Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 399 of 454 FirstFirst ... 299349389397398399400401409449 ... LastLast
Results 5,971 to 5,985 of 6799
  1. #5971
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    11,131

    2019-20 Offseason Thread 2.0: Winter Meetings Edition

    Quote Originally Posted by rcal10 View Post
    While I am offended by your characterization of my thoughts, I honestly cannot believe you or anyone else cannot see that different owners have different agendas (besides making money). I honestly do not understand why you would not be able to see that large market teams would be happier if there were not as many penalties for spending, or if spending was raised before these penalties come in. Because of this, and, of course, my crazy conspiracy thinking ways, I am done discussing this. We are just going to have to agree to disagree.
    I mean itís exactly what youíve said multiple times. You said that you felt that the big market owners do not like this CBA and they are abiding by the tax because they want to help the players get a more favorable deal in the next CBA which would allow them to spend more money without being taxed. That was your argument right? Is that not a conspiracy theory?

    You added the word ďcrazy.Ē I may have thought it, but I intentionally didnít write it.

  2. #5972
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Addison, IL
    Posts
    22,719

    2019-20 Offseason Thread 2.0: Winter Meetings Edition

    Last edited by CubsRule08; 02-13-2020 at 12:55 PM.

    2016 World Series Champions!!!


  3. #5973
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    14,935
    Quote Originally Posted by CP_414 View Post
    I mean itís exactly what youíve said multiple times. You said that you felt that the big market owners do not like this CBA and they are abiding by the tax because they want to help the players get a more favorable deal in the next CBA which would allow them to spend more money without being taxed. That was your argument right? Is that not a conspiracy theory?

    You added the word ďcrazy.Ē I may have thought it, but I intentionally didnít write it.
    I wouldn't call it that.

    Let me ask you this. If some owners did not like the system as it currently is (can you acknowledge some might not like it?) what is the best way to get it changed? Would it get changed if those owners (the high revenue owners) continually blew past the luxury tax? Or if they did that would the next deal possibly be even more penalizing for the owners? If teams did not pay any attention to restrictions what do you think would happen? I would think they would try to put more restrictions on the spenders, but I guess that makes it a conspiracy. And if teams blew past the LT threshold, players might not even mind more restrictions. As long as they got their money they wouldn't care where it came from.
    Or would more change is owners abided by the current rules. If more owners refused to go over the LT multiple times and this causes salaries to drop, what might happen? Might the players now get involved and demand a better deal? Do you not acknowledge AT ALL that a better player deal is also a deal that could help large revenue teams more compared to low revenue teams?
    This is my issue with your comment. By throwing words like conspiracy or sabotage you are belittling me. You didn't have to say crazy. I know it was inferred. So back to my question, and please only answer the question. Is it that CRAZY to think some owners wouldn't mind seeing changes?

  4. #5974
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    13,103

    2019-20 Offseason Thread 2.0: Winter Meetings Edition

    Quote Originally Posted by DamnGoat View Post
    That Astros presser was hilariously incompetent, embarrassing, tone deaf... take your pick.
    I know it wonít happen but I want to see the Astros getting totally stonewalled by the opposition this year. **** socialising at home plate or any of the bases. Their players should feel this shame all year on the baseball diamond and in the stands. And I am sure they will.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i-ylsZmeno8

    That cough after he says 2017 though.
    Last edited by JHBulls; 02-13-2020 at 01:01 PM.

  5. #5975
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    14,935
    Quote Originally Posted by CubsRule08 View Post
    Well if you believe in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king, sure Correa's comments were the best of the bunch. But he still added he did not feel it affected the 2017 series. Just say you are sorry, you are embarrassed by it and it will never happen again. No need to comment further as to what it affected or didn't affect. It is an apology while still trying to justify it as the cheating didn't really affect anything.

  6. #5976
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    69,573
    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    Did you expect different? I thought it went exactly how I figured it would go.
    Oh, definitely not. They've been pretty smug for about 5ish years or so. I'd expect a little more accountability from their owner though. Placing all the blame on the GM and manager. Just a waste of everybody's time.

    Quote Originally Posted by CP_414 View Post
    Really embarrassing. Totally incompetent public relations. Amazing that they had all this time to prepare and came out with that.
    PR firms should study that press conference on what not to do, in the future. At least some of the reporters didn't throw them softballs when their owner opened it up to questions. And why the hell was Dusty thrown out there? That made no sense.

  7. #5977
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    69,573
    Quote Originally Posted by JHBulls View Post
    I know it wonít happen but I want to see the Astros getting totally stonewalled by the opposition this year. **** socialising at home plate or any of the bases. Their players should feel this shame all year on the baseball diamond and in the stands. And I am sure they will.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i-ylsZmeno8

    That cough after he says 2017 though.
    They're definitely going to be booed wherever they go, except Houston, maybe. That's not enough though, especially after the way they've handled the fallout.

  8. #5978
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Addison, IL
    Posts
    22,719
    Quote Originally Posted by DamnGoat View Post
    PR firms should study that press conference on what not to do, in the future. At least some of the reporters didn't throw them softballs when their owner opened it up to questions. And why the hell was Dusty thrown out there? That made no sense.
    Yeah that made no sense. Why throw up a manager you just hired that has nothing to do with the situation and make him answer questions about it?

    Once again, complete and utter embarrassment

    2016 World Series Champions!!!


  9. #5979
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    587
    who's the first pitcher to bean Altuve and Bregman?

  10. #5980
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    13,103
    Itís amazing how Dallas Keuchel was literally the first Astros player on that 2017 squad (who is not Mike Fiers) to publicly apologise last month. Yet at the time he knew the Astros cheated and still had a dig at the Cubs saying that the Astros wonít have a 2018 hangover because ďI firmly believe we have better players.Ē. That is the attitude of the Astros back then and now. They cheat and still think theyíre better than everyone else (obviously not better than the Cubs back then as they cheated to win) and yet they have zero respect throughout baseball.

  11. #5981
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    867
    Quote Originally Posted by CP_414 View Post
    I mean itís exactly what youíve said multiple times. You said that you felt that the big market owners do not like this CBA and they are abiding by the tax because they want to help the players get a more favorable deal in the next CBA which would allow them to spend more money without being taxed. That was your argument right? Is that not a conspiracy theory?

    You added the word ďcrazy.Ē I may have thought it, but I intentionally didnít write it.
    Oh come on. It's a "conspiracy theory" because you don't agree with it? rcal and I both have seen what teams are doing and are interpreting their actions to infer their motivation. We agree that part of their motivation is to save money and to point to the tax as the reason for it. Another motivation is because they're sick of footing the bill for freeloading teams and want a change in the next CBA that prevents such freeloading. We seem to disagree that the Yankees and Orioles do not have the exact same view of every parameter of the CBA. That's fine. Nobody's going Alex Jones here and to call these interpretations/inferences "crazy" is straight up baiting (albeit somewhat entertaining baiting, if we're being honest).

  12. #5982
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    13,103
    Quote Originally Posted by DamnGoat View Post
    They're definitely going to be booed wherever they go, except Houston, maybe. That's not enough though, especially after the way they've handled the fallout.
    For sure. And I am sure they will get booed in Houston too. Minute Maid Park might be the hottest ticket in town for the opposition.

  13. #5983
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    14,935
    [QUOTE=Bluegrass;33383183]Oh come on. It's a "conspiracy theory" because you don't agree with it? rcal and I both have seen what teams are doing and are interpreting their actions to infer their motivation. We agree that part of their motivation is to save money and to point to the tax as the reason for it. Another motivation is because they're sick of footing the bill for freeloading teams and want a change in the next CBA that prevents such freeloading. We seem to disagree that the Yankees and Orioles do not have the exact same view of every parameter of the CBA. That's fine. Nobody's going Alex Jones here and to call these interpretations/inferences "crazy" is straight up baiting (albeit somewhat entertaining baiting, if we're being honest).QUOTE]

    Thanks bluegrass. But if we are being honest, the baiting is not entertaining me.
    Last edited by rcal10; 02-13-2020 at 01:28 PM.

