CBT Threshold and Team Salaries

This article has 82 Comments

1. I believe the Dodgers INTEND to be under the Luxury Tax Threshold… and I would be surprised (but not shocked) if they were over it by Spring Training. However, if by the trade deadline, a team like Yankees were out of the race, I could see them trading for Stanton and going over in an effort to win… then getting back under in 2020. I don’t think the Stanton example will happen, it’s just an example.
   –
   Here’s what we do know:
   1. We know MLB has a debt service ratio that they enforce. It is usually done privately within the confines of the good ole’ boys club.
   2. We know the Dodgers are worth a lot and bringing in a lot of money.
   3. We know the Dodgers have a lot of debt.
   –
   What we don’t know (but have heard rumors of) is that MLB is not happy with Dodgers’ debt service ratio. We don’t know whether the Dodgers have a “handshake” agreement with MLB to say under the luxury tax…and the MLBPA would be pissed if they did.
   –
   So, to say the Dodgers have the money to go over the Luxury Tax Threshold would be true, but it might not be THE TRUTH.
   –
   The Dodgers may be precluded by MLB from going over the Threshold; and/or
   The Dodgers may be precluded by Guggenheim Shareholders from going over the Threshold.
   –
   To believe that since the Dodgers have the money, they will go over the LTT is simplistic, naive and assumes facts not in evidence as they say in legal jargon. To say they won’t go over assumes the facts in evidence.
   –
   The dynamics of going over the LTT are not easy to discern, but there are hints.
   –
   I will say this: Whether Bryce Harper signs for $275 or $375 million – I think it’s a bad contract and I would not touch him or Machado with a 10 foot pole.

2. What the Dodgers need or don’t need has been thoroughly discussed since the end of the WS so I will just watch and see what happens or doesn’t happen. As far as trades and who the Dodgers trade,as long as the team is stronger after the trade whoever, I don’t care.
   Let’s see what happens.

3. The numbers are dizzying!!! I have faith and as Mick would say
   “You can’t always get what you want, but if you try sometimes well you might find out you get what you need”…
   Wasn’t it just yesterday that Koufax and Drysdale held out for three years at a total of $1 million split equally each at $167,000.00…

   1. I remember it. I was about 9 or 10 and thought the world had ended!
      –
      My dad told me they were greedy bastards! 😉

4. Mark, I totally agree with your final comment on BH. I think between Boras and the media they have hyped these crazy projected salary figures to absurd levels. Here are Harper and Machado average career #s:
   Harper:
   Avg: .279 HR: 26 RBI: 74 OBP: .388 SLG: .512 OPS: .900
   Machado:
   .282 24 70 .335 .487 .822
   These numbers are worth 30-40MM a year???? Please.
   Throw in Harper’s injury history and below average defense, how can he paid 30MM a year? With Machado, his stats are a bit less, but plays a premium position with gold glove quality. Why would any team pay either of the players more than $22MM a year? I would rather have Realmuto and Kluber than take on a Harper salary. Besides, we already have a outfielder with similar stats and plays better defense at 11MM. Yasiel Puig. With Realmuto you have the game’s best catcher and with Kluber an affordable, top line pitcher. Their total salaries approx. $23-25MM in 2019. Money much better spent for areas of need. With the players that would be included in any trades for Realmuto and Kluber the Dodgers would probably be under the $208MM. But, if it exceeded it slightly they would be able to reset in 2020 with approx. $50MM coming off the payroll.

   Guggenheim bought the Dodgers as an investment to make money. They overpaid for the team and proceeded to overpay in the Boston trade. To spend approx. $240MM for 4 years of Adrian Gonzalez production of .282-24-99
   with gold glove quality defense was insane. And, then to piss away over $100MM on useless Cuban players. Finally, over 100MM on minimal productive pitchers Kamir, Anderson, and McCarthy. So, they have spent plenty of money, just not wisely. Now, they want a return on their investments. I don’t think they really care about winning a WS. Hell, Walter is a Chicago Cubs fan. As long as the team is good enough to get into the playoffs each year to bring in the fans and maybe win a WS. If not, it’s OK. They know the fans will continue to support the team regardless. When you are in a position to win a WS you spend whatever it takes to do so. The team might not have another opportunity. Especially, when you have fans that fills the stadium nightly. They bought the team for the TV deal money. It worked out great for them, but not so much for the fans. It was basically an FU to the fan base and revealed the true intentions of Guggenheim. Get a good return on their investment and if it works out for the fans great but, if it doesn’t, oh well the fans will understand. It’s not us, it’s them who won’t let you watch Dodger baseball. BS

