Cubs offseason chit chat...

[Backtobanks]

1 hour ago, Rob said:

Maybe I just feel this way because I'm boring, but I can't imagine that I'd ever feel the difference between a $100M contract and a $105M contract.

I mean, sure, it's five million dollaredoos. But at a certain point, we've already eclipsed more money than I would ever spend in a lifetime. So I would definitely consider the smaller contract if it greatly increased my quality of life over the duration of the contract.

But what if it's the difference between $78 million over 3 years or $150 over 7 years?  

[SOFNR]

4 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

But what if it's the difference between $78 million over 3 years or $150 over 7 years?  

Yah. If he ends up signing somewhere like Anaheim my guess is the difference in money is quite a bit more then 5 million. Probably not to the extremes you posted but Jed is probably content to sit on something around 5 years and let him go otherwise. It certainly won't surprise me if it turns out Jed's out there offering 30 mil less then another team but trying to sell him on incentives and winning.

[Rob]

34 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

But what if it's the difference between $78 million over 3 years or $150 over 7 years?  

What's the point of such a specific hypothetical? Is it a reference to a specific rumor I've missed?

The general point was that, yes, there are circumstances in which I could see myself giving up a few million dollars in exchange for other various quality of life improvements.

But your hypothetical involves so many moving pieces that there's no way to ascertain what somebody might prioritize. Do they have family nearby? Do they like the weather? Do they have faith in their ability to cash in on a subsequent contract? Do they think their kids would make friends easily at a new school? Etc...

TL;DR: It depends. It always depends.

[Cubfanintheknow]

54 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I think it has less to do with spending, or security, at a certain point and it becomes something else. I think Logan Paul is an absolute trash human being, but I caught a quote of his that I think speaks to the mindset. Basically, it was that money was a scoreboard for him. And I think that probably is a way that many athletes look at it, too. They're competitive. The $100m vs $110m? It's keeping score. It's winning. 

It helps me make sense as to why someone would be cool playing for a losing team. Because, maybe in their head,  they're not winning games but they're winning contracts over others. It's just a new game to win. 

I kind of feel like there's at times a little union pressure to take the highest contract. Kind of a "others struggled so you can get this type of payday" mentality. I'm sure there's also some pressure from agents; a bigger contract means a bigger cut.

Probably doesn't happen very often. But I'm fairly sure it's something in the back of the minds of the players looking for a fat payday.

[Backtobanks]

24 minutes ago, Rob said:

What's the point of such a specific hypothetical? Is it a reference to a specific rumor I've missed?

The general point was that, yes, there are circumstances in which I could see myself giving up a few million dollars in exchange for other various quality of life improvements.

But your hypothetical involves so many moving pieces that there's no way to ascertain what somebody might prioritize. Do they have family nearby? Do they like the weather? Do they have faith in their ability to cash in on a subsequent contract? Do they think their kids would make friends easily at a new school? Etc...

TL;DR: It depends. It always depends.

It depends, but if the difference in money is something like $25 million most people can deal with weather, new schools, traveling to see family, etc.  People take new jobs for a lot less money with those same circumstances and they acclimate and make it work.

[javy knows my name]

2 hours ago, Cubfanintheknow said:

I kind of feel like there's at times a little union pressure to take the highest contract.

This little sentence has the most qualifiers I've ever seen! Not judging; celebrating, really

[Bull]

17 minutes ago, javy knows my name said:

This little sentence has the most qualifiers I've ever seen! Not judging; celebrating, really

Quote

 

I kind of feel like there's at times a little union pressure to take the highest contract

There is unequivocally always massive pressure from union to take the highest contract.

[Cubfanintheknow]

59 minutes ago, javy knows my name said:

This little sentence has the most qualifiers I've ever seen! Not judging; celebrating, really

Not an accident, my friend!😉

I honestly don't know for sure... just a feeling

[thawv]

17 hours ago, Backtobanks said:

You make that sound like a bad thing.  Why wouldn't a good player hire Boras with his track record.  You have a limited number of playing years in your career and you might as well get the most money you can.

