Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to comment and join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. If you become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

The Official Los Angeles Angels 2023-2024 Hot Stove Offseason Thread


Chuck

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, jsnpritchett said:

No, the present value counts for the next 10 years.  Once they start paying him the $68M/year in deferred money, it's just a real cash expense and doesn't count against the luxury tax (if there even is one at that point).

Man.  Maybe baseball needs a salary cap after all .  What’s the point in a luxury tax if you can skirt it and only get dinged for 65% of what you pay someone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Biergott said:

Man.  Maybe baseball needs a salary cap after all .  What’s the point in a luxury tax if you can skirt it and only get dinged for 65% of what you pay someone?

How are they “skirting” anything if they are actually charged the actual present value, just like every other contract in baseball?

Would you think it is fair to be presently charged MORE than the actual present value?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Biergott said:

Man.  Maybe baseball needs a salary cap after all .  What’s the point in a luxury tax if you can skirt it and only get dinged for 65% of what you pay someone?

MLB really needs to close the loophole. I think if you told the union that all the luxury tax penalty money would go evenly to all teams that didn’t incur the tax and only used for player salaries that they would be fine with that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bruin5 said:

MLB really needs to close the loophole.

It's not really a loophole.  It's really the opposite of a loophole.

Discounting future money to present value is a hard fact of economics.

What might be arguable what the discount rate should be.  There's an argument to be made that 4.0-4.5% is too low, in which case, the Dodgers might actually be getting hit with a larger current AAV than they really should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...