Bay vs. Holliday

[Keeper]

Something asinine can be defined as something silly or stupid. She attacked the post' date=' not the poster.While your opinion is valid, i fail to see the need to stir the pot.[/quote']

 

I didn't see the need to attack the post. I thought it was out of line. It's nice that you'll defend her no matter what, and vice-versa. I'll start calling her posts asinine. I'm sure she won't be offended at all.

[Dipre]

I didn't see the need to attack the post. I thought it was out of line. It's nice that you'll defend her no matter what' date=' and vice-versa. I'll start calling her posts asinine. I'm sure she won't be offended at all. [/quote']

 

Interesting, because my usage of the word asinine has been widespread during my time on the board, and also, i believe calling a team a "lock" to win a WS to be an asinine statement myself, you go ahead and call both our posts asinine, and maybe also apply for a moderating position in the meantime, since you've been doing quite a bit of moderating lately.

[Keeper]

I haven't done any moderating. But maybe somebody should because you two have fallen into old habits pretty fast. Dipre and Emmz ganging up on people who disagree with them. Deja vu all over again.

[Dipre]

I haven't done any moderating. But maybe somebody should because you two have fallen into old habits pretty fast. Dipre and Emmz ganging up on people who disagree with them. Deja vu all over again.

 

Well i have refrained from personally attacking anyone on the board, but i will call you a f***ing moron, and well deserved. I didn't attack Themino007, and i specifically refused to respond to his post, however i got involved seeing as you have taken it upon yourself to stir s*** up. If you had grounds to make the statement i would concede your point, but your intention is to obviously stir the pot.

 

With all due respect, you can go f*** yourself.

[Keeper]

No, my intention was to point out how you and Emmz haven't changed much since you both took your leave of absence. People who think your tag team bullying act is tired are obviously all stirring the pot or trying to incite something or baitng you or trolling (Edit: forgot that one). Nothing has changed.

[Dipre]

No' date=' my intention was to point out how you and Emmz haven't changed much since you both took your leave of absence. People who think your tag team bullying act is tired are obviously all stirring the pot or trying to incite something or baitng you. Nothing has changed.[/quote']

 

Well, you're the only one complaining. So that's the end of that. No personal attacks, no baiting anyone. And if we have similar opinions on something we back it up with stats. You're baiting, and trolling. Simple as that. Oh, and respond to this how you will, i don't care, you can't prove any of your claims, so you're just trying to stir the pot. What hasn't changed is you being a dick, champ.

[TheMino007]

The Sox are so worried about the luxury tax threshold... why don't they just back load the contract offer to Bay?

[Dipre]

The Sox are so worried about the luxury tax threshold... why don't they just back load the contract offer to Bay?

 

Every source that has reported the Sox' renewed interest in Bay has said that's exactly what the FO is looking into. Not to mention they should be worried about the tax treshold because it's their money and Bay is not obligated to work around a backloaded contract because it's his money.

 

Tricky road the Sox are driving in.

[Emmz]

No' date=' my intention was to point out how you and Emmz haven't changed much since you both took your leave of absence. People who think your tag team bullying act is tired are obviously all stirring the pot or trying to incite something or baitng you or trolling (Edit: forgot that one). Nothing has changed.[/quote']

 

You stir the pot, you're the one who's out of line and trolling. Seriously, dude, just give it a rest.

[Emmz]

I didn't see the need to attack the post. I thought it was out of line. It's nice that you'll defend her no matter what' date=' and vice-versa. I'll start calling her posts asinine. I'm sure she won't be offended at all. [/quote']

 

God you're a tool.

[Spudboy]

Keeper has at least one problem. Aside from residing in his Mom's basement.

[Emmz]

The 6th Grade wisecrack mentality is bordering on harassment. It's ironic that he's calling someone a bully, when that's exactly what he's doing.

[Dipre]

And the problem is specifically with her. He doesn't do it with me because he sees her as an easy target. Who's the bully?

