December 26, 20187 yr 17 minutes ago, Whitesox27 said: Lol this guy is so full of shit That deal would be done now by the Cubs if Giants would take Happ and Heyward and pay most of the contract.
December 26, 20187 yr 2 hours ago, fathom said: https://mobile.twitter.com/MLBNetwork/status/1078005928652431360 arguably the least surprising thing I’ve heard this offseason Fathom, I love you bro, but I’m worried you wake up at night with nightmares of Theo spooning you in bed. There is zero reason to believe the Cubs are the favorites for Harper until they move significant salary which still remains extremely unlikely IMO.
December 26, 20187 yr 51 minutes ago, Dick Allen said: The Cubs print money and they are going to start printing more. Not only the new TV deal, they have bought up a good portion of their neighborhood. People are going to be paying them all day. The question is how much luxury tax are they willing to pay. To add Harper to their team, it might be more than anyone believes. The Cubs are owned by a trust fund and are heavily levered. I know it’s fun to treat the Cubs as the boogeyman around here, but the Ricketts are not going beyond their means until they have cash in their pocket. Their new TV contract doesn’t help them in 2019.
December 26, 20187 yr Arent the cubs selling off small parts of team ownership to pay the bills.....there is a lot of debt there.
December 27, 20187 yr 18 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said: The Cubs are owned by a trust fund and are heavily levered. I know it’s fun to treat the Cubs as the boogeyman around here, but the Ricketts are not going beyond their means until they have cash in their pocket. Their new TV contract doesn’t help them in 2019. Also interesting is that the ownership structure that has been set up for the Cubs might not be the same one that is forming the TV network because of the unique nature of their structure they used to maximize tax avoidance with the Cubs. There is no reason the Ricketts couldn't have either formed a separate company or set it up to flow back to them personally instead of the Cubs.
December 27, 20187 yr People have screamed that the cubs are over leveraged since 2014 and it hasn’t mattered a smidge. You are lying to yourself if you think the cubs wouldn’t do this deal if they thought it could get them a World Series with this core.
December 27, 20187 yr 11 minutes ago, bmags said: People have screamed that the cubs are over leveraged since 2014 and it hasn’t mattered a smidge. You are lying to yourself if you think the cubs wouldn’t do this deal if they thought it could get them a World Series with this core. I don’t think you get how the Cubs’ ownership structure works if you actually believe this. And I can tell you with 100% certainty that the Cubs are operating on a tight budget. This comes directly from the Cubs’ front office. The Cubs can not add Harper without moving significant salary. If you think the Cubs are somehow going to blow past the second luxury tax tier while owned by a trust fund that hasn’t yet pocketed its new TV deal money, then more power to you. Edited December 27, 20187 yr by Chicago White Sox
December 27, 20187 yr FYI peavy44's "source" is spouting off quite the scoop in that Facebook group lol "Harper’s coming to Chicago, but it won’t be with us. Look for a short deal. 1-2 years. Maybe a bit more. He only is thinking Cubs. They are not even entertaining other teams. Haven’t since the winter meetings. I give Hahn and his crew major props for getting their nose in there."
December 27, 20187 yr 2 hours ago, Ross Gload Fan said: FYI peavy44's "source" is spouting off quite the scoop in that Facebook group lol "Harper’s coming to Chicago, but it won’t be with us. Look for a short deal. 1-2 years. Maybe a bit more. He only is thinking Cubs. They are not even entertaining other teams. Haven’t since the winter meetings. I give Hahn and his crew major props for getting their nose in there." Pretty sure Boras would hit Harper over the head with the business end of a 2x4 if he wanted to leave $250-300 million on the table to take a 2 year deal.
December 27, 20187 yr https://sports.yahoo.com/bryce-harper-manny-machado-reportedly-dont-like-idea-playing-philadelphia-024356728.html Phillies out, but Dodgers/Yankees still in driver’s seat? “But the other choice, particularly for Harper, is fascinating,” Sherman writes. Because even if the Dodgers refuse to offer the mega-deal, landing there for four-ish years is what is best for Harper and — not that this should matter to the slugger — the game. “ This suggestion would not have seemed like a realistic possibility a couple years ago. Given how the free agent landscape has changed the last two winters though, perhaps anything really is possible here. The biggest question coming into this winter was how high would the offers to Bryce Harper and Manny Machado be. Now it might actually come down to just how much money one or both are willing to give up in order to reach a preferred destination.
December 27, 20187 yr https://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2018/11/5/18058498/cubs-2019-payroll-luxury-tax-update?fbclid=IwAR1DQhmmvTeEgLNmybc7gAJWEL2ZIxKsmTQitVPJJBPCtFczr_Igsb_m6WE
December 27, 20187 yr 4 hours ago, Ross Gload Fan said: FYI peavy44's "source" is spouting off quite the scoop in that Facebook group lol "Harper’s coming to Chicago, but it won’t be with us. Look for a short deal. 1-2 years. Maybe a bit more. He only is thinking Cubs. They are not even entertaining other teams. Haven’t since the winter meetings. I give Hahn and his crew major props for getting their nose in there." All I can say is lol
December 27, 20187 yr Sherman was saying on High Heat yesterday Harper could sign close to Superbowl Sunday. Yuck.
December 27, 20187 yr 39 minutes ago, Baron said: Sherman was saying on High Heat yesterday Harper could sign close to Superbowl Sunday. Yuck. I wouldn't expect Machado to sign before then either Edited December 27, 20187 yr by Jack Parkman
December 27, 20187 yr 15 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said: I wouldn't expect Machado to sign before then either Lol...of course you wouldn’t.
December 27, 20187 yr 13 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said: I don’t think you get how the Cubs’ ownership structure works if you actually believe this. And I can tell you with 100% certainty that the Cubs are operating on a tight budget. This comes directly from the Cubs’ front office. The Cubs can not add Harper without moving significant salary. If you think the Cubs are somehow going to blow past the second luxury tax tier while owned by a trust fund that hasn’t yet pocketed its new TV deal money, then more power to you. How does their ownership structure work? Is the debt internal or external? IOW, can they be foreclosed? Someone told me a long time ago, back in the LBO days, that leverage is okay if you can pay the debt service and the underlying asset is appreciating.
December 27, 20187 yr 13 minutes ago, Orlando said: I'm reading his clarification of the tweet that he actually thinks someone else is up front that isn't one of those two.
December 27, 20187 yr Shots fired at Bruce, lol. Jon HeymanVerified account @JonHeyman 2h2 hours ago More Listen to the tape don’t go by the tweet of someone who wasn’t listening and even mistakenly tweeted @ me about it rather than to his followers 0 replies0 retweets19 likes Edited December 27, 20187 yr by maggsmaggs
December 27, 20187 yr 4 minutes ago, timbo8 said: how is bruce even employed? Its all about the clicks. Who cares about the facts.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.