2024 MLB Thread

[RatkoVarda]

2 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

FWIW - guys on the radio reported that the Cubs don't want to pay Bellinger - are looking to offload him to anyone that will take his salary. Very inconsistent player to take on though - he's all over the map performance wise.

Tigers can play him in RF and would then have an solid inhouse option if Tork bombs (bombs in the bad way). his road numbers are very good. Another LH bat is not the perfect choice, but even if he stays two years, he will be leaving as the Clark-McGonigle-Liranzo-Briceno wave arrives.

[gehringer_2]

14 minutes ago, RatkoVarda said:

Tigers can play him in RF and would then have an solid inhouse option if Tork bombs (bombs in the bad way). his road numbers are very good. Another LH bat is not the perfect choice, but even if he stays two years, he will be leaving as the Clark-McGonigle-Liranzo-Briceno wave arrives.

But I don't think the Tigers will consider the marginal left handed RF bat value increase from Carpenter to Bellinger to be worth $32M.

Personally, I'd rather see them put that money into 3B or SS - though with a better move than Baez was!

[Tenacious D]

I’d love to have Bellinger if the Cubs are excited about a reunion with El Mago.  Otherwise, hard pass.

[Shinzaki]

Guys like Bellinger are in the scratch and dent aisle.  We should be shopping in the new, full priced aisle

[RatkoVarda]

48 minutes ago, Shinzaki said:

Guys like Bellinger are in the scratch and dent aisle.  We should be shopping in the new, full priced aisle

the key word here is should - yes, Harris should - will he?

[monkeytargets39]

Too good not to share

[1776]

The Rays schedule has been revised to accommodate the move to Steinbrenner Field and the weather impacts that will come with the move.
Brutal second half. 
 

 https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/10144785-rays-to-play-47-of-first-59-games-in-2025-mlb-season-at-home-after-schedule-changes.amp.html

 

[Tenacious D]

Baseball salaries are getting increasingly out of control.  Tommy Edman was just rewarded with a 5 yr/$74M deal on the heels of his 0.9 WAR last season.

[gehringer_2]

42 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

Baseball salaries are getting increasingly out of control.  Tommy Edman was just rewarded with a 5 yr/$74M deal on the heels of his 0.9 WAR last season.

don't disagree but Edman is only a moderately bad example. That was 0.9 WAR in 37 games, which is a rate of 3.6 WAR for 150 games. He'd tallied 12 WAR in the previous 3 seasons so that's a solid enough player. Still, $14M is a likely overpay for his age 34 season.

[casimir]

On 11/27/2024 at 6:46 PM, monkeytargets39 said:

Too good not to share

It seems like deferred salary is being used more than before.  I don’t think that’s a good thing, kicking the salary debt down the road.  I understand the time value of money and those kinds of factors.  What I don’t understand is how this affects the luxury tax.  Is this a bit of a loophole in the CBA that might be good to keep current salaries down now but that debt exists still for the future?  Or is there going to be another windfall of money to absorb that debt later on via increased streams of revenue?

[gehringer_2]

20 minutes ago, casimir said:

It seems like deferred salary is being used more than before.  I don’t think that’s a good thing, kicking the salary debt down the road.  I understand the time value of money and those kinds of factors.  What I don’t understand is how this affects the luxury tax. 

We hashed this around over Ohtani's contract. If I remember it right, the league takes time NPV (discounted) of all the deferred dollars and divides the total equally over the playing years of the contract - adding to the direct salary for each year for the yearly total luxury tax amount. What I don't know is how they decide on the discount rate - probably some formula based on the prime rate or t-bill rate the year the contract is signed - IIRC the discount rate on Ohtani's money was something in the 3-4% range but I didn't save the calculation - I just remember it was something that seemed reasonable.

Edited November 30, 2024 by gehringer_2

[casimir]

12 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

We hashed this around over Ohtani's contract. If I remember it right, the league takes time NPV (discounted) of all the deferred dollars and divides the total equally over the playing years of the contract - adding to the direct salary for each year for the yearly total luxury tax amount. What I don't know is how they decide on the discount rate - probably some formula based on the prime rate or t-bill rate the year the contract is signed - IIRC the discount rate on Ohtani's money was something in the 3-4% range but I didn't save the calculation - I just remember it was something that seemed reasonable.

But what happens when a small market team engages in an Ohtani type deal?  Does this practice become too onerous in the long term for some teams?  Maybe it’s not that big of a deal, I don’t know.

[chasfh]

On 11/27/2024 at 2:08 AM, SoCalTiger said:

Must be nice to be a Dodger fan 

It’s definitely nice to be a perennial contender, even a perennial winner, and we definitely want to get there. Michigan fans have had a taste of that around here. So have Red Wings and Pistons fans at certain points in history.

But I am really enjoying where we are now with the Tigers—at the beginning of it all, where everything is new and the future seems to have limitless potential, and I can barely wait for next year to see where we go next.

I feel that way about the Lions, too.

