Dick Allen Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: What's the benefits part? I've never heard that every team just has an extra $15 million tacked on for that tax? Can you elaborate? Yes. I don’t know the exact figure but is around $15 million for ipension, health care etc. every team is charged the same. Cots estimated it was around &13.5 million in 2017. Edited December 24, 2018 by Dick Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 Just now, Chicago White Sox said: Are you asking what benefits are? Yeah, is that a line item that every team just has to account for under their luxury tax calculation number? It doesn't seem to show up in the total that the Red Sox had to pay for last year - their payroll was $230, their tax number came in at $237 because of a couple contracts that are back loaded? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: They don't have many contracts that balloon other than Joe Kelly, their payroll before Homer Bailey comes in is at $158 million, add in a couple extra million for Kelly and Bailey's contract and I get into the mid $180s, but I don't know what the "Benefits" DA just referred to is? I didn't know that benefits were factored into the luxury tax number either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 1 minute ago, soxfan2014 said: I didn't know that benefits were factored into the luxury tax number either. The dodgers came in just under the tax last year and their adjusted payroll was $199 million without counting benefits. Is that a new rule for this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 5 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: The dodgers came in just under the tax last year and their adjusted payroll was $199 million without counting benefits. Is that a new rule for this year? I don’t think that adjusted salary is for luxury tax purposes. The adjustments appear to prorate for acquisitions (partial seasons) and/or cash received in trades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 23 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said: I don’t think that adjusted salary is for luxury tax purposes. The adjustments appear to prorate for acquisitions (partial seasons) and/or cash received in trades. I'm just saying - if there was an extra $15 million in there, and their payroll was $199 million counting all the prorations and trades and everything else, then their number would have been way above the tax line. If the tax line counted an extra $15 million in pension and insurance costs and the Dodgers had a payroll of $199 million, they'd have been way over the tax line that was $200 million last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 6 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: I'm just saying - if there was an extra $15 million in there, and their payroll was $199 million counting all the prorations and trades and everything else, then their number would have been way above the tax line. If the tax line counted an extra $15 million in pension and insurance costs and the Dodgers had a payroll of $199 million, they'd have been way over the tax line that was $200 million last year. Sure, but the $199M wasn’t their luxury tax payroll so you can’t really jump to any of these conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 11 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: I'm just saying - if there was an extra $15 million in there, and their payroll was $199 million counting all the prorations and trades and everything else, then their number would have been way above the tax line. If the tax line counted an extra $15 million in pension and insurance costs and the Dodgers had a payroll of $199 million, they'd have been way over the tax line that was $200 million last year. This might help you out. Looks like $14M of benefits included in total payroll: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.truebluela.com/platform/amp/2018/3/29/17150586/dodgers-opening-day-payroll-luxury-tax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 We're in incarceratedbob territory now....sweet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, Baron said: We're in incarceratedbob territory now....sweet What did he say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, Bigsoxhurt35 said: What did he say? Just reading the past few pages. The guy is a fraud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 Just now, Baron said: Just reading the past few pages. The guy is a fraud. Big time fraud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 He blocked me for calling him out after saying Zach Parise was going to the Pittsburgh Penguins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 6 minutes ago, Bigsoxhurt35 said: He blocked me for calling him out after saying Zach Parise was going to the Pittsburgh Penguins. He got Dwight Howard being traded wrong atleast 2 or 3 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Gload Fan Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 (edited) Harper likes Dodgers IG Post Trolling? This is what it has come to lol Edited December 24, 2018 by Ross Gload Fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roughneck Posted December 25, 2018 Share Posted December 25, 2018 On 12/23/2018 at 1:39 PM, fathom said: I think still carl and Cat get their info from the same person I know Carl personally. Last I spoke with him, he was predicting the Sox would sign Harper. Then soon thereafter he started the "Harper supposedly really wants to sign with the Cubs and will wait for them to move salary" stuff, so who knows if he has a legit source for