|
Post by White Sox GM (Bob m) on Dec 6, 2014 14:09:50 GMT -5
Beckett retired officially ami still responsible for 1/2 his contract?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2014 15:18:55 GMT -5
I'm not sure on this rule but I think it is crazy to hold a team accountable if the player retires.
What is the logic behind this? In my mind how can you determine the possibility of a player retiring? Seems like it would be easier to determine the possibility of a player being injured and that's not an easy thing to do.
I went through this last year in another league with AJ Burnett. I believe that if a player retires and it can be substantiated by a credible source Roto World, etc. Then the organization should not be bound to said contract. IMO
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2014 15:38:10 GMT -5
It's in rule no 12. Whether that's enforced or should be, I don't care either way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2014 16:04:42 GMT -5
The logic is you dont lock up a guy for a ton of money and extended years in FA just to dump the contract when he retires. It forces the responsibility on the GM to manage their cap space better
|
|