Phillies

Transactions & Such

Winter leagues

Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Sunday thread: Trade rumors and minor signings | Main | Weekend hot stove open thread »

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Comments

The worst part? The Marlins will probably have a larger net profit in 2013 than the Phillies.

cirucs: "As much as it's fun to mock the marlins, I don't think the Phillies could get their payroll to 16 mil and receive major league prospects even if they wanted to (while keeping their most valuable player; in the marlins case Stanton, in the Phillies case Hamels?)"

This is definitely the most creative and ludicrous way to criticize our front office that I've seen in awhile.

NEPP: Who cares about net profits? The Kansas City Royals rack up awesome net profits every year!

NEPP - Um, of course they will, because of revenue sharing.

KAS - It's amazing how some "fans" use this instance to bash the Phillies FO. Simply mind-boggling.

Nolasco ($11.5M) and Dobbs($1.5M) are the only guys on the marlins that have guaranteed money in 2013.

RAJ should tell Loria he'll take Nolasco and Dobbs along with Stanton for a prospect or two. Hell, kick in $4M to help Loria pay for Heath Bell's leftover money so he can have $0 payroll expenses above a team of pre-arbs.

http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5755:how-the-miami-marlins-lost-their-minds&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39

Loria didn't loss his mind. He's actually kind of a genius even if he is unethical. 'Privatize gains, socialize losses' and that is exactly what he did to the tune of $500M to the suckers of Dade County.

Wonder if this kicks up interest again the SEC investigation which kind of died and went no where and if the FBI doesn't become involved again too because they were sniffing around this process too.

http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/03/54935/

It's crappy for any marlins fan(if those actually exist), but at the same time, if you just tried to by a team, saw how terrible they performed, looked at the NL east and though, hmmm 100mm payroll for a 5th place team? I guess it's not super crazy.

***Who cares about net profits? The Kansas City Royals rack up awesome net profits every year!***

I wasn't praising them at all...I was pointing out the ridiculousness of the current system MLB has in place. A team like the Marlins shouldnt be rewarded for putting out a team like this.

http://forums.marlinsbaseball.com/forum/1-miami-marlins/

Go read some major angst by Marlins fans (which apparently exist still)

From a competitive standpoint, it makes sense for the Marlins to blow it up given their poor performance for all the money they spent and a lout for a manager who embarrassed the franchise publicly.

Just went beyond that though with the likes of trading Reyes and with the talks they are trying to move Nolasco it moves beyond just demolishing to start over. They are just collect to sell of everything and collect a nice tidy net profit the next 2 years regardless of what happens on the field.

I'm thinking Selig needs to step in and do something here under the "Best Interests of Baseball" clause. Whether it's disallowing the trade or removing Loria from ownership, it's clear the system is being garishly abused.

mm: Its not crazy to blow up a failure, but it is crazy to trade that talent around a center piece of two prospects who are multiple years away from the majors along with a bunch of other question marks who include lesser prospects and mlb players with no guaranteed salary past 2013.

well, crazy if you are interested in your franchise's performance in anyway.

The worst part? The Marlins will probably have a larger net profit in 2013 than the Phillies.

Yeah, Maury Brown at bizofbaseball compared their racket to Max Bialystock: sometimes you can make more money with a flop than a hit. The Marlins will have a larger profit in 2013 than they did in 2012 too.

MG - It's not genius. Making money in this way is something any greedy idiot with capital and without shame could do. It's a very straight-forward process.

Springtime for Jeffrey Loria?

Loria needs to sell that team.

Colossal dump indeed.

Think this dump is a pre-cursor to move the franchise to Vegas or San Antonio? Selig loves to "reward" fiscally incompetent teams with a new city.

***Loria needs to sell that team***

To be fair, he just sold a huge chunk of it to Toronto.

Loria probably won't sell the team any time soon. Look at the article MG linked to. There's a built in disincentive where a percentage of any sale of controlling interest would have to be shared with the county/state if he sold in the next 10 years (goes down each year).

He could sell anyway and the stadium deal is rotten for the taxpayers but they do have that.

My favorite Twitter take on this supposed outrage:

"Alternate headline: Blue Jays land five regulars from a 69-win team."

I'm thinking Selig needs to step in and do something here under the "Best Interests of Baseball" clause. Whether it's disallowing the trade or removing Loria from ownership, it's clear the system is being garishly abused.

