What does it say about Cubs’ ownership/budget that Hoyer dealt a high ceiling prospect (Alfonsin Rosario) for a middle reliever (Eli Morgan), rather than pay 5 mil in FA to sign a comparable middle reliever?
re: pete + mets reunion
” I’d lean towards no at this point. My suspicion is that other teams have offered Alonso more money and are more willing to meet his demands in terms of contract structure.”
interesting… other tms have offered more $? but everyone & their mother swears to god that nobody is even remotely interested in alonso and wont pay more than a bucket of sunflower seeds
“My SUSPICION is that other teams have offered Alonso more money”
very keyword there is suspicion as in speculating or guessing as in no confirmation. As an example i can say my suspicion is that multiple teams have offered Flaherty an 800M deal with no deferments and full no trade and yearly opt outs but he really wants to play for the tigers so he has not accepted yet and willing to play on a 2M 1.yr deal with them.
Fly – I have to defend Mark here. There’s a huge difference between reasonable speculation supported by critical thinking, and wild speculation without justification.
If Mark says “his suspicion” that means he’s got very good reason to suspect it.
Here we go with the deferral questions. Not sure why people keep asking these questions, when the answers are all there for everyone to read. Let me help you…….YOUR TEAM CAN DEFER PAYMENTS AS WELL!!!!!! Your team just isn’t smart enough to do it.
Deferring payments is just kicking the can down the road.
Personally, for the purposes of calculating any luxury tax, a player’s salary should not be deferred beyond their career with that team. A team should be able to pay a player however they see fit. But for determining any luxury tax,teams shouldn’t be able to do that.
I think you missed when I said a team can pay a player whenever they see fit. No issues with that. But, for the purpose of determining a luxury tax, that should all hit when the player leaves the team or retires.
I think the NFL does something like that. I think it’s called dead cap? It seems like the Rams traded Goff and his salary, but still had to recognize a chunk of his salary when he was traded. Something like that…
Exactly. But, if he doesn’t make it to 2033, his salary would be transferred to the next team. Whatever the team pays of his salary to trade (if anything) would hit the trading team in a prorated fashion for the length of the contract. But, if the player retires, the entire amount would hit immediately. If a player is injured and retirement is a result of that injury, then the commissioner could forgive all or a portion of the salary for computing the luxury tax.
And no player should be contracted with deferred $ past like 42 years old.
I thought Mark’s answer about a shorter ST was a bit lacking. ST is too long for position players sure, but it’s as long as it is because of the pitchers, not the weather. There’s a reason why pitchers and catchers need to show up a week before the position players. Every pitcher in the rotation needs a certain number of ST starts before the regular season begins.
Jean – He is 100% correct, The regular season already starts March 18-19th for two teams and March 27th for 26 other teams. What a ridiculous suggestion to start the regular season for all teams in the middle of March when the chance of snow is extremely high. Plus you’re fighting for ratings with March Madness.
The weather is a factor. It’s why ST starts when it does.
But the question was about the length. I quote:
“Should spring training be shorter?”
The length of ST is dictated by the the need of the pitchers. If it was only about the weather a shorter ST could be achieved by starting it later. Again. ST is the length it is because of the pitchers, not merely to avoid bad weather.
Jean – Did you think I wouldn’t go to the transcript and read the question myself? Haha!
Here is the question *in it’s entirety* ….
“Should spring training be shorter? Start season earlier and move up post season or longer first round”
The question was ABSOLUTELY about BOTH the length of ST and starting the regular season earlier. Therefore I stand by my defense of Mark.
But I absolutely agree with you, the length of ST shouldn’t be shortened. For proof, look no further than 2019 when Cora decided to basically give the starting pitchers and starting position players ST off. They hardly played at all, and never in my life have I seen a team so unprepared to start the regular season. It led to a disastrous season and the departure of Dombrowski.
No, The germane part was about about making ST shorter. The rest of the quote was about how to go about accomplishing that. It was a question that was clearly about wanting to, and how, to make ST shorter.
I’m not arguing that ST should not be shortened. I’m only stating that it can’t be, and the reason for that. ST is the length it is because the pitchers need it to be that long. To think it’s that length only to avoid bad weather is silly.
Kind of tired of almost for a person MLBTR writers defend the current system. This “every team can do it” is more American Dream stuff, which ignores market, personal wealth, TV, merchandising & media money, philosophies etc. it’s in line with the argument that the pot is bottomless, that fans will/should pay whatever the market, manipulated by greed of the players, agents & owners, will bear. Yes it’s a reflection of current society, but you have legacy organizations like the Cardinals, Orioles & Tigers (now or recently) embrace losing over competing. Allowing a handful of teams to flood the FA market with seemingly endless purchasing power with deferred payments isn’t a case of “anyone can do it.” The sport has fallen out of its place as America’s game; inequities have grown wider even with the creation of a more generous playoff system. There needs to be some major changes – whether it’s hard cap/hard floor, an international draft (w/ picks allowed to be traded), but saying it’s all fine does no one good.
It’s not perfectly fine, but it’s not dying either. You were probably saying the same thing the last time the Yankees won 3 in a row, or when the Twins and Blue Jays won back-to-back in the 80s and 90s.
Yeah also the Dodgers been winning the past ten plus years so it’s a much easier choice for a player to sign there as opposed to Toronto, or a worse team, and don’t think many good players would take deferred money on a non contender.
Also, unless I am wrong, Dodgers owners aren’t spending out of their own pockets. No one would. They just make so much money that they can pay all these guys and not miss a beat. No owner is in the business “for the love of the game”.
What does it say about Cubs’ ownership/budget that Hoyer dealt a high ceiling prospect (Alfonsin Rosario) for a middle reliever (Eli Morgan), rather than pay 5 mil in FA to sign a comparable middle reliever?
See:: Josh Fields for Yordan Alvarez
re: pete + mets reunion
” I’d lean towards no at this point. My suspicion is that other teams have offered Alonso more money and are more willing to meet his demands in terms of contract structure.”
interesting… other tms have offered more $? but everyone & their mother swears to god that nobody is even remotely interested in alonso and wont pay more than a bucket of sunflower seeds
“My SUSPICION is that other teams have offered Alonso more money”
very keyword there is suspicion as in speculating or guessing as in no confirmation. As an example i can say my suspicion is that multiple teams have offered Flaherty an 800M deal with no deferments and full no trade and yearly opt outs but he really wants to play for the tigers so he has not accepted yet and willing to play on a 2M 1.yr deal with them.
Fly – I have to defend Mark here. There’s a huge difference between reasonable speculation supported by critical thinking, and wild speculation without justification.
If Mark says “his suspicion” that means he’s got very good reason to suspect it.
Lol. Pressly news indeed breaks during the chat.
Looks like the Pressly trade has held up the chat.
I thought the Dodgers would grab him.
Most insecure team in baseball, as usual.
Here we go with the deferral questions. Not sure why people keep asking these questions, when the answers are all there for everyone to read. Let me help you…….YOUR TEAM CAN DEFER PAYMENTS AS WELL!!!!!! Your team just isn’t smart enough to do it.
Deferring payments is just kicking the can down the road.
Personally, for the purposes of calculating any luxury tax, a player’s salary should not be deferred beyond their career with that team. A team should be able to pay a player however they see fit. But for determining any luxury tax,teams shouldn’t be able to do that.
TroyVan,
Why not? The deferred money will be less valuable when they receive it, so they’re making things equitable with these calculations.
I think you missed when I said a team can pay a player whenever they see fit. No issues with that. But, for the purpose of determining a luxury tax, that should all hit when the player leaves the team or retires.
I think the NFL does something like that. I think it’s called dead cap? It seems like the Rams traded Goff and his salary, but still had to recognize a chunk of his salary when he was traded. Something like that…
For the purpose of luxury tax, the salary hit only applies for the years the player is signed to play. For example, Ohtani’s tax hit is for 2024-2033.
