Should Mavs Have To Pay Underachieving Odom?

If this stiff had a normal job and didn't perform as expected; he would be let go with absolutely no chance of collecting any income other than for the days he was there. Of course I live in Pennsylvania, which is an "At Will" employment state.

Yes, they should have to pay him.A contract is a contract.

It the Mavs's own fault for not putting achievement clauses in the contracts of players.

Depends on his contract - is there a performance clause, injury clause etc

I think the sign at the top says it all!! getting paid millions for doing nothing!

what a waste

Yes they should

A contract is a contract. They have a legal obligation to pay him even if he doesn't perform like they hoped.

I honestly don't care... I liked the picture though. It made me giggle. :)

Contractual obligations are a bitch sometimes.

As much as it pains me to say it, yes. It doesn't say he has to leave without pay in the contract. They didn't say that he will not be paid for his absences. They should have contract further to say, "in the event of a leave of absence, or leave of contract termination cancellation, poor performance resulting in deactivation from the roster, those times will not be paid for." It's the management's fault for not covering their asses.



I understand where Barkley is coming from. Hell, I love the Lakers. If Odom played like he did this season had he still been with the Lakers I would have been equally as mad as Barkley. And even then I would say Odom deserves to get paid because his contract doesn't say he can't.



Of course this would probably mean that the CBA would have kicked in for him to get paid. I guess that means in the next negotiations they're going to have to bring this up as an issue if they want to clean up the CBA for the sake of both sides.

Contracts have obligations for both sides. The Mavs are obligated to pay, but Odom is obligated to play to the best of his abilities.

The world of sports contracts includes many people with big contracts who later develop big injuries. The team accepts a calculated risk -- they sign a player but he might break down. If that happens, the injured player gets paid. In many cases, the team will have an insurance policy to cover such a contingency.

But not all performance problems are uncontrollable risks. There are situations where a player fails to maintain reasonable diet, athletic conditioning, participate in practice, etc. Sometimes the player becomes such an outcast that he stops making an effort on game day. Contracts can only go so far to spell out all of the situations that can lead to cancellation for non-performance. And of course, nothing stops the non-performer from claiming the root cause is an injury.

Consider the case of Manny Ramirez. There were situations where Manny simply decided he didn't want to play. He claimed to be unavailable due to injury, so the Red Sox sent him for an MRI to disprove his various excuses. The team was dangerously close to voiding his contract for non-performance, sending a letter to his agent to that effect. Instead, they traded him to the Dodgers, where he managed to get himself suspended a year later for failing a drug test.

Good point.

He did play for them right? Enough said.

ridiculous

If his contract says that they should.

mavs took a risk and it didnt work out so now they are paying for it.... literally

my boss won't pay me to sit at home with no signs of returnin to work

you never produced like Odom.

There is a contract right

if youre not performing as you should at whatever type of job you have then you should either be fired or have a decrease in pay

Contract is contract. There were other ways of handling this, to the Mavs advantage, including a trade back to the Lakers.

I mean... he's working for you. You have to pay him. That's just... it's so basic. Even the bench-riders get paid.

If boxer did that, he'd be barred for life.

No one should pay someone who wnt help the team in anyway

They the mavericks signed the contract.And he should get the money.He did not ask to be traded.The Lakers did it for him. Either release him or pay him to sit on his butt.

Unless they have an, "underachieving clause" in the contract...is there a such thing? (ASK A LAWYER) then i would say "pay the piper!" put that in all the next players contracts...!!!!

You sign the contract you live with it. Barkley knows this very well.

You live the contract you sign.

Unless his legally binding contract specifically stated that his wages were forfeit if his performance didn't live up to their expectations, then YES, they have to pay him.

It's called a CONTRACT hell yes. We've all paid for stuff we weren't satisfied with

I know, right?

They signed the contract, and there is no performance clause in the contract. He could sit on the bench and be paid.

Of course, nobody in their right mind would sign Odom again.

Its not that he was underachieving ... he just didnt care . Never really tried ... too busy with his wife Kardashean BS

He's still under contract with the team. If they don't want to pay him, then they should outright release him.

Agreed.

He is a failure but you take a risk when you bargain for a player. He was ruined the moment he married that whale.

Umm noooo! I don't get paid if I don't feel like coming into work. And I for damn sure don't continue to get paid after I have been fired from a job. He has essentially been fired!

Mav's were idiots for taking this Laker $h!t stick. He doesn't want to play for the Mav's, he wants to be in LA sucking Kobe's "Black Mamba"