probably do if they dont pick a qb in this year's draft? rework his deal because in march 2025 if he can come back healthy that is probably in both sides best interest unless they have the #1 or #2 overall pick and know for sure they are drafting a top QB.
We don't even need to stretch our brains far to contemplate an alternative. The incremental cost of Jones over the tender was 3/128M and 50M fully guaranteed.
Xavier McKinney - 4/67/23
Saquon Barkley - 3/37.5/26
That's the alternative.
But hey, why risk your own free agents regressing, when you got the sure bet.
Cool, let's be a somewhat worse version of the Saints and Raiders.
and you know what they will probably do if they dont pick a qb in this year's draft? rework his deal because in march 2025 if he can come back healthy that is probably in both sides best interest unless they have the #1 or #2 overall pick and know for sure they are drafting a top QB.
The simple difference is they'll have the option. Which is what happens when you commit to one year in guarantees vs. two.
They have half the commitment and double the options. This so unequivocally a better route.
Cool, let's be a somewhat worse version of the Saints and Raiders.
I can't stand it. And I can't stand the notion that the Giants were somehow boxed in with no leverage, and had to franchise him at minimum.
They held all the cards, but after like they had none.
I think if significant progress is not seen this season than at minimum they will make a HC change.
We don't even need to stretch our brains far to contemplate an alternative. The incremental cost of Jones over the tender was 3/128M and 50M fully guaranteed.
Xavier McKinney - 4/67/23
Saquon Barkley - 3/37.5/26
That's the alternative.
But hey, why risk your own free agents regressing, when you got the sure bet.
they had the choice to pursue Carr last year and they instead paid Jones more. it appears they got that choice wrong but it was there for them, as was tagging Jones.
the point is that they took a shot on Jones and wanted the extra years beyond the tag. whether it was due to age or the fact that mayfield had worn out his welcome twice before, jones bargaining position was apparently better and that was what taking the shot cost. they took it right down the wire and gave him what i called a more aggressive deal than expected because in their minds "tagging him was worst case scenario". you more than anyone know i have never agreed with that with any player. in fact i think you disagreed with me that it wasnt that aggressive?
some people seem more comfortable taking the shot on whoever the best QB is with a top 10 picks any year even if they fail while getting very hot and bothered about taking a shot for $40m - which is what i find contradictory. if i gave you the choice of one asset or the other right now, an extra top 10 pick or $40m in cap space right now, which would you choose?
Cool, let's be a somewhat worse version of the Saints and Raiders.
it's almost as hilarious when people totally miss the point. the opportunity cost is what is overstated. signing jones cost them cap space they already had more of than the free market could fill with quality players.
that's why they traded a 2nd round pick for Burns instead of just spending the $150m on the free market. and why they spent a 3rd on Waller last year.
I was resigned to an outcome where he was functionally guaranteed 3/90-100. 2/82 is better. It's a kick, but a softer kick in the balls.
My wish was always tagging him, and making him prove it again. Go out and prove it and get that Lamar Jackson deal.
When I studied the Geno Smith agreement, I was even more nauseated.
They had choices, they chosen wrong, and it cost them more than double what it should have. And the fruit of that mistake potentially cost them retaining good players.
I was resigned to an outcome where he was functionally guaranteed 3/90-100. 2/82 is better. It's a kick, but a softer kick in the balls.
My wish was always tagging him, and making him prove it again. Go out and prove it and get that Lamar Jackson deal.
When I studied the Geno Smith agreement, I was even more nauseated.
They had choices, they chosen wrong, and it cost them more than double what it should have. And the fruit of that mistake potentially cost them retaining good players.
good players most didnt want to pay what they got paid and would probably consider combined almost as much of an overpay as jones (they got about $50m gtd combined, 60m in 2 year cash flows, which is more than jones had left when those contracts were signed).
both who they still could have retained if they wanted even with jones still on books this year.
so can i take that as you'd prefer a top 10 pick to having the cap room if the best thing they could have spent it on was retaining mckinney/barkley?
Depends on where in the top 10. Also, the incremental cost of the Jones contract vs. the tender is was 137M and 50M guaranteed.
If we're debating the value of that 50M guaranteed in terms of buying power? If that gets me within 1.5M of the total guarantees Sneed got, vs the 10th pick tonight, I'd choose Sneed.
Depends on where in the top 10. Also, the incremental cost of the Jones contract vs. the tender is was 137M and 50M guaranteed.
If we're debating the value of that 50M guaranteed in terms of buying power? If that gets me within 1.5M of the total guarantees Sneed got, vs the 10th pick tonight, I'd choose Sneed.
sneed wasnt just money you are also giving up more picks, which i actually agree they maybe should have done even with jones on the roster right now (just looked it up, hadnt realized all they gave up was a 2025 3rd). his cap number is 9.9m which is less than they could save by dumping waller. cant believe it ends up we functionally paid more for waller last year at age 31 than sneed at age 27. like the rumored aiyuk deal id have probably done the sneed deal.
you're brain probably broke because we have drifted off topic so let me try to steer us back - imo you can file all of what we just talked about in a drawer labeled "the OP is wrong because this is THEIR team". They made choices and like every team they weren't all right. I think it's a false narrative that they've been restricted in their decision making or that their ownership of the roster be viewed against some curve.
But if Schoen's MO is shop day two picks for good players, the money gets you access to talent you otherwise might not have. This is a novel and great tactic IMV.
If he gets Aiyuk tonight for 47, and the real cost is money, excellent.
In terms of ownership, I'm an absolutist. The day your name is on the door, that shit is yours.
By offseason three, I certainly wasn't giving Reese any flack for Gettleman's decisions.