Salary Travel

[Maydab23]

As long as the amount paid between teams adds up to the amount originally guaranteed to the player then I'm good. Traveling salary ensures that happens.

It helps ensure the integrity of the salary cap structure in the league. Otherwise you could get into situations where multiple teams are paying a players salary and that player is eating up more league cap space than he should be.

[Mets Donations Accepted]

I think what we're getting confused by is the difference between money being sent to a team and a team paying part of a player's deal. There is a difference between saying the Dodgers sent the Padres $5 million dollars toward Kemp's contract and the Dodgers are paying $5 million of Kemp's contract. If you're sending money then yes, the team gets the money and not the player so therefore it doesn't necessarily go to the players contract. But, if it states that x team is paying x amount towards a salary than the new team doesn't get any money and the player's salary is already altered

[Brian]

I think any  player involved in a trade money being spent then traded again I think that money should go  the newest team involved in it

[chrisetc21]

Looking at some past trades, it looks like this has already happened... where money did not travel. 

Chase Headley traded from to
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=221586.msg1008426#msg1008426

Chase Headley traded from to
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=287106.msg1223810#msg1223810

Headley had $2m paid by Tigers for 2017 and 2018 and the money did not travel to Washington. 

So I'm good with applying the rule going forward and already updated the rules section but I don't think it's fair to retroactively apply the rule.

[chrisetc21]

We'll update the rules to require the salary to travel. 

[GeoffTheScout]

If you got a player in a trade who was Paid for for x amount of years and he is traded again the new team should get the same deal not have to pay his full deal.

[nottathedaddy]

I don't like confusing Fantasy Baseball with MLB, I don't really think that the way MLB does something is the best way for Fantasy to do something.

I believe that the money is being paid to the player not the team the player is playing for. As for the Kemp example, according to Cots, The Dodgers are paying money to Kemp, not to the Padres or to the Braves. The Padres are also paying Kemp. The Braves are also paying Kemp. Basically the agreement between the Dodgers and Padres is that the Dodgers will a certin part of the contract, therefore the payment is linked to the player not the team that traded for him.

Otherwise this would fall under the rule of sending cash money from one team to another, which would have to be approved by the league offices....

[frankbullsfan]

I think if a player is traded to a team and money is sent to help cover or completely cover his contract the money should travel with the player otherwise the team getting the player is winning twice once by getting the player with money to help pay him off and again by trading him and not sending the money they got with the player.  In that case you have three teams being affected by one trade between two teams because you keep money someone else is still gave you for a player and the team you traded with is out that money you got for him so it is like the player is being paid twice.

[GeoffTheScout]

If the salary is paid yes. Kemp is still getting paid by the Dodgers. So why would the same not apply here?

[chrisetc21]

If I trade the reds Andrew Miller and pay his salary for two years and he trades him again the next team should not have to pay it. So like in your trade where Jose is free the next team should not have to pay his 6MM

Why?  An MLB team wouldn't pass that salary money on to the next team unless they were getting talent back for that money.  Money matters.