Exactly. But, if he doesn’t make it to 2033, his salary would be transferred to the next team. Whatever the team pays of his salary to trade (if anything) would hit the trading team in a prorated fashion for the length of the contract. But, if the player retires, the entire amount would hit immediately. If a player is injured and retirement is a result of that injury, then the commissioner could forgive all or a portion of the salary for computing the luxury tax.
And no player should be contracted with deferred $ past like 42 years old.
Rough ideas.
Saddest thing in the chat:
Do the Rockies lose 100 games?
Probably .
I thought Mark’s answer about a shorter ST was a bit lacking. ST is too long for position players sure, but it’s as long as it is because of the pitchers, not the weather. There’s a reason why pitchers and catchers need to show up a week before the position players. Every pitcher in the rotation needs a certain number of ST starts before the regular season begins.
Jean – He is 100% correct, The regular season already starts March 18-19th for two teams and March 27th for 26 other teams. What a ridiculous suggestion to start the regular season for all teams in the middle of March when the chance of snow is extremely high. Plus you’re fighting for ratings with March Madness.
The weather is a factor. It’s why ST starts when it does.
But the question was about the length. I quote:
“Should spring training be shorter?”
The length of ST is dictated by the the need of the pitchers. If it was only about the weather a shorter ST could be achieved by starting it later. Again. ST is the length it is because of the pitchers, not merely to avoid bad weather.
Jean – Did you think I wouldn’t go to the transcript and read the question myself? Haha!
Here is the question *in it’s entirety* ….
“Should spring training be shorter? Start season earlier and move up post season or longer first round”
The question was ABSOLUTELY about BOTH the length of ST and starting the regular season earlier. Therefore I stand by my defense of Mark.
But I absolutely agree with you, the length of ST shouldn’t be shortened. For proof, look no further than 2019 when Cora decided to basically give the starting pitchers and starting position players ST off. They hardly played at all, and never in my life have I seen a team so unprepared to start the regular season. It led to a disastrous season and the departure of Dombrowski.
No, The germane part was about about making ST shorter. The rest of the quote was about how to go about accomplishing that. It was a question that was clearly about wanting to, and how, to make ST shorter.
I’m not arguing that ST should not be shortened. I’m only stating that it can’t be, and the reason for that. ST is the length it is because the pitchers need it to be that long. To think it’s that length only to avoid bad weather is silly.
Jean – I agreed with you on the length.
Kind of tired of almost for a person MLBTR writers defend the current system. This “every team can do it” is more American Dream stuff, which ignores market, personal wealth, TV, merchandising & media money, philosophies etc. it’s in line with the argument that the pot is bottomless, that fans will/should pay whatever the market, manipulated by greed of the players, agents & owners, will bear. Yes it’s a reflection of current society, but you have legacy organizations like the Cardinals, Orioles & Tigers (now or recently) embrace losing over competing. Allowing a handful of teams to flood the FA market with seemingly endless purchasing power with deferred payments isn’t a case of “anyone can do it.” The sport has fallen out of its place as America’s game; inequities have grown wider even with the creation of a more generous playoff system. There needs to be some major changes – whether it’s hard cap/hard floor, an international draft (w/ picks allowed to be traded), but saying it’s all fine does no one good.
It’s not perfectly fine, but it’s not dying either. You were probably saying the same thing the last time the Yankees won 3 in a row, or when the Twins and Blue Jays won back-to-back in the 80s and 90s.
Yeah also the Dodgers been winning the past ten plus years so it’s a much easier choice for a player to sign there as opposed to Toronto, or a worse team, and don’t think many good players would take deferred money on a non contender.
Also, unless I am wrong, Dodgers owners aren’t spending out of their own pockets. No one would. They just make so much money that they can pay all these guys and not miss a beat. No owner is in the business “for the love of the game”.