Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    The luxury tax is not a good thing.

    But to hear management talk about not wanting to venture into it is a complete joke.

    The fact that some fans not only agree, but seemingly support this is unfathomable to me.

    Who decided to sign Lackey to that deal? The fans didn't want him.

    Who gave Crawford that deal? The fans thought it was a gross overpay.

    Ortiz? Fans split there.

    Are the Sox still paying Lugo? I think Renteria is off the books, Drew FINALLY is.

    My point is it's been the ownership's grossly irresponsible contracts that have put the Sox in this position, and now the team may suffer, and fans support that? Maybe I'm reading the board wrong, but it seems like fans are all for avoiding the luxury tax. Bad decisions put the Sox there, it's not like avoiding the luxury tax will kick in a 10% ticket price reduction...so why do people care? I often hear after a bad signing "Why do fans care? It's not THEIR money." So, "Why do fans care, it's not OUR money?"

    In my opinion, suck it up and pay the tax for about, oh, I don't know, another 6 years or so until BAD CONTRACT are off the books. Not just bad, historically bad at that. Fans are still expected to pay a premium while the Sox whine about finances/ How much did Henry recently spemd on Soccer players? 200 million? Cash flow is obviously not the problem, they can easily afford the tax, they are just choosing to let the team suffer rather than worry about it.

    And, no, I'm not for signing any big name guys, but if it comes to extending Ortiz to save a few million, or cutting bait with someone like Albers and his robust 1+mil...thats a joke. We're not Oakland, who has to dump Sweeney because of his 1.4million.

    Fans should NOT be supporting this line of bs coming from the front office.

    I agree, in the grand scheme of things, that they should have a MUCH lower payroll, but they've made their bed, to whine about it is totally disingenuous.

    I'm looking forward, and can already hear late July rumblings: "Sox could have added player X to their team to fill a glaring hole, but ownership didn't want to spend the extra 6mil on luxury taxes." It's coming, I can see it months away.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    The host of 98.5 was spouting the same stuff this morning...I was thinking, "How does a guy who has no clue about baseball economics get a job hosting a sports talk show?" Then I realized its all about ratings and he was trying to fire up the listeners...
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    You have been misreading the forum over recent years. It is said that the empty drum makes the most noise or in Internet forum terms; the minority views that garner the most responses and result in the most responded to threads. Thus Law's threads / posts were very popular. Others have tried to emulate Law such as Softlaw, Andrewmitch, Bosox1941, Georom, and Burrito.
     
    RSN was in favor of every free agent signing since the mission was to keep up with the Jones's / Evil Empire. RSN was for those signings at the moment of the signing. It was only later using 20-20 hindsight that the Monday Morning quarterbacks turned against the signings.

    The Yankees and Red Sox are doing everything to avoid the luxury tax. Get used to it.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from tomnev. Show tomnev's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    I really don't think that the tax persay would stop the Sox from adding a piece at midseason if they thought it could put them over the Top, but I can support and understand why they would want to be under the cap this year. With the Contracts that came off this year and with the Sox having been over the last two years, a) this years tax would be 40% and b) it is the perfect opportunity to reset back to a year one rate. This gives the team better flexibility next year or the year after to go over the cap, which may help them in a resigning of an Ellsbury for example. It is easy for fans to want the team to spend at will, but it is a business afterall, and the owners have a right to make as much money as they can while putting out a winning product.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    In response to "Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?": [QUOTE]I really don't think that the tax persay would stop the Sox from adding a piece at midseason if they thought it could put them over the Top, but I can support and understand why they would want to be under the cap this year. With the Contracts that came off this year and with the Sox having been over the last two years, a) this years tax would be 40% and b) it is the perfect opportunity to reset back to a year one rate. This gives the team better flexibility next year or the year after to go over the cap, which may help them in a resigning of an Ellsbury for example. It is easy for fans to want the team to spend at will, but it is a business afterall, and the owners have a right to make as much money as they can while putting out a winning product. Posted by tomnev[/QUOTE] Well said, Tomnev...unfortunately it probably won't register with those that it needs to...
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedGatorSox. Show RedGatorSox's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    I don't know that it's as much about supporting avoidance of the luxury tax as it is a favorable response by fans to the GM making smarter personnel decisions.  This is not a banner offseason for free agents.  Pujols and Fielder are probably the only proven players that merit the big bucks (although the Pujols contract with LAA is ridiculous in length and amount).

