|
Post by johnnybravo on Jan 18, 2010 15:51:15 GMT -8
somewhat speaking out of turn here as I'm commenting on another owner's $60 contract (tampering anybody?) but here goes. Reyes at 60 offers a prime example of what has happened in the past as Angels described. When Reyes was signed at $60 as an RFA, it was sign him or lose him. He was signed and worth it to that owner (now no longer with us due to participation limitations). Now, Phils has the unenviable decision of keep him (tough to say he's worth 60 with a bad hammy), cut him outright (that sucks, cause when healthy, he's worth considerable steals and decent peripherals) or find some poor sap other than the Astros with the room to accommodate 60. He can expect to receive little in return since the other owner is taking on 60 of cap. With those three scenarios, the punishment to Phils if he cuts him is no more Reyes and no bidding on FA Reyes. The benefit is obvious, 60 in cap room to apply to another player. Just like the real life Alex Rios, CHW got the whole contract, TOR got cap space for nothing. If Phils tries to reacquire Reyes in the future via trade, speaking to some of your concern, he damn sure wont get the new and improved $20 Reyes for a song, it'll take some talent, so there is some fairness. In the end, the greater issue, collusion, to date has not been a problem in this league. If it were, I think the senior players would either run off the colluders (my word) or simply fold up and go home. I think while it seems slightly unseemly on the surface, I think after a year of seeing it practice you'll find its not as a bad as you think. Kinda like having a slightly overweight girl that likes to sunbath nude living next door. It really aint right, but in the end, its tolerable.
|
|