QB Lamar Jackson, BAL (1 Viewer)

[Stoneworker]

The point is he has been hurt. Does it matter how? The other point is a lot of his production, and what makes him truly dangerous, is his ability to run, which the effectiveness of will ultimately decline with continued injury and age.

Couple all of that with his contract demands and the picks? I’ll go out on a limb and say he won’t be playing any time soon unless he drastically changes how he values himself.

Sure as we get older we all tend to slow down. Lamar just turned 26 years old, when do you think he will "lose" his running ability?

The ability he has now to basically be a RB? 3 years.

Agreed.

Jackson's running ability will decline at a far faster rate than his passing skills improve, and he will no longer in the elite QB conversation by the 2026 season.

 

[Anarchy99]

The point is he has been hurt. Does it matter how? The other point is a lot of his production, and what makes him truly dangerous, is his ability to run, which the effectiveness of will ultimately decline with continued injury and age.

Couple all of that with his contract demands and the picks? I’ll go out on a limb and say he won’t be playing any time soon unless he drastically changes how he values himself.

Sure as we get older we all tend to slow down. Lamar just turned 26 years old, when do you think he will "lose" his running ability?

The ability he has now to basically be a RB? 3 years.

If people want to bash on Lamar without any consideration to who he has been throwing to, so be it.

Active rank in passer rating: 10 . . . career rank in passer rating: 13.
Active rank in YPA: 11.
Active rank, yards per completion: 10
Active Adj Yds/Pass Att: 10
Active TD passing%: 3

I don't really get all the RB talk. Jackson has done fine passing . . . he just hasn't had the passing volume as other QB. Put Joe Burrow on the Ravens and Jackson on the Bengals. Does anyone here think Burrow would still have 4500/35 throwing to the Ravens receiving options? How about Lamar? Wouldn't throwing to Chase, Higgins, and Boyd make a considerable difference? Some people are acting like Jackson makes Tim Tebow look like a HOFer throwing the ball.

 

[Tau837]

The point is he has been hurt. Does it matter how? The other point is a lot of his production, and what makes him truly dangerous, is his ability to run, which the effectiveness of will ultimately decline with continued injury and age.

Couple all of that with his contract demands and the picks? I’ll go out on a limb and say he won’t be playing any time soon unless he drastically changes how he values himself.

Sure as we get older we all tend to slow down. Lamar just turned 26 years old, when do you think he will "lose" his running ability?

The ability he has now to basically be a RB? 3 years.

If people want to bash on Lamar without any consideration to who he has been throwing to, so be it.

Active rank in passer rating: 10 . . . career rank in passer rating: 13.
Active rank in YPA: 11.
Active rank, yards per completion: 10
Active Adj Yds/Pass Att: 10
Active TD passing%: 3

I don't really get all the RB talk. Jackson has done fine passing . . . he just hasn't had the passing volume as other QB. Put Joe Burrow on the Ravens and Jackson on the Bengals. Does anyone here think Burrow would still have 4500/35 throwing to the Ravens receiving options? How about Lamar? Wouldn't throwing to Chase, Higgins, and Boyd make a considerable difference? Some people are acting like Jackson makes Tim Tebow look like a HOFer throwing the ball.

Would Burrow have performed better than Jackson in Baltimore with same teammates and coaching? Yes IMO. Because he is a better QB IMO.

Would Jackson have performed as well or better than Burrow in Cincinatti with same teammates and coaching? No IMO. Because Burrow is a much better passer and much better suited to that offense and those teammates IMO.

As for Jackson's ranks in a handful of efficency stats, they are good, but not elite... 10 or 11 in 4 of the 5 rankings you posted. And it is obvious to me that his rankings in passing efficiency stats are boosted by passing much less often than most other franchise-level QBs. I strongly doubt those efficiency rankings will hold when they eventually scale up out of necessity, whether driven by new offensive scheme, need to pass more because team defense is weak, reduction in Jackson's running ability and frequency, or other reasons.

And this brings us back to who has been throwing to. One reason his targets haven't been better is because the team has prioritized its resources in defense, special teams, running game, and OL. To bring in better targets would require sacrifices in those areas, but Jackson has benefitted from all of them. The other thing that has been alluded to previously in the thread, have there been any actual prominent free agent WRs who have indicated interest in signing with Baltimore? Marquise Brown was Jackson's buddy and requested a trade out of Baltimore. The perception of Jackson as a passer is a possible factor here.

 

[Anarchy99]

In the same categories, Burrow's rankings among active players:

Active rank in passer rating: 4.
Active rank in YPA: 5.
Active rank, yards per completion: 18.
Active Adj Yds/Pass Att: 6.
Active TD passing%: 6.

Across those 5 categories, Jackson's average ranking is Burrow's average ranking is 7.8. Jackson's is 8.8.

Burrow has been throwing to: Chase (Pick 5 in the draft), Higgins (Pick 33), and Boyd (Pick 55). The huge majority of the past two years, he had Joe Mixon in the lineup. After the first month of the season last year, Jackson was throwing to Demarcus Robinson (Pick 126), Devin Duvernay (Pick 92), and 36-year-old DeSean Jackson (on his 6th team). The Ravens have struggled to play any RB consistently, having shuffled through Kenyan Drake, J.K. Dobbins, Gus Edwards, Justice Hill, Mike Davis, Devonta Freeman, Latavius Murray, Ty'Son Williams, and Le'Veon Bell the last two seasons. And I haven't listed the injuries to the Ravens receivers in that time.

Is Burrow a better passer? Absolutely. My point was, Jackson's counting stats would look better on a team more focused on building talent on offense and one that was healthy. Putting Burrow on BAL the past two seasons, and his passing totals would have taken a hit. In spite of all that, Burrow has a .583 career winning percentage in the regular season as a starter. Lamar is at .738. Would a team rather have Burrow? Yes. But Jackson still has shown he can win with marginal talent in less than ideal situations. Yeah, I get it, he's been hurt, and things didn't click in the playoffs so far.

 

[pollardsvision]

The point is he has been hurt. Does it matter how? The other point is a lot of his production, and what makes him truly dangerous, is his ability to run, which the effectiveness of will ultimately decline with continued injury and age.

Couple all of that with his contract demands and the picks? I’ll go out on a limb and say he won’t be playing any time soon unless he drastically changes how he values himself.

Sure as we get older we all tend to slow down. Lamar just turned 26 years old, when do you think he will "lose" his running ability?

The ability he has now to basically be a RB? 3 years.

It's what all this comes down to.......he either needs to do what RB's usually can't do (be elite in their 30's) or do something he's never done (be a top 5 QB without being an elite runner).

That's probably really unfair to Lamar. His ability and usage is absolutely being used against him, and that sucks.

But you still can't fault teams for being hesitant to bet $250 million (and multiple 1st round picks) on Lamar doing something that's never been done before.

 

[Tau837]

In the same categories, Burrow's rankings among active players:

Active rank in passer rating: 4.
Active rank in YPA: 5.
Active rank, yards per completion: 18.
Active Adj Yds/Pass Att: 6.
Active TD passing%: 6.

Across those 5 categories, Jackson's average ranking is Burrow's average ranking is 7.8. Jackson's is 8.8.

Burrow has been throwing to: Chase (Pick 5 in the draft), Higgins (Pick 33), and Boyd (Pick 55). The huge majority of the past two years, he had Joe Mixon in the lineup. After the first month of the season last year, Jackson was throwing to Demarcus Robinson (Pick 126), Devin Duvernay (Pick 92), and 36-year-old DeSean Jackson (on his 6th team). The Ravens have struggled to play any RB consistently, having shuffled through Kenyan Drake, J.K. Dobbins, Gus Edwards, Justice Hill, Mike Davis, Devonta Freeman, Latavius Murray, Ty'Son Williams, and Le'Veon Bell the last two seasons. And I haven't listed the injuries to the Ravens receivers in that time.

