• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: The Toronto Blue Jays

I doubt they were off by 80 million.

I dont get how 2 team competing for 1 player can be $80 million dollars apart in an offer. Makes no sense.

I could be wrong, but thats stupid business if thats the case.

numerous reports indicate NYY topped out at 160M.

And a place like Seattle does indeed have to overpay to pry away a guy from a place like New York
 
$80 million is a lot of dough to overpay by. You could be right.

I just don't see how a cashcow like the Yanks would "top out" on an offer.
 
$80 million is a lot of dough to overpay by. You could be right.

I just don't see how a cashcow like the Yanks would "top out" on an offer.

If the Cano deal leads to others considering Seattle i don't even hate this for them.

it's a smarter deal than Ellsbury IMO
 
When is the CBA over for MLB? They REALLY need to rethink the way they operate.

I don't mind the no salary cap system. Medium markets like Seattle and Toronto have now proven they can spend when they want to.

Oddly enough baseball has parity too.

Only the Blue Jays and Royals haven't made the playoffs since 1997 I believe. This in a league that has very few teams making the playoffs each year.
 
When is the CBA over for MLB? They REALLY need to rethink the way they operate.

Have you seen the regional TV deals that are being given out to clubs now? Even in a medium market team like the San Diego Padres were given 200 million upfront, and 1.4 Billion in total over the 20 yr life of their new TV deal. That's 70 million a year on average...for ****ing San Diego.

MLB doesn't need a salary cap because all of the owners are getting paid, large.
 
Toronto isn't a medium market. Not even remotely medium either. Metro population of 6 million, media market of almost 9 million.

Bigger than anything in the league not named New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago.
 
Yup, they could Deckie. Surprises me that Beeston isn't more visible and pushing the limit.

Though as they were talking about on Prime Time Sports, the whole self imposed 5 year limit is really killing them.
 
I've always been convinced the 5 year limit was imposed so the Jays could always have a go to excuse for not paying a top tier UFA.

Seeing as how zero top UFA's take less than 5.

I don't understand why they are even talking about David Price, as he too would command well north of 5 years
 
If the Jays were going to open their coffers, I'd love to have them do it for Price and Choo....I think Choo is liable to be one of the few FA's that easily lives up to the deal he signs.
 
If the Jays were going to open their coffers, I'd love to have them do it for Price and Choo....I think Choo is liable to be one of the few FA's that easily lives up to the deal he signs.

My only issue with Choo is that he's not really a CF...so you're either paying him to be in LF or maybe moving Jose to 1B
 
I've always been convinced the 5 year limit was imposed so the Jays could always have a go to excuse for not paying a top tier UFA.

Seeing as how zero top UFA's take less than 5.

I don't understand why they are even talking about David Price, as he too would command well north of 5 years

If the 5 year contract limit is in fact real, it essentially assures that no big name free agent who is in his prime and played on a different team in the previous season will sign with the Jays.
 
I've always been convinced the 5 year limit was imposed so the Jays could always have a go to excuse for not paying a top tier UFA.

Seeing as how zero top UFA's take less than 5.

Is that really such a bad thing though. These 10 year dea;s haven't exactly been paying off. Lots of risk, and these guys are typically older or fatter, or have some red flags. Most of these aren't A-Rod in his prime. And even there Texas bailed.
 
Back
Top