Jump to content
Jays Centre
  • Create Account

Terminator

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    21,406
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    93

 Content Type 

Profiles

Toronto Blue Jays Videos

2025 Toronto Blue Jays Top Prospects Ranking

Toronto Blue Jays Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Toronto Blue Jays Draft Pick Tracker

News

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Terminator

  1. Well I was trying to agree with your previous point (that beating the Dodgers' 10/460 offer might not have gotten Ohtani anyway) but now you are making a totally different point (that I shouldn't criticize Rogers for not offering more). And I agree with that too. The whole contract is hard to discuss because the 700M dollar number is fugazi.
  2. You guys, Benitendi sucks ass I get it. But if you want Robert without taking on a bad contract in return you'd basically have to let the White Sox hand select 5 prospects off our roster and even then we might get outbid by someone else or the ChiSox simply pass and hang on to him. If you take on Benitendi and Moncada, guys with negative value, maybe you get Robert without even having to give up Tiedeman. If we are unable to flex our financial muscles this offseason in FA, then perhaps we can do so in FA by taking on some bad deals via trade.
  3. Yeah he's included all so we wouldn't have to give up as much prospect capital. We could just use him as a 4th OF. Given their remaining contracts, Moncada has negative value and Eloy has very little value but we could start them at 3B and DH. Robert has a shitload of value.
  4. Maybe we could do a 2013-Marlins style trade where we give up Manoah and a bunch of 40/45 prospects for Robert, Benitendi, Moncada and Eloy Jimenez.
  5. Imagine giving a 5 foot 10 NPB pitcher 300 million lol
  6. It's an incredibly weak FA year and those are the top 3.
  7. Yeah I agree but nothing wrong with upping the offer and forcing the Dodgers to pay more
  8. Can one of you Bellinger fan boys please explain why I should want him? I want to believe but I can’t get there. Thanks
  9. If some fake number is what he wanted we should have offered him 15 years 1 billion dollars and just defer the hell out of that contract for the next 50 years. Then make it 15 for 600 million on the luxury tax books or whatever. 10 for 460 was a beatable number.
  10. You guys are cowards. The great Pat Gillick once traded Fred McGriff and Tony Fernandez while contending and it WORKED. And you guys don’t even have the balls to trade a reliever? Wow!
  11. He’d be a good sell high I think.
  12. Nope, we didn’t we offer him enough. 10 for 460 was beatable and Rogers didn’t do it.
  13. So the 700M number is BS. It’s 10 for 460. We could have spanked that deal if Rogers wanted to.
  14. This is basically all it is! The rest of it is all accounting fluff. It's not a luxury tax dodge or anything.
  15. It's pretty weird because it's not even really a luxury tax evasion thing. It's like he really cared that the number was reported as 700M even when it's not really 700 at all. It's not even close. It's all just accounting ******** to make a 460M dollar deal look like 700. Does he really care that the plebs will be losing their minds over the number that much? Because that's really the only benefit he is getting. And the Dodgers aren't really getting much of a benefit either with this escrow stuff. It's just a 10 year 460 mil deal for them.
  16. It’s calculated into the 10 year deal while he’s on the team. All told his tax hit is 10 year 460 mil. So 46 mil a year tax hit.
  17. Yeah that’s one way to look at it. It’s not that big of a deal really. It helps them during the Ohtani years (they could afford everything anyway) and it will hurt them when he’s gone (they’ll be able to afford that as well).
  18. Yeah it’s a bunch of rich people grouped together. Seems like a lot of NFL franchises are being bought by similar ownership groups now too.
  19. It’s kind of shocking to find out teams can do this but the Dodgers are going to be paying a guy who isn’t playing for them 68 million bucks a year for TEN YEARS. That’s going to be monumentally ugly. Yeah it won’t count for the luxury tax (if that’s even a thing by then) but regardless of how it’s set up they are still going to be paying for this deal eventually. Say we got used, call us a victim, etc. But at least Ross price checked those f***ers and in 10 years when they are paying out the ass the rest of the league can thank us.
  20. This is silly talk. The team has made zero moves this offseason and projects for 86 wins. Everyone is giving the Yankees high marks for their offseason and they are projected for 89.
  21. Same, I’m not sure what the tax implications are exactly. But it’s possible I guess.
  22. I trust Nightengale’s tax advice even less than his baseball scoops but…
  23. If he was willing to defer like this Rogers could have blown this offer out of the water. But 800M carries an amount of sticker shock that they may not have wanted to present to shareholders.
  24. One small thing about Bellinger is that the Giants are similar to us in that they want to spend money but have had a little trouble doing so. But they are a horrible fit for Bellinger. Both sides would be stupid to have him go there. So perhaps that’s one less suitor.
  25. it’s almost half the league, potentially. “When the season ended, the Minnesota Twins’ deal with DSG expired, putting them in the same boat as the Padres and Diamondbacks. That leaves 11 teams still in contract with DSG: the Atlanta Braves, Cincinnati Reds, Cleveland Guardians, Detroit Tigers, Kansas City Royals, Los Angeles Angels, Miami Marlins, Milwaukee Brewers, St. Louis Cardinals, Tampa Bay Rays and Texas Rangers. Reportedly, the Guardians and Rangers are most in danger of being dropped next.” https://sports.yahoo.com/how-the-collapse-of-the-regional-sports-network-is-affecting-mlb-economics-now-and-in-the-future-155227283.html
×
×
  • Create New...