Contact Info
Administration
Coaching Staff
Coaching History
Annual Records
Hall Of Fame
Retired Jerseys
Ring Of Honor
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Michael Lombardi @mlombardiNFL What has Jones ever done to deserve this deal and eat up 18.8% of the Giants’ cap? He is 6-21 against teams that went on to make the playoffs, 0-11 against teams that won twelve or more games, and according to NFL research, the only quarterback to receive a contract in excess of $100 million and never have a season of throwing for 3,500 yards, or 25 plus touchdowns. |
Quote:
Alright, that answers my question. You do not get it. Carry on.
You don't see the foolishness in making a decision based on one emotional game weighed over a much larger sample size? Further, you don't see the problem with completely ignoring the debacle that took place a week later?
Carry on pretending to be a good actor on this site.
So if I be disagrees with you they are a bad actor?
Good to know
Quote:
In comment 16536100 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
In comment 16536085 Go Terps said:
Quote:
In comment 16536083 christian said:
Quote:
There's no doubt Jones was hyper-efficient in 2022. Ideally at any position you're looking for a balance of efficiency and productivity.
At the risk of digressing, that's why I'm always leery to get excited at a pass catcher with high catch numbers, when it's really the yards per target that move the needle.
I can't imagine the Giants compensated Jones because they felt 2022 was a destination. And let's be real, there are lots of players who get compensated for that. Meaning, the team would be more than happy to rinse and repeat results.
I'm assuming the Giants compensated Jones because they felt like 2022 was a marker in upward journey.
I think you're probably giving the Giants too much credit. John Mara said "We're back!" and then slept through this:
Did you think the Giants should pay Jones after the Minnesota playoff win?
For about 12 hours, yes. After the elation of the playoff win wore off, logical thought took back over.
After the Philadelphia game (which did happen), most of the good feeling around the team was gone for me. It was clear what they were: a pretty poor team that was the beneficiary of a good deal of luck and an excellent coaching performance.
I'm right that the Philadelphia game happened? Winning in Minnesota wasn't the Super Bowl?
From my pov Terps, you are very harsh with the Giants decisions (understandable to a point). I also think that it is somewhat probable that you believe you would be a much better GM of the team based on your comments over the years. You (probably through emotion) thought Jones should be paid after beating a team with an absolute terrible defense (possibly historically bad). It just seems a little off that you often mock the Giants and other fans for talking positively about the Minnesota playoff win, yet that very game was a deciding factor in your thinking that Jones should be paid.
There isn't a doubt in my mind that Terps would have been a better GM than the collective performances of our GMs over the past decade.
Terps has been spot on in recognizing the fundamental problems with this organization, problems that have been completely missed for years by the shills, pollyanna gaslighters and delusional optimists on this board, all of whom attempt to bully other fans into submission with their off base opinions of this severely underperforming organization. The enemy is not other Giants fans. It is the inconceivably poor management of this franchise.
There isn't a greater Giants fan on this board than Terps. To indefatigably counter the trolling fanboy bullshit on behalf of the very large contingent of "beyond distressed Giants fans" is the very definition of a leader. Keep up the great work Terps and maybe some day we will have a competitive team again!
Quote:
this was your post:
In comment 16536006 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
Paying QB 12 money To QB 20-25 at best is still bad.
they quite obviously didnt pay him to be 20-25th. they paid him because they think he is better than that, and at his best he was. off the acl i have no idea what he will be but they seem to be confident enough to put their jobs on him being better than 20-25.
But currently he isnt better than top 20-25 and they are paying him as QB12, that’s bad.
What they thought he’d be and what they thought they were paying him to be is irrelevant to evaluating the contract.
It’s currently a bad contract because he’s a bottom 3rd QB currently. There’s really nothing outlandish in that post, I’m not sure where the disconnect is. Contracts get evaluated in present day and with production, not the past and hypotheticals.
Its currently a bad contract.
we dont know what he is currently because there are no games being played currently so your "currently 20-25" is either a) also hypothetical predicting 2024 or b) weighting the 6 games in 2023 (2 that he left injured) far more than the 18 in 2022.
the guys whose jobs are on the line chose not to hedge him all that much, and as it turned out this offseason had a lot more reasonable alternatives than their prior 2 offseasons combined. so what they thought of him when they signed him doesnt seem so irrelevant given how the offseason unfolded.
