Chris Jones threatens to Hold Out

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Halfcan

It took 50 years since our last championship to win and now we are favored to go back-to-back. We have a great team- why get rid of guys that contributed to winning just for cap space?

You strike while the iron is hot. This year is different, teams will not have much time to gel and we will be bringing back a championship team mostly intact. I like the strategy.

Because 'cap space' = talent. The former is required to retain the latter.

It's not 'just for cap space' it's for 'Chris Jones'.

Chris Jones will be more important to this team over the next 1-5 years than Watkins, Sorensen and LDT combined.

[Halfcan]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Because 'cap space' = talent. The former is required to retain the latter.

It's not 'just for cap space' it's for 'Chris Jones'.

Chris Jones will be more important to this team over the next 1-5 years than Watkins, Sorensen and LDT combined.

I am sure if the Chiefs felt they had a good replacements for Hitchens, LDT, Sorensen and Sammy- they would have swallowed the cap hit, but they didn't. These guys are over-paid but not scrubs.

The way it stands, we still have them and also Jones if he will lower himself to play for another ring for a measly 16 million bucks. This team is loaded.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Halfcan

I am sure if the Chiefs felt they had a good replacements for Hitchens, LDT, Sorensen and Sammy- they would have swallowed the cap hit, but they didn't. These guys are over-paid but not scrubs.

The way it stands, we still have them and also Jones if he will lower himself to play for another ring for a measly 16 million bucks. This team is loaded.

Hitchens would be the toughest pill, IMO.

Your position is that the Chiefs should continue to pay 4 different guys more than they're worth so that Chris Jones can take 75% of what HE'S worth on the open market?

You're essentially calling Chris Jones greedy for being unwilling to subsidize his teammates paychecks. In effect, JONES is the one that is overpaying for those guys because it's money he'd be getting but/for their inflated deals.

And that's...okay? You're cool with calling Jones greedy because he sees this team keeping guys around who aren't worth their checks while simultaneously telling him they aren't going to pay him what he'd otherwise be capable of earning?

That's odd...

[Halfcan]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Hitchens would be the toughest pill, IMO.

Your position is that the Chiefs should continue to pay 4 different guys more than they're worth so that Chris Jones can take 75% of what HE'S worth on the open market?

You're essentially calling Chris Jones greedy for being unwilling to subsidize his teammates paychecks. In effect, JONES is the one that is overpaying for those guys because it's money he'd be getting but/for their inflated deals.

And that's...okay? You're cool with calling Jones greedy because he sees this team keeping guys around who aren't worth their checks while simultaneously telling him they aren't going to pay him what he'd otherwise be capable of earning?

That's odd...

When did I say Jones was greedy?

First, you say- I am "essentially" calling him greedy- then you double down on that and say I am "cool with it" .

It is not My position- this is what the Chiefs have decided to do. I only disagreed when you said Veech is shortsighted wanting to win another SB with this loaded team that has great chemistry instead of breaking them up for cap relief.

BTW I have always been on the Keep Jones bandwagon- but think it would be a horrible move if he holds out.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by Halfcan

It took 50 years since our last championship to win and now we are favored to go back-to-back. We have a great team- why get rid of guys that contributed to winning just for cap space?

You strike while the iron is hot. This year is different, teams will not have much time to gel and we will be bringing back a championship team mostly intact. I like the strategy.

I disagree, and I've been disagreeing with this mindset all offseason. Hell, probably before this offseason.

If healthy, Mahomes will get you in the playoffs. Every. Single. Year. Shitty defense? If he has enough weapons he'll still take you to the AFC Championship and just about win the ****ing thing. No running game? Still won a Super Bowl. Month-plus injuries to his top speed WR, LT, all while the defense had a billion new starters attempting to work through a new defense and new coaches? 12-4 and a 2 seed (and an eventual Super Bowl).

We're not the Kansas City Royals. We don't play baseball. We don't need to stock up and sell the farm once every 8-10 years and be mired in mediocrity the rest of the time. Our "down" years are still playoff years, and even in some of those "down" years we can't be counted out to make a magical run if things gel just right.

The idea of striking while the iron is hot is a bit irresponsible, because I'd rather have a decent chance at winning a Super Bowl into the extension years of Mahomes' career than trying to go all in now but have to look like the Seattle Seahawks after Russell's big money deal.

Going for all the marbles in a particular year is great and all, but if you miss on that opportunity (and it does happen-- it's the NFL) THAT'S how guys like Aaron Rodgers get their careers wasted.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

I disagree, and I've been disagreeing with this mindset all offseason. Hell, probably before this offseason.

If healthy, Mahomes will get you in the playoffs. Every. Single. Year. Shitty defense? If he has enough weapons he'll still take you to the AFC Championship and just about win the ****ing thing. No running game? Still won a Super Bowl. Month-plus injuries to his top speed WR, LT, all while the defense had a billion new starters attempting to work through a new defense and new coaches? 12-4 and a 2 seed (and an eventual Super Bowl).

We're not the Kansas City Royals. We don't play baseball. We don't need to stock up and sell the farm once every 8-10 years and be mired in mediocrity the rest of the time. Our "down" years are still playoff years, and even in some of those "down" years we can't be counted out to make a magical run if things gel just right.

The idea of striking while the iron is hot is a bit irresponsible, because I'd rather have a decent chance at winning a Super Bowl into the extension years of Mahomes' career than trying to go all in now but have to look like the Seattle Seahawks after Russell's big money deal.

Going for all the marbles in a particular year is great and all, but if you miss on that opportunity (and it does happen-- it's the NFL) THAT'S how guys like Aaron Rodgers get their careers wasted.

Greatest coach/QB combination in history failed to win the Super Bowl more than half the time they were together.