Is Burrow a better passer? Absolutely. My point was, Jackson's counting stats would look better on a team more focused on building talent on offense and one that was healthy. Putting Burrow on BAL the past two seasons, and his passing totals would have taken a hit. In spite of all that, Burrow has a .583 career winning percentage in the regular season as a starter. Lamar is at .738. Would a team rather have Burrow? Yes. But Jackson still has shown he can win with marginal talent in less than ideal situations. Yeah, I get it, he's been hurt, and things didn't click in the playoffs so far.

Burrow came into a much worse organization than Jackson did. That matters, and to ignore that context reduces any potential validity of your point here IMO.

To say Jackson has won with marginal talent in less than ideal situations seemingly ignores coaching, defense, and special teams as if those things have not mattered to his winning percentage that you cite here.

ETA: And you are averaging those 5 particular rate statistics as if they are equal and are appropriate to average. Why did you choose those 5 rate statistics and not others? Surely it wasn't to fit a narrative?

 

[menobrown]

Does anyone here think Burrow would still have 4500/35 throwing to the Ravens receiving options?

Don't know on Burrow but I know the guy whose contract Lamar seems to be chasing threw for 4800 yards and a 33 to 7 TD to INT ratio his last full year throwing to a group of players I would view as inferior to what Lamar had in 2021 and on par with what he had last year before Bateman went down.

 

[Ghost Rider]

In the same categories, Burrow's rankings among active players:

Active rank in passer rating: 4.
Active rank in YPA: 5.
Active rank, yards per completion: 18.
Active Adj Yds/Pass Att: 6.
Active TD passing%: 6.

Across those 5 categories, Jackson's average ranking is Burrow's average ranking is 7.8. Jackson's is 8.8.

Burrow has been throwing to: Chase (Pick 5 in the draft), Higgins (Pick 33), and Boyd (Pick 55). The huge majority of the past two years, he had Joe Mixon in the lineup. After the first month of the season last year, Jackson was throwing to Demarcus Robinson (Pick 126), Devin Duvernay (Pick 92), and 36-year-old DeSean Jackson (on his 6th team). The Ravens have struggled to play any RB consistently, having shuffled through Kenyan Drake, J.K. Dobbins, Gus Edwards, Justice Hill, Mike Davis, Devonta Freeman, Latavius Murray, Ty'Son Williams, and Le'Veon Bell the last two seasons. And I haven't listed the injuries to the Ravens receivers in that time.

Is Burrow a better passer? Absolutely. My point was, Jackson's counting stats would look better on a team more focused on building talent on offense and one that was healthy. Putting Burrow on BAL the past two seasons, and his passing totals would have taken a hit. In spite of all that, Burrow has a .583 career winning percentage in the regular season as a starter. Lamar is at .738. Would a team rather have Burrow? Yes. But Jackson still has shown he can win with marginal talent in less than ideal situations. Yeah, I get it, he's been hurt, and things didn't click in the playoffs so far.

Burrow came into a much worse organization than Jackson did. That matters, and to ignore that context reduces any potential validity of your point here IMO.

To say Jackson has won with marginal talent in less than ideal situations seemingly ignores coaching, defense, and special teams as if those things have not mattered to his winning percentage that you cite here.

ETA: And you are averaging those 5 particular rate statistics as if they are equal and are appropriate to average. Why did you choose those 5 rate statistics and not others? Surely it wasn't to fit a narrative?

I think it goes without saying as well that Lamar's rushing ability scares the hell out of defenses, which helps out his passing big time. Even with not having standout wide receivers, I often see him throwing to one who is wide open because the defense was playing the run. Now, that of course is a credit to Lamar and part of the overall package, but to present his passing numbers without taking that into account (not that you did that; I am speaking generally) seems a bit disingenuous.

 

[pollardsvision]

In the same categories, Burrow's rankings among active players:

Active rank in passer rating: 4.
Active rank in YPA: 5.
Active rank, yards per completion: 18.
Active Adj Yds/Pass Att: 6.
Active TD passing%: 6.

Across those 5 categories, Jackson's average ranking is Burrow's average ranking is 7.8. Jackson's is 8.8.

Burrow has been throwing to: Chase (Pick 5 in the draft), Higgins (Pick 33), and Boyd (Pick 55). The huge majority of the past two years, he had Joe Mixon in the lineup. After the first month of the season last year, Jackson was throwing to Demarcus Robinson (Pick 126), Devin Duvernay (Pick 92), and 36-year-old DeSean Jackson (on his 6th team). The Ravens have struggled to play any RB consistently, having shuffled through Kenyan Drake, J.K. Dobbins, Gus Edwards, Justice Hill, Mike Davis, Devonta Freeman, Latavius Murray, Ty'Son Williams, and Le'Veon Bell the last two seasons. And I haven't listed the injuries to the Ravens receivers in that time.

Is Burrow a better passer? Absolutely. My point was, Jackson's counting stats would look better on a team more focused on building talent on offense and one that was healthy. Putting Burrow on BAL the past two seasons, and his passing totals would have taken a hit. In spite of all that, Burrow has a .583 career winning percentage in the regular season as a starter. Lamar is at .738. Would a team rather have Burrow? Yes. But Jackson still has shown he can win with marginal talent in less than ideal situations. Yeah, I get it, he's been hurt, and things didn't click in the playoffs so far.

Burrow came into a much worse organization than Jackson did. That matters, and to ignore that context reduces any potential validity of your point here IMO.

To say Jackson has won with marginal talent in less than ideal situations seemingly ignores coaching, defense, and special teams as if those things have not mattered to his winning percentage that you cite here.

ETA: And you are averaging those 5 particular rate statistics as if they are equal and are appropriate to average. Why did you choose those 5 rate statistics and not others? Surely it wasn't to fit a narrative?

I think it goes without saying as well that Lamar's rushing ability scares the hell out of defenses, which helps out his passing big time. Even with not having standout wide receivers, I often see him throwing to one who is wide open because the defense was playing the run. Now, that of course is a credit to Lamar and part of the overall package, but to present his passing numbers without taking that into account (not that you did that; I am speaking generally) seems a bit disingenuous.

Lamar peaked as a passer (so far) when he was running for 80 yards per game.
No QB, including Lamar himself since, has ever come very close to that.

Vick hit 65. Cunningham peaked at 59. Newton at 46. All did that when they were younger than Lamar, of course.

Those other guys were basically 40-50 yard per game runners after they hit Lamar's age. And they were the absolute best of the best among truly elite running QB's.

Lamar seems to be settling in around 60 for now. Seems reasonable that could go down for a million reasons.

Anyway, we can discuss WR weapons, but being elite running QB has always been Lamar's best weapon as a passer.

Can he keep doing that, or can he do it another way? That's the quarter billion dollar question.

 

[Chaka]

Is there much of a sample size of QBs who missed several games to close two seasons in a row before being in position to sign a market-driven contract?

The fact that you are using the timing of his injuries (and most everything else you wrote) is kinda what I'm talking about.

I'm pretty sure if he missed the same number of games between weeks 2-7 your opinion wouldn't change.

 

[Summer Wheat]

Why does anyone care?

Jackson is getting traded. Let the trade play out and see where he ends up. Then we can talk fantasy value for our teams, or homers from where he goes can talk about W-L value.

 

[Tau837]

Is there much of a sample size of QBs who missed several games to close two seasons in a row before being in position to sign a market-driven contract?

The fact that you are using the timing of his injuries (and most everything else you wrote) is kinda what I'm talking about.

