Bay vs. Holliday

[jacksonianmarch]

options do not count into AAV.

[bostonknuckleheadclothing]

I think at the end of the day many of these decisions are made by money. Money is the driving force every decision. Good players are traded all the time for money reasons.

[example1]

options do not count into AAV.

 

So, if Bay really wanted to play in Boston he could sign a $7m deal with vesting options that drive the deal up in subsequent years, strongly impacting future luxury tax thresholds but not the 2010 one?

[Dipre]

So' date=' if Bay really wanted to play in Boston he could sign a $7m deal with vesting options that drive the deal up in subsequent years, strongly impacting future luxury tax thresholds but not the 2010 one?[/quote']

 

That's why i think Jacko's wrong. That's an enormous loophole that could be easily exploited by every big-market team.

[jacksonianmarch]

So' date=' if Bay really wanted to play in Boston he could sign a $7m deal with vesting options that drive the deal up in subsequent years, strongly impacting future luxury tax thresholds but not the 2010 one?[/quote']

 

Yep. If Bay signed a 1 yr $7mil deals with 3 vesting options for $17 million or so that vest after 30 games played, then they would have a cap number of 7 mil for 2010 and 17 mil for every yr after that

[Dipre]

Yep. If Bay signed a 1 yr $7mil deals with 3 vesting options for $17 million or so that vest after 30 games played' date=' then they would have a cap number of 7 mil for 2010 and 17 mil for every yr after that[/quote']

 

The problem is, that if there's a loophole that big, then why don't other teams exploit it? (Namely the Yanks)

[example1]

The problem is' date=' that if there's a loophole that big, then why don't other teams exploit it? (Namely the Yanks)[/quote']

 

I imagine:

a) Players are hesitant to sign contracts for non-guaranteed money and

Selig's office would probably find a way to nix it as the "vesting" part of the option would probably be very simple, like "If Jason Bay steps on the field at 2009 he will get a contract for 2010" which means it is just a fluff stipulation meant to game the system.

[BSN07]

The problem is' date=' that if there's a loophole that big, then why don't other teams exploit it? (Namely the Yanks)[/quote']

 

They don't seem to care too much if they have to pay the Luxury Tax. The Red Sox FO does. That's about what it boils down too.

[jacksonianmarch]

That's why i think Jacko's wrong. That's an enormous loophole that could be easily exploited by every big-market team.

 

http://www.overthemonster.com/2009/12/22/1212797/lets-talk-about-luxury-tax?ref=yahoo

 

It doesnt go into it, but I did learn a bit about the lux tax

[Dipre]

I imagine:

a) Players are hesitant to sign contracts for non-guaranteed money and

Selig's office would probably find a way to nix it as the "vesting" part of the option would probably be very simple, like "If Jason Bay steps on the field at 2009 he will get a contract for 2010" which means it is just a fluff stipulation meant to game the system.

 

I'll check further into it, but it seems too simple a loophole to exploit, and as you said yourself, with an option that simple to fulfill, anyone would go for options like that one to help their teams avoid tax hits.

[jacksonianmarch]

But it would hit later. They arent hiding any money, as a matter of fact, they'll be hitting themselves with a much bigger budget hit later on.

[Dipre]

But it would hit later. They arent hiding any money' date=' as a matter of fact, they'll be hitting themselves with a much bigger budget hit later on.[/quote']

 

This makes sense, but in the Sox' case, with so much money coming off the books, it'd give them space to maneuver around the tax hit in '11.

[example1]

Let's be honest here though, it isn't like many teams bump against the tax threshold anyway, so it probably simply doesn't come up as useful that often.

 

What other teams would need to go to the trouble of manipulating a contract to reduce one year's AAV? Not many.

[riverside sluggers]

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/cardinals/story/19CF706A9EEF586C8625769B000B8245?OpenDocument

 

Haha wow, the Cards might look at Felipe Lopez as an alternative in left field. Try selling that to the fan base

[example1]

This makes sense' date=' but in the Sox' case, with so much money coming off the books, it'd give them space to maneuver around the tax hit in '11.[/quote']

 

It wouldn't hurt them if Bay signs a truly reasonable contract. If he is a Mike Lowell by the end of it then it will hurt like any other bad contract does.

[jacksonianmarch]

The point is moot. Holliday is the only big name OFer left on the market

[redsoxrules]

rather than trading the farm for Gonzo I think the Sox should break the bank for Holliday

[jacksonianmarch]

I posted an article around here somewhere that shows exactly why the sox wont do that. If the sox stay under the cap this season, then they will restart the whole cycle. Remember, there is an escalating penalty for being over the cap. If they crack the lux tax, even by $1, then their penalty for 2011 will be 40% instead of 22.5%. That's huge since the sox are expected to be big players in next free agency

[BSN07]

I posted an article around here somewhere that shows exactly why the sox wont do that. If the sox stay under the cap this season' date=' then they will restart the whole cycle. Remember, there is an escalating penalty for being over the cap. If they crack the lux tax, even by $1, then their penalty for 2011 will be 40% instead of 22.5%. That's huge since the sox are expected to be big players in next free agency[/quote']

 

This is why I don't see any more big money deals from the Sox this season. There are a few trade targets that makes decent money this season but aren't too expensive that they could theoretically bring in.

