They are are close enough to market, and once you lose that rfa pay advantage with your core… you better have cheap ELC talent coming up. There really isn’t another way to pull together enough excess contract value with out a bunch of cheap ELC or rfa deals. Yeah you can overpay a ton to get some excess value, but after 3-4-5 of those deals, you start running out of assets to pull them off.
For the money those guys will be making, you're better off getting cheap vets on 1 year deals and having those youngsters available for call-ups rather than banking on those guys making an impact in the lineup. The $$$ difference is negligible when you consider Myers is at $912K and Foudy $847K versus a guy like say Danton Heinen for example who is coming off a 1 year - $1M contract.
You can't ignore what the player would earn in the 8th year if he took the 7-yr contract.
To an extent… sure. Zero guarantee though these players get an 8th year. Just look at Landy now…
But they could. Nuke and Mack will be 35 and 36 respectively when they entered that 8th year. Still young enough for Nuke and as for Mack he is a health freak so it is very possible.
Could is not certain… many, many good players have had their games go prior to that age. Counting on that is a risk.
Yes and I assumed that is why a lot of them would take the 8-yr contract but that doesn't mean that 8th year should be discarded when comparing the two contracts. That 8th year still exists. Giroux was not far from 35 when he signed a 3-yr 6.5M AAV.
I’m not saying it should be discounted completely, but also shouldn’t be given full value. Somewhere in between. My accountant brain says time value of money it
Yeah… just focus on the next two seasons and anything after that is gravy. After 4/5 just accept being a bottom 10 team.
I never said the 8th year should be given full value. just that they shouldn't be discarded. Quite a few players have gotten contracts late in their 34th year or 35+ that would easily compare to a 3M contract after 7 years of increase in cap.I’m not saying it should be discounted completely, but also shouldn’t be given full value. Somewhere in between. My accountant brain says time value of money it
No matter how you slice it, if there were discounts… they aren’t much. Certainly not enough to make a huge difference cap wise.
Yeah… just focus on the next two seasons and anything after that is gravy. After 4/5 just accept being a bottom 10 team.
) complain that the Avs overpay by 250K on a lot of their players. They just reduced those AAV by ~350K and ~1M. That adds up.
Pretty big difference on overpaying 250k on a 1m player multiple times over and then extending that to 500-750k on Manson and Frank. Just a huge percentage difference. Avs have overpaid for depth a lot… and it hurts them. Getting a minor amount on the core helps, but the excess value just isn’t the 6m it was for MacK. Doesn’t help when you have more than the ‘discount’ taken by Nuke and MacK up by Frank and Manson.I never said the 8th year should be given full value. just that they shouldn't be discarded. Quite a few players have gotten contracts late in their 34th year or 35+ that would easily compare to a 3M contract after 7 years of increase in cap.
As I said before at least 375K for Nuke, arguably at least 1M for Mack, they are not that small when considering a lot of people here (including you
You are right. The percentage is different. Just saying everything counts when you are up against the cap. As I said before they are small discounts but discounts nonetheless.
I’d say it is debatable on some, and small on the others. In the end, it doesn’t make a big difference in the cap situation for the Avs. You get the core locked up and go from there with the budget you have. If they keep making mistakes like Manson, Helm, Frank… any discount that is there is wasted.
Again I don't disagree but that was not the point. I was responding to a post saying one contract = the other with no discount. The same amount of money does not mean there isn't a discount.
