Mookie
Re: Mookie
I don't understand getting as little in return as they got for him. I know adding Price was a salary dump but there had to have been something better out there not from LA
- Cardinals
- Posts: 8041
- Joined: Sat May 18, 2002 1:00 am
- Location: Manch Vegas, CT
- Name: John Paul Starkey
Re: Mookie
There's no way there was anything better out there. If there were, the Red Sox would've taken the better return. It seems only the Padres and Dodgers were in it at the end. If you think it's light, which I tend to think it is too, then shame on the other teams for not making a competitive offer. That's where the blame ought to go. Red Sox gave every signal that they were dealing him.
12, 14, 15, 17, 22
- Mets
- Posts: 2339
- Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:00 am
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Name: John Anderson
- Contact:
Re: Mookie
It's all about the money. Once LAD said they would take Price back all other teams offers took a backseat regardless of talent return.
2008-2023 Mets: 1,143-1,296...469%
2006-2008 Rockies: 242-244...498%
IBC Total: 1,385-1,540...474%
2022: lost WC
2023: lost WC
2024: 1st NL East; lost WC
2006-2008 Rockies: 242-244...498%
IBC Total: 1,385-1,540...474%
2022: lost WC
2023: lost WC
2024: 1st NL East; lost WC
- Cardinals
- Posts: 8041
- Joined: Sat May 18, 2002 1:00 am
- Location: Manch Vegas, CT
- Name: John Paul Starkey
Re: Mookie
Yeah, the $90M they shed had to easily outweigh the supposed superior packages, which I'm not sure even existed.
12, 14, 15, 17, 22
Re: Mookie
In the next CBA, the union needs to fight hard against the luxury tax. It's not helping competitive balance and this trade doesn't happen if it doesn't exist. The Cubs might trade Bryant for the same reason when they should be looking at extending him, it's gonna be painful when they trade him for a couple of A ballers at midseason.
- Mets
- Posts: 2339
- Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:00 am
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Name: John Anderson
- Contact:
Re: Mookie
The luxury tax was the concession for not having a Salary Cap like every other league. Not saying it's the best solution - but unless every team has a standard cap/floor - I cannot see it going away completely.
2008-2023 Mets: 1,143-1,296...469%
2006-2008 Rockies: 242-244...498%
IBC Total: 1,385-1,540...474%
2022: lost WC
2023: lost WC
2024: 1st NL East; lost WC
2006-2008 Rockies: 242-244...498%
IBC Total: 1,385-1,540...474%
2022: lost WC
2023: lost WC
2024: 1st NL East; lost WC
- Athletics
- Posts: 1930
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 1:00 am
- Location: San Diego, CA
- Name: Stephen d'Esterhazy
Re: Mookie
Boston didn't dump all the cash, but even eating what they did only put Price on par with what he would be worth in UFA which is like 3/45 or so.
And the luxury tax is only a problem because of how it builds up over multiple years, the major spenders wouldn't care if they had to shell out additional cash because they went over the limit for just one year, it is that if the next year they are over it they are taxed even more...yet there is revenue sharing.
Also, this luxury tax penalty messes with their international spending limits which now has a hard cap and there is no way they can exceed it.
And the luxury tax is only a problem because of how it builds up over multiple years, the major spenders wouldn't care if they had to shell out additional cash because they went over the limit for just one year, it is that if the next year they are over it they are taxed even more...yet there is revenue sharing.
Also, this luxury tax penalty messes with their international spending limits which now has a hard cap and there is no way they can exceed it.
"My shit doesn't work in the playoffs. My job is to get us to the playoffs. What happens after that is fucking luck."
LAA 11 - 15 331W - 479L
LAA 16 - 20 477W - 333L 17-20 ALW
OAK 21 - 24 297W - 189L 21-22 ALW
LAA 11 - 15 331W - 479L
LAA 16 - 20 477W - 333L 17-20 ALW
OAK 21 - 24 297W - 189L 21-22 ALW