You're assuming that Budzilla isn't in on the deal. Remember, Loria was the "Angel of Death" in Montreal. Selig lobbied for and approved his purchase of the Marlins for doing such a good job killing baseball in Montreal.

In other words, I smell a rat.

Sophist - Maybe so but but getting something threw like that isn't the easiest thing especially at the time in '09.

I despise that public funding is used to finance bonds to fund sports stadiums. It is an incredibly poor use of funds with a very few pocketing incredible gains as a result.

From a Phillies baseball perspective six of our final 13 games in a highly competitive NL East are against the hapless Marlins, who should be bordering on 100 losses at that point.

If Selig & Loria wanted to kill baseball in Miami, they wouldn't have gotten the stadium. Now that they have the Stadium, they can't threaten to move the team. I don't see what Selig's angle in this would be. Loria is going to pocket the other owners' money and kill baseball in Miami at the same time? this is lose-lose for MLB.

The Reading Phillies decide to rebrand their team and that is a "crass money grabbing move," by David Montgomery.

Jeffery Loria hoodwinks the town of Miami into paying for a stadium and then guts the entire roster leaving a bad, low-priced team with a check payable to the city of Miami and he is "kind of a genius."

MG logic at work people.


_____________________________________

This is just horrendous to the concept of competitive baseball in Miami. That is the big deal for me. Loria basically spit in the face of any fans that franchise does have and then they wonder why they can't build a true deep fanbase there.


I don't see what Selig's angle in this would be. Loria is going to pocket the other owners' money and kill baseball in Miami at the same time? this is lose-lose for MLB.

Loria doesn't release the pictures he has of Seligula and that sheep in a dominatrix costume?

Loria is going to pocket the other owners' money and kill baseball in Miami at the same time?

Is it possible to kill something that was never alive?


Loria doesn't release the pictures he has of Seligula and that sheep in a dominatrix costume?

That's not Selig, it's Pat Burrell. Again.

I seriously doubt Bud Selig will void this trade, but I agree with those who say that he should. The last time a trade was voided was when Charlie Finley tried to trade Joe Rudi, Rollie Fingers & Vida Blue for $1.5M. The difference there is that it was a straight cash dump, whereas this trade involves some prospects including a couple who are actually legitimate. Still, given the circumstances surrounding the trade -- like the fact that they do this same thing every 3 or 4 years, that they just got a brand new stadium on the public dime, and the fact that the return on the trade is so woefully short of what they could get if they traded the 3 marquee players individually -- it is difficult for me to come up with a plausible argument that letting this trade stand is really in the best interests of baseball. It isn't.

**The worst part? The Marlins will probably have a larger net profit in 2013 than the Phillies.**


No, the worst part is that this team has won more World Series Championships in the last 15 years than the Phillies.

http://www.forbes.com/teams/miami-marlins/

Look at how the Marlins' value has soared since the stadium was approved in 2009:

2008: $256M
2009: $277M
2010: $317M
2011: $360M
2012: $450M

That's a 12% CAGR over that 5-year period in a period where most assets classes have taken a giant dump or even with the rebound have had scant growth.

Hell, that that would crush almost any hedge fund over that time and makes people like the Harvard Management Co (manage Harvard's endowment) look like pikers.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2012/09/26/harvard-endowment-dips-slightly-billion-european-losses-offset-investment-gains/OWLuXKNanvZU0ZEjheTLAL/story.html

Loria may be a complete scumbag but the man has made major bank on his investment with the Marlins. Paid $143M in '02 has made over 12% annual return since then.

Only kind of people that have made that return are the goldbugs who had the foresight to buy gold in meaningful amounts from 2002-07.

While this trade isn't really in the best interests of baseball, one thing that would TOTALLY be in the best interests of baseball would be for the Marlins to trade Stanton to the Phillies for Mini-Mart & Schierholtz.

Though it should be noted that if the Phillies had played the part of the BlueJays in this trade, some people here would be criticizing the trade saying we gave up too much and that Buerhle is overpaid while Reyes is a bad clubhouse guy.


You all know its true.

Only kind of people that have made that return are the goldbugs who had the foresight to buy gold in meaningful amounts from 2002-07.

How does it compare to every other MLB owner? Every other MLB owner that has had a partially publicly financed stadium built in the last ten years?

Not sure Loria is any more a genius than any other major sports owner really. This doesn't involve financial wizardry or insight.

