Tracking 2012 Payroll (Theo year 1)

[LeftCoastCubFan]

There are only 7 players under contract for $72.9 million (including prorated signing bonuses)

 

Carlos Zambrano - 19.0 (2013 vesting option of 19.3 if he is in top 4 in Cy Young Voting)

Ryan Dempster - 14.0

Carlos Marmol - 7.0

Sean Marshall - 3.1

Alfonso Soriano - 19.0

Marlon Byrd - 6.5

David DeJesus - 4.3

 

Note Figures include 2.0 (Zambrano/Soriano) million in prorated signing bonuses

 

------

 

There are 6 arbitration eligible players with a SWAG of $19.3 if all retained

 

Matt Garza - 8.0 (6.0 2011 2nd year arb eligible)

Randy Wells - 1.0 (0.5 2011 1st yr arb eligible)

Geovany Soto - 5.0 (3.0 2011 2nd year arb eligible)

Jeff Baker - 2.0 (1.2 2011 3rd year arb eligible)

Blake DeWitt - 0.8 (0.5 2011 1st yr arb eligible)

Ian Stewart - 2.5 (2.3 2011 1st yr arb eligible - was super 2 last year?)

 

-----

 

8 Free Agents

 

Kerry Wood

John Grabow

Rodrigo Lopez

Ramon Ortiz

Koyie Hill

Carlos Pena

Aramis Ramirez

Reed Johnson

 

-----

 

Other players are under Cub’s control. If filling out roster with no changes, 13 players at $8 mil

 

Note: Samardzija (3.3 2011, 2.8 without signing bonus) Cubs declined contract but can only cut 20%, so if kept he will cost at least 2.2 mil

 

 

Current 25 man roster TOTAL is $100.2

Edited December 9, 2011 by LeftCoastCubFan

[CubColtPacer]

Marshall's deal is actually for 3.1 this year. He signed a 2 year deal before last season.

[A New Era]

Carlos Zambrano - 19.0

Ryan Dempster - 14.0

 

Thank God these are off the books after next year. That will really help with flexibility going forward.

 

Carlos Marmol - 7.0

Matt Garza - 8.0

Randy Wells - 1.0

Sean Marshall - 4.0

Samardzija - 2.7

 

I view these as nice young positive assets (IE: easily sought after for trades, but also appealing to keep). We need alot more of these.

 

Kerry Wood

Carlos Pena

 

Wouldn't mind seing back.

 

Koyie Hill

 

Good riddance.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Matt Garza - 8.0 (6.0 2011 2nd year arb eligible)

Randy Wells - 1.0 (0.5 2011 1st yr arb eligible)

Sean Marshall - 4.0 (3.1 2011 3rd year arb eligible)

Geovany Soto - 5.0 (3.0 2011 2nd year arb eligible)

Jeff Baker - 2.0 (1.2 2011 3rd year arb eligible)

Blake DeWitt - 0.8 (0.5 2011 1st yr arb eligible)

 

With both LeMahieu and Flaherty seemingly big league ready, may as well save 2 mil and let Baker go. Is it possible to trade him before ofering arbitration? Or perhaps let The Red Sox have him.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

There are 6 arbitration eligible players with a SWAG of $29.8 if all retained

 

Matt Garza - 8.0 (6.0 2011 2nd year arb eligible)

Randy Wells - 1.0 (0.5 2011 1st yr arb eligible)

Sean Marshall - 4.0 (3.1 2011 3rd year arb eligible)

Geovany Soto - 5.0 (3.0 2011 2nd year arb eligible)

Jeff Baker - 2.0 (1.2 2011 3rd year arb eligible)

Blake DeWitt - 0.8 (0.5 2011 1st yr arb eligible)

 

I think that should be $20.8 million, which I think makes your final total $9 million high.

[davell]

In all likelihood, Wells will make 2 mill or so this upcoming season. Pretty sure Dempster will be making 15.5 as well, he deferred a little cash previously to allow us to sign someone. Also Silva's buyout is 2 mill, which we have to pay and we owe Pena 5 mill in early January as well. Of course, we have no clue whether or not these things are counted towards the 2012 payroll or not.

[LeftCoastCubFan]

Marshall's deal is actually for 3.1 this year. He signed a 2 year deal before last season.

