|
|
Post by artfuldodger on Aug 7, 2016 6:21:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bnich on Aug 7, 2016 7:51:54 GMT -5
A guy still trying to find his way and hasn't been a problem for a guy that's been nothing but a head ache since he joined the Dodgers? No thanks. I'll still see what Castillo can do.
|
|
|
|
Post by barney27 on Aug 7, 2016 7:53:31 GMT -5
WOW interesting. I think not. Probably because it seems puig is a lot more volatile than Castillo. I am not sure he is a team player in the sox mode. What do the salaries look like? Have to give it some thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingofthetrill on Aug 7, 2016 15:17:56 GMT -5
Rusney makes 10.5M this year and in 2017, $11M in 2018 and 2019, and 13.5M in 2020. Rusney can opt out after 2019, although I don't see a reason why he would.
Puig makes 5.5M this year, 6.5M in 2017 and 7.5M in 2018. Puig also has an opt out when he hits 3 years of service time.
I'm down on Puig because he seems selfish, immature, and a headache, and his numbers have declined every year, but we are literally doing nothing with Castillo. We are treating him like Allen Craig, paying him not to play so that his salary doesn't count against the cap.
I'd trade Castillo for Puig just to get out of the money difference, even if I release Puig right afterward.
|
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Aug 7, 2016 16:36:49 GMT -5
Rusney makes 10.5M this year and in 2017, $11M in 2018 and 2019, and 13.5M in 2020. Rusney can opt out after 2019, although I don't see a reason why he would. Puig makes 5.5M this year, 6.5M in 2017 and 7.5M in 2018. Puig also has an opt out when he hits 3 years of service time. I'm down on Puig because he seems selfish, immature, and a headache, and his numbers have declined every year, but we are literally doing nothing with Castillo. We are treating him like Allen Craig, paying him not to play so that his salary doesn't count against the cap. I'd trade Castillo for Puig just to get out of the money difference, even if I release Puig right afterward. Keep in mind that Castillo's money doesn't count for luxury tax purposes unless and until he is added back to the 40-man roster. That is a big benefit to us (and moreso to the Dodgers). BTW, I would absolutely make the trade. Even with the luxury tax savings, I cannot see LAD making the trade without getting some positive value back; they'd be better off trading Puig for a bag of balls than Castillo. |
|
|
|
Post by kingofthetrill on Aug 7, 2016 19:03:15 GMT -5
Keep in mind that Castillo's money doesn't count for luxury tax purposes unless and until he is added back to the 40-man roster. That is a big benefit to us (and moreso to the Dodgers). BTW, I would absolutely make the trade. Even with the luxury tax savings, I cannot see LAD making the trade without getting some positive value back; they'd be better off trading Puig for a bag of balls than Castillo. Yes, I meant that moving Castillo's money would not help the team for luxury tax purposes, but it will still remove a sizeable owner obligation which may or may not have an impact on future expenses. Quite a bit of money for almost no positive return too. |
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,699
|
Post by nomar on Aug 7, 2016 19:09:43 GMT -5
Rusney makes 10.5M this year and in 2017, $11M in 2018 and 2019, and 13.5M in 2020. Rusney can opt out after 2019, although I don't see a reason why he would. Puig makes 5.5M this year, 6.5M in 2017 and 7.5M in 2018. Puig also has an opt out when he hits 3 years of service time. I'm down on Puig because he seems selfish, immature, and a headache, and his numbers have declined every year, but we are literally doing nothing with Castillo. We are treating him like Allen Craig, paying him not to play so that his salary doesn't count against the cap. I'd trade Castillo for Puig just to get out of the money difference, even if I release Puig right afterward. Keep in mind that Castillo's money doesn't count for luxury tax purposes unless and until he is added back to the 40-man roster. That is a big benefit to us (and moreso to the Dodgers). BTW, I would absolutely make the trade. Even with the luxury tax savings, I cannot see LAD making the trade without getting some positive value back; they'd be better off trading Puig for a bag of balls than Castillo. Yeah, this would be miraculous for us. It would allow you to move an OF for someone like Quintana or Sale this winter. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 7, 2016 19:21:24 GMT -5
Keep in mind that Castillo's money doesn't count for luxury tax purposes unless and until he is added back to the 40-man roster. That is a big benefit to us (and moreso to the Dodgers). BTW, I would absolutely make the trade. Even with the luxury tax savings, I cannot see LAD making the trade without getting some positive value back; they'd be better off trading Puig for a bag of balls than Castillo. Yes, I meant that moving Castillo's money would not help the team for luxury tax purposes, but it will still remove a sizeable owner obligation which may or may not have an impact on future expenses. Quite a bit of money for almost no positive return too. Why would the Dodgers want Castillo though? Surely they could do better than to take on Castillo's salary for free when he was DFA'd with no takers. |
|
|
|
Post by kingofthetrill on Aug 8, 2016 18:40:09 GMT -5
Yes, I meant that moving Castillo's money would not help the team for luxury tax purposes, but it will still remove a sizeable owner obligation which may or may not have an impact on future expenses. Quite a bit of money for almost no positive return too. Why would the Dodgers want Castillo though? Surely they could do better than to take on Castillo's salary for free when he was DFA'd with no takers. I don't think that they would, but that doesn't have an effect as to whether or not I'd want to do the deal. Just like Kate Upton's feelings about me don't effect my desire to "make a transaction" if you catch my drift. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 8, 2016 20:55:57 GMT -5
Why would the Dodgers want Castillo though? Surely they could do better than to take on Castillo's salary for free when he was DFA'd with no takers. I don't think that they would, but that doesn't have an effect as to whether or not I'd want to do the deal. Just like Kate Upton's feelings about me don't effect my desire to "make a transaction" if you catch my drift. I'm just pointing out how impossible this trade is. Puig almost assuredly wouldn't clear waivers. Castillo makes more and did clear waivers. Therefore, it's absurd to think that they could be traded for each other. |
|
|
|
Post by kingofthetrill on Aug 9, 2016 18:39:39 GMT -5
I agree, but that's why I'm not the one that created the thread.
|
|
