5 Year Contract Limits
View Single Post
11-24-2012, 03:05 PM
Join Date: Mar 2007
Originally Posted by
Maybe I'm stupid but I just don't get how this would be BAD for players. In my mind, this would be worst for the owners than it would be for the players.
Let's say -
Ryan Getzlaf becomes a UFA and signs a 10 year - $70M contract ($7M/yr)
instead, with the proposed 'restrictions', he signs a 5 year - $35M contract ($7M/yr)
At the END of that 5 year deal, with the
5-7% increase in HRR and consequent salary cap increase, combined with the fact that Getzlaf is still only around 32 years old, wouldn't he be
signing for MORE than $7M per year and somewhere near $8 or $8.5M if his value stays relatively the same???
Obviously, this is just an example with round figures but in theory it works with any player.
Now I'm no 'mathamagician' but I really don't get how players would be upset about this and why owners would actually WANT this (except to get rid of the backdiving deals, that part I get)...
Please, enlightened me...cuz I just don't get it.
Like others have already said, it doesn't always work out that way. In fact, for every guy who would be helped with contract limits in hindsight there would be at least a handful that wouldn't benefit from it in the end.
Plus factor in the owners want to push the FA age back to 28. You sign a 10-year deal at 28 (assuming none of the backdiving that has taken place the last few years), that takes you pretty much to the end of your career making good money each year.
Now, if you have to sign a five-year deal at 28, then you next become a FA at 33. What are the odds you're getting the same contract (or better) at 33 or better than you did at 28? Unless you're a star player that's going to get paid full freight regardless of age. Teams aren't going to want to pay full freight for non-stars' past their prime years. Especially if an injury occurs or a guy's play falls off a cliff.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by NJDevs26