Yankees Sign Masahiro Tanaka

[Sammy Sofa]

[expletive], Sammy wants back in with the Cubs AND looks like a Dracula:

 

http://deadspin.com/sammy-sosa-is-a-terrifying-vampire-1287618674

 

Canseco can go fart out a land mine.

[davell]

I want Canseco and Sammy. Bench coach and manager, don't care which is which. Just have that J-5 robot from Short Circuit there to spit out what they need to do at all times. And if they disobey, they get tasered immediately. Fun for all.

[Guest]

Oh God. Sammy as our manager would be [expletive] glorious.

[Derwood]

I would be very "optimeesee" about his tenure as manager

[davell]

Oh God. Sammy as our manager would be [expletive] glorious.

I tell him hit home run. The bunt is for sissy boy.

[Clem Fandango]

Phil Rogers of MLB.com reports that the Cubs are extremely interested in Japanese right-hander Masahiro Tanaka.

Sources say that signing Tanaka has become a top priority for the Cubs this offseason. The 24-year-old hurler, who is set to be posted this offseason, posted a 20-0 record, 1.24 ERA, 0.93 WHIP and 155/27 K/BB ratio over 181 innings during the regular season in 2013. It's been estimated that it will take nearly a $60 million posting fee for the rights to negotiate with Tanaka, then could require an additional $60 million to ink the right-hander. The Yankees, Red Sox, Rangers and several other teams are already known to have interest.

[Sammy Sofa]

The Cubs are interested in a ton of things they can't afford right now.

[Guest]

I really wish we had a better idea of how that posting fee would be handled as part of the payroll. You can make it work pretty much regardless, but if it ALL has to be a part of this year's payroll, then you need to pretty much trade Jackson, Shark, Villanueva, Schierholtz, even Barney to do so. You can come up to something that isn't a disaster, but since that pretty much caps the offseason, the best you can do is mostly tread water and hope for breakthroughs from young position players(Rizzo, Castro, Lake, Olt, Baez, Bryant) along with Tanaka and any pitching you get for Shark. Sets up brilliantly for 2015, but not exactly the ideal.

[Boris]

Golly, this would be so awesome. I am down for this signing. So down.

[SouthSideRyan]

Amazing how much this one signing could swing my opinion so far of #PoorTomRicketts

[HoopsCubs]

I really wish we had a better idea of how that posting fee would be handled as part of the payroll. You can make it work pretty much regardless, but if it ALL has to be a part of this year's payroll, then you need to pretty much trade Jackson, Shark, Villanueva, Schierholtz, even Barney to do so. You can come up to something that isn't a disaster, but since that pretty much caps the offseason, the best you can do is mostly tread water and hope for breakthroughs from young position players(Rizzo, Castro, Lake, Olt, Baez, Bryant) along with Tanaka and any pitching you get for Shark. Sets up brilliantly for 2015, but not exactly the ideal.

 

TT: The posting fee would not count against the payroll, so it won't be part of the luxury tax calculation. But internally speaking, it would have to count against the Baseball Operations budget. Let's assume the Cubs Baseball Ops total budget for 2014 is $150M - that includes payroll for the 40 man roster, funding minor league ops like scouting and player development, coaches and executive salaries, training centers, etc... Let's assume Mr. Epstein has calculated that he has already spent $90M on the guaranteed contracts plus all the other stuff, and can spend up to $60M more on the 40 man roster. So, he adds up the $60M posting fee plus Tanaka's $12M salary (e.g. 6 years $72M) plus $30M in additional moves he wants to make for the 2014 team. So, he needs $102M, but only has $60M to spend. What does he do? He goes to Mr. Ricketts and says, "boss, I need to borrow $42M." Ricketts might say, "Sure, but I will have to lower your future budget by $7-8M per year over the next 6 years to pay for it." Or, he might say, "I'll give you $24M, but you need to trade $18M in salaries to fund the rest." Theo will have to consider his options carefully. From my vantage point, I think the Cubs should got for it! With the team set to have fairly cheap offensive productivity over the next few years, investing in difference-making pitching seems like a no-brainer.

[Guest]

:shock: I feel like I just saw a ghost.

[XZero771679666304]

:shock: I feel like I just saw a ghost.

