Blake Snell to the Dodgers

[Redd Vencher]

5 hours ago, SRB said:

Yes, but as with the Ohtani contract they are moving money around in a way that gives them an unfair advantage year to year. So it is "within the rules" and not a salary cap violation, but in practice they are getting a roster that is way overvalued per season.

Ohtani has a $46 M CBT hit, and costing the Dodgers $46 M per year. $2 M for the salary, and $44 M into escrow to pay the deferrals.

[Fear The Chorizo]

21 hours ago, brewfanmn said:

What’s unfair about it? It would only be unfair if they were doing something every other org didn’t also have the ability to do. Any other team could defer a similar chunk of their multi-year commitments, and many do.

What is unfair about it, is they are the only organization that basically receives more than a large market team-sized payroll windfall from their own TV deal, even before the built in advantages of being in essentially the largest market in all of baseball.  Isn't it like over $300M a season?? No other team in MLB can afford to defer huge sums of $$$ on player contracts to skirt the immediate hit (for example, Ohtani's deal with no deferred money would be a $70M payroll hit annually, not ~$46M with the accounting gymnastics it currently is) - and they can do so simply because they know they have a much bigger gold mine to always provide plenty of money to continue buying the best players.

Other teams do defer a bit of player contracts when they can, but they don't have the ability to do so indiscriminately while also not caring about their luxury tax position.  It's honestly the Dodgers and then everyone else in that regard.

[ClosetBrewerFan]

Quote

Ohtani's deal with no deferred money would be a $70M payroll hit annually, not ~$46M with the accounting gymnastics it currently is) - and they can do so simply because they know they have a much bigger gold mine to always provide plenty of money to continue buying the best players.

That's not accurate. The $68M of the $70M is in "then year" dollars (2034).  If he were to get no deferred money, he would be getting something like $46M this year. Still, a hefty sum.  But that's why $46M is applied to the CBT. It does mean the Dodgers can sign more players to expensive contracts this year, but the CBT tax will not be avoided,  The actual payroll is much lower but the end of year tax will be quite a hit (projected at $45M so far).  They can afford it though with their market.

Any team can do this, even the Brewers.  Except in 2034, the Brewers would be putting out an A's type of a lineup for 10 years and risk going bankrupt.  The Dodgers will likely be fine.

[Jopal78]

On 11/27/2024 at 11:17 AM, Fear The Chorizo said:

If MLB doesn't make significant changes to force all TV revenue money to be shared (both MLB-wide and individual team TV deals), then they have to change the rules on deferring money in contracts to avoid or minimize luxury tax penalties in the here and now.  It's the Dodgers and then everyone else simply because of their TV deal and market size - they even make the Yankees and Mets look like a small market clubs by comparison.

This is just stupid - and honestly it's worth it for small market team owners to band together and force an extended work stoppage to make legitimate changes to MLB's financial model.  It's not even about creating an even playing field - it's about getting all 30 MLB teams on the same planet in terms of financial resources they are able to dedicate towards player payrolls.

Why would  the Yankees or Dodgers ever agree to share revenue from YES Network or Spectrum? Why would they cede their competitive advantage? 

They simply need an opposing team to play, and none of the other clubs have gone out of business with the current model. 
 

Therefore the big city clubs view this issue as “if ain’t broke don’t fix it”.

When many of the teams are now owned by hedge fund people, I don’t think they really care either as owning the team is just another investment with a long term goal of making a killing  on the equity. 

Edited November 29, 2024 by Jopal78

[Samurai Bucky]

On 11/28/2024 at 10:59 AM, ClosetBrewerFan said:

Any team can do this, even the Brewers.  Except in 2034, the Brewers would be putting out an A's type of a lineup for 10 years and risk going bankrupt.  The Dodgers will likely be fine.

The Brewers have, but not to that extent, obviously.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28871847/christian-yelich-paid-deferred-money-brewers-2042

[BrewerFan]

On 11/27/2024 at 5:30 AM, Jopal78 said:

I don’t know what your point is here. Snell has one complete game in his career, and has made 28 or more starts just twice in his career.  It is not as if he is some workhorse as your post seemingly suggests. 

Next, that stating pitchers are going through the line up twice before giving way to the bullpen isn’t something new or particularly noteworthy on a fan site message board 

No, his post doesn't seem to suggest he's "some workhorse." He's pointing out how all starters are throwing fewer innings and how he is guessing that trend will continue. It's really pretty simple. 

Not that long ago, 4 years and you'd have pitchers crossing that 1000-inning mark he used. Now...180 innings and you're a workhorse.

 

If it's not particularly noteworthy to you...ignore the note. 