No, it doesn't sound like a bad thing.  It's a fact.  There's nothing wrong with trying to get the most money they can.  That's what they should do.  And signing with Boras says, that money is the most important thing.  And there's nothing wrong with that. 

[Rcal10]

54 minutes ago, thawv said:

No, it doesn't sound like a bad thing.  It's a fact.  There's nothing wrong with trying to get the most money they can.  That's what they should do.  And signing with Boras says, that money is the most important thing.  And there's nothing wrong with that. 

I don’t think it is a bad thing. But I also don’t think everyone has to sign for the most money. At this level, I think where you are most happy counts more. Now maybe your priority to be happy is to make the most money. Again, that is fine. However if a place you really want to play is offering something that over 5 or more years pays you 3% or 5% less than another place that you are not sure you want to go, I believe there are guys who will go elsewhere for less. 
Hell, I took a job paying less because it allowed me to work from home versus a job where I had to go into an office. I make a decision based on comfort of life over the highest earnings. And I definitely don’t have the revenues these guys have. I have to think the highly paid player making $200M or more in their career isn’t going to miss $5M to $10M by choosing to play were he is happiest. As I said, nothing wrong with chasing the most money. I just don’t think everyone does. 

[BigbadB]

57 minutes ago, thawv said:

No, it doesn't sound like a bad thing.  It's a fact.  There's nothing wrong with trying to get the most money they can.  That's what they should do.  And signing with Boras says, that money is the most important thing.  And there's nothing wrong with that. 

Absolutely nothing wrong with it. But, the vision going into the offseason was a bidding war among a handful of teams that want to give you all the money you want to come and play for them. That's not happening here. Every team has balked at the money/years Boras and Bellinger want. Now it's about saving face. They may lose this battle of how much Bellinger gets, but if they are going to lose, they will lose at the last minute while Boras works diligently to find someone willing to jump out from a closet with a forgotten bag of cash that was just lying around.

Hell, the Dodgers still have some years available to defer money to. Maybe they could find a nice platoon for him for the next 7 or 8 years. Don't think Boras hasn't thought of that, cuz that guy will do anything to get his client his money. He's got his own reputation to think about. Right now, he looks a bit like ass to the sports world with all of these unsigned players.

[NorthsideAvenger]

I really don't think Boras is going to get 200m for Cody or 9 years (basically the Strasburg contract) for Snell. I think Boras overplayed his hand this off-season with his clients. 

[LBiittner]

1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t think it is a bad thing. But I also don’t think everyone has to sign for the most money. At this level, I think where you are most happy counts more. Now maybe your priority to be happy is to make the most money. Again, that is fine. However if a place you really want to play is offering something that over 5 or more years pays you 3% or 5% less than another place that you are not sure you want to go, I believe there are guys who will go elsewhere for less. 
Hell, I took a job paying less because it allowed me to work from home versus a job where I had to go into an office. I make a decision based on comfort of life over the highest earnings. And I definitely don’t have the revenues these guys have. I have to think the highly paid player making $200M or more in their career isn’t going to miss $5M to $10M by choosing to play were he is happiest. As I said, nothing wrong with chasing the most money. I just don’t think everyone does. 

Rcal, Justin Turner is a prime example of a player chasing the highest $ but once he got far along into the opt-out process he realized he effed up. Sure his agent got him the $ he hoped for, but Turner absolutely loved his short time in Boston and wanted to make his happy life in Beantown a much longer existence there. He really identified with his Boston experience and was certain his agent could deal with Breslow. But Breslows predecessor tied his hands by signing outfielder Yoshida to $90m, only to find out later he can't play the outfield. But at least Turner can find happiness looking at his financial portfolio 

[Backtobanks]