MG nails it. Loria knows that the bubble burst on the economy at large in 2007-08, but it continues to grow in MLB. He doesn't give a damn about being competitive - he cares about making money.

MG understates the return Loria's made on his initial investment, though. He bought a 25% stake in the Expos for $12M in 1999. He gobbled up the franchise when cash calls went unanswered by the other owners, then parlayed that into:

- $120M from the other 29 teams (MLB purchased the Expos to contract them, then failed when the Twins couldn't be contracted due to a lawsuit)

- approval to buy the Marlins

- a $38.5M interest-free loan from MLB to cover the difference between the purchase price of the Expos and the Marlins.

Loria essentially bought a professional sports franchise with $12M in 1999, and will likely clear $350M or more (he's on the hook for $150M in stadium costs, IIRC) when he sells the gutted Marlins (minus those pesky long-term contracts) to new owners in the near future. Nice work if you can get it.

Meanwhile the Miami locals, who see Loria (rather than the MLB system of extorting stadiums from taxpayers) as the enemy, will welcome new owners with open arms, and will buy the new owners' promises that things will be different this time. With hundreds of millions of public debt sunk into an awful stadium deal, do they have any other choice?

Phils value in 2003 according to MG's article: $239M.

Phils value in 2007: $457M.

Pretty similar growth there with the opening of CBP in the interim. Phils are now at $723M. Guess our guys are geniuses too. Or maybe owning a major sports franchise is a no-brainer.

I'm with Colonel Tom. Loria is scum but the problems here fall on the structure of MLB and the political decisions of county and state governments.

Gotta have money to make money

EXACTLY!

Owners generally don't own a sports franchise for year-to-year profits (which are nice, but not essential).

Owners own sports franchises because they are investments that pay off at a much greater rate than most investments. Even if they suffer some losses over the years, those operating losses won't come close to pure profit they'll receive from selling the franchise.

Sophist - And there aren't many baseball owners running around and yeah most of the credit actually goes to Selig.

Fans may not like Selig and I am sure plenty really dislike him.

Selig has kept labor peace for a long stretch, got new stadiums built for almost every team in the past 10 years with a huge helping of public funding, and has seen a dramatic leap in revenues.

As for Loria, he got over 10% knocked off the purchase price of Marlins when he didn't get a new stadium built in 5 years. I wouldn't say he is necessary a financial genius but he bought an asset a pretty low price for even that time, got it knocked down even a bit further in price, and has realized (or had the good fortune) of earning an incredible return since then.

Phillies sold in 1981 for $32.5 million
Phillies currently valued at $723 million....2225% growth in 31 years.

Sophist - They were in terms of signing Thome and working through the byzantine state and city politics to get it approved.

The thing I was most surprised that Montgomery did though was reinvest the profits after the '08 championship to really make this extended possible. They were financially conservative to that point.

Now Montgomery and Co. are trying to extend this run just a bit further so they are in a strong negotiating position with Comcast for when the TV deals expires at the end of the '15 season.

So now Selig is a genius? He's pretty much not as inept as Gary Bettman, which is what it would take for baseball to fail to grow (in the sense we're talking about -- MLB has actually declined in popularity during his tenure and many of these new franchises are failing).

ColonelTom - Yup. Thanks for adding the part of the Expos too and expounding on what I added.

MG - Really disagree that it takes a genius to sign Jim Thome and lawyer up with Ballard Spahr and whatever "government affairs" people they have to replace to Vet. They're "sophisticated" people, but most baseball owners, if they are geniuses at all, applied themselves and made money in something besides baseball. Like inheriting a billion dollar cigar company from their fathers. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Sophist - Selig has had labor peace (no interruptions in income) and made the current owners barrels of money since franchises have notably increased in value.

That's what the owners care about and everything is a distant 2nd. Don't screw with my business with radically increase my net wealth. He's done that for them and so they will keep in his current position as long as he likes.

Sophist - Largely agree about having made money in other places but disagree what owners largely buy teams out of self interest/attention with secondary consideration on annual income statements or net worth. Some owners do (Cuban in Dallas, Snyder with the Skins) but even there those guys have been hyper aggressive about expanding existing income streams and looking to realize new ones.

As for the stadium deal, that took a long time to work out (over a decade) and wasn't as easy as just greasing some palms locally to get a low-level contract. It doesn't make them 'geniuses' but it did take some persistence over a prolonged stretch.