[BrewersRice]

On 11/28/2024 at 3:39 AM, SF70 said:

Buyer beware when it comes to trading for LAD starting pitchers. Never seen so many starting pitchers blowing out their arms.

I’d much rather go after Alex Freeland.

[BrewerFan]

On 11/27/2024 at 1:39 PM, SF70 said:

Buyer beware when it comes to trading for LAD starting pitchers. Never seen so many starting pitchers blowing out their arms.

Are they really that rare or do they just have so many talented arms that it just seems like more guys are getting hurt? 

It feels like Tampa has a lot of guys who undergo TJ and come back. It also feels like the Brewers have been abnormally lucky in this regard...but in all of those statements, the word doing the heavy lifting is "feels like." I'm curious if there's an actual metric. 

And do the Dodgers tend to let their young pitchers fight through injury because they've got so many? Are the Brewers just better at getting out in front of that dreaded "forearm soreness," that invariably seems to lead to TJ?

I don't know, but I don't think the Dodgers pitchers are to be avoided because of this. Perhaps a gentler hand or maybe it's just bad luck and a competitive environment in which they pitch through it because if they don't, well, they have 6 guys make 25-35M ready to start for them!

[SF70]

Yeah, Tampa & LAD SEEM to have the most SP arm injuries. 

Hard to come up with a Dodger pitcher that hasn’t had TJ or a major shoulder injury. Don’t think it’s just bad luck, but who knows.

[bigred]

On 11/27/2024 at 10:17 AM, Fear The Chorizo said:

If MLB doesn't make significant changes to force all TV revenue money to be shared (both MLB-wide and individual team TV deals), then they have to change the rules on deferring money in contracts to avoid or minimize luxury tax penalties in the here and now.  It's the Dodgers and then everyone else simply because of their TV deal and market size - they even make the Yankees and Mets look like a small market clubs by comparison.

This is just stupid - and honestly it's worth it for small market team owners to band together and force an extended work stoppage to make legitimate changes to MLB's financial model.  It's not even about creating an even playing field - it's about getting all 30 MLB teams on the same planet in terms of financial resources they are able to dedicate towards player payrolls.

 

[Playing Catch]

From a capitalistic point of view, the Dodgers superteam is totally fair. From a league standpoint, it damages the credibility of the "competition". But that won't matter so long as fans keep showing up. This isn't a thing in Milwaukee, but Pittsburgh? Cincinnati? Kansas City?

At some point those owners and fanbases are gunna get fed up.

[Redd Vencher]

3 hours ago, Playing Catch said:

From a capitalistic point of view, the Dodgers superteam is totally fair. From a league standpoint, it damages the credibility of the "competition". But that won't matter so long as fans keep showing up. This isn't a thing in Milwaukee, but Pittsburgh? Cincinnati? Kansas City?

At some point those owners and fanbases are gunna get fed up.

The Royals fans gave up after they went back to sucking after their WS win well before the Dodgers super team. They'll stick around in the Witt Jr. competitive window, and bail again when that's over. There's few teams that are consistently successful and struggle with attendance. (OAK and TB) As for owners getting fed up, Bob Nutting has nothing to get upset about seeing he's one of the notorious owners that pockets the revenue sharing money he currently gets.

[Playing Catch]

22 hours ago, Redd Vencher said:

pockets the revenue sharing money he currently gets

This has been a commonly repeated belief, but as of yet, I don't believe we actually know how profitable owning a team is -- particularly with a terrible stadium.

Do you have a source for this belief that cheap owners are profiting at a percentage beyond that of any of the other owners?

[Frisbee Slider]

On 12/4/2024 at 9:22 AM, Playing Catch said:

At some point those owners and fanbases are gunna get fed up.

Soccer fans don’t seem to get fed up with specific clubs being able to afford mega contracts and others can’t.

If they are, it is not affecting revenue.

[treego14]

On 12/4/2024 at 9:22 AM, Playing Catch said:

From a capitalistic point of view, the Dodgers superteam is totally fair. From a league standpoint, it damages the credibility of the "competition". But that won't matter so long as fans keep showing up. This isn't a thing in Milwaukee, but Pittsburgh? Cincinnati? Kansas City?

At some point those owners and fanbases are gunna get fed up.

I agree ... fans need to boycott this crooked league until it gets fixed!

[Frisbee Slider]

1 hour ago, treego14 said:

I agree ... fans need to boycott this crooked league until it gets fixed!

Can you make this point more poetically?

[treego14]

On 12/5/2024 at 5:42 PM, Frisbee Slider said:

Can you make this point more poetically?

The Big Leagues are simply the Rig Leagues!