The "pay for not play" thing!
They should have contacted me. I would have agreed to not play for them for just a measly grand! Or absent that, a few of those St. Patrick's Day hats.
Think of the "savings"!
No economic degrees apparently in that front office.
.jpg)
a.jpg)
2 comments:
Sunk costs. It makes sense. They should have released him last year, because of the damage he was doing to the club vs. the cost of the contract, which was already set. It's better to realize a mistake and move on, versus hanging on to a player that hurts the team more than helps.
Yes, no doubt and the Mets are not the only team with an alarmingly horrific contract on the books.
Theirs just happened to be the most glaring.
Post a Comment