A couple of questions

[Colby]

FYI, you can buy out a contract.  Cap hits apply and then it can be wrapped up into one year with a 10% tax.

[Green]

FYI, you can buy out a contract.  Cap hits apply and then it can be wrapped up into one year with a 10% tax.

 ...I don't think I understand this rule at all and it is because I am not that smart but lets take the Dye situation. He is scheduled to make $11M...so 90% of that is $9.9M plus 10% tax on $11M is $1.1M and that gives me $11M cap hit and without the rights to the player in the event he comes back....I have got to be missing something...

[Lucas Lima #52]

This is a good suggestion, my only concern would be if we get into a situation where teams are abusing the fact that they get a free pass if someone retires (see my comments above).  If we can ensure that the rule would not be abused, I'd have no problem with a rule that keeps teams from getting screwed by something out of their control (an unexpected early retirement).

Well... One idea I had... The franchise should pay at least half of the contract (front loaded) in the case of a player officialy retiring...

Like, if the player contract was 5 years at 10mil per year and the guy retire sometime during the contract, the franchise should pay at least 25mil... It would be 10mil in each of the first two years and then another 5mil on the 3rd year... If the guy retired after the 3rd year, there would be no hit, as the franhise would have already paid 30mil...

As we can't go over 5 years, I think this should have enough effect into FA bidding...

[Lucas Lima #52]

...I don't think I understand this rule at all and it is because I am not that smart but lets take the Dye situation. He is scheduled to make $11M...so 90% of that is $9.9M plus 10% tax on $11M is $1.1M and that gives me $11M cap hit and without the rights to the player in the event he comes back....I have got to be missing something...

Green... Matter of fact, there is two ways of letting a player go... You can release the player or you can buy out a player...

Releasing a player, you'll have a cap hit in each year of the player contract, following a pre-determined percentage... In the case of Dye, if you release him before the trade deadline, you would have to pay 90% of his current salary this year... If you release after  the deadline, 75%...

Buying out a player contract you can choose how to divide the money during the years of contract... However, you have a bigger cap hit... In the case of Dye, you would have to pay 110% of his remaining contract... As there is only one year remaining, you would have to pay all of it during this year... But if it were more years, then you could ellect how to spread the money during those years...

Both ways are more detailed here: http://profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=32.0

[Colby]

...I don't think I understand this rule at all and it is because I am not that smart but lets take the Dye situation. He is scheduled to make $11M...so 90% of that is $9.9M plus 10% tax on $11M is $1.1M and that gives me $11M cap hit and without the rights to the player in the event he comes back....I have got to be missing something...

The buyout only aids in a multi-year cut.

[Dan Wood]

The only suggestion I can make, in response to your comment Ben (re: Wagner etc) is if a player is signed after a certain age during OFA bidding - TS, he is yours for the life of the contract. Or we can have an out clause if the players career is ended by injury or unforeseen circumstances, outside of old age. In this case Kenji Johjima would be a good example.  Also in fairness, any inherited contracts should not be subject to any retirement speculation, since we didn't sign them, we just got stuck with them. If the guy officially retires, and it is a contract originated from July 09, then you should be allowed some leeway. IMO

[Canada8999]

The only suggestion I can make, in response to your comment Ben (re: Wagner etc) is if a player is signed after a certain age during OFA bidding - TS, he is yours for the life of the contract. Or we can have an out clause if the players career is ended by injury or unforeseen circumstances, outside of old age. In this case Kenji Johjima would be a good example.  Also in fairness, any inherited contracts should not be subject to any retirement speculation, since we didn't sign them, we just got stuck with them. If the guy officially retires, and it is a contract originated from July 09, then you should be allowed some leeway. IMO

I'm not sure - I understand the intent of 'since we didn't sign them', but we also didn't sign Vernon Wells to $18.0 (2014)... no offense to Well's current owner but I don't think we should offer an exceptions to shed his contract.  What if you inherit the contract from an inept FGM owner who dolled out an albatross contract to an overrated player?  IMO, we should treat all contracts equally (is a bad MLB GM really worse than a bad FGM GM?).

If we can come up with a rule that is fair and abuse proof, I'd support it.  If we can't accomplish both, I don't think it's so bad if owners are responsible for the risk of their team's contracts (regardless of who wrote them).

[Dan Wood]

In response to the injury comments, teams have insurance. Personally I think if the guy is no longer a member of the MLB, either by choice or by injury, then we shouldn't have to have money taken out of our budget. Real GMs, terrible or not, have million dollar insurance policies. The Mets paid 25% of Mo Vaughn's contract when he missed an entire year, insurance picked up the rest. I'm just saying, as much as we would like this league to be exactly like our MLB counterpart. It won't. Sometimes you have to simplify things and make them black and white. For instance players that no longer are on an MLB roster. Maybe that should be part of the TCs job, the RCs job, or the Commish's job. So as to avoid any abuse. Or maybe even having an age threshold for OFAs, so if someone signs someone over the age of 35 to a multi year deal, then they knew the inherent risk going in. I also think that the Mariners shouldn't be responsible for Johjima, because well their MLB counterpart is not. The guy left. He's in Japan. The Mariners (real life) don't pay him anymore. He opted out of his contract. It's that simple.

And you would only be able to abuse the retirement clause so much, because if you keep signing old farts your team is going to suck. I think we can all agree in a post PED MLB world, these guys decline at around 32, 33 or so. Just saying.   

[Colby]

FYI, the inept GM that gave the money out to Vernon Wells was not in Franchise GM, but in MLB.  Ricciardi, the assistant to Billy Beane in Oakland, either thought it was a great idea or ownership pressed it on him to do.

[Dan Wood]

Among other sweet deals for mediocre players (Alex Rios, BJ Ryan, AJ Burnett)...plus bad drafts that, until recently, never turned out a star or even usable players.