Schwartz probably had one more 3-4 year deal in him if he hits FA after his age 32 season. There weren't any '3rd contract' OTs worth a shit this season but Saffold got 4/$44. The year prior Solder got 4/$62.
I wonder if this wasn't a bit of a trade here; the Chiefs are trying to make some salary space to wrap up a Jones extension and to do so they gave Schwartz an extra year. Or they gave him a nice signing bonus to keep him from getting too upset over the fact that he's making about 60% of what he could sign for on the open market.
Curious to see the structure on this one because it seems odd that 2 years prior to FA both parties engaged to add a single season to a deal. I'm betting that add'l year costs them $15 million or so. It seems like it's either an accounting move or a move designed to keep a team leader from getting cranky. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Well that just feels kinda weird for everyone.
Schwartz probably had one more 3-4 year deal in him if he hits FA after his age 32 season. There weren't any '3rd contract' OTs worth a shit this season but Saffold got 4/$44. The year prior Solder got 4/$62.
I wonder if this wasn't a bit of a trade here; the Chiefs are trying to make some salary space to wrap up a Jones extension and to do so they gave Schwartz an extra year. Or they gave him a nice signing bonus to keep him from getting too upset over the fact that he's making about 60% of what he could sign for on the open market.
Curious to see the structure on this one because it seems odd that 2 years prior to FA both parties engaged to add a single season to a deal. I'm betting that add'l year costs them $15 million or so. It seems like it's either an accounting move or a move designed to keep a team leader from getting cranky.
Either way, doesn't really seem like a bad idea? He's become quite the cornerstone of the team and franchise on and off the field so i'd imagine they want to keep him around even after this deal if he's still playing well. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
Yea just 1 year seems odd, but I’m happy!
Why does it seem odd? He was already signed for 2019 and 2020. This takes his current agreement through the next three years. He’ll be 33 years old at that time, and should have his replacement creeping in at RT by then. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TRR:
Why does it seem odd? He was already signed for 2019 and 2020. This takes his current agreement through the next three years. He’ll be 33 years old at that time, and should have his replacement creeping in at RT by then.
Originally Posted by O.city:
Either way, doesn't really seem like a bad idea? He's become quite the cornerstone of the team and franchise on and off the field so i'd imagine they want to keep him around even after this deal if he's still playing well.
No doubt - an extra year is a good thing and it gets him a year closer to a point that walking away makes sense for the Chiefs.
Take him to FA and you're in a situation where the market will dictate a 3-4 year deal when you really probably only want him for 1-2 more. Now you get one of those taken care of AND you have a possible single season on the tag you could give him before parting ways.
I just wonder what led to the parties not being able to come to terms on a 2-3 year extension that seems to be more common in situations like this. A 2 year deal would've probably been perfect for KC but 1 is better than nothing. [Reply]