Ding, ding, ding. The annual salary is irrelevant since they're making the same money, the disbursements are just changed. Crosby shouldn't have resigned then since Malkin was making more than him since he was earlier in his contract than Crosby (And thus had a higher annual salary) a couple years ago. It doesn't make sense like that.
Do you have examples? Only ones I remember in NFL are for younger players who have played above what was expected of them. Mojo and stuff complain because he's gone from being the back up to the only running back for the team and is paid peanuts and his stats and performance has been multiple levels higher than was ever though possible. I've seen a lot of rookies complain about that (it's been happening a lot in the NHL for years too) but I can't think of many others. The gap if there even is one will be gone once he resigns, using the twilight of his contract as a benchmarks is absurdly dishonest. You know most contracts are crap at the end, it's like doing this with Pronger's salary for his last year of the contract with Philly, or Luongo or whoever, most contracts pay more initially and taper over time.