   1. Some fans will think I wrote that , Ted! 😉
      –
      I think you are right, if the Dodgers could get Realmuto and Kluber, it would be better than Harper.
      –
      So, let’s say Barnes is part of that trade, so that the M’s have a starting catcher. The deals for Kluber and Realmuto might have to be three or even four-way deals, but I would think that Barnes, Pederson, Puig (to somewhere), Wood, Hill and Maeda could garner enough ammo and/or prospects to get the deals done. That woudl sacrifice some of the starting pitching depth that Friedman loves, but there’s another “wave” of youngesters coming in Gonsolin, Santana, maybe Freguson, White and May.
      –
      This is the team I want to see:
      1. Verdugo RF
      2. Turner 3B
      3. Seager SS
      4. Bellinger 1B
      5. Realmuto C
      6. Kemp/Toles LF
      7. Taylor CF
      8. Kike 2B
      –
      Then Will Smith can backup Realmuto. Maybe Muncy can learn LF, and 2B as well as 1B and 3B. Freese at 1B and 3B and outfield. Dozier might take a 1 year $5 Million deal and I would consider that.
      –
      Rotation:
      1. Kershaw
      2. Buehler
      3. Kluber
      4. Ryu
      5. Urias
      6. Chicken Strip
      –
      I like that MUCH better than getting Harper, whose contract will be a boat anchor.

      1. You aren’t getting those two without Verdugo being dealt. Ray Charles can see that.

   2. Absolutely agree!!

5. The dodgers have thrown away an enormous amount of money with the trade. Friedman has also thrown away a ton of money on Cubans that didn’t pan out. We have money on the books we are paying people who are not playing. I think we are getting close to relief on those. Friedman has made asinine signings with Brett Anderson, McCarthy, kazmir etc. these were signings reminiscent of mccourt who overpaid for mediocre talent so he could sign them yet he had mostly a body not performance. Only in the last couple of years has he been restrained. I think the ownership finally said get under the luxury tax and he is doing it. He was dealt a bad hand due to previous mistakes but he has made plenty of wasteful moves. But, where do we go from here. Friedman has also gotten us on the right track and when next year rolls around we should be in a very good financial position. He will be out from under all the muck he inherited. The Dodgers winning division titles and going to the World Series two times in a row is no small feat. The Dodgers are definitely one of the top franchises and with Friedman in charge the future looks even brighter.

   1. Yes, those were mistakes because he was not going to give out the DOPE-FIEND DEALS to Price, Greinke, Cuteo, et all. He had to take a risk on the “Blind, Crippled and Crazy,” but all of the deals were less than some of the single deals to Price or Greinke. They somewhat worked, because the Dodgers progressed further each year. I am sure Friedman learned. He fired most of the international scouts after the Cuban Dismisal Crisis.

6. Does Zaidi now go by tedraymond??? And no I don’t think you wrote it, not many would come up with Cuban Dismisal Project…
   Kudos to you Therealten amongst all this banter…

7. It’s crazy to think that Ryu, Hill and Kemp’s contracts all fall off next year. That’s about $60 million coming off the books, which doesn’t include Wood and Puig’s $20 Million of arbitration $$. That’s a ton of money for players they don’t really need to replace – except for maybe one outfielder. It’s not that crazy to think that money can’t be spent on Harper (an outfielder, the only position where they don’t have a clear replacement for Puig unless you count the guy who can’t hit more than 13 bombs in the minors), even if that means going over the “LTT” or “CBT” or “Fake Cap” or whatever you want to call it for just one year. Not too crazy considering the Red Sox already committed $50 million more than the Dodgers for the upcoming year. Especially not too crazy considering attendance and TV revenue is larger for the Dodgers than for the Red Sox. That’s a lot of facts in evidence right there. The only fact I’m neglecting is the fact that the Dodgers won’t go over the “Fake Tax” because they said they wouldn’t in some 2 year old investment prospectus. Well, I guess there’s another fact I’m neglecting to consider which is the debt service ratio which is totally impossible to consider since we don’t know how much debt or revenue the Dodgers have. We do know however, from a NOV 26, 2016 LA Times article by Bill Shakin that the Dodgers needed to get to a $200 million payroll in 2018 (they did). That number, that was referenced in the article was before the 2 ticket price hikes, 2 World Series appearances, and an inflow of equity money from BJK. Deducing the facts that are available, I can effectively conclude that there is some wiggle room when it comes to going over the “Fake Tax” threshold for a single year while still being in compliance with the debt service rule. I can also conclude that since the Dodgers appear to be in good financial health, that the good ol’ boy network that is the MLB, might just turn a blind eye to the second most important franchise in their sport in regards to any penalties for violating said rule. This isn’t to say that Friedman goes bananas and does something stupid. But, it also isn’t to say there isn’t at least a little pressure on Friedman to take another step forward in his contract year when there’s at least a hint of a little pressure and a sign that he’s taking the reigns to make something happen by not signing a GM. As a result, I think we’re going to be happy Dodgers fans this offseason. Weather or not that means Harper or Machado, I can not predict because I don’t know how stupid their contracts are going to be. But, I do think there is money to spend and the cap is fake, at least for one year.
   –
   Winter Meetings start today! Hooray!!!
   –

8. Agree with 59 that the fact $60 million comes off the ledger, and possibly more next year, means the FO can indeed make an investment in Harper. Will they?….who knows, but can the the answer is a resoundingly……YES!

