Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

$8 million signing bonus for Jackson

  • papa46
  • MVP
  • 741 posts this site

Posted: 1/2/2013 6:00 PM

$8 million signing bonus for Jackson 


This is interesting. This is a really big signing bonus.  I guess it makes sense to pay Jackson what amounts to $19 million this year while the payroll is relatively low.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/2/2013 6:24 PM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 


frontloading as much salary as possible makes him a more attractive trade candidate, too.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/2/2013 10:09 PM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 


Sounds like a shrewd plan, as well as (I am sure) a strong reason for Jackson to have chosen the Cubs over another club (more $$ up front). I'm glad to hear the team built in more financial flexibility for 2014 and later with this deal, too.

I have few expectations of the 2013 team, beyond steps toward improvement for some of the younger players, and possibly 1-2 bounce-back seasons (Feldman, Baker, Marmol, and Wood are the top candidates there); however, Theo & the Gang are doing a pretty good job so far in  this off-season to improve the pitching depth and to make for a better 2013 club. We're still 2-3 pieces short (reserve IF that can play 3rd/1st, OF, LH reliever), but are well on our way to being potentially better than the 2012 edition of the squad. Hopefully the worst is behind us.

"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.”  ~Albert Einstein

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/3/2013 8:19 AM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



cubbyfan25 wrote: frontloading as much salary as possible makes him a more attractive trade candidate, too.
It seems that as soon as a player is signed or traded for they are immediately viewed as a trade candidate. I view him as one of the core pieces you build around for the 4 years of his contract.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/3/2013 8:39 AM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



cubs2007 wrote:
cubbyfan25 wrote: frontloading as much salary as possible makes him a more attractive trade candidate, too.
It seems that as soon as a player is signed or traded for they are immediately viewed as a trade candidate. I view him as one of the core pieces you build around for the 4 years of his contract.

You can view him however you want.  The point is that Theo/Jed are leaving themselves more than one option.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/3/2013 11:54 AM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



cubbyfan25 wrote: frontloading as much salary as possible makes him a more attractive trade candidate, too.
There is no salary cap. Paying the 8 million now or as part of a deal later to an acquiring team changes nothing. Actually the 8 million is worth more now than it will be in 3-4 years (present day value), thus making this deal a little better for Jackson since he gets more of the money now. There could be some tax benefits now for the Cubs, but I'm thinking they used this bonus as an incentive to get the deal done.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/3/2013 1:53 PM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



absolutebadger wrote:
cubbyfan25 wrote: frontloading as much salary as possible makes him a more attractive trade candidate, too.
There is no salary cap. Paying the 8 million now or as part of a deal later to an acquiring team changes nothing. Actually the 8 million is worth more now than it will be in 3-4 years (present day value), thus making this deal a little better for Jackson since he gets more of the money now. There could be some tax benefits now for the Cubs, but I'm thinking they used this bonus as an incentive to get the deal done.
you're right, but it's customary for the receiving team to offer a better return when the sending team includes salary concessions. the end result is no different, but this way it's going to be easier to move him should we decide to go that route.
Reply | Quote
  • papa46
  • MVP
  • 741 posts this site

Posted: 1/3/2013 3:20 PM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 


There is a salary cap and above which a tax is paid.  I realize the Cubs are not close today, but maybe they are in 4 years.

While not close to a salary cap this year, I am certain the Cubs have a budget for this year and at least preliminary plans for budgets for the next three to five years. 

I like front loading contracts while the payroll is relatively modest.  In a zero interest rate environment, the present value of contracts vs future values are lower than in the higher interest rate environments.  Jackson was able to get $8 million at a lower tax rate. 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/3/2013 3:59 PM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



absolutebadger wrote:
cubbyfan25 wrote: frontloading as much salary as possible makes him a more attractive trade candidate, too.
There is no salary cap. Paying the 8 million now or as part of a deal later to an acquiring team changes nothing. Actually the 8 million is worth more now than it will be in 3-4 years (present day value), thus making this deal a little better for Jackson since he gets more of the money now. There could be some tax benefits now for the Cubs, but I'm thinking they used this bonus as an incentive to get the deal done.
I think they did it so that a couple years from now when they hope to be good, his salary then is not weighing down the team, like it would be if it were back-loaded. It also makes him more attractive for a trade down the road. Not saying you would do that, but if you succeed in developing talent, maybe Jackson isn't in your top 5 starting pitchers in a couple years and you want to move him. Nice to know you can....
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/3/2013 4:09 PM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 


