Mostly because the Dodgers owe their current roster over $1B. This has never been such a huge issue in the past as they are making it now. And it feels like they are gaming the system.
They still have the liabilities on the books. If they ultimately fail because of those liabilities, than sure, I will admit you are right.
I don’t think they will fail either. But they are buying Championships now with money that is due in 10-20 years. If they do fail in 2044, it will be worth it and they won’t even have to take asterisks on the titles that they do win.
That’s a financing strategy that is outside of baseball. The $$ still counts towards the tax upon accrual, so it is 100% within the current rule. And on the surface I see nothing wrong with it that needs fixing.
Here’s confirmation from Boston media that the Sox didn’t offer more money OR years. Definitely didn’t sound right…
Why does anyone ever bother giving Nightingale clicks anymore. He has proven over and over again that he is little more than a hack-level “journalist”.Here’s confirmation from Boston media that the Sox didn’t offer more money OR years. Definitely didn’t sound right…
“The Red Sox did stay in touch with Scott throughout the winter, sources said, but the suggestion that Boston offered more than the Dodgers in terms of both years and AAV was described as “very inaccurate” by someone with knowledge of the process Sunday afternoon. The Red Sox were thought to be wary of going to four years for Scott, who will be 34 at the end of the season.”
As Tanner Scott joins Dodgers, where will Red Sox turn for bullpen addition?
Tanner Scott won't be coming to Boston after signing a four-year, $72 million deal with the Dodgers. So where can the Red Sox turn for relief help before spring training?www.masslive.com
He gets linked to quite a bit on the main baseball subreddit. Otherwise he would be out of sight out of mind for me, no question.
