I believe you, southsider, but if the clause is he has to reach a certain number of at bats, why couldn't the team go to court and in its defense say, 'Yes, your honor, we decided to not play him so we wouldn't have to pay him 18 million next year. We feel that is our right as an organization, that's why we put that in the contract."
I just wonder why it would be a no brainer for the player to win over the team.
The stats prove he's not worth 18 mill.