CI Dan Johnson, Rays

[rcankosy]

$1m

[Dan Wood]

goes back to his original contract for you

[rcankosy]

Correct, until I cut his lameness again.  I already pointed out to Colby that there is nothing in the rules preventing us from cutting the same player twice in the same season.

[Colby]

Correct.  No rules to prevent this, so this is a potential loop hole for the RC to close before we enter our 4th season.  Dan Johnson's $4m (2013) contract would be reinstated.  Roy would cut him again and then owe $3m this year, $2m next year, and $1m in 2013 saving him an additional $500k this year and $500k next year.

[Dan Wood]

I think the new rule should be old contract + new contract. When you release a player you are in essence voiding the contract, yet still owe the player money. When signing them to a new contract, new terms must be applied.

[Colby]

I think the new rule should be old contract + new contract. When you release a player you are in essence voiding the contract, yet still owe the player money. When signing them to a new contract, new terms must be applied.

Not a bad idea... Roy gets away with this one while the RC has more work to do.

[rcankosy]

I suggest that the rule next year be "Cap hits plus new contract" since the team is only on the hook for the cap hits, not the entire old contract after releasing him.

[Brewers GM]

If the current rule allows a team to cut a player pre-deadline, then re-sign them and cut them again post deadline to save even more, then that is definitely bogus.  In my opinion, this would certainly have been 'implied' in the rules, and needs to be explicitly included. While I'd encourage counter arguments, at this point I personally would be against allowing this for this season, since this seems to be a clear case of exploiting the rules rather than misunderstanding them, especially for an RC member...

I would bag the current 're-instates contract' rule which is not realistic, and say you cut the player and the dead money is permanent, then after a certain grace period - say 60 days, but this can certainly be debated - you can try to resign the player following standard rules.

[rcankosy]

If the current rule allows a team to cut a player pre-deadline, then re-sign them and cut them again post deadline to save even more, then that is definitely bogus.  In my opinion, this would certainly have been 'implied' in the rules, and needs to be explicitly included. While I'd encourage counter arguments, at this point I personally would be against allowing this for this season, since this seems to be a clear case of exploiting the rules rather than misunderstanding them, especially for an RC member...

I would bag the current 're-instates contract' rule which is not realistic, and say you cut the player and the dead money is permanent, then after a certain grace period - say 60 days, but this can certainly be debated - you can try to resign the player following standard rules.

I take offense at your accusation that I exploited anything.  You exploited the rules last year in a much worse way when you traded Fielder AFTER the season for Hosmer when Fielder's contract had clearly expired.  A baseball purist like myself would never have believed that such a thing were even possible in a league that purported to simulate real life.  Don't take a high and mighty tone with me, because I persoanally cleared it with Colby PRIOR to posting the transaction. 

[Colby]

I suggest that the rule next year be "Cap hits plus new contract" since the team is only on the hook for the cap hits, not the entire old contract after releasing him.

I didn't write that in the original rules to prevent teams from taking back player at lower salary.