    For the Red Sox to overspend for the likes of Beltran, Buerhle, Heath Bell or even Papelbon, just doesn't make good business sense or "talent-upside" sense.

    IMO, Cherington has done a solid job so far in assembling pieces that have the potential to fill holes in the roster that needed filling.  Arguably, Paps or Heath Bell might be a safer bet to close than the injury risk of Bailey.  But, the amount of money those guys got as free agents is not worth the expenditure or the length of time we'd be tied up with those contracts if those guys falter.  The Bailey experiment is a gamble with good low-risk odds that is worth taking.

    Hopefully, a RH outfield bat solution will present itself before opening day.  But, unlike past years, it doesn't have to be an overpaid "superstar".  Give me a veteran gamer or a hungry young guy who needs a chance that will give 110% every day and boost club chemistry.  That's not about being cheap.  That's about assembling a true team.   
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    We spent this winter's money in April by extending AGon and Buch.
    Were you against those expenditures?

    The Sox spent big the last couple years probably with the plan that they'd not spend a lot this winter. You make not like some of the signings (and neither do I), but just because they made some bad signings, does not mean they should be forced to make up for it by keeping up the over-spending, especially in a weak year for FAs.

    I'm not happy with the CC signing and never was. But, we have him and his contract for another 6 years. We have been very close to the luxury tax limit for several years now, so I do not think it is strange to try and stay near it again this year. The rules changed this year on the tax rates, so it makes total sense to improve our future ability to spend big, by bringing down the tax rate this year. We have the ability to trade a couple higher priced players and still pick up more help while staying under the limit.

    It's easy to sit back and tell others how to spend their money. You should be grateful we have owners that are willing to try and improve the team by overspending, but to expect them to become like the Yanks, is just not realistic.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    Does the dragon man tune into 98.5 everyday and get brainwashed with their ratings motivated nonsense and speculation? Didn't Felger and Mazz admit off-the-air to John Henry that they don't care about the truth or reason but only care about the entertainment result of their rants. It's all about ratings, very irresponsible.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaBlade. Show DaBlade's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    Hmmm, wondering... do you think in this economic climate people will be more happy with the sox billionaire ownership going "cheap" and staying away from the luxery tax? or Will they say they are mad that they went "cheap" to avoid it?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    In Response to Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?:
    [QUOTE]Hmmm, wondering... do you think in this economic climate people will be more happy with the sox billionaire ownership going "cheap" and staying away from the luxery tax? or Will they say they are mad that they went "cheap" to avoid it?
    Posted by DaBlade[/QUOTE]

    It seems that the Steinbrenners feel the same way and their revenues are 40% higher than those of the Red Sox.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    No, the Dragon Man doesn't tune into 98.5 daily as he lives in CT, and they don't reach most of this state.

    It CAN be streamed, yes, but I don't do that either.

    Imagine that, 2 people can have similar thoughts on the same day. Fascinating.

    Moon:

    I'm fine with Clay's extension, not so much with Gonzalez'. I'd prefer to not see ANY 20+mil per year players on the Sox. I understand there are many across baseball, but I'd honestly be happy if the Sox never paid th at much for a player. Gonzalez is good, but paying that much to a 35 year old is plainly irresponsible and creates problems down the road.