I'm pretty sure if he missed the same number of games between weeks 2-7 your opinion wouldn't change.

If you don’t think the fact that he missed the end of each of the last two seasons due to injury is not affecting his market, I can’t help you.

 

[Chaka]

Is there much of a sample size of QBs who missed several games to close two seasons in a row before being in position to sign a market-driven contract?

The fact that you are using the timing of his injuries (and most everything else you wrote) is kinda what I'm talking about.

I'm pretty sure if he missed the same number of games between weeks 2-7 your opinion wouldn't change.

If you don’t think the fact that he missed the end of each of the last two seasons due to injury is not affecting his market, I can’t help you.

What difference does it make when he misses games if the team record is the same?

QBs miss games all the time. Across the board, every season. Now, when it happened previously is the driving factor.

 

[Chaka]

LJ can play 2023 under the $32m tender.

According to LJ himself, he turned down 3y/$133m fully guaranteed = $44m average value.

So hypothetically, let's say LJ plays 2023 on the tender. He's losing out $12m compared to if he'd signed the contract.

Does anyone think a future deal he's likely to sign would make $12m more in future years than the contract he could have already had, to where he'd at least break even?

Not to mention he might get hurt and lose out on the rest.
He is doing it wrong.

I think his biggest loss related to the contract is how much he is delaying getting to his next contract. If he signed a 5 year deal after his third season he would be hitting his next big payday at 28 years old, now he won't see that until 30 at the earliest. If he plays franchise tag roulette for the next two seasons it will be closer to 32 when he will have needed to prove he can be effective from the pocket. He gambled a ton on this play and I don't think it will work out best for him in the end.

This is almost certainly false in terms of the timing.

If he signed a 5 year contract extension after his 3rd season, the Ravens would almost certainly have first picked up his 5th year option, meaning the 5 year extension would begin in year 6 of his career, after the 5th year option season. In that case, if he played out the extension, he would become a potential UFA after his 10th season at age 31.

All you have to do is look at how the contract extensions for Mahomes, Allen, and Murray worked.

This is a great point that I didn't consider, or understand at all if I'm being honest, but isn't Allen's first real renegotiation point when the team has their first option in his 29 year old season?

 

[Tau837]

Is there much of a sample size of QBs who missed several games to close two seasons in a row before being in position to sign a market-driven contract?

The fact that you are using the timing of his injuries (and most everything else you wrote) is kinda what I'm talking about.

I'm pretty sure if he missed the same number of games between weeks 2-7 your opinion wouldn't change.

If you don’t think the fact that he missed the end of each of the last two seasons due to injury is not affecting his market, I can’t help you.

What difference does it make when he misses games if the team record is the same?

QBs miss games all the time. Across the board, every season. Now, when it happened previously is the driving factor.

Well, to state the obvious, being hurt at the end means missing the playoffs. Are you saying you don't think that matters? Odd stance.

 

[Tau837]

LJ can play 2023 under the $32m tender.

According to LJ himself, he turned down 3y/$133m fully guaranteed = $44m average value.

So hypothetically, let's say LJ plays 2023 on the tender. He's losing out $12m compared to if he'd signed the contract.

Does anyone think a future deal he's likely to sign would make $12m more in future years than the contract he could have already had, to where he'd at least break even?

Not to mention he might get hurt and lose out on the rest.
He is doing it wrong.

I think his biggest loss related to the contract is how much he is delaying getting to his next contract. If he signed a 5 year deal after his third season he would be hitting his next big payday at 28 years old, now he won't see that until 30 at the earliest. If he plays franchise tag roulette for the next two seasons it will be closer to 32 when he will have needed to prove he can be effective from the pocket. He gambled a ton on this play and I don't think it will work out best for him in the end.

This is almost certainly false in terms of the timing.

If he signed a 5 year contract extension after his 3rd season, the Ravens would almost certainly have first picked up his 5th year option, meaning the 5 year extension would begin in year 6 of his career, after the 5th year option season. In that case, if he played out the extension, he would become a potential UFA after his 10th season at age 31.

All you have to do is look at how the contract extensions for Mahomes, Allen, and Murray worked.

This is a great point that I didn't consider, or understand at all if I'm being honest, but isn't Allen's first real renegotiation point when the team has their first option in his 29 year old season?

You said Allen, but I assume you meant Jackson. I don't really understand what you are asking.

As I said, if Jackson signed a 5 year contract extension after his 3rd season, the Ravens would almost certainly have first picked up his 5th year option, meaning the 5 year extension would begin in year 6 of his career, after the 5th year option season. In that case, if he played out the extension, he would become a potential UFA after his 10th season at age 31.

I assume you understand that signing a 5 year extension after his 3rd season does not mean the first of the 5 years in the extension is year 4. It is a contract extension, meaning it extends the original contract. If the 5th year option is picked up, the original contract is a 5 year contract. Adding a 5 year extension would put him under contract for 10 seasons total. Now, it is possible he would be traded or released before the end of the extension, particularly if his play dropped off.

What I am describing is how the process worked for:

• Mahomes, except his extension was 10 years, not 5 years, putting him under contract to KC for his first 15 seasons
• Allen, except his extension was 6 years, not 5 years, putting him under contract to Buffalo for his first 11 seasons
• Murray, putting him under contract to Arizona for his first 10 seasons
• Watson, except his extension was for 4 years, not 5 years, putting him under contract to LA for his first 9 seasons (at the time he signed his extension)
• Goff, except his extension was for 4 years, not 5 years, putting him under contract to LA for his first 9 seasons (at the time he signed his extension)
• Tannehill, except his extension was for 4 years, not 5 years, putting him under contract to Miami for his first 9 seasons (at the time he signed his extension)

I expect Herbert and Burrow to have their 5th year options exercised, followed by a contract extension of at least 5 years.

Hurts is a bit different since he has no 5th year option. So a 5 year extension for him would put him under contract for 9 seasons.

Basically, every first round QB since 2015 who played well was handled this way to date, except Jackson.

 

[-OZ-]

Is there much of a sample size of QBs who missed several games to close two seasons in a row before being in position to sign a market-driven contract?

The fact that you are using the timing of his injuries (and most everything else you wrote) is kinda what I'm talking about.

I'm pretty sure if he missed the same number of games between weeks 2-7 your opinion wouldn't change.

If you don’t think the fact that he missed the end of each of the last two seasons due to injury is not affecting his market, I can’t help you.

What difference does it make when he misses games if the team record is the same?

QBs miss games all the time. Across the board, every season. Now, when it happened previously is the driving factor.

I could be wrong of course but I think him missing the playoffs this year is highly relevant. Then that the ravens almost beat the bengals doesn’t help his case.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Is there much of a sample size of QBs who missed several games to close two seasons in a row before being in position to sign a market-driven contract?

The fact that you are using the timing of his injuries (and most everything else you wrote) is kinda what I'm talking about.

I'm pretty sure if he missed the same number of games between weeks 2-7 your opinion wouldn't change.

If you don’t think the fact that he missed the end of each of the last two seasons due to injury is not affecting his market, I can’t help you.

What difference does it make when he misses games if the team record is the same?

QBs miss games all the time. Across the board, every season. Now, when it happened previously is the driving factor.

I could be wrong of course but I think him missing the playoffs this year is highly relevant. Then that the ravens almost beat the bengals doesn’t help his case.

Agreed. It took a play for the ages for the Bengals to win that game.

And John Harbaugh has a long history of winning playoff games (no thanks to Lamar who has gotten him one in five seasons since his arrival).

 

[Chaka]

Is there much of a sample size of QBs who missed several games to close two seasons in a row before being in position to sign a market-driven contract?

