When Giants WR Steve Smith was interviewed about his contract situation, he understands why he can't get a market value contract extension because of the 30% rule, but believes he's worth "at least" as much as Green Bay Packers WR Greg Jennings. I'm no Giants expert but I thought Smith is a different type of receiver (with Jennings working more downfield, and Smith on shorter routes).
It looks like Smith was better than Jennings in 2009, and that's what Football Outsiders says too, but Jennings is more of a home run threat. In 2007 and 2008 (Smith was a rookie in 2007) Jennings was the better receiver nearly anyway you looked at it. And Jennings has been starting in the NFL since Day 1 of his rookie season (2006) while Smith only began to start midway through his 2nd season.
I understand why Smith brings Jennings up as a comparable. Jennings signed his extension last June before beginning his 4th season, and Smith would like to sign an extension before he begins his 4th season. But would the Giants even want to extend the contract of a player who's only had one good year so far? I really liked Smith coming out of USC and thought he would make a solid pro, but he doesn't seem to be as good as Jennings yet.