Quote:
Alright, that answers my question. You do not get it. Carry on.
You don't see the foolishness in making a decision based on one emotional game weighed over a much larger sample size? Further, you don't see the problem with completely ignoring the debacle that took place a week later?
Carry on pretending to be a good actor on this site.
I certainly see the problems making decisions based on that thinking. Were you seriously asking if I did not understand that or were you implying that I didn't? Are we making stuff up now?
Quote:
In comment 16536107 Go Terps said:
Quote:
In comment 16536100 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
In comment 16536085 Go Terps said:
Quote:
In comment 16536083 christian said:
Quote:
There's no doubt Jones was hyper-efficient in 2022. Ideally at any position you're looking for a balance of efficiency and productivity.
At the risk of digressing, that's why I'm always leery to get excited at a pass catcher with high catch numbers, when it's really the yards per target that move the needle.
I can't imagine the Giants compensated Jones because they felt 2022 was a destination. And let's be real, there are lots of players who get compensated for that. Meaning, the team would be more than happy to rinse and repeat results.
I'm assuming the Giants compensated Jones because they felt like 2022 was a marker in upward journey.
I think you're probably giving the Giants too much credit. John Mara said "We're back!" and then slept through this:
Did you think the Giants should pay Jones after the Minnesota playoff win?
For about 12 hours, yes. After the elation of the playoff win wore off, logical thought took back over.
After the Philadelphia game (which did happen), most of the good feeling around the team was gone for me. It was clear what they were: a pretty poor team that was the beneficiary of a good deal of luck and an excellent coaching performance.
I'm right that the Philadelphia game happened? Winning in Minnesota wasn't the Super Bowl?
From my pov Terps, you are very harsh with the Giants decisions (understandable to a point). I also think that it is somewhat probable that you believe you would be a much better GM of the team based on your comments over the years. You (probably through emotion) thought Jones should be paid after beating a team with an absolute terrible defense (possibly historically bad). It just seems a little off that you often mock the Giants and other fans for talking positively about the Minnesota playoff win, yet that very game was a deciding factor in your thinking that Jones should be paid.
There isn't a doubt in my mind that Terps would have been a better GM than the collective performances of our GMs over the past decade.
Terps has been spot on in recognizing the fundamental problems with this organization, problems that have been completely missed for years by the shills, pollyanna gaslighters and delusional optimists on this board, all of whom attempt to bully other fans into submission with their off base opinions of this severely underperforming organization. The enemy is not other Giants fans. It is the inconceivably poor management of this franchise.
There isn't a greater Giants fan on this board than Terps. To indefatigably counter the trolling fanboy bullshit on behalf of the very large contingent of "beyond distressed Giants fans" is the very definition of a leader. Keep up the great work Terps and maybe some day we will have a competitive team again!
Well we know what teps dupe is.
Remember terps called the Russell Wilson trade a bargain. Would have taken Malik Willis with the 5th pick. And called Matt Stanford an average QB. And don’t forget he wanted to draft Jones 6th.
If there is anyone less clueless about the QB position it’s the Mike/Go Terps.
Quote:
In comment 16536107 Go Terps said:
Quote:
In comment 16536100 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
In comment 16536085 Go Terps said:
Quote:
In comment 16536083 christian said:
Quote:
There's no doubt Jones was hyper-efficient in 2022. Ideally at any position you're looking for a balance of efficiency and productivity.
At the risk of digressing, that's why I'm always leery to get excited at a pass catcher with high catch numbers, when it's really the yards per target that move the needle.
I can't imagine the Giants compensated Jones because they felt 2022 was a destination. And let's be real, there are lots of players who get compensated for that. Meaning, the team would be more than happy to rinse and repeat results.
I'm assuming the Giants compensated Jones because they felt like 2022 was a marker in upward journey.
I think you're probably giving the Giants too much credit. John Mara said "We're back!" and then slept through this:
Did you think the Giants should pay Jones after the Minnesota playoff win?
For about 12 hours, yes. After the elation of the playoff win wore off, logical thought took back over.