The fact that you are using the timing of his injuries (and most everything else you wrote) is kinda what I'm talking about.

I'm pretty sure if he missed the same number of games between weeks 2-7 your opinion wouldn't change.

If you don’t think the fact that he missed the end of each of the last two seasons due to injury is not affecting his market, I can’t help you.

What difference does it make when he misses games if the team record is the same?

QBs miss games all the time. Across the board, every season. Now, when it happened previously is the driving factor.

Well, to state the obvious, being hurt at the end means missing the playoffs. Are you saying you don't think that matters? Odd stance.

I'm saying basing future outcomes on the timing of previous injuries is a form of confirmation bias.

 

[Chaka]

You said Allen, but I assume you meant Jackson. I don't really understand what you are asking.

You told me to look at Allen's contract as an example of where Lamar would be had he signed a contract after his third season.

You seem to have a good handle on how NFL contracts work so I am asking if Allen's first team option year after the 2025 season, if I am reading spotrac correctly, is effectively the point where he starts negotiating his second contract?

 

[Chaka]

Is there much of a sample size of QBs who missed several games to close two seasons in a row before being in position to sign a market-driven contract?

The fact that you are using the timing of his injuries (and most everything else you wrote) is kinda what I'm talking about.

I'm pretty sure if he missed the same number of games between weeks 2-7 your opinion wouldn't change.

If you don’t think the fact that he missed the end of each of the last two seasons due to injury is not affecting his market, I can’t help you.

What difference does it make when he misses games if the team record is the same?

QBs miss games all the time. Across the board, every season. Now, when it happened previously is the driving factor.

I could be wrong of course but I think him missing the playoffs this year is highly relevant. Then that the ravens almost beat the bengals doesn’t help his case.

Missing the playoffs is relevant to the 2022 season but it has no predictive value when asking 1) if he will be hurt next season and 2) if he gets hurt when will it occur.

@Ghost Rider because I didn't want to answer both posts separately

 

[-OZ-]

Is there much of a sample size of QBs who missed several games to close two seasons in a row before being in position to sign a market-driven contract?

The fact that you are using the timing of his injuries (and most everything else you wrote) is kinda what I'm talking about.

I'm pretty sure if he missed the same number of games between weeks 2-7 your opinion wouldn't change.

If you don’t think the fact that he missed the end of each of the last two seasons due to injury is not affecting his market, I can’t help you.

What difference does it make when he misses games if the team record is the same?

QBs miss games all the time. Across the board, every season. Now, when it happened previously is the driving factor.

I could be wrong of course but I think him missing the playoffs this year is highly relevant. Then that the ravens almost beat the bengals doesn’t help his case.

Missing the playoffs is relevant to the 2022 season but it has no predictive value when asking 1) if he will be hurt next season and 2) if he gets hurt when will it occur.

@Ghost Rider because I didn't want to answer both posts separately

I’m more looking at whether he’s shown to be worth the contract he wants. When the ravens came that close with Huntley starting, there’s a better case to be made that they can just roll with him and spend the money elsewhere. LJ definitely >> Huntley, but how much $$ is debatable.

 

[Anarchy99]

Over the last 4 seasons, there were 54 QB that threw for at least 2,000 passing yards total in that time. Here are the average yearly PFF grades for all of them (ie, if a player didn't play a season his average is for the ones he did play). Clearly this is not the best way to score/rank things, as it doesn't account for where players are in their given careers, outside influences, recent improvement, not the same number of games played each season, etc. But it does give an idea of the QB landscape across the league. If people want to say PFF scoring is hogwash, so be it.

Tom Brady    86.2
Patrick Mahomes    85.9
Joe Burrow    85.9
Aaron Rodgers    85.8
Ryan Tannehill    85.3
Kirk Cousins    83.4
Josh Allen    83.3
Justin Herbert    82.8
Drew Brees    82.2
Lamar Jackson    82
Russell Wilson    80.4
Dak Prescott    80.3
Matthew Stafford    78.1
Derek Carr    76.9
Deshaun Watson    76.4
Philip Rivers    75.9
Kenny Pickett    75.5
Kyler Murray    74.5
Matt Ryan    74.4
Jalen Hurts    74.3
Jacoby Brissett    73.4
Mac Jones    73.2
Daniel Jones    72.8
Geno Smith    72.5
Tua Tagovailoa    71.9
Jimmy Garoppolo    71.4
Andy Dalton    71.4
Teddy Bridgewater    71
Jared Goff    69.1
Trevor Lawrence    68.5
Carson Wentz    68.3
Mitch Trubisky    67.8
Marcus Mariota    67.8
Baker Mayfield    67.7
Mason Rudolph    67.7
Justin Fields    67.2
Nick Mullens    65
Gardner Minshew    63.9
Taylor Heinicke    63.7
Ryan Fitzpatrick    63.5
Jameis Winston    61.5
Drew Lock    60.8
Davis Mills    60.2
Sam Darnold    59.7
Joe Flacco    59.4
Dwayne Haskins    58.2
Ben Roethlisberger    57.9
Cam Newton    57.6
Mike White    57.5
Nick Foles    56.6
Colt McCoy    55.8
Zach Wilson    52.9
Kyle Allen    52.8
Case Keenum    46.4

Jackson is one of 12 QB with an average season score of 80+ over the last 4 years (2 have since retired). Yes, all the other knocks on Lamar still apply (playing style, injury history, no agent, playoff performance and availability, hurt the end of the past 2 seasons, etc.). But in recent seasons, Jackson has delivered Top 10 production according to PFF (this past season, he ranked 5th). Sure, some day, he may not be as productive . . . but he just recently turned 26.

 

[Catbird]

That's like saying that relying on history is a form of confirmation bias. Its only bias where you exclude other historic factors. I think people here are trying to accurately take into account Jackson's positive and negative history and the history of other running QBs to gauge what risks a team who might want to trade for him would be considering. Its not evidence of bias that different people see different aspects of the available information as more or less reliable as a basis for their opinion.

The different facts people rely on are what make the discussion interesting.

 

[Anarchy99]

The history of other running QBs.

Has there really been a history of running QBs to even form an opinion on? At least enough of them to conclude anything? There have only been 21 seasons by a QB with 700 rushing yards in a season. Only 2 of them were before 2004. That very small sample size includes seasons by Justin Fields, Josh Allen, Russell Wilson, Kyler Murray, and Daniel Jones. Allen, WIlson, Murray, and Jones recently signed some pretty decent sized contracts. I don't recall people suggesting that they were injury risks because of their mobility / playing style. The two other most notable "running" QB were Cam and Vick. Cam can still run . . .he just can't pass very well these days. Vick played until he was 35. Those 3 guys account 10 of the 21 seasons.

Here are the Top 10 QB based on career rushing yards:
Vick - Played until he was 35.
Newton - Last played when he was 32.
Wilson - Still playing at 34.
Randall Cunningham - Played until he was 38.
Lamar - Just turned 26.
Steve Young - Played until he was 38.
Fran Tarkenton - Played until he was 38.
Steve McNair - Played until he was 34.
Donovan McNabb - Played until he was 35.
Aaron Rodgers - Still playing at 40.

Basically, the 9 other players in the Top 10 have played to an average age of 36 . . . and two of them are still playing. Bobby Douglass has a Top 5 single season rushing for a QB . . . and played 10 years. John Elway is #11 on the total QB rushing yards list. He played until he was 38. Jim Harbaugh ranks 14th and played until he was 37.

To reiterate, Lamar is 26. I don't think he's seeking an 8-year, $480M fully guaranteed contract. Is there any evidence to support that Lamar has gotten injured and missed more time than other QB or will miss more time than other QB? I am curious as to when people think the wheels are going to off for Lamar and have him go to the QB scrap heap. I'm also not seeing where running QBs will have short careers due to an increased injury risk. The one running QB that had a very short career was RGIII, Is he the poster boy for why all running QB will fall apart / fade / not last?