One of my friends always says that the Phillies are "unclassy"... How sweet it feels to remind him his owner is a swindler...

Posted by BAP: While this trade isn't really in the best interests of baseball, one thing that would TOTALLY be in the best interests of baseball would be for the Marlins to trade Stanton to the Phillies for Mini-Mart & Schierholtz.
------------------------------------
I think I broke some ribs laughing....well played, BAP!

MG - I agree with you on Selig's role and his success by owner's standards. Also don't mean to make government affairs sound like an easy business. It's just not innovative. You make it sound like it took foresight, risk-taking, and intelligence to get this done when all it really takes is capital. Laying the groundwork for the first small business investment companies, venture capital, in the philadelphia region this is not.

I don't know about a "genius," but Selig's been a damn good commissioner from the owners' standpoint - and remember, he's there to do their bidding. Players aren't complaining much either, with player salaries escalating nicely over Selig's term without long work stoppages. I don't personally like the guy, but give credit where it's due.

The other interesting factor in the Marlins' situation is that the SEC is investigating the stadium deal, based largely on Loria's alleged misrepresentation to Miami-Dade County of the Marlins' financial situation prior to the deal. Another possibility in all of this is that Loria's preparing himself for a hefty SEC fine/settlement, and wants to be sure that he's in a position to buy his way out of potential criminal charges. I doubt the SEC will be like MLB and extend Loria an interest-free loan or payment plan to cover his fines.

Sophist - Gov't Affairs may seem easy and that money buys you access & thus influence. Never worked directly on gov't contracts myself but have been in enough of a supporting ancillary role to see how messy it is and how damn hard access is to get especially at the federal level.

MG - Every other owner's ability to get public financing for their stadium suggests that, as messy as whatever work a law firm had to do on their behalf was, what the Phils did wasn't exactly innovative or all that risky. CBP's location in South Philly parking lot land where zoning and NIMBY troubles are minimized helps.

I just don't understand why a spectacular return on investment means the decisions that got you there are all that laudatory. These guys were working in a monopoly where public resistance to these stadium deals was non-existent.

BAP - you nailed it perfectly: it's the circumstances that make this deal such an outrage. If a new stadium w/ public funding wasn't just built a year ago and if the Marlins didn't have a history of dumping every 4 years, then we'd be saying "Ok, they're just blowing it up and rebuilding."

Obviously at the end of the day, every owner is in this to make money. But Selig's purpose is (should be) to keep baseball competitive and grow the fanbase as a whole. I understand if he doesn't want to wage the war of installing a salary floor, but then he's got to keep owners in line so they don't alienate the fans of a major city.

Its almost as if you can sub-contract out that type of stuff to the professionals...if you have the initial money to start with.

Rumor has it the Marlins are trying to pawn their cheerleaders (aka- Mermaids) off on local strip clubs.

Awright. This season's planned road trip to see Phils @ Marlins just got a little less costly.
Should be able to get tix on the secondary market REEEEAL CHEEEAP.

Torii Hunter is now a Tiger

Torii Hunter, 2 years, $26M with the Tigers. Good deal for Detroit.

Higher AAV than I expected.

I was expecting something closer to 2 years, $20-22 million.

Damn. I'd have taken Hunter at 2/$26M in a heartbeat. The short commitment (i.e., low risk) makes that a very solid deal for the Tigers despite the AAV.

Don't really expect Hunter to have an OBP over .350 or more than 15 HR next year so I wasn't crazy about him. I bet he'll have a lot of 2B in that park, though.

I just don't understand why a spectacular return on investment means the decisions that got you there are all that laudatory. These guys were working in a monopoly where public resistance to these stadium deals was non-existent.

Loria's enviable success was in getting himself into the easy-money racket without paying the normal nine- or ten-figure entry fee. It takes savvy and connections to worm your way into the MLB ownership clique. You don't just walk in the door. (Ask Mark Cuban.)

The trade should not be voided in the "best interests of baseball." It's not even a bad baseball trade for the Marlins. They dumped overpriced contracts on the Jays for (a few) legitimately good prospects. They got more back than the Red Sox did for A-Gon, Crawford and Beckett, easily.

What should be voided is the ownership by Loria. The worst part about this is that if you forced Loria to sell the team now, it's probably exactly what he wants--everything he's done in the last two years has massively raised the value of the franchise (a brand-new stadium, funded by the taxpayers, and a blank slate of a team with no future liabilities).