After the Philadelphia game (which did happen), most of the good feeling around the team was gone for me. It was clear what they were: a pretty poor team that was the beneficiary of a good deal of luck and an excellent coaching performance.
I'm right that the Philadelphia game happened? Winning in Minnesota wasn't the Super Bowl?
From my pov Terps, you are very harsh with the Giants decisions (understandable to a point). I also think that it is somewhat probable that you believe you would be a much better GM of the team based on your comments over the years. You (probably through emotion) thought Jones should be paid after beating a team with an absolute terrible defense (possibly historically bad). It just seems a little off that you often mock the Giants and other fans for talking positively about the Minnesota playoff win, yet that very game was a deciding factor in your thinking that Jones should be paid.
There isn't a doubt in my mind that Terps would have been a better GM than the collective performances of our GMs over the past decade.
Terps has been spot on in recognizing the fundamental problems with this organization, problems that have been completely missed for years by the shills, pollyanna gaslighters and delusional optimists on this board, all of whom attempt to bully other fans into submission with their off base opinions of this severely underperforming organization. The enemy is not other Giants fans. It is the inconceivably poor management of this franchise.
There isn't a greater Giants fan on this board than Terps. To indefatigably counter the trolling fanboy bullshit on behalf of the very large contingent of "beyond distressed Giants fans" is the very definition of a leader. Keep up the great work Terps and maybe some day we will have a competitive team again!
I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessment. I have not and do not see anything special about Terps' track record here. That is not a bad thing, I just think it is commonly overstated. He's been right on certain things and wrong on other like most of us.
Why not??
the scale isn't exactly the same but the better example is andrew thomas last year. he was paid as not just OT1 but the highest guarantee of any offensive non-QB. he got hurt and when he returned he had what for him was a down year (OT18 by PFF). He similarly has a history of leg injuries where durability is a concern going forward.
was it a bad 10g with some bad luck or is the contract a disaster? it could end up being either but that will be based on what happens in the future not what happened in a bad partial year w/ injuries. none of us can predict the future especially w/r/t health but i can certainly undertand anyone who believes that he's more the guy he was in 2022 than 2023.
we dont know what he is currently because there are no games being played currently so your "currently 20-25" is either a) also hypothetical predicting 2024 or b) weighting the 6 games in 2023 (2 that he left injured) far more than the 18 in 2022.
the guys whose jobs are on the line chose not to hedge him all that much, and as it turned out this offseason had a lot more reasonable alternatives than their prior 2 offseasons combined. so what they thought of him when they signed him doesnt seem so irrelevant given how the offseason unfolded.
We don’t? There’s 4+ years of body of work. Nobody ranks players before the season starts based on past performance? Cherry pick 2022 all you want but the whole body of work matters when evaluating what Jones is. Does his entire body of work say top 15 QB to you? Based on his entire body of work is he a top 15 or in the 20-25 range currently? Even if you just count the last two years is he a top 15 QB currently?
And again, what they thought about him when they signed him is irrelevant to evaluating the contract. Since signing the contract he was a bottom 5 QB. His entire body of work puts him in the 20-25 range. I think most people would say that’s a fair spot to rank him.
Plenty of contracts in sports have been signed based on what guys could become, but you evaluate the contact based upon what has happened since signing the contract. So far it’s been a handful of bad games.
So it’s not basic fact that Jones isn’t “20-25” at best, that’s your opinion. Just like I gave my opinion, not a fact, that he’s 20-25 at best. what basic fact did I get wrong?
Quote:
If Evan Neal had one top 15 tackle year and then got paid RT12 money while being a bottom third starting tackle in the league would that not be a bad contract or would we be referencing back to his one top 15 tackle year?
the scale isn't exactly the same but the better example is andrew thomas last year. he was paid as not just OT1 but the highest guarantee of any offensive non-QB. he got hurt and when he returned he had what for him was a down year (OT18 by PFF). He similarly has a history of leg injuries where durability is a concern going forward.
was it a bad 10g with some bad luck or is the contract a disaster? it could end up being either but that will be based on what happens in the future not what happened in a bad partial year w/ injuries. none of us can predict the future especially w/r/t health but i can certainly undertand anyone who believes that he's more the guy he was in 2022 than 2023.