[Guest]

I really wish we had a better idea of how that posting fee would be handled as part of the payroll. You can make it work pretty much regardless, but if it ALL has to be a part of this year's payroll, then you need to pretty much trade Jackson, Shark, Villanueva, Schierholtz, even Barney to do so. You can come up to something that isn't a disaster, but since that pretty much caps the offseason, the best you can do is mostly tread water and hope for breakthroughs from young position players(Rizzo, Castro, Lake, Olt, Baez, Bryant) along with Tanaka and any pitching you get for Shark. Sets up brilliantly for 2015, but not exactly the ideal.

 

TT: The posting fee would not count against the payroll, so it won't be part of the luxury tax calculation. But internally speaking, it would have to count against the Baseball Operations budget. Let's assume the Cubs Baseball Ops total budget for 2014 is $150M - that includes payroll for the 40 man roster, funding minor league ops like scouting and player development, coaches and executive salaries, training centers, etc... Let's assume Mr. Epstein has calculated that he has already spent $90M on the guaranteed contracts plus all the other stuff, and can spend up to $60M more on the 40 man roster. So, he adds up the $60M posting fee plus Tanaka's $12M salary (e.g. 6 years $72M) plus $30M in additional moves he wants to make for the 2014 team. So, he needs $102M, but only has $60M to spend. What does he do? He goes to Mr. Ricketts and says, "boss, I need to borrow $42M." Ricketts might say, "Sure, but I will have to lower your future budget by $7-8M per year over the next 6 years to pay for it." Or, he might say, "I'll give you $24M, but you need to trade $18M in salaries to fund the rest." Theo will have to consider his options carefully. From my vantage point, I think the Cubs should got for it! With the team set to have fairly cheap offensive productivity over the next few years, investing in difference-making pitching seems like a no-brainer.

 

That all makes sense, but I think the reason we're wondering where the money would come from is the restrictive purchase agreement they have to abide by and the fact that they apparently can't operate at a loss at any given moment of the entire year.

[davell]

Yeah, the cash flow issue is the problem I see. I'm hoping for some semblance of a slush fund that's already figured into things. Just in case something like this pops up.

 

God only knows how the actual accounting works, but a one time lump sum that could be 60-80 million dollars is a whopper to overcome, especially when the exact timing of the posting could truly affect things on our end, if something like that doesn't exist.

 

I have very little to zero doubt Theo has seen things like this coming, especially if it impacted their Darvish bid. It's just going to come down to how much flexibility Ricketts has within the multiple loans he has and whether its at least possible that with the renovations starting later, it could be a blessing in disguise for something like this.

[HoopsCubs]

I really wish we had a better idea of how that posting fee would be handled as part of the payroll. You can make it work pretty much regardless, but if it ALL has to be a part of this year's payroll, then you need to pretty much trade Jackson, Shark, Villanueva, Schierholtz, even Barney to do so. You can come up to something that isn't a disaster, but since that pretty much caps the offseason, the best you can do is mostly tread water and hope for breakthroughs from young position players(Rizzo, Castro, Lake, Olt, Baez, Bryant) along with Tanaka and any pitching you get for Shark. Sets up brilliantly for 2015, but not exactly the ideal.

 

TT: The posting fee would not count against the payroll, so it won't be part of the luxury tax calculation. But internally speaking, it would have to count against the Baseball Operations budget. Let's assume the Cubs Baseball Ops total budget for 2014 is $150M - that includes payroll for the 40 man roster, funding minor league ops like scouting and player development, coaches and executive salaries, training centers, etc... Let's assume Mr. Epstein has calculated that he has already spent $90M on the guaranteed contracts plus all the other stuff, and can spend up to $60M more on the 40 man roster. So, he adds up the $60M posting fee plus Tanaka's $12M salary (e.g. 6 years $72M) plus $30M in additional moves he wants to make for the 2014 team. So, he needs $102M, but only has $60M to spend. What does he do? He goes to Mr. Ricketts and says, "boss, I need to borrow $42M." Ricketts might say, "Sure, but I will have to lower your future budget by $7-8M per year over the next 6 years to pay for it." Or, he might say, "I'll give you $24M, but you need to trade $18M in salaries to fund the rest." Theo will have to consider his options carefully. From my vantage point, I think the Cubs should got for it! With the team set to have fairly cheap offensive productivity over the next few years, investing in difference-making pitching seems like a no-brainer.

