- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 37,808
- Reaction score
- 16,622
Yup, the recently invented signing bonus is a real killer.so sick of players signing front loaded contracts then being upset at the low salary in the last year. No morals
We have this debate dozens of times every year. Teams must make their decision based on new money required to be paid out, especially obvious for players in the last year of their contract. If Gilmore was awful last year, we would and should cut him if we thought that he wasn't worth the $7M we have to pay him. The bonus money paid 4 years ago is totally irrelevant. Many teams make the mistake of keeping a player too long, and end up with much more dead money than they might have had.
BTW, should the team keep a player for his last year, if he isn't worth the money they have to him? Of course not! But where are the player's rights? Now, we understand. The player tries to get money up front, because he knows that team is under no obligations to keep him.
With top players, the situation is somewhat different. Here, the player thinks that he is worth more than what the team will be paying under the contract for his last year. NOW, everyone is on the side of the team. Surely, it right and just for the team to cut him if they don't like the contract, but should expect the player to play, even if he is worth much more.
But, players have no rights or tools, unless the have negotiated a guaranteed contract. Of course, there will be more and more of these. All a player can do is to threaten to sit out, and then perhaps show up at the last possible moment, before say Game 4.
BOTTOM LINE
I want to see us extend Gilmore.
If not, I want Gilmore to play for his contract amount. I don't see that happening, and I understand why Gilmore will likely not be playing for us under this contract for Game 1. He will likely report before the deadline, so that the year counts, and he is a free agent next year.
The team will simply need to DEAL WITH IT. They have their various choices.
Last edited: