Player for cash discussion Topic

jclarkbaker
Posts: 1920 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 11 124
Prospect
Posted by hbdgirl on 7/30/2012 10:10:00 PM (view original):
This is one of those instances where one person is right and the rest of the world is wrong.
The world isn't wrong.  Just you and about 4 others.
7/30/2012 10:21 PM
jclarkbaker
Posts: 1920 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 11 124
Prospect
Posted by deathinahole on 7/30/2012 10:21:00 PM (view original):
What?

What's the difference between receiving $185M, and cutting $185M in liabilities?
You should really stop posting.  You are so out of your league it's scary.
7/30/2012 10:22 PM
deathinahole
Posts: 4139 (0)
Hall of Famer
76 2 1 42 1 72
Prospect
You're forgetting the players you'd be getting after moving $185M.
7/30/2012 10:24 PM
jclarkbaker
Posts: 1920 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 11 124
Prospect
Posted by hbdgirl on 7/30/2012 10:15:00 PM (view original):
As I pointed out before it's possible that the team receiving the $5M could ALSO come out ahead on the player end of a trade. It's called a trade rape. So not only does that owner improve his playing staff but he ends up with $5M more than everybody else.
But it is OK to trade a stud ML pitcher with a high salary (thus reducing liabilities) for a stud prospect, and then using that savings to sign a stud IFA?  That is OK.  

AGAIN, what is the advantage to getting $5m in cash as opposed to cutting $5m in liabilities.
7/30/2012 10:25 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18996 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 155 32 129
Prospect
Posted by jclarkbaker on 7/30/2012 10:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 7/30/2012 10:09:00 PM (view original):
If a team accepts $5m cash in a deal, then they have $190m budget, 30 teams have $185m budget, and one team has a $180m budget.

Some folks think that's just dandy.

So would it be OK for one team to accept $5m cash in 31 separate deals such that they end up with a $340m budget and the other 31 teams have a $180m budget?
Would it be OK?  Probably not, because that team would have gotten rid of all its good players in order to get the cash.  You see, it is not just cash.  Players come into it.  You know guys, the players you are forgetting about in this whole equation.
With $340m, they can restock their roster through FA.

So if receiving $5m is OK, why isn't receiving $155m OK?

And why hasn't 'tardcomm kicked me in the nuts yet?
7/30/2012 10:27 PM
deathinahole
Posts: 4139 (0)
Hall of Famer
76 2 1 42 1 72
Prospect
Because you are nutless
7/30/2012 10:28 PM
hbdgirl
Posts: 264 (0)
All Star
43
Prospect
It seems that understanding that a team with a $190M budget has an advantage over a $185M budget is a bridge too far for you.
7/30/2012 10:29 PM
jclarkbaker
Posts: 1920 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 11 124
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 7/30/2012 10:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jclarkbaker on 7/30/2012 10:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 7/30/2012 10:09:00 PM (view original):
If a team accepts $5m cash in a deal, then they have $190m budget, 30 teams have $185m budget, and one team has a $180m budget.

Some folks think that's just dandy.

So would it be OK for one team to accept $5m cash in 31 separate deals such that they end up with a $340m budget and the other 31 teams have a $180m budget?
Would it be OK?  Probably not, because that team would have gotten rid of all its good players in order to get the cash.  You see, it is not just cash.  Players come into it.  You know guys, the players you are forgetting about in this whole equation.
With $340m, they can restock their roster through FA.

So if receiving $5m is OK, why isn't receiving $155m OK?

And why hasn't 'tardcomm kicked me in the nuts yet?
Oh really?  What, you going to save up that cash and take it to the next few seasons?  You think you can restock through IFA in one season after dumping every good player you had?

Fantastic example.  Way to prove no point at all.
7/30/2012 10:30 PM
hbdgirl
Posts: 264 (0)
All Star
43
Prospect
By posting in this thread can I get a tax deduction for charitable contributions to Special Olympics?
7/30/2012 10:31 PM
jclarkbaker
Posts: 1920 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 11 124
Prospect
Posted by hbdgirl on 7/30/2012 10:29:00 PM (view original):
It seems that understanding that a team with a $190M budget has an advantage over a $185M budget is a bridge too far for you.
It seems to me that you do not understand that when you get $5m, you are giving up something to get it.
7/30/2012 10:32 PM
jclarkbaker
Posts: 1920 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 11 124
Prospect
Posted by hbdgirl on 7/30/2012 10:31:00 PM (view original):
By posting in this thread can I get a tax deduction for charitable contributions to Special Olympics?
It does not surprise me that you are a member.
7/30/2012 10:32 PM
jclarkbaker
Posts: 1920 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 11 124
Prospect
Posted by deathinahole on 7/30/2012 10:28:00 PM (view original):
Because you are nutless
Good one.  Did someone help you come up with that one?
7/30/2012 10:33 PM
jclarkbaker
Posts: 1920 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 11 124
Prospect
So, no takers re what the advantage is of getting $5m as opposed to cutting $5m in liabilities?  I thought not.  So sad.
7/30/2012 10:36 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18996 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 155 32 129
Prospect
Posted by jclarkbaker on 7/30/2012 10:36:00 PM (view original):
So, no takers re what the advantage is of getting $5m as opposed to cutting $5m in liabilities?  I thought not.  So sad.
Because you would have $190m of assets (scouting/training/medical/coaching/prospect/payroll budgets) instead of $185m.

What's that?  You don't understand?  I thought not.  So sad.
7/30/2012 10:39 PM
hbdgirl
Posts: 264 (0)
All Star
43
Prospect
Quit using logic.
7/30/2012 10:41 PM
◂ Prev 1...32|33|34|35|36...38 Next ▸
Player for cash discussion Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.