Author Topic: Cubs in '20  (Read 49130 times)

brjones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25868
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1125 on: December 09, 2019, 04:06:43 pm »
Jesse Rogers tweeted he was going to be on the radio, so I turned it on. He says the Cubs are going to get under the luxury tax. Also says they have been transparent about that, which is just a flat out lie.

Mentions that he thinks they could be a .500 team this year.

CurtOne

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27248
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1126 on: December 09, 2019, 04:12:25 pm »
"Mentions that he thinks they could be a .500 team this year. "  They will probably be battling the Cards for 3rd place.  Reds and Brewers at the top.  But things can change dramatically.

brjones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25868
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1127 on: December 09, 2019, 04:22:36 pm »
The Cardinals are the best team in the division, IMO. Reds are probably pretty close behind, and look like they're going to continue to be aggressive this offseason--I wouldn't be surprised if they were the clear favorite going into Spring Training.

The Brewers and Cubs are a distant 3rd/4th right now. The Brewers have already lost Grandal, Moustakas, and Pomeranz, and they don't seem to have a ton of money to add. And given that they will be monitored closely next year since they're one of the primary non-Astros teams who are suspected of stealing signs, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some "unexplained" team-wide regression from them next year.

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17347
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1128 on: December 09, 2019, 04:31:51 pm »
The Cardinals, Reds, and Cubs as currently constructed are at the top of the division.  Any of those three with a few tweaks would be the clear favorite. 

The Cubs if they trade Bryant are with the Brewers in the also rans battling to become a .500 team unless they catch lighting in the bottle.  If the Cubs trade Willson too and then I think they struggle hard to become a .500 level team and I'd wonder why you don't just blow the whole thing up.  Getting below the luxury tax is just stupid.

Deeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16920
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1129 on: December 09, 2019, 04:33:52 pm »
I'm not sure I understand the controversy here.  It seems to me that they picked up Quintana's option because they need someone in the rotation, and are not likely to get someone any near as good as Quintana for 9.5 million.  Craig - since you have often espoused the value of having an anti-awful player instead of an awful one, I assume you rate Quintana as awful.  If so, I don't agree.  He seems to me to be the very definition of an anti-awful fifth starter.

Nor do I see the logic in trading Quintana just to free up money for free agent players.  There isn't a chance in the world that the Cubs are going to be in on Rondon/Cole level players, and replacing him with another 9.5 million dollar pitcher probably wouldn't accomplish much.  And it is very likely that the Cubs are going to want to have about 15 - 15 million in reserve, just on the off chance that they need to bolster some area, as they did last season with Kimbrel.

The Cubs have made it clear that they are not going to go over the salary cap this year, and given the penalties involved, I think this is a reasonable decision.

Interesting Freudian slip there...

JR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13648
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1130 on: December 09, 2019, 04:37:46 pm »
Mentions that he thinks they could be a .500 team this year.

If that's the case, can we just go ahead and try to get as much of Heyward's and Darvish's contracts off the books as we can?  Those are the big contracts that are hindering us right now.  No sense fooling around trying to free up a spare $8-10 million here or there if that's the season we're looking at.  Just go ahead and start tearing it down and get rid of the albatross contracts while they're coming off reasonably productive seasons.

Deeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16920
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1131 on: December 09, 2019, 04:41:58 pm »
If that's the case, can we just go ahead and try to get as much of Heyward's and Darvish's contracts off the books as we can?  Those are the big contracts that are hindering us right now.  No sense fooling around trying to free up a spare $8-10 million here or there if that's the season we're looking at.  Just go ahead and start tearing it down and get rid of the albatross contracts while they're coming off reasonably productive seasons.

Yes, if we’re trading Bryant and Contreras not to extend the competitive window but to get under the luxury tax, then blow it up and trade everything that’s not nailed down.  Who cares about winning 80 games as opposed to 70?  That approach is the Bulls of the mid 2010s.  Basically everybody with surplus value should go and let Theo start over at 2012, which he seems to be better at than trying to be a buyer.
Like Like x 1 View List

brjones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25868
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1132 on: December 09, 2019, 04:44:25 pm »
As much as pitchers are making this offseason, I think the Cubs could probably trade all of Darvish's contract if they wanted to.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17347
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1133 on: December 09, 2019, 04:57:29 pm »
If the Cubs if the exceed the luxury tax threshold by $30,000,000 and think I might be overestimating the tax a bit by adding the 12% surcharge to the whole 30%.

Year 1- $9,600,000
Year 2- $12,600,000 (+$3,000,000)
Year 3- $18,600,000 (+9,000,000 over year 1)

The Cubs need to get rid of their best player to reset the luxury tax over a freaking $9,000,000 or less money than they paid Morrow to be on the IR..................

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17347
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1134 on: December 09, 2019, 05:06:47 pm »
The Cubs aren't a World Series contender without Bryant.  Trade freaking everybody and let Ricketts hoard up enough money to properly fund the next contending team.  Darvish has value and I think you could get rid of everyone not named Heyward without including assets.

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13097
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1135 on: December 09, 2019, 05:09:31 pm »
If the Cubs if the exceed the luxury tax threshold by $30,000,000 and think I might be overestimating the tax a bit by adding the 12% surcharge to the whole 30%.

Year 1- $9,600,000
Year 2- $12,600,000 (+$3,000,000)
Year 3- $18,600,000 (+9,000,000 over year 1)

The Cubs need to get rid of their best player to reset the luxury tax over a freaking $9,000,000 or less money than they paid Morrow to be on the IR..................

Dumb Q's by me. But clarify for me:
1.  we were under tax in 18, right?  So, *IF* over this year, it would be year 2, the $3M tax?  Not $9M?
2.  You mention exceeding the tax by $30M.  Where is that tax level? 
3.  There are a couple of tax levels, no? 
4.  If there are lux-tax levels/thresholds, is Rogers taking about being under even the lowest of them all, and being totally tax free?  Or is he perhaps referring to a higher-penalty lux level? 

Ron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8430
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1136 on: December 09, 2019, 05:28:18 pm »
I had no idea that Jesse Rogers had the ability to determine the Cubs' off-season.  But apparently he does.  Yeah, let's just blow it all up based on what he's reporting (or speculating).

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17347
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1137 on: December 09, 2019, 06:42:25 pm »
Craig

The Cubs would be in year 2 so a $30,000,000 overage would cost $12.6 million or $3 million more than a first time payer. Going over for 3 years in a row would be $18.6 million.

There are 3 tax tiers.
0-$20 million 20% then 30% then 50% tax
$20-$40 million over has an additional 12% surcharge.
$40+ million  42.5% surcharge the first time and 45% in subsequent years + a loss of 10 picks on your first pick.

The third tier could get expensive and I could see teams making a case to avoid it. The first 2 tiers nope it doesn’t make sense.


Rogers has been one of the most accurate reporters the past we years. 

CurtOne

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27248
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1138 on: December 09, 2019, 07:02:42 pm »
Deeg, what's Freudian in davep's post.  I'm missing it.  Not doubting you, just want to nail the Dutch dummy myself.

davep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15849
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #1139 on: December 09, 2019, 07:18:53 pm »
Idiot.  You can't use the words Dutch and the word dummy in the same sentence.  Just ask Craig.