I trust that Nick has a legitimate reason but I want the explanation on the Diggs restructure

“Player friendly” argument makes no sense, we could have cut him next season for free and that would have been the same thing.

“He will play harder” doesn’t make sense either, he was fully guaranteed this year and like I said above, we could have told him we will either restructure or cut him for free after this season.

We had the ability to extend him without outside market competition, even if it’s unlikely we want to extend him, that’s still a free option for us that’s not worth zero.

Lastly, if we didn’t care about being friendly we could have also traded him for free.

Surely I’m missing something but I need some better answers than this.