Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 95

Thread: 2014 Rotation

  1. #61
    Junior Member Rookie FSP's Avatar
    Posts
    11
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    MLR,

    You seem to have dealt with some of this payroll stuff before so maybe you could explain why both the posting fee and the contract have to be considered over the life of the contract because I certainly don't get it. The posting fee is a one time payment to a team in Japan, the contract is a yearly payment to the player. They are payed to different entities, for different reasons, over differing amounts of time, and possibly out of different accounts, so why would they both be tied to the length of the contract in the eyes of the IRS.

  2. #62
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer Physics Guy's Avatar
    Posts
    554
    Like
    16
    Liked 35 Times in 25 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by #24 Sano View Post
    Tanaka will most likly not be 20mil, due to the fact his comparison (Yu Darvish) got only 9.5 mil per year. Of course though with the success of Darvish will help bring the value higher priced maybe 11-16mil at highest, but there are the dodgers who have so much money it's falling out of there pockets they would be the team to hand him 20mil.
    You are right in that Tanaka will not personally get $20M per season, but the Twins would most likely have to pay that out. ($50M posting to team + $50M/5yr contract as an estimate). Rangers paid just over $50M posting fee and $60M/6 yr contract. The fact that only the player contract goes against the cap does not diminish the fact that the Twins will most likely view the entire amount in their budget.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by FSP View Post
    MLR,

    You seem to have dealt with some of this payroll stuff before so maybe you could explain why both the posting fee and the contract have to be considered over the life of the contract because I certainly don't get it. The posting fee is a one time payment to a team in Japan, the contract is a yearly payment to the player. They are payed to different entities, for different reasons, over differing amounts of time, and possibly out of different accounts, so why would they both be tied to the length of the contract in the eyes of the IRS.
    I am not a tax specialist either. This type of thing comes up from time to time in the consulting I do and a tax specialist is consulted. However, I can tell you that generally accepted accounting princples (GAAP) require that expense recognition match the benefit period or revenue generation. In this case I think it is very clear that the benefit period is over the life of the contract. You can Google "GAAP matching principle" or "GAAP expense recognition". I copied the section below from an internet search on the subject.

    Matching Principle
    Special consideration must be given to how revenues and expenses are related. Recall that an expense is the using up of an economic resource to generate a product or service. Those products and services will later be sold and recognized as revenue. GAAP has established a special rule for this relationship known as the matching principle. The matching principle requires that expenses must be recognized in the same period as the related revenues.

  4. #64
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    224
    Like
    3
    Liked 33 Times in 21 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Tanaka is not happening, the Yankees are determined to snag him & I believe the posting/bid fees dont apply to the payroll as they are determined to stay under 189M/year & retaining Cano.

    The Twins should be looking at signing 1 SP like Colby Lewis & trading for a guy who is in the last year of their deal and hopefully they can get him without giving up a big time prospect.

    Bailey, Lester, Anderson... etc

  5. #65
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    3,167
    Like
    19
    Liked 196 Times in 124 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by diehardtwinsfan View Post
    Has SF come out and said they are giving him a QO? I honestly don't see it. He certainly hasn't been 14M good for a couple years now, and if SF wants to pay him that much, and he wants a short term deal, I see nothing preventing him from accepting it, sans perhaps him asking for an agreement not to do the same next year. I agree with you here, he's going to have a tough time finding work if a 2nd round pick is being added to the discussion.
    Jon Heyman says they will give him the qualifying offer:

    Giants to make qualifying offers to Pence, Lincecum; they won't accept - CBSSports.com

    Obviously he could be wrong, but he usually has a pretty good feel for this stuff.

  6. #66
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    3,167
    Like
    19
    Liked 196 Times in 124 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckPaine View Post
    There is no way that Hughes is worth 12.5M a year, try more like 6M a year
    Clearly, but since when are free agent pitchers paid what they are worth? I think he gets less than 12.5M per year but it will be much higher than 6M I suspect.

    If you want pitching, you have to overpay or develop it yourself. It's just the rules of the game, and unfortunately the Twins aren't able to develop it themselves.

  7. #67
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer Physics Guy's Avatar
    Posts
    554
    Like
    16
    Liked 35 Times in 25 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor0333 View Post
    Tanaka is not happening, the Yankees are determined to snag him & I believe the posting/bid fees dont apply to the payroll as they are determined to stay under 189M/year & retaining Cano.

    The Twins should be looking at signing 1 SP like Colby Lewis & trading for a guy who is in the last year of their deal and hopefully they can get him without giving up a big time prospect.

    Bailey, Lester, Anderson... etc
    I would be more than fine with replacing one of the FA signings with Bailey, contingent on him signing an extension. I doubt Boston lets Lester go. He is their #1 pitcher and they can afford to keep him. Anderson is a good pitcher, but his injury history is not good. If you can get him on the cheap, fine.

  8. #68
    Senior Member All-Star JB_Iowa's Avatar
    Posts
    1,893
    Like
    423
    Liked 347 Times in 197 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ThePuck View Post
    We might care because if the team actually decides to spend the percentage on payroll they normally would, as explained by Jim Pohlad, and the posting fee gets spread out on payroll over the next 5 years, it means less talent to be able to get.
    It would seem to me that they could recognize that the quality of their product this year was abysmal and that they had a cost savings given actual payroll versus their "52%".

    By using those cost savings up front, it would reduce any amount that might need to be spread out over the next few years.

  9. #69
    Senior Member All-Star Ultima Ratio's Avatar
    Posts
    1,655
    Like
    26
    Liked 26 Times in 13 Posts
    Not so bold prediction:

    The only FA signed this winter will be Pelfrey.

    Ergo:

    Correia, Pelfrey, Deduno, Gibson, Worley

    This sadly but likely will be the rotation.
    Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.

  10. #70
    Senior Member All-Star Shane Wahl's Avatar
    Posts
    3,783
    Like
    4
    Liked 67 Times in 50 Posts
    Blog Entries
    63
    Somebody should probably compile a list of the mlbtr predictions for starting pitching FAs. I don't think they have done one for Lincecum or Hughes yet, however. I know they have done one for Jimenez, Feldman, Kazmir, Hernandez (Carmona), Arroyo, and a few others.

  11. #71
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer Oldgoat_MN's Avatar
    Posts
    646
    Like
    130
    Liked 23 Times in 16 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Last 3 years
    Player A: 411.2 IP, WHIPs of 1.487, 1.265, 1.455, bWARs -0.1, 1.9, -0.7, total: 1.1
    Player B: 510.1 IP, WHIPS of 1.390, 1.298, 1.419, bWARs 0.1, 0.2, 1.6, total: 1.9

    Player A: 2013 FIP 4.50, xFIP 4.39 (Fangraphs)
    Player B: 2013 FIP 4.40, xFIP 4.24

    Player A is Phil Hughes.
    Player B is Kevin Correia.

    We already have one of those.
    I'm on a whiskey diet. I've lost 3 days already.

  12. #72
    Senior Member All-Star YourHouseIsMyHouse's Avatar
    Posts
    1,235
    Like
    8
    Liked 17 Times in 12 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10
    1. Ubaldo Jimenez, 4 years 60 million
    2. Scott Kazmir, 2 years 11 million
    3. Samuel Deduno, -
    4. Kevin Correia, -
    5. Josh Johnson, 1 year 6.5 million


    Gibson in the wings to replace who struggles (and I'm sure one these guys will).
    Last edited by YourHouseIsMyHouse; 10-22-2013 at 05:00 PM.

  13. #73
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer Oldgoat_MN's Avatar
    Posts
    646
    Like
    130
    Liked 23 Times in 16 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by YourHouseIsMyHouse View Post
    1. Ubaldo Jimenez, 4 years 60 million
    2. Scott Kazmir, 2 years 11 million
    3. Samuel Deduno, -
    4. Kevin Correia, -
    5. Josh Johnson, 1 year 6.5 million


    Gibson in the wings to replace who struggles (and I'm sure one these guys will).
    I think you are being optimistic about Jimenez and Kazmir. People keep saying it's a pretty thin FA market this year.

    But I sure like the pitchers you've selected!
    I'm on a whiskey diet. I've lost 3 days already.

  14. #74
    The biggest PR splash would be Tanaka, and in a way, the lowest risk given his age and incredible track record. I posted this elsewhere (but in an old thread) but I think the math necessary to sign him does not take him out of the Twins' equation. You determine what you would be willing to pay to him as a free agent (and my suggestion is that is 10 years/$150 million because this team needs to make a splash and have an anchor pitcher). Then you decide how much you'd have to spend to get him for that amount of time on a contract (and I suggest that might be 10 years/$80 million for the length of the deal) and you throw the remaining money as a posting fee ($70 million) which - even if you don't get him, which I think you would - you would broadcast loudly to your fan base. Winning the posting fee also means that Tanaka will feel a lot of pressure from the Japanese club to sign so they get their money, which makes the 10 year/$80 million possible. A huge, huge risk that is outside of TR's comfort zone? Certainly. But this kid's size, velocity, nastiness, and the success of Darvish all point to it being a reasonable gamble for a franchise that won't need to spend much on others in a few years because their roster is almost entirely in the minor leagues and will be pre-arb.

