I see that Danial Jones is asking $45M per year on his next contract. Who knows how many dumb shit GM's there are out there, but I really think there is about to be a tidal shift in the value of QB's. DJ might get his dream contract, or maybe Lamar Jackson will get his but they probably both won't. And the next guy might not either. The next 6-8 QB contracts will be interesting for sure.
I liked your observation of the local radio hosts. I do enjoy hearing what some of their guests have to say, but a lot of the opinions seem to agree with what’s popular on twitter any given day. Maybe talking sports 4 hours a day, then finding 4 hour’s worth of interesting stuff to talk about the next day may be a lot to ask out of someone and, at the same time, expect original opinions. I tend to think of them more for their entertainment value than any serious sports discussion.
There are only nine veteran QB contracts next year! I read that and was like, "no there aren't!" But then I read "you're probably like... "no there aren't"" and I was like, "yeah, I was."
It's a bit shocking what the non-rookie QB market has become and I really don't think John and Pete are going to play that way. I think they let Geno go out and see, and they'll treat him just like any other free agent until, and if, he's back on the roster.
The major premise for Geno’s agent’s argument is that veteran staring QB get 35 million per year with 70 percent of their contract guaranteed. The minor premise is that based on last year Geno is a above average veteran equivalent to Carr, Goff, and Prescott. Ergo Geno should get a similar contract.
I see a problem with both the major and the minor premise of that argument.
The first problem is with the major premise, namely that it is in the interest of a team to continue to sign a veteran QBs to a similar contracts. As Seaside Joe readers know success on the veteran QB contract occurs when the cap hit is low. What that means is the team is a QB away when they sign / trade for the QB. The window , however, is short because as the QB costs hit both in terms of salary and the draft the chances of success diminish. See Tennessee and the Vikings. So there is a question of both whether teams are going to keep signing these contracts, and whether there is a team this year that believes they are a QB away.
The other problem is no matter how good Geno was last year he has only been good for a year. So are teams really buying that Geno is the same as Dak, Cousins, and Carr?
Put another way who is going to bid Geno up to the lofty heights of 35 million per year? John and Pete’s comments are that the Seahawks are not going to bid against themselves to get into that range, so who is the other bidder?
All that you said is correct and is being overlooked by many people. But there's still an alternative that hasn't been considered: a Tannehill-type deal. It's still not "$30M", but if we apply cap inflation, it gets a bit under $40M.
I found this article very thoughtful, Ken. Thank you for that. I agree, there is no basis to say that $30M (or whatever) is "middle tier." You either are/were a very good QB (most of the eight on veteran contracts), on a rookie contract, or are now a journeyman (your Jameis Winston, Sam Darnold, Marcus Mariotta, etc.).. Smith is an interesting case, because I feel he's not on par with the eight QBs on veteran contracts, but I think he's better than most journeymen (last year he would have been solidly in the journeyman camp!).
So where does that leave you? I could be wrong, but I'm not sure Seattle will offer $30M+ per year (even if they structure it so there are lower cap hits in early years). I'm not sure anyone else will either. I also think they'd be crazy to offer more than that based on one good year (which included some luck, too, in terms of bad balls that could have/should have been intercepted). I agree with one of your conclusions: "The Seahawks will either trade Geno...or he will return on a team-friendly deal because interest wasn’t as great as Geno/Chafie had hoped."
We are still talking about Geno Smith here. Does anyone really believe that Geno can carry a team deep into the playoffs without a strong supporting cast? Does anyone think that the Seahawks would be better off paying Geno 25 million, 30 million or more? Both Pete and John have stated numerous times that the Seahawks have two starting caliber quarterbacks. One with a starting salary in the 30 million range (by applying a tag) with a 2023 30 million cap hit and one with a starting salary in the 6 to 8 million range with a 2023 cap hit of maybe 4 million. Which choice makes the most sense?
I think looking at Trubisky-esque contracts distorts the discussion but I also don't think it's fair to only look at the contracts you laid out. Yeah, Chafie Fields might do that but no objective person should. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't all of those players either coming off a rookie contract or a previous big-time veteran extension? What's the history of QBs getting extended off prove-it veteran deals? That being said, I agree that the scenarios you laid out at the end are the most likely.
This is a little off topic, but generally on topic.
It is frustrating that disinformation is so nonchalantly parroted across the sports reporting world. And I don’t think it’s purposeful disinformation, it’s most likely sheer laziness and the comfort of following all the other lemmings. More scary though is the idea that sports reporters are making it all up in their minds what they want to believe and then actually convincing themselves that it’s true.
