but giving CC the right to get out of the contract is ridiculous if we receive no protection. The Blue Jays were dopes for letting Burnett have a one way opt out contract. For Burnett it was a no lose situation; pitch well and get paid even more or get injured and still have the security of a long term contract. Situations like this creates a no win situation for the team and a no lose situation for the player. If CC insists on this we should just let him walk. A "lose-lose" for the team is the entire point, though. Opt-outs and other clauses like it have subjective financial value. Let's say the team can only pay $X for a player over 3 years and the player wants $Y. If $Z is the subjective value of the opt-out clause and enough to cover the gap between X and Y, the team may add it in lieu of money to make the overall value of the contract high enough for the player to sign. If it's either $110MM over 5 years or $100MM over 5 years with an opt-out, you've gotta decide if saving those $10MM is worth giving up that kind of power to the player. So in this situation, you can either add real dollars, or modify an offer to include something with a subjective financial value. My employer giving me more vacation time is a "lose-lose" for them. I'm not productive and at work, AND they have to pay me. But the alternative is giving me a raise, which costs money they don't want to spend.