Or just answer the actual question.
When on the field Thomas has proven to be consistently a top tackle outside of his rookie year.
Jones has not consistently proven to be a top 15 QB when on the field
To all the dead horse beaters, why? They chose not to draft a QB in favor of a game-changing receiver which Jones has never had. Jones recovery in Daboll's words is exactly where it should be, and all beat accounts say he looks very good. So if no setbacks he'll be QB game one. There's no new information, the off-season sturm and drang is over. Rehashing the same arguments does what exactly?
There will be ample opportunity to pick him apart soon if ge has a crap game. If he throws for 350 yards and 5 TDs you can post 44 times about his one bad pass that could have been the 6th.
So it’s not basic fact that Jones isn’t “20-25” at best, that’s your opinion. Just like I gave my opinion, not a fact, that he’s 20-25 at best. what basic fact did I get wrong?
i'd refer you back to my initial reply. i take the phrase "at best" to mean the best we've seen him play in reality. which was 2022. you took issue with "advanced stats" but if total yards isn't too fancy for you ill add that here since he was 11th best.
for some reason you like to have your cake and eat it to on this. if you correctly predicted the contract he'd get ahead of time, presumably that was because you were correctly valuing that he'd played better than "20-25th" in 2022 (and was therefore better than that "at best")?
https://www.statmuse.com/nfl/ask/nfl-most-total-yards-by-a-qb-2022 - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 16536192 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
If Evan Neal had one top 15 tackle year and then got paid RT12 money while being a bottom third starting tackle in the league would that not be a bad contract or would we be referencing back to his one top 15 tackle year?
the scale isn't exactly the same but the better example is andrew thomas last year. he was paid as not just OT1 but the highest guarantee of any offensive non-QB. he got hurt and when he returned he had what for him was a down year (OT18 by PFF). He similarly has a history of leg injuries where durability is a concern going forward.
was it a bad 10g with some bad luck or is the contract a disaster? it could end up being either but that will be based on what happens in the future not what happened in a bad partial year w/ injuries. none of us can predict the future especially w/r/t health but i can certainly undertand anyone who believes that he's more the guy he was in 2022 than 2023.
Or just answer the actual question.
When on the field Thomas has proven to be consistently a top tackle outside of his rookie year.
Jones has not consistently proven to be a top 15 QB when on the field
that's not the point i've been making in this thread so not sure why that matters? i disagreed with your statement that he's a "top 20-25 qb at best" if you are amending that to say "he has not consistently proven to be a top 15 QB" ok.
To all the dead horse beaters, why? They chose not to draft a QB in favor of a game-changing receiver which Jones has never had. Jones recovery in Daboll's words is exactly where it should be, and all beat accounts say he looks very good. So if no setbacks he'll be QB game one. There's no new information, the off-season sturm and drang is over. Rehashing the same arguments does what exactly?
There will be ample opportunity to pick him apart soon if ge has a crap game. If he throws for 350 yards and 5 TDs you can post 44 times about his one bad pass that could have been the 6th.
I agree about Eric in Li - very good poster.
As for Jones, I noticed you left out the reasonable possibility that the Giants tried to trade-up to take a Qb.
You’re condescending douchness after interpreting something wrongly and taking shots and then basically call someone dumb is just silly. It’s ok to admit you’re wrong sometimes.
Daniel Jones entire body of work puts him in the 20-25 range. Since signing there contract he’s been worse. Not sure how that’s even up for debate.
Daniel Jones didn’t play 2022 under his current contract, the only thing that you can evaluate the new contract on is how he’s played under that contract. If the Yankees sign Soto to a 10 year $600 million contract and he gets hurt every year hits like Rizzo is 2024 relevant to determining if the contract was bad? No.
There’s no “well they thought he’d be better so how can you criticize the contract”. That’s not how it works.
To all the dead horse beaters, why? They chose not to draft a QB in favor of a game-changing receiver which Jones has never had. Jones recovery in Daboll's words is exactly where it should be, and all beat accounts say he looks very good. So if no setbacks he'll be QB game one. There's no new information, the off-season sturm and drang is over. Rehashing the same arguments does what exactly?
