2/18/2010 2:12 PM zbrent716
Why hasn't the contract for Nicholas Graham (http://www.whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx?pid=2753198) "merged" back into one contract?
He was auto-released and then I resigned him, but when I go to trade him now, the only money a new team would be responsible for is the league minimum, instead of having the contract merged and be treated as a single contract for full value.
2/18/2010 3:21 PM Customer Support
When you release a player, you're responsible for his contract, even if you sign him back.
2/19/2010 12:48 PM zbrent716
Could you please explain why a contradictory answer was given in connection with Ticket # 77336, which is copied and pasted below -
_______________________________
7/6/2009 10:37 PM tecwrg
A question that was brought up in the HBD forum.
Let's say a guy with a $5m salary is released. If the player is not signed by another team, and the original (releasing) team later re-signs the player, is his contract "re-joined" (for lack of a better word)?
Once the player is released, the releasing team is responsible for the remainder of the players contract, unless the player is signed by another team, in which case the new signing team is only responsible for $327k (pro-rated). In essence, the contract is split into two parts, the ML minimum part owned by the new team, and the remainder owned by the original team.
But if the new signing team is the original team, is the contract still split ($327k plus the other $4.673m), or is the contract re-joined back to $5m? This would be important if the team later works out a deal to trade the player. Would the entire contract be traded, or only the $327k part of the contract go with the player.
Hopefully I've explained this question clearly enough.
7/7/2009 2:05 PM Customer Support
Bill,
If a player is released and then resigned by the same franchise the contract value merges. So, if the player is traded further down the road in the season his entire contract moves with him.
_________________________________
Thank you.
2/22/2010 6:27 PM Customer Support
It appears there was some confusion in your previous response.
When a player is released from his contract, the contract is considered released moving forward. So when you re-signed him, you are paying him the proper amount but any intent to move him to another team does, in fact, result in the other franchise only having to pay him the prorated min amount. It's because it's the same contract. And it's one of the main reasons you have to really think through whether you want to release a player.
2/23/2010 2:46 AM zbrent716
The confusion stems from the fact that tecwrg submitted an identical ticket approximately six months ago and received the complete opposite response.
When CS replied to him, they said "If a player is released and then resigned by the same franchise the contract value merges. So, if the player is traded further down the road in the season his entire contract moves with him."
Which directly contradicts the initial response I was just given.
Thanks for your help in clearing this discrepancy up.
2/24/2010 9:54 AM Customer Support
It's a confusing game, sometimes even our support staff gets confused.
Sorry -- but we're glad it's now cleared up.
2/24/2010 1:54 PM zbrent716
So just to be 100% clear (like you said, it gets confusing), the way it is working with Graham (my current guy) is correct and the way it was explained to tecwrg is incorrect?
That is, the monetary obligations, once split, can never again merge?
2/26/2010 10:16 AM Customer Support
That is correct.
_____________________________________________
So, the takeaway less is that once a player is released and his contract is "split" into two parts - 1) a pro-rated league minimum and 2) the difference between his yearly salary and that minimum - it can never again be merged.
The releasing team is responsible for part 2 of the split contract, no matter what.