Official: Cubs, Almora agree to contract

[Rice Cube]

Underwood --> Cub

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/11729/cubs-sign-second-rounder-underwood

 

[dabynsky]

Not a surpise. Hoping for one last surprise before the deadline, but not holding my breath either.

 

[Rice Cube]

I'm pretty sure the Cubs are out of money :lol: Or at least, money they are allowed to spend without spankings.

 

[dabynsky]

They got 22K. Maybe they can get one guy to bite at 122K.

 

[Rice Cube]

They got 22K. Maybe they can get one guy to bite at 122K.

That'd be one desperate and/or stupid kid.

 

[dabynsky]

That'd be one desperate and/or stupid kid.

Probably, but maybe there is a kid that really wants to play. In the comments at BleacherNation there were some whispers that Hickman might sign, but take that for what it is worth. I am 99.999999% that is all we will sign, but until the deadline passes we have some hope.

 

[Rice Cube]

The club-biased leverage may help...like it did here:

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/07/marlins-to-sign-andrew-heaney.html

 

[Rice Cube]

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp...32290X899567X29c60c996f028c285f97de0fc727efcd

Underwood rumored to have signed at a bit over $1MM which means any money the Cubs might have saved is gone and they might have even gotten too close to the threshold where they might lose the draft pick but I'm not sure.

 

[dabynsky]

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp...32290X899567X29c60c996f028c285f97de0fc727efcd

Underwood rumored to have signed at a bit over $1MM which means any money the Cubs might have saved is gone and they might have even gotten too close to the threshold where they might lose the draft pick but I'm not sure.

I would be shocked if the Cubs did anything to jeopradize their top pick in 2013. That would be extremely disappointing to lose that pick and we would have to question this front office for that blunder.

 

[Rice Cube]

I would be shocked if the Cubs did anything to jeopradize their top pick in 2013. That would be extremely disappointing to lose that pick and we would have to question this front office for that blunder.

Maybe the amount paid to Almora already took potential overslotting into account. Guess we won't know until an official number is released.

 

[2SeamHeat]

Maybe the amount paid to Almora already took potential overslotting into account. Guess we won't know until an official number is released.

$1.05M for Underwood... $3.9M for Almora.... I think Dab's estimate of $22K is pretty close.... but why push it and take the risk of a miscalculation coming back and bite you on ass?

 

[Rice Cube]

$1.05M for Underwood... $3.9M for Almora.... I think Dab's estimate of $22K is pretty close.... but why push it and take the risk of a miscalculation coming back and bite you on ass?

If that many brainiacs had a stupid math error then the Cubs deserve to be fucked.

 

[2SeamHeat]

If that many brainiacs had a stupid math error then the Cubs deserve to be fucked.

And the wording of the CBA is oh so clear... and hasn't come back to **** many teams in the past...

It does say 0-5%.... and in the past, there have been interpretations of nit-picking levels where that "5" could either mean you're safe with a a full "5" or it could mean your protections dies at "4.9". That .1% is around $9K. So, I ask again, why take the risk over such a small amount of cash (to a MLB team) that won't actually be enough to sway a kid from going to college and potentially end up being a pick in the top 3-5 rounds (and thus making 3-10 times what he was offered presently)?

 

[Rice Cube]

I think the numbers for Almora and Underwood fall under the 5% so they'll just have to pay the tax and won't forfeit the draft pick, but somebody is going to have to actually do the math.

 

[2SeamHeat]

I think the numbers for Almora and Underwood fall under the 5% so they'll just have to pay the tax and won't forfeit the draft pick, but somebody is going to have to actually do the math.

I did at one point... I'll have to find it. I think in the end the team's going to end up paying a $300K or so luxury tax, but they were around 4.5% of the allowed overage. Of course, my math was actually based on what I was able to find, since so few actual official announcements included bonus amounts.

 

[Rice Cube]

I did at one point... I'll have to find it. I think in the end the team's going to end up paying a $300K or so luxury tax, but they were around 4.5% of the allowed overage. Of course, my math was actually based on what I was able to find, since so few actual official announcements included bonus amounts.

A lot of the later picks in the first ten rounds signed for like $10K or even $1000 so that might have saved a ton of money. Wonder if you can just Google it.

 

[2SeamHeat]

Here it is... something I posted elsewhere regarding this a few days ago:

The pool this year for the Cubs is, as you say, $7.9339M. 5% of that is $396,695. That comes to a total of $8,330,595.
So, if Callis' figures are correct, then he's wrong about the luxury tax. So let's do the math with what information is available to us:

Almora: $3.9M -over by $650K-
Johnson: $1.196M -even-
Blackburn: $911,700 -even-
Underwood: $1.05M -over $280,400-
McNeil: $471K -even-
Conway: $280K -under $63.2K-
Prieto: $200K -under $57K-
Lang: $165K -under $27.5K-
Bruno: $150K -over $1.4K-
Heesch: $10K -under $128.8K-
Krist: $10K -under $119.6K-
Martin: $10K -under $125K-

If these figures are correct, and they all I've been able to find... this brings the bonus spending to $8,353,700. That's a little over $23.1K above the overage allowance. So, while Callis' figures appear to be wrong in terms of how much the team has gone over slot.... he is correct that the team will indeed pay the 75% luxury tax. The team went over by $419,800... which means the luxury tax will be $314,850.... if what I've been able to find on the signing bonuses is correct.

15% overage is where you pay 100% luxury tax on what you go over, as well as lose your top 2 picks (including compensation picks). The Cubs, if what I found for the bonus figures to be correct, spent $419,800K beyond their pool of $7,933,900. That's 5.29%. If any of the signings here are less than what is listed (I'm unsure of how much McNeil was officially signed for, only found reports stating it was aorund his slot value), the team may not even have to pay a luxury tax.

 

[Rice Cube]

http://www.baseballamerica.com/draftdb/2012xteam.php?team=1004

Says the Cubs spent $8,307,700 and thus were $373,800 over budget. That's only 4.7%. Might have to recheck some numbers here and there. I also think at least one of those guys in the later rounds had to sign for $1000 but I don't remember who.

 

[2SeamHeat]

http://www.baseballamerica.com/draftdb/2012xteam.php?team=1004

Says the Cubs spent $8,307,700 and thus were $373,800 over budget. That's only 4.7%. Might have to recheck some numbers here and there. I also think at least one of those guys in the later rounds had to sign for $1000 but I don't remember who.

The $1K guy was like an 18th rounder or something like that. BBA's figures are $46K less than mine, which could all be in McNeil's bonus. Either way, the team's not in danger of losing a draft pick... and BBA's figure keeps them from having to pay a luxury tax at all.

 

[Rice Cube]

The $1K guy was like an 18th rounder or something like that. BBA's figures are $46K less than mine, which could all be in McNeil's bonus. Either way, the team's not in danger of losing a draft pick... and BBA's figure keeps them from having to pay a luxury tax at all.

I think they still have to pay a luxury tax because they went even a fraction over the total recommended bonus pool, but it's only a 75% tax of the overage up to 5%. If it's just money I'm sure they'll just pay it and call it a day, but they definitely didn't lose a draft pick then.