View Single Post
11-12-2012, 01:08 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,451
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Riche16 View Post
Am I missing something on contract length here?

Seems to me that if a guy got a new contract every 5 years, he could make a killing (if he plays well). With the revenue increases both sides love talking about he would get more pie even if it's still within the 50%.

Now if he stinks it up after signing a big 5 year deal I could see that not going well for him on his next contract, but one thing's for sure... it's fair since he'll get what he deserves. No more Redden/Gomez contracts where the player is earning based off something he's no longer capable of doing.
if you are giving out the first 5 year deal at 27-28 years old, very few guys would make a killing on the 2nd 5 year deal. there are exceptions but for the most part players want long term deals so then teams are overpaying them when they are 35, 36, 37 in order to have them at 29, 30, 31 in their prime

if brad richards contract ended after 5 years, the rangers wouldn't be giving him a $7 mil/year extension at age 36. they would instead turn to whatever 27-28 ufa is available and give the $$ to that guy.

Leetch3 is offline