Is Daniel Jones $35 Million better than Tyrod Taylor?

[B1GBLUE]

Bottom line for me on this topic was that Taylor was no worse than Jones has been this year, and that's putting in a way that's frankly generous to Jones.

Taylor is a $5.5mm a year journeyman backup in his mid 30s who has barely been on the field the last few years. Jones is a $40m a year, feature fifth year starter whom some fans here still see as the franchise QB they want the front office to continue to build the team around moving forward.

Am I arguing Taylor's performance last night was anything great? No, obviously not, but was it any worse than Jones? Sorry, but no, it was not. Anyone who refuses to admit that is simply suppressing the truth or is just too clouded by bias and stubbornness to be able to make an objective judgment.

Taylor made multiple nice downfield throws that we have seen very little of from Jones this year, and he took excellent care of the ball overall. And for those trying to downplay the Bills' D, give me a break, please. That's still a top D, and it was a hostile environment and a hostile opponent that was in the mood to fight. It was hardly an easy situation. And it was as bad an O line roster as anything Jones has had to deal with this year, not to mention Barkley clearly wasn't healthy and was getting stuffed at or behind the line for most of the game.

People can try to squint their eyes and manipulate the narrative as much as they want, but the reality is what it is: Taylor last night was no less than on par with Jones this year, and I actually think that's selling him short. Both the eye test and the numbers say he was better than what we have seen from Jones this year, and he is on this roster at about 1/8th of the annual price with about 1/10th of the total guarantee. The facts simply are what they are.

i think this is a fair assessment. was he better than jones? not really. was he worse? definitely not. and you bring up a good point about the difference in pay. but he did have barkley, who changes everything on this offense. lets see how jones looks once he's got him back, and if kafka calls plays the way he did last night. its frustrating that he only changed things up once jones got hurt.

[andrew_nyGiants]

The question was not was TT a difference maker, the question is in the name of the thread.

For that salary they could have signed a G, and upgraded the depth from guys like Peart and Lemieux, and maybe something on the defense

Perhaps.

But you can thank Meddling Mara for that and the current front office who acquiesced to his desire.

They should've never paid DJ that kind of $$, I agree. Tyrod is but a band-aid applied to a sucking chest wound.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[True Blue]

jones has more upside. but his confidence is SO low right now. Kafka needs to put him in a position to get in a rhythm. we've seen what he can do when he has that. I would love if jones would grow a set and show some damn fire. i'm getting tired of the nice guy thing. off the field thats great. but seriously, get mad, get in a linemans face when they blow an assignment. TT looked a little better, but he also had barkley, and kafka obviously changed some things up. why do we have to wait until jones is injured to do that?

Jones has played plenty of games with Barkley

[B1GBLUE]

Jones has played plenty of games with Barkley

and he generally played better when he's had him. one mediocre game by tyrod doesnt exactly negate jones (limited) contributions.

[True Blue]

and he generally played better when he's had him. one mediocre game by tyrod doesnt exactly negate jones (limited) contributions.

Yes, but with Barkley he has been average at best, he feasted on a few weak defenses last year down the stretch but that was fools gold, everyone produced against the Colts and Vikes last year

[B1GBLUE]

Yes, but with Barkley he has been average at best, he feasted on a few weak defenses last year down the stretch but that was fools gold, everyone produced against the Colts and Vikes last year

wont argue that. but every year is different.

[True Blue]

wont argue that. but every year is different.

It is, but Jones has more or less been the same regardless of who he has or doesn't have. They need an upgrade at QB (and RG) along with a break on health (looking at you Barnes)

[madbadger]

When Schoen came in and declined Jones's 5th year, I suggested then that they should just roll with Tyrod because he has a very similar skillset but would come at a much cheaper price. Plus, he was already under contract.

That was met with quite a bit of pushback, many citing his decision to run for a first down and got concussed against Chicago the previous season. Of course, he made a bone-headed decision last night as well. Point being, Taylor isn't the long-term answer... and neither is Jones.

In hindsight I agree with you. While I was in favor of franchising Jones as a stop gap measure I didn't think he played well enough to get the silly extension that they gave him.  If it wasn't worth picking up his void season then why was it worth extending him after throwing just 15 touchdowns?

