Hamilton Deserving of his Contract?

Josh Hamilton was a top prospect in baseball. He had the ability to go number one in the draft but his off the field actions caused great concern.  He has struggled with drug addiction for most of his life. Once in the majors, he went to rehab for the first time in 2001 and was suspended in 2003 due to failed drug tests. He had alcohol relapses in 2009 and 2012. This has been a constant battle for him.
After playing for the Reds and having great seasons with the Rangers he signed with the Angels for $125 million over 5 years.
Since playing for the Angels he has not played to his expectations and has also had shoulder surgery.
Due to his recent drug relapse, the Angels are fighting to get out of their contract with him and not pay the $83 million they still owe him.
In the article "C.J. Wilson takes a stand for Hamilton and against the Angels. He brings up a valid point. If Josh was hitting .300 with 35 home runs a year, what’s the situation?" and says “If you’re good, you get away with everything. That’s all there is to it.” (Axisa 2015 para 8-9).
The Angels argue that in Hamilton's contract it says he is not allowed to drink or do drugs.

Wilson brings up such a good point. If the athlete is performing, is what they do off the field okay? If Hamilton was having a breakout year like he did when he played for Texas would this get pushed under the rug? It is acceptable to ignore violating a contract or rule when you are getting your job done athletically?

Courtney Cox

Axisa (2015, April 11). C.J. Wilson calls out Angels over treatment of Josh Hamilton CBSSports.com Retrieved from http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-baseball/25145457