G&T

I think you misread my post.

I think the Cub reaction is very different if they miss the playoffs this year. They could use those guys right now. Anyway, i can’t argue Machado. Even if that deal goes bad, that was the guy the Sox targeted and lost him for no good reason.

I’m not sure Q is the reason for anything they’ve done. Tatis is a “potential” cornerstone too.

How are Cubs fans feeling when Cease and Eloy are cornerstones for the Sox? These things happen. So the second one.

If that’s the case, then Machado isn’t saving this team anyway. He becomes a trade chip with a huge salary.

No. Because they have a pile of talent and play in a crappy division. If guys start living up to expectations, this is a well positioned organization.

um...it seems clear that they are serious about not paying high impact players what they believe they are worth. That’s the kick in the nuts of this whole thing. It seems to be broader than Machado.

So...you’re finally an adult? It’s baseball.

There is a part of me that is comforted that the Phillies didn’t shell out for him. They wanted him for a long time too. Of course the Phillies made other moves...

Here's another thing i don't understand: why can't you give two more years? Who cares about years 9 and 10 right now? If everything works out with the prospects, the window has opened and potentially closed by year 8. I don't get the logic. Clearly, they made a strong offer and felt the AAV was high enough to win out. But what is the hold up on adding years?

No one wants to be hitting performance targets at age 34 or 35

Add to that they targeted this offseason to get these guys and got outbid by the Padres. I didn’t care about this at the beginning but it was clear that they were telling us they were serious and I bought in. And now...

Yeah part of the expectation of getting those guys is that money would be no impediment to a deal. And that wasn’t true. That $13m now looks dumb.

He may have meant media exposure and endorsements, but that’s not the way it reads.

See my edit. He basically said the same thing in January and I confused the tweets.

This is a retweet of a January tweet. Edit: never mind, he just claimed the same thing weeks ago.

Dude, oldest trick in the book. The old breach of contract. Tip your cap is all you can do.

Please stop. Amazon doesn't care what people think. This was a business decision. I haven't negotiated a deal of that size, but I have negotiated financial packages for job creation, and I have yet to see a company that didn't cut the jobs guarantee during negotiations. Everyone involved knows these deals are political fiascos, and are ready to fight for them. I will guess that this deal died because Amazon didn't think the creation would be there to get the full incentives.

This is what I started thinking. Problem with that logic is that Manny is better than most players, so if a team had the money to sign him, then they would sign him and kick their current option to the curb.

First, this is literally how a tax refund works. Second, your tax bracket is linked to your adjusted gross income based on deductions. If your local taxes and mortgage are capped, and you can't itemize deductions, then you might have a higher taxable income this year. So it may not be that your tax bracket is higher, it's that where you are being taxed on more money at the same rate.

I think what happened is everyone’s take home pay went up last year and it is being reflected in the refund. Tax liability didn’t change, but since people expected a “tax cut” they assume there would be more take home and the same refund. Other people understand this better than I do, but I don’t think there was a way to avoid a reduced refund if you already don’t take withholdings. My wife’s w-2 got screwed up so I haven’t been able to file. I’m hoping the hit isn’t too hard.

Baseball writers are terrible at understanding contract negotiations. They live in a world where years and dollars are the only substantive terms, and they talk about negotiations as though that's the case. These deals are getting more complicated, and the meaning of "beating any offer" becomes unclear. If the Phillies are in win-now mode, then their deal is going to be based on short term certainty and limiting long term risk. The Sox will want long term certainty but may want to mitigate short term risk if the rebuild fails. Each has their benefits and risks for the player, and the final dollars for each, if the whole contract is played, may be the same. But the path to the end of the contract will differ. How does someone say the Phillies will beat the Sox offer? The offers are different, and the teams are in a different situation. I am of the opinion that teams use the inability to understand the negotiation as a way of distracting writers. If you don't understand the topic enough to ask the right questions, then you can never piece together the truth.

It’s not remotely similar to Dolezal.

The answer is Rachel Dolezal. But I certainly think you're making an assertion that lacks evidence. I'm not sure what benefits Warren stole.

He is the reason his son owns the Cubs. I think it also interesting that they are planning a partnership with Sinclair Broadcasting.