|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Mar 2, 2012 12:41:22 GMT -5
Tracking Post for future cash payments in trades.
Rule reminder:
Teams can now agree to pay a portion of that players contract over 3 consecutive years that begins the following season. However, the payment of the contract CAN NOT exceed 50% of its lowest annual earning."
An Example of this rule: Aaron Hicks is under contract for 5 more years AFTER this season at a base salary of $13.5 million each season. The Cubs can agree to trade him to a lower market club and pay them $6.750M in 2018,2019 and 2020. For the 2021 and 2022 season, the team trading for Hicks would be responsible for full payment of his contract.
If a player has salaries of $10m, $12m and $15m then the team can pay up to 50% on the $10m salary so $5m can be paid for 3 seasons. The Cubs would pay $15M over 3 seasons to the buying team.
Teams can offer payments for 1,2 or 3 seasons. That is up to the trading teams.
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Mar 2, 2012 12:42:42 GMT -5
Reserved for List of future payments.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2013 9:03:48 GMT -5
Boston sends:
$2.5 Mil in 2024 $2.5 Mil in 2025
to Atlanta as part of the Tellez trade
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2013 12:19:35 GMT -5
Question: the money comes from budget or cash on hand?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by NickP_Marlins GM on Mar 27, 2013 12:28:15 GMT -5
Question: the money comes from budget or cash on hand? Sent from my Nexus 7 using proboards Great question! Plus, if it is cash then what if the team receiving cash already has the 10mil limit?
|
|
|
Post by Dustin Ackley on Mar 27, 2013 12:52:25 GMT -5
Question: the money comes from budget or cash on hand? Sent from my Nexus 7 using proboards Great question! Plus, if it is cash then what if the team receiving cash already has the 10mil limit? The owner takes the cash at the end of the year.
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Mar 27, 2013 13:38:35 GMT -5
I take the money and add it to 'players expense' for the paying team. This will limit the amount of money a team can spend on players on their own.
|
|
|
Post by Dustin Ackley on May 30, 2013 10:25:41 GMT -5
Boston sends: $2.5 Mil in 2024 $2.5 Mil in 2025 to Atlanta as part of the Tellez trade Can I please have my 2.5 million dollars?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 10:54:35 GMT -5
I think the payment is simply deducted from the player's annual salary up front.
|
|
|
Post by Dustin Ackley on May 30, 2013 11:19:59 GMT -5
I think the payment is simply deducted from the player's annual salary up front. That doesn't work. The player would then base his next extension on that incorrect contract. Plus in this instance Tellez is no longer on my team so Minnesota would take advantage of a trade Atlanta made which wouldn't be right.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 11:39:29 GMT -5
I think the payment is simply deducted from the player's annual salary up front. That doesn't work. The player would then base his next extension on that incorrect contract. Plus in this instance Tellez is no longer on my team so Minnesota would take advantage of a trade Atlanta made which wouldn't be right. Not really, trades that include salary relief are designed to offset the cost of that player's specific salary. Team A agrees to pay x% of the player's salary for x years. That's something that would typically follow them to their next team and, frankly, increases their value in subsequent trades as their contract is more reasonable. As far as the extension issue is based, I've seen no evidence of what you're talking about. When I've negotiated extensions with my own players, their demands usually have no correlation to what their last contract paid. I am routinely surprised at how different their demands tend to be.
|
|
|
Post by Dustin Ackley on May 30, 2013 12:47:16 GMT -5
That doesn't work. The player would then base his next extension on that incorrect contract. Plus in this instance Tellez is no longer on my team so Minnesota would take advantage of a trade Atlanta made which wouldn't be right. Not really, trades that include salary relief are designed to offset the cost of that player's specific salary. Team A agrees to pay x% of the player's salary for x years. That's something that would typically follow them to their next team and, frankly, increases their value in subsequent trades as their contract is more reasonable. As far as the extension issue is based, I've seen no evidence of what you're talking about. When I've negotiated extensions with my own players, their demands usually have no correlation to what their last contract paid. I am routinely surprised at how different their demands tend to be. I disagree. And I negotiated the deal to receive cash. There is nothing in the rules that says I'm not entitled to receive it if the player was dealt.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 12:59:48 GMT -5
A deal for cash is different. Salary relief and straight up cash are two different things. If your deal was for straight cash, then you should get the money directly for your budget and not for specific salary relief.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 13:00:10 GMT -5
The original post is quite clear, the cash is used to pay a proportion of the players' salary. It is not a cash payment to a team, it is part of the salary of the player.
|
|
|
Post by Dustin Ackley on May 30, 2013 13:25:55 GMT -5
Boston sends: RF - Jorge Tellez (ML) $2.5 Mil in 2024 $2.5 Mil in 2025
to Atlanta for: 3rd Round DP 2023 RF - Juan Rosario (AAA)
|
|