    To hear management complain about, and want to avoid the tax is a joke. That's my #1 point, and the fact that some fans seem to support management in this declaration. If they had been more responsible, they wouldn't be in this position. THey made their bed, so they have to lie in it. That's all.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    Dragon you are right...a guy like JHenry who collects pro sports teams for hobbies should never cry about a "luxury tax"....after all, it is simply a tax on wealth/luxury...and in these economic times, with sox tix prices being so high, it would be wise to not fret over it considering 99% of us have no luxury but plenty of tax in our lives...

    but there's a business side to everything too...we have been throwing around HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of $$$$$ to so many players recently that I'm ok with a more restrained approach...I also don't want to become the EE (but that train might have left the station last year for ever)...
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    I hear you on AGon. I'm also one to think the 1B position is loaded in MLB, and there are always bargains galore at the slot, plus we had Youk who is aging and in need of an easier position to keep his bat fresh. AGon is the real deal, so I'm not that upset about the $20M+, but I get your point.

    My point was that many here think Henry is "going cheap", when if fact he just spent this winter's money in April. Had we signed AGon and Buch as FAs this winter, nobody would be calling him cheap.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    If having the #2 payroll every year is not enough, then you are out of luck.  We will never outspend the EE.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    I won't be asking ma6dragon9 to manage my financial affairs.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    One way to look at the AGon signing is that it was protecting the investment.  Having traded the players the Sox traded they needed to make sure Agon wasn't just a one year and gone trade.  And by extending him in April, the Sox saved a ton of money.  Imagine if they had waited until this market to try and get their 1Bman.  They knew it was Agon they wanted, and not Pujols or Fielder.  But by Pujols signing first, and at the contract he got, he set the market.  Agon looks like a relative bargain now.

    So even our rich owners have found ways to be frugal.  I personally am intrigued by whether Ben C can fashion a winning team and stay under the tax threshold, thereby resetting their tax rate and making things better for next for 2013 and 2014.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from samclemens. Show samclemens's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    In Response to Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?:
    [QUOTE]Dragon you are right...a guy like JHenry who collects pro sports teams for hobbies should never cry about a "luxury tax"....after all, it is simply a tax on wealth/luxury...and in these economic times, with sox tix prices being so high, it would be wise to not fret over it considering 99% of us have no luxury but plenty of tax in our lives... but there's a business side to everything too...we have been throwing around HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of $$$$$ to so many players recently that I'm ok with a more restrained approach...I also don't want to become the EE (but that train might have left the station last year for ever)...
    Posted by georom4[/QUOTE]

    The Boston Red Sox outspent the New York Yankees for years between 1933 and 1978.  This century the Yankees have gone on an absurd spending spree which is unprecedented in the history of the franchise.  The 1946 Red Sox became the first team in history to spend $500,000 ($512,000) plus on team payroll (Yankees were third that year at $412,00) and the Cards who beat the Sox in 7 games were at $313,000.  The money the Yankees paid to buy Babe Ruth was a pittance compared to the money the Sox spent to acquire guys named Cronin, Foxx and Grove.  In the modern era of baseball with the exception of 1967, the Red Sox have always enjoyed a substantial payroll differential over their World Series opponents obviously including the Mets in 1986, the Cards in 2004 and the Colorado Rockies in 2007 (the greatest team payroll disparity in the history of the game).   

    The Boston Red Sox were the Evil Empire financially for years before George Steinbrenner appeared on the scene just so ya know.  You will not get factual and historical information like this because the local media if they are even aware of it and I doubt that many are well informed, have absolutely no vested interest in discussing or commenting on the past except when it is in their interest to do so.  Today and tomorrow are really all that matters in their world and that is what it is for a reason.       
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    In Response to Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?:
    [QUOTE]I hear you on AGon. I'm also one to think the 1B position is loaded in MLB, and there are always bargains galore at the slot, plus we had Youk who is aging and in need of an easier position to keep his bat fresh. AGon is the real deal, so I'm not that upset about the $20M+, but I get your point. My point was that many here think Henry is "going cheap", when if fact he just spent this winter's money in April. Had we signed AGon and Buch as FAs this winter, nobody would be calling him cheap.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Fair enough. My intent was never to claim the Sox are "going cheap". Quite the contrary in fact.