There will be ample opportunity to pick him apart soon if ge has a crap game. If he throws for 350 yards and 5 TDs you can post 44 times about his one bad pass that could have been the 6th.
And I'm sure if he throws 5 INTs we'll get to hear 44 times how none of them were his fault
To all the dead horse beaters, why? They chose not to draft a QB in favor of a game-changing receiver which Jones has never had. Jones recovery in Daboll's words is exactly where it should be, and all beat accounts say he looks very good. So if no setbacks he'll be QB game one. There's no new information, the off-season sturm and drang is over. Rehashing the same arguments does what exactly?
There will be ample opportunity to pick him apart soon if ge has a crap game. If he throws for 350 yards and 5 TDs you can post 44 times about his one bad pass that could have been the 6th.
Appreciate that though at this point i feel as guilty as the dead horse beaters beating the other end of the same horse (though at least lombardi is the embodiment of a dead horse so it didn't ruin an otherwise good thread). he is so transparently geared towards the lowest common denominator, just the absolute worst kind of commentator.
Quote:
which was 2022. you took issue with "advanced stats" but if total yards isn't too fancy for you ill add that here since he was 11th best.
You’re condescending douchness after interpreting something wrongly and taking shots and then basically call someone dumb is just silly. It’s ok to admit you’re wrong sometimes.
Daniel Jones entire body of work puts him in the 20-25 range. Since signing there contract he’s been worse. Not sure how that’s even up for debate.
Daniel Jones didn’t play 2022 under his current contract, the only thing that you can evaluate the new contract on is how he’s played under that contract. If the Yankees sign Soto to a 10 year $600 million contract and he gets hurt every year hits like Rizzo is 2024 relevant to determining if the contract was bad? No.
There’s no “well they thought he’d be better so how can you criticize the contract”. That’s not how it works.
i ask this with no intended condescending "douchness", but if that was the definition you were using, why not just reply to my initial post that you were referencing your ranking of him over his fuller career not just 2022?
why did you spend a bunch of posts arguing that his 2022 wasn't actually good because "advanced stats" are wrong and the non-advanced stats like Tds (14th), yards (11th), ints (1st) dont count for whatever reasons?
if you were arguing some kind of "entire body of work" it's a still stupid point but you possibly could have saved us some time by pointing that out instead of arguing against my very specific point that "at his best" in 2022 he played close to where his salary ranks.
Allen took off in Buffalo when Diggs was added. 2020 (127/1535/12.1/8) and then 2021 (103/1225/11.9/10). High volume go to WR. Giants add Waller. His last healthy season 107/1196/11.2/9. High volume go to TE/WR. Didn't pan out.
OL regressed. Injuries (especially SB/AT). Poor prep. Other issues but those seemed to be the big three imv.
Quote:
Your posts are excellent. I don't always agree but they're always well reasoned and supported with data, and educational. Thanks for that.
To all the dead horse beaters, why? They chose not to draft a QB in favor of a game-changing receiver which Jones has never had. Jones recovery in Daboll's words is exactly where it should be, and all beat accounts say he looks very good. So if no setbacks he'll be QB game one. There's no new information, the off-season sturm and drang is over. Rehashing the same arguments does what exactly?
There will be ample opportunity to pick him apart soon if ge has a crap game. If he throws for 350 yards and 5 TDs you can post 44 times about his one bad pass that could have been the 6th.
And I'm sure if he throws 5 INTs we'll get to hear 44 times how none of them were his fault
Not from me.
Unless they, you know, actually weren't his fault.
You replying to my post implied that you think he’s currently a top 12 QB. Then implied I was wrong about basic facts because you thought you could score points. I even asked for clarity on your opinion that he’s currently a top 12 QB, and you dodged the question and kept bringing up 2022.
You replying to my post implied that you think he’s currently a top 12 QB. Then implied I was wrong about basic facts because you thought you could score points. I even asked for clarity on your opinion that he’s currently a top 12 QB, and you dodged the question and kept bringing up 2022.
yes i kept bringing up 2022 because my point was clear from the start, in 2022, his best year and his only season with this regime, he played at the level his contract pays him. do you agree with that? simple yes is fine.
you continue wanting to have your cake and eat it to, "i wasnt talking about just 2022, but his 2022 wasnt that good either and here are all the reasons why".
