The Official 'TANAKA' Thread

[VariousCrap]

17.5%. So if Garza + Balfour cost 20 million, that would be 17.5% on about 5 million, or $875,000. Then the fine is 30% if they go over next year.

 

Not much, but it's still a tax and Arte may not be willing to pay it for Garza and a reliever.

 

 

Then Arte would be an idiot.

[nando714]

17.5%. So if Garza + Balfour cost 20 million, that would be 17.5% on about 5 million, or $875,000. Then the fine is 30% if they go over next year.

Not much, but it's still a tax and Arte may not be willing to pay it for Garza and a reliever.

Thanks for the info

[nando714]

Imagine

Metallica- One

Playing when Balfoursy takes the mound. 1/8 of the stadium would be rockin lol

[gotbeer]

Was thinking.  But if it's true, and we got Garza for 3 or 4/$45-50.  How about that Korean dude?  If you paid him reliever money, like $3 million a year, might be worth the gamble.  No way would I pay him starter money though.

[bloodbrother]

@osaki_makkura: #Tanaka sweepstakes come down to mano a mano between #Yankees & #Dodgers at around 6 year $140 million. http://t.co/2WdafxaOCx

 

No clue how reliable that is but if that is seriously the price then yeah, Halos need to stay out of that

 

I like Tanaka but I don't want him for 6 yrs at $23 mill per year. Too much of an unknown and this team has enough high risk, long term deals already on the books

[Cdaniel]

17.5%. So if Garza + Balfour cost 20 million, that would be 17.5% on about 5 million, or $875,000. Then the fine is 30% if they go over next year.

Not much, but it's still a tax and Arte may not be willing to pay it for Garza and a reliever.

Tax Is calculated at the end of year. So we could always trade Chris or Howie or both. Everyone says Lindsay should be MLB ready towards the 2nd half of the year. If we are still in it then eat the lux tax and go all out. If we are out make the trades and get under the tax.

[Chimi]

The Yankees are desperate so I can see them paying that. But the Dodgers don't really need Tanaka. The Dodgers seem hell bent on buying themselves a World Series.

[Cdaniel]

17.5%. So if Garza + Balfour cost 20 million, that would be 17.5% on about 5 million, or $875,000. Then the fine is 30% if they go over next year.

Not much, but it's still a tax and Arte may not be willing to pay it for Garza and a reliever.

Double post Edited January 16, 2014 by Cdaniel

[Chimi]

Tax Is calculated at the end of year. So we could always trade Chris or Howie or both. Everyone says Lindsay should be MLB ready towards the 2nd half of the year. If we are still in it then eat the lux tax and go all out. If we are out make the trades and get under the tax.

It's calculated at the beginning and the end.

[Cdaniel]

So what's the difference if we get under it with trades at the end of the year? I thought Fletcher said it was calculated at the end.

[Brent Maguire]

140 million?!

Yeah no thanks. Offer 6/120 including the fee. If he doesn't bite, move on.

[Jeff Fletcher]

So what's the difference if we get under it with trades at the end of the year? I thought Fletcher said it was calculated at the end.

It is calculated at the end and includes all money earned in contracts that cover 2014 (salary and performance bonuses).

The opening day issue involves future contracts. That's why if Trout signs a 2015 contract anytime after the start of the 2014 season it doesn't count.

I assume this is because you can't skip over years in contracts, otherwise you could sign a player to 10 separate one-year deals and skirt the whole AAV issue.

[VariousCrap]

The Yankees are desperate so I can see them paying that. But the Dodgers don't really need Tanaka. The Dodgers seem hell bent on buying themselves a World Series.

 

 

 

This is what these TV deals has done to baseball.

[Tyler]

6 years, $140m ??? Something doesn't seem right...

[ukyah]

i'd have no problem with the angels buying themselves a world series. i like it when they win the world series.

[Tavon Brown]

i'd have no problem with the angels buying themselves a world series. i like it when they win the world series.

 

Seems like people are acting like they are paying outta their own pockets.   At this point after Pujols and Hamilton might as well push the pile of chips and go ALL IN!!!

[ettin]

6 years, $140m ??? Something doesn't seem right...

 

I've submitted an article to Chuck that covers this subject with regards to Tanaka.