 

That all makes sense, but I think the reason we're wondering where the money would come from is the restrictive purchase agreement they have to abide by and the fact that they apparently can't operate at a loss at any given moment of the entire year.

 

Each team should see an additional $20M in revenue sharing this offseason from MLB. That will help to a certain extent.

But if the restrictive purchase agreement as you say has no leeway at all, then the Cubs will have to explore a 1:1 scenario with the business operations side, i.e., for every $1 spent on baseball operations above the given budget, $1 must be saved on the BusOps side (Crane Kenney's head will explode!). TT's idea of selling some players off now for prospects combined with some reconciliation between BaseOps and BusOps seems plausible.

[SouthSideRyan]

CRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNEEEE!!!!!!

[davell]

I really wish we had a better idea of how that posting fee would be handled as part of the payroll. You can make it work pretty much regardless, but if it ALL has to be a part of this year's payroll, then you need to pretty much trade Jackson, Shark, Villanueva, Schierholtz, even Barney to do so. You can come up to something that isn't a disaster, but since that pretty much caps the offseason, the best you can do is mostly tread water and hope for breakthroughs from young position players(Rizzo, Castro, Lake, Olt, Baez, Bryant) along with Tanaka and any pitching you get for Shark. Sets up brilliantly for 2015, but not exactly the ideal.

 

TT: The posting fee would not count against the payroll, so it won't be part of the luxury tax calculation. But internally speaking, it would have to count against the Baseball Operations budget. Let's assume the Cubs Baseball Ops total budget for 2014 is $150M - that includes payroll for the 40 man roster, funding minor league ops like scouting and player development, coaches and executive salaries, training centers, etc... Let's assume Mr. Epstein has calculated that he has already spent $90M on the guaranteed contracts plus all the other stuff, and can spend up to $60M more on the 40 man roster. So, he adds up the $60M posting fee plus Tanaka's $12M salary (e.g. 6 years $72M) plus $30M in additional moves he wants to make for the 2014 team. So, he needs $102M, but only has $60M to spend. What does he do? He goes to Mr. Ricketts and says, "boss, I need to borrow $42M." Ricketts might say, "Sure, but I will have to lower your future budget by $7-8M per year over the next 6 years to pay for it." Or, he might say, "I'll give you $24M, but you need to trade $18M in salaries to fund the rest." Theo will have to consider his options carefully. From my vantage point, I think the Cubs should got for it! With the team set to have fairly cheap offensive productivity over the next few years, investing in difference-making pitching seems like a no-brainer.

 

That all makes sense, but I think the reason we're wondering where the money would come from is the restrictive purchase agreement they have to abide by and the fact that they apparently can't operate at a loss at any given moment of the entire year.

 

Each team should see an additional $20M in revenue sharing this offseason from MLB. That will help to a certain extent.

But if the restrictive purchase agreement as you say has no leeway at all, then the Cubs will have to explore a 1:1 scenario with the business operations side, i.e., for every $1 spent on baseball operations above the given budget, $1 must be saved on the BusOps side (Crane Kenney's head will explode!). TT's idea of selling some players off now for prospects combined with some reconciliation between BaseOps and BusOps seems plausible.

Hoops, that 20 mill figure is canceled out by almost the exact same amount in lost revenue for us.

[Guest]

Yeah, the cash flow issue is the problem I see. I'm hoping for some semblance of a slush fund that's already figured into things. Just in case something like this pops up.

 

God only knows how the actual accounting works, but a one time lump sum that could be 60-80 million dollars is a whopper to overcome, especially when the exact timing of the posting could truly affect things on our end, if something like that doesn't exist.

 

I have very little to zero doubt Theo has seen things like this coming, especially if it impacted their Darvish bid. It's just going to come down to how much flexibility Ricketts has within the multiple loans he has and whether its at least possible that with the renovations starting later, it could be a blessing in disguise for something like this.

 

Didn't even occur to me that the not starting renovations money could go towards a Tanaka bid (at least in terms of budgeting).

[Gilby]

Watch us place the highest bid but with the changes in the process, he chooses to sign with the Yankees who had the second highest bid.

 

Nah, but seriously, really curious what the changes in the posting process look like (if they even happen this year) and what the cap would be.

