Who's right and Who's wrong?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Who's right and Who's wrong?

    Two statements from MLBTR have me confused.

    Statement 1: 

    The Angels are considering free agent closer Ryan Madson, tweets Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com. However, in order to stay under the cap, the club would likely have to backload his contract.

    We have discussed this in regards to the Sox.  If I have been paying attention, it doesn't matter what the current year's salary is, the CBA for luxury tax purposes is calculated on an average salary across the life of a contract.  Ipso facto, it does not matter if you backload a contract or not if you are trying to stay under the cap.  Who's right?

    Statemetn #2:

    The Yankees are also known to be interested in Garza but according to one source, they are not currently engaged due to the Cubs’ asking price. Garza’s rising salary could also be an issue for the Bombers as they approach the luxury-tax barrier.

    If what I have read is accurate, the Yanks have a payroll around 200 million already.  That is 22 million above the luxury-tax barrier.  How is it that they are "approach"ing the barrier, when they have already blown past it?  Who's right?

    Anyone with insight or explanation would be doing a confused fan a favor.  Thanks.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    Yankees aim is to lower their payroll by 2013 so that it is below the threshhold of $189 at that time. They wish to be frugal for the next three years. This is good for baseball, let the rest of MLB teams expand payrolls and catch up to the payrolls of the Yanks and Red Sox. Make it a level playing field.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    I believe salaries are straightlined.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    I don't believe to many teams are going to increase their payrolls by much.  I do think the nature of the luxury tax (it will go up for every additional year over the threshold) will give teams a much larger incentive to stay below it.  So teams like the Red Sox and Yankees will try to operate right at that level....but there will still be plenty of teams with low payrolls.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    In Response to Who's right and Who's wrong?:
    [QUOTE]Two statements from MLBTR have me confused. Statement 1:  The Angels are considering free agent closer Ryan Madson , tweets Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com. However, in order to stay under the cap, the club would likely have to backload his contract. We have discussed this in regards to the Sox.  If I have been paying attention, it doesn't matter what the current year's salary is, the CBA for luxury tax purposes is calculated on an average salary across the life of a contract.  Ipso facto, it does not matter if you backload a contract or not if you are trying to stay under the cap.  Who's right? Statemetn #2: The Yankees are also known to be interested in Garza but according to one source, they are not currently engaged due to the Cubs’ asking price . Garza’s rising salary could also be an issue for the Bombers as they approach the luxury-tax barrier. If what   I have read is accurate, the Yanks have a payroll around 200 million already.  That is 22 million above the luxury-tax barrier.  How is it that they are "approach"ing the barrier, when they have already blown past it?  Who's right? Anyone with insight or explanation would be doing a confused fan a favor.  Thanks.
    Posted by parhunter1[/QUOTE]

    1) Backloading a contract does  not effect the luxury tax. It is based on average salary. I'm surprised so many sports writers keep confusing readers by writing things like tis over and over. They obviously do not even understand what they are writing about.
        The Angels are not really that close to the threshold. They are projected to go to about $151M after all the arb signings (Baseball Ref).

    2) The Yanks are at about $175M right now, so technically they are approaching the barrier. They will definitly go over and are estimated to go to about $200M after all the arb signings.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    In Response to Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Who's right and Who's wrong? : 1) Backloading a contract does  not effect the luxury tax. It is based on average salary. I'm surprised so many sports writers keep confusing readers by writing things like tis over and over. They obviously do not even understand what they are writing about.     The Angels are not really that close to the threshold. They are projected to go to about $151M after all the arb signings (Baseball Ref). 2) The Yanks are at about $175M right now, so technically they are approaching the barrier. They will definitly go over and are estimated to go to about $200M after all the arb signings.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    It's a scary thought that some of these people are being paid.  The recent hack piece on Garza sounded like it was written by someone from HS with only a passing interest in BB.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    Thanks moon,

    It would appear both writers are essentially wrong (or is it the same writer?) in that the Yankees, while technically still approaching the threshold, will not be pushed over it by trading for Garza, but simply by settling all their one-year contracts through signing agreements, arbitration hearings and renewals at their own determined amount.  And what I read was, though not technically correct as of right now, a realistic representation of what the 2012 Yankees payroll will be with their current roster of players.

    Which reminds me of another question.  Which poster was it that got the job as a blogger, last year was it?  Has he disappeared from here, or just found a new handle, like softy, pike and other?  I think I can still see his avatar in my head...wasn't it a picture of a retired ball player?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    I think Chip Buck's handle was redsox791. He still makes an appearance once and a while.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    It is average annual base. Backloading has no affect on CBT computation, which is done in the last month of the end of this year. Players traded have AAV CBT computation amount pro-rated between two trade teams.

    And, the Red Sox going slightly over the CBT at year end is nothing more than image. There is no substance to trying to save a few million when the payroll is over 150 million, even considering the escalator portion of CBA. I'm quite sure Red Sox ownership is embarrassed by nearly a half a billion and zero playoff wins and 2 3rd place division finishes in the last 3 years. Had InEpstein not found a sucker, they were not going to extend his contract and effectively fired him.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    In Response to Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?:
    [QUOTE]Thanks moon, It would appear both writers are essentially wrong (or is it the same writer?) in that the Yankees, while technically still approaching the threshold, will not be pushed over it by trading for Garza, but simply by settling all their one-year contracts through signing agreements, arbitration hearings and renewals at their own determined amount.  And what I read was, though not technically correct as of right now, a realistic representation of what the 2012 Yankees payroll will be with their current roster of players. Which reminds me of another question.  Which poster was it that got the job as a blogger, last year was it?  Has he disappeared from here, or just found a new handle, like softy, pike and other?  I think I can still see his avatar in my head...wasn't it a picture of a retired ball player?
    Posted by parhunter1[/QUOTE]



    And no, this is not a picture of Chip Buck.  It is a retired ballplayer, although most people don't think of him that way, and he also wasn't very good.




    These days, some might think of him as Brad Pitt.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    This writer isn't using AAV in determining Pujols 2012 salary. He has it wrong.
    http://losangeles.sbnation.com/los-angeles-angels/2011/12/30/2669930/albert-pujols-contract-backloaded-los-angeles-angels-2012-payroll-150-million
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    More accounting jibberish! Go work on your portfolios.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    The intent of the luxury tax and revenue sharing is to make the playing field more level for the 30 MLB teams. The owners signed off on such needed measures. Other professional sports have other measures to accomplish the same result such as salary caps. If MLB took a "laissez faire" stance and let the market and filthy rich ownership have complete control then you would have only a dozen teams left with owners such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffet. Payrolls would exceed $500 mil. and ticket prices would triple.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    Thanks, Sherriff.  That is the picture that was in my head.  And thanks to you and moon I have the answer to my third question.  Happy New Years, one and all!!!
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheExaminer. Show TheExaminer's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    NYY are saving tax money until they decide not to.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    In Response to Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Who's right and Who's wrong? : 1) Backloading a contract does  not effect the luxury tax. It is based on average salary. I'm surprised so many sports writers keep confusing readers by writing things like tis over and over. They obviously do not even understand what they are writing about.     The Angels are not really that close to the threshold. They are projected to go to about $151M after all the arb signings (Baseball Ref). 2) The Yanks are at about $175M right now, so technically they are approaching the barrier. They will definitly go over and are estimated to go to about $200M after all the arb signings.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Yup, it also amazes me........MLB network yesterday spent 15 minutes discussing how genious the Angels were in backloading Albert's contract so they could also sign Wilson and still remain under the luxury tax threshold.  I think it was Heyman in fact....Really poor journalism.......
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    Carl Crawford = Timmy Lupus. Funny Ha-Ha. Andrewmitch is such a clever old Faht. Timmy was the inept right fielder on Bad News Bears, a movie that is 35 years old. Sounds like Andrew watches the kiddie movie quite frequently.  Andrew is a barrell full of laughs.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Who's right and Who's wrong?

    They may "backload" to keep this year's payroll budget down, but the luxury tax payroll is not effected by "backloading".

    Backloading long-term deals also works out well if you are planning on selling the team in 2-4 years.
     

Share