  15. #75
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    516
    Like
    37
    Liked 15 Times in 9 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4
    I have a sneaky feeling the Twins will sign Chris Narveson to a minor league deal with the opportunity to compete for a spot in the rotation. Anyone else see this as a good possibility?

  16. #76
    1) Dan Haren 2yrs/17M
    2) Phil Hughes 2yrs/13M
    3) Kevin Correia
    4) Samuel Deduno
    5) Gibson/Worley/Diamond/Albers

    It really doesn't make sense for the twins to sign anyone more expensive than Haren or Hughes, except for Tanaka, who is out of our price range.

  17. #77
    Senior Member All-Star YourHouseIsMyHouse's Avatar
    Posts
    1,235
    Like
    8
    Liked 17 Times in 12 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Oldgoat_MN View Post
    I think you are being optimistic about Jimenez and Kazmir. People keep saying it's a pretty thin FA market this year.

    But I sure like the pitchers you've selected!
    I agree with you and was hesitant, but I think we have to pull the trigger. I've never been a fan of Jimenez, but I checked his fip and xfip and both are actually very good career wise (even in his down years). It would be such a relief to have just one above average pitcher and I'm 50/50 he can provide that. Tanaka is a long shot and after him I think Jimenez is the best choice. Kazmir put a slightly above average season, so a Correia-like payday (better performance, higher risk) seems fair and I'd like to think this wasn't a fluke. Josh Johnson is coming off of one really bad year and right now he'd be a bargain. Can't forget he had a 3.81 ERA in 2012 with 180IPs. Injuries are his biggest concern for sure.

  18. #78
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,121
    Like
    370
    Liked 329 Times in 218 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckPaine View Post
    1) Dan Haren 2yrs/17M
    2) Phil Hughes 2yrs/13M
    3) Kevin Correia
    4) Samuel Deduno
    5) Gibson/Worley/Diamond/Albers

    It really doesn't make sense for the twins to sign anyone more expensive than Haren or Hughes, except for Tanaka, who is out of our price range.
    I think it's within the Twins wherewith-all to sign Haren, Hughes and Tanaka. If all 3 were signed at the numbers you propose, you're looking at $8.5/yr for Haren, $6.5/yr for Hughes and let's say $10M/yr for Tanaka. That's only $25M per year and seems entirely do-able.

    I just don't like the thinking that Tanaka should be considered automatically out of our price range, Target Field was built for just such an acquisition. Season Ticket sales and International marketing revenues would skyrocket for Terry Ryan for taking Jim Pohlad at his word...and finally firing the Shot Heard Around the World. Both Haren and Hughes, and an impact FA target like Ellsbury might be immediately more inclined to consider the Twins and Jim Pohlad's sincerity in "spending money" to avoid future embarrassment as rock-solid-sentiment.

    Heck, you could also trade Correia for prospects or combined in a package deal for a First Baseman.....and now you've knocked down your annual cost for the SP acquisitions to $20M and helped fill a hole at another spot. Throw in Ellsbury and the payroll still comes in well under $100m.

  19. #79
    Head Moderator All-Star glunn's Avatar
    Posts
    4,509
    Like
    2,330
    Liked 292 Times in 164 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Major Leauge Ready View Post
    I am not a tax specialist either. This type of thing comes up from time to time in the consulting I do and a tax specialist is consulted. However, I can tell you that generally accepted accounting princples (GAAP) require that expense recognition match the benefit period or revenue generation. In this case I think it is very clear that the benefit period is over the life of the contract. You can Google "GAAP matching principle" or "GAAP expense recognition". I copied the section below from an internet search on the subject.

    Matching Principle
    Special consideration must be given to how revenues and expenses are related. Recall that an expense is the using up of an economic resource to generate a product or service. Those products and services will later be sold and recognized as revenue. GAAP has established a special rule for this relationship known as the matching principle. The matching principle requires that expenses must be recognized in the same period as the related revenues.
    There is a recent IRS Field Advisory Memorandum that states the IRS position -- here is a link to a discussion of the IRS position.

  20. #80
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer Oldgoat_MN's Avatar
    Posts
    646
    Like
    130
    Liked 23 Times in 16 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by glunn View Post
    There is a recent IRS Field Advisory Memorandum that states the IRS position -- here is a link to a discussion of the IRS position.
    Thank you glunn. That was very kind of you to find and post that.

    Please don't be offended if we don't all run off and read exactly what the IRS has to say on the matter.

    Peace
    I'm on a whiskey diet. I've lost 3 days already.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.