Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat
I didn't know that. I assumed that if Samuels retired, he would be entitled to the rest of the pay on his contract. Do you happen to know what the "logic" is behind this situation. If a team releases a player, the team is screwed, but the player is not - he still gets his money. Logically, I would think that if a player "releases" his team by retiring, then the player should be screwed, but the team should not be. If a player retires, why should the player AND the team be penalized for money that is not paid? It doesnt seem like this rule is in the benefit of the players union or the league.
|
Because the team's not taking the big cap hit for money not yet paid, the team is taking the cap hit for money already paid but not yet realized on the cap.
A player who gets a $20 million signing bonus up front in a 5 year contract has that bonus prorated per year of his contract. So the $20 million bonus counts $4 million per season. If he's due a base salary of $1 million as well, then his total cap number is $5 million.
But if a player plays one year of that contract and then retires, the team has to realize the other $16 million of the bonus money not yet counted on the cap. This outweighs the savings they realize on not having to pay his base salary.
You can see that the earlier in a contract a player is released, the bigger the cap hit.