[Spudboy]

The 6th Grade wisecrack mentality is bordering on harassment. It's ironic that he's calling someone a bully' date=' when that's exactly what he's doing.[/quote']

 

Well. As Eddie Murphy's character said in "48 Hours".

 

"Lack a' pussy make you brave".

[Emmz]

That's exactly the reason I've developed the attitude I have, look at my early posting style, look at my current posting style.

[Cocos Disciples]

Great, please stop.

[Spudboy]

Great' date=' please stop.[/quote']

 

Will do.

[Keeper]

Keeper has at least one problem. Aside from residing in his Mom's basement.

 

Wow, I'm sorry I can't be as cool as you, man. Spud is a stud. I'm sorry that I'm a troll and I've been harassing Emmz? Lol wut. I'm sorry that Dipre and Emmz don't know how to argue without resorting to ad hominem and are an annoying united front. I'm sorry that I don't like it when Dipre calls people "champ." I guess I must be a tool and a dick for speaking my mind. At least I'm not asinine. That doesn't offend you, does it? Why should it? According to you and Dipre, it only means you're silly. It has no pejorative connoations whatsoever. How asinine of me for thinking otherwise.

[Dipre]

Wow' date=' I'm sorry I can't be as cool as you, man. Spud is a stud. I'm sorry that I'm a troll and I've been harassing Emmz? Haha. I'm sorry that Dipre and Emmz don't know how to argue without resorting to ad hominem and are an annoying united front. I'm sorry that I don't like it when Dipre calls people "champ." I guess I must be a tool and a dick for speaking my mind. At least I'm not asinine. That doesn't offend you, does it? Why should it? According to you and Dipre, it only means you're silly. It has no pejorative connoations whatsoever. How asinine of me for thinking otherwise.[/quote']

 

Great' date=' please stop.[/b']

 

Great post, mister Bully.

[Spudboy]

Wow' date=' I'm sorry I can't be as cool as you, man. Spud is a stud. I'm sorry that I'm a troll and I've been harassing Emmz? Lol wut. I'm sorry that Dipre and Emmz don't know how to argue without resorting to ad hominem and are an annoying united front. I'm sorry that I don't like it when Dipre calls people "champ." I guess I must be a tool and a dick for speaking my mind. At least I'm not asinine. That doesn't offend you, does it? Why should it? According to you and Dipre, it only means you're silly. It has no pejorative connoations whatsoever. How asinine of me for thinking otherwise.[/quote']

 

This is a well thought out and well written post. I would expect nothing less from an English teacher.

 

I apologize for the basement comment. Clearly, you live on the first floor.

 

However, you seem preoccupied by the friendship of two Talksox members. This is the second time in the last week and a half that you have made comments regarding Dipre and Emmz. Quite frankly, you are out of line. Your opinion is your opinion. You are not talking about two baseball players. You are talking about two members of the Talksox community. Attacking them on a thread is distasteful, uncalled for, and out of line.

 

If you have a problem with their symbiosis, maybe it would be best to keep it to yourself or to contact a Moderator via PM. You don't speak for others on the board.

 

By the way. B+ post.

 

Use spell check next time.

[ORS]

The Sox are so worried about the luxury tax threshold... why don't they just back load the contract offer to Bay?

The AAV (average annual value) of all contracts (including bonuses) is how they determine where a team is relative to the luxury tax limit. Backloading it would accomplish nothing.

[Dipre]

The AAV (average annual value) of all contracts (including bonuses) is how they determine where a team is relative to the luxury tax limit. Backloading it would accomplish nothing.

 

The problem isn't so much the luxury tax, because considering the fact that Lugo's $9 million and most likely Lowell's $13 million (with the Sox paying around 9 million) are not counted towards the luxury tax threshold because they'll each be on another team's roster. The issue is the budget they had established in the first place didn't account for the extra money Bay is going to make this year, therefore, they're looking to backload the contract, but as i said before, they should worry about the luxury tax, because it will be quite a hit if they fail to deal Lowell ,and quite frankly, it's their money. The Sox are not the Yankees.

[Lester82]

Mino posted the same thing on the SOSH board too

[MANNYHOF24]

Throw 20 million at Holliday, trade Buchholz and Ellsbury for A-Gonz. It's pretty simple.

[Dipre]

Throw 20 million at Holliday' date=' trade Buchholz and Ellsbury for A-Gonz. It's pretty simple.[/quote']

 

You, sir, need to post more.

[MANNYHOF24]

You' date=' sir, need to post more.[/quote']

 

I agree, I just got caught up with a busy semester of school and didn't have time. When the seasons get closer i'll be plugged in more regularly.

[example1]

The AAV (average annual value) of all contracts (including bonuses) is how they determine where a team is relative to the luxury tax limit. Backloading it would accomplish nothing.

 

Do vesting options play into the luxury tax limit? Can they do a one year contract with 3-4 vesting contracts that each have their own AAV?

[Dipre]

Do vesting options play into the luxury tax limit? Can they do a one year contract with 3-4 vesting contracts that each have their own AAV?

 

When it comes to money, however, there’s two kinds: real dollars, and luxury tax dollars.

 

For luxury tax purposes, contracts are judged on their average annual value, to prevent teams from pulling shenanigans such as the Red Sox might be inclined to try here: paying Bay $5 million in 2010, say, and then $18.3 million the following three years, to escape the tax. Using this average value, for instance, Jon Lester counts as a $6 million player in 2010, because that is the average salary per year for his five-year, $30-million deal.

 

Then, there’s the real dollars, the actual amounts the Sox will pay out in 2010.

 

Because the contracts for Lester, Dustin Pedroia, and Kevin Youkilis are backloaded, the Sox’ actual payroll for 2010 is slightly less than its payroll for luxury tax purposes. Lester, for example, will actually make only $3.75 million in 2010, but counts as a $6-million player because his deal spikes to $11.6 million by 2013. The same is true for Pedroia, who will earn $3.5 million but counts as a $6.75-million player for tax purposes, with a salary that hits $10 million by the later years of the deal.

 

Some of that accounts for the variations in value in buying out players’ pre-arbitration and arbitration years versus their free agency years, but the backloading also speaks to the Sox desire for dollar flexibility in 2010 and 2011.

 

Balancing for the reverse effect of a few players whose deals have a higher dollar value than average value, such as Josh Beckett, the Sox payroll is probably $4 to $5 million smaller than the payroll for luxury tax purposes –– perhaps in the low $160-million range, when factoring in benefits, minor-league salaries and cash owed to players such as Julio Lugo. .

 

Source: Daniel Barbarisi.

 

 

Signing Bay would be money matter for Red Sox.

[example1]

That doesn't answer my question but thanks for the link.

 

Vesting options, not assured subsequent years.

 

I realize that AAV is based on the length of the contract, that's common sense. With vesting options the actual value wouldn't be realized until the final incentives had been kicked in, right?. In other words, it's not a 4 year/$65m deal until the last year of the contract is turned on, presumably sometime during the 3rd season, after two years worth of payroll has been reported.

 

I doubt that loophole exists, and I doubt Bay would go for it, but I was curious if anyone knew.

[Dipre]

That doesn't answer my question but thanks for the link.

 

Vesting options, not assured subsequent years.

 

I realize that AAV is based on the length of the contract, that's common sense. With vesting options the actual value wouldn't be realized until the final incentives had been kicked in, right?. In other words, it's not a 4 year/$65m deal until the last year of the contract is turned on, presumably sometime during the 3rd season, after two years worth of payroll has been reported.

 

I doubt that loophole exists, and I doubt Bay would go for it, but I was curious if anyone knew.

 

All points indicate towards the vesting options counting towards the AAV of players, since every contract with vesting options i've investigated has the options set up in a way that it won't alter the AAV of the contract (Jon Lester is an example).

 

So is Magglio:

 

Magglio Ordonez (75/5) with both vesting options (108/7) which average out to 15 and 15.4 million respectively.

 

Lackey's conditional option contradicts this though.