[i think that should be $20.8 million, which I think makes your final total $9 million high.

Thank you for finding the errors. I corrected them on first post. Note to self: don’t look at numbers after midnight.

[LeftCoastCubFan]

In all likelihood, Wells will make 2 mill or so this upcoming season. Pretty sure Dempster will be making 15.5 as well, he deferred a little cash previously to allow us to sign someone. Also Silva's buyout is 2 mill, which we have to pay and we owe Pena 5 mill in early January as well. Of course, we have no clue whether or not these things are counted towards the 2012 payroll or not.

Wells is in his first year of arbitration. He is unlikely to see that big of an increase.

 

Silva’s buyout became an expense as soon as they cut him, regardless of when they actually pay it.

 

If the Cubs borrowed from Bank of America instead of Dempster would it change his salary for 2012? The expense is the same, just a liability added to the balance sheet. Same goes for Pena.

[dew1679666265]

Matt Garza - 8.0 (6.0 2011 2nd year arb eligible)

Randy Wells - 1.0 (0.5 2011 1st yr arb eligible)

Sean Marshall - 4.0 (3.1 2011 3rd year arb eligible)

Geovany Soto - 5.0 (3.0 2011 2nd year arb eligible)

Jeff Baker - 2.0 (1.2 2011 3rd year arb eligible)

Blake DeWitt - 0.8 (0.5 2011 1st yr arb eligible)

 

With both LeMahieu and Flaherty seemingly big league ready, may as well save 2 mil and let Baker go. Is it possible to trade him before ofering arbitration? Or perhaps let The Red Sox have him.

 

I don't want to turn this into a long debate as it would derail the thread, but it would be pretty hard, I think, to find a guy who has the positional versatility and mashes lefties the way Baker does for just $2 million. He's worth keeping.

[bukie]

Also, this page will help keep up with the Cubs current contracts for next year.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

By the time Soriano comes off the books, Garza should be in the heart of his big new contract. And we're going to probably want to buy out Castro's arbitration years.

 

Just makes you appreciate Epstein's insistence that we have to have a strong pipeline of players.

[LeftCoastCubFan]

Updated first post with double-D signing

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Pena's 5 million deferred counts against 2012:

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/7398/pena-still-may-end-up-with-cubs

[Hairyducked Idiot]

This is obviously made more difficult by the Cubs keeping mum, but for the moment let's assume $130 million is the payroll again.

 

We have 72.85 million committed right now.

 

We had it confirmed today that there is a $5 million hit to this year's budget based on Pena's deferral.

 

Using the same arbitration estimates from earlier in the thread, plus $2.5 for Stewart,

 

I've got us at $101.1 million for 14 players. We've still got some room, but we're creeping up fast. Assume 500k as a baseline for the remaining 11 roster spots, and we've got 24 million extra to spend. The nickel-and-dime stuff adds up fast.

[LeftCoastCubFan]

We had it confirmed today that there is a $5 million hit to this year's budget based on Pena's deferral.

Not really.

 

The 5 million is an expense of 2011, even though it is paid through payroll this year (Do a Google search on FASB or IRS and deferred compensation rules).

 

Pena’s full salary is included in 2011 player’s expense, and included in the Cubs 2011 tax return. The 5 million dollar deferral becomes a liability at present value in 2011. The basic agreement also requires that any amount over 1 million be funded in a safe investment. But it’s a balance sheet item at this point.

 

So even though it is correct that it will be paid through payroll in 2012; Bruce is incorrect saying “The $5 million will count against the Cubs' 2012 payrol”.

[LeftCoastCubFan]

Added Ian Stewart to first post

[CubFanPhilly]

We had it confirmed today that there is a $5 million hit to this year's budget based on Pena's deferral.

Not really.

 

The 5 million is an expense of 2011, even though it is paid through payroll this year (Do a Google search on FASB or IRS and deferred compensation rules).

 

Pena’s full salary is included in 2011 player’s expense, and included in the Cubs 2011 tax return. The 5 million dollar deferral becomes a liability at present value in 2011. The basic agreement also requires that any amount over 1 million be funded in a safe investment. But it’s a balance sheet item at this point.

 

So even though it is correct that it will be paid through payroll in 2012; Bruce is incorrect saying “The $5 million will count against the Cubs' 2012 payrol”.

 

Has management ever commented on how they construct their budget? If not, you're assuming GAAP determines the team's budget. It could just as well be cash flows.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

We had it confirmed today that there is a $5 million hit to this year's budget based on Pena's deferral.

Not really.

 

The 5 million is an expense of 2011, even though it is paid through payroll this year (Do a Google search on FASB or IRS and deferred compensation rules).

 

Pena’s full salary is included in 2011 player’s expense, and included in the Cubs 2011 tax return. The 5 million dollar deferral becomes a liability at present value in 2011. The basic agreement also requires that any amount over 1 million be funded in a safe investment. But it’s a balance sheet item at this point.

 

So even though it is correct that it will be paid through payroll in 2012; Bruce is incorrect saying “The $5 million will count against the Cubs' 2012 payrol”.

 

So if the Cubs tell a reporter "The $5 million will be counted against our 2012 payroll," they don't really mean it?

[LeftCoastCubFan]

Has management ever commented on how they construct their budget? If not, you're assuming GAAP determines the team's budget. It could just as well be cash flows.

 

The intent (in my opinion) of this thread has nothing to do with the budgeting directly. It is to see where we stand with payroll to speculate what we have to spend. We have limited data. Cotts contract details and USA Today’s database are the main sources of data. Also have found that when teams talk budget numbers, they tend to match the salary plus prorated bonus amounts.

 

This is not an accounting exercise. We do not include players per diem when they travel, the cost of the home game buffets, the cost of health insurance, the cost of individual hotel suites in contracts, etc. which amount to millions. We also are not looking at the increased costs for bringing in Theo and expanding the baseball management side. We aren’t looking at the cost of water for the troughs or TP in the stall. Or what revenues will be, or the cost of paying back the loans to themselves, or the current present value of money. Everything affects budget, but we don’t know the details or really care. But we do have a number every year. It may be as vague as payroll stays the same or will increase 10 mil. Or some years it’s a stared amount. We are just trying to see what we might have left to spend.

 

I’m not an accountant, and I haven’t stayed in a Holliday Inn Express; but I do have 25 years in analysis and development of financial systems. I know enough to know that when someone says 5 mil in deferred salary from last year is an expense for this year is wrong, and I point that out. If I am incorrect please point out how.

 

If the Cubs deferred salary last year, it is likely it was a cash flow issue. But that doesn’t change the player expense side.

 

So if the Cubs tell a reporter "The $5 million will be counted against our 2012 payroll," they don't really mean it?

Where do you get the quote part? I quoted Bruce Levine. He did not give his sources or any direct quote. I took it as his opinion. You took it as a quote. I disagree with your conclusion.

 

Go to the LA Times website. There is an article about Pujols financial benefit. It starts with a picture of a jersey being sold and talks about increased revenues from merchandise sales. If sports writers understood finance they would be part of the 1% rather than sports writers.

[CubFanPhilly]

I know enough to know that when someone says 5 mil in deferred salary from last year is an expense for this year is wrong, and I point that out. If I am incorrect please point out how.

 

It's your thread. I find it interesting and appreciate the information you're providing.

 

I agree with you that the $5 mil is not a 2012 expense, but as you stated the intent of the exercise is to discern whether Cubs management is counting deferred compensation against this year's payroll budget or last year's. I don't know if the Cubs build their budget based on the accounting treatment or the cash flows, but in my opinion either approach is equally plausible. I wouldn't draw any firm conclusions from a media report, but I wouldn't dismiss the idea either.

[davell]

LCCF. Just curious, but if the Cubs win the bidding on Darvish, how do you think they'd put the posting fee into payroll, if at all? All at once or amateurized over the length of the eventual contract, even though it's paid as one lump sum.

[davearm2]

amortized

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The Marshall trade shaved 2.6 million or so, assuming we aren't sending any cash (which isn't a safe assumption, the Reds are pretty tapped and I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't make paying his salary part of the deal).

 

If no cash was involved that trade, we'd be back down to $97.6 without Pena's deferral and $102.6 with.

[ConstableRabbit]

LCCF. Just curious, but if the Cubs win the bidding on Darvish, how do you think they'd put the posting fee into payroll, if at all? All at once or amateurized over the length of the eventual contract, even though it's paid as one lump sum.

your post?

[ctcf]

What's this up to nowadays, anyway?