Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 284 of 314 FirstFirst ... 184234274282283284285286294 ... LastLast
Results 4,246 to 4,260 of 4701
  1. #4246
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    812
    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    If that's the case (again, I don't think we should be giving Ricketts credit for payment deferrals, that's a cost of doing business, not payroll spending), then Pederson should be counted 2021, and Lester, not, as Lester's buyout is spread across 2015-2020 luxury tax purposes (the Cubs would get that tax benefit back for the year if they didn't buy him out). Pederson will cost $7m AAV luxury tax this season.
    I'm not an accountant and don't know how the expenses are recognized, personally nor do I really care. At the end of the day, payroll has been slashed considerably and that is problematic. My only point was that I think we may have been unfair in certain characterizations of expenses and that that is not necessary in order to have a legitimate gripe with the team's spending.

    Good chat, have a nice evening!

  2. #4247
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,728
    Quote Originally Posted by cubs1423 View Post
    I'm not an accountant and don't know how the expenses are recognized, personally nor do I really care. At the end of the day, payroll has been slashed considerably and that is problematic. My only point was that I think we may have been unfair in certain characterizations of expenses and that that is not necessary in order to have a legitimate gripe with the team's spending.

    Good chat, have a nice evening!
    I mean, if we want to be truly honest; we shouldn't be giving him credit for $7m. Even if fractually, Rickett's wont be paying out $7m real-world 2021. $2.5m in 2022 will be worth less that in 2021. Roughly 1.75% less. And you might say "that's really petty" (and you'd be right, it's petty. I'm a petty little ***** right now, and will own that) but the end result is that man is a cheap dick, and I'm not willing to give him anything right now.

    So yeah, I'm probably being a bit unfair, but it's the cheap stuff that sucks. I'm frankly done giving him anything for the spending.
    Last edited by 1908_Cubs; 02-14-2021 at 10:04 PM.

  3. #4248
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    7,619
    ST baseball

    https://twitter.com/WatchMarquee/sta...907703299?s=19

    Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

  4. #4249
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    91,694
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluefire View Post
    I think they'll bring Kipnis back. Jake Lamb is available, lightning in a bottle maybe?
    Kipnis to the ATL.

  5. #4250
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    7,619
    Minor league deal

    https://twitter.com/mlbtraderumors/s...969377285?s=19

    Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

  6. #4251
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,247
    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    So yeah, I'm probably being a bit unfair, but it's the cheap stuff that sucks. I'm frankly done giving him anything for the spending.
    Yeah, we've noticed. Time and time again. Honestly, if I had my pick, I'd rather we had an ownership group like LA with unlimited assets, but sadly, that's not the case; consequently, we have an ownership group that's much more afraid of risk. Such is life. Let's try to move on.
    Last edited by Crusader; 02-15-2021 at 04:30 PM.
    Ü

    "But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it."

    - Romans 8:25

  7. #4252
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    12,718

    2020 Chicago Cubs Offseason Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Crusader View Post
    Yeah, we've noticed. Time and time again. Honestly, if I had my pick, I'd rather we had an ownership group like LA with unlimited assets, but sadly, that's not the case; consequently, we have an ownership group that's much more afraid of risk. Such is life. Let's try to move on.
    I donít think fans should just accept it and move on. I think fans should try to hold them accountable. Criticize them. Try to give them less of your money unless you feel they have earned it. Nobody has a problem with holding players accountable when they fail. Why have such low standards for ownership?

    If someone is good with the ownership group, thatís their choice, but I donít think ďdeal with it and move onĒ is good advice. We were here before the Ricketts and weíll be the ones here after they really cash in and sell. We should expect more from them and not just say ďoh wellĒ if the owners are failing us.
    Last edited by CP_414; 02-15-2021 at 05:19 PM.

  8. #4253
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,728
    Quote Originally Posted by Crusader View Post
    Yeah, we've noticed. Time and time again. Honestly, if I had my pick, I'd rather we had an ownership group like LA with unlimited assets, but sadly, that's not the case; consequently, we have an ownership group that's much more afraid of risk. Such is life. Let's try to move on.
    Are you going to get snippy and sarcastic with me because I hold my ownership group to a higher standard?

    You can go on accepting it, it's your choice. But I'm not going to stop pointing out their cheap **** and holding them to the standard I expect just because of a poster on PSD. If you're uninterested in reading it, no one is forcing you to do so. Do I think my posts are singularly going to change anything? No, but I will continue to express my well researched position on the matter as I see fit. Much like the power of voting, no singular vote has a high effect on a large scale election, but the more people who vote and band together, the bigger impact that group has. If I can convince others to hold the ownership group to the same standard, then perhaps as a group, Cubs fans will get things to change by voting with their wallet, and by calling this nonsense out. Or if my voice is added to those who are also holding them accountable, same outcome, I'm certainly not alone or some leader here. If you'd like to just ignore what's going on, and shrugging your shoulders, you can be my guest. But my position will not change, and I have no reason to stop expressing it. Sorry, but not sorry.
    Last edited by 1908_Cubs; 02-15-2021 at 05:36 PM.

  9. #4254
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,718
    Travis Shaw might be worth a flier at 2B. Last 2 seasons have been bad. But his barrel %, hard hit % and EV haven't dropped. Main things are his contact rate has decreased and his LA has risen. These things might be fixable.

  10. #4255
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,718
    Rich Hill signs 2.5mil 1 year deal. James Paxton signs 8.5m 1-yr deal. Cole Hamels is still a FA

    Seems like we paid for more reliability/health with Arrieta.

  11. #4256
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    10,016
    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    There's no way the Cubs are going to spend $26m on players on the 40 but not on the 26-man roster. The Cubs have 9 pre-arb players who will only make $570 K if they make the MLB roster. When they are in AAA, they will make AAA rates. Holder, Miller, Duffy, Morgan, Hermosillo and Stewart are on non-guaranteed contracts and are not on the 40, so they only count if they are picked up. If not placed on the MLB roster, they will not make that salary. I'm also not sure where you're seeing $146m for the 26-man roster.

    https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/chicago-cubs/payroll/

    And don't add in anything like mutual option buy outs. Those will be paid out in 2022, and are not apart of the 2021 salary commitments. So players like Joc Pederson only count $4.5m for now. He'll cost $2.5m guaranteed next year, which could escalate. The reason the Cubs have things like mutual options with guys like Joc are because they're looking to defer salary to 2022.
    You're correct about the 170 number. That's their AAV plus benes and so on.

    Looking at Cot's, they have the Cubs 2021 26 man roster payroll right now at 146.7 mil, which includes (6) 0-3 guys and the Yu money. Tack on 2.25 mil for the remainder of the 40 man roster, and 15.5 mil in benefits, we're sitting at about 164.5 mil. Are you leaving off the last two numbers in your total? Don't we at the very least include the 26 man roster player benefits?

  12. #4257
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Bloomington, IL
    Posts
    5,832
    Quote Originally Posted by Stratos View Post
    Rich Hill signs 2.5mil 1 year deal. James Paxton signs 8.5m 1-yr deal. Cole Hamels is still a FA

    Seems like we paid for more reliability/health with Arrieta.
    I think we mostly paid for nostalgia. Don't underestimate the amount of casual fans who think the Cubs just signed an ace.
    Last edited by Sofnr; 02-15-2021 at 07:27 PM.

  13. #4258
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,247
    Quote Originally Posted by CP_414 View Post
    I donít think fans should just accept it and move on. I think fans should try to hold them accountable. Criticize them. Try to give them less of your money unless you feel they have earned it. Nobody has a problem with holding players accountable when they fail. Why have such low standards for ownership?

    If someone is good with the ownership group, thatís their choice, but I donít think ďdeal with it and move onĒ is good advice. We were here before the Ricketts and weíll be the ones here after they really cash in and sell. We should expect more from them and not just say ďoh wellĒ if the owners are failing us.
    And what exactly is constantly complaining that our ownership group isn't LA going to accomplish? Post after Post? It's not like the Ricketts are the worst owners in baseball. Unfortunately, they just don't have unlimited funds. So why keep complaining about it ... constantly?

