Random MLB News And Discussion 2013

[Eye Black]

Heard this idea being discussed on Chicago sports radio last August, would have been interesting to watch the Cubs play "home games" at MP... http://www.suntimes.com/sports/17642294-419/cubs-home-games-will-stay-home.html

[Invader3K]

Yeah, that's an idea that's been batted around for some time, since Wrigley is going to inevitably need a massive renovation soon. Still interesting that the Cubs did reach out to the Brewers about it, though.

[Spidey]

I'm sorry, but I felt too amused by this quote not to share: via rotoworld:

 

FOX Sports' Ken Rosenthal reports that Carl Pavano will be sidelined 6-8 weeks after suffering a ruptured spleen when he slipped and fell while shoveling snow on his driveway.

Well, that sounds about right for the oft-injured right-hander.

[razzzorsharp]

I hope that if they allow the Cubs to play, they set up tolls for all out of state residents to finally get back at Illinois for all the years of taking my quarters (and now dollars). The extra money brought forth can help get a new arena for the Bucks.

[adambr2]

Dumb random question here, and I'm assuming it's almost definitely no, but, long-term MLB contracts aren't adjusted for inflation, are they?

 

Take for instance Ryan Braun's contract that he signed in 2011, which will pay him $20M in 2021. If that's a flat rate, it's probably worth more like $17M (just as a complete estimate) in today's dollars.

 

I'm just curious as to whether this is something that agents and GM's discuss in long-term negotiations.

[Ennder]

No they are not adjusted for inflation. That is why for example the Soriano deal isn't as bad as it looks. Any time the player defers money it eats away at the value of his contract and helps the team.

[whizkid]

Certainly players, agents and teams understand the time value of money and that's included in negotiations when an agreement is reached. So I think saying it hurts players or helps teams is incorrect. It's all been taken into consideration before the player signs. A player and team can negotiate for more later or less earlier and it has the same value, though there may be tax and other considerations that affect the value outside of time value.

[Ennder]

Certainly players, agents and teams understand the time value of money and that's included in negotiations when an agreement is reached. So I think saying it hurts players or helps teams is incorrect. It's all been taken into consideration before the player signs. A player and team can negotiate for more later or less earlier and it has the same value, though there may be tax and other considerations that affect the value outside of time value.

 

 

Definitely they take it into account. All I'm saying is that a $30M deal over 3 years compared to the same deal over say 30 years is player friendly while the second one is team friendly. I'm sure the agents and teams realize this and that is why some contracts are structured the way they are. Soriano probably figures this is his last contract so didn't mind spreading it out some.

[whizkid]

All I'm saying is that a $30M deal over 3 years compared to the same deal over say 30 years is player friendly while the second one is team friendly.

 

Certainly that's the case for the numbers you gave, but that wouldn't be what was discussed in negotiations. The discussion would be $30M over 3 years or something like $50M or $60M or more over 30 years.

[Ennder]

All I'm saying is that a $30M deal over 3 years compared to the same deal over say 30 years is player friendly while the second one is team friendly.

 

Certainly that's the case for the numbers you gave, but that wouldn't be what was discussed in negotiations. The discussion would be $30M over 3 years or something like $50M or $60M or more over 30 years.

 

Maybe and maybe not. To use Soriano the discussion very well may have been for 3 years at $27M and Boras said how about we do $28M but spread the money out. We have no idea how the actual discussions go. If I told my boss I wanted a raise at work and he said yes but we are going to spread the extra money out over 5 years instead of just this year... I'd still want the raise. I would fully realize the raise isn't as big as it sounds but it is still a raise.

[whizkid]

Yes, it does depend on the player's bargaining power with other teams and your bargaining power with other companies.

[trwi7]

Former Brewers prospect Cutter Dykstra (traded for Nyjer Morgan) is engaged to Jamie Lynn Sigler.

[Raw Biz]

Former Brewers prospect Cutter Dykstra (traded for Nyjer Morgan) is engaged to Jamie Lynn Sigler.

 

Saw that and never knew they were even dating. From what it sounds like, he landed her when he was 21 and she was 29, either shortly before or shortly after he was traded from the Brewers.

[jjgott]

Former Brewers prospect Cutter Dykstra (traded for Nyjer Morgan) is engaged to Jamie Lynn Sigler.

 

Turtle must be devastated.

[BrewersSuperCollector]

No they are not adjusted for inflation. That is why for example the Soriano deal isn't as bad as it looks. Any time the player defers money it eats away at the value of his contract and helps the team.

Unless your Bobby Bonilla

[TooLiveBrew]

Former Brewers prospect Cutter Dykstra (traded for Nyjer Morgan) is engaged to Jamie Lynn Sigler.

