New York Giants Mailbag: Cap Stuff and Contracts
If you'd like to submit a question for the mailbag, please send it to nygiantsmaven@gmail.com. We reserve the right to edit letters for clarity and conciseness. While we try to answer all questions received, we reserve to consolidate if several people ask the same question.
(From Bill T.) Why not use the nonexclusive tag on Daniel Jones for the potential two No. 1's if "good, not great" doesn't lead to a Super Bowl? Indy, Las Vegas, Atlanta, and Carolina need a QB, and the Giants can reset at QB with any of these picks.
Bill, I think that is what they will do if they can't reach a deal with Jones. If that happens, I can't see any team trying to sign him that might be willing to give up two first-round picks to the Giants. I also think you're assuming that those quarterback-needy teams (all of whom have way higher draft spots than the Giants) will bypass drafting a quarterback, and I don't think you can make that assumption.
Besides Bill, do you REALLY want to see this team start over with a rookie that may or may not end up being better than Jones? Seriously, is there a clear-cut consensus top quarterback in this class everyone would want to get their hands on as of this writing? I'm not so sure there is at this point.
(From Paul H.) Of all the glaring needs, what will (should) the GM focus on regarding coaching staff and, in the draft, free agency?
Tricky question, Paul, because, as I always say, the Giants see things differently than we do on the outside. If I had to guess, I'd say go the free agency route for an inside linebacker since that group looks to have some solid prospects, and then go the draft for a wide receiver since the current free agency crop isn't very appealing. But that could change over the next several weeks.
(From Andy C.) My question is about Evan Neal. Does he have a nagging injury? He seems to have regressed after his initial injury. To me, when comparing him to Andrew Thomas’ first year, Thomas’ problems seemed to be about picking up stunts and blitzes, which can be learned, while Neal’s seems to be that he can’t handle speed.
Andy, I've noted that Neal hasn't looked the same with his technique since returning from a mid-year knee injury. He started bending at the waist far too much for my taste after returning, and while the Giants tried to downplay anything, the film doesn't lie.
Satoshi, I don't think it's a matter of the Giants being afraid to let Saquon test the market. I think they'd rather not let the market dictate to them what to pay players, and in Saquon's case, he has indicated that he wants to be a Giant for life, so you'd think that they'd prioritize getting him done, so both sides don't have to worry about things during free agency. But if his representation thinks the Giants will pay him like Christian McCaffrey, well, I just don't see that happening.
Miller was recently signed to a reserve/futures deal, so he's good to go after a broken forearm injury. I haven't heard much about Collin Johnson's rehab, but he's under contract for 2023, so I'd think he'll be ready to go by training camp, given how early in the process he was injured.
You know what, Reuben? I've never been a fan of drafting punters. I know it's done, but you can probably get a decent one via free agency. I also don't think you can compare what the Giants have had since FEagles to Feagles.
He was a long-time veteran who knew every trick in the book and who was a master at the coffin corner kick. A lot of the punters the Giants have had since then had far less experience than he did by the time he came to the Giants.
Oscar, I didn't hear the podcast, so I'm not sure in what context they made the comparison. Without knowing that, I can't even give you a more recent comparison that I might be more familiar with. Can you provide some clarity as to what exactly was said?
Both. The question is, do they want to sign a veteran linebacker, and if so, who? But I do think they'll be able to if they want, and I also think Beavers, if healthy, will play a big part in the defense in 2023.
I don't think they will re-sign Slayton. I could see Shepard getting a minimum deal allowing him a chance to make the roster, but it's too soon to say for sure since he's still in his rehab, and a decision doesn't have to be made for a while yet. I will be stunned if they don't release Kenny Golladay and rip the bandage off that one. I'd pick the linebacker.
I don't know about you, but I am tired of seeing the linebackers struggle with their run fits and getting beat in coverage over the middle. Another tight end would be nice, but last year the Giants moved away from using mostly two-tight end sets in favor of more 11-personnel. If they add another receiver or two, as is expected to be the case, then adding another tight end probably isn't as high of a need.