In sports it’s frustrating, but I think it should be obvious that this type of reporting is happening in US and world news, politics, local news, etc., people making up in their minds what they want to believe and reinforcing it over and over again until they end up with such a warped view of the world that it now makes complete sense that the world is flat. That’s an extreme example and it’s fun to make fun of those people, but the truly scary scenario is the minor warped-ness of each individual compounding to great misunderstandings, pitting large groups of people against each other who actually agree with each other, they just disagree on each other’s reinforced bullshit.
Perhaps the way to fix people’s thinking is to call out when this type of reporting happens, and sports may be the best venue for it. The real information is easy to access and confirm yourself, and there are great analysts like our Seaside who spend the time to point it out. To me there’s no better reason to recommend this newsletter to everyone I know. Hopefully it can fix some warped thinking, because once you start using objective logic, all those other idiots are easily identifiable as such idiots. Thanks for keeping it real, Seaside.
I so rarely see an error in your writing Ken but I don't think "a lack of NFL ignorance" is what you meant to say :D.
There are really only two possibilities for Geno and Seattle: a long-term (4 year) deal with void years to minimize his cap impact as you laid out, or a "below market" deal after he has found out there is no bag for him other than the Seahawks. in FA. "The tag" won't happen, and my own 'lack of NFL ignorance' persuades me that a long-term deal for Geno that is back-loaded would be a humongous mistake.
I think the current trend in thinking that QB is the most important position on the team and thus must be paid accordingly will go the way of the dodo and soon. Players should be looked at in terms of WAR (Wins Above Replacement) and paid accordingly, not because they play a certain position. Paying these guys who never have and never will win the Super Bowl 15% of your cap is just silly.
I've long thought that the way to have continued success in the NFL is to have young, hungry players and never get too old. A few vets is fine but you have too many you get top-heavy and a lack of depth and injuries will kill your chances. The Hawks spent the last 8 years trying to get back to the promised land with a highly pad QB and it led to a lot of above-average teams that couldn't get there... they need a new tactic and paying Geno $40 million for 3-4 years isn't it.
I see that Danial Jones is asking $45M per year on his next contract. Who knows how many dumb shit GM's there are out there, but I really think there is about to be a tidal shift in the value of QB's. DJ might get his dream contract, or maybe Lamar Jackson will get his but they probably both won't. And the next guy might not either. The next 6-8 QB contracts will be interesting for sure.
I liked your observation of the local radio hosts. I do enjoy hearing what some of their guests have to say, but a lot of the opinions seem to agree with what’s popular on twitter any given day. Maybe talking sports 4 hours a day, then finding 4 hour’s worth of interesting stuff to talk about the next day may be a lot to ask out of someone and, at the same time, expect original opinions. I tend to think of them more for their entertainment value than any serious sports discussion.
There are only nine veteran QB contracts next year! I read that and was like, "no there aren't!" But then I read "you're probably like... "no there aren't"" and I was like, "yeah, I was."
It's a bit shocking what the non-rookie QB market has become and I really don't think John and Pete are going to play that way. I think they let Geno go out and see, and they'll treat him just like any other free agent until, and if, he's back on the roster.
If your Geno’s agent you have a problem.
The major premise for Geno’s agent’s argument is that veteran staring QB get 35 million per year with 70 percent of their contract guaranteed. The minor premise is that based on last year Geno is a above average veteran equivalent to Carr, Goff, and Prescott. Ergo Geno should get a similar contract.
I see a problem with both the major and the minor premise of that argument.
The first problem is with the major premise, namely that it is in the interest of a team to continue to sign a veteran QBs to a similar contracts. As Seaside Joe readers know success on the veteran QB contract occurs when the cap hit is low. What that means is the team is a QB away when they sign / trade for the QB. The window , however, is short because as the QB costs hit both in terms of salary and the draft the chances of success diminish. See Tennessee and the Vikings. So there is a question of both whether teams are going to keep signing these contracts, and whether there is a team this year that believes they are a QB away.
The other problem is no matter how good Geno was last year he has only been good for a year. So are teams really buying that Geno is the same as Dak, Cousins, and Carr?
Put another way who is going to bid Geno up to the lofty heights of 35 million per year? John and Pete’s comments are that the Seahawks are not going to bid against themselves to get into that range, so who is the other bidder?
All that you said is correct and is being overlooked by many people. But there's still an alternative that hasn't been considered: a Tannehill-type deal. It's still not "$30M", but if we apply cap inflation, it gets a bit under $40M.