    Georom understood what I meant exactly, I don't want this uber-rich guy frettig over the luxury tax, find a different investment because, really, that all the Sox are to him.

    And Hill, I'm not looking to manage anyone's finances, but if I were, I would tell the guy who just bought the Maserati to quit whining about HIS luxury tax also. Don't like it? Buy a f r e a k i n Honda.

    In a country existing in excess, I'm looking for a little less, that's all. I'm NOT ok with how it is.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    In Response to Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?:
    [QUOTE]The luxury tax is not a good thing. But to hear management talk about not wanting to venture into it is a complete joke. The fact that some fans not only agree, but seemingly support this is unfathomable to me. Who decided to sign Lackey to that deal? The fans didn't want him. Who gave Crawford that deal? The fans thought it was a gross overpay. Ortiz? Fans split there. Are the Sox still paying Lugo? I think Renteria is off the books, Drew FINALLY is. My point is it's been the ownership's grossly irresponsible contracts that have put the Sox in this position, and now the team may suffer, and fans support that? Maybe I'm reading the board wrong, but it seems like fans are all for avoiding the luxury tax. Bad decisions put the Sox there, it's not like avoiding the luxury tax will kick in a 10% ticket price reduction...so why do people care? I often hear after a bad signing "Why do fans care? It's not THEIR money." So, "Why do fans care, it's not OUR money?" In my opinion, suck it up and pay the tax for about, oh, I don't know, another 6 years or so until BAD CONTRACT are off the books. Not just bad, historically bad at that. Fans are still expected to pay a premium while the Sox whine about finances/ How much did Henry recently spemd on Soccer players? 200 million? Cash flow is obviously not the problem, they can easily afford the tax, they are just choosing to let the team suffer rather than worry about it. And, no, I'm not for signing any big name guys, but if it comes to extending Ortiz to save a few million, or cutting bait with someone like Albers and his robust 1+mil...thats a joke. We're not Oakland, who has to dump Sweeney because of his 1.4million. Fans should NOT be supporting this line of bs coming from the front office. I agree, in the grand scheme of things, that they should have a MUCH lower payroll, but they've made their bed, to whine about it is totally disingenuous. I'm looking forward, and can already hear late July rumblings: "Sox could have added player X to their team to fill a glaring hole, but ownership didn't want to spend the extra 6mil on luxury taxes." It's coming, I can see it months away.
    Posted by ma6dragon9[/QUOTE]

    Theo certainly made a few moves that landed us where we are today.  Aceves and Gonzo were great moves but CC, Jenks and Lackey were grissly overpaid.  I would love to see us shed Jenks salary and possibly even Dice K. if he pitches well after returning.  Lackey is a guy I hope never to see pitch again in Boston but thats wishful thinking.  He needs to return and at least do something significant if we ever have a prayer of trading him.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    Just how do we shed the salary of Jenks and Lackey, please elaborate. Being upset with their performances does not make you unique. Do we project into the future that Jenks and Lackey are dead meat? Will you be here to justify / rationalize the decision to can them if they do well elsewhere? Where does bein g a fan and an optimist fit in here?
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    If I'm not mistaken, every year you stay over the luxury tax the tax goes up....so to make another big move now could become exponentially more costly in the future.  This will definitely have an interesting impact on how teams manage their payroll....obviously teams like the Sox are still at an advantage, but it will definitely (and we are seeing it) want teams like the Yankees and the Sox to operate within the tax limit.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    Going a little over CBT at year end 2012 should be of zero consideration. A payroll that borders on a quarter billion a year should not skimp on what amounts to a PVC valve.
     
    It is more about image than substance, and that would be incompetent to construct a team with image in mind. InEpstein created the bloated poor value payroll, but you don't approach it by skimping to try and get under CBT at 2012 year end. It needs to be dealt with over time.

    The following unmet needs from last winter:

    1. RH OF slugger
    2. Quality bottom tier starter
    3. Solid defensive catcher to compliment a solid offensive catcher
    4. Solid defensive SS

    So far:

    1. Zero effort and being ignored as something not needed. 30 million will apparently be spent on Crawford and Ellsbury, which is the ultimate in incomptence

    2. Addressed by moving Aceves and/or Bard into rotation. Miller has been signed on the cheap, and smart and likely move will be to add another minor league veteran contract and a one year 1 to 2M incentives deal for a capable bottom tier starter under the age of 45 and without a giant beer gut.

    3. Shoppach addresses horrific defensive catcher flaw for years, but opportunity blown by not signing Hernandez to a 1 year deal that would have netted the player as much guaranteed money over 2 years but allowed player to cash in if he has a big year. If Salty and Lavarnway are about even, Lavarnway should get the other roster spot. If Salty is still butcher hands and upper cutting for air by summer, stick a fork in Salty and invest time and innings in Lavarnway on the cheap.

    4. Scutaro is the remains of a terrible contract value for a player who has never been a MLB starter SS talent. Lowrie was one of Theo's pet rocks, but selling him low was predictable compounded mistake. Iglesias should move into many starts at SS spot by summer, with Scutaro becoming a pinch hitter for close games behind and Iglesias coming in for late innings when Scutaro starts and close game leads. If it weren't for getting lucky on a few months of OCab, Exptein would have a total zero on this spot despite spending a fortune for many years.

    At least Cherry hasn't followed a lot of posters whining about starting pitching and signed another disaster contract like John Lackey or a huge overpay for Beckett premature extension offer.

    Just to show the incompetence of Inesptein, a profile gifted entry into MLB via entertainment good ole boy network, the Red Sox will spend about 84 million dollars on starting pitching and the OF, which is more money spent than virtually half the teams entire individual team payrolls in MLB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Yet, there is whining about starting pitching issues and the OF is perceived as not needing anything more than the status quo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Can you say incompetent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    In Response to Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?:
    [QUOTE]Just how do we shed the salary of Jenks and Lackey, please elaborate. Being upset with their performances does not make you unique. Do we project into the future that Jenks and Lackey are dead meat? Will you be here to justify / rationalize the decision to can them if they do well elsewhere? Where does bein g a fan and an optimist fit in here?
    Posted by UticaClub[/QUOTE]

    Utica, I never suggested shedding Lackeys salary.  It's obvious the only way to shed any of the three would be for them to do well after they return and regain some trade value. 

    Dice, could be a gift late in the season if he can come back strong, especially if we see any significant injuries to the staff.  On the flip side his salary is also very affordable to another club and a good way for us to possibly shed some salary.

    Lackey, in my opinion could come back strong and still never be wanted in Boston ever again, especially with Valentine "who isn't as tolerant" with bad attitudes or large egos.  The problem is Theo overpaid John so much we may be stuck with him either way unless we eat most of his salary.  

    Jenks, may or may not come back strong but either way he is another large salary guy who we may not need.

    Between the three, they make 31mil next season.  I hope we do get something back from Jenks and Dice but we obviosly don't need any of them if one more solid starter can be found without breaking the threshold.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    Don't the Red Sox have to keep getting close or over to make the Yankees appear more in the same league as the rest of the teams?

    The luxury tax is a joke. It should be abolished. There should be a salary cap. The only reason why there isn't is because the Yankees would never want to comply. And the Yankees set the rules as they are baseball.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?

    In Response to Re: Are fans really supporting the Sox avoidance of the luxury tax?:
    [QUOTE]Don't the Red Sox have to keep getting close or over to make the Yankees appear more in the same league as the rest of the teams? The luxury tax is a joke. It should be abolished. There should be a salary cap. The only reason why there isn't is because the Yankees would never want to comply. And the Yankees set the rules as they are baseball.
    Posted by kimsaysthis[/QUOTE]

    It's part of the CBA, unfortunately, that the owners collectively fought against in vain. But don't let facts get in the way of your rants.
     

Share