Yankees Gonna Yankee: Agree to Seven-Year, $153 Million Deal with Jacoby Ellsbury

jacoby ellsbury[It was such a ridiculously active day already today that I figured I was in the clear to go play some tennis and get a milkshake. No dice. Curse you, unusually-active pre-Winter Meetings baseball offseason!]

Ah, remember that time the New York Yankees sat out the big ticket items? That was a nice one year.

According to multiple reports, the Yankees have grabbed their next big name of the offseason (having already signed Brian McCann), and it’s Jacoby Ellsbury, formerly of the Red Sox. He gets seven years and $153 million, according to Mark Feinsand. It’s the kind of absurd – but explicable – deal we expected to see this offseason, and it’s only fitting that the Yankees would usher it in. The Yankees just paid for Ellsbury almost 90% of the amount they’re offering to Robinson Cano. Ridiculous.

The Cubs had long been mentioned as a stealth candidate on Ellsbury, but, as I said all along, the only way it could happen is if he went a couple months without finding a serious nine-figure suitor, and then the Cubs nabbed him on the cheap in February. Thankfully for my own credibility, I made sure to always append those comments with some variation of “but I don’t think that’ll actually happen.” And here we are, with Ellsbury getting the kind of absurdly large contract that I figured he would get … and hoped he would get from a team not named the Cubs. I am perfectly comfortable with how this played out.

As for the Yankees, their quest to stay under the $189 million luxury tax cap is apparently not imperiled by this signing (plus McCann). They reportedly plan to still try and re-sign Robinson Cano and a starting pitcher. Clearly they know that MLB is gifting them some $25 million in luxury cap space in the form of an Alex Rodriguez suspension, and, sadly, signing Cano after Ellsbury doesn’t make nabbing Tanaka dicey. Really rough math here (courtesy of Cot’s contracts, a calculator, and quick arbitration guesses), but I’ve got the Yankees at about $135 million in payroll after signing McCann. Ellsbury puts them at $152 million, and Cano would put them around $180 million. An ARod suspension brings them down to $155 million. Miscellaneous other moves (and the expenses tied to payroll that every team has) probably bring that back up to about $165 to $170 million. Still plenty of room to grab Tanaka and stay under the $189 million mark. Again, this is real quick and dirty stuff, so I’m open to being corrected on the math (or if I missed a big chunk of money somewhere).

Brett Taylor is the editor and lead writer at Bleacher Nation, and can also be found as Bleacher Nation on Twitter and on Facebook.

315 responses to “Yankees Gonna Yankee: Agree to Seven-Year, $153 Million Deal with Jacoby Ellsbury”

  1. North Side Irish

    I’ve seen reports that there’s an 8th year vesting option to take it up to $169M…

  2. YourResidentJag

    Yep. Your math makes sense if they get Tanaka.

  3. WilliamGlass

    Baseball desperately needs a salary cap. This is getting so ridiculous.

    1. bbmoney

      Naw. Salary caps are unamerican and just make owners richer.

  4. Luke

    So what happens if MLB loses the ARod case? Unlikely, I know, but if the arbitrator rules that baseball overreached with the 2011 games and vacates the whole thing, do the Yankees eat the luxury tax for Tanaka?

    1. DocPeterWimsey

      Yes, with a garnish of crocodile tears. They will, after all, be flooded with them!

  5. Joey

    Perhaps this makes Brett Gardner available in a trade? Wouldn’t mind him in CF next year

    1. Patrick G

      Gardner plays LF

      1. DocPeterWimsey

        Gardner can play CF, but he’s only pretty good there. He’s amazing in LF, particularly in his ability to read well-hit balls of the bats of lefty hitters. (That has to be the toughest thing to do in the OF.)

        1. Patrick G

          What I meant was he played LF in NY so Ellsbury signing wouldn’t affect him. Outfield now is Gardner, Ellsburry, Ichiro

          1. trust me

            Thats an awful OF. What about wells and soriano there one DH, dhing would probbly be jeter and not to mention that mark texera is coming back for an injury. The only guy worth anythibg on the trade market is garnder.