The Cubs have never been close to the Luxury tax and are currently 70 million under. I don't see that happening, or even close to it in the next 5 years.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/3/2013 4:11 PM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



absolutebadger wrote: The Cubs have never been close to the Luxury tax and are currently 70 million under. I don't see that happening, or even close to it in the next 5 years.
Right. I don't think it has to do with luxury tax. I think it has to do with team payroll from one year to the next.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/3/2013 4:14 PM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



SportsGoblin wrote:
I think they did it so that a couple years from now when they hope to be good, his salary then is not weighing down the team, like it would be if it were back-loaded. It also makes him more attractive for a trade down the road. Not saying you would do that, but if you succeed in developing talent, maybe Jackson isn't in your top 5 starting pitchers in a couple years and you want to move him. Nice to know you can....
What 5 pitchers do you see better than Jackson in a couple years ?
Reply | Quote
  • cooljay788
  • Franchise Player
  • 1231 posts this site

Posted: 1/3/2013 9:23 PM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 


The Jackson signing is the best Cub signing in the off-season.  I dunno if he's in their long-term plans.  But I'd like to think if he does get traded, it won't happen til 3-4 years from now.


I can't think of 5 Cub pitchers who are better than Jackson.  He's certainly not gonna replace Garza as the ace of the rotation.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/4/2013 7:44 AM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



cubs2007 wrote:
SportsGoblin wrote:
I think they did it so that a couple years from now when they hope to be good, his salary then is not weighing down the team, like it would be if it were back-loaded. It also makes him more attractive for a trade down the road. Not saying you would do that, but if you succeed in developing talent, maybe Jackson isn't in your top 5 starting pitchers in a couple years and you want to move him. Nice to know you can....
What 5 pitchers do you see better than Jackson in a couple years ?
Jackson had an ERA of 4.03 last year, so that isn't exactly setting an impossible goal to achieve. Guys who could deliver that from the Cubs 2+ years from now:

  • Jeff Samardzija
  • Travis Wood
  • Dillon Maples
  • Arodis Vizcaino
  • Mark Appel (or whichever pitcher they select with the #2 pick in 2013 draft)
  • Trey McNutt
  • Pierce Johnson
  • Robert Whitenack
  • Ben Wells
  • Paul Blackburn
  • Marcelo Carreno
  • Barret Loux
  • Guy we pick up in a trade of Garza (or Garza himself if we extend him)
  • Guy we pick up in trade of Baker/Feldman/Villanueva (or Baker/Feldman/Villanueva themselves if we extend)
  • Free Agent acquisition not yet on team
  • Player acquired in trade not yet on team

Consider also that Jackson could get worse, setting a lower bar to have 5 starters better than him.

Now, will all of the above end up being better than Jackson? Obviously not. Most won't. But they have the potential, there are a lot of them with this potential, and if that situation comes up, it's nice to know Jackson's contract is low enough that if they wanted to trade him in a couple years, they likely could find a taker. That's all.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/4/2013 8:08 AM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



SportsGoblin wrote:
cubs2007 wrote:
SportsGoblin wrote:
I think they did it so that a couple years from now when they hope to be good, his salary then is not weighing down the team, like it would be if it were back-loaded. It also makes him more attractive for a trade down the road. Not saying you would do that, but if you succeed in developing talent, maybe Jackson isn't in your top 5 starting pitchers in a couple years and you want to move him. Nice to know you can....
What 5 pitchers do you see better than Jackson in a couple years ?
Jackson had an ERA of 4.03 last year, so that isn't exactly setting an impossible goal to achieve. Guys who could deliver that from the Cubs 2+ years from now:

  • Jeff Samardzija
  • Travis Wood
  • Dillon Maples
  • Arodis Vizcaino
  • Mark Appel (or whichever pitcher they select with the #2 pick in 2013 draft)
  • Trey McNutt
  • Pierce Johnson
  • Robert Whitenack
  • Ben Wells
  • Paul Blackburn
  • Marcelo Carreno
  • Barret Loux
  • Guy we pick up in a trade of Garza (or Garza himself if we extend him)
  • Guy we pick up in trade of Baker/Feldman/Villanueva (or Baker/Feldman/Villanueva themselves if we extend)
  • Free Agent acquisition not yet on team
  • Player acquired in trade not yet on team

Consider also that Jackson could get worse, setting a lower bar to have 5 starters better than him.

Now, will all of the above end up being better than Jackson? Obviously not. Most won't. But they have the potential, there are a lot of them with this potential, and if that situation comes up, it's nice to know Jackson's contract is low enough that if they wanted to trade him in a couple years, they likely could find a taker. That's all.
You stated Cubs developing talent - that excludes Samardzija & Garza & Wood

You will not develop 5 prospects better than Jackson in the next few years.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/4/2013 8:29 AM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



cubs2007 wrote:
SportsGoblin wrote:
cubs2007 wrote:
SportsGoblin wrote:
I think they did it so that a couple years from now when they hope to be good, his salary then is not weighing down the team, like it would be if it were back-loaded. It also makes him more attractive for a trade down the road. Not saying you would do that, but if you succeed in developing talent, maybe Jackson isn't in your top 5 starting pitchers in a couple years and you want to move him. Nice to know you can....
What 5 pitchers do you see better than Jackson in a couple years ?
Jackson had an ERA of 4.03 last year, so that isn't exactly setting an impossible goal to achieve. Guys who could deliver that from the Cubs 2+ years from now:

  • Jeff Samardzija
  • Travis Wood
  • Dillon Maples
  • Arodis Vizcaino
  • Mark Appel (or whichever pitcher they select with the #2 pick in 2013 draft)
  • Trey McNutt
  • Pierce Johnson
  • Robert Whitenack
  • Ben Wells
  • Paul Blackburn
  • Marcelo Carreno
  • Barret Loux
  • Guy we pick up in a trade of Garza (or Garza himself if we extend him)
  • Guy we pick up in trade of Baker/Feldman/Villanueva (or Baker/Feldman/Villanueva themselves if we extend)
  • Free Agent acquisition not yet on team
  • Player acquired in trade not yet on team

Consider also that Jackson could get worse, setting a lower bar to have 5 starters better than him.

Now, will all of the above end up being better than Jackson? Obviously not. Most won't. But they have the potential, there are a lot of them with this potential, and if that situation comes up, it's nice to know Jackson's contract is low enough that if they wanted to trade him in a couple years, they likely could find a taker. That's all.
You stated Cubs developing talent - that excludes Samardzija & Garza & Wood

You will not develop 5 prospects better than Jackson in the next few years.
You're smarter than this.  This is impossible to know if he will be in the top 5 in a few years.  They could develop, trade, or sign other pitchers.  Hopefully he's not in our top 5 in a few years.  Quit looking for an arguement.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/4/2013 8:32 AM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



cubs2007 wrote:
SportsGoblin wrote:
cubs2007 wrote:
SportsGoblin wrote:
I think they did it so that a couple years from now when they hope to be good, his salary then is not weighing down the team, like it would be if it were back-loaded. It also makes him more attractive for a trade down the road. Not saying you would do that, but if you succeed in developing talent, maybe Jackson isn't in your top 5 starting pitchers in a couple years and you want to move him. Nice to know you can....
What 5 pitchers do you see better than Jackson in a couple years ?
Jackson had an ERA of 4.03 last year, so that isn't exactly setting an impossible goal to achieve. Guys who could deliver that from the Cubs 2+ years from now:

  • Jeff Samardzija
  • Travis Wood
  • Dillon Maples
  • Arodis Vizcaino
  • Mark Appel (or whichever pitcher they select with the #2 pick in 2013 draft)
  • Trey McNutt
  • Pierce Johnson
  • Robert Whitenack
  • Ben Wells
  • Paul Blackburn
  • Marcelo Carreno
  • Barret Loux
  • Guy we pick up in a trade of Garza (or Garza himself if we extend him)
  • Guy we pick up in trade of Baker/Feldman/Villanueva (or Baker/Feldman/Villanueva themselves if we extend)
  • Free Agent acquisition not yet on team
  • Player acquired in trade not yet on team

Consider also that Jackson could get worse, setting a lower bar to have 5 starters better than him.

Now, will all of the above end up being better than Jackson? Obviously not. Most won't. But they have the potential, there are a lot of them with this potential, and if that situation comes up, it's nice to know Jackson's contract is low enough that if they wanted to trade him in a couple years, they likely could find a taker. That's all.
You stated Cubs developing talent - that excludes Samardzija & Garza & Wood

You will not develop 5 prospects better than Jackson in the next few years.
What!!? He said if they develop talent maybe Jackson won't be in the top 5. How does that disqualify guys already on the roster?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/4/2013 8:36 AM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



absolutebadger wrote:
What!!? He said if they develop talent maybe Jackson won't be in the top 5. How does that disqualify guys already on the roster?
Because players on the roster are already developed. Lets see how many starters are developed and promoted to the rotation in the next couple seasons.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/4/2013 8:41 AM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 


You seriously have a comprehension problem. He didn't say they would develop 5 that would be better that Jackson, he said if they can develop the Cubs could have 5 guys better than Jackson. See the difference?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/4/2013 8:47 AM

Re: $8 million signing bonus for Jackson 



absolutebadger wrote: You seriously have a comprehension problem. He didn't say they would develop 5 that would be better that Jackson, he said if they can develop the Cubs could have 5 guys better than Jackson. See the difference?
However you want to phrase it - I don't think the Cubs will have 5 better starters than Jackson.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >