So....if Sam Cassell had sucked completely, and had averaged 2 pts, 2 assists and 1 reb after signing his contract, I assume you would agree that the team should have been allowed to kick him out without pay? No? Well, a contract is a contract, and that goes both ways!
So, Sam's body falls completely apart in the playoffs, and he feels that entitles him to a multi-year extension, starting after 2005-6? I absolutely agree with those saying that if Sam feels that it's so unjust that he can't rip up the contract he signed and get more money, that the GM should retain the right to rip up Sam's contract in a couple years when he's totally run out of game. Evan
If we were talking about the nfl, this would be a different discussion. But Sam's in the NBA, so it was his option to take the longer term guaranteed money... or not. He chose security. His option. NBA's unique in the quickness that players can be unrestricted free agents, and that their contracts are guaranteed...so the argument that they are somehow coerced by ownership into accepting unjust deals just doesn't fly. Sam may be underpaid...but that was his doing.
As soon as all the players making more than they are worth decide to start renegotiating for smaller contracts, then I will agree that you should be able to hold out for larger ones. Until then, Sam should shut the hell up and Minny should get an exception for the value of his contract.
