Originally posted by jreff22:
Originally posted by bret:
@jeff22: If we keep a bunch of rookies, we pay them 500k/year and if we cut them they're done. But after a few years (I think it's 4) they become "vested veterans". Now they cost close to a million $ a year, and if you cut them their salary is guaranteed.
I get the financial end and a point I made in another thread was Cam should be cheaper. He is younger, has higher upside (in comparison to Skuta), and is a cheap alternative. 3/14/2013: Signed a two-year, $3 million contract. The deal included a $300,000 signing bonus. Skuta is eligible for annual $50,000 workout bonuses in both seasons. 2013: $1 million (+ $150,000 roster bonus), 2014: $1.3 million, 2015: Free Agent.
To me Cam is the better player and would cost less now. 12/21/2012: Signed a two-year, $795,000 contract. 2013: $405,000, 2014: Exclusive Rights Free Agent.
i think it comes down to that they could get something for Cam now. Skuta would probably get zilch. So the Niners are happier to let Cam go for a 7th and roll with Skuta, moreso than cutting Skuta and getting nothing.