Daniel Jones' much-ridiculed $160M contract might be a Giant bargain

[Stringer Bell]

The bottom line here is that there is absolutely no universe in which Jones' contract is a "bargain." The rest is really semantics.

I agree that DJ's contract is not a bargain. No argument there.

But definitely disagree that the rest is "semantics" when, in fact, it's a question of big-picture thinking vs. small-picture thinking. Especially when you consider the out that was very strategically written into the contract. If DJ continues to underperform, they took a swing on a guy and missed. Not at all uncommon in the NFL. But if performs at league average, that gives them very important team-building flexibility into 2027, and if he over-performs, then they do have a bargain for a year or 2.

[DaveBrown74]

I agree that DJ's contract is not a bargain. No argument there.

But definitely disagree that the rest is "semantics" when, in fact, it's a question of big-picture thinking vs. small-picture thinking. Especially when you consider the out that was very strategically written into the contract. If DJ continues to underperform, they took a swing on a guy and missed. Not at all uncommon in the NFL. But if performs at league average, that gives them very important team-building flexibility into 2027, and if he over-performs, then they do have a bargain for a year or 2.

I'm fully aware of the out, and when I used the word "semantics" I wasn't referring to that detail.

I don't see anything esoteric about pointing out that if he surprises significantly to the upside with his performance, that he might be technically cheap for a year or two towards the end of the contract and that hence, under those circumstances, you could term the deal a "bargain" for those particular years. I fully understand that, and that's true of anybody with any contract. I don't see how the Giants exercised clever "big picture" thinking there. That's a pretty basic concept that any layperson can understand.

My point is, and has been in other posts/threads, that the level of play we got from Jones in 2022 can be easily replicated in the free agent market for way less than $40mm, including in 2023, 2024, and likely 2025 and 2026 and perhaps 2027. And even if his $40mm AAV ends up being a technical bargain in say 2027 due to his playing well that year, I don't believe that justifies the contract, simply because it won't have been a bargain in any other year (or most other years) unless he suddenly becomes something he has never been in the NFL or in college. I don't see how making a big second contract bet on a player to suddenly be something he has never remotely been or shown any sign of being is smart, personally. Even if you manage to end up with one or two years where he is relatively fair value or perhaps even technically cheap towards the end of the contract.

[Jclayton92]

Carr got a deal at the same time and is making a 100 million I think and went 3,878 yards 25 tds 8 int 97.7 rating last year. Probably better to compare them two than the 14/15 guys ahead of Jones.

[MightyGiants]

Jones' contract made him a top 10 highest paid QB at the time it was signed. To me that is what is relevant and why the transaction has been justifiably criticized. The Giants decided to do that, and that is an unalterable fact.

Yes, QB contracts are on a steep annual incline in value, so if you wait a year or two and say "hey, Jones actually isn't as highly paid relative to the league as he used to be", that's a fairly transparent trick in my opinion. Everyone can see what the person who is making that claim is doing.

Moreover, even if one does believe it's perfectly fair to look at this subject that way and always constantly calibrate to the present, Jones' level of play last year (the most important year for any present discussion) was downright wretched, so in no way is his contract a bargain on any level.

The other point, which H-Town made and with which I firmly agree, is that the properly valued QB market is somewhat bifurcated, and then you have this no-man's land part of the market that Jones is now in.

To explain what I mean by the above: you have your clearly elite QBs who are making premium money. Burrow, Mahomes, Allen, etc. Then you have QBs on rookie contracts and also your lower paid journeyman vet types like Gardner Minshew, Flacco (now), Mayfield last year, etc. Then you have this middle-ground market where mediocre-ish QBs are paid less than the absolute elite but are nonetheless paid numbers that are still too high for the value they add versus the value that guys like Flacco and 2023 Mayfield add for much less money. Jones is very much in that latter group.

In short, yes, he is not paid as much as a fair number of QBs are, but he's still paid way too much for the value he adds. You can replicate or exceed the value Jones adds with much cheaper free agent veterans. That reality was on full display last year, and I firmly believe it was also on display in 2022, but just not as egregiously.

It's interesting that you focused exclusively on year one of the contract and called any effort to view the contract in its entirety a "trick".   I would suggest that perhaps you have things reversed.   Contracts should be viewed in their entirety rather than just in the first year. 

[MrGap92]

Historically speaking, Jones has never played at a top 14-15 level even prior to the contract

[killarich]

A few folks here mentioned that.

It will only be a bargain if he stays healthy and performs at a top 5 level this season.

I'm rooting like hell for him because he's the only shot we got this season. Let's hope he has a chip on his shoulder and plays aggressively.

Top 5 ? Idk about that

His contract was big at that moment ... but most if new when the slew of other contracts came out it wouldn't look as bad

I want him to be top 5 but if he's top 10 I think in that contract is extremely worth it

[T200]

Top 5 ? Idk about that

His contract was big at that moment ... but most if new when the slew of other contracts came out it wouldn't look as bad

I want him to be top 5 but if he's top 10 I think in that contract is extremely worth it

I'll take Top 10 if, especially if it comes with 10-12 wins!

[jgrangers2]

It's interesting that you focused exclusively on year one of the contract and called any effort to view the contract in its entirety a "trick".   I would suggest that perhaps you have things reversed.   Contracts should be viewed in their entirety rather than just in the first year. 

The overall numbers will always increase. The contracts signed this year will likely be surpassed by contracts signed next year. By this logic, every contract will look like a bargain in the future. Also, Daniel Jones currently has the 4th highest cap hit in the NFL heading into this season and is probably not even a top 10-15 QB. How exactly is that supposed to be a bargain?

The ultimate issue with the contract goes back to what a number of people have already mentioned. There is no middle market for quarterbacks so the only true bargain at the position will be great QBs on rookie deals.

[AZGiantFan]

A GM who looks at contracts on just a this year basis and doesn't project CAP situation a few years into the future is a peawit, IMO.

[MrGap92]

A GM who looks at contracts on just a this year basis and doesn't project CAP situation a few years into the future is a peawit, IMO.

The way the contract was designed to have a 2 year out, shows that Schoen clearly thought ahead several years

[MightyGiants]

The overall numbers will always increase. The contracts signed this year will likely be surpassed by contracts signed next year. By this logic, every contract will look like a bargain in the future. Also, Daniel Jones currently has the 4th highest cap hit in the NFL heading into this season and is probably not even a top 10-15 QB. How exactly is that supposed to be a bargain?

The ultimate issue with the contract goes back to what a number of people have already mentioned. There is no middle market for quarterbacks so the only true bargain at the position will be great QBs on rookie deals.

Contracts are not written in a vacuum.  They are written knowing the direction in which the salary cap is going.  New contracts will tend to top the charts.  Still, I appreciate that saying this doesn't mean that much.  I think an illustration is worth considering


Last year, 3 players on NYG got new contracts.

Andrew Thomas is still the 3rd highest paid LT
Dex is still the 8th highest-paid DT (he would be higher, but 3 techs tend to earn more than NTs)
Jones is 16th


That's why a deliberate micro-focus is not particularly helpful or enlightening

[AZGiantFan]

That's why a deliberate micro-focus is not particularly helpful or enlightening

But it is good for the narrative.

[jgrangers2]

Contracts are not written in a vacuum.  They are written knowing the direction in which the salary cap is going.  New contracts will tend to top the charts.  Still, I appreciate that saying this doesn't mean that much.  I think an illustration is worth considering


Last year, 3 players on NYG got new contracts.

Andrew Thomas is still the 3rd highest paid LT
Dex is still the 8th highest-paid DT (he would be higher, but 3 techs tend to earn more than NTs)
Jones is 16th


That's why a deliberate micro-focus is not particularly helpful or enlightening

But Dex is probably the best player in the league at his position and Andrew Thomas is a top 10, if not 5, player at his. Jones at the 16th highest paid QB might be about right, but that doesn't necessarily make him a bargain. It makes him sort of accurately paid. What the article you posted doesn't consider is that if you only have the 16th best QB, everything else better be great because he's probably not making up for significant deficiencies across the roster.

[MrGap92]

But Dex is probably the best player in the league at his position and Andrew Thomas is a top 10, if not 5, player at his. Jones at the 16th highest paid QB might be about right, but that doesn't necessarily make him a bargain. It makes him sort of accurately paid. What the article you posted doesn't consider is that if you only have the 16th best QB, everything else better be great because he's probably not making up for significant deficiencies across the roster.

In my opinion, this post is pretty spot on.

[MightyGiants]

But Dex is probably the best player in the league at his position and Andrew Thomas is a top 10, if not 5, player at his. Jones at the 16th highest paid QB might be about right, but that doesn't necessarily make him a bargain. It makes him sort of accurately paid. What the article you posted doesn't consider is that if you only have the 16th best QB, everything else better be great because he's probably not making up for significant deficiencies across the roster.

You appear to have completely missed the point.  If rankings dropped as fast as you claimed, they wouldn't still be ranked as high as their are