Spoken like a true shrimp dikked cac fakkit.Do you want to talk about dikk size, or something?
Spoken like a true shrimp dikked cac fakkit.Do you want to talk about dikk size, or something?
It's the fear of letting someone walk, getting little to nothing back, and then having to use that trade to somehow strengthen your chances of keeping your job.I don't think this is necessary. I think teams have to just have more accountability and not sign unworthy players to supermaxes or big 2nd contracts.
How about only 50% guaranteed?A better rule would be if player signs supermax and gets traded, the remaining contract becomes non-guaranteed.
for the team that trades for him? Unless they’re taking the full cap hit regardless this feels like a Black Friday saleHow about only 50% guaranteed?
You’re like a Coli NPC.Spoken like a true shrimp dikked cac fakkit.
Come NPC these nuts, fakkitYou’re like a Coli NPC.
Naw even he aint that far gone. You can play a "back injury" for a year not 5.would have no problem doing it.
And some of these orgs arent any better themselves...worse actually.This doesn't make sense for the player OR the team tbh... No one wants to be stuck with a terrible contract on their books with no chance to remove it.. If teams are that worried about players dogging it they shoukd stop overpaying players that aren't motivated high character guys.. They know who they're dealing with and shoukd know what kind of character they have after being apart of these organizations for years
Naw even he aint that far gone. You can play a "back injury" for a year not 5.
And if you trade him against his will his salary doubles.New rule:
* If a player demands a trade, he has to take a 50% pay cut