PDA

View Full Version : New Idea for 04' Payroll


Champs2004
11-13-2003, 09:40 PM
Instead of trading Maggs and that $14 Million deal he has, why not restructure it, cut that 14 Mil in half and use the other half to sign more free agents?

ScottyTheSoxFan
11-13-2003, 09:41 PM
because maggs wants all the money not half

Daver
11-13-2003, 10:07 PM
Originally posted by Champs2004
Instead of trading Maggs and that $14 Million deal he has, why not restructure it, cut that 14 Mil in half and use the other half to sign more free agents?

It is a guaranteed contract,which is not subject to restructuring.

Huisj
11-13-2003, 10:11 PM
i think it sucks that the sox sign a guy to a nice contract to reward him for being awesome, and then at the end of it, they don't want to pay what they said they'd pay. sucks man

nasox
11-13-2003, 11:17 PM
try it but beware of Maggs getting pissed at the front office

rmusacch
11-13-2003, 11:18 PM
Originally posted by Daver
It is a guaranteed contract,which is not subject to restructuring.

Do you know that for sure? If that is true, how were the Diamondbacks able to restructure all those contracts a few years ago?

JRIG
11-13-2003, 11:21 PM
Originally posted by Huisj
i think it sucks that the sox sign a guy to a nice contract to reward him for being awesome, and then at the end of it, they don't want to pay what they said they'd pay. sucks man

Somebody's going to pay him the 14 million he's owed next year. I wouldn't feel too bad for Mags.

CubKilla
11-14-2003, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by Huisj
i think it sucks that the sox sign a guy to a nice contract to reward him for being awesome, and then at the end of it, they don't want to pay what they said they'd pay. sucks man

Welcome to "Life as a Sox Fan" under the Jerry Reinsdorf regime :D:

jabrch
11-14-2003, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by Champs2004
Instead of trading Maggs and that $14 Million deal he has, why not restructure it, cut that 14 Mil in half and use the other half to sign more free agents?

Simply, because Mags has no reason to give up 7mm. They can do what AZ did, and restructure the deal, but Mags would just want more money later. OK, I'll cut down from 14 to 7 now, but instead of you being able to sign me for 30mm over 3 years, now I want 39 over 3 years to make up for the 7 that you took from me this year. We can do that, and Mags may even agree to it. But the money is still there...

Hangar18
11-14-2003, 01:01 PM
Heres a NOVEL APPROACH, Instead of Structuring Contracts so that you pay the MOST MONEY at the end of the deal
(sort of like paying for your Groceries with a Credit Card, eventually, your going to have to PAY THE INTEREST)
Why dont the EVER just equally split up the payments every year?
IN FACT....Why not give MOST of the REVENUE UPFRONT, in the 1st year, with the amounts getting Smaller Incrementally over
the years? That way, theyre not Worried about having to PAYUP
and can keep the player instead of Doing all the Scouting, Grooming the Player in their Minors, just so the Yankees/Braves can acquire him later :angry:

poorme
11-14-2003, 01:05 PM
Because we all know that this year is the only year that really matters.

voodoochile
11-14-2003, 01:06 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Heres a NOVEL APPROACH, Instead of Structuring Contracts so that you pay the MOST MONEY at the end of the deal
(sort of like paying for your Groceries with a Credit Card, eventually, your going to have to PAY THE INTEREST)
Why dont the EVER just equally split up the payments every year?
IN FACT....Why not give MOST of the REVENUE UPFRONT, in the 1st year, with the amounts getting Smaller Incrementally over
the years? That way, theyre not Worried about having to PAYUP
and can keep the player instead of Doing all the Scouting, Grooming the Player in their Minors, just so the Yankees/Braves can acquire him later :angry:

There are several factors as to why they structure young players contracts the way they do.

First, it more accurately reflects the way they would be paid through arbitration with amounts getting larger every year.

Second, it allows them to pay as little as they can for the player's services early in the contract. That means if they trade the player they didn't get stuffed paying the majority of the money through the contract. It adds flexibility for the most likely period of time the player will be on the team.

Third, basic economics says that the money they pay 3 years from now won't be as valuable (in today's dollars).

Finally, because JR is a cheapass owner who treats his players like they are servents and he is the star. That is why so many leave. Aside from Frank what's the longest anyone has been on this team? Maggs? What is that, 5 years? No continuity. JR PLANS on trading them when they get expensive.

StockdaleForVeep
11-14-2003, 02:55 PM
I think baseball should be like in the olden days, when players couldnt leave teams, and everyone would get paid the same...like..like...

indentured servants? YES!