Chris Jones - Making Him the Highest Paid Defender in the League

[dlphg9]

Why couldn't we do it? Khalil Mack, the highest paid defensive player in the league right now had cap hits of $13.8 mil in yr 1 of his new deal and $11.9 mil in yr 2. Macks avg yearly salary is $23.5 mil per year.

Veach doesn't seem to like giving guys contracts past the age of 30, so I could see him doing a 5 yr $120 mil deal. That keeps Jones in KC until age 30 and we get all his prime years and don't run the risk of having to pay him a ton of money after he's 30. Him being a 2nd rounder is going to help him in negotiating.

If we structure the contract so that his cap hit is $13 mil in year 1 and $15 mil in year 2, we have him cheap when we are tight with the cap this year and then next year there should be a decent jump in the cap and we're not out $8 mil because of Eric Berrys dead money. The cap should raise significantly for the remaining 3 years of his contract and it wont burden us with trying to get other good players.

There are several factors that should allow him to become the highest paid defender in the league.

1. He is an absolute beast. I am higher on his run D than most, but no one can argue that he is not, at worst, the 2nd best pass rushing interior lineman in the league. Personally, I put him right next to Aaron Donald when it comes to pass rushing. Now someone smarter than me correct me please, but has there ever been a better pass rusher at that position than those 2? His impact in the Super Bowl will be a big bargaining chip for him during negotiations as well

2. He is only 25 years old. Veach is smart. He doesn't like giving out big money to old guys and he's not going to extend guys into the twilight of their careers and pay them tons of money. Luckily for Chris Jones he is only 25 and a 5 year deal puts him at 30 years old. Veach wants to keep guys that still have their best years ahead of him and the prime age for a DT is 28 according to PFF, so that means in theory we haven't even seen the best Chris Jones and Brett Veach isn't going to just let that walk away.

3. The new CBA. When the top paid defenders signed their deals there were only 16 regular season game and now neverything is pointing to a 17 game regular season, so contracts are going to reflect that. Prior to the news about the newest CBA coming a year early my best guess was that CJ was going to get $21.5 mil a year from the Chiefs, since Frank Clark is basically getting $21 mil a year. $21.5 mil a year breaks down to $1.34 mil per regular season game, so that extra game should pay an additional $1.34 mil a year and that alone puts CJs yearly avg to just under $23 million a year. That hasn't even taken into account the increase in the percentage of profit the players are getting.

Chris Jones is one of my favorite players on the team and is probably my favorite player on the defense. I hope we keep him even if we have to pay him more money per year than any other defender in the history of the league. My love for Chris Jones may cloud my judgement and make me irrational and I may be completely wrong in my train of thought, but I dont think signing Jones long term is detrimental to the future success of this team whatsoever. I actually believe it would be insanely stupid and detrimental to let a generational talent like Chris Jones walk because we got some draft picks for him. Chris Jones's skills are only matched by one other player at his position and those 2 may be the best pass rushers we have ever seen at d tackle and I don't think anyone else is even close. You can't replace his production and trading him is an awful idea.

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

Unless youre clairvoyant, we dont know how the Clark deal turned out. Hes played one season of the deal. If he destroys his knee in training camp is it still great? Pops an Achilles after? Some will say the trophy makes it worth every penny already.

That Mahomes point is just ****ing stupid bro.

We are ****ed if Mahomes goes down no matter how much hes paid. You don't send him to another team to avoid paying him. Hes the best player on the planet.

I wouldn't give 2 shits if the Chiefs had to face Jones twice a year. Imagining Mahomes on another team? **** football forever.

Anyone that uses past players getting injured as a reason to not sign a 25 year old stud is just ****ing reeruned. I dont give a **** if Justin Houston didn't work out and got hurt, that has absolutely no effect on Chris Jones. If youre gonna use Eric Berry as a reason to not sign him long, then you are just a complete reerun, because Jones doesnt have the injury history of Berry, Jones is alot younger than Berry was when Berry got paid, and Jones didnt just come back from cancer.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by BlackOp

That's up for debate...if Trubisky was playing at a competent level, they would be a perennial playoff team.

Are you suggesting that paying Bryon Jones was worth losing Mack and the 4th overall pick to replace him?

In their situation yes. They drafted Ferrell (4.5 sacks) and Crosby (10 sacks) on cheap deals to replace him. They used a pick on Josh Jacobs, have another early pick this year and money for a Byron Jones big FA splash.

I want to keep Chris, but if Veach trades him and gets that type of return for him? You won’t find me bitching

[The Franchise]

Berry is an anomaly. The dude came back from cancer and had one of his best seasons ever. Nobody knew about the Haglunds deformity and it basically ended his career super early into the new contract.

