this is exactly why he's trying to get what he can now. at his age it's even possible to see a slight decline this year, although i certainly hope that doesn't happen.

i think the best course of action is to pay him. try to strike iron while it's hot and win back-to-back SBs. if you lose someone down the line because of it, that's just one of those decisions a team has to live if they're gonna chase rings.

And it's also why the Chiefs have the leverage. If he doesn't come down enough, they're sort of ok with getting one more great year out of him then letting him get paid elsewhere.

The 49ers and Pats stayed great for a long time by never shelling out for that big third contract.

That said I really hope they can reach one with Jones. I trust in Vorch not to pull a Dorsey.

I know guards are supposedly easy to replace but I would rather keep Smith than Sneed. Our DB situation looks pretty solid and I am in love with the play and attitude of Smith. Protecting Mahomes comes first for me.

To me, if 30M AAV is truly his number, I think we have to ask ourselves "Is Chris Jones the best defensive player in the NFL not named Aaron Donald?" Not best Defensive Tackle, best defensive player.

He'll be making 2M AAV more than T.J. Watt, who's new deal was just 2 years ago (and who is much younger). 5M AAV more than Myles Garrett (who has a consistently much higher sack total than CJ95, is better against the run, and also younger)

We have a tendency to act like CJ95 is in double digit sacks every year, but that's not really the case (This is not to say that play is only measured by sacks, only to hopefully help people realize.). He's only had 2 Double Digit sack seasons (2018 w/ 15.5 and 2022 w/ 15.5; the other seasons he has 9, 7.5, 9, 6.5, and 2 his rookie year). This is not to say that is the only criteria for which he effects the game, but it is one stat of many.

The reason I bring this up is because there are players who have been paid recently who he isn't just beating out with this contract, he's jumping 20% higher.

We succeed because of the team that Veach and Andy build around Mahomes. And at 30M AAV, the question of whether that money is best used on making the 2nd highest paid defensive player in football is a legitimate one.

Overpaying players is not the way that we can continue success in terms of longevity.

EDIT: Just hit me, his two 15.5 sack season were both the years that extension talks should happen that offseason. Not saying that he's a slacker or anything, but just a curiousity.

I'd guess we're at "show up, play out season then go from there" time.

I guess I'm off with this thought, but I just don't like getting into these things. Ideally, now, they'd have just traded him before the draft and FA and moved on.

Come on fellas Jones will be here this year barring injury. Next year is what is in doubt.

I just hate all the distractions. It seems a bit sloppy.

You are correct, he was noticeably better in contract years, that usually isn't a coincidence. Not saying he wasn't good outside of those years, but he certainly wasn't as good, and I think most people would agree with that.

I don't think Jones is the kind of guy who phones it in after being paid, but I think there is a noticeable difference. This is a very difficult decision for the Chiefs. If $30 million is honestly where he is and he won't budge, damn man, I just don't know if I could do it.

"Nate Taylor of The Athletic reported that the Chiefs have not been willing to give Jones $30 million per season on a new contract. Per Taylor, Jones wants a new deal that would make him "at least the second-highest-paid player at his position."

Work this bitch out and settle between 28 and 29.

To me, it's "How many OL are you going to pay?"

I am all-in on paying Humphrey. They already paid Taylor. They are paying Thuney. I think that 3 guys is kind of the max you can pay top of market contracts for at the OL. To me, I think they need to pick between Smith and Humphrey, while trying to get a long-term solution at the other T spot opposite Taylor.

Ideal situation would be to pay Humphrey while drafting a young T to bookend with Taylor, that you then pay when moving on from Thuney.

Considering Williams is at 2nd for DT with 24M AAV, I'd agree with someone else earlier who posted that Jones camp seems a bit disingenous by saying they want to be "at least the second highest paid player at his position" then wanting 30M AAV which is basically Aaron Donald money. I think plenty of us were content with 27M AAV which was right down the middle between 1st and 3rd for DT.

(That is unless Chris Jones considers EDGE part of his position too, in which case, 30M would be right in between 1st and 3rd.)