I think they're going to re-sign Jones, but if something unexpected were to happen, Tyrod Taylor is under contract, and I could also see them adding a young prospect to develop.
If they don't re-sign Barkley, I think they may try to re-sign Matt Breida and add another running back via the draft just to beef up the depth. They also have Jashaun Corbin, whom they signed to a reserve/futures deal, but I'd be curious to see how much he's developed since the summer.
It could be if Barkley ended up pricing himself out of most teams' budgets. If we look at the laws of supply and demand, if there are enough quality running backs out there that can give them what Barkley can, then you could make that argument. And if Barkley's representatives insist he be paid like CMC, as has been reported, then it could make for an interesting first few weeks to start free agency.
Both. Some mechanisms can be put into the contracts that allow you to have both. That said, I'm taking Jones if I have to choose one or the other. You can find another running back, and many times, running backs are only as successful as their offensive line allows them to be.
Getting another quarterback is a trickier proposition--and please don't say, "Well, you can draft one," because if it were that easy, there wouldn't be so many teams that need a franchise quarterback this year.
They could, but it wouldn't matter--he'll still count for the same cap hit after June 1 as he would before that date.
The June 1 date comes into play when you terminate a player's contract. Let's use Kenny Golladay as an example. If the Giants cut him before June 1, they'll save $6.7 million but be charged $14.7 million in dead money. The advantage, though, is that his contract would be off the books once the 2023 league year ends.
If the Giants designate Golladay a post-June 1 transaction, they'd save $13.5 million and get two dead money hits, one in 2023 for $7.9 million and one in 2024 for $6.8 million. They also wouldn't be able to "spend" those cap savings on a post-June 1 transaction until after June 1.
Let me ask you something--and be honest. Did he have a single receiver that created headaches for opposing defensive coordinator to work with? Was his pass protection among the league's best?
Considering what he had to work with, he delivered. He didn't turn the ball over, and he made far more correct decisions than he did wrong ones. He also elevated the talent around him, particularly receivers Isaiah Hodgins, Darius Slayton, and Richie James--all of whom had solid seasons.
And last I checked, he won games and helped to get them to the playoffs--the same can't be said of many other quarterbacks who had better stats or are making more APY than him.
How many games can you honestly say Jones cost them this year? Probably not a lot. So what do you want from the guy, fantasy football stats or wins?
That said, can Jones get better? Yes. I'd like to see him do more with moving off his first reads, but I think Year 2 in the same system will see him play faster and more confidently.
As for the money, the franchise tag is $32 million for a quarterback. That tag is calculated by averaging the top five cap hits at the position for the previous five years and then adjusting the number proportionally to the salary cap for the upcoming season.
It would be a stunning development if his new APY averages less than that amount. That's just how the river flows. You might want to start over with a rookie quarterback. I know many people who don't, and I suspect the Giants are in that same boat.
(From Waymond S.) We keep hearing all this talk about the franchise tag. The one tag nobody seems to bring up is the Transition tag. At least, I THINK that's the name of it. Why is this not even in the conversation? And can you please explain what the difference is between the two tags?
Hey Waymond. I know you sent this in for the podcast, but I'm picking it up here just to round out the mailbag. When you use the transition tag, you're basically inviting another team to do your bidding, which is dangerous.
If a player signs an offer sheet with another team, you have so many days to match it, else you lose that player. And if you don't match it, you don't get a comp pick the following year, as you would in most cases if you lost a free agent. This is why you usually don't see teams applying the transition tag to players.
With the franchise tag, if another team comes along and signs the player to an offer sheet, the team losing the player gets two first-round picks. There is also a difference in the tag amounts, with the non-exclusive franchise tag being more than the transition tag (see the cost differences per position here).
- Get the latest breaking news and analysis on the New York Giants
- Follow and like us on Facebook
- Submit your questions for our mailbag
- Check out the Giants Country YouTube Channel.
- Subscribe and like the LockedOn Giants YouTube Channel
- Sign up for our FREE message board forums
- Get your Giants tickets from SI Tickets!