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by RunKC

In their situation yes. They drafted Ferrell (4.5 sacks) and Crosby (10 sacks) on cheap deals to replace him. They used a pick on Josh Jacobs, have another early pick this year and money for a Byron Jones big FA splash.

I want to keep Chris, but if Veach trades him and gets that type of return for him? You won’t find me bitching

I hope to God they sign Byron Jones long term. Reports say he will be getting the biggest DB contract ever and to ecpect him to get 16-18 mil a year. Talk about a terrible deal. Paying a guy who is will be 28 at the start of the season is completely reeruned and is exactly the move you dont make.

[ChiefBlueCFC]

ESPN rated him the 8th best available free agent behind
1. Dak
2. Brady
3. Brees
4. Ngakoue
5. Scherff
6. Clowney
7. Tannehill

I get why they put the QBs ahead of him, but I definitely question Clowney Scherff and Ngakoue... not that those dudes aren't damn good but Jones is so ****ing under appreciated by so many

https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/sto...players-market (ESPN+)

Hopefully not a repost

[ForeverIowan]

Originally Posted by BlackOp

$43 million is their combined rookie contracts...#4 and #24.

No it's not. Not sure where you are pulling those numbers. I'm talking cap hit per year.

[Wallcrawler]

Originally Posted by dlphg9

Anyone that uses past players getting injured as a reason to not sign a 25 year old stud is just ****ing reeruned. I dont give a **** if Justin Houston didn't work out and got hurt, that has absolutely no effect on Chris Jones. If youre gonna use Eric Berry as a reason to not sign him long, then you are just a complete reerun, because Jones doesnt have the injury history of Berry, Jones is alot younger than Berry was when Berry got paid, and Jones didnt just come back from cancer.

Using players getting injured on huge contracts in our teams recent history AS A REASON NOT TO BREAK THE BANK FOR ONE PLAYER is not reeruned.

Its simply a " Hey, remember when we gave Berry all that money? That was awesome".

We are still eating millions of dollars of that contract.

Houston was a gigantic waste of 105 million.

The point is, you think you have a player in Jones, that we just cannot live without, and must drop a mega deal in his lap.

I'm saying the only player that way of thinking applies to, is Mahomes. Losing Mahomes would irreversibly cripple the franchise for years.

Losing Jones would be a minor annoyance, given the massive haul we would get in return.

I'd view Jones leaving as similar to losing Kareem Hunt's production. Yeah dude produced, was top 3 in his position in the league, and was awesome, but hes not here now so plug n play.

Is Damien Kareem Hunt? No. But the dude balled out in his stead. Veach and Spags could do the same replacing Jones. Not the same caliber, but not a scrub either, and we save a shit ton of cap doing it and retain or sign more players to keep this thing going for the next decade along with the draft picks we will land.

Whatever Veach decides, im good with. He stays, we have a monster DT locked up and hopefully stays injury free.

He offloads him for a haul, hey, gonna be exciting to see what Veach with the roster with his acquired resources.

If i had to lean one way or the other, I take the big haul in a trade. Never was a fan of a huge amount of your cap riding on one player, then riding on the pine in the case of injury.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by The Franchise

Berry is an anomaly. The dude came back from cancer and had one of his best seasons ever. Nobody knew about the Haglunds deformity and it basically ended his career super early into the new contract.

So was Houston.

Nobody can predict a guy destroying his whole knee right after signing a massive contract.

[kcclone]

Originally Posted by BossChief

So was Houston.

Nobody can predict a guy destroying his whole knee right after signing a massive contract.

This is true for every player we (or any other team) sign. It happens.

Guys that stay on the sidelines because of the small, nagging stuff is something you can try to avoid, but major reconstructions, etc are what they are.

[Wallcrawler]

Originally Posted by BossChief

So was Houston.

Nobody can predict a guy destroying his whole knee right after signing a massive contract.

For clarification, im not blaming the players. Its nobody's fault that they were injured. But dropping that much money on one player, is a gamble.

When you gamble, you are going to lose at one point or another.

Injuries are a major aspect of pro football. Its not a matter of IF you are going to be injured, its WHEN, and for HOW LONG.

If Veach is comfortable letting 200 million ride on two trench players, where violent contact is experienced every single play, then okay.

Its simply not a gamble that has paid off for the Chiefs.

Name any Chief (aside from Frank Clark who has played one season on his) given a monster contract that worked out, and was worth the money.

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

For clarification, im not blaming the players. Its nobody's fault that they were injured. But dropping that much money on one player, is a gamble.

When you gamble, you are going to lose at one point or another.

Injuries are a major aspect of pro football. Its not a matter of IF you are going to be injured, its WHEN, and for HOW LONG.

