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.

[Chargem]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

Ah, so it seems. What was the total then? I can't seem to find it.

And what was Clark guaranteed?

He said $18m max and 5 years, So I am guessing $90m.

Frank got $105.5m and $63.5m guaranteed. I am guessing an offer less than what Clark got would be a no go, even though they play different positions.

[synthesis2]

my opinion, which isn't going to be popular, but I think we should actively try and trade the guy.

Look, and I may be wrong, heck I hope I am wrong, but I think he has a great personality and when he wants to turn it on he can. But sometimes he just disappears for games or makes a play here and there, and other times he can really stand out.

Issue I have is that I'm not sure he is the type of guy who is effected by money in this regard. Will he put forth the same effort, will he be as dominate or more so in the coming years compared to what he was before, and last do we miss out on a couple of decent players that we will miss having him under such a big contract.

All of these things make me want to trade him. This is for the right price, but I would be happy with a 1st and 2nd and call it a day. I have faith in Brett and feel good about having two 1's, two 2's a 3,4 and 5 that we can get some very nice players in here along with signing a few more players we already have or above average FA and have a very solid, if not better team.

Again, I am 100% in the camp of trading for all those reasons but if I'm wrong, they keep him and he becomes even better, and we win another SB? Well then I'll be glad I'm wrong.

[lostcause]

pay jones whatever he wants. he's the 2nd best player on the team.

[Wallcrawler]

I seem to remember us breaking the bank for Houston. Got **** all in return for that money.

I remember when we couldn't just let Berry leave and *gasp* do something like sign with the Faid or Donks and gave that stupid ****ing contract because he was so important, and again, got DICK in return. We are STILL eating that weak willed ****s dead money.

Frank Clark already has a stupid contract. Now people want to tie up 200 million on the d line.

Why can we pay Jones **** you money? We can. We just shouldn't.

Outside of Patrick Mahomes, who is the one player who can most directly affect the outcome of any given game, huge contracts are ****ing stupid.

You limit your roster depth quality, and you basically are ****ed if another Berry situation happens. I dont know about everyone else, but I LOVE giving up cap space to a guy who isnt even on an nfl roster.

The Chiefs will be fine without Chris Jones, should that outcome end up as the final result.

No one player, outside of Patrick Mahomes, the best player on the God damn planet, is worth limiting roster depth quality with a massive contract. Especially when an iffy deal has already been given to Frank Clark on that d line.

Unless those guys can bat down every ****ing ball at the line, we need players to cover, and tackle.

[Chiefshrink]

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

I seem to remember us breaking the bank for Houston. Got **** all in return for that money.

I remember when we couldn't just let Berry leave and *gasp* do something like sign with the Faid or Donks and gave that stupid ****ing contract because he was so important, and again, got DICK in return. We are STILL eating that weak willed ****s dead money.

Frank Clark already has a stupid contract. Now people want to tie up 200 million on the d line.

Why can we pay Jones **** you money? We can. We just shouldn't.

Outside of Patrick Mahomes, who is the one player who can most directly affect the outcome of any given game, huge contracts are ****ing stupid.

You limit your roster depth quality, and you basically are ****ed if another Berry situation happens. I dont know about everyone else, but I LOVE giving up cap space to a guy who isnt even on an nfl roster.

The Chiefs will be fine without Chris Jones, should that outcome end up as the final result.

No one player, outside of Patrick Mahomes, the best player on the God damn planet, is worth limiting roster depth quality with a massive contract. Especially when an iffy deal has already been given to Frank Clark on that d line.

Unless those guys can bat down every ****ing ball at the line, we need players to cover, and tackle.

I say cash in on a lot of high draft picks for the future to your point about creating a quality depth roster as well as a solid starting roster. You are correct we will be fine without Chris. How many DL in the past who "got their $$" ever returned that same value in play? I can only think of one and that was Reggie White. You rarely ever get back what you paid and more often than not that motor starts to sputter big time after they get paid.

[Dunerdr]

If anyone is willing to give a top 20 pick this year and a third I’m all ears. I love the guy but we need corners, IOL, LBers and much more.

[dlphg9]

What is so god damn hard for some of you people to understand that in a couple of years the cap is going to go up a shit ton and you are able to structure these deals so that the cap hits stay below $15 mil for 2 seasons and then have his cap hits raise as soon as the cap jumps up because of the new tv deals. Just because an average salary is $23 mil does not mean that's what your cap hit is. Why is this constantly ignored?

