When things are reported inconsistently like this, assuming it's not bullshit, it's because contracts for young players are usually back ended, both because they player is expected to improve over the life of the contract, but also because probably every NRL club is full of back-ended contracts and bringing them back into parity requires sacrificing a year or two. Inertia and demand for results means when you bring in a $300k player (for example) at the last minute (e.g. in January) you can probably only give him $150k in the first year and maybe $250k in the second. The balance has to go into the final year of a three year contract. By the time you get to that year you are having to back-end new recruits in a similar way. The cycle of life continues.