Melwing wrote:Winsome Gerbil wrote:Not the way it works. If he gets a new job, then the Kings will no longer have to pay him.
Could you back that claim up? I have
never heard of such a thing. An employer doesn't get to just fire someone they have under contract because he's "not working out" and then not pay them. That's what a contract is for. I'm perfectly okay with being proven wrong, though.
Its the way it has always worked in the NBA, and likely other sports. Like the players, the coaches are signing exclusive personal services contracts. Like the players, those contracts are normally guaranteed. So Coach A agrees to coach Team A for 3 years. If Team A decides to fire Coach A in Yr 1, well the team still has to live up to its side of the bargain, which was we'll pay you x amount of dollars a year for your exclusive services. Since if he's fired, the coach isn't the one who breached his side of the deal, the team still has to pay him the remainder of the contract.
BUT, the key is the "exclusive" nature of the deals. The coach agrees to coach Team A, and Team A exclusively. He can't sign a deal to also coach Team B at the same time. So if he gets fired and then goes off and seeks and gets a job from Team B, then he's breached the exclusivity of his original contract, and the remainder of it is void. So when a coach gets hired by a new team, his remaining contract with the old one winks out. One of the reasons why coaches are sometimes willing to sit out a year or two.