2023 MLB (non-Tigers) catch all thread

[Tenacious D]

Ohtani had contended all along that he wanted to play on a winner.  With his deferral, they can now add the much needed pitching to round out that team.

[KL2]

49 minutes ago, oblong said:

Wrong. 
 Why would they be expected to pay on $70M when that’s not the actual value? The “luxury tax” was supposed to do what the text of the rules allows the clubs to do. Ohtani wasn’t going to end up in Pittsburgh or Colorado or Baltimore. The luxury tax or CBT is not a salary cap.  It’s  within the rules and didn’t severely alter the pay landscape.  

You're conflating issues here. 

They should be expected to pay on $700 million because that's what the contract is. 10 years 700 million. The deferrals is just a workaround so they don't take a 70 million hit this year instead they are only taking 43 million. The NHL had to outlaw this a few years ago when guys were all signing 12 years deals just to bring the cap down. 

Of course Pittsburgh wasn't going to sign Ohtani nobody has suggested as much. You completely missed the point there about small market teams losing players because of this. It's going to be an issue when the next small market player comes up for an extension. One of those teams might be offered 300 million, the Red Sox now can just offer 800 million and defer a bunch because its play money at this point and years don't matter. 

The tax *was* designed to act as a cap. How often have we heard teams say they don't like going over it or losing picks because of it? Hell its why the yanked went several years without signing a big name. 

The move by the Dodgers is within the rules, but just because its allowed doesn't mean everybody is cool with it. I don't think anyone expected $680 million to be deferred to get around a luxury tax today. This move is gonna piss off other 29 owners because it now makes the luxury tax irrelevant for the major teams and puts MLB right back in the same boat it was that led to the creation of the system to try and prevent just the big teams from acquiring free agent talent. 

 

Edited December 12, 2023 by KL2

[Tiger337]

I agree with KL2.  

[Edman85]

What is the California Jock Tax and where is Ohtani going to live in retirement where he can see a lot more of that 68 million?

[gehringer_2]

13 hours ago, Longgone said:

I believe any deferred payments are added to the luxury tax calculation for the period of the contract, but adjusted to present value, it is not postponed to the period beyond the contract.

13 minutes ago, KL2 said:

I don't think anyone expected $680 million to be deferred to get around a luxury tax today.

Whether the 1st is true or not is the critical difference. If they have to distribute the AAV over the playing years in the deal that is a huge difference - that means they only get around the amount of the tax equal to the time value of money (again and who decides that rate is a big deal also). 

[Tiger337]

13 hours ago, Longgone said:

I believe any deferred payments are added to the luxury tax calculation for the period of the contract, but adjusted to present value, it is not postponed to the period beyond the contract.

OK, I am now reading the same thing.  Apparently about 45 million per year goes towards the luxury tax calculation even though he doesn't get it until later.  

I guess I don't get to agree with KL2 anymore.  😀

[gehringer_2]

1 minute ago, Tiger337 said:

OK, I am now reading the same thing.  Apparently about 45 million per year goes towards the luxury tax calculation even though he doesn't get it until later.  

I guess I don't get to agree with KL2 anymore.  😀

and if the AAV is 45M, that means given the devaluation of the deferrals, the contract is actually worth $450M in current dollars. Not nearly so exciting.

I remember at the time the Ilitches complained that Scherzer's "$250M" contract offer from WSN was actually not worth any significant amount more than their $140m(? don't remember the exact number) offer because of deferrals but that wasn't stopping anyone from calling them cheap anyway.

[Jim Cowan]

Different sport but is Jon Rahm's blood money deal actually better than Ohtani's deal?  Did he get $400 million up front?

[Edman85]

35 minutes ago, Jim Cowan said:

Different sport but is Jon Rahm's blood money deal actually better than Ohtani's deal?  Did he get $400 million up front?

I don't believe he did, and thanks for raising my blood pressure. **** that guy.

[Edman85]

I did read that Scherzer's deferrals allowed the July 1 payment to be taxed in his home state of Florida and not DC.

[oblong]

2 hours ago, KL2 said:

You're conflating issues here. 

They should be expected to pay on $700 million because that's what the contract is. 10 years 700 million. The deferrals is just a workaround so they don't take a 70 million hit this year instead they are only taking 43 million. The NHL had to outlaw this a few years ago when guys were all signing 12 years deals just to bring the cap down. 