Now, if Barkley hadn't been a jerk, I have NO doubt Schoen would have franchised Jones.
If you STILL think that was over-paying, OK, but who was going to be the QB then, with Jones coming off a road playoff victory. Its easy to crap on him (and Schoen for the contract), but no one ever makes a good case for replacing him.
Considering Schoen was boxed into a corner (having to keep both SB and DJ), he did a pretty good job giving himself an out after this season.
yes i kept bringing up 2022 because my point was clear from the start, in 2022, his best year and his only season with this regime, he played at the level his contract pays him. do you agree with that? simple yes is fine.
you continue wanting to have your cake and eat it to, "i wasnt talking about just 2022, but his 2022 wasnt that good either and here are all the reasons why".
Well if we’re going to criticize people for “getting basic facts wrong” he did play games last year with this regime and the results were not good. And no, his 2022 wasn’t worthy of a $40 million contract because it was one year of body of work, where the team still struggled to score passing touchdowns. Blame that on David Sills all you want, but you don’t pay a guy $40 million and say “well if those others guy are better he’s might be worth it”.
Not sure how I’m trying to “have my cake and eat it too”. You brought up 2022 and I respodned to it. That’s how message boards work.
To summarize: you miss understand a post and then take shots, including at my career, and then continue to dig in. You’re a silly person.
Now, if Barkley hadn't been a jerk, I have NO doubt Schoen would have franchised Jones.
If you STILL think that was over-paying, OK, but who was going to be the QB then, with Jones coming off a road playoff victory. Its easy to crap on him (and Schoen for the contract), but no one ever makes a good case for replacing him.
Considering Schoen was boxed into a corner (having to keep both SB and DJ), he did a pretty good job giving himself an out after this season.
This is all pretty much correct. They paid him because they thought 2022 was repeatable and so far it hasn’t been. That makes the contract as we currently stand bad. Maybe that does a 180 in 2024, but until proven otherwise the contract is bad. Anyone in the league will tell you the same.
2022 isn’t part of the evaluation of a contract that started in 2023.
Quote:
yes i kept bringing up 2022 because my point was clear from the start, in 2022, his best year and his only season with this regime, he played at the level his contract pays him. do you agree with that? simple yes is fine.
you continue wanting to have your cake and eat it to, "i wasnt talking about just 2022, but his 2022 wasnt that good either and here are all the reasons why".
Well if we’re going to criticize people for “getting basic facts wrong” he did play games last year with this regime and the results were not good. And no, his 2022 wasn’t worthy of a $40 million contract because it was one year of body of work, where the team still struggled to score passing touchdowns. Blame that on David Sills all you want, but you don’t pay a guy $40 million and say “well if those others guy are better he’s might be worth it”.
Not sure how I’m trying to “have my cake and eat it too”. You brought up 2022 and I respodned to it. That’s how message boards work.
To summarize: you miss understand a post and then take shots, including at my career, and then continue to dig in. You’re a silly person.
i dont take shots at your career, i take shots at you using it as some crest of expertise when you get simple facts wrong. as you again did in this post.
there was no david sills projection needed, by his actual stats he got paid right in line with where his contract ranks. QBR, EPA, yards, TDs, interceptions, comp%, w/l record, go down the line. that's why even those that dont like him acknowledge that off 2022 he should have at least gotten tagged. is the tag amount based on the top 5 salaries at a position, or the top 20-25?
once a player has played well enough to get themselves into a negotiation where they are being "threatened" with the tag, there is no world where their contract isnt going to end up in the top 10-15 at their position.
these are basic concepts someone who throws around their occupation negotiating on behalf of athletes should probably realize. or you can continue digesting the knowing clickbait from hacks like lomardi.
He’s a 20-25 ranked QB in the league, that’s wrong?
2022 isn’t relevant to evaluating his contract, that’s wrong?
His production scoring touchdowns didn’t match his advanced stats, that’s wrong?
I simply said his EPA and QBR don’t tell the whole story because no objective person would say he had a better year than Burrow or Herbert and you replied with this:
I then said if they had opened up the offense more in 2022 his advanced stats would have been worse and you responded with another condescending shot at my career. You seem to have some sort of issue with me, when I have no issue with you and I’m not sure what it is. I don’t recall acting like I’m better than anyone here because of my career, you can read the Knicks threads to see that. You realize you also act like you have a crest of expertise right? Are you never wrong on this site?
This is leaving out important context:
once a player has played well enough to get themselves into a negotiation where they are being "threatened" with the tag, there is no world where their contract isnt going to end up in the top 10-15 at their position.
What the tag is based on has no relevance as to if the contract is currently bad, which is the whole point. The Giants got boxed into the situation by declining the fifth year option and not bringing in another QB to compete after that. That was partly because the draft they had two first round picks didn’t have a QB worth taking in the first round. Secondly, if they could have they would have tagged him and drafted a rookie QB. That route wasn’t possible because they had to tag Saqoun and weren’t picking high enough to get a QB. Acting like the Giants were 100% happy with giving him a long term contract is revisionist history.
They may have erroneously concluded they were boxed in. But it simply isn't true.
Were the Bucs BOXED IN when they decided to let Baker become a free agent? No.
And what was the worst that would happen to the Giants? We would get a bad QB who would post bottom of the league stats, while going 2-6 before getting injured twice? That's what is funny about all this hand-wringing that we HAD to sign Jones or we would experience some football hell. We're already experiencing the effects of football hell, with a decade of crap football and backup-level play out of our starting QBs since at least 2018.
The Giants had tons of leverage, and didn't realize it. Anywhere else Jones would have gone, would have been many times more pressure-packed, and they wouldn't wait around for him to become great. They would just release his ass -- unlike the Giants.
Quote:
<snip>
........ that's why even those that dont like him acknowledge that off 2022 he should have at least gotten tagged. is the tag amount based on the top 5 salaries at a position, or the top 20-25?
once a player has played well enough to get themselves into a negotiation where they are being "threatened" with the tag, there is no world where their contract isnt going to end up in the top 10-15 at their position.
........
This ~~~~~~ may be the single most insightful post in BBI history.
In comment 16536394 ajr2456 said:
What the tag is based on has no relevance as to if the contract is currently bad, which is the whole point. The Giants got boxed into the situation by declining the fifth year option and not bringing in another QB to compete after that. That was partly because the draft they had two first round picks didn’t have a QB worth taking in the first round. Secondly, if they could have they would have tagged him and drafted a rookie QB. That route wasn’t possible because they had to tag Saqoun and weren’t picking high enough to get a QB. Acting like the Giants were 100% happy with giving him a long term contract is revisionist history.
on that thread we had a few months ago you tried to claim that you "nailed" predicting the jones contract, how did you do that if there was no statistical basis for it?
The Giants had tons of leverage, and didn't realize it. Anywhere else Jones would have gone, would have been many times more pressure-packed, and they wouldn't wait around for him to become great. They would just release his ass -- unlike the Giants.
the Bucs signed Baker before he got to FA.
same as the Seahawks signed Geno before he got to FA.
noticing the trend darwin?
In comment 16536394 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
What the tag is based on has no relevance as to if the contract is currently bad, which is the whole point. The Giants got boxed into the situation by declining the fifth year option and not bringing in another QB to compete after that. That was partly because the draft they had two first round picks didn’t have a QB worth taking in the first round. Secondly, if they could have they would have tagged him and drafted a rookie QB. That route wasn’t possible because they had to tag Saqoun and weren’t picking high enough to get a QB. Acting like the Giants were 100% happy with giving him a long term contract is revisionist history.
Quote:
“I wanted to know we had our quarterback here and it wasn’t a franchise tag type deal,” Schoen said. “So to me that was a worst-case scenario, putting that franchise tag on him. But I also knew I had that as a tool. So the deal had to make sense for the franchise both short term and long term. And that was what was important to me.”
on that thread we had a few months ago you tried to claim that you "nailed" predicting the jones contract, how did you do that if there was no statistical basis for it?
You actually might be insane. Using Schoen media quotes to prove something is wild. The Giants preferred to tag Jones. All their actions pointed toward that. If Saqoun took the multi year deal Jones would have gotten tagged. So where is the “basic fact” that’s wrong in the bolded part?
