How Finances Likely Drove the Daniel Jones-Saquon Barkley Contract Sequence

Kayvon Thibodeaux recently weighed in on the order in which the team paid quarterback Daniel Jones and running back Saquon Barkley. Let's take a deeper dive into the financials that likely drove the decisions.

Long after the ink dried on the New York Giants' four-year, $160 million contract given to Daniel Jones and the modified franchise tag worth up to $11 million for running back Saquon Barkley, the debate continues to rage on over how the Giants handled each player and whether they got their priorities screwed up.

The locker room, which had carefully avoided the topic, may have had its opinions, but thus far, only outside linebacker Kayvon Thibodeaux was bold enough to go on the record as having been "mad" that Barkley didn't get the payday he deserved after accounting for a little less than 30 percent of the team's explosive plays on offense.

Thibodeaux, who aspires to one day host his own podcast and who likely has a media career waiting for him when his playing days are done, also made it a point to support Jones, who hasn't had it easy since being drafted No. 6 overall in 2019, but he was far more emphatic with his words in expressing disappointment over the direction of the team.

Thibodeaux, like everyone else on the face of the planet, has a right to an opinion and a right to express it, no matter how it might be perceived. He exercised that right based on the available information, just as many before him did.

But let's look at things through the financials to gain a little more clarity as to why things played out the way they did.

Giants OLB Kayvon Thibodeaux recently aired his thoughts about the team's failing to pay running back Saquon Barkley last off-season :: Danielle Parhizkaran/NorthJersey.com / USA TODAY NETWORK

Didn't Saquon Reject Multiple Offers?

He did, but let's dive in to understand why.

First, any notion of Giants general manager Joe Schoen prioritizing Jones over Barkley is false, and for proof of that, consider that Schoen, during the 2022 bye week, initiated discussions with Barkley's representation with the hopes of greasing the skids for a long-term deal.

Meanwhile, Jones, when asked, confirmed to reporters that the team had not contacted his representatives about a new deal. Make of that what you will, but one possible interpretation could be that the team was more certain about Barkley for the long term than Jones. Another possibility is that the Giants were simply trying to get one key negotiation out of the way so that it didn't have to decide how to apply the franchise tag if it became necessary to use it.

Barkley, who was consistent in his message that he wanted to be a Giant for life and didn't want to re-set the market at his position, saw his contract talks go nowhere during the bye, at which point they were tabled until after the season.

The Giants then tried again at least two more times, as was reported, to get a deal done with Barkley, and both times, the offers were rejected. While each deal seemed to have a reported APY within $2-$3 million of Christian McCaffrey's $16 million APY, the guaranteed money was always the sticking point.

When the two sides resumed talks in the days before training camp, it was reported that the Giants extended an offer to Barkley worth $13 million annually, including $26 million over the first two years.

Another report emerging three days before last year's July 17 deadline to get a long-term deal done claimed the Giants revamped their offer to include $19.5 million guaranteed, which would have made his guaranteed money the sixth most in the league at his position.

That offer was rejected, as the combined projected total of the 2023 and 2024 franchise tags for a running back was $22.51 million. And anything less than that for guaranteed money wasn't going to move the needle as far as Barkley's side was likely concerned.

Did Barkley's Agent "Misread the Room"?

No agent worth their certification will ever accept a contract on behalf of a client offering less guaranteed money than the two projected franchise tag amounts combined at minimum.

If that's why Barkley's agent rejected the Giant's offers, then it's hard to blame them for doing so. But if they wanted other unreasonable provisions, such as a longer deal, more likely to be earned incentives and other items that stood to drive up the APY, or if they rejected some potential protection clauses the Giants wanted included, such as a per-game roster bonus given the running back's history, then yes, a case could be made that Barkley's representation "misread the room." 

And What About Jones?

When talks with Barkley were going nowhere, the Giants turned their attention to Jones, whose representation seemed more willing to get a deal done.

The Giants, remember, were coming off a playoff season and were destined to draft in the bottom third of the league, which pretty much eliminated any hope of drafting a franchise quarterback. They also likely figured that since Jones had shown signs of growth under Brian Daboll, it might be a worthwhile risk to stick with him rather than start anew with a veteran off the street.

But the structure of Jones's deal, which includes that escape hatch after two years, spoke volumes about how the Giants really felt about Jones.

Jones's deal has $81 million guaranteed. To put that into perspective,$68.368 million is the sum of the 2023 and 2024 franchise tag amounts for the quarterback position, with an approximate extra 15 percent added.

To have franchised Jones at $32.416 million, which was 47.6 percent more than what his 2023 cap hit ($15.435 million) likely would have hamstrung the Giants in getting a deal done with linebacker Bobby Okereke or extending defensive Dexter Lawrence and left tackle Andrew Thomas.

And for those who believe that the Giants should have let Jones test the market because there is "no way" he would have gotten the deal he did from the Giants, that was a risk the team wasn't willing to take, nor one they should have taken, as again, they were drafting 25th that year and had no chance at landing a top quarterback drafting that low.

Oct 2, 2022; East Rutherford, New Jersey, USA; New York Giants quarterback Daniel Jones (8) celebrates his touchdown against the Chicago Bears with running back Saquon Barkley (26) during the first quarter at MetLife Stadium / Brad Penner-USA TODAY Sports

So Now What?

Despite Barkley having had an epiphany that brought him into training camp last year on the franchise tag, it does seem like Barkley is growing tired of being stonewalled by the front office, regardless of their reasons (which, again, are financial and not personal).

If Barkley couldn't get a deal with the guaranteed money described above (the equivalent of two franchise tags) coming off a healthy and productive 2022 season, the chances of that changing this year don't appear any better.

For all the chirping about Barkley going to the Eagles, the Cowboys, or whoever, it must be remembered that the Giants still hold the cards in that they can use the franchise tag a second time on the running back.

Absent their reaching a new deal, the Giants, who financially speaking don't appear to be in a position to carry the tag all year as they were the year prior, can look to execute a tag-and-trade of the running back in exchange for draft picks if both sides can't work out a deal.

For that to happen, the acquiring team would have to agree to terms with Barkley on a new multiyear contract that would include, at minimum, the equivalent of two franchise tag amounts as part of the guaranteed money. The Giants, in this case, would likely grant Barkley's agents permission to seek a new deal with another team, with New York holding the final say over whether to accept it or decline.

Barkley would then have to sign the tag with the Giants (since an unsigned player can't technically be traded), and that tag then gets transferred to the acquiring team, who would then be on the hook to finalize a multiyear deal with the running back.

Once the trade is executed, the $11.348 million tag total would then be credited back to the Giants cap, which, if this all happens before the draft, as would make the most sense for all parties, would then give the Giants more than enough money to get their incoming draft class signed. 

While tying up the franchise tag amount might mean the Giants miss out on signing a prospective veteran free agent, given how the estimated $11.348 million price it would cost to tag Barkley a second time, there is another angle to consider.

If the Giants end up trading him before the draft for a couple of draft picks in return, who's to say they won't be able to fill whatever needs they might have otherwise filled in free agency? The benefit, of course, would be being able to fill needs by selecting players with potentially higher ceilings and lower cap hits since they'd be on a rookie contract.

---

• 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