Feinsand: Dodgers Sign Tanner Scott to Four-Year, $72-Million Deal

6 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

But it is baseball. So my guess is they win around 100-105 games.

I'll take the over on that.

Just now, Irrelevant Dude said:

I'll take the over on that.

I agree it should be more. But baseball is a long season. The Dodgers will have the luxury of limiting innings for their pitchers to all be available for playoffs. Injuries also happen. What is the current betting number for wins? 

5 minutes ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

I'll take the over on that.

Andy Pages is their best position player under 30 and Tyler Glasnow is their SP who had the most IP last year.

They're going to be great still, but regular great not historically great.

50 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

He did say at seasons end. So I am not sure he is lying about that. Most trade deadlines the Cubs are strapped because they can go after a higher priced guy because they have no room in their payroll. If they are $20M short of the LT line there is no player at the deadline they can’t go after. They would only be picking up 1/3 of his salary. So if rhe Jays are out of it they can go after Vlad. There are several other players making $20M or so that may come available at the deadline. They can go after them. The problem is, will the Cubs buy at the deadline? Will this team be good enough compete so they can buy? That is the unnecessary game he is playing. I don’t think he is lying, if all works out they can get to $241M.  But I think what he is doing does suck. It shouldn’t be this way. 

Because god forbid the Chicago Cubs go over that $241M. I would hate for Tom Trying To Break Even Ricketts suffer more Biblical Losses by going over a bit. I can only imagine how owning the Cubs and Wrigleyville is such a horrible investment that makes him and his family almost zero money and trying to use their advantage of being a large market team would sink that family and their profits. I mean god bless the Ricketts for even willing to spend enough to run out a 85 win team while only breaking even at years end. That’s true dedication on their part. 

Scott would have been fun but I've always been a bit apprehensive about the length given his relatively short history of throwing strikes(especially poignant as a closer) which probably will degrade by default with his age.  Bring down Finnegan(my preference) or Yates and the pen looks good.

5 minutes ago, JD94 said:

Because god forbid the Chicago Cubs go over that $241M. I would hate for Tom Trying To Break Even Ricketts suffer more Biblical Losses by going over a bit. I can only imagine how owning the Cubs and Wrigleyville is such a horrible investment that makes him and his family almost zero money and trying to use their advantage of being a large market team would sink that family and their profits. I mean god bless the Ricketts for even willing to spend enough to run out a 85 win team while only breaking even at years end. That’s true dedication on their part. 

Why are you quoting me and responding to me? What did I say that suggest I am at all happy with what Ricketts is doing? I absolutely agree he should spend more. But he may not be lying if he says they will spend to $241M. The big lie to me is spending to break even. 

16 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Why are you quoting me and responding to me? What did I say that suggest I am at all happy with what Ricketts is doing? I absolutely agree he should spend more. But he may not be lying if he says they will spend to $241M. The big lie to me is spending to break even. 

Nightendale story said payroll will be 220 for 2025 . That includes deadline . With that said , they are currently at 180 according to that same story .
 

Roster resource has them at 198 , and that seems to be the number everybody is using .

30 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Why are you quoting me and responding to me? What did I say that suggest I am at all happy with what Ricketts is doing? I absolutely agree he should spend more. But he may not be lying if he says they will spend to $241M. The big lie to me is spending to break even. 

Sorry wasn’t directing that to you. I agree with what you’re saying. I was just airing my frustrations about their approach in response to your post, not at you. 

11 minutes ago, Dfan25 said:

Nightendale story said payroll will be 220 for 2025 . That includes deadline . With that said , they are currently at 180 according to that same story .
 

Roster resource has them at 198 , and that seems to be the number everybody is using .

I “think Bertz” explained how $220M for roster payroll and $241M payroll could mean the same thing. 

1 minute ago, JD94 said:

Sorry wasn’t directing that to you. I agree with what you’re saying. I was just airing my frustrations about their approach in response to your post, not at you. 

Ok, cool. I did not want to be misunderstood. I am not defending what TR does. 

Well Jed tried really hard, so there's that at least.

2 hours ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

Scott would have been fun but I've always been a bit apprehensive about the length given his relatively short history of throwing strikes(especially poignant as a closer) which probably will degrade by default with his age.  Bring down Finnegan(my preference) or Yates and the pen looks good.

what about estevez? morosi just said that the cubs are in on him

1 minute ago, 17 Seconds said:

what about estevez? morosi just said that the cubs are in on him

I’ve liked him going back to his Colorado days, so wouldn’t be bad.  He’s got a little of both of Finnegan and Scott’s imperfections in him, and I didn’t realize how much closing he’s done since leaving COL, so yeah sure let’s do it

If Trump came out in favor of a salary cap I bet the players would go for it. 
 

that’s my scorching hot take for the week.  

This signing is a joke. Beyond the Cubs this just isn't good for the mid and small market teams to compete.  Dodgers won the WS and will be adding Ohtani, Snell, Sasaki, and Scott to their pitching staff.

1 hour ago, 17 Seconds said:

what about estevez? morosi just said that the cubs are in on him

Cubs are waiting on the Dodgers to pass on Estevez. 

6 hours ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

I honestly can't decide between wanting the Dodgers to crash and burn or wanting them to completely dominate MLB for the next two seasons going into the expiring collective bargaining agreement.  Short term, watching them lose would be fun, but long term, I think I'll be rooting for Dodgers domination that results in major changes to force some level of payroll parity. 

Payroll parity isn’t the answer to any problem 

33 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

Payroll parity isn’t the answer to any problem 

Why not?

As if Tanner Scott didn’t want to pitch behind Javier Assad and Co. 😞

Deferred money needs to be abolished in the next CBA

7 hours ago, TomtheBombadil said:

^^ Almost feels like that’s a part of the con. If the players on the Dodgers don’t win all the WSs forever and ever, slip up even for a second, our overlords and their familiars will readily make the case that You Can’t Buy Rings and find the path to a harder cap a little more clear 

You’re thinking too small. They don’t just want an excuse for one team to not spend. They want an excuse for every team to not spend. Dodgers win consecutive WS>”baseball needs parity”>salary cap.

Jed: Hey Tom, ready to talk about that contract extension now?

Tom:  

45 minutes ago, UMFan83 said:

Jed: Hey Tom, ready to talk about that contract extension now?

Tom:  

 

 

If true this sucks. 4/$72 is not ridiculous for him. Of course I thought it was a no brainer Scott (or any player) would choose LA over Chicago if all is equal. So can’t tell if it is true.

11 hours ago, UMFan83 said:

Jed: Hey Tom, ready to talk about that contract extension now?

Tom:  

 

 

God forbid a player gets paid one extra dollar more than they are worth. Never mind all the players who are pre arbitration and arbitration. Don’t think about those players. 

Tell me more about rationality, Tom