Originally Posted by The Franchise (Post 14803190)

Every player that signs a large contract is a risk.

Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 14803188)

For those who are strongly advocating for signing Jones, does our experience with Houston not terrify you? He had 22 sacks, got paid, then proceeded to be hurt every year and never topped 10 sacks again. Sub in Eric Berry if you want another example.

What about Jones makes you confident that he's not going to fall apart similarly? I get the "draft picks are lottery tickets" take, but I don't understand how signing a guy like Jones to a huge contract is any different. And the former option comes with a bag of money.

Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 14803188)

For those who are strongly advocating for signing Jones, does our experience with Houston not terrify you? He had 22 sacks, got paid, then proceeded to be hurt every year and never topped 10 sacks again. Sub in Eric Berry if you want another example.

What about Jones makes you confident that he's not going to fall apart similarly? I get the "draft picks are lottery tickets" take, but I don't understand how signing a guy like Jones to a huge contract is any different. And the former option comes with a bag of money.

Originally Posted by smithandrew051 (Post 14803198)

Technically, signing Jones costs you both draft picks and money.

We are foregoing draft picks that we could acquire for Jones. Those picks will not belong to the Chiefs if we sign Jones.

So, by betting on Jones, we’re risking both the money he signs for AND the draft picks we could received in return for him.

Originally Posted by wachashi (Post 14803174)

You would rather have Chris Jones than Kelce, Hill, Hunt, Thornhill, and Hardman combined? Good Lord, that is crazy talk.

Originally Posted by smithandrew051 (Post 14803198)

Technically, signing Jones costs you both draft picks and money.

We are foregoing draft picks that we could acquire for Jones. Those picks will not belong to the Chiefs if we sign Jones.

So, by betting on Jones, we’re risking both the money he signs for AND the draft picks we could received in return for him.

Originally Posted by The Franchise (Post 14803199)

Oh Jesus Christ. This is a ****ing moronic way of looking at it.

Originally Posted by wachashi (Post 14803206)

If we hadn't already signed Clark, Mathieu, and Hitchens to big contracts the Jones decision would be much easier.

Originally Posted by smithandrew051 (Post 14803208)

It’s absolutely true. You have two scenarios.

Sign Jones.

Trade Jones for picks and save money.

It’s not just about what you pay for Jones, it’s also about the compensation that you don’t receive when you keep him.

Originally Posted by Halfcan (Post 14803204)

Yep, we might miss out on drafting the next Ryan Sims.

I will bet on the sure winner than taking the mystery box.

Originally Posted by smithandrew051 (Post 14803187)

Except elite QBs impact the game far more and take less physical punishment than a DT, which prolongs their careers.

Mahomes could lose some athleticism and still be an elite QB. We’ve seen guys like Brady and Brees stay effective for 15+ years.

DT’s are essentially in a car wreck every Sunday. Betting on a DT’s health is much riskier.

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 14803212)

You are not saving the money though. You are going to spend it else where on the team.

Originally Posted by Halfcan (Post 14803214)

It is not like the Chiefs will be signing him to deal that will still be paying out when Jones is in the twilight of his career. He will barely be 30 when this one is up. The guy is in his prime years and is on a HOF trajectory so far.

Originally Posted by smithandrew051 (Post 14803208)

It’s absolutely true. You have two scenarios.

Sign Jones.

Trade Jones for picks and save money.

It’s not just about what you pay for Jones, it’s also about the compensation that you don’t receive when you keep him.