  6. Norm

    Obligatory “but the Cubs got Darnell McDonald so here we come World Series” comment

    1. Sean

      So can people start throwing $1 hamburgers on the field when he gets a hit next year like they did when Henry Rodriguez got Oh Henry bars thrown on the field when he hit a home run?

      1. hansman

        No. It is never acceptable to just throw hamburgers around.

  7. Rich

    repeating myself, but ya 2 jumbotrons now needed at Wrigley.

    Salary cap would be a good idea..and by adding playoffs, you continue to play WAY TOO LONG….I was hoping for a 152 game season…

  8. FFP

    Each year it seems that there are more that days I hate baseball.

  9. Elephanthole

    That’s gotta really suck for Boston and their fan base. The much hated Yankees.

    1. FFP

      It is a well worn path. Yankees (hope they) can afford to pay an x-Sox for past performance. Sox brass hope the Yankees spend themselves to death.

    2. DocPeterWimsey

      What I find amusing is that the NY branch of the ESPN page was blaring “If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em!” as the headline. Is it 2013 or 2003, guys?

      As a Sox fan, I am a little miffed that Els is going to the Yanks. On the other hand, this is a business. Moreover, it’s not like the Sox always treated Els all that well: that was a big reason why I didn’t think he’d come to the Cubs.

      That written, I was sort of hoping that the Cubs might splurge on him. Yes, that certain type of fan would be bitching and moaning in 6 or 7 years about how much money Els gets for doing nothing, and how if they did that poorly at work, they’d get fired, ergo, Els should get fired, too, or something inane like that. But if you want to build a winner quickly, then you have to pay later.

      As it is, those “certain kind of fans” now will spend their time tacitly implying that the FO (for whichever team they root) should have found a way to get Els to sign a “reasonable” deal!

  10. Die hard

    There ought to be one league for the high rollers and one for the penny pinchers and let the top team in each play for all the marbles.. League teams then change each year depending on payroll which would make for interesting matchups each year

    1. Rebuilding

      What if the Cardinals won both leagues?

      1. Tony_S

        I LOL’d. Nicely done.

        1. YourResidentJag

          Looks like the avatar is up. :)

          1. Tony S.

            It ABSOLUTELY is, thanks again!

    2. TSB

      Big market teams set up “opponents,” i.e., like roller derby. Yankees play other teams (all on the Yankee payroll) like the Chicago Blivits, the Boston Lobsters, the LA In ‘n Out Burgers etc.

  11. Serious Cubs Fan

    After this Ellsbury deal and if you include the McCann’s deal thats a big chunk of change out of their budget. If they resign Cano for $200mil then that would most likely take them out of the Tanaka Free Agency race, IMO. The Yankees have esplicitly stated that they hope to stay under luxury tax limit. You never know about the Dodgers or Red Sox though

    1. DocPeterWimsey

      Yeah, the Yanks have stated that they want to get under the luxury cap, but they also want to win. As they have no farm system of which to speak, they get to make a choice: and they’ll be much happier playing in October while grousing about a luxury tax than sitting out for a second year in a row (GASP!) while saving some $$$.

      1. Rebuilding

        The Yankees are out on Tanaka. No other way to look at it. That only leaves the Dodgers as a team that can spend what we can

  12. Louie

    Just curious because I feel like depressing myself some more, what is the Cubs payroll at right now for 2014?

    1. Jeff

      I think that the Cubs payroll after arbitration will still be south of 70mil

  13. jj

    Brett, I’ve had the impression that the miscellaneous expenses that are included into the $189mm figure is more than you’re allowing – do you have the info somewhere on how much other stuff goes into the tax figure?

  14. woody

    Ever heard the term bottom feeders? Cubs FO?

  15. Xavier Martinez

    I really wanted beltran in the middle of the order behind cano. But I guess you could say it’s a good addition for the first 2 holes in the 2014 projected lineup! But if a-rod gets supsjed de then they would be able to afford tanaka which I think they have a good chance to get him.

  16. Serious Cubs Fan

    The Yankees shouldn’t be a loud to take the Arod’s money off their CAP limit. They dug their own grave when they gave a steroid user a contract. They shouldn’t have to pay Arod his money during his suspension but that money should still count against their cap for being so rash and arrogant about spending their money

  17. John Richmond

    What does this mean for the Granderson market and are the Cubs players?

    1. Serious Cubs Fan

      I don’t want Granderson. Old. Expensive. Fading skills. Injury Prone. AND would cost us a draft pick. No thanks

  18. ramy16

    This is really depressing..Ellsbury has been linked to the Cubs for a while. .what in the Fuck is the FO doing? ? Definately not making us better that’s for sure. .are they going to sit on there hands the whole winter? As a Cubs fan sitting back and watching us do nothing just sucks..wonder where loyalty to us Cubs fan lye,? Really Ricketts owe us Cubs fans to put some competitive team on the field!!!

  19. Die hard

    Seattle to sign Cano and Beltran?i

  20. Brian Peters

    Kinda tired of sucking.

    1. willis

      Well, better find another team then. Because sucking, and sucking badly is all this team will do for awhile yet. Nothing this offseason but trading Shark will push things back another 2-3 years at least, and that’s if damn near every prospect at least kind hits (not hits like hitting a baseball, hits like a good river card). Ricketts has made this a sad, sad organization and this is just going to be one more year in the mix of some of the worst we have witnessed as fans of the cubs.

  21. Jeff

    Honestly, the worst thing that could have ever happened to the Cubs was Rickets buying the team. The way I see it is, if you can’t afford to put at least a 100mil dollar payroll on the field you have no business buying the 3rd largest market team. Plus, keeping face value ticket prices as the 3rd largest in the MLB is ridiculous!!!!

    1. Rebuilding

      I think you are wrong about this. The Ricketts are quickly climbing the Forbes 500. No, I thought it was Ricketts at first but he brought in what is considered the best baseball executive there is. Frankly, they haven’t been trying for 3 years to get guys like Almora, Bryant and our pick next year. The money is there when they need it

      1. Deacon

        That’s a hope-based fallacy: “The money is there when they need it.” The easy front office post-rationalization could always be, “We didn’t need it yet.” How can you ever prove it false? When are they ever going to say, “We just didn’t have enough money?” It will always be, ‘We bid what we thought (insert player’s name) was worth and didn’t want to overpay in this crazy market.’”

        1. YourResidentJag

          Yes, that was my statement as well. They’ll bid on and get FAs at their prices which right now is pretty slim pickings.

        2. Jeff

          The truth of the matter is: If you don’t get players “now” for the contracts their asking when the Cubs are “ready” these current contracts will look like peanuts to what it will cost for comparable talent level 2-3 years from now… Hell, even next year it could go up….

  22. ramy16

    DieHard..Beltran mite sign with the Royals?

  23. ramy16

    I agree Jeff

    1. Jeff

      The only way Cubs fans can really let the FO understand that were not going to take it anymore would be to boycot buying tickets. Spreading the word! Bring an attendance to Wrigley Field that resembles the White Sox, but make it worst. We have to let them know that just because you have the attraction of Wrigley Field, it doesn’t mean we are going to pay a premium to watch a Triple A ball club!

  24. Blackhawks1963

    Allow me to be a contrarian but deep down I have always admired the hell out of the Yankees, dating back to 1977 and the Billy Martin / Reggie Jackson / Thurman Munson era. They are on singular mission to win the World Series. Always! And failure is never an option or tolerated for long. Yes they spend wildly, but they owe many of their World Series titles also to great homegrown talent they have kept and used or traded away for other nice toys.

    Ellsbury to the Yankees is a quintessential George Steinbrenner move. I love it. And I actually think it is stuff like the Yankees and their arrogant and evil doings that make baseball great in this nation.

    1. DocPeterWimsey

      ” the Billy Martin / Reggie Jackson / Thurman Munson era”

      Ah, yes, the team with a clubhouse chemistry that would get a 3rd world country invaded! Still, for all that they hated each other, they did win. (Lou Piniella frequently mentioned them when pointing out that clubhouse chemistry was overrated; after all, Milton Bradley would have been a “quiet one” that clubhouse….)

  25. salesguy

    Who would have guessed the new market “money ball” challenge would be to build a World Series contender/champion for just under $100 million, and that that team would be looked at as employing some kind of wierd ultra conservative philosophy.

  26. John Richmond

    Next years outfield market sucks in FA. I just heard Theo said new target is 2018.

    1. Professor Snarks

      Nothing happened today that affects the Cubs plan to compete in 2017.

    2. woody

      2017 and 2018 Really? Are you kidding?

      1. Mike F

        No they are serious, it is the idiotic you have to lose and bath in it to win.

        I have defended Theo and Ricketts but there is no defense. It is getting very clear that the Cubs intend to collect a couple of 1 in the lottery picks. It is pretty depressing.

        1. Professor Snarks

          Please understand, when I say 2017, it doesn’t mean I’m happy about it.

          1. Mike F

            No I understand. It is a difficult situation as we really don’t know who is behind the curtain. I think Theo is probably the one here, but a lot of tar is being lobbed at Ricketts. It is pretty head scratching from all appearances not to buy a line from Shakespeare and Romeo and Juiliet…..

            We’ll see but Murphy and Darnell M? Really year 3 and this is what they are lining the ML roster with. I never saw this coming. It is a little deflating to say the least.

      2. YourResidentJag

        No, nobody here is. They REALLY don’t believe in overpaying in 2nd tier FAs and until they have a core of young players (seeing these prices) I’ve come to the realization why blame them? Still sucks, though.

        1. caryatid62

          Because prices will continue to rise–free agents will ALWAYS be expensive, and we as fans will ALWAYS have sticker shock. We’ve been conditioned to be alarmed by all of these contracts. This is the market. We all just have to get used to it.

          1. YourResidentJag

            Yes, but the trend for high impact WAR FAs to exist in that market has never been high….and for a number of years now. That’s going to get worse year to year. So why spend the prices when you don’t know what the farm system will do?

            1. caryatid62

              Because every year that you don’t spend money gives you another season make the same excuse when/if a prospect doesn’t pan out or hit his ceiling.

              Basically, not spending in 2011 and 2012 has given them reason to not spend in 2013, 2014, and 2015, using the same reasoning: “It’s not going to get us over the hump, so it’s not worth it.”

              1. YourResidentJag

                Not disagreeing just resigned to the path I think they’re going down…not that I wanted them necessarily to go down that path since 2011-2012.

                1. caryatid62

                  No problem being resigned to it. And the reality of the situation isn’t going to change.

                  However, that doesn’t change the fact that the “rebuild” has not been done as efficiently, intelligently, or as respectful to the fans as some think it has.

  27. Joey

    A lot of people have asked about the Cubs payroll. Using cots and mlbtraderumors, I’ve come up with around $73 million with the current roster (I plugged in mlbtraderumors arb projections for the arb eligible guys).

    1. Rebuilding

      That’s right. As I posted earlier they make $90.6 million just off TV alone. These guys are socking away money for when spending it won’t mean 81 wins

      1. Kyle

        They have significant expenses outside of players that you aren’t accounting for.

        The amount player spending has gone down seems to match pretty closely to the amount of revenue lost to lower attendance plus the new interest payments on the debt. I don’t think they are socking away any money.

        1. Rebuilding

          Kyle, the Cubs are 1 of 4 teams whose payroll is completely covered by TV. Their other expenses barely make up the difference. $7 mil for IFA, $12 mil for draft and you are now just getting even. The Cubs could have 100,000 in attendance and cover their other expenses

          1. Kyle

            a) I think you don’t really understand the expenses involved

            b) Where are you getting $90m for their TV revenue

            1. Rebuilding

              This explains it all with regards to TV: http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2013/may/how-mlb-splits-your-tv-dollars.html

              And please, baseball owners have been running teams out of their own pockets since there was baseball. Are you that naive? Steinbrenner took out a personal loan to get Reggie Jackson.

              And whose been lying? The Cubs have said all along that the money is there to spend if they need it

              1. Kyle

                You misread your link. The Cubs aren’t getting $90m in TV money.

                1. Kyle

                  Oh wait, I see it. You meant starting in 2014.

                  That’s possible. But you aren’t accounting for the debt payments, revenue sharing, lost attendance or the cost of the renovations that are starting up.

                  1. Rebuilding

                    TV covers their payroll, IFA and draft. 2 million covers everything else with A LOT left over. There is a reason Forbes said the Cubs were the most profitable team in baseball. If Theo and Jed are ready to start trying now the money is there

                    1. Rebuilding

                      2 million in attendence

                    2. Kyle

                      TV projects to cover those things in 2014. This is new. It hasn’t been covering them for the last two years when you are theorizing the “socking away”.

                    3. Tony_S

                      Serious question here…

                      How the @&$! do I install an avatar on here?!

                    4. ClevelandCubsFan

                      You’re also neglecting to mention that the $90m figure puts them right in the middle of the pack. Also, it wouldn’t have covered their 2013 payroll obligations, and there’s a good chance it won’t cover 2014 either. Even if it does, 90m doesn’t get you very far. Consider that the Dodgers (at the top) are expected to have 90m more than the Cubs while Cincy (at the bottom) is expected to only have about 17m less, and you can see that the gap from the Cubs to the top is enormous.

                    5. Joe

                      FYI
                      Richest owners in baseball:
                      Malone (Braves) $6 b
                      Johnson (Giants) $5.7b
                      Lerner (National) $4b
                      Ilitch (Tiger) $2.7b
                      Fisher (A’s) $2.2b
                      Yamauchi (Mariners) $1.8b
                      Davis (Rangers) $1.6b
                      Henry (R. Sox) $1.5b
                      Moreno (Angels)$1.5b

                      Steinbrenner is only at $1.15b in 2009 when he died. Yankee’s revenue is from YES network. Dodger was from the tv contract. Btw, Rickett’s old man is only worth about $1b. The son isn’t even close – which is why he had to borrow money to buy the team.

                      http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomvanriper/2013/03/27/baseballs-billionaire-owners/

                  2. Rebuilding

                    Don’t you get it Kyle? Remember all of the players in 2011-12 where you and I said – why aren’t they getting these guys, why aren’t they doing this or that? They really haven’t been trying. They want it all or nothing. when they decide that they are ready to go for it, there will be plenty of money for them to do it

                    1. Kyle

                      Jed Hoyer specifically said this offseason that there won’t be an all-or-nothing sort of offseason in our future.

                    2. Rebuilding

                      That’s your response? You expected him to say there will be an all or nothing offseason in our future? Why would he say that when they have said repeatedly they want sustainable success?

                    3. Rebuilding

                      Not to mention…I would take what Hoyer says with about 10% of a grain of salt. He does the day to day bullshit work. He doesn’t make the decisions

                    4. Kyle

                      Why wouldn’t he say it?

                      Your entire theory sits precariously on a lot of silly assumptions, ignores a lot of facts and just doesn’t make any sense.

                    5. Rebuilding

                      My assumptions aren’t silly at all. The Ricketts are one of, if not the, richest owners in baseball. Theo Epstein has an enormous ego (not saying that’s a bad thing). Those are my assumptions

                    6. Kyle

                      Your assumptions also seem to be that revenue sharing, marketing, stadium ops, and debt service don’t exist.

                    7. Rebuilding

                      You really think that Theo wanted to scrape together 81 wins while trying his ass off so that people would say that obviously Lucchino was the brains in Boston? Wouldn’t it make more sense that he punts three years when he’s obviously not trying, picks up a monster farm system and then goes head to head with the big boys?

                    8. Kyle

                      “You really think that Theo wanted to scrape together 81 wins while trying his ass off so that people would say that obviously Lucchino was the brains in Boston? Wouldn’t it make more sense that he punts three years when he’s obviously not trying, picks up a monster farm system and then goes head to head with the big boys?”

                      Did you happen to notice last offseason that he *did* do everything he could to put together an 81-win team?

                    9. Rebuilding

                      Kyle, if I remember correctly, I was the first one on this site to say those things did exist. It took you and I six months to convince other people that debt service was part of “baseball operations”

                    10. Tony_S

                      Yes on the farm system, but I’m serious, I want an avatar on here…

                    11. Rebuilding

                      You and me

                    12. Kyle

                      “Kyle, if I remember correctly, I was the first one on this site to say those things did exist. It took you and I six months to convince other people that debt service was part of “baseball operations””

                      So I’m confused as to why now you want to ignore it and claim the Cubs have been saving money over the years.

                      I mean, for 2014, with a $90m payroll, I can buy that they’re projecting to have some sort of surplus (which I assume will get eaten up by the stadium project, not socked away). But that’s not the same as saying we have been doing it already.

                    13. Tony_S

                      Debt service isn’t really part of baseball operations.

                      Now, about that avatar…

                    14. Rebuilding

                      He did not?! Signing Edwin Jackson? Come on

                    15. Rebuilding

                      Unfortunately Tony S we have learned that it is

                    16. ClevelandCubsFan

                      Who cares how much money Rickets has? It is absolutely irrelevant. You know all those gut-wrenching stories about families who poured their every last dime into the family business? Yeah, well, there’s a reason that doesn’t make good business sense. The business has to be profitable without the owners infusing capital as if it’s QE4 time at the Fed. Eventually the business will fail that way.

                    17. Tony_S

                      Yeah, I don’t think EJax and Cubs 81 wins really belong in the same sentence.

                      Is there a way I could put a little picture of EJax, maybe right over there next to my name, so you know it’s me without having to read?

                    18. Rebuilding

                      I’m not saying that they are saving money necessarily. Baseball is a clique. Theo thinks he is, and wants to be known as, the smartest baseball executive in the game. If he can’t win it all then he wants to appear that he’s not trying (on the major league level) in order to keep that reputation. Haven’t you known people like that in life?

                    19. Tony_S

                      I would have thought the debt was Ricketts’, while the baseball operations belongs to the team, ie it’s Ricketts’ debt and not the Cubs’, per se. But that’s with zero research and an online degree.

                      Ohhhh, maybe a $ next to my name, that would be cool….

                    20. Rebuilding

                      @ClevelandCubsFan – I would agree with you except when it comes to professional sports

                    21. Tony_S

                      I’ve said for awhile that spending on the team is directly tied to the renovation, and I’m not alone. And I don’t believe it’s because the team (and its fans) are stuffing money in Ricketts’ pockets. Jumbotron = $$, $$ goes back to team.

                      A Jumbotron!?! That would look awesome next to my name…

                    22. Tony_S

                      Brett, that makes total sense, and I’ll save my opinions to avoid long ugly roads.

                      But since you’re here, I’m not shittin around about the avatar thing, I’ve been all over your site, read your wonderful piece on starting my own blog, learned a ton, but I really still don’t know how to get an avatar on here, if you could help a brother out, that’d be super….? Pretty please? A link or something to the instructions that I’m obviously too dumb to find?

                    23. YourResidentJag

                      @Tony_S Go to Gravatar.com.
                      Create an account. Upload a picture under “Change Avatar” and it should appear here after you refresh the webpage.

                    24. MichiganGoat

                      Gravatar.com use the same email there you use here and it takes a couple hours before you see it here.

                    25. Tony_S

                      YRJ/Goat, awesome, thanks!

                    26. Tony_S

                      Wow, that was fact, and it appeared as soon as I refreshed the page.

                      You guys are awesome, thanks again.

                    27. Tony_S

                      *fast

                2. Rebuilding

                  Really? Read a little lower…

          2. Rebuilding

            They aren’t spending money right now because they are stockpiling players and the FO doesn’t want to look like they are trying for ego purposes. The Ricketts are now worth around $3 billion and will be moving into the Top 200 wealthiest families this year. $50 million is Tom’s allowance

            1. Kyle

              The amount of money the Ricketts have is irrelevant. The Cubs are a business. You don’t run a business out of your personal pockets.

            2. Jeff

              Rebuilding, believe me if Theo had the go ahead from Ricketts he would be spending right now… Just look at the Red Sox payroll, Theo would love and I mean love to have a payroll like that. I’m sure in years from now when Theo talks about his failures with the Cubs organization, he will talk about the payroll constraints Ricketts put on him.

              1. Jeff

                Hey, change your name, King Jeff got pissed at me and now I’m pissed at you…lol

            3. Kyle

              Not to mention your theory requires Epstein and Ricketts to have told several outright lies in the past three years.

              1. Jeff

                Kyle, not necessarily…. Theo did talk about his payroll contraints in many interviews…. Honestly three years ago when they didn’t spend in the first offseason with Darvish and Fielder among others available, I noticed the path that they were taking. I remember thinking back then I wish they could have landed Andrew Friedman as a GM. He’s a guy who has done it over and over again with a small payroll. Epstein has never won without the 2nd highest payroll in baseball.

                1. YourResidentJag

                  I almost wish the Ricketts would have acquired an unknown like Jason Capellela of the Braves. Local guy/Notre Dame grad/player development exec.

                  1. Kyle

                    It was always my preference at the time to hire a first-time GM. I wanted someone young and hungry. “Name” GMs on their second job were definitely not my first choice. Epstein was in my top-10, but I wanted Cherington and several others over him.

            4. YourResidentJag

              I agree with Kyle here. Aren’t the Royals owned by Walmart ownership?

              1. Rebuilding

                Agree with him about what? Do you really believe that baseball teams are some anonymous businesses? They set up those structures for liability purposes. Since Babe Ruth was sold to finance a stage production baseball owners have been intimately involves with the finances of their team. If Kershaw became available tomorrow for $25 million total I bet Tom Ricketts could scrounge that up. Geez

                1. Kyle

                  I bet you he wouldn’t.

                2. YourResidentJag

                  1. He (Ricketts) acquired the team with limited competitors under a debt structure.

                  2. The ownership group of the Cubs regardless of how personally rich they are set aside a certain amount of their business funds to grow that business. It’s their discretion how much they set aside.

                  3. Theo is not playing with house money anymore like in Boston. It’s completely different here. He’s building an “expansion franchise” and holding out that he won’t need to spend much on FAs. Meaning, that he won’t give in to the demands of one Scott Boras, ie. This corresponds with the limits/baseline amount that the Ricketts have invested in the Cubs as an organization.

                  1. woody

                    Keep drinking the kool aid

                    1. YourResidentJag

                      I’m not…this is just how it is.

                    2. willis

                      I don’t think it’s kool aid. I think he’s laying it out there rather perfectly. It sucks for us as fans but it’s how Ricketts is going to run this thing.

                  2. Rebuilding

                    The Ricketts have more money than John Henry now. We are not at a disadvantage to anyone as far as ownership resources. Henry is in all kinds of debt by buying his English soccer team to the point they want to run him out of England

                    1. Rebuilding

                      I may be forgetting someone. But I’m pretty sure the Ricketts are the richest owners in MLB if they are around $3 million. They are closing up on being one of the richest 200 families in America

                    2. YourResidentJag

                      I wish I could agree….I can’t.

                    3. willis

                      And John Henry has three world series rings in 10 years. Ricketts won’t ever see that.

                    4. Rebuilding

                      And that almost had less than 0% to do with my point. He won two of those before Ricketts owned the team and a 3rd as a legacy to it

                  3. willis

                    So the cubs being an “expansion” franchise and having owners that won’t spend enough to be competitive is what you are saying? Yep I agree with that.

                    Either Theo’s huge ego got in the way of his decision to come to the cubs, or he was hood winked by Ricketts. Either way this ownership is going to have this organization in the toilet for many years to come. Fun times.

                    1. YourResidentJag

                      Or Theo likes the fact that he doesn’t have to spend unnecessary funds (in his opinion on FAs). He may like having a young prospect at almost every position and Ricketts funding of the Cubs simply coincides with this.

      2. YourResidentJag

        I thought that totaled approx $25 mil in TV revenues?

  28. ramy16

    Its soo sad knowing that my Grandmother rip was a die hard Cubs fan listening to Cubs games from her little radio..and going to her grave without witnessing a world series! Just crazy..and we have shit sticks in the FO making it even worse

  29. einstein

    Salty to marlins for 3/21?

  30. Stevie B

    I’m a Cub fan, and I’m a Bud Man

    Don’t get so worked up, people. Our day will come.

    Now, relax, sit back, and enjoy a nice cold Budweiser!

    1. Jeff

      LoL, Stevie that’s what I’ve been hearing on this site from fans like you since Ricketts took the team over. It’s what the FO wants. Believe me if this was taking place with the Yankees the fans wouldn’t stand for it and we shouldn’t either.

    2. woody

      Screw that Clydsdale urine I think I’ll have a Boston lager.

1 2 3

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.