Obviously at the end of the day, every owner is in this to make money. But Selig's purpose is (should be) to keep baseball competitive and grow the fanbase as a whole. I understand if he doesn't want to wage the war of installing a salary floor, but then he's got to keep owners in line so they don't alienate the fans of a major city.

The counterargument here is that the Marlins have had 20 years in which to build a fan base, in which time they've won 2 World Series titles. It hasn't happened. There's a distinct possibility -- I'd venture to say probability -- that a steady, stable market for Major League Baseball DOES NOT EXIST in South Florida.
Even the opening of a brand new ballpark, & an increase in payroll to the 2nd highest in the National League, only translated to a rank of 12th (of 16) in average home attendance, at barely 27,000 fans/game.

I've said it before, & I'll continue to beat the dead horse: there is nothing outrageous about what is going on in Miami. Sure, their ballpark deal screwed the average taxpayer. But guess what? EVERY MLB franchise w/ a publicly financed ballpark has screwed the average taxpayer. Let's see what the Marlins do going forward before passing judgment. I'd be willing to bet they'll field a competitive team in the next 3-5 years. If people need to be indignant in the meantime, focus on Pittsburgh, where a real fan base w/ real history has been brutally shafted by ownership for 20 STRAIGHT YEARS, getting fat off of revenue sharing w/out even attempting to field so much as a marginally acceptable team.

CT - Yeah, Loria's story in Montreal was very interesting. A longer review of what you alluded to above wrt Montreal is here:
http://www.thecubdom.com/opeds/ownerreviews/expos_review.html

He put in $30M (12 initially then 18 in cash) for 94% stake in a team valued at over $100M.

Crediting him with some kind of extraordinary savvy in managing the Marlins to the growth MG points out above seems far-fetched though.

Jack - exactly. Loria's not in the business of owning teams. He's a venture capitalist. He bought a struggling asset (the Marlins) at a discount price, maximized the good parts (obtaining a stadium at public expense), stripped the liabilities (by dumping guaranteed contracts), and now he'll spin it off for a fat profit.

***The counterargument here is that the Marlins have had 20 years in which to build a fan base, in which time they've won 2 World Series titles. ***

My memory is a tad hazy...what did they do in the year following each WS win? They logically reinvested in the team to build a viable long-term contender, right?

Jack - Except for the fact that selling now would hand over 50% of the sale to the city and county.

***Except for the fact that selling now would hand over 50% of the sale to the city and county. ***

Loria would probably get MLB to chip in to compensate him for such a penalty were he to promise to sell the franchise immediately.

Gtown - The difference between what's going on in Miami and elsewhere (well, not everywhere else) is that those places have a fanbase / consumers of the product. CBP may be screwing state and local tax payers, but at least the area enjoys the team and they've continually fielded a competitive product since opening. It may have screwed people over, but it doesn't compare with what's gone on down there.

NEPP: It's difficult to do so when practically no one comes to see the games whether the team is winning, or not, or has a new park, or not, or spends money on payroll, or not ...

Gtown - Exactly, which is way the whole thing is more outrageous than your typical MLB story.

Would have liked to have Hunter here on that deal. Oh well.

I mean, the level of fraud on display here totally outmatches that in your typical case.

Sophist: Pittsburgh is far worse, as they not only never sign anyone, they trade their best players once it becomes apparent keeping them will cost more than the league minimum ... & the Pirates actually have a fan base which would appreciate their franchise making an honest attempt at fielding a competitive team!

Devil's Advocate:

Loria simply says, "Listen, we tried to win by signing a bunch of high-priced stars and it got us a last place finish. This is an attempt to do it right. To do it the way we've done it for two World Series rings since 1997 which is only exceeded by the New York Yankees and is more than any other NL team over that time except the Cardinals and Giants who also have 2 rings."


The 97 Marlins were a high payroll team. They shed salary after winning the title. I do think selling on Johnson made sense though.

I dont think baseball will succeed in S. Florida but I also dont think they've ever had a good ownership that truly gave it a shot either.

    ...What should be voided is the ownership by Loria. The worst part about this is that if you forced Loria to sell the team now, it's probably exactly what he wants--everything he's done in the last two years has massively raised the value of the franchise (a brand-new stadium, funded by the taxpayers, and a blank slate of a team with no future liabilities).