If Veach is comfortable letting 200 million ride on two trench players, where violent contact is experienced every single play, then okay.

Its simply not a gamble that has paid off for the Chiefs.

Name any Chief (aside from Frank Clark who has played one season on his) given a monster contract that worked out, and was worth the money.

It depends on what your definition of "worked out" really is. If you're criteria is "we won a SB with that guy" then the list is pretty short. But that's an unfair metric IMO, because even just getting to a SB is an extremely rare and difficult thing to do, and it requires an entire team to get that done. Much less win one.

On the other hand, if your parameters are statistical production, leadership, etc. then the list is significantly larger.

Take Alex Smith for example. Alex signed a 4-year extension, including 45 million guaranteed, IIRC back in 2014 to be the Chiefs starting QB. Now despite the fact that he ultimately couldn't get the Chiefs to the big game, he was in fact well worth his contract. He took over a team that in the previous season went 2-14 or whatever it was, and led the Chiefs to five consecutive winning seasons, four of which totaled at least ten wins, two consecutive AFC-W championships, and four playoff appearances.

Except between 1990-95, the Chiefs had never experienced a such a period of consistent success in franchise history.

And in reference to your "gambling" scenario, the fact that the Chiefs ultimately lost on Houston and Berry actually tells us that the Chiefs should gamble on Jones, mathematically speaking. The law of averages says that gambling on Jones should work out positively for the Chiefs because those two gambles didn't work out.

[Wallcrawler]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

It depends on what your definition of "worked out" really is. If you're criteria is "we won a SB with that guy" then the list is pretty short. But that's an unfair metric IMO, because even just getting to a SB is an extremely rare and difficult thing to do, and it requires an entire team to get that done. Much less win one.

On the other hand, if your parameters are statistical production, leadership, etc. then the list is significantly larger.

Take Alex Smith for example. Alex signed a 4-year extension, including 45 million guaranteed, IIRC back in 2014 to be the Chiefs starting QB. Now despite the fact that he ultimately couldn't get the Chiefs to the big game, he was in fact well worth his contract. He took over a team that in the previous season went 2-14 or whatever it was, and led the Chiefs to five consecutive winning seasons, four of which totaled at least ten wins, two consecutive AFC-W championships, and four playoff appearances.

Except between 1990-95, the Chiefs had never experienced a such a period of consistent success in franchise history.

And in reference to your "gambling" scenario, the fact that the Chiefs ultimately lost on Houston and Berry actually tells us that the Chiefs should gamble on Jones, mathematically speaking. The law of averages says that gambling on Jones should work out positively for the Chiefs because those two gambles didn't work out.

I dont recall Alex making insane top qb money, but sure. So, one guy then?

As for your take on gambling, that because Houston and Berrys contracts flopped, and ****ed us for 15 million dead money this year, and 8 million next, your answer is go ahead and gamble another 100 million alongside the 100 mil you already have riding on Clark, who has already in his first year battled numerous injuries for no other reason than "Hey, we are due for one of these things to work out eventually." ?

I'll just say I disagree and leave it at that because i cannot begin to put into words how completely ridiculous a mindset like that is.

[Tribal Warfare]

Originally Posted by ChiefBlueCFC

ESPN rated him the 8th best available free agent behind
1. Dak
2. Brady
3. Brees
4. Ngakoue
5. Scherff
6. Clowney
7. Tannehill

I get why they put the QBs ahead of him, but I definitely question Clowney Scherff and Ngakoue... not that those dudes aren't damn good but Jones is so ****ing under appreciated by so many

https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/sto...players-market (ESPN+)

Hopefully not a repost

ESPN is also speculating that Chris Jones is only worth a 2nd round pick.

Thus, I dismiss their opinion on the subject

[Red Dawg]

Breaking the bank for Jones will hurt the overall roster. Too much money on the DL.

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

I dont recall Alex making insane top qb money, but sure. So, one guy then?

As for your take on gambling, that because Houston and Berrys contracts flopped, and ****ed us for 15 million dead money this year, and 8 million next, your answer is go ahead and gamble another 100 million alongside the 100 mil you already have riding on Clark, who has already in his first year battled numerous injuries for no other reason than "Hey, we are due for one of these things to work out eventually." ?

I'll just say I disagree and leave it at that because i cannot begin to put into words how completely ridiculous a mindset like that is.

There's more than Alex; as I wrote above it was one example.

As for your highlighted sentence, tell that to Andy Reid and Patrick Mahomes. When things got tough, they both had the mindset of "keep firing, just keep firing," did they not?

You don't win it all by being safe. You win it all by taking chances. Which was exactly my biggest problem with Alex; he didn't take enough shots when the game was on the line. You want to win big, you have to take big risks. Every uber successful person knows that.