Staying Under $189M: The Impossible Dream
- Thread starter jon abbey
- Start date
- Status
nattysez said:
Hey now they can make one more seriously misguided OF acquisition and still field a quasi competitive team for fourth place in the AL East.
rembrat said:
With the addition of Beltran they can trade Gardner. Murphy, Romine and Sanchez might have some trade value as well, especially as part of a package with Gardner.
Their best prospect Montero landed them Pineda and Campos, and injuries knocked them down. They also traded Jackson for Granderson. The Killer B's were knocked off by injuries/development issues, Hughes and Joba never lived up to the hype. Romine and Nunez have fell short. So yeah, the farm system has not produced much, and as JA said they did not do much in Latin America when they had the chance. That's really the root of their issues with payroll since you need some homegrown talent. No team can be good consistently when built 100% with free agents or 100% from home grown talent. You need a balance.
Doctor G said:
That, or a lesser deal for Brett Anderson (due to his injury history), with the A's then spinning Gardner to a third team, since they already have Cespedes, Gentry, Coco, and Reddick in the OF.
Edit: Incidentally, Mark Feisand from the Daily News said both on MLB Network and Twitter that he doesn't think the MFY are done spending, and I've heard others making similar statements. I can't figure out if this is an assertion that the MFY have decided to blow through the cap or a lack of realization regarding how close they are to the cap at this point.
Here's the latest from the blog I quoted on page 1. His numbers say that the MFY have $2.7mm left unless you assume Jeter hits none of his incentives, in which case they've got $9.7mm left.
This also assumes absolutely no salary from ARod, right? Which seems like a big assumption. If his suspension is even reduced to 150 games, he would count about $3 million against the cap. In other words, they are really gambling here.nattysez said:
How hilarious would it be to have ARod's suspension reduced and put them just a million or so over the tax threshold? Poetic justice.
What happens if ARod's suspension is reduced to 100 games? Wouldn't that put his salary tax/cap number to about $10 million, or slightly more?jon abbey said:
They are certainly gambling.
Ok, so they now have SIX outfielders. Not even one is someone I'd play less than just about everyday. Though Girardi loves to play weird line ups, so anythings possible. But how are you going to have that many outfielders, no second or third baseman or any worthwhile pitching?
Gardner is expendable with Ellsbury's speed, but otherwise, I don't see anyone being traded to get a needed piece.
Gardner is expendable with Ellsbury's speed, but otherwise, I don't see anyone being traded to get a needed piece.
Is there anybody out there who can explicate anything like an organizational philosophy for the Yankees right now?
I'm not at all upset with the result of the Cano negotiations, and don't really hold out any malice for any of the parties involved. The numbers are shocking, and the idea of extending a 10-year deal to a 31 year old who isn't the clear-cut best player in baseball runs afoul of my understanding of roster construction; but Cano is a Hall of Fame level player who will be great for a few more years, and the apparent unending growth in the sport makes projecting what a 'bad deal' is almost a fool's errand. I mean, it makes no sense for the Mariners, because the only type of team that can justify making a move like this is a team that thinks it can win a title NOW. I don't see them as being in that position, but whatever.
But the Yankees have given up all of their picks to tread water. I mean, with the return of Teixiera, the huge marginal upgrades over IchiWells, Chris Stewart and Overbay probably make them a significantly better offensive team that last year; but if they're going to say fuck it, why not go all the way? If you're going to give up your ability to acquire amateur talent and bet big on the present, why not sign Cano? At this point, with no high picks, and little IFA money, it's not like their development machine is going to be in high gear in four years anyway, so go all the way. It's the in-between shit that creates long-term stagnation. The Yankees are a $3 billion business, and yet I don't think they have any forward-thinking vision. When did they become Yahoo?
This has been one of the strangest months to observe in all of my years following baseball. I'm more convinced than ever that the sport is in the midst of a massive bubble. When it bursts, some teams might be left holding on to obligations they can't meet. I just hope Trout makes it to free agency before that happens, because I am completely fascinated to see what he gets. If a 31 year old Robinson Cano can pull this kind of deal, what is a 26 year old Trout looking at? 12/$400? I would have laughed that off yesterday, but now I'm not so sure.
I'm not at all upset with the result of the Cano negotiations, and don't really hold out any malice for any of the parties involved. The numbers are shocking, and the idea of extending a 10-year deal to a 31 year old who isn't the clear-cut best player in baseball runs afoul of my understanding of roster construction; but Cano is a Hall of Fame level player who will be great for a few more years, and the apparent unending growth in the sport makes projecting what a 'bad deal' is almost a fool's errand. I mean, it makes no sense for the Mariners, because the only type of team that can justify making a move like this is a team that thinks it can win a title NOW. I don't see them as being in that position, but whatever.