 

Turtle must be devastated.

Turtle? Think how Finn must feel.

[jerichoholicninja]

Not really MLB or 2013 but I thought this was kind of interesting.

 

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yke0eFEdPPw/TnOO4A2Y5EI/AAAAAAAAFjM/cXY18HdWiXE/s1600/1944_BrewersSchedule_front.jpg

 

Just a little post about the 1944 American Association Brewers' pocket schedule.

http://www.borchertfield.com/2011/09/1944-schedule.html

[adambr2]

Well in the hashtags he says we're wasting Braun's prime which says we should win now and he says we shouldn't rely on everyone in the rotation after Gallardo and he says we don't have the farm system to get another starting pitcher. Maybe I'm just connecting the dots wrong.

 

I didn't read it, but I think it's kind of comical if anyone is complaining about us wasting Braun's prime by not trying to win now.

 

In the last 5 years, we've traded for CC Sabathia, Zack Greinke, Shaun Marcum, and tried to trade for Roy Halladay which he denied. I'm pretty sure no team in baseball has "gone for it" every year as much as we have.

 

I for one am glad to see us get back to what brought us out of mediocrity in the first place and start relying on our young talent rather than gutting the farm system. Somewhere along the line, this organization lost patience and that's why we have a lousy farm system right now.

 

I think we started falling into the trap (several times) of thinking we were "one player away", which is the ultimate illusion in professional sports.

[dlk9s]

When do you stop waiting for the future to come, though?

[TooLiveBrew]

Per Tyler Kepner of the NY Times, the third-to-first pickoff move is illegal starting this season.

 

“It’s funny,” the umpire Ted Barrett said. “When they presented it to us at our meetings, nobody even said, ‘Why?’ ”

[sveumrules]

Red Sox prospect Bryce Brentz accidentally shot himself in the leg while "cleaning his gun."

 

Clearly he's never seen the Ice-T/Gary Busey/Rutger Hauer masterpiece Surviving the Game.

[MadScientist]

Red Sox prospect Bryce Brentz accidentally shot himself in the leg while "cleaning his gun."

 

Clearly he's never seen the Ice-T/Gary Busey/Rutger Hauer masterpiece Surviving the Game.

 

He heard someone say that the Red Sox were shooting themselves and took it to mean it was a team policy.

[monty57]

No they are not adjusted for inflation. That is why for example the Soriano deal isn't as bad as it looks. Any time the player defers money it eats away at the value of his contract and helps the team.

 

While I understand the theory of this, I would argue that when the player is no longer playing for the team, they still owe the deferred money and therefore cannot spend it to help the team. Therefore, deferring money helps the team now, but hurts the team later. I equate it with "six months same as cash" sales. It's great to get a free loan, but just like any other debt, if you spend beyond your means to eventually repay, you're screwed. Making these type of deals often makes it easy to spend beyond your means.

 

I also think opportunity cost has to be brought in. There's a reason the money is being deferred, and what is that reason? What is the cost of the alternative to simply paying the player more now rather than deferring it into the future? Often, the alternative means spending that money on something else, so there really is no saving.

 

For example, last year the Brewers couldn't afford Ramirez without making it back-end-loaded and deferring money. They will now pay Ramirez around 5% of team payroll to not play in 2015 because they paid K-Rod in 2012. That was essentially what Ramirez's deferred money was spent on. I understand K-Rod accepted arby prior to the Ramirez signing, but Melvin still went through with the signing after K-Rod accepted. This caused the owners to lose money, created a big guaranteed future liability and is the reason payroll was slashed. All this and we still missed the playoffs.

 

Again, "same as cash" deals help people make financially irresponsible decisions.

[Roderick]

I also think opportunity cost has to be brought in. There's a reason the money is being deferred, and what is that reason?

 

Obviously I don't know specifics, but would be willing to bet that a majority of the time the salary is deferred is because the player/agent wants it.

 

They player might want help budgeting and since they won't have access, it will be harder (but not impossible) to spend.

 

The agent will be able to publicize how big a contract he just negotiated to potential clients, but it is really window dressing.

 

As long as the team doesn't mess up a basic math equation, the time value of money to calculate the true cost of the contract isn't too hard to figure out. As for worrying about the club not budgeting accordingly, the team will have to account for the earned, but deferred pay as a liability on their books - so the accounting is an issue.

[topper09er]

Per Tyler Kepner of the NY Times, the third-to-first pickoff move is illegal starting this season.

 

“It’s funny,” the umpire Ted Barrett said. “When they presented it to us at our meetings, nobody even said, ‘Why?’ ”

 

So now I will wait to see who will be the first to fake to 2nd and then pick someone off with a force at 3rd, full count and 2 outs.