   I think it’s reasonable for fans to think at a minimum two of three scenarios will happen this off season. They will acquire additional top of the rotation pitching (Kluber, Bauer or someone else), they will acquire Realmuto and they will sign Harper. I’m thinking the FO scraps the Realmuto focus and instead goes the veteran stop-gap route with someone like Lecroy or Weiters and still gets SP and Harper.

   That’s my shot, now let the fun begin.

9. Part of my point is that when Harper and Machado do not get their absurd asking price (whether the team can afford it or not), Scott Boras is going to do what he did last year and start crying collusion. He is going to Tony Clark and advise him to call for a work stoppage so his clients can get outrageous salaries to make him look good. Scott Boras does not care about the game, only about his clients. And I am okay with that because it is his job to do so. But do not fool yourself. Boras does not give a rip about the game or anyone other than himself and his clients.
   .
   If Tony Clark were smart his whole emphasis would be on a salary floor. More dollars will go to the players by telling teams like the Rays or A’s or Fish that they have to spend a minimum amount on the salaries, more than Scott Boras crying foul because the Dodgers and Yankees are not bidding up his players. Boras basically went 1 for 3 last year with his clients (I know he had more, but he had a big 3). He found a sucker in SD for Hosmer, but could not generate enough interest for Moustakas or JDM. Unfortunately for the Players Union, I think Clark is a puppet for Boras and like minded agents.
   .
   There should be a formula that calculates what a minimum percentage of revenue needs to go to salaries. On top of that, every revenue sharing dollar that id provided to the team MUST go to salaries. Disney gave each team $50MM for BAMtech and every dollar of that should have gone to salaries. There is already a revenue sharing formula for the haves and the have nots. I would go further and create another revenue sharing fund to assist teams to build their stadiums. As an example, I would provide aid to the A’s and Rays to help finance the construction of their new stadiums. I envision the fund to be more of a guarantee to the lender or municipality providing the construction dollars.
   .
   I have no way of knowing the inner workings of MLB, but I absolutely would have the best land planning civil engineers and real estate attorneys on payroll to assist the teams with their real estate search and negotiations with the municipalities and stadium design. Make no mistake, MLB is an oligopoly, and needs cities like Oakland and Tampa and Miami, to succeed for MLB to succeed. If the cities and lenders knew all of MLB is behind the health of all teams, there might be a better partnership between the team and city. If however, a team cannot make a go of it in a certain saturated geographic location, then MLB must allow the team to look for an alternative and assist them. Teams still need to hire the best decision making personnel so they can properly function. But MLB as an organization must act in unison on certain situations for the good of the whole. When you limit competition to 30 cities, then you are really one organization.
   .
   I have no more insight into the financial operations of the Dodgers than anyone else. But I have put together dozens of financing MOU’s. MOU’s may not be legally binding, but that will not stop hostile investors for filing litigation for fraud, and at times win. Not all financial investors are owners. Some are debt holders. I do not happen to believe that the financing package was put together for Billie Jean King. The package could very well happen to have been to solicit secured debt investing to restructure an existing debt vehicle that MLB did not want. I do not know if that is true, but I do know that it happens all the time, because I have done it with clients. So for those that think my reasoning is flawed, you may be right. But it is no more flawed than yours that believe that LAD has unlimited capital to sign whoever they want. Both positions are flawed because none of us no what has taken place with inside the organization. I will say this. As tight lipped as the Dodgers are, doesn’t it seem strange that a financial investor package happened to be leaked to the press? A financial package that says that the Dodgers will not go above the CBT for four years? Not only does the Kershaw contract run out in 2021, but so does the MLB CBA. Coincidence? It is just a question.

   1. Downfall of a floor is teams will have to fill out their rosters spending money at the expense of young players getting a shot. Tony Clark got his ass kicked last contract.