But the Yankees have given up all of their picks to tread water. I mean, with the return of Teixiera, the huge marginal upgrades over IchiWells, Chris Stewart and Overbay probably make them a significantly better offensive team that last year; but if they're going to say fuck it, why not go all the way? If you're going to give up your ability to acquire amateur talent and bet big on the present, why not sign Cano? At this point, with no high picks, and little IFA money, it's not like their development machine is going to be in high gear in four years anyway, so go all the way. It's the in-between shit that creates long-term stagnation. The Yankees are a $3 billion business, and yet I don't think they have any forward-thinking vision. When did they become Yahoo?
This has been one of the strangest months to observe in all of my years following baseball. I'm more convinced than ever that the sport is in the midst of a massive bubble. When it bursts, some teams might be left holding on to obligations they can't meet. I just hope Trout makes it to free agency before that happens, because I am completely fascinated to see what he gets. If a 31 year old Robinson Cano can pull this kind of deal, what is a 26 year old Trout looking at? 12/$400? I would have laughed that off yesterday, but now I'm not so sure.
Cowboys Idiots N Beards said:
If that second sentence translates in English to "All six deserve to play everyday", I have to add a giant "HUH?". Vernon Wells is cooked and worthless and should be DFAd if his salary and what the Angels are paying weren't a factor. Ichiro isn't too much better, he is tolerable as a bench OF but certainly not a guy you want in the lineup every day anymore.
Great post. I had similar thoughts. It reminds me of the 04-05 offseason when the Yankees seemed to react to the Sox winning by trading for Randy Johnson and signing Carl Pavano and Jaret Wright, while letting the clear top FA on the market go to the Mets, who amusingly was Beltran (not to mention Pedro). Beltran had a poor 2005 by his standards but it was still better than the negative WAR they got from Bernie Williams who couldn't really play anymore, and then of course Beltran's 06-08 were fantastic. And of course they finally figured out the problem the next offseason and signed Damon.Meff Nelton said:
That team also had awful depth as Tony Womack had 351 PA with a 50 OPS+ (-2.5 bWAR) and the pitchers they acquired were underwhelming as we know.
Is my understanding correct that Wells *needs* a roster spot, or else they stop receiving the AAV subsidy?
Because otherwise, they'd surely cut him, no?
Because otherwise, they'd surely cut him, no?
nvalvo said:
I'd like to hear a clarification on this too, because if they need to carry him as an essentially dead roster spot for a second season, that will have been a quietly disastrous move that should get more attention.
nvalvo said:
According to Cots Wells is owed $21m this year and LA is paying NY $18.6m. As part of the trade LA picked up a total of $28.1m. The AAV of his deal is $18m. So wouldn't it be as simple as NY has an $18m cap hit but is getting $18.6m so trading him would cost them 600k in cap space but DFAing him wouldn't change anything?
I'm thinking that the Winter meetings are going to be pretty busy with trades. I can't recall an offseason where this much happened so fast across the sport.
soxfan121 said:
Their goal is just to reset their tax rate, which could theoretically happen just as easily in 2015. The problems are A-Rod's salary will come back onto the books and when you combine that with Teixeira and Sabathia and the three megadeals they just signed, they're already at $127M for six players (for 2016 too, by the way). It seems like it's this year or not until 2017 at the earliest (and more likely never).
soxfan121 said:
It's $189 million for 2014, 2015 and 2016 (per Yahoo sports).
Edit: And if they don't get under for 2014, Abbey's head is gonna explode after they let Russell Martin walk and front-paid $13 million last year for Vernon Wells so they could have him for free this season.
Obviously, Beltran makes no sense at all if the MFYs are trying to stay below $189M. In trying to find out more about revenue sharing, which many people claimed to be a big driver of the austerity plan, I ran across this post: http://www.captainsblog.info/2013/01/23/flaw-in-the-yankees-budget-plan-breaking-down-mlbs-revenue-sharing-system/18956/.
The basic premise is that if the Braves, Nationals, and Blue Jays changed from net payees to net payors, the MFYs would receive next to nothing in revenue sharing rebate. I have no idea whether the analysis is correct, but on a gut level, it would explain a lot of moves. Maybe Cashman was trying to construct a team that could be under $189M if the revenue sharing rebate was going to be upwards of $189M; but now they know that the rebate is going to be minimal, and they think it's better business sense just to pay the luxury tax and try to get more revenues than continue on the austerity plan.
