08-25-2010, 10:45 PM
|
#52
|
|
Practice Squad
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 241
My Mood:
|
Re: The Mankins paradox
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoLewisrocks
You have to know what you're looking at or you end up comparing apples and oranges. Mankins was playing out his rookie deal, and he was still making 3 times what Mangold was in salary that year. Mangold however had already made more than him because of where he was drafted. Older UFA were also making more on lucrative deals they got because they were FA. Jhari Evans was making more that year because he only got a 3 year deal as a 4th round draft choice in 2006 and he was a RFA in 2009 as well as again in 2010 before signing his new deal that was added on to his RFA year...
|
All true. And, of course, there are other factors, like position and talent. Consider some guys from the 2005 draft, when Mankins went 32. David Baas, currently a backup guard, was drafted with pick 33, 1 pick after Mankins, but made only $675K in '09. C Chris Spencer went six picks before LM and made $2.2M in '09. T Michael Roos went at 41 and made a cool $3M in '09. G Marcus Johnson was next next guard drafted after Baas, 17 picks after Mankins, and is out of the league. Roos, with 2 all-pro selections, is the only one of these dudes with a resume comparable to LM's; yet, because he's a tackle, he made twice what LM made that year.
Mangold, drafted in 2006 but already with 2 all-pros, made half of what Mankins made in '09, $700K vs. $1.4M. He might argue, like Mankins but more forcefully, that he has outplayed his contract.
Hmm. If one believes some of the rumors, Mankins was offered roughly twice what Roos, a slightly inferior but comparable player at a generally better paid position, got last year. Maybe he has no complaint after all.
|
|
|