   2. I totally agree that a floor would also help drive up salaries and would like to see a penalty system, such as no revenue sharing if you you don’t spend on payroll.
      –
      Your last paragraph is however, totally absurd and is in fact a paradox. MOU’s not legally binding but won’t stop hostile investors for filing litigation for fraud. NOT LEGALLY BINDING, FILING FOR FRAUD. First off, you would have to actually invest in order to bring a lawsuit. The only investor since the document came out is BJK, who invested 2 whole years after this document, so we don’t even know if said document was even presented to BJK. Not to mention, BJK’s ownership stake is mice nuts compared to the other owners, so her input on spending is pretty much non-existent. On top of that, it’s hard to imagine that she would file a lawsuit knowing full well that she can not win it, because it isn’t legally binding.
      Lastly, going past the CBT for a year is hardly implying unlimited capital.
      –
      Here’s a nice LA Times article referencing the “Document” in question. It doesn’t mention MOU anywhere in the article, so assumptions are nice, but you know what they say about assumptions – ASS – U – ME.
      –
      Here are some of my favorite tidbits from the article…
      “You would expect the Dodgers to have one of the highest-payroll teams in baseball,” Kershaw said before the season ended. “You would expect, since we got under [the tax threshold] this year, the club would be able to spend for a few years after that.” – Clayton Kershaw (Considering he just renewed his contract, he more than likely asked ownership directly if they were willing to spend past the tax threshold).
      –
      “It’s a projection that presumably is made in good faith,” said an investment banker not involved in the Dodgers’ negotiations to sell an ownership stake. “If, two years from now, Mike Trout becomes available and they decide to break the bank for Mike Trout? It’s not binding, in that sense.” (So, investor lawsuits are a bit more than not likely)
      –
      The Times asked for Tucker Kain, the Dodgers’ chief financial officer and managing director of Guggenheim Baseball Management, to explain why the business model presented to potential investors showed that the team does not plan to spend above the threshold in the near future, even as revenues increase.
      “Unfortunately, we have to decline the interview request,” Dodgers spokesman Steve Brener said. (In other words – Shenanigans)
      –
      Tony Clark, the executive director of the Major League Baseball Players Assn., said he would be concerned if a large-market team kept its payroll under the luxury tax threshold for an extended period of time.

      “Any time a club isn’t doing everything it can every season to compete for the World Series title, it’s a concern to players who are always doing what they can to be on the last team standing,” Clark said. (In other words, the CBT is bullcrap for the Dodgers, Red Sox and Yankees).
      –
      So, if you think they’re gonna stay under the CBT until 2021, I’ve got some beach front property in Lancaster that I’d be willing to sell you…
      –
      And if you’re a betting man, I would take that action.

      1. Of course Tony Clark is going to say that. He is the mouthpiece for Scott Boras and other agents of high priced players. You are right that Clark (and Boras) believe the CBT is bull crap. They need the big market teams to bid so that their players’ salaries are maxed. Your Bryce Harper is not going to get his $$$ if only the A’s, Rays, O’s, Reds, Pirates, KC and Milwaukee bid on him. But good of you to tell the Dodgers, Yankees, and Red Sox how to spend their money. I am sure they appreciate your sage advice.

10. 1 – As to Mark’s comments about the need for fiscal restraint due to debt service issues, MLB has said repeatedly that the Dodgers need not reduce payroll for debt service purposes and that MLB is content with the current debt service plan. Is Commissioner Manfred lying? Maybe, but we really don’t know anything about the debt service or any plan or agreement between MLB and the Dodgers.
    2 – Notwithstanding Mark’s argument to the contrary, you just can’t put a good face on the Braintrust’s signing of the old and infirm cadre of Misfit Pitchers (to be banned to the Island of Misfit Pitchers henceforth). I can argue that the Dodgers received less value from McCarthy, Kazmir, Anderson et al than the D-Backs have already received from Greinke, for example. Sure, Greinke is signed for more seasons, but $100 MM is $100MM either way and if what you are trying to do is win, the Dodgers received 1 so-so season from Anderson and nothing from the others that contributed to winning.
    3 – The real question is this: do the Dodgers intend to win the Series this year? If so, what do they need to get over the top? Last season, they were infamously 15-26 and clawed their way to 91 wins and a tie in the Division after winning 104 games the previous season. They made essentially one move in the offseason – the “salary dump” that netted them Matt Kemp. That Kemp contributed was not anticipated and but for Kemp, the Dodgers don’t win the Division last season. They made Deadline and post-Deadline deals for Machado and Dozier (1 for 2) and for some horrible relief pitchers (Axford, Rosscup, Madsen) who clearly weren’t going to contribute to the push for the post-season.
    –
    The Dodgers bet that several guys who had career years, (Taylor, Barnes, Jansen, Wood, etc.) would continue to perform at All-Star levels and lost the bet. Are they doing the same with Muncy et al this offseason?
    –
    The Dodgers have the financial wherewithal to spend money on players. As others here have noted, if they do not trade Kemp, Puig, Wood, Hill, et al this Spring, there is over $60 MM coming off of the books after 2019. They could go out and get what they need.
    3 – The Dodgers’ current management team has both a small-market aversion for spending on player payroll and a SABR-philes view of locking into long and expensive contracts. The second view has merit – BUT – if one or two big deals is enough to put a team over the top and win, should a team go for it or just keep doing what they’re doing, claiming that they get into the playoffs annually and that should be enough? I can guarantee you that Cub fans and Red Sox fans are thrilled that their teams took on contracts that were enough to get them over the top. Bluto likes to say that process is more important than outcome. I understand the argument for process, but ultimately outcome must trump process. Without achieving the desired outcome, how good is the process anyway?
    –
    I do not necessarily advocate signing Harper or Machado – I’m not convinced that either push the Dodgers over the top. But, in my opinion, that is the $64,000 question – what do the Dodgers need to do to be ready to compete on Baseball’s Biggest Stage?

    1. #1. They never retracted this: https://www.latimes.com/sports/dodgers/la-sp-dodgers-debt-payroll-20161126-story.html
       –
       #2. The results say otherwise, and you forgot the loss of Corey Seager and maybe those were not “career years” as you have characterized. After 2 years, how can you say Taylor had a “career year?”
       –
       #3. They didn’t just get to the playoffs – they got to the World Series TWICE!

    2. Bingo! They need to get a number one pitcher and a rh bat that is a good hitter. How can they do that? Well they could get both in one swoop. The Mets are dying to screw up! How about Syndergaard and cespedes? Remember I am not advocating these 2 as I know cespedes is injured and Syndergaard may be as well. But if the front office thinks they are the right fit and are going to be healthy it is a talking point. Who else is there? Kluber maybe? Stanton maybe? Arenado, one year prior to free agency. The Rockies aren’t going to deal him to the dodgers but maybe a 3 way. How about Rendon? Or the cincy 3rd basemen with Gennett. This is just talk out loud but I believe that is what we need. Who fits that bill if you agree. How do we make that happen?

11. I don’t think teams like the Dodgers should have to pay teams that are purposely tanking, the competitive balance money either.

    1. I agree. The Dodgers shouldn’t have to. But that is why you need to determine a fair minimum way for each team to spend on players, and then every revenue sharing dollar needs to go where it was meant to go, back into player salaries. The Disney BAMtech money should have gone into players salaries.
       .
       MLB is an oligopoly. What kind of league would it be if only the Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Phillies, Nationals, Houston, and Giants had the wherewithal to play. That is one 8 team league. If you want 30 teams, then those 8 are going to have to help fund the others. Not every team can get the TV deals that NYY, Boston, and LAD can.

12. I will also say again. I really do not care if the Dodgers go above the CBT threshold. If it helps the team I am all for it. I do not think they will and I do not think they need to do so. It will take trading away favorite players for many of us, but I believe more in the whole than the individual. But what I do not agree with is that Bryce Harper has to be signed even if that means going over the CBT threshold. It is not the threshold that bothers me. It is Bryce Harper. Bryce Harper is slightly better offensively than Matt Kemp was before he signed the outrageous contract that everybody is complaining about now. But nowhere near what Kemp was defensively. And there are those that want to pay Harper twice as much and for more years? Even Washington would rather have a rookie replace him than to re-sign him for what he (and Boras) thinks he is worth. I would bet that Ted Lerner is glad that Harper turned him down.
    .
    Corey Kluber and JT Realmuto make the Dodgers a far better team than Bryce Harper. If they sign Kikuchi, all three would be less than Harper. Not that they will trade for either one, or sign Kikuchi, but all are still being bandied about. No thank you for Bryce Harper or Manny Machado.

    1. https://www.mlb.com/news/bryce-harper-most-feared-hitter-in-baseball/c-301279762

    2. You speak perfect words AC.No thank you for Bryce Harper or Manny Machado.

13. Do you know what I like about the commenters on this site?
    –
    NOTHING! 😉
    –
    No, I am kidding!
    –
    Everyone has different opinions and well-articulated different point-of-view takes. I don’t like that… I actually LOVE IT!

14. I agree with AC. There should be a MINIMUM spend and a MAXIMUM spend. The fine should be the same for being above or below. It should be substantial enough that no one wants to go above or below. Then there should be more revenue sharing!

15. Bryce Harper will absolutely put us over the top this year. There will be no pitcher on earth that wouldn’t poop himself a little facing Seager, Turner and Harper in a post-season game.
    –
    Would you rather have Realmuto’s 2018 or Barnes’ 2017? (Look at the numbers and tell me that JT is the answer, now consider defense)
    –
    Adding Kluber and Harper is a hell of a lot better than adding Kluber and Realmuto.
    –
    There is less of a chance that the Dodgers add Kluber and Kikuchi, than Kluber and Harper.
    –
    Who was better in Japan, Kikuchi or Maeda? So, why do you want to add another left handed starting pitcher to the rotation, especially when Maeda (the better pitcher between the two) might not even be able to crack the starting rotation? Making even less sense is adding him and Kluber…
    Kershaw
    Bueller
    Ryu
    Hill
    Maeda/Wood/Stripling/Urias

    1. I guess the pitchers of the other NL teams facing the Nats in the playoffs didn’t have your same perception of them pooping in their pants. Imagine having to face Trea Turner, Daniel Murphy, Anthony Rendon, Ryan Zimmerman, and a healthy Wilson Ramos (2015-16) sandwiching Bryce Harper. With Scherzer, Strasburg, and Gio on the mound, why didn’t the commissioner’s office just hand the trophy to Lerner? After all they had Bryce Harper. And yet they have not won a single playoff series. I guess NL pitchers are not that afraid of Bryce Harper. Now with better pitching in the NL East, I am thinking that the pucker factor has gone down even more for those teams.