Unless the plan is possibly to move on from Thuney and retain Trey... Thuney's contract is up in 25' at his age 33 season, and we can get out of it Saving 16M with the remaining 6.6 as dead money if we cut him in 25'. 24' is the last year of Trey's rookie deal. Also, I don't think Trey will get Thuney money, but serves his role very well.

This is Jones last chance to really get paid because he's 30....so he's going to go for as much as possible. That also doesn't factor in that giving that deal to a dude that is 30 is how you end up way overpaying for his production. No one in their right mind should expect Chris Jones at 33 to be the player he was last year.

In short it's really hard for a team like the Chiefs to pay a 30 year old DT what Jones wants.

Billay just texted me a message telling me not to worry the last thing Chris Jones needs is an extension! Wink emoji wink emoji.
..so, not sure.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/SUgqTppHe-U" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Being reported by someone I don't know that he wants $30m/year.

If you're going to pay 3 guys, I think your T really would ideally be 2 of them. If you're going to pay 2 guys, I think your T really would ideally be 2 of them.

I just have a hard time seeing them commit big at C and RG and both Ts.

If they can draft a OT that would buy them a second contract for one of the other guys.

I'm not sure I agree that if we trade Jones we won't win a Super Bowl without him talk. YES if we trade Jones now and role with the current DTs we have a Super Bowl is gonna be very hard. I just think if Veach pulled a Tyreek and traded Jones he would then look for a stop gap or a trade to beef up the DT position more than what we have outside of Jones atm.

I mean hell bring in Suh as a 1 year stop gap. Yes he is about washed but would be better than what we currently have. Or maybe not and he should retire haha

100% agree and thats why Veach getting these starters on rookie deals need to keep happening. If Veach can get us a tackle in next years draft we can role with. Ideally Veach always has a couple of rookie contracts on the OL

It wouldn't cripple the team, we'd just have to be a different team.

There are some decent stop gaps out there right now that I'd argue we should look at because are DT depth is bleh and Warton may start the year on PUP. But odds are we have 1 more season with Jones either way.

If we draft a Tackle, he's cost controlled. at that point, we are committing big at RT (which we already are) and Center (Humphrey). I don't see that extending Smith is entirely out of the picture when Thuney is gone. Don't get me wrong, maybe Humphrey's extension will be massive and there will be no chance to keep Smith, but I think there is a (albeit uncertain) possibility both could be extended. By the time the OT is up for extension, Taylor will be gone and we can extend him. Just trying to see the situation coming before us.

updates?

I'm trying to poop

thank you.

Sorry fellas. My hopes that if it were successful Jones had simply overslept and would report tomorrow, but no luck.

Neg away.

Since clearly someone in the Chiefs camp leaked this, the Jones camp needs to leak what the Chiefs are offering.

I would assume no higher than $27M.

I don't have a problem with paying him the biggest contract for a defender that's not named Aaron Donald, so TJ Watt is at $28,002,750/yr. If $28.5-$29 mil isn't good enough for him, then I think Veach has to move on.

The Patriots would have already dumped this guy by now and replaced him with two white dudes at WR who are super-clutch and some Polish LB who makes the Pro-Bowl.

Letting Jones walk without the tag next year would be extremely incompetent. Veach is not incompetent.

Anyone have the running fine total

(number of days vets have been at training camp) X ($50,000.00) = Fine Total so far

I wonder if this is how HOF bids are done. No one would be talking about how important he is to the team if the deal was already done. Now it will be planted in the subconscious for a few years down the road

They’re not a Super Bowl contender without Chris jones this season

Why hasn’t anyone asked the CP KING of updates…. DJBILL???

Dude had the scoop, hell he might just be Burnt Peach!!

Bruh, CJ isn’t Mahomes. I love Chris, but you’re giving him a bit much credit. Vatch knows that, and will act accordingly! Either way we will have CJ this season. But the only player we absolutely have to have to win a championship is number 15!

Chris Jones was just barely less important than Patrick Mahomes. We don't win the SB last year with out him. If Karlaftis doesn't take a big jump and we don't see contributions from someone else on the line, then our D is probably the worst it's been in the Mahomes era of Jones doesn't play this year. Good thing he will.

Surely you haven't forgotten Bob Sutton's defense?

