|
|
Post by domeplease on Dec 10, 2023 18:07:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by chiyankee on Dec 10, 2023 19:23:27 GMT -5
No one is talking about the Angels. All that money they won't be paying Ohtani, shouldn't they take that and bundle it together and go after one or two of these big free agents? |
|
|
|
Post by inger on Dec 10, 2023 20:33:39 GMT -5
No one is talking about the Angels. All that money they won't be paying Ohtani, shouldn't they take that and bundle it together and go after one or two of these big free agents? You’d expect at least maybe 30-40%… At least! …Is Mickey in trouble… |
|
|
|
Post by kaybli on Dec 11, 2023 18:41:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by domeplease on Dec 11, 2023 19:01:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by domeplease on Dec 11, 2023 19:28:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by pippsheadache on Dec 11, 2023 19:36:24 GMT -5
What a sweet deal for the Dodgers. That's quite a loophole that it seems more teams should try to work out. I guess it helps that Ohtani is making $45 million a year in endorsements and the extra two he will get from the Dodgers is just walking-around money. So they should have plenty more to spread around for other free agents. |
|
|
|
Post by inger on Dec 11, 2023 20:59:22 GMT -5
What a sweet deal for the Dodgers. That's quite a loophole that it seems more teams should try to work out. I guess it helps that Ohtani is making $45 million a year in endorsements and the extra two he will get from the Dodgers is just walking-around money. So they should have plenty more to spread around for other free agents. He could play for free with those endorsement funds rolling in… |
|
|
|
Post by chiyankee on Dec 11, 2023 22:03:13 GMT -5
What a sweet deal for the Dodgers. That's quite a loophole that it seems more teams should try to work out. I guess it helps that Ohtani is making $45 million a year in endorsements and the extra two he will get from the Dodgers is just walking-around money. So they should have plenty more to spread around for other free agents. Ohtani could also save millions in taxes if he moves back to Japan before the deferral money begins to kick in. |
|
|
|
Post by chiyankee on Dec 11, 2023 22:42:29 GMT -5
I wonder if the current Dodgers owners sell the team before this.
|
|
|
|
Post by pippsheadache on Dec 12, 2023 8:08:06 GMT -5
What I didn't realize before this morning was that for CBT purposes the Dodgers will be charged for $46 million AAV with Ohtani's contract. So it's not as simple as a $2 million annual hit even with the deferred payments. For which there is no accrued interest payments.
|
|
|
|
Post by inger on Dec 12, 2023 8:31:15 GMT -5
What I didn't realize before this morning was that for CBT purposes the Dodgers will be charged for $46 million AAV with Ohtani's contract. So it's not as simple as a $2 million annual hit even with the deferred payments. For which there is no accrued interest payments. Seems like voo-doo money to me. I guess I’m not smart enough to understand how the Dodgers I tend to operate in the long run with that kind of future payroll, but it’s not my problem. Maybe they just figure a catastrophic end to the world by then, so they might as well go for it now… |
|
|
|
Post by chiyankee on Dec 12, 2023 9:16:15 GMT -5
What I didn't realize before this morning was that for CBT purposes the Dodgers will be charged for $46 million AAV with Ohtani's contract. So it's not as simple as a $2 million annual hit even with the deferred payments. For which there is no accrued interest payments. I don't see why it's still not 70 million a year for 10 years. The agreement to defer money between the club and player should have nothing to do with the luxury tax. |
|
|
|
Post by rizzuto on Dec 12, 2023 9:20:50 GMT -5
What I didn't realize before this morning was that for CBT purposes the Dodgers will be charged for $46 million AAV with Ohtani's contract. So it's not as simple as a $2 million annual hit even with the deferred payments. For which there is no accrued interest payments. I don't see why it's still not 70 million a year for 10 years. The agreement to defer money between the club and player should have nothing to do with the luxury tax. Same question I have. |
|
|
|
Post by pippsheadache on Dec 12, 2023 9:50:17 GMT -5
I don't see why it's still not 70 million a year for 10 years. The agreement to defer money between the club and player should have nothing to do with the luxury tax. Same question I have. I agree, but it’s in the CBA, so I guess both sides saw the benefit to this calculation. For the Dodgers, in addition to the CBT relief, they will be paying in dollars that will be increasingly devalued and for Ohtani I assume there are tax benefits. I wonder why more teams don't do this with extreme high value players. Maybe they will as salaries become increasingly incomprehensible. |
|