[imb]

I really wish we had a better idea of how that posting fee would be handled as part of the payroll. You can make it work pretty much regardless, but if it ALL has to be a part of this year's payroll, then you need to pretty much trade Jackson, Shark, Villanueva, Schierholtz, even Barney to do so. You can come up to something that isn't a disaster, but since that pretty much caps the offseason, the best you can do is mostly tread water and hope for breakthroughs from young position players(Rizzo, Castro, Lake, Olt, Baez, Bryant) along with Tanaka and any pitching you get for Shark. Sets up brilliantly for 2015, but not exactly the ideal.

 

TT: The posting fee would not count against the payroll, so it won't be part of the luxury tax calculation. But internally speaking, it would have to count against the Baseball Operations budget. Let's assume the Cubs Baseball Ops total budget for 2014 is $150M - that includes payroll for the 40 man roster, funding minor league ops like scouting and player development, coaches and executive salaries, training centers, etc... Let's assume Mr. Epstein has calculated that he has already spent $90M on the guaranteed contracts plus all the other stuff, and can spend up to $60M more on the 40 man roster. So, he adds up the $60M posting fee plus Tanaka's $12M salary (e.g. 6 years $72M) plus $30M in additional moves he wants to make for the 2014 team. So, he needs $102M, but only has $60M to spend. What does he do? He goes to Mr. Ricketts and says, "boss, I need to borrow $42M." Ricketts might say, "Sure, but I will have to lower your future budget by $7-8M per year over the next 6 years to pay for it." Or, he might say, "I'll give you $24M, but you need to trade $18M in salaries to fund the rest." Theo will have to consider his options carefully. From my vantage point, I think the Cubs should got for it! With the team set to have fairly cheap offensive productivity over the next few years, investing in difference-making pitching seems like a no-brainer.

 

what the [expletive]

[davell]

Watch us place the highest bid but with the changes in the process, he chooses to sign with the Yankees who had the second highest bid.

 

Nah, but seriously, really curious what the changes in the posting process look like (if they even happen this year) and what the cap would be.

Nothing has came out, as of yet anyway, that the posting system has changed. If it DOES change and allows for multiple teams to negotiate with the player, I personally don't see that as a likely help for us. Seattle has twice the Jspanese population Chicago does and has Japanese ownership. The LA market has about 10 times the Japanese population and New York has a giant advantage as well over Chicago as far as that goes. Texas already has Yu, which is appealing as well.....Basically, I think we're probably better off if it stays the same.

[Guest]

Welcome back, Hoops!

[Derwood]

I really wish we had a better idea of how that posting fee would be handled as part of the payroll. You can make it work pretty much regardless, but if it ALL has to be a part of this year's payroll, then you need to pretty much trade Jackson, Shark, Villanueva, Schierholtz, even Barney to do so. You can come up to something that isn't a disaster, but since that pretty much caps the offseason, the best you can do is mostly tread water and hope for breakthroughs from young position players(Rizzo, Castro, Lake, Olt, Baez, Bryant) along with Tanaka and any pitching you get for Shark. Sets up brilliantly for 2015, but not exactly the ideal.

 

TT: The posting fee would not count against the payroll, so it won't be part of the luxury tax calculation. But internally speaking, it would have to count against the Baseball Operations budget. Let's assume the Cubs Baseball Ops total budget for 2014 is $150M - that includes payroll for the 40 man roster, funding minor league ops like scouting and player development, coaches and executive salaries, training centers, etc... Let's assume Mr. Epstein has calculated that he has already spent $90M on the guaranteed contracts plus all the other stuff, and can spend up to $60M more on the 40 man roster. So, he adds up the $60M posting fee plus Tanaka's $12M salary (e.g. 6 years $72M) plus $30M in additional moves he wants to make for the 2014 team. So, he needs $102M, but only has $60M to spend. What does he do? He goes to Mr. Ricketts and says, "boss, I need to borrow $42M." Ricketts might say, "Sure, but I will have to lower your future budget by $7-8M per year over the next 6 years to pay for it." Or, he might say, "I'll give you $24M, but you need to trade $18M in salaries to fund the rest." Theo will have to consider his options carefully. From my vantage point, I think the Cubs should got for it! With the team set to have fairly cheap offensive productivity over the next few years, investing in difference-making pitching seems like a no-brainer.

 

what the [expletive]

 

Only 5 1/2 years between posts.

[imb]

What were you in for, Hoops?