I think this is a classic case of making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Some of you really want to go for the jugular, eh? Make them lose more?

The rule isn't likely to change. But something like adding in a fine of the same amount it would've cost the GM to buy out the player would all but eliminate any speculation.

I think if a GM uses it as a tactic to dump salary, it makes the GM look bad. Why not get something out of it at somepoint during the season, instead of letting it walk for free after a GM has likely paid a hefty SB for a player. As well as, depending on the timing, paid a good portion of his salary anyway for that season.   I can understand the small benefit of using this rule to an advantage. However, I think it comes off as lazy and well dumb.

I don't like the idea of sending him to waivers.

Personally, this is one of my more favorite rules. Which I've happened to of been on both sides of. I've been in leagues where the cap rules haven't been followed as strictly, and it just opens up for more complaining about teams being inelligible. Which is something most GMs have explained to me that they would like to avoid.


I'd like to remind most of you that all of these rules were open for debate during the off-season. Which will happen again next season.