I found this article very thoughtful, Ken. Thank you for that. I agree, there is no basis to say that $30M (or whatever) is "middle tier." You either are/were a very good QB (most of the eight on veteran contracts), on a rookie contract, or are now a journeyman (your Jameis Winston, Sam Darnold, Marcus Mariotta, etc.).. Smith is an interesting case, because I feel he's not on par with the eight QBs on veteran contracts, but I think he's better than most journeymen (last year he would have been solidly in the journeyman camp!).
So where does that leave you? I could be wrong, but I'm not sure Seattle will offer $30M+ per year (even if they structure it so there are lower cap hits in early years). I'm not sure anyone else will either. I also think they'd be crazy to offer more than that based on one good year (which included some luck, too, in terms of bad balls that could have/should have been intercepted). I agree with one of your conclusions: "The Seahawks will either trade Geno...or he will return on a team-friendly deal because interest wasn’t as great as Geno/Chafie had hoped."
We are still talking about Geno Smith here. Does anyone really believe that Geno can carry a team deep into the playoffs without a strong supporting cast? Does anyone think that the Seahawks would be better off paying Geno 25 million, 30 million or more? Both Pete and John have stated numerous times that the Seahawks have two starting caliber quarterbacks. One with a starting salary in the 30 million range (by applying a tag) with a 2023 30 million cap hit and one with a starting salary in the 6 to 8 million range with a 2023 cap hit of maybe 4 million. Which choice makes the most sense?
I think looking at Trubisky-esque contracts distorts the discussion but I also don't think it's fair to only look at the contracts you laid out. Yeah, Chafie Fields might do that but no objective person should. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't all of those players either coming off a rookie contract or a previous big-time veteran extension? What's the history of QBs getting extended off prove-it veteran deals? That being said, I agree that the scenarios you laid out at the end are the most likely.
This is a little off topic, but generally on topic.
It is frustrating that disinformation is so nonchalantly parroted across the sports reporting world. And I don’t think it’s purposeful disinformation, it’s most likely sheer laziness and the comfort of following all the other lemmings. More scary though is the idea that sports reporters are making it all up in their minds what they want to believe and then actually convincing themselves that it’s true.
In sports it’s frustrating, but I think it should be obvious that this type of reporting is happening in US and world news, politics, local news, etc., people making up in their minds what they want to believe and reinforcing it over and over again until they end up with such a warped view of the world that it now makes complete sense that the world is flat. That’s an extreme example and it’s fun to make fun of those people, but the truly scary scenario is the minor warped-ness of each individual compounding to great misunderstandings, pitting large groups of people against each other who actually agree with each other, they just disagree on each other’s reinforced bullshit.
Perhaps the way to fix people’s thinking is to call out when this type of reporting happens, and sports may be the best venue for it. The real information is easy to access and confirm yourself, and there are great analysts like our Seaside who spend the time to point it out. To me there’s no better reason to recommend this newsletter to everyone I know. Hopefully it can fix some warped thinking, because once you start using objective logic, all those other idiots are easily identifiable as such idiots. Thanks for keeping it real, Seaside.
I so rarely see an error in your writing Ken but I don't think "a lack of NFL ignorance" is what you meant to say :D.
There are really only two possibilities for Geno and Seattle: a long-term (4 year) deal with void years to minimize his cap impact as you laid out, or a "below market" deal after he has found out there is no bag for him other than the Seahawks. in FA. "The tag" won't happen, and my own 'lack of NFL ignorance' persuades me that a long-term deal for Geno that is back-loaded would be a humongous mistake.
Man, I’ve gone back and forth as far as what I think will happen and what I want to happen. And I’m still a bit confused.
I don’t want Anthony Richardson at #5. Or any QB in the draft not named Young.
Nor do I want Geno at 4 years and $150+ million.
I want PCJS to improve the roster across the board, and I don’t think that can be done with huge $ going to a QB.
Maybe it should be Lock at a lesser amount and focus on the entire team dynamic.
But I’m sure I’ll change my mind a few hundred times between now and the draft.
I think the current trend in thinking that QB is the most important position on the team and thus must be paid accordingly will go the way of the dodo and soon. Players should be looked at in terms of WAR (Wins Above Replacement) and paid accordingly, not because they play a certain position. Paying these guys who never have and never will win the Super Bowl 15% of your cap is just silly.
I've long thought that the way to have continued success in the NFL is to have young, hungry players and never get too old. A few vets is fine but you have too many you get top-heavy and a lack of depth and injuries will kill your chances. The Hawks spent the last 8 years trying to get back to the promised land with a highly pad QB and it led to a lot of above-average teams that couldn't get there... they need a new tactic and paying Geno $40 million for 3-4 years isn't it.