2 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t think it is a bad thing. But I also don’t think everyone has to sign for the most money. At this level, I think where you are most happy counts more. Now maybe your priority to be happy is to make the most money. Again, that is fine. However if a place you really want to play is offering something that over 5 or more years pays you 3% or 5% less than another place that you are not sure you want to go, I believe there are guys who will go elsewhere for less. 
Hell, I took a job paying less because it allowed me to work from home versus a job where I had to go into an office. I make a decision based on comfort of life over the highest earnings. And I definitely don’t have the revenues these guys have. I have to think the highly paid player making $200M or more in their career isn’t going to miss $5M to $10M by choosing to play were he is happiest. As I said, nothing wrong with chasing the most money. I just don’t think everyone does. 

Don't forget Bellinger played 6 years in LA, so it's not like he might pick a completely foreign city without knowing anything about it.  Of course playing for the Angels is exactly like playing for the Dodgers, but the living arrangements and lifestyle would be the same.

[Rcal10]

8 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

Don't forget Bellinger played 6 years in LA, so it's not like he might pick a completely foreign city without knowing anything about it.  Of course playing for the Angels is exactly like playing for the Dodgers, but the living arrangements and lifestyle would be the same.

I am not talking specifically about Bellinger. I am talking in more general terms. Not all players take the most money regardless of who is offering it. That is all I am saying. And whatever they do, no one should criticize them for their decision. Some will take the most money, regardless of the team or the city and some will be more concerned about them living arrangement or the teams ability to compete. Any reason is fine, IMO. 

[LBiittner]

Gregory Santos looks like he could've been interesting / don't know nuttin about mariners players sacrificed

[Irrelevant Dude]

3 hours ago, NorthsideAvenger said:

I really don't think Boras is going to get 200m for Cody or 9 years (basically the Strasburg contract) for Snell. I think Boras overplayed his hand this off-season with his clients. 

Maybe, but whether Cody signs the sub-200M deal in December or in mid-February, the end result is the same.  Boras might not get the desired amounts for a few of his guys, but did he actually cost them money by waiting?  That is hard to say, but I think they are going to get more or less what they are going to get, regardless of when they sign.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

17 minutes ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

Maybe, but whether Cody signs the sub-200M deal in December or in mid-February, the end result is the same.  Boras might not get the desired amounts for a few of his guys, but did he actually cost them money by waiting?  That is hard to say, but I think they are going to get more or less what they are going to get, regardless of when they sign.

If the destination is the same both times then yes they're equivalent, though there is something lost in delaying ST for the player if it comes to that.  But in December you also have potentially more suitors and can get the best of both worlds instead of hoping against hope a higher offer comes later.  This isn't as much the case for Bellinger, but for say Rhys Hoskins?  I have to think his 2/34 with opt out(or something very close to it) was available in December.  Now because other options dried up he ended up with that deal on a Brewers team that's going to try to thread the needle of transitioning eras instead of a team with a more desirable competitive situation(or a more desirable city than Milwaukee).

[Bertz]

Bob Nightengale says Willy Adames is in fact available post Burnes trade.  That would potentially be a twofer because it'd make the Brewers worse and depending on where he went take another Chapman suitor off the board.

[LBiittner]

18 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Bob Nightengale says Willy Adames is in fact available post Burnes trade.  That would potentially be a twofer because it'd make the Brewers worse and depending on where he went take another Chapman suitor off the board.

Wow! Nightingale really went out on a limb on that prognostication. Haha 

[LBiittner]

Like my Daddy always said: "Cubs don't need to get better, the other teams just need to get worser"

[CubinNY]

No team in the Central wants to win this year, maybe the Reds by default. 

[LBiittner]

3 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

No team in the Central wants to win this year, maybe the Reds by default. 

5 way tie for last 

[Backtobanks]

24 minutes ago, LBiittner said:

Like my Daddy always said: "Cubs don't need to get better, the other teams just need to get worser"

That and "Wait until next year" are the Jed's plan.

[pitchcs]

There are two insufferable posters in this thread