Owner A has a player at $60 who is on 60 day IL and probably not going to play in 2021. He doesn’t want to keep him at $60+, but if he just cuts him, other owners will certainly scoop him up at $30+ and keep for next year. Owner A would be unable to participate in the auction since he just cut him. So, he’s sort of stuck with this salary jam.
I don’t really care about this player, but I do care about other players on Owners A’s team.
What if I proposed a trade that included this $60 player with the promise that I would immediately cut him? This would allow the owner to at least participate in the auction that will surely happen for the high priced player.
I would include this intention in the trade comments, so it would be public while other owners decide to veto or not.
Is that ethical? Against the spirit of the league?
Usually, to these questions I say, “well, if you have to ask…” But I’m curious about others’ thoughts.
Thanks for reading.