16. Here’s another no vote on Harper. Let’s go get Haniger instead. With Puig and Kemp gone either this winter or after next season, we’ll need a right handed outfielder with some power. Haniger is that guy. We need to make the deal interesting for DiPoto so how about Muncy, Joc/Toles, White/Gonsolin. Two guys who immediately plug into his starting lineup plus a pitcher who is only a year away. Haniger has four years of control remaining, will probably cost about 30 million less than Harper in 2019 and may very well have a higher WAR.

    1. M’s have said that Haniger isn’t going anywhere several times. He’s got 4 more seasons of team control. He’s a piece they can build around while they are rebuilding.

       1. To be honest, I’m not sure if I do the deal I suggested if I’m DiPoto, but I’d have to think about it because, as I said, Muncy and whichever pitcher are long term pieces as well and if you take Toles that’s three pieces, all of whom might be starters for you. The fact that DiPoto said Haniger isn’t going anywhere doesn’t mean he isn’t. Everyone has their price.

       2. Totally agree, we aren’t trading for Haniger. Not to mention, no one in the world thinks that Haniger is better than Harper and Harper is available and won’t cost prospects (Harper’s a year younger and already has an MVP). Muncy outproduced Haniger last year, so there’s that as well. If everyone wants a right handed bat so damn bad, why not keep Puig, and resign Manny and move Seager to second for a year or two until JT is gone, then one goes to third and Lux takes over at second.
          –
          I will continue to think we are in on Manny and Harper until they sign elsewhere. And you all should too. Both are top 5 hitters in all of baseball, you aren’t going to get anyone better than those two guys and neither of them costs you any prospects (The right handed hitting one won’t even cost you a draft pick). Then you can trade away all the other spare parts for high-upside low-level minor leaguers to further bolster your minor leagues.
          –
          Remember, the Dodgers traded for one and tried to trade for the other. There is interest.

17. Nice thought provoking piece today AC, and spirited discussion! Whether the team will go above the CBT threshold or not is an open question and I hope they do-just not for Machado or Harper. Manny wore out his welcome for me with his lack of hustle at times and perceived dirty play (I never forgot throwing his bat at Donaldson either) I have never cared for Harper and I’m from Vegas so that is a statement on other things besides on field performance, he is a me not we kind of player and there is Boras. The team could get 2 or 3 players for what they would pay him and it’s a long term commitment. Who should go and who should stay and who should be acquired seem to have no real consensus: Bum wants Joc, MJ wants Toles, I want Puig and Muncy, on and on it goes but you have to give up something to get something. I am hoping for a splash at the Meetings where a 3 team deal can be done more easily. A lot of teams will make some noise in the next few days, I am counting on the Dodgers being one of them.

    1. Vegas

       I agreed with the tread AC wrote the other day, so I agree that you have a give up enough, to get what you want, like you mentioned.

       And like AC said the other day, to many of these deals are made with someone’s heart, more then the true trade value that is really needed, to make these trades.

       I only want Toles to get a fair chance, and nothing more then that.

       1. I agree MJ, I like Toles too, nice backstory and you are right he has not been given a real chance since his serious injury. He might be a starter somewhere else or just a 4th OF time will tell.

18. Jonah Keri writes today (or speculates) that the Dodgers May go for players with narrower splits. Abreu and Harper mentioned as targets. Pederson, Puig maybe the other way?

    1. If I read your comment correctly Bluto, that means more every day players and less platooning. That’s what I understood Friedman to say in an interview a couple of weeks ago. His best scenario would be to start the same guys most every day.

19. AC – I’m still stuck on Oligopoly!?!? Is it best served with a red or white wine???

    1. Vodka.

       1. 1. Thumbs up

    2. I prefer red.

20. 59, I am not going to get drawn into a pissing contest with you about this. But if you believe that ONLY owners are investors, then I do not need to. I have no idea what you do for a living, but I am guessing it is not corporate finance. You do not need to be an owner to be an investor. I have structured dozens of debt refinance private placement offerings to eliminate traditional bank financing (for a lot of reasons). I have a fair amount of corporate bonds that I invest in my IRA portfolio and that is not ownership, but they are investments. The investor package could very well have been for debt restructure through a private placement offering. I have no idea if that is what it was, but neither do you. But we do know (absolutely know) that the Dodgers had a debt service ratio compliance issue that they needed to address. Dodgerrick is correct when he says that Manfred did not tell the Dodgers that they had to get under the CBT threshold. What he did tell them was that they needed a plan to get back in compliance. As everyone continues to say, the Dodgers do not have a revenue problem. Do not disagree. They are flush in revenues. Therefore, either the operating expenses (player salaries?) need to be reduced or the debt needs to be restructured. Maybe both.
    .
    Also, if Guggs were sued (not by Billie Jean King) it will not be the first time because of the Dodgers. See Ogles v Security Benefit Life. The class action suit may or may not have had original merit. But after the settlement, the Dodgers are now collateral for Security Benefit Life. The number of investors is more than just Mark Walter, Bobby Patton, Stan Kasten, Earvin ‘Magic’ Johnson, Peter Guber, Todd Boehly, Billie Jean King, and Ilana Kloss.
    .
    I will make one other statement on this subject with you. You could very well be right that the Dodgers will sign Bryce Harper. I genuinely hope not. But I have no direct knowledge as to what they will or will not do and neither do you. I am only going on my interpretation of peripheral comments. But I will say that if the Dodgers do sign Harper, I will acknowledge that you were right. It will not be the first time I am wrong nor the last. Even if the Dodgers do not sign Harper, I will not say it is solely because of staying under the CBT threshold, because I do not know. I can and do speculate on what I read. It could be because of the threshold, or it could be that Andrew is just not as mesmerized by Bryce Harper as you are.

    1. Andrew Friedman is definitely more mesmerized by Harper than I am. Because it’s his job to be. Harper is twenty freaking five years old and had 2 season above 1.xxx OPS for Christ’s sake! And I certainly hope he’s sees it makes more sense to add Harper, than Kikuchi who would slot into #7 in our current rotation. Because if he doesn’t he should be fired immediately. And please don’t put Trea Turner in the same conversation as JT and Seager. That’s not even close.
       –
       It’s funny how fans are so fickle that they think Haniger is a better option than Harper because he’s right handed or whatever. A guy who made his debut at the same age Harper hits free agency. Haniger has 1 full season under his belt. Who’s to say he’s not gonna Puig, or Taylor, or Bellinger? If Haniger is the real deal, why not Muncy? But, the same people that want to trade for Haniger want to trade away Muncy, in the same deal, with 4 other quality guys?
       –
       I’m a Systems Architect, but I don’t need to be a Financier to know what “Not Legally Binding” means.
       –
       With all that said, you and Tim are awesome and I enjoy your blogs very much, please don’t take me the wrong way. I’m just putting my thoughts in the comments like many others. If we all agreed with each other, this wouldn’t be so much fun!

       1. WEll, I’m not Tim, but I love it. I like people who have takes and do not suck!

          1. lol – Sorry Mark, some kinda Freudian thing or something. Stop putting CT3 and Kike on the field together! We can do better.

21. Let me preface this by saying NO to Harper to to hell with BorASS. Everyone here wants to WIN the WS, not just be in it. We all have our own ways of making that wish become reality even though NOTHING is GUARANTEED. We could have an All Star at EVERY position and still lose.
    I also believe that except for Seager, CK, Bellinger and JT and also Ruiz, May and maybe White we have no untouchables. So here’s the plan: We get Kluber and Jose Ramirez from Cleveland and Realmuto from Miami. Ramirez would play 2B as he has in the past.
    In return those two teams receive whomever it takes. Let others work out the details.

    1. White is definitely not untouchable. The Indians have a very team friendly contract with Ramirez (5 years remaining at a total of 43 million). Compare that with what Harper will get (let’s estimate at 33 million/season). Ramirez had a 7.9 WAR last year, Harper was 1.3. You did the easy part Richie in asking for Kluber and Ramirez, definitely way better than spending on Harper. The hard part would be to get them. It would probably take Seager and CK and Bellinger and JT and Ruiz and May. We could probably keep White. I’m exaggerating of course, but the Indians would have no incentive to move Ramirez considering production vs salary. Even up for Trout, yeah. Anything else, doubtful.

       1. That is genius.

22. Ditto to AC and Richie.

23. From Vassegh: (not really sure I understand what he is saying)
    #Dodgers shopping list includes adding to bullpen.
    Andrew Friedman said the perception that he won’t spend on higher profile FA relievers is inaccurate “We’ve made offers on guys where we would have spent on the bullpen.” #WinterMeetings #Dodgers

24. 10 year guaranteed contracts are stupid investments. Player union shouldn’t expect any team to offer stupid contracts.
    .
    A team full of AAAA players should not have a minimum payroll.
    .
    Revenue sharing should go for something like WAR bonuses. Insufficient WAR, no earned revenue sharing. Money stays in pool. Goal is to reduce base salaries and reward performance.

25. Mark,
    Does 59 remind you of your old nemesis, Badger?

    1. No. He’s not even close. 59 is not dumb! I don’t always agree but he always has a well thought out argument. I respect that.

26. AC, your analysis of the situation gave me much to consider since my knowledge is driven more by the public sector and not for profits. Baseball is certainly neither of these although deeply involved with both.

    One of the ways that I feel that MLB could help grow the game for the future would be to pay considerably more in salaries and expenses to all of the players, coaches, staff and operating professionals at the minor league levels under the auspices of the organization. Better pay at the entry levels would, hopefully; encourage the better multi-sport athletes in high school or college to pursue baseball professionally rather than other options. This would be a real positive use of the revenue sharing $$$, IMO.

    1. Denny, I am all in favor of increasing the compensation packages for minor leaguers. Unfortunately, the MLB Players Union wants nothing to do with the minor leaguers. The MiLB players would have to unionize, but they have no leverage. I know my son struggled financially for 9 years in the minors. But he will tell you that the 2004 WS ring makes up for it all.

27. AC, I’m new to this site so am asking who your son is, or is that something your prefer not to divulge?

    1. I have not divulged that information as of yet. But I think some have figured it out. I have had some extremely nasty people say some not so nice things about him. He was a AAAA player who toiled 9 years in the minors with Philly, Boston, and Toronto. He also spent some ST time with NYM and Seattle. He came up in 05/25/2004 with Boston and went up and down all season. He did get his WS ring.
       .
       BTW, Mark does know who he is, and knows that I have been truthful and not exaggerated.

       1. Did he go to high school in the valley?

       2. True That!

       3. By gosh I think I’ve got it.
          Interestingly as you’ve told me before, you and I have the same initials, but also my son is the same age as your son and my step-daughter went to the same high school as he did. No wonder I find your posts so enlightening.

28. It looks like Jose Leclerc just might be available for the right price. Texas has not said it had to be waaaaay above market. They are going to need quality soon to be MLB ready players, or players with loads of team control.

    1. So, what do you think it would take to get Leclerc?

       1. Ross Stripling?

          1. Me thinks it would take more than that. If only he hadn’t crashed after the AS break. As I’ve mentioned previously, I think Stripling and Maeda are somewhat redundant and we could certainly turn one of them into another asset.

             1. Texas could use a team controlled starting pitcher. I would start with Stripling and see where it goes. Pre AS Cicken Strip v post AS Leclerc

29. This might just be the offseason that Freidman puts his stamp on the team or it could be more tinkering around the edges which at this point would cause my head to throb or reach for an adult beverage.

    1. You haven’t yet? What’s your secret?

30. Other than resigning our own free agents, recent history suggests the off season will be mostly “tinkering around the edges”.
    –
    That is, until the front office pulls a rabbit off of the hat that none of us expected.
    –
    For evidence of this, I offer one word – Kemp. First he was a Dodger, then he wasn’t, then he was. I dare say no one predicted either of those trades.
    –
    All our speculation means nothing – though it provides a forum to analyze the teams strengths and weaknesses.
    –
    Don’t get you blood pressure too high until you see the rabbit ears. I’m not sure we will see a rabbit this winter but …

    1. Off = out
       Hate posting from my phone

31. You speak perfect words AC.No thank you for Bryce Harper or Manny Machado.

32. I want to thank everyone who contributes to this blog, I appreciate opinions and discenting opinions. It’s fun!

33. Mark May I thank you AC and DC for your contributions with your bloges. they are fun to read and think about during the off-season until the hot stove starts

34. Lee Smith and Harold Baines elected to Hall of Fame by Today’s Game Era Committee. Smith ok, he had a lot of saves but Baines?! In the Hall of Fame? The one in Cooperstown? That’s a travesty IMO.

    1. If Harold Baines is in, why not Gil Hodges? WHY?

       1. At the very least, Gilly, #14, should be semi-retired like #19, Jim Gilliam

    2. Neither belong. Lee Smith. Give me break.

35. So, tonight was the night we take our family to the Indianapolis Yuletide Celebration at Hilbert Circle Theater. We have dinner and then watch the show. Josh Kaufman was the MC. However, I was surprised and happy to see my Godson Max, and his parents at the same show. His father is a Major in the US Army and one of my closest friends. Two tours of duty. Thank you for your service John!
    

36. Dodgers Hire Jeff Kingston As Vice President And Assistant General Manager

37. LAD was not going to hire a new GM, but they did sign a new Vice President – Assistant GM, Jeff Kingston. Kingston was most recently from Seattle under the same position since 2009. Previously with San Diego.

    1. Maybe the GM job is redundant or extinct?

Comments are closed.