Quote:
Originally Posted by fleury
Interesting. Right on ownership for making sure such stupid contracts don't hogtie them for years to come, but what does that say for their GM who gave out such a contract (presumably without permission before doing so)? Would such a move constitute a breach of trust with ownership? Embarrassing to the GM either way, but regardless, good on ownership for taking a stand on giving big bucks to a marginal player.
|
It's funny - now ownership gets a much better closer for 6 million total on the contract and less term.
Phils made the right decision. Signing relievers, especially long term is very dangerous.