    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    Are you going to get snippy and sarcastic with me because I hold my ownership group to a higher standard?

    You can go on accepting it, it's your choice. But I'm not going to stop pointing out their cheap **** and holding them to the standard I expect just because of a poster on PSD. If you're uninterested in reading it, no one is forcing you to do so. Do I think my posts are singularly going to change anything? No, but I will continue to express my well researched position on the matter as I see fit. Much like the power of voting, no singular vote has a high effect on a large scale election, but the more people who vote and band together, the bigger impact that group has. If I can convince others to hold the ownership group to the same standard, then perhaps as a group, Cubs fans will get things to change by voting with their wallet, and by calling this nonsense out. Or if my voice is added to those who are also holding them accountable, same outcome, I'm certainly not alone or some leader here. If you'd like to just ignore what's going on, and shrugging your shoulders, you can be my guest. But my position will not change, and I have no reason to stop expressing it. Sorry, but not sorry.
    See above. I read this board every day, and like 80% of the free agent posts are largely you and CP complaining about not having the Yankees or LA's ownership group, and I agree, it would be great, but that's not in the cards, and there's nothing online posting, day after day, post after post, about it on a message board will do about changing things. It's not like they're miraculously going to sell (and again ... there are far worse owners). I almost have to just limit myself to reading the prospects thread just to read something positive being said.
    Last edited by Crusader; 02-15-2021 at 07:33 PM.
    Ü

    "But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it."

    - Romans 8:25

  14. #4259
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Puerto Rico
    Posts
    14,604
    Quote Originally Posted by Stratos View Post
    Travis Shaw might be worth a flier at 2B. Last 2 seasons have been bad. But his barrel %, hard hit % and EV haven't dropped. Main things are his contact rate has decreased and his LA has risen. These things might be fixable.
    I think at this point they should just sign the best glove they can find at 2B and let Nico start at Iowa. The way the pitching staff has been design , I think putting the best defense possible behind it makes sense . Whoever the 2B is will hit 8th anyway .


    Thatís why I thought Wong was such a good fit and the Brewers will pay him only 2 million in 2021. I understand that the Cubs maybe didnít want to do a multi year deal with Nico lurking , but I think they could have worked around that . I would have used those 6 or part of it to sign Wong and a cheaper SP than Arrieta .

    With that said itís possible that those 6 million werenít available when Wong signed . I guess we will never know that .


    Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk

  15. #4260
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    12,718

    2020 Chicago Cubs Offseason Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Crusader View Post
    And what exactly is constantly complaining that our ownership group isn't LA going to accomplish? Post after Post? It's not like the Ricketts are the worst owners in baseball. Unfortunately, they just don't have unlimited funds. So why keep complaining about it ... constantly?



    See above. I read this board every day, and like 80% of the free agent posts are largely you and CP complaining about not having the Yankees or LA's ownership group, and I agree, it would be great, but that's not in the cards, and there's nothing online posting, day after day, post after post, about it on a message board will do about changing things. It's not like they're miraculously going to sell. I almost have to just limit myself to reading the prospects thread just to read something positive being said.
    What exactly does bootlicking accomplish?

    Itís not about accomplishing anything, itís about giving honest opinions. Like I said if you are happy with ownerships commitment, then good for you. Iím not. Iíll continue to criticize and Iíll continue to limit how much I spend on this team until the Ricketts provide a product Iím happy to pay for. If others want to spend more than me, I have no interest in stopping them.

    Itís not about them not having ďunlimited fundsĒ so you can save it with that line you keep using. Itís about them spending a disappointing amount of money on payroll compared to their revenues over the course of their ownership and them choosing to put a non competitive team on the field yet again in their short ownership.

    You are welcome to post about any topic you want to post about, but I couldnít possibly care less that you are tired of reading critiques of ownership.
    Last edited by CP_414; 02-15-2021 at 07:48 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
  •