  14. #5984
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    11,131
    Quote Originally Posted by rcal10 View Post
    I wouldn't call it that.

    Let me ask you this. If some owners did not like the system as it currently is (can you acknowledge some might not like it?) what is the best way to get it changed? Would it get changed if those owners (the high revenue owners) continually blew past the luxury tax? Or if they did that would the next deal possibly be even more penalizing for the owners? If teams did not pay any attention to restrictions what do you think would happen? I would think they would try to put more restrictions on the spenders, but I guess that makes it a conspiracy. And if teams blew past the LT threshold, players might not even mind more restrictions. As long as they got their money they wouldn't care where it came from.
    Or would more change is owners abided by the current rules. If more owners refused to go over the LT multiple times and this causes salaries to drop, what might happen? Might the players now get involved and demand a better deal? Do you not acknowledge AT ALL that a better player deal is also a deal that could help large revenue teams more compared to low revenue teams?
    This is my issue with your comment. By throwing words like conspiracy or sabotage you are belittling me. You didn't have to say crazy. I know it was inferred. So back to my question, and please only answer the question. Is it that CRAZY to think some owners wouldn't mind seeing changes?
    Iím not sure why you wouldnít call it a conspiracy theory. Do you have any evidence that it happened? No. So itís a theory. Right? Would it be a conspiracy for a small subset of owners to want the players to gain an advantage against the owners in the next cba and to decide to operate in a way that they think will force that change to help players do better against the collective owners? Of course that would be a conspiracy. Thatís a conspiracy theory. How could it not be? And it would be the definition of sabotage. The owners are on one side, the players on the other. If a small group of owners are wanting the players side to win parts of the negotiation they are working against the interests of the side they are on. Thatís sabotage.

    I in no way belittled you. I think your idea isnít supported by any evidence at all or by logic, but I didnít insult YOU. I was critical of your idea, because I think itís bad. Thatís the point of having these conversations. If you are going to get offended because I am critical of your idea I canít really do anything about that. Thereís a difference in insulting someone and saying that Iím not going to agree with that conspiracy theory.

    Regarding your questions, no I donít believe thereís any evidence that any owners are unhappy with the current CBA and want a better deal for players. I donít think the few owners who sometimes pay the tax sometimes enjoy paying the tax, but I think they like that the tax gives them justification not to spend and to go ďback underĒ an artificial payroll line. Thatís why many teams treat the tax like a cap. They want to. The players didnít think they were agreeing to a cap in the last CBA, the owners effectively turned it into one.

  15. #5985
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    11,131

    2019-20 Offseason Thread 2.0: Winter Meetings Edition

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluegrass View Post
    Oh come on. It's a "conspiracy theory" because you don't agree with it? rcal and I both have seen what teams are doing and are interpreting their actions to infer their motivation. We agree that part of their motivation is to save money and to point to the tax as the reason for it. Another motivation is because they're sick of footing the bill for freeloading teams and want a change in the next CBA that prevents such freeloading. We seem to disagree that the Yankees and Orioles do not have the exact same view of every parameter of the CBA. That's fine. Nobody's going Alex Jones here and to call these interpretations/inferences "crazy" is straight up baiting (albeit somewhat entertaining baiting, if we're being honest).
    Lol. Baiting?

    You guys: So I think thereís a small group of owners that really want the players to win the next CBA because thatíll allow them to spend more money on players and not pay taxes so they are helping the players do better in the next CBA by cutting player spending during this CBA.

    Me: Thatís a weird conspiracy theory. I donít agree.

    You guys: ďIím offended.Ē ďStop baiting.Ē



    Lol. Ok. And again, I didnít say ďcrazy.Ē I thought it, but Rcal wrote it.

    The issue between the Yankees and the Os is revenue sharing, not the lux tax. The Yankees will likely spend over 10 times as much on rev sharing than they will on lux tax and thatís as a repeat offender over the very top tier of the tax. If they are upset with the Os for not spending they should be much more upset about the 7 million+ they give to the Os (and every team) in revenue sharing than the 700k (200k last year) the oís might get for the Yankees lux tax penalty.
    Last edited by CP_414; 02-13-2020 at 01:58 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •