Terminator

They hate Springer because the Astros beat the Dodgers in the WS and they all think it shouldn't count. Betts was on the Red Sox team that won the WS against the Dodgers and he admitted that the team cheated and their video coordinator was also suspended for a whole season. But no one talks about that one, they only want to boo former Astros.

The greatest irony of them all is Dodgers fans booing Springer when Mookie Betts is on their team

If Tucker signs elsewhere and the Bo sweepstakes comes down to either us or the Red Sox I think you'd have to like our chances given how the Red Sox have been operating the past few years

He lost 20 pounds and is in the best shape of his life

It's also hilarious to see this all unfold for the Sox. Extend Devers Bring in Bregman for a year, trade Devers in the 2nd year of his extension Narrowly lose the FA bidding war for Bregman to the Cubs (aka the Red Sox of the NL) Now have a giant hole in their infield and the middle of the lineup

Even with the deferrals factored in, Bregman got his money. Bo is going to get a huge deal after this.

Nightengales' definition of a "super utility player" is someone who plays 3B 90 percent of the time, gives the star 1B a day off once or twice a year, and then literally stands in LF for a couple of games. Oh and don't forget, he adds to versatility by playing DH once in a while.

I don't know what the exact formula is or what assumptions they make. But Ohtani, Cease, Santander, and anyone else who gets deferrals in their contract has the total amount calculated into what they call a Net Present Value. That amount is what counts against the books for CBT luxury tax purposes. So in Ohtani's case, he signed a 10 year, 700 million dollar deal but the deferrals spread out as far as 20 years. Well they calculated the NPV for that and it's 46 million a year which is what counts on the Dodgers books each year. There aren't any adjustments or anything like that after the fact.

You are losing the forest for the trees. You've got to back up here. The majority of fans don't understand net present value, inflation, etc. You are getting into specific mechanisms that ultimately determine the exact amounts which will end up making the Net Present Value calculation of a contract off when it's all said on done. But it's confusing enough as it is, no need to further add to that confusion. And even so, from a fan perspective what you are saying doesn't really matter. They calculate the Net Present Value for CBT tax threshold purposes by using a standard formula that gets applied evenly to every signing at the time of the signing and that's all she wrote for how that contract affects the CBT thresholds. So yeah, the announced numbers are going to be slightly off compared to the final numbers in the end (though I wouldn't be surprised if the contracts contain provisions that deferral payments are subject to revisions based upon the Consumer Price Index or some other measure), but MLB doesn't care because it's a loose cap and players don't get X% of league revenues. With a hard cap, every dollar matters and can literally prevent teams from doing certain signings and trades. Also, when the players contractually get X% of league revenues you have to pay them exactly that amount or you are in breach of the CBA. In MLB, they announce the Net Present Value for CBT purposes and the league has collectively agreed that they don't care if that NPV is ultimately off a bit. This is because the soft cap doesn't prevent teams from making moves and it doesn't violate the CBA if the numbers are off slightly either. If they are off, it's just rounding errors on what goes in the league revenue sharing pot and everyone involved has contractually accepted it. I guess what you are getting at could be getting into the weeds on why deferrals are more beneficial to big spenders rather than small, but whatever concerns there are with that are completely overshadowed by the fact that the small market teams aren't even signing multi-year contracts to begin with. So once again it's missing the forest for the trees. I've spent way too much time on what feels like billable work but isn't so I'm dipping out of this convo now lol. But to summarize I think it's best to keep it simple and focus only on how this all applies to the CBT thresholds, because that's 99% of the concern.

The Yankees and Red Sox turning into the San Francisco Giants spending-wise is such a welcomed development Remember when we'd get excited when the Jays would sign damn near anyone? We'd sign a toilet like Corey Koskie and it'd put everyone in a good mood. Meanwhile, George Steinbrenner would look at the MVP voting from the previous year and would go sign and/or trade for several guys who finished in the Top 10. Lmao it was impossible to compete with them but to now think that we are bigger spenders than the Yankees is a pipe dream come true.