Of course Pittsburgh wasn't going to sign Ohtani nobody has suggested as much. You completely missed the point there about small market teams losing players because of this. It's going to be an issue when the next small market player comes up for an extension. One of those teams might be offered 300 million, the Red Sox now can just offer 800 million and defer a bunch because its play money at this point and years don't matter. 

The tax *was* designed to act as a cap. How often have we heard teams say they don't like going over it or losing picks because of it? Hell its why the yanked went several years without signing a big name. 

The move by the Dodgers is within the rules, but just because its allowed doesn't mean everybody is cool with it. I don't think anyone expected $680 million to be deferred to get around a luxury tax today. This move is gonna piss off other 29 owners because it now makes the luxury tax irrelevant for the major teams and puts MLB right back in the same boat it was that led to the creation of the system to try and prevent just the big teams from acquiring free agent talent. 

 

You are the one confusing things.  The NHL has and had a hard cap.  MLB doesn’t. The CBT is intended as a deterrent but it’s  not a rule. There are penalties to be paid.  
 

The CBA specifically says there’s no limit on deferrals. 

this deal doesn’t really alter the landscape in my opinion. If you were told he signed a $450M deal for 10 years is that crazy?  No. 

[SoCalTiger]

3 hours ago, KL2 said:

 

 

The move by the Dodgers is within the rules, but just because its allowed doesn't mean everybody is cool with it. I don't think anyone expected $680 million to be deferred to get around a luxury tax today. This move is gonna piss off other 29 owners because it now makes the luxury tax irrelevant for the major teams and puts MLB right back in the same boat it was that led to the creation of the system to try and prevent just the big teams from acquiring free agent talent. 

 

It only angers them because they did not think of it first.

[oblong]

Just now, SoCalTiger said:

It only angers them because they did not think of it first.

And Ohtani with his endorsement income is unique in being able to make this decision.  This will not become a normal thing beyond what it was a week ago.  It’s a difference of degree and nobody can touch his marketing impact personally. He’s getting his money now from endorsements.  He has that luxury. Everyone else doesn’t. 

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, Edman85 said:

I did read that Scherzer's deferrals allowed the July 1 payment to be taxed in his home state of Florida and not DC.

Sure. Max was smart enough to know the details of the NPVs well enough - but I don't think he minded that the media comparison made it a lot easier to say he left for a big money difference than all the reasons he was probably irritated with the Tigers that just would have produced more blowback for him to have talked about in public.

[Longgone]

7 hours ago, SoCalTiger said:

It only angers them because they did not think of it first.

I'm sure they did. Most teams wouldn't want to push the cash flow hit into the future.

[casimir]

11 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

Ohtani had contended all along that he wanted to play on a winner.  With his deferral, they can now add the much needed pitching to round out that team.

Its about time the Dodgers catch a break.

[casimir]

8 hours ago, oblong said:

The CBA specifically says there’s no limit on deferrals. 

this deal doesn’t really alter the landscape in my opinion. If you were told he signed a $450M deal for 10 years is that crazy?  No. 

I understand that there is an equilibrium for the present value of future expenses, and without going into the math, let's agree that $450M/10 now = $700M/10 later.  Seems close enough in theory to not quibble about that details, the concept of that individual contract with low cost now to help build a winner now makes sense.

But if deferring money begins to pick up steam, what happens in the present with ownership ready to win now pitching these contracts such that they're only paying for fewer premium contracts now, but the deferrals are due later on?  What happens to that team in 10 years when the previous deferrals are due as well as the current (at the that point in time) contracts?  Could this become a problem?  Maybe this is a slippery slope concern, I don't know.  Obviously we've seen deferrals before, Bobby Bonilla Day is probably of legal drinking age by now.  And it probably isn't going to be something for everybody, not all players/teams are going to engage in this.

[chasfh]

10 hours ago, Edman85 said:

I did read that Scherzer's deferrals allowed the July 1 payment to be taxed in his home state of Florida and not DC.

That’s basically robbing certain states and cities of the income tax payments they deserve from Scherzer plying his lucrative trade in their jurisdictions during the season.

[chasfh]

In all this kerfuffle, I will never forget how excited I was to be taking a California coast driving trip in April 2018 to see ball games in all five stadia there, including the Angels’ Opening Day in Ohtani’s first season, and mother****ing Mike Sciosia SAT OHTANI FOR THE WHOLE GAME. On OPENING DAY. THAT’S how the Angels rewarded their best fans after signing one of the most impactful players of the free agent era.

The Angels deserved to lose him. **** those guys.

[Biff Mayhem]

17 minutes ago, chasfh said:

In all this kerfuffle, I will never forget how excited I was to be taking a California coast driving trip in April 2018 to see ball games in all five stadia there, including the Angels’ Opening Day in Ohtani’s first season, and mother****ing Mike Sciosia SAT OHTANI FOR THE WHOLE GAME. On OPENING DAY. THAT’S how the Angels rewarded their best fans after signing one of the most impactful players of the free agent era.

The Angels deserved to lose him. **** those guys.

I mean, tell us how you really feel 😄

[Edman85]

Both behind paywalls, but good stuff in the Athletic from Drellich/Ardia yesterday and BP from Mains this morning on the contract setup.

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, Biff Mayhem said:

I mean, tell us how you really feel 😄

Ha haaaaa, good one! 🤣🤣🤣💀

[Motown Bombers]

This is why the NFL is so much better than MLB. The best team in the NFL the past several years has been the Kansas City Chiefs who have the best player in the NFL under a long term contract. The New York Jets haven't made the playoffs in over 10 years, the Chargers only have one fan and nobody cares about the Rams, a team from Green Bay Wisconsin has had two hall of fame QB for 30 consecutive years, the top AFC contenders last year were from Cincinnati and Buffalo, a team from Tampa had the greatest player of all time sign with them and win a championship, and one of the leagues elite franchises is from Pittsburgh. If the NFL was like MLB, Mahomes would have signed a $700 deal with New York and Los Angeles, Brady would have never stayed in Foxborough as long as he did, and Aaron Rodgers would have been able to hold more teams hostage. 

[oblong]

3 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

This is why the NFL is so much better than MLB. The best team in the NFL the past several years has been the Kansas City Chiefs who have the best player in the NFL under a long term contract. The New York Jets haven't made the playoffs in over 10 years, the Chargers only have one fan and nobody cares about the Rams, a team from Green Bay Wisconsin has had two hall of fame QB for 30 consecutive years, the top AFC contenders last year were from Cincinnati and Buffalo, a team from Tampa had the greatest player of all time sign with them and win a championship, and one of the leagues elite franchises is from Pittsburgh. If the NFL was like MLB, Mahomes would have signed a $700 deal with New York and Los Angeles, Brady would have never stayed in Foxborough as long as he did, and Aaron Rodgers would have been able to hold more teams hostage. 

The difference is the NFL teams are not reliant on local TV contracts and markets.  They also have a more stringent salary cap I believe.  The Salary Cap is basically the TV money.  The teams split that evenly, at the national level. And given the nature of the draft it's probably easier for bad teams to get good considering your top draft picks are very often impact players.

I don't see it as better but I'm not a football guy.  It brings me no special joy that KC wins over LA or NY. They both are not Detroit so who cares?

 

[Motown Bombers]

1 minute ago, oblong said:

The difference is the NFL teams are not reliant on local TV contracts and markets.  They also have a more stringent salary cap I believe.  The Salary Cap is basically the TV money.  The teams split that evenly, at the national level. And given the nature of the draft it's probably easier for bad teams to get good considering your top draft picks are very often impact players.

I don't see it as better but I'm not a football guy.  It brings me no special joy that KC wins over LA or NY. They both are not Detroit so who cares?

 

Yeah those are all reasons why the NFL is better than MLB. The thing is, if you do draft a player like the Chiefs did with Mahomes, New York and Los Angeles can't give him a massive deferred contract. They can pay him the same as what the Chiefs pay him. The Chiefs are rewarded for drafting well. If the Royals had drafted a player of Ohtani's caliber and spent the time developing him, he would have been traded because the Royals would know they can't keep him. It matters in the context of the Lions because they are equal with other teams. It means the Lions have just as good of chance of being one of the dominant teams in the league as any other team. Parity is what makes the NFL better.