this or if he was given bad info purposefully to drive up the cost for the Sox or something. He was realistic with me that the Cubs had no realistic way of signing Harper without moving Bryant, and said if it was up to him, he'd trade Bryant because he won't resign with the Cubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lillian Posted December 25, 2018 Share Posted December 25, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Roughneck said: I know Carl personally. Last I spoke with him, he was predicting the Sox would sign Harper. Then soon thereafter he started the "Harper supposedly really wants to sign with the Cubs and will wait for them to move salary" stuff, so who knows if he has a legit source for this or if he was given bad info purposefully to drive up the cost for the Sox or something. He was realistic with me that the Cubs had no realistic way of signing Harper without moving Bryant, and said if it was up to him, he'd trade Bryant because he won't resign with the Cubs. I thought that Harper's motivation for his alleged interest in the Cubs, was that it would afford him the opportunity to play with his best friend. The Cubs moving Bryant would defeat that purpose. Moreover, if the Cubs acquired Harper, why wouldn't Bryant want to resign with them? Edited December 25, 2018 by Lillian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 25, 2018 Share Posted December 25, 2018 48 minutes ago, Lillian said: I thought that Harper's motivation for his alleged interest in the Cubs, was that it would afford him the opportunity to play with his best friend. The Cubs moving Bryant would defeat that purpose. Moreover, if the Cubs acquired Harper, why wouldn't Bryant want to resign with them? Well, that would push out Rizzo, Baez and Contreras, for one thing. And you’d think they need one smaller deal for Hendricks, because who knows what they get from Darvish and Lester/Q are likely on the way out eventually. They really are going to have a tough choice between Baez and Bryant...they can’t afford all three. It’s all going to depend on Bryant returning to MVP form, and we know how well these 8-10 year deals typically work out when the majority of those seasons are in a player’s thirties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lillian Posted December 25, 2018 Share Posted December 25, 2018 1 hour ago, caulfield12 said: Well, that would push out Rizzo, Baez and Contreras, for one thing. And you’d think they need one smaller deal for Hendricks, because who knows what they get from Darvish and Lester/Q are likely on the way out eventually. They really are going to have a tough choice between Baez and Bryant...they can’t afford all three. It’s all going to depend on Bryant returning to MVP form, and we know how well these 8-10 year deals typically work out when the majority of those seasons are in a player’s thirties. If the Cubs intend to not resign Bryant and they make that clear to Harper, then Bryce would very likely not want to go there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted December 25, 2018 Share Posted December 25, 2018 44 minutes ago, Lillian said: If the Cubs intend to not resign Bryant and they make that clear to Harper, then Bryce would very likely not want to go there. This might be the only shot for them to play together. Assuming Bryant signs a huge deal, both Harper and Bryant's deals won't come from the same team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bschmaranz Posted December 25, 2018 Share Posted December 25, 2018 26 minutes ago, soxfan2014 said: This might be the only shot for them to play together. Assuming Bryant signs a huge deal, both Harper and Bryant's deals won't come from the same team. "Oh come on, the Cubs can have a $500m payroll!" -Most Cubs fans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roughneck Posted December 25, 2018 Share Posted December 25, 2018 9 hours ago, Lillian said: I thought that Harper's motivation for his alleged interest in the Cubs, was that it would afford him the opportunity to play with his best friend. The Cubs moving Bryant would defeat that purpose. Moreover, if the Cubs acquired Harper, why wouldn't Bryant want to resign with them? Remember the Cubs kept Bryant down well past he was ready. It was more glaring than the Sox have done with Eloy, and it was a national story. The Players Union filed a grievance over it. Bryant said something along the lines of "I'll remember that when it comes time for free agency." He might like playing for the Cubs and winning, but Bryant isn't going to sign an extension or give the Cubs a hometown discount. He will absolutely take the best offer, even if that means leaving. If the Cubs have $40 mil a year locked up in Harper, along with Baez, Rizzo, etc, it makes it much less likely they could afford Bryant. So Harper signing with the Cubs would mean he gets to play with his friend for 3 years (if that actually is the priority the media makes it out to be), but it would also almost guarantee that Bryant is playing elsewhere in 2022. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisox05 Posted December 26, 2018 Share Posted December 26, 2018 (edited) Lol Edited December 26, 2018 by aeichhor 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted December 26, 2018 Author Share Posted December 26, 2018 So apparently Daily BSB thinks Harper to the Yankees lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justBLAZE Posted December 26, 2018 Share Posted December 26, 2018 The Harper to CUBS narrative is starting to pick up in the media. FWIW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts