Jed: Cubs expected to be over the luxury tax THIS year

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, mul21 said:

No, he would have had to have been claimed off waivers.  If he signs somewhere they pay the prorated portion of league minimum for the rest of the year, so the Cubs get maybe $150K of relief at best.

Ok, so he has already been passed up by all teams. That is what I was asking. I know once he is passed up the team who does take him will only have to pay the protested of the league min salary. I didn’t know everyone already said they weren’t interested. 

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, mul21 said:

No, he would have had to have been claimed off waivers.  If he signs somewhere they pay the prorated portion of league minimum for the rest of the year, so the Cubs get maybe $150K of relief at best.

Double post.

Edited August 20, 2024 by Rcal10

[Rcal10]

6 minutes ago, chibears55 said:

A contending team will likely claim him, even if he's going to be just used as a 7th/8th inning guy.

For league minimum, prorated, I am sure someone will. I wasn’t sure if someone would before he cleared waivers. I guess not. 

[chibears55]

22 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

For league minimum, prorated, I am sure someone will. I wasn’t sure if someone would before he cleared waivers. I guess not. 

He cleared waivers already ?

I'm a bit surprised he wasn't claimed

[chibears55]

32 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

For league minimum, prorated, I am sure someone will. I wasn’t sure if someone would before he cleared waivers. I guess not. 

Fangraph shows the whole 9 mil that the Cubs pay.

They are slightly under the 237 mil cap as of now.

 

[Rcal10]

58 minutes ago, chibears55 said:

Fangraph shows the whole 9 mil that the Cubs pay.

They are slightly under the 237 mil cap as of now.

 

Well Hawkins confirmed the Cubs are over the LT. And most likely will end up over. So maybe FG is wrong or maybe it is a little more complicated than what FG is showing it to be. 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

7 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Well Hawkins confirmed the Cubs are over the LT. And most likely will end up over. So maybe FG is wrong or maybe it is a little more complicated than what FG is showing it to be. 

It's less that Fangraphs is *wrong*, it's that we have to work with estimates so when you get within a couple million you can't be certain one way or another.  Even the teams themselves have to operate this way, as Sahadev pointed out today (emphasis mine) 

Quote

Precisely calculating a team’s salary for luxury tax purposes can be complicated, especially because even mundane roster moves can have an impact. When players are placed on the 60-day injured list — the Cubs currently have six players there — they accrue dollars that go against the tax. So do the players who are then added to the 40-man and called up to the big leagues. Also, any benefits provided by the team for a player can also count toward the tax. Those costs can range from private jet hours to hotel suites on the road. With all those variables, sources said, front offices often work off projections rather than precise figures.

 

[Rcal10]

22 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

It's less that Fangraphs is *wrong*, it's that we have to work with estimates so when you get within a couple million you can't be certain one way or another.  Even the teams themselves have to operate this way, as Sahadev pointed out today (emphasis mine) 

 

FO mismanagement is the only thing that would cause this issue. It is ridiculous that the Cubs are in this situation. 

[CubinNY]

4 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

FO mismanagement is the only thing that would cause this issue. It is ridiculous that the Cubs are in this situation. 

That is retrospective. They never expected to be bad. They spent up to the line and it didn't work out. But in all sincerity who gives a horsefeathers about it?

[squally1313]

3 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

FO mismanagement is the only thing that would cause this issue. It is ridiculous that the Cubs are in this situation. 

Counterpoint: there's probably a pretty reasonable occam's razor argument that they've run the numbers and simply don't care that much about it (nor should we).

[Transmogrified Tiger]

18 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

FO mismanagement is the only thing that would cause this issue. It is ridiculous that the Cubs are in this situation. 

Again, this only makes a difference if they would change their spending significantly to avoid repeater penalties. Unless they previously intended to be way, way over the tax line(30+ million) in the next 2-3 years, the penalties are a rounding error of total roster spend so there's no reason to think it does impact future spending in any meaningful way.

[Stratos]

I am happy and not surprised Neris is gone.

Some money freed to grab a guy or 2 for pen this winter or whatever.

Pen for 2024 so far:  Hodge, Merryweather, Miller, Wesneski, Palencia, Roberts, Almonte, Little

Lopez and Smyly are FA this winter.

