He signed a contract 5 months ago, even after all of BOB's fuckups. The team shouldn't have to cave in to a players demands or grant him a trade just because he doesn't like how the team is going or he wasn't involved in FO decision making.
The "should" is irrelevant here for me. The guy doesn' want to play there anymore, and it seems the bridge is burnt. They have two choices :
- Say what you're saying "we shouldn't have to" bla bla, toxify things more, let it rot, make him lose a year, have him potentially lose value, have him sit the season, look like a franchise that isn't pro-players, make your roster angry about the situation, etc.
- Or say ok, this guy is worth a ton of picks right now, 6 teams are probably ready to sell their souls for him, lets trade him, let's rebuild this franchise from the ground with a lot of picks, let's turn a page.
Actually this is what I love most about McVay and Snead : the past doesn't matter, and they are right. All the people objecting to the Goff trade mentionning how many picks it cost to get him are wrong, this doesn't matter, it happened, it's over, you can't fix it. It's gambler's / sunk cost fallacy, Goff being expensive to get doesn't mean we should hang on to him longer. The past doesn't matter, all that matters is : right now what's the best thing to do.
The fact they signed Watson 5 month ago in itself is irrelevant, the question is : given the current conditions (including Watson's contract), what's the best course of action. Keeping him doesn't seem extremely healthy for anyone at that point.