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

I seem to remember us breaking the bank for Houston. Got **** all in return for that money.

^^^
Irrelevant.

I remember when we couldn't just let Berry leave and *gasp* do something like sign with the Faid or Donks and gave that stupid ****ing contract because he was so important, and again, got DICK in return. We are STILL eating that weak willed ****s dead money.

^^^
Also irrelevant.

Frank Clark already has a stupid contract. Now people want to tie up 200 million on the d line.

Frank Clark ended the season with 13 total sacks, 5 in the playoffs, ended every playoff game with a sack, 5 TFLs in the playoffs, 7 QB hits, and I don't know how many QB pressures, culminating in a Super Bowl win for the Chiefs. Pretty sure any reasonable person would conclude that Frank's contract was money well-spent.

And when considering that he was hurt for most of the first half of the season and only started 11 games, but still notched 8 regular season sacks, it's pretty obvious that Clark was worth his "stupid contract."

And as for DLs/DEs that got paid and lived up to their contract, Aaron Donald says hi. Since getting paid, he's only notched 33 sacks and 45 TFLs in two seasons.

Calais Campbell left ARI to get paid, and in his first two years of his new contract he actually posted more sacks than in his last 4 years with ARI combined, along with higher TFL numbers and total tackles.

[Red Dawg]

Veach won't kill our money paying Jones. He knows that just won't work for the team itself.

[RealSNR]

I'm certainly not desperate to trade Jones, but there is also a flaw to the reasoning: "Why do people want to trade Jones for draft picks? So you could one day pick Chris Jones? That's what we have right now!"

Not quite. What we have right now is Chris Jones on his rookie 2nd round contract. That's about to go away. We now have to pay out a contract that prevents us from being flexible in addressing other areas of the team. Yes, we have absolutely zero reason to believe that's not a good investment, but there's still the dreaded risk of injury.

It's assuming that none of our draft picks will be as good as Chris Jones, but it's also protecting against getting caught with our pants down. Which... when you have a player like Mahomes, is kind of the name of the game. In any given season where you didn't suffer catastrophic once-a-decade injury bad luck (think last year's Eagles) you're poised to tear ass through the playoffs and be in the hunt to win a Super Bowl.

Note: This is assuming we got a Kahlil Mack-like haul (hell, I'd even accept a Jared Allen-like haul) in the trade. And even then, if that were the reported offer, I wouldn't be too quick to pull the trigger, and I certainly wouldn't fault Veach for keeping Jones. Trading Jones just to not pay him is definitely a stupid idea.

[OrtonsPiercedTaint]

Anxiety needs a roost. Should we trade Kelce now before he gets old

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by OrtonsPiercedTaint

Anxiety needs a roost. Should we trade Kelce now before he gets old

He's 30 now; obviously past his prime. We need to get rid of him before he needs a new contract and tanks afterwards.

For that matter Tyreek just got paid; shouldn't we be worried that he'll mail in the rest of his contract?

And Pat Mahomes . . . well obviously according to the likes of Wallsucker, we should trade him before we have to sign him to a big contract, because he'll suck afterwards. Plus, he's 25 now, and obviously athletically he can only go down from here.

[Red Dawg]

Originally Posted by lostcause

pay jones whatever he wants. he's the 2nd best player on the team.

Yeah, screw the others. Jones can win titles all by himself. Are you crazy?

[Munson]

Part of me wants to keep Jones considering how hard it is to find game changing interior D-lineman. Think of all the high draft picks we've wasted on busts like Ryan Sims, Glen Dorsey, Tyson Jackson, Junior Siavii, etc.

The other part of me does knows that we could get some high draft picks for him, and not be stuck in shitty salary cap situation.

Hopefully he takes a discount. If not, he'll probably get traded to an NFC team.

[RunKC]

Frank Clark’s deal is the line. That would make him the highest paid DT not named Aaron Donald and by a hefty amount. 2nd highest paid DT is Fletcher Cox at $17 million, about $4 million less than Frank Clark’s deal.

If Chris Jones and his agent come charging at Veach asking to be the highest paid defensive player in football, then yeah I’d start considering a trade. He isn’t either of those players.

Not saying that he’s doing that, but this is based off the OP. He absolutely should not be the highest paid defensive player.

Take Frank Clark’s deal and be happy.