[monkeytargets39]

13 hours ago, casimir said:

It seems like deferred salary is being used more than before.  I don’t think that’s a good thing, kicking the salary debt down the road.  I understand the time value of money and those kinds of factors.  What I don’t understand is how this affects the luxury tax.  Is this a bit of a loophole in the CBA that might be good to keep current salaries down now but that debt exists still for the future?  Or is there going to be another windfall of money to absorb that debt later on via increased streams of revenue?

IMO, they should have to pay interest on the contract like you would for a credit card purchase.  
 

Also they should still be on the hook for all deferred money in the event that they trade him to another team.

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, casimir said:

But what happens when a small market team engages in an Ohtani type deal?  Does this practice become too onerous in the long term for some teams?  Maybe it’s not that big of a deal, I don’t know.

I suppose for any org, large or small you can still evaluate the NPV of their total future liabilities vs their current net worth and projected cash flow and determine if they have a reasonable probability of continued solvency or in the same way whether any new contract is pushing them over that edge. While we know the league will prevent teams from committing themselves to operating at a loss, how aggressive/conservative they are at evaluating future revenue against future liabilities in that assessment I have no idea.

[gehringer_2]

45 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said:

IMO, they should have to pay interest on the contract like you would for a credit card purchase.  
 

Also they should still be on the hook for all deferred money in the event that they trade him to another team.

has anyone ever succeeded in trading a player with a big deferred payout?

[oblong]

7 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

has anyone ever succeeded in trading a player with a big deferred payout?

Are the deferrals linked to a particular year?   I imagine it would be part of the negotiation in the trade.  
 

I know we had this discussion when Ohtani signed but I forgot the details. Isn’t the deferred money still counted against the luxury tax threshold based on its present value?  

[chasfh]

4 hours ago, monkeytargets39 said:

Also they should still be on the hook for all deferred money in the event that they trade him to another team.

I assume that would be a point of negotiation during trade talks.

[oblong]

Thinking out loud… if you pay a team for a player, does that count against the luxury tax threshold?   If a receiving team pays off a deferred salary arent they in essence paying the team?  It’s an obligation they made. The contractual obligation for a years salary was met, the player just agreed to basically give them a loan.  

[SoCalTiger]

9 hours ago, chasfh said:

It’s definitely nice to be a perennial contender, even a perennial winner, and we definitely want to get there. Michigan fans have had a taste of that around here. So have Red Wings and Pistons fans at certain points in history.

But I am really enjoying where we are now with the Tigers—at the beginning of it all, where everything is new and the future seems to have limitless potential, and I can barely wait for next year to see where we go next.

I feel that way about the Lions, too.

I totally agree with you I just hope we can speed it up bit so I can counter Dodger fans with something more than "Let's talk football " !!

 

[HeyAbbott]

8 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

I suppose for any org, large or small you can still evaluate the NPV of their total future liabilities vs their current net worth and projected cash flow and determine if they have a reasonable probability of continued solvency or in the same way whether any new contract is pushing them over that edge. While we know the league will prevent teams from committing themselves to operating at a loss, how aggressive/conservative they are at evaluating future revenue against future liabilities in that assessment I have no idea.

It is like making a car payment on a car you no longer own. Deferring payments on an asset pat it's useful life is a recipe for disaster  .

[Cruzer1]

7 minutes ago, HeyAbbott said:

It is like making a car payment on a car you no longer own. Deferring payments on an asset pat it's useful life is a recipe for disaster  .

For most of us, yes. For the Dodgers, no.

[Tiger337]

9 hours ago, chasfh said:

But I am really enjoying where we are now with the Tigers—at the beginning of it all, where everything is new and the future seems to have limitless potential, and I can barely wait for next year to see where we go next.

I feel that way about the Lions, too.

That is the best part all the way through the first few years of winning.  My experience with Boston sports teams is that it gets old after you start expecting wins and realize they won't win every year.  It doesn't get near as old as losing every year though!

[gehringer_2]

4 hours ago, oblong said:

Thinking out loud… if you pay a team for a player, does that count against the luxury tax threshold? 

Interesting question. I can't anything about the luxury tax that says anything more than that it's based on player salaries.

The Luxury tax in baseball is pretty useless because it kicks in at too high a level to have any real benefit to small market teams. It's designed more to be a disincentive to rich teams than create any serious levelizing of revenue. I would think the LT need to capture at least 20-30% of the richest teams' revenues to become a serious equalizing force. So far I don't think the tax has ever cost the Dodgers more than ~10% of their revenue in one year. The 'TrueBlue' site estimates the Dodgers have paid a total of $85M in luxury tax over the last 3 yrs - their revenue is over $500M/yr. Ohtani's contract could drive that higher though.

Edited December 1, 2024 by gehringer_2

[casimir]

On 11/28/2024 at 11:21 AM, 1776 said:

The Rays schedule has been revised to accommodate the move to Steinbrenner Field and the weather impacts that will come with the move.
Brutal second half. 
 

 https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/10144785-rays-to-play-47-of-first-59-games-in-2025-mlb-season-at-home-after-schedule-changes.amp.html

 

8 home games in July and 8 home games in August.  Also in August is a 2 week trip to the west coast.  3 games each at the Angels, Mariners, Athletics, and Giants.