Sure, Lamar runs more than the other QB rushing leaders, but the way the game is played today, there are more "running" QBs than ever before. Should we discount all of them for playing that way?

 

[Tau837]

Is there much of a sample size of QBs who missed several games to close two seasons in a row before being in position to sign a market-driven contract?

The fact that you are using the timing of his injuries (and most everything else you wrote) is kinda what I'm talking about.

I'm pretty sure if he missed the same number of games between weeks 2-7 your opinion wouldn't change.

If you don’t think the fact that he missed the end of each of the last two seasons due to injury is not affecting his market, I can’t help you.

What difference does it make when he misses games if the team record is the same?

QBs miss games all the time. Across the board, every season. Now, when it happened previously is the driving factor.

Well, to state the obvious, being hurt at the end means missing the playoffs. Are you saying you don't think that matters? Odd stance.

I'm saying basing future outcomes on the timing of previous injuries is a form of confirmation bias.

And I'm saying I believe teams will view the timing of his injuries the past two seasons as a negative that compounds how many games he missed. Two seasons in a row, he was not available to his team, which was in contention for the playoffs, in the most important games of the season. I'm fine agreeing to disagree about whether or not it matters. I think you may find you in the minority on your opinion on this.

So I take it you don't have any examples like Jackson, which was my question that led us to this exchange.

 

[Tau837]

You said Allen, but I assume you meant Jackson. I don't really understand what you are asking.

You told me to look at Allen's contract as an example of where Lamar would be had he signed a contract after his third season.

You seem to have a good handle on how NFL contracts work so I am asking if Allen's first team option year after the 2025 season, if I am reading spotrac correctly, is effectively the point where he starts negotiating his second contract?

OK, now I understand your question. The answer to this question would vary for each QB based on how his extension is structured.

In Allen's case, the team has its first reasonable out after the 2025 season, where it could release him after that season with a $19M dead cap hit to clear $33M in cap space. So, even though the NFL doesn't officially use the term "team option, that effectively makes the 2026-2027 seasons each team options, as things stand right now.

However, this assumes the team does not restructure Allen by then. For example, they could restructure him before the 2024 season to clear $20M+ in 2024 cap space by converting salary to bonus. They could restructure him before the 2025 season to clear about $25M in 2025 cap space by converting salary and roster bonus to restructure bonus. I would be surprised if he makes it to the offseason after 2025 without any restructuring of his contract.

If they do any of those things, it increases the dead cap hit and reduces the cap savings gained by releasing him after 2025. So it may be more reasonable to view their first likely out as following the 2026 season. But that also makes that offseason the one where he most likely signs another extension, assuming he is still playing well.

I would not expect him (or any QB, really) to start negotiating his next contract extension until the offseason when he has two years remaining under contract. For Allen, that would be the offseason following his 2026 season. He turns 31 in May 2027, so that would be in advance of his age 31 season.

 

[Tau837]

Over the last 4 seasons, there were 54 QB that threw for at least 2,000 passing yards total in that time. Here are the average yearly PFF grades for all of them (ie, if a player didn't play a season his average is for the ones he did play). Clearly this is not the best way to score/rank things, as it doesn't account for where players are in their given careers, outside influences, recent improvement, not the same number of games played each season, etc. But it does give an idea of the QB landscape across the league. If people want to say PFF scoring is hogwash, so be it.

Tom Brady    86.2
Patrick Mahomes    85.9
Joe Burrow    85.9
Aaron Rodgers    85.8
Ryan Tannehill    85.3
Kirk Cousins    83.4
Josh Allen    83.3
Justin Herbert    82.8
Drew Brees    82.2
Lamar Jackson    82
Russell Wilson    80.4
Dak Prescott    80.3
Matthew Stafford    78.1
Derek Carr    76.9
Deshaun Watson    76.4
Philip Rivers    75.9
Kenny Pickett    75.5
Kyler Murray    74.5
Matt Ryan    74.4
Jalen Hurts    74.3
Jacoby Brissett    73.4
Mac Jones    73.2
Daniel Jones    72.8
Geno Smith    72.5
Tua Tagovailoa    71.9
Jimmy Garoppolo    71.4
Andy Dalton    71.4
Teddy Bridgewater    71
Jared Goff    69.1
Trevor Lawrence    68.5
Carson Wentz    68.3
Mitch Trubisky    67.8
Marcus Mariota    67.8
Baker Mayfield    67.7
Mason Rudolph    67.7
Justin Fields    67.2
Nick Mullens    65
Gardner Minshew    63.9
Taylor Heinicke    63.7
Ryan Fitzpatrick    63.5
Jameis Winston    61.5
Drew Lock    60.8
Davis Mills    60.2
Sam Darnold    59.7
Joe Flacco    59.4
Dwayne Haskins    58.2
Ben Roethlisberger    57.9
Cam Newton    57.6
Mike White    57.5
Nick Foles    56.6
Colt McCoy    55.8
Zach Wilson    52.9
Kyle Allen    52.8
Case Keenum    46.4

Jackson is one of 12 QB with an average season score of 80+ over the last 4 years (2 have since retired). Yes, all the other knocks on Lamar still apply (playing style, injury history, no agent, playoff performance and availability, hurt the end of the past 2 seasons, etc.). But in recent seasons, Jackson has delivered Top 10 production according to PFF (this past season, he ranked 5th). Sure, some day, he may not be as productive . . . but he just recently turned 26.

I like and value PFF. However:

1. How does it look if you only look at the past 3 years? 2 years? 1 year? Using precisely 4 years is cherry picking to include Jackson's best season, which he has not come close to repeating. I certainly think potential acquiring teams will care about his performance over the past 3/2/1 seasons, not just over the past 4.
2. How does it look if you do this for passing grades? I think potential acquiring teams will care about evaluating his passing ability independent of his running ability.
3. It would be more appropriate to weight the grades, since the amount of playing time for these QBs varied. For example, Burrow's grade is pulled down by his lower snap 2020 season. This would actually improve Jackson's average.
4. It would also be more appropriate to include both regular and postseason games in this data, which PFF makes it simple to do. This would reduce Jackson's average, though not by much, since it is only 5 more games. I certainly think potential acquiring teams will care about how he has performed in the postseason (when he was available).

 

[Tau837]

Has there really been a history of running QBs to even form an opinion on? At least enough of them to conclude anything?

No, not running QBs comparable to Jackson, which most of the players named in your post are not... so all of the ages you posted are generally irrelevant.

The ones most relevant IMO seem to be Vick and Newton, though Newton obviously had a different style to his running.

Newton is bad for Jackson. He peaked in his 5th season, and really never had a good season after that, even though he played 6 more seasons.

Vick is a tough comparison because of his off field stuff taking away his age 27 and 28, and effectively his age 29 seasons. Nevertheless, the best season of his career was his age 26 season, and he only had one good season (2010) after that. He never had a season after his age 26 season when he played more than 13 games, including postseason. Again, not helpful to Jackson's case.

If you want to stretch and include Wilson, he has been a better passer than Jackson, despite playing most of his career in a similarly conservative offense. He also just had the worst season of his career in the first season after signing his massive contract extension. While that was at a more advanced age than Jackson, it isn't helpful to Jackson's case.

Allen may be the best comp for Jackson to point to, but Allen has been a better passer by most metrics, in many cases much better. So, again, I doubt this really helps Jackson's case.

 

[Anarchy99]

For the post above, Burrow’s grade potentially is too low because he missed time? Yet many people are arguing that Jackson has earned demerits for missing time? Things can’t work that way. Lamar missed time last year and still ranked 5th. Based on what you are suggesting (Burrow’s score would have been higher if he played more), why would that apply to Burrow but not Jackson?

 

[Tau837]

For the post above, Burrow’s grade potentially is too low because he missed time? Yet many people are arguing that Jackson has earned demerits for missing time? Things can’t work that way. Lamar missed time last year and still ranked 5th. Based on what you are suggesting (Burrow’s score would have been higher if he played more), why would that apply to Burrow but not Jackson?

You are conflating things.

If you want to show an average of PFF grades across seasons, just taking the overall grades without accounting for the number of snaps played is a faulty methodology. I even pointed out that weighting properly would increase Jackson's average (i.e., his weighted average > straight average), because, like Burrow, his lower grade seasons are seasons with fewer snaps. I absolutely would apply it to both Burrow and Jackson and every other QB you are seeking to include in your list. You are the one who brought up the average PFF grade 'metric'. You should strive to make it meaningful.

That is not the same thing as whether or not any QB should be 'dinged' for missing games due to injury.

And I noticed you ignored the rest.

 

[Anarchy99]

I only ignored the rest because I am on a phone posting between driving and running errands.

 

[humpback]

Has there really been a history of running QBs to even form an opinion on? At least enough of them to conclude anything? There have only been 21 seasons by a QB with 700 rushing yards in a season. Only 2 of them were before 2004. That very small sample size includes seasons by Justin Fields, Josh Allen, Russell Wilson, Kyler Murray, and Daniel Jones. Allen, WIlson, Murray, and Jones recently signed some pretty decent sized contracts. I don't recall people suggesting that they were injury risks because of their mobility / playing style. The two other most notable "running" QB were Cam and Vick. Cam can still run . . .he just can't pass very well these days. Vick played until he was 35. Those 3 guys account 10 of the 21 seasons.

Here are the Top 10 QB based on career rushing yards:
Vick - Played until he was 35.
Newton - Last played when he was 32.
Wilson - Still playing at 34.
Randall Cunningham - Played until he was 38.
Lamar - Just turned 26.
Steve Young - Played until he was 38.
Fran Tarkenton - Played until he was 38.
Steve McNair - Played until he was 34.
Donovan McNabb - Played until he was 35.
Aaron Rodgers - Still playing at 40.

Basically, the 9 other players in the Top 10 have played to an average age of 36 . . . and two of them are still playing. Bobby Douglass has a Top 5 single season rushing for a QB . . . and played 10 years. John Elway is #11 on the total QB rushing yards list. He played until he was 38. Jim Harbaugh ranks 14th and played until he was 37.

To reiterate, Lamar is 26. I don't think he's seeking an 8-year, $480M fully guaranteed contract. Is there any evidence to support that Lamar has gotten injured and missed more time than other QB or will miss more time than other QB? I am curious as to when people think the wheels are going to off for Lamar and have him go to the QB scrap heap. I'm also not seeing where running QBs will have short careers due to an increased injury risk. The one running QB that had a very short career was RGIII, Is he the poster boy for why all running QB will fall apart / fade / not last?

Sure, Lamar runs more than the other QB rushing leaders, but the way the game is played today, there are more "running" QBs than ever before. Should we discount all of them for playing that way?

No QB has run as much as Lamar has, so no, there really isn't a history to go on. However, I'll entertain your (IMO very flawed) analysis for a minute.

For starters, no one is saying "he can't have a long career because he had a 700 yard rushing season", so that "comparison" is completely irrelevant, same goes for the career rushing yards. Likewise it's not about what age he can play until, it's much more about how effective he'll be as the carries pile up. I won't bother going player for player but the vast majority of the guys you listed missed a lot of time and/or played poorly later in their careers. I mean, you can't seriously think Bobby Douglass or Jim Harbaugh have any relevance to Lamar?

You kind of "yada yada'd" over the best part- yes, Lamar runs more than the other guys on your list, that's pretty much the whole point. Heck, he already has more attempts than most of them did in their entire careers. Cam is by far the closest, and it doesn't exactly paint a pretty picture.

Anyway, it seems far more relevant to look at carries instead of yards and Lamar is basically in a league of his own there so all we can do is speculate on his longevity/effectiveness longer term. What isn't really up for debate (at least it shouldn't be) is that the trend for both isn't a good one for him. Obviously that doesn't mean it's going to continue, maybe he won't miss another game and play like an MVP for the next 5 years, but no one is going to bet on it right now. IMO he should sign his 3 year deal- if he reverses the trend he'll get a massive payday in 2-3 years, if not he'll still have more money than he'd know what to do with (and more than if he took it year by year).

 

[Anarchy99]

Let's go with rushing attempts by game, since it's been suggested that's a better starting point. Here are the QBs that averaged the most accries per game the past 3 seasons:

Lamar - 10.36
Fields - 8.59
Hurts - 8.36
Murray - 7.02
Allen - 7.00
Lance - 6.75
DJones - 6.02
Watson - 5.73

Fields and Hurts are still on their rookie deals. Lance got hurt and missed most of the season . . .but did he get hurt because he has a tendency to run more?

If the league is pushing back against running QB because they may have durability issues or a limited shelf life of decent production, that didn't seem to be a huge concern in giving Murray, Allen, Jones, and Watson are all making $40M+ (and as I mentioned a long time ago, have so-so records as a starter and haven't lit things up in the post season). The other thing that is different for Lamar vs. Allen, Murray, and Jones, the Bills, Cardinals, and Giants were more eager to extend their guys than the Ravens appear to be with Jackson.

I still contend the issue has nothing to do with Jackson's durability, playoff record, or his projected career track. IMO, the league is pushing back and not wanting to give him such a huge amount guaranteed (if not fully guaranteed).

 

[JohnnyU]

Baltimore will never get what they want for Jackson, so now may be the right time to pounce. The Colts won’t give the guarantees Jackson desires, but I’m hearing he’s backing off that some. Is that true?

 

[pollardsvision]

Yeah, this might be the absolute worst franchise for Lamar to be

Has there really been a history of running QBs to even form an opinion on? At least enough of them to conclude anything?

No, not running QBs comparable to Jackson, which most of the players named in your post are not... so all of the ages you posted are generally irrelevant.

The ones most relevant IMO seem to be Vick and Newton, though Newton obviously had a different style to his running.

Newton is bad for Jackson. He peaked in his 5th season, and really never had a good season after that, even though he played 6 more seasons.

Vick is a tough comparison because of his off field stuff taking away his age 27 and 28, and effectively his age 29 seasons. Nevertheless, the best season of his career was his age 26 season, and he only had one good season (2010) after that. He never had a season after his age 26 season when he played more than 13 games, including postseason. Again, not helpful to Jackson's case.

If you want to stretch and include Wilson, he has been a better passer than Jackson, despite playing most of his career in a similarly conservative offense. He also just had the worst season of his career in the first season after signing his massive contract extension. While that was at a more advanced age than Jackson, it isn't helpful to Jackson's case.

Allen may be the best comp for Jackson to point to, but Allen has been a better passer by most metrics, in many cases much better. So, again, I doubt this really helps Jackson's case.

Yeah, the lack of long-term samples hurts Lamar. Like you said, it's basically Vick/Newton, and you can throw in Cunningham and WIlson.

Any Young/Elway/McNair/Tarkenton comparisons aren't very helpful. They were mobile QB's that rarely ran for even 500 yards in a season.

But there's not a lot of long-term data on guys running for 700-1200 yards per season.

Even among VIck/Newton/Cunningham, Lamar stands out. In every year outside of his rookie season (where he only played 7 games, and was still 20 yards away from being the team's leading rusher), he's led his team in rushing by about 200 yards.

A QB handling the bulk of the running duties for the entire team for a decade is certainly something we've never seen before.

 

[pollardsvision]

Let's go with rushing attempts by game, since it's been suggested that's a better starting point. Here are the QBs that averaged the most accries per game the past 3 seasons:

Lamar - 10.36
Fields - 8.59
Hurts - 8.36
Murray - 7.02
Allen - 7.00
Lance - 6.75
DJones - 6.02
Watson - 5.73

Fields and Hurts are still on their rookie deals. Lance got hurt and missed most of the season . . .but did he get hurt because he has a tendency to run more?

If the league is pushing back against running QB because they may have durability issues or a limited shelf life of decent production, that didn't seem to be a huge concern in giving Murray, Allen, Jones, and Watson are all making $40M+ (and as I mentioned a long time ago, have so-so records as a starter and haven't lit things up in the post season). The other thing that is different for Lamar vs. Allen, Murray, and Jones, the Bills, Cardinals, and Giants were more eager to extend their guys than the Ravens appear to be with Jackson.

I still contend the issue has nothing to do with Jackson's durability, playoff record, or his projected career track. IMO, the league is pushing back and not wanting to give him such a huge amount guaranteed (if not fully guaranteed).

The league isn't pushing back against running QB's. As you point out, there a lot of them right now.

What we have yet to see......do many teams want expensive 30+ year old running QB's?

 

[Anarchy99]

What we have yet to see......do many teams want expensive 30+ year old running QB's?

Maybe they won't play out their contracts, but Allen is signed through age 32, with Watson and Murray through age 31,

 

[pollardsvision]

What we have yet to see......do many teams want expensive 30+ year old running QB's?

Maybe they won't play out their contracts, but Allen is signed through age 32, with Watson and Murray through age 31,

Good point.
I'm not sure I'd call Watson a "running QB', at least anywhere near Lamar's class. He'll likely never ever run for 500 yards in a season again.

Either way, he and Murray were given contracts that the team will almost certainly regret. Not helping Lamar at all.

I'm on record saying Allen's contract is going to be a problem long-term. I know most don't agree. He's Cam Newton 2.0, IMO.
Nothing about this will age well if he's still Buffalo's main runner and goal line running back a few years from now.

But yes, you're right, apparently some teams will. 2 of the 3 will almost absolutely regret it. I'd say the other probably will.

And of the many ways that timing is hurting Lamar here, Watson and Murray really hurt.

 

[Anarchy99]

What we have yet to see......do many teams want expensive 30+ year old running QB's?

Maybe they won't play out their contracts, but Allen is signed through age 32, with Watson and Murray through age 31,

Good point.
I'm not sure I'd call Watson a "running QB', at least anywhere near Lamar's class. He'll likely never ever run for 500 yards in a season again.

Either way, he and Murray were given contracts that the team will almost certainly regret. Not helping Lamar at all.

I'm on record saying Allen's contract is going to be a problem long-term. I know most don't agree. He's Cam Newton 2.0, IMO.
Nothing about this will age well if he's still Buffalo's main runner and goal line running back a few years from now.

But yes, you're right, apparently some teams will. 2 of the 3 will almost absolutely regret it. I'd say the other probably will.

And of the many ways that timing is hurting Lamar here, Watson and Murray really hurt.

Whether teams should give out the contracts they do really isn't what I have been arguing. Teams do stupid things all the time (whether that be for running, passing, or otherwise mediocre QBs. I don't think Lamar is worth $50M . . . but I don't think most of the QBs in the league are worth what they make.

 

[IHEARTFF]

Let's go with rushing attempts by game, since it's been suggested that's a better starting point. Here are the QBs that averaged the most accries per game the past 3 seasons:

Lamar - 10.36
Fields - 8.59
Hurts - 8.36
Murray - 7.02
Allen - 7.00
Lance - 6.75
DJones - 6.02
Watson - 5.73

Fields and Hurts are still on their rookie deals. Lance got hurt and missed most of the season . . .but did he get hurt because he has a tendency to run more?

If the league is pushing back against running QB because they may have durability issues or a limited shelf life of decent production, that didn't seem to be a huge concern in giving Murray, Allen, Jones, and Watson are all making $40M+ (and as I mentioned a long time ago, have so-so records as a starter and haven't lit things up in the post season). The other thing that is different for Lamar vs. Allen, Murray, and Jones, the Bills, Cardinals, and Giants were more eager to extend their guys than the Ravens appear to be with Jackson.

I still contend the issue has nothing to do with Jackson's durability, playoff record, or his projected career track. IMO, the league is pushing back and not wanting to give him such a huge amount guaranteed (if not fully guaranteed).

The league isn't pushing back against running QB's. As you point out, there a lot of them right now.

What we have yet to see......do many teams want expensive 30+ year old running QB's?

If Lamar got 4 years guaranteed, he wouldn’t even turn 30 until the 4th season was basically over.

 

[Da Guru]

Let's go with rushing attempts by game, since it's been suggested that's a better starting point. Here are the QBs that averaged the most accries per game the past 3 seasons:

Lamar - 10.36
Fields - 8.59
Hurts - 8.36
Murray - 7.02
Allen - 7.00
Lance - 6.75
DJones - 6.02
Watson - 5.73

Fields and Hurts are still on their rookie deals. Lance got hurt and missed most of the season . . .but did he get hurt because he has a tendency to run more?

If the league is pushing back against running QB because they may have durability issues or a limited shelf life of decent production, that didn't seem to be a huge concern in giving Murray, Allen, Jones, and Watson are all making $40M+ (and as I mentioned a long time ago, have so-so records as a starter and haven't lit things up in the post season). The other thing that is different for Lamar vs. Allen, Murray, and Jones, the Bills, Cardinals, and Giants were more eager to extend their guys than the Ravens appear to be with Jackson.

I still contend the issue has nothing to do with Jackson's durability, playoff record, or his projected career track. IMO, the league is pushing back and not wanting to give him such a huge amount guaranteed (if not fully guaranteed).

Any player can ask for any amount of $$$$. We see it all the time in the NFL. On a smaller note the Lions Jamel Williams coming off a career year turned down the Lions 3 year 18 million deal because he or his agent wanted to test the water and get a better deal. Lions moved on to Montgomery for same 3 year deal they offered Williams, Williams signed with Saints for 6 million less as there was not big market for his services.

There are good contracts and bad contracts. Jackson will get whatever one given team is willing to pay him..and it will be a lot of money. Will it be what he wants? does not look like it but who knows?

 

[Chaka]

However, this assumes the team does not restructure Allen by then. For example, they could restructure him before the 2024 season to clear $20M+ in 2024 cap space by converting salary to bonus. They could restructure him before the 2025 season to clear about $25M in 2025 cap space by converting salary and roster bonus to restructure bonus. I would be surprised if he makes it to the offseason after 2025 without any restructuring of his contract.

This is the interesting piece to me. The team will likely try to restructure at this point, yes?

Assuming, of course he is still playing at a QB1-12 level (roughly) so at that point either Allen agrees to restructure or begins to hold the teams feet to the fire, assuming they want to be competitive going forward.

So, if I understand correctly, and I'm not sure I do, this is when Allen starts to gain leverage again (again assuming he is playing at a high enough level). Is that right?

I assume you see where I am heading with this question vis-a-vis Lamar. But I am really trying to understand the nuance of NFL contract structure here because of I'm entirely off base with some of my positions on Lamar I would like to know.

Nothing worse than holding onto a position solely because I don't want to admit I'm wrong.

 

[Chaka]

Baltimore will never get what they want for Jackson, so now may be the right time to pounce. The Colts won’t give the guarantees Jackson desires, but I’m hearing he’s backing off that some. Is that true?

I doubt anything happens before the draft. Maybe, as @Ministry of Pain suggests, within 48 hours of the draft but why would either side grant concessions before then?

 

[GregR]

I feel like the comparison between Lamar, and Josh Allen signing his extension in 2021, should include a focus on actual money.

Here is how much money each of them were actually paid (as in, deposited in a bank account not a cap number) to date. 2023 assumes Lamar plays on the tender:

Year	Lamar Jackson	Allen
2018​	$5,448,472​	$13,965,844​
2019​	$6,359,002​	$15,408,709​
2020​	$7,700,062​	$17,904,439​
2021​	$9,471,652​	$37,904,439​
2022​	$32,487,652​	$84,904,439​
2023​	$64,903,652​	$112,904,439​

Allen was drafted earlier and so his contract over the first 3 years paid him about $10m more. So call Allen $100m through 2023 to cancel out draft position. He's still earning 50% more to date than Lamar. Largely because he signed an extension and got paid already and can start investing that money.

And yes, getting the money earlier is far better than getting it 3 years later. Unless you are pretty bad at investing. Again, reducing Allen's numbers by $10m to remove the draft position aspect... Allen was $18m ahead in 2021, $44m ahead in 2022 and will be $38m ahead in 2023.

Lamar is going to struggle to make that up. If Josh Allen invested just those portions and hit 10% growth, he's over $10m even further ahead just from interest on those extra amounts (again draft position was already removed from that).

If Lamar signed the 3y/$133m he'd be closing that gap in 2023-2025 by about $31m (the assumed $32m becomes $44m so $12m there and he'd gain another $19m on Allen in 2024+2025 combined).

So Lamar would still be behind by $7m plus the interest on the differences which with 3 more years of growth is what, maybe in the $18m to $20m range?

 

[humpback]

Let's go with rushing attempts by game, since it's been suggested that's a better starting point. Here are the QBs that averaged the most accries per game the past 3 seasons:

Lamar - 10.36
Fields - 8.59
Hurts - 8.36
Murray - 7.02
Allen - 7.00
Lance - 6.75
DJones - 6.02
Watson - 5.73

Fields and Hurts are still on their rookie deals. Lance got hurt and missed most of the season . . .but did he get hurt because he has a tendency to run more?

If the league is pushing back against running QB because they may have durability issues or a limited shelf life of decent production, that didn't seem to be a huge concern in giving Murray, Allen, Jones, and Watson are all making $40M+ (and as I mentioned a long time ago, have so-so records as a starter and haven't lit things up in the post season). The other thing that is different for Lamar vs. Allen, Murray, and Jones, the Bills, Cardinals, and Giants were more eager to extend their guys than the Ravens appear to be with Jackson.

I still contend the issue has nothing to do with Jackson's durability, playoff record, or his projected career track. IMO, the league is pushing back and not wanting to give him such a huge amount guaranteed (if not fully guaranteed).

So Lamar has 20% more carries per game than the 2nd highest running QB over the last 3 years. #2 and #3 on the list haven't completed a single season between them. #4 just tore his ACL (while running). And this is somehow supposed to support your case?

While obviously owners would prefer to not give out giant guaranteed contracts, I still contend that this is heavily influenced by Jackson's durability, playoff record, and projected career path. I have no doubt that if his last two seasons looked like the previous two his offers would be substantially higher, and I would bet that if Burrow, Herbert and Jackson all sign deals this off-season Jackson would get less than the other two. Time will tell.

 

[JohnnyU]

Let's go with rushing attempts by game, since it's been suggested that's a better starting point. Here are the QBs that averaged the most accries per game the past 3 seasons:

Lamar - 10.36
Fields - 8.59
Hurts - 8.36
Murray - 7.02
Allen - 7.00
Lance - 6.75
DJones - 6.02
Watson - 5.73

Fields and Hurts are still on their rookie deals. Lance got hurt and missed most of the season . . .but did he get hurt because he has a tendency to run more?

If the league is pushing back against running QB because they may have durability issues or a limited shelf life of decent production, that didn't seem to be a huge concern in giving Murray, Allen, Jones, and Watson are all making $40M+ (and as I mentioned a long time ago, have so-so records as a starter and haven't lit things up in the post season). The other thing that is different for Lamar vs. Allen, Murray, and Jones, the Bills, Cardinals, and Giants were more eager to extend their guys than the Ravens appear to be with Jackson.

I still contend the issue has nothing to do with Jackson's durability, playoff record, or his projected career track. IMO, the league is pushing back and not wanting to give him such a huge amount guaranteed (if not fully guaranteed).

So Lamar has 20% more carries per game than the 2nd highest running QB over the last 3 years. #2 and #3 on the list haven't completed a single season between them. #4 just tore his ACL (while running). And this is somehow supposed to support your case?

While obviously owners would prefer to not give out giant guaranteed contracts, I still contend that this is heavily influenced by Jackson's durability, playoff record, and projected career path. I have no doubt that if his last two seasons looked like the previous two his offers would be substantially higher, and I would bet that if Burrow, Herbert and Jackson all sign deals this off-season Jackson would get less than the other two. Time will tell.

More risk with running QBs, so I can see it.

 

[Tau837]

Assuming, of course he is still playing at a QB1-12 level (roughly) so at that point either Allen agrees to restructure or begins to hold the teams feet to the fire, assuming they want to be competitive going forward.

So, if I understand correctly, and I'm not sure I do, this is when Allen starts to gain leverage again (again assuming he is playing at a high enough level). Is that right?

This is incorrect. Teams can restructure contracts unilaterally without player consent. It doesn't harm the player, who gets paid the same total amount but gets the money sooner as a bonus rather than paid out as salary.

 

[GregR]

Assuming, of course he is still playing at a QB1-12 level (roughly) so at that point either Allen agrees to restructure or begins to hold the teams feet to the fire, assuming they want to be competitive going forward.

This is incorrect. Teams can restructure contracts unilaterally without player consent. It doesn't harm the player, who gets paid the same total amount but gets the money sooner as a bonus rather than paid out as salary.

I don't think this is right. Neither side can change contract terms without the agreement of the both sides.

However, my understanding is that a lot of contracts include prior consent from the player for the team to convert future money into an immediate signing bonus. Since that is only to the player's benefit to get paid earlier and be able to invest it and make more off of it.

But they consented when they agreed to a contract that stipulated the team could do that. Not all contracts have that.

 

[Tau837]

Assuming, of course he is still playing at a QB1-12 level (roughly) so at that point either Allen agrees to restructure or begins to hold the teams feet to the fire, assuming they want to be competitive going forward.

This is incorrect. Teams can restructure contracts unilaterally without player consent. It doesn't harm the player, who gets paid the same total amount but gets the money sooner as a bonus rather than paid out as salary.

I don't think this is right. Neither side can change contract terms without the agreement of the both sides.

However, my understanding is that a lot of contracts include prior consent from the player for the team to convert future money into an immediate signing bonus. Since that is only to the player's benefit to get paid earlier and be able to invest it and make more off of it.

But they consented when they agreed to a contract that stipulated the team could do that. Not all contracts have that.

Fair enough. My impression is most, if not all contracts include this prior consent, and that is what my comment is based on. Because it is beneficial to the player, why wouldn't a player agree to it up front?

This refers to "simple restructures." Restructures that go beyond simple restructures (e.g., including void years) are different and require agreement. But simply restructures are by far the most common, and simple restructure is what I was referring to in my earlier post.

I'd be interested to know examples of players who did not agree to this in their contracts and why, but I assume this is scarce knowledge.