|
Post by JohnM on Apr 13, 2024 6:31:26 GMT -5
“You can’t predict baseball Suzyn” Case in point last nights Dodger game. Didn’t envision the Padres comeback win. Yamamoto shows excellent flashes but he’s not dominant like Luis Gil. Yes, I said it.
|
|
|
Post by my2cents on Apr 13, 2024 6:51:36 GMT -5
Couldn’t say it better myself
|
|
|
Post by Knuckles on Apr 13, 2024 8:21:26 GMT -5
Didn't last until the 11th, but I was glad the Padres tied it 7-7.
|
|
|
Post by JohnM on Apr 13, 2024 8:31:30 GMT -5
Didn't last until the 11th, but I was glad the Padres tied it 7-7. Futility in RISP for the Dodgers. Winning ain’t easy.
|
|
|
Post by my2cents on Apr 13, 2024 8:33:01 GMT -5
Didn't last until the 11th, but I was glad the Padres tied it 7-7. You lasted longer than me.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan9 on Apr 13, 2024 9:46:08 GMT -5
Not sure I’m following. You’ve never seen a team down 4 runs use the last six innings to tie it and then win it in extras?
|
|
|
Post by JohnM on Apr 13, 2024 10:13:42 GMT -5
Not sure I’m following. You’ve never seen a team down 4 runs use the last six innings to tie it and then win it in extras? Dodgers were killers last night. They couldn’t keep the feisty Padres down. Winning ain’t easy.
|
|
|
Post by Knuckles on Apr 13, 2024 12:04:37 GMT -5
With all the deferred money (even for Teoscar?), they couldn't throw a little more toward the bullpen?
|
|
|
Post by JohnM on Apr 13, 2024 14:15:23 GMT -5
With all the deferred money (even for Teoscar?), they couldn't throw a little more toward the bullpen? It’s an incomplete team right now.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan9 on Apr 13, 2024 19:50:53 GMT -5
Not sure I’m following. You’ve never seen a team down 4 runs use the last six innings to tie it and then win it in extras? Dodgers were killers last night. They couldn’t keep the feisty Padres down. Winning ain’t easy. Ok, so it sounds like they *weren’t* killers, then.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan9 on Apr 13, 2024 19:52:49 GMT -5
With all the deferred money (even for Teoscar?), they couldn't throw a little more toward the bullpen? Not sure I understand the rub, Knuckles. Are you upset the Dodgers thought of all this before the Yankees did?
|
|
|
Post by Knuckles on Apr 13, 2024 20:36:47 GMT -5
With all the deferred money (even for Teoscar?), they couldn't throw a little more toward the bullpen? Not sure I understand the rub, Knuckles. Are you upset the Dodgers thought of all this before the Yankees did? I'm furious that they pay a luxury tax based on a figure $26 mil less than it should be, and that of course doesn't count the relative pittance they save in that respect for Teoscar. My team has been paying luxury tax forever. Yours is no stranger to it either, in years where they're trying to win. This accounting BS is thievery, nothing less.
|
|
|
Post by JohnM on Apr 13, 2024 21:04:12 GMT -5
You should also add they’ll be paying tax for decades.
|
|
|
Post by Knuckles on Apr 13, 2024 21:08:21 GMT -5
You should also add they’ll be paying tax for decades. They're going to pay the proper 2024 amount? What year is that?
|
|
|
Post by my2cents on Apr 16, 2024 11:00:29 GMT -5
Isn’t the $46,081,476 the Dodgers are taxed on annually, the amortized equivalent of his actual payout?
|
|
|
Post by JohnM on Apr 16, 2024 11:17:11 GMT -5
Isn’t the $46,081,476 the Dodgers are taxed on annually, the amortized equivalent of his actual payout? Yes it is.
|
|
|
Post by my2cents on Apr 16, 2024 11:52:11 GMT -5
Isn’t the $46,081,476 the Dodgers are taxed on annually, the amortized equivalent of his actual payout? Yes it is. So the only people getting “screwed” are the California tax payers. It will be interesting to see if that make a change in the Federal law. It’s always interesting to follow tax laws. Numerous laws are passed with stipulations that appeal to the masses (no tax on social security income in $35,000, be able to deduct $3000 in capital gain losses, tax on rental income, interest, capital gains for those with incomes over $250,000) but minor of these are index to inflation so ever year they effect more and more people. The law that Ohtani is taking advantage of was originally written in 1996 stop 15 states from taxing pensions, 401k’s,IRA’s and deferred payments of 10-years or more. The exclusion was for $50,000 per year. Instead of indexing it to inflation, the later removed the exclusion limit (I’m sure the politicians go lots of campaign donations for that). When it was revised, the argument was made that the $50,000 had become archaic because it wasn’t indexed.
|
|
|
Post by Knuckles on Apr 16, 2024 19:17:30 GMT -5
Not buying any of this.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan9 on Apr 16, 2024 19:50:17 GMT -5
Well if you do, perhaps you can ask for deferred payments? 🤷♂️
|
|
|
Post by Knuckles on Apr 16, 2024 21:22:48 GMT -5
Well if you do, perhaps you can ask for deferred payments? 🤷♂️ I think I'll be deferring reading posts offering no meaning. Doesn't look good for you.
|
|