Where did I say stats don’t matter when determining a contract?
“Nailed” based on what I heard, not some independent data evaluation. It seems like comprehension is an issue here.
You think Jones had leverage?
and with that jones' contract still = baker's same 13% of cap. jones just got the 2nd year guaranteed and baker didnt, jones got an inflated (nongtd) 4th year, baker didnt.
by golly it's almost like slotting all these contracts in isn't that hard, unless you want to be a knowingly obtuse pie eater like mike lombardi whose job depends on getting the lowest common denominator fired up with click bait.
Baker's career has been consistently better than Jones' career. How does Baker have less lwverage than Jones? He didn't. It's in your head. Jones had the same leverage as Baker.
But family is family, and Daniel is family.
Quote:
Baker had been on 4 teams in slightly over a year and a half and the Bucs just watched their third consecutive quarterback put up numbers with one of the sport’s elite WR duos. Baker had no leverage at all.
and with that jones' contract still = baker's same 13% of cap. jones just got the 2nd year guaranteed and baker didnt, jones got an inflated (nongtd) 4th year, baker didnt.
by golly it's almost like slotting all these contracts in isn't that hard, unless you want to be a knowingly obtuse pie eater like mike lombardi whose job depends on getting the lowest common denominator fired up with click bait.
Lombardi certainly got one of our posters here. He struggles with simple concepts though.
Regarding the signing, to say that without question it was a dumb move, at this juncture, is pretty irrational.
They signed him to what amounts to a 2 year contract after he had a good season which was his very first with the new regime. Played some of the best ball of his career. Signing him for 2 guaranteed years was actually a pretty good job by Schoen given the circumstances.
Going to be interesting to revisit all of these threads again this season. If Jones is playing well and the Giants have a winning record, you can bet the mortgage of who will actually still be around for it.
You actually might be insane. Using Schoen media quotes to prove something is wild. The Giants preferred to tag Jones. All their actions pointed toward that. If Saqoun took the multi year deal Jones would have gotten tagged. So where is the “basic fact” that’s wrong in the bolded part?
wrong again but i guess no reason to stop now - all of the reporting even through last july (mike g, dunleavy) was that the giants never up'd their offer from what they had offered Barkley during the bye week of 2022 and instead focused entirely on extending jones, and that barkley would have hit FA if the giants had to use the tag on jones.
https://www.nfl.com/news/giants-qb-daniel-jones-agree-to-four-year-160-million-contract
this was from january - he said that their goal was to extend jones. then they extended him. only in your world is there any "action" that showed their preference was to tag him.
https://nypost.com/2023/01/23/giants-gm-joe-schoen-reveals-teams-daniel-jones-stance/
When asked about Barkley, Schoen initially said, “This was a special team, to me, this was my first year, we’d like to have all the guys back, I really would.”
Schoen then pivoted to Barkley.
“Saquon’s a good player and he’s a great teammate,” Schoen said. “I loved getting to know him this season. He’s a guy we’d like to have back. Again, we haven’t had our end-of-season meetings yet.”
There is little doubt the Giants are prioritizing Jones. Barkley’s deal will have to make financial sense.
from march 2:
https://nypost.com/2023/03/02/giants-joe-schoen-feeling-time-crunch-with-daniel-jones/
There is still time, but not a whole lot.
One way or another, Jones will be the Giants’ starting quarterback in 2023.
Schoen this week reiterated that he will put the tag on Jones (which would pay him $32.4 million for this season) if a long-term deal cannot be worked out.
they wanted to extend jones and they extended him at the price it took at the time to get that done. the reporting on barkley never changed and also aligned with what happened - through this year when barkley left they never upped their offers and didnt match philly's. they were fine with him at the number they had already offered him but not any more.
The Giants have drafted 3 first round quarterbacks in 45 years. We're well aware that you can't draft one every year.
As a matter of fact, you apparently can't draft a quarterback at all in five years even if your starter is dogshit.
Hard to continue a discussion or actually have any type of discussion with substance when the time that Jones actually had some semblance of team success which had a lot to do with his play, you guys were nowhere to be found.
Again - ask Kurt Warner how he felt about Jones' 2023 season. I think we should probably listen to his opinion over yours.