I think CJ will play this year. But I’m not willing to pay him what he wants. If he doesn’t play (he will) then I still feel like we’ll be ok. We have very elite LB, and secondary. Spags will make it work. But no ****ing way is paying him 30 mil a year a good investment. We’re not talking about last year, we’re talking about THIS season. And as long as we have 15 we have the best shot in the league. I’d rather lose CJ next season, but keep Creed, Bolton, and one of Tre, or Sneed than pay 30 year old CJ 30 million a season. In Veach we trust.

Nope I haven't, but last year if we didn't have Chris Jones, then it'd be worse than those. He's a huge reason for why this D got to the QB so much. He did it himself and they had to constantly try and stop him which opened it up for the other pass rushers.

Those LBs look a lot worse without Jones taking up double teams and that secondary looks a lot worse without Jones wrecking shit and forcing the QB to pass the ball. Bolton is the only guy I'd worry about losing. Andy has never had trouble finding a center. Creed is going to get paid $15 mil/yr. Bolton is going to get $20 mil/yr. Sneed is going to get anywhere between $15-$20 mil/yr. Trey is going to get around $15 mil/yr.

Like I said I'm fine with losing everyone of those guys besides Bolton. This organization hasn't had trouble finding DBs and interior lineman. We haven't shown an ability to acquire dominant LBs and Bolton could become the best in the league. DTs like Jones are damn near impossible to acquire, especially when you pick where we pick.

I think he signs ~$29 mil/yr and I'm good with it. He's worth it.

Nate Taylor thinks that the Chiefs will actually cave in to his demands.

I would agree, they cave here I think.

If you wanna go back to back, he’s an integral piece for the next couple years

Found this an interesting read only part of article
https://arrowheadaddict.com/posts/ch...rushers-chiefs

If you aren't on board with giving Jones a deal with that high of average, you're really going to think what I'm about to suggest is crazy. After playing with the numbers a little, I think I would offer Jones a five-year deal. Something like 5 years, $150 million ($30 million/year average), with $80 million guaranteed. That would put him second behind all pass rushers behind Aaron Donald on a yearly average and would be the largest total dollar contract for a defender in the entire NFL.

That may sound crazy, but by spreading the money out over five years you can keep the cap hits down more in the first couple of years of the deal and give the team more options in what they want to do with Jones after the guaranteed money is finished. If you do a four-year deal for $30 million/year, you either have to have big cap numbers right away or have a ridiculously huge number in the fourth year of the deal that everyone knows will never be paid.

Here's a simplified example of how a deal like this could work. $25 million of the $80 million guaranteed is a signing bonus that is pro-rated over all five years of the deal. Then the remaining $55 million that is guaranteed is his salary for the first three seasons. So essentially you have a fully guaranteed three-year deal and after that the only dead money if he is cut is the remaining signing bonus cap hits. So the yearly breakdown could be something like this:

Year 1 - Fully guaranteed $15 million cap hit ($5 million signing bonus, $10 million salary)
Year 2 - Fully guaranteed $25 million cap hit ($5 million signing bonus, $20 million salary)
Year 3 - Fully guaranteed $30 million cap hit ($5 million signing bonus, $25 million salary)
Year 4 - $35 million cap hit (only $5 million signing bonus is guaranteed)
Year 5 - $45 million cap hit (only $5 million signing bonus is guaranteed)

So in year 4 of the deal (2026) the Chiefs would have options. They could keep Jones (who would be 32 that season) if he's still worth the $35 million cap hit, they could save $25 million in cap space by cutting him and only have $10 million in dead cap, or they could renegotiate if Jones' play has started to decline. The proposed fifth year is highly unlikely to be reached, but this structure at least makes the fourth year possible. While it would be a five-year deal on paper, it would essentially be a fully guaranteed three-year deal with an optional fourth year and no more than $10 million in dead money after the first three years.

Nah, we just have to be better on offense. We won a superbowl with Sorenson, Neimann, Raglund and Hitchens all getting significant snaps...

First day veterans have to report to camp. Last Monday.

Not going to devalue Jones' impact on the defense, but him not being there won't put this defense in the 2018 or worse category. Also on that 2018 defense we had Jones. Will the defense take a step back without him? Sure. But it won't go from middle of the pack to historically bad.

Wrong.

Because they had a superstar pass rusher in the middle of the defense as a force multiplier.

The Tyreek trade has rotted people's brains.

Didn't you know, Jones never had a post season sack until last year so we don't really need him. :p

Its not difficult, pay the man, figure out how to make it work salary cap wise and pay him. End of story. We certainly aren't paying the WR group or the RB group, or the CB group.

It's simple to say "just pay him," but there has to be a limit on that. He's looking to get more 5-6mm AAV more than the next highest paid guy.

The only reason this is even a potential level he could reach is because the Rams were stupid and insanely desperate with Aaron Donald in structuring his contract. CJ is pointing to that outlier and using it as some sort of baseline, and Veach would be an idiot to blindly validate that just because "we could" in theory make it work. That's not the way to sustainably run a team.

If he's dead set on that #, you trade him back in April, draft and move forward.

They're not a clear Super Bowl favorite. They're 100 percent still a contender because as long as they have Mahomes and Kelce and Reid.

Sure if you ignore that they are literally the SB favorite in Vegas at +600 right now with the next team being the Eagles at +750.

In what world do you have perfect foresight back then that this guy won't budge off that number and the Quennin Williams contract would come in at ~25mm AAV?

You're acting like Veach is a moron and somehow you've considered something he hadn't. Spoiler: that's not the case.

He's talking IF the Chiefs traded Jones.

He was saying they are not the favorite if Jones does not play.

CJ of Chiefs, if you don't sign by this weekend you can FORGET me ever logging onto wiziwig to watch you play!!!

Jones himself killed that market, probably intentionally, when he tweeted he'd only play in KC.

That was probably Veach's exact plan: get a Hill-like return and keep the roster churning. But Jones tanked it.

I do agree the Chiefs probably cave.

They're literally running Daniel Wise out there, and they have no cap space to sign a replacement.

Jones has almost all the leverage. The only move the Chiefs have is to hold out, play Turk or Daniel Wise at DT, and pray it doesn't collapse the season.

Veach/Mahomes/Reid are not in for that. They'll get the deal done, but it's going to cost them.

If he wants 30, Quennin Williams has nothing to do with it. His number didn't matter. There's no reason for him to budge off the number, similar to Tyreek last year. Once they knew the number, they pivoted.

It's the whole "deadlines spur action" thing in motion again and once again, here with are with our cock in our hand.

Nah. You take Jones off the current defense, they can't get the stops in the AFC the way it is right now to make it thru the gauntlet.

Are you at TC spectating & if so; Is X-Factor present and also are you going to eat lunch there? if yes; can you give us a brief paragraph or two reviewing your lunch, provided they have a snack bar or some eating arrangement for the guests...?

I was at training camp a couple of days, but have since headed home.

Practices have been underwhelming; this is the first time I've attended prior to pads, and I won't be doing it again.

I haven't seen X Factor, lucky for him...

I ate at Chipotle, and the barbacoa in their burrito is SO TENDER. OMG.

No matter what happens the Chris Jones of last year isn't gonna be around much longer.

Historically these DL start decline at around 31. JJ Watt, Von Miller, Calais Campbell, Julius Peppers. Even Aaron Donald showed signs last year.

They're still really good, but if you're paying $30 million per you expect elite, not really good.

That's what you have to consider when paying a 3rd contract.

Very much like the QB market post Watson contract. Just because Cleveland did a terrible contract does not mean other teams will follow suit, and they didn't.

The Donald contract is a little more understandable considering he is a 3 time DPOY, one of the best to ever play the position, a first ballot HOF player on a "win now" team. They paid him now and worried about the repercussions later. The Rams strategy is not one teams should mimic.

We're splitting hairs on what we consider a contender.

Without Jones, the defense likely looks more like the 2018 Chiefs and has a hard time getting stops. Sure.

But the offense is still going to be a dynamic blowtorch, and if healthy in the playoffs could be good enough to just overcome the D.

COULD.

But I don't see a way this ends other than one of the following:

1) New deal for Jones, he plays in 23
2) No new deal for Jones, he plays in 23 on the current deal with the understanding they'll revisit, and tag and trade him as needed in the offseason.

That was March with a lot of free agency and the draft in front of them.

If they trade him they gain $21M in cap space.

I thought they should have traded him in the spring, but now I think you're about pot committed unless another veteran springs loose during camp. I have NO idea who would trade for him now, though. Who has the space, the resources, and the belief that he will make a difference?

Of course the Quennin Williams contract has something to do with it. It's not that he wants 30, but if Williams gets 28 or Williams gets 24, it absolutely should have some bearing on the market-clearing price because it defines how much an outlier the Donald contract is.

Every team in every sport tends to negotiate to deadlines as they do indeed tend to spur action. Chris Jones is under contract for this season. It's not as if we're at risk of losing his production for this year because we weren't able to get a deal done.

Veach is instead supposed to be 100% certain that CJ won't come down off 30mm and proactively trade him back in March? That's the strategy you're sure would've been a better one?

when people tell you who they are, believe them the first time.

If I were GM, a lot of you would hate me. Because there are only two players that are untouchable to me, and they both play offense.

Otherwise, I would continue to flood the cupboard with draft picks. I really really really don't like the idea of putting 15% of your salary cap into a player that doesn't touch the ball every play and has to rotate out consistently. Chris Jones had FOUR games over the course of 21 games where he played more than 75% of the snaps. That kind of math needs to be accounted for.

It isn't just "he's the best in the league, pay him." because far more often than not, the best in the league spends 30-40% of the snaps on the sideline. So, you can have "the best in the league" for 52% of the snaps, and then... who is playing the other 48%? I'd rather have two B+ to A- players rotating in, with no drop off in play on any snap, as opposed to one A+ player who is off the field and letting a C- scrub take over for damn near half the time.

But with two B+ players, are you losing 100% of the game breaking plays Chris Jones can give you? It's possible.

Also, that isn't just a DT rotating in. It can be nickel or dime, but you're going to have to pay Gay and Sneed and Bolton and a bunch of others, eventually.

The math is really really fluid, and there isn't a right answer.

Nick Bosa and Chris Jones both holding out

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/...1a1hyespwkuhuv

Last season Chris Jones snap count percentage lowlights:

Week 5: 0%
Week 6: 0%
Week 7: 57%
Week 15: 0%
Week 16: 52%
Week 19: 51%


You're investing a SHIT TON of your available money for a guy who will at his absolute healthiest never average 80% of the snaps on defense.

And he's never going to be at his absolute healthiest again.

He had eight games in the 70s.
Five games in the 60s.

"Weak and sick and brokedick Frank Clark" played more snaps.

Holding out is so last decade... it's all about "holding in" now with the new CBA/mandatory daily fines.

They were sure Tyreek wouldn't come down and they traded him. So yeah, if that's what he wants and you aren't gonna pay it, move on.

And yet Jones made that much of an impact still.

You're paying those guys like Jones on the plays you need them to make in big spots. It may not be the most financially stable, but you need force multipliers.

The Chiefs don't need those guys in the regular season.

But we're at the point where we need a guy in the fourth quarter of the AFC champ game to go get a sack on 3rd and 7.

That's definitely a different perspective on him that I never really considered. It is something to consider for sure and I wonder if Veach is thinking along those lines as well.

I get it, and I tried to make the point that by having 140% of his snap counts covered, you might lose 100% of his game breaking plays.

Again, there's no right answer here. There is the safest route, the most daring route, and a universe of possibilities in between.

Personally, I wouldn't invest in the position. It's not about the player, really. DTs just don't play enough to warrant that kind of cap investment for how I would construct a team, but at this point I am much more in favor of paying him.

Uhhh, your stats are completely wrong. No idea what you’re looking at. He played 90%+ of the snaps in weeks 5 and 6 last year, as an example.

I’m pretty sure he led all defensive tackles in overall snap count.

I would think it’s easier to replace Hill with Mahomes at QB than it is to replace Jones with no other blue chip pass rusher on the team.

And the Hill situation is a sample size of 1 and exactly why it’s not worth criticizing them. It’s not as if they’ve shown an inability to pivot when they had to. Here they just chose not to.

All faith in Veach.

Yep - you're right. My deepest apologies. Those were 2021 numbers.

.