 

The only way I see them breaking the Bank for Holliday is if Mauer signs an extension with the Twins before Holliday signs somewhere. Then they may have no reason to wait around for next off season if Mauer and Halladay are both of the market.

 

I really hope there working on Beckett and V-Mart extensions as well.

[SoxSport]

It looks to me as though the Mets got "stuck" with Bay, and the Sox truly weren't interested. He obviously fit better in Boston, with Fenway and the DH which he'll be more suited for in a couple of years. The latter is what takes some value off the Mets deal. They continue to sign over-30 players to long term contracts and don't get full value on the back end. It looks like Bay blew it--turning the 4/60 down originally with the Sox. But he got his money--lucky, considering the Mets were bidding against themselves in this price range.

 

So now the speculation shifts to Holliday. Boras is holding the final card. He will look to the Red Sox. Then he will look to the Yankees. If he gets a no, he will finally deal with the Cardinals who are waiting hat in hand. The Cardinals are the obvious fit for Holliday, in view of his stats there last year.

[SoxSport]

rather than trading the farm for Gonzo I think the Sox should break the bank for Holliday

 

Hope they don't. Because you know Boras will take their offer to the Yankees, and Holliday will wind up in NY.

 

Holliday may have a better chance of winding up in St Louis if the Red Sox stay out of it.

[soxfan17881]

Here's my question, late as it maybe... If Bay was so happy in Boston, why would he turn down the Red Sox deal in favor of a Mets deal that gave him only 1.5 million more per season? I mean the difference between 66 and 60 is pretty negligible unless your only concern is the bottom line.

 

I suppose I'm just bummed cause I wanted Bay back. I get sick of these guys always saying nice sound bites about how they like where they are and then going to the highest bidder. It seems hypocritical.

[Dipre]

Here's my question, late as it maybe... If Bay was so happy in Boston, why would he turn down the Red Sox deal in favor of a Mets deal that gave him only 1.5 million more per season? I mean the difference between 66 and 60 is pretty negligible unless your only concern is the bottom line.

 

I suppose I'm just bummed cause I wanted Bay back. I get sick of these guys always saying nice sound bites about how they like where they are and then going to the highest bidder. It seems hypocritical.

 

The Mets did basically assure him the 5th year he was looking for though. The Sox wouldn't, so he chose what was best for him. I really don't see it as hypocritical in this instance.

[diony]

Here's my question' date=' late as it maybe... If Bay was so happy in Boston, why would he turn down the Red Sox deal in favor of a Mets deal that gave him only [b']1.5 million more per season[/b]? I mean the difference between 66 and 60 is pretty negligible unless your only concern is the bottom line.

It's their new trend .

[Dipre]

It's their new trend .

 

Your trolling act is tiring.

[example1]

Here's my question, late as it maybe... If Bay was so happy in Boston, why would he turn down the Red Sox deal in favor of a Mets deal that gave him only 1.5 million more per season? I mean the difference between 66 and 60 is pretty negligible unless your only concern is the bottom line.

 

1.5m is a lot of money. It's an extra $4,109 per-day over an entire year, or $171 per-hour. It's an extra 200K college education for the kids in 2 months. It's an extra 40k car every 10 days. That's not an insignificant amount.

 

I don't know about most of you, but that's a lot more money than I make and I would be happy to do a lot of things for an extra 4k per DAY.

[yankees228]

Hope they don't. Because you know Boras will take their offer to the Yankees, and Holliday will wind up in NY.

 

Holliday may have a better chance of winding up in St Louis if the Red Sox stay out of it.

 

I'm sure you would have said the exact same thing before Lackey was signed. The Yankees, with the exception of adding a cheap, right-handed outfielder, are done this offseason.

[jacksonianmarch]

And before New Year's. I'm pretty impressed

[SoxSport]

My reading of Bay's situation is he blew it when he turned down 4/60 from the Red Sox last summer.

He wanted to be a FA to see what he could get. He got 4/65 from the Mets. The Red Sox moved on and signed Lackey and Cameron. Bay presumably found the market barren, and went back to the Red Sox, who probably said they weren't in a position to offer him 4/60 or whatever again, so he finally accepted the Mets offer with an option year thrown in. I doubt any other deal was on the table at that point. I think the Mets added the option year so they wouldn't look like they were competing with themselves. They no doubt were. The Red Sox were not in the picture.

 

It's a shame. The guy misinterpreted the market, and wound up with a team that wasn't his first choice. He got his money, and will have to be satisfied with the Mets. With the immense win pressure in NY, I have no doubt they will move that LF fence in. Even then, the Mets have no chance to realize full value, since Bay will be DH material in 2-3 years. I see this as a typical Mets FA move.

[SoxSport]

The Yankees' date=' with the exception of adding a cheap, right-handed outfielder, are done this offseason.[/quote']

 

Can we have that in writing, please? LOL.