[jersey cubs fan]

5 hours ago, squally1313 said:

It's so tiring how Hoyer has missed out on like...maybe 3 large (>$100m) free agents that we wouldn't have regretted since he took over but people here just assume there are these self-imposed restrictions in place and then use these (made up) rules as justification to make the same criticisms over and over again. There were 4 contracts over $100m last offseason. We were never getting Ohtani, Yamamoto has been hurt multiple times and hasn't thrown a pitch in 2 months, Nola resigned and Jung Hoo Lee is out for the year and might also suck. It's basically just retroactively wishing we would have signed Seager or Semien 3 months after going through a total sell off. 

We were never getting Ohtani is not the support for your argument you think it is.

[squally1313]

7 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

We were never getting Ohtani is not the support for your argument you think it is.

1. Ohtani took a decade long deferral for the benefit of the Dodgers and by all accounts only ever really wanted to go there

2. If the argument for 'Jed Hoyer doesn't have the guts or permission to give out a big contract/he's not creative/whatever else' is 'He didn't land probably the biggest free agent in history, but certainly of his tenure as GM' then he falls into a group that is 'Everyone Besides Andrew Friedman and their massive outlier TV deal'

[Rcal10]

2 hours ago, squally1313 said:

Counterpoint: there's probably a pretty reasonable occam's razor argument that they've run the numbers and simply don't care that much about it (nor should we).

They shouldn’t care but we know they do. And why be over by something like $2M. Why get dinged for a year over because you couldn’t get the accounting straight. I get them going close to the  inner and the  at the deadline if they weee in it go over. But they are not really in it. So if they are going to go half way in and out, as they did, then they should have known to be under the LT. Honestly, even if they don’t care it makes sense to not start the clock this year. 
Had they been all in at the deadline and went over I wouldn’t have an issue with it. Seems that was their plan. But if that was the plan the default plan should have been if they aren’t going all in at least eat under. 

[squally1313]

4 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

They shouldn’t care but we know they do. And why be over by something like $2M. Why get dinged for a year over because you couldn’t get the accounting straight. I get them going close to the  inner and the  at the deadline if they weee in it go over. But they are not really in it. So if they are going to go half way in and out, as they did, then they should have known to be under the LT. Honestly, even if they don’t care it makes sense to not start the clock this year. 
Had they been all in at the deadline and went over I wouldn’t have an issue with it. Seems that was their plan. But if that was the plan the default plan should have been if they aren’t going all in at least eat under. 

Why do we know they care?

[Stratos]

10 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

FO mismanagement is the only thing that would cause this issue. It is ridiculous that the Cubs are in this situation. 

Don't worry, they'll be back under next year LOL

[thawv]

On 8/15/2024 at 8:43 PM, chibears55 said:

I don't know...

The Cubs can not just buy him out.  If he opts out, the Cubs have to give him 5 million.  

[thawv]

On 8/20/2024 at 10:55 AM, Rcal10 said:

Does releasing Neris give the Cubs a chance at being under the LT? Would a team pick him up now and pay the prorated portion of his contract the rest of the year? That would be over $2M, right? If he passes through unclaimed the savings is less. Someone might do it so that someone lower in the standings doesn’t get him once he clears. Maybe???? I can hope! 🤷

He signed with the Astros which is saving the Cubs 164,000.  The new team is only responsible for the prorated minimum salary.  The Cubs are on the hook for almost 2 million. 

[CubinNY]

Cubs raising season tickets by 3%. lol, I hate them so much. I’m not a season ticket holder but I hate them. 

[Cuzi]

16 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

Cubs raising season tickets by 3%. lol, I hate them so much. I’m not a season ticket holder but I hate them. 

Blasphemy! They should know that the sacred ground of Wrigley field does not follow the trends of inflation!

[CubinNY]

6 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Blasphemy! They should know that the sacred ground of Wrigley field does not follow the trends of inflation!

How does Tom’s dick taste? 

[Cuzi]

Awww, you mad?

[UMFan83]

1 hour ago, CubinNY said:

Cubs raising season tickets by 3%. lol, I hate them so much. I’m not a season ticket holder but I hate them. 

Is that before or after accounting for the fact that the Cubs will only play 79 games at Wrigley next year due to the Toyko trip?

[InSeungHo]

Doing the calculations on my season tickets package, the bleachers increased by 8%. Other locations in the ballpark increased up to 11% in price. This does include the fact there's only 79 home games next year.