 

In the article I have updated the work that Dave Cameron at FanGraphs published on Nov. 26th regarding the $/WAR. At that time it was about $6.2MM and now according to my update it is at $6.4MM. I then use that number to project Tanaka's potential contract based on three scenarios: 1) Tanaka produces 2 WAR/year, 2) Tanaka produces 3 WAR/year, and 3) Tanaka produces 4 WAR/year. It gives you an idea of the range of his potential contract, although I suggest that he is probably close to a 3 WAR player.

 

I'll leave the rest for the article but normally the $/WAR escalates year to year by 10% historically according to Cameron's article. This year it has risen 16% which represents the current influx of MLB cash from the National and local TV deals.

[Ohtaniland]

I don't mind Arte spending big $$$ on Tanaka. He's only 25 years old and its not my money. Anything Arte can do to avoid empty seats in August is alright by me.

[ispy45]

I'm still sticking to it. Tanaka will be an Angel. Tuesday will be the announcement.

Edited January 16, 2014 by ispy45

[Tyler]

I've submitted an article to Chuck that covers this subject with regards to Tanaka.

 

In the article I have updated the work that Dave Cameron at FanGraphs published on Nov. 26th regarding the $/WAR. At that time it was about $6.2MM and now according to my update it is at $6.4MM. I then use that number to project Tanaka's potential contract based on three scenarios: 1) Tanaka produces 2 WAR/year, 2) Tanaka produces 3 WAR/year, and 3) Tanaka produces 4 WAR/year. It gives you an idea of the range of his potential contract, although I suggest that he is probably close to a 3 WAR player.

 

I'll leave the rest for the article but normally the $/WAR escalates year to year by 10% historically according to Cameron's article. This year it has risen 16% which represents the current influx of MLB cash from the National and local TV deals.

 

I just can't see him getting more than a 5 year deal.

[ukyah]

Seems like people are acting like they are paying outta their own pockets.   At this point after Pujols and Hamilton might as well push the pile of chips and go ALL IN!!!

 

 

i said probably a month ago that the angels would not be legitimately pursuing tanaka. he won't be an angel, and they didn't even meet with him. i just don't really believe in the negativity associated with "buying" a world series. in my mind, there are many ways to build a team, FA is one of them. i'm not arguing for building through FA, but it doesn't invalidate a world series victory in my mind. that fruit would taste just as sweet to me.

[Brent Maguire]

The biggest issue with Tanaka is the possibility of him being a 3rd bad contract that limits our resources.

 

Personally, I'm fine with a 6/120 deal. If it's in the 140-150 million dollar range, then that's too much. Yeah it's not my money but that's still a sh*t ton of money for Tanaka. 

[Docwaukee]

If Tanaka gets a 6 year deal for about 120+ posting or 140 total.  Lets give him credit for 20mil in marketing over the 6 years to offset the posting fee so 20mil aav is left.  $/WAR values of 6.4, 7.0, 7.7, 8.5, 9.3, 10.2 would be yearly 10% increases but that seems a bit aggressive.  So lets call it an average of 8mil per by the time the contract is over.  meaning he needs about 15 WAR to be worth the 120mil.  I looked at a bunch of six year spans going back a few years and in any given stretch of 6 years there are about 40 pitchers that put up 15 WAR or better over that time.  Meaning he has to be one of the top 40 or so for 6 consecutive years.  Not totally unreasonable.  If you add an additional 24mil or 3 WAR, he has to be in the top 30.  3 more WAR needed and top 20. 

 

Obtaining surplus value here is very unlikely.  Getting creamed is a real possibility.  That noted, the upside that exists with him doesn't really exist with anyone anywhere else for the foreseeable future and that has value as well. 

 

We have limited prospects if any.  The front of our rotation is aging.  Free agents coming soon will cost more, be older, and may not be as good.  He's probably the only available starter that can anchor the rotation for the next six years.  If he pans out he makes it so we have a real chance of playing for seasons beyond 2015.  But that's a damn big if. 

[rick99gtp]

We're still in it?

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/01/cubs-pushing-hard-for-tanaka-angels-remain-involved.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[Jeff Fletcher]

Don't get caught up in this whole "in" and "out" business. There isn't some board in Jerry Dipoto's office with players names and signs under them that he flips from "in" to "out."

The Angels position has not changed.

They like Tanaka. They would love to have him. It's not likely to happen because they aren't going to be the highest bidder. Period.