Dead Money due to injury

[bkeich]

Talking with a friend of mine:

There should be another "list" for the Baseball Franchises. I was talking with a friend of mine about the Robertson money, which in a way is really hamstringing this franchise. Injuries are bad luck, but as teams get closer to the cap (and it is a cap, the penalties are getting so harsh that even the free spending teams are trying to get under now) completely dead money like Roberston really hurts.

There should be another, "not going to participate this year" category. Certainly it shouldnt be complete relief, but 50-80% relief to allow a team that has gotten a bad injury like we have to not stop them from filling that slot in their roster. We are essentially paying an extra high salary because we have one that is likely to not take the field or even think about it.

The Players Union of course would be thrilled with such an idea, more free money.

I think the teams would also want some type of recourse to solve the problem the Phils are in. We would like to spend more money, partially to fix the money spent on a guy we will get nothing from, but to do so goes over the cap and causes all kinds of rather rough penalties which frankly hurt the cause of a team trying to get better.

[zambonir]

Most teams don't want - or need - this though. Half of them would not want something that lets rich teams spend more without penalty and 80% of them are just as happy to have an excuse not to spend more.

[LoneStarPhan]

Sounds like a good idea. Owners could use as a bargaining chip in the next CBA to get some things the owners want.

[bkeich]

Actually, I think they might. We are not the only one that has a big contract for an inactive guy.

I am not talking about someone who gets hurt during the year, that is just the way the ball bounces. I am talking about a guy that literally has to be covered in the Hot Stove. I honestly think most teams would say “we need a recourse”, outlet insurance is going to pay off on this guy, but we are stuck with his cap hit for no value.

For instance, a player with a true career injury that is going to get paid anyway. Most teams would say that guy should be removed from the cap calculation

[zambonir]

That makes more sense than in-season but you are still talking about cap considerations rather than actual dollars. A majority of teams still wouldn't spend, and a larger majority of teams still wouldnt want to give the rich teams another avenue to spend.

Every team that is close to the tax can afford to pay the tax. If the Phillies go $20 million over they'd pay $4 million in tax. That's a relief pitcher. If Robertson and Herrera were on the "dead money" list (never mind that Herrera wouldn't be) instead of being $20 million over they'd be $3 million over the threshold and would pay $600K. Either way they'd still be paying another $20 million in salary, a much bigger obstacle than the $3.4 million tax difference. Most teams won't do it, while the savings should make little difference in a team's willingness to go over the threshold.

Now, some teams have been over the tax repeatedly and might be paying more if they continue to do so. I also have little interest in helping those teams (i.e. Yankees, Cubs, Washington, Boston). If our owner wants to be one of them he should just do it.

[Philsmania]

The Phillies signed Neshek, Hunter and Robertson for a combined six years, $57.25 million. In the end, assuming Robertson never pitches for them again, the three put up less than two full seasons' of work combined. Four-plus dead money seasons between the three of them.

[zambonir]

Robertson actually intends to pitch this season though. It's a long-shot that he really will (and only in September if so). But you wouldn't be able to put him on such a list. Also he has an option and his buyout is still part of his AAV. I think they'd have to exercise the buyout immediately in such a scenario (which is fine, but complicated and possibly not allowed). In his case I really think there's a chance Robertson pitches for the Phillies in 2021; they won't pick up the option but they could roll the buyout into a new one-year make-good deal.

If MLB's anti-spending forces actually wanted to make it easier to break the threshold they would just let you not count released players against the cap. Then the Phillies would have to decide if they wanted to waive Robertson or seriously hope to have him for the stretch run.

Anyway most owners want a hard cap, not to soften the current unofficial cap.