The Bryce is Right, Bitch

[Derwood]

Can someone explain why “The Cubs are interested “ always has the caveat of “but they would need to get creative”, while “The Dodgers are interested” has no such caveats? Don’t they have a ton of OF’s and a similarly high salary situation?

I’ve seen a decent amount of articles about how Puig, Pederson, Kemp and Verdugo are being shopped.

 

I’m sure, and yet the Dodgers are constantly considered “front runners” while the Cubs are “unlikely” despite the same numbers of hurdles for both teams to clear

[David]

The Lester thing was treated with a lot of skepticism, IIRC, because the Cubs were still terrible and it was a lot of money.

 

The Heyward thing was treated with skepticism because people didn't think they would go out and make a huge signing two years in a row, IIRC.

 

The Tanaka thing was treated with a ton of skepticism because of the rebuild "they're not gonna spend big on this guy when they're 8 million years away blah blah"

 

But there were obviously rumors about all of them. It wasn't completely out of nowhere.

 

additionally, does anyone remember how the whole courting maddon while renteria was still employed (and had been declared back for 2015) thing went?

[Cubswin11]

Can someone explain why “The Cubs are interested “ always has the caveat of “but they would need to get creative”, while “The Dodgers are interested” has no such caveats? Don’t they have a ton of OF’s and a similarly high salary situation?

I’ve seen a decent amount of articles about how Puig, Pederson, Kemp and Verdugo are being shopped.

 

I’m sure, and yet the Dodgers are constantly considered “front runners” while the Cubs are “unlikely” despite the same numbers of hurdles for both teams to clear

I mean this right here is kinda saying that.

 

[Sammy Sofa]

It's almost like a guy getting his baseball news filtered through a Cubs message board is missing the hot Dodgers goss...

[Derwood]

It's almost like a guy getting his baseball news filtered through a Cubs message board is missing the hot Dodgers goss...

 

I've been listening to MLB Radio Winter Meeting coverage during my commute and they NEVER mention the Cubs w/ Bryce, but CONSTANTLY mention the Dodgers

[Sammy Sofa]

Probably because according to things like Spotrac the Dodgers have more money to work with (though I dunno what their luxury tax situation is, so whatever), and they have more of a history of an FU approach to money.

[Bluescale]

I wonder if “trading future dollars” means more they don’t want to or “can’t” pay him $35-40 mil+ this year and with all the money coming off the next 2 years they want to pay him more like $20 mil this year and jump it starting in 2 years but Bryce/Boras want more in the first year or two and “trading future dollars” doesn’t necessarily mean having to trade money off this year (like yes I’m sure they’d be more than happy to dump Kintzler or Chatwood) but it’s more in relation to his deal and how they want it structured?

 

That's not what he means, unfortunately:

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Because nothing good will ever happen after the WS win and this is the darkest timeline.

[Post Count Padder]

So trade Russell to a team like the Mets or Padres or Royals and then add a prospect and bribe someone like the Angels into taking Chatwood's contract and then trade Almora or Happ for pitching prospects and there ya go.

[Hunter]

Probably because according to things like Spotrac the Dodgers have more money to work with (though I dunno what their luxury tax situation is, so whatever), and they have more of a history of an FU approach to money.

 

Dodgers are estimated at $197 million. That leaves them with about $9 million to play with. Previous 2 years they were over-cap. That third year of being over-cap really hurts. Penalty jumps from 20% 1st year, to 30% 2nd year, and then to 50% for the 3rd year. If they were be over by $20 million, they would then be paying a 62% penalty on their overages.

Edited December 12, 2018 by Hunter

[Cubswin11]

Probably because according to things like Spotrac the Dodgers have more money to work with (though I dunno what their luxury tax situation is, so whatever), and they have more of a history of an FU approach to money.

They’re in a bit better spot this year and next currently (not by a ton) but they probably have more things to spend on this offseason than us (starting catcher, 2B, SP and RP are all needs) 2 years from now is the same in terms of committed money. Under Friedman I’d say they definitely don’t have nearly as much of an FU approach to money as we’ve had. Ownership can change that obviously, but FO wise we’ve shown more willingness to spend.

Edited December 12, 2018 by Cubswin11

[imb]

I will believe we aren’t signing Harper the day I see him in another team’s uniform

[Bluescale]

That’s what I thought future dollars meant. Nice of that guy to clarify? It seems so doable but maybe not dundundun

 

Yep. We just gotta sucker someone into taking Bryant. Then it's smooth sailing to Harperville...

[Cubswin11]

I wonder if “trading future dollars” means more they don’t want to or “can’t” pay him $35-40 mil+ this year and with all the money coming off the next 2 years they want to pay him more like $20 mil this year and jump it starting in 2 years but Bryce/Boras want more in the first year or two and “trading future dollars” doesn’t necessarily mean having to trade money off this year (like yes I’m sure they’d be more than happy to dump Kintzler or Chatwood) but it’s more in relation to his deal and how they want it structured?

 

That's not what he means, unfortunately:

[Sammy Sofa]

God, I just saw a picture of Ted Cruz and it made me hate the Ricketts even more. GET FUCKED, YOU DILDO FACED ANUSES.

[Bull]

God, I just saw a picture of Ted Cruz and it made me hate the Ricketts even more. GET horsefeathers, YOU DILDO FACED ANUSES.

I will never be able to hate the ricketts’. I was a fan under tribune ownership.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I wouldn't be shocked if we signed Harper, but the "everything is secret good news, 15th degree underwater chess" explanations for every piece of bad news are annoying.

[Rob]

I wouldn't be shocked if we signed Harper, but the "everything is secret good news, 15th degree underwater chess" explanations for every piece of bad news are annoying.

 

I certainly wasn't espousing my belief that everything is secret good news --just that I refuse to get worked up over reports that we're saying exactly what I thought we'd probably be saying.

[17 Seconds]

ban kyle and mojo

[Tim]

I wouldn't be shocked if we signed Harper, but the "everything is secret good news, 15th degree underwater chess" explanations for every piece of bad news are annoying.

I'm attempting to harbor a careful neutrality.

[Sammy Sofa]

ban kyle and mojo

 

[Sammys Boombox]

I really don’t understand hating the Ricketts. Like, aren’t we supposed to want the monopoly guy to own our team AND also be a fan who wants the team to win AND is smart enough to hire smart baseball people to be the ones to decide how to spend his money?

 

Not sure what more you could want in an owner to be honest with you.

[Lefty]

I really don’t understand hating the Ricketts. Like, aren’t we supposed to want the monopoly guy to own our team AND also be a fan who wants the team to win AND is smart enough to hire smart baseball people to be the ones to decide how to spend his money?

 

Not sure what more you could want in an owner to be honest with you.

 

You do realize that he financially supports Republican politicians?

[jersey cubs fan]

I really don’t understand hating the Ricketts. Like, aren’t we supposed to want the monopoly guy to own our team AND also be a fan who wants the team to win AND is smart enough to hire smart baseball people to be the ones to decide how to spend his money?

 

Not sure what more you could want in an owner to be honest with you.

artificially low budgetary constraints is the issue as it pertains to the Cubs.

 

Being part of an awful family is the bigger issue

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I really don’t understand hating the Ricketts. Like, aren’t we supposed to want the monopoly guy to own our team AND also be a fan who wants the team to win AND is smart enough to hire smart baseball people to be the ones to decide how to spend his money?

 

Not sure what more you could want in an owner to be honest with you.

 

1) Hate all billionaires by default

 

2) No blank check to Harper