    Posted by: Jack | Wednesday, November 14, 2012 at 12:35 PM

This whole thing feels like a "bubble" economy; what with the Dodgers sold at a once unthinkable $2 billion, and a venture capitalist (Loria) pulling a Romney to maximize his return on a bad ball team.

What should really give Selig and his gangsters pause is ML Baseball's Antitrust Exemption. In this populist environment -- validated by the results of the recent election -- owners should be very aware that their primary obligation is to field a competitive ball club and not pillage a city for a stadium deal and sell out.

Senator McGovern of MA might be very interested in the outcome of any future stunts such as this. The exemption has teeth:

The History of Baseball's Antitrust Exemption

If MLB devolves into a commodities market, it could be the end of the sport as we currently know it.

Good for Hunter going to Detroit. He was pretty clear that he had no desire to visit a bunch of cities and negotiate the best deal, he simply wanted to go to a team he desired at a fair market-value price. 2yr/$26M is pretty win/win for both team and player.

"Loria simply says, "Listen, we tried to win by signing a bunch of high-priced stars and it got us a last place finish. This is an attempt to do it right."

That is disingenuous. If you were committed to rebuilding, you could certainly justify trading Buehrle, who is 33 years old. But Reyes is only 29 and is one of the top shortstops in baseball. If you were committed to rebuilding, he's precisely the kind of guy you'd want to rebuild around. Same goes with Johnson, who is only 28 and one of the best pitchers in baseball when healthy. A team which was committed to rebuilding would be re-signing him, not trading him away.

"McGovern" = "Warren". Geesh. Maybe I should rename my handle to "Bonehead II".

b_a_p: I'll give you Reyes, but that "when healthy" bit RE: Johnson is one huge caveat. Personally, I don't think he'll ever be "healthy". Re-signing him would have been a mistake.

GTown: Fair enough on Johnson. Maybe you could even justify trading him. But trading Reyes pretty much refutes any notion that this is a good faith rebuilding effort.

Besides, if it were a good faith rebuilding effort, you would trade the guys individually and take your time to try to drive up the trade market for each one. You wouldn't package them en masse for a package of prospects which includes only one true blue-chipper.

b_a_p: All valid points. Still, I'm taking a wait-&-see approach. The Marlins have an annoying tendency to come out of nowhere & compete when they have no business doing so.

Jack: "They got more back than the Red Sox did for A-Gon, Crawford and Beckett, easily. "

The Dodgers also took on over more than $100M in contracts compared to what Toronto did.

Also look at Reyes and Buehrle's deals. They made $10 and $6M respectively in 2012. Reyes' deal goes up to $22M and Buehrle's goes up to $18-19M.

How convenient.

As for the idea that Toronto is now a contender for the AL East title . . . I would say MAYBE, if Bautista and Lind & Johnson can stay healthy & Encarnacion can repeat his career-year numbers & Romero can pitch like he did in 2010 & 2011 & Lawrie can start to make good on his enormous potential & Darren Oliver can be as good at 42 as he was at 41.

In other words, if they expect to challenge the Yankees & Rays, a lot of things have to go right. If things don't break right, they could end up looking an awful lot like the 2012 Marlins.

BAP: As the 2011 & 2012 Phillies showed, a lot of things have to go right for any team to compete no matter how much talent they have or how high their payroll goes.

AA just pushed all of his chips into the game for next year and I like the gamble. O's overachieved big-time, Yankees look they might take a downturn, Red Sox look like at best .500 team next year, and the Rays are going to lose a few pieces.

AA traded away Alex Rios and Vernon Wells. That alone makes him a genius.

If I'm a FA, I'm leery of any discussions with MIA to begin with. If, however, they were offering me a multi-year deal where the salary jumps significantly in years 2+, I run like hell to the team that I actually WANT to play for, since it wouldn't be in Miami after next season anyway.

By the way, the players dealt to Toronto just lost a massive amount of money. Florida has no state income tax. Canada takes like half your money.

Lorecore - thanks for the tidbit on the salary raises, very interesting. Seems like we should have seen this coming from Loria, no?

KAS - I'm not sure it's as big a hit as you'd guess. A hit but not massive (relatively speaking). They don't just straight up tax the full income.

nokwurst - I'm pretty sure many people did see this coming.

Aren't you taxed in the locale where you make your permanent address, regardless of where your income comes from? I thought that's why A-Rod, Jeter, Tiger, etc. all make their "permanent" homes in Florida?

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

SHOP CSN


Advertisements


Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG