Man, what's your rationale for this? Simply age? Archer has been so, so much better than Odorizzi.Quote:
Originally Posted by biggentleben
Printable View
Man, what's your rationale for this? Simply age? Archer has been so, so much better than Odorizzi.Quote:
Originally Posted by biggentleben
You’re right, I can probably switch to “Odorizzi is more valuable than Archer” as my go to reference line for the dumbest thing stated on these boards by an “expert blogger” haha.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnAdcox
The basis is right here: https://puckettspond.com/2017/10/23/...t-huge-move/2/Quote:
Originally Posted by Super
It's a Twins site, but the reasoning is similar no matter the team pursuing him...
I always thought Kurt Rambis was more valuable than Larry Bird.
Sims is more valuable than Gohara because Sims is less likely to get hurt. Therefore, whichever team offers a bucket of balls for him will be the real winners!Quote:
Originally Posted by nsacpi
Now this is an interesting bad contract swap idea...
“Tom: Hear me out.
Matt Kemp for Adrian Gonzalez and Scott Kazmir.
All players subsequently DFA.
Combined AGone and Kaz cost $35.5 million in 2018. Kemp combined salary costs $38 million over the next 2 years.
This trade saves the Braves $2.5 million and gets Kemp off the books a year early.
This trade saves the Dodgers $18 million in their taxable salaries, and gets them underneath the tax threshold. Saving (bare minimum) $9 million in taxed money, and potentially significantly more (10’s of millions) if they stay under the tax threshold in 2018.”
I have to think about how much getting Kemp off the books a year early really matters. Why not just buy out his contract right now?
Seems like that's a swap titled towards the Dodgers' favor—with their saving at least $9 million, and the Braves only saving $2.5—and thus I'd think they'd have to offer something more to induce/incentivize the trade. As you say, the difference between just cutting Kemp now and not seems pretty trivial from the Braves' perspective (unless they're really that tight on funds).Quote:
Originally Posted by Enscheff
I think you’re right. Neither team is probably motivated enough to make that dealQuote:
Originally Posted by jpx7
That could change, though, if the Marlins become desperate enough to move Stanton (and he persists in vetoing non-Dodgers trades) that they're willing to pretty much give him away—in which case the primary impediment for LA would be LT concerns. Still seems unlikely, since any incentive for the Braves would end up essentially being an acquisition-cost for Stanton—though perhaps the Marlins' desperation could be parlayed into a three-way where they take Kemp, the Braves take Gonzalez/Kazmir and marginal prospects from the Marlins, and the Dodgers receive Stanton.Quote:
Originally Posted by Enscheff
Just spit-balling, but under some form of that scenario, I'd think the Braves would be better off cutting Gonzalez, but keeping Kazmir around for the final year of his deal and trying him out in the bullpen.
I currently have the Braves at ~$88M for 2018.
If they are going to buy out Kemp's contract and push all his money to this year, that puts the Braves at $106M.
If the Braves total payroll is approximately $110M as I predicted, that would explain their inability to accept Headley for free.
That would explain why they had to shed every scrap of payroll possible this offseason.
That would explain why AA said, "we have money to make additions during the season".
That would explain why the Braves have been unable to add BP arms making $7M-$10M per year.
As of right now, I expect an announcement that Kemp is released and the Braves are going to buy out his last 2 years.
What are the advantages of buying him out other than accelerating the money coming off the books.Quote:
Originally Posted by Enscheff
Use the payroll during a non-contending year so there is money available in the year they might be a contender is really the only benefit. It is logically a better use of funds if they are punting 2018.Quote:
Originally Posted by JxnMissFan
Risk of lawsuits from fans poking their own eyes out from watching him play defense would go down dramatically.Quote:
Originally Posted by JxnMissFan
But if they are punting 2018, it isn't logical to keep Teheran, Inciarte, Folty maybe even Freeman given a good enough return.Quote:
Originally Posted by Enscheff
Sitting on the sidelines to give the young guys a year to get older also makes the not so young guys a year older. Being good short term is about coalescing talent together at the right time. Being good long term is about coalescing talent together at the right time then supplementing it at the right times as cogs wear out, move on or become too expensive.
This brings up something I've wondered about in the past. I'm quoting you, but the question is for anyone who might know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Enscheff
If an MLB team is inclined to buy out a contract in this manner, are they obligated to pay the entire gross amount, or can they write a check for the present value of the total? It wouldn't be significant for a short term deal like Kemp, but assume the team owes a player 4 years at $20MM per, and can find no one who will take him in a trade. Obviously they could choose to pay him at the stated terms over four years, but if they chose to pay him the full amount all at once (maybe they had a lot of free payroll space), would they be able to discount the sum back to present value? In this example, assuming a discount rate of 6% and lump sum annual payments over 4 years, paying him future value would knock off about $11,000,000 off of the total amount.
that is good question. I would guess that since there is no salary cap the negotiation as to the buyout terms would be entirely between the team and the player. But I wonder what the rules would be regarding the luxury tax would be if that was an issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by DirkPiggler
Sure there is. All of those players will be under contract in 2019. It would be easier to contend in 2019 without having to completely reconstruct the lineup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsehide Harry
I don't know the answer, but if I were him, a retirement plan of... say $2M per year for the next 20 or so years might be pretty attractive. (in addition to investments he has likely made over his career)Quote:
Originally Posted by DirkPiggler
Kemp could be our Bobby Bonilla.Quote:
Originally Posted by mfree80
Remember when this guy posted this question and we wrote it off as not beneficial enough for the Dodgers to be realistic?Quote:
Originally Posted by Enscheff
Turns out the Braves got any even better deal out of it.