I get that Daboll wants to win and Jones is better than Taylor but not enough to justify the huge contract disparity between the two. Huge, unforced error by Schoen IMHO

[H-Town G-Fan]

In hindsight I agree with you. While I was in favor of franchising Jones as a stop gap measure I didn't think he played well enough to get the silly extension that they gave him.  If it wasn't worth picking up his void season then why was it worth extending him after throwing just 15 touchdowns?

I get that Daboll wants to win and Jones is better than Taylor but not enough to justify the huge contract disparity between the two. Huge, unforced error by Schoen IMHO

They weren't in position to draft a QB this past year and they were never just going to roll with Tyrod as the starter. Whoever they brought in would've probably gotten 2-3 years... which is basically what happened with DJ. He got 2/3 year deal and the Giants overpaid to (potentially) get out of it sooner side of that deal. I simply cannot view it as some huge error. Jones isn't living up to the paycheck, under admittedly difficult circumstances... but this is precisely why the deal is structured as such. And a complete dumpster fire of a season thankfully makes the path forward clearer.

[madbadger]

They weren't in position to draft a QB this past year and they were never just going to roll with Tyrod as the starter. Whoever they brought in would've probably gotten 2-3 years... which is basically what happened with DJ. He got 2/3 year deal and the Giants overpaid to (potentially) get out of it sooner side of that deal. I simply cannot view it as some huge error. Jones isn't living up to the paycheck, under admittedly difficult circumstances... but this is precisely why the deal is structured as such. And a complete dumpster fire of a season thankfully makes the path forward clearer.

They could have franchises him as a stop gap measure for this year when they could draft a quarterback of the future. It would have cost them a lot less and they would have been free and clear of him at years end. Now they're tied to him for at least another year. It's not my money but it's money that can't be used to improve the roster during free agency.

[H-Town G-Fan]

They could have franchises him as a stop gap measure for this year when they could draft a quarterback of the future. It would have cost them a lot less and they would have been free and clear of him at years end. Now they're tied to him for at least another year. It's not my money but it's money that can't be used to improve the roster during free agency.

I get your point. But if they're moving on from Jones, being tied to him next year isn't a big deal in my mind. In that scenario, you're probably grooming a rookie QB and contention in 2024 isn't likely. You're aiming for 25/26 when DJ is off the books.

[True Blue]

I get your point. But if they're moving on from Jones, being tied to him next year isn't a big deal in my mind. In that scenario, you're probably grooming a rookie QB and contention in 2024 isn't likely. You're aiming for 25/26 when DJ is off the books.

This, plus with other OL and offensive players surely to be added along with possibly a new OL Coach, it gives them time to gel, work out at least some kinks, and hopefully have things more stable, so no rush to play the rookie week 1

[Bob In PA]

They weren't in position to draft a QB this past year and they were never just going to roll with Tyrod as the starter. Whoever they brought in would've probably gotten 2-3 years... which is basically what happened with DJ. He got 2/3 year deal and the Giants overpaid to (potentially) get out of it sooner side of that deal. I simply cannot view it as some huge error. Jones isn't living up to the paycheck, under admittedly difficult circumstances... but this is precisely why the deal is structured as such. And a complete dumpster fire of a season thankfully makes the path forward clearer.

H-T: It seems clear to me (as it is to you) and, not being insiders ourselves, likely quite close to reality. Bob

[madbadger]

This, plus with other OL and offensive players surely to be added along with possibly a new OL Coach, it gives them time to gel, work out at least some kinks, and hopefully have things more stable, so no rush to play the rookie week 1

Stroud is proving that a first round pick can step in and play very effectively as a rookie. I'm not so sure I can stomach another completely lost season in the hopes that we can be good the following one. I'm sure Daboll isn't willing to do it either. If they draft a qb in the first round he isn't going to be patient and groom him for the next head coach. He's going to play him early. If they've decided to move on for whatever reason having Jones around is a hindrance not a benefit.

[H-Town G-Fan]

H-T: It seems clear to me (as it is to you) and, not being insiders ourselves, likely quite close to reality. Bob

The information we have (i.e. the money) paints a pretty clear picture of how the Giants approached DJ: hopeful, but not irrationally so.