Yankee fans having a meltdown online

Yeah this probably does merit consideration. It actually is a problem and it leads to things like popular sports podcast hosts saying "Can't you just buy championships in that sport?"

Yankees whiff on the one guy they've been linked to that actually had fans excited

It’s not stubbornness, it’s just accurate. And dismissing it as stubbornness actually gets to the crux of the problem, which is your failure to understand inflation. So forget everything else being said. If you understand and accept one basic principle, the confusion disappears: A dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow. That’s it. In the Ohtani example, $460 million today is economically equivalent to $700 million in the future because of inflation and the time value of money. You don’t need to invoke Jim and John's earned interest statements or the supposed strategic advantages and dangers of deferred contracts. Those are rounding errors compared to the fundamental reality that future dollars are discounted dollars. Simply put, the Dodgers are committing $460 million in today’s dollars whether they pay it now or later. The structure merely changes the timing (which allows Ohtani to avoid CA state income taxes), not the real cost. I'm now starting to worry about you on a personal level because this basic concept applies just as cleanly to personal finance. If your employer isn’t giving you raises that at least match inflation, you’re taking a pay cut every year. And when you do get a nominal raise, your boss isn’t being generous or rewarding excellence, he’s simply keeping your compensation flat in real terms. He’s paying you the same damn wage, adjusted for inflation. If he's not, then you need to ask and if he refuses, you should find a new job because your boss is cutting your pay each year.

Roughly 460 million in today's dollars will go into his bank account over the course of the contract

They don't get that into the weeds with it. They use historical trends for inflation and then assign the deal a Net Present Value which is then used for CBT calculations moving forward. The team then has to put that amount of money in escrow. It's essentially a soft cap, not a hard one, so they just need to get close. The players also don't contractually receive X% of revenues like other leagues do, so again there isn't a huge need to be super precise with it.

You keep pointing to supposed benefits and risks associated with deferrals, what specifically are these benefits and risks? You can probably point to something, but they are probably small risks for both player and the team. And in any event, that is A LOT different than caveman redditors who don't understand inflation at all and think the Dodgers are cheating the system. And even if you are right, the Pirates would actually have to sign someone to a multi-year deal long enough for any of this to even matter. But seeing as Ryan O'Hearn is one of the biggest FA deals in team history, I won't hold my breath.

Reported for politics Deserves a lifetime ban for repeated violations

You're technically right with this "we don't know exactly how much he'll get" due to the uncertainty regarding inflation, but let's not confuse the issue any further than it already is. We need to get these highly regarded financial illiterates on the board to understand the bare basics first, that way they can at least go to their boss and try to get a 3% cost of living wage increase each year.

He’s receiving 460 million in today’s dollars

Mitch Bannon says that the Jays recent pursuit of Tucker has become "more aggressive."

Well tbf he'd probably be the worst trade acquisition of all time. You'd probably have to give up your entire farm system for a guy who inexplicably turns into a pumpkin at age 30. Still a HoFer though.

The Dodgers literally have to take the 46 million a year and put it in an escrow account that they can't touch though. I swear MLB thought of every possible loophole and closed it.

That’s just a spending-capacity issue, not a deferral issue. MLB already accounts for deferrals by converting contracts to net present value for luxury-tax purposes. The team isn’t saving money, and they aren’t gaming the system. You could defer money on every player on the 26-man roster and it wouldn’t change competitive balance because the system normalizes it back to today’s dollars. The NHL comparison doesn’t really work because it operates under a completely different CBA that requires real-time accounting. Players are guaranteed exactly 50% of hockey-related revenue and there’s a hard cap, so timing of payments matters A LOT and why they have to limit accounting options like deferrals. MLB’s system is looser by design. There’s no hard cap and no fixed revenue split, so deferrals don’t distort the system. They just shift when money is paid, not how much is actually spent. And of course, it also gets rid of the income tax disparity between the various teams, something that the NHL struggles with.