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

[BlackOp]

Originally Posted by RunKC

Not that this affects Chris Jones but props to the Raiders for raping Chicago. They clearly won that trade.

And the free money they have for not spending on Mack could likely go to Byron Jones.

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?

[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

[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.

[VAGOMO 4 LIFE!]

Byron Jones is not good

[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.

[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.

[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

[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.

[Wallcrawler]

Originally Posted by dlphg9

Now someone smarter than me correct me please, but has there ever been a better pass rusher at that position than those 2?

John Randle, and the dude was only 6'1 245lbs. Guy was a ****ing beast. 137.5 sacks playing DT. 9 of 14 seasons double digit sack totals, half sack away from being 10 out of 14. Trash talk second to none. Eyeblack second to none.

Circa '99-'00 Warren Sapp was pretty God damn terrifying also.


Im sure there are others, but Randle and Sapp immediately come to mind when you talk qb killing DTs.

[Tribal Warfare]

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

John Randle, and the dude was only 6'1 245lbs. Guy was a ****ing beast. 137.5 sacks playing DT. 9 of 14 seasons double digit sack totals, half sack away from being 10 out of 14. Trash talk second to none. Eyeblack second to none.

Circa '99-'00 Warren Sapp was pretty God damn terrifying also.


Im sure there are others, but Randle and Sapp immediately come to mind when you talk qb killing DTs.

Reggie White played and rotated to RDE ,DT, and LDE positions on the line for the Packers when he was called upon to do so