then why do we have 15 players restructuring their contracts?
The logic is simple and team friendly.
When we first sign player x and only have y guaranteed. We're taking a risk on that y guaranteed if that player is a total failure for us.
When we do these annual restructuring of deals, we're taking base salary converting over to more guaranteed money. But the brilliance is, we're doing it to the players that are working out for us and that we still continue to want here long term. I fully expected that Mickey Loomis has the foresight in these deals to know that he has restructure capability built into these contracts to make them more friendly later on but the brilliance is, we aren't upping our initial guaranteed dollars when we first sign player x if they aren't working out for us. We don't restructure Ben Grubbs if he was a bust for us.
The logic is there and makes total sense, its built in protection for our franchise, way better than originally outright giving them the guaranteed dollars risking our franchise if they don't work out.