Having the best team or talent STILL doesn't guarantee dick.

I'll trade a year w/ a 50% shot at a SB for 2 years w/ a 40% shot at the SB every time. Gimme more bites at the apple over fewer larger bites. Sure, there's a bit of a gambler's fallacy issue there, but we have the ultimate force multiplier under center. By any reasonable measure the Chiefs should've lost that SB but then Mahomes did Mahomes shit and that was all she wrote.

That possibility will be there. So I don't feel any desperate need to push my chips into the center.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Greatest coach/QB combination in history failed to win the Super Bowl more than half the time they were together.

Having the best team or talent STILL doesn't guarantee dick.

I'll trade a year w/ a 50% shot at a SB for 2 years w/ a 40% shot at the SB every time. Gimme more bites at the apple over fewer larger bites. Sure, there's a bit of a gambler's fallacy issue there, but we have the ultimate force multiplier under center. By any reasonable measure the Chiefs should've lost that SB but then Mahomes did Mahomes shit and that was all she wrote.

That possibility will be there. So I don't feel any desperate need to push my chips into the center.

But that strategy was exactly what Veach tried to do. Keep everybody so the team would have one 50% shot instead of two 40% shots. And you said it was a bit of a shortsighted strategy.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

But that strategy was exactly what Veach tried to do. Keep everybody so the team would have one 50% shot instead of two 40% shots. And you said it was a bit of a shortsighted strategy.

I agree?

Again - I don't LIKE what Veach did here. My point is that I'd take multiple shots over a single more likely shot every time.

I'm not arguing with you. I'm saying that the NFL is so beholden to random chance that over any meaningful timeline, your outcomes will be better if you pursue a more balanced approach.

Now as to last season - I kinda get that one and I'll defend it. The Chiefs hadn't won a SB in 5 decades and seemed to be cursed. They'd knocked on the door the year before and it was time to kick that ****er in. Go ahead and make some aggressive moves then.

But now it's done. The championship is won, the curse is lifted and any potential of the "Can't win the big one" for Mahomes is gone, as is the 'greatest coach without a title' crap for Andy. All of that pressure is gone.

So with that being lifted, it was time to take a more measured long-term approach rather than continue to keep the pedal down, IMO.

The 'run it back' drive is admirable and defensible. Going back to back puts you in a different, special tier. But ultimately even THAT is hindered by the fact that Jones now appears to be unwilling to play on the tag.

Which gets back to where I was on the Buckner trade thing - I just feel like perhaps Veach mis-read the room w/r/t Jones here.

[Halfcan]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

I disagree, and I've been disagreeing with this mindset all offseason. Hell, probably before this offseason.

If healthy, Mahomes will get you in the playoffs. Every. Single. Year. Shitty defense? If he has enough weapons he'll still take you to the AFC Championship and just about win the ****ing thing. No running game? Still won a Super Bowl. Month-plus injuries to his top speed WR, LT, all while the defense had a billion new starters attempting to work through a new defense and new coaches? 12-4 and a 2 seed (and an eventual Super Bowl).

We're not the Kansas City Royals. We don't play baseball. We don't need to stock up and sell the farm once every 8-10 years and be mired in mediocrity the rest of the time. Our "down" years are still playoff years, and even in some of those "down" years we can't be counted out to make a magical run if things gel just right.

The idea of striking while the iron is hot is a bit irresponsible, because I'd rather have a decent chance at winning a Super Bowl into the extension years of Mahomes' career than trying to go all in now but have to look like the Seattle Seahawks after Russell's big money deal.

Going for all the marbles in a particular year is great and all, but if you miss on that opportunity (and it does happen-- it's the NFL) THAT'S how guys like Aaron Rodgers get their careers wasted.

So you would rather substantially lower our odds to repeat This year- to hopefully, increase our odds down the road? not me- I think we will win it again this year.

A lot of the guys came back on 1 year deals with Sammy taking a pay cut. So it is not like Veech pushed all of his chips in and completely mortgaged our future this offseason. Plus he brought in a lot of cheap talent- that will replace older / overpaid players in the coming seasons.

You can say he did that to some degree with bringing in Clark and Honey Badger. But would you rather be loaded in cap space not having these guys or a SB ring? In 10 years nobody cares how much cap space we had the last year-but will remember our SB forever.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Halfcan

So you would rather substantially lower our odds to repeat This year- to hopefully, increase our odds down the road? not me- I think we will win it again this year.

A lot of the guys came back on 1 year deals with Sammy taking a pay cut. So it is not like Veech pushed all of his chips in and completely mortgaged our future this offseason. Plus he brought in a lot of cheap talent- that will replace older / overpaid players in the coming seasons.

You can say he did that to some degree with bringing in Clark and Honey Badger. But would you rather be loaded in cap space not having these guys or a SB ring? In 10 years nobody cares how much cap space we had the last year-but will remember our SB forever.

If Jones chooses to hold out and we've swapped Jones for LDT, Watkins and Sorensen, we will have 'substantially lowered our odds' THIS season, IMO.

And definitely in subsequent seasons.

[Halfcan]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

If Jones chooses to hold out and we've swapped Jones for LDT, Watkins and Sorensen, we will have 'substantially lowered our odds' THIS season, IMO.

And definitely in subsequent seasons.

It seems this is a chicken and egg scenario.

If we would have cut LDT, Watkins and Sorensen- all solid guys - we would have taken a cap hit and possibly not have replacements this year. This Lowers our odds this year.

You sign Jones- who you stated before- misses his run assignments- to one of the highest contracts in chiefs history. It Helps our odds this year, while also eliminating cap flexibility in the future- which could Lower our odds.

Isn't going all in on Jones with a Mega contract- going "all In'?