Either that, or maybe they know that ARod is going to play next year so they are going to be over $189M anyways.
Head scratching really.
The basic premise is that if the Braves, Nationals, and Blue Jays changed from net payees to net payors, the MFYs would receive next to nothing in revenue sharing rebate. I have no idea whether the analysis is correct, but on a gut level, it would explain a lot of moves. Maybe Cashman was trying to construct a team that could be under $189M if the revenue sharing rebate was going to be upwards of $189M; but now they know that the rebate is going to be minimal, and they think it's better business sense just to pay the luxury tax and try to get more revenues than continue on the austerity plan.
Either that, or maybe they know that ARod is going to play next year so they are going to be over $189M anyways.
Head scratching really.
jon abbey said:
If they just release Arod after 2014 and pay him the 61 million he is owed in a lump sum, and remove him from the roster, how does that work for LT calculations? Is the 27.5 million still on the books for the next 3 years?
wade boggs chicken dinner said:
The Yankees have been pretty consistent in saying their first priority is fielding a competitive team, and that the 189 is a goal and not a mandate. Saving money on salary and tax and collecting rebates have to be balanced against revenue drops should the team not compete. They have just lost 3 draft picks (1st round and 2 compensation picks) to sign elite free agents when they could have signed Salty, Cruz and Granderson as cheaper options (except Cruz) without losing a pick. I think that's because they want to compete in 2014
Now maybe they wanted the marquee talent to draw fans in lieu of really competing. 189 is still in play if they don't sign anyone else and Arod gets suspended. But they have to assume fans are really dumb if they think they are going to keep them interested and spending money on a 500 team in 2014. Will be interesting to see if they fill the rest of the holes or just sign filler to stay under 189.
The actual #s and calculations involved in the refund seem illusive, but I've read a couple of web articles which estimate that IF the Ys remain under the cap for 2014-2016, the total refund for those years would be about $40 million. I mentioned this in one of the threads yesterday. The belief seems to be the Ys would save some $100 million in '14 alone. Again I'm not sure of the math or the calculations but a $40 million refund over 3 years, while you most likely get pounded at the box office and tv ratings, seems short-sighted, and not worth it. Penny-wise pound insane, X about a hundred million.wade boggs chicken dinner said:
For a team with needs at SP (IMO 2) an infield which is in shambles, and need a 2nd and 3rd baseman (and a SS) and maybe BP help, the Beltran signing is truly bizarre. Someone posted in one of the threads that this schizophrenic organizational behavior might be indicative of the schism at the top of the 2-headed monster running the show. In the absence of any other motive, that sounds about right.
bankshot1 said:
It seems short sited but are there really any players out there worth breaking the bank over? Even if it's "just" $40m, why is that trivial?
The $40M savings (lets assume that's the #) is the refund if the Ys stay under the cap for 3 years. Without slicing and dicing all FA transactions, and freely admitting I (we) do not have all the financial information to clearly assess the financial implications, it appears the Beltran signing jeopardizes that goal, while doing little to really strengthen the team's weaknesses. The restraint (low-balling) early on towards Cano, then the seeming excesses shown to Ells and then Beltran are curious at a minimum.
So two things about this:soxhop411 said:
1) writers keep saying the mfy are "close to the cap unless arod is suspended," but I don't see how that's the case. I think they're already way over if Slappy isn't gone for the year.
2) as others have said, this is really damning in terms of organizational philosophy. They've been pinching pennies (relatively speaking) for at least a year to get under the cap. Now they're throwing it away without spending enough to keep Cano? Senseless.
They are trying to move Ichiro and his $6.5M, good luck with that.
http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2013/12/07/yankees-shopping-ichiro/
http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2013/12/07/yankees-shopping-ichiro/
jon abbey said:
Scutaro for Ichiro would provide no cost savings and the Giants don't have someone who can play 2b in Scutaro's stead, so it won't happen. That said, acquiring Ichiro is a classic Sabean move, so taking his full salary for Nick Noonan or a scrub minor leaguer wouldn't surprise me at all.
I'm amazed at how many Sox fans think going 10 years on Cano would have been such a good thing for the Yankees.
EvilEmpire said:
If they're not staying under $189M why wouldn't they sign him? It's not like they haven't absorbed awful contracts before.
EvilEmpire said:
Of course they don't, but it certainly seems less dumb in some ways than what they've spent the money on instead, at least in the short term. They are spending $54M on Ellsbury/McCann/Beltran in 2014, $24-$25M on Cano and the rest elsewhere almost certainly would have made the team better for the next couple of seasons.
But we all know if NY had signed him, BOS fans would rightly be mocking NY taking on another 10 year deal, NY was always screwed on this one way or the other. The best case scenario was Cano testing positive for PEDs and NY then getting him back at a discount, but unfortunately that did not happen.
Also, when your best case scenario involves your best player testing positive, that's quite a testimony to how well your franchise is being run.
Honestly, I don't know why they didn't go Cano/McCann/Beltran. That would have at least made some sense. It's Ellsbury instead of Cano that baffles me.
Going 10 years for Cano is terrible for the Mariners and it would have been slightly less so for the Yankees given their huge revenue advantage over everyone. The last two-three years of that deal look to be as bad as bad can be. Paying a 39-41 year old 2b $24MM a year is frightening.EvilEmpire said:
Dewy4PrezII said:
That 24 million won't be worth as much in 2021, maybe only 16 million (assuming 5% salary inflation), and he can DH then. I mean, Ortiz is an effective DH at 38, so maybe Cano will be too.
If you want to focus on the last 3 years, fine, but over the next 3 years they get a 6 WAR player for 4 million per WAR, which is pretty nice. If the Mariner can add a few more pieces Cano's salary will more than offset by the additional revenues he generates, and they can save some of that money for a rainy day in 2021 and beyond.
Ellsbury will just be turning 37 in September at the end of year 7 of his deal. Players with his profile tend to age a little better. While nothing is guaranteed, he's a solid bet to be playing the outfield at the end of his deal. Beltran is old, but he's produced well the last few years and the deal is relatively short. Chances are good that Yankees will get value from both players at the end of their deals. There is nothing arbitrary about taking those chances and not wanting to roll the dice from ten years out with a middle infielder, even a great one.nattysez said:
Nick Swisher at 4/56 for his 32 through 35 years also looks good in retrospect, it just feels like there's no coherent macro strategy going on. This year's moves make no sense in context with last year's moves. Check this out, if NY just keeps everyone with value, Martin and Swisher last offseason, Granderson this year, the positions match up perfectly, starting in 2014:
Swisher 3/45 (ages 33-35)
Granderson 4/60 (ages 33-36)
Martin 1/8.5 (age 31)
Ellsbury 7/153 (ages 30-36)
Beltran 3/45 (ages 37-39)
McCann 5/85 (ages 30-34)
Top 3 by year: $38.5/$30/$30/$15
Bottom 3 by year: $54/$54/$54/$39/$39/$22/$22
I mean, that's indefensible. Indefensible. The top three guys are a better bet collectively to stay healthier too, just insane.
Swisher 3/45 (ages 33-35)
Granderson 4/60 (ages 33-36)
Martin 1/8.5 (age 31)
Ellsbury 7/153 (ages 30-36)
Beltran 3/45 (ages 37-39)
McCann 5/85 (ages 30-34)
Top 3 by year: $38.5/$30/$30/$15
Bottom 3 by year: $54/$54/$54/$39/$39/$22/$22
I mean, that's indefensible. Indefensible. The top three guys are a better bet collectively to stay healthier too, just insane.
No disagreement from me on that. Whatever signings they anticipated or player development they expected that didn't happen -- whatever the cause, any plan they had got blown up. Seems like they are just in reaction mode.jon abbey said:
jon abbey said:
Giving Cano his megadeal and throwing the brinks truck at Tanaka would've been almost universally accepted as a better offseason strategy than Ells/Beltran/McCann, right? That's what gets me. Past that, a trade for Samardzija or signing Garza could've still been an option too. Give your best player his due, try your hardest to fill out the rotation, THEN tinker with the OF and C situations and see what you can get done.
Instead, they chose the exact opposite route. Load up on OFs, sign a big name catcher, and see if you can scrounge up pitching or a viable 2B with no real room to do so. It's...interesting.
EvilEmpire said:
If you and the Yankees did the same analysis so that they're line-drawing wasn't as arbitrary as it seems, then I guess all I can say is that I disagree with the analysis, and we'll see in 10 years who was right. IMO, regardless of how Ellsbury's type of player ages, Ellsbury's actual injury history is awful. Cano, meanwhile, and I cannot get over this, missed 13 games TOTAL between 2007 and 2013. I think the risk inherent in investing 7 years in Ellsbury is at worst even with 10 years of Cano -- if they were willing to spend on one, and the cap wasn't an issue, they should've been willing to spend on the other.
- Status